traiters unite!

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 Ronak Patel’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:
Why did Narendra Modi not answer this question?

View Answer on Quora

What are the common myths about Arvind Kejriwal?

Definitely worth a read

Answer by Gaurav Gupta:

HERE IS WHAT AYN RAND MIGHT HAVE SAID ABOUT ARVIND KEJRIWAL

---

Throughout the centuries, there were men, who walked down new paths armed with nothing but their own vision. It is these men, their intensity, their conviction and their guts, which is the fountainhead of all human progress. Kejriwal is that man. He is that modern Atlas.

---

The biggest myth surrounding him is that he is a publicity seeker, that he wants power for himself and that he is doing it because he wants some political office. If Power or Money was his aim, he would have not exposed everyone in the political spectrum. He would have joined NAC under Sonia Gandhi, drank tea with “elite” jholawalas at India International centre while seeing his nation go down the trashcan.

Think of it, if Arvind Kejriwal had illusions of money or power, was IRS a bad place? (Retd as Income Tax Commissioner) .Yet, he left that and struggled in an NGO for long uncertain years to work on a then crazy-difficult idea, the RTI act. Today, you and me can use RTI to get our work done in Govt Departments.

On the flipside, just think of how many of us can even take a day, if not week out of our jobs/work to do something for the nation? Mr. Kejriwal has dedicated his entire life to serving his nation. Surely, that should count for something.

As a public servant of standing, he knew better than anyone else how nothing in India moves without money. But despite that, he is out there in the field getting hit by lathis and water cannons while battling a hostile government.


Public service and politics cannot be mutually exclusive. It is very easy to abuse Politicians sitting in our drawing rooms but the fact  that run this country cannot be wished away. While the Anna movement brought awareness, fasting without an overall vision can hardly be the solution.

For the system to change there has to be someone has to take the plunge to clean this cesspool and fight to the hard, cold and bitter end. Someone has to walk the talk.

I think Mr. Kejriwal would’ve given up already if his aim was merely to win votes or to become some minster. Congress would have accepted him with open arms and given him a ministry.

But thats much of an option for an Honest, Upright and Brilliant man who fights on despite all sorts of Income Tax Raids, Inquiries and underhand tactics.

He fights on to change the corrupt oligarchy India has become into true republic which is truly of the people, by the people and for the people.

History has shown that men driven purely by money, fame or power don’t take up such impossible tasks.

View Answer on Quora

Cricket Lessons?

Anurag Kashyap’s new find sings on local trains