TIME Magazine, in their world edition of March,
published article giving vivid
accounts of how "Hindu Extremists" (TIME phrase) killed Muslims and raped the
women in Ahamdabad, Gujarat.
This article claimed: Mr.Ahsan Jafri (who was killed by Hindu attackers) had
fired at the attackers and that a boy in the Hindu mob had watched Mr.Jafri’s
daughters being stripped and raped. The Hindu boy sounded frightened & admiring.
"When he grew up, would he do that?" The boy is claimed to have said: Maybe not
rape, but he would kill Muslims when they have to be punished.
Three months later TIME Magazine admitted:
"Mr.Jafri did not own a revolver, had only one
daughter, she was in USA at the time of violence and WAS NOT RAPED"
This article, by By Meenakshi Ganguly, was full of quotes (form all possible
unworthy references): Claiming Hindu rioters, giving counts of how many Muslims
they each killed, how they were proud of their acts, they boasted while they did
this themselves and many more claims. (Article on TIME.com Archive:
$2.50). Unfortunately Ms.Ganguly did not find single person describing how
Hindus were killed mercilessly by the Muslim mob or how
Hindus are refugees without
Do TIME publish anything said by any worthless TOM, DICK & HARRY? Is life
so cheap at TIME Magazine? TIME published what Ms Ganguly wanted to believe
in, rather than unbiased reporting. Ms Ganguly freely used the terms "Hindu
extremists" & "Hindu Militants" but was careful enough not to use
"Muslim extremists" whose BARBARISM (that can put even the animals to shame)
was responsible for the riots that followed: Action & Reaction both
must be reported without any bias. Why TIME has so much of hatred towards
Hindus? Is it because the Hindusim does not preach intolerance, hatred,
destruction and terrorism ?
Along with this correction, should TIME Magazine not apologize to Hindus for
this biased & irresponsible reporting?