. |
. |
EDITORIAL The much-hyped World Trade Organisation meeting in Seatle has failed to produce any draft ministerial declaration even after four days of intense lobbying and deliberations. This 134 nation meet was sought to be hijacked by USA and other developed countries to the detriment of the developing or under-developed countries. Right from the beginning American Agenda manifested its ugliness when large scale demonstrations were organised, albeit with blessings of the government, which delayed the inauguration.....more The three day All India Police Science Congress has discussed many problems threadbare to improve efficiency of the police in the strife torn state where insurgency is now in eleventh year. Besides Director General, Bureau of.....more |
|
Dialogue among
religions By Maulana
Wahiduddin Khan Wanted a
policy on By Navin
Chandra Joshi World
Accord on By Satyabrata Rai Chowdhuri Do conversions endanger
unity of the country? |
 |
||
EDITORIAL The much-hyped World Trade Organisation meeting in Seatle has failed to produce any draft ministerial declaration even after four days of intense lobbying and deliberations. This 134 nation meet was sought to be hijacked by USA and other developed countries to the detriment of the developing or under-developed countries. Right from the beginning American Agenda manifested its ugliness when large scale demonstrations were organised, albeit with blessings of the government, which delayed the inauguration ceremony by five hours. Many delegates were kept away and confined to their hotel rooms for fear of violent demonstration taking an ugly turn. The whole idea was to highlight American internal compulsions during an election year and Clinton did not wish the Democratic Party to be seen as compromising its labour and farmers interests. To that extent it turned out to be badly managed show as most of the developing countries led by India forestalled American moves. It may be mentioned that World Trade Organisation inter-alia takes care of trading interests of all the member nations so that none is at a loss and all gain in the process. In a way, WTO is the correct forum from which liberalisation theme is derived. It is meant to encourage both ways world trade by removing all types of barriers and inherent disadvantages that work against any nation. To that extent all WTO members have the right to protect the interests of their respective countries. It has been the consistent wont of the most developed nations like America, European Union and Japan which control 70 percent of the world trade to protect their trade interests to the detriment of poor developing nations. This round at Seatle was meant to remove the anamolous situation by adopting another declaration and remove lacunae in the earlier rounds. The last round was at Uruguay where many important decisions were taken. Its result manifests its ugliness in that developing nations opened up their markets for the highly industrialised nations. In return the latter was under obligation to remove all types of import barriers for goods imported from developing countries. In practice, Uruguay round decisions stand fully compromised in that poor nations did allow liberal imports by removing all barriers but industrialised nations continued with heavy import duties, fixation of quotas and other restrictive regimes that robbed the poor nations of valuable foreign excha-nge. It is to be seen that at Seatle, it was USA which remained on the receiving end not only for not fulfilling Uruguay agenda but also for attempts to hijack the Seatle meet. Besides other issues the most contentious ones which America wanted to include in the ministerial declaration related to labour laws and environment as part of the trade agenda. In layman's language it means that those nations who engage child-labour or do not protect workers rights are automatically penalised and excluded from the purview of imports by the industrialised countries. It also implies that countries that do not observe proper environmental regime shall also be likewise liable to be excluded from concessional tariffs and imports by industrialised countries. This aspect was strongly resisted by developing nations led by India and they succeeded in not allowing America to have one-way traffic. It is well recorded that all developing nations engage child labour as also there is near total lack of observance of environmental concerns. This would have provided sufficient handle to America and others to thrash developing nations while dumping their own goods in these countries under WTO regime. India forcefully projected that labour falls under the purview of International Labour Organisation and WTO should conform to its exclusive agenda of promoting two-way trade with minimum obstructive dispensation. Despite temptations offered by America to many poor nations, Seatle round failed to get any linkage of labour with trade. The credit for this naturally goes to India which sent a large delegation of 35 experts and 12 journalists who provided the lead to poor nations to resist or perish. There were also differences between EU and America particularly on farm subsidies. It may be mentioned that EU Agricultural exports are heavily subsidised and America wanted these subsidies to go as it rendered American agricultural produce incompetitive. European Union members notably France successfully resisted such linkage of subsidies with trade. Another dissenting note was by the Asian economic giant Japan which too found Uruguay round being trampled upon by America. Even as Japan opened up its markets to America in a big way, the latter persisted in anti-dumping laws that denied natural access to Japan in American markets. To that extent developing nations did have some sort of covert support even from Japan and EU so that WTO works impartially for the advantage of every member nation rather than helping only America to protect its trade interests. That explains why Seatle round failed because Presidential election is due in USA within a few months time and Clinton did not wish Democratic Party to be even remotely seen damaging American Labour and farmers interests. So they agree to disagree and meet again at Geneva to arrive at some sort of consensus even as developing nations have realised the importance of what WTO means and how best to protect their rights for fair trade practices. India seems to have matured in economic agendas that used to be forced by the bigwigs to the detriment of already impoverished nations. The three day All India Police Science Congress has discussed many problems threadbare to improve efficiency of the police in the strife torn state where insurgency is now in eleventh year. Besides Director General, Bureau of Police Research and Development, Mr B B Nanda and DGP J&K Police Gurbachan Jagat the Congress has also been addressed by Governor G C Saxena and Chief Minister Dr Farooq Abdullah. The deliberations have reached some tentative conclusions. First, police efficiency does suffer due to nexus amongst politicians, bureaucrats and police to what has been termed as political interference. Chief Minister has positively responded that political control (or interference) is unavoidable in that politician are answerable to the people during trial at the husting and even otherwise. But he does appreciate the need for protecting fixed tenure of district level and other senior officers so that they can perform their duties and lead the team under them meaningfully. Such fixed tenure obviously is reassuring and would naturally reduce chances of political and bureaucratic interference. To that extent DGP would be free to have the proper man in proper place as per the situation and allow them sufficient time of fixed tenure to prove their worth barring some odd exceptions in public interest where shifting becomes inevitable. Second, there is the dire necessity of repealing outdated Polices Act of 1861. During colonial rule the role of the police was to protect the colonial interests. Its post-independence role is to protect peoples interests. So new enactment brooks no further delay. Third, VDCs are to be strengthened and communal elements kept at bay. Fourth, Forensic Science Lab would be upgraded here and there will be substantial computer networking to improve efficiency. Fifth, improvements in the training institutions would be effected to update the same to conform to modern concepts and challenging environs. |
||
|
||
|
By Maulana Wahiduddin Khan The world's religious system fall into two broad categories, the one upholding the concept of the maniness of reality and the other believing in the oneness of reality. To the first category belong the Aryan religions and to the second the Semitic. The Islamic viewpoint in this matter is that conviction is the very bedrock of religion. This is called iman (faith). Where a man has no firm faith in his religion, he cannot put his heart and soul into its practice. He cannot fully involve himself in it. And when the truth is taken to be many, religion can only be an outer shell. It cannot assume the form which the Qur'an calls a faith which has penetrated the heart. (1:14). This concept of Islam does not in any way preclude dialogue. The difference in the concept of dialogue is only in respect of methodology and not in respect of the philosophy of the dialogue. If, to those religious systems which believe in the maniness of reality or in the maniness of paths to reach the reality, the basis of dialogue is mutual recognition, to Islam the basis of dialogue is mutual respect. In any dialogue between the adherents of the Aryan religions and Semitic religions, two assumptions will always be central to the proceedings. One will be that while the former believe themselves to be in possession of the truth, they also concede that others may make a similar claim. The second will be that the latter, holding their position of being sole possessor of the truth, will expect the other party to do likewise. On the basis of this mutual understanding, each side will listen with an open mind to the other's point of view - regardless of the initial standpoint. Then the point of view established by logical argument will be acceptable to all participants. In the history of Islam an example of this kind of dialogue is found in the life of the Prophet himself. After the emigration, when the Prophet of Islam built the first mosque in Madina, he invited the representatives of other religions - Judaism and Christianity - to hold a dialogue with these representatives in an open atmosphere. It was a trialogue which had probably taken place for the first time in the history of religions. There may be three forms in this matter. One could be that there is total agreement between the two parties. In such a case, the need to hold a dialogue does not arise. Two, that everyone remains doubtful about his viewpoint. In the absence of true conviction, deliberation between these groups cannot teachnically be termed a dialogue, but it is rather in the nature of a discussion. Three, clear differences exist among the participants. While some hold one thing to be right, others hold something else to be right. It is between such groups that dialogue take place. The condition for dialogue is dissent, and dissent will always be expressed by those who consider themselves to be one a truer path than others. The basic question in this connection is whether truth is real or relative. If truth is held to be relative, the concept of multiple reality can have some relevance. But if truth is held as real, this concept of multiple truth will be deemed without basis. It is because relative truth may be several, but real truth will only be one. Holding truth to be real and the holding it to be many is a contradiction in terms. Opting for one will mean abandoning the other. It is not proper to think that if someone believes that only his religion is true, he will not show respect for the adherents of other traditions. Such apprehension results from underestimating the capacity of human beings. A man, while respecting his mother, shows due regard at the same time for other people's mothers. Regarding one woman as his own mother does not render him incapable of such respect for other mothers. Human psychology goes far and beyond such limitations. A Western thinker has aptly said: I am large enough to contain all these contradictions. A devotee's belief that only his religion is true demands that he convey this reality to others. But such action has nothing to do with conversion. It is only what is called iblagh (communication) in the Qur'an, that is, the communication of the divine message to others. Addressing the Prophet of Islam, the Qur'an has this to say: You are not at all a warder over them. (88:22) Islam aims not so much at conversion as at making people aware of its message. Such action is the result of a feeling of well-wishing welling up in his heart, rather than of a feelings of superiority. So far as forced conversion is concerned, that is totally unlawful in Islam. It is human nature to want to share with others anything good which one has discovered. It is only very selfish and narrow-minded people who like to reserve the good things of this life exclusively for themselves. According to Islam, this is the case with truth, when the truth is discovered, a man's humanity itself give him a great urge to communicate it ot others. The discovery of truth and the communication of this discovery are, in fact, inseparable. Some extremist Muslims indulging in violence in our times have led people to the conclusion that Islam is an intolerant religion. But this is certainly not true. Islam is as tolerant a religion as any other. The only difference between Islam and other religions is that while to some religious tolerance is based on mutual recognition, to Islam tolerance is based on mutual respect. On this matter the Islamic viewpoint can be summed up as: follow one and respect all. Bringing harmony to human society is undoubtedly a noble goal. But harmony relates to social behaviour rather than to the adoption of a theoretical position. If we want to encourage a brotherly relationship to develop between two people, one wearing white shirt and the other a coloured one, this will not come about by abhoring the difference in the colour of their apparel of insisting uniformity of colour. The establishment of harmony between the two is fully possible by admitting and accepting the difference in colour. Our past history is witness to this and we repeatedly see the truth of this in present day events. The natural formula for brotherhood is to overlook differences and to show a proper respect for the right of others. This is the Islamic viewpoint. Misunderstanding on this subject has been created by taking certain verses from the Qur'an to suggest that the holy book commands the waging of war on, and the subjugation of, all the nations of the world. It is said that in such a case it is impossible for the adherents of Islam to live peacefully with the followers of other religions. But this is a sheer misunderstanding. Wherever the Qur'an has indicated that warfare is in order, it is solely on the grounds of defence. All the nations of the world have it enshrined in their constitions that if any country or group attacks them, they will fight to defend themselves. All these nations are nevertheless living peacefully under the UN umbrella. Exactly the same is the case with Islam. The general rule in Islam is peaceful co-existence, with war only as a last resort, when circumstances make it unavoidable. On the question of social harmony, Islamic tenets are based on the realities of nature. The truth is that differences are a part of life. The fact that no two human beings think alike has been proved by psychological and biological studies. So any formula which seeks to eradicate differences in order to bring about unity is simply not feasible. The only possible and practicable formula is to tolerate differences so that all may live in unity and harmony. It would not be true to say that the concept of single truth begets intolerance, while the concept of multiple truth stands for tolerance. Those who hold to this view are perhaps equating multiple truth with agnosticism. But this is an invalid proposition. A harmonious society is formed by tolerating rather than by bulldozing various viewpoints. The right way to engender tolerance is to bring about the kind of intellectual awakening which will make people realise that whatever the circumstances, they have to live in this world through adjustment. - CNF |
||
|
|
World Accord on terrorism a must By Satyabrata Rai Chowdhuri The recent explosions in and outside Moscow, reported to have been perpetrated by Pakistan - backed terrorist outfits, Taliban and Sunni fundamentalists, have once again highlighted the fact that terrorism poses one of the greatest threats to all countries today. These incidents underline the urgent need for international cooperation to combat terrorism. Contemporary terrorism has crossed national frontiers and assumed transnational dimensions posing a challenge to the entire international legal community. It has given rise to transnational acts of violence posing new problems in both theory and practice of international relations and law. The much-vaunted international law on renunciation of force has remained incomplete. Moreover, protestations of peace by states that allow such kind of violence to perpetrate further sounds an insincere ring. Global efforts to combat terrorism have always focused on legal and treaty obligations rather than action-oriented measures. The diplomatic and political implications, for example, of an international anti-terrorists strike force, are such that suggestions of this kind are never likely to be translated into reality. Rather, the only suggestion that has any hope of gaining acceptance is one which places treaty obligations on nations to act in a prescribed way in certain situations (agreement to bring to trial any captured terrorist or against to extradite them to the country of origin). However, even this avenue is fraught with dangers of being jeopardised. One of the central problem preventing international cooperation is the definition of 'terrorism'. As treaties are framed in legal terms, they rely heavily on definitions acceptable to all parties. Since the issues of what constitutes terrorism is still unsolved after so many debates, attempts to arrive at a definition for international treaty purposes epitomises the confusion which surrounds the whole subject. Until the 20th century, there were no efforts towards international cooperation to combat terrorism, even though many governments in the 19th century were seriously challenged by terrorist campaigns. It was the rise of international terrorism which prompted a concerted approach to suppress terrorism and encouraged efforts to reach an international agreement to combat it. Hijacking of aircraft, kidnapping and murder of diplomats, military personnel, and businessmen and terrorist acts by individuals of one country in the territory of another and spectre of nuclear blackmail have all pressured authorities to seek a common agreement to contain these incidents. In the past, terrorist violence was localised and specific because of absence of an effective, co-ordinated, and rapid-reaction news network. Today, many terrorist acts aim to draw world attention to a terrorist cause. Earlier, terrorists struck within a country against whose Government the act was directed. If conducted in a foreign country, the acts were generally limited to attacks on individuals or installations of the home country. As such, they represented little threat to the internal security of the country in which the attack occurred because they did not seek to change the policies of the host country nor force it to make concessions such as release of prisoners, pay ransom or guarantee of safe passage. The motivations, tactics and consequences of contemporary acts of terrorism make them a greater threat to both national sovereignty and international order than they were in the past. Many terrorist acts as possible only because of modern technology. Terrorists tactic is 'nilhilism and desperation, with no restraint.' As a result of these striking changes many people turn to international law as a force, which could play a significant role in the suppression of terrorism. The first attempts to stimulate international cooperation was by the League of Nations following the assassination of King Alexander I of Yugoslavia and French Foreign Minister Louis Barthou in Marseilles in 1934. The League considered two measures dealing with terrorism. The first was the 1937 Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Terrorism which declared hostile incidents involving of Terrorism which declared hostile incidents involving Heads of State and other internationally protected persons as a 'crime'. It also forbid destruction of public property and injuries to the citizens of one country by citizens of another. The second Convention, the creation of an international criminal court, gave signatories the option of committing persons accused of terrorist offences for trial in an international court established for the purpose. However, the Conventions never became operative because only a few nations ratified them. Subsequent efforts towards an international accord on terrorism through the United Nations have faced the same difficulties of 'definition' upon which the League's attempts had floundered. The rise in international terrorism prompted UN Secretary General Kurt Waldheim in September, 1972 to request the UN General Assembly to consider measures to prevent terrorist and other forms of violence which endanger or take human lives or jeopardise fundamental freedoms. The proposal gave rise to bitter controversy and opposition when the Assembly decided to include an amended version on its agenda. The amended agenda suggested a study of "the underlying causes of those forms of terrorism and acts of violence which lie in misery, frustration, grievance and despair and which prompt some people to sacrifice human lives, including their own, in an attempt to effect radical changes." Needless to say, the resolution was defeated. Similarly, irreconcilable views have been advanced from time to time as to what measures are appropriate to combat terrorism. Some states have favoured initial action at the national level, some stress the desirability of bilateral agreements and others favour multilateral treaty arrangements. In an attempt to sort out these differences, the Assembly formed three sub-committees to examine the definition, the underlying causes, and measures for the prevention of international terrorism. The results were predictable. In the first sub-committee, it soon became evident that there was substantial disagreement as to whether or not a definition was either necessary or desirable. In the second, there was a return of the debate as to whether measures could be undertaken to restrain terrorism parallel with efforts to deal with underlying causes or whether elimination of the causes must precede such measures. Again, no consensus or compromise was reached. The same issue was debated in the third sub-committee also. Thus, the report of the sub-committee to the General Assembly amounted to little more than a summary of divergent views. As a consequence, no Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism emerged and people of the world were left with only a lot of empty and high-flown phrases. States were invited "to become parties to the existing International Conventions which relate to various aspects of international terrorism and to take all appropriate measures at the national level with a view to the speedy and final elimination of the problem." |
|
Do conversions endanger
unity of the country? Any ideal and homogenous system of governance should be uniformly applicable and acceptable to all classes of people. But in actual practice, some concessions are inevitable to conciliate various groups and classes. Religions have been changing with the times. Religions like the Islam and Christianity were based on certain values, traditions, conventions, tenets and commandments. These were sought to be enforced by word of mouth, by conciliation, excommunication and use of force. The Lord as pictured in the Old Testament is like a commander-in-chief, directing his flock to one way of living, on pain of punishment. Obedience had its rewards and disobedience had retribution, in the form of calamities being rained on the populace. Psalm 13 says, "Judge me, O God, and plead my cause against an ungodly nation; O deliver me from the deceitful and unjust man". Joshua (6-9) reads as under: Be strong and of good courage; for unto this people shalt thou divide for an inheritance the land, which I swore unto their fathers to give them. Only be thou strong and very courageous, that thou mayst observe to do according to all the law, which Moses, my servant, commanded thee; turn not from it to the right hand or to the left, that thou mayest prosper whithersoever thou goest. This book of law shall not depart out of thy mouth, but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein; for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then shalt have good success. Have not I commanded thee? Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid; neither be thou dismayed; for the Lord, thy God, is with thee, withersoever thou goest". Achievements, success, and prosperity in life are dependent on following a certain set of values in life as directed by the Lord God. No religion is static, for progress and for keeping in with the time. As the original Christian religion did not stand the rationality test of the changing time, dissenters in every age set up a different version of the same, like the Protestantism, Baptists and Presbyterians, including the Lutherans. The original Catholic Christians are still the dominant majority. Those who found it difficult to follow, joined other streams of Christianity. It has happened to every religion, practically in every age, but imperceptibly. Islam had its origin in the battles Prophet Mohammed had to fight against non-believers. He had to protect himself, his followers and his teachings. He broke a new path in the age of darkness in Arabia. .He believed in preaching and persuading. He came to an amicable understanding with his rivals about the pilgrimage to be made to Mecca. His followers had different ideas. They did not hesitate using all kinds of means, including coercion and force, in converting others to their point of view and their way of believing in God. In every society and every religion, there are fence - sitters, who would gladly change their beliefs for worldly wealth, glories and comforts. With the rulers of Arabia converting themselves to the religion propagated by the Prophet, it was a question of time before the entire population professed Islam, partly by persuasion, partly by temptations, allurements and partly by conviction. Muslim rulers followed the same policy, wherever they were in power. Most of them had the one-point programme of seeing all their subjects professing their favoured religion. Islam entered the Indian sub-continent with Mohammed Bin Quasi in 536 AD. The region was subjected to massive conversion to Islam for over 1200 years till the arrival of the British. The cradle of Hinduism and other related religions like Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism lost over 330 million people to Islam in the countries known today as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, apart from a large chunk in the present India. After the arrival of Christian rulers, it was only a question of time that the same policy was started in another garb. Christian preachers approached through the basic needs of the people for medicine, education and sympathy. It showed them in a different light as compared to other religions, which left people to fend for themselves and their faith. Conversions, especially in backward areas, started with these accompaniments. Christianity was not based on any caste classifications. In this way, people could raise their status in the eyes of the British or Portugese rulers by becoming their co-religionists. Proselytisation is an article of faith with the Christian missionaries, as emphasised by Pope John during his visits to India. The Pope released a document called "Ecclesai in Asia", when he visited India on November 5, 1999. It proclaimed that "Just as in the first millennium the cross was planted in the soil of Europe, and in the second on that of America and Africa, we can pray that in the third millennium a great harvest of faith will be reaped in this vast and vital continent... Evangelisation had to be an absolute priority for the Church in Asia. The Church acknowledged what was true and holy in such religions as Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam, but Christ offered the way to ultimate salvation". Pope is regarded as a kind of a deputy to God. According to Christianity, salvation is possible only through the channel of Christ with God. Pope John Paul II called affirmation of faith in Christ as a basic tenet and it remains a call to conversion. Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism, Buddhism do not acknoweldge the existence of any channel for communication with God. Hindus, through they reverse Christ, do not believe that salvation is possible only through believing in Christ as the Son of God. Muslims too reject the concept that Christ is the Son of God. The emphasis in Article 25 of the Indian Constitution is to ensure equality of all religions. It is a calculated effort to promote secularism. Right to freedom does not indicate or imply unabated, forcible conversions. One's relationship with God is a personal affair. But what happens in actual practice is that by throwing a few crumbs an effort is made to change the religion of the people. It must be acknowledge that Christian missionaries, by approaching the totally inaccessible and inhabitable areas, have been able to achieve the objective of conversion to Christianity of the simple people residing there. There is no doubt that the Pope's call will lead to the redoubling the efforts for conversion, not only in India, but also in the entire Asia. Wherever there is dire poverty and a poor man is looked after by any denomination, it does not matter to him whether he worships Ram or Rahim or Christ or Waheguru. For the poverty - stricken people, struck by ill health, eking out a livelihood and not religion is of paramount importance. They easily fall prey to fundamentalism of the preachers, economic necessity and survival in the face of terrorists will make even ordinary persons, fundamentalists. If we had raised the economic standards of the common backward people, the battle against conversions would have been won. It would be necessary to wage a war against poverty, deprivation and ill health. At the same time, it is important to keep in view the activities of the fundamentalists like Osama bin Laden, in whose views embassy bombings in the name of Islam are all right. Hindu religion has been tolerant and the majority has ensured total religions freedom for the minorities. The result is that it has become a minority in Kashmir, Nagaland, and Lakshadweep. The propaganda of conversion based on economic benefit, social standing and medical attention would have to be met by the majority on the same terms as offered by others. However, forcible conversions are abhorent and are neither acceptable nor tolerable. Government is bound by the Constitution to ensure only freedom of religion, but not the freedom of conversion. It is this tolerance which has changed the demographic pattern in the country and has led to extra-territorial loyalities. A kind of hype has been created, where even to talk about Hindu religion or stopping conversions or preventing the people from going astray is considered anti secular.Hindu and the Sikh religions are the ones where there have been extensive traditions of liberalism. At no time in the history of these religions, there was a period when overt or covert conversions were the rule during the regimes of Hindus and Sikh rulers. There has been no conversion zealot or persecution fanatic greatery than Aurangzeb. Yet Delhi commemorates his name by naming an important road after him. During the time of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, when the Sikhs ruled from Afghanistan to Sutlej, jobs went by merit and not by religion. The foundation of the holiest of holy Sikh temple was laid by a Muslim divine Mian Mir. Macaulay says about Sikh relgion: "It prohibits idolatry, hypocrisy, caste exclusiveness, non-cremation of widows, the immurement of women, the use of wine and other intoxicants, tobacco-smoking, infanticide, slander, pilgrimage to the sacred rivers and tanks of Hindus, and it inculcates loyalty, gratitude for all favours received, philanthropy, justice, impartiality, truth, honesty, and all the moral and domestic virtues known to the holiest citizens of any country". Nepal, the only Hindu kingdom, has a law against conversions. Nobody can change his religon there. While we may not go that far, it is time that Government set up a commission to look into the whole gamut of conversions. It could look into the history of conversions, inducements offered or economic benefits extended to secure such conversions and suggest ways and means to keep peace and harmony in the country. A man is free to condemn others on the ground that he is the sole guardian of the Almighty on the earth. He is also not free to impose his gods or methods of worship on others, Let not the fabric of Indian society be destroyed by a few misguided individuals, by whatever name or garb they may be known. -CNF |
|
|
