Vistasp Hodiwala

To see humanity drag itself out of its deep dark hole; that's the only reason that wants me to be on this platform.

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

The collusion of the U.S. intellectual establishment on the Palestine issue is hardly a new phenomenon, with roots stretching back decades.

This is a story I stumbled upon from 1984 and it had me shaking my head in disgust all through. It was a huge scandal in its time for a while, but I am pretty certain that the passage of time has dulled its edges and rendered it almost invisible. After doing my preliminary digging and going through whatever available sources I could find on the internet, I decided to write it up in my own words for the benefit of the present day audiences.

The only two people who come out shining from this grotesque episode are @normfinkelstein and 𝐍𝐨𝐚𝐦 𝐂𝐡𝐨𝐦𝐬𝐤𝐲.

𝐏𝐒: After having written the piece, I sent it off to Professor Finkelstein to vet it, and correct errors if any. He wrote back amending the fourteenth paragraph giving out more details of what transpired. Read for yourself.

---

𝐀 𝐓𝐑𝐔𝐄 𝐒𝐓𝐎𝐑𝐘 𝐅𝐑𝐎𝐌 𝟏𝟗𝟖𝟒, 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐍𝐎 𝐋𝐄𝐒𝐒 𝐎𝐑𝐖𝐄𝐋𝐋𝐈𝐀𝐍.

It was April 1, 1984. A fitting day for a rotten joke that was about to be unleashed upon the world.

On this day 𝐻𝑎𝑟𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑅𝑜𝑤 released 𝑭𝒓𝒐𝒎 𝑻𝒊𝒎𝒆 𝑰𝒎𝒎𝒆𝒎𝒐𝒓𝒊𝒂𝒍, a rather exciting, revelatory and ‘groundbreaking’ book with a fortress of footnotes by Chicago-born American journalist 𝐉𝐨𝐚𝐧 𝐏𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 which offered scholarly proof that present-day Palestinians were not indigenous to Palestine. The book was founded upon years of research by Ms. Peters who claimed to have trawled through heaps of papers in the Ottoman archives to arrive at that definitive conclusion. Her work asserted that Arab immigrants had steadily made it to Palestine through the late 1800s, lured by job prospects where Jewish settlers had begun to transform the landscape with their sense of enterprise already.

So the sentiment that Palestinians lived there ‘𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑖𝑚𝑚𝑒𝑚𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙’ is a myth, she inferred. Having reached this cosy conclusion she implicitly made light of the idea of ‘Nakba’, the strongest argument that Palestinians have possibly had of being made refugees on a land they knew as theirs through generations. Her ‘benevolent’ solution was for world powers to prevail upon neighbouring Arab states to absorb Palestinian refugees, leaving the holy land for those who have always felt a Biblical pull towards it.

This narrative deftly tied in with the fanciful theory that early Zionist leaders had long propounded to escape their wafer-thin sense of guilt: 𝐴 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝑎 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑎 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝑎 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑. Essentially, this meant that a canard that was long debunked by a slew of scholars and historians ranging from 𝐍𝐨𝐚𝐦 𝐂𝐡𝐨𝐦𝐬𝐤𝐲 and 𝐘𝐞𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐡𝐮𝐚 𝐏𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐡 to 𝐑𝐚𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐝 𝐊𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐝𝐢 and 𝐀𝐛𝐝𝐮𝐥 𝐋𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐟 𝐓𝐢𝐛𝐚𝐰𝐢, rose phoenix-like, to demand the burden of proof from the Palestinians yet again.

𝐆𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐚 𝐌𝐞𝐢𝐫, Israel’s fourth Prime Minister from 1969 to 1974 wanted the world to believe that there was “𝑛𝑜 𝑠𝑢𝑐ℎ 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑠 𝑎 𝑃𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑎𝑛 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒”. As if on cue, a decade later, the ingenious Ms. Peters, neither a professional historian, nor a scholar, or even a proper academic decides to go all out and put her definitive stamp of ‘evidence’ on a specious theory that has readymade takers throughout the American intellectual community.

By delegitimising the moral weight that the Nakba provoked, it turned the mass tragedy of Palestinian exodus on its head in one stroke, and in doing so, attempted to purge them of all compassion; the only privilege Palestinians thought they couldn’t be denied. The book became wildly popular days into its release, garnering rave commentary from every respectable publication including @NYTimes and @washingtonpost. A knockout triumph of sorts with every highbrow reviewer falling over each other to endorse its thesis. 𝐏𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐩 𝐌. 𝐇𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐫, a well-regarded Professor of Demography and Pioneer in Urban studies at the University of Chicago, recognised its undisputed merit. Amongst many other heavy hitters who spoke in favour of this classic, there was 𝐒𝐚𝐮𝐥 𝐁𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰 who had enthusiastically blurbed the book cover, historian and author 𝐁𝐚𝐫𝐛𝐚𝐫𝐚 𝐓𝐮𝐜𝐡𝐦𝐚𝐧 who called the book ‘𝑎 ℎ𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑖𝑛 𝑖𝑡𝑠𝑒𝑙𝑓’, and historian 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐝𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐖𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞 who expounded that ‘𝑖𝑡 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑚𝑦𝑡ℎ𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑝𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 ℎ𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑀𝑖𝑑𝑑𝑙𝑒 𝐸𝑎𝑠𝑡’.

There was only one problem though. The book was the biggest hoax on either side of the Atlantic; a Zionist sleight of hand, eagerly embraced by those who wanted to be deceived. A lie that everyone badly wanted to believe. In the constant barrage of favourable endorsements, not one scholar of note deemed it a fit case for investigation.

No one, save a graduate student at Princeton, who hadn’t yet made a name for himself and would later be known for the meticulousness that was to become his steadfast signature in the years to come.

His name was 𝐍𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐅𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐞𝐥𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐢𝐧.

When Norman began reading the book, he quickly sensed that something was off. This made him go back and check out all the references and he realised that the data didn’t fit the conclusions. He wrote a brief paper based on his preliminary work, just 20 to 25 pages, to apprise people in the field of his conclusions. Of the 30 people he sent this initial paper to, only one responded.

The person who wrote back was 𝐍𝐨𝐚𝐦 𝐂𝐡𝐨𝐦𝐬𝐤𝐲.

The good professor thought it was worth pursuing and in the same breath warned Norman that they would come for him, all guns cocked and loaded. They could take away his opportunities, destroy his career, and put his life to ruin.

But Mr. Finkelstein (at this juncture, it just feels right to address this giant of a man with the respect he richly deserves) not only persevered, this work became the bedrock of his close friendship with Chomsky. An unflinching Finkelstein started submitting his article for publication to a whole lot of academic journals, but except for a nondescript leftwing journal that came out of Illinois, every other publication delighted in ignoring it summarily.

(𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝒂𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒅 𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒂𝒈𝒓𝒂𝒑𝒉 𝒃𝒚 𝑴𝒓. 𝑭𝒊𝒏𝒌𝒆𝒍𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒊𝒏)
But worse was to follow. Finkelstein’s professors cold-shouldered him. ONE OF HIS THESIS ADVISORS GAVE HIM AN ULTIMATUM: TO CHOOSE BETWEEN BEING A "MUCKRAKER" VERSUS A "SCHOLAR" (PROFESSOR MANFRED HALPERN). WHEN FINKELSTEIN WOULDN'T BUDGE, HE DROPPED OFF FINKELSTEIN'S THESIS COMMITTEE. Brilliant as he was, HE WAS AWARDED a PhD anyway, but HE COULDN'T EXTRACT a single letter of recommendation FROM HIS THESIS ADVISORS OR FORMER PROFESSORS, which for a student of his calibre should have been customary. WITHOUT SUCH A LETTER, HIS ACADEMIC CAREER WAS STILLBORN.

But this is Finkelstein, and Finkelstein doesn’t yield to mortal pressures. No matter how terrible the hostility he must encounter.

The following summer the man found himself closeted in the New York Public Library scrupulously and patiently poring over every single reference the book cited and eventually came to the realisation that the book was, and there is no other way to put it, a colossal fraud upon its readers. A calculated deceit that should never have been allowed to exist.

Long story short, even after the dirty secret was blown to high heaven and everyone who was someone in New York found out about it, the Omertà still prevailed. The editors of major newspapers refused to publish his letters, even when other approving reviews of the book kept gushing in.

The cover was finally blown when Michael Joseph Ltd, a British publisher, decided to bring out the book’s UK edition the following year. When Chomsky got wind of its impending publication, he promptly shared Finkelstein’s exhaustive work with a bunch of prominent scholars and journalists overseas. The spirit of political inquiry was far from dead in the land of the Queen and every newspaper and magazine worth its fresh scandals and recycled outrage excoriated the book without exception. This included the 𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑠 𝐿𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡, 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐿𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑜𝑛 𝑅𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑒𝑤 𝑂𝑓 𝐵𝑜𝑜𝑘𝑠, and 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑂𝑏𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑒𝑟. (@TLS, @LRB, @ObserverUK)

The turnaround continued when reviews of the book appeared in Israel. Not only did they uniformly trash the book, they expressed concern on how it would reflect back on Israel if the book found a bigger audience. In the meantime out of sheer embarrassment, 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑁𝑒𝑤 𝑌𝑜𝑟𝑘 𝑅𝑒𝑣𝑖𝑒𝑤 𝑜𝑓 𝐵𝑜𝑜𝑘𝑠 (@nybooks) commissioned a piece by the renowned Israeli historian 𝐘𝐞𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐡𝐮𝐚 𝐏𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐡. After Mr. Porath turned in his review they chickened out of publishing it for close to a year. The piece ultimately did come out and provoked some exchanges a few months down the line with a couple of historians who had praised the book earlier, and that was that.

𝐒𝐨 𝐰𝐡𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐤 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐰?

The simple answer is I just came across this shocking story in a completely different context and was floored with the level of collusion that’s been happening for decades in what’s supposed to be a free and fair democracy; especially when it comes to Israel and Palestine.

𝑭𝒓𝒐𝒎 𝑻𝒊𝒎𝒆 𝑰𝒎𝒎𝒆𝒎𝒐𝒓𝒊𝒂𝒍 has been thoroughly discredited within the wider community of historians and scholars. But that does not make it any less dangerous. With every new generation, fewer people know their history. The percentage of people who stay acquainted with such monstrous frauds within the knowledgeable academic community too keeps dropping perceptibly. If we don’t remind ourselves of such intellectual outrages from time to time, we will have more 𝐽𝑜𝑎𝑛 𝑃𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠’ and 𝐴𝑙𝑎𝑛 𝐷𝑒𝑟𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑤𝑖𝑡𝑧𝑒𝑠 (@AlanDersh) to contend with—spinning illusions, resorting to subterfuge, and creating false narratives under the guise of scholarship. Thus making a mockery of both history and our collective humanity.

𝐀𝐝𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐍𝐨𝐭𝐞: This piece was sparked by my initial reading of Noam Chomsky’s account of this egregious episode, which I stumbled upon fortuitously on his blog. That discovery forced me down a deeper rabbit hole; through Wikipedia, The @newrepublic, The @NewYorker, and many other articles and personalities leaving me in no doubt about what actually happened.

@AbbyMartin @yanisvaroufakis @mikopeled @vijnad @FerozeSidhwa @mohammedelkurd @bellahadid @GiGiHadid @rogerwaters @SusanSarandon @DUALIPA @democracynow @intifada @MMFlint @mehdirhasan @LastWeekTonight @jeremycorbyn @zarahsultana @johnmcdonnellMP @BernieSanders @PiersMorgan @JLMelenchon @AOC @MathildePanot @GregorGysi @RashidaTlaib @CoriBush @haaretzcom @Avi_Shlaim @AmiraHassH @pappe54 @DrGaborMate @MaxBlumenthal @aaronjmate @AsaWinstanley @ShashiTharoor @DalrympleWill @saliltripathi @SamDalrymple123

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

@pbhushan1 And then we expect these worthies to rule against the government! The fools that we are!

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

@trilochanb54072 @ranjona @prempanicker @Ram_Guha I can only pity your sense of all things liberal.

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

The BJP retards are sharing Saurav Das's image with Umar Khalid to prove that he is a liberal scum.
The INC geniuses are sharing his admiring tweets about Modi when he was all of 17 years of age to prove that he is just another Sanghi scum.

The BJP retards are conveniently ignoring his old tweets.
The INC geniuses are deliberately choosing to look past the extraordinary work he has done on the legal beat for almost five years now.

It's only natural to have low expectations from retards.
It's the geniuses who should be our real concern.

@MurzbanFShroff @darab_farooqui @ManojManojkapur
@RahulGandhi @priyankagandhi @pbhushan1
@atul_kulkarni @_YogendraYadav @TheDeshBhakt
@Article19_India @ppbajpai @ravish_journo @Nidhi
@abhisar_sharma @MnshaP @ManojManojkapur
@sardesairajdeep @saliltripathi @prempanicker
@PremSJha2020 @SloganMurugan @Sun_e_strokes @AbhinandanSekhr @chimni_sapna @VijetaDahiya @ArvindKejriwal @Aakar__Patel @thewire_in @scroll_in @newslaundry @nakulssawhney

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

@Arun_Kaku05 @zoo_bear @Saurabh_Unmute BRAVO!

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

@darab_farooqui It's the mutual hatred for AAP. You may not agree with this Darab, but there IS nothing more to this. You have realised how they behave but you need to acknowledge where the irrational roots of this hatred are.

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

@pranavpradhi1 He was SEVENTEEN then seven bloody teen. Cut him some slack and have a heart. Look at the fearless work he has done over the past five years. It's more than what you and I will accomplish in a lifetime!

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

We have no option but to give up on some of these soulless worthies on X who I had assumed were empathetic and rational voices. I have realised belatedly that the hardcore INC supporter is actually just a mirror image of the bhakt.

Hum toh dubenge, sanam tumhe leke dubenge.

This level of intellectual hypocrisy is not just stunning, but outright venal. To pull out @SauravDassss 's tweets from when he was 17 and ignoring all the good he has done over the past few years including standing up for Umar, Sharjeel, BK activists, taking on CJIs and Ex CJIs suggests a special sort of evil and must alert us to how AAP too has been demonised by the exact same set of people for 12 long years.

This is offensive at a level that I find utterly impossible to fathom. Keep going, psychos! There can be no better way to undermine your own credibility.

@MurzbanFShroff @darab_farooqui @ManojManojkapur @RahulGandhi @priyankagandhi @pbhushan1 @atul_kulkarni @a

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

@audeamuser @Sydusm You are the wise one. Keep going.

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

@philpjg @darab_farooqui Now @darab_farooqui is a fraud???

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

Darab, we have no option but to give up on these soulless worthies. I have realised belatedly that the hardcore INC supporter is actually just a mirror image of the bhakt. Hum toh dubenge sanam tumhe leke dubenge.

This level of intellectual hypocrisy is not just stunning, but outright venal. To pull out @SauravDassss tweets from when he was 17 and ignoring all the good he has done over the past few years including standing up for Umar, Sharjeel, BK activists, taking on CJIs and Ex CJIs suggests a special sort of evil and must alert us to how AAP too has been demonised by these same set of people for 12 long years.

@SloganMurugan @MurzbanFShroff @Sun_e_strokes

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

@audeamuser @Sydusm He was SEVENTEEN then, just SEVENTEEN! I am sure you have done enough things to be embarrassed about at that age. Have a heart and cut him some slack. Try to judge people by their work for a change.

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

Do you see Kejriwal or any of the AAP chaps with Ramdev, or any idiot from that time including Anna? How long will you geniuses keep beating the same ghisa pita drum? Kuch nahi kar sakte toh at least chup rehna sikh lo. Wait and watch instead of trying to burn everything down with your pointless cynicism. @SauravDassss has singlehandedly done more than enough to challenge the BJP than your entire ecosystem put together over the past five years: including supporting our human rights activists bravely, criticising SC CJIs and fighting to restore our institutions. He was 17 when he expressed some sentiment about Modi but anybody with a fair mind can see his contribution over the past few years, except hardcore INC nuts. You guys are truly pathetic and probably as terrible as the people you ostensibly oppose. Disgusting is too mild a sentiment to express what I feel for people like you.

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

@sandeep_PT My God you are not just pathetic, you are worse than that.

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

You are a child, I can see that. No understanding of what's happening around you. Quoting pieces that are anyway in the public domain with zero filters of what transpired. I can educate you but you are too ignorant or arrogant to waste time with. This is why conversations with random strangers over the internet are ill-advised.

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

@jyotig1002 @_astavakra @SauravDassss You are so silly, my friend. I hide nothing and my profiles are always public. Is this the best you can come back with? The same illiterate tropes about Jehadi? How old are you child? Are you capable of a proper conversation?

[Vistasp Hodiwala @AlwaysChekhov]

𝐇𝐎𝐖 𝐃𝐎𝐄𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐓𝐑𝐀𝐃𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍𝐀𝐋 𝐈𝐍𝐂 𝐒𝐔𝐏𝐏𝐎𝐑𝐓𝐄𝐑 𝐆𝐄𝐓 𝐈𝐓 𝐒𝐎 𝐑𝐈𝐆𝐇𝐓 𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐘 𝐒𝐈𝐍𝐆𝐋𝐄 𝐓𝐈𝐌𝐄?

Lots of my friends have already written numerous posts about the Cockroach Janta Party (@Cockroachisback). Even before the first shot has been fired, camps have been chosen.

There’s the @AamAadmiParty supporter who because of the past affiliation of some of the CJP members with the party are secretly thrilled about the entire development.

There are uncommitted neutrals who are watching this from the sidelines with a mix of enthusiasm, hope, and justified trepidation.

There is also the @INCIndia supporter who is watching this with clear-eyed idealism and wondering why his or her party is holding back from supporting this movement whole-heartedly.

And then there are vast swathes of other INC supporters who have no doubt in their mind that this is a Sanghi creation, only because some of these members seem to have had associations with the AAP party in the past.

Christ, how can they be seen anywhere near it!

Their logic runs thus (though they are wise enough never to say parts about it aloud):

The absolutely perfect, non-corrupt and utterly pristine Manmohan Singh government which couldn't be faulted on any count, and should have had a perpetual license to rule, was toppled because young men and women came out on the streets with the mistaken belief that things ought to change.

Their reasoning probably was: How can the country cope with so much happiness?

Oh yes, horribly motivated people did conjure up wild stories about corruption in multifarious scandals such as the CWG. There were terribly unfair whispers about the corporate-state nexus too. And let’s not forget, individuals such as Binayak Sen and Irom Sharmila were clearly out to defame the government’s fair name. Worse still, there were these malicious rumours being spread about a movement called Salwa Judum and Operation Green Hunt, all designed to sabotage the magnificent work that the then government was doing.

But by and large, the country was a land of milk and honey merely looking for some good old democratic muscle-flexing.

And since that blissful paradise that this country was pre-2014, felt so intolerably triggering, lifelong activists such as @ArvindKejriwal, Aruna Roy, @pbhushan1 and @_YogendraYadav decided that things simply had to change. Unnecessarily so, of course.

Therefore they went out of their way to align with business tycoons, dodgy Sanghi godmen like Baba Ramdev, and of course, Anna Hazare, the man who everybody at the time thought was a reborn Gandhi, all to ensure that the country enter a long and glorious era of communal strife, economic doom and gloom, and perfect crony capitalism.

Surely, there was no better way for the soft young men and women of India to build character than taking part in a movement which can prepare them for what could potentially be a tough life ahead?

Did the revolution succeed or what?
Oh well, beyond everybody's wildest dreams.

If there ever was a nationwide transformation effected meticulously to merely let citizens understand just how terrific and amazing the previous INC governments were, this was truly it.

I completely get it therefore. It stands to reason why this particular INC supporter hates anything resembling the cry of frustrated young men and women who want even more change.

What? Again one more AAP? Heaven forbid, NO!

HOW can they possibly trust @abhijeet_dipke, who was once associated with the same party's social media team? Or @AshutoshRanka, who once had AAP in his bio? Or #VijetaDahiya who collaborated with that dreaded AAP sympathiser @dhruv_rathee; so what if Rathee has spoken for the entire opposition at various points and mounted one of the fiercest challenges to the NDA during last year’s General Elections!

And c'mon, @Wangchuk66, the man who just spent over six months in prison and is probably still a BJP canary? Please! Don't even make me start!

But the worst offender of all has to be that maniac @SauravDassss.

He seems just the sort of person capable of disrupting the entire system like it happened during the IAC days. That man stands for uncompromising investigative journalism, doesn't spare Justices and Chief Justices whether they are active or retired, makes strategic use of the RTI act to uncover disturbing truths about this system, fearlessly writes informed critiques of our broken democratic institutions, and bloody hell, speaks as though he genuinely means what he says.

How can such a man ever be tolerated?

No of course, such a man cannot be allowed to exist, just because some stupid system needs to be changed again.

In fact, no system should be subjected to this much idealism twice.

So yes, my INC friends: your scepticism, your instinctive hate, and your venom, is all entirely well-founded.

Cockroaches must indeed be squashed whenever they challenge the system in ways not officially sanctioned by respectable liberals who have put their trust in the GOP.

Just like there cannot be such a thing as "Too Much Democracy", there also cannot be such a thing as "Too Much Idealism".

Please kill it before it starts to sprout wings.

Never mind if all the books you ever read and expounded about on liberalism and democracy have advised you otherwise.

𝐏𝐒: And what an extraordinary fool this Prashant Bhushan seems to be. Has the IAC-AAP experiment taught him absolutely nothing despite his severe antipathy toward Arvind and gang? Tch, Tch!

𝐏𝐏𝐒: I also can't help but marvel at the circular logic of my INC friends. If they don't arrest Dipke straightaway, it means this agitation is state-sponsored. If they arrest and release him in a couple of days, that still means he is funded by the state. Nothing less than incarcerating him for as long our human rights activists will suffice to convince them otherwise. Truth be said, it is such remarkable insight and analytical standards which makes me so hopeful about the future of this country.

𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐒: And while we are discussing suspicious state collaborators, take a wild guess: Outside of all the civil liberty activists from anti-CAA and Bhima Koregaon who have spent a horrid number of days in Tihar and elsewhere, which party's top leaders have collectively spent the most number of years in jail? The Aam Aadmi Party's, you say? Ah, but that merely proves how diabolical and sophisticated Sanghi affiliates really are when they wish to distance themselves from the party outwardly.

So yet again, Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

@MurzbanFShroff @SloganMurugan @urvish2020 @_amitbehere @atul_kulkarni @Aakar__Patel @thewire_in @scroll_in @newslaundry @tajmahalfoxtrot @Sun_e_strokes @chimni_sapna @Jasmine441 @AbhinandanSekhr @tarakgoradia @latashankar2 @Ram_Guha @RahulGandhi @priyankagandhi @TheQuint @TanushreePande @sardesairajdeep @saliltripathi @prempanicker @PremSJha2020 @_YogendraYadav @MaheshZagade07 @TheDeshBhakt @Article19_India @ppbajpai @ravish_journo @abhisar_sharma @Nidhi @MnshaP @ManojManojkapur