Resistance is the first step towards Iraqi independence

Fuzair #246: ``Human Rights Watch has just said that the attacks on civilians, or when civilians are killed in attacking military targets in Iraq, is a war crime.``

What would that make the attacks by the US military on Iraq (and Afghanistan), in which, to protect one USAF pilot, hundreds of civilians are killed?

If you were take the combined firepower of all the attacks against the USA, by the militants, they would pale in comparison to the firepower that was launched in any one minute by the USA forces in this Gulf War and in the previous wars. In each one of these attacks, the aim is predominantly to protect the American soldier, at the expense of the civilians.

In addiiton, the US strategy always targets civilian sources like water plants, electricity grids etc., to completely decapitate the resources of the country they are attacking. This leads to hospitals and other areas running out of electricity, etc.

Any attack in which a civilian is knowingly killed is a human rights violation. And invariably, more civilians are killed by a piece of armament manufactured in the USA, than by a piece manufactured anywhere else in the world. And more and more those pieces are being launched by the Americans, themselves. And more often than not, it is the USA which initiates the killings of the civilians.

Do a quick calcuation: How many American civilians had been killed by Iraqis, prior to this war. Zero. How many Iraqi civlians have been killed by Americans prior to this war. Thousands. And hundreds of thousands if we count the sanctions.

How many American civilians have been killed by Iraqis in this war? The number is probably less than twenty (most civilians killed even by the militants are Iraqis). How many Iraqi civilians have been killed by Americans in this war, under the broad stroke of, ``collateral damage?`` The numbers I have read are between 7000 and 15000.

Had the USA not invaded Iraq, neither side would have killed civilians. So, while I do not agree with some things Tariq Ali says. I do agree with a lot also. These are all vicitims of, ``American imperialism.``

USA was not, is not, cannot, nor has it ever been, threatened by Iraq. Yet it continues killing Iraqis, under one precedent or another. This time around, having run out of all excuses to attack, with no WMDs, it has used the one, which is arrogantly laughable, i.e. it is attacking Iraq for the benefit of the Iraqis. Isn`t that what the USSR said when they attacked Afghanistan? Everyone was up in arms when that happened. Yet so many people are willing to give the USA a clean chit. I am glad Tariq Ali isn`t..........

The posts here have taken a strange twist, but heres something to put it back on track. Human Rights Watch has just said that the attacks on civilians, or when civilians are killed in attacking military targets in Iraq, is a war crime. Tsk, tsk, tsk. Tariq Ali`s beloved resistance to the evil, imperialist Americans is a war crime. Tariq Ali always struck me as a washed up old Trotskyite who refused to grow up and persisted in biting the hand that fed him.

Ref Maasanamuthu #244

[#242
Lemme guess. Your prozac prescription has run out and you have started to hallucinate again? Just a wild guess but i`m probably not too far off the mark.]

Oh, that`s your explanation, right?

Have you forgotten what is painted on walls in Tamil Nadu? Have you forgotten the mantra of the Dravidian movement?

Let me remind you.

``If you see a Brahmin and a snake, kill the Brahmin first.``

Do you remember who said this?

Thanthai Periyar. The Father of the Dravidian Movement. For whom you have statues and busts in every nook and corner of Tamil Nadu. For whom you have named government buildings and schools and colleges.

And even a university (http://www.periyaruniversity.net/).

On whose birthday, all you Dravidian Progressives troop up to his statues and garland them.

And you have the nerve to come here on Chowk and pontificate about Gujarat and the guilt of Hindus.

As to my statements about you benefitting from the rip-off of hapless people in Tamil Nadu, haven`t you used this statement ``If you see a Brahmin and a snake, kill the Brahmin first`` to stop all merit-based admission to colleges and government jobs and declare yourself to be backward caste so that you can deprive the Dalits and the Aborigines of their quotas?

Tell Chowkies I am making this up.

Because I will be able to show you up for the liar and cheat that you are.

It is better for you to claim amnesia.

soysauce ji

I am sorry to say that you are proving to be an extremely dishonest person. I hope that is not so. Here is why I call you dishonest:

You made a statement that sati and Gujrat riots are the same things. After that you have not offered us one clear statement to explain why that is so. Your best has been that they are both related to Hindus (in the latter case, Muslims too) and both related to deaths. That, according to you, is enough to make them the `same things.`

A person who tries to be so clever with words can also write clearly what is on his mind, what led him to such an absurd and bigotted statement.

#242
Lemme guess. Your prozac prescription has run out and you have started to hallucinate again? Just a wild guess but i`m probably not too far off the mark.
Let`s get back to MY point. Back up what you say about me in #234. Don`t run away. It`s probably good for your heart but not for your reputation.

Ref soysauce #241

[#238
Oops, forgot to answer your question. I`d think, hey this must be harimau. Happy?]

Let us see.

I asked the question: what do you think of a man who says repeatedly ``If you see a Muslim and a snake, kill the Muslim first.``

I must agree you came up with a clever response.

Now let us see if you weren`t too clever by half.

Tell the Chowkies why I asked that question.

Go ahead.

Tell them.

Tell them why I asked that very specific question.

#238
Oops, forgot to answer your question. I`d think, hey this must be harimau. Happy?

#238 harimau,
Just as i thought. You`re running away by bringing irrelevancies.
Why don`t you first tell us that you didn`t cheat on taxes last year? Mind you, just last year. How does your brand of logic taste to you?
OK, where were we? You hate muslims because you think some anonymous guy on the net hates your type. Is that just about right?

#237
Personal tirades? Now, now aren`t you being a little martyr?
Here`s the logic for you:
Many people travel by car.
Many people travel by foot.
Conclusion: both are means to travel.

Hey Maasanamuthu (#235),

I noticed you skipped over my post #233 but responded to #234.

So, tell Chowkies what you think of a man who says repeatedly ``If you see a Muslim and a snake, kill the Muslim first.``

What, cat got your tongue?

soysauce ji

I request that instead being proud of being a bigot, or launching personal tirades against me, you consider whether your logic, as you have expressed it, does not follow this pattern:

Many people in XYZ place own cars.
Many people in XYZ place own umbrellas.

Hence owning cars is the same as owning umbrellas.

Thank you.

Plats

I dont know about your documentation, but the only concrete documentation on the riots so far shows that out of 850 or so people killed, about 300 were Hindus. Also, more than 150 (at least!) were killed in police firings. I dont remember the actual numbers, but dozens of policemen were killed by the mobs.

I know the Goebbelian theory that a lie repeated hundred times becomes the truth. But at least the lie has to be repeated - here the riot death toll first became exclusively muslim, then it went up to 2000, then 5000. I am waiting for it to cross 10000 mark anyday now! Justice Nanavati is put in charge of an inquiry commision. He comes out with some initial observations, about how he got no proof of direct government involvement in the riots in any way, also talks about how at 155 places in Gujarat the riots seem to have been started by muslims, and he (a parsi) becomes another hindu fundamentalist. And then he is boycotted by the progressive media. Nowadays he doesn`t exist for the media anymore.

Its upto you to come up with the proof that the govt aided a particular community in rioting. What do you have? A secret document? A picture of Modi leading the riotors? I dont believe in hysterical rantings of the Indian English press. But I know that hundreds of riotors and dozens of policemen were killed during the riots, and that doesn`t tell me that the government was doing nothing.

Maybe Modi was not sympathetic to Muslims, and maybe his government could have done better in trying to control riots. But in that he was neither better nor worse than a number of other chief ministers around India. The Gujarat riots were not the ones with most dead in the history of independent india. That glory goes to Bhagalpur and Muradabad riots (both single city ones).

The difference this time was that it was a BJP government. Our progressive media had drummed around the world that they were vicious, murderous nazis who will organise pogroms of muslims once they came to power. Time was passing and no pogroms! So, with some help from friendly powers, an actual pogrom was organised at Godhra - no muslim victims here, no armed hindus, victims surrounded from all sides, in a train compartment, and then burned to death. 58 victims - 25 women, 14 children. That is a pogrom for you.
And that created a massive reaction. The animal feelings took over - humanity took a temporary leave of absence. Half a million people on the roads - no police or army in the world could have stopped it.

This riot came as manna from heaven for our progressives in the media - especially for editors who had promised in Pakistan that they`d `take care` of the BJP. Now they could go around and tell the world - `look! we told you so!` Fine, the only problem is, we hindus have sort of stopped caring about what the progressive intellectuals of the world (including pakistanis - God! Is there any end to surprises!) think of us anymore. And believe me, it is a liberating thing.

Plats, go on, preach. But your preachings are useless. Next time something like Godhra happens, there is going to be a much larger reaction. Very very hurtful to India, with our economy just picking up. But it is not going to go away by holier than thou preaching. In fact that preaching is what has hardened the hearts of many Hindus. A dialogue is the answer, not a monologue. And if you have to preach, preach also to those who create Godhras.

#231
All I am asking you to do is to explain your statement that ``hindu tolerance of sati was (the same as) hindu tolerance of wholesale massacre of muslims because the latter was simply a reaction to the burning of the yatris``

Huh? Are you having comprehension problems? I`m saying (1) there`s hindu tolerance of wholesale massacre of muslims, (2) sati was tolerated by hindus for a long time, and (3) hence the equation.
Feel free to call me what you want. Since I get the feeling that in your opinion gujarat was mererly a hindu ``reaction``, I`ll wear that label with honor.

#234
Harimau,
Since you`re making a personal insinuation about me, why don`t you go ahead and prove that I`m any of those things that you say I am. Normally I don`t care as you always come across as having skipped a few doses of your medication, but since you keep hiding your bigotry under some assumptions about me, it`s time to prove your point. I predict you`ll run away.

Ref Sudalaikkannu #229

[#226
Did I say it excuses the Gujarat riots?

You didn`t have. Context is everything. You certainly implied that it does.
It`s like Dubya saying we had to invade iraq because we were attacked on 9/11. The connection isn`t made explicitly but it certainly is implied.]

Let us see an exercise in context-sensitive statements and their implications.

Suppose I say, ``If you see a Muslim and a snake, kill the Muslim first.`` Suppose I say this not once but repeatedly.

I would like to know exactly what you think of me or any such person making such a statement.

Ref plats8 #232

[harimau #226,

Going by your argument, we should never criticize any inequity (to put it mildly) of the
present, because there is always precedence of ``us`` having done something similar
in the past. I am sure Tamil Brahmins have their share of misdeeds as well, as do
all other ethno-religious groups. Surely you don`t intend to do that.]

You would notice that I carry a 2x4 and freely use it to demolish hypocrisy on Chowk.

I was merely pointing out that people like Soysauce who are full of concern for Gujarati Muslims have no concern when injustice was being done to other persons. It is even more interesting that Soysauce personally is a beneficiary of several injusticed wreaked on the hapless population of Tamil Nadu but he is posing here as a reasonable and rational person.

harimau #226,

Going by your argument, we should never criticize any inequity (to put it mildly) of the
present, because there is always precedence of ``us`` having done something similar
in the past. I am sure Tamil Brahmins have their share of misdeeds as well, as do
all other ethno-religious groups. Surely you don`t intend to do that.

satish #230,

No, these were not people caught in a vicious cycle of random violence - it was actually
spectacularly well-directed violence. There is enough documentation to prove that the
govt aided and abetted a particular community in the rioting (for purely electoral reasons, as Harimau did point out) - voter lists do not appear out of nowhere. And saying that
Hindus and Muslims were equally victimized is completely disingenuous ; just look at
numbers of refugees from each community.

No self-respecting Indian of any community should try and justify the Gujarat riots (or
the Delhi riots of 1984, for that matter). Any civil society would`ve thrown Modi into a
political dustbin for his colossal incompetence, but we are well short of civil at times.