Talk:2002 Gujarat riots/Archive 3

message: and he is vandalising the article ..removing point of view against the Chauvinist forces in Gujarat
:Please prove that any of my edits are 'chauvinistic'. and do not resort to ad-Hominem attacks and personal insults.(Pusyamitra Sunga 15:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Subhash Bose,Pussymitra Sunga,Netaji and propbably Msiev are same person 

message: Please donot remove any material from the talk page, this is an open forum to discuss the article every one can express their opiniions here. Some one with ip 213.128.227.74 is constantly removing material from bothe the article and the talk page, please stop it.anil 18:59, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Plea

message: Folks, again this is an encyclopedia and not a grudge airing forum. Links to individual opinions and statements only impair objectivity. This article is about Gujarat violence, so please refrain from adding links which serve no other purpose than airing a particular viewpoint or fanning sentiments. An example is repeated addition of the link. "Hindu Justifies Mass Killings of Muslims in Reprisal Riots, The New York Times, March 5, 2002" .
The article states "However, there were reports allegeing that it was the hindus riding the train who were the first to provoke standers-by Muslims in Godhra railway station by shouting hindu-religous slogans like "Jai Shri Ram" (Victory of Shri Ram)."
The article tries to justify the burning of the train compartments (and the gruesome death of the Hindus) while at the same time focussing on the 'state sponsored pogrom' angle without allowing for the possibility that the riots which followed were infact an outburst of anger directed at the community seen responsible for the train-burning incident. Hence I am removing the above statement (quoted).
= This is ridiculous some one deleted the alternative theory of how the fire started. No one is trying to justify the burning here, but it is a fact that a railyway department enquiry was conducted. anil 10:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Newspaper Article Links

message: i have put back the external link to the Citizens for Justice and Peace report  Crime against Humanity at http://www.sabrang.com/tribunal/ - it is an NPOV fact that this extensive enquiry collecting a massive number of testimonies from witnesses exists. Whether the witnesses spoke the truth or not and whether or not the synthesis is a neutral synthesis, is POV. However, removing the external link is POV. Please do not remove the link. If someone can point to an external document which claims that the Citizens for Justice and Peace report is biased in some way, then please add that. Boud 12:18, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Wrong: you misunderstand NPOV - NPOV means that all POVs which have some credible external sources backing them are allowed. Boud 23:56, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

text: If you have some external evidence which claims that Ms. Teesta Setalvad bribed witnesses, please provide the link. However, please remember that the Crimes Against Humanity report goes far beyond the Best Bakery case. Boud 23:56, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

text: The report is extremely detailed - it is not a one-page media condensation. Trying to hide this report is extremely POV. Boud 23:56, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  crimes against humanity 540 page report 

message: What was the financial loss to the state and the country due to these riots?  (shifted to new section for clarity Boud 00:01, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: money vs people: financial losses

message: Kindly do not reference editorials as a source. They are obviously opinions of people and are not facts. This is an encyclopedia not a personal opinion airing platform. Sources from news sites and books are welcome but editorials are not NPOV. - Sojourner
But it isn't an editorial Fuzzy numbers 05:58, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Godhra Fire

message: If she is not credible after her flipflops, she can't belong to this page. Along with Zaheera, you are going to bring in the Tehalka tapes, the subject of how witnesses can be intimaded easily (as had happened with Satnam Kaur) and so on. Keep in mind that the best bakery case is not all about Zaheera, and people who are trying to insert her are basically trying to discredit the investigation of that carnage. Hardly a way to establish NPOV! Sj oblx
The girl is a victim, but at the same time a dishonest person. The Best Bakery trial and Supreme Court of India overturning the ruling of Gujarat courts belong to this page, but not Zaheera's alleged perjury or the shady MLA who was caught on tape Fuzzy numbers 01:05, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Zaheera

message: Kindly start an aftermath section someone. The violence still generates a lot of heat despite the 3 year gap between then and now. surely there have been a lot of outcomes..
202.140.37.2 08:19, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Aftermath

message: Looks like Pakistani sock puppets are very active. Guess they are done with Mukhtaran Mai.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by  213.128.227.74 (talk • contribs) . Basawala 19:21, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overly apolegetic to Muslims? 

message: This is simply ridiculous - I've removed some particularly execrable language such as:
"who had converted to Christianity and hated Hindus to the core"
"National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India which is also known to be a bastion of communist anti-Hindus. "
"But the US doesnot find anything wrong with terrorists like Yasser Arafat, "
" the incident happened just after the afternoon prayers on a Friday, globally recognized to be an islamic prime time for terrorist attacks"
which any semi-rational person would agree are not NPoV - whould these anonymous editors please justify their changes?
Nedloh 03:57, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ridiculously biased.. 

message: the ridiculous edits continue:
"And they will know simply because they dont have a score to settle with Modi for his anti-communist leanings."
- whoever's doing this - stop..
Nedloh 04:06, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  the rubbish continues.. 

message: I have added some material to the convictions section, particularly about the sentence handed down by the fast track court today. I am removing the NPOV tag as I feel that the article is fairly neutral. If some body has objections please express your opinion in the talk page and I request people not indulge in name calling and refrain from adding material without citing neutral and NPOV sources.  anil 13:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Removing NPOV

message: Too many users are editing the pages and removing materials with out explanation. Let me remind you again that this is not a forum for accusations and please justify your edits how small they may be. anil 15:29, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Please Stop Vandalism

message: In few places of this article the spelling of Gujarat is written as Gujrat. Same way Godhra is known as Godhara in official spelling. can i proceed to change spellings in the article? --Kbi911 09:50, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gujarat Spelling in Article 

message: This article has a lot of over-heated rhetoric in it ("No period in history marks the kind of butchery that was displayed against women"), and an NPOV tag is appropriate until the article can be cleaned up. Steve Casburn 07:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: The article describes these Karsevaks as extremists.  The coach that was burnt has women and children (it is a ladies coach with many young children).
They went to offer their prayers peacfully to register their protest.  This is democracy - not extremism.
They were protesting that a temple should be allowed to be built at Ram Janmabhoomi (Birth place of Ram). Ram is a God for Hindus like Jesus for Christians or Mohammed for Muslims.  I am sure a Christian would demand the same for a place where Jesus is believed to be born or Muslims where Mohammed is believed to be born.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.111.250.230 (talk • contribs) 04:54, 4 March 2006.
That's nice, but Wikipedia goes under a Neutral POV.  The Kar Sevaks are a controversial group, and how many other places was Ram supposedly born on?  Supporting a Hindu temple to be built on the exact spot that a Mosque was burnt on without building another Mosque or giving compensation is not Democracy. Basawala 19:16, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hindus were protesting peacfully. That is democracy, not extremism 

message: 68.98.183.190 has been removing/oversimplifying this page.
Some one please revert back to the earlier version.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.17.149.13 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 6 March 2006.
==Removed the tag NPOV as what is not neutral was not indicated - we are writing encyclopedia from the global perspective and not for a particular country like India or Pakistan. Please discuss changes before doing massive changes. --Bhadani 17:41, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hindu "terrorists", huh? Wonder who it was who rammed planes full of people into buildings full of people. Please, if you have to express anti-Hindu hatred, there are al-qaeda forums for that. Sell crazy someplace else,Ahmed.[[[User:Subhash bose|Netaji]] 10:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page being vandalised

message: The Banerjee committee final report has come.And this time,the timing of the report DID NOT coincide with elections at some places in India.That means;a lot to be updated.And the implications of the Zaheera Sheikh conviction too. Madhu Srivastava too has been indicted (the current article says "A "sting" operation carried by the magazine Tehelka failed to prove that she had accepted bribes from Srivastava Brothers"). --Sahodaran 12:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update 

message: This is not a riot, i don't know how it came to be defined that way but it is clearly a massacre and not a riot:
Definition of a Riot:
A wild or turbulent disturbance created by a large number of people.
Definition of a Massacre:
the savage and excessive killing of many people.
The act or an instance of killing a large number of humans indiscriminately and cruelly.
Clearly the killings fall in the second category, it may have started out as a riot but it ended in a massacre, therefore it should be correctly called a massacre, and eyewitness accounts should be included.  
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.36.18.146 (talk • contribs) 00:26, 26 April 2006.
:Well, to me it looks like people of Indian origin, whether NRIs or living in India are contributing a lot here - as part of the process of decentralising the control of "knowledge", this is a Good Thing, IMHO. The people closest to the events are those who are most likely to be able to make informed comments on them, or in the wikipedia spirit, quote external, verifiable sources that they judge to be reliable. Boud 21:24, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a Riot 

message: i've added a note up the top to ask people to sign their comments with four tildes ~~~~ and i added "unsigned" tags to people who forgot or don't yet know about tagging. It won't solve all edit conflicts, but it will help people get to know each other. Boud 21:24, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: signing comments

message: The death toll and other figures are greatly distorted.  Will someone please change them back, since I really don't want to cause a revert war.  And how were  the 59 victims of the fire "mostly women and children"?  That's not true. 
Basawala 20:17, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy 

message: I took out this piece of info:
Arundhati Roy claimed that former Congress MP Ehsan Jafri's daughter was raped by "Hindu Fundamentalists". Later, however, it was proved that she was in the US, then. Roy was unavailable for comment. Ehsaan Jafri was reported as leading a mob of radical Islamists raiding and pillaging Hindu shops and shrines. He was killed that the very day, after allegedly opening fire on Hindu children. Central Government stated in parliament "The police under the Joint Police Commissioner, DCP, rushed to the site and tried their very best to protect and shift the residents. The police succeeded in saving 180 people including women and children. But unfortunately, the lives of late Jafri and 17 others could not be saved." 
This was placed in The Riots section without any reference at all, and I doubt it is true.  Do not add it back to the article without a proper reference, and even then, this piece of info is way too POV. --Basawala 19:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I find it interesting that any piece of fact that presents the Hindu point of view neutrally is deemed "POV", while clearly POV sections that portray muslim terrorists and Jehadis and their liberal socialist allies as heroes is kept. People like you are more responsible for anti-Hindu pogroms than muslims.I added a link to the reference proving the claims that historical revisionists like yourself deleted. Man, you must be seriously self-hating.[[[User:Subhash bose|Netaji]] 10:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What a fascinating little rant. Tragically, your 'references' actually state nothing at all along the lines of what you claim they state in your edits to the articles. One of the advantages of being 'self-hating' must be literacy. Hornplease 19:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not really. Delusion doesn't count as literacy. In any case, this is an article on politics and hindu-bashing. Ergo, neutrality is impossible.Anf fyi, here is the excerpt from the article by Balbir Punj from Outlook India that I cite as backing of Arundhati Roy's bias and falsehood:"Reports on riots often had quotes which were falsely attributed. Incidents which did not take place were described in gory detail. And there were instances of "intellectuals", better at fiction than fact, trying to outstrip other "secularists" in a race to paint the Sangh parivar in lurid colours. No effort was too small and no lie too big for them, since the purpose was "noble"—squash the "evil" called Sangh parivar.Arundhati Roy, for instance, presented a scroll charged with damnation against the Sangh parivar in Democracy: Who's She When She's at Home? (Outlook, May 6). We all know by now that her vivid account of how former Congress MP Iqbal Ehsan Jaffri and his family were killed was a piece of fiction. 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, replied that the police had no power to issue summons. Why is she hedging behind technical excuses?" Article here:http://www.fisiusa.org/fisi_News_items/Godhra/godhra0146.htm[[[User:Subhash bose|Netaji]] 00:15, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Try and read your references, please. Nowhere does Punj state that independent studies have shown the Jafri incident to be false. He merely claims "it is known" that Roy's account is 'fiction'. Your edits have been modified to reflect that. In addition, I dont think a sitting BJP MP is a reliable, independent, and unbiased source. Please try and edit in good faith. If you suffer under the belief that the subject of the article is inherently POV, please take it to WP:AFD, instead of making disruptive edits. Also, consider signing your comments with four tildas. Thanks. Hornplease 08:58, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Try to read my actual edits please. I never wrote that Punj said that the Jafri incident was false. Punj, however, casts doubt on Roy's recountings of the incodent, as well as points out her questionable political and anti-Hindu motives. Personally, I DO NOT think that a communist hindu-hater like Roy is reliable, independent and unbiased as well. However, I will not say so in the article without saying that Roy denies this accusation, so as to maintain NPOV. I suggest you maintain the same NPOV. My edits have not been disruptive, because I have not deleted anything. Only added. You did the deleting, which is considered vandalism. I have been signing with four tildas.[[[User:Subhash bose|Netaji]] 09:32, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I do not think an extensive discussion of Punj vs Roy is appropriate for this page. The current revision reads: "However, several accounts of the riots are contested as biased and "politically motivated". Previous claims by Teesta Setalvad of the death toll have been demonstrated as exaggerated. Arundhati Roy has made several claims about the details of the situation in Gujarat at the time, particularly regarding the murder of former Congress MP Iqbal Ehsan Jaffri. BJP MP Balbir Punj, writing in Outlook India, has criticized her recounting of the events as 'fiction'." I think thats more than enough information. Since we are linking to Punj's article, we do not need to recap it in so much detail. I personally agree with you that Roy is not a completely unbiased source either. However, it seems you added her to the article to begin with, in order to knock her down, so I dont know what you're getting at. That is a bit disruptive, in my book. Please discuss all further changes on the talk page first. Also, if you're signing with four tildas, I cant understand why there's no direct link to your userpage. I fancy you might want to get that seen to. Hornplease 09:42, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy (again)

message: Subhash Chandra Bose , one of the editors has been removing the following link.
This is a copy of the film available on Google Videos.The film is made by a Hindu Cinematographer.
Final Solutionis a film on Gujarat Riots banned in India
  
* Final Solution  
This is a scholarly film on Gujarat riots and has won following awards:
Awards 
Wolfgang Staudte award & Special Jury Award (Netpac), Berlin International film festival (2004)
Humanitarian Award for Outstanding Documentary, HongKong International film festival (2004)
Montgolfiere d’Or (Best Documentary) & Le Prix Fip/Pil’ du Public (Audience award), Festival des 3 Continents at Nantes (France; 2004)
Best Film, Freedom of Expression awards by Index on Censorship (UK; 2005)
Silver Dhow, Zanzibar International film festival (2004)
Best documentary, Big MiniDV (USA; 2004)
Special Jury Award, Karafest (Karachi; 2004)
Special Jury Award, Film South Asia (Kathmandu; 2005)
Human Rights Award, Docupolis (Barcelona; 2005)
Special Jury Mention, Munich Dokfest (2004) 
Special Jury Mention, Bangkok International filmfest (2005)
Nominee, Best Foreign Film, Grierson Awards (UK; 2004) 
Best Documentary/Short Film, Apsara Awards(India;2006)
Special Award by NRIs for a Secular and Harmonious India (NRI-SAHI), NY-NJ, USA (2004)
Special Award by AFMI, USA-Canada (2004)
Special Jury Award, Worldfest 2005 (Houston)
Special Jury Award, Mar Del Plata Independent film festival (2005; Argentina)
Screened at over 80 international film festivals.
It has been mentioned in BBC's review
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/storyville/final-solution.shtml
:Most of the accolades you cited above are awarded by left wing bastions. You may add the link if you wish, provided you also add that the content and veracity of the film is disputed (it's basically along the same lines as the palestinian propaganda films exposed in the "Pallywood" documentary). Otherwise, I'll start adding "Google Video films" exposing muslim atrocities in kashmir in the relevant wikipedia article to maintain NPOV. Also, the term "Final Solution" is used to denote the holocaust of European Jewry, and to use it in any other way is demeaning to Jews, and thus a film about muslims by that name should not be cited out of respect for Jewish sensibilities.(Netaji 16:40, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah please give us the URL to a film on Kashmir. Last time i cheked the name of the article was Gujarat. Giving a video on Kashmir really keeps a NPOV (sic) K ganju 11:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Read my post properly. I said IN THE RELEVANT WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE, NOT HERE. I'll open up a new article called "Islamic Genocides in Kashmir" if necessary. I'll bet you anti-hindu haters would not like THAT, would you? No, you're only content to applaud muslims for depopulating Hindu land. The only thing that means for you is that your throat will be the last one that muslims will slit open. (Netaji 17:21, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  So do it. And let a link to a film about the 2002 Gujarat violence be put on the '2002 Gujarat violence page'. I have no problem with you starting an article about violence in Kashmir. Its a encyclopedia. Put all the info where it is necessary, with a NPOV. (And if you insist on undisputed numbers on the numbers of deaths in Gujarat, get undisouted statistics for the number of deaths in Kashmir). Also, if you have nothing constructive to say in the last 3 lines of your post, then don't say it.K ganju 10:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Islamophobic? 
***Well, best I recall hindutva elements did not ram planes into buildings, behead journalists or anyone on television, bomb subways in London, Madrid or anywhere, or ethnically cleanse 250,000 people in Darfur (as of the last count), or massacre Hindus in Kashmir. 
***Hindutva elements don't have schools, madrassas and qutbas that teach hate ahead of math. 
***Hindutva elements don't infiltrate civilized societies like the United States and secretly send millions of dollars to Lashkar-e-Toiba, Hezbollah, Hamas, Fatah, al-Qaeda or whever to kill non-muslims. 
Subhash Bose would be pinning a medal on my chest for exposing the muslim terrorists for who they really are. Furthermore, to compare Godhra with the holocaust is typical Islamofascist propaganda (all the while you people secretly deny the holocause like Ahmadinejad does and Arafat did). The death toll of the holocaust was 60 lakh (6 million) Jews. The death toll of Godhra was 3000 terrorist jihadis and their sympathizers. Big difference,see? On, and I know that muslims find loyal allies in left wing liberals (like the organizations above) and self-hating hindus(like you, maybe). Like I said, you may post the link if you wish, but then I have evidence to balance it out with an endless litany of muslim genocides and atrocities in Gujarat itself. The truth about Islam is something you muslim-lovers don't want on wikipedia. Netaji 16:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have been. I haven't added any such POV statements on the article. In fact, if you look at the article history, I have REMOVED POV bias even from hindus. I merely want the article to present a balanced and neutral point of view, not become a vessel for Islamofascist propaganda. It's very easy to sympathize with the muslims when you're sitting in an ideological ivory tower and haven't met or seen any in bulk. Please don't let wikipedia get reduced to a POV of gutter multiculturalism. Always present all points of view and they will cancel each other out and generate NPOV. Thank you. (Netaji 15:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Why should we believe your assurances? You're just a random ip address to us? Do you have any academic qualifications? Do you have a background in film studies? Aren't you, in fact, a muslim?  Are you in a position to judge the accuracy of the film or authenticate the veracity of the source? For all I know, you're Osama bin-laden himself! You've provided a link that reviews the film. You haven't provided any proof (beyond your anecdotal evidence) that the film to which you have linked is, in reality, the film you claim is the "Final Solution" documentary. I have challenged the source (Google Video), the burden of proof is on you. Link to a legitimate scholarly site that contains the film. There has to be one. There is no shortage of hindu-haters among white scholars, or their pinko moonbat lackeys in India. Surely some hindu-hater like Wendy Doniger, Deepa Mehta or Arundhati Roy has a copy of the film on their website. Find it. Then put it up. Or better yet, rip your "DVD", do an md5sum, get it authenticated by the nearest department of film studies, get a signed, notarized copy attesting to the authenticity of the film, scan it, put it up on flickr or something, link to it, then link to your rip. Hindu haters should work to express their hate. Bear in mind that ripping dvd's is a copyright violation.(Netaji 09:24, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film on Gujarat Riots 

message: Anonymous users have been randomly vandalising this article (see history), adding absurd rubbish (like a muslim death toll of 750,000) and adding islamist-sympathetic POV stuff. How do I go about asking moderators to restrict edits from new or anon users? (Netaji 16:44, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Random Vandalism 

message: Seems it is being written by Narendra Modi's defense advocates,underplays the violence and governmental inaction as well as propogation of violence in many instances.
:One can argue that the article was previously written by left-wing negationists and pseudosecularist self-hating Indians. If you find anything specific in the article that is objectionable, please post it below and it will be looked into. Plus, suggest changes to present the socialist point of view, but DO NOT DELETE ANYTHING, THAT IS VANDALISM!! You may add sections called 'criticism of BJP/RSS regardinf riots' or something. (Netaji 21:58, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Deleting something inaccurate is not vandalism. Please check your terms. Refresh your memory with WP:Vandalism and WP:BOLD. Hornplease 23:40, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

text: What inncauracies? the only things edited are POV statements made by the liberal left. No verified facts were removed.Please check the dosage on your intravenous drip. Plus, Shri Modi has been mentioned but a few times in the entire article, and always as a relentless liberal moonbat screed against the great visionary, so how can this be biased in defense of him? You people might want to refill your prescriptions.(Netaji 10:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Subhash, please observe WP:NPA, or you will be reported to an administrator for repeatred violations. Hornplease 17:34, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please extend the same courtesy to the anonymous user (Netaji 19:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I certainly am doing so. However, the main personal attacks on this page seem to b from you. Hornplease 05:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The tone of the article 

message: The present revert has been made by myself owing to the extremely pejorative, libelous, and slanderous statements made on the article by user lkadvani. His language is extremely racist, anti-Hindu and points to an agenda of defamation. I have reverted to an earlier edit endorsed by a wikipedia admin. (Pusyamitra Sunga 14:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You should remember the last comment you got from Admin - I certainly am doing so. However, the main personal attacks on this page seem to b from you. Hornplease 05:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Where have I made any personal attacks in this section? Please point out. LkAdvani and Anwar Sadat have made RACIST and ETHNOCENTRIC remarks that are libelous and slanderous. That should be a bigger problem, or don't us 'nigger Hindus' get that much credence? (Pusyamitra Sunga 14:53, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reason for last revert