Govt will examine RSS role in stoking Cauvery violence: Home Minister

September 17, 2016

Bengaluru, Sep 17: The state government will examine if the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangha (RSS) had any role in stoking violence over the Cauvery issue in Bengaluru on September 12.

RSS

Speaking to reporters after presiding over the KPCC office-bearers meeting on Friday, Home Minister G Parameshwara said that during the meeting, a KPCC member wondered if the RSS had any role in instigating violence in the city.

He said the police had explored all angles during investigations and had no such suspicions on the RSS' role. However, his department would again look into the matter, he added. In his reaction, RSS Kshetreeya Sanghachalak V Nagaraj said that Parameshwara had the “malicious habit” of making immature charges against the RSS.

Meanwhile, BJP?state general?secretary and MLA?C?T?Ravi in a press note dubbed Parameshwara's statement as “irresponsible” and “politically motivated.” He made a counter-charge that violence in Bengaluru on Monday was stage-managed by Parameshwara with an intention to unseat Chief Minister Siddaramaiah.

Ravi charged that Parameshwara suspects Siddaramaiah's hand in his defeat from the Koratagere constituency in Tumakuru district in the 2013 Assembly elections and was keen on seeking revenge.

On Cauvery

Parameshwara said Karnataka would be “doomed” if the Supreme Court orders release of the Cauvery water to Tamil?Nadu beyond September 20. “If such a verdict is given, then I guess we will have no choice other than asking people of Bengaluru to go and settle down in Tamil Nadu,” he observed. He said Karnataka would impress upon the apex court on evolving a distress mechanism.

Comments

SHAJI
 - 
Sunday, 18 Sep 2016

I am sure that sangh parivar is involved in the rioting in Bangalore just to bring black dot to Sidhu Govt. They are the killers of Gandhiji who sacrificed his life for the freedom of India. What else we can expect from these unhuman, illogical, pro devil, terrorists organisations and their supporters. Its shame that Karnataka govt is soft for these terrorists.

Thoushi
 - 
Saturday, 17 Sep 2016

See the below comment of cheddi Mahesh.... govt has to investigate him, he may know all the information regarding RSS role in this violence....

AK
 - 
Saturday, 17 Sep 2016

Many times cheddis were caught doing their shit acts alll over india.. Y not .. They may be behind this ill act too..

ABD
 - 
Saturday, 17 Sep 2016

What else do you expect in a country when 60% of terrorists are in police force?

Mahesh
 - 
Saturday, 17 Sep 2016

this congress govt dont have any work, simply blaming rss instead of maintaining peace in the state.

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 23,2020

Mangaluru, Jan 23: Members of the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI) on Thursday held a protest against the Karnataka government, accusing it of shielding Aditya Rao, the main accused of planting an improvised explosive device (IED) at the Mangaluru airport on January 20.

Meanwhile, the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Court has sent the accused Aditya Rao to 10 days police custody.

Earlier on Wednesday, the Bengaluru Police said that the procedure is being followed to hand-over to the Mangaluru Police a suspect who surrendered before it two days after planting an improvised explosive device (IED) at the Mangaluru International Airport.

The IED was later defused in an open field by the personnel of the bomb disposal squad.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Ram Puniyani
January 22,2020

Shivaji is a great icon in Maharashtra. Different sections of society have given him very high status, though for diverse reasons. Folklores about him abound in the state. His statues, popular songs on him are very prevalent. These folk songs (Powadas) praise his multifarious actions. So it was no surprise that when Jayabhagwan Goyal, released his book, ‘Aaj ka Shivaji: Narendra Modi’, at religious-cultural meet organized by Delhi BJP, there was a strong resentment in Maharashtra. Various leaders from Maharashtra were furious. The Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut challenged the Shivaji’s descendent, Sambhaji Raje who is in BJP and is member of Rajya Sabha, to resign on the issue. Sambhaji Raje in turn stated that "We respect Narendra Modi, who was elected as the prime minister of the country for the second time. But neither (Narendra) Modi nor anybody else in the world can be compared with Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj,"

Not to be left behind Jitendra Awhad of NCP felt Modi-BJP are insulting the pride of Maharashtra. It is not the first time that controversy is erupting around the Maharashtra warrior of medieval period. Earlier we had seen Sambhaji Brigrade demanding the ban on James Laine book, Shivaji: ‘A Hindu King in an Islamic Kingdom’, for its objectionable content. Bhandarkar Institute in Pune, which had helped James Laine in his research, was also vandalized. At another level there was a talk that Babasaheb Purandare, a Brahmin, who has written some popular material on Shivaji will be made as the Chairman of the committee for statue of Shivaji. Maratha Mahasangh and Shiv Dharm officials objected to a Brahmin heading the committee for a statue for the Maratha warrior. The caste angel in Shivaji’s case is coming to the fore from quite some time.

While there is no dearth of controversies around Shivaji, it is also true that each political tendency has created Shivaji’s image from their political point of view. Who was the real Shivaji, is the question. One can see two clear streams of projection in this matter. On one hand there is an attempt to present Shivaji as the anti Muslim King, a king who was respecting Cows and Brahmins (Go Brahman pratipalak). This view was brought forward from the times of Lokmanya Tilak and picked up by Hindu nationalists, who have been looking for icons in history to suit their political agenda. Nathram Godse, while criticizing Gandhi says that Gandhi’s nationalism was dwarf in front of the one of Shivaji or Rana Pratap.

In tune with this the Hindu nationalists are promoting both these as icons of Hindu nationalism and giving anti-Muslim slant to the whole discourse. This discourse also hides in this the Brahmanical agenda of Hindu nationalism as Cows and Brahmins are presented as the central object of veneration by Shivaji. This image of Shivaji fits well into the current agenda of Hindu nationalists, being spearheaded by RSS Combine.

It is because of this that for seeking votes in Mumbai Narendra Modi on the eve of 2014 elections stated that Shivaji attacked Surat to plunder the treasury of Aurangzeb. This also presents Shivaji-Aurangzeb, Shivaji-Afzal Khan interactions as battle between Hindus and Muslims. The truth is that Surat was plundered for its wealth as it was a rich port city and Bal Samant’s book on the topic gives in depth description of the same. It is noteworthy that Shivaji began his real career of conquest in 1656 when he conquered Javli from the Maratha Chief Chandra Rao More. He took over the treasures of this kingdom. That it was not a Hindu Muslim battle becomes clear when we know that in confrontation with Aurangzeb it was Mirza Raja Jaisingh who was negotiating and engaging with Shivaji on behalf of Aurangzeb. And Shivaji had Muslim officers like Kazi Haider as confidential secretary and many Muslim Generals in his army.

Darya Sarang was chief of armor division, Daulat Khan was in-charge of his naval division; Ibrahim Khan was another general of significance in his army.  This mixed up administration just shows that the kings were not having Hindu or Muslim administration depending on their religion. In the confrontation between Shivaji and Afzal Khan, Rustam-e-Jaman was Shivaji’s side and Afzal Khan had Krisnaji Bhaskar Kulkarni on his side.

As far as Shivaji’s popularity is concerned it was due to his being a King with welfare of his subjects in his mind. He lightened the burden of taxation on the average peasants, and reduced the domination of landlords over the serfs. This picture of Shivaji is well documents in the booklets by Com. Govind Pansare (Who was Shivaji) and Jayant Gadkari (Shivaji: Ek Lok Kalyankari Raja- Shivaji: King doing People’s Welfare). He did not belong to the warrior caste so Brahmins had refused to coronate him, for which purpose Gaga Bhatt a Brahmin from Kashi was brought in with heavy fees. Teesta Setalvad’s hand book on History for teachers underlined this fact.

Today while BJP-Brahmanical forces want to present Shivaji as worshipper of Brahmins and cows, the non upper caste have seen through the game. As such it was Jotirao Phule who brought forward the caste angel of Shivaji as he wrote Powada (Poem) in his honor and today dalit Bahujan are not toeing Hindu Nationalist projection on the issue.

The likes of Jayabhagwan Goyal of BJP as such are trying to give two messages through such attempts. One hand they want to paint Shivaji in anti Muslim and Brahmanical color, they also want to give the subtle message of similarity of this presentation of Shivaji with what Modi is doing. Non BJP forces have seen this game and want to present the other picture of Shivaji, which was highlighted by the likes of Jotirao Phule and which today many of those standing for rights of dalit-Bahujan are trying to articulate. The criticism of the said, book, since withdrawn is on these twin aspects. One about the picture of Shivaji who was concerned about welfare of the farmers, and two his respect for people of all religions.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 5,2020

Bengaluru, Jan 5: Lambasting Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa over the proposal to rename Ramanagara as Nava Bengaluru, former chief minister H D Kumaraswamy on Sunday said that such a move will be an insult to Lord Ram, after whom the district is named.

In a series of tweets, Kumaraswamy accused that renaming the district was a pretext to sell its fertile irrigated land to capitalists. Yediyurappa also wants to settle a score with me by renaming it, he alleged

"If Yediyurappa wishes to develop Ramanagara, he should release the funds allocated in the budget. If you want to develop it further, you will find support from me and my people. But, don't set fire to the districts' culture and identity by changing its name," he tweeted.

Comments

Ahmed Ali Kulai
 - 
Monday, 6 Jan 2020

Dear CM

 

please dont follow UP CM-

Being a CM of Karnataka, please concentrate on the welfare of Kannadigas.

 

 

 

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.