Arundhati roy continues with her malicious campaign against India.Her hatred for India and all things Indian is sooooo huge that she won't spare us even when we all are in deep sadness and shock after the Mumbai terror attack.
She continues to spit venom on Indians.Her latest anti-India column was published in the British daily The Guardian on Saturday 13 December 2008.
She says some people in India are saying 26/11 is India's 9/11.
So what?If it is,what's her problem?And if it's not so,will she be happy?
Why is she bothered if Indians call it 9/11 or some thing else?
The article 'tries to give the impression' of talking in the context of the Mumbai incident,but actually it's not.The whole article reflects her contempt for India and an attitude of making fun at the expense of India,the land where she was born.There is also an attempt to link the Mumbai terror attack to Kashmir,which is highly barbaric.
She even says "If Kashmir won't willingly integrate into India, it's beginning to look as though India will integrate/disintegrate into Kashmir."
First of all from where Kashmir came into picture,if she is talking about Mumbai's nightmare.
Who told her that Kashmir has not willingly integrated with India?Kashmir was part of India,so where is the question of integration?
Still an instrument accession to the Indian Union was signed by the then ruler of Kashmir,at the time of partition.
arundhati infers that if her friends like syed ali shah geelani,umar farooq etc does not integrate with India,India might disintegrate...!!!
This is the height of treachery.
Indians in Kashmir are with India.It's the group of geelanis,farooqs and sundry who wants to be part of pakistan.Those people can go to pakistan,arundhati too can go,because she is now a great defender of pak terrorists.
In the article she also says
"we have a military occupation in Kashmir and a shamefully persecuted, impoverished minority of more than 150 million Muslims who are being targeted as a community and pushed to the wall, whose young see no justice on the horizon, and who, were they to totally lose hope and radicalise, end up as a threat not just to India, but to the whole world. If ten men can hold off the NSG commandos, and the police for three days, and if it takes half a million soldiers to hold down the Kashmir valley, do the math.".
Military ocupation in Kashmir?
She doesn't know why the Indian Army is in Kashmir?Even when the Indian Army is in Kashmir,pakis tried to snatch Indian territory as recently as what happened in Kargil.The Indian Army is in Kashmir primarily to safeguard India's Kashmiri territory and also to protect our citizens in J&K from the pakis terrorists.If pakis stop sending terrorists to Kashmir and Kashmir is free from pak terror,India surely will pull-off the army from the streets of Kashmir.
While fighting hardcore suicide terrorist squads,it's possible that some human rights violations could happen.Indian state and the Army does have adequate means to address such grievances.
Now talking about Indian Muslims,it's true that a few amongst our Muslim brothers have taken to terrorism,but that doesn't mean that the whole Muslim community will get radicalised or become terrorists..!!
Also it's not true that there is no 'justice on the horizon' to the Indian Muslims.There could be a delay in providing justice in some cases,but justice and truth will prevail finally.To tackle carnages like what happened in Gujrat or those which happened during the anti-sikh riots,it's necessary that Hindus,Muslims,Sikhs,Christians and all other communities join hand and fight democratically.There is enough means available in India to fight injustice and communal forces other than the terror route arundhati is suggesting.For one, Gandhian methods could be adopted.If the mighty British empire could be defeated by his methods,why can't we adopt those methods and make our own leaders do what is right?
Any way if she is soooo concerned and if her concern is genuine,why is she not suggesting any solution,other than blindly uttering non-sense...!
Now talking about 10 terrorists holding off NSG Commandos and police for 3 days...,arundhati should once again look at what happened in Mumbai.It was not a simple case of 10 terrorists holding on against the might of India's Elite Commando Force.The terrorists were inside huge hotels having more that 300 to 400 rooms and there were hostages inside.
In the article she shows her comic admiration for India by saying that India
is a "a country with a shadowy history of suspicious terror attacks, murky investigations, and fake encounters.A country that boasts of the highest number of custodial deaths in the world and yet refuses to ratify the International Covenant on Torture. A country where the ones who make it to torture chambers are the lucky ones because at least they've escaped being "encountered" by our Encounter Specialists. A country where the line between the Underworld and the Encounter Specialists virtually does not exist."
Nothing to say about this.Just a feeling of regret that she too was born in this Country.Look at her admiration for her motherland...!!!
She just generalises taking one or two instances.Few fake encounters or custodial deaths might have happened.Such occurances are unfortunate and should be condemned and properly dealt with.But to say that the Country boasts of it,just shows her overall attitude of an 'all-powerful-step-mother-of-India',who has the right to write rubbish and punish Indians.
Now in the same article she says
"Even today we don't really know who the terrorists that attacked the Indian parliament were and who they worked for."
Ohhhh..reallyy??Sorry madam,the whole world knows who was behind it.There is no real need that you should be knowing all the things that happen in this world.Even though you consider yourself as a very very important person,we Indians just don't care about you.You don't know,because, may be, you were in pakistan when the media and the international community came to know who was behind the Indian parliament attack.
Now to continue with her article,she says
"We're told one of these hotels is an icon of the city of Mumbai. That's absolutely true. It's an icon of the easy, obscene injustice that ordinary Indians endure every day.
If you were watching television you may not have heard that ordinary people too died in Mumbai. They were mowed down in a busy railway station and a public hospital. The terrorists did not distinguish between poor and rich. They killed both with equal cold-bloodedness. The Indian media, however, was transfixed by the rising tide of horror that breached the glittering barricades of India Shining and spread its stench in the marbled lobbies and crystal ballrooms of two incredibly luxurious hotels and a small Jewish centre."
She says the Taj Mahal hotel is an icon of injustice to ordinary Indians...!!!
What does that mean?
What is her logic?
She says media did not report that ordinary people also died in the terror attack.
So according to her what was the media reporting?
Media was reporting the death of 'extra-ordinary' people?
Is that what she mean?
How on earth she came to the conclusion that there was distinction between the rich and poor who got killed?
The railway station and hospital attacks were also covered by the media.It's just that the hostage situation was in the two hotels and the Jewish centre..
Is she not having the commonsense to understand this,or in her blind hatred for India,she conviniently forgets these facts?
Two killed 'ordinay' citizens' families,if they can be called ordinary based on arundhati's language,one among whom was a street vegetable seller,were given compensation by the Kerala government(since they were malayalees).Like-wise I read that the Maharastra government also announced compensation irrespective of whether they were rich or poor.
Is arundathi implying that just because the rich are rich,their death should not matter???
These are some of her opinions she expressed in that article.It's,as always,obviously an article to stay in limelight using her favourite topic - India bashing.Also,at a time when the international community is fully focused on neutralizing the terror groups operating from pakistan,she wants to tell the international community 'ok,Mumbai was attacked.160 plus people got killed.So what?What about Kashmir,what about Gujrat,
what about the Indian army,Police,Custodial death,encounters,rich,poor..'.
Exactly the same sort of diversionary tactics that pakistan is using to divert attention away from the immediate tragedy and it's consequences.
In the entire article,there is not a single expression of genuine sorrow for the innocent Indian public,which continuously suffer from the pak sponsored terror.Not a single condemnation of pakistan,even though a pakistani terorist is caught red-handed.
If some body mistakes arundhati's column to be an article written by a pak ISI or intelligence agent,he cannot be blamed.
She is an obnoxious little creature,a cancer.The Indian government in a normal circumstance should not be giving any attention to her attention-seeking-mad-rantings.But since she won some booker prize,her articles are getting published in international media,thereby giving wrong data to the international public about India.It's a humble opinion that the government of India should seriously think about what could be done to avoid this cancer from spreading.
She seems to have reached an agreement with the pakistan government.pakistan will fight the proxy-war with terror and she will fight the pen war or media war against India in the western media.
It's absolutely stunning to know that not even pakistani writers have written as badly of India as arundhati has done from the time she won the 'cooker' prize.
7 comments:
You use the term 'pak dogs' and have posted the poetry of Rabindranath Tagore!
Doesn't connect!
The poetry of Tagore doesn't say we should not be angry against attacks on us.Any way i do plan to remove that usage from the banner.It was just the frustration that was on display there.The term 'pak dogs' was meant only for the terrorists because i don't think they can be called human beings.
Any way I do understand that it's not a good world to use.I apologise for it.I will look for better usages next time to express my views and frustrations...
Thanks Kartikey Sehgal for the guidance..
You said she "hates India". She is critical of the government! Your definition of country love must be blind obedience. Maybe a quote from an American statesman would be appropriate right now: "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism". We should never let fear keep us from asking the questions that need to be asked. If we give up critical thought and civil liberties, the terrorists have already won.
The above comment is really interesting.What is this "blind obedience"..Love for the Country does not mean you should not ask questions..Correct...But pls go through the questions she asked..And see if they are genuine questions of concern to the Indian people.By saying such things do you think,she is helping India or the terror suffering innocent public of India in any way?As i said has she suggested any means ,whether peaceful or otherwise to counter the problems faced by India..Also if you think that my love for my country is blind obedience,then I sincerely hope that you read some others postings in my blog too..Bye..Take care..
I almost agree with you completely but I would also like to post my individual response to her article. Hope you agree.
Here it goes-
A lot of very sensible arguments indeed but any reasoned analysis of the piece would not be able to escape the personal prejudices involved in using sensible arguments towards something not quite sensible. The tragedy of language as is evident in the piece is it is most often hijacked to complicate simple realities and frequently connect a lot of unrelated incidents to justify one personal ideology that severely undermines common sense reactions to tragedies.
Such a treatment of the terrorist attacks on India, is a demonstration of a select few from the privileged so called educated class using the same arguments to justify their stances on a particular subject that they themselves do not stand for in actions.There was indeed no mention of how the very people who lost their lives in the terrorist actions were those who had previously been accused of fake encounters furthering right wing ideologies. The reason therefore the so-called civil society in India of which the writer is allegedly a part of, fails to make ground level changes, since unfortunately more questioning and logic is equated with objectivity that distances onself from the subjective experiences of such hateful attacks.
It is interesting to explore who can afford such intelelctual takes on such subjects when one is in the line of fire.
And therefore empathetic associations with the subjects of a tragedy by the common citizenry would always be interpreted and subsequently accused by the so called intellectuals as being unreasonable and an example of mass hysteria.
Sometimes every prominent public figure/writer needs to use the pen a little responsibly since as the old cliche goes with more power comes more responsibility and if I can add with more irresponsibility comes more unacceptability.
Who knows where to download XRumer 5.0 Palladium?
Help, please. All recommend this program to effectively advertise on the Internet, this is the best program!
Post a Comment