Untitled

India! I dare you to be rich

Request for evidence of Modi’s hate speeches against Muslims

Addendum 21 September 2013: "SIT’s report“Modi’s statement accusing some elements in Godhra and the neighbourhood as possessing a criminal tendency was sweeping and offensive, coming as it did from a chief minister, that too at a critical time when Hindu-Muslim tempers were running high” (p. 13, Chairman’s Comments).

“His (Modi’s) implied justification of the killings of innocent members of the minority community read together with an absence of a strong condemnation of the violence that followed Godhra suggest a partisan stance at a critical juncture when the state had been badly disturbed by communal violence” (p. 153, PI Report). ). [Sanjeev: SIT's preliminary report was quite clear about Modi's culpability. Then it watered it down in the final report.]   [Source]

Addendum (14 September 2013): I have now been able to analyse a serious hate speech, here.

I have no doubt that Modi HATES MUSLIMS AT A GUT LEVEL, and would like to wipe them out entirely, if he could.

A discussion on FB led to my requesting evidence about the actual hate speeches made against Muslims by Modi.

Two pieces of evidence have been provided so far, below. Please add to this list.

In my mind Modi is almost certainly involved in many serious crimes. I must, however, give him the benefit of doubt since matters are still being investigated/ proven. The main thing about these cases is that they are very hard to prove, since a LOT of key evidence was not recorded publicly. And Modi has diligently destroyed a lot of key records. And almost certainly got key witnesses killed, including his own Minister.

But on hate speech, evidence should be public, hence open and shut. .

These two cases, below do show a STRONG tendency by Modi to use the religious card. He is NOT Vivekananda or S. Radhakrishnan, or Patel.

1) VIDEO BELOW

In this speech he refers to Muslim "miyans" and Miyan Musharraf, etc., in a very aggressive voice and talks about Muslims in a very denigrating manner.

He speaks in a growling, goonda's voice, threatening VIOLENCE (pulling out eyeballs of "Pakistani" Muslims, etc.). His voice is filled with deep, visceral hatred. Such a man becoming PM would almost certainly lead to nuclear holocaust in South Asia.

The other problem is his claim that "Hindus" can "never" become terrorists. I have no issues with the claim. That's probably got considerable merit. But his job is NOT to comment on any particular community. His job is of a Chief Minister: to ENFORCE law and order.

So yes, this particular speech DOES qualify as hate speech against Muslims.

2) RECENT CASES

Further, this info: http://www.iosworld.org/Back_to_Hate_Speech.htm

3) Pride march (Gaurav Yatra)

These pre-election rallies were part of Modi’s weeks-long "pride march" through the state, in which he addressed crowds every few kilometres. "He said people (Muslims) who multiplied thus "should be taught a lesson." He made quite a few anti-Muslim remarks at the rally. "Relief camps (housing muslim survivors) should be closed because they have become baby producing factories" "Those who multiply should be taught a lesson"

He "told a rally that relief camps housing Muslim survivors of the pogrom should be closed because they had become "factories for producing babies"." [Source] http://www.milligazette.com/Archives/01102002/0110200268.htm  ("factories for producing babies")

4) Praise of fake encounter against Sohrabuddin Sheikh

The Election Commission on Thursday served a showcause notice to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi for his alleged justification of the killing of businessman Sohrabuddin Sheikh in a fake encounter on November 26, 2005, near Ahmedabad. [Source]

"A sitting Chief Minister “brazenly admitting that he liquidated” Sohrabuddin Sheikh is not a political statement, countered Singhvi." [Source]

5) This has a number of hateful public comments by Modi: http://hindumuslimindia.blogspot.com.au/2006/09/mr-narendra-modi-in-his-own-words.html

6) Strong tacit understanding with VHP

Togadia is clear that there is a strong understanding between him and Modi:

"There's a portrait of Hindu Rashtra behind the veneer. How do you know if there isn't a tacit understanding between us? Any PM aspirant should not forget that the road to Delhi passes through Ayodhya. The saffron cadre on the ground will only support such a leader who swears by the Hindu nation, the Ram temple and is ready to scrap Article 370" [Source]

Also see this:An ominous portent.

Please send me more data. Let's do some research on this and other aspects of Modi, to determine his suitability to become PM of India.

7) "Action reaction"

A number of attempts have been made by the Chief Minister and his coterie to distant him from the comment wherein he stated that “Every action has a reaction”. The CM claimed he never made the remarks nor did he give any interview to the correspondent that quoted the same.

But a transcript of the interview that the CM gave, wherein he clearly stated the above in reference to the attack of slain Congress M.P. Eshan Jafri unmistakably confirms that the CM made the remark.  

An excerpt of the interview with Chief Minister, Narendra Modi in Gandhinagar on March 1 2002, by Zee TV Correspondent Sudhir Choudhury is as follows:

The Correspondent begins by asking Mr Modi about the Chamanpura massacre in which former Congress MP, Ehsan Jafri was killed along with others. The Chief Minister referred to reports that Jafri had first fired at the violent mob which infuriated the crowd further. They stormed the Housing Society and set it on fire.  His exact quote is: “Kriya pratikriya ki chain chal rahi hai. Hum chahate hain ki na kriya ho aur na pratikriya”. 

He refers to Jafri’s firing as “action” and the massacre that followed as “reaction”.

(Source: “Rights and Wrongs” Ordeal by Fire in the Killing Fields of Gujarat: Editors Guild Fact Finding Mission Report- New Delhi, May 3, 2002) [Source]

8) Further (mostly indirect) compilation of Modi's hateful actions/speeches. [Actually not here but in Communalism Combat June 2009, "Tongue of Flame" - need to access it]

ADDENDUM

Turns out Vajpayee wasn't less in such matters: "Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s speech in Goa in 2002, soon after the Gujarat riots, where the then Prime Minister had said Muslims tend ‘not to live in coexistence with others" [Source]

 


If you found this post useful, then consider subscribing to my blog by email:

Breaking Free of Nehru

Join the Freedom Team of India or become a Freedom Partner.

Google
Print Friendly

Sanjeev Sabhlok

View more posts from this author
20 thoughts on “Request for evidence of Modi’s hate speeches against Muslims
  1. SSRAT

    Why cannot Modi comment on any particular community?
    Muslim mullahs talk about non hindus in an even more denigrating and violent manner, at least somebody is producing what Modi has said, the things muslims say and get away with is mind numbing.

     
  2. SSRAT

    Vajpayee was, is and will remain correct about the FACT that muslims NEVER LIVE PEACEFULLY WITH NON MUSLIMS once they become a significant minority. Look at Nigeria, Southern Thailand, Northern Kerala, parts of Philippines, muslim dens in european cities etc.

    Nothing wrong with saying things the way they are.

    I say India is secular because it is a HINDU MAJORITY country, if India ever becomes muslim majority secularism will disappear, you believe that or not? don’t point towards Turkey because in Turkey the iron fist of the secular Turkish military keeps islamists out. Kemal ataturk understood what a curse islam is.

     
  3. Sanjeev Sabhlok

    Generalising about any group is wrong. That’s the problem here. By all means any specific criminal must be pointed out and punished. But generalising is a very big problem. The difference between any vile Muslim who makes generalisations and Modi is that that vile Muslim is a two-penny local leader and not aspiring to be India’s PM. 

    India’s PM must be rational, judicious and capable of distinguishing indivdiuals from groups.

    s

     
  4. Sanjeev Sabhlok

    Please don’t generalise. India will remain a country worth living in, so long as liberty and justice prevail.

     
  5. SSRAT

    Most muslim moulavis and leaders are vile and the community follows them out of ignorance or willfully in the end others suffer because of them.

    Generalisations must not be done, 18% voted for congress in 2009 yet MMS is P.M for ALL, you know what I am trying to say here Mr. Sabhlok?

    muslims can no longer LIE about their religion and their nefarious intentions.

     
  6. Sanjeev Sabhlok

    I think only two groups: Hindu fanatics and Muslim fanatics have been indulging in nefarious anti-national hatred/killing policies. 

    Most Hindus and Muslims are peace loving citizens who contribute to the welfare of society.

     
  7. SSRAT

    Most Hindus show their secularism(not to show but it becomes visible) by voting for different parties if not BJP would have won 450 seats minimum.

    MOST MUSLIMS vote for the candidates their mullahs tell them to vote for, in Kerala (all parties are evil in this state), muslims votes for muslim parties, christians voted for christian parties and Hindu votes got divided. Same in Hyderabad.

    If you want to know muslim voting pattern i.e whether they vote keeping in mind religion then look at muslim majority areas or areas where there are a significant minority like Assam etc.

     
  8. Sanjeev Sabhlok

    We don’t want to ape primitive Muslim voting patterns. We want an INTELLIGENT India.

     
  9. SSRAT

    The only way you can avoid primitive/barbaric/stupid muslim voting patterns is by taking away muslims’s right to vote. Hindus are smart enough therefore votes get divided.

    Even among Hindus it is the upper caste votes that get divided though not SC/ST votes and OBCs are mid way.

     
  10. SSRAT

    Who do you mean by we? if you mean Indians then are not muslims Indians? If you mean Hindus then why should Hindus alone should not vote on religious grounds?

     
  11. muslimah

    Assalamu alaikum wa rehmatullahi wa barakatuhu…. Brother i don’t mind who is going to be a pm of our country… In this conversation i saw that u said something about Islam… Plz without any knowledge don’t say anything about Islam… First u study about Islam then i can bet u that u don’t even pass a single comment after knowing Islam … Islam is a religion of peace.,,, plz try to understand i am a Indian…. And i proud to be an indian

     
  12. Sanjeev Sabhlok

    Muslimah

    I will reserve my judgement on Islam being a religion of peace only after I see the end to insistent demands from Islam to shut down free speech. Across the world, Islam has created a niche as the enemy of liberty (particularly free speech). Please launch an agitation to un-ban Satanic Verses, for instance.

    Having said that, I do believe Islam has many good things going for it, and have written extensively about such things in my book Discovery of Freedom.

    This particular post is re: Modi’s attitude towards Muslims which, in my view, is extremely negative and inconsistent with  the expectation that all Indians have equal rights in India.

    s

     
  13. B S Bhamrah

    Every community is welcome in any temple in India, clear ur basics please. I am telling you with my own experience. Some rare incidents can be there but u then ur statement is absolutly rubbish.
    People like u will try ur level best to tarnish the image of mr. Modi, because probably u get your fundings through congress or some arabian nations.
    We have love for Modi because of his work, we can predict his moral character through his actions. But people like u can not understand that. You have not added any word about prime minister being just 3 months older and the level of carnage at Godhra. It was sproadic violence that erroupted in Gujrat, unpredictable.

     
  14. Sanjeev Sabhlok

    I do not intend to debate someone who walks with eyes and ears closed. When you wish to open your eyes, look around. You may be surprised.

     
  15. A

    Assuming that the media theory about Modi’s “visceral hatred” was true as of 2002, or even as of 2005, you can’t deny that Modi enjoys considerable support from Muslims today. The evidence you seek for the theory of hatred is just not there. That theory of hatred is even more flawed as it cannot explain the reality of today, that is — Why are large numbers of Muslims supporting Modi? ( source: http://www.niticentral.com/2014/04/17/how-a-muslim-betrayed-by-congress-found-a-home-in-bjp-212833.html ) . That runs counter to the theory. If large numbers of Muslims (too) were not supporting Modi, why would Sonia Gandhi have to appeal to the Sunni faction’s cleric in Delhi, Imam Bukhari, to make sure that Muslim vote will not be split (i.e. Muslims should not vote Modi to power. source: http://www.firstpost.com/politics/congress-cant-be-trusted-says-shahi-imams-brother-about-sonia-meeting-1462583.html ) ? This current reality can be ignored by your theory only at its own peril. Please comment.

     
  16. Sanjeev Sabhlok

    I really couldn’t care a damn about the religion of people who support Modi. I’ve found that he is a criminal, and that’s enough for me. In my view he should have served at least a few years in prison for his massive crime of inciting Hindutva fanatics, and for promoting people like Kodnani to his cabinet despite clear proof of their murderous actions.

    And I don’t care about Sonia, who should equally be behind bars for crimes against India.

     

Leave a Reply

p-4j9aGt2RSyXeB