Modi gets B*slapped

Although you may have already seen it in the comments on the sidebar, this is an important enough issue that I’m elevating it to a full post. A spokesman at the US Embassy in New Delhi announced that Chief Minister Modi has had his Visa DENIED [see previous posts 1,2]. This is a huge victory for grass roots activism (props to CAG) and I hope it will serve as a great example of Hindu/Muslim unity within the U.S. From Rediff:

The US has denied visa to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi to visit the country, apparently because of Gujarat riots.

Modi has been denied diplomatic visa and his tourist/business visa already granted has also been revoked as per the US Immigration and Nationality Act, a spokesman of the US Embassy in New Delhi said.

The CM was to pay a five-day visit to the US from March 20.

Modi is expected to address a press conference at 1400 IST to give his reactions.

“We can confirm that Chief Minister of Gujarat state Narendra Modi applied for, but was denied, the diplomatic visa under Section 214 (b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act because he was not coming for the purpose that qualified for a diplomatic visa,” the spokesman said.

His tourist/business visa was revoked under Section 212 (a) (2) (g) of the Act, which makes any government official who was responsible for, or directly carried out, at any time, particularly severe violations of religious freedom, ineligible for visa,” he added.

Assuming that the U.S. Embassy in India was working under orders from the Bush Administration, this means that Bush and the State Department are officially recognizing Modi as someone who committed a “violation of religious freedom,” thus acknowledging the validity of the State Department’s own assessment. If Karen Hughes is as on the ball as we expect her to be, then she better “use” this.

The other issue here that everyone seems to be overlooking is the predicament of the AAHOA. Indian Americans own an obscenely disproportionate number of hotels in this country in relation to the percentage of our population. There is SO MUCH untapped political muscle (or “capital”) there that was completely wasted on misguided efforts to bring over Modi. Now the AAHOA have been made to looks like fools.

In my opinion the last few weeks have also highlighted a generational difference between first and second generation Indians Americans. Most of the hotel owners are Hindu Indian immigrants whereas (I’m willing to bet) most of the people protesting Modi and working to thwart his entrance were Muslims, as well as the sons and daughters of those Hindu Indian immigrants, who were born (or at least raised) in America. For the most part, our parents that emigrated from India are politically apathetic at best and complacent at worst. I bet you (or maybe I just hope) that there were quite a few dinner conversations over the past few weeks between young Indian Americans, and their hotel owning parents who didn’t see what the big deal was. Whether I am correct in my assumptions or not, it was still great seeing Hindus and Muslims in America work together in order to thwart Modi.

Note: DarkDaysAhead has more on this latest news.

195 thoughts on “Modi gets B*slapped

  1. You mean like with the American Indians?

    Try this century, thanks.

    Or lynched Black people?

    Tulia court clears 38 blacks

    Or more recently, when the U.S. just keeps outsourcing it?

    Are you seriously claiming moral equivalence? Gujarat was like the Rape of Nanking on a smaller scale. Show me where that happened in the U.S. in the last 20 years.

    How much traction would CAG have gotten in India? You’re working with CAG, it won, and now you’re conflicted about it. You can get lost in hand-wringing, but it’s really, really simple: the U.S. denied an entry visa to a murderer. Celebrate it, like Preeta Bansal. Few policy decisions are so clear.

  2. Al Mujahid, What a hypocritical behaviour of describing the horrors of a horrific event that fits your own political agenda. Thats why I posted my comments about the selective outrage which is getting outraged when it fits ones own world view.

    As I noted in my comment above 15% of actual fatalities were Hindu (apart from the people burnt alive in the train). I am sure the above story could be descriving anyone of the Hindus just as much as it describes a muslim persons situation.

    I bet most people (the selective Outrage people) dont know the fact about the make up of casualties …..

    Selective outrage and demonizing also serves another purpose… It gives a pass to every other kind of atorcious events and persons. The same way smoking is demonized to an extent that every other kind of excess gets a pass (such as over eating) …

  3. Dear RC, You accuse me of selective outrage. Ha! Did you even read the excerpt which I posted above. The excerpt talks about atrocities against women. It does not even mention Muslims. So the problem here is not my selective outrage, but your selective reading. In the link I posted about the Gujarat riots from HRW, it talks about atrocities against both Hindus and Muslims !

  4. Saurav, The atrocities against native americans happened a century back. Public lynchings havnt happened for decades now. Please cite some more current evidence for equating American Justice with Indian Justice. It is laughable that you would purport to equate the Indian Justice System and Law and Order situation to American Justice System.

  5. Al mujahid, US judicial system have been evolving for more than 200 yrs and still it was not able to bring justice till a couple of decades ago.whereas Indian judicial system is young, just 50 yrs.

    daycruise “A basic part of Christianity is spreading the gospel of God. According to the New Testament this is through your actions and preaching the word to others. What is the problem here?”

    Don’t you think Jesus would have been labeled as a “SPAMER”, if he did the same thing in this internet age.My point was every religion says it is good to die for the religion, including christianity and hinduism.All these books were manipulated to the need’s of that time.You don’t have to necessarily follow a set of advice that was written for people who lived 2000 yr ago.

  6. Dear Al Mujahid, The HRW might say that the atrocities against women were both for Hindus and Muslims, but that did not reflect in the piece that you posted here. Lets get real, you wanted to shock us about the brutality and viciousness of the riots by not mentioning that the victim could be Hindu as well. But I respect the fact that you agree on principle that the horrific events description could be for Hindus or Muslims.

  7. Somewhere up there, I think it was KXB who wrote: Is this the impression you got when talking to thousand of Pandit families living in squalor in Jammu refugee camps?

    This is not about KXB in particular, but I often wonder how many people who say this have actually visited those Jammu refugee camps. (I have). (Also in Delhi).

    Manish, thank you for asking this: Which is the greater insult to India: a canceled business trip, or that a mass murderer is in elected office?

  8. Qoute “Manish, thank you for asking this: Which is the greater insult to India: a canceled business trip, or that a mass murderer is in elected office?”

    • There is another a mass murderer in office, Jagdish Tytler. (but I guess that does not count ..because like I said before … its not “sexy” to protest the massacre of Sikhs !!)

    • So kudos to selectively outraged people, it will help others if you publish your criteria of selection on which to get “outraged” (sarcasm) .. I have a few guesses but I dont want to judge !!

    • How about protesting mass murderer here in the US who is presiding over the killing of 100,000 Iraqis (Johns Hopkins estimate .. a conservative one) or that does not fit the definition of “genocide” ???

  9. Yay! The comments are open again!

    One thing I alway notice about people who claim “selective outrage” is that they don’t seem to ever press their own claims. By which I mean, if you think that Jagdish Tytler (whoever that is…I really don’t know nearly enough about the amritsar massacre) has done as much wrong as Modi, then you’re free to organize other people and press claims against him. If you do it and your claims are legitimate, I think you would find fairly quickly that you’re forced into an alliance with folks like Campaign Against Genocide because all of these issues tend to be linked at heart. One alternative is to never object to any wrongdoing, and the other is to build alliances with people who, at heart, object to all wrongdoing.

    Your choice, but the latter gives you a lot more credibility.

  10. manish,

    Remember John “death squad” negreponte who repeatedly gets promoted to top diplomatic positions? It looks like central americans’s life do not count in your scheme of things. Are central americans low life?

  11. Manish,

    here’s the link on death squad negreponte. It’s not in US but do you think it is less immoral to kill innocents in honduras than in usa? The link is below:

    http://www.nybooks.com/articles/14485

    Saurav,

    It’s Delhi massacre. Several people who are outraged about Modi tend to equivocate on the sikh mass murder by congress in 1984. May be selective outrage is a basic human trait.

  12. There is another a mass murderer in office, Jagdish Tytler. (but I guess that does not count ..because like I said before … its not “sexy” to protest the massacre of Sikhs !!) [RC]

    Several people who are outraged about Modi tend to equivocate on the sikh mass murder by congress in 1984. May be selective outrage is a basic human trait. [ab]

    Ever think before speaking? Re-read this:

    it’s a national shame India hasn’t carried out its own garbage in either Gujarat or the Sikh riots… I guarantee if 1,000 people were assassinated in organized murders, someone would be convicted in the U.S. In India we vote the culprits into power (Tytler and Modi).

    And:

    How about protesting mass murderer here in the US who is presiding over the killing of 100,000 Iraqis… [RC]

    It looks like central americans’s life do not count in your scheme of things. [ab]

    You guys didn’t mention Rwanda, Bosnia, the Holocaust, the Mughal invasions, Genghis Khan, the Crusades, Cain and Abel, and Og the caveman smacking Ug. Therefore, you must support genocide. (This concludes a demonstration of your logic.)

  13. Manish,

    You brought up america’s role in the last twenty years and I mentioned the role of american right wing politics in central america. I do not understand why you should be defensive about right wing politics which has caused great harm to minorities here and people abroad.

    You also mentioned tulia and it’s unfortunate that you seem to think less of sufferings of blacks here. Vanita Gupta who handled the tulia case mentioned that what happened in tulia is just the tip of the iceberg. The criminal justice system is a cruel joke on minorities and especially blacks. Your rationale is hardly a consolation for the blacks who are languishing in prisons. The fact of the matter is right wing politics suck big time for minorities and backward classes everywhere.

  14. Al Mujahid, If I were Sec. of state not only I would NOT have revoked visa for Modi (inspite of not being a fan of Modi), I would also have not dis-respected Iran and its democracy. I would treat Arab and Muslim nations with the same respect that I would any western European nations.

    I would NOT have been extremely hypocritical by calling Syria to pull troops out of Lebanon while representing a country that has ILLEGALLY occupied a once soverien nation of Iraq.

    So I would have done a lot of things, but I am just a poor reident alien. Cant even vote.

  15. It’s Delhi massacre. Several people who are outraged about Modi tend to equivocate on the sikh mass murder by congress in 1984. May be selective outrage is a basic human trait.

    Like I said, I know way too little about it. How about pointing me to some information, so I can condemn what the government did with as much zeal as you have 🙂

    In any case, I’ll reiterate that while you’re probably right that “selective outrage is a basic human trait”, that doesn’t make it logically defensible. So why don’t you abandon yours and I’ll abandon mine and we can together condemn the United States for its Latin American and Iraq policy (and many, many other things) as well as condemn Modi, the BJP, and the Indian polity for their handling of the Gujarat massacre (among other things).

    And then we can talk about what it actually means that Modi lost his visa and how to advance a reality of a more decent, safer, and more equitable South Asia? That is what you’re politically interested in, right?

  16. Manish, the problem with the guys who jump up and say “You didn’t condemn the Sikh massacre in 1984, so shut up about Gujarat now” is this: they want to hold that up to make the case that Gujarat was no big deal. (The wholesome BJP did exactly that even in their resolution condeming the visa rejection). And they don’t like being told that Gujarat was indeed a big deal. A huge, stinking, tragic, atrocious deal that is a permanent blot on my country. Like 1984 was.

    I’ve always believed that the massacre of Sikhs in 1984 was the worst crime in our history — that is, if I have to actually make a choice among horrible crimes. And I also believe that it is our failure to punish the Bhagats and Sajjan Kumars of 1984 that fuel subsequent crimes like Bombay 1992/3, Gujarat 2002. It fuels the Modis and Thackerays who know this country will never find the will to punish them, the Advanis and Vajpayees and Raos who wink at them.

    And in your listing of atrocities all the way back to caveman Og, I’m appalled to note that you didn’t mention the Roman assault on Carthage. You closet pinko Roman-lover.

  17. Saurav, The only problem I have with the term “genocide” is that .. who defines it??

    While CAG is all over Gujarat, there is not even a mention to 1984 and the people who were indicted (but never convicted) of it … It just smells political !!!

    Dont get me wrong, I dont want to be-little your or anyone’s real concern about horrors of Gujarat, and I think it is sincere, but I just want to draw attention of concerned Indian diasporic youngsters to not get used into something that smells politically motivated.

    I also wouldnt be presumtious to suggest that you cant make that decision for yourself. Just pointing out a few facts that might come in handy when making that decision.

    How about CAG take take up a concerted effort to make the US sign on the the International Criminal Court ??

  18. RC, You do realize that the Delhi Massacre happened in 84, when most of the people who post on here were less than 10 years old. Gujarat massacre however was witnessed by us in all its macabre glory over the internet. Btw why is that you are so outraged over the Delhi massacre but fail to mention the Bangladeshi massacre of 71 in which more than a million Bengalis were slaughtered by the Pakistani Army. I guess in 84 when people were expressing their outrage over the Delhi massacre you must be reminding them of forgetting the Bangla massacre of 71. I dont know if you were alive in 71 to reprimand people over selective outrage of the Bangla massacre while ignoring the partition massacres.

  19. The U.S. Dept. of State didn’t go through this much reasoning when they denied the visa. If they did, they’d most likely lose their argument when they began debating which genocide was worse…

    Gujarat was bad and so was ’84, ’92, ’48, ’71, Iraq, the killing fields, Pinochet, etc.. I think we can agree on that and just because someone doesn’t raise their voice about ’84 et al doesn’t mean they should back off the Modi-argument now, especially since comparing any of those things to this, given the U.S. response, is apples&oranges.

    But, okay, if you’re going to get into it, then think about it for what it is and not what you want it to be. In other words, talk about it from the political angle, not the human-rights side of things because that’s not where any of this is coming from…

    The report that got this ball rolling has been sitting int he State Department for two years. It’s not new and the guys who used it to get Modi’s visa denied could’ve acted on it a while ago if they’d wanted to make a point about human rights (singling out one guy doesn’t say half as much as condemning a nation, especially since it would have meant more to do so when the Vajpayee was in office).

    So, why now? Well, it could have something do with the guys on the India Caucus trying to get PM Singh out of office by making him look weak (to his own people) in a face-off with the U.S.. Or, it could be a a politically safe way to show the world, in light of Iraq and Abu Ghraib, that the U.S. does believe in defending human rights and more importantly, defending Muslims. Or, it could be both.

    I’m not trying to be a dick, but the entire discussion seems to be ignoring why the U.S. really did what they did and is instead taking a moral high-ground based on actions that had little to do with morality. It was political, it was supposed to score points with constituents in the U.S., Muslims around the world and set the stage for a political platform for/against Singh.

    So, if we’re going to have outrage, how about we direct at the fact that Gujarat is being recognized primarily for its political worth and not its effect on the moral compass of this great big genocidal world.

  20. Wow, sd, that was really well put. A couple of points to try and figure this all out:

    Rep. Frank Pallone, India Caucus guy, has objected to the visa revocation and actually offered a defense of Modi (granted, he reps NJ, but even so). You also left out that this revocation happened a few days after Condoleeza Rice left New Delhi, and more of the Indian than diaspora source I’ve seen on this have mentioned that.

    Building off of what you said and those facts, my guess for what’s behind the move: PR directed at the Muslim world, placate evangelicals in the U.S., a general “human rights” move, make India look bad as it seeks enhanced international clout (it’s always helpful to build up a case against India in advance in case the need to smack down should the need ever come up later–e.g. Security Council reform that’s about to happen).

    There are some more charitable interpretations you could come up with, like Abhi did in his post–e.g. marginalizing the Hindu Right for whatever reason (e.g. you see it as an inflammatory cause of islamist terror, like the Palestine issue), recognizing that, overall, a more secular india will be more receptive to American products and cultural exports, etc.

    Thanks for giving me a lot to think about.

  21. The only problem I have with the term “genocide” is that .. who defines it??

    Some diplomatic-consensus definitions are here at Wikipedia. However, your point is well taken that it’s a loaded term. Everyone defines/uses it as they like, and usually for particular political purposes.

    I’m probably more comfortable with “pogrom”, I’ve realized, for Gujarat because of the scale of the particular incident(s) and because genocide really is a loaded term that should be used rarely. However, maybe that’s because I don’t know enough about Gujarat and because I have Indian guilt/shame about it (sort of like the way Hindutva people use the neutral “riots”). The massacres did allegedly have some of the classic features of genocide–like assaulting women’s bodies as a means of desecrating a community.

    Anyway, important as it is what we label it, the more important point is how we describe what it was: a concerted and organized effort with state complicity (if not active direction) to murder, sexually assault, and otherwise destroy Muslims and their lives in Gujarat.

    That’s why all those points about X number of Hindus getting killed during the massacres are misleading–once you initiate an organized and violent campaign targeted against one group, it seems self-evident that there will be spillover and reactions against others, including Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Jains, Buddhists, Atheists, and Agnostics, who get caught up in the violence and the turmoil.

  22. Quote “That’s why all those points about X number of Hindus getting killed during the massacres are misleading-“

    That was pointed out to show people who know that however the riots started they became out of hand and as a result even Hindus got killed. That did not happen in 84, all the casualties of 84 were Sikhs for obvious reasons.

  23. Quote “I’m not trying to be a dick, but the entire discussion seems to be ignoring why the U.S. really did what they did and is instead taking a moral high-ground based on actions that had little to do with morality. It was political, it was supposed to score points with constituents in the U.S., Muslims around the world and set the stage for a political platform for/against Singh.”

    I agree to above almost completely. Political operatives manipulating well meaning citizens is not new. See what is going on in the Terry Schiavo case.. its disgusting how the Chri. fundamentalist are being appeased at the expense of someone’s family problem, in the guise of MORAL VALUES.

  24. Just a simple question: 1) Why didn’t “Isarel” minister “Sharon” gets visa denial? There were more muslims killed in Isarel than Gujarat.

    2) Why “Bangladesh” minister gets visa? There were so many Hindu killed in Bangladesh, than in muslim in Gujarat.

    3) Why “Kashmir” minister gets visa? No body has seen human right violation, like this in world. Unfortunatly Indian news media doesn’t have page to cover this, They do have page to print UK/USA flood/snow storm.

    *) There are some NGO feeling they are proud to stop Modi visa? I ask: Where is your pride For muslim killed in Isarel? For hindu killed in Bangladesh? For hindu & solders killed in Kashmir? For people killed/abused in Iraq? For native Indians killed in USA?

    I ‘ll say you don’t have guts for it!

    How I see: India is a hindu country. Muslims were invited to stay here in 1947, as they were screwed by Pakistan. If they burn hindu live in train in Gujarat, than they have to face sequence of reactions. If you burn someone else house, than someone might burn your house also.

  25. I believe Gandhi, a Gujarati who we should all look up to, abhorred this kind of thinking. “An eye for an eye, makes the whole world blind.”

  26. Gujarati, I thought you were simply foolish, until you said this:

    How I see: India is a hindu country. Muslims were invited to stay here in 1947, as they were screwed by Pakistan. If they burn hindu live in train in Gujarat, than they have to face sequence of reactions. If you burn someone else house, than someone might burn your house also.

    and then I knew you were a bigot.

  27. fight..sns of btch*s….fight….all you guys(hindus,muslims, christians, and the little sprinkling of parsis) can do is fight.

    first and foremost….stop comparing…..why are we always comparing….comparing modi to bush….bush to osama….osama to larry flynt….just stop all this whre SHT.

    2000 people were gutted in 2002…..i don’t care if they were muslims hindus or syrian christians…..just think about that….and please don’t compare this event to the crusades or some mughal invasion…..600 years back the foreign policy of any kingdom was blitzkrieg….so when a blitzkeig happens in this day and age of vibrators….we need to do something about it…

    i want all of you to take a good look at yourself in the mirrors and stop reading up some old english translation of the quran or copy/pasting some crappy literature from the VHP website.

    and think …just think as a human for a minute..there u go again….thinking about darfur now!!!!!!!

  28. I find it amusing that second generation americans on this board are somewhat opaque to trends in Indian history.

    There have been HUNDREDS of communal riots in Gujarat (Ahmedabad being a volatile flashpoint) since the 1700s. Yes, the 1700s. Hindu-Muslim riots with all the blood and gore is a subcontinental staple and is associated with specific geographical locales.

    The riots in 1969 were FAR worse (widespread) than the 2002 riots and they happened when a CONGRESS government in power. Of course there was no internet or instant news in those days.

    To conclude that Modi who has a record of making intemperate statements somehow planned and conducted the 2002 killings is off the mark. To effectively do so requires the acquiescence of the bureaucracy, police etc. etc. etc. And the perperators of the violence are lumpen, low caste youth (the so-called Dalits beloved of left wingers!).

    The problem is that there is considerable (putting it mildly) historical animosity between Hindus and Muslims in parts of Gujarat. Even IF there had been a congress government in place, the KILLINGS would have happened. The army took a couple of days to come in because they were all deployed on the border. The presence or absence of Modi is not particularly important.

    If the Indian Americans on this board ponder the AFTERMATH of the temple massacre conducted by Islamic militants after the 2002 riots, they will note that riots were avoided.

    Compared to the riots of earlier decades (some non religious), there has been considerable progress in reducing bloodshed. In fact most of India is remarkably peaceful, much more so than any American metro zone.

    One can hope there is no repeat of such incidents unlike places like Kashmir and Bangladesh where Hindus have been victims of ethnic cleansing and mass murder. Gujarat by comparison is an oasis of peace and prosperity. In fact, they should have learnt their lessons and react appropriately in case of a triggering event such as the train burning incident in Godhra.

    Of course the visa denial is going to make Modi a hero and enlargen his constituency, besides the self-congratulatory back patting.

  29. For second-gen american desi analysts, read the article at the rediff link below. (I do think the author confuses Indians and Indian Americans.)

    Even though I abhor what happened in Gujrat in 2002, I also find it disturbing that Indian Americans have caused a decision which is problematic for India as a nation. Visa is but a small issue and when you compare the atrocities of other assorted dictators including our neighbor to the west, it seems like a highly selective decision. The discussion on this board is very academic. What people like CAG and other assorted leftists and evangilists don’t realize is that they are making “the right wing of the right wing” of Indian politics stronger. If people on this board think that Vajpayee and Advani are hardliners – they don’t know much about India or its politics. Although i don’t want to recite history – both long past and modern, it would be foolish to think that it has not had an effect on a significant segment of Hindu population. The continous double standards of “communcal secularist” will continue to haunt both left of center folks as well as moderate hindus. For example, just the other day Mr. Ram Vilas Paswan of Bihar said that he would be willing to take support of a particualr party to form a government in Bihar if a minority – read muslim is made the chief minister of Bihar. Who is this Mr. Paswan? He is a cabinet minister in this UPA govt which also includes My. Tytler. Now if someone from the right had an equivalent statement, so called secularist would have gone nuts – including folks at CAG. This sort of duplicity is the oxygen for Mr. Modi and his ilk. Since it is hard enough for secualrists of minority vote bank type to figure this out, it would be harder for Indian Americans – with lose facts and half baked evidence to sort out Indian politics.

    If it is possible for Indian Americans to get off their high horse and let a billion Indians solve their own problems, they will do a great service to India.

    http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/mar/21raman.htm

    (On a side note – Hmmm. Interesting to note that second-generation Indian-Americans thing “ABCD” is a derogatory term. Soon it will be politically incorrect to use this term?)

  30. Saurav, About why CAG labels Gujarat massacres as ‘genocide’, the reasoning is laid out here:

    According to independent human rights observers, the events that transpired in Gujarat between February 28 and March 02 conform to the specifications of genocide. These events can be classified as a genocide under the Second Article of the Genocide Convention of 1948, adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on December 09, 1948, which delineates the following criteria in determining ‘genocide’. ‘Genocide’, the Convention clarifies, occurs when any of the following acts are committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group,such as: A. Killing members of the group. B. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group. C. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part. D. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group. E. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. In Gujarat, as the International Initiative for Justice identified, the (first) four of the above criteria were met: killing members of the group through massacre; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group through massacre, rape, burning, stabbing, beating, etc.; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part through massacre, economic boycott, psychic, physical, and social trauma; and imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group through rape, trauma, destruction of family, sexual violence and mutilation.

  31. There is no case against Modi in any of the courts in India.

    Yes there are cases against Modi in India. Some details and sources of information listed here:

    […] Of the cases filed, there are currently two civil suits against Narendra Modi for crimes against humanity and genocide. Some of the cases include: Dawood Case: Among those attacked by Hindu extremists in February-March of 2002 were four British nationals, Mohamed Aswat, Sakil Dawood, Saeed Dawood, and Imran Dawood, and an Indian national Yusef Palagar, as the vehicle they were traveling in was stopped by a well-organized road-block erected in close proximity to the local police station on a main highway leading into Gujarat. Targeted as Muslims, the group were stabbed and burned. Only Imran Dawood survived. On April 30, 2004, the widows and relatives of the murdered British Muslims filed a Civil Suit in district court in Gujarat against Chief Minister Modi and the state government for crimes against humanity and genocide. Best Bakery Case: This case was filed to seek redressal for the torching of fourteen persons in the Best Bakery Building in Vadodara, Gujarat, on the night of March 01, 2002. The attack coincided with the India-wide bandh called for by the Sangh Parivar and endorsed by Modi and the Gujarat Government. […] Based on evidence that the case could not proceed in Gujarat, on April 12, 2004, the Supreme Court transferred the Best Bakery case to Mumbai, in the state of Maharashtra. On February 09, 2005, the 43rd witness in the Best Bakery case, whose residence is within forty feet of the Best Bakery site, recanted his statements as eyewitness, and was subsequently declared hostile. Following the demands of the NHRC, on February 21, 2005, the Supreme Court granted a three-month extension for its self-appointed high-level committee investigation into allegations and counter allegations of key witnesses and activists seeking to challenge the order of acquittal.

  32. Z’s post illustrates why “independent human rights observers” have very little credibility outside their own circles. Horrible though the Gujarat riots were, they were no more genocide than the Godhra train burning or the riots against Sikhs led by current UPA minister Jagdish Tytler in 1984.

  33. I find it amusing that second generation americans on this board are somewhat opaque to trends in Indian history.

    Those of us who are ascribing misconduct to Modi are not “opaque”; we’re using better analytical tools (and less bias) to understand the history than you are. I mean, I’m happy to join you in a protest of Divide and Rule in front of the British embassy if you’d like, but I think it’s less directly relevant to the issue at hand than Modi’s conduct. If you want to see what I believe about Modi’s responsibility, read the Human Rights Watch report; it’s the most credible, non-partisan source I’ve come across.

    If it is possible for Indian Americans to get off their high horse and let a billion Indians solve their own problems, they will do a great service to India.

    Please keep in mind that that’s why some of us got involved in the protest in the first place. It seems that some of our uncles and aunties (like the ones who invited Modi) are heavily funding Hindutva; once they stop, I’ll be happy to defer unless I see a clear and urgent need (like a tsunami or a genocide).

    Also, try not to label all “Indian Americans” or ABCDS or “Second Generation” people as if they have one opinion. I certainly don’t believe that the two of you share opinions with Jyoti Basu, so why lump us all together?

  34. Saurav – My abcd comment was half in jest. So please excuse.

    Are you also worried about the money being sent by evangelists to india to indulge in gratitous conversion activites? Are you also against money being sent by Saudi Arabia to expand their wahabism?

    As with most posters on this site, I too think that Gujurat 02 was horrible. It is not some money from uncle and aunties that is spreading Hindutava. It is rabid communal secularism (i know it sounds like an oxymoron) which is feeding Hindutva and providing it sustainance. For example in India – Uniform Civil code is considered communal. Leftist in India don’t tire to paint this as fundamentalist idea from the right. Their counterparts FOIL (members of CAG) live under one in the US but consider it communal in India. Why the double standard? Where is CAG and its members protesting against this anomaly of Indian constitution. The issues between BJP and the parties of the left of center are well documented to ennumerate here but needless to say that policies of Congress in last 50 years have much more to do with the rise of the BJP then with few dollars that uncle and aunties might have sent across the Atlantic.

  35. or the riots against Sikhs led by current UPA minister Jagdish Tytler in 1984.

    This running meme about CAG’s position on Jagdish Tytler is getting real tiresome. CAG is a new org, Modi is the first issue they are handling. And CAG has Sikh orgs as members. Orgs for whom Tytler is the most important issue. Organizations like SAHO and VFF.

  36. Z: The link below from rediff in response to your link from TOI. While not defending Guj gov. for its actions during the riots. is it possible that CAG is going overboard with this Hitler bit? The problem with this hit and run evidence is that none of us will know the truth. The real truth about this text business will come out if you get a scanned copy of the text book posted. Also post the date of publcation of the book to see who was in power when the book came out. Then we will what exactly is the truth. Also if you can find what other 24 states of India say about this subject will also be insightful.

    Better to do full research instead of slapping shoddy evidence…… (BTW, I don’t know whose position is correct)

    Also in Tytler – Don’t get tired buddy. If you have stepped into a noble mission why be selective. Its tiring to see protesters be one sided.

    Congress glorifying Hitler: BJP

    September 30, 2004 21:54 IST

    The Bharatiya Janata Party on Thursday blamed the Congress for glorifying Hitler and Nazism in schoolbooks in Gujarat, saying these were brought out in 1986 when the Congress was in power.

    The Narendra Modi government plans to withdraw these books, party spokesman Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi said in New Delhi.

    Naqvi said he had a telephonic talk with Modi in the wake of reports that “in Gujarat, Hitler is a textbook hero”.

    He said the CM told him that the books were published when the Congress was at the helm of affairs.

    Naqvi also dismissed Congress criticism over certain schoolbooks in Gujarat in which Kashmir has been depicted as part of Pakistan. He said what had been shown was a physical map and not a political one.

    From –

    http://www.rediff.com/news/2004/sep/30guj.htm

  37. Better to do full research instead of slapping shoddy evidence……

    And your idea of ‘full’ research is a quote from BJP?! You’ll have to do better than that!

    Also in Tytler – Don’t get tired buddy. If you have stepped into a noble mission why be selective.

    The point of listing the orgs is that CAG members are anti-Tytler activists. So all this caring for 1984 being shown by Modi supporters, when no one gave a damn before, only to show down CAG – is really laughable. The people in CAG have already done work against Tytler.

  38. I’m gone for a few hours and I return to our very own communal riot, how nice…

    Saurav, thanks for taking what I said seriously, I do think the political angle is more important here.

    I’m not sure what the real intention was or is, but I do know that Modi has now attributed the denial to “anti-India” groups and, if you plug that into a Bush-esque “anti-America” formula, you come up with the rebirth of nationalism and PM Singh wasn’t built for that.

    Abhi also mentions the same argument in the “The Modi situation: a conspiracy theory”-post and the only point on which we differ is that he says its bad for the BJP and Modi. We’ll have to wait for the answer on that one, but we do know that it has been good for the U.S. because every major Islamic publication has picked up the news.

    As for Pallone, co-founder of the Caucus, I think he’s sincere in his human rights interest, but I don’t think holds true for everyone (certainly not for the State Department who timed the visa-denial to break on the same day Rice lauded “Pakistan’s democracy”)… Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the Caucus prefers the trade-relationship the U.S. had with India under the BJP as opposed to the one it has now and that’s enough of a reason to set up Singh using a politician’s dream a.k.a. a risk-free Modi.

    In any case, Pallone and Modi both addressed the Association of Indian Americans of North America yesterday (Madison Square Garden; Modi by remote) and is there any way you can get your hands on a copy of the transcripts? I don’t want to speculate too much, but from what I hear, Modi does not mention the visa-situation, but does declare that Gujarat is a much better place for citizens and NRIs with the BJP running it… It would be good to see what he actually says, maybe that would shift this argument out of the abstract.

    (sorry, I’m assuming that you or someone on this list is in NY and has access)

  39. Z, stop laughing. This is a serious matter eh? As i said in my post regarding the hitler in the text book, i do not know who is telling the truth – TOI or BJP spokesman. The problem with your evidence is that it is a copy of what someone elese wrote which itself is taken from some other publication. If you do a google search – you find numerous sites and publications with similar statements – meaning there could have been only one publication which did some primary research. The rest copy and pasted – including CAG. If you want people to believe you – with all the resources at your disposal – why don’t you present primary research which shows that the text book contained the aforementioned bit about nazis etc. and it was produced during Modi’s regime.

    Until then, you can pontificate all you want but except the choir nobody is buying it.

    And as Saurav said about gratitous classifcations – do not group some posters as Modi supporters. Is it possible to be both against Modi and leftist communal secualrists at the same time? I think yes!!!!

  40. Saurav – My abcd comment was half in jest. So please excuse.

    I care if you’re being derogatory, by I’m trying to embrace the label. I am an ABCD and it’s not your fault or mine as much as American race, queer (and other) politics.

    Are you also worried about the money being sent by evangelists to india to indulge in gratitous conversion activites? Are you also against money being sent by Saudi Arabia to expand their wahabism?

    Yes. And Sri Lankan Buddhist nationalism. And U.S. Christian fundamentalism that keeps poor women across the world from having access to abortions. And the Indonesian government for cracking down militarily on separatist groups…etc. I thought this either/or game had been laid to rest.

    As with most posters on this site, I too think that Gujurat 02 was horrible. It is not some money from uncle and aunties that is spreading Hindutava. It is rabid communal secularism (i know it sounds like an oxymoron) which is feeding Hindutva and providing it sustainance.

    It sounds like an oxymoron because it is. “rabid communal secularists”, almost by definition, can only be a very small group (unless you’re mischaratcerizing them). The real problem is that the Indian independence movement and Congress were too elite driven and that left a huge hole for Hindu fundamentalists to exploit.

    Why the double standard? Where is CAG and its members protesting against this anomaly of Indian constitution. The issues between BJP and the parties of the left of center are well documented to ennumerate here but needless to say that policies of Congress in last 50 years have much more to do with the rise of the BJP then with few dollars that uncle and aunties might have sent across the Atlantic.

    I can only speak for myself, but, without knowing enough of the specific ramifications of the civil code, I would argue that the spirit behind them is beautiful and a recognition that in the Indian state, as in every other state, there are disempowered groups (i prefer that rather than “minorities” because women are usually majorities). How that plays out and whether it’s been adequately sold to people at the grassroots level is a different question, but it’s not a communal issue to me; it’s exploited as a communal issue to win support for Hindu nationalism (sort of like how Affirmative Action is exploited by the American right to win support for a racist agenda).

    As for why I personally protest the uncles and aunties–1) it’s dismaying to me and 2) think globally act locally.

  41. Saurav, thanks for taking what I said seriously

    Well, you made sense 🙂

    Abhi also mentions the same argument in the “The Modi situation: a conspiracy theory”-post and the only point on which we differ is that he says its bad for the BJP and Modi. We’ll have to wait for the answer on that one, but we do know that it has been good for the U.S. because every major Islamic publication has picked up the news.

    I totally agree. What are the Muslim publications you’re talking about?

    As for Pallone, co-founder of the Caucus, I think he’s sincere in his human rights interest,

    Maybe, but i don’t care about his personal opinions in evaluating this situation; this is bull$hit. He’s totally placing his partisan and personal political interests above a human rights issue. It’s one thing to defend Modi getting a visa, but another to take a stage with him. I don’t know much about him, but he’s completely lost whatever credibility he had in my eyes on these issues.

    but I don’t think holds true for everyone No doubt. That’s why I appreciated your comment. If anyone thinks that the U.S. State (at least right now and prbably in general) acts accountably or in the interests of people that it’s systematically unaccountable to, then they only need to look at the recent appointment of Paul Wolfowitz to be disillusioned. or the numerous atrocities that the U.S. government has committed over the years. AGAIN–I’m not saying it’s evil–just that it’s a state and it’s not predisposed to act in ways that benefit it’s interests–you draw your own moral judgements.

    is there any way you can get your hands on a copy of the transcripts?

    Trying:) What i read in a news report was that he forgave, so to speak, the US government and the Americans (good pr move addressing NRIs and a congressman and in general since others are doing that work for him).

  42. Saurav – your sincerity is palapable on this issue. Its a good exchange of ideas.

    My friend, If VHP/BJP use the Kashmir or Uniform code issue to whip up passions. And passions are raised even in folks who do not subscribe to everything they say or do. Why? Guess what – It is because these issues exist, albiet they may exaggerate their impact. How would you feel as an American if bunch of Hindus got together here in the US and said we want our own civil code – maybe even our own tax code. It would not fly. And in india, its not muslim or christian people who really benefit from this but their narrow minded mullahs and leaders. Similarly on Kashmir issue, many on the left say – oh give them self determiniation. But why? What makes Kashmiris so special? As opposed to Sindhis, Punjabis, Bengalis who were also affected by the partition, not to speak of numerous other communities in south asia. Is it becuase they make more noise with the ammunition they get from across the border?

    In the last 50 years since Independance, secularists led by Nehru took Hindus for granted. Taking the civil code specifically, Hindu laws were enacted which broke tradtional Hindu positions – and as a progressive Hindu agnostic – I support that. But what Nehru and company missed was also to review communal laws of other communities – infact they should have promoted one law for the whole nation. Infact the preamble of Indian constitution calls for Uniform Civil code and even the Supreme court on occasion has called on the govt. to move on this issue. Its not neecessary to impose unifrom law on all citizens at one time. But alteast the Indian govt. should move towards voluntary uniform code which citizen of every community could chose to be governed under.

    The right in India does not have to create issues because many issues which they exploit already exist. Rest of it is politics. You won’t change minds of millions of Hindus as long as they percieve double standards from the secularist community.

  43. Anon, As I understand even Hindus have the choice of following their own religious laws in India and so do the Christians and other minorities. I think the key here is ‘choice’. Government should not be legislating the private issues to begin with. However India has a good compromise as I understand. You have the choice of following either the secular common law or the religious laws. Your analogy on Kashmir is not accurate. Kashmir is a disputed territory. There are numerous UN resolutions calling for a plebiscite and withdrawl of Indian/Pakistani forces from Pakistan and Indian occupied Kashmir. I havnt noticed any similar UN Security Council resolutions on Sindh and Bengal.

  44. Al Mujhaid – NO – There is no choice on civil laws in India. Every community has their own set of laws. That can’t be a secular state!!! Its communal by very nature.

    On Kashmir – Just because of UN resolution don’t exist does not mean that a community cannot demand someting based on a precedent. The Kashmir demands came first and then the resolutions. Its disputed only because the British f’ed up. We already had one partition based on religion (very secular indeed!!!), now India cannot trade land so few mullahs can give us peace at gunpoint. Kashmiri demands are itself communal. They need to resettle the pandits, convert LOC into border (Pakistan can keep the grabbed territory in its possession) and become a normal Indian state like any other.

  45. The BIGGEST mistake, in my opinion, that a lot of people make is to think that “Human Rights” is above politics. It may be for a few people but there are far more who treat “human rights” just as much politically as right of lifers… BTW Rahul Mahajan’s (empirenotes.org) radio commentary on the “right of lifer” is a must listen !!!

  46. How would you feel as an American if bunch of Hindus got together here in the US and said we want our own civil code.

    Ummm, we have pretty much the same thing, although lesser in scale and not as rooted in the founding law–it’s called affirmative action. It’s not just college admissions–federal contractors use it too to determine what companies to give business to. It’s presented as a way to remediate historical wrongs by the country, but it ought to be looked at as a way to reduce current inequities.

    And I support it, even though I don’t benefit from it most of the time. It combats the advantages that the majority has. It also generates the same kind of objections about “minorities” getting special privileges. So do hate crime laws, actually.

    Thank you for recognizing that I’m interested in engaging on this issue rather than bullshitting. I appreciate it.