Recent

Say Sorry To Shah Rukh Khan

Shah Rukh Khan’s story embodies the Great Indian Dream. Bring it on Shah Rukh, we want to hear more.

Shah Rukh Khan

There is a song in Chak De! India that has a very unexpected effect on me.

It happened first during a car journey. I was travelling to the Tees Hazari District courts with my 3-year-old daughter by my side. We were going to provide company to a friend who was fighting a bitter custody case for her daughter in the family court. I was already feeling very emotional. Both parents have been my friends and I have loved them dearly. Now I was being forced to choose a side in public. It was terrible to watch my friend, the father of the child, helplessly from a distance without being able to reach out.

The songs from Chak De! India were playing in the car as we drove from Noida towards north Delhi.

teeja tera rang tha main toh – 2
jiyaan tere dhang se main toh,
tu hi tha maula tu hi aan,

maula mere le le meri jaan…

Just like that tears started rolling down my eyes. I didn’t understand why. We reached the court and spent the day trying to negotiate the bewildering and aggressive justice system. Later in the day, the song played on the car stereo again. I felt the pangs again. Tears came again.

I have lived my life coated in your colours 
I have lived my life in the way you wanted me to,
You were my God, you were my pride.
Oh my God, take my life, if you want,
Oh my Maula, take my life if you want.

What we have with each other, no one else can understand,
It is with you that I fight, It is with you that I want to make peace. 
(tujhse hi roothna, tujhe hi manana).

Who is this person, I thought? What memory were these words stirring? Who is it that I feel misunderstood by? Who do I want to make peace with? It took a while for the answers to emerge in my mind.

My parents are Punjabis. My mother was born in Lahore, a few years before Partition. She grew up in Amritsar, living close to the Golden Temple. For her, going to the temple means going to a gurdwara. Her Hanuman Chalisa lies next to her Sukhmani Sahib. There’s plenty of space.

When we would travel from our childhood home in Ranchi to visit family in Delhi and Punjab, we were called Biharis. “Here come the rice-eating Biharis with their ek tho, do tho, teen tho”, my mami would say. So we were Hindu-Sikh-Biharis.

When I grew up and first visited Lahore, I tried to prepare for a visit to a “Muslim” culture. I was amazed to find myself in a vibrant Punjab, where I discovered my own urban Punjabi identity for the first time. Everyone spoke like my Mamajis. But of course! My uncles had been Lahoris. I became a Hindu-Sikh-Bihari-Punjabi.

In Lahore, we had a taxi driver called Javed. He would pick us up from The Pearl Continental, admire our TV equipment and watch us interview very important people. He took me to the best eateries, told me about his romances and of course shared his political insight on the state of the subcontinent. When it was time for us to return, Javed gave me some advice for my future.

“Be careful who you marry”, he said to me, “most men who woo you will probably do it for your money. Besides, I hear those Indian men beat their wives. Take care of yourself.”

I laughed out loud. The shock of this statement stayed with me for a long time. Especially because it coughed up the latent bias that I had grown up with: that most Muslim men ill-treat their wives. We think we know it all till we discover that most of our knowledge is just a truckload of biases. Just another way of hating the “other” to avoid focus on the trouble within.

My husband is a Muslim from Uttar Pradesh and our children are Hindu-Muslim-Punjabi-UP Delhi kids. My grandfather speaks Punjabi with an Urdu accent. He reads the Gita in Urdu everyday. My father-in-law recites Persian poetry. My father speaks Hindi with a Punjabi accent and our children speak English with a Walt Disney accent. In an individual way this feels unique, but actually there is nothing extraordinary about it.

Our syncretic roots combined with the choices we make give all of us a multi-dimensional identity that is an everyday fact of our lives. To lead a creative life, we often make the critical choice to not belong. To not conform to the dominant value system.

Being singled out and facing discrimination for one or many of these identities is an equally common experience. Some of us deal with it by denying it, others choose to express and share. Some confront it, others hide till it is safe to come out. One doesn’t need to be uprooted to know what homelessness feels like.

Of course, there is always the inevitable longing to belong. To belong in equal sum both to our private world – and to the public one, outside.

In a recently published essay on his life, Shah Rukh Khan, the superstar-actor has written:

“I sometimes become the inadvertent object of political leaders who choose to make me a symbol of all that they think is wrong and unpatriotic about Muslims in India. I have been accused of bearing allegiance to our neighbouring nation rather than my own country. This, even though I am an Indian whose father fought for the freedom of India.”

In the same essay he writes about the Pathan identity he has inherited from his parents, his marriage to Gauri, who is a Hindu and how he answers the questions his children ask him about their identity. He sings them a song that at its core means “Be a good human being, the rest will sort itself out”.

The abusive backlash on him started with one article where the writer, Venky Vembu, accused him of being ungrateful and thankless. He uses words like mediocre and boorish to describe the actor. “So, grow up, Shah Rukh, and learn to take it on the chin like a man”, he writes. “Don’t bite the hand that fed you – and made you who you are – by running off to an overseas publication and crying your heart out, thereby providing the space for low-life terrorists like Hafiz Saeed to take potshots at India.”

In essence, he implies, if you talk openly about being a Muslim in India, we will mock you and show you up as a traitor. Instead of dismissing and standing up to terrorists who don’t need a valid excuse to take pot-shots, we will turn our venom towards our own. We are clearly not man enough to allow for differences to be expressed.

This shockingly boorish analysis brought back the song from Chak De! India to my mind. My brain strained itself to understand my emotional response to it. Who is this person in my life whose approval was so important to me? Who was I willing to die for?

“I have lived my life coated in your colours 
I have lived my life in the way you wanted me to…”

The answers came together like pieces of a puzzle. The words evoke the struggle to belong to one’s homeland. To one’s society and culture. To authority figures who may have rejected us for the choices we make. For being who we are.

We demand to be independent and we insist on being accepted. This is how it works in the best relationships. We adapt to the way of life around us, yet often we are painfully singled out and ridiculed for that which makes us unique.

In the film, Chak De! India, Shah Rukh Khan plays Kabir Khan, the captain of the Indian hockey team. When he fails to score a goal with a penalty stroke, he is accused of having sold out to Pakistan to deliberately make India lose in the World Cup final against them. In the film, the media uses a photograph of Kabir Khan accepting a handshake from the captain of the Pakistan hockey team to label him a traitor to the country. The captain’s hockey career is over and he is forced by his neighbours to move out of his ancestral home. Singled out for being a Khan.

In a statement to the press clarifying what he had written for Outlook’s Turning Point, Shah Rukh Khan has said, “I am an actor and maybe I should just stick to stuff that all of you expect me to have a viewpoint on. The rest of it…maybe I don’t have the right kind of media atmosphere to comment on. So I will refrain from it”.

That’s not fair at all. Come on, Shah Rukh Khan, tell us more stories. Speak from your heart. Bullies are cowards, their words are empty shells.

When confronted on a show called The Social Network on NDTV, the opinion writer, Venky Vembu, has admitted that when he had written his opinion on Shah Rukh Khan’s essay, he had not even read the entire piece written by him. He says it as if to defend himself, but it shows him up as worse than before. When and how did these spaces get created in the media? Commenting before reading?

Life is complex. Stories are multi-faceted. The movies try to simplify narratives, but real life doesn’t need that treatment. Each of us has the power to resurrect the lost parts of ourselves with our imagination. We also have the power to redeem ourselves and undo some of the hurt we cause. Start by saying “Sorry”.

Contact Natasha Badhwar

 

Image by: Swarnabha Banerjee

Image Source: [http://www.flickr.com/photos/13019352@N03/2385012731/]

 

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (137 votes, average: 3.58 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...

 

More from Natasha Badhwar


  • http://twitter.com/EasyDestination EasyDestination.Net

    I don’t think SRK said anything wrong. A lot what has been said in media was never actually said by him. These things happen when media starts reading between the lines and make things up. There is no doubt that SRK has faced trouble and his nationality was questioned when he vouched for Pakistani players.

    I have seen a lot of other people advocating for Pakistani singers, writers, players, but they are not called Pakistani while SRK was immediately labeled as Pakistani. This I believe is wrong.

  • http://twitter.com/iamharshvasani Harsh Vasani

    Thank you for this beautiful write up. Did evoke emotions.

  • Abhinav

    What is with all the current and ex Ndtv folks? All of them seem to have a cut throat competition among themselves to become the drawing room spoc for SRK. In this case, the journo quotes a movie and does KooChiKooChiKoo. That movie itself was based on the former Hockey player Mir Ranjan Negi and Khan Saheb used the plot to evoke sympathies.

    Also, as far as his article is concerned, its mostly filled with the rants about him not getting a red carpet at a US airport. Obviously, someone who is used to of such pampering in India, and who sees Robert Vadra getting special treatment for letting his family get killed by his in-laws, wouldn’t understand the security procedures of US of A. Crying foul over controversies isn’t something SRK should do, as he invites it more often than not. Who asked him to dance at a Geo TV event on the eve of 26/11? Who asked him to make unnecessary comments over the IPL issue just to ensure that his movies keep selling across the border? Wasn’t he aware that before ranting “don’t mix politics with sports” that South Africa was banned from all international sports events for the political tool called “Apartheid” or wasn’t he aware that US had boycotted the Summer Olympics Moscow 1980 over Soviet invasion of Afghanistan? or the retaliation by the 14 countries of Eastern bloc led by Soviet Union boycotting Los Angeles 1984? Then why Pakistan needs to be given special treatment for its state/non-state actors pillaging over 200 Indians in Mumbai?

    //Come on, Shah Rukh Khan, tell us more stories. Speak from your heart. Bullies are cowards, their words are empty shells.//

    Apparently, she implies he should come to Ndtv for an exclusive interview or let her make an independent film on him over the issue. Yes, Bullies are cowards, they keep imposing garbage on us from their news studios and insult our intelligence.

    //Start by saying “Sorry”.//

    So, you have now given him the clean chit and every random person must apologize now, even the squirrels and parakeets. How about starting with an apology from Ndtv to NaMo over 11 years of slander, character assassination, mud slinging, debauchery, hit job (one falls short of verbs and adjectives to describe that), especially when SC appointed SIT has given him a clean chit (A bit out of context but related to “Say sorry to SRK” tirade).

    • Nitin

      We have lots of people like yours in our country India who don’t want peace at all in our nation. Fights are for the fronts, don’t bring this in our society. Grow up.

      • Abhinav

        During the 1965 war, Lal Bahadur Shastri appealed to the Indian citizens to skip one meal a day to save ration which could be sent to the forces. Every section of society has a responsibility to fight a war imposed on a nation. I am sure you would have Shastri to grow up too. But then you are entitled to your opinion just as I am. Deal with it.

        • Nitin

          Your comments are not relative with this incident. Seriously you are in your own world & may be trying to create the same atmosphere again which was in 1965. But this time on a nonsense issue. Think buddy about the severe issues in our country which are stopping it to go further.

          • Satyam Sharma

            Look up “analogy” in the dictionary.

          • Nitin

            All of you Who are trying to spread negativity in our country are pathetic.

          • Aware Indian

            Yep, so lets just forget that bad things exist (and wish them away) and everything will be hunky dory, right?

          • Guest

            Read the article first then do questions. Come on

          • Nitin

            Read the article first & then ask questions

    • Sameera

      Is it me or is this response really so nonsensical? May be I should read it in morning. Perhaps the words would stop jumping and make some sense?!Believe you me, I havent even started my evening yet :P Or may be Mr.Abhinav WordMan here can stop ranting and start stating the point. Throwing in Stats and Facts put together to suit your context doesnt necessarily make a point.

      • Abhinav

        Ignoring the stats and facts or calling it nonsensical doesn’t help. SRK does act in an irresponsible manner and later cries foul in the la la land of Ndtv. However, you are free to reject the stats, I don’t mind. Vatican took 350 years to apologize to Galileo and 150 years to agree with Darwin, I won’t lose sleep over being labeled as anything :)

      • aam aadmi

        ROFL, wait a sec, did this imbecile really just write “Throwing in Stats and Facts put together to suit your context doesnt necessarily make a point” ??!!!1 ha ha ha hah!!!!

        yep, in left-lib lalaland, “throwing in” STATS and FACTS that SUIT THE CONTEXT …. actually do NOT make the point !!!!!! ha hah ha ha hahah…..what actually makes a point, evidently, is wishy washy nonsensical factless subjective opinion not backed by any statistical evidence …. yep, THAT ladies and gentlemen, is leftist liberalism for you !!!

        OMG…. thanks for that early sunday morning dose of laughter, Sameera! much appreciated !!

        • Sameera

          While you are at it, please dont pee in your pants. Just a subjective opinion without actual factual statistics like yours. Whoops! Mango Man has gone bananas!

          • aam aadmi

            errmm.. not sure about the kind of circles you belong to, but i’m not exactly in the habit of “peeing in my pants” while LAUGHING, thank you! :D

            and “mango man has gone bananas”….. you macaulayputras never learn, do you??? what a shock you all are in for… ha ha hah!

    • Guest

      dude grow up , during that ipl -pak players controversy amtabh bachchan ,aamir khan , kapil dev also said that pak players shd have been selected but only srk was targetted ,why ?? and amitabh bachchan performed with pak artists during aman ki asha but one one targetted him ,why ??

      • Abhinav

        Atithi Mahashay: That’s because SRK ranted over how Pak players weren’t selected while being the owner of one of the franchises. IPL governing body itself clarified that it is at the discretion of the franchises whether to play them or not, the claim which was echoed by Rajasthan Royals. Why didn’t the Badshah babu opted for the green shirts himself? Please find me an answer and help me in growing up. Shall be grateful.

    • Satyam Sharma

      Superb, factual, logical and hardhitting points Abhinav! No wonder the lib-lefties have got their panties in a bunch below. :-)

      SRK has made a nice little cottage industry out of his minorityist identity politics and milking his imagined victimhood (already one movie released, may be more in the pipeline, LOL!) and now intellectually dishonest lib-lefty frauds come to his rescue demanding “apologies” on his behalf!

      Those who don’t get the perfectly valid and justified point of using sporting ties to make international political points are ignorant about world history, plain and simple:

      1. South Africa’s complete sporting boycott during Apartheid era is well known. (Not just on the cricket field, but across all sports.) In cricket, they were boycotted starting 1948. Anybody who attempted “rogue tours” of that country was globally shamed and pilloried for having given in to the temptation of money against the higher principles of fighting injustice. South Africa were expelled from the International Olympic Committee in 1970 and from FIFA in 1963.

      2. The closest India ever came to lifting the Davis Cup (highest trophy in men’s team lawn tennis) was in 1974. We were in the final with South Africa, but REFUSED to play, with South Africa becoming the champions by default. What happened next year? The world tennis fraternity boycotted South Africa as a whole. THIS is called principled international politics, and leading by example.

      3. 1980 Moscow Olympics were boycotted by the entire western bloc led by the US, and the 1984 LA Olympics were boycotted by the entire eastern bloc, led by the erstwhile USSR.

      Everybody, do yourselves a favour and read the TOI article “The right, and wrong, way to deal with Pakistan” by Minhaz Merchant (google for it).

      Finally:

      “So, you have now given him the clean chit and every random person must apologize now, even the squirrels and parakeets. How about starting with an apology from Ndtv to NaMo over 11 years of slander, character assassination, mud slinging, debauchery, hit job (one falls short of verbs and adjectives to describe that), especially when SC appointed SIT has given him a clean chit (A bit out of context but related to “Say sorry to SRK” tirade).”

      Point!

  • Riyaz

    How convenient. The partisanship really beseechs me. For some NaMo is this uber cool, no nonsense, top of the world super human. For others he is garbage, good to maul, and for some worthy of nothing short but murder. Nothing in this world I guess is so.

    Give the writer credit for what she has wonderfully written to promote peace and pluralism. These are the values that will take the world forward.

  • Skeptic

    Chak De India was based on the story of Mir Ranjan Negi , a Hindu, who had to suffer after a loss to Pakistan. Has any Muslim player suffered the same way as Negi did? No. Negi’s character was made into a Muslim in the movie to weave in a narrative of Muslim victimhood . Unforgivable.

    • Shyam

      See, this is why everybody is tired of Shah Rukh Khan’s constant reference (some statement or interview or media article or controversy bringing that topic up every few months) to his minority religious identity as a Muslim (with supposedly Pathan roots that he never fails to remind all and sundry all the time). The people who actually love him and admire his work or personality SIMPLY DO NOT CARE about his religion, why can’t he understand? If anything, he just puts us off with the constant chip on his shoulder, as someone else mentioned here…

      There have been so many others who have suffered the humiliation of being strip-searched on entry to US, including India’s ex Defence Minister George Fernandes, but I don’t see them repeatedly milking the story (by playing the victim) every few months for years on end !!

      I bet if he ever remakes even “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” in Bollywood, he would manage to weave in some fake narrative of imagined victimhood even in that story…may be make Snow White to be a poor little girl who is oppressed by her evil stepmom for “being a Khan” !!

  • Goodjokes

    Really….really India??? The guy that chocks himself praising you all around the World & you call him ungrateful & accuse him of putting a hole in your precious international image…?? Ok, some imbecile did it, and yet the rest of you didn’t burn a damn hole in the sky saying it’s untrue! You made him come & justify himself yet again! What this man is doing is reading poetry to the daft mind: he has to keep explaining every sentence! So darn sad! If I were him, I would’ve stopped putting up with all these tantrums & puss & moved to the Bahamas, where I would have lived in tranquility all my life! But this is exactly why he is unique & beautiful: he takes it all in, like he has been doing for the past 20 years & still keeps fighting the barricades: for your sake & with your narrow-mindedness. He loves that country like a mad dog, to put up with so much agonizing, stupid, daft resistance! Maybe he aims to high & craves too much…God bless Sir Shah Rukh Khan’s beautiful heart…it is a monument of resilience!

    • Satyam Sharma

      Ha ha, you must be SRK himself in disguise … fact is, SRK has made a nice little cottage industry out of his minorityist identity and milking his imagined victimhood for money and fame. The incidents have been WAY TOO MANY to even bother recounting. And yes, nobody would give a damn (if anything, Bollywood cinema quality would improve) if SRK obliges us and shifts to his island in Mauritius, LOL!

      You know what, I used to genuinely like him at one time. That’s because Bollywood is seven decades out of those dark days when a Mohammad Yousuf Khan was forced to change his name to Dilip Kumar just to find acceptance among fans. Today, we don’t give a damn … the “Khan” surname has in fact become a “premium brand” which guarantees success (even if the movie is not that good). An Atif Aslam is equally (if not more) popular than a Sonu Nigam, and the various Khans are all worshipped by their crazy fans.

      But why does he always feel compelled to somehow insert a mention of his religion in every forum all the time? THAT is tedious and crashingly boring. Why the perennial chip on SRK’s shoulder? Why this constant IMAGINED and FALSE sense of victimhood? I never see Aamir Khan doing anything like this, then why SRK?

      • Satyam Sharma

        Thank you for the informative and enlightening comment. :-) It was a pleasure having a point-wise, objective, factual and logical debate with you. :-)

      • Nitin

        Have you read that article which is written by Shahrukh? If not then read it first. If you read it already then there is only two reasons of opposing. 1. You are not a good human & patriot for India. 2. You haven’t understand good English which is written in that article.

        Shahrukh khan is the proudest son of India. This requires pious heart & positive frame of mind to understand.

        • Satyam Sharma

          I am not doubting SRK’s patriotism (and please, enough of the “pious heart” and “positive frame of mind”, LOL!).

          I am just sick and tired of his constant imagined sense of victimhood (even ex-Defense Minister of India George Fernandes was strip-searched at a US airport, but he never kept on crying for that, or made it into a movie, etc) and the constant “chip on his shoulder”, as someone else put it on this thread itself.

          Another question is, why does SRK feel the need to write such opinions, or constantly talk about his “Being a Khan” (and the supposed victimization that goes with it in India), in the first place? Aamir Khan never feels such a need, and which is why nor does he invite the same kind of tired derision that people feel for SRK. Then why SRK? Simple question!

          • Nitin

            Here is the answer of your simple question in simple words.
            Only few people have guts to say what is true & right in front of the public.
            And there is nothing wrong in that article if you read it. He only mentioned about some narrow minded politicians & people which he faced in his life. Only those narrow minded people will be badly effected from this statement. And one can make fun of “pious heart & positive mind” who don’t have it.

          • Satyam Sharma

            Yes! George Fernandes and Aamir Khan are cowards, are they not?! Only SRK has the “guts to say what is true & right in front of the public”! LOL!

            Please go on, the discussion has become “too intellectual” for an ignorant fool like me, clearly … (ha ha!)

          • Nitin

            I don’t know that they are coward or not, but seems that you surely have this attribute. I am also sharma but can’t appreciate yours kind of thinking in our society.

          • Nitin

            Now you proved yourself brainless also. If I would have been a casteist bigot then I would support you. But I won’t support your kind of person(full of cheap thoughts) who are bad for our country. I support them who are right. And don’t get upset after getting exposed yourself.Think before write.

  • DLB from the land of Aloha

    Watching from the outside, I find this the most intelligent, reasonable writing in response the recent Pakistan-India media mania. As I am not looking to promote a side, I find both this and the SRK article to be the honest, heartfelt communication of people looking for peace and humanity in the world. Let us all look for the good, the God in each other.

  • Raj

    awesome, awesome very awesome!
    completely felt like, i was reading this article.
    lots of love and much much happiness.

    Thanks,

  • lema dave

    Thank you for the wonderful article, unfortunately this journalist took advantage of his article to provoke people, but shame that politicians and intellectuals walk behind the fake news, why ? can’t they read before make any judged !!!.. shameful

  • Suraj

    Well said Paroma! You have thoroughly and brilliantly exposed the lies and deceit that this wolf in sheep’s clothing is engaging in. I suggest you to take a copy of your sharp comment before NL deletes it, which I’m sure they’d do, in which case, just keep on posting it.

    Venky Vembu was damn right in his write-up and he called a spade a spade, as we, who read Firstpost regularly, have known him for.

    Shah Rukh Khan is no saint or national hero as the above devious author tries to say. He’s just a shameless Bollywood actor who doesn’t mind sucking up to the country which as part of state policy, slaughters our innocent citizens. And he sucks upto them so that his third grade cheap films can do some business over there, the very same country which hates the people – Indians – who made him what he is. If this is not biting the hand that feeds him, then don’t know what is.

    You however have totally demolished the hypocrisy, lies and double standards of the author, and using her own writings to do that. So totally that now her article looks like a poor joke. It’s evident that so strong is her commitment to pluralism that she can’t even give her children a bi-religious upbringing or get her husband to attend the most important annual festival of her parents’ faith. And then she has the face to preach and tom tom and koochikoo about pluralism and blah blah blah, by peddling some namby pamby rubbish and sentimental crap that she thinks enough gullible idiots will fall for.

    Sau chuhe khake billi Haj ko chali!

    • Paromadas comment

      Paromadas’ original comment that totally exposed Natasha Badhwar for being an intellectually dishonest fraud (that was deleted by “free speech loving oh-so-liberal moral police brigade” of NL):

      Dear Natasha,

      This article seems to be at some VARIANCE from your blog (‘My Daughters’ Mum’ hosted on the website http://www.wordpress.com).

      1. Towards the middle of this article, you have written, “our children are Hindu-Muslim”. However, in your blogpost dated 26 May 2010, you had written, “My parents are Hindus, my children Muslims.” Moreover, according to other blogposts of yours, your children are named Sahar Beg, Aliza Beg and Naseem Beg (I wish them well).
      When they are Muslim, as per your own blog, why have you written in this article that they are ‘Hindu-Muslim’? Will it not MISLEAD those people who read this article but not your blog? Isn’t it a DECEPTIVE show of secularism?

      2. In this article, you have mentioned, “My husband is a Muslim”, which would lead some readers to assume that you two make a secular couple. However, in your blogpost dated 11 November 2007, you had written, “The first year after we were married, we went over to my parent’s home and sat with them for the annual family Diwali puja. We sing a bhajan and do a small pooja. The second year, he was uncomfortable and he said, you go ahead and I will join the family later after the pooja is over. So he did not have to participate…… perhaps he felt coopted and pressurised to assimilate. The third year I refused to visit my parents on Diwali. I called it cultural confusion…. and it depressed me. As the evening progressed, he just did not feel right about it and very belatedly, when it was all over, we turned up at my parent’s home to meet on Diwali. They were almost already in bed by then. I cannot remember at all how we got through the 4th year….. which was last year. I think we attended, arriving decently after the pooja was over and just when the feast and firecrackers time started. This year was the 5th Diwali. My original plan was to get away from it all by arranging to be in Lahore on Diwali…. for a workshop I have been invited for. So I thought, its a good way to avoid the confusion on Diwali.”

      If your Muslim husband feels so ‘coopted’ and ‘pressurized’ even in being PRESENT for an annual festival by your Hindu parents, as per your own blog, why have you not mentioned it in this article when you mentioned his religion? Isn’t it a COVER-UP of communalism? Moreover, if YOU feel confused about attending ‘a small pooja’ by your parents, are you sure that you have not become as ‘uncomfortable’ about Hinduism as your husband is? On the other hand, you feel no ‘cultural confusion’ in happily celebrating EID with your mother-in-law according to another write-up of yours published on 11th November 2011. Are you sure that you two ARE a secular couple?

      3. While Shah Rukh had been detained at a western airport in 2009, your husband had been deported from one in 2001 (according to your blogpost dated 12 March 2010). Shouldn’t you have DISCLOSED this similarity in your article? Isn’t THIS a probable reason why you feel sorry for Shah Rukh?

      With regards,

    • Paromadas

      Dear Suraj,

      You wrote, “I suggest you to take a copy of your sharp comment before NL deletes it, which I’m sure they’d do”. How right you were because my comment HAS been deleted (around 1:30 P.M. on 03 February 2012). Heeding your warning, I HAVE taken a copy of it but I do not know what to do with it. Even if I post it again, NewsLaundry will delete it again, isn’t it?

      With regards,

      • Nitesh

        Don’t worry, even I have taken copies (and reposted it). Even if it keeps getting deleted, keep reposting! THAT is what peaceful satyagraha is, right? :D These pseudo-liberal anti-free-speech fascists can only keep on deleting for a few times, but the aam aadmi junta like us will not give up easily. :)

        • Suraj

          Sahi bola Nitesh bhai! Let’s teach these hypocrites a lesson! Gone are the days when you could lie and get away with it!

          Welcome to Internet, Newslaundry!

        • Paromadas

          Dear Nitesh,

          Thanks a lot for your encouraging words!

          With regards,

      • Suraj

        Paroma, worry not! I have taken copies and I already posted it again! Your comment was exceptional and definitely deserves a place! If these libtard scum can’t take it, too bad! They will have to learn to respect freedom of speech! What’s the worse they can do? They will shut down the comments and not allow any more comments right? Well, we would know that they are basically a bunch of coward losers who got scared and we won!

        With Regards,

        Suraj

        • http://twitter.com/nskaile1 nskaile

          wowwwww just wowwwwww i almost believed in eve word she said… thank u for showing her real face.

        • vivek

          Too bad. You exposed and shredded her so easily. Feeling sorry for her :-(

          • vivek

            DHO DAALA……… NewsLaundry! unlike your MSM this is SocialMedia… where everyone is journalist, editor and ombudsman.

        • uglytruth

          good one — frankly for all these pseudo secularism ppl this is what : for a Muslim to claim ‘secular’ status, he must eat pork, cut off his beard and marry non-Muslims. But, for Mani ( mani Shankar Aiyyar), Muslims are, by birth, ‘secular’. Only Hindus have to turn un-Hindus to be ‘secular’.”

    • Paromadas

      Dear Suraj,

      Thanks for saving and re-posting my comment.

      With regards,

      • Suraj

        [The following is the original comment by Paromadas which was the top voted comment with the highest number of likes and which totally exposed the lies and deceit of the author. It unsurprisingly has been deleted by Newslaundry. I am posting it again as I kept a copy, suspecting correctly that it will be deleted. Credits to Paromadas.]

        Dear Natasha,

        This article seems to be at some VARIANCE from your blog (‘My Daughters’ Mum’).

        Towards the middle of this article, you have written, “our children are Hindu-Muslim”. However, in your blogpost dated 26 May 2010, you had written, “My parents are Hindus, my children Muslims.” Moreover, according to other blogposts of yours, your children are named Sahar, Aliza and Naseem.
        If they are Muslim, as per your own blog, why have you written that they are ‘Hindu-Muslim’ in this article? Will it not MISLEAD those people who read this article but not your blog? Isn’t it a DECEPTIVE show of secularism?

        In the article, you have mentioned, “My husband is a Muslim” without revealing anything his reaction to Hinduism. However, in your blogpost dated 11 November 2007, you had written, “The first year after we were married, we went over to my parent’s home and sat with them for the annual family Diwali puja. We sing a bhajan and do a small pooja. The second year, he was uncomfortable and he said, you go ahead and I will join the family later after the pooja is over. So he did not have to participate…… perhaps he felt coopted and pressurised to assimilate. The third year I refused to visit my parents on Diwali. I called it cultural confusion…. and it depressed me. As the evening progressed, he just did not feel right about it and very belatedly, when it was all over, we turned up at my parent’s home to meet on Diwali. They were almost already in bed by then. I cannot remember at all how we got through the 4th year….. which was last year. I think we attended, arriving decently after the pooja was over and just when the feast and firecrackers time started. This year was the 5th Diwali. My original plan was to get away from it all by arranging to be in Lahore on Diwali…. for a workshop I have been invited for. So I thought, its a good way to avoid the confusion on Diwali.”
        If your Muslim husband is so ‘uncomfortable’ even in being PRESENT for an annual festival of your Hindu parents, as per your own blog, why have you not made a mention of it in the article? Isn’t it a COVER-UP of communalism? Moreover, if YOU too are uncomfortable in attending that festival, are you sure that you are not as anti-Hindu as your husband? On the other hand, according to other blogposts of yours (dated 11 November 2011), you have attended Eid at your in-laws place.

        While Shahrukh Khan had been detained at a western airport in 2009, your husband had been deported from one in 2001 (according to your blogpost dated 12 March 2010). Shouldn’t you have disclosed this similarity in your article? Isn’t THIS a probable reason why you feel sorry for Shahrukh Khan?

        With regards,

    • GuyDiscus

      Suraj, thank you for saving Paromadas’ original post. Please post it somewhere outside NL so that we could all link to it.

    • GuyDiscus

      Someone here wondered how her zealot husband lets her out without a hijab. There is a reason for it. It’s important for her to NOT appear ‘muslim’ as she tries to take on the kafirs (aka Hindus). She’s more credible if she comes across as a Hindu herself. Islam allows its followers to break away from tradition if it will serve the cause of Islam. Remember the men who blew up the twin towers? They did not have beards or wear skull caps but that was ok, because they were on a mission for Islam.

  • abc

    stupid article. starts with a divorce and saunters off on to something totally unrelated and ends up at something else.

  • http://www.facebook.com/ravikpanjwani Ravi Panjwani

    very true n wonderful article..Thanks Natasha

  • http://twitter.com/somasrklover srk lover

    the hatred blind the people.people who their heart has rhe hatred leave them as they dont deserve to explain.srk the best.they only love speak abot him badly

  • Captain Obvious

    Brilliant!

    You have totally exposed Natasha as a brazen liar. Writing something somewhere, and writing the exact opposite opinion on another forum!

    Not to mention the other explosive revelations made both by Palomadas above, and Skeptic and Abhinav below, that totally nail Natasha as an intellectually dishonest fraud of the highest order.

    NL and Madhu, have some shame, and fire this person from your staff. Take down this blatantly dishonest, factually false and biased article. Obviously you do not condone the kind of duplicitous Janus-faced shenanigans by Natasha (exposed in the various comments), do you?

    • Paromadas

      Dear Captain Obvious,

      You asked NL to “Take down this blatantly dishonest, factually false and biased article.” Instead of doing that, they have deleted MY comment about the discrepancies between this article and its writer’s own blog (‘My Daughters’ Mum’).

      With regards,

      • GuyDiscus

        Brilliant work Paromdas. Your original post (which has since been deleted) was a work of analytical art. I thought NL was a ballsy news organization that can handle the truth, it’s amusing the way they are scampering with tail between legs at some straight talk!

        • Paromadas

          Dear GuyDiscus,

          Thanks!

          With regards,

    • Leo

      I don’t think can do tht cuz then she will accuse them of being racist and go around writing at diff sites tht NL fired her cuz she’s married to a Secular Muslim

  • Nitesh

    Ouch! If, as they say, “truth hurts”, then this will surely hurt these pseudo-seculars hard! But I am not so sure our friendly benevolent tyrant at the oh-so-liberal Newslaundry will let your comment remain undeleted for much longer, so I am taking precautions and backing up copies of all these comments just in case Abhinandan Sekhri does a Kapil Sibal on us, ROFL!

    Rest assured, if these “flag bearers of free speech” (ha ha!) at NL delete even one single comment exposing the duplicity, chicanery and brazen fraudulence of anti-India pseudo-journalists here, then I will keep reposting those comments (and encourage others to do so as well) TILL ETERNITY if need be.

    • Aware Indian comment

      The following is the top comment by Aware Indian that was deemed “too uncomfortable and politically incorrect” as per oh-so-liberal NL and therefore deleted by their free-speech-loving moral police brigade, LOL!

      Natasha is what the Islamists (who have “conquered” her) call “a good Dhimmi”. Oops sorry, after her conversion (surely her “secular” husband wouldn’t even dream of marrying an unconverted Hindu girl, would he?!), she is actually no longer a Dhimmi but a prim-n-propah Muslimaah in her own right! And now she wants all of Indian Hindus to also become good obedient “Dhimmis” to our Islamofascist overlords.

      That, in a nutshell, is Nehruvian-Marxist secularism for you.

      Natasha is the archetypal sufferer of a Stockholm syndrome. Her exploitative, insensitive, communal, regressive, tyrannical and aggressive in-laws’ family (who don’t accept her or let her live in peace or give her any independence whatsoever, unless she completely renounces her parents’ faith Hinduism) has now become the object of her affections and sympathies! Not that I’m saying anything new, almost all modern sociologists (the “those who call a spade a spade” variety, not your left-lib politically-correct types) have often explained how the entire womenfolk of Islam are essentially victims of a Stockholm syndrome. This can even be extended to the ordinary Muslim man, who is a victim of a Stockholm syndrome in the sense that he stands up to defend an ideology (Islam) that is actually actively oppressing him!

      And by the way, looking at that profile photo, I am shocked as to how her husband, being the righteous “secular” Believer that he is (who wouldn’t even attend an innocuous little Diwali pooja at his ex-Hindu wife’s parents’ home), allows poor Natasha to roam about without wearing a head scarf! Outrageous, blasphemous, I tell you! Ha ha!

      LMAO, even SRK himself is much better than Natasha’s husband… at least SRK gave religion-neutral names to his kids and affords them a truly secular and Indian upbringing where they are allowed to follow the practices of all or any religious philosophy as per their wishes.

      PS: Free speech-oppressing and comment-deleting NL editors and moderators have proved the age-old truism – “leftist liberals are the best fascists”.

      • Satyam Sharma

        Sad to see the level to which Newslaundry has stooped to, in its fascist quest to crush free speech, and push its Leftist agenda.

        BTW, India is indeed a strange country. Cases in point:

        1. Unlike animals, plants do not have a nervous system and therefore do not feel pain or emotions. Also, unlike animals, plants live in the form of “vegetation” and not as individual organisms that either live or die at once. Given this, is it not unethical to slaughter and eat millions of animals, when our dietary needs can be perfectly fulfilled with the consumption of plants?

        And yet, those who advocate vegetarianism are called “conservative” in India, and those who advocate meat eating (and especially the cow beef lovers!) are called “progressive” in India!

        2. Will the truth cease to be the truth just because it “hurts someone’s sentiments”? Isn’t “political correctness” a *disease* that seeks to negate historical fact and perpetuate falsehoods that seemingly gloss over hard reality? Given this, wouldn’t a true liberal stand for free speech, free expression and free exchange of ideas?

        And yet, those who pander to hurt sensitivities of various communities and smother truth in the name of political correctness are called liberals in India, and those who fearlessly speak (and aid the spread of) the truth are labelled as fascists.

        So who is the liberal and who is the fascist? Who is the progressive and who is the conservative?

        My theory regarding this weird state of affairs is as follows: In other countries, someone who sticks to ancient regressive philosophies and is unwilling to change with the times is labelled as conservative, whereas someone who is willing to liberalize with the modern times is called as progressive. However, ancient Indian culture and civilization heritage (you may call it the Dharmic traditions or philosophies) have already always been the most liberal and progressive in the world. So someone sticking to them should actually be called liberal and progressive, and not conservative! Sadly, 90% of Indians today look upon ourselves through the eyes and prism of the western world, and try to force-fit our much richer culture into their inferior boxes of categorization.

        THAT is the root of the confusion and contradiction in the terminology.

        • Gaterang

          Bullshit, dumbshit

  • Captain Obvious

    I agree with Nitesh that your compelling and powerful comment may not survive the overzealous moderators of ‘free speech’ here :P So what if it’s true, it’s not politically correct, is it? And only that (political correctness) is what matters, certainly not the uncomfortable truth, in left-lib land, you see… :P

    I also agree that Stockholm Syndrome accurately captures poor Natasha’s plight. For some reason, those who marry Islamist bigots become even bigger Islamist bigots… examples too many to recount. Now I get the origin of the proverb ‘with the zeal of a newly converted’ :D

  • EC Krishnaa

    This is super-funny. Because you are the kind of bullies referred to in this article.

    • Satyam Sharma

      Seriously, right? I tell you! What bullies! Ha ha!

      Err, if stating the truth and proving your opponent to be an intellectually dishonest fraud (through factual and logical debate, no less) was “bullying”, then all the great mathematicians and scientists through the ages have been the biggest bullies … and by God, are we thankful for being “bullied” by them into discovering the truth, or not?

  • http://www.facebook.com/vickysrk1 Vicky Srk Raj

    shah rukh khan is a nice guys, with his sweet heart.
    He respect everyone.so,we have to respect him.

  • Paromadas

    Dear Moderator,

    Please let me know WHY you have deleted my comment about the variations between Natasha Badhwar’s article and her blog ‘My Daughter’s Mum’. I merely tried to question her pretensions of secularism.

    • Satyam Sharma

      You make a brilliant point about countering someone’s personal life-related arguments with, obviously, that individual’s personal life-related counter points.

      Sadly, talking facts and logic with lib-lefties is generally not productive. They are more comfortable when the debate is subjective instead of objective, opinionated instead of factual, and sentimental instead of logical. :-)

      • Paromadas

        Dear Mr. Sharma,

        You have written, “They are more comfortable when the debate is subjective instead of objective, opinionated instead of factual, and sentimental instead of logical.” It is a wonderfully perceptive statement.

        Thanks!

  • Smita

    Could it be that the author is mixed up between the character in the movie ( towards whom the heart reaches out) and Shah Rukh the man? I believe SRK might be a pretty decent person except for the victimhood that reared its head when he was detained at the airport, and the ill manners he displayed when an ordinary policeman/guard dared to stop his children from running through Wankhede….

    • Nitesh

      Good analysis. May be that’s what the author’s honest mistake is. Though I also liked another analysis here, that showed how Hindu women who marry Islamist bigot husbands (like this author did) end up suffering from a Stockholm Syndrome, and end up having affection for their oppressor!

      Even I loved the character in the movie (based on Ranjan Negi the Hockey player). But SRK the person evokes no such heartfelt sympathies (though I occasionally like his acting). Too much imagined victimhood, too much ‘chip on his shoulder’.

  • GuyDiscus

    I have read Paromadas’ original post (bravo Paromadas!). Natasha Badhwar, please say sorry for your subterfuge and for your attempt to insult our intelligence.

    • Satyam Sharma

      In the Congress govt, corrupts and incompetents are rewarded with higher ministerial positions. I wouldn’t be surprised if at NL (left-lib lalaland), brazenly lying deceitful frauds like Natasha Badhwar get rewarded with more frequent columns!

      BTW, corrupt UPA ministers reminds me of Salman Khurshid. Last month, a couple of I-T raids on the shady Purti Group of Nitin Gadbadkari led to HUGE mainstream media coverage and kept him in the news for almost a full week. 12 hours out of 24 on every channel, and half the front pages of most newspapers, were solely focussed on him.

      But yesterday, the Allahabad High Court INDICTED (yes, this is the HIGH COURT I am talking of, not some govt-controlled police or I-T dept) Salman Khurshid’s NGO for fudging irregularities worth Rs. 1.30 crores. Media coverage? None whatsoever.

      THIS is the kind of news a supposed “media watch” website like NL should be covering. But what does it do? Same old Congressi lib-lefty agenda-pushing, as if the mainstream media isn’t doing enough of it already.

      • GuyDiscus

        Satyam, you are wrong. The Allahabad High Court has not “indicted” Salman Khurshid but just served his wife’s NGO a notice. Please provide a link to the news item by any respectable national daily. If you can’t do that, I am afraid you are no different than those Jehadis who post lies and it’s people like you who give secular Indians a bad name.

        • Satyam Sharma

          Haha, what nonsense! BTW to “indict” simply means to formally accuse or charge someone with a crime. I hope you are not confusing it with “convict” which means a court of law has given its judgment and held the accused as guilty as charged.

          The court has slapped a notice to Salman Khurshid’s NGO on a PIL that wants an FIR (formal charge) to be registered against them as well as for the court to monitor the case (a la the 2G spectrum scam and other high profile cases). The notice is the first step, when the NGO is only being asked as to why the misappropriated money may not be returned back and deposited with the Union social justice and empowerment ministry from which it had come to the NGO (through fraudulent means as revealed by the India Today sting operation). I think an FIR would certainly be filed by Feb 21 i.e. next hearing of case.

          More here:
          http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-02-01/news/36684457_1_basis-of-primary-investigation-high-court-notice-zakir-hussain-memorial-trust

          In any case, at least the matter is in court, and the court has even slapped notices asking for misappropriated funds to be deposited with govt agencies, etc. Compare with the progress in Purti case? And compare with the media coverage and 24/7 hype? Why so? Isn’t this blatant media bias?

          I will restate my original point: THIS is the kind of news a supposed “media watch” website like NL should
          be covering. But what does it do? Same old Congressi lib-lefty agenda-pushing, as if the mainstream media isn’t doing enough of it already.

          • GuyDiscus

            I am no fan of Salman Khurshid, the man has demonstrated his goonda roots with his threats to Arvind Kejriwal. But your insistence that all media should stop everything else and cover a simple court notice to Khurshid is being childish. The court has not even framed charges, not even an FIR has been lodged, and btw the money is “allegedly” misappropriated (you have conveniently removed the word “allegedly” from your post which exposes your hidden agenda).

            And the way you are screaming from the rooftops about the investigation into the Purti group of companies clearly show you as a BJP sympathizer. Don’t you know that BJP is a party of spineless losers. Even with an idiot PM like Manmohan Singh who handed the BJP hundreds of issues on a platter, BJP could not exploit even one. They have proven incapable of providing an alternative leadership to India. Anybody who supports the BJP (in its current avatar) has to be losers themselves or they must be fanatic Hindus which is of course, the same thing as being losers.

            As for REAL secularism, we don’t need you to define it for us. You stay with the BJP, support Gadkari and Purti, while the rest of truly secular India will find an alternative.

          • Shyam

            ROFLMAO…..there was a kickass response by Satyam Sharma to GuyDiscus here, that seems to have been deleted by NL’s Crazywal Nazi stormtroopers…no statement of facts (the way they are) or hard logic or criticism of Crazywal allowed on Abhinandan Sekhri’s website !!!

          • Satyam Sharma

            I don’t know whether to feel sad (that my “kickass” reply to GuyDiscus that utterly disproved and destroyed his entire argument was deleted), or laugh (at how my comments make “liberal” Newslaundry so insecure that they delete them every now and then). But yes, this website does seem to take an official editorial position heavily in favour of Kejriwal’s far-leftist political agenda. Anyway, NL’s “fascist Nazi stormtrooper” (haha!) attitude was definitely taught a lesson about Internet and social media (and the democratic equality for exchange of ideas that it enforces)!

  • http://www.facebook.com/sumeer.mathur Sumeer Mathur

    its so stupid ..and facile …a rightwinger calling others communal!!!.parmoma people who feel uncomfortable at other peoples religious ceremonies are not communal. and when people write blogs they let you in on their thoughts as they occur….have the ability to understand it first. by the way have you ever been to any religious ceremony other than your own? is srk supposed to be so indebted to us for making him a star that he ceases to be a person. if his words are being used as propoganda by hafiz sayeed …imagine how your words are used? you wont get what i mean…never mind my dear.

    • Paromadas

      Dear Mr. Mathur,

      You have written, “people who feel uncomfortable at other peoples religious ceremonies are not communal.” Even when those ‘other people’ are one’s own PARENTS-IN-LAW? Does the man who feels ‘uncomfortable’ at his parents-in-law’s religious ceremony understand how THEY might feel about their son-in-law’s religious intolerance, that too for ‘a small pooja’ (as described by Natasha Badhwar herself)? Just because they are generous enough to excuse his & his wife’s (their daughter) absence, is it right to to take that generosity for GRANTED? Moreover, if those who ‘feel uncomfortable at other peoples religious ceremonies are not communal’, then are they secular?

      You have also written, “when people write blogs they let you in on their thoughts as they occur.” Do you mean to say that those thoughts should not be used to cross-check statements made by the SAME author elsewhere?

      You have asked, “have you ever been to any religious ceremony other than your own?” How are the ceremonies which I attended related to the QUESTIONS which I asked?

      You have also asked, “if his words are being used as propoganda by hafiz sayeed …imagine how your words are used?” Sorry, I CANNOT imagine how my words can be used by him.

      You have ended by saying, “you wont get what i mean.” You are right because I have NOT got what you mean. If you really mean something, can you please write it clearly? Otherwise, never mind!

      With regards,

      • Nitin

        Are you really so idle to write all this? Don’t try to misled the people by giving these kind of comments.

        • Paromadas

          Dear Nitin,

          Thanks a lot for calling me “idle” and misleading. Next time, when you are not very busy, can you try the harder option of ANSWERING some of my questions rather than take the easier option of calling me names?

          With regards,

          • Nitin

            What are your questions about Shahrukh’s article. I’ll give you the answer but it would’t effects someone’s mind which is full of hate.

          • Paromadas

            Dear Nitin,

            You have asked, “What are your questions about Shahrukh’s article.” Perhaps, you have forgotten that this webpage carries NATASHA’s article and not Shahrukh’s. In the article, she has made a couple of statements which are more about HER than about him. And, my questions (in the deleted comment) were for Natasha and not for Shahrukh.

            You have said that my mind “is filled with negativity & hate.” This time, a BIGGER thanks for abusing me. Once again, I ask – can you try the harder option of ANSWERING some of my questions rather than take the easier option of calling me names?

            With regards,

          • Nitin

            I don,t know what kind of person Natasha is. If you have any issue in Shahrukh’s article then let me know. And I didn’t abuse to any individual If you think yourself so then its your choise.

          • Paromadas

            Dear Nitin,

            In the previous reply you had written that my mind “is filled with negativity & hate.” However, in this reply, you write, “I didn’t abuse to any individual”. Please let me know whether it is abuse or praise to write that someone’s mind ‘is filled with negativity & hate.’ Will you feel abused or praised if somebody were to pass such a comment about YOU? Any way, that somebody will most likely NOT be me because I am not good at making such comments.

            With regards,

          • Nitin

            Dear,
            Of course you are idle because you have so much time to write so long comments which are completely nonsense. And 2nd I am against to those who are spreading negativity without reading Shahrukh’s article. Because if they really read that article in their senses then they will find that there is nothing wrong in that.

            And please do some productive work if you really love our country. Thanks

          • Paromadas

            Dear Nitin,

            In your 1st reply to me, you asked why I was “so idle”; in your 3rd reply, you wrote, “I didn’t abuse to (sic) any individual”. Now, you re-write that I am “idle” and add that my comments “are completely nonsense.” Can you please make up your MIND once and for all, without see-sawing so often?

            You have written, “I am against to (sic) those who are spreading negativity without reading Shahrukh’s article.” However, I am for those who realise that this webpage is on NATASHA’s article.

            You have also advised me to “do some productive work”. Honestly, the only ‘productive work’ I can do is produce carbon dioxide. But what about you? Do you produce oxygen?

          • Nitin

            Dear,
            Hilarious, Give him some clap for this cheap thing first. and now when you have finally showed your love for our country by only producing gases. Nothing else remain here to say.

          • Paroma Das

            Dear Nitin,

            I am humble enough, even if you do not know what is humility, to admit that I can produce mainly carbon dioxide.

            However, you seem to believe that YOU can do much more for our country – so, please let us know when you win a Nobel Prize or an Olympic medal.

          • Nitin

            Sure bro.

          • http://www.facebook.com/aadith.kadambi.aiyangaar Aadith Kadambi Aiyangaar

            She is educating you. Good for ‘the country’.
            That is social service on her part.

      • Paromadas

        Dear Mr. Sharma,

        Thanks, once again, for saying it so well!

        With regards,

        • Shyam

          Man, NL’s fascist Nazi stormtroopers (aka Sekhri free-speech muzzlers) seem to have a particular dislike for the most top-liked and well-written articulate comments from the opposite political ideological camp… the best and most hardhitting ones only get deleted, so much for ‘leftist liberalism’…haha!

      • http://www.facebook.com/sumeer.mathur Sumeer Mathur

        let me try …uncomfortable does not mean communal or secular, those are your interpratations. as a hindu i would be uncomfortable in a south indian hindu ceremony as i would not know what to do. am i expected to stand or sit, to fold hands or not …and i will not understand a word of what they are saying …yes i will do what i always do …copy the behaviour of people around me but that does not make it less uncomfortable.

        i also believe that if you had attended religious ceremonies that do not mirror your own , you would know what i was saying. …

        ok let me explain how you are playing into the arms of hafiz sayeed ( this does not mean the same literally..its a turn of phrase ) …if he ever had to prove to people that muslims are mistreated , he will use your words, he will tell everyone – look even a star like srk is not spared or allowed to speak his mind…can you imagine what they do to average poor muslims in India? thats how propaganda works my dear.

        i hope now you understand …one more thing somewhere in your many replies ( do you have a day job at all?) you have stated that your comments have been removed even though you have not used abusive language …abuse is not about language only and hence the moderator can remove all that you say if it is deemed abusive even if your words carry no formal “abuse” in the form of gaalis…

        • Paromadas

          Dear Mr. Mathur,

          Firstly, you have forgotten to call me names in this reply the way you did in your last reply (“stupid”, “facile”, “rightwinger”). Perhaps you will remember to do it in your next.

          Secondly, to my question whether feeling ‘uncomfortable’ at the annual festival of one’s own parents-in-law (just because they follow a different religion) is not a sign of communalism, you have written, “uncomfortable does not mean communal or secular, those are your interpratations.” Now, can’t I say the same about you? Your assertion that being ‘uncomfortable’ (in this context) does not mean being communal is YOUR interpretation, right?

          Thirdly, you write, “as a hindu i would be uncomfortable in a south indian hindu ceremony” If you are not RELATED to another community, you might be ‘uncomfortable’ at their ceremony – but if your PARENTS

          • Satyam Sharma

            It’s not even just about Natasha’s husband not attending his parents-in-law’s small Diwali pooja. (It’s his choice whether or not to attend after all, so we can’t find fault with it.)

            But what actually makes him an Islamofascist bigot, however, is that he actively prevents even his wife and kids from going to her parents’ (or their maternal grandparents’) home for a few hours for the single most important Hindu festival. Poor Natasha has been reduced to a mere shadow of her vibrant past, and now needs to invent reasons to get out of India itself (by using trips to Lahore etc as an excuse) during the festive season, so as not to offend her hypersensitive and intolerant husband, so that he doesn’t even have to feel guilty for actively oppressing her (and denying their kids a truly secular and pluralistic upbringing, as falsely claimed by Natasha in her article here). Poor Natasha doesn’t even realize she is caught in a classic case of the Stockholm syndrome, as others have also diagnosed here, which leads to her apparent deceitful behaviour, comparing the truth written over several posts on her blog with her attempt to whitewash her family life as hunky-dory through sugarcoated falsehoods here.

            I had nicely summarized and explained Natasha’s intellectual dishonesty (with herself!) and hypocrisy (with her readers) in a small and potent much-liked comment above, that was (predictably) deleted by NL’s fascist Nazi free-speech-muzzling stormtroopers.

            PS: I am making a copy of this comment (as I’m sure this will again be deleted) and will continue reposting if necessary. NL is a slow learner, but don’t worry, we will definitely teach them what it means to be in the Internet and social media age. :-)

        • http://www.facebook.com/aadith.kadambi.aiyangaar Aadith Kadambi Aiyangaar

          What a poor apology for victim mongering!

  • SACHIN KACHROO

    Jiggs McDonald, NHL Hall of Fame broad caster speaking in Orillia , Ontario, says,
    “I am truly perplexed that so many of my friends are against another mosque being built in Toronto. I think it should be the goal of every Canadian to be tolerant regardless of their religious beliefs. Thus, the mosque should be allowed, in an effort to promote tolerance.

    That is why I also propose that two nightclubs be opened next door to the mosque, thereby promoting tolerance from within the mosque. We could call one of the clubs, which would be gay,
    “The Turban Cowboy “, and the other a topless bar called, “You Mecca Me Hot.”
    Next door should be a butcher shop that specializes in pork, and adjacent to that, an open-pit barbecue pork restaurant called, ” Iraq o’ Ribs.”

    Across the street there could be a lingerie store called “Victoria Keeps Nothing Secret,” with sexy mannequins in the window modeling the goods.

    Next door to the lingerie shop there would be room for an adult sex toy shop,
    “Koranal Knowledge,” its name in flashing neon lights, and on the other side a liquor store called, “Morehammered.”:-))

    All of this would encourage Muslims to demonstrate the tolerance they demand of us, so their mosque issue would not be a problem for others.”

    • aam aadmi

      haha hah! topless bar called “you mecca me hot” and adult sex toy shop called “koranal knowledge” !!

      blasphemy boy! you can be murdered by some crazy mullah for this…..and what’s even worse, no newspaper will bother publishing half an article for you, and the govt will likely declare ur murderer as juvenile (to appease the violently protesting votebanks) and he will get away after 3 yrs in some 2-star hotel on govt expense….. so take care !!!!

      • SACHIN KACHROO

        Thanks for your concern, you are right.
        I should be careful in future.
        Regards,
        Sachin.

  • http://twitter.com/nskaile1 nskaile

    wtfkk hahhaahhahahahahhahhhahha i almost fell from chair reading tht hHHahhhahahaa

  • http://twitter.com/rishisinha1 Rishi Sinha

    Loved your article Natasha… You are right… We want to hear more stories like these from people… It’s very sad that a Muslim in India has to prove his love towards nation time and again…

  • Paromadas

    Dear Indian,

    One correction – Natasha Badhwar’s husband, Mr. M. Afzal Beg, is from District Ghazipur in Uttar Pradesh.

    With regards,

    • Indian

      Thanks for correcting me…. the frequent mention of (family?) trips to Lahore in this article and her earlier blog you copy-pasted from led me to erroneously believe the husband was Pakistani

  • goodstuff

    beautifuuly and rationally written. kudos

  • http://twitter.com/bpatnaik143 Bhaskar

    The most random article I have ever read.. NL get some real writters tired of these half cooked stories.

  • roshni pandit

    Natasha, don’t expect people who have 1.never lived out of their narrow
    linguistic state borders, 2. who have never interacted with people
    outside their own religion, 3. who never will marry outside their silly
    caste-community groups and 4. who can never think of people as
    ‘individuals’ but always stereotype them by surnames….. to understand
    decency / humaneness. It’s a nice, touching piece you’ve written here.
    Don’t let these pseudo-opinion masters, full time-ramblers put you down.
    General frustration in life leads to such hate-posts. Apart from that,
    some of them have terrible English, and I can bet on the fact that they
    write equally incoherent stuff even in their mother tongues.

    • arun

      hmm! Terrible English makes somebody less human??
      “never will marry outside their silly caste-community groups” – do you mean that only those who marry outside their caste and comunity are human?? What if you like somebody from your “silly” caste- community will you marry somebody else just to prove that you are a “liberal”.

    • the grey matter

      the whole comment is “blah blah BLAH……continues till last full stop”

      PS: sorry for incoherent and terrible angregi comment :P

  • average indian

    who the hell is running newslaundry now? Has it been sold to Venod sharma or birlas . And btw who gives damn abt SRK.
    Best is just to stop coming to this site

  • Anti-Hypocrites

    Even I don’t like SRK but that’s not the point. It seems that you people are pissed off with him and anyone who takes his side coz of his religion and nothing else. You need to decide whether you are against him, Islam or Pakistan, coz all three are different. You guys can keep posting venomous comments but that’s not going to do anything. How many muslims have you killed till date with a sharp comment, huh? Narendra Modi and Hitler slaughtered a lot of people in the name of religion. But what happened? Jews and Muslims still exist. What this country needs is peace and not cowards like you who sit in a cubicle of an air-conditioned office and keep posting rubbish. And I’m 110% sure that none of you are a part of any defence force. Just a bunch of panzies with their soft fingers on a keyboard. If you are so much against a community then go out in broad daylight and kill them. Now, please go to another webpage after a coffee break and defend freedom of speech. Bloody hypocrites.

    • http://www.facebook.com/aadith.kadambi.aiyangaar Aadith Kadambi Aiyangaar

      The irony in your comment is hilarious!

  • Vikas

    That’s perhaps the one thing that distinguishes SRK from the other Khans in Bollywood. SRK loves playing the victim and his exaggerated sympathies for those across the border generally ticks off Indians. Feroz Khan was hailed as a BOSS for his comments on Pakistani radio(within my house atleast). We have zero problems with your religion but for god’s sake, if you keep whining over ever small detail, prepare to hear unsavoury comments.

  • raghu

    Article Heading says ”
    SAY SORRY TO SHAH RUKH KHAN”……………….I AM NOT SAYING SORRY………..He is guilty of self-PITY

  • neelu sree

    Nice.Thanks for sharing nice post.http://youtu.be/-XR4mnc2wqs

  • http://www.facebook.com/aadith.kadambi.aiyangaar Aadith Kadambi Aiyangaar

    Aah victimhood!!
    A wonderful tool to reduce stress by blaming others for our shortcomings and feeling sorry for ourselves.
    Ve

  • vijai

    Why should national identity have anything to do with religion I ask? Be independent for all you want which by the way the law of this land allows which is all one needs and has to care about. I do not understand all this brouhaha the author is drwaing our attention to when a Mr. Kalam is a celebrated idol of every youth in this country and Mr. Premji who is almost a demigod to all IT folks devoid of their religion.

Menu
Read previous post:
Ashis-Nandy-and-Media
Ashis Nandy: Media Marionette?

It’s not irrational political groups, but sections of the media which helped build up the Ashis Nandy drama at JLF.

Close