Ram Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 I would not have complained had you guys bene consistent in your emotional outppouring viz a viz your concern of human life. In fact would have put u on pedestal of Mahtam Gandhi. I thought the whole point of this was to prove how Modi is as innocent as a child. Now i get it, its all about making people to accept that Cong were criminals too right ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 Do you know the diff between a Verdict and personal opinion ? or shall I write it in 36 font size. Do you know the difference between a layman expressing his opinion and the chief justice of Ind expressing his opinion ? Or shall i put it in 48 font ? In the case of the former, i dont have a damn, but for the latter, i will listen to it like gospel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 So says of DR' date=' of none other than the Chief Justice of India ! No name dropping please u know I have allergy with opinions.... CJI for a newbie like u may be above reproach btu I have seen enough mud to know these samplea are not beyond politics either.. Go read how they behaved during emergency u will get the picture.. PS:First Human ( muslims) right commision chairman ex-CJ P N Bhagwati used to be bonafide a$$wipe of Indira Gandhi and was over-zealous to ratify all her extra-constitutional orders seps..In fact that's why he got CJ ahead of his senior colleague Justice Khosla who was the lone ranger against Indira's BS..As I said I have read enough and know enough to know that just becaise someone happens to be CJ his/her words doesn;t become gospel, certainly not when they have not enough cajones to write it down on record of the judgement I have seen it all.. Anyway as I said no name-dropping.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 I've always maintained Rajeev Gandhi is a mass murderer in the same vein as Modi, the only inconsistency being shown is by Hindutva nutcases because of their chaddhidhari brotherhood with Modi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 I thought the whole point of this was to prove how Modi is as innocent as a child. Now i get it' date=' its all about making people to accept that Cong were criminals too right ?[/quote'] It's about exposing the selctive-human-right-watch activists.. Modi is innocent and that says the court.. I don't have to worry there.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 It's about exposing the selctive-human-right-watch activists.. Modi is innocent and that says the court.. I don't have to worry there.. Who said i gave a damn to those pseudo whatever you call them.. Modi is innocent and that says the court.. I don't have to worry there.. :haha::haha::haha: How about paying a visit to this ? http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?t=86618 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 I've always maintained Rajeev Gandhi is a mass murderer in the same vein as Modi' date= the only inconsistency being shown is by Hindutva nutcases because of their chaddhidhari brotherhood with Modi. Not really 1984: 3000 sikh killed 0 hindu killed; not a single bulelt fired not even a single rioter killed, no police called no army called 2002: 794 muslim kileld 294 hindu killed, army called immediately as a result majoriy of hindus killed due to police firing. For an unbiaased mind it says one person has attempted to control ritos while other was sleeping if not abetting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 Do you know why the CJ could not use his opinion to reaching a verdict ? a case for 96 font size ? hehe.. verdicts are not always a reflection of the truth, they're based on evidence. And evidence can be hidden/destroyed/manipulated/tampered with. A case for 120 font maybe ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showpost.php?p=292116&postcount=128 Huh? What does that post have to do with Rajeev Gandhi being a mass murderer and yes he had more international credibility than Narendra "I can't get a US visa" Modi. What's the connection or is it just one more of your usual rambles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 meaning Not Guilty = Guilty .... why have things like supreme court .... lets do away with them :cantstop: Did you even make an effort to understand what i typed ? There seems to absolutely ZERO connection the text of mine you have quoted and your response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 hehe.. verdicts are not always a reflection of the truth' date=' they're based on evidence. And evidence can be hidden/destroyed/manipulated/tampered with. A case for 120 font maybe ?[/quote'] Brother where does the question of verdict arise without existance of any court case, ain't u jumping the gun here. We will talk about verdict later first do the bare minimum which is registration of a court case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 Huh? What does that post have to do with Rajeev Gandhi being a mass murderer and yes he had more international credibility than Narendra "I can't get a US visa" Modi. What's the connection or is it just one more of your usual rambles? There is connection some kind pf praise is inherent there.. and yes Narendra bhai Modi has more credibility as far as integrity honesty was concerned than Rajeev bofors-chor Gandhi:two_thumbs_up: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 How many FIRs were filed and cases registered against Rajeev Gandhi in the '84 riots case? Don't bother counting - None. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 thats your own rambling proff if you dont recognize it ... you were pretty proud of Killer Gandhi's international credibility .... :hysterical: Not proud but he did a much better cover up job than Narendra "I have been stripped to my privates internationally" Modi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 Brother where does the question of verdict arise without existance of any court case' date=' ain't u jumping the gun here. We will talk about verdict later first do the bare minimum which is registration of a court case.[/quote'] Hain, how many times should i repeat ? Lack of prosecution doesnt mean lack of crime ! P.S - This is getting boring ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 Oh an army was called in action in 1984 as well after two days, which was pretty much the same as in 2002. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 I have reason to be sceptical there. He was PM and Delhi was union territory hence had all the power in the world to control which judge gets promotion. Come to narendra Modi he is a mere CM since last 4 years openly anti-Modi givt has been at centre. There is 24/7 media channles again anti-Modi.. There are plethora of rights commisison which agsin was not present in those days. Most incriminating of them all is the fact that not even a single bullet was fired again unlike post-godhara episode. Of course there is no court case against him and I am sure it didn't happen because he was PM CM's don't enjoy same level of impunity. Tell me honestly if u were an indepdendent observer and had to give benfit of doubt which character would have been more worthy receioeint of benfit of doubt. The one who was less powerful executive i.e CM, seemed like attempting to control-riots through his poilice or the one who was all poerful executive i.e PM and did zilch zero nada as far as riot control was concerned. Honest answer forget for a second it's DR asking and Shwetabh answering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 yeah I just assumed that reagrdless of whether you can prove what happened or not - That too when the supreme torch bearer of human rights i' date=e Congress Govt is in power at center - you will continue your ramblings ..... so yeah sue me for saving myself some time.http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?t=86618 Would you mind paying a visit to here and answering some of highlighted points ? Excuse me ? Proof ? Have you even been reading the other threads on this forum ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 Hain' date=' how many times should i repeat ?[b'] Lack of prosecution doesnt mean lack of crime ! P.S - This is getting boring ! Of course this is boring so basically u are saying u will talk in vacuum..:two_thumbs_up: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 Why would I give benefit of doubt to anyone of the two mass murderers? I don't share a chaddhidhari bond with one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts