Mr Deputy-Speaker, Sir, let me once again clarify that I have not risen to reply to the discussion. The reply has to be given by Shri Mulayam Singh. He had moved the resolution; therefore, the House should be ready to listen to him. I am just providing some information to the House.
Apart from the announcement of the rehabilitation package, I have to speak on two issues. Firstly, an allegation was levelled against me during the discussion that I keep changing my statements. I refute it. My public life is open to all. My ideas may be different, but why would I change them? What self-interest do I have to serve? What political target do I have to meet? It is said that I have said one thing in Gujarat and a completely different thing in Goa—but this is not true. What I said in Gujarat is not different from what I said in Goa… (Interruptions)
My speeches are taped. They have been published. There is no scope for changing them. I would like to quote what I said. I am accused of opposing Islam. I have been accused of opposing Muslims. It seems that all I had earned throughout my life is going to be robbed of me. Such allegations I consider a blot on my personality. I have never discriminated in my life—either on the basis of religion, or on the basis of birth, or on the basis of caste—but this cycle of politics is such that it is destroying all my prestige. I feel sad. What I said… (Interruptions) What I said about Islam is like this:
Islam has two forms—one is tolerant to all, teaches adherence to the path of truth, teaches us compassion and mercy. But the Islam which is now being used in militancy has no place for tolerance. It runs on the slogan of Jihad and dreams of bringing the entire world under its aegis.
I am talking about my journey. I had been to Singapore and Cambodia. You would be surprised to know, as I was, that a few terrorists of Al-Qaeda were arrested in Singapore also. The Government of Singapore did not even think that Al-Qaeda would be active in their country—would be conspiring in their country. Fifteen or sixteen persons have been arrested there, and a covert inquiry is ongoing. The aim is to find out the truth.
The same thing is happening both in Indonesia and Malaysia. There are such Muslims who do not want to live with other people; they do not want to mix with other people. Instead of propagating their ideology peacefully, they want to propagate it by creating fear and terror among the people. The world has become conscious of this danger. What is objectionable about it?
But along with it, there is an allegation that I criticise Islamic fundamentalism but not Hindu fundamentalism. This is also wrong.
A few days back, I had to release a book, India First, written by Shri Malkani. At that time, I gave a speech. That book is mainly about Hindutva, but I said Hindutva should be liberal and generous. When we talk of Hindutva, I like the Hindutva of Vivekananda, but I do not like a Hindutva ideology based on narrow-mindedness. Some of my friends took offence. They may have a different opinion, but I did not miss the opportunity to criticise it.
I have always taken such steps during testing times that prove the country should move on a liberal path, a path of harmony. This is the message of Indian culture. Today, these allegations are being levelled to tarnish my image as if one day, one speech has finished me. The allegation has become a never-ending poison for me.
Deputy-Speaker, Sir, I have mentioned an issue. The second issue is in today’s speech… (Interruptions) The leader of the opposition party mentioned my name in her speech. She appealed to me to rise above the party line and think in the wider interest of the country. I respect her views. All of us have to rise above the party line.
Whatever I saw, heard, and experienced about Gujarat has made me apprehensive about the future. A new kind of communal poison and fanaticism is being spread. I would call it madness. I do not know how far the two or three stories being propagated are true. But the kind of atrocities being committed against women and the incidents of their humiliation reflect that the entire societal structure has changed.
A riot is one thing. I can also understand bitterness and fanaticism, but for human beings to fall so low that rape is committed and the rapist is not ashamed and society does not use strong words for him or expresses its outrage, then it should be understood that a disease has gripped us. If we do not treat this disease, it will consume our entire civilisation and culture. This is a new crisis.
I know that a Marathi paper wrote an editorial. Whatever is written in it should not be misunderstood at this juncture. I do not know how far it will prove to be true, but it wrote: “Muslim brothers, why are you complaining that atrocities are being committed against you?” This editorial is from Tarun Bharat. “Why are you complaining? The Hindu society is practicing the lessons learned from you.”
This behaviour is condemnable. We were proud of the fact that we would not flout old traditions by our actions, but I was stunned to hear that people from well-off families also looted shops. They were not in need of anything. How has the tendency of looting developed?
I have heard that they looted items, but after reaching home and finding them unsatisfactory, they returned with the same car, left the items back where they were looted from, and took other items they liked. If these incidents are true, it is deeply saddening.
A women’s delegation went to enquire about the atrocities committed against them. They talked with the women. They put a condition that when there would be no media persons, no loudspeakers, no TV cameras, and no male members, then they would talk. If the women’s delegation had come, it would talk only with women. They talked with women. I asked the delegation how far the stories being propagated were true. It said that those stories were partially true and were being exaggerated. It is very unfortunate. That is a different aspect.
Serious consideration is required about the role of the media in the Gujarat incidents. You will say that I am criticising the media. I am making the media a scapegoat, but how far is it justified to telecast the scenes of murders and burned dead bodies repeatedly in the form of news? News can be telecast only once, but such things are telecast repeatedly.
Basu Deb Acharia: The incidents are taking place daily.
Atal Bihari Vajpayee: If incidents are taking place daily; they should be stopped. It is the duty of all of us to stop them.
Tarit Baran Topdar: Can the media stop them?
Atal Bihari Vajpayee: The media can also be helpful in it; the media has to play its role in it as well. We do not want to control the media. The media people should themselves decide on a code of ethics for them. Earlier, it was decided that at the time of communal riots, the names of people would not be given. It would also not be made public how many Muslims and how many Hindus had been killed. Today, there is no such convention. Does it not spread communalism? There should be a code of conduct for it, and all should collectively decide it.
Amar Roy Pradhan (Coochbehar): Till now, you have not done it… (Interruptions)
Atal Bihari Vajpayee: Just now, Soniaji told me in her speech to rise above the party line. I want to rise, but I cannot rise alone. For this, Soniaji has to rise with me as well. If we want to rise above the party line, everybody should do it. If the nation is supreme, if India is firm, then come… (Interruptions)
Somnath Chatterjee: What you people have done… (Interruptions) You have started all these things… (Interruptions)
Atal Bihari Vajpayee: You have started all this… (Interruptions) When I said that if the House had unanimously condemned the killing of people in the Sabarmati Express in strong words, probably the incidents would not have taken place the next day. And this opinion was not only mine.
Today, Shri Chandrashekharji is present here; therefore, I am saying this in his presence. He said on that day that they wanted to stop it. On that day, Chandrashekharji wanted the House, which was adjourned due to uproar, to continue so that the incident of the Sabarmati Express could be condemned. But the session could not take place.
Soniaji said, who stopped me from holding the session? I cannot alone hold the session… (Interruptions) After the budget, when we met the next day, Chandrashekharji wanted all of us to collectively condemn it.
Today, all of us are saying separately that we condemn it, we condemned it, but the unanimous voice of the House could have awakened the country in this regard… (Interruptions)
This is part of ThePrint’s Great Speeches series. It features speeches and debates that shaped modern India.
The gentle giant. A right man for all seasons, all reasons.
Even Swamy Vivekananda was not spared by the communist hooligans in ‘The Hindu’ newspaper in an article ‘Taking the aggression out of masculinity’ (January 3, 2013)’.