Indian Express editor's views on Babri demolition

I read Ms Seema Chisti's article:"Remains of the day" in the Indian Express of December 5, on the 20th anniversary of the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, with deep dismay. It seems to have been written not by a sensitive, understanding Indian commentator; it was a piece appeared to have been driven by parochialism and one-sidedness of a Muslim communalist. She refused to accept despite the tell-tale evidence that the structure was super-imposed  on a Hindu temple by a foreign Muslim invader to humiliate Hindus. All attempts to persuade the Muslim  leadership to respect the majority Hindu sentiment in regard to the shrine to their epic icon Ram and his wife Sita(Sita ki Rasoi-Sita's kitchen) and make a brotherly gesture to hand over the structure to the Hindu community, failed. Instead, there was a display of aggressive posture of confrontation by its bigoted Islamic leadership.

Even with this background, kar sewaks who assembled at the venue on December 6, 1992, were not expected to take the law into their hands and undertake the demolition. However, a group of kar sewaks' act appalled and deeply saddened the movement leaders like LK Advani who along with his associates were opposed to the unilateral destruction of the disputed structure. But, looking at the dispute in hindsight, one cannot avoid the unhelpful attitude of the minority leadership in the stalemate that unfortunately led to the tragic denounement. With mutual accommodation and understanding, a temple could have been built as also a new mosque some distance away as a symbolic manifestation of inter-community harmony. Even a High Court verdict accommodating both sides' viewpoints was looked down upon.

Ms Chisti's strong plea is not to forget the event of the demolition. Even at the distance of twenty years of the tragic happenings, she does not see the need for the leaders of the two communities to jointly, peacefully come to an agreement to forget the past and built a temple on the iconic spot and a Muslim place of worship nearby. There are several examples of the majority gestures, for instance, Gandhiji's support for the Khilafat movement. Ayodhya was one case when the minority generosity and broadmindedness could have done wonders. Given the right attitude, it can still happen.   

Facebook girls question Mumbai shutdown

It is reported in the media that two young women-21-year-old Shaheen Dhada and her friend Renu Srinivas were arrested by the local police at Palghar in Thane district for posting a comment on the Facebook against the Mumbai shutdown over Bal Thackeray's death. There is a widespread condemnation of the police's highhandedness, in the public and the media. Even the State govt has not been spared over the "fascist"act of its police against freedom of expression.

However, while one cannot condone the police's clearly excessive action against the Facebook ladies, one cannot overlook their utter insensitivity, irresponsibility and thoughtlessness on the issue of the shutdown. Looking at massive crowds accompanying the funeral procession on the way to the cremation venue at the Shivaji Park on November 18, covered live on TV news channels, even a Balasaheb Thackeray critic would acknowledge the spontaenity of the sea of humanity peacefully walking in mourning. Mumbaikars had shut their shops and other businesses on their own to join the congregation to express grief over their beloved leader's death. Hence, to question their personal choice to do so without any appeal or direction from the Shiv Sena leadership, amounts to adding insult to injury. It is a height of juvenile delinquency and apaty to other people's sorrow.

Freedom of expression is not unrestricted and absolute. One's freedom of expression stops where other person's freedom begins. The Facebook women should have been mature, understanding and considerate. They are too young to know that when Gandhiji died, not only Delhi but many parts of India were shutdown in mourning. Could any one, claiming the right to free expression, have been so callous and stupid to criticise the shutdown? Bal Thackeray may not be comparable to Gandhiji but for millions of Maharashtrians he was their father figure. How could Shaheen and his friend be unaware of this?

New Yorker's long piece on Times of India

The Times of India, the leading daily simultaneously published from several centres, that was originally set up by a British company during colonial days, to promote their agenda, underwent a transformation after independence when its ownership came into Indian hands. Over the years, it became a premier newspaper institution under strong, thinking editors and commentators who inspired awe in the government of the day. They were keenly watchful of the govt's acts of commission and omission, voicing public sentiments without fear or favour.Their main focus was on national interest and not their own commercial and advertising objectives.

With the passing away of such powerful, highly respected, influential editor-writers-the last one being Girilal Jain, the Times of India was taken over by younger generation-great-grand children of RK Dalmia-the original Indian owner-businessman, and grand children of Shantilal Jain. They clearly hated intellectually, professionally and morally strong editors who until then had guided and shaped the newspaper. For the new young bosses, advertising revenue had the highest priority. The Editor of the TOI, under their charge, became a non-entity, an ingnificant individual as they held all the levers in their hands.

An extensive, well-researched write-up in the New Yorker journal of October 10,2012, carries stunningly revealing details of how two Jain brothers have turned the Times of India group into a higly money-spinning venture where reporters write laudatory pieces-called "advertorials"-on Bollywood stars and corporate honchos, in their local pictorial supplements. The thinking was that why should a leading newspaper like the Times of India give them free publicity through their valuable space with photographs and write-ups? They were asked to pay for this coverage which was obviously and readily agreed to. This seems to have the beginning of the phenomenon of "paid news". According to the New Yorker article, "the walls between the advertising and editorial sections were broken down" for a close coordination between the two, the emphasis being on "advertorials"-a great money-making source.

Interestingly, Times of India is now more a news-paper, rather than an opinion paper; its news stories are short. Letters to Editor column is thrown into a small corner, has only two short letters, and not more. In other words, views of readers are not really so important.   

Robert Vadra's dubious real estate deals

Mrs Sonia Gandhi's only Son-in-Law, Robert Vadra, married to her daughter Priyanka, seems prone to adverse publicity, off and on. His latest episode concerns his dubious real estate deals. The fact that top guns of the Congress and the government, in a sick and disgusting display of sycophancy, came out hastily to defend their supreme leader's son-in-law, calling him innocent of any wrong-doing. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, his Finance Minister P.Chidambaram and other senior colleagues, could not explain how an ordinary businessman with a small capital of his own amounting to some lakhs, became a multi-millionare-accumulating reportedly 300 crores of rupees within 3-4 years. Thus, in the eyes of the people, it was an undisputed manifestation of moral degradation of the ruling Congress party. The party line was that Vadra was a pivate businessman and individual. If so, why was a powerful battery of spokespersons aggressively appearing in TV studios to rescue Vadra from his critics' onslaught regarding his shady transactions? Why Vadra himself chose silence, instead of publicly explaining the whole affair with honesty. Instead, he mocked the aam admi as "mango" man and the Indian State a "banana republic"!

Looking back at the history of the Congress which, although set up by a British colonial bureaucrat, in 1884, was shaped and guided by freedom struggle stalwarts like Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and other dedicated leaders, with self-sacrifice, high values of morality, propriety and inner-party democracy. All this changed with the passing away of Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel and Lal Bahadur Shastri when the next generation led by Mrs Indira Gandhi, Nehru's daughter, took over the reins of the party and the govt. The rot began. Sycophancy and loyalty to the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty was the key element. The family under Mrs Sonia Gandhi, Mrs Indira Gandhi's daughter-in-law and the elder son Rajiv Gandhi's wife, could do no wrong. Two Ministers in the vanguard of Robert Vadra's defence, publicly swore that they would defend their leader Mrs Sonia Gandhi to their last breath.

But the tragedy is that these small-minded faithfuls cannot see to what terrible state they have sunk the grand old party with their mindless, morally unsound, shenanigans. No wonder, the country is in the grip of  unprecedented corruption, degeneration, despondency and cynicism.       

FDI in retail-No to Walmart

The most notable thing about our silence-loving, indecisive, laissez faire Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is that he suddenly becomes pro-active when it comes to helping a special friend, the USA. In the UPA-I, the PM went out of his way, exhibiting uncharacteristic determination-and defiance of the then allies-the Left-CPM,CPI, RSP and the Forward Bloc-to push the Indo-US nuclear deal through, as promised to President Bush. The key argument and justification was that India needed nuclear power most urgently. But, in the four years since the deal, there is no sign of even one megawatt of nuclear power on the horizon.

And, now, despite all the nation-wide uproar and anger over corruption scandals revealed by the constitutional body-the Comptroller and Auditor General(CAG), the opposition and the media, resulting in the washout of the monsoon session of the Parliament, as well as the sky-rocketing prices of essential commodities, Dr Singh, shockingly, watched the worsening situation in his usual silent mode, without communicating with the Indian people. Instead, he rubbed the salt on their wounds by hiking the price of diesel by Rs 5, limiting LPG cylinders to six in a year, per a house-hold and notifying the implementation of the FDI in multi-brand retail to please his friend in the White House-President Obama as also his foreign media critics who had earlier criticised him as "under-achiever", "a tragic figure" and "Sonia's poodle". It seemed Dr Singh was unconcerned about the cascading impact of the diesel hike on the deteriorating and uncontrolled inflation the common people were witnessing. Walmart seemed the greatest beneficiary of the FDI decision.

It needed a nationalistic, knowledgeable economic commentator like S.Gurumurthy to tell the innocent-or more appropriately, deliberately unaware, Prime Minister Singh, in an article in a national daily, that on the day-Friday, September 14, he was rolling out red carpet to Walmart, the New York City "shut down Walmart", complaining about the giant MNC "displacing nearby businesses". In Washington DC, hundreds of protestors shouted:"Say No to Walmart". Similarly, in Los Angeles, 10,000 marchers screamed:"Walmart=Poverty".     

US short film leads to widespread violence

A senseless American, misusing his democratic right of free expression, made a documentary film:"Innocence of Muslims" wherein he reportedly insulted the followers of Islam and the Prophet. Within days of its exhibition, even more senselss groups of Muslims went on a spree of killing, bombing and burning US targets in several Muslim countries. In Libya, Muslim terrorists assassinated the US ambassador, among others. We had angry protests even in India, particularly in Srinagar, the capital of J&K, a Muslim majority State in the Indian Union. Thankfully, the protests have been peaceful, so far.

One recent report from Paris said that a French cartoon weekly had published a few cartoons depicting the Prophet in bad light. The French govt has promptly condemned it to discourage any bloody reaction from the fanatics. The US authorities had similarly denounced the anti-Islam documentary but, unfortunately, it did not deter the zealots from taking the law into their own hands.

However, the question arises on the legitimacy and acceptability of widespread violent reaction of sections of Muslims unleashing their murderous anger on innocent non-Muslims. Muslims all over the world proudly proclaim that their superior faith-Islam is most peaceful; its name means peace and submission to the will of Allah. If it is so, then why a large number of Muslims from Iran to Libya, to Egypt, to Pakistan, Afghanistan,  India, and elsewhere, appear so intolerant and violently hypersensitive when it comes to dealing with some clearly mindless, uncivilised remarks of individuals against Islam and the Prophet? Does their extremist and fanatical response not amount to conniving with their critics to get huge publicity derogatory to Islam? Why can't the Ummah show great wisdom and large-heartedness by taking criticism in its stride and ignoring it? A ruthless, violent reprisal attacking innocents only underlines the terrible touchiness of the Islamic faithfuls.

We had a recent replay of this Muslim volatility and a short fuse when a bogus claim that some torn pages of the Quran were thrown from a fast moving express train in Masuri(Ghaziabad) and were found lying on a rail track. How could torn pages from any book thrown from a fast train collect in a neat pile instead of flying off in different directions in the wind? But, the fanatics had enough pretext to go amuck, assaulting  innocent people and indulge in arson. Is the Quran so fragile or the Prophet so vulnerable that a mad, brainless individual can destroy their credibility? Did the Prophet himself not acknowledge that he was a human being(Messenger) with all human imperfections? Then, these barbaric killings and bombings of innocents in their name?     

Washington Post story-Soli Sorabjee's comment

In his latest column in the Indian Express(Delhi edition), Soli J. Sorabjee has rightly questioned the wisdom of I&B Minister Ambika Soni's "hypersensitive reaction" to the Washington Post critique on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. However, while urging to take the US daily's report "in our stride", Sorabjee calls it "ill-founded", suggesting strong "rebuttal". Is it a sound, suitable advice? Does it not contradict his own approach outlined above? The PM's Information Adviser has issued a "strong rebuttal". Does it sound wise, convincing and sensible? Incidentally, every Indian newspaper readers knows that what Simon Denyer, the New Delhi-based correspondent of the Washington Post has written about the PM is something he-she has been reading and seeing in the Indian media for a long time. It is nothing new or surprising.
  __________________________________________________________________________________

2)     Indian President Pranab Mukherjee, who was recently elevated to the Rashtrapati Bhawan-the presidential palace-from the post of the Finance Minister in Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's cabinet, spoke to the Madras Chamber of Commerce and Industry on September 8. It was sad to read a PTI report on the address in the press the next day in which Mukherjee denounced the "Cassandras of doom" for criticising the slow pace of the Indian economy. It seemed a clear defence of his own less than great performance as the Finance Minister as the situation was causing considerable concern at the time he left. One had hoped that the newly-appointed President would snap his connection with the previous role and the ruling party and examine the views of the critics dispassionately without accusing them of being agents of doom. Unfortunately, Pranab Mukherjee's rhetoric was highly disappointing and ill-advised. He was expected to write a new chapter on a clean slate.