What's new

"Innocent" Ishrat Jahan

lay dump with me google it, she was declared suicide bomber but no suicide vest found on her or in the car. Where it gone
You're funny!!! :lol:

Just FYI- a suicide bomber doesn't wear his/her vest until the D-day.
A suicide vest is not a toy pistol that you carry everywhere you go. Lolzz

I give up, I can not drill sense into this one. Lol
 
.
Same question can be used agianst your Gods RB srikumar and Sanjeev bhatt ,why were they silent in 2002 and talked later ?

May I remind you that until you, following in the traditions of Marx, don't ask for all BJP & RSS members to be shot for preaching religion , your question will be considered as hypocritical as your profile name :lol:
 
.
You're funny!!! :lol:

Just FYI- a suicide bomber doesn't wear his/her best until the D-day.
A suicide vest is not a toy pistol that you carry everywhere you go. Lolzz

I give up, I can not drill sense into this one. Lol
Where is her hideouts did they recovered from there ? by the way check police version they say killed people are on the way to kill Darinder Moozi.
 
.
1. Janab how much do you know about this case ?
2. Janab don't you think better try to think from all angles and perceptive before calling you judgement of Fake Encounter.
3. Janab even if Israt Jahan is innocient, but her movement with the three terrorists different places in Rajasthan, Maharastra, and Gujrat dosen't feels good for her, as far as I am concerned.
4. Some of the Officers involved in this case, are now opening their mouth, and all of them cannot be politically deframed, and their ellegation is solid, that the case was deformed to defamed the image of CM Narendra Modi, and BJP.

Watch this

<iframe width="825" height="450" src="DNA: Analysis on Ishrat Jahan encounter case - YouTube" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

as i remember in 2013 i have study this case
 
.
Ishrat Jahan case, Operation Greenhunt and the convenient morality of P Chidambaram


by Ajay Singh Mar 3, 2016 14:43 IST

The eminence of a lawyer is often directly proportional to her/his ease with words and use of convenient logic. Former Union home minister P Chidambaram is an eminent lawyer. His capability to defend the indefensible can hardly be underestimated.

Chidambaram_PTI.jpg

File image of P Chidambaram. PTI

But truth, even if buried deep down, has an uncanny habit of resurfacing at inconvenient moments. The revelations of sarkari hanky-panky in the Ishrat Jahan affidavits filed before the Supreme Court, is one such inconvenient moment for Chidambaram that will not go away in a hurry.

Those aware of his role in the case know that Chidambaram’s part in this murky affair was not limited to his personal interest in drafting the second affidavit that erased Ishrat’s Lashkar-e-Taiba links.

Chidambaram’s role was much deeper — going right back to the manner in which he brought in a controversial IPS officer of the Gujarat cadre Kuldip Sharma as adviser to the home ministry. Chidambaram threw all norms to the wind and inducted the officer without even the mandatory approval of the Gujarat government.

Was Chidamabaram enamoured of Sharma’s professional calibre and efficiency? If this is true, Sharma would surely be one of the tallest police officers the country has ever produced. But Sharma is hardly known for his outstanding policing. Far from it. He was accommodated in the North Block to actualise Chidambaram’s plan to implicate the then Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi and Amit Shah in the fake encounter case. Sharma, who had fallen foul of the Modi administration, was just a handy tool to harass the state.

In an article in Governance Now on 9 July, 2013, I wrote the following:

"Hearsay, these days, seems to have acquired greater validity than truth. Look at the manner in which the CBI has been trying to implicate Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi and his lieutenant Amit Shah in the Ishrat Jahan encounter case. All it has so far got is specious verbal evidence of an low-rung officer claiming to have heard another senior officer telling a third that 'black beard and white beard' (obvious reference to Shah and Modi) had okayed the execution.

"The CBI had no problem making a mischievous mention of this bit of first rate hearsay in its chargesheet in the Ishrat case. But it conveniently omitted any mention of the recorded statement of David Coleman Hadley that Ishrat was indeed an LeT operative because that is supposed to have been mere hearsay. Headley’s statement, recorded by the National Investigating Agency (NIA), would not have undermined the CBI’s basic charge that the encounter was staged. But since the CBI is seeking to build a case that a minorities-unfriendly administration bumped off an innocent college girl, it chose to treat the NIA records as hearsay.

"Government agencies are past masters at resorting to hearsay and half-truths when it suits them. But rarely have they influenced the political discourse so much as they are doing now in the Ishrat case. In this context this bit of hearsay about Amit Shah is worth recounting. After he was arrested in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case by the CBI, Amit Shah was under constant pressure to turn approver and implicate Modi. "Arre bhai aap bania parivar se ho (Look, you are a bania) why are you putting yourself through so much trouble, just name Modi and be done with it," he was constantly nagged by CBI officers. Shah dutifully passed this information to top BJP political bosses.

"The rest is history. But what is particularly galling is the use of the home ministry as an instrument to stoke revolt in the IPS officers of Gujarat cadre. The office of Kuldip Sharma as adviser to Chidambaram came in handy to carry out these designs. There have been umpteen stories of the union home ministry encouraging police officers to revolt against the state government. The protective umbrella of the home ministry was a perfect indemnity for these officials."

The manner in which Chidamabaram altered the affidavit is no less culpable than a similar attempt made by his colleague in the Union government, Ashwani Kumar in relation to the coal scam case. But Kumar earned the ire of the Supreme Court and lost his job while Chidambaram emerged stronger after this indiscretion. There is a reason behind it. Unlike Kumar, Chidambaram was working to execute a political plan apparently vetted and approved by the Congress high command, particularly AICC president Sonia Gandhi.


And those aware of the intrigue in those times (four years before the 2014 General Election) would know about stories of late night meetings at the residences of either Ahmed Patel or former CBI chief AP Singh, in which the then CBI chief Ranjit Sinha was a regular attendee. At times when Singh was not there, his junior officers attended those meetings to finetune plans to implicate Modi and Shah in the Ishrat Jahan encounter. However it came a cropper because of the stout resistance from two home secretaries — GK Pillai and RK Singh.

At the same time, the Intelligence Bureau (IB) practically revolted against the political leadership for its move to implicate some senior IB officials being complicit in the encounter. As the 2014 elections drew near, CBI chief Ranjit Sinha developed cold feet and declined to include Modi's name in the chargesheet as an accomplice to the fake encounter.

Notwithstanding Chidambaram’s moral grandstanding, he was certainly not oblivious to the fact that the encounter that killed Ishrat Jahan and three others, was carried out with the approval of the internal security establishment of the UPA government. The then national security adviser (NSA) and old top sleuth MK Narayanan, was involved at every stage of the case and has recently acknowledged in this Hindu article the fact that the intelligence agency knew of Ishrat’s links to the LeT. The IB followed the precedent of handing over “suspected terrorists” to the state police for elimination.

Anyone with even an elementary brush with the intelligence operations in the country would know how agencies carry out counter-terrorist operations in insurgency-prone areas. Chidambaram was no novice in the home ministry. His own operation against Maoists across the country known popularly as 'Operation Greenhunt' was nothing but a ruthless pursuit and elimination of “suspected naxals” jointly by the intelligence agencies and security forces. But what was acceptable to Chidambaram in 'Operation Greenhunt' was unacceptable to him in the Ishrat Jahan case.

This change of heart for Chidambaram has far less to do with the killing of a hapless 18-year-old Muslim girl than to obtain his political objective of implicating Modi. His protestation of morality and lectures on ethics to the intelligence agencies is quite contrary to his conduct as the country’s home minister.

But then Chidambaram is an eminent lawyer.
Ishrat Jahan case, Operation Greenhunt and the convenient morality of P Chidambaram - Firstpost

@Abingdonboy @Levina @JanjaWeed @knight11 @Spectre
 
Last edited:
.
There is no doubt that some people wanted to portray her as 'innocent' to gain political advantage, the same way some people tried to highlight her as 'terrorist' to gain the same political advantage. Point is- there is no place for truth here. Let me assume that basis Headley's evidence she is an LeT member. So? What difference does it make? If she was innocent also the same claims would be made, with no hesitation from BJP claiming her to be a terrorist even if she was not. See both sides are playing pure politics here and modi has no reason to get any sympathy. If in this one he was screwed, there a 100 others where he screwed people using the same stuff- most recently doctoring the JNU tapes, declaring some students as LeT operatives etc.

You have no moral arguments to win here. This is a page right out of Modi's world.


LOL

Janab, first the what you hear from the Headley's statement in INdian court was the repeat of what it disclosed in front of FBI 9 year back in America, which gave the inputs to Indian security agency, that's why IB gave the inputs to various security agencies, and the plan to elliminate the threat was taken. But why don't you see any conspiracy which recent news are indicating that UPA govt tries to play the political game out of this.

Ishrat Jahan case, Operation Greenhunt and the convenient morality of P Chidambaram


by Ajay Singh Mar 3, 2016 14:43 IST

The eminence of a lawyer is often directly proportional to her/his ease with words and use of convenient logic. Former Union home minister P Chidambaram is an eminent lawyer. His capability to defend the indefensible can hardly be underestimated.

Chidambaram_PTI.jpg

File image of P Chidambaram. PTI

But truth, even if buried deep down, has an uncanny habit of resurfacing at inconvenient moments. The revelations of sarkari hanky-panky in the Ishrat Jahan affidavits filed before the Supreme Court, is one such inconvenient moment for Chidambaram that will not go away in a hurry.

Those aware of his role in the case know that Chidambaram’s part in this murky affair was not limited to his personal interest in drafting the second affidavit that erased Ishrat’s Lashkar-e-Taiba links.

Chidambaram’s role was much deeper — going right back to the manner in which he brought in a controversial IPS officer of the Gujarat cadre Kuldip Sharma as adviser to the home ministry. Chidambaram threw all norms to the wind and inducted the officer without even the mandatory approval of the Gujarat government.

Was Chidamabaram enamoured of Sharma’s professional calibre and efficiency? If this is true, Sharma would surely be one of the tallest police officers the country has ever produced. But Sharma is hardly known for his outstanding policing. Far from it. He was accommodated in the North Block to actualise Chidambaram’s plan to implicate the then Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi and Amit Shah in the fake encounter case. Sharma, who had fallen foul of the Modi administration, was just a handy tool to harass the state.

In an article in Governance Now on 9 July, 2013, I wrote the following:

"Hearsay, these days, seems to have acquired greater validity than truth. Look at the manner in which the CBI has been trying to implicate Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi and his lieutenant Amit Shah in the Ishrat Jahan encounter case. All it has so far got is specious verbal evidence of an low-rung officer claiming to have heard another senior officer telling a third that 'black beard and white beard' (obvious reference to Shah and Modi) had okayed the execution.

"The CBI had no problem making a mischievous mention of this bit of first rate hearsay in its chargesheet in the Ishrat case. But it conveniently omitted any mention of the recorded statement of David Coleman Hadley that Ishrat was indeed an LeT operative because that is supposed to have been mere hearsay. Headley’s statement, recorded by the National Investigating Agency (NIA), would not have undermined the CBI’s basic charge that the encounter was staged. But since the CBI is seeking to build a case that a minorities-unfriendly administration bumped off an innocent college girl, it chose to treat the NIA records as hearsay.

"Government agencies are past masters at resorting to hearsay and half-truths when it suits them. But rarely have they influenced the political discourse so much as they are doing now in the Ishrat case. In this context this bit of hearsay about Amit Shah is worth recounting. After he was arrested in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case by the CBI, Amit Shah was under constant pressure to turn approver and implicate Modi. "Arre bhai aap bania parivar se ho (Look, you are a bania) why are you putting yourself through so much trouble, just name Modi and be done with it," he was constantly nagged by CBI officers. Shah dutifully passed this information to top BJP political bosses.

"The rest is history. But what is particularly galling is the use of the home ministry as an instrument to stoke revolt in the IPS officers of Gujarat cadre. The office of Kuldip Sharma as adviser to Chidambaram came in handy to carry out these designs. There have been umpteen stories of the union home ministry encouraging police officers to revolt against the state government. The protective umbrella of the home ministry was a perfect indemnity for these officials."

The manner in which Chidamabaram altered the affidavit is no less culpable than a similar attempt made by his colleague in the Union government, Ashwani Kumar in relation to the coal scam case. But Kumar earned the ire of the Supreme Court and lost his job while Chidambaram emerged stronger after this indiscretion. There is a reason behind it. Unlike Kumar, Chidambaram was working to execute a political plan apparently vetted and approved by the Congress high command, particularly AICC president Sonia Gandhi.


And those aware of the intrigue in those times (four years before the 2014 General Election) would know about stories of late night meetings at the residences of either Ahmed Patel or former CBI chief AP Singh, in which the then CBI chief Ranjit Sinha was a regular attendee. At times when Singh was not there, his junior officers attended those meetings to finetune plans to implicate Modi and Shah in the Ishrat Jahan encounter. However it came a cropper because of the stout resistance from two home secretaries — GK Pillai and RK Singh.

At the same time, the Intelligence Bureau (IB) practically revolted against the political leadership for its move to implicate some senior IB officials being complicit in the encounter. As the 2014 elections drew near, CBI chief Ranjit Sinha developed cold feet and declined to include Modi's name in the chargesheet as an accomplice to the fake encounter.

Notwithstanding Chidambaram’s moral grandstanding, he was certainly not oblivious to the fact that the encounter that killed Ishrat Jahan and three others, was carried out with the approval of the internal security establishment of the UPA government. The then national security adviser (NSA) and old top sleuth MK Narayanan, was involved at every stage of the case and has recently acknowledged in this Hindu article the fact that the intelligence agency knew of Ishrat’s links to the LeT. The IB followed the precedent of handing over “suspected terrorists” to the state police for elimination.

Anyone with even an elementary brush with the intelligence operations in the country would know how agencies carry out counter-terrorist operations in insurgency-prone areas. Chidambaram was no novice in the home ministry. His own operation against Maoists across the country known popularly as 'Operation Greenhunt' was nothing but a ruthless pursuit and elimination of “suspected naxals” jointly by the intelligence agencies and security forces. But what was acceptable to Chidambaram in 'Operation Greenhunt' was unacceptable to him in the Ishrat Jahan case.

This change of heart for Chidambaram has far less to do with the killing of a hapless 18-year-old Muslim girl than to obtain his political objective of implicating Modi. His protestation of morality and lectures on ethics to the intelligence agencies is quite contrary to his conduct as the country’s home minister.

But then Chidambaram is an eminent lawyer.
Ishrat Jahan case, Operation Greenhunt and the convenient morality of P Chidambaram - Firstpost

Brother you hit the nail. Actually its an open and shut case, but still so called lefist, anti Hindutva, the fighters to save the democracy from the saffron terror would make sure that no stone left to be turned to save Congress leadership.
 
.
LOLZ, its an open and shut case now. But let Congress leadership have some sleepless nights.
More like sleeping with the enemy than sleepless nights for Congress! Congress in cahoots with LeT orchestrated this assassination plot to take out their potent political enemy! Otherwise why would they try & protect LeT with all their might? Congress is a terrorist organisation.. & it needs to be declared so, banned.. & all their top leaders should be imprisoned for life!
 
.
May I remind you that until you, following in the traditions of Marx, don't ask for all BJP & RSS members to be shot for preaching religion , your question will be considered as hypocritical as your profile name :lol:

Put it simple you dont have a proper answer (not un usual for me and other members) ,So usual rants ...Anyway your views about Ishrat changed alot
 
.
Put it simple you dont have a proper answer (not un usual for me and other members) ,So usual rants ...Anyway your views about Ishrat changed alot

Oh not as much as your views on Marxism you turncoat hypocrite :lol:
 
.
but this way create more violence janab . violence will bring more violence

I see you are a senior member and I follow your threads- In this Ishrat case It is now clear that she was a suicide bomber recruited by LeT- Zaki had talked about her with Headly and Gazwa Times declared her a Martyr- So that leaves little to imagine things-

I remember a senior moderator here Irafan he was talking about an incident which happened in Pakistan in one of your threads- I think the thread was on Bahawalpur- He mentioned that a suicide bomber was released by a Judge in Pakistan only because he couldn't detonate his vest- I am sure you would one of the first person to criticize such audacious decision by an educated person and a Judge at that- And any sane minded person would appreciate your criticism- Terrorism is something which is not same as organized crime- That is why world over there are special laws and special methods to deal with the menace- your country even had special courts for APS hearings and your military used F-16s to bomb the whole area where they thought the terrorists to be hiding- In this case a suicide bomber would not put their hands in air and let police cuff them up- They will simply blow themselves and take every one around with them in that explosion-

Now I leave It to your Judgement- A cop receives info from Intel agency that a suicide bomber is on her way to her mission- what should the cop do- call out warning for arrest and lets her blow herself and kill every one or shot her at sight-

In Ishrat's case the cops shot down the vehicle in which two Pakistanis and one Indian man were traveling with Ishrat- which killed every one inside-
 
.
Bhakt thinks he's terrorism traininig expert.
you dont have to be an expert or a bhakt,next time before we shoot a terrorist do we have to check or ask for a certificate that the terrorists have finished their training.

We can debate if she was a terrorist or not,but beleving that she is not a terrorist because she dint have time to fully become a terrorist.
The moment one decides to pickup arms ,the person is a terrorist
 
. . .
Oh not as much as your views on Marxism you turncoat hypocrite :lol:

Before giving turncoat Hypocrite to some one you must think about yourself Yo deserve that tittle better than any one We all know what was your political orientation before may 2013 ,and whom you support now my dear AAptard comrade ...
 
.
Why not a single round fire from inside, as per investigation all the bullets was from out side no evidence recovered to suggest they fire a single round from inside.
@Levina
Ishrat receive bullet in her upper back while sitting in a car (front seat) while as per police records the fire from the side...now tell me how can bullet hit a person on his / her back when fired from side.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom