Monday, July 05, 2010

Britons uneasy with Islam; chindu upset

Hasan Suroor is surprised at the poll findings in Britain on Islam. He uses the opportunity to do some propaganda for Islam and there is always space for such propaganda in chindu. Suroor tells us so much about the bunch of people carefully selected to be the face of Islam. But Suroor avoids telling us is the other side of the story: why do Britons hold such negative attitude towards Islam although it is not evidently visible in public sphere and what could it mean to future of muslims in Britain? May be he could choose a few faces from among the protesters who shouted slogans against the soldiers coming home from Afghanistan.

Dragging in Americans and comparing muslims with other immigrant groups is unbecoming. Such attitude has been the trend in chindu for a while now. In an eagerness to pander to muslim sensitivities, all decorum of decency is being discarded.
The Hindu : Today's Paper / OPINION : British Muslims: countering negative images
But what about Muslims themselves? Have they ever asked themselves why
the whole world appears to be against them? It is a bit like the
Americans who never tire of moaning how everyone is against them but
seldom pause to ask: why?

Indeed, in many ways, they are more culturally integrated than some of the apparently more “secular” immigrant groups.

1 comment:

sanjaya uvach said...

Journalist's apology for faulty reporting: Ishrat Jahan encounter case

Senior journalist Punya Prasoon Bajpai has expressed regret over the manner in which Ishrat Jahan was termed a terrorist in the media. He has apologised for the sensational reporting of the infamous extra-judicial killing in Ahmedabad.

Though it's a personal apology, it should be seen in wider context. Bajpai is a widely respected journalist and the fact that he wrote a column titled, 'Ishrat hamein maaf kar do', in India's largest circulated Hindi daily Dainik Jagran, is no ordinary thing.

It's rare to apologise, specially in media circles. But the candid piece and the expression of guilt over an encounter that was staged, is not just praiseworthy but also shows mirror to other journalists who accept the official line even though it is a farce.

In this article, he recalls that how the local reporter had called from Ahmedabad and describing the scene of encounter, said that it clearly appeared that the four persons including the college girl were shot dead from point blank range and it was not an encounter.

But as other channels had by then telecast the sesational story of 'fidayeen women terrorists' and Muslim girls taking to militancy, the race for TRP and the jingoistic rhetoric made it difficult for his channel to take another line or question the encounter.

Five years after Ishrat's death, a magisterial inquiry clearly stated that it was a case of cold blooded killings without any exchange of fire. The police theory was absolute farce. Fake encounters are staged by police officers to get promotions, bravery medals and increase one's worth in the eyes of their political masters.

Punya Prasun Bajpai needs to be congratulaed for taking the stand, accepting the responsibility of reckless coverage and sharing his moral guilt, which should instead be a collective guilt for Indian electronic channels.