Meenakshi

sharam tum ko magar aati nahi

Instead of meenakashi, this story should have been about Fatima, Safia, and Batool - half of whom were burnt alive after gang rapes and other half sold into brothels all across India by their fellow Hindu countrymen.

urstruly. . .

on second thought. forget it. i will let everyone else take panga with you on that remark. i just want to ask you why it feels so good for you to devalue the death of a hindu, versus the death of a muslim? but you and i have been down this road before. i just think it`s bloody shameful. bas.

No. 2

I ``devalue`` the death of a hindu because I understand all too well the difference between a ``riot`` (as our authoress puts it so innocently) and an all out, full-blown genocide conducted in collusion with the brutal efficacy of the state apparatus. Unless and until you understand and appreciate the difference bewteen the two, keep your pontification to yourself - hypocrites like you disgust me equally.

your disgust is noted. . .and reciprocated. at least in that, i am not much of a hypocrite afterall.

my apologies to the rest of the readers here. the irony of the viciousness of the exchange between trulyyours (though definitely not mine!) and myself here became apparent.
forgive me.

Now you regret and apologize? There is a proverb in urdu for people like you - pehle tolo, phir bolo - try it sometimes.

Hi Archana:

I thought you were building on the apparently humdrum life of Meenakshi rather well. A real story about a real person, interesting in its simplicity. I can understand your intent, but this place is for discourse, however much we may dislike certain aspects of it.

Your post-script will be seen in a political light and being an Indian living in India, like you are, I feel that it is only natural. Which is why I am a bit flummoxed...how was she or her family affected by what happened in Godhra (not to be confused with the Gujarat state-sponsored terrorism)? What was lost? What did she/her family lose?

It must be a poignant story, but the loose ends do not hold it together. Also, Meenakshi is an unusual name for a Gujarati (and if she is not, then it would have helped to know really what she had lost and why) and eating aloo-parathas is even more unusual. I would have seen these as minor aberrations, but for that last bit which makes one want to know more. Who is she really?

If you wanted it to be deliberately hazy, then it is your artistic right.

Best wishes for the road ahead...

Farzana

Urstruly
//....and until you understand and appreciate the difference bewteen the two....//

I understand the difference. Any case - hindus are vicious people - I am sure you know that already. So why do you expect anything better?

urstruly #6 you write to nooralain ``pehle tolo, phir bolo ``

If any man needs this advice, it would be you. As I said before to the hindutva eleven on chowk, a murder is a murder. 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.

I am explaining this at length so you get a chance to ``pehle tolo, phir bolo``. Of course, if you are happy to be at the same level as the hindutva scum from India that I have seen condoning murder just like you are doing, then dont bother to reflect on what I have written.

Nooralain was quite right in taking you to task on this. She need not apologize to anyone on chowk.

Urstruly is really peturbed by `Meenakshi`.

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

subhanallah..urstruely is around.

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

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.

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

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?

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.

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

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

Archana:

welcome:)

perhaps some not relevant thoughts here

lve,

t

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.

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.

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?

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?

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

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?

Urstruly,

I do feel for you, man. It must be so incredibly frustrating to deal with baysharam
soul-less creatures such as Noor (and all Hindus, of course). Kya karein, it is
an imperfect world after all.

Perhaps a trip to a better world is worth thinking about.

Why not?

If actions of few can put the faith of one billion people on this planet in the category of a terrorist ideology and people in the category of terrorists then by the same logic why sholudn`t we put the faith and political idelogy of Hindu genocidal maniacs to examination. Similarly, why can`t what the american and british sick fucks and war criminals are doing to Iraqi people, be chracterized as the national character of these two nations. After all overwhelming majority of these nations supports it democratically - doesn`t it?

Archana:
Welcome to chowk.
As others have suggested, your story has some loose ends. How was all lost for Meenakshi` living in a small town in Godhra? You say that Meenakshi could be of any religion. But your descriptions (temple priest, flowers for deity, lighting a wick, etc.) make it quite clear what her religion is. Nothing wrong with that either. The pain of a hindu`s loss of life is no less important because fewer hindus lost lives than muslims. The pain for the loved one is the same, regardless of their religious affliation.

Urstruly:
``Why not?``

You have to do better than that!
People who have accused islam of supporting terrorism quote the quran and hadith to support their case; whether they interpret those examples correctly or not is another matter. If you want to make a similar case againt the Hindu religion, you would have to do something similar. I suspect that, with effort, one could perhaps build such a case, but it would probably be based on how the history has shaped the hindu psyche or even on how the hindu society was structured rather than on any scripture telling them how to treat non-hindus.
Give it a try!

urstruly #28 Finally, a response (of sorts) from brother urstruly!! Hallelujah!!

you write `` Why not? ..If actions of few can put the faith of one billion people on this planet in the category of a terrorist ideology and people in the category of terrorists then by the same logic why sholudn`t we put the faith and political idelogy of Hindu genocidal maniacs to examination.``

Here are the two reasons why not:

1. Your facts are wrong. No one, other than a few nut cases like jay, is placing all muslims in the category of terrorists.

2. Your logic is wrong. That is, because you are allowing your views to be determined by views of others. If you are truly a free man, you will base your views objectively, and not be driven by what others are saying. If someone says you have horns on your head, you dont respond by saying ``No, YOU have horns on your head.`` Hope you see my point.

tahmad

The physical evidence below in posts number 26 & 29 voids your two points.

Take, for example, # 26. This post is written by a gentleman who is known to be a responsible writer and a journalist in his country. He holds and propagate his opinion that Muslims in India live in slums because of their well thought out strategic conspiracy, in order to blackmail and exploit (hindu) establisment at the time of elections etc. What he is necessarily implying here - if we see his contention in the light of discussion that is going on - is that Muslims get themselves genocided in order to give Hindus a bad name. For that they live in strategic slums and..............

Now take # 29. This post is written by a gentleman who claims to have held responsible position as a consultant and advisor to his government. Now he believes and propagates an opinion that since the allegation of Muslims being terrorists is corroborated through Qura`n and hadith therefore it is true. And that the authenticity of Quaranic and Hadith interpretations and who and how they are done - whether they are qualified or not - true or not - has no bearing on the matter.

In other words he is implying that since he has evidence that Muslims are terrorists, therefore, they are terrorits however, the authenticity of that evidence is irrelevant. And I don`t beleive that he is someone who lives in cukooland.

Tahamad:

Are you trying to defend this category and cadre of people; who are so blinded and prejudiced by hatred for their fellow human beings? Now should I beleive your claims or should I beleive the evidence I see with my own eyes?

Ms. Satpathy:

Would you care to comment on the pearls of wisdom sprinkled here by your hindu co-countrymen?

re: - dost-Mittar # 29

``rather than on any scripture telling them how to treat non-hindus.
Give it a try!``

That is easy to do. Some googling and an active imagination is all that may be needed.

I hope analyses of religions, societies, and behaviors are carried out at a deeper level. For example, Hinduism is not a scripture-based religion. So looking into specific `scriptures` in order to understand Hinduism is like digging into a Khet when all the gold and stones lie in a far-away khalihan.

Besides, I don`t think one can separate religions from their histories either.

Godhra and Gujrat have clear relationships with the existing ideologies of Islam and Hindutva in India and the subcontinent. So Urstruly # 28 is quite right. Ideologies, worldviews, and religions cannot be separated from the actions of people who are motivated and inspired by those dogmas. If the intellectual class suits its political and moral convenience by denying this very close relationship then people will always be convinced of their own innocence, and will be preparing for the next round of bloodshed til the last man or woman is left alive.

Coming back to the article, Meenakshi, you invited trouble by locating it in a hot spot. When it comes to social issues, subtlety is lost on us.

urstruly # 31 - may we please go forth in this debate on fact? So, please let me know where in my posts on this thread (or others) have I specified or propagated any theory based on the assumption that everywhere it is that ``Muslims live in slums``?

Of the 4 slums mentioned by me by name, just about one, the one at Signal Phata/Godhra, can be considered to have a majority of ``Muslims living in strategic slums.`` Another one may have a large number of Bangladeshi refugees, and these Muslims, per historical evidence as well as fact, are apparently not Muslim enough for you. The other two happen to have Hindu and Christian dominance, respectively.

Please do feel free to ask me anything you would like to know about how demographics impact democracies. The growth and evolution of slums for vote bank purposes, as part of State sponsored efforts, are not restricted to any one community.

Thank you. You are so predictable. I knew you would fall into this one when I was writing it.

Urstruly#31:
``This post is written by a gentleman who claims to have held responsible position as a consultant and advisor to his government. Now he believes and propagates an opinion that since the allegation of Muslims being terrorists is corroborated through Qura`n and hadith therefore it is true. And that the authenticity of Quaranic and Hadith interpretations and who and how they are done - whether they are qualified or not - true or not - has no bearing on the matter.

In other words he is implying that since he has evidence that Muslims are terrorists, therefore, they are terrorits however, the authenticity of that evidence is irrelevant. And I don`t beleive that he is someone who lives in cukooland.``


This is nonsense! You are twisting my words to mean something that simply do not mean? Where did I say that:
-I believe quran teaches terrorism?
-Muslims are terrorists?
Read again what I said ``People who have accused islam (not me!) of supporting terrorism quote the quran and hadith to support their case`` How does this say/mean that I accuse islam of any such thing.`` As for muslims, there are 150 million of my muslim countrymen none of whom has been accused of being a terrorist, at least outside the country. I have also visited your country where the people I met were all people like me and they were all muslims.
I would never make a statement such as muslims are terrorists, not because it is not politically correct but because it is not true.
Now, I would very much appreciate it if you could read my post again and rethink your conclusions.

AnOrdinaryHindu#33
I agree with most of what you said. This is also the point I was trying to make; if there is hatred among Hindus, it is shaped by history and social stratification.

tahmad

you want more evidence? did you see how clever and vile they are? you see how they time their posts and the way they post them one after the other; you see how they munch, crunch and twirl their own words. Did you see Ms. Satpathy?

Urstruly:
``you see how they munch, crunch and twirl their own words. ``

It`s you, my friend, who is ``munching, crunching and twirling`` others` words. Even your statement about my claiming to be an advisor to my govt. was a stretch from my earlier job as a lowly policy analyst - a mere clog in a wheel.
You could have simply said that there is hatred among Hindus, too, and I would have agreed. Indeed, you would have been preaching to the convert. But when it came to the cause of that hatred, I thought you were off-base, because at least I am not aware of any Hindu scripture which makes a distinction between a Hindu and a Non-Hindu.
And are you serious about ``you see how they time their posts and the way they post them one after the other``? I consider myself as an individual here and dont represent India, Hindus or Canada; and I assume the same about you too.
Now, please try to match your rhetoric with logic and let me know where I said that:
-I believe quran teaches terrorism?
-Muslims are terrorists?
...and please no more ``munching, crunching and twirling``.

Urstruly:
``you see how they munch, crunch and twirl their own words. ``

It`s you, my friend, who is ``munching, crunching and twirling`` others` words. Even your statement about my claiming to be an advisor to my govt. was a stretch from my earlier job as a lowly policy analyst - a mere clog in a wheel.
You could have simply said that there is hatred among Hindus, too, and I would have agreed. Indeed, you would have been preaching to the convert. But when it came to the cause of that hatred, I thought you were off-base, because at least I am not aware of any Hindu scripture which makes a distinction between a Hindu and a Non-Hindu.
And are you serious about ``you see how they time their posts and the way they post them one after the other``? I consider myself as an individual here and dont represent India, Hindus or Canada; and I assume the same about you too.
Now, please try to match your rhetoric with logic and let me know where I said that:
-I believe quran teaches terrorism?
-Muslims are terrorists?
...and please no more ``munching, crunching and twirling``.

Urstruly:
I have begun to feel that you write these baffling posts to attract attention to yourself,because I find no logic in your anti-thesis/accusations/criticisms/fact representations and whatever fare you indulge in.

An `O` Hindu:
Hii..You accuse me of `inviting trouble` by putting Meenakshi at a hot spot.But publication of posts at suitable spots is the prerogative of the Chowk editors/staff and I had no choice in it.In any case this is my first ever post and I had no idea what so over that it would end up pulling so many strings..

Dost-mittar:
Hii.. :)
`loose ends` is regretted and your take on religious affiliation is reciprocated.

Veeresh:
You had asked me about the possibility of an underlying reference to M.F Hussain`s `Meenaxi`.Well no..Haven`t even seen the film though I am very much exited about .I heard its songs.`Yeh rishta` and `Duan Dhuan` are splendid ,divine music indeed.A.R Rehman simply rocks...doesn`t he?

so why are the hindus blood-thirsty?

ignoring urstruly`s rhetoric, and after doing apropriate adjustment for various numbers, this question needs answering.

One possiblity is to deny, hindus are not blood-thirsty. This is not true, since hindu mobs have killed, not necessarily in the name of religion, but so what?

In terms of behavior with muslims, hindus have passive-agressive behavior. They will not do a direct assault, but attempt to press buttons, do an ``unglee`` every once a while. If muslims resort to violence (as they seem prone to), the hindus then retaliate out of age-old fears. So whats special about murderoushindus? I think its a question of clapping, we need two hands to clap.

Sikh killing stuff is different.

The funny thing is Pakistanis like Urstruly have been studying since childhood, in every year of their school in classes III - XII about ` the faith and political ideology of Hindu genocidal maniacs`.

In spite of this, he STILL has doubts whether Hindus are genocidal maniacs or not so he is asking for further `examination`. Urstruly clearly did not pay attention in school, why? (Perhaps it was coeducational?)

Archana

I regret your shortsighted reply. I do write to attract attention, but not towards myself; I write to attract your attention to yourself. You gotta look yourself in me.

Dost

You are such a vile character that you make me almost belive you, everytime I talk to you.

Sadna

I test these beliefs that were instilled in me through my seconadry education....regretfully I always find them to be true. What I am looking for is an idol breaker and what I find is one who sells idols.

Urstruly:
``You are such a vile character that you make me almost belive you, everytime I talk to you``

You still haven`t told me where did I say/imply that:
-I believe quran teaches terrorism?
-Muslims are terrorists?
on this thread or any other thread?
And may I remind you that when some of your co-religionists here, including the one you were addressing your posts to, were cheering Yankee troops to Iraq and Afghanistan in the name of fighting terrorists, I was in the opposite camp.

urstruly must be using some sort of a time machine - his techniques are getting more and more better - has he gone back to the time of Grand Spanish Inquisitions!

tut, tut urstruly - you are a mirror of Jay. I wish the guys who own your two consortia learn to be like the original urstruly (going back a long long time) and Jay (atleast back then there was a consistency in style, syntax, content, typos, errors etc - these days the old adage of too many crooks and broth come to mind).

Urstruly #43
``I test these beliefs that were instilled in me through my seconadry education....regretfully I always find them to be true. What I am looking for is an idol breaker and what I find is one who sells idols. ``

If you were stupid enough not to pay attention to the truth in your textbooks, why blame others for your own stupidity?

Urstruly #31 I read veeresh`s post #26 to which you refer, and I will agree that he is making fine distinctions on the Gujerat murders when there is no excuse for what happened there and the facts are well known: the police stood by while muslims were being brutalized. If I had the time or the stamina, I would start an argument with him on this and indeed he and I once had a long argument with him on this point and obviously it didnt do much good. However, unlike you, I dont see this as an indication of perversity on his part, but simply that he gets unduly defensive when it comes to Gujerat. You also point to other chowk posts by Indian posters.

HOWEVER, I would like you to think of the following points:

1. Veeresh also visited Pakistan, and has as you know been writing a series of interesting and postive articles about it. If he really hated all muslims, why would he bother visiting Pakistan? He would be like Jay (the Pakistan expert who has never visited Pakistan). And perhaps if you met Veeresh in real life, he would take you to some real cool eating places in Delhi. More seriously, what I mean is that while one may dislike what someone writes on chowk, that does not mean that one would hate that person in real life.

2. As I recall, when those Gujerat riots were taking place, while a few India posters like harimau tried to justify them as retribution for Godhra, many Indian chowkies were opposed to it.

3. There is more to India than chowk posts. Much, much more. Nothing anyone writes on chowk can represent a country of one billion people with an increasingly dynamic economy and culture.

(I had more points, but gotto run now - this is not an excuse).

tahmed32 # 47 - thank you for the interact.

I do get in an ``explanation mode`` when communal riots, or any commercial religion based friction, gets viewed in black & white, as in the case of Gujarat.

Please appreciate, the very basic ethos of commercial religion is about contol of the economy through control over people`s minds. Commercial religions, centralised like most or decentralised like Hinduism, are probably the most successful business models around, if longevity and profit are two parameters. Think about this, first, please, without any of the my religion/your religion, my country/your country baggage.

Next, this, in my experience (not opinion) reduces most frictions between religions and their communities therein to very quantifiable time-line based mathematical equations. The questions of majority and minority and brute strength versus quicksilver action are also mathematical equations. Further bring in strife betwixt and within religions, and the equations get more complicated. Can anybody, then, say that this is this and it is black and white?

At such time, yes, I do object to painting Godhra - Gujarat as a simple ``Hindu versus Muslim`` issue, or one where it is ``State versus religion/minority``.

Is it anybody`s contention that ALL Muslims and ALL Hindus in Gujarat, or even Godhra, were in blissful love with each other?

About Pakistan, I visited because there was a natural curiosity about the land my fore-fathers came from, like, say, Irish Americans? I am glad you think they are positive, I write it like I see it, and some of the ``established`` media have already chosen to draw swords against me with references to some of my interacts. So be it.

Nobody justifies, but facts are facts, and to state that something is solely State versus Religion/Group/Caste/Tribe/Colour etc reveals a lack of knolwedge about real intricacies of life.

In any case, the legal system of our country seems to be moving along well enough.

And yes, after coming back from Pakistan, I am even more convinced that India is a better place for Muslims than Pakistan. That is a simple true fact.

#19 by FarzanaVersey on May 5, 2004 11:42am PT


[But the fact that even today the PM says that had Godhra not happened, then Gujarat would not have taken place]

Unbelievable.

And we thought, Bush`s WMD joke was in bad taste.

SoulKeeper

Dost Mitter

I did not answer your querries because of my personal convictions. It might surprise you to know that I myself am convinced that Muslims are terrorists and inspiration for this terrorism is through Qura`n. I was just trying to get another perspective on the same point through you.

veeresh #48 Starting with your last point (mainly because I followed that), they say that comparisons are odious, and I dont think it makes sense to start comparing such broad-based things. Thus, while I will agree with you that in some ways India is better for muslims than Pakistan (religious fanatics dont shoot you in mosques in India because they dont like your sect, e.g., as they do in Pakistan) but in other ways it is not (they dont have people doubting your national loyalties, e.g.). Similarly, while you have this wipro man who is a dollar billionaire i believe, on the other hand, i understand that muslims are kept down in the indian military (correct me if i am wrong). Thus, my point is that comparisons often dont mean anything, since we are just measuring apples and oranges.

I dont understand why you feel the need to explain Godhra-Gujerat. How can anyone ever explain the murder of innocent people? Those incidents dont represent India anymore than jehadis represent Pakistan. Why shouldnt ordinary indians and pakistanis join hands and condemn those in their midst who commit murders, rather than try to protect them?

This is a sloppy piece of writing that relies on the tail-piece by peppering it with Gujarat Godhra ET all and the screeners oblige by publishing it. The whole idea is sickening!! Pick up the uninspiring, mundane and routine part of anyone’s life - a kid, a young man/woman, garroulous aunts or politics-infested uncles. Put it in the most humdrum of ways possible, never bothering about the quality of emotions or even sensitivity of situations, but you`ll be promised your space as long as you know how to treat the stinking meat with masalas.

Although I`m baffled by the churlish chattering of bored individuals who don`t spare a chance to display their `keen` sense of understanding about `religion`, one thought is worth the mention in this unfettered prattle - I liked Urstruly`s idea. If anyway you want to connect to Gujarat, how about using a Muslim name? Unless you are so gullible as to point out that you were depicting the lifestyle of a Muslim family who had `chutnified` in the great melting pot of Indian sub-continent so much that they were leading Brahmin lifestyle before their world was torn apart by riots.

I’m itching to write one myself – I know what to sprinkle to grab attention.

tahmed32 # 51 . . . sirji!!

1) The uniformed services in India, as well as the non-uniformed civil services, as well as the intelligence agencies . . . and the rest including the secret ones too . . . do not differentiate on grounds of religion. Please understand and appreciate that. Ofcourse there shall be heartburn on the part of those left behind in the race for promotions, and the easiest factor to blame is religion. I do not want to go into names and numbers on Muslims who have made it to the top, or to sensitive positions therein, these are open domain now and have been thrashed on chowk.com before. I mean, the top-cop in a ``sensitive`` state like Indian Punjab is a Muslim today, Siddique, and no big deal.

2) I continue to explain Godhra/Gujarat as one more aberration, which we in India shall endeavour to repair. Gets my goat when I have it thrown on my face by people who still continue to deny Bangladesh . . .

3) What I do wish you would understand is that religious riots have a rather well documented way of evolving into economic warfare within a day, maximum 2. For those who really sat and investigated the Godhra/Gujarat issues post-facto without the baggage of pre-determined positions, it was clear that there were as many problems within communities and religions as there were amongst them. I do think I understand why I can not explain this to people from a declared mono-culture society. But I do think you should also grant me the wisdom to understand that internecine strife between Muslim sects in Pakistan has more to do with economic battles than with murder in the name of religion.

Dear Urstruly:
Your sarcasm is misplaced! I only wish that you were as persuasive in your interacts as you are in your artilces, from which I always learn something.

#19
`` But the fact that even today the PM says that had Godhra not happened, then Gujarat would not have taken place.``

He shouldnot have said that. He is clearly taking sides with the rioters with that statement. As PM he respresents not only those who rioted afterward, but those who burnt the train before. He is as responsible for the situation with the Muslims of Signal Falia as he is for the situation with the rioting others(this goes for Modi too, as CM but try telling him).

As PM, what Vajpayee was required to say was, ``both episodes are humongous national tragedies. The only way forward for all Indians is for us to stop politicising communal violence of this sort and bring to light the roots of both episodes to understand how to pre-empt them in future``.

Even if Vajpayee had to toe the party line on `fifth columnists`, he could have said, while fifth columnists are a threat to the country, the large scale breakdown of public order and atrocities committed by populations on each other is as much an open invitation to fifth columnists and threat to India as any foreign-state backed terrorism.

It was not beyond Vajpayee`s capabilities to say all this and show the gumption to follow through on this POV in realpolitick terms. He would have become the next Nehru had he done so. He has shown similar gumption combined with real politic in the case of seeking peace with Pakistan.

Vajpayee couldnot do so because he is a party animal who decided not to go against the unprincipled BJP party line which stands behind every two-bit or four-bit neighbourhood goonda and criminal as along as they shout Jai Sri Ram during their goonda gardi.

#51 by tahmed32
``Similarly, while you have this wipro man who is a dollar billionaire i believe, on the other hand, i understand that muslims are kept down in the indian military (correct me if i am wrong). ``

heh heh, why do you toss these softballs?

On rest of your post, i think jihadis do represent a facet of pakistan and godhra-gujrat do represent a facet of india and we must embrace it as a reality, dont deny. Joining hands and condemning these murders is going to do little, accepting the responsibility is the first step.

sadna#56:
Good post. It`s at times like this that even I start missing Nehru. He may had his weaknesses but no Modi could survive under him.

re - Sadna #56

Excellent post. It helped me correct a part of my own thinking. Thanks.

Sadna #56,

Very appropriate, but most people completely circumvent it. I once had an argument
with our beloved Angana Chatterjee on this issue. She did her little impassioned piece
on how non-secular Modi is, and how to restrain him. My simple counter was that before
anything else, Gujarat was a law and order problem (actually, more order than law)
and we should haul Modi over the coals for completely failing there. Far easier to do
than make him sit through Tolerance 101.

Her smirky response to this was ``whose law and whose order?`` - the sheer callousness
of this statement was astounding. Narcissism is the core problem with many self-
proclaimed academic leftists like her.

Anyway, you and Dost should try and catch this Gujarat documentary ``Final solution``
by Rakesh Sharma. Very vivid, I hear - watching it tonight myself.

jang #55 I agree with you that jehadis are a facet of Pakistan just as godhra-gujerat are a facet of india. What I am saying is that there is other facets to Pakistan just as there other facets to india. In other words, we are both saying the saying thing.

veeresh #53

On 1. i think you are saying that there is muslims do indeed rise to high ranks in the military services in India. Fair enough.

On 2. i think you are being unduly defensive. the fact is that the Gujerat electorate rewarded Modi with a re-election. On the basis of this fact, i beg to differ with you on the point of this aberration being fixed. I dont think anything has been done about it.

On 3. of course there are underlying reasons of all kinds - economic, human psychology - behind lawless activity. However, the basis for civilized society is respect for certain basic norms, respect for the life of all individuals being one of them, and punishment for those that violate those norms. Sectarian killings in Pakistan are just as much murder as communal killings in India, and so I beg to differ when you say they are explainable by similar economic reasons. If we, the supposedly educated types of the subcontinent dont understand this fundamental point, then who in God`s name will?

Tahmed32 #60,

I guess we have discussed this before, but it is certainly worth revisiting. I agree
with Jang on this point. Verbally condemning Godhra-Gujarat/Jehadis and just
relegating them to the category of ``fringe elements murdering innocents`` dilutes
the core issue. These aren`t random acts of violence, these are actually an integral
part of a political philosophy that is gaining credence - a far more sinister creature.

Whether or not there are other facets to India or Pakistan is completely irrelevant
to this discussion - we need to own up to this beast in our midst.

#48 by veeresh

“And yes, after coming back from Pakistan, I am even more convinced that India is a better place for Muslims than Pakistan. That is a simple true fact.”

Veeresh Sahib,
I was wondering, in your zest to argue and prove your point, you may have written some thing that probably does not have much ground to base your judgement on.

Making such an over-generalization based on a few days stay is simply preposterous! Clearly, your subjective analysis is based on the quality of “Religious” life that you encountered in a few days of stay in Pakistan and compared it to a lifetime of observation in India. With such a lopsided sampling an error of judgment is evidently possible.

If I were to assume that you based your judgment on the overall quality of life in India and compared it to overall quality of life in Pakistan, based on your short stay there, your statement would still not be a “True Fact” and would remain subjective.

However, I tend to believe that overall quality of life and experience may be better in India for all Indian and that includes Muslims too. But I find it hard to accept that based on religion alone India is a better place for Muslims.

When we compare Indian Muslims and Pakistani Muslims we run into several factors that would tend to NOT favor your argument. Muslims in Pakistan are a majority community and their attitude about Islam would tend to be aggressive compared to Muslims that are a minority community and somewhat have to rely on the support of the majority community to even fulfill their basic religious rites. Please don’t get me wrong I am not even remotely suggesting that there are religious restrictions in India. However, minority communities tend to be more conservative and often look at the majority community with suspicion.

Being a majority community in Pakistan often results in Pak-Muslims accepting much more aggressive interpretation of the religion than the minority community Muslims would ever do in India.
For example, Jihad means the same thing to all Muslims but jihad’s interpretations in Pakistan would be much more aggressive than it would ever be in India. There can be many examples of that but my point is that the mindset of any majority community would be different than a minority community pretty much anywhere in the world.

A minority community would in most cases accept a narrower view of the social life and would tend to be more like “looking after each other” rather than a majority community that would show much more divergence of views based on a broader perception.

I can say that the quality of life for American Black is much better then the quality of life for Nigerian Black or for that matter any African Black but the attitude of the Nigerian black would always be different than the American black as the American black has to deal with a majority white community that he/she would inherently look at with suspicion. This may not be a very good example but certainly one can draw some parallels.

The freedom to practice religion exits in India, still the air of freedom for Muslims exits in Pakistan. I think a change of perception often influences/determines the quality of life much more than a few days of observation.

plats #61 I didnt use that phrase in quotes ``fringe elements murdering innocents``. Far from using a santized phrase like ``fringe elements`` I have always referred to the perpetrators as murderers. If anyone needs convincing on this point, it would be veeresh in his post #53 whom i also addressed in that post on this very point.

We certainly need to own up to this beast in our midst. Jang also refers to taking responsibility. I think to hold an entire nation responsible for a murder is to trivialize the concept of responsibilty. It is better to be honest and simply acknowledge evil done in the name of one`s country or religion or whatever, and to do what one can to fight that evil. My late father wrote a whole book in the late 1990`s titled ``Quranic vs Non-Quranic Islam`` as his attempt to separate the mullah philosophy of violence from the peaceful message of Islam. This was his way of trying to fight this evil on the battlefield where he thought it was best fought: in the battlefield of ideas. Perhaps someday someone in India will challenge the hindutva ideology and separate their violent philosophy from the peaceful message of Hinduism. Perhaps someone in India has already written such a book.

It is time we - the ordinary people of India and Pakistan - recognized the real beast - who, as you correctly say, is in our midst. But let us not let the beast off the hook by trivializing the concept of responsibility by spreading it across an entire nation.

dost-mittar #57, AOH #59
Glad that we agree.

plats8#58
I suspect many armchair or jhola Leftists are quite as unprincipled in supporting two-bit goondas perpetuating violence, as long as they do so in the name of Marxism. In addition said Leftists appear to harbor a deep antipathy towards the Indian state CONCEPTUALLY(as distinct from opposing the Indian state`s various actions, which is fine by me), not sure why.


Jang and Urstruly talked of reasons for Hindu violence.

For whatever it is worth, what Dr. Ambedkar said in his book Pakistan( Chapter IX, 1945). He argues in many places in the book that at that time, the way Muslims viewed/practiced politics was heavily influenced by their feeling of being menaced as a minority among majority Hindus. One of his related points :

`The third thing that is noticeable is the adoption by the Muslims of the gangster`s method in politics. The riots are a sufficient indication that gangsterism has become a settled part of their strategy in politics. They seem to be consciously and deliberately imitating the Sudeten Germans in the means employed by them against the Czechs. 44[f.44] So long as the Muslims were the aggressors, the Hindus were passive, and in the conflict they suffered more than the Muslims did. But this is no longer true. The Hindus have learned to retaliate and no longer feel any compunction in knifing a Musalman. This spirit of retaliation bids fair to produce the ugly spectacle of gangsterism against gangsterism.

How to meet this problem must exercise the minds of all concerned. There are the simple-minded Hindu Maha Sabha patriots who believe that the Hindus have only to make up their minds to wipe[out some] the(sic) Musalmans and they will be brought to their senses.. ``


(And Dr. Ambedkar goes on to say ``...The Hindu Maha Sabha plan is no way to unity. On the contrary, it is a sure block to progress. The slogan of the Hindu Maha Sabha President— Hindustan for Hindus— is not merely arrogant but is arrant nonsense.``)


My comment:
That was the Hindu Maha Sabha attitude when the British were in charge and various groups were jockeying for a share of power in the future.

Now in independent India, the descendants of Hindu Mahasabha ideologues are THE power in government and hold responsibility for all of India - and still hold the same attitudes.

I have heard/read not only BJP elected officials/lay supporters voice the above view but also ordinary Indians - namely that what SOME communal Muslims need is a good thrashing, that unless such thrashing is administered, Muslims who are communally aggressive will continue to consider Hindus to be weaklings and cowards who can be attacked as and when such Muslims please.

To the extent we are talking of predominant PAKISTANI official/unoffical discourse and policy, this assessment could well be true.

On the other hand, it is absolute nonsense/criminally irresponsible to suggest that Indians killing/attacking fellow Indians can be in any way be good for India or Indians.

Unfortunately this attitude appears to have currency. And unfortunately, though BJP/VHP(the standard bearer of this attitude on the Indian side) and the Pakistani side are clearly `made for each other` combatants, they are not fighting directly with each other at the front lines.

Rather, both sides have put Indian Muslims, Indians and the Indian state in-between as proxies/proxy enemies and Indian Muslims get the worst of it from all sides.

Dear HP #62 . . . my standing statement on quality of life for Muslims being better in India than for Muslims in Pakistanis is based on quantitive parameters. The simplest one is - how equal are the playing fields on grounds of religion for breaking free of the shackles of poverty in India and Pakistan? On that:-

a) Muslim women in India surely have it better in India, there can be no argument about this simple truth. That is 50% of Muslims.

b) The definition of ``Muslim`` in India refers to a multi-cultural people with freedom to take part in an Islam which is open to fresh interpretations and thought. A large number of Muslims in Pakistan can not lay claim to this simple truth, shall we say another 30%, and thus lead their lives as second rate Pakistanis. In India, it really does not matter what sort of Muslim you are.

So. What am I saying?

I am saying, Sir, that it is equally simple (or difficult, take your pick) for a Muslim in India to break out of the rut of poverty, illiteracy or bondage as it is for any other Indian. Sure, we fail in many ways in India, but please believe me, I travel India by the back roads with as much observation power as I did Pakistan, and if there is one single parameter that applies, then religion is not what holds an individual back in India.

A lot of other things do hold people back in India, sure. Wealth, or lack thereof. Education. Access to communications. Caste, by no means restricted to Hindus. Peer pressure from within one`s own community and religion. Gender bias. But not religion.

I mean, who are the big employers, or the small businesses? Let us see?

In India:- Agriculture? Government? Public Sector? New generation technology industries? Entertainment? Media? Defence? Railways? Medicare? Road Transport? Small shopkeepers? Property speculators? Porters? Exporters? Whores and pimps? Milk co-operatives? Poultry farmers? Flower merchants? Large engineering industries?

Next. You know what, it is impossible for anybody in India who is trying to run a business or service or anything on compettiive terms to ignore 15% of the population, if you do not take, in proportion, the better persons from such a smaller group, then you end up taking idiots from the larger group, it is as simple as that, no?


In Pakistan:- you tell me. If I am a Muslim woman, if I am a non-acceptable kind of Muslim, if I am a minority, where are my options?

nice
i love the way u have opened up a window to the lives that are so common and mundane that we often dont value them enough
but i feel that it lacks `shock value`
wat were u trying to communicate ?
the riots bit didnt hit hard enough.