"You do not defend the British Army by defending the indefensible. We do not honor all those who have served with distinction in keeping the peace and upholding the rule of law in Northern Ireland by hiding from the truth."
- Prime Minister of Britain, David Cameron, reacting to the just-released report of the inquiry into the events of "Bloody Sunday", January 30 1972.
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
23 comments:
I hope Dcubed doesn't use this development as an excuse to compare India unfavourably with the great, wonderful UK. Just remember one little detail: the UK has refused to apologise for the much bigger massacre at Amritsar in 1919, and many more killings in India and Africa. Apologising to the Irish is a different ball game. They are higher in the British pecking order than Indians.
One needn't add that the British have refused to apologise for colonialism per se, and the drain of wealth from India.
So no, the white Christian, British, ex-master UK is not on a higher moral plane than India. To pre-empt D'Souza's innuendo.
Thanks Dilip, and those were fine words but I believe the UK govt has NOT acted to prosecute the soldiers. I havent followed this closely and could be wrong- just a couple of reports in theHindu and elsewhere.
It could be waiting for them to get back from their vacations in Canada :-)
thx,
Jai
my god he cant help himself!! having been noticed in an earlier post for repeatedly using "dsouza", chandru tried to use "dcubed", but it lasts only aslong as the end of the comment.
the quote is not about apology, so pl dont try to score points where there is none. it is about that dangers of "defending the indefensible". ie cameron says that the defending criminals is a bad way to honor or defend the army. pl i request both above comments to understand this point.
" "it is about that dangers of "defending the indefensible". "
Yes, but the underlying reason is to show up India and Indians, to contrast them with the wonderful Brits. Well, don't be so quick to admire the sweet, loving, humanistic Brits. At least wait till they apologise for Amritsar and a score of other atrocities in India. Then admire away. Actually, try not to do that either.
Hah,
I've actually wanted to comment on the DSouza vs Dcubed thing for a long time, but it looks like someone has beaten me to it.
Regards,
PM (of PM & BV )
As I've said before, there are two distinct kind of comments coming under the name - 'Chandru K'.
One, which deals with the issues directly with examples & logic, and the other which seems to parody the original with incoherent points but mimicking the language.
Yet, I cannot be sure if the two kinds of comments are indeed coming from two different persons, though that seems to be the case.
The same thing had happened with Sapathan ( = Pub chick). That's unfortunate because comments under the name of Sapathan had been logically the most incisive I had read, not just on this blog, but even when taking into consideration the whole Indian blog scene (to the extent I've been exposed to).
There's some chance that Chandru K could be Sapathan/Pub chick, but while Sapathan used to rely almost only on the material provided within the blog post, Chandru K tends to use global examples to compare them with 'Indian' situation.
While it's possible, Chandru K's world view is severely at odds with Dilip's & hence might consider Dilip to be biased against India, his comments have, in my knowledge, never implied this to be because of Dilip's being Christian by birth.
I request, the real Chandru K to correct me, if I'm wrong, & also to get himself a Blogger account, which will help me take his comments more seriously.
Dilip,
You & I have disagreed a lot (and that's because what we agree on naturally becomes uninteresting to discuss :) ). You're much older than me & (am assuming) emotionally much more mature than me. Yet, I want to convey, I felt very sorry when religion of your birth was brought up (not just here, but also in some comments in a newspaper column). Because, I've never even remotely felt that you're biased towards one religion or the other. I hope, such instances do not hurt you. If they do, then if it helps, please remember, at least I don't feel you're biased based on people's religion, caste, language, etc., & that you've imbibed the concept of egalitarianism quite wholly.
Since I myself have never got personally insulting to you, I cannot apologize on others' behalf who did so, but I feel doing so (ad hominem attacks based on circumstances of one's birth) is one of the cheapest things to do, and I feel very sad seeing that happen. I wish it (bringing up of your religion of birth) does not get repeated.
Take care.
Ketan, you're absolutely correct. That has been the nature of my postings here.Anyone who is sharp like yourself can detect the tone and underlying message. No, I am not mimicking myself; someone is getting a thrill out of doing that.
I am positively not "Pub Chick". Pub Guy maybe. Actually, very rarely that.
Ketan, thank you for your words.
As for CK, I've long lost interest in trying to distinguish between the two or three or whatever number avatars he (or she) comes in. Sometimes the one who complains about a fake CK sounds different, sometimes the same, so I can't tell them apart even if I cared to. For the arguments and attitudes and taunts are ones I believe I am wasting my time trying to reason with (having tried for years).
Sorry one last point: besides all the avatars here, s/he goes by at least two names in email to me and comments on other sites I've seen (e.g. outlook): CK and "Varun Shekhar".
Yes, it's true that I use another name sometimes, but that's not to mimic anyone. Again, look at the tone and content of the postings.
"Chandru K" is not "another name", it is your name.
Yet, I want to convey, I felt very sorry when religion of your birth was brought up (not just here, but also in some comments in a newspaper column). Because, I've never even remotely felt that you're biased towards one religion or the other.
Ketan - I like your civility and comments in general. But you think Dilip is unbiased. Just going through his columns clearly reflect his biases.
Quoting his old friend Varsha Bhosle - Seeing everything in Black and white. Hindu = bad everything else = good.
Of course he never openly states this - though it would help if he were upfront.
Once the biases go away and some amount of balance comes in like say Vir Sanghvi then perhaps the feelings that he is biased will also go away.
On the other hand maybe he should continue in the present mode so we can have more unintended comic humor like building monuments to honor Pakistanis killed by Indians s=during war
But you think Dilip is unbiased.
Whoever thinks this needs a reality check. I am biased like the next guy is biased, and I have no problem saying so.
But about this ...
Hindu = bad everything else = good.
... I'll ask for the umpteenth time: are you willing to point out precise words in anything I've written that show I believe this? Or will you, yet again, weasel out of answering the question with some handwaving? i.e. do you have the gumption to back up your allegation? Or is it easier to just make it and leave it there?
"But you think Dilip is unbiased.
Seeing everything in Black and white. Hindu = bad everything else = good."
Nikhil, D'Souza follows the international media in this respect( or is it the other way around- the international media follows the so called Left anti-Hindu writers of India like Bidwai, D'Souza, Arundhati etc??).
That is, the sufferings and injustices of Hindus in Pakistan, Bangladesh, the state of Kashmir and throughout India, are downplayed or outright ignored, while injustices or wrongdoings toward Moslems and Christians are given huge publicity and prominence. There is some weird nonsense about underdogs and showing sympathy for them, that is at work here. And of course, it helps massively if the 'underdogs' are Moslem or Christian. The dumb, insular, parochial international audience can identify with that, but not with Hindu nomenclature. The only time the international media expressed some degree of sympathy for Hindus was back in 2001, when the Hindu minority in Afghanistan was forced to wear yellow scarves. That was very exceptional, and fleeting.
Puppy Manohar
"I've actually wanted to comment on the DSouza vs Dcubed thing for a long time, but it looks like someone has beaten me to it. "
That was me!
I beat you to it
- Baby Vaijayanti.
I have given several instances, but how about a simple questions. Whenever Jammu and Kashmir goes on boil - by people of a particular religion- I do not recall you writing anything when the people of Jammu went inro rebellion after the Amarnath yatra controversy- you write poignant articles.
Would you write similarly or show the same standards whenever Thackerays goons go on the rampage in Maharashtra.
In your words tackle the root cause.
Thank you - Not that i expect any different answers.
A guy whose only argument is the assumption that I approve of killing or assaults on innocents or the like is a guy who does not have ground to stand on and argue his case to begin with. Who does not believe his case either. I have no desire or need to prove things to such a guy.
Make of that what you like. Thank you.
You did not answer my question about Thackeray vis a vis Kashmir rage boys. Not that I expected you to - but i expect one of your chamchas - Suresh, Anon etc to attack me. The pattern seems so obvious
nikhil what is the comparison between thackeray and the guys shot dead in kashmir? can you please name for me one time that one of thackerays' sena boy demonstrations/processions/whatever has been fired on by cops? just *one* time.
yeah yeah, im a chamcha. now answer the question.
Ok chamcha
First Maharashtra (including Thackerays sena boys)has not ethnically cleansed most of its population because they belonged to another religion and they are not living in refugee camps.
can you please name for me one time that one of thackerays' sena boy demonstrations/processions/whatever has been fired on by cops? just *one* time.
The least one can say about this is that Thackeray's sena boys did not create a situation for the army to step into Maharashtra.
Why hasnt anybody fired upon them for their demonstrations?
Same reason why Dilip and his fellow traellers empathize with Kashmiri youth every time they come out and riot while the same empathy is not shown to the Sena boys.
may be a chamcha nikhil, but at least i am not a liar.
"Thackeray's sena boys did not create a situation for the army to step into Maharashtra."
so easily does a guy forget the roits of 1993, or are you just lying hoping that we have forgotten?
not only did the army get called out in mumbai, it actually apprehended some of thackeray's sena boys, led by his own party leader sarpotdar.
did you forget or did you lie? answer the question.
and you still did not answer, pl tell us one time that sena guys were fired on by police.
so easily does a guy forget the roits of 1993, or are you just lying hoping that we have forgotten?
No dear I am not lying. But the army was there just during a few days in 1993.The army has been called out on several occassions in different parts of India to control riots.
And the army has been there in J & K for how long -more than 20 years??????
Wow how the likes of you can draw an equivalent. Admire youtr creativity.
Yes - the army did open fire. There are no statistics on whether any of Thackerays rage boys were hit. but i remember a lady corporator who was among the rioters died in the firing.
But you avoid the key question. Why do dcubed and the likes cry out so much in empathy when youth in J & K go on a rioting spree but deny Thackerays goons that courtesy?
Post a Comment