Meenakshi

Farzana 19 . . . the complete thought process behind Godhra/Gujarat riots is about religion, how can one ignore reality. I shall bring religion into it, why hide?

When I talk about taking things in chronological order, and want to make a case that building ``strategic slums`` based on religious vote banks is part of state sponsored terrorism, then religion shall come into the picture. Citizens from these strategic slums can not or do not subscribe to the norms and laws of State and Society, and then when their inter-necine flashpoints reach a boil, demand ``protection``? That is strange, no, first you defy the State, then you run into a jam, and then you run to the State for protection? Matter of fact, do you see a pattern?

So . . .how come you, Farzana, for example, have not brought up for the benefit of the readers here how the social and religious fabric of Gujrati Muslims was sought to be ``adjusted`` by the more radical Muslims from ``outside``, and how much of State sponsored effort there was in this? And on the chance that this was ``State Sponsored``?

Bit of a convoluted way to explain things, but then, who said life was black & blue & white?

+++

Archane various - just for the sake of the record, Maharani Gayatri Devi`s original name was ``Ayesha``. So, the first name doewsn`t matter. As a matter of fact, are you putting in some deep connection between MF Hussain and Meenaxi?

Hello Everybody,
Went through temporal`s `not so relevant` thoughts about me,and found them perfectly relevant.Thankyou for the appraisal.
I take this oppurtunity to heartly appologize to all the readers about the typos that have sneaked in into the article.I only stand corrected..
Farzaan,even I didn`t intend(even when I was writting the story) to bring religion into the plot.But,seeing where the discussion was leading to,especially the comments from `Urs truly``,forced me to mention about it.Clearly,my intention was to highlight the trauma that suddenly surfaced into the lives of thousands of Gujuratis,and not about which sect of religion suffered most.Humanbeings suffered and that`s enough to put us to shame till we correct ourselves.
I am sorry `Urstruly`,but I find your comments extremely vitriolic and shocking.Its realyy depressing to know about your hatred towards Hindus.Surely,this blame game and `wrong-findings` will lead us to nowhere,it never did.Our priority should be xactly the opposite,about trying to remove religious diffrences and suspicion,rather than fostering it.

love,
Archana Satpathy

urstruly: I had written this to you: ``And the killing of any individual is murder unless done in pure self defense as accepted in criminal law in virtually every country in the world today. The killings at Godhra do not fall into the definition of self-defense, and so are murder.``

You have chosen to ignore this point.

Would you perhaps care to say whether you agree or disagree with the last statement above? And if you disagree, why you disagree?

urstruly #21 you correctly point to instances where hindus killed sikhs and muslims, and from that you draw the incorrect conclusion that there is something wrong with ``this religion - this people`` (hinduism and hindus).

One could correctly point to instances where muslims killed sikhs and hindus. By your logic this means there is something wrong with islam and muslims (as no doubt your kind on the other side - the hindutvas - dont fail to advise us day in and day out on chowk).

Perhaps there is something wrong with both you and your hindutva counterparts, dont you think?

I am not going to comment on the nonsensical Urstruly (Yours Truly A Bevakoof?) ``The Jews did the WTC``-type dialog on-going here. Some interactors do not deserve a response and our crocidilian friend is definitely high on the list.

But I do have the question for Archana: why site this story in such a confusing location? 50 or so hindu pilgrims were murdered in Godhra by a predominantly muslim mob; more than a 1000 predominantly muslim individuals were then killed by predominantly hindu mobs in Ahmedabad and elsewhere. But there were never any riots in Godhra !!

Summary: by situating your story in this somewhat careless way, I think you have made it easier for people to be confused. It also opens the door to agitators and professional disinformation purveyors to make specious claims. It would be simpler if you had referred to either innocent hindu pilgrims or innocent muslim residents or both.

FV

Veeresh is not a kaka thunna (baby), he knows all too well already what you are saying here. As a matter of fact him and his countrymen spare no effort to deliver lectures to others on these things yet what stinks is this almost conspitorial remorselessness and lack of moral courage to owning up to their actions.

Whether or not you want to bring religion into your post, religion remains at the core of this issue.

- It was Hindu hoodlums aka pilgrims and not just Indians who taunted Muslim vendors at Godhra station, stole their money and kidnapped Muslim women, which triggered the whole tragedy.

- It was Muslim mob that attacked the train carrying Hindu hoodlums aka pilgrims which resulted in fiery death of 55 Hindus.

- It was Hindu mobs who initiated a genocide, which is tonned down as ``pogrom``, against Muslims to avenge the death of their own. It wan`t ``Indians`` fighting with each other. It was the one sided murder of one religious group by the other religious group. So religion is not irrelevant.

- Just as the murder of 40,000 sikhs after Indira`s assissination cannot be termed as ``Indians attacking siks`` - since it was actually Hindus massacaring sikhs - the case in Gujrat can not be viewed in secular or nationalistic terms. It was a religious mess.

That brings in question the Hindu religion and political ideology in question. We must examine what is in it that drove its adherents to near madness. We must examine what is in it that lowers its adherents to bloodthirsty ghouls whose thirst for blood is not quenched even by brutal masacares of 100000 Kashmiri Muslims; 40,000 sikhs; about 6000 Mulims while raising Babri Masjid; and now about two to 3000 Muslims in Gujrat while displacing hundereds of thousands to date. What is wrong with this ideology - this religion - this people.

Archana:

welcome:)

perhaps some not relevant thoughts here

lve,

t

veeresh (#16):

State-sponsored terrorism is when the Establishment plays a part in the subjugation of its citizens, the chief minister makes incendiary comments, the PM does his double talk, honest police officers are tarnsferred, the culprits are not arrested, ordinary citizens are killed with the connivance of the authorities, and the courts can be made to turn and twist and are so ineffective that for justice to even be seen to be provided the cases have to be moved to another state. This does not stop the sitting CM from being the calling card of the ruling party which could rule us again.

State-sponsored terrorism is when the citizens the state is supposed to protect get targetted by it. No one is looking to be protected by terrorists. The satte often does aid and abet terrorism, but only to suit its ends. There is a difference between Godhra and Gujarat, and the reason is not merely about religion. But the fact that even today the PM says that had Godhra not happened, then Gujarat would not have taken place.

I don`t think there will be many takers for the theory that the incitement for Godhra came from the state.

I had not brought religion in my post to Archana...would appreciate if you did not imply that I did.

- - -
Hi Archana:

I am glad you took my remarks in the spirit they were meant to be taken. In fact, I had wanted to being up the point, which sadna has raised in her post, but desisted...When I questioned you about Meenakshi`s identity, it had nothing to do with her religion. To me her name could have conveyed someone who has moved to the state and her displacement would have been of a different kind, if that were so...I was also clear about the footnote conveying something else...

We all learn, and it does not have to be from our mistakes!

Be well,
F

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

veeresh:

thank you for pointing that out. as is probably evident, i`m not too savvy with indian names. . .i don`t even know all that much about pakistani names. to this day i challenge those who tell me i have a `muslim` first name. it`s farsi with no particular religion attached to it. (i`m not talking about the name i use here)

anyway, my frustration with urstruly stemmed from previous remarks that he`s made about hindus, and the value of a hindu life. . .that is no big deal? perhaps.

Urstruly # 1 - as far as selling of young girls into flesh trade is concerned, do all of us here at chowk a very VERY big favour, please depute somebody to visit Wagah/Pakistan Border Checkpost or Lahore Railway Station on the days the train from India comes in . . . and tell all of us here what the religious denominations and nationalities of the organisers of the flesh trade are? Frankly, I couldn`t tell about their nationalities . . . though I did get a good idea of their religion by the clothes they were wearing. But I want you to please re-confirm, thank you.

Nooralain # 2 - Meenakshi, in India, could be as much the name of a Muslim as ``Shah`` or ``Kulkarni`` or ``Bhatti`` or ``Gloria`` or ``Johhny Greene`` or ``Rashmi`` or ``Furkan`` or ``Helen`` or ``Sameera`` or even ``Ram Rahim``. No big deal lately.

Farzana # 7 - taking matters strictly in chronological sequence, and assuming that state sponsored terrorism is the strictly correct definition, would you venture forth the possibility that the initial burning of the train which catalysed matters in Godhra was also state sponsored terrorism? And if so, which state, and how long before the actual event did this start? Would we be correct in assuming that ``The State`` came in to the picture when it permitted or maybe even provoked radical fundoo elements to broadcast hatred from the loudspeakers of otherwise peaceful mosques in Signal Phata and other parts of Gujarat?

Otherwise, in your opinion, at what time in the sequence of events did the State come in? (To understand what I mean, let us take the example of a few other rather similar area, the slums around NSD Docks in Kolkata or Dagd Chawl in Bhaikhula or some of the backlanes near Palton Road Police Station in Bombay. ``The State`` has, for years now, chosen to or been unable to enter these area. So what is ``State Sponsored``? The evolution of Signal Phata, was that ``State Sponsored``?)

I think that Archana has brought out simply that ``M`` had a rather abrupt change in her life after the Gujarat riots. What has her religion got to do with it?

Hi Farzana
Thankyou for patiently reading my story(which as pointed by you, has so many abberations ,not to mention gramatical errors!)
I have no idea whatsoever about Gujrati names or their food habits,just a few stray nuggets of information collected over the years.But,Godhra carnage and the riots that had followed was something that has left an indelible impression on me,and meenakshi was a character that i weaved out of the scenario.Meenakshi could be Fatima ,Safia or Batool as well, because all of them were innocent victims in those riots.
Apart from facing inhuman attrocities and degradations what all of them were really robbed off, in those unspeakable and terrible acts of savegery,(`them` includes every sensitive right thinking humanbeing in India)was their `peace of mind` , their `blissfull existence` .
As for the `loose ends` ,I will learn from my mistakes.
love,
Archana Satpathy

First get your facts right.
If I am not mistaken, there were no riots in `a small town of Godhra`. Unless Meenakshi was on the train which was burnt there, curfew was the maximum that she had to contend with.
In which case, all was not lost.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

subhanallah..urstruely is around.

Hii ...thanx for reading ...am sorry if the article offended anybody