The Pahalgam terrorist attack left a deep imprint on the people of India. While Mr Modi indulged in a show of verbal bravado, the Godi media followed suit and claimed that India had intruded into Pakistan's territory. Pakistan, in turn, claimed to have bombed down many planes of India. Donald Trump was the first to claim that he had brokered a ceasefire.

While Modi took credit for the same, the army spokesperson elaborated that there was a request from Pakistan authorities for cessation of hostilities, and India responded in the affirmative to bring a halt to the potential bloodbath of more army personnel and civilians on both sides.

The Government decided to tell the Indian side of the story by sending various delegations abroad. Many MPs from opposition parties were included. One such delegation was headed to America by Congress MP Shashi Tharoor. The type of briefs these delegations were given becomes clear from Mr. Tharoor's statement in America.

Tharoor stated in America that "while the intent behind the Pahalgam terror attack was to divide people, it brought people together in India, irrespective of their religion or any other divide...There was an extraordinary amount of togetherness cutting across religious and other divides that people have tried to provoke. The message is very clear that there was a malignant intent..."

Have all the delegations been given a brief like this? This narrative clearly has truth to it as all Indians, Hindus, Muslims, and others came together to condemn the dastardly act of Pahalgam. Still lurking under this is the continued hate being spread against Muslims. Even before the Pahalgam tragedy, the hate directed against Muslims had been rising; after this tragedy, it peaked monumentally. In my article last week, I gave select hate actions against this hapless community. These events have been chronicled by the Center for Study of Society and Secularism, Mumbai.

Even as India mourned lives lost in the terrorist attack, a coordinated campaign unfolded, offline and online, with one message: that Muslims were a threat to Hindus, that a similar fate awaited all Hindus, and that Muslims needed to be punished through violence and boycotts. Most disturbing of these was the arrest of Ashok University Professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad, who heads the political science department there.

In a very pertinent post, he stated, "I am very happy to see so many right-wing commentators applauding Colonel Sofiya Qureshi," he wrote. Further, "they should also demand that the victims of mob lynching, arbitrary demolitions [of houses], others who are victims of the BJP's hate-mongering be protected as Indian citizens". Several rights groups have pointed out that there has been a rise in violence and hate speech against Muslims in India in the past decade."

Following this, there were complaints against him by the Haryana State Women's Commission "that Mr Mahmudabad's social media posts had "disparaged" the two women defence officers and "undermined their role" in the armed forces." It is beyond one's comprehension as to how this post disparaged the women defence officers or undermined their role in the Indian army?

The other complaint was filed by a BJP youth activist. Ali Khan was arrested based on these complaints and approached the Supreme Court, granting him provisional bail. SC also gave a judgment which asked him not to write on this matter and to deposit his passport. The judgment stated that Ali Khan's post is a "dog whistling" and that it may transmit contentious messages subtly. We know "dog-whistling" is the most used label for coded speech that carries contentious meaning indirectly. The judge doubted the time and motivation behind the posts, though the bail was very gratifying.

Even Vijay Shah, a BJP leader who commented that Sophiya Quraishi is the sister of terrorists, was heavily reprimanded by the Court. This comment by a BJP leader was the most hateful comment possible against the outstanding army officer. As such, this was a clear dog-whistling by Vijay Shah. While the Court rejected his apology, his arrest has been put on hold.

What is a dog whistle? Prof. Ali Khan's post is not a dog whistle, to be sure. It is an expression of the anguish of the minority community. On the contrary, it is Vijay Shah whose dog whistle is bordering on open articulation of hate. Prof Ali Khan, in a very sensitive manner, has shown us the mirror as to how the nation is treating its minorities. Mr. Vijay Shah has shown openly how every occasion is used to sow hatred against minorities.

A Professor from a minority community should not be taken to task for talking about bulldozers and lynching, which has become part of our 'new normal', and despite the Court's disapproval of bulldozers, the state Governments many times have resorted to their use.

Also, two satirists, Neha Singh Rathore and Madri Kakoti, known as Dr Medusa online, were booked for their social media posts critical of the Modi government in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack.

In a way, what Vijay Shah has done is largely condoned by his party, no suspension, no expulsion and no arrest. The open hate against minorities from top BJP leadership to down below is not only quietly accepted, it also acts as a stepping stone for their political career. Just to recall, in the prelude to the 2019 Delhi violence, those calling for peace and Harmony, Umar Khalid and Sharjil Imam, have been rotting in the jails for over 5 years, their cases not even coming up for hearing while a minister of state Anurag Thakur got promoted to full Cabinet rank after he made the people shout 'Goli Maro' (shoot them) slogans.

The norms of our civility and Constitution are being slowly eroded by the politics which wear the clothes of religion. What democracy needs is the likes of Ali Khan, Umar Khalid, Neha Singh Rathore and Himanshi Narwal, who, truthfully, are calling for peace and also showing us a mirror of our society.