[Reader-list] Freedom of Expression my foot!

[zainab]

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
>> practical
>> >> examples.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --- Rahul Asthana <rahul_capri at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Dear Sadia,
>> >> > I think we are using and understanding the
>> phrase
>> >> > "essential nature of state" differently,so we
>> are
>> >> > ending up talking through each other.In your
>> >> > usage,essential nature of state is how it
>> exists
>> >> in
>> >> > practice.So if India is a country where dalits
>> are
>> >> > oppressed,which I agree with incidentally, then
>> >> > perhaps in your terms the oppression of the
>> dalits
>> >> > is
>> >> > the essential nature of the state.
>> >> > But my usage is constitutional\legal.I wont say
>> >> that
>> >> > oppresion of dalits is an "essential nature of
>> >> > Indian
>> >> > State",because the constitution does not enable
>> >> the
>> >> > oppression,quite the contrary in fact.
>> >> > So for me,the essential nature of Indian state
>> is
>> >> a
>> >> > "secular democracy".In a secular democracy
>> >> inequity
>> >> > of
>> >> > income may exist,and other "what ifs" that you
>> >> have
>> >> > mentioned may exist.That does not make them the
>> >> > essential nature of the state,because the
>> >> > constitution
>> >> > does not specifically enable them.
>> >> > My argument is not on the lines of what is more
>> >> > important or who is more patriotic;because that
>> is
>> >> > just sidestepping from the current topic.
>> >> >
>> >> > regards
>> >> > Rahul
>> >> >
>> >> > --- "S.Fatima" <sadiafwahidi at yahoo.co.in>
>> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Dear Rahul
>> >> > > Of course I am not in favour of somebody's
>> >> freedom
>>
> === message truncated ===
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
> Got a little couch potato?
> Check out fun summer activities for kids.
>
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=summer+activities+for+kids&cs=bz
> _________________________________________
> 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/>