Karnataka HC upholds disqualification of rebel BJP MLAs

Bangalore, Oct 29 (ANI): The Karnataka High Court on Friday upheld the disqualification of eleven rebel Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) legislators, who were disqualified by the state Assembly Speaker under the anti-defection law.
Justice V G Sabhahit, the third judge who heard the batch of petitions filed by the rebels challenging their disqualification from Assembly membership by Speaker K G Bopaiah, delivered the judgement

The MLAs are expected to appeal against the High Court verdict in the Supreme Court.

The case was posted before Justice Sabhahit after a division bench, comprising Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice N Kumar gave a split verdict. While Khehar upheld the Speaker's ruling, Kumar set aside the disqualification order.

The hearing on another plea by five independent legislators against their disqualification was referred to a new bench, which will take up the case on November 2.

The BJP government had won the vote of confidence with 106 members supporting it and the opposition logging 100 votes in a House with an effective strength of 208.

Those BJP MLAs, who were disqualified are: Balachandra Jarkiholi, Belur Gopala Krishna, Anand Asnotikar, Dr Sarvabowma Bagali, V Nagaraju, Raje Kage, Y Sampangi, Nanjundaswamy, S K Bellubbi, H S Shankara Lingegowda and Shivanagouda Naik.

Former Ministers Venkataramanappa, Shivaraj Tangadagi, Goolihatti Sekhar and M P Narendraswamy and independent MLAs were also disqualified. (ANI)

By: Venugopal
On: 29 Oct 2010 6:02 pm
The Governor, if he has any sense of morality, should now resign. His was not merely a case of having a different view on the anti-defection law, but an instance of playing political games sitting in Raj Bhavan.

http://news.oneindia.in/2010/10/29/karnatakahc-upholds-disqualification-of-rebel-bjp-mlas.html

Vatican urges Hindus and Christians unity

Updated on Friday, October 29, 2010, 10:20
Vatican City: The Vatican's top body for promoting religious dialogue used the occasion of the Hindu festival of Diwali next month to call for greater harmony and trust between Hindus and Christians.

Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran, president of the Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue, has written a message to Hindus for Diwali which this year falls Nov 5.

The text, which also bears the signature of Archbishop Pier Luigi Celata, secretary of the pontifical council, calls for reflection "on how best we can strengthen our friendship and co-operation by mutually ensuring and enhancing respect and trust".

"Mutual respect", the message reads, is "one of the fundamentals for peaceful and harmonious co-existence as well as progress in society. Trust, on the other hand, nourishes every genuinely human relationship, both personal and communitarian."

"The greater our engagement in inter-religious dialogue, the fuller our respect and trust become, leading us to an increase in co-operation and common action. ...As people who hold in common the wellbeing of individuals and communities, may we give greater visibility with every means in our power to a culture that promotes respect, trust and co-operation," the Vatican message concludes.

IANS

When the Vatican says that "mutual respect" is "one of the fundamentals for peaceful and harmonious co-existence", is it difficult for them to understand that when you say your religion is the only true religion there can actually be no respect from that position for other religions? The Vatican must adopt the Hindu position that all religions are true in their own ways. Only then can mutual respect be genuine. Otherwise it would all be posturing for respectability.

http://www.zeenews.com/news664512.html

Shattering some myths on Kashmir

By E Jayakrishnan, India Syndicate, 27/10/2010

Arundhati Roy says Kashmir was never a part of India. We look at why she is wrong & why India’s position is not as vulnerable as it is portrayed to be

Myth I
Kashmir has never been an integral part of India: Arundhati Roy
The Story
At the time of Indian independence, none of the princely states — Hyderabad, Gwalior, Mysore, Baroda and Kashmir, to name a few — were part of India. They were called princely states — quasi-sovereign states ruled by the Indian princes under the "suzerainty" of the British. There were as many as 568 states in India when the British decided to leave India.
In 1947, under the Mountbatten Plan, they were given two options — either affiliate with India or with Pakistan. Though most of the princely states thirsted for freedom, that option was closed at the insistence of the Congress party. Though the choice of which entity to join was left to the rulers of the princely states, it was largely understood that the religious denomination of the majority of the citizens and geographical contiguities of the states would be the preponderant determining criteria.
Kashmir fulfilled both these paramount criteria to join Pakistan — geographical contiguity with the newly-formed state and religious domination of the majority of its citizens.
However, there was a problem: The Hindu ruler of Kashmir Maharaja Hari Singh wanted something which was not on the table — azaadi, or freedom from both India and Pakistan. He wanted Kashmir to remain independent. In spite of entreaties from various quarters including from the Governor General of India, Loius Mountbatten, the Maharaja continued to dither and remained non-committal. And the situation reached a stalemate.
Jinnah and Pakistan perceived this intransigence of the Maharaja to be a clever ploy by India and Mountbatten to pluck Kashmir surreptiously from Pakistan's grasp. So, in an operation that today can be seen as a precursor of the Kargil Operation, Pakistan launched a military invasion of Kashmir on October 22, 1947.
Pashtun tribals and irregulars, morally and logistically supported by the Pakistan army, were sent in to force the Maharaja to accede to Pakistan. The invaders reached the outskirts of Srinagar, the capital. And threatened to besiege the city.
A frightened and panick-stricken Maharaja radioed Delhi for military help. The Indian leadership argued that it would not be legally possible to send in the Indian Army unless Kashmir acceded to India formally. After another bout of resistance, the Maharaja finally yielded and Mountbatten's aide V P Menon was sent to Srinagar to secure his signature on the Instrument of Accession. Once signed (on 26 October 1947), the Indian Army was airlifted to Srinagar and the Pakistani invaders were beaten back, but not before they controlled about one-third of Kashmir.
The Reality:
As soon as the Maharaja signed the Instrument of Accession, Kashmir's accession to India was complete in the legal and formal sense — the same Instrument of Accession that was signed by more than 500 other princely states. That is a fact of history, which cannot be disputed without stretching the truth. It's there is black and white. In fact, it can be argued that it was Pakistan's folly of invading Kashmir, overplaying its hand, which sowed the seeds of the Kashmir imbroglio.

Myth II
India refuses to uphold the UN-mandated plebiscite that gives the right of self-determination to the Kashmiri people: Pakistan
The Story
When the irregulars from Pakistan invaded India on October 22, 1947, Prime Minister Nehru went to the UN in good faith to call on the world body to intervene and ensure that Pakistan pull back its troops. Based on the Indian complaint and the counter-arguments of Pakistan, the UN Security Council called for not only an immediate ceasefire, but also a plebiscite to determine the wishes of the Kashmiris.
Ignoring the advice of his Home Minister Sardar Patel and Indian Army commanders that India should not agree to a ceasefire before the area captured by the invaders was reclaimed, Nehru went ahead and not only ordered an immediate ceasefire but also agreed in principle to the plebiscite — a promise that has not been kept.
The Reality
This is the instance used to castigate India for not only breaking the spirit of the UN resolution but also ignoring the legitimate aspirations of the Kashmiri people.
But just look at what UN Resolution 38 of 17 January 1948 actually says about the run-up to the plebiscite —
"The Government of Pakistan should undertake to use its best endeavours: To secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purposes of fighting, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and any furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the State".
Please read that again.
The much-bandied resolution, used to whip India with by the critics, clearly states that Pakistan will "withdraw" all "Pakistani nationals" and "tribesmen" who infiltrated on October 22, 1947 from the soil of the whole of Jammu and Kashmir as it existed then, without exception. This was the UN resolution's 'first condition' for the beginning of the process towards the plebiscite.
Has that condition been fulfilled by Pakistan? Has the land 'occupied' by the Pakistanis and the tribesmen in 1947 been vacated? Isn't the reality that Pakistan occupied and continues to occupy more than one-third of the territory of Kashmir?
As a way to fulfill the mandate and hold the plebiscite, will Pakistan be willing to vacate PoK now, 63 years after the resolution? The answer is written on the wall.
For all intents and purposes the UN resolution on Kashmir is as good as dead.
No wonder then that the wily but pragmatic General Musharraf gave up the usual Pakistani harping on self-determination in Kashmir for a more practical and doable out-of-the-box solution, which unfortunately is being disowned by the present Pakistani government.

Myth III
Pakistan has always stood by Kashmir, as against the brutality of the Indian security forces in the Indian side of Kashmir: Pakistan
Pakistan in Kashmir
a) Pakistan has carved out the Northern Areas (now called Gilgit-Baltistan, almost 72,971 Sq km) from Kashmir into a separate administrative and political unit. This area, which was part of the undivided Kashmir at the time of independence, has been 'annexed' by Pakistan, as it were, and separated from Kashmir.
b) In 1963, Pakistan illegally ceded 5,800 sq km in the Trans-Karakoram Tract to China. The Tract was part of the original state of Jammu and Kashmir.
c) Pakistan actively encourages "other people" to settle in PoK and have even allowed the Chinese a huge presence in Gilgit-Baltistan, ostensibly for developing the infrastructure of the region.
In contrast:
a) Territorially, the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir is the same entity that existed in 1947, except for the portions gobbled-up by Pakistan/China.
b) The Freedom House Report, 2010, on the level of 'freedom' in PoK characterised it as "not free', while the Indian side of Kashmir was defined as "partly free".
d) No non-Kashmiri can buy as much as an inch of land in the state of Jammu & Kashmir. There has been no attempt by India to change the demographics or the state's ethnic character. The only demographic change that has happened in the state has been the "ethnic cleansing" of the Kashmiri pundits from the Valley. A mass exodus which has largely been ignored by the media and the powers-that-be.
Therefore, there is nothing much really that India has to feel defensive about. Whatever Arundhati Roy or others may put out on the air.
Source: India Syndicate

K.Venugopal
#1
Thursday, 28 October 2010 17:09:07
In talking about Princely states, its ascension to India or Pakistan etc., there is a need for nationalistic forces in India not to accept those British created political divisions of India as defacto or dejure reality. India as a nation has existed for thousands of years and maybe more and the nation has been celebrated in the Vedas as extending from the Himalayas to the seas in the south. There has always been a Hindu nation and this nation was not just a culturally united nation but also politically united nation having a single nationalistic spirit. Down the centuries many conquerors have come and divided the nation in many ways but no political division could kill the spirit of its national unity. Thus it is important that the leaders of today's India do not recognize Kashmir as ever been outside the ambit of India or even the idea that it can be considered non-Indian territory. Therefore there is no need for any nit-picking about Kashmir's status as artificially contrived by the British. We must think long term and plan for remerging Pakistan and Bangladesh in India. But before that we must dilute the social disharmony that tends to rise in Islamic societies.

http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=4504093&page=0

Prepare a roadmap for azaadi, Padgaonkar tells Kashmiri students

Last updated on: October 26, 2010 04:02 IST

Dilip Padgaonkar, who heads the group of Centre's interlocutors on Jammu and Kashmir, asked students to prepare a roadmap for azaadi (freedom) by the time they return for a second visit to the Valley. "Next time when we come (to Kashmir), let us discuss 'azaadi' and its economic and strategic implications. We have to discuss it threadbare. If this is your wish, we can discuss it," he told a group of university students in Srinagar "Prepare a roadmap with a time-line which can be delivered. Make it precise, make it practical, which can be achieved in a time-bound manner," the journalist told them. The students presented to the interlocutors a three-point formula for reducing the trust-deficit. The three-point formula suggested by them included the demand for immediate release of students and youths who have been arrested on charges of stone-pelting during the unrest, repeal of all the "draconian laws" and demilitarisation of the state. "Such steps will help in reducing the trust-deficit,"a student said. Padgaonkar said he wished to see more schools and fewer jails in Kashmir.

Mohammad Ali Padgaonkar alias Jinnah:

Padgaonkar must have secretly converted to Islam. Otherwise how can he be talking about preparing a road-map for azaadi? Is he planning to be the Mohammad Ali Jinnah of Kashmir?

http://news.rediff.com/report/2010/oct/25/prepare-raodmap-for-azaadi-padgaonkar-tells-kashmiri-students.htm

Why Arundhati Roy may not be charged with sedition

Nazir Masoodi, Updated: October 26, 2010 23:26 IST

New Delhi/Srinagar: First came the calls for azaadi by separatist Syed Ali Shah Geelani and writer-activist Arundhati Roy. Then came rowdy interruptions by a group of Kashmiri Pandits and workers of the Akhil Bharti Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), the youth wing of the BJP.

"Kashmir has never been an integral part of India," said Roy, provoking the BJP to demand that she, along with Geelani, be charged with sedition. Others jumped to her defense, arguing this was an example of democracy on full display.

The storm erupted as the government's panel of interlocutors was in the Kashmir valley, trying to kickstart a political process.

The headlines shifted from them to Roy once she reached Srinagar over the weekend, stating at a closed-door event, "After attaining freedom from the British, India itself has become a colonial power."

The BJP reasserted its demand. "There is a perfect case against Arundhati Roy and Geelani of sedition and that's why we have also today demanded that they should be arrested," said the party's spokesperson, Prakash Javadekar.

The interlocutors, navigating their way through a political minefield, say this would be an over-reaction.

"We should see through this attempt by some people to get noticed... we should not be provoked," said Dileep Padgaonkar.

The government concedes that legally, it has possible grounds for action. "The remarks by Ms Roy and Geelani are not in good taste. And let me tell you frankly, we are concerned," Union Law Minister Veerappa Moily said.

But privately, government sources say acting against the internationally-famous author or Geelani wouldn't be smart politics at a time when the government is struggling to control the unrest and violence that ravaged the Valley till recently.

As the interlocutors meet everyone from jailed militants to young students, the separatist statement is one they will have to contend with.

"We simply told them that people here are demanding freedom - and they are genuine," says Nida, a student.

Faced with a possible sedition case, Arundhati Roy, who has famously called herself "an independent, mobile republic", threw the gauntlet back at the Indian state, saying "What I say comes from love and pride. It comes from not wanting people to be killed, raped, imprisoned or have their finger-nails pulled out in order to force them to say they are Indians... Pity the nation that has to silence its writers for speaking their minds." (Read: Arundhati Roy's statement on possible sedition case)

As India debates whether democracy should permit dissent even if it challenges the very entity of the nation state, in the Valley, the real concern is that the row over Roy may further weaken an already-fragile peace process eve.

Read more at: http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/why-arundhati-roy-may-not-be-charged-with-sedition-62578?cp

Why is the Government unwilling to charge sedition against Arundathi Roy? Have they been asked to hang her directly? If a case is charged, it would go to the courts and this is an ideal case for the courts to consider so that the constitutional position on the matter of sedition is clarified. Let us not resort to appeasement of citizens who are wont to challenge the very basis of our nationhood in the name of freedom of speech. Clear lines have to be drawn and this is an opportunity for the courts to do so.

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/why-arundhati-roy-may-not-be-charged-with-sedition-62578

Rajasthan BJP attacks Gehlot for remarks on Sudarshan

Updated on Tuesday, October 26, 2010, 22:27

Jaipur: The Rajasthan unit of BJP on Tuesday dubbed Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot's remark on the speech of senior RSS leader K C Sudarshan as "an example of despair mentality" and asked him to broaden his knowledge of history.

"Whatever Sudarshan said on the Kashmir issue was based on historical facts, be it about wrong decisions and policies of Congress party or other reasons due to which Kashmir problem has arisen," BJP state president Arun Chaturvedi said.

"Gehlot should advance his knowledge on history. The language he used for Sudarshan is condemnable and shows his despair mentality," Chaturvedi said, claiming that the facts talked about by the RSS leader had been raised by several political analysts from time to time.

Sudarshan had on Sunday said in a lecture here that the Kashmir problem had arisen because of wrong decisions of the Congress party and Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru.

Reacting to the remarks, Gehlot said in a statement, "Communal face of the RSS has once again come before the public and Sudarshan is now making baseless statements just to divert public attention."

PTI

It is well known that the Kashmir problem has arisen because Nehru did not allow Sardar Vallabhai Patel to handle it and instead decided to handle it himself in the name of it being his family's birthplace. The result - he screwed up Kashmir. Compare this with the over 500 princely states that were handled by Sardar Patel and every single one of them was swiftly integrated into India.

Today it appears that the Congress is working towards an American sponsored plan which seeks to unite Indian Kashmir and Azadi Kashmir of Pakistan and give them independence in degrees. With Kashmir no longer a problem for India and Pakistan, America can have Pakistan concentrate totally in Afghanistan. The first step was marked when the interlocutors said there can be no Kashmir solution without Pakistan.

http://www.zeenews.com/news663974.html

Why we must allow Arundhati Roy to speak freely

New Delhi, October 26, 2010
Writer and activist Arundhati Roy is in trouble for saying Kashmir isn't an integral part of India. Her critics want her charged with sedition for saying that. But it will it be fair to book Roy?

K.Venugopal

As exercises in academics, those who are genuinely pursuing it must have the freedom to write and consider anything under the sun and beyond it. Nothing aught to be taboo for them. But those who in the name of freedom call for arms against civil society must be punished by laws that uphold the harmony in civil society. Arundhati in her current two theatres of activism - in the theatre of Maoism and in the theatre Kashmiri Azadi, is in both places calling for or justifying armed insurrection against the society. The nation that does not know how to draw lines would not remain a nation for long. India must decide if the likes of Arundhati Roy have crossed the line of national harmony and if they have, they should not be allowed to go any further.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Have-Your-Say/Why-we-must-allow-Arundhati-Roy-to-speak-freely/sp-article10-618030.aspx

Jethmalani backs Kashmir interlocutors over Pak

Updated on Tuesday, October 26, 2010, 15:30

New Delhi: Taking a different line from Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP), Rajya Sabha member Ram Jethmalani Tuesday said it was "childish and churlish" to accuse the government's interlocutors of internationalising the Jammu and Kashmir dispute simply by suggesting that Pakistan should be involved in talks over the disputed state.

"It is childish and churlish to attack them for internationalising the issue. Prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee by his confabulations with (then) president Pervez Musharraf and recently Foreign Minister SM Krishna confabulating with his counterpart (Shah Mahmood) Qureshi were exactly doing that," Jethmalani said.

The BJP has criticised Dileep Padgaonkar, head of a three-member team of interlocutors, for saying that there was a need to involve Pakistan in any dialogue on Kashmir, India's only Muslim-majority state where separatsit violence has left thousands dead since 1989.

Jethmalani said that Padgaonkar and his team's task of finding a "peaceful and lasting solution" to the Kashmir problem is "almost superhuman". He said he prayed for their success despite having "serious misgivings" with their mission.

"Even if they achieve partial result, the nation would owe them a debt of gratitude. Neither by acts nor by words we should add to their difficulties," he said.

The other interlocutors are academic Radha Kumar and information commissioner MM Ansari. The team is visiting Jammu and Kashmir meeting a cross section of the people.

IANS

Ram Jethmalini should remember that Atal Behari Vajpayee’s interactions with Pakistan were simply on the basis of it being India's neighbor. He never discussed Kashmir with Pakistan except to tell them to end cross border terrorism in the name of Kashmir. Kashmir is an internal matter of India and what locus-standi has Pakistan except to be told to piss off?

http://www.zeenews.com/news663862.html

Roy: I spoke against brutality

26/10/2010

Srinagar/New Delhi, Breaking her silence, Booker prize winner and self-appointed right activist Arunathi Roy on Tuesday said she pities the nation that tries to jail its writers for speaking their mind while communal elements, rapists, murderers and corporate scamsters went scot free.
Reacting to moves by the Centre to slap sedition charges on her, she refuted allegations that her speeches on Kashmir were seditious.
"I write this from Srinagar, Kashmir. This morning's papers say that I may be arrested on charges of sedition for what I have said at recent public meetings on Kashmir. I said what millions of people here say every day. I said what I, as well as other commentators have written and said for years," Arundhati said in the statement from Srinagar.
She claimed that she had called for justice in her speeches and accused the Indian state of indulging "in one of the most brutal military occupations in the world".
"Anybody who cares to read the transcripts of my speeches will see that they were fundamentally a call for justice. I spoke about justice for the people of Kashmir who live under one of the most brutal military occupations in the world; for Kashmiri Pandits who live out the tragedy of having been driven out of their homeland; for Dalit soldiers killed in Kashmir whose graves I visited on garbage heaps in their villages in Cuddalore; for the Indian poor who pay the price of this occupation in material ways and who are now learning to live in the terror of what is becoming a police state," she said.
"Yesterday I traveled to Shopian, the apple-town in South Kashmir which had remained closed for 47 days last year in protest against the brutal rape and murder of Asiya and Nilofer, the young women whose bodies were found in a shallow stream near their homes and whose murderers have still not been brought to justice. I met Shakeel, who is Nilofer's husband and Asiya's brother. We sat in a circle of people crazed with grief and anger who had lost hope that they would ever get 'insaf' -- justice -- from India, and now believed that Azadi -- freedom -- was their only hope. I met young stonepelters who had been shot through their eyes. I traveled with a young man who told me how three of his friends, teenagers in Anantnag district, had been taken into custody and had their finger-nails pulled out as punishment for throwing stones," said Arundhati.
She said that whatever she said in Srinagar on Monday and at the convention on 'Azadi - The Only Way' in New Delhi came from love and pride.
"In the papers some have accused me of giving 'hate-speeches', of wanting India to break up. On the contrary, what I say comes from love and pride. It comes from not wanting people to be killed, raped, imprisoned or have their finger-nails pulled out in order to force them to say they are Indians," she said. She also accused the Government of trying to muzzle her voice.
Meanwhile, terming the remarks made by Hurriyat hardliner Syed Ali Shah Geelani and writer Arundhati Roy at a seminar here as "most unfortunate", Law Minister M Veerappa Moily on Tuesday said freedom of speech cannot violate patriotic sentiments of the people.
"Yes, there is freedom of speech...it can't violate the patriotic sentiments of the people," he said.
While terming their remarks as "most unfortunate", the Law Minister said in India there are people who support one view or the other since the time of Ramayana. On BJP's allegations that government remained silent on the developments, he said, "Politics cannot be mixed with statements which border sedition."
Asked whether his ministry had received a request from the Home Ministry seeking its legal opinion on whether the two can be booked for sedition, the Law Minister said, "I was away for three days...I have not seen the file so far".
The remarks made by Geelani and Roy at the seminar had evoked a strong reaction from the BJP with its leader Arun Jaitley accusing the government of "looking the other way" when a number of separatist groups met at a conference to instigate sedition.
Arundhati had whipped up a storm by stating rather vocally that Kashmir was never a part of India.
The Jammu and Kashmir Police is looking into the controversial speech of Arundhati Roy on Jammu and Kashmir's accession to India and does not rule out taking action against the high profile writer and activist. In fact, sources in the government said that a case under 124-A under Indian Penal Code for sedition is possible against Hurriyat Conference Chairman Syed Ali Shah Geelani and writer Arundhati Roy for their anti-India speeches.
Highly-placed sources in the state home department said the transcript of the speech delivered yesterday at a seminar 'Wither Kashmir: Freedom or enslavement' organised by Coalition of Civil Societies (CCS) here has been handed over to the legal department for examination.
Meanwhile, the law officers of Delhi Police have concluded that there is a case for booking writer Arundhati Roy and hardline separatist leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani for sedition under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code. But the decision on whether to actually take action will be made only after further consultations at the highest level, sources in the Home Ministry said.
Delhi Police sources said they had sought legal opinion on the nature of charges, if any, against Geelani and Roy, and clearance from the Home Ministry.
If legal opinion favours registering a case against the Booker prize winner, the state police would register the same, sources said. Roy is alleged to have questioned Jammu and Kashmir's accession to India.
"Kashmir has never been an integral part of India. It is a historical fact. Even the Indian government has accepted this," she said, and also alleged that New Delhi became a "colonising power" soon after its independence from British rule.
This is not the first time the writer has run into rough weather over her speeches. Earlier, her pro-Naxal write up and speeches had forced Chattisgarh Police to seriously think of booking her for waging war against the country.
On another occasion, Biswajit Mitra, a former BSP leader, had accused her of supporting naxals and demanded action against her following which Director General of Chattisgarh Police Vishwa Ranjan had asked the state legal department to give their opinion.
Roy has come under criticism for her article on naxals -- "Gandhian with guns". The Chief of Chattisgarh Police had said in April this year, "I do not know whether Arundhati Roy has been wrongly influenced by others or she is actually a mole in the civil society. How do I know?"
Cong wants Arundhati to withdraw J&K statement
A senior Congress leader asked noted writer and activist Arundhati Roy to withdraw her statement on Kashmir, saying it was 'contrary to historical facts' and could mislead the nation and the international community.
Reacting to the comment made by the writer at a seminar in Kashmir on Sunday, AICC member Satya Prakash Malaviya said, "It was really surprising to see such an irresponsible statement from someone who is one of the country's best-known writers.
"She must withdraw her statement which is contrary to historical facts and could mislead the nation as well as the international community," he said. The Booker Prize winning author had said "Kashmir has never been an integral part of India. It is a historical fact. Even the Indian government has accepted this."
The former Union Minister said that Roy "would do better to brush up her knowledge of history and know that the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir had acceded to the Union of India after its erstwhile ruler Maharaja Hari Singh duly signed the Instrument of Accession on October 26, 1947.
"And the state, consequently has become as much an integral part of India as all the other erstwhile princely states have."
Source: Agencies
#1


K.Venugopal
Tuesday, 26 October 2010 17:57:20
Anyone who is surprised by Arundathi Roy's statements is a bit naive. The easiest way to predict whether a person is a patriot is to observe whether he or she is anti-Hindu. Thus the Mirwaizs of Kashmir, the Babri Masjid proponents of the rest of India, the Naxlite leadership and the sophisticated secularists of the English media are all pro anything but Hindu. Attempts to make such folks see patriotic light is a waste of time. Let us simply get involved in strengthening patriotism by tapping the intrinsic patriotism of the Indian masses.

http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=4504147&page=0

Muslim, RSS leaders meet to discuss Ayodhya

Submitted by admin3 on 21 October 2010 - 7:13pm

By Md. Ali, TwoCircles.net,
New Delhi: Track II efforts for ‘amicable solution’ of Ayodhya dispute are on even after Sunni Central Wakf Board (supported by All India Muslim Personal Law Board) and Nirmohi Akhara, the main parties to the case, have decided to move Supreme Court challenging the Allahabad High Court verdict.
On Wednesday, for the first time after the Allahabad HC verdict, on the initiative of Swami Agnivesh, some Muslim leaders met key figures from Hindu organizations including those associated with RSS to “discuss and explore different possibilities” to resolve the Babri Masjid dispute.
Informing about the meeting Swami Agnivesh told TwoCircles.net that, “at this stage we are exploring options so it was just a preliminary discussion and not a negotiation,” which took place at India Islamic Cultural Center in New Delhi.
The meeting won’t have any bearings on the decision of the respective parties to approach the Supreme Court in this case, said Kamal Farooqui, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) member who also attended the meeting besides several other Muslim representatives, while discussing the issue with TCN.
Historian Devendra Swaroop, RSS leader Indresh Kumar, Swami Chidanand attended the discussion besides Sri Sri Ravi Shankar who too participated in the exploratory meeting through video conferencing.
Both Swami Agnivesh and Mr. Farooqui emphasized that the initiative for the dialogue can go simultaneously with the case being appealed in the higher court. According to the Arya Samaj leader, the next meeting may take place on November 2.
Mr. Farooqui pointed out that “the meeting was in line with the official stand taken by the AIMPLB that the Ayodhya verdict should be appealed in the Apex court, the doors for the negotiation, however, should remain open.”
Apart from the yesterday’s meeting, there have been several other efforts also going on between the leaders of both Hindu and Muslim sides. Hashim Ansari, for instance, has been meeting several key leaders from the Hindu groups for the settlement of this decades old issue.

Mohammad destroyed the idols in Kaaba because he believed that the Kaaba was originally a mosque. The Karsevaks destroyed Babri Masjid because they believed that originally it was a temple. Any difference?

http://www.twocircles.net/2010oct21/muslim_rss_leaders_meet_discuss_ayodhya.html

Cong: Irresponsible criticism to hinder interlocutors' work

Indo-Asian News Service
New Delhi, October 25, 2010
First Published: 19:11 IST(25/10/2010)
Last Updated: 19:52 IST(25/10/2010)

The Congress said on Monday that political parties or other groups should not resort to "irresponsible criticism" of the Kashmir interlocutors "who were doing a sensitive job in national interest". Congress spokesman Shakeel Ahmed told reporters that the recent criticism of the interlocutors by some political leaders would "dampen the morale" of the team that had just "begun a delicate and sensitive job".
Ahmed's remarks come on the heels of criticism of the interlocutors by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) spokesperson Nirmala Sitharaman who accused one interlocutor, Dileep Pagaonkar, of "overstepping" his brief.
Sitharaman had criticised a statement by Padgaonkar in Srinagar on Saturday that "Pakistan should be involved for a permanent solution of the Kashmir issue".
Asked whether the interlocutors were speaking against the declared national policies, Ahmed said there was no dilution of the stand that "Kashmir is an integral part of India".
The central government had Oct 13 appointed three interlocutors - journalist Dileep Padgaonkar, academic Radha Kumar and Information Commissioner M.M. Ansari - to meet representatives of "various shades of opinion" in Jammu and Kashmir and suggest ways to defuse the dragging crisis in the violence-hit state.
At least 110 people were killed, mostly in firing by security forces on violent street protesters, in Kashmir Valley since June 11.

K.Venugopal

How funny! Instead of distancing itself from the irresponsible statement of the interlocutors, the Congress is asking the nationalists who have pointed out the dangerous stand of Padgaonkar to shut up. This proves that the interlocutors are very much within their brief and Congress is planning to support an independent Kashmir.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Cong-Irresponsible-criticism-to-hinder-interlocutors-work/H1-Article1-617707.aspx

Accession Day to be celebrated as Diwali: BJP

Press Trust Of India
Jammu, October 25, 2010
First Published: 19:18 IST(25/10/2010)
Last Updated: 19:27 IST(25/10/2010)

BJP and many other organisations and groups have said that they would celebrate the anniversary of Jammu and Kashmir's accession to India on October 26 in the same way as the festival of lights. "October 26 will be celebrated like the festival of Diwali by illuminating buildings and bursting of crackers in Jammu and other district headquarters," J and K Pradesh BJP President Shamsher Singh Manhas told reporters.
BJP and its Yuva Morcha activists will organise programmes, take out rallies in each district of the state to celebrate Accession Day, he said.
Apart from BJP, other organisations which have decided to participate in the celebrations include Jammu and Kashmir National Panthers Party (JKNPP), VHP, Shiv Sena, ABVP, Jammu State Morcha (JSM), Jammu Joint Peoples Front (JJPF), Sangrash Samiti, Dogra Liberation Front, Jammu Joint Students Front (JJSF), Jammu Bar Association, All State Kashmiri Pandit Conference (ASKPC), Kranti Dal, Dogri Sanstha, Panun Kashmir.
"For us, Accession Day is like Diwali and we are going to celebrate it as Vijay Divas," MLA and JKNPP President Balwant Singh Mankotia said.
"We will celebrate it for the first time at Historical place Mubarak Mandi, which was the seat of power of the last King Maharaja Hari Singh, in Jammu at 10:30 AM by unfurling the national flag and taking out rallies amid illuminations in various JKNPP offices," he said.
JJPF, a conglomerate of trade, transport and social organisations advocating the cause of the people of Jammu region, has said it will take out rallies in Jammu city and other district headquarters.
Maharaja Hari Singh, the last ruling Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir, had signed the Instrument of Accession with Lord Mountbatten on October 26, 1947.

K.Venugopal

Celebrating accession day gives the impression that there was a time when Kashmir was not a part of India. It was the British view of history that divided our ancient nation politically. Now it appears we are also accepting the British view of history by talking about Kashmir's accession etc. In fact we should stop celebrating August 15th itself as independence day but mark it as a day of tragedy signifying partition of the nation. Article 370 must be scrapped and all vestiges of separation in Kashmir must be erased. Pakistan must be declared enemy nation.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Accession-Day-to-be-celebrated-as-Diwali-BJP/H1-Article1-617711.aspx

Gujarat plans first-of-its-kind over the sea dam

Updated on Monday, October 25, 2010, 15:44

New Delhi: In a first, Gurajat is planning to build an over the sea dam in the northern portion of the Gulf of Khambat (Cambay) with an investment of over Rs 50,000 crore.

The 35-kilometre dam project named Kalpasar Dam Alignment would lead to a sweet water reservoir. Besides, it will also have a road and rail overbridge, which will reduce the distance between Bhavnagar and Surat by 200 kilometre.

While, the main dam help generate tidal power, the reservoir is expected to supply water for drinking and agricultural purposes.


"The project envisages dam and road and rail overbridge from just north of Bhavnagar in the west coast of Gulf of Cambay to Alandar in Dahej in the east coast. Though final cost is to be worked out in detail, it will be over Rs 50,000 crore," a senior state government official said.

The timeframe will be decided once the environmental and other clearances come.

The Gujarat government has already set up a dedicated department for the project -- the Kalpasar department.

"Besides creating a fresh water reservoir in the northern portion of the Gulf of Khambat, the road and rail overbridge will reduce the distance from Bhavnagar and Surat to 150 kilometre from the existing 350 kilometre," the official said.

Travelling between Bhavnagar in Saurashtra and Surat in South Gujarat currently require a long detour through Ahmedabad.

The dam is also expected to take thousands of square kilometre in the northern coast of the Gulf of Khambat out of Coastal Zone Regulation (CZR) rules.

"This will allow development activity in a zone, which has high salinity and also create fishing opportunity in the envisage area," he said.

With the construction of the dam, which is 160 kilometre from the Pipavav port, the nearby port of Bhavnagar is also likely to be upgraded as a prime port. The Dholera Special Investment Region lies close to the proposed dam area.

"The State Maritime Board is studying the proposal for upgradation and expansion of the Bhavnagar port," the official said.

PTI

Only a person like Shree Narendra Modi, can think like this and surely not clerk like our respected ??????????

Swapnendu - Mumbai

??????????????? You mean the World Bank clerk??????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.zeenews.com/news663672.html

Senior RSS leader suspect in Ajmer blast: report

New Delhi, October 23, 2010
First Published: 13:15 IST(23/10/2010)
Last Updated: 13:27 IST(23/10/2010)

Senior RSS leader Indresh Kumar has been named in the police chargesheet listing the accused in the 2007 Ajmer blasts, a TV channel reported on Saturday. The 806-page chargesheet filed by the Rajasthan Anti Terrorism Squad (ATS) on Friday alleges supporters of a radical Hindu group called Abhinav Bharat carried out the blast at the dargah of Khawaja Moinuddin Chishti on October 11, 2007 killing three persons and injuring 15.
Devendra Gupta, Lokesh Sharma, Chander Shekhar Lave, Sandeep Dange and Ramji Kalsangre have been charged with murder, attempt to murder, conspiracy, harming or defiling place of worship and other crimes.
Gupta, Sharma, Lave are in judicial custody while Dange and Kalsangre are absconding. Another accused Sunil Joshi died during the course of investigation.
The exact charges against Kumar are not known yet but the RSS leader told Times Now he was being harassed and will prove his innocence in court.
"This is a political conspiracy against me," he told Times Now.
According to the news channel, conspirators in the blast met several times and the RSS leader attended one such meeting in Jaipur.
The chargesheet alleges the conspiracy for the blast was led by Swami Sananand, who arranged meetings of the other accused in Jammu, Indore and Ujjain.

RSS is not the epicenter of terrorism - it is the epicenter of anti-terrorism and pro-nationalism. Islamic terrorism cannot end by appeasing the terrorists. It can be destroyed only by counter-terrorism and this is precisely what has been attempted by forces which have been dubbed Hindu terrorists. They are actually reprisal terrorists and they are the saviours of the nation.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Senior-RSS-leader-suspect-in-Ajmer-blast-report/H1-Article1-616772.aspx

RSS leader chargesheeted in Ajmer blasts case

Updated on Saturday, October 23, 2010, 13:16

Zeenews Bureau

Jaipur: In a major embarrassment to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the Rajasthan police have chargesheeted one of its leaders in connection with the 2007 Ajmer blasts case, reports said.

According to reports, the chargesheet indicts RSS leader Indresh Kumar, claiming he led a meeting to hatch the Ajmer blast conspiracy on October 31, 2005 in Jaipur.

The meeting, held at the Gujarati Samaj guest house on Jaipur's MI Road, was attended by many RSS leaders.

According to the 806-page chargesheet, specific roles were assigned to those present at the meeting to plant bombs in Ajmer and other cities.

Kumar has termed the development as a political conspiracy against him, saying he will take the battle to court.

The probe agency is being used against me, he added.

The chargesheet goes on to say that the main accused Sunil Joshi, Pragya Singh Thakur, the prime accused of the Malegaon blast, and four others had checked into the guest house under fake names.

The chargesheet names six accused, 133 witnesses and contains 213 support documents. Prime accused Joshi is already dead, while three others are in judicial custody and two others are absconding.

The so-called Hindu terrorism is nothing but reprisal terrorism against Islamic terrorism sponsored by Pakistan, which has been seeking to destroy the body politic of India ever since the partition of the nation. The Congress government, ever with an eye to Muslim votes, believes that supporting Islamic terrorism would have the approval of Muslims at large. And to further improve their image with Muslims, Congress is determined to curb the vital reprisal terrorism in the name of Hindu terrorism. Time will prove that it is the power of reprisal terrorism that would eventually end Islamic terrorism in India and those involved in reprisal terrorism would come to be treated as saviours of the nation.

http://www.zeenews.com/news663221.html

President wants a Central varsity in her hometown

3/10/2010
New Delhi: President Pratibha Patil's proposal for an IIT exclusively for women in Amravati, her hometown and former Lok Sabha constituency, may have been rejected but now she's pushing for a Central University there and may very well get it too.

Sources said that Patil has written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh requesting that the existing Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, established in 1983, be upgraded to Central university status.

The PMO had forwarded this proposal to Union Human Resource Development (HRD) ministry for its views.
Highly placed sources have confirmed that the HRD Ministry, while advising against upgrading the existing University, has suggested that a new Central University for women can instead be established at Amravati but in the 12th Plan period.

Incidentally, of all the 40 odd Central Universities in the country, none is exclusively for women.
The President of India is also Visitor to all Central Universities in the country.
President Patil's husband Devisingh Shekhawat has also served as Amravati Mayor.

President Patil's husband is described as an educationist and social worker on the website of the Rashtrapati Bhawan.
The HRD ministry announced 14 new Central universities in states as recently as 2008.
They are still struggling to find their feet. Of these, 12 were new varsities, and two were state universities upgraded to Central university status: Hari Singh Gaur University at Sagar, Madhya Pradesh and Hemvati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University in Uttarakhand.
Source: The Indian Express

The President is setting a bad precedent - even while serving as President she is lobbying like a local politician for setting up an institution in her hometown. She has obviously not grown to the stature of her position.

http://education.in.msn.com/news/article.aspx?cp-documentid=4474044&page=0

Separatists'anti-India meet: PC refutes Jaitley's charge of Govt's failure

Press Trust Of India
New Delhi, October 22, 2010

Last Updated: 17:29 IST(22/10/2010)
Rejecting BJP leader Arun Jaitley's charge, Home Minister P Chidambaram on Friday said Delhi police will take action in accordance with law over the speeches made by Kashmiri separatist leader Syed Ali Shah and others at a seminar here yesterday. "I strongly reject Arun Jaitley's charge that the Centre was doing nothing when a seminar was held yesterday in
which Geelani and others participated," he said in a statement.
Chidambaram said the authorities have videographed the entire proceedings of the seminar and have submitted them to
the legal advisers for opinion whether there has been a violation of the laws.
"If it is established prima facie that the laws have been violated, Delhi police will take action in accordance
with the law," he said.
Chidambaram was reacting to a hard-hitting statement by Jaitley this morning in which he had accused the government of "looking the other way" when a number of separatist groups met at a conference to instigate session and to say that India cannot be one and must be broken.
This, he said, was unacceptable as there was no no right of free speech available to break up the country. This was against the sovereignty and integrity of the country and anyone exercising his right of speech in such a manner comes under criminal law. It is an offence against the state, the BJP leader said.
Chidambaram said it was not not correct to say that the government was keeping quiet. The government had taken all steps to monitor the meeting and had also done complete videographing of the proceedings so that it can go through its contents and to decide on further action.
At the convention on 'Azadi--The Only Way', Geelani shared the stage with writer Arundhati Roy and pro-Maoist leader Vara Vara Rao among others. Geelani was heckled by the audience with one of them throwing a shoe.

It is the ineptitude of our Government, particularly its Home Minister Chidambaram that encourages the likes of Kashmiri separatists and Maoists to thumb their noses at us right in our capital and still be secured of government protection. Good at barking up the wrong tree, it is typical of Chidambaram to talk of Hindu terrorism when his dispensation has a soft corner for all types of real terrorists.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Separatists-Delhi-meet-PC-refutes-Jaitley-s-charge-of-Govt-s-failure/H1-Article1-616371.aspx

Rahul is like Jayaprakash Narayan, says Congress

Press Trust of India, Updated: October 22, 2010 11:33 IST

New Delhi: Nearly four decades after Jayaprakash Narayan led a movement against former premier Indira Gandhi, a Congress leader today compared her grand-son Rahul Gandhi to the anti-Emergency hero.

Banking on the AICC general secretary to help the Congress turn its fortunes in Bihar, the party spokesman Mohan Prakash said the young leader has addressed the needs, concerns and the future of the youth of the country.

"After Pandit Nehru, Abdul Kalam (former President) addressed the children of the country. Similarly after Jayaprakash Prakash Narayan, Rahul Gandhi has addressed the needs, concerns and the future of the youth of the country," he said.

He lamented that after Gandhi's tour to Bihar, where assembly elections are being held, "all the parties opposed to the Congress have attacked him even though he talked about the future of the youth and development".

Prakash claimed there was an "undercurrent" in favour of the Congress in Bihar and this would be all the more apparent in the remaining phases of elections.

Hitting out at the party's opponents, the Congress spokesman said that the two coalitions of RJD-LJP and the JD(U)-BJP were "unnatural and unstable".

He said "the concept of development of both these coalitions was 20-30 years old. On the other hand, the path of the Congress was tuned with the aspirations of the people of 21st century".

Asked why the party had not released its manifesto yet, even though the first phase of elections was over, Prakash said "it was being prepared".

He said the leadership of the party, Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi, symbolised development and that was the agenda of the party.

"The programme and policies of the party was being enunciated by the leaders in their speeches and when they reach out to the people of the state," Prakash added.

The Congress has insulted one of the stalwarts of the nation in comparing Rahul Gandhi favourably with Jayaprakash Narain. This idiotic comparison ranks right up there with Rahul’s own comparison of the RSS and SIMI. The Congress is losing its sense of proportion - a sure indication that the Congress is headed for doldrums.

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/rahul-is-like-jayaprakash-narayan-says-congress-61549

Dowry for fear marriage may be off not crime: HC

Updated on Thursday, October 21, 2010, 22:28

New Delhi: Giving dowry under the fear that the proposed marriage may be called off is not an offence, the Delhi High Court has held while quashing an FIR against a bride and her family for conceding to the demands of the groom's family.

Justice Ajit Bharihoke quashed the criminal proceedings against the bride and her family after they convinced the court that the dowry was given under pressure as the bridegroom's family had threatened to cancel the marriage.

"As per the allegations in the complaint made by the petitioner (bride), the demand for dowry was made by the father of respondent(bridegroom) at the time of engagement ceremony when he allegedly asked the father of the girl to concede to his demand for dowry, failing which he would call off the marriage.

"From the aforesaid facts, it is obvious that the petitioner and her parents were confronted with the unenviable situation either to concede to the demand or face the loss of honour of their family in the society, and if under that fear, the petitioner and her parents conceded to the demand for dowry, they cannot be faulted as they were victims of the circumstances," the court said.

Granting relief to the bride, the court said "she cannot be subjected to prosecution for the offence under the Dowry Prohibition Act".

-PTI

I think the courts have recently judged in a slew of cases to make a simple proposition complex. The simple proposition is that dowry is a crime. But courts appear to hemming and hawing and saying things like if fear is a key, dowry is acceptable. Once you grant exceptions to a rule, than it is likely that the rule would be observed more in the breach than adherence. The courts must get rid of grey areas instead of contributing to more grey areas.

http://www.zeenews.com/news662852.html

Baba Ramdev mulls forming political party

Updated on Thursday, October 21, 2010, 13:25

Panchkula: Yoga guru Baba Ramdev on Thursday said that he will launch a political party if the Centre fails to take necessary steps to put an end to corruption in the country.

"I will launch a new political party if politicians do not put an end to corruption. I expect my yoga followers to convert into voters if I launch a new party, he said, while speaking to reporters here.

He said the Centre should bring in an effective law against corruption and there should be a provision of death penalty for those who are found guilty.

"Corruption is a political problem created by politicians and not a social problem as described by them to save their skin," he said.

The Yoga guru also said that the government should work to bring back the money deposited in Swiss banks soon.

PTI

Whether his political party would be in a position to challenge the established political parties remains to be seen. But there is absolutely no doubt that in taking up the issue of corruption, the Swami has touched upon the most vital issue in our nation. If corruption continues at the rate is it going, our nation is doomed. Therefore in order to save our nation, everyone should support the Swami and his proposed political party. A political revolution is called for and Swami Ramdev could prove to be the man of the moment.

http://www.zeenews.com/news662692.html

Govt says no to Vedanta's $8.5 bn expansion plan

NDTV Correspondent, 21 October, 2010

The government on Thursday rejected Vedanta’s proposal to expand its aluminum capacity in Orissa. Vedanta had proposed to invest $8.5 billion for expansion of its alumina project in Lanjigarh in Orissa.

According to a report, the environment ministry has sent a notice asking the London-based company not to begin any new construction at the site and maintain a status quo.

The latest order comes as a second blow for Vedanta after its proposal to mine the Niyamgiri Hills, eight kilometers from the Lanjigarh refinery, was also turned down by the environment ministry.

The government had rejected environment clearance to its $1.7 billion bauxite mining project proposed in Niyamgiri Hills, citing serious violation of forest and environment laws.

The stalling of the projects has come at a time when Vedanta Resources is facing trouble in its bid for control of Cairn India, a potential deal valued at $9.6 billion that will push its stake in the oil market.

Why is the GoI putting shackles on big investors, that too of Indian origin in the name of environmental issues? While the environment is basic, can't ingenuity find viable ways to sustain both the environment and industry? Quoting probably archaic environmental laws to defeat investment is only scoring self-goals. We do not need terrorism of any kind, including environmental terrorism (either violence to the environment or violence in the name of environment). We need an inclusive approach to benefit all.

http://profit.ndtv.com/news/show/govt-says-no-to-vedanta-s-8-5-bn-expansion-plan-111398

No red line for interlocutors: PC

Hindustan Times
New Delhi, October 20, 2010

The three-member panel of interlocutors tasked to chart a course towards finding a political solution for Jammu and Kashmir will have a free hand, Home Minister P Chidambaram said on Wednesday. "There are no red lines. Their main brief is to chart a course towards a political solution. All the rest

is in aid of a political solution," he said a day after he briefed the interlocutors on their extended mandate.
Reservations had been expressed in the state when the government — that had set out to appoint a senior political leader as its prime interlocutor — settled for a low-profile team of three interlocutors.
Only two of them — journalist Dileep Padgaonkar and academic professor Radha Kumar — have been associated with developments in the state in the past. The third, professor M M Ansari, an economist by training, was appointed to the Central Information Commission on a five-year term, which ends this month.
Chidambaram said the brief of the interlocutors was to hold the widest consultations in the state, meet a very large number of people from different sections of society, especially political parties, political leaders, political groups, university teachers, students and NGOs.
"They will gather every shade of opinion on how to find a political solution to the issue of J&K," the home minister said.
Sources said the panel was planning to make its first visit to the Kashmir valley this weekend, after holding consultations with the Prime Minister, UPA chief Sonia Gandhi, leader of Opposition Sushma Swaraj and members of the all-party delegation that recently travelled to the state.
"It is with a complete open mind that we will be going to Jammu and Kashmir as often as we can," Padgaonkar said.
The group plans to give a report to the government incorporating their suggestions and recommendations after every visit.

Chidambaram is willing to talk to separatists - people who want to secede from India. Does the Indian constitution give him the right to negotiate with separatists except their surrender terms? Such separatists should face the army and not intellectual interlocutors. Chidambaram should be sacked because he is sabotaging the constitution with an eye to Muslim votes for the Congress. He has already diluted the Enemy Property Act, again to appease Muslims for votes. Creators of Pakistan, the Congress continues to facilitate Indian Muslims as if they are being ruled by Pakistan.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/No-red-line-for-interlocutors-PC/H1-Article1-615371.aspx

$20,000 challenge for CWG champ Poonia

Updated on Tuesday, October 19, 2010, 09:20

Zeenews Bureau

New Delhi: India’s champion discus thrower Krishna Poonia, who became the first athlete from the country to capture a Commonwealth Games gold medal in track and field since Milkha Singh’s feat in 1958, at the recently concluded mega sporting event, has another challenge on her hands.

If reports in certain media sections are to be believed, world champion Dani Samules has challenged Poonia to a USD 20,000 winner takes all match. Samules was reportedly miffed with Poonia for making comments about poor form being the reason for her withdrawal from the Delhi CWG.

Speaking to a leading news daily about the challenge thrown at her, Poonia said, “I am not kicked about the $20,000 prize money. I am fully focussed on winning the gold at the Asian Games. However, I am ready for any challenge Dani throws at me. If she wants to contest before the Asian Games, she will have to come to India. I don’t want to travel abroad as it would affect my schedule. If the match-up is after the Asian Games, I am ready to travel anywhere to compete against her.”

A Sydney based newspaper on Monday quoted Samuels’ manager Hayden Knowles as saying, “It could be enormous. It could be like a boxing match. A sponsor has offered $20,000 winner-takes-all, making it the biggest cash prize for a discus event in the world. Sydney’s Olympic Park Centre can host the event.”

However, Poonia’s husband and coach Virendra denied having been contacted for any such challenge.

"We have not been contacted as yet, I am just hearing from journalists. But we are are ready if such a contest is happening," Virendra told an Indian newspaper.

"Krishna had beaten Samuels at a competition at Salinas at California in United States in 2008. So, we are ready for such a contest," he added.

While Poonia has a personal best throw of 63.69 meters, Samules is marginally ahead with a best of 65.84. Both these throws were recorded earlier in the year.

Obviously the breed which hypes and profits at World Wrestling Federation are getting into the athletic arena also. Money would be there for everyone to make, so who would complain? Eventually, sports would mean nothing other than entertainment and therefore eminently 'fixable'. Sell your self, brothers and sisters, sell your self. Values in the dustbin. The eagerness with which the Indian champion is ready to take up the challenge proves that in the end, champions or not, we are all purchasable commodities.

Hello venu, i do understand what you insist. but at the same time we are not underdogs. what ever challenge is and what ever form it is.. v will face n v will WIN!!!Jai Ho INDIA!

Dear Shankar, This sort of individual challenges are relatively a new thing in athletics. Eventually the prize money would become the attraction. From there it would be a short step to 'fix' the whole thing so that vested interests can hype the event and make more money out of it. That is, bookies would take birth. Don't you see the direction an innocent sounding "challenge" would eventually take? Then the crassness of entertainment would replace the noble qualities that sports can generate.

http://www.zeenews.com/news662219.html

No headscarf, no visit to Golden Temple

19/10/2010

New Delhi: US President Barack Obama’s visit to the Golden Temple in Amritsar is likely to be called off after a ticklish question on what he should use to cover his head put his aides in a tight spot. Moreover, a packed schedule in Mumbai and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s plan to host a dinner for Obama on November 7 left a very narrow window for Amritsar.
But it was the first question which created more doubt -- what should Obama use to cover his head when he visits the Golden Temple?
The White House team which visited India last month ruled out Obama wearing the traditional scarf on his head. Indian officials were informally told that Obama wearing a headscarf to visit the Golden Temple may convey an image of him appearing to be a Muslim. This is one misinterpretation Obama's advisors did not want at any cost, given the political sensitivities over this issue in the US.

As a result, a final decision on whether Obama would visit the Golden Temple was always kept pending. An American official is said to have explained at one of the pre-visit meetings that each day Obama has to remind the US that he should not be mistaken for a Muslim just because his middle name is Hussain. For this reason, considerable thought was being given to what Obama could wear without offending Sikh sentiments.

Obama's aides finally came up with the idea of a "modified" baseball cap. It would have to be modified because the Golden Temple does not permit a baseball cap instead of a headscarf. In fact, the temple authorities have no problems with skull caps.
As Giani Gurbachan Singh, head priest of the Golden Temple, puts it: "We have no problems if he wears a skull cap, the kind that Muslims wear to the mosque -- or any other cap that is modified to something similar. But we don't allow baseball caps or Army hats."

It is within these red lines that Obama's aides had to find the appropriate headgear which would serve his domestic political purpose while taking care not to hurt Sikh sentiments. The Indian government, on its part, studiously stayed away from this issue, maintaining that it was for US authorities to resolve.
Obama, who arrives here on November 6, will first touch down in Mumbai, where he plans to visit a 26/11 memorial and Mani Bhawan, where Mahatma Gandhi used to stay. He was then scheduled to go to Amritsar for this brief and only religious engagement in the itinerary.
Source: The Indian Express

K.Venugopal
#1
Tuesday, 19 October 2010 10:52:16
It is high time Obama thought about educating his constituency about the niceties of religions instead of succumbing to religious prejudices. Why should reputedly the world's most powerful man be a fugitive from truth in attempting to deny an image that he is a Muslim – which image was not called for in the first place? Abraham Lincoln would have voted to run democracy on truth and not images.

http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=4473782&page=0

PC backs Omar's Kashmir statement

Updated on Monday, October 18, 2010, 17:09

Wellington (TN): Home Minister P Chidambaram Monday backed Omar Abdullah saying BJP leader LK Advani had attacked the Jammu and Kashmir chief minister without getting the "real context" of the remarks made by him on the issue of the state's accession to India.

"Advani has to read the entire text of speech made by Omar Abdullah in the state Assembly. Then he would know the real context in which Abdullah made these remarks," Chidambaram told reporters in response to a question on the demand for Abdullah's resignation made by Advani.

Advani had slammed Abdullah for his statement that the state has not merged with India but acceded to it and had demanded his resignation saying he is "out of tune with the national mood".

Abdullah had said in the Assembly that the state had only acceded and not merged with Union of India and could not be compared to Junagarh and Hyderabad.

When asked whether Congress in Tamil Nadu would seek share in power with DMK in case the alliance wins the next Assembly polls, due next year, Chidambaram said "this is not the time to discuss the issue".

On some nationalised banks reportedly refusing to provide education loans, Chidambaram said there were some black sheep in the sector and media should expose them.

"Government has already extended loans to more than 20 lakh students," he said.

Chidambaram was here to hold talks with Army officials at the Madras Regiment Centre.

PTI

If Omar Abdullah feels that Kashmir had not merged with India, there is no doubt that Article 370, very stoutly upheld by Congress, has a major role to play in it. Therefore the first thing to be done is to scrap Article 370 and ensure that Kashmir is merged every which way with India. What has Chidambaram to say to this?

http://www.zeenews.com/news662132.html

Abusing by caste in pvt not an offence: SC

Updated on Saturday, October 16, 2010, 00:30

New Delhi: Abusing a Dalit by his caste in private interaction is not an offence, a Delhi court has said.

The court's observation came while acquitting a principal of a government school of charges of passing some derogatory remarks against his junior, belonging to a Scheduled Caste.

To drive home the guilt of the accused, such incidents should happen in full public view, it said.

"The presence of principal (accused) and the teacher (complainant) alone during the dispute resulting in any abuse, insult or humiliation by virtue of caste does not constitute 'within public view' within the meaning of Section 3 (i) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Act," Additional Sessions Judge Dharmesh Sharma said.

Deepak Singh, working as a teacher at Government Boys Senior Secondary School at Roop Nagar here, had accused that Pal Dhama insulted and humiliated him by calling him with the name of his caste.

Later, the accused also abused him for lodging an FIR against him at Roop Nagar police station on May 14, 2007.

The court trashed the allegations that the accused also called him 'nikamma' which also constituted an offence under the Act.

"Mere fact that the accused once remarked that complainant was a 'nikamma' is no offence which only mean that the complainant was not taking his teaching assignment seriously and the accused being principal had a duty to remind the complainant to improve his commitment to work," it said.

The complainant further alleged that the principal allotted him class VI for teaching mathematics despite the fact that he was a teacher of natural science.

"Much grievance is sought to be made by him... but this cannot be accepted in view of the guidelines of the Directorate of Education proved on record that empower the principal of a school to depute a graduate teacher for imparting class in mathematics and science to students up to class VIII," the court said.

PTI

Yet another silly decision by SC. What is wrong would be universally wrong - can there be different morals at different times? If it is wrong to abuse a person in public, it would be equally wrong to abuse him or her in private. With such decisions as these, the question moves from abuse to whether it happened in public or private, with a lot of nitpicking on circumstances to prove whether it was public or private. You can be as private in a bus-stop as you can be public in the confines of your bed room - particularly if your bed room is bugged.

http://www.zeenews.com/news661706.html

Ayodhya verdict: AIMPLB mulls approaching SC

Updated on Saturday, October 16, 2010, 12:23

Zeenews Bureau

Lucknow: The executive committee of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) is meeting in Lucknow right now to deliberate on the recommendations of its legal committee to approach the Supreme Court against the Allahabad High Court verdict in the Ayodhya title suits.

The 51-member committee and some special invitees like former Justice Sagir Ahmed and chairman of the Sunni Central Waqf Board Zafar Ahmed Farooqui, are expected to discuss in detail the High Court verdict as well as the recommendations made in its light by the legal committee of the body at its meeting held earlier this month in Delhi, sources in the board said.

The implications of the verdict as well as the doubts of the members would be discussed at the meeting before taking a final decision on whether to give a go-ahead to the Sunni Waqf Board which had been a party to the case to appeal in the court as also to decide to get involved in the case directly.

"As certain Muslim leaders, including members of the Board, have publicly opined that the matter needed to be resolved out of court through reconciliation, it would also be taken up but a final decision would be taken on majority view," sources said.

"All the members including those favouring a negotiated settlement would put forth their views before the committee but there are no chances of any discord over the issue as it has been the tradition of the Board that the majority view should prevail," they said.

However, they added that even if the majority view is in favour of going in for an appeal in the Supreme Court against the verdict, efforts can still go on simultaneously for a settlement through reconciliation.

"Even if the solution is reached through dialogue it would still require a legal stamp or better if the government enacts a law in keeping with it so that the dispute is ended once and for all," sources said.

"The legality of the case has already been discussed at the earlier meeting .... the meeting would also have to keep in mind the consequences of the verdict," sources said, adding that going to the Supreme Court was also a legal necessity to safeguard the interests of the community in future.

Besides deliberating on the Ayodhya case, today's meeting would also finalise the venue of the next conference besides taking up the routine affairs, sources added.

(With PTI inputs)

AIMPLB should take the Karsevaks' demolition of Babri Masjid in the same spirit as the destruction of idols in Mecca by Mohammad. They can't have different morals about justification of the same thing.

MR. VENU THERE IS BIG DIFERENCE BETWEEN PEOPLE WHO SPREAD ISLAM IN MEECA AND THE KARSEVAK DEMOLISING THE MOSQUE SO ISLAM SPREAD FROM ARABIA TO EUROPE AND ASIA I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BRO

sam - mumbai

Dear Sam, Islam and all Muslims justify Mohammad's destruction of idols. In absolute terms, destroying another's place of worship or mode of worship is wrong. But often things don't happen in a vacuum and there is a history behind all incidents and history may justify what may not be morally justifiable. Like you can't kill a person but if it is done in self-defense, it is different. Therefore as a historical event what Mohammad did has to be accepted as a reality and we move on. Can't the same position be taken by Muslims on the Ram Janmabhoomi issue? If they wish to turn the clock back and have their mosque rebuilt in Ram Janmabhoomi, it would probably be as futile as putting the idols back in Kaaba.

Venu, The removal of idols from Mecca were not Hindu Deities but the Idols of Arabia which they use to believe. Are you interested in them then go and bring them and keep in India. I think i should tell you one more thing, when some people like you came to destroy Mecca during the period of Grand father of Mohammed then Allah send on the birds with a piece of stones and each stone was dropped on the elephant which worked like a missile. So stop talking stupid and justify things with assuming.

Dear Mus, The point is that the idols belonged to another religion, whether Hinduism or not, and Muslims have no compunction in calling a person who destroyed the idols of another religion as a model for humanity. If during the time of Mohammad's grandfather Allah protected the idols, then what happened during the time of Mohammad? Did Allah have a change of mind? Or was the action of Mohammad passed off as having the sanction of Allah?

http://www.zeenews.com/news661766.html

Muslim scribe beaten up by Shahi Imam's supporters

Updated on Thursday, October 14, 2010, 19:53

Lucknow: Shahi Imam of the Delhi Jama Masjid, Maulana Syed Ahmed Bukhari on Thursday lost his cool when a Muslim journalist questioned him regarding the Ayodhya verdict during a press conference following which he was thrashed by supporters of the cleric.

Mohd Abdul Waheed Chisti, a reporter with a local Urdu daily, raised a question relating to the ownership of the disputed site before the construction of the Babri mosque in Ayodhya.

Chisti asked the Shahi Imam to spell out his stand on the mention of King Dashrath's name in land records of 1528 before the Babri mosque was constructed.

Initially, Bukhari skirted the question but when the journalist insisted, he was threatened.

"Get him out of this conference, Bukhari shouted while accusing the journalist of working against the interests of the Muslims.

Bukhari's supporters then thrashed the journalist in full public glare. People like him will "not be tolerated by Muslims at any cost," the Shahi Imam said before leaving the press conference.

Chisti said he was only seeking a clarification from Bukhari, who had needlessly got provoked.

The journalist later filed an FIR against Bukhari and his supporters at Hazratganj kotwali.

Earlier, Bukhari said the September 30 verdict of the Allahabad High Court on the Ayodhya title suits was based on faith and was not acceptable to the Muslims.

He said there was no question of evolving a consensus or even holding talks for giving the mosque site for temple construction.

The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court had directed that the 2.77-acre disputed site be divided into 3 parts. Of this, 2 parts go to the Hindus and the remaining to the Muslims.

On efforts by Hashim Ansari, the oldest litigant in the title suits, for an out of court settlement, Bukhari said he did not take him seriously as he was "changing his statements frequently."

PTI

Mohammad destroyed the idols in Kaaba because he believed the Kaaba originally did not have idols. The Karsevaks destroyed Babri structure because they believed originally a temple stood there. So if the Muslims condemn karsevaks for destroying the mosque, Hindus should also condemn Mohammad for destroying idols in Kaaba.

http://www.zeenews.com/news661521.html

We want result-oriented dialogue on Kashmir: Qureshi

Updated on Wednesday, October 13, 2010, 14:15

Islamabad: Islamabad wants to have a meaningful dialogue with New Delhi over the the Kashmir issue, Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said Wednesday.

Qureshi told mediapersons after chairing a meeting of the National Assembly's Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs that Pakistan has maintained its historical and principled stance on the issue.

He stated that India has been told that the next session of dialogue should be result-oriented as opposed to being a mere photo session, Dawn reported Wednesday.

On Sep 22, Qureshi asked the US and the international community to help resolve the Kashmir issue.

"The international community must recognise that the people of Kashmir, in an entirely indigenous upsurge, are demanding their right to self-determination," Qureshi claimed.

Qureshi asked India to take a "fresh look" at the evolving situation in the territory and sit down with Pakistan to resolve the issue.

"Dialogue is the only way forward…We can do it," he said.

IANS

Why is India even thinking of talking to Pakistan over Kashmir? Kashmir is a part of India and none of anybody's concern. The only thing to be discussed with Pakistan is the vacation of its illegal occupation of the so-called Azad Kashmir. All those who are fighting for Kashmir's independence should be considered traitors and shot dead.

http://www.zeenews.com/news661246.html

Azchavattam: Ayodhya and Kandamangalam village

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4CXRWLmwRA

Jamila is, for all practical purposes, a Hindu. She is from a Muslim family which had cooperated with the temple. When her parents died, Jamila, who is deaf and dumb, continued to work in the temple and the temple has built a house for her beside the temple. But in what way is she a Muslim now? Is she being heralded as a Muslim because the temple authorities want a certificate of secularism?

A very real estate

Gopalkrishna Gandhi, Hindustan Times
October 08, 2010
First Published: 22:36 IST(8/10/2010)
Last Updated: 23:01 IST(8/10/2010)

I do not know if the precincts of the high court in Lucknow have a garden and if that garden has maalis. I have simply assumed that to be the case for the following imaginary narration. Waiting for the court’s pronouncement on the Ayodhya case, a reporter gets to talk to two gardeners, Yusuf and
Raghu, in the grounds of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court.
Reporter: What do you think will be the verdict?
Raghu: What can it say? If it says mandir, then the masjidwalas will be cross…
Yusuf: And if it says masjid, the mandirwalas will not forgive it.
Reporter: But the court has to pass some order. But then if no one is satisfied, what is the use?
Yusuf: But then this is not just about individuals.
Raghu: It is about communities.
Reporter: Is it really about communities? Is the man on the street really bothered about whether there should be a mandir or the mosque should be re-built?
Raghu: I would say, the man in the street is bothered but within limits. The man in the street would like to see something done in Ayodhya, which satisfies pious people. But the man in the street wouldn’t want to either break anyone’s head for that or have his own head broken in the bargain.
Reporter: So, what according to you would ‘satisfy pious people’?
Raghu: Let us see… One side says, ‘You have broken our mosque’…
Yusuf: The other side jumps and says: ‘But you broke our temple before that…’
Raghu: The first side then says ‘… No, no it was already broken… in ruins…’
Yusuf: Then the other side says ‘… Let that be so, why did you have to build a mosque over that ruin or over any ruin…?’
Raghu: The first side then says ‘I did not… Babur did… and that was a long time ago…’
Yusuf: The other side then asks: ‘But was that right?’
Raghu: To which the first side says ‘I can’t answer that but was it right for the old mosque to be brought down now?’
Reporter: And so it goes on and on…
Yusuf: Yes, on and on.
Reporter: Think of a solution that would satisfy pious people.
Raghu: I’d say before anything else, there was soil, there was something growing on it, watered by the river. And plants grew on that soil, trees, flowering trees, fruit-bearing trees…
Yusuf: Khajur…
Raghu: Banyan…
Yusuf: Roses… There were streams there…
Raghu: And ponds…
Reporter: And so, what does that take us to?
Yusuf: There was peace... No one thought of ‘this is mine’.
Raghu: ‘No, no it is mine’.
Reporter: This is all very beautiful, but…
Yusuf: … what will satisfy pious people?
Raghu: The trouble is pious people are not just ‘pious’. They are also now…
Reporter: Influenced by others, by people with their own plans.
Yusuf: Exactly. The whole trouble starts from there.
Reporter: And so…?
Raghu: Back to your question?
Reporter: No, forward to some solution. Your solution, shall we say.
Yusuf: All right, let us say that there may have been a temple there… which may have been pulled down...
Raghu: Was pulled down…
Yusuf: And in its place a mosque built and was also pulled down... So now, let us say goodbye to all buildings there…
Raghu: No buildings?
Yusuf: Arey, how many buildings can you build on two or three acres anyway, especially, if each has to have some walking space around it for a decent garden…? You asked us your question as we are malis right? So, let us say let us have on the site on which stood a mosque and on which earlier stood a temple, what existed before those structures were built… what may have been seen by the devta…
Raghu: Ramchandraji.
Yusuf: Yes, Ramchandraji and his abba…
Raghu: Raja Dasrath.
Yusuf: Right, what those two might have seen…
Raghu: As is, if they were to come there now, they would recognise it as their own place…
Yusuf: Right. Let us plant at the centre of the site, right below the central dome… Let us plant… What would you suggest, Raghu?
Raghu: A huge banyan…
Yusuf: Barhiya! A great banyan, with many roots…
Raghu: It’ll grow slowly but grow great… it will give shade… shelter…
Reporter: I like the idea...
Raghu: The banyan, sending newer and ever newer roots which grow into trunks themselves and then send another generation of roots down, tells us about eternal life…
Yusuf: That should be at the centre of the site. Around it should be other trees...
Reporter: And not just trees but perhaps some flowering shrubs as well?
Raghu: The parijat, certainly. Such fragrance!
Yusuf: I would insist on the rose, all varieties of it.
Reporter: If we have the banyan and other trees with a wild look won’t the rose-lines look too… too streamlined?
Yusuf: Janab, life is like that, is it not, a little wild, a little in our hands…
Raghu: Let us have the banyan in the middle, with a scatter of trees all around it, the khajur trees on an elevation to the west so that they can be seen against the brilliantly changing lights at sunset, and in between them, not trimmed rows of roses but rose bushes so that we can see them in their own natural condition… And let us have on the opposite side, the east, tulsi bushes growing wild…
Reporter: I am entranced…
Raghu: Sir, look… the court seems to have given its decision…
Reporter: Heavens! I missed it…
Yusuf: That bearded gentleman there… he looks pleased!
Raghu: And that other bearded gentleman… He looks a little downcast.
Yusuf: Janab, now don’t you feel downcast at having missed the moment in the court. We have seen thousands of orders being given. This way and that. But the grass here, it never stops growing. The more the rose bush is trimmed, the more fragrant comes the flower.
Raghu: And oh yes, I forgot to say, we must have on the Ayodhya garden…
Reporter: Will there be one?
Raghu: Why not… some day… when everyone has had enough of buildings… I was saying we must have on that garden some sandalwood trees.
Yusuf: Absolutely… The axe that falls on it, janab… it gets scented. Gopalkrishna Gandhi is a former administrator, diplomat and governor
The views expressed by the author are personal

K.Venugopal

Of all the places in the world, many folks seem to consider that Lord Ram's birthplace is fit to contain anything but a temple. Is a temple in the memory of Lord Ram such a mismatch? Or is it because Muslims would be unable to consider themselves part of any temple enterprise and without appeasing Muslims no project is valid, particularly under a secular culture which believes that Muslims have the first right to the economics of development?

http://www.hindustantimes.com/A-very-real-estate/H1-Article1-610210.aspx

RSS prefers out of court settlement on Ayodhya: Spokesperson

IANS, Oct 8, 2010, 08.55pm IST

NEW DELHI: The Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) will prefer an out of court settlement in the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute in the light of the recent Allahabad high court judgment, RSS spokesperson Ram Madhav said on Friday.

"Of course, we will prefer an out of court settlement. The court has upheld the main contention of the Hindu litigants, that the site is the birth place of Lord Ram," Madhav said.

Asked whether attempts have begun for an out of court settlement by the RSS or other parties, Madhav said it was premature to comment.

"Now, all parties are studying the voluminous verdict. It is too early to say anything," he added.

"Our chief (RSS sarvsangh chalak Mohan Bhagwat) had said that we would welcome a settlement. There are some feelers, but it is premature to comment upon the developments," Madhav said.

According to him, with the judgment, the movement for construction of a temple at the disputed site in Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh has found judicial acceptance now.

On Sept 30, a three-member Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court, in a unanimous verdict, said that the site where the Ram idols were placed in Ayodhya was the birthplace of Hindu god Ram.

In a majority judgment, the court further ordered the division of the disputed site into three equal parts among the litigants - two Hindu litigant parties and the rival Sunni Wakf Board.

The Wakf Board, which had filed a title suit for the site in 1961, has said that it will appeal in the Supreme Court against the high court judgment.

The RSS - a hardline cadre-based Hindu organisation - had been in the forefront of the Ram Mandir movement to claim the disputed site where the Babri Masjid stood till 1992, and build a temple there.

Activists of Hindu radical groups demolished the 16th century mosque on Dec 6, 1992, claiming it was built after razing a Hindu temple there. The mosque razing triggered countrywide riots in which more than 2,000 people were killed.


Read more: RSS prefers out of court settlement on Ayodhya: Spokesperson - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/RSS-prefers-out-of-court-settlement-on-Ayodhya-Spokesperson/articleshow/6714865.cms#ixzz11mdI8srX

The nature of Ayodhya dispute is such that it will accept only one solution - that the Muslims forgo all claims to the area and Hindus be permitted to build a grand temple at the birthplace of Lord Ram. The longer Muslims refuse to see the historical imperative of this solution, the more the Muslims would be isolated from the mainstream of the nation.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/RSS-prefers-out-of-court-settlement-on-Ayodhya-Spokesperson/articleshow/6714865.cms

Accept Ayodhya verdict, top cleric Madni tells Muslims

Lucknow, October 08, 2010

The president of Jamiat Ulema Hind (JUH) Maulana Mahmood Madni on Friday called up on the Muslim community to accept the High Court verdict in Babri Masjid-Ramjanam Bhoomi case. The Maulana, heading one of the biggest organizations of Ulema (clerics) in the country, told Hindustan Times on Friday that the Muslim community should coolly think over the issue and accept the judgment.
The acceptance of the verdict would be in larger interest of the nation, Muslim community and especially for next generation. Madni said by quickly sorting out conflicting issues, the community should try to move ahead. He said the construction of places of worship of both communities at the place in Ayodhya would vastly improve the image of the country.
However Madni said it was his personal view as the working committee of JUH would meet October 19 to discuss the matter and take a final view.
He said during the last few days various views had come out in the community. While one group wanted appeal in the Supreme Court, another had asked for out of court settlement. But there was a third group in the community, which wanted to hand over one-third land, awarded by the High Court, either under protest or happily.
“People are talking differently on the issue”, Madni said, adding now the solution should be peaceful. He said the community should ponder over the problems of next generation so that it could progress and prosper.
Even before JUH takes up his views for discussion on October 19, he is likely to raise it at the working committee meeting of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) in Lucknow on October 16. There are dissenting views in the AIMPLB over the verdict and one group has been insisting on out-of-court compromise. The legal committee of the board will meet tomorrow in Delhi to discuss the verdict and make suggestions to the AIMPLB working committee.
The JUH, known for prominent role in freedom movement, had always taken moderate views of the contentious problem. The JUH had last year issued a fatwa against terrorism. The organization has now summoned a conference of Ulema on Kashmir on October 10 in Deoband to make suggestions to sort out the vexed problem.

K.Venugopal

Muslims by now ought to have no doubt that the Hindus wish to construct a grand temple at the birth-place of Lord Ram. While there may be arguments about whether a particular spot can now, after all these ages, be identified as the very spot Ram was born, it is a fact that Hindus have opposed Babri masjid right from the time it was built supposedly by destroying a temple, which masjid was called Masjid Janmasthan even in the Mughal period. Therefore adding up the fact that Hindus wish to build a temple at that spot and the fact that Babri masjid was always opposed by the Hindus, there would be no solution to the problem except for the Muslims to give up all claims to a Babri Masjid in Ayodhya. If Muslims consider such a withdrawal an unacceptable surrender to Hindus, then in all probability matters would lead to a situation of long drawn strife between both communities and it is not difficult to see that Muslims would lose out.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Accept-Ayodhya-verdict-top-cleric-Madni-tells-Muslims/H1-Article1-610078.aspx