Dodging Pakistani Sleuths to Cover a War and a Coup

UCC is often touted as a blunder in India. it's not.

UCC is LIMITED to civil issues like MARRIAGE and INHERITANCE. Hindu Right had been selling this UCC issue as appeasement of Muslims in India.

Though the Directive Principles talked abt development of UCC down the years, it never happed nor the current Indian society is ready for the Uniform Civil Code.

======

National Geographic reporters gave their opinion (Best, Worst and the Quirkiest)of reporting from Pakistan:

Quirkiest
As photographer Reza and I explored the crowded streets of Lahore's Diamond City one Sunday afternoon, a young guy in a funky feathered hat and multicolored cape walked by leading a black dog, a white goat, and a monkey in a little circus outfit. From his clownish dress—and his colorfully adorned animals—it was clear he was some kind of a street performer. When he and his entourage ducked down a tiny side alley, we followed. We caught up with them at the box office of a back-alley movie theater, which was showing a pirated Bollywood gangster flick. The performer paid his money, entered the darkened theater, and set himself and his animals up in a row of rickety seats near the front. I asked the 70-year-old bearded guy collecting tickets at the door whether bringing livestock and trained monkeys into movie theaters was prohibited in Lahore. "Of course not," he said, looking at me as if I were nuts. "Animals need to be entertained as much as we do." Reza and I watched the movie for a while from the aisle. When we left, the street performer and his monkey were engrossed in the show, and the dog and the goat were asleep. The rest of the audience still hadn't given them a second glance.

Another one:

Quirkiest
Pakistan has a very big heroin problem—the number of drug addicts is very high—and I wanted to photograph this story. Of course, the government does not want this story told, so, in Karachi, I took all the necessary precautions to make sure that the police would not follow me while I was working on this story. I even had an assistant be a lookout to warn of possible trouble. I didn't want to get myself or the addicts into trouble. But one day, I was under a bridge, where a lot of addicts live and shoot up heroin, when suddenly I heard the loud wail of police sirens and saw two police cars coming at high speed. I immediately thought: My god, they have been informed and now they are going to arrest me. The cars stopped, and I saw two policemen get out with their guns. They were yelling, "Who is the photographer? Where is the photographer?" I was very worried that they were going to take all my film and arrest me.

An officer came running up to me, but then he suddenly stopped. "Oh, you are Mr. Reza from National Geographic," he said. "I saw your film on the National Geographic Channel in Afghanistan. You are my hero. I love your work and I love what you do." He starts shaking my hand, and the other policeman does as well. And then the officer asks, "What are you doing here?" "Well, I'm just taking some pictures," I said. "You are taking pictures of drug addicts? This is nothing," he said. "I know much better places. I can take you to see all of them." All of a sudden everything changed because this man had seen my work on the Channel. He became my guide and took me to places that I never would have been able to see on my own.

This has happened many times to me. I'll be in a very remote place, and the people will say, Oh we have seen you on the National Geographic Channel. They then become very friendly and help me.

=== LOL=========

Re: # 183
Kaal
"cow-loving, stone-worshipping heathens, the vanity of hell-bound kafirs. But in others' eyes it cannot win respect nor understanding."

dont go by name calling by Up and some paki on fp kind...

Re: # 183

Kaal:

Suggest something else, my learning never stops. Upon reading what you wrote, I just realized that Lotus has been politicizzed. I can no longer use, what my grandmother taught me.

DM Sahib doesn't really disagree with others here on any of the basics. He just sees a certain 'softness' in us, and points to its possible 'negative' aspects. Not the least of which are that that 'softness' can lead to some internal in-efficiencies, and can be totally miscontrued and misued by others (to their and our discomfiture). One can see all that and still be quite happy 'overall' provided that one does not believe in any perfection.

DM Sahib, is that a fair assessment of your views?

[There is so much agreement here that one is almost pleased to see how each of us may be bringing a slightly different, unique, but always complementary, perspective to add to and strengthen the rest.]

---------------------------

I would still go back and say that India's treatment of Muslims has been 'absurd' and 'unfair' to all Indian communities, including Muslims. It is not easy to understand for anyone who does not automatically have very Indian (Gandhi-Nehru-like) sensitivity. It does not seem to follow the much-touted 'fabian socialist' or 'secularist' models at all. To anyone with non-Indian mind, it can only appear foolish. Cowardly. Suicidal. If we succeed economically, others may 'forgive' us this arrangement, as an eccentricity of those cow-loving, stone-worshipping heathens, the vanity of hell-bound kafirs. But in others' eyes it cannot win respect nor understanding.

And we certainly cannot expect any 'gratitude' from any quarters, unless we wish to be badly disappointed, and consequently unhappy.

Knowing all that, we can, still should, stick to our way of doing things. And this is where, I would confess to sympathizing with dm sahib. In being aware of some of the problems that we may - because of our own eccentricities, face - and being ready, in our own way, to deal with them.

-------------

anil ji, nobody else on chowk uses that lotus in keechad metaphor as much as you do. And I, respectfully, accuse you of being the most Hindu or Indian of us all. :)

Shah2:

There is no Uniform Civil Code in India today for either Hindus or Muslims. But you do make some valid points that many aspects of the Hindu laws are flouted in India, which in general is true of most laws in India.

swarrier#177:

"You seem to prefer chaos to order."

No, quite the opposite. It is India that is chaotic and Singapore which is orderly. I do not favour military dictatorships or any other dictatorships, for that matter. I do believe, however, that the Singapore model is a good transitionary model for an underdeveloped society.

anil#176:

"India is doing it in its own way, and evolving its Bangalore and Gurgaon models. These, I feel, you dismiss as not real, but something that you say I believe should happen. My point is that it is already happening."

I do not dismiss the successes of Bangalore and Gurgaon, although I wish that the Rs 2 crore plus apartments in Gurgaon had an uninterrupted supply of hydro and water. Generally speaking, I am quite pleased with the development taking place in India today.

Re: # 173

"There were also good reasons for not reforming the Muslim Sharia law. Indian Muslims at that time were feeling like political orphans.'

The uniform civil code is at the present time only partially practiced .....It would interesting to compare how many Indian muslim opting for Personal law aside from sensalised case { Bano, Imran etc )how many hndu follow uniform uniform civil code indowry ,joint family inheritence,bride burning, women rights, equal treat ment of dalits and achoots ...It may be many more hindus break the uniform civil code than muslim adhering to personal law

It may be the hindus do not want uniform civil code and justify there hindu law by excuding the minority dispencing them as cast away .After all they justify indian muslim as having no stake in india by creation of Pakistan as there country .It is still debatable Pakistan was good riddence for Hindus ,Was british divide and rule or genuine threat of majority

Dost sahib:

My response to Kaal's question was that pre-independence Congress was not driven by fear. Instead it was driven by single goal and single game plan. Post-independence, Nehru for sure, wasted the capital that verdict had delivered to him.

I forgot to mention to Kaal elsewhere, Lee Kwan-Yu was also a student at Cambridge, and he had said the Nehru to him was a role model that he wanted to emulate. Lee Kwan-Yu also said that Nehru wasted people's verdict. He had said this in a speech that Singapore's senior had delivered at Stanford.

I used to believe in it, but as I have grown older, I have started to believe that on economic front, Nehru's socialist model, despite all its problems, was appropriate for its time. Any other way, India would have to compete, with Germany, Japan and pro (pro is a very light word to describe the price paid) American governments in Taiwan and S. Korea.

Also, I have studied Singapore's city model and its applicability to India and China. India is doing it in its own way, and evolving its Bangalore and Gurgaon models. These, I feel, you dismiss as not real, but something that you say I believe should happen. My point is that it is already happening.

Chandigarh and Kochi are two cities which are trying to create their own models. This evolution of multiple models in India fascinates me. It is as Indian as Indians are individualistic. I love this part, and believe that Chinese, be in Singapore or Beijing cannot duplicate. They are used to regimentalization that comes from single blue print.

175 Posted by harimau on August 30, 2007 6:21:15 am
Re borivili_express # 131

Harami why should Indian muslim be governed by Soodi Arabias law and not INDIAN constitution And since petty thief is to be hanged or dragged like this guy was .Even in India whether hindu or Muslim deserves punishment commisurate to crime and street justice which is coupled with rascism and hatred of the religion and community the criminal is associated with ...
This guy looks and is another Bihari living in Bhagalpur just like all hindus .He would not be owned by Ashrafi muslim for being Bihari Kala or any thing else
Which comes to the same question why just having name abdul or jehangir arouse so much passion among the majority to make him soodi and different

DM
I find your remarks strange and your choice of words more so. You seem to prefer chaos to order.

I don't agree that taking over a government especially a civilian government requires a lot of bravery from the armed forces especially if they are in collusion (I'm talking about the three branches).

Secondly professional generals (those who can run an army) need not deceive themselves into thinking they can run a country. The two things are completely different. If you have a majority of generals and foot soldiers coming from a cohesive class with delusions of grandeur, yes, this might seem common. But what if you have been brought up to believe in a civilian government?

Corruption is present in every form of governance. It doesn't disappear because a feudal overlord turned army general turned politician wishes it away.

I see that generals on the other side of the border have not lost guts (by your definition) over the years, but they haven't got any better at running a country either. They seem over dependent on the great Satan to shore them up.

You mention that Indians did not get rid of our civilian dictatorship like the Pakistanis. Well now, let's see, the Emergency was imposed by a Prime Minister with two thirds of the majority in the parliament. It lasted slightly less than two years. Now Ayub Khan was around from 1958-1969, and then there was Yahya Khan who had to leave because of the 1971 fiasco and then you had Zia and now Musharraf. Except for Yahya all military dictators have been around for more than two years. So the public didn't mind having these dictators around for such long periods?

You call this a basis for comparison?

Re: # 168

Sadna:

Thanks for posting this conversation. India as a system is undoubtedly very different, citizens as individuals may not very different. If differences do come, they are probably more arising out of their religious beliefs.

Professionals put in charge of Indian armed forces were non-political, and their self restraints are admirable leadership qualities. Indira Gandhi too must be admired that after attempting to destroy democratic institutions, she called a free and fair election, and accepted people's verdict, and court's verdicts too.

Whatever there weaknesses and immaturities, Indians of all color and hues respected their oaths to serve the constitutions. Only person who didn't, Indira Gandhi, was handed verdicts of the people and courts.

Re borivili_express # 131

[Treatment of muslims in India

http://www.ibnlive.com/videos/47578/.html]

That is treatment of thieves in Bihar. Despite what you may believe India owes its Muslim population, it doesn't owe them the right to steal. The right to fcuk 4 wives, yes; but not the right to steal.

Why don't you post a picture of treatment of thieves (including Muslim thieves) in Saudi Arabia -- you know, the birthplace of Islam, the Religion of Peace, blah, blah, blah -- so that we can see for ourselves what is ordained in the Koran, the Book to End All Books?

Most chowkwallahs can handle the sight of blood dripping from an amputated hand.

harish_hyd#166:

"Conversely, it can also be said that Paki politicians didn't have the guts to resist Army intervention the way Indian politicians did, which perhaps put off the Indian Army from intervening in the first place."

I don't think that the Indian politicians in general had any opportunity to show any guts. The only incident that I can think of is the rumours regarding General Thimmaya grumbling against Krishna Menon when the latter was made the Defence Minister. It was said that Nehru called him and gave him a dressing down on that occasion. And I have never doubted that Nehru had guts.

"Something surely can be said about NRIs and their double standards. On the one hand, you berate India for being a land of lawless people and praise the west for being so very orderly and efficient. OTOH, you do not hesitate to advocate lawlessness in India when something that happened in a different country catches your fancy, as you seem to be doing here."

I am personally not in favour of military rules. But I do believe that if a country has to transform from the third world to first world in a hurry, it should adopt some variant of the Singapore model. I think that China, too, is moving towards that model and would be some sort of democracy in another decade or so.

"Do you seriously think Indira Gandhi voluntarily decided to end the Emergency? People spilling onto the streets in almost a repeat of the freedom struggle had nothing to do with her decision?"

The opposition parties did organise demonstrations when the Emergency was imposed in 1975 although they were not a huge success. But there were no demonstrations or opposition in 1977 when the Emergency was lifted.

Further to 163:

There were also good reasons for not reforming the Muslim Sharia law. Indian Muslims at that time were feeling like political orphans. The Party they stood by deserted them completely and dissolved itself, except in Kerala. Its leader, who had put them in the position of virtual traitors in their own country, now asked them to be loyal to the nation which, until the day before, he was saying could not provide them justice. In these circumstances, depriving them of their right to live according to their own religious laws would have further demoralised and alienated them.

Re: # 169

There must be some truth in this fear about sam. He was denied pension for all these years and he was paid only recently, a few months back, if I recall.

#169 by harish_hyd, #170 by sadna

Shows how wrong Roedad Khan's commens that Pakis were as good or as bad as Indians were.