Karnataka Congress was hit by cash-for-ticket charge in 2008 polls too

Thiruvananthapuram, Mar 28: A man from Kerala was among the terrorists affiliated to Islamic State (IS) who allegedly attacked a Gurdwara in Kabul earlier this week in which 27 people were killed.

The IS has claimed that one of the suicide bombers was Abu Khalid al-Hindi.

According to sources, investigation agencies on Friday have identified him as 29-year-old Mohammed Sajid Kuthirummal of Padne in Kasargod. He was among the 14 persons, who left from Kerala to join IS in Nangarhar province of Afghanistan.

"IS had released the name Abu Khalid al-Hindi through its media agency soon after the attack. The photograph of him holding a rifle was also published by IS in their propaganda magazine Al Naba. From that, we have identified the person as Mohammed Sajid Kuthirummal. We are investigating the matter and in touch with the investigating agencies in Afghanistan for tracking his trail," sources told ANI.

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) probe had earlier revealed that Mohammed Sajid was recruited by Abdul Rashid Abdulla of Chandera, who was killed in Afghanistan last year.

Sajid worked as a shop keeper in a gulf country and returned to Kerala. Based on a complaint by Sajid's father Mahamood, the FIR was registered at Chendara Police Station, Kasaragod in 2016 regarding Sajid joining IS and leaving for Afghanistan.

He was among the 14 member team that left from Kerala to join IS in Khorasan Province' in Nangarhar.

ANI had earlier reported that two of these members Ayesha alias Sonia Sebastian and Fathima alias Nimisha who were in IS had expressed their interest in returning to Kerala. Out of 14, seven including Sajid is dead.

Bengaluru, Jan 10: Barely 24 hours after the standoff between BJP workers and students of Jyoti Nivas College (JNC) in Bengaluru over CAA became breaking news, it took political hues with the saffron party and the Congress locking horns over the issue.

Taking the battle to the anti-CAA camp on Thursday, the BJP aggressively defended its party workers, who on Wednesday erected a pro-CAA banner on the college compound wall and allegedly forced students to sign on it as a mark of support.

With one of the workers who had locked horns with JNC students by his side, deputy chief minister CN Ashwath Narayan, at his official residence, questioned students’ right to protest party cadre erecting a pro-CAA banner on their college compound wall.

“How can you tell people not to create awareness about a law that has been passed in this country? Who gave students the right to question political workers? If there was anything wrong, let them report to the police,” retorted the minister, who also holds the higher education department portfolio.

On the other hand, the Congress, cashing in on simmering anger over the assault on JNU students in Delhi, used the JNC standoff to project the ruling party as prime culprits in stifling the voice of students. BTM Layout MLA and seasoned politician R Ramalinga Reddy even warned the BJP against “allowing JNC to become another JNU”.

Reddy met with the JNC administration and extended his support against any “threats” to students. It is being alleged that Reddy was the first to “leak” the video of Wednesday’s row to the media. The college falls in his assembly constituency.

Taking a cue from his colleague’s stand, former CM and opposition leader Siddaramaiah also leaned into the matter and sent a strong message “backing” students in the standoff. “BJP goons are threatening students of Jyotinivas College to support CAA. MrYediyurappa, I am strictly warning you to control hooligans from your party. Don't subvert knowledge & institutions for your selfish motives. We won't let Ktaka to be victim of your Hitler rule!” said Siddaramaiah in a tweet.

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.