Daman Singh's book

CAN YOU DEFEND THE INDEFENSIBLE CONDUCT OF DR. MANMOHAN SINGH, Ms. DAMAN SINGH ?

The outgoing Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh was regarded as a respected economist before he took on the mantle of PM. However, under his 10-year rule not only was economic skullduggery the order the day, it was gross ignoring of facts and figures (which one would assume an economist would regard as sacred) that is unforgiveable and which has resulted in a greater communal divide that had the blessings of his government.  As his daughter Daman Singh defends her father from public criticism by penning the book, ‘Strictly Personal, Manmohan and Gursharan’, Ram Ohri an 84 year-old retired IPS officer writes this open letter asking her to answer his 10 questions:

Dear Ms Singh,

At the outset, congratulations to you for standing up to defend your father, who was the Prime Minister of India for nearly ten years. By coming out with a book to defend your beloved and beleaguered father, you have emerged as a courageous lady. Trust me young author, I greatly value your filial endeavour to save your father from public criticism by penning the book, ‘Strictly Personal, Manmohan and Gursharan’.  However, I have certain questions, which have disturbed the peace of mind of a mere mortal like me, and which I request you to answer frankly and earnestly.

  1. The PM Robbed children of 34 crore Hindus living BPL their scholarships

Are you aware that by acting in cahoots with Sonia Gandhi and Salman Khurshid (former Minister of Minority Affairs) Dr Manmohan Singh robbed unlettered daughters and sons of nearly 34 crore Hindus living below the poverty line (BPl) their share in the 20 million scholarships showered on Muslims and other minorities?

Working on an unsubstantiated belief that economically and educationally, Muslims are more disadvantaged than the Hindus, Dr Singh unabashedly used this to favour the powerful vote bank lobby to bestow many unmerited benefits and concessions, including nearly 20 million scholarships and concessional educational loans worth several lakh crore rupees exclusively on the Muslims and four other minorities.

And it was a minister in your father’s cabinet who let the cat out of the bag in a press conference in May 29, 2012. He said that during the previous 6 years not one single scholarship was given to any daughter or son of the poorest Hindus. Nor were any cheaper educational or entrepreneurial loans advanced to any Hindu poor, while funds worth several lakh crores rupees were advanced to the children of the blessed five minorities, namely the Muslims, the Christians, the Buddhists, the Parsis and the Sikhs.  Why did your father’s government in an ugly bid to promote the ‘exclusive development’ of five minority communities deprive the poorest of Hindu children, their scholarship in the garb of ‘inclusive development’?  If you are unaware, this discriminatory policy was launched by your father with great fanfare in June, 2006, in the garb of Prime Minister’s New 15 Point Programme for Welfare of Minorities.

During the previous 6 years not one single scholarship was given to any daughter or son of the poorest Hindus

.

  1. Dr Singh trampled on right to equality in education

Why did he bury equal opportunities in education to please one community? A careful examination of Dr Manmohan Singh’s communal shenanigans reveals that he actively worked for consolidation of Muslim and Christian vote bank by trampling upon the Right to Equality of the poorest children of eighty percent population of India on the ground of religion. The most shocking aspect of this biggest post-independence scam is that the Christians, Buddhists, Parsis and the Sikhs are the real show-stealers in literacy and education  –  miles ahead of the majority community, namely the Hindus. Yet unmerited scholarships and educational loans were showered on them, too. Now tell me, spirited young author, why the poorest students belonging to the majority community were denied for six years a proportionate share in millions of scholarships and financial largesse worth several lakh crore rupees because they happen to belong to the politically-pariahed religion called Hinduism?

Manmohan Singh,

  1. Ignored numbers which put Hindus as the most disadvantaged religious group

Why did your father, an economist choose to ignore the numbers, the facts? The data pertaining to the infant and child mortality, degree of urbanization and life expectancy at birth was available in public domain in March 2005. It conclusively proved that in India it is the Hindus, not the Muslims, who are the most disadvantaged religious group. As you must be aware, the five globally recognized major human development indicators are the Infant Mortality, the Child Mortality, Life Expectancy at Birth, Degree of Urbanisation and Literacy.  Hindus are far behind the Muslims and four other minorities in the first four human development indices, though in literacy the Hindus with 65.1 percent literacy are marginally ahead of Muslims, who have the literacy average of 59.1 percent. The real reason for this inadequacy is the discrimination practised by Mullahs and community leaders against women.  You father’s government did not have the moral courage to admit that THE factor responsible for lower Muslim literacy average was the lower ratio of literacy among Muslim women, which was barely 50.1 percent. It was lower by 3.6 percent than the national average of female literacy at 53.7.  This important figure of lower female literacy among Muslims was deftly ignored by Dr Singh! Why?

Dr. Manmohan Singh actively worked for consolidation of Muslim and Christian vote bank by trampling upon the Right to Equality of the poorest children of eighty percent population of India on the ground of religion. 


  1. Conducted grave constitutional impropriety by forming the Justice Sachar Panel

Do you know that the High Level Committee appointed on March 9, 2005, under chairmanship of Justice Sachar was born in the sin of grave constitutional impropriety? The task assigned to Justice Sachar had been vested in 1992 by our Parliament to the National Minorities Commission by enacting a special law called, The Minorities Commission Act, 1992. Thereafter all responsibilities for protection of the rights of minorities and ensuring their welfare stood assigned to the National Minorities Commission. Hence, the very act of Dr Manmohan Singh to favour one single religious group by constituting a High Level Committee by an executive fiat was patently unconstitutional and bad in law. Enumerated below is an instance of fudging of facts by Justice Sachar in his factually-fudged report.

Justice Sachar deliberately refused to consider the documented fact that according to the National Family Health Surveys Nos. 1 (1992-93) and 2 (1998-1999) the Muslims were better placed than Hindus in four major human development indicators, namely the Infant Mortality, Child Mortality, degree of Urbanisation and Life Expectancy at Birth. After admitting this important fact on pages 37-38 of his report, Justice Sachar took recourse to suppressio veri, suggestio fallaci, by attributing this important truth to the highly inventive argument that it could be due to better child feeding practices prevalent among Muslims.

Instead of candidly admitting that the Muslims were better fed and had access to better medical care the retired Chief Justice decided to weave the yarn of ‘better child feeding’ practices among Muslims. Could there be a worse example of falsification of the data available in public domain?

  1. Used Sachar report to propagate falsehoods

Do you know Ms Singh, that in the Sachar report there is a grave instance of suppressio veri, suggestio falsi resorted to? Given below is the description of the plight of Muslim women, which appears on page 13 of his report! The mind boggling observation is reproduced below.

“Everything beyond the walls of the ghetto is seen as unsafe and hostile –   markets, roads, lanes and public transport, schools and hospitals, police stations and government offices.”

Young lady, you are as good an Indian as I am. Do you honestly believe that Muslim women are treated so shabbily in our country? If so, how are eminent Muslim women like Sayeeda Hameed, Dr Najma Heptullah, Tajdar Babbar, Shabnam Hashmi, Teesta Setalvad, etc., are articulating their views across India’s 24/7 telemedia  universe with aplomb ? Many more instances of fudging of facts can be cited from the report of Justice Sachar.  These are being left out because of shortage of space.

  1. Indulged in religion-based discrimination with his Muslims First policy statement

Do you know that the obnoxious strategy of religion-based discrimination was implemented in pursuance of the communally divisive vote bank policy enunciated in the Prime Minister’s notoriously famous “Muslims First” policy statement made on December 9, 2006? Inexplicably the aforesaid policy statement was made by Dr Singh on the birthday of Sonia Gandhi, Chairperson of the United Progressive Alliance (UPA)- and thereby hangs a tale! Have you ever tried to know who motivated your father to make such a communally loaded and divisive announcement on Sonia Gandhi’s birthday in 2006? Have you tried to explore the truth? If yes, will you explain it to nearly one billion Hindus treated as pariahs by your father?

  1. Ignored 2006 data on poor economic status of Hindus

Will it shock you, Ms. Daman Singh, that the well-documented confirmation of the better economic status of Muslims became known as early as September 2, 2006, when in his seminar paper Prof. Sanjay Kumar of the Centre of Studies for Developing Studies (CDS), New Delhi, revealed the truth that there was no difference in the economic and educational status of Muslims and Hindus in a seminar organized at the prestigious Indian Institute of Public Administration. It was highlighted that the proportion of ‘the very poor’ Indians was far higher among the Hindus than among the Muslims. The survey conducted in the year 2004 showed that the percentage of ‘very poor’ Hindus was 31 percent while the percentage of the ‘very poor’ among Muslims was only 24 percent. Thus, on the basis of well ‘documented’ CDS Survey the percentage of the ‘very poor’ Hindus was higher than that of the Muslims by a staggering 25 percent! Why was this very significant finding of Prof. Sanjay Kumar’s research ignored by Dr Manmohan Singh?  Was it done under instructions frequently sent down by the Political Adviser to the UPA Chairperson, Sonia Gandhi? This research paper highlighting these important findings had been duly sent by Speedpost in May, 2006, to Justice Sachar by our Think tank, Patriots’ Forum.  But, the former Chief Justice of Delhi High Court, chose to ignore the publicly stated truth.  Reasons best left unstated.

  1. Ignored 2010 data yet again!

When a person of your father’s economic stature, ignores numbers and figures again as he did again in 2010, what are you going to defend him with? The incontrovertible truth that economically Muslims were better placed than Hindus was reiterated again in October, 2010 when the National Health Survey- 3 (2005-2006) revealed a quantum jump of 5.4 years from 62.6 years in the life expectancy of Muslims within a short span of 7 years, i.e., between 1998 and 2005. The advantage which Muslims had over their Hindu counterparts in life expectancy at birth was barely 1.2 years in 1998-1999, but it grew to 3 years in 2005-2006, as revealed by the National Family Health Survey -3.

justice sachar

  1. Purposeful delay of survey results

While you go about defending your father, please also answer why a survey that would favourably speak about the Muslims, was released after a full four years? The results of the National Family Health Survey of 2005-2006 (mentioned above) were released in October, 2010  – i.e. after a long delay of four years! Prima facie it looks like this this inordinate delay of four years in declaring the data of National Family Health Survey -3 was aimed at facilitating the showering of 20 million scholarships on Muslims and Christians! If this is not the reason, then what is? Please explain.

Prof. Sanjay Kumar of the Centre of Studies for Developing Studies (CDS), New Delhi, revealed the truth that there was no difference in the economic and educational status of Muslims and Hindus.

 

    10. Chose vote bank politics over development

An economist as the nation’s head had inspired many to believe that we will walk on the path of inclusive development. When a systematic and rational analysis of the comparative scores of the Hindus and the Muslims in various human development indices, revealed as early as 1998-1999 that in the first four globally recognised economic development indicators, namely Infant Mortality, Child Mortality, Life Expectancy at Birth, Degree of Urbanisation, showed that it’s the Hindus who are lagging behind the Muslims and four other religious minorities, namely the Christians, the Buddhists, the Parsis and the Sikhs, your father, our Prime Minister, played appeaser. He chose vote bank politics over development.

Can you please care to explain why?

Sincerely,

Ram Ohri

(The writer is an 84 year-old retired IPS officer and author of four books, including ‘The Majority Report,’ which is a candid exposé of the gross discrimination practiced by Dr Manmohan Singh and Salman Khurshid.)

Ram Ohri is a former IPS officer and writes regularly on security issues, demographics, and occasionally, on policy.
  • Chitra Sharma

    We need to investigate about what illegal benefits were accrued by Daman and other relatives of this puppy of Italian mafia queen.

  • ronak

    I always thought that hindus are better placed than Muslims in key indicators . Thanx for the info.

    One question : why Hindus condition is worse than Muslims. Is it because of complete indifference of govt. towards Hindus or some others reasons.

    • Big Bully

      hindus do not vote enmass like ghettos do

  • Satish Sood

    He had sold his soul for the sake of power. He today is one of the most loathed person in India. Hiding your face would be much easier option for you Ms Daman Singh than trying to justify or defend this blot on the sikh community. If I really pour my true feelings for your spineless father you would get nightmares, so I spare you but do not try to defend or glorify a lump of decayed and rotten meat that is your father.