news details |
|
|
| Attack on Prashant a warning for supporters of separatists | | Plebiscite In Kashmir -- II | | Neha
Jammu, Oct 14: It was hoped that the October 12 attack on Prashant Bhushan by some young nationalists would reform him or make him see reason and that he would withdraw the anti-India remarks he made at Varanasi. It turned out to be false hope. He defended what he said at Varanasi and reiterated that if after the plebiscite, it is found that Kashmiri Muslims are against India, then they should be allowed to become independent and have a dispensation of their own choice. He asserted that independence of Kashmir from India would be in the interest of Kashmir and India and warned that the continuation of the unwanted rule in Jammu and Kashmir would create in Kashmir Afghanistan-like situation. He, in addition, asserted that India is a democratic country and everyone should be given the right to free speech and India cannot retain the territories of Jammu and Kashmir through the use of force, army and black laws. His stand was as clear as crystal and his stand was that India mist quit Kashmir to end what he called the alienation of Kashmiri Muslims.
It needs to be underlined that Bhushan held the Government of India responsible for the creation of a situation that the "fascists" to take the law of the land into their own hands and beat and attack those opposed to their nationalist ideology. He conveniently overlooked the fact that he and others of his ilk have been exploiting the weak-kneed policies of the Indian State and preaching sedition and defending the seditionists since decades. It was a contradiction of sorts. How could a man who has misused and exploited New Delhi's weaknesses and ambivalence blame New Delhi itself for what the three young nationalists did to him?
In other words, the thick-skinned and shameless Bhushan not only stuck to his anti-India stand, but also dismissed the attackers as "fascists", demanded stringent action against them and urged the Government of India to ban all such organizations which in the name of spurious nationalism and unity and integrity of India take recourse to violent methods to silence the votaries of Kashmir's independence. He didn't demand a ban on the Kashmir-based separatist and communal outfits. Nor did he demand a ban on the dreaded Maoist terrorists. On the contrary, he insisted that he would continue to defend the "human rights" of the Maoists and Kashmir separatists. And, still he is roaming about freely, with the electronic media not really questioning his credentials and outrageous views.
If the response and reaction to what was done to him by the three young nationalists, all behind the bars now, was provocative, the reaction of his father and another member of Anna Hazare's team Shanti Bhushan was no different. He defended his son to the hilt, supported his seditious views and ideas and asserted that "his son is a brave man and no one can cow down and browbeat him". It's no wonder then that the demand for the arrest of Bhushan and Shani under the charge of sedition is gaining momentum. Significantly, the Government of India has disapproved of what Bhushan said at Varanasi and reiterated in New Delhi on and after October 12. It is a different story that it has acted against those who attacked the seditionist and thought it wise not to touch the seditionist.
The most disturbing aspect of the whole situation was the support Bhushan got from two other prominent members of the Anna team, Kiran Bedi and Arvind Kejariwal. Leave alone Medha Patekar, another member of Anna's team, Kuldip Nayar, Birinda Karat and others of their ilk who also defended Bhushan. For, it was expected of them. Their views on Kashmir are too well-known and, hence, no comment on them. It was the support of Kiran and Arvind that came as a bolt from the blue. They described Bhushan as a gentleman, who is committed to the cause of the community and nation. They didn't have the audacity to question the Bhushan's anti-India stand on Jammu and Kashmir. So much that they feigned ignorance about what had provoked the three young nationalists to take recourse to the methodology they took to produce the moral effect.
It is time for the likes of Bhushan to retrospect and refashion their views on India and its Jammu and Kashmir and act in the best interests of the country. They should remember that the right to free speech never means the right to preach sedition and right to defend the indefensible: Dreaded Maoists and separatists of all varieties. At the same time, they would do well to appreciate the feelings and sentiments of those who attacked Bhushan. (Concluded) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
