Does anyone remember 59 people on a train in Godhra?
As the Supreme Court�asked the Narendra Modi government to set up a Special Investigiation Team to probe the major Godhra riot cases, I came across this article, “A Requiem for Godhra“�by�U. Narayana Das. Below are�some excerpts (emphasis mine):
Excerpts:
“….When the whole body is on fire, the victim is �beyond exhaustion,� locked into a private world where all existence is a miasma� to use a� popular novelist�s quaint description of pain and �the will to survive ceases�, to invert his expression. The body prays the good lord to end it all!
…This was what the fifty nine Karsevaks including women and children� travelling in S6, Sabarmati Express on February 27, 2002 underwent � bodies� wholly on fire, they were beyond exhaustion, locked into a private world where� all existence was a miasma of pain and with the will to survive ceasing,� praying the good lord to end it all.
Our good prime minister did not seem to lose any sleep that night* �� on February 27, 2002 – as he did on the night of the Glasgow bombings in 2007. For after all, only� the minorities have first claim to our national resources and the prime� ministerial sleep is a national resource. It does not come cheap � to� the nation!
To be fair, our good prime minister was not alone in not losing sleep over the horrible, indescribable death that befell the hapless Karsevaks.� Our society as a whole, its intellectuals, the leading lights of its media, the secular intelligentsia and the human rights brigade which rushes to� defend rapists, child molesters and mass murderers disvalued them.
For us they ceased to exist not after the horrendous death;� they never were! They died a horrendous death not because they committed� some crime that deserved it but because they took to God�s work in a country in� which nearly 90% of the populace worshipped that God!
…The objective of this piece is not to justify the aftermath of the� horrendous death of the fifty nine Karsevaks – even a single unnatural death is� one death too many. It is to focus on societal reaction to the two events.
In the six years since the Karsevaks died a horrendous death…nobody thinks of them; nobody talks of them; no� commemoration meetings are held; no cenotaph erected and no prayer meetings� held…
…In stark contrast, the aftermath has been described as genocide,� holocaust, pogrom et al. The English language media in India let its imagination run riot and quite a� few media persons made a career out of the dead bodies of Gujarat� – not of the fifty nine Karsevaks, but of those killed in the aftermath.
Was the aftermath the first communal riot in India?� Wilkinson*, no friend of what the western media fondly calls the Hindu right� wing observed, �one can think� of not one or two, but many instances when the ruling party was not the� anti-Muslim BJP, or its analytic equivalent, the Shiv Sena, but deadly� Hindu-Muslim riots nonetheless took place.�*
…Wilkinson adds, ��at one time or another,� Congress politicians have both fomented and prevented communal violence for� political advantage. Congress governments have failed, for example, to prevent� some of India�s worst riots� (e g, the Ahmedabad riots of 1969, the Moradabad� riots of 1980, and the Meerut� riots of 1987) and in some cases Congress ministers have reportedly instigated� riots�and have blocked riot enforcement.�3
…In a grave travesty of justice to the Karsevaks who died a� horrendous death, one of the messiahs of social justice, Lalu Prasad Yadav had� a report �made to order� to garner electoral advantage in the 2006 elections in� his home state.
The English language media would rather there was no reaction to the� horrendous deaths of Godhra, in order to be able to praise the �resilience�,� �composite culture�, �triumph of secularism� et al.
Rajiv�s �Gandhian�reaction to the Sikh killings� following the assassination of his mother in 1984 � �the earth trembles when� a big tree falls� is too well known.
In reaction to the killing of a congress legislator in Vijayawada (Andhra� Pradesh) in 1990, the secular party cadres went on a three-day rampage� burning and looting and systematically targeting the residences and businesses� of a dominant caste in the state. The slain legislator� was not exactly known for his Gandhian virtues but lived by the sword and later� graduated into politics.
In reaction to the conviction of their leader on corruption charges� by a court in Tamil Nadu in 2000, the AIADMK cadres went on rampage burning� buses in one of which three unfortunate girls were burnt alive.
It was the turn of another secular party � the Telugu Desam -� to avenge the death of its legislator in Anantapur (Andhra Pradesh) in 2005.� The party too went on a three-day rampage burning more than 600 government� buses.
…In reaction to the publication of a cartoon in a newspaper in far� away Denmark there were not only protests but also burning and looting in� Lucknow and Hyderabad in 2006.
In reaction to a news-report criticising one of the DMK scions� published in the Tamil daily Dinakaran, owned by another branch of the� ruling dynasty the �secular� cadres of the DMK went on rampage burning� the newspaper�s offices in which three unfortunate employees were burnt alive� in 2007.
In relation to the police firing in Nandigram in 2007, the Marxian� god, Buddhadeb Bhattacharya said, �they were paid in their own coin.�� Just imagine how the �secular� media would have screamed if only� Narendra Modi had said this in relation to the aftermath of Godhra?
The foregoing was not an exhaustive list of �secular�� reactions to events nor does it justify any of them…
…Would the �secular� polity shed a tear for the fifty nine� unfortunate victims of Godhra at least now, six years after the event?”
* Source:�Wilkinson, Steven I, Communal Riots in India,� 2005, Communalism Watch, November 11, 2005, (reproduced from The Economic and� Political Weekly,�October 29, 2005),�
*** Excerpts end ***
Related Posts:
Of Godhra and Gujarat – Part�II�and
Join the discussion on Islam, Hindutva, Dr Zakir Naik,�Godhra�(Long post with 125 comments)
P.S. For my position on Godhra, read this comment�from which an extract:
…There can never be any justification for taking the lives of innocent people (and lets not forget that it was not just Muslims who were killed in the riots and several thousand Hindus had to flee their homes as well � I am not justifying anything just mentioning this fact in the interest of completeness)
If the people who did this, did it in the name of Shri Ram or Hinduism, they are not only ignorant of the fundamentals of Hinduism, they are also insulting its great traditions and principles…
* UPDATE:� The article makes�erroneous comparison(s). As Patriot has pointed in his comment below: “…the PM on Feb 27, 2002 was Atal Behari Vajpayee. The PM in 2007 was Dr Manmohan Singh.“� Thanks, Patriot for alerting me and other readers to this.
Dear Shantanu,
I am totally disgusted and dissapointed with you. 59 Kar Sevak’s. What are you talking about.
They are after all “HINDU,S!! burnt to death by persons over whom one must lose sleep over; DO NOT LOSE SLEEP OVER THIS MATTER!!!
Regards,
vck
In this article one more deliberate attempt has been taken to make wrong comparisons and add fuel to the already set fire…..and once again try to raise the communal feelings against a particular section of society….
1…..PM has lost sleep over the glascow incident coz he gives more importance to the death of only 2 citizens ( as compared to 59 citizens) that too belonging to minority community (now this is more objectionable).
2. I think its not minority vs majority…but jst a concern of indian citizens in foreign land….PM tried to gve solace to the already damaged relatives of the victims back home….
3. Does this incident so much worth that it shld be subjected to microscopic scrutinization…….or once again such statements shld be misquoted to create drift among the communities which will serve the purpose of fulfilling political interests…
4. Or does that mean, nobody sould express grief over anybodys loss of property , life etc ..thus paving a way to the construction of more inhuman society….
5. Those who gives hype to such issues should know that common man be he from any community,
has no time to gve a second thought to such political gimmicks from his struggle to earn food shelter and clothing, which is still just a dream come true for him ….much to his tragedy.
Is it surprising that this fact does not get much press when all of the ‘secular’ (this word had acquired a different meaning in India) media is hijacked by leftists tendencies?
The entire coverage on the Gujarat riots has barely discussed how it all started in Godhra. The emphasis lay entirely on how Muslims were butchered by Hindus, which is not the sole truth, the vice versa is also true.
The journalists should be dispassionate & put forward both the sides & leave it to the people to infer, not cover only one side of the story & propogate their opinions. The quality of mainstream journalism in India is appaling & severly lacking in credibility.
However, the riots, post the Godhra incident, were very unfortunate indeed.
When cartoon and publication of books can make Islam intolerable than this was 59 people and is more than enough to make anyone furious.
Any sane can become insane by seeing this sight and the news. Aftermath was a reaction to what happened in train carriage in Godhra. Again no killing is justified whether it is Hindu or Muslim.
But level of tolerance is surely something to be watched and observed.
Jai Hind!
*** COMMENT EDITED by MODERATOR ***
Let me ask “Prince of Angel” did he lose sleep when Kashmiri Pandits were cleansed out of the valley ?
Time for Islamists to leave, and go back to misogynist Saudi society.
*** NOTE by MODERATOR ***
Ajay: Thanks for your comment. Please avoid personal remarks that are hard to substantiate.
If we remember 59 people on a train in Godhra, then we will not be secular
Two points:
First, it is indeed surprising that no memorial or plaque has been erected in the memory of the 59 innocent people butchered in the train. But, you would expect the Gujarat State government to do that, right? After all, it happened there and the Gujarat govt has been such a strong supporter of majority rights. I wonder, then, why this has not happened? Was all the outrage only a carefully orchestrated political program?
Second, the author Das says “Our good prime minister did not seem to lose any sleep that night – on February 27, 2002 – as he did on the night of the Glasgow bombings in 2007. For after all, only the minorities have first claim to our national resources and the prime ministerial sleep is a national resource. It does not come cheap – to the nation!”
Unfortunately, this is how bad and vicious propaganda is created ….. the PM on Feb 27, 2002 was Atal Behari Vajpayee. The PM in 2007 was Dr Manmohan Singh.
I wonder what Das will say if he is forced to check his facts?
Shantanu, you should not publish the works of people with zero credibility.
Cheers
Patriot: Well spotted.
This fact slipped me…I should have spotted it before rushing to put excerpts here…
I have added a note to the post ( see UPDATE) and am still debating whether it would be better to just take the post out altogether…
Thanks for alerting me and point well taken re. checking facts/establishing credibility before publishing articles/essays..
…Let me ask “ajay” did he lose sleep when palestinians were cleansed out of their contry ?
….muslims have 59 contries in the world to give shelter…..if hindus are forced to leave…i am afraid they have only oceans left in the world to dive….
prince of angel
One Hindu Nation is enough to drive 59 countries in the ocean, even ocean will not accept 59 countries. Get ready with theoption to get converted.
Jai Hind
@prince –
you are laughable when you bring in Palestinians into the picture – how are we (India) responsible for their plight? Did we give arms to the Israelis to do so? In fact, under a misguided policy, we shunned Israel for decades. So, what was your point? If you had any to start with, that is.
And, are you threatening the hindus in India? Are you?
BTW, When you talk about muslims and 59 countries, etc ….. you play into a popular thought about Muslims – that they are not loyal to the states in which they reside but to an international brotherhood of muslims.
In which case, why should muslim minority populations not be the target of majority suspicion? Think about it.
@patriot:- this was an apt reply to ajay….i seem to be laughable to you coz i brought the point of palestinians …..now u came to the point…..as palestinians are not concerned with indians…similarly osama laden , iraq , taliban , etc should not have any concern with indians….now did you get the point….many times our peaceful and holy majority community justifies the riots of post godhra to the actions of laden , suicide bombers at iraq , palestine etc…anyways your point is valid….and i agree to your point….
@indian:- first of all there is not a single hindu nation in the whole world…..when in the past, a hindu nation could not compete with a handful of muslim warriors sweeping states after states under their domination…..how cld now a no hindu nation of present match 59 muslim countries….take the option to convert or leave india….
i request shantanu not to edit this comment….
@prince: The only reason I am NOT editing/deleting this comment is to show to everyone how outrageous (I am sorely tempted to use other words) you can be…
Are you really serious when you say: “take the option to convert or leave india….” ?!!!
This is classic troll behaviour and I will not have it on this blog…
You have *entertained* us enough… I am putting a temporary ban on ALL comments made by you…It will be lifted at my sole discretion…It may become a permanent ban…again at my sole discretion…
The burden of proof is now on you…
Just wondering…Why Hindus keep on electing their government that treats them as second class citizens compared to minorities…When Kashmiri Hindus are driven out from Kashmir then non Kashmiri Hindus seem to careless else there would be a nation wide revolt against the silent government about it…Can Hinduever learn from muslims that one cartoon of Mahamad brought a government to its knees? Do Hindus ever learn after getting subjected to barbaric brutalities of invades for centuries?
What do majority of Hindus care about anyway? Hindu are Buzdil… Don’t lear from Histort then it repeats itself in a differnt form….
@Observer
The times …. they are a-changing ……. what you say is probably true of 1947-1995, as majority of Indians were just too busy eking out a living to be too bothered about dual sets of laws and other forms of appeasement. However, the economic changes starting from 1991 (actually 1983 with the new telecom policy of Sam Pitroda under Rajiv Gandhi), things began to improve economically for a significant majority of Indians (not all, but a significant portion).
Now, when your stomach is full and you are no longer worried about your next meal, you can start thinking about or reacting to socio-cultural issues. It is no co-incidence that the rise of BJP to national political power also started during this periord.
So, the voices that are being denounced as fundamentalist hindu voices are the voices of hindus saying we will no longer tolerate dual laws. These things take their own time, but the tipping point was in 1995 ….. and you will see the change more and more as we go along.
The problem for muslims now is that the majority people of india are no longer willing to countenance special or separate rights for minorities. So, either they have to assimilate into the broader Indian nation or they have to risk being marginalised even further in the bigger scheme of things.
PS: Which nation was brought to its knees on the Danish cartoon issue? If you are not aware of this, let me point out that the whole series of cartoons were *re-printed* last month by all the Danish newspapers to celebrate the freedom of expression.
This is to clarify that the article never mentioned Dr. Manmohan Singh as the Prime minister in 2002.
Nor was it to deepen the divide between communities as some correspondents seem to opine. Please read the following paragraph (highlighted by Satyameva Jayathe) again
“…The objective of this piece is not to justify the aftermath of the horrendous death of the fifty nine Karsevaks – even a single unnatural death is one death too many. It is to focus on societal reaction to the two events.”
The objective of the sentence was to highlight differing political approaches to issues relating to majority and minority – read vote bank – politics. For Dr. Manmohan Singh was not the Prime Minister in 2002 but he was alive then, and could easily have made his feelings known!
The Truth of Godhra.
http://nsm.org.in/2008/08/02/the-truth-of-godhra/
http://nsm.org.in/2008/07/14/deadly-plan/
http://www.ibnlive.com/news/godhra-report-says-train-carnage-a-conspiracy/74309-3.html
From HT:
The Nanavati Commission, which was set up by Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi’s government in 2002 to inquire into the fire on coach S-6 of the Sabarmati Express that killed 58 people and the subsequent riots, has stated that the incident was the result of a “pre-planned conspiracyâ€.
The report states that the Commission has come to the conclusion that “there was a conspiracy to burn coach S-6 of the Sabarmati Express train coming from Ayodhya and to cause harm to the Kar Sewaks travelling in that coachâ€.This is an endorsement of the Gujarat government’s stand on the issue, and contradicts the finding of the UC Banerjee committee, which said the evidence suggested the fire was an accident.
The report states that the Commission has come to the conclusion that “there was a conspiracy to burn coach S-6 of the Sabarmati Express train coming from Ayodhya and to cause harm to the Kar Sewaks travelling in that coachâ€.
The conspiracy hatched appears to be a “part of a larger conspiracy to create terror and destabilise the Administrationâ€, the report says. It however adds that, “there is no evidence regarding involvement of any definite religious or political organisation in the conspiracyâ€.
The Commission has sought to substantiate the conspiracy theory by relying upon statements of passengers who said the coach was stoned for 10-20 minutes and the alleged purchase of 140 litres of petrol the previous night. An eyewitness account claiming that sliding door of S-6 leading to S-7 was “forcibly opened†and a burning rag was thrown into S-6 was also quoted by the Commission as evidence.
“Satyameva Jayate Nanritam,” Truth alone triumphs, not falsehood.
The statement “Satyameva Jayate” only reflect part of the Whole truth, other part being “Nanritam”, i.e, not falsehood (or not untruth).
No amount of clouds can cover-up the the Sun and its light, so as no amount of cover-ups and white-washing can cover-up a crime.
One who try to cover-up truth, will only aid to expose the falsehood of himself/herself. So, never dare to cover-up truth, only to expose yourself.
====
Here is another example.
“Ahimsa Paramo Dharmah” is half statement. So, it does not reflect the whole truth, the other part being “Dharma himsa tathaiva cha.”
The full statement:
Ahimsa paramo dharmaha, Dharma himsa tathaiva cha.
Which means, “Non-violence is the greatest Dharma,†“So too is all righteous violence.â€
OR
“Non-violence is the highest principle, and so is violence in defense of the righteous.”
OR
“Try to follow Non-violence and given no choice follow violence (for protect your self).”
—–
Here is an article by the Swami Chinmayanandaji.
DHARMA HIMSA TATHAIVA CA
http://www.chinmaya.org.nz/Articles/Swami%20Chinmayananda/11.htm
Exceprts:
Personally, I am no advocate of violence. But violence, too, has its rightful place in life, life does not preclude death.
Ahimsa Paramo Dharmah. This is the opening line of a stanza, and the very next line reads: Dharma himsaa tathaiva cha. “So too is all righteous violence.” …If only we all learn that dharma – himsa is equally noble as ahimsa.
I recd. this today via email. It is a dated article (relatively speaking) but worth reading in full…(note the emphasis is as in the article on Vir Sanghvi’s website, as on 30th Jun ’12)
***
One-way ticket
Vir Sanghvi
Hindustan Times
March 1, 2002
There is something profoundly worrying in the response of what might be called the secular establishment to the massacre in Godhra. Though there is some dispute over the details, we now know what happened on the railway track. A mob of 2,000 people stopped the Sabarmati Express shortly after it pulled out of Godhra station. The train contained several bogeys full of kar sewaks who were on their way back to Ahmedabad after participating in the Poorna Ahuti Yagya at Ayodhya. The mob attacked the train with petrol and acid bombs. According to some witnesses, explosives were also used. Four bogies were gutted and at least 57 people, including over a dozen children, were burnt alive.
Some versions have it that the kar sewaks shouted anti-Muslim slogans; others that they taunted and harassed Muslim passengers. According to these versions, the Muslim passengers got off at Godhra and appealed to members of their community for help. Others say that the slogans were enough to enrage the local Muslims and that the attack was revenge.
It will be some time before we can establish the veracity of these versions, but some things seem clear. There is no suggestion that the kar sewaks started the violence. The worst that has been said is that they misbehaved with a few passengers. Equally, it does seem extraordinary that slogans shouted from a moving train or at a railway platform should have been enough to enrage local Muslims, enough for 2,000 of them to have quickly assembled at eight in the morning, having already managed to procure petrol bombs and acid bombs.
Even if you dispute the version of some of the kar sewaks – that the attack was premeditated and that the mob was ready and waiting – there can be no denying that what happened was indefensible, unforgivable and impossible to explain away as a consequence of great provocation.
And yet, this is precisely how the secular establishment has reacted.
Nearly every non-BJP leader who appeared on TV on Wednesday and almost all of the media have treated the massacre as a response to the Ayodhya movement. This is fair enough in so far as the victims were kar sewaks.
But almost nobody has bothered to make the obvious follow-up point: this was not something the kar sewaks brought on themselves. If a trainload of VHP volunteers had been attacked while returning after the demolition of the Babri masjid in December 1992, this would still have been wrong, but at least one could have understood the provocation.
This time, however, there has been no real provocation at all. It is possible that the VHP may defy the government and the courts and go ahead with the temple construction eventually. But, as of now, this has not happened. Nor has there been any real confrontation at Ayodhya – as yet.
And yet, the sub-text to all secular commentary is the same: the kar sewaks had it coming to them.
Basically, they condemn the crime; but blame the victims.
Try and take the incident out of the secular construct that we, in India, have perfected and see how bizarre such an attitude sounds in other contexts. Did we say that New York had it coming when the Twin Towers were attacked last year? Then too, there was enormous resentment among fundamentalist Muslims about America’s policies, but we didn’t even consider whether this resentment was justified or not.
Instead we took the line that all sensible people must take: any massacre is bad and deserves to be condemned.
When Graham Staines and his children were burnt alive, did we say that Christian missionaries had made themselves unpopular by engaging in conversion and so, they had it coming? No, of course, we didn’t.
Why then are these poor kar sewaks an exception? Why have we de-humanised them to the extent that we don’t even see the incident as the human tragedy that it undoubtedly was and treat it as just another consequence of the VHP’s fundamentalist policies?
The answer, I suspect, is that we are programmed to see Hindu-Muslim relations in simplistic terms: Hindus provoke, Muslims suffer.
When this formula does not work — it is clear now that a well-armed Muslim mob murdered unarmed Hindus – we simply do not know how to cope. We shy away from the truth – that some Muslims committed an act that is indefensible – and resort to blaming the victims.
Of course, there are always ‘rational reasons’ offered for this stand. Muslims are in a minority and therefore, they deserve special consideration. Muslims already face discrimination so why make it harder for them? If you report the truth then you will inflame Hindu sentiments and this would be irresponsible. And so on.
I know the arguments well because – like most journalists – I have used them myself. And I still argue that they are often valid and necessary.
But there comes a time when this kind of rigidly ‘secularist’ construct not only goes too far; it also becomes counter-productive. When everybody can see that a trainload of Hindus was massacred by a Muslim mob, you gain nothing by blaming the murders on the VHP or arguing that the dead men and women had it coming to them.
Not only does this insult the dead (What about the children? Did they also have it coming?), but it also insults the intelligence of the reader. Even moderate Hindus, of the sort that loathe the VHP, are appalled by the stories that are now coming out of Gujarat: stories with uncomfortable reminders of 1947 with details about how the bogies were first locked from outside and then set on fire and how the women’s compartment suffered the most damage.
Any media – indeed, any secular establishment – that fails to take into account the genuine concerns of people risks losing its own credibility. Something like that happened in the mid-Eighties when an aggressive hard secularism on the part of the press and government led even moderate Hindus to believe that they had become second class citizens in their own country. It was this Hindu backlash that brought the Ayodhya movement – till then a fringe activity – to the forefront and fuelled the rise of L.K. Advani’s BJP.
My fear is that something similar will happen once again. The VHP will ask the obvious question of Hindus: why is it a tragedy when Staines is burnt alive and merely an ‘inevitable political development’ when the same fate befalls 57 kar sewaks?
Because, as secularists, we can provide no good answer, it is the VHP’s responses that will be believed. Once again, Hindus will believe that their suffering is of no consequence and will be tempted to see the building of a temple at Ayodhya as an expression of Hindu pride in the face of secular indifference.
But even if this were not to happen, even if there was no danger of a Hindu backlash, I still think that the secular establishment should pause for thought.
There is one question we need to ask ourselves: have we become such prisoners of our own rhetoric that even a horrific massacre becomes nothing more than occasion for Sangh parivar-bashing?
***
Parts of the article have also been quoted here
http://www.dailypioneer.com/169490/Gujarat-riot-myths-busted.html
Hi shantanu
The below links has the same information of the above link, but if I have a permission to paste this 2 links again as it comes from differet source. It is very important because many films also has been made on this false charges, sending a wrong message to the public.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/PoliticsNation/Setalvad-in-dock-for-cooking-up-killings/articleshow/4397849.cms
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/NGOs-Teesta-spiced-up-Gujarat-riot-incidents-SIT/articleshow/4396986.cms
List of passengars
http://g.imagehost.org/0810/Sabarmati_s6_list_godhra.jpg
“Our good prime minister did not seem to lose any sleep that night – on February 27, 2002 – as he did on the night of the Glasgow bombings in 2007.”
The term ‘our good prime minister’ here refers to a particular individual who publicly claimed to have ‘lost his sleep’ over the troubles faced by a single person of the ‘minority’ community who was being investigated for ties with Glasgow bombers.
The point being that this particular individual had not similarly expressed ‘inability to sleep’ thinking about the plight of 58 indians of ‘majority’ community who were burnt to death earlier in Godhra.
Point being to bring out the blatant inconsistency in ‘this eminent persons’ attitude towards people, apparently based on what he perceives as ‘minority’ or ‘majority’. It means that for this person, considerations of ‘minority’ or ‘majority’ trumps human and ethical considerations. This person was also known to have made the disgusting statement that people of ‘minority community’ shall have first claim on nation’s resources.
This apparent inability of this person to consider humans as humans and all his countrymen equitably, motivates him and ‘his govt’ to classify people in Census 2010 on the basis of ‘caste’ and ‘religion’, as a precursor to framing policies.
It is necessary to understand these incongurencies in such ’eminent persons’ behaviour, because it is reflected in the way they frame their policies that ultimately affect our society and our nation- with serious repercussions. It also says a lot about the ethical blindness of the society that considers such ’eminent persons’ virtuous and tolerates them in seats of power.
Obviously, this kind of behaviour is not something related to the ‘chair of prime minister’. To misconstrue it so and to talk about Vajpayee being PM in 2002 is like telling a person pointing out the moon that his finger is not the moon.
Of course his finger is not the moon, he is only using his finger to point at the moon.
Only an intellectually deficient person will be stuck with the pointing finger, oblivious to the moon that is being pointed out.
When this fact is made clear in comment 16 by the author of the article himself, to persist with the so-called ‘update’ at the end of the blog- “UPDATE:� The article makes�erroneous comparison(s).- “…the PM on Feb 27, 2002 was Atal Behari Vajpayee. The PM in 2007 was Dr Manmohan Singh“, seems meaningless.
namaste
Read this..
Teesta Setalvad, head of Communalism Combat, a group that opposes religious extremism in India, said that “while I condemn today’s gruesome attack, you cannot pick up an incident in isolation. Let us not forget the provocation. These people were not going for a benign assembly. They were indulging in blatant and unlawful mobilization to build a temple and deliberately provoke the Muslims in India.” [source]
Now, re-read Vir Sanghvi’s comment I reproduced at #21