Plot to kill Modi and many BJP leaders

[Joe Shearer]

If there is even an iota of proof that links the 4 dead people with LET,then this case is nothing.

Dangerous terrorists can be encountered off,nothing wrong.

Just normal justice.

Not surprised to read this.

Justice is delivered by the courts of law. Not by trigger-happy policemen.

 

[Yeti]

To be fair Gandhi was warned on numerous times but he did not listen to the views of the masses that is why Godse took the matter into his own hands which I do not support I just wish leaders like Bose lived he was one of the best we had along with Sardar Patel.

 

[omkar]

@Aeronaut, killing Modi is not the only objective here.. Just think about it, what if an Indian muslim killed Modi?? Is it a good reason to start a religious riot? The whole India would be burning because of that..

You are pathic sicho, get some mental help soon .

 

[Joe Shearer]

Im afraid you are taking a very theoretical line of reasoning without any reference to the hard realities. Now, even if they were terrorists, they have not yet carried out any attack. It is also certain that they would not be carrying incrimination material. So, if on a tip off, the police and IB pick them up, and interrogate them - what could they be charged under if they have not yet committed any offence? The best police could hope was to keep them in custody under a few weak sections after which they would be set free on bail. Imagine certified LeT operations being at large and the security apparatus twiddling its thumbs. There is no option but to eliminate them.

And there is no option but to charge the eliminators with murder.

 

[sankranti]

Still at it? Good for you. Win or lose, you are persistent.

Just two simple things explode your saffron balloon.

First, a puppet department would not have revealed anything to the court. The court had NO way of investigating; it cannot take newspaper and media reports into cognizance as evidence. So if the CBI Director had not had the courage to speak up, none of the rest, the freeing of the CBI, would have happened.

Second, the most important reason for discussion of the CBI's independence was its role investigating the killings. Was it a Congress-driven probe, to embarrass the Modi government? Here the facts are clear; it was a Magistrate's Court in Ahmedabad that first refused to believe the Gujarat Police story, called the incident a faked encounter and brought in the CBI to investigate. It was not an initiative by the centre. That blows a big hole in your Sangh Parivar conspiracy theory.

More from the spin doctor ....

1. It is widely reported that the CBI officer was insulted, indicating that there was resistance from the CBI, but none from both counsel of CBI or the Attorney General. What is more important is that this entire conspiracy was disclosed by the CBI itself by leaking out information to the media. That is the way the CBI perhaps decided to settle scores with political heavyweights. Even caged parrots can settle scores when the opportunity arise.

2. It is strange that courts believed 2,50,000 fake encounters in Punjab, UP, Maharashtra before this.

 

[Iggy]

You are pathic sicho, get some mental help soon .

??????????

 

[Yeti]

That woman who was shot was a LET member she got what she deserved she was a traitor pure and simple no pity for her

 

[Joe Shearer]

This admission does not lessen his puppetdom.

If the court asks a pointed question and asks for a personal affidavit, no official, however pliant, can tell a lie. In a government system, all draft affidavits will be kept on file and cannot be destroyed easily. The record would have shown that the original affidavits were changed. The courts could have asked for the records and then CBI's goose would have been cooked.

The issue was not with the affidavits, the issue was with the report.

How would the court have penetrated the curtain of secrecy with the Director and the law officer testifying that nothing had been changed?

Nobody expected the CBI director to stand up for the agency. That is what marked the break, and no longer keeps it a puppet of the government.

 

[Omtatsat]

And there is no option but to charge the eliminators with murder.

Oh!! So you would rather have a situation where there is no concept of preventive action because no policeman would be ready to do the dirty job? And all we can do is to wait like sitting ducks. Are you sure you were in the army?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Still waiting for your reply for this post... loser

What happened no answer or you have another BS for your congress bhakti?

Really, you must learn to think for yourself, not have me spoon feed you.

Your running after me for every small thing is boring.

HOWEVER, a teacher's dharma is to teach: not that you yuppy neo Hindus would understand dharma.

The IB Director was right in defending his Deputy Director SIB (as Rajender Kumar was at the time). Passing on news was precisely his job, and he cannot be blamed for it.

BUT, and this is where everyone is anticipating events, no one has blamed the man for passing on information. IF THERE IS ANY QUESTION ABOUT HIS ROLE, IT IS ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT HE CONSPIRED WITH THE GUJARAT POLICE TO MURDER THE DETENUS, AND WAS PART OF THE PLANNING PROCESS.

He was questioned to find out why exactly happened.

IF THERE WAS CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT HIS INVOLVEMENT BEYOND PASSING ON NEWS, HE WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGESHEETED AND THE DIRECTOR IB WOULD NOTHAVE DEFENDED HIM.

Until that charge sheet, if ever that is framed, Rajender Kumar must be judged to have done his duty of informing the local police force. That is all. That is what the Director IB is saying. And he is correct. So, too, are the CBI correct. They are investigating to find if the Deputy Director did mor than he was empowered to do, whether he was an accessory to the murders. In which case the law will take its course, and no one, least of all the Director IB, would defend him.

 

[Omtatsat]

The issue was not with the affidavits, the issue was with the report.

How would the court have penetrated the curtain of secrecy with the Director and the law officer testifying that nothing had been changed?

Nobody expected the CBI director to stand up for the agency. That is what marked the break, and no longer keeps it a puppet of the government.

Government does not work on oral instructions. Every draft affidavit is placed on file and put up through a proper channel. All modifications to the draft are placed on record. If the CBI consulted the PMO and the Law Ministry, the suggested changes will also be on record. The only way CBI director could have lied was if he had destroyed the drafts first, and that is no small matter for a career IPS, not even for a puppet.

 

[Omtatsat]

Government does not work on oral instructions. Every draft affidavit is placed on file and put up through a proper channel. All modifications to the draft are placed on record. If the CBI consulted the PMO and the Law Ministry, the suggested changes will also be on record. The only way CBI director could have lied was if he had destroyed the drafts first, and that is no small matter for a career IPS, not even for a puppet.

And before you do further hair splitting, let me tell you that all reports are submitted to the court as part of an affidavit.

 

[Ammyy]

Really, you must learn to think for yourself, not have me spoon feed you.

Your running after me for every small thing is boring.

HOWEVER, a teacher's dharma is to teach: not that you yuppy neo Hindus would understand dharma.

The IB Director was right in defending his Deputy Director SIB (as Rajender Kumar was at the time). Passing on news was precisely his job, and he cannot be blamed for it.

BUT, and this is where everyone is anticipating events, no one has blamed the man for passing on information. IF THERE IS ANY QUESTION ABOUT HIS ROLE, IT IS ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT HE CONSPIRED WITH THE GUJARAT POLICE TO MURDER THE DETENUS, AND WAS PART OF THE PLANNING PROCESS.

He was questioned to find out why exactly happened.

IF THERE WAS CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT HIS INVOLVEMENT BEYOND PASSING ON NEWS, HE WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGESHEETED AND THE DIRECTOR IB WOULD NOTHAVE DEFENDED HIM.

Until that charge sheet, if ever that is framed, Rajender Kumar must be judged to have done his duty of informing the local police force. That is all. That is what the Director IB is saying. And he is correct. So, too, are the CBI correct. They are investigating to find if the Deputy Director did mor than he was empowered to do, whether he was an accessory to the murders. In which case the law will take its course, and no one, least of all the Director IB, would defend him.

Still you dint use word terrorist in your post

IB chief protect Rajender Kumar because all 4 were terrorist and IB officer did right thing.

Are they terrorist or not??

I can understand how hard for you to call these people terrorist cause this will ruin your cause to defame image of modi

 

[Omtatsat]

Really, you must learn to think for yourself, not have me spoon feed you.

Your running after me for every small thing is boring.

HOWEVER, a teacher's dharma is to teach: not that you yuppy neo Hindus would understand dharma.

The IB Director was right in defending his Deputy Director SIB (as Rajender Kumar was at the time). Passing on news was precisely his job, and he cannot be blamed for it.

BUT, and this is where everyone is anticipating events, no one has blamed the man for passing on information. IF THERE IS ANY QUESTION ABOUT HIS ROLE, IT IS ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT HE CONSPIRED WITH THE GUJARAT POLICE TO MURDER THE DETENUS, AND WAS PART OF THE PLANNING PROCESS.

He was questioned to find out why exactly happened.

IF THERE WAS CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT HIS INVOLVEMENT BEYOND PASSING ON NEWS, HE WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGESHEETED AND THE DIRECTOR IB WOULD NOTHAVE DEFENDED HIM.

Until that charge sheet, if ever that is framed, Rajender Kumar must be judged to have done his duty of informing the local police force. That is all. That is what the Director IB is saying. And he is correct. So, too, are the CBI correct. They are investigating to find if the Deputy Director did mor than he was empowered to do, whether he was an accessory to the murders. In which case the law will take its course, and no one, least of all the Director IB, would defend him.

The Intelligence Bureau is not simply a messenger boy to pass inputs to the states. It is fully involved in "dirty" activities which someone has to do to keep the country safe. Was it not revealed that the IB was involved in interrogation of the terrorists? Why do you think they had a cache of arms which were allegedly planted on the dead bodies? Why do you think the IB and The MHA are protecting Rajender Kumar and denying prosecution sanction? If the court fixes culpability, no way that IB and the central government can escape.

 

[Ammyy]

Please enlighten us.

First encounter is not fake.
Second investigation is shoddy.
Third encounter was fake,but they were terrorists.
Fourth judiciary is biased.

If highlighted is reality then I have no problem at all.