What's new

Kashmir | News & Discussions.

So, is new media only reinforcing old stereotypes?


  • Total voters
    44
frankly once for all...i wud like JANA to come into this discussion..nothing better than a journalist to discuss things......lets see her version !

A discussion happens when both sides puts there points and if one person has solid argument the other person agrees. With Jana I do not think you can have a discussion. She is hardcore anti Indian, in her book India cannot do anything right. You will realise if she comes to discussion.

A better person to discuss will be AM, he uses arguments to discuss, instead of emotions. Strong player.

Few other people are Santro, blain2, graphican etc.
 
lets not stereotype guyz..... jana is a journalist and has her own learnings.....

what better way to smoothen a person as on this forum ? Lets discuss !

and i dont mean propaganda....just discuss our stories......lets see how can we agree or counter argue for a give point with logic !
 
lets not stereotype guyz..... jana is a journalist and has her own learnings.....

what better way to smoothen a person as on this forum ? Lets discuss !

and i dont mean propaganda....just discuss our stories......lets see how can we agree or counter argue for a give point with logic !

I will wait to see the day when u can prove me wrong on this.
 
Somewhat relevant:

------------------------------

Tuesday, 23 December 2008, 13:26
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 003228
SIPDIS
DEPARTMENT FOR SCA/INS
EO 12958 DECL: 12/22/2018
TAGS PGOV, PREL, PTER, KISL, IN
SUBJECT: CONGRESS PARTY STUNG PLAYING RELIGIOUS POLITICS
WITH TERRORISM

REF: MUMBAI 518
Classified By: PolCouns Ted Osius for Reasons 1.4 (B, D)



Antulay sparked a political controversy on December 17 with comments insinuating that the killing of Maharashtra Anti-Terror Squad (ATS) Chief Hemant Karkare by the Mumbai terrorists was somehow linked to Karkare's investigation of bombings in which radical Hindus are suspected (reftel). The outlandish comments suggested that somehow Hindutva elements were in league with the Mumbai attackers, or used the attacks as cover to kill Karkare.




Antulay made a series of public comments drawing attention to a possible link between Karkare's killing and his investigation. He offered no evidence to back-up his claims.


Most Congress Party leaders quickly disassociated the Party from Atulay's comments. Congress Party spokesman Abishek Singhvi told the press, "We do not accept the innuendo and the aspersions cast. This should be the end of the matter. The Congress does not agree with Antulay's statement." Another Congress Party spokesman, Manish Tiwari, followed the next day with, "The Congress in any manner does not endorse Antulay's views."



However, on December 21 senior Congress leader Digvijay Singh told the media, "I don't think Antulay made a mistake. What he asked for is a probe. What is objectionable in his statement?"




While the killing of three high level law enforcement officers during the Mumbai attacks is a remarkable coincidence, the Congress Party's initial reaction to Antulay's outrageous comments was correct. But as support seemed to swell among Muslims for Antulay's unsubstantiated claims, crass political opportunism swayed the thinking of some Congress Party leaders. What's more, the party made the cynical political calculation to lend credence to the conspiracy even after its recent emboldening state elections victories. The party chose to pander to Muslims' fears, providing impetus for those in the Muslim community who will continue to play up the conspiracy theory. While cooler heads eventually prevailed within the Congress leadership, the idea that the party would entertain such outlandish claims proved once again that many party leaders are still wedded to the old identity politics. The seventy-nine year old Antulay was probably bewildered to find that his remarks, similar in vein to what he would have routinely made in the past to attack the BJP, created such a furor this time.

-------------------------------------------
US embassy cables: Mumbai conspiracy allegations 'outrageous' ? US ambassador | World news | guardian.co.uk
 
Ridiculous, its simple translation based questions and hearing the narrative of students and let them express their views. Examiners always set hypothetical question papers with a subject matter that is relevant to the times.

In India it is open season to squash all dissenting voices.
 
Professor arrested for setting exam paper with questions on Kashmir unrest
PTI, Dec 10, 2010, 12.55pm IST
SRINAGAR: A lecturer of a government college was today arrested for allegedly setting a paper filled with questions related to the recent unrest in Valley.

"Noor Mohammad Bhat, a lecturer at Gandhi Memorial College, has been arrested," IGP (Kashmir range) S M Sahai said.

The students appearing in the English paper for BA, BSc and B Com annual examinations were surprised to find questions related to the five month unrest in Kashmir.

"Are the stone-pelters the real heroes?" was one of the questions asked.


The students were also asked to translate from Urdu to English, a paragraph laden with allegations of human rights violations by security forces.

Investigations revealed that the question paper was set by Bhat, leading to his arrest.

Professor arrested for setting exam paper with questions on Kashmir unrest - The Times of India

In English Paper
Questions are asked about HISTORY
To me Lecturers state of mind is MYSTERY.:lol:
 
it is written that paper was set by him,so wats the deal of world largest democracy.
 
paaji out of syllabus paper piche nobel price dogey,is article wich mention hai ji
He exercised the human beings right to free speech and taught the same to his students.

I think he deserved the award, to defy the tantrums of 1 billion people against free speech.
 
He exercised the human beings right to free speech and taught the same to his students.

I think he deserved the award, to defy the tantrums of 1 billion people against free speech.

But he is also accepting payments from government.
 
Setting up question papers based on a persons "freedom of speech" in volatile subjects like separatism, religion cannot be tolerated.

What if he put some really nasty scenarios which are explicit and call it "its my freedom of speech"???
 
Back
Top Bottom