One of Many Genocides, Holocaust is of Evil Proportions. IHRA definition as adopted by the Labour Party

One of Many Genocides, Holocaust is of Evil Proportions.

IHRA definition as adopted by the Labour Party and Some local government bodies is a political stain of another evil intent. Only this times Fascism is building up against the Muslims.



London.  Protesting Zionist Group with Israeli flags and IHRA cards Raising many questions. These racist were in small numbers but seem to be almost every where at the National Unity rally against racism and fascism.

Labour Party’s  NEC’s Monster has come alive. The Labour Party’s National Executive Committee’s  adaptation in full of the IHRA definitions which where meant to be Antisemitism guidelines only without the adaptation of any genuine working  efforts on including caveats is  dangerous, stinks of fascism and evil intent .

These racist were in small numbers but seem to be almost every where at the National Unity rally against racism and fascism. Here they are in Whitehall


Six people have been convicted of being members of the banned extreme right wing neo-Nazi group National Action.

West Midland Police:         Talking about today’s verdict, head of West Midlands Counter Terrorism Unit (WMCTU) Detective Chief Superintendent Matt Ward, said: “This result is a culmination of two years of painstaking work in the West Midlands and across the country to recognise and understand the threat of National Action.

Six people convicted for National Action membership

Six people have been convicted of being members of the banned extreme right wing neo-Nazi group National Action.

The organisation was formed in 2013 and proscribed as a banned group by the government in 2016.

A jury at Birmingham Crown Court found two men and a woman guilty today after three other men had admitted membership of the group before the trial.

Daniel Bogunovic, aged 27 of Crown Hills Rise, Leicester, Adam Thomas, aged 22, and 38-year-old Claudia Patatas − both of Waltham Gardens, Banbury, Oxfordshire − were all found guilty this morning.

Thomas - Patatas - Bogunovic
Thomas – Patatas – Bogunovic

Joel Wilmore, aged 24 of Bramhall Moor Lane, Stockport, Darren Fletcher, aged 28 of Kitchen Lane, Wednesfield, Wolverhampton and Nathan Pryke, aged 27 of Dartford Road, March, Cambridge, all previously admitted their membership.

Wilmore - Fletcher - Pryke
Wilmore – Fletcher – Pryke

They will be sentenced in due course.

All six were arrested on 3 January and charged on 8 January with being concerned in the commission, preparation and instigation of acts of terrorism under Section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000; namely on suspicion of being a member of a proscribed organisation (National Action) contrary to sec 11 of the Terrorism Act.

Thomas was also found guilty of possessing information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism contrary to s.58 of Terrorism Act 2000 (possessing bomb making instructions).

Bogunvic was found guilty of inciting racial hatred under Sec 18 (1) of the Public Order Act 1986 after National Action branded stickers were found displayed in the grounds of the Aston University complex in July 2016.

Joel Wilmore also pleaded guilty to possessing information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism contrary to s.58 of Terrorism Act 2000 (possessing bomb making instructions).

Darren Fletcher pleaded guilty to five breaches of his criminal anti-social behaviour order.

The court heard how the group used several methods to disguise their contact with each other such as using pseudonyms through closed, encrypted messaging platforms as well as regularly meeting in person to spread their ideology.

Daystreak collage
Top to bottom and left to right: Thomas in KKK robes holding son; Thomas with knife; Patatas & Thomas with son; Fletcher, Thomas & Patatas; Thomas & Fletcher; Thomas with crossbow

Talking about today’s verdict, head of West Midlands Counter Terrorism Unit (WMCTU) Detective Chief Superintendent Matt Ward, said: “This result is a culmination of two years of painstaking work in the West Midlands and across the country to recognise and understand the threat of National Action.

“These individuals were not simply racist fantasists; we now know they were a dangerous, well-structured organisation. Their aim was to spread neo-Nazi ideology by provoking a race war in the UK and they had spent years acquiring the skills to carry this out. They had researched how to make explosives. They had gathered weapons.  They had a clear structure to radicalise others. Unchecked they would have inspired violence and spread hatred and fear across the West Midlands.

“Today’s convictions have dealt a significant blow to National Action. We have dismantled their Midlands Chapter but that doesn’t mean the threat they pose will go away.

“Others on the periphery will take on leadership roles and so I ask for the public’s vigilance − if you see this group’s posters or stickers please report them to police − where there are new cells, we will intercept and prosecute them.”

Two men were convicted and sentenced earlier this year also for membership of National Action − Mikko Vehvilainen and Alex Deakin − however due to legal reasons restrictions were placed on reporting.

Vehvilainen - Deakin
Vehvilainen – Deakin

Vehvilainen − a 34-year-old lance corporal in the army − was jailed for eight years in April. Born in Finland, Vehvilainen was arrested by officers from West Midlands Counter Terrorism Unit (WMCTU) at his army base in Brecon, Powys in September 2017.

At an earlier hearing, Vehvilainen admitted a separate offence of being in possession of pepper spray.

Det Ch Supt Ward said: “Vehvilainen’s role typified the progress that National Action wanted; he was a non-commissioned officer in the British Army with access to young men who could be radicalised and recruited into the group. He was an incredibly dangerous individual and a key part of the National Action strategy.”

Alex Deakin (24) was also jailed for eight years for being a member of National Action, distributing extremist publications and two charges of possessing documents likely to be useful to a person preparing to commit an act of terrorism and distribution of a terrorist publication.

Sacae collage
Top: Vehvilainen pictured performing Nazi salute Bottom left: Deakin and right: Vehvilainen’s weaponry

Matt Ward continued: “Deakin had a long history with the far right movement, he held the mantle of regional coordinator to help facilitate online communications in the group. He turned it into a well organised cell in the midlands and as a result he’s serving a long sentence.

“Today’s guilty verdicts highlight the commitment by counter terrorism policing to tackle all forms of extremist ideology.

“We have seen many convictions over the past few years in connection with Syria-related terrorism and this work continues apace. But extreme groups such as National Action also have the potential to threaten public safety and security.

“We work tirelessly to counter terrorism. Our absolute priority is to ensure the safety and security of the people who live, work and visit the West Midlands area.

“If anyone has any suspicions over an individual’s behaviour and suspects them to be involved in this type of activity, I would urge you to report it to police as soon as possible. You can report suspicions online via ACT campaign’s website or call police confidentially on 0800 789 321. In an emergency dial 999.

“Suspicious activity is anything that seems out of place, unusual or just doesn’t seem to fit in with day-to-day life – Let us decide if it is important.”

Source: West Midland Police     ( )

Policeman Threatening Muslim Girl with his gun. Forcing Her To Marry a Hindu

Racism is now used as terrorism. Its a tool being used by governments around the world and their security services to persecute and terrorise mostly people with Muslims origins.

“Schools and playgrounds can be dangerous places where children are isolated or bullied. Children often use differences in appearance, skin colour, food habits, misogyny, homophobia and casteism to inflict pain on their peers.

And now, according to a new book out in India, Muslim children are increasingly being targeted in posh schools for their religious identity because of the growing Islamophobia in India and across the world.

Writer Nazia Erum, who spoke to 145 families in 12 cities and 100 children studying in 25 elite Delhi schools while researching her book Mothering a Muslim, says that children as young as five are being targeted.

“What I found during my research was shocking, I didn’t think it was happening in these elite schools,” Ms Erum told the BBC. “When five and six year olds say they were called a Pakistani or a terrorist, how do you respond to that? And how do you complain to the school?” she asks.

“A lot of it is said in jest, it’s meant to be funny, to evoke a laugh. It’s subtle and it can seem like harmless banter, but it’s not. It’s actually bullying and tormenting.”

The children she interviewed for her book told her about some of the questions and comments that are regularly hurled at them:

Are you a Muslim? I hate Muslims.

Do your parents make bombs at home?

Is your father part of the Taliban?

He’s a Pakistani.

He’s a terrorist.

Don’t piss her off, she will bomb you.

Since its launch, the book has started a conversation around religious hate and prejudice in schools and last weekend, #MotheringAMuslim trended high on Twitter, with many taking to social media to share their own experiences.

Writer Nazia Erum says she was shocked to see the level of bullying of Muslim students during her research

Nearly 80% of India’s population of 1.3 billion is Hindu, while Muslims make up 14.2%.

For the most part, the two communities have lived peacefully, but religious resentment has always simmered below the surface since 1947 when India and Pakistan were carved out of a single nation. The parting was bloody – between half a million and a million people were killed in religious violence.

Ms Erum says while anti-Muslim slurs have been used since the 1990s, after the demolition of the Babri mosque by Hindu hardline groups and the Hindu-Muslim riots that followed, in recent years their tone and intensity have changed.

Girls attacked ‘for meeting Muslim boys’

A night patrol with India’s cow protection vigilantes

Arrest after ‘cow vigilantes’ lynch man

She became acutely aware of it in 2014, after she gave birth to her first child.

“As I held my little daughter Myra in my arms, for the first time I was afraid,” Ms Erum said, adding that she was worried about even giving the baby a name that could be easily identified as Muslim.

It was a time of sharp religious divisions in India. The Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party was running a hugely polarising election campaign, which helped sweep Prime Minister Narendra Modi to power.

There was a rise in Hindu nationalist sentiment and some television channels were presenting a distorted narrative that painted Muslims as “invaders, anti-national and a threat to national security”.

“Since 2014, my identity as a Muslim was in my face, and all my other identities had become secondary to that. There was a sense of palpable fear among the entire community,” Ms Erum says.

And since then, the fault lines have only widened. The polarising arguments and debates on television have entrenched biases, which are now being passed around from the adults to children.

“So in playgrounds, schools, classrooms and school buses, a Muslim child is singled out, pushed into a corner, called a Pakistani, IS, Bagdadi and terrorist,” says Ms Erum.

The stories of children she cites in the book make for grim reading:

A five-year-old girl is terrified that “Muslims are coming and they will kill us”. The irony: she doesn’t know that she herself is Muslim.

A 10-year-old boy who feels shame and anger when after a terrorist attack in Europe, a classmate asks him loudly: “What have you done”?

A 17-year-old is called a terrorist and when his mother contacts the name-caller’s mother, she’s told: “But your son called my child fat”.

Being bullied on account of one’s religion in schools is not limited to India, it’s happening across the world.

In the US, it’s been described as the “Trump Effect” after reports that his presidential campaign had produced an alarming level of fear and anxiety among children of colour and inflamed racial and ethnic tensions in the classroom.

So can the increased bullying of Muslim children in Indian schools be described as the “Modi Effect”?

Ms Erum says parents and schools must do everything possible to counter communal bullying

“All politicians are using a similar tone, including those from Islamic parties,” Ms Erum says.

She adds that schools have refused to accept that religious bullying took place on their premises.

That, she says, could also be since most cases go unreported – children don’t want to be seen as tattletales and most parents dismiss them as random incidents.

But what is worrying is that a form of self-censorship has crept into their lives and many Muslim parents have begun telling their children to be on their best behaviour at all times – don’t argue, don’t be good at computer games that involve bombs or guns, don’t crack a joke at the airport, don’t wear traditional outfits when you go out.

Ms Erum says these are warning signs and parents and schools must do everything possible to counter communal bullying.

“The first step is to accept that there’s a problem, and then have a conversation about it. Whataboutery is not going to help,” she says.

“If this issue is not addressed, it’s not going to be restricted to 9pm debates in television studios or newspaper headlines, because hate swallows all, it impacts both the tormentor and the tormented equally.”



Allahabad in Uttar Pradesh, headed by hardliner accused of violence against Muslims, to become Prayagraj

Guardian Report of 16 October 2018

“Hindu nationalist-led state changes Muslim name of Indian city Allahabad in Uttar Pradesh, headed by hardliner accused of violence against Muslims, to become Prayagraj

Michael Safi in Delhi  @safimichael.  Tue 16 Oct 2018 12.28 BST Last modified on Tue 16 Oct 2018 15.26 BST

Yogi Adityanath, the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, has instigated a programme of Mughal-era name changes. Photograph: Rajat Gupta/EPA

An Indian city in a state led by a hardline Hindu nationalist preacher accused of instigating violence against Muslims has had its Muslim name changed to one with Hindu associations.


The state cabinet in Uttar Pradesh announced on Tuesday that it had approved the renaming of Allahabad as Prayagraj, which harks back to the city’s ancient appellation, Prayag, before it was changed by Mughal-era rulers in the late 16th century.

Prayag in Sanskrit means place for sacrifice, in reference to the Hindu belief that the creator of the universe, Brahma, made his first offering at the area in the city where the Ganges and Yamuna rivers meet.

The Uttar Pradesh health minister, Siddharth Nath Singh, told local media: “The city used to be known as Prayagraj since the beginning. To those who are opposing the decision, how would you feel if the name your parents gave you was to be changed?”

The city, about 400 miles (650km) south-east of the Indian capital, Delhi, is the ancestral home of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty, which has produced three Indian prime ministers, including the country’s first, Jawarharlal Nehru.

It is also the site of one of India’s Kumbh melas – mass Hindu pilgrimages that are considered to be among the world’s largest religious festivals. The most recent was held in the city in 2013 and attended by an estimated 100 million worshippers.

Changing Allahabad’s name has been a longstanding demand of Hindu nationalist groups in India which regard the three centuries in which huge areas of the subcontinent were ruled by Mughal dynasties as a period of foreign occupation.

The traditional view of Indian leaders has been that the Mughals integrated with the largely Hindu society around them, forging a unique blended culture over time.

In the decades since independence in 1947, the country has gradually thrown off British imperial-era names such as Bombay (now Mumbai), Pondicherry (now Puducherry) and Madras (now Chennai).

Under Uttar Pradesh’s chief minister, Yogi Adityanath, the state has also started replacing Mughal-era names.

Last year, Mughalsarai Junction railway station in the state was renamed Deen Dayal Upadhyay Junction railway station, after a Hindu nationalist thinker and politician.

The Uttar Pradesh energy minister, Shrikant Sharma, said more names were likely to be changed. “It is the right of the government to rename any city,” he said. “If needed, we will rename more cities and roads. The mistakes done earlier will be rectified.” “ Continue reading Allahabad in Uttar Pradesh, headed by hardliner accused of violence against Muslims, to become Prayagraj

Focus Forward. Seeking Fairness and Accountability. A World Free from Oppression and Injustice.

At The Exclusive  Launch Of A New Report by CAGE in Birmingham Thursday 11 October 2018 (not just full but over crowded house )

Focus Forward.               Seeking Fairness and accountability.                     A world free from oppression and injustice.

 Azad Ali

Truly Excellent! Evaluations and Analysis of PREVENT Separating Families: By Azad Ali, Asim Qureshi and Moazzam Baig.

Asim Qureshi


How PREVENT seeks removal of children from their parents. Until recently what seems to be unfair, racist and very secretive has been exposed from home office, that’s governments own statistics as purely motivated by racism. In most cases parents are of origins or practising Muslims.

Moazzam Baig

At The Exclusive  Launch Of A New Report by CAGE


Heading with the subject of first hand cases exposing the use of PREVENT in family courts where children were threatened to be removed from parents.

Absolutely no doubt PREVENT is preventing the good and Not the No Good.


Continue reading Focus Forward. Seeking Fairness and Accountability. A World Free from Oppression and Injustice.

Another Shocking Case of Racism From a Large Retailer. Police Called on a Couple for Simply Shopping at the Store.

Why Do Retailer Advertise? Ask yourself. They Cannot Achieve Their Projected Sale Targets for the Year by Restricting Sales.

Tesco Shares price has been Slipping since the shocking incident of extremely bad and offensive handling of customers Nasir and his wife Mahira Hussain.

No Retailer Can Afford to Limit its Sales / Business. Tesco is there to make Money. Task always is sales up resulting in efforts to increase sales,  more money loads of money. More than the previous year. Tesco is no exception their share holders expect them to make more each year .

Money is the heart of the retail business More sales means bigger turn over that translates into bigger share value and they make yet again More Money. Any one suggests otherwise is talking rubbish.


Item are Rationed when Given Free of Charge. Or when there is Famine, Drought going on.

Other than that, Retailers often use it as a ploy, a publicity Stunt hoping people will go crazy with the hope of pulling that many more customers from other retailers to make more money.

Reality is Tesco like any other retailer is there to sell as many items as it can.  Items are there to sell whether lorry loads or singularly.


No Retailer Sells items at Cost Price or at reduce price . Unless in case of food items have reached end of their life. Or in case of reduced price they wish to bump up their turn over.


Logic of limiting sales is simply a publicity stunt. It makes no business sense. Wasting our already extremely stretched, short in number police force time and resources is very questionable, and that on a totally bad handling of a normal situation made bad by Tesco management.


Tesco must, not only apologise but compensate the couple Nasir and Mahira Hussain.

If customer is able to fill up ten trolleys, all it mean is its there to be sold unless clearly stated. Retailer opens their doors to sell.

Worsceter edl counter rally message Racist Not Welcome.

Excellent turnout. Worcester, small town but big on unity. Unite and Fight.

Video credit: P. Hussain


No to racism message went out from Worcester community in an excellent carnival style, supported by drum/Dhol beats lead the happy rally crowd to its loud and clear message of the day to (EDL March) Racists Not Welcome in Worcester.


Like Rajiv Gandhi in November 1984, Vajpayee will go down in history as a prime minister who preached the virtues of tolerance even as he turned a blind eye to the massacre of innocent citizens.

Let Us Not Forget the Glimpse We Got of the Real Vajpayee When the Mask Slipped

Like Rajiv Gandhi in November 1984, Vajpayee will go down in history as a prime minister who preached the virtues of tolerance even as he turned a blind eye to the massacre of innocent citizens.

Siddharth Varadarajan
Credit: Siddharth Varadarajan    The Wire

Perhaps the most significant elaboration of the Golwalkar-Savarkar thesis of India as a Hindu nation beset by Muslim trouble-makers in recent times was that provided by Atal Bihari Vajpayee in hisspeech to the BJP national executive meeting in Goa on 12 April 2002.  The speech is remarkable for the manner in which a prime minister attempts to justify the murder of Muslim citizens in Gujarat by referring to Godhra and contrasting the supposed ‘traditional tolerance’ of Hindus with the alleged ‘intolerance’ of Muslims.

Like Golwalkar, who believed only Hindus were true Indians, Vajpayee uses ‘us’, ‘our’, ‘Hindus’ and ‘Indians’ interchangeably throughout his speech. He begins by making an observation about Hindu kingdoms in ancient Cambodia.

“No king destroyed a temple or damaged the deities’ idols at the time of attacking another king. This is our culture. This is our outlook, which treats all faiths equally.’ India, he said, was secular before Muslims and Christians set foot on her soil. Once they came, they had freedom of worship. ‘No one thought of converting them with force, because this is not practiced in our religion; and in our culture, there is no use for it.”

Here, Vajpayee was trying to contrast the ‘tolerance’ of Hindus and Hinduism, which he described as ‘our religion’, with the supposed intolerance of Muslims and Christians. The reference to the destruction of idols and conversion ‘with force’ is a standard part of the RSS arsenal. At the root of major incidents of violence, he said, was ‘growing intolerance’. Since Hindus are, by definition, tolerant, the obvious inference is that this ‘growing intolerance’ is on the part of the Muslims. Turning immediately to the burning issue of the day, he asked:

“What happened in Gujarat? If a conspiracy had not been hatched to burn alive the innocent passengers of the Sabarmati Express, then the subsequent tragedy in Gujarat could have been averted. But this did not happen. People were torched alive. Who were those culprits? The government is investigating into this. Intelligence agencies are collecting all the information. But we should not forget how the tragedy of Gujarat started. The subsequent developments were no doubt condemnable, but who lit the fire? How did the fire spread?”

Here, in as unsophisticated a fashion as Narendra Modi had stated it earlier, we find Vajpayee presenting his own version of Newton’s Third Law. There is no remorse about the killing of hundreds of innocent people, no apologies for the failure of the government to protect its citizens. He makes no attempt to distinguish between the criminal perpetrators of the Godhra attack and the innocent victims of the ‘subsequent tragedy in Gujarat’. For him, Muslims are an amorphous, undifferentiated lot who collectively ‘lit the fire’. They were to blame, not his party men who took part in the ‘subsequent developments’.

Going from the specific to the general, Vajpayee then launched a frontal attack on Muslims. He asserts that ‘For us, the soil of India from Goa to Guwahati is the same, all the people living on this land are the same. We do not believe in religious extremism. Today, the threat to our nation comes from terrorism’.

Who is this we and where exactly does this ‘threat to our nation’ come from? The Hindi text provides a clue. Vajpayee deliberately uses the Urdu word mazhabi for ‘religious’ (rather than the Hindi worddharmik) when he says ‘religious extremism’. We do not believe in religious extremism; it is the Muslims. His exact words were ‘Hum mazhabi kattarta mein vishwas nahin karte’. The fact that mazhabi is the only Urdu word used in the sentence is not accidental. In Sangh parivar literature and propaganda, whenever a positive reference to religion is made, the word used tends to be dharm, implying Hinduism; when the reference is negative, the word used tends to be mazhab. And terrorism, of course, is synonymous with Islam, or ‘militant Islam’, as Vajpayee chose to put it. But having first made a distinction between militant Islam and tolerant Islam, he then makes a sweeping generalisation about all Muslims:

“Wherever Muslims live, they don’t like to live in co-existence with others, they don’t like to mingle with others; and instead of propagating their ideas in a peaceful manner, they want to spread their faith by resorting to terror and threats. The world has become alert to this danger.”

The statement is classic hate speech, but after it generated a huge controversy, Vajpayee claimed his remarks were aimed not at all Muslims but only ‘militant Muslims’.

The Prime Minister’s Office subsequently issued a doctored version of the speech in which the word ‘such’ was inserted between ‘Wherever’ and ‘Muslims live’. Many newspapers subsequently printed this version. It was not until a privilege motion was raised in Parliament — for Vajpayee had made the mistake of claiming on the floor of the House on May 1, 2002 that the doctored version of the speech was the true version — that he was forced to admit the word ‘such’ had been deliberately interpolated.  However, he reiterated that ‘no one who reads my entire speech and takes note of the tribute I have paid to the tolerant and compassionate teachings of Islam, can be in any doubt that my reference . . . is only to the followers of militant Islam’.

The allegation of Muslims not living in co-existence with others and not mingling with others is such a standard trope in RSS propaganda that Vajpayee’s claim of intending to refer only to militant Muslims does not seem very convincing. Earlier in his speech, he had equated militant Islam with terrorism. ‘Not mingling with others’ is a peculiar charge to level against terrorists. In any case, it was a bit odd for the prime minister to talk about terrorism and militancy as if they were the preserve of the adherents of Islam— especially at a time when his own Sangh parivar was heavily involved in acts of terror in Gujarat. But there was a deeper level of dishonesty in the charge against Muslims, for it is precisely the policy of the RSS to ghettoise and isolate the Muslim community. As sociologist Dhirubhai Sheth has argued, it was not accidental that the Muslims who bore the brunt of the Sangh parivar’s violence in Gujarat were those who chose to live in Hindu-majority areas. The communal killings in the state, he says, have exposed the dishonesty of the ‘Hindutvavadis’ who reproach Muslims for not entering the ‘national mainstream’ but then beat them back into their ghettos whenever they do emerge.

In another attempt to soften the impact of his Goa remarks, Vajpayee told parliament that he was as opposed to militant Hinduism as he was to militant Islam. ‘I accept the Hindutva of Swami Vivekananda but the type of Hindutva being propagated now is wrong and one should be wary of it.’ Having said this, however, he went back to square one by adding that although there were laws to deal with such an eventuality, he was confident no Hindu organisation would become a danger to the country’s unity.  In other words, only Muslim (or Christian or Sikh) organisations have the potential of endangering the country’s unity. After maligning Vivekananda — who never spoke of Hindutva but of Hinduism — Vajpayee went straight back to the teachings of Golwalkar and Savarkar.

Apart from reverting to the usual chauvinist line of the Sangh parivar, Vajpayee was also diverting the debate into a dead end. The issue is not whether he personally opposes militant Islam or Hinduism but whether, as prime minister, he is prepared to defend the constitutional rights of all Indians. Regardless of his own views and beliefs, a prime minister cannot speak for only a section of citizens. Do the Muslims of Gujarat have the right to physical security? Is he prepared to punish those who have committed crimes regardless of their political or ideological affiliation? Rather than dealing with these questions, Vajpayee is trying to cover up his own political failure and culpability.

Survivors of the Gulberg Society visit their building. Credit: Reuters/Ahmad Masood/Files

Survivors of the Gulberg Society visit their building. Credit: Reuters/Ahmad Masood/Files

It is remarkable that Vajpayee’s first televised address to the country was only on March 2, 2002 — after the seventy-two hours of apparent freedom enjoyed by the Sangh parivar in Gujarat expired — and even then, all he could do was appeal for calm and tolerance.  In fact, his attempt to blame the ordinary people of Gujarat — and their supposed lack of ‘harmony ’— for the mass killings in their state was a disingenuous manoeuvre aimed at absolving himself, his party colleagues and the state machinery they control, of any responsibility for the crimes. Like Rajiv Gandhi in November 1984 and Narasimha Rao in January 1993, Vajpayee will go down in history as a prime minister who preached the virtues of tolerance even as he turned a blind eye to the massacre of innocent citizens. Instead of using national television to tell the people of Gujarat that the genocidal mobs would be put down with a firm hand — and that policemen failing to protect the life and liberty of all would be punished — Vajpayee delivered a sermon on the need for religious sadbhavna.

There was little passion or feeling in what he said, no words of succour for the victims, no anger or opprobrium for the killers. He said the violence was a ‘black mark on the nation’s forehead’ but he couldn’t bring himself to say that retaliatory attacks on Muslims for what happened at Godhra would attract the same punishment as the burning of the train. Here was a violent disturbance that had made a mockery of state power as it is supposed to operate, yet the prime minister issued no dire warnings to those who were challenging his authority and power as chief executive. In the US, President George W. Bush and his senior aides publicly warned citizens against attacking Muslims, Arabs and other immigrants following the World Trade Centre terrorist strike. In less than a year since 9/11, a man in Texas was sentenced to death for the ‘retaliatory’ murder of a Sikh immigrant. To date, however, Vajpayee has yet to even publicly acknowledge that Muslim citizens of India were victimised in Gujarat or to threaten the attackers with the severest consequences.

Indeed, Vajpayee was later to demonstrate that he was so loyal to his party and parivar that he didn’t mind undermining the majesty of the state and his own office. On April 17, 2002, he said that if only parliament had condemned Godhra, the subsequent massacres would not have happened. The fact is that he is leader of the House and could have ordered a discussion and condemnation of Godhra on the day it happened — instead of the scheduled presentation of the budget.

In early May, he made another curious statement, this time on the floor of the Rajya Sabha: That he had decided to remove Modi in April but didn’t act fearing a backlash in Gujarat. ‘I had gone to Goa making up my mind on changing the ruler in Gujarat but according to my own assessment, I felt that the change in leadership will only worsen the situation.’  At the time, the only people opposed to a change in leadership were the RSS and VHP. Removing Modi may or may not have provided temporary relief for Gujarat’s beleaguered Muslims but it was odd for the prime minister to admit being held hostage to the threats of criminals and goons. “Vajpayee,” wrote B.G. Verghese, “placed the diktat of the mob above his oath of office . . . the emperor has no clothes, stripped of the last shred of moral authority.”

Aurangabad’s Syed Mateen Sayyad Rashid was attacked by several corporators and sent to judicial custody for a year for citing the Babri Masjid’s demolition as a reason why he did not wish to condole the former PM


Geplaatst door Hate Racist Monitoring Group op Zondag 26 augustus 2018


Credit: Sukanya Shantha       The Wire

Mumbai: In an incident that raises serious questions not just about the fate of freedom of expression in India but also the rule of law, an elected official in Maharashtra’s Aurangabad has been sent to prison for a year for declaring that he would not be participating in a condolence meeting for former prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee.

Prior to his arrest, he was assaulted by fellow corporators but despite the violence getting recorded on video, the persons who attacked him have managed to avoid being taken into custody.

On August 17, a group of BJP corporators attacked a Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) corporator in Aurangabad after he refused to participate in the condolence meet organised for Vajpayee. Syed Mateen Sayyad Rashid, a 34-year old corporator elected from the Town Hall constituency, was attacked by several corporators including deputy mayor Vijay Autude and a lady corporator.

Curiously, Rashid was later booked and arrested under three different cases for rioting, inciting communal disharmony and also under the stringent Maharashtra Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Slumlords, Bootleggers & Drug Offenders (MPDA) Act, 1981, and sent to judicial custody for a year.

The City Chowk police confirmed that a case of rioting was registered against the five BJP corporators also, but they were all let off immediately on bail.

Soon after Vajpayee’s death, Sanjay Kumar, a professor at the Mahatma Gandhi Central University in Motihari was also assaulted by a group angered by critical comments he had posted on social media about the former prime minister.

The corporators of the Aurangabad Municipal Corporation had assembled at the corporation office on August 17 to pay homage to Vajpayee, who had passed away a day before. Mateen, who was present at the meet, decided to register his protest in the standing committee meeting and announced: “I have not forgotten Babri Masjid. I shall refrain from participating in the condolence meet.” Mateen was hinting at the demolition of the Masjid that took place in December, 1992 and the alleged role played by BJP leaders in inciting the mob of Kar Sevaks and the subsequent demolition. Soon after his statement, several BJP corporators leapt on Mateen, punched him on his face and even beat him with slippers. The commotion was recorded on the house’s CCTV camera, and the footage was soon made public.

AIMIM’s MLA from central Aurangabad Imtiaz Jaleel told The Wire that Mateen was singled out and attacked. “Mateen had, without using any unparliamentary words, registered his protest against the standing committee’s decision to pay homage to Vajpayee. He was targeted by a mob of BJP corporators. But the police booked them under bailable sections and let them off within less than two hours but booked Mateen under three separate cases,” Jaleel said. City Chowk police said the five BJP corporators were booked under sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 506 (criminal intimidation), 143 (unlawful assembly), 147 (rioting) and 149 (unlawful assembly with common object) of the IPC.

Mateen was arrested soon after the commotion at the corporation’s standing committee meeting. He was initially booked under section 153 (A) of the Indian Penal Code for ‘promoting enmity between two groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, etc. and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony’ and sent to police custody for a day. “That same evening, a few men went ahead ransacking a few private vehicles belonging to BJP leaders from Aurangabad. The next day, when Mateen was released on bail, he was booked again for the violence,” Jaleel said. Finally, the deputy commissioner of Police issued proceedings against Mateen under the MPDA sections and ordered for his judicial custody for a year. This law, mostly used in political cases, does not allow bail for a year, and the only appellate authority is the three-member advisory committee comprised of former high court judges. AIMIM plans to move the high court against Mateen’s arrest.

The Aurangabad police later issued a press statement, alleging that Mateen had been involved in several criminal cases including inciting mob violence. Police inspector Madhukar Sawant told The Wire that the proceedings under the MPDA were begun after taking Mateen’s behaviour into consideration and the several charges against him. “He has around nine criminal cases registered against him; some three of them were registered in last three months,” Sawant told The Wire. Jaleel claimed those cases were politically motivated and were mostly filed by BJP cadres and local leaders.

Mateen is not new to controversies, though. In the past, too, he has been vocal against the corporation’s stand to build a memorial in the name of Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackeray. Mateen had objected to the decision and had pointed at the Sena’s “communal politics” and asked for the money to be spent in the welfare of common people from the city. He had also opposed to the singing of ‘Vande Mataram’ in the corporation office and sought to exert his right to ‘freedom of speech and expression’. His acts of defiance such as these have been construed as a crime and an attempt to incite communal disharmony in the city. “He has been unnecessarily taking difficult stand against the establishment. It has been his habit to disrupt the normal course of events in the corporation office,” Sawant added. Municipal commissioner Nipun Vinayak said a resolution has been passed by the corporators recommending to the government to disqualify him as a corporator.

Mateen’s move to oppose the condolence meet on August 17 did come as a surprise to his party too. “The party had issued a condolence note as soon as Vajpayee passed away. All 25 corporators of AIMIM were to participate in the condolence meet. I do not know why he decided to defy the party, but that is a separate matter. What happened to him was absolutely unfair and unconstitutional,” Jaleel added.

Continue reading Aurangabad’s Syed Mateen Sayyad Rashid was attacked by several corporators and sent to judicial custody for a year for citing the Babri Masjid’s demolition as a reason why he did not wish to condole the former PM

UK Muslim Community Living in Fear Under Tory Rule. Two Mosques In Birmingham Attacked.

Muslim Community Living in Fear.

The heart of Birmingham has been targeted once again.

Administration for now rule out any motive other than a Racist attack. Head admin of the Qamarul Islam Mosque, Imam M Khalil Mirza has expressed his disappointment at elected community leaders doing naught.  

However he was grateful for the local community showing their support.

Qamarul Islam and Al-Hijra Mosques both attacked. Windows were shot at with powerful air guns using steel ball bearings. Weaponry used here indicates towards it being most likely a gas loaded air gun. Commonly used in war games and easily available in UK without any hassle.

BALL BEARING vs Book your perception and Physics. Ball bearings are easily available in UK. These are and can be very deadly. There is an urgent need to make them illegal.

There is a strong case amply demonstrated here that these weapons should be banned.

“Will it make a significant difference if we shoot a book that is free to move backwards than if the book is secured with a sand bag? Many people have brought this up this since we often shoot things both ways. It’s natural to assume that a FIXED object would suffer more damage than a “free-floating” object. If you try to punch a balloon in the air, the balloon is just pushed away no matter how hard you punch it. If you secure the balloon to keep it from moving, you are more-likely to pop it. Does this apply to objects -AS MUCH- when they are travelling as a high velocity? Inertia is the resistance of any object to any change in its motion. The resistance in this case are the pages of the book. Momentum is a body’s mass multiplied by its velocity. The momentum in this case, is the steel ball bearing travelling just above supersonic speed.”


Lets build tomorrows priceless treasures. A better world is possible together!