Modi, Muslims and Media. Voices from Narendra Modi’s Gujarat, 2014

• I am well aware that many will dismiss this book as a hagiographical account of Modi’s term as CM. To them I can only say, for 12 long years you have swallowed uncritically poisonous propaganda against him based on statements and testimonies which are being proven motivated, cooked-up, and plain false by courts and the SIT team. Let this come as a necessary antidote to that malicious smear campaign. I assure you that, unlike most of Teesta Setalvad’s witnesses, none of the people who spoke to me used tutored language. All of them spoke spontaneously on video. Unlike Teesta’s many witnesses, none of these people are likely to disown what they told me.
  • Madhu Purnima Kishwar: Modi, Muslims and Media. Voices from Narendra Modi’s Gujarat, Manushi Publications, Delhi 2014.

• The demonisation of Modi did not start with the 2002 riots. “Smear Modi Campaign”started from day one and was carried out in the same do-or-die spirit that one witnesses today when Congress Party wants to eliminate him from the prime ministerial race.

• At the same time, Congress’s well-orchestrated chorus calling Narendra Modi a “maut ka saudagar”, mass murderer, Hitler, snake, scorpion, yamdoot, and worse kept getting shriller by the day, duly amplified by propped up NGOs, pliable journalists, and patronised academics. So much so, that many within the BJP also came to believe the charges leveled against him and even demanded that he be sacked. Several BJP allies quit the NDA alliance, which facilitated the ousting of the otherwise popular Vajpayee-led NDA government in Delhi. The anti-Modi hysteria ensured that no one gave him a hearing; no one was willing to look at facts. How Modi retained not just his personal sanity but also emerged, as an outstanding administrator, capable of dreaming big for Gujarat and translating those dreams into action deserves serious study.

• Given Modi’s determination to crack down and eliminate underworld dons and international crime syndicates who had deeply embedded links in the Congress and many “secular” parties, letting him survive or grow in strength would sound the death knell of the Congress and all such parties. Congress was the first to recognise this danger and therefore went gunning for Modi from the start quickly rallying all other compromised parties to join in the battle. As we shall see in later chapters, it was not Modi, but the Congress Party that played communally-divisive politics in order to derail Modi’s inclusive development agenda With Atal Bihari Vajpayee as the prime minister having already dislodged the Congress Party in the Central government, the Congress Party was in dire need of an issue to target the BJP at the national level and Modi in Gujarat. The Godhra carnage and the riots that followed were the product of this desperation.

• The fourth phase starting May 5 saw even more aggression by rogue elements propped up to attack Hindu localities, with the clear intention of triggering large-scale Hindu-Muslim riots. These were deliberately staged on the eve of the concluding session of Rajya Sabha on May 6 to provide ammunition to the Congress and its allied parties to attack the NDA government. The morning of May 5, 2002, saw organised and aggressive attacks on Parikshit Nagar area of Ahmedabad city. It was marked by large-scale use of firearms and explosives. Miscreants used bombs and rocket launchers in this phase of violence.

• Such incidents on an important festival were clearly aimed at provoking Hindus. The timing also betrayed their real purpose. The Parliament was scheduled to resume its session on April 22. This fresh outbreak of violence provided much-needed ammunition to the Congress and the Left parties to go ballistic against the Vajpayee government at the Centre and Modi’s government in Gujarat

• The first phase of violence that began on February 28, 2002 and lasted until March 3, 2002 was characterised by anti-social politicians of all hues exploiting mass outrage against the Muslim community for the Godhra train burning. However, the worst was over in 72 hours due to a swift deployment of the army. By mid-March, the situation started cooling down.

• The second phase of stray incidents of violence, from March 18 to March 28, was part of a deliberate strategy by politically-patronised miscreants to disrupt the board examinations at various centres, which started from March 18, 2002. This was done to keep the pot boiling.

• The third phase, starting April 17, was again engineered by miscreants, on the eve of the second phase of board examinations, to subvert return to normalcy conditions so that the world could be told that Modi was unwilling and incapable of controlling the violence.

• The fourth phase of violence starting May 5 saw attacks on Hindu neighbourhoods by mischief mongers with the intent of provoking a backlash. The idea was to influence the scheduled discussion on Gujarat in the concluding session of Rajya Sabha the next day. These stage-managed riots were aimed at misleading the Parliament, as well as the outside world, to believe that the situation in Gujarat was grim and to build a national hysteria around Narendra Modi in order to browbeat Prime Minister Vajpayee into sacking Modi.

• However, the fact that Mushrif has to apologise for giving his community good news from Gujarat, gives us an idea of the kind of intellectual terror Congress and its “secular” allies have come to exercise among Muslims. They must appear as permanent victims in the Congress scheme of things or else be declared traitors as happened with Salman Khan, who dared speak a few mild words in favour of Modi’s regime or, worse still, be bulldozed into silence as happened with Maulana Vastanvi.

• It has already been well-documented how false reports were spread about a pregnant Muslim woman whose stomach was allegedly ripped open, her foetus wrenched out with a sword, and set on fire. BBC lent credibility tothis rumour in its report of March 6, 2002. Harsh Mander repeated the same story in a tear-jerking article published on March 20, 2002, in The Times of India. The Tehelka website lent further colour and credence to it by writing that a woman named Saira Banu had claimed that the victim of that gruesome incident was her sister-in-law.

• One of the early charges against Modi was that when post-Godhra riots broke out, he justified and legitimised violence against Muslims thus proving his complicity. This mischief started with an incomplete statement telecast on Zee TV based on an interview conducted by Zee correspondent Sudhir Chaudhary. Modi’s exact words were: “Kriya pratikriya ki chain chal rahi hai. Hum chahte hain ki na kriya ho aur na pratikriya.” (A chain of action-reaction is going on. We want that there should be neither ‘action’ nor ‘reaction’). But Zee TV deliberately left out the second sentence and presented the mischievously clipped first half of the statement to build a case that Modi had justified the post-Godhra riots as a legitimate reaction of Hindus against the killings of karsevaks at Godhra.... When Chaudhary questioned the CM about the Gulberg Society massacre in which the former Congress MP, Ehsan Jafri, was killed along with more than 50 others, the chief minister in his reply referred to the reports that Jafri had first fired at the violent mob, which apparently infuriated the crowd further. Thereafter, the mob stormed the Gulberg Society and set it on fire. According to Chaudhary, Narendra Modi referred to Jafri’s firing as “action” and the massacre that followed as “reaction”.... However, he could not provide a satisfactory explanation why in the Zee TV telecast, the last line—“Hum chahte hai ki na kriya ho aur na pratikriya”—was deliberately omitted. ...But this admission, coming years later, was not telecast and propagated the way the mischievous half-statement had been. What is worse, Sudhir Chaudhary continues to reiterate even today that Modi had justified the 2002 riots.

• But within days, the narrative started getting manipulated as though an invisible hand was guiding it in the direction of targeting Narendra Modi as the evil genius who personally masterminded the massacre. This line of argument became so aggressive and entrenched that when in 2010, the SIT report did not fall in line with those targeting Modi, SIT members came in for vicious personal attack and slander. They were accused of having been bought over by Narendra Modi. Teesta & Co. launched a full-fledged campaign for disbanding the SIT and replacing it with a fresh inquiry. It is worth asking why the SIT report and various court orders that came before and after the SIT clearing Modi’s name have not altered the tone or tenor of the hate campaign carried out by leading journalists, NGO activists, and jet-setting academics. Why do journalists keep flinging the same set of questions to Modi and repeating the same charges ad nauseam totally ignoring the outcomes of court cases and the SIT report?