Recently, Madison Square Veteran Rajdeep Sardesai has produced what may be the most despicable

article in recent times, spitting in the face of Hindus and telling them why the murder of Prashant
Poojary in Mangalore does not deserve the same outrage level as that of the lynching in Dadri:
http://scroll.in/article/764062/why-bajrang-dal-activist-prashant-poojarys-murder-cant-be-compared-tothe-dadri-beef-lynching
First of all, let me remark that the existence of an article like this is in itself a victory for Hindu
nationalists and possibly more so for nationalists on Social Media. At least they have been cornered
enough to respond! Previously, the slaughter of Hindus would be ignored by media Mameluks with a
confident and condescending smile. Now they are responding.which means the liberals sense that
the charge of selective outrage is beginning to stick.
This is what we wanted, really. While they stayed silent on killings of Hindus, they could hide behind
general disclaimers like we condmen all violence. Now they are annoyed enough to come out and
justify themselves. And in laying out their justification for ignoring deaths of Hindus, they are
automatically compelled to present their bigotry explicitly. Its the confession we wanted! Hurray!
I am not angry with Rajdeeps article. I am happy. For the first time, a prominent liberal has come out
and presented explicit reasons for ignoring the killing of a Hindu. I hope many more liberals join in and
elaborate on this theme. Here is the heart of Rajdeeps article:
But when we seek to compare two instances without even bothering to examine the political context,
we are entering dangerous territory. Prashant Poojary was a Bajrang Dal activist in Moodbidri. The
Bajrang Dal has self-admittedly used violence as a weapon against minorities (dont believe me,
meet Babu Bajrangi in Gujarat or listen to him in a Tehelka expose). Poojary has been allegedly
involved in cases of intimidation and violence in the region. He was fighting the beef Mafia as part
of the anti-cow slaughter agitation. He didnt deserve to die under any circumstance but there is a
political context to his death as there would be in Bengal when Trinamool workers clash with cadres of
the Communist Party of India (Marxist).
Ah! So, just because someone is a political activist, his murder automatically becomes unworthy of
outrage. Excuse me, but since when have killings of political activists become objects of lesser
outrage? From the Boston massacre to the Jallianwalla Bagh massacre to Tiananmen Square, killing of
political activists has usually received more, not less outrage. It has often changed the course of history.
Dear Rajdeep, do you know who Miss Marcella Sherwood was? She was an innocent English
missionary who was brutally gangraped and beaten and left for dead by some monsters in Amritsar on
April 11, 1919. Martial law was declared in Punjab and Indians were ordered to crawl on the street
where Miss Sherwood had been attacked. Two days later, 1000 political activists who were protesting
the clampdown were gunned down while protesting in Jallianwala Bagh. Congratulations Rajdeep
because your logic is similar to the argument that General Dyer made.the atrocities on Miss
Sherwood meant that the Jallianwala Bagh massacre was not worthy of outrage.
I can try, but I can hardly do a better job of debunking Rajdeeps argument than what Opindia has

done here:
http://www.opindia.com/2015/10/but-rajdeep-sardesai-you-are-wrong-again/
In this article, Opindia asks:
You now invoke Babu Bajrangi. You are ready to sacrifice Prashant at the altar of secularism for the
crimes of a Babu Bajrangi in Gujarat (who incidentally is already paying for his crimes by serving a
life term, as prescribed by courts, not some kangaroo court in a TV studio). Why should Prashant be
judged via the prism of Babu Bajrangi? Should I judge you from the prism of a Tarun Tejpal?
Ha ha! Totally! Yes, Rajdeep, should we judge you for Tarun Tejpal? Lets explore this argument
further. Should we judge every Muslim via the prism of Islamic terrorists? Where does this logic leave
leftists considering the crimes of Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot and Castronot to mention the Naxals in India?
But I think Opindia left something out. Let us examine Rajdeeps logic by putting in some numbers.
How many Indian citizens are currently in the danger zone where they can be killed without hurting
the conscience of a liberal? Let us see
The BJP claims to have 10 crore members. This number is obviously exaggerated and let us assume
that this number is exaggerated by a factor of 4. So, that gives us a figure of 2.5 crore actual members.
Thats 25 million Indians who can now be killed without pricking the conscience of liberal India! For
comparison, 6 million Jews were killed by the holocaust! Yes, thats what it means, it will take a
minimum of four holocausts before Indian liberals sit up and take notice!