No announcement yet.

Pakistanis criticize plan for Mahatma Gandhi statue.

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Pakistanis criticize plan for Mahatma Gandhi statue.

    A proposal to erect a downtown statue of Mohandas K. Gandhi has raised the ire of some Muslims and renewed controversy over the Indian leader’s legacy. The statue, planned for a pedestrian mall, would be part of the city’s effort to embrace diversity, Mayor Ron Loveridge said.

    A statue could help the city heal from racial tensions that have been simmering since the 1998 officer-involved shooting death of a black woman, said Lalit Acharya, a founder of the Riverside Mahatma Gandhi Peace Foundation. Tyisha Miller, 19, was killed by police Dec. 28, 1998, as she sat with a gun on her lap in a locked and idling car in this city 55 miles east of Los Angeles.

    The foundation is hoping to raise $150,000 for the statue over a two-year period.

    Many Muslims blame Gandhi for failing to prevent the deaths of thousands of Muslims when religious fighting broke out in 1947 as India and Pakistan moved away from British colonial rule. “He was not a hero to everybody,” said Jamil Dada, an investment manager. Religious violence forced his grandparents to abandon their home and business when they fled India for Pakistan, he said. “It’s just going to open a whole can of worms,” he said of the proposed statue. “It would be in Riverside’s best interest to nip this in the bud.” Some 4,000 Muslims who live near Riverside are learning more about the planned statue, said Mustafa Kuko, director of the Masjid and Islamic Center of Riverside.

    Loveridge said he will meet with Hindus and Muslims to resolve differences over the statue. “I am not an expert on Hindu-Muslim perceptions of Gandhi,” Loveridge said. “We’re essentially getting people around a table and talking. That is how you resolve conflict.”

    And I thought Gandhi was the one who was opposing the most about violence on the basis of religion. Muslims may however blame him for opposing the partition in the first place, but for violence, I wonder.


      Where is riverside?


        What impact this article has to make on the lives of 135 million Pakistanis in general and 40%(below poverty line) in particular?

        Sarfraz Khan


          This article reflects the general resistance of Pak nationals towards anything Indian, be it Gandhi. It also gives a hint of how the people living in comforts of Europe and US spread the hatred between the two states on the bait of religion on such a trivial issue.


            Riverside is in Southern California, near to Los Angeles.


              There was a similar controversy when the largely Desi area in Chicago (Devon Street) was to be renamed as Mahatma Gandhi street. Pakistanis objected to that so half the street was named after Gandhi, half of it named after Jinnah.

              Later Bangladeshis objected so a part was named after Bangabandhu Mujibur Rahman.


                Nobody is perfect and niether was Gandhi, if they wanna put a statue up to honor him..let em..I dont see a problem with it. Its such a trivial matter with people wasting their energy opposing which could be redirected elsewhere.

                All I know is that there better not be pigeons around cuz they have a nasty habit of using statues as restrooms.

                I for one would not want to have a statue of any of my heroes being crapped upon by those damn birds.
                The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he did not exist. And like that... he is gone.


                  Sir Winston Churchill called Ghandi
                  "A Half Naked Fakir"

                  ... and they wanna make a statue of him ?? YUK..eugh..



                    Gandhi fought for muslims all the way. It is the very people he supported the most are aganist him.

                    Educate youself under British rule most of Indians were very poor and half naked. Gandhi was a barrister and he could have had a good comfortble life but he choose to live like masses to make a point and also to unite Indians by idenfying with them. If present day leaders would come out of their plush houses and live like an ordinary citizens we will be way ahead.

                    Just on a different note the Millions of people died in famine In 1922 (not sure about the date)on Indian sub-continent British didn't lift a finger to help them.

                    I think you should read history of freedom struggle before quoting likes of Winston Churchill.

                    [This message has been edited by Rani (edited May 12, 2000).]


                      So any person could be perceived differently by different groups. Just as Rani would deny the greatness of Winston Churchill due to her perspective, people will deny Gandhi due to their perspective.

                      btw Rani, was churchill the prime minister in 1922? I think not, could you thus judge a person by the actions of his nation? I think not. His responsibility for the colonies was coming to an end in 1922, and as democracy works the actions taken or inaction was not his "rule" but decided by the elected representatives in the house of commons.
                      So to claim that it was all Churchill's doing is inaccurate, and takes away from his greatness as a prime minister in the later years.

                      Otherwise I may just have to tear up my posters of schumacher the f1 great because of germany's history.

                      [This message has been edited by X Factor (edited May 12, 2000).]


                        Nobody is denying or subscribing any greatness to Churchill. But taking a Churchill's testimonial, whose empire Gandhi fought with, for Gandhi's greatness or otherwise makes no sense. It is like judging Ho Chi Minh from Richard Nixon's words.


                          Oh i dont agree with Churchill's remarks about Gandhi, but simply put a statement like that in itself does not either promote to condemn an action honoring Gandhi.

                          There are favorable remarks about Gandhi from Churchill as well.

                          Rani's post was unclear as to what she was trying to state. ZZ, yours was not and I understand the point.