Rahul Gandhi should apologise as he insulted Hindus by calling Lord Ram mythological: VHP
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
44 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Leaders hail work of visionary scientist M.S. Swaminathan
The immunisation programme led by the country's first Health Minister, Rajkumari Amrit Kaur, and the Green Revolution initiated by M.S. Swaminathan were the reasons for the decrease in the death rate in India, former West Bengal Governor Gopalkrishna Gandhi said in New Delhi on Wednesday (August 6, 2025). Speaking at the launch of The Man Who Fed India, a biography of Dr. Swaminathan by the Singapore-based author Priyambada Jayakumar, Mr. Gandhi said three English words known by all farmers in the country was 'Swaminathan Farmer Commission'. Mr. Gandhi said Dr. Swaminathan had been part of the group of scientists around the world who stood for humanity and nuclear disarmament. 'Swaminathan's works for agriculture has given India's farmers a life,' Mr. Gandhi said. In a panel discussion that followed the book release, Shashi Tharoor, MP, said Dr. Swaminathan worked at a time when the memories of Bengal famine were haunting the country. 'International contacts' Former Planning Board Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia said Dr. Swaminathan revolutionised the country's agriculture through his international contacts. DMK leader Kanimozhi said Dr. Swaminathan's works for empowering women and ensuring ecologically friendly agriculture practices were not discussed the way it deserved.
The Hindu
3 hours ago
- The Hindu
Judicial overreach: on the top court and democratic dissent
The Supreme Court of India's recent handling of defamation charges against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi marks a troubling shift from established norms of free speech and jurisprudence on constitutional protections for political discourse. This became clear when the Bench led by Justice Dipankar Datta, while staying the proceedings on Mr. Gandhi's remarks on the Galwan clash in 2020, made problematic oral observations. Among others, Justice Datta said that had Mr. Gandhi been a 'true Indian', he would not have said what he did. The Court's primary function is to adjudicate on questions of law and constitutional principle rather than to prescribe standards of national loyalty. In a democracy, surely a 'true Indian' is one who fearlessly pursues the truth and holds the government accountable — not one who accepts official narratives without question. Mr. Gandhi's commentary, in which he questioned the government's border policies and drew attention to credible reports of Chinese intrusions, also fell well within the legitimate ambit of Opposition politics. This critiquing does not, and must not be seen to, undermine the nation. Such criticism is protected by the principles of free speech and is indispensable for a healthy public discourse. The Court's remarks, by implying otherwise, risk chilling legitimate dissent and setting an inimical precedent for future Opposition conduct. Equally, Mr. Gandhi's statements regarding Chinese occupation of Indian territory and confrontations are not without backing in public and governmental sources. Open-source satellite imagery, parliamentary discussions, and journalistic reports have documented the aftermath of the Galwan Valley clash, including new Chinese activities along the Line of Actual Control (LAC). A parliamentary committee report has acknowledged the loss of access to certain patrol points in eastern Ladakh. Military officials and independent analysts have corroborated, at various times, the ongoing disputes and loss of patrolling rights over substantial stretches of territory, including parts of Ladakh's Galwan and Depsang areas. Local residents are also unable to access grazing lands. The loss of about 2,000 square kilometres, cited by Mr. Gandhi, is also based on estimates by independent defence experts studying China's LAC transgressions. The general thrust of Mr. Gandhi's remarks — i.e., China has altered the status quo to India's disadvantage and that the government's public statements have not always aligned with ground realities — is supported by public evidence. Thus, the Court must resist the temptation to offer moral or patriotic judgments and instead direct its considerable energies to the rigorous and impartial adjudication of legal questions. Only by adhering to this principle can the Court reinforce its legitimacy and protect the tenets of free and open public debate.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
The Spectator wins defamation claim brought by Muslim activist who criticised Hindus
TOI correspondent from London : The Spectator magazine and Douglas Murray have won a defamation case brought by a Muslim online influencer who stirred up trouble during the 2022 Leicester riots. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Mohammed Hijab, a YouTuber with 1.3 million followers, whose real name is Mohammed Hegab, claimed that an article in the Spectator about the riots, titled 'Leicester and the downside with diversity' and published in Sept 2022, defamed him. The author, Murray, wrote Hijab was a 'a street agitator' who 'cropped up in Leicester to whip up his followers'. He wrote: 'Among other things he (Hijab) told them that Hindus are ridiculous people, not least because of their belief in reincarnation.' Hijab sued for defamation claiming he lost thousands of pounds in fees as a result of the article. But in a judgment handed down on Tuesday in the high court, Justice Johnson found that what Murray wrote about Hijab is 'substantially true, and it is not materially inaccurate'. Hijab's claim was that his comments were not about Hindus but 'the Hindutva' in Leicester which, Hijab, claimed 'promotes conspiracy theories, including that Muslim men conspire to convert Hindu women to Islam'. Johnson wrote: 'When asked to name anyone in the world who subscribed to the Hindutva ideology but who was not Hindu [Hijab] was able to give only one name: Benjamin Netanyahu.' He also said Hijab 'lied on significant issues, with the consequence that his evidence, overall, is worthless'. Johnson pointed out a video of Hijab's speech in Leicester shows him, 'far more vividly than is conveyed by the words of the article, directly whipping up a large group of masked men and ridiculing Hinduism'.
