Monday, November 16, 2009
Appeal to ban Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind
This is an formal appeal to ban anti national organization Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind who recently issued fatwa against National Song Vande Mataram.
There is NO way this can go on in India.
There is NO way this can go on in India.
Labels: Awakening, ban, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, Protest, Terrorism, vande mataram
Monday, February 23, 2009
Muslim passenger from Pakistan abuses Hindu in Malaysian Airlines flight:- ‘She’s a Hindu, I cannot sit beside her
Radhika Iyer-O’Sullivan | Jan 20, 09 3:55pm
I am a Malaysian currently residing and working in Dubai. On Dec 25, 2008, I flew with Malaysian Airlines flight MH161 to Kuala Lumpur to visit my parents. I was in seat 36H (an aisle seat) and the seat next to me, 36K (window seat) was vacant. The flight stopped over at Karachi for an hour.
In Karachi, more passengers boarded the plane. One male passenger boarded, showed his boarding pass to a stewardess and she pointed to seat beside me (36K). The man looked at me and said, ‘She’s a Hindu, I cannot sit beside her.’ The stewardess responded, ‘So what? What’s wrong with Hindu?’ The man then began to yell and shout that he would not sit next to a Hindu.
The crew insisted that he had to because there were no other seats available because the plane was full. Then this passenger sat down but began to verbally abuse my faith and the crew members. I sat in my seat but was physically cringing away from him. The flight supervisor was summoned and until then the man was still seated next to me. Imagine my shock, horror and fear in being next to a hostile, abusive person.
One steward did stand next to me but did not offer any help and I did not feel safe or reassured. I reached out and told that steward that I did not feel safe anymore. I said this to him softly in English and he told me to sit and wait. He then walked off and a female crew member took his place. All this time I was under the impression that this hostile passenger beside me was a Pakistani.
I then told the stewardess in Malay that this man should not be seated beside me after what he had said about me. There were other Malaysian passengers sitting in the same area and all of them heard me. She smiled and merely nodded.
Finally, the flight supervisor, ‘SB’, approached the passenger and after an angry exchange, the passenger said, ‘Move her then!’ and SB replied, ‘Yes, we will move her’. More angry words were exchanged and it was revealed that the passenger was actually a Malaysian. When this news was revealed, the passenger actually stood up with his fists up, ready to be physically violent. I was then hauled out of my seat and taken to the back of the plane. I was kept in the kitchen.
By this time I had gone into shock and was crying uncontrollably. I was shaking with rage because I was in a position where there was nothing I could do to defend myself. No one else seemed to be doing anything too.
I could not see what was happening from the rear of the plane but I did see uniformed security personnel approaching my original seat. I could not hear or make out what was happening as there was a group of people standing around my original seat. Eventually, the group left and it was announced that the plane would be taking off.
All this time I was in the kitchen, shaking and crying. All that was done for me was crew members taking turns to ask me if I was okay and offering me Coke and water! The plane began to taxi and I was then taken to another seat (42H). As I sat down, I asked the steward, ‘Is he off the plane?’ and the answer was, ‘No.’ I was appalled.
After the plane took off, the flight supervisor, SB, came and sat beside me. He explained to me that they could not put him off the plane because he was a deportee and if they had insisted on putting him off, then the plane would not have been cleared for take off. I was still crying at this point. I asked, ‘Why am I in a different seat? He should be!’ but my question was not answered.
The plane was not full. There were eight seats vacant in the rear, four on the right aisle and four seats on the left. Seat 42H, where I was put, was one of those vacant seats in the rear. If the MAS crew knew there was a deportee boarding, should they not have made arrangements to place him at the rear of the plane? What kind of airline policy allows a deportee to sit beside a female passenger travelling alone?
I spent the next five and a half hours on the flight in tears. I was not able to sleep because I knew that a hostile passenger was only six rows down from me. I was not afraid but in rage. My friends who are reading this would know the kind of person I am. I have always stood up for my rights and for the rights of people whom I love. I would not usually tolerate such abuse and I would not have hesitated in defending myself.
What stopped me was knowing that I was on a plane, in a confined space and that there were other passengers around me too, women and children. The abusive passenger was not removed from the plane and when we landed at KLIA, he disembarked like a normal passenger and was not escorted or arrested. I also disembarked knowing that I was now in the same terminal, on my own, as this hostile passenger.
I am very disappointed with the way MAS dealt with the incident. That passenger should have been taken to the rear of the plane and restrained. I was the victim of the incident yet I lost my chosen seat that I had paid for. Apart from offers of water, Coke and some verbal reassurances, the crew did not do anything else for me.
I have contacted other major airlines and this is how they would have dealt with the matter: I would have been moved to Business/First Class and I would have been escorted into the terminal until I safely exited the airport. MAS did not do anything for me. First of all, they jeopardised my safety and well-being by forcing the passenger to sit beside me knowing that he was hostile towards me and then they did nothing else to keep me safe.
I was in the same cabin as that passenger, wondering if he was going to walk by or pass me. I spent the entire five and a half hours in tears because I could not stand up for my rights and also because I had to keep my own rage pent-up.
Once I landed, I rang my husband in Dubai and related the events to him. He took immediate steps to contact MAS but to no avail. I stayed for one week in Malaysia and every single day, I tried to call their Customer Complaints Department. All I got was a voice mail. I left numerous messages but no one called me back. No one contacted my husband in Dubai. It is only after he put it up on the MAS blog that we have received some kind of response. Fourteen days after the incident, someone from MAS called me to offer an apology.
My husband also received an email from someone who has offered me 25 percent discount on a return flight from KL to Dubai and actually referred to that abusive passenger as a ‘fellow customer’! She also clearly stated that measures taken were to prevent that passenger from getting angrier. So in other words, they do admit that.
These are the questions I posed to MAS:
Why force a passenger who is racially abusive and hostile to my appearance and faith to sit beside me? There were other seats available at the rear as I discovered later.This was not a passenger who was merely fussing about his seat, this was a passenger who was potentially a threat to another passenger.
Why did the flight supervisor immediately give in to his demands and agree to move me? I was not the passenger causing trouble.
Upon retrospect, I think I was lied to. I do not think the passenger was a deportee. It was a lie told to me to keep him on the plane and keep me quiet. If a lie was told, that means that the crew took measures to protect the hostile passenger and themselves but not me, the victim. If so, then the MAS crew perpetuated the racism and discrimination initiated by the passenger.
If this is the case, then the entire crew participated in jeopardising my safety and appropriate action should be taken against them. If the passenger was truly a deportee or an INA (inadmissible because of visa) then the plane captain should have documents about him. If a deportee or INA caused trouble on a flight, the captain should have been informed immediately.
Why was the captain not informed and if he was, why did he not come to see me? I have been informed that KLIA security had been called but there was no one waiting when the plane landed. The abusive passenger disembarked like any other normal passenger. Why was he not nabbed or restrained? Why did not the crew ensure my safety in the terminal too?
I am demanding a formal, written apology from Malaysian Airlines. I want a truthful, reasonable explanation for all the five points I have listed above. I want some compensation for what I suffered. So far, I have only received an e-mail informing that the matter is under investigation.
Posted by jagoindia on February 22, 2009
source : http://islamicterrorism.wordpress.com/
I am a Malaysian currently residing and working in Dubai. On Dec 25, 2008, I flew with Malaysian Airlines flight MH161 to Kuala Lumpur to visit my parents. I was in seat 36H (an aisle seat) and the seat next to me, 36K (window seat) was vacant. The flight stopped over at Karachi for an hour.
In Karachi, more passengers boarded the plane. One male passenger boarded, showed his boarding pass to a stewardess and she pointed to seat beside me (36K). The man looked at me and said, ‘She’s a Hindu, I cannot sit beside her.’ The stewardess responded, ‘So what? What’s wrong with Hindu?’ The man then began to yell and shout that he would not sit next to a Hindu.
The crew insisted that he had to because there were no other seats available because the plane was full. Then this passenger sat down but began to verbally abuse my faith and the crew members. I sat in my seat but was physically cringing away from him. The flight supervisor was summoned and until then the man was still seated next to me. Imagine my shock, horror and fear in being next to a hostile, abusive person.
One steward did stand next to me but did not offer any help and I did not feel safe or reassured. I reached out and told that steward that I did not feel safe anymore. I said this to him softly in English and he told me to sit and wait. He then walked off and a female crew member took his place. All this time I was under the impression that this hostile passenger beside me was a Pakistani.
I then told the stewardess in Malay that this man should not be seated beside me after what he had said about me. There were other Malaysian passengers sitting in the same area and all of them heard me. She smiled and merely nodded.
Finally, the flight supervisor, ‘SB’, approached the passenger and after an angry exchange, the passenger said, ‘Move her then!’ and SB replied, ‘Yes, we will move her’. More angry words were exchanged and it was revealed that the passenger was actually a Malaysian. When this news was revealed, the passenger actually stood up with his fists up, ready to be physically violent. I was then hauled out of my seat and taken to the back of the plane. I was kept in the kitchen.
By this time I had gone into shock and was crying uncontrollably. I was shaking with rage because I was in a position where there was nothing I could do to defend myself. No one else seemed to be doing anything too.
I could not see what was happening from the rear of the plane but I did see uniformed security personnel approaching my original seat. I could not hear or make out what was happening as there was a group of people standing around my original seat. Eventually, the group left and it was announced that the plane would be taking off.
All this time I was in the kitchen, shaking and crying. All that was done for me was crew members taking turns to ask me if I was okay and offering me Coke and water! The plane began to taxi and I was then taken to another seat (42H). As I sat down, I asked the steward, ‘Is he off the plane?’ and the answer was, ‘No.’ I was appalled.
After the plane took off, the flight supervisor, SB, came and sat beside me. He explained to me that they could not put him off the plane because he was a deportee and if they had insisted on putting him off, then the plane would not have been cleared for take off. I was still crying at this point. I asked, ‘Why am I in a different seat? He should be!’ but my question was not answered.
The plane was not full. There were eight seats vacant in the rear, four on the right aisle and four seats on the left. Seat 42H, where I was put, was one of those vacant seats in the rear. If the MAS crew knew there was a deportee boarding, should they not have made arrangements to place him at the rear of the plane? What kind of airline policy allows a deportee to sit beside a female passenger travelling alone?
I spent the next five and a half hours on the flight in tears. I was not able to sleep because I knew that a hostile passenger was only six rows down from me. I was not afraid but in rage. My friends who are reading this would know the kind of person I am. I have always stood up for my rights and for the rights of people whom I love. I would not usually tolerate such abuse and I would not have hesitated in defending myself.
What stopped me was knowing that I was on a plane, in a confined space and that there were other passengers around me too, women and children. The abusive passenger was not removed from the plane and when we landed at KLIA, he disembarked like a normal passenger and was not escorted or arrested. I also disembarked knowing that I was now in the same terminal, on my own, as this hostile passenger.
I am very disappointed with the way MAS dealt with the incident. That passenger should have been taken to the rear of the plane and restrained. I was the victim of the incident yet I lost my chosen seat that I had paid for. Apart from offers of water, Coke and some verbal reassurances, the crew did not do anything else for me.
I have contacted other major airlines and this is how they would have dealt with the matter: I would have been moved to Business/First Class and I would have been escorted into the terminal until I safely exited the airport. MAS did not do anything for me. First of all, they jeopardised my safety and well-being by forcing the passenger to sit beside me knowing that he was hostile towards me and then they did nothing else to keep me safe.
I was in the same cabin as that passenger, wondering if he was going to walk by or pass me. I spent the entire five and a half hours in tears because I could not stand up for my rights and also because I had to keep my own rage pent-up.
Once I landed, I rang my husband in Dubai and related the events to him. He took immediate steps to contact MAS but to no avail. I stayed for one week in Malaysia and every single day, I tried to call their Customer Complaints Department. All I got was a voice mail. I left numerous messages but no one called me back. No one contacted my husband in Dubai. It is only after he put it up on the MAS blog that we have received some kind of response. Fourteen days after the incident, someone from MAS called me to offer an apology.
My husband also received an email from someone who has offered me 25 percent discount on a return flight from KL to Dubai and actually referred to that abusive passenger as a ‘fellow customer’! She also clearly stated that measures taken were to prevent that passenger from getting angrier. So in other words, they do admit that.
These are the questions I posed to MAS:
Why force a passenger who is racially abusive and hostile to my appearance and faith to sit beside me? There were other seats available at the rear as I discovered later.This was not a passenger who was merely fussing about his seat, this was a passenger who was potentially a threat to another passenger.
Why did the flight supervisor immediately give in to his demands and agree to move me? I was not the passenger causing trouble.
Upon retrospect, I think I was lied to. I do not think the passenger was a deportee. It was a lie told to me to keep him on the plane and keep me quiet. If a lie was told, that means that the crew took measures to protect the hostile passenger and themselves but not me, the victim. If so, then the MAS crew perpetuated the racism and discrimination initiated by the passenger.
If this is the case, then the entire crew participated in jeopardising my safety and appropriate action should be taken against them. If the passenger was truly a deportee or an INA (inadmissible because of visa) then the plane captain should have documents about him. If a deportee or INA caused trouble on a flight, the captain should have been informed immediately.
Why was the captain not informed and if he was, why did he not come to see me? I have been informed that KLIA security had been called but there was no one waiting when the plane landed. The abusive passenger disembarked like any other normal passenger. Why was he not nabbed or restrained? Why did not the crew ensure my safety in the terminal too?
I am demanding a formal, written apology from Malaysian Airlines. I want a truthful, reasonable explanation for all the five points I have listed above. I want some compensation for what I suffered. So far, I have only received an e-mail informing that the matter is under investigation.
Posted by jagoindia on February 22, 2009
source : http://islamicterrorism.wordpress.com/
Labels: dubai, hindu, hinduttva, Hindutva, karachi, malaysian airlines, Terrorism
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Hang Kasab at Gateway!
January 10, 2009
Mumbai: Ajmal Amir Kasab, the lone surviving terrorist in the Mumbai carnage, should be hanged at the Gateway of India to pay a "real tribute" to the martyrs killed while saving lives during the terrorist attacks, daughter of a brave cop Omble's daughter has demanded.
"It would be insulting to our martyrs if Ajmal is let off on humanitarian grounds without any punishment," Vaishali, daughter of Tukaram Ombale who was killed during the terror siege, said in an interview to Shiv Sena mouthpiece Saamna on Friday.
"Why should he not get punished while my father died fighting Ajmal without thinking about the family?" she asked.
Vaishali also rubbished the arguments about Ajmal being young and, therefore, should not be punished. She said the terrorists have killed nearly 200 innocent people, including 16 policemen.
"In fact, not punishing Ajmal would encourage the terrorist organisations to send even younger ones in the age bracket of 15-16 years with guns to kill more Hindus," she said.
In yesterday's Saamna editorial, Sena chief Bal Thackeray had criticised Kavita, wife of slain Anti Terrorist Squad chief Hemant Karkare, and their daughter for suggesting that Ajmal should be let off on humanitarian grounds, and said the country did not share their stance.
Families of those killed in the terror strikes want Ajmal to be hanged, he had said, adding that only the Karkares have adopted a humanitarian approach and want to prove that they are "different".
Source: Rediffnews.com
Mumbai: Ajmal Amir Kasab, the lone surviving terrorist in the Mumbai carnage, should be hanged at the Gateway of India to pay a "real tribute" to the martyrs killed while saving lives during the terrorist attacks, daughter of a brave cop Omble's daughter has demanded.
"It would be insulting to our martyrs if Ajmal is let off on humanitarian grounds without any punishment," Vaishali, daughter of Tukaram Ombale who was killed during the terror siege, said in an interview to Shiv Sena mouthpiece Saamna on Friday.
"Why should he not get punished while my father died fighting Ajmal without thinking about the family?" she asked.
Vaishali also rubbished the arguments about Ajmal being young and, therefore, should not be punished. She said the terrorists have killed nearly 200 innocent people, including 16 policemen.
"In fact, not punishing Ajmal would encourage the terrorist organisations to send even younger ones in the age bracket of 15-16 years with guns to kill more Hindus," she said.
In yesterday's Saamna editorial, Sena chief Bal Thackeray had criticised Kavita, wife of slain Anti Terrorist Squad chief Hemant Karkare, and their daughter for suggesting that Ajmal should be let off on humanitarian grounds, and said the country did not share their stance.
Families of those killed in the terror strikes want Ajmal to be hanged, he had said, adding that only the Karkares have adopted a humanitarian approach and want to prove that they are "different".
Source: Rediffnews.com
Labels: Ajmal Amir Kasab, Azam Amir Kasab, Karkare, kasab, kasav, Mumbai carnage, Terrorism, Tukaram Ombale, vaishali
Thursday, February 5, 2009
With People Insecure, why High Security for Leaders?
What is the main challenge the country is facing today? Even a child can answer this question! Security for the people!
The victims of the gruesome Mumbai terror attack is a heavy price the people had to pay for the indifference of the leaders, whose prime responsibility is to provide security to the people.
The leaders who cannot provide security to the people have provided tight security for themselves at the expense of the tax-payers! The Constitution has given every citizen a fundamental right to live a secure life, but they are being deprived of the security deliberately!
Why should the people suffer due to the leaders’ security?
Today, the importance of a leader is judged by the number of security men surrounding him; hence the race to extract the highest category of security. Over 60 percent of National Security Guards (NSG) commandos are deployed on personal security duties. It is an obnoxious sight to see that the arrogant Police are cordoning roads through which the leaders will pass with a posse of security guards, putting the people to great inconvenience. People are fed up of all this. Some leaders intentionally create adversaries by their irresponsible statements and thereafter seek state protection for personal safety. We have situations in which the leader of one party apprehends a threat from one party and demands Government protection, while the leader of the other party seeks similar security fearing attack by the first party. This is a misfortune of our country!
Follow the example of Denmark!
A few years ago, while on a visit to Denmark a Bharatiya tourist saw the Queen of Denmark doing her weekly shopping of household requirements in a Mall. She was accompanied by a solitary maid. The Queen was picking up required items from the shelves and the maid was pushing the cart. No posse of security guards or the paparazzi of media!
Amazed at it, the Bharatiya tourist quizzed his local guide. The reply was quite an eye-opener - “If a ruler needs protection from his own subjects, he might as well relinquish his chair. Why should citizens pay for the security of a leader who feels insecure amongst his own people? Only devious leaders feel threatened and Denmark can do without them.”
Why commandos for security of leaders?
While they seem unable to protect ordinary people from terrorist attacks, the politicians spend hundreds of crores of tax-payers money to protect themselves. Over Rs. 250 crore is spent on VIP protection - including VIPs like Deve Gowda, Amar Singh, Ram Vilas Paswan, Sajjan Kumar, BL Joshi, RL Bhatia, Sharad Yadav, Rameshwar Thakur, E Ahmad and Pramod Tiwari. Most of these worthies are said to be facing little real risk. It is also questionable whether lakhs of rupees should be spent on the protection of some others, like Sajjan Kumar, who have murder cases against them. The NSG, set up in 1984 for anti-hijack and anti-terror operations, has two wings – the Special Action Group (SAG), comprising of army personnel on deputation, and the Special Rangers Group (SRG), comprising of personnel from the ITBP, CISF, CRPF, BSF and SSB. More than half of SRG has been diverted to VIP security. How far is it correct that the commandos who have been trained to fight at the time of terrorist attacks be assigned the job of protecting the leaders?
Why does the Gandhi family feel insecure in Bharat?
The Special Protection Group (SPG) has been set up exclusively for providing security to the Gandhi family members, the Prime Minister and former Prime Ministers. Interestingly, the SPG budget for 2008-09 is Rs. 180 crore, up from Rs. 117 crore the previous year, while the 2008-09 budget for NSG, which is meant to protect over a billion people from terror, is Rs. 158 crore as against Rs.159 crore for the previous year.
The total expenditure on the security of the Gandhi family and the present and former Prime Ministers is more than that for the protection of the entire population of the country! Is the Gandhi family more important than 120 crore population of the country?
Why Z+ only? Assign Army for leaders’ security!
The VIP security is classified into five levels - Special Protection Group is the highest level, followed by the Z-plus, Z, Y and X categories. Z-plus security is provided by NSG consisting of six ‘black cat commandos’, two head constables, 12 constables, one escort and one pilot vehicle.
Thirty politicians including Mayavati, Jayalalitha, Amar Singh, Ram Vilas Paswan and Narendra Modi are provided this cover. Sixty-eight VIPs get Z category protection, 243 get Y category and 81 X category. Alongwith the SPG and NSG, the state Police are also deployed for the security of VIPs. In Delhi alone, a whopping 14,200 Policemen have been deployed for the security of VIPs. The Delhi High Court has passed a stricture, “Politicians are not national assets that need to be protected.” From this, the politicians should realise the import of the Court’s say!
True protection lies in total uprooting of terrorists!
People have to unnecessarily undergo untold harassment due to the security of leaders. Even the huge expenditure on their security is made out of the tax-payers money. Stop providing security to leaders merely to boost their importance or fancy! Provide security only to those on whom the Damocles’ sword of terrorists is hanging!
Though it is the first step of defence against the terrorists to provide security to the people, it is imperative to attack the root of terrorism and destroy it. To make this possible, leaders with the fire of nationalism burning in their heart should be in power!
(Ref: ‘Dainik Sanatan Prabhat’)
The victims of the gruesome Mumbai terror attack is a heavy price the people had to pay for the indifference of the leaders, whose prime responsibility is to provide security to the people.
The leaders who cannot provide security to the people have provided tight security for themselves at the expense of the tax-payers! The Constitution has given every citizen a fundamental right to live a secure life, but they are being deprived of the security deliberately!
Why should the people suffer due to the leaders’ security?
Today, the importance of a leader is judged by the number of security men surrounding him; hence the race to extract the highest category of security. Over 60 percent of National Security Guards (NSG) commandos are deployed on personal security duties. It is an obnoxious sight to see that the arrogant Police are cordoning roads through which the leaders will pass with a posse of security guards, putting the people to great inconvenience. People are fed up of all this. Some leaders intentionally create adversaries by their irresponsible statements and thereafter seek state protection for personal safety. We have situations in which the leader of one party apprehends a threat from one party and demands Government protection, while the leader of the other party seeks similar security fearing attack by the first party. This is a misfortune of our country!
Follow the example of Denmark!
A few years ago, while on a visit to Denmark a Bharatiya tourist saw the Queen of Denmark doing her weekly shopping of household requirements in a Mall. She was accompanied by a solitary maid. The Queen was picking up required items from the shelves and the maid was pushing the cart. No posse of security guards or the paparazzi of media!
Amazed at it, the Bharatiya tourist quizzed his local guide. The reply was quite an eye-opener - “If a ruler needs protection from his own subjects, he might as well relinquish his chair. Why should citizens pay for the security of a leader who feels insecure amongst his own people? Only devious leaders feel threatened and Denmark can do without them.”
Why commandos for security of leaders?
While they seem unable to protect ordinary people from terrorist attacks, the politicians spend hundreds of crores of tax-payers money to protect themselves. Over Rs. 250 crore is spent on VIP protection - including VIPs like Deve Gowda, Amar Singh, Ram Vilas Paswan, Sajjan Kumar, BL Joshi, RL Bhatia, Sharad Yadav, Rameshwar Thakur, E Ahmad and Pramod Tiwari. Most of these worthies are said to be facing little real risk. It is also questionable whether lakhs of rupees should be spent on the protection of some others, like Sajjan Kumar, who have murder cases against them. The NSG, set up in 1984 for anti-hijack and anti-terror operations, has two wings – the Special Action Group (SAG), comprising of army personnel on deputation, and the Special Rangers Group (SRG), comprising of personnel from the ITBP, CISF, CRPF, BSF and SSB. More than half of SRG has been diverted to VIP security. How far is it correct that the commandos who have been trained to fight at the time of terrorist attacks be assigned the job of protecting the leaders?
Why does the Gandhi family feel insecure in Bharat?
The Special Protection Group (SPG) has been set up exclusively for providing security to the Gandhi family members, the Prime Minister and former Prime Ministers. Interestingly, the SPG budget for 2008-09 is Rs. 180 crore, up from Rs. 117 crore the previous year, while the 2008-09 budget for NSG, which is meant to protect over a billion people from terror, is Rs. 158 crore as against Rs.159 crore for the previous year.
The total expenditure on the security of the Gandhi family and the present and former Prime Ministers is more than that for the protection of the entire population of the country! Is the Gandhi family more important than 120 crore population of the country?
Why Z+ only? Assign Army for leaders’ security!
The VIP security is classified into five levels - Special Protection Group is the highest level, followed by the Z-plus, Z, Y and X categories. Z-plus security is provided by NSG consisting of six ‘black cat commandos’, two head constables, 12 constables, one escort and one pilot vehicle.
Thirty politicians including Mayavati, Jayalalitha, Amar Singh, Ram Vilas Paswan and Narendra Modi are provided this cover. Sixty-eight VIPs get Z category protection, 243 get Y category and 81 X category. Alongwith the SPG and NSG, the state Police are also deployed for the security of VIPs. In Delhi alone, a whopping 14,200 Policemen have been deployed for the security of VIPs. The Delhi High Court has passed a stricture, “Politicians are not national assets that need to be protected.” From this, the politicians should realise the import of the Court’s say!
True protection lies in total uprooting of terrorists!
People have to unnecessarily undergo untold harassment due to the security of leaders. Even the huge expenditure on their security is made out of the tax-payers money. Stop providing security to leaders merely to boost their importance or fancy! Provide security only to those on whom the Damocles’ sword of terrorists is hanging!
Though it is the first step of defence against the terrorists to provide security to the people, it is imperative to attack the root of terrorism and destroy it. To make this possible, leaders with the fire of nationalism burning in their heart should be in power!
(Ref: ‘Dainik Sanatan Prabhat’)
Labels: Amar Singh, BL Joshi, Deve Gowda, E Ahmad and Pramod Tiwari, Ram Vilas Paswan, Rameshwar Thakur, RL Bhatia, Sajjan Kumar, Sharad Yadav, Terrorism, terrorists
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]