In native Bharatiya Dharma, deceit manifested for doctrinal goals is a sin. Among others, MK Gandhi wrote about the importance of Satya in the discourse. In the asuric & sickular narratives, ‘means’… justfy the ends.
If you understand the above, you can make sense of the distortions carried out by Saba Naqvi and Outlook Magazine. Saba Naqvi ended up twisting the telephone interview of B Raman, Retd Additional Secretary, RAW. Worse Begum Saba Naqvi attributed thoughts to B Raman which he never made..Malicious that. Not surprisingly, B Raman was appalled and issued a public rebuttal in his blog-post, tweeted about it.
In her sickular zeal, Saba in her Outlook piece claimed B Raman as saying “Today the threat from Indian Muslim terror groups and Hindus who have taken to terror is equal in scale.” As someone who understands the lexicon of violence and terror, B Raman in his blog-post, called out this canard and distortion. He wrote
“In the article titled as above in the latest issue of “Outlook”, Saba Naqvi has quoted me as telling her as follows: ““Today the threat from Indian Muslim terror groups and Hindus who have taken to terror is equal in scale.””
“I did not repeat not say this when she rang me up on January 14. I said that terrorism from the Muslim or Hindu communities should be of EQUAL CONCERN to the investigating agencies.”
“I notice that Saba Naqvi had given some of the points mentioned by me during her telephonic conversation with me as her own views and attributed to me by name a view which had not been expressed by me.”
By outlining facts and not motivated opinions on terror attacks perpetrate by islamic groups in India, Columnist Sadanand Dhume had called the sickular position on Hindu violence laughable and dangerous for India’s well-being.
In the interests of media ethics, Rahejas, owners of Outlook Magazine, would do well to fire those responsible for this malicious misrepresentation.
Shri B Raman deserves kudos for calling out sickular distortion.
Post Script: There also appear other typically sickular subversions in Saba’s piece. She like P B Mehta etc., use ‘We’ to pass off her opinions as the views of Indians and slyly accuses Hindu people of bias and prejudice when there is a factual basis for distrust, rooted in islamic doctrine and manifested in events like partition. Saba also seems to have plagiarised the title of her piece from the recent ZIM blogpost.