Monday, April 14, 2008

Increasing rapes and molestation of minors

New Delhi: In a fifth sexual assault on minor girls in Delhi in barely two weeks, all by neighbours, a rickshaw puller allegedly raped a two-and-a-half-year-old girl, the police said on Monday.

Lalan Prasad, 23, took the victim to a secluded place in Raghubir Nagar area late on Sunday and allegedly raped her.

The police said Prasad, who is from Bihar, then dropped the girl home but the family caught him after seeing their daughter bleeding profusely.


The family informed the police, but Prasad managed to escape before the officials could reach the spot.

The girl was admitted to Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital, where her condition was stated to be critical on Monday afternoon.

Deputy Commissioner of Police (West Delhi) Sharad Agarwal said Prasad was a distant relative of the victim. "We have sent a team to Bihar to arrest him," he said.

The incident comes in a series of crimes targeting minor girls.

A 12-year-old girl, who is mentally challenged and hearing and speech impaired, was raped in her east Delhi home in the early hours Sunday. She was going to the toilet when her neighbour Sandip Rawat attacked and raped her, police said.

Saturday, Attar Singh, a Railway employee allegedly molested an eight-year-old girl in his northeast Delhi neighbourhood.

A seven-year-old girl was allegedly raped by her neighbour in Najafgrah area of southwest Delhi last Monday.

On April 3, three men allegedly raped a 12-year-old girl in a stationary car in west Delhi. The victim's neighbour was among the accused.

Source: Indo-Asian News Service

Defensive Nature of Jihad

Taken from A Critical Exposition of the Popular 'Jihád' by Moulavi Gerágh Ali , Chapter 3

Sidenote: 17. Verses from the Koran in support of the defensive character of the wars.

This brief sketch of the defensive wars of Mohammad with the Koreish will fully show, that those who assert that Mohammad was aggressive or revengeful in his wars, or that he made war to force his religion upon the people, are altogether in the wrong.

I will now quote some verses of the Koran, showing that all the wars of Mohammad with the Koreish were defensive wars.

39. "Verily, God will ward off[1] mischief from believers: lo, God loveth not the false, the unbeliever."

40. "A sanction is given to those who have been fought,[2] because they have suffered outrages, and verily, God is well able to succour them"—

41. "Those who have been driven forth from their homes wrongfully, only because they say, 'Our Lord is the God.' And if God had not repelled some men by others, cloisters and churches and oratories and mosques wherein the name of God is ever commemorated, would surely have been destroyed! And him who helpeth God will God surely help: Verily, God is Strong, Mighty."

42. "They who, if We established them in this land, will observe prayer and pay the alms of obligation and enjoin what is recognized as right—and forbid what is unlawful. And the final issue of all things is unto God."—Sura, xxii.

186. "And fight for the cause of God against those who fight against you: but commit not the injustice of attacking them first: verily, God loveth not the unjust."

187. "And kill them wherever ye find them, and eject them from whatever place they have ejected you, for (fitnah)[3] persecution is worse than slaughter: yet attack them not at the sacred mosque, until they attack you therein; but if they attack you, then slay them—Such is the recompense of the infidels!"—

188. "But if they desist,[4] then verily God is Gracious, Merciful!"

189. "And do battle against them until there be no more (fitnah) persecution, and the worship be that of God: but if they desist, then let there be no hostility, save against wrong-doers."

214. "They will ask thee concerning war in the Sacred Month. Say: The act of fighting therein is a grave crime; but the act of turning others aside from the path of God, and unbelief in Him, and to prevent access to the Sacred Mosque, and to drive out his people, is worse in the sight of God; and persecution[5] (fitnah[6]) is worse than bloodshed. But they will not cease to war against you until they turn you from your religion, if they be able: but whoever of you shall turn from his religion, and die an infidel, their works shall be fruitless in this world and in the next: and they shall be consigned to the fire; therein to abide for aye."

215. "But they who believe, and who fly their country, and do their utmost in the cause of God, may hope for God's mercy: and God is Gracious, Merciful."

245. "And fight in the cause of God; and know that God is He who Heareth, Knoweth."

247. "Hast thou not considered the assembly of the children of Israel after the death of Moses, when they said to a prophet of theirs,—'Raise up for us a king; we will do battle for the cause of God?' He said, 'May it not be that if to fight were ordained you, ye would not fight?' They said, 'And why should we not fight in the cause of God, since we are driven forth from our dwellings and our children?' But when fighting was commanded them they turned back, save a few of them: But God knew the offenders!"

252. "And by the will of God they routed them; and (Dâood) David slew Goliath; and God gave him the kingship and wisdom, and taught him according to his will: and were it not for the restraint of one by the means of the other imposed on men by God, verily the earth had assuredly gone to ruin, but God is bounteous to his creatures."—Sura, ii.

76. "Let those then fight in the cause of God who barter this present life for that which is to come; for whoever fighteth on God's path, whether he be slain or conquer, We will in the end give him a great reward."

77. "But what hath come to you that ye fight not on the path of God, and for the weak among men, women and children, who say, 'O our Lord! bring us forth from this City whose inhabitants are oppressors; give us a champion from thy presence; and give us from thy presence a defender?'"

78. "They who believe, fight on the path of God; and they who believe not, fight on the path of Thâgoot: Fight then against the friends of Satan—Verily, the craft of Satan shall be powerless!"

86. "Fight then on the path of God: lay not burdens on any but thyself; and stir up the faithful. The prowess of the infidels, God will haply restrain; for God is the stronger in prowess, and the stronger to punish."

91. "They desire that ye should be unbelievers as they are unbelievers, and that ye should be alike. Take therefore none of them for friends, until they have fled their homes for the cause of God. If they turn back, then seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; but take none of them as friends or helpers."

92. "Except those who seek asylum among your allies, and those who come over to you—prevented by their own hearts by making war on you, or from making war on their own people. Had God pleased, He would certainly have given them power against you, and they would certainly have made war upon you! But, if they depart from you, and make not war against you and offer you peace, then God alloweth you no occasion against them."

93. "Ye will find others who seek to gain your confidence as well as that of their own people: So oft as they return to sedition, they shall be overthrown in it: But if they leave you not, nor propose terms of peace to you, nor withhold their hands, then seize them, and slay them wherever ye find them. Over these have We given you undoubted power."—Sura, iv.

19. "O Meccans! If ye desired a decision, now hath the decision come to you. It will be better for you if ye give over the struggle (or attacking upon Medina or the Moslem). If ye return to it we will return; and your forces, though they may be many, shall by no means avail you aught, because God is with the faithful."

39. "Say to the infidels: If they desist (from persecuting, obstructing, and attacking the Moslems), what is now past shall be forgiven them; but if they return to it (commit again the hostilities), they have already before them the doom of the ancients!"

40. "Fight then against them till civil strife be at an end, and the religion be all of it God's; and if they desist, verily God beholdeth what they do."

41. "But if they turn their back, know ye that God is your protector: Excellent protector! and excellent helper!"

73. "... And they who have believed, but have not fled their homes, shall have no rights of kindred with you at all, until they too fly their country. Yet if they seek aid from you on account of the faith, your part it is to give them aid, except against a people between whom and yourselves there may be a treaty. And God beholdeth your actions."

74. "And the infidels have the like relationships one with another. Unless ye do the same (i.e., aid the oppressed and repel the oppressor), there will be discord in the land and great corruption."—Sura, viii.

(When the Meccans broke the Hodeibia treaty mentioned in the above paragraph, the Koreish and Bani Bakr attacked Bani Khozaá, who were in alliance with Mohammad. It became incumbent on him to assist Bani Bakr and to chastize the aggressors. The following verses were published on that occasion, but happily, before the expiration of the fixed period, the Koreish submitted and Mecca was taken without bloodshed, and these verses were not acted upon:—)

1. "An immunity from God and His Apostle to those with whom ye are in league (and they have violated the same—compare verses 4, 8 and 10) among the polytheist Meccans."

2. "Go ye therefore at large in the land four months (i.e., four sacred months from Shaw-wal. The treaty was violated by the Koreish in Ramzan, a month immediately previous to the sacred months. It is announced here that four months' time is given to the aggressors, who violated the treaty of Hodeibia, to make terms. After the time is over (verse 5) the Moslems will commence hostilities to defend their allies, the Bani Khozaá), but know that ye shall not find God feeble, and that those who believe not, God will put to shame."

3. "And a proclamation on the part of God and His Apostle to the people on the day of the greater pilgrimage, that God is free from any engagement with those who worship other gods with God, as is his Apostle. If then, ye turn to God, it will be better for you; but if ye turn back, then know that ye shall not find God feeble: and to those who believe not, announce thou a grievous punishment."

4. "But this concerneth not those Polytheists with whom ye are in league, and who have afterwards in no way failed you, and not yet aided any one against you. Observe, therefore, your engagement with them through the whole time of their treaty. Verily, God loveth those who fear Him."

5. "And when the sacred months are passed[7] kill those who join other gods with God[8] wherever ye find them; and seize them, and besiege them, and lay wait for them with every kind of ambush; but if they repent and observe prayer and pay the obligatory alms, then let them go their way.[9] Verily, God is Gracious, Merciful."

6. "If any one of those who join gods with God ask an asylum of thee, grant him an asylum, in order that he hear the Word of God; then let him reach his place of safety. This, for that they are people devoid of knowledge."

7. "How can they who add gods to God be in league with God and His Apostle, save those with whom ye made a league at the sacred temple? So long as they are true to you,[10] be ye true to them: verily, God loveth those who fear Him."

8. "How can they? since if they prevail against you, they will not regard in their dealing with you, either ties of blood or good faith: With their mouths they content you, but their hearts are averse, and most of them are perverse doers."

9. "They sell the signs of God for a mean price, and turn others aside from his way; of a truth, evil is it that they do!"

10. "They respect not with a believer either ties of blood or good faith; and these are the transgressors!"

11. "Yet if they turn to God and observe prayer, and pay the impost, then are they your brethren in religion: and We make clear the signs for men of knowledge."[11]

12. "But if, after alliance made, they violate their covenant and revile your religion, then do battle with the ringleaders of infidelity—verily there is no faith in them! Haply they will desist."

13. "Will ye not do battle with a people (the Meccans) who have broken their covenant and aimed to expel your Apostle and attacked you first? Will ye dread them? God truly is more worthy of your fear if ye are believers!"

14. "Make war on them: By your hands will God chastize them and put them to shame, and give victory over them, and heal the bosom of a people who believe."

36. "... and attack those who join gods with God one and all, as they attack you one and all."—Sura, ix.

What the above-quoted verses show.

I need not repeat here what these verses and the facts related above show, that the wars of Mohammad with the Koreish were merely defensive, and the Koreish were the aggressors, and that Mohammad was quite justified in taking up arms against them.

"In the state of nature every man has a right to defend," writes Mr. Edward Gibbon,[1] "by force of arms, his person and his possessions; to repel, or even to repeat, the violence of his enemies, and to extend his hostilities to a reasonable measure of satisfaction and retaliation. In the free society of the Arabs, the duties of subject and citizen imposed a feeble restraint; and Mahommed, in the exercise of a peaceful and benevolent mission, had been despoiled and banished by the injustice of his countrymen." It has been fully shown in the foregoing paragraphs that the Moslems in Mecca enjoyed neither safety nor security. Religious freedom was denied to them, though they were harmless and peaceful members of the community. Besides this they were expelled from their homes, leaving their families and their property in the hands of their persecutors, and were prevented from returning to Mecca, and were refused access to the Sacred Mosque; and, above all, they were attacked by the Meccans in force at Medina.

Justification of the Moslems in taking up arms against their aggressors.
The persecution of the early Moslems by the Koreish was on religious grounds. They would not allow the believers to renounce the religion of their forefathers and profess Islam. Their intolerance was so strong and harsh that they tortured some of the professors of the new faith to renounce the same and to rejoin their former idolatry. "Taking away the lives, the fortune, the liberty, any of the rights of our brethren, merely for serving their Maker in such manner as they are persuaded they ought, when by so doing they hurt not human society, or any member of it, materially, is evidently inconsistent with all justice and humanity: for it is punishing those who have not injured us, and who, if they mistake, deserve only pity from us. The early Moslems had had every international right to resent persecution and intolerance of the Meccans and to establish themselves by force of arms, to enjoy their religious liberty and to practise their religion freely.

The first aggression after the Hegira was not on the part of Mohammad (saw).
Some of the European biographers of Mohammad say, "that the first aggressions after the Hegira were solely on the part of Mahomet and his followers. It was not until several of their caravans had been waylaid and plundered, and blood had thus been shed, that the people of Mecca were forced in self-defence to resort to arms.

This is not correct. The aggressors, in the first instance, were the Koreish, who, as already shown, followed up their persecution of the Moslems by an attack upon the city in which the Prophet and his followers had taken refuge. Even taking it for granted that the Moslems were the first aggressors after the Hegira, was not the Hegira, or expulsion itself (leaving aside the previous persecutions and oppressions at Mecca), a sufficient reason for the commencement of hostilities by the Moslems, who were anxious to secure their moral and religious freedom, and to protect themselves and their relatives from further aggressions?

Sir William Muir admits, that "hostilities, indeed, were justified by the 'expulsion' of the believers from Mecca. "It may be said," says Major Vans Kennedy, "that, in these wars, Mohammad was the aggressor by his having, soon after his flight, attempted to intercept the caravans of Mecca. But the first aggression was, undoubtedly, the conspiracy of the Koreish to assassinate Mohammad, and when to save his life he fled from Mecca, himself and his followers were thus deprived of their property, and obliged to depend for their subsistence on the hospitality of the men of Medina, it could not be reasonably expected that they would allow the caravans of their enemies to pass unmolested."

The alleged instances examined:
There is no proof that Mohammad, after the Hegira, commenced hostilities against the Koreish by intercepting their caravans. The alleged instances of the caravans being waylaid by the Moslems at Medina are not corroborated by authentic and trustworthy traditions. They have also internal evidences of their improbability. The Medina people had pledged themselves only to defend the Prophet from attack, and not to join him in any aggressive steps against the Koreish. Therefore, it seems impossible that they should have allowed Mohammad to take any aggressive steps against the Koreish which would have involved them in great trouble.

Hamza and Obeida expedition:
The alleged expeditions against the Koreish caravans by Hamza and the other by Obeida in pursuit of caravans which escaped, are in themselves improbable. Mohammad (saw) would not send fifty or sixty persons to waylay a caravan guarded by two or three hundred armed men.

The Abwa, Bowat, & Osheira expeditions:
The alleged expeditions of Abwa, Bowat, and Osheira, said to have been led by Mohammad (saw) himself to intercept the Mecca caravans, but in vain, are altogether without foundation. He might have gone, if he had gone at all, to Abwa, and Osheira to negotiate friendly terms with Bani Dhumra and Bani Mudlij, as his biographers say, he did.

The affair at Nakhla:
The affair of the Nakhla marauding party, as related in the traditions, is full of discrepancies, and is altogether inconsistent and untrustworthy. The very verse (Sura, ii, verse 214) which the biographers say was revealed on the occasion, and which I have quoted above (para. 16), contains a reference to the Meccans' fighting against the Moslems, which runs counter to the assumption of the European biographers, who make it an aggressive attack on the part of Mohammad (saw). It is probable that Mohammad (saw) might have sent some six or eight scouts to bring in news of the movements and condition of the Koreish, whose attitude towards Mohammad (saw) had become more hostile since his flight to Medina. As the Koreish had a regular and uninterrupted route to Syria for traffic, it was only reasonable on the part of Mohammad (saw) to take precautions, and he was always on his guard. The biographers "Ibn Is-hak", "Ibn Hisham" (p. 424), Tabri (Vol. II, p. 422), Ibnal Athir in "Kamil" (Vol. II, p. 87), Halabi in Insanul Oyoon (Vol. III, p. 318), say, that Mohammad (saw) had given written instructions to Abdoollah-bin-Jahsh, which was to the effect "bring me intelligence of their affairs." They also say that Mohammad (saw) was displeased with Abdoollah's affair at Nakhla, and said, "I never commanded thee to fight in the Sacred Month." The biographers also relate that Mohammad even paid blood-money for the slain.

At Badr Mohammad (saw) had come only in his defence:

Some of the European biographers of Mohammad allege, that the battle of Badr was brought by Mohammad himself. They appear to hesitate to justify Mohammad(saw) in defending himself against the superior numbers of the Koreish, who had advanced to attack him as far as Badr, three stages from Medina. It is alleged that Mohammad (saw) intended to attack the caravans returning from Syria, conducted by Abu Sofian, his arch-enemy, therefore he set out upon his march with eighty refugees and two hundred and twenty-five people of Medina, and halted at Safra to waylay the caravan. Abu Sofian, warned of Mohammad's (saw) intention, sent some one to Mecca for succour. The Koreish, with nine hundred and fifty strong, marched forth to rescue the caravan. In the meantime, the caravan had passed unmolested, but the Koreish held a council whether to return or go to war. On the one hand, the biographers say, it was argued that the object for which they had set out having been secured, the army should at once retrace its steps. Others demanded that the army should advance. Two tribes returned to Mecca, the rest marched onwards; but it is not fair to allege that Mohammad (saw) had set forth to attack the caravan. Had he any such intention, the people of Medina, who had pledged themselves only to defend him against personal attack, would not have accompanied him. The presence of a large number of the Ansárs, the people of Medina, more than double that of the Mohajirins, the refugees, is a strong proof that they had come out only in their defence.

Mohammad (saw), on receiving intelligence of the advancing force of the Koreish, set out from Medina to check the advance of the Meccan force, and encountered it at Badr, three days' journey from Medina. The Meccan army had advanced nine days' journey from Mecca towards Medina. The forces met at Badr on the 17th of Ramzan (13th January 623), the Meccans had left Mecca on the 8th of Ramzan (4th January), and Mohammad (saw) started only on the 12th of Ramzan (8th January), about four days after the Meccan army had actually set out to attack him. Supposing Abu Sofian had some reason for apprehending an attack from Medina, and sent for succour from Mecca, but the object of the Meccan army of the Koreish for which they had set out having been secured, the caravan having passed unmolested, they ought at once to have retraced their steps. The fact that Mohammad (saw) left Medina four days after the Koreish had left Mecca with a large army advancing towards Medina, is strongly in his favour.

The first aggressions after the Hegira, if from Mohammad, might fairly be looked upon as retaliation.
Even taking it for granted that the first aggressions after the Hegira were solely on the part of the Moslems, and that several of the caravans of the Koreish had been waylaid and plundered, and blood had been shed, it would be unfair to condemn Mohammad. Such attacks, had they been made, might fairly be looked upon as a retaliation for the ill-treatment of the Moslems before the flight from Mecca. "Public war is a state of armed hostility between sovereign nations or governments. It is a law and requisite of civilized existence that men live in political continuous societies, forming organized units called states or nations, whose constituents bear, enjoy and suffer, advance and retrograde together, in peace and in war. The citizen or native of hostile country is thus an enemy, as one of the constituents of the hostile state or nation, and as such is subjected to the hardships of war."[1] The almost universal rule of most remote times was, and continues to be with barbarous nations, that the private individual of a hostile country is destined to suffer every privation of liberty and protection, and every description of family ties. But Mohammad protected the inoffensive citizen or private individual of the hostile country. He even protected those who had actually come out of Mecca to fight at Badr, but were reluctant to do so. Mohammad had desired quarters to be given to several persons in the Koreish army at Badr. Abul Bakhtari, Zamaa, Hárith Ibn Amir, Abbás and other Bani Háshim were amongst those named.

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Ulema association Condems terrorism

New Delhi, Feb 26: The Anti-terrorism conference organized by Darul Uloom Deoband, India’s oldest and most respected seminary is the first conference where Muslim ulama have condemn terrorism in very clear terms. In the conference the maulanas also defended the Muslim youth who have been wrongly implicated in terrorism cases like never before. It was an occasion that also brought all the Muslim organizations and groups on a common platform.

Here we give the declaration issued by Darul Uloom Deoband's Rabta Madaris Islamiah (Islamic Madrasas Association) at the end of anti-terrorism conference on 25th February 2008.

Islam is the religion of mercy for all humanity. It is the fountainhead of eternal peace, tranquility, security. Islam has given so much importance to human beings that it regards the killing of a single person the of killing the entire humanity, without differentiation based on creed and caste. Its teaching of peace encompasses all humanity. Islam has taught its followers to treat all mankind with equality, mercy, tolerance, justice. Islam sternly condemns all kinds of oppression, violence and terrorism. It has regarded oppression, mischief, rioting and murdering among severest sins and crimes.

This All India Anti-Terrorism Conference attended by the representatives of all Muslim schools of thought organised by Rabta Madaris Islamiah Arabia (Islamic Madrasas Association), Darul Uloom Deoband condemns all kinds of violence and terrorism in the strongest possible terms. The Conference expresses its deep concern and agony on the present global and national alarming conditions in which most of the nations are adopting such an attitude against their citizens especially Muslims to appease the tyrant and colonial master of the West, which cannot be justified in any way. It is a matter of greater concern that the internal and external policies of our country are getting heavily influenced by these forces. Their aggression, barbarism and state-sponsored terrorism not only in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan but also in Bosnia and various South American countries have surpassed all the records known to human history. Contrary to it, our great nation has always been known for impartiality and its moral and spiritual values. Now the situation has worsened so far that every Indian Muslim especially those associated with madrasas, who are innocent with good record of characters, are always gripped by the fear that they might be trapped by the administrative machinery anytime. And, today countless number of innocent Muslims are spending their lives behind the bars and are forced to bear many intolerable tortures. And, those spreading terror, attacking police stations, killing the police in broad daylight and showing illegal arms are roaming about freely with no effective and preventive steps being taken by the government to check their acts of terrorism and violence. This partial attitude has put a big question mark on the secular character of the government posing great threats to the country. Therefore, this All India Anti-Terrorism Conference strongly condemns this attitude and expresses its deep concern on this partiality of government officials and declares its continuous joint struggles for domination of law, justice and secular system.

This conference strongly demands the Indian Government to curb those maligning the madrasas and Muslims. The administrative machinery should be demanded to conduct impartial investigations in activities disturbing public peace in the country and to punish only those found guilty. It also demands to free the accused if he is found innocent and punish severely those officials who accused him of crimes of terrorism. No person of any particular community should be suspected without solid reasons. In short, the government agencies must fulfill their duty justly without any prejudice and bias so that real peace and security may prevail in the country.

Source: khabrein.info

Wednesday, January 9, 2008

Churches torched on Christimas

Hindu extremists ransacked and burned eight village churches in eastern India, marring Christmas celebrations in a corner of the country with a history of violence against Christians, officials said Wednesday. One person was killed in the violence.

Authorities deployed 450 police and imposed a curfew to quell the violence in the remote district of Orissa state where the churches — most nothing more than mud and thatch houses — were attacked, said Bahugrahi Mahapatra, a government official.

Six village churches were torched on Christmas Day, and two more were attacked Wednesday along with 10 houses belonging to Christians, Mahapatra said.

India is overwhelmingly Hindu but officially secular, a fact India's leaders often point out. They note that religious minorities, such as Christians, who account for 2.5 percent of the country's 1.1. billion people, and Muslims, who make up 14 percent, often coexist peacefully. Some have risen to the highest levels of government and business.

But throughout India's history, both communities have faced repeated attacks from hard-line Hindus, with violence against Christians often directed at foreign missionaries and Hindu coverts to the religion.

Orissa has one of the worst histories of anti-Christian violence. In one of the most brutal incidents, an Australian missionary and his two sons, aged 8 and 10, where burned to death in their car following a Bible study class in 1999.

Orissa is also the only Indian state that has a law requiring people to obtain police permission before they change their religion. The law was intended to counter missionary work.

There were conflicting reports of what sparked the Christmas violence in the rural district of Kandhamal, with each side blaming the other.

Officials, meanwhile, were hesitant to wade into he-said, she-said — Mahapatra called the violence a "sensitive matter" and refused to discuss how it began.

The Hindu hard-liners said Christians had attempted to attack one of their leaders, 80-year-old Laxmanananda Saraswati of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad group, who leads an anti-conversion movement.

"When they were prevented from attacking him by his followers the Christians hit someone with an ax and one Hindu died," Giriraj Kishore told reporters in New Delhi.

But the New Delhi-based Catholic Bishops Conference of India said the fighting Monday began when Hindu extremists objected to a show marking Christmas Eve, believing it was designed to encourage Hindus at the bottom of the religion's rigid caste hierarchy to convert to Christianity. Low-caste Hindus are often a target of missionaries.

An argument over the Christmas show got out of hand and some of the Hindus opened fire on the Christians, wounding three of them, said John Dayal, a spokesman for the Bishops Conference.

The Hindus then went on a rampage Tuesday, Christmas Day, chasing people out of six churches and setting the mud-and-thatch buildings ablaze, he said.

Later, dozens of people from each community clashed, Dayal said. One person was killed, he added, but could not say if the dead man was a Hindu or Christian. Another 25 people were wounded, the Press Trust of India news agency said.

Much of the ill-will in the area, about 840 miles southeast of the national capital, New Delhi, stems from anti-missionary sentiment. Some hard-line Hindus are pushing for all missionaries to be expelled while Christians have challenged the conversion law in court, saying it violates India's constitution.
Source:knx1070.com

Pushkar temple priest molests an american lady

An American tourist on Wednesday alleged that she was molested by a priest at a temple in Pushkar in Rajasthan's Ajmer district.

In her FIR lodged with the Pushkar police station, the 28-year old woman said the priest indulged in eve-teasing and molestation while she was performing puja at Pap-mochani temple on the banks of Pushkar lake on Tuesday, the Circle Officer (CO) Sangram Singh said.

A case of alleged eve-teasing and molestation was lodged against the priest whose name she did not know, the CO said.

The tourist hailing from Oregon in the US had come for pilgrimage in the holy city, he said, adding an investigation was initiated to trace the priest.

On reports of another foreigner woman being allegedly beaten up by locals in Pushkar, Singh said police has not been approached in this regard.
Source:timesofindia
Google Groups
Subscribe to IRAT
Email:
Visit this group

Hindu Facism