The Invincible Team of Modiji and Amit Shah

I thank God for this man, Amit Shah. He did three controversial yet significant things that many people initially disliked but eventually grew accustomed to or benefited from. The first is the Citizenship Amendment Act. Fake news and some opposition leaders stated that Muslims would lose their citizenship if the Parliament passed that act. However, in reality, many persecuted minorities, including some Goan Christians, got Indian citizenship. No Indians, including Indian Muslims, lost their citizenship. Second is the withdrawal of Article 370. It was probably the best decision in history to save Kashmir from Terrorism and Pakistan. It led to the development of the Kashmir Tourism industry.

Third is Abolishing the Triple Talaq. Regarding Triple Talaq, I loved Mr. Shah's argument. He said, "You cannot cherry-pick laws. You say according to Muslim special law, we must include Triple Talaq. However, would you include the Islamic punishments for rape, adultery, homosexuality, murder, and theft? If so, we must stone to death every Muslim who commits adultery according to Muslim special law. The punishment of people of other religions would be much smaller in comparison. Likewise, we must cut off the hands of Muslims if they steal. If you can't agree with such special Quran-based Muslim laws, why do you insist on Triple Talaq? We would say it is because you want to abuse your power and mistreat women."

Shah's latest work is the Waqf Amendment Bill. Muslim women and impoverished Muslims will thank him for it for decades. WAQF amendment bill is a fair bill for both Muslims and non-Muslims. Al-Al-Aulad, which denies inheritance rights to non-male heirs, is wrong. It sounds like Lord Dalhousie's doctrine of lapse, a law that denied succession to the kingship if the king did not have a male heir. Many Muslim women must have accepted their fate if their parents failed to produce a male heir. The inheritance would then be dealt with as a WAQF. Therefore, the government needed to revoke these narrow-minded, medieval laws, such as Al-Al-Aulad, completely to give fair rights to the legal heirs, including females.

WAQF by the user is unfair, and so is claiming government properties or dedicating others' properties as a WAQF. The government's property belongs to the people of the country, not the WAQF. You may declare anything as waqf, but in a sense, the whole cosmos is a property of God. That does not mean you can claim anything that Muslims used once upon a time as a WAQF property. For instance, some Muslims claimed the Taj Mahal—a monument managed by the Archaeological Survey of India—as a waqf without any proper documentation from Emperor Shah Jahan. When this demand arose, and they filed a lawsuit against ASI, the Supreme Court of India finally instructed the litigants to produce a document signed by Shah Jahan, which they failed to produce.

Including two Muslim women and two non-Muslims for greater transparency is an honorable move. I can understand the logic that if Christian societies have only Christian people and Hindu societies have only Hindu people, then the WAQF must have only Muslim people. Even so, the provision to include two non-Muslims came from complaints against the WAQF's transparency. If there were no such issues, there would be no need for non-Muslims. Suppose only Muslim males are the members of the WAQF. How can they have an unbiased view about how they deal with Muslim women, poor Muslims, and people whose properties they claim to own unfairly?

The amendment that states that only a person who has been a Muslim for five or more years can donate his property to the WAQF is a fair law. If Allah can't receive the prayers or soul of a non-Muslim, how can he receive his property only? Therefore, overall, the WAQF Amendment Bill is fair. It corrects the unfairness of "Al-Al-Aulad," "WAQF by user," and donation of properties that people don't themselves own to WAQF. Including two women and two neutral men in the WAQF would add to its credibility. The WAQF amendment bill also rectifies the wrongs done to rightful owners of properties whom the WAQF boards and tribunals target. Such owners can now approach the High Court directly rather than going through the tribunal.

Even so, many people in the Muslim community do not like Amit Shah. They think that he and Modiji are anti-Muslim and caused the Gujarat riots. Regarding the Gujarat riots, I would remind you that Hindus did not start it. A group of pilgrims to Ayodhya were burnt mercilessly by a Muslim mob on a train. If your parents or siblings were in the group, wouldn't you question it or retaliate against it? That is all, what the Hindu mob did. I know both parties did wrong. But is Modiji or Shah responsible for it? Did they do anything personally? The only question was whether he took appropriate action or not. The Supreme Court answered: They did nothing wrong. Therefore, I have no issues with them regarding the Godhra riots. I studied in a Gujarati management-run school, and we know what my fellow students felt about the incident. Let us not judge Shah and Modi hastily.

Right now, as we speak, in Bengal, TMC-sponsored killings of Hindu people are happening. Three Hindus were cut to pieces by Muslim people who also burnt people's houses and their shops. TMC police and Gunda leaders did nothing to stop it. It's a High Court report, not my narration. Google it and read it carefully. In Manipur, it was a tribal fight, which some leaders wanted to project as a Hindu-Christian fight. Even if the people did not become Christians, these two tribes would still fight. They have been fighting for a considerable amount of time. Therefore, it's not right to blame their political parties. But that's not the case with Bengal. Hindus are killed ruthlessly by Muslims, and Mamata Banerjee has taken no action. We condemn the killings and hope that God will change her Dictatorship.

Finally, to those who say Nathuram Godse killed Mahatma Gandhi and RSS murdered the father of our nation, let me ask: Who started the Muslim League? The Muslim League is Jinnah Sahib's party, not Mahatma Gandhi's party. If Nathuram killed one benevolent human being, how many unarmed, innocent civilians of India did Pakistani terrorists kill? They killed so many people in our country mercilessly. If we say, RSS is bad because Nathuram killed Mahatma Gandhi, then is not Jinnah's Muslim League that birthed Pakistan and killed innocent civilians much worse? Muslim League is worse than RSS, for it is Jinnah's party, the Pakistani party, and the party of those who sponsored terrorists in Pahalgam and Pulwama.

The Indian Union Muslim League is the Indian counterpart of Jinnah's Muslim League. How logical would it sound to condemn the Indian Union Muslim League for being Jinnah's party? Will anybody sensible say that IUML is a Pakistani Terrorist party? No, right. We would say it is an Indian party formed after the partition. The same logic applies to those who foolishly say BJP (formed in 1979) is Nathuram Godse's party and condemn the people who join it. RSS is not BJP. RSS supports the BJP, like IUML, and gets support from all other Muslim League parties in Pakistan, Hindustan (1947), and Bangladesh (1976). We don't blame IUML for the actions of the Pakistani Muslim League Pakistani army or Pakistani Terrorists (an offshoot of Pakistani army). Similarly, we must not blame the BJP for Nathuram's actions. Furthermore, Modi-Shah led BJP and Indian Government is making tremendous progress in the growth of India. Their vision is to Make India Great Again.

Now, let me share Modiji's vision for our country. 1. Nation First. Make India (not China) Great Again in defense, infrastructure development, foreign investment, and increased per-capita income for the Indian people. Develop cities, roads, cleaner streets, flyovers, highways, rail networks, skill-based education, small businesses, and farming with innovative technologies. 2. Make quality Indian goods and buy Indian. Promote Indian medicine, education, tourism, farm produce, art, culture, and technological advancements developed in India. 3. Make India Affordable Again by increasing people's income, reducing taxes, and encouraging them to switch to less costly, more efficient, and environmentally friendly energy options, such as solar and wind power.