Blog against fundamentalism. We stand for communal harmony, composite culture and humanism. Leading Indian Muslim Voice on internet since mid-2005. Now in its 10th year. More than a MILLION HITS by 2012. For ad related queries, write to

Saturday, January 24, 2015

Bihar court blast not termed terrorist act: Urgent need to stop distinguishing crimes on the basis of culprit's religion

On Friday, a blast in a court in Bihar led to two deaths and 17 persons getting injured. 

But wasn't termed a terror act, either by the police or the media. Reason?

Immediately after the blast, it was clear that the woman responsible for the act, did not fit into the 'criterion' (she was not a Muslim*). 

So it is just a 'crime' and won't be labelled as an act of 'terrorism', which would have led to round the clock coverage, talks about modules and Bihar becoming particular organisation's den or about handlers.

Cops say, 'no terror link'. What does that mean? Journos also parrot the same line. In a way its good that there is no scare, no panic caused through mass media. There are no indiscriminate arrests and detentions.

TV channels didn't stop other stories to show the incident for hours and hold panel discussions, there is no NIA teams rushing there, no senior spymaster's visit (unlike in Bardwan where no one was killed), papers just reporting it plainly without screaming headlines. 

The coverage of crimes in media and TV should also be balanced and similar. That reporters on National Security Beat would suddenly get active and start holding forth just because a crime is committed by a Muslim but ignore and pretend as if nothing has happened, if there is no Muslim connection, shows their hollowness and lack of professional ethics.

Real terror in public mind is created through coverage and by distinguishing acts of crime as 'crime' and 'terror'. All incidents of crime should be dealt with equal toughness, but without distinguishing the ideological motive or religion of culprits. 

Two posts on this blog on the same topic. How to defeat terror and stop getting terrorised, and the role of media in the entire issue.

[*Police identified the woman killed in Ara civil court as Rina Gaud of Ballia district in UP. She was known to 2009 Ara court blast convict Lambu Sharma, who escaped from custody after the explosion along with another rpsinoer on Friday. Reported Indian Express on January 25, 2015 ]

READ: 80 including 29 children killed in Bodo outfit's attack in Assam but this is not Terror

READ: Media's hysteric coverage leads to worldwide panic, just one madman enough to scare us?

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

Nasheman: Reading the weekly Urdu newspaper from Karnataka

That's Nasheman, the Urdu newspaper, on my table.

It comes to me from a distant place--1500 km away i.e. Bangalore.

So when it comes from that far, you do take sometime to read it, at leisure.

The paper that has a pan-India circulation, has been running for 54 years.

I grew up reading this paper and hence I was dejected when it ceased publication for a while. I had written a post on this blog about Nasheman, its uniqueness and its history. But, Rizwan Asad sahab has revived it.

Now the paper looks more impressive. It also has a website that has English news, apart from plan to put up the Nasheman epaper. Of course, the columns, the tone of the paper and the satirical style remains same.

Karnataka has a large population of Urdu speakers, however, it is a mystery that overall on the map of Urdu, this state is not given its due. While Hyderabad has far more Urdu speakers and newspapers, surprisingly, none of them could get pan-Indian readership to such an extent.

Saturday, January 10, 2015

Crisis in Islamic world: Clerics have failed, Muslims desperately need statesmen now


A group of terrorists commit an act in a city but Muslims across the world, in towns and cities in faraway countries bear the consequences.

They are expected to condemn it (everywhere--online and offline), worry about hate crimes or Islamophobia and face even more trouble in finding rented accommodations or getting jobs.

This is an unprecedented situation today. The argument is that these terrorists commit crime in the name of Islam.

Yes, they might, but Muslims repeatedly say that terrorists are defaming the Islamic teachings and their acts have nothing to do with Islam.

A man holds a few persons hostage in a city in Australia and because he is a Muslim, the images are shown live across the world, and it becomes a global problem. However, crimes of much higher magnitude are often not reported outside particular countries.

But when a crime qualifies to be 'terror', it becomes an international issue. And when does a crime become 'terror'? It is when the perpetrator is a Muslim. So when a 'terror' releated report breaks out, TV channels and media lap it up, shows it round the clock, and this in turn leads even more scare and 'terror' for society.

Terrorism COULD BE TACKLED and contained if crimes aren't distinguished i.e. crime remains crime irrespective of perpetrator's faith and if terrorist aren't given publicity, which they badly want. There is no dearth of loonies in our society.

Many commit such acts because they know media would fall in the trap. So the incidents keep happening. Muslims feel that why 1.6 billion people are stigmatised because of acts of a few individuals. But the other argument is always ready, 'the commit the act in the name of Islam'. Huh.

So what's the solution? After 9/11, the Us Vs Them stand has brought the situation to such a passe that no one wants to listen. This is a terrible situation where the entire Muslim world find themselves in. And it's even sad that we have no VOICE.


The entire Muslim world hasn't produced an intellectual voice, a statesman, a leader of leaders in these years, why? That's a crucial question.

Though I am not a big fan of Saudi monarchs, but they could have taken the lead, given their celebrity status and their being custodians of the holy mosques.

But they don't utter a word or shown any interest in this regard. The truth is that if they speak, despite the sectarian differences, everybody would pay heed.

They have excellent rapport with the Western rulers, but have remained content with the relationship as long as West doesn't interfere in their internal issues, especially, their poor human rights record and their treatment of women and minorities.

Further, they seem more interested in containing Iran's influence or maintaining their regional supremacy, rather, than taking up a stand. It is such an irony that none of the countries in entire Middle East, has a leader whose voice is heard. Or even who is willing to speak.

The Saudis have a privileged position and could have used it to issue diktats over Islam's liberal tradition, and for shunning fundamentalism. Millions of Muslims go for Haj and throughout the year too for pilgrimage, and appeals or messages by Sheikhs would have worked.

Had they taken a stand to urge Muslims and reminded them about Islamic tradition of tolerance and good treatment of minorities, it would have been heard, and also message would have gone to rest of the world too.

But they are happy living in their ivory towers and managing 'order' in their nations. If not rulers, the religious personalities like Imam Haram could have issued a diktat. Sad. Nothing of that sort is even expected.

Why don't we hear a strong word from them against Boko Haram, Al Shabab or regarding the mindless sectarian violence in many Muslim countries. It is simply beyond comprehension why Muslim world doesn't have a leader today?


There is a need among Muslims to hear a leader, a statesman who can have DIALOGUE with the West. It is not that you always end up blaming US attacks on Iraq or Afghanistan, for problems in Muslim world.

There is restlessness among Muslims, who want someone to take up the position.There is a vacuum, but no leader is stepping in to the shoes of the statesmen of the past. No one is taking the lead.

Someone who can urge Muslims to do inward looking too. Someone who can also talk to France over the ban on Hijab, if not resolve it, but put this point across. Someone who can tell the world to stop the practice of terming particular crimes as terror, and then putting the entire community in the dock.

Someone who can remind Muslims about the Prophet's teachings regarding tolerance, how Muslims treated their minorities fairly, how to stop the barbaric practices, how to stop misusing laws on blasphemy, give call to make Muslims focus on education rather than sectarian divides, reviving intellectual tradition.

Muslim world should have many statesmen today. Sadly, it has none. Why there are no public speakers, motivators, statesmen who could have come from countries like Turkey, with its cultural affinity to both East and the West.

In the early part of 20th century, we had visionary leaders like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad in India. Even Agha Khan was a major figure in British India.

In those days no one thought which leader belonged to which sect.If today, the current Agha Khan, speaks, won't the world listen? 

I have taken his name just as an example. The point is that there is a space, a huge vacuum. We want to hear someone take intellectual leadership.

No one would prop you up, rather, you have to take up the leadership. But no one is willing to speak to the large number of Muslims and also on behalf of them.



Islam doesn't have a system of institutionalised clergy. It was once a boon, as there were no separate class of Monks or Gurus.

Unfortunately, it is the clergy which is today seen as the voice of Muslims. But clerics have failed us. BADLY. Another tragedy is that motivational and articulate 'Islamic' speakers who have a huge following, rather than talking of reason, turn towards bigotry and sectarianism--thereby harming the community.

There is need for modern, educated, sensible, liberal Muslim to come forward and claim his religion from the clergy. There is dire need for this. Muslims in countries where they are in a majority, especially, in Middle East, probably don't realise this as much.

The reason could be that they don't face religious prejudices (or Islamophobia) on a daily basis, in their own land, but across the world, Muslims are fed up of the situation. They do feel the need for saner voices.

They won't come from the skies. It's we who have to speak and fill this void.

READ: Media's excessive, hysteric coverage of Australia hostage led to worldwide panic

Sunday, January 04, 2015

Saluting the Suregon: Courageous Haryana doctor confronted Bajrang Dal activists over a hate speech against Muslims, gets attacked

Dr Jitender Phogat, a eye surgeon, was going to the chowk, when he heard a group of right-wing activists spewing venom against Muslims.

The doctor took a brave stand, he confronted the Bajrang Dal activists on the spot.

He was the lone voice against the hate speech, and was assaulted. The doctor was injured in the attack, and approached the police.

It is a different issue that the police are yet to register a case for either hate speech or assault. But the doctor did what many of us don't.

The harsh truth is that generally educated people don't take stand and this is the reason that extremists--Hindu or Muslim, get emboldened.

This is no doubt inspiring. A man sees that there is something very serious going on in front of our eyes, and the police are standing silent, he dares to object. Dr Phogat, 38, is a surgeon with the PGIMS at Rohtak (Haryana).

Journalist Sat Singh reported the news in Hindustan Times, and soon it became viral on internet. Dr Phogat is getting praise from all corners. In fact, it is inspiring and if we intervene against Hindu, Muslim radicals, with the same passion, we can change our society for good.

The Bajrang Dal workers at the same spot, caught a Muslim pearl-seller, termed him a spy and handed him to police, though the police said that he was targeted just because of his religion. READ THE NEWS at this LINK.

Wednesday, December 24, 2014

Terrorist or 'Rebel': Bodo terrorists kill 70 in Assam, yet it is not 'Terrorism'

The heavily armed members of banned outfit, fired on unarmed women and children, killing at least 70 persons in cold blood, and yet this is not termed as a 'terrorist attack'!

This has happened once again in India. On Tuesday, as details began emerging--the death toll rising from 11 to 34, and later crossing 50, most of the TV channels avoided the story.

On certain English channels, it was visible in the scroll, but many 'national channels' had no time for it. For them, results of Jammu & Kashmir election, was the sole important story of the day.

Certain channels had changed their entire home page on the website for the day, and it had nothing except poll results. Such was the brutality that a kid was shot seven times. LINK

Of those dead, around 40 were women and children. Yet none of the major news groups termed it a 'terrorist attack' in plain words, despite the fact that NDFB(S) is also a banned outfit just like Naxals, SIMI or other such extremist outfits.

In fact, words used in morning newspapers on Wednesday, showed the attitude of Indian media towards such acts. Even word like militant, radical or extremist was avoided in the newspapers. For Hindi papers, they are 'Ugravadi' not 'Aatankvadi'. Strange.

Telegraph, which is published from Kolkata (West Bengal), a state neighbouring Assam, carried the news in brief on its front page. See news encircled in red on the left. That's how they treat such a massacre, despite the number of deaths!

The headlines were either 'Massacre in Assam' or 'Rebels kill 40', [not terrorists kill 40 or 70] forget bold headlines which are otherwise visible, along with photographs and adjoining stories of outrage. Why? Do you have any answer? Later, in follow-up stories, most papers termed it as 'Assam violence'.

Many papers didn't carry the news on front page. In fact, there have been incidents when one or two persons injured in a suspected extremist attack, has been enough to shake the nation, because of the hysteric round-the-clock coverage. So who is a terrorist and who is a militant or a rebel? Time for definition!


If gunshots don't make it a terror attack, then there is another example. Just three days ago, a blast in Manipur had killed three migrants. It wasn't a 'terrorist attack' either for TV channels and newspapers.

Clearly, if the perpetrator is a Maoist or a non-Muslim group, there there is no need for outrage. Numbers are just numbers. There is no outrage, nothing about modules, leaders of the outfit, its members, its aims, its past history and its 'threat to the nation'.

Dangerous Distinction: Indian media must introspect, be objective in reporting

It is very clear that our media indulges has double standards in covering incidents, depending on ethnicity or religion of the perpetrators.

Why else, one of the biggest massacres on Indian soil, in recent years, was simply hushed up?

Once incident in which no one is killed may be termed a 'terrorist attack' and another in which dozens are killed, could be simply hushed up or ignored.

Whether knowingly or unknowingly, whether for TRP or because of biased mindsets, this is happening regularly.

It is poisoning the society. Certain incidents are blown up and panic is created by non-stop coverage while others are blacked out. Shouldn't journalists and media houses be objective and show the correct picture or at least adhere to a certain guideline and agree to using similar terms for similar acts of violence irrespective of perpetrating group and its ethnicity.

If one incident in which 70 persons are killed, is not termed terrorism and the story is not splashed on front page, and only particular incidents are treated as 'cases of terror', then, it is very dangerous game, as it is calculated game to condition minds, stuff biases in the minds of people and misinform the society. Isn't it?

Sunday, December 21, 2014

Greatest sporting icons Muhammad Ali, Pele and Sobers: Heroes of an Indian sports lover; coincidence all three of them are black!

In a conversation with a friend over the greatest sports icons, I instantly took names of three names--Muhammad Ali, Pele and Sobers.

The names just came out without giving much thought. In fact, I later thought over it again, but I couldn't find anyone else who fits in this league.

When I and those in my generation (who were born in seventies and began appreciating sports in the 1980s), these three sports stars were already icons for decades. We grew up with elders talking about them and reading about their heroics.

For the sports crazy, it's an exhilarating thought, something not easy to explain, that one just feels happy with the thought we have lived in this era and have the honour to see the sports persons. All of them are now septuagenarians.

Icons--they are in an altogether different league, those who are simply incomparable with other players or sports stars. In other sports, like Tennis, you may have Rod Laver, Bill Tilden, Don Budge or the Jordans and Johnsons, in Basketball, but none of them come close to my idea of an icon.

You may personally love a McEnroe or Roger Federer or more, but icons are different. An icon is an sportsperson who not only enthralls the world but inspires entire generations with their actions, both on and off the field, and the mention of whose name evokes respect.

While Pele and Ali are great sportsmen, for the cricket crazy Gary Sobers evokes similar respect and passion.

In our childhood, we heard that there was the incomparable Sir Don [Bradman], who hit 29 centuries in 52 tests, with an average of over 99.

But it was Sobers, who was almost an equal legend, in the second half of the 20th century.

Garfield St Auburn Sobers excelled in every sphere of the game. He amassed over 8,000 runs in his test cricket with more than 200 wickets, apart from nearly 100 catches, and his impact on cricket world was tremendous. For ages, his 365* was the highest individual innings of a batsman.

And, in the twilight of his career, it was he alone who could score 254 and demolish Dennis Lille, who was in his prime. Boxing legend Ali had the guts to speak up and take a strong [and highly controversial in those days] stand on the Vietnam war.

It is a strange coincidence that all these three icons are black. In the era when Apartheid existed [till late 80s in South Africa], they were role models and heroes for youths and sports lovers across the world. Ali is now 72, Pele is 74, and Sobers, 78.

Like Ali, Sobers and Pele also played an important role in confronting the racial prejudices and the idea of White supremacy. Great men, inspirational figures and statesmen, there is no one close to them in the world of sports.

Long Live, Pele, Ali and Sobers, my heroes.

Tuesday, December 16, 2014

Taliban are NOT HUMAN, surely NOT: Islamic world, leaders must stand up, go beyond condemnation to tackle the monsters and their ideology

The Taliban are NOT HUMAN.


Which ideology, belief or motivation can turn humans to become monsters and kill innocent children with such brutality.

They are not MUSLIMS
They are not HUMANS

The world must shun Taliban and their ideology.
Muslim world must stand up and take a decisive step.

Taliban are MONSTERS
Taliban are not HUMANS

Ulema, citizens, should say loud and clear, that all these groups are outside the pale of humanity and religion. After the attack in the school in Peshwar in Pakistan, that's the smallest first step which is needed. If this doesn't wake up everyone in Pakistan, against the Taliban, what else will?

Taliban MONSTERS. You have shamed us all.