Key NDA allies not in favour of banning Jaswant's book

New Delhi: Jaswant Singh's book that got him expelled from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is now creating fissures in the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA), with many key allies opposing the idea of banning the book.
BJP-ruled Gujarat has already banned the book "Jinnah - India, Partition, Independence", which says that Pakistan founder Mohammad Ali Jinnah has been demonised in India and holds country's first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru and home minister Sardar Vallabhai Patel also responsible for the partition.
The Gujarat government led by Narendra Modi banned the book for being critical of Patel's role during partition.
"I do not support the ban. Banning a book does not help," Shiv Sena MP Bharat Kumar Raut told IANS.
Jaswant Singh, who has held defence, finance and external affairs portfolios in BJP-led governments, was expelled from the party Aug 19.
Raut said: "If you want to contest the content of a book then it should be done either through writing or on various other forums."
Janata Dal-United (JD-U) MP Monazir Hassan also said that in a democracy everyone has a right to express his views.
"I am not in favour of banning the book. It is not justified, in a democracy every one has a right to express his views," Hassan told IANS. The BJP leadership has left it to the respective governments in the BJP ruled states to decide whether to ban the book or not.
"It depends on the state whether to ban the book or not. It is their right to decide," party spokesperson Prakash Javadekar said when asked if the party would like the book to be banned in BJP-ruled states.
Among these states, Karnataka has already declared it will not ban the book, while the Madhya Pradesh government was SDaturday reported to be of the also of the view that the book should not be banned.
IANS
No wonder Key NDA allies are not in favor of Banning the book as Jaswant Singh blames Nehru and Sardar Patel (READ CONGRESS) for Partition.
Gujarat had to do as Sardar Patel was a leader from Gujarat.
If anything is written against Shivaji, Shiv Sena would started burning shops and buses.
Raut said(Shiv Sena): "If you want to contest the content of a book then it should be done either through writing or on various other forums." - Perhaps his memory is short as what they did on book on Shvaji.

Well in Politics every Politicians have local priorities and National Interest takes back seat.

This includes CONgress who are not defending wrong things written about Nehru and Sardar Patel since its suits them to see internal fights in BJP - they also seems to be least bothered if Nehru and Sardar Patel are pictured WRONGLY.
P.C.Chadaga
#4
22 August 2009 15:54:52
Let us allow people to read Jaswanth Singhs book and have a healthy debate.Demacracy will survive if we follow the principle I may disageee with you but I will defend your right to put forth your views.
K.Venugopal
#6
22 August 2009 18:43:30
These folks who oppose the banning of Jaswant Singh's book are just the folks who would have supported banning of Satanic Verses. Jinnah, the person most responsible for partition of the country, is eulogized, and Sardar Patel, the person most responsible for uniting the country, is slighted. If such a book is not banned, which book should be banned? Otherwise, no book should ever be banned.

http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3165743&ucid=178238#uc2Lst178238

What happened to the BJP I knew?

Updated on Saturday, August 22, 2009, 10:49 IST Himanshu Shekhar

A few days back I opened an account on Facebook just to see what my friends were upto, as the amount of time we spend at office or meeting other obligations leaves us with no room for socializing, especially in the Metros. Interestingly, the social networking site popped a question as to what political view I would associate myself with. Initially unsure of revealing my party affiliations as a journalist by profession, I decided to answer it later. I was not hesitant or ashamed of letting people know that my answer was BJP, even though it had lost the general elections and was struggling to remain ‘a party with the difference,’ after its greatest icon Atal Bihari Vajpayee faded away from active politics.
But today I am feeling different, confused and am forced to ask the question: Is this the same BJP which I once vouched for? My thoughts go back to over a decade when I was doing my matriculation and was living with my parents in a small town called Begusarai, in the state of Bihar. The whole town was covered by slogans and posters of different parties as the nation was gearing up for general elections. With my father being a keen a follower of politics, I had the opportunity of knowing some of the local leaders from close quarters. Political issues and the country’s economic policies were the favourite pastime subjects over tea and dinner and that is when I started leaning decisively towards the Bharatiya Janata Party. With Atal Bihari Vajpayee at the top and leaders like LK Advani, Murali Manohar Joshi, Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, Jaswant Singh, Govindacharya, Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie, Kalraj Mishra, Sushma Swaraj, Jagmohan, Pramod Mahajan, Ram Jethmalani, Kalyan Singh and young turks like Arun Jaitley and a string of state leaders like Shivraj Singh Chouhan, Rajnath Singh, Vasundhara Raje, Ravi Shankar Prasad, Rajiv Pratap Ruddy, Maneka Gandhi etc: it was a party that a youngster like me could blindly look up to. For heaven’s sake, that team looked like made to lead India in the right direction, free from nepotism, free from corruption and take the country on the path to glory. And it did to an extent- with Vajpayee leading his team into a different era of foreign relations and hemming the new India’s economic policies with people like Shourie, NK Singh and Brajesh Mishra at the helm. But those were golden days. Come 2009 and BJP has reached a stage where I am forced to regret my decision which moulded my thoughts a decade ago. That was the Vajpayee era when opinions, even different ones, were appreciated and the party was known as a party with distinction not because of an imposed discipline, but due to its self-discipline and a concerted sense of purpose.
A decade later, in a most shocking incident, the party has expelled a man who served it for 30 long years on the grounds of writing a book on Jinnah. Jaswant Singh’s expulsion on such a flimsy ground has left BJP watchers baffled and I am sure a common BJP worker from Kanyakumari in south to the one up there in Jammu might be feeling the same. What sort of intra-party democracy is this? How is BJP now any different from other parties? If Jaswant’s expulsion was a disciplinary measure then why did party president Rajnath Singh not step down when things hit pit bottom in Rajasthan? Jaswant was once projected as ‘Hanuman’ of the BJP serving ‘Ram’- in reference to Vajpayee. Those were the days when Jaswant Singh-Talbott were engaged in talks after India had conducted nuclear tests in Pokharan. Now, in the words of Jaswant, “I have been transformed from BJP’s Hanuman to Ravana.” If this is the fate that a senior leader like Jaswant had to meet after expressing his views in public, then one can easily imagine what may happen to local leaders. There is something wrong in the BJP and the rot seems to run deep. This chintan baithak will surely have lots of chinta to do. India can do without such a party which decides to expel a man due to a work of research titled, ‘Jinnah — India, Partition, Independence’ while it moves into a future, to a destiny which will be written by young Indians. This intellectual bankruptcy marks the end of Vajpayee’s era in BJP. As far as correcting the information on Facebook is concerned, I will wait with a hope that the last word on the whole drama is heard from none other than Atal Bihari Vajpayee himself.
Himanshu Shekhar A few days back I opened an account on Facebook just to see what my friends were upto, as the amount of time we spend at office or meeting other obligations leaves us with no room for socializing, especially in the Metros. Interestingly, the social networking site popped a question as to what political view I would associate myself with. Initially unsure of revealing my party affiliations as a journalist by profession, I decided to answer it later. I was not hesitant or ashamed of letting people know that my answer was BJP, even though it had lost the general elections and was struggling to remain ‘a party with the difference,’ after its greatest icon Atal Bihari Vajpayee faded away from active politics.
But today I am feeling different, confused and am forced to ask the question: Is this the same BJP which I once vouched for? My thoughts go back to over a decade when I was doing my matriculation and was living with my parents in a small town called Begusarai, in the state of Bihar. The whole town was covered by slogans and posters of different parties as the nation was gearing up for general elections. With my father being a keen a follower of politics, I had the opportunity of knowing some of the local leaders from close quarters. Political issues and the country’s economic policies were the favourite pastime subjects over tea and dinner and that is when I started leaning decisively towards the Bharatiya Janata Party. With Atal Bihari Vajpayee at the top and leaders like LK Advani, Murali Manohar Joshi, Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, Jaswant Singh, Govindacharya, Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie, Kalraj Mishra, Sushma Swaraj, Jagmohan, Pramod Mahajan, Ram Jethmalani, Kalyan Singh and young turks like Arun Jaitley and a string of state leaders like Shivraj Singh Chouhan, Rajnath Singh, Vasundhara Raje, Ravi Shankar Prasad, Rajiv Pratap Ruddy, Maneka Gandhi etc: it was a party that a youngster like me could blindly look up to. For heaven’s sake, that team looked like made to lead India in the right direction, free from nepotism, free from corruption and take the country on the path to glory. And it did to an extent- with Vajpayee leading his team into a different era of foreign relations and hemming the new India’s economic policies with people like Shourie, NK Singh and Brajesh Mishra at the helm. But those were golden days. Come 2009 and BJP has reached a stage where I am forced to regret my decision which moulded my thoughts a decade ago. That was the Vajpayee era when opinions, even different ones, were appreciated and the party was known as a party with distinction not because of an imposed discipline, but due to its self-discipline and a concerted sense of purpose. A decade later, in a most shocking incident, the party has expelled a man who served it for 30 long years on the grounds of writing a book on Jinnah. Jaswant Singh’s expulsion on such a flimsy ground has left BJP watchers baffled and I am sure a common BJP worker from Kanyakumari in south to the one up there in Jammu might be feeling the same. What sort of intra-party democracy is this? How is BJP now any different from other parties? If Jaswant’s expulsion was a disciplinary measure then why did party president Rajnath Singh not step down when things hit pit bottom in Rajasthan? Jaswant was once projected as ‘Hanuman’ of the BJP serving ‘Ram’- in reference to Vajpayee. Those were the days when Jaswant Singh-Talbott were engaged in talks after India had conducted nuclear tests in Pokharan. Now, in the words of Jaswant, “I have been transformed from BJP’s Hanuman to Ravana.” If this is the fate that a senior leader like Jaswant had to meet after expressing his views in public, then one can easily imagine what may happen to local leaders. There is something wrong in the BJP and the rot seems to run deep. This chintan baithak will surely have lots of chinta to do. India can do without such a party which decides to expel a man due to a work of research titled, ‘Jinnah — India, Partition, Independence’ while it moves into a future, to a destiny which will be written by young Indians. This intellectual bankruptcy marks the end of Vajpayee’s era in BJP. As far as correcting the information on Facebook is concerned, I will wait with a hope that the last word on the whole drama is heard from none other than Atal Bihari Vajpayee himself.

I think the writer is a wee bit unfair. Sacking Jaswant Singh was not about curtailing anyone`s freedom. That India is one nation is the cornerstone of the nationalistic ideology that has powered Sangha Parivar right from its inception 85 years ago. Now for a senior BJP leader to eulogize a person who swore by the two-nation theory runs counter to what Sangha Parivar is about. It is quite obvious that in spite of Jaswant Singh’s many years of association with the BJP, he has not grasped the sanctity of India`s integrity espoused by Sangha Parivar. Thus BJP would have been compromising its ideology in continuing with Jaswant Singh at the helm of affairs in the BJP. Now Jaswant is free to start his own Jinnah fan club. (With its HQ in Pakistan!) -K.Venugopal - Mumbai
http://www.zeenews.com/news557351.html

Advani should have retired in 2004: Govindacharya

Home » Zee Exclusive

Updated on Saturday, August 22, 2009, 20:10 IST

Former BJP ideologue KN Govindacharya believes Bharatiya Janata Party’s senior most leaders Atal Bihari Vajpayee and LK Advani should have retired from politics after the 2004 Lok Sabha poll defeat. Here, in an exclusive interview with Swati Chaturvedi of Zeenews.com on Kahiye Janab, Govindacharya – who himself had in September 2000 taken "sabbatical" from active politics – talks about the Jaswant Singh expulsion issue, problems plaguing the BJP and much more.
Swati Chaturvedi: Welcome to the show Govindacharyaji. After BJP’s chintan baithak, your concerns must have grown. Are there different rules for different people in the party? More than 60 years have passed since partition but (Mohammad Ali) Jinnah is still important for the party. After losing two elections, should the BJP still be discussing this? What do you think is plaguing the party? Govindacharya: Who would have thought a book on Jinnah would come at this stage. The party already had no less trouble to tackle anyways. Swati: But the issue that who was behind the partition and who was responsible for it, has been raised at a time when the party has lost two consecutive Lok Sabha elections. Was it necessary? Govindacharya: The reason why this issue has taken centrestage is probably because they want to shy away from the basic problems facing the party. They don’t have the courage to face these issues, there’s a lack of confidence so they are trying to rake up dead issues. But they won’t be able to escape from the problems. Swati: You raised this party from being a sapling to a giant tree. Where were these so-called ‘high-profile’ leaders when the party was being nurtured? Govindacharya: It happens. Like migratory birds these leaders too will walk away with time. We see so many leaders today who have now become a critic of the party. Swati: RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat recently made a call for new leadership in the BJP. Who are these new/young leaders in the party? Govindacharya: A politician becomes a leader only after working with the public and leading them for years. Now we are seeing a trend where people become ‘leaders’ using media platform, sycophancy, conspiracies etc. Swati: LK Advani was promoted as the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate during the elections. It was taken up as a mission and it failed. Then he decided to quit (as the Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha) and there were murmurs that the RSS forced him to resign. What happened exactly?
Govindacharya: I believe the RSS doesn’t interfere in such matters; it doesn’t interfere with the working of outfits related to it. This is what Mohan Bhagwat has said, that Advani approached him after resigning and said the partymen were pressing him not to step down as he was the party’s prime ministerial face. This is why he continued and this is what might have happened. Swati: But should Advani have continued? Govindacharya: My personal views are that after some time, it is better to take up the role of a guiding force. Atalji and Advaniji should have retired from active politics after the 2004 General Elections and acted as a guide to the party. That was the right time for such a step. I had advised them then only. Swati: But your views were ignored. Govindacharya: I had even said that the meeting ground between what the party believed and the worker on the ground, was getting lost. I believe like from the Jan Sangh, Janta Party was born and from it the BJP; similarly it was time something new emerged out of the BJP. Swati: Have Atalji and Advaniji become banyan trees under which nothing else is growing? Govindacharya: Till 1995, efforts were made to make workers grow, develop but after 1996 all this stopped. This is the reason why this party is failing. The situation in the BJP is like of stagnant water. Swati: Did you ever think the party’s situation will become so bad that one day, media-savvy, high-profile leaders will be inside the party and you will be out? Govindacharya: I had expected this to happen. In 1995, I had predicted this. I had said then that we should have a bio-data bank so that right people take up right posts, otherwise paratroopers will come and occupy everything. In 1997, when nothing was done regarding the party’s ideology I knew the BJP will at the most remain a saffron Congress – saffron because it will continue to have links with the Sangh and its wings. Swati: Ever since the BJP came to power how ‘sad’ has the RSS been? Govindacharya: The RSS doesn’t interfere in other outfits’ working as it believes every organisation should have a breathing space. The RSS is concerned, but it can only give advice. Whatever needs to be done will have to be done by the BJP and people associated with it. But there’s no will power. Of the 116 BJP MPs, almost 85 of them have nothing to do with the RSS ideology. Swati: It used to be said that the BJP should have ‘bench strength’, like in football, of a second line of leaders. You tell me who out of the likes of Rajnath Singh, Sushma Swaraj and Arun Jaitley are of a stature who can inspire and attract the voter. Govindacharya: An individual alone cannot succeed. It is a team which succeeds. For a team to win, an aim and the commitment to fulfil it is required. If a footballer chooses to keep the ball with him and refuses to pass, the opponent will come and snatch it. This is what has happened with the BJP. Swati: But none (of the second line of leaders) seems to be a mass leader. Is the BJP in need of one? Govindacharya: BJP badly needs one. A mass leader is not one who rises from inside a room, but from the streets. There are some in the villages and districts, but what is required is to tap their potential. Swati: Arun Jaitley devised Lok Sabha poll strategy. After the party lost, he was made Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha while Sushma Swaraj was made Advaniji’s deputy in the Lok Sabha. Govindacharya: I believe rules should apply to all alike. Like (Vasundhara) Raje is being asked to step down in Rajasthan, people should themselves decide to give way to new blood. This will help the BJP only. Swati: It seems Jinnah is important for the BJP and Advani too had made similar remarks in 2005, why are then rules different for different people? Govindacharya: Different BJP leaders have given different reasons for Jaswant Singh’s expulsion. This is nothing but inner factionalism and power struggle. If the book (on Jinnah) was the real reason, then a committee should have been formed with the task to read the book, only then a decision should have been taken. Swati: Do you think anyone in the BJP has actually read the book? Govindacharya: (laughs) A senior leader had once told me that “you have a number of geniuses in your party. They read The Indian Express and India Today and feel they know everything.” I believe reading is important but for a leader, it should go along with work on the ground. Swati: People in the BJP are involved in fighting among themselves. What do you have to say on this?
Govindacharya: Differences on ideology are welcome but on selfish grounds, these are condemnable. Nobody in the BJP is discussing SEZs, FDI, malnutrition, women’s issues these days. What they are discussing is Jinnah. Swati: Has the upper caste agenda taken over BJP? Govindacharya: I believe the BJP is moving towards pro-America, pro-rich policies. Instead, it should have adopted pro-India, pro-poor policies. Swati: In a healthy democracy, the principal opposition party plays an important role. Similarly, India needs BJP. In your view how should the BJP revive itself? Govindacharya: I believe there’s no real opposition today as both the ruling and opposition parties are following pro-America, pro-rich policies. If people’s voice is not raised in the Parliament, we will hear it on the streets and it will only strengthen secessionist forces like in Lalgarh. Swati: Is there a need for change in the BJP leadership? Govindacharya: I believe, yes. This is why I have talked about Kamraj plan, or that a new outfit should emerge out of the BJP, or the seniors should hand over the reins to the RSS. Sangh will then intervene, but it won’t take half measures. It will do all that is necessary. Superficial changes or measures won’t help. Adaptation: Deepak Nagpal
Former BJP ideologue KN Govindacharya believes Bharatiya Janata Party’s senior most leaders Atal Bihari Vajpayee and LK Advani should have retired from politics after the 2004 Lok Sabha poll defeat. Here, in an exclusive interview with Swati Chaturvedi of Zeenews.com on Kahiye Janab, Govindacharya – who himself had in September 2000 taken "sabbatical" from active politics – talks about the Jaswant Singh expulsion issue, problems plaguing the BJP and much more.
Swati Chaturvedi: Welcome to the show Govindacharyaji. After BJP’s chintan baithak, your concerns must have grown. Are there different rules for different people in the party? More than 60 years have passed since partition but (Mohammad Ali) Jinnah is still important for the party. After losing two elections, should the BJP still be discussing this? What do you think is plaguing the party? Govindacharya: Who would have thought a book on Jinnah would come at this stage. The party already had no less trouble to tackle anyways. Swati: But the issue that who was behind the partition and who was responsible for it, has been raised at a time when the party has lost two consecutive Lok Sabha elections. Was it necessary? Govindacharya: The reason why this issue has taken centrestage is probably because they want to shy away from the basic problems facing the party. They don’t have the courage to face these issues, there’s a lack of confidence so they are trying to rake up dead issues. But they won’t be able to escape from the problems. Swati: You raised this party from being a sapling to a giant tree. Where were these so-called ‘high-profile’ leaders when the party was being nurtured? Govindacharya: It happens. Like migratory birds these leaders too will walk away with time. We see so many leaders today who have now become a critic of the party. Swati: RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat recently made a call for new leadership in the BJP. Who are these new/young leaders in the party? Govindacharya: A politician becomes a leader only after working with the public and leading them for years. Now we are seeing a trend where people become ‘leaders’ using media platform, sycophancy, conspiracies etc. Swati: LK Advani was promoted as the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate during the elections. It was taken up as a mission and it failed. Then he decided to quit (as the Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha) and there were murmurs that the RSS forced him to resign. What happened exactly? Govindacharya: I believe the RSS doesn’t interfere in such matters; it doesn’t interfere with the working of outfits related to it. This is what Mohan Bhagwat has said, that Advani approached him after resigning and said the partymen were pressing him not to step down as he was the party’s prime ministerial face. This is why he continued and this is what might have happened. Swati: But should Advani have continued? Govindacharya: My personal views are that after some time, it is better to take up the role of a guiding force. Atalji and Advaniji should have retired from active politics after the 2004 General Elections and acted as a guide to the party. That was the right time for such a step. I had advised them then only. Swati: But your views were ignored. Govindacharya: I had even said that the meeting ground between what the party believed and the worker on the ground, was getting lost. I believe like from the Jan Sangh, Janta Party was born and from it the BJP; similarly it was time something new emerged out of the BJP. Swati: Have Atalji and Advaniji become banyan trees under which nothing else is growing? Govindacharya: Till 1995, efforts were made to make workers grow, develop but after 1996 all this stopped. This is the reason why this party is failing. The situation in the BJP is like of stagnant water. Swati: Did you ever think the party’s situation will become so bad that one day, media-savvy, high-profile leaders will be inside the party and you will be out? Govindacharya: I had expected this to happen. In 1995, I had predicted this. I had said then that we should have a bio-data bank so that right people take up right posts, otherwise paratroopers will come and occupy everything. In 1997, when nothing was done regarding the party’s ideology I knew the BJP will at the most remain a saffron Congress – saffron because it will continue to have links with the Sangh and its wings. Swati: Ever since the BJP came to power how ‘sad’ has the RSS been? Govindacharya: The RSS doesn’t interfere in other outfits’ working as it believes every organisation should have a breathing space. The RSS is concerned, but it can only give advice. Whatever needs to be done will have to be done by the BJP and people associated with it. But there’s no will power. Of the 116 BJP MPs, almost 85 of them have nothing to do with the RSS ideology. Swati: It used to be said that the BJP should have ‘bench strength’, like in football, of a second line of leaders. You tell me who out of the likes of Rajnath Singh, Sushma Swaraj and Arun Jaitley are of a stature who can inspire and attract the voter. Govindacharya: An individual alone cannot succeed. It is a team which succeeds. For a team to win, an aim and the commitment to fulfil it is required. If a footballer chooses to keep the ball with him and refuses to pass, the opponent will come and snatch it. This is what has happened with the BJP. Swati: But none (of the second line of leaders) seems to be a mass leader. Is the BJP in need of one? Govindacharya: BJP badly needs one. A mass leader is not one who rises from inside a room, but from the streets. There are some in the villages and districts, but what is required is to tap their potential. Swati: Arun Jaitley devised Lok Sabha poll strategy. After the party lost, he was made Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha while Sushma Swaraj was made Advaniji’s deputy in the Lok Sabha. Govindacharya: I believe rules should apply to all alike. Like (Vasundhara) Raje is being asked to step down in Rajasthan, people should themselves decide to give way to new blood. This will help the BJP only. Swati: It seems Jinnah is important for the BJP and Advani too had made similar remarks in 2005, why are then rules different for different people? Govindacharya: Different BJP leaders have given different reasons for Jaswant Singh’s expulsion. This is nothing but inner factionalism and power struggle. If the book (on Jinnah) was the real reason, then a committee should have been formed with the task to read the book, only then a decision should have been taken. Swati: Do you think anyone in the BJP has actually read the book? Govindacharya: (laughs) A senior leader had once told me that “you have a number of geniuses in your party. They read The Indian Express and India Today and feel they know everything.” I believe reading is important but for a leader, it should go along with work on the ground. Swati: People in the BJP are involved in fighting among themselves. What do you have to say on this? Govindacharya: Differences on ideology are welcome but on selfish grounds, these are condemnable. Nobody in the BJP is discussing SEZs, FDI, malnutrition, women’s issues these days. What they are discussing is Jinnah. Swati: Has the upper caste agenda taken over BJP? Govindacharya: I believe the BJP is moving towards pro-America, pro-rich policies. Instead, it should have adopted pro-India, pro-poor policies. Swati: In a healthy democracy, the principal opposition party plays an important role. Similarly, India needs BJP. In your view how should the BJP revive itself? Govindacharya: I believe there’s no real opposition today as both the ruling and opposition parties are following pro-America, pro-rich policies. If people’s voice is not raised in the Parliament, we will hear it on the streets and it will only strengthen secessionist forces like in Lalgarh. Swati: Is there a need for change in the BJP leadership? Govindacharya: I believe, yes. This is why I have talked about Kamraj plan, or that a new outfit should emerge out of the BJP, or the seniors should hand over the reins to the RSS. Sangh will then intervene, but it won’t take half measures. It will do all that is necessary. Superficial changes or measures won’t help. Adaptation: Deepak Nagpal

Govindacharya has suggested handing over the BJP to the RSS. This will electrify politics in India. The RSS will not take half-measures, he has said. Won`t that be revolutionary? This is what the cadres want. RSS only needs to integrate all its parivar members in one magnificent effort of coordination to be able to easily take over India through the ballot. -K.Venugopal - Mumbai

http://www.zeenews.com/zee-exclusive/2009-08-22/557516news.html

Mend your ways or face the music, BJP tells rebels

22/08/2009
New Delhi: If anything concrete came out of the three-day 'chintan-baithak’ (brainstorming session) of the Bharatiya Janata Party at Shimla, it was a stern warning to the rebels and dissidents within to mend their ways or face the consequences as happened to a stalwart like Jaswant Singh.
Rajnath Singh, BJP national chief, told journalists in Shimla at the end of the three-day meet that the party had decided ''rebellion and indiscipline will not be tolerated at any cost.'' His words only sought to augment the shock waves that had gone across the party by Jaswant Singh's summary sacking even before the 'baithak' had begun on Tuesday.
By announcing "Advaniji would continue to be our leader", Singh's announcement also sought to send signals to other squabbling leaders who were expecting an immediate race for leadership in the party, in case the party's prime ministerial candidate in the recent Lok Sabha election now opts out as leader of the opposition there.
Besides Singh and Advani, 21 others, including the general secretaries, Arun Jaitley, leader of the opposition in the Rajya sabha, Sushma Swaraj, deputy leader of the party in the Lok Sabha, and members of the parliamentary board arttended the meeting. The leaders are supposed to have discussed issues facing the party in a secluded location.
The brainstorming session, however, failed to draft a road-ahead plan for the party, which had been feeling low after its recent defeat in the Lok sabha election. The job has since been entrusted to a group of general secretaries, who, as Singh said, would present the report before the next BJP conclave scheduled in October.
However, Rajnath Singh was evasive about the questions on whether the select 24 leaders of the party had discussed the reasons for party's defeat at the 'baithak.' While he said no draft on reasons for the party's defeat was discussed, the speakers did make an in-depth analysis of the party's performance in each state. At the same time, he said "thereasons for the party's defeat could not be shared with the media".
While the BJP meet has proposed that there be no shift on the party's Hindutva ideology, the leaders want that this must be propagated in a simple and easy-to-understand manner. Besides, Singh said, the party would expand its base among more sections of people -- mainly farmers, the poor, backward and the scheduled tribes, and accommodate more youth in the party. The party has also asked its workers to undertake relief work in the drought- affected areas.Source: Business Standard
1-1 of 1
Venu10
#1
21 August 2009 23:58:15
No party can survive if it compromises on discipline. However, discipline cannot be brought out in an atmosphere of feudalism. Being a democratic party, BJP must allow for freedom of expression within the organization. But its core values, which must always be articulated by the leadership at all forums, should not be permitted to be sabotaged, intentionally or unintentionally.

http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3165462&ucid=177783#uc2Lst177783

JASWANT SINGH EXPELLED FROM BJP

I was BJP's Hanuman, now I'm Ravana: Jaswant
CNN-IBN
Published on Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 14:31, Updated on Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 16:06 in Politics section

Shimla: Darjeeling MP Jaswant Singh has been "pained" by his sacking from the primary membership of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
"It pains me that I have been sacked for writing a book," said an emotional Jaswant while addressing the media in Shimla on Wednesday.
"During Vajpayee's (Atal Bihari Vajpayee) time I was seen as the Hanuman, today I have become Ravana," said Jaswant.
"The party's Parliamentary Board has taken a decision to expel me from the primary membership of the BJP. Rajnath informed me of my sacking. I should have been informed personally, not on the phone. I am a member of BJP since the day the party was formed. I am grateful to the party for having given me so much for 30 years. Responsibilities have been entrusted to me which I have tried to deliver. Advani and Rajnath should have informed me personally. If I was to be sacked... then the party should have informed me in Delhi itself. It's a matter of regret that I have been sacked for writing a book," said the senior politician.
"I have accepted party's decision to sack me," he said but added that his political career had not come to an end.
Hinting that the party had singled him out Jaswant said, "Some elements in the party feel there's a great deal of selectivity in the party."
When asked why former BJP president LK Advani was not expelled from the party for calling Jinnah secular, Jaswant said, "It's up to the party to do whatever it wants."
"I have not committed any sin by writing the book. I don't regret writing on Jinnah, five years of labour has gone into this. Reading, writing and publishing is entering a dark alley. I don't know if my sacking is part of the succession battle in BJP. I can understand if Congress attacks me, but why BJP. It's a matter of regret that i have been sacked for writing a book," he added.
He also claimed that he had never been a member of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.


The Muslim League, with its two-nation theory, is responsible for partition and Mohammad Ali Jinnah, as its president, can not escape responsibility. If Jaswant Singh's theory is that Jinnah was a good man or that he loved Hindus, he may be right as these are subjective views. But the unfolding of history due to the organised actions of a major political party serving the interest of only Muslims cannot be whitewashed. When Muslim League called for "direct action", were they asking their cadres to preach love of India or were they calling their cadres to take to the streets in violence for the partition of India?

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/i-was-bjps-hanuman-now-im-ravana-jaswant/99507-37.html

Jaswant releases book on Jinnah, BJP boycotts launch

18/08/2009
New Delhi: Apparently reflecting their discomfort, no BJP leader showed up at a function today in which Jaswant Singh's book on Jinnah was released and where his view that Nehru was responsible for the Partition was contested.
Senior party leader LK Advani was in Chandigarh whereas leaders who were in Delhi were conspicuous by their absence while George Fernandes was prominent among those present.
After the book release, when reporters asked Jaswant about the absence of BJP leaders, he said "invitations were extended to all".
BJP leaders were said to be wary of Jaswant Singh's views in praise of Jinnah against the backdrop of the convulsions in the party in 2005 after LK Advani's praise of Jinnah drew criticism from within the BJP and the Sangh Parivar, including the RSS.
When asked if the RSS agreed with Singh's view that Jinnah has been "demonised" in India, RSS leader Ram Madhav said, "I have only read excerpts of the book. But I am constrained to say that it is far from the truth to state that Jinnah was not responsible for partition."
BJP spokesperson Prakash Javadekar refused to make any direct comment on Singh's book but made it clear that the party does not agree with the contention that Jinnah was not responsible for partition and said the party stands by its June 2005 resolution on Jinnah, which holds him as one of the most important politicians responsible for the partition of India.
In the panel discussion that followed the release of the book "Jinnah - India, Partition, Independence", noted journalist MJ Akbar did not agree with Singh's apportioning blame on Nehru for the Partition.
"It was the Congress Working Committee which accepted the Cabinet (Mission) Plan...Nehru was not the dictator of Congress," he said, adding "while Gandhi wanted a secular nation with a Hindu majority, Jinnah wanted a secular nation with a Muslim majority."
Referring to causes of Partition, senior journalist Mark Tully said there were "no saints and all are, in a sense, sinners...everyone made mistakes." He said this included both Nehru and Jinnah as well as the British.
CEO of Pakistan's The Dawn newspaper Hameed Haroon said Jinnah's image remains wrongly portrayed and unexplored in that country.
He said Jinnah's pictures wearing Western dresses and smoking cigarettes were suppressed in Pakistan "...and he became a two dimensional cardboard of (General) Zia's ideals."
According to Haroon, Jinnah's speech on religious freedom was "censored by the information hierarchy of Pakistan before even the state came into being." Critic Namvar Singh said Singh has tried to break "what according to him is a myth that Jinnah was a villain".
#1
18 August 2009 03:43:25
It is most shocking that such a book has been released to create confusion amongst our people. We are already under so many health problems leading to swine flu, AIDS, Cancer etc added to this we get a masala news from Jaswant Singh Claiming to know what was inside the mind of Jinnah or Nehru. It is now more than 62 years since our country has god divided...May be good may be bad..We cannot make judgment at this juncture. It is to create such controversy seems to be the order of some of our politicians and Mr Jaswant Singh is no exception. Whether one agrees or not many of the minority community in India are having a good time only in India. It is a country where the Boll wood is totally dominated by Khans....the Carpenter, Tailors and many leather related business is dominated by minority community. It is India Irfan and Yusuf could play with Cricket coming from a poor and minority community....One likes it or not it is the majority Hindus who are suffering in many of the cases. Name one Hindu player in any sphere of activities in Pakistan, Iran, Iraq or any other UAE Countries...In taking care of the minorities our majority has taken a back seat. Added to all this here is a work from Jaswant Singh further pouring hot water to a nation which is standing on the cross roads of many issues which has no solution as on date..Narayan S

Venu10
#2
18 August 2009 03:44:56
The BJP should forthwith expel Jaswant Singh from the party, as he has trivialized the partition of India by absolving its chief architect from the primary responsibility for partition. Jinnah's two nation theory not only led to partition but is a pernicious doctrine that continues to threaten India's integrity. By stating that Nehru’s insistence on a centralized polity was the cause of partition is to reduce the events that led to partition as one of merely a difference in the form of governance and whitewash Jinnah’s use of religion in influencing the events. If BJP accepts Jaswant’s view, would it tomorrow say that Islamic terrorism in India is not to be linked to religion but is merely political in nature? BJP, which stands for Indian nationalism, cannot afford to compromise on its core values and cannot have in its midst, that too at the leadership level, a person who trivializes the cause of an event that lead to the biggest human tragedy of modern times.
Reply

http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=3149838&ucid=175051#uc2Lst175051

Jaswant praises Jinnah, blames Nehru for partition

Updated on Sunday, August 16, 2009, 20:08 IST
New Delhi: Walking in the footsteps of party senior L.K. Advani, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Jaswant Singh has called Pakistan's founder Mohammed Ali Jinnah "a great Indian", saying he was "demonized". In an interview to a news channel, the former external affairs minister blamed India's first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru for the Partition.
"Nehru believed in a highly centralized polity. That's what he wanted India to be. Jinnah wanted a federal polity. That even Gandhi accepted. Nehru didn't. Consistently, he stood in the way of a federal India until 1947 when it became a partitioned India," Jaswant Singh told Karan Thapar in "Devil's Advocate", which will be aired on CNN-IBN Sunday and Monday. Jaswant Singh strongly contested the popular Indian view that Jinnah was the villain of the 1947 partition or the man principally responsible for it. Asked if he thought this view was wrong, Jaswant Singh said: "It is. It is not borne out of the facts... we need to correct it." "I think we have misunderstood him because we needed to create a demon... We needed a demon because in the 20th century the most telling event in the subcontinent was the partition of the country," Singh said. His praise for Jinnah comes ahead of the BJP's three-day 'Chintan Baithak' (brainstorming session) to begin in Shimla Aug 19. The BJP has also been maintaining that it has not changed its resolution on Jinnah that was adopted in 2005 against the backdrop of Advani's visit to Pakistan and his comments appreciating Jinnah. Jaswant Singh, whose biography on Jinnah would be released Monday, said he did not subscribe to the popular demonization of Jinnah and said he was attracted by the personality of the Pakistani leader. "Of course I don't (subscribe to the popular demonization of Jinnah). To that I don't subscribe. I was attracted by the personality which has resulted in a book. If I was not drawn to the personality I wouldn't have written the book. It's an intricate, complex personality, of great character, determination," Singh said. Jaswant Singh also questioned the wisdom of Indians who hesitated to call Jinnah a great Indian. Asked if he views Jinnah as a great man, he said: "Oh yes, because he created something out of nothing and single handedly stood against the might of the Congress Party and against the British who didn't really like him ... Gandhi himself called Jinnah a great Indian. Why don't we recognize that? Why don't we see (and try to understand) why he called him that?" He said Jinnah was a nationalist leader. "He fought the British for an independent India but also fought resolutely and relentlessly for the interest of Muslims of India... the acme of his nationalistic achievement was the 1916 Lucknow Pact of Hindu-Muslim unity," he said.
"I admire certain aspects of his personality. His determination and the will to rise. He was a self-made man. Mahatma Gandhi was the son of a Diwan. All these (people) - Nehru and others - were born to wealth and position. Jinnah created for himself a position. He carved in Bombay, a metropolitan city, a position for himself. He was so poor he had to walk to work... he told one of his biographers there was always room at the top but there's no lift. And he never sought a lift," Singh said. New Delhi: Walking in the footsteps of party senior L.K. Advani, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Jaswant Singh has called Pakistan's founder Mohammed Ali Jinnah "a great Indian", saying he was "demonized". In an interview to a news channel, the former external affairs minister blamed India's first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru for the Partition.
"Nehru believed in a highly centralized polity. That's what he wanted India to be. Jinnah wanted a federal polity. That even Gandhi accepted. Nehru didn't. Consistently, he stood in the way of a federal India until 1947 when it became a partitioned India," Jaswant Singh told Karan Thapar in "Devil's Advocate", which will be aired on CNN-IBN Sunday and Monday. Jaswant Singh strongly contested the popular Indian view that Jinnah was the villain of the 1947 partition or the man principally responsible for it. Asked if he thought this view was wrong, Jaswant Singh said: "It is. It is not borne out of the facts... we need to correct it." "I think we have misunderstood him because we needed to create a demon... We needed a demon because in the 20th century the most telling event in the subcontinent was the partition of the country," Singh said. His praise for Jinnah comes ahead of the BJP's three-day 'Chintan Baithak' (brainstorming session) to begin in Shimla Aug 19. The BJP has also been maintaining that it has not changed its resolution on Jinnah that was adopted in 2005 against the backdrop of Advani's visit to Pakistan and his comments appreciating Jinnah. Jaswant Singh, whose biography on Jinnah would be released Monday, said he did not subscribe to the popular demonization of Jinnah and said he was attracted by the personality of the Pakistani leader. "Of course I don't (subscribe to the popular demonization of Jinnah). To that I don't subscribe. I was attracted by the personality which has resulted in a book. If I was not drawn to the personality I wouldn't have written the book. It's an intricate, complex personality, of great character, determination," Singh said. Jaswant Singh also questioned the wisdom of Indians who hesitated to call Jinnah a great Indian. Asked if he views Jinnah as a great man, he said: "Oh yes, because he created something out of nothing and single handedly stood against the might of the Congress Party and against the British who didn't really like him ... Gandhi himself called Jinnah a great Indian. Why don't we recognize that? Why don't we see (and try to understand) why he called him that?" He said Jinnah was a nationalist leader. "He fought the British for an independent India but also fought resolutely and relentlessly for the interest of Muslims of India... the acme of his nationalistic achievement was the 1916 Lucknow Pact of Hindu-Muslim unity," he said. "I admire certain aspects of his personality. His determination and the will to rise. He was a self-made man. Mahatma Gandhi was the son of a Diwan. All these (people) - Nehru and others - were born to wealth and position. Jinnah created for himself a position. He carved in Bombay, a metropolitan city, a position for himself. He was so poor he had to walk to work... he told one of his biographers there was always room at the top but there's no lift. And he never sought a lift," Singh said.

Leaders, particularly leaders who are politicians, would invariably and necessarily have the trait of being all things to all men. Therefore a research into an eminent leader would no doubt throw up facets that would paint him in a many coloured glory. This is all what Jaswant has achieved with Jinnah. If the answer to the question who was responsible for partition is sought to be answered more thoroughly, we have only to take the role of the two principal political parties of India at the time of partition, the Congress and Muslim League, to see clearly whose actions led to partition. It would be as clear as daylight that while Congress sought to take people of all hues abroad, the Muslim League had only the exclusive Muslim interest at heart. And in the end it got what its heart desired - the partition of India. Jinnah, being the President of Muslim League, cannot be absolved of partition’s sin, particularly as he never chose to decry Muslim League’s policies. Jaswant planted a non-existing mole in his previous book. In this book he has planted an unlikely saint. Sales gimmicks? -K.Venugopal - Mumbai

http://www.zeenews.com/news555699.html