Rushdie and the British Establishment

Indian/Hindu Democracy and Justice in action:

The Times of India -Breaking news, views. reviews, cricket from across India


Driven to despair
20 Jul 2007, 0030 hrs IST,Jyoti Punwani

SMS NEWS to 8888 for latest updates
On January 10, 1993, Hajirabi Qureishi saw her husband and eldest son dragged from her house by Shiv Sainiks who used to hang around the local Sena shakha. When she tried to stop the sainiks, they pushed her off the parapet and she lost consciousness. She never saw her husband and son again.

Much before his inquiry into the 1992-93 Mumbai riots was complete, Justice Srikrishna wrote a letter to the government recommending immediate payment of compensation for missing persons in cases that he had personally investigated. The Qureishis headed that list. Hajirabi should have received Rs 4,00,000; instead she received Rs 2,00,000 eight years later for her husband. Compensation for her son Saleem Qureishi continues to form the subject matter of petitions being heard for the ump-teenth time in the Supreme Court.

Unable to cope with memories of their disappearance, Hajirabi left the Hindu-Muslim chawl that had been home for years to live in a Muslim ghetto. Every known and unknown Muslim organisation had its offices there, including SIMI. Yet they could not recruit Hajira's son Rizwan, his father's favourite.

Farooq Mapkar should have been an ideal candidate for SIMI. Shot in his shoulder on January 10, 1993, while praying inside a mosque, this bank employee saw a namazi being shot dead at point-blank range despite coming out of the mosque with his hands up. Along with the other namazis, Farooq was charged under Section 307.

Fourteen years later, Farooq continues to take leave from his job to attend court hearings in a case declared false by the Srikrishna commission. Contrast this with the case of sub-inspector Nikhil Kapse. The commission found him guilty for unprovoked firing that killed six innocent Muslims. But he was exonerated by a bunch of policemen entrusted with implementing the commission's findings.

The policemen didn't think it necessary to talk to those who testified in front of the commission about the incident involving Kapse. In these 14 years, Kapse hasn't faced a day's suspension. More than Farooq and Rizwan, Abdullah would have made the ideal jehadi. As a 12-year-old, he saw his handicapped father being dragged down the stairs of the madrassa where he taught and shot, pleading for water as he lay dying. Abdullah continued to live in the same madrassa. Eight years later, he joined the legal battle to put behind bars the policemen charged with murder for this incident. When he lost, the entire madrassa felt betrayed.

Even while lashing out at the government's indulgence towards policemen charged with murder, Abdullah was packing his bags for further studies in Deoband. He had graduated from his madrassa with flying colours, with full marks in logic. "Why don't you study law", i asked, "you could fight for your father". "My world is the hereafter", he replied. "He can't get involved in all this", added his teachers.

Mumbai's riot orphans have grown up deprived of their childhood, seen their mothers struggle alone - and often fail - to give them the education their fathers desired for them. They've seen those who led the violent mobs become ministers. A sitting judge pronounced these policemen guilty; his report became an election issue and made ministers out of nobodies, but has yet to be acted upon.

They've seen, over the last year, those who took revenge on their behalf by killing innocent Hindus, being made to pay, some even with life sentences.

Last week, as two Muslim accused in the July 11 train blasts in Mumbai confessed on TV (by a mysterious coincidence, all channels got hold of the footage exactly a year after the blasts), the news anchors screamed: "This man not only betrayed his nation, but also humanity. Doesn't your blood boil when you see this traitor"?

Narendra Modi could be accused of having done the same. No channel asks these questions about him. These double standards are now part of being a Muslim in India's "vibrant" democracy. We should be thankful hundreds of Kafeel Ahmeds haven't produced a swadeshi version of jehad.

The writer is a political commentator.

Giani ji

One rarely meets a chaddhi wala. So it's a privilege.

I was curious, and looked up a few of your past interacts.

Would you mind commenting on how your views differ from those of any other regular Hindu' (secularist')s and leftist's?

Yes they are and I am proud to be a chaddi wala. Alas you are a disgrace to yours I am afraid.

#37 Arjun

-sigh-

I thought that other folks talking garbage riled you up and given the chance, you could see reason. Apparently, not so.

1. I did not mention justification in my post did I? I mentioned cause and effect.

2. I did not condone any violence, rather I stated that violence in all forms is wrong. I sincerely believe that we can evolve past settling disputes by killing or maiming others.

3. If you do not see cause and effect, then you cannot elevate your thinking past what just happened. You do not have context for the causes and possible solutions. You are blinded and do nothing but fuel the agression (this applies to government sponsored violence as well as violence by smaller groups, fundamentalist religious types, and yes I am including mulsim fundoos here too).

4. I don't agree with what's going on (Israeli wall, palestinan refugee camps, islamic extremism, etc), but I can understand where it is coming from. All these activities are political moves in a larger chess game. To understand things does not mean you agree with them.

5. Why is understanding cruicial? So that we can treat the "other" as a fellow human. The most ignorant and arrogant policy is to think of the other as "inhuman", "evil", and other such things because then you can simply state that there is no reason to why they are doing what they are doing, so there is nothing to negotiate, and since they are inhuman, we can kill them all anyways. There can be no peace if we don't understand why the other is doing what is being done.

Hope you see my point of view.

i dont know..a starbucks cashier and a representative of the united stated govt (national park service cop who gave me a speeding ticket) called me "sir". who needs the queen.

#33 Posted by giani_240 on July 19, 2007 10:34:56 am


I am of Indian origin and a card carrying member of the VHP.


I'm sure your parents are proud of you...half of my family, the hindu half, would disown me if i had anything to do with the chaddis...


You (all) are always among the first to attack any muslim poster, and your theme is always anti-muslim - "islamofascists" or like.


why is it anti-muslim to point out the things that qualify as islamofascism..the cartoon protests, the pope thing, rushdie, brit-muslim orgs being against the teaching of the holocaust etc etc.

This isn't a small minority of extremists thing..25%, yes one out of 4, young american muslims think suicide bombing is ok..


you must be an ISI plant out to destroy whatever dialog is attempted.


why, yes...that's what I'm out to do...destroy any dialog that's attempted..specifically ones with indians going "oh the pakis are victims of terrorism, just like us"..If I can stop one indian from being a kuldip nayyar, it'll be worth it..

Saima shah writes "Tomorrow Mr Rushdie may write something beautiful about Islam, then would the British govt. take back the knighthood? no"

The Knighthood is meaningless, but when its used deliberately to manipulate people's emotions, especially after a third rate writer- who happens to be a distant relative of my aunt- deliberately went out of his way to write fictionalized accounts distorting and trying to throw mud at the prophet and his family, it become mischief- especially when it is put to political use- as was when the Knighthood was given.

There is nothing in this entire episode to feel proud about, rather we need to feel ashamed at our condition that these colonial bas***** still consider us sh** to play these games with us. Rushdie can write whatever he wants, he'll get his due soon enough, but as soon as he becomes an instrument that is used to subdue parts of the "Third World", that is when like the Jihadists he becomes an instrument of the Shaitan. If he was smart enough he'd stay clear of all this but the poor bast*** is a damn fool, like Musharraf he wants to hurry his journey to the abyss...

Kulharee writes " A poor moron without access to clean drinking water protesting over Rushdie affair comes across as a stupid poor moron "

No you stupid fcuk, a "poor person without access to clean water protesting over the Rushdie Affair", is protesting those same forces that trample on his humanity, deny him clean water and consider him expendible vermin. He is protesting that same injustice when he/she rails against the West that colonized him, impoverished him, and then ensured through their morons (the likes of you) that he is denied clean drinking water.

#32 Posted by thinkingstorm on July 19, 2007 9:12:52 am

ok..in that case, whenever the israelis take over pali land or do something bad to arabs, I'll be asking about the root cause of why the israelis were forced to do what they did. What's sauce for the goose and all that. The root cause thing cuts both ways. I'm sure the Israelis will say that pali terrorism justifies their land-grab wall.

Either you think people blowing up subways or flying planes into buildings is wrong or you don't. You can't have it both ways. If you think it's wrong, the justification shouldn't matter. Once you start accepting some justification, you're on a slippery slope. I'm sure the sunni bomber who kills a bunch of shias has some root cause he completely believes in.

Justification is in the eyes of the beholder. I'm sure the 15 relatively well off saudis who flew planes into buildings thought they had some just cause. I'm sure the british born and raised brit-pakis who blew themselves up in subways completelty believed in their cause.

Hi Arjun,

I am of Indian origin and a card carrying member of the VHP. I have noticed your interacts across various posts on chowk and cant decide whether you are one person or a group of persons. But one thing I am sure of and that is you must be an ISI plant.

You (all) are always among the first to attack any muslim poster, and your theme is always anti-muslim - "islamofascists" or like. Even when serious discussion is taking place, you tend to trivialize it and start straight away on a communal theme. And it is so consistent that is why I believe that you must be an ISI plant out to destroy whatever dialog is attempted.


On one hand I could tell you - let it go, look around you and see what is happening to the 2 nation theory. Just do not keep justifying it by your diatribes.

Do not let echo and zee rile you so much. Take the high road.

Just a friendly advice on the off chance you are not a ISI plant.

giani

#31 Arjun

Wrong analogy there Arjun. We are talking about political cause and effect. Where a well oiled overwhelmingly strong military and economic force exerts its will on a weaker foe. The resistance from the weaker foe will be asymetrical. And by that, one means, gurilla style, no formal military, going after targets usually not acceptable in direct conflict etc etc.

I beleive all war and violence is wrong. So symmetrical or asymmetrical, both are wrong. However, one can see when a response arises, why it will arise, and how it will take place.

You are an intelligent guy (have read many of your interacts), don't let emotions blind you all the time.

--thinking

#27 Posted by thinkingstorm on July 18, 2007 11:59:04 am


we should not ignore the reasons that come after the "but" either.


BS...do you care about the root cause when a man rapes a women? Do you say "what he did was bad but he probably was too poor to get a real date"? I'm guessing not...

overall this is a good thing. if knighthood is not about provocating muslims but purely literary, its a good thing to have a muslim knight. if its a challange to "muslims", thats great too. this will cause a discussion..and may the best argument win. sure there will be some bombings, but they will be there anyhow methinks.

http://eteraz.wordpress.com/2007/06/18/muslim-fundamentalists-suffering-from-col onized-mentality/

Muslim Fundamentalists Suffering From Colonized Mentality

If the hardliners hate Rushdie, they shouldn't really give a flying
f*ck whether he gets knighted, abducted by aliens, or anally probed.
Yet the fundos care very much about all those when it comes to
Rushdie. Why? Get a life, you freaking losers. He doesn't like you.
Not only that, but he actually left the faith you both once shared.
He dislikes you that much. Stop acting like a stalking ex-boyfriend
and leave him alone. The best revenge --- if that is what you want
--- is to ignore him, not keep having ejaculations every time you
hear about him. That just gives him more power over you. You'd know
all these things if you ever dated, but of course, since you forbid
that too, you have no idea how to play mind games with your exes. So
you just keep agitating to kill your ex

#22 Harish, #23 Folio
Harish, exactly my point as well. I fear that the majority will suffer immensely due to inaction. The overall picture is more complicated however. When Arjun says that the majority says "BUT"...we should not ignore the reasons that come after the "but" either.

Overall though, freedom of speech is not so free in US and UK either. Having said that however, understanding the chess game that is taking place in world politics is much better then being outraged or offended :).

Moeed is right that the Knighthood itself is a chess move, challenging the disgruntled muslim youth. The British are worried that thier identity will be taken away (having listened to one raving mullah in UK, I don't blame the White British for thinking what they think), but at an even higher level...this is an intricate dance of cause and effect.

We may not be able to change other people's minds, but we can certainly change our own. I am willing to listen to all sides :).

-thinking

Without debating Rushdie's literary abilities, the selection process,
whether or not one should give a flying fart about GBEs, OBEs and
other fanciful orders of the British Empire, etc. etc., just one
little comment on the freedom of speech bit.

If, to many, Islamic or sharia law seems to squelch speech that is
subversive of Islam, British law on freedom of speech also seems to be
inconsistent to some Muslims. This freedom of speech, which is based
on individual autonomy and self-governance, isn't quite as absolute as
one would believe. Critics who wish to point out this as hypocrisy,
have quoted the British government's ban on the film based on the real
life of the Saudi princess who was executed for committing adultery
(after pressure from the Saudi royal family), the temporary ban on the
Pakistani film, International Guerrillas, whose protaganist is a
dissolute drunk (supposedly Rushdie) and whose life ends when he is
struck by lightning, the cancellation by the Royal Court Theatre of
the play Perdition, to list a few. These do not provide sufficient
ethical justification for a ban on any of Rushdie's books, in my mind,
but it was a pov I read, interestingly enough, in a legal journal (and
I do not know if they were/are sufficient as legal precedents).

I am all for Freedom of Speech and unequivocally against
Off-With-His-Head Fatwas but the reality is even in liberal democratic
nations, blasphemy laws exist today. Look at this law in existence in
Massachusetts:
http://mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/272-36.htm

Where is the right balance? Is there not subjectivity intrinsically
involved with words like "wilfully"?