[Reader-list] the latest stupidity of arundhati roy - comparing her utterances on kashmir with those of nehru

Aditya Raj Kaul kauladityaraj at gmail.com
Mon Nov 29 00:43:43 IST 2010

Take a walk Inder Salim. Living in a fool's paradise has become a hobby for
few writers on sarai.

Arundhati Roy is a limousine liberal who has a problem for every solution!

Travels first-class & pretends to care for the poor!

Illegally occupies tribal land and talks about rights of Maoists and
Communal Separatists!

Wake up to these anti-India rants! Or you will get entangled in your own web
of worms.

We know who has shown 'stupidity' at a time of sagging career in writing.

You might use abuse against Court Order here on Sarai. But, have some balls
to come in front of the court and do the same! Yep, consider that a dare!
Call Geelani or Roy for help!

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Inder Salim <indersalim at gmail.com> wrote:

> Alok, before you go into the so called stupidity of Roy, have you ever
> thought about the stupidity of GOI;s Home Minister who is/was begging
> for an appointment with SAS Geelani,  so how to laugh on this sedition
> charge.
> Well, about Nehru's treatment of Kashmir... is genesis of all the mess
> which he created, and how to convince the people of India that he
> arrested Sheikh Mohd Abdullah for 11 long years without any charges ,
> and then his daughter ( inheritor of power ) enters into an accord
> with sheikh, He was obviously made to take the chair of CM before he
> fought elections even.
> the list is long, and best of wishes for this Delhi courts stupid
> order which will be finally dismissed in the Supreme Court
> best
> is
> On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Aalok Aima <aalok.aima at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > ARUNDHATI ROY : "My reaction to today's court order directing the Delhi
> Police to file an FIR against me for waging war against the state"
> >
> > has the court asked the police to file an FIR against arundhati roy for
> 'waging war against the state' or is arundhati trifling with facts?
> >
> > the directive of "Metropolitan Magistrate Navita Kumari Bagha" asks delhi
> police to "lodge an FIR under relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code"
> against some named persons (which includes arundhati roy) for their speeches
> made in the seminar on 21/10/2010  ........ it does not say anything about
> 'waging war against the state'
> >
> > it is another thing that arundhati roy's utterance could be interpreted
> as 'waging war against the state'
> >
> > as she did in an earlier statement, arundhati seems to find unacceptable
> that someone should seek prosecution against her or that a court of law
> should be approached with the complaint that delhi police have not taken
> cognisance of the 'anti-india speeches' by arundhati (amongst others)
> >
> > so arundhati roy issues yet one more statement (quoted below from 'the
> hindu')
> >
> > she seeks to compare her statements on kashmir with those of nehru on
> kashmir and suggests that delhi police "should posthumously file a charge
> against Jawaharlal Nehru too"
> >
> > (her statement, giving quotes of nehru on kashmir, is a regurgitation of
> what has since long been put forward as arguments by the secessionist and
> secession supporting propaganda machines ...... geelani also used the
> quotes just a few days back)
> >
> > this is where arundhati roy reveals her stupidity and how little she
> knows about kashmir
> >
> > in comparing her utterances with those of nehru, arundhati roy gives us a
> list of 13 quotes attributed to nehru (and 1 of krishna menon)
> >
> > what arundhati roy overlooks, in her stupidity, is that the position of
> goi (and of nehru as pm) treating the accession of j&k to india as
> confirmedly final (in what goi considers as fulfilling it's part of the un
> resolution on kashmir) is on the basis of the ratification of j&k's
> accession to india by the constituent assembly of j&k on 15/02/1954
> >
> > the nehru statements nos 1 to 12, that she quotes, pre-date that
> ratification date of 15/02/1954 and are from a period when the status of j&k
> with respect to india was subjected to a lot of questioning (including the
> un resolution) and nehru acknowledged that as is reflected in his statements
> >
> > after the 15/02/1954 ratification by the j&k constituent assembly, goi
> treated the accession of j&K to india as being unquestionable and nehru did
> not make any statement that carried the vein of the statements 1 to 12
> quoted by arundhati
> >
> > arundhati roy is being stupid in comparing her own statements on kashmir
> with those of nehru prior to 15/02/1954 and on that basis self-righteously
> suggesting that if she is to be prosecuted then nehru (posthumously) should
> also be prosected
> >
> > ........... aalok aima
> >
> >
> > http://www.hindu.com/2010/11/28/stories/2010112862661200.htm
> >
> > They can file a charge posthumously against Jawaharlal Nehru too:
> Arundhati Roy
> >
> > Arundhati Roy
> >
> > My reaction to today's court order directing the Delhi Police to file an
> FIR against me for waging war against the state: Perhaps they should
> posthumously file a charge against Jawaharlal Nehru too. Here is what he
> said about Kashmir:
> >
> > 1. In his telegram to the Prime Minister of Pakistan, the Indian Prime
> Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru said, “I should like to make it clear that
> the question of aiding Kashmir in this emergency is not designed in any way
> to influence the state to accede to India. Our view which we have repeatedly
> made public is that the question of accession in any disputed territory or
> state must be decided in accordance with wishes of people and we adhere to
> this view.” (Telegram 402 Primin-2227 dated 27th October, 1947 to PM of
> Pakistan repeating telegram addressed to PM of UK).
> >
> > 2. In other telegram to the PM of Pakistan, Pandit Nehru said, “Kashmir's
> accession to India was accepted by us at the request of the Maharaja's
> government and the most numerously representative popular organization in
> the state which is predominantly Muslim. Even then it was accepted on
> condition that as soon as law and order had been restored, the people of
> Kashmir would decide the question of accession. It is open to them to accede
> to either Dominion then.” (Telegram No. 255 dated 31 October, 1947).
> >
> > Accession issue
> >
> > 3. In his broadcast to the nation over All India Radio on 2nd November,
> 1947, Pandit Nehru said, “We are anxious not to finalise anything in a
> moment of crisis and without the fullest opportunity to be given to the
> people of Kashmir to have their say. It is for them ultimately to decide
> ------ And let me make it clear that it has been our policy that where there
> is a dispute about the accession of a state to either Dominion, the
> accession must be made by the people of that state. It is in accordance with
> this policy that we have added a proviso to the Instrument of Accession of
> Kashmir.”
> >
> > 4. In another broadcast to the nation on 3rd November, 1947, Pandit Nehru
> said, “We have declared that the fate of Kashmir is ultimately to be decided
> by the people. That pledge we have given not only to the people of Kashmir
> and to the world. We will not and cannot back out of it.”
> >
> > 5. In his letter No. 368 Primin dated 21 November, 1947 addressed to the
> PM of Pakistan, Pandit Nehru said, “I have repeatedly stated that as soon as
> peace and order have been established, Kashmir should decide of accession by
> Plebiscite or referendum under international auspices such as those of
> United Nations.”
> >
> > U.N. supervision
> >
> > 6.In his statement in the Indian Constituent Assembly on 25th November,
> 1947, Pandit Nehru said, “In order to establish our bona fide, we have
> suggested that when the people are given the chance to decide their future,
> this should be done under the supervision of an impartial tribunal such as
> the United Nations Organisation. The issue in Kashmir is whether violence
> and naked force should decide the future or the will of the people.”
> >
> > 7.In his statement in the Indian Constituent Assembly on 5th March, 1948,
> Pandit Nehru said, “Even at the moment of accession, we went out of our way
> to make a unilateral declaration that we would abide by the will of the
> people of Kashmir as declared in a plebiscite or referendum. We insisted
> further that the Government of Kashmir must immediately become a popular
> government. We have adhered to that position throughout and we are prepared
> to have a Plebiscite with every protection of fair voting and to abide by
> the decision of the people of Kashmir.”
> >
> > Referendum or plebiscite
> >
> > 8.In his press-conference in London on 16th January, 1951, as reported by
> the daily ‘Statesman' on 18th January, 1951, Pandit Nehru stated, “India has
> repeatedly offered to work with the United Nations reasonable safeguards to
> enable the people of Kashmir to express their will and is always ready to do
> so. We have always right from the beginning accepted the idea of the Kashmir
> people deciding their fate by referendum or plebiscite. In fact, this was
> our proposal long before the United Nations came into the picture.
> Ultimately the final decision of the settlement, which must come, has first
> of all to be made basically by the people of Kashmir and secondly, as
> between Pakistan and India directly. Of course it must be remembered that we
> (India and Pakistan) have reached a great deal of agreement already. What I
> mean is that many basic features have been thrashed out. We all agreed that
> it is the people of Kashmir who must decide for themselves about
> >  their future externally or internally. It is an obvious fact that even
> without our agreement no country is going to hold on to Kashmir against the
> will of the Kashmiris.”
> >
> > 9.In his report to All Indian Congress Committee on 6th July, 1951 as
> published in the Statesman, New Delhi on 9th July, 1951, Pandit Nehru said,
> “Kashmir has been wrongly looked upon as a prize for India or Pakistan.
> People seem to forget that Kashmir is not a commodity for sale or to be
> bartered. It has an individual existence and its people must be the final
> arbiters of their future. It is here today that a struggle is bearing fruit,
> not in the battlefield but in the minds of men.”
> >
> > 10.In a letter dated 11th September, 1951, to the U.N. representative,
> Pandit Nehru wrote, “The Government of India not only reaffirms its
> acceptance of the principle that the question of the continuing accession of
> the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India shall be decided through the
> democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite under the auspices of
> the United Nations but is anxious that the conditions necessary for such a
> plebiscite should be created as quickly as possible.”
> >
> > Word of honour
> >
> > 11.As reported by Amrita Bazar Patrika, Calcutta, on 2nd January, 1952,
> while replying to Dr. Mookerji's question in the Indian Legislature as to
> what the Congress Government going to do about one third of territory still
> held by Pakistan, Pandit Nehru said, “is not the property of either India or
> Pakistan. It belongs to the Kashmiri people. When Kashmir acceded to India,
> we made it clear to the leaders of the Kashmiri people that we would
> ultimately abide by the verdict of their Plebiscite. If they tell us to walk
> out, I would have no hesitation in quitting. We have taken the issue to
> United Nations and given our word of honour for a peaceful solution. As a
> great nation we cannot go back on it. We have left the question for final
> solution to the people of Kashmir and we are determined to abide by their
> decision.”
> >
> > 12.In his statement in the Indian Parliament on 7th August, 1952, Pandit
> Nehru said, “Let me say clearly that we accept the basic proposition that
> the future of Kashmir is going to be decided finally by the goodwill and
> pleasure of her people. The goodwill and pleasure of this Parliament is of
> no importance in this matter, not because this Parliament does not have the
> strength to decide the question of Kashmir but because any kind of
> imposition would be against the principles that this Parliament holds.
> Kashmir is very close to our minds and hearts and if by some decree or
> adverse fortune, ceases to be a part of India, it will be a wrench and a
> pain and torment for us. If, however, the people of Kashmir do not wish to
> remain with us, let them go by all means. We will not keep them against
> their will, however painful it may be to us. I want to stress that it is
> only the people of Kashmir who can decide the future of Kashmir. It is not
> that we have
> >  merely said that to the United Nations and to the people of Kashmir, it
> is our conviction and one that is borne out by the policy that we have
> pursued, not only in Kashmir but everywhere. Though these five years have
> meant a lot of trouble and expense and in spite of all we have done, we
> would willingly leave if it was made clear to us that the people of Kashmir
> wanted us to go. However sad we may feel about leaving we are not going to
> stay against the wishes of the people. We are not going to impose ourselves
> on them on the point of the bayonet.”
> >
> > Kashmir's soul
> >
> > 13.In his statement in the Lok Sabha on 31st March, 1955 as published in
> Hindustan Times New Delhi on Ist April, 1955, Pandit Nehru said, “Kashmir is
> perhaps the most difficult of all these problems between India and Pakistan.
> We should also remember that Kashmir is not a thing to be bandied between
> India and Pakistan but it has a soul of its own and an individuality of its
> own. Nothing can be done without the goodwill and consent of the people of
> Kashmir.”
> >
> > 14.In his statement in the Security Council while taking part in debate
> on Kashmir in the 765th meeting of the Security Council on 24th January,
> 1957, the Indian representative Mr. Krishna Menon said, “So far as we are
> concerned, there is not one word in the statements that I have made in this
> council which can be interpreted to mean that we will not honour
> international obligations. I want to say for the purpose of the record that
> there is nothing that has been said on behalf of the Government of India
> which in the slightest degree indicates that the Government of India or the
> Union of India will dishonour any international obligations it has
> undertaken.”
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________
> > reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> > Critiques & Collaborations
> > To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> > To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> --
> http://indersalim.livejournal.com
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>

Aditya Raj Kaul

India Editor
The Indian, Australia <http://www.theindian.net.au/>

Blog: http://activistsdiary.blogspot.com/

More information about the reader-list mailing list