Monday, November 24, 2008
Terror in the aisles - By Khalid Mohamed - Hindustan Times
 | Tue,25 Nov 2008 |  |
Turns out that their families are more incendiary and unreasonable than the rioters during the 1993-94 conflagrations in Mumbai.
Evidently, Chopra discarded his original script because he didn't want to gamble with an iffy topic at the box office. Moreover, Mani Ratnam was already about to outrace him to the screens withBombay (1995), a sit-on-the-fence account of the riots carnage.
Today, Chopra's much-vaunted Yash Raj banner is studying white collar terrorism in a film titled New York which has just completed principal shooting in the US. On another plane altogether, with the sleeper successes of Khuda Kay Liye (imported from Pakistan) andA Wednesday, as well as the critical laurels gathered by Aamir andMumbai Meri Jaan, terrorism has become a desirable theme on Bollywood's storyboard. In addition, Muslims have also been associated with D-Company godsons and god-bhais who squat in dimly lit ghetto interiors designed by Ram Gopal Varma.
Is this what we are? Without attempting to understand the Muslim psyche or why lumpen elements are spawned, screenplays are setting up despicable stereotypes. Muslims in films today, are out to kill in the garb of assassins and assorted bozos who have emerged from a limbo land.
In this, Indian cinema is not alone. The Muslim as the terrorist lunatic is everywhere, be it in a Die Hard blockbuster, giving Bruce Willis a run for his bullets. And the infallibly bearded and shifty Muslim is a staple in every hijack 'entertainer.' In the recent rush of Hollywood war movies, the Muslim is by contrast faceless but as dreadful. Although these movies critique the US involvement in the Iraq war, the recalcitrant American soldier is canonised as the war hero. As for the other's dead? Hopefully they art in heaven, inshallah.
More than any other cinemas of the world, ours has to deal with a multiplicity of communities. Like the Parsis, too often reduced to air-gulping clowns. As for Christians, they are portrayed as 'Kya bolta hai, men?' rum guzzlers or are represented by Janet of Fashion who must choose between unhappiness and marrying a gay at a church wedding. None of us has come a long way baby.
Minorities just cannot be heroic. Custom has made it a must for the hero to be a Rahul or a Rohit and the heroine to be a Sapna or Suman. In any case, beyond the same old naming ceremonies, how many of the 'now' generation's film makers are even remotely interested in breaking the norms or in doing something ― anything! ― through a populist medium?
Entertainment, it is presumed, doesn't gel with purposeful stories. It is argued that mainstream cinema, by its very nature, isn't realistic or relevant to the conditions around us.
Periodically, demographic statistics have affirmed that the Indian Muslim is the most fervent and passionate filmgoer. In most metropolitan cities, after the Friday afternoon namaaz, sizeable numbers make a beeline for the new movie in town. Lose them and you lose a huge slab of the ticket vote-bank. Indeed, in a bid to appease this section of the audience, there was a time when films would add a sympathetic Chacha Rahim, a qawwal Altaf, or a sacrificial goat who takes the bullet for Hero Rohit at the end.
Today, though, there is something downright crude in the representation of Muslims in the movies. For instance, there was neither head nor tale to the Salman Khan clinker, Tumko Na Bhool Payenge(2002), in which a Muslim gadabout goes amnesiac, is adopted by a Hindu family, retrieves his memory and fetches up at the Haji Ali dargah. If any point was being conveyed it was entirely lost on the audience. Maine Dil Tujhko Diya (2002) exhibited Sanjay Dutt as a Muslim don with a heart of gold; Dutt repeated the act as 'Iqbal Danger' in Annarth (2002). Nothing can be done. We have been painted by the bhai brush.
Even in films that are notches above the commonplace, there have been transgressions. Example:Sarfarosh (1999). The bad guy, Naseeruddin Shah, is a ghazal singer from Pakistan. As if to redress the balance, a cop is depicted as a nationalist Muslim victimised by his superiors and by the world at large.
Most filmmakers care a dried fig for what sub-texts and subterranean messages are being bleeped out to an audience that is largely unlettered and impressionable. If Muslim bashing is on, so be it.
Still, any purist (idealistic?) filmmaker will tell you that characters emerge from the plot ― caste, creed and religion no bar. It doesn't matter if you're black, brown or white, Hindu, Muslim or Christian. As long as the filmmaker believes in a story, as long as there is conviction that the story must be told, that's cinema.
Otherwise, you might as well play the anorexic stock market, the loaded roulette or the iffy horse races. Playing with cinema and communities may pay... but for how long and, at whose expense?
A LETTER TO THE EDITOR: INDIA SHOULD CONDEMN THIS OPEN THREAT TO INTERNATION LAW
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
A LETTER TO THE EDITOR: INDIA SHOULD CONDEMN THIS OPEN THREAT TO INTERNATION LAW
'Israel should consider killing Ahmadinejad', is the headline of the story put out by PTI. There is no doubt in legal terms, this brand of threat of assassination of head of state, it is a criminal act. And since all UN member countries are bound by international laws to take note of such threats and move UN legal measures to suggest appropriate response to such violent threats publicly propagated, Indian government should take specially interest, as the next member of the top table in the world affair, to discourage and denounce such lawless threat to a UN member country's head of state, with whom India has friendly relations.
Government of India must issue its response to such open threats and make it clear to Israel that no such illegal and criminal act will ever find favour with India that is committed to solving all international problems by negotiation and not by violent means. India herself had been victimised by assassination of its leaders in the past. It can again become a target of internal or external threats to its leaders.
Government must take her public in confidence, about internal and external movements that hold a constant threat to its stability and integrity and join UN to see that all UN members should make public renunciation of such threat of assassination and punish those who are found to flaunt the world laws and public opinion. Israel must haul the candidate likely to be defence minister, to court and get him debarred from participation in coming election in Israel.
India's silence may be interpreted as condoning such acts of violence to bring about regime change in the world, as it happened in India.
Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai
www.ghulammuhammed.wordpress.
Togadia funded Abhinav Bharat, Sadhvi said ‘my people’ set off Malegaon bomb: Purohit to CBI - INDIAN EXPRESS
Togadia funded Abhinav Bharat, Sadhvi said ‘my people’ set off Malegaon bomb: Purohit to CBI
Shishir GuptaPosted online: Nov 24, 2008 at 0131 hrs
The officer has also said that Swami Aseemanand of Dangs had told him that Sunil Joshi — the man to whom Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur sold her motorcycle that was used in the Malegaon blast— was also involved in the Ajmer Sharif shrine bombing of October 11, 2007.
Sunil Joshi, whom Swami Aseemanand described to Purohit as “apna banda” (our man), was murdered in Dewas, Madhya Pradesh in the last week of December, 2007. The swami, originally Jatin Chatterjee of Bengal, is on the run.
The CBI interrogated Purohit in connection with its investigations into the May 18, 2007 blast at Hyderabad’s Mecca Masjid.
Purohit is understood to have told interrogators the name of a serving Colonel of the Army, his neighbour in Panchmarhi, who attended key meetings of Abhinav Bharat, including one allegedly hosted by the senior New Delhi endocrinologist R P Singh in Faridabad in January this year.
The Army has denied that any of its officers besides Purohit is under the scanner in the Malegaon probe. Dr Singh has denied involvement in the blast conspiracy.
The CBI report records competing claims made by Purohit and Sadhvi Pragya on the Malegaon blast. Purohit claimed to have met Pragya on October 5, 2008 to tell her that “our people” had carried out the killings in Orissa, burnt down two churches in Karnataka, and also carried out the Malegaon blast. To which, says the CBI report, the Sadhvi retorted: how could Purohit claim that Abhinav Bharat had been responsible for the Malegaon blast, when it was actually her people who had carried out the attack?
Purohit told interrogators that one Prashant Hartalkar, who he identified as the VHP’s Maharashtra chief, had called him on the phone to say that Pravin Togadia wanted him to find out who was investigating the Nanded blast case. In April 2006, an explosion in the home of an alleged RSS worker in Nanded, Maharashtra, killed two men who were suspected to have been putting together a bomb.
The CBI report details plans by Abhinav Bharat to try and ultimately replace the RSS and VHP as the standard-bearer of the ‘Hindu cause’. Purohit claimed to have told VHP leader Eknath Rao Shete that “the RSS needs to change its dress code to attract the youth of the country”.
Purohit also gave details of the conspiracy to eliminate RSS leader Indresh Kumar for ‘getting Hindus killed in Nepal’. He admitted he had, at the behest of Dayanand Pandey (alias Sudhakar Dwivedi alias Mahant Amritanand) and the Pune-based veteran RSS leader Shyam Apte, given a weapon to one Alok, a colleague of the Kolkata-based radical Hindu activist Tapan Ghosh, on April 11-12, 2008 in Bhopal. Next month, he had sent 12 rounds of ammunition to Alok, meant to be used to kill Indresh.
Purohit told the CBI Pandey had asked him to get RDX or some other explosive as “Guru Agya”. But it is not clear if he actually got the explosives.
Pandey also made Purohit contact Dr R P Singh over the telephone in August 2007. The report quotes Singh as having told Purohit that Indresh had “sold off Hindus in Nepal”, a job for which he (Indresh) had been given Rs 3 crore by the ISI. Purohit conveyed this to Togadia, who said that he already knew about this.
Purohit’s interrogation report includes several other details:
• Purohit first met Togadia in February 2006 in Nashik at the home of the local VHP unit head Vinayak. In December that year, he met Togadia in Mumbai and apprised him of the Abhinav Bharat concept. In March-April 2007, Togadia told Purohit over the phone the names of donors to the trust. In August-September, 2007, Togadia gave him Rs 2 lakh, which were subsequently passed on to Abhinav Bharat’s Samir Kulkarni. On August 2, 2008, Togadia severely reprimanded Purohit for breaking up the VHP’s Madhya Pradesh unit.
• On February 2, 2008, Shyam Apte gave Rs 2 lakh to Purohit, and orders to kill Indresh. Purohit passed on the money to another activist, Rakesh Dhawade, who gave him the weapon for Rs 50,000. This weapon was given to Alok. Dhawade, Purohit said, claimed to have trained the RSS cadres who died in the Nanded blast. Purohit had given Dhawade Rs 3.2 lakh the month before, to buy another four weapons.
• The same month, Purohit met Sandip Dange and Ramji Kalsangra with Samir Kulkarni. Ramji and the Purohit exchanged numbers, and decided to keep Kulkarni out of the operation.
• On April 11-12, 2008, Purohit spoke to Sadhvi Pragya at the instance of Aseemanand in Bhopal. The Sadhvi told the officer that Indresh was like a father to her. In June 2008, she told Purohit that she did not want to work with him. He met her five days after the Malegoan blast.
• Apte and Pandey insisted on killing Indresh. Dange called up Purohit repeatedly for arms-training. In July 2008, all those who had come for arms to Abhinav Bharat scattered, including Tapan Ghosh.
• On August 3, 2008, Pandey directed Purohit to get RDX for Ramji at a meeting in Mahakaal Dharamsala. Towards the end of the month, one Pravin Patil came to Panchmarhi to state that he had gained knowledge of explosives through Internet research.
• On Oct 23, 2008, Purohit was interrogated by Col Srivastava of the Army about the Malegaon blast. The Colonel got him to talk to Dr R P Singh.
