Curse of the Ummah
http://www.dawn.com/2011/06/02/the-curse-of-nationalism.html
This time round, the bearded one wants to make villains of Indian nationalists. Using one faulty argument after another, as is his custom, he sets upon the task of vilifying them. But we in India have had enough of these semi-literate media crooks, and love to rip these pen-pushers apart. Honestly, I haven’t seen any full-time Indian journalist who is more convincing than a part-time blogger. What are these guys paid for? To kiss the bottom of the establishment?
Here, Naqvi pretends to take issue with chest-thumping nationalists, but his beef clearly is with all nationalists. The word chest-thumping is a clever sleight-of-hand. There is no nationalism which cannot be conveniently branded chest-thumping. I am sure the clever one knows his, he has been doing this act for so long.
The nationalism he vilifies is the same that protects his precious posterior from jihadi attacks.But to a dyed-in-the wool mullah, global ummah matters more than national security. These guys have so little attachment to their country that nationalism looks like a cuss word to them. That is why they find its presence so onerous and intolerable. They live, the world over, like leeches, creating friction and hatred wherever they go, crazily standing apart with their fungal beards and skull caps, and abusing the genuine people of the land as nationalists.
Naqvi uses the following repetitive and tired tricks in his column:
1) Pretend that you are attacking a fringe group, but make sure anyone can smell you hate the entire community (viz. nationalists)
2) Ascribe hyper and imaginary arguments to his hated group, and then proceed to vilify them. Straw man fallacies, these are called.
3) When pontificating on anti-americanism and anti-whatever the mullahs love to talk about, do push in a few anti-hindu arguments. Carefully replace Hindu with nationalists/Sangh Parivar/ obscurantist.
4) While mouthing poison against Hindu fringe (of course) elements, drop in a few lines against mullahs which everyone knows to be the truth, such as ‘madarsas teach intolerance’. These do not sound provocative, because the mullah world is full of example of hate and intolerance and this is what we expect of them. But these serve the purpose of creating the illusion of a balanced picture, not just an anti-Hindu tirade, and you can freely ascribe imaginary heinous motives to Hindus.
5) Mix timelines and contexts like a raving maniac.
6) Link shallow, worthless examples to a larger point, such as a girls’s jeans and America’s imperial designs.
He has used these tricks ad nauseam and I thought it was high time we told him we know them. Most of us are more intelligent than these pedestrian journalists, who are usually mediocre in the intelligence department. It is not difficult to see through them.
In the examples below, note the relevant trick number in brackets. Going through them, you can understand why his columns sound so confusing.
Naqvi you can rant and rave all about America and pakistan you want, but no false word of yours against us will go unchallenged here.
Chest-thumping Indian nationalists, for example, have periodically slandered fellow compatriots, usually Muslims, as anti-Indian, all because they backed a different cricket team. (1)
Ah, the hurt! This is because there is an all-too obvious similarity between people who cheer for the Paki team and those who burn alive women and children in packed compartments. Who do you think Kasab would cheer for, India or Pakistan?
Likewise, groups of Christians are declared anti-national for spreading the word of Christ among the socially shunned lower strata of indigenous Indians. (3)
Let them start converting your impoverished bearded mullas with bags of rice and abusing your prophet, then we will see how much you howl about misplaced nationalism. But then the missionaries will never dare to. Not because there is any dearth of impoverished mullahs, but because they are so sectarian, brutal and violent that no missionary will dare to risk his neck. It’s amazing how much advantage people take of the tolerance of certain communities, provoke them, and then blame them for violence. I think till the time all mullah countries became secular in law and deed, you guys better unload your preachings onto them.
A homegrown movement against big dams is readily branded as national treachery, (2) as is someone visiting Srinagar to release a book on Kashmir’s struggle against military occupation.
Clever trick, mixing the two examples, to get sympathy for your fellow bearded genocidal Kashmiri mullas. But I don’t know anyone who calls anti-dam activists as anti-national. Who called Medha Patker anti-national?
When it comes to fudging facts there is no one to beat Israel. It has cleverly turned the tables on the most agreeable critics of Zionism by labelling them anti-Semitic.
This is good strategy on the part of Israel.Until the whole world rubs their noses on the ground asking jews forgiveness for the holocaust and also slaps muslims wholesale because their book refer to jews as pigs, they can and should do anything to the rest of the world.
However, the flip side of the narrative is just as absorbing. Underneath the chador, the younger women have not abandoned their love of jeans, universally seen as an exclusively American symbol. (6)
Exactly the kind of shallow and stupid observation you are capable of. Many jeans wearing muslims have been known to plan bombing sane non-muslim communities. What about your pro-Americanism? Was your underwear invented in Arabia?
“How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of Negroes?” asked Samuel Johnson in 1775. “I am willing to love all mankind, except an American,” he famously stated. (5)
He did not know one day there will be a grotesque pool of inhumanity called Pakistan in the world, else he would have never said that. Dont use quotation of 1775 to justify the schizophrenic acts of mullahs in 21st century. You mix timelines and contexts like a raving maniac.
“Marx once compared [the] revolutionary new era of struggle with the work of the mole, who sometimes burrows so far beneath the ground that he leaves no trace of his movement on the surface. This [Obama] is the old revolutionary ‘mole’, not only showing his traces on the surface but also breaking through.”
Jabbering uncontrollably, are we?
