[Reader-list] Azadi: The Only Way ­ Report from a Turbulent Few Hours in Delhi

[Pawan Durani]

Shuddha,

While I agree that 87 elections were unfair , but quoting that all
elections were a fraud on people of Jammu & Kashmir would be grossly
incorrect.

In such a case , Mr Geelani himself would have never contested and won
elections in Kashmir . Even in the 87 elections , Mr Geelani won.
Shunning elections became a compulsion for Mr Geelani with the advent
of Gun culture and today he cant even talk of a compromise with Indian
Govt. He knows what happened to many who tried to compromise . He too
fears for his life , his son fled to Rawalpindi to save himself.

It is not for no reason that ISI is considered the worlds No 1 Spy agency.

I do not wish to reply to Anupam's mail , his tone & language doesnt
deserve an answer

Pawan

On 10/22/10, Shuddhabrata Sengupta <shuddha at sarai.net> wrote:
> Dear All, dear Lalit,
>
> I happen to know a little bit of Persian. And one of the reasons why
> I loathe people like Ahamdinijad is because they really represent the
> antithesis of all that I think is significant in Persian culture The
> expression, 'Azadi bara-e-Islam' (which is pure Persian, not Arabic)
> means ' Freedom for Islam' not 'Freedom Through Islam' and there is a
> world of difference between the words, 'for' and 'through'. The
> Persian for 'through' in this sense is - 'ba estefade az' When you
> say 'Freedom through Islam' (Azadi ba estefade az Islam)  it means,
> Islam is the 'means' to freedom, (this rules out other means, because
> means are causes, instrumentalities, and when you stress the primacy
> of one cause, you undermine others). When you say Freedom for Islam,
> it means that the abstract category called freedom, including the
> specific abstraction of freedom for Islam is your goal. It does not
> rule out other goals, other freedoms, other general or specific
> abstractions.
>
> I am for 'Azadi bara-e-Islam' as much as I am for 'Azadi bara-e-
> Zindiqui' (Freedom for Heretics) as I am for 'Azadi bara-e-
> kuffar' (freedom for infidel/unbelievers) as I do not see two
> different kinds of liberty to be mutually exclusive. To you, your
> faith, to me, my unbelief. We may still have reason to sit and talk
> to each other. However, if you decide that only one method will do
> for the reaching of our goals, then, one of us has to concede defeat.
> That would be the meaning of 'Azad ba estefade az Islam'.
>
> Ahmadinijad stole an election from the Iranian people, he perpetrated
> a fraud on them. That is why he needs to be opposed. The Indian state
> has stolen several so called elections in Jammu and Kashmir,
> including the infamous one of 1987, in which Syed Ali Shah Geelani
> did win a seat to the assembly. Had the Indian state not acted as
> perfidiously as Ahmadinijad in the matter of stealing elections,
> perhaps we would not have been where we are today. I have many things
> against Narendra Modi, but I do concede that he was elected by a
> popular mandate. Syed Ali Shah Geelani and his camp believes that the
> governance of the state of Jammu and Kashmir in India does not have
> the moral legiitimacy of the freely and fairly given consent of the
> people. In this specific sense, i am in agreement with him. If
> tomorrow, hypothetically, Narendra Modi were to be defeated in a
> frauduent election. And if he then were to initiate a popular
> movement against a goveranance that did not have the moral legitimacy
> of an electorate's consent, then, in that limited sense, I would
> support his campaign, regardless of how loathesome or not his
> politics may be to me.
>
> This point (of the legitimacy of governance, and of the consent to be
> governed by a specific sovereign) need not be confused with
> ideological questions of how one responds to a particular individuals
> position with regard to the formulation of an Islamic state.
>
> Next time you invoke a slogan, and try to score a point, try and be a
> little more precise and careful.
>
> best,
>
> Shuddha
>
> On 22-Oct-10, at 6:03 PM, Lalit Ambardar wrote:
>
>>
>> This is height of ideological perfidy----oppose elected Ahmadinejad
>> in Iran & eulogise the megalomanic proponent of “Azadi- bara- e-
>> Islam” (freedom through Islam) in Kashmir.
>>
>>  Compulsive anti-state ‘agent provocateurs’ are only prolonging the
>> agony of Kashmiri masses by patronising those who want to usher
>> Kashmir in to the medieval past.
>> Rgds all
>> LA
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>> Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 17:59:44 +0530
>>> From: pawan.durani at gmail.com
>>> To: sonia.jabbar at gmail.com
>>> CC: reader-list at sarai.net
>>> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Azadi: The Only Way  Report from a
>>> Turbulent Few Hours in Delhi
>>>
>>> Awaiting a 3000 + Lines explanation from Mr Sengupta
>>>
>>> On 10/22/10, SJabbar <sonia.jabbar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Dear Shuddha,
>>>>
>>>> I've read with interest your report on the meeting at the LTG and
>>>> am amazed
>>>> that you have aligned yourself with and have so wholeheartedly
>>>> endorsed the
>>>> reactionary politics of SAS Geelani. Whatever he may have said
>>>> for the
>>>> benefit of audiences in New Delhi he has always advocated Kashmir's
>>>> accession to Pakistan based on the 2-nation theory. He has made this
>>>> unambiguously clear in his book on the Kashmir issue: 'Nava-e-
>>>> Hurriyat'. He
>>>> has reiterated this position as late as Sept 25 in an interview
>>>> to Seema
>>>> Mustafa of News X where he clearly states the independence option
>>>> is not
>>>> viable. He has never described the Kashmiri movement as a
>>>> political struggle
>>>> but a jihad and had in 1992 even written to the Afghan Mujahideen
>>>> to save
>>>> Kashmir from 'Hindu India.'
>>>>
>>>> And what of the votaries of independence and their assassination
>>>> by the
>>>> Hizb, the armed wing of the Jamat e-Isami of which Geelani was a
>>>> member
>>>> until his expulsion in 2003? What is SAS Geelani's position on
>>>> that? If he
>>>> has ever condemned it I should be grateful if someone were to
>>>> send me a
>>>> reference.
>>>>
>>>> That a man who has all his life scorned the notion of an
>>>> independent Kashmir
>>>> should now detail the character and complexion of such a state
>>>> including its
>>>> attitude to the sale and consumption of alcohol is truly funny,
>>>> that he
>>>> should quote Gandhi, even funnier (he was one of the first to
>>>> castigate
>>>> Yasin Malik's Gandhian methods of fasting as 'un-Islamic'.) That
>>>> he should
>>>> call for the return of the Pandits without once condemning their
>>>> killings or
>>>> the killings of Communists and National Conference workers in
>>>> Kashmir is
>>>> like Advani speaking about the prosperity of Muslims in Gujarat.
>>>>
>>>> You say Syed Ali Shah says "explicitly" he is not against
>>>> dialogue, but you
>>>> don't stop to question the placing of preconditions to a
>>>> dialogue. Geelani
>>>> has scorned talks with Delhi for years. He has abused those who
>>>> have talked
>>>> to N Delhi as traitors. The HM has assassinated those who dared
>>>> to talk to
>>>> N Delhi, whether it was Moulvi Farooq, Qazi Nissar, and even its
>>>> own senior
>>>> commanders like Abdul Majid Dar (they didn't even spare his wife Dr.
>>>> Shameema who was shot at and grievously injured several years
>>>> after her
>>>> husband's murder.)
>>>>
>>>> Who places preconditions and then says let's have unconditional
>>>> talks? What
>>>> would you say if New Delhi were to say, we will only speak to
>>>> SASG if he
>>>> stops describing Kashmir as disputed territory or for that matter
>>>> we will
>>>> not speak to Hurriyat (M) and JKLF until they give up their stand on
>>>> independent Kashmir? All of us would think New Delhi as being
>>>> supremely
>>>> unreasonable to expect a negotiation to begin by insisting the
>>>> other party
>>>> give up its core premise.
>>>>
>>>> And what is Geelani's FIRST precondition? That India accept that
>>>> J&K is
>>>> disputed territory. For India to accept that (esp. On SASG's
>>>> goading) would
>>>> mean, in diplomatese, to forgo its position on the Simla
>>>> Agreement and all
>>>> other agreements reached with Pakistan post 1972 and return to
>>>> 1948 and the
>>>> 'dispute' that was framed in the UN Resolutions, meaning, tossing
>>>> the ball
>>>> back into the UN and set itself up to arbitration from the
>>>> international
>>>> community. Why should it do that when both parties to the dispute
>>>> agreed to
>>>> settle the issue bilaterally? SAS Geelani knows that well enough
>>>> and is
>>>> content having tossed his 5 points into the arena and say, well I
>>>> never said
>>>> I wouldn't talk.
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>> sj
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 22/10/10 3:51 AM, "Shuddhabrata Sengupta" <shuddha at sarai.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> (Apologies for Cross Posting on Kafila.org)
>>>>
>>>> Dear Friends,
>>>>
>>>> I was present and
>>>>> speaking a few hours ago at a meeting titled
>>>> ŒAzadi: The Only Way¹ on the
>>>>> situation in Jammu and Kashmir,
>>>> organized by the Committee for the Release
>>>>> of Political Prisoners at
>>>> the Little Theatre Group in Delhi yesterday (21st
>>>>> October). I was not
>>>> present from the beginning of the meeting as I was
>>>>> traveling from
>>>> another city, but can vouch for what occurred from around
>>>>> 4:30 pm
>>>> till the time that the meeting wound up, well after 8:00 pm in the
>>>>>
>>>> evening.
>>>>
>>>> The meeting took place in the packed to capacity auditorium of the
>>>>>
>>>> Little Theatre Group on Copernicus Marg at the heart of New Delhi.
>>>> Several
>>>>> speakers, including the poet Varavara Rao, Prof. Mihir
>>>> Bhattacharya, Sugata
>>>>> Bhadra, Gursharan Singh, G.N.Saibaba, Professor
>>>> Sheikh Showkat Hussain of
>>>>> Srinagar University, the journalist Najeeb
>>>> Mubaraki, a repesentative of the
>>>>> Naga Peoples Movement for Human
>>>> Rights and Justice, the writer Arundhati Roy
>>>>> and myself spoke at the
>>>> meeting. (I may be missing out some names, for which
>>>>> I apologize, but
>>>> I was not present for a part of the meeting, at the very
>>>>> beginning)
>>>> The climax of the meeting was a very substantive and significant
>>>>>
>>>> speech by Syed Ali Shah Geelani of the Hurriyat Conference (G),
>>>> which
>>>> spelt
>>>>> out the vision of liberation (Azaadi) and Justice that Syed Ali
>>>> Shah Geelani
>>>>> held out before the assembled public, of which I will
>>>> write in detail later
>>>>> in this text.
>>>>
>>>> The artist known as ŒInder Salim¹ originally from Kashmir,
>>>>> currently
>>>> living in Delhi, made an intervention by inviting the assembled
>>>>>
>>>> people to take (with him) the stance of a masked stone pelter for a
>>>> brief,
>>>>> silent moment. Students from the Jawaharlal Nehru University
>>>> sang a song,
>>>>> ŒTu Zinda Hai to Zindagi Ki Jeet Mein Yakeen Kar¹
>>>> invoking the delights of
>>>>> life and liberation. In conclusion, the
>>>> meeting adopted a resolution, which
>>>>> was read, on behalf of the
>>>> Committee for the Release of Political Prisoners,
>>>>> by Mihir Bhattacharya.
>>>>
>>>> The atmosphere, for the several hours that I was
>>>>> present, was
>>>> absolutely electric. The vast majority of the audience was warm
>>>>> and
>>>> appreciative of all the speakers. They were patient and respectful
>>>>>
>>>> and despite grave provocation from a section that identified
>>>> themselves as
>>>>> ŒIndian patriots¹ and partisans of the ŒKashmir as
>>>> indivisible part of
>>>>> India¹ position - that repeatedly tried to
>>>> interrupt the meeting and heckle
>>>>> speakers, and on one occasion even
>>>> tried to throw an object at the dias
>>>>> did not stoop to be provoked
>>>> by these pathetic attempts at disruption of a
>>>>> peaceful gathering.
>>>>
>>>> No provocative, secterian or hateful slogans were raised
>>>>> by the
>>>> majority of the people present. The only provocative posturing
>>>> that I
>>>>>
>>>> witnessed was undertaken by the self-declared Indian patriots, who
>>>> were not
>>>>> stopped from having their say, but were requested simply not
>>>> to disrupt the
>>>>> proceedings.
>>>>
>>>> When their behaviour crossed the limits of public decency, they
>>>>> were
>>>> escorted out of the premises by representatives of the Delhi Police.
>>>>>
>>>> The Delhi Police, to their credit, did not act against the majority
>>>> of the
>>>>> audience, simply because the majority of the audience
>>>> conducted themselves
>>>>> in a completely civil and democratic manner.
>>>>
>>>> There was no attempt made at
>>>>> intimidation of any kind. Professor SAR
>>>> Geelani, who was conducting the
>>>>> proceedings on behalf of the
>>>> organizers  Committee for the Release of
>>>>> Political Prisoners
>>>> (CRPP) , repeatedly asked the people obstructing the
>>>>> speakers to
>>>> conduct themselves in a cultured and dignified manner. His pleas
>>>>> were
>>>> disregarded by the section of the crowd that let its ŒIndian
>>>>>
>>>> patriotism¹ get the better of its civilisation. When things got a
>>>> little
>>>>> too hot on occasion, the majority of the audience present
>>>> simply drowned the
>>>>> rude remarks and indignant posturing of the small
>>>> minority of self styled
>>>>> Indian patriots and champions of the ŒKashmir
>>>> as indivisible part of India¹
>>>>> position  in wave after wave of
>>>> cheerful but firm hand clapping.
>>>>
>>>> While
>>>>> there as enthusiastic cheering and sloganeering from the
>>>> majority of the
>>>>> young men and women assembled at the gathering, there
>>>> was no attempt while I
>>>>> was present to give the slogans a religious or
>>>> secterian colour. When Syed
>>>>> Ali Shah Geelani said that the people of
>>>> India and Kashmir are tied together
>>>>> by the bonds of insaaniyat
>>>> (humanity), when he quoted Gandhi, or spoke of
>>>>> the necessity of
>>>> conducting a non-violent struggle that was devoid of
>>>>> hatred, or even
>>>> when he said that he wished to see India rise as a great
>>>>> power in the
>>>> world, but as a power that felt no need to oppress others, he
>>>>> was
>>>> wholeheartedly and sincerely applauded, by the majority of people
>>>>>
>>>> present in the auditorium, regardless of whether or not they were
>>>>>
>>>> Kashmiri.
>>>>
>>>> Yesterday¹s meeting needs to be seen in the context of a momentum
>>>>> of
>>>> different events, which have included public meetings at Jantar
>>>> Mantar,
>>>>> meetings in the Jawaharlal Nehru Universtiy and Delhi
>>>> University, film
>>>>> screenings and talks, independently organized
>>>> exhibitions on the history of
>>>>> Jammu and Kashmir in educational
>>>> institutions, photographic exhibitions on
>>>>> the situation in Kashmir
>>>> today that have taken place recently at the India
>>>>> Habitat Centre,
>>>> while Kashmir has reeled under the brutality of the
>>>>> occupation that
>>>> has resulted in a hundred and eleven deaths of unarmed or
>>>>> stone
>>>> pelting people, including children and teenagers. The momentum of
>>>>>
>>>> this process, which recognizes the urgency of the situation in
>>>> Kashmir,
>>>>> needs to be taken to its logical conclusion, until the world
>>>> and the
>>>>> international community sits up and takes notice of the true
>>>> nature of the
>>>>> hold of the Indian state on Kashmir and its people.We
>>>> need many more such
>>>>> meetings and gatherings in Delhi, and indeed in
>>>> every large city in
>>>>> India.
>>>>
>>>> It must be maintained so that even a Barack Hussein Obama, scheduled
>>>>>
>>>> to visit New Delhi in November, is compelled to recognize the fact
>>>> that the
>>>>> conduct of the Indian state in Kashmir, based as it is on
>>>> brutal violence
>>>>> and intimidation, based as it is on a disregard of
>>>> every norm of the conduct
>>>>> of civilized governance is unacceptable to
>>>> the world. You simply cannot
>>>>> claim to be the world¹s largest
>>>> democracy and preside over the deaths of
>>>>> 70,000 people in twenty
>>>> years. You cannot claim to be judged as a democracy
>>>>> and have laws
>>>> like the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. You cannot claim to
>>>>> be a
>>>> democracy and have your police and paramilitaries beat children to
>>>>>
>>>> death openly on the streets, or rape and kill young women with
>>>> impunity. A
>>>>> state that does so is an oppressive, immoral, occupying
>>>> power, and needs to
>>>>> be resisted by every right thinking person in the
>>>> world. The Indian state¹s
>>>>> record in Kashmir over the past several
>>>> decades is not only an oppression
>>>>> visited on the people of Kashmir,
>>>> it is an insult to the United Nations, to
>>>>> the world community, and to
>>>> every principle of justice, fairness and
>>>>> democracy. It is an insult
>>>> to all the peace loving and freedom loving
>>>>> citizens of India that do
>>>> not wish to see oppression carried out in their
>>>>> name.
>>>>
>>>> This is the message that needs to go out, and is going out, not only
>>>>>
>>>> from the streets of Sringar, Baramulla and Kupwara, but also from
>>>>>
>>>> gatherings, such as yesterdays, from the heart of Delhi, the capital
>>>> of
>>>>> India. We, who are the friends of liberty and justice in India,
>>>> need to
>>>>> stand besides our Kashmiri brothers and sisters and say to
>>>> the world that we
>>>>> do not accept the lies put out by the Indian state
>>>> and its apologists on
>>>>> Kashmir. That is the true significance and
>>>> import of the process in which
>>>>> yesterday¹s meeting plays an important
>>>> part. This process will not stop
>>>>> until the world takes notice. The
>>>> United Nations, and the broad democratic
>>>>> currents as well as the
>>>> political leaderships of Europe, the Americas, and
>>>>> of every
>>>> significant power in the world needs to know that hundreds of
>>>>> people,
>>>> young and old, intellectuals, writers, activists, lawyers, teachers
>>>>>
>>>> and others, Indians and Kashmiris can stand united, in Delhi, at the
>>>> heart
>>>>> of the Indian Republic¹s capital, in refusing to accept the
>>>> continued
>>>>> occupation of Jammu and Kashmir, by India and by Pakistan.
>>>> That they believe
>>>>> that it is only the people of Jammu and Kashmir who
>>>> must decide for
>>>>> themselves their own future destiny, peacefully, in a
>>>> climate free of
>>>>> coercion and intimidation.
>>>>
>>>> As Syed Ali Shah Geelani and Sheikh Showkat
>>>>> Hussain said, all that
>>>> they are asking for is the right to self
>>>>> determination, promised by
>>>> India, before the Untied Nations, to be freely
>>>>> enacted through a
>>>> plebiscite, in conditions of peace and liberty, without
>>>>> the presence
>>>> of armed force, for the inhabitants of every part of the
>>>>> undivided
>>>> state of Jammu and Kashmir  regardless of whether the results of
>>>>>
>>>> that plebiscite are in favour of India, Pakistan or an independent,
>>>> united,
>>>>> Jammu and Kashmir that can live in peace with all its
>>>> neighbours in South
>>>>> Asia.
>>>>
>>>> There was a great diversity of statements and styles present in
>>>>>
>>>> abundant splendour at yesterday¹s meeting. There was no way by which
>>>> the
>>>>> meeting could be reduced or simplified a single monotonous
>>>> statement. Yes,
>>>>> all the panelists, spoke unambiguously about the
>>>> necessity for ending the
>>>>> military occupation by the Indian state in
>>>> Kashmir. This does not mean that
>>>>> their statements and sentiments were
>>>> a manufactured and processed
>>>>> uniformity. The people on the panel may
>>>> have significant political and
>>>>> philosophical differences amongst
>>>> themselves, they may even think
>>>>> differently about what ŒAzaadi¹ might
>>>> mean, but this was a sign, not of the
>>>>> weakness, but of the strength
>>>> and vitality of yesterday¹s
>>>>> gathering.
>>>>
>>>> ŒAzaadi¹ if and when it comes, will not be the parting gift of an
>>>>>
>>>> exhausted colonial power, it will be the harvest of the fruits of
>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>> imaginations and intelligences of millions of people, of their
>>>> debates and
>>>>> their conversations.
>>>>
>>>> What was extremely heart warming was the fact that each
>>>>> speaker spoke
>>>> of the fact that the voices of the people of Kashmir are no
>>>>> longer
>>>> alone and isolated, that there is a chorus of voices in different
>>>>>
>>>> parts of South Asia that echo and endorese their desire for
>>>> liberation from
>>>>> a brutal militarized occupation. From my notes of the
>>>> time that I was there,
>>>>> I recall that the writer Arundhati Roy, while
>>>> endorsing the demand of Azaadi
>>>>> for Kashmir, reminded the audience of
>>>> the need for the people of Kashmir not
>>>>> to be selective about justice
>>>> and injustice, that they must find methods to
>>>>> forge webs of
>>>> solidarity with all the suffering and oppressed peoples of
>>>>> India. She
>>>> was heckled and rudely interrupted by a small group of Indian
>>>>>
>>>> nationalists in the audience, who repeatedly raised the situation of
>>>>>
>>>> Kashmiri Pandits, Arundhati Roy, when she was able to resume
>>>> speaking,
>>>>> spoke unambiguously about the fact that she considered the
>>>> situation of
>>>>> Kashmiri Pandits to be a tragedy. She was echoed in this
>>>> sentiment later by
>>>>> Syed Ali Shah Geelani who said that he personally
>>>> stands guarantee for the
>>>>> safety and security of all minorities,
>>>> Hindu, Sikh, Buddhists, Christians
>>>>> and others in a future free
>>>> Kashmir. He implored the Pandits to return to
>>>>> Kashmir, and said, that
>>>> they are an integral part of Kashmiri society. He
>>>>> spoke of the need
>>>> for ensuring that a free Kashmir was a just Kashmir, and
>>>>> that justice
>>>> meant that the freedom, safety and security of all minorities,
>>>>> of
>>>> their property, their places of worship, their freedom of conscience
>>>> be
>>>>> given the utmost importance. He reminded the assembled people that
>>>>>
>>>> throughout these turbulent months, the people of Kashmir have
>>>> continued to
>>>>> be hospitable to Hindu pilgrims, have set up
>>>> ŒLangars¹ (Kitchens) for them,
>>>>> and have cared for them when they have
>>>> fallen sick, despite being at the
>>>>> receiving end of the violence of
>>>> the Indian state.
>>>>
>>>> I spoke briefly, about
>>>>> the fact that I was proud that so many of us
>>>> had gathered in my city, Delhi,
>>>>> putting aside the abstraction of our
>>>> politically determined, state given
>>>>> construct of citizenship, and
>>>> standing, here, now, on the grounds of a
>>>>> concrete human solidarity
>>>> with the people of Kashmir. I spoke of the fact
>>>>> that there are
>>>> significant voices, even in the mainstream media who have
>>>>> been
>>>> compelled to recognize the urgency of the situation in Kashmir, by
>>>>>
>>>> the sheer determination of the youth of Kashmir to get the news of
>>>> what is
>>>>> happening in Kashmir out to the world. I spoke of the role
>>>> played by
>>>>> facebook sites like ŒAalaw¹ and blogs, and the fact that
>>>> the people of India
>>>>> and the world can no longer be kept in the dark
>>>> by a pliant media, as
>>>>> happened in 1989-90. I spoke of the ways in
>>>> which the viral circulation of
>>>>> leaked videos of the humiliation of
>>>> Kashmiri youth on facebook pages and
>>>>> online fora have successfully
>>>> shown us what the reality of Kashmir is today.
>>>>> I urged media
>>>> professionals in the mainstream media to introspect and
>>>>> reflect on
>>>> the role that they may be compelled, against their own
>>>>> professional
>>>> ehtics, to play in the pyschological and propaganda war that
>>>>> the
>>>> Indian state is currently conducting. I spoke of my sense of shame
>>>> and
>>>>> remorse at the evasive and dissimulating role played by sections
>>>> of the
>>>>> mainstream media in India while reporting (or not reporting)
>>>> atrocities that
>>>>> make even the images from Abu Gharaib pale in
>>>> comparison.
>>>>
>>>> I am ashamed to
>>>>> say, that despite my respectful plea to the media to
>>>> play a responsible role
>>>>> in their reportage of Kashmir related
>>>> matters, major channels like Times Now
>>>>> and NDTV once again let the
>>>> truth down in their reports on the days events.
>>>>> NDTV saw it fit to
>>>> simply report
>>>>
>>>> an incident of Œshoe throwing at SAS
>>>>> Geelani¹. A shoe (or some other
>>>> indeterminate object) was indeed thrown, but
>>>>> not at Geelani. It
>>>> landed on a bottle of water in front of another speaker,
>>>>> while he was
>>>> speaking. So let¹s at least set that record straight. Arnab
>>>>> Goswami
>>>> of Times Now, while conducting what he likes to call a Œdebate; on
>>>>>
>>>> the programme called ŒNews Hour¹ (neither News, nor just an Hour)
>>>>>
>>>> repeatedly uttered hysterical untruths, such as the presumption that
>>>> ŒNo
>>>>> State permits the advocacy of secession and self determination¹
>>>> and that a
>>>>> meeting such as the one I participated in yesterday, were
>>>> it to take place,
>>>>> say, in the United States, would immediately lead
>>>> to all speakers present
>>>>> (including, presumably, myself) in being
>>>> imprisoned on charges of sedition.
>>>>> I have to inform my readers here,
>>>> that on both counts, Arnab Goswami is
>>>>> wrong. Seriously wrong. Either
>>>> he is a misinformed idiot. Or he knows that
>>>>> he is wrong, and is lying
>>>> to his public through his teeth. We can choose to
>>>>> be generous about
>>>> how he would interpret his motives, and assume he is
>>>>> simply a fool.
>>>>
>>>> Goswami, consequently demanded to know why we were not
>>>>> immediately
>>>> imprisoned under section 124 of the Indian penal code. Arnab
>>>>> Goswami
>>>> needs to be reminded, that in United States law, the provisions of
>>>>>
>>>> the Sedition Act are applicable only in times when the country is in
>>>> a
>>>>> declared state of war. And therefore his analogy does not apply, as
>>>> I am not
>>>>> aware that the Indian republic is currently in a declared
>>>> state of war, as
>>>>> per international law, (unless Arnab Goswami has
>>>> lost his marbles to the
>>>>> extent that he confuses the shadow boxing
>>>> that he does on television with a
>>>>> war declared by a state under
>>>> international law). That, furthermore, the
>>>>> provisions of the US
>>>> Sedition Law have been declared substantially void by
>>>>> the US Supreme
>>>> Court ruling in the Brandenberg vs. Ohio (1969) judgement,
>>>>> and of
>>>> course, by the US Supreme court guaranteeing the primacy of free
>>>>>
>>>> speech, including Œseditious¹ speech, including the burning of the
>>>> United
>>>>> States flag, under the provisions of the first amendment to
>>>> the US
>>>>> constitution.
>>>>
>>>> There have been repeated attempts made to pass a law that would
>>>>> make
>>>> Œflag burning¹ an offence under US Law. Fortunately, (for liberty
>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>> free speech) as of now, these attempts have not come to pass, and
>>>>>
>>>> currently, under US Law it is perfectly legal to advocate self-
>>>>>
>>>> determination and secwssion, if done peacefully, even to the extent
>>>> of
>>>>> burning or destroying or descerating symbols of state authority
>>>> like the
>>>>> national flag. Furthermore several constiutions, such as the
>>>> constitutions
>>>>> of Canada, Ethipopia, Austria and France, implicitly or
>>>> explicitly, provide
>>>>> for a legal expression of right to self
>>>> determination, provided it is
>>>>> exercised in a peaceful and democratic
>>>> manner, as part of the freedom of
>>>>> expression principle.
>>>>
>>>> But the point that needs to be made is larger than
>>>>> whether or not
>>>> Arnab Goswami is a fool and a charlatan. Yesterday¹s meeting
>>>>> was a
>>>> historic opportunity for his channel, and indeed for all of the
>>>>>
>>>> Indian mainstream media, to report and take cognizance of the fact
>>>> that
>>>>> there is a significant section of Indian public opinion that is
>>>> actually in
>>>>> favour of ŒAzaadi¹ in Kashmir. I am not suggesting that
>>>> this section
>>>>> constitutes an overwhelming majority at present (that
>>>> might change) but,
>>>>> that it does exist, and that it presents, cogent,
>>>> precise arguments, that
>>>>> cannot be dismissed, (as is being done by
>>>> Times Now and its ilk) by invoking
>>>>> the spectre of Œterrorism¹. There
>>>> is hardly any Œterrorism¹ in Kashmir today
>>>>> (if we don¹t count the
>>>> Indian state and its terror) . The 111 people who
>>>>> have died in the
>>>> past months, have not died at the hands of non-state
>>>>> insurgents, they
>>>> have died, unarmed, facing the bullets of the Indian state.
>>>>> The
>>>> movement for Azaadi in Kashmir has left the culture of the gun and
>>>> the
>>>>> grenade behind. It fights today without weapons, armed only with
>>>> courage. If
>>>>> there is a terrorist in Kashmir today, he wears the
>>>> uniform of the forces of
>>>>> the Indian state, and carries the weapons
>>>> supplied by the arsenal of the
>>>>> Indian state. To discount the voices
>>>> that rise in dissent against this
>>>>> reality as Œterrorist sympathizers¹
>>>> as Arnab Goswami has done on his channel
>>>>> is to insult reality.
>>>>
>>>> Syed Ali Shah Geelani spoke of the bonds of insaaniyat
>>>>> that tie the
>>>> peoples of Kashmir and India yesterday. I heard him say this. I
>>>>> was
>>>> barely five feet away from him. I heard him speak of his regard and
>>>>>
>>>> respect for the minorities in Jammu and Kashmir. I do not agree with
>>>> much
>>>>> of what Geelani Saheb represents politically, or ideologically,
>>>> but I have
>>>>> no hesitation in saying that what he said yesterday, was
>>>> surprising for its
>>>>> gentleness, for its consideration, for its
>>>> moderation, even for its
>>>>> liberality and open heartedness. This should
>>>> have been big news. That Syed
>>>>> Ali Shah Geelani said that he wants to
>>>> see a strong and resurgent India. I
>>>>> heard him say this. And was this
>>>> reported by anyone? NO. Was it reported
>>>>> that he was cheered when he
>>>> said this ? NO. Was it reported that no one had
>>>>> any thing angry to
>>>> say against the struggling peoples of India? NO. Was it
>>>>> reported
>>>> that SAS Geelani expilicity said that he is NOT against dialogue,
>>>>>
>>>> provided that the five point formula put forward by him (none of
>>>> whose
>>>>> provisions  1. acceptance of the disputed nature of the
>>>> territory of Jammu
>>>>> and Kashmir, 2. repeal of AFSPA and other black
>>>> laws, 3. release of
>>>>> political detenues and prisoners, 4. withdrawal
>>>> of the disproportionate
>>>>> presence of the armed forces and 5.
>>>> punishment to those gulty of taking life
>>>>> in the past few months
>>>> require the government of India to think Œoutside¹
>>>>> the framework of
>>>> the Indian Constitution) are accepted as the basis of the
>>>>> dialogue? NO.
>>>>
>>>> Don¹t you think that it makes BIG news that the tallest
>>>>> separatist
>>>> leader in Jammu and Kashmir actually, in a moderate voice, spells
>>>>>
>>>> out, in Delhi, the fundamental basis of a considered dialogue with
>>>> the
>>>>> Indian state, while offering it a chance to do so on bases that
>>>> are
>>>>> absolutely reasonable and sound, and honourable to all concerned?
>>>> Do you not
>>>>> think that a responsible media organization would consider
>>>> this a scoop, a
>>>>> major news stor? But that is not what happened.
>>>>
>>>> Instead, Times Now, (and I
>>>>> am waiting for the morning newspapers to
>>>> see how far this muck has spread)
>>>>> chose to focus on the deliberately
>>>> staged disruption of a handful of agent
>>>>> provocateurs, our familiar
>>>> posse of self styled patriotic champions of the
>>>>> continued occupation
>>>> of Kashmir, who posed for the camera, hyperventilated,
>>>>> and occupied,
>>>> perhaps no more than five percent of the attention of several
>>>>> patient
>>>> hours. If you saw the news reports on Times Now¹s ŒNEWSHOUR¹
>>>>>
>>>> programme, you would have thought that all of what happened was
>>>> their
>>>>>
>>>> presence as a Œprotest¹ against the meeting. As someone who was
>>>> present
>>>>> through much of this, I am totally, utterly aghast that a lie
>>>> of such
>>>>> magnificient proportions could be dished out with such ease.
>>>> I am aghast
>>>>> that Aditya Raj Kaul who was one of the panel invited by
>>>> Arnab Goswami to
>>>>> the Times Now Newshour show could lie with a
>>>> straight face by saying that
>>>>> there was no attempt made to Œdisrupt¹
>>>> the meeting by those who were there
>>>>> to represent his point of view.
>>>>
>>>> Someday, I hope that all of these people, the
>>>>> Arnab Goswamis of the
>>>> world, find reason to repent for continuing to keep
>>>>> the people of
>>>> India and Kashmir in the dark. They had better think hard,
>>>>> because
>>>> the day when they will have cause to repent, is not far. Azaadi will
>>>>>
>>>> come to Kashmir, and with it, a glimmer of Azaadi will be the share
>>>> of
>>>>> those people in India who stood by their Kashmiri friends, in
>>>> their darkest
>>>>> hour.Going by what I witnessed yesterday, there will be
>>>> many such people, so
>>>>> Arnab Goswami and his ilk had better start
>>>> practicing how to say sorry,
>>>>> several hundred times a
>>>>> day.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> best,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Shuddha
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> Shudd
>>>>> habrata Sengupta
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _________________________________________
>>>> 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: <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: <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: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
> Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> The Sarai Programme at CSDS
> Raqs Media Collective
> shuddha at sarai.net
> www.sarai.net
> www.raqsmediacollective.net
>
>
>