Six-year-old Indian girl skates into Asia Book of Records

K Darshini, a six-year-old Indian girl,

Kanhaiya Kumar to campaign for Left Front in West Bengal, Kerala Assembly polls?

New Delhi: A day after Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) student leader Kanhaiya Kumar, arrested for sedition 20 days ago, was released from the Tihar Jail, reports on Friday said the JNUSU president will campaign for the Left Front in the upcoming Kerala and West Bengal Assembly polls.

Reports suggest that the Left, which is battling hard to counter Trinamool Congress in Bengal wants to bank on Kanhaiya’s popularity and attract the youth. Notably, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is also pitching in hard to make inroads into the state.

West Bengal will see balloting on seven dates despite a six-phase election: April 4, 11, 17, 21, 25 and 30 and May 5.

Kerala will see election on a single day May 16.

After returning to JNU campus Thursday night, the university’s students’ union leader Kanhaiya Kumar said they are seeking freedom within the country and not from India, as he hurled barbs at Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Addressing students at the campus, 29-year-old Kumar, hit out at Prime Minister Narendra Modi saying, he had many differences with the PM but he agreed with his tweet “Satyameva Jayate” which he had posted in praise of HRD Minister Smriti Irani’s fiery speech in Lok Sabha on the JNU row as it is in the Constitution.

“I have many differences with the PM but I agree with his tweet Satyameva Jayate because these words are in our Constitution,” he said.

Source: Zee Group

RSS is working to organise the society on the basis of a national character and discipline: Dr Manmohan Vaidhya

As a part of their strategy, some political parties are increasingly and intentionally targeting the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), which is the ideological mothership of the Sangh Parivar. Inside and outside Parliament, the Congress and the Left have blindly blamed the RSS for every irrelevant issue.

Dr Manmohan Vaidya, All India Prachar Pramukh of the RSS, defends his organisation and dismisses these intentional accusations against it as “frivolous and false”. Edited excerpts from an exclusive interview with Praveen S Thampi:

Ever since the BJP came to power in New Delhi, the RSS is being dragged into every controversy, from the JNU issue to a student’s suicide in the University of Hyderabad. Political leaders such as Rahul Gandhi and student leaders of JNU all accuse the RSS of having a hidden agenda that they say is being carried out by the ABVP and the Central government. How do you respond to these allegations?
The Congress, the Left parties and their leaders, even when they were in power, were consistently opposing and defaming the RSS over frivolous and false premise. Whenever they were in trouble they would blame the RSS now and then. But the people of Bharat began to see through their lies and stopped believing them. There is nothing new about it. All these allegations are unfounded and false.

When the ministry of human resource development instructed all Central university campuse to fly the national flag , the political stand adopted by its critics was to ask if the RSS flew the Tricolour in its office. What do you have to say to this?

 

To fly the national flag compulsorily in government-funded institutions is purely the government’s decision. Where does the RSS come into the picture? The national flag, by the way, has been hoisted on Independence Day and Republic Day at the RSS headquarters by its senior functionaries
Does the RSS feel it is better to reach out to people directly through its new outreach programmes, like the IT Milans aimed at the new generation, than by replying to political allegations?

The people of Bharat are aware of the lie behind such political allegations. They know the RSS through the discipline and service of the swayamsevaks. As a result, people’s admiration, support and trust in the RSS is consistently growing. The RSS has been working to organise the entire society on the basis of a national character and discipline. Reaching out to all sections of society is a natural process of this mission. This has been going on since 1925. IT Milans began due to the emergence and specificities of the IT field. What has it got to do with political allegations?

. You have clarified that the Sangh wants to bring change through social work and not through government. But ever since this government has come to power, critics have been accusing the RSS of implementing its ideological agenda through the ministries of HRD and culture. How would you like to respond to these critics?

In your question itself you have answered it all. When you describe them as critics of the RSS, they are bound to criticise the RSS even on false and baseless premise. The BJP is a party with an ideology that reflects in its manifesto that they had made public before the 2014 elections, saying what they will do if voted to power. Now that the people have voted them to power, they are implementing their manifesto. Let them fulfil the promises they made to the people.

The khaki shorts and white shirt ganavesh (uniform) has been the identity of the Sangh for a long time. Reports hint that a new uniform that is more contemporary is under consideration. Could you please elaborate on this?

Actually, selfless service and discipline is the identity of the Sangh swayamsevaks and they have been exhibiting it whether they are in uniform or not in uniform. And they will continue to exhibit the same (its core identity) even in the new uniform, if it gets changed.

Regarding the JNU issue, do you think there should be zero-tolerance towards anti-India sloganeering or should we bring such fringe groups into the national mainstream by reaching out to them proactively? How do you view the whole controversy and the government’s response to it?

Nothing anti-India should be tolerated. One should differentiate between anti-India and anti-government. There should be a process of dialogue, addressing the grievances and attempting to change the mind. But talking about this particular case/instance, it is not just sloganeering. It is the mindset that is consistently nurtured that leads to committing violence, or condoning violence, or supporting violence and anti-national activities.

What are the main topics that would come up at the Akhil Bharatiya Pratinidhi Sabha (ABPS) in Nagaur in March?

The ABPS is our largest policy-making body that meets once annually, every March. This time, the ABPS will meet on March 11 -13 at Nagaur in Rajasthan. An annual report of the organisational activities and achievements will be presented by sar karyavah (general secretary). Participants will share some of their new experiments, experiences, initiatives and observations. Annual planning for the coming year will also be discussed. From mid-April to June-end, there will be annual summer training camps (around 70 camps) of 20 days’ duration throughout the country. Detailed discussions about the planning of these camps will be held there. Along with discussing the present national scenario, some resolutions will also be taken up for discussion at the ABPS.

Source:  Interview given to Economic Times.

 

Explosive Document by Ajit Doval on Ishrat Jahan, Media Refused to Screen in 2014

On 1st of March 2016, when TimesNow created a stir in the political arena by airing a series of videos on #IshratCoverup, exposing many dark and dirty secrets of political corridors which tried to manipulate Ishrat Jahan case, a twitter handle run by the name of @Kabirsinghn wrote about a documentary named “The Ishrat Jahan Conspiracy 2014”, which, as claimed by Kabir Singh Nihang was filmed by his brother and Manish Pandit.

The explosive video, shot in 2014, features Ajit Doval, Tavleen Singh, RSN Singh and Dr Gautam Sen. As claimed by Kabir, all the channels refused to screen the documentary in 2014. Kabir sarcastically writes how journalists ignored the documentary despite having a long and detailed explanations given by Ajit Doval.

After Kabir posted a video link of the documentary on twitter, the video finally gained some audience. Kabir also questioned the ethics and morality of Indian journalists who blatantly refused to screen the video and hide the facts.
Here is the video :

Documentary on Ishrat Jahan

Courtesy: satyavijayi.com

Video: Headley told about Ishrat’s LeT Link in 2010, but Congress Supressed Facts

Click the below link:

Interview with Loknath Behra
Give Your Valuable Opinion in Comment Box

Rajdeep Sardesai, a great ‘anti-national’ & most ‘anti-Hindu’

“Exposing an ‘anti-national’ and ‘anti-Hindu’ Rajdeep Sardesai. Beware of this barking mad dog attacked with Hinduphobia”   ~ Upananda Brahmachari.

He is no more a ‘proud Hindu’ within few hours with a unique somersault after publishing his moronic musing  as “I am proud to be ‘anti-national’, says ‘proud Hindu’ Rajdeep Sardesai” in Hindustan Times dated Feb 20, 2016.

Some of my friends noticed the filthy attempt of Sardesai, the branded ‘anti-Hindu’, ‘anti-Sangha Parivar’ and ‘anti-Modi’ journalist for extending his support to the JNU culprits for ‘glorifying Afzal Guru and demanding Azad Kashmir’, in a very twisted manner of vilifying Hindutva by taking a Hindu name.

In his article Sardesai wrote, “Yes, I am anti-national because while I am a proud Hindu who wakes up to the Gayatri mantra, I also like a well done beef steak, which, according to BJP minister Mukhtar Naqvi, is a treasonous act, enough to pack me off to Pakistan. I celebrate the rich diversity of my country through food: Korma on Eid, pork sorpotel with my Catholic neighbours in Goa during Christmas and shrikhand during Diwali is my preferred diet. The right to food of my choice is again a freedom which I cherish and am unwilling to cede.”

Stuck by such type of gibberish full of mala fide intention of portraying Hindutva  in a  very mischievous way, my Hindu friends started ringing both to Sardesai and HT for a clarification of it. Within some hours they changed the article headline editing it as  “I am proud to be ‘anti-national’, says Rajdeep Sardesai”. But, the content remains the same.

We don’t know anything about the linkage of ISI with Sardesai. But, he is well exposed as ‘anti-national’ once again with his veiled support to the secessionists in JNU and the subversive forces of Azad Kashmir emerged in the JNU campus. And this Rajdeep ‘anti-National’ Sardesai cannot be a ‘proud Hindu’. Each and every ‘proud’ and ‘nationalist’ Hindus of this country are pained with the dereliction of the duties of a section of citizens in JNU campus and in some other venues like JU and UoH and obviously with their culpable attempts to attack the unity, integrity and sovereignty of this country. And all these dangerous attempts in the University campuses are tried for a beatification with the provision of Art. 19 of Indian Constitution and in the name of ‘freedom of speech and expression’!

Rajdeep ‘anti-National’ Sardesai also took the tool of Art. 19 in his article by saying, “Yes, I am anti-national because I believe in an expanded definition of the right to free speech as spelt out in Article 19 of the Constitution.” But, Sardesai could not understand the meaning of the concerned Article 19 as well.

It goes as below:

Article 19. Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech etc.

(1) All citizens shall have the right

(a) to freedom of speech and expression;

(b) to assemble peaceably and without arms;

(c) to form associations or unions;

(d) to move freely throughout the territory of India;

(e) to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India; and

(f) omitted

(g) to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business

But, Sardesai missed its Clause (2) and (3) in which these are categorically said:

(2) Nothing in sub clause (a) of clause ( 1 ) shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub clause in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.

(3) Nothing in sub clause (b) of the said clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making any law imposing, in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India or public order, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub clause.

So, the slogans like, “Bharat ki barbadi tak jang rahegi jari” (The war will continue till the destruction of India, “Afzal hum sharminada hai, tere katil zinda hai” (Afzal we are shamed as your killers are still alive), “Bharat ko ragda, le ragda” (thrash India, keep thrashing) are not and never permissible under Art. 19 of the constitution of India, however all attempts of Sardesai to uphold JNU activities on Feb 9th and on wards.

Parroting of Sardesai is shameful. In his blatant act favoring the hoodlums in JNU like Kanhaiya, Lenin and Umar Khalid in the same voice of them, Sardesai enriched his article by saying, “Would we then by extension also suggest that the Hindu Mahasabha, which even today glorifies Nathuram Godse every January 30, even as the rest of India mourns the Mahatma, is an anti-national organisation?” or by articulating, “Yes, I am anti-national because in a plural democracy I believe we must have a dialogue with Kashmiri separatists as we must with those in the North-East who seek autonomy. I will listen to student protestors in Srinagar or Imphal as I will to those in an FTII or a JNU.”

We know the pain of Rajdeep ‘anti-National’ Sardesai as he is compelled to see Kashmir, Mizoram and Nagaland are still within the boundaries of India. He must not forget that a great extent of Kashmir’s Indinization was made on the life sacrifice of Dr Shyamaprsad Mookerjee who was a leader of Akhil Bhartiya Hindu Mahasabha and Jansangh both.

The members of Hindu Mahasabha is not talking only for the National unity and integrity, they also demand a unified Bharat (Akhand Bharat) as before partition. Hindu Mahasabha always protested the division of India. Sardesai never hard that a Hindu Mahasabha activist raise a slogan that they want the autonomy of Uttar Pradesh as it is a Hindu majority province or for Hindu autonomy in Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Bihar, Bengal and all other Hindu majority provinces. But, He tried to blemish the Hindu Mahasabha in the same category of fanatic Muslims and Christians who want autonomy for a Muslim Kashmir and Christian Nagaland and Mizoram.

Murder of Mohondas Gandhi was an end point of intolerance felt by a section of majority people traumatized under severe Muslim appeasement and Pak favouritism. Nobody liked the killing of Gandhi, but it was a blink of Indian history that once Gandhi leveled Dhingra, Sukhdev, Rajguru and Bhagat Singh as terrorists and Gandhi was killed under an act of terror. Nathuram found guilty in the court of justice and finally hanged accordingly. Did any Hindu Mahasabha activist make any attempt to defame the judiciary of India for that? But, for hanging of Afzal Guru and Yakub Memon, the Indian Judiciary has been challenged by a band of anti national people including Sardesai!

The role and intention of Rajdeep Sardesai are very clear. As an umpire of this national and anti-national match, Sardesai’s benefit of doubt always goes to those people who want to see the nationalism is India is defeated and Kashmir, Nagaland and Mizoram are free and not within India! So. Sardesai is appeared in the field to attack the national side by hook or crook.

In a very elusive manner Sardesai attacked both Hindu and Sikhs to brand them as seditious people like the Pak agents of JNU, JU and UoH.

Sardesai wanted his article as viral by saying, “the slogan of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement ‘Jo Hindu hit kee baat karega vahi desh pe raj karega’, which openly calls for a Hindu Rashtra, to be seen as violative of the law or not and does it spread enmity among communities? Is ‘Raaj karega khalsa’, the slogan of the Khalistanis, to be seen as seditious or not?”

This crooked person has heard several times, ‘Jo Gariv-Kisanon kee baat karega vahi desh pe raj karega’ or Jo mazdooron kee baat karega vahi desh pe raj karega’. But, Sardeshai has no problem with the poor, peasant or worker section of people, but only with the Hindus! Why is this problem? The answer is very simple. Sardesai’s mind is set all out for reservation and appeasement for the minority Muslims and Christians and not for the well being of majority Hindus at all. Sardesai may think that majority Hindus are the scared animals of sacrifice so that Sardesai and his fellow men can enjoy some ‘Hindusteak’ like his favourite ‘beefsteak’.

Actually, it is a big exposure of an anti-national Sardesai that even he branded ‘Raaj karega khalsa’ as seditious too. Shame for this attempt to tarnish the height of ‘Khalsa Panth’ which was the spearhead of nationalism of Sikh wars against the barbaric Mughals and the foreign rulers with their Arabic fanaticism and British perpetration. Some hijacking of the slogan  ‘Raaj karega khalsa’ by the Khalisatnis should not be the symbol of any separatism. The attempt of Sardesai to draw a picture of violative Hindus and Sikhs in general like the increasing Pak ans IS supporters in India is brazen but grossly futile.

 

Ishrat Jahan case: Former under secy says he was forced to file second affidavit, burnt with cigarettes

In a startling revelation, RVS Mani, former under secretary in the home ministry on Tuesday told Times Nowthat he was coerced to file the second affidavit in the Ishrat Jahan case.

The second affidavit is the one in which the references to the alleged links of Ishrat Jahan, Pranesh Pillai, Amjad Ali Rana and Zeeshan Johar with Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) were removed.

When he was asked whether he filed the second affidavit, Mani told Times Now, “No…I was given an order to file it. That was the order of the government. So, I went and signed it.”

Mani also hinted that the second affidavit had actually been filed on the directions of then home minister P Chidambaram.

“It was not drafted at my level,” he said. “If the home secretary did not file the affidavit, it is clear who filed it. The home secretary is the senior-most bureaucrat in the MHA. The conclusion is easily drawn,” he added.

On being asked whether it was correct to believe that there political interference in the Ishrat Jahan case, Mani said it was “perfectly okay” to believe that.

An even more disturbing claim which Mani made was that he was tortured by Satish Verma, the Indian Police Service officer who served as lead investigator in the Ishrat Jahan case. “What Satish Verma did to me was unprecedented…On 21 June 2013, Satish Verma burnt me with cigarettes,” he told Times Now.

“He was not collecting evidence, but engineering evidence,” he further said. “I was chased by so many officers and people,” he added.

“At one point of time, I thought I won’t be able to continue (as Under Secretary). Baseless cases were opened against me,” he said. He also alleged that a lady officer of the CBI had chased him once.

This is not the first time Mani has spoken out against Satish Verma. In 2013, he had alleged that Verma sought to coerce him into signing a statement unsupported by evidence, according to this Firstpost report.

Mani’s shocking claims come just a few days after former home secretary GK Pillai on Thursday had revealed that someone at the political level did not want the real picture to come out in the Ishrat Jahan case.

Pillai had mentioned that two affidavits submitted by the home ministry in relation to the case were contradictory to each other.

The former home secretary had said there was no doubt that those killed in the alleged fake encounter in Gujarat had links with Lashkar-e-Taiba. “They were LeT activists. She (Ishrat) knew that something was wrong. Otherwise an unmarried young Muslim woman would not have gone with some other men,” he had said.

Ishrat Jahan was one among four people killed in an alleged fake encounter case in 2004. Javed Sheikh alias Pranesh Pillai besides two Pakistani nationals Amjad Ali and Jishan Johar Abdul Ghani, all alleged LeT terrorists, were also killed in the encounter. The case had been a major point of controversy.

With inputs from PTI

ED RAIDS DIG UP EMPIRE OF PC’S SON

Former Finance Minister P Chidambaram’s son Karti has built a huge empire for himself in different parts of the world by making investment in real estates and engaging in other business activities in London, Dubai, South Africa, Philippines, Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, British Virgin Island, France, USA, Switzerland, Greece and Spain. This came to light from the documents recovered during the recent joint raids of the Enforcement Directorate and Investigation Wing of Income Tax in the Aircel-Maxis scam.
The investigation team got the details of Karti’s wealth following raids on his company, Advantage Strategic Consulting, which is involved in the Aircel-Maxis deal for financial transactions with telecom beneficiaries.
Most of the transaction and purchases of properties and acquisition by Karti was executed through Advantage’s Singapore-based subsidiary Advantage Strategic Consulting Singapore Pte Ltd. According to the investigators, the ED and I-T (Investigation Wing) are expected to contact their international counterparts to get more details from the 14 countries as per the United Nation’s Convention on prevention of money laundering.
The 2G Court had already issued Letter Rogatory to Singapore for getting transaction details of the Karti-controlled company in Singapore.
The probe details coming out of the recent raids expose massive wealth acquired by Karti during 2006 to 2014 when his father was Finance Minister and Home Minister at the Centre. Karti’s Singapore firm acquired 88 acres in September 2011 at Surridge Farm in Somerset in the UK for one million Pounds. The deal comprises four land titles, which were seized by joint probe team of ED and I-T. Karti’s company in Singapore also has investments in Artevea Digital Limited in Cambridge and has transactions with another London-based company Oppenheimer Investments (UK) Limited.
According to the details unearthed by investigators, Karti’s Singapore-based firm had acquired majority shares of a big resort in Sri Lanka, known as Lanka Fortune Residencies. This company owns the prestigious resorts ‘The Waterfront’, ‘Weligama Bay Resort’ and Emerald Bay Hotel. During the raid, the tax sleuths unearthed the acquisition agreement papers between Karti’s Singapore company and share holders of the Sri Lankan firm. Document of money trail of investments made in a Sri Lanka with a Lanka-based financial firm, Union Development & Investment Company Private Limited, were also seized in the December raids.
The probe details how Karti’s Singapore firm routed money via Dubai to acquire three farms and vineyards in South Africa, identified as Rowey Farm in Grabouw, Cape Orchards and Vineyards Private Limited, and Zandvliet Enterprises, a wine and stud farm in Ashton. The Karti-controlled Singapore firm also had money transactions with Nicholls Steyn and Associates in South Africa.
The Dubai-based Desert Dunes Properties Ltd has also investment in Karti’s Singapore-based company Advantage. The sleuths have unearthed a money trail of 1.7 million Singapore Dollars between these firms. Another Dubai-based company, Pearl Dubai FX LLC, also had financial transaction with the Advantage.
The Advantage’s Singapore subsidiary had entered into joint ventures with the Philippines-based companies to obtain a franchise team of International Premier Tennis League (Asia). The Philippine firms, which were engaged in joint ventures with the Karti-controlled company, are SM Arena Complex Corporation, Sports Entertainment Events Management Inc and two persons from Philippines – Juna Kevin and Haresh C Hiranand. 
The Advantage had also had financial transactions with another real estate company in Singapore known as Real Beyond Pte Ltd having three subsidiaries in Malaysia. The investigation has unearthed that these transactions led to 16 land purchases in Thailand.
The Advantage’s Singapore unit has set up a firm in British Virgin Island (BVI), namely Somerset Surridge Ltd. The Advantage also

SPOTLIGHT – Oscar Winning Movie based on True Story of Child Abusing by Priests in Catholic Church

Spotlight (2015) – The Oscar Award winning Movie based on the true investigative story of sexual abuse of children by priests in Catholic Churches.

A team of Journalists of Boston Globe led by Walter Robinson did a lot of investigation to bring the matter into spotlight.

“These crimes were unimaginable, and that they could’ve been countenanced and enabled by such an iconic institution, it gave us so much energy to pursue the story and get the story and make it public” – Walter Robinson

Walter Robinson

– What caused the Boston Globe to decide to pursue the story?
The Spotlight true story reveals that at the end of July 2001, Globe editor Marty Baron (portrayed by Liev Schreiber in the movie) insisted on further pursuing a column written by Eileen McNamara, which reported on lawsuits pertaining to a priest allegedly involved in sexual abuse. Marty Baron was new to the paper, having just come to the Globe from the Miami Herald. After he learned that the judge had sealed the court records to prevent the personnel records of the priest from going public, Baron became determined to dig deeper and discover the truth. He launched an effort to go to the courts and get the records unsealed.
“In Florida virtually everything is public,” says the real Walter Robinson (Michael Keaton in the movie), implying that Marty Baron was not used to the more private way things were done up north (Variety.com). Baron had the Spotlight team begin an investigation into Father John J. Geoghan, who had been allowed to keep his job after his abuse of young parishioners had been discovered and kept hushed for more than 30 years (Boston.com). It turned out that Father Geoghan was just the tip of the iceberg.

– How many priests did the Spotlight team learn were involved in sexual abuse in Boston over the years?
“There were many, many other priests, we thought perhaps 15 or 20 at the time, who had done the same thing,” says the real Walter Robinson, “yet the Archdiocese had covered up their crimes by making secret settlements. … In the end, it turned out to be almost 250 priests in Boston who had molested children over several decades” (NPR). Prior to the credits, the movie states a parallel value of 249. The church had shuffled some of the predatory clergy from parish to parish to help prevent their crimes from being exposed

– Did a priest really freely admit to Sacha Pfeiffer that he had molested children?

Yes. As in the movie, Rev. Ronald H. Paquin told Globe reporter Sacha Pfeiffer (portrayed by Rachel McAdams) that he had molested boys until 1989, the year before the Archdiocese of Boston removed him from his position. His crimes spanned 15 years across two different parishes. “Sure, I fooled around. But I never raped anyone and I never felt gratified myself,” Paquin told Pfeiffer. Like in the film, he said he himself was raped by a Catholic priest when he was a teenager. The actual interview took place in the living room of Paquin’s apartment, not at the front door.

These crimes were unimaginable, and that they could’ve been countenanced and enabled by such an iconic institution, it gave us so much energy to pursue the story and get the story and make it public. -Walter Robinson, NPR, October 2015

Is the Catholic Church really as powerful in Boston as it is portrayed to be in the movie?Yes, according to the real Walter Robinson, the Catholic Church had great political power in Boston and always put pressure on institutions like The Boston Globe. “You had to be very, very careful because of its power, and in this case it meant for us getting documents.” -NPR

– How does the Catholic Church feel about the Spotlight movie revisiting the abuse scandal?

Boston Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley, who took over in 2003 after disgraced Cardinal Bernard F. Law stepped down, says that the movie depicts “a very painful time” in the history of the church, when a series of reports forced the church “to deal with what was shameful and hidden.” A spokesman for Cardinal O’Malley says that the archbishop would not discourage people from seeing the movie.
O’Malley reiterated his commitment to eradicating abusive priests from the church. “The Archdiocese of Boston is fully and completely committed to zero tolerance concerning the abuse of minors. We follow a vigorous policy of reporting and disclosing information concerning allegations of abuse.” -BostonGlobe.com

– Is there a higher incidence of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church than in the general public?

No. In researching the Spotlight true story, we discovered that as of 2002, the incidence of pedophilia in the Catholic Church was around 6%, which is in line with the general population (this percentage is also stated in the movie). This means that despite what some have come to believe, there is no disproportionate separation between priests and civilians when it comes to this terrible crime. The efforts by some members of the church to cover up the abuse is what makes it perhaps significantly more tragic.

– Were the reporters really not very religious?

Yes. The screenwriters realized that having at least one of the reporters be more in touch with his or her faith could enhance the drama, but the reality was that none of them were in touch with their faith. The real Spotlight team members were all lapsed Catholics (Wall Street Journal). After conducting their research for the 2001 Globe story, some of the reporters found it impossible to return to their religion. “I was a lapsed Catholic at the time, and I’m super lapsed now,” says the real Walter Robinson.

“Even though I was a lapsed Catholic, I still considered myself a Catholic and thought that possibly, some day, I would go back to being a practicing Catholic,” says the real-life Michael Rezendes (portrayed by Mark Ruffalo in the movie). But after this experience, I found it impossible to do that – or even think about doing that,” he said. “What we discovered was just too shattering.” -People.com

Are the actors in the movie very religious?

To a large degree, no. Actor Mark Ruffalo, an outspoken, pro-choice political activist, told reporters at Spotlight’s Boston premiere about his unsavory experience with the Catholic Church. “I grew up Catholic and the hypocrisy of it and the dogma of it had chilled my relationship with it very early on. Even as a boy, I could feel it. There was a cruelty in the way the nuns treated us. It just didn’t jibe with the teachings of Christ that were being taught, you know?” Ruffalo said that he had friends who were victims of clergy abuse. -People.com

Michael Keaton told Prestige Hong Kong magazine that he “liked going to Catholic school” as a boy and his experience was “fine.” He continued by saying, “It was classic knuckle-rapping and stand in the corner and corporal punishment. But it was just sort of what it was. I didn’t come away scarred for life.” Despite being raised Catholic, Keaton acknowledges that he is not very religious today. -MovieFone.com

Actor Liev Schreiber, who portrays Globe editor Marty Baron in the Spotlight movie, had a rather convoluted religious upbringing. His mother’s family was Jewish and he has described her as a “far-out Socialist Labor Party hippie bohemian freak who hung out with [William] Burroughs” (LAMag.com). She gave him a Hindu name for a time, Shiva Das, and sent him to high school at Friends Seminary, a Quaker school in Manhattan operated by the Religious Society of Friends. Today, he seems to associate somewhat with his Jewish roots, though he is not very devout. “The funny thing is that I write and I act a lot about being Jewish,” says Schreiber, “but I don’t really think about it as a regular person” (TimeOut.com).
Did many more victims come forward after the story broke?

The real Spotlight team interviewed 30 or 40 victims during their research, which often took an emotional toll on the reporters, as emphasized in the movie. Once the story reached the masses in early 2002, more victims came forward, no longer believing they were alone in what had happened. “We received calls just in the Boston archdiocese from over 300 victims in just a month or two,” says Walter Robinson. He notes that these victims were all adults who had suffered the abuse years earlier. Most had been too afraid to come forward. -NPR
Has the Catholic Church removed the bishops who tried to cover up the abusive priest’s crimes?

Though he is pleased with the meaningful steps that the church has taken, former Globe editor Marty Baron (portrayed by Liev Schreiber in the movie) says that it took the church too long “to name a tribunal to hold the bishops accountable for having participated in the cover-up – where they knew that priests who were in their diocese were abusing kids, and yet they were reassigned from parish to parish.”

“It’s been 14 years. One would have thought this would have been addressed before now,” Baron said of the church’s announcement in the summer of 2015 that it was going to name a tribunal. “Clearly this is an issue that endures, and one that the church is still grappling with.” -People.com

Why was The Boston Globe’s story more significant than other similar stories of abuse within the Catholic Church?

“All over the country there were instances [of abuse],” Spotlight movie director Tom McCarthy told NPR, ” … but this story, this reporting, it connected the dots, and that is what sort of blew the roof off of this crisis.”
Did the story earn the Spotlight team a Pulitzer Prize?

Yes. The real Spotlight team members won a Pulitzer Prize in 2003 for their series of reports on the Catholic Church child abuse scandal and its systemic cover-up. -BostonGlobe.com
Were the original reporters and editors involved in the making of the movie?

Yes. “We would interview each of them about the same moments, to triangulate what happened, 10 or 11 years after the investigation,” said director and co-screenwriter Tom McCarthy. “Put it sometimes in their words, or our words, or a combination. … These reporters and editors read almost every draft we threw at them.” -Wall Street Journal

“I was definitely nervous when this idea of a movie first got floated,” says the real Sacha Pfeiffer (pictured below). “[The script] followed what really happened. There is very little license in terms of changing things that happened along the way. So, I think they ultimately created a really real-life, authentic, true-to-history story, and I feel grateful for that.”

– Did Michael Keaton meet the real Walter Robinson?

Yes, in researching the true story behind the Spotlight movie, we learned that in addition to watching video of old news appearances featuring Robinson, Michael Keaton met the real Walter Robinson over dinner. Robinson described the meeting as an “odd experience” because Keaton spent the entire time studying his mannerisms, which he says Keaton gets right in the movie. -NPR