Interesting. However a few questions. The media - western and eastern - has defined this as a hindu on muslim killing issue and they cite an attack by a mob of Bodos who attacked a Muslim village in response to a girl being raped. Is this true? Or was there some other catalyst? Also how bad are ethnic tensions there because this is not the first time we have had hindu-muslim riots in the region. Someone on Al Jazeera mentioned 1993 - any idea what happened there?
Interesting. However a few questions. The media - western and eastern - has defined this as a hindu on muslim killing issue and they cite an attack by a mob of Bodos who attacked a Muslim village in response to a girl being raped. Is this true? Or was there some other catalyst? Also how bad are ethnic tensions there because this is not the first time we have had hindu-muslim riots in the region. Someone on Al Jazeera mentioned 1993 - any idea what happened there?
Isn't that the same reason they gave about the conflict in Burma??? With Burma it is the Buddhists vs Muslims!
In the pre independent part of Indian history both assam and bengal were merged together whenever any discussion came up, western assam was always muslim bengali dominated, but during partition it came to India, many muslims migrated to EP then, then came 71 war in which people of assam and tripura accepted bengalis, especially hindus to stay till war is settled and can go back to EP, which never occured because of better oppertunities than newly formed bangladesh. ULFA(United Liberation Front of Assam) was just a slogan writing organization in early ninties before becoming anti bengai bihari organization and culminating into anti India, there are many tribes who call native brown indians as Indians while call themselves by the name of their own tribes, gogoi, adi, apang, these tribes don't intermarry and have cannibalistic culture too, Nagas are well known cannibals too. Too much of bengalis in the region tilt the ethnic balance in the favour of bengali which these bodos can't bear and hence ethnic violence happen anytime, all this bengalis will get displaced for sometime and then will go back and stay in assam:)
Lots of people whining about ‘massacre of Muslims’ by evil Hindoos without being aware of the facts. The violence may be termed as inter-ethnic : between Bodos and Bengalis or trans-national:between Indians and alien Bangladeshis. Those who are projecting this as a Hindooo-Muslim conflict have malicious intentions.
Anyways, it seems like the foreigners are winning over Indians:
EDIT: The word ‘Muslim’ is often conflated with illegal Bangladeshi by leftist Indian mainstream media [In Assam context]. So if one criticizes illegal Bengali migrants one automatically becomes a Hindooo communalist.
tribes, gogoi, adi, apang, these tribes don't intermarry and have cannibalistic culture tonio, Nagas are well known cannibals too. Too much of bengalis in the region tilt the ethnic balance in the favour of bengali which these bodos can't bear and hence ethnic violence happen anytime, all this bengalis will get displaced for sometime and then will go back and stay in assam:)
Presently, there are no cannibals in NE India.Even if there were in the past highly unlikely], no concrete evidence exists. No rumor-mongering/hearsay please.
So the violence is not because they are Muslims. It is because they are illegal immigrants? That's something I have never heard off before. That is actually unheard off where tribal communities target a community on their illegal status after 3 of their men were killed.
So these weren't revenge attacks like international media is stating?
CM, Do I detect a hint of sarcasm in your post. Anyways, I shall give you the benefit of doubt and attempt to explain very complex issue according to my understanding. I lived for a couple of years in a small Assamese town, so I have some local knowledge:
The Assamese tribals have traditionally voted for local tribe based parties rather than any 'national' party in elections.
The biggest 'national' party in India tried to solve this problem by 'facilitating' the illegal migration of Bangladeshis to Assam and providing them with documents like Ration cards, thus magically transforming them into 'Indian' citizens. These illegal 'Indians' then voted the said party into power again and again in Assam. This brand of politics is called 'vote-bank politics'.
The result of this policy has turned the native population into minorities in several districts of their own state. This has proved disastrous for the social harmony of Assam. The native population compete with the illegal 'Indians' for the limited resources as well as government sponsored welfare schemes. The illegal 'Indians' have completely dominated the labor and other lower end jobs as they are willing to work for much lower wages [as these wages are still much better compared to those offered in Bangladesh].
The simmering discontent and tensions comes to the fore at the slightest provocation, as happened in this case when four tribal student leaders/ex militants were killed allegedly by settlers.
The fact that the religion of the settlers is Islam is incidental rather than central as has been insinuated by several posters] to the issue. The tribals have targeted Hindu Indians from the north India in the past especially Marwaris who have completely dominated the commerce/trading and UP/Biharis/Bengalis who have hold over the government jobs. However, these north Indians had limited themselves to urban areas as opposed to illegal Bangladeshis who have penetrated into the rural regions. Consequently, the anger against them is much higher.
The main blame for the present ruinous situation goes to a certain political party which has a penchant for practicing vote-bank politics in order to achieve short-term electoral gains at the expense to the nation. The list of their blunders is long and sordid: starting with their support to Khilafat movement, flirtation with Bhindarwale, opening of Babri Masjid gates for Hindus, Shah Bano case and culminating with the sorry state of affairs in Assam.
So tell me this. That is all great for the background and I appreciate it but I am still confused as to why the settlers or illegal migrants were targeted when 4 people were killed? Its like the religious tensions in Nigeria. The moment someone is killed they attack the other religious group.
Economic reasons are never the basis for mass murder.
I have a question though from what I know ration cards are the Indian form of identity cards right? You can only have a ration card if you are an Indian? How are these guys considered illegal when they have ration cards? Clarification not sarcasm. Trying to grasp the situation better. They would have been illegal in the 1970s and 1980s but I believe if you are born in India you are Indian correct?
