What's new

Timeline Gujarat 2002

Here's a thought to help you navigate any discussion, online or real life: focus on the content of the post, not the poster's nationality.

My comment about Indian obsession was in the context of the post which attempted to divert the topic from Gujarat onto some self-styled psychoanalysis of the Pakistani nation.



How is that a facepalm?
Does that negate my claim that sitting officers of the Modi government were involved in orchestrating the pogrom?

Indeed, so one should not express one's opinion if it happens to pertain to the idea that the poster in question feels that the posters of a certain nationality are biased as far as the topic at hand is concerned for various reasons- specially on a forum which happens to be open to all and thus contains posts from the said nationals. Listen he thinks that any Pakistani posting on this topic will present a prejudiced view- he stated that along with the reasons he attributed to said prejudice. You want to muzzle him on a free forum? He feels you and your compatriots are biased and he posted as much- hardly any cause for an issue. Anyway this will soon turn into a circular argument. To each his own.
 
.
How is that a facepalm?
Does that negate my claim that sitting officers of the Modi government were involved in orchestrating the pogrom?

For the last time she was elected MLA in the year 2007 5 years after Gujarat riots took place
 
.
Indeed, so one should not express one's opinion if it happens to pertain to the idea that the poster in question feels that the posters of a certain nationality are biased as far as the topic at hand is concerned for various reasons- specially on a forum which happens to be open to all and thus contains posts from the said nationals. Listen he thinks that any Pakistani posting on this topic will present a prejudiced view- he stated that along with the reasons he attributed to said prejudice. You want to muzzle him on a free forum? He feels you and your compatriots are biased and he posted as much- hardly any cause for an issue. Anyway this will soon turn into a circular argument. To each his own.

Vinod not only questioned his credibility - which would be an ad hominem argument, he provided an argument as to WHY the posts of pakistani posters are biased and they keep ignoring facts to the contrary.

That was a valid argument.

For the last time she was elected MLA in the year 2007 5 years after Gujarat riots took place

No she was sitting MLA during Gujrat riots, however she belonged to Keshubhai faction and was not a Modi supporter.
 
.
Only ministers are office bearers. All other MLAs, be it from any party are the same - representatives and have no special administrative powers.

Also voter lists are not confidential government documents, they are available even to political parties.

Read the court's statement. She used her privileged position to act as kingpin of the rampaging mobs in that locality.

For the last time she was elected MLA in the year 2007 5 years after Gujarat riots took place

Read the link from The Hindu I posted. She was a sitting MLA in 2002; she became minister in 2007.
 
.
How is that a facepalm?
Does that negate my claim that sitting officers of the Modi government were involved in orchestrating the pogrom?
So were local Congress hindu cadre ...She was an MLA at that time not in Govt as a minister..We Only have a Problem with Singling out Modi for all the Mess ..

Here is a excerpt from an Interview with Modi by Some Muslim Gentlemen .the Author was One of the strong critics of Modi of his times
I was really nervous about the outcome of this meeting. He shook my hand and broke the ice saying in Hindi: “Aayo yaar!” Inside, there was a jhoola (swing). He made me sit next to him on the jhoola. Because at that time Modiji used to talk of Gujarati asmita (identity),I said to Mr Modi you are a slightly diluted Gujarati than me. He said: How come? I replied: You know that I am an Ahemadabadi and Ahmedabadis by all accounts are the purest of all Gujaratis while you are from Vadnagar. You are a very impure Gujrati. He said: “Yes, you have a point.”

"About 8-10 people were present during that meeting, including Rajat Sharma. I began by saying, ‘you have come here for Vibrant Gujarat, for the economic progress of Gujarat. But this economic progress will remain empty without justice. The West rules the world because these countries ensure justice to their citizens. And our country is in a mess—here I am not talking of Muslims alone—because every one of us faces injustice in our country. There cannot be peace without justice.’

"After that the Maulana gave a long sermon to Modi on the value of justice. A very top notch industrialist from Gujarat was also sitting there. He kept looking at his watch. Modi had some other big program fixed for that evening. But he told him, “Stop looking at your watch. I am going to spend time with these people now”. He then told us, “Take all the time you want, and say all that you want to tell me.”

"Then we began talking of all the riots and asked him: what were you doing on the morning of 27 February 2002? Why did you not call your police and the army? Why did you not go to Juhapura? Why did you not visit refugee camps? The questions that the SIT asked of Modi much later, we asked him all those questions that day. And yet we were accused of going to meet Modi to curry personal favours with him! Can there be a bigger lie than that?


Maulana Isa Mansuri
"Maulana Isa Mansuri was very tough on Modi, but Modi treated him with great respect because the Maulana is a great scholar. Modi kept listening, which was least expected from the “Hindu Hriday Samrat” (The Emperor of Hindu Hearts).Maulana said to him, “Modi sahib, forget everything else, help us get justice. If you do that you will automatically surge ahead. We are not talking of justice only in relation to the Muslims who are only 15 % of the population. Hindus are bigger victims of injustice. Make justice available to all.” Maulana literally made Modi stand in the dock. It is Modi’s maturity that even after winning the election with a thumping majority, he listened to all of that.

"My younger brother Talha was there for that meeting, he had come from India for it. Talha had seen it all and was actively involved in relief work. I told Modi, “Look, no one can deny that a 1000 plus Muslims were killed. I only ask you, whatever happens between Palamapur and Vapi, between Bharuch and Jamnagar—good or bad- the buck will stop with you. You are our chief minister. Whenever there is a problem, whoever is in put in trouble—whether Hindu or Muslim- it is your responsibility. We will always have the right to ask you: why did this happen under your charge?

"To this Modi replied: Yes, this blot happened during my tenure and I have to wash it off.(‘Haan ye mere kaal ka kalank hai, aur mujhe usko dhona hai’).People told us Modi never says sorry. I said, what does sorry mean? If this Maya Kodnani comes and says sorry to Muslims, will she be forgiven? We have a criminal justice system in this country which does not accept sorry. What will Narendra Modi’s sorry mean to us? We will judge his sorry from his actual doings..

"We did not beg for any concessions from Modi. We did not say, ‘do this, do that for us’. My first statement to Modi was: you answer this one question before we proceed any further: ‘You talk of 5 crore Gujratis. Are the 60 lakh Muslims included in the 5 crore? If the answer is ‘yes’, then we talk further. But if you say that ‘I am the chief minister of only the 4.5 crore Hindus of Gujarat’, then there is nothing to say.

"He said, ‘Of course you are mine. Among the 5 crore Gujratis you are included. When I bring Narmada water into Sabarmati River, do I stop it flowing through Muslim settlement of Juhapura? Who are the biggest beneficiaries of Sabarmati waters near Nehru Bridge?’

"After hearing us out with patience, Modi said some of your points are valid but many are exaggerations. Modi described how in February 2002, he was very new to administration. He was suddenly sent as chief minister of Gujarat in 2001, just three and a half months before the riots since BJP was in doldrums and the Keshubhai Patel government had performed very poorly. His mandate was to clean up the mess and win the December 2002 election for BJP. Then he explained to us all the steps he had taken starting 27th February under very challenging circumstance.

"Maulana Isa Mansuri did not let Modi speak for an hour; he spoke in the harshest tones and words. Usne to bakayda Modi ki class laga di. But Modi did not interrupt them for a minute. After they had finished Modi responded in detail with facts of each case they narrated. He knew each incident in depth and challenged the veracity of many of the alleged atrocities while conceding several lapses where government failed to reach help. Then he told the Maulana – “You know very well, I had been chief minister only for three and a half months. When this happened, I had no experience of administration. I had not even been an MLA till then. Therefore, I did not have full grip over the administration. But think of the number of Hindus that got killed in police firing. But no Muslim was killed by police bullets. How many places I sent the army.” He convinced them that stories of pregnant woman’s wombs being ripped open were all bullshit exaggeration. He also narrated how many relief camps he visited, how he helped Muslims in rehabilitation. The Maulana then said, “If this is all true, then why don’t you say it openly? Modi said , “You will not see me fail you in action. But don’t ask me to say it openly. VHP types will wipe me out. Elections are right round the corner
The point is Narindra Modi is not a fanatic He is made out to be.
 
.
Vinod not only questioned his credibility - which would be an ad himent argument, he provided an argument as to WHY the posts of pakistani posters are biased and they keep ignoring facts to the contrary.

Nonsense, it was the perennial Indian delusion that they have managed to psychoanalyze the Pakistani nation. We see this time and again on this forum from many Indians, including the "Friendship with India" thread.

That was a valid argument.

It may impress fellow Indians, but only provides amusement to everyone else.
 
.
Read the court's statement. She used her privileged position to act as kingpin of the rampaging mobs in that locality.

She used her priviledged position as elected representative - YES. She did not use her priviledged position as a state government office bearer - BECAUSE she was not one. She did not have administrative powers.

Nonsense, it was the perennial Indian delusion that they have managed to psychoanalyze the Pakistani nation. We see this time and again on this forum from many Indians, including the "Friendship with India" thread.



It may impress fellow Indians, but only provides amusement to everyone else.

I would believe you when I stop reading daily how thankful to god and jinnah pakistani are :) even though more muslims have been killed in east _ west pakistan put together than in India. Yes, the need to keep justifying TNT is very real and manifests daily on the forum.
 
.
She was an MLA at that time not in Govt as a minister..

I said "state officials"; she was a state official in 2002.

We Only have a Problem with Singling out Modi for all the Mess ..

It's not a question of singling anyone out.

My comment was to label the event accurately as a pogrom rather than a spontaneous riot between two equal factions.
 
.
Now we are being told riots were not spontaneous, that it was a joint conspiracy of hindus and muslims, where muslims were first asked to burn down many hindu women childred and men to play their part.

OK, I'm outta here now. Too early in the day for twilight zone, victimhood complex and conspiracy central.
 
. . .
She used her priviledged position as elected representative - YES. She did not use her priviledged position as a state government office bearer - BECAUSE she was not one. She did not have administrative powers.

The question is whether she represented authority, and the answer is yes.

Yes, the need to keep justifying TNT is very real and manifests daily on the forum.

OK, if you say so...

Now we are being told riots were not spontaneous, that it was a joint conspiracy of hindus and muslims, where muslims were first asked to burn down many hindu women childred and men to play their part.

OK, I'm outta here now. Too early in the day for twilight zone, victimhood complex and conspiracy central.

You truly have an amazing imagination to read things which are not written.

It was an overwhelming response to the worst provocation.

The provocation was real; the issue is how the aftermath was handled by some people in government.

If there were No train Burning of 60 Lives Including Women and children ..There would be no Riots Period

What I wrote above.
 
.
Personal accounts are famously inaccurate. Ask five witnesses at a road accident to describe it after 1 hour and your nick will change to jawdrops :P

I'm not even going into the personal accounts of some victims who have said on camera that they were asked to say what they did. The world famous case of foetus killing story - later totally refuted by the doctor who performed the autopsy is one more example.

I assume the SIT investigation itself was based on testimonies of those who gave first person accounts? I guess there would be a paper and electronic trail as well but the bulk of it would be testimonies of people. As I said earlier - it might be exaggerated but there is no smoke without fire. The truth lies somewhere in between the polarizing views which have become the calling card of Modi.

Would a Modi Government at the Center be beneficial to me as an individual? Sure it would - since I am anthropologically a Hindu and into business. Would it be good for the economy of the country? It might be - he does inspire confidence. Do I think he will be acceptable to all his allies in the NDA? I doubt it. Will be acceptable to all the citizens of India? I doubt it. The majority of people in India I deal with swear by him.
 
. .
Perhaps you need to amend your blasphemy law, so that anybody who denies that Gujarat 2002 was a "pogrom" is given the death penalty.

Tu quoque again? How many times do you need to be told that two wrongs don't make a right? Why are you not responding to questions about what went wrong, instead of pointing out other things that went wrong elsewhere?

like who?????

Maya Kodnani?
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom