Banned terror outfit's attack killing lawmaker, 10 others got little attention in mainstream media

A banned outfit that has been involved in terror and violence in the past, attacked a legislator and killed 11 persons.

This incident occurred in Arunachal Pradesh. The legislator--Tirong Aboh, and his son were among the 11 victims in this daredevil terror attack.

Aboh had got warning from the outfit earlier too. It must be remembered that NSCN (IM) is a banned outfit in India, and hence its actions must be termed as terror attack just like other similar banned outfits.

When the incident occurred, national media didn't have any other big news. The Lok Sabha elections have been on for nearly two months. Now it was just the wait for results.

However, channels didn't focus much on the terror attack. There were tickers on some channels but no special story, no reports sent to spot from Delhi or Kolkata to get special stories. Nothing about the outfit, the circumstances about the incident and, of course, just no photos of the 'terrorists' on screens.

Generally, in most cases, TV channels show the sketches and photos. It earns them TRP. But in this case there was no interest. The next morning, newspapers also showed similar disinterested. In some papers, it was page 1 story but with no insights, plain reporting and a day later, no more follow-ups.

LINK: 11 killed in terrorist attack on MLA's cavalcade in Arunachal Pradesh, legislator and his son dead

Firing at Chief Minister's chopper, bomb blasts, helipad attacked, yet it won't be called Terrorism!

It was the biggest news of the day. A chief minister was fired at, just when he was about to get out of the chopper.

Armed terrorists began firing at the helipad. Bombs were also set off the same day in the State.

Still, did you watch the news as lead on TV channels. Was it given due importance?

"Suspected militants opened gunfire as he was getting out of helicopter", said this report, quoting CID officials. There were four ministers and two MLAs too in the helicopter. Manipur CM's helicopter ambushed, reports Scroll.

"A jawan of the Manipur Rifles was injured in the firing which took place when the chief minister stepped out of the helicopter and was being greeted by government officials", it further said.

The audacity of the attackers could be gauged from the fact that security was already beefed up in Ukhrul as CM was to reach there to inaugurate the developmental projects.

The militants attacked the helipad where CM Okram Ibobi Singh's chopper was scheduled to land in Ukhrul in Manipur, reported International Business Times (IBT).

The newspaper reported that several policemen were hurt in firing between militants and security forces, and the CM escaped unhurt. India Reserve Battalion jawans were also injured in IED blasts elsewhere in the State, on the same day.

In reports, words like 'unidentified gunmen' or 'militants' were used. Nowhere the word terror was found--neither on websites of major newspaper, nor on TV channels which carried these reports.

How headlines were sanitized [no use of word 'Terrorist']:

1. Helipad attacked after Manipur CM’s chopper takes off.

2. Manipur CM escapes ambush. 

3. CM Okram Ibobi escapes unhurt as militants open fire.

[See link, link and link]

NSCN(IM) is a banned outfit, just like other outfits which can't operate under Indian law.

However, its cadre is mostly called 'gunman', 'rebel', 'shooter' or 'outlaw', but not 'terrorist'. This is the same with ULFA, Bodo and Maoists too. The attacks may be brazen but they never fall in 'Terrorism' criterion in Indian media. 

When media terms a Terrorist attack as 'ambush' : Criterion for terming a violent attack as terrorism, another more severe attack as 'ambush'

When 20 armymen were killed in attack by banned 'militant' groups in Manipur, the TV channels and newspapers termed it as 'ambush'.

Despite the fact that it was the worst attack on army in decades, the word terror wasn't used.

In fact, many reports didn't mention early in their reports, that who was behind the attack.

1. The headlines and sub-headlines were just about 'armymen killed', not about those who committed the act.

2. No one showed photos of wanted NSCN-KCP-KYKL chiefs or security experts talking about their modules or other past crimes by them.

3. For our media, which is quite sensitive about army, this attack was not enough to cause any OUTRAGE.

No live reports, no flash and no special panel discussions. The next morning, newspapers also carried the story just like a routine report, sans any emotion or information about the 'killers'.

4. In follow-up stories in many papers, words like 'rebel' were used, not terrorist or militant. So what exactly is terror? Does the identity of the 'shooter' or' attackers' lead to sudden decision that word like 'Terrorist' would not be used and it would be termed as 'Ambush'. How this happens, who's behind it?

5. After all in incidents, when there is no casualty and a person who may not belong to any banned group and is killed in an encounter by police, he is quickly termed terrorist, just for carrying a gun or firing a bullet. Is it because the person has a different name!

6. Let's be straight, it is about having a Muslim name. So how does it occur? Knowingly or Unknowingly. No norms or internal system to decide. Or it is so deeply engrained in minds, that as soon as the report comes or story develops, the differentiation of words is there.

7. Any attack, anywhere [not just in North East, Chhattisgarh or any other part of the country by any banned outfit, howsoever dreaded or big in magnitude, will never be termed Terror attack unless the suspect is a Muslim.

8. If a Muslim is killed in encounter and police says that he was trying to fire, he is termed 'TERRORIST', but those who belong to banned militant-terror groups, and commit such gruesome killings, aren't termed even extremists or radicals.

9. By use of words like 'ambush', the severity of the incident is diluted and the image continues to be reinforced that Terrorist can only be a CERTAIN PERSON, belonging to a certain group. Isn't it absolutely unfair and unjustified.

10. Religious is a factor. There is a clear bias. Let's face it. A non-Muslim can commit crime of any magnitude but won't be termed as Terrorist. And a Muslim can always be implicated and termed Terrorist even if he hasn't commit any violent act.

If youths who shot a Delhi cop who had raided their home in Batla House locality were termed terrorists by all, then why those who killed 20 armymen NOT called terrorist? Define terrorism or accept your biases and double standards. Accept, that you are not naive, but doing it purposely to defame Muslims. That it's Islamophobia--crime to malign an entire religion.

11. The result is that in a country where Armyman is treated in utmost respect and injury or casualty can lead to media affecting relations with other countries, the terrorist attacks like in Manipur, are simply treated as 'just an unfortunate happening' and is forgotten.

12. On the contrary, individuals can be framed, termed 'Terrorist' without even firing a bullet, and made to rot in jails for the rest of their lives, because if someone is termed Terrorist, everyone parrots the line, he is branded and he is destroyed--from lawmakers to courts, he is seen as one.

So does anyone has answer that why such unfair attitude in media persists.

Aren't Muslims justified in feeling that they are being targeted and wrongly portrayed. Why it continues? Is it because there is no strong voice raised till now by Muslim leaders, politicians, thinkers and community jointly? 

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!

MANIPUR BLAST

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?

Bengaluru woman's race slur charge turns out to be fiction: She had attacked burqa clad women, then played the victim card

It is a sad story that how an educated and privileged woman, who is the daughter of an ex-MP, falsely claimed that she was racially abused but it turned out that she was the aggressor and her lie was exposed thanks to CCTV footage.

Rachel Sangliana's allegation that two women at a supermarket racially abused her, drew instant attention. The reason was that her allegation that she was targeted for her looks, struck a chord. There have been many incidents when people from North East, have been targeted.

Hence, it was taken seriously. Retired Supreme court judge, Markandeya Katju, who has a huge following on Facebook, also expressed concern. Rachel had claimed that the women told her that, 'We are Indians, you go to China", as per media reports.

She claimed that she was also assaulted. Outrage was expected and it happened. The incident had made headlines. Firstpost wrote, "The image of India's I-T capital Bangalore as 'one of the most cosmopolitan cities' has taken yet another hit..."

TV channels, newspapers were also quick to take up the issue. But the other side of the story came out soon. The supermarket staff testified that it was Rachel, who had used provocative language against the burqa clad women and told them to go to Pakistan.

Also, camera footage showed that the women didn't use racial slur, and it was she who did it. This was the reason, apparently, that she wasn't keen on filing an FIR earlier. But the later developments didn't lead to any outrage. In fact, it wasn't covered in media well.

Rachel Sangliana's father was police commissioner in Bangalore and also a member of parliament (MP) later. The burqa clad women's trolley had dashed her leg but the women had apologised. Still, she shouted, raised her hand at one of them and even asked them to go to Pakistan or Afghanistan.

Further, she made a false claim of being a victim of racist attack. While the incident shows how people who have connections, can play the 'victim' card, and create sensation. Thanks to technology (camera), the entire episode can be seen and other side of the story can be probed.

Else, the one who shouts and plays the 'victim' card well, gets away, despite being at fault. Hopefully, a proper police investigation will reveal the truth.

See links

1. CCTV footage shows Sangliana's daughter slapped first

2. Twist in tale: Bangalore cop's daughter told burkha clad woman to 'go back to Pakistan'
 

Do you know Donyi Polo is the major traditional religion of Arunachal Pradesh?

Shams Ur Rehman Alavi

Arunachal Pradesh is a big state--just a bit smaller than West Bengal and more than twice the size of Kerala.

Still, how little we know about this state that borders China. How many among us are aware that the main traditional religion of Arunachal Pradesh (AP) is Donyi Polo.

Have you heard of that? In the last couple of decades, followers of Hinduism, Christianity, Islam and Buddhism have grown at the expense of Donyi Polo.

It is commonly referred to as the 'faith of the Sun and the Moon'. Interestingly, here Sun is regarded as Mother while Moon is father.

But still, the religion remains one of the most dominant faiths in the state. As converts to other faiths still carry the traditional beliefs.

Whenever Arunachal is described, its religious composition is shown in terms of Hindu, Christian, Buddhist, Muslim and OTHERS.

And it is these others who form almost 30% of the population of the state, and are carelessly termed as followers of tribal religion or simply as Animist. The Donyi Polo religion also has over 3.3 lakh followers. Donyi Poloism is the religion that believes in supernatural. 

They have their own rites and rituals apart from sacrifices to appease deity. There are legends, myths and practices dating back to centuries. All the tribes of the state have faith in this belief. The Donyi Polo mission is active for several decades. Now there are people converting to this faith and also reverting back.

The Encyclopaedia of North East says:

The Donyi-Polo has emerged as a symbol of synthetic force. It represents almighty in its omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent form. Donyi-Polo is the source of light, generator life, sole protector of all creatures. It is the essence of truth, justice, beauty, morality, love and goodness.

The person having faith in Donyi-Polo will not continue in metaphysical dwarfism, he raises himself to high orders of spiritualism. Donyi-Polo is the set of eyes of Lord that observes all living beings from heaven, day or night, each creature is under surveillance.....

The uniqueness of culture of North Eastern states is often praised but rest of India still doesn't know much about the beautiful region, except, perhaps, Assam. Apart from names of states and their capitals, little effort is made by us to know more about Mizoram, Nagaland, Manipur, Tripura, Sikkim, Meghalaya et al.

Religion is just an aspect. There are big and small states with indigenous population, that have varied customs and culture. There is enormous tourism potential also. However, for us North East remains a distant land.

While ending this post, just another addition. Arunachal is much bigger than Haryana, Jharkhand and Punjab and just a bit small than Bihar, but it is 28 times the size of Goa. This could perhaps give us an indication of how little we know about states in our own country. 

*This piece was written when Census 2011 report hadn't come out. The 2011 census figures appeared after 2015.