"All muslims are not terrorist but all terrorists are muslims"- A Myth

It is a myth that "all muslims are not terrorist, but all terrorists are muslims". If this is right then just look at some of the terrorist incident happened in India and try to find out who was behind these incidents.

आतंकवाद - दोषी कौन?1- मालेगाँव का बम विस्फोट किन लोगो का षड्यंत्र था?

2- अजमेर दरगाह का बम विस्फोट किन लोगो का षड्यंत्र था?

3- मक्का मस्जिद का बम विस्फोट किन लोगो का षड्यंत्र था?

4- समझौता एक्सप्रेस का बम विस्फोट किन लोगो का षड्यंत्र था?

5- नांदेड में संघ कार्यकर्ता राजकोंडवार के घर में बम बनाते हुए विस्फोट, जिसमें दो बजरंग दल के कार्यकर्ता मारे गए थे और पुलिस ने वहा से नकली दाड़ी और शेरवानी , कुरता , पायजामा भी बरामद किया था?

6- गोरखपुर का सिलसिलेवार बम विस्फोट किन लोगो का षड्यंत्र था?

7- मुंबई ट्रेन बम विस्फोट किन लोगो का षड्यंत्र था?

8- घाटकोपर में बेस्ट की बस में हुए बम विस्फोट किन लोगो का षड्यंत्र था?

9- वाराणसी बम विस्फोट किन लोगो का षड्यंत्र था?

10- कानपुर बम विस्फोट किन लोगो का षड्यंत्र थाविश्लेषण?

You may be surprised but all these terrorist plot were executed by hindu terrorists and are as follows- 

1- मालेगाँव का बम विस्फोटलेफ़्टिनेंट कर्नल श्रीकांत, साध्वी प्रज्ञा सिंह ठाकुर,

2- अजमेर दरगाह का बम विस्फोटस्वामी असीमानंद , इंद्रेश कुमार (आरएसएस के वरिष्ठ नेता), देवेंद्र गुप्ता, साध्वी प्रज्ञा सिंह, सुनील जोशी, संदीप डांगे, रामचंद्र कलसांगरा उर्फ रामजी, शिवम धाक़ड, लोकेश शर्मा, समंदर , योगी आदित्यनाथ

3- मक्का मस्जिद का बम विस्फोटस्वामी असीमानंद एन्ड कंपनी

4- समझौता एक्सप्रेस का बम विस्फोटस्वामी असीमानंद एन्ड कंपनी

5- नांदेड बम विस्फोटसंघ कार्यकर्ता राजकोंडवार

6- गोरखपुर का सिलसिलेवार बम विस्फोटपुलिस ने कलकत्ता के एक आफ़ताब आलम अन्सारी है, को गिरिफतार किया था बाद मे कोर्ट से बा ईज्जत रिहा हुये

7- मुंबई ट्रेन बम विस्फोट किन लोगो का षड्यंत्र थाआज तक सच सामने नही आया

8- घाटकोपर में बेस्ट की बस में हुए बम विस्फोटआज तक सच सामने नही आया

9- वाराणसी बम विस्फोट किन लोगो का षड्यंत्र थाआज तक सच सामने नही आया

10- कानपुर बम विस्फोटबजरंग दल कार्यकर्ता , भूपेन्द्र सिंह छावड़ा और राजीव मिश्रा

Now we need to think, Is their any difference between Taliban, muslim extrimist and hindu extrimist? Answer is none. Every extrimist group thinks that it is doing great service to its religion or country but reality is otherwise. These religious leaders brainwash people in such a manner that even killing someone seems right for them. Hindus are told by their leaders that temples are being destroyed and hindus are being murdered so kill muslims, similarly muslims are being told by their leaders that hindus are destroying their religion and mosques, so if you want to save your religion kill hindus. Both the extremist group take pride and boast about killing the people from other religion. My friends take it from me, whoever says killing is justifiable and is a matter of pride under some conditions (i.e. if done for saving religion etc) is taking you to a wrong path. The day you start thinking about killing someone without any guilt, just accept this you have been brainwashed and need proper guidance. To justify killing people argue that if your relatives etc are murdered/raped infront of you then also will you not kill the culprit? So a person may kill the wrongdoer in self defence as the last option(if unable to stop him otherwise) but will still have a feeling of guilt rather than pride which differentiates the act from killing the other people for pride or revenge.    

Partition of India-Pakistan. Who is right and Who is not?

First of all I am not an expert or have any degree in law/justice to decide who did the right thing and who did not. But answer to who is right and who is not in context of India-Pakistan lies in the history. A great author once said concept of justice is complex and based on the predetermined objective. So if we assume our objective is to meet the basic rules set by British govt.(or Lord Mountbatten), that is

1) Partition will be done on the basis of percentage of population of Muslims & Hindus in the state. Muslim dominated regions will go to Pakistan and hindu dominated regions will go to India.

2) All the princely states governed by local rulers will decide for themselves, to which country they want to align itself to irrespective of the majority of the population.

So before taking case of Kashmir, lets examine these rules being followed or not.

Case 1: Junagadh

Nawab Mohammad Mahabat Khanji III of Junagadh, a princely state located on the south-western end of India chose to accede to Pakistan. India asserted that Junagadh was not contiguous to Pakistan and refused to accept the Nawab's choice of accession to Pakistan. Nawab argued that Junagadh could access Pakistan by sea. India cut off supplies of fuel and coal to Junagadh, severed air and postal links, sent troops to the frontier, and occupied the principalities of Mangrol and Babariawad that had acceded to India. Pakistan agreed to discuss a plebiscite, subject to the withdrawal of Indian troops, a condition India rejected and occupied rest of Junagadh by 9 Nov 1947. The Nawab and his family fled to Pakistan and appealed United Nations, where case is still pending.

Case 2: Hyderabad

The Hyderabad State had a majority Hindu population; the Nizam wanted to accede to Pakistan or if that was not possible remain independent. However such a decision was unacceptable to India, so in 1948 Indian Armed Forces engaged those of the State of Hyderabad and ended the rule of Nizam, annexing the state into the Indian Union.

Case 3: Jammu & Kashmir

The Princely state of Kashmir and Jammu had a majority Muslim population; Muslims were 80 percent of the whole state. The Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir acceded to India at the outbreak of violence.

So we can conclude, both the basic rules were not followed anywhere leave alone Jammu & Kashmir. Also many areas with slight muslim majority near India-Pakistan border were ceded to India as alleged to have influenced the Radcliffe Line in India's favour by Sir Cyril Radcliffe(who prepared report on the India-Pakistan partition). There were some cases in east Pakistan(now Bangladesh) which ceded districts with slight hindu majority.  So looking at cases in hand as a whole Pakistan was at lose. Although legally speaking Pakistan have no right over Jammu & Kashmir but similarly India have no right over Hyderabad, Junagadh and other princely states ceded forcibly. Point is both the countries didn’t stick to rules as the process of partition was rushed through. Now it is a catch 22 situation where two kids are fighting since one did wrong so the other should also be allowed to do it or not?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_India

Upper Caste vote bank is the ultimate reality

All this talk about Dalit vote bank, Muslim vote bank is such bogus talks. The only one vote bank that exists and actually matters due to their lung powers, financial clout and huge nuisance value is 'upper' caste vote bank in this country which no party dares to defy. And that is why you will never find any govt taking any credible action against people like pramod muthalik, bal thakre, modi, advani, those accused of killing, raping dalits, muslims, christians etc and can see how govt just gives in to anti-reservation forces so easily without even a semblance of fighting it out.If majority of dalits vote for BSP in UP and Muslims against BJP, it is not vote bank politics but ideological commitment against the reality that they face daily.If u want to see how this vote bank works. Just take the example of BSP's brahmin candidates. why do they win?

They win because brahmin and other upper castes vote their castes unlike BSP's Dalit voters who vote for them despite candidates being upper castes, just becasue of the commitment they feel towards BSP.

On the other hand upper castes despite their deep aversion to BSP, still is ready to vote for their caste men and women even if they stand on BSP's ticket. This is what is casteism, this is what vote bank means. And the most funny thing is when political anylsts talk about 'casteism' in politics while talking about contemporary times. They conveniently forget the factional battles that used to happen between brahmins, thakurs and kayasth lobbies in UP and their impact on electoral fortunes in Up just 2 decades back. The only difference is now that these lobbies now have to confront a new reality - lower caste political assertion whereas earlier they were the only players fighting with each other to protect their political turfs and their caste interests.

Reservation Simplified !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For all those who raise questions on reservations again and again-

Year 200 BC (Vedic Era):-

Dalit: I want education, drink clean water, earn wealth and respect.

Brahmin: Religion does not permit, it is written in manusmriti (hindus constitution) if you even think of any of these we will punish you, torture you and kill you.

Dalit: But what about equality, justice and merit?

Year 1000 AD-Mughals & Year 1900-British Rule:

Dalit: I want education, drink clean water, earn wealth and respect.

Brahmin: So what ruler has changed but you will remain slaves and ruler does not dare to interfere in our religious matter. If anyone will raise their voice we will burn down your houses and kill you.

Dalit: But what about equality, justice and merit?

Year 1930 (Second round table conference & Poona Pact):

Dalit: I want education, drink clean water, earn wealth and respect.

Dr Ambedkar: British (in second round table conference) have agreed to give our right to choose our own leaders on the basis of population to each and every community.

Brahmin : This will finish our domination, we are merely 15%, if it happens all our wealth (earned by sweat & blood - donations from preaching) created in so many years will be distributed among all the masses and soon we will come on road.

Gandhi: Dont worry I am here, I will fast till Dr Ambedkar takes few steps back, since dalits have suffered for so many years we are ready to give a small share through reservation. Atleast our wealth will remain with us and dalits will no longer demand their fair share or might be a separate state (because then 85% of area would go to dalits and we will have to live with 15% share only).

Dalits: But what about equality and justice.

Year 2000 (after independence):

Dalit: I want education, earn wealth, respect and above all our rights.

Brahmin: What about merit? We all are equal so why this discrimination? We believe in equality and fairness, so what 90% of wealth belongs to us, we have earned it through our sweat and blood.

Moral of the story: whatever happens these caste hindus will find some or the other reason to keep dalits away from education and their rights. In future when dalits will start competing with caste hindus they will come up with some other reason may be in the name of their hindu religion or country. But will never leave their domination over dalits. If we have to reduce the gap between rich caste hindus and poor dalits, some caste hindus will loose some of their wealth, which is why they oppose reservations. Because of this transition caste hindus becoming less richer comparatively and hence crying about merit & equality !!!!

Reservation simplified in terms of mathematics !!!!

Case 1: For past 3000 years, different rule was used for community A and Community B.

For Community A:      5+5 = 1          Community A: But this is not fair.

For Community B:       5+5 = 19       Community B: Look if you will add up all the equation will be equal 20=20, but if your refuse you will suffer dire consequences.

Case 2: One fine day, people realized system is biased towards community B and decided to bring equality, also since system was skewed in favor of community B, it was decided to follow a different rule.

For Community A:    5+5 = 11           Community A: Now, I might prosper.

For Community B:    5+5 = 9              Community B: This law is against principle of equality and merit.

Case 3:  Now community B says system is distorted and unequal. Why this discrimination with us. In this way Community B will suffer and will be frustrated. So Community A asked what kind of system do you want and Community B come up with following rule.

For Community A:     5+5 = 10

For Community B:     5+5 = 10

Community A: But what about wealth gained by community B through ages, even after following case 2, Community B holds 90% of the wealth. Don’t you think first we should equally distribute the wealth and then your case 3 would be valid, otherwise we should continue with case 2 only. Community B says “ Community A does not want equality and merit, they don’t want to compete and want everything for free?

You do the justice. Tell me your views????

Mayawati, Clear Case of Witch Hunting by Media.

You see in present condition, we create our own reality based upon our internalized preconceptions. Since there is no longer one objective truth, we are free to create our own truth, so you see there is no right and wrong, just an infinite number of equally valid stories. So perception about a person depends on whose story finds space in the media.

Media hates Mayawati but never concedes so. Because sometimes we do things involuntarily which are ingrained in our mind due to preconceived notions. Otherwise how could you justify ridiculing of a party by media on reports of sacking a minister for his wrongdoings without being forced by the media? Or building a world class park which will help in increasing tourism in the state? Any action of Mayawati is seen with eye of suspicion. And only time it praises her is to see itself as neutral is on the issue of managing caste alliances. Projecting as if everything is wrong with her except her hold on caste mathematics. This reminds me of scene from Sholay where Amitabh Bachan goes to mausi for marriage proposal of Dharmendra with Hema malini. Media also praises her in a similar fashion just to fulfill its duty half heartedly showcasing only one side of the story.  

As a result you set wrong precedent for other parties that if you will act against criminal elements belonging to your party then your party will also see a defeat. Past experience teach parties to shy away from taking actions against “Bahubalis” or criminal elements. It is responsibility of media that if a government takes positive step towards cleaning the political landscape, it should have been appreciated. Is there a single party in India who dares to throw its ministers out of the party if minister fails to act responsibly without being forced by media?  So when media is called fourth pillar of democracy it does not mean that its only responsibility is to catch the corrupt leaders but also to appreciate the good work done by a leader.

Question is not of capability but the intention of media. Any responsible journalist will look twice at the reliability of source of information before tarnishing image of a person through media. But when you take case of “Wikileaks revelation on Mayawati sending plane to fetch her sandals”, all journalist jumped to the story as if they were waiting something like this to happen and keeping aside every rule of responsible journalism, they published the incident as a scam but the truth which every journalist knew was that report send by British embassy was based on opinion of a journalist in UP without any evidence. For Mayawati damage had been done, whatever she will try to explain would go in vain as a foreign brand of Wikileaks gave credibility to the story made up by a journalist.

In an another incident, an IPS officer Devendra Dutt Mishra vent his anger against Mayawati for whatever reasons and claims high level of corruption by his senior officers. By looking at the video footage of his media address, any sensible person will tell you that he was giving incoherent and haywire statements such as to quote “Mere Senior officers ne bhi paisa khaya he, aapko yakeen na ata ho to puch lo abhi abhi mithai kha ke gaye hain se”. Even journalist knew the truth that he doesn’t sound mentally stable but treats his testimony as valid argument in broadcasting high level of corruption in UP government.

This small-small negative publicity creates a wrong perception in minds of the masses. You will ask any random person on the road and he will associate Mayawati with corruption. And then media will proclaim that it is unbiased and broadcasts information on the basis of available information. Stand of  any person depends on his caste, education and environment he/she is raised into. And journalist are no different people and comes from same society. So when there is no participation of dalits on editorial posts in the popular media how can one expect them to provide masses the other side of the story. Dalit leaders have been projected as demons throughout the history and sadly story continues. Media should stop this witch hunting by projecting dalit leaders as demons.