What's new

'Headley says Ishrat was Lashkar suicide bomber'

I would have loved it if they have Encountered the Whatever Sadhvi you are talking about .I have no two opinions about Extremists of any community and me being a sikh that Includes Bhindrawale as well.

I would appreciate your equal approach to both the kind, my approach is just opposite to yours but with same consistency.
I don't oppose killing of terrorist in a fight, or entering in holiest places to kill them, I can also understand the cultural damage, but one thing I am opposed to is custodial and extra judicial killings, not because I sympathise with the terrorists but because the chances of innocents getting killed is high.
 
.
I did not do it ..sir.. :astagh:
its the usual suspects who lose their mind.. :D

I was not singling out anyone .... was talking in general.

Because somebody has a different view does not mean they are your enemy ...... just saying .....:D
 
.
evidence from their communications,electronic gadgets,revelations on questioning, further investigations on extracted information which I believe will certainly give prosecutable evidence.

Really & what would that be? Even wiretaps have to be authorised to be legally acceptable. Without the source, it would be meaningless.


IB is an intelligence agency not an investigating agency, it gives intelligence inputs and it's up to the respective branch of investigation agency to take a call and act accordingly. besides how can IB conclude that possibility of getting further evidence is nil when they were only observing the four accused, they didn't have access to them or their belongings which is a major source of evidence.

IB has far more abilities than you give credit for. In cases like these, further evidence would not be easily available unless one waited till the last minute which might be risking a lot more deaths.

I certainly don't support a set up like that. And the drone strike and a custodial killing is very much different isn't it. There is is a war going on, in Gujarath is on war, on panic situation which calls for military action. In drone strike innocents get killed, just like in any genuine military action, I wouldn't be complaining if these killings were in afghan desserts where there is no law and order. I think you are comparing apples and oranges. every action is according to the situation prevailing in that particular region.

I was pointing out that there exists a nebulous grey region, not just black & white that you seem to suggest. Whether relevant or not is a matter of opinion. The point here that IB did warn the state government on an impending attack & the state police neutralised it. Happens all the time. all over India. Nothing particularly special about this encounter except that it is now being used to seriously damage anti-terrorist operations in the future for the sake of political expediency now.
if it wasn't Gujarath police investigation then who was the investigation agency ?

In this case, police investigation wasn't done and the supposed terrorists were not within Gujarat police jurisdiction all the time. This was primarily an intelligence operation handed over to the state police at the very last moment i.e. when an attack was deemed imminent. Expecting a long investigation then would have been a bit much. An analogy would be if the Mumbai attackers were intercepted on the basis of intelligence inputs & were picked up from the boat. Assuming that weapons were thrown overboard, what case would you make out against them? Trespassing? Have to prove they are Pakistani even to do that. The purpose of that example is simply to point out that in many cases, the situation faced by intelligence operatives is not clear cut. Expecting them to purely follow normal rules of conduct is, while a valid constitutional position, a position that has the nose firmly in the clouds.
 
.
I am not a saffron supporter nor am I on Modi bandwagon but to me this looks like a case of vested agenda and vendetta by the center. There are encounter specialists in various police forces glorified by the media and people were fine with the bumping of the rogue elements in the society be it the Mumbai underground or the rowdies in Chennai. So where were all these protectors of constitution and justice when those encounters happened and appeared in the news and why this hounding against a particular case? And the center's biggest hound CBI is at play going against its own Intelligence agency and the police force of Gujarat.

yes I know you are not ! and you should also know that I am not a terrorist sympathizer either, I also understand that theory and practical is different, I also believe sometimes you need to break the law, but I when it comes to the matter of vulnerability of innocents against this method, it's inappropriate to support extra judicial killings. let the cops do his job and give the decision making to judiciary.


May be media is doing it against modi, may be not I don't know, bjp is a national party, in my state both congress and Marxist got their own channel and news passers, what's stopping bjp from doing so to counter the so called media propaganda ?? everybody has an agenda, a political stand, they portray it in various degrees.
 
.
yes I know you are not ! and you should also know that I am not a terrorist sympathizer either, I also understand that theory and practical is different, I also believe sometimes you need to break the law, but I when it comes to the matter of vulnerability of innocents against this method, it's inappropriate to support extra judicial killings. let the cops do his job and give the decision making to judiciary.


May be media is doing it against modi, may be not I don't know, bjp is a national party, in my state both congress and Marxist got their own channel and news passers, what's stopping bjp from doing so to counter the so called media propaganda ?? everybody has an agenda, a political stand, they portray it in various degrees.

Mate - I know you are not a terrorist sympathizer. But my question remains and it is not answered - While there are encounter specialists whose scores are published by the media(Salaskar had more than 50 killings against his name - Daya Nayak likewise) and glorified by media but why this shrill by many in this particular case?

India is not closer to a perfect democracy or comparable to western democracy where personal rights violation is an exception. The same is not the case in India and is a norm where even the investigations by the cops are not clean without violation of a person's rights. Can't blame the cops as well as they are either ill-equipped or overwhelmed with cases to conduct proper investigations. Sometimes encounters are needed like in Veerappan's case or cleaning up Punjab or J&K or Mumbai underworld.

I belong to the group who feel that encounters are necessary evil. And I belong to the bandwagon who wants Dawood and Hafeez to be bumped up by our intelligence agencies which may not be necessarily legal under Indian constitution. Let me know what is your stance in bumping up Hafeez and Dawood.
 
.
Really & what would that be? Even wiretaps have to be authorised to be legally acceptable. Without the source, it would be meaningless.
so you think by seizing these laptops, mobiles, other material evidences, interrogation, etc wouldn't help in any manner ???
if they have to tap the phone they could have get it done easily, people on list were not high profile citizen.

IB has far more abilities than you give credit for. In cases like these, further evidence would not be easily available unless one waited till the last minute which might be risking a lot more deaths.
Don't wait, nab them, which they did, but they didn't bother to investigate further, they just lost faith in their own ability to investigate and collect evidence.
I was pointing out that there exists a nebulous grey region, not just black & white that you seem to suggest. Whether relevant or not is a matter of opinion. The point here that IB did warn the state government on an impending attack & the state police neutralised it. Happens all the time. all over India. Nothing particularly special about this encounter except that it is now being used to seriously damage anti-terrorist operations in the future for the sake of political expediency now.
Tho damage would have been avoided if police invested more than four days to crack the case, if they had faith in their own investigating abilities.
In this case, police investigation wasn't done and the supposed terrorists were not within Gujarat police jurisdiction all the time. This was primarily an intelligence operation handed over to the state police at the very last moment i.e. when an attack was deemed imminent. Expecting a long investigation then would have been a bit much.
I am not saying you continue investigation until they go and blow themselves up, threat is neutralized when police arrested them isn't it ?? Then from that point investigation should follow.
An analogy would be if the Mumbai attackers were intercepted on the basis of intelligence inputs & were picked up from the boat. Assuming that weapons were thrown overboard, what case would you make out against them? Trespassing? Have to prove they are Pakistani even to do that. The purpose of that example is simply to point out that in many cases, the situation faced by intelligence operatives is not clear cut. Expecting them to purely follow normal rules of conduct is, while a valid constitutional position, a position that has the nose firmly in the clouds.
I important thing is this that by intercepting them you neutralized the threat, regardless of you being sure about they are terrorists or not..even if they are terrorists they can't be punished for killing people but for waging war against country or so.

assume there is an intelligence input, and police intercept them
with no material evidence ??? what would you do ?? spray them with bullets then and there ?? or arrest and investigate it ??? why do we have so many pak fishermen on our jails, police could have assumed they were terrorists pretending to be fishermen.I believe through interrogation and proper investigation and with help of technology you can bring out the truth.I am in no fools paradise to argue police should away follow each and every procedure and law, but they should follow it on important matters, and this I believe is one.


Since you given a a hypothetical situation let me give one to you as well.

what if police arrested four five of your friends( who do mall small illegal activities ) based on intelligence, but because they don't have enough evidence police killed them all in a fake encounter case. would you accept this in the name of acting tough and practicality etc.. would you say it's a necessary price we should pay for our security ???
 
.
Mate - I know you are not a terrorist sympathizer. But my question remains and it is not answered - While there are encounter specialists whose scores are published by the media(Salaskar had more than 50 killings against his name - Daya Nayak likewise) and glorified by media but why this shrill by many in this particular case?

India is not closer to a perfect democracy or comparable to western democracy where personal rights violation is an exception. The same is not the case in India and is a norm where even the investigations by the cops are not clean without violation of a person's rights. Can't blame the cops as well as they are either ill-equipped or overwhelmed with cases to conduct proper investigations. Sometimes encounters are needed like in Veerappan's case or cleaning up Punjab or J&K or Mumbai underworld.

I belong to the group who feel that encounters are necessary evil. And I belong to the bandwagon who wants Dawood and Hafeez to be bumped up by our intelligence agencies which may not be necessarily legal under Indian constitution. Let me know what is your stance in bumping up Hafeez and Dawood.
agree our police is not well equipped, vulnerable to politics etc but still I think it's important to follow the law in a matter which sometimes decides the life and death of innocents also.I also believe even criminals and terrorists should be given proper trail and max punishment.

I would agree with killing Dawood and hafiz if they are not within our country and can't possibly bring to India and have ample evidence against them (which is true here ), both are internationally recognised terrorists as well, it's not lack of evidence but politics and lack of accessibility which is the hindrance here.

if they were in India I am all for judicial trail and against custodial or fake encounter killing.
 
.
so you think by seizing these laptops, mobiles, other material evidences, interrogation, etc wouldn't help in any manner ???
if they have to tap the phone they could have get it done easily, people on list were not high profile citizen.


Don't wait, nab them, which they did, but they didn't bother to investigate further, they just lost faith in their own ability to investigate and collect evidence.

Tho damage would have been avoided if police invested more than four days to crack the case, if they had faith in their own investigating abilities.

I am not saying you continue investigation until they go and blow themselves up, threat is neutralized when police arrested them isn't it ?? Then from that point investigation should follow.

I important thing is this that by intercepting them you neutralized the threat, regardless of you being sure about they are terrorists or not..even if they are terrorists they can't be punished for killing people but for waging war against country or so.

assume there is an intelligence input, and police intercept them
with no material evidence ??? what would you do ?? spray them with bullets then and there ?? or arrest and investigate it ??? why do we have so many pak fishermen on our jails, police could have assumed they were terrorists pretending to be fishermen.I believe through interrogation and proper investigation and with help of technology you can bring out the truth.I am in no fools paradise to argue police should away follow each and every procedure and law, but they should follow it on important matters, and this I believe is one.


Since you given a a hypothetical situation let me give one to you as well.

what if police arrested four five of your friends( who do mall small illegal activities ) based on intelligence, but because they don't have enough evidence police killed them all in a fake encounter case. would you accept this in the name of acting tough and practicality etc.. would you say it's a necessary price we should pay for our security ???

They weren't the high profile, but the person they were targeting was of high profile..

From where you come to conclusion that they were in custody, Until proven, blindly believing the propaganda? the same with the fake encounters. where is the proof. the hypocrisy is that certain people jump to their guns with all the different different names, when they see the name Modi attached with something, just based on the assumption, but when it suites their agenda they would be asking the court verdict for proven terrorists.
another thing is even if it was a fake encounter, then still it has to be proven that if the police person was working with Modi's Govt in faking it. But see all the same terrorist sympathizers were first singing Innocent Innocent for their vested agenda, and when the sufficient proof are there, so now I'm only hearing fake encounter fake encounter and even stoop so low that start abusing..
 
.
They weren't the high profile, but the person they were targeting was of high profile..

From where you come to conclusion that they were in custody, Until proven, blindly believing the propaganda? the same with the fake encounters. where is the proof. the hypocrisy is that certain people jump to their guns with all the different different names, when they see the name Modi attached with something, just based on the assumption, but when it suites their agenda they would be asking the court verdict for proven terrorists.
another thing is even if it was a fake encounter, then still it has to be proven that if the police person was working with Modi's Govt in faking it. But see all the same terrorist sympathizers were first singing Innocent Innocent for their vested agenda, and when the sufficient proof are there, so now I'm only hearing fake encounter fake encounter and even stoop so low that start abusing..

until now I was basically arguing against custodial killings with members who assumed that (as well as I ) it's custodial killing and yet taken a view that it's ok to do custodial and extra judicial killings.There is a lower court verdict and a SIT report in favour of assuming it was custodial killing, to assume otherwise I have nothing in hand..and I believe even you have nothing in hand except your ideological agreement and favoritism with the ruling govt under which cops were working. so my center of argument was not innocence or otherwise of the cops in this case (although I assumed the cops are guilty based on available information) but dangers and injustice of fake encounter killings.

rest part of your post is politics and how I or every body assume things against Modi..well every body make their opinion on assumptions based on available information according to their intelligence.doesn't Modi supporters make all kind of corruption allegations against congress and Gandhi family ?? is even 10 % of them proven ? No, it's assumptions and perception based on media reports and hear say.

There is basically two approaches
1. when there is sufficient data and evidence against something/some one, we assume him to be guilty until proven otherwise.
2. when you think the evidence is weak you assume him to be innocent until proven guilty.
3.political favoritism or likes or dislikes would affect the position one takes on matters like this at varying degrees. on some people the influence is minimal but
some others relay heavily on their political affiliations to take any of these two postures even though primary evidence and logic suggests that their favourite is more likely to be guilty than innocent.
 
.
agree our police is not well equipped, vulnerable to politics etc but still I think it's important to follow the law in a matter which sometimes decides the life and death of innocents also.I also believe even criminals and terrorists should be given proper trail and max punishment.

I would agree with killing Dawood and hafiz if they are not within our country and can't possibly bring to India and have ample evidence against them (which is true here ), both are internationally recognised terrorists as well, it's not lack of evidence but politics and lack of accessibility which is the hindrance here.

if they were in India I am all for judicial trail and against custodial or fake encounter killing.

Mate - You can't pick and choose what type of trial you provide depending upon where the criminals are located. Either you stand for the judicial trial of all criminals irrespective of whether he is a Dawood or a Hafiz living elsewhere or Israt or Veerappan living in India.

You can't claim that the system is not working when the terrorists are living elsewhere and working within India. How many times we have seen a terrorist walk out on bail only to cause more harm? Perfect example - An Al-ummah man called Kichan Buhari who was convicted in Coimbatore blasts which killed 58 people walked out last year only to cause the Bangalore blasts a few months ago.


System does not work many times in India and and that is recognized by many including the same central government - If not we will not have AFSPA
 
.
Mate - You can't pick and choose what type of trial you provide depending upon where the criminals are located. Either you stand for the judicial trial of all criminals irrespective of whether he is a Dawood or a Hafiz living elsewhere or Israt or Veerappan living in India.

You can't claim that the system is not working when the terrorists are living elsewhere and working within India. How many times we have seen a terrorist walk out on bail only to cause more harm? Perfect example - An Al-ummah man called Kichan Buhari who was convicted in Coimbatore blasts which killed 58 people walked out last year only to cause the Bangalore blasts a few months ago.


System does not work many times in India and and that is recognized by many including the same central government - If not we will not have AFSPA

exactly the same point I am making, you can't have a universal posture and law regardless of the territory and situation we are dealing with. A AFSPA doesn't make sense in gujarath but to be effective in Kashmir law enforcement needs it. one could also argue that it's a double standard that I support AFSPA in Kashmir but not gujarath or any other state, but the truth is you can't take a universal stand detaching completely from the situation on ground.

so I believe my different positions on dawood and hafiz is not hypocrisy or pick and choose but a case by case logical approach.
 
.
exactly the same point I am making, you can't have a universal posture and law regardless of the territory and situation we are dealing with. A AFSPA doesn't make sense in gujarath but to be effective in Kashmir law enforcement needs it. one could also argue that it's a double standard that I support AFSPA in Kashmir but not gujarath or any other state, but the truth is you can't take a universal stand detaching completely from the situation on ground.

so I believe my different positions on dawood and hafiz is not hypocrisy or pick and choose but a case by case logical approach.

The two highlighted portions is what I am trying to insist here - You can't have double standards or have a universal stand - double standards - one for Kashmir and hundreds of encounter cases in India which is agreed by almost every Indian as the state of life and another for Ishrat case alone. Universal stand - you can't have judicial trial for each and every case in India considering the situation on the ground. That is not feasible even for rich developed countries like USA - else you might not have CIA run blacksites.
 
.
assume there is an intelligence input, and police intercept them
with no material evidence ??? what would you do ?? spray them with bullets then and there ?? or arrest and investigate it ??? why do we have so many pak fishermen on our jails, police could have assumed they were terrorists pretending to be fishermen.I believe through interrogation and proper investigation and with help of technology you can bring out the truth.I am in no fools paradise to argue police should away follow each and every procedure and law, but they should follow it on important matters, and this I believe is one.

The intelligence input convinced them of the threat posed. I'm sure they would have reacted differently if the intelligence input was lighter. Your interrogation means nothing in a court of law. Police confessions are inadmissible & there are plenty of lawyers who work with "NGO's" who will take care of that.

Since you given a a hypothetical situation let me give one to you as well.

what if police arrested four five of your friends( who do mall small illegal activities ) based on intelligence, but because they don't have enough evidence police killed them all in a fake encounter case. would you accept this in the name of acting tough and practicality etc.. would you say it's a necessary price we should pay for our security ???

Your are now arguing for the sake of it. People are always someone's friends, sons, daughters etc. The Boston bombers didn't lack for either friends or family. If the evidence suggested a definite risk & the top intelligence agency was offering a definite assessment, if you capture & get further information confirming your suspicions, what do you want them to do? Let them walk away? Your argument that threat is contained won't do. You would have to release them & another lot will be emboldened by such soft glove treatment & try again. After all, risk is low since all the police will do is stop you & release you, right? No one argues that this is ideal but do you seriously believe that next time on the loc, the army must not shoot to kill but offer just some rest in an Indian prison? You can well open the floodgates then. If you are convinced that you are dealing with terrorists, you have to make an example of them. You & I do not have the evidence in our hands, I believe we must not necessarily belittle(Disagree if you want but not belittle) the actions of men who stand between us & the terrorists and in whose hands evidence exists.
 
.
guys, is this the the first encounter case in INDIA ? THere were scores of encounters on source based evidences in Maharashtra in full swing before which underworld was finally pushed to the shadows.

How come people were so happy about it and one case has just lingered on forever with not even charge sheets filed !!

This is an undenying fact that, without even a chargesheet filed against any person on the fake encounter case, how a person is being vilified where as there was no mention about any CM ever in history for a fake encounter case !

COming to this case in particular, the Police acted on inputs from IB. Lets leave the court to decide how actionable those inputs were ! But, how does people crying violation of law so conveniently forget that people accompanying her had fake passports and how convincing proofs of those accompanying Ishrat being operatives of LeT were present already with multiple police and intelligence sources ?

So, is it a conincidence that Ishrat was a goddess born in heaven and it just happened that she was accompanying some known LeT operatives ? Mind me, I am not talking of the AK-47s which could have been planted as well !
 
.
The two highlighted portions is what I am trying to insist here - You can't have double standards or have a universal stand - double standards - one for Kashmir and hundreds of encounter cases in India which is agreed by almost every Indian as the state of life and another for Ishrat case alone. Universal stand - you can't have judicial trial for each and every case in India considering the situation on the ground. That is not feasible even for rich developed countries like USA - else you might not have CIA run blacksites.

By situation on the ground I meant place and overall law and order situation in there..not availability or non availability of prosecutable evidence, time, men or material.even in Kashmir I don't advocate custodial killing or extra judicial killing but lawful extra privilege, protection and power to the armed forces, AFSPA is not a license for extra judicial killings.I think you will also agree that Kashmir is far more violent and prone to terror attack than gujarath is.

I talked about this case today because I was present and it came up as a topic, I would take same position on custodial or extra judicial killings done in any other state.I am not talking about it because of any political. reasons.
if one has taken a position that in some some cases extra judicial killings has to be done how do you discriminate that what qualifies for that. if there is no real evidence how can the police be so sure about he being guilty ? if there is enough evidence to be sure about it then what's the difficulty in further developing it and presenting it in the court ? Forget selective allowance of encounter killings how can we even allow a AFSPA on case by case on same area, either these AFSPA act on every case handled by particular agency or there is not.

I think it's correct to say You can't take a case by case case approach in same place or state but on different place to place according to other factors and situation on hand to decide whether or not any special privileges should be given to law enforcement agencies in that area or state.
 
.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom