VHPA logo / X

“Umr bhar Ghalib yahi bhool karta raha, Dhool chehre par thi aur aaina saaf karta raha.”

(All my life, I kept making the same mistake: I kept cleaning the mirror, not ever realizing that the dirt was on my own face.)

The couplet, popularly attributed to the 19th century Urdu poet Mirza Ghalib, is an apt lens through which to view the opinion piece “VHPA’s Unholy Connection with India’s Hindu Nationalists” by Rasheed Ahmed, executive director of the Indian American Muslim Council (IAMC), published in New India Abroad. Masquerading as investigative journalism, the article reads less as inquiry and more as a calculated ideological attack on the Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America (VHPA).

From the very first paragraph, the article does not present evidence of wrongdoing — it begins with a guilty verdict. VHPA is declared guilty by association, smeared through historical links, and painted as a sinister “foreign appendage” without a single proven violation of U.S. law. No criminal charges. No financial scandals. No illegal activity. Just guilt by Indian cultural connection.

This write-up, prepared on behalf of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America, offers a clinical examination of the methods and framing techniques employed by writers such as Rasheed Ahmed and presents VHPA’s response to his principal claims. It also challenges a broader pattern of selective suspicion in which Hindu organizations are subjected to levels of scrutiny rarely applied to other religious or ethnic communities in the United States.

Anatomy of the Manufactured Narrative Playbook

• This narrative-manufacturing playbook follows a predictable four-step formula:
• Introduce highly charged terms — RSS, Hindutva, “Hindu supremacism,” and majoritarianism — to establish guilt by association from the outset. 
• Link the target organization to this narrative through history, ideology, or cultural ties, regardless of whether those links demonstrate wrongdoing. 
• Collapse distinctions so that cultural identity becomes political ideology, cultural connection becomes political control, and participation in American civic life is portrayed as evidence of divided loyalty. 
• Recast ordinary Hindu cultural and religious activity in America — temples, language classes, youth camps, and charitable work — as inherently suspect, reframing them as proof of hidden or sinister intent, including claims of “transnational repression.” 

No actual evidence of illegal conduct, financial wrongdoing, or violations of U.S. nonprofit law is required; mere association is treated as sufficient. Once the framework of suspicion is established, the burden shifts to the ‘target’ to disprove allegations embedded in a narrative already presumed to be true.

These tactics reflect a broader and recurring pattern employed by advocacy groups such as the Indian American Muslim Council, Hindus for Human Rights, and aligned networks. Through coordinated petitions, open letters, media amplification, and institutional pressure campaigns, they reinforce particular narratives through repetition, creating the appearance of consensus and legitimacy.

Viewed through this framework, Rasheed Ahmed’s article follows the playbook almost step for step. It opens with loaded terminology, builds guilt through association, blurs the line between cultural identity and political intent, and reframes ordinary Hindu religious and civic activity as evidence of something suspect. No demonstrated illegality, misconduct, or violation of law is required; insinuation carries the argument. The conclusion is assumed at the outset, and the narrative is constructed backward to justify it. What emerges is not an investigation grounded in evidence, but a manufactured indictment designed to appear analytical.

Issue 1 (raised in Ahmed’s article): “A Hindi-language book event co-sponsored by a VHPA school at the Germantown Library in Montgomery County gets canceled after a civil-rights coalition raises concerns.”

The Germantown Library controversy was never an isolated disagreement over programming. It reflected a broader, recurring pattern in which a network of advocacy organizations mobilizes institutional pressure to frame ordinary Hindu cultural activity as politically suspect or threatening.

The event itself was straightforward and benign: a Hindi-language book initiative centered on literacy, language preservation, and cultural education. It contained no political messaging, ideological seminars, or partisan advocacy. Yet opposition rapidly shifted focus away from the content and onto association alone — the mere involvement of Hindu organizations was framed as sufficient cause for alarm.

This is now a recognizable playbook. Petitions, coordinated letters, media amplification, and reputational pressure are routinely deployed to challenge Hindu organizations seeking participation in public institutions or civic spaces. The objective is not debate over substance, but the creation of institutional discomfort strong enough to trigger retreat.

This pattern of anti-Hindu fixation and manufactured outrage was vividly illustrated in August 2024 during New York City’s India Day Parade. Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America sponsored a float carrying a replica of Shri Ram Lalla from Ayodhya, celebrating the reconstruction of a deeply sacred civilizational site destroyed during the period of Islamic invasions in India. For many Hindus, the temple’s rebuilding represented the recovery of a sacred site tied to centuries of memory, legal struggle, and cultural continuity.

Despite the float’s deep symbolic importance to Hindus—or precisely because of it—Islamic advocacy groups, led by the Indian American Muslim Council (IAMC), launched a vicious campaign pressuring officials to ban it. That effort failed thanks to a strong counter-response from Hindu community groups and organizers, who rightly called out the selective censorship of Hindu expression. On August 18, 2024, the majestic Shri Ram Lalla float proudly marched down Madison Avenue before thousands of attendees — a classic case of good prevailing over evil.

The message is clear. When organized networks carry an ever-present chip on their shoulder, ordinary cultural and educational activity is easily recast as provocation. A Hindi literacy program becomes “infiltration.” A sacred temple replica becomes “hate.”  Institutions often yield to pressure before evidence or context has a chance to matter, unless a forceful counter-response makes retreat politically costly.

A modern multicultural society cannot function if medieval religious taboos or fear-driven pressure campaigns are allowed to dictate what may be displayed, taught, discussed, or celebrated in public institutions. True diversity and pluralism require reciprocal tolerance — not conditional tolerance that privileges one group’s manufactured grievance over others’ rights to education, heritage, and expression.

Citation 

India Today, “Ram Mandir float graces India Day Parade in New York,” August 19, 2024, https://www.indiatoday.in/world/us-news/story/ram-mandir-ayodhya-float-annual-india-day-parade-new-york-city-protest-2584351-2024-08-19

Issue 2: “It does not deny that the VHPA was founded in 1970 on the instructions of M.S. Golwalkar, the then leader of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the 100-year-old Indian paramilitary. Golwalkar is on record having  praised Nazi Germany as a model for how to treat religious minorities.”

Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America (VHPA), founded in 1970, is an independent, transparent, law-abiding American 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to cultural education, temples, youth programs, disaster relief, and community service — not a “foreign agent” or political front.

Critics obsessively recycle a single controversial passage from M.S. Golwalkar’s 1939 book We or Our Nationhood Defined, written when he was a young man, well before the full horror of the Nazi genocide became known to the world. 

The text was never formally adopted or republished by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) as an institutional doctrine, and Golwalkar himself later distanced himself from that early book as RSS ideology matured. Crucially, VHPA has never endorsed, promoted, or operated on any such views. 

Yet, this single line is endlessly weaponized to brand the entire Hindu movement as “Nazi-inspired.” The hypocrisy is staggering. If this standard of permanently damning people and organizations for views expressed in a different era were applied consistently, many of America’s own venerated Founding Fathers would be tarred and feathered today for their openly racist ideologies, slave ownership, and supremacist beliefs.

The same critics also ignore the broader 1930s historical context, when strong assimilationist and nationalist ideas were mainstream across the globe:

• The United States ran aggressive “Americanization” campaigns forcing immigrants to shed their old identities.
• France suppressed minority languages and cultures under its strict republican model.
• Turkey under Atatürk brutally imposed Turkish identity on Kurds, Armenians, and Greeks.
• Several Eastern European nations declared that minorities must assimilate or accept second-class status.

Equating a 56-year-old U.S. organization running language classes, youth camps, and humanitarian projects with 1930s European fascism is a malicious, intellectually bankrupt smear rooted in selective historical distortion. 

Such dishonest tactic deserves nothing but outright contempt.

Issue 3: “It does not deny that the VHPA has transferred at least $7 million to the VHP and its affiliates in India.”

The article alleges that VHPA transferred millions of dollars to organizations in India — specifically citing a cumulative figure of over $7 million between 2001 and 2020 — and presents it as evidence of ideological alignment or concealed political purpose. What it does not acknowledge is that these transfers are neither hidden nor unusual.

VHPA’s books are fully open. As a registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit, every grant is documented in its publicly available IRS Form 990 filings and subject to the same strict U.S. reporting requirements, audits, and legal oversight as every other American charity. The real question is not whether funds crossed borders — but why they did, and whether they served legitimate humanitarian purposes.

VHPA’s overseas charitable work has consistently focused on education, disaster relief, and emergency medical aid. Through its Support A Child program, it has provided schooling, supplies, food, clothing, and basic care to thousands of orphaned and economically disadvantaged children. It helped rebuild an entire village in Gujarat after the devastating 2001 earthquake and supported fishing communities in Nagapattinam following the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. During the second wave of COVID-19 in India, VHPA coordinated the delivery of oxygen equipment, ventilators, and urgently needed medical supplies to overwhelmed hospitals. In the United States, it has likewise supported disaster relief for families affected by Hurricane Katrina, California wildfires, and Hawaii wildfires.

Importantly, this work has crossed religious lines. VHPA facilitated shipments that also assisted other charities, including the Islamic Medical Association of North America, which publicly acknowledged VHPA’s logistical support during COVID relief operations. These were urgent humanitarian responses to human suffering, not ideological projects.

Cross-border philanthropy is standard practice for American charities across all communities — especially Islamic organizations. The hypocrisy lies in the selective smear that treats Hindu giving as uniquely dangerous while turning a blind eye to far larger and more controversial flows from Islamic networks. 

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) was named a co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) terrorism-financing case — the largest successful terrorism-financing prosecution in U.S. history. HLF, a major U.S.-based Muslim charity, was convicted in 2008 on all 108 counts of providing material support to Hamas (a designated foreign terrorist organization), money laundering, and tax fraud. It had funneled approximately $12.4 million to Hamas-linked entities in the West Bank and Gaza. Five HLF leaders received sentences ranging from 15 to 65 years in prison. 

Other U.S.-based Muslim charities faced similar consequences. The Benevolence International Foundation (BIF) was designated a Specially Designated Global Terrorist by the Treasury Department in 2002 for providing direct financial and material support to al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, including weapons purchases for terrorist camps. 

The Islamic American Relief Agency (IARA) was likewise designated in 2004 for supporting al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, and the Taliban, and later pleaded guilty to sanctions violations involving illegal transfers of $1.4 million to Iraq. 

These were not vague “associations.” They were criminal convictions and formal terrorist designations involving millions of dollars routed to designated terrorist groups. Yet the same voices now scrutinizing VHPA’s transparent humanitarian grants failed to apply equivalent scrutiny to those cases — or to the organizations linked to them.

Citations

U.S. Department of Justice, “Federal Judge Hands Down Sentences in Holy Land Foundation Case,” May 27, 2009, https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/federal-judge-hands-downs-sentences-holy-land-foundation-case

Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Holy Land Foundation Convictions,” November 25, 2008, https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/stories/2008/november/hlf112508

U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury Designates Benevolence International Foundation and Related Entities as Financiers of Terrorism,” November 19, 2002, https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/po3632

U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Treasury Designates Global Network, Senior Officials of IARA for Supporting bin Laden, Others,” October 13, 2004, https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/js2025

Issue 4: “The VHPA does not deny that it invited Yati Narsinghanand, a cleric who has publicly called for the extermination of Muslims, to the U.S. It does not deny that it platformed Kajal Hindustani, an Islamophobic speaker…” 

The article points to a small number of controversial speakers as evidence of VHPA’s alleged extremism. The allegation rests on a sweeping and inconsistent assumption that merely inviting or hosting a speaker automatically defines an organization’s entire ideology and character. One cited example, involving Yati Narsinghanand, ignores an important fact. He was invited to a local chapter program before his most controversial remarks became public, and the invitation was withdrawn once those statements emerged.

Major U.S.-based Muslim advocacy and community organizations, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), and the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), have documented records of inviting, honoring, or sharing platforms with individuals tied to designated terrorist organizations or convicted in terrorism-related cases: 

In November 2014, CAIR’s San Francisco Bay Area chapter awarded its “Promoting Justice Award” to Sami Al-Arian and his family at its 20th-anniversary banquet. Al-Arian, a former University of South Florida professor, had pleaded guilty in 2006 to conspiring to provide services to Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), a U.S.-designated terrorist organization. He was later deported.

• In 2020, CAIR-Florida featured Al-Arian as a guest in its “EXPOSED” livestream interview series, presenting him as a “former political prisoner.” 
• In October 2025, CAIR-Ohio Executive Director Khalid Turaani moderated a panel at an online conference hosted by the Beirut-based Al-Zaytouna Center (titled with reference to Hamas’s “Al-Aqsa Flood” operation). One of the speakers was Majed al-Zeer, designated by the U.S. Treasury Department in 2024 as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist for his role as a senior Hamas operative involved in European fundraising and coordination. 
• Imam Siraj Wahhaj — named an unindicted co-conspirator by federal prosecutors in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing case and a character witness for the convicted “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel-Rahman — has been a repeated invited speaker at ISNA conventions, ICNA-MAS joint conferences, and related events over many years.
• In 1997, at ICNA’s Southeastern Regional Convention in Georgia, organizers presented a commemorative plaque to the family of Abu Adaam Jibreel Al-Amreekee (Lawrence Nicholas Thomas), an American convert who trained with the U.S.-designated terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba and was killed in a 1997 armed raid in Kashmir. The plaque praised his “ultimate sacrifice on behalf of his fellow Muslims in Kashmir.” 

These examples come from court records, U.S. Treasury designations, and contemporaneous investigative reporting. Yet not a single word of criticism of these speakers has ever emerged from IAMC or its allies.

If platforming controversial figures is to be the test, then apply that test equally to all advocacy organizations, religious institutions, universities, and activist groups. Otherwise, the critique is not rooted in principle. It is rooted in sheer hypocrisy.  

Citations

Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America (VHPA) Official Statement on the cancellation (April 2021): https://twitter.com/VHPANews/status/1382207509595877376

Investigative Project on Terrorism, “Days Before UAE Terror Designation, CAIR Awards PIJ Board Member,” November 20, 2014, https://www.investigativeproject.org/4660/days-before-uae-terror-designation-cair-awards

Middle East Forum, “CAIR ‘Exposes’ Itself,” August 26, 2020, https://www.meforum.org/cair-exposes-itself-61434.

Jewish Insider, “CAIR-Ohio leader moderated event featuring designated terrorist Hamas member,” October 27, 2025, https://jewishinsider.com/2025/10/cair-hamas-member-majed-al-zeer-web-conference-speakers/; Algemeiner, “CAIR-Ohio Director Moderates Event With US-Designated Hamas Terrorist,” October 28, 2025, https://www.algemeiner.com/2025/10/28/cair-ohio-director-moderates-event-us-designated-hamas-terrorist/.

Investigative Project on Terrorism, Masjid At-Taqwa profile, https://www.investigativeproject.org/mosques/409/masjid-at-taqwa (citing U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White’s 1995 letter listing unindicted co-conspirators); federal court records from the 1993 World Trade Center bombing prosecution

Investigative Project on Terrorism, “ICNA’s Search for Radicalism Should Start Within,” December 15, 2009, https://www.investigativeproject.org/1577/icnas-search-for-radicalism-should-start-within (includes image and details of the 1997 plaque)

Issue 5: “Rutgers University's Center for Security, Race and Rights concluded in 2025 that U.S.-based Hindutva groups constitute “a threat to equality and religious pluralism” in this country, and recommended that organizations functioning as proxies of the RSS and its affiliates be required to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. “ 

The allegation rests entirely on a 2025 report from Rutgers University’s Center for Security, Race, and Rights (CSRR) — an entity currently under active congressional investigation for platforming extremists, stoking antisemitism, and misusing taxpayer funds.

Led by Professor Sahar Aziz, CSRR has been formally probed by the Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans, led by Sen. Lindsey Graham (February 2024), and the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, chaired by Rep. Virginia Foxx (March 2024). Both committees have accused the center of becoming “a hotbed of radical antisemitic, anti-American, anti-Israel, and pro-terrorist activity.” The committees also described CSRR’s Director Sahar Aziz and numerous CSRR fellows and faculty affiliates as having records of virulent antisemitism and support for terrorism.

VHPA does not need to defend its right to exist as an American organization. Labeling patriotic U.S. citizens exercising their First Amendment rights as foreign agents or repressors by a tainted, radical institution soaked in antisemitism and extremism is not journalism, scholarship, or legitimate criticism — it is rank hypocrisy and ideological venom. Such a discredited source has no moral authority to lecture anyone on pluralism, equality, or democracy. 

Citations

U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans, “Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans Probe Rutgers University Center that Promotes Terrorist Sympathizers and Anti-Semitism,” February 7, 2024, https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/senate-judiciary-committee-republicans-probe-rutgers-university-center-that-promotes-terrorist-sympathizers-and-anti-semitism.

U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce, Letter to Rutgers University President Jonathan Holloway, March 27, 2024, https://edworkforce.house.gov/uploadedfiles/rutgers_letter_final.pdf.

Issue 6: “The VHPA is, in fact, a national security risk for the United States. Its Indian counterpart, the VHP, was listed as a “militant religious organization” in the CIA World Factbook in 2018. It is the American appendage of an Indian fascist paramilitary, the RSS, one that the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), a bipartisan Congressionally mandated panel, has recommended this year for the U.S. sanctions.”

Calling a transparent, law-abiding American Hindu nonprofit a “national security risk” is not just false — it is one of the most dishonest and malicious smears imaginable, aimed at demonizing an entire community.

First, the CIA World Factbook claim is ancient history. In mid-2018, an older archived version briefly listed India’s Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal as “militant religious organizations.” That entry was removed within weeks, has never reappeared, and is absent from every current edition. The CIA never designated VHP or VHPA as a terrorist group or national security threat.

Second, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommended sanctions on the Indian RSS in its 2026 Annual Report. USCIRF is an advisory body only. Its recommendations are non-binding and carry no legal force. The U.S. State Department has taken no action against VHPA.

Here’s the real scandal: VHPA is portrayed as a “national security risk” over an eight-year-old deleted footnote and a non-binding advisory note, while U.S.-based organizations with documented links to designated terrorist networks often escape comparable scrutiny, even as Islamist actors within the United States have repeatedly displayed exclusionary and supremacist behavior.

It was not VHPA that carried out or inspired the major terrorist attacks that killed thousands of Americans — it was Islamist extremists behind 9/11 (2,977 dead), Fort Hood (13 dead), Boston Marathon, San Bernardino (14 dead), Orlando Pulse (49 dead), New York City truck attack (8 dead), and the 2025 New Orleans Bourbon Street massacre (15 dead).

• It was not VHPA that told a white Christian pastor in Dearborn, Michigan, to “get out” of his own city in September 2025 — it was Muslim Mayor Abdullah Hammoud.
• It was not VHPA that renamed a major street in Paterson, New Jersey, “Palestine Way” and celebrated the area as “New Palestine” — it was the Muslim-majority city council.
• It was not VHPA that proposed a 402-acre Sharia-compliant “EPIC City” enclave in Texas — it was the East Plano Islamic Center.
• It was not VHPA that banned Pride flags on all public property in Hamtramck, Michigan — it was the first all-Muslim city council in America.
• The real national security threat is not VHPA. The real threat comes from exclusionary ideologies, sectarian enclaves, and openly supremacist behavior that seek to reshape civic norms, silence dissent, or impose religious identity as a condition of belonging. 

Citations

Factly.in, “Older version of CIA’s World Factbook listed Bajrang Dal and VHP as militant religious organisation,” February 24, 2021, https://factly.in/older-version-of-cias-world-factbook-listed-bajrang-dal-and-vhp-as-militant-religious-organisation/

U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, 2026 Annual Report (India section), March 2026, https://www.uscirf.gov/sites/default/files/2026-03/USCIRF_2026_AR_3326_NEW.pdf

Issue 7: Hindutva and Islamophobia: A Clear Contrast

Throughout his article, Rasheed Ahmed repeatedly invokes terms such as “Hindutva,” “Islamophobia,” “majoritarianism,” and “Hindu nationalism” as though their meanings are self-evident. Yet these labels do much of the article’s rhetorical work while remaining largely undefined. Clarifying what these terms mean — and how they are selectively applied — is essential to understanding the framework through which VHPA is being portrayed.

In Ahmed’s framing, Hindutva is presented as synonymous with extremism or exclusionary politics. Yet the Supreme Court of India, in its landmark 1995 judgment and subsequent rulings, has described Hindutva as a “way of life” or “state of mind” rather than a narrow form of religious fundamentalism or allegiance to a single faith. In that interpretation, it reflects India’s cultural ethos and civilizational heritage, closely associated with the idea of Bharatiyata or Indianization, encompassing the diverse traditions, philosophies, and values that shape Indian society. 

At its core, Hindutva is understood as “Hindu + Tattva,” referring to the essential principles of Hindu Dharma. It draws from enduring concepts such as the idea that truth may be expressed in many forms, openness to wisdom from all directions, and the belief that the world functions as one extended family. Within this framework, emphasis is placed on dharma, personal growth, coexistence, and an inclusive worldview rooted in ancient Indian thought.

Viewed through this lens, Hindutva exists not as a political doctrine, but as a cultural and philosophical outlook tied to Hindu identity, continuity, and civilizational memory. Within that framework, it rejects colonial and Marxist narratives that supporters believe imposed inherited guilt or diminished Hindu civilizational confidence. It advocates for a self-assured and cohesive Hindu society that preserves its heritage, resists fragmentation, and pursues cultural renewal alongside national integration. In this understanding, Hindutva envisions a strong and prosperous Bharat in which Hindus no longer feel culturally defensive or marginalized within their own homeland. Supporters frame it as a response to historical erasure and continuing cultural pressures, grounded in continuity, pride, and respect for others rather than aggression.

In sharp contrast, Islamophobia is the rational, evidence-based fear of Islam and its adherents, rooted in its 1,400-year history of violence, supremacism, and intolerance. It stems from doctrinal calls for jihad and subjugation of non-Muslims, paired with real-world patterns like the 9/11 attacks and the Boston Marathon bombing, along with dozens of other plots on American soil. Muslims often demand hypersensitivity and special exclusionary accommodations. Yet they offer zero reciprocity, destroying non-Muslim sites abroad while shielding their own ideology from scrutiny through intimidation.

This is not irrational prejudice. It is the natural reaction to a belief system and community that repeatedly proves dangerous, intolerant, and incompatible with open societies.

If you don’t like Islamophobia in the United States, you only need to address the community habits and patterns that create it. To do so, you must take concrete steps:

• Condemn and dismantle domestic extremism by actively rejecting and reporting jihadist ideology, addressing why 9/11, Boston, and dozens of other plots were carried out by Muslims in the name of Islam.
• Fully support free speech and academic freedom by ending the weaponization of “Islamophobia” to silence criticism, including CAIR-style threats over historical art or cartoons.
• Embrace full integration and the rule of law by prioritizing American values and the Constitution over Sharia, rejecting parallel societies and supremacist attitudes.
• Reject hypersensitivity and victimhood by accepting that critique of Islam is protected free speech, just like any other ideology.
• Demonstrate genuine reciprocity and integration by publicly supporting equal rights for all faiths without demanding exemptions and proving loyalty to America first.
• Reform internal education and leadership by purging radical preaching from mosques and teaching American Muslim youth peaceful coexistence instead of conquest or grievance.
• Islamophobia will fade in America only when American Muslims consistently prove they are fully compatible with American freedoms and security. The solution lies in behavior, not denial.

Closing Remarks

Rasheed Ahmed’s piece is not an isolated piece of criticism; it is part of a larger effort to stigmatize Hindu organizations through insinuation, selective standards, and guilt by association. For 56 years, VHPA has served American Hindu communities through transparent education, cultural preservation, and humanitarian work with zero violations of U.S. law.

The real scandal is the glaring double standard: Hindu Americans are subjected to obsessive scrutiny and smear campaigns for routine cultural activity, while organizations with documented ties to terror financing and extremism receive red-carpet treatment.

The message to IAMC and the professional grievance industry is simple: Hindus are minding their own business. It’s about time you did the same. Stop manufacturing scandals and focus on reforming the real problems in your own circles.

We have had enough. Patriotic Hindu Americans will not apologize for their identity, their heritage, or their right to participate fully in this democracy. VHPA will continue its mission undeterred. Those peddling ideological venom from compromised institutions deserve only contempt — not credibility.

The writer is a retired scientist, currently serving as the VP Education for the Vishwa Hindu Parishad America (VHPA)

(The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of New India Abroad.)

Discover more at New India Abroad