What's new

Indian retaliation: Australian man stabbed by Indians, Australian's car torched

Communist

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Dec 28, 2008
Messages
3,489
Reaction score
0
Indians 'retaliate' after new attacks

Indians 'retaliate' after new attacks
Andra Jackson
June 9, 2009

A 20-YEAR-OLD man was stabbed once in the neck and twice in the arm in St Albans early yesterday after allegedly racially abusing a group of Indian students.

The victim allegedly said: "You are black. You don't belong here. Go away from our country".

Police described the two men they want to speak to over the attack as aged between 23 and 29 years old and dark skinned.

A car believed to belong to people attacking Indians was also torched in a factory near St Albans station.

A Metropolitan Fire Brigade spokeswoman said firefighters were called to the blaze in Gratz Street at 11.10pm and have ruled it suspicious.

Just 24 hours earlier, Indian student Kamal Jit, 23, was bashed unconscious while walking home from St Albans station. Around the same time, the car of an Indian student was torched on the other side of the city, in Springvale.

The attack on the 20-year-old is the first time Indian students appear to have retaliated against violent attacks against them as they walk home late at night from St Albans station.

One man, who did not want his name published, said they took the action "in self-defence" after police failed to respond to their call for protection in the wake of attacks on fellow Indian students.

He disputed claims police were liaising with the Indian community group that gathers at the station each night to protect late travellers from attacks as they walk home.

"The police don't care. In this suburb everyone is a migrant," he said.

His claims were verified by another person who witnessed the attacks but did not want his name published.

Chairman of the Ethnic Communities Council of Victoria, Sam Afra, said it would be unacceptable for the Indian community to take the law into its own hands. "There is a danger this will become like a chain reaction with the victim becoming the perpetrator. We don't want to get to that," he said.

Kapil Bajaj, spokesman for the Hindu Council of Australia, said the possible retaliation was worrying and the council would condemn such a response.

A Metropolitan Ambulance Service spokesman said the 20-year-old man stabbed in the early hours of Monday morning was treated at the scene before being transported in a serious but stable condition to the Royal Melbourne Hospital. Police said they believe the man was approached by two men in Walmer Avenue around midnight and a knife was produced.

Detectives from Keilor Downs are appealing for any witnesses to contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000.

In other incidents the same night, a group of Indians were abused by a group of males and one Indian was punched but when the police arrived, "they did not do anything", The Age was told.

A police spokesman said police had met people organising the community watch at the station and the police presence had been increased on trains and near the station.

:coffee:
 
Ah....my beloved communist is back......btw there is a thread running on this issue......please post the article there if you like....thnx
 
A modest confession from an Indian intellectual:

Juggle-Bandhi:Jug Suraiya's blog-The Times Of India

We're even more racist than Aussies
Jug Suraiya Monday June 08, 2009

The attacks on Indians in Australia have once again raised the ugly head of racism. Once again India is caught up in the midst of a racist storm. A while ago, the Big Brother controversy launched Shilpa Shetty as an international anti-racism icon from India. This is entirely appropriate as Indians are arguably the biggest targets of racism in the world. And they are targeted not just by unlettered British yobs or Australian thugs but, first and foremost, by their own compatriots. It's because we are so racist ourselves that we are so quick to react to a racist slur: it takes a racist to catch a racist. And our racism is colour-coded in black-and-white terms: white is intrinsically superior and desirable; black is inferior and undesirable.

In the Indian colour scheme of things, black is far from beautiful. The colloquial word for a black person of African origin is 'habshi', an epithet as offensive as the American 'nigger', both terms derived from the days of the slave trade.

For all India's official championing of the anti-apartheid crusade in South Africa's erstwhile white regime, north India at least is steeped in colour prejudice - ask any African student who's had a taste of Delhi's campus life. For the north Indian, fair is lovely, as those abominably tasteless TV commercials keep proclaiming: Don't get sunburnt, use skin whitening creams, or you'll end up dark and no one will marry you. (When did you last see a matrimonial ad seeking an 'attractive, dark-complexioned life partner'?)

Why is dark literally beyond the pale for so many of us? Is it an atavistic throwback to the supposed superiority of 'white' Aryans vis-a-vis the 'non-white' original inhabitants of the subcontinent? Is it the result of 250 years of white rule under the British? Is a pale skin, as against a deep tan, a testimonial to social rank, segregating those who don't have to toil under the sun from those who do? Is it an amalgam of all these?

Whatever the reason, 'chitti chamri' (fair skin) is a passport to fawning social acceptance -- which might partly explain why an increasing number of Caucasians look for assignments in India, be it as MNC executives or bartenders in 5-star hotels.

Our racism is largely, but not exclusively, based on colour. Caste is India's unique contribution to the lexicon of racial bigotry. Whether 'caste' - a result of cultural and social segmentation - can legitimately be conflated with 'race' - with its genetic and physiological underpinnings - is a matter of academic debate. However, as only too many horror stories testify, the average rural Dalit fares worse on the human-rights scale than her 'kafir' counterpart in the worst days of South African apartheid.

Caste apart, real or imagined ethnic traits compound our racism. People from the north-east are said to have 'Chinky' (Chinese) eyes and are routinely asked if they eat dogs. Even in so-called 'mainstream' India we sub-divide ourselves with pejoratives: 'Panjus', whose only culture is agriculture; stingy 'Marrus'; mercenary 'Gujjus' who eat 'heavy snakes' for tea; lazy, shiftless 'Bongs'; 'Madrasis', who all live south of the Vindhyas and speak a funny 'Illay-po' language. In our ingrained provincialism is our much-vaunted and illusory unity.

No wonder we can't stand racism. It reminds us disquietingly of the face we see in our own mirror.


Very crucial points you have raised Mr Suraiya.
Jug Suraiya jai ho... :smitten:
 
^^ From what I've seen in India, light skin is only considered more attractive, not in some way superior. Racism is a completely different issue, you are comparing apples and oranges. A racist believes that he is superior to others by virtue of his 'race', that's not the case in India.

The caste system is illegal, India is poor and over populated, its hard to educate all those poor people. People will cling to anything that makes them feel better about themselves, all in good time sir.

and this is found throughout the subcontinent by the way. Nepalis pride themselves on their light skin, as do Pakistanis. A lot of Pakistanis I have talked to claim 'Aryan' heritage. Furthermore Australia has experienced regular bouts of racial violence, they have gang wars with the lebanese.
 
Last edited:
Here we go again with the fair skin argument, there is already a thread the talks a whole lot of bull crap!!!

Regarding Racism, Racism is a universal treat among human beings, not only in India but every country. And this is one for you Mr. Communist, Even in China if you are not a Hun, then you are treated as inferior. Where a non Hun can become a doctor, but has to work in a factory because he is not a HUN.
 
^^ From what I've seen in India, light skin is only considered more attractive, not in some way superior. Racism is a completely different issue, you are comparing apples and oranges. A racist believes that he is superior to others by virtue of his 'race', that's not the case in India.

The caste system is illegal, India is poor and over populated, its hard to educate all those poor people. People will cling to anything that makes them feel better about themselves, all in good time sir.
and this is found throughout the subcontinent by the way. Nepalis pride themselves on their light skin, as do Pakistanis. A lot of Pakistanis I have talked to claim 'Aryan' heritage.


No mate, lighter skin is considered not only attractive, but superior sometimes as far as the much debated dravidian-aryan conflict is concerned. The birth of AIDMK confirms the fact. Someone named Ashim said in the blog, "One more interesting fact about our racial discrimination. If we look at the item numbers in our Bollywood movies, the appearance of White (Westerners) girls is increasing day by day. The movie makers make money by showing what the consumers will like so they show more and more of partially nude white women. Indian men love to see white women rather than non-white. I have seen multiple songs where they have also moved Indian dancers to the back and kept the white ones in the front.
This explains a lot about us."

Also the Brahmins for example consider themselves superior to other castes, and particularly shudras and dalits. Thus the sense of superiority does exist that we cannot deny. The word caste is actually misguiding, it should be race or ethnicity. Caste did not exist in India, its a Portuguese word used by the British who did not understand what the Indian Sanskrit word Jati meant.

I think, we should not drag Pakistani or Nepalese views about skin color in this discussion.
 
Here we go again with the fair skin argument, there is already a thread the talks a whole lot of bull crap!!!

Regarding Racism, Racism is a universal treat among human beings, not only in India but every country. And this is one for you Mr. Communist, Even in China if you are not a Hun, then you are treated as inferior. Where a non Hun can become a doctor, but has to work in a factory because he is not a HUN.

When did I say racism is not seen in Asian countries? Tibetans hate the Chinese Huns, Tha Japs hate the Chinese Huns also, even think of the Koreans. But that racism is different. Their racism is not color based, its culture based.

Racism is multidimensional. Racism is not based upon any monolithic bias. In India racism is largely based upon color thanks to the existence of different colored ethnicities. Sometimes it is based upon physical traits. The north eastern mongoloids are called chinky according to that. The proto austroloids of Orissa are called Mundas. In Ramayana the southern dravids were described by the term rakshasas or demons or monsters.
 
No mate, lighter skin is considered not only attractive, but superior sometimes as far as the much debated dravidian-aryan conflict is concerned. The birth of AIDMK confirms the fact. Someone named Ashim said in the blog, "One more interesting fact about our racial discrimination. If we look at the item numbers in our Bollywood movies, the appearance of White (Westerners) girls is increasing day by day. The movie makers make money by showing what the consumers will like so they show more and more of partially nude white women. Indian men love to see white women rather than non-white. I have seen multiple songs where they have also moved Indian dancers to the back and kept the white ones in the front.
This explains a lot about us."

Also the Brahmins for example consider themselves superior to other castes, and particularly shudras and dalits. Thus the sense of superiority does exist that we cannot deny. The word caste is actually misguiding, it should be race or ethnicity. Caste did not exist in India, its a Portuguese word used by the British who did not understand what the Indian Sanskrit word Jati meant.

I think, we should not drag Pakistani or Nepalese views about skin color in this discussion.

I disagree 'mate', lighter skin is only considered more attractive. India's entire economic engine is in the south by the way. Don't quote blogs to me, my 11 year old cousin sister has a blog. If they have more white girls in bollywood numbers now, its only, as I've already said before, because it is believed that they would appeal to the most number of people, sex sells.simple.

My mother is a 'brahmin', im half a brahmin, I doubt she considers herself superior to me. Once again, the caste system is illegal, the government is doing what it can to address the issue among the whole mess of other things they have to fix, these things don't disappear overnight. People are poor, illiterate and live miserable lives. If they can delude themselves into thinking they are better than their neighbors to make themselves feel better, than there isn't much one could say to stop them.

and finally once again, this attitude isn't unique to India, its found throughout the sub continent and a whole host of other countries as well. Nepal and Pakistan are part of the sub continent, I didn't drag them there.
 
When did I say racism is not seen in Asian countries? Tibetans hate the Chinese Huns, Tha Japs hate the Chinese Huns also, even think of the Koreans. But that racism is different. Their racism is not color based, its culture based.

Racism is multidimensional. Racism is not based upon any monolithic bias. In India racism is largely based upon color thanks to the existence of different colored ethnicities. Sometimes it is based upon physical traits. The north eastern mongoloids are called chinky according to that. The proto austroloids of Orissa are called Mundas. In Ramayana the southern dravids were described by the term rakshasas or demons or monsters.

You are so wrong about this that you do not even understand Indians. I am from gujarat, In gujarat if you are from a certain county/provance, the judgement is already placed on you before considering you as a person. Now technically all gujarties are the same color, yet they hold this prejeduce against what provance you are from. Hummmm, I wonder.

Regarding this color racism, I just do not get it. Color racism is very different then what you see in India. The fair skins is a perception of beauty to Indians not some form of racism, period.
 
I disagree 'mate', lighter skin is only considered more attractive. India's entire economic engine is in the south by the way. Don't quote blogs to me, my 11 year old cousin sister has a blog. If they have more white girls in bollywood numbers now, its only, as I've already said before, because it is believed that they would appeal to the most number of people, sex sells.simple.

My mother is a 'brahmin', im half a brahmin, I doubt she considers herself superior to me. Once again, the caste system is illegal, the government is doing what it can to address the issue among the whole mess of other things they have to fix, these things don't disappear overnight. People are poor, illiterate and live miserable lives. If they can delude themselves into thinking they are better than their neighbors to make themselves feel better, than there isn't much one could say to stop them.

and finally once again, this attitude isn't unique to India, its found throughout the sub continent and a whole host of other countries as well. Nepal and Pakistan are part of the sub continent, I didn't drag them there.

Yes you are right in saying sex sells from a commercial point of view. Thats fine. But you missed something, even in the entertainment industry racial discrimination based on color and physical traits is present even by commercial parameters. Thats why Katrina Kaif or Yana Gupta receive much bigger business assignments than their counter parts, the Mallu aunties who perform in B grades or C grades. Its hierarchical as the grades are vertical and not horizontal. The grades are racially motivated on the basis of skin color. Thus the preference itself is based upon a binary opposition. I am talking about that social psyche which establishes the desirability or attractiveness.

Can you tell me what the root cause of this peculiar social psyche is in spite of the fact that India's economic engine is in the south according to your claim?

I know the govt is doing its best, particularly the Congress. But after 20 years of the reservation, why still dalits are dalits, I do not understand. The appointment of a dalit woman as Lok Sabha speaker is appreciating, she is definitely capable of dealing with the Lok Sabha. But does that mean all dalits have been uplifted? Here, your point makes sense. India's majority population is poor and illiterate. There are tribals, dalits, shudras, Muslims, etc, who need to be addressed first by the govt as well as by other civil bodies.
 
we were supposed to be discussing racist attacks on Indians in australia, not sure how I started discussing dalits instead..
 
Last edited:
The thread has been hijacked by posting stupid & ir relevant issues.

This retaliation is both good & bad depending on where u see it from. The Aussies have changed their high commissioner to Delhi . They stand to lose a lot if GOI decides to block Indian students going down under.

For Indian students , I have not come across many cases wherein Oz degrees have added skills to students getting them better jobs in India.
 
I agree with communist on this.. racism still exists in India..!! But i don't think its against blacks from Africa.. but to their own people. Racism based on social status.. racism based on caste.. You cannot ignore it. Its on a subdued level.. its seems that everyone have accepted it..But that doesn't mean that we should not condemn what is happening in Australia. But education have brought in a sweeping change in mindset of people.. and that is why you see no racism in kerala or westbengal..!!! And the day india is free from this caste based reservation and bias is not far..!!!!
 
Racism exists in India like any other nation but this thread is to discuss student attacks on Indians in Australia and its fallout.
 
Back
Top Bottom