Dear Editor, As reported by “India West,” Jan.8,1993 that “In a packed auditioned at the Ghaddar Memorial
Hall at San Francisco speakers made a spinach affirmation of Secular values all public meeting on Jan.3,” and condemned razing of mosque by Hindu fanatics. The meeting concluded with Iqbal’s patriotic son: “Sare Jahan Se Achcha Hindustan Hamara.” Perhaps the audience did not know that same Dr.Mohammed Iqbal, on a later lage recited about India;”Mudten Ho Gai Hen Aziaten Sehte Hue, Ab Sharam See Ati Hai is Walan Ko Watan Kehte Hue.”
(Times have passed bearing tortures in this country and one feels ashamed now owning this country as motherland).
Surely this is a real picture of India now. Audience should have asked the following questions to our Council General Sushil Duba;
1)Why did Nehni’s so-called Secular government allow to place idolsof “Ram Laila” in the mosque in 1949?
2) Why did Indian courts not decide since 1949, the controversial point as to whether the Babri Masjid was constructed by demolishing a Mandir in 1528 or no?
3)Why did Rajiv Gandhi allow the Hindu fanatics to lay down Shilla Nyas near the controversial site when they were declaring their intention to construct the temple at the place of the mosque, laiming the as “Garbh Grehia?”
4)When the Home Minister of India, Chahaun, had declared that security forces could teach and take the charge of their duties: within eight minutes from the place of their posting, why did Narasimha Rao not allow 15,000 cenural security forces to take charge of the mosque when these called karsewaks started demolinon?
5)Why were the karsewaks allowed to lay a makeshift temple with clothes at the site of the mosque when Rao had pledged at rampant of the Red Fort on Independence Day while hoisting the national flag that he would not allow any construction of the temple al the site of the mosque? The Supreme Count of India had also ordered that no constriction be made at the site.
6)Why were the security forces not asked to remove the makeshift cloth temple when they took over charge on Dec.8,1992 but Started paying obeisance (worship) the idols placed therein and thus became instrumental to establish the “Possession?”
7)Why this single point, whether the worship be allowed at that place or not, was referred to the court instead of protests by the secular parties?
8)Now who will invite the contempt of the court by questioning the decision of the court whether it looks partial or impartial? (The court has allowed the worship al the make shift cloth temple).
Khud Hee Katal, Khud Hee Mukhbar, Khud Hee Mansaf there (Himself murderer, himself informer, and himself judges, to whom one should approach to seek justice.
May I request Raghavan Rangarjin, who has been reported as a very effective speaker, as lo tell us who is communal, and how he proposes this “Communal Sentiment” should be confronted? Resham Singh President Sikh Youth L.A.
Article extracted from this publication >> January 29, 1993
Article extracted from this publication >>
