Hafta 507 audio

Manisha: [00:00:00] This is a News Laundry Podcast and you're listening to NL Hafta. GaN or News, I'm your host Manisha Pane. I'm filling in for AB, who's in de. I think there's a Founder's Day, something of the Dune School. Usually it's around this time, so he is there. He's gonna be chilling in the cooler climbs of Dune and certainly the cleaner air of Dedo.

And I'm gonna be taking on the hosting duties for News LA's Premium Weekly News podcast and El Haveta this week. I'll quickly introduce our panel. Pretty action packed week. I think the biggest news of the year broke in this week, but we'll get to all of that. In house, of course, we have Raman Kirpal with us.

Welcome Raman sir. We have Anand Vardhan.

Sting: Hello. Jai

Manisha: Shree. Joining us from Chennai and we believe it's not too rainy anymore. Now it's. It's. Horrifyingly sunny. Yes. Hello. [00:01:00] And we have Sherbir Panag joining us from Delhi. Welcome Sherbir.

Sherbir Panag: Hi Manisha. Thank you for having me.

Manisha: Sherbir is a financial crimes and corporate governance lawyer.

He is acting as defense counsel in some of India, some of India's most high profile cases. He also comes with a deep understanding of issues surrounding Punjab, India, Canada relations. This is Sherbir. The Sikh Diaspora and Khalistan. You would have read his pieces in the Quint and the Print, and this is precisely why we have him this week because there's so much with relations to India and Pakistan that has happened this week.

Let's quickly get the headlines, Yashni, and then we'll jump right into our conversation.

Sting: Yeah,

Manisha: so here

Jayashree: are the headlines for the week. The Election Commission has announced the schedule for assembly polls in Jharkhand and Maharashtra. Elections in Jharkhand will be held in two phases on November 13th and 20th.

Maharashtra will vote in a single phase on November 20th. In Jammu and Kashmir, National Conference leader Omar Abdullah was sworn in as chief minister. The Congress, which fought the election in alliance with the NC has refused to join the government, but [00:02:00] I don't think they needed. No. Yeah.

Manisha: Also, it was very friendly, friendly.

Like Rahul Gandhi was there, the India Alliance guys were there. So it wasn't like the

Jayashree: option open.

Manisha: Yeah. Yeah. But

Jayashree: we have to make it sound much more exciting. So they refuse to join the government. And in Haryana, Naib Singh Saini was sworn in as chief minister of the state today. So there were full page ads in all my newspapers in Madras.

So just for this. Now the biggest news of the week is India and Canada have expelled top diplomats this week amidst escalating tensions over the assassination of a Sikh separatist, Nijar, on Canadian soil. This is after Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau has claimed the Canada police is investigating allegations of India's direct involvement in the killing.

Manisha: And Lawrence Bishnoi's name has cropped up in all of this, of all the people.

Jayashree: Yes, the police have said the Indian government is using organized crime groups like the Bishnoi group. Delhi, of course, has said this is preposterous. And rubbish. Yes. Meanwhile, the US and the UK have called for India to cooperate with [00:03:00] Canada's legal process.

Ma, a former NCP leader, Baki, uh, he belonged to the faction led by Deputy cm. Aja Power was shot dead in Mumbai. Yeah.

Manisha: And members of the Binui gang, again, have taken the credit, claimed the credit for it, if you can call it

Jayashree: credit. But yeah, they have, uh, very busy external affairs minister as Schenker was in Pakistan.

He was attending a conclave of the Shanghai Corporation Organization. I think this is the first visit, visit to Pakistan by a senior Indian minister in years. Hmm. Yes. Then in, meanwhile, in Uttar Pradesh, one person was killed, at least four were injured in a communal crash during a Durga idol immersion procession.

Manisha: Yeah.

Jayashree: Protests then broke out and they set fire to several properties, including shops. In Uttarakhand, an altercation between two youths over parking turned, turned violent. Shops were vandalized and signboards were damaged. In rather silly news, the Delhi High Court has ordered Wikipedia to take down a web page on ongoing proceedings of the defamation suit [00:04:00] filed by ANI against the platform.

The bench has said the comments made on the Wikipedia page were prima facie contemptuous.

Manisha: I don't know, it's so strange. This case is kind of, it's as if They can't, they don't know how Wikipedia works. Yeah. I think they also

Jayashree: said the matter of sub judice and you're saying malicious things. But they're not, it's like a community

Manisha: edited thing.

So it's just, it's a strange, do you have any take on that?

Sherbir Panag: Not really, not really. I just think that, uh, I always find anything that's prima facie, anything as problematic, prima facie, like contemptuous, prima facie, um, Criminal, I think all of us, we need to get, we need to move over from, from these concepts, but I honestly don't, um, don't know enough about this ongoing matter to be able to comment, um, comment substantially.

Jayashree: Welcome to Hafta where we all don't know enough about most matters, but we still can't comment substantially. So. [00:05:00] Right. Back to the headlines. A human rights activist and former Delhi University professor G. N. Sai Baba passed away this week. He was 57. He'd spent over seven years in jail in an alleged Maoist links case, but he was acquitted seven months ago.

In the Supreme Court, uh, the Apex Court today upheld the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act of 1955. In a separate judgment, it also took objection to inaction by Punjab and Haryana over implementing the directions of the Commission for Air Quality Management and its failure to prosecute people who burn stubble.

And finally, Israel bombed a makeshift displacement camp in the courtyard of a central Gaza hospital. This is the Al Aqsa hospital, killed four people and injured many more. There were deeply disturbing images and videos on social media of displaced civilians burning alive in the camp.

Manisha: Meanwhile, Times Now is getting a scintillating war reporting from Israel with people dancing to Jeho.

I hope you caught that. [00:06:00] Okay, let's jump right in. And Sherbi, before we started recording the show, I was telling you about this little segment I saw on Sky News with this person called Muninder Singh from Sikh Federation Canada. It's a sort of an interview. And before we get into the whole diplomatic shit show has happened this week, there is this fundamental question I had, which is when you listen to some of these Sikh Federation, you know, and this gentleman very openly said, I'm a Khalistani and so was Nijjar, Bhai Nijjar as he calls him, they just sound so deluded, you know, the way he's talking about India is as if he's stuck in 84 actually.

I mean, that's the way to describe it. There is this hyperbole around genocide against Sikhs for the past four decades. And you have this person being platformed, of course, in a mainstream news channel. So how do you understand this, a, this whole Khalistan fixation of the diaspora? And to me, these guys [00:07:00] just seem very cartoonish and out of touch with everything that's happening in Punjab of today.

How seriously should we be even taking them to begin with?

Sherbir Panag: So Manisha, that's a That's an excellent question. And in some way, that's a description of the problem we are facing. The idea, there is no resonance with the idea of Khalistan in India and in Punjab, and Punjab turned over a bloody chapter of its, um, uh, of its past and, and moved on even at, um, and And even at its peak, I think what everybody forgets is that they were, um, the, some of the highest casualties that were suffered were by the Punjab police were by Punjab civilians, um, Sikhs included in, in, in the whole period of the, of, of, of the eighties and who were, you know, subjects and victims of, of, of terrorism.

But Punjab moved on nice and clean. [00:08:00] And, you know, that, that difficult, that difficult period has no real resonance. I think the challenge is that every now and then somebody takes us, uh, looks at, uh, at a key chain or a stray poster and says, Oh, you know, we, we saw this, there's a bit of an image image out there.

I don't think that's, you know, none of us. And, and I've said this multiple times that in, in, in the new generation, even as far as the old generation is concerned, the idea of Punjab, India. And, and being sick, they're all sort of one common identity for those of us behind the diaspora is an entirely different question.

And I think the problem at the diaspora level is sort of threefold. I think first and foremost, yes, there were challenges, there were excesses, and we can't sort of write, write over the, uh, write over, um, both. Police excesses for which at different points of time, we've had truth and reconciliation commissions, some enough, some not enough.

We've of course had the bloody past of the, of the 1984 anti Sikh, anti Sikh [00:09:00] riots. And, and, um, you know, several prominent leaders who continued to stay in political life, Jyotish Taikler, Sajjan Kumar and, and, and several others. So there was one part was that. Then there was genuine angst and a genuine cry for justice, which over a period of time got compounded with two problems and hence lost their way.

Um, rather than being a true cause for justice metamorphosized, of course, with the fact that Punjab is a border state and the, and Pakistan's ISI has, has, has. Played a big role back then continued to play a role and continues to see it as a, as a, as, as an opportunity to, to constantly finger India. And I think that's, that's part of their state polity and we can't ignore that dynamic.

But I think the two sub dynamics that emerged as far as the diaspora Manisha are first and foremost is with respect to. Just the sheer lack of information. The number of times I have engaged with somebody, um, I engaged, I, a [00:10:00] few years back, I met a partner at a leading law firm in, um, in, in London who, um, who asked me very candidly and thought that they're going to get a serious answer from me saying, Mr.

Panag, what do you think about the upcoming referendum? And I was like, what referendum are we talking about? None of us know about any referendum. And, you know, it's irrelevant to us. You guys, you don't like go and find, make a Khalistan in South Hall or in Brampton or wherever else in Canada or the UK, because there is no residence for it back home.

So one is this delusion that everybody out here is in this, in this zone and just, you know, And with limited information. And I think the second part of just the false information, the number of times I see statistics that get put up, which do, which do true injustice to those who actually died either at the behest of terrorism or in communal riots.

They've I've seen statistics, Manisha, Punjab three times over in terms of how many people have died. I see numbers where on what are supposedly genocidal claims, which are against. Again, you [00:11:00] know, um, again, completely exaggerated false and and manipulated numbers. So one is the lack of information and very little has been written about this and very little has been historically accounted.

You know, the books that came out at that point of at that point of time did not have the ability to sort of bring together. Uh, the different, the different elements. And I think only recently has a more seminal work emerged, which is Ramesh Inder Singh's, uh, turmoil in Punjab. He was the deputy commissioner in Amritsar at that point of time.

So I think one is the lack of information, which can be weaponized. I think all of us in this post truth world understand how quickly information can be weaponized. And I think the second part that we don't Talk about enough is the whole scam that there is to get asylum and immigration does have foundational fundamental problems in its economy, employment, drugs, and other things.

Absolutely. Yes. Are people looking for a way out? Absolutely. Yes. Would. [00:12:00] In a point based immigration system, would a lot of people qualify? Maybe not. But what we see is, you know, the number of times I've been in the, I've been in the US or elsewhere, and I met a driver, you know, who's sort of a chauffeur who sort of driving, driving me to the airport.

And I asked them, how did you get in here? And he'd be like, Uh, you know, I got an asylum letter. I got a persecution letter signed by Mr. Jit Singman saying that I'm a member of his party and hence persecuted . And here Mr. Man is, was still recently in our parliament after he won a by election and subsequently lost yeah.

Has contested multiple elections, taken an oath to the Constitution of India at different points of time, but is able to sign with a small, with a small, irrelevant. Irrelevant following is able to sign letters, which become the basis for asylum claims. So the asylum claims and the claims of violence and persecution are so heavily exaggerated.

And as a result of which somebody gets their immigration or asylum documentation, and then a generation and the next generation is constantly lying about it. Because the moment [00:13:00] you come

Manisha: out,

Sherbir Panag: And the moment you come out and say, no, you know, this is not, this isn't the truth. You know, you go back, you want to come back to the village and then, you know, make nice videos and Instagram reels about how beautiful Punjab is and how, how I'm eating this and eating that.

But suddenly when the asylum application comes, oh, you know, those, those fields are actually dead bodies and there is no sarsoka saag and makki ki roti. And, you know, the water in our wells is poisoned and things like that. So that I think that that intergenerational movement on false accounts, is Immigration asylum paperwork has taken its toll where you have, like, I'm very surprised with the, with the latest generation.

Most people are born, born in the nineties, haven't seen, haven't really have, have seen Punjab in a peaceful period. And somebody who was, who was, who sort of saw Punjab as an adult in that period as well into their sixties and seventies. So what's, and so they, they, you know, the cause and effect. Between somebody who's born now in the 90s and is in their 30s or was born in the 80s and is in their 40s and is still vying for something they've [00:14:00] not seen or something they had probably saw as children, not taking away from the two events I spoke about, but Um, Is, is a major cause for this attrition, for this cognitive dissonance and also, um, and also weaponizing this, this false information.

It's, it all comes together.

Manisha: That's very interesting, actually. So what you're saying, there are material gains to be had from this victimhood, exaggerated victimhood story that. is sold and that is being bought. And I think that's something that we haven't really explored enough. But okay, quickly one more question and then I'll let everyone else come in.

So now you come to the current standoff between India and Canada. There are serious allegations that, you know, there were these designated, uh, for us, they're terrorists. Canada calls them pro Khalistan activists. Activists and there are serious charges that have been leveled that with the Indian agencies, we have colluded to finish these guys off.

Even if you dismiss these charges aside, the kind of rhetoric around us [00:15:00] that we've seen since this news has broke is a sort of a celebration among those who support the Modi government that yes, we have to teach our, uh, enemies a lesson. We have to teach these stanis a lesson in their own land and and all that kind of rhetoric around it.

Now, you know, given that what you've told us about. the manufacturing of this myth of, you know, whatever the genocide that has been ongoing since the 80s in Punjab. Is there an overreaction also from the India side and could there have been a better way to deal with these irritants, quote unquote, who, you know, peddled this myth of Khalistan and Canada?

Do you see us also kind of giving into it by, you know, uh, with the rhetoric that you're seeing right now?

Sherbir Panag: Manisha, I think we've got to, you know, everything is. Is hyper is, is hyper nuanced, but let's just take some steps back. Canada's track record on dealing with terrorism and especially [00:16:00] Um, and especially, um, you know, whether it's specifically dealing with, um, with Khalistani terrorism has been poor.

Their own investigation of the Konishka bombing has been critiqued multi times over. I think first and foremost, let's look at what is okay and what is not okay. Having. Uh, a parade with the taboo, which has, which is, um, celebrating the assassination of a head of state that should not be okay in any part of the civilized world, uh, that sort of crosses boundaries of, of, of, of, of free expression, because it's a call to violence.

Images of our ambassadors and diplomats with bullet holes through, through them, that sort of, and not acting on that, not willing to investigate, investigate these actions and having domestic politics compound their problems of domestic politics compounds. Our rhetoric in some part is also driven by domestic politics, their rhetoric, and [00:17:00] the high handed approach is also driven by domestic politics.

Mr. Trudeau's government at its, at its core needs the, the needs, needs Mr. Jagmeet Singh support and, um, and, and his, and his voters. So I think the first part is let's, if we start breaking this up, it is, let's look at it from the Canadian side. We have a poor track record on terrorism. We have calling Mr.

Niger in whatever capacity, a local preacher is also like calling Mr. Osama bin Laden, a family man, um, you know, it's, it's some of the, some of this, we can't have, we can't have this. You can't, there shouldn't be no nuance when it comes to terrorism. So we've had this poor track record, which was not looked into.

And I think to some extent it was ignored over the years, because pretty much for some of the reasons that you established Manisha that, you know, there's a bunch of people who are delusional, [00:18:00] who sort of have domestic politics and domestic immigration requirements and, and, you know, have a, have, have turned into a somewhere between a vote bank and a guild to work to a cult and are using it to their, to their domestic advantage could do whatever you feel like.

I think the translation to us and its impact in India and this suddenly the fact that for so many years, there were no conversations about this and all of a sudden conversations have kicked off. One of course was prime minister Trudeau's visits to India and the, and, and the fairly questionable people who came along with, uh, with him or who he wanted.

Um, there's some reports about how he wanted several others to join, join in on that list, but I think we can't also take away, What happened? What changed with the farmers protest?

Sting: The

Sherbir Panag: farmers protest happens. There are farmers from Punjab at the forefront, um, rather than sort of ultimately. And this is where I think the dog whistling and the turning holier than the king approach changes.

On one side, you have Prime Minister Modi, who, in all fairness, [00:19:00] reached out and revoked the farm laws. And mentioned in his, in his communication in a fairly in a departure from his usual style that he believes we were not able to communicate our position effectively enough to the, to the, to the farmers.

But at the same point of time, I think at that point, you know, given that sobriety. And respect in our discourse left us several years back, everybody boiled down to the knee jerk, classic knee jerk reaction turned into this, this being, oh, you know, the protest is hijacked by the Khalistanis and suddenly Folks like Guru Patwan Singh Pannu and the ninjas of the world started, you know, good, but Pannu has been saying random stuff for years and nobody's taken him

Manisha: seriously.

With, with,

Sherbir Panag: with, with due respect, he sounds like a clown.

Manisha: Yeah.

Sherbir Panag: Uh, and so suddenly you have, you know, those are being supported because he's been saying the same kind of trash all along. And, and that [00:20:00] hyphenation. The lack of, you know, proper communication at during the protest or trying to spotlight and say, this is happening.

It was deeply unfortunate and led to this sort of led to led to this inflection inflection point, because how do you call a state where probably every village? And definitely every district multiple times over has seen body bags and has had people killed in action in service of the nation has significant contribution to military and paramilitary forces.

How do you make broad generalizations about being called anti national? When I sort of said that it's the, you know, it's everybody's right to, to protest and it's equally anybody's right to disagree with that protest. I got called a Khalistani in my Twitter feed used to be full of some random folks, uh, calling me a Khalistani.

I think that. Had its impact of creating an inflection point and adding fuel to the fire. And then in moments like this, it's not like we live in the most peaceful neighborhood, Manisha, you have, [00:21:00] you, you know, you have Pakistan sitting right there, observing all of this. They'll also take advantage of this and see that they understand, you know, that every second household in Punjab has family in Canada.

And that this is a means of, of, of adding fuel to, to file. So, We've had multiple elements that have contributed to, to the sort of what I would call the spotlighting of, of, of this, uh, fairly obscure Khalistan claim by a bunch of, by a fringe and lunatic elements outside India, or a misinformed diaspora.

Let's, let's, let's try and be respectful or a misinformed diaspora, which the inflection point then came, which when compounded with Canada, not taking a serious stance on it. Getting spotlight in a moment in a, in a, in a moment of, of, of confront of confrontation and fairly aggressive confront confrontation during the farmers protest.

I think they all, all these elements come together and then look at look at, [00:22:00] um, this, I think the main streaming of, of a fairly dead issue. Is events between December 2020 and now, and, and people like Ms. Kangana Ranaut and look at, look at the kind of statements she has, she has made fairly despicable statements, which her own party has been compelled to distance themselves.

Manisha: Time and again, they've come during this whole moment calling for, you know, calling anyone who's dissenting as Khalistani. Can I just jump in though? Um,

Jayashree: I feel like even if we set aside So I say we take as a given Canada's very poor track record, which is, I mean, widely known and available. And also the fact that, you know, how this sort of point was reached, but I think what has happened this week.

So see what happened is that Canada has claimed credible evidence. India has put back and said, no. And then started

Sherbir Panag: with claiming intelligence.

Jayashree: Yeah. It said intelligence and

Sherbir Panag: evidence. And it's that's, that's been an interesting movement on, on the, yeah, I think Canada

Jayashree: had said last September it had. [00:23:00] Um, intelligence, but not, uh, evidentially proof.

And that's when it asked India to work together. We look at your security services, whatever. And this is what Trudeau has claimed. And India said no. And parallel to this is also the fact that, um, India has agreed to appoint that high level committee or whatever to investigate charges in the US about the plot to assassinate Pannu.

So, yeah. And they arrested one guy. And now, yeah, this morning or yesterday, they said that they arrested that one guy who was allegedly an Indian official who communicated with whoever. So, but I just think, so the question is, for me is how credible, credible are these claims that India did actually try and assassinate a man on foreign soil or these allegations of collusion?

And like you said, we don't have the evidence, but I would say what I want to talk about is that See, Australia had expelled four Indians for spying. I think this was in June. Uh, spying is fine. It's what you're supposed to do when you're part of the intelligence, part of RAW and so on. But getting caught [00:24:00] means you're a bit of an idiot.

And this is at one level of stability. Now, the other thing that I think we should talk about is this Panun assassination plot. The U. S. has very categorically stated and produced evidence that India tried to use some higher gangster to assassinate someone on US soil. It tried and failed. And in Niger's case, Canada is saying that India tried and succeeded.

Now there are many contradictions here. For me, there are two sort of theories that could explain this. And the first theory is that everyone is conspiring against India because since India has such a great rising superpower, all the five eyes, the US, the UK, Australia, Canada, everyone is conspiring to pull us down.

And Seems a little far fetched, which only brings us to the second theory to me, which is that maybe India has been really stupid. It's, I mean, a lot of commentators even in Canada are saying Trudeau is under a lot of pressure. He relies on that chap to keep his government in power. All this is pandering and all this is true and all this is at play.

And I think it would be compelling to therefore say that Canada has sort of manufactured a bit of this case. If the U. S. [00:25:00] case did not exist, if Canada was an isolated incident, then sure, but is Joe Biden also compelled to pander to the Sikhs as a vote bank? It's a mix for, yeah,

Sherbir Panag: let's, let's distinguish the approach to the U.

S. and Canada. So let's, let's. Let's take a step back. I think when it comes to Canada, let's go by the approaches taken by both governments. I think the West and India, um, acted maturely and responsibly, uh, in terms of in the, in the corridor of their conversations. And that's much what friends do.

Intelligence operations go wrong all the time. Uh, we aren't the first, uh, where if, if it is one, that is that an intelligence operation has gone wrong. But when There are friendly nations, you sort of have constructive conversation. And I think to some extent that constructive conversation with the United States happened.

On the other hand, that constructive conversation [00:26:00] with Canada did not happen. Um, partly, um, And partly driven by, I think, Canada's own compunctions and like you rightly pointed out that, um, you know, Trudeau may be over himself on this, even right from the beginning, you know, we've all heard of, we've heard of all, you know, the wordsmithing of the Canadian government, even if I, even if I do try and sort of, for a moment, Leave all other context aside in round one, it was credible allegations.

And I think the same reason I smiled when you said Prima facie contemptuous, I would smile at something called a credible allegation. A credible allegation is, doesn't have an oxymoron,

Jayashree: it's still an allegation. Yeah.

Sherbir Panag: It's, it's an oxymoron. I would, I would go with an oxymoron. So from credible allegations, you go to intelligence.

Because clearly they got, they got hurt enough by using those words. And then from that, they went in [00:27:00] here. I think Canada's domestic approach compelled India to, to, um, compelled India to sort of respond more, more aggressively. Usually these things, if this was an intelligence operation, um, these things normally would get resolved quietly between two friendly countries.

Um, the, somebody raised the ante and then, then the other one has to respond. It sort of falls flat, flat between, between those lines of raising, raising the ante. And I think on this with do with, I think the Canadians take all the credit and all the cake. On, on, uh, on raising the ante,

Manisha: I want to come to Anand now.

So exactly like there is this thing of intelligence operations going wrong. Friendly nations tend to solve these issues behind the door. And certainly you don't have a country naming home minister, like we know in Washington Post has named Amit Shah. And now there's this whole talk in India that [00:28:00] Canada is the new Pakistan, except it's not, right?

We have an 8. 4 billion trade relationship with them. We have students who study there, we have a diaspora, we're certainly way more in sync and collaborating with each other than with Pakistan. How do you see this diplomatic fallout? Like what could have led to this? And you'd have to theorize quite a bit because a lot of it is not in the public domain.

But according to you, what went. You know, how do things go so South and also the thing is that it's not as simple now as Trudeau being weak in elections because relationships when this are so badly, it's not like Trudeau will, you know, lose power and there'll be conservatives and we'll be back to being besties.

Now, the relationships between the two countries will very much be defined by what has happened right now. So what do you see for us in the future and what could have led to, like, such a deterioration of. relationships and wouldn't be accurate to say that we've never had such an altercation with any other country apart from Pakistan.

Lots of questions thrown at you. Take them at your will.[00:29:00]

Anand: I think we can look at it from the lens of international relations then and the fallout. First is the domestic political imperatives in Canada. are important here. And second is how, why India responded differently to the U. S. charge and the Canadian one. So, um, first, uh, you see the, um, uh, Significance that Mr.

Trudeau attaches to New Democratic Party that, uh, led by, uh, what is his name? Anyway, so, uh, that is important for him. Uh, but, uh, there is also one thing that in Canada, we have, uh, this, uh, political interference commission and, uh, Its findings in last few [00:30:00] months were more about China, that there has been Chinese interference in the political process, particularly electoral process of Canada.

But, uh, um, Trudeau's, uh, approach has been that yes, he admits that there has been Chinese interference, but deflected to India also and make India the key interfering force in the Canadian politics. Because the conservative party Party there, the rival party is more inclined towards, uh, charging China with political interference.

So, uh, the heat was on him to deal with this matter also.

Manisha: So he added India to the mix.

Anand: India is the chief one because the political interference commission of Canada, in an, Official reports said that China is the main interfering force in our electoral process, but Trudeau [00:31:00] admits it. And, uh, but he also says, uh, now his focus is that India is at power.

In fact the more, uh, um, bigger problem, more, uh, meddling force. So that is one thing. And so

Manisha: he's dealing with India strongly,

Anand: strongly. Also, also the new democratic admit seen by the, also, also he is, uh, uh, he is trying to piggyback on the US allegation, uh, against India. But India has. Uh, also see, uh, uh, uh, in 2018, uh, uh, that, uh, why, who are you Chinese company?

It's chairman was arrested because U. S. wanted him to be arrested. And what was the Chinese response? They, they just, um, had a crack at two or three Canadian officials and they negotiated the, Now, uh, uh, Mr. Trudeau is mending his ties with [00:32:00] China. His foreign minister in July was in China and working on a strategic partnership.

And His approach to China in the domestic politics of Canada is quite contrary to how the conservative party looks at China. So it is also a political hot potato there and targeting of China to gain, uh, foothold over that important vote bank of the Sikh separatists, or let us not say separatists, the Sikh diaspora.

So that is one thing. Second, that, uh, uh, A Sikh, any separatist group, whether it is Sikh or not, it is an, uh, security and intelligence asset. If, if you are a separatist group, uh, somehow, uh, housed in any other country, you are an [00:33:00] intelligence asset and security asset against that country. So it's, it's a kind of bargaining chip.

Also that this we had have against you. Like, uh, before Mr. Moody's visit to us, they issued someone against, uh, NSA, uh, in ju in, in, uh, when did in July or August. Mm-Hmm. So, uh, so to just to keep heat on. But India's approach has been. Um, and to insulate the can and this, uh, uh, but no issue from working on other areas of strategic partnership and they have been successful in doing so in this Tuesday only or they have signed a 4 billion, uh, predator drone deal with us.

So they have been working on insulating this issue from that. And they have also set, uh, uh, uh, Committee inquiry committee. So what [00:34:00] they are doing is, and anyway, if you take out all the pretext of positive moralism, moralism from international relations for us, this is nothing for us killing some. Some target in a foreign land is nothing.

They have, they have engineered regime change. But you don't do it

Manisha: in a friendly country. I mean, that's the difference. You do it with countries you're not friendly with, but you rarely would. I think

Anand: Pakistan is a friendly country of U. S. They killed Osama there. So, uh, uh, that, that is one thing, uh, but let us keep the pretensions of all these international obligations and friendly country and all that.

But, uh, even within that, that has been, uh, and he. Correctly pointed out that there can be phases of [00:35:00] competence and incompetence of intelligence agencies and security agencies. They fail many times. Uh, most of the time it does not come to public domain.

Sting: Hmm.

Anand: So, uh, that is another thing to, uh, so to say that, uh, India has come out looking as stupid out of it is an overstatement, I would say.

Mm-Hmm.

Jayashree: But I'm saying, is it really worth destroying dramatic diplomatic relationships to sort of chase this shadow? I mean, why would I

Manisha: guess because since we started this conversation and I'll come to Raman sir after that, but just to continue on this train, since we started with this conversation on, I get that there is, you know, it's an intelligence asset and any separatist group will be of interest to us.

But were they to begin with? Yeah. If you're taking everything into face value that, yes, we are going ahead and taking down on enemies in foreign soil, are they really worth the trouble is my question. It's

Jayashree: a lot of diplomatic costs for some very limited jingoistic gain. I mean, I don't see. I

Sherbir Panag: think there's, there's always the concern to also [00:36:00] keep in mind that, look, I don't think we know right now whether this was a covert operation or not.

Audio insert: Yeah.

Sherbir Panag: There are, I want to make two points and I think one to what Anand just said, there are I think the first that has Canada had their own history of, of gang violence and other, other challenges. Absolutely. Yes. Um, and I think the second part to what Anand said, you know, hyphenating India in the foreign interference In the foreign interference claim and seeing some of the stuff that's come out today, as in tweets by Shiva Prakash A and I may be distasteful, but to take those tweets and quote those, those, the, the quote that language and claim that as foreign interference is absolutely hogwash.

Manisha: Yeah. Agree. In the, in the same

Sherbir Panag: plane, you have somebody out there who threatens. Indians do not and do not board Air India flights because they're going to take action. You have statements [00:37:00] of killings that are going to, that are going to take place. You have threats that are directly issued to Indian nationals.

And that is not, that is not foreign interference. I think this, this dichotomy is why Canada's response becomes all the more laughable. When you now You know, since we're, since we've, it's become famous, the chronology becomes important. Chronology that their own language. on their from credible allegations to hard intelligence, you know, by adding an adjective before the, before a primary word does not, does not change.

It's does not change its construct. First, the verbiage, then the fact that they're not doing anything about those guys back home, you leave more than ample ground for, for, for, um, for a judging their own conduct and realizing What this is geared up towards. And it takes away that component that friendly countries could have had a sit down and said, listen, we think there's a challenge.

Could we, could we resolve this? [00:38:00] But when you've taken up the ante because of other compunctions, then it, it, it plays out.

Manisha: Raman sir, in all of this, you have Lawrence Vishnu enter the scene and again, very outlandish right now. It's a claim by the Canadians that He is somehow in touch with the diplomats and diplomats there have been feeding him information on Khalistanis and the crime syndicate has been going on a killing spree.

Meanwhile, NIA last year had actually filed a charge sheet saying that Lawrence Vishnowi has Khalistani connections with Babbar Khalsa and all. How is this 31 year old, I think, sitting in jail since 2015, been able to create this international racket And is it even plausible that this person sitting in jail has been able to kind of maneuver?

Of course, there's a Baba Siddiqui case which happened last week, but also now his name is coming up in Canada. It's the most bizarre twist to all of this.

Raman: No, his, [00:39:00] uh, I mean, Bishnoi's story began with the fact that he belongs to a community, uh, which worships, uh, the animal Black Buck, which was killed by, uh, you know, Salman Khan.

So this is how his story began. Yeah. And, uh, he, he issued some videos initially that Salman Khan should say, come to the temple and he should say, sorry. Otherwise the community is not going to spare him. So this is how his story began. And he wasn't a big. criminal when he was, uh, you know, arrested in 2015.

And since 2015, he is in the jail and I think he has, and, uh, he has claimed five big murders, you know, which happened when he was inside the jail. First in Tihar jail. And then again, he was transferred to, uh, Sabamati jail where, you know, you have hundreds of policemen, uh, you know, [00:40:00] um, and, and the temp, uh, and the, and the, Uh, the prison itself is layered into, uh, it is a layered, uh, prison.

So, so he is instructing, I mean, if you believe, uh, you know, all these claims, these claims first of all comes, I mean, I've seen, uh, only these claims are coming from the police. The police is saying that the three or four persons who have been arrested, they have a connection with Bush. This is how we, the media, is also reporting.

We don't have any access to Vishnoy. We don't have any access, even, even whatever that has come out in the court during the trial, even the trial hasn't begun. In fact, whatever the case diary, it doesn't reflect that how, you know, these people are connected with Vishnoy. So Vishnoy's story is, uh, I don't know how much, uh, you know, credibility we can give it to.

Um, so this is [00:41:00] when, when, when the. This Baba Siddiqui case happened, then the Canada, Canadian authorities, uh, they spoke that, uh, he is, he is an alibi for the agents of India to conduct their operations even abroad. Uh, because See, the motive is missing in all these five killings. Uh, NIA has recently, uh, you know, um, they have, uh, I think two charges, they have filed in which they have claimed that, uh, this, uh, Vishnoy had links with the Khalistan organization.

Again, there is no substantive evidence. There is no. No, no, no material evidence, which links Bishnoi, you know, with those Khalistan terrorist organizations.

Manisha: Yeah, except it's just the members in his gang who get recruited apparently also have connections too. And of course, Goldie Brar, his other associate.

Raman: And another thing I'll say, uh, I mean, most of it has been said and rightly so. But, uh, when we talk of [00:42:00] diaspora, uh, even in Canada, I think we should not dub it as that they're all the six, 2 percent of the population that Canada has over a little over 2%. All of them are separatist. No, I mean, there are few leaders who are controlling the Gurdwaras over there.

So these leaders have emerged, but, but most of the population, I've got my relatives over there. And I, I mean, most of the population is not, uh, you know, Um, in favor of Khalistan. So so, uh, I mean, this is a diaspora when we talk about diaspora, we should not,

Manisha: uh, club, everyone,

Raman: everybody in the same, uh, this thing.

And I think both countries, uh, and also the credibility and the credence of that Intel, you know, that comes out from the fact that this intelligence has come from five countries. They claim and none of the country is saying. No to it. Australia, America, [00:43:00] uh, Britain, all of them have said, yes, this Intel has come.

It's a collective Intel and India has to respond. That's, that's how, uh, you know, the Trudeau claim has get some credibility. And

Manisha: also he wouldn't be saying all of this if he didn't have the U. S. 's. So, so,

Raman: so you have five countries saying, and, and us again has said yes, uh, yesterday or day before that India is not cooperating with Canada.

So the us, uh, there was a press conference in the us. So I think in the white house, so they have said it, uh, I mean, uh, they are not like they have India. has cooperated with the US, but they haven't cooperated with Canada. I think both the countries were hyper in their reaction. And in diplomacy, all that matters is the image.

So, so, so. And also how

Manisha: you word everything, I think with Canada also coming out and naming like the top guys, now it's even more difficult. I think India will just make [00:44:00] it

Raman: a, not want to come on the same table where you named Amit

Manisha: Shah.

Raman: It has become really worse because today I was reading in the papers that Canadian authorities, they wanted to interrogate or question, you know, our diplomats, the six diplomats who have been, uh, expelled or whatever, uh, India says that they have recalled.

So, so, so they wanted to, uh, invest, uh, you know, question them. It has come out today in the newspaper. So this, this, sorry, sorry, Mr. Kipal, I think on

Sherbir Panag: me, may I, may I make a quick point there?

Manisha: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay.

Sherbir Panag: So I think that two parts to what you just mentioned, uh, the Canadian claim that they wanted diplomatic diplomatic immunity waived to question them as persons of interest.

I think not how it generally works. Nobody with diplomatic immunity almost ever. And diplomatic, it's, it's all would be unheard of. [00:45:00] I think when you actually look at the. So, as far as the intelligence is concerned, I don't think it's got, and I may be entirely, I, to the best of my memory, I don't believe it's been endorsed by five eyes because all the five eyes countries have made.

varying remarks. Some have gone to the extent of saying that if these are serious, if they are proven, then it would be a challenge. Somebody said, let's respect rule of the usual sort of diplomatic, you know, uh, diplomatic statement. Some, the U S of course has said, we urge urge both, both, both countries to come together.

So I don't think it's been a complete backing of Canada's position. Of course, the five eyes shares intelligence. But I'm, but to the best of my knowledge, it wouldn't be the, that they've backed all the intelligence Canada has put up, put, put forth in this case.

Raman: But you wanted to come in? No, I, uh, see what, uh, whatever I have said, yes, of course, I've, I've just gone through the various [00:46:00] statements.

They haven't even, uh, denied it when, when Canada claims key, this is, this Intel has come from the five eyes and us has also endorsed it. So, so maybe, maybe individually denial of

Manisha: what is, there's no denial

Raman: to it. So, so, so the, and, and, uh, you know, right from the beginning, they are claiming this is an Intel based on the, you know, these five eyes, they are cooperating among themselves, uh, you know, for this Intel.

So, so nobody has

Manisha: Proof what links, see in the U. S. case, there's a raw operative apparently who's gone rogue. Now that's the sense that we are getting because they were arrested CC1. Canada will have to prove and they've already made a statement without backing it up with enough proof that this comes from the top, like the order to kill, there may be rogue operatives, they may be like intelligence bots or whatever, but the order to kill right from the top, that I think they still have to.

Raman: Canada has had, uh, you know. Canada [00:47:00] also has a very, uh, bad way of handling the entire thing. They have arrested four guys in Niger case, right? And if you see the background of these four, four persons, they had come, some, some of them have had come as students, uh, you know, uh, studying on somebody had some relatives.

So they had come over, uh, in Canada. How they are linking these four persons. To the agents of India. I mean, that's what they need to prove.

Manisha: So

Raman: they haven't worked on it at all. I mean, if, if, if you look at their legal case also, I think, uh, the case has come up in the court. There were five dates, uh, so far in the case, nothing substantive has come, come up in the court.

So if you really want to build up. A legal case. I mean, you need to link these five guys. I mean, these, these are the people who have executed it and all four people. And

Manisha: you have to have a very direct chain of command between him and operatives and then the operatives and the Indian government. [00:48:00] So I think that, but my trivia on Lawrence Bishnoi is that he is named after.

Raman: We are doing a story on. Did you know he's

Manisha: named after? Lawrence Lovedale, Henry Lovedale, Henry Lawrence, whatever. And he actually comes from a very affluent family. He's like, A rich landowning family.

Sherbir Panag: Henry Lawrence component. I went to law school up there. Lawrence

Manisha: Vishnoy was named for Henry Lawrence. I

Sherbir Panag: didn't know that.

Manisha: And he also studied law by the way, for your information from Punjab University, studied law, lost it. But what do you make of this whole Lawrence Vishnoy phenomena? Do you think it's just a cover? Just, you know, I mean, what's the, will be

Raman: in the realm of, uh,

Manisha: speculations, but,

Raman: uh, We are, I mean, if you just look at the structure of the prison and somebody ordering and hiring people, uh, and, and building his gang.

Manisha: And the gang only grows after he goes to jail, in the sense that it becomes bigger than what it was.

Raman: And then you send him to the [00:49:00] most secured, the so called most secured prison and he's killing people from there also.

Jayashree: And they're not letting Maharashtra police have access to him. No other state can have access to him, right?

That's the thing now.

Raman: No, they, they said if you get the judicial order, uh, then they can

Sherbir Panag: move to have access to when somebody is arrested in one matter to another is a, is a judicial process they'll need to do. Even in, in the case of the Sidhu Musewala probe as well, there were people that were moved from different prisons who were, who had been apprehended.

So that'll be a, that'll be a judicial process.

Manisha: And your comments on Lawrence Bishnoi before we let you go. I

Sherbir Panag: don't know. You know, I think, um, I started, in fact, I think anyone who's got any sort of base in Punjab has, has seen that the rise of the gangs in the recent past, uh, wasn't a, wasn't an age old phenomenon was a relatively new phenomenon.

In fact, there's a journalist who's reported extensively on this [00:50:00] topic. His name is Aditya Menon. Um, with, um, he's reported for the Quint and And I think to a lot of us, when Sidhu Moosewala's murder took place, I think that's really when, when this came to the, came to the, to the, to the forefront. Does Punjab have a drugs problem?

Absolutely. Yes. I don't think any one of us can deny that. Did partly organized crime, plus drugs, plus opportunities with, um, could have, could they have resulted in this totally? Um, I honestly, I think we're all coming to terms with the Lawrence Vishnoy phenomenon and it was distresses all of us and concerns all of us that here is somebody who, who's been in jail since he was potentially 22 years old and, and has managed to gather this level of.

Um, influence, um, such that he's, his name is featuring in, in international communique [00:51:00] between, between sovereign nations and of course, high profile, high profile, uh, cases. So I think it's, um, definitely very, very distressing and

Manisha: And actually, there's a very interesting piece on him. I was reading a profile, I think in the BBC, which basically talked about how a lot of these young people from Punjab, especially from the villages when they come there, basically like feudal lords.

And when they come to the cities, there is this sense of feeling like a nobody. And a lot of them are driven by Crime is not just about money or being, you know, getting involved in extortion rackets and all that, but it's also about fame. It's about feeling that you are somebody. And in Lawrence's case, you know, they noted that often he said this, Ki kuch bada karna hai.

And Salman also like saying that Black Buck, Thing is a thing he's saying, but a lot of people also feel that it's his way of arriving on the scene that you kill a superstar like Salman Khan. And he's ironically this week, he actually gets what he's been wanting, which is international fame [00:52:00] for just

Raman: to get international or national fame.

I mean, this looks, I don't think, I mean, you will kill five people just to. To get fame and that too, and that too from a, from too high security gene. I

Manisha: mean, it's so. There's also a monetary angle, of course, if, if the more notorious you are, the more you can ask in extortions, of course, that is one, one, one.

But certainly very perplexing. Thanks. If you have any last parting comments, we know we have to let you go in.

Sherbir Panag: Not at all. Not at all. Great. Great seeing you all. And it was, do you have any

Manisha: recommendations for our listeners? What they should watch? I do. In

Sherbir Panag: fact, it's the book I briefly referenced upfront. I would, I think Punjab, the whole story of Punjab in the eighties and after that needs, needs a far more nuanced understanding than three events of, uh, you know, blue star anti, Anti Sikh riots and Pindarawale.

It needs, it needs, people need to get more, [00:53:00] need to get their facts, uh, right. And I think Mr. Ramesh Inder Singh's book, Turmoil in Punjab is a, is, is a great way to, to, to read and understand that period in Punjab and India's history.

Manisha: Great. Thank you so much for joining us. And hopefully next time we have you in the studio.

Sherbir Panag: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank

Manisha: you. Okay. So does anybody want to add to this diplomatic row? Two things

Anand: that, uh, that are in the electoral laws of Canada, which make parties pander to these communities, which are solid wood bank. One is that in Canada. You, uh, if a party is nominating someone, he has to get endorsement of the voters of certain number of voters.

So a Sikh community means is one of the few communities, well knit communities in Canada. So [00:54:00] parties are attracted to these kinds of communities. Eco communities. Second is that. The Sikh Guru Dwara Charity is also a way of finance because in Canada, you cannot finance a political party through corporate bodies and trade unions.

You cannot root funds from them. So charities. are a way to do that. So there also they come in handy.

Manisha: They're pretty. Yeah.

Anand: Second thing I wanted to add is that one of the allegations they made through foreign service that made them look a bit, uh, naive in sense of understanding of how Indian establishment works, because generally there is a divide between intelligence agencies and the Indian diplomatic corp.

So, uh, Really, they work in tandem really means and their allegation is that all were [00:55:00] first and they have named them as persons of interest. So that is also a means only prima facie that It is something highly unlikely to me.

Manisha: Great. So with that, let's get to the letters of the week. We have lots of letters in this episode is supposed to be an all letter episode.

So we'll quickly go through them. I'm going to read the first 15 letters and Jayshree you read the next 15. And if there are questions addressed to any of you. Please answer. So T800 has said that, um, they're very disturbed by looking at protests in support of Nasrallah. I felt very odd as many Muslims looked up to Nasrallah and called him innocent.

Groups like Hezbollah and Iran's axis of resistance use violence in the name of God. This is worse than America that uses violence for geopolitical and capitalist means. The Ayatollah derives his power from divinity. Modi just made one reference that he was, he has godly power and it sounded so idiotic, but the Ayatollah has been doing this since 1979.

It's unfortunate that Iran and its axis have managed to find sympathy [00:56:00] among Indian Muslims, specifically the Shia community. Iran has nothing but political Islam to offer for Indian Muslims. Any support towards such groups should be condemned. Norman Khan says, as a student of Delhi University, I witnessed firsthand how the veneer of youthful idealism often crumbles over political activism.

It's not uncommon to see people beating each other up over smallest disagreements. And what's worse, at the end of every farewell or function, the inevitable chant of Jayshree Ram echoed through the air like some grim punctuation mark. This isn't the spirit of unity or intellectual growth we are promised.

It's a sad reflection of where we are. Maneesha's observation about Bangladesh feels uncomfortably close to home. The expectation that youth, by virtue of their age, should possess a progressive mindset is a romantic fantasy. If anything, the young seem to be more inclined to emotional extremism, easily swayed by rhetoric.

The reality is that fanaticism doesn't discriminate by age, and the rising tide of intolerance we see in India today reveals just how far we've drifted from critical thinking, intellectual inquiry. You want

Jayashree: [00:57:00] to comment? And when you get older and you realize that adults are even more petty than what students can be.

So good times away to you, Noman Khan. But see,

Anand: there are two types of students. One who are students and second who come to university and get a degree. So, Uh, second, I don't count among students,

Manisha: you're going to get a barrage of letters next week.

Anand: So unfortunately in, uh, not in only recent, but in last, it means I have been living In and in the vicinity of Delhi University, I came, I am giving these observations because his, uh, letter is specific to University of Delhi.

So, uh, what has happened is that, uh, what I observed, I am not been never a participant in student politics, but, uh, [00:58:00] To serious students have, it has become difficult for serious students in last two decades to be participant in student politics because student organizations put a lot of demand on their time.

Earlier it was not so. Earlier you could be a very good student and be In student politics, but now it is very difficult and, um, you have to get involved in a lot of things which have not, not to do anything with a study. So if you are aiming for to do something with your academics, it becomes difficult.

So it has led to a certain degree of lumpenization in all organizations, uh, means four or five active organizations in the campus. But this is a general, but what I just don't agree with him is that idealism is the [00:59:00] prerogative or monopoly of one section of so called progressive student. Idealism means what he's decrying may be idealist, means people who are doing lumpen things or They may be violent people with long career ambitions in politics, but people who are behind them may be idealist.

Also, uh, there is, uh, um, a kind of, uh, say, uh, the, uh, Delhi University politics has always been different from the other universities. Uh, in, on, uh, see. July 20, uh, sorry. September 27 last year. Uh, last month they had elections and the high court has stayed its result. And it is result, hasn't it? No, no. It'll come on October 21st and there will be a hearing they need to clean.

There will be a [01:00:00] hearing and the status report will be given . And it is because they overspent, uh, the ling to committee recommendations and. And the high court was very strict in its comments that money power has been pumped now. NSUI, ABVP, ISI, SFI to a lesser extent, but there, there were patches of idealism.

Like I saw a lot of students campaigning, uh, on, uh, tree leaves. NSUI, S O Ing themselves said. Concerned with environment and there were new modes of campaigning and people spoke in different voices. There was a lot of diversity in the ideological positions they came from. Uh, came up with in, uh, campaigning.

So, uh, it's not that there is one, uh, what is, [01:01:00] what has happened that the things, uh, that we're not finding wires because of some kind of consensus politics and the decorum that has been breached. That is one thing. You want

Raman: to go? I studied in Delhi University for five years, 79 to 84, and two years in London.

Sting: In

Raman: five years, uh, we used to have election within the college, which where I found some serious students, some good students who used to participate in politics, but very few of them, but they used to, I mean, the very idealist, of course, but lumpenization, I saw it right all during the five years when it comes to do so election.

I mean, The entire Delhi University election. There was a lot of negation. So these students either used to, uh, you know, wanted to contest elections. So they used to fail and or or they used to take readmission or they were studying Pali [01:02:00] language. Uh, so I saw. That in those five years, I mean, very closely I saw, I mean, I, because my question used to be, who are they?

You know, even when I became a reporter, that's what I used to report. Who are they? What do they do? How many times they, how many years they have taken to, you know, pass their graduation or post graduation. So that lumpenization at DUSU level was quite prominent even during my time. Yes. Elections in JNU were all together a different thing.

It was It gives you a real intellect kick. I mean, it was pretty good. I

Anand: mean, uh, DOSU elections are more means real picture of what is happening around neighboring states of Delhi, Delhi. There was a time when the DOSU election results were taken as a barometer for the nature of results that will come in Delhi assembly.

Oh, wow. Yes.

Manisha: Okay, Shweta says congratulations NL Srinivasan [01:03:00] Jain for report from Israel. I've been following the investigative reporting on NY Times on labor conditions in Maharashtra sugar mills. She's wondering if we can collaborate with someone like Pari to report on it. We'll definitely pass this on to our reporter who is in Pune and maybe we could look into this.

Rakesh says excellent reporting by Srinivasan Jain from Israel and Gaza. In the US, the only thing between the fat orange pimp, FOP and the presidency is us. the people. Hopefully, Jain will also with coalitions, community organizers, political leaders opposing FOP in Jain's election report. As always, thank you.

He's there. Although we are very disappointed that Srimasan Jain didn't dance with Israeli people. And there's no point

Jayashree: anymore then.

Manisha: He may as well just come back. Sent him all the way and he came back without a dance. Okay. Akash says, I subscribed to NL during the election during elections because it helped me make sense of the few months in Indian politics.

This was after years of not subscribing because every time I read NL, all I could think about was that [01:04:00] this was a place that birthed. No, we certainly didn't give birth to Anand Ranganathan, but I get your point. Now, I greatly appreciate that NL is so self aware and accepting of criticism. So I was deeply disappointed by article on Ratan Tata.

It's fine to praise him, but to say without any qualifier that he lived a very austere life. And all his money went to NGOs without putting any stats on any links to any reports outlining these things as just PR. Since Anand loves playing devil's advocate and bring up points that are not covered elsewhere, what new perspectives does Orbit provide and hadn't been covered elsewhere in the Tata press release?

Anyway, love your work. So, Anand, do you want to respond to your obituary on Tata?

Anand: Yes. Uh, if you say someone is austere, he would, uh, speaking in relative terms. If you compare him with me, and then obviously he was living a flamboyant life. So, so, uh, [01:05:00] But so, but see, uh, if you look back at a corporate leader's life and the, uh, public memory has this thing that he was, uh, distinct with his frugal lifestyle and other things, then it's.

It stands out because the, that is a field where that is, uh, distinguished by numbers and materialist, uh, say milestones. So that, that is one thing. Obviously he stood out that and a lot of public adulation came, uh, with that, uh, how to measure. Austerity with, uh, empirical data. I don't know. So,

Manisha: but did he give his money to the NGOs?

So,

Anand: uh, like that, so, NGOs? NGOs I have not mentioned in my piece. You can reread it. Uh, NGOs I have not mentioned, uh, I have mentioned that he gave it to [01:06:00] charitable causes. He, beyond the Tata fold, he gave money to a lot of, uh, say startups. Startups. He invested his money also with enormous. Assets at his command is at his conglomerate's command.

He didn't trouble the billionaire list makers So he could have got into that race I seriously don't believe that corporate leaders want to get into that race But they get into it by way of accumulation means it's not a that It is a race, but he is stood out from that. That is one thing. Also, I was conscious that I should look at him.

Of course, his conglomerate, the group, uh, attended, uh, means not attended. It invited a lot of controversies. I focused only on controversies, which concerned him. That is one radio tapes. And second, his, uh, means obsession with, [01:07:00] uh, nano car and how he, how he, Uh, looked back at it and he himself analyzed why it failed and I have given it in my piece that is besides that you are free to that.

But I have not said NGOs and data. If you say someone is austere and frugal than the other corporate frame point captains of industries, then I don't know what is the data for that.

Manisha: Yeah, I guess it's in relative terms. He is more frugal than an. I have an

Jayashree: asshole take on Ratan Tata though, which is that I feel like he's the perfect example of a billionaire with fantastic PR.

I mean, that Ambani's son spent so much money setting up that zoo in Jamnagar to save the elephants and all, and no one cared. Ratan Tata cleverly and smartly realized, you just need to talk about dogs. I've realized you can be the worst person in the world. And I'm not talking about Ratan Tata, I'm saying in general.

You can be the worst person in the world, but you do something related to dogs and all that, that is all it [01:08:00] takes for people to love you. It appeals to a certain kind of, like, liberal commentator who feeds street dogs, you know, that sort of ideology really works. And I feel like it's a masterclass, like, if you're sort of, you know, Well spoken, somewhat discreet in your personal life, generally personable, soft spoken, and you love dogs, then that is what they value more than everything.

And I feel that also greatly explains that entire outpouring of love that, I mean, I had a lot of friends who just posted incessantly saying, my God, sir, we'll miss you and all. And you don't really expect to see that for a while. I mean, but

Manisha: maybe he did love dogs.

Jayashree: Why do we think that? No, I'm saying he did love dogs.

I'm saying, but obviously there is also PR involved. The man loved dogs and all those photos came out about it. It was smart. As

Raman: a corporate group. I mean, I have done a very critical story when I was in the past. It was 20 years ago when I was in Express, we did that Tata tapes, Tata Alpha tapes. [01:09:00] And it was a very critical story, which, and Tata did not give advertisements to Indian Express for five years.

So, so that, and then again, I did a story in First Post when I was with First Post, I did a story. Yes. But, uh, having said that, I know many employees, uh, who work with Tata. Nobody speaks. You know, bad about him. No one. So that is one way of looking at the person, you know, at the group. Uh, everybody is happy.

Let

Anand: me end it with an anecdote that this precedes Ratan Tata. In 1944, generally when companies are nationalized and government takes it over, the employees are very happy that they will get government benefits. But, but in 1944, British government moved forward to nationalize Tata Steel and the workers protested against nationalization.

Back

Raman: then. And people were [01:10:00] so happy when Air India came, went back to Tata because the people who are retired, they get some benefits. First they thought maybe these benefits will just go away, but no, They are, in fact, getting better benefits, you know, after Air India was, uh, given its

Anand: legacy groups. Legacy also means spilled over to him.

Like, I think this is one

Raman: way of judging people. I mean, if employees are talking so nice, if If

Anand: a corporate house, which has been in business for so many years has only three or four controversies to be counted on fingertips, it has done something well, means otherwise every week you have some corporate house quoting some controversy or other.

Manisha: I think since we're talking about that, I'll give my recommendations now. Also, I think one piece that Sunita Narayan wrote in Business Standard on Ratan Tata was actually quite interesting because she's an adversary. So she starts off with, you know, how the Ratan Tata, [01:11:00] the Tata group filed defamation cases against her because she, late nineties, they were saying that diesel is causing pollution and they're, You know, leading cause of PM 2.

5 Ratan Tata felt that these guys are speaking on behalf of petrol lobby because he was entering into diesel cars and filed cases against them. And then she explains how once they got talking, there was a lifelong disagreement, but there was a lot of kind of respect that he held for her. And this. thing that, you know, of wanting to listen to your adversary.

He exemplified that. And I thought that was very interesting coming from Sunita Narayan, especially at a time now where when you accuse Adani, he'll stand in front of a flag and say, Oh, India is under threat. So there is something to be said about someone who was willing to listen to adversaries. And I thought the other really good obituary was by Manu Joseph, where he basically You know, talks about radia tapes and how Ratan Tata talks of everyone like, you know, they're [01:12:00] his butler, but I really love this.

How he starts off is saying that basically he made entitlement look good and capitalism didn't look so bad when he was doing it. Ratan Tata had conveyed through the course of his public life that some gigantic public figures can only emerge from privilege. Their coolness comes from lack of desperation, the near absence of predators, and the fact that that they probably never had to endure anything that could make them bitter about human beings.

So he also, you know, this thing of why everyone likes him is because there's this intangible like he's a classy guy. What does it mean to be classy? I think Ratan Tata really exemplifies. It's this aspirational thing, I think. And it also comes from a lot of privilege. Like you're never told. Yeah.

Desperate to want something. So you can be classic. So I thought those were two very good, uh, obituaries on him. Next is, uh, Somnath says, disheartening to note that the reason for not predicting the Haryana polls right is due to deep rooted caste system and not attributed to EVM. When votes are not tallied with VVPATs, they are definitely suspect.

No democracy is using EVMs. Oh, I thought you were [01:13:00] being sarcastic. Sorry. You're being serious. No democracy is using EVMs like we do in the world. These points also need to be photoelectric. Yeah. But I think bringing up EVMs every time they lose is a bit of a, I think it's Just clearly something

Jayashree: that needs to be investigated, but also,

Manisha: but as a whole, broadly, the process of conducting such a large election, but I think just to blame EVM for a lost election is idiotic.

Chetan Bhaskar says, Hi NL team, you guys discussed about protein at the end of previous podcast. I'd like to point you point out. An article in the Hindu titled, The Many Myths About Protein Deficiency In India by Anura Kurpad and Harshpal Singh Sachdev. Uh, it's an interesting read about the myths around protein, especially in infants and people who work out.

Hope it's helpful. Okay, I'll read it. I'm happy to buy into protein myths.

Jayashree: You'll like this one because this thing says that, Oh, actually Indians are doing fine. And also I don't agree with a lot of the stuff in the article. So I think you'd love it. [01:14:00] Kunal

Manisha: Sengupta says, uh, greetings on Bijoy Dashmi. Thank you so much.

Had a small request for urban office goers, business people. Could you have a separate section on the app website catering to mental health space, spirituality, not religion, or. Ergonomics. This will help us since we would be getting articles from credible sources and will help in website engagement as well.

I think mental health. Yes, maybe we should restart Shardul's podcast. It did one season, but maybe we could restart that. Spirituality is not really our zone. Um, we might as well start doing sun signs then for engagement or have crosswords. So we won't get there, but sure. Health, mental health is something we could do.

Jyotsna, uh, says, as corporate employee myself, wanted to weigh in on the working hour debate that has been in discussion recently. The work that we put in is not high stakes and is catering to made up emergencies, which make it very difficult for an employee to digest the reasoning of the hours that we put in and the trade off with our personal lives.

Also the [01:15:00] environment in which all of this is happening matters a lot. I think the fatigue is coming in more from the Unempathetic environment and micromanagement if employees are trusted with their task and only judged on the outcome rather than the hours spent in office or the bootlegging, bootlegging, bootlegging competitions or their availability on weekends.

Even if there's no urgent task, I believe much of this. Added stressful diadem. And second, she says, I'd like to continue with the recent TCS case where employee was fired because she spoke about harassment online and also the HSBC case. I think we have the resources or connections we should to do a story on what action is being taken in harassment cases reported in corporates.

Um, I believe the cases heard and acted upon keeping the power dynamics in mind. If a person bringing in business for the companies accused of something, they're being retained with a slap on a wrist or a warning, which results in Complainant still sharing the office space with them. And finally, in the complainant's resignation, because [01:16:00] what is she saying?

Yeah,

Jayashree: she's saying that the company is accused of something, but depending on the power dynamics, the person who has been accused will get a slap on the wrist or a warning, but meanwhile, the person who has complained will still share office space with them and they may even have to resign because it's easier to change your workplace than to fight.

That's what she says. I don't think it's worth it to have a longer sort of maybe on work life balance. Yeah. Yeah. Or a worklife balance on sort of like work conditions, especially if we can get subscribers from India and abroad to sort of compare. Yeah. We

Manisha: could do a podcast on this and especially corporations.

I think there's a lot of the

Jayashree: letters are on.

Manisha: Yeah. This clearly some emotional issue. It is. Vishnu says, this is my third letter. Hope it's gets read. INC Got a deserved defeat. in Haryana elections. They forgot what worked in the last campaigns. Raga wasn't seen with his pocket constitution and she thought they could win by supporting the powerful cast in this election and it backfired.

My last letter was about Supreme Court subcategorization, judgment and comments contradicting reality. They [01:17:00] repeated empirical data, but made judgments with no data. If I'm doing something wrong in sending the letter, please let me know. You're not, we read your letter out. Vatsal says, Hi NL team, recent escalation in the already sour.

India Canada relations has reached a bizarre level while I believe that the Indian foreign ministry's hand has been fairly poor in handling Canada in recent years. This time the Canadian side's allegations of Indian agents colluding with the Bishnoi gang against Canadian citizens is next level absurd straight out of Bollywood.

Now the discomfort of the Indian government with the pro Khalistan elements and Canadian polity is understandable. Yet, I don't think our recent policy of completely antagonizing this historically friendly and soft spoken. soft state with sizable Indian diaspora serves any long term purpose. The whole situation since July 2022 required an intricate hand of diplomacy.

But alas, the right honorable external affairs minister is more concerned with providing YouTube shots worthy content and punch punchy one liners. In fact, that appears to be a general foreign policy outlook since [01:18:00] 2019. Yeah, it's really bizarre that we're having this fight with Canada of all the countries.

No, but I

Jayashree: like what he said about Jaishankar because my thing is that Okay. Everyone says he's a smart chap, and maybe he's a very smart chap. I don't know if he's constrained by the PMO or whatever, but nothing he says is really conveys the aura of like a seasoned diplomat. And he is a seasoned diplomat.

That's

Raman: what diplomats are. No, I feel like as

Jayashree: a foreign minister, all his statements of public posturing just seem like extensions of what the BJP IT cell is saying, rather than trying to establish. His hands are tied, of

Raman: course.

Manisha: Did some I

Raman: better

Manisha: interventions when he lashed out, you know, for re, re-using Russian oil and all.

I mean that was like really is

Jayashree: actually

Manisha: more craft, like more carefully crafted response he gave, I thought in that, yeah, anonymous says I've contributed a few N Senna also, I only listen to Htan and I don't get to consume a lot of the reportage. It's great that you. Talk a little bit about it in [01:19:00] Hafta, especially the discussion with Srinivasan Jain.

Yeah, we should actually, every NL Sena when it's done, we should have somebody on board and just talk a little bit about it. One of the things about daily dose was that it was put out towards second half of the day and mostly, usually, uh, by the time you, you know what has happened, would be great if these NL Sena reporters can be shared in something like a daily dose.

Yeah, why not? But some Sena stuff is also discussed on Reporters Without Orders. Reporters Without Orders, for sure, you should catch because that does discuss very in detail the reports. But we should think of some cross section between Sena. Good idea. We'll think of it. Another anonymous letter says, I would like to say that Hafta has just about the right amount of fucks in the episode.

It makes the show not only realistic, But also keeps it honest. If you need to add an R rating for language, so be it. Secondly, we have not learned anything new from Vasu's visit. It's better we don't get sucked in covering only well publicized war zones among the many that are taking [01:20:00] place around the world.

And in India, I'm in Manipur, just getting such scant. Attention. Amit Airon says, Hello, this is my second feedback. Hopefully it'll be included in the podcast. I want to know what is the schedule for Vasu in US? Is he visiting Houston? Is he visiting Houston? I don't think so. He's already there now and he's on a very tight schedule.

So I don't know. He's going to be have to like moving quite a bit. Thank you for having Sanjay Kumar. It was insightful to know the nuances behind the scene and post election polling. I've always wondered where do the analysts get data about which community cast voted for which candidates party. If voting in a closed ballot exercise, is it all guesswork based on voting percentages or just based on exit survey data?

Well, Sanjay, if you heard him, then at least the reliable ones, people who are transparent with their methodology, they are in person interviews with a sample size. Shivam says, damn, Abhi, are you guys so naive? Is it this easy to fool you guys? Last week you were [01:21:00] taking stats from Kamala's website.

Seriously? You're serious news folks? I mean, of course she'll want to show herself lagging just a little to make people give hope that she can win, but at the same time make them come out and actually vote You're a guy Here, a guy who's major news source before NL was Dhruv Rathee can suggest you go and look up at this polls by Reuters.

It's not a matter of left right, a friend of mine from US once told me a joke. You know how to tell a politician's lying,

Sting: hmm?

Manisha: You can see their lips moving. On a side note, keep this Aftab banter going. I tune in every week despite my approaching exams. Every week I say, not this week, but I end up watching at least some part.

Thank you. Very sweet of you. So Kamala Harris, we, last time we said that her own website declared that she's a little behind Trump. So yeah, right. We said that, we said that in the context of. She was saying that to

Jayashree: advertise it. Yeah. But certainly

Manisha: it's a contest. I think what he was also trying to say that it's a contest despite [01:22:00] Trump being what he is.

You want to take the next letter?

Jayashree: Uh, so the next letter is from AK. Okay. So he wants to talk. I think this is something that Anand had brought up a little while ago, which is plagiarism. Oh, is it Anand or Shardul? Plagiarism by Dr. Radhakrishnan. So the letter says that these allegations usually circulate by people in left progressive circles, especially Ambedkarites.

No one in the mainstream writes on this, and this allegation refuses to die down. Anand did not address this properly in the last hafta. So he cites a bunch of references to explain how a man in an article in Modern Review accused S. Radhakrishna of plagiarizing passages from his thesis. Radhakrishnan said he and Sinha had used the same text.

There were similarities. He also said he'd been lecturing on the subject for a long time. Um, the fact that Radhakrishnan was lecturing and distributing notes was corroborated by his colleagues, but their responses were not published in Modern Review. His publisher also confirmed That the publication of Radhakrishnan's book was delayed by three years, but a response was [01:23:00] not published.

So he's saying it's speculated that many academics and the editor of Modern Review were unhappy at that Radhakrishnan, being Tamil, held a prestigious chair at the University of Calcutta instead of a Bengali. The matter was finally settled out of court. He says, I'm not claiming either party was a bad guy, but such a nuanced episode is presented in such black and white manner by left progressive people, and this sickens me to the core.

This is their version of WhatsApp University.

Manisha: So you did not really plagiarize. It was a contestant.

Jayashree: No. No, but the contestation is that people are saying that he did, they're saying the matter was settled out of court. But if I remember correctly, they say it was settled out of court because there was a lot of pressure on the complainant to settle the case out of court.

Because, so, I mean, again, it's all he said, she said. So the next letter is from Amit. Who also wrote the previous letter, I think. He said, I've been a subscriber for two or three years. It's my go to source for authentic news. Thank you for being awesome. This is my first letter. I disagree with Avinandan's statement that working conditions in the [01:24:00] U.

S. are as bad as India. Having worked in both, there's a clear difference. People in the U. S. do work long hours. The work life balance is much better. In India, employees may spend 10 or 12 hours at work, but only truly work for 6 In the U. S. there's less time wasted. People often work fewer hours, maybe eight to nine, but more efficiently.

And once off the clock, most can enjoy personal time without harassment from bosses. Okay. He also says, I don't understand why full hafta episodes include repeated subscription requests, given they're only available to subscribers. Wouldn't it make more sense to focus these appeals on Chota Hafta only, which is freely available on YouTube?

Manisha: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Raman: We also tell all of you

Manisha: should go out.

Raman: We also tell our subscribers to

Manisha: subscribe again.

Raman: They should, they should probably say

Manisha: on that note, please guys subscribe to newslaundry. com. We have some amazing ground reporting that's happened this week by Avdhesh from BDH. And also of course, Srinivasan Jain's report from [01:25:00] Israel.

All three episodes are out. We've been able to do this. Thanks to your support. So please continue supporting us. There'll be a QR. code on your screen right now. So if you like what we do, and if you want to watch the full version of this amazing banter on YouTube behind the paywall, please subscribe, you'll get access to the entire podcast.

Jayashree: Karthik Prasad says, going through your recent coverage on the conditions of Kashmiri life under Delhi's rule, is it fair to make a comparison between Indian rule of Kashmir and British rule of India? I know my fellow Indians will be outraged at my insinuation that Indian government is acting like the British Raj, but would you be interested in doing financial analysis of the Indian government spending on security in Kashmir?

Maybe if not the moral stain it's causing our society, they'll understand the huge financial drain this causes us without producing any results. How long can we continue spending billions of dollars and continuing in what is now essentially a police state? If we're not winning the hearts and minds of Kashmiris, there's no end to this.

And I'm not making any anti national seditious statements. This is what Dr. Ambedkar [01:26:00] advocated for in his election manifesto of the SC Federation. Kashmir to be partitioned, the Muslim area to go to Pakistan, subject to the wishes of the Kashmiris living in the valley, and the non Muslim area consisting of Jammu and Ladakh to come to India.

He's also added a link.

Manisha: So no, I don't think one can compare with British rule and all. I think that's a gross exaggeration and I think when we make these exaggerations, we undermine the very real cause of Kashmiris or the real issues that do happen there, which is an intense crackdown on press freedom for sure, which I, I don't think there's any two ways about it, but very different from, I mean, I'm sure you're also saying it for effect, but.

I'm okay with some of these comparisons. So, I mean, I don't think it's accurate and I don't think it does any justice to

Raman: it. Comparison will not do justice, but yes, the questions that he has raised, uh, uh, they are valid to some extent, like spending on the security and all, but unfortunately we are not going to get the exact, you [01:27:00] know, data

Manisha: about

Raman: it.

Also, I think with this

Manisha: government that has come to light, um, this Umar Abdullah government And now they have a deputy CM from Jammu that they've allocated. Let's see what, uh, happens next because I think, I think it's a very popular, at least from the numbers, there was a good turnout and a very decisive, you know, result for NC.

So let's see how the next few years actually unfold. I think one, see, uh

Anand: oh, I have a mention. Not, um, it's a practical from an, uh, estate craft point of view. So modern is modern in states have territoriality at their heart. So modern estate evolved as way, so they take. Into their stride, take for granted that few zones would be very problematic zones like big territorial estates like [01:28:00] say Russia, Chechnya, China has its problems because of its sheer size.

India, the modern Indian state has also evolved. So it, there is a very cynical establishment view of these troubled states, like for India, kmi, some, uh, states of northeast, maybe some belt. So for territoriality, they have this very practical approach that they would be dealt differently. So. They take as a fat accompli and they proceed that way.

What, whatever be the government, uh, that forms the, that forms the current establishment in of the day. So, so that is, uh, I'm, I'm means, uh, deviating from all kind of idealism that would be the establishment's view of Kmi or Northeast.

Raman: My general feeling is. I mean, not Kashmir. I'm not talking about Kashmir, but my general feeling is in this [01:29:00] digital area, era, I mean, boundaries don't matter.

What really matters is, I mean, how economically, how your people are, I mean, their standard of living and all, and how economically you're powerful. Because once you are, Economically powerful. You can call your shots,

Anand: but you ask any modern estate to see the one inch of land.

Raman: This is just an opinion,

Manisha: but also I feel like even everything that we've read about Kashmir on the police presence, the CRPFs presence, it is still very stark when you go there. It's really in your face. It's really everywhere. And then Pulwama becomes all the more Shocking because I, of course, I, I didn't know exactly where Pulwama is, but then when you go there, you realize Pulwama is just like one hour away out of the city.

It's in the heart of the valley and there's such major police presence, such major CRPF presence that for such an attack to have happened, it's really very, very [01:30:00] alarming. So, and of course, Since the abrogation, there may be no stone peltings, but the number of security forces, the deaths and casualties in the police, CRPF and army has just, there's, it's been at an all time high.

So lots of stuff to, but yeah, I guess there's also that thinking that Anand said that also, you know, there is this thing of we deal with them differently. And also I think BJP politically is very clear that Kashmir's rhetoric. is to win elections in the rest of the country. And what, whether they win there, lose there, whether people love them there, hate them there, doesn't matter.

The rest of the country will vote. What really

Raman: matters is that people came out and voted. It had not happened in the past. That is true. I mean, only 5%, 10 percent people used to cast their vote. But this time, many, many Uh, I think it was about 50 percent plus.

Manisha: Yeah. So, which is

Sting: good.

Manisha: Okay. Anonymous says, I watched Basant Kumar's Smart City video story.

Kudos [01:31:00] to the reportage. Our area is in Delhi, but the condition of roads here has not changed since the last 25 years and the condition is worse. One can see a slip here. This one can face a slip disk if tread, if you don't tread carefully, we have seen all sorts of government in power here. BJP, ARP, Congress, the material quality is so bad used for the roads, basically the quality is so bad that it chips off within four days.

In our area, some piece of land was allotted to the hospital before COVID, not a single piece of brick was laid for the hospital. And after COVID, there's some work and has been done, but not yet completed. And currently work is stagnating. So much technological advancement and money. Uh, the government puts an infrastructure is deplorable to see these roads and hospitals collapse after 503.

There was a discussion on toxic culture. I'm a PhD student from I. T. Supervisors verbally heckle their students if they ask for a holiday on national holidays, and they sometimes grant the day off, but mostly ask us to come a little late to the lab. If they grant two days off because you're homesick or unveil your unless unwell, you're [01:32:00] unnecessarily scolded for a month.

We have raised these issues with higher authorities. Yeah, I don't like people who harass people for just your legitimate right of a holiday. I just don't understand. It's a very Indian mentality. Chutti le rahe ho. Oh, so bad. Tab jo hai, wo le lo.

Jayashree: Next letter is from Harjot, who is a BTech engineering student from a tier three college in Uttar Pradesh and has been listening to Hafta for a while.

Thank you for the journalism you do and for the student subscription. I genuinely appreciate it. I want to share some incidents. Quite a few times in my college, there'll be a group of students, mostly men, chanting Jai Shri Ram very aggressively, unprovoked, inside the campus, which I find quite scary.

Funny, but also sad, is that the whole route to my college was filled with Bhagwa flags. They were removed during G20, but they're back now. More disturbingly, there are students and faculty in my college who believe things like 1 is equal to 26 rupees. Along with many such other facts. There was a particularly insane incident where a teacher came to teach a technical subject [01:33:00] but rattled off how we're a great country once and also spewed things like why sati was a good practice.

This again was during election season, even though a lot of students in my class agreed. Now, if I leave the college, I see a trend of being proud of one's religion and displaying it aggressively, commonly portraying it as the greatest thing ever, not only from boomers, but also from very young people.

People who can fact check things very easily if they want. Even though it's so easy to counter such fake facts, why do you think there are so many people, young people especially, who choose to move towards religious conservatism instead of being open minded?

Manisha: Which college are you in? It just sounds terrible.

Jayashree: Shirti in UP.

Manisha: Yeah, a teacher is coming and saying stuff like one dollar is 26 rupees. It's a bit scary if your teachers are doing this.

Raman: I think when I look at this religious fanaticism, Mostly, I think it is mainly, uh, people, uh, whom I see around mostly unemployed. Unemployment is a [01:34:00] major, major cause. I mean, uh, political parties are exploiting them because, and I've seen the, uh, I'm seeing this fanaticism increasing day by day.

Manisha: Also, I think it's a cover like now Jayshree Ram has become cool. So now why did those Akhtik Ahmed murderers chant Jayshree Ram? I mean, it's become, Like, you know, you're siding with power, basically. That's what you're, that is what you're putting out when you, you know, chant Jai Shri Ram. You have this case of those murderers in Ateeq's case who shot and then immediately Jai Shri Ram, cover that Oviya with power.

Lawrence Vishnoy, we don't know much, but again, he also apparently now starts signing off with Jai Shri Ram. He said, I'm not an

Jayashree: anti national or something, no? Yeah, he's become, and

Manisha: there is, there's a, volley of people online, including like BJP supporters like Major Arya and that string reveal guy who are like, finally, we have a Deshbhakt Don, you know, we have a Don who's a nationalist.

So I think it's also people just making use [01:35:00] of what they think is powerful at that point. You know, it's powerful to align yourself with a certain ideology today. So you do it. Just to align with power.

Anand: So, uh, also there's like, uh, de legitimization of, of, uh, religious, uh, behavior also had a backlash. Now it has come back with, uh, Vengeance.

Not vengeance, but Like we are like this. So why are you were stopping us to do or why you were say denigrating our feelings of this? Also, also, uh, in campuses, a lot. Lot of time, uh, ham is of, uh, religious. So also it has become like signing off with a playful exuberance, like okay, hip ream, . So, so it, it, so it, it, it, it is not always [01:36:00] invoked, invoked with a religious f It's sometime just exuberant.

Okay. Or sometimes also in say like, uh, say. People laugh, Jai Sriram and they will start laughing. So they are, they are not, I

Jayashree: have never so badly want to change my name in my life.

Raman: No, in fact, uh, religion, uh, you know, when you play religion in the community, as a community, it's becoming a frenzy. If religion is at home, fine.

I, I really abhor any religious activity which is using, uh, what is that? Boombox? Boombox, huh? Yeah, DJ. Yeah, DJ, boombox. I mean, any religious, I mean, whether, uh, or any religion, I mean, Doesn't matter. I'm not talking about one particular religion. But this boombox, I mean, have you, you will just go mad? I mean, yeah.[01:37:00]

You are all shaking at the, I mean, your eardrums, I mean, they will just burst someday. Yeah. I don't know

Jayashree: what. Next, there are two short letters from Joe. First one says, Regarding Joyjeet's comments on Kamala and about how her agenda isn't very clear and she's trying to pander to everyone, I'd like to highlight how American politics have been consistently shifting to the right.

Medicare is not on the agenda anymore, even though it was a hot topic in 2016 2020. Or as the panel mentioned, her change stance on fracking. Republicans constantly shift the policy to the right, Democrats have done little to move it back to the center. We're at a point where even Democrats are saying the same anti immigration talking points Republicans used 10 years ago.

Meanwhile, a bill to release funds to Ukraine and Israel also ends up including a section for stronger borders. As for women's rights, I agree a Republican presidency would be disastrous when it comes to abortion rights, but both Obama and Biden had promised to codify Roe v. Wade. They failed to do so, and eventually it got overturned.[01:38:00]

Manisha: Yeah, but Kamala Harris is saying, I own a block of land.

Jayashree: Oh, my God.

Raman: What kind of gun do

Jayashree: you own and when and why did you get it?

Audio insert: I have a Glock and, um, I've had it for quite some time and, um, I mean, look Bill, my background is in law enforcement and, um, so there you go.

Raman: Have you, uh, ever fired it?

Audio insert: Yes, of course I have.

At a shooting range? Yes, of course I have.

Manisha: Horrible. He's clearly pandering to. Yeah.

Jayashree: Regarding the West's coverage of Israel and Palestine, I agree with Jayshree that there is a definite bias in how certain events are reported based on who is the victim and who is the perpetrator. 9 11 would never have been described as a tactical genius move.

Every Western media outlet has the same jargon, Israelis get murdered, Palestinians simply die. I'm Enel's reports from Israel. I love you guys. Waiting for Haftar and Charchar is the highlight of my Saturday afternoon. Sorry for exceeding the word limit [01:39:00] again. I tried my best. Thanks. Joe, did you really try your best?

But I agree with both your letters.

Manisha: I'm just reminded of a scene from Reluctant Fundamentalist where the protagonist is looking at the 9 11 thing and he's actually quite in awe. There's a line where he says that he's just in awe of What they have achieved with it. But yes, it would never be called tactical genius by anyone, except for in that reluctant fundamentalism, which kind of suggests that he's in awe of this operation.

So now Vishnu says, uh, in the recent Dalit boy missed admission to IIT because the server crashed three minutes before deadline. In the recent case, his family needed time to borrow money for fees. We've actually done a nice interview, so you should catch this. And, uh, Vishnu says, um, CGI said efficiency shouldn't be affected by reservation.

There was a study on railways that proved efficiency isn't affected. Supreme Court on subcaste is uniformed and disingenuous. Basically saying that this whole subcaste reservation is not. [01:40:00] They ignored casteism fact and reason. Reservation is for representation, not poverty elevation. Few jobs from the reservation won't solve poverty of 20 percent of the Indians.

There are suicides due to caste discrimination from students to IPS officers. SC says casteism is over. To be fair to them, they didn't really say casteism is over. I mean, that would be a misreading of what they're saying, but you can be wholly critical of that entire judgment. Anonymous says, Hi NLT, I listen to Hafta avidly and find the conversations very enriching.

However, was dismayed by 503. Panel's opinion on EY employee dying and private sector work culture lack perspective says that speaking personally, we have no protection from government. Our bosses claim that we have flexibility, but that quickly turns into working till 11 PM and on weekends, leading to deteriorating mental health.

Uh, show up. The person also says that this has a negative impact on women more than men. Men can still afford to slog for hours because they're freer from household responsibilities. Women on the other hand also have to juggle household chores. Work [01:41:00] from home has been snatched simply because state governments collude with companies to have butts in seats and jack up real estate.

And says Bangalore residents are forced to pay more than 60K a month as a rent on mere two BHK. This should even be an election issue. This will never be an election issue, but I honestly think house rents should be an election issue in cities. Yeah, it's crazy how rents have just skyrocketed and there's no cap.

It's, I really think this should be an election issue as a, as a victim of house rents going up in Delhi. I was hoping that independent media like News Laundry will investigate. So you know what? We should just simply do a

Raman: good podcast on this. Yeah,

Manisha: we'll

Raman: try to do a story on house rents,

Manisha: but we'd also do a work life, uh, you know, podcast or something because this issue clearly resonates with a lot of people.

Kishan says, I think the view of NL Haftar on Israel conflict misses the gray areas, especially urban warfare as brutal affairs. My problem with Israel is not the way they are conducting the war. They're tactically brilliant, but have no long term solutions. Netanyahu is a [01:42:00] good world warlord, but not a statesman.

He's been a hindrance to a solution for almost three decades. Israel should have formally taken control of the administration as an occupying army and even invited foreign peacekeepers to help. during a transition period to find a permanent solution. Also left criticism on Israel while I understand it ignores the brutal conflicts that have the brutal civil war under Assad or the fact that Gaza was ruled by Hamas or malignant influence of Hezbollah in Lebanon or even Iran's regime.

I agree that the way Israel treats Palestinians, even prior to this conflict is in open prison should never be accepted. But also at the same time, Israel is not targeting people who are offering them roses. Second letter says, uh, the other thing on Modi's discovery that decisions should be data driven.

It got me thinking that I've never seen an Indian politician ever make a presentation on their systematic approach to decision making. So they've never done, identified the problem, analyzed the problem, solutions. They do that, they'll bore people and they'll lose

Jayashree: elections. Yeah, I think we like to think that these are the things that if a [01:43:00] politician says, you know, then it's smart, it's clear, we're solving your problems.

But this is not what is getting votes at all. No one is voting based on it. Okay, Jagraj, I am condensing all four of your letters really quickly because totally they're about like 500 words. So he says Arabs are listed as white in the U. S. census. They're still discriminated against. This was that conversation we had.

The U. S. refuses to collect any data about the Arab population to benefit them in state schemes. He recommends the book Conditional Citizen, which has very interesting insights on this. He also says that Vijay Prasad's book The Karma of Brown Folk Debunks the narrative of Indian Americans being a model minority that's rich and affluent.

Majority of Indians in the U. S. are actually blue collar. And regarding discussions on Indian lobby in U. S. politics, the book calls out that, despite remarkable examples set by other Indian Americans, like the Ghatar movement in the early 20th century. He says Indians have mostly wanted to stay away from grassroot politics in the U.

S. while reaping the benefits from civil rights movements led by others. Third letter is [01:44:00] in response to Abhinandan's remark about the Indian youth being fragile. He says he's in his early thirties. As long as I was in college, which is in 2013, I believe youth would change everything wrong in India. As soon as I left college, when social media was picking up and started seeing how conservative or bigoted my fellow age group was, it was a heartbreaking realization on how conservative Indian youth is.

I am now a believer that relying on the young generation is not a magic pill. Bigotry in older generation will reap bigotry in the younger. This is true worldwide. I absolutely agree with this. And finally, he says in response to Abhinandan's comment on how he checks his glucose levels every afternoon. I consider myself an aware and educated person.

I'm living in the U. S. My mother's diabetic, but I did not know how harmful our common eating practices are. Like our obsession with chai and biscuits, our obsession with matai, especially when guests come home, our exposure to sugar. We need a lot more awareness on how these eating habits are harmless and customary.

And how products are deceitful and peddle sugar in the [01:45:00] name of health. Is

Manisha: it? There's also,

Jayashree: I agree with Now we have

Manisha: packaged sugar now in the West, I think, or Canada or US. Where did I read that you, the aisle, the supermarket aisles have to say packaged sugar instead of like,

Jayashree: Really?

Manisha: Yeah. Oh,

Jayashree: no, but I totally agree because I remember, so my brother in law is diabetic and so therefore, you know, we sort of pay a lot more attention to like what people are eating.

We realized that the coffee powder that we use at home has sugar in it. And. I wouldn't have imagined that regular, you know, yeah, it's coffee powder, but it contains sugar, which is crazy. Like,

Manisha: that's crazy. Yeah. Okay. So,

Jayashree: Akash says he has a trivial point to make and it is for Manisha.

Sting: On

Jayashree: a recent podcast, somebody said NL should promote independent bookstore links.

Manisha claimed, I love Amazon. I get it was a throwaway comment. I use Amazon as much as the next guy, but these billionaires who run warehouses where workers have to use diapers because they aren't allowed toilet breaks are celebrated enough all over the place. Everywhere you look, some new business dude [01:46:00] has become a thought leader and is on a podcast talking about their views on everything under the sun.

So please, at least in one of the independent places, can we not do that? Also a quibble on Abhinandan's point that young people can't be leaders because they've seen the world. I agree, but let's not kid ourselves that our aged politicians are doing a great job.

Manisha: Point. Okay, we will try and promote independent bookstores, but are there any left also to promote?

There is Champaka and Bangalore. But then they don't sell online, if you want to buy a book online. They do. sell. Okay, so our producer tells us we've started doing As I place my trust in Amazon, our progressive producers are already giving you links from independent. We should use that on

Jayashree: our thumbnail, picture of Manisha.

I love Amazon.

Manisha: Vatsal says, Hi team, writing this on Gandhi Jayanti. I feel in today's time, Gandhi's reputation in India is at a lower ebb. Liberal side is busy cancelling him for his various beliefs and acts, and well, not [01:47:00] much to say about the right wing anyway. Personally, I feel it's great disservice to the man that his writing philosophy are taken with little to no context to discredit him.

If people try and read him, or several of the works written around him, I think there's much to learn from every generation. While I do admit much of the disillusionment is also an after product of the over deification by Congress after his death. Yeah, this is also, I think, what Anand was saying about where Mint is, backlash against an over celebration of Gandhi.

Also, some of his experiments, such as the ones with celibacy are deeply problematic. Yet, I would say there's still a lot to take away from his life. Actually, you know, Ram Guha's podcast with William Darenpill is very good where he talks about this obsession with celibacy and him sleeping with his nieces.

It's actually a very twisted logic Ram Guha gives, which You should listen to it's very interesting podcast. They, they precisely go into this. That will also be one of my recommendations. Now, Dheeraj says, in the last podcast, Abhinandan referred to a debate between Mehndi Hassan and Eloy and Levi. I [01:48:00] saw the debate myself afterwards.

In my view, debates are not a good medium As podcast for such discussions and people clapping and shouting like cheerleaders, debates have become a wrestling contest. Nowadays, Mehdi has written a book about never losing a debate, made it a game, winning in all winning is all that matters. He also played psychological tricks in his debates.

Okay, really? He's like a particular family he kept referring to. There's a mental bias where the first casualty will register deep pain, whereas the next thousand will not. pain in the same proportion and will only register as a number. Media outlets also expose this bias. Further, I advise you to watch the debate between Mehndi and Richard Dawkins.

Your high opinion about Mehndi will rationalize. Mehndi and absurd comments, but in matters like this, there's no real winner.

Sting: Hmm.

Manisha: Okay. I'll

Jayashree: watch this. And finally, the last letter, who is, which is from Parith 24. Who says, I hesitate to contribute to the Palestine and Al Sena project. Firstly, the access to the just released part one is restricted.

[01:49:00] But why? Because the video is hosted on YouTube. I refuse to log into YouTube to watch it. But you have, where else will you watch it? Wait, that's what he's saying. I pay to subscribe to you and not Google. It's unjust to expect me to surrender my data just because of big daddy Google's whims. I'm wary of many of your web forms and videos hosted on Google, Amazon, Microsoft, where data thuggery is well known.

They should be hosted independent of monopolistic megacorporations and only additionally uploaded to these platforms if it helps your reach. Secondly, please reconsider branding the situation in Palestine as the Israel Gaza war. When Pakistan attacks our country, it's not Pakistan Punjab war or Pakistan Kashmir war.

Just as an attack on any part of India is an attack on all of us, Palestine deserves to have its territorial integrity honoured too, not subject to the terminology vomited out by a Zionist entity. Happy to contribute if you consider fixing these issues.

Manisha: How can we fix, how can, from not giving Amazon links to now completely rejecting YouTube, it's a very hard [01:50:00] ask.

We can't create our We also need people to see our stuff. And we can't create a platform like YouTube. Sorry. There's a lot of faith you're putting in

Jayashree: us. But we tried using that daily motion. Remember when our YouTube thing was restricted and it was such a headache to use and people also wrote in crashing and complaining.

But

Manisha: also hats off to Paritya who's been able to avoid blogging onto YouTube. It's really quite a achievement.

Anand: Why is avoiding? Because he doesn't

Manisha: want Google to get his data. Google to get his data. But, okay. But no, sorry, we can't do this. It's too much of an ask. We have to go with YouTube. It's the best player right now and we need to reach people.

So we will be uploading most of our stuff on YouTube. Please watch it if you can, otherwise keep tuning into Hafta, which is on our own app, indigenous, self made, made in Bharat. Main Bharat makes it sound so bad. So you can check out and which is [01:51:00] why there's so many complaints. App crashing every now and then.

But that's it. We read, speed read the letters, but I think we captured the spirit of most of the letters. Thank you so much for putting in so much thought and time and writing to us. We really enjoy reading this and we love your feedback. Keep it coming. And from next episode, we have a fresh set of letters to you.

argue about, debate on, and ponder over. Thank you guys for listening. Abhinandan will be back next week in full form to host NL Hafta. Let's end with our recommendations. Jayshree, would you like to tell us what you would like us to read and listen?

Jayashree: Two, uh, small recommendations. The first is this book called Empire Land by Satnam Sanghera.

So I think that many books catalog are so

Manisha: good.

Jayashree: Yes. So, and I, so it's like everyone sort of, I mean, it's very boring to sort of go over the atrocities of the empire, but this book sort of picks a different tactic. He talks about willful amnesia in the British [01:52:00] without realizing how the darker side of imperialism is its most pernicious legacy.

And he says, you see it everywhere in delusions of exceptionalism, it's immense private public wealth, the way cities are built, even in the entitled and drunken behavior of British expats abroad. So I think it's a very interesting way to sort of describe Empire in a very modern context. So I highly recommend it.

You

Manisha: must interview him. I'm, I love his work. I think if we can interview him, it'll be great.

Jayashree: Yeah, let me try. And also, since we are talking about spies and spycraft and very bad Indian spying, I'm recommending a show on Apple TV, which is Slow Horses. I'm only because I'm currently on the fourth season.

It's great. So it's about a group of dysfunctional MI5 agents and they're pretty gross. Yeah, I

Raman: saw the first season.

Jayashree: Yes. And so, you know, they're cracking down on spies. And the thing is that they're sort of the worst of the worst of the agents. But even they are pretty terrific, let us say, especially when we look at this plot to kill paon and so on.

And it's slow. So it's just, it's very tense. It's [01:53:00] quite thrilling. It's very entertaining. So

Anand: they're, they're they, no, the name of this, they, they are sent to their headquarters. Ah, dingy place. Slaughterhouse, yeah.

Jayashree: Yes, yes, yes. That is the one.

Raman: Uh, so the first season, yes,

Jayashree: it gets much better. So, like the first season is good, but like second, third, fourth are great.

Manisha: Anand, what would you like us to read and listen to?

Anand: Two things. First, I am recommending a speech that Dr. Manmohan Singh gave in 2005 to FIKI. It is relevant because So, um, we talked about Ratan Tata and a lot of anti capitalist things. So, um, he, as a prime minister, I think it was, it was important to speech from Indian street crafts point of view, because he acknowledges the key rule of capitalists in the [01:54:00] nation making a very boldly, and it is a point of departure for an Indian prime minister to If we, uh, were on the course of liberalization in early nineties, it is the most common Uh, emphatic statement by an Indian prime minister of the new rule that wealth cleared.

So he talks about the Indian psyche that how wealth was delegitimized and we didn't value wealth creators. But, uh, Rest of us just change hands, means distribute wealth, but capitalists, uh, creative rule is to create wealth. Uh, second remuneration that, uh, I was thinking since Raman sir debunked that BBC report about uh, Lawrence Vishnoyan that he [01:55:00] did for fame and analysis.

So, I have always been, uh, see, people generally debunk factual conspiracy theories that this happened due to this, and people look down upon conspiracy theorists, but I think, uh, and he's right, in fact, a lot of our business would collapse if we were not conspiracy theorists, like we, like, uh, say, journalists or academics or.

Columnist, they come up with abstract conspiracy theories that this happened due to this systems theory. All philosophers have are actually abstract conspiracy theories. Theories like conspiracy theories. No. I mean, requires

Raman: some, some, some links, some motive, some, I mean. I am five guys killing five guys.

No, no, no. I am something which we really need to look

Anand: at talking about something else. [01:56:00] Like I know when I reread some of the philosophers and theorists that we read in university, I, I don't. Uh, look at them as abstract philosophical conspiracy theories. Now someone comes and explains a phenomenon and he has to strike an interrelationships between a lot of elements to come to a conclusion or philosophy like, uh, economic analysis.

So, uh, but

Manisha: what's your recommendation?

Anand: So Cool. Cool. No, my recommendation is also a conspiracy theory. So it's a book on cause and effect, a structure of scientific revolutions, Thomas Kuhn. So he talks about that, why certain scientific inventions, uh, found a social context and we're product of that. So, uh, I read [01:57:00] it, uh, Recently, again, I had read it in my, um, when I was a postgraduate student and I thought that, uh, this is just, uh, means, uh, third rate conspiracy theory, though it is considered a classic, but when you read it, it, it's a classic people should read it and I want their feedback that whether they thought that it was a conspiracy theory or not abstract kind of.

He. He places everything in a social context and the structure of scientific revolutions, how the elements came together and produced it. So that's my second, means it's a insight that I came, uh, that came to me through rereading of this work. And when he said that, I connected it to that. Yes. Means BBC report that, that because Lawrence, this, he came from rural area, urban, and he missed that kind of [01:58:00] feudal ambience.

Now he wants to create his identity with all that.

Manisha: Not just him, Punjabi gangsters. The thing was for gangsters in Punjab.

Anand: Okay. Means this is a borrowed sense of being interesting. Like you make things interesting by this kind of. In,

Raman: in, uh, in reporting, we also make lots of assumptions, which you can call them conspiracy theory also.

Abstract. They are abstract, everything, but after making those assumptions and abstract conspiracy, we put them to test. And the test is whether we have a causal relationship. Uh, facts, uh, you know, contributing to this conspiracy and then we report. But with human beings

Manisha: I always feel that if there's a choice between a sinister explanation and an idiotic explanation, I'll always go with the idiotic explanation.

Most human beings actually behave [01:59:00] very stupidly for stupid reasons. They're very big for them. Anyway, your

Raman: recommendations. One is our own report by Prateek. In fact, uh, many subscribers had written to me and then I got that story done and he has done it beautifully. This is a story. This is a follow up story on Porsche accident.

Uh, which happened in Pune and, uh, you know, how the rich can circumvent the law that this is all that this story about. And how

Manisha: nakedly they're conspiring to frame the driver.

Raman: Yes.

Manisha: It's like you see it play out in front of you.

Raman: It's a beautiful story. It's a very

Manisha: good story. All our subscribers should read it.

Yes.

Raman: So, so this is one recommendation. Second, I just stumbled upon, you know, one, one talk show on YouTube called Metri. I, I didn't know about it, but, uh, but I [02:00:00] liked it. I, I mean, I saw, uh, you know, like, uh, this actress, what is her name? One who acted in Call Me Bae. Ananya Pandey. Ananya Pandey and all, uh, the, the one who had written the story.

There is one, uh, women director, uh, there were two other, uh, one, one editor, uh, one, one, uh, person who directed, uh, some angry men, uh, that Javed story, Javed Salim. Uh, so, so they were so articulate and the talk was so good. I liked it. So I, I didn't know that there was such a. Talk show called My Three, ah, my three on, uh, YouTube.

So I've been promotion talk. Huh?

Anand: Book promotion.

Raman: It's uh, maybe book promotion. And the movie. Yes. There was one person, that's why Fred Deja was also there. So, so good. I mean, very nice to see such articulate, uh, you know, [02:01:00] discussions. Very, I mean, people know their mind. I mean, this Ananya Pandya, I was impressed, the way she chooses her roles and it looked good.

So I'll recommend Maitri.

Manisha: So my recommendation are two obituaries in the beginning that I noted, one by Sunita Narayan in Business Standard, the other by Manu Joseph, the podcast with Ram Guha and Villain Dharampal on Gandhi, and of course, what Raman Sir suggested. The story by Prateek on the Pune Posh case.

I think the recent Daily Show was really hilarious. It's unbelievable stuff is happening in the US. So this one is on how Trump turned a town hall into a 40 minute DJ session where he's just, you know, asking them to play songs and singing along and dancing. And it's just Cinematic to see this man do these things.

Some 30 minutes or something he did. 40 minutes and then crazy. The best part is he's like, at the end of it some people want to [02:02:00] ask questions and he's like, Nah, who wants to have questions?

Audio insert: Let's not do any more questions. Let's just listen to music. Let's make it into a music. Who the hell wants to hear questions, right?

So, This has been an honor tonight, uh, we could do another question or two if you'd like, but probably. Do you want to do one? Do do it? Let's go. Let's go. You know, it's, but it ends so beautifully. How about this? We'll play. YMCA. And we'll go home.

Manisha: Let's play Ave Maria. It's just beautiful to see this guy. I mean, I'm just, it's just too much fun.

So the recent daily show on this is really great fun. So watch that. And with that, we shall wrap this week's podcast. Thank you so much for listening. Thank you so much for tuning in. This is our song of the week. See you next week.[02:03:00]

Thank you for your subscription. You're changing the world by changing the way news is funded. For the smoothest news laundry experience, download the News Laundry app. It is the best way to listen to our paywall podcasts.

Sting: And you'll also get access to all free News Laundry shows. Keep us ad free and subscriber funded.

Help us grow. Tell people who listen to you to pay to [02:04:00] keep news free. Subscribe to News Laundry. Keep journalism independent.

Humans of a BJP rally in Jharkhand: ‘We came to see Hindu hriday samrat!’