Why do people who support Narendra Modi choose to pardon/ignore/forget his alleged role in the Gujarat riots?
Very well reasoned -
Answer by Himanshu Yadav:
Why I’ll vote for Narendra Modi:
1. Maths logic:
Solution by elimination: Out of the 2 possible candidates as of now (Narendra Modi and Rahul Gandhi), I’d vote for Modi any-day for reasons we all know, let’s not go there again.
However, if AAP and Arvind Kejriwal catch up to the political race by 2014, then I would need to invest more time on studying the proposed policies and election manifestoes of Narendra Modi and Arvind Kejriwal before deciding who to vote for. I highly doubt there will be anyone else other than these 3 in the next PM race.
2. Chemistry logic:
Narendra’s Modi’s chemistry with the people of Gujarat and India in general is much better than any other PM candidate. People associate with their leader who used to sell tea at a railway station in his childhood. They know he has seen and experienced it all, and that he means when he says he’s working to make things better for everyone.
As they say, pictures speak louder than words! If he, being a muslim loves him, there’s no reason why anyone else shouldn’t!
3. History logic:
Gujarat’s tremendous growth over the last decade is an example for all the states. He did not get any special benefits from the UPA government, but yet he managed to turn around the entire development model of the state with the limited resources he had. His credentials list is long, and his resume for the position of PM stronger than anyone else out there right now.
Let there be no doubt about it, Narendra Modi is a brilliant leader who has a great vision of the future, who realises the strength and potential of our nation and of a 1.2 billion+ people at the world stage and knows how to make India work towards achieving that goal of becoming the world leader, and if elected, he’ll do just that, and nothing else.
So does that mean I’m ready to ignore and forget the 2002 Gujarat riots and his ‘alleged’ involvement in the same?
Well, Supreme court gave him a clean sheet, so did all other agencies.
Even if we do consider the situation that he ‘could’ have done something back then to prevent the incidents that took place, I’m still forced to think that being in his position at that time wouldn’t have been an easy job at all, just think about it for a second.. what would you do knowing there are 2 religious communities in your state completely out of control ready to kill and burn everything in their path? Any decision that he could have taken may also had gone horribly wrong at the time, and he’s a human in the end, not a god!
Edit: I would like to add a paragraph from ’s answer here:
“Perhaps people do not know that at the time of the Gujarat 2002 riots, Narendra Modi was very new and inexperienced having been appointed chief minister only a couple of months earlier, fresh from many years of organisational work outside Gujarat. And only a week before the 27th February 2002, when 58 Hindu pilgrims were burnt to death at the Godhra railway station by a Muslim mob, he had emerged victorious in a hard-fought Assembly by-election. Even then at the first signs of serious riots in Ahmedabad on the 28th February, Modi asked for army deployement and the next day several army columns were staging flag-marches in the city. In the month-long riots, curfew was imposed and shoot-at-sight orders were given in 34 cities and towns of Gujarat, and more than 100 rioters, nearly all Hindus, were killed in police firing. In all, in the Gujarat 2002 riots, 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus were killed and 223 more people were reported missing. As against this, in the week following Indira Gandhi’s assassination on the 31st October 1984 at the hands of two Sikh securitymen, mobs led by Congressmen massacred about 2,800 Sikhs in Delhi alone, and about 7,000 more in the rest of the country, and nowhere the police fired on the murderous mobs. Not one, and I repeat not one, non-Sikh was killed in Delhi in those so-called riots in November 1984.
Yet, no one ever called Rajiv Gandhi a Hitler or for that matter branded the Congressmen as Nazis, why so? Is it because the life of a Sikh is far cheaper than that of a Muslim? Or is it because about 19 crore of Indian Muslims are electorally far more important than about 2 crore Sikhs?”
which brings me to my last point..
4. Hollywood logic:
Professor X: I had a terrible choice to make, I chose the lesser of the 2 evils.
Edit: An extension of this question and answer: