I've rewritten the article today, keeping closely to what has been published by reliable sources and focusing it on the National Democratic Front. There is also a redirect here from National Development Front at the moment, but that is not substantiated by the sources I've seen. --Mereda 15:58, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from User:Mereda talk page -

The Rss/BJP/Muslim league were not involved in the Marad massacre, it was the NDF and later the Araya Samajam. The terrorists massacred five Hindus at the beach, the police killed one terrorist in crossfire, the terrorists hid inside a mosque. When the police tried to get them, a mob of the terrorists wives surrounded the Mosque, barring entry.The police later found bombs, and swords there. By then, the Araya Samajam and VHP had evicted all terrorists from the area, and as of now, I dont think the terrorists have been able to return, even with pleas from the Communist party.Bakaman 17:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its an unreliable partisan org and their page reads like SIMI propaganda.Bakaman 00:31, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All organizations, newspapers and publications are in some way partisan. If you think [1] is SIMI propaganda, well then the definition of 'SIMI propaganda' is stretched as widely that virtually any written text can fall under that definition.

The problem is not that a source can be politically tilted. The question to maintain a NPOV outlook is to be able to weed out POV formulations in sources to write an NPOV encyclopediatic tone in an wiki article. It would not be ok to write the article on BJP relying only/mainly on Congress sources, and neither should the article on Congress be based on RSS/BJP-affiliated websites. That I cannot understand in this case, is why you find it objectionable to mention that NDF is in conflict not only with the Hindu groups but also with the majority of the Muslim community in Kerala? The only explanation I could come up with is that it spoils your own communal agenda of picturing all local political conflicts in India as parts of greater epic battle between Hindus and non-Hindus. --Soman 15:41, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well its obvious the NDF is in conflict with Muslims in Kerala. The vast majority of Muslims are not terrorist maniacs. Sabrang is not a reliable source, its partisan.Thats why I only used mainstream sources for the article. I myself quoted the CBI report but I think it hurt you to see fellow anti-Hindus getting smacked by the rule of law. I dont find it objectionable to show the NDF is in conflict with local Muslims (after all Kerala is home to four groups: Christians, Muslims, communists, and Hindus). My communal agenda? I'm sorry that I cant be an apologist for the genocide of innocent fishermen and have to call a terrorist a terrorist. Perhaps you didnt realize Hindus and Muslims are not "classes" and that Terrorists are no proletariat.Bakaman 17:55, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You seriously need to study Marxist concepts of class, before making half-baked analogies. --Soman 18:03, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Epic battles between Hindu and non-Hindus"? "Communal agenda"? Oh no, Sonia Gandhi maine maaf karo.Bakaman 18:09, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

battle, not battles. There is a difference in meaning. --Soman 18:25, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no organisation named National Democratic Front in Kerala. i think the user had given partisan data and is not relevent. No government or any enquiry commmison reported NDF worked behind Marrad massacre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sm ashiq (talk • contribs)

If that's true, then why did you create the article? [2] --Sigma 7 08:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you read the Malayalam text on Image:Kerala2006_(18).JPG, the name of the organization is actually National Development Front. --Soman 15:45, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support - correct name.Bakaman 17:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no organisation named National Democratic Front in Kerala. It is National Development Front. Please move to the later.

I've completed the page move. Cheers. -GTBacchus^(talk) 18:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Terrorism, is a word to avoid. The NDFFare undoubtably involved in political and communal killings, but that is not the same as being a terrorist in its encyclopediatic definition. See similar arguments about Shiv Sena at List of terrorist organizations.
• ISI connections? Needs to be backed up by other quotes than from politicians. The standard explanation that all evil is a foreign import is mainstay in Indian politics, and accusations of ISI links to quite widely distributed. (Likewise allegations of RAW connections in Bangladesh).
• Role in Muslim communal politics in the state? See for example [3]
• Regarding political alliance building, [4].

--Soman 18:24, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Similar arguments? Especially because you were the only person making the argument. They were implicated in the massacre of Hindus, and in rampant assassinations of their political enemies.Bakaman 18:43, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear editors, please see the edited pages in this articles. May be you are not aware of this organisation in deep. I have gathered the information from reliable medias and sources. NDF is accused of terrorism and killing innocents. But it is not in the agenda of NDF. It work for freedom and human rights of common people in the contry. See its website in the references.Sundaram7 06:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]