Europe Solidaire Sans Frontières
On August 9, 2007, the Centre for Enquiry,
Hyderabad, held a meeting at the local press
club, to celebrate the publication of two Telugu
books, both translations, one from the Bengali of
Taslima Nasrin, and the other from the Chinese
(via English) of Jung Chang. Since the two
authors are victims of persecution in their home
countries, the meeting was also a celebration of
the fundamental human right of free expression
and political dissent. The guest of honour was
the Bangladeshi writer herself, who had flown in
from Kolkota where she presently lives in a
perilous and uncertain exile.
As the meeting was coming to a close, it was
disrupted by a small mob. This is how The Hindu,
under the heading — ’Taslima Roughed Up in
Hyderabad,’ reported the main events the
following day:
’Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasrin was roughed up
by legislators of the Majlis-e-Ittehadul
Muslimeen (MIM) and a mob led by them in the
Press Club of Hyderabad on Thursday... She had
just completed her engagement when about 20 MIM
activists, led by MLAs Syed Ahmed Pasha Qadri,
Afsar Khan and Moazzam Khan, barged into the
conference hall.
She looked in disbelief as they hurled abuses
against her. Demanding to know "who had mustered
the guts to invite her to Hyderabad, they wanted
Ms. Nasrin to be handed over to them.
Without further warning, they began throwing
books, bouquets, chairs, and whatever they could
lay their hands on at her. Some persons in the
mob almost got hold of her but Narisetti Innaiah,
rationalist and chairman of the Center for
Inquiry, who was her host, shielded her. He was
injured in his face. A couple of journalists who
went to their rescue also sustained injuries in
the scuffle.
Ms. Nasrin escaped unhurt though she was badly
shaken by the sudden attack that came minutes
after she made a categorical statement that she
would continue to fight against evil "till my
death".’
I then looked up the same news on the websites of
Hyderabad’s two most widely read Urdu newspapers,
Siasat and Munsif, and also the English language
website of the former. What I found on August 10
did not come as a surprise at all. In fact, it
was as I had expected on the basis of my
experience of Urdu newspapers in Lucknow and
Delhi. But what I read today (August 11) on the
English language website indeed surprised me. It
made me aware that things have changed more
radically than I had thought.
What I read on August 10 were two fiery,
rabble-rousing statements in Urdu, but a more
professional news report in English, no different
from what I quoted above from The Hindu. Below I
give in translation portions of the two Urdu
reports. (But first an explanation of a phrase
used below. Gustakh-e-Rasul, lit. one who insults
the prophet. I abbreviate it as GR.):
1. In Siasat, dated August 10, under two headings:
’GR Authoress Taslima Nasrin Attacked with Bouquets of Flowers’
’An Observance of What the Shari’at Commands or Merely a Political Ruse?’
’. . . GR Taslima Nasrin succeeded in safely
going back from Hyderabad, despite the fact that
three MLAs, with some fifty supporters, threw
flowers at her in the name of a protest. The
shameless GR authoress, who stands next to Salman
Rushdie, was taking part in a function organized
by the Center for Enquiry at the Press Club,
Somaji Goda, when three members of the
Legislative Assembly, Muqtada Khan Afsar, Ahmad
Pasha Qadiri, and Muazzam Khan, together with
more than fifty of their supporters, arrived and,
while using abusive language, did no more than
cause a ruckus and some vandalism. All of them
were unable to harm in the slightest a GR, not
even a woman GR. A person despised in the Muslim
world, against whom fatwas to kill have been
issued, on such a person they threw [merely]
bouquets that had been placed near the stage,
when [in fact] there were not too many people
present there to protect her...
Neither the police nor the Intelligence Service
knew about the presence of Taslima Nasrin. That
is why the MLAs had a fine opportunity to disrupt
her program. However, a most opportune moment to
enforce the law of Shari’a on that GR was wasted,
what they did was only for political opportunism.
The political ambitions of the protesters was
also made evident by the fact that they dared not
throw shoes or chappal at the GR who was only
three or four feet away from them, but instead
kept throwing bouquets. The Muslim Millat can
tolerate every tyranny, injustice, and
humiliation but it can never tolerate any
disrespect to the Last of the Prophets (pbuh).
Whenever anyone has shown such disrespect,
Muslims have in turn shown no fear in bringing
that person to his deserved end. It is a fact of
history that the Faithful have never worried
about consequences when it comes to punishing a
person who defames the Prophet (pbuh).’
2. In Munsif, dated August 10, under three headings:
’An Attempt to Attack the GR and “Notorious in Time” Taslima Nasrin’
’The Bangladeshi Authoress Didn’t Get Even a Scratch.’
’People say: ’The confused author should have been taught a severe lesson.’
’Three members of the legislative assembly, with
some fifteen supporters, disrupted the meeting.
They raised slogans and threw a bouquet of
flowers and a ladies’ handbag toward Taslima
Nasrin. Taslima Nasrin hid in a panic behind her
hosts and was not at all hurt. She was trembling
in fear even though no protesters came near her
or lay a hand on herŠ.
’Eyewitnesses say that the way this protest was
conducted made it look like a welcoming ceremony
with flowers instead. The MLAs and other
protesters threw only flowers at Nasrin. They
took flowers out of the bouquets set up in the
hall, and threw them at her. Not one of the
protesters had the courage to take off his shoes
or chappals and hit Taslima with them, throw them
at her, or at least point the same at her. It was
perfectly legitimate [ja’iz] to attack Taslima
Nasrin, to humiliate her, or to insult and mock
her in any fashion. However, the MLAs and workers
of a political party threw flowers, which had
people’s minds ringing with the old song, ’Baharo
phul barsao, mera mahbub aayaa hai.’
’What should have been done instead? Taslima
Nasrin should have been dishonoured in such a
manner that henceforth she’d never dare to return
to Hyderabad. But that was not done. There was no
police officer present there. Only two persons
were trying to protect Taslima. The protesting
MLAs made a lot of noise but showed no
willingness to charge forward. Those who saw the
whole thing call it a “drama.” The leaders of
this political party had thrown a pot of filth
upon the editor of an Urdu newspaper in Mahdi
Patnam, but now they showered only flowers on a
GR. Today all was possible to teach a GR and a
disparager of Islam what her end could be, but a
political party of the city wasted the
opportunity by seeking only cheap publicity. The
leaders of this party drew revolvers in their
tussle over one hundred yards of Waqf land, but
cast only flowers at Taslima today...’
Long accustomed to reading such blatantly
rabble-rousing statements in the Urdu press of
North India, I was not surprised to find the same
in the Hyderabadi Urdu press. And the more
professional report published on the English
language website of Siasat, reflective of a kind
of hypocrisy also found in North Indian Muslim
circles, came not as a surprise either. One is
always on one’s best behaviour in English in
India. Or so was the case, I thought. But today’s
web-edition of the English language Siasat
carries an unsigned statement concerning the
incident that tells me that things have indeed
changed radically. The statement is headlined,
’Barking dogs never bite!’, and reads as follows:
’It is said that 30 minutes are enough either to
make or break anybody’s career, reputation or
life. In the wake of the incident of attack on
Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreeen [sic] at
press club on Thursday, it is indeed unbelievable
that MIM MLAs got more than thirty minutes and
instead of using this time to its maximum damage,
they simply wasted it in chanting useless slogans
and hurling flower bouquets knowing fully that
they would get badly needed political mileage.
’They could not lift even a chair lying near by
to attack her with strong impact though only a
few persons were present there. It is nothing but
a political gimmick played on her.
’The suicide bombers in Iraq are the best example
to eliminate not only their targets but also
themselves. And they are doing so with an eye
blinker. Imagine, what could they have done if
they had 30 minutes. Religious sentiments are
totally different from the political ambitions.
’If you are religiously hurt, no might on this
earth be able to prevent you to eliminate a
person or organization that is involved in
blasphemy of prophet Muhammad (PBUH). It clearly
indicates that whatever MIM people have on their
tongue, it is missing from their hearts as the
proverb goes that barking dogs never bite.
’Now, according to Times of India and The Hindu,
they are trying to add one more ’feather’ to
their cap by showing an intention to organize a
campaign against Taslima to oust her from the
country.
’When they could not utilize those thirty minutes
to oust her from this world itself, what is the
use to organize a campaign now? It is just like
an embarrassed cat is scratching the pole.
Religion is second to none to Mr. Asad.’
To my knowledge, the Munsif does not have an
English language edition. Its issue today,
however, carries an editorial, which deserves
some notice. Titled, ’The Accursed
Gustakh-e-Rasul Taslima Nasrin,’ it begins by
raising a question: ’What would a true Muslim do
if he came face to face with a GR woman and there
is no “security” to protect her?’ While it
explicitly recommends ’beating with shoes’ and
’blackening the face,’ it also uses innuendo and
’historical’ references to suggest more severe
actions. For Munsif, any ’protest’ must be
’punitive.’ It further points out that if the
protesters were hesitant to attack a woman, they
could have brought some of their own women with
them-the MIM has its own ’women force’ and women
’corporators’-and the latter could have made
Taslima a target of their wrath.
Munsif, incidentally, is owned and edited by
someone who long lived in Chicago, made his money
here, and might still be an American citizen.
That may explain why Munsif has no English
website-it could get its owner in trouble with
the American security hotheads. Siasat, on the
other hand, seems to have some ambitions to reach
out to both Urdu and non-Urdu readers on the web.
As one reads the reports and editorials in the
two newspapers one understands the true
significance of the incident and its deep links
to local political rivalries. One also sees how
violently radical the so-called Muslim-Urdu
opinion-makers have now become, and how blatantly
they go about radicalizing the public discourse
in the worst way. As Barkha Dutt, in a passionate
and hard-hitting analysis in the Hindustan Times
(August 10), points out, the incident at
Hyderabad must be taken most seriously by every
Indian. The MIM MLAs are indeed as reprehensible
as any Pravin Togadia or Bal Thackeray. They
should indeed be condemned equally forcefully and
widely. In addition to public condemnations of
the incident at Hyderabad and its perpetrators,
it is most urgent for the state and press
authorities themselves to examine the reports and
editorials mentioned above and determine if any
violation of India’s secular laws has also
occurred. Similarly, Urdu intellectuals in
Hyderabad and elsewhere should undertake a more
active role in exposing and challenging the
violent and extremist views that are seemingly
becoming more acceptable in Urdu journals and
newspapers with every passing day.
Twitter
Facebook