Citizenship Amendment Bill was passed in Lok Sabha as well as Rajya Sabha. I explicitly mention both the houses so as to make it clear that it was not only BJP that wanted the bill, other political parties in the country supported the bill. In Rajya Sabha the party had only 83 seats however the bill got 125 ayes. Keeping in mind that one of its
major allies ex-ally Shiv Sena did not support the bill. You should ask yourself where did the other 42 votes come from.
What country witnessed at Shaheen Bagh for last three months was anything but a protest. An event like Shaheen Bagh suggests that if there is an act that does not suit you, you should hold the country hostage; block the roads. How is it any different than terrorists holding hostages to get their demands fulfilled? What is the use of Parliament or courts when you can get your work done by blackmail?
Each and every politician in India and outside knew that the government at center in India would not budge. It was not the first time the government ruled by BJP took a difficult decision. We saw the same kind of pressure building when Article 370 was removed, or when Triple Talaq was banned or when Demonetization happened. When the government did not succumb to the pressure then, what made anyone think that it would this time?
Let me ask you a simple question, what changed in the last few days that the women decided to expand their so-called protest and block other roads and metro stations for example Jafrabad? They say Kapil Mishra was responsible for the clashes as he openly stated that he would not let anybody create a second Shaheen Bagh at Jafrabad. I might like him or not, but he was not wrong this time, you simply cannot block metro stations. More than a million people use metro on a daily basis in Delhi. If it was not him it would have been someone else. But there would definitely be someone to stop this madness. The question, however, is why did they want to block Jafrabad now? Why didn’t they do it when Prime Minister Modi and Home Minster Amit Shah in the very beginning of this so-called protest, made it abundantly clear that the government would not go back on CAA even by an inch? It would have made more sense, wouldn’t it?
The post clash investigation might explain, as to why.
The women at Shaheen Baagh were a part of a larger conspiracy. The women created an environment for their male counterparts to begin with. They had meticulously planned their attack. Do you think it is possible to built these kind of makeshift catapults and install them on roof-tops and in rickshaws in a couple of hours?
Who decided which buildings to pick? Which sides these “manjaniks” (trebuchet) like structures be facing? Before the advent of cannons and gunpowder, muslim invaders used “manjaniks” to hurl fireballs at the opponent. Muhammad bin Quasim used just five of them when he conquered Sindh in 712 AD. You don’t think that it was a coincidence that the Hindu localities found themselves at the receiving end of these makeshift catapults, do you? The building used in one of the cases was a school. Muslim mothers had visited the school and took their children home early that day because they knew what was coming. Tahir Hussain, one of many AAP’s leader used his home as a launch pad.
Selling acid is banned in India but is illegally sold in some parts of Delhi. There were heaps of pouches filled with acid were found at the roof tops where sling shots were installed. Do you think they were arranged in an hour? How long would it take to carry enough number of heavy stones/crates of petrol filled bottles/acid pouches to the roof of a five story house that would last to continue the attack for at least a couple of days? And that too without being noticed. It would take days.
I guess, Kapil Mishra and the people with him had no clue as to what they are getting into. Thanks to the people who shot the videos of people attacking from the roof tops, or else we would have never seen what was happening. The mainstream media the secular cum liberal intellectuals would have easily portrayed as a communal riot supervised by Kapil Mishra. They say Hindu mobs burnt the houses and the shops, they never said that acid, patrol bombs, chilli powder were raining down from the roof tops of those houses.
I don’t understand why and how media is trying to show it as a communal riot. Was Kargil war a communal clash? Was 1971 war communal? Was 1965? or was Kashmiri Hindu exodus in 1989-90 communal? They were all wars, India won three of them and lost the last one. This was not a communal riot, it was a meticulously planned war to alter the demographics of the state like it happened in Kashmir, like it happens in West Bengal, like it happens in Kerala. This time it is Delhi.
Would you in your sane mind even think of living in Northeast Delhi? If you are a non-muslim, you will start looking for a new dwelling place. Camera phones were not so popular during the time when Kashmir happened other wise, this would not feel as a surprise this time. Ankit Sharma, IB sleuth was not just killed, he was stabbed more than 400 times. Another non-muslim from Uttrakhand was not only killed but first maimed and then burnt.
Arvind Kejriwal could have very well stopped it. Instead, he became a party to it, for the sake of his politics. He just had to issue the same statement that Yogi issued in UP. “The losses incurred to the state due to any clash would be recovered from the rioters”. But he didn’t say that. Why? Who stopped him? The Chair!! What we now certainly know is that he was able to convince the attackers to postpone their attack to after the election time frame. If this clash would have happened before the elections, he would have won ZERO seats, even with all the freebies. The attackers were just lurking in the shadows of Shaheen Bagh, waiting to make a move, waiting for the right time. And when they saw the window they attacked. Donald Trump’s visit to India was just the right time when Delhi was on the magnifying glass and the entire world was looking at it. The attack became an international topic of discussion in minutes. Kejriwal and his entire team should resign right away, no questions no justifications. Indians would be more than happy to make donations for re-elections in Delhi and the state will not have to bear the cost of a re-election. It is better to pay the price now because everybody would have forgotten in five years and some more freebies would get him the victory again. He has made Jaichand look like a nut job.
Even though polarization is a very sensitive topic and should be taken very seriously. But in India, a certain section of Indian society would always see BJP as the sole reason; a scapegoat which has become very easy to digest. It does not matter what happens, it is always BJP. If BJP wins the election, it is because of polarization, it loses the election, the people rejected the polarization politics. If the police did not evacuate Shaheen Bagh or Jafrabad, BJP ruled government did not give orders in time, if they had done that BJP is trying to crush protest using force. You don’t have to go much far in the past, just look at the election figures of Delhi Assembly elections and you would see who did what. You can literally map that the muslim voters for example people of Mustafabad who used to vote Congress before voted AAP this time. If it were not because of polarization the win margins of Manish Sisodia and Amanatulla Khan would have been different. If people had voted for education, Manish Sisodia would not have won by a margin of just 3,000 votes and if communal politics were not a part of the game plan Amanatulla Khan would not have won by a humongous margin of 70,000 votes (there is an extra zero, if you failed to notice). Polarization is a one way street, the caste or the community or the religion that can vote as one, will always win. That is why vote banks exists. The party that is going to get votes from these communities is going to win, and not the other way around. A majority community never votes as one and it rightly does so.
Some times I feel, Mahatma Gandhi was indeed a very clever man that he approved the partition, he could have protested if he wanted to stop the partition. If the country was not divided that time, it would not only be Hindus from the rest of the world seeking refuge, it would be the Hindus of India who would have been seeking refuge.
I hope there is a solution for this.
Thanks for reading!!!