Quantico’s Hindu Terror is Bizarre and Funny

Recently, in a tele-serial, Quantico, Priyanka Chopra playing the role of a FBI agent, identified a man as a Hindu terrorist who was out to sabotage a top level meet between and Indian and a Pakistani leader. The terrorist was out to cause a nuclear explosion in the US, and blame it on Pakistan. The role of FBI officer was essayed by Indian movie star, Priyanka Chopra. Ms. Chopra has a big fan following in India and beyond the shores of India. Many of her fans as well as common Indians expressed anger at the serial and role Ms. Chopra played in it.

Ms. Chopra had apologised for the hurt she has inadvertantly caused. So did the promoter of the show, American Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). Obvious question that emerge, include:

  • In this day and age, does an artist have freedom to potray any role freely?
  • Why can a hindu man not be shown a terrorist, when TV shows regularly a muslim man to be a terrorist?

I think one cannot deny artistic freedom while writing a scene. We have seen how the movie Padmavat was disrupted, in recent past, by people claiming to be representing Rajput pride. All said and done, Padmavat was released in India and made very good business. Unlike Padmavat, Quantico was shot in the US, and was meant primarily for the US audience. Ms. Priyanka Chopra need not have to worry about its business success. Most likely, Ms. Chopra apologised to protect her commercial interest in Indian film industry.

Idea behind potraying a hindu terrorist detonating a nuclear device on a foreign soil is more complex, if not controversial, for the following reasons:

Firstly, there is no argument that a hindu can resort to violence and there is no reason why he cannot be a terrorist. India has seen violent incidences. There are indigenous terrorist groups in India. Many groups have hindu members in leadership position. Most of these groups, however, fight against Indian establishment. An idea of Hindu / saffron terror was floated by a political party. Such Hindu terror group was implicated in Mecca Masjid blast and Samjhauta Express blast. However, US intelligence has indicated hand of radical islamic group in Samjhauta Express blast. All people arrested as Hindu terrorists were released by court of law after prolonged incarceration. There is no evidence in the history of independent India, where an Indian had crossed into a foreign country with explicit intent to damage life and property. Though possibility of a hindu terrorist cannot be ruled out, at this time there is no realistic basis to paint such a picture.

As my second argument, I find the idea of India implicating Pakistan in a terror plot is absurd. India and Pakistan were created on the basis that hindus and muslims do not get along with each other. Subsequently, India has remained a hindu majority country and Pakistan became a muslim majority country. Since its creation, Pakistan has attacked India in 1947, 1965, 1971 and 1999. India has also suffered numerous terrorist attacks on her soil, which were carried out by extremists based in Pakistani territory. In this background, depicting a hindu man to be a terrorist and Pakistan to be potential victim is ludicrous.

My third argument is use of rudraksh rosary bead to identify a terrorist as hindu. Rudraksh rosary is not a sacred symbol of hindus alone. Buddhists also use it. Infact, anyone in the world can carry a rudraksh. In this background it is simplistic, if not outright silly, to identify a man to be hindu, just because he had a rudraksh on him. A muslim man can also carry a rudraksh, to pass the blame of nuclear explosion onto India. A terrorist, who has enough hate on his mind to detonate a nuclear device, will he be so scrupulous about symbol of any religion?

Finally, coming back to the issue of exploding a nuclear device, one has to understand that one needs to have high level complicity at government level to get access to nuclear material. Of different nuclear capable countries, India has been one of the most responsible country when it comes to nuclear non-proliferation. The same cannot be said about Pakistan. Yet, a picture is being painted for viewers of the show that it is India that is propagating nucelar terrorism.

Resource:

  1. http://www.thehindu.com/…/priyanka-chopra…indian…terror…in-quantico/article24127642
  2. 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Samjhauta_Express_bombings

29 thoughts on “Quantico’s Hindu Terror is Bizarre and Funny

Add yours

      1. Terrorism is something not inherent to Hinduism. Whole world knows which religion has the maximum contribution to this menace!
        Previous government coined the term Hindu Terrorism! Alas! Now everyone knows the rationale behind it.
        Don’t try to manufacture things which doesn’t exist.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Those who kill in the name of left wing terror are also hindus. Those who kil in communal violence are also hindus. Those who Lynch another person on pretext of cow smuggling are also hindus. So how can you be so sure that in future someone will not cross over into another country to kill? All we can be certain that so far no one has done it. All the points you mentioned I have covered them in my discussion.

        Like

      3. Left wing Terrorism is not the outcome of Hindu religious fanatism, but it’s an external idea! Do remember this point.
        Communal violence can’t be term as a Terrorist act because it’s always diadic, a reactionary act.

        Like

      4. Mind of a terrorist is full of hate. He does not care if he is killing innocent unrelated people. Those who engage in communal violence and kill innocent unrelated people, who can stop them if they decide to graduate? Those who practice leftwing terrorism, you cannot wish away that they are not Hindus. Under broad umbrella of Hinduism, both believers and non believers are covered. So if a naxalite blows up a police jeep and kills security men, he may not be a practicing Hindu but he is not Muslim or Christian or jew either.

        Like

      5. The way you are trying to brand Hindus, Future Terrorist, and ignoring the present realities, you will end up making them the same. I
        Here You is not You, but the idea of yours.

        Like

      6. I am not branding anyone. I am a Hindu too. It is simplistic to say no Hindu in future will be a terrorist. Who can guarantee that? What would you call LTTE? Is it a Hindu or Buddhist organization? LTTE committed terror and killed Rajiv Gandhi.

        Like

      7. Don’t drag me to the Sri Lankan politics now. The hands of Sinhala community of Sri Lanka is tainted with bloods of Tamilian. Their atrocities is well known to all the Human Watchdogs of the world. Despite of being majority in the Northern Province, they were badly represented and persecuted.

        Liked by 1 person

      8. Issue we are discussing is can a Hindu be a terrorist? If Pirbhakaran was a Hindu, he was a terrorist. What ever may be his reason, every terrorist believes his cause is real.

        Like

      9. Then according to your Logic Shiva Ji was also a Terrorist! As he ambushed the Mughal Soldiers on multiple occasions!
        The irony is that we Hindus are so so liberal that we can present ourselves as a Terrorists only for the sake that other can call us secular or liberal!

        Liked by 1 person

      10. When Shivaji operated the term terrorism was not coined. Those were different times. Rules of engagement were different. Shivaji fought with army against army. He did not wait for innocent people to walk into a public area and detonate a device. So, we cannot compare apples and oranges. Liberal thoughts of Hinduism is our strength. We cannot compare ourselves with monotheistic religious practices.

        Like

      11. Now as you have already proved my point that Shivaji fought against army, so did the LTTE. They had army too and they fought against the Sri Lankan army and targeted those who were helping that repressive army of Sri Lanka.

        Liked by 1 person

      12. We cannot equate LTTE with Shivaji. Shivaji was a sovereign ruler. He did not accept mughal rule. There was no unified India bound by one constitution in those days. Sri Lanka has a constitution. If someone wants to violate constitution and wages war against government, then that is called rebellion. Apart from being a rebel, who fights legitimate army, if you kill innocent by exploding bomb then you become a terrorist. Besides whatever may be the cause, a Hindu can employ terrorism as a tool to further his cause. Who can deny that?

        Like

      13. Where did I equate him with LTTE? I asked this from you. As far as sovereignty is concerned, Aurangzeb did not provide him any! He declared himself sovereign.
        As far as the Constitution of Sri Lanka was concerned, I request you to please go through once and discrimination will be conspicuous.
        “Hindu can employ terrorism”??
        I will just quote you one of the widely, yet half know philosophy:
        “अहिंसा परमो धर्मः धर्म हिंसा तथैव च: l”
        (अहिंसा सबसे बड़ा धर्म है और धर्म रक्षार्थ हिंसा भी उसी प्रकार श्रेष्ठ है)
        Ahimsa Paramo Dharma Dharma himsa tathaiva cha,, 
        (Non-violence is the ultimate dharma. So too is violence in service of Dharma).

        Liked by 1 person

      14. What are you debating? Can a Hindu become terrorist? Answer is yes he can. Look at Pirbhakaran. I am not interested in his reason. I am interested in his inclination to further his cause.

        Like

      15. I am debating that the debate”can Hindu become a Terrorist” which you have initiated is not debatable at all. It is hypothetical, fictitious, unreasonable and absurd.
        Rather we should debate the real terrorism which is going in Kashmir by Secessionist Radical Islamists.
        You should write article on that issue. Aur haan please dont tell that I am muzzling your freedom of expression.

        Liked by 1 person

      16. I am not dragging you anywhere. Do you think Pirbhakaran was a Hindu by his religion? If he was, I rest my case.

        Like

  1. Though it is a fictional story, no one has seen the future and a person of any religion can be a terrorist, yet in my opinion, actors have the choice to refuse roles that denigrate the image of the country, that too in the most absurd manner.
    As you have pointed out wearing a rudraksha is no guarantee that a person is a Hindu. Also, coining and propagating the term Hindu terrorism is a figment of absurd imagination because so far there has been no incidence of India being involved in International or nuclear terrorism.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. I could not either. I guess many of us comment after reading a few lines. Besides, mind blanks out what we don’t want to hear. Many upper cast Bengali Hindus have joined naxalite movement and we know the extent of brutality perpetrated by maoists. Yet we want to believe, Hindus cannot do the same at a different place and time.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: