Tuesday, November 19, 2024
Home Blog Page 6913

JNU issue: If sedition laws must go away, so should our blasphemy laws!

Manithan
-
0
JNU issue: If sedition laws must go away, so should our blasphemy laws!

Students of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) had gathered on the third anniversary of terrorist Afzal Guru’s execution and had allegedly shouted statements that went against the concept of Indian state. They had allegedly called for ‘breaking India into pieces and asked for Afzal to be born from every home’ ending with shouting few verses (which has got nothing to do with religion). Of these, Kanhaiya Kumar and Umar Khalid along with few other students had been arrested. Rahul Gandhi and several political leaders descended into the JNU campus, to express their solidarity with students who were alleged to have called for breaking India and for re-surging terrorism. ‘Freedom of Expression’ were the words in the mouth of every self-confessed intellectuals and liberals. Newsrooms were blaring with shouts of politicians and activists labeling the Modi government as Fascist, the JNU incident as Emergency and the students as innocents.

Kamlesh Tiwari had been arrested too in December with NSA invoked against him. He is behind bars till now. No Rahul Gandhi or Sitaram Yechury visited him. No news studios supported him. Let us not jump to conclusion about our intellectuals and liberals here, ‘Freedom of Expression’ were the words in their mouth, but I’m not sure where their mouth was. The whole bunch of FoEktards were busy doing something else when Malda was burning, when Muzaffarnagar was brimming and when Tiwari was probably hiding in the corner of his cellar anticipating his death.

Now, who are these FoEktards?

FoEktards is the portmanteau of Freedom of Expression and retards. This newly coined term denotes the set of self-confessed alleged liberals and activists who implement the Freedom of Expression concept in a selective manner, partly due to their agenda and mostly due to their pusillanimous attitude towards particular religions and thereby appearing as retards before our eyes.

According to FoEktards, Kamlesh Tiwari belongs to a Hindu organisation and hence, whatever criticism he has for any other religion will fall directly under Hate Speech. Sakshi Maharaj and Sadhvi Niranjan’s words describing any other religion become an incendiary Hate speech. Amit Shah’s call for vote becomes Hate Speech.

For these FoEktards,  a group of students calling for breaking India and resurgence of terrorism falls under Love Speech. Because they belong to Leftist groups and by birth, they have every right to criticise anyone.

Criticising Hinduism and any other religion must be allowed under the real Freedom of Expression (not the crap that our FoEktards peddle). And the one who criticises religions can be of any religion or consider himself irreligious. But for the FoEktards, they have every right to criticise religions (only Hinduism) but a Hindu cannot and should not criticise religions (Islam or Christianity). That is why they batted for M.F.Hussain but didn’t even batted their eyelids for Sitaram Goel. Husain’s story is known to almost any Indian, but the historian Sitaram Goel was hounded and put behind bars for publishing a well researched book. That is why these FoEktards hadn’t cried Freedom of Expression for Sanal Edamaraku or Salman Rushdie or Charlie Hebdo, but it is all over the news in case of JNU student’s arrest.

If calls for ‘Breaking India’ and ‘Resurgence of terrorism’ can be shown as Freedom of Expression, then the ‘Hate speeches’ of Kamalesh Tiwari, Sakshi Maharaj and any other Hindu group must also fall under Freedom of Expression.

Religion > India??

Kamlesh Tiwari was charged with 295A of the Indian Penal Code (Hate Speech in religious grounds), which is indirectly the Indian form of Blasphemy law. JNU students are charged with Sedition. Our FoEktards support the arrest of Kamlesh on grounds of Hate Speech but oppose the Sedition laws.

By opposing sedition law and by being a muted audience to Indian form of blasphemy laws, are our liberals and intellectuals sending a message that they consider religions to be greater than India? If a group of religious people can be offended by anti-religious statements of someone, then can’t a group of nationalist people be offended by anti-national statements of someone? If our liberals consider that only religious people (particularly Muslims and Christians) have the right to get offended and not the nationalist Indians (which includes anyone who considers themselves), do they consider those two religions above India? If the Indian government must arrest Sakshis and Sadhvis for shouting against other religious people and the same Indian government must not arrest Kumars and Khalids for shouting against other Indians, does it not send a message that our liberals do not respect India as much as they love those religions?

If our media and liberals demand insulation for religions from criticism, why can’t we extend the same to our nation? How could it be that ‘a religion can enjoy silencing its detractors but a nation cannot’?

Victims of Blasphemy law:

If you want Sedition laws in India to be removed but do not say so for ‘Hate speech in religious grounds’ law, then please take a deep look at the below table. The term Perpetrator is used because section 295A of Indian Penal Code identifies the person exercising his Freedom of Expression as a perpetrator of crime.

BlasphemyOp

The above table has been constructed with the help of Wikipedia article on ‘Hate Speech laws in India‘. I might have missed few more incidents involving hate speech in religious grounds. For a short brief on its history, the 295A was brought in force by British in 1927 after Muslims called for a Blasphemy law following the publication of Rangila Rasul book.

Absolute Freedom of Expression must be the end point of human struggles for Freedom. But, it is impossible to be practically applied in the present situation, that too for a country like India, which is surrounded by enemies on all sides. As of now, I would prefer Sedition law to remain albeit with few changes, like, removing the word ‘Government’ from it so that governments can be opposed from inside but not India and by applying it for criminals who wage war against India and urge for its breakup or secession. But, ‘hate speech in religion’ aka blasphemy laws must go away, as soon as possible.

Ending this post with a ‘This is Bill’ styled meme featuring Kamlesh Tiwari and our FoEktards:

KTiwari

Open Letter to JNUites from a Social Science Researcher of IIT

Vinod
-
0
Open Letter to JNUites from a Social Science Researcher of IIT

Studying in the Humanities and Social Science department of IITs is tough in itself as you have to always justify your existence that what you are doing here, why not some other institute completely dedicated for humanities and social science. We struggle, we show our work which are beneficial academically at least and then suddenly some JNU happens and again the questioning and cross question restarts. I thought to constrain myself even this time about the seditious act going on in JNU but couldn’t.

These days I am saddened with the incidents happening in one of the premier institute of this country i.e. JNU and in such a situation, no one can be neutral even in abstract sense. I am getting the news through various media like Social Media, Mainstream Media and from my JNUites friends. I am appalled with the sheer of insensitivity of those students who were involved in anti-India sloganeering. I wonder about the “kind of motivation” they get for wishing “Bharat Ki Barbaadi” (destruction of India).

I learnt that they are claiming that it is a kind of witch hunt because the institution has never supported the government as well as the current establishment. It is fine argument to project itself victim but how it will justify trashing the nation as a whole and demanding secession. Being at a the centrally funded Institution, I am well aware of my responsibilities as a researcher and at the same time, I use my freedom of expression for criticizing the current government policies (there are many of them, which I don’t like) and even the head of the government but nowhere have I imagined the abhorrence towards my beloved country.

Our few liberated souls at JNU think that entire concept of nation is an idea and it’s kind of imagined one so it is fine to degenerate the country into pieces. Really! The country named India has its own long historical stance and this concept of India as a nation has been solidified over time. Continuous sacrifices has been made to protect its integrity and even these days our army are making sacrifices so that we could be protected from vices of our enemies.

JNU thrives on the idea of liberty while “claiming” its belief in equality and “promoting” fraternity. You celebrate killing of CRPF Jawans or beat Army men to prove your idea of fraternity. I heard that sexual harassment is widespread culture inside JNU campus, in fact JNU topped list of higher education institutions in this regard. Is it your dedication towards the gender equality or is it the shameless show of your libertarianism?

Suddenly numerous admirers of Voltaire have emerged on my facebook page for supporting “anti-nationals” by giving arguments about  freedom of speech of perpetrators involved in seditious act. Yes, I am borrowing the word “anti-national” from the utilitarian vocabulary because what you are doing there are completely an act of treason towards an Idea called India and for the sake of its safety, I will use as many tactics as you use for defaming and destructing this idea. Even Voltaire wouldn’t have thought that his argument will be used for protecting the culprits who desired death of such beautiful nation named India. The other party (to which people like me belong) is forced to use Karl Popper’s argument in this situation that “extreme of tolerance will cause disappearance of tolerant”.

No doubt, JNU has been a wonderful institution as long as we look into its academic achievement but when we hear such news, we become hopeless. How much disappointment this creates in the mind of genuine researchers, you guys won’t be able to ascertain? A centre of excellence is being marred just because of few extremely “liberated” and “politically motivated” individuals who are pursuing their agenda through the campus politics in the name of democracy and freedom of speech. When the freedom of speech will be used in such a dangerous and one-sided manner, it won’t leave enough scope for democracy.

Research is an achievement and you are being provided all the tools to master it. It should bring a sense of pride and you should be involved in removing all the existing malice and misconstrued notion in the society as you are at advantageous position in comparison to many of our fellow countrymen. Please, don’t defame the free thinking researchers’ fraternity. Being one of them pains me that some of us has reached at that level where they can harm the concept of our country. Mother India is trying to provide us all the resources necessary for our development and if you believe that certain sections are being ignored, complain to the country. Even on an extent you can hate it for being unequal but murdering it won’t suffice your agenda as well as wants and be sure, most of us won’t let you do that. Discuss, debate, dissent but please, don’t be disloyal.

Why Indian media is against Arnab but India isn’t

Gaurav
-
0
Why Indian media is against Arnab but India isn’t

Indian media’s dislike for Arnab Goswami, Times Now’s thundering Editor, is well known. There have been many subtle media campaigns by channels like NDTV and CNN-IBN (sense over sensationalism) trying to counter Arnab’s style of vociferous, over the top news anchoring. The reason till now was simple: Arnab just got much better TRPs. Much, much better.

Now, Indian media-persons have found a new reason to hate Arnab, and hate him viciously: He was one of the few anchors, and thus Times Now was one of the few TV news channels, to take a strong stance against the JNU anti-nationals. Every other channel took much much softer stands against the JNU sloganeering. Their stands, were clear from their editors’ tweets:


But Arnab went the other way. Every day his panel discussion was about trashing all such arguments in favour of the slogans like “Bharat Ki Barbaadi” and “Bharat tere tukde honge”. His video which slammed Umar Khalid and gang has been viral on social media for days.

Why did he do it? Arnab Goswami is a hard character to judge.

Is he a BJP supporter? Not if you see his relentless tirade (perhaps the strongest) against Sushma Swaraj during the Lalit Modi issue.

Is he a “Right-Winger” who is not necessarily with BJP, but more with the cause? His debates questioning the practices of barring women in Hindu temples ought to suggest he is not.

Is he then a “Nationalist”, for taking up a pro-India stance in every debate which gives him a chance to do so? (for example, every debate with Pakistan on the other side). Probably.

One might very well argue that he is just TRP hungry and hence he chooses to be a “nationalist”, and to an extent that might be true. But studying his stances across debates, no one can say he is not a “nationalist”.

And that’s what has irked many from his fraternity. Take a look at one of the “sly” tweets by his former colleague Barkha Dutt, after his anti anti-nationals stand was clear:


The likes of Barkha were shocked. They suddenly realised how Arnab had beaten them completely. What the TRP ratings had been saying for long, was now much more visible. And this was caused them to raise the pitch against Arnab.

Soon, came the utterly shameful alleged attack on journalists by the Patiala court lawyers and a BJP MLA O P Sharma. Violence against anyone can never be excused, even less so by lawmakers and law practitioners. The left liberal media was deeply uncomfortable in holding these debates over the JNU issue because they couldn’t openly slam JNU and yet they couldn’t back them fully either. These lawless lawyers provided the perfect escape route for this section of the media. Once the incident at Patiala played out, the narrative in these channels changed from JNU sloganeering to Lawless lawyers and attack on media.

While the likes of Barkha Dutt, Nidhi Razdan, Rajdeep Sardesai changed their debate direction, Arnab held on to his old stance of anti anti-nationals. This further incensed the Left Liberal group. Eventually, Arnab even skipped the solidarity rally taken out by media persons, against the lawless lawyers. Apparently Arnab was attending to his ailing father, but such nuances are lost on “moral compass” wielding journalists:


And now, thanks to all the above escalations, things have reached to a hilarious situation where Leftist rags are suggesting people should Boycott Arnab. Of course, till a few months back boycotts were “communal” (read Boycott Dilwale).

What did this result in? A hashtag: #IndiaWithArnab, which was trending at number 1 on Twitter:

Untitled

And guess who were using this hashtag? “Bhakts”, or right-wingers, who have abused Arnab in the past (and will surely abuse in the future too). In fact, even as they were trending this hashtag, Arnab was reportedly bashing BJP. So what explains this?

Arnab is with India, hence India is with Arnab stupid! As I had said in a tweet earlier, the “Bhakti” of the “Bhakts” lies with India and whoever/whatever they perceive, at that moment, to be beneficial to India. And Arnab fits that criteria. He may go anti-BJP, anti-Hinduism, anti-Right Wing very soon, but the so called “Bhakts” will support him when he takes up the cause of the nation.

What should the Left Liberal media draw out of this entire episode? They have lost the pulse of the nation completely. This is reflected in multiple interactions but they just refuse to see this. Their TRPs are falling, their twitter mentions are almost always filled by abuse. Now they are getting abused by lawyers in person! Abuse is wrong (although it is covered under Freedom of Expression), but the Leftist media-persons need to introspect why are they facing this blowback.

Talk to any average India, see your WhatsApp groups, most people are incensed about the anti-national slogans in JNU. On the other hand the likes of Rajdeep and Barkha have tried their best to defend the accused. And the public also knows that these defences are not from their love for free speech. Sagarika has openly batted for restrictions on free speech in the past, Barkha has sued bloggers. Most glaringly, these so called crusaders of free speech were silent when Kamlesh Tiwari was arrested and charged with NSA. These are just positions taken by these star anchors to suit their ideological biases. And now, the average Indian is slowly waking upto this.

Arnab Goswami may still be a “nationalist” by convenience, convenience which high TRPs afford him, and that mask is yet to fall, but the masks have fallen off the likes of Rajdeep and Barkha.

I hate my country and I want you to stop questioning my patriotism

Guest Author
-
0
I hate my country and I want you to stop questioning my patriotism

Gentle readers, I must inform you, my frame of mind as I write this is far from cheerful. Infact if I could afford a moment of candidness, last few years weigh heavily on my shoulder.

As you might have guessed I, of course, refer to persecution unleashed by that Rowlingnian blackguard, Narendra Modi. I tremble at the transformation of this country from a liberal democratic republic to fourth Reich under coercive majoritarianism of khaki chaddis.

This was not how it was supposed to happen. There we were happy as a clam, planning the succession of the prince charming with dimples, when all of a sudden, we found ourselves getting strangled by the intolerable intolerance, as bleak and as dispiriting as when Anne Frank had to hide in the closet, or when my maid failed to show up for a week.

If only that were the extent of our indignities, we could have stomached it, but no, that were not to be. To add insult to our injury, we find ourselves besieged by the internet hindus.

Nowadays my friends and I can’t express opinions on any subject without these black shirts jumping on us about “truth” and “accountability “.  And all said and done, it is their cultlike obsession with such primitive superstition which is of utmost concern, if not alarm.

What these simple-minded thugs do not realize is that our liberal order can not be based on such problematic constructs. Because truth is gendered, and patriarchal, also heteronormative and privileged.Which is why if we sincerely believe in a better future, we at all cost should ignore reality. If that doesn’t work we should shut our eyes and cover our ears unless it is gone. And since we wish for a better future, asking accountability for our exalted opinion is not just churlish but bordering on blasphemous.

Make no mistake, our mission is nothing short of sacred, we are guardians of light in this area of darkness, light first brought from the blessed Arabia by Muhammad Bin Qasim, and passed over to successive generations entrusted with protecting and spreading this divine revelation to this blighted land of superstitions, of idolatry, of ridiculous notions such as respect to all faith.

Which is why, the best thing to happen to this land is us, selflessly trying to bring the wretched subhuman Hindus to enlightenment. Which is why our real heroes are Afzal Gurus and Yaqub Memon, who sacrifice life to bring true civilization to the repellent barbarians, and not simpletons like Unnikrishnan and Hanumanthappa who died to save Brahammanical status quo.

It is necessary that we defend our right to curse this godforsaken land, to pray for its destruction because we must remember, our rights are inalienable , just like our morning tea and crustless toast.

– @doubtinggaurav

Free Speech: Kamlesh Tiwari vs JNU

Nitin Rivaldo
-
0
Free Speech: Kamlesh Tiwari vs JNU

Kamlesh Tiwari comments on Prophet Mohammad. He gets booked under the National Security Act. He gets arrested as a threat to the national security of India.

He just made a statement. Police stations were torched by a mob of 2.5 Lakh Muslims in Malda. Yet he was a threat to the national security. Mullahs were offering 51 Lakhs for his beheading in open. Yet, he was a threat to the national security.

If I remember correctly, the Mullah who made an offering of 51 Lakhs wasn’t arrested. Because that would have been Fascism! Secularism put behind bars!

The threat to national security were those Lakhs of goons going on a rampage in Malda. But, Kamlesh Tiwari was arrested because what Kamlesh Tiwari said was portrayed to be provocative.

That’s like arresting a girl for getting molested because some people found her dress provocative.

No one cried free speech, dissent under threat. No one cried Fascism by the UP govt. There was pin-drop silence among the champions of free speech like Kejriwal, Rahul Gandhi, Barkha, Rajdeep, Sagarika, Pratap Bhanu Mehta and other self-proclaimed intellectuals.

Media was forced to pick up the story. Even then, media didn’t debate”Why has Kamlesh Tiwari been arrested under NSA”, but they discussed, “Bhaiya, arrest kar liya hai, Ab dange kyon kar rahe ho? Phansi kyon maang rahe ho?” No one questioned 295A then?

An Editor of an Urdu daily Shirin Dalwi was arrested for publishing Charlie Hebdo cartoons. No one came out in her support. Not even people from the media. Op-eds by Pratap Bhanu Mehta, Sagarika, and others on Charlie Hebdo are great case studies of hypocrisy in their commitment to free speech.

In fact, Pratap Bhanu Mehta wrote :

Sometimes, such attacks are intended to draw attention to double standards. Can a country that bans hijabs stand the ground of free expression? If liberty can be curbed for equality, why not for piety? Suppose we now publish the cartoons, not as an act of disrespect for Islam but as an act of defiance against violence.

Today, suddenly same voices are championing calls for violence in the name of Free Speech.

Kya Free speech mein bhi odd even chal raha hai kya?
Malda mein Maun the! JNU mein ON ho gaye?

Their support for free speech is a Sin Wave. Crest in JNU, Trough in Malda/Charlie Hedbo.  What we are seeing is not a principled commitment to free speech but free speech used as a shield for a deeper sinister campaign.

Today, some JNU Students are chanting, “Bharat tere tukde honge, Insha-Allah, Insha-Allah. Afzal hum sharminda hai, tere kaatil zinda hain!”, “Bharat ki barbadi tak yeh jung chalegi.”

These are calls to violence. Does Jinnah’s call for “direct action” qualify as free speech? Would you support that?

No one is shutting JNU down. No one is arresting all students. But how can you support people like Umar Khalid?

It’s a political issue, painted as a free speech one. There is something sinister going on.

Remember Ishrat Jahan was sold as an innocent school girl by Barkha. This time, it is Umar Khalid’s turn, and he too incidentally is a student. If they could paint terrorists as victims, what keeps them from painting an Islamist like Umar Khalid a victim?

Look at their narratives. Ishrat Jahan was Bihar ki Beti. But, when evidences surfaced and she was found a terrorist, these messiahs of humanity changed their goalposts from “innocent girl” to “fake encounter”.

KPS Gill is considered a hero for putting an end to the insurgency in Punjab. Ever seen a campaign against him for fake encounters? Did you ever see the same intellectuals making sure he goes to jail? But the cops who killed Ishrat Jahan went to jail. Why? Because they killed a good terrorist, a terrorist who wanted to kill a person whom the ruling elite of politics, media and the intelligentsia hated.

If you take them to courts, these people sign mercy petitions. When SC orders execution, then you read headlines in the Indian Express like “And They Killed Yakoob!”

Matlab, Agar koi Terrorist mil gaya Hindustan mein. Mazaal hai tum use haath laga kar dikha do. We will make you pay the price. The Police, the IB, even call SC names.

So leave the terrorists alone. Leave the people offering money to behead Kamlesh Tiwari alone. Leave the mobs of rampaging extremists in Malda alone.

If you stand up for Kamlesh Tiwari, you will be called enemies of Muslims. If you touch these students with links to Jaish, you will be accused of saffronizing the universities.

These people promised Fascism, and because they don’t see it coming, they are ensuring that every incident is painted as Fascism. They promised riots, but because we don’t see those happening, they are propping pro-separatist forces to create riot like situation. They won’t mind seeing this country burn for political gains.

IB head Rajender Kumar who was framed by CBI and the puppets of Madam to nail Modi in Ishrat Jahan encounter said, “26/11 could have been averted had the then regime not targeted IB!”

“I hate India” is free Speech. “Bharat ke tukde honge, Khoon bahega, Afzal niklenge” is a threat of violence. If we don’t draw a line between the two concepts, we’re helping them draw a new line on the map. And remember the mayhem when a new line created. The last time it was drawn in 47!

It’s a dangerous game being played in the garb of supporting free speech at JNU. The irony is, threats to the national security are treated as victims, and victims like Kamlesh Tiwari are treated as a threat to the national security.

(adapted from Nitin Gupta’s Facebook post)

“Kejriwal-Insults-Hanuman” trends on Twitter as outrage over Kejriwal’s tweet grows

OpIndia Staff
-
0
“Kejriwal-Insults-Hanuman” trends on Twitter as outrage over Kejriwal’s tweet grows

On Tuesday, Social media was filled with outrage over a particular tweet of Arvind Kejriwal. Kejriwal, has been steadfastly standing behind the “students” of JNU saying “targetting innocent students” will prove costly to Modi:


It is well known that Kejriwal leaves no stone unturned when it comes to getting a chance to attack Modi, and here too, he played his cards. Today, Kejriwal shared a cartoon which among other things, showed Hindu God Hanuman as an arsonist, with a club in his hand.

The cartoon, which was originally published in The Hindu, showed a rowdy, uncouth man in the form of Hanuman, flying with his tail on fire and a club in his hand, saying that he has done his job, and “now all attention is on JNU”. It appears that the cartoon was trying to make the point that all the anti-national slogans in JNU had been planted by BJP/Modi’s henchmen, “Hanuman” being one of them. This is not different from Kejriwal’s own stand. In his past tweets, based on a disputed video (against which ABVP has filed a case), Kejriwal has often said ABVP is suspected of these activities, even while disregarding all the videos which show JNU students like Umar Khalid chanting slogans:


Social media users expressed their in various forms, accusing Kejriwal of insulting Hanuman and Hindus:


Some also asked questions why The Hindu is being spared for such a post:


A lesson in free speech for our blabbering commentators

Mayuresh Didolkar
-
0
A lesson in free speech for our blabbering commentators

In one of my articles elsewhere on net I argued that the biggest strength of left liberals comes from their ability to think as an institution. In India, as in abroad, the left liberals are a remarkably coordinated bunch and when under attack they show the remarkable teamwork displayed by a pack of grey wolves on hunt. And of course, they are not fazed by a setback. The “Indian Barbadi” episode on JNU campus, where the stunt of students backfired badly is a case in point.

The backlash was so severe that the lefties (and their loyal tontos in the media) knew some damage control was in order, so they went Plan B ; i.e. “Free speech defence”. Sagarika Ghose called the clampdown on the JNU students “ridiculous”. Rajdeep and Barkha (perhaps fearing a backlash for an overtly pro separatist stance) asked if our state is so weak as to arrest students for raising slogans. Sagarika even posted a US SC judgement on flag burning. Their overwhelming message- if you do not stand still and take separatist scums shouting slogans against your motherland, you are weak, you are dictatorial and you do not get free speech.

Actually, idiot sirs and madams, it is you who don’t get free speech. Your arguments are so self-contradictory that they are impressive only in their brazenness. You really must be counting on us to be exceptionally stupid or exceptionally coward to hope to get away with it. You are not, not today. And just to prove how hollow your arguments are, I am not even going to use the most basic argument that anyone with a modicum of decency will find self-suggesting- namely there is no bravery in being a traitor and that our sovereignty should be above such petty discussions. I get it; your moral decay is so deep that these things will not occur to you. Never mind, like they say, more than one way to skin the cat.

So first way to look at how wrong you are to make this as a free speech issue let’s consider the fact that if free speech can be used to attack sovereignty of the nation, then free speech can be used (with the same moral right) to attack free speech itself and hence any effort to suppress those separatists should not raise your eye-brow. This is a circular argument and one the late comedian George Carlin best summarized as follows “next time someone tells you they have a right to their opinion, tell them you have a right to your opinion too and your opinion is they do not have a right to their opinion”. Got it? Even the ancient Latin doctrine cautions non faciat malum,ut inde veniat bonum i.e. not to do evil that good may come. Or as once again the late George Carlin put it so well “fighting for peace is like f**king for virginity”.

In fact if you apply your mind well to the definition of free speech, you will see that the government and police response to this incident is exemplary in its upholding of free speech. The simple fact is that free speech allows you freedom to say things should change. It provides legitimacy to the act of protesting against an unjust law or government diktat. It does not give you a license to unilaterally revoke the law. Separate the two group of people protesting against government and you will see the police action is only on one of the two. The students who raised slogans of “India ki barbadi tak jung rahegi jung rahegi ( our war will continue till Indian state is not destroyed) are all facing action because they broke an existing law.

A law that states that “whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law in India, shall be punished with 5 imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine.”

It is an existing law passed by legitimate means through Indian legislature and the law enforcement machinery would have failed their duty towards the country if they had not upheld the law in this case. The other group, i.e. people like Sagarika who wishes to abolish the sedition law itself are free and will remain so because they have not broken a law but merely protested it.

Let me take an example away from this debate to clarify my point- let’s say you are one of those activists who feel the laws about domestic violence are hopelessly female centric and require change. Free speech guarantees that your demand to make the change will be heard. However, if you lose your patience with the system and start advising men “ sc**w this, laws are not fair so start beating women till you don’t win” you will be charged. It is so simple that you have to be clinically mentally challenged or deliberately obtuse not to see it. Breaking the law- crime, protesting the law- no crime. May be you should write it down on a cue card or something.

Having addressed the first part, whether the government was within its rights to take action, let’s move to part two. Is the existing law fair? And does it not abate free speech?

Actually no, once again. And to understand why, you need to understand the difference between free speech and consequence free speech. (The last term borrowed from the retired talk show host Jon Stewart, though me and Jon may have varied in our interpretation of the term)

Do I mean to use the popular argument that free speech should not include speech against the country? Not really and for my own reasons. Thankfully, there is no need to use it either. You see free speech is a mere guarantee that your spoken word will not become a reason for your persecution. Free speech is a guarantee that someone (your college/employer/community)/govt) will not punish you in one area for the crime of speaking your mind in an unrelated area. It means if you support Kejriwal and your boss supports  Modi, he cannot fire you from your job as a computer engineer (though in this case if you are a team leader he should fire you for poor judgement, hehe) because supporting Kejriwal is not a deterrent in discharge of your duties at work. But if you are working with Reliance petroleum and you write a blog suggesting all the oil refineries should be set on fire to rid the world of the polluting fossil fuels, he has a right, nay an obligation to act against you. In case of JNU, these students are using their free speech asking people to wage a war against the state. Sorry, free speech does not cover that. For that you would need to have consequence free speech.

Consequence free speech alone can guarantee you that whatever you say will have no consequences of themselves. It also means you can hurt sentiments of the majority of people, make changes without keeping the fairness of them in mind and never get a blowback of your words. For that to happen you need to be the top guy (or one of the top guys) in an authoritarian regime so it is a limited commodity enjoyed by a select few only. A few months back, Russian Foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, in a joint press conference with US secretary of state John Kerry, told a female journalist “ it is politically incorrect for a lady to address a gentleman when she is on her knees” (no kidding Sherlock !!) and continued as if nothing happened. That my friends, is consequence free speech. Ms. Ghose, if you wish to be part of a society where a foreign minister tells you not to open your mouth while you are on your knees, have at it. Not my circus, not my monkeys.

Of course the other group that can get away with consequence free speech are small kids and idiots. (Notice how quickly we are tired of criticizing Kejriwal). That is the other extreme of consequence free speech where people say “oh bachcha hain” or “oh he is an idiot” shake their head and walk away. This is hardly the position a true revolutionary will aspire for.

There is also the fact that most of the people advocating free speech on this issue have demanded actions against hate speech in past. Sagarika herself, even in this controversy tweeted that free speech is not hate speech. What she means is, we can prosecute people for their spoken words, just ask Aunt Sagarika when. A few months back, the same set of intellectuals that are protesting this crackdown had written an open letter to Times Now demanding ban on words like Anti nationals and terror sympathizers. The most ridiculous inconsistency of this particular argument, however, is when people like Shekhar Gupta chided government for taking action against Students in collusion of ABVP. So students protesting against state are kids, students protesting against the first set however are not students, they are merely part of an organization that has students in its name. I, like most Indians, simply don’t have the right education to get the logic of this.

A word to the students then. Your cause is despicable and your cry for help shows you to be morally coward. As someone noted on twitter today, the older generation of lefties at least had the moral fibre to own up sedition if they believed in it. For two days on television every students representative is saying the same thing “the posters were disgusting, we believe in united India but oh all the students arrested for this are a result of the government’s political vendetta”. The famous court judgement that said “nobody killed Jessica” in the Jessica Laal murder case comes to mind.

Here is the truth kids, whatever worth having is worth fighting for. You want to become revolutionaries, more power to you. But then don’t run go running to the constitution of the same country you are fighting against. The bar for fighting for freedom in this country is set pretty high by people like Bhagat Singh and Rajguru and Sukhdev. If you believe this government is dictatorship, learn to fight from those brave hearts and not from some coward professor who masterminded an attack and then spent years begging to the judiciary for his life. Facing a near certain death sentence Bhagat Singh fasted for 116 days to protest treatment mated to him and his colleagues in jail. His comrade in arms Jatindra Nath Das went on hunger strike to protest treatment given the prisoners by the British authorities died after fasting for 63 days. Those were the people who believed in putting everything on line to fight for the ideal they believed in. They did not count on a democratic regime to bail them out of trouble.

Those bravehearts sang “सरफरोशी कि तमन्ना अब हमारे दिल मे हैं देखते हैं जोर कितना बाजू ए कातील मे हैं” and we sing their praises even today. We have neither admiration nor sympathy for despicable cry bullies who run for cover at the first hint of trouble.

Home Minister joins media in getting fooled by fake twitter handles and satire

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Home Minister joins media in getting fooled by fake twitter handles and satire

Update: Media reports now suggest that the Spokesperson of Home Ministry has now clarified that the Minister’s statement was based on inputs from security agencies:

Today, speaking on the issue of the anti-national slogans at JNU, Rajnath Singh said that he has instructed the police to take action on the guilty and ensure than no innocent students are harassed. He further added that the entire event had the backing of Hafiz Saeed.

This last statement of his got plenty of flak from social media. Reason? The statement of Hafiz Saeed backing the JNU protests was from a fake Twitter handle (the handle has now been suspended/deactivated). (Edit: He may well have intelligence information on this, but as of now no such facts have been placed on record by him and the Delhi Police which comes under HMO has also quoted this fake tweet) Journalists like Rajdeep Sardesai  jumped at this statement from the Home Minister:


So where did Rajnath Singh get this information from? He might have actually read that tweet, but considering that the account had only 2000 odd followers, its reach is highly suspect. He might have got this information from the media though, because CNN IBN itself had reported this “news” a few days back. The report is now deleted, but we have the screenshots: 

jnu hafiz saeed

Yes, a premier news organization like CNN IBN had reported this tweet from a fake handle as a news item. There were also a few journalists who had raised an alarm based on this tweet. Indian Media, which is supposed to verify and check facts before reporting, itself failed at this basic check. And it is entirely possible that this report, which had become viral, might have been trusted by Rajnath Singh too.

And this is not the first time Indian media has taken quotes from fake accounts/satirical pieces and shown it as news. If you have been reading OpIndia.com regularly, you would know we have been repeatedly pointing out all the occasions when Indian media has spread blatant lies, which innumerable politicians have fallen for.

Rajnath Singh too has been on the receiving end of blatant lies by Indian media. In November 2015, Outlook in its article, made a passing comment that Rajnath Singh has said “Modi is first Hindu ruler after 800 years “. This was from an article dated November 16 2015. A good two weeks later this came into focus as CPM leader Mohd Salim used this alleged quote of Rajnath Singh to stir up the Intolerance debate and cause a huge furore. He placed reliance on and even quoted the above mentioned Outlook piece. Rajnath Singh denied it and rightly so, because he had never made such a statement. It was in fact said by VHP leader Ashok Singhal almost a year back. This was widely reported at that time yet Outlook chose to lie on this issue.

Other cases where Indian media reported “news” based on satire/parody sources:

In 2011, Shekhar Gupta wrote and Indian Express published a piece where Gupta (of Military Coup fame) quoted from the Twitter feed of “Fake Jhunjhunwala”, assuming it to be from the real one, the stock broker Rakesh Jhunjhunwala. They later had to apologise for this idiocy. 

In March last year, Rajdeep Sardesai’s own media house India Today had reported that Sadhvi Prachi had said  “Valdimir Putin’s original name is Vaarahmihir Putr Singh”. The truth? This news report was based on a satirical post by an India Today publication itself. How thick can you be if you can’t recognise satire from your own media house? Or was it deliberate?

In May 2015, ABP News reported that  Arvind Kejriwal had called Akshay Kumar’s Gabbar is Back “Nonsensical”. Again, this was based on a satirical piece in Times of India’s “Mocktail” section. 

In August 2015, CNN IBN again, reported that Pakistani commentator Syed Tarikh Pirzada had said Rahul Gandhi and Kejriwal must break Hindus on caste line to break India. This too was based on a tweet by a parody account. 

In September 2015, Rediff.com reported that former Finance Minister Arun Shourie had attacked Narendra Modi. Rediff believed that an unverified twitter handle called “@ArunSFan” with barely 2286 followers, was the real handle of former Finance Minister Arun Shourie. This inspite of the fact that the handle clearly mentions in its bio that it is run by “Fans of Arun Shourie” and is a “Parody account”

These are of course beyond the over 200 lies told to us by Indian media over the last year. Rajdeep Sardesai himself has been involved in many such half-truths and whole lies and we have exposed him repeatedly on twitter:


Ultimately, it is a good thing that at least by virtue of Home Minister Rajnath Singh’s gaffe, Indian media has woken up to parody handles and fake news. Let us hope we get a better level of journalism henceforth and till then we request all readers of MSM, including the Home Minister, to verify news independently. 

Dear Facebook, instead of free basics, how about giving us free speech?

vaibhav vishal
-
0
Dear Facebook, instead of free basics, how about giving us free speech?

We all love Facebook. Facebook loves us back. Or at least it used to, till they decided to do away with Free Basics in India. But, hell, these minor setbacks in our relationship apart, I think we still love Facebook. And I’m sure Facebook still loves us back.

To such an extent that Facebook decides on which posts and pictures are good for us and which ones are not. In principle, it is a good idea. There are certain rules and regulations of a civilised world that any democratic societal set up, real or virtual, needs to follow. And Facebook being a strong and smart reflection of what we are, has a set of Community Standards that one has to adhere to. If and when one is not quite adhering to those Community Standards, Facebook has the right to unilaterally debar you from posting on the network. Or, in the worst case scenario, throw you out, no questions asked, or answered.

So far, so good. Freedom of speech is linked to respecting that freedom. Live with it.

Having said that, while Facebook gives us this lovely platform to communicate and converse – and we love you back, Mark & Co. – it cannot be a totalitarian regime, where they decide on what is good, bad or ugly for us. Which is precisely how things seem to be working right now! These calls on whether or not a post or picture is violating the Community Standards seem to be subjective calls, based on the opinion of Employee A or Employee B sitting in front of a screen with Rulebook.doc  open, deciding what works and what does not, basis the time of the day, week or month.

And that’s clearly not how things should be.

In these times of the democratization of the political discourse, media, opinion makers and opinion seekers; in these times of people getting exposed within seconds to anything and everything that has ever happened, is happening or will happen around the world; in these times of reference points continuously changing and evolving, the lines between what is right and what is wrong have totally blurred. Facebook needs to, therefore, stop overbearingly imposing these Standards on us. Or at least relook at how things are happening. These guidelines need to be based on the collective wisdom of the people using FB, and the social stratosphere enveloping them. And, most importantly, these calls cannot be randomly subjective. That’s being both bossy and boorish.

Here’s Exhibit A. Orijit Sen is an established artist. He paints.  Sometimes he paints nudes. And, then, sometimes he uploads them on his FB profile. His painting “She came in through the bathroom window…” got reported for nudity, and FB removed the picture. It violated the dreaded Facebook Community Standards. Another friend of Orijit put up the same picture, somebody reported again, and this time, Facebook did NOT remove it because it did NOT violate the Community Standards. The same painting! Encouraged, a third friend also put it up. But in her case, not only was the picture removed, but her account was also suspended for 24 hours! Same painting. Same voice urging the same freedom of expression. Three similar same cases. Three different outcomes. Wow.
1.0

Facebook Block

Now, either the guys handling these complaints are plain confused or they are power lords or they are high on something good. I hope for their sakes, it is reason number three.

Exhibit B. Rahul Raj, the man behind the very popular Facebook page Bhak Sala (and also a key custodian of OpIndia, in the spirit of complete disclosure), reposts something by Indian Express on the page Bhak Sala. The post was a link to an article published in Indian Express about Arvind Kejriwal’s picture adorning posters with Bhindranwale’s images in it, urging people to celebrate Bhindranwale’s birthday. I would not get into WHYs and HOWs of the story or how smart or stupid Kejriwal is. But this was a legitimate story published by a mainstream national daily. All what Rahul did was post it with a clean, uncomplicated and straightforward line preceding it. That, according to him, AAP celebrating Bhindranwale’s birthday was shameful politics by Kejriwal and his team. By no stretch of imagination was the line or the news article violating the community standards of any community, even if Arvind Kejriwal was heading that community! And yet, Facebook chose to block Rahul’s account. No removal of posts, that would be too mild for the non-believer, let’s just suspend him from posting. Because we can, yay! This, when Indian Express had also published the story, and it had totally survived inviting the wrath of the digital Big Brothers!

Bhak Sala

Facebook Ban

This wasn’t Rahul’s first brush with Facebook’s random policies. According to them, he is a repeat offender. He may be the man behind one of India’s best youth communities honing original thoughts through active debates and discussions. BUT then again, he also has the dubious distinction of having his account suspended for 30 days for posting a picture pertaining to ISIS which showed a young man being burnt alive, with his PoV on the picture/ ISIS. The picture was widely shared across social media. It was already in public domain. But Facebook decided to ban him for 30 days. Again, while I understand the rationale behind censoring and censuring what Facebook thinks are extreme thoughts, I still cannot fathom how the decision was taken and how the ‘punishment’ was derived! What was the logic behind suppressing a debate in both these cases pertaining to Rahul? Why not let the voices be heard!

Bhak Sala

In Facebook’s defence, it is not as if these actions are taken suo moto by them. They react after somebody files a complaint against a post or a picture. So while we can take FB to the cleaners, the dissent is primarily stemming not from FB, but from us, our varied belief systems, and our understanding of rights and wrongs. We need to look as much within as we expect FB to look into its algorithms and systems and policies.

And now Exhibit C. A cartoon by Kashmiri artist Mir Suhail Qadiri, blocked within an hour of it getting posted. Why does the post not follow Facebook Community Standards? Because it talks about how the roots growing from Afzal Guru’s grave in Tihar Jail are connecting to the roots of Kashmir. And because the artist refers to Afzal Guru as Shaheed. Facebook considered it hate speech, and boom! Fair enough. Afzal Guru was a convicted terrorist, an enemy of the state, given death penalty by the Supreme Court of India for the attack on Indian Parliament, and calling him a martyr isn’t really siding with the law of the land. But then again, there could be a set of people who may find the idea of blocking a cartoon depicting a different perspective of a conflict-torn Kashmir not really in sync with the idea of democracy!

Afzal

Because voices, even if they are the voices of dissent, should be heard. Or NOT.

I would leave this to the opinions of the learned, discerning readers of OpIndia. Three cases of apples, apples and apples to compare. Meanwhile, I shall be Zen about it all, and get back to posting cat pictures on Facebook. 🙂

PS: In other news: http://tech.firstpost.com/news-analysis/if-your-last-name-is-chutia-your-fb-ac-might-be-blocked-209806.html

 

(Vaibhav Vishal is the Chief Creative Officer with a Mumbai based entertainment firm. The views expressed in this article are his own, though he hopes they find some resonance at the FB offices, too. He is @ofnosurnamefame on Twitter and can be seen on http://ofnosurnamefame.com every now and then.)

Liberal outcry over JNU – a genuine topic for research in hypocrisy

Editorial Desk
-
0
Liberal outcry over JNU – a genuine topic for research in hypocrisy

“Government is taking away the right to disagree”, “This is attack on free speech”, “Innocents students are being targeted” – similar rhetoric on these lines are being offered to the police action against JNU students, who had shouted anti-India slogans during an event to commemorate “martyrdom” of Afzal Guru, who had attacked Indian parliament in 2001.

Since obfuscation of issues is an art well mastered and perfected by the media and the so-called intelligentsia of India who imagine themselves to be liberal, we have to ignore the rhetoric being offered and look at the facts.

A bunch of JNU students had organized a pro-Afzal Guru event on the campus where they shouted anti-India slogans. There is video proof of the incident, which has not been disputed by those on campus, although those outside are trying their best. Earlier today, a propaganda video, claiming that the original JNU video could be misleading, was spread by controversial journalist Mihir Sharma, but his lies were called out even by journalists of his own disposition.

Coming back to what actually happened; among the slogans shouted on campus were calls for Kashmir’s independence from “Indian occupation” and that struggle for Kashmir’s independence (aazaadi) will continue till “India is destroyed” (bhaarat ki barbaadi tak).

Apparently, these are words and thoughts of “innocent students” and these are not “anti-national” sentiments. Yearning for a fight that will destroy the nation is not anti-national. Okay.

Maybe those innocent students have not read the Indian constitution, which is the foundation of the nation. The Indian constitution asks its citizens to uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India as a fundamental duty. And therefore, acts that threaten the sovereignty, unity or integrity of the nation are deemed serious criminal offenses.

One can argue that there was no act, but just a speech.

Ideally, no speech should be seen as a criminal offense – that is our broad right-liberal stand on the issue. However, the police and the courts won’t function based on what is “ideal”, but based on what is prescribed in the constitution.

And our constitution criminalizes certain types of speech, which include punishment for speech that is against the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India and the security of the State.

Ironically, this “criminalization of speech” is the fallout of the first amendment of the constitution moved by the first Prime Minister of India Jawaharlal Nehru, after whom JNU is named.

So while we may stand for ‘no criminalization of speech’, the fact is that our constitution and laws allow it. Police had a prima facie evidence (the video and the news reports) and a formal complaint (by a Member of the Parliament) in this regard, and thus they had the right and a duty to act. Rest is upon the courts to decide.

At this point, it is important to note that the same bleeding heart liberals, who today are calling upon the state to be magnanimous and ignore the constitutional and legal provisions (thanks to Nehru) that criminalize speech, prefer to keep stony silence when certain other types of speech is punished for being criminal.

Only a few weeks back the Uttar Pradesh government imposed the National Security Act – a law that has been called draconian by the same set of bleeding heart liberals – was imposed upon one Kamlesh Tiwari, who had abused Prophet Muhammad.

No liberal was outraged. No op-ed was written. No tweets were composed.

Essentially, arrest and jail for abusing a community’s prophet goes down well, but an arrest for abusing the nation is seen as “reminder of Emergency” to our liberals. Only in India those who give more importance to religion than to the nation are deemed as “liberals”!

Just like they are saying “Don’t support anti-national sentiments, but sedition charges are over-reaction” now, they could have said “Don’t support abusive language, but slapping NSA is over-reaction” then.

They didn’t say that, because to say that, the primary commitment has to be towards the idea of free speech. Looks like their primary commitment is to hypocrisy.

The other rhetoric being offered is that of sanctity of educational institutes, and that all kinds of views should be allowed on campuses; that an educational institute should become a battleground of ideas where all views, however unpleasant, are allowed and debated.

And this is being told weeks after some JNU students belonging to the left ideology vehemently opposed a talk by Baba Ramdev on their campus. And the same set of bleeding heart liberals had then supported the students blocking Ramdev.

Amazing hypocrisy!

The truth is that our liberals are not concerned about dissent or free speech or plurality of views. That was never their concern; else this glaring hypocrisy would never come to the fore.

Indian liberals want free speech only for themselves. It’s a monopoly that they hanker for. JNU epitomizes this monopoly, where freedom to shout anti-India slogans are demanded but freedom of Baba Ramdev to express his views is curtailed.

This is why they are shouting so much for JNU.

1...6,9126,9136,914...6,967Page 6,913 of 6,967

Contact: [email protected]

About us

News and opinion website that brings you reports and narrative from a perspective often ignored or suppressed by the mainstream media of India.

Follow us

© OpIndia.com