Monday, May 19, 2008

pseudo secularists kill 64

If Praveen Swami is to be believed, the Samajwadi party is guilty of at least indirectly aiding the Jaipur blasts. In his article today, he makes a mention of the shocking instance of the government pandering to minority votes and letting some accused go scott free. These  "innocent" beneficiaries are the prime suspects behind the Jaipur blasts that killed 64.

Mujahid and Kazmi were arrested. Mukhtar, however, succeeded in escaping — helped along by a series of bizarre events.

First, relatives and friends of Mujahid and Kazmi levelled allegations that the men had been kidnapped and tortured by the police. Large-scale protests by Islamist political groups and the Samajwadi Party followed. Police sources told HinduThe they were then ordered by the State government to ease down on further arrests, for fear of provoking a communal problem.

Among those who benefited from the easing of police pressure were two men now being sought in connection with the Jaipur attacks


http://www.hindu.com/2008/05/19/stories/2008051959501200.htm


It would be interesting to know whether the communists were party to the protests. Chindu of course wouldn't tell us that.

 This is a slap in the face of those who actively campaign against stern anti-terrorism measures. When some suspects( who eventually may turn out to be innocent) are picked and subject to ruthless investigation, it should be seen in the wider interest of a billion people . When the police are given sweeping powers, misuse and even abuse is bound to happen. The efforts must be directed at minimizing the abuse and not doing away with tough laws. Heard of throwing the baby with the bathwater?

 The very same "liberals" opposing counter terrorism laws advocate tough punishments for rapists and those discriminating against SC/ST. How are they so very sure that these laws won't be misused or abused? It is shameful that such people masquerade  as intellectuals and roam around freely while the millions of ordinary civilians cringe in fear. For all that is said about the US and Israel, it is worth remembering that there has not been any terrorist attack on America since 9/11. People attacking Israel dread the ferocity of the retaliation. It is  India that is a sitting duck. With a spineless political leadership, irresponsible media, minority vote craving parties and anti-nationals masquerading  as intellectuals, this nation is a paradise for terrorists. God save its nationals.

5 comments:

socal said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
socal said...

Notice the hypocrisy in their exhortation. The law should take its own course sometimes, the law has to be strictly followed in others(post-Godhra riots), but when it comes to Afzal and terrorists, the course that law is taking is dangerous and has to be reversed. Not just that, the very integrity of the court process itself is questioned: Afzal didn't get fair trial first, and now the poor Maoist doc, too.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Shankar said...

Let's give credit where it is due. I hope you will highlight this piece by Sudarshan Rodriguez


A mockery of science, conservation and environmental laws

Sudarshan Rodriguez

It is beyond doubt that the Sethusamudram project will have disastrous consequences for the region’s biodiversity.

http://www.hindu.com/2008/05/19/stories/2008051951091100.htm

Pilid said...

Shankar, I saw that but if you read the item, you see that it is based entirely on speculative assessments. Unless studied, it is impossible to know whether these claims are true and if so, to what extent environmental damage is likely to occur. The other question is whether the damage/benefits trade off is worthwhile - there is damage with most big projects be it dams, industries, etc.

The question of course is whether a study is feasible and worth the trouble. So far, the government has not indicated whether such an environmental assessment is a good idea or not. Since the matter has come up before the SC, at some point, the government might indicate what it thinks of the idea.