The trouble with Indian secularism

[Guest Gunner]

You missed the point by a mile and half. I didn't say there are no religious bigots in western democracies. I want you to tell me of a country where piglets like him are kid gloved like we do in India.

The UK. They are the closest to us in this form of idiocy.

[bharathh]

You missed the point by a mile and half. I didn't say there are no religious bigots in western democracies. I want you to tell me of a country where piglets like him are kid gloved like we do in India.

I think he just told you how they are kid gloved. If you watch Fox News all your questions will be answered.

[seedhi]

And which average Indian really cares about these list put together? Even though you invoke it if I had to ask who was number 1-5 in that list? I bet you wouldnt know unless you googled it. Heck Aishwarya Rai and Chetan Bhagat were considered by TIME to be amongst most influential! Really??? That too TIME? Stop using a nameless list that nobody cares for.

I am just giving you examples saying that he is not ignored by the media as far as propagating his image as an influential "scholar". But his views are hardly scrutinized.

Doesnt surprise me one bit about Shekhar Gupta. I like the guy' date=' but he is hardly confrontational. It would be insane to think just because Shekhar Gupta didnt criticize him Mr. Naik is being celebrated by media! I bet someone like Shourie or Karan Thapar wouldnt do it. Why dont you dig up some journalists who actually ask pointed questions??? [/quote']I can dig up an interview with a pakistani journalist Shahid Masood,(here watch it:) [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMAZR8YIhxI]YouTube- Death Penalty for Apostates! (Dr. Zakir Naik)[/ame] who actually challenged him on his views on apostasy for death. Is it not shameful for the Indian media that it took a pakistani to ask him this question. I have not seen him being challenged about this on Indian TV news channels. Even today, after this denial of visa hardly any news channel is analyzing the reason why this happened.

I dont know about Mr. Dhume and unlike right wingers I dont go after the man instead of the article. My point was largely about you suggesting a whole conspiracy theory, which you usually do, and I pointed out the fallacy in there. Simple. xxx

I am not suggesting any conspiracy theory, and nether is Mr Dhume. What is being pointed is the attitude of the Indian media/discourse where the space for criticism of Islamism has been abandoned for the fear of being seen as aligned with the RSS/VHP unless maybe one is a Muslim. Therefore a Rajdeep Sardesai will require the endorsement of Shabana Azmi before he opens his mouth against Shahi Imam. This is simply a continuation of a non-interventionist, hands off approach of the Indian state as far as Muslim affairs is concerned. So the Indian govt can enact laws for Hindus but the same for Muslims has been left to AIMPLB. This is simply a continuation of the same attitude.

[yoda]

You missed the point by a mile and half. I didn't say there are no religious bigots in western democracies. I want you to tell me of a country where piglets like him are kid gloved like we do in India.

All religious bigots get away (including the ones I mentioned in the US and UK) cause they are vicious, violent, extreme and dangerous. Common folk who try to take on these bigots could be in danger of their own lives. The only ones who can tackle them is the state with it's resources, but the threshold for state to take any action is a crime/laws broken not just some hate speech.

[bharathh]

? That's what I said - the laws and official policies of the State are seemingly secular but the political compulsions have driven us to practice a convoluted form of secularism.

I'm saying that it is not secularism. It is called vote bank politics.

[seedhi]

Thinks you. For starters RSS,VHP and Togadias <> Zakir Naik. The latter is an evangelist, the former are all political in nature. So obvious formers get criticized more. In India Televangelists dont merit any TRP, quite correctly, in my opinion. So no reason why he should get any coverage in the first place.

But he does get coverage! He is invited into debates, interviewed by Shekhar Gupta, terrorists have been known to be inspired by his literature. HE DOES GET COVERAGE! The point is that his views are simply not being exposed for their obscurantism.

The hilarious aspect is how right wingers, like you, are ready to explode on visa being rejected when only sometime back Modi was denied the same by United States. I kinda remember having this debate back then with you, and likes of you, right here and it was all - Oh so United States is the Judge, Jury and yada yada... what a difference a year makes :haha:

Was not the denial of visa to Modi debated on TV? It was widely reported and debated. Has the same been done for this incident, or even a fraction of it. All we are asking for is a honest debate on TV where his (offensive) views are put forth in mainstream media and the issue is discussed. If the Wall Street Journal can carry an article on this matter why is our mainstream media silent.

[seedhi]

So who is stopping someone from criticizing Zakir Naik?

I would also like to know who is stopping NDTV, CNN-IBN from discussing why Zakir Naik was denied a UK visa.

[yoda]

You are comparing a lunatic who sides with OBL with the red-necks who oppose obortion. Brilliant !!

Thanks for missing the context. It was in the context of considering India a failed secular state because we have nutcases like this guy, when religious extremism (unchecked) is prevalent in other secular states as well. We are not talking terrorism here, talking about secularism.

[Lurker]

I am just giving you examples saying that he is not ignored by the media as far as propagating his image as an influential "scholar".

No. You are using that list as some sort of credibility factor here. I personally have no interest in these list that are put out by every media outlet and I doubt anyone else does that too.

But his views are hardly scrutinized.I can dig up an interview with a pakistani journalist Shahid Masood,(here watch it:)

who actually challenged him on his views on apostasy for death. Is it not shameful for the Indian media that it took a pakistani to ask him this question.

Thats not a fair analogy now is it? Mr. naik does not get interviewed by hard hitters in Indian journalism. Maybe, and I am purely guessing this, that the hard hitters will actually go after the man and so he doesnt show up to a Karan Thapar, for example. He shows up at Shekhar Gupta who almost always celebrates his guests. If you watch/read his Walk the Talk show he is always genial and welcoming to his guests, nothing different than what he did to Naik. With regards to Pakistani channels well thats again a guess(cant speak for them). Religion is always a bigger driver in Pakistan so Mr. Naik would most likely be asked questions related to religions, including hard hitting ones. Of course these are my guesses so take it for whatever its worth.

I have not seen him being challenged about this on Indian TV news channels. Even today, after this denial of visa hardly any news channel is analyzing the reason why this happened.I am not suggesting any conspiracy theory, and nether is Mr Dhume. What is being pointed is the attitude of the Indian media/discourse where the space for criticism of Islamism has been abandoned for the fear of being seen as aligned with the RSS/VHP unless maybe one is a Muslim. Therefore a Rajdeep Sardesai will require the endorsement of Shabana Azmi before he opens his mouth against Shahi Imam.

Of all the people you could think of the only one that came to mind was Rajdeep Sardesai?? Man you need to start looking at serious journalist. Since you have invoked Indian Express I shall ask you to look for Javed Anand. He used to take up Zakir Naik regularly and criticized him much before visa rejection. Look him up, if you care enough to challenge your conservative views. xxx

[bharathh]

You are comparing a lunatic who sides with OBL with the red-necks who oppose obortion. Brilliant !!

Those rednecks oppose abortion and many other things including apostasy in the name of religion. How are they any different from this dude?

[Guest Gunner]

Relative to other western democracies' date=' UK might appear soft. [b']But a cursory glance at their MSM suggests that they call these Islamofascists for what they are. In India they are prized commodity for the political class. There's no comparison.

The UK has started calling these bigots out quite recently, it all started with Omar bakri mohammad, who was not permitted to return to the UK in 2006. This was post the 7/7 bombing, until thne UK pandered to the extremists much like India.

[Guest Gunner]

Good point' date=' all the more reason why this article singling out "Indian Secularism" is BS.[/quote'] You are still missing the point. The only two countries in the world which try to pander to all religions under the name of secularism are India and the UK. The UK just stopped doing it four years ago whereas India continues. What is being said in that article however is (whether secularism in other countries is perfect or not) that extremists from all religions are called out in other countries whereas in India muslims are not.

[Guest Gunner]

London has been called Londonistan for a reason.

The UK has started calling these bigots out quite recently' date=' it all started with Omar bakri mohammad, who was not permitted to return to the UK in 2006. This was post the 7/7 bombing, until then UK pandered to the extremists much like India.[/quote'] Why only the UK, pick other continental European countries as an example.

[yoda]

You are still missing the point. The only two countries in the world which try to pander to all religions under the name of secularism are India and the UK. The UK just stopped doing it four years ago whereas India continues. What is being said in that article however is (whether secularism in other countries is perfect or not) that extremists from all religions are called out in other countries whereas in India muslims are not.

Are you saying India is ok with Islamic extremism and we don't speak against it or take action against it at all? Don't confuse ineffectiveness with some kind of policy. We are ineffective in many things.

[seedhi]

Mr. naik does not get interviewed by hard hitters in Indian journalism. Maybe' date=' and I am purely guessing this, that the hard hitters will actually go after the man and so he doesnt show up to a Karan Thapar, for example. He shows up at Shekhar Gupta who almost always celebrates his guests. If you watch/read his Walk the Talk show he is always genial and welcoming to his guests, nothing different than what he did to Naik.[/quote']You really are clutching at straws. To criticize a person's views it is not necessary to interview him. Narendra Modi or Sonia Gandhi are hardly interviewed, but their speeches and policies are citicized. Neither is it required to interview Praveen Togadia to criticize him. What is stopping NDTV/CNN-IBN from discussing Zakir Naik's views in the way others are critiqued.

With regards to Pakistani channels well thats again a guess(cant speak for them). Religion is always a bigger driver in Pakistan so Mr. Naik would most likely be asked questions related to religions, including hard hitting ones. Of course these are my guesses so take it for whatever its worth.

My interpretation is that the mainstream channels are simply afraid of criticizing Zakir Naik.

Of all the people you could think of the only one that came to mind was Rajdeep Sardesai?? Man you need to start looking at serious journalist. Since you have invoked Indian Express I shall ask you to look for Javed Anand. He used to take up Zakir Naik regularly and criticized him much before visa rejection. Look him up, if you care enough to challenge your conservative views. xxx

This is exactly what I am saying. It is left to Muslims like Javed Anand to take on Zakir Naik. But he is not Rajdeep or Barkha who have their own channels to discuss issues, or even a Vir Sanghvi who can editorialize about it. The people who would jump on a Praveen Togadia in a similar situation seem absent in the case of Zakir Naik. When Canada denied retired BSF personnel a visa it was rightly debated in an extensive manner. Tell me honestly, had Sri Ravishankar been denied a UK visa would there not have been a huge debate discussing why this was done? But there is complete radio silence on the denial to Zakir Naik.

[Guest Gunner]

All religious bigots get away (including the ones I mentioned in the US and UK) cause they are vicious' date=' violent, extreme and dangerous. Common folk who try to take on these bigots could be in danger of their own lives. The only ones who can tackle them is the state with it's resources, [b']but the threshold for state to take any action is a crime/laws broken not just some hate speech.

Anwar al-awlaki.

[yoda]

One explanation for not interviewing an Islamic cleric with extreme views is that there is nothing new to report.

[Guest Gunner]

Are you saying India is ok with Islamic extremism and we don't speak against it or take action against it at all? Don't confuse ineffectiveness with some kind of policy. We are ineffective in many things.

We are reactive not proactive. We take action against extremism once the misfortune has befallen us instead of taking action when all the signs are there. A man like Naik should be called out not just because of his hate speeches but the influence he has on people who are looking for a means to rationalise terrorism. Apparently he was the inspiration for khaleel ahmed, the glasgow bomber. So in a way India is pandering to Islamic extremism.

[yoda]

Anwar al-awlaki.

For one he was not a UK citizen if I am not mistaken, plus his involvement with terrorists was much more than just a few hate speeches IIRC. Also I think he was giving these speeches for a while before being thrown out.

[Guest Gunner]

For one he was not a UK citizen if I am not mistaken' date=' plus his involvement with terrorists was much more than just a few hate speeches IIRC.[/quote'] You are wrong. He is a US national, the only US national for whom the POTUS has signed an order to capture dead or alive. He is not even indicted for any crime in the US.