[Reader-list] Azadi: The Only Way ­ Report from a Turbulent Few Hours in Delhi

[Lalit Ambardar]

This is height of ideological perfidy----oppose elected Ahmadinejad in Iran & eulogise the megalomanic proponent of “Azadi- bara- e- Islam” (freedom through Islam) in Kashmir.
 
 Compulsive anti-state ‘agent provocateurs’ are only prolonging the agony of Kashmiri masses by patronising those who want to usher Kashmir in to the medieval past. 
Rgds all 
LA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


 
> Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 17:59:44 +0530
> From: pawan.durani at gmail.com
> To: sonia.jabbar at gmail.com
> CC: reader-list at sarai.net
> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Azadi: The Only Way ­ Report from a Turbulent Few Hours in Delhi
> 
> Awaiting a 3000 + Lines explanation from Mr Sengupta
> 
> On 10/22/10, SJabbar <sonia.jabbar at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dear Shuddha,
> >
> > I've read with interest your report on the meeting at the LTG and am amazed
> > that you have aligned yourself with and have so wholeheartedly endorsed the
> > reactionary politics of SAS Geelani. Whatever he may have said for the
> > benefit of audiences in New Delhi he has always advocated Kashmir's
> > accession to Pakistan based on the 2-nation theory. He has made this
> > unambiguously clear in his book on the Kashmir issue: 'Nava-e-Hurriyat'. He
> > has reiterated this position as late as Sept 25 in an interview to Seema
> > Mustafa of News X where he clearly states the independence option is not
> > viable. He has never described the Kashmiri movement as a political struggle
> > but a jihad and had in 1992 even written to the Afghan Mujahideen to save
> > Kashmir from 'Hindu India.'
> >
> > And what of the votaries of independence and their assassination by the
> > Hizb, the armed wing of the Jamat e-Isami of which Geelani was a member
> > until his expulsion in 2003? What is SAS Geelani's position on that? If he
> > has ever condemned it I should be grateful if someone were to send me a
> > reference.
> >
> > That a man who has all his life scorned the notion of an independent Kashmir
> > should now detail the character and complexion of such a state including its
> > attitude to the sale and consumption of alcohol is truly funny, that he
> > should quote Gandhi, even funnier (he was one of the first to castigate
> > Yasin Malik's Gandhian methods of fasting as 'un-Islamic'.) That he should
> > call for the return of the Pandits without once condemning their killings or
> > the killings of Communists and National Conference workers in Kashmir is
> > like Advani speaking about the prosperity of Muslims in Gujarat.
> >
> > You say Syed Ali Shah says "explicitly" he is not against dialogue, but you
> > don't stop to question the placing of preconditions to a dialogue. Geelani
> > has scorned talks with Delhi for years. He has abused those who have talked
> > to N Delhi as traitors. The HM has assassinated those who dared to talk to
> > N Delhi, whether it was Moulvi Farooq, Qazi Nissar, and even its own senior
> > commanders like Abdul Majid Dar (they didn't even spare his wife Dr.
> > Shameema who was shot at and grievously injured several years after her
> > husband's murder.)
> >
> > Who places preconditions and then says let's have unconditional talks? What
> > would you say if New Delhi were to say, we will only speak to SASG if he
> > stops describing Kashmir as disputed territory or for that matter we will
> > not speak to Hurriyat (M) and JKLF until they give up their stand on
> > independent Kashmir? All of us would think New Delhi as being supremely
> > unreasonable to expect a negotiation to begin by insisting the other party
> > give up its core premise.
> >
> > And what is Geelani's FIRST precondition? That India accept that J&K is
> > disputed territory. For India to accept that (esp. On SASG's goading) would
> > mean, in diplomatese, to forgo its position on the Simla Agreement and all
> > other agreements reached with Pakistan post 1972 and return to 1948 and the
> > 'dispute' that was framed in the UN Resolutions, meaning, tossing the ball
> > back into the UN and set itself up to arbitration from the international
> > community. Why should it do that when both parties to the dispute agreed to
> > settle the issue bilaterally? SAS Geelani knows that well enough and is
> > content having tossed his 5 points into the arena and say, well I never said
> > I wouldn't talk.
> >
> > Best
> > sj
> >
> >
> > On 22/10/10 3:51 AM, "Shuddhabrata Sengupta" <shuddha at sarai.net> wrote:
> >
> >> (Apologies for Cross Posting on Kafila.org)
> >
> > Dear Friends,
> >
> > I was present and
> >> speaking a few hours ago at a meeting titled
> > ŒAzadi: The Only Way¹ on the
> >> situation in Jammu and Kashmir,
> > organized by the Committee for the Release
> >> of Political Prisoners at
> > the Little Theatre Group in Delhi yesterday (21st
> >> October). I was not
> > present from the beginning of the meeting as I was
> >> traveling from
> > another city, but can vouch for what occurred from around
> >> 4:30 pm
> > till the time that the meeting wound up, well after 8:00 pm in the
> >>
> > evening.
> >
> > The meeting took place in the packed to capacity auditorium of the
> >>
> > Little Theatre Group on Copernicus Marg at the heart of New Delhi.
> > Several
> >> speakers, including the poet Varavara Rao, Prof. Mihir
> > Bhattacharya, Sugata
> >> Bhadra, Gursharan Singh, G.N.Saibaba, Professor
> > Sheikh Showkat Hussain of
> >> Srinagar University, the journalist Najeeb
> > Mubaraki, a repesentative of the
> >> Naga Peoples Movement for Human
> > Rights and Justice, the writer Arundhati Roy
> >> and myself spoke at the
> > meeting. (I may be missing out some names, for which
> >> I apologize, but
> > I was not present for a part of the meeting, at the very
> >> beginning)
> > The climax of the meeting was a very substantive and significant
> >>
> > speech by Syed Ali Shah Geelani of the Hurriyat Conference (G), which
> > spelt
> >> out the vision of liberation (Azaadi) and Justice that Syed Ali
> > Shah Geelani
> >> held out before the assembled public, of which I will
> > write in detail later
> >> in this text.
> >
> > The artist known as ŒInder Salim¹ originally from Kashmir,
> >> currently
> > living in Delhi, made an intervention by inviting the assembled
> >>
> > people to take (with him) the stance of a masked stone pelter for a
> > brief,
> >> silent moment. Students from the Jawaharlal Nehru University
> > sang a song,
> >> ŒTu Zinda Hai to Zindagi Ki Jeet Mein Yakeen Kar¹
> > invoking the delights of
> >> life and liberation. In conclusion, the
> > meeting adopted a resolution, which
> >> was read, on behalf of the
> > Committee for the Release of Political Prisoners,
> >> by Mihir Bhattacharya.
> >
> > The atmosphere, for the several hours that I was
> >> present, was
> > absolutely electric. The vast majority of the audience was warm
> >> and
> > appreciative of all the speakers. They were patient and respectful ­
> >>
> > and despite grave provocation from a section that identified
> > themselves as
> >> ŒIndian patriots¹ and partisans of the ŒKashmir as
> > indivisible part of
> >> India¹ position - that repeatedly tried to
> > interrupt the meeting and heckle
> >> speakers, and on one occasion even
> > tried to throw an object at the dias ­
> >> did not stoop to be provoked
> > by these pathetic attempts at disruption of a
> >> peaceful gathering.
> >
> > No provocative, secterian or hateful slogans were raised
> >> by the
> > majority of the people present. The only provocative posturing that I
> >>
> > witnessed was undertaken by the self-declared Indian patriots, who
> > were not
> >> stopped from having their say, but were requested simply not
> > to disrupt the
> >> proceedings.
> >
> > When their behaviour crossed the limits of public decency, they
> >> were
> > escorted out of the premises by representatives of the Delhi Police.
> >>
> > The Delhi Police, to their credit, did not act against the majority
> > of the
> >> audience, simply because the majority of the audience
> > conducted themselves
> >> in a completely civil and democratic manner.
> >
> > There was no attempt made at
> >> intimidation of any kind. Professor SAR
> > Geelani, who was conducting the
> >> proceedings on behalf of the
> > organizers ­ Committee for the Release of
> >> Political Prisoners
> > (CRPP) , repeatedly asked the people obstructing the
> >> speakers to
> > conduct themselves in a cultured and dignified manner. His pleas
> >> were
> > disregarded by the section of the crowd that let its ŒIndian
> >>
> > patriotism¹ get the better of its civilisation. When things got a
> > little
> >> too hot on occasion, the majority of the audience present
> > simply drowned the
> >> rude remarks and indignant posturing of the small
> > minority of self styled
> >> Indian patriots and champions of the ŒKashmir
> > as indivisible part of India¹
> >> position ­ in wave after wave of
> > cheerful but firm hand clapping.
> >
> > While
> >> there as enthusiastic cheering and sloganeering from the
> > majority of the
> >> young men and women assembled at the gathering, there
> > was no attempt while I
> >> was present to give the slogans a religious or
> > secterian colour. When Syed
> >> Ali Shah Geelani said that the people of
> > India and Kashmir are tied together
> >> by the bonds of insaaniyat
> > (humanity), when he quoted Gandhi, or spoke of
> >> the necessity of
> > conducting a non-violent struggle that was devoid of
> >> hatred, or even
> > when he said that he wished to see India rise as a great
> >> power in the
> > world, but as a power that felt no need to oppress others, he
> >> was
> > wholeheartedly and sincerely applauded, by the majority of people
> >>
> > present in the auditorium, regardless of whether or not they were
> >>
> > Kashmiri.
> >
> > Yesterday¹s meeting needs to be seen in the context of a momentum
> >> of
> > different events, which have included public meetings at Jantar
> > Mantar,
> >> meetings in the Jawaharlal Nehru Universtiy and Delhi
> > University, film
> >> screenings and talks, independently organized
> > exhibitions on the history of
> >> Jammu and Kashmir in educational
> > institutions, photographic exhibitions on
> >> the situation in Kashmir
> > today that have taken place recently at the India
> >> Habitat Centre,
> > while Kashmir has reeled under the brutality of the
> >> occupation that
> > has resulted in a hundred and eleven deaths of unarmed or
> >> stone
> > pelting people, including children and teenagers. The momentum of
> >>
> > this process, which recognizes the urgency of the situation in
> > Kashmir,
> >> needs to be taken to its logical conclusion, until the world
> > and the
> >> international community sits up and takes notice of the true
> > nature of the
> >> hold of the Indian state on Kashmir and its people.We
> > need many more such
> >> meetings and gatherings in Delhi, and indeed in
> > every large city in
> >> India.
> >
> > It must be maintained so that even a Barack Hussein Obama, scheduled
> >>
> > to visit New Delhi in November, is compelled to recognize the fact
> > that the
> >> conduct of the Indian state in Kashmir, based as it is on
> > brutal violence
> >> and intimidation, based as it is on a disregard of
> > every norm of the conduct
> >> of civilized governance is unacceptable to
> > the world. You simply cannot
> >> claim to be the world¹s largest
> > democracy and preside over the deaths of
> >> 70,000 people in twenty
> > years. You cannot claim to be judged as a democracy
> >> and have laws
> > like the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. You cannot claim to
> >> be a
> > democracy and have your police and paramilitaries beat children to
> >>
> > death openly on the streets, or rape and kill young women with
> > impunity. A
> >> state that does so is an oppressive, immoral, occupying
> > power, and needs to
> >> be resisted by every right thinking person in the
> > world. The Indian state¹s
> >> record in Kashmir over the past several
> > decades is not only an oppression
> >> visited on the people of Kashmir,
> > it is an insult to the United Nations, to
> >> the world community, and to
> > every principle of justice, fairness and
> >> democracy. It is an insult
> > to all the peace loving and freedom loving
> >> citizens of India that do
> > not wish to see oppression carried out in their
> >> name.
> >
> > This is the message that needs to go out, and is going out, not only
> >>
> > from the streets of Sringar, Baramulla and Kupwara, but also from
> >>
> > gatherings, such as yesterdays, from the heart of Delhi, the capital
> > of
> >> India. We, who are the friends of liberty and justice in India,
> > need to
> >> stand besides our Kashmiri brothers and sisters and say to
> > the world that we
> >> do not accept the lies put out by the Indian state
> > and its apologists on
> >> Kashmir. That is the true significance and
> > import of the process in which
> >> yesterday¹s meeting plays an important
> > part. This process will not stop
> >> until the world takes notice. The
> > United Nations, and the broad democratic
> >> currents as well as the
> > political leaderships of Europe, the Americas, and
> >> of every
> > significant power in the world needs to know that hundreds of
> >> people,
> > young and old, intellectuals, writers, activists, lawyers, teachers
> >>
> > and others, Indians and Kashmiris can stand united, in Delhi, at the
> > heart
> >> of the Indian Republic¹s capital, in refusing to accept the
> > continued
> >> occupation of Jammu and Kashmir, by India and by Pakistan.
> > That they believe
> >> that it is only the people of Jammu and Kashmir who
> > must decide for
> >> themselves their own future destiny, peacefully, in a
> > climate free of
> >> coercion and intimidation.
> >
> > As Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Sheikh Showkat
> >> Hussain said, all that
> > they are asking for is the right to self
> >> determination, promised by
> > India, before the Untied Nations, to be freely
> >> enacted through a
> > plebiscite, in conditions of peace and liberty, without
> >> the presence
> > of armed force, for the inhabitants of every part of the
> >> undivided
> > state of Jammu and Kashmir ­ regardless of whether the results of
> >>
> > that plebiscite are in favour of India, Pakistan or an independent,
> > united,
> >> Jammu and Kashmir that can live in peace with all its
> > neighbours in South
> >> Asia.
> >
> > There was a great diversity of statements and styles present in
> >>
> > abundant splendour at yesterday¹s meeting. There was no way by which
> > the
> >> meeting could be reduced or simplified a single monotonous
> > statement. Yes,
> >> all the panelists, spoke unambiguously about the
> > necessity for ending the
> >> military occupation by the Indian state in
> > Kashmir. This does not mean that
> >> their statements and sentiments were
> > a manufactured and processed
> >> uniformity. The people on the panel may
> > have significant political and
> >> philosophical differences amongst
> > themselves, they may even think
> >> differently about what ŒAzaadi¹ might
> > mean, but this was a sign, not of the
> >> weakness, but of the strength
> > and vitality of yesterday¹s
> >> gathering.
> >
> > ŒAzaadi¹ if and when it comes, will not be the parting gift of an
> >>
> > exhausted colonial power, it will be the harvest of the fruits of the
> >>
> > imaginations and intelligences of millions of people, of their
> > debates and
> >> their conversations.
> >
> > What was extremely heart warming was the fact that each
> >> speaker spoke
> > of the fact that the voices of the people of Kashmir are no
> >> longer
> > alone and isolated, that there is a chorus of voices in different
> >>
> > parts of South Asia that echo and endorese their desire for
> > liberation from
> >> a brutal militarized occupation. From my notes of the
> > time that I was there,
> >> I recall that the writer Arundhati Roy, while
> > endorsing the demand of Azaadi
> >> for Kashmir, reminded the audience of
> > the need for the people of Kashmir not
> >> to be selective about justice
> > and injustice, that they must find methods to
> >> forge webs of
> > solidarity with all the suffering and oppressed peoples of
> >> India. She
> > was heckled and rudely interrupted by a small group of Indian
> >>
> > nationalists in the audience, who repeatedly raised the situation of
> >>
> > Kashmiri Pandits, Arundhati Roy, when she was able to resume
> > speaking,
> >> spoke unambiguously about the fact that she considered the
> > situation of
> >> Kashmiri Pandits to be a tragedy. She was echoed in this
> > sentiment later by
> >> Syed Ali Shah Geelani who said that he personally
> > stands guarantee for the
> >> safety and security of all minorities,
> > Hindu, Sikh, Buddhists, Christians
> >> and others in a future free
> > Kashmir. He implored the Pandits to return to
> >> Kashmir, and said, that
> > they are an integral part of Kashmiri society. He
> >> spoke of the need
> > for ensuring that a free Kashmir was a just Kashmir, and
> >> that justice
> > meant that the freedom, safety and security of all minorities,
> >> of
> > their property, their places of worship, their freedom of conscience
> > be
> >> given the utmost importance. He reminded the assembled people that
> >>
> > throughout these turbulent months, the people of Kashmir have
> > continued to
> >> be hospitable to Hindu pilgrims, have set up
> > ŒLangars¹ (Kitchens) for them,
> >> and have cared for them when they have
> > fallen sick, despite being at the
> >> receiving end of the violence of
> > the Indian state.
> >
> > I spoke briefly, about
> >> the fact that I was proud that so many of us
> > had gathered in my city, Delhi,
> >> putting aside the abstraction of our
> > politically determined, state given
> >> construct of citizenship, and
> > standing, here, now, on the grounds of a
> >> concrete human solidarity
> > with the people of Kashmir. I spoke of the fact
> >> that there are
> > significant voices, even in the mainstream media who have
> >> been
> > compelled to recognize the urgency of the situation in Kashmir, by
> >>
> > the sheer determination of the youth of Kashmir to get the news of
> > what is
> >> happening in Kashmir out to the world. I spoke of the role
> > played by
> >> facebook sites like ŒAalaw¹ and blogs, and the fact that
> > the people of India
> >> and the world can no longer be kept in the dark
> > by a pliant media, as
> >> happened in 1989-90. I spoke of the ways in
> > which the viral circulation of
> >> leaked videos of the humiliation of
> > Kashmiri youth on facebook pages and
> >> online fora have successfully
> > shown us what the reality of Kashmir is today.
> >> I urged media
> > professionals in the mainstream media to introspect and
> >> reflect on
> > the role that they may be compelled, against their own
> >> professional
> > ehtics, to play in the pyschological and propaganda war that
> >> the
> > Indian state is currently conducting. I spoke of my sense of shame
> > and
> >> remorse at the evasive and dissimulating role played by sections
> > of the
> >> mainstream media in India while reporting (or not reporting)
> > atrocities that
> >> make even the images from Abu Gharaib pale in
> > comparison.
> >
> > I am ashamed to
> >> say, that despite my respectful plea to the media to
> > play a responsible role
> >> in their reportage of Kashmir related
> > matters, major channels like Times Now
> >> and NDTV once again let the
> > truth down in their reports on the days events.
> >> NDTV saw it fit to
> > simply report
> >
> > an incident of Œshoe throwing at SAS
> >> Geelani¹. A shoe (or some other
> > indeterminate object) was indeed thrown, but
> >> not at Geelani. It
> > landed on a bottle of water in front of another speaker,
> >> while he was
> > speaking. So let¹s at least set that record straight. Arnab
> >> Goswami
> > of Times Now, while conducting what he likes to call a Œdebate; on
> >>
> > the programme called ŒNews Hour¹ (neither News, nor just an Hour)
> >>
> > repeatedly uttered hysterical untruths, such as the presumption that
> > ŒNo
> >> State permits the advocacy of secession and self determination¹
> > and that a
> >> meeting such as the one I participated in yesterday, were
> > it to take place,
> >> say, in the United States, would immediately lead
> > to all speakers present
> >> (including, presumably, myself) in being
> > imprisoned on charges of sedition.
> >> I have to inform my readers here,
> > that on both counts, Arnab Goswami is
> >> wrong. Seriously wrong. Either
> > he is a misinformed idiot. Or he knows that
> >> he is wrong, and is lying
> > to his public through his teeth. We can choose to
> >> be generous about
> > how he would interpret his motives, and assume he is
> >> simply a fool.
> >
> > Goswami, consequently demanded to know why we were not
> >> immediately
> > imprisoned under section 124 of the Indian penal code. Arnab
> >> Goswami
> > needs to be reminded, that in United States law, the provisions of
> >>
> > the Sedition Act are applicable only in times when the country is in
> > a
> >> declared state of war. And therefore his analogy does not apply, as
> > I am not
> >> aware that the Indian republic is currently in a declared
> > state of war, as
> >> per international law, (unless Arnab Goswami has
> > lost his marbles to the
> >> extent that he confuses the shadow boxing
> > that he does on television with a
> >> war declared by a state under
> > international law). That, furthermore, the
> >> provisions of the US
> > Sedition Law have been declared substantially void by
> >> the US Supreme
> > Court ruling in the Brandenberg vs. Ohio (1969) judgement,
> >> and of
> > course, by the US Supreme court guaranteeing the primacy of free
> >>
> > speech, including Œseditious¹ speech, including the burning of the
> > United
> >> States flag, under the provisions of the first amendment to
> > the US
> >> constitution.
> >
> > There have been repeated attempts made to pass a law that would
> >> make
> > Œflag burning¹ an offence under US Law. Fortunately, (for liberty and
> >>
> > free speech) as of now, these attempts have not come to pass, and
> >>
> > currently, under US Law it is perfectly legal to advocate self-
> >>
> > determination and secwssion, if done peacefully, even to the extent
> > of
> >> burning or destroying or descerating symbols of state authority
> > like the
> >> national flag. Furthermore several constiutions, such as the
> > constitutions
> >> of Canada, Ethipopia, Austria and France, implicitly or
> > explicitly, provide
> >> for a legal expression of right to self
> > determination, provided it is
> >> exercised in a peaceful and democratic
> > manner, as part of the freedom of
> >> expression principle.
> >
> > But the point that needs to be made is larger than
> >> whether or not
> > Arnab Goswami is a fool and a charlatan. Yesterday¹s meeting
> >> was a
> > historic opportunity for his channel, and indeed for all of the
> >>
> > Indian mainstream media, to report and take cognizance of the fact
> > that
> >> there is a significant section of Indian public opinion that is
> > actually in
> >> favour of ŒAzaadi¹ in Kashmir. I am not suggesting that
> > this section
> >> constitutes an overwhelming majority at present (that
> > might change) but,
> >> that it does exist, and that it presents, cogent,
> > precise arguments, that
> >> cannot be dismissed, (as is being done by
> > Times Now and its ilk) by invoking
> >> the spectre of Œterrorism¹. There
> > is hardly any Œterrorism¹ in Kashmir today
> >> (if we don¹t count the
> > Indian state and its terror) . The 111 people who
> >> have died in the
> > past months, have not died at the hands of non-state
> >> insurgents, they
> > have died, unarmed, facing the bullets of the Indian state.
> >> The
> > movement for Azaadi in Kashmir has left the culture of the gun and
> > the
> >> grenade behind. It fights today without weapons, armed only with
> > courage. If
> >> there is a terrorist in Kashmir today, he wears the
> > uniform of the forces of
> >> the Indian state, and carries the weapons
> > supplied by the arsenal of the
> >> Indian state. To discount the voices
> > that rise in dissent against this
> >> reality as Œterrorist sympathizers¹
> > as Arnab Goswami has done on his channel
> >> is to insult reality.
> >
> > Syed Ali Shah Geelani spoke of the bonds of insaaniyat
> >> that tie the
> > peoples of Kashmir and India yesterday. I heard him say this. I
> >> was
> > barely five feet away from him. I heard him speak of his regard and
> >>
> > respect for the minorities in Jammu and Kashmir. I do not agree with
> > much
> >> of what Geelani Saheb represents politically, or ideologically,
> > but I have
> >> no hesitation in saying that what he said yesterday, was
> > surprising for its
> >> gentleness, for its consideration, for its
> > moderation, even for its
> >> liberality and open heartedness. This should
> > have been big news. That Syed
> >> Ali Shah Geelani said that he wants to
> > see a strong and resurgent India. I
> >> heard him say this. And was this
> > reported by anyone? NO. Was it reported
> >> that he was cheered when he
> > said this ? NO. Was it reported that no one had
> >> any thing angry to
> > say against the struggling peoples of India? NO. Was it
> >> reported
> > that SAS Geelani expilicity said that he is NOT against dialogue,
> >>
> > provided that the five point formula put forward by him (none of
> > whose
> >> provisions ­ 1. acceptance of the disputed nature of the
> > territory of Jammu
> >> and Kashmir, 2. repeal of AFSPA and other black
> > laws, 3. release of
> >> political detenues and prisoners, 4. withdrawal
> > of the disproportionate
> >> presence of the armed forces and 5.
> > punishment to those gulty of taking life
> >> in the past few months ­
> > require the government of India to think Œoutside¹
> >> the framework of
> > the Indian Constitution) are accepted as the basis of the
> >> dialogue? NO.
> >
> > Don¹t you think that it makes BIG news that the tallest
> >> separatist
> > leader in Jammu and Kashmir actually, in a moderate voice, spells
> >>
> > out, in Delhi, the fundamental basis of a considered dialogue with
> > the
> >> Indian state, while offering it a chance to do so on bases that
> > are
> >> absolutely reasonable and sound, and honourable to all concerned?
> > Do you not
> >> think that a responsible media organization would consider
> > this a scoop, a
> >> major news stor? But that is not what happened.
> >
> > Instead, Times Now, (and I
> >> am waiting for the morning newspapers to
> > see how far this muck has spread)
> >> chose to focus on the deliberately
> > staged disruption of a handful of agent
> >> provocateurs, our familiar
> > posse of self styled patriotic champions of the
> >> continued occupation
> > of Kashmir, who posed for the camera, hyperventilated,
> >> and occupied,
> > perhaps no more than five percent of the attention of several
> >> patient
> > hours. If you saw the news reports on Times Now¹s ŒNEWSHOUR¹
> >>
> > programme, you would have thought that all of what happened was their
> >>
> > presence as a Œprotest¹ against the meeting. As someone who was
> > present
> >> through much of this, I am totally, utterly aghast that a lie
> > of such
> >> magnificient proportions could be dished out with such ease.
> > I am aghast
> >> that Aditya Raj Kaul who was one of the panel invited by
> > Arnab Goswami to
> >> the Times Now Newshour show could lie with a
> > straight face by saying that
> >> there was no attempt made to Œdisrupt¹
> > the meeting by those who were there
> >> to represent his point of view.
> >
> > Someday, I hope that all of these people, the
> >> Arnab Goswamis of the
> > world, find reason to repent for continuing to keep
> >> the people of
> > India and Kashmir in the dark. They had better think hard,
> >> because
> > the day when they will have cause to repent, is not far. Azaadi will
> >>
> > come to Kashmir, and with it, a glimmer of Azaadi will be the share
> > of
> >> those people in India who stood by their Kashmiri friends, in
> > their darkest
> >> hour.Going by what I witnessed yesterday, there will be
> > many such people, so
> >> Arnab Goswami and his ilk had better start
> > practicing how to say sorry,
> >> several hundred times a
> >> day.
> >
> >
> >
> > best,
> >
> >
> >
> > Shuddha
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------
> >
> > Shudd
> >> habrata Sengupta
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________
> > 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/>
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________
> > 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/>
> _________________________________________
> 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/>