Sangh Parivar leader claims Satheesan sought RSS support to win in 2001, 2006 Assembly polls
Satheesan said he never sought RSS or BJP votes and alleged that Babu, a resident of Paravoor constituency from which the UDF leader is contesting, was anti-Congress due to some statements made by the party against him.
Babu, state president of pro-RSS group Hindu Aikya Vedi, told a TV channel that the opposition leader had earlier denied attending an RSS event in 2006, but has now admitted that he did.
Babu said, “So who is lying. Similarly, in future he will have to confess that he sought RSS help to win Assembly elections in 2001 and 2006.” he said.
He also said that the stand taken by the Congress on the RSS issue was not the same as in 2001 and 2006.
Babu claimed that Satheesan lost miserably to P Raju of CPI in 1996 and then sought the help of RSS to win.
Babu also said that he wants Satheesan to be defeated. The Sangh Parivar leader also said that he sees both UDF and LDF as two sides of the same coin. Answering reporters’ questions on the issue, Satheesan said Babu’s decision to want him to lose shows that there is no agreement with the BJP or RSS.
He categorically rejected the RSS leader’s allegations that he sought the support of the right-wing organization in 2001 and 2006 to win the elections.
Satheesan also reiterated his earlier allegations regarding the RSS-CPI(M) nexus.
He also questioned whether the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), which has declared its support to the CPI(M), is secular.
“When the CPI(M) can question the support given to us by the Welfare Party of India and Jamaat-e-Islami, we can also question them about the PDP,” he told reporters here.
The opposition leader claimed that the CPI(M) had problems with the Welfare Party only because it supported the UDF.
While talking to reporters, Satheesan also accused the CPI(M) of protecting its leaders accused in the Sabarimala gold misappropriation cases.
He also urged the central government to withdraw its move to amend the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA), claiming that it could affect public charity and welfare activities carried out by various NGOs.
