Articles
Markandeya Katju’s Modi-Phobia
Dt: 18/2/13
Markandeya Katju’s Modi-Phobia
Dr T.H.Chowdary
Js. Markaney Katju’s critique of Sri Narendra Modi ( Hindu 15/2/2013) is unjust and unreasonable. Js Katju cannot believe that Sri Modi had no hand in the horrible events that happened in Gujarat in 2002, because Modi was than the Chief Minister . In 1984, nearly 4000 Sikh men, women and children were slaughtered in Delhi and its environs over four days. Sri Rajiv Gandhi was then the Prime Minister and he was present in Delhi The army and police were available to him. But the carnage went on. Does Js Katju hold Rajiv Gandhi responsible for the slaughter of Sikhs? Never did he do so. It is therefore obvious that Js. Katju is prejudiced against Sri Modi.
2. regarding the torturing alive of 59 Hindu Karsevaks in Godhra, Js. Katju hold that event as a story and does not want to “buy” it. According to him, “ there is still mystery as to what exactly happened”. Obviously, facts he does not want to believe are ‘mystery” to whom As obviously, they are not mysteries to the relatives of Godhra victims, to the police and government there and the Gujarati people ( one of whom a co-passenger in an airliner could not suffer this Js. Katju’s hatred of Modi and so even changed has set, a way from Katju, as narrated by the Justice).
3. Js. Katju seems to have irrefutable beliefs and knowledge when he asserts that 200 mln Muslims in Indi a are solidly against Modi. But he does not mention the fact that over 98% of the Muslims electorate in India rejected and voted against secular Gandhi’s, socialist Nehru’s and nationalize Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s Congress in eh general elections to the h
Legislative Assemblies in 1946; they agreed with the Muslim League which said Muslims are a separate nation (separate from Hindus ), that India should be divided to create the Islamic State of Pakistan as a home-land for all Muslims of the subcontinent and that there should be an exchange of minority populations between Pakistan and Hindustan. Only minuscule of Muslims voted for Congress’ “nationalist” Muslims, all of whom lost deposits.
4. Js. Katju rightly laments the death of 2000 Muslims in Gujarat’s 2002 riots; but not once does he mention that 800 Hindu also died in those very riots!
5. Js. Katju trashes the fact of impressive economic and industrial and agricultural development that Gujarat is recording under Modi’s leadership. He would want us to believe his definition of development. The Justice surely must be knowing that different people; including luminaries like him, give different contents and meanings to socialism, secularism, democracy development and even justice. They reflect the beliefs, prejudices, ideologies and religious faith of the people speaking and writing about them.
6. Js. Katju seems to be of Kashmiri origin.. From his name, he appears to be a Hindu too. But neither as an exponent of Kashmiriat or Hindu or secular or just as an objective person, he has not been writing about the expulsion or frightened exit of 400,000 Hindu Pandits from Kashmir Valley, wrought by Islamist jihadi terrorists injected by Pakistan into Kashmir and their sympathetic, safe-haven and logistics providing co-religionists in the valley, Also, the learned justice equates Kalidasa with Mirza Ghalib by founding and projecting a Kalidasa-Ghalib (something) society What perversity it is to equate above and despondency versifier like Galib to the great and inimitable bard like Kalidasa whose Sakuntalam and Megha Sandesa are acclaimed as world’s most precious literature.
7. There is anti-Modi industry in India. It produces hate literature calumniating and slandering Modi, indeed, Modi is surrogate for Hinduism . This industry is directed by well known anti-Hindus ; “secularists”, “composite” culturists ; some who fled from Pakistan to India but preach, secularism tolerance and Indo-Pak brotherhood to Hindus , Indians ( not to Pakistanis and Muslim residents of India). Js Markandey Katju seems to be having obsessive Modi-phobia. He can see only irreconcilable diversity among Indians; and cultural heritage. Should wise people propagate and commend integrating unity or divisive diversity? (675 words)
END