[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Re:



---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Rakesh Raju,

>While all are against anarchy; As a citizen i look to our law to >protect 
>society. What happened in 1992 was against our then and >current law. I 
>believe in the rule of law while you seem to support >settling of scores 
>any which way.

Please re-read my posts carefully.  I indicated very clearly that there was 
a long process of discussion and negotiation with muslim leaders prior to 
Ayodhya.  It was muslim intractability which prevented justice being done.  
It is your kind of thinking which leads to the 'settling of scores' 
mentality by denying and postponing justice.  Having said this, all those 
who broke the law in 1992 must be punished.

>To extraploate on your logic:
>What if the Shudra leadership takes the case to the VHP that all their
>temples are offensive because they are symbols of fascism. And then >what 
>if they decide to "correct" the situation? would you be equally >supportive 
>of this mob rajya?-Rakesh Raju

Far from extrapolating my logic - your statement is completely devoid of any 
logic.  You've taken a giant leap to nowhere and left all of us behind.


Sanjay Garg


>From: "Rakesh Raju" <zoot@squishyfx.com>
>Reply-To: debate@indiapolicy.org
>To: <debate@indiapolicy.org>
>Subject: Re: Re:
>Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 06:45:03 -0800 (PST)
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Dear Sanjay Garg,
>While all are against anarchy; As a citizen i look to our law to protect
>society. What happened in 1992 was against our then and current law. I
>believe in the rule of law while you seem to support settling of scores any
>which way.
>
>To extraploate on your logic:
>What if the Shudra leadership takes the case to the VHP that all their
>temples are offensive because they are symbols of fascism. And then what if
>they decide to "correct" the situation? would you be equally supportive of
>this mob rajya?
>
>-Rakesh Raju
>
> > >But that doesn't alter the fact that a barbaric criminal act was
> > > >committed. Many people were involved as actors,directors,sponsors and
> > > >thousands died.
> >
> > When a murderer is punished for a heinous crime, is it a 'barbaric
>criminal
> > act?'  By any civilized standard this would be regarded as justice, pure
>and
> > simple. This is a fundamental and necessary rule of life, without which 
>we
> > will have widespread anarchy.  Surely, you are not advocating that, are
>you?
>
>
> > >Cause --  Deep resentment over perceived flaw in bill of rights.
> > >Symptom - Mosque deconstructed. Two thousand citizens too.
> > >PM:    "It was the will of the majority"
> >
> > Cause - Deep *and growing* resentment over perceived flaw in bill of
>rights
> > which sees the continual and pervasive appeasement of minorities.
> > Symptom:  So long as this fundamental cause is not addressed, it will
> > manifest itself in ugly incidents such as the Babri.  FYI, there is a
>demand
> > for 3 more major temple sites in North India put forward to Muslim
> > leadership by the VHP.  In the South, there is at least one major site
>which
> > is on the table.  Unfortunately, muslims have been dragging their feet 
>on
> > this issue for years now.  Needless to say, these have the potential to
> > explode into another Babri.
> >
> > This demand is dwarfed by the complete universe of 80,000 sites all 
>across
> > India.  3,000 of these sites have been thoroughly and conclusively
> > documented based on islamic documents of the period.
> >
> > >This is no way to reassure the citizens of Indian that they will be
> > > >treated uniformly and with civility.
> >
> > If a criminal and a law abiding citizen are both treated 'uniformly', it
>is,
> > in fact, a slap in the face of the law abiding citizen.
> >
> > Sanjay Garg
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: "Rakesh Raju" <mail@raju.net>
> > >Reply-To: debate@indiapolicy.org
> > >To: <debate@indiapolicy.org>
> > >Subject: Re:
> > >Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 13:09:12 -0800 (PST)
> > >
> > >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
> > >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >Dear Sam Garg,
> > >
> > >I don't know how I managed to convey that a majority has to swallow the
> > >fact
> > >that it has no rights whatsover, but I don't want to get into a 
>semantics
> > >debate or discuss the merits of the statistical methods you employed; I
>am
> > >not qualified.
> > >
> > >But I would like to respond to your conclusion:
> > >
> > > > You confuse symptoms with cause.  The re-establishment of a 
>destroyed
> > >temple
> > > > is merely the symptom of a deep resentment at a flawed bill of 
>rights.
> > >
> > >No confusion here. I have seen examples of crude mosques that were
> > >obviously
> > >once temples, as in Varansi where it is right next to the golden temple
>and
> > >you can still see parts of the original structure. I felt and still 
>feel
> > >the
> > >resentment quite strongly. I can relate to how people got amped and 
>went
> > >nuts. As thermodymanics it makes total sense: a "correction", as 
>Naipaul
> > >refers to it.
> > >
> > >But that doesn't alter the fact that a barbaric criminal act was
>committed.
> > >Many people were involved as actors,directors,sponsors and thousands
>died.
> > >
> > >          Cause --  Deep resentment over perceived flaw in bill of
>rights.
> > >          Symptom - Mosque deconstructed. Two thousand citizens too.
> > >             PM:    "It was the will of the majority"
> > >
> > >This is no way to reassure the citizens of Indian that they will be
>treated
> > >uniformly and with civility.
> > >
> > >
> > >-Rakesh Raju
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Sam Garg" <gargsam@hotmail.com>
> > >To: <debate@indiapolicy.org>
> > >Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2000 8:59 PM
> > >Subject: Re:
> > >
> > >
> > > > 
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate 
>it!
> > > > 
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > Dear Rakesh Raju,
> > > >
> > > > Just as respectfully, I, too, take issue with your seeming logic:
> > > >
> > > > >Mr Vajpayee's statements reflected the will of the BJP and its
> > > > > >supporters.
> > > >
> > > > Even if what you say is correct, it is well within accepted limits 
>for
>a
> > > > party leader to reflect the will of his constituents.
> > > >
> > > > >He deserves to be exiled to Saudi Arabia for succumbing to 
>electoral
> > > > >politics.
> > > >
> > > > An absurd comment. By your standard, every political leader from 
>every
> > > > country will soon be calling Saudi home.  At this rate, Saudi
>nationals
> > > > would soon be outnumbered by exiled politicians from every 
>democracy.
> > > >
> > > > >As a long time NRI I see overwhelming nausea...from fellow NRIs.
> > > >
> > > > Your nauseous state is self-evident. Pray provide some evidence of
>other
> > > > nauseated NRIs, as I provided to support my statement.  Easy to make
> > >tall
> > > > claims....
> > > >
> > > > >Your example illustrates that BJP supporters are more vocal.
> > > > >Its possible...I'll buy it.
> > > >
> > > > Strange as it may seem to you, BJP supporters do not need your 'buy
>in'.
> > > > You seem to have missed the simple math in my little statistic - 
>there
> > >was
> > > > more than 20 times the normal response rate for this particular
>issue -
> > > > almost all of them pro Vajpayee. To sweep this under the rug would 
>be
> > > > foolhardy and irrational.
> > > >
> > > > >FIRST;  since when did the the bjp become a majority?
> > > > >SECOND; && Even if it were a majority, representative democracy
> > > > >works within a bill of rights. If a majority says, "liquidate the
> > > >jews"
> > >,
> > > > >it does not become right.
> > > >
> > > > FIRST:  Please re-read my intial post carefully - I wrote 'bjp
> > >represents
> > > > the will of the majority' on this issue.
> > > > SECOND: Really?  by what universal standard?  if the majority in ANY
> > >country
> > > > decides to do ANYTHING, who will stop it?
> > > >
> > > > >Again; bjp and its spporters are a minority.  A vocal and 
>demolition
> > > >savvy
> > > > >minority, but still; a minority.
> > > >
> > > > Why make this redundant statement? you yourself claim in your 
>previous
> > >point
> > > > that even if the bjp had a majority this 'would not be right' i.e 
>you
> > >want
> > > > to eat your cake and have it too.  What you are really asking me to
> > >swallow
> > > > is that the majority has no rights whatsoever in their own country,
> > > > regardless whether they have a majority or minority government.
> > > >
> > > > >How is razing of a 16th century religious structure in the 21st,
> > > > >deinstitutionalizing differences ?
> > > >
> > > > You confuse symptoms with cause.  The re-establishment of a 
>destroyed
> > >temple
> > > > is merely the symptom of a deep resentment at a flawed bill of 
>rights.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sanjay Garg
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >From: "Rakesh Raju" <mail@raju.net>
> > > > >Reply-To: debate@indiapolicy.org
> > > > >To: <debate@indiapolicy.org>
> > > > >Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 07:53:04 -0800 (PST)
> > > > >
> > > > 
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate
>it!
> > > > 
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > >Dear "Sam" Garg,
> > > > >      I respectfully disagree with your inferences:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Mr Vajpayee's statements reflected the will of the people.
> > > > >
> > > > >        Mr Vajpayee's statements reflected the will of the BJP and
>its
> > > > >        supporters.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >He deserves not
> > > > > > censure but praise and support for his courageous statement.
> > > > >
> > > > >       He deserves to be exiled to Saudi Arabia for succumbing to
> > >electoral
> > > > >       politics.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >As a long time
> > > > > > NRI, I see around me overwhelming support for Mr Vajpayee's
> > >statements
> > > > > >from fellow NRIs.
> > > > >
> > > > >       As a long time NRI I see overwhelming nausea...from fellow
>NRIs.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >Case in point -  I frequent another open discussion forum
> > > > > > which discusses and debates current topics from India.  When Mr
> > > > >Vajpayee's
> > > > > > statements were posted on the board, it generated a flood of
> > >supporting
> > > > > > comments.  In fact, when all was said and done, there over a 100
> > > > >messages,
> > > > > > the vast majority in support of Vajpayee.  ...To any reasonable
> > >person,
> > > > > >this little  >example illustrates the broad based, grass roots
> > >support
> > > > >that
> > > > > >Mr Vajpayee enjoys on this issue.
> > > > >
> > > > >       Your example illustrates that BJP supporters are more vocal.
> > > > >       Its possible...I'll buy it.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To chastise him for reflecting the will of the majority goes
>against
> > >the
> > > > > > very essence of a representative democracy.
> > > > >
> > > > >       FIRST;  since when did the the bjp become a majority?
> > > > >       SECOND; && Even if it were a majority, representative
>democracy
> > > > >               works within a bill of rights. If a majority says,
> > > > >               "liquidate the jews" , it does not become right.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > It also renders the second
> > > > > > point moot - it is the majority, as is its right, which is
>rejecting
> > >the
> > > > > > constitution, not Vajpayee.
> > > > >
> > > > >        Again; bjp and its spporters are a minority.
> > > > >        A vocal and demolition savvy minority, but still; a 
>minority.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >The majority can no longer swallow a document
> > > > > > which institutionalises differences - it would be akin to 
>separate
> > > > > > constitutions for blacks and whites in USA and would be laughed
>out
> > >of
> > >a
> > > > > > grade 5 classroom here.
> > > > >
> > > > >       How is razing of a 16th century religious structure in the
>21st,
> > > > >       deinstitutionalizing differences ?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >-Rakesh
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >From: prabhu.guptara@ubs.com
> > > > > > >Reply-To: debate@indiapolicy.org
> > > > > > >To: debate@indiapolicy.org
> > > > > > >Subject: apology needed from Mr Vajpayee for betraying his Oath
>of
> > > > >Office
> > > > > > >Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 06:54:34 -0800 (PST)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > >Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and
>propagate
> > >it!
> > > > > >
> > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > >All Indian organisations and individuals should support the
> > >following
> > > > > > >demand
> > > > > > >for an intervention by the President, and for an apology from 
>Mr
> > > > >Vajpayee,
> > > > > > >and
> > > > > > >should urge evryone to stop dealing with Mr Vajpayee as long as
>he
> > >does
> > > > >not
> > > > > > >issue such an apology.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Whether he can and will dismiss the ministers is entirely a
> > >political
> > > > > > >matter:
> > > > > > >if there is enough support for the move within and outside 
>India,
> > >he
> > > > >will
> > > > > > >have
> > > > > > >to do so, but that, I repeat, is a political matter.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >The apology relates to a matter which has resulted in his
>betraying
> > >the
> > > > > > >Constitution of India which he swore to uphold when he took the
> > >office
> > > > >of
> > > > > > >Prime
> > > > > > >Minister.  Like every other citizen he can follow due process 
>of
> > >law
> > >in
> > > > > > >seeking
> > > > > > >to change the Constitution, but if he violates the Constitution
>or
> > >any
> > > > > > >other
> > > > > > >law, he should suffer the penalty for it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Given Indian realities, it is extremely unlikely that he will 
>be
> > > > >impeached
> > > > > > >(as
> > > > > > >he should be) but he should be forced at least to offer an
>apology.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >prabhu guptara
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >PRESIDENT INTERVENTION SOUGHT:
> > > > > > >The All India Babri Masjid Re-building Committee (AIBMRC)
>demanded
> > >a
> > > > >public
> > > > > > >apology from the Prime Minister, Mr. Atal Behari Vajpayee, for
>his
> > > > > > >statement on Ram temple and dismissal of charge-sheeted Union
> > > > >Ministers,
> > > > >L
> > > > > > >K Advani, Mr. Murli Manohar Joshi and Ms. Uma Bharti, in the
>Babri
> > > > >Masjid
> > > > > > >demolition case. Seeking the President, Mr. K R Narayanan's
> > > > >intervention
> > > > >in
> > > > > > >the matter, the AIBMRC in a letter requested him to refer all 
>the
> > > > >disputes
> > > > > > >of Babri Masjid - Ram Janmabhoomi to the Supreme Court under
> > >Article
> > > > >138-B
> > > > > > >of the Constitution for a final, time bound and binding 
>decision.
> > > > >(HINDU,
> > > > > > >14 Dec.)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > >This is the National Debate on System Reform.
> > > > >debate@indiapolicy.org
> > > > > > >Rules, Procedures, Archives:
> > > > >http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >_________________________________________________________________________
> > > > > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> > > > >http://www.hotmail.com.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > This is the National Debate on System Reform.
> > > > >debate@indiapolicy.org
> > > > > > Rules, Procedures, Archives:
> > > > >http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >This is the National Debate on System Reform.
> > >debate@indiapolicy.org
> > > > >Rules, Procedures, Archives:
> > >http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
> > > >
> > >
> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > >
> > 
> >_________________________________________________________________________
> > > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> > >http://www.hotmail.com.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > This is the National Debate on System Reform.
> > >debate@indiapolicy.org
> > > > Rules, Procedures, Archives:
> > >http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
> > > >
> > 
> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >This is the National Debate on System Reform.
>debate@indiapolicy.org
> > >Rules, Procedures, Archives:
>http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
> > 
> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > 
>_________________________________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at 
>http://www.hotmail.com.
> >
> >
> > 
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > This is the National Debate on System Reform.       
>debate@indiapolicy.org
> > Rules, Procedures, Archives:            
>http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
> > 
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
>Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------