Talk:2002 Gujarat riots/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Subhash Bose,Pussymitra Sunga,Netaji and propbably Msiev are same person

and he is vandalising the article ..removing point of view against the Chauvinist forces in Gujarat

Please prove that any of my edits are 'chauvinistic'. and do not resort to ad-Hominem attacks and personal insults.(Pusyamitra Sunga 15:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC))

NPOV

The last revision increased the death toll without citing the sources,whereas a scenario like that may well have been possible.One should stick by the most prevalaant figures and these are around 2000 according to BBC.If one finds figures from the Human Rights Organisations , those too should be acceptable.If a party believes that figures are more than cited then better write it as Muslim sources maintain that the figures are xxx while the figures from the Gujarat government are yyy.

Some have cited that the article does not show the injustices done by Muslims well go on and cite those and say that certain sections of Hindus maintain that this carnage took place due to actions by Muslims in Kashmir and Bangladesh.However, I dont agree to their point of view.Muslims in India have not supported the Kashmir militancy and if it was something closer to their hearts they would have prayed for it in mosques as they pray for Palestine.Bangladesh is another country and what is happening to them is their internal matterss.Why gas your neighbours for something they dont have control over.

If one sees the Godhra issue , it was because First of all these people had gone on a ceremony taking place on a disputed site while different cases are still in courts with all anti Muslim propoganda inciting them and secondly while they returned they behaved improperly all through the stations the train passed providing more fuel to the earlier fire.I have been personally witness to Anti Muslim sloganeering on train stations at midnight during the 1990's and it was enough to boil my blood.It felt like I am not in my country and it is fair to believe that if an educated person like me can feel that - there are many who will find it difficult to sustain such sloganeering.This does not justify killings of any body - but then it is imperative to know who is the real aggresor and the aggreived.

In a real democracy , government should contain any such thing

NPOV

I am dissapointed by this article. It glorifies the actions of muslims while demonizing those of Hindus. While I admit that Hindus in Gujarat may have taken things too far, the communal violence perpetrated by Muslims in other parts of the country that may have contributed to the riots in Godhra were not mentioned. Not even peripherally. The communal situation in India is extremely complex and sensitive. Bear in mind that hate crimes against innocent HINDUS have increased in Kashmir and Bangladesh, and that is connected to Godhra. After all, in articles of the holocaust of European Jewry, Wikipedia authors also mention the Dresden bombings. So why this negative portrayal of Hindus?User: Subhash Bose

NPOV

Edited some parts under Riots. Things like this was the biggest butchering of people and it was supervised by Modi dont make any sense.

Plea

Please donot remove any material from the talk page, this is an open forum to discuss the article every one can express their opiniions here. Some one with ip 213.128.227.74 is constantly removing material from bothe the article and the talk page, please stop it.anil 18:59, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Article

This article is full of bias and bigotry. 254 Hindus have died in this riot but article does not have a single incident except godhra where hindus are victims. Even in godhra article blames hindu-victims (mostly women and children) for their death.


Article is basically apologetic to the Hindu radicals. Luckily there are links to more opinions at the end.

Moved to Archive 2, it was too cluttered. I have a small request, please sign your name and the time you edit the pages so others who join in later on the discussion are aware of the timeline. Thanks. Gaurav Arora Talk 12:47, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

This artcle does not talk about the background on why there is so much violance in Gujarat. This was not an isolated case. It overlooks the role played by the bootlegers and politicians in the past. Role of muslim leadership and riase of Latif (notorious Gangster).

Newspaper Article Links

Folks, again this is an encyclopedia and not a grudge airing forum. Links to individual opinions and statements only impair objectivity. This article is about Gujarat violence, so please refrain from adding links which serve no other purpose than airing a particular viewpoint or fanning sentiments. An example is repeated addition of the link. "Hindu Justifies Mass Killings of Muslims in Reprisal Riots, The New York Times, March 5, 2002" .

The article states "However, there were reports allegeing that it was the hindus riding the train who were the first to provoke standers-by Muslims in Godhra railway station by shouting hindu-religous slogans like "Jai Shri Ram" (Victory of Shri Ram)." The article tries to justify the burning of the train compartments (and the gruesome death of the Hindus) while at the same time focussing on the 'state sponsored pogrom' angle without allowing for the possibility that the riots which followed were infact an outburst of anger directed at the community seen responsible for the train-burning incident. Hence I am removing the above statement (quoted).

= This is ridiculous some one deleted the alternative theory of how the fire started. No one is trying to justify the burning here, but it is a fact that a railyway department enquiry was conducted. anil 10:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Electoral Consequences

Can we leave this out since it seems biased in its implication. Gaurav Arora Talk 12:47, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

crimes against humanity 540 page report

i have put back the external link to the Citizens for Justice and Peace report Crime against Humanity at http://www.sabrang.com/tribunal/ - it is an NPOV fact that this extensive enquiry collecting a massive number of testimonies from witnesses exists. Whether the witnesses spoke the truth or not and whether or not the synthesis is a neutral synthesis, is POV. However, removing the external link is POV. Please do not remove the link. If someone can point to an external document which claims that the Citizens for Justice and Peace report is biased in some way, then please add that. Boud 12:18, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

    • SABRANG communications "convenor" Ms. Teesta Setalvad has a pending court case against her for coercing witnessses into giving false statements. Till that case is resolved, any articles from SABRANG communications should not be referenced. It is equally wrong to put in articles from sources under investigations. That is also POV.
Wrong: you misunderstand NPOV - NPOV means that all POVs which have some credible external sources backing them are allowed. Boud 23:56, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
    • Ms. Teesta Setalvad also came very close to having been charged with a criminal conspiracy. Apparently, she paid witnesses, including those in the Best bakery case, for their testimonies. True or not, I think her report should be kept as far away from this article as possible. I'm sure we can find much better sources of information. Gaurav Arora 09:25, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
If you have some external evidence which claims that Ms. Teesta Setalvad bribed witnesses, please provide the link. However, please remember that the Crimes Against Humanity report goes far beyond the Best Bakery case. Boud 23:56, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Teesta Setalvad seems to be reputed and has won international awards. Naturally, taking on government or powerful right wing groups would make enemies and they would counter accuse her. The report from the organization she represents is fine in my opinion, but at the same time it isn't something that the other media outlets haven't covered. User:Fuzzynumbers

The report is extremely detailed - it is not a one-page media condensation. Trying to hide this report is extremely POV. Boud 23:56, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm no supporter of the government when it comes to these riots. Neither am I a supporter of Ms. Teesta Setalvad. I'm not sure how to prove this to you because most of it is just talk but she has had political ambitions for quite some time now. Also what I said earlier, that she bribed witnesses was a direct outcome of the BJP bribing witnesses not to testify, she merely fought fire with fire. But while BJP and leaders didn't get caught, she did. So ..... --Gaurav Arora Talk 12:25, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
    • Let's leave her out. As I mentioned earlier, she doesn't add anything to what hrw and the media has reported.User:Fuzzynumbers
      • Sorry, you're being very vague here. http://www.sabrang.com/tribunal/ is a 540-page report. If someone wants to show external sources (not anonymous gossip) claiming there are errors in it, then please do so, but please do not vandalise the page by removing the link. Let other people compare the different external sources and judge for themselves.
      • It seems that on 19:55, 5 August 2005, anonymous user 69.239.198.33 removed the report. That action was POV. Please do not do that. Boud 23:56, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

money vs people: financial losses

What was the financial loss to the state and the country due to these riots? User:Fuzzynumbers (shifted to new section for clarity Boud 00:01, 15 August 2005 (UTC))

Godhra Fire

Kindly do not reference editorials as a source. They are obviously opinions of people and are not facts. This is an encyclopedia not a personal opinion airing platform. Sources from news sites and books are welcome but editorials are not NPOV. - Sojourner

But it isn't an editorial Fuzzy numbers 05:58, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Zaheera

If she is not credible after her flipflops, she can't belong to this page. Along with Zaheera, you are going to bring in the Tehalka tapes, the subject of how witnesses can be intimaded easily (as had happened with Satnam Kaur) and so on. Keep in mind that the best bakery case is not all about Zaheera, and people who are trying to insert her are basically trying to discredit the investigation of that carnage. Hardly a way to establish NPOV! Sj oblx

The girl is a victim, but at the same time a dishonest person. The Best Bakery trial and Supreme Court of India overturning the ruling of Gujarat courts belong to this page, but not Zaheera's alleged perjury or the shady MLA who was caught on tape Fuzzy numbers 01:05, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Zaheera Sheikh does deserve a mention here. Fuzzy Numbers, How can one write about the Best Bakery Case without the mention of Zahira Sheikh. User Sj, even if she is not credible then also she can belong to this page because it was on the basis of her statements that Supreme court ordered a re-trial of the case. As for the Tehelka case, it would be perfectly all right if somebody mentions it here. I am never trying to discredit the investigation of that carnage. The only point I am trying to make that an action could not be taken against the accused due to the antics of Zahira Sheikh. As for the argument that already there is an article on Best Bakery Case and so it does not fit in here, please refer to Economy of India. There you can find that for every sub heading there exists a comprehensive page.

PS: The earlier edit on Zahira Sheikh by IP 61.246.177.204 was also made by me. It happened so that my login session had timed out by the time I finished/started editing. Gaurav1146 12:12, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Aftermath

Kindly start an aftermath section someone. The violence still generates a lot of heat despite the 3 year gap between then and now. surely there have been a lot of outcomes.. 202.140.37.2 08:19, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Yeah ... Some more bomb blasts over the world [madrid, london, new delhi] by the minions of the Terrorist state of Pakistan.

Can you prove that any of these attacks were carried out by Pakistani citizens? The london bombings were carried out by 3 British citizens and a Jamaican, and the Madrid and New Delhi events are typical of the blame Pakistan brigade. Either way none of them have any relevence what so ever to the events of Gujrat.

Unverified sources cited as truth

It is deplorable that sound bytes are cited by "unnamed official at high places or in intelligence setup" and passed off as truth. This is pathetic at best and highly deplorable. Citing "unnamed sources" can be applied to any and all tragedies and rumours spinned from there. Refrain from such sources.

Overly apolegetic to Muslims?

Looks like Pakistani sock puppets are very active. Guess they are done with Mukhtaran Mai.


—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.128.227.74 (talk • contribs) . Basawala 19:21, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

ridiculously biased..

This is simply ridiculous - I've removed some particularly execrable language such as:

"who had converted to Christianity and hated Hindus to the core"

"National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India which is also known to be a bastion of communist anti-Hindus. "

"But the US doesnot find anything wrong with terrorists like Yasser Arafat, "

" the incident happened just after the afternoon prayers on a Friday, globally recognized to be an islamic prime time for terrorist attacks"

which any semi-rational person would agree are not NPoV - whould these anonymous editors please justify their changes? Nedloh 03:57, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

the rubbish continues..

the ridiculous edits continue:

"And they will know simply because they dont have a score to settle with Modi for his anti-communist leanings."

- whoever's doing this - stop.. Nedloh 04:06, 6 November 2005 (UTC)


No Eyewitness Accounts?

Let's face it some of these killings were very gruesome, the bakery fire and the shooting of the politician were important, but the worst part of the violence was carried out by hand and the article doesn't mention any of this, despite it being widely reported by human rights groups. I don't think human rights groups are biased sources, yet indian media and government sources clearly are. History is written based on first hand eyewitness accounts, yet this article which pertains to events only a few years old, has none? Even articles on the holocaust, which occured over 50 years ago will have eyewitness accounts. Also, many of the accounts taken from human rights groups are very consistent further validating their accuracy, so i see no reason why not to include them. The article also mentions the disputes regarding the train fire as well as police complicity, but i believe these topics can both be further explored, as i have found many sources of information regarding these topics, both within India and outside of it. All in all this article is fairly neutral, considering how politically charged the topic is, but it is not very informative and this is my main complaint.

NPOV

I think the page has reached an acceptable neutral viewpoint and I propose to remove the NPOV tags, if anyone supports or opposes the move please post your opinions.

--Anil


I agree, varying viewpoints are represented, and i cannot find anything non-factual in the article.

The cause of the fire in train

The central govenment report is ridiculous How on earth did a stoppedtrain which was about 500 mts away from the railway station catch fire so suddenly catch fire that 59 people died???? That too on a windless winter day?? How come the fire fighters were not able to control the blaze as it burned more than 4 coaches?? How is it possible that people from more than one coaches died due to fire injuries?? It was a well-planned attack. No way is a killing justified no way. I believe the govenment should have hunted down the guilty of the carnage rather than foment the violence. But yes the attack did happen.


RE: The cause of the fire in train

Are you kidding, they arrested over 60 people, compared to the handful they arrested for riots themselves.

If Indian firefighters struggled to put out a blaze, this would not be the first time. Basically what you are saying is that it is impossible for a train to catch on fire, but this is a very rediculous argument http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1835451.stm http://english.pravda.ru/society/2000/11/11/861.html . If a train can catch fire in a tunnel in Austria, then it can catch fire on a "windless day in the Gujarati winter" I don't think your post contains any scientific facts, the report from the forensics lab, however, does.

OK, trains can catch a fire and Indian firefighters are known to be late. But, if people inside the coach decided on their own to have a playful barbecue lunch in the compartment, What was the mob outside doing there; waiting for a share of the meal? Who answers the 2 most obvious questions that should come to anyone's mind - why didn't the poor souls jump out of the burning train and why did the train stop after all?

Removing NPOV

I have added some material to the convictions section, particularly about the sentence handed down by the fast track court today. I am removing the NPOV tag as I feel that the article is fairly neutral. If some body has objections please express your opinion in the talk page and I request people not indulge in name calling and refrain from adding material without citing neutral and NPOV sources. anil 13:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Please Stop Vandalism

Too many users are editing the pages and removing materials with out explanation. Let me remind you again that this is not a forum for accusations and please justify your edits how small they may be. anil 15:29, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Tahelka

Tehelka did not FAIL to prove that Zaheera accepted bribes. The person on the tape, boasting that he had bribed Zaheera, later accepted that it was him on the tape, but alleged that someone else could have dubbed his voice. Tehelka's sting operation, IMO was by all means, a success. If not a success, definitely not a failure.

Not NPov at all

This page will probably retain its NPoV tags for eternity... for the simple reason that emotions on this affair, as well as perceptions of being victimised and persecution are so high on all sides. the very first paragraph is wrong. It says "The riots were triggered by the an attack on ..." It took about 2 days for the full fledged rioting to start. It fails to mention that the buring of the train was not condemned in the parliament, which was in session at the time, but the riots were immediately condemned. The riots spread all across Gujarat including to rural areas... something that had not happened previously. In previous cases of sectarian violence in Gujarat, the violence was mostly confined to the city of Ahmedabad, and in a few cases to Baroda. All throughout these times, even in villages just outskirts of Ahmedabad, Muslims and Hindus were living in peace and harmony. Also bashing the BJP all the time for sectarian violence is nonsense. I will get the figures from somewhere, but the sectarian violence incidences and communal tension in general was greater when the Congress Party was holding the reins of power in Gujarat, notably under the Chief Ministership of Madhavsinh Solanki.

The riots, as they keep being called, were not foreseen by any political party. How then can the allegation be made that the BJP orchestrated the violence. I cant believe that people would say that the riots were orchestrated but the burining of the train was an accident. I will add more views here as I have time.

I am not trying to side with the hindus or the muslims, nor am I playing into the hands of the pseudo-secularists/human rights brigade. What I am trying to do is to present the complex situation and also show that people here do not hesitate to exploit human suffering for personal gains.

Gujarat Spelling in Article

In few places of this article the spelling of Gujarat is written as Gujrat. Same way Godhra is known as Godhara in official spelling. can i proceed to change spellings in the article? --Kbi911 09:50, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

  • i went ahead and corrected spelling of Gujarat and left Godhara spelling as it is as it needs discussion. --Kbi911 05:55, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

2002 Gujarat violence (

This article must give both side of the accounts. It also includes accounts of journalists, NGOs and other eye witnesses. The User:AMbroodEY is cautioned not to delete any contribution without first discussinfg the issue in discussion page of this article and after getting a consesensus.

Siddiqui 16:00, 23 February 2006 (UTC)


If there are any eye witness accounts , give citations of the same . First of all , there is a citation for the 750 muslims and 254 Hindus killed . Then , you come in and give a higher figure for the muslim deaths without citing any sources . Also , statements like "Of course , there is evidence" and then referring to some kind of a cover up by the authorities , without citing the evidence reeks of an agenda . It is ridiculuosuly POV driven .

juggernaut_1729 11:30, 24 February 2006 (IST)

Hah!... when did great Siddiqui ever ask for consensus? Dude, i've got enough stuff on you to get you banned from editing India related articles. Yeah.. Shivaji occupied Maharashtra, Aurangzeb never destroyed any temples. Dude this is a serious encyclopedia not a place for History revisonist crap like Sakastan. Your subtle vandalisms are getting tad annoying with poor me having to police you. अमेय आर्यन DaBroodey 07:31, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

juggernaut_1729 The citation is CRY, THE BELOVED COUNTRY I hope that will suffice your your objections. If you need more please ask.
अमेय आर्यन DaBroodey The Sakastan existed as documented by many historical quotations.
Siddiqui 14:11, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

A countercurrents link..... lmao. That pinko link isnt exactly neutral. I may as well cookup an article using Hindutva links. And as for Historical quotations, Shakas always called their kingdoms as Sakastan . That doesnt mean there was a Sakastan under one unified rule.

P.S In retrospect i may have been too personal with you. I'm sorry for that. But you are obviously feeding subtle-POV, half-truths on purpose or you are putting in what you believe to be the truth. You must appreciate other side's POV, such unilateral editing defeats the purpose of Wikipedia.

अमेय आर्यन DaBroodey 14:37, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

NPOV

This article has a lot of over-heated rhetoric in it ("No period in history marks the kind of butchery that was displayed against women"), and an NPOV tag is appropriate until the article can be cleaned up. Steve Casburn 07:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

URL Standard violated

All the URLs below reference each other [circular referencing] and regurgitate the same information to drive a particular POV.

Needs to be removed and each and every URL needs a check. None of them are true eye-witness accounts. The url from imc-usa is particulary standing out.

Not true eye witnesses

THe article refers to websites that are not true eye witnesses. Please refer to the following article which refers to the train carnage with immediate victims in the train accounts

http://www.indianexpress.com/ie20020228/top4.html

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.111.250.230 (talk • contribs) 04:19, 4 March 2006.


Hindus were protesting peacfully. That is democracy, not extremism

The article describes these Karsevaks as extremists. The coach that was burnt has women and children (it is a ladies coach with many young children).

They went to offer their prayers peacfully to register their protest. This is democracy - not extremism.

They were protesting that a temple should be allowed to be built at Ram Janmabhoomi (Birth place of Ram). Ram is a God for Hindus like Jesus for Christians or Mohammed for Muslims. I am sure a Christian would demand the same for a place where Jesus is believed to be born or Muslims where Mohammed is believed to be born.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.111.250.230 (talk • contribs) 04:54, 4 March 2006.

That's nice, but Wikipedia goes under a Neutral POV. The Kar Sevaks are a controversial group, and how many other places was Ram supposedly born on? Supporting a Hindu temple to be built on the exact spot that a Mosque was burnt on without building another Mosque or giving compensation is not Democracy. Basawala 19:16, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Basawala, the Muslims have destroyed numerous temples and built mosques on top of them. The Muslims took 25% of Hindu land in the form of Pakistan and Bangladesh, the lest they could do is give up a mosque. You have shown your bias by supporting the Muslims. Wikipedia's idea of "neutrality" shows its bias. It is impossible to be neutral.

Page being vandalised

68.98.183.190 has been removing/oversimplifying this page. Some one please revert back to the earlier version.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.17.149.13 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 6 March 2006.

==Removed the tag NPOV as what is not neutral was not indicated - we are writing encyclopedia from the global perspective and not for a particular country like India or Pakistan. Please discuss changes before doing massive changes. --Bhadani 17:41, 6 March 2006 (UTC) Excuse me! Muslims took 25% of Hindus land??? Listen, Muslims are natives of Indian subcontinent just that their forefathers converted to Islam. I am happy that my forefathers did convert to Islam and nothing humane law stops me being landowner if I convert to any faith. Also, remember that before Britishers, Muslims were the rulers and lanowners so its actually Hindus who have been given 75% of land in which some of the hindu terrorists are harrasssing Muslims.

Hindu "terrorists", huh? Wonder who it was who rammed planes full of people into buildings full of people. Please, if you have to express anti-Hindu hatred, there are al-qaeda forums for that. Sell crazy someplace else,Ahmed.[[[User:Subhash bose|Netaji]] 10:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)]

Update

The Banerjee committee final report has come[1].And this time,the timing of the report DID NOT coincide with elections at some places in India.That means;a lot to be updated.And the implications of the Zaheera Sheikh conviction too. Madhu Srivastava too has been indicted (the current article says "A "sting" operation carried by the magazine Tehelka failed to prove that she had accepted bribes from Srivastava Brothers"). --Sahodaran 12:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


Not a Riot

This is not a riot, i don't know how it came to be defined that way but it is clearly a massacre and not a riot:


Definition of a Riot:

A wild or turbulent disturbance created by a large number of people.


Definition of a Massacre:

the savage and excessive killing of many people.

The act or an instance of killing a large number of humans indiscriminately and cruelly.


Clearly the killings fall in the second category, it may have started out as a riot but it ended in a massacre, therefore it should be correctly called a massacre, and eyewitness accounts should be included.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.36.18.146 (talk • contribs) 00:26, 26 April 2006.

Well, to me it looks like people of Indian origin, whether NRIs or living in India are contributing a lot here - as part of the process of decentralising the control of "knowledge", this is a Good Thing, IMHO. The people closest to the events are those who are most likely to be able to make informed comments on them, or in the wikipedia spirit, quote external, verifiable sources that they judge to be reliable. Boud 21:24, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

signing comments

i've added a note up the top to ask people to sign their comments with four tildes ~~~~ and i added "unsigned" tags to people who forgot or don't yet know about tagging. It won't solve all edit conflicts, but it will help people get to know each other. Boud 21:24, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Accuracy

The death toll and other figures are greatly distorted. Will someone please change them back, since I really don't want to cause a revert war. And how were the 59 victims of the fire "mostly women and children"? That's not true. Basawala 20:17, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Accuracy (again)

I took out this piece of info:

Arundhati Roy claimed that former Congress MP Ehsan Jafri's daughter was raped by "Hindu Fundamentalists". Later, however, it was proved that she was in the US, then. Roy was unavailable for comment. Ehsaan Jafri was reported as leading a mob of radical Islamists raiding and pillaging Hindu shops and shrines. He was killed that the very day, after allegedly opening fire on Hindu children. Central Government stated in parliament "The police under the Joint Police Commissioner, DCP, rushed to the site and tried their very best to protect and shift the residents. The police succeeded in saving 180 people including women and children. But unfortunately, the lives of late Jafri and 17 others could not be saved."


This was placed in The Riots section without any reference at all, and I doubt it is true. Do not add it back to the article without a proper reference, and even then, this piece of info is way too POV. --Basawala 19:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I find it interesting that any piece of fact that presents the Hindu point of view neutrally is deemed "POV", while clearly POV sections that portray muslim terrorists and Jehadis and their liberal socialist allies as heroes is kept. People like you are more responsible for anti-Hindu pogroms than muslims.I added a link to the reference proving the claims that historical revisionists like yourself deleted. Man, you must be seriously self-hating.[[[User:Subhash bose|Netaji]] 10:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)]
What a fascinating little rant. Tragically, your 'references' actually state nothing at all along the lines of what you claim they state in your edits to the articles. One of the advantages of being 'self-hating' must be literacy. Hornplease 19:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Not really. Delusion doesn't count as literacy. In any case, this is an article on politics and hindu-bashing. Ergo, neutrality is impossible.Anf fyi, here is the excerpt from the article by Balbir Punj from Outlook India that I cite as backing of Arundhati Roy's bias and falsehood:"Reports on riots often had quotes which were falsely attributed. Incidents which did not take place were described in gory detail. And there were instances of "intellectuals", better at fiction than fact, trying to outstrip other "secularists" in a race to paint the Sangh parivar in lurid colours. No effort was too small and no lie too big for them, since the purpose was "noble"—squash the "evil" called Sangh parivar.Arundhati Roy, for instance, presented a scroll charged with damnation against the Sangh parivar in Democracy: Who's She When She's at Home? (Outlook, May 6). We all know by now that her vivid account of how former Congress MP Iqbal Ehsan Jaffri and his family were killed was a piece of fiction. Roy had begun her charter of hate with another damning description: "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".Shocked by this despicable "incident", I 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. Why is she hedging behind technical excuses?" Article here:http://www.fisiusa.org/fisi_News_items/Godhra/godhra0146.htm[[[User:Subhash bose|Netaji]] 00:15, 15 June 2006 (UTC)]
Try and read your references, please. Nowhere does Punj state that independent studies have shown the Jafri incident to be false. He merely claims "it is known" that Roy's account is 'fiction'. Your edits have been modified to reflect that. In addition, I dont think a sitting BJP MP is a reliable, independent, and unbiased source. Please try and edit in good faith. If you suffer under the belief that the subject of the article is inherently POV, please take it to WP:AFD, instead of making disruptive edits. Also, consider signing your comments with four tildas. Thanks. Hornplease 08:58, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Try to read my actual edits please. I never wrote that Punj said that the Jafri incident was false. Punj, however, casts doubt on Roy's recountings of the incodent, as well as points out her questionable political and anti-Hindu motives. Personally, I DO NOT think that a communist hindu-hater like Roy is reliable, independent and unbiased as well. However, I will not say so in the article without saying that Roy denies this accusation, so as to maintain NPOV. I suggest you maintain the same NPOV. My edits have not been disruptive, because I have not deleted anything. Only added. You did the deleting, which is considered vandalism. I have been signing with four tildas.[[[User:Subhash bose|Netaji]] 09:32, 15 June 2006 (UTC)]
I do not think an extensive discussion of Punj vs Roy is appropriate for this page. The current revision reads: "However, several accounts of the riots are contested as biased and "politically motivated". Previous claims by Teesta Setalvad of the death toll have been demonstrated as exaggerated. Arundhati Roy has made several claims about the details of the situation in Gujarat at the time, particularly regarding the murder of former Congress MP Iqbal Ehsan Jaffri. BJP MP Balbir Punj, writing in Outlook India, has criticized her recounting of the events as 'fiction'." I think thats more than enough information. Since we are linking to Punj's article, we do not need to recap it in so much detail. I personally agree with you that Roy is not a completely unbiased source either. However, it seems you added her to the article to begin with, in order to knock her down, so I dont know what you're getting at. That is a bit disruptive, in my book. Please discuss all further changes on the talk page first. Also, if you're signing with four tildas, I cant understand why there's no direct link to your userpage. I fancy you might want to get that seen to. Hornplease 09:42, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Film on Gujarat Riots

Subhash Chandra Bose , one of the editors has been removing the following link.

This is a copy of the film available on Google Videos.The film is made by a Hindu Cinematographer.

Final Solutionis a film on Gujarat Riots banned in India

This is a scholarly film on Gujarat riots and has won following awards: Awards Wolfgang Staudte award & Special Jury Award (Netpac), Berlin International film festival (2004)

Humanitarian Award for Outstanding Documentary, HongKong International film festival (2004)

Montgolfiere d’Or (Best Documentary) & Le Prix Fip/Pil’ du Public (Audience award), Festival des 3 Continents at Nantes (France; 2004)

Best Film, Freedom of Expression awards by Index on Censorship (UK; 2005)

Silver Dhow, Zanzibar International film festival (2004)

Best documentary, Big MiniDV (USA; 2004)

Special Jury Award, Karafest (Karachi; 2004)

Special Jury Award, Film South Asia (Kathmandu; 2005)

Human Rights Award, Docupolis (Barcelona; 2005)

Special Jury Mention, Munich Dokfest (2004)

Special Jury Mention, Bangkok International filmfest (2005)

Nominee, Best Foreign Film, Grierson Awards (UK; 2004)

Best Documentary/Short Film, Apsara Awards(India;2006)

Special Award by NRIs for a Secular and Harmonious India (NRI-SAHI), NY-NJ, USA (2004)

Special Award by AFMI, USA-Canada (2004)

Special Jury Award, Worldfest 2005 (Houston)

Special Jury Award, Mar Del Plata Independent film festival (2005; Argentina)

Screened at over 80 international film festivals.

It has been mentioned in BBC's review

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/storyville/final-solution.shtml

Most of the accolades you cited above are awarded by left wing bastions. You may add the link if you wish, provided you also add that the content and veracity of the film is disputed (it's basically along the same lines as the palestinian propaganda films exposed in the "Pallywood" documentary). Otherwise, I'll start adding "Google Video films" exposing muslim atrocities in kashmir in the relevant wikipedia article to maintain NPOV. Also, the term "Final Solution" is used to denote the holocaust of European Jewry, and to use it in any other way is demeaning to Jews, and thus a film about muslims by that name should not be cited out of respect for Jewish sensibilities.(Netaji 16:40, 21 June 2006 (UTC))
Yeah please give us the URL to a film on Kashmir. Last time i cheked the name of the article was Gujarat. Giving a video on Kashmir really keeps a NPOV (sic) K ganju 11:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Read my post properly. I said IN THE RELEVANT WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE, NOT HERE. I'll open up a new article called "Islamic Genocides in Kashmir" if necessary. I'll bet you anti-hindu haters would not like THAT, would you? No, you're only content to applaud muslims for depopulating Hindu land. The only thing that means for you is that your throat will be the last one that muslims will slit open. (Netaji 17:21, 22 June 2006 (UTC))
So do it. And let a link to a film about the 2002 Gujarat violence be put on the '2002 Gujarat violence page'. I have no problem with you starting an article about violence in Kashmir. Its a encyclopedia. Put all the info where it is necessary, with a NPOV. (And if you insist on undisputed numbers on the numbers of deaths in Gujarat, get undisouted statistics for the number of deaths in Kashmir). Also, if you have nothing constructive to say in the last 3 lines of your post, then don't say it.K ganju 10:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
      • We dont know why the author chose that name - probably there is a parallel.Both events are genocides
    • Wikipedians are no fools and they know the depth of your sensibilities for Jews.You have been promoting your personal POV and deleting facts published in national and international newsmagazines.

Who are you to classify the International Film jury as Left bastion.It goes on to prove further that you are a right wing Xenophobe who is promoting the pro Fascist Hindutva agenda. Your fiction goes on as fact and the facts presented by people on middle ground you want to add the tag - Veracity disputed.

Subhash Bose would be turning in his grave - if he has one - to find his name sake promoting and supporting hatred.

Please go on and add the Kashmir links if you find it is pertinent to Wikipedia.It will only help people in identifying the two sides of the story and they can judge themselves.Truth is universal and longer lasting than your Islamophobic propganda.

Islamophobic?
      • Well, best I recall hindutva elements did not ram planes into buildings, behead journalists or anyone on television, bomb subways in London, Madrid or anywhere, or ethnically cleanse 250,000 people in Darfur (as of the last count), or massacre Hindus in Kashmir.
      • Hindutva elements don't have schools, madrassas and qutbas that teach hate ahead of math.
      • Hindutva elements don't infiltrate civilized societies like the United States and secretly send millions of dollars to Lashkar-e-Toiba, Hezbollah, Hamas, Fatah, al-Qaeda or whever to kill non-muslims.

Subhash Bose would be pinning a medal on my chest for exposing the muslim terrorists for who they really are. Furthermore, to compare Godhra with the holocaust is typical Islamofascist propaganda (all the while you people secretly deny the holocause like Ahmadinejad does and Arafat did). The death toll of the holocaust was 60 lakh (6 million) Jews. The death toll of Godhra was 3000 terrorist jihadis and their sympathizers. Big difference,see? On, and I know that muslims find loyal allies in left wing liberals (like the organizations above) and self-hating hindus(like you, maybe). Like I said, you may post the link if you wish, but then I have evidence to balance it out with an endless litany of muslim genocides and atrocities in Gujarat itself. The truth about Islam is something you muslim-lovers don't want on wikipedia. Netaji 16:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

    • Thanks for the comments.I appreciate your point of view.But keep that to yourself.Wikipedia does not need a single sided version as you propose
I have been. I haven't added any such POV statements on the article. In fact, if you look at the article history, I have REMOVED POV bias even from hindus. I merely want the article to present a balanced and neutral point of view, not become a vessel for Islamofascist propaganda. It's very easy to sympathize with the muslims when you're sitting in an ideological ivory tower and haven't met or seen any in bulk. Please don't let wikipedia get reduced to a POV of gutter multiculturalism. Always present all points of view and they will cancel each other out and generate NPOV. Thank you. (Netaji 15:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC))
    • Good, this video goes to the main story.Put another of your source to cancel it and let people form their own opinions.
      • You didn;t add that the content is disputed. The film "Final Solution" may be well-reviewed, but the source to which you linked (Google Video) has no official or schoarly standing. There is no way to know if the content of the video is really the film "Final Solution", or has been edited by biased radical muslim organizations using non-linear video editing software like avidemux or kino and false and misleading information added to the content of the original film. Until you ADD a link section stating that the film is a criticism of Godhra retaliation and is POV, it stays out. Furthermore, WHY WAS THE FILM BANNED IN INDIA? India is a free society with complete freedom of the press, and with a government that bends over to the muslim vote bank every chance it gets. There has to be a REASON why it was 'banned'. The reason being that the film content is DISPUTED even by the MUSLIM-SYMPATHETIC congress government. (Netaji 01:22, 24 June 2006 (UTC))
        • It is useless banging into a wall - Your stand is totally biased and full of your own personal fascist POV and you have been making edits into articles with the sole purpose of eliminating evidences against the BJP and Hindutva point of views.World knows the ways and workings of democracy in India as well as the Hinduta brigade and if one agrees to the contention that India is a free society with complete freedom of press you will be delighted to note that the ban has recently been lifted.

I have personally seen the entire movie as a DVD and can assure you it is the exact copy, you have been trying to fool around around the people by saying that and imposing your personal agenda of removing articles and evidences against the BJP but it is useless.You are wasting your own time and Wikipedia's trust on its editors.A synopsis of the film is available in pdf on this link http://www.rakeshfilm.com/downloads/FSsynopsis.pdf

Why should we believe your assurances? You're just a random ip address to us? Do you have any academic qualifications? Do you have a background in film studies? Aren't you, in fact, a muslim? Are you in a position to judge the accuracy of the film or authenticate the veracity of the source? For all I know, you're Osama bin-laden himself! You've provided a link that reviews the film. You haven't provided any proof (beyond your anecdotal evidence) that the film to which you have linked is, in reality, the film you claim is the "Final Solution" documentary. I have challenged the source (Google Video), the burden of proof is on you. Link to a legitimate scholarly site that contains the film. There has to be one. There is no shortage of hindu-haters among white scholars, or their pinko moonbat lackeys in India. Surely some hindu-hater like Wendy Doniger, Deepa Mehta or Arundhati Roy has a copy of the film on their website. Find it. Then put it up. Or better yet, rip your "DVD", do an md5sum, get it authenticated by the nearest department of film studies, get a signed, notarized copy attesting to the authenticity of the film, scan it, put it up on flickr or something, link to it, then link to your rip. Hindu haters should work to express their hate. Bear in mind that ripping dvd's is a copyright violation.(Netaji 09:24, 24 June 2006 (UTC))

Random Vandalism

Anonymous users have been randomly vandalising this article (see history), adding absurd rubbish (like a muslim death toll of 750,000) and adding islamist-sympathetic POV stuff. How do I go about asking moderators to restrict edits from new or anon users? (Netaji 16:44, 21 June 2006 (UTC))

The tone of the article

Seems it is being written by Narendra Modi's defense advocates,underplays the violence and governmental inaction as well as propogation of violence in many instances.

One can argue that the article was previously written by left-wing negationists and pseudosecularist self-hating Indians. If you find anything specific in the article that is objectionable, please post it below and it will be looked into. Plus, suggest changes to present the socialist point of view, but DO NOT DELETE ANYTHING, THAT IS VANDALISM!! You may add sections called 'criticism of BJP/RSS regardinf riots' or something. (Netaji 21:58, 29 June 2006 (UTC))
Deleting something inaccurate is not vandalism. Please check your terms. Refresh your memory with WP:Vandalism and WP:BOLD. Hornplease 23:40, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
What inncauracies? the only things edited are POV statements made by the liberal left. No verified facts were removed.Please check the dosage on your intravenous drip. Plus, Shri Modi has been mentioned but a few times in the entire article, and always as a relentless liberal moonbat screed against the great visionary, so how can this be biased in defense of him? You people might want to refill your prescriptions.(Netaji 10:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC))
      • Subhash , Mate , You seem to have a vested interest and a distinct POV.You autoproclaim that you are slef loving Indian and that you are right wing .So where is the balanced POV?
        • Ahmed, 'mate'. You seem to have a POV biased towards terrorists. Your edits are dripping in fawning praise of people who assault Hindus with boulders and bombs. Where is YOUR balanced POV, Ahmed?
      • Hi, Did they say 2000 Terrorists were killed in Gujarat anywhere in media or did BJP claim that
Subhash, please observe WP:NPA, or you will be reported to an administrator for repeatred violations. Hornplease 17:34, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Please extend the same courtesy to the anonymous user (Netaji 19:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC))
I certainly am doing so. However, the main personal attacks on this page seem to b from you. Hornplease 05:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Reason for last revert

The present revert has been made by myself owing to the extremely pejorative, libelous, and slanderous statements made on the article by user lkadvani. His language is extremely racist, anti-Hindu and points to an agenda of defamation. I have reverted to an earlier edit endorsed by a wikipedia admin. (Pusyamitra Sunga 14:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC))

You should remember the last comment you got from Admin - I certainly am doing so. However, the main personal attacks on this page seem to b from you. Hornplease 05:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Where have I made any personal attacks in this section? Please point out. LkAdvani and Anwar Sadat have made RACIST and ETHNOCENTRIC remarks that are libelous and slanderous. That should be a bigger problem, or don't us 'nigger Hindus' get that much credence? (Pusyamitra Sunga 14:53, 10 July 2006 (UTC))

Pussymitra Edits

No body has called Hindus niggers except you.People have commented only on fascist ideologies of which International Human Rights organsiations have commented too.Narendra Modi's Visa was revoked due to his policies by a versy democratic country USA where you live Subhash Bose,Netaji ,Pusyamitra Sunga

Modi's visa was revoked due to left-wing bullying and bemoaning. The US govt did it merely to shut them up, not that Shri Modi really cares.

Now, as for my problems with the article as it is now:

  • " Hindu extremists called Kar Sevaks"

The Kar Sevaks are a controversial group, but you have provided no proof that they are 'extremist'. They are not listed by any official government or international body as an 'extremist' group (as opposed to, say Hamas, which has)

And the login is spelled "Pusyamitra". Please don;t resort to insults as it undermines your credibility (Pusyamitra Sunga 15:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC))

Let us stick to the International news site.Seraching BBC on Karsevaks we get: [2] which states that they "].Obviously they had not assembled in Ayodhya to remain moderates and agitate peacefully.They had extremist views.In journalistic parlance you need not necessarily need a state to declare someboady as extremist.

Journalists rarely maintain NPOV. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a mouthpiece of liberal media.(Pusyamitra Sunga 17:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC))
I am sorry but I fail to understand why 99% of the worlds's jouranlists from reputed publications can together be wrong while you are right

Or do you think they should be called as Hindu extremists - suggest an alternative term that explains what they have done so far?

I can do so easily. "Aggressive social activists". That's very accurate and completely NPOV.(Pusyamitra Sunga 17:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC))

What Social activism have they done.From all the reports they have been very violent with sloganeering against many sections of the society.To say they were "aggressive anti social elements" could be an understatement. Ya..they see incorrectly your name it spells as Pusyamitra Sunga..

Kar Sevaks - Difference between Hindu Kar Sevaks and Sikh Kar Sevaks

Kar Sevaks helped rebuild the Harmandir Sahib (a sikh holy shrine, not Hindu) after the massacre during the emergency.
1. This is a wild guess
2. Emergency took place in 1970s while reconstruction of Akal Takht Sahib took place in 1984-85 after operation Blue Star - I remember it well , perhaps you were not born even.
3. There is a difference between Sikh Kar Sevaks and Hindu Kar Sevaks - Kar Seva (Holy Work or Service) is well enshrined in Sikh scriptures and tradition; while it does not exist in Hindu scriptures at least by that name.Sikh Kar Sevaks went on to repair the damage done to their shrine after the Indian army damaged it extensively in the famous operation Blue Star while Hindu Kar Sevaks themselves destroyed a standing monument of another faith Babri Masjid in Ayodhya and have made many trips on the calls by Vishwa Hindu Parishad to erect a Hindu temple in its place - even though a court case is there to resolve the dispute.
4. Sikh Kar Seva preceded Hindu Kar Seva by many years and the Hindutva organisations adopted that name as it became much famous in the national media due to the events in Punjab.I am pretty sure had this term not been in the national media by the 1980s the Hindutva miscreants would have been short of an innocent word to describe their activities.
5.This again proves Pusyamitra aka Nateji aka Subhash aka UOT Austin IPs that there are valid reasons not to allow someone with biased knowledge edit the Wikipedia.Has the lifelong ban on Wikipedia lifted for you?

Rushdie 10:51, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Sucking up to the Sikhs now are we? Too bad, won't work. We (Hindus and Sikhs) all know the truth about the 'religion of peace', after Mumbai blasts. Now there's hell coming.
Oh, and again, wild claims with no backing from Salmaan bhai.The phrases "Kar" and "Sevak" are both Sanskrit. Last time I checked, Sanskrit dates back to Vedic Hinduism, about 4000 years before Sikhism even existed.
Plus, the muslim word 'Allah' is stolen from the Hebrew word 'Eloha'. As a wise man once said, those with glass houses shouldn't throw stones at others...
Finally, wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. This is not your precious Mecca. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.83.131.125 (talk • contribs) 12:18, 16 Jul 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and let me enlighten you to a simple truth. Hindutva is not fascist. It does not satisfy the litmus test for fascism. Fascism is a left wing ideology (Nazi stood for National SOCIALISM; There's a reason for the 'SOCIALISM'). No right-wing ideology can ever be fascist. Hindutva advocates small decentralized givernment, Nazis and Mussolini advocated the precise opposite (HUGE government). In fact, the purpose of all conservatove parties is to curtail the spread of fascism, which invariably comes from the left. Congress people are far more likely to be fascists than BJP/RSS people. Indira gandhi was a true fascist in every sense of the word, and she committed far more atrocities than Shri Modi has. Yet India venerates her like a pack of TV-blinded mules. What a farce!(Pusyamitra Sunga 17:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC))
Fascism is not currently used as a term denoting a form of Political system but rather the methods of containing individual freedom, extreme nationalism and often characterised by personality cult

1. often Fascism a. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government. 2. Oppressive, dictatorial control. So a movement having one of these charactersicts could be classified as one or having those tendencies.

Actually I agree with this definition. However, Hindutva people have done none of those things.
  • No centralization (power distributed among regional political parties). Congress was centralized under Indira Gandhi
  • No socio-economic restrictions (Hindutva prefers capitalism to communism, which the Comgress touts)
  • Nationalism, yes sure. Hindutva is a national liberation movement. Racism? Nah! Racism is a European ideology. We're all the same race in India. Hindus, muslims, sikhs, Jains, whatever. This is about religion and the future of Indian civilization. Race has nothing to do with it. Don;t cloud the issue with meaningless tripe.
  • Hindutva is no more fascist than Zionism. Only anti-Semites and terrorists say that Zionism is fascism.
Pussya, I am sorry but your rants do not provide any information that can shed light on "Kar sevaks".It is just the normal anti Muslim and Pro Hindutva propoganda which we have now got used to on these pages..I am still wondering how you are able to write even though you are officially under suspension.

Rushdie 20:57, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Remove this article?

This is absolutely the worst article I have ever seen on Wikopedia. Much of the commentary drips with POV. Grammar, spelling, and references are all a mess. This is a shame because there must be a lot of hits resulting from the Mumbai train bombings. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Natephipps (talk • contribs) 23:07, 13 Jul 2006 (UTC)

That's a very bold statement for your first edit on Wikipedia.Is that the ghost of user Subhash Bose
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lkadvani (talk • contribs) 15:31, 14 Jul 2006  (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2002_Gujarat_riots/Archive_3&oldid=607965402"