[Reader-list] Freedom of Expression my foot!

[Rahul Asthana]

Hi Zainab,
I noticed you did not answer my first question.So I
assume you did not go through my posts and\or you do
not know what I stand for.You just know that I am
talking about restricting freedom of speech and it is
connected with nation in some way.This thought is
probably so traumatic to you that you wrote that
earlier post in deep anguish and you refuse to see the
nuance in my stand;nor do you have a concept of nation
of your own.
I do not have anything new to say;not that I am
unwilling to discuss that or repeat it further.But
what you are asking me is nothing but a straw man.So
yeah,my view is that freedom of expression for
anything that cannot be achieved by a constitutional
process as the constitution is defined today should be
restricted.Or in other words,anything which is against
what is defined as the "essential nature of the
constitution" or is defined as the "essential nature
of the state" should be restricted.
So anything against secularism,democracy etc should be
restricted.Anything which seeks to redefine as our
state exists now AS A LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL ENTITY
should be restricted.
If its still not clear,In this forum and at other
places I have criticized AFSPA repeatedly.AFSPA is not
the essential nature of the state;it can be repealed
by a constitutional process.
What else?Did I miss anything?
Let me know.
Oh yes and if the essential nature of state is not
clear as I mean it,do go through this link..
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2007/20070115/edit.htm#4
Regards
Rahul


--- zainab <zainab at mail.xtdnet.nl> wrote:

> Hi Rahul,
> 
> I really do not know what this nation is and
> thereofore I am asking you
> what is this nation that you talk about? What is
> this nation that is above
> me or greater than me, which has the right to ban my
> freedom of expression
> (which it incidentally does under the guise of
> 'reasonable restrictions'
> and 'national security' if we read Article 19 (1))
> if I 'say anything
> against it'? I don't know what this nation is. I
> don't know what this
> mighty force is and I refuse to let it determine my
> life. 
> 
> Best,
> 
> Zainab
> 
> 
> On Sat, 1 Sep 2007 17:43:47 -0700 (PDT), Rahul
> Asthana
> <rahul_capri at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Zainab,
> > OK,I read that.Well written.Can you please do me a
> > favor and read my posts in this thread and tell me
> > what do you think I stand for?
> > Also,can you please do me one more favour and tell
> me
> > what do you mean by nation?
> > 
> > This will help me in answering your question.
> > Best regards
> > Rahul
> > 
> > 
> > --- zainab <zainab at mail.xtdnet.nl> wrote:
> > 
> >> I do not live in a war zone
> >> I live in a state of terror
> >> Terror which is perpetual
> >> which assumes various proportions.
> >> There is terror inside of me,
> >> Outside of me
> >> Terror about who is lurking,
> >> In those distant shadows
> >> Is it my enemy or my foe?
> >> Oh, it is the security guard!
> >> He is here for my security.
> >> He has a naked gun in his hand
> >> The gun is ignorant, but the guard is not.
> >> The strength, might, and power of the gun gives
> me
> >> courage to muster up
> >> courage.
> >> I am feeling safe.
> >> My breath is calm and smooth.
> >> So is my heartbeat.
> >> I am safe.
> >> Suddenly, the guard advances towards me
> >> His naked gun is too.
> >> He comes close enough,
> >> looks into my eyes,
> >> peers. His looks are piercing.
> >> He says, ‘Sorry pal, I have to shoot you
> down.’
> >> ‘I have to shoot you so that you become
> (vulgar)
> >> news.’
> >> ‘The headlines should shriek, ‘We
> gunned down an
> >> enemy spy.’’
> >> ‘But I am a citizen of this country, not an
> enemy
> >> spy,’ I pleaded.
> >> ‘Why do you do this to me?
> >> What is my crime?
> >> What is my sin?’
> >> ‘Nuffing! Nffing’s your crime,
> >> Nuffing’s your sin’
> >> ‘You are simply going to be a martyr,
> >> A martyr of the Other Side
> >> And a source of security for Our Side
> >> You see buddy, there are many
> >> whom I have to protect,
> >> Many whom I have to make feel safe
> >> Many whom I have to assure that the world is a
> safe
> >> place to be in, to live
> >> in
> >> as long as I am there.
> >> So put your faith (and money) in me (and my guns)
> >> For as long as I am there,
> >> You will be there,
> >> Your progeny will be there,
> >> Safe, calm and soothed.
> >> And you, buddy, will help me comfort the souls of
> >> this world
> >> Souls, who are in un-rest and discomfort
> >> Because the Other is there,
> >> The enemy is there,
> >> And they (the perturbed and disturbed souls) need
> to
> >> be protected
> >> And made to feel secure.
> >> Your death shall bring them security.
> >> Your dead body shall unnerve their perturbed
> souls.
> >> Your death will be their joy.’
> >> ‘But what about tomorrow,’ I asked,
> >> ‘Who will you gun tomorrow?
> >> How long will you continue to make them feel
> safe,
> >> Feel secure, feel soothed?
> >> Will they ever cease to be insecure?’
> >> ‘No, not until I know,’ said he,
> >> ‘As long as there are weapons,
> >> As long as there are bombs,
> >> As long as there are walls (in people’s
> minds)
> >> As long as people don’t know
> >> (The unknown enemy is always greater than the
> known)
> >> As long as we don’t let them know,
> >> Fear will prevail (in their hearts and minds)
> >> The state of terror shall be
> >> And there shall be martyrs like you
> >> Whom we shall slay alive’
> >> Saying this, he shot a bullet into my skull
> >> And the next day, I, an unknown citizen, became
> >> known.
> >> I became The Enemy.
> >>
> >> So now Rahul, I want to ask you a question - what
> is
> >> this nation that you
> >> talk about? What is this nation which cannot hear
> >> anything said against it?
> >> What is this nation that has the right to clamp
> down
> >> on me if I say
> >> something which is supposedly against it?
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Zainab
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, 1 Sep 2007 05:40:32 -0700 (PDT), Rahul
> >> Asthana
> >> <rahul_capri at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> > Sadia:)
> >> > I am not asking you to ignore them.So when I am
> >> saying
> >> > something is against the essential nature of
> >> state,I
> >> > do not mean how the state exists in practice.I
> do
> >> not
> >> > mean all those things you listed because the
> >> > constitution specifically does not enable
> them.For
> >> eg.
> >> > The income equity as it exists is not the
> >> essential
> >> > nature of state.All your scenarios to me become
> >> straw
> >> > men.
> >> > Anyway, this is my last word on this.
> >> > Cheers.
> >> > Rahul
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --- "S.Fatima" <sadiafwahidi at yahoo.co.in>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> No Rahul, the constitution and judiciary is
> >> >> certainly
> >> >> not against any citizen - I am not saying that
> >> the
> >> >> Dalit oppression exists because of the
> >> constitution.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I am stressing on the practical aspect of
> >> judiciary/
> >> >> state since that's what counts. Nobody can
> >> endanger
> >> >> the essential nature of state if it is only a
> >> >> theoretical entity.
> >> >>
> >> >> Secular democracy means nothing as long as
> >> >> corruption
> >> >> and prejudice exists. We cannot ignore the
> 
=== message truncated ===



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Shape Yahoo! in your own image.  Join our Network Research Panel today!   http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7