Image courtesy: The Hindu
Two boys in a speeding Maruti 800 lost their lives to army-men’s bullets in Budgam district of J&K. Regrettable.
Two more are seriously injured and are admitted to hospital. Hope they recover soon.
Kashmir seethes in anger over the killings, says DNA. Understandable.
Whenever Basim Ahmed Bhat closes his eyes, he sees his Faisal’s body on the steering wheel. Sympathies to this boy.
But then, there are a few things I do not understand, like―
Faisal Yousuf was driving the car, says newspaper reports. His age is given as 13. Is 13 not an underage for driving a vehicle? Is it not possible that a juvenile driver, because of his immaturity, ignored the warnings of the army men, which could have led them to suspect the passengers to be terrorists and fire at them? You must be a moron to ask such questions. Pointing out such trivial violations reveals your sick mind. Only Naxals enjoy this privilege―whenever they indulge in a heinous crime, we should dwell over the trivial human rights violations in their past which could have instigated them to indulge in violence. Army men are not so privileged.
Basim seems to be still in shock and that perhaps explains his incoherence. He tells Indian Express that Faisal ‘did not see the soldiers’ and said he would stop on the edge of the road. To Greater Kashmir he says that Faisal ‘had just applied breaks.’ They were trying to overtake a tipper lorry in Indian Express whereas there was no such adventure in Greater Kashmir. Soldiers were firing from ‘two sides’ in Indian Express while in Greater Kashmir they were firing from ‘three sides.’ What are you trying to prove by pointing out these inconsistencies? The boy is lying? Or the killings are justified?
The boys’ families have accused the army of ‘cold blooded’ murder, says a report. But the army seems to have admitted the injured two in the hospital. The ‘cold blooded’ soldiers did not seem to be inclined to kill them. You are impossible!
Mehbooba Mufti says that the soldiers could have fired at the tires instead of pumping dozens of bullets on their bodies. She implies army resorted to excessive violence at the very first instance. But then this report says that the boys did not stop at the first mobile check post when asked to do. When they did it not stop at the 2nd and 3rd check posts, the soldiers opened fire. He he he! You don’t know the basic rules of secular reporting of Kashmir news. Army always lies.
Basharat Masood has taken great pain to meet this ‘frightened’ boy who ‘avoids meeting strangers’ and made him narrate his story. Why does not anyone from media approach the army jawans involved and report their story. Ok, army jawans may not want to be identified or quoted. But then media guys can always use the phrase ‘…said an army source who did not want to be quoted.’ Does the fact that the media has not approached the soldiers for their story mean that their side is not worth reporting?
Consider for a moment the army’s story without jumping into conclusion whether it is true or false. Let the enquiry announced by the army decide on it.
Army had specific intelligence input of terrorist movement in a Maruti car; the guys do not stop at any of the check-posts. What do you expect the army to do other than firing? Such a scene in a Bollywood movie would have been appreciated because we would have applied logic while watching the movie whereas we apply emotions in real life.
All I am trying to say is, none of the above can make up for the loss of lives. But try and appreciate the extreme conditions in which the soldiers operate. They deal with terrorists and militants. They need to take spot decisions and some of the decisions could go wrong. They cannot be judging and evaluating the evidence like a judge in a court of law. As Cho Ramaswamy says with regard to such events, we sympathise with the victim’s families, but to make baseless allegations against army will be a serious disservice to the men in uniform.
Yet I have to say... 