Not good news.
The Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT), chaired by former CBI director RK Raghavan who investigated the 2002 Gujarat riots has concluded in its 541-page closure report that the Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi took ample measures to control riots rather than stoking the fire as it is made to be believed. The SIT also questioned the motive behind filing a complaint against the Chief Minister by Zakia Jafri four years after the communal violence.
Modi is apparently on the way to being India’s next prime minister…which is appalling.
Get this part –
The SIT has said that even if Narendra Modi had told the police during the riots to allow the Hindus to vent their anger over the massacre of 56 kar sevaks in the Godhra train burning incident, the mere statement of those in the confines of a room does not constitute an offence. On this, the SIT seems to have based its report on public statements made by Modi during the riots.
Jeezis.
Not well written news, either.
“… rather than stoking the fire as it is made to be believed. … the mere statement of those in the confines of a room does not constitute an offence.”
The combination of passive voice and bureaucratese mangling ESL doesn’t leave much room for comprehensibility.
However, a distinct whiff of whitewash does come through rather clearly.
@1 It’s not ESL, it’s Indian English.
RJW @ # 2 – What’s the difference? Do they teach vagueness and awkward phrasing in Indian English classes? Do the students not start off with Hindi or other local tongues as first languages in their homes?
@3 Pierce R Butler,
“Do the students not start off with Hindi or other local tongues as first languages in their homes?”
English is an official language of India and has been in use for more than a century, so it’s rather misleading to categorise it as ‘ESL’.
Indian English has retained some archaic phrases that seem awkward to other English speakers, so, essentially, it’s a different variety of English and only someone who speaks Indian English could provide an informed opinion.
RJW @ # 4 – Maybe those sentences got that way because the reporter &/or his/her editor wanted them that way so that they would never face accusations of having told anybody which way to point their fingers – but if such phrasings pass muster in any India-English class, clearly the dialectical drift has gone way further than any mere sail across the Atlantic.
Agreed. I’m sure ‘cover up’ means the same in all English dialects.