upvote
I mean that was one of the reasons why he got re-elected twice in Gujarat. It's a shame what that party has devolved to now
reply
Still better than INC (Rahul Gandhi) IMO.

Would reconsider if INC appoint someone competent like Shashi Tharoor.

reply
one of. other is he killed Muslims.
reply
Riots in India are uncontrollable. Muslims killed 59 Hindus returning from Ayodhya by burning a train full of innocent karsevaks which started the riots
reply
Let’s not lie now.

IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt alleged that at a meeting on the night of February 27, 2002, Modi told senior police that Hindus should be allowed to "vent their anger." Another officer, R.B. Sreekumar, said he was denied a promotion for criticizing the government's inaction

reply
Please don't throw around accusations like this; especially after creating a temporary account.
reply
Sanjiv Bhatt's wife fought on Congress ticket. R. B. Sreekumar was implicated and charged for framing a highly decorated ISRO scientist Nambi Narayanan in a fake espionage case.

Both are dubious characters with conflict of interests and one of them even straight up went against an innocent scientist just to massage his fat ego.

reply
I've no horse in this debate; why create a throwaway account for this comment?
reply
This trope is going to get you guys nowhere. The Gujarat riots started with burning of a train filled with Hindu Karsevaks by Muslims. Once religious riots start in India no politician can control it. It requires military intervention. Gujarat riots was curbed the fastest if you compare it to any other riot in Independent India. It was ended in 3 days. By comparison, 1984 Sikh riots took 4 days to end.
reply
The historical debate was revived globally when a British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) documentary highlighted a previously unreleased, classified 2002 British Foreign Office report. The internal UK government report concluded that the violence was pre-planned and that the rioting had all the hallmarks of "ethnic cleansing," alleging that Modi was "directly responsible" for the political climate that allowed it. The Indian government banned the documentary domestically, calling it a biased piece of colonial propaganda.
reply
Supposed to be unbiased because "Internal UK government report"?. Both the train and the riots were crimes against humanity. Sorry if Indians don't believe shit coming from the UK.
reply
Because it is propaganda. Explain to me how it is ethnic cleansing with figures. The same BBC did not recognize Kashmiri Pandits genocide, rape and exodus as ethnic cleansing but calls 2002 Gujarat Riots as ethnic cleansing? Do you guys even know what "ethnic cleansing" even means? Muslims are 10% of Gujarat's population. Roughly 6 million Muslims. In 2002 they were 4.6 million. Please tell me how TF is that ethnic cleansing? Compare it to Kashmiri Pandit Hindu genocide, rape and exodus of 1990s. In 1989, Kashmiri Hindus were roughly 150,000 in number. They were systematically targeted and wiped out from the Valley. Today there are only 3,000 Kashmiri Pandits.

Has BBC made any fucking documentary on this? No it has not.

Nor will losers like you question the blatant hypocrisy and propaganda.

> The internal UK government report concluded that the violence was pre-planned and that the rioting had all the hallmarks of "ethnic cleansing," alleging that Modi was "directly responsible" for the political climate that allowed it

"Internal UK government report" belongs in the dustbin.

> all the hallmarks of "ethnic cleansing,"

Please elucidate what those hallmarks are. I am extremely curious to know what the yardstick is for "ethnic cleansing" according to UK government.

reply
Can we not call it the Sikh riots? Those were riots by Congress, the BJP and VHP and their supporters against the Sikhs. The Sikhs didn't rise up. You don't call the Gujarat riots the "Muslim riots" do you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_anti-Sikh_riots

Perpetrators - Indian National Congress, Bharatiya Janata Party, Vishwa Hindu Parishad.

And if you want lessons on riot control, learn from Kerala. North Kerala is host to an uncountable number of Hindu-Muslim riot triggers but most of them are defused before they can take root, and if they do occur, the riots are curbed in a day or so.

This one is the most recent and deadliest riot in Kerala - defused in 2 days before it could escalate because of timely police action. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marad_massacre

And this is the entry for the Gujarat riots - Perpetrators: Government of Gujarat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_violence

To quote some extracts :

> Throughout the violence, attacks were made in full view of police stations and police officers who did not intervene.[15] In many instances, police joined the mobs in perpetrating violence. At one Muslim locality, of the twenty-nine deaths, sixteen were caused by police firing into the locality.[18] Some rioters even had printouts of voter registration lists, allowing them to selectively target Muslim properties.[66][75][65] Selective targeting of properties was shown by the destruction of the offices of the Muslim Wakf board which was located within the confines of the high security zone and just 500 meters from the office of the chief minister.[61]

> The violence had been planned far in advance, and that similar to other instances of communal violence the Bajrang Dal, the VHP and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) all took part in the attacks.[64] Following the attack on the train the VHP called for a statewide bandh (strike), and the state took no action to prevent this.[61][62]

> The Concerned Citizens Tribunal (CCT) report includes testimony of the then Gujarat BJP minister Haren Pandya (since murdered), who testified about an evening meeting convened by Modi the evening of the train burning. At this meeting, officials were instructed not to obstruct the Hindu rage following the incident.[109][110] The report also highlighted a second meeting, held in Lunawada village of Panchmahal district, attended by state ministers Ashok Bhatt, and Prabhatsinh Chauhan, among other BJP and RSS leaders, where "detailed plans were made on the use of kerosene and petrol for arson and other methods of killing."[70][110] The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind claimed in 2002 that some regional Congress workers collaborated with the perpetrators of the violence.[111]

> Dipankar Gupta believes that the state and police were clearly complicit in the violence, but that some officers were outstanding in the performance of their duties, such as Himanshu Bhatt and Rahul Sharma. Sharma was reported to have said "I don't think any other job would have allowed me to save so many lives."[112] Human Rights Watch has reported on acts of exceptional heroism by Hindus, Dalits and tribals who tried to protect Muslims from the violence.

Don't repeat BS talking points that the government couldn't do anything. If the government doesn't have a monopoly on violence, it has lost its legitimacy. That's literally one of the main jobs of the people in power.

Oh, and what did Gujarat do to Rahul Sharma, the IIT grad police officer who was one of the few officers to actually try to stop the riots? They transferred him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahul_Sharma_(Gujarat_police)

reply
EDIT: funny how you edited your post and added BJP and VHP as part of Anti-Sikh riots. This is as fake as it can get. BJP and VHP actually saved many Sikhs from getting massacred. Why TF would BJP and VHP kill Sikhs? Indira Gandhi was not part of either BJP or VHP. She was part of Congress Party. This is how I know you are peddling propaganda.

> Can we not call it the Sikh riots? Those were riots by Congress and its supporters against the Sikhs. The Sikhs didn't rise up. You don't call the Gujarat riots the "Muslim riots" do you?

Why did the riots even begin in the first place? Because Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was shot by her two Sikh body guards. It was as revenge for Operation Bluestar which targeted Khalistani terrorists who had taken over the Golden Temple. Now I have no love for Congress or Gandhi family but you cannot exclude the history from it or cherry pick it according to your liking. Khalistani terrorism was at its peak during that period. Just look at the history of how many Hindus were killed during the militancy in Punjab.

> You don't call the Gujarat riots the "Muslim riots" do you?

It is not a name I have given. I did not decide to name 1984 riots as Sikh or Anti-Sikh riots. I did not decide to name 2002 riots as Gujarat riots. That is literally what it is called. There is no reason to get so butthurt about the name.

> And if you want lessons on riot control, learn from Kerala. North Kerala is host to an uncountable number of Hindu-Muslim riot triggers but most of them are defused before they can take root, and if they do occur, the riots are curbed in a day or so.

LMFAO this is the worst state when it comes to controlling riots. It tolerated Moplah Genocide of all things. Lasted several months.

> This one is the most recent and deadliest riot in Kerala - defused in 2 days before it could escalate because of timely police action. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marad_massacre

This is not a riot mate. This is a terror attack. Do you not know the difference between a riot and a terror attack?

> Don't repeat BS talking points that the government couldn't do anything. If the government doesn't have a monopoly on violence, it has lost its legitimacy. That's literally one of the main jobs of the people in power.

I never said Government couldn't do anything. Are you unable to comprehend what I wrote? I wrote politicians have no power to stop riots. It is only the military (which is also part of the Government) that has the power.

reply
Your "Sikh riots" are literally called the "anti-Sikh riots". You don't get to brand the entire community just because the root cause was an assassination perpetrated by fringe elements of that community.

Second, very laughable of you to call out the Moplah rebellion, which happened in the 1910s lol. Are you still stuck in the British Raj, pre-WW1?

Third, Marad was a riot, except it was extinguished in a day (by a North Indian Hindu top cop by the way), because of timely action by the police in actually discovering the weapons. What could've been a terror attack was averted.

> I wrote politicians have no power to stop riots. It is only the military (which is also part of the Government) that has the power.

And fourthly, no riots in any democracy across the world are controlled by the military lol. The military serves a different purpose, and using them for tasks such as riot control is exactly how you end up with another Tiananmen Square massacre (in which case, the military were explicitly called because the civilian police of Beijing did not want to shoot and kill the protesters). Perhaps that's where your mind is, to make India another one-party Hindutva dictatorship.

My edits were taken from the Wikipedia article only.

reply
EDIT: > Perhaps that's where your mind is, to make India another one-party Hindutva dictatorship

Thanks for confirming you are part of the propaganda. I have no further interest in continuing this discussion with a lunatic.

> My edits were taken from the Wikipedia article only.

Your edits even in the Wikipedia article call it "dubious". You still mentioned it anyway, without mentioning that the claim is dubious, because you are part of the propaganda machine.

> And fourthly, no riots in any democracy across the world are controlled by the military lol

It infact IS controlled by the military. In US, for example, it is called National Guard. Police is not equipped to control a riot in any democracy in the World. India is actually an exception where it has a CRPF for riots and because scale of riots in India exceeds even the CRPF's ability to handle it (due to our size and population), the Military is called.

> Second, very laughable of you to call out the Moplah rebellion, which happened in the 1910s lol.

Moplah Genocide was not part of the rebellion. Unless you want to call Muslims genociding Hindus and raping Hindu women as part of rebellion against the British Raj. Have some shame. And it happened in 1921 not 1910.

reply
One thing I have noticed is "It is very easy for the Empire to vassalize Muslim countries". Try to notice next time.
reply