news details |
|
|
| Even Sonia's tears didn't move insensitive PM, HM! | | Defending Terror For Votes | | Rustam
JAMMU, Feb 11: "When I showed her the pictures of the Batla House encounter, Soniaji (AICC president and UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi) wept bitterly and asked me (not to show these pictures to me and) go to the Prime Minister so that something could be done…The government was set to appoint an enquiry panel headed by a former Chief Justice to examine the genuineness of the Batla encounter but had to abort its plans in view of the ensuing 2009 general". Who made these startling revelations and when and where? Law and Minorities Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid made these starling disclosures at Azamgarh (UP) on Thursday while addressing an election rally. His whole objective was to woo the Muslim voters, who constitute a substantial chunk in this assembly constituency.
What is this Batla House encounter? In 2008, Batla House encounter against suspected Indian Mujahiddin (IM) terrorists took place at Jamia Nagar, Delhi. The encounter culminated in the killing of two Azamgarh youth, Atif Amin and Mohamed Sajid. Two others, Mohammed Saif and Zeeshan, were arrested. One of the accused, Ariz Khan, managed to escape. The encounter also caused serious bullet injuries to one Delhi Police inspector, Mohan Chand Sharma, who later died in hospital. The Government of India recognised his contribution and awarded Ashok Chakra.
Remember, he was the same Salman Khurshid who had, on January 9, declared at Farrukhabad (UP) that the Congress, if voted to power, would earmark for the "Muslims 9 per cent sub-quota within the 27 per cent quota" meant for Other Backward Classes (OBCs), all Hindus. In other words, he held out an assurance to the Muslims that they would get 33 per cent reservation out of 27 per cent (read 100 per cent) in government jobs and educational institutions. His wife Louis Khurshid is contesting election on a Congress ticket from Farrukhabad assembly constituency. The Election Commission of India, on the complaint of BJP, took a very serious cognizance of the episode. On Thursday, the Election Commission censured and warned Salman Khurshid, obviously on the ground that he had violated the Model Code of Conduct and communalised the election scene in UP in order to capture Muslim votes, who constitute nearly 18 per cent of the state's electorate. He has turned so communal and desperate that he announced today that he would continue to advocate 9 per cent sub-quota for Muslims.
It is very important to note that Khurshid made what could be termed as startling revelations hours after the Election Commission censured him for promising 9 per cent sub-quota to Muslims in UP during an election speech in Farukkhabad last month.
Earlier, at the same place, Azamgarh, Congress general secretary, in-charge of Congress in UP and "political guru" of Rahul Gandhi, Digvijaya Singh, had also told media persons that "he believed that Batla House (Delhi) encounter was fake; he met the Prime Minister and the Home Minister to persuade them to examine the genuineness of the Batla encounter; they didn't agree saying it was a genuine encounter; thereafter, I did not press the matter". It happened last month. What Singh said was countered the very next day by the Home Minister. The Home Minister held a press conference to set the record straight and told media persons in unequivocal terms that "Batla House encounter was a genuine encounter". It is important to note that Rahul Gandhi, during a visit to Azamgarh last month for campaigning, had to face angry reaction from the Muslims over the Batla encounter. He had left the place without addressing the scheduled election rally.
Significantly, it was none other than Singh who denied Khurshid's claim and told media persons, "Sonia Gandhi did not cry...Salmanji was only narrating an anecdote". Yesterday, Khurshid also clarified that "his remarks had been taken out of context" and that "he had only implied that Soniaji had become 'emotional' on seeing the Batla pictures".
What does all this indicate? It indicates many things. One, it indicates that the Congress could go to any extent to pollute the Indian political scene and garner Muslim votes; it can even make a common cause with terrorists. Two, it shows that the Congress doesn't believe in secular values and people's democracy. Three, it indicates a sharp division within the government over this sensitive issue. Four, it indicates that the Prime Minister and the Home Minister are so insensitive that even the "tears" of Sonia Gandhi" didn't move them. Five, it indicates that the party and an influential section of government are not on the same page.
In any case, the casualties are secularism, people's democracy and the nation itself. This is the Congress party. It's no wonder then that the people have started dismissing the Congress party as the other face of the Muslim League that ensured the partition of India on communal lines in August 1947. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
