Terrorists, Animals, and Judges

I haven't written for more than three months (unless you deem filling in some half a dozen inane online recommendation letters to the U.S. Universities a literary activity).

Simply because I am happy with my own present state of affairs: Like the lion in the Gir forest who is busy digesting the lamb he has just pushed into his belly and is in no mood to get cross with the mice that are crawling all over him. As Jerome K Jerome says, a full stomach is a better soporific than a clean conscience, and cheaper at that. One's own relation with the Universe is always 'relative'. And the warm Hyderabad winter sun is more soothing than that shining on the sands of the Gir forest.

So, when I opened my favorite newspaper, Deccan Chronicle, reclining on my bed after a long morning walk, I was struck by the top item in the Banner Gist on its Front Page: NATION: Terrorists are animals: SC judge..7.

I duly opened Page 7 and there it was: the report from which I quote excerpts: 'A senior judge of the Supreme Court on Tuesday likened terrorists killing innocent people to "animals" and said that they cannot be allowed to take benefit of human rights....adding that those who killed innocent people by no stretch of imagination are human beings. They are worth not more than animals.'

Let us hope that Justice Arijit Pasayat has been either 'misquoted' or 'his comments have been taken out of context'. Let us also hope that the cub reporter on his 'beat' has been mis-edited and the sub-editor of the Banner Gist denied of his due hike lately....

Still, I was upset enough to drag myself to the keyboard at once. I am no animal lover, I never kept pets, nor lectured on animal rights and sometimes I am irritated by the antics of the 'animal rights activists'. But I do read some good and wholesome books on the animal world and enjoy it vicariously.

So, I wrote a Letter to the Editor of DC under the title: "Terrorists, Animals and Judges". I append it below verbatim:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sir:

I am pained to read the report on Page 7 (highlighted as the top item on the banner of the Front Page of the Deccan Chronicle dated 28 January) in which 'a senior judge of the Supreme Court on Tuesday likened terrorists killing innocent people to "animals" '.

Jim Corbett, who killed many man-eaters, was at pains in his book, 'Jungle Lore', to emphasize that no animal kills another animal or human being except in hunger or self-defense.

No animal is a "terrorist", except hounds trained by men.

Mark Twain famously said: 'No animal except man blushes; or needs to'.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First thing next morning, when I opened the Editorial Page, I was delighted to find my Letter accorded the top honors in the Letters Column. But was amused by its changed title: 'Unfair Remark'. And the first operative sentence completely deleted. Not because of space. The letters below mine were at least thrice longer, but more 'innocent'. The Editor was obviously covering himself or herself, afraid possibly of 'contempt of court' summons from a Serving Senior Justice of the Supreme Court, quoted by name.

You will admit that the title:'Unfair Remark' was very fair to the Judge but was 'unfair' to the animal world and ME. 'Unfair', my foot! If it had to be a 'Remark', they could have called me up; and I would have supplied half a dozen juicy adjectives impromptu: e.g. perverse, preposterous, scandalous, insensitive, senseless, goofy and more.

You will see that the thing starting from Jim Corbett out of the blue is not merely a watered-down version of my original, but is deeply mystifying to the readers, if any.

I should have added to my Letter the sentence: "No animal is a jihadi, with his own crazy notions of Heaven and Hell and Holy War; and all of them devoid of 'religious bigotry' ".

Talking of bigotry, I am always reminded of Oliver Wendell Holmes's analogy between the mind of a bigot and the pupil of the eye: "The more light you pour into them, the more they contract".

Seeing analogies is the stuff of 'Parallel Thinking'.