SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : India Coffee House -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: JPR who wrote (11858)3/7/2002 7:46:33 AM
From: JPR  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 12475
 
Swamy Vs Acharya: Dharma vs Adharma
hinduonnet.com

CHENNAI, MARCH 6. The Janata Party president, Subramanian Swamy, has criticised the Kanchi Sankaracharya, Jayendra Saraswathi, for mediating on the Ayodhya issue.

In a statement released here today, Dr. Swamy described Sankaracharya's involvement as the ``most dangerous for India's constitutional process, secularism and rule of law. This dispute for any government was never a religious one for a Sankaracharya to be involved, especially one so close to the RSS and so controversial as Sri
Jayendra Saraswathi''.

He said the dispute ``is primarily whether the rule of law will prevail or whether any mob can alter any dispute in its favour by stealth and terror. The Babri Masjid dispute has been twice altered by stealth and force; in 1949 when the photos of Bhagwan Ram were smuggled into the masjid premises in the darkness of night. That new status quo was maintained till December 6, 1992 when a pre-assembled mob demolished the Masjid itself''.

``Now a new unilateral alteration of the 10-year status quo is being sought by the VHP. This, no constitutionally committed government can allow, either by force or by fraud. An `agreement' to allow the VHP to build on the undisputed land will foreclose the possibility of any option other than to construct the temple on the disputed site as well. Hence, it is mendacious for the Sankaracharya to suggest it as a solution. As for the VHP's assurance to wait and abide by the court orders, the whole country knows how they disregarded their assurance given to Rajiv Gandhi in the autumn of 1989 and to the Supreme Court in 1992.''

The Sankaracharya, Dr. Swamy said, ``can preach and propagate, but not jet-set for intermediation. I condemn it, as well as I condemn those Muslim bodies which have pusillanimously agreed to negotiate, instead of demanding equality before the law and bringing the culprits to book''.



To: JPR who wrote (11858)3/20/2002 8:01:26 AM
From: JPR  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 12475
 
Ignore the Cow-belt at your own risk and pay dearly
dawn.com
Options before Vajpayee By Dr Iffat Malik
It is sending out contradictory signals.
Attorney-General Soli Sorabjee told the Supreme Court the government would have no objection to a Hindu ceremony being performed some distance from the proposed temple site - a plea more in line with an advocate for Hindu India, than a defender of secular India. Similarly, Prime Minister Vajpayee upheld the Supreme Court verdict by not allowing the Hindus to worship at Ayodhya, but sent his personal emissary to receive the foundation stone for the Ram temple at a ceremony performed close by. As Congress leader Sonia Gandhi put it, Vajpayee had 'neither the will nor the capacity to deal with the VHP blackmail'.

JPR's note:

Vajpayee is the Prime Minister of India-all Indians; therefore, he has to uphold the Supreme Court verdict; yet, he is a Hindu at heart and has no problem in reconciling the two aspects of his life.
Sonia Gandhi, knowing the mind-set of the cow-belt Hindus and aspiring to be the Prime Minister of India, cannot afford to alienate the cow-belt Hindus. For Sonia to say that Vajpayee has neither the will nor the capacity to deal with the VHP blackmail is pure hogwash, because it is impossible for her to govern the country without Hindu assent, even she gets elected on account of her family connection and the Nehru-Gandhi mantle.