By Salim Nazzal
10 May, 2010
Countercurrents.org
Memory is the power which Zionist Jews cannot destroy.
In memory of the Palestinian babies, children, women and men slaughtered mercilessly by Zionist Jews like these days 62 years ago.
Each year on May 15th, Palestinians commemorate the war crimes committed by East European Jews and ask the same question: how did the so-called “Holocaust survivors” bring themselves to murder pregnant women, babies and others, put explosives in crowded Palestinian markets in the Palestinians towns, Haifa, Jafa, and Jerusalem, at schools and in orphanages and terrorize and expel a whole nation? Do Zionist Jews have hearts like other human beings, and if so how could they allow themselves to murder innocent people who had done no wrong to them?
How could those Jews, claiming to be hated in Europe to a degree where Hitler sought to eradicate them physically, bring themselves to do the same thing to Palestinians? This question is addressed to the Zionist Jews who murder Palestinians, to Jews who support and finance the murder and the robbery of Palestinians, and to those Jews who do not say any word about the slaughter of Palestinians.
The Nakhba (Limitless Catastrophe) is the Palestinian name for the Zionist Jewish policy of murder and expulsion of Palestinians in 1948, indicating a disaster of immeasurable magnitude, which resulted in the destruction of a whole society for the benefit of immigrants from Poland and Russia. The Palestinian Nakhba was more brutal than natural disasters like a volcano, or earthquake or tsunami.
All these natural disasters come and go, however, while Zionist Jews have become steadily more aggressive over time, confirmed by their nuclear, biological and chemical weapons capability, which could, as they themselves put it, return the whole Middle East to the Stone Age, meaning in practice that they would murder around 20 to 30 million Arabs and Muslims in about 5 minutes. This leaves the region with two choices; either the UN forces Israel to give up its weapons of mass destruction or the other countries of the region develop equivalent weapons to protect themselves.
The Nakhba is not only a historical event, however, with Palestinian still experiencing Zionist atrocities on a daily basis. Every day, Palestinians are tortured by members of ‘the most moral army in the world’! Every day, this ‘moral’ army murders Palestinians, every day Palestinians are arrested, and every day Palestinians are humiliated in their own country.
Every day Palestinians’ land is stolen by Zionist Jews, and every day the exiled Palestinians living in refugee camps grow more determined to reclaim their stolen rights, even if this takes another 1,000 years. And each and every day, the actions of Zionist Jews are building a Mount Everest of hatred against them, which will ultimately lead to endless wars throughout the 21 century.
How does the Western world, which claims to be expert in democracy and human rights, square this with accepting, enabling and supporting professional murderers in destroying a whole society and now in threatening stability and peace across the entire Middle East? When Zionist Jews come from different countries, murder and expel the natives, and call this independence, what kind of independence is that?
One understands that the peoples of occupied nations call the day that foreign forces leave the country Independence Day. In the case of Palestinians, however, it was their country that was occupied, with the British occupying Palestine while Zionist Jews were still living in their homeland in Eastern Europe. The colonizing power, Britain, then brought Polish and Russian Zionist Jews to Palestine with a clear goal of destroying the nation and the Palestinians. Therefore the question is; if Russian and Polish Zionist Jews were part of the British colonial system, from whom did they claim their independence?
In the behavior psychology theory we learnt that in order to understand what a group (Zionists in this case) are doing now, we have to know what they had previously planned to do. Such actions are goal directed behavior and can only be accounted for if we know who set the goal, and for what purpose.
The answer is simple; Zionist Jews said clearly that they planned while they were still in their Eastern European homelands to murder and expel Palestinians, while the native Palestinians were not even aware of what these Zionist Jews were planning. This is exactly what happens every year, with these Jews dancing joyfully to celebrate the theft of Palestine, which they call “independence” and Palestinians commemorate that day with deep sadness but with unlimited determination to restore their rights in order to live in dignity and in freedom in Palestine away from the zio Jewish culture of death.
I also pose this question to the countries that recognized the state of Israel: please tell us who exactly did the Polish and Russian Zionist Jews proclaim their independence from? And what right hand and have they to murder thousands of Palestinians and take their homes?
If Arthur Balfour, the British foreign minister in 1917 gave them that ‘right,’ Palestine was not his property to give him any right over it.
If the Jewish god supports killing pregnant woman as in Deir Yasin near Jerusalem, if it is a god that gives Jews the right to murder babies, if it is a god which spread the culture of death, he must be an international murderer and must be put immediately on the Interpol list at all airport to be arrested. And if Jews around the world believe their god is against violence, their voice must be heard, but, the fact is, until now, very few Jews have opposed the culture of death Zionists brought to Palestine.
While these atrocities continue, Palestinians see the hypocrisy of the US and Europe which dares to criticize the violation of human right everywhere, but, when it comes to Israel, where torture is an official state policy, nobody say anything. And, when we ask about the reason for this silence, they tell us Jews control the media, Jews control the banking system, Jews control the US Congress and nobody dares to confront them.
But why the policy of supporting Israel is encouraging wars? The answer is simple, past history has taught us that the support and the silence about the occupation encouraged Israel to occupy more and to oppress more because it knows no body will account it for its atrocities. The appeasement policy, is also poisoning the international relations between the east and the west, and gives strong argument to hardliners in the Muslim world that the West talks only rhetoric about human rights while supporting the Zionist occupation. Past experience demonstrates beyond doubt that the credibility of the US, Europe and the UN grows weaker every time Israel commits genocide and escapes sanctions. It has taught us that the policy of appeasement towards Israel means more wars, more destruction and thus more instability across the entire world.
Some may argue that questioning the legitimacy of the Zionist state after 62 years is too late, but for the Palestinians this question will always be asked and will never get old, as long as Zionism deprive Palestinians from Palestine. The questioning of the legitimacy of the Zionist state will be passed from generation to generation, and consequently the Palestinian struggle for freedom will continue throughout the 21 century.
It has been proven that Zionist Jews have failed to integrate in the region through use of wars and weapons. Effective, modern arms may make a well equipped army, but definitely make no friends. Justice and quitting a racist policy does. The Zionist policy is also encouraging the region to arm itself. Middle East observers anticipate that the next wars will be more destructive than all the previous ones. Some even predict that in 20 years time the most sophisticated arms will be available to everybody in the Middle East. This means a group of just handful individuals can launch a war on their own against the state of Israel.
Today most political analysts, including Israeli says that after 62 years of its establishment Israel is still worried about its existence. The question is why Israel is worried despite its large arsenal of arms? The answer is simple; Israel is like the man who stole a flat .The owner of the flat erect a tent opposite to his stolen flat, and each time the thief opens the window he sees the owner and feels unsafe because the stolen pose a moral threat to him. The thief owns a gun which scares the whole building naturally sympathizes with their stolen neighbor. The thief is insecure because he knows everybody will turn against him the moment he gets week or if times changed.
Indeed times are changing. Israel previously had a monopoly over sophisticated arms and on the media. Today the whole region is seeking to arm itself with equal sophisticated arms, and in the media, the alternative media is breaking this monopoly.
The Jewish community in Palestine needs to make radical changes if there is any hope to stop the cycle of violence. Israel army has the power to kill millions of Palestinians and Arabs; this is no secret. Yet, would it help them in any way? The answer is a Big No; the more they murder, the more they are hated and the more they increase vengeful sentiments towards them. In a research I made 12 years ago among Palestinian kids born Fifty two years after the Nakhba , I found out that the most precious dream the vast majority of them have is to see the apartheid state of Israel disappears, this generation which Israel will face in the future.
Jews in Palestine, therefore, have only two choices, to continue with the occupation and the oppressive policies, which will definitely lead to more wars, and in the end to the disappearance of the Jewish existence in Palestine or, to integrate in the region, meaning that Palestinians get their full rights and non Zionist Jews continue to live in the region on an equal footing with everyone else. But as we are in 2010 there is no shred of evidence that Israel is changing its apartheid nature. Today Israel,expel,arrest,murder,and use intensively the same policy Russian and polish Jews did 62 years ago.
And as the old generation of Palestinians defeated in previous wars with Israel passes away, and as our generation is aging, a new generation is emerging with a metal will and determination to carry on the struggle under the slogan that the destruction will be inflicted on everyone. This apparently changes the rules of the coming wars, and leads the region into a new phase.
Dr. Salim Nazzal is a Palestinian-Norwegian historian in the Middle East, who has written extensively on social and political issues in the region
Source:http://www.countercurrents.org/nazzal100510.htm
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Climate Action
With simple modifications to your daily routine, you can be part of a cleaner, more sustainable world.
1.Drink from the tap
You can save money and your environment by giving up bottled water. The production of plastic water bottles together with the privatization of our drinking water is an environmental and social catastrophe. Bottled water costs more per gallon than gasoline. The average American consumes 30 gallons of bottled water annually. Giving up one bottle of imported water means using up one less liter of fossil fuel and emitting 1.2 pounds less of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
2. Tithe a fixed percentage of your income
Tithe a fixed percentage of your income to non-profits of your choice.Many of our public health and welfare services are tied to consumer spending which, in turn, depends upon planetary resources. If you want to help, don’t go shopping. Just help.
Have dinners with friends.Enjoying each other costs the planet much less than enjoying its resources.
1.Drink from the tap
You can save money and your environment by giving up bottled water. The production of plastic water bottles together with the privatization of our drinking water is an environmental and social catastrophe. Bottled water costs more per gallon than gasoline. The average American consumes 30 gallons of bottled water annually. Giving up one bottle of imported water means using up one less liter of fossil fuel and emitting 1.2 pounds less of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
2. Tithe a fixed percentage of your income
Tithe a fixed percentage of your income to non-profits of your choice.Many of our public health and welfare services are tied to consumer spending which, in turn, depends upon planetary resources. If you want to help, don’t go shopping. Just help.
3. Build a community
Have dinners with friends.Enjoying each other costs the planet much less than enjoying its resources.
4. Get there under your own steam
Get around by bike or by foot a certain number of days a month. Not only does this mean using less fossil fuel and creating less greenhouse gases, it means you’ll get exercise and we’ll all breathe fewer fumes.5. Commit to not wasting
Wasting resources costs the planet and your wallet. Let your clothes hang-dry instead of using the dryer. Take half the trips but stay twice as long. Repair instead of rebuy. The list goes on.6. Take your principles to work
We must act as though we care about the world at work as much as we do at home. Company CEOs or product designers have the power to make a gigantic difference through their business, and so do the rest of us. In commercial buildings, lighting accounts for more than 40 percent of electrical energy use, a huge cause of greenhouse gas production. Using motion and occupancy sensors can cut this use by 10 percent.
7. Believe with all your heart that the way you live your life makes a difference
We are all interconnected. Every step toward living a conscious life provides support to everyone else who is trying to do the same thing—whether you’re aware of it or not. We are the masters of our destinies.
Source:http://www.countercurrents.org/beavan100510.htm
P. Chidambaram’s Charm, Alarm
By Raja Jaikrishan
10 May, 2010
Heraldofindia.com
After prescribing the two-pronged cure of development and security for the Maoist upsurge Home Minster P. Chidambaram used his lawyer’s wit and flourish to answer questions of JNU students late Wednesday.
Dressed in blue shirt and khaki trousers, he sounded earnest in solving the problem leading to trouble in the country’s heart. If Naxals abjured violence,“ Give me 72 hours and I will tell you (Naxals) time and venue for talks”. “Be it security, development, government structure and MoUs on mining, everything can be discussed. I will ask the Prime Minister to suspend all MoUs related to mining till the talks go on”, he said.
While he was speaking at the function organized by the Congress student wing NSUI, a section of students protested outside the auditorium. He asked a plainclothes policewoman not to push Vibha, an Economics PhD scholar. He took her questions and invited her over tea for further discussion on Anil Aggarwal’s Vedanta.
Next day,the students and others concerned over the violence , felt cheated on learning about his ministry’s statement warning sympathizers of the Maoists /Naxalites of action under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. The overnight bar on inquiry and dialogue into the causes underlying Maoist / Naxalite programmes shows the split between lawyer and minister in Mr Chidambaram.
Civil society groups and individuals have reacted sharply to the Home Ministry's statement.
Suhas Chakma, director , Asian Centre for Human Rights, said on the one hand the home minister takes support of the DMK and allies ,some of whom known supporters of the LTTE (a banned organization in India)and on the other he holds out threats to civil society .
Harsh Dobhal, editor , Combat Law, said: "How do you define sympathy (for Maoists)? The government in its own report says deprivation is the main cause of Naxalism. The civil society groups sympathize with the concerns of poor, they care for such people (as do the ultras). Basically, it is a witch-hunt by the government. In the name of fighting terror, the government can catch people and put them in jail and say that they are Maoists sympathizers."
Mahipal Singh, secretary , People's Union for Civil Liberties, said: Holding a political view and political ideology was no crime, even if it was the Maoist ideology. "If someone holds a gun and shoots people like the Maoists do that is a crime and the state can take action."
He also criticized the MHA's reference to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in taking punitive action against those collaborating with the Maoists. He said it was precisely for this reason that the PUCL was opposed to the draconian law. "Collaboration is a matter of interpretation. Collaboration as in helping the activities that are illegal, like supplying arms and ammunition and giving shelter to armed people, can be punishable but not sharing a meal or sheltering someone without being aware of that person's illegal activities."
PUDR activist Gautam Navlakha said: "Instead of exploring more sensible and imaginative policies to deal with the Maoists and the tribals who live in the same zones where huge mining deals have been signed, the government is taking recourse to authoritarian and dictatorial measures".
Delhi University Prof. G.N. Saibaba, said the MHA directive directly violated the right to freedom of expression.
Source:http://www.countercurrents.org/jaikrishan100510.htm
10 May, 2010
Heraldofindia.com
After prescribing the two-pronged cure of development and security for the Maoist upsurge Home Minster P. Chidambaram used his lawyer’s wit and flourish to answer questions of JNU students late Wednesday.
Dressed in blue shirt and khaki trousers, he sounded earnest in solving the problem leading to trouble in the country’s heart. If Naxals abjured violence,“ Give me 72 hours and I will tell you (Naxals) time and venue for talks”. “Be it security, development, government structure and MoUs on mining, everything can be discussed. I will ask the Prime Minister to suspend all MoUs related to mining till the talks go on”, he said.
While he was speaking at the function organized by the Congress student wing NSUI, a section of students protested outside the auditorium. He asked a plainclothes policewoman not to push Vibha, an Economics PhD scholar. He took her questions and invited her over tea for further discussion on Anil Aggarwal’s Vedanta.
Next day,the students and others concerned over the violence , felt cheated on learning about his ministry’s statement warning sympathizers of the Maoists /Naxalites of action under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. The overnight bar on inquiry and dialogue into the causes underlying Maoist / Naxalite programmes shows the split between lawyer and minister in Mr Chidambaram.
Civil society groups and individuals have reacted sharply to the Home Ministry's statement.
Suhas Chakma, director , Asian Centre for Human Rights, said on the one hand the home minister takes support of the DMK and allies ,some of whom known supporters of the LTTE (a banned organization in India)and on the other he holds out threats to civil society .
Harsh Dobhal, editor , Combat Law, said: "How do you define sympathy (for Maoists)? The government in its own report says deprivation is the main cause of Naxalism. The civil society groups sympathize with the concerns of poor, they care for such people (as do the ultras). Basically, it is a witch-hunt by the government. In the name of fighting terror, the government can catch people and put them in jail and say that they are Maoists sympathizers."
Mahipal Singh, secretary , People's Union for Civil Liberties, said: Holding a political view and political ideology was no crime, even if it was the Maoist ideology. "If someone holds a gun and shoots people like the Maoists do that is a crime and the state can take action."
He also criticized the MHA's reference to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in taking punitive action against those collaborating with the Maoists. He said it was precisely for this reason that the PUCL was opposed to the draconian law. "Collaboration is a matter of interpretation. Collaboration as in helping the activities that are illegal, like supplying arms and ammunition and giving shelter to armed people, can be punishable but not sharing a meal or sheltering someone without being aware of that person's illegal activities."
PUDR activist Gautam Navlakha said: "Instead of exploring more sensible and imaginative policies to deal with the Maoists and the tribals who live in the same zones where huge mining deals have been signed, the government is taking recourse to authoritarian and dictatorial measures".
Delhi University Prof. G.N. Saibaba, said the MHA directive directly violated the right to freedom of expression.
Source:http://www.countercurrents.org/jaikrishan100510.htm
Sunday, May 9, 2010
India: Criminalizing Dissent
By Coordination of Democratic Rights Organizations
09 May, 2010
Countercurrents.org
The most recent alert (regarding use of section 39, UAPA) issued by the government in so called public interest has brought out in the open what had so far been implicit in its anti-Maoist policy. The purpose of the circular is to intimidate voices of protests and dissent over government policies, particularly Operation Green Hunt. The statement criminalizes dissent and makes a mockery of the spirit of critical inquiry which is at the foundation of a strong democracy. As members of civil rights groups we consider the statement as an attack on civil society and reminiscent of the Emergency era.
The contents of the circular show complete disregard of the concerns expressed by Supreme Court when it rebuked the Chhattisgarh government for labelling human rights activists and legitimate activities as sympathetic to naxals, or the more recent concerns expressed by the Chief Justice over the governments war against its own people. It is not surprising that the government has also chosen to ignore the sympathetic and undoubtedly saner voices in its own ranks, which have a different perspective on addressing the problem.
We condemn the governments threat to use extraordinary draconian laws such as UAPA to constrain freedom of expression and free and informed debate on issues which are of crucial importance for the country. We further condemn the government for targeting political and civil rights groups who are doing no more than carrying out their democratic responsibility of ensuring equal protection of the Constitution to all sections of society.
Signed by:
Association for Democratic Rights (AFDR, Punjab); Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties Committee (APCLC, Andhra Pradesh); Association for Protection of Democratic Rights (APDR, West Bengal); Bandi Mukti Committee (West Bengal); Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights (CPDR, Nagpur); Coordination of Human Rights (COHR, Manipur); Campaign for Peace and Democracy in Manipur (CPDM, Delhi); Human Rights Forum (HRF, Andhra Pradesh); Lokshahi Hak Sangathana (LHS, Maharashtra); Manab Adhikar Sangram Samiti (MASS, Assam); Naga Peoples Movement for Human Rights (NPMHR); Organization for Protection of Democratic Rights (OPDR, Andhra Pradesh); Peoples Committee for Human Rights (PCHR, Jammu and Kashmir); Peoples Democratic Forum (PDF, Karnataka); Peoples Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL, National); PUCL (Chhattisgarh); PUCL (Jharkhand); PUCL (Nagpur); PUCL (Rajasthan); Peoples Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR, Delhi); Peoples Union for Human Rights (PUHR, Haryana)
Source:http://www.countercurrents.org/cdro090510.htm
Karnataka : Operation Media Gagging
By Gauri Lankesh
09 May, 2010
Tehelka
The Central home minister P Chidambaram has often issued veiled threats to intellectuals who offer covert or overt support to the Maoists, whom the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has identified as the ‘biggest internal security threat to the country’ today. While Singh and Chidambaram have limited themselves to issuing threats, the top brass in the Karnataka Government has opted for direct action. The police of Shimoga district has issued a ‘threatening’ notice to a young Kannada journalist.
Sometime last year, Rahul Belagali, a reporter with Prajavani, a leading Kannada daily, met with one of the state leaders of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) at an ‘undisclosed’ location. The interview that was published in his newspaper was full of expected rhetoric from the Maoists. Statements like — ‘The Maoists will continue their struggle’, and the ‘Indian democracy is flawed’ are now cliché. Not too many people paid attention to the interview — it offered no new political insight, neither provided new information. Until now.
Perhaps in the light of recent events, the Shimoga police issued two notices to Belagali, the first one as recently as on April 8, citing the interview and asking Belagali to appear before them and reveal his sources. The police wanted to ascertain information about a case registered in 2009 against a state Maoist leader. If Belagali did not accede, the police threatened action against him under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act of 1967.
The police sent a second notice to Belagali and this time to his Associate Editor, Padmaraj Dandavate. For Belagali, the second notice sounded alarm bells. It threatened to book him in four other cases — the Indian Arms Act, the Destruction of Government Property Act, the Explosives Act and the dreaded UAPA. Normally, the publisher of a newspaper accords protection to its reporters and holds up the fundamental rights of the media to protect its source. Unfortunately for Belagali, his publication did not stand up for him with all its strength. More interestingly, it did not appear to be interested in protecting the rights of the media. Instead it showed signs of wanting to ‘somehow get the matter settled’ and willingly become the fifth column of the government. That such a mighty media group was willing to let its reporter be threatened by the police is shocking, to say the least.
However, some human right activists and concerned journalists filed a complaint to the Editors Guild regarding the threats issued by the Karnataka Police to the two journalists. Rajdeep Sardesai, president of the guild, and Coomi Kapoor, the secretary general, have condemned the police action and said, “Professional ethics demand that mediapersons should protect their sources and not reveal their identities, when they request privacy. The confidentiality of a source is a well-established journalistic principle. Without such privilege, sources would not be willing to speak freely to the media, whose duty it is to report the facts fairly and objectively from all points of view to present a true picture to the public.’’
It is important to see the notices issued to Belagali in the context of the complaint filed against Arundhati Roy recently. A social worker from Chhattisgarh, Vishwajit Mitra, argued that Roy’s essay ‘Walking with the Comrades’ glorified the outlawed Maoists and sought to justify their activities. In his opinion, the essay and the photographs were liable to be viewed as an offence under the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act, 2005.
That Operation Green Hunt, the State’s war against the Maoists, has claimed the freedom of the press should sound as a wake up call to all journalists and people in the media.
(Tehelka, 7th May)
Source:http://www.countercurrents.org/lankesh090510.htm
09 May, 2010
Tehelka
The Central home minister P Chidambaram has often issued veiled threats to intellectuals who offer covert or overt support to the Maoists, whom the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has identified as the ‘biggest internal security threat to the country’ today. While Singh and Chidambaram have limited themselves to issuing threats, the top brass in the Karnataka Government has opted for direct action. The police of Shimoga district has issued a ‘threatening’ notice to a young Kannada journalist.
Sometime last year, Rahul Belagali, a reporter with Prajavani, a leading Kannada daily, met with one of the state leaders of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) at an ‘undisclosed’ location. The interview that was published in his newspaper was full of expected rhetoric from the Maoists. Statements like — ‘The Maoists will continue their struggle’, and the ‘Indian democracy is flawed’ are now cliché. Not too many people paid attention to the interview — it offered no new political insight, neither provided new information. Until now.
Perhaps in the light of recent events, the Shimoga police issued two notices to Belagali, the first one as recently as on April 8, citing the interview and asking Belagali to appear before them and reveal his sources. The police wanted to ascertain information about a case registered in 2009 against a state Maoist leader. If Belagali did not accede, the police threatened action against him under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act of 1967.
The police sent a second notice to Belagali and this time to his Associate Editor, Padmaraj Dandavate. For Belagali, the second notice sounded alarm bells. It threatened to book him in four other cases — the Indian Arms Act, the Destruction of Government Property Act, the Explosives Act and the dreaded UAPA. Normally, the publisher of a newspaper accords protection to its reporters and holds up the fundamental rights of the media to protect its source. Unfortunately for Belagali, his publication did not stand up for him with all its strength. More interestingly, it did not appear to be interested in protecting the rights of the media. Instead it showed signs of wanting to ‘somehow get the matter settled’ and willingly become the fifth column of the government. That such a mighty media group was willing to let its reporter be threatened by the police is shocking, to say the least.
However, some human right activists and concerned journalists filed a complaint to the Editors Guild regarding the threats issued by the Karnataka Police to the two journalists. Rajdeep Sardesai, president of the guild, and Coomi Kapoor, the secretary general, have condemned the police action and said, “Professional ethics demand that mediapersons should protect their sources and not reveal their identities, when they request privacy. The confidentiality of a source is a well-established journalistic principle. Without such privilege, sources would not be willing to speak freely to the media, whose duty it is to report the facts fairly and objectively from all points of view to present a true picture to the public.’’
It is important to see the notices issued to Belagali in the context of the complaint filed against Arundhati Roy recently. A social worker from Chhattisgarh, Vishwajit Mitra, argued that Roy’s essay ‘Walking with the Comrades’ glorified the outlawed Maoists and sought to justify their activities. In his opinion, the essay and the photographs were liable to be viewed as an offence under the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act, 2005.
That Operation Green Hunt, the State’s war against the Maoists, has claimed the freedom of the press should sound as a wake up call to all journalists and people in the media.
(Tehelka, 7th May)
Source:http://www.countercurrents.org/lankesh090510.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)