Some Questions on Narendra Modi and Gujarat riots

Indian flag created out of a collage of photographs by Dinesh Cyanam, based on his work with India - A multitude of people and cultures.

A reader left an outraged comment defending Narendra Modi’s honor. I must admit I have not encountered them being answered. I have not thought enough on the subject to answer reliably. Reproducing them here, if anyone wants to give it a shot. [Note: Read to end before commenting]

In quote below, “I” is the writer, Dhananjay. “Author” is me, Vidyut.

  1. Author conveniently forgets that more people have been successfully prosecuted in Gujarat riot cases than in any other riots in the history of India before.
  2. More bullets were fired during Gujarat riots AND more people killed at the hands of Police & Military during Gujarat riots than during ANY riots in the history o India
  3. For the first time in the history of India, a commission was set up by a CM asking to investigate his & his cabinet’s actions / inaction.
  4. Gujarat had a Muslim – Shabbir Hussain Shekhadam Khandwawala as its Police Chief during Feb. 2009 to Nov. 2010 – while SIT investigations are going on. If Narendra Modi had things to hide, he would have never appointed a Musilm as a police chief.
  5. Also, Khandwawala was among the top 10 Police Officers during Gujarat riots. Gujarat also has a far better balance of muslim in police force relative to their % population in Gujarat than in many other states. Can the directives to target Muslims & be linient on Hindus be given without Khandwawala & muslim cops knwoing about it then or getting to know about it later on?
  6. No one has bothered to ask how 10% population (of Muslims) killed 24% of riot victims (Hindus).
  7. The then home minister of Gujarat, Gordhan Zadaphia, is no longer w/ BJP & a sworn enemy of Nrenda Modi. It is impossible for giving all orders to police without him knowing about them. If he had the slightest proof of Narendra Modi’s incitement, complicity or inaction, it would have been leaked to the media by now.

Normally I do very little moderation of the comments, but on this subject, and knowing the extremes of emotion prevailing, I WILL moderate thus:

  • Abusive in any way to ANYONE. Modi, Congress. ANYONE. Zero abuse, or even an informative comment will die.
  • Less loyalty, more logic. We understand that if you are defending Modi, you are doing it out of respect and loyalty, and vice versa. But these questions get flatlined by emotion often enough. Answer data, logical reasoning.
  • Any comment that answers the questions or part of them, will get added to this post over this moderation paragraph. I am the sole person to decide what gets put in the post. In other words, insulting me is unlikely to make me your fan unless you present outstanding logic.
  • Anyone wants to create counter questions, comment them in, but I’ll start a new page – DON’t go off topic by answering them here, or I’ll delete your precious answers. Wait to answer on new page.
Thank you.

Join the Intellectual Anarchy!

About the Author

Vidyut
Vidyut is a blogger on issues of National interest. Staunch advocate of rights, learning and freedoms. @Vidyut

12 Comments on "Some Questions on Narendra Modi and Gujarat riots"

  1. As with any other complex issue, finding out the truth about Godhra and Modi can’t be done merely by sitting in one place. One has to put in the work and spend a considerable amount of time researching all the facts.

    This is why people like me rely on two things to get an idea of what the truth is:

    1. Credibility of reports/organizations that have done the research
    2. Consensus among the organizations/reports

    I do this with issues like Climate change for example. I’m not a scientist and don’t pretend to have the capability to do all the research and find out the truth for myself. But when 98% of all scientists in the field agree that it’s happening, I blindly follow the consensus.

    Similarly in the Godhra riots, many organizations with no vested interest agree with one another that atrocities were committed in Godhra against the minority community with at least implicit help from Modi. Many International organizations have done independent research into the circumstances during Godhra and have come to this conclusion.

    So here, as in the case of climate change, I follow the informed consensus. I’m not going to be swayed by random strangers on the Internet since I have neither the time nor the inclination to check the “facts.”

    Since it’s also assumed that courts and their investigations will do their homework, I will blindly accept the verdict of the courts in this matter as well. Will the supporters of Modi accept the SC’s verdict no matter how it turns out?

    • Hello Bhagwad Jal Park:

      Good points. I expect that Modi supporters would & should
      accept SC verdict. I know I will, whichever way it goes. Some pointers
      that will interest you:

      1. There are NO cases either in the Supreme Court or in the lower courts naming Narendra Modi as accused.

      2. In fact, the whole game for “Hate Naredra Modi” NGOs is to somehow
      get him listed as an accused in any court cases & then keep the
      cases going for ever since they have no desire for the ruling by any
      Court of Law. Rather, they want to abuse Narendra Modi indefinitely in
      the Court of Public
      Opinion, at least outside of Gujarat (where people do not get to see
      & benefit from progress that is simply unprecedented in the history
      of India).

      3. Let’s try to answer these simple questions – What do CONgress, pliant Mains Stream Media and “Hate Narendra Modi”
      NGOs know about Narendra Modi’s guilt that SIT & Supreme Court do
      not know & who stopped them from submitting those proofs in the last
      decade.

      4. SIT was appointed by SC and found nothing that implicates Narendra
      Modi of any dereliction of duty which is why Supreme Court refused to
      intervene in cases going on in the lower courts – meaning that all
      attempts at trying to get Narendra Modi at least listed as an accused by CONgress, pliant Mains Stream Media &
      “Hate Naredra Modi” NGOs have failed miserably despite 10 years of false
      propaganda through pliant Main Stream media.

      5. So the real question is whether opponents of Narendra Modi will
      accept SC ruling & whether those who abused Narendra Modi for a
      decade will apologize and publicize the true story of Gujarat’s rapid
      progress with same frequency, fervor, & magnitude of coverage with
      which they abused Narendra Modi & Brand Gujarat fro the last decade.ad more: http://aamjanata.com/some-questions-on-narendra-modi-and-gujrat-riots/

      Hello Bhagwad Jal Park:

      Good points. I expect that Modi supporters would & should
      accept SC verdict. I know I will, whichever way it goes. Some pointers
      that will interest you:

      1. There are NO cases either in the Supreme Court or in the lower courts naming Narendra Modi as accused.

      2. In fact, the whole game for “Hate Naredra Modi” NGOs is to somehow
      get him listed as an accused in any court cases & then keep the
      cases going for ever since they have no desire for the ruling by any
      Court of Law. Rather, they want to abuse Narendra Modi indefinitely in
      the Court of Public
      Opinion, at least outside of Gujarat (where people do not get to see
      & benefit from progress that is simply unprecedented in the history
      of India).

      3. Let’s try to answer these simple questions – What do CONgress, pliant Mains Stream Media and “Hate Narendra Modi”
      NGOs know about Narendra Modi’s guilt that SIT & Supreme Court do
      not know & who stopped them from submitting those proofs in the last
      decade.

      4. SIT was appointed by SC and found nothing that implicates Narendra
      Modi of any dereliction of duty which is why Supreme Court refused to
      intervene in cases going on in the lower courts – meaning that all
      attempts at trying to get Narendra Modi at least listed as an accused by CONgress, pliant Mains Stream Media &
      “Hate Naredra Modi” NGOs have failed miserably despite 10 years of false
      propaganda through pliant Main Stream media.

      5. So the real question is whether opponents of Narendra Modi will
      accept SC ruling & whether those who abused Narendra Modi for a
      decade will apologize and publicize the true story of Gujarat’s rapid
      progress with same frequency, fervor, & magnitude of coverage with
      which they abused Narendra Modi & Brand Gujarat fro the last decade.

      – Dhananjay
      Bhagwad Jal Park Read more: http://aamjanata.com/some-questions-on-narendra-modi-and-gujrat-riots/

  2. As with any other complex issue, finding out the truth about Godhra and Modi can’t be done merely by sitting in one place. One has to put in the work and spend a considerable amount of time researching all the facts.

    This is why people like me rely on two things to get an idea of what the truth is:

    1. Credibility of reports/organizations that have done the research
    2. Consensus among the organizations/reports

    I do this with issues like Climate change for example. I’m not a scientist and don’t pretend to have the capability to do all the research and find out the truth for myself. But when 98% of all scientists in the field agree that it’s happening, I blindly follow the consensus.

    Similarly in the Godhra riots, many organizations with no vested interest agree with one another that atrocities were committed in Godhra against the minority community with at least implicit help from Modi. Many International organizations have done independent research into the circumstances during Godhra and have come to this conclusion.

    So here, as in the case of climate change, I follow the informed consensus. I’m not going to be swayed by random strangers on the Internet since I have neither the time nor the inclination to check the “facts.”

    Since it’s also assumed that courts and their investigations will do their homework, I will blindly accept the verdict of the courts in this matter as well. Will the supporters of Modi accept the SC’s verdict no matter how it turns out?

    • Hello Bhagwad Jal Park:

      Good points. I expect that Modi supporters would & should
      accept SC verdict. I know I will, whichever way it goes. Some pointers
      that will interest you:

      1. There are NO cases either in the Supreme Court or in the lower courts naming Narendra Modi as accused.

      2. In fact, the whole game for “Hate Naredra Modi” NGOs is to somehow
      get him listed as an accused in any court cases & then keep the
      cases going for ever since they have no desire for the ruling by any
      Court of Law. Rather, they want to abuse Narendra Modi indefinitely in
      the Court of Public
      Opinion, at least outside of Gujarat (where people do not get to see
      & benefit from progress that is simply unprecedented in the history
      of India).

      3. Let’s try to answer these simple questions – What do CONgress, pliant Mains Stream Media and “Hate Narendra Modi”
      NGOs know about Narendra Modi’s guilt that SIT & Supreme Court do
      not know & who stopped them from submitting those proofs in the last
      decade.

      4. SIT was appointed by SC and found nothing that implicates Narendra
      Modi of any dereliction of duty which is why Supreme Court refused to
      intervene in cases going on in the lower courts – meaning that all
      attempts at trying to get Narendra Modi at least listed as an accused by CONgress, pliant Mains Stream Media &
      “Hate Naredra Modi” NGOs have failed miserably despite 10 years of false
      propaganda through pliant Main Stream media.

      5. So the real question is whether opponents of Narendra Modi will
      accept SC ruling & whether those who abused Narendra Modi for a
      decade will apologize and publicize the true story of Gujarat’s rapid
      progress with same frequency, fervor, & magnitude of coverage with
      which they abused Narendra Modi & Brand Gujarat fro the last decade.ad more: http://aamjanata.com/some-questions-on-narendra-modi-and-gujrat-riots/

      Hello Bhagwad Jal Park:

      Good points. I expect that Modi supporters would & should
      accept SC verdict. I know I will, whichever way it goes. Some pointers
      that will interest you:

      1. There are NO cases either in the Supreme Court or in the lower courts naming Narendra Modi as accused.

      2. In fact, the whole game for “Hate Naredra Modi” NGOs is to somehow
      get him listed as an accused in any court cases & then keep the
      cases going for ever since they have no desire for the ruling by any
      Court of Law. Rather, they want to abuse Narendra Modi indefinitely in
      the Court of Public
      Opinion, at least outside of Gujarat (where people do not get to see
      & benefit from progress that is simply unprecedented in the history
      of India).

      3. Let’s try to answer these simple questions – What do CONgress, pliant Mains Stream Media and “Hate Narendra Modi”
      NGOs know about Narendra Modi’s guilt that SIT & Supreme Court do
      not know & who stopped them from submitting those proofs in the last
      decade.

      4. SIT was appointed by SC and found nothing that implicates Narendra
      Modi of any dereliction of duty which is why Supreme Court refused to
      intervene in cases going on in the lower courts – meaning that all
      attempts at trying to get Narendra Modi at least listed as an accused by CONgress, pliant Mains Stream Media &
      “Hate Naredra Modi” NGOs have failed miserably despite 10 years of false
      propaganda through pliant Main Stream media.

      5. So the real question is whether opponents of Narendra Modi will
      accept SC ruling & whether those who abused Narendra Modi for a
      decade will apologize and publicize the true story of Gujarat’s rapid
      progress with same frequency, fervor, & magnitude of coverage with
      which they abused Narendra Modi & Brand Gujarat fro the last decade.

      – Dhananjay
      Bhagwad Jal Park Read more: http://aamjanata.com/some-questions-on-narendra-modi-and-gujrat-riots/

  3. Vidyut,        The basic problem is this: A bunch of statements have been made without much supporting evidence. Unfortunately, that means all of these arguments can be easily torpedoed if we apply even a little logical and scientific rigor in our analysis. For instance let us take item 1:Item 1: “Author conveniently forgets that more people have been successfully prosecuted in Gujarat riot cases than in any other riots in the history of India before”1. Unless we have figures for number of victims of  “any other riots in the history of India” we cannot assess the veracity of this statement. Since Dhananjay is passing this off as fact, it is his responsibility to provide sufficient data to corroborate it. I don’t see that here.  This first objection, in fact, applies to all of the points he makes. There are no figures, no independently verifiable sources cited anywhere. Unless he remedies this, it remains the fatal flaw in his argument and he cannot be taken seriously. But, let us assume he has all this data at hand and will immediately provide it to us. So, moving on.2. What conclusion are we to draw? I presume the conclusion Dhananjay wants us to draw is “..And hence, Narendra Modi (NM) is Innocent, and the Govt. of Gujarat (GoG) was not complicit in the riots”. Can we reach this conclusion directly from Item 1 (or even all of his statements put together?). No. For this reason:- The question of NM’s guilt hinges mainly over his constitutional role as CM and administrator *during* the riots.  His (constitutional) ability to influence outcomes severely diminishes after the riots. An independent police has to investigate and frame charges and an independent judiciary has to conduct a fair trial. Since Item 1 concerns investigation and trial, and nothing about the riots themselves, we cannot use this fact (again, assuming it is true) to make any deductions about NM’s or GoG’s guilt/complicity in the riots.- The data that would actually help us in establishing guilt/innocence of NM+GoG, is really logs, call records, testimony about orders given by CM/his ministers, action taken by police to control riots, testimony by witnesses etc. I am just listing a few items to give a general idea of the data we should be actually interested in. Since we do not have this data, we cannot pass judgement either way. I presume the court will decide on this given such evidence. However, it is hard to reconcile two seemingly contradictory arguments made about NM by his supporters: (a) Modi is an extremely competent, brilliant administrator. (b.) For 3 days, he was seemingly not at all in control of his state. So this casts reasonable doubt over his role.  This could be explained away as coincidence, or through other alibis. But laypeople (like us) and the courts are right to ask these questions.3. Dhananjay, although he does not cite any hard numbers, is actually essentially drawing comparisons between riots of different scales/magnitudes (what is his definition of a riot, anyway? We can’t even proceed without a baseline definition) spread over different eras (we don’t even know which era — history of India stretches back to thousands of years ;-)). Is this comparison even valid? Most probably, not. Statements such as this suffer from several logical and quantitative pitfalls. Instead of listing them exhaustively, let me give you a similar example that makes them explicit:”Ghulam Nabi harvested 253 apples in his Orchard in Doda, in November, 1972. Nitin harvested 896 oranges in his orchard in May, 2005. 26 of Ghulam Nabi’s apples were bad, whereas 57 of Nitin’s oranges were rotten. It is obvious from this information, that Ghulam Nabi is a far superior cultivator than Nitin.”In conclusion, this is just a small sampler of objections I have with Dhananjay’s “arguments”. I did not want to exhaustively list all of my objections. That would take forever. So, I just attacked one point, to illustrate the methodology one can use to question his assertions. The rest, I leave for you, as homework. But to summarize, at least three errors that he repeatedly makes can be used to poke holes in his arguments:
    1.) Complete lack of verifiable evidence
    2.) Inferential gaps and faulty reasoning (e.g. A is true. B is true. Hence, Z must be true)
    3.) Invalid comparisons.

    • A_P_K:

      If you want evidence, all you have to do is read the below 2 articles that have links back to the evidence you seek:

      MODI-fied Media & Godhra – the scarecrow, Part 1 – http://www.jitegabharat.com/entry.php?118

      MODI-fied Media and Godhra – the scarecrow, Part 2 – http://www.jitegabharat.com/entry.php?121

      Finally, NO one in the media has taken up the challenge of this site to prove any of their evidence wrong – http://www.gujaratriots.com/

      The real Q is do people want to know the truth or are they comfortable in their delusional “sense of balance” that presumes Narendra Modi’s guilt with the logic that there must be fire (Narendra Modi’s guilt) when there is so much smoke (false propaganda). That the Supreme Court found NOTHING to intervene in cases in lower courts (that do not even have Narendra Modi as accused) is just a mere uncomfortable truth that people like to forget after 10 years of brain washing. Remember, those who pretend to be asleep cannot be woken up. The choice is yours. Embrace the truth if you ever want to be liberated from prejudice.

  4. Vidyut,        The basic problem is this: A bunch of statements have been made without much supporting evidence. Unfortunately, that means all of these arguments can be easily torpedoed if we apply even a little logical and scientific rigor in our analysis. For instance let us take item 1:Item 1: “Author conveniently forgets that more people have been successfully prosecuted in Gujarat riot cases than in any other riots in the history of India before”1. Unless we have figures for number of victims of  “any other riots in the history of India” we cannot assess the veracity of this statement. Since Dhananjay is passing this off as fact, it is his responsibility to provide sufficient data to corroborate it. I don’t see that here.  This first objection, in fact, applies to all of the points he makes. There are no figures, no independently verifiable sources cited anywhere. Unless he remedies this, it remains the fatal flaw in his argument and he cannot be taken seriously. But, let us assume he has all this data at hand and will immediately provide it to us. So, moving on.2. What conclusion are we to draw? I presume the conclusion Dhananjay wants us to draw is “..And hence, Narendra Modi (NM) is Innocent, and the Govt. of Gujarat (GoG) was not complicit in the riots”. Can we reach this conclusion directly from Item 1 (or even all of his statements put together?). No. For this reason:- The question of NM’s guilt hinges mainly over his constitutional role as CM and administrator *during* the riots.  His (constitutional) ability to influence outcomes severely diminishes after the riots. An independent police has to investigate and frame charges and an independent judiciary has to conduct a fair trial. Since Item 1 concerns investigation and trial, and nothing about the riots themselves, we cannot use this fact (again, assuming it is true) to make any deductions about NM’s or GoG’s guilt/complicity in the riots.- The data that would actually help us in establishing guilt/innocence of NM+GoG, is really logs, call records, testimony about orders given by CM/his ministers, action taken by police to control riots, testimony by witnesses etc. I am just listing a few items to give a general idea of the data we should be actually interested in. Since we do not have this data, we cannot pass judgement either way. I presume the court will decide on this given such evidence. However, it is hard to reconcile two seemingly contradictory arguments made about NM by his supporters: (a) Modi is an extremely competent, brilliant administrator. (b.) For 3 days, he was seemingly not at all in control of his state. So this casts reasonable doubt over his role.  This could be explained away as coincidence, or through other alibis. But laypeople (like us) and the courts are right to ask these questions.3. Dhananjay, although he does not cite any hard numbers, is actually essentially drawing comparisons between riots of different scales/magnitudes (what is his definition of a riot, anyway? We can’t even proceed without a baseline definition) spread over different eras (we don’t even know which era — history of India stretches back to thousands of years ;-)). Is this comparison even valid? Most probably, not. Statements such as this suffer from several logical and quantitative pitfalls. Instead of listing them exhaustively, let me give you a similar example that makes them explicit:”Ghulam Nabi harvested 253 apples in his Orchard in Doda, in November, 1972. Nitin harvested 896 oranges in his orchard in May, 2005. 26 of Ghulam Nabi’s apples were bad, whereas 57 of Nitin’s oranges were rotten. It is obvious from this information, that Ghulam Nabi is a far superior cultivator than Nitin.”In conclusion, this is just a small sampler of objections I have with Dhananjay’s “arguments”. I did not want to exhaustively list all of my objections. That would take forever. So, I just attacked one point, to illustrate the methodology one can use to question his assertions. The rest, I leave for you, as homework. But to summarize, at least three errors that he repeatedly makes can be used to poke holes in his arguments:
    1.) Complete lack of verifiable evidence
    2.) Inferential gaps and faulty reasoning (e.g. A is true. B is true. Hence, Z must be true)
    3.) Invalid comparisons.

    • A_P_K:

      If you want evidence, all you have to do is read the below 2 articles that have links back to the evidence you seek:

      MODI-fied Media & Godhra – the scarecrow, Part 1 – http://www.jitegabharat.com/entry.php?118

      MODI-fied Media and Godhra – the scarecrow, Part 2 – http://www.jitegabharat.com/entry.php?121

      Finally, NO one in the media has taken up the challenge of this site to prove any of their evidence wrong – http://www.gujaratriots.com/

      The real Q is do people want to know the truth or are they comfortable in their delusional “sense of balance” that presumes Narendra Modi’s guilt with the logic that there must be fire (Narendra Modi’s guilt) when there is so much smoke (false propaganda). That the Supreme Court found NOTHING to intervene in cases in lower courts (that do not even have Narendra Modi as accused) is just a mere uncomfortable truth that people like to forget after 10 years of brain washing. Remember, those who pretend to be asleep cannot be woken up. The choice is yours. Embrace the truth if you ever want to be liberated from prejudice.

  5. Vidyut:

    Well done in asking for others tochallenege the FACTS I presented & NOT just comment based on EMOTIONS! For those who have not seen your previous article & my response there, here are the links to my blog articles that I referred to in my response:

    MODI-fied Media and Godhra – the scarecrow, Part 1 – http://www.jitegabharat.com/entry.php?118

    MODI-fied Media and Godhra – the scarecrow, Part 2  – http://www.jitegabharat.com/entry.php?121

    – Dhananjay

  6. Vidyut:

    Well done in asking for others tochallenege the FACTS I presented & NOT just comment based on EMOTIONS! For those who have not seen your previous article & my response there, here are the links to my blog articles that I referred to in my response:

    MODI-fied Media and Godhra – the scarecrow, Part 1 – http://www.jitegabharat.com/entry.php?118

    MODI-fied Media and Godhra – the scarecrow, Part 2  – http://www.jitegabharat.com/entry.php?121

    – Dhananjay

  7. MODIJI IS THE KING OF GUJURAT…..AND WE LOVE HIM, SOON WE HOPE TO SEE HIM AS THE KING OF INDIA!  SOON, VERY SOON…

  8. MODIJI IS THE KING OF GUJURAT…..AND WE LOVE HIM, SOON WE HOPE TO SEE HIM AS THE KING OF INDIA!  SOON, VERY SOON…

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.




Contact information || Privacy information || Archives