COVID-19 is going to stay for a long time – no one can say how long – especially in overpopulated and poor countries.
The impact of COVID-19 on our planet Earth is so serious with far reaching consequences that I feel like calling it “Coverth”, at least for the present. Covid+Earth = Coverth.
There is hardly any country that is not living in fear due to this new disease. It has already made more than 4.72 million people sick and killed more than 0.31 million people. More than 2.56 million are struggling to get rid of it. (As on May 17, 2020.)
Experts world over are unanimous that effective vaccine is the only way to eradicate it. But such a vaccine may not be available in the market for 10-12 months, or maybe even more. The availability is only one part. Equally important is its mass production. Today the population of the world is around 7600 million. Even if 10 million people are given a vaccine every day, it will take nearly 2 years to cover all. Moreover, it can benefit only those who have not been infected. It is not a treatment for those already infected. Unless there is a miracle, many more millions of people will be infected during the next three years.
There is one more problem that may turn out to be quite serious. On May 21, India TV reported today that anew version ofcoronavirusis infecting people in China. This may be due to mutation of DNA of originalcoronavirus. It poses a serious challenge to the scientists trying to develop effective vaccine.
Lockdown breaks the chain and reduces the number of persons getting infected. However, lockdown cannot be permanent as it will seriously reduce economic activities and deprive the people of means of livelihood. Those not killed by COVID-19 will be killed by poverty and starvation.
Therefore, the experts are unanimous that we need to have a middle path. Since #COVID-19 has come to stay, we have to put up with it and make ourselves ready to carry out normal economic activities.
How to do that? Several measures have been suggested and are being gradually used. These measures include:
Improving the immunity of human beings.
Maximum use of technology to minimize human contacts
Even where such technology cannot be used, making social distance part of day-to-day living.
Making cleanliness and hygiene a habit.
Easier said than done, more so in overpopulated poor countries.
Some of these measures are meant only for well-off people. Though most of the COVID-19 patients are in rich countries, the latter are in a better position to introduce these measures. The governments of overpopulated and poor countries like India cannot provide all the facilities.
Take the improvement of immunity. It requires nutritious food, sleeps for 7-8 hours, regular exercises such as walking and yoga, and also medication. Only well-off people can afford nutritious food regularly. Vast majority of people are neither aware of exercise, yoga, and meditation nor have they time.
Even most of the well off people who are aware of the benefits of exercise, yoga, and meditation find it difficult practise. These activities will require about two hours every day. Add to it 7-8 hours of sleep. So much time is not possible if a person has to spend 2 to 4 hours travelling to and fro work place. Large number of them remain busy with office work even after coming out of office.
Before the lockdown, I had seen several senior executives of big companies busy on phone even after returning from office. It was a common sight that a senior executive was discussing office issues even while getting out of his/her car, ignoring young kids waiting for the parent for hours.
Only a very small percentage of people have made exercise, yoga, and meditation part of their life.
Employers can provide the number of hours needed for developing immunity only by reducing the workload and allowing, as far as possible, employees to work from home and. But a reduction in workload is not possible without increasing the number of employees which will reduce their profit that is unacceptable.
No doubt, in this age of advanced information technology, there are several areas of work that can be done from home. When I was in service, information technology was coming slowly. The government provided personal computers (PCs) to senior officers sometime in 1986-87 without any training though. Those days PCs had very limited capacity. There was no Internet. By the time I left the government (in December 2002), powerful PCs had started coming and the use of the Internet was becoming common. In retrospect, I can say that from the mid-1970s to 2002, more than 75% of what I did sitting in the office I could have done from home.
Though facilities are available, a change in attitude is needed. Perhaps the International Labour Organisation and the World Health Organisation may provide guidelines to the employers to let, as far as possible, employees work from home. If physical presence is needed, they can be asked to come once a week or fortnight, depending on the nature of work.
“Work from home” will significantly reduce the number of cars and buses on roads which will improve the quality of air.
The use of robots is also increasing. Even in India, some hospitals are using robots for supplying medicines and other necessities to patients. Our government should encourage the production of robots for various purposes.
Educational institutions in rich countries and those meant for the well-off Indians have started online classes. However, most Indian children study in crowded classrooms. Our central and state governments cannot arrange online classes for all students in the country.
Social distancing is necessary but very difficult in over-populated poor countries India. The rich countries are changing sitting arrangements in buses, trains, and planes to keep a safe distance between two passengers. In our country, buses and trains are always very overcrowded. We do not have resources to emulate rich countries. We will require several times more number of buses and trains, much beyond the capacity of our roads and railway tracks. If the number of seats in planes is reduced, only very rich can afford to pay a higher fare.
Prime Minister Modi’s emphasis on cleanliness ever since he took over was a farsighted decision. However, people still do not attach full importance to cleanliness and personal hygiene. Now, because of COVID-19, some state governments and civic authorities have started imposing fines on those who spit on roads. We need strict laws to keep our roads, streets, and localities clean and force people not to spit on the road, walls, and in offices.
The images (taken from the Internet) reproduced below highlight the stark difference between thinly-populated rich and over-populated poor countries. Overpopulated and poor countries will take a much longer time to eradicate COVID-19.
How rich and poor will live on planet Coverth
Rich Poor
Student attending a virtual class A crowded government school of Delhi
A real Tramway platform in France A crowded bus in India
due to Covid19
Social distancing in trains due to A crowded train India
During his last days on an isolated island, St Helena, Napoleon Bonaparte, a graduate from a French military academy and an accomplished swordsman, had famously said, “Pen is mightier than sword.” If someone had asked Prophet Mohammad, founder of Islam, to make a choice, probably he would have said, ”Both are mighty but sword is mightier. The messages Allah gave me had to be written down but the use of sword is necessary to spread his message. Without the help of sword, pen would not achieve anything.”
Arab before Mohammad
Since time immemorial, the Arab tribes had lived as self-governing sedentary or nomadic communities. They worshipped idols of their gods considered their protectors, natural things such as trees, stones, springs, and wells, etc. In Mecca, unity among the members of the same tribe was not a common characteristic. A tribe consisted of clans with common ancestry. Clans too clashed for supremacy. In Mecca, the mercantile Quraysh tribe had two rival clans, Banu Hashim (Hashemites) and Banu Umayya (Umayyads) with common ancestry. Hashemites were custodians of Mecca’s sacred precinct, the Kaaba, which housed the idols of tribal deities. Umayyads ruled the city-state in their traditional tribal style.
Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullāh (570-632 CE) was born into the Hashemite clan in Mecca. According to the Islamic belief, when he was about 40, he used to spend hours alone in prayer and meditation in the Mount Hira cave of mountain Jabal an-Nour, 3 miles from Mecca, speculating, inter alia, about the moral degeneration of the people and in the quest for true religion. One day, he claimed that the angel Gabriel appeared before him and commanded him to recite five verses. The angel said that God had chosen Muhammad and ordered him to spread the message of Islam meaning (in Arabic) “submission” that there is only one God i.e. Allah. Those five verses, later included in the Quran (meaning “the recitation”), became the foundation of Islam. The process of revelations continued for the next 23 years (each revelation known as Ayah — literally, “Sign of God”), until his death. Every Muslim proclaims: “I testify that there is no god but Allah, and I testify that Muhammad is a Messenger of Allah”. The last ayah says: “So prostrate to Allah and worship.”
Since he was unable to read or write, at least 29 of his companions served as scribes to record the revelations. If the claim is to be believed, Muhammad had a fantastic memory. The Quran – 6,236 verses organized in 114 chapters- is the composition of those revelations. What is claimed to be the authentic agreed collection of Quranic verses was prepared after Muhammad’s death, during the reign of Uthman ibn Affan (6 November 644 – 17 June 656).
Next to the Quran, the most important religious composition is Hadith, a collection of half verbal and physical teachings and traditions of Muhammad, compiled after his death by several of his followers.
In 613, he started preaching monotheistic Islam in Mecca condemning idol worship and polytheism. Muhammad’s message challenged the traditional social, economic, and religious order. Naturally, he faced tough opposition from pagans including members of his tribe. The Meccan clans led by Umayyads retaliated by crippling commercial and marital boycott of the Hashemite clan. For 9 years since 613, he had tried to persuade Meccans to convert to Islam. He succeeded but only partially. To escape the wrath of Umayyads, in 615 large number of Muslims migrated to Abyssinia.
In 622 CE, to escape the increasing persecution Muhammad and his followers fled to Medina (the episode known in the Islamic history as Hijra or migration, marking the beginning of the Islamic calendar). He continued to receive revelations in Medina and gradually formed a community of believers. (Some historians say that the process of Muslims settling in Medina had started before 622 CE.) As a strategy, Muhammad patronised Umayyads and others who converted to Islam, though more out of compulsion than conviction.
Muhammad decided to deal with his enemies with force. In Medina, he and his followers started raiding Meccan caravans. A series of armed conflicts followed. Over a period of about 9 years (623 to 632), he fought 98 battles (ghazwah, lit. battle i.e.). He personally took part in bigger battles numbering 28. In the Quran, Mohammad has justified the use of violence: “Ye (Muslims) slew them not, but Allah slew them. And thou (Muhammad) threwest not when thou didst throw, but Allah threw, that He might test the believers by a fair test from Him. Lo! Allah is Hearer, Knower.”(8:17)
According to an article written by Asma Afsaruddin for Encyclopædia Britannica, the word “Jihad” is erroneously translated as “Holy War”. “Jihad, particularly in the religious and ethical realm, primarily refers to the human struggle to promote what is right and to prevent what is wrong.” In the Quran, its meaning depends on the context in which it is used. “In these kinds of extra-Qurʾānic literature, the different ways of promoting what is good and preventing what is wrong are included under the broad rubric of al-jihād fī sabīl Allāh, “striving in the path of God.” A well-known Hadith refers to four primary ways in which jihad can be carried out: by the heart, the tongue, the hand (physical action short of armed combat), and the sword.”
(No other founder of a religion has advised the use of sword to promote what is good and prevent what is wrong. And who decides what is good and what is wrong? Of course, the believer.)
In all these battles he and his followers acted with utmost brutality. They looted property, converted large numbers to Islam, massacred grown up males who refused to convert, sent thousands of women and young children (who had not reached puberty) to be sold in slave markets for horses and weapons. (In one battle in 628, he kept beheaded Jewish leader’s young widow, Safiyah, for himself.)
In 630, he returned to Mecca as a hero reciting verses of the Quran and ordered destruction of all idols or idol looking shapes. In Kaaba, all 365 idols were destroyed and it was converted into a mosque, considered by Muslims Bayt Allāh (“House of God”)
While destroying each idol, Muhammad recited Surah 17:81: “And say: Truth hath come and falsehood hath vanished away. Lo! falsehood is ever bound to vanish.”
An orthodox Muslim believes that only the Quran is right, what he believes, and does is right and is blessed by Allah.
Legacy of Mohammad
Mohammad died in 632 CE. Before his death, he had united several Arabian tribes into a single polity of about one hundred thousand believers in Islam and became ruler as well as the religious head of the Arabian Peninsula. He had laid the foundation of a new political ecosystem that gradually affected the entire globe. Its basic components, as outlined by Mohammad himself and preserved in the Quran and Hadith, are:
· mixing of religion with politics (for him, religion was not a private matter),
· religion controlling every aspect of personal, social and political life,
· rule of Sharia (law based on the Quran), and
· all forms of Jihad to bring more geographical areas and people under Islam.
The institution of caliph (spiritual as well as temporal head) was the product of the first component i.e. mixing of religion with politics
(Every religion influences the life of its followers but not to the extent Islam does. All Hindus do not regularly worship a god or go to temple. Nor is there any religious compulsion to visit a temple every week or month. Christians go to church on Sundays for payers. They don’t need to pray every day. But, barring exceptions, all Muslims offer Namaz five times a day. It is mandatory. )
Mohammad’s followers after his death
After his death, the first issue to be settled was the selection of his successor and new caliph (leader of the Muslims). The issue divided Mohammad’s followers, including his immediate family members and relatives into two groups. One group (that later came to be known as Sunnis) claimed that Mohammad had not appointed anyone his successor and, in any case, the caliph had to be elected. The other group (that later came to be known as Shias) claimed that he had indeed appointed his son-in-law Ali ibn Abi Talib his political as well as spiritual successor and believed that caliph had to be one of the descendants of Mohammad.
Even Hadith is unable to indicate Muhammad’s choice. In a Hadith, he says: “My Ummah (community) will be fragmented into seventy-three sects and all of them will be in the Hellfire except one.” But he did no clarify which “one”. Both Sunnis and Shias claim to be the “one”. Sunnis claim that their interpretation of Islam follows the Sunnah (ways of Mohammed). Shias consider Sunnis as a usurper. The use of terms “Sunnis” and “Shias” (short form of ‘Shiat Ali’, meaning ‘partisans of Ali’) were used much later.
Whatever the apparent ideological (or theological) differences, the desire to dominate the community was the root cause. Mohammad’s close friend and father-in-law Abu Bakr’s supporters being in the vast majority, he was elected the caliph (8 June 632 – 23 August 634). He, a rich and respected trader, was one of the first to covert. He provided funds liberally to Mohammad for his cause, accompanied him to medina, and participated in major battles Mohammad fought later to crush his adversaries. Ali ibn Abi Talib pledged his allegiance after initial hesitations.
Abu Bakr adopted the title of Khalifat Rasul Allah, generally translated as “Successor to the Messenger of God”. This was the beginning of the institution of caliphate.
The new rule was known as the Rashidun (meaning “Rightly Guided”) Caliphate or Khalifat, the first of the four major caliphates. Shia Muslims avoid the use of this term because they do not consider the rule of the first three caliphs as legitimate. All caliphs were related to Mohammad.
The first caliph, Al Bakr, died a natural death but the last 5 years of the Rashidun Caliphate saw assassinations of all three Caliphs due to internal and external struggle for power. One assassination prepared background of the next assassination. Al Bakr successor, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (Mohammad’s another father-in-law), named before his death was assassinated by a Persian, perhaps to avenge Muslim conquest. The next Caliph, ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan, another son-in-law of Mohammad and one of the six shortlisted by Umar before his death, was also assassinated. His style of governance, appointment of only favoured family members as governors of different regions who ruled as tyrants, made many enemies, especially among the Egyptians who wanted Ali as the Caliph. The Egyptian rebels got an opportunity on June 20, 656, and killed Uthman in his bedroom before one of his wives.
After Uthman’s assassination, Muhammad’s son-in-law Ali ibn Abi-Talib. a Hashemite Shia was chosen caliph. His selection reignited the pre-Islamic rivalry between Hashemites and Umayyads leading to the first Islamic Fitna (civil war) for supremacy. His main opponents included Muhammad’s widow Aisha (Al Bakr’s daughter) and Governor of Syria and Uthman’s cousin Mu’awiya and their followers. They started accusing Ali of not saving Uthman’s life and not doing enough to punish the murderers. Failure of dialogue between the opposite parties led to the Battle of Camel (656 CE) in which Ali defeated A’ishah. Some historians believe that the real issue was the political ambition of Ali’s opponents who found his caliphate against their interest. Ali’s supporters considered him a true Imam and his enemies infidels.
(The differences were purely political but impacted politics as well as religious unity.)
Now Ali and Mu’awiya had to settle scores Ambitious Muawiyah wanted more areas under him, refused Ali’s demands for allegiance. Again, the failure of dialogue led to war. In the Battle of Siffin (July 657) in which Ali lost 25,000 men, while Muawiyah lost 45,000.
During the battle, something unexpected happened that deeply impacted not only a large number of contemporary Muslims but Muslims in the future also. (The world is facing the impact more seriously now in the 21st century than ever before.) When Muawiyah was on the verge of defeat, on the advice of a commander he ordered his soldiers to hoist the Quran on their spearheads. It was a clever use of religion in the battle for political supremacy. It served the desired purpose. Though Ali immediately realised that it was a trick, most of his soldiers disobeyed his order to fight and deserted him. Those rebels were Qurrā’ (“Quran readers”). The daily recitation of the Quran had made them very committed and militant.
In the confusion, Muawiyah fled. The battle remained indecisive. The warning sides decided to go for arbitration. Ali agreed because he had become weak. At the end of the arbitration by two persons, one declared Ali deposed and Muawiya’s appointment as the new caliph. A disappointed Ali declared the award not binding as it was contrary to the Quran.
To continue to fight for survival, Ali tried to raise an army but could not get support. Even those who had deserted him in the battle and forced him to go for arbitration boycotted him. The Qurrā’ formed their organisation called Kharijites (“those who leave”). They adopted a militant religious stance. They believed
· “Arbitration belongs to God alone.”
· True Muslims prayed and read Quran every day.
· They were true Muslims and those who opposed them where enemies of God, and unbelievers.
· True believers had the right to overthrow an unjust ruler.
· True believers were ready for martyrdom and death for the sake of God
According to some authors, Kharijites had claimed to be true Muslims because they were afraid that they might be accused and killed for the murder of Uthman. Whatever the reason, they started killing Ali’s supporters and other Muslims who were against them. (Sounds like a precursor of ISIS; Baghdadi, who wanted to be a new caliph, killed Muslims who opposed him.) Ali defeated Kharijites in the Battle of Nahrawan (659) but he had become very weak while his enemies were getting stronger. There was unrest in Egypt. Muawiyah occupied Egypt and several cities in Iraq.
On January 26, 661 while Ali was offering namaz in a mosque, a Kharijite seriously wounded him with a poison coated sword. Ali asked his son not to kill the attacker for he knew that under Islamic law, the attacker would be pardoned but in case victim died, he would be given one equal hit. After two days, Ali died and the attacker got equal punishment.
After Ali’s murder, his son Husayn ibn ‘Ali became the fifth caliph but it was not acceptable to Muawiyah who was ruling over the Levant and Egypt. With the largest Muslim Force at his command, he rebelled and declared himself the caliph. He weakened Hasan’s army by bribing commanders. He virtually forced Hassan to abdicate in his favour. was crowned new caliph and founded Umayyad Caliphate.
Before its end, in fact, before Ali took over as the fourth caliph, the Rashidun Caliphatehad, after a series of wars, conquered modern Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Ctesiphon, Palestine, and Jerusalem.
With the end of the Rashidun Caliphate, the first and a very important phase of Islamic history ended. It had all started with Mohammad declaring himself the last messenger of God, Allah. He tried to convert the pagan tribals to the new faith, belief in only one God, and leading life as ordained by God. He made it a mission to spread the divine message, by persuasion and, if necessary, by force. Under Islam, religion was an integral part of day-to-day life, social order, and political system.
Mohammad had left behind about 1 lakh followers to carry on his mission to spread Islam. Though all the followers swear by Mohammed and the Quran, they could not remain united. If the first split was on the issue of criteria of selection of caliph, the second was on the issue of who was a “true Muslim” and who was a “fake Muslim”. This distinction was created by Khajirites who claimed to be “true Muslims”. They believed in killing the “fake Muslims”, forcibly overthrowing unjust rulers and martyrdom for the sake of Islam. For a few hundred years, they continued to create troubles for Muslim rulers. Gradually, they split into several groups and became extinct but the Muslims continue to be divided and subdivided into several groups, peace-loving as well as those believing in violence. The violent groups are more than ever active in the 21st century, creating troubles in several countries.
1. This article is the first of a series of articles. The articles are not about the teachings and principles of their religion, Islam. The articles are about the expansion of Islam, how more geographical areas and people came under Islam.
2. The facts mentioned in this article as in the subsequent articles, yet to be uploaded on my website, are based on materials available in the public domain, on the Internet. Only a few interpretations are mine.
3. The article should not taken as criticism of Prophet Mohammad. He was neither the first nor the last to write history with sword.
The purpose of this article is to highlight that the existing security checks protect only recipients of money, not the victims of online banking frauds.
According to John Detrixhe ((https://uk.linkedin.com/in/john-detrixhe-b808856, November 12, 2019), Future of Finance Reporter at Quartz (a digitally news outlet), last year the growth of cashless transactions (CTs) in India (55% ) was far ahead of China (48%) and UK (10%). In India, CTs gathered momentum after demonetisation in in November 2016. The RBI expects growth rate to remain fast. Due to the fear of currency notes spreading corona virus, people are being advised to do, as far as possible, CTs. Several times RBI Governor appeared on TV channels advising people to make online payments for goods or services.
With fast global shift to CTs, the number of service providers has also increased. In India alone, there are more than 45 mobile wallet providers, and some 50 UPI-based wallet providers. Banks have been proving the service through debit and credit cards and facilities for on-line inter-bank as well as inter-bank transfers.
The increase in volume of CTs has opened a new ‘opportunity’ to thieves also. Cybercrime is steadily increasing. On February 4, 2020, Union Minister of State for Home G Kishan Reddy informed the Lok Sabha that nearly 6,900 cases of online banking frauds were registered in the country in 2017-18. He added that with the rapid increase in use of cyber space, the number of cybercrime is also increasing.
According to survey by FIS, a financial services technology provider (2018) India has the highest rate of online banking frauds in the world. In December, Ravi Shankar Prasad, IT minister said that there were over 25,800 cases of digital fraud in India in 2017. According to a news item dated Feb11, 2020 in the Hindustan Times, RBI’s reply to a right-to-information (RTI) query revealed that over a period of 10 years (April 2009 to September 2019), fraudsters siphoned off ₹615.39 crore in more than 1.17 lakh cases of credit and debit card frauds. The number does not include cybercrimes amounting to less than ₹1 lakh between April 2009 and April 2017. According to a news item in Mail Today (April 23, 2020), a New York based cyber intelligence firm IntSights and other cyber security researchers have also warned against spike in cybercrimes during the present period of crisis caused by coronavirus.
From time to time, RBI issues regulations to improve security measures. Banks tell their customers to follow security measures such as not disclosing credit/debit card No., EVV and one-time password (OTP, i.e. 6-digit numeric PIN). On January 15, 2020, RBI issued a fresh notification that new credit or debit cards issued after March 16 will work only for domestic card transactions at ATMs or point of sale terminals. If a consumer wants it to do more, he/she will have to enable such functionality through the banking app, internet banking, or by calling the bank or visiting its branch. (The notification does not cover mobile based wallet providers.)
There are instances of banks not following RBI regulations. Fraudsters succeed in breaching the security walls because, due to ignorance or when unconsciously customers share forbidden information. The news item published in the Hindustan Times mentioned earlier points out that “In a survey conducted by online marketplace OLX in February 2020, in which 7,500 people participated, it was found that 52% of the respondents publicly shared their phone numbers and personal addresses online and 26% of them shared OTP with others. Around 22% admitted to sharing bank account, UPI (Unified Payments Interface), credit or debit card PIN details.”
Another modus operandi of fraudsters is to create their own websites, open bank accounts and offer goods or services at attractive prices. When they realise that it was not safe to continue, they close the shops and vanish.
The use of advanced technologies such as web application attack, ransomware and reconnaissance by fraudsters has made cybersecurity a difficult task.
My personal experience is that while banks do not always follow RBI instructions, security measures have been devised to protect banks and wallet providers from any liability. The message is very loud and clear: ‘Take care of yourself. We have told you how to protect yourself.’
The existing security measures do not take into account the fact that all users are not familiar with the technical details of CTs, tricks used by fraudsters and unconsciously become victims. When such customers complain to their bank or wallet providers, the common reply is, ‘Sorry, payment was made after you followed the prescribed procedure’ whereas the fact is that it was the fraudster who collected all the information from the customer and followed the procedure for transfer of money. When a victim of fraud pursues his complaint, bank or wallet provider advises him to lodge a complaint with cybercrime cell of police.
For a common person, it is very difficult to make police act fast to catch fraudsters and recover money. I have learnt it at my cost.
I realised the weakness of the system first time in July 2016 while making an online payment through ICICI bank credit card for a software. To my utter shock and surprise, amount was paid without OTP. After receiving confirmation of payment, I sent an email to the bank to enquire how the payment was made without OTP. The bank’s reply was even more shocking: ‘The merchant’s bank has not complied with the RBI regulation effective from August 1, 2009. Hence the PIN was not asked and your card transaction went through without the mandatory requirement of entering the 6-digit numeric PIN.’ The bank advised me to “always transact on websites/with merchants that are 3D-Secure authenticated.” ((https://www.devendranarain.dev/2016/08/your-credit-card-may-be-used-without.html)
Since the company to which I had made the payment was genuine, I did not lose money but I wrote to the bank, “A credit card holder may not know that the website/merchant is not 3D-secure authenticated. He relies on you to protect his interest. I request you to please bring such cases of violation of regulation to the notice of the RBI.” The bank sent a standard reply that the feedback would be used to improve the service. Despite reminders, t the bank never told me whether non-compliance of regulation about ‘no payment without six-digit PIN’ was brought to the notice of the RBI or not.
Very recently, on March 12, 2020, for the first time I really became victim of cyber fraud. I have been using debit/credit cards for over two decades and Paytm for about 18 months. I admit, I became a victim entirely due to my fault.
On that unfortunate day, I received SMS from “PAY,,TM” that ‘unless KYC is updated, my “Pay,,tm” account will be blocked.’ I was asked to contact on 8388095829. I have a Paytm account. Without noticing, the difference in the spelling, I proceeded to update KYC (actually, to fall in the trap). When contacted, one Manish Kumar chatted on Quick Support (on mobile), collected photo of driving license for ID proof and details of ICICI credit card for linking it to Paytm.
By the time I realised that I had become a victim of cybercrime, 3 amounts – Rs. 9999/- (PAUPAYMENTS), Rs. 4990/- (Accelyst Soluti.Avbl) and Rs. 9990/- (PAUPAYMENTS) – (total Rs.24,979) had been collected from my ICICI bank Visa credit card No. 4375 51XX XXXX 5015. Since I had not made any payment for anything purchased, it was a clear case of fraud.
Immediately, I blocked the card and emailed complaints to ICICI Bank and Paytm. After collecting details of what had happened, both washed their hands off. The bank told me that since the payments had been made after due authentication, ‘the bank will not be able to raise any further claims on your behalf with the merchant and refund the amount involved in the transaction.’ Paytm replied that since the transaction did not belong to Paytm, it would not do anything. They did not bother that it was a case of online fraud.
On the same day (March 12), I lodged an online complaint with the Cyber Crime Cell of Gurugram Police on its website. I did not get any acknowledgement or response. On March 19, I tweeted my complaint drawing the attention of Haryana Chief Minister. Thereafter his office collected my phone number. Two days later, on March 21, a policeman of cybercrime cell contacted me to get the details. The complaint No. is 1473-5p 2 dated 20-03-2020. (The cell could not trace my complaint of March 12). As required by the cell, I emailed complete account of what had happened on and after March 12.
In my email, I pointed out that
Even if I lost money due to my fault, theft is theft and a criminal who has stolen the money remains a criminal. The criminal cannot be pardoned because he took advantage of my mistakes.
Even if the ICICI bank is helpless (which is not true), the criminal can be traced with the help of the payment gateways through which the amounts were transferred to his bank account and the bank to which the amounts were transferred’
The payment gateways can tell the police name of the bank, address of the branch and account number.
The bank to which the amounts were transferred can easily identify the fraud. No bank is supposed to accept the request of opening a bank account without proper verification of name and address, Adhaar No. and PAN. KYC is mandatory.
Had the cyber cell of Gurugram police acted promptly, the fraudster could have been caught immediately. His mobile No. 8388095829 was active at least till forenoon of March 16, 2020. When I got that mobile No. checked by TRUE CALLER, reply was that it was used for KYC FRAUD.
On April 1, 2020 I received a phone call from the same policeman of the Cybercrime Cell. He wanted to know the date of crime! Obviously, even nine days after the registration of complaint, he had not bothered to read it. The same day, I sent identical emails to (1) Anil Viz, Home Minister, Haryana, (2) Manoj Yadava, Director General of Police and (3) Muhammad Akil, Police Commissioner, Gurugram. In emails, I gave full account of what had happened on March 12 and developments thereafter and requested each one of them to direct the Cyber Crime Cell, Gurugram Police, to expeditiously complete investigation and catch the criminal. Needless to say, there was no response. No action has been taken till date (April 25, 2020).
On April 22, to draw the attention of PAYU PAYMENT (@PayUIndia) and Accelyst Solution gateways, used by the fraud, I tweeted that these gateways are very helpful to cybercriminals. After 24 hours, @PayUIndia sent a message asking me to share details which I did but it refused to disclose the name of the recipient. It advised me “to follow up with cybercrime cell, they will contact us and all necessary details will be provided to them”
In nutshell, credit card issuer, wallet service providers and gateways share “secret” information only with cybercrime cell but the latter does not bother when victim is a common man. Home Minister and senior police officers are also not bothered when common persons become victims of online banking frauds.
After bitter experience, I decided to analyse various modes of transfer of money and to find how CTs can be made safer i.e. how to protect customers even if they commit the mistake of sharing secret information with a fraudster.
There are several modes of online transfers of money:
From one person’s bank account to another person’s bank account (inter-bank and intra-bank).
From bank account to smart phone operated wallet such as Paytm.
From customer’s bank account to the bank account of merchant (seller of goods or services).
From one person’s wallet to another person’s wallet.
From wallet to bank account.
From wallet to merchant’s bank account.
From credit/debit card to wallet.
From credit/debit card to merchant’s bank account.
My experience is that online transfer of money from one bank to another bank account is the safest. It is done after getting confirmation of all details from the transferor as follows:
Name of beneficiary XXXX XXXXXX
Beneficiary IFSC Code XXXXXXXXXX
Beneficiary Account Number/ XXXXXXXXXXXX
Credit Card Number
Bank Name xxxx.00
Transfer Type
Transfer Now
Mode of Communication SMS
Communication detail XXXXXXXXX
For authorisation of transfer of money, bank sends six-digit ODP that has to be entered.
For authorisation of payment, bank sends six-digit OTP that has to be entered. There is no chance of fraud even if a fraudster has access to user ID and password to open the net banking window and the transfer pin or the OTP because fraudster will have to add new payee which is not easy because the account holder will get SMS with OTP for confirmation of addition does not come immediately.
Online transfer of money to a merchant’s bank account
The entire process is explained in Appendix. It takes only a few seconds. Payment to merchant’s bank account may be made same day or after a couple of days. (I have not checked time taken by different gateways.)
Who is responsible for online banking frauds?
Whatever the cause of fraud, whatever the modus operandi of fraudster, which of the parties in the loop is or are the main culprit(s)? They are undoubtedly payment gateway and merchant’s bank.
Every fraudster has to open a bank account or should have a wallet account. For opening a bank account he has to furnish several documents such as proof of identity, proof of address, PAN card and two recent passport size photographs. For receiving online payments, merchant and his bank enter into an agreement.
If after all these precautions, the million-dollar question is: how does a fraudster open and operate his bank account?
For mobile-based wallet, the company providing the service verifies all the details furnished by the customer, followed by physical verification at the residence of the customer. When I wanted to have a Paytm account, an executive of the company visited by residents for verification
Again, the million-dollar question is: after all the verifications, how can a fraudster use his wallet for online banking frauds? While it is for the RBI to enquire how fraudsters are able to open bank accounts or wallets, I hold the gateways also as the main culprit. Normally an email confirming payment through credit contains the name of the recipient merchant. However, when the fraud collected amounts in three “transactions”, instead of the name of the “merchant” , each confirmation email mentioned the name of the gateway. Look at the intimation of five transactions, including three fraudulent, to me.
(PAYU PAYMENT is a gateway. The name of the merchant receiving payment is not mentioned. The amounts were collected by online banking frauds)
(Accelyst Solution provides mobile payment services. The name of the merchant receiving payment is not mentioned. The amount was collected by an online banking fraud)
(The above two payments were genuine. In each case the name of the merchant is clearly mentioned)
Cybercriminal would not have succeeded had mentioning the name been mandatory. After analysing the existing procedures, existing security check and my personal experience, I have two suggestions to stop online banking frauds.
GiftTool or processor or payment gateway should have a software tocommunicate to the customer – not immediately but after 24 hours – through SMS and email the name of the merchant, name of his bank, his bank account number with IFSC, the amount to be transferred to that account, the way bank informs his customer in case of inter-bank or intra-bank transfer, as shown in the table above. The gap of 24 hours is necessary because at the time transaction is being processed, fraudster may have access to all the communication to the customer. Pending confirmation, the amount to be deposited in merchant’s account should be kept on hold. The amount should be deposited into merchant’s bank account only after customer’s confirmation. If the customer has not taken any action to pay, he will not confirm payment and will be saved from losing his money.
The above security check may not stop online banking frauds when a customer has placed order with a fraud merchant and is not aware that the merchant is a fraud. To take care of such frauds, the agreement between merchant and his bank (that allows merchant to accept online payments) should not be finalised unless the merchant makes a security deposit of, say, Rs. 5 (five) lakh. If the merchant is not in a position to deposit the amount in one instalment, his receipts should be automatically transferred to the security deposit until the prescribed limit is reached. The security deposit can be used to compensate victims of online banking frauds.
With these two new security checks, it would be impossible for fraudsters to stay in “business”.
In the case of online banking frauds, it is bank’s responsibility to refund money to the customer when he lodges a complaint. A bank cannot have a fraudster’s account and disown responsibility. Similarly, it is wallet service provider’s duty to refund money to the customer when he lodges complaint. A wallet service provider cannot have a fraudster’s account and disown responsibility. A gateway must disclose the name of the recipient.
A telephone call or a voicemail for confirmation will not serve the purpose because it will not produce all the details in black-and-white. (For checking fraud in withdrawal from ATM, if it is decided to provide OTP, it should always be sent as SMS, rather than as voicemail. Many cardholders may not follow the accent of voicemail.
It is easy to stop online banking frauds or at least to reduce it significantly provided RBI understands that and acts.
If readers agree with my analysis and suggested additional security measures to stop online banking frauds, they should please share this article with their friends.
Using a computer or smartphone, customer submits to the merchant’s (seller’s) website amount to be paid, information about his bank account for net banking payment or credit card information (card No. Name of the cardholder, three-digit CVV i.e. Card Verification Value)
A software, GiftTool, checks entries. If card No. is wrong, error message is flashed for correction. Thereafter, customer receives OTP (through SMS) to be entered. If there are still mistakes in card details, issuing bank refuses to accept. When all entries are correct and OTP has been entered, GiftTool submits information to the merchant’s payment gateway server.
Merchant’s payment gateway server (software that provides a link between customer and merchant) sends information toInternet Merchant Account, a bank account for an online business, that allows the merchant to deposit and refund online payments. Merchant and his bank (called the acquirer) enter into an agreement that allows the merchant to process and accept debit/credit card payments. Merchant agrees to abide by the operating regulations established by Card Issuer (VISA, Master Card, etc.).
Internet Merchant Account submits transaction details toCredit Card Interchange (a network of financial entities that communicate to manage the processing, clearing, and settlement of credit card transactions) for approval of payment.
Credit Card Interchange submits transaction details to customer’s Card Issuer for approval of payment.
Using a computer or smartphone, customer submits to the merchant’s (seller’s) website amount to be paid, information about his bank account for net banking payment or credit card information (card No. Name of the cardholder, three-digit CVV i.e. Card Verification Value)
A software, GiftTool, checks entries. If card No. is wrong, error message is flashed for correction. Thereafter, customer receives OTP (through SMS) to be entered. If there are still mistakes in card details, issuing bank refuses to accept. When all entries are correct and OTP has been entered, GiftTool submits information to the merchant’s payment gateway server.
Merchant’s payment gateway server (software that provides a link between customer and merchant) sends information toInternet Merchant Account, a bank account for an online business, that allows the merchant to deposit and refund online payments. Merchant and his bank (called the acquirer) enter into an agreement that allows the merchant to process and accept debit/credit card payments. Merchant agrees to abide by the operating regulations established by Card Issuer (VISA, Master Card, etc.).
Internet Merchant Account submits transaction details toCredit Card Interchange (a network of financial entities that communicate to manage the processing, clearing, and settlement of credit card transactions) for approval of payment.
Credit Card Interchange submits transaction details to customer’s Card Issuer for approval of payment.
Card Issuer approves or declines the transaction based on customer’s available funds and communicates its decision to Credit Card Interchange.
Credit Card Interchange communicates Card Issuer’s decision to merchant’s Internet Merchant Account.
Internet Merchant Account relays transaction results to merchant’s Payment Gateway.
Payment Gateway relays transaction results to GiftTool. Customer receives an on-screen confirmation message as well as an email confirmation via GiftTool secure servers.
Internet Merchant Account deposits appropriate fund for the transaction into merchant’s bank account
Once order has reached payment gateway, payment processor software becomes operational. It processes requests from the gateway until money reaches merchant account and customer gets confirmation of payment. Victim of online banking frauds realises only when the damage has been done.
Part V – Lawmakers and bureaucrats messed up citizenship-related issues – questions the wisdom of the lawmakers of the ruling NDA who unnecessarily amended the Citizenship Act in 2003 and did not change the wordings of the Amendment Act in 2019 to take the steam out of the protests. https://www.devendranarain.com/lawmakers-and-bu…p-related-issues/
Conspirators against India (domestic as well as foreign), most of the Indian Muslims, almost all political parties (other than BJP), self-proclaimed secularists, self-proclaimed liberals and so-called intellectuals have made common cause against National Population Register (NPR). Each one has “reasons” to oppose NPR that would contain basic information such as nationality and date of birth of every Indian resident. The common reason is deep-rooted hatred of Prime Minister Narendra Modi because he is a strong leader who says that he is against the policy of appeasement of minorities, something unheard of in Indian politics earlier. No other Prime Minister had said so. He succeeded Dr. Manmohan Singh who as Prime Minister had declared that the minorities had the first claim on the nation’s resources. Those whose vested interests are adversely affected do not want such a leader, more so when the leader is strong and firm. Compulsive Modi-haters will continue to portray him as a ‘threat’ to democracy on some excuse or the other. CAA/NPR/NRC is just an excuse.
The Muslims in the non-Muslim majority countries are very particular about their separate identity that is reflected in their day-to-day life. They want to live according to the tenets of Islam. During the British rule, prominent Muslim leaders like Dr. Syed Ahmed Khan, Mohammed Ali Jinnah and Maulana Abul Kalam Azad told them to assert their separate identity. (https://www.devendranarain.com/consequences-of-…ay-be-disastrous). Prime Minister Modi gave them a big jolt when he made triple talaq a punishable offence. Abolition of Article 370 and the Supreme Court verdict on Ayodhya were other unexpected jolts. Naturally, the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019 gave an opportunity to the Indian Muslims (it would be politically more correct to say “to the Muslim leaders with few exceptions”) to express their anger.
My impression is that there are two reasons for strong protests by Muslims.
One reason is to hide the identity of the Muslims who have come from outside and are illegally staying and working in India. Bangladeshi Muslims are even sending large amounts of money to their homeland (https://www.devendranarain.com/consequences-of-…ay-be-disastrous). The agitation against CAA was started on the ground that by discriminating on religious grounds, it violated Article 14 of the Constitution though most of those claim they are fighting for the Constitution have not even seen the Constitution. Soon they added opposition to NPR and NRC (National Register of Citizens), their main agenda.
The other reason is that if they do not protest effectively, tomorrow Modi may bring uniform civil law. Even the secular Constitution makers of India had no courage to make it mandatory. They included it in the Directive Principles of State Policy, leaving the matter to be decided by the government in the future. The Indian Muslims want to preserve their separate identity at any cost and also enjoy the special privileges guaranteed by the Constitution though they are more in number in India than the Muslims in Pakistan.
The conspirators against India such as Islamic State (IS, successor of ISIS), Pakistan’s ISI, Popular Front of India (PFI) and Rehab Foundation India (RFI) have a more dangerous agenda. They saw in the nationwide agitations by Muslims seed of Ghazwa–e–Hind (an Islamic concept in the Hadith (collection of sayings and daily practices of Prophet Muhammad). The term means a brutal war of conquering India after which the winning Islamic army would kill all Idol worshippers).
Now we know the involvement of these domestic and foreign elements in the agitations and their hands behind riots in the last week of February 2020, perhaps part of a bigger design.
When the Muslim leaders are protesting against CAA, NPR, and NRC, can the political parties competing for Muslim votes remain quiet? Before independence, Congress and Muslim league were the main competitors for Muslim votes. The League had the upper hand even in the Hindi heartland. After independence, the Muslim League in India continued with a new name though with little influence.
For several years Congress kept Muslims as their exclusive vote bank. With the emergence of regional parties and Muslim parties, competition for Muslim votes became intense and aggressive. Sonia Gandhi, the unquestioned leader of Congress since mid-March 1998 when in a palace coup like scene, the then Congress President Sitaram Kesri was insulted and booted out. In hindsight, it seems that when she saw the growing popularity of Narendra Modi as Gujarat Chief Minister, she realised that he was the greatest threat to her and her family. During her election campaign in Gujarat in 2007, she called Modi “merchant of death” for his alleged role in communal riots in early 2002 though the fact is that he had done everything possible to control the riots. (https://www.devendranarain.dev/2016/08/intellectuals-fatwa-against-narendra.html). Spreading hatred against Modi to win over Muslims and lower his image among Hindus became the main agenda of the Congress.
In 2003, when Atal Behari Vajpayee was Prime Minister, prominent Congress leaders had demanded grant of citizenship to the Hindus who had fled Pakistan and Bangladesh to seek refuge in India and opposed the grant of citizenship to Bangladeshi Muslims. The CAA of 2003 was passed with the full support of Congress, RJD and DMK. During the UPA-II, as Home Minister, P. Chidambaram was strongly in favour of NPR (https://www.devendranarain.com/citizenship-law-…right-about-turn/). The UPA government started compiling the first NPR as the first step towards the preparation of the NRC, a work that continued during the first tenure of Prime Minister Modi. Names of about 360 million Indians were entered in the NPR.
However, when the Congress sensed that the Muslims were against CAA and NPR, it took about-turn and became a strong opponent of CAA (on the ground that it violated right to equality granted by Article 14 of the Constitution) and NPR (on the ground that for the millions of Indians, it would be impossible to furnish documentary proof of date of birth and citizenship, the arguments made by the Muslim leaders).
Among those making common cause against NPR, Delhi Chief Minister and AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal, “deserves” a special mention. He formed a political party with the help of people like Amanatullah Khan, Sanjay Singh and Tahir Hussain to introduce a new type of politics in India. Perhaps, the unexpected victory in the late 2013 Delhi Assembly election convinced him that only he could challenge Modi. In a tearing hurry to prove that to the people, after a brief tenure as Chief Minister, he rushed to Varanasi to contest against the Modi. He lost his security deposit but not his confidence in himself to remain the main challenger. Like Sonia Gandhi, he made spreading hatred against Modi his main political agenda. In his opinion, whatever Modi does is wrong.
In a melodramatic speech in Delhi Assembly on March 13, while opposing the NPR, he said that neither his parents nor he and his wife had birth certificates which were required to be produced for NPR. He asked whether he and his family members would be sent to a detention camp for not producing birth certificates. In the same melodramatic tone, he said that none of the members of his Cabinet had birth certificates. The Delhi assembly adopted a resolution to oppose NPR. Governments of 12 states and union territories are opposing NPR.
If you look at the table presented later in this article, you will notice that even for Census 2011 and NPR 2010, the date of birth was demanded. Prime Minister and Home Minister have repeatedly said that every information furnished by a resident would be accepted as true without any documentary proof. On March 12, a day before melodrama by Kejriwal, Home Minister Amit Shah had categorically stated on the floor of the Rajya Sabha that only oral information was to be furnished, no documentary proof was needed, no individual would be categorised as “doubtful citizens” if the person is unable to provide the required information.
If after all the clarifications, Arvind Kejriwal expresses fear of being sent to a detention camp and decides to oppose NPR, he can be called only a mischievous fellow. Earlier, he had openly said that he was with the Shaheen Bagh sit-in against CAA. He continues to incite and frighten Muslims.
When Muslims are aggrieved and angry, the “intellectuals” think it their duty to tell them that they (the “intellectuals”) are equally worried. On March 5, as many as 194 economists and social scientists (five of them foreigners) issued a joint statement strongly attacking NPR. The signatories include professors of Jawaharlal Nehru University (29), Delhi University (17), IIMs (13), foreign universities like Oxford, Massachusetts, and Tokyo (10 Indians and 5 foreigners) and several other Indian universities colleges and institutes as well as persons not shown associated with any institution.
I have no idea of their political leanings but signatures of 29 from professors of JNU and Marxist historian Irfan Habib give the impression that they subscribe to different hues of leftist ideology. The leftists, particularly Marxists, always want to remain in forefront of any protest against any “injustice” to Muslims. They were not bothered when Kashmiri pundits or Sikhs were butchered.
They asked the government to abandon the NPR exercise, at least for the time being. Their arguments are as follows.
During the Census, anonymous data are collected for assessment of the conditions of population and force necessary social and economic policies.
Census data should remain “uncontaminated by any other factor”.
Fears have been “growing among substantial sections that enumerators can determine whether a respondent’s citizenship is “doubtful”.”
“It is not at all clear that there are any benefits from the NPR at the present juncture.”
The twin exercises conducted at the same time violate Clause 15 of the Census Act, 1948 that bars anyone from accessing “any book, register or record made by a census-officer in the discharge of his duty”.
Replies to all these arguments are available in the Census Act of 1948 and the Citizenship Act, 1955 as amended by the CAA in 2003 and the rules framed under these two acts.
The census is conducted under the Census Act while the preparation of NPR is mandated by the Citizenship Act. Thus, the two exercises are carried out under two different laws.
The census is conducted in two phases. In Phase 1 – houselisting and housing census – information is collected about buildings and structures (residential as well as non-residential), availability of basic amenities in each household and conditions of human settlement. The objective is to assess how Singh deficit, quality of dwellings, etc. In Phase 2 – population enumeration – particulars such as name, age, sex, religion, educational qualification, occupation, etc are collected. There is a time gap of 6 to 8 months between two phases.
Information for NPR 2020 will be collected along with Phase 1 of the census. The data for the first (though partial) NPR was collected in 2010 along with the house listing phase (phase I) of the Census of India 2011 and updated in 2015 by conducting a door-to-door survey. The next exercise (updating and addition) will be carried out along with the house listing phase of Census 2021 between April and September 2020 in all the States/UTs except Assam. Gazette notification to that effect was issued on July 31, 2019.
True, most of the particulars to be collected for NPR (along with Phase 1 of the census) will also be collected, though separately, in Phase 2 of the census. The charge that should be leveled against the government is that there is unnecessary duplication. Whatever information is to be collected for NPR should be part of the Phase 2 exercise. Anyway, these two exercises are being done independent of each other.
The table set out below contains a list of information for NPR and also what could not be part of Census data.
NPR 2020 (Information to be collected under the Citizenship Act and Rules framed thereunder)
Census 2011 (Information collected under the Citizenship Act, 1948 and Rules framed thereunder)
S. No.
Yes
No
1
Name of person
Yes
2
Relationship to head of family
Yes
3
Sex
Yes
4
Marital status
Yes
5
Date of Birth
Yes
6
Place of Birth
No
7
Nationality as declared
No
8
Passport Number*
No
9
Educational Qualification
Yes
10
Occupation/Activity
Yes
11
Present address of usual residence
Yes
12
Duration of stay and place of last residence
Yes (Only place of last residence)
13
Permanent Residential Address
14
Father’s name, date of birth and place of birth.*
No
15
Mother’s name, date of birth and place of birth.*
No
16
Spouse’s name, date of birth and place of birth. (if married)*
No
15
Mobile Number*
No
17
Aadhaar Number*
No
19
Voter ID Card Number*
No
20
Driving License Number*
No
Information marked * not collected for NPR 2010.
In the Puttaswamy case, the Supreme Court has ruled that furnishing Aadhar details cannot be made mandatory.
Had I access to any of 194 signatories, I would have asked a straight question: ‘how many of have read relevant laws?’ Most probably, a couple of mischievous fellows – they are mischievous – planned, drafted and got signatures of those sharing their views. It is highly unlikely that professors of Tokyo University would bother to read the Citizenship Act, Census Act, and rules before appending their signature.
Had they read the two legislations and the relevant rules, they would not give him arguments (a), (b) and (e).
Strictly speaking, the census is not “anonymous”. Personal particulars of each individual are collected though not maintained in the form of a register, as required for the NPR. Only the numbers – population, males, females, educated, educated, etc – at the village level to the national level are published.
Since census and NPR are two different exercises, there is no question of “contamination” of census data by any other factor. Nor is there any question of violation of Clause 15 of the Census Act, 1948. The census data are not to be used for NPR.
The signatories’ real objections are as mentioned at (c) and (d). They are making these arguments because the Muslim leaders are saying so. The wordings of the argument make their intention very clear. The Modi government is perhaps the only government in the world which is being told by highly educated Indians and their foreign friends that ‘please don’t try to know the number of those illegally.’ Will those foreigners tell the same thing to the governments in their own countries?
Several countries including Australia, China, Canada, Indonesia and USA maintain registers to know each and every person – citizen or non-citizen living with permission or without permission – within the boundaries of the country.
The Kargil Review Committee formed by the government after the Kargil war (May-July 1999) recommended preparation of a register of citizens and non-citizens as an essential national security measure. The CAA of 2003 authorised preparation of National Register of Citizens (NRC). NPR is the first step towards preparation of NRC, though the government has deferred it in view of protests by the Muslims.
The more I read opinions and suggestions of academics and other intellectuals on who should be our leader and how the government should work, the more I am convinced that despite all their degrees and all their achievements in their profession, they know nothing about the governance of the country. They are not just educated idiots but highly mischievous fellows. Readers may recall that when in 2013, BJP declared Narendra Modi its prime ministerial candidate, such “intellectuals” became nervous. (https://www.devendranarain.dev/2016/08/intellectuals-fatwa-against-narendra.html). More than 100 Indian and foreign “intellectuals” including Nobel laureate Amartya Sen had made a written appeal to the Indian voters not to elect Narendra Modi.
That’s why I am saying that the conspirators against India to “intellectuals” have made a common cause with NPR.
They are opposing NPR because they do not want the government and the people of India to know the number of Muslims illegally living in India. A large number of Indian politicians and the so-called intellectuals are helping the conspirators against India. I will not be surprised if many Indian politicians are on the payrolls of the foreign conspirators.
By issuing an irresponsible statement, the mischievous “intellectuals” are supporting the programme of very dangerous Islamic State. Recently, on the basis of survivors’ horrifying testimonies, a New York Times reporter Rukmini Callimachi gave chilling account of Islamic State’s systematic, logistically complex program of sex trafficking of captured Yazidi women & girls.
These stupid “intellectuals” will realise what they are doing only when they will have to live in Islamic State. The same is true of all Indian politicians supporting agitations against CAA_NPR_NRC. All these fellows are pushing India to hell.