A few things are interesting because of their absence. For example, in old age, in few cases at least, teeth become interesting because of their absence. You look at others’ teeth and sigh with nostalgia, ‘Oh, those were the days, I had teeth back then!’.. And so on.
Is that the case with Hindu terrorism? Political parties who were cultivating Muslim votes were looking for a stick to beat Hindus with. But, those jihadis were queering the pitch. Damn, those Hindus, couldn’t they just go out and shoot a few sparrows? Then we will have a few Hindus in our hands, to equalize the score, sort off.
Then they got this brilliant idea – Hindu Terrorist. It sounded so spicy and sexy.
At least it equalizes the score. Now, we can say that we are
secular sickular. Muslim terrorists vis-vis Hindu terrorists. Now, you cannot accuse us of partiality, right? We (dis)respect all religions. We do not differentiate. We insult a Muslim by assuming that they have sympathies for terrorists, and we insult Hindus too by proving that they can at least kill sparrows!
But, what stirred me (I am quite lazy otherwise, you know!) to go into a reverie was this news item – HuJI ban takes no note of ‘Hindu terror’ role
It reads –
Contrary to Centre’s growing estimate that alleged Hindu extremists carried out the May 2007 Mecca Mosque blast in Hyderabad, the United States and the United Nations have held the Pakistan-based Harkat-ul-Jihad Islami (HuJI) responsible for it. The UN has, in fact, termed the blast a joint operation of HuJI and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and listed a number of other terror attacks in India in which these outfits were involved.
But, the paper does try to balance the act with –
It is possible that the UN and US authorities did not check with India for fresh updates on investigation into the crimes, going along with the initial line of Indian investigators.
..as if they need to. Well that is another matter. We should never expect the worst. Fair play and all that!
But, suppose, Hindu terrorist is really there, no seriously, then what are the implications? Why does a populace that is 80% of the entire population, feel compelled to take up arms? Why should they feel that they are threatened? That they will not get a fair hearing in a country that has been their own for millenniums!
This calls for some serious thinking.
I call your comments on this.