#India – Narendra Modi Slide Show to woo Muslims


MODI1

Shaheen Khan Naqshbandi

So Modi Ji is now wooing Muslims. Hmm. Interesting!

At a function yesterday, Modi Ji agreed to see a PowerPoint Presentation
about Muslims of Gujarat. I cannot help but wonder whether the PowerPoint
Presentation had the following Slides:

1)…a slide where, during the riots, he said, “Hinduoon ko apni badaas
nikaalne do”.

2)…a slide where he was in Police Control Room listening to everything and
doing nothing to stop the riots.

3)…a slide where ‘Safed Daadhi’ gave the approval to Vanzara to kill
scores of innocent Muslims like Ishrat Jahan in cold-blood.

4)…a slide where he ridiculed young Muslim boys as being future ‘garage
mechanics’.

5)…a slide where he called Muslims with the prefix “Mian” in contempt.

6)…a slide where no Muslim candidate was given ticket in the Assembly
elections.

7)…a slide where he refused to put on the Muslim cap, while he puts on
headgears of all other ethnicities and communities in his functions.
… a slide where tens of thousands of Muslims have still not been
rehabilitated even after 10 years of riots.

9)…a slide where ghettos where Muslim were forced to live after riots are
ignored by municipality.

10)…a slide where Modi fought a case in High Court against granting
scholorship to poor Muslim students.

11)…a slide where Maya Kodnani was promoted to Minister of State for Women
& Child Development AFTER she sucessfully conspired to kill 97 Muslims, MOST
of who were Women & Children

………

The SlideShow without these slides is simply incomplete in order to depict
the LOVE & RESPECT that Modi Ji has for Muslims.

 

Three questions for Madhu Kishwar


JUNE 13, 2013
Guest post by DILIP D’SOUZA

Dear Madhu,

20+ years ago, I picked you up at the airport in Austin and you stayed at my home there for a few days. You had come there to deliver a lecture, as I’m sure you remember. We developed a friendship based on a degree of mutual respect and liking. I think you’ll agree? Several years after that I remember a stimulating afternoon sitting with you in Panchgani, catching up on many things and discussing various issues threadbare.

We haven’t met in some years now, but I’m going to call on the privilege of our 20+ years of friendship as I write these lines.

I have no problem at all with your desire to learn about Gujarat and Narendra Modi for yourself. Nor with your desire to see beyond what you’ve called the “targeting” of Modi. Nor with your speaking in support of Modi: if there are people who criticize Modi, I understand and accept that there are those who support him — it’s a democracy we live in after all. Nor with your speaking your mind: you have always done so and it’s the least I expect from you. (In turn, it’s the least you should expect from me).

No Madhu, I have no problem with any of that. And I’m not going to get into debates about Gujarat’s development (as with most things, there are multiple ways of looking at it). Not even into debates about what Modi did or did not do in 2002 to stop the massacres. I travelled there in that time and I have my own opinions, but I realize others see things differently.

There are probably three things I do have problems with.

One is in your reply to Zahir Janmohammed. Your third sentence there says his letter “annoyed me no end.” Your sixth sentence says “my annoyance kept increasing at your jaundiced viewpoint.” It seemed to me this set the tone for the whole reply. So I’d like to ask: Zahir’s viewpoint is clearly and dramatically different from yours; does that necessarily mean it is “jaundiced”?

These are wrenching, divisive issues you and he and all of us are grappling with. I can’t deny they get people on all sides annoyed. But you actually end your letter to Zahir by saying we need to “know how to bridge divides rather than widen them”. How do we bridge divides if we start out by calling the other guy “jaundiced”? What happened to respecting the other guy’s views and engaging with them? Is it not conceivable that some might see your views as jaundiced? And if so, what if they began a note to you by saying “I’m annoyed by your jaundiced views”? Would you feel like continuing a dialogue with such a person?

After all, I didn’t agree with some of what you said that afternoon in Panchgani (among other things, we discussed the RSS). Yet I think you will agree, if you remember that conversation, that I didn’t call your opinions jaundiced, and that it was indeed a stimulating afternoon.

I don’t know if you think this is a trivial thing. But I don’t. I think this is fundamental to any attempt at understanding and dialogue. And given the divisions and polarization I see around me, we need dialogue more than ever. Or the anger and hatred, I fear, will one day consume us all.

The second is your criticism of Teesta Setalvad (for example, in your interview with News Livehere) — among other things, for all that’s happened with the SIT. Npw I will support fully your right to disagree with Teesta. But surely you know — to pick just one thing to wonder about — of the discrepancies between the preliminary and final SIT reports? For example look at a couple of side-by-side excerpts here. What happened to “The explanation given by Shri Modi is unconvincing and it definitely hinted at the growing minority population” in the preliminary report?

This is the kind of thing that has people, and not just Teesta, asking serious questions about the SIT report.

The third is one Kodnani. For me, one thing about 2002 stands out and so many years later, I cannot see any way to suppress its implications. In 2007, after he won the Gujarat Assembly elections, Modi actually appointed Maya Kodnani as his Minister of Women’s Development and Child Welfare. He did this despite knowing what she had done in 2002 (for which she is now in prison). We know so because Modi’s own government, in which Kodnani was a Minister, actually filed an affidavit in the High Court in 2009 saying Kodnani “was the leader of mob … she was instigating the mob to commit crime and therefore she was playing the main role.” What’s more, “she is a minister in the present government, so there are ample chances of tampering with prosecution witnesses by way of giving threat.” (See this article for some details).

Overseeing the welfare of Gujarat’s children and its women’s development for a period a few years ago was a lady doctor who, a few years before that, had orchestrated the murder in Naroda-Patiya of 90+ Gujaratis, including 34 children and 32 women. Knowing that history, Modi appointed her to that position.

It’s simple, then: A man who knowingly appoints a murderer as Minister of Women’s Development and Child Welfare is not a man I want to see as PM of this country. It astonishes me that anyone would.

Good luck, Madhu. As always, I wish you only the best.

Yours,
Dilip

 

The Candidate- Why Narendra Modi defends the undefendable


MODI1

Aakar Patel, Asian Age

Should ministers who murder their citizens not be pun ished? There is no answer from Gujarat’s chief minister Narendra Modi to this question.

 

A court has convicted his minister for women and child welfare Maya Kodnani to 28 years for rioting. She is currently in jail serving this sentence.

She supervised the murder of 98 Gujaratis in Ahmedabad, including three dozen children and women. The victims of the violence have specifically said after her conviction that they do not want her to be hanged, and that the 28 year sentence is enough.

 

However, the special investigating team that gathered evidence against the minister recommended to the state government that it should seek Kodnani’s hanging.

 

Last month, for some reason of its own, the state government first accepted that Kodnani would be hanged. And on May 14, Mr Modi decided this was a mistake and took back the state government’s recommendation of the death penalty. It was reported that the government is relooking at the matter, but what is clear is that a decision earlier taken is now again being thought over.

 

So what does Mr Modi want?

The fact is that Mr Modi has not even accepted Kodnani’s guilt, leave alone wanting the quantum of her punishment to be increased. When asked by reporters to comment, he says he cannot because the matter is subjudice (because Kodnani has appealed her conviction) though the truth is that he is wrong, since the case has already been adjudicated.

 

In fact, quite shamefully, he has made no statement on her at all. This is despite the fact that he gave her a ticket and then made her a minister while very serious allegations confronted her.

 

One problem he has is that in the 18 years that the BJP has ruled Gujarat, the state has become aggressively Hindutva-minded.

Large parts of the population and the entire group of the Sangh Parivar rejects the idea that any Hindus should be punished merely for retaliating against what they see as Muslim provocation.

 

There is enormous pressure on the government in this matter from these quarters. They are aghast that a Hindu minister should be held accountable.

 

The other aspect is that Mr Modi himself feels this way. He is, after all, a lifetime Sangh man. And believes, in my opinion wrongly, that the rest of the country is going to see it from his perspective.

The media will actually not let go of this Kodnani issue and only negatives can accrue to Mr Modi from this mistake. In an earlier column I noted that Mr Modi has been able to successfully keep separate his mismanagement of the riots from his agenda of development. He has done this well and because of it can deflect the negative attention that his antiMuslim and communal views bring. Such mistakes as he is making in the Kodnani issue bring his nasty side to the fore.

He will pay a price politically every time he fumbles on this.

 

The second person that Mr Modi thinks should not be punished is the thuggish Babu Bajrangi. From the Patel caste that is the BJP’s votebank and which dominates Gujarat’s Cabinet, Bajrangi is a man Mr Modi doesn’t want to alienate.

 

So keen is Mr Modi to appease the Patels that four out of nine ministers in his previous Cabinet and three out of seven in the current one are Patels.

 

Bajrangi became famous for forcibly undoing the marriages of Muslim boys with Hindu girls. He actively participated in the riots and was also convicted along with Kodnani. He represents the worst sort of Hindutva -crude, vulgar and violent -and it is a shame that even such people are being given a free pass by Mr Modi.

 

As I have said, the victims have specifically said they do not want the death penalty. This game is one that Mr Modi is playing against nobody in particular, and it is one that will damage him.

 

Naroda Patiya case: Modi government does a U-turn on Kodnani, Bajrangi #deathpenalty


CNN-IBN | Updated May 14, 2013

Ahmedabad: In a U-turn of sorts, the Gujarat state legal department has written to the chief prosecutor in the Naroda Patiya massacre case, seeking approval for enhancement of punishment for BJP leader Maya Kodnani and Bajrang Dal’s Babu Bajrangi to be put on hold. The legal department wants the punishment to be put on hold until further instructions.

Earlier the department had given a sanction to the Special Investigation Team to file an application in the High Court seeking death sentence for Maya Kodnani, Babu Bajrangi and nine others. 97 persons were killed in Naroda Patiya during the 2002 Gujarat riots.

In 2012, a special court had sentenced Maya Kodnani to 28 years in jail for the massacre in Naroda Patiya. Kodnani is the sitting MLA from Naroda Patiya.

 

Kodnani, a three-time MLA from Naroda area, who was considered to be close to Chief Minister Narendra Modi, is the first woman and first MLA to be convicted and sentenced in a post-Godhra riots case.

Kodnani was the minister of women and child development in the Narendra Modi government but was forced to resign after a case was lodged against her in the Naroda Patiya massacre of 2002.

The trial court had convicted 32 people and acquitted 29 others in the Naroda Patiya massacre case which took place during the 2002 Gujarat riots.

The Naroda Patiya massacre is the largest single case of mass murder during the 2002 Gujarat riots that broke out following the Sabarmati Express train carnage near Godhra station. The case has been probed by a Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigating Team (SIT).

As many as 327 witnesses, comprising eye witnesses, victims, doctors, police personnel, government officials, forensic experts and journalists including Ashish Khetan, who conducted a TV sting operation on the accused, were examined by the court.

 

#Gujarat- Death for Kodnani move to warn Advani, deflect Zakia?


Gujarat EDN

TOI 18APR2013

Turmoil In State Sangh Parivar

TIMES NEWS NETWORK
Ahmedabad: The Gujarat government’s clearance on Monday of the file put forth by the special investigations team that recommended death penalty for former minister Maya Kodnani, instead of a life term, in the Naroda Patia massacre of 2002 has brought about turmoil in the entire Sangh Parivar in Gujarat. The file had been submitted to the legal department in September 2012 and the timing is most discussed.
In an interview to BBC on January 28 this year, BJP president Rajnath Singh had said that Maya Kodnani is innocent and the party will fully support her in the legal battle. But the move on Monday against Kodnani is now being seen with suspicion by even Parivar insiders because Kodnani’s loyalties lie with L K Advani.
Kodnani’s parents, who have a strong Parivar background, had met RSS supremo Mohan Bhagwat in Ahmedabad last fortnight and requested him to use his good offices to help Kodnani. Many local RSS stalwarts had supported the impassioned plea from the family.
The timing of the clearance of the file is important as it comes seven months after the SIT submitted the report and deflects attention from Zakia Jafri protest petition against chief minister Narendra Modi with thousands of pages of wireless messages and call data record as evidence that Modi government knew about the violence in advance. Also, it comes on the heels of a section of the BJP and NDA favouring Advani as PM.
The change in government’s stance is stark. In 2009, when Kodnani was granted bail and SIT wanted bail cancellation, the Modi government replied to SIT that Maya is innocent and denied permission. Even during trial, Kodnani was not arrested.
Kodnani was sentenced to 28 years in jail August 2012 with 30 others for their role in the Naroda Patiya massacre. Kodnani, a three-time Naroda MLA, was identified in the court by 11 survivors as a mob leader.
Kodnani, a gynaecologist inducted as minister of state for women and child development by Modi in 2007, is the first former minister to be found guilty in any case relating to the riots.
VHP opposes move
Ahmedabad: The VHP leadership in Gujarat is up in arms against the state government’s decision to seek death penalty for former state minister Maya Kodnani and nine others in the 2002 Naroda Patia massacre case.

Kodnani seeks suspension of sentence

Former minister and a convict in the Naroda Patia massacre case, Maya Kodnani has requested the Gujarat high court to suspend the sentence against her and to release her on bail till her appeal against the conviction is decided.
Special judge Jyotsna Yagnik sentenced her to 28-year imprisonment after holding her guilty of participation in the killing of 97 people on February 28, 2002. The court held that she was the kingpin of the massacre and had incited the mob to resort to violence. She was sentenced on August 31 last year.
Kodnani has sought suspension of her sentence mainly on the ground that her appeal against conviction is not likely to be heard soon. Moreover, she has also contended that her appeal has good merit and there is likelihood of her succeeding in it. She has stated in her petition that the lower court had not evaluated evidence in proper manner and ignored constant improvisation on part of witnesses. She has also questioned the lower court’s decision to admit the electronic evidence in form of the sting operation, which contains extra-judicial confessions of Kodnani’s co-accused like Babu Bajrangi and Suresh Langdo.
Demanding bail, Kodnani has contended that she has deep roots in society and is not likely to abscond. TNN

Sanction to SIT a clever ploy: Activist
S ocial activist Cedric Prakash has dubbed the sanctio n granted by the state government to the SIT for seeking harsher punishment for Maya Kodnani and others in Naroda Patia case as “a very clever ploy to defocus from more important issues”. “The ruse now is to deflect from the protest petition filed by Zakia Jafri, which definitely names people and the events during the carnage,” he stated, adding that the state government had in fact promoted Kodnani to the ministry even after knowing her role in the massacre. TNN

 

Gujarat Riots peaked after Kodnani’s arrival: Court #Narendramodi


 

 

Special court said that Maya Kodnani had done nothing to restore peace in the riot-torn Naroda Patia
Nikunj Soni l Ahmedabad

Special judge Dr Jyotsna Yagnik who conducted the trial in the Naroda Patia murder case, noted in her verdict that, according to eyewitnesses, the riots had intensified and peaked after the arrival of Naroda MLA Maya Kodnani. The court also set aside Kodnani’s defence that she was at the Gujarat assembly during the massacre and that she had become a victim of political conspiracy.

“As far as Kodnani and other leaders of the communal riot are concerned, and as far as other accused leaders who were admittedly members of the Peace Committee of the Sardarnagar police station and Naroda police station are concerned, they have not been found to have done any act of a peace agent or a pacifying agent,” said the court in its judgment. “The CD provided by the accused [Kodnani] shows that the accused was in the Legislative Assembly up to 8:40 a.m. of February 28, 2002. This court is of the opinion that Gandhinagar and Ahmedabad are twin cities and that it is hardly at a distance of 30 km from Ahmedabad,” the court said.

It further said that if Kodnani was relieved at 8:40 a.m. (as had been claimed by her), it could not have been difficult for her to reach Naroda Patia after 9 a.m. “In the records of this case, the witnesses have stated that all the disturbances were started and, in fact, reached a peak after the arrival of Kodnani,” the court said.

It further said that if Kodnani had not provoked Hindus (as had been argued by the defence), then there was nothing on record to show that she had played the role of a pacifying agent. “She had not done anything to stop the massacre; she had not instructed even the police officers to stop the lawlessness at the site,” the court observed.

Regarding the role of the state police in shielding Kodnani, the court said: “This court is not sitting in an ivory tower and is conscious of the hard realities of the system. In the system, normally if a police officer knows the desire of the political leader, the officer would not leave a single stone unturned to give all colours to such desire.” The court further said that to respect and to give ‘colours’ to the desire of Kodnani, the police had taken all care to ensure that the statements of all the eyewitnesses repeated the same thing.

 

Archives

Kractivism-Gonaimate Videos

Protest to Arrest

Faking Democracy- Free Irom Sharmila Now

Faking Democracy- Repression Anti- Nuke activists

JAPA- MUSICAL ACTIVISM

Kamayaninumerouno – Youtube Channel

UID-UNIQUE ?

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 6,233 other followers

Top Rated

Blog Stats

  • 1,762,933 hits

Archives

October 2019
M T W T F S S
« Jun    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  
%d bloggers like this: