India That Is Bharat
In the considered opinion of secular Satiricus there is only one type of murderous terrorism, and that is Hindu terrorism. Any other terrorist killing is in fact just a political activity. So it was in the fitness of all things secular that the learned judges of a Kolkata court decreed the other day that Maoists in jail will henceforth be entitled to privileged treatment, such as independent accommodation, home-cooked food, access to newspapers and books, and meeting with not only their near and dear ones but also advocates and lawyers. Why? Because their violence, however violent, is not for personal gain. In the particular case with the court, the Maoist prisoners on whom this status has been bestowed include the chief of the CPM’s technical committee for arms manufacture and the in-charge of the CPM’s rocket-launcher factories.
See? Guns and rockets are political instruments, and if those who are killed with them are unable to understand this important aspect of getting killed, what can the poor killers do about it? Satiricus is sorry to see that the run-of-the-mill anti-Maoist-in-the-street is so stupid that he (or she, or it, in the case a child) does not discern the definitive distinction between getting killed and getting murdered. Take, for instance, this recent case of Kerala. Only the other day a leader of the state CPM (some anti-communist idiots say the initials stand for Communist Party of Murderers) most helpfully described in detail how his party kills its “political enemies”. He narrated in an open speech how a taluka unit of the party had drawn up a regular list of over a dozen such enemies to be killed, out of whom one was shot to death, another stabbed to death, and yet another beaten to death. Were these murders? Of course not. It was a purely political activity, which the Kerala CPM has been diligently carrying on for 30 years. Thus, whether it is Kerala or it is Kolkata, the CPM never murders, it only kills.
What a relief! Now timid anti-Red Satiricus need not go into a blue funk. He can rest assured that in spite of being a pernicious political enemy he will never be murdered. At the most he will be killed. But in that case what type of getting killed would Satiricus prefer? Would he prefer to be killed with a gun manufactured by the CPM in West Bengal, or would he opt for the triple technique of termination popular in Kerala? Frankly he is not sure. Will some knowledgeable CPM leader kindly explain to him the difference between getting killed with a bullet in the chest, a knife in the back or a bludgeon on the head?
This attractive variety in fashions in getting killed apart, there is another important aspect to this mortal matter. It is this: Can we sterling secularists indulge in an invidious distinction between Maoists and Muslims in this respect? If one can conduct this legal political activity, why can’t the other? True, Afzal Guru has been rewarded with a long lease of life despite being sentenced years ago to be hanged till death; but why, oh why, has the acceptance of his mercy petition been delayed so inhumanly inordinately? Why, what he did was not only a political activity; it was actually a parliamentary activity. Then again, why is the Maharashtra government doubly secular because run by two Congresses so deadly against Kasab’s mercy plea although he is just a political killer and not a mass murderer?
This can unfortunately only mean that our political establishment’s commitment to this particular political activity is unhappily half-hearted. Consequently the security establishment is sadly suffering from communal confusion worse confounded. For instance, a senior official of a national security agency was silly enough to say, “Even a Hafiz Saeed does not spread violence for personal gains and fights for an ideology and a particular political order; should he be granted the same privilege?” Satiricus’s answer is: No, he “should” not he “must”. In fact, as Janab Saeed has already promised us that he is going to visit Kashmir, the least our political powers that be can do is to erect a welcome arch for him when he comes from Islamabad in Pakistan to the ‘Islamabad’ university in Srinagar. After all, he is the master organiser of mass killings, not mass murders. And he will come as the rightful representative of a political state reputedly called “terroristan”, where political killings of secular infidels is a fundamental part of foreign policy. Even otherwise Saeed should be not only doubly but triply welcome, for has he not publicly assured us that he wants to create three Islamistans out of ex-Hindustan? Could there be a more glorious consummation of Indian secularism?