Tuesday, January 17, 2012

Victims of Secularism

Whew! That was really a looooooonnnng break from blogging! Got tied up in various things.... Anyways, what triggered this post was an excellent comment on an article that I was reading. The article has been written by Shashank Joshi, immediately after the terror attacks in Mumbai in July 2011. He claims that while the fingers are being pointed to Indian outfits, Pakistan still cannot be let off the hook as the ISI and its agents feed this terror in the country. While he has a point, he still goes on to the usual defence of why the Islamic network has flourished in India, post Babri and post Gujarat! So why am I talking about this article now, after so may months?

Well, a comment on this article by someone who calls himself "Marty Martel" exactly voices my thoughts. I reproduce the comment verbatim below...

India’s secular seclusion and a hara-kiri

Indians have nobody to blame but themselves for this Islamic terrorism because they reelected Sonia Gandhi’s Congress government in 2009 that thrives on pandering to Muslim minority at the expense of Hindu majority.

Under their policy of aligning with Muslim political parties, Sonia-Singh’s government tolerated Islamic jihadis who have turned peaceful India into their terror base. The Islamic jihadis have advocated, incited and abetted unlawful activities to “liberate Kashmir from India” and to encourage “hatred and contempt” towards the Government of India. The various terror-related incidents in India since 2005 were not stray cases of “misplaced anger of Muslim youth”, as certain activists would want the world to believe, but acts of violence carried out with meticulous planning with the diabolic intention of turning the whole country into the terror hub.

India, which has been at the receiving end of jihadi violence for centuries (since 712AD), is in deep slumber ... secular slumber. India, predominantly Hindu and targeted by the terrorists precisely for that reason remains suspended in secular seclusion! Any association of terror with the religion of a minority is taboo even when it is glaringly apparent and any invocation of Hindu culture or religion is dubbed communal even when it could actually strengthen India, as a rallying point.

It does not seem to occur to Indians that for them to be secular, they have to be alive first! So as bombs go off in crowded places with chilling regularity, a Pavlovian spirit of slavishness, slip-shod logic and self-defeating tolerance takes grip of everyone.

From the public to prime-time pundits to pen-pushers of the print to politicos, all are coy, confused and confounded about how to react.

The stoic leaders exhort the nation to be calm, as if it were raring to bark and bite like Bush. The media waxes eloquent on the country's resilience in the face of terror, forgetting that bombs or no bombs, those alive have to go to work for their daily bread. The world sheds tears and then advises restraint, a virtue they themselves have shelved in similar situations, while the killers for their part start preparing for their next brutal assault, cocksure that they can pick and choose their targets so sedated by secularism.

Add to that the imposed guilt of Babri Masjid and Gujarat being drilled into the Indian psyche day in and day out by rational intellectuals amidst the masses and the media, much to the Jihadis’ joy. Should Hindus not be paying an eternal price for those sins? Were not the Jihadis just lambs before that, tolerant to boot and lovers of 'kafirs'? What delusions!

Really, in a country inhabited and led by mere men of straw, no provocation can truly become the last straw.

Barring announcing themselves through neon signs, the Islamic terror network in India and specifically in Kerala, is as conspicuous as an over-bearing mother-in-law! Yet, the long arm of our law remains folded, in secular deference to minority sentiments. Even when it is apparent that the so-called moderates in them have no voice.

Government authorities are politically inhibited from raiding the numerous mohallas of terror right under their own noses! On the contrary, the rulers bend over backwards with bouquets of reservations and what not in a wishful fit of appeasement, reminiscent of a sheep's optimism when faced by wolves.

Now does a nation, so committed to hara-kiri, really need any other enemies?

Monday, July 06, 2009

The 90:10 challenge!

Finally, the Bombay High Court (surprising, it is still called Bombay High Court) has dumped the Maharashtra Govt order providing 90% reservation to students from the State Board, applying to junior colleges within the State.


It was some 25 years ago, when I was a SSC student who had stood 2nd in school and secured admission into the Science stream of one of the premier junior colleges of that time. Out of the roughly 100 students in my class, about 40% were from the CBSE and ICSE boards. In those days, students passing out of these Boards had an additional weightage of 5% (Percent, mind you, not marks, so that was really huge).

These guys used to have a certain aura around them – at least that’s what I felt. Let me explain why. They were not really snooty; in fact my entire circle consisted of only CBSE/ ICSE guys, since most of the SSC guys were from vernacular schools, with whom I used to have a problem relating to). In Standard XI, the standard of curriculum suddenly appeared to have risen sharply. The complexity and volume of the syllabus was far higher than what I had been used to upto the SSC level. And my friend circle from the ICSE and CBSE found the same curriculum a breeze. Reason – most of it had already been covered in their respective courses back in school. And for the rest of us hapless SSC guys, it was a major struggle coping with the stress.


That experience of my own in Junior College convinced me that the level of studies in the ICSE and CBSE Boards most definitely provided a superior quality of student given the same IQ level and genetic background. It was this belief that led me to shift my own kid from the SSC School that she was going, to a recently opened ICSE school. The sense of urgency to make this shift was also on account of the fact that the number of ICSE schools were on the rise. Hence, in my kid’s generation the percentage of her peers who get an ICSE exposure would also be higher (than the relatively smaller percentage in my generation).

My hunch was right. The change was felt right from the first month of the shift. The volume of studies was far higher, but not stressful. It was richer in content, but not demanding on the student’s overall time and effort.


It was thus, with a great deal of frustration, that I heard about the Maharashtra Governments order to have a 90:10 quota system for SSC/ non-SSC students applying for junior colleges.

1. The ICSE and CBSE boards do not have sufficient number of their own junior colleges – hence the students have to forcibly move into the State Board stream to further pursue their studies. Discriminating against them therefore, is unfair.
2. Further, the issue is that of shortage of seats. If all the ICSE/ CBSE guys had actually studied in SSC format, then they would have fallen into the same category as the present SSC students – in such a situation, how would the Govt have tackled the seat shortage issue?
3. The Government has to remember that while the Boards might have been from Maharashtra, the Students are locals. Discriminating against them on flimsy grounds is not only unfair, but is only postponing the problem of seat shortage.
4. Adjustment of grades to account for difference in grading systems between the two streams can be done to a limited extent. That can take care of the misgivings which SSC students have about the regional language compulsion which they claim brings down their percentages.

On a long term Basis, the ICSE and CBSE boards would need to plan for extending their courses upto Standard XII. This alone would help resolve this issue as well as make sure that the quality of education enjoyed by these students is sustained.

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

The "NON" Congress Party!

In 1999, after Jayalalitha brough down the one and half year old Vajpayee Government by a single vote, the prospects of Sonia Gandhi (who is Italian Born) becoming the Prime Minister were real. Three Senior Congressmen, Sharad Pawar, Tariq Anwar and Purno Sangma, in a closed-door Congress meeting, raised objections to a foreign born person occupying the highest chair. (Whether Pawar’s objection was really to the foreign origin or whether this was merely a political ploy to bring himself centre-stage, one cannot say). Sonia was enraged at this affront to her authority (after all, who can offend a Gandhi in the Congress and get away with it?) and showed these three the door! The NCP, supposedly the “Nationalist” Congress Party, thus came into being!

Now, 10 years later, questions are being raised about the raison d’etre of the NCP! Let’s see why:

1) Just one year after its formation in 1999, the Congress and the NCP had no qualms about joining hands to form a coalition government in Maharashtra, which ran “successfully” for the entire term.
2) They then fought the 2004 Maharashtra Assembly elections together and again continued the Government for another five years.
3) And now, they are all set to fight the 2009 Assembly elections as well.
4) In the meantime, the NCP has also fought the 2004 and 2009 General Elections with the Congress and become an integral part of the UPA with Sharad Pawar becoming the Agriculture Minister in both the stints.
5) Now, Purno Sangma, who wants to make sure his next generation’s career is well taken care of, has apologized to Sonia for his misdemeanor 10 years ago. Obviously, after Sonia visits his son’s wedding and takes Agatha Sangma under her tutelage, he would be hard pressed to say such a thing.

So, the issue is, why is NCP still alive?

If the foreign origin issue, raised so evocatively by Pawar and his cohorts in 1999, was such an important issue, then pray, why didn’t they pursue it? When in 2004, Sonia was all set to become PM, did we hear any murmur from the NCP?

The other day, when Praful Patel was asked the question about the continuation of the NCP, he deflected it by giving a standard vague reply that they were partners in secularism or something to that effect. Pray, what has secularism got to do with this? Do they need to exist as a separate entity just to promote secularism? If that were the objective, wouldn’t it be better if they unite and form a single entity? Why struggle and try to find a feature distinctive from the Congress?

I’ll tell you why!

If NCP merges with the Congress, Sharad Pawar loses his bargaining power. Today, whenever he senses that the Congress is on a weak wicket, he can always try and flirt with the third front, fourth front, fifth front and so on, like he did during the 2009 election campaign. That way, he can remain in power whichever combination comes to power. (He is rumoured to have even been in talks with Bal Thackeray by playing the Marathi PM card).

And by

a) wooing Agatha Sangma, Purno Sangma, Tariq Anwar,

b) putting the CBI after Padmasinh Patil,

c) getting the IPL matches played outside India and

d) making the media raise questions about the NCP’s existence,

Sonia is trying to nullify exactly that – Pawar’s bargaining power!!!

Monday, November 24, 2008

Shameless bias!

Sometimes I really wonder if these pseudo journos do not fear losing their credibility. They have carefully crafted a veneer of a neutral commentator but in most of their articles, their bias screams out!

Take the case of Anil Dharker. This is the same chappie who magically created those “three clear days” between February 28 to March 1, 2002 during the Gujarat riots. Now the same guy has written a piece dripping with hatred and sarcasm and full of half truths and lies!

Let us see the depths to which these guys go!

So, finally, L K Advani has got off the fence. After keeping quiet on the Malegaon blast case for a couple of weeks, and letting Raj Nath Singh do the talking, he has now come out in support of "Sadhvi" Pragya. A tiger can’t hide its stripes for too long, and this particular tiger's stripes have always been a deep saffron which show through whatever robes he is wearing at the moment.

Look at how the Sadhvi has been put into quotes, Advani has been described as a tiger who hides his stripes and how saffron has been treated as something to be despised!

The robes he is displaying now is of prime minister-in-waiting. That's what he donned when he played host to the captains of industry last week, an elder statesman in thoughtful dialogue with leading industrialists about the state of the nation. And then emerged Mr Hyde, railing and ranting at the government for "torturing" Pragya. The basis of his allegations? Pragya said so. (A little aside here: the 'Sadhvi' has not claimed she was subjected to physical torture, just that she was verbally abused and mentally tortured. What does she expect in an investigation into terror and killing of people? Soothing music? Scented agarbattis? Polite requests to tell the truth?)

Sadhvi Pragya’s affidavit vividly describes the manner in which the ATS ordered her disciple to lash her with a belt. Yet Dharker sees no physical torture in that! After all, she is only a Hindu!

Now the Chief Monster of the Gujarat violence, Narendra Modi, is saying that the government is maligning the Indian army because a serving officer is alleged to be the mastermind of the Malegaon blasts and possibly the explosion in the Samjhauta Express. Bal Thackeray too has been part of this chorus: "Countless Sadhvis will stand up to safeguard the interests of the Hindu community" is one of his less inflammatory statements. He also talks of "brilliant military officials" who have been "maligned on mere suspicion of having plotted bomb blasts" and "Efficient police officials who took on terrorists have been brought to disrepute by the Anti-Terrorist Squad".

So, Narendra Modi is a Chief Monster!

And the Samjhauta blasts charge continues to stick even after the ATS, which had leveled the charges in the first place, has itself retracted them!

The combined message of all this is clear: "No Hindu can be guilty of terrorism. No Hindu military officer can be guilty of terrorism. No Hindu policeman can be guilty of terrorism." There is an implied sub-text here which goes like this: "Any Muslim held for questioning in a terrorism enquiry has to be guilty because he is a Muslim. If a 'suspect' is questioned, then released because there is no evidence against him, it's okay to torture him because he is a Muslim".

Can’t the same accusation be made against the pseudo-secular breed like Dharker? Wouldn’t they have written breast beating pieces if some Muslim terrorism accused had leveled charges of torture in custody?

Does this sound crude and extreme? Yes, it is crude and extreme but that in effect is what these gentlemen are saying. Remember poor Khwaja Yunus? Arrested for the Ghatkopar bombing (a charge which has never been proved), he was killed in police custody by former police officer Sachin Vaze and three constables. So says the Maharashtra CID. Vaze is now out on bail awaiting trial. So what happens to him? Why, the Shiv Sena welcomes him into its fold (presumably he is Thackeray's 'efficient police official').

So Khwaja Yunus is “poor”? But Sadhvi Pragya is evil! Why? Oh, don’t look too far for answers – just look at their respective religion!

And what about the young Muslim men who were arrested in Andhra Pradesh on suspicion of terrorism? They were kept in detention for months, tortured by the police, then finally released because they were innocent (a fact acknowledged by the Andhra government which has now said sorry and announced a compensation package for them).

Did LK Advani, prime minister-in-waiting, whose heart bleeds for 'Sadhvi ' Pragya, say anything about these terrible human rights abuses? He hasn't, has he? You will not find a sane person in this country who will justify the despicable acts of the Muslim terrorists who have bombed and killed our countrymen. They deserve no sympathy and they deserve no leniency in the punishment they will get. But the same impartial standards should apply to Hindu terrorists as well. In the end a terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist; there is no such thing as a Hindu terrorist or a Muslim terrorist.

So convenient to say that you do not justify acts by Muslim terrorists – but you will do everything to make sure that suspects are not apprehended and investigated!

If the Hindutva brigade tries to justify their Malegaon and Samjhauta Express bombings on the basis of retaliation, that's a dangerous route to take; Muslim youth are being indoctrinated to avenge Babri Masjid and Gujarat; Indira Gandhi was killed by Sikhs. Rajiv Gandhi by the Tamils in revenge too.

The Samjhauta Express lie continues – and will continue till eternity – once they have tasted blood, these suckers will not let go!

Where do we go from here? Into a black hole for sure. It's a shame that Messrs Rajnath, Advani and Modi can't see that.

Such shameless bias, and yet they are called in for TV discussions as neutral commentators! What irony!

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Does CEC mean Congress Election Commissioner?

The Chief Election Commissioner (as also the Election Commissioners) of the country is privy to a lot of information on political parties and the election process and has tremendous powers to use or misuse this. In a situation where there is a neck to neck fight between two major political formations, a slight tweaking of a ruling or decision can tilt the scales in one way or the other.

Therefore, it is important that the post of the Chief Election Commissioner is occupied by a person who is not only unbiased and neutral, but also conveys this attitude through his behaviour, words and policies.

However, some of our “respectable” ex-CECs have some question marks on their head, based on their post-retirement careers.

Take the case of Mr. M.S. Gill. Yes, insiders always knew that he was a Congress stooge, but the man kept a neutral face on the outside. God alone knows how many decisions and policy matters he must have tweaked in order to aid the Congress. Of course, post-retirement he has joined the Congress and was well rewarded for his services during his tenure as the CEC with a plum ministry job.

Even as Sports Minister, there was no hint of any neutrality that might have creeped in during his years as a “neutral” CEC. After the sharpshooter, Abhinav Bindra, won the Gold medal at the Beijing Olympics this year, the ex-CEC was so crass in his anti-BJP approach (having shed all pretense of neutrality which he was showing during his CEC years), that he advised the sportsman to visit only Sonia and not Advani.

If one stooge was not enough, now we have the famous James Michael Lyngdoh, who was the CEC during the 2004 General Elections which gave the Congress a slight edge and led to the formation of the present disastrous UPA. His activism during the Gujarat polls of 2002 (after the riots) and his run-in with the BJP loudmouths is well known. We also know how the usual suspects rushed to his defence at that time. While he maintained a straight face when he was accused of being a “Congress agent”, what was startling was his sharing of the dais with Rahul Gandhi at Amritsar on 18th November.

Finally all doubts have been put to rest. Whether he formally joins the party or not, only time will tell. But where his loyalties lie, we all know. Tell me, as a supposedly neutral ex-CEC, would he be willing to share the dais with say, Advani?

And last but not the least, don’t we all know the background of incumbent Election Commissioner, Navin Chawla, whom the Congress is banking upon to see it through in the forthcoming General Elections?

Thursday, October 16, 2008

Another anti-Hindu article

Ranjona Banerji, who keeps showing up on the DNA off and on, infuriates me no end. In her latest article, she spews venom on her pet-hate - "Hindutvawadis".

The article is full of holes - which I have tried to rebut below (my comments in saffron colour). I have also emailed the same to her so that she can see some flaws in her thinking. I hope she doesnt treat it as hate-mail since I have only responded in her own language.
History is not an excuse for Carnage!

It is true that Mahmood of Ghazni arrived in India and went through the land with sword and fire. He also raided the Somnath Temple many times. There. I said it.

How obliging!

The only problem is that Ghazni died in 1030 AD.


This does not affect me personally, so it is not that kind of a problem. The problem is that I find myself unable to understand the logic that connects his excesses to explain why it is somehow okay for Muslims to be burnt to death in Andhra Pradesh in 2008.

Probably the same logic that people like you use while justifying reservations with the argument that the OBCs were discriminated against for thousands of years.

And so, now, I feel the wrath of the “majority community” or the Hindutva brigade, in other words. “Do you have the guts to write about Muslims being terrorists?” All right, here you are: There are Muslims who are terrorists and terrorists who are Muslim.

Okay, now that you have said it, can you pinpoint exactly which Muslim is a terrorist? If you can’t, why don’t you allow security forces to do their job without screeching about “human rights” at the slightest hint of an innocent person getting called for interrogation? Obviously, since the terrorists do not come with the brand written on their forehead, there are bound to be some investigations done before going directly and picking up the right man!

Could you please now tell me the logic that connects some Muslims being terrorists to a family of six Muslims being burnt to death in Bhainsa, Adilabad district, Andhra Pradesh? The fight in Bhainsa was something to do with Dassera versus Eid celebrations. Now I get it.

So you got it? It was nothing to do with terrorism. That fight might have been due to some routine logistic related issue which unfortunately got blown out of proportion? Why do you guys jump at the slightest provocation to pounce on Hindutva?

When Hindus and Muslims collide, the Muslims get burnt to death because Mahmood of Ghazni ransacked Somnath several times between 1024 to 1026, because Muslims in pre-Independent India partitioned the country and because Kashmiri pandits were driven out of Kashmir by militancy — also by Muslims.

What a pack of lies! When Hindus and Muslims collide, it is NOT JUST MUSLIMS WHO DIE, EVEN HINDUS DIE! Let us get that fact cleared first! You guys conveniently ignore the number of Hindus who die in each communal riot!

Secondly, isn’t it true that India was partitioned by Muslims and the Kashmiri pandits were driven out from Kashmir by Muslims. What are the Hindus supposed to do, according to you? Write more anti-Hindu articles in DNA like you do?

And I’m supposed to believe that all this justifies, in no uncertain terms, that 2000 Muslims were brutally killed in Gujarat in 2002? Oh, now I know what I’m going to hear: who threw the first stone? If Godhra had not happened and the rest of the Hindutva rant.

Oh, how convenient, once again! When it was Mahmood Ghazni, you want to forget it. When it was Godhra being the “first stone”, you want to ignore! No history lessons here! But when terrorist attack after terrorist attack takes place, you want to blame the insecurity among Muslim youth on account of the 2002 Gujarat riots! History in full force here! How nice!

Well, how about this? What happened in Godhra is not clear, the recent report of the Nanavati commission notwithstanding.

Why? Just because he has exonerated your pet hate figure? Justice Nanavati is not a Modi-stooge. He was appointed by the Supreme Court of India. If you want to disregard the Supreme Court Judge, it only shows your respect for the judiciary! If you guys are so sure that Modi did it, why haven’t you been able to put him behind bars yet? Isn’t the Teesta Setalvad – Harsh Mander- Prof Bandukwala – Anu Aga – Nandita Das – brigade strong enough, not to mention all the international big bucks and lobbyists at the US, who have successfully blocked Modi’s visa for so many years?

Worse, how do the deaths of 59 people — horrible though they were — justify large-scale rioting and the deaths of 2000 people who had nothing to do with the Godhra attack?

Probably, just like you guys justify every terrorist attack since 2002 and blame it on the 2002 Gujarat riots! You want us to forget Mahmood of Ghazni, but you will not let Muslims forget Babri Masjid demolition!

And even stranger, why did the Hindutva parties, so ready to stand up and fight when their cock-eyed version of Hinduism is attacked, do nothing to help the victims of the Godhra attack?

What do you really know about what has been done? Any proof?

Why did the father of some of the victims of S6 of the Sabarmati Express come out and attack the Narendra Modi government for itsindifference?

What is the difference here? Arent victims of all terrorist attacks always grumbling that the Government has not done enough for them? Nothing new here! The point is larger!

No, we’re not allowed to talk about all that. We’re not allowed to talk about the recent brutal and disgusting attacks on Christians and Muslims by Hindutva mobs, because by doing so, we are being anti-Hindu.

As if you will stop talking! The point is that the Christian attacks in Orissa are not really being orchestrated by the Hindutvavadis in the form of the Bajrang Dal, but is actually a inter-tribal rivalry between the Kandhas and the Pandas. Of course, you will ignore this fact as it will blow your propoganda to smithereens!

This insult is so bad, that we must, to avoid it, ignore all the atrocities done by the Sangh Parivar. That way, we become good Hindus, even if we have never read the Bhagvad Gita or believe in karma or the transmigration of souls.

Oh no! We become good Hindus by running down other Hindus who protest against terrorism, forcible conversions and vote-bank minority politics!

All that stuff is not Hinduism. Hinduism is whatever Praveen Togadia or some random illiterate says at any point in time.

Yes, Dr.Praveen Togadia is illiterate, but Ranjona Banerji is perfectly qualified to speak on behalf of all Hindus!

Hindus, incidentally, according to this Hindutva theory, only believe in Hindutva and only feel disgusted when Hindus die.

Not at all! In fact, as per the Hindutva theory, Hindus feel disgusted when anyone dies. It is only pseudo-secular leaders who feel disgusted only when non-Hindus die. For e.g. when Churches are attacked in India and European countries make noises, our PM says that this is a shame! But when Hindu temples are burnt in Malaysia, our PM says that this is an internal issue of Malaysia!

However, they do not feel so bad when lower caste Hindus die and that is why there were no Hindutva-led riots when members of the Bhotmange family of Khailanji were massacred. They were Dalits. Hindutva does not know what to do with Dalits.

It has now been proved that the Bhotmange massacre has nothing to with caste, it was a fight between two families blown out of proportion! By the way, the perpetrators of this ghastly crimes were not upper caste Hindus but OBCs, a fact which is cleverly concealed by the pseudo-secular Hindu-hating media!

The question which Hindutva does not answer is what about those of us — regardless of our faiths or the faiths we were born into or the faiths we may have acquired ourselves — who object to what is going on because we are Indians, who owe allegiance to the Republic of India first?

You can owe allegiance to the Republic of India without ignoring the atrocities on Hindus, cant you? Why must you tolerate Islamic terrorism? Why must you tolerate forcible conversions by Christians? Why must you tolerate pseudo-secular politicians saying that minorities have the first right to resources in India?

Or those of us who think killing is wrong, regardless of whether it is by Hindus or Muslims or Christians or anybody?

Yes, why do you exclude us, the Hindutvawadi’s from this tribe? Even we do not want killing!

Indians who do not narrowly limit our definition of ourselves to instructions from a political party? Indians who are willing to discuss our faults and limitations and not mistake that discussion for one more assault by Mahmood of Ghazni (dead since 1030)?

Political parties or their ideologies would flourish only if they articulate a feeling of a sizeable section of the populace! Nobody can take people for a ride!

George Santayana said that those who forget history are condemned to repeat it. What could you say to those who distort their history or never understood it in the first place?

Where is the distortion? Why do you want to deny that Islamic rulers have for centuries plundered India and subjugated Hindus? Why do you want to deny the Goa inquisition? I can understand minorities trying to denigrate Hindutva because it makes them insecure about all the goodies given by them in the form of reservations and other dole-outs by pseudo-secular governments. But whats in it for so-called Hindus like you to wish that Hindus remain subjugated forever? What is the benefit for you? I have asked this question to so many of your tribe, no one has been able to answer this!

Saturday, August 09, 2008

When its Maya, anything goes!

When somebody like Sushama Swaraj makes allegations about the UPA's involvement in the blasts in Bangalore and Ahmedabad as a conspiracy to divert attention from the cash-for-votes scandal, the mainstream media castigates her and treats her like a madwoman. Even BJP-friendly blogs caution her on shooting of her mouth on far-fetched possibilities.

However, when a Mayawati screams in her rally that "she fears a conspiracy by the Congress and the BJP to imprison her or get her killed with the assistance of a terrorist group or Naxalite organisation", we all lap it up happily. After all she is a Dalit-ki-beti, so hence she has to be a Prime Minister material, no questions asked!