posted by Anand @ 2/28/2006
:-)) If not nothing, I now know what would I see in the Delhi Zoo!
I do not know what the purpose of this post was, but it is hilarity unlimited. M/s Roy calls Bush a war criminal but praises the most brutal Taliban. She calls US the most criminal power, but is ok with receiving awards and going on lecture tours there - of course enjoying all the capitalist evils. Curiously she has never visited Afghanistan and Iraq. Didnt the same M/s Roy refuse the Sahitya Akademi award due to Indias military prescence in J&K?. At least a chimp called Arundati Roy is making rude noises. Delhi zoo needs to make some space for her.Indo-US relations will move forward in spite of stupid people like M/s Roy and their media stooges.
Can't put it better than that. Hypocrisy, the lack of principle and plain dishonesty distinguish the Left and its al-lies in India from normal folk. Arundati Roy wouldn't make even a good clown. A pity that people of learning choose to endorse such nonsense.Courtesy:Secular-right.blogspot.comLeftist polemicist Arundhati Roy compares inviting President Bush to India with inviting a brick to drop through your windshield !!Her words are, typically, clever in form -- ridiculous in substance.While she was busy sharpening her spiteful words, her ideological allies on the extreme left were busy plotting murder.Via BBC, 'Many dead' in India rebel attack At least 25 people have been killed after Maoist rebels blew up two trucks carrying civilians in India's central state of Chhattisgarh, police say.Senior state police official SK Paswan said the number of dead could rise. Many of the nearly 40 injured were in a critical condition, he told the BBC.And who were the victims of this carnage?The victims were tribal people returning from a meeting called to protest against the Maoists' activities in the state.The terrorists on the left are now killing the very people whose rights they claim they are protecting through such violence. Killing the weak and the poor is their attempt at garnering cheap publicity for their lost cause.Ms. Roy has aversion to bricks through windshields. She's, however, unlikely to say much about landmines under trucks. What a disgrace.
Its not in our power to stop Ms Roy. And she isn't worth protesting either. "Hypocrisy, the lack of principle and plain dishonesty distinguish the Left and its al-lies in India from normal folk."Calling the entire left hypocritical is incorrect. I hope likes of her become fringe elements of the Indian left. Ditto with CPI(*) As nikhil said, hilarity unlimited.
Mere semantics; no causality.The 'ganas'is missing therefore the ink ain't flowing. Roy.... a flash in the pan afterall... fretting the 'small things'?
Anonmous : Arundati Roy has also attended many Naxalite love fests along with that other 'champion of the oppressed' - Sandeep Pandey.During a tour of PAkistan she even volunteered to be a Human shield in case a nuclear missile from India struck them.I am curious where The Hindu put her column - in the Humor page.I think she should seriously consider a career in Bollywood. There has been no female comiediene after Tun Tun. M/s Roy can fit the bill.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20060302/wl_csm/otibet_1Spain examining the Tibetan genocideWaiting for Arundati Roy to whipe out her outrage. But hope this time it is real. But then will the Stalin devotee aka N.Ram publish it? But we know The Hindu is a fine newspaper isn't it?
M/s Roy ... praises the most brutal Taliban.Where did M/s Roy praise the Taliban? I'd like to read that.
To AnandCould you please clarify what the purpose of this post was?a) Provide a dose of humorb) Concur with these ridiculous protests by the left parties.c)Just pure academic interest
This certainly isn't one Arundhati Roy's good pieces but then, it's just a short protest piece. I'm still wondering what all (sorry Dilip, most) of you are cackling about?
To Nikhil -- Ans is (b). Without the "ridiculous" part though.
Two more martyrs to our protest culture. A good take by JK.
Let's repeat the question:Where did Roy praise the Taliban?Put up or shut up time, I should think. Unless, of course, you too are a chimpanzee interested only in making rude noises.Now let's take the next statement:"Roy ... is ok with receiving awards...there (USA)"Can you tell us what awards (I know the answer, do you?)? Once you figure out what the awards were and were for, you may understand why she had no problem accepting it. Go on, enlighten yourself with some real facts.And again:"Roy refuse(s) the Sahitya Akademi award due to Indias (sic) military presence in J&K"This seems entire consistent with"She calls the US the most criminal power".Your post has established that Roy has protested two governments engaged in the criminal exercise of military power, one her own, and the other a foreign power. Exactly how is this hypocrisy? It seems remarkably consistent.Going by the inane arguments here, no one can make any statement critical of the US unless it is first prefaced by condemnation of Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Che and Castro. In that case why have none of our "right-wing" friends first issued a 200 page apologia for Hitler, Mussolini, Pinochet, Batista, Papa Doc, Baby Doc, Duarte, Somoza, Yahya Khan, Ershad, Suharto,Sharon, Reza Pahlavi, Mobutu, Botha, King Hassan, the Al Saud family, Amin Gemayel, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Regan, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II (I will graciously waive the required apology for Jefferson, Jackson, Monroe ...., Teddy Roosevelt,... ,FDR) before ever opening their mouths to condemn anyone at all.But worst of all:"distinguish the left and its allies from normal folk".The left and its allies (including the Congress!) got more votes from normal folk than from a bunch of sophomoric deracinated netizens. I am no great fan of the Congress or the Indian Left, but they are far more representative of Indian aspirations than semi-literate chimpanzees punching away on keyboards. Having vented my spleen, I return to my gracious self.Ravi
Ravi,You haven't vented not only your spleen but also your...By placing the Taliban and a democratically elected administration like the US on the same plane, Arundati all but praises the Taliban. Many 'netizens' like me who find the loony left a crooked and murderous lot are a part of the Indian electorate. So Ravi India's not the worker's paradise where people you don't like are packed off into labor camps. Get used to living in a democracy OK?Declining the Sahitya Akademi Award because of "military abuses in J&K" and calling the US a criminal military power are certainly consistent. Only a nutcase would would criticise the Indian military's actions in J&K considering they stand between murderous vermin who machine gun babies for sport and behead people at will (Arundati calls these gentle souls freedom fighters) and the common folk - as for the Pandits who were butchered and driven out - let's forget it OK? The Lenins, Stalin, Mao, Che etc. commies go misty eyed over are among the greatest mass murderers of all time. Mao certainly stands right at the top. Stalin doesn't do badly either his reign of terror began before Hitler's and ended after him. As for the other laundry list of right-wing dictators, you err. we aren't stuck in the past prevaricating. As for winning more votes Kim Il Sung and Enver Hoxha polled over 99% in their respective slave camps in the 50s. Commie crooks always justify their plunder in the name of the 'people'. Nothing new there.Hey Dilip we know you get prickly under the collar when your pals are criticised. If you are so particular about their 'reputation' ask them to speak up over here for themselves once in a while.
Dear Nikhil & Anonymous Friend who is even afraid to reveal his name: Think twice before writing baseless accusations. Read this message from Sandeep Pandey about such accusations and the forces behind them:dear friends,There is a renewed attempt to brand me as a terrorist and a naxalite in the wake of my ongoing tour of the US by some unknown people who refuse to identify themselves. i was labeled as a terrorist because of my support for SAR Geelani who was accused of masterminding the attack on indian parliament on dec. 13, 2001. however, SAR Geelani, a teacher of zakir hussain college associated with delhi univ. has finally been acquitted by the supreme court of india also. there was no proof to show that he had anything to do with that attack.i've friends in CPI(ML) and do attend their events. but then i also have friends in samajwadi jan parishad, loktantrik samajwadi party, samajwadi party, congress, CPI and CPM. i do not support violence and have never made a statement to support violence or have ever been invovled in any violence. neither am i a member of any political party.when i confronted the person distributing leaflets against me outside the westin hotel in california on 2nd october, he just said i should dissociate myself completely from CPI(ML) and he accused me of being a supporter of armed revolution. i said i did not support armed revolution but only supported pro-poor stands of that party. he refused to tell his name or that of his association and said he would not come to india because naxalites would kill him. i invited him for a dialogue inside the hotel but he just kept repeating his accusations against me without entering into any meaningful dialogue with me. i told him that he was a coward and walked away.people who are running slander campaign against me or Asha or AID from the US (there is no such campaign in India) are certainly more coward than my CPI(ML) friends who have taken on bullets in their bodies when fighting the goons of mafia don and member of parliament from siwan in bihar - shahabuddin. it certainly takes more courage to fight criminals and powerful vested interests on ground than merely issue leaflets or post messages over internet from the safe confines of US.love, sandeep
Anonymous 2:04 - You have already mentioned many of the points I intended to reply. Just one more point - I speak of only the loony left who are not normal people. I think there is still sanity left in the Congress. They have invited Bush. Fareed Zakaria has put it rightly. It is only the left that is making a clown of itself. To all the people who are protesting the Bush visit - Why are u doing this? Are u protesting any of Bush's policies against India? Please read Varnam's blog that has asked the right questions. Before Bush many people like Musharraf have visited India. In fact your fellow citizens, irrespective of their religion, are being killed by terrorists brainwashed and trained by Pakistan. Yet there were no protests against these people when they visited here. What are all these protests then against?Pradeep - I think Sandeep Pandeys raionale is the most ridiculous. Having friends and attending functions of mass murderers. Why are these people then crying about communalism etc and also pretending to be Gandhian? Why does he call the US an evil power and then go and attend conferences in the US and that too the Westin(gasp--again symbols of evil capitalism)Honestly not many people are fans of Bush but then it is a matter of national interest that we build up relations with the US.Honestly what has happened in Lucknow is disturbing. A new communal polarisation is shaping up and this is not even related to what is happening in India. I think in the long run this irresponsible behavior by Mulayam and the left will be bad for India. But I think I should not speak further on this else I will be labelled a communal saffronite.
Just to add a dose of humour to the rather heavy and serious discussion preceding this, may I bring take the liberty of bringing to your attention, the fact that while you guys were discussing about Bush vs Ms. Roy vs Taliban vs God-knows-who-else...Bush indeed left for home.No offense. We all have our points of view, and we wont budge. Take it easy. The world is big enough for all of us.
SrihariAfter reading some good analysis of Mr Bush's visit, this article by M/s Roy was hilarity. But I did not reckon she had such a dedicated fan following.
"By placing the Taliban and a democratically elected administration like the US on the same plane, Arundati all but praises the Taliban."Roy thinks America is evil and (according to the anonymous nitwit) compares the US to the Taliban. Therefore, anonymous nitwit thinks that Roy (all but!) praises the Taliban. Brilliant deduction. Nikhil has let the anonymous nitwit speak for him, so can we presume he shares this idiotic notion?Anonymous nitwit, Nikhil, Niket: You (and I ) are not "normal Indian folk". We belong to a particularly privileged 5% (or is it 2%?) that uses the internet and writes in English. I don't pretend I represent the masses (in fact, I have not staked out a political position in this debate). If anyone is guilty of hypocrisy it is a bunch of urban yahoos claiming to be representative of Indians as a whole while simultaneously declaring that a bunch of parties which have some 317 seats in Parliament are not normal. No answer (even idiotic) is forthcoming for the other questions:What awards did Roy accept in the US?You are apparently too lazy to look that up on the internet.Also still waiting for the answer to this one:Exactly how is this hypocrisy? It seems remarkably consistent.The fact that you think that state sponsored violence in J&K is justified is irrelevant to the argument. Roy thinks it is criminal, she thinks the US in Iraq is criminal, ergo she protests both. She may be wrong about her belief(s), but she is consistent, not hypocritical. There is also still no answer to the following issue. Why should someone who criticises the US be immediately obliged to criticise naxalites? When, if ever, have you criticised the assassination of Salvador Allende? Why don't you before you condemn terrorists in J&K or the Taliban? Or, even closer home. Have you condemned the murder of Datta Samant? Should you be obliged to?Also, for all those not living in the "past". How many people killed by Western/Western sponsored regimes in the last year, and how many by others (note to the illiterates, the following regimes are supported by the West with aid, trade and arms: China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Columbia, Turkey, Morocco, Egypt, Algeria, Uzbekistan and about 30 other unpleasant regimes). How many in the last 50 years (more notes to the illiterates: more regimes supported by the West: Pol Pot (don't believe me? look up UN resolutions after 1979), Saddam Hussein, Ceaucescu, Bhutto, Zia. What did Mao do in 67-68- kill about a million people in the Cultural Revolution. What was his reward? American recognition in 1972.)Let me answer some of the questions. There is no point condemning terrorists in Kashmir. They are evil, that is why they are called terrorists. They are not reponsive to public opinion. But, most people do not call the American army a terrorist army, although it is a wholesale dealer in terrorism compared to the retail version at home. The American army is not responsive to (Indian) public opinion. The Indian government maybe. Hence, Indians should protest to the Indian government. That's where their voice has the greatest impact. Screaming about terrorism has no value. Governments, BJP or Congress try to do what they can to stamp it out. All that you hysteria accomplishes is to allow them to run a fascist state and trample our rights under the pretext of fighting terrorism.Ravi
Those who cry against Roys comparison of US and Taleban should read the following excerppts from a BBC intrerview with Noam ChomskyJEREMY PAXMAN (BBC News):You seem to be suggesting or implying, perhaps I'm being unfair to you, but you seem to be implying there is some equivalence between democratically elected heads of state like George Bush or Prime Ministers like Tony Blair and regimes in places like Iraq. NOAM CHOMSKY:The term moral equivalence is an interesting one, it was invented I think by Jeane Kirkpatrick as a method of trying to prevent criticism of foreign policy and state decisions. It has a meaning less notion, there is no moral equivalence what so ever. JEREMY PAXMAN:Is it a good thing if it is preferable for an individual to live in a liberal democracy, is there benefit to be gained by spreading the values of that democracy however you can? NOAM CHOMSKY:That reminds me of the question that Ghandi was once asked about western civilisation, what did he think of it. He said yeah, it would be a good idea. In fact it would be a good idea to spread the values of liberal democracy, but that I would be a good idea to spread the values of liberal democracy. But that's not what the US and Britain are trying to do, it's not what they've done in the past, I mean take a look at the regions under their domination. They don't spread liberal democracy. What they spread is dependence and subordination. Furthermore its well- known there is a large part of the reason for the reason the great opposition to the US policy within the Middle East. In fact this was known in the 1950's. JEREMY PAXMAN:But there is a whole slur of countries in eastern Europe right now that would say we are better off now than we were when we were living under the Soviet Empire. As a consequence of how the west behaved. NOAM CHOMSKY:Well, and there is a lot of countries in US domains, like Central America, the Caribbean who wish that they could be free of American domination. We don't pay much attention to what happens there but they do. In the 1980s when the current incumbents were in their Reganite phase. Hundreds of thousands of people were slaughtered in Central America. The US carried out a massive terrorist attack against Nicaragua, mainly as a war on the church. They assassinated an Archbishop and murdered six leading Jesuit intellectuals. This is in El Salvador. It was a monstrous period. What did they impose? Was it liberal democracies? No. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/3732345.stmDemocracy in America:From another Chomsky interviewQ: So how did George Bush get elected?CHOMSKY: "Because elections are carefully contrived so that they are like selling toothpaste. In fact, they're run by the same people who sell toothpaste. I mean when you turn on an ad on television, you don't expect to get any information. You expect deception. That's the point. Only economists talk about markets. Business can't tolerate markets. They don't want markets in which informed consumers make rational choices. What they want is deluded consumers who will make irrational choices. That's what hundreds of billions of dollars in advertising are spent on. You don't get any information about the product."But what happens when the same industry sells candidates? Exactly the same thing. I mean, about 10 percent of the crop of voters knew what the stand of the candidates was on issues. What they knew is the delusionary imagery that was created. So Bush is created to be an ordinary guy with his sleeves rolled up and you could have a drink with him in a bar. My guess is he's taught to make those mispronunciations and grammatical errors; I doubt that he talked like that at Yale. He's probably taught that way so that 'them liberal intellectuals' would make fun of him and then they can say, oh yeah, he's an ordinary guy just like you, going off to his ranch. That makes him about as realistic as the next ad you could see on television for a lifestyle report. [John] Kerry was goose-hunting, riding his motorcycle - anything but talking about issues, and you can see why. On issues people just disagree with both parties but the media aren't particularly concerned. And they're marginalized."Also watch the BBC Video " Theft of the PResidency"http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=29&row=2and Read Greg Plasts book : THe Best Democracy Money can Buyhttp://www.gregpalast.com/contents.htmSandeep Pandeys US Visits.PAndey been invited by Volnteers of Asha (www.ashanet.org) who are mostly students and post-docs in US Universities. Check his itenerayhttp://www.thesouthasian.org/archives/000467.htmlHe came here to talk about the work he is doing in INdia. He stayed in Asha volunteers houses. His visit is in line with what Arundhati Roy told to his crtics " We are not against American People but We are against the Govt and the their Policies"
Ravi : claiming to be a part of the Indian electorate is not the same as claiming to represent the masses. Also, I think election results hardly mean a thing. Even Hitler was elected to power. And while there is no immediate obligation to criticise naxalites, her sum total of the expressions of her attitudes to naxalites as a whole, betray hypocrisy - unlike what happens in Nicaragua this is a question that is raised often. Also what about, as Nikhil said, not protesting Musharaff's visit? It is ridiculous to say "I won't protest those who kill 100 people but I will protest those who kill 10000 people". And I can't prove the following but I believe Arundhati Roy won't mind if India invites Chinese authoritiesresponsible for the Tiananmen square massacre. Certainly India can invite Bush if Sandeep Pandey can attend CPIML functions. But I suppose India's relationship with US is more significant for India than relationship with CPIML is for Asha or Sandeep Pandey's other activities. Moreover RSS does tonnes of social service - will Sandeep Pandey ever be open to friendship with RSS ( if he were, I suppose he would have made a statement to that effect ).Pradeep : I too, like the anonymous, am afraid to reveal my real name but shouldn't you be concerned only about the merits of the specific arguments?
You (and I ) are not "normal Indian folk"Why not? I don't claim to speak for the majority of Indians. I speak for myself and present one point of view from an Indian who is as "normal" as someone zooming in his Merc-SLK on Marine Drive, or someone begging for a vadapav on chowpatty. Why does being "previleged" mean that I cease to be a "normal Indian"?If standing besides CPI(ML) does not automatically mean that Mr Pandey supports violence, why should a partnership with the US automatically mean that we support the Iraqi war?There are absolutely valid reasons for people to protest GWB's visit. There are equally valid reasons for me to disagree with the protests. I respect Ms. Roy's right to protest. At the same time, I feel certain hypocrisy in her statements. Hypocrisy because her bedfellows - to me - do not seem to espouse the concept of freedom as much as the one she regularly protests against.
The first thing one notices is that there is still no answer to the questions I posed 1. When did Roy praise the Taliban? 2. What awards did she receive?The second is that anonymous nitwit et al do not address any of the substantive issues in Roy's post. If the government's US policy is so popular why is Bush hiding out in the Purana Qila? The real point is that for a very large section of Indians, Bush's visit and the neo-liberal hegemony he symbolises is profoundly distasteful. But since anonymous nitwit et al want to be seen as "democratic" they won't admit they are advocating an unpopular policy. Instead, they will claim that anybody who opposes them must be a hypocrite, not-normal, naxalite and so on. To address some other points:Actually, being privileged by definition makes you abnormal. What does privilege mean? That you have access to resources that normal people don't. But let that pass. What you are saying is that you are as much an Indian as someone else. Granted. What you (or rather Nikhil) also said is that the left and their allies do not represent "normal Indian folk". Not granted. I merely pointed out that a sizeable number(majority?) of Indians who voted, voted for the left and their allies. I am not interested in whether this is a good choice or not. It permits me to say that the left and their allies better represent "normal folk" than half-a-dozen English-educated smart alecks on their computers. Incidentally, Hitler did represent a sizeable section of the German people, and yes, many of them were simply evil racists (note, kuen ka medak). But more importantly, what is the responsiblity of an honest Indian when he sees injustice perpetrated by the state? It is to condemn it and protest against it. India being a democracy, can be responsive, if enough people protest. On the other hand, what purpose is served by screaming about Musharraf? He is a dictator, not even responsive to the people of Pakistan. Why would it matter if an Indian screamed? What do you gain - pretty much nothing. What is the most likely outcome when one foams at the mouth about terrorism and naxalites? That the rogues who run the Indian State sense an immediate oppurtunity to use their power to clamp down on dissent. Sure, first they will start with Pota and use it only to harass Muslims or tribals being evicted from their lands by contractors or other defenceless and weak people. This ought to be morally reprehensible in itself. But it doesn't seem to persuade most people. What does eventually persuade them is when Sanjay Gandhi- like goons go after all of them. Then they suddenly discover the virtues of freedom and human rights and democracy.Let us go back to the standard extreme example to make the point clear. If you were a German in Nazi Germany in 1935, and you knew that there were two nasty Jewish people in your neighbourhood, would you be morally justified in screaming about it, knowing fully well that you remarks will be used to foment anti-semitism and target innocent people - of course not. Your main duty would be to oppose the murderous regime in power.The responsibility of an intellectual is to protests his/her own government's actions. It is easy to tell the truth about the enemy. It require no courage and even less imagination.There is a great difference between Mr. Pande's actions, that of a private citizen and that of the Indian State. The latter stands for all of us. Therefore, its crimes and the crimes of its new-found friends are ours. Not protesting them means that you are culpable. Not protesting Sandeep Pande implies nothing. Apparently this elementary difference is beyond our super-patriots. What seems to really drive them is blind class-based fury. So much so that they are ever eager to declare leftists and anyone they disagree with as sub-human ("not normal folk").And finally Niket says:"There are absolutely valid reasons for people to protest GWB's visit. There are equally valid reasons for me to disagree with the protests. I respect Ms. Roy's right to protest. At the same time, I feel certain hypocrisy in her statements. Hypocrisy because her bedfellows - to me - do not seem to espouse the concept of freedom..."And George Bush epitomises freedom to you? The man who has single-handedly suspended habeas corpus, has the right to kidnap you from your own country and lock you up indefinitely because, he, and he alone, determines you are terrorist. The man who has led some 100,000 people to the grave in Iraq after a murderous bombing campaign and twelve years of sanctions that killed half a million children. This is your notion of freedom? A private citizen protests this murderous injustice, and to you her hypocrisy is more important than the fact that your zillion year old civilisation, the only one with at least half a traditon of non-violence, genuflects, nay slobbers all over the sly half-wit's Texan calf-leather boots. You think these are equally valid reasons? What are you smoking?The worst part of it is that the Bush visit can't even be defended on the grounds of "national interest", whatever that is (it is apparently in the national interest to have Iraqis killed on a daily basis). Exactly what does Musharraf-loving Bush have to offer? Nuclear power plants that will, by 2030, augment our projected capacity by 5%? Oo, what delight. Terrorism intelligence? Pressure on Pakistan? Is that why Dawood is still hiding there? Has Bush promised to reduce arms supplies to Pakistan (answer: no)? Has he even promised easier visas for Indian tourists? And now, amusing as it has been, to debate some particularly obtuse people, with no understanding of history, ethics, logic, freedom, or anything beyond their next consumer goody (see, I can do the whole if-you-don't-agree-with-me-you-must-lack-all-moral-fibre routine too, previously, I only used nitwit, which is technically ok, because I could judge that based on arguments made here) I return to the workforce. It has been ten years (since the days of usenet) since I indulged in arguing with the humourless (with their peculiar notions of hilarity). It is, as a friend, the redoubtable Theotonio Dominic Sequeira said, one of the chief joys of life, but I have a family to feed. Fare ye well, and may this thread prosper in my absence.(I told you, I part without rancour!)Ravi
Ravi : If you are refering to that comment, "allies" wasn't used in a sense to include the congress. Now the word "normal" is used with several shades of meaning, to insist on interpreting another person's sentence in the particular manner you like isn't correct. For instance it is offensive to call homosexuality abnormal.amusing as it has been, to debate some particularly obtuse people, with no understanding of history, ethics, logic, freedom, or anything beyond their next consumer goody This isn't technically okay.There is a great difference between Mr. Pande's actions, that of a private citizen and that of the Indian State. The latter stands for all of us. If Pandey's actions are morally okay so is the government's. None asked you to hold a rally protesting Pandey.On the other hand, what purpose is served by screaming about Musharraf? He is a dictator, not even responsive to the people of Pakistan. If by any chance you meant it as an argument as to why Musharaff's visit need not be protested, that wouldn't hold water. Because if the fact that Indian government may be responsive is what matters then that applies to either person's visit.Regards.
To repeat: M/s Roy ... praises the most brutal Taliban.Where did M/s Roy praise the Taliban? I'd like to read that.
Dilip,Do you really expect an answer from these guys?
Here is the piece that has been asked and I reproduce it here:The International Coalition Against Terror is a largely cabal of the richest countries in the world. Between them, they manufacture and sell almost all of the world's weapons, they possess the largest stockpile of weapons of mass destruction - chemical, biological and nuclear. They have fought the most wars, account for most of the genocide, subjection, ethnic cleansing and human rights violations in modern history, and have sponsored, armed and financed untold numbers of dictators and despots. Between them, they have worshipped, almost deified, the cult of violence and war. For all its appalling sins, the Taliban just isn't in the same league. The Taliban was compounded in the crumbling crucible of rubble, heroin and landmines in the backwash of the cold war. Its oldest leaders are in their early 40s. Many of them are disfigured and handicapped, missing an eye, an arm or a leg. They grew up in a society scarred and devastated by war. Between the Soviet Union and America, over 20 years, about $45bn (£30bn) worth of arms and ammunition was poured into Afghanistan. The latest weaponry was the only shard of modernity to intrude upon a thoroughly medieval society. Young boys many of them orphans - who grew up in those times, had guns for toys, never knew the security and comfort of family life, never experienced the company of women. Now, as adults and rulers, the Taliban beat, stone, rape and brutalize women, they don't seem to know what else to do with them. Years of war has stripped them of gentleness, inured them to kindness and human compassion. Now they've turned their monstrosity on their own people. Yes - Poor guys who were forced to become what they were. No mention that they were a totally brainwashed fundamentalist people. Modern societies are compared to these medieval barbarians.Ravi -Nikhil has let the anonymous nitwit speak for him, so can we presume he shares this idiotic notion?No presumptions needed. I share the notion - whether you term it idiotic or not.The fact that you think that state sponsored violence in J&K is justified is irrelevant to the argument.Do not misquote. I do not consider the Indian army's or govt's action in J&K to be state sponsored violence. It may be your definition- not mine.The real point is that for a very large section of Indians, Bush's visit and the neo-liberal hegemony he symbolises is profoundly distasteful. But since anonymous nitwit et al want to be seen as "democratic" they won't admit they are advocating an unpopular policy.How did you arrive at this? Apart from the loony left and some islamists there was no protest from anybody else.Regards M/s Roys award, here are the details:http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1902593804/103-7897781-9631841?v=glance&n=283155Add to that the Sydney Peace prize - again an ally of America.Ironies abound - Allies of the US awarding their biggest critic awards.Ravi - No rancour from my side either.
I wonder what he is going to start next!
Is this Arunhati Roys Praise for Taliban?!!!From Algebra of Infinite Justice".....In 1995, the Taliban - then a marginal sect of dangerous, hardline fundamentalists - fought its way to power in Afghanistan. It was funded by the ISI, that old cohort of the CIA, and supported by many political parties in Pakistan. The Taliban unleashed a regime of terror. Its first victims were its own people, particularly women. It closed down girls' schools, dismissed women from government jobs, and enforced sharia laws under which women deemed to be "immoral" are stoned to death, and widows guilty of being adulterous are buried alive. Given the Taliban government's human rights track record, it seems unlikely that it will in any way be intimidated or swerved from its purpose by the prospect of war, or the threat to the lives of its civilians. ......Set up to fight the Soviets, the terrorist training centres and madrasahs, sown like dragon's teeth across the country, produced fundamentalists with tremendous popular appeal within Pakistan itself. The Taliban, which the Pakistan government has sup ported, funded and propped up for years, has material and strategic alliances with Pakistan's own political parties. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4266289,00.html
I asked: Where did M/s Roy praise the Taliban?In reply (I think it is in reply), there's an article that says:... the Taliban beat, stone, rape and brutalize women, they don't seem to know what else to do with them. Years of war has stripped them of gentleness, inured them to kindness and human compassion. Now they've turned their monstrosity on their own people.This doesn't look like "praise" to me. Therefore, to repeat (sorry Anirudh):Where did M/s Roy praise the Taliban? I'd like to read that.
Now, I have to drag myself out of retirement again. But really, this is the last time.From the excellent url that Nikhil has provided we learn the following (and not much more):"This summer, she will accept the Lannan Award for Cultural Freedom."From this we are to conclude, based on god knows what (small case "g" is a nod to my polytheistic roots and my atheistic present) - and the fact that Roy got the Sydney Peace Prize that:"Ironies abound - Allies of the US awarding their biggest critic awards."This is one of the lamest defences ever. If you read Roy's acceptance speeches or other documents which you are still too lazy to look up it will become clear to you that1. She is not a critic of the Lannan foundation.2. She is not a critic of the Sydney prize.3. Neither award committee approves explicitly or implicitly of American foreign policy and are therefore not "allies" of the US.As Dilip has already pointed out you have completely failed to substantiate your assertion that Roy praised the Taliban (hint: you won't be able to because she has not praised the Taliban).At this point, I have to conclude that having made a few idiotic assertions in the heat of the moment, you now refuse to withdraw them even when given ample oppurtunity. Moreover your defence has not only been wrong, but incredibly lazy - witness your giving an amazon url when a cursory search could have yielded much better information.You also say:"Do not misquote. I do not consider the Indian army's or govt's action in J&K to be state sponsored violence. It may be your definition- not mine."The Indian army kills people in Kashmir - that is the job it has been given by our political leaders. It is therefore violent. It is an arm of the Indian state- therefore this is state-sponsored violence. If you read carefully, I used violence, which is neutral, not state-sponsored terrorism (I do not want to enter into a discussion about whether this is the more appropriate word). Your indignant reaction tells me you disapprove of state-sponsored violence also. Good. Also, I was not quoting you, so I couldn't have misquoted you. And lastly, you say:"How did you arrive at this? Apart from the loony left and some islamists there was no protest from anybody else."Not everyone who disapproves protests. Also, just because your only sources of information are a slavish press grovelling before the King Emperor (think Shekar Gupta) or TV channels whose main job is to sell toothpaste it does not mean that a very large number of Indians dislike their government's policy. Even excluding the Congress, the allies of the left (dmk, Lalloo, SJP, Janata Dal etc.) and the left together account for at least 15% of the vote - that is roughly 14% more than the number of idiots reading Engish language newspapers and commenting on blogs. You will find many Congressmen and BJP members who violently opposes American intervention in the world - for whatever reason - jingoistic nationalism, votebank politics etc. That doesn't change the reality that George Bush is unpopular. It doesn't change the reality that American imperialism is the single greatest threat to human life and civilisation.I won't debate you anymore, not because I disagree with you, but because you refuse to own up to your errors even when they have been pointed out and also because your arguments are terribly lazy from the point of view of substance. You apparently think that by reiterating the words "loony left" or "Islamist" you are making tremendous points. Anirudh et al have already pointed out that Roy's criticisms of the Taliban are more pointed and naturally more eloquent than yours. And others have pointed out that the staunchest Taliban allies in their formative years were Pakistan and their American sponsors whom you love well, if not wisely. It is possible that you did not know this, but having been alerted to the facts, a mea culpa is distinctly in order.best,Ravi
I read through the whole list of comments to this blog. I do not agree with Ms. Roy. I stopped reading her book after reading her piece on Indian Nuclear Tests in Outlook. So you know where I am heading. Ravi: You said,"If the government's US policy is so popular why is Bush hiding out in the Purana Qila? " Hiding in Purana Qila? As per Ms.Roy herself, the other two locations were rejected due to security reasons. Bush is a cowboy but not so brave or stupid to go into a muslim ghetto to give a speech. Then you say the most hilarious thing I have read in quiet some while. "What does privilege mean? That you have access to resources that normal people don't." So that's why you are talking so abnormally do you. Each on of us, whether we have a red ferrari or don't even have clothes are equally representative Indians. So all this talk of "real India" is rubbish. As long as you are eligible for an Indian Passport , you are a Real Indian and normal. I saw you have this illusion that Left were voted to power last election and they drove the BJP out. The left represent in only 3 states of these country. In all three they defeated non - BJP parties. The major reason BJP lost the last general election was that they got their alliances equation wrong. If you see the vote tally of BJP and Congress, there is'nt much difference.I do not support the US invasion of Iraq or their so called war against terror. Neither does our parliament support the Iraq war and they unanimously opposed it. But that is no reason to protest and tell the President of the richest country and sole superpower in the world to go back. Idealism in International Politics is stupidity. We need Uranium for Nuclear Power Plants. Nuclear power is now widely accepted as cleanest possible source of power. Till we are unable to harness a cleaner resource, we have to accept it. You would not insult a middle-eastern arab leader (neither would Ms. Roy).. Why? You have to worry about the Oil imports. Also your left leaders will be worried about hurting local muslim sentiments. Why were'nt they protesting the visit of King of Saudi when he came for the Republic Parade. Indian Government has to do what is good for the country now. Not worry about what is good for Iraq or Afghanistan. So it send military to J & K to kill terrorists and invites GWB because we need his dollars and uranium. They also invite the King Of Saudi brcause right now we also need Oil. If the government protests and sends back every immoral leader, we will have no friends in the entire world.I agree Ms. Roy never said good things about Taliban. Thank her for that!!!!
kgroupieCould not have put it better. But apparently for some people what happens in Iraq and Afghanistan is more important than India's national interests. A suggestion for them is to go and take citizenship of those countries.
On a different, note, I enclose a link to picture I took on my recent trip to Delhi (near Firoz Shah Kotla)-- I think Anand you might get a kick out of this :-)http://umuhajir.shutterfly.com/action/slideshow?a=67b0de21b334a8bd2506&auto=0&idx=92&m=1&d=1142633335463
we don't want him. please keep him.
http://www.lineage2.lv :: Great Online Game !
:-) Christ! What's all this Anand?
It's a shame that you support Roy. She is a career communist and nihilist.
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1030507/asp/frontpage/story_1945565.aspHere you go. The biggest cheerleader of the Narmada Dam purchased forest land illegally.
Dilip jumping up and down with his silly - "show me where, show me where, show me" comes up with "I'd don't see.."Grow up Dilip - fads lame and getting old. We know how vigiriously you supported Roy at Sandeepweb some years ago. Roy accused Hindus of killing Eshan Jafri's daughter in Outlook article. Dilip wanna jump up and down where, where where.... can point to article and Jafri's daughter live and well in USA - four years after Godhra. Amazing, no outrage on illegal construction by the damned champ. How about a hooker prize for pimps around?
The Fictional World of Arundhati Roy
grosse salopecam por smswebcam por smstransessualimonliveshow photo trans
Enjoyed your blog. I hope it pays off for you. I also have a blog that you might enjoy...The Best Lingerie At The Best Prices - Romantic-Intimates
Thank you for your blog,your blog have a lot of very important knowledge and information.After i read giving me a good experince of all the articles at your site.I will always visit your site in future and i hope i will have a special experince after reading all your important article in your site/blog.Thanks you very much.From business advertising is a effective way to grow your small business plan for consumer products ,industrial supplies & mlm business.http://firstname.lastname@example.org
Post a Comment
View my complete profile