(This is a reprint from NewsBred).
I once heard Salman Rushdie say: “I might be indifferent to religion but if it acts as a balm to billions, who am I to quarrel with.” This is a perfect position for both atheists and non-atheists; believers and non-believers. devotees and rational. If you can’t help or console humanity, a majority of whom are without power or hope, the last thing you ought to do is to hurt the faith which allows them to live by.
The only set who wouldn’t agree to this position are artistes. They are a different breed. They argue, they question, they debate and we all feel it’s for our advancement. There is no harm if dogmas are revisited. A faith reformed is a faith purified. It’s rationality. The problem occurs when your are not out to cleanse the faith. It’s to use your art to abuse the faith. Messenger, instead of message, becomes your target.
Unfortunately, it pays. More in the case against the Hindus than say Muslims or Christians. If you take liberty against Muslims and their faith—dare even sketch a portrait of Prophet Muhammad—it’s unlikely you would see the next day. The retribution is swift. Charlie Hebdo isn’t the sole instance. But against the Hindus—you could slap at their Hanuman; call a “kutiya” (bitch) a Savitri; term “Chitrakoot” as “Paatal Lok”; show them genocidal—and its’ artistic license. Worse, it ensures raving reviews and 10-serial contract with the new beasts in town: The Over The Top (OTT) platforms.
The OTT platforms are your Netflix and Amazon; Voot and Hotstar etc. The stream straight into your living rooms. There is no censorship. It doesn’t come under the CBFC (Central Board of Film Certiication) or the Cinematograph Act of 1952. Profanity passes off as gritty dialogues; sex scenes are watched together by both father and daughter, one skirting his eyes, the other holding her breath; a young kid bemused why the “uncle” on the screen finds a young boy in his mirror-image so tempting.
This is my third piece on the matter. One was on Leila, last year, a futuristic tale of Hindus in ethnic cleansing. The second was Paatal Lok which filled me with disgust. Now it’s on Chippa where an old man is narrating how his grandma once slapped “Hanuman” and the latter “sar jhukai. dum dabai, ae bhaaga (bowing his head, tail between his legs, he scampered for safety). All three have been streamed on Netflix in rapid succession.
Twitteratis this morning were outraged at Chippa. Predictably, excuses came up: “Langaurs in Bengal are called Hanumans”; or “A specie of monkeys in India is called Hanuman.” Rebuttals came that “if so, why a man is seen kicking a kid while reading Hanuman Chalisa in Chippa;” or “If true in Bengal; why use this truism for rest of India?” Surely, two million Hindus of Bengal isn’t the same thing as 1000 million other Hindus in rest of India.
It’s easy to understand the motive. Such artistic liberties secure a platform, ensure good reviews and probably a 10-series contract from an OTT outlet. Guaranteed profits. Secured careers. Unlike Muslims, Hindus are unlikely to walk into the Mumbai office of Netflix and spray bullets. Their impotent outrage on the social media—for no mainstream media gives a hoot to Hindu sensibilities—actually drives up the viewership. India’s OTT market would be worth $5 billion in 2023, as per Boston Consulting Group. Netflix has reported a 30% hike in their viewership during these pandemic months. Be pretty sure also they are not taxed either by the Indian government.
Not that Information and Broadcasting ( I & B) ministry hasn’t stirred. Just before lockdowns, a notice had gone to these OTT platforms in March to standardize their code of conduct and set up an adjudicatory body. China, France, Singapore all enforce it. However, in a meeting which the minister Prakash Javadekar summoned in his office, to abide by the rules of the Digital Content Complaint Council (DCCC), predictably, Amazon Prime refused. Netflix asked for extra weeks to firm up their mind. Others, such as Hotstar, Voot etc have come on board.
The OTTs hiding behind censorship is a joke. It can’t overrule what the courts in India find outrageous in light of the Constitution. You can’t be promoting religious violence or show barely-concealed pornography in the name of artistic licence. And if you could, dare and do it against Islam. You know as well as I do, you won’t. Between money or a hole-in-the-chest, the choice is not too difficult.
(This is a reprint from NewsBred).
If riots are the moment which sank the bobbing mass, be fairly sure that Donald Trump would not only float but sail to the promised land of US re-election this November.
Indian elites and movie stars might hold placards of “BlackLivesMatter”; Europe might erupt in enraged fury at the racial injustice; mainstream media might soil their pants in outrage; and the biggest brands might shut their shops in solidarity but the voting masses are pissed as events are unfolding.
Long after riots die down, all that would remain in voters’ memory is arson and looting; those images of goons emptying stores, big and small; shops gutted; properties ablaze; owners beaten to pulp; videos of Manhattan’s luxury shopping district, shut and looted to the last store.
This is the last thing voters would condone, reeling as the little man is at drying income, lost jobs, deaths in family and neighbourhood and a pandemic which is arguably the biggest enemy the United States has faced since being formed in the 18th century. There is a swell of anger which of course escapes the Big Media, by accident or design, since they love burning decks splashed on their front pages. Psychology doesn’t bring readers. The national cost of one cop’s knee on an unfortunate man is already sky high.
There is enough evidence on the crime scenes to correlate that riots were fabricated as pre-delivered bricks hurled in burning cities were identical; that it has happened mostly in states led by Democrats; and the resultant curfews lacked the will to enforce its maxims. The removal of statue of Robert E. Lee, the defender of Virginia capital from being looted and burned, would hurt millions. And no opportunity is being lost to stress that George Floyd had a criminal record and was suffering from ailments.
It hasn’t helped that “knee-on-Floyd” moment is largely drawn from the Israeli copybook methods in which the US Police is trained. Both view protestors as enemies and employ aggressive restraining measures. Kids as young as five-year-old are handcuffed; teenagers are pushed to sink to their knees. It won’t help matters now that the police in US is getting on one-knee to show that they are sorry. A common man values law and order above everything: even over racial divide which is institutionalized in memory and practice in the United States.
The United States inherited the black slave trade; they didn’t start it. They were born with it. And they never learnt. It was history’s curse. Over time, Blacks were taught that Whites were to be hated; White arguably owned up some guilt. As an analyst drily remarks: “People don’t employ people they hate to look after their children, cook their meals, run their households, and people who hate don’t perform these tasks for those they hate.” It’s flying in the face of logic to assert that Whites and Blacks don’t function together in their lives.
And that’s exactly fake sympathizers of “BlackLivesMatter” are doing. Nike and Adidas have run long campaigns in support; Spotify ran an eight-minute and 46-second track of silence across its playlists and podcasts as a “solemn acknowledgement for the length of time that George Floyd was suffocated,” L’Oreal shed tears; and Apple mourned with “Blackout Tuesday.” Interestingly, none of these multinationals have one black face in their command centres. NOT ONE. This is true of 46 out of 50 top brands originating from the United States.
In India, Bollywood bimbos have gone to town on “BlackLivesMatter” even as they pose for fairness creams ads in dozens. Indians, right from Mahatma Gandhi onwards, have reserved only contempt for the Blacks. So embarrassing was Gandhi’s views on “Kaffirs” that before he left South Africa in 1914, he burnt all his archives of such damning literature. We have umpteen attacks on black students in the Capital and its suburbs. It’s hypocrisy at its most vile.
Trump of course wouldn’t let go this moment. His quotes “when the looting starts, the shooting starts,” is the right kind of noise voters want to listen. His anti-China stance, contrary to one of Joe Biden’s free trade philosophy, is already a head-start. Now the riots would bring the voters’ anger to the brim. Worse, it could lead to a renewed burst of Corona numbers and deaths. After all, these riots are mostly in those 25 hotspots where the pandemic has cast its deepest spell. A worsening Corona in these districts, controlled by Democrats, would play into the hands of Republican Trump.
(This is a reprint from NewsBred).
In filing a FIR against Ganga Ram Hospital in the Capital, and accusing them of “black-marketing” Arvind Kejriwal could’ve appeared a concerned chief minister of Delhi but for a condemnable transgression—he saw a few “political” contacts behind it.
Taken to a logical conclusion, Kejriwal seems to be implying that Corona patients are not given due care and are being turned away as the hospital is secure in its political contacts. That is, if Delhi buckles under Corona’s weight, it would help a few of his political opponents.
If it wasn’t so, Kejriwal could have just limited his diatribe to the conduct of the hospital which doesn’t pass his muster. A FIR and accusation of “blackmail” is bad enough. The accusation that the hospital is not following the due norms is contestable. But to give it a political colour is wildly unnecessary.
One, it’s suspicious for in the past Kejriwal had made many wild accusations against other political heavyweights and then, with his tail between his legs, offered unconditional apology. In effect, he is loose-tongued and makes accusations when it politically suits him – only to flush it down the drain after it has served its purpose. Two, it raises the spectre of fear that Delhi is sinking and pretexts are being manufactured. Both are not good.
The Delhi Medical Association (DMA) duly has sent a stinging reply to Delhi’s chief minister. They feel it’s an “insult” to paramedical staff who are “risking their lives;” and are being “penalized” for their tireless work of the last few months. They feel an “overstressed” medical staff is being “threatened” and “intimidated.” For good measure, DMA has mentioned its 15,000 members as being the ones who are being put “under pressure” by the “diktats (farmaans)” of the Delhi government.
The DMA, for good measure, has made a few demands which, if true, reveal the immense pressure under which medics are performing their duty. For one, they are explicit that testing facilities are inadequate. There are not adequate labs. The DMA has made two other relevant points which deserve close attention of readers.
One is that there is need for timely transfer of grave patients to higher care centres. Two, in case of Covid-19 deaths, a prompt and efficient system to transport and cremate the body as per guidelines is urgently needed. It points to an overwhelmed medical system in the Capital. There are multiple issues with Corona pandemic where hospitals are being subjected to sorting their patients; bring additional requirements for those “quarantined” including supervision and in case of worsening patients virtually dictated to keep them within confines instead of shifting them to better care Centres.
Further, a peeved Kejriwal has banned the test on suspected Corona patients by the hospital since June 3. Implying that they be admitted without ascertaining if they are Covid patients or not. It’s leading to the situation of over-congestion and chaos which the DMA has outlined in its letter. It would overwhelm the system and not help anyone—neither the hospitals nor the unsegregated patients nor Delhi for that matter.
Delhi needs a chief minister with hands on burning deck—not one who is blaming everyone but himself for at least one of his oversight: Remember Tablighi Jamaat? The last thing we need is to put the ones on the dock who are India’s real saviours. If they go, so would Delhi.
(This is a reprint from NewsBred).
It’s happening in the United States but it concerns all of us. President Donald Trump has passed an executive order to “censor” Social Media. If it passes the legal test, the current immunity enjoyed by Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, WhatsApp etc would be stripped bare. If they lose freedom, what chances you and I have on our “freedom of expression?”
A background is in order. Trump showed his contempt for mail-in ballots in case the due November 3 Presidential election keeps the voters indoors due to Corona Virus. He tweeted: “no way…mail-in ballots will be anything less than substantial fraudulent. Mail boxes will be robbed, ballots will be robbed, ballots will be forged and even illegally printed out and fraudulently signed…” He followed it up with another tweet, mentioning it would be “rigged elections.” Twitter censored it, stating “Trump makes unsubstantiated claim that mail-in ballots will lead to voter fraud.”
Trump was livid. He termed it selective censorship. Twitter, the president said, was making “editorial decisions.” In essence, it doesn’t make Social Media a neutral platform. They are publishers, like other media houses and must come under regulations.
“They’ve had unchecked power to censure, restrict, edit, shape, hide, alter virtually any form of communication between private citizens or large public audiences…We cannot allow that to happen…in these moments, Twitter ceases to be a neutral public platform – they become an editor with a viewpoint,” said Trump, adding his comments don’t exclude other media platforms such as Facebook, Google etc.
Is Trump wrong? Probably not. What Twitter censors by Trump would look extremely scandalous if Twitter was owned, say by a Chinese company. How can Social Media censor views on local election process, that too of the US president, when there are legitimate grounds for his comments? The New York Times in 2012 had reported “fraud” in postal ballots. Washington Post is on record for stating that “no one questions the mail-in ballots have much higher rates of not being counted.” Twitter’s action does curtail “freedom of expression”. Social Media today has the power to shape truth in the image they want. Democracy won’t have the diversity it preens upon.
Trump’s order aims to turn Social Media platforms as regular publishers. It means they could be bogged down by lawsuits. It could, and should, flag down racial and religious bigotry; terrorism and pornography etc. But Social Media giants ought to have no role in censoring people’s opinion. More so, political opinions. Trump has accused twitter of “doing nothing about all of the lies and propaganda being put out by China or the Radical Left Democratic Party (i.e. his rival Joe Biden).”
It could well be that Trump’s executive order falls flat on legal count. But Social Media giants can’t have unbridled freedom. They are being hauled up, for instance, in Europe and Australia; the latter quite close to labelling Social Media platforms as media outlets. They derive commercial benefits on disseminating news content. Their usage of people’s data has long been in regulators’ crosshairs. There are wide-ranging antitrust probes against them. They are no innocent bystanders.
Twitter presently is asserting its power to “curate” the content So, tomorrow, if the Indian prime minister Narendra Modi was to say that Congress can’t hold a candle to Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS); or that Mamata Banerjee is supporting Jihadi elements in Bengal; or that he is worried about attacks on Sadhus; or that he is surprised to learn that below Babri Masjid remains of a temple has been found, could Twitter “fact-checks” and blocks those tweets? Is Twitter now the new “arbiters” of truth? And if they think they are, shouldn’t they be deemed as media houses and suitably brought under legal purview? Who is to say they are being neutral and not biased?
In the Indian context, just imagine the size we’re talking about. Between Facebook and WhatsApp, there are 700 million users. YouTube has 265 million users: twitter 14 million. It’s an enormous power to wield if the Social Media giants choose to be the arbiters of truth as they see it. If tomorrow, the Indian government follows Trump’s example, how would we react? In the name of “freedom of internet” would we be helping or breaking the India we know?
(This is a reprint from NewsBred).
The riots in United States have spread across the nation. From Minneapolis to Dallas, Los Angeles to Atlanta, New York to Portland, 40 cities are under curfew. National Guard have been called out in Washington DC and 15 other states. Today is just one week since Floyd George was murdered.
Innocents are confused at the clockwork precision of multiple riots. All four concerned police officers were fired the next day. The offending police officer with his knee on George’s throat has been charged with third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is holding its own investigations. Yet the violence has bubbled over.
The United States suffers from racial discrimination. That’s a truth. Blacks might be up to 40% of the entire population but they carry little weight. That’s a truth. Most jailed in the US prisons are blacks. That’s a truth. But could we call it spontaneous riots when pallets of bricks, of same size and standard, shape and colour, are spotted across the rioting cities?
Donald Trump’s government has gone public in naming the alleged conspirator. Trump has blamed the riots on “Antifa and the Radical Left”. Attorney General William Barr, in a statement, has claimed that the “violence (is) instigated and carried out by Antifa and other similar groups.” National Security Adviser Robert O’ Brien has told CNN that the violence “is being driven by Antifa.” Anti-Fascists in short is Antifa.
The principal funding of Antifa, and Black Lives Matter groups, is by George Soros and his Open Society Foundations in which he has stuffed $38 billion for operations in 120 countries. He has been funding terror activities and disruption of government around the world for decades. He pledged one billion dollars last year against “resurgent nationalism” and openly named India’s Narendra Modi as the man on his radar. This was in the wake of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).
Everything you want to know about George Soros you could find in this article of mine I penned early this year. His alleged role in overthrowing elected governments; the prime ministers and presidents who have openly accused him of coup d’etats; and his control on media as revealed in Wikileaks, among others. This man, in essence, is part of global cabal which through bankers control the world governments and sees existential threat in “nationalism” which runs counter to their “profits and profits only” agenda of free trade. They fear the likes of Modi and Trump, like darkness would to light.
Invariably they succeed. They succeeded in Libya and Iraq; Ukraine and Egypt; those Arab Spring revolutions; countless Latin American and African countries; and nearly succeeded in Syria. The “pro-democracy” movement in Hong Kong is one such manifestation. The “anti-CAA protests” in India, before it was halted by Covid-19, is another.
The standard method is to bring people on streets, make police duck, splash it in media they control and bring the elected government on its knees. This is what’s being attempted against Trump now. This is what surely would be resumed on Modi after Covid-19. They work on a country’s faultlines which exist in every country of this world. In US, its’ Whites vs Blacks. In India, it’s Hindus vs Muslims. Before long the country is torn asunder.
Trump has moved swiftly. He has announced his intention to declare Antifa as a domestic terrorist organization. Barr has announced a similar resolve. Once done, Antifa and Open Society Foundations would be prosecuted and the assets of their backers seized. The international banking system could be cut off to Soros and his octopus of affiliated groups.
More importantly, the alleged tie-ups between Antifa and the Democrat party could be laid bare in public. It’s apt to remember that Minneapolis is run by the Democrats. And that Democrat-candidate Joe Biden and his campaign staff have made donations to the Minnesota Freedom Fund. The group donates to pay bail fees for those who are arrested in Minneapolis, a city of Minnesota. President Trump’s campaign finds it “disturbing” that Biden’s team “would financially support the mayhem.” He has called upon Biden to condemn the riots. Biden incidentally is for free-trade or is pro-China compared to hawkish Trump who openly berates the Middle Kingdom
The US presidential elections are slated for November 3. Minnesota is critical. In the 2016 elections, Hillary Clinton had won narrowly by a 1.5 per cent margin. Trump had struggled to attract African-American voters. Only 8% of this group had voted for him in 2016.
Knowing how Trump is raising trade barriers against China; and how it could win him another presidential term this year; and how Modi could follow his best friend in raising the stakes against China; which is important for these pirates of “open trade” there is little wonder that US cities are burning.
Or that similar would be the fate in India after Corona Virus.
(This is a reprint from NewsBred).
India is worried on count of Maharashtra. The Western state appears to be losing the battle against Corona Virus. There are three matters which suggest we haven’t seen the worst yet.
One is a measure by the Mumbai Police. While imposing Section 144 till June 8, it prohibits any attempt on social media to incite mistrust against the government officials. It’s a loosely worded order which empowers the state machinery to take punitive measure on what it doesn’t like and considers as creating “mistrust” in public against it. It’s censorship otherly-worded.
Second is Rahul Gandhi going public in distancing himself from the Maharashtra government of which his party Congress is a part. In a video message, Gandhi said his party doesn’t have a say in key matters in running of the state.
Third is an Indian Express report which claims that there is “resentment in the cabinet” over Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray’s reliance on the bureaucracy who virtually are running the state’s Corona strategy and are “keeping ministers in the dark.”
Further, the Indian Express claims that the three partners in coalition—NCP, Congress, Shiv Sena—differ over lockdown. While Thackeray prefers an extension of lockdown, Pawar (NCP) “is keen on granting some relaxations.”
In plain terms, Corona is like a mad dog on the leash which is taking its master, the Maharashtra government, all over the place. There is no firm hand to keep the canine on its trajectory. The Maha Aghadi (The Great Development Front) is a grumpy house where a key partner has distanced itself, the cabinet is sore over the bureaucracy and there is bickering on the lockdown strategy.
A few side issues haven’t won Maharashtra government many friends. The harassment of media personality Arnab Goswami is viewed prejudiced. The Palghar Lynchings of Sadhus is hanging fire. Then we had a few barons in the Yes Bank scandal, sought by state agencies, moving without intervention in their caravans amidst the lockdown. We now have reports where Shiv Sainiks (Shiv Sena cadre) have vandalized shops of individuals who allegedly didn’t have complimentary words for Thackeray. A FIR against the owners, two individuals, has added insult to injury.
Predictably, BJP has mounted pressure. The Railways minister Piyush Goyal has run hourly tweets on how Maharashtra government is doing nothing to avail Shramik Trains for stranded migrants. Now there are reports that a few BJP functionaries have met the governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari raising speculation over the President’s Rule. Former chief minister Devendra Fadnavis, on his part, has stated that they don’t need to win over any sitting MLAs as “they (Maha Aghadi) would collapse under its own weight.”
Meanwhile Loksatta, a Marathi news outlet, ran a twitter poll on whether the state should have President’s Rule. Within five hours, the voters leaned in favour of dissolution of assembly. Though the regional newspaper promptly dropped the poll, the twitteratis went to town on the mood of the people in Maharashtra.
Politics and power is small price compared to the catastrophe which is unfolding in the state. Cynics would say that it perhaps is the reason why Corona is spiralling out of control. So far up to 40 per cent of India’s numbers and deaths to the pandemic are accounted by the state of Maharashtra. The prized city of Mumbai has been gripped by the curse. The commercial capital of the country is bleeding and no end is in sight. It’s not good for state, definitely not for India. Besides, there is this question: How long could you keep the people locked out. How long would they watch the rest of india limp back to life while they are sealed between their four walls?
The alliance of convenience in Maharashtra must show itself as an alliance of saviours. Or give way to those who could get the job done.
(This is a reprint from NewsBred).
I cringed watching Paatal Lok. Kutiya (bitch) is a word used in everyday life for a women of no-character. A bed-hopping adulteress. In the serial, a kutiya is named “Savitri.” The name which has a pious association for all Hindus since it tells about “Sati Savitri” who made Yamraj (God of death) return Satyavaan for her exemplary devotion to her husband. Many metaphors with Savitri are routinely used, e.g “Badi Sati Savitri bani phirti hai. (Don’t act as you are a Sati Savitri).”
Indifferent, that most Hindus are, would give a benefit of doubt. Maybe, the producer, Anushka Sharma, knows many bitches who are named “Savitri.” Maybe, the creator, Sudip Sharma, remembered a cousin who was Savitri and was called “kutiya” at home. Maybe the platform, Amazon Prime Video, is obliged to some Jihadi or missionary sponsor.
Then you have a scene which would bear a recall to the unfortunate Junaid incident when a young Muslim boy lost his life on a suburban train. The Left-Liberal media made sure that Junaid became a posthumous symbol of Hindu’s intolerance on beef. Only, the Court later ruled that the clash had occurred over occupation of seats and not beef. This truth remains uncorrected in Lutyens Media. Paatal Lok turns it into a legend. The scene has no relevance to the script. Its dispensable to narrative. Yet it’s forced in.
Chitrakoot is sacred for Hindus like few holy sites are. Rama and Sita and Laxman spent 11 years and six months of their 14 years of banishment here. As per Hindu legends, Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva made a pilgrimage here. Great sages like Sati Anusuya and Valmiki meditated. It remains a place where renowned seers, devotees and thinkers visit for Nirvaana. In Paatal Lok, it’s shown as a hotbed of criminals and murderers. A dark world. A habitat of monsters.
Here we have Hindu priests who make the most profane abuses in temples and distribute beef. We have an upper-caste Hindu confidante of a corrupt Hindu leader who does extra-marital sex with his janeu (sacred thread) visible on his torso. The corrupt Brahmin leader himself eats with Dalits but carries mineral water in his jeep. We have CBI cook up the Islamic State terrorists theory when none exists.
Most of this is intended to show Hindus in poor light. To make them doubt their gods, to lose faith in a culture and heritage which is unbroken for last 5000 years, without an equivalence in the world. So that young Hindus see no reason to develop faith. It dies out without followers in due course.
If this is artistic licence, just imagine: A Muslim is doing sex with his faith’s holy images on the wall; a bitch is named Ayesha or Mary; Mecca and Medina are Jihadis hideouts; pork is being served in Mosque. Or if the Prophet is picked like Krishna is occasionally done for gopikas. Does this make you angry, our Muslim and Christian brethren? Sure it does and it must. But don’t worry, these transgressions only happen for Hindus for they won’t burn producers’ homes or cars like it could happen if you dare draw an image of a certain Prophet. None have done so and not paid the price.
This is the boundary which is never crossed in the name of creative licence and artistic freedom. Hindus apparently are the only suckers in this world.
Paatal Lok’s creator Sudip Sharma has now given an interview to a Leftist website where he claims “all art is inspired by reality…we need to trust our faith and I believe our faith is strong enough to take any criticism.” He says bitch was named Savitri as like the holy goddess, she also saves her husband.
If we may ask you Sudip, do Dolly and Sanjeev Mehra remind you of Savitri and Satyavaan? The husband routinely does sex outside marriage with a colleague; the wife picks a boy with the same on her mind. Would your reality extend to temples (Chandni Chowk) which are broken by Muslims; or where people are peeing on Lord Shiva’s bust. Would this reality encompass men like Tahir Hussain who had allegedly stocked petrol bombs and threw them through his men from his terrace? Or when Hindu kaanwarias are attacked while passing a Muslim locality? Is the reality that beef-mafia is run by Muslims and between Akhlaq and Junaid, dozens of Hindus were killed by this mafia for their cows, could be your reality-check? How about a Madarsa teacher who raped a minor 100 times? Is Islamic State a myth by Indian state agencies which must be mocked by you?
As of now, the BJP government has no plan to censor Over The Top (OTT) platforms like Netflix and Amazon Prime Video for derogatory content. We the viewers though could boycott Paatal Lok. They most probably did so to invite a Hindu outcry which in turn would bring more viewers in front of their TV sets. They also know it would ensure a favourable review. Hindus have an obligation to switch off.
(This is a reprint from NewsBred).
All of us would agree that public transport should’ve been allowed to let migrants reach home. Done and dusted in the first week of Lockdown 1.0 itself. Free food and community centres are not homes.
Then came mischief. One fine day, we had thousands of migrants at a bus station in Delhi. Somebody had promised them transport home. This whisper also worked in Mumbai. Thousands poured into Bandra station. Somebody was trying to get them on streets. An educated guess is it was politics. As we would presently see, any political upheavals can’t be caused without people-on- streets.
It’s now Priyanka Gandhi on the move. Her bleeding heart has arranged a thousand buses for migrants for Uttar Pradesh. She has chosen buses over trains. Never mind UP is successfully requisitioning tens of trains by the hour. Half of all Shramik Trains, 301 out of 642, have headed to Yogi’s state. She won’t tell, and our media won’t ask, if she has allergy to Indian Railways. She is surely not living up to her surname who once discovered India on trains and ended up as Mahatma.
So let’s agree on the basics: One, State made a mistake in denying migrants a window to escape. Two, somebody wants human misery on streets. This agenda was bound to soar on the headwind of people’s trauma. This was one reality which was wired to favour fiction.
We got to know of fictions on a regular basis though our media don’t give enough credit to its readers for intelligence. This usually happens when you are unchecked. NDTV was caught arranging migrants through a staged performance. They were shamed enough to delete the video but its men were soon up to another mischief. So, a report has Priyanka’s buses lined up, only the image actually is of Yogi’s buses for Kumbh Mela last year. One recalls a fake report in The Hindu of migrants being extra charged. Indian Express isn’t leaving a single migrant on a single highway who could add to its’ misery editions. India Today group meanwhile is selling migrants photos for thousands of bucks.
These are the kind of times when Western media wakes up to India. Washington Post has run dozens of photographs on Indian migrants; New York Times likewise; The Guardian wasn’t quite British in overplaying it as India’s greatest exodus since the Partition. Quite interestingly, the newspaper in a matter of 24 hours, was praising the United States and Australia for enforcing a complete lockdown on its people; no escaping the measure. It had drooled on UK lockdown as a “necessary hardship.’
All this doesn’t blind us to migrants’ nightmare. People have lost lives on roads, trucks and railway lines. Centre hadn’t seen it coming. Nobody had, truth to tell. Smiling idiots who pass off as experts were moving between one media house to another, predicting catastrophe for at least 40 million Indians. The end was near.
This is the thing about images. Young kids are psychologically scarred by Corona Virus. Possibly in lakhs. But they don’t make up images. Indifferent couples, in 24×7 proximity, hate each other more than ever. We possibly have lakhs of divorces sowed. Again, there are no images. Young entrepreneurs are ruined. Again, no images. Corona has been a pandemic which in real gritty world, outside our Netflixes and home-bakeries, has been nothing short of death to millions. Again, no images.
The political beasts know this truth from ages. In modern world, it’s the most important tool of imperialism. These days they don’t send out armies, well not everywhere. They strangulate you by propaganda. A government, howsoever loved, is pulled down through steps in these orders: (a) Bring people on streets; (b) Show police as murderers; (c ) police freezes; becomes spectators; (d ) anarchy on streets morphs into violent mobs; (e ) Pressure groups—UN, EU, Media, Human Rights Groups, NGOs—pounce on its prey. Its’ “sleeping cells” they have fattened all these years in the home country—opposition and corrupt media—are the proverbial fifth column. Judiciary succumbs. Before long, the popular leader is pulled down. Those who know the truth of Yugoslavia, Ukraine, Iraq, Libya and “Arab Springs” –and a pro-democracy fake in Hong Kong—would agree.
Narendra Modi is in this unfortunate situation. He is popular and nationalist – two traits which financial sharks don’t allow to exist. It hurts free trade and their agenda of endless profits. They hold the presidents and the prime ministers of the world by their little finger. Men like Modi, or Putin, Xi or Kim, who put nation first, are caricatured and shown as savages unworthy to be in office. First the world opinion is won over by propaganda. It paves their road for intervention in the name of “democracy” and “human rights.” The suffering nation would face financial sanctions; or worse military action.
This is Modi’s fate for next four years. People-on-streets is an agenda which has been set in motion. Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) was the first roll of the dice. Migrants is another. They would keep recurring, in the guise of one or other, to bring anarchy on streets. Every day, every month, every year. This much I know for sure. What’s Modi’s response we would know. India can’t desert its man in this hour.
(This is a reprint from NewsBred).
The very headline demands a comparison. Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru had his own view of India, not the one he shared with his mentor Mahatma Gandhi. Views on science was one thing, Hindus were another. Gandhi’s India was more than just Hindus, often at its cost. Nehru’s India could do without Hindus. For their own reasons, almost a century they shared between them (1869-1964), never made Hindus a political question. Hindus, “the bloodiest story in human history” as historian Will Durant put it, remained unattended.
Indira Gandhi didn’t burden herself with the weight of ideology. Power was all that mattered. Two notables which she is credited with, probably owed little to her. The liberation of Bangladesh was an Indian army’s gift. Indeed, New Delhi held back the permission to storm Dhaka well beyond the expiry date. The storming of Golden Temple, and clearing of Sant Jarnail Bhindranwale and his proverbial 40 henchmen, was the outcome of her own experiment which went horribly wrong. Between the imposition of the Emergency and her butchering of Constitution–“secular” and all–it’s difficult to say which was worse.
Rajiv Gandhi, the reluctant politician, was terrible on Sri Lanka’s Tamil issue. He paid with his life in the end. He also apparently had a blood-streak in him which his velvety profile hid well. Ask the survivors of 1984 Sikh Progrom, it’s justice in perpetual limbo. He also carried on the tradition of Muslim appeasement which under Mahatma Gandhi had cost India its western and eastern arms. He upturned the Supreme Court verdict on Shah Bano which had granted the divorced woman the right to alimony. Sharia Law had trumped democracy. India was rightly perceived to be a soft state by fundamentalists. It gave wind to separatists in Kashmir.
Thereafter, terrorism became the headlines. Hindus were shown the chimera of independence as lakhs of them were driven out of Kashmir Valley. Atal Behari Vajpayee favoured peace with Pakistan and got Kargil in return. Vajpayee was no ordinary leader though. He made India nuclear. It was a game changer in India’s security doctrine. Vajpayee also did bold reforms in education and infrastructure.
Manmohan Singh was an economist at the service of politicians. He was a dummy prime minister, an accidental one, who turned a blind eye to scams dancing -under his chair. Pamphleteers give him credit for opening up the Indian economy. In essence, he only carried out the dictates of his prime minister Narasimha Rao who didn’t belong to Nehru-Gandhi clan. His has been a pursuit of power, of communal bias— “Muslims have the first right on India’s resources” – and between visits to hospitals, he is presently panting for a Rajya Sabha seat.
In all these pre-Modi years, India wrestled with hunger, wars and terrorism as its three key moments. In the 60s, India was without food. Wars bloodied its earth virtually every decade. Terrorism brought death to cities after 1990. Mumbai’s 26/11 was as big a psychological scar to India as battles of Panipat from Babur to Ahmed Shah Abdali. Rich made the best of licence raj; poor couldn’t even enter a park. Police and bank accounts were out of bounds. Subsidies were for the middlemen. Entrepreneurship a sin and a road to suicide. Mandal Commission–oh we forgot VP Singh–created regional satraps in Mayawati and Yadavs on the plank of Dalit politics.
Modi now has completed six years in office. His both terms secured with a resounding vote from 1.35 billion Indians. He chose demonetization against black money and Indians became friends with the digital world, an offshoot nobody had foreseen. India took halting steps towards one-tax regime in Goods and Services Tax (GST). India’s unseen people today have electricity, cylinders, health coupons, bank accounts, direct subsidies, Mudra loans and gifts of sanitation etc. These benefits don’t choose Hindus over Muslims.
Yet, this is not what makes Modi India’s greatest prime minister ever. It’s about vision–which is not ideology–where he seems to be up against the world. He dreams of a safe, prosperous and united India but not at the cost of Hindus. It upsets a hell of a lot of people.
Let’s begin with Kashmir. He has restructured the former state which was manipulated by Nehru-Gandhi clan to ensure Kashmir Valley always wins. In due course, it became a personal fiefdom of Abdullahs and Muftis. Now the assembly seats, whenever elections are held, would see a balance in proportion to size and population. There is not an ounce of evidence to suggest it is against Kashmiri Muslims. But there is plenty to suggest it would hurt the entrenched regional dynasties who had turned a blind eye, if not aided and abetted, the terrorism from across the border. Muslims in Kashmir Valley were in pits in all these years. They could only look up.
An impartial history would judge Modi as an Indian who saved India’s borders which Prithvirajs, Gandhis and Nehrus couldn’t do in a thousand years. Kashmir was a lost case. In 2047, it would’ve been hundred years to that thorn. It was not a matter of if, but only of when, India would become the rest of Kashmir. In the age of Islamic State (IS) and its known cahoots in India this was given. My children, and their children, and their children, have been blessed with that one ring of security which is Modi’s offering at Mother India’s feet.
Then, we have Ram Janmabhoomi. This was hanging fire much beyond our independent years. Nothing had been in doubt: That the Babri Masjid had been built over a temple; that it was a mosque in disuse; and that mosques are routinely removed in Saudi Arabia. Yet, Hindus were denied a home for their supreme deity in their own land. Modi has managed it without resorting to unconstitutional norms.
One half of India’s 200 Muslims, their womenfolk, had a constitutional disadvantage due to a practice which isn’t objected to by Sharia Law even though the Holy Book probably doesn’t sanction it. A husband could take away his wife’s investment of her life and career in him by simply pronouncing triple talaq. This was slavery within homes. It hurt Muslim women, their kids, the family, the society and the nation. The Triple Talaq Act 2019, which had been approved by Supreme Court but stuck in Parliament on numbers, was finally enacted within days Modi assumed his second term. This was the first definite step towards Uniform Civil Code (UCC) which is desired by the Constitution.
It’s said Muslims are unsafe in Modi’s India. Lynchings are cited as proof. I remember so clearly the early days of Modi’s first term when this word was repeated ad nauseam. A few scribes and newspapers worked in lockstep on this agenda. You couldn’t pick up a newspaper where “lynching”, real or fake, wasn’t mentioned. Lynchings have always happened in rural India where cows are wealth and people would give life to protect them. It’s no different to how anti-CAA and now migrants have been picked for propaganda though they couldn’t care less for Muslims or poor.
This anti-India lobby of journalists, politicians and their foreign handlers see an existential threat in Modi. He is a Hindu in thought and action but they would rather portray him as anti-Muslim. It’s easy to sway millions of Muslims for most are uneducated and poor; and have a latent fear of Hindu’s rise. This frenzy would again be on us once Corona Virus recedes in the background.
Modi’s position is secure in history. His real test would be coming four years. Anti-India lobby, which includes Jihadis, Communists and imperialist forces, won’t give him a moment’s respite on Muslims. Modi is a nationalist and nationalists are always a threat to these global forces. I predict an anarchy on streets where police would be immobilized. Any action they take would have screaming headlines and images in next day’s daily. It in turn would bring pressure groups such as the United Nations, European Parliament, George Soros etc. into play. Police would freeze; the anarchy would bring in violent mobs in a bid to overthrow him. This is a script I am reading it out to you in advance. How Modi responds, we would see.
We haven’t touched how painstakingly Modi has invested his time and energy to be a world leader of considerable respect. Or how, if we beat Corona, he would invite books of gratitude. He doesn’t part with national coffers easily which is a leeway we must grant to a Gujarati. But the sum is always greater than the parts and it’s the whole which makes Modi the greatest ever.
(This is a reprint from NewsBred).
I am in the middle of writing a book on World History where I show strands where the reality is vastly different to the narrative we have been fed through newspapers and academia. My compass is big, covers all continents, and this endeavour would take up my four years by a modest estimate.
One of the problems I am confronted with is references. Most books I pick have references which appear untrue. For instance, Pyarelal Nayyar, the personal secretary of Mahatma Gandhi mentions an incident from Second Boer War (1899-1902), quoting Natal Mercury where the date is before the event happened. It’s not typo, there are several such instances.
We are not talking of biases here. That is given in most cases. You pick facts and incidents to your liking. My issue is with “creating” those facts and incidents. People in social media, newspapers, TV channels are doing it all the time. These “fakes” are repeated, read or seen by millions and shape people’s opinions—and actions.
This is the background in which I want the present issue of journalists in India being hauled up be seen. Two prominent names, Sudhir Chaudhary and Arnab Goswami, are such. The are perceived to speak the Centre’s line and it has put them in crosshairs of opposition states. In Himachal Pradesh, 14 FIRs have been filed against five reporters. This is likewise in UP, Gujarat, West Bengal, Rajasthan and in many other states. Indian Express is moving heavens on one of their reporters facing action for what Delhi Police believes to be “fake news” on Tablighi Jamaat’s head, Maulana Saad. Is media’s freedom a thing of the past?
There are no clear-cut answers and there would never be. None of us can expound an opinion and say: Yes, that’s it. How can journalism survive if State is the Big Brother watching them all the time? How would State function if media is like an ass in a pottery shop, to borrow a metaphor from Aesop’s fables.
None of us would deny that State is prejudiced; and media is biased. Or that we don’t live in the world of corporate media. Power and money, the two essential evils, are working all the time to grow bigger today than they were yesterday. It could only be at the cost of citizenry, the sheep to be sheared, Where are the arbiters in this toxic, noxious air?
There could be many arbiters but let’s begin with judiciary which has the final word. What do they go by with? Our Constitution doesn’t provide freedom to press as an enshrined Article. Most of it is presumed under Article 19 (1-a). This is the Right to Freedom of speech and expression to individuals. This is Liberty, the root of democracy. Ideally, media shouldn’t be interpreted from this prism. Unlike individuals, media is a “watchdog” for public interest which gives them privileged access to men and matters.
Yes, there is Press Council Act of 1978. It’s to ensure freedom of press as well as pull up media if untruthful. In essence Press Council is just a talk shop. Most members are hand-picked. Editors’ Guild of India and News Broadcasters Association (NBA) are no better. Their credibility is zilch. In essence, it’s a Big Boys Club who keep public interest out of their rounds of drinks.
Ombudsman, a neutral voice of credibility, was once deemed an important self-regulatory organ, to keep the content truthful. It has been a joke on us for last two decades if not more.
Then there are unseen arbiters, we the readers, the citizens, the suckers. Both the State and media would prefer us to be blindfolded, to be goaded into alleys of their own mischiefs. We don’t get the truth from either; yet we tilt one way or the other. An irony: Those who can’t do without us, have little of our interest on their minds.
The time has come to draw a line in the sand. Ambiguity must give way to well-defined laws. Journalists must follow the time-tested dictums: Present both sides of story; name your source who wish to be quoted or don’t use it at all. I agree it’s not possible in political reporting but don’t let a good story come in the way of a patient’s good who is on a ventilator.
I also know it’s easier said than done: your editors are mostly handpicked by your employers to serve their business or political agenda. That “little journo” on the desk, the sub-editor, also is prone to rejig your story in a manner which could induce a saucy headline and cause you embarrassment next morning. I doubt if there is any reporter who hasn’t muttered a swear to an editor/sub-editor on the final output.
State, on their part, must not allow mischief by press. But it also shouldn’t use the long arm of law to settle personal scores or come down on an investigative story. Mostly, States should limit itself to denying a news or offering a clarification. Or be a mouthful like Trump is to despicable US media. But state action or imprisonment isn’t on. Individuals could evoke defamation suit: Like Sonia Gandhi should have done against Arnab Goswami. It was shameful to involve a state machinery for her personal score.
Press is the breath of democracy: All you need is a strong filter. Putting a lid would suffocate it to death.