Archive for October, 2010

Mr Obama, do you have real business to talk with us?

Mr Obama, do you have real business to talk with us?

http://www.dnaindia.com/opinion/comment_mr-obama-do-you-have-real-business-to-talk-with-us_1457914

DNA / R Vaidyanathan / Tuesday, October 26, 2010 3:10 IST

The next two weeks will be full of atmospherics and inanities linked to the visit of US president Barack Obama. Indians are known to derive satisfaction from symbolism rather than substance. When Diwali was supposedly celebrated by George Bush’s White House — a celebration in which the US president did not participate — we went into raptures. When Rajan Zed of Nevada was called to chant Vedic hymns at a Congressional opening, we were ecstatic. Similarly, when Obama visits India next month, we will drool over Michelle buying Kanjeevaram sarees or Obama savouring a paratha at a Delhi dhaba — or some such meaningless events. There is a move to take Michelle to the Red Light areas of Mumbai to get a feel of “inclusive” growth. Imagine Gursharan Kaur being paraded in Soho in London as part of her itinerary. Sikhs are pleading with Obama to visit the Golden Temple, even if he merely wears a baseball cap to cover his head.

(Comment: Remember our PM requesting Obama’s autograph?)

This is how we barter away our self-respect, even as our civil aviation minister Praful Patel is charged a hefty free (£480) for using the lounge at Heathrow airport. Our high commissioner in London had to hurriedly pay for it. In India, even head clerks and deputy assistant undersecretaries of the Anglo-Saxon establishments command red carpet treatment and free VVIP lounges at airports. When Obama arrives, he is going to come as a wounded tiger from a declining empire. His party of change would, by then, have lost its last dime in the Congressional elections to be held on November 2. He could well end up as a one-term president. When American presidents are hurt at home, they try to show off abroad. Nixon made his China trip when his fortunes were going downhill back home. Clinton did mischief in J&K and Bush in Iraq.

Democratic presidents come across as more sanctimonious humbugs and self-righteous compared to Republicans. The latter just bother about business; the former want to be seen as backing causes like human rights — as long as it is done abroad. What should our agenda be with Obama? First, we should ask him to remove every Indian entity which is on the banned export list of the US. Second, if he even mentions Kashmir, we should request him to carry on to Indonesia — his next stop. We should recognise Bangladesh as the successor country to a united Pakistan because of its size and the number of members in it had in parliament before the break-up. If at all anyone has a say in Kashmir, Bangladesh as the successor entity has a more legitimate case, Obama should be told.

Third, we should insist on the need to split Pakistan into many more countries in the interests of world peace. Pakistan’s army is the world’s terror central and a constant threat to world peace. The David Headley saga reveals that US intelligence and enforcement agencies such as the FBI, CIA and DEA have been infiltrated and compromised by the Pakistani ISI and its creations like the LeT. The billions given to appease Pakistan will not help world peace and it will only increase global terror. Hillary Clinton says her heart is in Pakistan and one wishes her a hale and healthy heart. We should remember that her husband, through Robin Raphael, was instrumental in creating the Hurriyat in the Kashmir Valley.

The fourth point is that India should not bother with the talk-shop called the UN Security Council. It has lost its purpose and role. It helps some Indian government bureaucrats to have untaxed pensions. The only important member is China and we can deal with it directly. Becoming a permanent member of the UNSC is not exactly a big payoff for us. Many UN agencies are a joke. What is one to make of the fact that Saudi Arabia and Libya are on the human rights panels, and Pakistan is heading the International Atomic Energy Agency (no doubt, by rotation), after proliferating nuclear weapons and sponsoring terror.

The fifth point we need to tell Obama is that India will not look at China through the US’s lenses. We will deal with China on our terms. We have no need to play sidekick to the US when it deals with China. A British political leader during World War II is reported to have said that Britain would fight the Germans to the last Indian. We do not want to be in the same situation with regard to US-China conflicts. The sixth point is that any enlarged scope for US companies to do business in India should be linked to India getting unrestricted access to the US markets for onshore and offshore software services, including visas for our professionals. Every additional Coke bottle consumed in India or insurance policy sold should be dependent on how the US puts Pakistan on leash. We need to unashamedly and unequivocally link commerce with US pressure on Pakistan on terrorism.

Declining empires do listen to rising powers if they want market access. We need to ask Obama to address our real concerns instead of getting carried away with all the soft praise he may shower on us. We have to grow up.

Mafiosi, their lies and a fake state:

Mafiosi, their lies and a fake state:
India has fallen victim to a fake state – rulers who are taking the angst and patriotism for granted – inviting an unavoidable storm.
http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indus-calling/entry/mafiosi-their-lies-and-a-fake-state
Tarun Vijay
23 October 2010,
Delhi witnessed a scene which would have been unimaginable in any other country with a governance that speaks for the land and its people. A person known as Syed Ali Shah Geelani, allegedly a known hawala racketeer and a backstabber Kashmiri who is a qualified Pakistani agent demanding “Azadi” from India, was allowed to speak at a meeting on “Azadi the only way”. And the patriotic Indian protesters were arrested while the traitors were given law’s khaki protection.
Geelani, even by a modest definition, is a traitor who has no qualms about accepting Indian money for his medical treatment and getting Indian security for his life, and still abusing Indian democracy and people. He is the one who had more than a hundred Kashmiri youth killed by instigating them to pelt stones while his own kith and kin are enjoying foreign jaunts and a secure future abroad.
And lo and behold, this is what our home minister, P Chidambaram, said, “Geelani will be punished if sedition charges proved”. He added that the proceedings of Thursday’s seminar had been videographed and the footage was being checked to see if there was any violation of law in Geelani’s speech at the seminar organized by sympathizers of Kashmiri separatists.
It’s like taking a picture of a caged jackal and sending it to wildlife experts to “have it examined” and figure out whether it’s a jackal or a rodent.
The seminar’s subject was clear. The organizers and the speakers were known anti-India schemers who abuse Indian democracy and guarantees of freedom of speech. The speeches made at the meeting were dismissive of the Indian state and insulted the spirit of the tricolour. In spite of the evident sedition, the Sonia-Rahul government has decided to go soft and further cause injury to the morale of those soldiers who have been sent to Kashmir by the state power to protect the Constitution and India’s integrity. Why should a soldier fight and die for such an enemy-friendly government? If the voices of sedition are to be allowed to spread venom against the armed forces and patriotic people of India and then the home minister, confused and much-maligned by the Sonia loyalists, issues such ridiculous statements that reflect his “mazboori” to placate the traitors, then at least the armed forces should be spared the humiliation of being the target of both the traitors and the rulers in the valley.
Except during the emergency, I have never seen such a terrified media and a fearful section of the opposition that feels scared to call the bluff of the ruling elite putting Indian security and morale of the forces at its lowest ebb. It was left for the fighting spirit of an opposition leader, Arun Jaitley, to come out with a statement that reflected the anguish of the Indian patriotic people. Where have all other leaders gone? Is the tricolor and its honour the responsibility of just one party? Can the rest can speak in favour of secessionists or maintain silence, looking for the right kind of vote-gathering opportunity? The professor who should have been sent to the gallows for conspiring against the Indian state is seen leading the attack on the nation’s integrity again, rather than feeling grateful to the democratic ironies of our society where the social secular sirens helped him to get a new lease of life.
Freedom of speech cannot be an absolute right etched in stone. Those who made use of this freedom in Delhi to assault the sentiments of millions of Indians do not give this right to anyone in their respective areas of influence. Geelani not only instigates his hired hoodlums to silence the other voices in the valley but is the main instigator to push Kashmir into the black alley of backwardness and Talibanism. He is, by any modest definition, a traitor, who has no qualms about accepting Indian money for his medical treatment and getting Indian security for his life and still abusing Indian democracy and the people.
Freedom of speech has limitations. Hence hate, secessionism and pornography do not constitute essential parts of the right to speak and write. As Stanley Fish puts it, “free speech, in short, is not an independent value but a political prize”. No society has yet existed where speech has not been limited to some extent.
I must quote a few lines from the invitation that was circulated for the “Azadi” meeting. It said, “The happenings in Kashmir over the past few months need no retelling. The situation has deteriorated to extreme levels with unarmed civilians, mostly young teenagers, being killed by the Indian armed forces with impunity. The toll from June 11 has reached 109, with the numbers of injured, maimed, and blinded much more. Curfews, bullets, tear smoke have become a routine to suppress the peaceful democratic protests.
“It is important at this juncture to bring the attention towards the fact that the basic issue at hand regarding the Kashmir dispute is the Self-Determination of the people of Jammu & Kashmir, for which they have been steadfast and hence been the target of the repressive military machine of the Indian State. The people of Jammu & Kashmir are clear about the fact that what they want is Azadi, which they have time and again defined in coherent terms of letting them decide their own future.
“The latest people’s resistance — which forms part of recently launched ‘Quit Jammu & Kashmir Movement’ — needs to be viewed as a continuity of the Resistance movement (Tehreek) which the people of Kashmir have been sustaining for over six decades.
“The political dispute vis-a-vis Kashmir need not be confused with the superficial measures like the removal of AFSPA, human rights violations, other draconian acts, stopping of unlawful killings, torture, enforced disappearances, etc. Though all these things do exist and need to be stopped at any cost, they manifest only symptoms of a broader and deeper malaise — militarized governance used to maintain a military occupation of the region by the Indian state, through its armed forces, numbering at least 7,00,000.”
Lies, absolute lies. You can talk to an honest enemy. You may have a dialogue with a secessionist who is sticking to his guns with some integrity and conviction. But how can you have a debate with a dishonest pleader?
Who are the people of Jammu & Kashmir waging this “Tehreek”? Is it true that “unarmed civilians” are being killed by the Indian armed forces? Or the violent and hateful stone pelters fell victim to Geelani’s instigations to attack Kashmir police, which is 95% Kashmiri Muslim? Why is the name of Indian armed forces being falsely dragged by these stone pelters’ Delhi shields?
Aren’t they playing the game of Pakistan by attacking the Indian armed forces, while everyone knows they are not at all at ground zero in the valley and all the active assignments of enforcing the law are being executed by J&K police or by CRPF, that too at the instructions of the state government, which is headed by Omar Abdullah, the “confused Indian and an uncertain Kashmiri” CM.
Who are these people, working as journalist in a mainline paper or dollar gatherer jugglers of words of an anglicized tribe to hold a brief for the “self-determination of the people of Jammu & Kashmir”? Do they know what constitutes J&K? Do they even know where Ladakh is? Do they know the patriotic people of Ladakh? And Jammu? And of the valley too? A small pro-Pakistan coterie of the Wahhabism, not more than 10% of the entire population of the state, is trying to grab the centre stage through violence and forcefully exiling its minority Hindu community. Why is this factor never discussed by or seen on the radar of “Azadi” seekers and their traitor friends in Delhi and Aligarh Muslim University?
Who is this Wazahat Habibullah, the backroom boy of the ruling family, speaking for the secessionists? Is he trying to repay some kind of a debt to his mentors?
India has fallen victim to a fake state – rulers who are taking the angst and patriotism for granted – inviting an unavoidable storm.

Harvard and the Indian Billionaires

Harvard and the Indian Billionaires
By Rajiv Malhotra, Oct 15, 2010.

This morning, Times of India celebrates the headlines that, “Harvard gets biggest international donation in 102 yrs, from Tata Group.” http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/Harvard-gets-biggest-international-donation-in-102-yrs-from-Tata-Group/articleshow/6752185.cms The timing on the eve of Obama’s India visit has strategic importance. This whopping $50 million gift is part of a massive trend that deserves some thought, so here I go…

Many years ago, when RK Mishra (Dhirubhai Ambani’s right-hand man) was alive, he and his wife stayed a weekend with me specifically to get briefed on what to do about Harvard’s request for funding chairs there. I brought in 6 scholars who were part of my team studying the state of South Asian Studies in the west. The data we supplied were eye-openers for Mishra, as they had never been made aware of the anti-India tilts in places like Harvard. One talk I gave compared how harvard studies China with great respect, while India is seen through the human rights lens – caste, women’s “oppresion”, minority “oppression”, etc… Others gave specific areas of biases as well – from Aryan theory on. The result was that Mishra went back and advised the Ambanis to NOT give Harvard a dollar, until they would make changes to their stance on India. China, I was able to show, gets treated as a serious civilization. One factor was that China studies is done largely in Mandarin while India is studied in English. Also, China regulates visas for western scholars such that it blacklists those it finds troubling, whereas India is open and welcomes everyone without supervision, and fails to do any analysis after the fact as to whats being produced. In fact, Indians find it a compliment when westerners study them, as though suffering from an inferiority complex of feeling left out. Finally, a key difference is that Indian intellectuals are heavily anti-India because of pseudo-secularism and marxism deeply entrenched in Indian intellectual circles, and most important Indian scholars are western trained and/or funded and/or craving to be in their good books for fame and prestige. Chinese do not suffer such complexes, which in India are the after-effects of colonization. This is because Gandhi got superseded by Nehru in defining the elitist Indian ethos. Gandhi was emphatic about his Indianness, whereas Nehru bragged to John Kenneth Galbraith that he was the “last white man to rule India.”

This intervention by me through R.K. Mishra did put a temporary dampener on their crusade to dip into the pockets of rich Indians. It also put me on the hit list of harvard. I also ended Infinity foundation’s annual sponsorship of the Indology Roundtable at Harvard which was my “listenind device” of what they were up to. As a follow up to this saga, my friend, JC Kapur in Delhi, called up the head of FICCI at the time, and told him point-blank to stop supporting Harvard’s PR campaign with Indian industry for such funding. This too worked, and grudgingly the FICCI head at that time stopped opening doors for harvard in India. But the lure to become famous in harvard and dine with the who’s who of white american establishment is too powerful for Indians to resist. The real “success” for most is when they are recognized by the west. This is what the west knows well, having studied Indian culture for centuries, and used precisely this knowledge to manage, control and topple one raja after another in the 17th and 18th centuries. Take the kids to Cambridge, play polo with them, have western women to flirt, etc. – so they can feel like admitted to the club as honorary whites in front of other Indians. After independence, the brits got replaced by the americans, hence the strategic importance of places like harvard.

Some years later, there came a call from a prominent Indian that Anand Mahindra was being roped in by Harvard, and he had given them office space in his Mumbai HQ. So I was set up for a persional one-on-one meeting with Anand Mahindra. He is a very decent, gentle, open-minded executive for sure. He listened to my frank talk. He was unaware of these issues which clearly bothered him. But he made clear that he owed a lot to harvard, as they had given him a scholarship to study there when his father had refused to support him go there. So it was payback time for him, nothing more. Not to worry, he said, because he was giving only very small sums of money, such as $20,000 at a time, and that too for Indian students to go there as scholars. He suggested that I write to him my objections concerning harvard, so he could pass it on, and make sure they change their approach. I also suggested to him that Indians who want to fund Harvard should fund their business school, which has become pro-India, but NOT the humanities which are the nexus of this “south Asian” nonsense. A few days later, at Mr. Mahindra’s suggestion I had a brief phone chat with Harvard’s Sugata Bose who was visiting India as harvard brand ambassador to raise funds. I have publicly criticized Sugata Bose for his writings that depict pre-Mughal India as uncivilized, his idea of colonial problems focusses only on British but exempts the islamic colonizers, and he sees de-colonization as the return to a unified south asia under quasi-islamic civilization (positioned as “secularism”). This, of course, his girlfriend and co-author, Ayesha Jalal, has very skillfully managed to make into the core curriculum on south asia at places such as Harvard. (Jalal while not on the Harvard faculty was on the committee of their South Asia program until I pointed this strange anomaly out, and then she suddenly left that visible spot.) Prof Bose was cordial and frank, and we agreed to continue to chat later – which never materialized. Bose also lashes out against his great grand-uncle, Subhash Chandra Bose, the freedom-fighter, portraying him as a fascist. Music to the ears of the harvard establishment. These folks bring in Kashmir separatists, Maoists, “abused Hindu women”, Dalit activists, etc. routinely as the “voices of the real India.” Anand Mahindra announced last month that he is donating $10 million to Harvard specifically designated for the Humanities.

About 5 years ago, my colleague at Infinity Foundation, Krishnan Ramaswamy, and I went to see Rajat Gupta (McKinsey) to meet privately for several hours. I raised the topic that before Indian philanthropists give funding to US unversities, people like Rajat should do “due diligence” on what a given program has produced, how it fits into the image of India that the philanthropist has. After all, no management consultant proposes an investment by his wealthy client in any venture without due diligence. It struck a chord with him. Then I pointed out that nobody other than me had attenpted any such arms-length critical study of South Asian Studies in USA. I mentioned that Chinese government and Chinese private donors do an annual report on the state of China Studies in the west, just like any industry analyst would do for an indistry, and this guides them where and how to invest. This gives them the basis for evaluating a given program and negotiating from a position of knowledge about what is what in the discipline. He was candid in confessing that he had not studied the south asia studies discipline to be able to tell me what went on in depth. But, he remarked in typical India style, he thinks the persons involved in such studies seem like “nice guys” and decent folks. I responded that in evaluating a business investment, the due dligence would not be based on whether the management team were “nice guys” or decent folks in their personal lives, but that it would look for hard-hitting data and evidence to evaluate. Had he or anyone else studied the writings of such departments over the past 50 years, to be able to evaluate what was going from the Indian point of view? The answer then reamins the same today – no, they have not!

In one meetng after another for 15 years, I have raised such issues. One example of such an article I wrote in 2003 is on Rediff.com, titled, “Does South Asia Studies undermine India?” (See: http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/dec/08rajiv.htm ) I have also proposed that India could use its own India Studies and even South Asian Studies based in Indian universities (as a way to study neighbouring countries with an India-centric lens). I have argued that the money used to fund one Harvard chair (at least $5 million) could fund a whole department of scholarship in India. The irony is that even those who claim to be patriotic, nationalists, including those being described as “Hindu nationalists,” seem confused and mixed up. The GOI has given major funding to western studies of South Asia – including both BJP and Congress led governments. Yet there is not a single government or private philanthropist report on the state of this “industry” that studies India, which consists of several thousand scholars full-time who come from various disciplines – religious studies, history, anthropology, sociology, political science, human rights, women’s studies, etc. On the other hand, China Studies in the academy is secure in China’s hands, with western scholars are “outsiders” craving to be allowed entry.

Before spending money, one must have a strategic clarity as to what ideas of India are to be promoted. Otherwise, well formulated ideas of India by various other institutions get to dominate – such as ideologies of seminaries, US government thinktanks, academic south asian marxists-islamists, etc. Indians participate but not on their own rules. Tragically, Indians do not even have clarity on this amongst themesleves much less being able to project it. At a gathering at Ram Jethmalani’s house last year, I was invited as the featured speaker for the evening. I spoke on this very issue that Indians must take control of India Studies. One prominent woman activist (Madhu Kishwar) diverted the issue by asking whether the studies would be done in Hindi! The whole gathering easily got distracted by any odd and irrelevant idea, that should not have diverted them from the core proposition being discussed. Some others asked “whose idea of India” would be studied, would it be the Muslims’ idea and dalit idea, or would brahmins dominate? Indians do not even have a consensus on what is India as we want to see it.

Earlier this year, there was a rumor that Infosys founder Narayan Murthy was giving $15 million to harvard to translate and publish ancient Indian texts into English, for popular reading. On the surface this seems good for us. But the details count and such details are typcially glossed over by Indians. The editor appointed for the series is none other than Prof. Sheldon Pollock (Columbia), even though he takes an explicitly Marxist view of Sanskrit – explotation by brahmins of dalits, women, muslims, etc. His famous writing, “The Death of Sanskrit” laid out his idea of its history as a source of power in the hands of a few. He has been editor of the CLAY series of Indian Classics already, and one has to see that to get an idea of his biases. (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clay_Sanskrit_Library ) While doing a great job bringing out the “beauty” of the indian materials, the fact remains that he simply assumes and states the Aryan invasion/migration theory as a given without even raising any issue with it. Very elegant and beautifully produced, this series already has 46 volumes in print, and its influence is considerable. My concern was that the Murthy family might not have invested time and resources to go into the details of the issues at stake in the translation of Indian classics in the west. The Murthy donation will also take this new series from harvard, and send it back into Indian education, making this “Made in USA” depiction of Indian Classics the canon for Indians to study as their definition of themesleves. This is what max Mueller’s works did a century ago. It is their money and they have a right to do what they please with it. But wouldn’t it have been wiser if they had funded something to do with their area of expertise and competence, so they could at least evaluate and monitor professionally, and not depend on “they are nice fellows” level of naivete. When this rumor was critiqued by me, the head of the Hindu American Foundation inquired and concluded that the runor was false based on his “inside” information from the Murthy’s. A few days later the official announcement was made. Also, Prof. Pollock was awarded the Padma Shri award by GOI at a Republic Day ceremony in Rashtrapathy Bhavan, for his great contributions to the study of sanskrit.

None of the reactions from the “Hindu activists” have made any sense either, be it issuing petitions or writing angrily to the parties concerned. They have failed to understand the deeper mechanisms at work. You dont fight a patient’s infection by holding playcards shouting slogans against the germs! The doctor has to understand the mechanisms of the disease and how/where to intervene. But a lazy, incompetent man (despite his good intentions) would have no time to go to med school and learn all that, and THEN be competent to defeat the disease. He is in too much of a hurry, wants to make a big splash in public to look important; and hence he stands outside the hospital shouting slogans against the germs. This sounds like a strange analogy, but if you examine closely the “activists” at work, it is a fairly accurate one.

Harvard gets biggest international donation in 102 yrs, from Tata Group

BOSTON: India’s Tata Group has given a whopping $50 million to the prestigious Harvard Business School here to fund a new academic and residential building on its campus, the largest gift received by the institute from an international donor in its 102-year-old history.

The gift comes from Tata Companies, the Sir Dorabji Tata Trust and the Tata Education and Development Trust, the philanthropic entities of the Group.

It comes days after Anand Mahindra, Vice Chairman and Managing Director of Mahindra and Mahindra Group, gave USD 10 million to the Humanities Centre at Harvard. A Harvard alumnus, Mahindra gave the gift, the “largest” in the Centre’s history, in honour of his mother Indira Mahindra.

Ratan Tata, Chairman of Tata Sons, attended Harvard’s Advanced Management Programme — one of three comprehensive leadership programmes offered by the Harvard Business School’s (HBS’) Executive Education — in 1975.

He had also received the School’s highest honour, the Alumni Achievement Award, in 1995.

The School said it will use the USD 50 million gift from the Tata Group to fund a new academic and residential building on its campus for participants in its broad portfolio of Executive Education programmes.

HBS hopes to break ground for the building, which will be named Tata Hall, next spring. It is expected to be open for use by late 2013.

Calling it a privilege and a pleasure to “give back to Harvard a little bit of what it gave to me,” Tata said he hoped the new facility would encourage and inspire future leaders to take advantage of the executive education offerings at HBS.

“The Harvard Business School is the preeminent place to be exposed to the world’s best thinking on management and leadership and we are pleased that this gift will support the School’s educational mission to mold the next generation of global business leaders,” Tata said.

Expressing “deep appreciation” for Tata’s “generosity,” Harvard Business School’s Indian-origin Dean Nitin Nohria said the “historic” gift comes from an organisation “revered” for its significant economic, civic and philanthropic impact.

“The Tata Group is widely respected for integrity and innovation, not just in India — where it produced both the first indigenous car and the 2,000 dollar Tata Nano automobile — but in a variety of business lines across several continents, from cars to hotels and from tea to information technology,” Nohria said

Read more: Harvard gets biggest international donation in 102 yrs, from Tata Group – The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/Harvard-gets-biggest-international-donation-in-102-yrs-from-Tata-Group/articleshow/6752185.cms#ixzz12PpiXZKn

Nouf Mohammed Al-Marwaai: Saudi yoga instructor

Nouf Mohammed Al-Marwaai: Saudi yoga instructor

http://arabnews.com/lifestyle/food_health/article155386.ece

The quest for knowledge has not ended for yoga instructor Nouf Mohammed Al-Marwaai, even though her bachelor’s degree in clinical psychology from King Saud University took her to Australia and later to India to learn about yoga and Ayurveda.
Thirty-year-old Al-Marwaai is the first certified Saudi woman yoga and Ayurveda expert and the co-founder of the Riyadh-Chinese Medical Center in Jeddah — the first center providing alternative medicines and treatments in the Kingdom. She is also the regional director of the Gulf Yoga Alliance.
Yoga was not a new concept to her, unlike the rest of the Saudi society, as her father Mohammed was founder of the Arab Martial Arts Federation in the Kingdom, Tunisia and Egypt before the 1980s.
She started practicing yoga at the age of 19, but remained dissatisfied with the meager resources and experts in the Kingdom, which persuaded her to travel abroad.
“I started to practice yoga just because I was interested in some slow and therapeutically exercises. I desperately searched for yoga classes or teachers but couldn’t find any,” she said.
“So, I started self-practicing with the limited resources I could access. I found an Indian teacher and started practicing with her for a year. Very soon, I realized its benefits for the mind and body.
“Continuing the practice regularly for years, I found that the practice and the knowledge are linked with many facts in psychology and science. Practicing it is not just an exercise, but its effects are far reaching, more than our brain can imagine.
“This made me serious and I wanted to study the science behind it, for which I started traveling and educating myself in different colleges, medical centers for yoga and Ayurveda clinics in different countries at the age of 24.”
So, why India?
“I traveled to many places like Australia first to obtain a graduation diploma in physiology and anatomy. I also studied Hatha yoga practically and theoretically with two other types of yoga, weight management and stress release therapy,” she said.
“Also, I studied some of the Ayurvedic medicine theories and its nutrition. This gave a deep insight about yoga and its functions in a body. After that I felt the need to go to India — the original land of this knowledge and learn more about the philosophy and therapy of yoga, where there are many colleges and universities of yoga and access to Ayurveda medical training and teachings.
“While studying yoga, I found it interesting to study Ayurveda because they are sister sciences and they use the same theory of mental and body energies, physiology and psychology. I heard and read about Ayurveda a long time ago before I start practicing yoga. I went to India to study more about both.”
In India, she also studied the management and diagnosis of disease through yoga and Ayurveda. After that she did higher studies in yoga therapy and medical approach, yoga psychotherapy research and higher academic studies in the field. Also, she wanted to understand the conflict between yoga and Islam.
For a long time, Muslims had shunned yoga because of the perception that it is linked to the Hindu and Buddhist religions. She argues that yoga was the practice of people living in the pre-Buddhist era, over 5,000 years ago.
“It is more a lifestyle and a science than a religion. Especially Hatha yoga, which involves physiotherapy, lengthening and stretching exercises with breathing techniques which affects and stabilizes the nervous and endocrine systems deeply and creates harmony in the brain,” she said. “Treatments should be taken without considering the religious background. There are many books which Muslim scholars translated from other cultures and made use of and vice versa. There is nothing that involves worshipping anyone other than Allah in yoga.”
However, Al-Marwaai claims she was lucky in getting good media exposure, which helped her get established. She received a breakthrough opportunity when she was invited by the King Abdulaziz University to hold a three-day stress buster yoga workshop, which was a big hit among female students.
She also conducted mental enhancement programs for gifted girls under the supervision of Ministry of Education from time to time. This brought her into media spotlight and many television channels including Saudi Channel 1, Rotana, Iqraa channel, Oyoon Jeddah and others interviewed her.
She then started receiving frequent invitations to address seminars and lectures about yoga and Ayurveda. She also received offers to spearhead awareness programs from multinational companies like Unilever and Proctor and Gamble in the Kingdom.
“After I was made the regional director of Yoga Alliance International (YAI) in 2009 in the Gulf region by Swami Vidyananda, the founder of YAI in India, people started to know more about yoga and enquired more about it and its health benefits,” she added.
In Dec. 2009, she started her center for yoga and other alternative medicines. She also conducts a certified professional yoga-teaching program. So far, 40 women have completed this diploma in and outside Jeddah.
“Around 20 of them are very active in teaching others yoga,” she said. “I also have more than 400 women students in Jeddah alone. I have a kids’ yoga program too and my five-year-old boy is one who has learnt many poses!”
When asked what made her explore yoga despite achieving a bachelor’s degree in clinical psychology, she explained that the link between yoga and psychology is very strong and known by every practitioner.
Yoga is a body and mind exercise involving control of the central nervous system, somatic system and autonomic nervous system and harmonizes all three together.
The central nervous system controls the mind, the somatic system governs the body and the autonomic nervous system controls the emotions.
Practicing yoga improves stability and endurance for the three systems, resulting in strong physical health, a focused and balanced mentality and balanced emotions. Physical, mental and emotional endurance improves, so practitioners experience less diseases and pain, less mental disturbances and disorders, plus enhanced and insightful emotions.
Talking about her family and background, she said that her father has been her biggest source of inspiration.
“Being an achiever himself, my father believes in achievements. He received the King Fahd Prize in 1990 for his self-defense program, which was implemented in almost every military force in the Kingdom,” she said.
“He is now an adviser to the Interior Ministry and the government has been very supportive to him for his services to the Kingdom by introducing martial arts here. My parents are my biggest supporters who are always there for me. My husband was with me for a year in my three-year trip and traveled with me twice. My sisters and mom take care of my child when I am at work or traveling.”
Al-Marwaai asserts that her stay in Southern Indian state of Kerala was a comfortable one. “I love the people there for their kindness, hospitality, sincerity and friendliness. Their food, culture, music and dress are lovely. I miss the family I lived with in India, who were so caring and treated me like their daughter so that I never felt homesick. I would love to thank them so much for all they had done for me,” she said.

Economic Consequences of Minority Appeasement – SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY

Economic Consequences of Minority Appeasement
SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY
[Former. Union Cabinet Minister for Law & Justice]
Source – Janamejayan’s Weblog
Economic science teaches us that only in a transparently regulated competitive market system, the allocation of the nations resources for alternative uses will be optimal and of maximum return on investment. This means giving to primacy to merit.

However, those sections of society which have disabilities, which could be mental, physical, gender, or cognitive, that which have been imposed on those sections by circumstances or by prolonged social discrimination, are entitled to affirmative action to compensate for these disabilities and inability, to empower them to compete but with a handicap. This is how we can achieve inclusive development.

By this criterion, only Scheduled Castes, Scheduled tribes and women are entitled to by-pass the usual competitive selection by merit. To offer reservations and quotas to Muslims and Christians is however unjustified because these two communities do not suffer from any imposed disabilities because they were part of the ruling classes of India– for a total of 1000 years, and hence could not be victims of any social or political oppression. In any event it is bad economics too because affirmative action leads to sub-optimisation.. It is pure and simple appeasement hence to recommend or advocate reservations or quotas for these two communities as in fact as the Sachar and Ranganath Misra Commissions have done.
The question that I have repeatedly asked those who are appeasing the Muslims today is: Why the Muslim community that ruled India for over eight hundred years and belonged to privileged ruling class even during the hundred fifty years of British Raj while subjecting the Hindus to untold tortures, violence, rape and suppression have become socially handicapped compared to Hindus? To date I have not received even a semblance of an answer.

Dr.Ambedkar had warned us 60 years ago about the terrible consequences of appeasement. Analysing the attitude of the Congress Party in 1940 to the demands of the Mohammed Ali Jinnah, he said the party was adopting a policy of appeasement.

In his book Thoughts on Pakistan, which I believe must be read by every patriot, Dr.Ambedkar had said:

Appeasement [of Jinnah] means to offer to buy off the aggressor by conniving at or collaborating with him in the rape, murder and arson on innocent Hindus who happen for the moment to be the victims of his displeasure.

On the other hand settlement means laying down the bounds which neither party to it can transgress. Appeasement has no limits to the demands and aspirations of the aggressor. Settlement does.

The second thing the Congress has failed to realize is that the policy of concession has increased their aggressiveness and what is worse, the Muslims interpret these concessions as a sign of defeatism on the part of the Hindus and the absence of will to resist. This policy of appeasement will involve the Hindus in the same fearful situation in which the allies found themselves as a result of the policy of appeasement which they adopted towards Hitler†.
He therefore felt that the creation of the separate Islamic state of Pakistan with transfer of population could be a preferable settlement that could end the Hindu-Muslim problem in the sub-continent. However, the Congress Party which was handed power by the British did not heed Dr.Ambedkars sage advice. Today, after six decades, it is too late to implement Dr.Ambedkars suggestion instead, I would suggest that we accept as our brothers and sisters those Muslims and Christians who proudly acknowledge that their ancestors were Hindus, and that they accept change in religion does mean change in their ancestral Hindu culture. Those who do not so acknowledge and accept this, should be placed on par with NRIs on citizenship rights.

When Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh made the ridiculous statement that ‘Muslims have the first charge on our resources’, he was revealing that he too had contracted the ‘M’ virus. Minorityism or the M virus unbalances the brain and rationality of Indian political leaders, and makes them lopsidedly favour minorities even if not required on the principles of equity.

Of course being compassionate to deprived minorities and their concerns is a noble human rights value. But being fixated on Muslims and Christians, as the only minorities of concern, even if they are majorities in pockets e.g., in Kashmir and Northeast India, is lopsided.
In such a lop-sided minorityism, Hindus as and when in minority do not have the same rights, even as a ‘last charge’, as the events in Kashmir and Northeast have proved. The facts that Hindus in these areas are being butchered, raped, driven out, forcibly converted does not concern Dr. Manmohan Singh. Even Muslims and Christians as minorities, are not entitled to ‘first charge’ because sequentially Muslims and Christians have been ruling classes for a 1000 years while Hindus were brutalized. Only SC and STs are entitled to first charge, and that too for one generation.

Political parties which have been swearing by ‘secularism’ all these years, because of lop-sided minorityism, have failed to persuade the masses that what they advocate is good for country. Secularism as defined and propagated today in India has been reduced to minorityism or minority appeasement. Only Hindus have to appease Muslims and Christians in majority in pockets of India, or anywhere else in the world have to return the favour of appeasement.. The question today is not whether secularisn is flawed but whether we should conceptually redefine secularism to make it acceptable to the masses in the country. Such a re-defined concept must be harmonized with concept of an Indian identity, which requires that India be regarded as Hindustan, i.e., a nation of Hindus and those other who proudly accept Hindus as their ancestors. In this context, Indianness means ‘Hindutva’. Thus, Indian identity rests on two pillars: India as Hindustan and Indianness as Hindutva.

In India, Jawaharial Nehru and his followers had given the concept of secularism an anti-Hindu content. For example, personal and inheritance laws would be legislated for Hindus and subject to judicial review, but not for Muslims and Christians. Thus Manmohan Singh’s “M virus’ has its roots in Nehruism. Even in public functions, cultural symbolism such as lighting a lamp to inaugurate a conference or breaking a coconut to launch a project was regarded as against secularism. A conceptual void thus will remain until we not only reject minorityism but also develop a concept ofsecularisn that is in harmony with the national imperative of Hindutva and the nation as Hindustan.

To fill this void, we need to develop therefore a concept of secularism by which an Indian citizen could comprehend how he or she should bond “secularly” with another citizen of a different religion, language or region and feel as a fellow countrymen. The Indian instinctively cannot accept the idea that India is what the British had put together, and that the country was just a body administratively incorporated. Instead, Bharat-Mata has a soul which Deendayal Upadhyaya had called Chiti which soul was not recognized in Nehru’s view. The ridiculous idea that India is a nation fostered by British rule, propagated even today by Jawaharial Nehru University historians, finds just no takers amongst the Indian people.
Only by using religious symbols can this void be filled. India being 83 percent Hindu, and that the folklore in this religion is pan-Indian, therefore it is easy for the masses of all Hindustanis to understand religious bonding. Ramayana narration traverses from the Punjab to Srilanka. Mahabharata covers incidents from Assam to Gujarat. Adi Shankara connected Kerala to Kashmir. This not need alienate Muslims and Christians if they proudly accept that their ancestors were Hindus. The problem arises only if the Muslims and Christians identify themselves with foreign invaders.

Minorityism has undesirable effect on national integrity. For example, minorityism enables Muslimmen to resist family planning by making their women vulnerable to sudden divorce, and hence not have voice in how many children they will bear. Muslim men know that uniform civil code will never come under a regime committed to minorityism. Christian missionaries have now under minorityism got a free hand to conduct money-induced religious conversion. They are not bothered from where that money comes and what ethical and moral norms they have to violate for it.

For example, Mother Theresa shocked the conscience of all genuinely secular minded persons when she wrote directly to Judge Lance Ito of Los Angeles Court on behalf of a known fraud and embezzler Charles Keating who was facing prosecution because he stole $252 million from 17,000 pensioners, retail stock holders and insurance premiums by selling them bogus bonds of his company. He had donated $5 million (Rs.25 crores) to Missionaries of Charity, Kolkata headed by Mother Theresa, and that was enough for her to write to Judge Ito directly asking him not to convict Keating! Her words to Judge Ito were even more astounding: “Please look into your heart as .you sentence Charles Keating -and do what Jesus would do”.

Judge Ito ignored her plea, and convicted Keating to spend years in jail, and also imposed a huge fine. He however asked the Public Prosecutor (Deputy District Attorney in US) Paul W. Turley to reply to Mother Theresa. Turley turned Mother Theresa’s plea on her by posing a question “You asked Judge Ito to do what Jesus would do. I submit the same challenge to you: Ask yourself what Jesus would do if he were given the fruits of a crime; what Jesus would do if he were in possession of money that had been stolen; what Jesus would do if he were being exploited by a thief to ease his conscience?” Then came Turley’s punchline: ” I submit that Jesus would promptly and unhesitatingly return the stolen property to its rightful owners. You should do the same”.

Then Turley implored Mother Theresa: “You have been given money by Mr.Keating that he has been convicted of stealing by fraud. Do not keep the money. Return it to those who worked for it and earned it! If you contact me I will put you in direct contact with the rightful owners of the property now in your possession”. (Extracted from Hitchens Christopher: The Missionary Position: Mother Theresa in Theory and Practice. Of course, Mother Theresa felt no such moral compulsion, ignored Turley and kept Keating’s tainted and stolen gift of $5 million.

Hence, we Hindus must learn today that in the name of secularism and ‘vasudeva kutambakkam’ we do not fall prey to pious looking foreign ladies dressed in saris and talking about a ‘universal God’. Remember, when Ravana came to abduct Sita, he came dressed as a pious sanyasi, and not as his true self.

Likewise, minorityism is a recipe for national disintegration and disaster. Capitulationist Hindus are paving the way for this to happen. The only antidote is a virat Hindutva. The present UPA is hellbent on protecting the interests of the Muslims and Christians by lop-sided minorityism. In 2005 a group of Mizos were discovered by Jewish scholars as a lost tribe. The Mizos also confirmed that their practices were Jewish but formally they were converted forcibly to Christianity by British colonialists. They desired to return to the Jewish faith. Therefore in November 2005 Israel decided to dispatch some Rabbis to Aizwal to conduct the necessary re-conversion ceremonies. But Dr.Manmohan Singh intervened on the direction of Ms. Sonia Gandhi to ask the MEA to cancel the Rabbas’ visa and inform Israel that “Government of India does not approve of such conversion activities”.

First we need to be clear about the concept of minority before we can discuss minority rights. It is essential hence to understand how Muslim and Christian came to he regarded as minorities in India. The word minority has a substantive meaning only if special protection in the Constitution is to be provided. Such protection is required for a minority in order to be compensated for some historically acquired or imposed disability. Otherwise it would be meaningless to have a discourse on minorities at all, much less waste public money on a Commission of Inquiry.

The present practice in India is to regard any group of less than 50% of the population-except Hindus (e.g., in Kashmir) as minorities. This is ridiculous. Numbers are not a sufficient basis for defining a minority. The Whites of South Africa are numerically a small number, but they cannot be treated as “minorities” deserving of special protection or reservations, or affirmative action. Parsis in India despite being a microscopic minority numericall, have consistently refused to ask or accept for any Constitutional safeguards since they have never felt forcibly disabled in Centuries of Hindu dominant society. They are therefore not a minority in the Constitutional or statutory dispensation.

Strange as it may sound, there is no definition of minority in the Indian Constitution [although Articles 29 and 30 make provisions for a minority, religious and linguistic), nor is there a definition in United Nations Resolutions or an universally accepted definition in international law.

Some countries such as Thailand and Brazil, refuse to accept that there are minorities in their country. These nations had told the UN Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities that they have no minorities to notify, despite being a multi-religious multi-racial society.

In 2001, a 11-judge Constitutional Bench, delivered a judgment on the question of minority rights in education [T.M.A.Pai Foundation case], but did not define the term ”minority”. What they did do was to opine that minorities are not lo be defined nationally but state-wise, thus overturning their 1971 DAV College judgment. Subsequent judgments of the Supreme Court, such as delivered by a 5-judge Constitutional Bench in 2003 in the Islamic Academy case, and the 7-judge Constitutional Bench in 2005 in the Inamdar case have also not defined the concept of minority.

In 1992 India’s Parliament enacted the National Commission for Minorities Act, but did not define a minority in it Section 2 (c} of the Act merely states that minority is what the Government of India will notify in the Gazette!! The Government has notified, without reason or explanation, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and Parsis as religious minorities. Why they are so has not been explained. Even the State Minorities Commissions have not bothered to define minorities.

In other words, the nation has been discussing minority rights for the last sixty years without defining what or who ran be the minorities. How can we identify minorities if we do not have a definition of the term? Because of this;

Hence, I shall begin with my definition of minority and then discuss what their rights can he in, the context of national integrity In this connection, it is appropriate to quote from the judgment of the 3-judge Supreme Court bench in Bal Patil versus the Union of India case, delivered by Justice Dharmadhikari in 2005:

“Such claims to minority status based on religion would increase the fond hope of various sections of the people in getting special protections, privileges and treatment as part of the constitutional guarantee. Encouragement to such fissiparous tendencies would be a serious jolt lo the secular structure of constitutional democracy. We should guard against making our country akin to a theocratic State based on multinationalism”.

What we can therefore hold now is that if a group is numerically small, and substantially below 50% of the population, then although it has the necessary attribute of a minority, that attribute is not sufficient for it to be declared a minority for the purpose of constitutional or statutory protection. Such a group must have sufficient other attributes as well, to be identified as a minority.

Based on the circumstances arising out of the Indian legacy, and in recognition of defining events of Indian history, I would define a Minorityin India as:

“A collective of Indian citizens, constituting a numerical minority and situated in a non-dominant position in society, endowed with characteristics which differ from those of the majority, having suffered from imposed deprivation over a long period and thus have acquired disabilities, are a minority if these disabilities cannot be removed except by providing special constitutional protection and facilities for affirmative action”.

That is for sufficiency of attributes to quality as a minority under the Constitution of India, it is required that such a group be in a non-dominant position in society, have suffered deprivation for a long period to have acquired disabilities which cannot be removed except by special constitutional protection such as reservations in jobs and educational institutions.

By this definition, the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes would constitute a minority even if they are a part of the numerical majority Hindu community. Their disabilities cannot be removed except by specific affirmative action such as reservation in jobs, education, and in legislatures. Backward castes of the Hindu community also suffer disabilities, but these can be removed by special arrangements of education facilities and financial assistance. But due to our political folly and selfishness, these backward castes have been given reservations in jobs and education which cannot now be taken away except by persuasion in the future. When world class primary and secondary education can be provided to all, it is possible that the youth of the backward castes would prefer to compete rather than advance by availing of quotas. Since, the Indian DNA structure is the same for all castes, hence, competing on merit, if equally empowered, is possible for the backward castes.

But Muslims and Christians cannot be considered as minorities in Indian society because their disabilities are not acquired from deprivation imposed on them. In fact Muslims and Christians, like the Whites of South Africa, have been ruling classes in India for a long period. Sequentially, these two religious groups have ruled India for over a thousand years, during which period they practiced religious apartheid against the Hindus. Hence, for national integrity, patriotic Indians should resist with all their might any attempt to introduce quotas in jobs and education, or for anything else, for the benefit of Muslims and Christians. Those Muslims and Christians who consider themselves as patriotic Indians should also, like the Parsis, reject any offer by mischievous politicians to introduce quotas for them. Instead they should ask for world class primary and secondary education to empower them to compete on a level playing field with the rest of the society.

Whatever has now been incorporated in the Constitution for minority rights cannot be taken away. Articles 29 and 30 are part of the Basic Structure of the Constitution and hence cannot be amended out. Hence, minorities will continue to have the right for example, to administer their own educational institutions. But as the Supreme Court has held in the Islamic Academy case, the unfettered right to administer does not include the right to mal-administer. Hence, minority-run educational institutions, including unaided ones, must be subject to obtaining Government approval for curriculum standards, faculty quality, and basic infrastructure that should be common to all. Sooner or later, we must require that ali students including Muslims and Christians, learn Sanskritised Hindi, whose vocabulary should be progressively Sanskritised till the Hindi becomes indistinguishable from Sanskrit. Our long term link language has to be Sanskrit, because it’s vocabulary is in large measure in every language. Even Tamil has 40 percent of its vocabulary in common with Sanskrit.

The goal of minority rights has to be to further social justice. Towards this end, we must strive for equal and high quality educational opportunity and create a mindset for national unity and integration. Quotas and reservations are essential for Scheduled Castes and Tribes, but here too the concept of creamy layer must operate. But we cannot accept special rights for religious minorities of Muslims and Christians, just as we cannot for Brahmins although they as poor a community as Muslims and Christians. The logic is the same—those who have been ruling classes cannot claim minority status in the constitutional matrix of the nation.
In my opinion, like the Parsis who have rejected reservations, Muslims and Christians should themselves decline to accept reservations in employment and education, and its leadership should instead look inward and analyse why after being ruling class of India for thousand years, they need now reservations to compete with hapless Hindus who have suffered huge prosecution, discrimination and impoverishment at the hands of Muslim and Christian rulers. In fact instead of Hindus giving reservations to Muslims and Christians, Hindus should demand that Muslims and Christians atone for past atrocities committed by their rulers on Hindus or alternatively, disown their rulers, and declare themselves proudly as those whose ancestors were Hindus.

Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges as Dr.Peter Hammond has observed in his many writings. When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well.

As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% and the non Muslim majority remains cohesive in any given country, Muslims will be for the most part a ‘peace-lovingminority, and not a threat to other citizens. This is the case in:

United States — Muslim 0.6%
Australia — Muslim 1.5%
Canada — Muslim 1.9%
China — Muslim 1.8%
Italy — Muslim 1.5%
Norway — Muslim 1.8%

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in:

Denmark — Muslim 2%
Germany — Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom — Muslim 2.7%
Spain — Muslim 4%
Thailand — Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves — along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:

France — Muslim 8%
Philippines — Muslim 5%
Sweden — Muslim 5%
Switzerland — Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands — Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago — Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris, we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections, in:
.
Guyana — Muslim10%
India — Muslim 13.4%
Israel — Muslim 16%
Kenya — Muslim 10%
Russia — Muslim 15%

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:

Ethiopia — Muslim 32.8%

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:

Bosnia — Muslim 40%
Chad — Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon — Muslim 59.7%
. .
From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:

Albania — Muslim 70%
Malaysia — Muslim 60.4%
Qatar — Muslim 77.5%
Sudan — Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:

Bangladesh — Muslim 83%
Egypt — Muslim 90%
Gaza — Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia — Muslim 86.1%
Iran — Muslim 98%
Iraq — Muslim 97%
Jordan — Muslim 92%
Morocco — Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan — Muslim 97%
Palestine — Muslim 99%
Syria — Muslim 90%
Tajikistan — Muslim 90%
Turkey — Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates — Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of ‘Dar-es-Salaam’ — the Islamic House of Peace. Here there’s supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:

Afghanistan — Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia — Muslim 100%
Somalia — Muslim 100%
Yemen — Muslim 100%

Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate kill less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons adduced on the basis of the Shariat.

It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large.

Appeasement proposals through reservations for Dalit Muslims and Christians have been in two pending petitions in the Supreme Court, a third from the All India Christian Federation has been admitted at the beginning of the year.

The apex court has asked the center to reply to the plea that Dalits in the Zoroastrian, Jain, Christian and Muslim communities be granted scheduled caste (SC) status. Already, the report of the National Commission for Religious and Linguistic Minorities, popularly known s the Ranganath Misra Commission, has stirred a hornets nest with its recommendations.
Submitted in May 2007 it was not tabled in Parliament until it got leaked to the media and the government had to give in to pressures from a section of Members of Parliament. Introduced in Parliament on 18 December last year, it says that the quota in government jobs, education and welfare schemes should be extended to all religious minorities, including the Hindus where they are in a minority. In the matter of the criteria for identifying backward classes, there should be absolutely no discrimination whatsoever between the majority community and the minorities. Therefore, the criteria now applied for this purpose to the majority community.must be unreservedly applied to all the minorities.

The Congress Partys election manifesto had claimed that it pioneered reservations for minorities in Kerala, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. However, the government it now heads is equivocal over the recommendation of a 15% quota for minorities, 10% of it for Muslims and the rest to the other minorities. It has made it amply clear that it is in no hurry to act on the recommendations which would only promote religious conversion. Christian and Muslim organizations hence demanded immediate implementation.

But a number of dalit organizations in Tamil Nadu also have warned of agitations if the Misra report is implemented. The Misra report has suggested that if the 15% reservation is not possible due to an insurmountable difficulty, then, in the 27% Other Backward Classes (OBC) quota, an 8.4% sub-quota should be earmarked for minorities, based on the Mandal Commissions estimate that the minorities constitute 8.4% of the total OBC population. The governments statement that it is considering this possibility is not going to be welcomed by the OBC leaders of the majority community.

Dalits in the Muslim and Christian Communities: A Status Report on Current Social Scientific Knowledgeprepared for the National Commission for Minorities by Satish Deshpande (with the assistance of Geetika Bapna) and submitted in January 2008, analysed data from the National Sample Survey Organization to map economic well-being of these Dalitsections of the two communities, and compare their situation with that of non-dalits in their own communities and dalits in other communities. It concludes, among other things, that there can be no doubt whatsoever that Dalit Muslim Section (DMS) and Dalit Christians (DC) are invariably regarded as socially inferiorcommunities by their co-religionists. This is a severe indictment of Islam and Christianity.

The other conclusions of this status report are also significant. In terms of poverty DMS are the worst among all Dalits in both rural and urban areas; DCs are moderately better off than other Dalits except Dalit Sikhs who are even better off. In intra-community comparisons DMS are only slightly worse off than non-dalit Muslims but that is because the Muslim community as a whole tends to be very badly off compared to other communities.
DCs have the highest inter-caste differentials for the opposite reason that the non-dalit Christians tend to be much better off. In economic terms, whatever differences there are among dalits of different religions only become visible in the top 25%. Other than rural dalit Sikhs, 75% of all other dalits are indistinguishable from each other. Urban Muslims show worrying levelsof economic vulnerability across caste groups. Occupational differences, where significant, show DMS to be the worst off in urban India. The status report says it finds a strong casefor according sc status to DMS and DCs.

It cannot be argued, as the Appeasers tend to argue, that if the DMS and the DCS are not so different from other Dalit groups, there is no basis for denying them the reservations enjoyed by Buddhist, Sikh and Hindu Dalits.

On the contrary, what it shows is that by conversion to Islam or Christianity Dalits are not able to improve their lot. That is why Dr.Ambedkar was farsighted to convert to Buddhism instead of Islam or Christianity.

Some of the radical Muslim leaders especially in forums where foreign journalists are usually present, proclaim unabashedly that the Muslims in India are living in perpetual threat and are being treated as second class citizens in this country. If that were indeed so, these leaders need to explain how over two crores Bangladeshi Muslims and over a lakh Muslim immigrate into India illegally from Pakistan at the risk of being killed by BSF or the Army at the border, and another 80,000 Muslims who came from Pakistan on valid visas and just vanished and got absorbed in India, gave up their Free From Fearenvironment and first class citizenship status in Bangladesh and Pakistan respectively to court a life of perpetual fear and a status of second class citizenshipin India?

If it is the poverty of India then explain, as Konrad Elst in his book [Indias Only Communalist] pertinently points out that successive UN reports on the State of the Arab countries have documented how inspite of their God given abundant oil wealth, they are hopelessly behind in practically every respect of human endeavour: human rights, gender equality, enterprises set up, original research conducted, inventions patented, internet access per head, books published, sales per book foreign book translated, etc.not to mention democracy.

Indeed therefore, religion-based quotas and reservation is not certainly the cure for a backwardness which is not imposed but caused by unsafeguarded and unregulated educational system. If state-owned schools have a high absenteeism of teachers, and even higher student drop-out rate because of poor employment opportunities at the semi-skilled level, backwardness will be the economic consequence. It is wrong however to identify it as socially imposed.

We thus now have to demolish some dominant caste myths: about our economy as well:
First, is that caste groups are not uniform monoliths. While, at an all-India level, upper caste households earn an average of Rs.86,690 per annum, OBCs earn Rs.59,741, SCs Rs.45,889 and STs Rs.40,753. [This data is from the NCAER’s annual household survey of income for 2004-05], averages, like all averages, miss out on the important differences.
An analysis of the NCAER data (in the book Caste in a Different Mould authored Sunil Jain) shows that while SC households in Uttar Pradesh can Rs.39,655 per annum, those in Punjab earn Rs.63,055; OBCs in Bihar earn Rs.40,839 as against Rs.73,223 in Maharashtra. Similar differences hold true for all other caste groups. The short point is incomes across caste groups differ widely across various states, which means the overall level of development of the state is more important than the caste of an individual when it comes to determining income levels. So ST households in Karnataka earn Rs.62,238 per annum, more than upper-caste ones in Bihar (Rs.51,187).

Second, related to the first, is that it is false nation that differences in income automatically imply discrimination, and therefore affirmative action is called for. Apart from the impact of the “state” of development has on income levels, the differences between castes are largely explained by education, by the industry/service of employment, by whether an individual is situated in a rural area or a small town or a big metro, and the list can go on. Even where groups are classified as ‘graduate and above’, if the group has more post-graduates, income levels are certain to be higher.

So, for instance, OBC households in villages (73 per cent of OBCs are to be found in villages) have an average annual income of Rs. 51,740 but this goes up to Rs.72,288 in small towns, Rs.81,745 in mid-sized towns (5-10 lakh population) and to Rs.95,999 in towns with more than a million people. Some of this is just the location factor. A driver in a village is going to get next to nothing while a driver in a metro probably earns Rs.7,000 on average, a month.

There’s education as well. So, a large part of the higher income levels in urban settings are probably also a reflection of higher education, not just location but because it needs sophisticated econometrics, and even that can go wrong, this is often ignored. An OBC household that has is headed by an illiterate earns Rs.24,363 per year, and this rises to Rs.32,169 in case the head of the household has studied till class V, Rs.67,371 in case she has studied till class XII, and to Rs.105,285 in case the head of the household is a graduate. Just 20 per cent of the OBC households have graduates as compared to 35 per cent for upper castes.

A recent study of Dalit villages in Uttar Pradesh by Devesh Kapur, Chandra Bhan Prasad, Lant Pritchett and D. Shyam Babu confirms the role urbanization plays. In Azamgarh district, for instance, the study found just 18.1 per cent of Dalit households lived in pucca houses in 1990, and this rose to 66.4 per cent in 2007. For Bulandshahr district in Western UP, the figures were 38.4 and 94.6 per cent respectively. Ownership of television sets rose from 0.9 per cent to 22.2 per cent in Azamgarh, and from 0.7 to 45 per cent in Bulandshahr. The found similar changes for mobile phones, simple chairs in homes, fans and even the use of shampoo, toothpaste and bottled hair oil. There are, the authors say, several reasons for the change: the rise of Mayawati could be one, as could economic reforms which led to greater marketisation of the economy. One of the powerful reasons, the authors conclude, is migration. While the eastern district of Azamgarh saw dependence on family members who had migrated to urban areas rise from 14.5 per cent in 1990 to 50.5 per cent in 2007, Bulandshahr district saw much smaller rise. Compare this with the population of family members living in he village, and this suggests that in Bulandshahr, villagers were probably traveling out of the village for work in the morning and returning the same day.
All of which would suggest the solution cannot be a uniform one. It has to be education in some cases, urbanization in some and industrialization in others. With over 75 per cent of ST households having studied only till class X (93.8 per cent till just class V) reservations in colleges are unlikely to be a solution, to cite one instance. Affirmative action also poses a problem in terms of implementation since 90 per cent of all ST households are in rural areas.
In the case of Muslims, where the government hopes to fix things through an Equal Opportunities Commission, it’s worth keeping in mind that nearly 90 per cent live in rural areas (64 per cent) and small towns; Muslims have the highest proportion of households who are self-employed in non-agricultural occupations (25.7 per cent versus 16.2 for Hindus) and the least who are salaried (13.1 per cent versus 18.8 per cent for all Hindus).
The moral of the story is that it’s not so much imposed disabilities as it is about urbanization, industrialization and education. Not that changing the scenario is easy either. The agitation against land acquisition in Uttar Pradesh shows the limits to the pace of urbanization.
The lack of Hindu unity and the determined bloc voting in elections by Muslims and Christians has however created a significantly large leverage for these two religious communities in economic, social and foreign policy making. Thus, although uniform civil code is a Directive Principle of State Policy in the Constitution, it is taboo to ask for it because of this leverage. It is not as if Muslims will not accept uniform laws when it suits them, even if it is against the Shariat. For example, Muslims accept uniform criminal code under the IPC even though it infringes the Shariat, but resist uniform civil code because it violates the Shariat. These contradictions are permitted for Muslims by the Mullahs because India is considered Darul Harab.

Accordingly Muslim leadership deploys its leverage where it is tactically advantageous. This leverage exists despite the people of India who declare in the Census that they are adherents of religions which were born on Indian soil, that is Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, and Jains constituted 83.21% of the total Indian population (as of last Census in 2001).

In 1941, this proportion, adjusted for Partition, was 84.44%. But this figure hides the fact that Hindus resident in undivided Pakistan have migrated to post- Partition India which is why the share of Hindus and co-religionists have barely reduced since 1941. In the area now called Bangladesh, Hindus were 30% in 1941. In 2001 they are less than 8%. In Pakistan of today, Hindus were 20% in 1941, and less than 2% in 2001. Such religious cleansing has however not been noticed by anybody in the world! When Hindus do not care, why should the world take notice?

If the figures are adjusted for this migration, then in the five decades 1951-2001, Hindus have lost more 3 percent points in share of Indian population, while Muslims have increased their share by about 3%. What is even more significant is that Hindus have lost 12% points since 1881, and the loss in share has begun to accelerate since 1971 partly due to illegal migration of Muslims from Bangladesh.

The current scenario of minority appeasement is that Muslims and Christians together even though less than 16% of the voters, vote en bloc. Hindus despite being over 83% of the voters are hopelessly divided and amorphous. Hence unless a Hindu bloc vote emerges, being at least 35% of the 83% minority appeasement will continue at Hindus cost.

The mother of all problems thus amongst Muslims is the lack of secondary and higher levels of education among. But let alone the Muslim women, even the literacy rates of Muslim males is way below the national average. This is so inspite of the fact that community wise, the percentage of Muslims living in urban areas is 50% higher in comparison to the percentage of Hindus, and the chances of obtaining higher education are more easily available to urban dwellers as against the rural folks.

Thus much more than reservations as a cure, the Muslim community in India must undergo a cultural revolution to develop a healthy attitude to secular and cognitive arts and sciences and to gender equality. Reservations and quotas are not the right medicine for the Muslim community’s current backwardness.

Whose man is that soldier fighting in Kashmir?

Tarun vijay

14 September 2010, 07:44 PM IST
India must be the only country in the world where being an antinational murderer means a person or organization getting invitations for talks with the government. Mir Waiz and Geelani should have been booked months ago and punished for their anti-India activities. They not only instigated Kashmiri youth to attack our patriotic people and soldiers but also vitiated the entire atmosphere in the valley bringing normal life to a halt and using Kashmiri youth as fodder for their Pakistani plots, resulting in so many killings of young boys. The fact of the matter is that the killers in Kashmir are these two pro-Pakistani elements, who would have been taken to task by any government with a spine much earlier than their fangs grew more poisonous. In such a situation, instead of talking tough and straight, the government is not only giving confused signals to ‘soften’ (whatever that means) the Armed Forces Special Powers Act but making gestures to terrorist supporters to come to talk. Talks, always a welcome way to find a solution, can be held or even an indication for a discussion can be sent only when the atmosphere is ripe for it and the other side, offenders in this case, show a willingness to come to terms. I must say Prime Minister Manmohan Singh sounded reasonable at the Armed Forces commanders’ meet on September 13 when he said: “The youth of Kashmir are our citizens and their grievances have to be addressed….We are willing to talk to every person or group which abjures violence, within the framework of our Constitution.” But is this the time to extend an olive branch?
Have they ever thought what effect these gestures by the government have on the morale of the soldiers?
For whom is the Indian soldier fighting the battle in Kashmir?
It pains me immensely to see how our secular media sirens show their undiluted love for the separatists on TV screens and they go to the streets of Srinagar only to interview the unpatriotic people. When they invite any of the antinational separatists on their shows, they display an utter lack of sensitivity towards those who love their country and give all the space and time to those voices of insanity and violence with a soft, affectionate anchoring you seldom witness when they put on trial any leader showing patriotic leanings. There was hardly a time, except during the Kargil war, when the voices representing the soldiers were given a chance to come to the TV studios or have their say on the editorial pages of the media empires. He is despised, hated and made responsible for all the bad happenings, in a sweeping manner. No one has treid to see the hardened daily routine a soldier is subjected to from 6am to sunset, and after that the night vigil. Anything untoward happens and rogue actors like Salman Khan say meekly to the Pakistan media: Oh, it was the fault of the Indian security personnel. Salman should have been tried for treason. But we have people who lovingly go to his house and try to ‘settle the issue’. These very people and their governors make this day possible when anyone feels free to speak against the soldiers, against the national psyche of patriotism. A soldier is not a daily wage earner like the stone pelters. He is a representative of the nation’s time-honoured traditions. He is nurtured and nourished on a family’s “khandaani izzat” – “Mera beta fauji hai”. Ask any politician acting as an apologist for the separatist murderers, has he ever thought of sending his child to the forces? A family offers mannats at the feet of their wahe guru over devatas to ensure their son gets selected in the “fauj”. He is trained by the best of the warriors at the National Defence Academy or the Indian Military Academy. Some lucky ones get selected early and go through the National Defence School route and see the pictures when they recommissioned – after a thrilling passing out parade in Dehradun. Their caps in the air and their moms and dads hugging them with moist eyes. Years of training and a life of a great Indian patriotic goes waste before the gang of rogue pro-Pakistan elements who have hardly any idea what they are demanding.
Whether he is in the Army or in CRPF, BSF or ITBP, the story is the same. He is there not because he wanted to loot and rape and maim people. He was sent by the Indian government to safeguard the interests of the nation and the Constitution. He is a uniformed gentleman. Those who blow the case of rights violation must be heard definitely. But can an individual’s fault be attributed to the olive green or the khaki fraternity of the soldier? I absolutely agree with Manmohan Singh when he says “The youth of Kashmir are our citizens and their grievances have to be addressed”. But this should be done through good governance and a mechanism that can win their trust and not through “Srinagar-CM-living-in-Delhi” type Omars who never find time to place a wreath on the body of a soldier martyred in Kashmir.
In fact, the killers of Kashmir are people like Mir Waiz and Geelani. The angst of Kashmir must be directed against them. The soldier would be too happy to go back to his barracks and celebrate Diwali and Eid with family.
In the secular sultanate of Delhi’s power brokers, a soldier is just another babu, another employee to be denied a justifiable demand of “one rank-one pension” by those politicians who raise their salaries 300% in a jiffy. And in the media he is a punching bag. Just read a poem an Indian soldier wrote (saw it on a blog; Ali, perhaps, was his name).
Why do I still serve you?
How you play with us, did you ever see?
At Seven, I had decided what I wanted to be;
I would serve you to the end,
All these boundaries I would defend.
Now you make me look like a fool,
When at seventeen and just out of school;
Went to the place where they made “men out of boys”
Lived a tough life …sacrificed a few joys…
In those days, I would see my “civilian” friends,
Living a life with the fashion trends;
Enjoying their so called “college days”
While I sweated and bled in the sun and haze…
But I never thought twice about what where or why
All I knew was when the time came, I’d be ready to do or die.
At 21 and with my commission in hand,
Under the glory of the parade and the band,
I took the oath to protect you over land, air or sea,
And make the supreme sacrifice when the need came to be.
I stood there with a sense of recognition,
But on that day I never had the premonition,
that when the time came to give me my due,
You’d just say, “What is so great that you do?”
Long back you promised a well-to-do life;
And when I’m away, take care of my wife.
You came and saw the hardships I live through,
And I saw you make a note or two,
And I hoped you would realise the worth of me;
but now I know you’ll never be able to see,
Because you only see the glorified life of mine,
Did you see the place where death looms all the time?
Did you meet the man standing guard in the snow?
The name of his newborn he does not know…
Did you meet the man whose father breathed his last?
While the sailor patrolled our seas so vast?
You still know I’ll not be the one to raise my voice
I will stand tall and protect you in Punjab Himachal and Thois.
But that’s just me you have in the sun and rain,
For now at twenty-four, you make me think again;
About the decision I made, seven years back;
Should I have chosen another life, some other track?
Will I tell my son to follow my lead?
Will I tell my son, you’ll get all that you need?
This is the country you will serve
This country will give you all that you deserve?
I heard you tell the world “India is shining”
I told my men, that’s a reason for us to be smiling
This is the India you and I will defend!
But tell me how long will you be able to pretend?
You go on promise all that you may,
But it’s the souls of your own men you betray.
Did you read how some of our eminent citizens
Write about me and ridicule my very existence?
I ask you to please come and see what I do,
Come and have a look at what I go through
Live my life just for a day
Maybe you’ll have something else to say?
I will still risk my life without a sigh
To keep your flag flying high
but today I ask myself a question or two…
Oh India…. Why do I still serve you?
http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indus-calling/entry/whose-man-is-that-soldier-fighting-in-kashmir