Friday, 23 November 2012
Kasab: Terrorist for India, Gunman for USA and UK!
What I have always thought to be the inherent bias in the west - and especially the US and the UK is finally confirmed in my mind and out in the open. Not that it is a surprise: most of us already suspected it. But some sensitivity from them was expected, given that their citizens perished as well. But no... the west has proven its total inability to rise above its own jaundiced, prejudiced and selfish world-views by this display of crass insensitivity. Thank you is all that comes to mind: for coming out into the open with what certainly seems to be bias. The media reports have left me speechless with rage... media reflects the views of its people; and the media reports speak for themselves!
As the firstpost notes : "The words we deploy reflect our latent biases, and on occasions media megaphones lose their perspective, particularly when they operate on alien turf. Sometimes, it’s just a case of echoing the official political line of their home countries. The same Mujahideen in Afghanistan, who were valorised in the international media as “freedom fighters”, so long as they were being armed by the CIA and taking on the occupying Soviet forces in the 1980s, became “terrorists” the moment they began to bite the hand that fed them."
I could go on and give several more links... most of which refer to Kasab as a Gunman! If it was only about that, it would be merely bias, not offensive. What takes the news coverage offensive to me is the open anti-India bias that seems to be evident in the news. That makes the coverage appear highly offensive... the man had been caught on live camera feed, proven beyond all doubt to be a Pakistani, killed dozens (of the total toll of 166) of people - and you can only call him a gunman? Then what is a terrorist attack? Do tell! What else can I conclude except bias? What do I as an Indian citizen read into this except bias? This has done great and incalculable harm only to the west, and caused heartburn and rage in India... it is our country which has been at the point of a gun for some 65 years - with no appreciation of this brutal reality anywhere
The articles focus on hanging moratorium, on Indo-Pak relationship, Human Rights groups observations. The general impression one gets is that the case against Kasab was far from concrete! There is even a not-so-faint suggestion that Pakistani involvement has not been proven, that Kasab may have been Indian... words fail me. And this is after a transparent trial involving copious evidence and irrefutable proof being provided. There is precious little admission of the Indian Position, and in its place Pakistani responses have been given inordinate emphasis. "The Washington Post went with the headline "India hangs lone suspect in 2008 attacks - in.news.yahoo.com!". There is only 1 newspaper that I have come across in the west that refers to Kasab specifically as a Pakistani National! That speaks volumes of the western attitude!
The news coverage incurred the wrath of huge numbers on social media, leading a couple of newspapers to change their headlines, and leading Nirupama Rao to tweet an acerbic and pretty damning comment. The question that comes to mind is what prevents the west from seeing Kasab as a Pakistani Terrorist, as a man fairly tried and convicted, as a killer, and as a criminal against humanity? Why is one man's terrorist another man's "gunman"? Why is the coverage giving undue weightage to frankly offensive and insensitive Pakistani viewpoints, referring to Kasab albeit obliquely as Indian, denying Pakistani role, anaylsing in far too great a depth the impact on Indo-Pak relations, using words like "suspect" etc?
The articles seem to be damning proof of the bias of the western media, and another nail in the budding relationship with India that the west is now enjoying. This stupidity has done more to damage the image of the west in India than any other single event in recent memory. People like me are now of the firm belief that USA and UK cannot be political allies, and that they will always favour Pakistan - even if it means the deaths of Indians. What else can it mean - supplying arms to a state like Pakistan?
What else can I conclude from the above? I guess it isnt Terrorism until it happens to us....