[Reader-list] About Accusations on this List

[yasir ~يا سر]

dear moderator,

if you do decide to expel the KPs concerned from the list, please do so so
that they land in PK.

this will give us a chance to show our hospitality. it may change a few
minds

regards

yasir.pk



On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Shuddhabrata Sengupta <shuddha at sarai.net>wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> I have noticed a curious and remarkable phenomenon of late on our
> list, and am wondering whether or not any of you have noticed it too.
> Unfortunately it is not without precedent.
>
> We know well by now that when those who speak for 'Panun Kashmir' and
> 'Roots in Kashmir' run out of arguments, especially when faced with
> detailed and cross referenced material that does not support their
> 'case', habitually retort with abuse, invective and insinuation. They
> express their desires to 'spit' on people's faces, exactly as their
> ABVP / Sri Ram Sena  goon allies spit on the faces of university
> lecturers invited to speak at the university.
>
> Of late, there has been another kind of 'spitting' going on in this
> list, and in the online communications emanating from individuals
> associated with 'Panun Kashmir' and 'Roots in Kashmir'.
>
>  I am speaking about a curious pattern of a specific kind of
> insinuations emanating mainly from Pawan Durani (but also of late
> from Aditya Raj Kaul) that suggest that whosoever does not agree with
> the PK/RIK gospel or the broad hardline Indian nationalist position
> on anything must be doing so because they are actively doing the
> bidding of their 'foreign masters' and further, because they are
> being 'paid' to do so. Since their ethical horizons are severely
> limited and compromised, the makers of these accusations cannot
> imagine that some of us take a principled position against the things
> that they hold sacrosant. And so, failing to account for the ethical
> basis of our opposition, they leap to accuse us of being adversarial
> purely for the sake of private and pecuniary gain. So, 'writers' and
> journalists are paid by their terrorist masters, I am a paid agent,
> Sanjay Kak was paid by Yasin Malik (this is a charge that was made
> when the debate on Jashn-e-Azadi began) and Prakash Ray is 'Sanjay
> Kak's propoganda agent on the payroll of Yasin Malik' , and so on.
>
> This allegation that ones critics are ones critics because they are
> being paid to be critics and that too by devious foreign powers or
> their local clients is the time tested 'foreign hand' and 'agent of
> the foreign hand' theory that is the Brahmastra (secret lethal
> weapon) that Indian politicians (and not only Indian politicians)
> resort to when all else fails. It is the true hallmark of a failure
> of reason, a profound disconnect with reality and dismal poverty of
> the political imagination. It attempts to hide but fails to conceal a
> rancid, rabid, raucous politics.
>
> Of course, as is evident from the emails forwarded by Sonia Jabbar on
> to the list recently, some of the illustrious company that Mr. Durani
> keeps, such as the gentleman known as Ashish Zutshi, another 'Roots
> in Kashmir' luminary, himself offered her a 'reasonable sum of money'
> to write for their cause. Perhaps the sleazy language of bribery is
> the only one that these gentlemen understand, because at least in
> this case, they seem to be doing precisely what (offering a bribe)
> that they accuse us of being beholden to. Rather, this is a case of
> one kind of influence peddlers admitting to the fact that they lament
> not having their current adversaries as their own 'paid agents'. Why
> else would they offer to pay someone who doesn't agree with them a
> 'reasonable amount' to change her mind.
>
> In the last two weeks there have been several specific occasions when
> either I, or someone broadly willing to question the PK/RIK hard line
> nationalist gospel has been called a paid 'agent'. Further, Aarti has
> been accused of selling herself 'cheaply' and Sanjay Kak has been
> accused of taking money from Yasin Malik. And there have also been
> two specific occasions when people (Aman and me, by implication) have
> been called 'puppets of the Chinese'.
>
> Now this is something that I take quite seriously. I do not take this
> casually, as I do not think that these accusations are made casually
> either.
>
> The allegations suggest, basically, that some of us are writing what
> we are writing on this list because some 'foreign power'  or
> 'terrorist' is greasing our palms. Since I am included in this list,
> I am willing to take on this matter personally. Notwithstanding the
> fact that my bank accounts suggest otherwise, I am insulted to know
> that Pawan Durani should think that my political convictions and
> reflections are available for purchase at such low rates in the
> market, or, more fundamentally, that I am a hired hack who writes not
> out of conviction but  for the sake of crumbs and leavings from my
> 'masters' table. The Reader List is a space of freedom. No one is
> paid by the hosts  or the administrator of the list to write
> anything. No payments are sought from the hosts or administrator for
> any kind of writing either. My professional responsibilities at Sarai
> do not include writing on the Reader List either.
>
> I consider this an insult to the community of the reader list, to the
> Sarai programme at CSDS and a serious affront to my reputation and my
> professional standing. I do not wish to ignore this or take it
> lightly, especially as this has been made on a very public forum. I
> may have been willing to ignore the odd barb of this nature (and it
> is not that it has not been thrown in the past) but when we get seven
> defamatory missives in two weeks, then we are looking at a serious
> and determined pattern that I do not think deserves to be ignored or
> overlooked.
>
> Let's look at each one of these instances. I have tagged each quote
> with the subject header and the date of the posting from which it is
> taken, so that they can be traced easily by all list members. My
> comments follow each quotation. Certain portions within each
> quotation have been capitalized for reasons of emphasis (mine).
>
> --------------------------
> 1.
>
> Re: [Reader-list] When will Muslims join the mainstream?
> Date: 21 October 2008 6:21:56 PM GMT+05:30
>
> (from Pawan Durani)
>
> "...Notwithsatnding a well CALCULATED EFFORT BACKED BY A FOREIGN
> COUNTRY , so called intellectuals and so called jornalists who
> created a disinformation campaign, such as in Jamia Encounter ,
> Parlaiment case are being followed more closely.
>
> Number of people are supposed to be under close scanner and their links
> ascertained. Hoping the truth and the DETAILS PAYOUTS will come out
> soon..."
>
> MY COMMENT: Pawan Durani claims to know the following -
> (a) that those raising questions about the Jamia Encounter and the
> Parliament Attack case are party to a 'well calculated effort backed
> by a foreign country'
> (b) that they are 'under a close scanner', their 'links are being
> ascertained'
> (c) that the 'details' of 'payouts' will come out soon...
>
> In all fairness, either he should furnish the list with details of
> how he can substantiate (a - which foreign country?), (b) & (c)
> above, or stand charged of making baseless allegations designed to
> malign the character and reputation of people in a public forum.
>
> In the event that he cannot prove (a), (b) & (c) I would like to know
> whether or not list members believe that this alone ought not to
> count as sufficient reason for his expulsion from the list ?
>
> 2.
>
> Re: [Reader-list] When will Muslims join the mainstream?
> Date: 25 October 2008 3:53:21 PM GMT+05:30
>
> (from Pawan Durani)
>
> "...I know I am not a master of mixing words NOR IS THIS A FULL TIME
> JOB FOR ME  FOR WHICH I GET PAID FOR..." (sic)
>
> MY COMMENT: This is specifically addressed to me. Since I am neither
> employed nor monetarily compensated to write posts on the Reader List
> on any subject whatsoever, and do so entierly of my own free will, I
> want to know what Pawan Durani means when he implies that writing on
> the Reader List is a 'full time job for which I get paid'. Again, if
> he cannot substantiate this, it will amount to defamation because it
> will imply that I say what I do, or have the political convictions
> that I have because I am paid for this. In other words, that I am a
> 'mercenary'. If he cannot substantiate this charge, I would again
> like to ask whether he should be expelled from this list, or allowed
> to continue to make allegations without basis?
>
> 3.
>
> Re: [Reader-list] Thinking Through Figures on Internal Displacement
> from Kashmir
> Date: 1 November 2008 2:11:09 PM GMT+05:30
>
> (from Pawan Durani)
>
> "...Mind it , we are fighting for ourselves and IT IS A UNPAID JOB,
> UNLIKE SOME SURROGATES WHO ACT PROXY for secessionists in Kashmir and
> support their
> cause by trying to create an opinion..."
>
> MY COMMENT: If what he is doing is an 'unpaid job' it implies, from
> reading this and the previous quote, that I am doing a 'paid
> job' (again because this is addressed to me). Once again, the
> questions I have asked immediately before this still hold.
>
> 4.
>
> Re: [Reader-list] Thinking Through Figures on Internal Displacement
> from Kashmir
> Date: 1 November 2008 5:17:49 PM GMT+05:30
>
> (from Pawan Durani)
>
> "...I dont have time like Shuddha for writing such a long mail, and
> also IT IS NOT MY PAID JOB."
>
> MY COMMENT: Implication - it is Shuddha's "paid job" to write in the
> way he does. See my previous two comments above. Same question holds
>
> 5.
>
> Re: [Reader-list] Thinking Through Figures on Internal Displacement
> from Kashmir
> Date: 2 November 2008 12:37:24 PM GMT+05:30
>
> (from Pawan Durani)
>
> "We dont need him or his lip service. LET HIM SERVE HIS MASTERS and
> we would continue to counter their agenda..."
>
> MY COMMENT: So providing a detailed set of arguments amounts to me
> "serving" my "masters". Who are these "masters"? Does Durani have a
> list of my "masters" or  any proof for the allegation that he is
> making here that I write on the list at the bidding of "masters"? If
> he does not have this proof, then again, I am constrained to ask
> whether or not he should be expelled from the list for reasons of
> defamation.
>
> 6.
>
> Re: [Reader-list] Kashmiri Pandits demand 'internally displaced
> persons' status
> Date: 3 November 2008 1:33:03 PM GMT+05:30
>
> (from Pawan Durani)
>
> "...At least WE ARE NOT PUPPETS OF CHINESE IDEOLOGY. You know what I
> mean."
>
> MY COMMENT: The implication here is that those who do not agree with
> Pawan's position are the puppets of "Chinese ideology"? What does
> "Chinese ideology" mean? Does it mean, Confucianism, Taoism, Maoism,
> Kuomintang Thought, Dengism, Falun Gong tendencies or an unnatural
> preference for Chinese cuisine?
>
> I take it (though, who knows, I could be wrong)  that Pawan is
> referring to a willingness to act at the behest of 'Chinese' masters,
> specifically those in positions of power within the Chinese Communist
> Party and the government of the Peoples Republic of China.
>
> If so, how would he explain the fact that several of the people he
> would identify as his adversaries (me, for instance) have been vocal
> critics of Maoism (all varieties), the Chinese Communist Party and
> the government of the Peoples Republic of China on this list. We have
> in fact gone on record to point out the similarities between the way
> in which the government of mainland China deals with Tibet, and the
> way in which the Government of India deals with the occupation that
> it undertakes in Kashmir.
>
> In the light of this fact, the above allegation is rendered baseless.
>
> 7.
>
> Re: [Reader-list] Kashmiri Pandits demand 'internally displaced
> persons' status
> 3 November 2008 1:42:34 PM GMT+05:30
>
> (from Aditya Raj Kaul)
>
> "It has become so usual now to SEE THESE PUPPETS SPEAK THEIR MASTERS
> TONE..."
>
> MY COMMENT: Here, Aditya Raj Kaul echoes Pawan Durani's insinuation
> that anyone who questions them (him and Durani) are "puppets" who act
> at the behest of their masters.
>
> -----------------
>
> Re: [Reader-list] SIMI Activists found with SAR Geelani CDs
> 9 November 2008 14:14:12 IST 2008
>
> (from Aditya Raj Kaul)
>
> "dear SANJAY KAK'S PROPOGANDA AGENT ON PAYROLLS OF YASIN MALIK
>
> MY COMMENT: None
> __________________________
>
> I am giving Pawan Durani and Aditya Raj Kaul exactly one day (from
> the date and time of this posting) to furnish detailed,
> substantiatable proof for what I consider to be the allegations in
> their defamatory and scurrilous postings aimed at me and others on
> this list.
>
> If they are not able to furnish these proofs within this one day. Or,
> if the proofs they furnish are found to be insubstantial, motivated
> and inadequate to the charges that they make, then I would request
> the list administrator that both of them be expelled from this list
> with immediate effect.
>
> Let me clarify one thing in closing. I am and have always been in
> favour of freedom of expression. And I have defended (over the last
> year and a half) the right of Pawan Durani and Aditya Raj Kaul and
> their allies (in serious offline discussions) to continue to torment
> this list with their rubbish time and time again when demands have
> been made for his expulsion on grounds of 'hate speech'. I am willing
> to go the extra mile to give the benefit of the doubt when someone
> stands accused of 'hate speech' especially when I do not agree with
> them, because I think that even things said in anger need a hearing.
> And I have gone that extra mile with Pawan Durani, Aditya Raj Kaul
> and their allies.
>
> But defamation and libel are offenses, not opinions. The harm that
> they can do is objectively verifiable, not a matter of speculation or
> conjecture. Opinions, no matter how vile they may be can be countered
> by arguments and better formulated opinions. But the lies that attack
> peoples personal lives and conduct, especially when they are uttered
> on public fora, spread poison if they are not dealt with exemplary
> and immediate severity. There have to be consequences for such
> conduct, no matter who does it.
>
> If someone says that I am paid to speak in the way that I do by a
> foreign power, then there is no ambiguity in this statement. EIther I
> am, or I am not. I know I am not. The mails that I am referring to
> above suggests that I am, and several others on the list are. And
> since this is a statement about concrete people, not about some
> abstractions . then the only way to settle this is to demand that the
> person or persons making the allegation proves what they say, or
> faces the consequences of bearing false witness. The reason I am
> saying this is because there actually are very serious consequences
> to being thought of as a 'paid' agent of a 'foreign power' in this
> country, at a time like what we are going through, today. Such
> accusations and labels cannot and must not be taken lightly.
>
> Either he is lying, or I am. And an untruth about a person is libel
> and cannot by any stretch of imagination be subject to protection on
> the grounds of freedom of expression. This forum would be betraying
> itself and the reasons why it was founded if it confuses the license
> to defame a person or persons with the freedom of expression.
>
> I hope I have made myself abundantly clear. I have nothing to conceal.
>
> regards
>
> Shuddha
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________
> 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/>