Crookbond Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 I am least bothered about proving courts are wrong. And hence, you have no choice but to accept the rulings. Anything other than that until categorically proven is conspiracy theories.
bulbul Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 so IB director Ibrahim' date=' 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:[/quote'] No wonder terrorists are living happily in this country :two_thumbs_up:
Crookbond Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 IB itself is under investigation for extra judicial killings. Obviously you can't take their claims on face value!
bulbul Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 And hence' date=' you have no choice but to accept the rulings. Anything other than that until categorically proven is conspiracy theories.[/quote'] Where does ruling links this issue with Modi?
The Outsider Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 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? As I said whether she was a terrorist or not is irrelevant to the fact that extra judicial killings took place and whether Modi had an involvement in them.
bulbul Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 IB itself is under investigation for extra judicial killings. Obviously you can't take their claims on face value! CBI is not a autonomous body.
Crookbond Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 Where does ruling links this issue with Modi? Did you miss the part where Gujarat "government" over the years has been filing an appeal with the Gujarat HC?
bulbul Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 As I said whether she was a terrorist or not is irrelevant to the fact that extra judicial killings took place and whether Modi had an involvement in them. Again assumption , why can't you give Modi benefit of doubt till proven? Tell me what you believe whether she is terrorist or not?
The Outsider Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 so IB director Ibrahim' date=' 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:[/quote'] Can you tell us about the conflict of interest post in more detail and what code of conduct clause her being a judge violates?
Crookbond Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 CBI is not a autonomous body. CBI never entered the frame until 2011 I guess but sure don't let these facts come in your way.
FischerTal Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 IB itself is under investigation for extra judicial killings. Obviously you can't take their claims on face value! so just believe the SIT comprising of Satish Verma, a known Modi baiter? Funny how those claims can be taken at face value too.
Crookbond Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 so just believe the SIT comprising of Satish Verma' date=' a known Modi baiter? Funny how those claims can be taken at face value too.[/quote'] Seriously?!!! What is the problem with Gujarat HC ? It is there to verify these claims.
FischerTal Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 Seriously?!!! What is the problem with Gujarat HC ? :--D finally came to realization.Der aaye durust aaye. If you know the history of Satish Verma with Modi since 2002 riots, which i expect you to ignore, you would look at case differently :good:
FischerTal Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-02-09/india/31041516_1_zakia-jafri-r-k-raghavan-closure-report SIT finds no evidence against Modi in Zakia case read this and how zakia jafri withdrew name of IPS Satish Verma and Rahul Sharma from her original complaint. they,atleast satish, are repaying her favor quite nicely. lage raho :clap:
Crookbond Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 :--D finally came to realization.Der aaye durust aaye. If you know the history of Satish Verma with Modi since 2002 riots' date=' which i expect you to ignore, you would look at case differently :good:[/quote'] IDK how to even respond to this. :facepalm: Sirjee, Mr. Satish Verma never entered the fray of the SIT Team until late 2011. The initial SIT team did not consist of Mr. Verma the Modi baiter. Ab kaun der aaye? :two_thumbs_up: Long before Satish Verma entered into the scene, the SIT team had submitted a report that the encounter was fake. I hope Modi doesn't have a problem with the Metropolitan Magistrat as well.
FischerTal Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 IDK how to even respond to this. :face palm: Sirjee, Mr. Satish Verma never entered the fray of the SIT Team until 2011. The initial SIT team did not consist of Mr. Verma the Modi baiter. Ab kaun der aaye? :two_thumbs_up: Long before Satish Verma entered into the scene, the SIT team had submitted a report that the encounter was fake. I hope Modi doesn't have a problem with the Metropolitan Magistrat as well. :giggle: i know you wont be able to because there is a clear conflict of interest. If you had read that zakia jafri had withdrawn her complaint against verma, you would know that was suspect. but again, lets trust the integrity of IPS Satish Verma as blindly as you do. :two_thumbs_up: and you should also know, Justice Abhilasha Kumari, part of the Ishrat Bench, is daughter of HP CM Virbhadra SIngh. but no conflict of interest there. No one asking if she should have recused herself from the case, but lets just blindly follow as you do. :cheer:
seedhi Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 IB itself is under investigation for extra judicial killings. Obviously you can't take their claims on face value!Yes, but we should accept the findings of an SIT which includes this guy: 1996 fake encounter case: Gujarat cop Satish Verma faces probe ........ The Gujarat High Court last week ordered a probe into an alleged fake encounter in 1996, in Porbandar town of Saurashtra region, bringing IPS officer Satish Verma under the scanner. The order came after Hiralal Shial (58), a resident of Porbandar, moved a petition before the high court alleging that his brother, Jasu Gagan Shial, was shot dead in December 1996 under the supervision of Verma, who was the then SP. ....... Verma, with his colleagues Atul Karwal and S. Zala, faces allegations of letting off Sattar Maulana, a key accused in a case pertaining to the landing of RDX at Gosabara near Porbandar in 1993. http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/1996-fake-encounter-gujarat-satish-verma-probe/1/185607.html
seedhi Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 The astounding thing is that an officer who himself faces allegations of fake encounter is nominated to be part of the SIT by the family of Ishrat Jahan and this nomination is also accepted.
Crookbond Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 :giggle: i know you wont be able to because there is a clear conflict of interest. If you had read that zakia jafri had withdrawn her complaint against verma' date=' you would know that was suspect. [b']but again, lets trust the integrity of IPS Satish Verma as blindly as you do. :two_thumbs_up: and you should also know, Justice Abhilasha Kumari, part of the Ishrat Bench, is daughter of HP CM Virbhadra SIngh. but no conflict of interest there. No one asking if she should have recused herself from the case, but lets just blindly follow as you do. :cheer: So now once you can't win, make a straw man. Character never goes away! Satish Verma was not in the SIT team which said the encounter was fake. I know this comes as a shock but time is a good healer. Oh btw, please reply to Outsider regarding what conflict of interest Abhilasha Kumari has and what clauses she violates. We are all ears.
Crookbond Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 Yes' date=' but we should accept the findings of an SIT which includes this guy:[/quote'] :fail: He was not in the team which said the encounter was "fake". :cantstop:
Recommended Posts