Editor,
The recent panel discussion on environmental issues hosted on the 4Front YouTube channel took an unfortunate and unexpected turn when two panelists —Mr. Reading War and Rev. Kyrsoibor Pyrtuh—diverted from the core topic and engaged in an unwarranted critique of the sacred Behdienkhlam Religious Festival and the culturally significant Chad Sukra Festival. Their remarks not only misrepresented the deep religious and cultural essence of these festivals but also blatantly disregarded the constitutional rights of the Niamtre people in the Jaintia Hills region.
Mr. Reading War, an advocate by profession, should be well aware that Articles 25-28 of the Indian Constitution guarantee the fundamental right to freedom of religion, ensuring that every citizen has the right to profess, practice, and propagate their faith without interference or misrepresentation. However, his statements during the discussion displayed a lack of understanding and a misinterpretation of the very constitutional provisions he is sworn to uphold. Behdienkhlam and Chad Sukra are not mere celebrations; they embody the spiritual, cultural, and communal harmony of the Niamtre faith, passed down through generations. It is indeed disheartening to witness a professional advocate like Mr. War exhibiting a concerning lack of understanding of these constitutional principles. His statements not only reflected ignorance but also insensitivity toward the spiritual and cultural heritage of the Jaintia people.
More disturbingly, Rev. Kyrsoibor Pyrtuh, a former pastor who should ideally be promoting harmony and mutual respect, was heard referring to these sacred festivals as ‘Chad Cement.’ This derogatory remark was not only uncalled for but also an outright insult to the indigenous community that has for generations observed these festivals as sacred and divine. One would expect a religious leader to foster unity, compassion, and respect for all faiths. Instead, Rev. Pyrtuh’s words have only sown seeds of discord and religious intolerance. Dear Pastor, is it not your duty to spread love among humanity rather than breed hatred and discrimination?
Equally disappointing was the reaction of the show’s host, who was seen laughing and seemingly endorsing these disrespectful remarks rather than steering the discussion back to the environmental issues at hand. A responsible moderator should ensure that a platform meant for public discourse does not become a stage for religious insensitivity and misrepresentation.
The Behdieňkhlam Festival is a sacred ritual observed by the followers of Niamtre, signifying purification, warding off evil, and seeking divine blessings for prosperity and well-being involving rites and rituals as per religious teachings and practices. Chad Sukra, on the other hand, is a cultural festival and holds equal religious importance to Niamtre faith that celebrates agricultural prosperity, reinforcing the deep connection and bonds between the people and mother earth. To distort the essence of these traditions with misleading rhetoric is a direct affront to the indigenous faith and cultural identity of the Jaintia community. The Jaintia people have upheld these traditions for centuries, and they continue to be an integral part of the region’s spiritual and social fabric. These festivals are not just rituals; they are embodiments of faith, history, and heritage. They have stood the test of time and will continue to do so, despite attempts by a few to misinterpret their significance.It is imperative that individuals engaging in public discussions—especially those holding influential positions—exercise responsibility, sensitivity, and a commitment to factual discourse. Environmental issues are indeed critical, but they should be addressed with constructive solutions rather than unwarranted attacks on religious and cultural traditions. Respect for diversity and the peaceful coexistence of beliefs must remain at the heart of any meaningful debate.
The indigenous faith of Niamtre deserves the same level of respect and recognition as any other religious or cultural tradition. We urge Mr. Reading War, Rev. Kyrsoibor Pyrtuh, and the other panelist along with the host to reflect on their statements and actions and recognize the importance of fostering dialogue that unites rather than divides. It is only through mutual respect and understanding that we can truly work toward a sustainable and harmonious future.
Yours etc.,
O.R Shallam
Panaliar, Jowai
Let bygones be bygones!
Editor,
This has a reference to the letter by Kyrsoibor Pyrtuh captioned, “No intention to offend anyone” (ST, 29th March 2025). While the writer had tendered unconditional apology he still justified his comment. A sincere apology involves expressing remorse. Hence a person who apologizes but still argues and justifies his or her statement(s) is essentially offering a “non-apology” or a “fauxpology.” Further, his comment “Chad Cement” is to be understood as a metaphor cannot be accepted, because metaphor as it has been employed historically to denigrate various social subgroups present a pejorative image of the group in question. Anyway, let bygones be bygones!
Yours etc.,
Dr. Omarlin Kyndiah
Via email
Clarification regarding statements during panel discussion
Editor,
I am writing to clarify certain statements I made during the panel discussion titled “Rynsan Iathir: Sa Katno ngin pynjot ia ka Mei Mariang,” held on 25th March, 2025, organized by 4Front Media. I understand that my statements have inadvertently caused offense to some viewers, particularly members of the Niamtre community.
I would like to assure everyone that it was never my intention to disrespect or hurt the sentiments of any particular community. My comments were made within the broader context of discussing environmental degradation and its impacts on our cultural practices, without any intent to delve into or comment negatively on religious beliefs.
I sincerely apologize for any distress or offense my words may have unintentionally caused. I hold the deepest respect for all religious traditions, beliefs, and sentiments. It is my firm belief that meaningful dialogue must always be rooted in mutual respect, understanding, and tolerance.
I appreciate the opportunity to provide this clarification and hope that it will help to clear up any misconceptions and reassure those who may have been affected by my words. Moving forward, I remain fully committed to nurturing positive and respectful exchanges of ideas in our community.
Thank you for your understanding.
Yours etc.,
Reading War,
Via email
Calling out the abysmally poor Jio mobile service
Editor,
A growing number of Jio mobile users have reached breaking point trying to figure out reasons for the unreliable service provided by the company. What makes the situation particularly frustrating is the mismatch between what users are promised and what they actually receive. For instance, Jio’s Rs 899 plan offers 2 GB of data per day, yet in most areas, users are unable to even access, “20 KB of data” consistently; even in the city centre – the heart of town, such as Mawkhar Market in Shillong.
Jio earlier used to offer a more affordable plan such as the Rs 479 recharge — which was mainly meant for people who mostly needed voice calls. It included just 6 GB of data for 84 days, making it a good fit for users who didn’t depend much on mobile data and just wanted to stay connected with calls.
However, without any explanation, Jio has quietly phased out the Rs 479 plan over the past few months. As a result, users who once had a cost-effective alternative are now compelled to go for the Rs 899 plan — even if their data usage is minimal or the data service is completely non-functional.
This shift has left many users feeling exploited. Let’s imagine a tailor charging you for stitching a coat, shirt, and trousers — but only delivers the trousers, claiming that the sewing machine broke down. If you filed a complaint at the police station, the tailor would likely be arrested, because it is a clear case of a serious criminal offence. Here my question is why is there no accountability when a big telecom company charges for services it doesn’t deliver at all? Why isn’t the government taking action against such blatant exploitation? Is there one law for ordinary citizens and another for the rich and powerful?
Yours etc.,
Salil Gewali,
Shillong