Attack and one more and another one….

November 23, 2009 at 5:24 pm 9 comments

I am not just referring to the series of bomb blasts or terrorist attacks across India but also  to the verbal, communal, language, disease etc! Clearly bandwidth of the word ‘Attack’ has expanded and stretched like an elastic.

Situation-1; Scared of a terror attack? Oh come-on! We have learnt to live with it. They will not strike with a warning and our systems are too weak to unveil them. If the militants can surpass the securities of our Parliament House then every corner of our country is exposed.  Can we stop moving about? Can every person at any public place be scrutinized for security? Can a minister be frisked for a security check?

Situation-2; Sachin is ridiculed for making a secular statement and faces wrath of the Shiv Sena head! A minister’s oath ceremony in a particular language turns into a big tamasha. MPs showing off bundles of money as bribe in Lok Sabha another reason for national shame.

Situation -3; The farmers took out a procession in Delhi, blocked roads, damaged public property including the transport.

Situation-4; Followers of a particular sect attack preachers of another one (this happened in Punjab some months ago)

Situation-5; H1N1 flu, HIV, Polio and many other diseases that are on rise and getting out of control.

Other shameful attacks include; the one on Babri Masjid, students from North East treated with a bias because of their looks, China’s claim on parts of Arunachal Pradesh, people in J&K, West Bengal & Assam who are victims of Naxals, Jihadis, Maos.

 So how do you define ‘Attack’?

PS: The term is ‘global’ though I have listed only the national issues here.


Entry filed under: no mind thoughts!.

You are at RISK… Read On

9 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Prateek  |  November 24, 2009 at 2:09 pm


  • 2. Bikram  |  November 24, 2009 at 6:00 pm

    Hmmm I could go on and on but you will get angry at me. So the article is EXACTLY my point.

    Attack to me is Basicaly .. IF you for an instant think that u r NOT safe.. wherever you are, It should be considered a ATTACK. an Assault as we put in this country. I know this is far fetched but then in the current scenario it is valid. Gone are the days when in the middle of the night you could get up, go out of your house for a stroll.

    I hope I am making some sense here as sometimes my mind too works in mysterious ways.

    Ladies going for a morning walk, OLD WOMEN, whom we should be helping are attacked there ears- nose snatched at cause of gold, 4 incidents in the last week in chandigarh.

    This is the hard reality at the moment. The fact, forget about national security, or STATE security we are not safe in the surroundings of our own AREA, Parliament house- Babri masjid or other places are not even worth mentioning if we are not safe in our own house or within the parameters.

    I think what we need to counter this ATTACK is start from root level, make your house safe, then your street, then the Road, then the locality, city,state and then the NATION.

    sorry if i got carried away…

  • 3. Mayur  |  November 25, 2009 at 4:27 pm

    Any damaging action or obstruction to one’s freedom is how I define an attack. May it be verbal, physical, psychological or social.

  • 4. tangyorangesour  |  November 26, 2009 at 6:28 pm

    When I’m too weak to fight for what I know true to my gut is the right thing to do.

  • 5. Gaurav  |  November 27, 2009 at 7:21 pm

    Interesting Post!

  • 6. Sapna  |  December 2, 2009 at 1:03 pm

    Nice post. Attack is definitely an overloaded term.

  • 7. Ketan  |  December 2, 2009 at 1:40 pm


    The impression I got through your post was that you actually sought a definition of ‘attack’. As far as I see it, following criteria must be fulfilled to term something as that:

    1. Something should get damaged, potentially damaged. This could also include attacking something abstract, like attacking an ‘argument’.

    2. The attack must be unanticipated/sudden.

    3. There must be a definite intent to attack thus.

    While above are the bare minimum criteria, there a few more connotations that go with it:

    4. Usually not in the right of the attacker to attack thus, but exception would a soldier attacking an enemy.

    5. Infringes on at least some right of the one attacked. But for this would not hold true in for instance, a case of argument. In entering a debate, one knows that their ideas will be ‘attacked’.

    Hope, I could add some clarity. 🙂

    And do you not respond to readers’ comments? :O


  • 8. Ketan  |  December 2, 2009 at 1:41 pm

    Oh and yes, if you were only trying to point out that the word has come to be used in an overtly sensationalist manner, then I entirely agree. 😀

    • 9. delhizen  |  December 2, 2009 at 1:56 pm

      I do respond If I feel there is a need to and not just for the sake of adding the number of comments on posts! thanks for all your comments.


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


  • 35,284 hits

Posts from the past

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 50 other followers

Delhizen captures



%d bloggers like this: