Talk:Hindu terrorism

Saffron Terror Debunked

As per investigation by Times Now, the whole saffron terror conspiracy was floated by the UPA government. This is a conspiracy and has no backing anymore. This article therefore needs drastic and significant changes to match the reality as supported by the new investigations.

Reference Links

india.com

timesnow.tv

Times of India

NDTV

Kushagr.sharma1 (talk) 16:09, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

There is nothing called "Saffron Terror". It was a conspiracy. Please, either add that it was a conspiracy by the UPA government or kindly remove this article. This does not give the full truth and it is very misleading. Ananya sastry (talk) 17:35, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

My link to a data-driven article in Open Magazine debunking "Saffron/Hindu terror" based on a detailed analysis from the Global Terrorism Database was reverted frivolously. This is one of the few authoritative pieces of academic stature on this topic vs anecdotal accounts. The claim was that the article does not call it a myth, while that is the very title of the article. A full revert of this very relevant reference shows bad faith This needs to be restored. Puck42 (talk) 19:14, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

The article is best classified as an opinion piece. "Pieces of academic stature" are the ones that are published in peer review journals where the analysis and data sources can be appropriately whetted. --regentspark (comment) 19:55, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I following article in fact baser report by IndiaTV and its journalist Rajat Sharma. I am sure it will qualifies. Please take a look.

http://www.indiatvnews.com/news/india-samjhauta-express-blast-how-officials-connived-to-ensure-prime-accused-pakistani-national-was-let-off-despite-evidence-387479

Times of India also published regarding this calling it cover up by UPA government.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/samjhauta-express-blasts-upa-cover-up-questioned/articleshow/59261489.cms

Clean Chit to Sadhvi Pragya and Indresh Kumar by NIA

http://www.financialexpress.com/india-news/ajmer-blast-case-nia-files-closure-report-against-sadhvi-pragya-and-indresh-kumar/614070/

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/nia-clears-sadhvi-pragya-thakur-indresh-kumar-of-ajmer-dargah-blast/story-Wd5MsSz3Lq5knsBJ4cLBGP.html

http://www.news18.com/news/india/ajmer-blast-case-nia-files-closure-report-clean-chit-to-sadhvi-pragya-1367820.html

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/nia-closes-ajmer-case-against-sadhvi-pragya-indresh-kumar-4598327/

Edit to 2002 Gujarat riots

Why is more text being added about the train attack than the actual subject of the section? [1] --NeilN ^{talk to me} 04:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Our article on Godhra train burning says "The event is widely perceived as the trigger for the riots that followed." El_C 11:47, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@El C: Yes, but the same article suggests that the description is disputed; and it is the same sources which say that the Gujarat violence was planned, and not a spontaneous reaction, that use Saffron Terror in that context. Now the article does not reflect this, agreed, but that is not reason for using it as a coatrack for stuff about what triggers violence against Muslim people. Vanamonde (talk) 11:54, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Note that our article on 2002 Gujarat riots also says the same thing: "The burning of a train in Godhra on 27 February 2002, which caused the deaths of 58 Hindu pilgrims karsevaks returning from Ayodhya, is believed to have triggered the violence." El_C 11:58, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: I don't know enough about the event to comment—but I hope your claim has it's basis on reliable sources that represent due weight. El_C 12:01, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

I suppose my question is whether this article should mirror our other two articles more specific to the event (should Godhra train burning be mentioned?). El_C 12:04, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@El C: I don't have an issue with the turn burning being mentioned but having more text about that event than the riots themselves seems problematic. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:28, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

I suggest that we get rid of the subsection on the 2002 Gujarat riots. It wasn't a terrorist incident in the normal sense of the term. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:30, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

(ec) I think it is ok to mention the train burning but further down in the paragraph. Perhaps "The riots, which are believed to have been triggered by the Godhra train burning incident, are part of ...". The edit by the simple human is obvious POV.--regentspark (comment) 12:33, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

This article isn't about terrorism. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:35, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Right, it's about "acts of violence motivated by Hindu nationalism." I think regentspark has the right idea. El_C 12:43, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:58, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

NIA clears Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur to apply for discharge in case

anyone up to update the article with this latest information. --Swami16 (talk) 11:41, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

References

Samjhauta Express blast: How officials connived to ensure prime accused Pakistani national was let off despite evidence to nail him

I request the editors to rewrite the page after reading following report by Rajat Sharma who is a journalist from India TV.

http://www.indiatvnews.com/news/india-samjhauta-express-blast-how-officials-connived-to-ensure-prime-accused-pakistani-national-was-let-off-despite-evidence-387479

S Gurumurthy also Exposed Pak’s Hand Behind Samjhauta Blast in 2013 with Crucial Rebuttals

http://rightactions.in/2017/06/21/see-how-s-gurumurthy-exposed-paks-hand-behind-samjhauta-blast-in-2013-with-crucial-rebuttals/

There is also Times Now News Hour Debate over this issue.

Did UPA 'Discharge' Pakistan's Terrorist? | The Newshour Debate (20th June)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO_8OzYcEgI

--Swami16 (talk) 19:26, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

References