January 12, 2011

Three deaths

All three were killed in retaliation for some perceived affront or threat to members of some religion.

All three killers have their vocal defenders who celebrate their deeds.

Two were killed in public places.

Two were killed by members of their security detail.

Any more parallels/differences?

I refer to Mohandas K Gandhi, Indira Gandhi and Salman Taseer.


Arun said...

Taseer spoke out against a ridiculous practice in Religion (or rather, the State), and did nothing much else that became really famous. Indira Gandhi played politics, initially fostered Bhindranwale etc, and later ordered an armed storming of the golden temple, killing several hundred civilians. Taseer easily comes out with his hands clean, he didnt cause anyone any real harm. Indira Gandhi, not exactly.

K said...


Shouldn't Salman have also been fighting to bringing the men who raped the Christian woman to justice?

The standards of justice you have set make me think had he been a maverick he would have fought that injustice publicly as well.

If I have wrong information, please correct me.


Dilip D'Souza said...

Gandhi died because Godse thought he disintegrated India, not because of any religious angle.

"It was my first duty to serve Hindudom and Hindus."

"All [Gandhi's] experiments were at the expense of the Hindus."

"My shots were fired at the person whose policy and action had brought rack and ruin and destruction to millions of Hindus."

(Among other things). All from Nathuram Godse's speech at his trial.

All of which is not to suggest Godse was not also dismayed by the partition of India. He was, but to pretend that he wasn't motivated by his Hindu identity is just that, pretence. Even Godse would not claim that.

Arun, you're right, that's a distinction we should draw between Indira's death and Taseer's.

Anonymous said...

"sudha", is that fried, boiled or scrambled egg on your face??

Anonymous said...

I am still not inclined to believe the story behind Indira Gandhi's assassination. Why did the ambulance head the wrong way and why after being held by ITBF was Beant Singh done away with ?
Perhaps we will never get to know.
Would RK Dhawan reveal the details ?

Sudha said...

thanks for pointing it out, you believe he is hindu then why overlook the other words in the same sentence ?
" person whose policy and action had brought rack and ruin and destruction to millions of Hindus"..So looks like you do agree that Gandhi caused it.

Sudha said...

also can you name some people who own up nathuram versus people who own up killers of taseer? hope you appreciate that difference in the two nations/religions

Anonymous said...

But what is the difference between admirers of the killer of Salamn Taseer and defenders of Binayak Sen? I don't see any. Technically Sen did not kill anyone, only aided and abetted those who kill in the name of ideology and "poor people". That can spare Sen the trauma of gallows, but does not spare his supporters any shame.

Anonymous said...

There is one more disturbing similarity between Qadri's admirers and Binayak Sen's.

When Indira was killed, Sikhs were attacked and murdered in Delhi and elsewhere indiscriminately. Her killers were tried and executed.

When Gandhi was killed, brahmins were attacked and killed in Mah and elsewhere. Godse was tried and executed.

We do not support the attacks on Sikhs or brahmins. The point is that the murders of Gandhi and Indira did not meet with public approval, and the killers did not get the kind of vocal support Qadri and Binayak Sen are getting today.

Anonymous said...

"sudha" is asking, "can you name some people who own up nathuram"??

are you serious? what abt thackeray/shiva sena? they are alwyas gloryfying godse!!

Dilip D'Souza said...

It takes a special kind of genius to equate a murderer with a man who committed no murder (saying nothing else about him). But I see that we have such genius present on this page, attempting to make just such an equation.

That's how blinkered and unthinking we have allowed ourselves to become in the face of the mention of the word "maoist".

Anonymous said...

>>That's how blinkered and unthinking we have allowed ourselves to become in the face of the mention of the word "maoist".

I see. So Maoists are actually good guys -- just like, you, know, those who killed Gandhi, Taseer and Indira... It's just that the mention of the word "Hindutva" or "khalistani" induces blinkered thinking in their mindless opponents.

This is how good Maoists actually are:

"Armed Maoists .. today blew up a cabin signal point of Bandamunda railway station in Orissa...The Maoists left a number of posters...and demanded the release of Dr Binayak Sen"


Dilip D'Souza said...

This post asks: are there similarities between the murders of Gandhi, Gandhi and Taseer?

Why is it hardly surprising that there are geniuses out there who try to hijack it into a discussion of Maoists? Who try to equate a murderer to a man who committed no murder?

And when that equation is challenged, the same geniuses equate THAT to "So Maoists are actually good guys."

Geniuses. Enough said.

Anonymous said...

This genius is impressed always by superior genius. Digressing into listing Godse's views is not "hijacking" the discussion but pointing out similarities between BinayakSen's supporters and Godse's, is. That's genius too.

At the risk of hijacking the discussion even more, I'd like to point out another crucial fact. Following Gandhi's murder, the RSS was banned and had to prove its innocence to become legal again. But PUCL continues to be a legal entity. The first people to let the world know of Narayan Sanyal's arrest (although he was allegedly in hiding) is PUCL, in a statement issued on its behalf by Binayak Sen. Clearly, the guys were in the know of a fugitive's movements, but did not bother to turn him in to the cops.

Now think about the similarity with Qadri. The extremist outfits that support him (but maybe then we're speaking of the whole of Pakistan) are operating there legally.

Dilip D'Souza said...

This is apparently a serious discussion?

Responding to this post, commenter Sudha (3rd comment above) says: "Gandhi died because Godse thought he disintegrated India, not because of any religious angle".

Quoting Godse to show that he was in fact motivated by his Hindu identity (and therefore the religions angle applies) is a "digression"? He was motivated by religion just as Taseer's killer was.

Whereas this post has no mention (do go check it) of Maoists, PUCL, Binayak Sen, Narayan Sanyal, Bandamunda, etc. All of which you have, in your anonymous bravery this time, introduced into this page. Seems to me that's a digression all right, and one you indulge in because you have nothing to say about what's in the post.

There are plenty of extremists operating in this country, just as in Pakistan. It's why I used the word "blinkered".

Anonymous said...

Not being a superior genius, I don't see a whole lot of difference between being religiously motivated or ideologically motivated (as Sen was). After all, religion is also an idea. At any rate, how about all those Jesuits, Church leaders and the All India Christian Council fellows cheering for him?

Which brings us to another important point. We're told we have to confront the fact that Maoists have lot of "support". Godse's defenders claim the same too! To prove Godse's popularity, they point to instances like the trial judge claiming that if the people in the court-room were the jury, Godse would have walked free. Or that his funeral was conducted in secrecy so as to not allow memorials to spring up.

Our man Qadri in Pakistan is drowning in a sea of affection sweeping across the land of the pure. Looking at all that hungama, you'd think he is the martyr, not Taseer.

So that's another curious similarity between Qadri, Godse and Sen: the "support" that killers and their helpers enjoy, which supposedly absolves them of their crimes.

Jai_C said...

I agree with Arun (1st comment) that Indira G didnt have her hands clean. Salman T was to the best of my limited knowledge way better.

I've been following this a bit at Beena's blog, Pak Tea House and other places. It looks like Ansar Burney is among the vanguard still fearlessly (if a little foolhardily?) calling for the repeal of their blasphemy law.

I dont think I will ever forget Mr.Burney and his blood donation here post 26/11. Stay safe Mr. Burney. If Pervez Hoodbhoy has it right, the liberals are now the fringe in Pakistan (I hope not... this must be an emotional reaction).

Its one thing to "offer support" from relative safety here to Beena, Burney and Co. I wouldnt be able to deal with a direct threat to my life or to my family.

For Pakistan's sake, I hope they are, and they seem to be so far, the right kind of material. To quote Salman T, they are "made of a kind of wood that does not burn easily".

PS: Apologies if I got a bit off-topic.

Anonymous said...

I hate to say this but "three deaths" is kind of a vacuous observation-blog. On that note I would add Julius Caesar to that list then. Killed by his closest, in a public place and celebrated by Mark Anthony. You say religion did not play a role? Remember they did not love Caesar less, but loved Rome MORE. Religious enough for me.