[Reader-list] Lists and assaults

Sat Sep 15 12:35:55 IST 2007

On 9/15/07, Partha Dasgupta parthaekka at gmail.com> wrote

>>>>>>You 'ask for a terrorist to be brought to justice' forgetting the path
forged by JP in including the outsiders and bringing them into civil
society.
Do you really want to continue the cycle of hate? An eye for an eye - is
that the point so that we go on and on killing. More and more, till the
bodies pile up and all that is left is a ravaged landscape. >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Partha ,
We live in a country where the constitution exists. general amnesty to all
criminals ,especially terrorists is a very dangerous thought.

We can not go on and start defending people for they are *supposed* to have
been reformed [ or become political ] . Justice has to be served for their
deeds. These people have been source of violence against innconets , and
responsible for making a race homeless.

As the Pope Greogery VII  had once said and this may hold true for me ,"I
have loved justice and hated inequity; and therefore I die in exile."

Regards

Pawan Durani

> Dear Pawan,
>
> What you have provoked me into thinking about is how far this "gimme"
> attitude will go. As a father, I stop my youngest from doing it with his
> elder siblings since he's at the age when everything is 'mine'.
>
> Should I demand back Bangladesh, since as a Bengali my roots are there?
>
> Should I demand back Pakistan, where hundreds of thousands of Indians have
> there roots?
>
> Should I demand back Sri Lanka where Ram made his conquest (and it resides
> in the Indian Ocean)
>
> You 'ask for a terrorist to be brought to justice' forgetting the path
> forged by JP in including the outsiders and bringing them into civil
> society.
>
> Do you really want to continue the cycle of hate? An eye for an eye - is
> that the point so that we go on and on killing. More and more, till the
> bodies pile up and all that is left is a ravaged landscape.
>
> Or do we look at what the government has finally figured out - an
> 'inclusive' debate wherein concerned parties form a common consensus - which
> also cuts down the enforced mortality rate.
>
> Sure, I can block you off with spam - but that would allow you to write
> whatever you want as I sit silent. The same attitude in Germany that allowed
> Hitler to come to power and destroy decades of sensibility and almost wipe
> out a tribe. I can't because I have growing children and I hope that they
> will emerge into a reasoned society instead of a regimented one.
>
> You talk of the homeless because your home was taken away. That's personal
> so you care - and forget the pain of separation in India or the Nandigrams
> and dams that have caused so much pain.
>
> "But the dams are for the greater good" - in that case, wouldn't letting
> peace reign in J&K be for the greater good?
>
> I'm sure you have 50+ subscribers writing to you offline, maybe more. Good
> for you. If they're that proud of you, why slide offline and write? Keep the
> debate in the public forum unless you're ashamed of your views.
>
> When I wrote to you about the Yasin Malik post, all I enquired about was
> the reason and logic of the debate you wanted to start. Since this is not a
> blog or a 'me too' mass mail, the whole point about a post here is to raise
> debate.
>
> Till date, though we've reached the level of personal denigration, we have
> not had a debate on the central issue, and not a single response to the
> questions I asked.
>
> That you have a passion for J&K is an undeniable fact. However, just as I
> have a passion for Bengal, to present the case to you I must base my
> argument in reason and not gung-ho platitudes about heads and hearts. That's
> for polticians making a speech for elections - while this is a forum to
> discuss and debate viewpoints.
>
> If you have a point and a reason, let's talk. If not, why throw up tons of
> dust in the air? Sure, it'll obfuscate the issue and drown out everything
> else and make me dirty. But you're there too, and you will get just as
> dirty. Like every other day I'll take a bath and start off again.
>
> If you truly believe that you have a point that you can get across, then
> explain it and I will listen. If you stick to loud noises then I will make
> more noises so that my children hopefully get to see an India where reason
> and love form the core of society - not hate and intolerence.
>
> Rgds, Partha
>
>  On 9/15/07, Pawan Durani <pawan.durani at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear Anamika ,
> >
> > That is what I was trying to provoke the likes of Suddha , Partha and
> > Zainab
> > to think into.
> >
> > When they talk about freedom of expression , that means the liberty to
> > portray a terrorist as a moderan day Gandhi .
> >
> > And when I express my desire that a terrorist has to be bought to
> > justice ,
> > they find it pushing and then use some unparliamentary words.
> >
> > If my expression of resentment for a man who has made me homeless is not
> >
> > acceptable in freedom of speech , I wonder what else is ?
> >
> > I would continue to drag the issue below or above the belt as long as
> > the
> > terrorist is not bought to justice. if someone is not interested a
> > button is
> > needed to delete the mail or put me on SPAM . That is a gift technology
> > has
> > given to us.
> >
> > But if I interest you , you would continue to read me.
> >
> > To put on record I have around 50 + subscribers of readers-list writing
> > to
> > me offline and appreciating my concern.
> >
> > Who knows, the way things are turning , 20 years down the line your
> > child
> > may be writing the same stuff which I write now.
> >
> > Pawan
> >
> >
> > On 14 Sep 2007 23:19:52 -0000, Anamika Bhatnagar <
> > bhatnagar_anamika at rediffmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Man...I am seriously irritated by these stupid replies and counter
> > replies
> > > ...true...that
> > > freedom of speech must be maintained and preserved but these...pawan
> > and
> > > company drag
> > > it below the belt...it is so difficult to have a constructive argument
> > > with them..
> > >
> > > On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 Rana Dasgupta wrote :
> > > >Rana Dasgupta wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Given the seriousness of some of the issues at stake, and the
> > enormous
> > > > > gulfs of understanding between some of the contributors, I have to
> > say
> > > > > I've admired the restraint of many of the writers on the
> > list.  People
> > > > > have held themselves back from expressing outright disgust, or
> > from
> > > > > violent attacks.
> > > >
> > > >I take it all back.
> > > >_________________________________________
> > > >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: &lt;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: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Partha Dasgupta (9811047132)
> http://www.jaxtr.com/parthaekka