Follow us:
POSTED BY Sundeep Dougal ON Jan 24, 2012 AT 23:55 IST ,  Edited At: Jan 25, 2012 03:55 IST

This will come as no newsflash to anyone who followed the story. Let's not put too fine a point on it: there was craven capitulation at Jaipur. Again.

After much plucking of flower petals about "will he-won't he" attend, the organisers finally pushed forward Rampratap Singh Diggi, owner of the Diggi palace, where the Jaipur Literary Festival was being held, to make an announcement:

“I have taken a decision not to allow the video link to take place on the advice of the Rajasthan police. There are lots of people who are averse to this video link. They are threatening violence. This is unfortunate. This is to safeguard you, my family, my children …”

Some of the immediate reactions are best reproduced from Twitter:

For trying to figure out who indeed is responsible for this sorry state of affairs, perhaps we need to finally acknowledge the other so far ignored elephant in the room and just need to listen to Salman Rushdie himself -- very much on video, talking to the very same person he would have talked to at the JLF, possibly fielding the very same questions, in addition of course to what his session was supposed to be all about: his book Midnight's Children

While the entire transcript of the NDTV interview with Salman Rushdie needs to be read and absorbed, I think the following, obvious as it is, and much repeated though it has been, needs to be highlighted in this:

It seems incredibly fishy to me and I feel a bit of a fool to have been taken in by it. But, obviously what we see today is, that had I come to Jaipur, the level of violence that that would have unleashed might well have been far too great for anybody to be safe. I was sent, by email, by the festival organizers, an email on which very senior Rajasthan Government officials were cc'd and the email was sent at their request, with their knowledge and approval. And what it told me was: first of all, it told me about the likelihood of protests such as the ones you've seen today. But it also told me specifically that they had received intelligence from Maharashtra that a Bombay Mafia Don had handed weapons and money to two hit men who were on their way to Jaipur to, as the email said, eliminate me. At the first instance I was not told the names of these people. So I wrote back and I said, "Look, if somebody is trying to kill me and you know who the name is then I deserve to know those names". So then they sent me three names. I have my own contacts in Bombay, through journalist friends, of people who know and investigate and write about D-Company and the Bombay underworld in general. I sent these names to them and said "Could you please tell me if these names make any sense to you and who they might be?" One of the names, this guy Sakib Nachan I think, who was identified as a member of that banned group SIMI, and obviously is a person with a violent history, but no known contacts to the Bombay underworld. The other two underworld names were frankly ones that everybody who responded to these emails said they'd never heard them. And afterwards I read in the Indian press Bombay Police officials saying that the names were funny and had made them laugh. These were non-existent names. So, I had been told that a Mafia Don, who turned out not to be a Mafia Don, had given money and weapons to people who turned out not even to exist. This was the line I was fed. Subsequently, the Bombay intelligence people denied it, the central intelligence people in Delhi denied it, even bits of the Rajasthan Police denied that they knew anything about it. But yet I was sent this, at the request of, and with the approval of and knowledge of, senior Rajasthan Government officials. Now that's a very, very poor state of affairs.

NDTV: So, essentially, Salman, it's your feeling that the entire threat to you was either exaggerated or fabricated.

Salman Rushdie: Well, the threat of assassination was either exaggerated or fabricated. And my view is that it was probably fabricated. The threat that did exist was the threat to the festival grounds of the sort that we have seen today. I think for that you have to blame, obviously, the Muslim groups that were so unscrupulous, and whose idea of free speech is that they are the only ones entitled to it. Anyone else, who they disagree with, wishes to open his mouth, they will try and stop that mouth. That's what we call tyranny. It's much worse than censorship because it comes with the threat of violence. That threat was there. There is no question. And you've seen some of the result of it today. It would have been, obviously, bigger had I been there is person. That would have been a threat to everyone at the festival.

NDTV:
What made you eventually decide to not come? Is it because you felt that it is not fair to put the entire fest through what you seem to be told? Is it that you didn't think it was worth it or did you at some level instinctively feel that "I don't fully buy what I'm being told"?

Salman Rushdie:
Yes. I thought the whole thing was fantastically fishy. I think that from the moment, the way in which the Congress Party, wherever the Congress Party led government, or in Rajasthan, or wherever; the way in which Congress officials, and many other party officials of other parties, all stated their opposition to my coming, I felt quite clear that some way would be found to prevent me from coming. And in the end, sadly it was.

Read the full transcript: I'm returning to India, deal with it - Salman Rushdie to NDTV 

POSTED BY Sundeep Dougal ON Jan 24, 2012 AT 23:55 IST ,  Edited At: Jan 25, 2012 03:55 IST
Follow us on Twitter for all updates, like us on Facebook for important and fun stuff
TRANSLATE INTO:


Post a Comment
Share your thoughts
You are not logged in, please log in or register
Must See
Daily Mail
Digression
5/D-43
Jan 27, 2012
05:06 AM

"They insult their prophet everyday by their gangsterism."  Amit

That's politically correct nonsense. If you read the life of Muhammad, you will see that he killed poets and authors who opposed him. The case of Asma bint Marwan is just one example:

"Asma was a poetess who belonged to a tribe of Medinan pagans, and whose husband was named Yazid b. Zayd. She composed a poem blaming the Medinan pagans for obeying a stranger (Muhammad) and for not taking the initiative to attack him by surprise. When the Allah-inspired prophet heard what she had said, he asked, "Who will rid me of Marwan’s daughter?" A member of her husband’s tribe volunteered and crept into her house that night. She had five children, and the youngest was sleeping at her breast. The assassin gently removed the child, drew his sword, and plunged it into her, killing her in her sleep."  Source: Ibn Ishaq, pp. 675-76 / 995-96.

Google "Umm Qirfa" for another example. I can understand why Muslims try to cover these things up but I don't understand why others feel the need to join them in doing this.

Fedup Indian
Hyderabad, India
4/D-40
Jan 26, 2012
06:27 AM

Outlook could make a beggining by understanding the REAL meaning of the word 'credibility', and allow its male readers to express their opinions without reservations too.

Male Unblocked
Chennai, India
3/D-19
Jan 26, 2012
01:58 AM

State Congress spokesperson Satyendra Raghav for the first time made party's stand official on January 24: "Yes, Congress never wanted that Rushdie should come."

And Congress says that they had nothing to do with it even now?

Ajit Tendulkar
Seattle, United States
2/D-37
Jan 25, 2012
11:01 AM

Poor fellow--still holding on to the straws that only Deobandi jackasses were behind this. When the VC of Jamia can go on to support the ban, I know where the fault lies. I am glad to see the anger and froth over such non issue like Salman's visit. I wish they had shown similar anger when Anna was being bullied by the same rascals. Truth is: Sachar commission or not, Muslims are their greatest enemy. They insult their prophet everyday by their gangsterism.

Amit
Tucson, United States
1/D-24
Jan 25, 2012
07:27 AM

Barkha Dutt's video interview with Salman Rushdie is good. He says that he is not the real enemy of Islam. The real enemies of Islam are the mullahs of Deoband who started the protest against his visit. I fully agree with him. He comes out with an attack on Deobandi's regressive teachings..  He also says that the fact that M.F.Husain was "driven" out of India was an outrage. He says he is determined to return to India. Worth a listen!

Anwaar
Dallas, United States
Order by
Order by
Short Takes
recent tags
1984 Anti-Sikh Riots
AAP: Aam Aadmi Party
Amitabh Bachchan
Arvind Kejriwal
BJP
Delhi - New Delhi
Govinda
Internet
Lok Sabha Elections
Lucknow
Music
Narendra Modi
Uttar Pradesh
Youtube
 
bloggers
A. Sanzgiri
Boria Majumdar
Buzz
Dr Mohammad Taqi
Freya Dasgupta
G. Rajaraman
K.V. Bapa Rao
Maheshwer Peri
Namrata Joshi
News Ed
Omar Ali
Our Readers Write Back
Prarthna Gahilote
Shefalee Vasudev
Sundeep Dougal
ARCHIVES
Go
SMTWTFS
12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930
recent comments


ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIBE | ADVERTISING RATES | COPYRIGHT & DISCLAIMER | COMMENTS POLICY

OUTLOOK TOPICS:    a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z  0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9   
Or just type in a few initial letters of a topic: