I admit that I was wrong about Narendra Modi.
He did not say anything which could be considered inflammatory.
Overall the speech was a litte substance and lots of grandstanding

Regards

It is almost 48 hours after the speech. There are no riots yet. Will you retract your statement or atleast modify it to say “alleged potential for setting off riots” now ? Do you want to wait longer ?

Let us not buy into the demonization theories floated around by the media. Fan or no fan, Modi is talking straight against terrorism. There is a significant chunk of Indians who want to hear the “right” side of any debate.

What exactly is the bases, Nanda? Can you recall when Hindu extremists/fundamentalists went on revenge roiting after a terrorist incident – ever?

That said, I agree that provoking communal riots by either the BJP or the Shiv Sena is morally reprehensible as well as not strategic.
But given a climate where anybody less than a Mulayam is cast as a Saffronite, and demonized, it is difficult to find a popular hardline anti-terrorist politician.
I, for one, can’t think of many.

Besides, even if riots do break out, it’s the fault of the terrorists and their supporters (hmm, I wonder who these supporters are?), not the fault of Modi. Godhra happened in 2002 and there have been terrorist attacks before. If Godhra led to an increase in attacks, it’s because of all the p-sec “activists” who spread wild lies about a “pogrom” on Muslims. You’re basically telling us to stand down because this will result harder retaliation from the enemy! It’s like saying we should give up Kashmir because it’s leading to terrorist attacks. On the contrary, I think this is the perfect time mobilise the masses and spread awareness about Jihad. And with the election coming, who do you think is the better cadidate – BJP (in spite of any flaws it might have) or the Pseudo-Secular Cabal? If the statements by BJP after the attacks are anything to go by, it looks like they’re slowly growing balls. If solving our problems results in an increase in tensions and conflict, then so be it.

PS: I can’t even begin to describe how much I feel offended when people say this will lead to riots. I’m not even going to argue why that claim is utterly ridiculous. You should know stuff like this.

How can the BJP bear any responsibility what-so-ever for acts that it has not done ? That is to say, unless BJP is involved in setting off any riots, for e.g. if BJP workers set fire to a mosque or to Korans or some other nonsense of this sort, I dont see how they could bear any responsibility for actions by some other group or party.

Last I heard, India is a country that guarantees freedom of speech, movement and congregation to people as basic human rights, and if certain sections of people commit violent acts because some other people choose to exercise these basic rights – I fail to see how the latter party becomes responsible for acts by the former !

The reality of the situation is that there will never be a united front against terrorism. At least not under the present political set up. Talk is cheap. After all they are not the ones who bore the brunt of the attack. How may MLA’s and MP’s actually use public transport? Unless those in power feel the very real threat to life and limb, we can expect more of the same. Maybe we can strip them of the protective cocoon of Z grade security? Perhaps then we might see some of that “political will” to tackle terrorism.

You forgot to mention “moral bankruptcy” as well.