A Critique of de-compos mentis by Dr. O. P. Sudrania
Modi Whiff Wharton Miff – Wharton Soiled its Rugs?
The blunt knell via Wharton sting: “The rescission now is perceived internationally as an indicator of an institutional position in the vigorous ongoing political debate over upcoming elections in India.” Profs. Aseem Shukla and Saswati Sarkar
How more political or ideological? “We do not endorse any political views and do not support any specific ideology. Our goal as a team is only to stimulate valuable dialogue on India’s growth story,” the statement added.” Student Organisers of WIEF2013
Vilifying Narendra Modi (centre right) in a forum where Montek Singh Ahluwalia and Milind Deora (centre left and representatives of political arch rivals UPA II) were co-invitees, will be seen paying politically to humiliate their most hated opponent and a rival Prime Ministerial aspirant at every available stance. He is also a biggest stumbling block in the uphill road for the ‘Khurshid’s Cameo’ Prince Rahul Gandhi, the cynosure of the dynasty of Nehru-Gandhi (1st) family loyalists; has been crucified in the media dock, is left permanently scarred, bruised and vilified. “Is Modi vilified or vindicated in this imbroglio, I feel time will prove him stronger”?
The Wharton India Economic Forum at Wharton Business School has created flutters over the disgusting invitation scandal using Modi as a petty scapegoat to please the centre-leftist political forces in India. The invitation was rescinded on March 4, 2013; Wharton declared, “As it stands currently, Mr. Modi’s keynote address at Wharton India Economic Forum has been cancelled.”
Modi never asked for in the first place. TOI quipped, “Interestingly, one of WIEF’s speakers in previous years who did not attract the attention of Ghose and his associates was BJP MP Varun Gandhi, who was accused of hate speech and more recently acquitted of the charges.”
“… The model that Narendra Modi has put forward is seriously flawed and is based on some extremely egregious flouting of human rights. That is his economic model” Ghosh said. He further added that contrary to public opinion “Gujarat has some of the worst (no data) human development index report. We need to unpack this rhetoric what development is and we will continue to do that,” he added. Read here the full text of their letter.
“In 2007, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia University. Needless to say, Ahmadinejad is not exactly a popular figure and was even booed at the event, but Columbia President Lee Bollinger staunchly defended inviting the divisive figure, saying the event was “an enormous benefit in terms of advancing public understanding.”
In a candid sarcasm, “An Indian Politician’s Past Proves Too Hard to Shake”, Chandrahas Choudhury has rightly critiqued the travail of Mr Narendra Modi in the aptly worded phrase. It is less with the said Indian politician (Narendra Modi) than the paranoid current Indian biased media, with no ethics and morality are working as paid news under the patronage of patriarchal glitch.
The Modi Glitch:
In 2002, there were 58 Kar sevaks burnt in the Sabarmati Express including 38 children, infants and women by dousing the S6 bogie after stopping it just past the platform by a strong mob of thousands of Muslims preplanned, laced with all the incendiary material. It is also widely learnt that the said incidence was masterminded, funded, manned through the local Islamist groups knowing that the Hindu pilgrims were returning in the concerned compartment. This has a historical background behind it.
Historical Background: Hindus Live an Exiled Life in Their Home –
Godhra is a well known place where Ghanchi Muslim activists have always been volatile and violent as usual per their Pavlovian reaction. “The court recorded the history of communal riots in Godhra – there were incidents in 1965, 1969, 1971, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1992.”
Firstly the Hindu community has been a most peace loving docile masses termed “Hindu banya” in the pejorative hate phraseology of the most dreaded outlawed Islamist Pakistani terrorist Hafiz Saeed, chief of banned organisation Lashkar-e Taiba Vis a Vis Muslims or any other sections of people.
Secondly Hinduism has traditionally believed in tolerance and considers the entire living being as sacrosanct, equivalent to human life. Thus Hinduism has always advanced the philosophy of “Vasudev Kutumbakam” – universal brotherhood. This further translates into their practice of non conversion or proselytisation; predation is out of question. Advertisements are seen for becoming a Muslim or a Christian but never saw any such attempt by any Hindu organisation thus far. This ‘Hindu tolerance’ is being equated sadly with coward ‘Hindu baniya’.
Having said, this rampant religious evangelism and proselytisation is bound to incite Hindu retaliatory reaction, as existential threat increases in the competitive global God market. If this backlash does ever take place, it will be most unfortunate and sad news for the peaceful co-existence of the global fraternity in an already factionally torn society.
Origin of fiasco in Wharton campus:
Few names must be studied threadbare, e.g. 1. Angana Chatterjee and her live-in partner Richard Shapiro, cynosure of radical Muslims in Kashmir where he goes with his contubernal partner frequently for Jewish-Muslim interfaith promotion (?), what a travesty 3. Suzzane Arundhati Roy, 4. Ania Loomba, 5. Toorjo Ghosh, 6.Catherine Bryson, 7. Suvir Kaul 8. A M Rosenthal, etc.
These videos describe who opposed Modi’s invite and caused pressure on Wharton’s WIEF organizers via their ‘furious’ petition.
Why a blogpost relating to Jammu and Kashmir and sympathiser of Pakistan advanced by some Muslim anonymous authors (New Red Indian) have sympathy with Ms Angana and her contubernal partner? Let us examine the following extract: “Stop the termination of Chatterji and Shapiro at CIIS” October 25, 2011 by newredindian
“… the suspension of two core faculty of the Social and Cultural Anthropology (SCA) Department, Chair Richard Shapiro and Professor Angana Chatterji.” Thus far they both remain suspended. It is noteworthy that this post at this anonymous Muslim blog comes soon after their dismissal in July 2011; smacks of some complicity and is not without a vested interest.
This Pakistani sympathy and their (Angana duo) heartfelt deep conviction of Human Rights violation against the Kashmiri Muslims Vis a Via Kashmiri Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and even those Muslims who these Pakistani sponsored Islamist terrorists consider “Kaffirs”; cannot be brushed aside lightly. They were also in the best books of infamous ISI and its notorious spy Ghulam Nabi Fai, who is now behind bar for his illegal activities and tax evasion in USA. He received millions of dollars from ISI to throw lavish parties and bribe the suspected conduits and lawmakers in USA, besides the rogue elements like Angana and her unconventional contacts and partners in this murky corrupt practice. Hence her interest against Narendra Modi fiasco is extremely business related quid pro quo for Islamist cause directly against India and Hindus equivalent to treason against her nation of birth. People like hers usually engage in such attention seeking mean and cheap activities irrespective of its gravity and sensitivity.
Angana Chatterjee’s Playback Singings:
It is noteworthy to peruse this statement and a rebuttal here. “A Rebuttal to Angana Chatterji’s Misinformation Campaign against India; 22/08/2008 20:41:53
LETTER TO OFFICE OF HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, IN RESPONSE TO INDIA BAITER ANGANA CHATTERJI’S LETTER. This letter is an eye opener as back as 2008.
Sandeep writes, “I first heard about Angana Chatterji in connection with the Narendra Modi U.S Visa denial episode. That was some six years ago at which time her name was one among the numerous folks who had ruthlessly worked behind the scenes to make sure that the US didn’t give Modi the visa.”
Sandeep further exposes her: “Angana Chatterji is one of the leading lights of the radical Leftist outfit called Forum of Indian Leftists (FOIL), which lends support to violent and banned organizations that regularly carry out guerilla wars against the Indian state. FOIL has been highly controversial ever since its inception. For a detailed account, see this chapter in NGOs Activists and Foreign Funds, a seminal volume that has found a place in the Indian Parliament’s library.
The Star of FOSA
Far more dangerous than FOIL is Friends of South Asia (FOSA)—an offshoot/offspring/sibling of FOIL—with which Angana has been associated from the beginning. Very briefly, FOSA is a combination of FOIL and the Pakistan-American Association, with very apparent sponsorship from the Pakistani Inter Services Intelligence, per the Pakistani media. Led by Gera, Ra(h)man, Vinay Lal, Mainland Chinese CIIS graduate student(s) working for Chatterji, and several Pakistanis. FOSA with the Pakistan American Association (PAA) are the worthies seen on San Francisco streets holding signs saying: Sometime in April-May 2005, FOSA, which had gotten sponsorship from the Pakistan American Alliance (PAA), took out a public demonstration jointly in San Francisco. One of the “highlights” of that demonstration includes a prominent placard that proclaimed “ALLAH WILL DESTROY THE TERRORIST STATE OF INDIA.” (Original Picture here)
When outrage ensued at this appalling, open call for destruction, FOSA resorted to blatant cover-up by removing all references to PAA from its website. The complete account of FOSA’s chicanery in this connection is available in these documents: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
Indeed, all prominent events that FOSA has held under its banner have a distinct tinge of anti-America, anti-India and pro-Pakistan and/or pro-Islamism written all over. And Angana Chatterji is at the forefront of almost all these events. An illustrative example is the “SELF DETERMINATION IN SOUTH ASIA: South Asia’s Struggle against US-led Imperialism” panel discussion, …featuring Vijay Prashad, Angana Chatterji, Abdul Nayyar, and Snehal Shingavi…”
Showing Solidarity with FeTNA
Angana’s association with sympathizers, advocates, and supporters of violence and terror is as wide as it is far-reaching. Federation of Tamil Sangams in North America (FeTNA) is just another outfit in her long list of terror-friendly associations. FeTNA is a front of the now-decimated Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam (LTTE), an outfit that finds a place in the U.S. State Department list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. Angana’s association with FeTNA is primarily in connection with the California Textbook Controversy where she wrote a letter, under FOSA’s banner, to the California State Education Board expressing solidarity with FeTNA, which opposed the proposed textbook revision on grounds rooted in Tamil chauvinism —the same chauvinism that led to the decades-long LTTE-perpetrated bloody civil strife in Sri Lanka.” More here.
Sandeep continues in his Part 2: “…The fact that she finds America, not Saudi Arabia or Pakistan a very conducive place to pontificate on the liberating virtues of terrorism says a lot: use their money, their infrastructure, their media, and their government to help those who’ve sworn to destroy the US (Israel and India).”
Sandeep exposes her links with ISI, LTTE, FeTNA, Maoists and Naxalists, Left-winger political organisations, which involve against the ‘imperialist interests of India, Israel, USA but she finds no fault in ethnic cleansing of Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, christians, in radicalised Kashmir valley, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia including the fortyfour terrorist training camps in PoK.
Sandeep states further, “And so there we have it: the ISI agent Ghulam Nabi Fai who parrots His Master’s Line and Angana Chatterji also known as “Mary,” his associate/friend/co-activist, who takes the exact same line. But let’s hear it from the horse’s mouth: the FBI charge sheet mentions a certain Mary who “would be testifying in front of a United Nations working group. Mary is a human rights activist; Major General Mumtaz Ahmad Bajwa had requested that Fai introduce him to Mary in July 2009.” Major General Bajwa was the head of ISI’s Security Directorate, which was responsible for nurturing and helping Kashmiri terrorist groups.
With such strong evidence that nail Angana Chatterji’s credentials as a willing stooge of the ISI, it’s unsurprising that she has consistently hushed up and/or whitewashed Pakistan-backed terrorism in Kashmir and has repeatedly taken an anti-India line, a chilling echo of the ISI’s words, and guns and bombs set off by the terrorists it backs. What’s worse is the fact that her claims about India’s alleged human rights abuse in Kashmir are based on gross fabrications.”
The extent of Ghulam Nabi Fai’s lobbying success is evident when Congressman Joseph “Joe” Pitts from Pennsylvania “introduced a resolution in 2004 calling for peace between Pakistan and India in the disputed territory of Kashmir – just days after he had received a $2,000 campaign contribution from Zaheer Ahmad, one of two men charged with distributing Pakistani money to U.S. politicians.”
Pitts has donated that money to charity since Fai was discovered to be an ISI agent but the question remains: didn’t he do due diligence before accepting said $2000? … The same applies in equal measure to Indiana Congressman Dan Burton, who took $10,000 from Fai. Dan Burton already carries the tag of being too pro-Pakistan on the exact same Kashmir issue.
“…But that’s not all there is to Franks. He’s associated with the Dalit Freedom Network, a group that claims to work for the Dalits of India but is engaged in rather shady activities. It’s actually a group run by White people and everything about it starting from its address is fake. A few years ago, when a subpoena was served on them and the person serving the subpoena went to the address, he found that it was actually a Church! One wonders why an organization that claims to be a human-rights NGO needs to indulge in this kind of falsification. (It also exposes the heinous church complicity in castes in India.)
In May 2007, Trent Franks introduced a resolution on untouchability as an unacceptable practice, a move aimed at furthering the cause of the Dalits. Except that this selfsame resolution was pasted verbatim on a website that talks about the prowess of Pakistan’s defence establishment! The reach of Trent Franks is as truly amazing as it is mysterious.”
“The picture that emerges of Trent Franks is gravely disturbing: a Republican Congressman who is associated with a shady “human-rights” outfit, who supports a Communist professor (and her live-in-partner), who is herself the stooge of ISI, which has nurtured Al Qaeda, the group responsible for 9/11. Even more disturbing is the fact that Trent Franks sits on the Committee on Armed Services, and Committee on the Judiciary in the House of Representatives. It’s not too farfetched to conclude that the American people … were unaware that the Jihad-mongers in ISI were skillfully manipulating … Franks.”
One commentator in this post furnished: “Here is a link to the testimony, where you can access full-text documents submitted by witnesses, as well as video of the hearings, which included a Q&A session with U.S. congressmen in which ties to GN Fai were discussed and Angana featured eminently.”
Following excerpts from Angana Chatterjee’s blog narrating a long babble of her indulgent biographical details:
Chatterji is convener, Co-founder and Co-convener of the International People’s Tribunal on Human Rights and Justice in Indian-administered Kashmir, which she instituted with Parvez Imroz in 2008. The first such civil society-based effort in Kashmir, the (self styled) People’s Tribunal has documented witness/survivor testimonies, investigating legal-political states of exception, disappearances, gendered and sexualized violences, torture, extrajudicial killings, and unknown and mass graves. Parvez Imroz is also convener of International People’s Tribunal on Human Rights and Justice in Indian-administered Kashmir (IPTK) alongside Angana Chatterji, Gautam Navlakha, Zaheer-Ud-Din, Mihir Desai, Khurram Parvez – Liaison IPTK and Programme Coordinator, Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society.
Queries may be directed to:
Chatterji has received support, including scholarships and research awards, for her work from various institutions, including the Planning Commission of India, Society for Promotion of Wastelands Development, Ford Foundation, Wallace Global Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, SwedForest, Marra Foundation, and the University of California, Berkley.
She received grants from American and Indian official organisations, only to back stab them!
Also peruse Facebook Link on Facebook developed by a group of patriotic youngsters with their own Website first developed it on 3 March 2013 following the Wharton Narendra Modi Fiasco. The Facebook link has a good collection of material relating to this episode. It sites a number of videos trying to expose this loathingly disgusting episode.
“While she finds US intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan to be a violation of those countries’ rights and calls George Bush ‘a man who himself should be charged with crimes against humanity,’[iv] she still wants US intervention in India’s affairs, for example through the US Commission on International Religious Freedom. Chatterji provided testimony before the United States Congressional Task Force on International Religious Freedom on violence in Orissa,[v] chaired by Congressmen Trent Franks and Joseph R. Pitts, both with strong right-wing evangelical connections.[vi]
Malhotra cites several names like: Martha Nussbaum, Lise McKean, Romilla Thapar, Meera Nanda and Vijay Prasad besides off course the ubiquitarian Angana Chatterjee. He also states: “A closer look at these scholars will illustrate their funding, their connections and their agendas.”
“For almost a decade Chatterji, … had worked tirelessly to build up a body of work that took a critical record of India’s human rights violations in Kashmir. Today, most of her work has been stigmatized by her association with Fai.
Alongwith Angana, others involved were: Gautam Navalakha, journalist Ved Bhasin, Sonia-MM Sigh’s choice – Kashmir interlocutor Dileep Padgaonkar, justice Rajinder Sachar, former chief justice of Delhi High Court (who was commissioned by UPA II in 2005 to prepare a report on the latest social, economic and educational condition of the Muslim community of India, headed by the former Chief Justice of Delhi High Court Rajinder Sachar, including other six members), Kuldip Nayar.
Angana acclaimed pretentiously, “It was embarrassingly bad judgment on hindsight,” … adding that she found “the news of Dr. Fai’s alleged actions on behalf of the ISI to be highly disturbing and disillusioning.” Navalakha had a similar reaction.
Intelligence shared by the US with India indicates that Fai also sought money from the ISI using the names of these prominent Indians. “At one point Fai sought $50,000 from them using the names of Indian intellectuals like Chatterji and Padgaonkar,” a senior Indian official familiar with the case said.
Uploaded on Nov 20, 2009
The first of two panel discussions spnsored by the CarrCenter’s Kashmir Initiative. This event took place November 11, 2009 at HarvardUniversity’s Kennedy School of Government.
Panelists included: Dr. Sugata Bose, Dr. Ayesha Jalal, Alexander Evans, John Halpern and Dr. Angana Chatterji; Suvir Kaul, Parvez Imroz, Dr. Ahmad Faruqui, Robert Nickelsberg.
Suzzane Arundhanti Roy:
Angana is also close to another known Indian lady Suzzane Arundhanti Roy, also a bird of the same flock but mostly flies in Delhi. They have both co-authored a book on Kashmir and both of them are heavy weight darlings of the Kashmiri separatists and Fai Inc. aka Pakistan/ISI.
Suzzane is more vibrant in her than Arundhati Roy, ought to be taken note of.
She is a spokesperson of the anti-globalization/alter-globalization movement and a vehement critic of neo-imperialism and of the global policies of the United States. She also criticises India‘s nuclear weapons policies and the approach to industrialisation and rapid development as currently being practised in India, including the Narmada Dam project and the power company Enron‘s activities in India.
Support for Kashmiri separatism by both Roy and Chatterjee.
In an interview with the Times of India published in August 2008, Arundhati Roy expressed her support for the independence of Kashmir from India after massive demonstrations in favour of independence took place—some 500,000 separatists rallied in Srinagar in the Kashmir part of Jammu and Kashmir state of India for independence on 18 August 2008, following Amarnath land transfer controversy. According to her, the rallies were a sign that Kashmiris desire secession from India, and not union with India. She was criticised by Indian National Congress (INC) and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for her remarks.
Roy has raised questions about the investigation into the 2001 Indian Parliament attack and the trial of the accused. She has called for the death sentence of Mohammad Afzal to be stayed while a parliamentary enquiry into these questions are conducted and denounced press coverage of the trial. The Bharatiya Janata Party spokesperson Prakash Javadekar criticised Roy for calling convicted terrorist Mohammad Afzal a ‘prisoner-of-war’ and called Arundhati a ‘prisoner of her own dogma (and conscience too if not the loyalty)’.
Roy’s criticisms about Mumbai terror attack are no less impressive. In her estimation, Afzal Guru and Ajmal Kasab are war heroes. “In an opinion piece for The Guardian (13 December 2008), Roy argued that the November 2008 Mumbai attacks cannot be seen in isolation, but must be understood in the context of wider issues in the region’s history and society such as widespread poverty, the Partition of India …, the atrocities committed during the 2002 Gujarat violence, and the ongoing conflict in Kashmir. … Roy warns against war with Pakistan, arguing that it is hard to “pin down the provenance of a terrorist strike and isolate it within the borders of a single nation state”, …”. Her remarks were strongly criticised by Salman Rushdie and others, who condemned her for linking the Mumbai attacks with Kashmir and economic injustice against Muslims in India; Rushdie specifically criticised Roy for attacking the iconic status of the Taj Mahal Palace & Tower. Indian writer Tavleen Singh called Roy’s comments “the latest of her series of hysterical diatribes against India and all things Indian.”
In November 2010, Roy (along with Syed Ali Shah Geelani and five others) was brought up on charges of sedition by the Delhi Police. With such diverse perversive personality defect, the role complicity against Modi is perhaps too little. Look here for further perusal.
Professor C I Isaac dismisses her, “But Arundhati’s are masqueraded in bogus arguments of secularism and democracy.”
The right to free speech is not simply the right to talk — it is the right to have an audience. You cannot have true dialogue and advance public knowledge without a rigorous discussion involving both sides of the story.”
Allowing Modi to speak at the Forum would not have legitimized him, but the result has legitimized, to an extent, suppressing the speech of those we disagree with (by disinvite).
Blowback from Wharton Scandal
Pai said he was upset at the way India had been treated by a section of the international community at the forum.
WIEF has been hit by a string of keynote speakers dropping out, after its controversial decision to first invite Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi to the forum, and rescind the invitation.
…He is the latest in the list of panelists and sponsors who have opted out of the forum, after Wharton’s controversial decision to rescind its invitation to Modi.
Gautam Adani from the Adani Group, and Atul Nishar from Hexaware Technologies have dropped off as key sponsors of the WIEF.
Columnist Sadanand Dhume, who is a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, an American think-tank, withdrew from the conference.
Dr Preetha Reddy, managing director of Apollo Hospitals, and Dr Ashwin Naik, CEO and co-founder of Vaatsalya Healthcare too, are no longer among the listed speakers at the forum.
Your Voice | Modi should have stayed: by Aseem Shukla is an associate professor at the Perelman School of Medicine. Saswati Sarkar a Department of Electrical and Systems Engineering professor (Excerpt)
As members of the Penn faculty, we have shared our views … Our concern is not whether Modi should be feted or condemned, but that capriciously silencing an invited speaker without (cogent) explanation wrought the following:
a) The rescission now is perceived internationally as an indicator of an institutional position in the vigorous ongoing political debate over upcoming elections in India. Extending an entirely avoidable discourtesy to Modi and the largest opposition party alliance effectively galvanized his legions of supporters. The citizens and press in India are indignant that the conference would seem to endorse the current ruling coalition. The move also fosters the perception that the University is corroborating a particular ideology, rather than considering the perspectives and aspirations of the greater Penn Indian-American community.
b) We must neither be supporters nor detractors of Modi to condemn extremist rhetoric and categorically false accusations to vitiate dialogue here at Penn. After a special investigative team appointed by India’s fiercely independent Supreme Court held that Modi did not launch a “pogrom” in Gujarat to target its Muslim minority, the United Kingdom and European Union lifted a ban on his diplomatic credentials — the United States has yet to follow. Gujarat under Modi enjoys the most economic freedom in India and, … it showed the most rapid decline in malnutrition among all Indian states between 2007 and 2011. Most certainly, neither Modi nor any mainstream politician in pluralistic India is either an anti-Muslim or an anti-Semite. Modi has resoundingly won democratic mandates of several Muslim-dominated constituencies in Gujarat, and currently, Gujarat enjoys the strongest relationship with Israel in its history.
The Wharton India Economic Forum was right to invite Modi to join its prestigious forum. His is an influential voice in the Indian polity and relevant to any dialogue on the convergence of business, policy and governance. The public disinvitation of a thrice-elected leader of a state of 60 million people invited unprecedented international censure, loss of nearly all of the forum’s corporate sponsorship and several distinguished speakers.
However, the saddest consequence of the rescission is capitulation on the value that constitutes the core of a vibrant academic ecosystem — that of encouragement of a plurality of discourse.
More reactions against the Wharton Scandal: Important reads
Arvind Kumar can be reached at email@example.com.
(2) There were serious protests against the Wharton decision, “Members of the protest called the march a memorial to free speech”
(3) Wharton Pulls Away Narendra Modi’s Invite, Creates Controversy by Archana Chaudhary