Indianexpress.com : comments : Sack Antulay

Sack Antulay

Monday was lost to adjournments in both Houses of Parliament, with A.R. Antulay’s remarks on Hemant Karkare’s death continuing to dominate proceedings. But the damage being inflicted by Antulay extends beyond the precious legislative hours wasted. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh must consider the ....Read more

Comments

Post comment

5 Comments |

sack antulayBy: manish bajaj | Sunday , 28 Dec '08 17:09:55 PM Reply | Forward after the way congress has behaved - i am definitely not voting for them. this shows why terrorists can target us and get away. this is the weakness that they highlight and this is what we need to rid out country of.

sack antulayBy: harun | Tuesday , 23 Dec '08 22:06:29 PM Reply | Forward no way antulay must go.he has done the nation in.we cant have such guys as ministers.the saddest part is the bjp which called karkare names is trying to act as nationalist,the left have been truely mature in the whole saga.what has he done for all these years as a minister to act as a idealist.digvijay hasnt got the guts to fight and win a election in madhyapradesh and he goes about commenting on issues of nationl importance.sick.

Cheap PoliticsBy: M K Keswani | Tuesday , 23 Dec '08 16:39:40 PM Reply | Forward It is truly sad that when all the political parties stood united against terrorism, Antulay choose to play communal politics. It is all the more sad that congress leadership does not have courage rebuff and sack him fearing losong votes from particular section of people. When will our politician learn that voters now are definetly above these cheap, time worn out politics. This they should have realised by the results in five state election. Voters these days vote for the party who is performing, has united and corruption free eadership. Congress should not have taken time in sacking Antulay which would have silenced others like Dig Vijay Singh who rose to support him.

Identity PoliticsBy: Kishan | Tuesday , 23 Dec '08 14:18:01 PM Reply | Forward It seems we are living in very scary times.There is a fear hidden in a corner of everyone's mind that something is going to erupt but we don't want to face it. And when an Antulay brings that fear to surface then we insist that he has committed a sin and should be punished. Of course Antulay has his own fears to contend with.This is what the politics of fear does to society where even the so called liberal voice is circumscribed by minority and majority mindset. Why should Antulay have to flaunt his minority status? This makes even his genuine questions suspect. And this applies to even those belonging to majority community who want to flaunt their identity. Why should the so-called minorities be satisfied with the 'minority' tag which was created by politicians for 'divide and rule'? Why should they not demand from politicians better opportunities to improve their lives ? Better roads, better electricity, better water, better schools, better hospitals, better markets.

Identity politicsBy: K | Wednesday , 24 Dec '08 0:55:41 AM Reply | Forward Kishan, you are assuming that our minority minister is not playing minority politics to appease minority in the country, which is not true. Do you think Antulay could exist in Indian politics without his muslim identity. The very same reason makes him make such foolish statements. Had a person of higher strature and proven record that does not connect him or her with her faith made such comments than they should be taken seriously. For example, if Kiran Bedi makes any statement on the case then it should be taken seriously and the case should be investigated accordingly. If a satement comes from person like Antulay, Bukhari or Bal Thackrey then people must show them their place. Antulay should be sacked.Further to your point, if people like you seriously want to irradicate cast or religion politics then one state one law is the answer. All special concessions and reservations should be based on economic backwardness and not cast or religion. Please pepare the countrymen for this change and then then talk about identity-less politics.