[WikiEN-l] India problems

Sat Nov 8 16:36:35 UTC 2003

Ray Saintonge < saintonge at telus.net > wrote:

> As I read more into this it is clear that the train fire was not an 
> accident. Hindus on their way to a disputed religious site were 
> indeed the victims in that incident. 

Ray, let me give you some background as well give you known facts.

First, they were not on the way to any disputed religious site.
Those who were on the train were supposedly on the way back from
the disputed site and many roasted alive were women and children.

Secondly, disputed religious site or not is totally unconnected to 
the issue. It is not against the law to go to a disputed site and
offer prayers.
It is mischievous to try to find a bizarre reason and
come up with any sort of connection which would lay the blame at
the door of the victims. For heavens' sake, they were victims. Show
them some respect. The train halted for 3 minutes and within that 
time so many things happened that the train was doused in petrol
and set on fire? According to the Communist version, it would 
appear that people carry petrol cans all the time for the purpose
of resolving disputes.

> Although it is widely accepted that Muslims were responsible for 
> that specific incident, no individuals have been caught and 
> prosecuted. 

They have and they are Muslims.

> It is also apparent that most of the rioting that followed was 

The correct word is RIOTING. You got it man! Riots are common in 
India. This was not the first one that it needed to be romanticised.
It turned out that this was the first one in which the party so
much hated by Communists were in power.

> instigated by Hindu mobs, but not exclusively so. 

Correct on this one too, but like the dynamics of every riot, they
are not "planned" and executed by large organizations. Most riots
follow a pattern - some local criminal gathers his gang and they
go and indulge in destruction and carry off the spoils and then a
similar person from the opposing side and now some of the innocent
victims do the same thing to exact revenge.

Who started the first of those riots, we do not know. What we do 
know is that the result of riots until now has been that the Muslims
rally together and vote en bloc for the Congress party. For the
FIRST time in India, the opposite happened. The Hindus rallied 
together and voted against the Congress Party.

At least in one case, we know that members of Congress were arrested
for preventing kids from attending exams and releasing news that
kids were terrified of coming out of their homes due to the rioting
going on. This was long after the riots had ceased.

> Most of the between 2,000 and 2,500 deaths that resulted were 
> Muslims. 

'Most' would be an exagerration. Majority would be the correct
term. Not just in the Gujarat riots. In all such riots, it is
Muslims who suffer because they are outnumbered. 850 is closer to
the actual figure.

When the train was burnt, the victims were blamed by the Indian
English media. A rumor on the internet was published as fact by
Washington Post and Independent. Those who had the presence of
mind to make a phone call (the number was also given) to 
the 'witness' named in the chain mail learnt that it was a lie.
The report from Communists used this 'fact' to buttress their 
claim.

Here is one journalist who had the presence of mind to call up
the witness named (also a journalist) -
http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/may/14rajeev.htm
---- I contacted Anil Soni to ask about the veracity of this account. He said, "Some enemy of mine has done this to make life difficult for me. Do you understand, sir? I did not write this at all. I am a PTI correspondent. Yes, that is my phone number, but it is not my writing." He apparently had heard from hundreds of people, and he was very upset. ----

> Gujarat is awash with extremists of all kinds. 

This sort of statement does no one any good. I assume you are in
the United States. Imagine broadbrushing the entire South and
claiming that the Southern states are awash with extremists of
all kinds.

> Nationalist and religious issues are far more significant
> in Gujarat.

It might interest you to know that the election commission keeps
an eye on the campaigning and any candidate using religion is disqualified from the election.

> There is no denying Iyer's communist background, and his 
> participation in an elected state in relatively far away Kerala in 
> 1957

Far away Kerala? You treat politics in India the way you treat 
politics in USA. Kerala being one of the three states where
Communists are strong (others are not allowed to vote), it is
very important. Many Communist politicians from other states 
get elected to the Upper House of Parliament from Kerala.

Further, he is a national figure. He was the Communists' candidate
for President not so long ago.

> (i.e. 45 years earlier). His communist background has no relevance 
> to the incidents in Gujarat

Not to the incidents, but to the report which used words like
"fascist", "pogrom", "planned", "state-sponsored" and so on. He
wrote it for an organization stuffed with Communists.

Why is it that if Republican Party is called a White Nationalist
Party, you can think rationally and reject the claim but you are
unable to think rationally when it comes to branding people from
other countries and accept the branding?

Communism is a huge problem in India and the Communists were part
of the Central Govt until 1998 before the present "fascist" (i.e., 
not Communist) Govt won the election.

Arvind Narayanan seems to be a young college going boy who is not
aware of many things - as I pointed out earlier, he did not even
know the background of VR Krishna Iyer. He learnt it from me.

-libertarian

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Introducing My Way - http://www.myway.com