Tytler is freed of charges.
You hear the noise? That's the hammering of one more nail into the coffin of justice for the victims of homegrown Indian terrorism. Terrorism that slaughtered thousands in 1984, in 1992-93, in 2002: but terrorism that we refuse to face up to and acknowledge, let alone punish.
Two previous attempts at exploring this: Some kind of history, Badbye, infernal dark glasses.
But if you prefer not to read them, by all means listen to the hammering of the nails.
Roadrunner on Amazon!
Buy Roadrunner, Indian sites
Travel: Our Judgement Free
My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die. (Listen)
It was January the thirtieth/And everybody was feelin' fine.
Yo!
Good times!
TwitTwotTwet
Some of my writing
Asirgarh, Narbona, towelsTsunami reports
Girls of his (my) dreams
Winner, Outlook/Picador 2004/5
'74 Bra Flinging Story
Not just about tennis
My books
Branded by Law | The Narmada Dammed | RoadrunnerSome of my photographs
Worth your time
Ramani's fieldnotesTom Pietrasik | Abi
Annie | Shivam V
Bombay Addict
Uma MD | Amitava Kumar | John Naughton
Amin for your travel needs
22 comments:
Times like these I wish I believed in heaven and hell.
sorry to be out of context....
Just heard from G20 that tax haven regulations are limited to OECD countries only. Apparently secular Sardar wanted to keep India out of these regulations. There is no way Congress will apply for OECD info.
Which now makes me to ask 'secularists' one question. Do you agree that a corrupt secular person is as bad as a communal person...If so why 'secularists' are keeping mum on the former. tough hey...
@km....reminds us of Churchill on the our independance "Power will go to the hands of rascals, rogues and freebooters. All Indian leaders will be of low calibre and men of straw. They will have sweet tongues and silly hearts. They will fight amongst themselves for power and India will be lost in political squabbles. "......
Oh....how correct he was...
I am a Sikh and I have been through 1984.
I have come to believe that not only has justice not been done, it will probably never be done.
The killers of 1984 have not been punished and probably never will be.
Sidhusaaheb, may I suggest that you should remove those two "probably"s from your comment.
What's more, the same sentiment applies to 1992-93 and 2002 as well.
So Dilip
Here you are mentioning 1984, 1992-93 and 2002. Do not know if this is deliberate, but no mention of J & K 1990.
Now please once again say it with a straight face
I do not believe in Different strokes for different folks.
Rest my case
Dilip, when u can 'forget' 1990, Godhra train burning, the numerous train blasts in Bombay, why not also forget 2002. Selective amnesia
"Do not know if this is deliberate, but no mention of J & K 1990."
Dilip i do not know if this is deliberate, but above there is no mention of Aman Kachru's killing, Jessica Lall case, the Vidarbha suicides, the Abhayankar/Joshi murders, Ramesh Kini case, the Bhagalpur blindings, the Nallie and Meerut massacres, the Ramabai Ambedkar case, bomb blasts in 1993, Chatisingpura deaths, the Samjhauta Express bombs, Malegaon blast case, Guwhati bomb blasts, Salwa Judum, murder of Krishna Desai, Naxalite menace, the Orissa cyclone, Mumbai incest case.
when u can 'forget' all these, it is Selective amnesia. Now please once again say it with a straight face I do not believe in Different strokes for different folks.
Rest my case. QED. PTO.
Ramesh (not Kini).
"You bring up the Sikh cause only to mention 2002 all over the place"
Dilip he is right. You also bring up Chitisinghpura, Jessica Lall, Aman Kachru, Meerut, Bhagalpur, Malegaon, Samjhauta ony to mention 2002 all over the place.
whats your thought about that?
Ramesh (not Kini).
Interesting Sidhusaheb
You claim you are a sikh and speak of 1984. Do you even once mention the thousands of hindus who died during the Punjab terrorism days. Are they ever going to get justice. Oh but these are police atrocities and human rights abuses of terrorists.
Bottomline - as long we have personal agendas and continue with identity politics, 1984, 1992, 2002, 1990 etc will continue.
But of course - when we talk about boycotting people to people contact with pakistanis until the country stops cross-border terrorism, Dilip will call us Thackeray fans, saffronites, war-mongers etc.
Are they ever going to get justice.
Last time I checked, they had indeed got a measure of justice: the whole Khalistani movement has been silenced and many of its killers themselves finished.
I trust you can point me to any similar measure of justice for the 3000 Indians who were slaughtered in Delhi in 1984.
I'm waiting. I trust you will do it in your next comment here, which thus won't be more handwaving instead.
talk about boycotting people to people contact with pakistanis until the country stops cross-border terrorism
Talk about it, sure. Will you therefore also talk about boycotting people to people contact with, let's say, Maharashtrians till that state punishes the killers of 1992-93?
Why or why not?
Dilip will call us Thackeray fans, saffronites, war-mongers etc.
I trust you can point me to one time I've called you, or anyone, a (to take just one of your examples) "saffronite".
I'm waiting. I trust you will do it in your next comment here, which thus won't be more handwaving instead. Thank you.
(You are going to make another comment here, are you not?)
Dilip - nicely done..you have equated Maharashtra and Pakistan...- Surya
This subterfuge cannot go on forever. A day will come when Taliban will ask different kind of question to Indian muslims and to rest for the Indians.
Dilip and his likes may ridicule me for writing above lines. It doesn't matter. I'll take it with a pinch of salt.
I am a Sikh and I have been through 1984.
I have come to believe that not only has justice not been done, it will probably never be done.
I am a Hindu, and I also echo what Sidhusaheb says. As Dilip adds, we might just as well remove the "probably."
The tragedy is that if we do not do justice, then this will come back to haunt us and culminate in a bigger tragedy. Many seem to believe that we have put 1984 behind us because Punjab and the separatists are quiet at the moment. Rest assured, what happened then has not been forgotten. How can anyone who has seen 1984 - particularly, a Sikh - ever put it behind him/her? At best, a Sikh can hope for justice - not because it is going to bring back the dead - but because prompt justice offers the reassurance that they are living in a civilized society where such acts are an aberration. When blatant crimes simply go unpunished, then that belief is eroded. The effect of that erosion may not be immediate but the cumulative effect of many such acts of omission will, I fear, end in a big tragedy.
Indian Sikhs may be quiet at the moment - for good reason - but it would be foolish to think that they have reconciled to what happened in 1984 or forgotten what happened then. Justice would be desirable but at the very least, we need a variant of South Africa's "Truth and Reconciliation" Commission. I don't think we are going to get even that.
Similar observations go for Gujarat 2002 and all the other "riots." I use the quotes because by now, it is well-known that riots are rarely spontaneous: they are (with apologies to the engineers) "engineered." (See, for instance, the book of Paul Brass "The Production of Hindu-Muslim violence in contemporary India" - note the word "production.")
Do you even once mention the thousands of hindus who died during the Punjab terrorism days. Are they ever going to get justice.
You ever heard of the dictum that one crime does not justify another? Why should Sidhusaheb mention the Hindus killed by separatists in the Punjab everytime 1984 anti-Sikh violence is brought up?
Let me get your logic: Because many Hindus were killed by Sikh separatists, it is okay for the state to sponsor the killing of totally innocent Sikhs following Indira Gandhi's assassination. Brilliant.
By the way, if the state wants to go after the killers of Hindus in Punjab, then it is free to do so - in fact, it should do so and that is something with which most Sikhs would agree as well. Incidentally, you might care to note that many who died at the hands of the separatists were themselves Sikhs.
Some time has passed but it is worthwhile to at least comment lest somebody asks whether I would be commenting or not. Honestly it is a waste of time when people resort to lies and all sorts of stupid analogies to argue their points.
Dilip's comment:
Will you therefore also talk about boycotting people to people contact with, let's say, Maharashtrians till that state punishes the killers of 1992-93?
Honestly I wonder if such a statement is worth responding to but as you make such wonderful analogies without any logic to back it up, here is my take:
If there were regular riots against muslims as in 1992-93, then the answer is 'Yes' The case against Pak is the same. Not only does it refuse to hand over the guilty of 1993 blasts, but continues to support terrorist activities. Now over to you - What is your stand? With all hidden agendas, no point hoping for any logical answer.
My answer to Sidhusaheb was when he linked 1984 to his being a Sikh.
As a Hindu even I get distressed that the Radhabhai chawl culprits have been set free or Kashmiri pandits have been ehnically cleansed from their native land. Where is justice here? Has Teesta and CJP who you have defended in the earlier post tried to get justice for these people?
But O when I say hindu being anguished by these, I am communal -it is after all a human problem.
Suresh
Regarding your comment:
You ever heard of the dictum that one crime does not justify another? Why should Sidhusaheb mention the Hindus killed by separatists in the Punjab everytime 1984 anti-Sikh violence is brought up?
Let me get your logic: Because many Hindus were killed by Sikh separatists, it is okay for the state to sponsor the killing of totally innocent Sikhs following Indira Gandhi's assassination. Brilliant.
To part 1 I say the same thing - when we are all the time talking about sikhs being distressed by event X and muslims being distressed by even Y, why not Hindus being distressed by event Z.
Thats why ' Different strokes for different folks'
Let me get your logic: Because many Hindus were killed by Sikh separatists, it is okay for the state to sponsor the killing of totally innocent Sikhs following Indira Gandhi's assassination. Brilliant
Again not worth responding to, but only to say that only an idiotic, stupid mind with pea sized brain can see such a logic. Good luck with your logic and good luck to Dilip who has thanked you for it.
Any idea Dilip why you are outraged now and have raised this now and not in 2004 when the same PM appointed Tytler as his minister or even in 1999 when Manmohan Singh blamed the RSS for the 1984 riots. Maybe the joy and exuberance of BJP losing or your hatred of the RSS resulted in this slip. Hidden agendas again?
Again if denied justice results in people becoming terrorists and blowing up trains, then tomorrow if Afzal guru's victims families become terrorists, then can I also say the same thing about justice denied to them.
Suresh - Please use your thinking faculties - if any - rather thant just lap up any nonsense that Dilip or other sickulars put up.
Here is the best possible analysis of Teestas latest drama. So even TOI now becomes a saffron rag.
http://www.sandeepweb.com/2009/04/14/teesta-it-hit-your-face/
For a comparison between 1984 and 2002 please see this:
http://theprudentindian.wordpress.com/2007/10/25/so-what-did-the-doctor-say/
For the last comment:
I believe it will be the same for that other craven party, the BJP, if it continues to refuse to even acknowledge the crimes of 2002 and 1992-93, as the Congress refused to punish the crimes of 1984.
Why BJP for 1992? Nowhere has any BJP leader been blamed for Mumbai riots of 1992. Even the Srikrishna report (Geeta) has not mentioned anybody. Plain dishonesty again.
when people resort to lies ...
If you mean me, please point out exactly where I have lied. No hand waving, the exact place. Please. I'm waiting, even as I proceed to the rest of your comment.
What is your stand?
Simple: justice. Nothing less, nothing more. Justice that we here in India can administer where it is needed without waiting for Pak to do whatever it wants or is forced to do.
The case for justice for the victims of 1984, or 2002, or 1992-93, has nothing to do with Pakistan. Why have we not delivered that justice then?
Why, in this post that talks solely about the killings of 1984, have you decided to talk about Pakistan? What is the connection?
As a Hindu even I get distressed that the Radhabhai chawl culprits have been set free or Kashmiri pandits have been ehnically cleansed from their native land.
Take me: I'm a human being. It's because I am that that I am distressed that killers of every stripe are not punished. In the case of Pandits, it so bothers me that I've made trips to their camps in Jammu and Delhi and learned about the way they live, the hostility they face today, that sort of thing. I'm hardly interested in trumpeting that, it's just something I felt I had to do.
Why aren't we all anguished by killing of anyone, purely by virtue of it being a killing? Why "as a Hindu" or so forth? After all, it doesn't need me to be a Sikh to know what a great and horrible crime was perpetrated in November 1984 in Delhi.
Any idea Dilip why you are outraged now and have raised this now and not in 2004 when the same PM appointed Tytler as his minister... [etc]
By now, I'm used to this. Whatever I write, there will be people saying "What about this other thing", or "why didn't you write about it before?" I've written about the 1984 massacre for years -- Bhagat, Tytler, Sajjan K -- going back to at least the early '90s. But of course, when I write about them now, there will naturally be you to pop up and say "why haven't you written about them in 2004?"
Here is the best possible analysis of Teestas latest drama...
And you point me to the website of a guy I personally know to have lied. Sorry, that interests me not.
That apart, do explain to me what the uproar over Teesta hasto do with this post, and therefore why you brought it up (much as you did Pakistan).
That apart, the report that criticizes Teesta S, the one that occasioned the "analysis" you point me to -- it doesn't stand up to the least scrutiny. What a pity that those who dislike Teesta -- and they are welcome to their dislike, I have no problem with that -- are so demonstrably uninterested in doing that simple scrutiny.
But more about that in another post.
In the meantime, I'm waiting. Please point out to me exactly where I have lied. No handwaving, please. Thank you.
... I say the same thing - when we are all the time talking about sikhs being distressed by event X and muslims being distressed by even Y, why not Hindus being distressed by event Z.Presumably you suffer from reading comprehension. If you want to talk about crimes in which Hindus were deliberately targeted on account of their religion, do so. More importantly, fight for justice for the victims of such crimes. You would be doing everyone a big favour by doing so. What Dilip and I object to is the linking of unrelated crimes.
Let's say you pursue justice for the victims of crimes in which Hindus were deliberately targeted on account of their religion. Why you want to do so is really irrelevant. How would you like it if every time you brought up this issue, I interjected by saying "How about crimes where Muslims were deliberately targeted? How about crimes where Christians were deliberately targeted? Why not take those up?" See the point? I wouldn't be surprised if you don't see it.
It is noteworthy that not a single Hindutvavadi organization to my knowledge has actually taken on the difficult challenge of pursuing justice for victims of crimes where Hindus were deliberately targeted. Can you point me to any such organization? All that seems to happen is that every time someone brings up Gujarat or whatever, you have these tiresome and repetitive interjections "How about Kashmiri Pandits? How about Hindus shot by Khalistan terrorists?"
My last comment on this thread. Regards lies it is with one specific comment from you as mentioned below:
I believe it will be the same for that other craven party, the BJP, if it continues to refuse to even acknowledge the crimes of 2002 and 1992-93, as the Congress refused to punish the crimes of 1984.
My comment was:
Why BJP for 1992-93? Nowhere has any BJP leader been blamed for Mumbai riots of 1992. Even the Srikrishna report has not mentioned any BJP leader as deserving of prosecution. Plain dishonesty again.
Positively my last post, but forgot to add it in my previous entry, hence the late addition.
For your comment:
By now, I'm used to this. Whatever I write, there will be people saying "What about this other thing", or "why didn't you write about it before?" I've written about the 1984 massacre for years -- Bhagat, Tytler, Sajjan K -- going back to at least the early '90s. But of course, when I write about them now, there will naturally be you to pop up and say "why haven't you written about them in 2004?"
I have only one reply:
for somebody who makes it a point and rightly to correct any error from anybody regarding the timelines of 2002-2003, it is surprising you have been silent on Manmohans Singh's gaffe on RSS being responsible for the riots in 1999 and his induction of Tytler into the cabinet - why you even praised him as a man of integrity during the time while condemning Vajpayee who included the likes of Manohar Joshi in his cabinet - why 'different strokes for different folks'
Positively my last post here
Goodbye and good luck
Post a Comment