The monk, misogyny and more

It is surprising that people are surprised only because a Buddhist monk got abusive. As with any other religious community, Buddhism would have its share of disgusting men of faith. 

Buddhist monk Ashin Wirathu called human rights envoy Yangee Lee names:

"We have explained about the race protection law, but the b**** criticised the laws without studying them properly."

"Just because you hold a position in the United Nations doesn't make you an honorable woman. In our country, you are just a whore...You can offer your arse to the kalars (derogatory term for South Asians) if you so wish but you are not selling off our Rakhine State."

More than his statements, one must note that the crowd cheered. That is something we tend to miss, and therefore target the tree when the woods are alive with similar sounds. 

The condemnation by Thawbita, of the progressive Saffron Revolution Buddhist Monks Network, was rather revealing:

"The words used that day are very sad and disappointing. It is an act that could hurt Buddhism very badly."

How would such abuse tarnish the faith, and is that the only concern? 

Honestly, though, in drawing attention to the abusive man as a person of religion there appears to be implicit belief that he has morally wavered rather than pointing out the patriarchal notions embedded in religion. 

Name-calling invariably takes away from what is really abused. Wirathu has served time in prison; he is openly anti-Islam and anti-minority. Ms. Lee was speaking about the discrimination against them. After the monk's comments, she said:

"During my visit I was personally subjected to the kind of sexist intimidation that female human rights defenders experience when advocating on controversial issues."

However, all we get to read is that the monk called her a bitch and a whore. We don't seem to even want to address the issue of the abuse not being for who she is but for what she says. Indeed, women in such positions or with a political stand are sought to be reduced with such slurs. 

The idea is to keep women away from public space, again mainly because women tend to have a more humane perception of the world. Gender here is also about how it impacts social positions and therefore ought not to be relegated to a victim of misogyny narrative. 

Had the human rights envoy been a man, Wirathu would have had the same problem with the findings. But, he might not have called him names because he would assume they were equals, in that it would be gender reflection. Calling him a dick would resonate with his own, for example. 

Some monks have said there would be no action against him. Even if there was it would soon be forgotten. In the end, Yangee Lee's report seems to have lost to the more potent insults she was subjected to. In that, everybody has become a conspirator. 

Veerappan's Legacy and a Sleeping State

Veerappan

Veerappan was probably the last of the bandits. Shot dead in 2004 by the security forces that he eluded for a good few decades, he is back in the news. The Supreme Court has stayed the death sentence of his four associates.

It again raises the question about whether the mental agony and physical confinement due to delayed execution is humane. Besides this, the courts must ask themselves whether the severe punishment to deter further such acts of crime serves its purpose. The Veerappan gang survived in the jungles across three states – Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala. It started with poaching, and went on to smuggling of ivory and sandalwood available in the forests.

How he and his band of dacoits survived for this long has spawned many stories, including the complicity of certain forces and the romantic notion of him being protected by the villagers.

I mention this in the context of how the legal pattern of the mercy petition on behalf of his aides is being dealt with. Gnanprakasam, Simon, Meesaikara Madhaian and Bilavendran will have to wait until tomorrow to know whether the amended version of their plea will alter the punishment.

It is frightening to think about the political games that might play themselves. Afzal Guru’s case has already showcased how fast-tracking is done with ulterior motives. There are other precedents, all waiting for the noose. Sandalwood smugglers do not matter as much as an attack on Parliament in the general scheme, but now that the government has displayed brawn it cannot turn wimpy. If it flexed muscles in Kashmir, will it be forced to do the same in Kanya Kumari?

What is particularly intriguing is the Attorney General G E Vahanvati’s reasoning about denying that mercy in this case:

He said Veerappan’s gang members had committed a crime against the state by triggering a landmine blast that killed 22 people— five policemen, 15 police informers and two forest guards. Opposing the petition, the AG said, “These are crimes against the state and must be distinguished from crimes against society.”

A chief minister is killed. Does he constitute the state? Does the state not include society? One understands the validity of symbols, but without wishing to sound insensitive how are policemen, aware of the dangers of their job, more important than others? Going by the AG’s statement, is it not the business of the state to protect society and, therefore, crimes against the latter could also make the state responsible for laxity?

Where was the state when Veerappan was committing the crimes? People might recall that the police went full force only when Kannada superstar Rajkumar was kidnapped and held captive for over three months. This gave the Centre enough ammo to get Karnataka and Tamil Nadu to fight it out. 

Elephants, sandalwood, ivory may be state property, but they are also about business. Whose business? How did the dacoit manage to have an army with him? Had he not been shot dead, he and his men would still be on the run, continuing with their activities.

It is important to understand Veerappan a bit. At the age of ten, he picked up a gun and killed his first elephant. Was it for a lark or were these the makings of a criminal? One suspects it was pathological, for there were instances where he did not just snuff out a life, but beheaded the victims and even choked a six-month old lest its cries alert the police. And he never expressed remorse for any of his actions.

Yet, he remained in touch with those in power. He offered to surrender on the condition that he got a presidential pardon, the right to continue to hold arms and a movie to be made on his life. Part of it could be attributed to his close observing of Phoolan Devi whose post-dacoit ‘mainstream’ life he was beginning to be inspired by.  His numerous video cassettes were less about communicating to the outside world than to project himself as an invincible man; it was the trailer of the film he hoped would one day be made by a director of international standing.

Veerappan decided he was a messiah of the whole region. When he sent his list of demands, there was nothing for himself. What he said sounded like a politician’s manifesto – a solution to the Cauvery dispute, Tamil as the administrative language of Karnataka, and an ensured daily wage for the Manjoloi estate workers in Tirunelvelli. He wanted to portray himself as the king of Tamil Nadu, a real-life version of the celluloid MGR.

He even compared himself with Jayalalitha, saying that if she could be chief minister with cases pending against her, why could he not be set free? The fact is he would never get any credence as a free man. His appearance was geared to cause fear as a bandit. In the urban jungle, he would become a part of the history of thuggery. So he ensured he remained in the news every few months, and propped up his image as a folk hero.

He often said he respected women and hated the security forces who raped them under the ruse of trying to find him. It is true that women were arrested for helping him, for providing him information and food.  Then there were his aides.  It is possible that he captured them and they worked for him under duress.

The government and police forces that rely on informants ought to know how they use their powers to keep such people safe. It is barter. What applies to them would apply to the criminal too.

These people constitute society. They could well be victims, of the bandits/terrorists and the state, and one cannot with certainty tell anymore what comes first.

The killing of Veerappan was justified because it was a case of one force against another. But getting four aides executed now reeks of political opportunism.  For argument’s sake, if the state is convinced that capital punishment is the best way to deal with criminals (it is not and it will have to face the music by right-thinking citizens), then instead of looking back in anger, it ought to immediately address recent cases of terror against the state and announce the death sentence. Only then can it afford to take a high moral ground.

Justice seen to be done is not always justice. It is sometimes a coverup con job by those in charge of booking cons.

© Farzana Versey

Re-Public

“I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money-power of the country will endeavor to prolong it's reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.” 

- Abraham Lincoln

I found this quote applies rather well to us in India as we celebrate our existence as a Republic.

There is much to question, but the Indian Constitution ensures rights. It is our duty to not misuse them. Among these, the right to life, livelihood and dignity should get supremacy. Unfortunately, we as individuals are helpless.

The right to breathe in a secular environment is important. Anyone who dreams of a nation based on religion - and any name given to it in disguise will not help - has no right under this Constitution.

- - -

Also:

Nehru, Ambedkar and a Cartoon

Cartooning the Constitution: Look before you leak

Foetus and Feminism: What about the other Savitas?

 

Words like “pro-choice” did not even occur to her as they forced an iron rod into her vagina and, together with the blood, remnants of an unborn human being seeped out. She wept a little for the lost child and much more for the scalded part that was essential to her job. Shanno was a sex worker. The brothel owner could not afford her ‘wares’ to be mothers. Shanno had opted for survival on sleaze street. Brothels are secular, so she followed all faiths. No one would justify or hold back her abortion on the basis of religion.

Savita Halappanavar’s death due to negligence at the University Hospital Galway in Ireland has become a global issue largely due to that. A 17-week-old foetus is considered risky for termination of pregnancy. Unfortunately, she was miscarrying and in the state of unbearable pain asked the doctors to abort the baby. The reply they gave her has become a whip-mantra: “This is a Catholic country.”

Is it news that the Catholic Church is against abortion? Savita’s family is justifiably incensed; the denial of her right to terminate the pregnancy is a crime for which they ought to get justice. However, would there be such international outrage had the doctors cited medical reasons for their refusal to abort? Indian politicians who pay scant respect for women’s health and welfare have urged the external affairs minister to intervene and order an enquiry into this case. A report states that 12 women die every day in India due to unsafe termination of pregnancy.

  
Jodie Jacobson wrote in RH Reality Check: 

“Someone's daughter, wife, friend, perhaps sister is now dead. Why? Because a non-viable fetus was more important than her life. Because she was left to suffer for days on end in service of an ideological stance and religion she did not share. Because a wanted pregnancy went horribly wrong, and, because as must now be clear, there are people who don't care about the lives of women.”

If it is an ideological stance, would the lawmakers in Ireland even consider this example based on a religion Savita “did not share”? Some foreign newspapers have carried stories with large pictures of Savita and her family at her wedding, including a dance video of a private function. The motive seems to be to pit one culture against another, or at least to highlight that an ‘outsider’ had to suffer because of these laws. Last month, the first private abortion clinic opened in Belfast amidst protests. Why did it take this long for such a medical service to be available when it is public knowledge that women travel to England for abortion? Do activists believe one case will lead to a re-examination of the country’s archaic laws?

Every religion talks about the value of life. That they do not value the quality of life, are misogynistic, and follow a wholly patriarchal notion should make us wary about using their programmed responses to falsify the reasoning. In fact, most social norms too consider abortion as the last resort. How many women, even among the educated, take an individual decision to abort?

***

Let us digress and expand on the idea of choice.  By applying the argument that a ‘woman’s body is her own’ – an obvious fact – the onus shifts entirely on women. Where abortion or childbirth is concerned, this amounts to being the sole caregiver or guilt-ridden slave of chauvinistic tripe. Just as the Pill did not really empower women but made her accountable for her ‘freedom’, the womb has been desexualised as a pre-birth nanny.

Contemporary feminist literature, especially about sexuality, while apparently busting myths ends up as a Hallmark card celebration of feminine body parts. Take this: “I experienced some of the 'thoughts' of the uterus myself”, from Naomi Wolf’s ‘Vagina: A New Biography’.  Imbuing the sexual organs with emotions demotes physicality as a natural state. The woman becomes an addendum to the part: “Your vagina makes you a goddess. Or rather, ‘The Goddess’.”

A review in The Guardian had taken on Wolf by recounting her description of “a ‘bodyworker’ who attempts, through massage, to re-engage sexually traumatised women and who, Wolf relates in the book with a straight face, once saw an image of the Virgin Mary in a vagina”.

This is a concept that the male module employs effectively to worship women as divine pleasure-givers whose own contentment is essentially to procreate. It appears that female sexuality can only be sanctified as motherhood. It is not easy to discard the psychological baggage, the subliminal conditioning of creating that which is in God’s image. When an Indian intimate cleansing product was advertised as satiating the male, some women activists had raised objections using the convenient hitch of its ‘fairness’ claims. While owning up to the right to pleasure, I had written then that they seemed to look upon it as an individual activity. This too amounts to a quasi-virginal Madonna state.

The supposedly more open western society is also not immune to this. When Demi Moore posed in the buff in an advanced stage of pregnancy for Vanity Fair, she was legitimising pop culture through maternity. Angelina Jolie goes a step further by a public forsaking of the crutch of cohabitation to become the ‘adopted’ mother.

Where choice is concerned, there can be extremes. If widows could use the frozen sperm of the spouse because the couple were seen as “together”, according to Britain’s Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, 1990, then at the other end a foetus born to a brain-dead woman was kept alive because it had the right to live. Savita might well have been saved had medical assistance opted to do so.  

It is not only Ireland that has to think. We forget that in many parts of the world foetuses are discarded because they are female and infants are thrown in garbage bins because they are viewed as burdens. By some weird logic, this is justified as a choice by a society that has no respect for human dignity and for women.  It is the low self-esteem choice to be chauvinistic.

---

Published in CounterPunch

Rethinking Asylum for Pakistani Hindus

Crossing over. Pic; India Today

What has made 250 Pakistani Hindus want to seek asylum in India? The obvious answer is that the community is persecuted. Hindu girls are kidnapped, raped, forced to convert to Islam and marry Muslims. This is true, as true as Muslim girls being kidnapped, raped, and forced to marry men they do not wish to be with. The only difference is that there is no conversion. Criminal law for all citizens of Pakistan is the same, and it falls short in execution where women’s issues are concerned.

The law does not protect minorities. The Blasphemy Law is ridiculous, for it assumes that non-Muslims will run down the Prophet or the Quran, although it must be understood that Muslims too have been arrested for the same.

However, I’d like to know why it is only Hindus who are looking to move to India, and why now? Christians are treated no better; Ahmadis suffer; Shias are killed. Only a small fraction of extremists is involved in such persecution and holding the country to ransom. We do hear Pakistani leaders talk about minority rights, and either they do nothing about it or have to suffer the consequences.

The Hindus who arrived here got visas for pilgrimage. Did they plan not to return, or was it an idea that germinated in their minds later? Do all of them belong to a group? Mass asylum – although this really isn’t all that large a number – is sought with some pre-meditation. Did the Indian government know about the plans?

The opinions are contradictory. Some say they are seeking refuge here because they are afraid. Others are emphatic they will return. Yet, voluntary organisations have rushed to help them the moment they crossed the border. Were they intimated about it?

India Today states:

NGOs, lawyers, professors and artists have stepped in to bring relief to the 113 Pakistanis, living in a refugee camp in the national capital. They have arranged for food, sanitation and even education for them.

Human Rights Defence secretary general Rajesh Gohna said, "We have moved the application for extension of visa for them and now we are going to meet the chief visa officer on the first (December 1). Our group could go there along with their representatives. We will request the government of India that their visas should be extended and long-term visa should be granted to them and subsequently citizenship should also be granted to them."

Are those who are here the persecuted cases? If they are being helped on the basis of actual experience, then the human rights organisations must file specific cases.

I am afraid that do-gooders these days also have political agendas. In their enthusiasm, they might take away from these Pakistani Hindus their homes and livelihood only to make a point.

At the camp. Pic The Hindu

Art of Living guru Sri Sri Shankar too met these Pakistanis at the camp. He runs a franchise operating in Pakistan. Has commercial gain superseded his concern for all these years? He visited the country a while ago. Did he listen to the woes of the Hindus? Did he approach the Indian government for assistance?

A PTI report of August 11 gives another picture:

"It would be wrong to say that Hindus or Hindu families who have crossed over to India were no more willing to go back to Pakistan," group leader Rajesh Singh said. The Hindus from Pakistan have come to India to pay obeisance in the Hindu historic temples located in Amritsar, Indore, Haridwar, Rishikesh and Delhi but not for asylum," he said, while dismissing as "rumours" reports of exodus of Hindus. "In fact, none of the Pakistan-based Hindu families could afford to live in India while leaving their ancestral houses and set up behind in Pakistan," he said.

250 of 4.3 million Hindus do not constitute an exodus. So, are there only practical considerations? Certainly that is the major reason. Since most are based in Sindh, it is rather obvious that it was a factor in their not moving to India during the Partition or later. It has been 65 years. How many tried to return to India? Were they denied licences to run their businesses in Pakistan? Don’t they hold jobs? I am speaking purely at the practical level. Indeed, there are fewer temples than there were in 1947. It is not the Islamists who have targeted those. They were mainly demolished as illegal constructions. There is rarely any mention of the celebration of Hindu festivals, including Ganapati visarjan.

A minority in a religion-based majority state is at a disadvantage by default. In principle and practice there are some things they have to accept and have done so. Therefore, Justice Bhagwan Das had taken the oath of office in the name of Allah. It seems absurd that the momins would want those they consider ‘kafirs’ to utter the name of Allah at all.

Returning to those who have arrived in Indian, an anonymous voice has been quoted:

"If Indian government throws open the doors for Pakistan based Hindus, they would flock to India," he said, adding that they felt life would be much easier here especially when they have to marry their children.

Again, it is a practical consideration.

India as refugee haven is a bit of a delusion. If these Hindus who have crossed over are provided for, despite being illegal immigrants (should that happen), and they are granted quick citizenship, it will raise questions about several Bangladeshis who have been living here for decades and should have become naturalised citizens and are not.

Would political parties be as enthusiastic had Muslim refugees decided to land up here and seek asylum? There are many more Muslim families who are separated. If persecution is the yardstick, then Pakistani Muslims are right up there.

The reason I bring this up is simple: It is not merely a humanitarian story. It is politically charged.

The global censure for its failure to protect minorities appears to be pinching the Pakistani regime. The 250 Hindus who recently arrived in India were briefly detained at the border by Pakistani authorities. They were allowed to enter India after signing a commitment to return, and told not to criticize Pakistan while in India.

Why did the Pakistan ask them to sign documents stating that they would return? Would the government not wish them to go away? Or do they fear a diplomatic impasse? That is unlikely. The Pakistani establishment has never expressed concern about such niceties. Is it really afraid of international repercussions when the concern is diplomacy and little else? Is Pakistan looking for lamb to feed the fundamentalists? Going by figures, and the different kinds of communities and sects targeted, this is unlikely.

Pakistan is a helpless spectator. If you have visited Hindu homes and met Hindus, or for that matter other minority groups there, they are not Islamised. I was at a friend’s home and her help wore a Gujarati style saree and a bindi. Shopkeepers run their businesses, their identities rather obvious. Sikhs, of course, stand out because of their turbans. If anything, it is the poor Christians who due to the menial tasks they are relegated to perform are disparaged. People don’t like comparisons, but think about how we treat “bhangis”.

Is the Indian government going to capitalise on this or play safe? Minister of State for Home, Mullappally Ramachandran, had said:

"All such Pakistani nationals who have come to India on group pilgrimage visa will have to return to Pakistan... within the visa validity period or the short extended period allowed in specific cases."

Since then, there are attempts to approach the authorities, mainly by making it into a TV show. The Hindutva parties will benefit the most. This should be pause for thought. Just as Indian Muslims, or even most Muslims in Pakistan, are urged not to fall into the rightwing trap, the same applies to Hindus, in Pakistan or in India. The ruling party should not bite the saffron bait and act in a hurry. It is dangerous, for Pakistan might want to swoop down on just such an opportunity and offer asylum to Indian Muslim victims of riots only to score points.

I understand that people are concerned, but let us look beyond the concern. How many of the Hindus were asked to “Go back to India” by the general Pakistani population? If it is fundamentalists we are talking about, then this is not what they want. This is what they do to draw attention to their shaky ideology.

I would not want to leave home. Think about those people too, the ones who are not part of this group of 250. In fact, think of mass exodus of Christians, Sikhs, Shias, Ahmadis. This will not be a reversal of Partition, but one more.

If we paid heed to the larger picture we’d not be feeding off a group of pilgrims.

(c) Farzana Versey

The Dolphin Person

I have nothing against dolphins. In fact, I find them delightful. However, the scientific understanding of them as individuals, raises a few questions.

The Centre for Ethics and Business at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles has come up with a ten-point charter for “life, liberty and wellbeing”, among others.

A group of scientists and ethicists argues there is sufficient evidence of the marine mammals' intelligence, self-awareness and complex behaviour to enshrine their rights in legislation. Under the declaration of rights for cetaceans, a term that includes dolphins, whales and porpoises, the animals would be protected as "non-human persons" and have a legally enforceable right to life.

Is intelligence the only yardstick to project an ethical perception of rights? This would put to test many humans – the physically handicapped, the mentally challenged, those who behave differently from what is the norm, and those who might not quite fathom the complex nature of abstract thought. There are parts of the world where people still live on basic necessities and follow rudimentary rules of social intercourse.

"Dolphins are non-human persons. A person needs to be an individual. And if individuals count, then the deliberate killing of individuals of this sort is ethically the equivalent of deliberately killing a human being. The captivity of beings of this sort, particularly in conditions that would not allow for a decent life, is ethically unacceptable, and commercial whaling is ethically unacceptable.”

The scientists quoted examples of how dolphins know to work on the reward principle. Early experiments conducted on rats have shown similar behaviour. Dogs, as in the Pavlov experiment, expressed their reaction through salivation. There is an understanding where survival makes animals and humans behave in a certain manner.

So, is such ethical treatment based on a human paradigm the right and only one? Protecting a species is fine. But is it really necessary to ‘dignify’ it on the basis of being a ‘person’. This, strangely enough, contradicts the effort to not treat human beings as superior. Then, why elevate only some species to that level?

Animal rights activists might want all animals to be protected. The movement against zoos, cages, slaughter, meat-eating has been active and often vocal. They too use the human in a trapped situation to emphasise the point about rights. It does not quite work because there is a tendency to glamorise and bring out the beast in the person behind the cage or dressed in fur. It sexes up the message.

The dolphin lobby is using a parallel argument by saying that they are ‘non-human persons’ and therefore as good as individuals.

I can see that there is a pecking order here, and wonder just how a species will seek to gain the sanctified position of being human. It really isn’t the best thing to be when the record of human rights is abysmal and the ethics of how certain being are treated as opposed to others affords it less ethical validity than an elephant squashing an ant unknowingly.

7 Billion Mutinies Now: The Fight For Women

Imagine a situation where a few years from now she could be married and forced to become the shared booty between brothers because she survived

Phul Kumari with her son

Across the globe, the seven billionth addition to the human population has been welcomed symbolically. Baby deaths, another vital statistic, can be pushed aside.

Numbers are nice. They give us an idea about just how insignificant we are and how each of us has to wage a battle. The seven billionth girl in India was born in Lucknow – the symbolism here is of the girl child. There are photographs and nice family moments.

Imagine a situation where a few years from now she could be married and forced to become the shared booty between brothers because she survived. Nobody poked a coat hanger in her mother’s womb to kill her. No one poisoned her milk or just threw her in the dustbin. The tragedy of her life is her survival.

What I mention about shared booty is a shocking report that somehow did not cause a flutter in the mainstream Indian media. My inbox that is usually flooded with information about female circumcision in some African country or how women in Saudi Arabia have to fight the authorities to be able to drive did not have a word about this news. We Indians are concerned about how the world treats women when we are among the worst criminals.

Baghpat does not figure in the maps we understand. It is a small village in North India, two hours away from the capital New Delhi and 500 kms from the 7 billionth baby girl. The report mentions the story of a woman, now in her 40s, who had come like any other bride to her new home. Munni did not know what awaited her. In her words:

"My husband and his parents said I had to share myself with his brothers. They took me whenever they wanted – day or night. When I resisted, they beat me with anything at hand. Sometimes they threw me out and made me sleep outside or they poured kerosene over me and burned me."

She has three sons from her husband and his two siblings. She would not be able to tell who is whose father. She filed no police complaint. She had no choice; some would say her position is better because others are kidnapped and raped or sold to brothels.

The British Medical Journal quotes the astounding figure of 12 million deaths of female children in three decades. Voluntary agencies mention the sex ratio. In Baghpat for every 1000 men there are 858 women; nationally the ratio is 1000 men for 940 women.

This is a far more delicate problem than rape and human trafficking, for it is kept within the family. In Haryana, brides are imported from the vastly different cultural southern state of Kerala. It would be a good example of breaking regional barriers, but many of the women are bartered.

We also need to look beyond the skewed sex ratio, because in some ways it ends up sounding like a justification even as we deplore it. We also have mythology to rely on. In the Mahabharata, the Pandavas – the good guys of the epic – all marry Draupadi. The reason? They are obedient sons. Their mother Kunti always told them that they should share whatever they get. After Arjuna successfully wins Draupadi in a swayamwar, upon their return they tell their mother they have brought alms and she repeats her advice. One can look upon this as less literal than it is because it is mythology. However, later these brothers do put their wife at stake in a game of dice.

Munni, the victim, is shamed; the shameless get away

Munni of Baghpat does not have a kingdom she can claim to belong to or a Krishna she can seek succour from. There must be many such women who are not only shared by the brothers but also sold or loaned to the desperate bachelor population.

Such a sense of camaraderie and community living was not uncommon in tribal societies. In fact, there were matrilineal societies too, but power was vested in the hands of the woman and lineage also passed through her. It did not give rise to any questions about fatherhood. Women had control over choice of mate and property.

If the Baghpat type situation were reversed and women indulged in this sort of polyandry in today’s times, it would most certainly be unacceptable. For all our talk of women’s empowerment, even offbeat cinema sees a woman’s sexuality as the masculinisation of her. Or, an error.

In UP, too, the fact that Munni is not even granted respect and treated as a sex object should alert us to the fact that the sex ratio figures could well turn into a ruse for polygamous relationships. Where men do not need to pay for sex and can get women to work in the farms and at home to cater to their every need, it might alter the dynamics of gender relationships and parenting. One is bound to sneer at what appears to be an urban concern, but gender relations are not only about seminar discussions. It is about how they affect people of two sexes.

If the men are following the patriarchal format and want to propagate their lineage, why are they not concerned about who the father is? Is there any guarantee that they are not going out with other women to satisfy their sexual urges? What about the issue of diseases? Education of women is a priority as the agencies there rightly point out, but will it ensure that the woman gets out of this circle? They obviously have little control over the gender of their offspring and what happens to it. Since it is the men who seem to ‘suffer’ due to lack of women, should they not be educated and informed about the long-term consequences of snuffing out the life of the girl child?

Munni’s story is incomplete without pondering over a few concerns. She has three sons. Did she have any daughters that she had to get rid of? Had the daughters been allowed to live, would their own fathers have exploited them for no one would know who the natural parent is?

By now, we have gone much beyond the seven billionth figure and if a girl has survived in some backward village, her fate is sealed – sold and delivered. It could be to a client or it could be one husband too many.

(C) Farzana Versey

Also published in Countercurrents

Gujarat at the UN, Shiv Sena at Unity

Is it right for an issue that has to do with Indian court cases to be taken to an international organisation? In principle I do not agree. But, the fact is we cannot put strictures on stapled visas to China and who is talking to whom in the North East and Kashmir.

Of course, these are issues of insurgency movements. Gujarat is not. This is the reason why the Supreme Court pulled up activist Teesta Setalvad for reporting to the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Council about 10 serious Gujarat riot case proceedings monitored by the highest court. I’d like to counter-question some of the posers by Justices D K Jain, P Sathasivam and Aftab Alam:

“It shows you (Teesta) do not have confidence in us. We are monitoring the cases and are here to hear your grievances. Yet, you write to the UN body. Can the international body provide protection to witnesses?”

Does this mean that the witnesses need to be protected? Has the court provided for such protection?

“Can they guide us how to proceed with the cases?”

No. But there is a charter of human rights that have to be followed. It is not to guide the courts; it is to take up the issue of victims.

“You are reporting the day-today proceedings in the Supreme Court and trial courts to that organization as also what the joint commissioner of police does. Is the international body a disciplinary authority for the police?”

No. It can only prepare a report based on the police’s acts of omission and commission.

However, Setalvad ought not to report every detail. There is also the issue of an international organisation getting involved for its own agenda. It is also prudent to ask whether the victims gave the go-ahead. Such cases are delicate in nature and they and their families have to live in the state and deal with people and the authorities on a daily basis.

In the interest of transparency she should also make the communication with the international organisaiton public. One assumes she has shared it with the court by now.

As I had said earlier: This is about Gujarat, not Teesta.

- - -

On Sunday, the 23rd, Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray will celebrate his 84th birthday. The party has decided to mark this occasion as ‘Hindu Ekata’ (unity) day.

This has nothing to do with Hindus or unity, but wih the BMC elections and, as reports say, to embarrass the Congress for bringing up the issue of Hindu terrorism.

The Shiv Sena has the gall to now claim that the saffron coour of its flag is about a blend of various communities and castes as it was during the Bhakti movement.

Perhaps this doha (couplet) by Kabir, the bhakti poet and sage, might be a good birthday gift for Balasaheb:


Bura Jo Dekhan Main Chala, Bura Na Milya Koye
Jo Mann Khoja Apna, To Mujhse Bura Naa Koye

My rough translation:

I sought the wicked ones, but found none
And when I looked within myself, I found none more evil than me

Life of and for Comrade Binayak Sen

Dr. Binayak Sen has been awarded a life sentence. There is no evidence to nail him down. I will not go into the details of this case that will stand up for scrutiny only in a banana republic, not in a democracy.

The war against the state is a convenient ploy. Dr. Sen, an award winning doctor and national vice-president of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) was arrested in Bilaspur on May 14, 2007. He has been behind bars ever since. And it was not a fashionable ‘statement’ arrest.

His crime is that he passed letters to the Maoist ideologue, Narayan Sanyal. Together with a young businessman, Piyush Guha, they are seen as a triumvirate. The letters were apparently to “establish an urban network of the banned extremist group CPI (Maoist)”.

The charges are drawn from the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act, 2005, and the IPC for conspiracy for war against the state and treason, apart from being the accused as members of a banned organisation.

Let us go along for a minute with the charges. What war has been fought against the state due to the efforts of Dr. Sen? How many politicians are arrested for creating wars within their own states? What is treason here? To speak out, to believe that a people have the right to seek a space? The moot point is: have they got it? As regards being members of a banned organisation, may I know how it is possible when an organisation that is banned becomes irrelevant, a persona non grata, so to speak? Therefore, his being a part of it is a non sequiter.

Apparently, the prosecution has problems with him being addressed as ‘Comrade’ in two postcards. “Comrade usi ko kahaa jaata hai jo Maowadi hai,” (Only a Maoist is called comrade) said prosecutor Pandya who is probably a comrade-in-arms with the state machinery and a whole ideology based on idiocy. If you refer to someone as 'Bhai', does it mean the person is an underworld don? Communist leaders still use the term comrade. Even so, he has every right to be a Maoist, just as people can be Bajrang Dali or Jamaatis; at least he is not using obfuscation.

How do you imagine Dr. Binayak Sen is linked to international terror groups? The sessions court in Chhattisgarh said that his wife Ilina was corresponding with Pakistan’s ISI based on some letters written by her to “some Fernandes of the ISI”.

Here is the report from the TOI:

The email said: “There is a chimpanzee in the White House.” Pandya said: “This may be code language... this perhaps means terrorists are annoyed with the US... We do not know who this Fernandes is, but ISI, as we all know, means Pakistan.”

TOI spoke to Walter Fernandes, currently director of the North Eastern Social Research Institute in Guwahati. “Ilina and I are good friends and we frequently exchanged correspondence on development-induced displacement among tribals, which has been my subject for the last 20 years,” he said. He described the prosecution’s attempt to interpret ISI (Indian Social Institute) as Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence wing and link it to Binayak Sen as “either ignorance or bad will”.

I am currently writing about Indian Stupid Insecurity (ISI). The imagination of the prosecution aside, I have issues with the use of ‘perhaps’ in a case of this nature, that involves the life of a person and the life of civil liberties. The prosecution is supposed to verify its claims before charging a person. If it is a code word, then decode it; if it is terror groups, snoop around and check the IP address. We don’t live in the stone age that this is not possible.

There will be an appeal against this judgement. But, it is a sad state of affairs when after 1000 pages of the charge-sheet, the Indian courts come out the worse for the wear. There is nothing that reveals that Comrade Binayak Sen has betrayed the country. The judiciary has.

- - -

Updated here

Imran Khan’s drones

He has filed a petition under article 184(3) of the Pakistani constitution in the Supreme Court asking it to declare US drone attacks inside the country as illegal and unconstitutional.

It is an interesting case, for it pleads to the nation’s highest judicial authority to take action against another nation based on “a violation of the United Nations charter, the universal declaration on human rights, international laws and international humanitarian laws”.

Would these organisations not expect the ‘host’ country to disallow the presence of troops and, if they are there, then would they not be expected to provide an explanation?

The government and several top officials, including the Defence Secretary, the Secretary of the cabinet division, Interior Secretary, Foreign Secretary and Home Secretaries of all provinces, were made respondents in the case.

Since it is the fundamental right of citizens to life, property and dignity, the buck will be passed on to the insurgency movement within Pakistan. The US always has a ready alibi and is often in cahoots with at least one power centre inside. There is also the question about which citizens Imran Khan is talking about. There are thin lines that divide the citizens and it is difficult to fathom whose rights are being talked about.

There have been several occasions when the Pakistani authorities have suppressed their own population of various stripes; there is a legal system that can be played around with; there is tribal rule in certain parts where regular Pakistani jurisprudence has absolutely no control.

Imran Khan’s petition works only at a symbolic level. Even as that, it will in fact work counter-productively. After all, the respondents can plead helplessness for in some ways not only are the sensitive areas outside their scope, but the American operations too will be seen as forced ‘occupation’ and make those Pakistani politicians and armymen who are well in the know of things appear to be victims rather than active participants in the suppression of the insurgency.

Therefore, the buck will stop at the door of the insurgents and both the villainous parties – the US and the Pakistani authorities – shall get away. As always, it appears to be their fundamental right to do so.

The CIA Chicks?

Would you like to sell your story to help promote war? Do you believe that troops marching into terrain that has abused women would truly help them?

The CIA plans to use women to market the war.

“Afghan women could serve as ideal messengers in humanizing” the mission for Europe, according to the CIA analysis, posted on WikiLeaks, a whistleblower website. Afghan women could express “their aspirations for the future, and their fears of a Taliban victory”.

Isn’t there a difference between humanising and being humane? True, many of these women have suffered, but how will a war solve their problems, their social status, their gender roles, their subjugation? Who will help them realise their dreams once the war is over and there are many left dead, including their fathers, their husbands, their sons? What if they want a future that includes family?

The analysis, dated March 11, says “outreach initiatives that create media opportunities for Afghan women to share their stories with French, German, and other European women could help to overcome pervasive scepticism among women in Western Europe”.

This is too conniving. You get women under Taliban rule (from where will they get real women or will they be westernised spokespersons?) to talk to women in the west and convince them that a war is essential. This is blackmail that is planned by one set of patriarchy to subvert another. Both kinds of women are being used.

Even if the Taliban loses, we already know the cost of such wars – in economic as well as psychological terms. The woman in the west perhaps understands that besides those being sent off to fight a futile war, the immense tragedy is of bringing back a baggage of guilt.

Those plotting such efforts simply reveal another dimension of machismo. This isn’t much different than keeping women in an intellectual harem and expecting them to send off the men to slay the lions while they wait for them to return, bloodied and victorious.

Neither woman gains anything. The memorandum is subtitled, “Why Counting on Apathy Might Not Be Enough.” The PR exercise is itself apathy, using a tragedy as a soap opera.

Over 60 and Unsafe

What makes some men into monsters? I got goose bumps when I read about old women worried about being raped learning martial arts to defend themselves.

Close to Nairobi in the shanty town of Korogocho, women who are in their 70s and 80s practise karate, hit a punching bag and watch as a teacher demonstrates the vulnerable points in a young man’s body. Their frail frames have to know about this so that they don’t end up just trying to beat hard.

It is apparently a known fact that bandits operate in this area. “Every time the boys make a robbery, they will ask the grandmas to sleep with them,” says Mary Wangui, 73. “Young men believe that young girls are all infected with AIDS, so they’d rather go to the old ones.”

Two years ago, three drunken young men broke into Frida’s home in the middle of the night and raped her. "They knew I lived alone... they broke (down) the door and came in and covered my eyes with a blanket, then they raped me... and left me there just lying on the floor. I can't believe people young enough to be my grandchildren could do that to me. When I heard they are teaching women how to beat rapists here, I decided to come and learn. Now I know if somebody wants to rape me, I just poke their eyes and make a noise."

Philip Otieno, executive director of I'm Worth Defending (IWD) said that besides fear of AIDS, "Others do it for ritual reasons... (some) criminals believe that having sex with an old person before or after a robbery will bring good luck either for a successful mission next time or protection from the police."

Surely the cops would catch these guys? Are there no groups to teach them something? It is terrible that even when one woman told her assaulter that she had AIDS that did not stop him. What about security agencies in the area? The media outside will report it, and in some cases it will be seen as one of those backward things out of Africa, but will it change the rot within? Don’t these women have children and grandchildren?

What do those guys get? This is a poor shanty. What can they rob? And why sexually abuse a woman? The reports talk about their fear of disease. Why is there no mention about these women getting infected by those sick men?

Cruelty is part of the human psyche and is manifested in different forms, but when such survival groups have to be set up, it reveals the sheer careless attitude of society, the government and human rights organisations too. The latter are often too busy with fancy causes to bother about these things.

Poverty is no excuse. Poverty expects you to survive and feed yourself and get shelter. Those are the basics.

It is tragic that the stigma attached to rape is such that these women don’t always speak out. Imagine the sense of shame that is already ingrained and then to have to face the smirks as the listener wonders: Oh, grandma, you think you are still worth it?

No one will ask those guys why they cannot get a life and lead it with some level of decency.

RDX? Catch a Kashmiri...

A cricketer from Kashmir was arrested at the T20 Tournament in Bangalore. Why?

The drama started early in the morning when the private agency tasked with security at the stadium reported that a detector was beeping, indicating explosives within 300 metres. Alerted, the Karnataka anti-terrorism squad moved in at 6.30 am and narrowed their search to the rooms in the Karnataka State Cricket Association Club House on the eastern side of the stadium. The J&K under-22 team had checked in on Friday night for a match in the C K Nayudu tournament from October 21.

The cops were led by sniffer dogs to room 105, occupied by Pervez Rasool and Mehrajuddin. The detectors went off in the room and the cops zeroed in on Rasool’s kit bag, which they suspected had traces of explosives. Immediately Rasool was taken in for questioning. Mehrajuddin was asked to accompany him.

Some questions:

• Do the security agencies run a check of the grounds everyday? These matches are to begin on the 21st.
• What else was within the 300 metre radius?
• What does ‘suspected the kit of containing traces of RDX’ mean?
• Later, it is reported, the stadium was sanitised. Why was the stadium sanitised if the RDX traces were only in the kit?

This was deemed a terror scare, and these things are not unlikely anywhere. But here is what happened later:

M R Pujar, additional commissioner in charge of law & order and security in Bangalore, said: “A young man was taken for questioning by police but he has subsequently been released without charge. Police and security experts have checked the stadium twice, as well as the suspicious bag, but nothing of concern has been found.’’

So, is one to assume that traces of RDX are not of any concern anymore? Why was the player released? What is the idea behind sending the kit to the forensic lab if you have let him off and the cops say there is no evidence? Isn’t there a possibility that someone will tamper with that kit now that they have been proved wrong and all their terror dreams have come to naught?

What? It is rare to see a J&K team, and it is important that they are playing.

We have had instances of match fixing and other dubious deals in the past even as betting for high stakes continues. That seems to have become legitimate. You need some terror threat at any given time to make things interesting. And what better than a Kashmiri.

News meeows - 20

Are the attacks in various cities of Pakistan a holocaust?

Pakistan Human Rights Commission chairperson Asma Jehangir said the government failed to get its act together despite an intelligence report about an impending terror strike. “People of Pakistan are going through a holocaust. They are suffering high levels of trauma and stress due to sheer helplessness. Deep down they know they are in for a long haul,” Jehangir said.

What are these intelligence reports? Our subcontinent is known for intelligence reports that are either vague or come out in the open after such attacks. Media reports are careless, to say the least:

The Frankenstein’s monster unleashed by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence struck back at its creator as suspected Taliban terrorists detonated a car bomb near the ISI office in Lahore, and gunmen opened fire at the guards.

No group has claimed responsibility for the attack, but the authorities said it was in retaliation to the anti-Taliban offensive in the country’s northwest. “This is a reprisal from the Taliban after their defeat in Swat,’’ interior minister Rehman Malik said. “Baitullah Mehsud (Pakistani Taliban chief) had threatened to attack major cities after the Swat operation.’’ He said the militants were on the run and had no option but to lay down arms.

Does Mr. Malik not realise that if militants are on the run and so scared of the government, how could they target a part of its own organisation? The Taliban is the creation of the ISI? If this is a certainty, then the government can disband it, right? And nothing will happen? I do not understand how the current regime is managing to get away with so much credit for its “anti-Taliban offensive” when it has destabilised the country.

Voluntary agencies have a propensity for playing along when the powers involved are so-called democratic forces.

Now, we are told that media reports think it was probably an attempt to free Lashkar-e-Taiba chief Hafiz Mohammad Sayeed, who is under house arrest after the 26/11 carnage in Mumbai and was to be produced before a local court not far from the attack site.

Do you see how completely confusing these messages are? The Taliban was not involved in the Mumbai attacks. These are just tactics to deflect from the main issue – the Pakistan government had created this monster and is answerable to its masters elsewhere.

- - -

The Slumdog Millionaire actors are getting on my nerves. Every other day there is some story. One thing is for sure. The film will remain in the public eye for longer than it deserves to be. No one ever bothered about what happened to the kids who acted in Salaam Bombay. The producers had also started a trust but its main actor got nothing and is now, I believe, an autorickshaw driver.

Mohammed Azharuddin and Rubina Qureshi have been endorsing products, are being feted by political leaders, the state government has given them some property, and a voluntary organisation is giving them Rs. 6,500 for monthly expenses. And what happened to that Qatar businessman who came to sponsor Rubina’s education?

What is going on? If at all, the film’s producers should have paid the kids a proper amount and been done with it. Why the tamasha of a trust, homes? What happened to the tale about Rubina’s father willing to ‘sell off’ his daughter? I think that was a plant to get sympathy and maybe prop up the film. You think Danny Boyle has returned to Mumbai to save these kids? From what?

And then our government and people will feel all so sad. Damn. Has anyone realised that when the Garib Nagar slums were bulldozed there were other families there too? Did anyone read the report of the Sanjay Gandhi Nagar slumdwellers who were given housing and sold those flats? That was a huge racket and it is fairly common. What is actor Gerard Butler doing visiting them? If Hollywood is so concerned, someone can just take them there. They are the business of their employers, not of the Government of India or the state or NGOs.

If the establishment wants to help them then they will have to help all slumdwellers. The GOI has not produced the film. The GOI has not benefitted from it. The GOI is not in the business of selective choices. There are no reservations yet for those who star in international films. The GOI has responsibilities towards all citizens.

- - -

The Dalai Lama has offered $100,000 and his help fundraising to prevent the planned closure of an imperilled religion department at a Florida university after receiving an emailed plea for a letter of support from a longtime acquaintance on the faculty.

Great. One more international personality that makes the headlines always. The Dalai Lama is the spiritual head of a community based in a specific location. His people have been fighting for the right to a homeland. They are refugees in India. He has got his own shop set up in Dharamsala and until recently pretty much decided how much bhai-bhai we could do with China.
He is pretty cut off from many of his own as this piece I wrote shows.

Why is he trying to save a department of religion? What is so great about it? Obviously, no one cares enough for it. So what are they trying to prevent from folding up? What is the source of the Dalai Lama’s funds? Is it his job to help in fund-raising drives when Tibetans have to go on strike and suffer huge losses whenever they need to protest against something or the other by the Chinese authorities?

Where are all those Hollywood followers who embraced Buddhism? They are closer to Florida or is the clinch only for convenience when they can show off their robes and their beatific expressions and make those mandatory gestures to claim His Holiness as their superstar?

Jade Goody and the big questions

Ok! Magazine has carried a tribute issue to Jade Goody. Terms like "In Loving Memory" and "Jade Goody 1981-2009" appear on its cover. Jade Goody is not yet dead, but she has sold the rights of her death being made into a reality show to make some money to ensure the future of her children. Her family has not objected to this story.

The debates have been swaying from one end to the other.

It is a difficult to have a problem with her choice because although this sort of precedent isn’t there, it is quite common for even the richest in Hollywood to sell rights to their wedding photographs or the first pictures of their babies. They make loads of money and flaunt their charitable intentions. With the kind of money they already possess, they can feed some village in Africa or adopt some babies. But, no, this gives an excuse to use their own lives.

Jade Goody is only following these august footsteps.

However, in doing so, the emphasis is on what the magazine calls "a celebration of Jade's amazing life". Resorting to hyperbole is a part of the ethos of such journalism, but has the media been highlighting the problems about cervical cancer? Has anyone started a campaign to educate young women about getting themselves screened for it? Has Jade Goody herself made statements to that effect?

The amazing story is that a woman got catapulted to national fame in Britain because of her racist remarks. She was the punk spunk. I am sorry if this sounds insensitive, but she is merely carrying on that legacy.

She is going to die a natural death, as in it is probably inevitable. Isn’t it important for the media to highlight cases where young people are fighting for the right to die? They don’t want the cameras; they merely want the opportunity to control their lives in the face of devastating suffering.

The ethics of euthanasia are important to discuss; in some ways Jade’s life in the open waiting for death amounts to mercy killing. Maybe, if she was in a cocooned environment she could live longer or die more peacefully whenever that is to happen.

Isn’t this a concern of the medical fraternity? Of human rights organisations? Even the media, which is playing along…but is that its job?

One only hopes for peace for the lady and one hopes she feels at peace every moment of the day and night when she is being scrutinised beneath a microscope. Wish she had chosen a more human way to go…

- - -

The picture is from another cover of Ok! magazine when she got married after her treatment and selling the rights to that as well.

The stiff upper lip gets the Indian government's ear

Do we have a spine at all? Do the citizens of our country have a say and reach the highest authorities, unless they are somebody…and that too after a lot of file pushing?

I am seething with anger. If you or I were to send a letter to the Prime Minister, some bureaucrat would file it. End of the story. Geoff Chapman, a Briton, dashed off a note to Dr. Manmohan Singh about the beggar racket, which has been getting a lot of mileage in the press overseas after the success of Slumdog Millionaire. He read an article, was disturbed and decided to demand an answer from our authorities.

What do you think happens? This:

The Prime Minister’s Office promptly forwarded the letter to the central Women and Child Welfare Ministry, who, in turn, sent it to the Maharashtra government for further action. The state government has now initiated a probe into the allegations made in the article and will be sending a detailed report to the PMO.

Maharashtra government’s secretary V S Singh confirmed receiving the complaint from the Centre. “We will forward it to the Home department and the State Commission for Protection of Child Rights for investigation,” he stated.

Mr. Chapman is not aligned to any human rights organisation; he is doing this in his individual capacity. He has never been to India. He watches a film, reads stuff about the reality behind what the reports have referred to as “the cinema fantasy”. And our government institutes a probe.

The Raj still seems to be alive and kicking.

The sensitivity displayed by people is always laudable. But would this gentleman dare to write to the President of the United States of America demanding probes into racism? In his own country teenage pregnancies are on the rise with little boys who should be comparing sizes of willies like good ole kids becoming fathers and getting into ‘I am the daddy of this babe’s baby’ competition. Has he written to his PM, Gordon Brown?

The problem with such cinema becoming too mainstream is precisely that it gives rise to an offshoot industry of patronising people who think they have the right to mess around in other countries’ affairs, all in the name of human compassion and social concern.

In July 2006, CNN-IBN had done an expose of the beggar mafia. I had written about it here.

Did any government official do a thing about that TV report?

You might say as long as some action is taken that ought to be good enough. No. I think it is demeaning that we citizens are made to feel useless; even with all the evidence provided nothing is done. A Chapman sitting in some town in Somerset has his letter noticed only because it has a UK stamp. Is he doing anything about it besides sending the copies to the media that publishes it?

I don’t want him to interfere. Simple. If the government is keen on doing something – and it better be – it should look at several reports that have been painstakingly compiled by organisations working right here that talk about such abuse.

As for Mr. Chapman’s letter, it should be redirected to 10 Downing Street. No foreigner, that too an ordinary citizen of another country, can demand an explanation from us – ordinary citizens or the powers-that-be – and get away with it. There should be a strong note to their PMO telling them to keep their citizens in check.

If the GOI wants to be a slave of some White guy, then it should first ask us. We are paying for the upkeep of the ministries with our taxes. The Indian government is answerable to us, and that includes those beggars who are being maimed and have the constitutional right to a life of dignity. One would think that no one from political parties has ever seen a blind or lame mendicant ever.

- - -

It is time to put the Slumdog Millionaire titbits to sleep. Am getting sick of the sidelights. Mohammed Azharuddin's father slaps him for not giving interviews and it becomes news. Both beta and baap give their versions. What the hell is going on?

Strangely, the media covers it, the same media that was the cause of the slapping episode in the first place. And they have the bloody cheek to say it is inhuman or some such thing. Only because the fellow has walked the red carpet does not mean parents do not beat up their children. Forget the slums, it is pretty common even among the middle class and the rich. So, go do a reality check before you go park your ass and OB van in the Garib Nagar slums.

Burney 'pissing and pissing' peace

Pakistani human rights activist Ansar Burney has received the 3rd annual Mother Teresa Memorial (International) Awards for Social Justice. Despite other numerous accolades, he thinks this one is special: “Yeh dil se dilko jodne wala award hai (this is an award to join hearts).’’

Why? Whose hearts are being joined together in this? He got Kashmir Singh out of prison. And we all know that Kashmir Singh admitted upon his return that he was an Indian spy.

Burney said, “They issued fatwa from the mosques against me. My family members were scared to go out for quite some time as they felt threatened. But I remained committed to the cause. If to save one innocent life, I have to die 10 times, I will not flinch.”

Fatwas are a joke. He has been making trips to India, which means he gets his visa. And just for the record, people are not cats; they die just once. Dramebaaz.

And I repeat for the nth time:

As for all the hosannas being sung for Mr Ansar Burney, what has he done for those missing POWs? I know I have been ranting about it for years and do take a look at ‘54 Indian POWs versus Sarabjit Singh’.

I had written a letter to Mr Burney on January 8, 2002. There was no response. I provided links, offered all help. Zilch.

Meanwhile, it is amusing to see him follow our celebrities’ path. They all go the Ajmer Sharif dargah and the Siddhivinayak Temple to get blessings and provide a photo-op. Here he is with his son Fahan at the temple. The main caption called it ‘DIVINE HELP’.

Now I can imagine if some maulana rants about it and issues a fatwa. Burney saab will say, look, this is what happens for dil se dil jodna. I’d like to remind him that actress Meera too had this fatwa thing issued because she kissed an Indian non-actor in one of those forgettable films. She too talked about being a peace ambassador. He should have at least gone to some mohalla type place and sung, “Jumma chumma de de…” It would be paisa and peace vasool…

Dis n dat

Pregnant pause

Haresh and Niketa Mehta have gone to court challenging the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, which bars abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy. They have to await the verdict, though Niketa is now 24 weeks pregnant. She had been told by doctors that the foetus in her womb has a congenital complete heart block. The unborn child would require a pacemaker immediately after birth, and subsequently another four to five pacemaker replacement surgeries during its life-span. They also warn of intra-uterine death of the foetus.

I am assuming the reason for this Act is both medical and ethical. The mother’s life could be in danger and ethically you are killing a baby. In this instance, since the courts have got the hospital records and the parents have made the decision, they ought to be given the right to abort. Almost every village and small town and even big city has centres where illegal abortions take place; female foetuses are routinely killed and so are female babies. Where are the laws and the courts then?

Niketa and her husband are taking a risk. They will sign a form that says so. No one has the right to meddle here.

Amar Raho!

Amar Singh’s first demand from the Centre when the PM took the first step towards wooing the SP was a better security blanket. Within days of it being raised at the UPA anniversary dinner, he got Z- plus category security. The Congress just cannot thank the Samajwadi Party enough for ridding it of the Left and rescuing it from the nuclear standoff.

Does he need it? That was never the question. It was a power war with chief minister Mayawati. We all know that there is nothing like a free lunch, more so in politics. Now let us see what more demands Amar Singh makes and how much the Congress is willing to play along.

We have effectively sold out to the US in the nuclear deal and now political parties will demand their pound of flesh. Amar Singh has already started talking about what portfolio he would like. Incidentally, I still do not know what he has done in political terms in Uttar Pradesh.

All one has seen of him is accompanying the Bachchans, renaming his bungalow ‘Aishwariya’, trying to get sops for Anil Ambani or getting into brawls with some film stars, when not cozying up to others.

Rahul Mahajan’s Maha news?

“Rahul to be single again”.

This was the headline in the main section of The Times of India. This is of course Rahul Mahajan, who still has cases against him in the courts. His marriage with Shweta has ended in a divorce. This should be in the glossy segment, not the main paper. Unless it is to tell us that the criminal charges against him were back in the court.

How does his being single again matter to anyone except himself and his clique of socialites? Who is he? What has he done in terms of social/political contribution?

Here is what I had written then.

End note:

Since there is so much talk about bomb defusion, here is this bit of news:

A member of the bomb detection and disposal squad (BDDS) is insured for Rs 1.25 lakh in the eventuality of death. The corresponding amount for his counterpart in the anti-terrorism squad is Rs 10 lakh. In addition, the ATS staffer gets a house rent allowance. There are only 43 BDDS personnel in all of Mumbai. They have to carry equipment like X-ray scanners, hook-and-line sets, bomb blankets and bomb suits (weighing around 36 kg).

My question is this: Are bombers different from terrorists? If not, then why are there two categories and hierarchies for those dealing with them?

Revisiting the callousness towards the Bombay riots

35 ’93 ‘rioters’ walk free (News report)

On the night of January 11, 1993, a mob of around 100 men ran riot in Lower Parel, pelting stones at buildings, looting and burning shops in the vicinity. The police had arrested 49 men, for offences ranging from rioting, housebreaking to theft, but since some of them absconded or died, the trial took place against 35 men (All of them hindus). Although the police assessed a total loss of approximately Rs 85 lakh, only about Rs 10,000 were recovered from the men. Even the investigating officer of the case died during the trial.

Defence lawyer J K Tandulekar said that the prosecution’s case failed miserably when all 13 witnesses failed to identify the accused, and no evidence was gathered to prove the accused had committed the offences. “After 15 years, no witness could recognise three dozen men from a frenzied mob which went on a rampage that night. Sadly, the huge monetary damages suffered during the incident will be foregone and unaccounted for, as the real culprits haven’t been nailed,” Tandulekar added. The prosecution had also alleged that a part of the mob pelted stones specifically on homes of-Muslim families. However, no witness could substantiate these claims nor could any or evidence be put before the court. With the recent acquittal, the number of those acquitted in the 1992-93 riots cases has gone up to 79 from 81 who have been tried (only two have been convicted). Of the 18 policemen examined, 11 turned hostile.

If any of you were around in those days, your blood would be boiling once again. Why is the onus always on the victims? I had seen those shops, houses burning. However, unlike the judge I think we ought to think beyond the money. In 15 years those people would have either managed to put their lives back together again or been out in the streets. Please do look carefully at the portions marked in bold.

How the hell are people to identify those from a mob? And if they had pointed out randomly to some, what would have happened? They would have to provide evidence? Of what? Did they take goddamn photographs while their shops and homes were looted? What does the judge want?

What does this mean: “The prosecution had also alleged that a part of the mob pelted stones specifically on homes of-Muslim families. However, no witness could substantiate these claims nor could any or evidence be put before the court”?

Isn’t this stupid? If those accused were rounded up, then did not the legal system already know who they were? Do they expect the victims to check just the way they were in those days in the good old “Drop your pants and show is who you are” manner?

Please let us know what evidence is required. Why is it so easy to start talking about Islamic terrorists and jihadis but difficult to point fingers at others? They were arrested, they were a mob, and they did commit a crime. What more do you want? Do you think they saved the money in little piggy banks at home after selling the loot to leave as traces of evidence?

Why don’t we just say: No justice is required in this case and be done with it? Well, you be done with it. Because I am going to keep at it.

- - -

In the course of researching an old article of mine, I found this gem by someone, which essentially gets connected with what has been stated above:

Frankly this is what I think. FV doesn’t believe in the middle or moderate majority and the sooner it disappears the happier she is to be `vindicated`. It has been a constant implicit or explicit theme in all her writings on Hindu-Muslim affairs (according to me) that there are no Hindus who are not genocidal and no Hindus who are not hard core Hindutva-vadis pretending to be something else. This could be the general Indian Muslim belief or not, I have no way of knowing. Pakistanis are certainly 100% behind her on this as it is their national ideology.

Now if Hindus in turn believe that there are no moderate Muslims, that they are all genocidal, that of course is also welcome to FV since then she gets to be a victim twice over. It is an ideology one wields, leaving all responsibility for the complexities of real world to everyone else. It is labelled patriotism by some.

Great!

I have often said and will continue to say it: The moderate majority speaking on behalf of the minority is doing a disservice because it only shows up their ‘concern and magnanimity’. Yes, I believe it is patronising. So? Does it mean I do not believe they exist? It is because they exist I am asking them to lay off. It isn’t a question of vindication but letting us speak for ourselves. Am really tired of these “there are no Muslim leaders” whining from the other side…as though there are any good Hindu leaders.

It is convenient for people to accuse me of branding all Hindus when I very specifically use the terms Hindutvawadis, saffron brigade, Hindu fundamentalist. The fact that someone has to state that Pakistanis are behind me is very revealing. It just shows that without my having to believe in it, the Hindutva ideology has seeped into mainstream thought and any Indian Muslim who says something that is ‘Muslim’ in nature is immediately branded along with Pakistan. So, the problem lies with them, not with me.

Of course the last bit had me smiling. FV as victim twice over? FV takes full responsibility for what she believes in but not for what others expect or think she believes in. So, if someone says I think all Hindus are genocidal, that I should be nice to Taslima, then please go fly a kite. The complexities of the real world are as much mine…it is the fantasies of these cyber warriors who have not been to the places I have that makes them talk about the real world. Some of us just live in the real world. We write short stories and poems and musings when we want to fantasise and we call it fantasy or the labels mentioned.

As for patriotism. I really do not need anyone or their cyber chelas to tell me whether they think I am a patriot or not. I don’t need a certificate from anyone, Indian or NRI for that. Branding me with a victim complex is a ploy because many people cannot deal with someone who dishes it out to them in their language and refuses to be cowed down. Only a fool (or a wily mind) would call such a person a victim. There are indeed many so-called secular and liberal Muslims who have these hand-holding sessions with citizens groups and talk about how we are all one…and they feel good because of the concerned Hindus.

I am glad that I am not one with many Muslims either. And the Hindus who know me don’t need to support me. They know what I mean and I know what they mean and we both have our nice little fireside chats and have a good laugh at those who stand and stare.

We have travelled miles…and slept a peaceful sleep…