Myth 24: The bodies of Godhra victims were displayed in public
FACT: The Godhra carnage occurred on 27 February 2002 at 8 AM. After that, the bodies of the karsevaks killed in Godhra were brought to Ahmedabad. This was necessary, because most of the killed karsevaks were from Ahmedabad and keeping the bodies in Godhra could have inflamed the situation there and Godhra was also under
FACT: The Godhra carnage occurred on 27 February 2002 at 8 AM. After that, the bodies of the karsevaks killed in Godhra were brought to Ahmedabad. This was necessary, because most of the killed karsevaks were from Ahmedabad and keeping the bodies in Godhra could have inflamed the situation there and Godhra was also under curfew. It would have been very inconvenient for relatives to come to Godhra which was under curfew! So, it was necessary to get the bodies out of Godhra as soon as possible.
Also, note that if the bodies had not been brought to Ahmedabad and been kept in Godhra and retaliation taken in Godhra, all Modi-haters would have cried that “Modi deliberately kept the bodies in a communally-charged Godhra so as to instigate Hindus to retaliate in Godhra and did not bring them to Ahmedabad though the relatives and victims were from Ahmedabad”. While bringing the bodies to Ahmedabad, care was taken to bring the bodies after midnight in a very somber atmosphere.
The bodies were brought to Western Ahmedabad’s isolated Sola Civil Hospital, where the Muslim population was negligible. Had the government wanted to instigate Hindus, it would have brought the bodies to Eastern Ahmedabad’s main civil hospital from where most of the killed karsevaks resided and from where it would have been ideal to instigate the violence against the Muslims. The bodies were brought at 3:30 a.m. of 28th February in a sombre atmosphere (as reported by India Today dated 18th March, 2002 and Times of India online on 28th February). The time 3:30 a.m. is very difficult to instigate riots with most people asleep and is also very inconvenient for the relatives. Had the government wanted to, it would have brought the bodies at 2 p.m. or 12 noon, which would have been convenient for relatives and easy to instigate riots. The government, thus, seems to have done 4 things right which are:
1. Bringing the bodies to Ahmedabad instead of keeping them in Godhra so as to calm the matters in Godhra and for relatives’ convenience.
2. Bringing them to Ahmedabad at 3:30 am instead of in day-time so that chances of retaliation were very low.
3. Bringing them in a sober atmosphere instead of ceremonial procession.
4. Bringing them to Western Ahmedabad’s hospital where the Muslim population was negligible instead of Eastern Ahmedabad.
The transport of these bodies was done inside five (5) trucks, and no one could see them, and it was also done from 11:30 pm – 12 midnight to 3:30 am, from Godhra to Ahmedabad per the report of the SIT- appointed and monitored by the Supreme Court.
Even after coming to Western Ahmedabad’s isolated hospital, care was taken to send the bodies to the crematoriums (those which were not cremated at the hospital itself, some had been cremated at the hospital itself) in vehicles, not visible to anyone, while this could have been done on foot as well. This shows the sincerity of the government in preventing display of the bodies. The SIT appointed by the Supreme Court has said all this in its closure report on page 63 as well. The SIT has also said that the decision to bring the bodies was a collective one, taken by many Ministers, and with knowledge and consent of officials like the then Collector of Godhra, the Police Commissioner of Ahmedabad, the DGP of Gujarat, etc.Despite this, several people have tried to spread outrageous lies that ‘the dead bodies were paraded by the Government’. The media has not told the truth of all the above facts to clarify things. As a result, many infuriated people continue to believe the lie that the bodies were ‘paraded’. Lies have also been tried to be spread that the then Collector of Godhra, Smt. Jayanti Ravi was against bringing of the bodies to Ahmedabad. The SIT report stated on page 64 that this allegation is proven to be false, Jayanti Ravi had supported bringing of bodies to Ahmedabad.
The SIT report says on page 64: “The allegation that the dead bodies were transported to Ahmedabad against the wishes of Smt. Jayanti Ravi is proved to be incorrect.”
Despite this, several people have lied on this even after the SIT report. (E.g. Gujarat Congress leader Shaktisinh Gohil repeated this lie on Live National TV on 10 August 2013 in a debate with BJP’s Meenakshi Lekhi on India News TV Channel in the 8-9 pm show.)
Bringing bodies to Ahmedabad did not have the slightest impact on the riots. Bodies were brought after midnight on 27 Feb i.e. at 3:30 am of 28 Feb in Western Ahmedabad’s isolated Sola hospital (as reported by weekly India Today dated 18 March 2002 and Times of India online on 28 Feb 2002) while the riots began on 28 Feb at 11 AM and took place in far-off places like Naroda Patiya and Chamanpura (Ehsan Jafri case). And what about the riots that occurred OUTSIDE Ahmedabad- in Vadodara, Rajkot and other areas? Did they also occur because bodies were brought from Ahmedabad to Godhra at 3:30 am on 28 Feb?
Far from the bodies being displayed publicly or ‘paraded’, extra care was taken by the Government to prevent display of the dead bodies. They were brought from Godhra to Ahmedabad inside closed trucks between 11:30 pm to 3:30 am, not visible to anyone. And even after that, the non-cremated bodies were taken to the crematoriums in closed vehicles, not visible to anyone outside.
More details of this issue are given comprehensively in the book, but not in this website. A special chapter on the SIT report is also in the book, which reveals the whole truth and the SIT’s observations.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 23: Ehsan Jafri called Narendra Modi during the riots
FACT: This is absolutely untrue, and a lie concocted many years after 2002. No such charge was made in 2002, neither during the time of the riots, nor for many months and years after 2002. The SIT report says on pages 261-262 that there is NO RECORD of any call made to Narendra Modi by
FACT: This is absolutely untrue, and a lie concocted many years after 2002. No such charge was made in 2002, neither during the time of the riots, nor for many months and years after 2002. The SIT report says on pages 261-262 that there is NO RECORD of any call made to Narendra Modi by Ehsan Jafri.
The following is some part of Arundhati Roy’s article in weekly Outlook dated 6 May 2002 on the Ehsan Jafri case:
“…A mob surrounded the house of former Congress MP Iqbal Ehsan Jaffri. His phone calls to the Director-General of Police, the Police Commissioner, the Chief Secretary, the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) were ignored. [Our comment: Notice how in this article, as late as May 2002, even Arundhati Roy does not claim that Jafri called Modi! All these claims of calls to Police Commissioner, Chief Secretary are false. The SIT examined call records of the Police Commissioner Pandey and found that no call was made by Jafri. And that day, the Chief Secretary G Subbarao was abroad, out of India on leave! But even Roy doesn’t name Modi!] The mobile police vans around his house did not intervene. The mob broke into the house. They stripped his daughters and burned them alive. Then they beheaded Ehsan Jaffri and dismembered him. Of course it’s only a coincidence that Jaffri was a trenchant critic of Gujarat Chief Minister, Narendra Modi, during his campaign for the Rajkot Assembly by-election in February…”
This is a credibility-less article by Arundhati Roy, claiming that Jafri’s daughters were raped. His son T A Jafri clarified that his sisters were safe in USA and this exposed the truth. We also dealt with this in Myth 11. But even in such an article full of factual errors, even Roy does not claim that Jafri called the then Chief Minister Narendra Modi.
In fact, Congress ally the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind alleged in August 2003 that Jafri had in fact called Sonia Gandhi for help! The Times of India reported on 9 August 2003 in an article titled: “Congress silent on cadres linked to Gujarat riots” that the JUH secretary N A Farooqui says: “The Congress has committed sins of omission and commission during the riots. Former MP Ehsan Jaffri had called up Sonia Gandhi for help. She didn’t take a strong stand in her subsequent visit to Gujarat. The local bodies were mostly headed by the Congress which could have done a lot for relief and rehabilitation, but it was all left to the NGOs.” As late as August 2003, no claim of Jafri calling Modi is made, in fact JUH claimed that Jafri had called Sonia Gandhi!
Also Roy says-“His phone calls to the Director-General of Police, the Police Commissioner, the Chief Secretary, the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) were ignored. The mobile police vans around his house did not intervene.” What rubbish again! Police vans outside his house not only intervened, they shot dead 5 rioters outside his house and saved the lives of 200 Muslims, at a great risk to their own personal life. Police fired 124 rounds and burst 134 tear gas shells at the spot, also injured 11 Hindus and lathi-charged the crowd as well, according to the SC-appointed SIT’s report, Page 1. Jafri’s widow Zakia Jafri also said in her statement to the Police, recorded under Section 161 of CrPC on 6 March 2002 that the police saved her and many others that day in Gulberg Society by transporting them in vans, and had it not been for timely action by the Police, the mob would have lynched them all. This is also mentioned in the SIT report.
Note here that even Roy does not claim that Jafri telephoned the Chief Minister Narendra Modi as late as May 2002! Now lies are out that Jafri actually phoned Modi and was abused by Modi on phone! The fact is that that day the situation was out of control, Modi frantically called the Army to Ahmedabad according to The Hindu and he was very busy handling the situation. And on page 203-204 the SIT says that though P C Pandey (Ahmedabad Police Commissioner) received/made 302 calls in 24 hours on 28 February 2002, no call was made to him by Jafri. And yet, liar ‘activists’ seem to have paid bribes to a witness and survivor, Imtiaz Pathan to falsely claim that Modi had abused Jafri on phone, and Jafri told him (Pathan) this fact before he died!!!
If all the below-mentioned facts are reported by the media, then the reality will be out for everyone to see. There is a heap of evidence present to prove the opposite i.e. that Jafri did not call Modi, which is ignored largely by the mainstream media, particularly TV channels like NDTV, CNN-IBN. There is only one eye witness who has claimed this, Imtiaz Pathan who claimed that Jafri called Modi on phone and before dying Jafri told him (Pathan) that Modi abused him on phone. (This is of course, trash. Let us say, for argument’s sake that Jafri did call Modi and Modi did not want to help him. Would Modi have abused him on phone? Modi would have said “We will send help as soon as possible” and not sent help in such a case. Is Modi a fool to abuse Jafri on phone even if he did not want Jafri to be saved when he knew that anything spoken on phone can be recorded? Such a ridiculous charge has no credibility).
In his immediate testimony to the police in 2002 soon after the riots, Pathan had not named Modi at all, nor made this allegation (Of Jafri calling him and Modi abusing Jafri) for many years after 2002! This charge was first made by Pathan in 2009, years after the incident. If this was true, he would have said so in 2002 itself, and not in 2009 as an ‘after-thought’.
Imtiaz Pathan has claimed the following things wrongly:
1- Police did not come to the complex till 4:30- 5:00 pm
2- Ehsan Jafri gave himself to the crowd, told the crowd “Take me, but spare the women and children”
3- Police Commissioner P C Pandey visited Jafri at 10 am on 28 February (All above things are wrong on facts, i.e. blatant lies)
Hence it is clear that Imtiaz Pathan has been tutored by someone to claim this. Let us first list some points:
1- The Times of India in its online edition on 28 February 2002 reported at 2:34 PM :
“Ahmedabad: At least six persons were injured when police opened fire to disperse a rampaging mob in Meghaninagar area of the city on Thursday afternoon. The injured were brought to civil hospital where the condition of at least three is stated to be serious…the incident took place at Chamanpura area under Meghaninagar police station…(Ehsan Jafri case)”
This is the Ehsan Jafri case- Chamanpura. NOTE THAT THIS REPORT PUBLISHED AT 2:34 PM says that police came and opened fire injuring so many people. India Today weekly dated 18 March 2002 also reports : “Reinforcements did arrive but by that time the mob had swelled to 10,000”. Since this report was posted at 2:34 PM it is clear that this event of police coming and firing must have happened much earlier, say at 1:30 pm at least considering the time it takes to get information, prepare report, proof read it, edit it and post it online. This completely dismantles Imtiaz Pathan’s lies that the police did not come till 4:30-5 pm when The Times’ report POSTED ONLINE at 2:34 PM says that police came and fired. We also have the statement on Zakia Jafri recorded under Section Section 161 Cr.PC on 6 March 2002 that the police saved her and dozens of residents that day. The Times of India also reported in its online edition on 28 Feb in a report posted at 9:41 PM. We quote from Times of India online edition posted on 28 Feb night at 9:41 PM “Meanwhile fire tenders which rushed to the spot (Chamanpura- Ehsan Jafri case) were turned back by the irate mob which disallowed the Ahmedabad Fire Brigade (AFB) personnel and the district police from rushing to rescue…Sources in Congress Party said that the former MP after waiting in vain till 12.30 pm for official help to arrive had opened fire on the mob in self-defense, injuring four…”.
Despite being overwhelmingly outnumbered by the mob which had swelled to more than 10,000 (Zakia Jafri herself told India Today weekly in its issue of 18 March 2002-“I have never seen such a huge mob, they burnt alive my husband”), and the mob going crazy by Jafri firing on them with his revolver, the police did a brave job and at a great personal risk they fired on the Hindus and shot dead 5 Hindus outside his house as reported by weekly India Today dated 18 March 2002 and Times of India 28 Feb online. This also did not stop the violence because the crowd was willing to lose a few lives to, as S K Modi puts in his book “Godhra- The Missing rage” ‘teach Jafri a lesson’. Thus Imtiaz Pathan’s claims have no credibility since police arrived much before 4:30-5 pm and shot dead 5 rioters outside his house. Police saved more than 180 Muslims in this episode since there were 250 people inside Jafri’s house and the mob killed 68- after all missing were declared dead, despite being overwhelmingly outnumbered.
2- Ehsan Jafri fired on the crowd in self-defense. Whether he should have done so or not is a matter of debate, but this act drove the crowd mad and it resolved to kill him, and was willing to lose a few lives. We have seen reports of Times of India and India Today to know that he did fire on the mob which drove it mad. Imtiaz Pathan does not say this. Pathan lies and says: “Jafri appealed to the crowd to spare women and children. He said, ‘Take me, kill me but leave these innocent people’ and gave himself to the crowd.” This claim is absolute trash since it is an established fact that Jafri did not do anything like this and fired on the crowd in self-defense with his revolver, as reported by weekly India Today, Times of India, and also Outlook. SIT has also said that Jafri did indeed fire on the mob, killing 1 and injuring 15, in its report on page 1. This nails Imtiaz Pathan’s another lie.
3- Narendra Modi was very busy that day and there is no way he could have talked to Ehsan Jafri on phone. Though Modi had a mobile phone at that time, he didn’t use it much. That day, all his official lines were busy and he was very busy handling the riots. The SIT has said in its report on page 204 that the landline at Jafri’s house was the ONLY phone in operation in the entire complex, and that Jafri did not have a mobile. If Jafri did call Modi and was abused by him, Jafri would have told this to his widow Zakia or some other people instead of Imtiaz Pathan, who did not make this allegation for a good 7-8 years after 2002.
4- Pathan also claimed that the then Ahmedabad Police Commissioner P C Pandey had visited Jafri’s place in the morning. But the SC-appointed SIT has dismissed this claim after talking to P C Pandey and examining all evidence (and call records of P C Pandey, who made/received as many as 302 calls between 00:35 and 24:00 on 28 February 2002) and said that instead it was Congress Mahamantri Ambalal Nadia who came to meet Jafri at Gulbarg Society at 10 AM and left 10:30 AM. The SIT has said in its report that: “It is established that Shri P C Pandey did not visit Gulbarg Society in the forenoon of 28 Feb”.
This exposes Pathan’s lies. Note that for around 10 years, from 2002 to 2012, a myth was out in the media that the then Ahmedabad Police Commissioner P C Pandey had visited Jafri’s house in the forenoon of 28 February 2002, before it was attacked. The truth came out in 2012 with the SIT report, which revealed that call records conclusively prove that P C Pandey did not visit Jafri’s house. But neither Imtiaz Pathan nor his obvious tutors knew this in 2009, and thought that it was Pandey himself who visited the place. So they tutored Pathan to claim that Pandey had visited the place. This clearly shows that Imtiaz Pathan was tutored to make such a claim of Jafri calling Modi. Had he been a genuine witness, he would have honestly stated that he did not see P C Pandey at Jafri’s place in the forenoon of 28 February 2002.
The SIT said that it found no record of any call to Modi by Jafri on pages 261-262. The man with the task of doing this, i.e. requisitioning the call records was a very anti-Narendra Modi official and a favorite of Teesta-NGOs-Media brigade, Rahul Sharma. There is no way he would have missed such a record, had it been true.
Some other questions which can be raised here are: Why didn’t Jafri call any CONGRESS LEADER and ask the Congress Party to assemble 500 workers outside his house to save his life? Why couldn’t the Congress Party have do anything to save its former MP? Jafri was reported to have called Amarsinh Chaudhary, the then PCC chief many times, and indeed made several calls to CONGRESS LEADERS also. The media hid from the public for many years that a top accused in this case was none other than Congress leader Meghsingh Chaudhary himself. He was arrested not by Gujarat police, but by the SC-appointed SIT itself in 2009. One link:
Even if there was a record of any such call, how can the statement of a THIRD PERSON (Pathan, who has given so many wrong claims, like police not coming till 4:30- 5 pm when it came much earlier, and the lie claiming that Jafri surrendered himself to the crowd when he in fact fired on it, and P C Pandey visiting the house when he did not) who was at neither end of the alleged telephone call be relied?
Those who tutored him to make this ridiculous charge years after 2002 also should be prosecuted. And those who give credibility to such ridiculous and laughable charges like Outlook, CNN-IBN, NDTV and Rana Ayub should also be prosecuted.
More details of this issue are given comprehensively in the book, but not in this website. A special chapter on the SIT report is also in the book, which reveals the whole truth and the SIT’s observations.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 22: A B Vajpayee said Modi is not following Rajdharma
FACT: This incident happened on 4th April 2002, when the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee visited Gujarat. When a reporter asked the Prime Minister in his joint press conference with Narendra Modi what message he will like to give the Gujarat Chief Minister, he said: “A ruler should follow Rajdharma. Not differentiate between
FACT: This incident happened on 4th April 2002, when the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee visited Gujarat. When a reporter asked the Prime Minister in his joint press conference with Narendra Modi what message he will like to give the Gujarat Chief Minister, he said: “A ruler should follow Rajdharma. Not differentiate between the subjects on the basis of caste or religion. I always try to do so. I am sure Narendra bhai is also doing so.”
The latter part of the sentence: “I am sure that Narendra Modi is also following Rajdharma” was completely ignored, not reported and it was made to sound as if Vajpayee had said: “Narendra Modi should follow Rajdharma (Implied that he is not doing so now)”.
Luckily, the entire video is today on YouTube and can be viewed by anyone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5W3RCpOGbQ
In the days of the domination of the biased media, and terrible PR work from the Gujarat Government, this lie continued unchallenged for almost 10 years. But now with the social media and YouTube taking away the monopoly of TV channels, the reality came out.
Some more details of this issue are given in the book but not in this website.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com _____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 21: No one was brought to justice for the riots
FACT: To claim that “No justice was got in Gujarat for the 2002 riots” is completely untrue. There have been a world record number of convictions. There have been a total of at least 484 convictions, including 373 Hindus and 111 Muslims, according to official records. It is a world record to see so many
FACT: To claim that “No justice was got in Gujarat for the 2002 riots” is completely untrue. There have been a world record number of convictions.
There have been a total of at least 484 convictions, including 373 Hindus and 111 Muslims, according to official records. It is a world record to see so many people convicted. Here we must remember that for horrible past riots of Gujarat, 1969, 1985, 1990-91,92 in which far far more people were killed and which were far more serious than the 2002 riots, hardly 3 to 4 convictions took place under previous Congress Governments (Janata Dal in 1990 till October 1990 then again Congress till 1995 when Janata Dal merged with Congress). Yes 3 to 4 convictions only for the worst riots of 1969 and 1985. In the 1984 riots where at least 3,000 Sikhs were killed, no action was taken against rioters and according to TV channels CNN-IBN and NDTV both, 30 people were convicted in 12 riot cases in the past 28 years till April 2013. Link for CNN-IBN saying that 30 were convicted in 12 cases as of August 2012.
Some people claim that 442 people were convicted for the 1984 riots, because some official of the Delhi Police said so. But no one ever gave a date-wise list of convictions accounting to 442 people being convicted in the 1984 riots. According to an RTI query answered in November 2014, 27 people were convicted for the 1984 riots in 7 cases.
After reading about these world-record 484 convictions some still claim that the convictions could be made possible because of the SIT and inspite of the Gujarat Government. This is absolutely false. SIT is seeing only a selected few cases. In other cases SIT is not involved at all and yet many many have been convicted. As for the convictions in SIT seen cases, most of the convicted had already been arrested by the Gujarat Police. Most of those arrested by the SIT were ACQUITTED. For example in the Sadarpura case 31 were convicted, 29 had already been arrested by Gujarat police. Only 2 of the 21 arrested by SIT were convicted- i.e. 19 out of 21 arrested by SIT were acquitted. Even in Naroda Patiya case, 21 out of the 32 convicted were already arrested by the Gujarat police. Out of 484 convicted till now, only 172 have been in SIT seen cases, 141 Hindus and 31 Muslims. And most of the 141 Hindus convicted had already been arrested by the Gujarat Police. This gives 312 convictions in non-SIT seen cases, world record still. The following cases are as per official records. Where newspaper reports are not mentioned, they are exclusively official records and where the newspaper reports are given, they are records supplemented by newspaper reports.
Note here that there are a total of around 2000 cases on in the Gujarat riots. They don’t mean 2,000 riots but far lesser number of riots, and cases against 2000 odd accused rioters. So, we have till now 484 people convicted out of total 2000 odd accused, a very high conviction rate. All this is given in proper detail in the book.
A brief summary of total convictions will be as follows:
1- On 7 October 2002- 1 Hindu was convicted in Bharuch district
2- On 5 March 2003- 1 Hindu was convicted in Junagadh
3- On 4 August 2003- 1 Muslim convicted in Modasa town in Sabarkantha district
4- On 15 September 2003- 4 Muslims were convicted in Anand
5-On 16 October 2003- 4 Muslims were convicted and given life imprisonment
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com//india/Four-get-life-imprisonment/articleshow/236376.cms
6- On 25 November 2003- 15 Hindus were convicted of whom 12 were given life imprisonment
http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/nov/24godhra.htm -Link for conviction
http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/nov/25godhra.htm -Link for punishment
7- On 15 Jan 2004- 1 Hindu convicted in Ahmedabad
8 – On 5 May 2004- 3 Muslims were convicted
9- On 27 July 2004- 3 Hindus convicted in Ahmedabad
10 – On 30 July 2004- 1 Muslim was convicted in Ahmedabad
11 – On 1 November 2004- 2 Muslims were convicted in Ahmedabad
12 -On 4 November 2004- 2 Muslims were convicted in Bharuch district under Ankleshwar Police Station
13- On 30 November 2004- 8 Hindus convicted in Bharuch district under Amod Police Station
14- On 10 December 2004- 8 Muslims were convicted in Bharuch
15- On 31 December 2004- 3 Hindus were convicted in Bharuch district under Ankleshwar Police Station
16- On 31 January 2005- 13 Hindus were convicted in Ahmedabad
17- On 16 February 2005- 9 Hindus were convicted in Sabarkantha district
18 – On 23 February 2005- 3 Hindus were convicted in Ahmedabad
19- On 24 February 2005- 2 Hindus were convicted in Panchmahal district
20- On 22 July 2005- 6 Muslims were convicted in Bharuch district in Ankleshwar city
21- On 28 July 2005- 7 Muslims were convicted in Ahmedabad
22- On 4 August 2005- 2 confessing Muslims were convicted
This was reported by Deccan Herald the next day, 5 August 2005. The Muslims confessed their crime.
http://archive.deccanherald.com/Deccanherald/aug52005/national172323200584.asp
23 – On 11 October 2005- 27 Hindus convicted in Kalol town in Panchmahal district
24- On 24 October 2005- 5 Hindus convicted in Panchmahal district
25- On 7 December 2005- 8 Hindus convicted in Ahmedabad
26- On 14 December 2005- 14 Hindus were convicted
http://www.rediff.com/news/2005/dec/14godhra.htm
27- On 24 February 2006- 9 Hindus were convicted (Outside Gujarat)
http://www.rediff.com/news/2006/feb/24gujarat.htm
28- On 10 March 2006- 3 Hindus were convicted in Bhavnagar
29- On 18 March 2006- 7 Muslims were convicted
http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=174094
30- On 28 March 2006- 9 Muslims were convicted
http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=65065
31- On 14 April 2006- 11 Hindus convicted
32- On 8 May 2006- 4 Muslims convicted in Ahmedabad
33- On 12 May 2006- 5 Muslims were convicted in Ahmedabad district under Sanand Police Station
34- On 14 May 2006- 5 Muslims were convicted
http://www.hindustantimes.com/POTA-court-convicts-five-in-Ahmedabad-blast-case/Article1-97222.aspx
35- On 18 May 2006- 4 Muslims were convicted
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/postgodhra-riots-dna-test-nails-4-killers/4719/
36 – On 29 May 2006- 5 Hindus were convicted in Anand
37- On 1 June 2006- 11 Hindus were convicted in Gandhinagar district under Adalaj Police Station
38- On 23 November 2006- 3 Muslims were convicted for blasts on 6 August 2002 in Ahmedabad in which no one was killed but caused panic
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2006-11-23/india/27818103_1_pota-court-pota-case-memco
39- On 25 January 2007- 33 Hindus were convicted in Mehsana district
40- On 19 September 2007- 1 Muslim was convicted
41- On 30 October 2007- 11 Hindus were convicted
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2007-10-30/india/27970801_1_godhra-riots-gujarat-riots-life-term
42- On 18 January 2008- 12 Hindus were convicted in the famous Bilkis Bano case (outside Gujarat)
http://www.hindu.com/2008/01/22/stories/2008012259991300.htm
But on 4 May 2017 the Mumbai High Court convicted 7 more people, to make the total number of convictions in this case as 19.
http://www.rediff.com/news/report/no-death-penalty-for-bilkis-banos-rapists-bombay-hc/20170504.htm
43- On 20 August 2009- 2 Muslims convicted in Sabarkantha district
44- On 13 July 2011- 6 Hindus were convicted
http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Ahmedabad/Six-convicted-in-post-Godhra-riot-case-after-nine-years/Article1-720552.aspx
45- On 9 Nov 2011- 31 Hindus were convicted for the Sadarpura case
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-11-09/india/30377556_1_riot-case-riot-victims-sardarpura
46- On 9 April 2012- 23 Hindus were convicted
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_gujarat-riots-court-convicts-23-acquits-23-for-ode-massacre_1673458
47-On 4 May 2012- 9 Hindus were convicted
http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=250003912#page=2
48- On 30 July 2012- 22 Hindus were convicted
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article3702882.ece
49-On 29 August 2012- 32 Hindus were convicted for the Naroda Patiya killings
http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/other-states/article3835078.ece
50- On 2 June 2016- 24 Hindus were convicted for the Gulberg Society killings (in which Ehsan Jafri was killed).
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/550068/gulberg-society-massacre-verdict-likely.html
51- On 4 August 2016- 11 Hindus were convicted in a case in Mehsana district in which the accused had been acquitted by the trial court in 2005.
52- On 22 Feb 2011- 31 Muslims were convicted for GODHRA roasting of karsewaks which was the cause of everything
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-03-01/india/28643060_1_haji-billa-godhra-train-rajjak-kurkur
Now adding all those convicted, we get 111 Muslims convicted in all, 31 for Godhra and 80 for post-Godhra. And we have at least 373 Hindus convicted.
We have seen some of the court judgments sentencing Muslims for the Gujarat riots. This is direct evidence that even after Godhra, the riots that happened were not one-sided. But despite this, the media refuses to budge and accept the truth. And it continues to lie causing immense damage to the country. More details of this issue are given in the book, which are not on the website.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_______________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 20: Zakia Jafri’s complaint against Narendra Modi is a genuine one
FACT: First thing to be noted is that Zakia Jafri did not make any complaint against Narendra Modi at all, for as many as 4 years after the 2002 riots, i.e. until 2006! In this time, she made statements before the police, the Nanavati Commission, filed affidavits in the courts as well and never once
FACT: First thing to be noted is that Zakia Jafri did not make any complaint against Narendra Modi at all, for as many as 4 years after the 2002 riots, i.e. until 2006! In this time, she made statements before the police, the Nanavati Commission, filed affidavits in the courts as well and never once made any complaint against Narendra Modi. It is only after 2006 that she began speaking against Modi, perhaps tutored by some influential ‘activists’ when they saw this as a chance to frame and crucify the biggest fish!
The complaint, filed against Modi and 61 others including Government officials and State Ministers by the wife of late Congress leader Ehsan Jafri who was killed in the 2002 riots , was a bundle of inexplicable factual errors, legal loopholes and wild allegations and virtually looked like a tutored child’s complaint , simply impossible to prove.
Factual blunders
Zakia Jafri’s complaint has named a man as Babubhai Rajput, worker of the BJP as accused No 24. The SIT after probing the case found that no such person was in existence at the time of the 2002 riots! (On page 19 of its report). He of course does not live at the address provided in the complaint now.
The complaint has a charge that the Anand district police chief B S Jebalia was not only a witness to the massacre at Ode village soon after the Godhra carnage of 27 February 2002 but was also an abettor in it through a blatant connivance. The complainant obviously did not know that the truth is that another police officer, B D Vaghela, and not Jebalia , was posted as Anand district police chief at that time!
Zakia’s complaint also says that the then Chief Secretary Subba Rao participated in the February 27 (2002) night meeting in which it alleged Chief Minister gave orders to officers to direct law enforcement agencies to allow Hindus to give vent to their feelings in reaction to Godhra carnage. But the fact is Subba Rao was on leave on that day and instead of him it was acting Chief Secretary S K Varma who participated in the meeting. This blunder has been made by many Narendra Modi-baiters, such as weekly Outlook in its article dated 3 June 2002 trying to nail Modi forcibly. Obviously, Zakia Jafri engaged some people to do some search and make allegations. This single blunder is enough to see through the claims of people like Zakia Jafri and magazines like Outlook.
But that is not all! Many persons who had either no direct connection with the 2002 riots or had in fact played positive role in controlling the riots have been named as conspirators and abettors in the complaint filed by Zakia Jafri. These seriously militate against the established canons of law and justice. For example, former Ahmedabad police commissioner KR Kaushik who was brought on to the post to control the riots has also been named as an accused. How can Kaushik be accused as an abettor or conspirator when he had been brought in to control the riots and after whose arrival there was further improvement in law and order situation in Ahmedabad ? Actually the Commissioner P C Pandey’s removal was demanded (despite the fact that he too did a commendable job) and as the controversy escalated in 2002, Kaushik was appointed. He was appointed on 10 May 2002, after which riots virtually ended, and the Army did not need to remain in Ahmedabad within 10 days, as it left on 21 May 2002.
http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/may/10train.htm
The riots, thus, ended very soon after Kaushik took charge.
The complaint has been filed by people who either did not know this fact, or did not know the reason behind Kaushik’s appointment and the fact that after his appointment there was further improvement in law and order in Ahmedabad.
Zakia Jafri has further alleged in her complaint that the remains of the slain karsevaks were purposefully brought from Godhra to Ahmedabad “in a ceremonial procession” on February 27 after the carnage at Godhra railway station in order to instigate Hindus to target Muslims. Of course, this is again wrong on facts!
The fact is that the bodies were brought to Ahmedabad after midnight of February 27 in a very sombre atmosphere and not in a ceremonial procession. Also, the bodies were brought to the then isolated Sola Civil Hospital on the western outskirts of Ahmedabad as a precautionary measure and not to the Ahmedabad’s main civil hospital which is located in eastern Ahmedabad from where most of the killed karsevaks came. Sola Civil Hospital was in 2002 located in the far outskirts of Ahmedabad and had very little population around it. This shows the Government’s efforts to control the situation.
Had the Government planned to instigate the Hindus then it would have brought the bodies to the Ahmedabad’s main civil hospital in Eastern Ahmedabad where most of the karsevaks resided and from where it would have been ideal to orchestrate violence against Muslims. The Government conduct clearly implies that it tried to take preventive measures to pre-empt Hindu retaliation after the Godhra carnage. We also seen various other steps taken to control and prevent violence in previous chapters.
Wild allegations
But the most unimaginable allegation she makes against the Chief Minister Narendra Modi is that while issuing instructions to his officials in the February 27 night meeting to give long rope to Hindu rioters Modi also indicated that Hindus be encouraged to “indulge in sexual violence against Muslim women”. This whole mischievous and manufactured charge has to be seen in the light of the fact that many Muslim witnesses who claimed to have witnessed acts of rape on Muslim women in their 2003 affidavit before the Supreme Court later told the SIT in May, 2009 that they had been made to make the false charge by human rights activists. India Today weekly’s report titled “Inhuman Rights”in its issue dated 5 April 2010 has, for a change, completely dismantled the human rights lobby.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/Inhuman+rights/1/89840.html
In the first place, we have already seen in Myth 19 as to fake and phony this charge of Narendra Modi telling officers to go slow on Hindus or ‘allow Hindus to vent their anger’ is. Narendra Modi is also not a fool to openly give such orders to so many officials in such a meeting where any of the officers could have secretly recorded such orders or which would have had 9 witnesses against Narendra Modi. If he did want such orders to be issued, he would have done it through middlemen and other communicators being careful not to come into the picture directly! It is astonishing to see that no one with an iota of common sense has till now raised this point. Assuming that Narendra Modi did give such instructions in that 27 Feb meeting, is it believable that he would have told police officials and other authorities to tell Hindus to ‘indulge in sexual violence against Muslim women’? This is an utterly unbelievable and far-fetched allegation. And in the third place, irrespective of what Narendra Modi said in that meeting, we know that the police did not at all allow Hindus to vent their anger the next day, or the remaining days. We say how curfew was imposed, 1000+ rounds fired on the first day including 600+ in Ahmedabad, 17 shot dead by police, 700 arrests made etc etc.
In support of her charge that Modi gave instructions to his officials not to act against Hindu rioters in the February 27 night meeting she produces only one piece of evidence, namely the deposition of former Gujarat IPS officer RB Sreekumar who told the Nanavati Commission in an affidavit and later also the SIT that the then Director General of Police VK Chakravarty, who participated in that crucial February 27 meeting, told him that the CM had directed officers to go slow against Hindu rioters and allow them to give vent to their feelings against the Muslims. Chakravarty has denied ever saying this to Sreekumar.
What Chakravarty and many other officials involved with police department at that time told the Nanavati Commission was exactly the opposite. They said Modi had told them to control the riots. Plus, Sreekumar started making anti-Modi charges in the case only after the Government denied him promotion on strong grounds. He didn’t make the same charge in his first two affidavits.
We have already seen in Myth 19 the truth of the 27 February meeting. Also note here that the SIT appointed by the Supreme Court with judges like Arijit Pasayat and Aftab Alam who have commented against the Gujarat Government many times, debunked the claim of Sanjiv Bhat that he was present and blamed NGOs for forcibly trying to find something against Narendra Modi. This is a must read report of the SIT.
Also note that Ehsan Jafri fired on the Hindu crowd outside his house in self-defense on 28 Feb 2002. This was reported by The Times of India online on 28 Feb and in weekly Outlook dated 11 March 2002 also in weekly India Today dated 18 March 2002 and also on 5 April 2010. It is a well established fact that Jafri fired on the Hindu crowd in self-defense. But Zakia Jafri denied even this basic fact as reported by weekly India Today dated 18 March 2002. That is, in its 18 March 2002 issue India Today reported that “Zakia Jafri denies that Ehsan Jafri fired on the mob”. We quote from Times of India online edition 28 Feb night at 9:47 PM “Meanwhile fire tenders which rushed to the spot were turned back by the irate mob which disallowed the Ahmedabad fire brigade (AFB) personnel and the district police from rushing to rescue…Sources in Congress Party said that the former MP after waiting in vain till 12.30 pm for official help to arrive had opened fire on the mob in self-defense, injuring four..”.
Zakia Jafri also has not bothered to mention the following facts:
1- Reinforcements did arrive (as reported by weekly India Today dated 18 March 2002) but by that time the mob had swelled to 10,000. Zakia Jafri herself said as reported by weekly India Today dated 18 March 2002 that “She had never seen such a huge mob”.
2- Though the police were overwhelmingly outnumbered and the mob did not allow the police and the fire brigade to enter Jafri’s house (as reported by Times of India in its online edition on 28 February) the police bravely fired on the crowd at a great risk to personal life and shot dead 5 Hindus outside his house and injured many others, as reported by Times of India and India Today. False claim on Ehsan Jafri calling Modi has also been made when so such call was made, this claim too has been comprehensively debunked by us in Myth 11.
3- Police saved 180 Muslims in this episode since there were 250 people inside the house and the mob killed 68 (assuming all missing were are dead) though they were overwhelmingly outnumbered.
The media hid from the public for many years that a top accused in this case was none other than Congress leader Meghsingh Chaudhary himself. He was arrested not by Gujarat police, but by the SC-appointed SIT itself in 2009. http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2009-03-26/subverse/28032145_1_religious-symbols-religion-and-politics-gulbarga-society
Legal loopholes
There are several law sections applied in the complaint which are simply inapplicable in the manner she has done. Like Jafri has asked section 193 of IPC to be applied which is about giving false evidence in court during judicial proceedings. But this section can be applied only by the court and not an individual. Then Section six of the Commission of Inquiry Act has also been slapped on the accused by Jafri which only a commission of inquiry can apply.
Then the Protection of Human Rights Act too is wrongly invoked in the complaint whose actual prayer is that the complaint should be turned into an FIR for registering cases against Modi and other accused as conspirators and abettors in the 2002 riots.
Interestingly, the many factual and other contradictions in Jafri’s complaint show that old complaints of 2002 filed by Muslims and human rights activists with a view to building a case against the Modi government and having it pulled down under Article 356 of the Constitution had been put together in a footloose manner for Jafri by some low level lawyer in a form of one full-fledged complaint. Clearly, the situation stands reversed. Today, Narendra Modi can now file a defamation case against Jafri. The role of the media in all this is of course, disgusting. It is simply impossible that the “Gujarat-obsessed” media would not have known these facts. But they did not bother to report them. Not a single paper has ever bothered to publish these facts, so much is their hatred for Narendra Modi. The media knows that if the truth of Zakia Jafri’s complaint comes out, even the most biased judge cannot convict Narendra Modi or entertain the complaint and hence it is suppressing all these facts.
Only weekly India Today has published just some of the few errors, and that too much after the case was settled by the Supreme Court of India- when on 12 September 2011, the Supreme Court ordered the case to go back to the trial court and end its monitoring, and refused to file an FIR against Narendra Modi. What prevented weekly India Today from carrying all the errors, or most of the errors, when the complaint was filed and still in courts is a question worth asking. Perhaps it wanted the Supreme Court to entertain such a childish complaint of Jafri so that Modi could be crucified. But when it was no longer possible for the Supreme Court to entertain and monitor such a complaint, it just let slip in bits and pieces of the truth. India Today did admit that Zakia Jafri’s complaint contained some errors when it wrote “The real reason for the court’s ruling perhaps lies in the series of glaring factual errors and misplaced allegations in Zakia’s complaint. She alleged that Modi gave instructions to officials in a meeting at his residence on the night of February 27, 2002, the day 59 Hindus were killed at Godhra, that the community should be allowed to give vent to its anger against Muslims. She also alleged that the state government “sanctioned sexual violence against women”. The list of officials Zakia has named as being present at the meeting is also inaccurate. She claims the then chief secretary G. Subbarao and Modi’s secretary A.K. Sharma were present, which was not the case. Zakia also wrongly alleged that the burned bodies of the 59 victims of the Godhra carnage were brought to Ahmedabad in a ceremonial procession to inflame Hindu passions. The bodies were actually brought without any brouhaha to Ahmedabad’s western outskirts to be handed over to the relatives. “
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/2002-gujarat-riots-narendra-modi-supreme-court-order/1/151573.htm
More details of this complaint’s childish nature and numerous mistakes are given comprehensively in the book, but not in this website. A special chapter on the SIT report is also in the book, which reveals everything about this complaint’s nature and the SIT’s observations.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
___________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 13: Narendra Modi said-“Every action has equal and opposite reaction”
FACT: Balbir Punj writes-“Blatant myths and fiction have lacerated the facts on Gujarat. The Times of India (March 3) reported Modi’s much-publicised misquote of Newton’s third law—”Every action has an equal and opposite reaction”. In fact, the CM had never said such a thing and no other paper except for Times of India had carried
FACT: Balbir Punj writes-“Blatant myths and fiction have lacerated the facts on Gujarat. The Times of India (March 3) reported Modi’s much-publicised misquote of Newton’s third law—”Every action has an equal and opposite reaction”. In fact, the CM had never said such a thing and no other paper except for Times of India had carried the misquote in its original reportage. But later on, numerous editorials were penned on the basis of this canard. All his denials were thrown in the dustbin…”
Virendra Kapoor wrote in Cybernoon on 19 March 2002-
“An angry Modi wrote to the English daily, which had first put the quote in his mouth, protesting that he had never met its correspondent nor had he an occasion to say what he had been quoted as having said and that it was only fair that the paper made amends for its wholly ‘inventive reportage.’ The newspaper editors, however, refused to do so and two weeks later were still sitting on Modi’s letter. Left to himself perhaps the paper’s senior-most editor may well have published Modi’s letter but since his writ does not run and the place is teeming with new-fangled journalists who openly talk of blacking out all news about the Sangh Parivar, and the paper’s management is only obsessed with packing nothing other than revenue-earning advertisement in its columns, Modi’s letter has not been published. Modi, therefore, is not entirely wrong in complaining of the bias of the media and the attempt to tar his image. For, the quote in the said paper was immediately recycled and rehashed by the rest of the print and audio visual media.
Inquiries reveal that no one from the paper had met the Gujarat Chief Minister on the day he is supposed to have quoted Newton’s law to its correspondent to justify the revenge killings of the minority community in Ahmedabad and other places in the state. The paper’s editors too have concluded that the said quote was ‘invented’ by the correspondent to indicate ‘the attitude of the Modi government.’ Indeed, it was all a cooked up job to justify what the paper’s deputy bureau chief in New Delhi said at a gathering of secularist scribes to ‘fight the fascist forces and not to give them any space in ‘our’ papers.’
Time the owners woke up to this little upstart who seeks to usurp the ownership of their paper for his own brand of fascism.
Meanwhile, Modi is contemplating taking his complaint to the Press Council of India.”
Even the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigating Team (SIT) said in its report submitted to the court that there is no evidence at all of Narendra Modi saying “Every action has equal and opposite reaction” and his statements were quoted out-of-context and twisted.
When anyone makes an allegation, he has to prove it. No one has ever been able to prove that Modi ever uttered these words. And these people- far from apologizing- have not even published Modi’s denials.
Some more details of this issue are given in the book but not in this website.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
______________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 11: In Ehsan Jafri’s case, women were raped
Fact: The following is some part of Arundhati Roy’s article in weekly Outlook dated 6 May 2002 on the Ehsan Jafri case: “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
Fact: The following is some part of Arundhati Roy’s article in weekly Outlook dated 6 May 2002 on the Ehsan Jafri case:
“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…
…A mob surrounded the house of former Congress MP Iqbal Ehsan Jaffri. His phone calls to the Director-General of Police, the Police Commissioner, the Chief Secretary, the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) were ignored. [Our comment: Notice how in this article, as late as May 2002, even Arundhati Roy does not claim that Jafri called Modi! All these claims of calls to Police Commissioner, Chief Secretary are false. The SIT examined call records of the Police Commissioner Pandey and found that no call was made by Jafri. And that day, the Chief Secretary was abroad, out of India on leave! But even Roy doesn’t name Modi!] The mobile police vans around his house did not intervene. The mob broke into the house. They stripped his daughters and burned them alive. Then they beheaded Ehsan Jaffri and dismembered him. Of course it’s only a coincidence that Jaffri was a trenchant critic of Gujarat Chief Minister, Narendra Modi, during his campaign for the Rajkot Assembly by-election in February…”
Outlook had the guts to publish a rebuttal from a senior functionary of the BJP, the then Rajya Sabha MP Balbir Punj. The following was the reply:
“Fiddling With Facts As Gujarat Burns
Introduction: The Roys in the media are harming India with half-truths and worse.
“(Here Balbir Punj quotes some sentences from Roy’s article dated 6th May 2002)…
That was the Goddess of small things, Arundhati Roy, painting the big picture of Gujarat in Democracy: Who’s she when she’s at home? (Outlook,May 6, 2002). Roy sums here neatly almost all the charges against the Sangh Parivar. When a reputed weekly like Outlook publishes a Booker Prize-winner, it is meant to be serious commentary.(NOTE: Here we completely disagree with Balbir Punj. In our opinion, Outlook is not a reputed weekly but a weekly run by a Congress sychophant loyalist Vinod Mehta, and Arundhati Roy, though a Booker Prize winner, is no respected writer whose writing is serious commentary, but an ultra-Left author whose articles are not taken seriously by now as she has written many imaginary stories full of hyperbole). And concomitantly, Roy has put her brilliant linguistic skills to the service of “truth”. Read her graphic details—”The mob broke into the house. They stripped his daughters and burnt them alive”. Roy speaks with the confidence of an eyewitness. Alternatively, she must’ve access to an eyewitness. Anyway, it reads heart-rendingly honest.
Heart-rending, yes, but honest, no. Jaffri was killed in the riots but his daughters were neither “stripped” nor “burnt alive”. T.A. Jafri, his son, in a front-page interview titled Nobody knew my father’s house was the target (Asian Age, May 2, Delhi edition), says, “Among my brothers and sisters, I am the only one living in India. And I am the eldest in the family. My sister and brother live in the US. I am 40 years old and I have been born and brought up in Ahmedabad.”
So, Roy is lying—for surely Jafri is not. But what about the hundreds of media lies that haven’t been exhumed as yet? Her seven-page long (approx: 6,000 words) hate charter against India and the Sangh Parivar is woven around just two specific cases of human tragedy, one of which—by now, we know for sure—is a piece of fiction…
…She terms Gujarat the “petri dish” of the Sangh Parivar. The fact is that Godhra has been used as a crucible by the secular fundamentalists. No wonder, after the roasting of the Ram sevaks, they, while condemning the crime, blamed the victims. Many of them invented events such as a quarrel with hawkers, misbehaviour with women and shouting of provocative slogans to justify the horrendous crime…
…But was what happened in Gujarat a “pogrom” targeted at Muslims? Loss of 900-odd innocent lives (both Hindus and Muslims) is definitely not a “genocide” of any one community. Yet it is one more shameful event in the long and unfortunate chain of communal riots in India, since the 1893 Bombay and Azamgarh riots. Beginning from the 1714 Holi riots in the Mughal period, Ahmedabad itself has witnessed no less than 10 major recorded riots.
The Sangh Parivar was not there in 1714, nor was it a dominant force during the ‘69 and ‘85 riots. So what explains these riots when Gujarat was not a ‘Sangh Parivar petri dish’?…
…Following Godhra, massive spontaneous violence broke out in various parts of Gujarat against the Muslims. Since the rioters were mainly Hindus, they also accounted for about 75 per cent of those who fell to police bullets in the first three days. In fact, till April 18 Hindus accounted for more deaths in police firing than Muslims.
But for almost three weeks now, the violence has been led by Muslims against Hindus and, naturally, a bulk of the casualties are accounted for by them. The police have booked 34,000 rioters, majority of whom are Hindus. Both communities have suffered heavy loss of business and property in the arson and looting. While rioters are communal in picking their targets, looters are not—and they target at random. One lakh Muslims are struggling in relief camps, but so are 40,000 Hindus. This is a horrible riot, which is sad enough, but why call it a genocide? Whom does it help? Not the riot victims, only our enemies across the border.
The country hasn’t suffered so much loss of face in the world as it has now, though it is like one of the scores of riots India has seen. Why? The obvious culprits are those who set ablaze a compartment full of innocent kar sevaks at Godhra and those who indulged in the senseless violence in the following weeks. But the real villains in tarring India’s image are the Roys in the media and a section of public life, who mix half-truths with fiction to settle their ideological or political scores with the Sangh Parivar.
Roy (a role model for several in the secular pack) opens her hate charter with the case of a woman named Sayeeda “whose stomach was ripped open and stuffed with burning rags”. I heard similar horror stories in Parliament. The most frequently quoted were the cases of women raped (in some cases gang-raped), their stomachs ripped open, foetuses taken out and paraded on swords or trishuls. But no one was able to give me even one specific case with all the particulars. Roy gave one, but it proved to be a piece of fiction…
… Blatant myths and fiction have lacerated the facts on Gujarat. The Times of India(March 3) reported Modi’s much-publicised misquote of Newton’s third law—”Every action has an equal and opposite reaction”. In fact, the CM had never said such a thing and no other paper except for Times of India had carried the misquote in its original reportage. But later on, numerous editorials were penned on the basis of this canard. All his denials were thrown in the dustbin…
…The Editor’s Guild came down heavily on the Gujarati press and hailed the role of the English press in coverage of the riots. The former might have been guilty of exaggeration but I am sure it has not concocted stories the way the Roys did in the English media. Surprisingly, the Guild has nothing critical to say on the role of the electronic media and of the Roys, guilty of blackening India’s name, generating more communal hate at a critical time and demonising a section of citizens through half-truths and complete lies. Some rioters may be guilty of rape and should be punished for their heinous crimes, but what about those who have raped the truth and the country in the last two months?”
This really gave the game up. After this, Arundhati Roy wrote “An apology”. The full text of that apology is reproduced here:
“To the Jaffri Family, An Apology
In a situation like the one that prevails in Gujarat, when the police are reluctant to register FIRs, when the administration is openly hostile to those trying to gather facts, and when the killings go on unabated—then panic, fear and rumour play a pivotal role.(Note how she blames others for her fault!) People who have disappeared are presumed dead, people who have been dismembered and burnt cannot be identified, and people who are distraught and traumatized are incoherent. So even when those of us who write try and use the most reliable sources, mistakes can happen.
But in an atmosphere so charged with violence, grief and mistrust, its important to correct mistakes that are pointed out.
There is a factual error in my essay Democracy: Where’s she when she’s at home? (May 6). In describing the brutal killing of Ehsan Jaffri, I have said that his daughters had been killed along with their father. It has subsequently been pointed out to me that this is not correct. Eyewitness accounts say that Ehsan Jaffri was killed along with his three brothers and two nephews. His daughters were not among the 10 women who were raped and killed in Chamanpura that day.
I apologise to the Jaffri family for compounding their anguish. I’m truly sorry.
My information (mis-information, as it turned out) was cross-checked from two sources. Time magazine (March 11) in an article by Meenakshi Ganguly and Anthony Spaeth; and “Gujarat Carnage 2002: A Report to the Nation” by an independent fact-finding mission which included K.S. Subrahmanyam, former IGP Tripura, and S.P. Shukla, former finance secretary. I spoke to Mr Subrahmanyam about the error. He said his information at that time came from a senior police official.(What was the name of the senior police official? Neither Subrahmanyam nor Arundhati Roy reveal it!)
This and other genuine errors in recounting the details of the violence in Gujarat in no way alters the substance of what journalists, fact-finding missions, or writers like myself are saying.”
The link is: http://www.outlookindia.com/rants.asp?type=single&id=20020527133759
Years later, Balbir Punj wrote in weekly Organiser dated 9 July 2006:
“Some four years ago I had a clash in print with Arundhati Roy. The occasion was the Gujarat riots that had come as a windfall to ‘secular’ brigade’s publicity campaign. Those ‘secularists’ are no where visible, not even with a telescope, when Hindus are killed in Doda...
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 [He was Prashant Bhushan], replied that the police had no power to issue summons. Thus she hedged behind technical excuses. I took up this incident in my rejoinder published as Dissimulation In Word and Images (The Outlook, July 8, 2002).”
See link:
http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=138&page=8
This incidentally also exposes Prashant Bhushan as a liar, and an accomplice-in-crime of Arundhati Roy. He too knew that that story by Arundhati Roy was concocted and not true, but he defended Arundhati Roy on some technical excuse.
However, here it is worth mentioning a couple of things which even Balbir Punj did not mention. This apology is also false, since Roy claims that 10 women were raped and killed that day. In reality, after reading the then English newspapers in the first week of March 2002, one finds no mention of any rapes at all. These stories of rape starting coming out in the middle of March 2002, after Time magazine concocted lies in its issue of 11 March 2002, copied by Arundhati Roy. Neither Roy nor the Time correspondent can point out any rapes, because they just didn’t happen. Roy also apologizes to the Jafri family- not to the BJP or Narendra Modi for defaming them by her incorrect claim. She should also have done that. And she should also have apologized to the country. Note how while giving the apology Roy makes sure that is only “To the Jafri family”.
Second incorrect fact- the police did nothing to stop the mob in Jafri’s house. India Today weekly dated 18 March 2002 clearly admits that at least 5 people were shot dead by the police outside Jafri’s house. The police also saved the lives of some 200 Muslims, since 68 out of the 250 people inside the house died. Jafri’s widow Zakia Jafri also said in her statement to the Police, recorded under Section 161 of CrPC on 6 March 2002 that the police saved her and many others. It was impossible for the police to control the mob of around 10,000+ people and the mob had gone crazy after Jafri fired from his revolver on the crowd, which injured 15 Hindus and killed 1- as per the SIT report on page 1. But despite this the police saved 200 Muslims in this episode. It was impossible for the police to control the mob of around 10,000 people- but they managed to disperse the mob by 8 PM on 28 February- according The Times of India’s online report at 9:41 PM published the same day. And nowhere did The Times of India accuse the police of not doing anything. On the contrary, it said that the furious mob, gone crazy by Jafri firing on it, did not allow fire tenders to reach the house. And this Times of India report POSTED ONLINE at 2:34 PM of 28 February also says that police fired on the crowd injuring 6, who were taken to hospital where 3 were critical at that time, and ultimately 5 died. The SIT report said on page 1, that the police lathi-charged the mob, fired 124 rounds, and burst 134 tear gas shells at the spot on 28 February 2002, in which 4 Hindus were killed and 11 injured.
Out of the 250 people in the complex- police saved around 200, at least 180.
The Human Rights Watch in its report quotes 38 year old Mehboob Mansoori, a witness who lost 18 from his family at Gulbarg Society as saying: “Early in the day at 10:30 the police commissioner came over and said don’t worry. He spoke to Jaffrey and said something would work out then left. The name of the commissioner of police that visited in the morning is P.C. Pandey, commissioner of police Ahmedabad…”
Actually the testimony of this witness is a poorly constructed story. S K Modi in his book “Godhra: The Missing Rage” had quoted this story and completely dismantled it. But even he mentions that P C Pande visited the place at 10:30 AM.But the SC-appointed SIT has dismissed this claim after talking to P C Pandey and examining all evidence and said that instead it was Congress Mahamantri Ambalal Nadia who came to meet Jafri at Gulbarg Society at 10 AM and left 10:30 AM. The SIT has said in its report that: “It is established that Shri P C Pandey did not visit Gulbarg Society in the forenoon of 28 Feb”.
Also Roy says-“His phone calls to the Director-General of Police, the Police Commissioner, the Chief Secretary, the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) were ignored. The mobile police vans around his house did not intervene.” What rubbish again! Police vans outside his house not only intervened, they shot dead 5 rioters outside his house and saved the lives of 200 Muslims, at a great risk to their own personal life. Roy’s lies are exposed since that day (28 February) the Chief Secretary was abroad, out of India on leave as mentioned in SIT closure report, page 448. He was recalled immediately after Godhra on 27 Feb and he returned on 1 March 2002. So how could Jafri have called the Chief Secretary for help on 28 Feb when he was out of India on leave that day?
The SIT has examined call records of the then Police Commissioner P C Pandey of 28 Feb 2002 and found that 302 calls had been made/received by him on that day, but they do not include any call by Ehsan Jafri, whose landline was the only phone in operation in the entire Housing complex on 28 Feb 2002. Thus Arundhati Roy’s claim that Jafri called the Police Commissioner (P C Pandey) is proved false from call records, mentioned by the SIT in its report.
Note here that Roy does not claim that Jafri telephoned the Chief Minister Narendra Modi as late as May 2002! Now- lies are out that Jafri actually phoned Modi as was abused by Modi on phone! For full truth of this lie, read Myth 23.
The Times of India in its online edition on 28 February 2002 reported at 2:34 PM :
“Ahmedabad: At least six persons were injured when police opened fire to disperse a rampaging mob in Meghaninagar area of the city on Thursday afternoon. The injured were brought to civil hospital where the condition of at least three is stated to be serious…the incident took place at Chamanpura area under Meghaninagar police station…”
That is, as early as 2:34 PM itself police had injured 6 outside Ehsan Jafri’s house and actually 5 were killed in their firing and 11 injured. This despite the hopeless situation, which is clear from reading The Times’ report that Fire Brigade and Police were not allowed to be reached by the mob. Though police gained control only after 8 PM- they fired much before that- before 2 PM and saved 200 Muslims. Kalupur was already under curfew before 2:34 PM. The SIT report also says on page 1 that the police lathi-charged the crowd, fired 124 rounds and burst 134 tear-gas shells at Ehsan Jafri’s place, and killed 4 Hindus in firing and injured 11.
We quote from Times of India online edition 28 Feb night at 9:41 PM “Meanwhile fire tenders which rushed to the spot (Chamanpura- Ehsan Jafri case) were turned back by the irate mob which disallowed the Ahmedabad Fire Brigade (AFB) personnel and the district police from rushing to rescue…Sources in Congress Party said that the former MP after waiting in vain till 12.30 pm for official help to arrive had opened fire on the mob in self-defense, injuring four..”. Thus the Police and the Fire Brigade ‘rushed to the rescue’ and did not indulge in neglect of duty.
Some other questions which can be raised here are: Why didn’t Jafri call any CONGRESS LEADER and ask the Congress Party to assemble 500 workers outside his house to save his life? Why couldn’t the Congress Party have do anything to save its former MP? Jafri was reported to have called Amarsinh Chaudhary, the then PCC chief, and indeed made several calls to CONGRESS LEADERS also. The media hid from the public for many years that a top accused in this case was none other than Congress leader Meghsingh Chaudhary himself. He was arrested not by Gujarat police, but by the SC-appointed SIT itself in 2009. One link: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2009-03-26/subverse/28032145_1_religious-symbols-religion-and-politics-gulbarga-society
Even the National Commission for Women in its report stated that the media needlessly exaggerated the plight of women victims of the communal carnage. The NCW team visited Gujarat on 10, 11 and 12 April 2002. On 22nd April 2002, Tehelka’s website said–“Nafisa Hussain, a member of the NCW, has gone on record saying that several organisations and the media have needlessly blown out of proportion the violence suffered by minority women in the communal riots of Gujarat.”
More details of this issue are given comprehensively in the book, but not in this website. A special chapter on the SIT report is also in the book, which reveals the whole truth and the SIT’s observations.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
____________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 6: Gujarat riots were the ‘worst ever massacre’ in India
Fact: Gujarat riots of 2002 AD were much lesser as compared to Gujarat’s past riots of 1969 and 1985 AD. Gujarat also saw riots of a large scale in 1980, 1982, 1990-91- 92. Some people claim that even the 1987 Ahmedabad riots were worse than the 2002 riots in the state. And the 2002 riots
Fact: Gujarat riots of 2002 AD were much lesser as compared to Gujarat’s past riots of 1969 and 1985 AD. Gujarat also saw riots of a large scale in 1980, 1982, 1990-91- 92. Some people claim that even the 1987 Ahmedabad riots were worse than the 2002 riots in the state. And the 2002 riots were again almost nothing as compared to pre-Independence riots of the 1940’s in Ahmedabad when the Hindu community took a sound beating. In the 1960s, in 10 years there were 2938 riots, as reported by the Reddy Commission, coming to an average of 3 riots every 4 days. In 1969, curfew was imposed for 65 days in a row. In 1985, violence continued for as long as six months, from February to July.
And there were many more riots far far worse than the 2002 Gujarat riots in India- not to talk of the 1947 Partition riots. Let it be repeated here that we consider even a single killing as one too many. There is no justification for a single death, be it a Hindu or a Muslim, but that doesn’t give anyone the license to lie that “The Gujarat riots were the ‘worst-ever massacre’ in India”.
Much worse riots took place in New Delhi in 1984 under the Congress Party’s rule. Officially 3,000 people were killed. Ranganath Mishra Commission gave the number of 3874 out of which 2307 were in Delhi alone. Riots were also not limited to New Delhi then. They occurred in places like West Bengal, Tripura as well. Killings of more than 40,000 Indians have happened in Jammu and Kashmir state of India. 1000 people were killed in Gujarat in 2002 AD, for the sins of 2000 attackers of Godhra. Out of them, more than 250 are Hindus. Post-Godhra riots were neither ‘pogrom’, nor ‘genocide’, nor ‘massacre’. They were not even ‘massacre’, not to talk of the ‘worst-ever massacre in India.’ Despite this, self-styled secularists like Teesta Setalvad, Harsh Mander, Amulya Ganguly, Prafull Bidwai and some others, like Tehelka, political rivals thriving on Muslim votebank, etc have called the 2002 riots as ‘Gujarat massacre’- and lied that there was “Gujarat massacre of Muslims with the sanction of Narendra Modi”. These people have demanded action against Modi. (An article on some facts about the media can be read here “NDTV is CPM Today“. And another article which is worth reading is “The channels strategy of attacks”. Note that these articles are purely the view of the blogger and not of Gujaratriots.com )
There was no “Gujarat massacre of Muslims” in the 2002 riots but plain Hindu-Muslim riots in which hundreds of Hindus were also killed by Muslims even after the gruesome and horrific roasting of 59 Hindus- including 25 women and 15 children in Godhra and 40,000 Hindus were thrown out of their homes by Muslims despite comprising only 10 % of the population and that too in a state ruled by a Hindu party like the BJP with a man like Narendra Modi as Chief Minister.
The worst ever massacre was of the Hindus during the medieval times. Timur massacred some 1 lakh Hindus on a single day in Delhi in 1399. Nadirshah, the invader, massacred three to four lakh people in 1739 in Delhi. The massacres of Hindus in medieval India would have put Hitler’s Nazi death-chambers of the 1930s to shame. These massacres happened under all the medieval rulers of India including Akbar- who ordered killing of 30,000 Hindus in February 1568. Mahmud of Ghazni also massacred many Hindus in between 1001-1027 AD. Mohammad Ghori also did the same between 1192 to 1206. So did all others. The invaders were like a cloud of locusts destroying and devouring everything on their way. In fact, Professor K.S.Lal in his book “Growth of Muslim population in India” has said that according to his calculations, the Hindu population declined by 80 million between AD 1000 and AD 1525- probably the biggest ever holocaust in world history. 8 crore Hindus were slaughtered by foreign Muslims in this period.
For just a brief and cursory (very very brief and very very cursory)history of Islam in India, see this. This doesn’t focus on the mass murders and massacres of Hindus with detail, which have been given in the book (“Gujarat Riots: The True Story”) but not included in this website.
http://historyofmuslimattacks.blogspot.in/2013/02/islam-in-india-history.html
Pakistan and Bangladesh were also parts of India, and the Hindu population in West Pakistan has declined from 20 % in 1947 to around 1% now- the biggest unreported genocide, massacre and holocaust in recent times. The media and the government did nothing to raise this issue with Pakistan. Similarly, the Hindu population in Bangladesh has declined from 34 % in 1901 to 29 % in 1947, and to 10 % in 2001, and its around 8.6% as per the 2011 census. Even in India, the Hindu population has declined from 85 % in 1951 to 80.5 % in 2001- and according to the 2011 census it is already in the 70s at 79.8%, below 80%. The liberals in the Indian media, human rights activists, and Indian government have never ever raised this complete annihilation of Hindus by Pakistan ever in the world at any forum. On the contrary, the biased people in the media have exaggerated and inflated the case of Gujarat riots along with the Indian media and whitewashed Muslims’ guilt in annihilating Hinduism in Pakistan and Bangladesh and also Kashmir.
Pakistan’s TALLEST Hindu leader, Sudham Chand Chawla was killed in broad daylight in Jacobabad on 29 Jan 2002 while returning from his rice mill. The culprits were not nabbed, nor was any compensation given to his family. He had in fact been complaining to the so-called civil society of Pakistan for years about the threat to his life, to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and yet nobody did anything. If this was the case with the BIGGEST Hindu leader, then what must be the story of ordinary Hindus, who have already been reduced from 20 % in 1947 to just 1 % now?
http://www.sudhamchandchawla.com/
Looking at the modern, independent India, these riots were still very lesser in intensity. The worst ever massacre in independent India was of the Hindus in Kashmir, which continues till date. After that, nothing was worse than the 1984 riots, when the Sikhs were massacred by the ruling Congress Party. In Bhagalpur, Bihar in 1989 under the Congress rule itself more than 1400 people were killed, most of whom were Muslims, after Muslims threw bombs on Hindu localities, and then suffered in retaliation. There were much worse riots in various other places, like in Assam in 1983, Moradabad, Jamshedpur, etc on many other occasions.
More details are given in the book but not included in this website.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 2: Muslims were ‘butchered’ in Gujarat
Fact: Undoubtedly, Muslims were killed in one-sided attacks in many places in the state, like in Naroda Patiya, Gulbarg Society, Naroda Gram, Sadarpura, Ode and other places, but by and large, the riots were not one-sided, and Muslims were hardly the cattle hiding from the slaughter house. As we have seen in a couple of
Fact: Undoubtedly, Muslims were killed in one-sided attacks in many places in the state, like in Naroda Patiya, Gulbarg Society, Naroda Gram, Sadarpura, Ode and other places, but by and large, the riots were not one-sided, and Muslims were hardly the cattle hiding from the slaughter house. As we have seen in a couple of earlier chapters, Muslims were equally on the offensive, at least after the first three days. Muslims killed Hindus brutally in Himmatnagar, Danilimda, and Sindhi Market and other areas of Ahmedabad, as reported by weekly India Today.
To read the full story of India Today–
http://archives.digitaltoday.in/indiatoday/20020415/states.html
See paragraphs 8,9,10,11 and 15 of this story in India Today
The Hindu reported that as early as 1st March 2002 itself, Muslims started violence in Ahmedabad. (See The Hindu’s report on this subject in its issue dated 2nd March 2002).
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/2002/03/02/stories/2002030203050100.htm
See last line of 9th paragraph from the top.
Reports of The Hindu on this subject throughout the months of March and April 2002 make it clear that Muslims were on the offensive, called the shots in many areas, drove out Hindus from their houses, started the riots in many cases. India Today’s report on this subject in its issue dated 15 April 2002 also points out this same thing. To read the full story of “Attacks on Hindus”, read the book.
Around 40,000 Hindus were forced to take shelter in refugee camps. The Dalits suffered heavily in the riots, only at the hands of the Muslims. On 21 March 2002, 50 Hindu shops were burnt in Ahmedabad’s Revdi Bazaar that caused a loss of 15 crore rupees.
See link:
The Muslims attacked the Hindus on 1st and 2nd March 2002 as well. They are on record starting as many as 157 riots in Gujarat after 3rd March 2002. They did not allow the police and the Army to search for criminals in their areas. They pelted the police and even the Army with bullets and stones, when they arrived to conduct search operations in Muslim areas. The Muslims formed human chains and cut off power at night so that the criminals could flee with weapons (from the Army).
Link: http://www.indiatoday.com/itoday/20020415/states.shtml – Paragraph 15 from top.
Several judgments of different courts in Gujarat have sentenced 80 Muslims for rioting after post Godhra. On one occasion, 7 Muslims and on another occasion, 9 Muslims were convicted and punished for rioting and killing after Godhra. The full details of these convictions can be seen in the Chapter “Some court Judgments” given in the book but not in this website and in “Myth 21″.
The conviction of Muslims proves that Muslims were equally on the offensive-and not the cattle hiding from the slaughter house that the media makes them out to be.
To see a link for the conviction of 9 Muslims in Ahmedabad- on 28 March 2006- click here
http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=65065
7 Muslims were convicted on 18 March 2006-
http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=174094
4 Muslims convicted on 18 May 2006-
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/postgodhra-riots-dna-test-nails-4-killers/4719/
A must see article on the role of the Gujarat Government in controlling violence is this:
http://www.gujaratriots.com/29/role-of-the-government-in-controlling-violence/
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Answers to Outlook’s 25 questions
Sundeep Dougal writing in the OutlookIndia posed 25 questions to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi based on the testimony given by Mr. Modi to the Supreme Court appointed SIT. http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?280034 Mr. Modi’s testimony was meant to be confidential but that has not prevented media outlets from leaking stories based on it. Earlier in the week
Sundeep Dougal writing in the OutlookIndia posed 25 questions to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi based on the testimony given by Mr. Modi to the Supreme Court appointed SIT.
http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?280034
Mr. Modi’s testimony was meant to be confidential but that has not prevented media outlets from leaking stories based on it. Earlier in the week The Hindustan Times leaked the testimony in its entirety on its website. All the answers which Narendra Modi gave to SITs questions are leaked here http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/specials/modi.pdf
Here we are answering ALL Of the questions raised. (Some of the points in the answers are taken from OFFSTUMPED’s rebuttal to Outlook, because they are very genuine. Anyone can write any rejoinder to anyone, but we have taken only the points we deem are very genuine. Outlook wrote a counter-rebuttal to OFFSTUMPED too). But will Outlook dare to publish them on its website? And after answering all the questions, we will ask a lot of questions to not just Outlook, but the entire media. Will they be ready to answer those? Before that, let everyone, specially Outlook, see Our Challenge
We have opened a twitter account at last after persistent demand from readers. You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/#!/Gujaratriotscom The author of these 25 questions Sundeep Dougal too is on twitter. His account is : https://twitter.com/#!/SundeepDougal Now he has been informed by us about our answers to his 25 questions on twitter in a tweet sent by us. You too can contact him on twitter about our answers. In the comments section on Outlook’s 25 questions page, one of the readers by the name of Rahul posted the link of our answers. Sundeep Dougal posted the link of his counter-rebuttal to Offstumped. The reader Rahul has informed us that Outlook has deleted 2 of his comments and banned him from posting any further comments. When Outlook and Sundeep Dougal were given our 25 answers, they shied away, banned people like Rahul from posting. Their answer is “We have replied to OFFSTUMPED”. So what? Offstumped and our answers are different. Remember that Sundeep Dougal will give every possible excuse to avoid responding to us, or even posting our answers’ link on the website of Outlook. You can ask him about this on twitter.
Question #1 – Mr Modi, in an interview on March 1, 2002, to Zee TV you said about the post-Godhra riots, “A chain of action and reaction is going on. We want that neither should there be action, nor reaction.” Don’t such statements echo the ‘earth-shaking’ rationalisations offered by Rajiv Gandhi after the 1984 riots?
OUR ANSWER: The exact words are “Kriya pratikriya chal rahi hein. Hum chahte hein kin na kriya ho na pratikriya ho”. How can such a statement be rationalizing the riots? This was just a statement in a long interview . This is nothing like the lie concocted by Times of India first on 2nd March 2002 misquoting the Chief Minister as having said “Every Action has equal and opposite reaction”. This lie was copied and further carried on by almost all the media, including weekly Outlook. Full details of this trash are given in Myth 13- on our website “Every action has equal and opposite reaction”. Far from Narendra Modi giving any provocative statement, it is media, especially papers like Times of India and Outlook who inflamed the situation by lying and misquoting a big and important Chief Minister as quoting Newton’s third law, not being able to prove it ever, and not even publishing Narendra Modi’s denials ever since.
Since today they cannot accuse Narendra Modi of having said that “Every action has equal and opposite reaction” since that lie has been conclusively rebuked, (In Myth 13)– and also been clarified by Narendra Modi in his leaked answers to SITs 60+ questions, they has now chosen some non-issue of one line in an interview to Zee News which is nowhere like saying Newton’s third law. What Narendra Modi was saying on that day was that on 27 Feb occurred Godhra and the reaction to it happened on 28 Feb- there was a minority backlash on 1st March. , it was a statement of fact if one pays attention to the situation as of 1st March 2002. Reporting on the events of 1st March 2002, The Hindu newspaper on its front page in the edition dated 2nd March 2002 had this to say:
“Despite the imposition of indefinite curfew, sporadic incidents of violence, group clashes and stoning continued throughout the night and during the day today in the walled city and labour-dominated eastern parts of Ahmedabad. But unlike Thursday (i.e. 28 Feb) when one community was entirely at the receiving end, the minority backlash (on Friday, March 1) caused further worsening of the situation …. Police presence had little impact on the two communities pelting stones at each other in Bapunagar, Gomtipur, Dariapur, Shahpur, Naroda and other areas from where incidents of firing had been reported. But there were no reports of casualty. Pitched battle was continuing between the two communities late in the evening (of Friday, 1 March).”
Thus the chain of action-reaction was happening, which SHOULD NOT HAPPEN was also what he said. There is absolutely nothing can be held against Narendra Modi here.
Notice how the question-asker totally ignores the issue of “Newton’s 3rd law” allegation, and gives no apology to Narendra Modi for it, and does not even bother to mention that Modi was defamed by the media including Outlook for it.
The Times of India was the only newspaper to report on 2nd March 2002 accusing Narendra Modi of saying “Every Action has equal and opposite reaction”- and no other paper except for The Times carried this news in its original reporting on that day. Had Modi really said that, the whole media would have gone downtown on the next day. And since there are official records available which show that no one from The Times of India met Narendra Modi on that day, it is absolutely clear that the misquote was invented by The Times of India. A true paper with an iota of honesty will show the true context in which Narendra Modi said that sentence in that Zee News interview. Outlook trying to crucify Narendra Modi on this issue is like a thief asking the victim to apologize. Since Outlook launched one of the worst campaigns against Narendra Modi and the BJP on the Gujarat riots issue- and repeated the outrageous lie defaming the Chief Minister Narendra Modi accusing him of saying “Every action has equal and opposite reaction” and inflaming the situation by needlessly infuriating the Muslims, Outlook is the one which is guilty of inflammatory and defamatory writing- instead of apologizing for it, it wants Narendra Modi to apologize!
Quoting this statement made on Zee News now is a forcible attempt to desperately look at the past and dig out anything that can be found against Narendra Modi. Note that no one even noticed this sentence made by Narendra Modi to Zee News in an interview for so many years. So when the false charge on “Every Action has equal and opposite reaction failed”, Outlook forcibly tried to bring out this one line out-of-context in an interview to Zee News which no one even remembered.
Question #2 – A few days later, you told Outlook (Mar 18, ’02), “You have to remember that communalism runs high in Gujarat—even a small provocation can lead to violence and Godhra was a very big incident.” Did you not stoke that spark when it was decided that the bodies of Godhra victims would be taken to Ahmedabad?
OUR ANSWER: What a logic! So the spark was stoked by bringing bodies from Godhra to Ahmedabad but not by the shocking Godhra massacre! Again, absolutely not. Bringing bodies to Ahmedabad did not have the slightest impact on the riots. Bodies were brought after midnight on 27 Feb i.e. at 3:30 am of 28 Feb in Western Ahmedabad’s isolated Sola hospital (as reported by weekly India Today dated 18 March 2002 and Times of India online on 28 Feb 2002) while the riots began on 28 Feb at 11 AM and took place in far-off places like Naroda Patiya and Chamanpura (Ehsan Jafri case). And what about the riots that occurred OUTSIDE Ahmedabad- in Vadodara, Rajkot and other areas? Did they also occur because bodies were brought from Ahmedabad to Godhra at 3:30 am on 28 Feb? The context in which Modi rightly said that even a small spark can lead to violence is because Gujarat is a very sensitive state (or, was, till 2002) where trivial things like kite flying and cricket matches cause violence. Compared to that, Godhra massacre was unparalleled in human history, where Muslims locked 59 Hindus including 40 women and children and old in a train, pushed them back as they tried to come out, watched them roast to death in front of their eyes without letting a single child or old person come out of the train. Such a terrible situation was controlled in 3 days in Gujarat and in a communally ultra-sensitive place like Ahmedabad in just 2 days. Outlook weekly reported in the last line of its cover story in its issue of 11 March 2002 covering events till 28 Feb 2002 that: ” Gujarat has always been a communal tinderbox and even a small spark ignites big trouble. The ghost of Godhra looks set to walk its streets for months.” It is in this context that that Narendra Modi said to Outlook in its issue of 18 March 2002 that even a small spark can lead to violence. Compare the horrific roasting of 59 Hindus in Godhra with the trivial reasons that sparked earlier riots. India Today weekly also reported in the last line of its cover story in its issue of 11 March 2002 also covering events till 28 February that: “They will have time to react. The bloody cycle of violence so familiar in Gujarat may have just begun.” So India Today and Outlook knew on February 28 itself that a bloody cycle of violence had begun in Gujarat and could continue in Gujarat for several days. But in fact, it stopped only after 3 days, though petty rioting continued subsequently in Ahmedabad, Vadodara and some places near Godhra. Outlook should praise Modi for controlling violence in 3 days and in ultra-sensitive Ahmedabad in just 2 days while it itself expected months of violence.
For Outlook, the spark that lead to violence was the decision to bring bodies to Ahmedabad at 3:30 am from Godhra, not the shocking massacre of 59 Hindus in Godhra! As a matter of honesty, let the media ask this question- what would have happened if 2,000 Hindus had locked 59 Muslims in a train including 40 women and children and roasted them to coal in Karachi Railway station in Pakistan? Had Hindus dared to do that, each and every Hindu in Pakistan would have been killed after horrible tortures. What would have happened had minority Blacks done so to majority Whites in a country like, say, Britain? Even such an inhuman killing did not make the media’s heart melt and instead it kept insulting the dead by blaming them for ‘provoking’ the incident.
In the first place, since most of the killed karsewaks resided in Ahmedabad, it was only natural that their bodies be brought to Ahmedabad to be handed over to their relatives. In Godhra, the situation was tense on 27 February and had the bodies been kept there, it would have inflamed the situation there with a strong chance of retaliation on Muslims in Godhra itself. So was in the best of interests to get the bodies out of Godhra as soon as possible. Also, it would have been very inconvenient for relatives to come to Godhra which was under curfew! The question asker seems to forget that Godhra was under curfew.
The remains of the slain karsevaks were brought from Godhra to Ahmedabad on February 27 after the carnage at Godhra railway station . The bodies were brought to Ahmadabad after midnight of February 27 at 3:30 am in a very sombre atmosphere and not in a ceremonial procession. Plus, the bodies were brought to the then isolated Sola Civil Hospital on the western outskirts of Ahmedabad as a precautionary measure and not to the Ahmedabad’s main civil hospital which is located in eastern Ahmedabad from where most of the killed Ramsevaks came. Sola Civil Hospital was in 2002 located in the far outskirts of Ahmedabad and had very little population around it. This shows the Government’s efforts to control the situation. Had the Government planned to instigate the Hindus then it would have brought the bodies to the Ahmedabad’s main civil hospital in Eastern Ahmedabad where most of the Ramsevaks resided and from where it would have been ideal to orchestrate violence against Muslims. This shows that it tried to take preventive measures to preempt Hindu reaction following Godhra carnage.
The Godhra massacre occurred on February 27 at 8 AM. At 8:30 AM to 9 AM Chief Minister Narendra Modi- then in Ahmedabad / Gandhinagar- was informed about the carnage. Modi gave ‘shoot-at-sight’ and ‘curfew’ orders in Godhra at 9:45 am, within 2 hours. ‘Shoot-at-sight’ orders in Godhra were primarily aimed at Hindus who could have retaliated in Godhra. The leading English daily from South India- The Hindu in its issue dated 28 February 2002 reported that- “The Chief Minister Narendra Modi gave shoot-at-sight orders in Godhra”.
The same day- The Times of India reported in a report titled “Shoot-at-sight orders, curfew in Godhra” –
“The Gujarat government imposed an indefinite curfew and issued shoot-at-sight orders in Godhra after 57 people were killed and several injured when a mob set the Sabarmati express on fire. Four bogies of the train were set on fire by miscreants at Godhra station…”
See link: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2256789.cms
This report was posted at 1:37 PM. This shows that Modi’s claim of imposing curfew at 9:45 AM was absolutely true (considering the time it must have taken for The Times of India to get this news, make an article, proof-read it, edit it and post it on its website).
The same day- The Tribune (published from Chandigarh) – gave a report titled-“Sabarmati Express set ablaze– 57 dead -‘Ram sevaks’ among victims, shoot-at-sight orders in Godhra” and the report said–
“Indefinite curfew was clamped and the shoot-at-sight order issued in Godhra town immediately after the incident…”(Notice the words IMMEDIATELY AFTER)
See link: http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020228/main1.htm
Also, note that if the bodies had not been brought to Ahmedabad and been kept in Godhra and retaliation taken in Godhra, OUTLOOK and all other Modi-haters would have cried that “Modi deliberately kept the bodies in a communally-charged Godhra so as to instigate Hindus to retaliate in Godhra and did not bring them to Ahmedabad though the relatives and victims were from Ahmedabad”. While bringing the bodies to Ahmedabad, care was taken to bring the bodies after midnight in a very somber atmosphere.
Had Narendra Modi been irresponsible, (knowing that even a small spark can ignite violence) he would have brought the bodies in day time (which is the ideal time for relatives to take them instead of at 3:30 am, which is very inconvenient for relatives and at which time it is very difficult to instigate violence!) instead of after mid night, in a ‘ceremonial procession’ instead of a sober way. Most importantly, bodies could have been brought to Eastern Ahmedabad’s hospital from where the karsewaks resided. Outlook has deliberately ignored all these points, all these steps taken by Narendra Modi and tried to hold him guilty whereas he should in fact be applauded for :
1- Bringing the bodies to Ahmedabad instead of keeping them in Godhra so as to calm matters in Godhra and make it easy for relatives
2- Bringing them to Sola Civil Hospital in Western Ahmedabad after midnight at 3:30 am (as reported by weekly India Today of 18 March 02 & Times of India on 28 Feb) instead of in day time so that chances of retaliation were very low
3- Bringing them in a sober atmosphere instead of ceremonial procession
4- Bringing them to Western Ahmedbad’s hospital at the outskirts of the city where the Muslim population was negligible instead of Eastern Ahmedabad where the karsewaks resided from and from where it would have been ideal to instigate violence against Muslims.
NARENDRA MODI HIMSELF MADE AN APPEAL TO THE PEOPLE TO MAINTAIN PEACE IN AN APPEAL BROADCAST ON NATIONAL TV (DOORDARSHAN) ON 28 FEBRUARY AFTERNOON.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIRMR8zW0iI
RSS and VHP also appealed for peace and urged Hindus not to retaliate along with Atal Bihari Vajpayee on 27th and even later. In Gujarat where even a small spark can lead to violence, there was absolutely no need for Narendra Modi to give such a statement urging people to maintain calm and not retaliate if he wanted to inflame the situation. Outlook has of course ignored all these points and other steps taken by Narendra Modi to control and prevent violence on 27 Feb- which are given in detail in this site. Just some of them include, 827 preventive arrests on 27 Feb, deploying all companies of Rapid Action Force, deploying entire 70,000 police force including reserve police, shoot-at-sight orders and curfew in Godhra primarily aimed at Hindus who could have retaliated there, curfew in other sensitive places etc.
There was something which caused the riots even after 27 Feb Godhra. And that was the inflammatory reporting by TV channels and the secularist media-politician combine which rubbed salts on people’s wounds by insulting the dead karsewaks accusing them of provoking the incident by giving imaginary charges like kidnapping a Muslim girl, not paying for tea and snacks, etc and blaming VHP and the Sangh Parivar and insulting the Ayodhya movement. Congress leader Amarsinh Choudhary came on TV on 27 Feb night in Gujarati and blamed Ramsewaks for provoking the incident by not paying for tea and snacks at Godhra Railway station. Actually if anyone gave a spark after Godhra that led to violence, it was this statement from Amarsinh Choudhary blaming the dead karsewaks who were killed in one of the most inhuman masscares in human history- locked in a train and pushed back as they tried to come out.
We have seen Vir Sanghvi’s statement earlier- “We (secularists) are programmed to see Hindu-Muslim relations in simplistic terms, Hindus provoke, Muslims suffer. When this formula does not work- it is clear now a well-armed Muslim mob murdered unarmed Hindus- we simply do not know how to cope. We shy away from the truth- that some Muslims committed an act that is indefensible, and resort to blaming the victims…Why have we dehumanised the poor karsewaks to the extent that we don’t even see the incident as the human tragedy that it undoubtedly was…have we become such prisoners of our own rhetoric that even a horrific massacre becomes nothing more than occasion for Sangh-Parivar bashing? “The media and politicians tried everything to set free culprits of such an inhuman massacre.
Since Outlook knows that even a small spark can lead to big violence why did Outlook report inflammatorily lying that Muslims were being massacred after Godhra whereas they were equally on the offensive even after Godhra and threw out 40,000 Hindus out of their houses even after Godhra? Why did Outlook repeat the lie that Narendra Modi said “Every action has equal and opposite reaction” when he said nothing of this sort? Who is guilty -Narendra Modi or Outlook?
Question#3: You have denied the allegation that you instructed bureaucrats and senior police officers at a high-level meeting (Feb 27, ’02) that “in communal riots, police takes action against Hindus and Muslims on one-to-one basis. This will not do now; allow Hindus to give vent to their anger”—a statement attributed to you on record by then deputy commissioner, intelligence, Sanjiv Bhatt and slain minister Haren Pandya. Why do you think the charge persists?
OUR ANSWER: This claim has been refuted many times by us. Even a cursory reading of “Myth 19” will reveal the truth. The charge persists for the simple reason that the media is BIASED and wants Narendra Modi to be held guilty by hook or by crook and does not bother to report the truth. Before getting into the details, let us post one important thing here. Is Narendra Modi a fool to openly give such orders to so many officials in such a meeting where any of the officers could have secretly recorded such orders or which would have had 9 witnesses against Narendra Modi? If he did want such orders to be issued, he would have done it through middlemen and other communicators being careful not to come into the picture directly! It is astonishing to see that no one with an iota of common sense has till now raised this point. Is Modi a fool to directly give such orders to officers in a crucial meeting? Even if he did want to issue such instructions, there is no way in the world that he would have given them directly in an official meeting.
Secondly- Haren Pandya is no more. But the late Minister was NOT present in that 27 Feb meeting. Outlook forcibly tried to convict Narendra Modi in its issue of 3rd June 2002 by saying that a minister told it (Outlook) about that meeting. That minister was Haren Pandya, as claimed by Outlook. Whether Pandya really did say so or not is known, but even if he did, his statement has no credibility since he was NOT present at that meeting at all!
Outlook reported in that article “The minister told Outlook that in his deposition, he revealed that on the night of February 27, Modi summoned DGP K. Chakravarthy, commissioner of police, Ahmedabad, P.C. Pande, chief secretary G. Subarao, home secretary Ashok Narayan, secretary to the home department K. Nityanand (a serving police officer of IG rank on deputation) and DGP (IB) G.S. Raigar. Also present were officers from the CM’s office: P.K. Mishra, Anil Mukhim and A.K. Sharma. The minister also told Outlook that the meeting was held at the CM’s bungalow. (Notice that Sanjiv Bhatt comes nowhere in the picture!!!)
Now there are clear factual errors in this. The Outlook report names chief secretary G. Subarao and an officer in the CM’s office, A.K. Sharma, as among those at the meeting. Neither was present in that meeting. That day Subarao was on leave and instead it was acting chief secretary S K Varma who participated in that meeting! This single goof-up alone is enough to dismiss the claims of Outlook on that meeting, or, assuming that the late Pandya did make such allegations, his. Outlook realized its terrible goof-up and in the 19 Aug issue has acknowledged its error in its claimed interview with Pandya. Let us assume that Pandya did tell Outlook that Modi told officials to allow Hindus to vent their anger the next day in that meeting. What credibility does Pandya have when he was not even present in that meeting? And when he could not even correctly tell the people who were in the meeting, wrongly naming 2 people as being present there, how can anyone believe that he would know what happened inside the meeting? Outlook’s aim is also exposed here. Outlook wanted to crucify Narendra Modi by hook or by crook, and in its issue of 3rd June held Modi guilty without bothering to cross-check if the information provided by the Minister (Pandya) was correct or not, assuming that Pandya did speak to Outlook. Was it not Outlook’s duty to cross-check facts before making such a serious allegation against a Chief Minister?
And when the true facts came up, Outlook should have admitted in its 19 August 2002 issue- “Since the details given by the minister were incorrect, the claim that he would know what happened inside that 27 Feb meeting is difficult to believe, because he could not even correctly tell the names of the people who were present, and he himself was not present. So our article in 3 June 2002 issue relied on a man whose testimony is worthless. ” Instead of ending it like this, Outlook acknowledged the errors but continued to hold Modi guilty! Outlook said “That June 3 report wrongly named 2 people as being present, but rest all is true”. Meaning- “We could not even correctly name the people present in the meeting, but we know what happened inside the meeting. And Modi is guilty”.
It is well known that Haren Pandya had several issues against Narendra Modi. Haren Pandya was demoted in the Cabinet, from Home Minister to Revenue Minister. There were reports of his personal grudge against the Chief Minister. It is said that after he became Chief Minister in October 2001, Narendra Modi wanted to contest a bypoll from Ellisbridge (which is one of the safest seats for the BJP in Gujarat and in the country) which was represented by Pandya. It is reported that Pandya refused to vacate this seat for Modi and hence Modi had to contest from Rajkot II which Narendra Modi won.
Also he himself was accused of demolishing a dargah and many self-styled secularists were howling against him. Pandya cleverly shifted the focus by talking against Narendra Modi so that he would become the media’s hero, and the media would stop targeting him for his alleged role in the dargah demolition and instead focus on big fish Narendra Modi. That is exactly what happened. This also exposes the self-styled secularists. Their aim is to crucify Narendra Modi and glorify anyone talking against him, and not being bothered about who actually was involved in a dargah demolition or not.
The link for Outlook’s interview with Pandya of Aug 2002: (Assuming Outlook‘s claim of having taped it is true)
http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?216905
In this interview of 19 August 2002 Outlook reports:
“Minister (continuing): See, whatever I told you, it was not as if some disgruntled man was saying it. I didn’t say all those things because I was unhappy. (NOTE: That is exactly why he spoke against Modi, because he was unhappy and disgruntled, on the issue of vacating his Ellisbridge seat and being demoted from Home Minister to Revenue Minister. And also to shift focus from his own role in the dargah demolition to becoming a media hero taking on Narendra Modi). There is nobody in my position who can fight him. So it’s important I remain an insider, in power, in position. That’s why I want my identity to be protected.
You mentioned Subarao. There was trouble with that. (The Outlook report named chief secretary G. Subarao and an officer in the CM’s office, A.K. Sharma, as among those at the meeting. Neither was present.)
Minister: What happened was that there was a chief secretary-in-charge then. I got my facts mixed up. But listen, their denial was very weak, wasn’t it? If they try to make an issue of it, tell them that you want the official denial from all the people mentioned in the story on paper, with their signatures. Leave the two they say weren’t there at the meeting but ask the others to say that there was no meeting, no direct or indirect orders. Let them say that on paper with their signatures…
Minister (continuing): I made a mistake with the chief secretary’s name. But the rest is all true. The time, the place, everything was correct. If they put pressure, ask them for official denial from the officers.
Minister (continuing): Vijay Rupani (who was supposed to organise the yatra) will give information on the (Gujarat) Gaurav Rath Yatra. But be careful when you meet these people. They are such guys that they’ll try to extract my name from you. Be careful.”
And Outlook stuck to its story even after the clear goof-up. See the role of Outlook. It admitted that it wrongly named two people as being present in the meeting. That should have been enough to dismiss this charge, when Outlook and an alleged Minister cannot even correctly tell the names of the people who were present in the meeting (Haren Pandya was of course not present and had never claimed to be present either). How could they know what happened in that meeting? So what Outlook said was “Though our report wrongly named 2 people as being present, though we could not even tell correctly who were present, our charge that Modi ordered the police to allow Hindus to vent their anger is 100 % true”. What rubbish! A magazine with an iota of honesty would have said “We relied on a man whose information was incorrect and who had personal grudges. We withdraw our story”.
But that’s not all! Even in its 19 August issue, there are blunders. Haren Pandya says (as claimed by Outlook) “I made a mistake with the chief secretary’s name. But the rest is all true.” But the rest is also not all true. Not only was the chief secretary not there (he was on leave and it was acting Chief Secretary S K Verma who participated), another officer A.K.Sharma was also not present. This was admitted by Outlook, not by the Minister! And sadly for Outlook, there was a THIRD BLUNDER in this allegation even in the 19 August issue, which is that DGP (IB) G.C. Raigar was also not present in this meeting! Neither Outlook nor Pandya knew this. So even in the 19 August 2002 issue when they admitted mistakes in the 3rd June issue, they stuck to their story saying ‘rest all information is correct’, but the information in the 19th August 2002 was also wrong since G C Raigar was also wrongly named as being present. Pandya said: “1 man was wrongly named- Chief Secretary G Subarao, rest all was correct”. (A single mistake is enough to dismiss these ridiculous claims). Outlook said “2 people were wrongly named- Chief Secretary G Subarao and A K Sharma”. But the fact is that THREE people were wrongly named, G C Raigar also was not present! And the shameless magazine continues to hold Modi guilty in that 27 Feb meeting ignoring all its mistakes and continues to stick to its story! LET SANDEEP DOUGAL OPEN HIS MOUTH ON ALL THIS, WHY OUTLOOK STICKS TO THIS CHARGE DESPITE BLUNDERS AND MISTAKES. (Also note that Pandya says “I made a mistake with the Chief Secretary’s name”. If he is saying that he got the name wrong, this is another error- he did not make any mistake with the Chief Secretary’s name. The Chief Secretary’s name was indeed G Subbarao, but it was Acting Chief Secretary S K Verma who participated in that meeting.)
Notice here that while 3 people were wrongly named, the name of Sanjiv Bhat did not come even rightly or wrongly! He came nowhere in the picture!
If all facts are rightly seen, as given in Myth 19, it will be clear that there is no reason for this charge to persist. Sanjiv Bhat was of course not present in that meeting so what credibility does he have? And he made these charges against Narendra Modi a good 7-8 years AFTER 2002- this reveals that there is no merit in his claims. Since Outlook tried to convict Modi even after realizing the terrible goof-up in its accusations in its article of 3 June 2002, it shows why this charge persists!
Also note here that the SIT appointed by the Supreme Court with known anti-Modi judges like Arijit Pasayat and Aftab Alam debunked the claim of Sanjiv Bhat that he was present and blamed NGOs for forcibly trying to find something against Narendra Modi. This is a must read report of the SIT.
Question #4: Why did you single out Bhat and say he wasn’t present at the Feb 27 meeting when you were only asked about those present?
OUR ANSWER: Outlook is wrong again. Modi did not single out Sanjiv Bhat and say that only he was not present. He also said “G C Raiger ADG (Intelligence) was not present. Sanjiv Bhatt DC (Intelligence) was not present. None of my cabinet colleagues were present in the meeting”. This shows that Haren Pandya or any other Minister like Gordhan Zadaphiya also were not there. Outlook cannot see that Modi also clarified that G C Raiger and any of the other Ministers were not present, it can only see Sanjiv Bhat.
Only the written question and answers of those 71 questions are out. Is it not possible that the SIT asked Narendra Modi about Sanjiv Bhat’s presence (which Bhat may have claimed to the SIT orally) orally which Narendra Modi denied orally also and in writing also? It is clear from Mr. Bhatt’s affidavit which is in the public domain that he had been providing information to the SIT since November 2009. It is reasonable to assume that at the time of Mr. Modi’s SIT deposition in March 2010, the content of Mr. Bhatt’s claims was known to Mr. Modi. Far too much is being made of confidentiality here when leaks from SIT to the media had been occurring a full six months before Nov 2009. As an example on 28th June 2009 right after Teesta Setalvad’s testimony to the SIT the DNA in a story filed by Roxy Gagdekar reported a leak from SIT sources to the DNA on the contents of Teesta Setalvaad’s testimony. Also on 7th December 2009 OutlookIndia carried a PTI story on specific claims by the activists against the SIT in the Supreme Court on the SIT ignoring an unnamed witness. The activists were reprimanded by the Supreme Court for those accusations. Clearly in the run up to March 2010 the SIT’s activities were hardly a state secret to the Activists. Hence there is nothing extraordinary about Mr. Modi singling out Mr. Bhat. It is silly to make a mountain of leaks when the SIT’s reports continue to be treated with no respect for confidentiality by both the activists and the media.
Even if Narendra Modi did say that Sanjiv Bhat was not present before he made the claim that he was present, what does this prove? That he was present? Whether he was present or not has to be seen in view of records and facts, not by “Why did Modi deliberately say that Sanjiv Bhat was not present?”. To this, I will like to ask Outlook, why did Outlook not mention Sanjiv Bhat as being present in its issue of 3rd June 2002 or even later, of August 2002 and much later when it forcibly tried to crucify Narendra Modi on that 27 Feb meeting for which a defamation case has rightly filed against it? Here in March 2010, the SIT knew that Sanjiv Bhat had claimed to be present- so Narendra Modi clarified that he was not present. There is absolutely no doubt that Sanjiv Bhat was not present. Narendra Modi knew perhaps in March 2010 itself that Sanjiv Bhat was been bought by so-called activists and politicians to try to nail him (so that Rahul Gandhi’s way becomes clear in 2014- the only man who can come in way of Rahul Gandhi is Narendra Modi- who is being targeted in case after case, first post-Godhra riots, Zakia Jafri complaint, when this failed –that 27 Feb meeting, this will also fail, then Sohrabuddin encounter case (dragging Amit Shah), then Ishrat Jahan case –where the Lashkar e Toiba had admitted that she was its member, and then the Haren Pandya murder case where they are trying to accuse Modi of murdering Pandya- first step has been achieved in acquitting 12 Muslims who were convicted by a trail court) . Since Narendra Modi may have known about Sanjiv Bhat’s ideas, he may have clarified that he was not present. Note how Outlook says that “Modi singled out Sanjiv Bhatt and denied that he was present when he was asked only about those who were present- while Modi also said that G C Raiger too was not present nor any of his Cabinet colleagues.
Also note here that the SIT appointed by the Supreme Court with known anti-Modi judges like Arijit Pasayat and Aftab Alam debunked the claim of Sanjiv Bhat that he was present and blamed NGOs for forcibly trying to find something against Narendra Modi. This is a must read report of the SIT.
Question #5 – Is it true that P.K. Mishra, your principal secretary, asked R.B. Sreekumar, then Addl DG (Intel), to confirm whether Haren Pandya was the minister who had deposed about the Feb 27 meeting to an independent citizen’s tribunal. Did he then, as the allegation goes, ask that Pandya’s mobile number, 9824030629, be tapped?
OUR ANSWER– Firstly, this question is irrelevant. How is this related to the riots? Let us say, Narendra Modi did try to get intelligence people to confirm if Pandya deposed before the CCT tribunal or not. That is an internal matter between BJP leaders. We have already seen that the late Pandya was not present in that 27 Feb meeting and that the list of officers allegedly given by him on those who were present was also wrong. Assuming that Pandya did deport before the CCT it was within Narendra Modi’s rights to take disciplinary action against a leader accused or suspected of violating party discipline. This does not include the right to tap the phone of course. But we have seen how Outlook’s claims that Pandya told it about that 27 Feb meeting in its issue of 3rd June are all trash-assuming that he did say so, the factual errors reveal that anything Pandya may have said against Modi was due to personal differences. If Narendra Modi found that a minister is wrongly giving wrong information to magazines like Outlook and tribunals like CCT (which made a fool of itself by trying to say that the Godhra fire was ‘set from inside’ as if Muslims did not set it and outrightly denying that any mob attacked the train!) because of personal differences, then he had every right to take steps to find out who this person was.
There are many other problems with this question. Whether Mr. Pandya’s Mobile was tapped or not tapped in June 2002 is irrelevant to the events of Feb 2002. A question of this sort is a fishing expedition and it is one reason why the line of questioning suggests conspiracy theory making more than a quest for Justice for the events of that day.
Let us note that the said “independent citizen’s tribunal” made scathing accusations of Mr. Pandya himself accusing him having personally led mobs and provoking riots. They accused Pandya of using derogatory words for Muslims (“Bandyo” in Gujarati, often in Hindi the derogatory term “Bando” is used).
Question #6 – Given the suspicious circumstances of Haren Pandya’s assassination (Mar 26, ’03), and given that many point the needle of suspicion at your administration, what action has been taken to clear your name and find out who his real murderers are?
OUR ANSWER–Another perfect case of thief shouting “Thief Thief” and getting away! Outlook has always tried to blame Narendra Modi for Haren Pandya’s murder for the past many years without directly saying so. It has carried stories saying “A murder foretold” etc etc. The truth is that Haren Pandya was perhaps the only leader of the BJP to be accused of rioting, with an allegation having some credibility. Note that many self-styled secular activists had alleged Pandya himself being culpable in the 2002 riots, of being involved in an attack on a durgah in the 2002 riots. But after his murder in March 2003, for which Muslims were convicted, or ever after he started speaking against Narendra Modi in 2002 itself (on personal grudges, since he was demoted from Home Minister to Revenue Minister and ever since the issue of refusing to vacate Ellisbridge seat for Narendra Modi to contest rose) the media immediately took to him as a ‘hero’ forgetting its allegations on him! The self-styled liberals, Concerned Citizens Tribunal (which made a fool of itself by trying to say Godhra fire was set from ‘inside’ as if Muslims did not do it and outrightly denying that any mob torched it) was howling against Haren Pandya since March 2002, when it was alleged that Pandya was involved in demolising a dargah on 1 March 2002. He allegedly took the leadership on the next day of burning of Godhra train, to demolish a Dargah which was protruding on the main road of Bhathha (Paldi) not far away from his own house. Thereafter, he started double talking against the government for not protecting the minority. The demolition he allegedly did, brought him on the top of the hit list and therefore he was killed. The trial court in Gujarat had convicted 12 Muslims for Haren Pandya’s murder in 2007. Despite knowing this, Outlook tried to hold Narendra Modi responsible for it. Now with all 12 accused acquitted by the Gujarat High Court, the political rivals and media men will again launch a crusade against Narendra Modi- perhaps to clear way for Mission 2014. Incidentally, the judge of the High Court who acquitted all the accused is a first-cousin of a Congress leader of Rajkot, who is also the Congress’ spokesman in Rajkot.
Any wild accusation can be made by anyone. Mr. Pandya’s murder has been investigated by the CBI and prosecuted in the Courts. The acquittals in the case came after the Courts severely criticized the CBI’s botched case. Most recently the High Court has rejected a petition to re-investigate the matter. The acquittals have since been challenged in the Supreme Court. Let us leave it at that. This question again has nothing to do with Justice for 2002 Riots. It smacks of conspiracy mongering when the matter has been the hands of Central Agencies and the Court system for years now. Outlook has all along never bothered to report the one single thing, that Haren Pandya himself was also accused in the post-Godhra riots case and accused of demolishing a dargah and was on the top of hit list of terrorists.
Note here that the CBI works under the Congress and has wrongly framed Amit Shah in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter fake despite knowing very well that Amit Shah is totally innocent in the case. This CBI could easily have framed at least someone of the Modi administration if not Modi himself for Pandya’s murder. But even this CBI which framed Amit Shah as he was Modi’s close aide has said that Muslims murdered Pandya to take ‘revenge’ of the 2002 riots (in which hundreds of Hindus were also killed even after Godhra), and Pandya was accused in the dargah demolition. This itself is enough to know that there is no need to suspect Modi administration in Pandya’s murder and Outlook is needlessly dragging its name in the case.
Question #7 – You told the SIT that you came to know from newspaper reports that the BJP had ‘joined’ the call for a Gujarat bandh on Feb 28, ’02, and a Bharat bandh on Mar 1, ’02. For someone so clued into the party machinery, isn’t that a strange lapse?
OUR ANSWER– The Times News Network in a late night release (past Midnight of 27th/early hours of 28th) reports the bandh call by the VHP. It makes no reference to the BJP joining the bandh. In fact it makes no reference to the BJP at all. There are also no other news reports from that day on the BJP joining the Bandh. Sheela Bhatt of Rediff reporting on the morning of 28th Feb 2002 describes incidents associated with the Bandh. Sheela Bhatt too describes it as a VHP bandh with no reference to the BJP. In fact that full report by Sheela Bhatt is a must read for it gives a very factual picture of how events unfolded that morning even as a Cabinet meeting was on and curfew had been imposed in one town. On March 1st 2002 the Times News Network has two stories one from Delhi and another Bangalore on the impact of the Bandh. Both stories describe it as a VHP Bandh with no formal reference to BJP joining it but for stray individual involvement. Hence it is perfectly reasonable if Mr. Modi subsequently learned of some stray BJP involvement from news reports in a Bandh that was all along described as a VHP bandh. Narendra Modi himself was very busy that day taking steps to prevent and control violence which could break out the next day. The decision to support the bandh or not was taken by Gujarat BJP leaders, and not the Chief Minister. And of course, it was perfectly right to support it.
Question #8 – You claimed to the SIT that you had no personal knowledge of the presence of BJP ministers Ashok Bhatt and I.K. Jadeja in the police State Control Room and Ahmedabad City Control Room respectively (Feb 28, ‘02). Doesn’t this show some incompetence on your part?
OUR ANSWER–It would make for a disturbingly paranoid Chief Minister to keep hourly record of the exact physical location of every one of his Ministers on a day with fast moving development and general chaos. As far as the matter of reasons for their presence, the duration of their presence and the impact of their presence in those control rooms is something the Nanavati Shah Commission will definitely delve into having already examined Mr. Jadeja. Whether they were present or not is a different matter which will be seen by Commissions probing the case, and the answers given by these ministers themselves will also have to be seen. And if they were not present, then how would Narendra Modi ‘know of their presence’?
Question #9 – You denied to the SIT that you knew ex-MP Ehsan Jafri—who died in the Gulberg Society massacre—or that he contacted you by phone and requested for help even as the rioters were at his door. Eyewitnesses, though, claim that he had spoken to you. Why do critics persist in arguing that this was a case of personal revenge and vendetta?
OUR ANSWER: This once again is a bizarre question. Our question to Outlook is- “Why do YOU continue to support this lie, or at least not bring out the facts which we have quoted here?” If you report all the below-mentioned facts, then the reality will be out for everyone to see. Asking “Why critics persist in arguing …” is something that needs to be posed to the critics for it is they who persist despite the lack of any concrete evidence on the same, and heap of evidence present to prove the opposite, which they ignore. As far as what has been leaked to the media of the SIT report goes there is no telephonic evidence of such a phone contact with Mr. Modi. There is only one eye witness who has claimed this. Imtiaz Pathan who claimed that Jafri called Modi on phone and before dying Jafri told him (Pathan) that Modi abused him on phone. (This is of course, trash. Let us say, for argument’s sake that Jafri did call Modi and Modi did not want to help him. Would Modi have abused him on phone? Modi would have said “Don’t worry, we will send help asap” and not sent help in such a case. Is Modi a fool to abuse Jafri on phone even if he did not want Jafri to be saved? Such a ridiculous charge has no credibility).
Hence it is clear that Imtiaz Pathan has been tutored by someone to claim this. Imtiaz Pathan has also alleged that police did not come to Jafri’s house till 4:30- 5:00 pm. In his immediate testimony to the police in 2002 soon after the riots, Pathan had not named Modi at all, nor made this allegation (Of Jafri calling him and Modi abusing Jafri) for many years after 2002! We have already dismantled Pathan’s claims who seems to be a tutored witness by Teesta Setalvad or some other such people in Myth 11 and Myth 20. Let us first list some points:
1- The Times of India in its online edition on 28 February 2002 reported at 2:34 PM :
“Ahmedabad: At least six persons were injured when police opened fire to disperse a rampaging mob in Meghaninagar area of the city on Thursday afternoon. The injured were brought to civil hospital where the condition of at least three is stated to be serious…the incident took place at Chamanpura area under Meghaninagar police station…”
This is the Ehsan Jafri case- Chamanpura. NOTE THIS REPORT PUBLISHED AT 2:34 PM says that police came and opened fire injuring so many people. India Today weekly dated 18 March 2002 also reports : “Reinforcements did arrive but by that time the mob had swelled to 10,000”. Since this report was posted at 2:34 PM it is clear that this event of police coming and firing must have happened much earlier, say at 1:30 pm at least considering the time it takes to get information, prepare report, proof read it edit it and post it online. This completely dismantles Imtiaz Pathan’s lies that the police did not come till 4:30-5 pm when The Times’ report POSTED ONLINE at 2:34 PM says that police came and fired. The Times of India also reported in its online edition on 28 Feb in a report posted at 9:41 PM. We quote from Times of India online edition 28 Feb night at 9:41 PM “Meanwhile fire tenders which rushed to the spot (Chamanpura- Ehsan Jafri case) were turned back by the irate mob which disallowed the Ahmedabad fire brigade (AFB) personnel and the district police from rushing to rescue…Sources in Congress Party said that the former MP after waiting in vain till 12.30 pm for official help to arrive had opened fire on the mob in self-defense, injuring four..”.
Despite being overwhelmingly outnumbered by the mob which had swelled to more than 10,000 (Zakia Jafri herself told India Today weekly in its issue of 18 March 2002-“I have never seen such a huge mob, they burnt alive my husband”), and the mob going crazy by Jafri firing on them with his revolver, the police did a brave job- and at a great personal risk they fired on the Hindus and shot dead 5 Hindus outside his house as reported by weekly India Today dated 18 March 2002 and Times of India 28 Feb online. This also did not stop the violence because the crowd was willing to lose a few lives to, as S K Modi puts in his book “Godhra- The Missing rage” ‘teach Jafri a lesson’. Thus Imtiaz Pathan’s claims have no credibility since police arrived much before 4:30-5 pm and shot dead 5 Hindus outside his house. He wrongly claims that police did not come till 4:30-5 pm.Police saved more than 180 Muslims in this episode since there were 250 people inside Jafri’s house and the mob killed 68- after all missing were declared dead, despite being overwhelmingly outnumbered.
2- Ehsan Jafri fired on the crowd in self-defense. Whether he should have done so or not is a matter of debate, but this act drove the crowd mad and it resolved to kill him, and was willing to lose a few lives. We have seen reports of The Times of India and India Today to know that he did fire on the mob which drove it mad. Imtiaz Pathan does not say this. Pathan lies and says: “Jafri appealed to the crowd to spare women and children. He said,’ Take me, kill me but leave these innocent people’ and gave himself to the crowd.” This claim is absolute trash since it is an established fact that Jafri did not do anything like this and fired on the crowd in self-defense with his revolver, as reported by weekly India Today, Times of India, and yes, also Outlook. Yes, Outlook too.
3- Narendra Modi was very busy that day and there is no way he could have talked to Ehsan Jafri on phone. There has been absolutely no record of any call made to Narendra Modi. If Jafri did call Modi and was abused by him, Jafri would have told this to his widow Zakia or some other people instead of Imtiaz Pathan, who did not make this allegation for a good 7-8 years after 2002. In his immediate testimony to the police in 2002 soon after the riots, Pathan had not named Modi at all, nor made this allegation (Of Jafri calling him and Modi abusing Jafri) for many years after 2002! What prevented Pathan from making this allegation against Narendra Modi (of abusing Jafri on phone and Jafri telling this to Pathan before dying) soon after the riots or for many many years after the riots? Also, does Pathan’s claim have any credibility when it is an established fact that no call was made to Narendra Modi and there is no record of it? Even if there was a record of any such call, how can the statement of a THIRD PERSON (Pathan, who has given so many wrong claims, like police not coming till 4:30- 5 pm when it came much earlier) who was at neither end of the alleged telephone call be relied? Outlook weekly itself carried Arundhati Roy’s article on 6 May 2002 on this issue in which she said “A mob surrounded the house of former Congress MP Iqbal Ehsan Jaffri. His phone calls to the Director-General of Police, the Police Commissioner, the Chief Secretary, the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) were ignored. The mobile police vans around his house did not intervene. The mob broke into the house. They stripped his daughters and burned them alive.”
Of course, all this is factually untrue. We have already seen reports of Times of India to know that the police did their best, saved more than 180 Muslims, shot dead 5 Hindus outside his house. But notice how the allegations of CALLS MADE do not include Narendra Modi at all! Even such a trash article which alleges that Jafri’ daughters were raped (which was found to be untrue since they were in USA at that time!) and makes false allegations on his calls being ignored does not accuse him of making any call to Narendra Modi directly. This trash article by Arundhati Roy in Outlook has been dismantled by us in Myth 11. All these allegations of call to Narendra Modi started coming after 2010- many many years later. Outlook has not bothered to mention any of the above facts.
India Today weekly dated 18 March 2002 clearly admits that at least 5 people were shot dead by the police outside Jafri’s house. The police also saved the lives of some 200 Muslims, since 68 out of the 250 people inside the house died. It was impossible for the police to control the mob of around 10,000 people- and the mob had gone crazy after Jafri fired from his revolver on the crowd- which injured 7 Hindus- and allegedly killed 3 Hindus. But despite this- police saved 180 Muslims in this episode. It was impossible for the police to control the mob of around 10,000 people- but they managed to disperse the mob by 8 PM on 28 February- according The Times of India’s online report at 9:41 PM published the same day. And nowhere did The Times of India accuse the police of not doing anything. On the contrary- it said that the furious mob, gone crazy by Jafri firing on it, did not allow fire tenders to reach the house which did its best along with the police. And this Times of India report POSTED ONLINE at 2:34 PM of 28 February also says that police fired on the crowd injuring 6, who were taken to hospital where 3 were critical at that time, and ultimately 5 died.
7 years after the riots where all missing people have been declared dead-death toll is 68. Out of the 250 people in the complex- police saved around 200, at least 180.
For making such a ridiculous charge years after the riots, and not saying anything like this for more than 7 years after 2002, Imtiaz Pathan can and should be prosecuted. Those who tutored him to make this ridiculous charge years after 2002 also should be prosecuted. And those who give credibility to such ridiculous and laughable charges like Outlook, Sandeep Dougal and CNN-IBN and NDTV should also be prosecuted.
Question #10 – Did your government slap the Official Secrets Act against whistleblower cop Rahul Sharma because he passed on explosive phone data records to the Nanavati Commission which showed that rioters were in touch with policemen and politicians?
OUR ANSWER: Let us leave the slapping of OSA to the Commission Report to settle. Only thing here we would like to say is, don’t assume Rahul Sharma as a ‘whistleblower’ -as yet, and please don’t talk vague. This is a serious issue with a serious discussion. Which rioters were in touch with with policemen (details please) and which politicians?
On the phone records – let us not forget that the said records have never been authenticated at source. CJPOnline’s website that carries PDF files of Individual Phone Records and Time-Location graphs clearly shows these are not original raw network records (GSM CDRs – Call Detail Records) but carefully constructed post-facto analyses by a 3rd party with no reference to the original data. In the absence of “source authentication” not much credibility can be attached to them. Even if we give 100% benefit of doubt to the authenticity of the records, we once again make the mistake of confusing correlation with causation. The fact that X called Y establishes nothing beyond X called Y. This smacks of classic conspiracy theory mongering.
Question #11 – The vindictiveness seems to have a pattern, considering the SC’s recent strictures against your government for initiating criminal proceedings against social activist Teesta Setalvad (allegedly for her role in the illegal exhumation of bodies of 2002 riot victims)?
OUR ANSWER: “This case is hundred per cent spurious. In other cases against the petitioner, there may be something,” said a bench of Justices Aftab Alam and Ranjana Desai”.
Who are the 2 judges of this bench? One is Aftab Alam, whose daughter Shahrukh Alam is an known anti-Narendra Modi activist. Aftab Alam himself has spoken a lot against Indian secularism in a speech in London in 2009. So much so that former Gujarat High Court judge and former Gujarat Lokayukta S M Soni wrote to the Chief Justice of India S H Kapadia to keep ‘communal minded judge Aftab Alam’ away from the Gujarat cases. The other judge of this bench is Justice Ranjana Desai who is the daughter in law of former Congress Minister of Gujarat Amul Desai. Even this bench says that: “In other cases against Teesta Setalvad there may be something”.
Also this is absolutely nothing. Actually far from being vindictive against Teesta Setalvad, the Gujarat Government has been far too liberal. This lady has no locus standi to do anything in this matter. I- the author of the website www.gujaratriots.com have as much locus standi as her or even more. The crimes of Teesta Setalvad and others are all far too serious. According to the Supreme-Court appointed SIT itself, “NGOs Teesta cooked up Gujarat riots incidents” And these crimes are horrible. They range to a lot of issues. There is a nice article titled “Enough evidence to prosecute Teesta, not Modi” . Also read the articles in this blog to know the truth of Teesta Setalvad.
Also note that in this grave digging case, it was the Supreme Court bench of 2 judges which felt that there is no merit in this case. This case was continuing in the trial courts (which did not think it was spurious). The High Court also refused to stay the case against her. Are the trial courts and the High Courts fools to allow such a case? Of course there is a difference of opinion, between the SC and the lower courts. But if this case was a cent per cent spurious one, then the Supreme Court judges of Aftab Alam and Ranjana Desai should have also blasted the trial courts for allowing such a case- and not dismissing it! We feel that a case which was deemed fit to proceed by 2 courts- trail court and High Court is not a spurious one.
Also, the fact that grave digging took place is well-established. After digging the graves so-called human rights activists claimed that “Murders were done and bodies buried without telling. We are exposing murders” whereas in reality they were proper graves unnecessarily dug up for the purpose of forcibly trying to find out anything. When this case was investigated, the witnesses and former aides of Teesta Setalvad like Rias Khan said that the graves were dug at her behest. Teesta had claimed in 2005 that these graves were an expose. When the accused and the witnesses and former aides name Teesta Setalvad as the brain behind the grave digging, is this case spurious? It was found fit for trial by 2 courts, lower courts and High Court.
Far from being vindictive the Gujarat government should have long ago filed a lot of cases against Teesta Setalvad for her serious crimes of cooking up witnesses bribing them forcing them to give false evidence, harassing a democratically elected Chief Minister, lying and inflaming the situation, criminal defamation, cooking up stories like a pregnant woman’s womb being ripped open, digging up graves and wrongly claiming that ‘hidden and suppressed graves are exposed’ etc. The Gujarat Government was too soft on dangerous ladies like Teesta Setalvad who tutored witnesses, made false charges, false cases, false evidence for fear of being called vindictive by the biased media.It is also too soft on liars of the Indian media like NDTV and CNN-IBN, Outlook and Hindustan Times who lie that constantly on the 2002 riots violating 153-A and 500 of IPC.
Question #12 – Isn’t this also why a 21-year-old custodial death case allegedly involving Sanjiv Bhatt was resurrected and suspension orders issued against him?
OUR ANSWER: This is a rhetorical question. Implying that anyone speaking against Narendra Modi has the license to break all laws, violate all rules and become a “MARTYR” with activists and Muslims saying “WE BACK YOU SANJIV BHAT”. These activists and supporters have assumed Sanjiv Bhat as a ‘whistleblower’ (why he took as many as 7-8 years to claim that he was present in that 27 Feb meeting has never been answered by anyone). Bhat was absent from work without warning for many days and ignored ALL NOTICES seeking explanations and was finally suspended. Bhat also allegedly threatened a subordinate constable K D Pant to falsely sign an affidavit saying that he (the subordinate Pant) knew that Bhat participated in that 27 Feb meeting. The subordinate was allegedly told to do as said by Gujarat Congress leader Arjun Modhvadia who allegedly assured him that ‘everything will be fine if you do so, else you will have deep trouble’. So this case of threatening doesn’t appeal to anyone. So Bhat has full license to do all this- remain absent from work, ignore repeated notices to return to work and when get suspended, BECOME A MARTYR. What is painful is that one does not get an iota of objectivity from the media in dealing Sanjiv Bhat’s suspension on merit- on his behavior. It is to the credit of the government that Bhat has been suspended for violating laws, not responding to notices- despite the fear of media criticism. Let the media answer this simple question- especially OUTLOOK- What should be done when an officer is absent from work for days and days, ignores repeated notices, done not give any explanation? Should be promoted and given Bharat Ratna?
Also note that the SIT appointed by the Supreme Court (which gave its report of April 2009 saying that Teesta and NGOs invented imaginary cases and fake witnesses to a 3 judge bench which included Aftab Alam and Arijit Pasayat-both known Modi-baiters) reported in its final report that Sanjiv Bhat was hand-in-glove with Arjun Modhwadhia, Teesta Setalvad, and Shaktisinh Gohil and was totally unreliable.
One doesn’t need to see Mr. Bhatt’s from the 2002 prism. A simple google archive search of stories on Mr. Bhatt prior to 2002 will reveal his dubious record. As an example here is the case in Rajasthan High Court from April 2000 against Mr. Bhatt. Here is what the NHRC had to say of that case against Mr. Bhatt
“The NHRC also, in its report in September 2010 considered it a case of “serious human rights violation” in view of the fact that the provisions under which Mr. Rajpurohit was falsely implicated could have fetched him 10 years of imprisonment.
Here we would like to ask Outlook- what should be done with Sanjiv Bhat when he remains absent from work without any information for days on end and ignores repeated notices? Should he be given BHARAT RATNA for doing this just because he has made allegations Narendra Modi- after a good 7-8 years? Shouldn’t his case be judged on merits? Far from the Gujarat Government being vindictive (it actually was too soft for fear of being called vindictive by the opponents) it is Outlook which is vindictive of Narendra Modi unable to judge any situation of merit and hold Modi guilty.
Question #13 – It is alleged that compliant police officers during the 2002 riots were promoted and those who steadfastly did their duty were sidelined or persecuted. Many such cases have been widely documented and also brought to your attention. What action have you taken in this regard?
OUR ANSWER: In a democracy anyone can say anything. This is a sweeping generalization. We can’t just go on and on with every disgruntled state employee and link their grouses back to 2002. There is no end or meaning to such an exercise. Promotions are given on the basis of work and a lot of things. It is not the Chief Minister who directly promotes or transfers officers- there is a mechanism involved. Also, these transfers which were done were due anyway. The media did not bother to check the facts on the roles of the officers and whose promotions were due anyway. When liars lie, they will use every trick in the book to make allegations without cross checking facts.
Question #14 – You denied to the SIT that your ministers were involved in leading any of the violent mobs, but what action did you take when the alleged involvement of people like Bharat Barot, Mayaben Kodnani, Nitinbhai Patel and Narayan Lallu Patel was officially brought to your attention?
OUR ANSWER: It is pertinent to point out that Mayaben Kodnani was not a Minister in 2002 but a local MLA. Between 2002 and 2007 there are several news reports that describe her as a rebel BJP MLA in the anti-Modi Keshubhai faction. Nevertheless Ms. Kodnani is on trial. Let the courts settle her fate. Though Maya Kodnani has been convicted, and now she has to be assumed as guilty until proved innocent by the higher courts, there is an article worth reading on this conviction. There was only one BJP man against whom there could have been a credible case, the late Haren Pandya accused of demolishing a dargah. While the courts will decide the merits of the case against Mayaben Kodnani, this writer is certain that she will be acquitted one day because on that day she was in Ahmedabad. But we will not jump to conclusions- and respect the courts decision. But it does seem unbelievable that a BJP MLA like Mayaben Kodnani will be foolish enough to actually lead a 17,000 strong mob targeting and killing Muslims in 2002 in broad daylight in Naroda Patiya on 28 Feb 2002 so that there would be 17,000 witnesses against her! Now the trial court has convicted her, but the judgment has been criticized for not having her run her terms of 10 years and 18 years concurrently and instead give 28 years.
There is no case against Nitinbhai Patel, no specific accusations beyond the odd story of Muslims voting en-bloc against him in 2002 due to his “alleged” role.
The Special Courton the Sardarpura Riot case had rejected witness statements on Narayan Lalu has being inconsistent while delivering 31 Life sentences. Strangely this story was carried by OutlookIndia on Nov 10th 2011
“While holding that there was no conspiracy behind the killings, the judgement said there are discrepancies in the versions of the witnesses on this point.
One of the witnesses claimed that former Godhra MLA Haresh Bhatt and BJP MLA Narayan Lalu had held a meeting in the village 20-25 days before the incident and distributed weapons, while another claimed that this meeting took place on February 27, 2002.
The court noted that even the investigating officer had rejected the contention that any such meeting had taken place.
The version of Basirabibi Shaikh, a witness, with regard to the alleged conspiracy did not corroborate complainant’s version, the judgement says.”
Question 15: What stopped you from taking action on the basis of the media footage available on the riots? That said, why didn’t the Gujarat police document the carnage?
OUR ANSWER: This question is completely unworthy of even being responded to. How has this question asker concluded that the footage was not used to take action against rioters? For the record, the efficiency of the Gujarat Police can be seen from the fact that out of 25,486 accused the Gujarat police arrested as many as 25,204 accused- as per official Government figures as of October 2005. This includes 7856 Muslims out of 7997 Muslims accused. This question will only reveal the silliness of the asker- prosecuting agencies obviously use all the material available.
Question #16 – What action, if any, did you take after Tehelka’s Operation Kalank in which the likes of Haresh Bhatt, Babu Bajrangi and Rajendra Vyas, while narrating their ‘exploits’, implicated you and your administration?
OUR ANSWER: “Operation Kalank” has no meaning since Even the SIT and courts have rejected the Sting’s admissibility as evidence in a Trial. Besides, all these claims of Tehelka in its doctored and fake sting operation, which is a serious violation of law and prosecutable in the courts, are answered by us already in this article TEHELKA LIES. No one has yet refuted our arguments against Tehelka’ sting operation here. But despite this, all claims made by these people caught on camera were examined. For example, the SIT itself asked Narendra Modi if he visited Naroda Patiya on 28 Feb evening at 7-7:30 pm giving up his security to put the rioters of Naroda Patiya and whether he was ‘garlanded’ by women. Haresh Bhat, the BJP MLA from Godhra claimed that he met on 27 Feb 2002 when Modi visited Godhra- which is completely untrue because records show that no such meeting happened. Despite this, all statements by all those involved in that sting operation were examined. Most of the people in the sting have only implicated themselves, not anyone else. So whether what they said was true or empty boasts, i.e. boastful lies has to be established. despite this, all claims made were examined. Some of the claims may perhaps be true to some extent (of implicating themselves)- so these claims have been investigated. Though they will not stand as evidence in a court of law at least the matters were found fit to be investigated.
Tehelka of course will believe that Narendra Modi visited Naroda Patiya on 28 Feb evening at 7 pm and taking out his security he thanked and applauded the rioters for doing a great work, just because stray accused like Suresh Richard and Babu Bajrangi while talking casually to a Tehelka reporter (thinking that he was writing a book from the VHP point of view) say so, not aware that secret recording is going on, when official records show that he was busy elsewhere in Ahmedabad that day! Such laughable claims that Narendra Modi visited Naroda Patiya and thanked rioters, when we have Times of India’s online report that police escorted 400 Muslims to safety in Naroda Patiya (after 8 pm) and saved the lives of 900 Muslims in this episode, will only make Tehelka and Outlook look silly. It is shocking and unbelievable to see that Outlook would not know that ‘confessions’ given in full knowledge on camera to police are not admissible as evidence as per laws, only intentional confessions given to the judge are admissible as evidence. Here these individuals did not even confess before the police knowingly- they were just talking casually to a man thinking him to be a man writing a book from the VHP point of view and indulging in boastful lies. Of course, Outlook and Tehelka both know this, and despite this Tehelka claims to have ‘irrefutable evidence’ of Modi’s involvement. What trash!
Question #17 – Why was no action taken or inquiry held against officers of the executive magistracy, particularly the DMs who failed to initiate prompt action against the rioters, especially from Feb 27-Mar 4, ’02?
OUR ANSWER: The dates mentioned are completely incorrect. There were no riots on 27 Feb barring a few stray incidents of violence. Riots began on 28 Feb 2002 at 11 AM and lasted for just 3 days- 28 Feb, 1st March and 2nd March 2002. There were no riots, no rioters to act against on 3rd and 4th March 2002 at all! So how can the officers be held responsible for ‘not taking action’ against rioters on 3rd and 4th March? We have seen the reports of all English dailies of those days.
We have given details of ACTION TAKEN AGAINST RIOTERS. 827 preventive arrest on 27 Feb, 700 arrests on 28 Feb though the situation was out of control, curfew imposed as soon as the violence began on 28 Feb and in many places much before the violence began, police firing 1,000 rounds of 28 Feb including 600 in Ahmedabad, etc etc.
Just for the sake of argument, look at the report of The Telegraph (Kolkata) dated 1st March 2002 on the events of 28 February 2002:
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1020301/front_pa.htm#head2
Where in this report does The Telegraph accuse anyone of inaction on 28 February? No allegations of any inaction. See the report of The Tribune (which editorially fully supported the claim of U C Banerjee in January 2005 that the Godhra train burning was an accident thereby whitewashing the heinous murderers of their heinous crime) dated 1st March 2002 on events of 28 February. http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020301/main7.htm
NO ALLEGATIONS OF ANY INACTION. These newspapers are among the worst critics of Narendra Modi and the BJP ever after the riots. But at the time of the actual riots, they said nothing like this- “Inaction”, “Police complicit” or anything. If there was any deliberate inaction, these dailies along with foreign dailies would have screamed worldwide and raised a hullabaloo in their reports THE NEXT DAY. But we see nothing against anyone. Same is the case of reports of 2nd March and 3rd March 2002 too. Let us look at the report of The Hindu dated 2nd March 2002 on riots of 1st March 2002. http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/2002/03/03/stories/2002030303020100.htm No allegation of any inaction. Also the same in its issue of 3rd March 2002 on riots of 2nd March 2002.
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/2002/03/03/stories/2002030303020100.htm No allegations of inaction . And as for proofs that the riots stopped on 2nd March itself and that there were no riots on 3rd and 4th March, see this report of The Hindu dated 4th March 2002.
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/2002/03/04/stories/2002030403090100.htm Doesn’t this show that there were no riots, i.e. no rioters on 3rd and 4th March 2002 against whom officials could take action?
How can the officials be accused of failing to take action against rioters when the best possible action was taken against rioters? This is a sweeping generalization. A perusal of all the news reports from 28th Feb 2002 will show a mixed picture of action taken yet a scale of violence that clearly overwhelmed the system. The Srikrishna Commission Report on 1993 riots had come up with specific recommendations for action against negligent officers. Let us give the Nanavati Commission report the same opportunity and wait to see what it has to say of specific instances of delinquency, negligence or willful inaction.
All accusations on Narendra Modi and demands for his resignation, dismissal started AFTER the riots. This was because, the media wanted some scapegoat to be made for the riots. It wanted Modi to sack a few police officers, drop a minister or two. But Modi did nothing of the sort. He did not blame anyone, did not make anyone a scapegoat. In an interview to NDTV’ broadcast on 20 March 2004, Narendra Modi said to Shekhar Gupta (Editor of The Indian Express), “You all wanted that someone be made scapegoat. I did not do that. I allowed you to break all pots on my head alone. You have all decided, all these riots happened under this man (Narendra Modi). Until this man is removed from the Chief Minister’s post, we will not rest in peace. My best wishes to you in your mission.” Narendra Modi did not resign, and the BJP did not dismiss him, so the media was livid. Remember that on the day of the actual riots, no allegations were made against Narendra Modi or the administration.
Question #18 – You denied recommending pro-BJP/VHP advocates for appointment as public prosecutors. Then why was no action taken or inquiry conducted against the DMs who made such biased selections?
OUR ANSWER: Let us give the Nanavati Commission report the opportunity and wait to see what it has to say of specific instances of bias. But in our opinion, wasn’t the prosecution very efficient? Till now we have had at least 447 people convicted for rioting including 34 Muslims and at least 184 Hindus- not including 31 Muslims convicted for Godhra- only from newspaper reports read by us. The official figures are 478 people- 367 Hindus and 111 Muslims. This is a world record- the highest ever convictions in Gujarat. In 1969 and 1985 far worse riots took place in which far more people were killed in riots which lasted for a much longer duration, like 5 months in 1985. There have been horrible riots in Gujarat details of which are given by us in the chapter “Gujarat’s Bloody History of Violence”. In those riots, the previous Congress Governments (and Janata Dal in 1990) hardly managed to get 3- 4 people convicted, yes- 3 to 4 people convicted for such horrible riots. The 1984 riots which were far far worse than the post-Godhra riots saw a mere 16 people convicted in the past 28 years. As compared to that, at least 478 people have been convicted (including those for Godhra) in Gujarat which is by far the highest ever- compiled just from newspaper reports read by us. The official figures show 478 convictions till now- 367 Hindus and 111 Muslims. So how can be prosecutors be biased or unprofessional? Outlook and the media have of course not bothered to mention these facts of people convicted ever in their articles!
Question #19 – You often boast that you do not discriminate on grounds of religion. On Sept 9, ’02, as part of your gaurav yatra, you made a speech in which you equated the Muslim relief camps with child-producing centres and used crudities like “Hum paanch, hamaare pachees”. Are you proud of such remarks?
OUR ANSWER: Remarks taken out of context can sound crude and despicable. Let us not forget what followed those remarks. The Independent People’s Tribunal of Justices Suresh, Krishna Iyer et. al in its Report (Part 1, Page 266) carried an English translation of the audio recording of that speech via NDTV/Indian Express. Here is what followed:
“Who will benefit from this development? Is family planning not necessary in Gujarat? Where does religion come in its way? Where does community come in its way? .The population is rising in Gujarat, money isn’t reaching the poor? What.s the reason? They make a beeline, fix cycle punctures (Audience laughs). If Gujarat is to be developed, then an economic system has to be developed where every child born in Gujarat gets education, manners and employment.”
Where is the question of bias or discrimination when Mr. Modi speaks of an economic vision for Gujarat where every child gets education and opportunity?
This is not spin from 2008 this is his much maligned election speech of 2002 ! There is absolutely nothing that can be held against Narendra Modi here. And he has already responded to all these questions in 2002.
Question #20 – It took the Gujarat HC to finally issue a contempt notice against your government for failing to compensate those whose shops were burnt down in the riots? Where was your ‘sadbhavana’ during the last 10 years?
OUR ANSWER: As for failing to compensate those whose shops were burnt down, we would like to say that hundreds of Hindus also suffered economically. Hindu shops were also looted (by Muslims!- which will give a terrible pain to Outlook to mention on paper!). The Hindus also suffered economically. Just for one example, As per the report of none other than The Times of India, as many as 50 Hindus shops were torched in Revdi Bazaar area of Ahmedabad on 23 March 2002 by Muslims. The financial loss was as much as 15 crore rupees. Many more Hindu shops were looted in the rest of Gujarat too.
To read the report of The Times of India on the burning of 50 shops in Ahmedabad- see this link- http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/4609603.cms
It is pertinent to point out the contempt notice was issued to a District Collector and not to the Chief Minister’s Office, Cabinet or Cabinet Secretary. In an era where even the Prime Minister gets to distance himself from his own Office on Court strictures, to describe contempt notice against one District Collector as a “contempt notice against an entire State Government” is frankly bizarre.
We have already seen the steps taken by the Government to quell the violence, and in saving the lives of the victims- for example in Sanjeli, Bodeli and Viramgam areas of Gujarat, 24,000 Muslims were saved. We have also seen how the police saved 900 Muslims in Naroda Patiya and 180 Muslims in Ehsan Jafri case. Hindus were also saved by violent Muslims in many places in Gujarat-like in Jamalpur in Ahmedabad on 1 March 2002, and in Modasa on 19 March 2002 when Muslims attacked. But there has also been a claim by many that the Gujarat Government was like Hitler and have called these plain riots as ‘holocaust’ and equated them with the killing of Jews in Germany. What a ridiculous comparison!
The Gujarat Government spent a lot of money for providing relief to the riot victims. None other than the UPA Government’s MoS for Home Sriprakash Jaiswal said in the Rajya Sabha that too in a written reply on 11 May 2005. He said an amount of Rs 1.5 lakh was paid by the government to the next of kin of each person killed and Rs 5,000, Rs 15,000, Rs 25,000 and Rs 50,000 to those injured up to 10, 30, 40 and 50 per cent respectively.
In addition, Jaiswal said relief was also extended by the state government to the victims of the riots under the heads of cash doles and assistance for household kits, foodgrains to Below Poverty Line (BPL) families in affected areas, housing assistance, rebuilding earning assets, rehabilitation of small business, assistance to industries/shop and hotel and so on.
The state government, Jaiswal said has informed that a total of Rs 204.62 crore has been incurred by it towards relief and rehabilitation measures. The Gujaratgovernment has also informed that they had published the data as recommended by the NHRC, he added.
See link: http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=46538
In April 2002 Gujarat Government said : “ At the rate of Rs 30 per person, the Government is spending Rs 35 lakh a day on providing foodgrains to the 1.1 lakh inmates of the 99-odd relief camps in the state, 47 of them in Ahmedabad.
The relief operations at the camps are being directly looked after by IAS officers of the rank of secretary to the state Government.
The camps in Ahmedabad have been divided into six groups. Each group is being monitored by a bureaucrat of the rank of secretary. The secretaries have been looking after the minutest problems of the inmates. Teachers were deputed in each camp to help the children prepare for the exams and the state Health Department has been taking special steps to look after the well being of the inmates. In order to rehabilitate the rural inmates, the Government has floated the Sant Kabir Awas Yojana as per the directions of Prime Minister A. B. Vajpayee. The scheme will enable the inmates to build houses.”(And in these camps were 1 lakh Muslims and 40,000 Hindus as well)
How ridiculous to equate this with Hitler! Did Hitler ever spent crores on helping Jews or other Christian Germans affected by violence? He ordered killing of Jews- not spending of money to help them. Has any government in the world ever cared about minority Hindus who suffered like this? In the 1971 East Pakistan genocide, West Pakistani soldiers killed around 2 million Hindus (and also other Bangladeshi Muslims when their leader declared that Bangladeshis are un-Islamic). and also raped at least 2,50,000 Bengali women. From 1947- Pakistan has constantly massacred the Hindus, reducing their population from 20 % in West Pakistan to 1 % now. In Bangladesh also- the Hindu population has declined from around 30 % to just 7 % now. Hindus are regularly killed, women raped, abducted and forcibly converted to Islam, temples attacked, Hindus thrown out of their homes in Bangladesh and Pakistan. In Kashmir in January 1990, Hindus were given 3 choices by local Islamic leaders- convert to Islam, die or leave Kashmir. Nobody ever reconstructed houses for these Hindus. Nobody gave them financial compensation of crores of rupees. And nobody spent 35 lakhs per day on them. Nobody arrested the culprits and punished them. Those who order killing of others- or want others to suffer horribly, do not take the pains to do all that the Gujarat Government did. Not only did the Gujarat Government do all this- the police also arrested 35,552 people as of 28 April 2002, out of which 27,901 were Hindus. Around 20,000 people were arrested as a preventive measure out of whom 17,000 were Hindus. No Islamic country (or our own country in Kashmir in 1990) or other mass murderers like Saddam Hussain, Hitler ever carried out preventive arrests to save the victims. And already 130 people have been convicted for rioting- the highest ever in Gujarat. No Islamic country has ever punished anyone for killings of Hindus- not even of the tallest Hindu leader of Pakistan- Sudamchand Chawla, who was killed by Islamic radicals on 28 January 2002. There is no way a Muslim nation will punish a believer (Momin) for the murder of a kafir (infidel) that too an idolator.
Question #21 – The Gujarat HC also had to order the various authorities under your administration to pay for the restoration of the hundreds of religious structures destroyed. Why did the situation come to this?
OUR ANSWER: The Supreme Court set aside this judgment of the Gujarat High Court. http://news.rediff.com/commentary/2017/aug/29/sc-relieves-guj-govt-from-reconstructing-shrines-damaged-in-2002-riots/40ad1d59ca527e3e38d129a1ef2b2e84
But a correct question. This doesn’t mean that the Gujarat Government did not give compensation on all other victims. Religious structures are public property, individuals don’t have to be compensated here. the Gujarat Government has spent crores and crores on victims relief, like Rs 35 lakh a day in April 2002 handling 99 odd relief camps. The maximum relief/ refugee camps opened were 159 since many camps were closed and new ones opened at different times. As on 5 March 2002 out of 85 refugee/ relief camps opened 85 were for Muslims and 13 for Hindus.
The question on religious structures is a genuine one. There is a legitimate Constitutional question on this on tax payer money being spent on religious structures. Let the Supreme Court appeal be settled. After all no compensation was paid for structures that were damaged or destroyed in the 2001 earthquake or during the terror attack on the Akshardham temple in Gandhinagar in 2002. And let us also mention here that many temples too were destroyed by Muslims even after Godhra. And after the Babri demolition of 6 Dec 1992, there were around 160 temples demolished in Kashmir by Muslims- let us not even talk of temples demolished in Pakistan and Bangladesh by Muslims right since 1947 and specially after 6 December 1992. There were 37 temples demolished in Kashmir BEFORE 6 December 1992. Also, leaving apart Kashmir more than 600 temples have been demolished in India by Muslims after 1947- yes you read it right. We have a list of all these 600 temples demolished OUTSIDE Kashmir in today’s India after 1947. Is it surprising, since temples were also demolished in Gujarat by Muslims under Narendra Modi’s rule even after Godhra. Only one question to Outlook- did you bother to even mention these temples demolished, not to talk of demanding any compensation for them? Since no government ever paid for religious structures demolished in riots, 200 odd temples demolished in Kashmir before and after 6 Dec 1992, nor in any other place perhaps this court ruling will set a precedence.
Question #22 – What is your take on the high court blaming the 2002 riots on the “negligence of the state”?
OUR ANSWER: All these actually are questions to Narendra Modi- not us. We replied to all accusations of inaction, causing violence, etc. Here the PERSONAL OPINION of Narendra Modi is being asked which we cannot give. But we will give OUR PERSONAL OPINION (unsolicited!).
This was in a case filed by an Islamic group seeking compensation from Government on damages caused to religious structures. The job of the Gujarat High Court in this case was to simply decide whether the state government should give compensation or not for damaged religious structures. It has absolutely no right to comment on whether those structures were demolished due to ‘negligence of the state government’ or not when that it not its job, nor its jurisdiction. When the matter is in case of whether compensation should be given or not, the High Court has no right and no business to comment on what caused the damages, blaming someone for it and that too without listening to that party’s side. That too is irrelevant, whether the court gave a chance to the Gujarat Government to argue on why it did not do any negligence, because that is a matter which is simply beyond the powers of the High Court.
The basic minimum for any court before saying anything , even on a point which is not in the powers of the court to speak on, has to be- LISTENING TO BOTH SIDES. If a court passes some order without even asking the other party its position- then it means that the opinion (mind the word, opinion not judgment) of the court is terribly biased. In this case, did the Gujarat High Court listen to the side of the state government ON THIS POINT- on whether the religious structures demolished were due to negligence on its part?
The words are : “Even if, for the sake of argument, we accept the defence of the state that the cause of riots was the ‘general reaction from the incident of Sabarmati Express, failure on part of the police intelligence to gather such general reaction (after the Godhra train burning incident) in time and to take appropriate timely action definitely come within expression ‘negligence of the state’.
“Similarly, the fact remains that the anarchy continued unabated for days … itself suggests lack of appropriate action or adequate action, if not inaction, on the part of the state in handling the situation,” it further observed.
The division bench of acting Chief Justice Bhaskar Bhattacharya and Justice J B Pardiwala, while castigating the state government, ordered payment of compensation for over 500 religious structures, damaged during the riots.
The state cannot shirk its responsibilities, the court observed. “There was ‘inadequate endeavour’ on the part of the state government in effectively handling the situation resulting in destruction of more than 500 places of religious worship throughout the state belonging only to one religious community,” it said.
The judges held that “it is the duty of the state government to restore all those religious places, irrespective of the religion, to original position as they existed at the time of destruction.”
If the structures are already restored by now, the government should reimburse the amount spent, the court said.”
The High Court has absolutely no right to comment on either this or the 2002 riots. It is beyond the jurisdiction of the court to comment on what happened in the 2002 riots – in the first place when there is a full-fledged Commission of Inquiry which has all the powers under the Commission of Inquiry Act i.e. Nanavati Commission to probe the riots and give its report. Secondly, assuming that the Gujarat High Court did pass such a comment, that is just an opinion of the bench which passed it- and it is not a judgment or a law. For example a case which comes to mind is a ruling of the Karnataka High Court which said that 18 is an ok age for a girl to marry if its an arranged marriage, but for a love marriage the age should be 21 for a girl since a girl is too young at 18 to go in for a love marriage. Now this is just the view of the court- it is not a law, it is not a judgment. A girl can go in for a love marriage even at 18, 19 or 20.
Let us point out here that respect for the Gujarat High Court does not mean that no action of it can be challenged. The High Court is also incorrect on facts in saying that religious structures of only one community were damaged. It did not note that 17 Hindu temples were also demolished by Muslims, and that Muslims attacked a prominent temple in Jamalpur locality in Ahmedabad as early as 1 March 2002 as reported by The Hindu the next day. The High Court did not look at all the steps and PRO ACTIVE ACTION (far from negligence) taken by the Gujarat Government to control the violence which was controlled in a mere 3 days which we have given in detail in Chapter 2 “Role of the Government in controlling violence”.
Q 23: How is it that instead of censuring newspapers like Sandesh and Gujarat Samachar—which spread false, dangerous and communal rumours—you actually wrote them letters of appreciation while seeking to ban those who exposed the complicity of your administration in the violence?
OUR ANSWER: One factually incorrect news given was that Hindu girls were kidnapped, raped and their breasts cut off by Muslims in Godhra. What this question asker does not seem to remember is that the report of his own magazine, Outlook in its issue dated 11 March 2002 (Covering events till 28 Feb 2002) said, “Though the government scotched the rumours, the damage was done”. Naturally, the Narendra Modi Government DENIED THE RUMOURS of Hindu girls being kidnapped in Godhra by Muslims and their breasts cut off. This too on 28 Feb when there was no confirmation of whether this is false or not. Government did not say “There is no proof of this news ” etc. It directly DENIED the rumours. No Hindu girl will ever say that she has been raped. So the government could not have concluded on 27 Feb that no rapes took place. It took some days for this fact to be established, that no rapes took place in Godhra, but the Narendra Modi government immediately DENIED THE RUMOURS as reported by none other than Outlook! The very next day i.e. 1st March, one of them carried a clarification that the news of the earlier day regarding the rape of Hindu girls in Godhra was wrong.
The newspapers like Sandesh and Gujarat Samachar were far more truthful, safe and factually correct than magazines like Outlook and our national English media and TV channels who reported very inflammatorily and factually incorrectly and were responsible more a lot of violence. The claim “While seeking to ban those who exposed the complicity of your administration in the violence” is based on a terrible assumption that the administration was complicit in the violence. This shows Outlook’s bias- in holding the administration complicit-guilty. As we have said, we have not seen a single evidence against the administration in the past 10 years nor has anyone refuted our arguments till date. This is also a very generalized question against Narendra Modi. Talking vague. The question should have been more specific- which channels or newspapers did Narendra Modi try to ban and for what reason did he try- if at all he did. No details given by Outlook. What complicity did they expose? No answer. Where and when did Narendra Modi write letters to appreciation to them and for what reason- is not mentioned by Outlook. It is too generalized a statement made by Outlook. If Sandesh and Gujarat Samachar did something good- like exposing any criminal activity etc and they were praised for it, what can be wrong in it? Sundeep Dougal gives no details of WHY they were praised. Also, if someone speaks against Modi like NDTV-Star News (who then had a collaboration) does that mean they can telecast anything inflammatory and no action should be taken against them just because they spoke against Modi? This question again proves what we have been saying for long, that Outlook and co lack the ability to judge any situation on merit.
Papers like Sandesh and Gujarat Samachar may have been guilty of exaggeration but they definitely did not concoct stories the way the national English media did and magazines like Outlook did- for example, lying that Ehsan Jafri’s daughters were raped, lying that a pregnant woman’s womb was ripped open and foetus taken out, that in that 27 Feb meeting officers were told to allow Hindus to retaliate, or that 2000 Muslims were killed in the riots whereas the correct number is less than 1000, calling the riots a ‘genocide’ whereas they were plain riots, ignoring all actions taken by the government to control and prevent the violence and instead alleging that free hand was given etc etc. On this, we will ask some questions to the Indian media in general and Outlook in particular after we answer all its 25 questions.
There was a contrast of day and night in the versions of the riots as projected by the ‘national’ English media and the local Gujarati papers, not merely Sandesh and Gujarat Samachar. All Gujarati papers were giving identical versions of riots, which was completely different from the versions given by national TV channels and English dailies. The reason was that the national English dailies were projecting Muslims as victims ignoring that fact that almost all the riots after 4th March 2002 were started by Muslims and were attack on Hindus. Muslims threw out 40,000 Hindus from their homes into relief camps even after Godhra, in a state ruled by Narendra Modi is something which the national media forgot to mention, but the Gujarati media reported.
The Justice Tewatia Committee study team went to Gujarat in April 2002, studied and gave a report. Justice D. S. Tewatia, a former Chief Justice of Calcutta and Punjab and Haryana High Courts, was the leader of the team. Other members were: Dr J C Batra, senior advocate, Supreme Court of India, Dr. Krishan Singh Arya, Academician, Chandigarh, Shri Jawahar Lal Kaul, former Assistant Editor, Jansatta, Delhi, and Prof. B K Kuthiala, Dean, Faculty of Media Studies, G. J. University Hisar. Note that this was not a team with Hindu ideology, it was a panel having all ‘other’ people and a retired Chief Justice. Its report says:
“ROLE OF MEDIA
The Study Team received a large number of complaints against biased reporting’, non-objective attitude and anti Gujarat conspiracy of Delhi Media. The team felt it necessary to objectively observe and analyse the role of Media both regional and English language newspapers published from metropolitan cities. It also solicited comments about the role of media from about 500 persons with whom the members of the team interacted. The team’s observations are:
1. Local and regional papers at times seemed to be emotionally surcharged and lost sight of objectivity. However, Gujarati newspapers, by and large, were factual in day to day reporting.
2. The editorial pages of local and regional newspapers maintained a balance in projecting all viewpoints.
3. Newspapers published in English from Delhi invariably editorialized the news. Direct and indirect comments in the news writing were so telling that the personal likes and dislikes of the news reporters were too obvious to be missed.
4. English language newspapers published from Delhi appeared to have assumed the role of crusaders against the State Government from day one. It coloured the entire operation of news gathering, feature writing and editorials.
5. The edit pages of English language press carried comments that clearly indicated biases:
a. against the State Government of Gujarat,
b. in favor of Congress, leftist parties and the secularist
intellectuals,
c. indifferent to the carnage at Godhra,
d. against the Hindu organizations, and
e. against the NDA government at the Centre.
6. Most of the national newspapers and news channels played down the intensity of Godhra carnage and projected it as a result of provocation by pilgrims. Not many reporters were deputed to dig out facts or to do follow-up stories. This resulted in large number of editorials and articles that projected Godhra as a reaction to provocation by karsevaks’ and riots in rest of the state as “state sponsored terrorism”.
7. A distorted image of sectarian violence in the state was projected by the electronic and print media based in Delhi.
8. Repeated telecasts of arson and violence contributed in spreading the tension to unaffected areas. TV channels ignored warning from officials and kept telecasting communal riots like infotainment.
9. Coverage of Machhipiti in Vadodara is an example. One national news channel went overboard to telecast police firing at Machhipit as if it had taken place in Ahmedabad.
10. On 27.02.02 the Government of Gujarat announced a compensation of Rs. 2 lakh for the next of kin of victims of Godhra carnage. There were protests about discrimination between Hindu and Muslim victims and the Government announced on March 9 that all victims would get Rs one lakh.
Yet, as late as the first week of April a Congressperson in USA citeda report in an Indian newspaper to accuse the Government of discriminating against minorities in the grant of compensation. The newspaper concerned did not care to inform its readers of the correct situation.
11. The code of ethics prescribed by the Press Council of India was violated by the media with impunity. It so enraged the citizens that several concerned citizens in the disturbed areas suggested that peace could return to the state only if some of the TV channels were closed for some weeks.
12. Media did not help to cool down the tempers. It failed to act as a platform for a dialogue between the Hindus and Muslims on the one hand and between the people and the establishment on the other.
The Study Team is of the considered opinion that the media in general failed to perform as conscious and socially responsible gatekeepers of information.
It followed in the footsteps of an American journalist who said, ” My job is to report the facts. I give a damn to the consequences”.
Telecasting images that spread hatred and instigated violence is unhealthy, but their repeated telecast is lethal. The media acted as an interested party in the confrontation, not a neutral reporter of facts.
The team was alarmed at the intensity of hostile attitude among the people of the state for Delhi press and television news channels. This attitude was especially articulated by delegations of intellectuals like lawyers, doctors, and businessmen. Even the tribals complained that the media had no time to hear their tale of their agony and was spreading canards against the Hindus.”
THIS IS A REPORT of the Justice Tewatia Committee, not of any RSS study-team!Outlook would do well to criticize the English media and TV channels for inflammatory, dangerous and one-sided reporting with complete lies which caused violence in Gujarat. The sufferings of Hindus did not find any mention at all.
Q 24: While you claim to condemn the killings in 2002, your critics argue the reason you refuse to show any repentance for the same is your deep-seated anti-Muslim prejudice. Do you agree?
OUR ANSWER: Prejudice is what is an integral part of the anti-Narendra Modi media (a section of it) who cannot judge anything on merit- like Sanjiv Bhat being suspended after being absent from work for days and days without information and ignoring all notices to him. Actually, it is the English dailies and weeklies like Outlook and TV channels like NDTV (run by CPM leader Brinda Karat’s younger sister Radhika Roy) and CNN-IBN which have a deep rooted prejudice against Narendra Modi-horrible anti-Modi prejudice. This question has been answered by us in “Myth 18”. And the much-repeated nonsensical claim that Narendra Modi never expressed regret at the Gujarat riots is absolute rubbish.
Narendra Modi has expressed regret for the riots and termed the riots as ‘unfortunate’ . In an interview to Aaj Tak‘s Prabhu Chawla on its program Seedhi Baat, the excerpts of which were published in India Today weekly dated 4 Nov 2002, Narendra Modi was asked “Prime Minister Vajpayee and Home Minister Advani have said that whatever happened in Gujarat was wrong” to which he said, “I say the same thing. The communal riots in Gujarat were unfortunate and we are sad they took place.”
See link: http://www.indiatoday.com/itoday/20021104/conf.shtml#co
After the 2002 Gujaratriots Narendra Modi made a statement in the State Assembly (Vidhan Sabha) in March 2002. One paragraph from that statement is “Are we not supposed to soul-search ourselves? Whether it is Godhra incident or post-Godhra it does not enhance the prestige of any decent society. The riots are a stigma on humanity and do not help anyone to hold his head high. Then why is there a difference of opinion”.
When Narendra Modi went on his “Sadbhavana fast” in Gujaratin 2011, some newspapers said, “In a statement interpreted as his first sign of regret over the 2002 post-Godhra violence, Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi Friday said the pain of anyone in the state is “my pain” and he had a duty to do justice for everyone.”Constitution ofIndia is supreme for us. As a Chief Minister of the state, pain of anybody in the state is my pain. (Delivering) Justice to everyone is the duty of the state,” Modi said on the eve of his three-day fast.”
It wasn’t merely this paper, almost the entire media said the same thing. What a ridiculous interpretation from the media, and how factually incorrect it reported! The entire self-styled secularists and activists have carried on this myth in their hate-campaigns against Modi. Gujarat Congress leaders too have repeated this terrible lie. The BJP’s public relations work truly is not up to the mark. How it allowed such a massive lie to crop up without ever bothering to try to bring out the truth is beyond comprehension.
What is correct is that Narendra Modi has not apologized for the Gujarat riots, and rightly so. Why should he? Apology is given when someone does something wrong, makes a mistake and asks for forgiveness for a mistake. What wrong has Narendra Modi done? He actually has done an excellent work in controlling the 2002 riots, his administration saved more than 24,000 Muslims, the riots were controlled in 3 days while weeklies like India Today and Outlook predicted weeks of violence on 28 Feb, he frantically called the Army to Ahmedabad on 28 Feb 2002, ordered preventive arrests of 827 people on 27 Feb itself, gave ‘shoot-at-sight’ orders in Godhra on 27 Feb itself (primarily aimed at Hindus who could have retaliated in Godhra). His government spent more than 204 crores rupees on relief and rehabilitation measures, built houses, opened relief camps, etc. Strong action was taken against the rioters, with as many as 35,552 arrests made as of 28 April 2002, including 27,901 Hindus. Already, in just 11 years at least 425 people have been convicted for the riots, including 333 Hindus and 92 Muslims. The media’s argument often is “The Congress has apologized for the 1984 riots. Will the BJP apologize for the 2002 Gujarat riots?” This was asked by Arnab Goswami to BJP leader Nalin Kohli on 16 May 2009 on TV after the BJP’s massive debacle in the 2009 Lok Sabha polls.
There is absolutely no need to equate the two. Firstly there is not a single parallel between the post-Godhra riots of 2002 and the 1984 riots. We have seen the contrasts between these two riots. Secondly, Congress apologizing for the riots is not an action of credit. Apologizing means accepting culpability in the 1984 riots in which 3,000 Sikhs were killed. Is the sin of killing 3,000 forgivable by merely issuing an apology? Accepting culpability for the death of 3,000 people means the party deserves severe punishment. 3,000 murders cannot be pardoned and condoned by an apology. The then Congress Government took no action against the rioters, hardly any arrests were made and hardly 16 people have been convicted in 7 cases in 28 years. For what should the BJP or Narendra Modi apologize? They have done absolutely nothing wrong, controlled violence in Gujarat in record time even after a shocking massacre like Godhra, while it took previous Congress Governments several months to stop riots in 1985 and 1969 even without any cause like Godhra.
It should be remembered that not a single English newspaper actually accused the Chief Minister Narendra Modi of any wrongdoing on the actual days of the riots, i.e. 28 Feb 2002 (Thursday), 1st March 2002 (Friday) and 2nd March 2002.
Q 25: If you really have nothing to hide, why do you refuse to engage with those who have raised such allegations about you?
OUR ANSWER: For once, we agree with something said by Outlook. But the question that “If you have nothing to hide why don’t you speak on this issue” ignores one big issue. And that is- that all these questions were answered by Narendra Modi in 2002. He engaged in dialogue with all those at that time. If Narendra Modi had something to hide, why did he answer all these questions in 2002- like in interviews to India Today weekly dated 18 March 2002, 8 April 2002, 29 April 2002, Outlook dated 18 March 2002, in various other interviews and in press conferences almost daily? However, here we agree that Narendra Modi should now break his silence on the issue of riots. Perhaps he could be keeping quiet as a matter of strategy. Once he is given a clean chit- may be by the Nanavati Commission he will open his mouth. Perhaps he is waiting for 100 sins’ pot to be filled. Let us tell you, that if and when he opens his mouth, it will a disaster for the media and political rivals and social ‘activists’. The defamation cases fought and won by him will cost these liars and false allegation-makers THOUSANDS OF CRORES OF RUPEES remember- thousands of crores of rupees. This question has one counter question by us- if YOU (OUTLOOK) have nothing to hide, then why do you refuse to engage with those who challenge you for a debate on this- that is, us at www.gujaratriots.com ? Note that the media has not published any articles refuting allegations on Narendra Modi and the state government since 2002. This writer himself has sent many many letters and articles many many times to many many English dailies and weeklies and not a single has been published. Why have none of the people we sent invitation mails to debate us ever responded to us? Does this not show that they can only lie and lie in their newspapers (like Vir Sanghvi’s Hindustan Times lying that 3,000 Muslims were killed in Gujarat on the edit pages day after day and calling Narendra Modi a ‘mass murderer’ without answering our arguments ever or giving us a space in their pages?)
OUTLOOK or any other paper, scholar, magazine or anyone is challenged to debate with us on this issue. http://www.gujaratriots.com/our-challenge/
Myth 19: Narendra Modi told police officers to go slow on Hindus in the 27 Feb night meeting
FACT: Before getting into the details, let us post one important thing here. Is Narendra Modi a fool to openly give such orders to so many officials in such a meeting where any of the officers could have secretly recorded such orders or which would have had 9 witnesses against Narendra Modi? If he did
FACT: Before getting into the details, let us post one important thing here. Is Narendra Modi a fool to openly give such orders to so many officials in such a meeting where any of the officers could have secretly recorded such orders or which would have had 9 witnesses against Narendra Modi? If he did want such orders to be issued, he would have done it through middlemen and other communicators being careful not to come into the picture directly!
Also note here that the SIT appointed by the Supreme Court with judges like Arijit Pasayat and Aftab Alam debunked the claim of Sanjiv Bhat that he was present and blamed NGOs for forcibly trying to find something against Narendra Modi. This is a must read report of the SIT.
This issue is given with comprehensive details in the book- of Sanjiv Bhat’s claims as well as the SIT findings. Though all details are not given in this website, let us see many things.
Now let us see this issue of that 27 Feb late night meeting.
On 27 February 2002 occurred the Godhra massacre, at around 8 am. The Chief Minister Narendra Modi was informed about the carnage at 8:30 to 9 am. He immediately issued shoot-at-sight orders and curfew in Godhra at 9:45 am, within 2 hours of the Godhra massacre. He visited Godhra on 27 Feb and returned to Ahmedabad the same day. 827 preventive arrests were made on his orders on his return to Ahmedabad. All these are well-documented facts which cannot be contested by anyone. India Today weekly in its issue dated 18 March 2002 mentions that pre-emptive arrests were made without specifying the number. (Even the SIT admitted 827 preventive arrests). In an article titled “Chronology of a crisis”India Today reported:
FEB 27, 2002
8.03 AM: Incident at Godhra claims lives of 57 kar sevaks
8.30 AM: Modi is informed of the carnage. (This may have been at 9 am and not 8:30 am)
4.30PM: Gujarat Assembly adjourned and Modi visits Godhra where he holds a meeting, giving shoot-at-sight orders to the police.
10.30PM:CM holds meeting with senior government officials at Gandhinagar; orders curfew in sensitive places and pre-emptive arrests.
Now this information from the weekly India Today dated 18 March 2002, which covered events till 7 March 2002 gives us a crucial piece of information. And that is, that this meeting had indeed taken place on 27 Feb 2002 late night (not midnight, as claimed by several opponents of Narendra Modi, like Outlook). Secondly, this meeting was not at all kept secret (and denied having taken place) by the Government. It is indeed very clear and very obvious that this meeting did take place in Gandhinagar on 27 Feb 2002 at 10:30 pm. But that was to discuss steps to CONTROL THE VIOLENCE which could possibly break out the next day.
Firstly, let us see the background of that crucial 27 February meeting. In the chapter “Role of the Government in Controlling Violence“we have already seen the steps taken by the Government to control the violence. We will just take a brief re-look at them.
The Godhra massacre occurred on February 27 at 8 AM. At 8:30 AM to 9 AM Chief Minister Narendra Modi- then in Ahmedabad- was informed about the carnage. Modi gave ‘shoot-at-sight’ orders in Godhra at 9:45 am, within 2 hours from Ahmedabad/Gandhinagar itself. ‘Shoot-at-sight’ orders in Godhra were primarily aimed at Hindus who could have retaliated in Godhra. The leading English daily from South India- The Hindu in its issue dated 28 February 2002 reported that- “The Chief Minister Narendra Modi gave shoot-at-sight orders in Godhra”.
The same day- The Times of India reported in a report titled “Shoot-at-sight orders, curfew in Godhra” –
“The Gujarat government imposed an indefinite curfew and issued shoot-at-sight orders in Godhra after 57 people were killed and several injured when a mob set the Sabarmati express on fire. Four bogies of the train were set on fire by miscreants at Godhra station…”
This report was posted at 1:37 PM. This shows that Modi’s claim of imposing curfew at 9:45 AM was absolutely true (considering the time it must have taken for The Times of India to get this news, make an article, proof-read it, edit it and post it on its website).
The same day- The Tribune (published from Chandigarh) – gave a report titled-“Sabarmati Express set ablaze– 57 dead -‘Ram sevaks’ among victims, shoot-at-sight orders in Godhra” and the report said–
“Indefinite curfew was clamped and the shoot-at-sight order issued in Godhra town immediately after the incident…”(Notice the words IMMEDIATELY AFTER)
It wasn’t merely them. All English dailies the next day reported this- and websites like rediff.com also reported this- and so did many foreign newspapers. The Daily Breeze– a US newspaper- reported on 28 February–
“Fearing the attack would ignite sectarian riots, Indian officials immediately stepped up security across this vast, religiously divided nation. The prime minister urged Hindus not to retaliate.”
Even Xinhua news agency also reported this online on 27 February 2002- that Vajpayee appeals for peace.
The same day- the website rediff.com also reported that the state government had taken all precautions and tightened security to prevent riots. These reports of rediff.com are given in Chapter 7, Myth 15 “Narendra Modi gave free hand 3 days”.
Narendra Modi talked to TV channels in Godhra on 27 Feb evening and urged people to maintain peace and not retaliate. He also made an appeal to the people to maintain calm which was broadcast on National TV (Doordarshan) for everyday since 28 February 2002. Luckily this is also available on YouTube today.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIRMR8zW0iI
The same day, on February 27, the Gujarat government deployed the entire police force of 70,000 in Gujarat. The Telegraph of UK in its issue of 28th February also reported that more than 70,000 security men had been deployed in Gujarat on 27 February.
The same day, on February 27, the Gujarat government deployed the Rapid Action Force in Ahmedabad and other sensitive areas and the Centre sent in the CRPF personnel. This was reported by The Indian Express in its report dated 28 February 2002. The English daily Mid-Day also reported both these things in its issue of 28 Feb.
The Hindu also reported on Feb 28 that- “(On Feb 27) The state government has appealed to the people to maintain peace…The Home Minister said the Government was taking necessary steps to ensure that the disturbances did not spread during the bandh tomorrow (i.e. Feb 28).” This was reported by many newspapers on 28 February.
The VHP also appealed for peace. The Times of India reported on 28 February 2002 even before a single major riot had taken place:
“VHP international Vice-President Acharya Giriraj Kishore told reporters here at Sola Civil Hospital, where 54 out of the 58 bodies of the train attack victims were brought, that “Hindus should maintain calm and keep patience. I appeal to Muslim brethren to condemn the attack and ask them not to put Hindus’ patience to test. Hindus are keeping a restraint but if such incidents do not stop, there can be a counter reaction which may be uncontrollable”.”
The Indian Express dated 28 February 2002 also reported that the Centre had announced a nationwide alert in the evening of 27th February.
Thus, in brief, the steps taken on 27 February (Wednesday) were:
1) The Gujarat Chief Minister, Shri Narendra Modi, rushed from Ahmedabad to Godhra and gave shoot-at-sight orders
2) The entire police force of 70,000 was deployed in Gujarat.
3) All companies of Rapid Action Force in the state were deployed in Ahmedabad, Godhra and other sensitive areas by the state government.
4) The Central Government rushed CRPF personnel to Gujarat.
5) The state government imposed curfew in Godhra at 9:45 am within 2 hours of the carnage and other sensitive areas.
6) 827 preventive arrests were made.
7) The Prime Minister, Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee and the Gujarat Government urged Hindus not to retaliate and maintain peace.
8) The RSS and VHP also appealed to Hindus to maintain peace and not retaliate.
9) CISF (Central Industrial Security Force) units were also deployed.
10) The Centre sounded a nationwide alert in the evening.
On Feb 27 itself- www.rediff.com reported- “The situation became tense as news of the incident spread to other parts of the state prompting the state government to initiate precautionary security measures. Security has been tightened in Godhra and other parts of Gujarat.”
The Link for this report is:
http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/feb/27train.htm
Rediff.com reported on Feb 27 itself- after Godhra that- “Two companies of the Rapid Action Force and one company of the State Reserve Police were deployed at Godhra to guard against further outbreak of violence.”
The link for the report: http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/feb/27train4.htm
The remains of the slain karsevaks were brought from Godhra to Ahmedabad on February 27 after the carnage at Godhra railway station . The bodies were brought to Ahmedabbad after midnight of February 27 in a very sombre atmosphere and not in a ceremonial procession. Plus, the bodies were brought to the then isolated Sola Civil Hospital on the western outskirts of Ahmedabad as a precautionary measure and not to the Ahmedabad’s main civil hospital which is located in eastern Ahmedabad from where most of the killed Ramsevaks came. Sola Civil Hospital was in 2002 located in the far outksirts of Ahmedabad and had very little population around it. This shows the Government’s efforts to control the situation. Had the Government planned to instigate the Hindus then it would have brought the bodies to the Ahmedabad’s main civil hospital in Eastern Ahmedabad where most of the Ramsevaks resided and from where it would have been ideal to orchestrate violence against Muslims. This shows that it tried to take preventive measures to preempt Hindu reaction following Godhra carnage. Also bodies were brought at 3:30 am of 28 Feb (as reported by India Today 18 March 2002 and Times of India online on 28 Feb) which is a very inconvenient time to instigate riots, and also for relatives!
Considering all these facts, it would actually be sufficient to conclude that far from asking the administration to ‘allow Hindus to went their anger’, what was discussed were steps to control the violence the next day. That this indeed was the case is proved by the actual action of the police and the administration. The police and the administration, the next day DID NOT ALLOW Hindus to vent their anger and did their best to control the violence.
WHO HAS ALLEGED THAT MODI TOLD THE POLICE TO GO SLOW ON HINDUS?
Now, let us come to the point of 27 February 2002 meeting. The weekly Outlook magazine, which is extremely anti-Narendra Modi has alleged that Modi told officials to allow Hindus to take revenge the next day in that crucial 27 February night meeting. It first did this in its issue dated 3rd June 2002, following which Narendra Modi sent a defamation notice as reported by The Indian Express on 8 June 2002. Now, there was a Concerned Citizens Tribunal (CCT) headed by Retd Supreme Court judge Justice Krishna Iyer which conducted its own ‘study’ and report on the Gujarat riots and as expected, held the government guilty. Sadly for it, it also made a fool of itself by trying to absolve Muslims of the crime of Godhra by suggesting that the fire was set ‘from inside’ (as if it was an inside job!) and outrightly denying that any mob torched the train.
Outlook reported that a certain Gujarat Minister (At that time, it did not name him- but after his murder named him as Haren Pandya) was interviewed by this CCT and he revealed that in that 27 Feb meeting, Modi told officials to allow Hindus to vent their anger.Outlook reported in that article:
“The minister told Outlook that in his deposition, he revealed that on the night of February 27, Modi summoned DGP K. Chakravarthy, commissioner of police, Ahmedabad, P.C. Pande, chief secretary G. Subarao, home secretary Ashok Narayan, secretary to the home department K. Nityanand (a serving police officer of IG rank on deputation) and DGP (IB) G.S. Raigar. Also present were officers from the CM’s office: P.K. Mishra, Anil Mukhim and A.K. Sharma. The minister also told Outlook that the meeting was held at the CM’s bungalow. (Notice that Sanjiv Bhatt comes nowhere in the picture!!!)
The minister told the tribunal (CCT) that in the two-hour meeting, Modi made it clear there would be justice for Godhra the next day, during the VHP-called bandh. He ordered that the police should not come in the way of “the Hindu backlash”. At one point in this briefing, according to the minister’s statement to the tribunal, DGP Chakravarthy vehemently protested. But he was harshly told by Modi to shut up and obey. Commissioner Pande, says the minister, would later show remorse in private but at that meeting didn’t have the guts to object.
According to the deposition, it was a typical Modi meeting: more orders than discussion. By the end of it, the CM ensured that his top officials—especially the police—would stay out of the way of Sangh parivar men. The word was passed on to the mobs. (According to a top IB official, on the morning of February 28, VHP and Bajrang Dal activists first visited some parts of Ahmedabad and created minor trouble just to check if the police did in fact look the other way. Once Modi’s word was confirmed, the carnage began.)”
https://www.outlookindia.com/magazine/story/a-plot-from-the-devils-lair/215889
Now there are clear factual errors in this. The Outlook report names chief secretary G. Subarao and an officer in the CM’s office, A.K. Sharma, as among those at the meeting. Neither was present in that meeting. That day Subarao was on leave and instead it was acting chief secretary S K Varma who participated in that meeting! This single goof-up alone is enough to dismiss the claims of Outlook on that meeting, or, assuming that the late Pandya did make such allegations, his. Outlook realized its terrible goof-up and in the 19 Aug issue has acknowledged its error in its claimed interview with Pandya.
Let us assume that Pandya did tell Outlook that Modi told officials to allow Hindus to vent their anger the next day in that meeting. What credibility does Pandya have when he was not even present in that meeting? And when he could not even correctly tell the people who were in the meeting, wrongly naming 2 people as being present there, how can anyone believe that he would know what happened inside the meeting? Outlook’s aim is also exposed here. Outlook wanted to crucify Narendra Modi by hook or by crook, and in its issue of 3rd June held Modi guilty without bothering to cross-check if the information provided by the Minister (Pandya) was correct or not, assuming that Pandya did speak to Outlook. Was it not Outlook’s duty to cross-check facts before making such a serious allegation against a Chief Minister? Haren Pandya was demoted in the Cabinet, from Home Minister to Revenue Minister. There were reports of his personal grudge against the Chief Minister. It is said that after he became Chief Minister in October 2001, Narendra Modi wanted to contest a bypoll from Ellisbridge (which is one of the safest seats for the BJP in Gujarat and in the country) which was represented by Pandya. It is reported that Pandya refused to vacate this seat for Modi and hence Modi had to contest from Rajkot II which Narendra Modi won.
In all this, Outlook relies only on the testimony of Haren Pandya, who it did not even name at that time. But neither the tribunal or Outlook have given any evidence that Pandya met them or told them anything of this sort. Outlook claims that it has a taped interview of Haren Pandya of August 2002. In its issue dated 19 August 2002, Outlook reports: “Modi’s pet theory was that the man who went to the tribunal was his then revenue minister Haren Pandya. He even asked his intelligence officials to get proof to nail Pandya. But the intelligence wing, Outlook learns, gave no conclusive proof to Modi. Yet, he sent Pandya a show-cause notice through the state BJP president asking him to explain if and why and with whose permission he went to the tribunal. Pandya, in his sharp reply that unmistakably ridiculed Modi, denied he went to the tribunal.” So, neither Outlook nor the tribunal have any evidence that Pandya told them anything, and Pandya himself denied the charge! Now, in the same issue, they give an interview with a Minister (who, Outlook claims after his death was Haren Pandya, and that it has the conversation on record). In that entire interview, there is not the slightest allegation that Modi ordered officials to allow Hindus to vent their anger on 27 Feb night in that crucial meeting. He is simply talking about the meeting, and the officials present in it. In short, there is not the slightest proof that Haren Pandya ever made any allegations on Modi on that 27 Feb meeting. There is no evidence and record of Pandya ever telling Outlook anything before August 2002, or of him deposing before the CCT. In the only available interview (assuming that Outlook does have the tapes of it) of Aug 2002, there is no allegation at all, only confirmation that the meeting took place, and that was never an issue at all!
The link for Outlook’s interview with Pandya of Aug 2002: (Assuming Outlook‘s claim of having taped it is true)
http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?216905
In this interview of 19 August 2002 Outlook reports:
“Minister (continuing): See, whatever I told you, it was not as if some disgruntled man was saying it. I didn’t say all those things because I was unhappy. (That exactly was the reason, that he was unhappy!) There is nobody in my position who can fight him. So it’s important I remain an insider, in power, in position. That’s why I want my identity to be protected.
You mentioned Subarao. There was trouble with that. (The Outlook report named chief secretary G. Subarao and an officer in the CM’s office, A.K. Sharma, as among those at the meeting. Neither was present.)
Minister: What happened was that there was a chief secretary-in-charge then. I got my facts mixed up. But listen, their denial was very weak, wasn’t it? If they try to make an issue of it, tell them that you want the official denial from all the people mentioned in the story on paper, with their signatures. Leave the two they say weren’t there at the meeting but ask the others to say that there was no meeting, no direct or indirect orders. Let them say that on paper with their signatures…
Minister (continuing): I made a mistake with the chief secretary’s name. But the rest is all true. The time, the place, everything was correct. If they put pressure, ask them for official denial from the officers.
Minister (continuing): Vijay Rupani (who was supposed to organise the yatra) will give information on the (Gujarat) Gaurav Rath Yatra. But be careful when you meet these people. They are such guys that they’ll try to extract my name from you. Be careful.”
And Outlook stuck to its story even after the clear goof-up. See the role of Outlook. It admitted that wrongly named two people as being present in the meeting. That should have been enough to dismiss this charge, when Outlook and an alleged Minister cannot even correctly tell the names of the people who were present in the meeting (Haren Pandya was of course not present and has never claimed to be present either). How could they know what happened in that meeting? So what Outlook said was “Though our report wrongly named 2 people as being present, though we could not even tell correctly who were present, our charge that Modi ordered the police to allow Hindus to vent their anger is 100 % true”. What rubbish! A magazine with an iota of honesty would have said “We relied on a man whose information was incorrect and who had personal grudges. We withdraw our story”.
But that’s not all! Even in its 19 August issue, there are blunders. Haren Pandya says (as claimed by Outlook) “I made a mistake with the chief secretary’s name. But the rest is all true.” But the rest is also not all true. Not only was the chief secretary not there (he was on leave and it was acting Chief Secretary S K Verma who participated), another officer A.K.Sharma was also not present. This was admitted by Outlook, not by the Minister! And sadly for Outlook, there was a THIRD BLUNDER in this allegation even in the 19 August issue, which is that DGP (IB) G.C. Raigar was also not present in this meeting! Neither Outlook nor Pandya knew this. So even in the 19 August 2002 issue when they admitted mistakes in the 3rd June issue, they stuck to their story saying ‘rest all information is correct’, but the information in the 19th August 2002 was also wrong since G C Raigar was also wrongly named as being present. Pandya said- “1 man was wrongly named- Chief Secretary G Subarao, rest all was correct”. (Actually a single mistake is enough to dismiss these ridiculous claims). Outlook said “2 people were wrongly named- Chief Secretary G Subarao and A K Sharma”. But the fact is that THREE people were wrongly named, G C Raigar also was not present! Also note that it also mentioned the name wrongly- his name is G.C.Raiger, not G.S.Raiger!
And the shameless magazine continues to hold Modi guilty in that 27 Feb meeting ignoring all its mistakes and continues to stick to its story! (Also note that Pandya says “I made a mistake with the Chief Secretary’s name”. If he is saying that he got the name of the Chief Secretary wrong, this is another error- he did not make any mistake with the Chief Secretary’s name. The Chief Secretary’s name was indeed G Subbarao, but it was Acting Chief Secretary S K Verma who participated in that meeting.)
There are even more details of Pandya’s testimony which are given in the book but not on this website. Also, note that the names mentioned by Outlook, of the people being present at the meeting do not include Sanjiv Bhatt at all! He is nowhere in the picture, and wasn’t for 9 years after that meeting. Nobody, for 9 years after that meeting ever even mentioned that Sanjiv Bhatt was present at that meeting. This man has a terrible past and has no evidence at all of being present. Notice how even a magazine like Outlook, which forcibly tried to hold Modi guilty in that 27 Feb meeting, has never even mentioned Sanjiv Bhatt, not in its 3 June issue, not in its 19 August 2002 issue, nor in its Nov 2007 issues, when it tried to hold Modi guilty. Why would Sanjiv Bhatt have taken 9 years to claim that he was present at that meeting if he really was? The SIT report also says that Bhat asked Rahul Sharma, an IPS officer to find out if Haren Pandya was present in that meeting or not, and to check his mobile records. If Bhat was present, why would he need to ask someone else to find out if Haren Pandya was present or not?
The only police officer who has made allegations against Modi apart from Sanjiv Bhatt is R Shreekumar. Former Gujarat IPS officer RB Shreekumar told the Nanavati Commission in an affidavit and later also the SIT that the then Director General of Police VK Chakravarty, who participated in that crucial February 27 meeting, told him that the CM had directed officers to go slow against Hindu rioters and allow them to give vent to their feelings against the Muslims. Note that Shreekumar does not even claim that he was present in that meeting and that Modi told officers in front of him to go slow on Hindus. He alleges that the then DGP Chakravarty told him so. There is absolutely no evidence that Chakravarty told him (Shreekumar) so. If Chakravarty told Shreekumar so, then he could easily have told some others, like Outlook or anyone else, this or the media or the Nanavati Commission in private. And Chakravarty denied these charges of Sreekumar, and claimed that he never told anything like this to him.
However what Chakravarty and many other officials involved with police department at that time told the Nanavati Commission was exactly the opposite. They said Modi had told them to control the riots. Plus, Sreekumar started making anti-Modi charges in the case only after the Government denied him promotion on strong grounds and his junior was made DGP. What’s more he didn’t make the same charge in his first two affidavits he filed before the Nanavati promotion which he submitted before he was denied promotion. Significantly, Sreekumar sticks to his ground when he says “ The SIT virtually functioned as B-Team of Gujarat police and ignored the evidence I produced “.
That is, Shreekumar admits that the SIT saw through his game and did not fall for his ‘evidence’ which is absolutely nothing, since he was not present at all in that meeting, and he has no proof at all that Chakravarty told him anything. And even if Chakravarty told him anything, that would be no proof, since Chakravarty has to tell it to the Nanavati Commission or the SIT. Also note that Shreekumar did not make this allegation until he was denied promotion in his first 2 affidavits.
So, in short let us the people who are supposed to have alleged that Modi told the officials to allow Hindus to vent their anger the next day. They are:
1- Sanjiv Bhatt. He has no credibility, was not present at that 27 February 2002 meting at all. No one, including Modi’s biggest enemies like Tehelka and Outlook while trying to crucify Modi ever claimed for 9 years after that meeting that he was present in that meeting. This man has a very terrible past and has cases against him. He was absent from duty for many many days without any reason and when was finally suspended tried to become a ‘martyr’. The full details of Sanjiv Bhatt’s claims and SIT’s observations on him are given in the book, but not on this website. A reading of the book will fully make clear this issue- of Sanjiv Bhatt’s claims.
Also note here that the SIT appointed by the Supreme Court with judges like Arijit Pasayat and Aftab Alam debunked the claim of Sanjiv Bhat that he was present and blamed NGOs for forcibly trying to find something against Narendra Modi. This is a must read report of the SIT.
2- R Shreekumar. He too was not present at that 27 February meeting. He claims that a man who was present told him that Modi ordered the officials to go slow on Hindus the next day. Even if this was true, this is no proof. Shreekumar has given no proof at all that that man (Chakravarty) ever told him this. Chakravarty has told the Nanavati Commission exactly the opposite. Shreekumar made these allegations only after he was denied promotion, and not in his first 2 affidavits.
3- Haren Pandya. There is in fact, no proof that he ever made any allegations that Modi ordered the officials to go slow in that 27 Feb meeting. Neither Outlook nor CCT have given any proof of his claiming so before them. There were personal and other matters which could have prompted Pandya to speak against Narendra Modi (there is no proof at all that he made any allegations against him). Also, note that many self-styled secular activists had alleged Pandya himself being culpable in the 2002 riots, of being involved in an attack on a durgah in the 2002 riots. But after his murder in March 2003, for which Muslims were convicted, or ever after he started speaking against Narendra Modi in 2002 itself (on personal grudges, since he was demoted from Home Minister to Revenue Minister and ever since the issue of refusing to vacate Ellisbridge seat for Narendra Modi to contest rose) the media immediately took to him as a ‘hero’ forgetting its allegations on him!
The self-styled liberals, Concerned Citizens Tribunal (which made a fool of itself by trying to say Godhra fire was set from ‘inside’ as if Muslims did not do it) was howling against Haren Pandya since March 2002, when it was alleged that Pandya was involved in demolishing a dargah on 1 March 2002. He allegedly took the leadership on the next day of burning of Godhra train, to demolish a Dargah which was protruding on the main road of Bhathha (Paldi) not far away from his own house. Thereafter, he started double talking against the government for not protecting the minority. The demolition he did, brought him on the top of the hit list and therefore he was killed. The full truth of Haren Pandya’s issue is also given in the book (“Gujarat Riots: The True Story”). A reading of that will reveal everything.
Also, there were clear mistakes in Outlook’s report of 3 June 2002 on the people present in that meeting where it quoted Haren Pandya (without naming him at that time).
That is, not even one person who was actually present at that meeting has alleged that Narendra Modi told them to allow Hindus to vent their anger. All those who were present, like the then DGP Chakravarty, have reported that Modi told them exactly the opposite, to control the riots. All those who have alleged that Modi told officials to go slow at that meeting were not even present at that meeting, neither Sanjiv Bhatt, nor R Shreekumar, nor, if he did, the late Haren Pandya. Outlook’s first attempt to crucify Narendra Modi in June 2002 failed, that that report contained glaring factual errors on the presence of officials in that meeting. This shameless magazine still tries to report: “In that crucial 27 February meeting Modi reportedly told officials to allow Hindus to vent their anger”. What reportedly? Which reports? Where’s the evidence? We have given a heap of evidence proving the opposite. No one has ever refuted our evidence. The book gives all the details of this.
The book also gives findings of the SIT to reveal everything about this 27 February meeting- the full truth of the claims of Sanjiv Bhatt, Haren Pandya and the reality.
Let us say, for argument’s sake, that Modi did tell the officials at that crucial meeting on 27 Feb night to go slow on Hindus. But did they do so the next day? Not at all. On 28 Feb 2002 (Thursday), large scale riots occurred in Ahmedabad and other parts of Gujarat. Despite a terrible situation, the police fired 1,496 rounds on 28 Feb 2002 , including 600+ in Ahmedabad. 700 people were arrested for rioting. 10 were shot dead in police firing in Ahmedabad alone, 16 were injured and at least 2 more were shot dead in Godhra and Nadiad. All these details of the actual action taken by the police can be viewed in this article Role of the Government in controlling violence.
The book also gives findings of the SIT to reveal everything about this 27 February meeting- the full truth of the claims of Sanjiv Bhatt, Haren Pandya and the reality. The full details are given in the book, but not in this website. To know the full details, read the book.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 18: Narendra Modi never expressed sadness for the post-Godhra riots
FACT: It is not astonishing to see the media level absolutely false and wrong charges on the Chief Minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi. But what is astonishing is the extent to which the media goes in putting unbelievable factual errors and sticking to them, and believing its own lies. These days, the livid media and
FACT: It is not astonishing to see the media level absolutely false and wrong charges on the Chief Minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi. But what is astonishing is the extent to which the media goes in putting unbelievable factual errors and sticking to them, and believing its own lies. These days, the livid media and political parties opposed to Narendra Modi have all made full use of the myths and lies concocted on him. Congress spokesman Abhishek Singhvi has said many times,”BJP never expressed regret for the Gujarat riots”. The much-repeated claim that Narendra Modi never expressed regret at the Gujarat riots before December 2013 is absolutely wrong.
Narendra Modi has expressed regret for the riots and termed the riots as ‘unfortunate’ . In an interview to Aaj Tak‘s Prabhu Chawla on its program Seedhi Baat, the excerpts of which were published in India Today weekly dated 4 Nov 2002, Narendra Modi was asked “Prime Minister Vajpayee and Home Minister Advani have said that whatever happened in Gujarat was wrong” to which he said, “I say the same thing. The communal riots in Gujarat were unfortunate and we are sad they took place.”
See link: http://www.indiatoday.com/itoday/20021104/conf.shtml#co
After the 2002 Gujarat riots Narendra Modi made a statement in the State Assembly (Vidhan Sabha) in March 2002. One paragraph from that statement is: “Are we not supposed to soul-search ourselves? Whether it is Godhra incident or post-Godhra it does not enhance the prestige of any decent society. The riots are a stigma on humanity and do not help anyone to hold his head high. Then why is there a difference of opinion”.
When Narendra Modi went on his “Sadbhavana fast” in Gujarat in 2011, some newspapers said ,
“In a statement interpreted as his first sign of regret over the 2002 post-Godhra violence, Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi Friday said the pain of anyone in the state is “my pain” and he had a duty to do justice for everyone.”Constitution of India is supreme for us. As a Chief Minister of the state, pain of anybody in the state is my pain. (Delivering) Justice to everyone is the duty of the state,” Modi said on the eve of his three-day fast.”
It wasn’t merely this paper, almost the entire media said the same thing. What a ridiculous interpretation from the media, and how factually incorrect it reported! The 2011 statement was not the ‘first sign of regret’, he had directly expressed sadness and condemned riots many times before, right from 2002. The BJP’s public relations work truly doesn’t seem to be up to the mark. How it allowed such a massive lie to crop up without ever bothering to try to bring out the truth is beyond comprehension.
What is correct is that Narendra Modi has not apologized for the Gujarat riots, and rightly so. Apology is given when someone does something wrong, makes a mistake and asks for forgiveness for a mistake. What wrong has Narendra Modi done? He actually has done an excellent work in controlling the 2002 riots, his administration saved more than 24,000 Muslims and many Hindus too, the riots were controlled in 3 days while weeklies like India Today and Outlook predicted weeks of violence on 28 Feb, he frantically called the Army to Ahmedabad on 28 Feb 2002, ordered preventive arrests of 827 people on 27 Feb itself, gave ‘shoot-at-sight’ orders in Godhra on 27 Feb itself (primarily aimed at Hindus who could have retaliated in Godhra). His government spent more than 204 crores rupees on relief and rehabilitation measures, built houses, opened relief camps, etc. Strong action was taken against the rioters, with as many as 35,552 arrests made as of 28 April 2002, including 27,901 Hindus. Already, in just 11 years at least 443 people have been convicted in at least 50 cases for the riots, including 332 Hindus and 111 Muslims (including 31 Muslims for Godhra and 80 for post-Godhra). The media’s argument often is “The Congress has apologized for the 1984 riots. Will the BJP apologize for the 2002 Gujarat riots?” This was asked by Arnab Goswami to BJP leader Nalin Kohli on 16 May 2009 on TV after the BJP’s massive debacle in the 2009 Lok Sabha polls.
There is absolutely no need to equate the two. Firstly there is not a single parallel between the post-Godhra riots of 2002 and the 1984 riots. We have seen the contrasts between these two riots. Secondly, Congress apologizing for the riots is not an action of credit. Apologizing means accepting culpability in the 1984 riots in which 3,000 Sikhs were killed. Is the sin of killing 3,000 forgivable by merely issuing an apology? Accepting culpability for the death of 3,000 people means the party deserves severe punishment. 3,000 murders cannot be pardoned and condoned by an apology. The then Congress Government took no action against the rioters, hardly any arrests were made and hardly 30 people in 12 cases have been convicted as claimed by CNN-IBN in 28 years, till August 2012. For what should the BJP or Narendra Modi apologize? They have done absolutely nothing wrong, controlled violence in Gujarat in record time even after a shocking massacre like Godhra, while it took previous Congress Governments several months to stop riots in 1985 and 1969 even without any cause like Godhra.
It should be remembered that not a single English newspaper actually accused the Chief Minister Narendra Modi of any wrongdoing on the actual days of the riots, i.e. 28 Feb 2002 (Thursday), 1st March 2002 (Friday) and 2nd March 2002. As a matter of fact, not a single newspaper, except for The Indian Express, accused the police of any inaction on the day of the worst violence i.e. 28 February in its report the next day. All English newspapers, like The Hindu, The Tribune etc reported that the violence was out of control, the police were overwhelmingly outnumbered, the fire brigade ran out of water, and still the police did its best, arrested 700 people on 28 Feb, shot dead at least 10 people in police firing, the Chief Minister Narendra Modi frantically called the Army units to Ahmedabad, etc.
See the report of The Hindu and The Telegraph dated 1st March 2002 covering events of 28 Feb. Do any of them accuse Narendra Modi or the police of any deliberate culpability? After this day, 28 Feb, no one, not even The Indian Express accused the administration or police of any inaction. In fact, The Indian Express reported on 2nd March 2002 that on 1st March 2002 (Friday, the second day of the riots), “The police, its credibility at its lowest, tried to salvage its reputation intervening in some clashes by opening fire. 20 were killed in police firing across the state, 12 in Ahmedabad.” All accusations on Narendra Modi and demands for his resignation, dismissal started AFTER the riots. This was because, the media wanted some scapegoat to be made for the riots. It wanted Modi to sack a few police officers, drop a minister or two. But Modi did nothing of the sort. He did not blame anyone, did not make anyone a scapegoat. In an interview to NDTV broadcast in March/April 2004, Narendra Modi said to Shekhar Gupta (Editor of The Indian Express), “You all wanted that someone be made scapegoat. I did not do that. I allowed you to break all pots on my head alone. You have all decided, all these riots happened under this man (Narendra Modi). Until this man is removed from the Chief Minister’s post, we will not rest in peace. My best wishes to you in your mission.” Narendra Modi did not resign, and the BJP did not dismiss him, so the media was livid.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 17: Gujarat Government did nothing to help the victims
Fact: We have already seen the steps taken by the Government to quell the violence, and in saving the lives of the victims- for example in Sanjeli, Bodeli and Viramgam areas of Gujarat. Hindus were also saved by violent Muslims in many places in Gujarat, like in Jamalpur on 1 March 2002, and in Modasa
Fact: We have already seen the steps taken by the Government to quell the violence, and in saving the lives of the victims- for example in Sanjeli, Bodeli and Viramgam areas of Gujarat. Hindus were also saved by violent Muslims in many places in Gujarat, like in Jamalpur on 1 March 2002, and in Modasa on 19 March 2002 when Muslims attacked. But there has also been a claim by many that the Gujarat Government was like Hitler and have called these plain riots as ‘holocaust’ and equated them with the killing of Jews in Germany. Let us see the facts.
The Gujarat Government spent a lot of money for providing relief to the riot victims. None other than the UPA Government’s MoS for Home Sriprakash Jaiswal said this in the Rajya Sabha that too in a written reply on 11 May 2005. He said an amount of Rs 1.5 lakh was paid by the government to the next of kin of each person killed and Rs 5,000, Rs 15,000, Rs 25,000 and Rs 50,000 to those injured up to 10, 30, 40 and 50 per cent respectively.
In addition, Jaiswal said relief was also extended by the state government to the victims of the riots under the heads of cash doles and assistance for household kits, foodgrains to Below Poverty Line (BPL) families in affected areas, housing assistance, rebuilding earning assets, rehabilitation of small business, assistance to industries/shop and hotel and so on.
The state government, Jaiswal said has informed that a total of Rs 204.62 crore has been incurred by it towards relief and rehabilitation measures. The Gujarat government has also informed that they had published the data as recommended by the NHRC, he added.
See link: http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=46538
And the Gujarat Government in an advertisement given in weekly India Today dated 6 May 2002 said-
“ At the rate of Rs 30 per person, the Government is spending Rs 35 lakh a day on providing foodgrains to the 1.1 lakh inmates of the 99-odd relief camps in the state, 47 of them in Ahmedabad.
The relief operations at the camps are being directly looked after by IAS officers of the rank of secretary to the state Government.
The camps in Ahmedabad have been divided into six groups. Each group is being monitored by a bureaucrat of the rank of secretary. The secretaries have been looking after the minutest problems of the inmates. Teachers were deputed in each camp to help the children prepare for the exams and the state Health Department has been taking special steps to look after the well being of the inmates. In order to rehabilitate the rural inmates, the Government has floated the Sant Kabir Awas Yojana as per the directions of Prime Minister A. B. Vajpayee. The scheme will enable the inmates to build houses.”(And in these camps were 1 lakh Muslims and 40,000 Hindus as well).
Not just this, the then Central Government of Atal Bihari Vajpayee also gave several packages to the victims- both Hindus and Muslims. He announced one on 4 April 2002 on his visit to Gujarat and gave another one on 1 May 2002 of Rs 150 crore.
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020502/main3.htm
More details of the help with the astronomical amount of money spent and vast range of help given with SIT confirmation is given in the book.
How ridiculous to equate this with Hitler! Did Hitler ever spent crores on helping Jews or other Christian Germans affected by violence? He ordered killing of Jews- not spending of money to help them. Has any government in the world ever cared about minority Hindus who suffered like this? In the 1971 East Pakistan genocide, West Pakistani soldiers killed around 2 million Hindus (and also other Bangladeshi Muslims when their leader declared that Bangladeshis are un-Islamic) and also raped at least 2,50,000 Bengali women. From 1947, Pakistan has constantly massacred the Hindus, reducing their population from 20 % in West Pakistan to 1 % now. In Bangladesh also the Hindu population has declined from 34 % in 1901 to 29 % in 1947 to just 7 % now. Hindus are regularly killed, women raped, abducted and forcibly converted to Islam, temples attacked, Hindus thrown out of their homes in Bangladesh and Pakistan. In Kashmir in January 1990, Hindus were given 3 choices by local Islamic leaders- convert to Islam, die or leave Kashmir. Nobody ever reconstructed houses for these Hindus. Nobody gave them financial compensation of crores of rupees. And nobody spent 35 lakhs per day on them. Nobody arrested the culprits and punished them.
Those who order killing of others or want others to suffer horribly, do not take the pains to do all that the Gujarat Government did. Not only did the Gujarat Government do all this the police also arrested 35,552 people as of 28 April 2002, out of which 27,901 were Hindus. Around 20,000 people were arrested as a preventive measure. No Islamic country (or our own country in Kashmir in 1990) or other mass murderers like Stalin, Hitler ever carried out preventive arrests to save the victims. And already 443 people have been convicted for rioting- the highest ever in Gujarat and indeed, in the country. No Islamic country has ever punished anyone for killings of Hindus, not even of the tallest Hindu leader of Pakistan- Sudamchand Chawla, who was killed by Islamic radicals on 29 January 2002.
And many have concocted many tales of rapes and killings,like the false claim that Ehsan Jafri’s daughters were raped, or Medina was raped, or the outrageous lie that a pregnant woman’s womb was ripped open and foetus taken out, when nothing like this happened. Nobody has ever lied and falsely exaggerated the killing of Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh at the hands of Muslims, or made fake stories of Hindu women’s wombs being ripped open and foetuses taken out. Actually they have all done exactly the opposite. Killings of lakhs of Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh have been ignored, rapes and abductions of Hindu girls have been suppressed ever after 1947.
Pakistan’s TALLEST Hindu leader, Sudham Chand Chawla was killed in broad daylight in Jacobabad on 29 Jan 2002 while returning from his rice mill. The culprits were not nabbed, nor was any compensation given to his family. He had in fact been complaining to the so-called civil society of Pakistan for years about the threat to his life, to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and yet nobody did anything. If this was the case with the BIGGEST Hindu leader, then what must be the story of ordinary Hindus, who have already been reduced from 20 % in 1947 to just 1 % now?
http://www.sudhamchandchawla.com/
The PR work of the Gujarat Government indeed does not seem to be up to the mark. The media is of course guilty of ignoring all these facts, and needlessly infuriating Muslims by lying that Narendra Modi is responsible for harm caused to the community. Far from it, his government actually helped the victims- both Hindu and Muslim- by spending lakhs per day on them. 40,000 Hindus were thrown out of their homes by Muslims in the Gujarat riots and the Gujarat Government gave them relief camps and rehabilitation help too. Perhaps this was the only case in the world where oppressed Hindus were given state help!
More details of the help given by the Gujarat Government are given in the book (“Gujarat Riots: The True Story”). The SIT has also made some comments on this point, which are given in the book but not on this site. To know all those details, read the book.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 16: A pregnant woman’s womb was ripped open and fetus was taken out
Fact: Dr J S Kanoria who carried out the post mortem of the woman, Kausarbanu on 2 March 2002 found that her womb was intact, and that she had died of burns suffered in the riots. Weekly India Today dated 5 April 2010 reports: “Significantly, in March 2003, the SC had stalled the trial of
Fact: Dr J S Kanoria who carried out the post mortem of the woman, Kausarbanu on 2 March 2002 found that her womb was intact, and that she had died of burns suffered in the riots.
Weekly India Today dated 5 April 2010 reports:
“Significantly, in March 2003, the SC had stalled the trial of nine Gujarat riot cases, thanks to the relentless campaign by the human rights activists seeking justice for the Muslim victims. The riot victims said they won’t get justice as long as the Gujarat Government had a role in the police probe and the subsequent trial. The SIT is reinvestigating the cases under the virtual supervision of the apex court, with even the judges and public prosecutors being selected under the SC’s monitoring.
As the SIT goes about its task, more and more evidence is surfacing that the human rights lobby had, in many cases, spun macabre stories of rape and brutal killings by tutoring witnesses before the SC. In the process, it might have played a significant role in misleading the SC to suit its political objectives against Modi and his government.
Last week, one of the most horrible examples of cruelty resurfaced once again as the trial of the Naroda Patiya case, where 94 persons were killed, began in the SC-monitored special court in Ahmedabad. Soon after the riots, the human rights activists and the Muslim witnesses had alleged that a pregnant woman Kausarbanu’s womb was ripped open by rioters and the foetus was flung out at the point of a sword. The gruesome incident was seen as the worst-possible example of medieval vandalism in the modern age.
Last week, eight years after the alleged incident, Dr J.S. Kanoria, who conducted the post-mortem on Kausarbanu’s body on March 2, 2002, denied that any such incident had ever happened. Instead, he told the court: “After the post-mortem, I found that her foetus was intact and that she had died of burns suffered during the riot.” Later Kanoria, 40, told INDIA TODAY, “I have told the court what I had already written in my post-mortem report eight years ago. The press should have checked the report before believing that her womb was ripped open. As far as I remember, I did her post-mortem at noon on March 2, 2002.”
A careful study of the three police complaints, claiming that Kausarbanu’s womb was ripped open by the rioters, shows several loopholes. While one complaint accuses Guddu Chara, one of the main accused in the Naroda Patiya case, of ripping open Kausarbanu’s womb, extracting her foetus and flinging it with a sword; another complaint accuses Babu Bajrangi, yet another accused in the case, of doing the act. A third complaint, on the other hand, does not name the accused but describes the alleged act.
Modi will also have reasons to smile at the affidavits filed by the Muslim witnesses in the SC in 2003 at the behest of Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) and Teesta Setalvad on the basis of which the trial in nine cases were stalled for six long years. The most glaring hole is in the affidavit of Nanumiya Malek, a key witness in the Naroda Gam case. In his affidavit before the SC filed on November 15, 2003, Malek stated that a newly married woman called Madina, who lost four of her relatives, including her husband in the riots, had been raped by the rioters.
Malek’s affidavit states: “I was witness to the crimes of murder and rape that took place on Madina and her family. I also saw seven people being burnt alive, including four orphans. I request the SC to keep the details of this rape victim confidential since she is alive and use it only for the purpose of trial and conviction of the rapists.” But on May 5, 2009, in his statement before the SIT, Malek said: “I had wrongly claimed that Madina had been raped. I made the charge because of Teesta Setalvad’s pressure. I kept on telling her not to include that charge in my affidavit, yet it was included.”
In her statement before the SIT on May 20, 2008, Madina, who has remarried now, said: “The charge made by Malek claiming that I was raped by a riotous mob is false. I wasn’t raped. When the riotous mob put my house on fire, I tried to run but was attacked by a rioter who injured me with a knife. Later I managed to merge in a Muslim crowd.”
There are six other affidavits filed by different Muslim witnesses on November 15, 2003, that wantonly allege rape in the Naroda Gam and Naroda Patiya riot cases without giving any details. Interestingly, all the affidavits have a uniform language: “Over 110 persons were not simply killed, but raped and mutilated as well, including young children. We urge the SC to stay the trials and transfer them to a neighbouring state and also order fresh investigation.” The affidavits state that they had been filed at the behest of Setalvad and in the presence of her co-activist Rais Khan.
If this wasn’t enough, other glaring attempts by human rights activists to tutor witnesses have come to the fore. For example, soon after the Gulberg massacre in which Ehsan Jafri was killed, nearly a dozen Muslim witnesses told the police that Jafri had fired in self-defence, killed a rioter and injured 14 others. They also said that this led the mob to resort to violence and attack Muslims in Gulberg with vengeance. But almost half of them who deposed before the special court have retracted from this statement.
The statement of Imtiaz Pathan in the Gulberg trial also raises eyebrows. He told the special court that before being killed, Jafri told him that Narendra Modi abused him (Jafri) on phone when he sought protection during a mob attack. Incidentally, there is no record available of Jafri having made any call to Modi. Pathan didn’t name Modi in the first police statement he made soon after the riots. Interestingly, he has also identified as many as 27 individual attackers from a mob of thousands of rioters.
When the SIT started taking statements of witnesses in the Gulberg Society case, around 20 witnesses came with typed statements. But the SIT objected to it, citing Section 161 of the CRPC, saying that the police must record the statement of a witness. So when the SIT forced the witnesses to give their statement during the interrogation, there was a vast difference between the ‘readymade typed’ statements and the oral evidence that the police had received earlier.
As a senior lawyer defending the accused puts it: “The witnesses under the influence of the human rights activists didn’t allow videotaping of their statements while they were being recorded. There is an obvious attempt on the part of activists to dictate not just the SIT, but also the courts.” Last week, INDIA TODAY quizzed Setalvad about the charge of tutoring the witnesses and creating false evidence before the courts in the 2002 Gujarat riot cases.
Her response: “I am under no obligation to respond to your questions.
Credibility Gap | |
Then In his petition before the SC, Nanumiya Malek, a key witness in the Naroda Gam case, says that a married woman called Madina had been raped by rioters. | Now Malek later told the SIT that Madina’s rape was an accusation put forth at the behest of Teesta Setalvad. Madina also denied the charge. |
Then For the past eight years, human rights activists and Naroda Patiya victims have alleged that the rioters ripped open the womb of the pregnant Kausarbanu. | Now Dr J.S. Kanoria, who conducted a post-mortem on Kausarbanu’s body, says she died of burns during the riot and that her womb was intact. |
Then While reinvestigating the Gulberg case, the SIT comes across nearly 20 witnesses who came with their readymade, typed statements to which the SIT objects. | Now The Muslim witnesses refuse to videotape their statements. The statements that are recorded by the SIT do not match the readymade statements. |
Then Imtiaz Pathan, a key witness in the Gulberg case, tells the special court that Ehsan Jafri was abused by Modi when Jafri called the latter seeking his help during the riots. | Now The SIT has not been able to find any evidence or a record of Ehsan Jafri making a phone call to Narendra Modi. |
Then In their 2003 SC petition, Muslim witnesses accused the rioters of raping women. As a result, the trials of nine major cases were stalled for over six years. | Now In their statements made before the SC-appointed SIT, the witnesses haven’t accused the rioters of raping women. |
“
This full report can be read by clicking here.
Just that this weekly India Today does not seem to remember that it itself also reported the blatant lie on ‘pregnant woman’s womb being ripped open’ in its issue dated 18 March 2002. Its not merely this report. Even a newspaper as biased as The Times of India– which falsely reported that Narendra Modi had said “Every action has equal and opposite reaction” and did not even publish the Chief Minister’s letter denying having said any such thing reported thus:
“Doc’s testimony nails lie in Naroda Patia fetus story
AHMEDABAD: One of the most gory stories of the Naroda Patia massacre, of how a pregnant woman’s womb was ripped open and the fetus dangled on the tip of a sword by the mob, before she was killed, has been busted by a testimony given by a government doctor.
After 95 persons were killed on February 28, 2002 at Naroda Patia, stories were doing rounds that the killers had cut open eight-month pregnant Kausar Bano Shaikh’s womb, pulled out the fetus and killed her.
Dr J S Kanoria, who conducted post-mortem on the woman’s body on March 2 (2002), told the special court on Wednesday, supported by documents, that he found the fetus intact. He said he was posted at Nadiad but called to the Civil Hospital following the emergency when he conducted the autopsy on an unidentified body, which was later identified as Kausar Bano.
Kanoria showed his post-mortem report to the court saying he found the fetus intact in the woman’s womb itself. The fetus weighed 2,500 g and was 45 cm long. He mentioned about burn injuries in his post-mortem note, but was quiet on whether there was any other injury on the body.
In April last year, the Gujarat government argued before the SC on this case after SIT submitted a report in a sealed cover. The government’s claim was that SIT had refuted charges that Kausar Bano’s fetus was pulled out of her womb and killed by sword before her eyes by violent mob. Senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi contended that such allegations levelled by an NGO were proved false by SIT report. (The Supreme Court-appointed SIT had already said in its report in April 2009 that there is no truth in the allegation that Kausar Bano’s womb was ripped open and foetus taken out. Note that this SIT was appointed by highly anti-Modi judges like Aftab Alam, Arijit Pasayat etc). Nearly a year later, the doctor, considered a neutral government witness, has deposed the same before the trial court.”
The link for the above report is:
Perhaps the only other newspaper to even report Dr Kanoria’s statement in court was The Hindu. The Hindu too has lied and called the riots a ‘pogrom’, ‘genocide’ and ‘massacre’ of Muslims ever after the riots and published white lies on this subject on its edit page. But even it reported:
“Foetus was intact in Naroda-Patiya victim: doctor
Manas Dasgupta
AHMEDABAD: The doctor who performed autopsy on the bodies of three victims of the Naroda-Patiya massacre during the 2002 communal riots in Gujarat has denied that the womb of a pregnant woman was slit open by the attackers.
During cross-examination before special court judge Jyotsnaben Yagnik on Wednesday, Dr. J.S. Kanoria said he found the foetus in place in the womb of Kausarbanu Sheikh. As part of the post-mortem procedure, it was he who took the foetus out of the womb, the doctor said.
It was widely alleged during the riots that the then State Bajrang Dal convener, Babu Bajrangi, had led a violent mob of activists, some of whom not only burnt alive local Muslims but also raped the pregnant woman, slit open her womb with a sharp-edged weapon and threw both the mother and the foetus into a fire.
Dr. Kanoria admitted that he had found Kausarbanu’s body 100 per cent burnt. To a question by the public prosecutor, he did not rule out the possibility of her having been thrown alive into a fire by the attackers, resulting in her death, but disagreed with the claim that her womb was slit open.
As a large number of bodies were arriving at the Ahmedabad civil hospital, Dr. Kanoria was specially summoned there from the Nadiad hospital and he conducted post-mortem on three bodies including that of a pregnant woman, who was later identified as Kausarbanu…”
The link for this report is:
http://www.hindu.com/2010/03/18/stories/2010031863801300.htm
In the 2007 Tehelka sting operation also, Babu Bajrangi did not claim to slit open any womb. He was simply saying that “The FIR on me says that I cut open the womb, but I did not do so”. Tehelka lied that “Bajrangi ‘boasted’ slitting open the womb” which was blatant violation of law.
Even if he had said so in the sting operation, Tehelka should have checked if they are boastful lies or the truth. Since he was told that this is a private conversation between a man writing a book from the VHP point of view, he may have indulged in blatant empty lies, and so Tehelka should have cross-checked. Actually he did not even indulge in boastful lies here- he totally denied the crime.
Even in the judgment of Jyotsna Yagnik convicting Kodnani and Bajrangi on 29 August 2012, Jyotsna Yagnik’s judgment denied such an act. The Times of India reported:
”A decade later,the special court accepted that Kausarbanu was killed in the most ghastly manner by Bajrangi and his associates,but the story of bringing her fetus out and swirling it on tip of the sword is improbable and an exaggerated narration.
Designated judge Jyotsana Yagnik discussed in detail the possibility of such incident after evaluating testimonies of eyewitnesses,extra-judicial confession by Bajrangi and medical evidence.The judge concluded that both a 14-year-old witness Javed Shaikh and accused Bajrangi were not gynaecologists and they did not know anything about the possible situation when a nine-month pregnant womans belly was slit with a sword or a knife.
The court accepted evidence,though considered medical evidence quite diluted,and held that Kausarbanu was killed at the khancho near water tank,as described by witnesses and accused himself.However,The fetus could not be brought out,Kausarbanu died there along with fetus in her body,Kausharbanu and unborn child were burnt there, the order reads.
The court came to a conclusion that Bajrangi killed the woman,but the description was exaggerated.It must be understood that this is an observation of child of about 14-year-old then and that his perception to such ghastly occurrence would be little different then the adult man with all understanding, the court opined.“
http://mobiletoi.timesofindia.com/mobile.aspx?article=yes&pageid=5§id=edid=&edlabel=TOIA&mydateHid=04-09-2012&pubname=Times+of+India+-+Ahmedabad&edname=&articleid=Ar00505&publabel=TOI
The tale of such concocted cooked up tales can go on and on and on. Because no one checked them- the activists and the stark liars went to unimaginable levels. Now it will need a great task to even list all their lies.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 15: Narendra Modi gave free hand to rioters for 3 days
Fact: This much-repeated allegation is wrong. Narendra Modi frantically called the Army units to Ahmedabad on February 28- as per the report of The Hindu the next day. India Today weekly’s report ‘Chronology of a Crisis’ on this topic in its issue dated 18 March 2002 also proves this beyond doubt. Before seeing this issue,
Fact: This much-repeated allegation is wrong. Narendra Modi frantically called the Army units to Ahmedabad on February 28- as per the report of The Hindu the next day. India Today weekly’s report ‘Chronology of a Crisis’ on this topic in its issue dated 18 March 2002 also proves this beyond doubt.
Before seeing this issue, let us remember the following facts. In an interview given by Narendra Modi to Outlook magazine in its issue dated 18 March 2002–
“Were you playing the fiddle while Gujarat burned?
No. Contrary to what is now being projected, I brought sanity within 72 hours of the violent outbreak…”
Note Narendra Modi’s sentence “No. Contrary to what is now being projected, I brought sanity within 72 hours of the violent outbreak.” In other words, the projection against Modi started AFTER the riots. We have already seen the reports of the newspapers like The Hindu, The Telegraph to note that there were no allegations against Narendra Modi or the Gujarat Government at the time of the actual riots. They started much later.
Doordarshan news said on 3rd March 2002 (Sunday) at night in the English bulletin: “Violence has ended in a record time in Ahmedabad…Only 3 days…In the past it would take many weeks… Today (Sunday) curfew was relaxed, people bought items from bazaar…”. No allegation against the state government but praise of controlling violence in just 3 days! All accusations on Narendra Modi and demands for his resignation, dismissal started AFTER the riots. This was because, the media wanted some scapegoat to be made for the riots. It wanted Modi to sack a few police officers, drop a minister or two. But Modi did nothing of the sort. He did not blame anyone, did not make anyone a scapegoat. In an interview to NDTV broadcast in March/April 2004, Narendra Modi said to Shekhar Gupta (Editor of The Indian Express): “You all wanted that someone be made scapegoat. I did not do that. I allowed you to break all pots on my head alone. You have all decided, all these riots happened under this man (Narendra Modi). Until this man is removed from the Chief Minister’s post, we will not rest in peace. My best wishes to you in your mission.” Narendra Modi did not resign, and the BJP did not dismiss him, so the media was livid.
The fact is that the Army staged a flag march in Ahmedabad, Vadodara, Surat and Godhra on 1st March- i.e. the 2nd day. So there was no question of giving anyone a free hand. The blatant lie was repeated many times in the media. The TV channel CNN-IBN on its Hindi channel reported on 26 October 2007 by writing on TV screens: “There was given 3 days time to kill in Gujarat”. The fact is- out of the 3 days the Army was present in 2 days and the extent of violence was far less as compared to the first day. The Hindu itself reported on 3rd March 2002 that the situation improved in Ahmedabad on 2nd March i.e. the 3rd day of the riots. The Tribune reported on 3rd March 2002 that:
“(On 2nd March) Ahmedabad, the worst hit by the communal flare-up in the wake of Godhra train killings, was virtually back to normal…” That is, the Gujarat Government managed to control riots in the state in 3 days after Godhra, and in only 2 days in a communally ultra-sensitive place like Ahmedabad!
Moreover, there was already a minority backlash on the 2nd day of the riots, i.e. on 1st March the Muslims started a backlash in Ahmedabad, as reported by The Hindu the next day. The question of the next two days does not arise, even on February 28- when the Army was not present- the police shot dead 17 rioters in all in the state [10 in Ahmedabad alone] and 16 Hindus were injured in police firing. 700 were arrested and 4297 tear gas shells were also burst throughout the state. The police fired more than 1,000 rounds [exact number 1496]- out of which 600+ were fired in Ahmedabad alone-on February 28. Police saved 2500 Muslims from certain death in Sanjeli- a town in North Gujarat on 1st March 2002 i.e. the 2nd day of the riots.
Narendra Modi did not even give 3 minutes, not to talk of 3 days to the rioters. He had ordered 827 preventive arrests on February 27 itself (even the SIT appointed by judges like Aftab Alam, Arijit Pasayat admitted 827 preventive arrests)- and given shoot-at-sight at Godhra on February 27 itself at 9:45 AM- only 2 hours after the Godhra carnage. The entire police force was deployed in Gujarat in view of apprehension that riots might break out on February 27 itself. The Rapid Action Force was deployed in Ahmedabad and other sensitive areas and the Centre sent in CRPF personnel-on February 27 itself! All this was reported by various English newspapers-like The Indian Express, The Times of India, The Tribune, The Hindustan Times etc the next day- i.e. 28 February.
Also- Defence Minister George Fernandes was in Ahmedabad on 1st March at 1:00 AM on Narendra Modi’s request. And the next day- he was bravely on Ahmedabad’s streets at a great risk to personal life. If Modi gave a free hand for 3 days- then why did he call George Fernandes?
On Feb 27 itself- www.rediff.com reported- “The situation became tense as news of the incident spread to other parts of the state prompting the state government to initiate precautionary security measures. Security has been tightened in Godhra and other parts of Gujarat.”
The Link for this report is:
http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/feb/27train.htm
Rediff.com also reported quoting PTI on Feb 28 evening that-“The army has been asked to stand by and the Rapid Action Force and the Central Industrial Security Force have been deployed in Ahmedabad and other places.”
The link for this report is-
http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/feb/28train15.htm
Rediff.com reported on Feb 27 itself- after Godhra that- “Two companies of the Rapid Action Force and one company of the State Reserve Police were deployed at Godhra to guard against further outbreak of violence.”
The link for the report: http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/feb/27train4.htm
On Feb 28 curfew was imposed in Baroda at 8 Am in the morning itself as reported by rediff.com the same day. The report says-
“Indefinite curfew was imposed in the city from 0800 hours following the stabbing incidents, a senior police official said.
Curfew had been imposed in the six police station areas of the walled city (i.e. Ahmedabad) and RAF and CISF companies have been deployed in sensitive areas, Police Commissioner Deen Dayal Tuteja said.
Indefinite curfew has also been imposed in Lunawada town of Panchmahal district after 0200 hours on Wednesday night following incidents of arson and looting, he said.
Meanwhile, indefinite curfew, imposed in Godhra town after the attack on the train on Wednesday, continued on Thursday without any relaxation.
No untoward incident was reported during the curfew so far, police said.
The situation had remained peaceful and under control in other parts of the state during the night, police said.”
The link is- http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/feb/28train1.htm
On the 2nd day of the riots, Shoot-at-sight orders were extended to Ahmedabad as well. The report of rediff.com on 1st March 2002 was-
“Alarmed by the unabated incidents of violence in the city, the Gujarat government on Friday issued shoot-at-sight orders to the police against those indulging in arson and violence.
The announcement was made by Chief Minister Narendra Modi in Ahmedabad, official sources said. Modi has issued directives to the police to deal ‘strictly with arsonists and if need be shoot-at-sight any person indulging in rioting’, they added.
Meanwhile, the army staged flag marches in the violence-hit areas of Ahmedabad – Daraipur, Shahpur, Shahibaug and Naroda – to instill confidence among the people as unabated violence has claimed 111 lives in the city alone so far.
The army personnel were out in different areas like Daraipur, Shahpur, Shahibaug and Naroda, police said.”
Link: http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/mar/01train4.htm
In chapter 2 we have already seen the reports of The Hindu and The Indian Express to know the steps taken by the Gujarat government to curb the violence. The Telegraph-published from Kolkata also reported on 1st March 2002-
“ (On Feb 28) The Vajpayee government, alarmed that law and order were spiralling out of control, ordered deployment of the army in the state. The army has already begun pre-deployment drills in violence-scarred areas and will be out latest by tomorrow morning. Defence minister George Fernandes is travelling to Gujarat tomorrow…Curfew was clamped in 26 towns… “There is a fire inside us. Our blood is boiling,” Mangalben, a woman from Dariapur, said. “What is the fault of those children who died? There is a volcano of anger.”
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1020301/front_pa.htm#head2
In other words, there was a volcano of anger among the masses- whose blood was boiling after the Muslims brutally roasted 59 kar sewaks including 15 children in Godhra. On the events of 1st March 2002, The Telegraph reported in its issue dated 2nd March:
“A funeral procession cast away its veil of mourning and exploded into a mob of killers, torching houses inside which the pursued were huddled. Official sources said eight people died in the incident, but unofficial estimates put the toll at above 30.
An agency report suggested vengeance for the death of three persons earlier in the day as the motive for the attack at Pandarwada, 70 km from Godhra….
Despite the presence of the army — some 3,500 soldiers have arrived in the state — in Ahmedabad, Surat, Vadodara and Rajkot, the rioting has not stopped.”
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1020302/front_pa.htm#head1
And they say that Narendra Modi gave 3 days to the rioters to kill! They demand that the BJP and Narendra Modi should ‘apologize’ for the Gujarat riots. They should realize and so also the BJP spokespersons who come on TV and miserably fail to point out the truth- that it is not Narendra Modi who should apologize- but the entire media- for lying and lying, exaggerating, defaming Narendra Modi. The media can be tried under Section 153-A (Creating enmity between two groups)- because of its one-sided reporting- and Section 500 of IPC- (Defaming)- for needlessly defaming BJP, Sangh Parivar and Narendra Modi- and also tarnishing the image of India.
This tale of lies and myths is unending. It can go on and on and on. An enterprising writer would do well to compile an encyclopedia of these media lies on the entire Gujarat scenario. He can start with media lies on Godhra, on concocting imaginary ‘provocations’ for Godhra, the lies concocted on the post-Godhra riots-such as the extent of the riots, the number of people killed, the imaginary tales and stories of unnamed victims, the rapes and murders of innocent people, etc etc. And he can conclude with the media’s malicious reporting during the Gujarat Assembly elections of December 2002 when the media was the Congress’ pillar and tried to defeat the BJP. The BJP, which suffers the maximum damage from these lies, has unwisely allowed the media to escape the courts for one-sided, malicious lies.
For full details of the steps taken by the Gujarat Government see link:
http://www.gujaratriots.com/category/02-role-of-the-government-in-controlling-violence/
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 14: Sangh Parivar organisations like VHP organized the riots
Fact: Out of Gujarat’s 18,600 villages, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) had units in 10,000 villages at the time of the riots of 2002. If it had wanted, it could have easily organized retaliatory riots in many of these 10,000 villages. Instead, only 40 out of the state’s 18,600 villages saw riots. The then VHP
Fact: Out of Gujarat’s 18,600 villages, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) had units in 10,000 villages at the time of the riots of 2002. If it had wanted, it could have easily organized retaliatory riots in many of these 10,000 villages. Instead, only 40 out of the state’s 18,600 villages saw riots. The then VHP General Secretary Dr Praveen Togadia is a Patel and hails from Saurashtra region of Gujarat- just like Keshubhai Patel. And yet, no riots happened in Saurashtra at all- even in the first 3 days!
On the other hand, the scale of the riots on February 28 in Ahmedabad was so large, that no organisation or group of organisations, like the Sangh Parivar could have done it alone. It was a spontaneous mass reaction to the Godhra killings.
Many people have asked-“On one hand you say nothing happened-hardly 40 villages saw riots. On the other hand you say that the riots were so enormous that they could not have been organized by anyone”.
Both these things are simultaneously true. On February 28 in Ahmedabad- there were 17,000 people attacking Muslims in Naroda Patiya area- as per the report of the then Police Inspector of the area- K.K. Mysorewala. India Today weekly also reports in its issue dated 18 March 2002 that the Charas had attacked in Naroda Patiya leading 3 mobs of at least 4 to 5 thousand each. At one point of time in Ahmedabad there were at least 25,000 people targeting Muslim localities. The mob outside Ehsan Jafri’s house was 10,000 strong. The police force of 6,000 for Ahmedabad out of which only 1500 were armed and the Rapid Action Force and the CRPF jawans could not control the violence. The Hindu also reported the next day that the situation seemed to slip out of control. Ahmedabad Police received 3,500 calls instead of the normal 200. It was beyond the means of the Sangh Parivar- or anybody to organise mobs on such a large scale in Ahmedabad within 24 hours.
However, the VHP could have easily organised riots in many of the 10,000 villages in Gujarat where it had units, either on February 28, or days after that.
On February 27 occurred the Godhra massacre. That same day the RSS gave a statement saying- “RSS condemns the killings and calls for restraint”. The Hindu also reported in its report on Feb 28 that the “RSS appealed to the people to exercise restraint”.
The then RSS Joint General Secretary Madan Das Devi said-“Now is the test of the patience of the Hindu society…These killings are a ploy of the terrorists to create riots…”. This was reported in weekly Organiser, the weekly mouthpiece of the RSS, in its issue dated 10 March 2002, which covered events till 27 February. In the 10 March 2002 issue itself, two RSS leaders- Madan Das Devi and Mohan Bhagwat gave statement’s asking the Hindu society to maintain peace. The Telegraph reported on 28th February 2002-
“The RSS rallied behind the Prime Minister, pleading for restraint. Joint general secretary Madan Das Devi said: “The tolerance of the Hindu society is a litmus test. Instead of taking the law into their hands, people should cooperate with the state government in dealing with the serious situation.”
Link: http://www.telegraphindia.com/1020228/front_pa.htm#head1
See the statement by Madan Das Devi in the topic- “Nation faces trial by fire” 9th paragraph from the top.
The scanned copy of the full statements of RSS given by Madan Das Devi, and Mohan Bhagwat, given on 27 Feb 2002, reported in weekly Organiser dated 10 March 2002 (covering events till 27 Feb in totality) is given below:
This was the then Deputy General Secretary (Sah-sarkaryawah) Madan Das’s statement.
The VHP also appealed for peace. The Times of India reported on 28 February 2002 even before a single major riot had taken place: “VHP international Vice-President Acharya Giriraj Kishore told reporters here at Sola Civil Hospital, where 54 out of the 58 bodies of the train attack victims were brought, that: “Hindus should maintain calm and keep patience. I appeal to Muslim brethren to condemn the attack and ask them not to put Hindus’ patience to test. Hindus are keeping a restraint but if such incidents do not stop, there can be a counter reaction which may be uncontrollable”.”
On 2nd March 2002- www.rediff.com reported quoting Agencies:
“RSS,VHP appeal for peace in Gujarat
In the wake of mounting violence in Gujarat, the RSS and VHP on Saturday appealed to their volunteers to avoid any action that would disturb peace in the country and expressed hope that ‘good sense will prevail’.
“I appeal to all RSS volunteers, sympathisers and friends who have faith in Hindutva to do their utmost in preventing any activity – like sloganeering and stone-pelting – that would disrupt peace, keeping in view the disturbed situation in the country for it would only strengthen the hands of anti-national terrorist elements,” RSS general secretary Mohan Bhagwat said in a statement in Delhi.
He urged followers of other faiths not to fall prey to the instigation of terrorist elements and ‘to conduct themselves as children of India along with their Hindu brethren’.(This statement of Mohan Bhagwat was reported in weekly Organiser in the 10 March 2002 issue. This statement was given on 27 Feb itself).
Meanwhile, the VHP also made an appeal to put an end to the ongoing violence in Gujarat, saying ‘any kind of violence against anyone’ was a matter of concern.
Talking to reporters in Delhi, VHP spokesman Veereshwar Dwivedi said: “The Godhra incident and the violence that followed was tragic. Any kind of violence against anyone is a matter of concern.”
Calling for an end to the ongoing carnage in Gujarat, he said: “Good sense must prevail soon.”
Dwivedi also condoled the deaths and expressed sympathies for those affected by the violence in the state.
He, however, regretted that opposition parties had decided to send a delegation to Gujarat to assess the situation but did not consider it appropriate to do so after the Godhra killings.
Dwivedi said this was being done taking vote bank politics into consideration.
Agencies”
The URL for this is:
http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/mar/02train10.htm
There is another scanned image given in the book which is not in this website.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Concocted Lies And Myths By The Media
By now we have seen much of the reality of the post-Godhra riots. The entire media continues to concoct white lies on this subject. In this chapter, let us see some of the malicious lies circulated by the media, NDTV in particular, and company. Myth 1: 2,000 Muslims were killed in the Gujarat riots Myth
By now we have seen much of the reality of the post-Godhra riots. The entire media continues to concoct white lies on this subject. In this chapter, let us see some of the malicious lies circulated by the media, NDTV in particular, and company.
Myth 1: 2,000 Muslims were killed in the Gujarat riots
Myth 2: Muslims were ‘butchered’ in Gujarat
Myth 3: Whole of Gujarat was burning
Myth 4: The Gujarat police turned a blind eye to the rioting
Myth 5: Gujarat police was anti-Muslim
Myth 6: Gujarat riots were the ‘worst ever massacre’ in India
Myth 7: Only Muslims were rendered homeless and suffered economically
Myth 8: The Gujarat government was involved in the riots
Myth 9: Gujarat riots were like the 1984 anti-Sikh riots
Myth 10: Gujarat became a dangerous place to live in, in 2002
Myth 11: In Ehsan Jafri’ case, women were raped
Myth 12: The photo of Qutubuddin Ansari is genuine
Myth 13: Narendra Modi said: “Every action has equal and opposite reaction”
Myth 14: Sangh Parivar organizations like VHP organized the riots
Myth 15: Narendra Modi gave free hand to rioters for three days
Myth 1: 2,000 Muslims were killed in the Gujarat riots
Fact: 2000 is the number of Muslims who roasted to coal 59 Ram sevaks in Godhra, including 25 women and 15 children, on 27 February 2002, not the number of Muslims killed in the subsequent Gujarat riots. As per figures given by the then Union Minister of State for Home Shriprakash Jaiswal, who belongs
Fact: 2000 is the number of Muslims who roasted to coal 59 Ram sevaks in Godhra, including 25 women and 15 children, on 27 February 2002, not the number of Muslims killed in the subsequent Gujarat riots.
As per figures given by the then Union Minister of State for Home Shriprakash Jaiswal, who belongs to the Congress Party, in Parliament on 11 May 2005, 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus were killed in the riots, 2548 people were injured and 223 people were missing. This was in a WRITTEN REPLY to a question asked by a Congress member on the religion wise casualties in Gujarat after Godhra. The report placed the number of riot-affected widows at 919 and the number of children orphaned at 606. The UPA government gives these figures, and hence they themselves may be inflated. To read the Rajya Sabha records click:
http://164.100.47.5/EDAILYQUESTIONS/sessionno/204/uq11052005.pdf
http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=46538 or
http://news.indiainfo.com/2005/05/11/1105godhra-rs.html
Even Indian Muslims’ English newspaper Milli Gazette also reported this
http://www.milligazette.com/Archives/2005/01-15June05-Print-Edition/011506200511.htm
BBC too reported the same.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4536199.stm
The editorials of the national English dailies, and the articles published from the freelancers on the newspapers’ editorial pages are nothing but a pack of lies, akin the autobiography of former Pakistan President General Pervez Musharraf, “In the Line of Fire”. Newspapers like The Times of India, The Hindustan Times, The Indian Express, etc. continue to publish articles saying, “Win in Assembly elections of December 2002 does not whitewash Narendra Modi’s sins of the Gujarat pogrom of 2002 when 2000 innocent Muslims were butchered” or “The Gujarat pogrom of killing thousands of Muslims did not help the BJP in the long term” etc. etc.
All these numbers again came into the picture when Narendra Modi was denied a US diplomatic visa in March 2005 by the USA and his earlier tourist visa, issued in 1998 was revoked just one day before his scheduled visit to the USA. Why the USA took as many as three years after the Gujarat riots to revoke Modi’s earlier visa is not told.
But these numbers are nothing but a pack of lies. Let us see the interview given by the Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi to Aaj Tak’s Prabhu Chawla, excerpts of which were published in the weekly India Today, dated 4 November 2002
“Q – Your opponents call you ‘Jinnah of the Hindus’.
A- I am hearing this for the first time though I still don’t consider you as an enemy.
Q- You are held responsible for the killing of 1,100 innocent people in the riots.
A- In our last interview, you said 900 people. Now you are saying 1,100. Are you adding all the people killed in other states like Maharashtra and Bengal to Gujarat’s account?(Narendra Modi is talking of the Solapur riots of 10 and 11 October 2002 in Maharashtra and other petty riots which occured long after Godhra and had nothing to do with Godhra and post-Godhra).
Q- So what is the correct toll?
A- There would have no riots in Gujarat if there had been no Godhra…
Q- Do you accept that you failed to provide security to the people of the state?
A- 98% of Gujarat would not have had peace if we had failed to fulfill our duties. We managed to control the riots in 72 hours…
Q- Why don’t you accept that Gujarat is being defamed because of Narendra Modi?
A- If that is true, give the people of Gujarat a chance to pronounce their verdict through elections.”
As we see, the number of people killed in the riots jumped from 900 to 1100 after Narendra Modi’s previous interview, i.e. within 4 months! Now it has jumped from 900 to 2,000. May be after 10 years, at this rate it will jump to 10,000!Already it is being said that, “thousands of Muslims were killed in Gujarat” and “3,000 innocent Muslims were butchered in Gujarat”. The death of a single innocent person, whether Hindu or Muslim or belonging to any other religion, is highly unfortunate and cannot be justified. That more than 1,000 people were killed is highly unfortunate and reprehensible. But that cannot a justification to exaggerate and inflate the number of people killed to 2,000 or any higher figure.
What these lies have done to well-meaning people
It is generally believed, even in the Sangh Parivar, that the post-Godhra riots were one-sided. Even a correspondent of RSS weekly Organiser once believed the bluff that 2,000 Muslims were killed in the riots. He actually reported- “Over 2,000 Muslims were killed in Ahmedabad”. This when the correct number of Muslims killed for the entire state of Gujarat (including Ahmedabad) was 790, along with 254 Hindus.
Most leaders of BJP seem to be blatantly ignorant of the truth of the Gujarat riots. Whenever Congress leaders or anti-BJP journalists raise the issue of the Gujarat riots on TV, the BJP leaders generally fail to give befitting reply. They falter in speech. They merely try to point out that the Gujarati electorate gave a huge mandate to the BJP and to Narendra Modi in the December 2002 Gujarat Assembly polls, and mention the Godhra incident as a cause of the riots. None of them ever points out any instance of Muslim aggression, sufferings of the Hindus in the riots, police firing deaths, or the fact that only 60 places out of 18,600 saw riots. This is because of ignorance and blind belief on media lies.
In March 2005, the Pakistan cricket team was on a tour to India. It refused to play a Test match in Ahmedabad on ‘political’ grounds, i.e. for ‘the killings of Muslims’ in that city. All this is clearly the result of stark lies concocted by the biased media, which it itself may have started to believe by now. All these lies and myths need to be thoroughly exposed.
That the UPA government, with Congress President and Italian-born and staunchly anti-BJP Sonia Gandhi as the UPA chief, and Communists as outside supporters, gave the figure of 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus killed in the Gujarat riots inside Parliament is something worth pondering about. These figures themselves may well be exaggerated given as they are by a Congressman, who works under Sonia Gandhi.
India Today weekly reported in its issue dated 20 May 2002, when the riots had almost stopped that “Total dead- 972” (For details, see page 122). Out of these 972, India Today included 57 people killed in Godhra. If anyone sees the English newspapers of those days, i.e. between 10 to 21 May 2002, no riots took place in Gujarat in those 10 days at all, and the Army left Gujarat on 21 May. A maximum of 20 more deaths might have happened in Gujarat after that. The death toll in Gujarat riots would thus be 935.
The Tribune reported on 30 April 2002 that the death toll crossed the 900 mark on 29 April. The riots had almost ended by that time and maximum 50 more would have been killed by 10 May 2002.And this was 2 months after the real violence of 28 Feb, 1st and 2nd March had ended, most of the bodies of the killings of these days had been found by 30 April.
Thus there is no way at all that the toll could be anywhere close to 2,000. The 950-odd toll was exaggerated and inflated to 2000 by the liars some months after the riots.
Central India’s English daily The Hitavada also reported that 936 people were killed in the Gujarat riots after the Army left Ahmedabad on 21 May 2002. The official figures before the missing were declared dead were 952. After missing were declared dead- the toll was revised to 1180.
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090301/jsp/nation/story_10608005.jsp
Let us, for argument’s sake, assume that the figures given by the UPA government are correct. Does that give anyone the reason to believe that more than 790 Muslims were killed in Gujarat? Why should the English dailies and the 24-hour news channels lie through the skin of their teeth that 2000 Muslims were killed in Gujarat?
Actually, the figures given initially said 228 people missing (closely matched by the UPA Government also saying 223 people missing in Parliament on 11 May 2005) and later 101 people were found alive, so the final missing people’s figure is 127 only. The official statistics show that 101 people were found alive and 127 people are still missing and hence assumed dead after the 7-year period is over. Ex-gratia was paid to 1,169 people by the Gujarat Government. The UPA Government also paid extra compensation to Gujarat riot victims in May 2008. Even this UPA Government said ex-gratia was paid to 1169 people which shows that the death toll is less than or equal to 1169 since it is absolutely impossible that the UPA Government will fail to give ex-gratia to families of people killed in the riots when the riots have been politicized so much. (And if the UPA government which is a staunch opponent of Narendra Modi claims that any more than 1169 people were killed in the riots, then it itself would be admitting that it did not pay compensation to some killed people’s families!) UPA’s figures in Parliament would amount to 1171 deaths- 790 Muslims, 254 Hindus and 127 missing people (after many missing were found alive), 790+254+127= 1171. This closely matches the ex-gratia figure of 1169, paid by both the Gujarat and the UPA Government.
Despite this NDTV reported many times during the Lok Sabha elections of April- May 2004 that, “2000 Muslims were killed in Gujarat” exaggerating and as if not a single Hindu was killed and implying that the riots were one-sided.
2,000 is the number of Muslims who carried out the massacre and gruesome roasting alive of 59 Hindus-including 25 women and 15 children in Godhra. It is not the number of Muslims who were killed in the subsequent riots. There is no justification for violence and of even a single death, be it in Godhra or after Godhra. But why lie? Who gains by these lies? And it is everybody’s duty to correct the figure. The point is, what should be reported is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
And it is this mentality which is responsible for them exaggerating the number of Muslims killed in the riots to as much as possible. When the total number of people killed in the riots- Hindu as well as Muslim- is 1,169, they lie that 2,000 Muslims were killed in the riots just like former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf did in the United Nations in September 2002. Teesta Setalvad increased this number to 2,500 Muslims (as if not a single Hindu was killed) in one of her articles titled “What ails Gujarat” published in CPI(M) party weekly Peoples Democracy in its issue of 16 July 2006. And Tehelka reported in 2007 after its sting operation that 2,500 Muslims were killed in the first 3 days! This would imply that many more were killed in the next days of riots!!!
A must read article is on the role of the Gujarat Government in controlling violence in the riots.
Some more details are given in the book. To know the details, read the book.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 3: Whole of Gujarat was burning
Fact: Out of the state’s 18,600 villages, 240 municipal towns, and 25 district headquarters, less than 90 places saw riots. If one includes the two big cities of Ahmedabad and Vadodara, by the wildest stretch of imagination, only 2 % of the state can be assumed to have been burning. Only 40 or maximum 50
Fact: Out of the state’s 18,600 villages, 240 municipal towns, and 25 district headquarters, less than 90 places saw riots. If one includes the two big cities of Ahmedabad and Vadodara, by the wildest stretch of imagination, only 2 % of the state can be assumed to have been burning. Only 40 or maximum 50 out of the state’s 18,600 villages saw riots. Had the state government been involved in the riots, or wanted to encourage the riots, it would have created riots in 10,000 out of Gujarat’s 18,600 villages. In the past curfew has been placed in 300 villages at the same time time. As compared to that, absolutely nothing happened in 2002.
In this regard, some people quote a report of R Sreekumar, a police officer, of August 2002 and claim that 154 Assembly seats (out of the total 182), with 151 towns and 993 villages were affected by riots. Of course this does not mean that all these places saw riots. Some liars have tried to lie that ’993 villages saw riots’. This is trash. Curfew was needed to be imposed in only 40 villages as against 200 to 300 simultaneously in Gujarat’s past riots. The figure of 993 villages seeing violence is absolutely far-fetched and cited by R Sreekumar, the man who did not make allegations against Narendra Modi until he was denied promotion by the Gujarat Government on strong grounds and his junior was made DGP before him.
On page 153 of SIT closure report, Ashok Narayan, ACS (Home) is quoted as saying that Sreekumar arrived at this figure by including all places where food grains and other items of relief had been provided in relief camps or other places by the government. Ashok Narayan is quoted as saying that the actual places seeing violence were lesser. Naturally, there is a vast difference in the places where the foodgrain was provided and places which actually saw violence.
For argument’s sake, accepting the figure of 993 villages out of 18,600, we get 5% of the state affected, with 95% still peaceful.
Despite some people hell bent on trying to magnify the Gujarat riots as much as possible, there are reports from diehard anti-BJP people like Frontline which also say more or less the same thing. Diehard anti-Sangh Parivar magazine Frontline also reported: “The Bharatiya Janata Party made its greatest gains in the riot-affected areas — it captured 50 of the 65 riot-affected constituencies…In places untouched by riots, the BJP lost ground. In Kutch, it got only two out of the six seats, compared with the four seats that it had won in the previous election…In Saurashtra, where the water crisis is acute, the BJP slipped from its 48-seat tally (out of 52) in 1998 to just 37 seats this time. (out of 52)”
http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl1926/stories/20030103005900400.htm
If Frontline itself claimed 65 riot-affected seats out of 182, (this includes places like Ahmedabad district and Vadodara district which had 19 and 13 Assembly seats at that time, and also 2 other cities of Rajkot and Surat), then it shows that it is absolutely impossible for riots to have occurred in 993 villages and the correct number of places of violence must indeed be close to less than 90, since Ahmedabad and Vadodara districts themselves account for 32 Assembly seats. And Frontline also admitted that Saurashtra and Kutch were untouched by riots.
On the 1st day of the riots, 26 places needed to be placed under curfew as reported by all major dailies the next day- e.g. The Hindu. On the 2nd day, 34 places needed to be under curfew as reported the next day by dailies (these include most if not all of the 26 already under curfew). And on the 3rd day 40 places were under curfew (Mostly already under curfew from 1 or 2 days). Since the violence was controlled in 3 days, and after the 3 days, violence was limited mainly to Ahmedabad, Vadodara and some places near Godhra, we can clearly see that it is absolutely impossible for riots to have occurred in 993 villages, and that the figures of maximum 50 villages and maximum 90 places seeing riots are absolutely true.
Let us say, for argument’s sake, that some people from 993 villages went to relief camps for fears of attacks- real or imaginary fears. How does that mean that 993 villages saw riots? The above figures from the English dailies as also from Frontline clearly reveal the truth. As they say, half-knowledge is always dangerous. Those who do not know the full truth, that the figures given by Sreekumar were for all places where foodgrain was given, and not for places which saw violence, wrongly accused others of lying that riots were seen in less than 90 places, whereas in reality those who said that riots were seen in less than 90 places were telling the truth, and those claiming that violence was seen in 993 villages were lying. Half-knowledge is always dangerous!
Also, only 7 out of 25 districts of Gujarat saw any significant violence. Remaining 18 were virtually untouched by riots, according to official records. So less than half of the districts saw the riots and most areas of the districts which saw riots were peaceful.
Saurashtra and Kutch account for one-third of Gujarat. Riots did not spread to these parts, either in cities or in villages even in the first three days. These places account for 58 out of Gujarat’s 182 Assembly seats. After the first three days riots took place largely only in Ahmedabad, Vadodara, and some places near Godhra in Panchmahal district. That is to say, after 2nd March 2002 riots had stopped in almost the whole of Gujarat. The real riots happened only in the first 3 days and the violence also progressively reduced in these 3 days. But in Saurashtra and Kutch, no riots took place even in the first three days even in cities. And villages of Saurashtra and Kutch were untouched by the riots.
But the media lied at that time and has also lied ever since that the whole of Gujarat was burning. Around 6 December 2002, Narendra Modi was invited on Star News- NDTV’s programme ‘Hotline’. In that programme, the anchor Pankaj Pachouri asked Narendra Modi this question. He said, “Your party always gains because of the riots. But no riots took place in Saurashtra and Kutch, so you are all set to lose there. How will you respond to this?” To that question, Narendra Modi replied,
“When 2 % of Gujarat was burning, you were saying that the whole of Gujarat is burning. Now you are saying that no riots took place in Saurashtra and Kutch. So first you apologize for lying that the entire state was burning when only 2 % of the state was burning.”
These malicious lies of the media were exposed twice. Once during the time of the riots in Gujarat in March-April 2002. And second, during the Gujarat Assembly elections of December 2002. After the BJP’s huge victory in Gujarat in December 2002, the media again ignored these facts and lied that the whole of Gujarat was burning. The BJP seems unable to ever remind the media of its own lies and its own true reporting. It has never bothered to expose the truth of Gujarat, and attack the media for lying that the whole of Gujarat, including Saurashtra and Kutch were also burning.Without exaggeration, it seems to be one the biggest ever Public Relations disaster in human history, by the BJP in general and the Gujarat Government in particular.
(An article on some facts about the media can be read here “NDTV is CPM Today“. And another article which is worth reading is “The channels strategy of attacks”. Note that these articles are purely the view of the blogger and not of Gujaratriots.com)
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 4: The Gujarat police turned a blind eye to the rioting
Fact: Even though the situation was terrible, the police performed its work extremely efficiently. The police force was woefully insufficient, despite the deployment of the entire police force. India Today (18 March 2002)reported: “Ahmedabad has a police force of 6,000, including 1,500 armed personnel. In addition, the entire state has just four companies (530 jawans)
Fact: Even though the situation was terrible, the police performed its work extremely efficiently. The police force was woefully insufficient, despite the deployment of the entire police force. India Today (18 March 2002)reported:
“Ahmedabad has a police force of 6,000, including 1,500 armed personnel. In addition, the entire state has just four companies (530 jawans) of the Rapid Action Force (RAF) of which only one company could be spared for Ahmedabad. Considering that the mobs that simultaneously surfaced at nearly half a dozen places numbered from 2,000 to 10,000, the forces proved woefully inadequate. At one point on February 28 there were at least 25,000 people targeting the Muslim localities in Ahmedabad alone.”
See link: http://www.indiatoday.com/itoday/20020318/cover.shtml
Even in its infamous article misquoting Narendra Modi as having said “Every action has equal and opposite reaction” (Which Narendra Modi never did), The Times of India reported, “The sparse police presence looked like a drop in the ocean of violence.” This despite the deployment of the entire police force. The Hindu also reported the next day that on 28 February “Mob fury reached its crescendo” and “The situation seemed to slip out of hand” and “Police were outnumbered by the rioters“. Same was the report of The Telegraph, The Tribune.
The Times of India reported on 2nd March 2002 on events on 1st March (Friday)- “Neither the Army nor the shoot-at-sight orders given to Gujarat Police could stop riots on Friday 1st March…” And this was on 1st March 2002 when the violence was much less than 28 Feb (Thursday). If even the Army and shoot-at-sight orders couldn’t stop the violence when it was much less, then what must have been the situation on 28 Feb when the Army was not present in the day and the violence was much more?
Despite this, the police fired more than 1000 rounds (exact official number given now is 1496) and burst 4297 tear gas shells on 28 Feb. More than 180 people were saved at Ehsan Jafri’s place and more than 900 out of the 1,000 in Naroda Patiya were saved. The police fired more than 3,900 rounds in the first three days alone and fired 6500 rounds of tear gas shells. (Despite the presence of the Army for 2 out of 3 days ). As many as 98 people were shot dead by the police in the first three days, majority of whom are Hindus. For the complete period of rioting, despite the presence of the Army for 73 out of 74 days, the police fired as many 15,000 tear gas shells- the exact number is 15,369 and a total of 10,500 rounds- exact number 10,559. Out of the total people killed in the riots, about 20 % have been shot dead by the police. According to official records, 199 people were killed in police firing of whom 101 were killed in the first week.
Infact- the encyclopaedia wikipedia reports-based on sound sources-that as many as 200 policemen laid their lives trying to quell the violence during the riots. We feel this number is not possible.
Official records show that 83 officers, 419 men and 50 Home Guard were injured- total 552 injured. How many gave their lives is not told.
Out of the 25,486 accused, the Gujarat police arrested as many as 25,204 people. As of 28 April 2002, as per The Times of India there were 35,552 arrested including 27,901 Hindus. Finally there were 4274 cases registered, i.e. FIRs and the number of people arrested was 19,200 Hindus and 7,799 Muslims to get a total of 26,999 i.e. almost 27,000 arrests. This is slightly different from October 2005 when 25,204 were arrested. This clearly shows the efficiency of the Gujarat police. On March 1st and 2nd and afterwards, Muslims too rioted and they too were killed in police firing.
The Gujarat police saved as many as 2,500 Muslims in Sanjeli, a town in North Gujarat, 5,000 Muslims in Bodeli, in Vadodara and about 10,000 Muslims in Viramgam. A total of at least 24,000 Muslims were saved. Infact, some sources say that 24,000 were saved in the first three days alone and the total number is even higher. Police officials themselves suffered injuries in trying to save the Muslims, as reported by the weekly India Today.
See link: http://www.india-today.com/itoday/20020422/states.shtml
There are many other instances as well of people being saved- as per official records. Some of them are:
- a) 5,000 people from the Noorani Mosque area were saved by Ahmedabad Police
b) 240 people were saved at Sardarpura of Mehsana district and shifted to safer places
c) 450 were saved in Pore and Nardipur villages of Gandhinagar district, and shifted to safer places
d) 400 were saved in a Madrasa at Bhavnagar
e) 1,500 people were saved from Fatehpura village of Vadodara district
f) 3,000 people were saved and shifted from Kwant village of Vadodara district
Hindus were also saved from violent Muslim mobs in places like Modasa, Bharuch, Jamalpur area of Ahmedabad etc.
On February 28, the police shot dead 10 Hindus in Ahmedabad alone. The leading most English daily from South India, and an extremely anti-Hindu newspaper, ‘The Hindu’ reported this on 1st March 2002. By 1st March, the police had shot dead ‘at least 17 people’ in Ahmedabad alone-as reported by The Hindu dated 2nd March 2002.
On 2nd March 2002-police firing resulted in 47 deaths-as reported by The Hindu the next day-i.e. 3rd March 2002.
See link: http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/2002/03/03/stories/2002030303020100.htm
The Indian Express dated 3rd March reported that 77 people were killed in Police/Army firing by 2nd March 2002.
The steps taken to control the violence were-
1-The Indian Express dated 28th February 2002 reported that the State Government had deployed the Rapid Action Force in Ahmedabad and other sensitive areas and the Centre sent in CRPF personnel on February 27 itself even before a single riot had taken place. This was also reported by Mid Day dated 28 February and also The Times of India.
See link: http://www.mid-day.com/news/2002/feb/21232.htm
This is mentioned in 3rd catagory- 7th paragraph
2- The Hindu reported in its issue dated 28th February 2002 that “Shoot-at-sight” orders had been given in Godhra on February 27 itself. And so did ALL the English dailies that day. Also read the sentence ” the state government has appealed to the people to maintain peace.”
Link: http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2002/02/28/stories/2002022803070100.htm
3-The Hindustan Times reported in its issue dated 28 February 2002 that the entire police force of 70,000 was deployed in Gujarat on 27 February itself after the shocking massacre in Godhra- in view of apprehensions that riots might break out. This was also reported by British daily The Telegraph the same day.
Link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/1386341/Hindus-massacred-on-blazing-train.html
See second last paragraph of this report.
4-827 preventive arrests were made on the evening of February 27 itself on Chief Minister Narendra Modi’s orders on his return to Ahmedabad from Godhra. This was reported by weekly India Today dated 18 March 2002 which did not give the number (827 arrests) but mentioned preventive arrests. Even the SIT admitted 827 preventive arrests.
5-On February 28 -despite the deployment of the entire police force, the CRPF personnel and the Rapid Action Force-the situation slipped out of control, according to The Hindu dated 1st March 2002.
See link: http://www.hinduonnet.com/2002/03/01/stories/2002030103030100.htm
6-Despite the fact that the situation slipped out of control, the mob sizes were unprecedented and the police were overwhelmingly outnumbered, the police did its best. The police fired more than 1,000 rounds on the first day of the riots-i.e. February 28.
Link: Same as Number 5′s link- but this doesn’t mention 1000 + rounds which were fired that day- including 600 in Ahmedabad.
7-The Hindu reported in its issue dated 1st March 2002 that at least 10 persons were believed to have been killed in police firing in Ahmedabad alone by evening of February 28. ( Same link as number 5, paragraphs 2 and 9 from the top).
5 Hindus were shot dead outside Ehsan Jafri’s house on Feb 28, according to India Today weekly dated 18 March 2002 and also from The Times of India‘s online report on 28 February.
8-Curfew was clamped in Godhra on 27 February itself-as reported by The Hindu dated 28 February 2002. Also reported by all English dailies- such as Times of India, dated 28 Feb.
Link: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-2256789,prtpage-1.cms or
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020228/main1.htm
9-An indefinite curfew was clamped in 26 cities and towns in the State, including parts of Ahmedabad, Surat, Baroda, Rajkot, Nadiad, Anand and Kaira on February 28 in addition to the indefinite curfew in force in Godhra since February 27-according to The Hindu dated 1st March 2002- and every English daily the next day and also weeklies- like India Today– which covered events till Feb 28 in its issue dated 11 March 2002.
Link: http://www.hinduonnet.com/2002/03/01/stories/2002030103030100.htm
10- The Chief Minister, Narendra Modi, frantically called the Army units to Ahmedabad on February 28-as reported by the The Hindu dated 1st March 2002.
See link: http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/2002/03/01/stories/2002030103030100.htm
See 8th paragraph from the top.
11-The Indian Express and The Hindu both reported that Army units started arriving in Ahmedabad on the night of February 28-in their issues the next day-i.e. 1st March 2002. This shows that the Army units reached Ahmedabad so quickly-that the newspapers had the time to report their arrival on February 28 itself itself and publish it on 1st March!
(Same link as number 5- 8th paragraph from the top)
12-The Army staged a flag march in Ahmedabad on 1st March 2002 at 11:30 AM-as reported by weekly India Today in its issue dated 18th March 2002. The Hindu and The Indian Express and all major dailies also reported that the Army staged flag marches in Ahmedabad and also Vadodara on 1st March 2002.
13-The Army began flag marches in the worst-affected areas of Ahmedabad, Baroda, Rajkot and Godhra cities and the `shoot at sight’ order was extended to all 34 curfew-bound cities and towns in Gujarat on 1st March 2002-as per The Hindu dated 2nd March 2002.
See link: http://www.hinduonnet.com/2002/03/02/stories/2002030203050100.htm
14-The Gujarat police fired a total of around 4,000 rounds in the first three days alone. This-despite the presence of the Army for 2 out of the 3 days. The police also arrested more than 4,000 people in the first 3 days alone, majority of whom are Hindus. As on 6 May 2002 35,000 people had been arrested for rioting by the police- the highest ever in Gujarat, not even in 1969 and 1985 were so many arrested. On 28 April 2002 The Times of India reported that 9954 Hindus and 4035 Muslims were arrested by police as substantive arrests and 17947 Hindus and 3616 Muslims were arrested as a preventive measure. This gives a total of 27,901 Hindus and 7651 Muslims arrested as on 28 April 2002, a total of 35,552 arrests- the highest ever in Gujarat.
15-The Gujarat police shot dead 98 people in the first three days, majority of whom are Hindus.
16-The Hindu reported in its issue dated 4th March 2002 that only 2 deaths were reported on 3rd March in the entire state and the violence has ended on 3rd March 2002. Thus the Gujarat government managed to control the situation in 3 days even after the shocking massacre in Godhra- while it took previous Congress governments 6 months to stop the riots in 1969 and 1985 even without any cause as Godhra.
In an interview given by Narendra Modi to Outlook magazine in its issue dated 18 March 2002–
“Were you playing the fiddle while Gujarat burned?
No. Contrary to what is now being projected, I brought sanity within 72 hours of the violent outbreak…”
Note Narendra Modi’s sentence “No. Contrary to what is now being projected, I brought sanity within 72 hours of the violent outbreak.” In other words, the projection against Modi started AFTER the riots. We have already seen the reports of the newspapers like The Hindu, The Telegraph to note that there were no allegations against Narendra Modi or the Gujarat Government at the time of the actual riots. They started much later. Doordarshan news said on 3rd March 2002 (Sunday) at night in the English bulletin: “Violence has ended in a record time in Ahmedabad…Only 3 days…In the past it would take many weeks… Today (Sunday) curfew was relaxed, people bought items from bazaar…”. No allegation against the state government but praise of controlling violence in just 3 days! All accusations on Narendra Modi and demands for his resignation, dismissal started AFTER the riots. This was because, the media wanted some scapegoat to be made for the riots. It wanted Modi to sack a few police officers, drop a minister or two. But Modi did nothing of the sort. He did not blame anyone, did not make anyone a scapegoat.
Even the SIT appointed by the Supreme Court said that ‘All efforts were made to save Ehsan Jafri’. It is common sense that if even the Army and the shoot-at-sight orders given to the Gujarat police could not control the violence on 1 March, Friday, when it was much less, the situation on 28 February, Thursday, must have been far worse when the violence was much more and the Army was not present in the day. Since this argument could not be refuted, some liars resorted to tricks and theatrics showing two police officers unable to reach Chamanpura from Revdi Bazaar, hiding completely the fact that reinforcements arrived, district police personnel rushed to the spot, and the Fire Brigade too.
These liars also hide the fact that the police killed 5 people outside his house, saved 180+ people out of 250 in Jafri’s housing complex, saved 900 out of 1,000 in Naroda Patiya. This Times of India report POSTED ONLINE at 2:34 PM of 28 February also says that police fired on the crowd injuring 6, who were taken to hospital where 3 were critical at that time, and ultimately 5 died.They also hide the fact that the Police fired 1000+ rounds on 28 Feb, including 600+ in Ahmedabad. 10 Hindus were shot dead and 16 injured on 28 Feb and 2 were killed in police firing in Nadiad and Godhra on 28 Feb. There were 4297 tear gas shells also fired on 28 Feb, and suppressing and concealing all these facts, the liars claim that “Police did total inaction”. If all these facts are not police action, we wonder what can be termed as police action.
Thus some liars did theatrics by showing records and graphs of calls, but hid the fact that the calls were heeded to and reinforcements sent, and all efforts made to save lives. Theatrics and lying to delude people are being practised by people who have no answer to the site’s arguments on merit.
A must read article on the role of the Gujarat Government in controlling violence is:
http://www.gujaratriots.com/29/role-of-the-government-in-controlling-violence/
(An article on some facts about the media can be read here “NDTV is CPM Today“. And another article which is worth reading is “The channels strategy of attacks”. Note that these articles are purely the view of the blogger and not of Gujaratriots.com )
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 5: Gujarat police was anti-Muslim
Fact: Far from it, the police was slow to act on Muslim fanatics for fear of being called ‘anti-Muslim’ by the media as implied by the report of India Today dated 20th May 2002. As many as 170 people were shot dead by the police in Gujarat- i.e. killed in police firing as of 27
Fact: Far from it, the police was slow to act on Muslim fanatics for fear of being called ‘anti-Muslim’ by the media as implied by the report of India Today dated 20th May 2002. As many as 170 people were shot dead by the police in Gujarat- i.e. killed in police firing as of 27 April 2002 according to Times of India dated 28 April 2002 while the official records now show 199 killed in police firing, till the end of the riots. Since riots continued till 10 May 2002, it explains the increase in the number of police firing deaths, since more were killed after 28 April and also some injured earlier may have died later.
Some Muslims greeted the police, and also the army, with bullets and turned off the power supply and made life hell, and also started riots and accused the police of being biased, when the police came to search for armories in some Muslim areas like Juhapura, Kalupur etc, as reported by a major weekly India Today. For fear of being labeled anti-Muslim, the police failed to do their duty.
The official records show that as many as 552 security personnel were injured trying to control the riots- 83 officers, 419 men and 50 Home Guard. Many policemen lost their lives as well, like when a mob burnt alive a policeman in Juhapura on 1st March 2002 as reported by The Hindu the next day, or in Ahmedabad’s Gomtipur area on 21 April 2002- Ramnavami Day, when constable Amar Patil was stabbed to death.
India Today weekly in its issue dated 20 May 2002, clearly admits that, far from being anti-Muslim, the Gujarat police did not act speedily against Muslim fanatics and rioters, for fear of being called anti-Muslim by the biased and partisan media.
The India Today weekly report dated 20 May 2002 says-”A series of attacks on policemen by Muslims has further added to the lack of faith. Now, strapped with the anti-Muslim label, the police has been slow in acting against Muslim fanatics”.
See the link- http://archives.digitaltoday.in/indiatoday/20020520/states2.html
This will contain the above sentence in the 6th paragraph from the top.
The Gujarat Police saved at least 24,000 Muslims from certain death in the first three days-in places like Sanjeli, Bodeli, and Viramgam in particular.
Link- http://www.india-today.com/itoday/20020422/states.shtml
See passages 2,3 and 4 from the top.
Gujarat police shot dead 98 people in the first 3 days-majority of whom are Hindus. The Police arrested most of the accused for rioting. Also The Times of India in a report titled “More fall prey to police firings in Gujarat” dated 28 April 2002 says that a total of 35,552 people were arrested for rioting in Gujarat- out of whom 27,901 were Hindus.
Moreover, the prosecution of the police was so efficient that until now, at least 443 people have been convicted for the violence in Gujarat-out of whom at least 332 are Hindus and 111 are Muslims (31 for Godhra and 80 for post-Godhra). As from the newspaper reports available to us itself we can see 249 convictions, 184 Hindus and 65 Muslims (31 for Godhra and 34 for post-Godhra) which in itself is a world record. The list of all the newspaper reports is given in Myth 21. The actual convictions are 443- 332 Hindus and 111 Muslims according to official records.This is so, since the newspapers did not seem to report all the convictions, or we did not record all of them or both.
A must read article on role of Gujarat Government in controlling violence can be read here:
http://www.gujaratriots.com/29/role-of-the-government-in-controlling-violence/
There are more details given in the book, but not in the website. To know the full details, read the book.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 7: Only Muslims were rendered homeless and suffered economically
Fact: The UPA Government, staunchly anti-BJP, anti-Sangh Parivar and anti-Narendra Modi said in a WRITTEN REPLY inside Parliment on 11 May 2005 that 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus were killed after Godhra. It mentioned 223 people missing at that time. At one point, 228 people were missing but later 101 of them were found alive
Fact: The UPA Government, staunchly anti-BJP, anti-Sangh Parivar and anti-Narendra Modi said in a WRITTEN REPLY inside Parliment on 11 May 2005 that 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus were killed after Godhra. It mentioned 223 people missing at that time. At one point, 228 people were missing but later 101 of them were found alive and only 127 people remained missing even after 7 years, when they were declared dead. 59 Hindus were also killed in Godhra. So, as a minimum 313 Hindus were killed in Gujarat in 2002.
As early as 5 March 2002, out of the 98 relief/ refugee camps set up in the state, 85 were for the Muslims and 13 were for the Hindus. As on 17 March 2002, as per the report of a newspaper as anti-BJP as The Times of India, more than 10,000 Hindus were rendered homeless in Ahmedabad alone.
As on 25 April 2002, out of the 1 lakh 40 thousand refugees, some 1 lakh were Muslims and 40 thousand were Hindus.
None other than Times Now channel admitted in 2009 quoting from Agencies that 40,000 Hindus were also rendered homeless in the Gujarat riots, i.e. Muslims threw out as many as 40,000 Hindus in Gujarat even after Godhra, just like they did in Kashmir where lakhs of Hindus left the valley.
http://www.timesnow.tv/articleshow/4327688.cms
The Indian Express devoted two full reports exclusively to Hindu victims of Ahmedabad. Dalits were attacked by Muslims in Ahmedabad and were rendered homeless. The Indian Express dated 7th May 2002 and 10th May 2002 gave two reports on the plight of Hindu victims. These Hindus were not only rendered homeless-they did not even have refugee camps to live in-and hence had to live in temples. Many others were forced to sleep on the streets.
See link: http://archive.indianexpress.com/oldStory/2401/
The Times of India dated 18 March 2002 also devoted a report exclusively to the Hindu victims of Ahmedabad. The report was titled-”Riots hit all classes, people of all faith” and says-”Contrary to popular belief that only Muslims have been affected in the recent riots, more than 10,000 people belonging to the Hindu community have also become homeless”. This was the case only in Ahmedabad. What happened to Hindus in Muslim dominated villages outside Ahmedabad and in other cities like Vadodara was not reported by The Times of India! This report also indicates that Muslims attacked Hindus unprovoked on February 28 itself in some areas of Ahmedabad. The Hindus who were living in minority in Muslim dominated areas of Ahmedabad suffered horribly. The Dalits suffered heavily at the hands of Muslims.
This report can be read on http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/4193006.cms
The Hindus also suffered economically. As per the reports of none other than The Times of India, as many as 50 Hindus shops were torched in Revdi Bazaar area of Ahmedabad on 23 March 2002 by Muslims. The financial loss was as much as 15 crore rupees. Many more Hindu shops were looted in the rest of Gujarat too. The Tribune dated 30 April 2002 also reported that 36 Hindu shops were looted on 29 April 2002.
To read the report of The Times of India on the burning of 50 shops in Ahmedabad, see this link- http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/4609603.cms
On 30 May, 2002 The Hindu reported: “In a chat with The Hindu, (CPM Politbureau member) Ms Brinda Karat, who was in Bangalore last week, shared a few thoughts on the hurdles in the rehabilitation of people affected by the riots, both Hindus and Muslims…When she did actually see a cheque for Rs. 22,000, it was at the Kankadia camp, which housed Dalits, and Hindus. There, Karat also came across cheques for Rs. 10,000, Rs. 12,000 and Rs. 22,000. “The government seems to be offering some substantial compensation only to the Dalit community,” Ms. Karat observes, emphasising the need to compensate everyone equally.”
(Source: http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/mp/2002/05/30/stories/2002053000180200.htm )
None other than Marxist leader Brinda Karat also admitted that Hindus and particularly Dalits were also homeless. The compensation provided by the Government was equal for all, just that she ‘saw’ cheques of different denominations at different relief camps. While forcibly trying to imply that the Gujarat Government was discriminating Hindu and Muslim victims of riots, she admitted that there were Hindus also rendered homeless. Note here also that Dalits and Hindus are not separate, Dalits are Hindus only, but Brinda Karat forcibly tries to separate Dalits from Hindus as if they are different.
(An article on some facts about the media can be read here “NDTV is CPM Today“. And another article which is worth reading is “The channels strategy of attacks”. Note that these articles are purely the view of the blogger and not of Gujaratriots.com )
Full details of this are given in the book in the chapter “Attacks on Hindus”. To know the details, read the book.
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 8: The Gujarat government was involved in the riots
Fact: The full details of the role of the government in controlling violence can be seen by opening the link. Gujarat government of the BJP, headed by Narendra Modi was blind to the mushrooming of madrasas in the state. Not only that, the previous government headed by Keshubhai Patel too was equally blind to the
Fact: The full details of the role of the government in controlling violence can be seen by opening the link.
Gujarat government of the BJP, headed by Narendra Modi was blind to the mushrooming of madrasas in the state. Not only that, the previous government headed by Keshubhai Patel too was equally blind to the same. From India Today we know that it was because of fear of harming the BJP’s newly discovered ‘secular’ image that the party did nothing to control the madrasas. It reported in its issue of 18th March 2002: “The general perception is that this was the venting of a latent anti-Muslim sentiment fostered by the unchecked activities of radical Islamic schools in the state. Being debated just as hotly is the question of why the authorities failed to check the blood-letting. Was it because the BJP feared its new-found secular image would suffer if it came down heavily on the fundamentalists? Or was it plain administrative inefficiency?”
So, the BJP did not want to risk losing its ‘secular’ image. Maybe even if there was no such fear, the government would have been neutral and efficient in dealing with riots. But with the NDA allies at stake, ‘secular’ image at stake, and the powerful electronic media which was hostile, BJP Government of Gujarat was definitely determined to prevent riots.
The Gujarat government had to face the most difficult situation in trying to control the post-Godhra riots. That’s because Gujarat is an extremely communally sensitive state and often even minor things like kite flying and cricket matches are enough to cause riots.
To understand this issue fully we have already seen the horrific massacre in Godhra carried out on February 27. Gujarat has along history of communal violence-dating from 1714 AD and in the recent past saw horrible riots in the pre-Independence period of the 1940s and then again riots after Independence. The Times of India in its issue dated 13 April 2002 carried a report saying- “Trivial reasons sparked earlier riots” and begins with the sentence–
“If it took a shocking massacre like Godhra to trigger off massive communal riots in the state in the 21st century, history shows that trivial incidents caused most riots in the 20th century…”
Now the situation was far worse in February 2002- after the gruesome killings in Godhra. But the Godhra killings were not the only cause. At that time, in 2002, there were war clouds between India and Pakistan following the attack on Parliament. There was great anger in Gujarat over terrorism and anti-national activity and over the growth of madarsas. Added to that was the Godhra incident and the rubbing of salts into people’s wounds after Godhra by the media and politicians.
The Telegraph, published from Kolkata, also reported on 1st March 2002: “(On Feb 28) “There is a fire inside us. Our blood is boiling,” Mangalben, a woman from Dariapur, said. “What is the fault of those children who died? There is a volcano of anger.””
In other words-there was a volcano of anger among the masses, whose blood was boiling after the Muslims brutally roasted 59 kar sewaks including 15 children in Godhra.
Steps taken on February 27 (Wednesday)
On 27th February 2002 occurred the Godhra carnage at around 8 AM.
In brief, the steps taken on 27 February (Wednesday) were:
1) The Gujarat Chief Minister, Shri Narendra Modi, rushed from Ahmedabad to Godhra and gave shoot-at-sight orders and imposed curfew at 9:45 am as reported by the English dailies at that time.
Link: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2256789.cms
2) The entire police force of 70,000 was deployed in Gujarat as reported by The Hindustan Times the next day as well as The Telegraph (UK).
3) All companies of Rapid Action Force in the state were deployed in Ahmedabad, Godhra and other sensitive areas by the state government as reported by The Indian Express and Mid-Day on 28 Feb.Congress loyalist weekly Outlook also reported this online on 27 Feb.
http://www.outlookindia.com/printarticle.aspx?214725 (Paragraph 8 of this report).
4) The Central Government rushed CRPF personnel to Gujarat, as reported by The Indian Express and Mid-Day both the next day. The Gujarat Government had requested the Centre to send 10 companies of CRPF personnel as reported by The Times of India.
5) The state government imposed curfew in Godhra at 9:45 am- within 2 hours of the Godhra carnage and in other sensitive areas.
6) 827 preventive arrests were made. Narendra Modi said this in an interview to India Today dated 18 March 2002. India Today of 18 March 2002 admitted preventive arrests without specifying the number. Even the SIT appointed by known anti-Modi judges of the SC like Aftab Alam and Arijit Pasayat admitted 827 preventive arrests.
7) The Prime Minister, Mr. Atal Bihari Vajpayee and the Gujarat Government urged Hindus not to retaliate and maintain peace.
Narendra Modi talked to TV channels in Godhra on 27 Feb evening and urged people to maintain peace and not retaliate. NARENDRA MODI HIMSELF MADE AN APPEAL TO THE PEOPLE TO MAINTAIN PEACE IN AN APPEAL BROADCAST ON NATIONAL TV (DOORDARSHAN) ON 28 FEBRUARY AFTERNOON.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIRMR8zW0iI
8) The RSS and VHP also appealed to Hindus to maintain peace and not retaliate. The RSS appeal was reported by The Telegraph, The Hindu along with weekly Organiser in its issue of 10 March 2002 covering events till 27 Feb (See detailed RSS statement later in Myth 14 and Chapter 2). The VHPs appeals were reported by The Times of India. Gujarat VHP leaders urged ‘Every Hindu to stay indoors the next day i.e. 28 Feb’ while VHP Senior Vice-President Acharya Giriraj Kishore said ‘Hindus should maintain calm and keep patience’.
9) CISF (Central Industrial Security Force) units were also deployed as reported by PTI.
10) The Centre sounded a nationwide alert in the evening as reported by The Indian Express the next day i.e. 28 Feb.
The Daily Breeze, a US newspaper, reported on 28 February:
“Fearing the attack (Godhra train roasting) would ignite sectarian riots, Indian officials immediately stepped up security across this vast, religiously divided nation. The prime minister urged Hindus not to retaliate.”
Even Xinhua news agency also reported this online on 27 February 2002– that Vajpayee appeals for peace.
These were the steps taken by the Gujarat Government on February 27 itself to quell the violence- or prevent the violence. But on February 28, large –scale riots happened. That was due to the extreme anger of the masses over Godhra, the reaction from the media and politicians on it, and great anger over terrorism and anti-national activity.
On February 28 (Thursday)
Now-the government faced genuine difficulties in controlling the anger of the masses in view of the limited police force. India Today dated 18 March 2002 reported:
“Ahmedabad has a police force of 6,000, including 1,500 armed personnel. In addition, the entire state has just four companies (530 jawans) of the Rapid Action Force (RAF) of which only one company could be spared for Ahmedabad. Considering that the mobs that simultaneously surfaced at nearly half a dozen places (on 28 Feb) numbered from 2,000 to 10,000, the forces proved woefully inadequate. At one point on February 28 there were at least 25,000 people targeting the Muslim localities in Ahmedabad alone…
Last Thursday (i.e. Feb 28), the Ahmedabad police received at least 3,500 calls for help from fear-stricken residents, mostly Muslims, against the normal average of 200. The fire brigade which has the capacity to handle 100 fire calls received 400 calls on February 28. Says Ahmedabad Police Commissioner P.C. Pande: “In my 32-year career I have never seen something like this. It was an upsurge, unstoppable and unprecedented. A stage came when it became physically impossible for the police to tackle mobs running into thousands.”
The Hindu also reported the next day that mob fury reached its crescendo on 28 February 2002. The Times of India reported on 2nd March 2002- “Neither the Army nor the shoot-at-sight orders given to the Gujarat police could control the mob frenzy in Ahmedabad on Friday (1st March 2002) as the city witnessed a total collapse of the law and order machinery for the second straight day taking a heavy toll of human lives…”
And this was on 1st March- when the violence was much less as compared to 28 February. If even the Army and shoot-at-sight orders couldn’t control violence when it was much less, what must have been the situation on 28 February- when the Army was not present during the day and the violence was far more?
But the state government dealt with the situation firmly, harshly and effectively.
In brief, the steps taken on 28 February were:
1) The riots began in Ahmedabad at 11 AM. India Today dated 18 March 2002 reported that the Chief Minister Narendra Modi informally contacted the Central Government to send Army at 12 noon – i.e. within 1 hour in an article titled ‘Chronology of a Crisis’. Curfew was imposed by 12:20 at noon at all places and at some places right since morning, even before the riots began from the reports of The Times of India of 28 Feb.
2) As per the report of The Hindu the next day– Narendra Modi “frantically” called the Army units to Gujarat on 28 February.
3) Narendra Modi requested the Union Defence Minister George Fernandes to come to Gujarat as reported by The Indian Express & Times of India the next day as well as India Today.
4) Curfew was imposed in 26 towns and cities in Gujarat as reported by all English dailies the next day and weeklies Outlook and India Today both in their issues dated 11 March covering events till 28 February.
5) There were around 250 people in the housing complex of Ehsan Jafri and the mob killed 69, with the police saving about 200 Muslims despite being overwhelmingly outnumbered by the mob, which was 10,000 strong and the crowd going mad by Jafri’s firing. Police shot dead 5 Hindus outside his house as reported by India Today dated 18 March 2002 and Times of India online of 28 February. The Times’ report at that time said 6 were injured of whom at least 3 were critical and 5 died ultimately.
6) The police fired at least 1,000 rounds (Exact number 1496) in the state including at least 600 in Ahmedabad. These are the official statistics.
7)The police shot dead 10 Hindus in Ahmedabad and injured 16. These are official records and can also be seen from the report of The Hindu the next day where it said:
“At least 30 others were killed in police firing, stabbing and other incidents in different parts of the city while the casualty in other cities and towns in the State was put at over 50…Till evening, police fired 46 rounds in Ahmedabad, in which at least 10 persons were believed to have been killed.”
In fact, the BBC reported online on 28 February when the death toll reported by it was a mere 40 for the entire state of Gujarat i.e. when violence was going on-“The army has been deployed there (Ahmedabad) to counter Hindu youths…They included six people who were shot dead by police in Ahmedabad as they tried to restore calm. (Final figure was 10)”
URL: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1845996.stm
At least 2 were shot dead outside Ahmedabad in Nadiad and Godhra as reported by The Telegraph (Kolkata) the next day.
8) Gujarat Government requested Army deployment within 1 hour. At 4 PM- a press conference was held- in which this decision was publicly announced. All procedures needed for this were done very quickly- Cabinet meeting of Central Government was held at 6:45 PM, it approved Army deployment and Army units reached Ahmedabad after midnight from India Today‘s article Chronology of a Crisis as well as The Indian Express’ report online of 28 Feb.
9) The Army units reached Ahmedabad so quickly that newspapers like The Hindu, The Indian Express had time to report their arrival on 28 February 2002 (Thursday) itself and publish it on 1st March 2002 (Friday)!
10) Defence Minister George Fernandes reached Ahmedabad so quickly that newspapers like The Indian Express reported his arrival the next day!
11) Police escorted 400 Muslims to safe areas and gave them accomodation in Naroda Patiya after dispersing the mob in Naroda Patiya as reported by The Times of India. Total of 95 people were killed- at least 900 Muslims were saved, since The Times of India reports that 1,000 Muslims lived in the attacked area in Naroda Patiya.
12) The Gujarat Government requested neighbouring states to send additional police force. All these states were ruled by the Congress. Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Rajasthan did not send. Only Maharashtra sent a mere 260 personnel.
13)700 people were arrested by the police in the state, including around 80 in Godhra on the very first day of the violence when situation was out of control as reported by The Tribune the next day. The official statistics show that 4297 tear gas shells were also burst, i.e. nearly 4300 tear gas shells burst in the whole state.
Nowhere was it alleged that the police deliberately turned a blind eye to the rioting. No mention of police being involved in the violence or giving a free hand to the rioters. No mention of any delay in calling the Army. These charges of “Police turning a blind eye, allowing killings for 3 days, not calling Army until 3 days had passed…etc” were made after the riots. If these charges were true- the newspapers would have screamed and gone downtown on the very next day. Nothing like this happened. And of course- no charge that the riots were being ‘sponsored’ by the Gujarat Government!
On March 1 (Friday)
The Hindu reported on 2nd March 2002-“ (On 1st March)The Army began flag marches in the worst-affected areas of Ahmedabad, Baroda, Rajkot and Godhra cities and the `shoot at sight’ order was extended to all 34 curfew-bound cities and towns in Gujarat”.
On this day- the violence was much less as compared to 28 February (Thursday). And also the Muslims started a backlash on this day, according to The Hindu dated 2nd March 2002 which reported “But unlike Thursday (Feb 28) when one community was entirely at the receiving end, the minority backlash (On Friday, 1 March) caused further worsening of the situation.”
The steps taken were:
1) On morning of 1st March, George Fernandes bravely took to streets to check violence in Ahmedabad, at a great risk to personal life. He was pummeled with stones. Later he left for Vadodara as reported by The Times of India which praised him, but not Modi who called him in the first place.
2) 24 Hindus were shot dead by police and 40 injured-these are official records. The Indian Express reported on 2nd March-“The police, its credibility lowest than ever, tried to salvage its reputation intervening in some clashes by opening fire. Twenty were killed in police firing across the state, 12 in Ahmedabad.”
There are two things to be noted from this very vital statement. First- the police did their best to control the violence and could not be accused by anyone, even The Indian Express of negligence from this day onward- the second day of the riots i.e. 1st March 2002. And second, there were “clashes” going on between Hindus and Muslims- not one sided massacres of Muslims.
The Indian Express reported on 2nd March, 2002: “(On 1st March) Tension escalated in the walled city areas just before the Friday prayers. There were violent clashes between mobs in Jamalpur, Bapunagar and Rakhial.” Clearly, Muslims were on the offensive. And The Times of India also reported the same day: “There were signs of retaliation in areas like Juhapura, Kalupur, Dariapur and Shahpur….” This clears all possible doubts.
The slight difference in the number of people killed in police firing as per official records and this report is because many injured were alive when The Indian Express wrote this, and died later, so the number of killed in police firing increased. And also, The Indian Express could have deliberately kept the number of people killed lower than the true figure due to its horrible anti-Narendra Modi and anti-BJP bias.
3) The Army staged flag marches in Ahmedabad, Vadodara, Surat and Rajkot’s worst affected areas as reported by The Hindu the next day.
The website www.indianembassy.org reports:
“The next brigade of the Army was also deployed in Rajkot and Vadodara on 1 March 2002 itself. Three columns allotted to Godhra reached in Godhra, Lunawada and Halol on the early morning of 2 March 2002.
Thereafter the Army has been shifted in Surat and Bhavnagar as and when the situation warranted such a shift.”
URL: http://www.indianembassy.org/new/gujarat_02/index.htm
4) Shoot-at-sight orders were extended to all 34 curfew-bound cities and towns in the state.
5) 2500 (Two thousand five hundred) Muslims were saved in Sanjeli, a town in North Gujarat from a crowd of 8000 armed tribals by the police as reported by India Today dated 22 April 2002.
Official records show that people were also saved at other places- date not known to this writer. There are many other instances as well. Some of them are:
- a) 5000 people from the Noorani Mosque area were saved by Ahmedabad Police
- b) 240 people were saved at Sardarpura of Mehsana district and shifted to safer places
- c) 450 were saved in Pore and Nardipur villages of Gandhinagar district and shifted to safer places
- d) 400 were saved in a Madrasa at Bhavnagar
- e) 1,500 were saved at Fatehpura village of Vadodara district
- f) 3,000 people were saved and shifted from Kwan village of Vadodara district
On March 2 (Saturday)
2nd March 2002 was Saturday. On this day also Muslims were aggressive. Ahmedabad was almost completely peaceful on this day, with major violence occurring in other parts of Gujarat. The police brought the situation under control there and fired on pitched battles between Hindus and Muslims. The Tribune reported on 3rd March 2002 that:
“Ahmedabad, the worst hit by the communal flare-up in the wake of Godhra train killings, was virtually back to normal…”
That is, the Gujarat Government managed to control riots in the state in 3 days after Godhra, and in only 2 days in a communally ultra-sensitive place like Ahmedabad! Reports of The Hindu and The Telegraph of 3rd March 2002 also prove that Ahmedabad was virtually back to normal on 2nd March 2002 itself.
Thus, in brief, the steps taken on 2nd March 2002 were:
1) The police fired more than 1031 rounds and burst 1614 tear gas shells.More than this, because this was the figure till the evening after which more were fired.
2) As per the report of The Hindu– at least 47 people were shot dead by the police in Gujarat- 19 in Ahmedabad, 8 in Godhra, 6 in Vadodara, 5 in Anand, 3 each in Mehsana and Gandhinagar, 2 in Kaira and 1 in Bhavnagar.
As per The Indian Express the next day, 77 people were killed in either police or Army firing.
3) Curfew was imposed in 40 places in Gujarat as per The Hindu.
4) Border Security Force units were dispatched to Surat as reported by The Hindu.
5) 2000 Muslims (Two thousand) were saved in Dahod by the Police.
The efforts of Narendra Modi to control the violence can be clearly seen from India Today weekly dated 18 March 2002 in an article titled “Chronology of a Crisis”.
“FEB 27, 2002
8.03 AM: Incident at Godhra claims lives of 57 kar sevaks
8.30 AM: Modi is informed of the carnage. (This could be 9 AM).
4.30PM: Gujarat Assembly adjourned and Modi visits Godhra where he holds a meeting, giving shoot-at-sight orders to the police.
10.30PM:CM holds meeting with senior government officials at Gandhinagar; orderscurfew in sensitive places and pre-emptive arrests.
FEB 28, 2002
8.00 AM: Special control room set up in CM’s house to monitor the situation during VHP bandh.
12.00 PM:Modi informally contacts Centre for calling in army. Cabinet Secretary T.R. Prasad tells Defence Secretary Y. Narain that army is to be mobilised.
12.30PM: Vice-Chief of Army Staff Lt-General N.C. Vij tells Narain that only twocolumns are available as the rest are deployed on the border.
12.35 PM: Prasad directs Narain to advise Chief of Army Staff Gen Padmanabhan to have troops ready due to the rapidly deteriorating situation in Ahmedabad.
12.45PM: Narain tells Vij to arrange immediate movement of troops to Gujarat.
4.00PM:Modi requests army deployment following consultations with Advani.
6.45PM: Cabinet Committee on Security meets under the prime minister’s chairmanship;approves the immediate movement of troops to Ahmedabad and other parts of Gujarat. Vajpayee deputes Fernandes to supervise the deployment of troops.
7.00PM:The Gujarat Government’s formal request for army deployment is received in Delhi.
11.30 PM: Airlifting of troops begins.
MARCH 1, 2002
2.30 AM: A brigade reaches Ahmedabad. The 54th Division’s General Officer Commanding contacts acting Chief Secretary.
9.00AM: Discussions between representatives of the army and the state take place, followed by troop flag march in Ahmedabad.”
Reports from the biased English media also proved that the real riots had stopped in the first three days. Not just that, the media knew it fully well. The following report from The Hindu dated 4th March 2002 will make it clear:
“AHMEDABAD, MARCH 3. The orgy of violence in Gujarat appears to have ended. Today only two deaths were reported, one from Godhra. Officially the death roll is 431, more than half of them in Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad was quiet, apart from two major arson attacks on a Muslim-owned petrol station and warehouse.
Curfew has been lifted in most areas of the 40 towns and cities where clashes were reported, including Naroda and Meghnaninagar (i.e. Gulmarg Society case) in Ahmedabad, where hundreds were killed. The state administration says that curfew will be relaxed in more areas tomorrow. There was a `sense of normality in the State’ today.
But, the smouldering remains of burnt-out buildings and the acrid smell of burning rubber, five days after the violence began, are a reminder that `normality’ in Ahmedabad is a very long way off.”
URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2002/03/04/stories/2002030403090100.htm
This newspaper report clearly proves that the government claim of controlling the riots in 72 hours was absolutely true.
After 3rd March 2002, the riots were mostly all instigated and started by the Muslims and they were limited only to Ahmedabad, Vadodara and some places near Godhra in Panchmahal district.
Like in Sanjeli where 2,500 Muslims were saved, 5,000 Muslims were also saved in Bodeli, a town in Vadodara district, from a crowd of over 7,000. The following is another report quoted from India Today dated 8 April 2002:
“When a Muslim woman was burnt alive by Hindu zealots, (in Viramgam, not far from Ahmedabad) the minorities, who constitute almost 30 % of the 70,000-odd population went on the rampage. Soon, nearly 15,000 Hindus from nearby villages encircled Viramgam and targeted the Muslim localities in the town. It took some deft handling by the police and the Army to save the day.”
And in the 22 April issue India Today said-
“…Take Sanjeli. In the carnage that ensued after the February 27 Godhra killings, 8,000 armed tribals descended on the town of 8,000 in the tribal heartland of Dahod district. Bows, stones and gunshots rained on the fleeing Muslims, killing 15. Police intervention meant another 2,500 were spared a savage death … In an identical display of insanity, around 7,000 armed tribals marched into Bodeli town in Chotte-Udepur tribal area of Vadodara district intent on massacring the Muslims who had taken shelter there after being driven out of the neighbouring villages. While hundreds were saved by the police, Vadodara District Collector Bhagyesh Jha and other senior officers were fired upon by tribals as they tried to rescue the trapped Muslims.
Tragedy was also averted by the police and army at Viramgam town near Ahmedabad where over 15,000 Hindus, mostly armed OBC Thakores, burnt 250 Muslim houses…”
http://www.india-today.com/itoday/20020422/states.shtml
That is to say, the Gujarat police and the Indian Army together saved thousands of Muslims, of the 21,000-odd of the town. If we assume that there was no police or Army presence, 10,000 Muslims of the town may have been killed. On the basis of records available to this writer, we can conclusively say that the Gujarat Police saved at least 17,500 Muslims in Gujarat. As a matter of fact, many sources have told this writer that the Gujarat Police saved 24,000 Muslims in the state in the first three days alone. They may well be quite correct, since we already have on record 7,500 Muslims saved in Sanjeli and Bodeli in the first three days.
The website www.indianembassy.org seems to be an official site of the Indian Embassy in USA. It says-
“In Mora village of Panchmahal district, SDM, Mamlatdar and police rushed to the spot where the crowd was gathered, dispersed the crowd and saved the lives of 400 people by shifting them to a safe place.
On receipt of information on 3rd March 2002 a madarsa in Asoj, in Vagodia, Vadodara district was likely to be attacked, nearly 40 persons including 22 children were evacuated to a safe place.
On the night of 2/3 March 2002, in Dahod, the police escorted over 2000 persons belonging to minority community to a safe place, rescuing them from the mob that had gathered from surrounding 28 villages.
In Surat city, protection was provided to about 60 persons and mosque in Nana Varacha area.On receipt of information that some women and children were trapped in a mosque, Surat police escorted them to a safe place.
On receipt of information that 100 persons were trapped near Rita society opposite Yateem Khana Jain Mandir, the police immediately rushed there and dispersed the mob, but found no persons trapped inside. Surat police immediately provided protection requested for by 12-15 houses of Muslims near Khoja Masjid.
See link: http://www.indianembassy.org/new/gujarat_02/index.htm
The riots were brought under control in 72 hours. Police records and figures given by the Union Home Ministry as well as figures given by The Times of India dated 7th March 2002 reveal that as many as 98 people were killed in the first three days in police firing. We have already looked at the reports The Indian Express and The Hindu to know that the figure of 98 people being shot dead in the first 3 days is indeed true. This was a record of sorts. Never before were so many people shot dead in police firing for rioting in so few days in the entire history of communal riots in India, and certainly not in Gujarat, which saw far worse riots in 1969 and 1985.
In the entire state of Gujarat, there are 18,600 villages, 240 municipal towns and 25 district headquarters. In the entire state, riots occurred in no more than 70 places. If you include the two big cities of Ahmedabad and Vadodara, by the maximum stretch of imagination, it can be said that 2 % of the state was affected by riots, or was in flames.
The Times of India in a report dated 28 April 2002 reported that “Of the total substantive arrests made by the police, 9,954 are Hindus and 4,035 Muslims. However, in the preventive arrests column, the statistics show that the number of Hindus arrested is much higher — 17,947 as against 3,616 Muslims.”
To quell the violence:
1-Not only did the Gujarat government call the Army as early as possible but also declared this decision publicly on February 28th evening.
2-The Gujarat police arrested nearly 25,204 out of the 25, 486 accused.
3-More than 17,000 of the 25,000 arrested were Hindus.
4-Police fired over 10,500 rounds of bullets-including around 4,000 in the first 3 days, though Army was present for 73 out of 74 days.
5-Police fired over 15,000 tear gas shells.
6-98 people were killed in police firing in the first 3 days- and 170 for the entire period of the riots.
7-The police arrested 35,552 people as on 28 April 2002 out of whom 27,901 were Hindus. About 20,000 were preventive arrests.
Far from the BJP being in any way involved in the riots, rivals of the then Chief Minister of Gujarat instigated riots in the state after 21stApril 2002 so as to target Narendra Modi in their Modi-hatao campaign. The Rajya Sabha debated on Gujarat on 6 May 2002. The NDA allies’ votes were also going to count. To get NDA allies to vote against the Modi government, the Opposition wanted to keep the riots going on in Gujarat. It also hoped for a collapse of the NDA, with allies quitting coalition because of the riots.
Riots in the first three days were all the result of Godhra. But Godhra itself was the brain of local Muslim Congress leaders. The Indian Express of 5 March 2002 reported on Godhra that Congress leaders are accused in Godhra:
1- Mehmud Hussain Kalota, convenor of the Congress district minority cell and president of the Godhra municipality.
2-Salim Abdul Ghaffar Sheikh, president of the Panchmahal Youth Congress.
3-Abdul Rehman Abdul Majid Ghantia, a known Congress worker.
4-Faroukh Bhana, secretary of the district Congress committee.
5- Haji Bilal, a known Congress worker.
When 31 people were convicted for the Godhra carnage, one Congressman was given life imprisonment and one was given death penalty out of the above five, while Faroukh Bhana was absconding, and convicted later after being caught. Abdul Rehman Abdul Majid Ghantia got life imprisonment and Haji Bilal got death penalty—two out of these five. The Gujarat High Court also upheld their conviction, but gave all of them life imprisonment reducing the death penalty to one of them on 9 October 2017. http://www.rediff.com/news/report/the-men-convicted-for-godhra-carnage/20110222.htm
Nos 2 and 3 in this list are the above-mentioned Congress people. Later when 2 more Muslims were convicted in August 2018, Faroukh Bhana, who had been been absconding since 2002 was also convicted.
The following was the report of NDTV dated 3rd March, 2002:
“Sunday, March 3, 2002 (Godhra)
The prime suspect in the Godhra train carnage case, Mohammad Hussain Kolota, local Congress leader and president of Godhra Municipality, was today arrested, bringing the total number of arrests in connection with the attack to 27. Kolota, convener of city Congress minority cell, was picked up by personnel of the anti-dacoity squad of the city police from the residence of one Iqbal in Polan Bazar area during a combing operation at about 4 a.m. (IST), Inspector General of Police, Deepak Swaroop said. Kolota, 45, has been evading arrest since the attack on the Sabarmati Express last Wednesday, in which 58 people were killed.
Police have already arrested two municipal councillors and were looking for another two—Bilal Haji and Farookh Bhana—in connection with the mayhem that led to widespread communal violence in several parts of Gujarat, claiming more than 300 lives.
Kolota, who practised law in the town, reportedly joined Congress six years back, informed sources said in Godhra. Others arrested from different places were identified as Siraj Jamsa, Zabir Kala, Abdul Sheikh and Abdul Rauf Yayman…Earlier, police had arrested 22, including two councillors—Salim Shaikh and Abdul Rahim Dantia. Both the councillors had contested the polls on independent symbols (PTI).”
http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/mar/03train5.htm Even NDTV reported this PTI News.
On 28 Aug 2018, 2 more were convicted and given life term for Godhra. With the verdict, total 33 have been convicted. 8 more accused are absconding. Faroukh Bhana was absonding, but caught later, and has been convicted and given life imprisonment on 28 August 2018, and he was Congress’s District secretary.
The Indian Express reported on 28 August 2018:
“A special trial court here on Monday sentenced two more accused — Farukh Bhana and Imran alias Sheru Batuk — to life imprisonment in the 2002 Sabarmati Express train burning case at Godhra railway station that led to communal riots in Gujarat.
Special judge H C Vora acquitted three others — Hussain Suleman Mohan, Kasam Bhamedi and Faruk Dhantiya. They were among the six arrested by different agencies between 2015 and 2016. Another accused, Sabir Abdul Gani Pataliya, had died during pendency of the trial.
Among the two convicted on Monday, Farukh Bhana, in his 50s, was the sitting corporator of Polan-Bazar area of Godhra municipality in February 2002 when the train was set on fire, killing 59 people, and was on the run since then. It was alleged that on the night of February 26, 2002, Bhana and other accused held a meeting at Aman Guest House near the Godhra railway station as part of their conspiracy to set ablaze the S6 coach of the Sabarmati Express. He was arrested by Gujarat Anti-Terrorist Squad in May 2016 from a toll plaza in Panchmahals where he had come to meet his family members.
Sheru Batuk, who has also been sentenced to life imprisonment, was convicted of conspiracy and being part of the mob. He was arrested by Ahmedabad Detection of Crime Branch in 2016 from Malegaon in Maharashtra.
Special Additional Public Prosecutor N N Prajapati said, “While Bhana was the mastermind of the attack, Batuk was actually leading the mob…”
On March 1, 2011, the special SIT court had convicted 31 people, out of whom 11 were given death sentence and 20 were sentenced to life imprisonment.
In October last year, the Gujarat High Court commuted the death sentence awarded to 11 convicts to life term. All 31 convicts have moved the Supreme Court challenging the High Court’s order.”
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 9: Gujarat riots were like the 1984 anti-Sikh riots
Fact: There was a contrast of day and night in these two riots. NDTV and company, and some stark liars deliberately misled the nation by equating the two riots. In May-June 2005, NDTV deliberately asked a question to its viewers in its programme “Khabron ki Khabar” (anchored by Vinod Dua): “Which of these issues are
Fact: There was a contrast of day and night in these two riots. NDTV and company, and some stark liars deliberately misled the nation by equating the two riots. In May-June 2005, NDTV deliberately asked a question to its viewers in its programme “Khabron ki Khabar” (anchored by Vinod Dua):
“Which of these issues are you most bothered about?
1-Sachin Tendulkar’s injury
2-A question on films
3-The blot on BJP and the Congress for the Gujarat and 1984 riots”
This question’s options, just like any other of NDTV, are typically Marxist. Option 3 belies the reality and equates the 1984 riots with the Gujarat riots, and directly accuses the BJP of orchestrating the riots. (An article on some facts about the media can be read here “NDTV is CPM Today“. And another article which is worth reading is “The channels strategy of attacks”. Note that these articles are purely the view of the blogger and not of Gujaratriots.com )
The next chapter will comprehensively point out the differences between the Gujarat riots and the 1984 riots. In 1984, the Sikhs were butchered. In 2002, Muslims attacked Hindus and as many as 254 Hindus were killed in the Gujarat riots. In 1984, riots occurred outside New Delhi, including places like West Bengal, Tripura, while not a single riot occurred outside Gujarat in 2002.
In 1984, officially 3,000 Sikhs were killed. Not a single Congressman was killed in 1984 riots (except Indira Gandhi) while as many as 313 Hindus were killed in Gujarat in 2002 AD, including 59 karsevaks killed in Godhra.
Not even one person was killed in 1984 in police firing, while 199 people were killed in police firing in the Gujarat riots of 2002 AD. 40,000 Hindus were living in refugee camps in Gujarat, while not even a single relief camp was organized for the Sikhs in 1984, not to talk of any Congressman needing to live in refugee camps, as per ex-Director General of Police, B P Singhal. Not only was there a huge difference in the nature of the riots- there was also a huge difference in the government handling of the riots.
There are many more details of these contrasts. For full details of these contrasts- see the next chapter. Click on the link:
http://www.gujaratriots.com/category/07-contrasts-between-1984-and-gujarat-2002-riots/
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 10: Gujarat became a dangerous place to live in, in 2002
Fact: The opinion poll by the weekly India Today in its issue dated 25 November 2002 asked a question to its respondents- “Do you feel secure living in Gujarat today?” in which approximately 68 % people including around 56 % Muslims felt secure. While commenting on the entire poll, India Today reported, “Voters have rallied
Fact: The opinion poll by the weekly India Today in its issue dated 25 November 2002 asked a question to its respondents- “Do you feel secure living in Gujarat today?” in which approximately 68 % people including around 56 % Muslims felt secure. While commenting on the entire poll, India Today reported, “Voters have rallied solidly behind the chief minister’s aggressive posturing. They have endorsed his view of the riots being a reaction to Godhra. They approve his fulmination against outsiders who have vilified the state. And they contemptuously dismiss all suggestions that Gujarat has become a dangerous place to live in.”
To see the full India Today report see this link:
http://archives.digitaltoday.in/indiatoday/20021125/cover2.html
The newspaper editors lied along with 24-hour TV news channels like NDTV that the whole of Gujarat was burning. Living outside Gujarat and lying about the state, their lies did not go well with the masses. The media lied to such an unimaginable extent that the media itself by now may have started believing its concocted lies.(An article on some facts about the media can be read here “NDTV is CPM Today“. And another article which is worth reading is “The channels strategy of attacks”. Note that these articles are purely the view of the blogger and not of Gujaratriots.com )
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Myth 12: The photo of Qutubuddin Ansari is genuine
Fact: This photo is reproduced here in this book on page 136. This photo has been used repeatedly to tarnish the name of BJP, VHP and the Bajrang Dal throughout India. The victim, Qutubuddin Ansari, is seen pleading for mercy to the rioters. Later he is shown in Kolkata, living happily on the help given
Fact:
This photo is reproduced here in this book on page 136. This photo has been used repeatedly to tarnish the name of BJP, VHP and the Bajrang Dal throughout India. The victim, Qutubuddin Ansari, is seen pleading for mercy to the rioters. Later he is shown in Kolkata, living happily on the help given by the West Bengal government which is of the CPI (M) and Left parties. Many questions that arise, (and some of which were raised by the then RSS chief K S Sudarshan in his speech in Nagpur on 4thOctober 2003) are:
1-A MASSIVE CLUE IS GOT ON THIS PHOTO BEING FAKE (means taken after the incident by the photographer asking the victim to pose thus, or taken when Ansari was genuinely in such a position but definitely after the incident was over) looking at the bandage on the poor victim’s face. This suggests that after the incident was over, bandage was applied to his face, and then the photo was clicked. If this photo was clicked with the mob targeting him and he pleading a bloodthirsty mob for mercy, how did he have the time to apply bandage on his face?
2-Also, it seems scarcely believable that the victim is pleading to rioters to spare his life on the first floor of the building, no rioter is seen in the photo, the photographer Arko Dutta was present at that very moment in that building to snap this in his camera and the rioters did nothing to either the photographer or the victim and allowed him to snap such a clear photo of the victim.We have utmost sympathies for the victim, Mr Qutubuddin Ansari since he was no doubt a victim of the riots. But that cannot be a license to concoct a fake photo and circulate it the world over instigating innocent people to terrorism.
3-If Mr Qutubuddin Ansari was seen pleading for mercy to rioters on the first floor of a building, how is it that no rioter is seen in the photo?
4-How and why did the rioters leave him alive and not kill him?
5-How was the photographer allowed to take the photo by the rioters? Why did they not attack him?
6-How, at least, did the rioters not destroy his camera if they would have left both Ansari and the photographer alive?
And a couple more:
7-Can the photographer, Mr. Arko Datta of the Reuters, explain any of the above questions?
8- Can Mr Ansari answer any of the above questions and other questions which may be raised on this issue now that he lives happily in Kolkata? (He has since returned to Gujarat). Here it must be said that the poor victim Qutubuddin Ansari is reported to have said “This photo was taken after the mob had left my house. The police were there and I was very scared and at this time the photo was clicked”. This is what has been said by a senior journalist of Gujarat. However, we could not get such a newspaper report available today on the web. But to be fair, we also could not get any report in which Ansari claims to be pleading before a mob to spare his life. So it is possible that Qutubuddin Ansari himself denies that he was pleading to a blood-mercy mob. In this report it is said by a Muslim website itself that he was pleading to security forces (after the mob had left) and not to a blood-thirsty mob.
http://www.indianmuslimobserver.com/2013/02/face-of-gujarat-riots-qutubuddin-ansari.html
Someone must now pin-pointedly ask him about this. If Mr Ansari claims that he indeed was pleading before a bloodthirsty mob, then it must be asked to him as to how he had bandage applied on his face. The poor guy is also fed up of the constant use of his photo and harassment and has urged the media to leave him alone many times, starting from as early as August 2003.
We repeat here that we have utmost sympathies for the victim, Mr Qutubuddin Ansari since he was no doubt a victim of the riots. But that cannot be a license to concoct a fake photo and circulate it the world over instigating innocent people to terrorism.
These are just 2 of the true photos of Godhra victims. Will the media dare to show them worldwide? NDTV and CNN-IBN will never, in their wildest of dreams think of showing these photos, which are true, but circulate the fake photo of Qutubuddin Ansari worldwide which is highly inflammatory. The lies of the media have caused many innocent Muslims to turn fanatics. If the Muslims (and also our own liberals) had known the guilt of Islam in roasting Hindus in Godhra, and seen the gruesome photos of Godhra, they would not have been needlessly instigated by the post-Godhra riots (which were also not one-sided).
This tale of lies and myths is unending. It can go on and on and on. An enterprising writer would do well to compile an encyclopedia of these media lies on the entire Gujarat scenario. He can start with media lies on Godhra, on concocting imaginary ‘provocations’ for Godhra, the lies concocted on the post-Godhra riots-such as the extent of the riots, the number of people killed, the imaginary tales and stories of unnamed victims, the rapes and murders of innocent people, etc etc. And he can conclude with the media’s malicious reporting during the Gujarat Assembly elections of December 2002 when the media was the Congress’ pillar and tried to defeat the BJP. The BJP, which suffers the maximum damage from these lies, has unwisely allowed the media to escape the courts for one-sided, malicious lies.The real photos are reproduced here. The media especially TV channels like NDTV and CNN-IBN will never dare to show these pictures- though they are true, and circulate the false photo of Qutubuddin Ansari worldwide.
http://www.gujaratriots.com/89/godhra-photos/
(An article on some facts about the media can be read here “NDTV is CPM Today“. And another article which is worth reading is “The channel’s strategy of attacks”. Note that these articles are purely the view of the blogger and not of Gujaratriots.com )
Copyright © Gujaratriots.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________
You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom
After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:
https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline
Leave A Comment