For those who of you not in the Twitter world, here’s a great illustration of why serious bloggers give a huge margin of humor and chagrin to the media. A certain Mr. Jaideep Kulkarni asked NDTV’s news anchor, Vishnu Som the following question:
@VishnuNDTV why should we care if they ban Minaret or a mosque. Does it concern us. does it affect us?
To which Vishnu Som replied thusly:
@jaideepsk Yes it does. It represents a fundamental threat to millions of Muslims in our country
In the end, Vishnu Som didn’t really address the Acorn’s basic question:
Now, what you think of Switzerland’s decision is one thing. It is totally another to declare that the Swiss decision on minaret-building represents a “fundamental threat” to millions of Indian Muslims.
And on his Twitter timeline, Vishnu Som took the time-honoured route of resorting to labelling people who criticized his views.
Among other things, he frequently uses these words: “right wing,” “secular right,” and “agenda.” These would have probably been justified if his response addressed the Acorn’s question. Because it doesn’t, these terms become what they really are: labels. And it’s also a tad amusing to read that his response is a:
. reply to the right wing gibberish posted by Vishnu bashers on Acorn’s website. See at end of comments
Words have meanings, and characterizing the minaret ban in Switzerland as a “fundamental threat to Indian Muslims” will invite criticism. This statement will be true only if you assume that Muslims the world over are united only by their religion and owe no allegiance to their native country and/or the country they’ve adopted as home. However, in case of Islam, this is not an assumption, but a fact and is one of the main reasons why Islamism is such an urgent, global problem. Another recent example: the Danish cartoons controversy where Muslims worldwide were quickly organized into gangs that torched embassies in at least two countries. Vishnu Som’s statement makes sense only from this perspective.
It is not wrong or bad to feel kinship with people who follow the same religion. What is wrong is putting religion over nation. But then, years of Marxist-Left-liberal indoctrination especially in the Indian media has ensured that nationalism is itself a dirty word. As Vishnu Som assumes in his comment:
“Would you’ve been OK if your place of worship was banned in a country based on the premise that people of your religion are terrorists?.”
Agree. It isn’t ok. However, this gives rise to some questions:
- Why and how did that premise originate?
- Why have all terrorist attacks in the last 10 or so years been entirely carried out by the followers of Islam?
- What is the common motivating reason and/or ideology behind these attacks?
- Where does this ideology have its roots?
Vishnu Som says we need a “secular bent of mind” to understand his statement. I suggest commonsense and old-fashioned logic. Isn’t Switzerland specifically, and Europe in general entitled to feel jittery when it is routinely faced with
Rallies by radical Islamists, which were once rare, are now a common feature in European capitals with banners and placards denouncing democracy as the ‘problem’ and Islam as the ‘solution’.
How does Vishnu Som justify this?
It is also interesting to note the aftermath of every single Islamic terror attack. The investigations and the perpetrators themselves–if they’re caught–reveal the following commonal features the attack:
- To instill fear and terror in the hearts of the Kaffirs
- To spread the message of Islam
- It was carried out in the service of Allah and Mohammed
- The perpetrator(s) was proud of the holy deed
- Similar attacks will follow till the kaffirs either convert or die
Our eminent columnists, intellectuals and thinkers around the world actually do a disservice by denying what the perpetrators themselves said! This is akin to what Marxist historians did by whitewashing Aurangzeb’s atrocities. The mighty Moghul, had he been alive, would have had their heads for despoiling his service to Islam.
But the likes of Vishnu Som completely ignore all of this and throw around words like “fundamental threat to Indian Muslims” so casually. When confronted with criticism, he resorts to labelling. One plausible explanation for his flippant labelling is the fact that Indian media folks have been pretty much insulated from direct criticism by the general public. An recommended way is to engage in debate and admit that you can, you know, be (gasp!) wrong. There’s really no right-wing conspiracy out to get Vishnu Som or anybody.
Tags: Bloggers, Blogging, Commentary, Islam Watch, Islamic Terrorism, Media Watch, NDTV, Pseudosecularism, Pseudosecularism Hall of Shame, Religious Politics, Right Wing, Secularism, Society & Culture, Switzerland Minarets Ban, Terrorism, The Acorn, Twitter, Vishnu Som, World Politics