Godhra

[Guest]

Check out this blog

http://o3.indiatimes.com/yossarin/archive/...1/24/57830.aspx

[Guest]

Fuel For The Lantern

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Fuel For The Lantern
The Godhra report's timing is all wrong. The Laloo angle can't be ignored.
PREM SHANKAR JHA

Much as one would like to believe former Justice U.C. Banerjee's finding in his interim report, that the fire in the Sabarmati Express at Godhra on February 28, 2002, was 'most probably an accident', the regrettable fact is that neither the reasoning he has produced, nor the procedure he has followed leads unambiguously to this conclusion. As a result, what the report has done is to turn the Godhra tragedy into a political football that anyone can kick in any direction. The fact that 59 people died a gruesome death, of whom more than half were women and children, and that this triggered a mini-holocaust that has claimed at least a thousand lives, and destroyed twenty times that number, has receded into the background.
 
Justice Banerjee's finding is not convincing for two reasons. First, he comes to it after dismissing every other explanation that has been put forward so far. But to reject all other theories, he needed to make a truly exhaustive study of the evidence produced
in their favour first. How could he possibly have done that without even giving a hearing to either the special investigation team (SIT) of the Gujarat police that has been plodding through the investigation, or the forensic laboratories that concluded that somewhere around 60 litres of petrol had been used? In fact, Justice Banerjee issued his interim report one day before a scheduled meeting with the SIT! What on earth made him do that?

Regrettably, one does not have to look very far for a possible answer. Justice Banerjee's one-man commission was set up in August by the railways minister Laloo Yadav and Laloo Yadav faces an election in Bihar in a few days. Bihar does not only have a large Muslim population, but much of it is so heavily concentrated in a few constituencies that it is impossible to win in them without their support. Laloo's purpose in setting up the commission could not therefore have been more obvious. He gave the commission an initial term of three months. When Justice Banerjee did not complete his report, it's term was extended by another three months. The most probable explanation for Justice Banerjee presenting his interim report a day before he met the SIT was that Laloo Yadav was running out of patience. But this raises the disturbing possibility that Laloo knew what the report would say even before it was written. It is hardly surprising therefore that the bjp has accused the railway minister of manipulating the inquiry for political purposes.

The second weakness of Justice Banerjee's report is that it does not provide answers to the many questions that the Godhra train conflagration has raised. By denying all other theories, he leaves us to conclude that the fire began somewhere in the middle of the rake, S-6, and not at one or both of the two ends. This conclusion is also supported by an independent panel of engineers whose report, confirming that the fire was an accident, appeared a few days after Banerjee's report. But if the fire started in the middle, and if it was set off by a match or a lighter, as the engineers surmise, then when volumes of smoke began to fill the compartment why did not a singe person open the doors and jump off the train? Why did even those sitting or sleeping at the ends of the coach not go into the adjoining compartments, S-5 and S-7, through the interconnecting vestibule?

The engineers' report does attempt an answer. It says that there must have been 150 people in the coach, which had been described as overcrowded when it left Ujjain the previous day. When the fire started, a huge number of people rushed to the two exits. This jammed them for long enough to allow the smoke to render many of them unconscious. There are two flaws in this theory. First, we do not know how many people got off the train between Ujjain and Godhra.The fact is that it was a sleeper and contained no more than 72 berths.This theory also does not explain why almost no one escaped. There were, after all, not one but three exits at each end of the coach, and the train was at a standstill. Last but not least, if there were 150 aboard and 59 were burnt to death, what happened to the remaining 90 passengers? Why were there not scores of interviews with survivors after the train reached Ahmedabad?

The theory that the fire began at the centre gets further weakened by the SIT's disclosure that the coach was built in 1993 and used fire-retardant and self-extinguishing materials. The engineers' report depends heavily upon the belief that the berths were filled with latex and built of plywood—both of which are highly inflammable. Since I do not know what fire-retardant materials are I cannot comment on this assumption. But its main weakness is that it cannot explain how a fire that started spontaneously at a single source, and created a huge volume of smoke, could have consumed the entire coach in just seven minutes. Its theory that the heat grew within the compartment till it reached the 'flashpoint' of the materials of which the berths were made is not credible at the best of times, and becomes even less so if the coach was furnished with genuinely fire-retardant materials. Smoke is emitted by partial combustion, and partial combustion by definition takes place at a lower temperature than the flashpoint needed for full combustion.

Justice Banerjee's report has performed valuable service by pointing out the sloppiness of the railways' follow-up to the fire. This may well prejudice any future trial of the alleged conspirators. But one should be wary of reading more than that into it.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[arindam]

<!--QuoteBegin-rajesh_g+Jan 30 2005, 12:49 AM-->QUOTE(rajesh_g @ Jan 30 2005, 12:49 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> Check out this blog

http://o3.indiatimes.com/yossarin/archive/...1/24/57830.aspx <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Any way to increase the font size on that page...

[Guest]

Fuel For The Lantern
Prem Shankar Jha talking logic for a change
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> Much as one would like to believe former Justice U.C. Banerjee's finding in his interim report, that the fire in the Sabarmati Express at Godhra on February 28, 2002, was 'most probably an accident', the regrettable fact is that neither the reasoning he has produced, nor the procedure he has followed leads unambiguously to this conclusion. As a result, what the report has done is to turn the Godhra tragedy into a political football that anyone can kick in any direction. The fact that 59 people died a gruesome death, of whom more than half were women and children, and that this triggered a mini-holocaust that has claimed at least a thousand lives, and destroyed twenty times that number, has receded into the background.
 
How could Justice Banerjee not have waited for the SIT or the forensic lab's findings before releasing his report? 
 
Justice Banerjee's finding is not convincing for two reasons. First, he comes to it after dismissing every other explanation that has been put forward so far. But to reject all other theories, he needed to make a truly exhaustive study of the evidence produced
in their favour first. How could he possibly have done that without even giving a hearing to either the special investigation team (SIT) of the Gujarat police that has been plodding through the investigation, or the forensic laboratories that concluded that somewhere around 60 litres of petrol had been used? In fact, Justice Banerjee issued his interim report one day before a scheduled meeting with the SIT! What on earth made him do that?

Regrettably, one does not have to look very far for a possible answer. Justice Banerjee's one-man commission was set up in August by the railways minister Laloo Yadav and Laloo Yadav faces an election in Bihar in a few days. Bihar does not only have a large Muslim population, but much of it is so heavily concentrated in a few constituencies that it is impossible to win in them without their support. Laloo's purpose in setting up the commission could not therefore have been more obvious. He gave the commission an initial term of three months. When Justice Banerjee did not complete his report, it's term was extended by another three months. The most probable explanation for Justice Banerjee presenting his interim report a day before he met the SIT was that Laloo Yadav was running out of patience. But this raises the disturbing possibility that Laloo knew what the report would say even before it was written. It is hardly surprising therefore that the bjp has accused the railway minister of manipulating the inquiry for political purposes.

The second weakness of Justice Banerjee's report is that it does not provide answers to the many questions that the Godhra train conflagration has raised. By denying all other theories, he leaves us to conclude that the fire began somewhere in the middle of the rake, S-6, and not at one or both of the two ends. This conclusion is also supported by an independent panel of engineers whose report, confirming that the fire was an accident, appeared a few days after Banerjee's report. But if the fire started in the middle, and if it was set off by a match or a lighter, as the engineers surmise, then when volumes of smoke began to fill the compartment why did not a singe person open the doors and jump off the train? Why did even those sitting or sleeping at the ends of the coach not go into the adjoining compartments, S-5 and S-7, through the interconnecting vestibule?

The engineers' report does attempt an answer. It says that there must have been 150 people in the coach, which had been described as overcrowded when it left Ujjain the previous day. When the fire started, a huge number of people rushed to the two exits. This jammed them for long enough to allow the smoke to render many of them unconscious. There are two flaws in this theory. First, we do not know how many people got off the train between Ujjain and Godhra.The fact is that it was a sleeper and contained no more than 72 berths.This theory also does not explain why almost no one escaped. There were, after all, not one but three exits at each end of the coach, and the train was at a standstill. Last but not least, if there were 150 aboard and 59 were burnt to death, what happened to the remaining 90 passengers? Why were there not scores of interviews with survivors after the train reached Ahmedabad?

The theory that the fire began at the centre gets further weakened by the SIT's disclosure that the coach was built in 1993 and used fire-retardant and self-extinguishing materials. The engineers' report depends heavily upon the belief that the berths were filled with latex and built of plywood—both of which are highly inflammable. Since I do not know what fire-retardant materials are I cannot comment on this assumption. But its main weakness is that it cannot explain how a fire that started spontaneously at a single source, and created a huge volume of smoke, could have consumed the entire coach in just seven minutes. Its theory that the heat grew within the compartment till it reached the 'flashpoint' of the materials of which the berths were made is not credible at the best of times, and becomes even less so if the coach was furnished with genuinely fire-retardant materials. Smoke is emitted by partial combustion, and partial combustion by definition takes place at a lower temperature than the flashpoint needed for full combustion.

Justice Banerjee's report has performed valuable service by pointing out the sloppiness of the railways' follow-up to the fire. This may well prejudice any future trial of the alleged conspirators. But one should be wary of reading more than that into it.


<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Prem Shankar Jha talking logic for a change<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
His master's voice helping Cong+Paswan in Bihar election. There is no change in heart or mind.

[Guest]

[SAPAC_Chicago] FYI FWD: urgent from dunu roy - Shashi Menon

The original request sent out by Dunu Roy of Hazards center to get some experts for investigating the godhra case..

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Wed, 11 Aug 2004 22:13:35 -0700


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

    From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
    Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:21:18 EDT
    Subject: Fwd: urgent from dunu roy
    To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
    [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
    [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
    [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
    [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
    [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
    [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
    [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
    [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]

    My friend Dunu Roy from Delhi (of the Hazards Centre) has sent out the attached urgent appeal for help in regard to Godhra. I am trying to locate a person in India who would have some Railroad knowledge. However, he is looking for people in India or in the US who can help in  technical sense in the areas outlined. We should help this process because we need to know what really happened at Godhra. If you know of a person or persons who can help, let me know or let Dunu know with information copied to me.
    
    Thanks,
    Harinder
    


    > ATTACHMENT part 2 message/rfc822
    Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 15:28:13 +0530
    From: qadeeroy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
    Subject: urgent from dunu roy
    To: Girish Sant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Harinder Lamba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
    Harsh Kapoor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Harsh Mander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
    Himanshu Thakkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
    Indur Shivdasani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
    Jamal Kidwai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
    Janak Daftari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
    Javed Anand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
    Jimmy R Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
    Jitendra Bhatia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Juzer Vasi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
    Kanwal Rekhi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kirtee Shah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
    Larry Malarkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

    GODHRA - URGENT APPEAL FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
    
    As many of you perhaps know, the burning of onne of the coaches of the Sabarmati Express at Godhra over two years ago, is now pending before a designated POTA court. In addition, the Nanavati-Shah Commission has also been conducting enquiries into the Godhra incidents and the post-Godhra killings. Furthermore, the Railway Minister has recently announced a departmental enquiry into the episode.
    
    The police theory is that the coach was flooded with 140 litres of petrol spread on the floor, and this was ignited by a burning rag. However, testimonies of passengers, policemen, and others before the Nanavati-Shah Commission have testified that they saw no petrol on the floor. The report of the Gujerat State Forensic Sciences Laboratory also categorically states that petrol was not used to set fire to the coach. Hence, the critical question remains, what was the cause of the fire? This question is at the heart of the raging debate around the violence in Gujerat.
    
    There are two favourable circumstances at the moment. Firstly, there is now a lot of evidence available in the public domain from the Nanavati-Shah Commission depositions as well as the trial court proceedings. Secondly, with the setting up of a Railway enquiry, more information can be unearthed from Railway sources. Hence, some of us have decided to set up a completely independent and scientific committee to look into the evidence and produce a technical report on the possible causes of the fire, which could be used by all concerned parties to unearth the truth.
    
    For this committee to function competently, we urgently require the following expertise:
    1. A person with experience in the design and manufacture of railway coaches with a good understanding of what inflammable materials are used for different parts of the coach.
    2. A person with detailed knowledge of polymer chemistry who can provide information on what toxic gases are released when materials such as butadiene rubber, polyvinyl chloride, rexine, polystyrene, paraffin cloth etc. are burnt and what are the physico-chemical properties of these toxins.
    3. A person with expertise in fires and fire safety who can interpret how fires spread and what is the cause of the damage.
    
    As you will understand, there is no remuneration involved although we shall be able to meet basic travel and lodging costs. Individuals staying in or near Delhi would obviously be preferred. I am sure that within our large network of friends with a good technical background, we shall be able to find individuals with the required degree of knowledge and scientific curiosity to be able to unravel this puzzle.
    
    Please do let me know as soon as possible (and that means tomorrow!) of anybody you know who fits the bill. You could also circulate this message to other friends who might be able to help in the search. But time is of the essence.
    
    I look forward to hearing from you.
    All the best
    Dunu<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

Who are these SAPAC_Chicago guys ? SAPAC -> South Asian Progressive Action Collective..

Their website .. http://www.sapacchicago.org/sapacwebpage.htm

[Guest]

Dunu also goes by name Anuvrata Roy. He is Chem Engg from IIT-Bombay (BTech 67/MTech 67)

From here.. http://www.iitbombay.org/info/whatsnew/whatsnew.html

[Guest]

More on Dunu Roy..

Convention On Employment Guarantee Act

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->THE new UPA government at the centre has prepared a draft Employment Guarantee Bill that is expected to be tabled in parliament next month. Against this background, SAHMAT organised a convention to reaffirm the centrality of an Employment Guarantee Act, and to outline the framework of an effective Act, which promotes the interests of workingmen and women and ensures that state governments can implement the Act without an additional financial burden.

The political leaders, activists and academics who spoke included Jairam Ramesh (Congress), Sitaram Yechury (CPI-M), D Raja (CPI), Saba Faruqui, Suneet Chopra, Prabhat Patnaik, Aruna Roy, Jean Dreze, Medha Patkar, Arundhati Roy, Sukhdev Thorat, Dunu Roy and Jayati Ghosh. Brinda Karat chaired the meeting.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

A petition from Dunu Roy.. (April 2002)

PUNISH THE GUILTY OF GUJARAT GENOCIDE

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Signatories (in alphabetical order)

Dilip Simeon
Dunu Roy
Harsh Kapoor
Jairus Banaji
Purushottam Agrawal
Rohini Hensman <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

Article on IMC-USA website..

Strategies of the Sangh 'Parivar' - August 2004 Khurshid Anwar, Bobby Poulose, Dunu Roy

[Guest]

Project Saffron Dollar: Petition to Stop Corporate Sponsorship of IDRF

Dunu Roy is a signatory to the above petition.. 'Independent', yeah right.. <!--emo&:flush--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/Flush.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='Flush.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Guest]

Support for Best Bakery case gathers momentum

Dunu is a signatory of this too..

[arindam]

If we look at the following request carefully,

Dunu's request for engineering help...

it would seem that Dunu's experts have not seen the real evidence - they have perused the processed evidence - that is they have not touched or even analysed the burnt out parts of the train, but they have read somebody's report of the analysis. How can this be independent at all?

Independent would be, if they took it to a a different lab, looked at the burn evidence, analysed it again and wrote up a report - not if they took the some arbitrary report and passed comments, while sitting in front of their fireplaces in Boston or Chicago.

[Guest]

Dunu's email address is qadeeroy@vsnl.com

He is also involved with some organisation called "The Other Media" based in new delhi

[arindam]

<!--QuoteBegin-rajesh_g+Jan 31 2005, 03:29 AM-->QUOTE(rajesh_g @ Jan 31 2005, 03:29 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> Dunu's email address is qadeeroy@vsnl.com

He is also involved with some organisation called "The Other Media" based in new delhi <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is he a card-carrying member of the Communist party?

[Guest]

I dont know. I am still googling away. We know his leanings. Whether he card-carrying or not remains to be found out. His 'concern' for workers and poor also seemed strange. At one point i found him complaining about bad env etc and then i think when SC asked some industries to be closed down due to bad standards, he complained about workers without employment. I have not followed that angle yet. But might be interesting if somebody else follows up on that.

[Guest]

Also his other claim that forensic lab said there was no petrol is not true, IIRC. Somebody should follow that up.

[Guest]

Nothing terribly important, but just thought i'd post this..

http://www.cpiml.org/pgs/ml_upd/vol4/4_2.htm

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->FDI Conference Against Eviction of Industries

<b>Forum for Democratic Initiatives, Delhi</b> held a seminar on "Anti-poor operation in Delhi: An agenda for democratic intervention" at Gandhi Peace Foundation Hall on 8 January. It was attended by around hundred people. <b>Com. Rajendra Pratholi, Staate Committee Secretary of CPI(ML), Dunu Roy of Sanjha Manch, JP Singh of Forward Bloc, Harish Tyagi of SUCI, Mrigendra of CPI(ML)-New Democracy, Rajendra Mittal of Samajwadi Jan Parishad and Vidya Shankar of Loktantrik Samajwadi Party spoke on the occasion addressing . Rajesh Tyagi presided over the seminar conducted by Prakash Chaudhury. Convenor Ravindra Sharma offered vote of thanks.</b>

Almost all speakers felt that the grim situation created by the high-handedness of the government and the Supreme Court in favour of the eletes demands coming together on a common platform to fight the demolition of small scale industries. They blamed government's subservience to globalisation for the present tragedy. Com. Pratholi said that it was a political issue and cannot be dealt at trade union level so all political forces opposed to globalisation should come together on this issue. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

Hey bhagwan, i really dont want to make this into a dunu roy thread but found another one of those websites..

http://www.pipfpd.org/

And the list of forum members is ..

http://www.pipfpd.org/add_fin.htm

You name a dork, and you find him/her in this list.. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='rolleyes.gif' /><!--endemo-->