N.Ram of 'The Hindu', has threatened to sue Hindu Voice
I signed and sent the protest letter emailed by Laura Kelly Kelly on Sep.19, to The Hindu. Mr. N. Ram, Editor-in-Chief, The Hindu, has threatened to sue me. My reply to him is also given below.
P. Deivamuthu
Editor, Hindu Voice.
19 September 2003
Letter to the editor The Hindu Chennai ,India
Dear Mr. Ram
You spoke about "Truth Telling" a few days ago. When you cared to give wide publicity to BMAC and Irfan Habib, which was pointed by
an alert reader,which you also published what prevented you from publishing the article of Dr.Nagaswamy on Ayodhya?
ARTICLE BELOW
Muslims and christians are using your Newspaper for spreading misinformation disinformation "Historic distortions" ( malini
parthsarthy and Gail vedt combine) has been spearheading against the 'Hindu
Interests'. Now both are out for obvious reasons,you have taken over their jobs!
YOU HAVE DONE SOME COSMETIC CHANGES AND APPEAR TO BE HINDU FRINDLY JUST BECAUSE 90% PERCENT OF YOUR 9 LAKHS READERS ARE HINDUS.
90 percent of your readers Vasudevans, Subramaniams and Visalakshis are too innocent to understand your leftist
strategems, manuevers and expertise in Manufacturing propaganda! They also do not know that you are a follower of Noam
Chomsky !
Poor readers they do not know that you sponsored a J&K seperatists conference in Chennai AND FUNDED THEIR CONFERENCE! [SEE BHARATSURAKSHA.COM
]
Poor readers SOUTH INDIAN BRAHMIN READERS who wax eloquent ABOUT THE NUMBER OF YEARS THAY WERE SUBSCRIBING TO YOUR PAPER DO NOT
KINOW THAT SINCE 1991 EVER SINCE KASTURI WENT WENT INTO COMMUNIST HANDS !
They do not know that your paper was behind the Dalististan movement led by Gail Omvedt the rabid anti- Hindu sociologist who
was till few months ago the Prima Donna of 'The Hindu' THE HINDUS HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW WHETHER you ARE with the Hindus or
against them?
If you are against them please do not use the name " The Hindu". You are making money out that name which belongs to Hindus and
Hindus alone and not to the enemies of Hindus.
The Hindus if they are alert will realise WHAT A 'Trojan Horse' that 'The Hindu' has become! The Hindu has become everything
synonymous with anti-hindu BAITING.
If not why not publish the article of Dr.N.Nagaswamy who is an acknowleged expert than BMAC's Irfan Habib WHO HAS NO KNOWLEDGE on
Hindu Temples?
P. Deivamuthu
Editor, Hindu Voice
(A monthly in English & Hindi, espousing the cause of Hindutva)
4, Alakjyoth, Aarey Road
Goregaon East, Mumbai 400063.
Tel: 28764418, 28764460, 28742812
From: <nram@vsnl.com>
To: <hinduvoice@vsnl.net>
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 1:29 PM
Subject: Re: PROTEST
Dear Mr Deivamuthu
I find your letter highly offensive and defamatory. If you don't withdraw
it and tender an unqualified apology, we will consider launching legal
proceedings against you.
N. Ram
Editor-in-Chief, The Hindu
Dear Mr. Ram,
It is you who have to "tender an unqualified apology" to the people of this
country for promoting anti-Hinduism and anti-nationalism, and making your
newspaper into a "viewspaper". By using the title "The Hindu", you are
taking the gullible Hindus for a ride. If you want to propagate an ideology
other than Hinduism (Nationalism), it is time you change your title
accordingly, for example if you want to promote communism, the right title
should be "The Communist", and so on. Hindu Voice espouses the cause of
Hindutva (Nationalism), and will expose anti-nationals and anti-Hindus.
Yours,
In the Service of Bharat Mata
P. Deivamuthu
Editor, Hindu Voice.
Article of Nagaswamy Which The Hindu Refused to Print
The Ayodhya Report
Dr. R. Nagaswamy
Former Director of Archaeology, Tamilnadu
Under the orders of the Allahabad High Court the ASI has concluded an
excavation at the disputed site of Ayodhya to ascertain whether there
was any temple structure in the Babri Masjit area. The report has
since been opened and the contents revealed (The Hindu, Aug.25,
2003). According to the report it is held that a massive structure
of 10th cent of stone and brick lie buried beneath the site in
addition to a carved sculpture and motives. A large number of pillar
bases, were found in the excavation conducted under the supervision
of the Special Officer appointed by the court. The ASI in its first
part of the report has expressed its opinion and the second carries
technical data like drawings, sketches, etc.
Even as the excavation was under way, the contesting parties were
giving contradictory views and reports. Predictably the pro-Mosque
party has instantaneously dubbed the present ASI report as vague and
self-contradictory. The High Court has given six weeks time for both
the parties to give their opinion. As evident both the parties were
reportedly approaching the subject from a preconceived conclusion
but as the Ayodhya issue is of national importance it may be
legitimate for non-committed scholars also to study the report in
detail together with stratigraphic evidence and photographs of the
sculptures and pillar bases.
No one need to doubt the report of the highly competent department
like ASI but it would help public opinion from a neutral stand to
understand the intricacies of the result. The ASI needs to
facilitate this study by publishing immediately, the reports with
drawings, photographs etc for public assessment, with the approval f
the Court. Assuming that the ASI opinion mentioned in the report is
correct, a historic judgment in an earlier case regarding the legal
right of a ruined temple, delivered by the London High court
deserves attention.
"As long as even a single slab belonging to the ancient ruined temple
is found in the site, the temple continues to exist in the eye of law
and has its right to claim its possession" was the historic judgment
delivered by the London High Court with the reference to an ancient
Hindu temple that was ruined and remained with out worship for long.
The Appeal Court in London, presided over by three senior judges to
which the case was taken upheld this judgment, but the case was
taken to the Privy Council and the apex court also upheld the
judgment. Thus three Foreign courts that command greatest respect in
the world of judiciary held that the presence of even one slab in
the site empowers the ancient temple to be treated as an existing
entity in the eye of law, irrespective of whether the temple was in
ruins or was not under worship. This decision of the
London high
Court was delivered hardly fifteen years ago when the then Congress
Government headed by late Rajiv Gandhi was Prime Minister of India,
who enthusiastically supported and got the case filed in the London
high Court in the now famous London Nataraja case. The present
writer appeared in the case as an Expert witness in that case on
behalf of Government of India.
One of the Pivotal arguments in the case advanced by
the Indian
Government was "once a temple, it
remains always a temple". The
history of the case is as follows. A group of Bronze Idols including
a Nataraja, was found in a land behind a ruined Chola temple at
Pattur, in Tanjore District. The idols were found by a labourer who
sold the Nataraja to an antique dealer and the image was smuggled
out of India and was caught in London by the Scotland Yard Police.
The Government of India filed a case in the London High Court
claiming the Nataraja as a property of the ruined temple.
Among the various legal points raised in the case, a few are
relevant. What constitutes the Hindu temple? Is it the structure, or
the space around it or the enshrined image? When the temple has been
ruined and worship ceased, whether it could claim ownership? The
court agreed that not only the building and the image but also the
consecrated space around the religious building constitutes the
temple. The temple ritual treatises mention various causes of ruin
such as vegetation on the buildings, fire, floods, earthquakes and
the like besides destructions by enemy during invasion. Having
examined the ritual and historical position, the court came to the
decision "so long as even one stone slab belonging
to the ancient
temple is found in the site, the temple continues to exist in the
eye of law. Any ruined temple could be brought back to worship at
any point of time by purificatory rites".
The ASI, which is aware of this judgement, may be expected to
appraise the Allahabad High Court while submitting the opinion and
further clarifications The opinion of other Archaeologists who study
the report from an objective angle may also be assistance in this
case. It would also help to dispel the view that the ASI repot
is "vague and contradictory" as claimed by the other side. What ever
be the case one thing seems to be certain that the vexed question of
this case seems to be nearing an end.