Open letter: How can you justify killing humans in order to protect cows?

Open letter: How can you justify killing humans in order to protect cows?

(This is the full text of the Open Letter, an edited version of which was first published by Express Tribune) Dear Mrs. Vaidya, I saw your post on ‘Indian Liberal Intellectual’, through a dear friend of mine who is an ardent advocate of Hindutva. I must confess, before I begin to put forward my points- cum- reply on your ‘Indian Liberal Intellectual’ post, let me confess, I do agree with you partially considering the facts, but I do disagree with your intentions and also of those whom you support. And this disagreement in terms of intentions itself draws me to write this reply to your post. To being with you dedicate your post to ‘Indian Liberal Intellectual’, and blatantly describe them to be “neither Indian, nor Liberal, nor Intellectual!” Well Mrs. Vaidya, can you please define “Indian”, “ Liberal” and “Intellectual” so that we get some clarity on the issue and can examine your allegation of somebody not being ‘Indian’ ‘Liberal’ and ‘Intellectual’ can be verified. Or is it the case, that you subscribe to our Governments attitude where everybody in dissent is advised to go to Pakistan, or is it the case that your post is a corollary to the theorem put forward by new Government, if people are not going to Pakistan, just call them ‘not Indians’ or ‘pseudo-Indians.’ Mrs. Vaidya probably you have devised a new law to decide about the citizenship of this country. What makes a man pseudo Liberal Mrs. Shefali, condemning Dadri Lynching, if that is what makes a man pseudo liberal, then perhaps Mr. Advani and now the Prime Minister Mr. Modi is also pseudo liberal, as atleast for the sake of Bihar elections he condemned the Dadri Lynching. Yes you are right, when you point out that the prize money too should be returned by those who returned their awards, and I in no way want to justify or take side as to why the said prize money was not returned but there could be more than one reason for not doing so, and the very idea of returning the awards is to register protest, the sanctity of award is in award itself and not in...

The Indecency of Decency

Ravi Shanker Kapoor That intolerance has become the defining feature of the governance becomes evident, if any more evidence was needed, from the so-called advisory the Information & Broadcasting Ministry recently issued to TV channels regarding Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s Independence Day speech this year. It may be the first ‘advisory’ in history that is accompanied with the threat of “penal provisions.” The ‘advisory’ said that “it had come to the notice of Ministry of Information & Broadcasting that certain TV channels attempted to denigrate the Office of the Prime Minister of India by constantly trying to compare the speech of the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India with the speech of other political leaders on 15th August, 2013.” The charge is based on two assumptions. First, “the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India” is a heavenly figure whose utterances need to be grasped in a state of reverence, while other political leaders are lesser mortals. Second, comparison is denigration. While the first assumption is anti-democratic, the second one is outright arbitrary. The prime minister is not a celestial creature with a divine right to rule. Therefore, the Ministry’s contention militates against even the suppositions of the government. And it surely is an affront to basic principles of democracy: the prime minister is one of us and is elected by us; he enjoys the high office so long as we, the people of India, deem him fit to rule the country; he derives his powers from our consent, and not from gods as many kings claimed to do in the past. As for the second postulate, equating comparison with denigration is as idiotic as it is arbitrary. In fact, it is nothing but an abuse of language, just as calling a threat an ‘advisory.’ The operative part of the Ministry’s advisory was in the third paragraph: “…as per Section 5 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, read with Rule 6(1 Xa) & (i) of the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994, as amended from time to time, no programme can be transmitted/re-transmitted on any Cable Service which contains anything [that] offends against good taste or decency; and criticizes, maligns or slanders any individual in person or...

A Dialogue with Agha Humayun Amin Major (r)

A Dialogue with Agha Humayun Amin Major (r)

Agha Humayun Amin Major (r) Tank Corps: 13 Years service in Pakistan Army (PAVO 11 Cavalry,29 Cavalry,58 Cavalry,15 Lancers,5 Independent Tank Squadron,14 Lancers,15 SP) and 31 years research . Ex Editor Globe , Ex Assistant Editor Defence Journal , Ex Editor Journal of Afghanistan Studies. Publications: More than 200 articles in News, Nation , PRAVDA,Pakistan Army Journal , Citadel Magazine of Command and Staff College,Journal of Afghanistan Studies,Indian Strategic Review,Dawn ,Friday Times,Outlook Afghanistan ,Afghanistan Times,Frontier Post,Globe,Defence Journal,Media Monitors Network,Pakistan Army till 1965 held at US Army War College Library,US Army Command and Staff College Library,Indo Pak Wars a Strategic and Operational Analysis,Sepoy Rebellion of 1857-59 Reinterpreted, The Essential Clausewitz,Man’s Role in History: Education/Credentials : Masters (History). Past/Present Clients: Various Think Tanks , Afghanistan Research Associates,Centre for Study of Non State Militant Actors in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Can you share some of the important events of which you were an active part in your Military Service? The first event was 1984 mobilization. Pakistan Army was in bad shape and would have come to certain grief if India had attacked. We were mobilized and concentrated at Qila Sobha Singh near Pasrur. Tanks were in bad shape and the nuclear deterrent was not there. Only assassination of Indira Gandhi averted the disaster that Pakistan was sure to face. The second event was 1987 mobilization in face of Brasstacks. Again the Pakistani military was in bad shape but disaster narrowly avoided because Indians had no long term strategic vision. The Indians lost three golden chances to strategically reduce Pakistan in size in 1971, 1984 and 1987.Now Indians will reap the harvest of destabilization, which would be difficult to foresee as well as handle. What exactly do you mean by destabilization? When India avoided the chance to reduce Pakistan by size, then what exactly are you referring to by destabilization? India lost chances to deal with the Pakistan factor in 1971,1984 and 1987.With the nuclear deterrent now fully active India cannot impose any settlement on Pakistan. The threat of destabilization and a possible war will now increase because of following factors: A new Afghan civil war. US China rivalry in Pakistani Baluchistan. India Pakistan tensions over water. Greater religious...

A Dialogue with Amin Solkar- Advocate of Kasab

A Dialogue with Amin Solkar- Advocate of Kasab

Vedchetan Patil: So, firstly I’d like to ask you about your entire inclination and background behind all your activities for the protection of the minority rights. What drove you for the same? Amin Solkar: Being a member of minority. Vedchetan Patil : (cuts in) No, of course, being a minority. But there would be something you would have felt. Some injustice which is happening in this country and which should be addressed? Amin Solkar : Which particular injustice you’re talking about? Vedchetan Patil : What is the one point where the secular India is going wrong and which should be addressed? Amin Solkar :A We are about 60 years post-independence and in the Constitution, what minorities were promised, sometimes we feel that, those promises are not yet fulfilled. Like, if you see economically, then education and appointment to an important post. Even there we basically feel that the promises are not kept. When the minorities had chosen to be in India, in 1947, a choice was given to them that, those who want to go to Pakistan can go, and those  who’d like to stay here in India can stay here. Since we were born and brought up here and had our ancestors living in India, So, we were not willing to go to a total new land. But aftersome years,  we felt, that we should fight for our rights also. Now if you see, there was no need for any minority commission. There was no need for a ministry specifically for minority affairs. What was the need? Earlier it was not there. So, this in itself  indicates that the minorities are not being treated as  equivalent. And to uplift them,  the government thought  of making a newministry or some mechanism where the upliftment can be monitored and then they have come up with some financial foundations. That was not that early. Now, whatever schemes the government is coming up with is really reaching those people or not is another question. Vedchetan Patil : So, whatever mechanism that has evolved, either by the state or by the minority institution as per the relevant articles of the constitution of India, do you think it’s working...

Visit Us On FacebookVisit Us On TwitterVisit Us On YoutubeVisit Us On Google PlusCheck Our Feed