Monday, December 15, 2008

Beware of Gurumurthyism and Gautierism

Words. More dangerous than bullets and bombs. Terrorists bank on the power of words to expand their cadre. The lone survivor of the Mumbai carnage was inducted into jihadi by a CD he bought from the roadside of Karachi. Decades back, words turned a whole nation’s value system topsy turvy resulting in the worst holocaust in modern times – in Hitler’s Germany. People in positions of influence – be it activists, politicians or journalists- must be held accountable for irresponsible rhetoric that trigger off violence.
Following the Mumbai carnage, Gurumurthy went on the rampage. In this, he had an able(?) lieutenant in Francois Gautier, that French “friend “of India. With his bigoted logic, Gurumurthy churned out a disgusting piece in The New Indian Express titled ISOLATE TERROR, DO NOT SECULARISE IT!(The NIE, Dec. 1, 2008). Here, he rightly points out the knee-jerk reactions of the government of India while the terror was on. If he had stopped there, it would have been OK. But then he forays into his usual anti-secular ravings in his perverted, hate filled but brilliant language throbbing with his customary revulsion for non-Hindu Indians. Referring to the PM’s rather strange invitation(or summons? that’s what it sounded like to me) to the ISI, Gurumurthy says: Did he(Manmohan Singh) think that the ISI has suddenly shed its enmity and turned its admirer under the secular leaders Sonia Gandhi, a Christian, and himself, a Sikh?
His tirade continues. It is the Indian Polity’s inability to say plainly that Islamic terror is a global phenomenon, and it is extending itself into India through global Islamic network. Result, instead of isolating terror, the national political discourse began secularizing it. And then in his usual God-is-love-love-is-blind-therefore-god-is-blind type of logic he goes on and on, hammering the secular forces in India for not coming down heavily in thoughts, words and deeds on Muslims. The article concludes with Terror stands secularized, not isolated in secular discourse! How will India fight terror with this cerebral paralysis?

What on earth does this fanatic want? Charge Indian political discourse with virulent communal sentiments? Posit a communal worldview as the ideal one for India? Does he realize that the demolition of Babri Masjid is the start point of the entry of jihadis in India? Does he want the government to harass Muslims in India, isolate them and start a communal war in the country? Does he want to see normalcy in the country completely destroyed so that predictability on a day to day basis is forever banished from the life of every Indian? Is that his idea of Ramrajya? Why doesn’t he understand the government(be it BJP or Congress) is always skating on thin ice and every patriotic citizen should refrain from making this task more difficult for them? Well, how can he when his brain in infected by communal bigotry leading to cerebral paralysis, which has rendered one portion of his thinking process non-functional?

The day after this article appeared came another one from Francois Gautier titled SONIA’S PRESENCE IN DELHI IS COSTING INDIA DEARLY (The NIE, Dec 2, 2008). Very much in bad taste on account of the very personal attacks on Sonia Gandhi, the atrticle gives the impression that this French man is trying to out herod herod to please this newspaper which has hired him, paying, no doubt, an obscenely fat fee in order to recruit a white man to lend greater credibility to its communal agenda. Gautier indulges in a litany of I accuse Sonia, which despite its mischievous intent, is uproariously comical by its very ridiculous, puerile melodramatic tone. For a sample:
I accuse Sonia of being responsible for the tragedy of Mumbai
I accuse Sonia and her govt.of having made NSG the laughing stock of the world
I accuse Sonia of having her Christian and Western background, in four years, divided India on religious and caste lines in a cynical and methodical manner
I accuse Sonia of weakening India’s spirit of sacrifice and courage - - -
I accuse Sonia of always pointing the finger at Pakistan when terrorism in India is now mostly homegrown.
I accuse Sonia of being an enemy of Hindus - - -
I accuse Sonia of taking advantage of India’s respect for women -
I accuse Sonia for exploiting the Indian Press’ obsession with her
After this hilarious litany fit for high school declamation contests, Gautier goes on to make vitriolic personal attacks on her.

Not that I am fan of Sonia Gandhi, but this is bad journalism. Will some one tell The NIE, that readers are discerning and when an obsession becomes a paranoia with a journalist, the reader only goes tut tutting in pity?

Why is NIE wasting its space on such maniacal assault on secularism while its editorials go tom tomming secular ideals? Why this Janus like position?

If the NIE wants to divide the country along communal lines, it should rope in journalists who know their job better, and do not lower the quality of the paper. Or is it quality at the altar of Hindutva?

Previous posts on Gurumurthyism : http://pareltank.blogspot.com/2006/12/gurumurthyism.html

32 comments:

  1. OMG, cant believe that something as inflammatory as this can even get published in a paper like NIE!! But then, this too, is just yet another media act!

    But then, terrorism is a complicated thing! I do agree with you, that in these times, the bigger danger would be to attack the secular nation that we are.KT, even without these articles, there is an unhealthy fear with a communal colour in the minds normal people. I would think that's a bigger danger and will affect us in the longer run, too. It is essential that our leaders talk about secularism at these times.

    At the same time, terrorism is complicated.Its not even clear whether its ideology, economics or culture or a combination of all this thats causing the problem. Any simplistic answer would only mean trivialising the issue.

    And although, often, fanaticism inside the country is often compared to terrorist activity, maybe both of them needs to be dealt with differently too.We must not be blind to that, i guess.

    A friend forwarded this article http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/12/mumbai-arundhati-roy

    I think, it reaffirmed that I do not understand terrorism completely!

    Good post!

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's shocking that people can spread such venom through newspapers..
    Isn't spreading anti secular sentiments a crime? Why is this newspaper allowed to publish whatever nonsense it does!!

    In this case, there is not even an attempt to mask defamation under the disguise of criticism!!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. In his very topical articles Gurumurthy has been exposing the pseudo-secular hypocrisy and also the crass vote-bank politics of the Congress party. He has in several contexts in the past reiterated that Hindutua means only Indianness that is based on the bedrock of our ancient culture and ethos and that which differentiates an indian from others, a significant part of which is merely subcontinental in nature.

    Apparently what provoked you is his reference to Sonia as a Christian. A closer reading of that context will reveal his real meaning that ISI can't be seen as having developed a sudden love for India just so that the
    Prime Minister and the Congress supremo are non Hindus. Just for so little if you could launch a tirade of choicest epithets and vile vituperation on him, then one's respect of Gurumurthy only increases that not withstanding people of your ilk he still writes what is to be said so forcefully but so dispassionately and never stoops to your level.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Good Post.Now you know why Gurumoorthy and his Hindutva friends are writing like this.They have their blind fan following.
    Yes,this kind of hate in people's minds always encourages terrorist acts. Ideological fight against communal ideology is very important.Each one of us should be equipped for such a fight in our family,in our neighbourhood,in our office,in our club etc.Silence is suicidal.

    ReplyDelete
  5. @krish
    yes. no doubt congress indulges in vote bank politics.but is the bjp free from that sin? hindutva, ayodhya - if these are not vote bank politics, what are they?

    'Hindutua means only Indianness that is based on the bedrock of our ancient culture and ethos and that which differentiates an indian from others'
    this bedrock? - violence and communalism, violence and murder in the name of our ancient culture and ethos - come on, give me another. that's not part of Hindu weltanschaung, but of hindutva. the two have nothing to do with each other.

    'Apparently what provoked you is his reference to Sonia as a Christian.'
    possibly but with a qualification. i'm an indian first and then a christian, also, being a christian does not make me any less an Indian.
    No, sir.it's not just this one statement that made me write this post. am a researcher myself and have tried for years to rationalise gurumurthy's ideology within the context of assertion of national identity, reassertion of different identities in the face of modernity's universalisation and globalisation's leveling.but the exclusionism and the subtext of violence in gurumurthy's ideology do not seem to find a space in the pluralistic Indian/Hindu worldview, as i understand it.
    No, it's not just this statement but all his writings that i am protesting against. he is divisive and an intellectual-a deadly combination.
    sorry if i have stooped. but for my country, i am willing to do it again.

    ReplyDelete
  6. @bombaydosti and deepak
    unfortunately we live in a political atmosphere where secularism has become a dirty word.Pl read my post on this- i have tried to work out how this came about.if u choose to read it, pl read the whole thing-dont react half way like some hve done. it's a long piece-attempt reading it only if u have the time & the inclination:-)
    http://pareltank.blogspot.com/2007/12/polarisation-of-indian-politics-search.html

    @ charakan
    i agree wth you whole sale-each one of us must fight this in our own private spheres, starting from the individual's mind. i think the time has come for every indian to become a proactive, patriotic indian, working towards building a condition for a pluralistic society to thrive. and it should start in the private spheres.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Re. kochuthresiamma p .j

    Every political party indulges in vote bank politics; it is their bread and butter while ideology, if it can be gleaned at all, is only their cloak. But I said "crass vote bank politics" - I should have used a stronger adjective,perhaps - so crass that when global terrorism is surging in to India, burning into the vitals of our democracy, security, and development, the Congress Party plays soft on terrorism.

    Only a bigoted mind can equate Hindutua, even in it's resurgent mood,-resurgent in response to brazen exploitation by those who want their own kind of dirty secularism to abet them in their nefarious games of conversion and deceit - with violence and murder. Only by those who are myopic or ignorant or inconvenienced of lessons of history that are crystal clear: that Christianity through crusade and Islam through jehad are the only two religions in the world which spread by violence.

    You may continue to fulminate against Gurumurthy or others who relentlessly expose the evil games of psuedo-secularists and send them out of court. When one feels so small,guilty and vulnerable against a righteous adversary, sheer vehemence and abuse could serve as a strategy.

    ReplyDelete
  8. @krish
    the trouble is we are talking of two different things. i agree more than fully with you that hinduism is the most expansive, tolerant and sophisticated religion. it has no history of bogotry, violence and conversion, unlike xianity and islam. It provided space to all creeds. But hinduism is not hindutva. The mistakes that hinduism never made, hindutva is making now, by indulging in violence, and all other shameful practices that that other religions made in the past, as is making now.
    though a xtian, i am the proud inheritor of a way of life created in the subcontinent by hinduism. it hurts when i see that great religion being politicised dragged in to justify political violence.that's not how i see hinduism. correct me if i am mistaken.
    'Only a bigoted mind can equate Hindutua, even in it's resurgent mood,- - - - with violence and murder'.
    post godra carnage is not violence and murder? you can justify it if you please, but dont drag that great religion into it. you are doing a great disservice to hinduism

    ReplyDelete
  9. we see such types of journalism and propaganda everywhere around us, dont we?

    if i have a paper and the power of the pen I could easily twist common minds to absorb and advocate my thoughts and ideas, be it outrageous or ridiculous. Thats what the media is doing...

    As you put it, words are more lethal than bullets...

    PS: I'm taking the liberty of placing pareltank in my blogroll; its my privilege... Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Please read the latest article by Gurumurthy in New Indian Express of today the 18th Dec. Hopefully it might help to clear the cobwebs and provide answers to issues that seemingly bother you a lot.

    I came by your page by chance and reacted to what I felt to be sheer wastage of a lot of steam by an otherwise adequate writer. You will do well by using more objectivity instead. Bye for now.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @KT,
    Don't eulogise the old Hindu way of life[can we really call it a religion?] too much.The rulers and Brahmins were tolerant to visitors but severely oppressive to Dalits.That is some thing not to be proud off.
    As you said Hindutva of Sangh Parivar is an attempt to ape the bad in Islam and Christianity.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hi KPJ :)

    My hearty congratulations for this wonderful, extraordinary,inspiring post.

    WOW! I am astonished at the powerful way in which you have exposed Gurumuthy. You tore this mad man's mask to pieces. He is writing trash and spreading canards and he has the temerity to expect educated Indians to stomach his falsehood.

    He is writing because NIE pays him heavily to write this kind of rubbish to increase their circulation. Just take a look at that paper - huge headlines which can be read standing one mile away and tiny news details which cannot be read with magnifying glass, binoculars and what not. They have no news. All that they want is to dish out cheap thrills and make money and I don't think they are even capable of making money. Just losers.

    Accoring to me Gurumurthy should be put behind bars in an undisclosed jail for at least twenty years for instigating divisions in the society. He is vicious and full of poison. I am amazed he has admirers also for writing nonsense. I just can't believe it.

    Ofcouse, I forgot. Yellow journals have their own set of admirers! Gurumurthy will write any stupid thing he wants and it it will be published by NIE. If I write to NIE pointing out the idiotic gibberish of Gurumuthy, they will not publish it. What a great newspaper!

    Gurumurthy is senile and against the unity of Indians. He is a vampire who desparately wants people to fight and kill each other so that he can drink blood. He should be banned from writing.

    Once again let me thank you whole heartedly for this wonderfu post written in great style and elequence to serve as an eye opener for all educated Indians, irrespective of cast,creed or religion.

    I salute you!

    Wish you a wonderful day full of joy and happiness.

    ReplyDelete
  13. @scorpiogenius
    u r right. I write strongly about it 'cos of my loyalty to Indian express which alone rsisted the draconian rules of the emergency. it was the only paper which defied censorship and the subversion of fundamental rights during the emergency.
    what a fall from that ststus!
    thanks for blogrolling me.

    @ cris
    then how can i read gurumurthy?:-)

    @Joseph Pulikotil
    u r right. the NIE never publishes any letter against its GURU. that's why i chose to blog.
    the NIE has changed completely from what it was before. very sad.

    ReplyDelete
  14. @krish
    objectivity? the very concept is very subjective:-)
    secular(pseudo secular, as it is termed) politics and hindutva shall run parallel eternally. never shall the twain meet. the best we can do is to agree to disagree. a live & let live policy.
    thanks for visiting and responding to my blog. nothing like knowing there can be another way of looking at things even if i can look at things that way.
    @charan
    a way is life is the highest form of practice of a religion, dont you think?

    ReplyDelete
  15. It’s hard to respond to a fundamentalist, and hence it’s hard to respond to respond to the Gurumurthy piece. His article hinges on what he sees as the failing of “pseudo secularism”, which, like Bush’s “war on terror” or an Islamic extremist’s “war on infidels” ---- is a phrase which essentially means nothing but serves well as an excuse for everything. Once you have such a linguistic device at your disposal, then it’s the end of reason.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Let us be objective. We have Moslem militancy in Kashmir. We have Christian militancy in the North East.

    What is wrong with Hindu miltancy? In parliamentary democracy, the majority should reign. As such, Hindus can demand majority space in militancy also.

    You will agree that most of the appointments that Sonia Gandhi makes go to Christians - YR Reddy, Hormis Tharakan, AK Anthony, Haibi Eden, Tom Vadakkan...

    If only our silly Catholic clergy had not tried to be 'militant', nobody would have noticed Sonia's preferences or slandered them. With only 2% in population though with 12% in capital, Christians could have lain low and made more under Sonia. Instead, our clergy tried to act out delusions of grandeur. Just look at the Net propaganda that our priests indulge in about violence against Christians. Even Radio Vatican broadcast many times that a nun had been raped and then burnt in Orissa.

    A group of 2 crores in a population of 110 crores ought to be discreet and practical.

    ReplyDelete
  17. @ valia kuttappan
    the point i was trying to make is all militancy is bad-be it christian, islamic or hindu.
    and also that militancy should be, in nomanclature, delinked from religion.
    yes. all parties are playing politics with religion. that includes congress. i never meant to exclude congress from that.
    my post was about the intellectuals who are trying to divide the country.
    i also agree with you that minorities should always remeber that they are minirities and areprivileged, and should stop complainig.but that's not the issue in my post.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Minorities are privileged? I feel only the upper class among minorities get all the privileges while the poor everywhere suffers.So poor among minorities should complain and get what they deserve

    ReplyDelete
  19. @ charakan
    yes. most certainly minorities are priviliged. which other country has minority rights?
    all poor must complain - not just minority poor.
    listen, it's time we started thinking of ourselves indians and not in terms of minorities and majorities. our continued thinking along those lines make us play into the hands of wily politicians.

    for god's sake, why cant we be just indians?

    ReplyDelete
  20. This link will give you some idea regarding minority situation in different parts of the World. http://www.unhchr.ch/minorities/group.htm
    Most countries have regulations for protecting their minorities.May not be properly implemented in all places [our own examples of Gujarat,Orissa,and of course Kashmiri Hindus and Muslims].When we speak to a member of minority group in Gujarat or Orissa we will understand the "privilege" they enjoy.Or even if we ask a middle class Muslim family or a Dalit family living in Delhi or Mumbai we will come to know their "privileges".Better to understand all Indians are not equal in many parts of our Country.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Solomon's Ecclesiastes is not Judaic. All of you might read it.

    Then read Yidhishtira's laments in the Shantiparva of Maha Bharatha, which is a semi-historical/semi-fictional work of enormous proportions created by a low-caste named Krishna Dwaipaayana Vyaasa.

    And may sense come to all!

    ReplyDelete
  22. "Words. More dangerous than bullets and bombs. Terrorists bank on the power of words to expand their cadre. The lone survivor of the Mumbai carnage was inducted into jihadi by a CD he bought from the roadside of Karachi. Decades back, words turned a whole nation’s value system topsy turvy resulting in the worst holocaust in modern times – in Hitler’s Germany. People in positions of influence – be it activists, politicians or journalists- must be held accountable for irresponsible rhetoric that trigger off violence."

    Hilter was a ruthless dictator who murdered millions of people. Gurumurthy is a journalist and an economist who has never hurt anyone. Equating the two would be bad enough if Gurumurthy's words were in fact violent and hateful, but since the aren't, this kind of statement is simply slander, and particularly reprehensible slander at that. There are very few people in the world whose depravity can be compared with genocidal mass murderers.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Following the Mumbai carnage, Gurumurthy went on the rampage. In this, he had an able(?) lieutenant in Francois Gautier, that French “friend “of India. With his bigoted logic, Gurumurthy churned out a disgusting piece in The New Indian Express titled ISOLATE TERROR, DO NOT SECULARISE IT!(The NIE, Dec. 1, 2008). Here, he rightly points out the knee-jerk reactions of the government of India while the terror was on. If he had stopped there, it would have been OK. But then he forays into his usual anti-secular ravings in his perverted, hate filled but brilliant language throbbing with his customary revulsion for non-Hindu Indians."

    To recap, here you have referred to Gurumurthy as employing "bigoted logic," to write a "disgusting piece", labeled thus because it records Gurumurthy's "anti secular ravings" using "perverted, hate filled but brilliant language" that is "throbbing with his customary revulsion for non Hindu Indians." These are your four charges against Mr. Gurumurthy. These are serious charges. One might expect that you would back them up with evidence. Sadly, this is not the case.


    Referring to the PM’s rather strange invitation(or summons? that’s what it sounded like to me) to the ISI, Gurumurthy says: Did he(Manmohan Singh) think that the ISI has suddenly shed its enmity and turned its admirer under the secular leaders Sonia Gandhi, a Christian, and himself, a Sikh?

    ReplyDelete
  24. The following is your first piece of evidence presented to prove your charges against Gurumurthy:

    "Referring to the PM’s rather strange invitation(or summons? that’s what it sounded like to me) to the ISI, Gurumurthy says: Did he(Manmohan Singh) think that the ISI has suddenly shed its enmity and turned its admirer under the secular leaders Sonia Gandhi, a Christian, and himself, a Sikh?"

    You seem to believe that this validates your charges against Gurumurthy's alleged hatred and bigotry. However, as Mr Gurumurthy points out, the terrorist attacks in question were carried out by terrorists backed by Pakistan's ISI. So, after the nation suffers a terrorist attack masterminded by the ISI, the PM invited the terrorist supporting ISI to Delhi so that he could share information about the terrorist attack! Gurumurthy is merely calling attention to the PM's naivety in assuming the ISI's trustworthiness when the had caused the very terrorist attack he was concerned about. Gurumurthy's point was that the ISI would not stop its subversive activities against India simply because a "secular" government headed by A Christian and a Sikh (non Hindus) was in power. This is clearly not a hateful statement, but an acknowledgment of a grim reality.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Your second piece of evidence against Gurumurthy reads thus:

    "His tirade continues. It is the Indian Polity’s inability to say plainly that Islamic terror is a global phenomenon, and it is extending itself into India through global Islamic network. Result, instead of isolating terror, the national political discourse began secularizing it. And then in his usual God-is-love-love-is-blind-therefore-god-is-blind type of logic he goes on and on, hammering the secular forces in India for not coming down heavily in thoughts, words and deeds on Muslims. The article concludes with Terror stands secularized, not isolated in secular discourse! How will India fight terror with this cerebral paralysis?

    What on earth does this fanatic want? Charge Indian political discourse with virulent communal sentiments? Posit a communal worldview as the ideal one for India? Does he realize that the demolition of Babri Masjid is the start point of the entry of jihadis in India? Does he want the government to harass Muslims in India, isolate them and start a communal war in the country? Does he want to see normalcy in the country completely destroyed so that predictability on a day to day basis is forever banished from the life of every Indian? Is that his idea of Ramrajya? Why doesn’t he understand the government(be it BJP or Congress) is always skating on thin ice and every patriotic citizen should refrain from making this task more difficult for them? Well, how can he when his brain in infected by communal bigotry leading to cerebral paralysis, which has rendered one portion of his thinking process non-functional?"

    Despite having not yet proven your previous charges against Gurumurthy, you claim he is a "fanatic" affected by "cerebral paralysis" a phrase he used in his article. You claim that there is something wrong with Gurumurthy's statement that the Indian government refuses to "say plainly that Islamic terror is global phenomenon" and thus "begins secularizing it."

    However, you do nothing to prove his statement incorrect. Islamic terror is indeed a global phenomenon, but the Indian government refuses to see this terror as Islamic or a global war against infidel India, when it is clearly derived from Islamic hatred for infidels. As such, when opponents of Indian anti terror laws pointed out the large number of Muslims jailed, it was assumed that this was as a result of discrimination against Muslims as a result of anti-Muslim terror laws. However, the truth of the matter, as Gurumurthy points out, is that the laws were merely anti terror laws; the reason that there were large numbers of Muslims jailed is because the terror was inspired by Islam, which would naturally result in lots of Muslim terrorists, who would be jailed by the authorities for terrorism. Gurumurthy's point here is that, because the government is ignoring the fact that the terrorists are part of a global jihadi network, inspired by Islam, they assume that they are discriminating against Muslims, when they are not. This assumption has lead to the authorities repealing anti-terror legislation, because that legislation is automatically, and falsely, seen as communal and anti-Muslim (when in fact, the only reason it is seen that way is because lots of Muslims, inspired by hate against infidels are committing terrorist attacks), thus exposing India to more terrorist attacks.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Therefore, Gurumurthy is not using "his usual God-is-love-love-is-blind-therefore-god-is-blind type of logic" (whatever that means) to "hammer the secular forces in India for not coming down heavily in thoughts, words and deeds on Muslims." He isn't criticizing the government for "not coming down heavily" on MUSLIMS at all, but on terrorists who are Muslims. He's criticizing them for refusing to understand the Islamic ideology that the terrorists espouse. The government sees the fact that they are Muslim to be of no consequence, and as such it sees the fact that lots of Muslims are being detained for terrorism to automatically indicated anti-Muslim discrimination, when in fact, since the terrorists are inspired by Islam, it makes sense to thoroughly investigate the Muslim community; failure to do so makes the Muslim community in India a safe haven for terrorists, since they know that the Indian government is too fearful of being labeled communal to properly investigate.

    In short, Gurumurthy is saying that it is unfairly considered "communal" to investigate MUSLIMS for complicity in acts of terror carried out by ISLAMIC terrorists. The secularists (aka anti Hindus) immediately cry foul and demand that the government show equality by banning Hindu groups and arresting Hindus. However, as Gurumurthy states, individuals should be jailed and groups should be banned, based on whether or not they are terrorist individuals and organizations respectively, NOT in order to equalize the number of Hindu terrorists and terror groups and Muslim terrorists and terror groups. Not all terror is equal; this is simply a sad reality, not "communalism." There are fewer Hindus jailed for terror and fewer Hindu organizations banned than their Muslim counterparts because Islamic terrorism is motivated by a global Islamic terrorist network driven by a hatred for infidels. Thus, the presence of more Muslim detainees than Hindu detainees should not automatically be assumed to be Islamophobic or communal. It is a sad reality that more Muslims ARE going to be detained for terrorist activities because Islamic terror is global; it is more pervasive, and more virulent, being based on a more deep seated hatred for infidels. This is not communal, it is REALITY.

    The secularists are unable to face the reality that due to the nature of the terrorist's ideology, there are going to be more Muslim terrorists than Hindu terrorists in jail. Because of this, they attempt to artificially equate the two, and deem any end result that results in more Muslims investigated, jailed, and convicted to be communal, whether or not the Muslims convicted are in fact terrorists, (in which case it would be justice). This attempt to "cap" the number of Muslims convicted results in weaker anti-terror investigations and half-hearted terror investigations because catching too many Muslim terrorists is considered communal!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Thus, you are woefully misunderstanding what Gurumurthy is trying to say. Gurumurthy is not using bigoted logic. He did not write a disgusting piece. He did not use irresponsible rhetoric, or perverted, hate filled language. He is not a fanatic, nor is he afflicted with cerebral paralysis. He doesn't want to charge Indian political discourse with virulent communal sentiments" or "posit a communal worldview as the ideal one for India" either. He wants Indians to call a spade a spade, and not assume that all terror is created equal, or that it is somehow automatically discriminatory against Muslims to investigate their communities for terrorists. Your entire rant about communalism is an unsupported red herring that fuels your baseless, contemptuous, vituperative rant against Gurumurthy. At no point in your post did you even remotely come close to showing that what he was saying was even remotely hateful; a careful deconstruction of Gurumurthy's piece, as I have done, shows it to be harmless and in fact, good advice. You claim to have read Gurumurthy's work for years, but prove yourself to be incapable of even understanding its basic premise. That you consider him HATEFUL for criticizing the PM's decision to attempt to appeal to the ISI to CATCH THE VERY TERRORISTS THEY LET LOOSE is evidence of this. Most people would not know whether to laugh or cry at the PM's stupidity, but you consider it a good decision!

    What is particularly disturbing is that your readers seem to be laboring under the same perverse delusions about Gurumurthy's supposed bigotry. Bombay dosti considers it to be "inflammatory." The Layman considers it to be "venom." Charakan says that Gurumurthy has hate in his mind. Scorpiogenius considers it to be "propaganda." Joseph is particularly nasty; he says Gurumurthy is a "mad man," hwho is "vicious and full of poison," his article is "trash," "canards," and "falsehood" and "rubbish" that "educated Indians" would be unable to "stomach." Amusingly, he says that your hilariously inaccurate post was"wonderful, extraordinary," and "inspiring," and that you "exposed Gurumuthy", in a "powerful way," "tore his mask to pieces,"

    This is insane. You did no such thing. You clearly had NO CLUE what Gurumurthy was saying, and yet you drag his name through the mud, and shower him with vicious, hurtful insults, all while accusing HIM of being hateful! I'm sorry but that is truly pathetic.

    Joseph shows his commitment to free speech when he says that "Gurumurthy should be put behind bars in an undisclosed jail for at least twenty years for instigating divisions in the society" and that he should be "banned from writing." Joseph claims that he is "amazed that he has admirers also for writing nonsense." The only thing that amazes me is that you, Joseph, and almost everyone else who has commented here is incapable of even the most basic understanding of Gurumurthy's simple prose! Where you all are getting these weird ideas that Gurumurthy is some kind of bigot is beyond me.

    Later he claims that Gurumurthy is "senile", a "yellow journalist," a "vampire who desperately wants people to fight and kill each other so he can drink blood" and that he writes "idiotic gibberish" that Joseph could easily refute if the newspaper would let him. Given that Joseph's comment is nothing more than pointless, substance less, vitriolic garbage, I'm not surprised that no newspaper would consider his work.

    ReplyDelete
  28. "Does he realize that the demolition of Babri Masjid is the start point of the entry of jihadis in India? Does he want the government to harass Muslims in India, isolate them and start a communal war in the country? Does he want to see normalcy in the country completely destroyed so that predictability on a day to day basis is forever banished from the life of every Indian? Is that his idea of Ramrajya? Why doesn’t he understand the government(be it BJP or Congress) is always skating on thin ice and every patriotic citizen should refrain from making this task more difficult for them? Well, how can he when his brain in infected by communal bigotry leading to cerebral paralysis, which has rendered one portion of his thinking process non-functional?"

    You're being absurdly paranoid. Gurumurthy is certainly not advocating that innocent Muslims languish in jail, or that Muslims be randomly hauled off the streets for questioning, as you seem to imply. Again, if you actually READ HIS ARTICLE, you'd understand that he's not promoting "communal war" or promoting a harassment of Muslims but actually attempting to promote communal harmony by demanding a more thorough crackdown on terrorism that isn't constantly hampered by bogus and illogical worries about "communalism." And no, terrorism did not start in India with the demolition of the Babri Masjid. The terrorists are motivated by the same hatred of infidels that prompted Babar to raze the temple that was on that site and build a mosque.

    In essence you have slandered, mocked, vilified, and sneered at one of the few honest writers in India who actually analyzes problems and attempts to solve them rather than blame the Sangh Parivar for everything, as "secular" journalists love to do. Congratulations.

    ReplyDelete
  29. The day after this article appeared came another one from Francois Gautier titled SONIA’S PRESENCE IN DELHI IS COSTING INDIA DEARLY (The NIE, Dec 2, 2008). Very much in bad taste on account of the very personal attacks on Sonia Gandhi, the atrticle gives the impression that this French man is trying to out herod herod to please this newspaper which has hired him, paying, no doubt, an obscenely fat fee in order to recruit a white man to lend greater credibility to its communal agenda."

    If you actually READ Gautier's other works, you'd find that he's actually been writing about Indian for decades now; clearly the NIE isn't paying him to "recruit a white man to lend greater credibility to its communal agenda." That simply revolting racism; simply because he is white does not mean that he is being bribed to write anything. If anyone is using white skin to lend greater credibility to themselves, it is the Congress itself which is shamelessly treating an Italian waitress like a queen. In fact, Gautier even writes about this craving for white skin in his book, Ferengi's Columns. A pathetic irony if there ever was one.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Gautier indulges in a litany of I accuse Sonia, which despite its mischievous intent, is uproariously comical by its very ridiculous, puerile melodramatic tone. For a sample:
    I accuse Sonia of being responsible for the tragedy of Mumbai
    I accuse Sonia and her govt.of having made NSG the laughing stock of the world
    I accuse Sonia of having her Christian and Western background, in four years, divided India on religious and caste lines in a cynical and methodical manner
    I accuse Sonia of weakening India’s spirit of sacrifice and courage - - -
    I accuse Sonia of always pointing the finger at Pakistan when terrorism in India is now mostly homegrown.
    I accuse Sonia of being an enemy of Hindus - - -
    I accuse Sonia of taking advantage of India’s respect for women -
    I accuse Sonia for exploiting the Indian Press’ obsession with her"

    The only one here being puerile and hilarious is you. You accuse Gautier of being a paid agent and issuing ad hominem insults when he is one of the few journalists to criticize Sonia Gandhi's autocratic rule over the Congress party and detail its disastrous results for the Indian people. In order to do this, you resort to vituperative, unsupported insults and slanderous accusations, a delicious irony you seem blissfully unaware of.

    ReplyDelete
  31. "After this hilarious litany fit for high school declamation contests, Gautier goes on to make vitriolic personal attacks on her."

    Given the absolutely horrific quality of your analysis of Gurumurthy's work, I don't see how you're in a position to criticize the honest analysis of a seasoned journalist.

    "Not that I am fan of Sonia Gandhi, but this is bad journalism. Will some one tell The NIE, that readers are discerning and when an obsession becomes a paranoia with a journalist, the reader only goes tut tutting in pity?

    Why is NIE wasting its space on such maniacal assault on secularism while its editorials go tom tomming secular ideals? Why this Janus like position?

    If the NIE wants to divide the country along communal lines, it should rope in journalists who know their job better, and do not lower the quality of the paper. Or is it quality at the altar of Hindutva?

    NIE clearly not sacrificing anything. It's actually being bold and publishing an article that ISN'T hagiographic sophistry by a Congress sycophant eager to lick the genitals of the Royal Family in exchange for scraps form their table. Gautier has actually been brave enough to CHALLENGE Sonia's dictatorial stranglehold over the party through her position in the Nehru Gandhi royal dynasty. He should be praised for this, not mocked! So now you've slandered the reputations of two excellent journalists, and proved absolutely nothing. Well done indeed.

    ReplyDelete

Dear visitors, dont run away without leaving behind something for me :-)
By the way, if your comment does not get posted at the first click, just click once more.