Saturday, December 31, 2011

Caution Against Premature Optimism

The performance of the government at the center has been pathetic and there seems to be no sign of improvement. There is agitation by Anna Hazare. And there also seems to be a realignment amongst the so called Hindutva forces with the news of Subramanian Swamy's joining the NDA.

However, this should not make us unduly, and more importantly prematurely, optimistic like the NDA was in 2004. Recall that NDA ate a humble pie in the later elections. Further, we as Hindus must not assume any party to be pro-Hindu for none are. We must focus on getting pro-Hindu (pro Sanatana Dharma) policies to be implemented.

For example, if Swamy joining NDA is another opportunistic self-seeking tactical move, then even before the 2014 elections, the whole aggregation will disintegrate. S-Swamy will point out that Nitish Kumar is Secular (which is true) and Nitish will leave (to establish his Secular image) and join the Congress (or the third rate front). The old wind-bag Atal B will conspire against S-Swamy, while S-Swamy will focus on getting even with his erstwhile foes. And then, understandably, the prognosis is abysmal!

The NDA has been functioning more as Naturally Dumb Alliance against the present Evil governing coalition which has rather been Uncontrolled Pilferers Alliance. So any members of these alliances should be taken in, for example, only when they openly and definitively take a Pro-Hindu stance, are corruption-free, and have no criminal cases against them.

We have mentioned earlier that it would be a nice idea if people like Bal-Thackeray (with his courage and wisdom), Subramanian Swamy (with his astute shrewdness and perseverance) and Narendra Modi (with his determination and diligence) join together and start working towards a Hindu-Rashtra, it will be a great beginning. This is not to undermine BJP or Raj Thackeray and so on. Their contribution will also surely be significant and welcome.

However, these three need to guard against certain specific pitfalls. Bal-T getting carried away by Marathi-Manoos emotion, S-Swamy falling prey to opportunism and N-Modi favoring Secularism. In addition they must guard against quibbling because of fragile and over-sized egos. For example S-Swamy needs to discover his greatness in belonging to Hindu civilization rather than by his erstwhile position at Harvard! This is a great opportunity. These individuals can really make best of it by openly and humbly seeking cooperation from all willing groups while not compromising even the least on core principles (Sanatana Dharma). They and their group also need to develop imbibe a spirit of self-sacrifice for the Hindu-cause. If these things happen, we could be doing quite OK.

It is important to remember that we are not glorifying individuals by mentioning names. Rather, we are pointing out that we need a leader who is Wise and Courageous to work as a guardian, a leader who is Sharp and Foxy to work as the chief-Legislator, and a leader who is Devoted and Hardworking to work as the chief-Executive. We also clarify that we do not imply that Bal-T lacks Sharpness or N-Modi lacks Wisdom or that S-Swamy lacks Devotion to the Hindu-nation. We have used the names of these personalities along with their associated public images as suggested abstract symbolism.

What happens to Anna and Baba then? In our opinion, they must continue to do what they are really good at, and that is inspiring and educating the people with patriotism as well as functioning as peoples' watchdog over the formal government. However, that is not enough. For example, Anna needs to disabuse himself of his aversion to RSS and "politics" and similarly Baba needs to clip his tendencies to flirt with Muslims.

So the perils are many although there is a glimmer of bright possibility. Thus we must be cautious against indulging in premature optimism. There is many a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip!

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Learn Your Lesson Shri Subramanian Swamy

There is an old saying, those who live by sword, die of sword; we could paraphrase it to "Those who live by pride, die of shame". In the present context It would translate into "Subramanian Swamy has been, for so long, proud of being on the faculty of Harvard, however now he must be shamed of it!"

On December 6, the anniversary of demolition of the structure rightfully belonging to the Hindus, the Harvard University showed Dr. Swamy the door!

Indians, and Hindus have been suffering from deep rooted inferiority complex for a long time. We value only those who have been valued by our hallowed erstwhile masters! People think Manmohan Singh is good because he was at London School of Economics. People thought highly of Rabindranath Tagore because he won the Nobel Prize. Even the noted director Satyajit Ray felt he got his true recognition in India only after he got an Oscar.

We never recognized our own Ram Swarup, Sitaram Goel, even Swami Vivekananda!

We think being Professor at an IIT is easier than and inferior to being a Professor at a phoren (foreign) university. We think winning an Oscar is a greater achievement than winning a filmfare, the list goes on and on. So we believe that we are inferior (existentially inferior) to the West. The joker Lalu was immediately thought to be a genius the moment Harvard invited him to give a talk.

Unless we learn to be self confident, unless we learn to recognize the talents that our own people have, and unless we learn to scout, nurture, and reward local talent; we will perpetually face the likeness of the present predicament. If Subramanian Swamy has been great because he was a faculty at Harvard University then he must have done something terribly wrong if he is being shunned by the Harvard faculty! If Subramanian Swamy wants us to believe that it is Harvard which is wrong and stupid then he needs to feel ashamed of the pride that he has indulged so far in having been a faculty at Harvard.

We, Hindus may be good or bad, superior or inferior, but we need to begin with faith in ourselves. This is what Swami Vivekananda reminded us more than a hundred years ago. But we still revel in our old habit of worshipping phoren recognition. The other part is that we are yet to learn to truly recognize and value our own people.

If we want to be worthy successors of our ancient Rishis, we need to begin with Faith in Ourselves, Faith in our Past, Faith in our Ishwara, and so on. We must learn to recognize and appreciate talent in our own neighbors, and for this we need Faith in Our own judging abilities, and therefore faith in our own abilities. This is what we must begin with and inculcate in ourselves.

Don't be proud of being recognized by phoren; be proud of who and what you are. Be proud, as Swami Vivekananda exhorted us long ago, that we are children of ancient Rishis, and we will reach equally great or even greater heights. Let us pray to our Ishwara and obtain our Tathastu.

Friday, December 16, 2011

The Solution to the Iran Problem: Persia

The western nations have long been at loggerheads with Iran, blaming it for fomenting terrorism against Western Liberal Democracies. Here we present a Hindu perspective.

Historically a region much larger than present day Iran was known as Persia. Zoroastrianism was the main religion of the population there. Parsis in India are the Zoroastrians from Persia who were forced to flee their homeland in search for safer residence, and the then Hindu king of Gujarat had readily obliged.

According to the legend, when the Parsis arrived to the Hindu Kingdom and sought permission to settle, the king presented the chief (or the wise man) of the Parsis a bowl of milk. The chief returned the bowl of milk after adding a sweetener to the milk, purportedly to signify that their population will dissolve into the local population while also sweeten it. Parsis, in large part, have lived up to their old promise. Certain questions could be raised but we will gloss over them for the moment.

There are two great lessons that both Parsis and Hindus must have learnt together.

1. The violently cruel nature of Islam: Both Persians, and Hindus have lost a very large population and enormous wealth to Savage Muslim marauders and plunderers.

2. The emptiness of the notion of Secularism: Parsis lived for a long long time in Hindu Kingdoms and never faced any persecution, rather they flourished as much as the rest. Similarly, they never received any preferential status (as best as is known) and had to work as diligently as the rest to prosper. And which they surely did, and became one of the very propsperous communities in India.

In this hour of crisis, it will be good if the people of Iran, dug deep into their traditions and re-emerged as the once great civilization they were, to an even greater civilzation in modern times. For that they have to forget and erase their barbaric Islamic recent-past and re-write it with their civilized ancient Persian tradition.

A Persia which emerges from Iran, with Zoroastrianism replacing Islam, will not only be a much more prosperous nation for its own people, in addition it will also be a geo-politically stabilizing entity.

For Hindus, this new Persia could be the Old Sweetener in New Form or should we say, the Same Old Sweetener Again?

Not just that, Hindus must also encourage Arabs to rekindle their Pagan roots and shed their new found evil delirium called Islam.

Saturday, December 10, 2011

Anna Hazare - A Shivajian Mohandas or a Mohandasian Shivaji?

Anna Hazare appears to be a simple man. His life seems to be an open book. He has narrated himself how he got alcoholics in his village rid of their addiction. One can vividly imagine scenes wherein people are tied to poles and then beaten black and blue using leather belt. The immense power of non-violence!

Anna criticized Baba Ramdev when Ramdev declared that he would raise an army for self defense in lieu of the midnight attack in Ramlila ground. Anna thought this amounted to violence.

But then a brave Sardar (unlike the timid Sick who passes off as PM) gave a slap to Sharad Pawar. Anna, on hearing of this news, spontaneously asked,"Ekach Marla?" (Slapped only once?). Then Anna tried to regain his ground by denouncing all forms of violence.

Now, in his latest, Anna has justified his spontaneous outburst. In his new definition of non-violence public property should not be damaged. However, Anna reserves the right of righteous anger, with the terms of righteousness to determined by Anna himself from time to time. For example, he has invoked the name of Chhatrapati Shivaji. Anna now says "I have said many times that I consider Mahatma Gandhi as my ideal but sometimes I keep Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj also as my ideal."

We have mentioned earlier that Anna, Baba or for that matter any other amongst us, can not accomplish much without shunning the poisonous ideologies of Mohandasian non-violence and Jawaharian Socialism. And this needs to happen in thought, word and deed. Anna is still playing hide and seek. He has to come out in the open about this issue. Does he think that the end justify the means, or that the means are more important than the end?

We congratulate Anna for introducing the Shivaji factor. Anna needs to seek further inspiration from Samarth Ramdas, and Bhagwan Krishna; and not Mohandas. Anna, Baba are great mass mobilizers, it is important if they get their intellectual and spiritual moorings right as quickly as possible.

Friday, December 2, 2011

A Proposal : Voluntary Disclosure of Corruption and Exemplary Punishment Act!

Until just a few decades ago, income tax in India used to be very high; and the government brought in VDIS plans, VDIS standing for Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme. The deal, typically, used to be: Declare your hitherto undisclosed wealth, pay a one time tax of about thirty percent along with some negligible penalty, and the money becomes yours, and "white". This was supposed to be an idea to bring in "black" money into the main-stream market.

In the present hullabaloo of Corruption and Lokpal vs. Jan Lokpal we need a genuinely new idea. Here we present a proposal which is based on the "voluntary disclosure earning some concession" idea. We do not claim that it should be exactly like we are stating it (We are not the adamant Team Anna, LOL), nor do we insist that this is a good idea. It is just an idea that we would like to share with our readers, and we are throwing it open to discussions, criticisms and comments.

Firstly, we need to realize that Corruption has become endemic in our society and system. Though it is true that political corruption is really really huge, we can not ignore the fact that this corruption pervades the whole system and also a large part of society.

Suppose we think that since politicians emerge from the society itself, a corrupt society can only engender corrupt leaders. Also, suppose that we want things to change. As we have suggested earlier, we need to completely overhaul both our society (through education, thus it is a much longer process, may be a few decades) and our system (by enacting a new Constitution, with a possibly new form of government, election, electorate, law, and so on). Overhauling the system by writing a new Constitution too will take, say about, three to five years; and we need an interim government until then.

Secondly, we need to remember that this change can only be meaningful and effective when it is brought about by people of much cleaner character and wisdom. Also we grant, at least for the sake of argument, that there may still be a few people amongst currently practicing politicians who really want to be clean and good, though they have a tainted past.

Thirdly, we surmise that the election for the interim (caretaker) government will take place with the existing system.

Now, suppose we want to give a fair chance to our politicians. In this para, the term "we" means the peoples. Consider the following proposal based on voluntary disclosure. We declare that before the next election, any politician who confesses to his Corruption and deposits all the money that he acquired through corruption into our national treasury, will get the following concession. After the new system (Constitution) comes into place, if he is investigated and it is found that he disclosed ALL of his corrupt past and surrendered all money acquired thus, then he will be left to lead the life of a common citizen, and that he could participate in the political process again. However, if the disclosure is less than the totality, and on investigation this fact is established, then he will face Exemplary Punishment. We also mention that those politicians who confess to their criminal acts will get the concession that they may receive a softer version of exemplary punishment. Also, that this will be the last chance for VDOC. One could also consider making a suitably modified version of this proposal for bureaucrats.

For the purpose of discussion, let us call the proposed as Voluntary Disclosure of Corruption Act, or VDOC Scheme. Please note that this could be combined with the plan that in the absence of VDOC by the currently practicing politicians, we will encourage, support and elect only "newcomers", more specifically "first timers" who have a very clean past. Since the election would result in the formation of only an interim and care taker government which would oversee the writing of NEW CONSTITUTION, NEW LAW, and so on; party affiliation will not be crucial for candidates in winning elections. In the development of new constitution, the "civil society", along with common citizen would (and preferably must) play an important and actively participatory role.

We invite comments from our readers.

Friday, November 25, 2011

Don't Condemn the Slapper! Learn from the Slap.

The recent slap to Sharad Pawar has cleared the air on many subjects.

We have been, as many many other have been, repeating over and over again that there is immense build-up of dissatisfaction with the present situation (price rise, series of scams and so on) along with a distrust in the current politicians in the minds of public. The very fact that Anna, Baba and so on have such influence over people has a lot to do with this. This is not to take away from Anna, Baba and their likes, any credit where it belongs; rather this is to emphasize that by now the dissatisfaction with and distrust of the politicians must be obvious to the meanest of intelligence.

However, our politicians and most of the media seem to lack even this intelligence; or what seems more likely is that they are evil and shameless people who don't care so long as they are making the dough in the sackfuls. But, then the inevitable outcome of such nonchalance would be manifestation of public outrage in various forms. If politicians, media, "democracy", or "constitution" are unpleasantly surprised by it, then nobody can or is going to help them.

In democracy, leaders are supposed to voice the minds and will of the people; if they don't, people will surely react. The Mulayams, the Mayawatis, the Commies who are endlessly reminding us of the "social-injustices" of the past by the then alleged feudal system, are completely mute on the present injustice, much grosser, much more devastating, injustice by the "Constitution", "Parliamentary Democracy" (or should we say a mockery of these) that is being perpetrated by themselves. And the grand daddy of all this perpetration, whose bastard childresn are these votaries of social and economic justice, is Congress.

How long does it take to figure out that the system has failed and must be overhauled? How long does it take to perceive that the current political class is, with few exceptions, utterly corrupt and immoral? How long does it take to realize that the ideas on which the present system is based are flawed? The answer is, it doesn't take any long at all; rather it takes only a willingness. And it is for this lack of willingness that we categorize the current politicians, with Congress on the top, as evil.

Now consider the Slapgate.

All politicans are shouting at rooftops that violence is unacceptable and must be condemned. Even if, for the sake of argument, we continue on this line, then the question is what next? After condemnation, what do we do? Do we give Z+ category security to all these corrupt politicians so that they can be protected from the people who they claim to represent? Why can't they reflect on why the people who they represent are so angry? Why are these current politicians not willing to listen to the pain and plight of the people?

Anna Hazare, instinctively asked the question, that all normal and sane Indians are asking, "Only a slap?"; however he quickly took politically correct position and condemned the attack. Our question is, why should this attack (or the attacker) be condemned? How long will we merely keep condemning? The Delhi Police at the behest of their masters wreaked havoc on peaceful protesters on Ramlila ground. It resulted in many wounded and a middle aged lady died after long suffering. What did the politicians learn? Just condemning the police atrocity?

We disagree. Unless we build a system that punishes the evil and protects the good, governance has not even begun! You cannot have "leaders" with numerous civil and criminal ongoing cases "representing" the people. The system is rotten. And if the system is rotten, people will react.

So, what is our position? Don't we condemn the slap?

Firstly, we do not uphold Mohandasian non-violence as the highest virtue. Secondly we admire the slapper for showing restraint in his expression of his anger. Recall that the slapper said that martyrdom of Guru Teg Bahadur played on his mind which calmed him down. However, in the future, such restraint may not be exercised by the people.

What needs to be realized (by Anna as well) is that Mohandas has always been irrelevant, and has become even more irrelevant now. Hindus have known non-violence from their Sanatana Dharma. They do not need a stupid mohandas to interpret it for them. What also needs to be realized is that Jawahar has always been irrelevant, and has become despicably irrelevant now. Hindus know charity from their Sanatana Dharma. They do not need a Hindu-loathing Jawahar to teach them about Fabian Socialism and Secularism. We beg your pardon here. Mohandas and Jawahar have not been merely irrelevant, they have been poisonously evil.

What we need is a cleansing of the poison. That will not happen unless we uproot their legacy which is the sham ideology of Secularism, Socialism, and Parliamentary Democracy. What we need is an interim government, a care taker government, comprising of completely new (first time politicians) who will oversee a writing of a new Constitution, and bring about a new system.

However, what we observe instead is that the people at the "top", the self appointed leaders (politicians), the self appointed watchdog (the media) are focussing on condemning the slapper. Don't condemn the slapper. Learn from the Slap. And beware, this is only a beginning. If there is a refusal to learn from the slap, things are inevitably heading into a civil war. That will shower much much more than mere slaps!

Monday, November 21, 2011

The need to build pro-Hindu movements

We began an initiative for Election-2014 wherein we set a tentative agenda for the elections. In this piece, we examine the discourse of political debate focusing on the Hindu aspect.

The political camp in India is divided into two main factions. The self styled Secular parties (Congress, Communists, third (rate) front, etc.) and the self styled Nationalists (BJP and the likes (are there any?)). The latter always try to sell themselves as pro-Hindu while criticizing the former as perpetrators of vote-banks through appeasement.

The reality, from the perspective of Hindus is much much worse. The Seculars are anti-Hindu, while the Nationalists are merely pseudo-Hindu. So what should Hindus do?

There is a need for the creation of a pro-Hindu movement. The prevailing political discourse is centered around minorities, fringe groups, etc. It is not ceneterd around us, the Hindus. Thus despite being termed a majority, we are condemned to live a life under the shadow of false shame and guilt imposed on us. Shame for the lost wars against Islam, and guild of the ill treatment of the underprivileged. The history is distorted as well as misrepresented. The central agenda being the demolition of the confidence of the majority in themselves.

Thus, besides understanding the bluff of the Secularists and the confusion of the Nationalists, we must first regain our confidence. We must begin with what we are without being ashamed of what we are. We may discover things which we may decide or understand as undesirable, and we may even take corrective actions; but the foundation must be that of self-belief. We must be a majority which is not afraid, which can boldly express its truth.

For example, we must speak boldly that the invaders (in majority of the cases) did not win for they were more valiant or courageous. The invaders won the war as the war was between them, the barbarians and us, the civilized, for the barbarians had no moral hang-ups! We lost for our then conscience keepers failed in their educational duty. It was as if Krishna advised Arjuna to shun violence and embrace servitude. The failure in itself occurred owing to the complexity of the ways of the Dharma (the moral way).

However, once a society loses a war and the history is written by the victors truth is the first casualty. The victors became the gallants against the sissy natives, while the moral confusion became to be portrayed as the stupidity and uselessness of the ancient tradition. We need to know how courageous and perspicacious our ancestors were and how they did so well against all odds.

Similarly, we also need to speak out that the caste-problem became much worse only after the reformists took over. Like there is freedom of association, there must be freedom of disassociation. Freedom of disassociation was painted as immoral and wrongful discrimination. It may or may not have been wrong and/or immoral, but it surely was within the purview of freedom.

We mention a popular joke about an absent minded professor. The professor went to purchase an earthen container used to store water. The potter had kept the pot upside down. The professor looking at the pot exclaimed that the pot could not be used as it had no mouth, and after lifting the pot further complained that even if water was somehow put into the pot it would flow away through the hole at the bottom!

We believe that most evaluations of Sanatana Dharma by the self appointed wise belongs to the above category. And these pseudo-wise do so, for they either are outright evil with subterfuge as their motive, or they are dimwitted diffident persons. Therefore we need to learn about ourselves on our own and with confidence.

Lest we give any wrong impression, we mention that we do not lay any claim to be the sole representative of the Hindus. Rather, we would like to encourage and support all Hindu resurgence movements, especially towards imparting confidence. Similarly, although we mention people, our central emphasis is on ideas. The true demise of the specters of Mohandas and Jawahar can hardly be achieved without their signature ideas (Mohandasian non-violence, Jawaharian Secularism-Socialism) being thoroughly junked.

Only a confident and strong majority can face and over throw this evil tyranny. Let us all work towards building strong and confident Hindu movement. And on the way, let us not only be wary of the Secular (anti-Hindu) forces, but also be critical of the pseudo-Hindu forces.

Sunday, November 13, 2011


Before parliamentary elections in 2014, we Hindus must be able to find 500-600 able political candidates who must then contest elections on a pro-Hindu agenda.

1. Pro-Hindu not in the apologetic BJP sense wherein they criticize pseudo-Secularism while claiming to subscribe to true-Secularism. We must discredit Secularism itself.

2. Pro-Hindu not in the sense of condescending and violent reformers, rather those confident and self-believing leaders who may also pursue reforms more as a health-keeping pursuit. We must tell anti-Hindu reformers mind their own business and bother about reforming themselves.

3. Pro-Hindu not in the sense of perpetrators of birth-based discriminations, rather those humble and ready to self-examine Spiritual persons who are deeply interested in understanding the essence of Varnashrama Dharma, and interpreting it it the present context.

4. Pro-Hindu not in the sense of those who will surrender to the present Constitution and anti-Hindu ideologies of Mohandas and Jawahar, rather those who will boldly question, besides also contemplating and providing aletrnatives to, the present Constitution and the present system of Parliamentary Democracy.

We invite the comments from readers to make this list more comprehensive.

What are our Secular People (read Islam-appeasers) Doing Now?

We have had a horrifying news from, where else, Pakistan. Four doctors were brutally attacked, three of whom died. They were targeted because they were Hindus in particular and non-Muslim in general. This is religion-based hatred in its manifestation.

In Pakistan, a sports-person turned politician shed crocodile tears after the incident. This is the same politician who recently betrayed his dumb-fuckery on Kashmir. We Hindus must always remain wary of Islam and its political children in the subcontinent Pakistan (as well as Bangla Desh).

However in India we have had an eloquent silence!

The poisonous-shit-between-the-ears, DogVijay Singh has been mum on the subject. We were anticipating that DS would conjecture that Hindu-Right-Wing-Groups have engineered these killings in Pakistan. Equally deafeningly silent have been the Media. the media which has been chasing Modi in Gujarat has been conspicuously silent on this. We were expecting Teesta Setalvad to visit Pakistan and fight for justice for the widowed wives of the doctors.

Why are people not asking any questions on this? Why is team-Anna and anti-Corruption movement which is so quick to distance itself from Sangh Parivar, silent on this? Why are those bleeding heart Muslim-backside-licking Seculars silent on this? This is because these people belong to the category of anti-Hindu traitors, DogVijay Singh, Teesta Setalvad, most of our media etc. Stupid and gullible a-politicians might at best be ignorant about the consequences of Secularism, nevertheless in effect they remain anti-Hindu traitors. Another factor about them is that they are all afraid of Islam. This is exactly the way V S Naipaul described here: However, we are aware of one of the more cynical forms of liberalism: it admits that one fundamentalism is all right in the world. This is the fundamentalism they are really frightened of: Islamic fundamentalism. Also, since there is no moderate Islam; Islam itself is fundamentalist and it is a mortal threat to all non-Islamic societies, more particularly our Hindu society.

So what should we, as Hindus ( Hinduism meaning Sanatana Dharma), understand from all this? We must realize that despite our country being a constitutional democracy, neither the constitution nor the democracy is concerned even an iota about Hindu interests. They are bothered about Muslims, Christians and such minorities, especially vote-bank minorities. Compare how anti-Sikh pogrom perpetrated by the Congress is ignored while spontaneous reaction against brutal burning of passengers (which included women and children) is vilified as genocide. Similarly they are bothered about Dalits and OBCs with a view only to undermine Hinduism. It is not for reforming some current practices which one might disagree with. It is with the aim of obliterating Hinduism.

Thus, we as Hindus, must understand, call their bluff and not be fooled by these anti-Hindu traitors. We must be prepared to defend ourselves and our interests. Those who sing glories of the present Indian Constitution, the present Indian parliamentary democracy and such bogus institutions must be completely de-legitimized and derided as self serving frauds with anti-Hindu agenda. These anti-Hindu traitors should not be representing us, much less have any legitimacy of political power over us. Rather they must be understood for what they are, anti-Hindu villains, and must be ridiculed in addition as well.

Thursday, November 3, 2011

Apolitical Kejriwal's transition into a politician ...

Below is a recent news item that shows how apolitical Mohandasians turn into crypto-politicians. It is important to remember that Mohandas (K Gandhi) was a dirty and bad politician who sacrifised Hindu interests for his personal aggrandisements and whims besides foisting Jawahar, another poisonous moron, on the nations as the Prime Minister.

Ghaziabad: Facing allegations of financial misconduct, Team Anna member Arvind Kejriwal today said that he will quit the anti-graft movement if "corruption of even Rs 10 is proved" against him.

On the day the movement's audit report for six months starting April was released, Kejriwal also dared the Congress and the BJP to make public information about all the donations received by the parties.

Claiming that allegations were levelled against him and other Team Anna members to weaken the movement, he said, "I challenge those making the allegations, our accounts are on the web site, if they prove corruption of even Rs 10, I will leave the movement and surrender for being punished."

Speaking to reporters at the office of India Against Corruption, he said, "Congress had recently made public funds received by it. If the party wants to maintain a clean image, it should release information about all the money received by it from other sources".

He also asked the opposition BJP to follow suit.

Kejriwal's statement came even as Congress leader Digvijay Singh targeted him again.

"For Anna's Super Team. Na Khata na Bahi. Jo Kejriwal kahe woh sahi!" (No accounts, no books, whatever Kejriwal says is right), Singh said on a popular micro-blogging website.

The AICC general secretary was apparently reacting to allegations against Kejriwal of siphoning off Rs 80 lakh from India Against Corruption to his trust and Team Anna's decision to return Rs 42.55 lakh to donors who "did not provide their complete details and their sources of funding".

Kejriwal claimed that it was not valid.

"Many more officers like me have left the job after training but government has never initiated action against them," he said and alleged that authorities had acted with prejudice in his case.

He said that he will pay Rs 9.27 lakh in dues to the department but needed time to arrange the money.

Kejriwal said that he and other members had briefed Anna Hazare about the meeting of core committee. He said that Hazare did not want to change the members on the basis of "charges levelled by government".

Kejriwal said he was ready to face all proceedings if any charge of corruption is proved against him.

Amongst other things Team Anna member Arvind Kejriwal said:

Facing allegations of financial misconduct, Team Anna member Arvind Kejriwal today said that he will quit the anti-graft movement if "corruption of even Rs 10 is proved" against him.

Remark: Hiding behind innocent until proven guilty! How about prima facie evidence? If we apply the same standards on A Raja, is A Raja guilty? Have the charges been proven, as of now, in the court?

Not every one who joins the anti corruption movement need have an impeccable record, not even every leaer os anti corruption movement need have an impeccable record, that is record beyond even an iota of prima facie suspicion. However, those who want to brandish the moral wand must be above suspicion. This habit of post-hoc explanation will not do. Not that it makes Kejriwal guilty, but it surely makes Kejriwal a politician; and recall that he and his colleagues are hell bent upon discrediting all politicians!

On the day the movement's audit report for six months starting April was released, Kejriwal also dared the Congress and the BJP to make public information about all the donations received by the parties.

Remark: This is the game of counter-allegations. Kejriwal must ask his colleague Mr. Bhushan if such arguments are valid, except in politics!

Claiming that allegations were levelled against him and other Team Anna members to weaken the movement, he said, "I challenge those making the allegations, our accounts are on the web site, if they prove corruption of even Rs 10, I will leave the movement and surrender for being punished."

Remark: This (... weakening the movement ...) is exactly how a bad politician expects his followers to think. Recall what that psychophantic servile and fawning Congresspersons were claiming after Jawahar lost the war to China owing to his own incompetence and utter stupidities? They collectively reverberated: "We need to strengthen the hands of Panditji!". Strngthen the hands? My foot! Just this one reason (losing a war owing to your own whims, incompetence and stupidities) must be sufficient to disqualify every member of his extended clan from any position of national leadership.

All this happened in response to the tweet:

"For Anna's Super Team. Na Khata na Bahi. Jo Kejriwal kahe woh sahi!" (No accounts, no books, whatever Kejriwal says is right), Singh said on a popular micro-blogging website.

Dogvijay Singh who is an empty Kurta (empty suit) is able to direct the whole music! He tweets and this team starts singing! Now for the sake of argument if we assume that DS's claim is factual. That is, suppose there are no accounts. Then no charges can even be proven! So Kejriwal's defense becomes instantly invalid. However, this will indicate an even greater mismanagement on part of the anti-corruption movement.

The readers might ask of us: Do we believe that Team Anna is corrupt? The answer is: We don't know. Probably not, we hope. But what these proceedings surely exhibit is that Team Anna vs Politicians is more and more appearing to be a match between Children (Team Anna) and Adults (Politicians). Now how long can the children rely only on public sympathy and an unquestioned and unflinching faith in the purity of these children is an important question to be investigated.

And any movement to genuinely transform Indian political landscape must necessarily incorporate discrediting of secularism and socialism.

Sunday, October 30, 2011

DogVijay Singh's latest Poop: Team Anna should have faith in parliament

There is a famous quote by Rita Mae Brown:

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

All experiments of "Peace with Islam by non-Islam or Reforming Islam" have failed. All experiemnts with "Socialism" have failed. All experiments with "Appeasement of Bullies" have failed". Now, in the name of the Constitution of India, this is what our Parliament believes in and practices, except that it expects a different result! So what can we understand by this? That the parliament is insane!

Now, the empty shell Dogvijay Singh has advised that Team Anna should have faith in parliament. Who else but a fool will have faith in insanity? Who does DS think that he can fool? DS must strictly confine himself to tutoring Rahul Gandhi as it would be doubly useful. It keeps us away from DS's fecal production, and it will keep RG away from political power!

Coming back to the Constitution of India and the Parliamentary System, we must recognize that both have squarely failed. We need to take a serious relook at the whole system. It is only those who have huge vested interests in the matter keep parroting that "parliament is supreme" or that "our constitution is sacred". Whatever does not work despite decades of efforts must be rejected as unworthy. Not only has the system not worked efficiently, it has brought our nation state to a near breakdown and on the verge of complete disintegration. Owing to Secularism we remain prey to Jihadis, owing to Socialism we remain on the brink of economic disaster, and owing to Mohandasian non-violence, we remain vulnerable to bullying neighbors. If someone continues to advocate faith in these then he must either be a damn fool or a damn evil or both.

Team Anna: Arrogant Self-Image Humbled by Reality

Team Anna is planning to have a Constitution. Anna Hazare said: "In future, a constitution will be framed for the anti-corruption movement, following which the core committee will be revamped."

We had mentioned months ago that:

Here we pose a simple question:

Which is better: Discuss, debate, conclude and then communicate the conclusion OR decide and then offer explanations while maintaining a rigid stance?

Our answer: A sane way is the former, and typical Mohandasian way is the latter.


Thus, our message to the people is:

Look, observe and understand the follies of such nature. You can love, respect and even follow whichever leader you wish to, including Anna, Baba, and so on; however, force them to shun their insane, dumb-fuck ways. For insanity will beget more insanity, and dumb-fuckery will beget even more dumb-fuckery!

Let the skeletal framework be: Think, act and learn; and not Act, explain and repent!

After indulging in "Act, explain and repent", and seemingly paying heavy price interms of growing public misperception, Team Anna wants to return to the reasonable "Think, act and learn".

So now they want to make a Constitution for their movement. But should they not realize that this is what Politics is about! So what happens about their claims regarding they all being apolitical? After making "Politics" an abomination, they are forced to commit the same abomination themselves!

So long as Indian Reformers refuse to see themselves as larger than life, so long as they refuse to put in necessary intellectual home work, and so long as they arrogantly believe in their own infallibility, there can never be even an iota of progress towards real and workable solutions. Whether in Social life, or in Political life, action without clarity will only lead to confusion, as it has done in Team Anna's case.

Friday, October 21, 2011

At the first Time-Out in the Fight Against Corruption : The Game so far.

This whole anti-corruption movement has been rudderless from the very beginning. It has looked promising but that is all about it!

For a broader understanding let us collect a few points about which there can be little disagreement (we hope so!).

1. Corruption is a big problem in India. Almost anything can be done by paying bribes. People in high places or those with connections can get away with rape, murder, sedition, you name anything!

2. Anna is a decent man (not so sure about his team though). However, being decent does not necessarily imply that he (Anna) is a very intelligent man (on this front, about his team, the less said the better!). In our opinion, Anna, and more so Team-Anna, like the RSS (SP = Sangh Parivar) etc., is a case of "heart is right but the head is empty"; though we must add that his team is possibly much much worse.

3. Congress has been just marginally better than Islam, and deserves, not merely to be defeated but rather decimated. All the political parties have had to toe the Congress methodology owing to our sick electoral system. Thus, unfortunately, at the present moment there are hardly any politicians who are clean.

4. There is utter lack of leadership in the country. The society as well as the polity are on a cruise mode with neither a driver nor any definite direction! The general drift being "whatever happens happens!".

The result of this has been:

1. A general, ubiquitous, and almost all pervasive loss of trust in, and unadulterated disdain for, the politicians and the political system.

2. A growing realization that something needs to be done and thus a willingness to rally behind and around any one who is willing to provide a rallying point.

The Problems with these movements:

1. Notwithstanding the fact that even a Jan Lokpal Bill can not be a panacea against Corruption, this anxiety and passion amongst the masses, should be (should have been) harnessed for not only dealing with the problem of Corruption, but rather bigger problems like Secularism and Socialism (read Mohandasism and Jawaharism) as well. However, these movements seem to desire a reinforcement of these two poisonous ideologies!

2. There must be a realization that the causes are leadership-crisis and bad politicians; and therefore the solution would come through effective and coherent leadership and cleaning up of the political system. However these movements managed to have, what might be termed a pandora-box leadership and a spite for politics. Thus on the one hand each member of the team is busy making a buffoon of himself, and on the other each is competing with the other in establishing himself as the most apolitical person!

Thus, as the unavoidable consequence, we now have a non-stop comedy show offering us rib tickling entertainment, while the atmosphere is permeated with looming perils of dire tragic outcomes for all of us as a nation. The strategy, in our opinion, must be:

1. Using the energy and passion of the people, the effort must be directed into achieving bigger goals, e.g. dethroning Secularism and Socialism from their crown positions), and towards drafting of a new Constitution rather than drafting of mere new Bills.

2. Instead of discrediting politics and scampering to appear - the fashionable - apolitical, discredit bad politics (and politicians) and more importantly encourage and push good people into becoming good politicians.

If there is failure in doing this, then the inevitable result would be:

1. Anti-Hindu forces will hijack anti-corruption movement.

2. Apolitical "politicians" will end up becoming the next generation of "dirty politicians" or worse still we will have a rudderless ship for much longer exposing us to the dangers of dire consequences mentioned above.

As is often said: To fail to plan is to plan to fail. Let that mistake not be committed.

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

Sick PM Manmohan Singh : the King of hypocricy! And the terrible state of our politics.

The blot on sardars has given an interview again. In an interview to NDTV, the imbecile, hypocritical, shameless, evil Manmohan said among other things, in answers to various questions, the following. We quote pertinent portions of the interview here with our comments:

Question: On attacks on Prashant Bhushan and Arvind Kejriwal, and if these were signs of growing intolerance?

PM: Well, there is no place for violence in our democracy, therefore any act of violence is to be condemned, on that point I am absolutely clear that nothing is gained by pursuit of violence, howsoever angry one may feel, there are more civilised ways of expressing one's anger and frustration.

What do you mean Mr. Singh? Is condemnation enough? So you just condemn the atrocities on the peaceful protesters at Ramlila ground and leave it at that? As the PM of the country is it not your duty to ensure that the guilty are brought to book? What happened against anti-National ranters like Prashant Bhushan is violence, then what will you call what your government did to the peaceful protesters at Ramlila grounds?

On your second point, you have ensured that everything is gained ONLY through violence. Geelani, a leader of violent Jihadis, came and thundered at you and went away. And you and your stooges, in abject servility, were protecting his freedom of speech. But when a non-violent Baba was staging a protest against corruption, not only were barbaric evil atrcities were committed, you had the foolish audacity to state that whatever happened was inevitable? Do you know that an old lady by name Rajbala finally succombed to her injuries after suffering for weeks in the hospital? What do you expect people to do? Condemn the act? Mr. Singh, you and your stooges deserve to be at the receving end of usually what you and your stooges have been perpetrating on peaceful people. Nay, much much worse.

Question: On rising threat perception from China and plans to tackle it?

PM: India and China are neighbours, we have problems. The border problem is a long standing problem, but it's my sincere hope that is possible for us to find ways and means by which the two neighbours can live in peace and amity. Despite the persistence of the border problem, our both countries have agreed that peace and tranquility should be maintained along the border. Therefore, despite sometimes something appearing in the newspapers in our country, something appearing in the newspapers in China that I think invites comments, but overall our relations are quite good. I have good working relations with President Hu Jintao, Prime Minister Wen Jiabao and I am convinced that the top leadership of China wants peaceful resolution of all problems that exist between India and China.

Like illegitimate ideological father, like illegitimate ideological son. Where restraint is needed, as against peaceful protesters, horrible atrocities were commited and you condoned them. And where urgent action is needed, you advocate trust on your personal convictions? You shameless leader, do you remember what the consequences were of similar foolishnesses by Jawahar?

Question: On reorganization of states and formation of commission?

PM: Well, if you are talking about the establishment of states reorganization commission, then that has been under discussion for several years. There have been proposals from several sources that there is scope redrawing the federal map of India, but we have not taken a view on this matter.

When can you disclose your views on the matter? Congress never reveals its views beforehand. It always discloses its views post facto. This deception won't work any longer Mr. Singh.

Question: On Tamil Nadu CM's comment that she did not receive PM's letter on Kudankulam?

PM: Well, I am sorry. I have seen that comment. I had sent a letter. When I go back I will look at my office as to why the letter which was sent did not reach her in time. But I do feel that we can give reasonable satisfaction to all the stakeholders who are worried about the safety of the atomic energy plant at Kudankulam. And for that matter I have offered to the Chief Minister that we will set up a high level group to interact with the state government, to interact with the local population. That will be set up today or tomorrow.

Wow. Are you sorry? A truly commendable feat. You incompetent bureaucratic inefficient clerk masquerading as a leader, you can not even ensure delivery of a simple yet important letter on time; and you think you can deliver much greater goods, like freedom from corruption, or the Jan Lokpal Bill? As a clerk, you know nothing more than setting up endless committees, a strategy known as committology. Why did you not say that you will set up a committee which will look into setting up of a committee which will oversee the setting up of another committee ad infitum? That would have saved your backside even better.

Question: Wall Street movement and similar protests spilling into India?

PM: Peaceful protests are allowed, and are part of functioning of any democratic polity. And there are reasons why people are protesting. People are protesting in Wall Street, in Europe about the fat salaries that the bankers are getting when people are being asked to tighten their belts. There is problem of growing unemployment in United States. There is worry in Europe also. So, these are problems which the system must have credible answers to take them on board. I think democracy that way, provides outlet for people's frustrations, which I think is a very timely warning, for all those who are in charge of the processes of governance.

Oh yes? Peaceful protests are allowed? Where? In the USA? Or did you mean India? You hypocritical cheat, you allow even violent protests, so long as they are by Muslims, Christians, Communists, Dalits, and so on. For peace-loving Hindus, no protest is allowed!

Whether they pass the Jan Lokpal Bill or not, Congress must be made to pay for the sins it committed on protesters in Ramlila ground.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Two members of the core team from Team-Anna have left alleging that the movement has turned political! Bigger hypocrites leave smaller hypocrites?

Two team members of the core team from Team-Anna have left. The reason? Anna's movement has turned political! Bigger Mohandasians leave smaller mohandasians! This is what happens with hypocrites. Bigger hypocrites criticize smaller hypocrites. Let us take a quick look at the movement.

The claim of the India Aganist Corruption is that there is a need for a Bill to bring into place a mechanism to check and punish those from the highest to the lowest place, who are corrupt. Their suggested mechanism is the Jan Lokpal Bill. For the moment let us ignore whether JLB is a correct solution or not and focus on the other aspect. If one is addressing a problem whose solution requires a passage of a bill by the parliament, then what can be said about the nature of the problem? The problem is related to good-governance, and the solution is about good-governance. Now, what is the nature of politics? In the present context politics is about governance. So the problem and the solution are related to politics. So how can someone be apolitical and bring about a solution to a political problem? It is possible that one does not take any stand about any political-party; and yet takes a political stand. Which is what needs to be done in this case. Social change will come through education and needs longer time. Systemic changes require legislation in the short run. Deeper systemic changes require new Constitution which in turn will happen in medium time scale. Nevertheless, political change is an undeniable part of the change that is needed.

In contrast, Anna and his team have been considering themselves above - not just above corrupt politicians, not just above politicians, not just above corrupt politics - but above politics itself. They may be deluding themselves into believing that they are leading only a social movement; but they can not ignore that the movement is for political change. Granted that they are not looking to change merely the political party which might be in power, or to change superficially the existing political parties; rather they aim to bring about a change in political thinking across the spectrum. Thus at best (we still do not agree though) they can call themselves social-activists for political change (observe the misnomer!). In reality, they are political activists for political change. They may not belong to any political party or political ideology (as of now), and they may not be interested in contesting elections, but they will be much better placed if they realize that they are doing politics. And there is nothing wrong or contemptible about that. Political system requires cleaning and they are attempting that. So it is political action. Plain and simple, and it is well and good!

Thus owing to this hypocritical self-image resulting in taking the stand that they are "far removed from, and above politics", each is competing against the other in pretending that each is more apolitical than the other! Anna never stops to ask himself, especially since he considers himself to be a Mohandasian, if Mohandas was a politician or not. Mohandas indeed was a politician and a bad politician at that. He practiced the same hypocricy of claiming to be above politics and all the time playing politics. It is no wonder that his able followers are doing likewise. Thus, we now have more than a dozen who are competing against each other for the coveted spot of "the most Mohandasian of all"! All those who wear caps with slogan "I am Anna" forget that Anna himself is wearing a cap with slogan "I am Mohandas"! Once this is so, can bad politics and hypocricy be far behind? Thus Bhushan exhibited his apolitical stature by blabbering on Kashmir, and others have followed suit. They allege, like the sissy Justice Hegde did, that campaigning against Congress is tantamount to becoming "political". This is as confused as Anna thinking that if his movement drew any support from members of RSS, the movement became "communal"!

What needs to be realized is the following: Anti-Corruption movement can draw support from any group, and yet remain an anti-corruption movement! Since anti-corruption movement is about good-governance, the goal of the movement is political, and they should not try to hide the political nature of the goal. Their strategy may be to generate a mass socio-political movement which brings pressure on political parties to take necessary steps. Thus team Anna can claim that they are not seeking governmental posts of political power. However, the nature of their work remains political. There is no need to shy away from this. Corrupt politicians (like most of the current politicians), corrupt political parties (like most with Congress at the top!) must surely be discredited. But "politics" by itself must not be discredited, rather the importance of politics must be acknolwedged. Politics is too serious a thing to be left for corrupt and incompetent politicians! Therefore, what we need are not apolitical people, but good politicians! Thus, for better efficacy team-Anna needs to make it a "good political movement" rather than a "bad and hypocritical movement". We have already mentioned that anti-corruption movement must not let itself be hijacked by anti-Hindu ideologies. Similarly, the movement must also not be hijacked by "apolitical hypocrites" or "bad politicians"!

Saturday, October 15, 2011

Nicole Elfi's excellent article GODHRA: THE TRUE STORY

Nicole Elfi has written a very revealing piece on the Godhra incident. The write-up is titled Godhra: The True Story, we have retained the same title. We are reproducing it here for our readers.

Godhra, a city of the Indian State of Gujarat, was the lead story in all Indian newspapers on February 27th-28th, 2002. A shattering piece of news: 58 Hindu pilgrims had been burned alive in a train.
57 die in ghastly attack on train ran the Times of India’s headline; Mob targets Ramsevaks [Devotees of Rama] returning from Ayodhya; 58 killed in attack on train with Karsevaks [volunteers] (The Indian Express); 1500-strong mob butcher 57 Ramsevaks on Sabarmati Express (The Asian Age). But the BBC’s announcement had a very different tone: 58 Hindu extremists burned to death … or Agence France Press on March 2nd: A train full of Hindu extremists was burnt.
A deluge of anguished news followed about a Muslim genocide: Mass killings of Muslims in reprisal riots (NYT, March 5th), The authorities … share the prejudices of the Hindu gangs who have been busy pulping their Muslim neighbours (The Observer, March 4th). We were told that Narendra Modi, Chief Minister of Gujarat, intended to eradicate Muslims from the State — more than 9% of Gujarat’s population, in other words five million people. We read that the police was conniving in the mass slaughter and did nothing to prevent it. Narendra Modi was compared to Hitler, or Nero. We shuddered reading the reports describing rapes and various horrors, supposedly inflicted on Muslims by Hindus.
Today, six years later, with the noises and cries of the wounds having fallen silent, what emerges from those events? What are the facts?
At 7:43 A.M. on February 27th, 2002, the Sabarmati Express rolled into the Godhra station, fortunately with a four-hour delay, in broad daylight. This train transported more than 2,000 people, mainly karsewaks on their way back to Ahmedabad after participating in the Poorna Ahuti Yagya at Ayodhya, a ritual at the traditional birthplace of Rama.
As it pulled out of the station, the train was pelted with stones and bricks, and passengers from several bogeys were forced to bring down their windows to protect themselves. Someone pulled the emergency chain: the train came to a halt about 100 metres away from the platform, surrounded by a large crowd of Muslims. The railway police managed to disperse the crowd, and the train resumed its journey.
Within minutes, the emergency chain was simultaneously pulled again, from several coaches. It halted at about 700 metres from the station. A crowd of over 1,000 surrounded the train, pelting it with bricks, stones, then burning missiles and acid bulbs, especially on the S-5, S-6 and S-7 coaches.
The vacuum pipe between coaches S-6 and S-7 was cut, thereby preventing any further movement of the train. The doors were locked from outside. A fire started in coach S-7, which the passengers were able to extinguish. But the attack intensified and coach S-6 caught fire and minutes later, was in flames. Passengers who managed to get out of the burning compartment were attacked with sharp weapons, and stoned. They received serious injuries, some were killed. Others got out through the windows and took shelter below the coach.
Fifty eight pilgrims were burned alive, including twenty-seven women and ten children. The whole attack lasted 20-25 minutes.[1]
What transpired then, in the Indian press? Let’s imagine a coach of French pilgrims coming back from Lourdes, burned alive.
Strangely, instead of clearly, straightforwardly condemning the act, the Indian English-language press tried to justify it: Pilgrims provoked by chanting pro-Hindu slogans (they were not slogans but bhajans, or devotional songs, ending with Jai Sri Ram (Victory to Sri Rama). It’s because they were returning from Ayodhya, where they asked for the reconstruction of a temple at the traditional birth place of Rama; this offends the feelings of the Muslims.In sum, the victims, roasted alive, were guilty.

The Anger
Numb with shock, the people of Gujarat did not react straightaway. They remained calm at first. Till that afternoon, when the charred bodies started arriving at their respective families — with no comforting voice sounded, either from the government, or from the media, no condemnation for this barbaric act, but an indifferent, deafening silence — then these people known for their non-violent nature and exceptional patience, burst into a frenzy.
There was a revolt in the whole of Gujarat. For three days, tens of thousands of enraged Hindus set fire to Muslim shops, houses, vehicles: They came out from all sides, all parties, all classes, uncontrollable — one cannot control a revolution (except in China maybe). The fatalities: 720 Muslims, 250 Hindus, according to official figures.
We read all over about a genocide of Muslims. Do we remember a single report on the Hindus who heroically helped save Muslims in their neighbourhood? Was even one family of Hindu victims interviewed following the criminal burning of the Sabarmati Express? One fourth of the dead in the ensuing riots were Hindus. How to classify those 250 victims? Who evoked the dead on the Hindu side? According to reports, Congress Party councillor Taufeeq Khan Pathan and his son Zulfi, notorious gangsters, were allegedly seen leading Muslim rioters. Another such character, Congress member of the Godhra Nagarpalika [municipality], Haji Balal, was said to have had the fire-fighting vehicle sabotaged beforehand.[2] Then,
he stopped the vehicle on its way to the Godhra Station and did not allow it to proceed any further. A man stood in front of the vehicle, the mob started pelting stones, … The
headlights and the windowpanes of the vehicle got damaged … Fearing for his own and his crew's life, the driver drove the vehicle through the mob, as it was not possible to move backwards. The mob gave in but 15-20 precious minutes had been lost.[3]

Lost for a coach full of innocent people in flames.
Which newspaper article stated that the most violent events took place following provocations by leaders of this sort? The Union Home Ministry's Annual Report of 2002-03 stated that 40,000 Hindus were in riot relief camps. What made those 40,000 Hindus rush to relief camps? To seek protection from whom? Why was it necessary if they were the main aggressors?
More than the barbaric event itself, it is the insensitivity of the Indian elite and of the media that infuriated the Gujaratis.
Those accused of terrorism often receive political support, are benevolently portrayed by the media, and a host of human rights organisations are always on hand to fight for them. But those victims whose life is cut down for no reason, are they not human enough to get some rights too? The great majority of those who took to revolt in Gujarat were neither rich nor particularly intellectual — neither right nor left: they were middle- and lower-class Gujaratis, simple people, workers, also tribals. But some from the upper middle class, among them a lot of women, took part in the upheaval.

The media sources
Apart from local journalists usually more objective in their reports, no English media reporter, thought it worthwhile to look deeper into the events at the Godhra railway station. Nobody came to question possible survivors of the tragedy. Is a coach of Hindu pilgrims even worth the trip? They had to wait for theelite to react; they had to receive directives from the politically correct, before taking their pens. Worse, they reported deliberate rumours and made up versions as actual news.
We were told, for instance, that when some pilgrims got off the ill-fated coaches to have tea, some altercation took place between them, and a Muslim tea vendor: They argued with the old man on purpose, wrote some newspapers; they refused to pay for their tea (though Gujarati honesty is well known); they pulled his beard and beat him up ... They kept shouting Mandir ka nirmaan karo, Babar ki aulad ko bahar karo (start building the temple and throw out the sons of Babar). Hearing the chaos, the tea vendor’s 16-year-old daughter came forward and tried to save her father from the karsevaks. She kept pleading and begging them to leave him alone. The karsevaks, according to this version, then seized the girl, took her inside their compartment and closed the door. The old man kept banging on the door and pleaded for his daughter. Then two stall vendors jumped into the last bogey, pulled the chain, and put the bogey on fire.
But would they have been stupid enough to set fire to the coach where their colleague’s young daughter was being held? And why were 2,000 Muslims assembled there at 7 A.M. with jerry-cans of petrol bought the previous evening?
Rajeev Srinivasan, an American journalist of Indian origin, was e-mailed this anonymous report a dozen times, supposedly written by Anil Soni, Press Trust of India reporter. He contacted Anil Soni to check on the veracity of this account. Soni answered:

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.

Anil Soni apparently had heard about it from hundreds of people, and was upset to see a false report circulated in his name.
Inquiries with the Railway Staff and passengers travelling in the Sabarmati Express showed that: no quarrel whatsoever took place on the platform between a tea vendor and pilgrims, and no girl was manhandled nor kidnapped.
As the Nanavati Report established later, this fictitious report was in fact circulated by the Jamiat-Ulma-E-Hind, the very hand responsible for the carnage.[4] It nevertheless went around the world, exhibited as the true story. Aren’t we compelled to conclude that the assailants, in India, are those who dictate what’s politically correct, and instruct the media?

Arson and Canards
On the afternoon of February 28th, Gujarati Hindus’ revolt broke out. A few journalists then booked their tickets for Gujarat. As far as we can see, they had a framework in place: the outbreak would be dealt with independently of the Godhra carnage, as a different, unrelated subject; it was a planned violence perpetrated by fundamentalist Hindus against Gujarat’s Muslims, fully backed by the State of Gujarat. From this day on, the burning of coach S-6 was to be left behind, forgotten.
On February 28th evening, Chief Minister Narendra Modi announced his decision to deploy the Army, and the next day, March 1st, by 11 A.M. the actual deployment of troops at sensitive points had begun. Violence abated in most major cities, after their arrival with orders to shoot on sight. But security forces were largely outnumbered by the angry flood of people, spreading for the first time like rivers in spate, to rural areas and villages. Apprehending the seriousness of the situation, Narendra Modi had made a request for security personnel from neighbouring States of Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Punjab. This request was turned down by each State. Why did no one report this fateful refusal?
That same day (1st March), at the peak of the turmoil, the National Human Rights Commission faxed a notice to the Gujarat Government, calling for a report within three days on the measures being taken … to prevent any further escalation of the situation in the State of Gujarat which is resulting in continued violation of human rights of the people.[5] But it was silent on what had led to such a situation in the first place.
One major event which received a great deal of attention from the media was the conflagration at the Gulbarg Society in Ahmedabad, home of a former Member of Parliament, Ehsan Jaffri. This man, rather refined and usually respected, did not feel threatened. But on February 28th morning, a crowd surrounded his house, in which a number of Muslims had taken refuge. Jaffri made a number of panic-stricken phone calls for help to authorities and to his colleagues, journalists and friends. The crowd was growing … (from 200 to 20,000, figures vary in the reports). The Indian Express (March 1st, 2002), as well as police records, reported that eventually, in panic, he fired at the 5,000-strong mob … 2 were killed and 13 injured ... That incensed the mob … which at 1:30 P.M. set the bungalow ablaze by exploding a gas cylinder. Final toll: 42 (March 11th edition).
Human Rights Watch, an NGO based in New York, published a dossier (on April 30th, 2002) about the Gujarat events which caused a sensation and fed a large number of articles in the international press.
In this report, Smita Narula had an unnamed witness at hand, to relate the attack on Jaffri’s house. First a 200 to 500-strong mob threw stones; refugees in the house (also 200-250 people — sic!) also threw stones in self-defence.Then the crowd set the place on fire at about 1:30 P.M. Our witness then jumped from the third floor where he was hiding — and from where he had been observing in minute detail all that was going on in the ground floor, even the theft of jewels (it would seem the floors between the third and the ground floor were transparent). At that point we jump into the sensational. Narula’s witness sees that four or five girls were raped, cut, and burned …; two married women were also raped and cut. Some on the hand, some on the neck …; Sixty-five to seventy people were killed. Those rapes and hackings are said to have started at 3:30 P.M. ... when the house was already on fire. Was the mob waiting for everything to be reduced to cinders to commit its crimes?
Among the most morbid canards, the novelist Arundhati Roy’s vitriolic article (Outlook magazine, May 6th, 2002). She describes the event which precedes Ehsan Jaffri’s death (extract):

… A mob surrounded the house of former Congress MP Iqbal Ehsan Jaffri. His phone calls to the Director-General of Police, the Police Commissioner, the Chief Secretary, the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) were ignored. The mobile police vans around his house did not intervene. The mob broke into the house. They stripped his daughters and burned them alive. Then they beheaded Ehsan Jaffri and dismembered him …

Wait a minute. Jaffri was burned alive in the house, true — is it not awful enough? Along with some other 41 people. Not enough? But his daughters were neither stripped norburnt alive. T. A. Jafri, his son, in a front-page interview titled Nobody knew my father’s house was the target (Asian Age, May 2nd, Delhi ed.), felt obliged to rectify:

Among my brothers and sisters, I am the only one living in India. And I am the eldest in the family. My sister and brother live in the US. I am 40 years old and I have been born and brought up in Ahmedabad.

There we are, reassured as regards Ehsan Jaffri’s children. He had only one daughter, who was living abroad. No one was raped in the course of this tragedy, and no evidence was given to the police to that effect.
The Gujarat Government sued Outlook magazine. In its May 27th issue, Outlook published an apology to save its face. But in the course of its apology, the magazine’s editors quoted aclarification from Roy, who withdrew her lie by planting an even bigger one: the MP’s daughters were not among the 10 women who were raped and killed in Chamanpura that day! From Smita Narula to Arundhati Roy, four or five girls had swollen to ten women, equally anonymous and elusive.
Roy begins theatrically:

Last night a friend from Baroda called. Weeping. It took her fifteen minutes to tell me what the matter was. It wasn’t very complicated. Only that Sayeeda, a friend of hers, had been caught by a mob. Only that her stomach had been ripped open and stuffed with burning rags. Only that after she died, someone carved ‘OM’ on her forehead.

Balbir Punj, Rajya Sabha MP and journalist, shocked by this despicable incident which allegedly occurred in Baroda, decided to investigate it. He got in touch with the Gujarat government.

The police investigations revealed that no such case, involving someone called Sayeeda, had been reported either in urban or rural Baroda. Subsequently, the police sought Roy’s help to identify the victim and seek access to witnesses who could lead them to those guilty of this crime. But the police got no cooperation. Instead, Roy, through her lawyer, replied that the police had no power to issue summons.[6]

This redefines the term fiction writer.
Another story about a pregnant Muslim woman whose stomach was allegedly ripped open, her foetus taken out” and both being burnt, horrified people all over the world. The first mention of it seems to be in a BBC report around March 6th, which, though uncorroborated, spread like wildfire, with fresh details (divergent and varied, but who cares?), so much so that you end up feeling there is no smoke without fire. The rumour was never confirmed — which twisted tongue first whispered it?
Press articles kept quoting one another, creating dossiers out of floating rumours. None of the authors even deigned to visit the scene of the alleged events; none except the official inquiry commissions, had the honesty to question fairly, in parallel, the involved Hindu families regarding the tragedy unfolding in the two Gujarati communities.

Onlookers get caught
On March 1st, 2002, in a village on the outskirt of Vadodara (Baroda), the Best Bakery was set on fire: fourteen persons were burnt alive (nine Muslims and three Hindus). This particular incident made much ink flow, since the prime witness, young Zaheera Habibullah Sheikh, aged 19, turned against the prosecution in favour of the accused in the trial court.
Though Zaheera lost several family members in the tragedy, on May 17th, 2003, in the Vadodara High Court, she testified that the accused persons in the dock were innocent and had nothing to do with the arson. She, as well as the other witnesses, did not recognize their own alleged statements before the police.

Justice Mahida of the High Court observed that:
1) There has been an inexcusable delay in the First Information Report (FIR). The so-called FIR of Zahiribibi (Zaheera) was sent to the Magistrate after four to five days. So there is every reason to believe that factually this FIR was cropped up afterwards in the manner suitable to the police.
2) The arrested persons had nothing to do with the incident.
We all knew these accused persons and because of them, our lives are saved, reported Lal Mohammed Shaikh, a witness before the court. … There were cordial relations between my family members, the persons residing in the compound of Best Bakery and all the accused persons before the court … The 65 persons who are saved in this incident are all before the Court and all these were saved by and due to the accused and their family members … These persons had called us, in darkness we silently came out of our house, and they saved our lives.
3) The police is trying to put as accused passers-by at the place of incident, innocent persons gathering there or persons residing in the neighbourhood (in confidence that the police wouldn’t do anything to them).
4) No legal or acceptable evidence at all is produced by the prosecution against the accused involving them in this incident. In this case, … it has come out during the trial … that false evidences were cropped up against the present accused to involve them in this case. The case … is not proved and hence the accused are acquitted [7].

On June 27th, 2003, the twenty-one defendants were freed, and Zaheera Sheikh felt the court has given her all the justice she wanted.

In the interests of a community
But all were not satisfied. A former Chief Justice of India, A.S. Anand, Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission decided that the Vadodara judgement was a miscarriage of justice and the twenty-one not-guilty people were actually guilty and therefore should be punished. Now this honourable person should have been aware that seated in Delhi at the helm of this human rights affair, he would have been the first target of a number of dubious NGOs with vested political interests. Strangely, Justice Anand did not even consider it important to send his own team of independent inquiry before questioning the judgment of another court of law.[8]
Consequently, just after the fast-track court acquittals, three members of Zaheera’s community barged into her home” around midnight, and told her she would have to change her statement “in the interests of the community.
This meant that Zaheera had to declare that she had lied to the court (which is a criminal offence [9]). Did she have a choice?
Along with her mother and brother, she was taken to Mumbaiwithout their consent, and brought to Teesta Setalvad,[10] an activist of the much-vauntedhuman rights. The activist took them under her wing for several months, accommodated them in a rented apartment while providing assistance for a living. In the meantime she prepared affidavits (in English which Zaheera does not read) for the girl to sign before the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), in which she confessed to having lied to the Vadodara trial court, trembling with fear and threatened by BJP MLA Madhu Shrivastav (who had nothing to do with her area and whom she did not even know). And Zaheera now designated as guilty, the twenty-one people she had considered innocent. All media were ready with their cameras, mikes and pens to splash the news.
The Gujarat High Court dismissed the appeal, rightly suspecting that the witness had been pressured to turn hostile, and upheld the acquittals.
But the Supreme Court accepted the retraction and, as demanded by NHRC and Setalvad, ordered the retrial of the case outside Gujarat. The acquittal of the twenty-one people was quashed. In 2004, Zaheera managed to flee” from her confinement by the activist, and in November, seized by remorse for having allowed innocent people to be accused, stated that whatever she had told the Supreme Court, was done under duress from Teesta Setalvad and her associate Rais Khan; and whatever she told the NHRC was a lie. “Ramzan is on and I want to state the truth,” she said. What I had said in Vadodara Court during the trial was my true statement. The judgement was correct and had given me all the justice I wanted. She sought police protection from Teesta Setalvad.[11]
The Supreme Court judge called the girl flip-flop Zaheera, accepted a high-powered committee report which indicted Zaheera Sheikh as a self-condemned liar, and awarded the girl with a simple one-year imprisonment for contempt of court, as well as a fine of Rs. 50,000. Activist Teesta Setalvad was cleared.
Now, who took the court for a ride? Especially in light of the new revelation that a host of Gujarat riot case victims were misled into signing affidavits giving false information, for which as many as ten of them had received 100,000 rupees from Teesta Setalvad NGO.[12]
As it stands today, nine persons among the twenty-one passer-bys picked up, have been condemned to life imprisonment and are languishing in jail.
In December 2004, a fatwa was issued against Zaheera by the Muslim Tayohar Committee, excommunicating her with the approval of All India Muslim Personal Law Board, for having constantly lied. In other words, for having stood by the twenty-one wrongly accused Hindus neighbours.

Let us pursue our investigation.

Premeditated files
Human Rights Watch Smita Narula’s report (April 30th, 2002) was titled “ ‘We have no order to save you — State participation and complicity in anti-Muslim violence. From US shores, its words were lapped up by the Indian elite and politicians:

What happened in Gujarat was not a spontaneous uprising, it was a carefully orchestrated attack against Muslims … planned in advance and organized with extensive participation of the police and state government officials.[13]

But where are the facts to corroborate such an allegation, which of course was instantly peddled the world over? Can a carefully orchestrated attack happen overnight? And how can someone sitting in the U.S., gauge the spontaneity of such an outbreak?[14]

Authentic inquiry
By contrast, a genuine, on-the-spot investigation was conducted under the aegis of the New Delhi-based Council for International Affairs and Human Rights.[15] Its findings were made public as early as April 26th, 2002, through a press conference held in Delhi. Running counter to the politically correct line of an orchestrated attack, they were largely ignored by the media.
On March 3rd, 2002 the five-member fact-finding team under Justice Tewatia’s direction went to Godhra and spent six days visiting three affected areas in Ahmedabad and some of the relief camps. At all places, team members interacted with the two communities freely, without intervention of any officials. Five delegations from both communities presented their facts and views. The team then went to the Godhra railway station and interviewed officials, survivors and witnesses of the burning of the S-6 coach, as well as the fire brigade staff. They met the Godhra District Collector, along with other officials.
On April 4th, the team was in Vadodara (Baroda) visiting five relief camps of both communities, and seven areas which were the scenes of violence in the preceding month, as well as a number of sensitive areas. To have exposure to the ground realities they visited some areas still under curfew and also met the Commissioner of Police and District Collector along with other officials. Thirteen delegations consisting of 121 citizens met the team and presented their testimonies; they included not only members of both communities, but ranged from the Association of Hoteliers to a group of Gujarati tribals (Vanavasis).

“Indisputable” facts
Let us quote some findings of Justice Tewatia’s Inquiry Commission, which its report described as “indisputable”:

The attack on Sabarmati Express on 27.02.02 was pre-planned and pre-meditated. It was the result of a criminal conspiracy hatched by a hostile foreign power with the help of local jehadis … carried out with the evil objective of pushing the country into a communal cauldron.
The plan was to burn the entire train with more than two thousand passengers in the wee hours of February 27th, 2002.
There were no quarrels or fights between the vendors and the Hindu pilgrims on the platform of Godhra Railway Station.
Firebombs, acid bulbs and highly inflammable liquid(s) were used to set the coaches on fire that must have been stored [the day before] already for the purpose.
The fire fighting system available in Godhra was weakened and its arrival at the place of incident wilfully delayed by the mob with the open participation of a Congress Councillor, Haji Balal.
Fifty-eight passengers of coach S-6 were burnt to death by a Muslim mob and one of the conspirators was a Congress Councillor, Haji Balal.
Someone used the public address system exhorting the mob to kill kafirs and enemies of Bin Laden.

About the police:

Police was on many occasions overwhelmed by the rioting mobs that were massive and carried more lethal weapons than the police did.
[They] did not have the training and know-how to manage situations of communal strife witnessed in the state in recent weeks.
In many places, … [they] made a commendable work in protecting life and property. Barring a few exceptions, it was not found to be communally motivated.

Army deployment:

Available information shows that the Army was requisitioned and deployed in time.

After Godhra
The involvement of the tribal communities or Vanavasis, in the post-Godhra riots added a new dimension to the communal violence, as Justice Tewatia’s report reveals:

In rural areas the Vanvasis attacked the Muslim moneylenders, shopkeepers and the forest contractors. They used their traditional bows and arrows as also their implements used to cut trees and grass while attacking Muslims. They moved in groups and used coded signals for communication. Apparently, the accumulated anger of years of exploitation … had become explosive.

About the media:

Gujarati language media was factual and objective. Yet its propensity to highlight the gory incidents in great detail heightened communal tension.
English language newspapers … appeared to have assumed the role of crusaders against the State [Gujarat] Government from day one. It coloured the entire operation of news gathering, feature writing and editorials. They distorted and added fiction to prove their respective points of view. The code of ethics prescribed by the Press Council of India was violated … with impunity. It so enraged the citizens that several concerned citizens in the disturbed areas suggested that peace could return to the state only if some of the TV channels were closed for some weeks.[16]

A few healing voices
It would be unfair not to mention a few voices that rose from among the journalists themselves, against this enormity. The most eloquent one was Vir Sanghvi’s, usually part of thesecular establishment, ever ready to portray Muslims as victims, Hindus as aggressors. Vir Sanghvi’s crisis of conscience suddenly gave him intellectual clarity. Some extracts from his articleOne-way ticket” in The Hindustan Times of Feb. 28th, 2002:

There is something profoundly worrying in the response of what might be called the secular establishment to the massacre in Godhra. …
There is no suggestion that the karsewaks started the violence … there has been no real provocation at all … And yet, the sub-text to all secular commentary is the same: the karsewaks 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 karsewaks 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 …
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[17] 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.
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?[18]

S. Gurumurthy in The New Indian Express (March 2nd), Jaya Jaitley, in The Indian Express (March 7th), Rajeev Srinivasan in Rediff on Net (March 25th), Arvind Lavakare in Rediff on Net (April 23rd), T. Tomas in Business Standard (April 26th), Fran├žois Gautier in The Pioneer (April 30th), M.V. Kamath in The Times of India (May 8th), Balbir Punj in Outlook (May 27th), each one expounded the absurdity of a situation where the majority of Indians — the Hindu community — are looked down upon as second class citizens. A negligible lot taken for granted because it is harmless, non-aggressive, and unable to speak and act as one coherent, organized group.

A farcical interlude
Two and a half years after the events, on Sept. 3rd, 2004, the cabinet of the Central Government (ruled by the UPA coalition[19]) approved the setting up of a committee constituted by the Railways Minister Lallu Prasad Yadav, and headed by Justice U. C. Banerjee, former judge of the Supreme Court, to probe the causes of the conflagration in the Sabarmati Express.
The blaze is an accident, Justice Banerjee coolly concluded in January 2005. There was no possibility of inflammable liquid being used, said he, and the fire originated in the coach itself, without external input. The Cabinet ministers were fully satisfied.
Now among the few survivors, Neelkanth Bhatia, was not one. He gathered enough strength to challenge the formation of this committee, and in October 2006, the Gujarat High Court quashed the conclusions of the Banerjee Committee. It declared its formation as a colourful exercise, illegal, unconstitutional, null and void, and its argument of accidental fire opposed to the prima facie accepted facts on record. Moreover, one high-level commission conducted by Justice Nanavati-Shah had been appointed by the Gujarat Government to probe the incident, two months earlier. The Court also did not miss the point that the interim report was released just two days before the elections in Bihar — the State of the Railways minister, well-known for his political ambitions and notorious for his histrionics.
Politicians know no common sense or shame. But what about the judiciary?

The Nanavati Report
The first part of Justice Nanavati-Shah Inquiry Commission report was released in September 2008, after four years of thorough investigations.[20] It lifted the cloak of blame that had been wrapped around the Gujarati people all those years. It also cleared the most blackened Chief Minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi.

There is absolutely no evidence to show that either the Chief Minister and/or any other Minister(s) in his Council of Ministers or Police officers had played any role in the Godhra incident or that there was any lapse on their part in the matter of providing protection, relief and rehabilitation to the victims of communal riots or in the matter of not complying with the recommendations and directions given by National Human Rights Commission. There is no evidence regarding involvement of any definite religious or political organization in the conspiracy. Some individuals who had participated in the conspiracy appear to be involved in the heinous act of setting coach S/6 on fire.
The policemen who were assigned the duty of travelling in the Sabarmati Express train from Dahod to Ahmedabad had not done so and for this negligent act of theirs an inquiry was held by the Government and they have been dismissed from service.
On the basis of the facts and circumstances proved by the evidence the Commission comes to the conclusion that burning of coach S/6 was a pre-planned act. In other words there was a conspiracy to burn coach S/6 of the Sabarmati Express train coming from Ayodhya and to cause harm to the Karsevaks travelling in that coach. All the acts like procuring petrol, circulating false rumour, stopping the train and entering in coach S/6 were in pursuance of the object of the conspiracy. The conspiracy hatched by these persons further appears to be a part of a larger conspiracy to create terror and destabilise the Administration.[21]

According to Justice Nanavati, Maulvi Hussain Umarji from Godhra was the brain behind the events. Two of the main accused, Salim Panwala et Farukh Bhana, are absconding, very likely having fled to Pakistan. The report named a few others, with various degrees of involvement in the events, but they are unlikely to be troubled in view of their political connections.

Heartstrings for whom?
It is easy to see why the Nanavati Report was frowned upon by Citizens for Justice and Peace, namely Activist Teesta Setalvad who asked the Supreme Court to restrain the Gujarat Government from acting upon, circulating and publishing this report. Fortunately on October 13th, 2008, the highest court sharply turned down the petition, thus making the testimonies and inquiries available to all (the Nanavati Report is available on the Internet).
However, under pressure from the UPA Government and pestered by the National Human Rights Commission and Citizens for Justice and Peace NGO, on October 21st, 2008, the Supreme Court directed that the Prevention of Terrorist Act (POTA) could not be used against the 134 accused in the Godhra train burning incident, whose trial was to be held under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code. This amounted to accepting prima facie that the guilty were not terrorists: we are allowed to call them militants, gunmen— but not terrorists. This ruling will have nationwide impact, as other State governments may have to drop charges under POTA against those accused of indulging in terrorist activities. The recent terrorist attacks on Mumbai (on November 26th) demonstrate the danger of such a withdrawal.

Pattern for Harmony
This appears to be a pattern: whenever Muslim riots or bomb attacks target Hindus, it is thought acceptable to accuse the victims, in order to avoid possible revolts. Thus in 1993 in Mumbai, after eleven coordinated bomb blasts in Hindu majority areas, which killed 257 people and injured 713, the then Maharashtra Chief Minister Sharad Pawar quickly cooked up a twelfth explosion … in a Muslim area! I have deliberately misled people, he explained later, to show that both communities had been affected.[22] And to portray both communities’ potential to behave as “terrorists”! Truth and clarity of mind are the casualties.
We remember the great art historian A.K. Coomaraswamy’s words in 1909:

It is unfortunate that libels upon nations and religions cannot be punished as can libels upon individuals.[23]

Gujarat had greatly suffered throughout all those years. Through a devastating Bhuj region earthquake in January 2001, in which more than 20,000 people died; the pilgrims burned alive at Godhra in Feb. 2002 and just six months later another terrorist attack in the Akshardham temple in Gandhinagar, where thirty-three peaceful worshippers were brutally gunned down (with seventy injured). Amidst those tragedies the people of Gujarat seemed to have no doubt whatsoever regarding the sincerity of their Chief Minister, whose administration happens to be among the least corrupt in the whole of India. State elections were held twice since those events: in December 2002 and December 2007. How is it that Narendra Modi won landslide victories on both occasions despite extremely hostile and sustained media campaigns, seeking to demonise him as a blood-thirsty ruler?

Official India has chosen to forget a millennium of Islamic intolerance and brutality. Millions of butchered Indians have no right to be remembered, not even in history textbooks, where invaders are sometimes turned into heroes. Sadly, this ostrich-like attitude leaves the wounds open and condemns us to relive the past rather than heal it.

January 2009

© Nicole Elfi

Nicole Elfi left France thirty-four years ago for India, drawn to Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. She participated in publication of works related to them and in research on Indian culture, authoring two books in French; the second one, Aux Sources de l’Inde was published June 2008. Contact email:

Notes & references

[1] See Commission of Inquiry Report of Justice G.T. Nanavati & Justice Akshay H. Mehta (Justice Nanavati Report for short further below): p. 71-84: 97-125; p.86: 128; p.89-90: 130; p.170: 223; p.172: 226-27; p.174-175: 229; the integral text is available on the website of the Gujarat Government:
See also Godhra the Missing Rage, by S.K. Modi (New Delhi: Ocean Books, 2004).

[2] One of the main vehicles was out of order, as its clutch-plates had been taken out a few days earlier. On their arrival on 27.02.02 in their office, firemen found that the other fire engine had been tampered with. (Justice Tewatia Report and Justice Nanavati Report: p.88-89: 131.)

[3] Ibid.

Justice Nanavati Report, p.39-41: 50-52, p.48-49: 67-68.

[5] To which Gujarat Chief Secretary sent a request to grant further time of 15 days, as the State machinery is busy with the law & order situation, it would take some time to collect the information and compile the report. Indeed.

[6] See Balbir Punj in Outlook, May 27th and July 8th; also in The New Indian Express, March 8th, 2002.

[7] See Vadodara Sessions Court, Best Bakery Case, Justice H.U. Mahida’s Judgement, June 27th, 2003.

[8] Columnist Arvind Lavakare in Blindfolded in Best Bakery(9.9.2003), commented: … The Gujarat government quickly appointed three public pleaders for the purpose of suing [Justice Anand] for contempt of court; these pleaders, in turn, filed an application before the Vadodara judge asking him to move the state's high court to punish the contemnor who, they said, had insulted the honour and dignity of the judge, besides undermining the entire judiciary. … But Justice Anand … went to the Supreme Court even before an appeal against the Vadodara verdict could be thought out by the Gujarat government. His NHRC petitioned the apex court to order a re-trial of the 21 'not guilty' Best Bakery accused. And the re-trial demanded is one that should be out of Gujarat state!…Though article 20(2) of the Constitution of India prohibits trial for the same offence twice (M. N. Buch, The Indian Express, Mumbai, August 13th, 2003).

[9] Section 191 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, says, Whoever, being legally bound by an oath or by an express provision of law to state the truth or being bound by law to make a declaration upon any subject, makes any statement which is false, and which he either knows to or believes to be false or does not believe to be true, is said to give false evidence. Section 193 lays down that punishment for the offence of giving false evidence is imprisonment which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.

[10] Social activist and Secretary of the NGO Citizens for Justice and Peace, and co-editor of Communalism Combat, a CPI-CPI(M) affiliated magazine.

[11] Zaheera isn’t the only one to seek police protection from activist Teesta Setalvad. Rais Khan, who worked closely with her, now feels under threat and recently asked for it too.

[12] As it happens, a host of Gujarat riot case victims were misled into signing affidavits giving false information at the behest of Setalvad’s Citizens for Justice and Peace, which was instrumental in organising payment of Rs. 1 lakh each to ten witnesses in various post-Godhra riot. Among the recipients, four are Best Bakery case witnesses. A list of names were sent to the CPI(Marxist) relief fund, and demand drafts were handed out at a function in Ahmedabad on August 26th, 2007 by CPI(M) politburo member Brinda Karat, Teesta Setalvad and Rais Khan. Incidentally, those who were both victims and eyewitnesses received 100,000 rupees, some others 50,000 rupees, while the victims got a mere 5,000 rupees each. This has raised eyebrows over the selection of beneficiaries and the purpose of paying a disproportionately large sum to the eyewitnesses before the trial.See Navin Upadhyay, Daily Pioneer, Dec. 20th, 2008:

[13] South Asia researcher for Human Rights Watch and author of the report.

[14] This New York-based Human Rights Watch, still watches the Indian shores closely, as it appears, but not to protect innocent lives. On Dec. 3rd, 2008, just a week after the ghastly Nov. 26th terrorist attacks in Mumbai, HRW issued a statement to the Government of India, offering gratuitous advice on how to manage its affairs and demanding that investigators should respect the human rights of captured terrorist Ajmal Amir Kasab (also called Butcher of Mumbai). A commentator in The Jerusalem Post pointed out,The HRW’s website lists 38 reports attacking counter-terrorism efforts around the globe but only three on the brutal impact of terrorism on civilians.See also Kanchan Gupta’s excellent article, Mumbai’s Butcher and human rights, in The Pioneer, Dec. 17th, 2008.’s-Butcher-and-human-rights.html

[15] Council for International Affairs and Human Rights (governing body for the term 2001-2003), New Delhi. Facts Speak for Themselves: Godhra and After, A Field Study by Justice D. S. Tewatia, Dr. J.C. Batra, Dr. Krishan Singh Arya, Shri Jawahar Lal Kaul, Prof. B. K. Kuthiala. Available online at .

[16] From Justice Tewatia Report.

[17] The Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) is a pro-Hindu organization.

[18] The Sangh Parivar is a network of pro-Hindu organizations deriving from the Rashtriya Sevak Sangh (RSS).

[19] The UPA is a coalition of political parties, the main one being the Congress presided over by Sonia Gandhi; Manmohan Singh is the Prime Minister. As many as 10 Cabinet ministers (at the helm of India’s affairs till today …) as well as 93 Lok Sabha MPs face criminal charges ranging from rape, extortion and murder (Association of Democratic Reforms, New Delhi, in The New Indian Express, Dec. 6th, 2006).

[20] Among its specific tasks, the Nanavati Commission was required by the Government to consider: Role and conduct of the then Chief Minister and/or any other Minister(s) in his council of Ministers, Police Officers, other individuals and organizations in both the events referred to in clauses (a) and (b); (e) Role and conduct … (i) in dealing with any political or non-political organization which may be found to have been involved in any of the events referred to hereinabove; (ii) in the matter of providing protection, relief and rehabilitation to the victims of communal riots (iii) in the matter of recommendations and directions given by National Human Rights Commission from time to time. By that notification the Government also included within the scope of inquiry the incidents of violence that had taken place till 31-5-2002.

[21] Nanavati Commission Report, p.174-75: 229; p.175: 229; p.176: 230.

[22] New Indian Express, August 13th, 2006.

[23] Ananda K. Coomaraswamy in Essays in National Idealism, p.143 (Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, 1981).

Extracts of Justice Nanavati-Shah Inquiry Commission report

(18 September 2008)

223. Ajay Bariya in his statements recorded by the police on 4.7.2002 and J.M.F.C. Godhra on 9.7.2002 has stated that on 27-2-2002, he had gone to Godhra railway station at about 7.00 a.m. After referring to the incident of Mohmad Latika, he has stated that after the chain was pulled and the train had stopped, he had gone out of the station. Shaukat Lalu had met him there and told him to run along with them. So he had gone with them to the backside of Aman Guest House. Shaukat and others had then gone inside the room of Razak Kurkur and come out with Kerbas. He was asked to put one Kerba in the rickshaw which was standing nearby. Petrol like smell was coming from it. Thereafter others had also come there with Kerbas and they were all kept in the tempy. All of them had then got into that vehicle which after passing through Bhamaiya nala and Ali Masjid had stood near the railway track near 'A' cabin. Each one of them was asked by Shaukat Lalu to carry one Kerba with him. At that time he had come to know that the train was to be set on fire. They had run towards the train through the foot track. He himself was reluctant go with those persons but Shaukat Lalu had compelled him to go along with them. He has then described in his statement how the coaches were attacked and coach S/6 was set on fire. According to him, Shaukat Lalu and Mohmad Latika had forcibly opened the sliding door of S/6 leading to coach S/7 and entered coach S/6 through that door. Hasan Lalu had thrown a burning rag which had led to the fire in S/6.

224. It is rightly pointed out by the Jan Sangharsh Manch that there was no prior information with the police and the authorities at Gandhinagar regarding the return journey of the Karsevaks from Ayodhya as can be gathered from the evidence of Mahobatsinh Zala (W-17), Raju Bhargav (W-31), DGP K.A. Chakravarti, Addl. DGP R.B. Shreekumar (W-995) and Ashok Narayanan, Chief Secretary, Home Department (W-994). Under the circumstances prevailing then, movements of Karsevaks was not a matter of concern. That appears to be the reason, why the police had not thought it necessary to keep itself informed about (171) their movements.

Merely because the police was not aware about the return journey of Karsevaks from Ayodhya, it would not follow therefrom that no one had known about their return journey from Ayodhya. Anyone who wanted to know about it could have obtained that information easily. Therefore, it would not be correct to say that there was no scope for any conspiracy, as the alleged conspirators did not know that Karsevaks were going to return from Ayodhya by that train. VHP had already announced earlier its plan of taking Ramsevaks to Ayodhya for the 'Purnahuti Maha Yagna'.

225. It is also true that some other train carrying Karsevaks going to Ayodhya had passed through Godhra railway station and the conspirators could have attacked them in pursuance of the object of the conspiracy to burn a coach carrying Ramsevaks and it was not necessary for them to wait till the morning of 27th February, 2002. Other possibilities cannot make doubtful what really has happened. Why the conspirators chose the Sabarmati Express train coming from Ayodhya and why coach S/6 thereof was made the target, was obviously the result of many factors, including what was desired by and suitable to the conspirators. Unless the conspirators who took that decision disclose the real reason, it would be a matter of drawing an inference from the surrounding facts and circumstances. It appears that the decision to put the plan into action was taken on the previous evening. On 26.2.2002 at about 9.30 p.m. the first step for procuring petrol was taken. It is likely that the conspirators had decided to burn a coach of this train as it used to pass Godhra during the night. That would have enabled them to carry out their object without being noticed and identified. It appears that because the train was running late, they had to make some changes in their plan and circulate a false rumour regarding abduction of a Ghanchi Muslim girl. That was done in order to collect large number of persons near the train and induce them to attack it, so that they get sufficient time to go near the train with petrol. It was also an (172) attempt to show that what happened was done by an angry mob because of the earlier incidents which had taken place at the station. The mob consisting of the general public would not have set coach S/6 on fire on the basis of the false rumour as their attempt in that case would have been to stop the train, search for the abducted girl and rescue her.

226. Ranjitsinh Jodhabhai Patel and Prabhatsinh Gulabsinh Patel serving at Kalabhai's petrol pump were present at the petrol pump on 26.2.2002 at about 10.00 p.m. Both of them have stated that at about that time Rajak Kurkur and Salim Panwala had come there and told Prabhatsinh to give them about 140 litres of petrol. Petrol was filled in the carboys which were brought in a tempy rickshaw. Prabhatsinh has further stated that Jabir Binyamin, Shaukat Lalu and Salim Jarda had come in the tempy. Both these witnesses have explained in their statements why they had earlier told the police that they had not given loose petrol to any one in a carboy on 26.2.2002.

227. On the basis of the facts and circumstances proved by the evidence the Commission comes to the conclusion that burning of coach S/6 was a pre-planned act. In other words there was a conspiracy to burn coach S/6 of the Sabarmati Express train coming from Ayodhya and to cause harm to the Karsevaks travelling in that coach.

228. The confessions of Jabir Binyamin Behra, Shaukat alias Bhano son of Faruk Abdul Sattar and Salim alias Salman son of Yusuf Sattar Jarda have also been placed before the Commission for its consideration. Jabir Behra had made a confession before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panchmahal District under section 164 of Cr.P.C. The confessions of Shaukat and Salim were recorded under the provisions of Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002. It was contended by the Jan (173) Sanghars Manch that the Commission should not consider the confessions of the accused as the findings that may be recorded by this Commission are likely to cause prejudice to the accused in the trial which is pending before the Sessions Court. This objection was raised at an earlier stage of inquiry and it was rejected by passing an order. …. The inquiry before by the Commission is a fact finding inquiry and therefore, the Commission can look into and consider any piece of evidence for finding out the correct facts provided it is satisfied about its correctness. (174)

229. Jabir Behra in his confession dated 5.2.2003 has stated that he had gone with Salim Panwala to the petrol pump of Kalabhai for bringing petrol. Though the carboys filled with petrol were kept in the guest house of Rajak Kurkur, Salim Panwala had then gone to the Station to inquire whether the train was on time or was running late. Returning there from he had informed them that the train was running late by about 4 hours. Therefore, he had gone to home. He had again gone back to Aman Guest House at about 6.00 o'clock in the morning of 27th. Along with Salim Panwala, Shaukat Lalu and others he had gone in the tempy along with carboys to a place near 'A' cabin. He has further stated that Mohmed Latika had cut the vestibule between coach S/6 and S/7 and entered the coach through that opening and he had also followed him. Both of them had then together by force opened the door of coach S/6. They had gone inside with two carboys. Shaukat Lalu had followed them and opened the door of coach on A cabin side. Through that door Imran Sheri, Rafik Batuk and Shaukat Lalu had come inside the coach with more carboys. Those carboys were thrown in the coach and immediately thereafter there was a fire in the coach. Shaukat Lalu has also in his confession dated 19.8.2003 given these details. Salim Jarda in his confession dated 20.06.2004 has also stated that he had accompanied Salim Panwala, Siraj Bala, Jabir and Shaukat Lalu while going to the petrol pump of Kalabhai at about 9.30 p.m. for procuring petrol. He has also referred to the message sent by the Maulvi Saheb. Since he was reluctant to take any further part in such a bad act Rajak Kurkur had not allowed him to go. He was forced to stay in one room of the Guest House. He has then stated that next day morning he, along with Jabir Behra, Irfan, Shaukat Lalu and others had put the petrol filled carboys in the tempy and gone near A cabin. Rajak Kurkur and Salim Panwala had also followed them. He had thereafter not taken any part in the attack on the train and had remained standing at some distance.

All these three persons have retracted their (175) confessions but that by itself is not a good ground for throwing them out of consideration. When considered along with other facts proved by the evidence details given by this accused regarding the manner in which coach S/6 was burnt appear to be true. These confessions disclose that Rajak Kurkur and Salim Panwala were the two main persons who had organized execution of the plan and that what was being done was according to what was planned earlier and the directions of Maulvi Umarji. All the acts like procuring petrol, circulating false rumour, stopping the train and entering in coach S/6 were in pursuance of the object of the conspiracy. The conspiracy hatched by these persons further appears to be a part of a larger conspiracy to create terror and destabilise the Administration.

229. The Commission is required to consider the role and conduct of the then Chief Minister and/or any other Minister(s) in his Council of Ministers, Police Officers other individuals and organizations in the Godhra incident (i) in dealing with any political or non-political organization which may be found to have been involved in the Godhra incident and also (ii) in the matter of providing protection, relief and rehabilitation to the victims of communal riots and (iii) in the matter of recommendations and directions given by National Human Rights Commission from time to time. There is absolutely no evidence to show that either the Chief Minister and/or any other Minister(s) in his Council of Ministers or Police offices had played any role in the Godhra incident or that there was any lapse on their part in the matter of providing protection, relief and rehabilitation to the victims of communal riots or in the matter of not complying with the recommendations and directions given by National Human Rights Commission. There is no evidence regarding involvement of any definite religious (176) or political organization in the conspiracy. Some individuals who had participated in the conspiracy appear to be involved in the heinous act of setting coach S/6 on fire.

230. The policemen who were assigned the duty of travelling in the Sabarmati Express train from Dahod to Ahmedabad had not done so and for this negligent act of their an inquiry was held by the Government and they have been dismissed from service.

Ahmedabad. (G.T. Nanavati) (Akshay H. Mehta)
September 18, 2008 Chairman Member

See the integral text on the website of the Gujarat Government :