Counterpoint: The Taslima ControversyAds By Google
Sheetal Sheth Photos
edited
Maxim.com/Sheetal Sh
Movie Times
Find listings for local movie theaters - indie, multiplex & more.
Movies.YellowPages.c
HP Projectirect
The Top 20 Directors Have Been Determined. Vote On A Final Winner! www.YouTube.com/Proj
ALSO READ
Taslima gives in, withdraws linesNovember 30, 2007
Edit: Our con artistsNovember 29, 2007Vir Sanghvi
December 01, 2007
First Published: 23:50 IST(1/12/2007)
Last Updated: 02:02 IST(2/12/2007)
I knew, last week, that I would be expected to write about the Taslima Nasreen controversy. I chose not to for a variety of reasons, the most important of which was exhaustion.
How many times can one make the same points again and again? How many times will readers be expected to read more or less identical liberal-outrage pieces on Taslima, all of which make roughly the same points? Frankly, there's not much left to say on this subject that I haven't said already or that others haven't written on these pages.
But because the Taslima controversy refuses to go away, I'm going to have to devote this week's Counterpoint to the subject. You will forgive me if I don't rehash the usual free-speech-is-a-basic-right arguments all over again. For the record, yes, I believe in freedom of expression, in the fight against religious fundamentalism and all the other worthy values that we are expected to subscribe to, so you can take those as a given.
My concern this Sunday is less with the actual controversy than with the manner in which all of us and especially the intellectual establishment have reacted to Taslima's enforced flight from Calcutta and to what it says about the current state of the liberal consensus.
I have very little patience with people who act as though they always regarded free speech as an absolute value. I am something of an uncompromising fundamentalist on the subject of freedom of expression but let's not forget that no matter what they say now, Indian liberals have traditionally been willing to trample on free speech in the name of religious sensitivity.
Most of you will remember the fatwa against Salman Rushdie over The Satanic Verses. What you may have forgotten is that even though Ayotollah Khomeini signed the death warrant, he was provoked not by the book itself â which he had never read â but by the actions of educated Indians.
It happened like this. Penguin was supposed to publish the Indian edition of The Satanic Verses. The manuscript went to Khushwant Singh, then Penguin's consulting editor, who read it and pointed out that Muslims would find the book incredibly offensive. Khushwant's views were communicated to the Penguin management who decided not to publish The Satanic Verses in India for the fear of provoking riots.
Shrabani Basu, then the London correspondent for Sunday magazine, went to interview Rushdie and asked him about Penguin India's reservations. In a now-famous remark notable for its mixture of hubris and ignorance, Rushdie responded, "It is a funny view of the world to think that a book can cause riots."
When Shrabani's interview appeared in Sunday, along with a piece outlining the contents of The Satanic Verses, Syed Shahabuddin demanded a ban on the book. The matter was referred to the then home minister Buta Singh. He promptly decided to forbid the sale of The Satanic Verses.
Even though the book had been banned, various Muslim organisations in India and Pakistan then took it upon themselves to demonstrate outside British Council offices and to burn cars â apparently to register their outrage that such a book had ever been written. Ayotollah Khomeini saw one such demonstration on TV and issued his fatwa.
The most notable aspect of the genesis of the fatwa is that nobody who called for the ban had read the book, except for Khushwant Singh â and he was ambivalent. Shahabuddin went by the Sunday piece. There is no evidence that Buta Singh knows how to read. And by the time the demonstrations began, the book was unavailable for the protestors to read, anyway.
How should liberals react to a demand for a ban from people who haven't even read the book? Judging by the current public response to Taslima, we should have all spoken up for free speech then. In fact, we did no such thing.
Khushwant Singh's view became the prevailing consensus and the widely-accepted liberal argument was that as regrettable as it is to ban a book, it is far better to impose such a ban than to risk riots and public disorder. No book is worth the loss of lives.
It intrigues me that many of the same people who cheerfully acquiesced in The Satanic Verses ban are now singing a different tune. Could it be that the liberal consensus has shifted? Have we all changed our minds on where to draw the line restricting freedom of expression? Or do we just have double standards?
Another interesting aspect of the Taslima controversy is the extent to which it has become an exercise in Left-bashing. State governments ban books all the time. A Congress government prevented the distribution of a scholarly book on Shivaji in Maharashtra, for instance. The BJP's record is especially shameful. Sangh Parivar thugs prevented Deepa Mehta's Water from being shot in Banaras while the government did nothing to protect the unit. And, of course, the Husain controversy is still fresh in our minds.
So, why has the Left received so much flak? Writing in the HT on Friday, Sitaram Yechury suggested that we were being unfair to the CPM by looking at the Taslima controversy in isolation. Of course, he's right. But the Left has painted itself into a corner. Every time there's an attack on Husain or on a cinema hall showing Fire, assorted fellow travellers and crypto-Communist 'secular' organisations march in the streets in favour of free speech.
The truth, of course, is that only in India do we make a bizarre association between Communism, a totalitarian ideology that has little respect for human rights and whose leading lights have murdered millions of people, and liberal freedoms. But because the Left has rushed in to occupy this space, it is judged on different standards from other political parties. And so, the liberal outrage is greater when Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee behaves in a manner that we might expect from, say, Murli Manohar Joshi.
Plus, I have a growing sense that the liberal consensus has turned against the Left. There are many reasons for this shift, including the rising prosperity of the liberal elite. But, the most obvious ones include the spoilt-child behaviour of the CPM as a constituent of the UPA, the suspicion that the opposition to the nuclear deal was motivated by patriotism on behalf of China rather than India, and anger over the coup staged by CPM cadres in Nandigram.
Much of the outrage over Taslima has nothing to do with her. It's just become another stick to beat the CPM with. And I also think that Sitaram is right when he says that it's silly to compare Bengal with Gujarat. As much as I disapprove of how the Left has behaved, I do not see how comparisons to mass murder can be sustained.
And finally, the Taslima controversy shows us how much Indian liberals have matured in our understanding of secularism. The Satanic Verses controversy demonstrated our double standards in the 1980s â Hindus should learn to take it on the chin but we must be very careful not to offend Muslims.
My sense is that we are now much more even handed in our approach to religious fundamentalism.
I sensed this first in the manner in which we regarded the Muslim political leadership's attempts to turn the Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad into a domestic political issue in India. There's no doubt that pious Muslims would have found the Danish cartoons deeply offensive (if they had seen them; most people know they exist but have never actually seen the cartoons themselves), but liberals felt that a) there's no reason why non-believers should consider their freedoms circumscribed by the standards of pious believers, and b) that even if some Scandinavian had insulted the Prophet, this had very little to do with us in India.
It's always dangerous to draw broad general conclusions from a single event so I will be careful in claiming that I detect a tectonic shift in the liberal consensus. But even so, it does seem to me that we now regard free speech as more important than we ever have, that the Left has lost its status as the favourite party of the well-meaning but moderately-informed artist and intellectual, and that we are finally treating Muslim communalists with the firmness that we previously applied only to Hindu fundamentalists.
Regardless of how things turn out with Taslima, these are still positive steps and genuine gains for Indian liberalism.
Uttar Pradesh bans Aaja Nachle over 'casteist' remarks
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->UP Chief Minister Mayawati late on Friday evening banned Madhuri Dixit's comeback film Aaja Nachle in Uttar Pradesh, leaving countless fans of the Bollywood actress in the state disappointed. The ban has been issued following complaints that the title song of the film contains certain casteist remarks.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
M F Hussains favorite actress!
Banned by secular government!!
<!--emo&:roll--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ROTFL.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ROTFL.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<i>Taslima thrown out to take Nandigram mess off the radar</i>
Was the recent violence witnessed in some parts of central Kolkata, leading to dissident Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen's forced eviction from the city, genuine Muslim anger or manufactured rage? Did the CPI(M) have a hand in organising the rioting? Who has gained the most after mobs took to the streets?
For possible answers, we need to step back and take a look at the sequence of events beginning with the CPI(M)'s smash-and-grab of Nandigram.
When the Marxists let loose a reign of terror in the villages of Nandigram in end-October, ratcheting it up in the first week of November, to recapture territory they had lost to the Bhoomi Uchchhed Pratirodh Committee protesting acquisition of farmland for an Indonesian SEZ, they had not bargained for extensive and sustained negative publicity in media.
The CPI(M)'s Nandigram takeover strategy was based on the doctrine of shock and awe, that is, rapid dominance through the use of overwhelming force. Marxist cadre were deployed to block entry to Nandigram and newspersons were chased away. It was hoped that this would prevent media from putting out details.
In the event, the media coverage of Nandigram was beyond anything the CPI(M) could have imagined and hugely damaging for the party. Newspapers and channels across the country picked up the story, as did foreign agencies. The fact that most of the victims of the Marxist mayhem were Muslims painted the CPI(M) in lurid colours.
With Muslim organisations, till now favourably disposed towards the CPI(M), beginning to voice their protest -- Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind said "Muslims in West Bengal are worse off than in Gujarat" - Marxist leaders, yet to recover from being pilloried over police harassment of Rizwanur Rehman and his death in mysterious circumstances, found themselves scampering for cover.
Seeking to capitalise on Nandigram, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind called a three-hour shutdown in central Kolkata on November 15. There was moderate response to the call, disrupting Kolkata's usually chaotic traffic, but there was no violence.
The next day, Pashchim Banga Milli Ittehad Parishad, comprising 12 Muslim organisations, including Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, Milli Council, Indian National League, Jamiat-e-Islami Hind and All-India Minority Forum, called a four-hour shutdown. Once again, apart from fiery speeches, the protest was unremarkable. Traffic was stalled at Esplanade, Park Circus, AJC Bose Road and Kidderpore. Not that traffic moves smoothly in these areas otherwise.
Suddenly, the All-India Minority Forum, led by Idris Ali, former head of the local Congress minority cell and a serial 'public interest' litigant in Kolkata High Court, called a three-hour shutdown on November 21 to protest against "Marxist atrocities on Muslims in Nandigram" and demand the "expulsion of Taslima Nasreen from Kolkata".
On the day of the shutdown, mobs emerged from Muslim-dominated areas, many of them in CPI(M) leader and West Bengal Assembly Speaker Hashim Abdul Halim's constituency, Entally, and went berserk, torching vehicles and attacking policemen. Within no time, news channels across the country were broadcasting live footage of the violence.
The footage showed mobs on the rampage and Kolkata Police personnel on the retreat. In one particular shot, a policeman was seen loading a teargas shell and then not firing it as a mob, waving swords and chanting slogans, advanced menacingly.
At none of the places that witnessed violence was the mob larger than 100 hooligans. If the police had wanted to, they could have chased away the mobs. But they didn't. It was almost as if they had been instructed not to act.
Surprisingly, the State Government, which later claimed to have been taken by surprise, promptly called in the Army and imposed curfew. This, too, made headlines as the Army's help had not been sought in West Bengal for the past 15 years although there had been worse incidents of violence.
In sharp contrast to the prompt deployment of the Army in Kolkata, the Left Front Government had refused to deploy CRPF personnel in Nandigram. When CRPF personnel were finally allowed in days after the Marxists had taken over Nandigram, they were not given the power to enforce law and order.
It took less than an hour for the Army to clear out the violence-hit streets and restore order. By early evening, calm had returned and life in Kolkata was back to normal, barring the dusk-to-dawn curfew in a few areas. Briefing newspersons on the violence, CPI(M) politburo member and State party secretary Biman Bose said if Nasreen "should leave Kolkata if her stay disturbs the peace".
What he did not explain was the ease with which mobs had been mobilised by an unheard of organisation and the listless behaviour of the State police. Neither Idris Ali nor his All-India Minority Forum could have organised the crowds. The Forum had already participated in the protest organised by Pashchim Banga Milli Ittehad Parishad and there was no reason for Ali to call a separate shutdown.
Those who track the CPI(M)'s dirty tricks department believe that Ali may have been "encouraged" to call a shutdown and highlight the "Muslim demand" for Nasreen's expulsion from Kolkata. He may have been the proverbial cat's paw. Apart from him, four men may have played a crucial role in securing for the CPI(M) an escape route from the Nandigram mess: Aslam alias Pappu, Ruhul Amin, Sultan Ahmed and Iqbal Ahmed. Aslam, a resident of Alimuddin Street, where the CPI(M)'s State headquarters are located, is a "property dealer" known for his links with the CPI(M). Amin lives in Topsia, has CPI(M) links and a dubious profile. Sultan, a resident of Ripon Street who has switched loyalties from the Congress to the Trinamool, is "open to persuasion if the price is right". His brother Ibal has done a reverse switch though his services are "not strictly restricted to the Congress". On November 21, mob fury was seen in the Ripon Street and Topsia areas, apart from Park Circus.
By the morning of November 22, media focus had shifted from Nandigram to the rioting. That day Nasreen was put on a flight to Jaipur and since then, newspapers and 24x7 channels, especially in West Bengal, have front-paged and prime-timed stories about the CPI(M) "giving in to Muslim demands". Nobody is talking about the CPI(M)'s "atrocities on Muslims in Nandigram" anymore.
Yesterday's 'persecutor' has become today's 'appeaser'.
Capt. That article is an example of DIE bashing the Hindus on the side. Its a cricus. The writer attacks the left of Center liberals for questioning the CPM on their ambivalence on Muslim clerics rage at Taslima and keeps whacking the BJP and NDA in case they think he is giving the Left Liberals a bashing. The guy is an out and out DIE. He doesnt belong to India, bodily he might but his mind is above all this.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Thou Shalt Not Criticize the Prophet
Posted by Sandeep on December 5, 2007 | Comments (3) | Trackbacks (0)
Mahmood A. Madani, one of the prime torchbearers of the recent Calcutta riots, expounds on Taslima Nasreenâs "offensive passages" in Dwikhandita. He supports intellectual debate "but not rubbish."
Rubbish isnât worth debating so what is he angry about? The answer lies in the middle of a pile of circuitous stuff about his perception of the freedom to air your views, etc:
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->
In what is styled as an account of her life, Nasreen airs her views on Islam, the role of women in it, the Quran and so on. This much is unimpeachable: since everyone is entitled to their views. Itâs paragraphs on the Prophet, between pages 64 and 66, that are believed to be "grossly indecent", in bad taste, and not worthy of any intelligent debate on the Prophet or the religion he founded. [â¦] "People think we are angry because she has written against the burqa," says Madani. "We are not fools. You are entitled to your views on the burqa. I am open to an intellectual debate on Islam. But not the kind of rubbish she has written about the personal life and character of the Prophet. She has called him an aiyash (philanderer), written about his relations with women and dirty details I cannot repeat.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There cannot be any intellectual debate on Islam minus Muhammad. Things like burqa are simply derivatives of the core of Islam. To that extent, Madani is a pious Muslim because in Islam you can only worship Muhammad, not scrutinize his life.
A brief gloss at the offensive passages reveals that there is truth in what she has said about Muhammad. We can begin with Khadija to trace Muhammadâs relations with women. One wonders why after her death the conditions of women in that region altered drastically. After Khadijaâs death, Muhammad aged 50, married 11 (or 13?) women in different age-ranges with the youngest aged around 9.
Perhaps Taslima has taken her poetic licence too seriously to qualify for "dirty details" but what she has written is historically-verifiable. And that history makes Madani uncomfortable and angry.
<b>Govt has virtually asked me to leave: Taslima</b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Her voice choked with emotion, Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen on Thursday said the Indian government has virtually asked her to leave the country by insisting she could live here only confined in a room without being able to visit anywhere or receive visitors.
"What have I done? Am I a criminal? Have I committed any crime? I cannot go back to Bangladesh they know. Now they want me to stay like a prisoner in a room without being able to meet anyone," Nasreen told IANS on phone, even as she broke down while speaking from her New Delhi safe house.
Nasreen, living at an undisclosed address in New Delhi under state protection, has been told by Indian officials that she could either continue to stay in the national capital confined or leave the country.
<b>"One Mr Amit Dasgupta from the Indian government met me recently and told me the government decision. I was asking when I could return to Kolkata because it is just impossible to live like this in a room. He told me I would not be allowed outdoor, nor visit anybody or be allowed to receive any visitor if I am to stay in India,"</b> Nasreen said.
"Can you tell me what do they want?" she asked, her voice breaking down with every word.
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>"He clearly told me that I would not be allowed a normal life in India. This amounts to asking me to leave India," </span>she said.
"I still want to live in India and go back to Kolkata," she said.
................
The Intelligence Bureau is keeping Nasreen in a 'safe house' within a National Security Guards complex in New Delhi.
However, West Bengal 's ruling Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) washed its hands of the matter saying the Bangladeshi writer moved out on her own and it was for the government to decide where she should stay.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
UPA is run by radical/fascist people who have no respect for wopman.
UPA is backing Sorbuhdin of Gujarat, a known terrorist, is sleeping with SIMI, but hey Ho , it finds small woman as danger who had never use any weapon or killed anyone.
What a shame? India PM is just a stupid fool and President is a shame.
Its in Hindi. This book caused quite a bit of stir during the British period.
Taslima is right the life of the Prophet Muhammed is what should be publicised.
A request of IF Hindi speaking members. Can anyone translate this into English and pdf it? If its too much can India based members go to a translation service and get it done as a favor?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Taslima's 'house arrest' a national shame: BJP</b>
Pioneer News Service | New Delhi
The BJP on Friday said the "shocking news" of the house arrest of noted writer Taslima Nasreen was a matter of shame for the UPA Government, especially in a country that proudly propounds the age-old philosophy of Athithi Devo Bhava. Â
Party spokesman Prakash Javadekar said it was even more shocking that for the sake of their political survival and acting completely under pressure from the CPI(M), the Central Government had gone ahead and conveyed to Taslima that she cannot go back to Kolkata, a city that she loves.
<b>"This has thrown up an extremely relevant and important question as to how a victim of persecution is being treated by a civilised State in which the victim has sought refuge. Taslima is a victim of religious persecution in Bangladesh. She is now a refugee in India,"</b> Javadekar added.
Criticising the UPA and the CPI(M) for their dismal display of conduct in Taslima episode, Javadekar maintained it clearly established their complete submission to Islamic fundamentalists. He demanded freedom of movement, safety and just treatment to Taslima, as also to allow her to follow her wishes.
On CPI(M)'s attack on the party in its mouthpiece People's Democracy, the BJP said it was a sign of the growing insecurity amongst its leadership and cadre. "They have falsely charged the BJP with going back to basics of aggressive communal polaralisation. This precisely reflects the complete insecurity and frustration of the CPI(M), in face of the growing popularity of the BJP," Javdekar claimed.
...........
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Taslima should apologise to Muslims: Dasmunsi</b>
Union Information and Broadcasting Minister Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi on Sunday said controversial Bangladeshi author <b>Taslima Nasreen should apologise with "folded hands" for hurting the sentiments of Muslims of the country</b>, and hinted that her book Dwikhandito could be banned.
Talking to reporters in Malda in West Bengal, he said: "We are a pluralistic nation and we respect all religions. I love literature and I have nothing against her writing. But that does not mean she can use her pen to insult and hurt the religious belief of the Muslims or for that matter any religion."
"The comments made by her in the book in question were uncalled for. She should bow down before the people whose sentiments she has hurt and apologise with folded hands, and expunge those pages from her book," Dasmunsi said.
"We did not allow Salman Rushdie's book (The Satanic Verses) when it caused a flutter and raised controversy. She will not be an exception," said Dasmunsi.
Confined to a 'safe house' somewhere in New Delhi and shut out from the world except for phone calls and emails, Taslima Nasreen longs to come back to Kolkata from where she was shunted out in November after unprecedented street riots over her writings.
The Indian government earlier virtually told Taslima to leave the country or stay confined in a house away from Kolkata, where she had set up home for the past few years returning from exile in Europe after she was hounded out of Bangladesh for her writings.
Asked if she should be allowed to return to West Bengal, Dasmuni said, "I will not make any comment on this. When the state government had welcomed her and asked her to settle down in Kolkata complying with her wishes, they were under the impression that they were about to bring a progressive revolution in the state."
"So it is their headache now," he said taking a dig at the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M)-led Left Front government in the state.
But if Taslima has to stay in India or any other country, she has to honour and respect the philosophy and identity of that nation, he added.
At the beginning of 2008, the writer had described her condition as in a no man's land of fading hope, despair and crushing loneliness.
"I am only breathing. I don't think I am alive like you are. Can anybody live like this? It was beyond my imagination that in a secular democracy this can happen to a writer," Nasreen told IANS from her room in an undisclosed New Delhi house recently.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"I am only breathing. I don't think I am alive like you are. Can anybody live like this? It was beyond my imagination that in a secular democracy this can happen to a writer," Nasreen told IANS from her room in an undisclosed New Delhi house recently.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think this really highlights Taslima misunderstanding of India. Who told her India was secular?? Hindus themselves have had their fatih questioned by the Centre - did she really think she would be protected from Islamists-the apple of the govt's eye?
<!--QuoteBegin-thayilv+Jan 6 2008, 11:02 PM-->QUOTE(thayilv @ Jan 6 2008, 11:02 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"I am only breathing. I don't think I am alive like you are. Can anybody live like this? It was beyond my imagination that in a secular democracy this can happen to a writer," Nasreen told IANS from her room in an undisclosed New Delhi house recently.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think this really highlights Taslima misunderstanding of India. Who told her India was secular?? Hindus themselves have had their fatih questioned by the Centre - did she really think she would be protected from Islamists-the apple of the govt's eye?
jmts,IMHO etc.
[right][snapback]76868[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As C. Raja Mohan of CHindu would have averred - had she consulted properly, that, India is an Islamic Nation. <!--emo&:flush--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/Flush.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='Flush.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Indeed, India does display the characteristics of an Islamic or mildly Islamic nation.
The tight clamp down of criticism of Islam.
Persecution of other religions with little or no reprecussions etc.
Nothing but high praise for Muslim butchers like Aurangazeb (city and roads named after him) Bakthiyar (city named after him) and last but not the least - the upcoming movie Jodha Akbar which makes Akbar out to be some great patriot.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Bow before fanatics </b>
The Pioneer Edit Desk
Dasmunsi is welcome to do that
Some politicians suffer from what is known as 'foot-in-mouth' disease. Those afflicted by this illness tend to open their mouths once too often, only to put both their feet in. Union Information & Broadcasting Minister Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi, who also doubles up as Parliamentary Affairs Minister, is one such politician.<b> On Sunday he pompously declared that dissident Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen should "bow down and apologise with folded hands" for hurting the sentiments of Muslims.</b> He then went on to add, rather gratuitously, "We are a pluralistic nation and we respect all religions." What does Mr Dasmunsi want Ms Nasreen to "apologise with folded hands" for? Presumably he was referring to the contentious portions, contained in all of three pages, of her book, Dwikhondito. Perhaps the Minister needs to be informed that she has already offered to delete those portions and instructed her publisher to withdraw all copies of the book from the market. She has also clarified that she neither intended nor wishes to hurt anybody's sentiments. And whom does Mr Dasmunsi want Ms Nasreen to "apologise with folded hands" to? Fanatical Islamists who are supported in their murderous mission by those who have nothing but contempt for the law of the land and our open, plural society.
The vast majority of India's Muslims, Mr Dasmunsi also needs to be informed, is not agitated by Ms Nasreen's writings; those who preach hatred and intolerance are. So, if he must speak for those who are "offended" by Ms Nasreen's book, let him speak for the likes of Idris Ali who heads the 'All-India Minority Forum' and organised the anti-Taslima Nasreen riots in central Kolkata on November 21 last year. Let him not defame all Muslims. The hate-monger is an exalted 'leader' of the party to which Mr Dasmunsi belongs; it is not surprising that they should think so remarkably alike. And since the Minister for Information & Broadcasting appears to be so appallingly ill-informed, it would be in order to remind him that Dwikhondito, banned by West Bengal's CPI(M)-led Government, has been cleared by Kolkata High Court. In a sense, he has questioned the judiciary's wisdom, and thereby cast aspersions on the law. <b>It is obvious that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's esteemed Cabinet colleague, who claims to "love literature", is indulging in no more than competitive communalism to outdo the Marxists in pandering to the lowest common denominator for whom violence is the only means of demonstrating their loyalty to Islam. He is welcome to bow before them with folded hands -- that's something Mr Dasmunsi, as a courtier, should be adept at -- but he should desist from asking others to emulate him. </b>
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-ramana+Jan 9 2008, 03:51 AM-->QUOTE(ramana @ Jan 9 2008, 03:51 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Has any member read those 'offending' pages?
[right][snapback]76913[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Taslima on the prophet and Allah:
"Such then has been the character of this rascal of a prophet; and concealed with in the folds of his raiment is the hoax known as Allah"
irect
