In a rare departure from tradition, N.Ram shares the grief of the victims of the terrorist attack. I have shown repeatedly in the past how the post-terror editorial followed a similar pattern. N.Ram justified Islamic jihad through the standard phrases:
- discimination against minorities
- babri masjid demolition (this one never ends)
- hindu intolerance
- rss/bjp (any and everything wrong in india can be traced to this)
- pakistan's good intentions
- congress' good governance
The editorial never had any valid recommendation to counter terrorism. How can N.Ram come up with anything valuable when his analysis(sic) is rigidly biased. In this editorial too, he says more policemen and intelligence would do. Empowering them is not an option and no more tough measures required. How can you take this guy seriously?
This terror attack has destroyed the "mumbai resilience". Now the anger is palpable. What incident will trigger a smilar change in N.Ram? Afterall, a "secular" tag and a fully loaded gun could not help Karkare save his own life. And N.Ram is no more immune than him.
Just as the political establishment failed to inspire confidence, the media outlets have failed to trigger any intelligent debate on the issue of tackling terror. I was watching the coverage on NDTV today. It was about joining and not breaking up the nation. The discussion about improving relations with Pakistan never seemed to end. Friendly ties with Pakistan took precedence over terrorism. N.Ram toed a similar line in the past too. I would blame the media as much as the political class for misleading the public.
Some foriegn media outlet has written about the elephant in the drawing room. Very soon, you may expect the Indian media to follow suit. But Chindu will be very frugal with the truth. I doubt if it will even make it to the print edition. So I am posting the excerpts here:
"When faced with fundamentalist demands, India's democratically elected leaders have regularly preferred caving to confrontation on a point of principle. The country's institutions and culture have abetted a widespread sense of Muslim separateness from the national mainstream," the Wall Street Journal said in a stinging commentary.
"The country's anti-terrorism effort is reactive and episodic rather than proactive and sustained. Its public discourse on Islam oscillates between crude, anti-Muslim bigotry and mindless sympathy for largely unjustified Muslim grievance-mongering. Its failure to either charm or cow its Islamist-friendly neighbours -- Pakistan and Bangladesh -- reveals a limited grasp of statecraft," the Journal said.
on taking office in 2004, one of the first acts of the ruling Congress Party was to scrap a federal antiterrorism law that strengthened witness protection and enhanced police powers.
The Congress, it says, has stalled state-level legislation in Gujarat, which is ruled by the opposition BJP. And it was a Congress government that kowtowed to fundamentalist pressure and made India the first country to ban Mumbai-born Salman Rushdie's "Satanic Verses" in 1988.
It is now time to call the WSJ a communalist, hindu fundamentalist, fascist, saffron outfit.