FEATURE
‘I DIDN’T MEAN’ ESCAPIST SYNDROME
People in media glare, if not in public life, have a tendency to be little oversmart. Being in the limelight gives them a little aura, at least that is what they think. Sometime, they mouth ‘pearls of wisdom’ unsolicited and then walk into avoidable tricky situations. Caught in the wrong foot, they mouth inanities justifying some, denying some other statements, usually ending into saying "I am being quoted out of context and I didn’t mean what they (the aggrieved) think. Media is twisting the truth to hurt my reputation etc. etc."
One such episode was the one involving Salman Khan. Probably all 24x7 T.V. viewers and print media reading public are privy to this incident. This Salman Khan, the Bollywood actor, gave an interview to a Pakistani T.V. Channel called Express T.V. Why in the first place Pakistani T.V. was interested in seeking the views of someone like Salman Khan is not known. Salman Khan has reportedly remarked "Too much hype has been created around the 26/11 attacks, because elite people were targeted. Attacks have happened in trains and small towns too, but no one talked about it so much". This statement itself is totally unwarranted, but he added another ‘wise’ but truly stupid remark to a good measure. He is reported to have stated "Everybody knows that the Pakistani government was not behind it and it was a terrorist attack. Our security had failed. We have had lot of attacks earlier and all of them were not from Pakistan. They were from within."
At the outset itself, it can be said that the statement of this Salman Khan is not merely preposterous but highly irresponsible. He simply has no locus-standy to discuss or dismiss the Pakistani role, either in the 26/11 attack or any other attack.
Understandably there was an avalanche of outpouring from across the socio-political spectrum. Special Public Prosecutor Ujwal Nikam remarked the Khan barb as ‘very childish’.
And as expected, smarting under intense vitriolic attack, Khan reportedly apologised, but insisted, that his statements were twisted and that he "did not mean to hurt any body’s sentiments".
Khan’s father and brother reportedly came to his defence. Both mouthed the same cliché "He had no intention to hurt anyone".
Here there are some very important nationally relevant questions. First of all one should never give interview to Pakistani media. They do not come here as friends, they come here with an agenda. Of course most media men and women work towards an agenda, but one must be extremely careful while dealing with Pak media, if one can’t refuse outright, to talk to them. Besides, in a situation that we have in India, if you are a Muslim and talking to Pakis, there can be added problem, for obvious reasons, to explain to interested parties, about your innocence.
Another very important and very sensitive issue is the statement exonerating Pakistani governments complicity in the 26/11. This was patently wrong. It was a ‘foot in the mouth’ statement. It was an amateurish, insensitive and completely avoidable barb, we could have lived without. Of course his father Salim Khan was more circumspect and has admitted that his son should not have said what he said and should apologise. But Salman’s brother was less reticent. He has reportedly stated that "whatever he said was just his opinion. It is necessary to understand the intent with which Salman made such remarks and not create a hue and cry." In this statement, there is an air of assertiveness, and it is such assertiveness that leads to trouble. Salman’s brother, one Ayub Khan, reportedly an actor-producer, is a typical brash, whose utterances has the potential to cause unease. It is exactly such attitudes that lead to response by Shiv Sena terming the Salman remark as ‘anti national’.
Imagine somebody saying something similar in Pakistan, how would his people and government have reacted, and what if he was a Hindu or a Christian. What fate would befall him? In India, except some raised eyebrows, he was not hauled up by the authorities. In fact Chief Minister Chawan has reportedly admitted to his ignorance of Salman Khan’s interview with a Pak TV Channel. That’s how people like Arbaz Khan take things for granted.
Here it is very pertinent to quote the latest book by journalist Bob Woodward of ‘Watergate’ expose fame. In his latest work "Obama’s Wars’, he has exposed comprehensively the role of ISI of Pakistan. The book quotes the statement of ISI chief Ahmed Shuja Pasha telling CIA that "the 26/11 assault on Mumbai was the handiwork of ‘rogue’ ISI elements". This itself was a kind of admission. Since those in terrorist business are indeed rogues. But Woodward rubbishes this Pasha, the ISI chief. He says, on examination, the CIA found Pasha’s claim wrong. According to him, ‘the ISI was directly involved in the planning, training and implementation of Mumbai attack’. Thus Woodward fully endorses what the
Indian authorities have claimed all along about the insidious ISI hand in the Mumbai attack. The book also quotes Obama talking about Taliban and LeT activities, where he stated that "the cancer indeed is in Pakistan".
Thus our Indian Muslim brethren should understand that Pakistan cannot be trusted and taken on the face value. So before you tried to be nice to them, watch your words and steps, you may walk into an irretrievable situation. For all 63 years Pakistan has only tried to hurt India, despite India’s honest attempts at improving bilateral relations.
Another to hit the head lines were the admission of former Pak ruler Pervez Musharaff, who while talking to the media admitted to the training of jehadies in Pakistan to foment trouble in India, and accepted "Pakistan exported terror". He was only confirming, what India always accused Pakistan, for its active support to terror outfits. And suddenly he has turned turtle. In a volte-face he is reported to have said "I am not that naïve to pass such a comment. There is no question of army or ISI indulging in such a thing". Before him it was Asif Ali Zardari who admitted to the media similar happenings in Pakistani army and ISI against India, only to retreat under attack from army and ISI.
Here both Musharaf and Zardari are senior Pakistani politicians and are responsible people. What they say matters. But who is Salman Khan? He is nobody to give clean chit to Pakistan, rightly or wrongly. His arena is cinema and hence should keep to that.
People in media glare, if not in public life, have a tendency to be little oversmart. Being in the limelight gives them a little aura, at least that is what they think. Sometime, they mouth ‘pearls of wisdom’ unsolicited and then walk into avoidable tricky situations. Caught in the wrong foot, they mouth inanities justifying some, denying some other statements, usually ending into saying "I am being quoted out of context and I didn’t mean what they (the aggrieved) think. Media is twisting the truth to hurt my reputation etc. etc."
One such episode was the one involving Salman Khan. Probably all 24x7 T.V. viewers and print media reading public are privy to this incident. This Salman Khan, the Bollywood actor, gave an interview to a Pakistani T.V. Channel called Express T.V. Why in the first place Pakistani T.V. was interested in seeking the views of someone like Salman Khan is not known. Salman Khan has reportedly remarked "Too much hype has been created around the 26/11 attacks, because elite people were targeted. Attacks have happened in trains and small towns too, but no one talked about it so much". This statement itself is totally unwarranted, but he added another ‘wise’ but truly stupid remark to a good measure. He is reported to have stated "Everybody knows that the Pakistani government was not behind it and it was a terrorist attack. Our security had failed. We have had lot of attacks earlier and all of them were not from Pakistan. They were from within."
At the outset itself, it can be said that the statement of this Salman Khan is not merely preposterous but highly irresponsible. He simply has no locus-standy to discuss or dismiss the Pakistani role, either in the 26/11 attack or any other attack.
Understandably there was an avalanche of outpouring from across the socio-political spectrum. Special Public Prosecutor Ujwal Nikam remarked the Khan barb as ‘very childish’.
And as expected, smarting under intense vitriolic attack, Khan reportedly apologised, but insisted, that his statements were twisted and that he "did not mean to hurt any body’s sentiments".
Khan’s father and brother reportedly came to his defence. Both mouthed the same cliché "He had no intention to hurt anyone".
Here there are some very important nationally relevant questions. First of all one should never give interview to Pakistani media. They do not come here as friends, they come here with an agenda. Of course most media men and women work towards an agenda, but one must be extremely careful while dealing with Pak media, if one can’t refuse outright, to talk to them. Besides, in a situation that we have in India, if you are a Muslim and talking to Pakis, there can be added problem, for obvious reasons, to explain to interested parties, about your innocence.
Another very important and very sensitive issue is the statement exonerating Pakistani governments complicity in the 26/11. This was patently wrong. It was a ‘foot in the mouth’ statement. It was an amateurish, insensitive and completely avoidable barb, we could have lived without. Of course his father Salim Khan was more circumspect and has admitted that his son should not have said what he said and should apologise. But Salman’s brother was less reticent. He has reportedly stated that "whatever he said was just his opinion. It is necessary to understand the intent with which Salman made such remarks and not create a hue and cry." In this statement, there is an air of assertiveness, and it is such assertiveness that leads to trouble. Salman’s brother, one Ayub Khan, reportedly an actor-producer, is a typical brash, whose utterances has the potential to cause unease. It is exactly such attitudes that lead to response by Shiv Sena terming the Salman remark as ‘anti national’.
Imagine somebody saying something similar in Pakistan, how would his people and government have reacted, and what if he was a Hindu or a Christian. What fate would befall him? In India, except some raised eyebrows, he was not hauled up by the authorities. In fact Chief Minister Chawan has reportedly admitted to his ignorance of Salman Khan’s interview with a Pak TV Channel. That’s how people like Arbaz Khan take things for granted.
Here it is very pertinent to quote the latest book by journalist Bob Woodward of ‘Watergate’ expose fame. In his latest work "Obama’s Wars’, he has exposed comprehensively the role of ISI of Pakistan. The book quotes the statement of ISI chief Ahmed Shuja Pasha telling CIA that "the 26/11 assault on Mumbai was the handiwork of ‘rogue’ ISI elements". This itself was a kind of admission. Since those in terrorist business are indeed rogues. But Woodward rubbishes this Pasha, the ISI chief. He says, on examination, the CIA found Pasha’s claim wrong. According to him, ‘the ISI was directly involved in the planning, training and implementation of Mumbai attack’. Thus Woodward fully endorses what the
Indian authorities have claimed all along about the insidious ISI hand in the Mumbai attack. The book also quotes Obama talking about Taliban and LeT activities, where he stated that "the cancer indeed is in Pakistan".
Thus our Indian Muslim brethren should understand that Pakistan cannot be trusted and taken on the face value. So before you tried to be nice to them, watch your words and steps, you may walk into an irretrievable situation. For all 63 years Pakistan has only tried to hurt India, despite India’s honest attempts at improving bilateral relations.
Another to hit the head lines were the admission of former Pak ruler Pervez Musharaff, who while talking to the media admitted to the training of jehadies in Pakistan to foment trouble in India, and accepted "Pakistan exported terror". He was only confirming, what India always accused Pakistan, for its active support to terror outfits. And suddenly he has turned turtle. In a volte-face he is reported to have said "I am not that naïve to pass such a comment. There is no question of army or ISI indulging in such a thing". Before him it was Asif Ali Zardari who admitted to the media similar happenings in Pakistani army and ISI against India, only to retreat under attack from army and ISI.
Here both Musharaf and Zardari are senior Pakistani politicians and are responsible people. What they say matters. But who is Salman Khan? He is nobody to give clean chit to Pakistan, rightly or wrongly. His arena is cinema and hence should keep to that.
Comments