Facebook Instagram X Youtube
Wednesday, April 22, 2026
Facebook Instagram X Youtube
Home Blog Page 186

“Can’t Accept That Christians Can Use Ground For Easter But Hindus Can’t Do Annadhanam”: Madras High Court Intervenes To Ensure Public Ground Belongs To All In TN Village

By
The Commune
-

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has delivered a significant ruling on religious freedom and the public’s right to access common land. The court granted permission to a Hindu organization to organize an Annadhanam (community meal) in Dindigul district, despite objections claiming the venue had been exclusively used for Christian Easter events for more than a hundred years. Citing Article 25 of the Indian Constitution, the court affirmed that the freedom to practice and propagate one’s faith is a protected fundamental right.

The bench emphasized that local officials and the police are obligated to safeguard this constitutional right rather than curtail it on the pretext of potential “law and order” problems. It noted that maintaining order is the responsibility of the police, not an excuse to deny citizens their lawful freedoms.

The judgment arose from a petition filed by a devotee who had sought permission to hold an Annadhanam near the Kaliyamman Temple on a public ground. His request was denied by local authorities, who instead suggested conducting the event on a public road. Finding this arbitrary and discriminatory, the petitioner approached the High Court. When questioned, the police justified their refusal by claiming the event might trigger disturbances.

During the proceedings, the court learned that a permanent stage had been constructed on one side of the ground about a century ago, and local Christian groups traditionally used it for Easter festivities. Members of that community argued that Hindus had never been allowed to conduct religious activities on the site. A 2017 peace committee meeting had also recorded an understanding that only “customary events” would continue there.

Justice G.R. Swaminathan, presiding over the case, examined the land’s ownership and found that the open area was classified as gramamatham—public land under panchayat control—and therefore belonged to the state. The judge held that any land owned by the government must remain open for all citizens, irrespective of faith or community.

He reasoned that denying access to a group solely because of its religion would constitute discrimination prohibited under Article 15 of the Constitution. In his words, “A public ground should be available for the use of all communities or none.” The court thus rejected the idea that Christians could use the ground for Easter but Hindus could not use it for Annadhanam.

At the same time, Justice Swaminathan clarified that the Christian community’s exclusive use of the ground during Easter must be respected, and no other event should be permitted during that period.

The judgment also took note of the demographics of the village, which comprises roughly 2,500 Christian families and 400 Hindu families. The court criticized the authorities for citing community opposition as a reason to deny permission, calling it “a very sorry state of affairs.” The judge further stressed the need for interfaith goodwill, remarking that all religious festivals should be occasions for participation, not exclusion.

In a touching personal reflection, he said, “When a Christian friend celebrates Christmas, I should greet him first,” recalling how a Muslim friend once made vegetarian Nonbu Kanji so he could share in the meal. “Such is the beauty of our culture,” he observed, adding that this spirit of mutual respect is essential for communal harmony.

Ultimately, the court overturned the authorities’ rejection order and directed the Tahsildar to grant permission for the Annadhanam at the requested public ground. The petitioner, however, was instructed to handle all logistical arrangements and to restore the venue to its original condition after the event.

Source: LawChakra

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally. 

Islamist Zohran Mamdani Supporter & Soros-Funded Activist Sunita Vishwanath’s ‘Hindus For Human Rights’ With Ties To Terror Orgs Hosts US Event For Anti-India/Anti-Modi Journalists

By
The Commune
-

A group of Indian journalists and commentators known for their usual rhetoric against Prime Minister Narendra Modi participated in a recent event in the United States organized by Hindus for Human Rights (HfHR) – an advocacy group co-founded by activist Sunita Vishwanath, who has been associated with George Soros’s Open Society Foundation.

The event, titled “Journalism in Today’s India: A Conversation with Veteran Journalists,” was held on 19 October 2025, in Palo Alto, California. It was jointly organized by the Association for India’s Development (AID) and featured seven speakers: Anand Vardhan Singh, Abhay Dubey, Ashutosh, Rakesh Pathak, Sheetal P. Singh, Rajkeshwar Singh, and Gyanesh Tiwari.

Promotional material for the event said discussions would focus on “media freedom, truth-telling, and navigating political pressures and censorship.” However, social media users have questioned the timing and funding behind the journalists’ extended foreign stay, several of whom have been touring or stationed in the US for weeks, reportedly for the second time this year.

The participation of Uttar Pradesh–based journalists in particular has drawn attention ahead of the state’s upcoming elections.

HfHR – An Organization With Terror And Soros Links Behind

Sunita Vishwanath, a key figure behind the event, is known for her activism against the Indian government. She co-founded HfHR in 2019 alongside groups like the Indian American Muslim Council (IAMC) and the Organization for Minorities of India (OFMI), both of which have been linked to Islamist advocacy and have actively protested Modi’s international visits.

IAMC is associated with groups like ICNA (Islamic Circle of North America), known for ties to Pakistan’s Jamaat-e-Islami and promoting anti-India propaganda.

IAMC’s Executive Director, Rasheed Ahmed, also leads IMANA (Islamic Medical Association of North America), implicated for alleged misuse of funds involving links to Pakistani officials and terrorist organizations like Lashkar-e-Taiba.

Vishwanath’s NGO, Women for Afghan Women, has received funding from George Soros’s Open Society Foundation, raising concerns about the financial backing of such initiatives.

The event also highlighted the political network opposing Modi. Vishwanath previously hosted Rahul Gandhi during his 2023 US visit.

She has also publicly supported Zohran Kwame Mamdani, the New York City mayoral candidate accused of anti-Hindu activism.

Mamdani, who recently attempted to appeal to Hindu voters through temple visits, has a record of leading protests against the Ayodhya Ram Temple, which he labeled a “fascist atrocity,” and aligning with Khalistani separatists.

He participated in a protest where slogans of “Hindus are bastards” were echoing. He demonized the construction of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. And who were his allies? Not progressive idealists, but Khalistani separatists! Nice company he keeps.

Mamdani is just following the well-worn playbook of the left: patronize the Hindus for a photo-op while advancing policies that would cripple them.

This is a man who has publicly labeled India’s Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, a “war criminal.”

Mamdani often conflates Hindus with India’s ruling BJP, turning political dissent into religious animosity. When fellow politicians like Jennifer Rajkumar and Kevin Thomas refused to denounce PM Modi during his 2023 New York visit, Mamdani labeled them as complicit, again stoking intra-community rifts.

His hatred for Hindus mirrors his hatred for Jews, both are enemies in the Islamist worldview.

It is this Mamdani that Sunita Vishwanath supports and what does she and her organisation Hindus For Human Rights conduct? An event on journalism in India – that too in American soil! Sunita is an activist linked to anti-India initiatives like the “Dismantling Global Hindutva” conference. Vishwanath is associated with groups like ICNA (Islamic Circle of North America), known for ties to Pakistan’s Jamaat-e-Islami and promoting anti-India propaganda.

Here is a quick look at how Sunita is connected to Jihadi networks such as IAMC and the Soros Foundation.

Image Source: Disinfo Lab

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally. 

Two Visions, One Nation: How Patel And Nehru’s Ideological Rift Defined India’s Early Years

By
The Commune
-
nehru sardar vallabhbhai patel

The period immediately following India’s independence was defined by the monumental task of nation-building, a process guided by two towering figures with profoundly different philosophies: Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and Jawaharlal Nehru.

As India’s first Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister, Patel was a pragmatic realist, fiercely focused on national integration, internal security, and a strong, centralized state. In contrast, Prime Minister Nehru was an idealist, championing socialist economics and a foreign policy based on internationalism.

This report details eight major conflicts between them from 1946 to 1950, highlighting how their contrasting visions shaped the nascent republic and how Patel’s more decisive approach was often overruled, with long-term consequences for the nation.

#1 The 1946 Congress Presidential Election

In May 1946, the first major conflict occurred over the election for the Congress President, a post that would lead to becoming the first Prime Minister. Despite 12 out of 15 Pradesh Congress Committees nominating Sardar Patel for the presidency, Mahatma Gandhi expressed his preference for Jawaharlal Nehru. Out of respect for Gandhi’s wishes, Patel voluntarily withdrew his candidacy, clearing the path for Nehru. This decision, while ensuring party unity, established Nehru as the paramount leader and set the stage for their future disagreements, with Patel’s supporters often viewing it as a missed opportunity for a more pragmatic leadership from the very inception of independent India.

#2 The Kashmir Issue

October 1947 onwards, the integration of Jammu & Kashmir became a critical point of contention. While both leaders agreed to send troops after the Maharaja’s accession, Patel advocated for swift, decisive military action to secure the entire state. He strongly disagreed with Nehru’s decision to take the issue to the United Nations in January 1948, arguing it internationalized a domestic matter and weakened India’s position. Patel believed a firm military stance could have resolved the issue more conclusively. His frustration was evident when he later remarked that “Kashmir is insoluble,” highlighting the consequences of what he saw as Nehru’s hesitant and idealistic approach.

#3 Perceptions of the China Threat

In November 1950, following China’s invasion of Tibet, Sardar Patel wrote a comprehensive memo to Nehru in November 1950, warning him of a new threat from the North. Patel expressed deep suspicion of China’s intentions, advocating for a fortified border and a tough, realistic foreign policy. Nehru, however, dismissed these warnings as “unnecessary suspicion,” believing that Communist China could be a peaceful ally. He pursued a policy of appeasement and idealism, famously championing “Hindi-Chini Bhai-Bhai,” which ultimately proved disastrous in the 1962 Sino-Indian War, validating Patel’s foresight.

#4 Administration of the North-East

In 1950, a significant administrative conflict arose over Nehru’s policy to place the North-East Frontier Agency (NEFA) under the purview of the Ministry of External Affairs. Patel vehemently opposed this, arguing that it would psychologically and administratively isolate the region from the rest of India. He warned that treating the region as a foreign entity would have adverse consequences. His fears were later realized as the policy made it easier for secessionist elements and missionaries to propagate that the region was not an integral part of India, creating long-term challenges for national integration.

#5 Internal Party Democracy

Again in 1950, Sardar Patel was a staunch advocate for a disciplined and democratic Congress party. In 1948, he had pushed for a constitutional amendment to prohibit internal party factions with separate membership, which led to the ouster of the Congress Socialist Party (CSP), a group Nehru was close to. The conflict climaxed in the 1950 Congress Presidential election. Patel supported Purushottam Das Tandon, while Nehru backed J.B. Kripalani. When Tandon won despite Nehru’s open opposition and threats to resign, it was a major political victory for Patel, underscoring the deep rift over control of the party’s organization and ideology.

#6 Military Action in Hyderabad

In September 1948, the integration of the princely state of Hyderabad was a critical test of India’s resolve. Patel, describing Hyderabad as an “ulcer in the belly of India,” pushed for immediate military action (Operation Polo) against the Nizam and his brutal Razakar militia to quell violence and secure integration. Nehru, preoccupied with India’s international image and the potential for UN intervention, favored a prolonged diplomatic approach. Patel’s persistence eventually led to a swift military operation in September 1948, which successfully integrated the state, demonstrating the effectiveness of his firm, security-first approach over Nehru’s caution.

#7 Divergent Economic Visions

Between 1947 and 1950, Nehru and Patel held drastically different economic visions. Nehru was a committed socialist who envisioned the “elimination of profit” and established a Soviet-style Planning Commission to control the economy. Patel, however, believed capitalism could be “purged of its hideousness” and denied the inevitability of class struggle. He had faith in Indian industrialists and argued for a balanced approach that encouraged private enterprise alongside social welfare. Patel was instrumental in tempering Nehru’s socialist resolutions within the Congress, advocating for a mixed economy that would not stifle private initiative.

#8 The Socialist Pattern Resolution

Although Sardar Patel passed away in 1950, the ideological conflict over economics continued. In the 1955 Avadi session, Nehru successfully passed a resolution committing the Congress to a “socialist pattern of society.” This was a direct implementation of Nehru’s vision and a move away from Patel’s beliefs. Patel had consistently acted as a brake on Nehru’s socialist agenda during his lifetime, purging such language from official documents. The Avadi resolution marked the culmination of Nehru’s economic philosophy, which came to define India’s policy for decades, ultimately sidelining Patel’s advocacy for a more enterprise-friendly economy.

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

Months Before October 7 Hamas Terror Attack, Islamist Zohran Mamdani Led A Campaign Against US Charities Aiding Israel

By
The Commune
-
zohran mamdani nyc islamist new york city

In 2023, the New York State Assembly passed a controversial bill aimed at stopping tax-exempt donations from state-registered charities that funded Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank – activities widely regarded as violations of international law.

The legislation, titled “Not on Our Dime!: Ending New York Funding of Israeli Settler Violence Act,” was introduced by the then-Assembly member Zohran Mamdani in May 2023. It sought to prohibit not-for-profit corporations registered in New York from using charitable funds to support organisations linked to Israeli settlement expansion or violence against Palestinians in the occupied territories.

This was just a few months before the October 7 Hamas terror attack on Israel. In a now-viral video, he is seen campaigning vociferously for it. He is seen saying, “So who is ready to end the exception? I want to hear you say ‘Not On Our Dime Not On Our Dime’.”

In essence, he was already globalising the Intifada.

SMILE GONE:

Mamdani argued that several New York-based charities had collectively sent at least $60 million a year to Israeli settler groups, money that he said contributed to “the history of expulsion and dispossession of Palestinians” in contravention of the Geneva Conventions. “New York can no longer subsidise war crimes and the flouting of international law,” he said at the time.

The law amended the state’s not-for-profit corporation statute by adding a new Section 116, which explicitly defined “unauthorised support of Israeli settlement activity.” The definition covered aiding or abetting the Israeli government, armed forces, or citizens in acts such as the transfer of settlers into occupied territory, violence against Palestinians, or the destruction and seizure of Palestinian property.

The legislation empowered the New York attorney general to take legal action against non-profit organisations found to be funding settlement activities. It also allowed Palestinians harmed by such groups to seek damages in U.S. courts.

During the debate, Mamdani named several U.S.-based organisations as principal targets, including the Central Fund of Israel (CFI) and Friends of Ir David, both of which had long been accused of financing settler organisations operating in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem.

CFI, which described itself as “promoting charitable causes in Israel,” had been linked to groups such as the Israel Land Fund, accused of facilitating the forced eviction of Palestinian families to make way for Jewish settlers. Friends of Ir David was associated with Elad, a settler organisation responsible for evictions in occupied East Jerusalem under its campaign to “Judaise” the city.

“These organisations masqueraded as charities while funding illegal activities,” Mamdani said while presenting the bill.

The legislation drew sharp opposition from several Assembly members, who denounced it as an attempt to “demonise Jewish charities connected to Israel.” They claimed the measure was designed “to antagonise pro-Israel New Yorkers and sow divisions within the Democratic Party.”

Despite criticism, the bill won backing from major human rights groups, including the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), the US Campaign for Palestinian Rights, and Jewish Voice for Peace. CCR’s executive director Vince Warren had argued at the time: “Aiding and abetting war crimes is not charitable, period. This bill ensures New York is not inadvertently subsidising violations of international law.”

After encountering initial resistance, his coalition expanded the bill in May 2024 before reintroducing it in February 2025. The final version passed after extensive committee deliberations and public hearings.

The move followed longstanding revelations that U.S.-based charities had funded Israeli settlements for years.
Mamdani acknowledged at the time that the bill’s passage would be politically contentious, given strong bipartisan support for Israel in the United States. “There’s a phrase I grew up hearing — ‘PEP: progressive except Palestine,’” he said. “Politicians who preach universal rights always seem to find an exception when it comes to Israel and Palestine.”

(Source: The Guardian)

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally. 

Amazon’s Indian-Origin Employee Harjeet Singh Allegedly Glorifies Terror, Peddles Pakistan & Khalistani Propaganda, Attacks Hindus And Jews

By
The Commune
-

A controversy has erupted after social media posts attributed to Harjeet Singh (FTWHarjeet), reportedly an employee of Amazon, surfaced online showing patterns of anti-Semitic and anti-Hindu hate speech, terror glorification, and violent rhetoric.

Image Source: X

He also allegedly claims he has worked with the Indian Air Force (the LinkedIn profile also reflects that).

He even claimed so in some of his posts on his handle. For example, when he shared about his podcast discussion with a PAF pilot about Operation Sindoor, badmouthing India.

Khalistani Allegiance

Screenshots and archived posts reviewed by independent users indicate that Singh allegedly shared content praising Babbar Khalsa, a US-designated terrorist organization responsible for bombings that killed over 300 people, including Canadians and Americans.

Image Source: X
Image Source: X

Analysts tracking online extremism described his conduct as an example of “radical propaganda finding cover under corporate anonymity.”

In multiple posts, Singh is seen posing with a firearm, using it as a symbol of aggression and resistance. Commentators have expressed concern that this was more than performative posturing, calling it a “direct display of hate and intimidation.”

He has also made several threats to Hindus on his X handle.

Targeted Hate And Harassment

According to digital investigators, Singh allegedly engaged in targeted harassment of Jewish individuals and made anti-Hindu attacks, often using derogatory or inflammatory language. In several instances, he appeared to justify or glorify violent movements associated with Khalistani separatism.

He has also made anti-India posts while showing off his Air Force credentials.

Reports further claim that Singh made politically motivated posts targeting elected officials, including California Governor Gavin Newsom, making derogatory posts such as the below and accusing them of suppressing Sikh and Islamic identities.

Image Source: X

Extremist Rhetoric And Propaganda Themes

His social media activity reportedly included claims that Islam and Sikhism were under threat, while Hindus and Hinduism were portrayed as oppressors. In one thread, Singh allegedly expressed hope that Khalistani and Pakistani forces would “take over India,” invoking familiar narratives used in extremist circles.

Here are some pro-Khalistani posts he made.

Singh also reportedly amplified content aligned with Dravidianist and separatist ideologies, connecting them with broader anti-India propaganda networks.

Account Withheld In India

Following multiple reports and complaints, Singh’s X (formerly Twitter) account has been withheld in India, indicating that local authorities or the platform may have found his content in violation of Indian laws relating to hate speech or incitement. Despite this, the account remains active in other regions, where the inflammatory material continues to circulate.

Corporate Accountability Questions

Observers and advocacy groups have urged Amazon to take note of the allegations, arguing that such conduct violates workplace ethics and the company’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies.

The matter has sparked a broader conversation about corporate responsibility in monitoring employees’ extremist affiliations, especially in influential positions where online conduct can impact brand integrity and public trust.

As of now, Amazon has not publicly responded to the allegations.

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally. 

Convert, Confirm Or Be Cancelled: Religious Freedom In US Is A Sham, A Country That Preaches Freedom Abroad But Practices Intolerance At Home

By
The Commune
-

America loves to lecture other nations about religious freedom. The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) regularly denounces countries like India for allegedly persecuting Christians, demanding they be designated as “Countries of Particular Concern.” Yet here’s the uncomfortable truth: the American government is simultaneously creating task forces to privilege Christianity at home while Hindu Americans face harassment at the highest levels of government. This is not hypocrisy but a calculated use of religious freedom rhetoric as a geopolitical weapon.

The USCIRF: A Tribunal For Thee, But Not For Me

The mechanism for this hypocrisy is official and well-funded. The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) acts as a global moral arbiter, annually publishing reports that name and shame other nations for their failures. It recommends designating countries as “Countries of Particular Concern” and lectures the world on the path to tolerance.

Yet, this moral authority rings hollow. How can we credibly condemn the suppression of religious minorities abroad when, domestically, we see a concerted push to impose a majoritarian Christian culture? The same political ecosystem that supports USCIRF’s mission often champions a vision of America where non-Christian faiths are treated as foreign, suspect, or simply in need of conversion.

The Vance Case: A Microcosm Of Assimilation

Look no further than the personal story of JD and Usha Vance. Usha Vance has spoken with clarity about her Hindu upbringing, stating it shaped her parents into “really very good people.” Yet, in the public square, her faith has been systematically erased and targeted.

Her husband, the vice president, did not defend her heritage when it was mocked by trolls in his own political base. Instead, he publicly diminished her religious background and expressed his hope that she would “eventually” embrace Christianity. Vance just made a public statement that signals a disturbing norm: your faith is welcome only as a waystation on the road to ours.

This is the domestic reality of “religious freedom” for many in the US: not the liberty to practice one’s faith in peace, but the pressure to assimilate into the dominant Christian identity to be fully accepted.

The Ramaswamy Test: Conditional Acceptance For A “Model Minority”

The experience of Vivek Ramaswamy further exposes the conditional nature of this acceptance. He ran for president as a staunch Hindu, but to be palatable, he was forced to perform a delicate dance. He constantly framed his Hindu beliefs as an echo of “Judeo-Christian values,” a testament to the unspoken rule that to be legitimate, a faith must be validated through a Christian lens.

Despite his compliance, he still faced naked bigotry. When commentator Ann Coulter told him, “I still would not have voted for you because you’re an Indian,” it laid bare the ultimate barrier. His faith, no matter how he packaged it, and his ethnicity were, for a significant portion of the electorate, disqualifying. His story proves that for non-Christians, acceptance is often provisional and can be revoked at any time by the forces of pure prejudice.

Digital Demonization: When Hindu Gods Become Targets

Beyond policy and politics, the cultural hostility toward Hinduism plays out most visibly in the digital sphere. On social media, a network of ultra-Christian zealots — often based in the U.S. — regularly circulate abusive caricatures of Hindu gods and goddesses, depicting them as “demons,” “false idols,” or “Satanic figures.” Organized evangelical pages and YouTube channels openly call for “breaking the idols of India,” echoing a colonial-era contempt dressed up as modern evangelism.

Platforms like X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, and Instagram are flooded with memes that mock Hindu deities, equating sacred symbols like Om, Shiva, and Durga with devil imagery. These attacks rarely face moderation, even as the same companies swiftly censor perceived “hate speech” against Christianity or Islam. Hindu Americans who call out such bigotry are dismissed as “Hindutva extremists,” while their abusers hide behind the language of “religious freedom” and “free speech.”

Alexander Duncan, a Republican leader from Texas, posted on social media:
“Why are we allowing a false statue of a false Hindu God to be here in Texas? We are a CHRISTIAN nation!”

He was referring to the 90-ft statue of Lord Hanuman at the Sri Ashtalakshmi Temple in Sugar Land, Texas.

The statue continues to face online attacks from MAGA supporters since its unveiling in 2024.

This is not fringe behavior — it reflects a deeper ecosystem that normalizes the vilification of Hinduism while presenting Christianity as the universal moral standard. The irony is stark: the same America that lectures India about tolerance harbors online crusaders who actively dehumanize Hindu belief, often with silent approval from the very institutions claiming to defend religious liberty.

The Great American Sham

This is the great American sham. They cry freedom of religion through USCIRF in other countries, pointing fingers at nations that privilege a state religion or a majority faith. Yet, simultaneously, a powerful movement in their politics seeks to do the very same thing in their country – impose a Christian identity on their laws, their culture, and their national self-concept.

Until America extends genuine religious freedom protection to its own minorities, until it stops lecturing other nations, until a Vice President can’t publicly hope his wife converts, until Hindu candidates aren’t subjected to religious tests for office, American preaching about global religious freedom will remain what it truly is: cynical geopolitical theatre masquerading as principle. The hypocrisy isn’t incidental. It’s the entire point.

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

AAP MP Swati Maliwal Accuses Self-Styled “Fact-Checker” Zubair Of ‘Fake Propaganda’ Over Kejriwal’s Alleged ‘Sheesh Mahal’ In Punjab

By
The Commune
-
AAP MP Swati Maliwal Accuses Alleged Fact-Checker Zubair Of ‘Fake Propaganda’ Over Kejriwal’s Alleged ‘Sheesh Mahal’ In Punjab

Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Rajya Sabha MP Swati Maliwal on Friday, 31 October 2025, alleged that former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has been allotted a “luxurious 7-star government mansion” in Chandigarh under the Punjab Chief Minister’s quota, dubbing it a new “Sheesh Mahal.”

In a post on X, Maliwal wrote, “After the Sheesh Mahal in Delhi became vacant, Arvind Kejriwal ji has had an even more splendid Sheesh Mahal built in Punjab than the one in Delhi. In Chandigarh’s Sector 2, a luxurious 7-star government mansion of 2 acres under the CM quota has been allotted to Arvind Kejriwal ji.”

Maliwal, who has been at odds with the AAP leadership since she accused one of Kejriwal’s aides of assault last year, further claimed that “the entire Punjab government is serving one man.” She alleged that Kejriwal used a government helicopter and private jet for party work, posting, “Yesterday, he boarded a government helicopter right from in front of his house for Ambala, and then from Ambala, the Punjab government’s private jet took him to Gujarat for party work. The entire Punjab government is engaged in serving one man.”

Earlier this month, the Delhi government confirmed plans to convert the former chief minister’s residence at 6, Flag Staff Road — dubbed “Sheesh Mahal” by critics — into a government guest house with an in-house cafeteria. Kejriwal’s residence had been a key issue in the BJP’s 2025 Delhi Assembly election campaign, which saw the party return to power in the national capital after 27 years, winning 48 of 70 seats. Kejriwal lost his New Delhi seat to BJP’s Parvesh Verma, while AAP secured 22 seats.

Following Maliwal’s post, Alt News co-founder and alleged fact-checker Mohammed Zubair responded on X, disputing her claims. “Hello @SwatiJaiHind, the Google map screenshot you are showing is of a building next to the Haryana Agricultural Minister’s office. Also, the building wasn’t built now but has been there for years. Here are Google images of that building from 2013-2024,” Zubair wrote. He further questioned the area estimate, stating, “Not sure how you got the figure of two acres. The empty land opposite the building is max 20,000 sq ft, not 2 acres (87,120 sq ft).”

Maliwal later hit back at Zubair, calling him a “so-called fact checker” who “worked overtime trying to prove that Chandigarh’s lavish bungalow being used by Kejriwal ji is some random building.” She added, “Do read this Indian Express report that exposes his fake propaganda! He should now delete his tweet and apologise for posting without research.”

 Neither the Punjab government nor AAP has issued an official statement on the controversy so far.

(Source: Money Control)

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

If Thanking Jesus And Allah Is Not A Problem, Why Is ‘Jai Shri Ram’ Communal?

By
The Commune
-

In world cricket, expressions of faith have always had a curious double standard. When Western players kneel, pray, or point heavenward, it is described as “spiritual,” “humble,” or “deeply moving.” When Indian athletes express pride in their Hindu faith by saying “Jai Shri Ram” or “Har Har Mahadev”, the same global commentators suddenly find it “polarizing” or “majoritarian.”

The recent example of Jemimah Rodrigues has brought this contradiction into sharp focus.

In India’s stunning semi-final win over Australia, Rodrigues played the innings of her life – a magnificent 127* that powered the women’s team into the World Cup final. As cameras rolled and the world waited for her reaction, she began her speech not with a tribute to the tricolour, not to her team, but to Jesus. “Firstly, I want to thank Jesus, because I couldn’t do this on my own. I know He carried me through today,” she said.

No one condemned her. Nor should they have. Faith is personal, and she had every right to express it publicly.

But imagine, for a moment, if a Hindu player had said, “I want to thank Lord Ram, He gave me strength,” or quoted a verse from the Bhagavad Gita instead of the Bible. Would the reaction have been as serene? Would the same media outlets have called it “graceful faith,” or would they have exploded with editorials about “religion entering the playing field”?

This hypocrisy has persisted for decades, nurtured by the colonial hangover that still defines what is “acceptable” belief in public life.

The irony deepens when we look beyond the field. Rodrigues’s father, Ivan Rodrigues, a preacher associated with Bro Manuel Ministries, allegedly used Mumbai’s Khar Gymkhana where Jemimah herself held honorary membership, to host a series of evangelical gatherings aimed at “bringing people to Christ.” After members complained of repeated use of the club for religious events, Jemimah’s membership was revoked. The same liberal ecosystem that celebrates her “faith journey” had little to say about these alleged attempts at proselytization inside a secular institution.

Her old video, now resurfaced, shows a teenage Jemimah testifying about “how Jesus made her score 25 runs” before collapsing in what appears to be a charismatic-style religious trance — again, an overtly religious moment treated as harmless.

Let us be clear: no one questions Jemimah’s right to believe. What needs questioning is the hypocrisy of those who champion “freedom of religion” for evangelicals abroad, often through platforms like the USCIRF or the Western press, but shame Hindus at home for expressing their devotion openly.

If Jemimah can thank Jesus, Hindu players should never hesitate to thank their Bhagwan. If an Indian Christian can quote Scripture on camera, an Indian Hindu should feel no guilt in chanting “Jai Shri Ram” or “Har Har Mahadev” when they triumph.

Take, for instance, players from Pakistan or other Muslim-majority teams. It is routine for them to bow in sajda after reaching a milestone or to gather for namaz on the field — powerful public affirmations of their faith. No Western journalist calls it “divisive” or “inappropriate.”

Yet, if an Indian cricketer were to fold hands before the stumps or raise a “Jai Shri Ram” after a victory, the same global commentators who applaud namaz would be quick to label it “majoritarian” or “Hindu nationalist.” This selective outrage exposes not a concern for secularism, but a deep discomfort with unapologetic Hindu expression.

For too long, Hindus have been conditioned to suppress visible faith, to whisper their prayers while others preach theirs. That era must end. Equality in expression means equal respect for every form of faith, not selective celebration based on Western comfort.

So yes, thank you Jemimah Rodrigues. Not for the runs alone, but for reminding a billion Hindus that belief, too, deserves its voice. That faith does not have to be hidden. And that if Jesus can be thanked at the crease, then so can Ram.

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally. 

Deep State’s New Puppet? Anarchist Sonam Wangchuk Who Instigated Leh Violence Named As TIME’s Most Influential Person

By
The Commune
-
Deep State's New Puppet? Anarchist Sonam Wangchuk Who Instigated Leh Violence Named As Time's Most Influential Person

The TIME recently published an article naming Sonam Wangchuk, the engineer-activist currently detained by Indian authorities for his role in instigating violent protests in Leh, to its 2025 TIME100 Climate list, celebrating him as one of the “world’s most influential leaders driving business to real climate action.”

Just as the Indian government identified Sonam Wangchuk as a national security threat, slapping him with the National Security Act (NSA), a major American magazine anoints him a global climate hero. The celebration of an anarchist by TIME seems to indicate that Wangchuk is a Deep State puppet.

Wangchuk, currently detained under the National Security Act (NSA), is the face of protests in Ladakh that escalated from environmental concerns into violent demands for autonomy and separate statehood. The Indian government has presented substantial evidence that his so-called “climate fast” was a carefully orchestrated political campaign, designed to mobilize crowds under a virtuous guise while pushing a divisive separatist agenda. His arrest in September 2025 followed accusations that he was mobilizing crowds and delivering fiery speeches earlier seen as a direct challenge to India’s sovereignty.

Critics are now asking whose narrative we should believe. The TIME piece, which leans heavily on Wangchuk’s own storytelling, feels less like a neutral profile and more like a strategic PR rescue mission for a figure whose actions have been deemed unlawful by the Indian state. The timing is, to many, highly suspect, another case of a Western institution propping up someone who stands in opposition to the elected Indian government.

The TIME’s profile appears to be a strategic, one-sided rehabilitation effort. This is a public relations campaign for a man whose actions have been deemed a direct threat to India’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The timing is particularly suspect. This international endorsement arrives just as the Indian judiciary is processing the state’s serious charges against him. It mirrors a familiar pattern where foreign entities attempt to legitimize individuals who actively oppose the policies of a democratically elected government, effectively placing external pressure on India’s internal legal and political processes.

Security officials have long warned that Wangchuk’s environmental work provides a perfect “halo effect,” shielding his political activities from scrutiny. The TIME accolade seems to exploit this very duality, celebrating the engineer to legitimize the agitator. This playbook is not new: create a global icon out of a local dissident, then use that platform to challenge the nation-state from the outside.

The glaring disconnect between his portrayal as a global climate saviour and his status as a detained individual facing serious national security charges raises a critical question: whose interests does this narrative truly serve? For many observers, the answer points not to genuine environmental advocacy, but to a deeper, more cynical game where Wangchuk is merely a pawn in a larger strategy to undermine India’s unity and stability.

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

“That Individual Alone Is Not Responsible”, Says Actor Ajith Kumar On Karur Stampede

By
The Commune
-
"We Are All Responsible", Says Actor Ajith Kumar On Karur Stampede

Actor Ajith Kumar has reacted to the recent stampede at actor Vijay’s political rally in Karur, Tamil Nadu, which left 41 people dead and over 60 injured. Speaking to The Hollywood Reporter India, Ajith said the tragic incident reflected a deeper societal obsession with crowds and celebrity culture, adding that “all this has to end.”

Referring to how fans sometimes take celebrations to extremes, Ajith said that while he is grateful for the affection he receives, the “love and attention” should be monitored. He shared, “Fans, in the name of celebration, burst firecrackers and tear the screens… all this needs to end.”

Addressing the Karur tragedy, Ajith remarked, “I’m not trying to put anybody down, but like I say, there’s so much happening in Tamil Nadu today because of this stampede that happened. That individual (Vijay) alone is not responsible; we are all responsible for it, and I think even the media has a part to play in this. Today I think we have become a society that’s so obsessed with gathering a crowd, to show your crowd. All this has to end.”

Ajith also reflected on how fan behaviour has affected the perception of the film industry. “I mean, you have a crowd that goes for a cricket match, you don’t see all this happening there, do you? Why is it happening only in theatres? Why is it only happening with celebrities, film personalities? So, what happens? It projects the whole film industry, world over, in a bad light,” he said.

The actor added that while stars value their fans’ affection, expressions of admiration should remain safe and respectful. “I mean, even Hollywood actors or we don’t wish this. We want that love and that’s what we work hard for… There are ways you can express your love,” Ajith said.

The stampede occurred on 27 September 2025 at Velusamipuram in Karur district during a public interaction event attended by Vijay. The incident resulted in the deaths of 41 people, including women and children, and left over 60 others injured.

(Source: Hindustan Times)

Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.

1...185186187...1,845Page 186 of 1,845
TheCommune
The Commune is a news and views portal focusing on social and political issues of the southern part of India with a focus on Tamil Nadu.
Contact us: thecommune.news@gmail.com
Facebook Instagram X Youtube

NATIONAL NEWS

Congress 'President' Mallikarjun Kharge's Son Gives Up 'Ownership' Of Land Amid MUDA Row

Mallikarjun Kharge Ducks Women Empowerment Question In TN, Hides Behind Congress...

The Commune - 0
A press interaction in Tamil Nadu, meant to project Congress's electoral messaging ahead of the state Assembly elections, turned into an uncomfortable moment of...
© The Commune 2025. All Rights Reserved.