seedhi Posted October 28, 2010 Posted October 28, 2010 ^ I think the only ones giving her credibility and news space are either sansaneekhej news channels or right wing loonies.Wrong. Her articles are given top billing in pretty serious news magazines like Outlook, Frontline, The Hindu .. not to mention that foreign media frequently publishes her nonsense. Nice tactic to blame "right wing loonies" for giving her credibility. Its a bit old now. Perhaps you need to be aware that the whole host of "rights activists", naxal sympathizers etc along with Arundhati and Geelani were part of this drama. Songs were sung for azaadi by JNU students in the auditorium. Without the sustenance given to her by the left-liberal establishment she would be a nobody. The left-liberal establishment cannot run away from the monster it has created. All of them were quite overjoyed a decade ago when they got no less than a Booker prize winner to champion the Narmada andolan, dalit, tribal, environment etc. Modi, RSS, BJP, Bush, USA all logically followed. Unease set in when she joined the Maoists, tried to contextualize 26/11, and now has turned to embarrassment on her anti-India vitriol. But the left-liberals have to bear this burden now, they cant blame anyone but themselves for watering her narcissistic ego.
The Outsider Posted October 28, 2010 Posted October 28, 2010 Wrong. Her articles are given top billing in pretty serious news magazines like Outlook, Frontline, The Hindu .. not to mention that foreign media frequently publishes her nonsense. But those publications are pseudo sec garbage anyways?
ravishingravi Posted October 28, 2010 Posted October 28, 2010 Here is a lovely pick of India's only hope I wonder what she is thinking. "What should I edit ? "
seedhi Posted October 28, 2010 Posted October 28, 2010 But those publications are pseudo sec garbage anyways?Unfortunately, garbage sells.
ravishingravi Posted October 28, 2010 Posted October 28, 2010 Unfortunately' date=' garbage sells.[/quote'] Believe me when I say this, that a nutjob like her will actually work to or advantage if the people and the media handle her right.
achilles Posted October 28, 2010 Posted October 28, 2010 Everytime I think of this issue, this is the first thing which comes to my mind- Tt0xxAMTp8M Listen to the words very carefully.
triam Posted October 28, 2010 Posted October 28, 2010 I wouldn't. I was quite aware of their acquaintance but do not necessarily infer it as association or even validation on Chomsky's part for every single position that Miss Roy takes. In fact, you could take a closer look through the thread. I have also stated admiration for her as a writer and naturally she commands some respect among the literati circles. The fact that she has a tag of "social activist" along with being relatively eloquent also doesn't hurt. So Chomsky is more than justified in praising her in certain context. Care to elaborate how is this ipso fact an attestation of her "positions" by Chomsky. And her sharing the same platform with Noam should necessarily override my opinions about her or even Chomsky for that matter. Sure there must be issues that both agree on like I agree with Miss Roy. But I also agree with Osama Bin Laden on Global Warming or even "imperialist" west or even the oppression of muslims. But the difference is that he wouldn't provide me with the factual precision like Miss Roy wouldn't and reduce the arguments to mere rhetoric. So, I feel I am more than entitled to discount their opinions. Now where is the "issue of abuse". In a free society, where likes of Miss Roy can form "opinions" about the nation is extremely offensive, nonchalant and "abusive" terms, then surely those on anonymous internet forums have a right for their opinions on her. For all her talks of "authoratarian" govt , she could have been jailed in US under the "sedition" law. Btw here is an 8 part video with both of them YouTube - Noam Chomsky & Arundhati Roy - Democracy's Endgame? - 1/8 that you would enjoy. top post:hatsoff:
seedhi Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 Believe me when I say this' date=' that a nutjob like her will actually work to or advantage if the people and the media handle her right.[/quote']A section of the left-liberal biased media is busy comparing Arundhati to Gandhi.
The Outsider Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 A section of the left-liberal biased media is busy comparing Arundhati to Gandhi. Going by the point of view of right wing loonies, that should be an apt comparison?
seedhi Posted October 29, 2010 Posted October 29, 2010 Going by the point of view of right wing loonies' date=' that should be an apt comparison?[/quote']Dont know about loonies but A.Roy is the 21st century Katherine Mayo - whose "Mother India" was termed as a drain inspector's report by Gandhi.
ina_jawaan Posted October 30, 2010 Posted October 30, 2010 First to jump on the military's role but very smartly leaving out the predicament of Kashmiri pandits........... Wrong again. “This one cannot by any means call itself pristine, and will always be stigmatised by, and will some day, I hope, have to account for among other things the brutal killings of Kashmiri Pandits in the early years of the uprising, culminating in the exodus of almost the entire community from the Kashmir Valley. †http://www.global-sisterhood-network.org/content/view/2178/59/ “"I spoke about justice for the people of Kashmir who live under one of the most brutal military occupations in the world; for Kashmiri Pandits who live out the tragedy of having been driven out of their homeland... †http://www.deccanchronicle.com/national/what-i-said-call-justice-says-arundhati-758
seedhi Posted October 30, 2010 Posted October 30, 2010 Wrong again. “This one cannot by any means call itself pristine, and will always be stigmatised by, and will some day, I hope, have to account for among other things the brutal killings of Kashmiri Pandits in the early years of the uprising, culminating in the exodus of almost the entire community from the Kashmir Valley. †http://www.global-sisterhood-network.org/content/view/2178/59/ “"I spoke about justice for the people of Kashmir who live under one of the most brutal military occupations in the world; for Kashmiri Pandits who live out the tragedy of having been driven out of their homeland... †http://www.deccanchronicle.com/national/what-i-said-call-justice-says-arundhati-758Pathetic. She has ZERO knowledge of history. When the pakistani tribals were busy burning, looting and raping Kashmir in 1947, it was the Indian army which saved the it from becoming a slaughterhouse. Even today, the Indian military is only present because pakistan sends terrorists every day there. Before 1989, there was no abnormal military presence in Kashmir. And a huge LOL at calling the military presence a brutal occupation. Compare how the Indian army operates with the Russian use of airpower, tanks etc in Chechneya or the Chinese army in Tibet and Xinjiang where it is completely unaccountable or pakistan which continues to use fighter jets and tanks on its own soil. It must be a unique "brutal military occupation" when the residents of the rest of India are not allowed to buy land in Kashmir whereas Kashmiris can freely buy land in India. Another huge LOL at her concern for Kashmiri Pandits when she shares stage with Geelani who was responsible to a large extent for the ethnic cleansing of the Pandits, who wants to establish Shariah law in the whole of Kashmir and claims that living amongst the immoral Hindus corrupts Muslim way of life.
ravishingravi Posted October 30, 2010 Posted October 30, 2010 Wrong again. “This one cannot by any means call itself pristine, and will always be stigmatised by, and will some day, I hope, have to account for among other things the brutal killings of Kashmiri Pandits in the early years of the uprising, culminating in the exodus of almost the entire community from the Kashmir Valley. ” http://www.global-sisterhood-network.org/content/view/2178/59/ “"I spoke about justice for the people of Kashmir who live under one of the most brutal military occupations in the world; for Kashmiri Pandits who live out the tragedy of having been driven out of their homeland... ” http://www.deccanchronicle.com/national/what-i-said-call-justice-says-arundhati-758 I also stated this ""facts", lack of respect and clinical understanding for history, inability and in some cases "deliberate" negligence to state verifiable "sources" and lack of ability to make a concisive, definitive arguments on part of the self proclaimed social activists" Talk about self pawnage. Man, you must be pretty used to getting whipped on every forum. No wonder the counter point you present is so formidable " Wrong again ". Those quotes and the contradiction presented by Kashmiri Pandits demonstrate exactly what is wrong with this lady. Now lets see, does she mention who killed those Kashmiri Pandits ? "Brutal Uprising" she mentions, by whom ? against whom? and Why were they slaughtered in the uprising ? What has it got to do with the military ? Where exactly do the limited Kashmiri Pandits remaining in Kashmir stand on the military and Indian constitution ? Are they in favour or against military or India for that matter ? So, your quotes more than anything shows what Miss Roy doesn't about Kashmii Pandits and how she conviniently leaves out the Islamization and the radical elements infiltrated into India from Pakistan that have caused the massive genocide. Don't ask me or Miss Roy, ask them. For those two quotes I can produce 10 links to counter Miss Roy's assertions. It only further underlines Miss Roy's incapability to know or present the ground realities of even the people she claims to represent. In fact, those quotes further validate my point, that like Miss Roy and her supporters like you are merely interested in propoganda. They present "fill in the blank" argument albeit with great gusto. "We demand reorganisation of Jammu and Kashmir among the stakeholders believing in the unity and integrity of India and having full faith in the Constitution." http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_reorganise-j-and-k-kashmiri-pandits_1418468 Kashmiri pandits storm separatist seminar in New Delhi http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_kashmiri-pandits-storm-separatist-seminar-in-new-delhi_1456232 Pandits demand mini India in Kashmir http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_pandits-demand-mini-india-in-kashmir_1459211 Pandits, BJP boycott interlocutors in Jammu http://sify.com/news/pandits-bjp-boycott-interlocutors-in-jammu-news-national-kk2suujbiij.html Act against Roy, Geelani, demands Kashmiri Pandit group http://www.hindustantimes.com/Act-against-Roy-Geelani-demands-Kashmiri-Pandit-group/Article1-618370.aspx Kashmiri Pandits to unfurl national flags on Oct 26 http://www.hindustantimes.com/Kashmiri-Pandits-to-unfurl-national-flags-on-Oct-26/Article1-617210.aspx First time ever, Jammu to celebrate Accession Day http://www.tribuneindia.com/2010/20101025/main2.htm ChgMFMsu3OI
ravishingravi Posted October 30, 2010 Posted October 30, 2010 Pathetic. She has ZERO knowledge of history. When the pakistani tribals were busy burning, looting and raping Kashmir in 1947, it was the Indian army which saved the it from becoming a slaughterhouse. Even today, the Indian military is only present because pakistan sends terrorists every day there. Before 1989, there was no abnormal military presence in Kashmir. And a huge LOL at calling the military presence a brutal occupation. Compare how the Indian army operates with the Russian use of airpower, tanks etc in Chechneya or the Chinese army in Tibet and Xinjiang where it is completely unaccountable or pakistan which continues to use fighter jets and tanks on its own soil. It must be a unique "brutal military occupation" when the residents of the rest of India are not allowed to buy land in Kashmir whereas Kashmiris can freely buy land in India. Another huge LOL at her concern for Kashmiri Pandits when she shares stage with Geelani who was responsible to a large extent for the ethnic cleansing of the Pandits, who wants to establish Shariah law in the whole of Kashmir and claims that living amongst the immoral Hindus corrupts Muslim way of life. Ina-jawan is our friend from across the border. I am not sure he/she is concerned with specifics when it comes to Arundhati. I am not sure if Roy was ever bothered with specifics.
ina_jawaan Posted October 30, 2010 Posted October 30, 2010 My dear Ravi Of course you have pwned me - I am no match for a debater of your callibre. Allow me to point out a couple of things however............ You have so far been exposed on 3 counts: 1) spreading the lie that Roy ever said “The people of Dantewanda have risen up” 2) trying to fictionally manufacture a schism in the long and distinguished collaboration between Roy and Chomsky in support of popular struggles across the globe (including Kashmir) 3) claiming that Roy never acknowledged “the predicament of the Pandits”. “Now lets see, does she mention who killed those Kashmiri Pandits?” Don't embarrass yourself mate. it is pretty obvious (to anyone with a reading age over 10) from the first quotation that if there is an uprising against the Indian occupation resulting in the “brutal killings” and “ultimate exodus” of the Pandits, then the only people responsible are those staging the uprising!! "Brutal Uprising..." No she didn't say that – it is a figment of your imagination. “by whom ? against whom? ” Again – pretty obvious from the context. Anyway what are you getting so worked up about? You should be happy that, contrary to your fears, Roy has acknowledged the suffering and dispossession of the Kashmir Pandits, not once but several times. Actually I could provide more links along the lines of your “10 links” but that is - well you know - a bit childish. As for the "brutality" of India's occupation it is common knowledge nowadays – Noam Chomsky recently said much the same thing! http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/5134/war_peace_and_obamas_nobel/ Oh by the way you also said "she conviniently leaves out the Islamization and the radical elements infiltrated into India from Pakistan..." I believe she mentions that here "One of the things that happened in the early 1990s in Kashmir was that when the elections were rigged in 1987, which led to the movement in Kashmir which existed beforehand, suddenly it had become a militant movement, and there were young men rising up with arms, young men crossing the border to Pakistan to train and come back." http://www.sacw.net/article717.html All the best - more later.
youngindia Posted October 30, 2010 Posted October 30, 2010 She is no supporter of terrorists but she has courageously spoken out against the state terrorism of half a million Indian soldiers occupying Kashmir against the wishes of the local people. . correction. its the desire of the kashmiri sunni muslim popualtion and totally sectarian based . shia muslims and other non sunni muslims in kashmir have opposite politcal aspirations. The desire for seperatism is fuelled totally by the illegitimate and bigoted desire of the sunni mulim population for a yet another regressive and discriminatory islamic state that will reduce and terrorise nonmuslims, if not shia muslims into second class citizens. you think the non muslims have no job but go out of their homes for an islamic state ? for partitions, how many people had to move out of their homes? enough is enough .pakistan is the last concession to politcal islam in the subcontinent. we don't like the religion= state model of states like pakistan and saudi arabia. the message to the kashmiri terrorists is clear- politcal islam is not acceptable and very dangerous to multi cultural democracies. its either us or them. if indian soldiers are "brutal" for crushing a illegitimate ,bigoted, sectarian based terroist campaign with an evil ideology, then we are glad to be "brutal".
youngindia Posted October 30, 2010 Posted October 30, 2010 As for the "brutality" of India's occupation it is common knowledge nowadays – Noam Chomsky recently said much the same thing! [\QUOTE] what "occupation" are you blabbering about? pakistan's illiegitimate control in pok? India is fully there by legitimate means and international law. just because nutcases like arundhati are ignorant of international law,does it become "occupation"?
ina_jawaan Posted October 31, 2010 Posted October 31, 2010 correction. its the desire of the kashmiri sunni muslim popualtion and totally sectarian based . shia muslims and other non sunni muslims in kashmir have opposite politcal aspirations. The desire for seperatism is fuelled totally by the illegitimate and bigoted desire of the sunni mulim population for a yet another regressive and discriminatory islamic state that will reduce and terrorise nonmuslims, if not shia muslims into second class citizens. you think the non muslims have no job but go out of their homes for an islamic state ? for partitions, how many people had to move out of their homes? enough is enough .pakistan is the last concession to politcal islam in the subcontinent. we don't like the religion= state model of states like pakistan and saudi arabia. the message to the kashmiri terrorists is clear- politcal islam is not acceptable and very dangerous to multi cultural democracies. its either us or them. if indian soldiers are "brutal" for crushing a illegitimate ,bigoted, sectarian based terroist campaign with an evil ideology, then we are glad to be "brutal". I completely agree about the dangers of clerical fascism, whatever religion it might cloak itself in. As Arundhati Roy has said, Kashmir is a "toxin" which poisons the whole region and feeds both jihadist and Hindu revivalist sensitivities. It would be a tragedy if the intifada developing now in Kashmir was derailed into the clerical fascist route which it took in Iran and which it might yet take in Palestine. In the dialectic of the Kashmir struggle there are 3 strands - a) the unquestioning affirmation of the status quo ("Kashmir is Indian"), b) the abstract negation of this ("Kashmir cannot be part of India therefore it must be part of Pakistan") and c) a more well rounded perspective which both recognises the apiration of most people in Kashmir for an end to Indian occupation and couples this with a recognition of the right of all communities to live in Kashmir. This last is Roy's position and it is vital that Roy and those who think like her are allowed to put forward this position both within Kashmir and within India generally. The alernative is a further polarisation along communalist lines across the whole region, leading to the increasing Islamisation of Kashmir, Pakistan and Afghanistan. At the same time the Indian state would become increasingly militarised, Hindu revivalist politics would gain the ascendancy and Indian muslims would be more inclined as a reaction to embrace Islamist politics.
ina_jawaan Posted October 31, 2010 Posted October 31, 2010 As for the "brutality" of India's occupation it is common knowledge nowadays – Noam Chomsky recently said much the same thing! what "occupation" are you blabbering about? pakistan's illiegitimate control in pok? India is fully there by legitimate means and international law. just because nutcases like arundhati are ignorant of international law,does it become "occupation"? When half a million soldiers are in a region enforcing a regime against the wishes of the majority of the population there, I think we are justified in calling it an "occupation". As for international law, both India and Pakistan are complicit - India has repeatedly refused to agree to a demilitarisation of the region in order to conduct a plebiscite to consult the people of Kashmir on the final status of the region, as required by UN Resolution 47 originally passed in 1948 and subsequently revised. Pakistan has also repeatedly refused to allow Kashmiris a "third option" of outright independence in a plebiscite. The point is that it is in Indian occupied Kashmir that discontent with Indian rule is so widespread that an uprising has broken out.
The Outsider Posted October 31, 2010 Posted October 31, 2010 As for the "brutality" of India's occupation it is common knowledge nowadays – Noam Chomsky recently said much the same thing! When half a million soldiers are in a region enforcing a regime against the wishes of the majority of the population there, I think we are justified in calling it an "occupation". As for international law, both India and Pakistan are complicit - India has repeatedly refused to agree to a demilitarisation of the region in order to conduct a plebiscite to consult the people of Kashmir on the final status of the region, as required by UN Resolution 47 originally passed in 1948 and subsequently revised. Pakistan has also repeatedly refused to allow Kashmiris a "third option" of outright independence in a plebiscite. The point is that it is in Indian occupied Kashmir that discontent with Indian rule is so widespread that an uprising has broken out. You have obviously not read the UN resolution. Go and read it and then summarize what it says in 5 lines. That's your homework.
Recommended Posts