And why not Modi?

The Organiser denounces Kerala’s Left government for letting S.A.R. Geelani, set free by the Supreme Court in the Parliament attack case, address a meeting on ‘Encounter Killings and State Terrorism’. The Organiser’s grouse: the Kerala government had denied VHP leader Pravin Togadia permission to hold meetings in the state, and the Marxist cadre had protested Narendra Modi’s visit to the state. “While Modi’s effigies were burnt all over Kerala by the comrades, Geelani was given a red carpet welcome and commando protection. In the case of terrorists, CPM is very magnanimous,” says the Organiser.

Temple entry

Another article says the Kerala government is “conspiring for entry of Christians and Muslims in temples.” The provocation is the recent debate set off in Kerala after the Guruvayur temple did a purification ceremony after Union minister Vayalar Ravi’s son entered the premises. The temple authorities claimed Ravi’s son, born to a Christian mother, is Christian too. “Communist MLAs, who as atheists don’t take oath of office in the name of god, appoint presidents to the temple boards, who also take pride in their anti-god labels. But for looting poor Hindus’ money deposited in temple coffers, they are together.”

Deserving of cruelty

Organiser joins issue with the “media diatribe” against Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi over fake encounters. The magazine carries an article originally written in Tamil by Cho Ramaswamy. The argument: “When the policemen eliminate, in this manner, those who indulge in cruel offences, should it be termed ‘murder’? Or, should it be construed as ‘termination by police of a persistent cruelty to society’? Under law, that too is murder. But in the eyes of society, it is a good deed. What is the way out for this incongruity?

Policemen must be brought to book when they go about eliminating innocents or political adversaries of rulers or those whom the police do not like. But, when the police kill — in an encounter — those who are a threat to the nation or those who pose serious problems to people or those who have committed serious crimes and those who bully prospective witnesses against themselves, it is left to an adept administration to leave no scope for a probe into whether it is a genuine encounter or a fake encounter. It may sound cruel to say so. But an administration that fails to be cruel to those who deserve to be treated cruelly, will be deemed as flawed.”

Presidential questions

Columnist Shyam Khosla welcomes the public scrutiny of UPA presidential candidate Pratibha Patil. He welcomes the trend and refutes allegations of mudslinging. “There is absolutely nothing wrong in the Opposition asking the lady who wants to be the Head of the State to take the people into confidence about allegations levelled against her. ... In the United States, Senate Committee questions even the would-be judges on their records and personal lives before they are made members of the judiciary. Presidential candidates in America too are subjected to stringent scrutiny about their public and private lives. It is time Indians too show more interest in examining track record of persons seeking to occupy high offices. “

Compiled by Varghese K. George