 |
||
|
||
|
||
That this report is politically motivated and spearheaded by the unemployed proclaimed Marxists and Christian Missionaries is made evident in the following points: a) Authors of the report themselves accept of having “political persuasion”. b) The report was released by SAHMAT, whose members are CPI and CPI(M) cardholders. c) Biju Mathew who addressed media persons is a founder-member of Forum of Indian Leftist (FOIL). d) In Communalism Combat, Sabrang Communications carried out a Rs. 1.5 crore advertising campaign against BJP, which was funded by Congress, CPI and CPI(M). e) Teesta Setalvad and Javed Anand who run Sabrang Communication criticised the Government of India for canceling FCRA registration of Christian organisations who failed to submit their audited accounts as prescribed by FCRA rules.
Many scholars have challenged the methodology of the “research-based report'. Prof. Beloo Mehra (who teaches qualitative research) writes in Sulekha.com: “For a 91-page report, the entire methodology employed by the researchers and writers presented in one small paragraph in section 1.2 (of the report). Given the absence of any detailed methodology in Sabrang report, readers are strongly advised to question the validity of its conclusion. In fact, in such a case, readers should find it easy to believe that the conclusions have more to do with the researched agenda or bias, rather than the trends emerging from the data. It would be reasonable to argue that the highly purposive, agenda specific and cut - and paste routine, employed by the authors of Sabrang report, has helped it become more of a malicious propaganda than a factual research report. At the end of one paragraph about methodology, the authors write: 'The methodological emphasis on primary sources, internal to the Sangh Parivar, is to ensure that the evidentiary basis of the conclusions drawn is of the highest standards'. While the sentence structure makes it sound that the finding of this report are credible and even reproducible, there are several questions that a methodology critic must ask when going a layer beneath the surface. For example, what is meant by primary sources'? Typically, ‘primary' in research lingo means data that is original; data that was not 'collected' prior to the present study. A quick look at the references included in the report makes it clear that most of the information is retrieved from online documents, press releases, media reports, and mass communiques. Thus, the language used by Sabrang writers with respect to primary and secondary sources of data can be seen as a way to confuse the reader and lend more credibility to the report's 'findings'. The language used in Chapter I of the report appears biased, sensational, and full of generalisations, thus making the report appear as an ideological discursive structure, which first and foremost expresses the values of an ideological system and of a specific discourse authority. A quick look at the rest of this report suggests that the authors continue to use phrases, statements, and expressions that are at best mere rhetoric or assumptions, rather than ‘scientific' arguments... After reading just the first few pages of this report, the one-sided, partial, and biased nature of the 'truth' becomes so evident, that even a statement such as 'the authors had any hidden agenda' becomes meaningless. The agenda is not hidden at all-anyone or any text that seems to suggest that they have the complete truth on their side must be challenged.”
So this report is factually wrong and incoherent as none of the NGOs supported by IDRF are involved in spreading hate or inciting violence. Sewa Bharati (Madhya Pradesh) was never banned as the report says. Sewa Bharati (Delhi) was awarded thrice the best organisation working in the field of child welfare by the then Congress Government. Other organisations such as Sookruti and Swaroop Wardhini supported by IDRF have also been recognised by various governments and organisations for their social service projects. The two NG0s CAPART and PRAYAS during the Congress rule praised the work of Vivekanad Kendra, Kanyakumari, which is listed as an RSS organisation and its activities was termed as “Hinduisation” by the report. The IDRF-supported organisations never discriminate against minorities as claimed by the report. Families of Hindu and non-Hindu martyrs of Kargil war were given help without any religious distinction. In Gujarat and Orissa, families of earthquake and cyclone victims respectively, belonging to the minorities, were pulled out of the rubble, and were also the beneficiaries of the IDRF supported projects and relief work. The Sewa Bharati volunteers distributed blankets and food packets at a mosque in Hajipur immediately after the earthquake hit the Gujarat. Volunteers of Sewa Bharati even arranged for the maulvies to perform final rites of some of the bodies of Muslims after two planes crashed at Charakhi-Dadari in Haryana. Al-Riyad, a newspaper of Saudi Arabia, had unreservedly praised its role and had commented that their misunderstanding that it being anti-Muslim had been removed to a large extent. Several letters were written to the press by the Muslims in our country to the same effect. One organisation, which the report categorises as an RSS organisation, Miraj Medical Center, is in fact associated with Church of North India. Many IDRF-supported NGOs have also been receiving grants from the States and the Central Governments and also from American charities like ASHA, AID, and others. Jnan Prabodhini has been funded by AID, and Sevalaya by ASHA and both have been categorized as RSS organizations spreading hate. If this were so, these governments and organisations should also have been charged with funding hate. Interestingly, the report has described tribal as animists rather than as Hindus, a known Marxist perspective. If this is so, why didn't the report treat IDRF's work for them as work serving non-Hindus?
One contention, which needs to be challenged, is that IDRF funds have been used for violence in Gujarat. This is an excellent example of Stalinist policy of propaganda through false claims. No court or commission has ever indicted any organisation funded by IDRF.
Now let us look into what these people are doing. Vijay Prasad, Biju Mathew, Anjana Chaterjee have been writing articles mainly in leftist publications like People's Democracy, a CPI (M)'s mouthpiece, etc., advocating no action against Afghanistan after 9/11 WTC attack and telling the world that these attacks are result of US' colonial policies. So, there should be No wonder if the reports are quoted from markazdawa.org, the official website of the Lashkar-e-Toiba. Sabrang.com had a page called “aman” prominently displaying a graphic containing oversized map of Pakistan and mutilated map of India sans Kashmir and Northeastern States. Teesta Setalvad of Sabrang went to US Religious Commission and maligned the image of India whereas she did not utter a word when the innocent Hindus got killed in Kashmir and Bangladesh.
This report is a part of larger
conspiracy hatched by Christian Marxist leadership. On November 7, 2002,
a CPI(M) leader openly declared “Hindutva forces” the common enemy in a
conference organised by Tribal Catholic Mission at Ranchi, an organisation
openly involved in conversion. In the last decade, despite specific instruction
from Pope and funding from Western countries, Christian missionaries failed
to harvest their targeted number of Indian souls. They have to face stiff
resistance from tribal who are ready to fight for the preservation of their
traditional culture. This has frustrated them and they have started blaming
service organisations like Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram (VKA). But that is happening
the world over. For centuries, these Christian missionaries have destroyed
cultural traditions of thousands of tribes world over and converted them
forcibly and with allurement. Now more educated members of these tribes
are challenging these missionary activities. VKA or no VKA this had to
happen in India too. Some Marxists who write tons of articles criticising
fundamentalism are playing in the hands of these Christian missionaries.
Let us work together to defeat this conspiracy behind this report, which
should be called “Hate Campaign to Stop Funding”.
|
||
|
||
|
||