My other writings
Cricket 24 x 7
Jaagruthi
Yahoo! 360
Mayajaal
My Bloglines
My 43 things
My LinkedIn
On Orkut
Badri's Tamil thoughts
Ganesh's Happily Haphazard
Nitin's Acorn
Prabhu's Pethals
Raghu the reluctant Delhiite
Samanth's blahg
Sankhya the busy idler
Srini the movie critic
Rabble Rousing Random Ramblings by S Jagadish is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.
The US Embassy confirmed that Gujarat CM Narendra Modi's request for a diplomatic visa had been denied owing to his direct contribution and role in the Gujarat riots of 2002. The US has an explicit immigration act which aims to keep out government officials who have been directly involved in or abetted acts of religious intolerance.
Modi's assertion that the action of the US government is tantamount to insulting Hindus and India is laughable. If anyone is an insult to Hindus, it is him and those in the Sangh parivar, who have no qualms about preaching intolerance and inciting the public into violent action and mob fury. To use the vernacular, "Modi, moodu da".
The US government has the right to deny entry to whoever it deems unfit. No one has a right to enter any country. *Nudge nudge, wink wink* to Pervez and his freedom fighters. The problem, as Nitin points out, is the United States' none too impressive record when it comes to human rights.
Siddharth Varadarajan opines that the BJP cannot protest because it has benefitted in the past from the US looking the other way. Since I do not have a subscription, I am unable to completely figure out what Vir Sanghvi wants to say.
I think the best option for the Indian government is to not pursue the issue any further with the US government and do a quid pro quo by denying a visa to some decently high ranking US official who wants to visit India, perhaps Bush himself, for the fun those under his command had at Abu(se) Gharib.
Labels: gujarat violence 2002, narendra modi
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
I am unsure about whether to pass judgement on whether Ishrat Jahan Raza, shot dead by the Ahmedabad police on June 15, was really a terrorist or not. I am skeptical about the claims by the Ahmedabad police that the 'terrorists' were connected with the Lashkar-e-Toiba and had a plan to assassinate the CM Narendra Modi. This is purely because of the timing. Barely a couple of days before this incident, Vajpayee had conceded that not removing Modi as CM following the Gujarat riots was a mistake and that it affected the BJP in the LS polls. Then a tug-of-war started within the Sangh parivar as various people in the BJP & RSS came out with statements on what Vajpayee actually meant and whether Modi was responsible for the BJP's defeat in the general election or not.
Modi needed all the good press that he could garner, at this juncture. He needed to project himself as someone who cannot and should not be disowned by the BJP. The BJP had invested substantially in him, especially the way he addressed rallies not only in Gujarat, but in other states as well. His vitriolic campaign against Sonia, Rahul & Priyanka thrilled the BJP and gave them a sense of bloated self-confidence. Modi is also seen as being among the next generation leaders in the BJP, representing the hardline view. With the convenient killing of a few 'terrorists' from the Lashkar who were out to kill him Modi would have successfully brought a sympathy factor upon himself.
Modi's strategy has worked. As we went to press, it was announced that Modi would continue as Gujarat CM and that the issue was now a thing of the past!
Prem Shankar Jha offers his opinion on Vajpayee's assertion.
Labels: gujarat violence 2002, narendra modi
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Politics
Haren Pandya, the former Gujarat minister, who dared to raise a voice of dissent against Narendra Modi, was shot dead by unidentified assailants yesterday at Ahmedabad. In yet another clean chit issued to the Modi government, the deputy PM LK Advani said that intelligence points to it being a terrorist act and that it had nothing to do with political vendetta etc. Which type of terrorists want to kill someone who objected to the way the Narendra Modi government handled the riot victims? Muslim terrorists? Highly unlikely! Pandya would have been on 'their' side actually. How about Hindu terrorists? The VHP-RSS types? I think that's possible. I'd really not rule out Modi's role in the issue!!
Labels: gujarat violence 2002, narendra modi
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Some of the links may now be broken/not take you to the expected report since the original content providers may have archived/removed the contents.
All opinions expressed are mine alone. My employers (past, present or future) are in no way connected to the opinions expressed here.
All pictures, photographs used are copyrights of the original owners. I do not intend to infringe on any copyright.
Pictures and photographs are used here to merely accentuate and enhance the content value to the readers.
