news details |
|
|
| Doordarshan also rigorously excludes Jammu, Ladakh | | Debate On Interlocutors' Report | | NEHA
JAMMU, June 3: The Doordarshan (national) last evening organized a debate on Jammu & Kashmir. The topic was Jammu & Kashmir: The Interlocutors' Report". The progamme was anchored by none other than Neelam Sharma. The panelists included M M Ansari, former interlocutor for Jammu & Kashmir; Varun Sahni, former Vice-Chancellor of Jammu University; Dr Sameer Kaul, spokesperson of People's Democratic Party; Kapil Kak, close friend of Jammu University's former Vice-Chancellor Amitabh Mattoo and ex-air force official and Sheikh Manzoor Ahmad, Kashmiri journalist. Neelam Sharma also thought it necessary to talk to NC MP Sharief-ud-Din Shariq and Kashmir-based Congress leader Farooq Andrabi to ascertain their views on the interlocutors' report. Both of them were in Srinagar when Neelam Sharma talked to them. There were nearly two dozen people, mostly from Kashmir and a few of them from New Delhi, in the studio where the debate was organized.
All those who spoke only talked about Kashmir, Kashmiri Muslims and Kashmiri Hindus. But more than that, all the panelists, especially Sameer Kaul, Kapil Kak, Manzoor Ahmad and Shariq, took on New Delhi and supported the Kashmiris' demands, without any exception. The role of M M Ansari was, of course, somewhat different, notwithstanding his clear bias in favour of Kashmir. Varun Sahni was neither here nor there. Of course, he appreciated the idea of regional councils and said that Jammu and Kashmir is a national issue.
The fact of the matter is that it was all Kashmiri debate. None talked about the woes, needs and aspirations of the people of Jammu and Ladakh. The organizers of the debate on a very crucial issue did not think it proper to invite anyone from Jammu or from Ladakh. They did not think it desirable to contact Delhi-based journalists/activists of Jammu and Ladakh origin in order to ensure the participation of Jammu and Ladakh in the debate or to make the debate balanced. Nor did Neelam Sharma think it proper to talk to anyone in Jammu and Ladakh. Perhaps, everything was pre-planned; perhaps, the authorities wanted Neelam Sharma to organize the debate in the manner she organized; perhaps, the authorities wanted to tell the country that Kashmir means Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh and the views as expressed by the panelists from Kashmir the views of the entire population of the state; perhaps, the authorities wanted to tell the people of Jammu and Ladakh that they have no say whatever and that they have no other option but to lick the Kashmiri shoes, dance to their tunes, live at their mercy and lead a wretched and undignified life; perhaps, the authorities controlling the Doordarshan wanted to tell the Kashmiri separatists and the "mainstream" Kashmiri leadership, plus the people of Kashmir, that they are there in New Delhi to watch, protect and further advance their interests and that they would not mind causing a grievous injury to Jammu and Ladakh in order to watch, defend and advance further the interests of Kashmir.
It was all disgusting. It was indeed a criminal act on the part of the Doordarshan to exclude Jammu and Ladakh, which houses half of the state's population and occupy more than 88 per cent of the state's geographical area and which have suffered immense losses in political, social and economic terms during all these years of the independence. It would not be an exaggeration if someone may says so that the Doordarshan is in the hands of those who want to upset the Indian applecart in Kashmir; who want the already rather New Delhi |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
