What's new

Elections pass Gujarat Muslims by

Cheetah786

PDF VETERAN
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
9,002
Reaction score
-3
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
As the Indian state of Gujarat gets ready to vote in the second and final phase of elections on Sunday, the BBC's Geeta Pandey talks to Muslims displaced by religious riots in 2002 in which more than 1,000 people, most of them Muslims, were killed.
Overlooked by a hillock of garbage near Ahmedabad city's biggest rubbish dump, a group of children play in the early afternoon sun.

Small heaps of garbage burn a few metres away and the air smells acrid.

This is Citizen Nagar - home to hundreds of Muslim families, displaced by the 2002 religious riots in Gujarat.

Five years on from the carnage in which hundreds of Muslims were killed, these people live forgotten by the powers that be.

At every election rally, the state's Hindu nationalist chief minister Narendra Modi talks about how he has helped make Gujarat the most developed state in India by bringing tap water and round-the-clock power to every home.

He prides himself on Gujarat's world-class roads and the billions of dollars of investment he has won for the state.

'Uninhabitable'

But this development is yet to reach Citizen Nagar. Once you turn off the main road, you are on a dusty uneven untarred road.

The water here is so hard that it corrodes their pots. And the proximity to the garbage dump brings many illnesses.

And the residents' patience is wearing thin. I'm surrounded by a very vocal group of women as soon as I arrive and the list of complaints is long.
"The Citizen Nagar does not have the basic amenities. We have received nothing from the government. We live right next to the garbage pit. No one from the government has visited us in the last five years," says Reshma Bano.

She says the biggest worry they have is about their children's future. "There's no school here, no health centre, no work, nothing," she says.

In the monsoons, the residents say, the place is uninhabitable. The rain water floods everything, ***** swirls around.

Fatima Begum, who lost eight members of her family during the riots, says, "We had a nice house but now we are forced to live near this garbage dump."

The residents of Citizen Nagar are now demanding that they are moved away to another location.

"This place stinks. They often come and throw animal carcasses here. And recently they threw two human bodies here. We are living like animals," says Reshma Bano.

Low priority

Of the state's 50 million population, Muslims make up about nine per cent. And because they are scattered around, they do not vote as a composite unit in the elections.

Which means their welfare is not a priority with any political party.

In the narrow lanes and bylanes of the Muslim-dominated Naroda Patiya area of Ahmedabad, hundreds of Muslims were butchered alive by marauding mobs five years ago.
The memories still haunt those who survived the massacre. Most here lost several members of their families and are still living with grief.

Shakila Bano begins to weep as she recounts the horror of the riots.

"I lost eight members of my family - my mother, two brothers, sister-in-law and four small children. They hacked my brother into pieces, my mother and the children were all burnt alive."

Shakila Bano says her mother offered all her life's savings - 40,000 rupees - to the attackers to spare her family.

"They took the money and promised to spare my family. But, they still burnt them all. We begged and pleaded with the police to help us - they said they couldn't do anything for us."

Since the riots, Shakila Bano says festivals have lost any meaning for her family.

"Even Eid doesn't bring a cheer to us anymore. I avoid going to the lane where my mother lived, the memories of my family and happier times come flooding back to me. I don't wish to live any more, I wish for Allah to give me death," she says, sobbing.

Discrimination

Many of the residents have returned to Naroda Patiya since the riots to pick up the pieces and start afresh.

In a matter of days, most lost everything they ever owned, and their entire life's savings.

Almost all community members I spoke to said they had to deal with daily discrimination and humiliation.

"If you're a Muslim, no bank will give you a loan," said Rafiq Lala, an Ahmedabad-based driver. "However well educated and qualified we may be, we are never considered for any government jobs," says Sardar Ahmad.

He lost all his savings during the riots. "Today, we've been turned into beggars. Now I work in a factory, I earn 50 rupees a day."

For many Muslims, the current assembly elections have no meaning.

And they have no faith in any political party. "All we want is to be able to live in peace. Do you think any political party will give us that?" Mr Ahmad asks.

Angry

Muslims in Gujarat say they feel let down by the main opposition party in Gujarat, the Congress, which has not taken a strong stand on the minorities' issue in the state.

But most of the anger here is directed at one man - state's Hindu nationalist chief minister Narendra Modi.

Mr Modi was the chief minister during the 2002 riots and has been heavily criticised for not stopping the violence against Muslims.

Mr Modi is once against contesting the elections.

Community members say obviously they will not be voting for his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

"Modi's supporters say he's done great work - yes, he has, he's made women like us widows, he's made our children orphans, that's the great work he's done," says Fatima Begum, a resident of Citizen Nagar.

BBC NEWS | South Asia | Elections pass Gujarat Muslims by
 
. .
Another reminder of why the "Two Nation Theory" was necessary.

Mr. Mujahideen, if this was the case what happened to B'desh?

So these kind of things are at times unavoidable as we are in Samudra's words not an Utopian Society

I imagine there are lots of covert progroms taking place in both our countries.. which we have not even heard of.. some are more eviler than the other..

anyways

All exit polls after the first phase of voting in 87 constituencies (of Gujarat's total of 182) point to a swing away from the BJP. An NDTV poll forecasts a loss of 13 BJP seats, placing it behind the Congress by three seats. Such a defeat will deliver the BJP a seismic shock and mark a historic setback for the Sangh Parivar. LK Advani's laughable anointment as the party's prime ministerial candidate will only aggravate the shock. Ideologically, the setback will be even more severe than the BJP's rout in the 2004 national elections. It will prove that a politics based on religious hatred, which rejects pluralism and secularism, is not sustainable even in a "Hindutva laboratory" state.
Modi losing ground in Gujarat

NDTV Exit Poll Highlights

(Sample Size: 8515, Fieldwork done by GfK-MODE)
The BJP is losing ground in Saurashtra. It is likely to drop 13 seats from 2002.

A close fight in South Gujarat where the seats of both the BJP and the Congress remain unchanged.

It's a neck-and-neck fight in Phase I for the BJP and the Congress.


Gujarat Polls- Phase 1: (86 seats)

BJP-40 (Year 2007),53 (Year 2002)
Congress-43 (Year 2007), 30 (Year 2002)
Others-3 (Year 2007), 3 (Year 2002)

Exit Poll Projection - Saurashtra (58 seats)

BJP-26 (Year 2007), 39 (Year 2002)
Congress-31 (Year 2007), 18 (Year 2002)
Others-1 (Year 2007), 1 (Year 2002)

Exit Poll Projection- South Gujarat (28 seats)

BJP-14 (Year 2007), 14 (Year 2002)
Congress-12 (Year 2007), 12 (Year 2002)
Others-2 (Year 2007), 2 (Year 2002)

NDTV.com: Exit Polls: Phase 1 sees close fight

Even the Bookies are offering 1 Re per 1 Re Rate on BJP and 50 paise on Congress..

So I think Congress has a good chance...
 
.
Mr. Mujahideen, if this was the case what happened to B'desh?

May be you haven't read and analyzed the "Two Nation Theory." It say that the Muslims and Hindus are two seperate nations, and thus should have two countries. Now when the Lahore(Pakistan) Resolution was passed, no where is the word Pakistan mentioned in it. Now if one analyzes the Lahore Resolution it is very loose. At that time many wanted two seperate Muslim Nations, but that was not to be. Now I personally think that the "Two Nation Theory" is still alive because you have two independent Muslim Nations. Now Gandhi, Nehru and other high ranking Congress leaders were quoted as saying that the only way the "Two Nation Theory" can go away if the whole of the Indian sub-continent was under one (Indian) flag. but as you can see that is not the case. We have Muslim Pakistan and Bangladesh and Hindu India. Indians(Hindus) must be reminded that the "Two Nation Theory" is alive and here to stay and believe me it wont go away.
 
.
May be you haven't read and analyzed the "Two Nation Theory." It say that the Muslims and Hindus are two seperate nations, and thus should have two countries.

Acc. to the late Mr. Jinnah, the Muslims and Hindus have radically opposite views hence cannot ever have a flag of common nationality.. but sir India has more Muslims than any other south asian country.. how did this happen??
:confused:

Now when the Lahore(Pakistan) Resolution was passed, no where is the word Pakistan mentioned in it. Now if one analyzes the Lahore Resolution it is very loose. At that time many wanted two seperate Muslim Nations, but that was not to be. Now I personally think that the "Two Nation Theory" is still alive because you have two independent Muslim Nations.Now Gandhi, Nehru and other high ranking Congress leaders were quoted as saying that the only way the "Two Nation Theory" can go away if the whole of the Indian sub-continent was under one (Indian) flag. but as you can see that is not the case.

:confused:

We have Muslim Pakistan and Bangladesh and Hindu India. Indians(Hindus) must be reminded that the "Two Nation Theory" is alive and here to stay and believe me it wont go away.

here is my reply . perfectly tailor made for this arguement.
..
Problem # 1. Identification of India as a Hindu Land

for eg. Hindu India, Muslim Pakistan... esp when videos of Riots etc. are shown.. this is a major stereotype of India in the west.

Many Indians are against this kind of portrayl of India as Hindu by the Western Media..as it is insensitive to the fact that how outside perceptions have shaped Indians themselves historically.. even the word Hindu is foreign in nature and now accepted by Indian "Hindus".. therefore this is the most wrongful portrayl of India..

The fact that the Indian diaspora is massive and are large contributors to India.. therefore they cannot be expected to not be influenced by the "wrongful" portrayl of India by the media..

--> main question is Hindu India the counterpart to the Muslim Pakistan?? <---

one must realize that Pakistan after independence has become an Islamic Republic, a largely theocratic state, and with special powers for Muslims.. where as India is a Secular democracy, with no state religion..

It is cruel the way the Westerns are unable to see the contrast between the 2 nations..and the few odd riots(condmenable no doubt) have fuelled the westerns vision that India is a masquerading Secular Country without realising India has more Muslims than Pakistan.....

Pakistan explicity doesnot allow a nonmuslim to become the head of state whereas India is pretty secular in this regard. 2 half Parsis(Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi), a Sikh(Manmohan Singh) have been heads of state in India..

similarly India cannot have special laws protecting any religion unlike Pakistan's laws protecting Islam w.r.t Blasphemy etc..

Though one must realize that the Hindus in India enjoy an advantage over Muslims in many fields w/o enforcement of any state legislation..

There is no clear identification of the kind or form of Secularism practised in India w/o admonishing or glorifying the same.. and there are lot of questions that are unanswered wrt to how the state of India conducts itself with different religions.. for.eg, Minorities are generally favoured over Minorities.. esp during court or govt rulings.. is this insecular act.. though justifiable, legal and constitutional ?? a famous case, Satanic Verses was banned versus Hinduism trashing books which are allowed to be published...

another issue is that wrt to religion etc. does the state be sensitive to religions and use the religious scholars to interpret certain very sensitive subjects like anti-Islamic or anti-Hindu actions or should the state rely on rationality and do away with all religious interpretations ?

the first case is again secular since the state is equidistant, in second the state is again secular by removing the religion component..

protecting the right to worship, etc can be called secularism in principle as the state is granting religious freedom to various religious communities against what they deem to be blasphemous/hurtful etc.

certain actions deemed classically anti-secular though are arguably in-principle secular -- are very necessary in case of India to prevent religious intolerance and violene.. though having religious scholars sit and interpret the topics is unfeasible and downright anti-Constituional yet.. the govt's or courts intervention in topics which are potentially flammable is welcomed..

The secularism practised in India as over the years adopted a dynamic form and can be thought of as at times biased towards minority but in the interest of the nation.. and the question that Indian secularism has no special requirements is plain jane stupid..

http://www.defence.pk/forums/119578-post297.html
 
.
I understand that India is a so-called democracy. This Democratic process has been used by the Hindus to deny the Muslims power. This is exactly why the Muslims demanded for a seperate homeland because they were afraid of this democracy. Through this democracy the Hindus have been able to control all of the Indian Government. Now Pakistan being an Islamic Republic or a theocratic state, is a different story, you can present your arguement and I can mine, even though I believe that my arguement will be stronger, this we can discuss some other time. Now I know that India has had many non-Hindu leaders, but I think they were brought into power to show how secular India really is. They were not brought in because they enjoyed support of the majority. The point being they were brought in to improve India image. Now in Pakistan even though we have had no non-Muslim head of state, non-Muslims are given rights. They have especial seats alloted to them in the government and other places.
 
.
I understand that India is a so-called democracy. This Democratic process has been used by the Hindus to deny the Muslims power. This is exactly why the Muslims demanded for a seperate homeland because they were afraid of this democracy. Through this democracy the Hindus have been able to control all of the Indian Government.

Sir you are quite illprepared..
you speak as though hindus are united and homogenous.. :hitwall:

BTW

UPA/Congress is headed by a WOMAN of ROMAN CATHOLIC beliefs of ITALIAN Origin.

Her Husband was Half PARSI of PERSIAN origin(from paternal side) and Half HINDU of KASHMIRI origin.

The PM of INDIA is a SIKH of PAKISTANI origin.

Leader of Opposition is a Sindhi of Pakistani origin.

Now Pakistan being an Islamic Republic or a theocratic state, is a different story, you can present your arguement and I can mine, even though I believe that my arguement will be stronger, this we can discuss some other time.

:confused:

Now I know that India has had many non-Hindu leaders, but I think they were brought into power to show how secular India really is.

Please see above..
Why would anyone do that??
It all boils down to the constituencies and politics..

They were not brought in because they enjoyed support of the majority. The point being they were brought in to improve India image.

Try asking Advani to fight Sonia Gandhi(Italian/Christian) in Amethi..
or Modi to fight in Meerut(muslim dominated)
or Jayalalitha in Punjab(Sikh dominated)..
or Mayawati in Jaipur(Rajput dominated)
or Bhupinder Hooda in Amritsar(jatt dominated)
or Mufti in Jammu(Dogra Dominated)
These are elected leaders who have won in their constituencies..
If you actually noticed..
For eg. in Punjab a Sikh dominated state there is a Muslim MP why?? because it makes sense for a Muslim to stand elections from malerkotla a Muslim dominated area.. :yahoo:


Now in Pakistan even though we have had no non-Muslim head of state, non-Muslims are given rights. They have especial seats alloted to them in the government and other places.

I think there are some reservations for tribals and chrisitans.. unwarranted IMO..

India is being run at present by a Sikh under control of a Chrisitan.. this is democracy and secularism and politics..:bunny:
 
.
all these minorities were brought into power to show how secular India is to the world. It was done because we are at a time called globilization. They need to have non-Hindu leaders to show how secular they are. These people are just puppets with the Hindus pulling all the strings in the back.
 
.
all these minorities were brought into power to show how secular India is to the world. It was done because we are at a time called globilization. They need to have non-Hindu leaders to show how secular they are. These people are just puppets with the Hindus pulling all the strings in the back.

What does not suit your perception can indeed be labelled in the manner you and your psychology and your mindset find it fits best.

However, it need not be the reality.

Minorities have been in very senior positions even before globalisation. That itself indicates how much you are aware of the facts. And to call them puppets also indicates that your pique seems to have overtaken your logic.

As I have said in many of my posts that nothing in the world is perfect. There are no perfect democracies or a perfect flawless secularism. Even a country like the US which is a land of immigrants, it is not flawlessly perfect, secular or a democracy. Likewise, Pakistan is an Islamic country, but I find there are ample posts here on this very forum by Pakistani members, questioning the Islamic content of Pakistan. Therefore, one can surmise Pakistan is not an Islamic state. Would that be acceptable? If one goes by the tenor of the Pakistani posters, then one would realise that they sincerely believe that it is an Islamic Republic; some would admit flaws and some would not. But that is not material. What is material is the intent. Pakistan's intent is to be Islamic, but it is not perfect in Islamic content (like Moslems killing Moslem or the Sharia is not the sole legal process, etc). Likewise, the intent in India is secularism and like Pakistan, it is not perfect.

Therefore, I would only advise you to see the broader intent without looking at the warts, which is eveident in all nations.

Are you a perfect person? Have you no faults? If you have, does it make you anything but a human being?

Think it over.
 
.
What does not suit your perception can indeed be labelled in the manner you and your psychology and your mindset find it fits best.

However, it need not be the reality.

Minorities have been in very senior positions even before globalisation. That itself indicates how much you are aware of the facts. And to call them puppets also indicates that your pique seems to have overtaken your logic.

As I have said in many of my posts that nothing in the world is perfect. There are no perfect democracies or a perfect flawless secularism. Even a country like the US which is a land of immigrants, it is not flawlessly perfect, secular or a democracy. Likewise, Pakistan is an Islamic country, but I find there are ample posts here on this very forum by Pakistani members, questioning the Islamic content of Pakistan. Therefore, one can surmise Pakistan is not an Islamic state. Would that be acceptable? If one goes by the tenor of the Pakistani posters, then one would realise that they sincerely believe that it is an Islamic Republic; some would admit flaws and some would not. But that is not material. What is material is the intent. Pakistan's intent is to be Islamic, but it is not perfect in Islamic content (like Moslems killing Moslem or the Sharia is not the sole legal process, etc). Likewise, the intent in India is secularism and like Pakistan, it is not perfect.

Therefore, I would only advise you to see the broader intent without looking at the warts, which is eveident in all nations.

Are you a perfect person? Have you no faults? If you have, does it make you anything but a human being?

Think it over.

It seems to me that the main point you are making here is that everyone and every country has its pros and cons. And if this really is your main point then I agree with you 100%. Look we can sit here and argue all we want but the fact remains that it does no good to our respective countries. What needs to be done is that first of all we need to acknowledge our pros and cons and address them.
 
.
We may like to address the pros and cons and the warts and all.

But politics and politicians are a nasty phenomena.
 
.
all these minorities were brought into power to show how secular India is to the world. It was done because we are at a time called globilization. They need to have non-Hindu leaders to show how secular they are. These people are just puppets with the Hindus pulling all the strings in the back.

Manmohan Singh was made Reserve Bank Governor and then Finance Minister because he was a Sardar. Bismillah Khan was made to play his shenai every year on our independence day because he a Muslim! Kalam was made head of SLV programme because he was Muslim! TATA's in India have been made to flourish because they're Parsi's. Infact they were even made to support our nuclear programmes back in 1950s...you know..we needed to show the world that we were secular.

We Hindus are cunning, I tell ya. :smokin:
 
.
Manmohan Singh was made Reserve Bank Governor and then Finance Minister because he was a Sardar. Bismillah Khan was made to play his shenai every year on our independence day because he a Muslim! Kalam was made head of SLV programme because he was Muslim! TATA's in India have been made to flourish because they're Parsi's. Infact they were even made to support our nuclear programmes back in 1950s...you know..we needed to show the world that we were secular.:

MM Singh being Governor of the bank and later Finance Minister was due to his won abilities but later his PM slot is indeed showing the world secular face.
Rest about Kalam and Bismillah Khan they were because they are rendering services and benfiting India otherwise their other fellows are well you alll know their condition.

We Hindus are cunning, I tell ya. :smokin:

;) ;)
 
.
As cunning as the article of the Pakistani officer I posted which indicated the popular Pakistan myth that one Pakistani is equal to 10 Hindus and which the Pakistani officer debunked as ridiculous giving examples of the bottomline in the various Indo Pak wars!

Get rid of these stupid myths from your minds and quit using them as crutches when logic fails!
 
.
I think the simplest answer to this thread is that wait and see the decision of the people. If they vote for Mr. Modi than there is nothing one can do except to accept the decision of the majority whether it be wrong or right. This is the beauty of the democracy, isn’t it?
If they vote against him than there is a change in government. Again the power of vote is at work.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom