Vrinda Karat, the Commie Henchwoman had accused Swami Ramdev of using human and animal parts in his ayurvedic preparations.

BBC reports:

A leading Indian yoga guru has been cleared of mixing human bones and animal parts in his medicines.

Uttaranchal state Health Minister Tilak Raj Behad told the BBC Swami Ramdev's medicines contained no objectionable ingredients and were purely herbal.

He said four samples of medicines were sent to Shriram Institute of Industrial Research in Delhi, which is recognised by the Indian government.

Swami Ramdev had described the allegations as a conspiracy.

Bone powder

The institute submitted its report last week after testing the samples.

The state government had set up an enquiry into the charges made against Swami Ramdev by Vrinda Karat, a leader of the Communist Party of India.

The BBC's Shalini Joshi in Dehradun, the Uttaranchal state capital, says Swami Ramdev's popular yoga classes are watched in hundreds of thousands of Indian homes every day.

Ms Karat alleged that ayurvedic medicines from his Haridwar-based pharmacy contained human bone powder and animal parts.

Vir Sanghvi sometimes, albeit rarely, gets the point.

The philosophical distinction is an important one. We have no right to make defamatory or slanderous statements about people. All of us also accept that the right to free speech can be curtailed on grounds of national security. But there are good reasons for these limitations. To reveal defence secrets may compromise the security of the state. To defame somebody harms their reputations and affects how they are perceived in the eyes of the public.

Do statements that cause religious offence fall in the same category? To argue that they do, we would have to prove that they caused damage to the safety of the religious faith (the national security parallel) or that they affected the way the faith was perceived by society, or even lowered its standing.

But surely none of the people who complain about insults to religion accept that the slights can have these consequences? Is the safety of Islam threatened because a Danish newspaper carries a cartoon? Is Islam so weak a religion that a couple of cartoons can cause the world or society in general to think less of it?
Clearly not. So, I’m not sure on what grounds we could abridge the right to free speech when it comes to religion.

The only argument you are left with is the “it has caused offence” line. And nearly all of the big ban-this-book, burn-this-cartoon, destroy-this-painting kind of demands have rested on the we-are-offended argument.

But just because something offends you, it does not follow that you have the right to stop me from saying it. For instance, I am deeply offended by the insistence of the more reactionary elements in the Catholic Church that the only way to get to heaven is to swear allegiance to the Vatican. But I wouldn’t dream of banning anybody — let alone the current Panzer Pope — from saying it. I am also offended by the Muslim fundamentalist position that a woman who wears make-up is loose and, therefore, condemned to eternal damnation. But I would not arrest or assault any loony cleric who took this position.

The problem with the people who think that their sense of offence gives them the right to curb your or my freedom of expression is that the basis of their value system is illiberal. I am quite prepared to believe that many Muslims find The Satanic Verses offensive. But my solution to their anger is simple enough: don’t read the damn thing — that way you won’t be offended. They have no business to curtail my right to read the book.

It is instructive that the agitation against the Danish cartoons began three months after their publication. In many cases — dare one say, in nearly every case? — the outrage is manufactured by religious and political leaders who whip a frenzy among ignorant followers. Let’s stick with The Satanic Verses. Ayatollah Khomeini placed the fatwa on Salman Rushdie’s head only because he heard about demonstrations in the Indian subcontinent. He never read the book and nor did any of his assassins.

After the rabble-rousers have manufactured the outrage, they incite their followers to violence. The argument then placed before governments is straightforward blackmail: if you do not ban the book/film/play/newspaper/etc then there will be a riot and people will die.

Governments are expected to say, surely no cartoon is worth the lives of innocent people, and to promptly declare a ban.

It is to the credit of Western societies that they rarely give in to this blackmail. In India, unfortunately, we surrender at the slightest provocation. And so every nasty, unpleasant political grouping has a readymade strategy: protest against a book on Shivaji, an art exhibition, a novel or a movie. The threat of violence (and in many cases the violence itself) will cause the state to impose a ban and the political grouping will seem important and powerful. That is how the unit of Water was driven out of India and that is how the Shiv Sena has hounded MF Husain.

If India is not to become a soft state, then we must stand up for liberal principles. We must stand up to the rioters, arrest those who foment violence and never, ever, give in to the blackmail.

The third point is one that I am always reluctant to make because I know it will be misused by right-wing fanatics and extremists. But I think I am going to make it anyway.

All of us who espouse the secular cause follow — to some degree — a double standard when it comes to comparing Muslim anger to Hindu outrage. I first noticed this during The Satanic Verses controversy when perfect liberals — men who railed against Hindu fundamentalism day after day — suddenly abandoned their liberal values and began supporting a ban on the book on the grounds that minority sentiments were at stake.

We see this now on a regular basis. All of us are outraged when the VHP or the Shiv Sena objects to Husain’s portrayals of Hindu goddesses and argue that, as an artist, he has perfect right to paint what he likes. But would we take the same position if his paintings offended Muslims?

The sad truth is that we are much more mindful of offending the sentiments of Muslims than we are of Hindus, Sikhs or Christians.

We claim we do this because we know that Muslims are a minority. But the real reason is because we know that Muslims tend to protest more loudly than Hindus; because these protests can be unreasonable; and because so few liberal Muslims stand up to the extremists in their community. When the VHP goes on the rampage, it is liberal Hindus who issue the loudest condemnation. When the lunatic fringe of the Muslim community gets agitated about the length of Sania Mirza’s skirt or about a cartoon in a European paper, few moderate Muslim voices are heard.

In the process, it has become easy for Hindu zealots to caricature the entire Muslim community as comprising fanatics, fundamentalists and lunatics. As the joke goes: Islamic is a peaceful religion and if you don’t accept that, they start sending you death threats.

I have waited many years for liberal Muslims to break this conspiracy of silence. And while I do hear some voices, these are people on the fringes of their community. Muslim liberals are still as shamefully silent as they were when students at Jamia assaulted the gentle and scholarly Mushirul Hassan for saying that while he found The Satanic Verses deeply offensive, he did not believe in the principle of banning books.

The time has now come, I think, for us to stop waiting for moderate Muslims to speak up. Liberal Hindus must end the double standard of the secular mindset and speak out as loudly against Muslim fundamentalism as they do against Hindu extremism.

If we do not do that, we discredit the whole concept of secularism. More important, we admit that our liberalism is not an absolute value but a convenient stick to beat Hindu extremists with while making shameful and unnecessary compromises with minority intolerance

Moslems have no qualms hurting the religious sentiments of Hindus.

They built Mosques by tearing down and destroying Sacred Temples. They went about the task of destryoing the Bamiyan Buddhas with such gusto. To this day, the Moslems of India continue their act of denigrating Hinduism by insisting that Hindus give up their most sacred places like Ram Janma Bhoomi (Birthspot of Lord Ram) and Krishna Janma Bhoomi (Birthspot of Lord Krishna).

Government of India, the obliging Dhimmi it is, says,

"It is incumbent on all of us to be sensitive to the beliefs and sentiments of others and avoid all actions that cause hurt to them [Muslim community]. India's commitment to religious harmony and tolerance is unshakeable and actions that cause hurt to the sentiments of any part of our people are not acceptable,'' the statement said. []

What a load of grandstanding crap. The Government seems to imply that whatever be the consequences to Freedom of Speech and Expression, the Muslim community matters more, much more than the Constitutionally guaranteed rights.

It further says that 'actions that cause hurt to the sentiments of any part of our people'.. Pray, do Hindus form 'any part of India's People'? or do Muslims only matter.

The Babri Masjid is a of no religious significance to the Moslems, while it signifies and represents the most holiest of all holy places for Hindus, being believed to be the Birth spot of Lord Ramachandra. The continued insistence of Moslems that Hindus give up these sacred places and accept the superiority and lordship of the Moslems over these spots has been causing untold hurt to the sentiments of Hindus for centuries now.

Does it not matter?

This Government does not come to the rescue of thousands of Indians in Russia who have been denied the right to build a single temple. It does not come to the aid of the French Sikhs in the turban ordeal. It does not come to the Fiji Hindus aid, nor to the Bangladeshi Hindus when they are undergoing genocide. It does not voice its concern when Pakistani Hindu girls are being abducted by dozens.

Yet, when the something happens in remote Denmark, the Government is quick to make known its concerns.

What happened in Denmark is the internal matter of that country. Muslims of India are most welcome to demonstate peacefully as private citizens. That is THEIR freedom of speech. However if the Moslems had come out in droves and protested against terrorism in the same spirit as they do now about insult to their religion, the world would be a better place. Their silence is tactically acceptance of the Islamic terror, groups unleash all over the world, from New York to Kashmir, Israel to Bali.

The government, I feel, has no business in this regard when it cannot do the same for Hindus. Impartiality should be the guiding lines of Secularism. Twisted vote bank politics is a hallmark of a fractured democracy that India is today.

[]

NEW DELHI: The Government on Saturday expressed "deep concern" over the growing controversy on the publication of Prophet Muhammad cartoons in a Danish newspaper and some European dailies.

A statement said India expressed its outrage in October last itself to the Danish government and suggested that apologies be sought and assurances obtained from the newspaper that it will not publish such cartoons in future.

`Actions not acceptable'

"It is incumbent on all of us to be sensitive to the beliefs and sentiments of others and avoid all actions that cause hurt to them [Muslim community]. India's commitment to religious harmony and tolerance is unshakeable and actions that cause hurt to the sentiments of any part of our people are not acceptable,'' the statement said.

Imam's criticism

The Shahi Imam of Delhi Jama Masjid Maulana Syed Ahmed Bukhari alleged on Friday that the Centre and the Congress had remained silent on the sensitive issue.

There have widespread protests on the issue in the past few days in several cities of the country.

Protest march

PTI reports from Lucknow:

Hundreds of Muslims, carrying placards and raising anti-U.S. and anti-Denmark slogans on Saturday, marched to the Uttar Pradesh legislature in protest against the cartoons publication.

The protesters, from various Muslim organisations, burnt effigies of the Denmark government outside the legislature building

France fighting Mittal because he's Indian?

Paris, February 3: France's opposition to Mittal Steel's bid for Arcelor is not due to the fact that its owner is Indian-born, Finance Minister Thierry Breton said on Thursday, brushing off alleged French arrogance towards an outsider.

France's conservative government and the Socialist opposition have stepped up rhetoric against steel magnate Lakshmi Mittal's $24 billion bid for Arcelor, sparking criticism by an Indian minister and some commentators.

"This has nothing to do with India or anyone else," Breton told Europe 1 radio. "This is a European company. The nationality of the shareholders has nothing at all to do with this. I appeal to everyone to be reasonable."

France, where more than 26,000 jobs could be affected by a takeover, has condemned the hostile offer for Arcelor -- the product of a three-way merger four years ago between Spain's Aceralia, France's Usinor and Luxembourg's Arbed steel firms.

If the bid succeeds, Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin will have little to show for a year-long campaign to prevent hostile foreign takeovers through a policy known as ‘economic patriotism’.

Breton has said he has profound concerns about both the form and content of the offer and that it was poorly prepared. French Industry Minister Francois Loos described Arcelor on Wednesday as "a flower of the European economy" and told parliament that France was opposed to the takeover.

Criticism of France

Although Arcelor executives and French ministers have mainly focused on criticising the protocol of the sudden bid, rather than the origin of the bidder, criticism about France's arrogance towards a foreign outsider has risen. India's Commerce Minister, Kamal Nath, said India was concerned about French opposition to Mittal's bid.

"We are watching the comments of the French government very carefully," he said on Wednesday after meeting European Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson in London.

French newspaper Liberation asked whether the affair might become a diplomatic incident between France and India.

"France...is complaining about the way the marriage proposal was conducted -- a two-faced way of signalling that it's the face of the groom that it doesn't like," the French daily said in an editorial.

Commentators said the rise of the Indian-born steel magnate and his hostile takeover bid exemplified the globalisation of companies from emerging countries, which were still taking Western companies and governments by surprise.

"The -- double -- problem is that Lakshmi Mittal is Indian, and that India was more reassuring when it was not a new emerging power, with multinationals on the market," wrote Joel Ruet, a researcher at the London School of Economics.

"This worries old Western capitalism -- Japan included -- which did not want to believe in it. This ‘save our jobs’ sounds like a ‘save our elites’," Ruet wrote in Liberation.

Mittal, the world's third richest person, was born in a Rajasthan village with no electricity and made himself a multibillionaire by leading consolidation of the steel industry.

He lives in London and Mittal Steel -- of which he and his family own 88 per cent -- is quoted in the Netherlands and the United States.

Mittal on Thursday dismissed talk that this was a bid for a European company by an outsider.

"This is a merger of two European companies, not a foreign company," he told a news conference in Madrid.

The Indian unwashed masses are awaiting for Rahul Gandhi the savior of our Nation.
So claim huge banners that have changed Hyderabad into a stinking hero-worshiping ritual of a 'Congress Meet'.

Rahul might not have even graduated just like his father, who instead of attending classes at Cambridge, was busy romping with an Italian waitress; but this does not stop the senile Congressmen from calling him, 'Accomplished'.

Reuters: India's Congress can't wait for the son to rise
HYDERABAD, India (Reuters) - Giant banners festooning this south India city proclaim the hopes of the ruling Congress party -- "Country needs RAHUL: Reformist, Accomplished, Honest, Upcoming, Leadership."

What has he accomplished so far, one might ask. Well, if his family traditions are anything to go by, He has bagged a Columbian Girlfriend, a Criollos or a Mestizos isn't clear, but surely another Daughter in Law for India to fawn over!

http://in.rediff.com/election/2004/mar/23espec1.htm

So did Rahul go to college in India at all?

He went to St Stephen's College, Delhi, for a year. He enrolled for history honours in 1989 and left in 1990. But here's the most interesting part: he was not admitted to St Stephen's on merit, but from the sports quota.

Really? So what sport was he good at?

He is good in rifle shooting, trap shooting being his speciality.

Was Rahul any good at studies while at St Stephen's?

His academic performance is unknown, as Rahul did not complete his degree.

But Dr Anil Wilson, the principal of St Stephen's College, recalls him as a diligent student. "He had no airs about the famous family he belonged to," says Dr Wilson.

Rahul's security cover must always have been stifling, right? Also, celebrity children wear their parents' fame prominently. Was Rahul one of those Delhi kids?

Apparently not! Rahul was always embarrassed by the security cover the college was under because of him, is what Dr Wilson has to say: "I think he left college because of security concerns. We really did not get an opportunity to assess his academic brilliance."

So was it sayonara to studies for Rahul after that?

No. He went to the United States in 1990, to study economics at Harvard University.

Great! So did he complete his studies in Harvard?

A little bit of confusion there. He did complete the four-year AB course in economics, but did not get his degree since he did not get the required grades.

And here, may we point out that Rahul's dad, Rajiv Gandhi, did not complete his studies at Cambridge? Neither did his grandma Indira Gandhi at Oxford's Somerville College. But did the absence of a degree interfere with the late Mrs Gandhi's leadership abilities? We think not!

So between leaving Harvard and fighting the Lok Sabha election, what has he been doing?

Nothing really. An acquaintance of Rahul says, "He is a man of apparently no occupation." After Harvard, Rahul shifted base to London and worked as a financial consultant but even that is a bit unclear. Some say he worked as a manager in a financial consulting agency, the name of which is not known. But Congress leaders who know Rahul disclose that "he was whiling away time in Britain and the US."

Sounds so much like P G Wodehouse's Bertie Wooster!

In 1999 he kicked up his job to help mother Sonia Gandhi and sister Priyanka during that year's Lok Sabha election. Congress leaders say Sonia has been politically grooming Rahul over the last five years, and that she has now "initiated him into politics, fulltime."

So he has been based in Delhi since 1999?

Yes, he has been living in Delhi for the past five years. But unlike his rather flamboyant sister Priyanka, he has always kept a low profile.

Is Rahul married? There were some reports about a foreign girlfriend.

No, he is not married, but you are right, he has a Colombian girlfriend, Juanita.

So where and how did he meet her? Are they just good friends, or is it more serious?

Congress leaders in the know say he fell in love with Juanita at Harvard. She is the daughter of a Colombian businessman. She is said to be spending a lot of time in Delhi these days. Rahul traveled with her to Kerala's Kumarakom backwaters resort in January -- in the company of sister Priyanka and her husband Robert Vadra, so we guess the family is cool about the relationship.

But she does not stay at 10 Janpath, the Gandhis' home while in Delhi. Sources say she stays at the family farmhouse on the outskirts of Delhi.

Now back to politics. What do Congressmen think is Rahul's USP?

His looks. They say he resembles his late father. In fact, when he toured Amethi in January in the company of sister Priyanka, the villagers apparently went berserk over the resemblance to his late father.

UK Groups Seek to Protect Russian Hindus from Persecution by Christians


Source: hinduforum.org

The Hindu Forum of Britain, Vishwa Hindu Parishad UK Hindu Council of Brent & ISKCON Bhaktivedanta Manor invite you to a special discussion for the launch of the Defend Russian Hindus Campaign

At 2.30 PM on Sunday, 28th November 2005, the office of the Hindu Council of Brent Cottrell House, 53/63, Wembley Hill Road Wembley, Middlesex HA9 8BE
RSVP: Vishal Merai, Hindu Forum of Britain Phone: 020 8965 0671

Fax: 020 8965 0672
info@hinduforum.org

Hindus in Russia are being subject to persecution and discrimination by a corpus made of the Russian Orthodox Church and the State. There are over 5000 Hindus from India and 10,000 Hindu converts from the local Russian population in Moscow. Two years ago the Mayor of Russia asked devotees to vacate their temple in exchange for a piece of land on which they could build a bigger temple. This was followed immediately by mass protests orchestrated by the Russian Orthodox Church which did not want land given to a temple that was converting Russian Christians to a Hindu way of life. Hindus were victimised, threatened, bullied, beaten and subject to violence. A misinformation campaign was launched against everything Hindu.

Finally last month, the Mayor of Russia cancelled the land order and took away the piece of land given for the construction of the Hindu temple. Now, the 15,000 Hindus in Moscow have no place to worship. The consecrated Dieties of Radha and Krishna will have no home.

Russia also has a history of passing laws that discriminate against minority faith communities. The Defend Russian Hindus Campaign seeks to highlight the plight of Russian Hindus through messages to media, community, World governments and other stakeholder groups to stop discrimination and persecution of Russian Hindus.

California Textbooks Remove Anti-Jewish Claims, Hindu Objections Postponed

Source: www.jewishtimes.com

SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA, November 17, 2005: When the California state board of education voted Wednesday to adopt new social studies textbooks for elementary and middle school students, it required nearly 1,000 edits and corrections to be made to the materials. Far from the spotlight of the public debate over evolution and intelligent design in science textbooks, a less-publicized battle was being waged for months over the religion content of social studies and history materials. Close to 200 of the nearly 1,000 edits and corrections had been put forward by the Institute for Curriculum Services, a project of the San Francisco Jewish community Relations Council, which spent months reviewing all 12 of the proposed educational programs for bias against Judaism or inaccuracies in their depiction of Jewish history.

Getting the coveted seal of approval from California means big money to educational publishers. California is the nation's largest purchase r of school textbooks, and schools throughout the state may use public funds to purchase approved programs. Not only do other states often follow California's lead in their own adoptions, but as one board of education member noted at the meeting, publishers "write for our state." California has mandated the study of religion since 1987. Students learn about Judaism, Hinduism and Christianity in sixth grade, and Islam in seventh grade.

Close to 80 speakers addressed the education board during its five-hour meeting here, and the 13 board members listened to all of them carefully, discussing their major points publicly before voting on adoption. The vast majority of the speakers were Hindu and Sikh, communities who said they felt slighted by all the publishers' offerings. "Hinduism is not treated with the same respect as Christianity or Judaism," said Dr. Mihir Meghani, president of the Hindu American foundation. "The sacred scriptures of Hinduism are referred to as legends or myths," he said. In contrast, with Christian or Jewish biblical accounts, "they write 'the Bible says' or 'according to the Torah.'" Sikh speakers told the board that although there are almost 600,000 Sikhs in the United States, half of them in California alone, none of the textbooks discusses Sikhism or shows pictures of Sikhs so children can learn to identify and respect them.
To read the article in its entirety, click on "source" above.

HPI adds: The attempts by Hindus to get adjustments to these same books suffered a setback with the intervention of Prof. Michael Witzel of Harvard University. He sent the board a letter claiming all the Hindu objections were "unscholarly, politically and religiously motivated. " You can download his entire letter here. [update: unavailable lately] The letter makes no references to actual text from any of the schoolbooks, and it is possible the author has not actually reviewed the exact material being considered by the school board. The board has postponed a decision on the Hindu objections to its December 2 meeting. Concerned Hindus may contact Khanderao Kand, who has headed up the Hindu effort, at khanderao@yahoo.com.

Wired News comes out with a hard hitting piece on why Google Print is not just a revolution in making, but why the insane opposition from publishers will hit the end users and ultimately limit the Internet's huge potential as a true information highway.

A rich and rational (and publicly traded) company may be tempted to compromise - to pay for the "right" that it and others should get for free, just to avoid the insane cost of defending that right. Such a company is driven to do what's best for its shareholders. But if Google gives in, the loss to the Internet will be far more than the amount it will pay publishers. It will be a bad compromise for everyone working to make the Internet more useful - and for everyone who will ultimately use it.

Quote:

Vishal dares to go where demons fear to tread - The Indian bureacracy, and lives to tell the story.

Also known affectionately as the Babudom, this living pulsating organism within whom, time looses all meaning and stands still, is the last bastion of British Legacy in India.
Unless we attain salvation from this corrupt redtappers, Freedom will remain an inept word on files that will run in circles around their tables.

Desipundit has issued a call for a BLOG QUAKE DAY on Oct 26, urging readers to post on the South Asian Earthquake fundraiser campaigns under their blogs.

I respond but with a preliminary caution note. After exhaustive discussions and examination of all news coming from Pakistan post earthquake, analytical conclusions point to a grave danger of earthquake relief funds being diverted to terrorist camps and activities of which India would inevitably be the victim. Collection of news items and discussions on them can be found at Bharat-Rakshak Forum (BRF). [Bharat Rakshak Discussion Forum]

Actually, the word 'South Asia' is a combination of convenience that Pakistanis use to combine their nation along with India to enjoy the goodwill Indians earn abroad.

When and wherever you find the word South Asians, it is most of the time humiliating to the idea of India. India being a sub-continent, need not come under any other umbrella term like South Asia.

Indians are lumped along with Bangladesis and Pakistanis and called South Asians in the British Press as if we are all a homogeneous population.

Also, a few of our Desi Dork Authors tend to over emphasise the similarities between Indians and Pakistanis vis a vis common culture, food habits etc. They conveniently tend to forget or overlook the fact that a rice-n-sambar eating dark short veggie south Indian like myself has as much similarity with the fair, tall, carcass munching pakistani as apples have with oranges.

Pakistan prefers to be connected with its neighbours to its west and Asian middle east when it comes to its identity as a Islamic state, a part of the Ummah.

When it prefers to take advantage of its proximity to the Central Asian nations, it hypes itself as one of the extended Central Asian region.

When it wants to hide the hideous actions of its citizen-terrorists, it tries to pass off as a part of 'South Asia'. Leveraging the goodwill earned by Indian expatriate community overseas by claiming commonhood with Indians, they force us to share their infamy. Public Relations Parasitism is what it is.

Many a times, I have noticed in Belgium and Netherlands, Pakistani men call themselves Indians to appear more acceptable to females who generally tend to romanticize the idea of India.

Let us not fall into this trap of South Asianism. Indians first and Indians last.

Coming back, here is a MUST READ ADVISORY for those considering to support or feature fund raising campaigns on their blogs.

Please join the discussion thread on this topic on Bharat Rakshak to air your views. 'Kashmiri Terrorists collecting earthquake relief money'

More follows...

At The Patry Copyright Blog, I revisit the Google copyright issue with a small question.

Bill.. what if this is the scenario?

Google scans all the books, but DOES NOT store the scanned information as running text replica of the original, but instead employs algorithm to remember which words are there in which book.

Now to those individual words, it tags a brief contexual text.

Now, can I argue that Google does not have a COPY of the original, but only an analysis? Now, if I can argue that the analysis data is NOT the same as the original data, but only a derivative, how would it affect the copyright issue?

-Jagan

Google Print and Authors guild Issue has raised people both for and against google's endeavour to index books in public libraries and make available in a search form much like the current google search.

I, without hesitation support google's brave and groundbreaking plan.
The published matter of mankind is huge and indexing them to make them searchable will be epochmaking.

Just as the Internet and search-engines made finding information on such obscure topics as, say, 'Roman trade ties with Arikamedu' accessible even to kids, the books index will revolutionise they way we find and use data from books. Morever, books will become transnational and a person from say, Bali Islands would have no problem trying to find books on American Transcendentalism, past and contemporary. Presently, we have no system to enable that.

In a age when physical books face the prospect of being replaced with digital ebooks, this will balance it all.

Remember, books are our friends.

Here in is my reply to a post on Prawfsblawg on the topic of google print where the Author calls for caution before allowing google the right to index without asking for permissions first.

The Democratic Progressive Front in Tamil Nadu has a montley cast of every anti-national organisation, starting with DMK, the Athesist Party and once champion of TN Secession from India, to all the naxalite brothers_in_arms - the Commie leftists and.........

THe Muslim League!

Now, afaik, Muslim League is perhaps the only avowed Religious Political Party in the South, the very party that remained back in India after its former members and leaders successfully fought, killed Indians for Pakistan and migrated there.

With Muslim League as their Allies, the DMK has the audacity to campaign as the 'Secular' front and claims that its only aim in this elections is to dislodge the 'Communalist forces'.

I am a bit confused now...

Being Hindu automatically qualifies one as Communal while Muslim League is 'secular'??

Hope to those who have despaired at Reuters, BBC and all the host of Desi Dork Media!

This news proves that proper and strong objections and protestations can help keep the Dorky Media from displaying its stupid biases when it comes to reporting..
---------------------------------------------------
A campaigning couple have won their battle to have several complaints of anti-Israel bias upheld by the BBC – the first such successful complaint in more than a year.

Lynette and Michael Ordman were infuriated by a BBC2 programme aired on 7 June 2003, entitled Dan Cruickshank on the Road to Armageddon.

The 90-minute documentary centred on exploring the dangers posed to architectural treasures by the conflict.

But after the Ordmans, from Stanmore, took their protest to the programme complaints unit and then to the governor’s complaints committee, the BBC acknowledged the programme had contained both factual errors and misleading footage.

In one section about the 2002 siege of the church of the nativity in Bethlehem, the BBC admitted it had given the untrue impression an IDF tank had fired a tank shell at the church.

Later, presenter Cruikshank theorised on the settler’s methods of land acquisition, a supposition the BBC agreed he was not qualified to make.

In a sequence on the 1994 Hebron massacre carried out by settler Baruch Goldstein, the programme stated 70 Palestinians had been murdered, rather than the correct figure of 29.

Whole Report here!

When George Bush declared war on Terrorism, every Media in US was keen to add Bush's reassuarance that it has nothing to do with Religion. It was not a War on Islam. Right. Point noted. It is a war on Inhumanity, war on terror and war on violent intolerance.
But when it comes to India and Pakistan, the whole Media outlook changes.
India is as much a secular nation as US or any other country. But when newspapers write about Indo-Pak conflict, they love this word India which is 'predominantly Hindu' and Kashmir which has a Muslim majority' etc.

How about saying Predominantly Christian US going to war with Islamic Iraq? How does that sound? What will it represent.

THen why is India always tagged with the 'Hindu' label??

Take a look at these articles to sense what I am saying:

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi ... 004/01/12/EDGG2465C71.DTL

THE DECISION by top leaders of India and Pakistan to start far- reaching peace talks next month is a sign of political thinking that sweeps past each country's narrow-minded taboos. (My comment: Why should India and Pakistan be put in the same bracket? How about US at war with Iraq.. each country's narrow minded taboos??)

Since their territories were carved from former British India in a rough separation of Hindus and Muslims (Comment: Again.. it was a partition of a Secular State called India and a Muslim country, Pakistan. NOT seperation of Hindus and Muslims), Pakistan and India have fought three wars and almost engaged in a fourth two years ago. No more chances can be taken on their settling their differences by the use of arms.

The perpetual flashpoint is the rulership of Kashmir, whose predominantly Muslim population was pushed after partition to the Hindu (Indian) side of the redrawn border.(Comment: Again reference to religion! Hindu side? How about referring to US as Christian Side.. ever heard of that sentence?)

Musharraf has gone far toward creating the climate for the upcoming talks by promising to prevent Pakistan-supported terrorism against India. Vajpayee, facing elections in his own country, must now prevail against anti-Muslim extremists in his Hindu-nationalist party in order to compromise with Pakistan.(Comment: anti-muslim extremists? no..they are Anti-Pakistan maybe.. but not Anti-muslim... akin to Anti-Muslim Extremist Republican Party headed by Christian Right Winger, George Bush kind of statement.)

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0112/p08s02-comv.html

The world has seen many false peaks in the infrequent trek of India and Pakistan to settle the Himalayan-size issue of Kashmir. Leaders of both nations(yeah, treating India and Pakistan as equals! like US and Iran or Libya for example) have often found more reasons not to budgethan to create a peaceful South Asia for their 1.2 billion people and to bury the threat of nuclear confrontation.

General Musharraf's new promise to block infiltration of militants into Kashmir needs to be kept if the talks are to succeed. And Mr. Vajpayee needs to move forward on plans to at least grant more autonomy to the mainly Muslim territory.>/b> (Yeah, can we call US, Christian Territory? or Boston as Catholic territory, Texas as Baptist Territory?? - [asks Jrjrao from BR])