As Britain is getting Islamised at a rapid pace, the sympathy for radicals keeps growing in the country. In one such instance of clear pro-radical bias, The Guardian, a London-based newspaper has dishonestly reported on the passive land Jihad in Gurgaon and tried to portray the city’s public parks as ‘Muslim spaces’.
Unauthentic anti-Hindu article published by The Guardian:
What seems to be unauthentic, lacking in credible research, and based on conjecture, The Guardian has reported the recent Namaz controversy with the title “New city, old schism: Hindu groups target Gurgaon’s Muslim prayer sites”. The controversial piece is written by Hannah Ellis-Peterson with the input of a certain Vandana K. Twitter bio of Vandana claims that she is an independent journalist, while Hannah is the South Asia head of the newspaper who believes in hedonism (seeking impulsive pleasure).
The writer has cleverly set the tone of the passage as Muslim victimisation by establishing in the title itself that Muslim prayer sites are targeted by Hindus. The truth is that those are parks, and all parks, in general, are public places, and every individual citizen of India, whether they are Hindu, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Man, or woman have a right to visit that place. This is virtually the definition of a public place, and it is absurd to claim it as a Muslim prayer site. Muslim prayer sites are called mosques and not public parks.
Hindus’ unity is termed as a Mob:
For its gullible elite readers, the author then went on to establish another claim that people opposing the passive land-Jihad are Hindu-nationalist mob. A mob literally translates to a disordered gathering which takes law and order into their own hands. However, in reality, the Hindus who had gathered there to free Public Park from Islamists took the legal pathway and sought the support of the administration in freeing up the public park. Yet again, the author’s bias stands debunked.
Muslims are shown as victims:
Hannah then proceeds to claim that Muslim labourers who were employed by the Gurgaon administration are denied their basic right to offer prayers. Like all other false claims, this is also not grounded in reality. A Muslim can offer prayer either alone or with a group of people at any place. It is absurd that they are choosing to pray in a group of hundreds and then demand land from public authorities to offer Namaz. It ends up disrupting the normal life of a commoner. Surely, they do their own Namaz, but they cannot infringe on others’ rights.
Hindus are aggressors while Muslims are peaceful according to Hannah:
Similarly, the Gurgaon administration’s efforts to reduce the burden of commoners by decreasing the numbers of legally accepted Namaz sites have been termed as ‘bowing to the demand of fanatics’ by the author. She then went on to claim that Hindus were demanding to shoot the traitors (Muslims in this case). It is pertinent that these kinds of slogans are mainly raised in institutions like JNU, a reminiscent of leftist bastion; against Indian forces fighting the enemies. Rarely will you find any Indian citizen using this slogan on a road.
The Guardian stoops to defaming Hindus:
In the next part of her piece, Hannah strides on defaming the people protesting for Hindus’ rights in public places in Gurgaon. Claiming that Dinesh Thakur, one of the protestors ran aggressively towards a Muslim to stop him from doing Namaz she wrote that Muslims were silent and were just busy bowing down their heads for Namaz. It is a clever attempt to paint Hindus in a bad light while making readers sympathise with the Muslim mob.
Tried to project a ‘Sikh-Islamist unity’ against Hindus:
At the end of the write-up, Hannah goes on to talk about Gurudwaras offering a place of worship to Namazis. She writes that Gurdwaras stepped in to assist Muslims, but they were also met with the calls of disbanding them. Historically, Islamists have been brutal against Sikhs, and they had killed the 9th Sikh guru. Citing Daya Singh, a member of the Gurudwara Shri Guru Singh Sabha committee, Petersen claims that Hindus using public places hijacked by Islamists is an attempt to alienate Muslims from society.
With a history of anti-Modi, anti-Hindu and anti-India biased behind it, Indians, especially Hindus do not expect any better treatment from The Guardian. But it was the height of absurd Islamic appeasement to try to create a sympathy wave for Islamists infringing on the individual rights of Hindus.