NRI

Google fb32x32 twitter linkedin feed-icon-32x32

Lessons From The Binayak Sen Case

Lessons From The Binayak Sen Case

January 11, 2011
Sourav Roy

How justified are India's so-called intellectuals in blindly supporting Binayak Sen?

Naxalism, also called CPI (Maoist), is an organization of aggressive communists. Naxalites believe in violence. They adopted the path of armed revolutionary activities from the Naxalbari village in Darjeeling, West Bengal in 1967. Today, Naxalites are active across approximately 220 districts covering twenty states of India. All in all, accounting for around 40 percent of India's geographical area. Today, the ideology behind Naxalism is lost and they are just an angry mob that uses unemployment and the rage in economically backward areas as the medium for their publicity. These are people who believe in revolution over reformation. These are people who have rebelled without a cause!

Naxalism is a serious problem for India. Recently, the court of Chhattisgarh has found Binayak Sen, the national Vice President of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), guilty of sedition for helping the Naxalites in their fight against the state. He was subsequently sentenced to life imprisonment. Soon afterwards, a wave of protest against the court's decision spread in the media, on social networking sites, and among bloggers and activists. The Binayak Sen hype has diminished but it has put the spotlight on some intriguing and disturbing tendencies amongst our people and media.

Sen may or may not be a functionary of the Naxalites. But do we realize what damage the bloggers and the national media have caused by acting like an appellate court for the past few days? By raising awareness of Sen's arrest and conviction, to an extent they have inadvertently legitimatised the Naxalite insurgency. I had never before witnessed such a fiasco like this from the intellectual and socially aware class of my nation.

These were the same so-called-intellectuals who were screaming against the Naxalites when they had killed 76 of our jawans in Dantewada. The same intellectuals who had united to criticize and condemn the Naxalites, when hundreds of people were killed in the Gyaneshwari derailment. Not even a year has passed since then. Why then, now there is a sudden change in stance?

We are really lucky to be a part of democracy, where, unlike China, we can challenge the state. Disagreement with a judicial verdict is part of the democratic process. It is absolutely okay to claim that the evidence against Sen was planted by the vengeful police. But that's a technical issue of evidence, which will be reviewed by the higher courts sooner or later.

The unnecessary support and hype for Sen's case has given some activists a chance to channel their anger with the judgment in turning every TV studio into a political forum to condemn the Indian democracy.

India certainly doesn’t want to repeat the experience of Sri Lanka in the name of Naxalism. Let these sympathisers know that the so-called innocent people burn schools and rape females in their own cadre, and the money and arms they use are supplied from enemy countries, who want to destroy the peace and harmony of India.

I understand the agony of the poor farmer who drops his shovel and picks up a gun, but these sympathizers must acknowledge that only reformation can save the nation. Naxalites kill the government officials and employees even when they peacefully build roads, offer jobs, and supply food or medication in the area. Revolution can't save our nation; rebellion definitely can't. Only reformation can.

Democracy has provided us with many privileges, but let's not misuse them. With this kind of hatred for the nation, we will only end up becoming another Talibanised nation. We certainly can't afford that. The Binayak Sen hype has passed, but let's keep this in mind in the future.


25 Comments

  • Y3
    By
    Y3
    05.02.11 09:52 PM
    Dear Mr. Roy,

    Lets suppose that I am a member of some outlawed
    organization -- nay, even a spokesperson of such an organization. An organization that has killed indiscriminately, and spread terror. Now suppose this organization professes a cause (lets say that the government's treatment of adivasis is tantamount to exploitation) that you happen to agree with. Now you do NOT agree with their methods, but you do agree with their cause.
    Can you understand this distinction?

    Now lets suppose that I, the spokesperson for said organization, say something that expresses solidarity with you. Does that make you at one
    with the **methods** of the organization for whom
    I speak? If "yes", then everyone is in danger of being convicted for pretty much anything anyone alleges. That is not a world to which many of us care to succumb, and therefore we protest what
    is a miscarriage of justice. There are many examples in history of what happens when societies
    are subjected to such conditions. If the answer to my question above is "no", then your argument in the last post is absurd.

    - Y3
  • Sourav Roy
    By
    Sourav Roy
    05.02.11 12:13 AM
    @ Gautam Sen

    You totally misunderstood me. If Binayak Sen is not associated with Maoists then why did the CPI(Maoist) sopkesperson write this article?

    http://indianvanguard.wordpress.com/2010/12/31/binayak-sen-cpimaoist-press-release/

    Why does the leader of a banned party sympathise with Sen? Why does a group of people who have killed 577 civilians and 260 security forces personnel in the past 10 months, all of a sudden sympathise with one arrest?

    You live in a democracy. You have all rights to show extremist behaviour. You can not only shout on me here, but also shout on streets to free Binayak Sen. But instead of freeing Sen, you will only jeopardise the life of hundreds of others who will get killed by the hands of Maoists in the times to come. You will only make the Maoist movement stronger- directly or indirectly...

    I don't have anything else to say. If you can forgive Dantewada and Gyaneshwari, it is purely your problem. I can't forget, nor can I forgive the people who believe in rebellion more than reformation.

    How can you justify innocents getting killed in the name of revolution? How can you justify a group of people trying to stop all forms of development in their area, and then provoking people claiming government is responsible for lack of development in their areas? How can you justify people who are feeding their stomach and cause by innocents' blood and a false dream of justice? Maoist leader Chatradhar Mahato claims to be a poor man's leader. Do you know he has a life insurance of 1 crore? How can you justify rebellion when reformation is possible? How can you justify ISI trying to link up with Naxalites? Think about it.

    I think I have answered you questions. Well, my friend, our opinions will always differ. And that is the charm of the democratic debate. Please don't expect any more replies from me to your comments. I have got better things to do.

    However, you can continue with your comments. Afterall, you (just like Arundhati Roy for that matter) live in a democracy.
  • Gautam Sen
    By
    Gautam Sen
    04.02.11 10:42 PM
    Thanks for your reply to my comment. What this is a place for is of cours for you to determine, but I will take your reply as an admission that you are unable to defend your own statements I have quoted from your original posting in my two comments. I hope that you will at least stop traducing a man whom you clearly do not know, except from the lies of the police which you are only too ready to believe. Good bye.
  • Sourav Roy
    By
    Sourav Roy
    04.02.11 03:29 PM
    This is not the place to debate the merits of Binayak Sen’s case. That is a matter in the legal domain and since senior advocates are already falling over one another to argue for him, I am sure that Sen will have the best defence he could have hoped for. If Raipur court was not fair, the highr courts will be. Let the right thing happen!

    And when did we become such argumentative Indians who split hair endlessly on futile squabbles losing big picture to our detriment. Sometimes I wonder that we are all myopic, pretending to be hypermetropic!

    My article is about the selective manipulation of public opinion by a set of Left-leaning radicals (Arundhati Roy included) who have a romantic notion of Maoists, Kashmiri secessionists and all those out to weaken the Indian state and dilute the country’s national resolve. I am not here to claim that Binayak Sen is guilty or innocent. I am not the right man to be asked that question.

    My primary concern was the unnecessary support and hype for Sen’s case had given some activists a chance to channel their anger with the judgment in turning every TV studio into a political forum to condemn the Indian democracy.
  • Gautam Sen
    By
    Gautam Sen
    30.01.11 09:43 AM
    @Sourav Roy, your non-response to my comment has nothing to say directly about Binayak Sen except right at the end, with the comment: "Binayak Sen’s deed was unconstitutional, and therefore against the nation India. He past and goodwill should not matter." In claiming his deeds to be unconstitutional, you not only betray your utter ignorance (inexcusable for someone claiming to judge him) of his actions as a human rights activist, which have always been to remind the state NONVIOLENTLY about the constitutional obligations (the Fifth Schedule, the Directive Principles, and other derivative principles such as the D K Basu judgment of the SC). You also seem to be ignorant of the court's judgment, the way the case was conducted, and the horrendous corruption in the lower courts throughout our country, including in Chhattisgarh. Finally, you have shown yourself to be impervious to any evidence that shows that you are wrong on a matter where you are ideologically committed. In this of course, you are not alone but in the august company of the entire right-wing chatterati like Kanchan Gupta, Chandan Mitra and Swapan Dasgupta...all great intellectuals who have done SOOO much to advance the welfare of the common man, as we all know.

    PS Corrections in my last comment: "MOST powerless", not "least powerless". also earlier, "Reputation of A man"...
  • Sourav Adhikary
    By
    Sourav Adhikary
    29.01.11 05:48 PM
    @ Sourav Roy (the author ) If anyone took the trouble to go through my blog the link of which I had posted in connection to your article, one would find that neither I tried to judge whether Dr. Sen was innocent or guilty, nor did I want to undermine our constitution. What I expressed was rather in complete accordance with our constitution, with its idea of pluralism of thought and freedom of expression. Democracy cannot and should not be seen in a black and white parameter. Democracy is a rainbow of a versatile ideas, thoughts and expressions. I do have faith in our constitution and judicial system in general. Perhaps, many other advocating for Dr. Sen also have the same faith. But,to think that the judiciary is always completely free of errors, is not a wise choice either. Had it been so we Indians would never have learnt words like miscarriage of justice. And such miscarriage, it is known, is more seen in lower courts than in higher courts. The role of the media and the civil society in highlighting such cases are, despite the recent negative image of media which is an altogether different context, is undeniable. So one guesses just closing our eyes saying the court knows it all and condemning those who have come forward to highlight the issue, doesn't go well to our constitutional spirit of pluralism. One wonders if anyone making such claim has ever stepped in a court and knows how they function in reality. However, it's to be noticed that no one criticising tha judgement has raised a war against the court or the nation. They just stressed that there might be some inconsitency in the judgement and that our courts, especially the lower ones, are not free from errors. One may argue then there is provision to get it rectified in higher courts. But it cannot and should not go on like that. We definitely need some reform and what's wrong if the Binayak Sen case, acts as a stimulator to it, no matter Mr. Sen is really guilty or not. Besides, the intellectuals have every right to ask question regarding the relevance of a law that was designed to entrap the nationalist leaders during the British Raj.All these must be debated.Those who are citing anticipated paranoiha amongs the mass as an argument against free debates must remeber that if, the courts, our democratic system or the consitution,are so tiny as not to withstand a single blow of mass scrutiny, it does not deserve to be called as such august institutions or systems. Rather, it's the dynamism with which institutions pass the time's taste and mainatains their cardinal position in democracies.And as an Indian, I believe India will pass the taste since still there are lot of people who believe in dialogue and debates, in plurality of ideas and free speech, despite the existence of a little chunk of intolerant people who just want to sush any opposing voice, citing so called nationalistic grounds which often borders on Jingoism.
  • Sourav Roy
    By
    Sourav Roy
    29.01.11 04:39 PM
    @ Kajal Iyer, Sandeep Bhardwaj, Gautam Sen and Sourav Adhikary-

    Sorry for the delayed reply. This online debate had affected me a lot and I was trying to seek answers to any questions asked directly or indirectly by many of you.

    I was unable to seek answers to my questions, until, I watched the republic day parade recently. Though I watched it partially, but the very ambience took over me later in the night of Republic day.

    I had a question in my mind. Why do we celebrate Republic day at all? An answer could be- To honour those who risk their lives on our borders, and those who have given their lives defending them.

    However, while soldiers defend our borders, protect our lives and, on occasion, keep the nation together in times of crisis, they cannot ‘defend’ the Republic.

    The Republic of India requires far more numerous and vigilant defenders: us.

    While on the 15th of August 1947, we made a clean break from the past, on the 26th January, 1950, “We, the People of India,” charted our course for the future. Our Constitution, which came into force, then, is not just about what the Government of the day should or should not do.

    It is about what “We, the People of India,” must not give up or lose, at any cost: our freedom, our constitution!

    A brief look across the world shows that people from various parts of the world have achieved Independence without getting Freedom, or have gotten Freedom and lost it at the hands of tyrants and oppressors. Even today in India, there are those who are still trying to rob it from us. We rarely lose our freedoms in one go, but let them go gradually, one by one, until we wake up one day and realize they have been taken away from us.

    No matter what, the country and its ideals have a direct relation with our constitution. It, more than any other national symbol, represents us as a nation.

    Binayak Sen's deed was unconstitutional, and therefore against the nation India. He past and goodwill should not matter.
  • Sourav Adhikary
    By
    Sourav Adhikary
    28.01.11 08:19 PM
  • Sourav Adhikary
    By
    Sourav Adhikary
    28.01.11 08:16 PM
    Before being judgemental we should better look into the arguments ensued for and against the concerned judgement.I would like to say the same things that i wrote on my blog a few days back. In that very blog article titled ‘Judging a Judgment’, I sought to comprehend the debate that on one side has people petitioning for Dr. Sen’s acquittal and on the other the puritans who suggest that any discontent over judicial matters must be solved judicially.
  • Gautam Sen
    By
    Gautam Sen
    19.01.11 06:43 PM
  • Gautam Sen
    By
    Gautam Sen
    19.01.11 06:42 PM
    @Sourav, your assertion "There is little doubt that Binayak Sen has been a known Maoist supporter and worker" has no basis in the evidence that has been presented in court. Therefore your continuing to smear Binayak Sen as a maoist is malicious. You will reply that the court has determined his guilt, but it is precisely HOW they have done so that makes the conviction so wrong. Courts have an obligation to follow legal principles and precedents. The conviction was secured with no regard for them. Please acquaint yourself with the facts of the case before you smear the reputation of man who has done more for the weakest and least powerless of his fellow citizens than you or I will ever do in our lives. Please visit my blog and see the more detailed rebuttal of arguments such as yours.
  • Sandeep Bhardwaj
    By
    Sandeep Bhardwaj
    14.01.11 08:25 PM
    Really like the point. It has been on the top of my mind but I never said it, brow-beaten by the "intellectuals" around me. Thanks for saying it.
  • Kajal Iyer
    By
    Kajal Iyer
    14.01.11 04:28 PM
    From whatever little I have observed scams/controversies from the sidelines, it has been my strong conviction that there is a lot of propaganda from both sides. I am not sure how guilty Mr. Sen is, what I am sure however is that our democratic discourse is about absolutes these days. We have an all or nothing approach to many things and the fact is that around 80% who comment havent gone through the actual documents, are influenced by some or the forward email campaigns or secondary information. Now I know that not all of us have access to information equally, but what is dangerous is despite this we start forming extreme positions.

    He may or may not be a traitor, but what needs to be investigated is the state of Naxal areas in the country. IMHO, neither the government, nor the NGOs will tell you the truth, that is something for the public to find out and act on rather than believe any side totally.
  • Sourav Roy
    By
    Sourav Roy
    14.01.11 10:11 AM
    Addition to what Azad said, I'd also add three things.

    Firstly, it is a mistaken belief that some are more equal than others and hence above the law. Or that courts must make a distinction between those deemed to be ideologically ‘correct’ and those who are ideologically ‘incorrect’.

    Secondly, it’s a war being waged by the democratic Republic of India against those who want a totalitarian People’s Republic of Maoistan. In the first 10 months of this year alone Maoists have killed 577 civilians and 260 security forces personnel; they have lost 137 cadre in encounters. In this war, we can choose to be either with the state or the Maoists; there’s no halfway house because the future of our freedom, our liberty, our open society and our democracy is at stake. Binayak Sen exercised his choice.

    Finally, Sen was tried in an open court under laws that are equally applicable to all citizens of India. He had access to the best lawyers and at no stage was he starved of either legal advice or funds. unlike the trials in Maoist courts where those who refuse to obey are executed. Those held ‘guilty’ by these ‘people’s courts’ are poor Adivasis and Dalits who are denied the right to appeal, a right Sen can exercise.
  • Azad
    By
    Azad
    13.01.11 11:07 PM
    If i help poor people for years, does it give me a permit to do anything in exasperation, no matter how obvious it may be? Yes, it gives me a certain latitude but associating with people who have decided not to be civil and are known to even train children to fight in their crusade? And if i do anything in frustration, i should be ready to face the consequences.
    Every coin has 2 sides. None of them is wrong. For Britishers, Netaji Subhash was a terrorist and for Netaji, it was the opposite.
    I, for one, believe we need to fight against the rampant corruption in the nation. People siphon billions and trillions of rupees and we, the so called intellectuals, do nothing. That money could have been utilized in welfare of the same tribals. What we cannot do is to go and help a bunch of looney murderers who have killed more than 10,000 of their poor brethren just to force govt. Where were the human rights of all the CRPF, BSF, Army personnel who were killed and whose kith and kin now depend on us for survival? Did any 'intellectual' or human rights group (read Amnesty international) raise a single voice against that? For me Binayak Sen is on the wrong side of the line and no matter how good a man he is, he should be treated as an enemy! Period!
  • Sourav Roy
    By
    Sourav Roy
    13.01.11 12:18 AM
    @ Sourav Roy and Arpit Vaish

    What Binayak Sen did as a doctor is indeed admirable. I didn't want to make a stand here but, but I should bring out the other side of the story which is being overlooked.

    There is little doubt that Binayak Sen has been a known Maoist supporter and worker. He might not have been involved in any violence himself. This is amply clear from his more than twenty meetings with Piyush Guha. For the same reason of having close links with Maoists, among others, Arundhati Roy too should be behind bars. It is an irony that she’s free and has a problem with everything that India stands for.

    Many are claiming what Sen did is free speech and not sedition. We are a state that has a constitution. And our constitution has nothing like moderate sedition. There cannot and should not be any middle ground for such cases. In this case you can either be a Maoist sympathizer or you can believe in Indian constitution because the Maoists have said it quite openly that their overall aim is to overthrow the govt of India.

    Strong nation states do not and should not be lenient towards sedition. They have to act tough to ensure their sovereignty. Today you allow one. Tomorrow there will be many. It is because we have been soft towards separatists in Kashmir that we are still paying for it with blood of our jawans and countrymen. The same is happening with the Maoist supporters as well. If we do not act tough with Maoists and their sympathizers this country will implode, which is the aim of Maoists. We have to stop this state from disintegrating, and only reformation (and not revolution) is the answer.
  • Arpit Vaish
    By
    Arpit Vaish
    12.01.11 06:48 PM
    @Sourav: You are right in saying that to some people support for Sen may seem like support for naxalism. But, if we don't protest, how will he get justice? Some people support the cause silently, others go loud about it. Its just the nature of people, and you can't do anything about it. I was one of the people who signed the petition for Sen's release without making a fuss about it. But then, in India no one listens to silent warriors. Also, this fear of support for naxalism due to Sen's support is somewhat far fletched. If that's the case, then people would have started sympathizing with terrorists long back. As there were protests for Afzal Guru. Your headline says, "How justified are India's so-called intellectuals in blindly supporting Binayak Sen?". Well, there are people who are not supporting him blindly and they would not create the paranoid you are talking about.
    Also, i would request all not to compare Sen with Arundhati Roy or Swami (so-called) Aseemanand. While Roy publicly encouraged people to disintegrate Kashmir from bhookha-nanga Bharat, Aseemanand confessed about his involvement in the blasts. Sen's case is totally different from them. He is charged for helping poor people. He has never talked about disintegrating any part of country and is certainly not involved in any bomb blasts. The irony is that Sen is rotting in the jail, while Roy is free!
  • Sourav Roy
    By
    Sourav Roy
    12.01.11 02:31 PM
    @ Zephyr

    Thanks.
  • Sourav Roy
    By
    Sourav Roy
    12.01.11 01:18 PM
    @ Arpit Vaish

    Firstly, thanks for your comment. It really means a lot to me. I was afraid this debate will start with this article, but I am glad someone so close to me as you started it.

    Well, the third para of my article clearly mentions-

    Sen 'may or may not be' a functionary of the Naxalites. But do we realize what damage the bloggers and the national media have caused by acting like an appellate court for the past few days?

    Please understand that this article is not another article to justify or condemn Sen. That is not what I am concerned about. My concern is the way activism has erupted to justify Sen. The right to campaign peacefully for Sen is a feature of India's open society. The same goes with Arundhati Roy's claims as well. That is the privilege we Indians have got of being in a democracy.

    But, do you realize that the campaign's success in creating a paranoid discourse has inevitably suggested interesting possibilities for those who have no time for the India we value and cherish? That is my primary concern!
  • Arpit Vaish
    By
    Arpit Vaish
    12.01.11 12:38 PM
    You are right in saying "people today are more infected by ‘wrong knowledge’ than ‘little knowledge’". The fact is Sen is arrested in a case of sedition. Now, sedition is a heavy charge and he is rightly give life imprisonment when proven guilty. But, do you know what was the evidence used against him? Here is the list:
    1.A post card dated 3 June 2006, written by Narayan Sanyal to Binayak Sen from Raipur Central Jail, regarding his health and legal case, duly signed by the Jail authorities
    2.A yellow coloured book "On The Unity Between CPI (Peoples' War) and Maoist Communist Centre".
    3.A letter written by Madanlal Banjare of CPI (Maoist) to Binayak Sen.
    4.An article titled "Krantikari Janwadi Morcha (ITF) (Revolutionary People's Front) Vaishvikaran evam Bharatiya Seva Kshetra; (Globalization and the Service Sector in India)
    5.Two articles titled "Naxal Movement, Tribals and Women's Movement" and "How to build an Anti-US Imperialist Front."
    Now is it justified to charge someone of sedition, just because he is reading some articles abt naxalites or Karl Marx. Is it justified to give someone honored with Paul Harrison award for a lifetime of service to the rural poor, life sentence just because someone who is a criminal, and possibly a patient of his, has written him a letter? Or is it justified to punish him just because he wanted to deliver a letter to someone's relatives?
    If yes, then charge every postman with sedition. Charge every doctor treating poors for free. Then even I am a terrorist because i read about taliban! In a country where murderers and rapists are roaming free, how can a doctor helping poors be jailed? Those against Sen should voice their opinions for people like Purushottam Naresh Dwivedi, that rascal who is free instead of raping a minor.
    Binayak Sen was not supporting maoism or naxalism. He was only against salwa judum where police was given all the rights against innocent villagers. Movements like salwa judum increase the distrust of people against the system, turning them into naxalites. Sen publicily condemned the acts of violence carried out by naxals.
    I think you have made this article based only upon Pritish Nandy's blog in Times of India. As a responsible author and a social worker, this is not expected of you. You should do in-depth research before posting any aritcle. Please don't get me wrong, its just a friend's advice.
    PS- I am not a suppporter of naxalism and consider them equal to terrorists.
  • Sourav Roy
    By
    Sourav Roy
    12.01.11 08:21 AM
    Let the courts decide if Sen was a terrorist or an angel.I feel the hype shows that in India we have freedom to express our views.
    Before jumping to a conclusion we need to keep in mind that in jungles of chattisgarh finding a doctor is a luxury for the tribal people.Binayak sen could have easily gone on to make truck loads of money and giving expert comments on empowerment of poor people in his drawing room.
    But he sacrificed everything and his popularity in Chattisgarh is a testimonial to it.We who dream of nation building have to realise that we need people and doctors like Dr.Sen who actually care for millions of poor who cannot afford medical bills and can't fight for their rights.
    @Sourav
    I am a big fan of yours.We being bengalis should be proud of our revolutionary history.We have produced netaji,....i can go on... to Kanu sanyal,Charu majumdar who were educated and sacrificed all for people. They were not lunatics who just kill.
    All I want to say is its too quick to label Dr.Sen as a terrorist as he may be a victim of a corrupted and vengeful political system.It is the responsibility of the intellectuals to make sure that a person is fairly treated,punished or praised.
    Waiting for your comments
  • zephyr
    By
    zephyr
    12.01.11 06:34 AM
    Your post is very lucid and hits the nail on the head bang on. In the quest for popularity and publicity people churn out trash and like you rightly pointed out, they change their stands as the wind blows, which is even more dangerous given the reach of the social media in particular. The Naxalites must be thrilled at the free publicity just as the Kashmiri seditionists had been when Arundhati Roy had trashed the country to support them.

    It has now become a fashion to take a stand no matter if the person has a valid one or not. And our 'national' TV channels are doing their bit to undermine democracy.
  • Sourav Roy
    By
    Sourav Roy
    11.01.11 07:28 PM
    @ Azad

    I was a silent observer of the Sen drama that went on Facebook and Twitter for a while. Many editorials of some popular newspapers were trying to justify Sen. I have nothing against Sen personally, nor do I know how guilty he is, but I do understand what sedition means. We cannot and should know try to justify 'Deshdroh' with half cooked information in our head..

    @ Amit Joshi

    You are right. With access to information, people today are more infected by 'wrong knowledge' than 'little knowledge'. What's worse is that they don't have a proper stand. One moment they read a speech of Obama and have a capitalist stand. The next moment they read an article on Frontline on the same topic and have a socialist stand :D
  • Amit Joshi
    By
    Amit Joshi
    11.01.11 06:59 PM
    I totally agree with you. I feel that more than anything these so called intellectual need one or another issue to shout about and make them noticed. I guess it's more about being in limelight and nurturing their egos than anything else. I guess give them any thing that is slightly controversial and they will climb on roof and shout like hell even if they don't know at all for what they are shouting :))
  • Azad
    By
    Azad
    11.01.11 04:10 PM
    Very well written Sourav!
    These pseudo-intellectuals have a hero out of Binayak Sen, a convicted criminal. One has all the right to appeal in higher courts but this hype and hoopla has led a trivialization of the entire case! We keep hearing, "Binayak Sen was doing a lot for the tribal folk" etc etc. Even Aseemanand gave his life for the poor people! Beat that! Let us not support terror at any cost.
    BTW, I am waiting for Amnesty International to intervene in Aseemanand and Pragya Thakur's case too :P

Leave a comment