News is coming from India about how the administration is preventing hijab-wearing young Muslim women from receiving an education. That these women have gone on record stating that the hijab is more important to them than education doesn’t raise many eyebrows, because we are supposed to focus on how the Hindu nationalist government is suppressing these knowledge-enthusiasts from their access to education. But we need to take a deep dive into this matter, as it is more than what meets the eye.
One must understand the basics of how things work in India. In India, to maintain social parity and secure students from social inequality, there is the concept of the uniform in schools and a dress code in higher educational institutions. On January 1, a group of Muslim students of the state-run PU College in Karnataka’s Udupi arrived at the institution sporting the hijab. They were stopped by the principal from entering the classroom, as the attire failed to ensure uniformity in the classroom. This snowballed into a massive protest, with political parties of the opposition supporting these girls and their right to wear religious garb.
In response, the Hindu students came in wearing saffron scarfs. But they were deemed “terrorists” by some media outlets because in secular India, wearing the hijab is a right, while carrying a scarf of a particular color translates to fascism and hooliganism.
The issue is now being considered by the State High Court, where the opposition-backed lawyer representing the Muslim women was seen referring to Islamic religious restrictions that forbid women from exposing their neck and hands once she starts menstruating. (Did someone say hijab is a choice and not a restriction?) An average Indian girl starts menstruating at the age of 10 and 15 years. Is it not perplexing that an argument this absurd was presented at the court of secular democracy? Is India inching towards its total Islamization? One wonders after witnessing this travesty at the court.
While the case was still being considered, on Tuesday, February 8, some Muslims in the area resorted to stone-pelting, injuring around 40 students and several policemen. Police had to throw tear gas and carry out a baton charge, and eventually imposed section 144, which involves restricting “a certain number of people or people in general from certain acts in the interest of law and order or general well-being of people.” Though police have not confirmed which side engaged in this violence, videos going viral on the Internet show skull-cap wearing men participating in the mayhem. We have not independently verified these videos. Two Muslim men, identified as Abdul Majeed and Rajab, were caught brandishing lethal weapons at the protest site. Both have multiple criminal cases pending against them.
The protest of Muslim women demanding their right to wear a hijab has now spread to other parts of the country, including the national capital region. This is reminiscent of the Shaheen Bagh protests that culminated in violence, riots and bloodshed in Delhi. Cartoons and memes applauding the bravado of these women demanding their right to wear the hijab in an educational institution have become widespread across the Internet. Signs have gone up in the middle of streets, reading, “Hijab first, books next.” Every political party eyeing the large bloc of Muslim votes in the state elections to be held this year and next year are jumping on the “support hijab” bandwagon.
Representatives of the Communist Party, which, with support of Muslim groups, banned the hijab in the educational institutions of the only state they rule, have given immense support to the Muslim women demanding their right to cover up from Karnataka government ruled by the nationalist party. Some Muslim groups have offered cash prizes as bravery awards to students protesting for the hijab. The feminist and social activist Malala, who once described the burqa as a “shuttlecock with only a grille to see through,” has voiced her support for the burqa-clad Muslim women entering Indian institutions.
As the tension escalates and reaches other parts of the country and Muslims get branded as a suppressed minority, we need to turn the clock back to 1947. In 1947, India became a free country, but not before suffering a bloody partition to accommodate the demand for a separate Islamic country by Islamists and their leaders. After creating Pakistan as an Islamic country, ambitious political leaders of India decided to uphold India as a religiously neutral country, assuring the Muslims of safety and equality if they wished to be citizens of this secular democracy. The Muslim who desired an Islamic heaven had moved to Pakistan, but those who stayed back were expected to dwell in India as equal citizens.
But for many Muslims, equality is just eyewash; privilege is preferred. Hence the entitled minority got halal food, state-run Islamic schools, state-sponsored Hajj, Islamic personnel law, prayer rooms in government establishments, time out for prayers while at work, liberty to gather in roads, halting traffic to offer prayers – you name it, they got it. Restaurants, including Western food chains, operating in the Hindu-majority country are serving halal food because Muslims won’t touch non-halal food. Where is the much-touted equality?
Muslim students receiving a mainstream education, however, were wearing regular uniforms. Now, after 75 years of independence, they wake up to their right to dress differently. They haven’t needed these hijabs since 1947 – why now? To impose their religious identity?
How logical is wearing the burqa or hijab in an examination hall, anyway? Can one carry cheating material under the wraps of fabric? You can’t check them, because of “modesty.”
Their advocates say that hijab is prescribed in their Islamic religious texts. The religious texts also suggests killing kafirs (Surah at-Taubah, chapter 9 verse 5 of the Qur’an says, “Kill the Mushriqs where ever you find them”). Are we waiting for Muslims to demand impunity after killing non-believers because that’s a religious right?
India is in a bowl of thick hot soup.
Nitin Nimkar says
Extremely weil written article. However, I wish to provide a nugget of information. In 1947 the population of Muslims in India was @ 4.75 Cr (I think 47.50 Millions). In the vote for partition 95 % of the people voted for Islamic Pakistan. All those who voted for Pakistan were spread all over India. But after the partition only out of 4:75 Cr. only 75 Lakhs (7.5 million) went to Pakistan. Out of those 75 lakhs 50 Lakh were from Punjab that was given to Pakistan. From the remaining parts of India only 25 Lakhs went to Pakistan & all 95% who voted for Pakistan remained in India.
The next generations of those Muslim are now demanding special treatment after first dividing the country on religious basis.
Many politicians like Dr. Ambedkar who was Chairman of Constitution Committee wanted make complete population exchange with Pakistan. But Gandhi/Nehru & their secular congress opposed it & allowed all same Muslims who voted for Pakistan remain in India.
Now the next generation of non-Muslims particularly Hindus are paying the price of it.
Infidel says
Thank you for this account! This cancer known as secularism is what has scarred India perhaps beyond repair. Although I have hopes: if Himanta Biswa-Sarma can pull Assam out of that mess of islamization, as he has done, there may be hope for other states like Bengal and Kashmir
Violet C says
If they want to wear a hijab, go to a Muslim majority country, there are plenty of them, and they can wear it all they like.
Infidel says
+10
Infidel says
As I pointed out in a previous thread, the reason this has come up now is to target the elections in 5 states, particularly Uttar Pradesh, where muslim women freed by the triple talaq laws (outlawing the instant divorces) look like they could conceivably vote for the BJP, which would never do. So they decided to plan this farce in Karnataka, which is a BJP ruled state, and let it spread to other states in India
It’s good that Hindus at the street level are fighting back, and threatening to wear other religious clothing. I saw one video yesterday of a woman in burqha who arrived at the college on her bike, got off and headed for the school. She was in a burqha, but walking barefoot, which no school or college going student does, but on Twitter, she was celebrated as the face of courage in India. Never mind that she had no face to provide that ‘courage’.
The state court has told them that they would decide, and ordered students not to wear any religious clothing until the decision came down. However, other secular parties, like the Congress, are trying to get it to India’s Supreme Court, which rejected the attempt
Hopefully, the elections in UP will provide a watershed to Yogi and put paid to all the secular attempts to increase islamization attempts
gravenimage says
Thanks for that background, Infidel.
gravenimage says
The hijab controversy: Is India still paying for 1947?
……………
This dates back further than 1947 and the succession of Pakistan–back to the Islamic invasion of India by Muslim conquerers.
Islam is never going to stop–not this kind of violence and lawfare, nor Jihad terror and attacks from Pakistan and Bangladesh. The whole focus is on Islamization.
OLD GUY says
The Muslim/Islamic followers don’t want to go to an islamic country they want to convert India to another islamic country. Islam’s number one goal is WORLD DOMINATION. The infiltration of Islam into western countries is an invasion of an enemy bu migration.
Ramaswamy says
Just see the links:
https://cisindus.org/2020/04/18/learning-from-mahatma-gandhis-mistakes-2/
https://www.quora.com/The-quote-if-the-Muslims-want-to-kill-us-we-must-face-death-bravely-has-been-attributed-to-MK-Gandhi-Can-someone-confirm-its-authenticity
Most Hindus (and non Muslims) are not even aware of the above and many more ugly things that Gandhi said.
He exhorted the Hindus to not harbour any hatred against murderous and fanatical Muslims who had for centuries committed terrible atrocities against Hindus (and other non Muslims) like rape/murder/ arson/destruction of places of religious worship. Yet, when Gandhi was pushed out of a train in South Africa he resolved to fight imperialism/ racism. Why did he not follow his own advice? Why did he instead harbour so much grievance against the British for merely kicking him out of a train? What hypocrisy and double standards!!!
More and more Indians should know about this miserable traitor’s dark side so that they stop revering him as a Mahatma (great soul).
You cannot condone his treachery just because he led a very simple life.
We should have the courage to alter our constitution to stop this suicidal policy of Muslim appeasement even if that damages the image of our country. Even such damage will be temporary – 6 months at the most. Barring Pakistan, no other country is going to really bother about ban on Burqah/ Hijab/ open Namaz on roads hindering traffic/ special permission during duty hours for performing Namaz etc.
The pseudo secular forces in our country continue to use this miserable traitor’s name to continue the policy of Muslim appeasement to this day just for the sake of votes.The common man’s reverence for Gandhi is the foundation for all the pseudo secularism (continuing Muslim appeasement) in our country.
Break the foundation and the building will collapse.
sidney penny says
“More and more Indians should know about this miserable traitor’s dark side so that they stop revering him as a Mahatma (great soul).”
and naming a street after him in every town.
sidney penny says
“You cannot condone his treachery just because he led a very simple life.”
a simple life where he did not have to work because he was supported by some very rich Indian.
Infidel says
Yeah, somebody once remarked that it was very expensive to maintain his lifestyle of poverty
Infidel says
These days, on social media, it’s hard to celebrate Gandhi w/o having Nathuran Godse – his assassin – trend as well along w/ him, and that’s some achievement. In fact, over the last few months, there have been several scholars who’ve analyzed Gandhi and what he did from 1945-1948:
‣ Insist that muslims in the Hindu part of India remain within India, much over the objection of leaders like Ambedkar (one of the main authors of India’s constitution)
‣ Scold Hindus who were fleeing muslims in Pakistan and urging them to have offered themselves for sacrifice to muslims, including getting raped (this is similar to his advice to Jews who approached him about the Nazis and the holocaust)
‣ Force Sindi Hindus who were taking refuge in a mosque during a cold winter to vacate the mosque in order to appease the muslims
‣ He was actually never pushed out of that train in South Africa. That was something that either he or his aides made up to embellish his record
‣ In South Africa, he referred to South African Blacks as ‘Kuffar’ – the term used by muslims, and called on the British to bunch Indians there w/ Whites, rather than Blacks
‣ One British official once described Gandhi as the best soldier of the British Army in India
‣ He did not resign his ‘Kaiser-e-Hind’ award after the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, but did do it in support of the Khilafat movement
‣ He called for Urdu to be the national language of India
‣ He undertook a fast unto death to emotionally blackmail Nehru to pay Pakistan 55 crores, when the latter was starting a war w/ India over Kashmir. That was an allahsend to Pakistan’s war effort
‣ The week he was assassinated, he was scheduled to go to Lahore and discuss a corridor connecting East and West Pakistan. That would have split India into 2, instead of Pakistan. Also, had Gandhi survived, large Hindu swathes of Central and South India that were under the Nizam of Hyderabad would have gone to Pakistan as well
‣ Lastly, there was a lot of controversy amongst his supporters and followers over his practice of sleeping nude w/ his niece-in-law and granddaughter, to test his self-control. It ended when one or both of them resented not being consummated despite being required to be nude
Also, there was a lot of analysis of Godse and the analysis he went through before he finally decided that it was either Gandhi or millions of Hindus who’d have to die
KUNDAN says
what can I say afte this, all the communist and muslim Jamat are making a collective to end the humen civilization from this beautiful world. Lefts find absolute rationality where there is absolutely no rationality at all. yet they alway think of being themselves full of reasone than the others.
Ramaswamy says
In my previous post I had indicated the following link:
https://cisindus.org/2020/04/18/learning-from-mahatma-gandhis-mistakes-2/
The following is an extract from the above link:
“I would tell the Hindus to face death cheerfully if the Muslims are out to kill them. I would be a real sinner if after being stabbed I wished in my last moment that my son should seek revenge. I must die without rancour. (*) You may turn round and ask whether all Hindus and all Sikhs should die. Yes, I would say. Such martyrdom will not be in vain.” (Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, vol.LXXXVII, p.394-5)
Is it not clear from the above statement that as far as Gandhi was concerned his personal beliefs/ values were more important to him than (thousands of) human lives? He acquiesced at genocide (even total annihilation) of Hindus and Sikhs but became incensed if they (Hindus and Sikhs) swerved from his prescribed path to avoid certain massacre of themselves and their loved ones. Is this what we expect from an acclaimed ‘apostle of non violence’?
Let the millions of ignorant Indians know the whole truth about Gandhi so that they can judge whether he was a Mahatma or a heartless megalomaniac who though that he must be obeyed even at the cost of thousands of human lives. After all, Gandhi was himself a barrister was always interested in the ‘whole truth’.
Ramaswamy says
Muslims formed about 9% of India’s population at the time of independence and today they account for about 15%.
Nearly 40 years back (early 80s) as I was returning from a late night movie (about 1am), I came across a small gathering of (about 100) Muslims listening to some small time leader. He reminded them that they had once ruled the country and were now being ruled because they were a minority. He urged them to increase the Muslim population by having as many children as they could so that they could once more become the majority and restore Muslim rule in India. We don’t know how many such meetings are taking place every day and whether prayer meetings in mosques are also used for such ‘counseling’ and more importantly whether this sizable percentage increase is not accidental but the result of deliberate plotting.
He went on to say that the Muslims in Tamilnadu (state in India where Tamil is the spoken language) were using the Tamil greeting ‘Vanakkam’ (meaning salutation) to greet one another. He chastised them for it and said that as Muslims they should use only the Islamic greeting ‘Salam alaikum …’.
As a Hindu (though I am agnostic) I can only be deeply suspicious of Muslims and view every act of theirs including the present demand to wear Hijab in the classroom as a part of their conspiracy to take over the country.
Ramaswamy says
In a meeting that was aired on TV, a regular spokesperson (Kovai Ayub by name) for a Muslim organization in my state (Tamilnadu) said that the demolition of the Babri Masjid was a crime against God. But he justified the destruction of Hindu temples saying that the Vedas (among the most ancient Hindu scriptures) did not sanction idol worship. In the first place, who is any Muslim to tell me how I should worship God or whether (at all) I should worship God. Hindu religion is not monolithic and is not based on just Vedas. Hindu religion is the fusion of several native faiths many of which have lost their identity and even been forgotten. Every state in the country has some associated Hindu festival that is not even known (let alone celebrated) to people of other states (also Hindu).
And I like to remind these self righteous Mohammedans that their religion says that even a person who rapes/ murders/ (even) slits the throat of a helpless infant can atone and expect forgiveness but there is no forgiveness for someone who commits shirk (turning away from Allah/ worshiping anyone other than Allah/ idol worship/ polytheism).
To me, if there is a God he would go only by “Karma” (‘do as you would be done by’ and ‘be done by as you did’) – whether they are atheist, agnostic or theist makes no difference.
I see Mohammedans as a great threat to any multi religious society.