|HOME | NEWS | COMMENTARY | LIBERAL AGENDA|
|November 2, 1998||
How Readers responded to Vir Sanghvi's recent columnsDate sent: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 19:39:38 -0500
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Kachibhotla Rao)
Subject: Vir Sanghvi writes...
Well, this is one of the lengthiest pieces of crap I have ever read. Mr Sanghvi is comparing apples and oranges. I am quite surprised that he thinks owning an assault rifle is more serious than killing endangered species. Hello! Both are serious!!! What has the fact that Sanjay got away to do with Salman? I think this middle-class crap that our intellectuals started churning out is getting out of control. Every damn thing is somehow connected with the middle-class starting from the BJP becoming a viable option to nuclear bombs. I think the guilty needs to be punished. Period.
Also, what is this that the 'rich and the powerful get away with any thing in India' concept? Look around, buddy. It happens everywhere. Does the name O J Simpson mean anything to you?
Date sent: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 11:11:27 -0500
To begin with, both are rich guys who can dictate and control law. Sanjay Dutt suffered a little in jail because he was meddling with the religious feelings of a larger community. On the contrary, Salman did meddle with the feelings of the Bishnoi community, which is smaller. Sanjay Dutt's case involves national integrity while Salman's involve environmental awareness. You can see clearly here that many of us give a shit to environment. But not so to national integrity.
There are a lot of people who are rich, commit crimes and get away. Jayalalitha, who amassed a ton of public wealth when she was in power, and Laloo, who is doing the same now, are two examples. For me, they are all criminals. Only, they are lucky to be in India where they can do whatever they want and get away with the money they have.
Things are not going to change in India. Nothing is going to happen by writing columns about these people. In fact, they get some free publicity from this. It is a sorry state that people who write these columns know what is going on behind the scenes and doesn't have the guts to put it on paper. They know very well what's going to happen if they do so. So no point in talking about what we cannot do.
Date sent: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 12:35:45 -0500
I get the impression that you are sympathising with Sanjay Dutt's crime. You defend that by saying everyone sympathised with him. I disagree. I don't think any one who was a witness to the Bombay riots care even a little for Sanjay. May be you have met people who have not been witnesses to the riots.
The charges pressed against Sanjay were just not for merely possessing an AK-56 (I think it was AK-56 and not AK-47). May be the press or the corrupt government reported just this. But there were far more serious charges. You can come to know these from inside sources. The police knew much more. So he deserved what he got. He being a national superstar should have had thought a ten thousand times before indulging in such horrendous acts.
So please don't ever sympathise or feel sorry for Sanjay Dutt.
A rediff.com reader
Date sent: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 15:20:34 +0800
Great reading. Makes some very good points.
P B Krishnaswamy
Date sent: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 18:02:00 -0500 (EST)
I would like to know the basis of Mr Sanghvi's assertions about "public sympathy." I am surprised that he could make out the feelings of a vast population! Of course, the crime Sanjay was accused of is far more serious than what Salman is accused of. But I find it hard to believe that Sanjay is a naive person who did not know what a stock market is and that possessing an AK-47 is against the law . Anyway, (feigned) ignorance of the law is not a sufficient excuse for a crime. In your future articles, speak for yourself.
BTW, do you have any information on the status of the case against Sanjay?
The blast case hearings are still going on in Bombay. Sanjay Dutt is out on bail.
Date sent: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 16:05:02 -0600
It would be better if an article, instead of aiming to show off the author's power with the language, is written to the point. It's important that instead of leading the reader into wilderness, the article should present him the facts. The reader should be allowed to judge himself.
In a court of law all are equal. Why doesn't the media take note that if the crime was committed by an ordinary citizen, and not Salman, he would have been subjected to a different kind of a treatment. Would he be served food from a star-hotel? It's sad to see that the media these days is moulding itself into a source of entertainment rather than serving the purpose of upholding principles.
Date sent: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 13:32:02 -0600
Your perception of what the middle-class thinks about Sanjay is a bit different from reality. Many of us feel the law should take its course. But all the political parties and the system was busy finding Sanjay a way out. It was only the judge who was serious about the implementation of the law. Then the judge was promoted to make the way clear. Rarely has it happened that the CBI removes all charges against a person and requests the court to release him. While the system was purchased, the middle-class was looking on helplessly.
You are talking about using an assault rifle to protect a family! There are many legal ways of protecting your family. Sanjay's case only proved that the rules are for common people and rich people can buy automatic weapons to protect themselves.
A few rented road-dancers do not represent the middle-class. I don't see even a single article talking about the pain of the relatives of those who lost there lives in the bomb blast done thr' cross-border conspiracy.
Date sent: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:38:28 -0600
Vir Sanghvi's column reflects the exact feelings of the middle-class. We would like to watch closely what is going to happen with Salman. People should reject his films. That will be a punishment for him, even if he escapes the IPC.
Date sent: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 08:25:44 +0530
Thank you for an excellent article. Your point is well taken. Very nicely put.
The middle-class certainly wants justice to be done. But please, there are a lot among them who are concerned with wildlife. Don't lessen Salman's crime by saying "all that he has done is kill 2 endangered species and have them for dinner" with 3 damsels and a comedian cheering him along with a chote nawab. Please, all are equally guilty. If these fellas are proved guilty, then nothing short of a life sentence should be meted out to them to make an example that Indians value any life as much as our own. Give wildlife a chance.
Dr Mukesh Desai
Date sent: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:53:10
Dear Mr Sanghvi,
You do believe that "rape is murder" if not worse. I could have asked you a lot of questions, refuted you on a lot of points, but since all those points already exist in your mind, I just have only a small question to ask:
Do you think that, under all possible combination of circumstances, if a rape victim be given a chance to end "the trauma" she is going through -- do you think she would take the chance? And do you think this will hold true in "all" possible situations that exist in one's life (you know the reasons that compel you to live, which are actually one's love for life in disguise)?
And it is here that I think that the debate might get linked to some of the points that are often brought up in association with the debate going on around the globe on euthanasia.
|Tell us what you think of this column|
INFOTECH | TRAVEL | LIFE/STYLE | FREEDOM | FEEDBACK