Ishrat Jahan: The inconvenient story no one wants to tell

[bulbul]

Proof of what? Are you thick? Where have I said Ishrat was or was not a terrorist? Just making up things are you? Whether she was or was not a terrorist is immaterial. The main point is that she was killed in a fake encounter, one associated person is already in jail for another encounter killing and another associated person made dozens of phone calls to Modi's office the day of the encounter.

Proof of Modi ordered hit. Why should Ishrat is a terrorist or not is immaterial , if She is a terrorist encounter is fake or not doesn't really matter , terrorist must die. If she is not terrorist then fake encounter point will be valid. As for as thick , yeah I have a thick beard will shave on Sunday.

[Crookbond]

No it doesn't. It deliberately uses the word "hearsay" instead of "falsehood" in order to suppress Headley's testimony and avoid contempt of court when it is discovered.

I wonder why Gujarat HC believed NIA. Also, don't try the "tautology trick" on me - doesn't work.

[FischerTal]

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/ishrat-jahan-was-part-of-let-terror-module-gk-pillai/1/161264.html

Ishrat Jahan was part of LeT terror module: GK Pillai

so now former Home Secretary of India was lying too, he also is part of Modi's PR team :giggle:

[seedhi]

Proof of what? Are you thick? Where have I said Ishrat was or was not a terrorist? Just making up things are you? Whether she was or was not a terrorist is immaterial. The main point is that she was killed in a fake encounter, one associated person is already in jail for another encounter killing and another associated person made dozens of phone calls to Modi's office the day of the encounter.

Actually, in a roundabout way it is material whether she was a terrorist. If she indeed was a terrorist, then the IB warning about the threat to Narendra Modi's life was genuine. This "associated person" was the one who provided intelligence about the threat to the Chief Minister's life. That would explain him being in contact with the Chief Minister's office. Here I am assuming that the claim of phone calls etc made by you is correct.

[bulbul]

I wonder why Gujarat HC believed NIA. Also' date=' don't try the "tautology trick" on me - doesn't work.[/quote'] You can fool the courts by twisted information , happens all the time in India.

[The Outsider]

Proof of Modi ordered hit.

The kind of proof you are looking for will never be provided. Modi is too powerful for that. But yeah, you can continue believing Kodnani and Kumar were calling his office dozens of times on the day of the riots and the encounter for general chit chat.

Why should Ishrat is a terrorist or not is immaterial , if She is a terrorist encounter is fake or not doesn't really matter , terrorist must die. If she is not terrorist then fake encounter point will be valid.

No. Extra judicial killings are illegal. There are no "ifs" associated with it.

[FischerTal]

Virbhadra daughter is Additional HC judge http://www.hindu.com/2005/12/03/stories/2005120313850500.htm justice abhilasha kumari in ishrat jahan bench is daughter of HP CM Virbhadra Singh. Conflict of interest? Shouldnt she have recused herself? and before the anti-modistas start fapping, read the Code of Conduct for Judges http://www.slideshare.net/AJAYPRATAPSHARMA/fitalp-06122010-restatement-of-values-of-judicial-life-c-js-resolution-of-1999

[bulbul]

The kind of proof you are looking for will never be provided. Modi is too powerful for that. But yeah' date= you can continue believing Kodnani and Kumar were calling his office dozens of times on the day of the riots and the encounter for general chit chat. But I am not going to shed tear for death of terrorists legal or not.

Then I will say MMS is the most corrupt PM in Indian history. 1984 riots are supervised by Gandhi family etc,

[Crookbond]

You can fool the courts by twisted information ' date=' happens all the time in India.[/quote'] and the SIT, the Metropolitan Magistrate, CBI. So easy no? I find it a bit amusing that we can believe LeT mouth piece and other hearsay but not courts.

[bulbul]

and the SIT' date=' the Metropolitan Magistrate, CBI. So easy no? I find it a bit amusing that we can believe LeT mouth piece and other hearsay but not courts.[/quote'] You can simply say posters who are saying LeT said Ishrath is their operative & support IB's claim are wrong. BUt you are taking opposite stand without complete proof, but accuse others of hypocrisy :dontknow:

[The Outsider]

Then I will say MMS is the most corrupt PM in Indian history. 1984 riots are supervised by Gandhi family etc,

Go ahead and say it, who is stopping you? Not in this thread though because the topic has got nothing to do with those things.

But I am not going to shed tear for death of terrorists legal or not.

What you shed a tear to or not is not the topic of discussion.

[The Outsider]

Virbhadra daughter is Additional HC judge http://www.hindu.com/2005/12/03/stories/2005120313850500.htm justice abhilasha kumari in ishrat jahan bench is daughter of HP CM Virbhadra Singh. Conflict of interest? Shouldnt she have recused herself? and before the anti-modistas start fapping, read the Code of Conduct for Judges http://www.slideshare.net/AJAYPRATAPSHARMA/fitalp-06122010-restatement-of-values-of-judicial-life-c-js-resolution-of-1999

Can you point out what is the conflict of interest and what clause of the code of conduct it violates?

[bulbul]

Go ahead and say it, who is stopping you? Not in this thread though because the topic has got nothing to do with those things. What you shed a tear to or not is not the topic of discussion.

Topic is also not about belief either. You didn't provided any proof other than saying why Kondani called CM's office multiple times. Do you tapped those phones? or do you have any transcripts about what they talked? you are also just assuming and talking like what you write is only the truth.

[Crookbond]

You can simply say posters who are saying LeT said Ishrath is their operative & support IB's claim are wrong. BUt you are taking opposite stand without complete proof' date= but accuse others of hypocrisy :dontknow:

WHAT? I am obeying the court of law - the one which our constitution gives powers to. Anything apart from it with references to credibility from LeT (a terrorist organization) is nothing but close to laughable. AS for hypocrisy - I find it odd that people have a problem with IJ nominating a member to SIT but will use IB's statement as firm truth! That is indeed hypocrisy.

[bulbul]

WHAT? I am obeying the court of law - the one which our constitution gives powers to. Anything apart from it with references to credibility from LeT (a terrorist organization) is nothing but close to laughable.

I don't have much faith in law , does that make me wrong?

[Crookbond]

I don't have much faith in law ' date=' does that make me wrong?[/quote'] In that case, the proof of burden is on you to categorically prove the courts wrong with a more rigorous investigation not conspiracy theories.

[The Outsider]

Topic is also not about belief either. You didn't provided any proof other than saying why Kondani called CM's office multiple times.

And that's about as good as it can get when it comes to someone as powerful as Modi.

Do you tapped those phones? or do you have any transcripts about what they talked? you are also just assuming and talking like what you write is only the truth.

No, but Kodnani calling Modi's office multiple times when she was instigating riots and distributing weapons and Kumar doing the same the day he was involved in extra judicial killings are dots not too difficult to connect.

[bulbul]

In that case' date=' the proof of burden is on you to categorically prove the courts wrong with a more rigorous investigation not conspiracy theories.[/quote'] I am least bothered about proving courts are wrong.

[FischerTal]

so IB director Ibrahim, IB officer Kumar,Home secretary GK Pillai, and the LET itself is wrong in saying Ishrat was an LET operative. a new low for anti-modistas. lage raho :cheer:

[bulbul]

And that's about as good as it can get when it comes to someone as powerful as Modi. No, but Kodnani calling Modi's office multiple times when she was instigating riots and distributing weapons and Kumar doing the same the day he was involved in extra judicial killings are dots not too difficult to connect.

More and more assumptions. That's why I said we can call anyone criminal or any one saint by just connecting dots. what about a conservative Muslim girl from Pune roaming in Gujarat with 2 Paki's + a converted Hindu ? doesn't that feel any suspicious? not dots there to connect?