jalebi_bhai Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 OK......If the UPA want to use the 'Anti-Secular' card against the NDA (mainly BJP and Modi,) can't the NDA do they same by accusing the UPA of being 'Anti-Secular' with regards to the 1984 Sikh massacre??......Or since Indira Gandhi is dead, that ploy is no more a viable tactic??
The Outsider Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 OK......If the UPA want to use the 'Anti-Secular' card against the NDA (mainly BJP and Modi' date=') can't the NDA do they same by accusing the UPA of being 'Anti-Secular' with regards to the 1984 Sikh massacre??......Or since Indira Gandhi is dead, that ploy is no more a viable tactic??[/quote'] It's not that they don't try. Watch any debate on TV and the BJP representatives are always ready to raise their chaddhis bringing up '84 whenever '02 is being discussed. However, the point has no resonance among people beyond their own supporters because: 1. Rajiv Gandhi is long dead. 2. All other prominent leaders involved in '84 are non entities today. 3. A Sikh is a PM appointed by the widow of Rajiv Gandhi. 4. Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi have both apologized for '84.
1983-2011 Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 It's not that they don't try. Watch any debate on TV and the BJP representatives are always ready to raise their chaddhis bringing up '84 whenever '02 is being discussed. However, the point has no resonance among people beyond their own supporters because: 1. Rajiv Gandhi is long dead. 2. All other prominent leaders involved in '84 are non entities today. 3. A Sikh is a PM appointed by the widow of Rajiv Gandhi. 4. Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi have both apologized for '84. +1 and does modi show any remorse or regret for 2002? no, instead he calls them kutte ke bacche
seedhi Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 It's not that they don't try. Watch any debate on TV and the BJP representatives are always ready to raise their chaddhis bringing up '84 whenever '02 is being discussed. However, the point has no resonance among people beyond their own supporters because: 1. Rajiv Gandhi is long dead. 2. All other prominent leaders involved in '84 are non entities today. 3. A Sikh is a PM appointed by the widow of Rajiv Gandhi. 4. Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi have both apologized for '84.Did Sonia Gandhi or Manmohan Singh accept that there was a lapse by the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi ? No. All they did was express regret but not accept any responsibility.
seedhi Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 +1 and does modi show any remorse or regret for 2002? no, instead he calls them kutte ke baccheHe gave an analogy. An analogy is not the same as a metaphor. It is also interesting that while many Hindus also died in the riots, it is only some Muslims who are imagining themselves as being called kutte ke bachche.
jalebi_bhai Posted July 25, 2013 Author Posted July 25, 2013 It's not that they don't try. Watch any debate on TV and the BJP representatives are always ready to raise their chaddhis bringing up '84 whenever '02 is being discussed. However, the point has no resonance among people beyond their own supporters because: 1. Rajiv Gandhi is long dead. 2. All other prominent leaders involved in '84 are non entities today. 3. A Sikh is a PM appointed by the widow of Rajiv Gandhi. 4. Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi have both apologized for '84. +1 and does modi show any remorse or regret for 2002? no, instead he calls them kutte ke bacche It's not a question of remorse.....it's a case of a pot calling a kettle black......If their main weapon against the BJP is that they are anti-secularism, and the Gujarat Riots is their main evidence.......then shouldn't people realize that the UPA too has a history of being anti-secular?? It's like one rapist blaming another rapist for being a pervert...... Showing remorse is all good and dandy......but apologies can't reverse the course of history.......Also, did Indira Gandhi ever apologize?? Don't think so........then why should Manmohan Singh's and Sonia Gandhi's apology hold any weight??.....their roles in the riots were minimal to non-existent.......... The point I'm trying to make is that.......both parties have the blood of communal genocide on their hands......and neither should take the moral high ground in this regard......and neither should their supporters......
The Outsider Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 Did Sonia Gandhi or Manmohan Singh accept that there was a lapse by the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi ? No. All they did was express regret but not accept any responsibility. While their statements were not perfect, it's certainly way more than what Modi has said. Also, they did not use some bizarre kutte ka bachcha analogy to trivialize the event in addition to the fact that he was not even sure of whether he was the driver or sitting in the backseat, and who was driving his hypothetical car. And I never claimed it to be the only reason for it not finding resonance with the voters. There are 3 other points I've mentioned as well. Taken together, it's not a surprise that voters find it irrelevant in the current context.
seedhi Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 Rajiv Gandhi or Indira Gandhi never accepted any responsibility for the riots. The Congress party has never accepted their responsibility either. If, for example, Sonia and Manmohan had said that Rajiv Gandhi failed and that he should have apologized, then this could be seen as some genuineness of contrition. The Congress party keeps worshiping Indira and Rajiv as the second coming of Mary and Jesus. This flies right in the face of their so called apology for 1984.
jalebi_bhai Posted July 25, 2013 Author Posted July 25, 2013 15 vs 2 on this thread I personally don't like either alliance......politics is disillusioning.....you are ultimately forced to decide between the lesser evils rather than the best candidates........
seedhi Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 While their statements were not perfect, it's certainly way more than what Modi has said. Also, they did not use some bizarre kutte ka bachcha analogy to trivialize the event in addition to the fact that he was not even sure of whether he was the driver or sitting in the backseat, and who was driving his hypothetical car. And I never claimed it to be the only reason for it not finding resonance with the voters. There are 3 other points I've mentioned as well. Taken together, it's not a surprise that voters find it irrelevant in the current context.You made this somewhat bizarrely self-fulfilling statement: "However, the point has no resonance among people beyond their own supporters .." Obviously, the supporters of the BJP are also voters. I mean I can also claim that the so called apology by Manmohan and Sonia does not resonate beyond the support base of Congress. On the ground in Gujarat more Muslims are voting for Modi than ever before. I guess at least part of this could be a realization that Congress has been responsible for far worse riots than any other party in India.
adi B Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 I personally don't like either alliance......politics is disillusioning.....you are ultimately forced to decide between the lesser evils rather than the best candidates........ yup,we know which party is the less evil :nice:
The Outsider Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 It's not a question of remorse.....it's a case of a pot calling a kettle black......If their main weapon against the BJP is that they are anti-secularism, and the Gujarat Riots is their main evidence.......then shouldn't people realize that the UPA too has a history of being anti-secular?? It's like one rapist blaming another rapist for being a pervert...... Politics is a lot about personalities and not just parties. Rajiv Gandhi has been dead for more than 20 years. The top Congress leadership of today had no involvement in the '84 riots. On the contrary, Modi is not only alive but pretty much the face of the BJP today. Showing remorse is all good and dandy......but apologies can't reverse the course of history.......Also, did Indira Gandhi ever apologize?? Don't think so........then why should Manmohan Singh's and Sonia Gandhi's apology hold any weight??.....their roles in the riots were minimal to non-existent.......... It was Indira Gandhi's death which triggered the riots, but I get your point - Rajiv Gandhi never apologized. However, in the '89 elections the campaign against him did involve his failure of the '84 riots along with the main issue of Bofors. The point I'm trying to make is that.......both parties have the blood of communal genocide on their hands......and neither should take the moral high ground in this regard......and neither should their supporters...... Say 30 years from now, when Modi is dead or irrelevant in politics the Congress keeps talking about '02, do you think it will find any resonance with the voters? Even in this campaign, hardly any references are being made to Uma Bharti's role in '92 because she is irrelevant today. It was talked about in the elections in the 90s, when she was a more prominent figure in the BJP.
The Outsider Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 You made this somewhat bizarrely self-fulfilling statement: Obviously, the supporters of the BJP are also voters. I mean I can also claim that the so called apology by Manmohan and Sonia does not resonate beyond the support base of Congress. On the ground in Gujarat more Muslims are voting for Modi than ever before. I guess at least part of this could be a realization that Congress has been responsible for far worse riots than any other party in India. Your analogy is off. The correct analogy would be if '02 finds resonance beyond Congress supporters and the answer is a resounding yes.
jalebi_bhai Posted July 25, 2013 Author Posted July 25, 2013 Politics is a lot about personalities and not just parties. Rajiv Gandhi has been dead for more than 20 years. The top Congress leadership of today had no involvement in the '84 riots. On the contrary, Modi is not only alive but pretty much the face of the BJP today. It was Indira Gandhi's death which triggered the riots, but I get your point - Rajiv Gandhi never apologized. However, in the '89 elections the campaign against him did involve his failure of the '84 riots along with the main issue of Bofors. Say 30 years from now, when Modi is dead or irrelevant in politics the Congress keeps talking about '02, do you think it will find any resonance with the voters? Even in this campaign, hardly any references are being made to Uma Bharti's role in '92 because she is irrelevant today. It was talked about in the elections in the 90s, when she was a more prominent figure in the BJP. Arrey......I don't care about the apologies......My simple point is this......both parties have the blood of communal violence on their hands......neither should use secularism as a beating stick .......this, however, will never happen.......as you pointed out in your third para, the fact that Modi is still very relevant in the current national political scene and the fact that the riots are still fresh on the minds of people renders the UPA in a very favorable position if Modi turns out to be BJP's Prime Ministerial candidate........they will play to the sentiments of the secularists and liberals and social activists and blah blah...... But come next year, if it is a choice between Modi and Rahul baba (:giggle:).........with absolutely no hesitation, I'd want Modi to be the PM........ The main issue I have (and my family, we are Christians) with the BJP is their supposed support (it is dwindling but still) for that party called the RSS......
seedhi Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 Your analogy is off. The correct analogy would be if '02 finds resonance beyond Congress supporters and the answer is a resounding yes.This is strange. In Gujarat the Congress carefully avoids raising the 2002 riots issue during the elections because they know that their duplicity will be exposed. More and more Muslims are voting for Modi. In the rest of the country I am not so sure of the impact today of the Gujarat riots issue.
KFC_Zinger Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 While their statements were not perfect, it's certainly way more than what Modi has said. Also, they did not use some bizarre kutte ka bachcha analogy to trivialize the event in addition to the fact that he was not even sure of whether he was the driver or sitting in the backseat, and who was driving his hypothetical car. And I never claimed it to be the only reason for it not finding resonance with the voters. There are 3 other points I've mentioned as well. Taken together, it's not a surprise that voters find it irrelevant in the current context. Does it matter who says what after a killing spree.... Sikhs were killed in 1984... hindus were killed and thrown out in 1989-90 in Kashmir Muslims were killed in 2002 in Gujarat ( after the Godhra massacre) Yeh sab ke baad kya achaar daloge apology ka
The Outsider Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 This is strange. In Gujarat the Congress carefully avoids raising the 2002 riots issue during the elections because they know that their duplicity will be exposed. More and more Muslims are voting for Modi. In the rest of the country I am not so sure of the impact today of the Gujarat riots issue. What percentage of Gujarat Muslims vote for Modi? Does it matter who says what after a killing spree.... Sikhs were killed in 1984... hindus were killed and thrown out in 1989-90 in Kashmir Muslims were killed in 2002 in Gujarat ( after the Godhra massacre) Yeh sab ke baad kya achaar daloge apology ka It doesn't matter to me, but it might for other voters. I was giving the reasons from the point of view of a general voter and not all reasons will apply to all voters. For me the most relevant bit is that Modi is the face of BJP today and no one from '84 is of any relevance in the Congress today. If BJP were to relegate Modi for someone with a more neutral stance like Jaitley or Swaraj, I would have no issues voting for them.
Crookbond Posted July 25, 2013 Posted July 25, 2013 Why is Nehra in the title of this thread? :dontknow:
jalebi_bhai Posted July 25, 2013 Author Posted July 25, 2013 Why is Nehra in the title of this thread? :dontknow: I wonder who this mischief maker is?? :dontknow:
Recommended Posts