The village of Ode in Anand district had 200 houses of Muslims. The Muslims lived in the four neighbouhoods known as Sarewalli Bhagol, Malao Bhagol, Pirawali Bhagol and Ode Nawapura.
On March 1, 2002 there was no Morning Prayer call from the mosques of the village as the Muslims were so much frightened by the reports of murder, mayhem and arson of the previous day that they were shocked stunned and terrified to the extent of being transfixed alive within their dwelling.
But their turn had overreached them. They had premonition of what lay in store for them as a community for the last two months. They had been animated into freezing fear of nervousness as they watched the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh volunteers and activists descending on the village with evil intent. The meeting of these took place in the house of Harishbhai Vallabhbhai Patel and the ominous posters for purging Muslims appeared on the walls in the public places soon afterward. These warned the people that Muslim youths had been teasing Hindu girls and there was need for teaching them a lesson. The two inauspicious threatening events were the harbingers of secret meetings in the nearby farms where the Hindus of the village gathered. Although they pretended it was farm related work but the farm hands mostly Muslims got the wind that it was an organized movement planned that did not bode well for their existence. For two months beginning with the last days of 2001 and the months of January and February 2002 the Muslims had become self conscious of what they were on account of the new deportment of their fellow villagers from the majority community.
Then the most dreaded first act of announcement came on March 1, 2002 when Harishbhai Vallabhbhai, Vasantbhai Poonambhai Patel and Natubhai Sanabhai Patel and some others warned them that soon there would be a rally of Hindus. What really transpired was the murderous crowd armed with sharp swords, spears, petrol bombs and gas cylinder entering the areas and locking the houses of the Muslims and burning them! They perished in the fire. Two of them were seriously burnt but ran out and went to a house of a Hindu whose key they had. They were farm hands of the Hindu farmers. For three days they hid there. There was no food or water worth name but they survived. One of them was Rehana Yusufbhai Vohra who saw how the houses were burnt and people killed, there were 28 of them of which seven were young girls and two elderly women. She became the eye witness.
Two others also had come out. One was Syed Ghulam Hussein and a small boy. The old grandfather of the boy could not walk. Chotubhai Ramabhai attacked and killed him by setting him on fire. His grandson saw the gruesome end of his grandfather from where he had sheltered himself.
The survivors identified the attackers who killed the Muslims as Dilipbhai Vallabhbhai Patel, Chotubhai Ranabhai Patel, Prakashbhai Jamnadas Patel and Hemant Kumar Rathod led the attackers. Among the armed they named Harish Vallabh who had a can of petrol, Nantubhai Sana who had a spear, Basant Poonambhai with a can of kerosene and a fire ball, Lalabhai Bakoorbhai with sickles. Some other identified and named were Ghanshayambhai Ambala, Devendrabhai Harishbhai Patel, Prakashbhai Jashbhai Patel, Dilipbhai Sanabhai Patel and Grishbhai Somabhai Patel.
Later on when the police came there and the victims were evacuated to nearby village of Sureli they identified and named Haribhai Vallabhbhai Patel who brought those who wanted to prevent the evacuation. There were two ex sarpanch or head of the village council, Ganesh Panwala Odhi and Ashabhai Patel. They also had their vehicles filled with people. The crowd intended to stop the victim survivors and kill them. Godhabhai Patel, Arvindbhai Patel, Anil Kumar,, Niranjan Kumar (Bobo), Arvind Rambhai, Raoji Sarabhai, Rajubhai Santabhai and Chotu Ramabhai Patel were on the road.
Twenty three Hindus were arrested including the above but most of them got bail. Seven were put in prison. One of them was given bail to celebrate Navratri dance of nine nights!
The most remarkable for history of modern India is that the local people many of whom had lived generations together turned on the Muslims in frenzy to eliminate them. They almost succeeded. The bulldozers had replaced the hands and bullock carts of yore to destroy any remnants of households of Muslims there. The Muslims of Ode could never return there. They dare not. That was what came out when Lord Mountebatten and his lady visited villages in Punjab where the Punjabi Muslims too were thus uprooted.
Unlike partition era when a fig leaf of holistic sense of nationalism was still there to hide the unseemly tendencies, things now and especially in Hindu party BJP ruled state like Gujarat have slid into an abyss. There is no hope left for the victims to return to their earlier life, let alone to their position or status, thanks to the kind of new order that Modi ushered in. He dreamed that Muslim should be so taught a lesson that they would never retaliate. Thus far he has succeeded and India has failed.
This bitter inference is based on how the state of Gujarat under the control of Modi has suborned the judiciary. Judge Ms SY Trivedi was constrained to resign in the first week of May 2011. April 28 2011 was the day she had fixed to give her verdict on Ode. But the Modi dispensation did not want to hear what her decision on the case was. She was transferred out of Anand district even before April 28. But the matter was tightly kept in secret. But now that it is in public domain we wait with waited breath how India reacts.
India reacted to the Non Resident Indians (NRI) enthusiastically as it meant huge funds coming into the country. But the acronym is a status symbol, it connotes opulence and affluence. However, its grim side is that the fund that Sonal Shah and VHP had collected and sent it to the Delhi address of office of the same saffron group which channeled it to those who conducted the pogroms of Muslims. Most of it ended up in the hands of the marauding crowds who had dry fruit packets, pouches of liquor, and weapons. They killed the hapless Muslims of Gujarat in 2002. The twenty eight of Ode were done to death with wherewithal supplied by the NRI. Ode of Anand district was famed as an “NIR village.” Most of the Hindus in the village known as Patels were quite rich and had many members of their families in the US. Even the superrich abroad shared the juggernaut of Hindutva back home.
-------
http://da.feedsportal.com/c/33039/f/533916/s/15755d35/l/0Ltimesofindia0Bindiatimes0N0Cindia0C20A0A20EGujarat0Eriots0Ejudge0Eresigns0Eafter0Etransfer0Carticleshow0C865630A70Bcms/ia1.htm
Crime Against Humanity
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Arun Jaitley and the albatross of CTVB hanging from his neck
The Communal and Targeted Violence Bill of 2011 is the bird of good omens which the mariner of BJP has shot down.
The bill must be seen in the backdrop of the last two decades of India’s communal cauldron and the past beyond that should not be forgotten either. Only obsession with the highest powerful man in Gujarat and shielding him by sophistry will not do.
Arun Jaitley conveniently forgets that mass rape of Muslims in Gujarat 2002 was an act of communal violence and an act of terror. Terror and communal violence are the two sides of the same coin as far as India and the whole of Indian subcontinent is concerned. The most disastrous events of violence associated with the juggernaut of demolition of the mosque in Ayodhya in the late eighties and early nineties of the 20th century and building a temple there and the burning of the train compartment carrying karsevaks returning from Ayodhya in 2002.
It is history and fresh in mind that Muslim girls and women were paraded naked, gang raped and burnt alive. In many cases their fetus were also yanked out and stuck on spears. These heinous acts were perpetrated by extremist “groups” of the right wing Hindutva—Bajrang Dal, VHP, Chhara community which the RSS had co-opted into the attacking hordes. There is no doubt that they belong to the majority community, Hindu. But then all the Hindus in Gujarat did not think or act like the hordes. The same ‘groups’ or hordes who descended on the Muslims carried out the pogroms because it was well known from day one that the Chief Minister of the state of Gujarat had given instructions to that effect. On February 27, 2002 he had instructed the police not to intervene but let the Hindu crowds vent out their anger at the Muslims to teach them a lesson that they would never dare to react.
This is the most crucial example of ‘targetting’ Muslims as a ‘group’ by right wing groups of BJP, VHP, Bajrang Dal. That is, the threat held out. The Chief Minister said that VHP had declared strike on February 28 and his own party BJP had also accepted the call to strike and joined it. Therefore he and his party acted as ‘group’ made up of the Hindu who are in majority in the state. But by no stretch of imagination does this mean all the Hindus had subscribed to his and his party’s views. There were Hindus like RB Sreekumar, Sanjiv Bhatt, Rahul Sharma or many good Samaritans in scattered rural and urban places who did not either agree or carry out the instructions of Modi. But KK Mysorewalla in charge of Naroda Patia police did toe the line of the Home Minister who was also Chief Minister of the state. Mysorewalla did commit dereliction of duty to protect the Muslims who pleaded for shelter but he left them to the mercy of the bloodthirsty marauding crowd and did not protect them.
But there were other Hindu officers in the police force who did not allow any pogrom in their areas. The pogroms were limited to certain districts of Gujarat. Not the whole of Gujarat was affected as not all the Gujarati Hindus had turned blind to what was happening around in other parts of the state. Therefore it is false syllogism that the majority community will only bear the blame if the CTVB is passed and enacted and they alone will be punished. It stands out clearly that the police officers who were even handed in keeping law and order were penalized by the state. Were they not Hindus and members of the majority community in the state?
What Modi did is he committed the crime in the sense of Dostoevsky’s protagonist in his novel Crime and Punishment. The novelist and his hero have a theory that an extraordinary character like Napoleon or Mohammad was so powerful that he would break the law knowing that it was wrong. But he would do it when he is convinced that it serves the larger interest of the community. For example the hero kills a Jewess money lender for her exorbitant rate of interest. Usury was condemned by Christ for which the Jews nailed him on the crucifix. But then every breaking of law is a crime and must lead to punishment. The would-be heroine persuaded the hero to confess his homicide and undergo exile to the Siberian desert. The whole momentum of BJP is against this meting out of the judgment. Jaitley again: "The drafting of this bill appears to be the handiwork of those social entrepreneurs who have learnt from the Gujarat experience of how to fix senior leaders even when they are not liable for an offence." Therefore, according to the theory of Dostoevsky Modi stands with Napoleon and Mohammad.
Why does Jaitley appropriate the whole of the populace of India when he says “Even when minor communal or caste disturbances occur, there is a national mood of revulsion against them. The governments, media, the courts among other institutions rise to perform their duty. The perpetrators of communal trouble should certainly be punished.” He should better ask AB Vajpayee and Narendra Modi if they did their raj dharma or state duty. What was “shameful” to the former was not shared by the latter. They also belonged to the majority. And how far did the former share in the national mood of revulsion which the latter did not show an iota of it. Did the targeted killing of Sohrabuddin fill either of the two with remorse? So talking of the national mood is limited to the ‘group’ of the ‘cultural nationalists’ of the two who indulge in prevarication. Those who felt true revulsion were different Indians.
Perhaps Jaitley needs to be schooled in the phenomenal shift that terrorism has taken the place of communal riots and violence in India and hence they are interchangeable. This phenomenon has not transpired in the US. There were no communal riots as a result of 9/11. But what began as a traffic offence in Coimbatore in 1998 became a communal riot and ultimately terrorism. Hindus who quartered Muslims injured and hospitalized were as much terrorists as Muslims who bombed the same hospital. Both ‘groups’ practiced it, the Hindus and the Muslims. Terror is terror whether you wield a sword or detonate a bomb. In Kannur, Kerala, the turf war between the RSS and Muslims and Marxists is indistinguishable whether it is communal violence or terrorism. Who and what had “incentivized” who to do what?
Babu Bajrangi and his associates had collected arms from fellow Hindus and used them against the hapless Muslims. He boasted that they found better way of eliminating the Muslims by herding them with their guns into the dry well of Naroda Patia and took the petrol from the nearby ST bus workshop where KK Mysorewall was stationed and burnt the hundreds of Muslims alive. The commissioner of police PC Pande found the number of dead staggering and ordered the dispersion of the dead corpses to other parts. This was the work of an “association”, to use the word that Jaitley mentions in the following. “Clause 9 creates an offence for communal and targeted violence. Any person who singly or jointly or acting under the influence of an association engages in unlawful activity directed against a 'group' is guilty of organised communal and targeted violence.” Does not this description of Jaitley do justice to the offence and the offenders?
Furthermore, BJP, erstwhile Jan Sangh and the mother of all ‘groups,’ RSS, are familiar in the art of creating ‘groups’ to carry out the hidden agenda of the saffron affiliates. DR Goyal who was a member of RSS and wrote extensively about RSS has this to say: “In 1969, riots broke out in Ahmedabad. There was a separate organisation called “Support for Hindus” to lead the riot. Similarly, when there were riots in Jalgaon and Bhiwandi, a similar organisation was set up. However, if you look at their composition, all the members were also members of the RSS. The parent organisation of such groups that engineer such riots is always the RSS.”
On May 23 1969 the Jan Sangh leader and RSS hard core ‘volunteer’ Dr Bhagwan Prabhashanker Vyas created a ‘group’ in the town of Bhiwandi in Maharashtra. He christened it Rashtriya Utsav Mahasangh or National Festival Great Organization. The nineteen members of this group did not stomach the way the Shiv Jayanti committee celebrated the birth anniversary of the Maratha king. Vyas wanted them to linger longer before mosques and throw gulal or red powder at mosques to create tension and that is a sure recipe of communal violence and riots. In the past as in 1967 he did it at the Panjarpol Dargah but the police nipped the trouble in the bud. Thus the creation of the dissenting 19 under the name of a ‘group’ RUM came handy to create a riot in 1969. This is the way of the multi-headed Hydra of the sangh parivar thrives. Does Jaitley still pretend that he does not know the multiplication of the ‘groups’ created by the RSS? Such groups are from the majority community of Hindus who are in minority in Bhiwandi vis-à-vis Muslims who were 65% of the population according to Justice Madan.
Look at the lofty aims of RUM ala RSS: (1) to celebrate festivals according to Indian tradition; (2) to organize religious, social and cultural programmes; (3) to develop Indian culture consistent with the modern scientific age; (4) to foster nationalistic tendencies; (5) to curb anti–national activities ; and (6) to foster national integrity. All this proved ostentation of which the Jaitleys of such groups are always before the mike with their old legerdemain up in their sleeves. “In all matters likely to create communal tension the R.U.M. adopted a militant and aggressive attitude and set itself up as the champion of what it considered to be the rights of the Hindus against the Muslims and, so to say, to teach the Muslims their place and if they were not willing to learn their place, to teach them a lesson. It even went out of its way to create such occasions”
Some groups can be openly hostile and violent and attack Hurriyat leaders in Jammu and Kashmir irrespective of the fact whether they belong to the minority or majority. Such acts are potentially dangerous because they can create law and order situation and the local political set up in such a state may like to exercise political correctness and waive the laws of the land in dealing with the situation. That was what happened with the Shiv Sena in Jammu.
That is what Modi chose to do in Gujarat. And more, he instructed the police to do his dictate.
Thanks to the draft bill as it encompasses the whole of India and not just Gujarat or JK either
Be Indian and live Indian. Stand up, how many of you belong to this ‘group’!
The bill must be seen in the backdrop of the last two decades of India’s communal cauldron and the past beyond that should not be forgotten either. Only obsession with the highest powerful man in Gujarat and shielding him by sophistry will not do.
Arun Jaitley conveniently forgets that mass rape of Muslims in Gujarat 2002 was an act of communal violence and an act of terror. Terror and communal violence are the two sides of the same coin as far as India and the whole of Indian subcontinent is concerned. The most disastrous events of violence associated with the juggernaut of demolition of the mosque in Ayodhya in the late eighties and early nineties of the 20th century and building a temple there and the burning of the train compartment carrying karsevaks returning from Ayodhya in 2002.
It is history and fresh in mind that Muslim girls and women were paraded naked, gang raped and burnt alive. In many cases their fetus were also yanked out and stuck on spears. These heinous acts were perpetrated by extremist “groups” of the right wing Hindutva—Bajrang Dal, VHP, Chhara community which the RSS had co-opted into the attacking hordes. There is no doubt that they belong to the majority community, Hindu. But then all the Hindus in Gujarat did not think or act like the hordes. The same ‘groups’ or hordes who descended on the Muslims carried out the pogroms because it was well known from day one that the Chief Minister of the state of Gujarat had given instructions to that effect. On February 27, 2002 he had instructed the police not to intervene but let the Hindu crowds vent out their anger at the Muslims to teach them a lesson that they would never dare to react.
This is the most crucial example of ‘targetting’ Muslims as a ‘group’ by right wing groups of BJP, VHP, Bajrang Dal. That is, the threat held out. The Chief Minister said that VHP had declared strike on February 28 and his own party BJP had also accepted the call to strike and joined it. Therefore he and his party acted as ‘group’ made up of the Hindu who are in majority in the state. But by no stretch of imagination does this mean all the Hindus had subscribed to his and his party’s views. There were Hindus like RB Sreekumar, Sanjiv Bhatt, Rahul Sharma or many good Samaritans in scattered rural and urban places who did not either agree or carry out the instructions of Modi. But KK Mysorewalla in charge of Naroda Patia police did toe the line of the Home Minister who was also Chief Minister of the state. Mysorewalla did commit dereliction of duty to protect the Muslims who pleaded for shelter but he left them to the mercy of the bloodthirsty marauding crowd and did not protect them.
But there were other Hindu officers in the police force who did not allow any pogrom in their areas. The pogroms were limited to certain districts of Gujarat. Not the whole of Gujarat was affected as not all the Gujarati Hindus had turned blind to what was happening around in other parts of the state. Therefore it is false syllogism that the majority community will only bear the blame if the CTVB is passed and enacted and they alone will be punished. It stands out clearly that the police officers who were even handed in keeping law and order were penalized by the state. Were they not Hindus and members of the majority community in the state?
What Modi did is he committed the crime in the sense of Dostoevsky’s protagonist in his novel Crime and Punishment. The novelist and his hero have a theory that an extraordinary character like Napoleon or Mohammad was so powerful that he would break the law knowing that it was wrong. But he would do it when he is convinced that it serves the larger interest of the community. For example the hero kills a Jewess money lender for her exorbitant rate of interest. Usury was condemned by Christ for which the Jews nailed him on the crucifix. But then every breaking of law is a crime and must lead to punishment. The would-be heroine persuaded the hero to confess his homicide and undergo exile to the Siberian desert. The whole momentum of BJP is against this meting out of the judgment. Jaitley again: "The drafting of this bill appears to be the handiwork of those social entrepreneurs who have learnt from the Gujarat experience of how to fix senior leaders even when they are not liable for an offence." Therefore, according to the theory of Dostoevsky Modi stands with Napoleon and Mohammad.
Why does Jaitley appropriate the whole of the populace of India when he says “Even when minor communal or caste disturbances occur, there is a national mood of revulsion against them. The governments, media, the courts among other institutions rise to perform their duty. The perpetrators of communal trouble should certainly be punished.” He should better ask AB Vajpayee and Narendra Modi if they did their raj dharma or state duty. What was “shameful” to the former was not shared by the latter. They also belonged to the majority. And how far did the former share in the national mood of revulsion which the latter did not show an iota of it. Did the targeted killing of Sohrabuddin fill either of the two with remorse? So talking of the national mood is limited to the ‘group’ of the ‘cultural nationalists’ of the two who indulge in prevarication. Those who felt true revulsion were different Indians.
Perhaps Jaitley needs to be schooled in the phenomenal shift that terrorism has taken the place of communal riots and violence in India and hence they are interchangeable. This phenomenon has not transpired in the US. There were no communal riots as a result of 9/11. But what began as a traffic offence in Coimbatore in 1998 became a communal riot and ultimately terrorism. Hindus who quartered Muslims injured and hospitalized were as much terrorists as Muslims who bombed the same hospital. Both ‘groups’ practiced it, the Hindus and the Muslims. Terror is terror whether you wield a sword or detonate a bomb. In Kannur, Kerala, the turf war between the RSS and Muslims and Marxists is indistinguishable whether it is communal violence or terrorism. Who and what had “incentivized” who to do what?
Babu Bajrangi and his associates had collected arms from fellow Hindus and used them against the hapless Muslims. He boasted that they found better way of eliminating the Muslims by herding them with their guns into the dry well of Naroda Patia and took the petrol from the nearby ST bus workshop where KK Mysorewall was stationed and burnt the hundreds of Muslims alive. The commissioner of police PC Pande found the number of dead staggering and ordered the dispersion of the dead corpses to other parts. This was the work of an “association”, to use the word that Jaitley mentions in the following. “Clause 9 creates an offence for communal and targeted violence. Any person who singly or jointly or acting under the influence of an association engages in unlawful activity directed against a 'group' is guilty of organised communal and targeted violence.” Does not this description of Jaitley do justice to the offence and the offenders?
Furthermore, BJP, erstwhile Jan Sangh and the mother of all ‘groups,’ RSS, are familiar in the art of creating ‘groups’ to carry out the hidden agenda of the saffron affiliates. DR Goyal who was a member of RSS and wrote extensively about RSS has this to say: “In 1969, riots broke out in Ahmedabad. There was a separate organisation called “Support for Hindus” to lead the riot. Similarly, when there were riots in Jalgaon and Bhiwandi, a similar organisation was set up. However, if you look at their composition, all the members were also members of the RSS. The parent organisation of such groups that engineer such riots is always the RSS.”
On May 23 1969 the Jan Sangh leader and RSS hard core ‘volunteer’ Dr Bhagwan Prabhashanker Vyas created a ‘group’ in the town of Bhiwandi in Maharashtra. He christened it Rashtriya Utsav Mahasangh or National Festival Great Organization. The nineteen members of this group did not stomach the way the Shiv Jayanti committee celebrated the birth anniversary of the Maratha king. Vyas wanted them to linger longer before mosques and throw gulal or red powder at mosques to create tension and that is a sure recipe of communal violence and riots. In the past as in 1967 he did it at the Panjarpol Dargah but the police nipped the trouble in the bud. Thus the creation of the dissenting 19 under the name of a ‘group’ RUM came handy to create a riot in 1969. This is the way of the multi-headed Hydra of the sangh parivar thrives. Does Jaitley still pretend that he does not know the multiplication of the ‘groups’ created by the RSS? Such groups are from the majority community of Hindus who are in minority in Bhiwandi vis-à-vis Muslims who were 65% of the population according to Justice Madan.
Look at the lofty aims of RUM ala RSS: (1) to celebrate festivals according to Indian tradition; (2) to organize religious, social and cultural programmes; (3) to develop Indian culture consistent with the modern scientific age; (4) to foster nationalistic tendencies; (5) to curb anti–national activities ; and (6) to foster national integrity. All this proved ostentation of which the Jaitleys of such groups are always before the mike with their old legerdemain up in their sleeves. “In all matters likely to create communal tension the R.U.M. adopted a militant and aggressive attitude and set itself up as the champion of what it considered to be the rights of the Hindus against the Muslims and, so to say, to teach the Muslims their place and if they were not willing to learn their place, to teach them a lesson. It even went out of its way to create such occasions”
Some groups can be openly hostile and violent and attack Hurriyat leaders in Jammu and Kashmir irrespective of the fact whether they belong to the minority or majority. Such acts are potentially dangerous because they can create law and order situation and the local political set up in such a state may like to exercise political correctness and waive the laws of the land in dealing with the situation. That was what happened with the Shiv Sena in Jammu.
That is what Modi chose to do in Gujarat. And more, he instructed the police to do his dictate.
Thanks to the draft bill as it encompasses the whole of India and not just Gujarat or JK either
Be Indian and live Indian. Stand up, how many of you belong to this ‘group’!
Sunday, May 22, 2011
The killing of a driver
In Ben Jonson’s play Volpone there is a character who inspects the contents of a match box for what kind of piece of intelligence it might contain for a foreign country. The Intelligence Bureau of India has fortuitously given out to the world that it is assiduously doing the same in its pursuit of the most dangerous terrorist after Osama bin Laden who is also hiding in Pakistan.
The killing of the driver of Iqbal Kaskar was designed to locate where Dawood Ibrahim was hiding. The Intelligence Bureau used a middle man from Nagpada who gave subcontract to a source outside Mumbai to kill the driver. As a fall out of Abbottabad assassination of Osma bin Laden this was quite expected. What was not expected was that the IB should be so foolhardy to venture into such a tangle of terror in the heart of the underworld in Mumbai. The Mumbai edition of The Asian Age on Thursday May 19, 2011 made it a front page headline. It shows India in a poor light. If “IB outsourced Kaskar firing” according to the paper, then IB could also have outsourced Karkare killing as well. Or, still better someone outsourced Karkare killing to IB among others.
It also shows how much our agencies are obsessed with terror of one kind rather than terror of all kinds which beset us. We also fail to differentiate ourselves from the Americans. We are opportunists and wanted to piggy ride the Yankees.
It revives the memory of the blunders of IB in regard to the security set up in Mumbai in November 2008. That precipitated the climax in the assassination of Hemant Karkare though the terrorist attack continued for two more days thereafter.
Hindustan Times of January 10, 2009 says that the mobile phone numbers used by the terrorists during 26/11 were available with the IB for 5 days before the attack started. On November 21 the naval headquarters wrote and also spoke to Prabhakar Alok for more information. The Joint Director of IB did not reply. Of the 35 phones 3 were actively used to communicate with the handlers in Pakistan. In the first place the IB was in the know of more than what is known. It knew that 32 phones were bought from Kolkata and 3 from Delhi. It should have been very seriously concerned but did not show any awareness of the urgency of the request or just ignored it.
Even if we cannot call it complicity, but, the meaning can be inferred, nevertheless, that this facilitated the movement of the terrorists who attacked Mumbai on November 26, 2008.
As of now in the murder of the driver there is need for monitoring by a committee of the parliament as to the authenticity of the alleged involvement of the IB. Vice President Abdul Hamid also emphasized this in his Kao memorial lecture.
The murder of Arif Abu Baker Sayyed is clearly an act of terrorism. Unless proved otherwise it stands to reason that it was an act of terror committed by the Indian intelligence agency. It is also quite known to the world that IB has set up training camps in which criminals are trained to kill those whom the agency wants to bump off. There is recent history of 1993 bomb blasts witnesses who were killed in such a way. Scores of them met this fate. IB is back on its old hunt. But the moot question is whether it would serve the interest of the country when already judgment has been delivered and the guilty are sentenced varyingly. Even for the sake of argument suppose Dawood Ibrahim indicates flurry of activity, is India really going to execute a surgical strike? And, where is the don?
It is quite sobering to remember that India had almost gone to war with Pakistan when the Parliament was attacked in December 2001.
What kind of signal we are sending to our neighbouring countries and the world at large? Including in the list of names of the most wanted criminals like Dawood, Saeed we have also such names like Wazul Kamar Khan and Feroz Khan in the dossier we sent to Pakistan. Feroz is in high security prison of Arthur road and Wazaul is out on bail and has been marking his presence at local police station in Mumbai.
It is as absurd as the character in Samuel Beckette’s play Waiting for Godot watching for a foreign body in his hat and hitting it on the palm of the other hand again and again to see whether it falls down.
The underword has a code of honoring each other’s family by not attacking a member of it. Therefore it was not Iqbal but the driver who was the target. So, it was not Chhota Rajan or Ravi Pujari who organized the attack. Then the others in the field are IB or middle men like Ubaid ur Rehman. Striking the hat again and again would end in reduction ad absurdum.
The killing of the driver of Iqbal Kaskar was designed to locate where Dawood Ibrahim was hiding. The Intelligence Bureau used a middle man from Nagpada who gave subcontract to a source outside Mumbai to kill the driver. As a fall out of Abbottabad assassination of Osma bin Laden this was quite expected. What was not expected was that the IB should be so foolhardy to venture into such a tangle of terror in the heart of the underworld in Mumbai. The Mumbai edition of The Asian Age on Thursday May 19, 2011 made it a front page headline. It shows India in a poor light. If “IB outsourced Kaskar firing” according to the paper, then IB could also have outsourced Karkare killing as well. Or, still better someone outsourced Karkare killing to IB among others.
It also shows how much our agencies are obsessed with terror of one kind rather than terror of all kinds which beset us. We also fail to differentiate ourselves from the Americans. We are opportunists and wanted to piggy ride the Yankees.
It revives the memory of the blunders of IB in regard to the security set up in Mumbai in November 2008. That precipitated the climax in the assassination of Hemant Karkare though the terrorist attack continued for two more days thereafter.
Hindustan Times of January 10, 2009 says that the mobile phone numbers used by the terrorists during 26/11 were available with the IB for 5 days before the attack started. On November 21 the naval headquarters wrote and also spoke to Prabhakar Alok for more information. The Joint Director of IB did not reply. Of the 35 phones 3 were actively used to communicate with the handlers in Pakistan. In the first place the IB was in the know of more than what is known. It knew that 32 phones were bought from Kolkata and 3 from Delhi. It should have been very seriously concerned but did not show any awareness of the urgency of the request or just ignored it.
Even if we cannot call it complicity, but, the meaning can be inferred, nevertheless, that this facilitated the movement of the terrorists who attacked Mumbai on November 26, 2008.
As of now in the murder of the driver there is need for monitoring by a committee of the parliament as to the authenticity of the alleged involvement of the IB. Vice President Abdul Hamid also emphasized this in his Kao memorial lecture.
The murder of Arif Abu Baker Sayyed is clearly an act of terrorism. Unless proved otherwise it stands to reason that it was an act of terror committed by the Indian intelligence agency. It is also quite known to the world that IB has set up training camps in which criminals are trained to kill those whom the agency wants to bump off. There is recent history of 1993 bomb blasts witnesses who were killed in such a way. Scores of them met this fate. IB is back on its old hunt. But the moot question is whether it would serve the interest of the country when already judgment has been delivered and the guilty are sentenced varyingly. Even for the sake of argument suppose Dawood Ibrahim indicates flurry of activity, is India really going to execute a surgical strike? And, where is the don?
It is quite sobering to remember that India had almost gone to war with Pakistan when the Parliament was attacked in December 2001.
What kind of signal we are sending to our neighbouring countries and the world at large? Including in the list of names of the most wanted criminals like Dawood, Saeed we have also such names like Wazul Kamar Khan and Feroz Khan in the dossier we sent to Pakistan. Feroz is in high security prison of Arthur road and Wazaul is out on bail and has been marking his presence at local police station in Mumbai.
It is as absurd as the character in Samuel Beckette’s play Waiting for Godot watching for a foreign body in his hat and hitting it on the palm of the other hand again and again to see whether it falls down.
The underword has a code of honoring each other’s family by not attacking a member of it. Therefore it was not Iqbal but the driver who was the target. So, it was not Chhota Rajan or Ravi Pujari who organized the attack. Then the others in the field are IB or middle men like Ubaid ur Rehman. Striking the hat again and again would end in reduction ad absurdum.
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Demonstrating a cover-up job of Modi of Gujarat
On May 5, 2011 the Supreme Court refused to consider the affidavit that Sanjiv Bhatt had submitted to it. SIT submitted its report on April 25 and denied that Bhatt attended the meeting at the house of Modi. Bhatt alleged that the CM had told the police to let the Hindus vent out their anger at the Muslims as he wanted to teach the Muslim a lesson to stop the balancing act of the previous governments in communal rights and let the Hindus have the upper hand and to tilt the balance in their favour for good. The other serious observation of the SIT is that Bhatt has some motive to level grave charges nine years later and it calls for a probe. Next, he tutored his driver to give false information.
Earlier report of SIT submitted in November 2010 had found insufficient evidence against Modi and amicus curaie Raju Ramchandran objected to “no prosecutable evidence against Modi.” SC asked SIT to probe further.
However SC hints at the fact that SIT has not come up with any change in the second report submitted to it. It has given 8 weeks time to Ramchandran to study all the evidence and suggest if any offence can be made out against anyone. Next hearing is on July 28. Thus the slow movement of the judicial process makes one wonder whether the adage justice delayed is justice denied is still true.
This has been going on in Gujarat for more than ten years now. It is proudly passed off as Moditva, unrepentant hijacking of the state to commit atrocities and still go scot free. The best example is Babu Bhai Bajrangi. The crimes he committed speak loudly for the heaven to hear and yet we on the earth have not heard it so far! The courts also seem to be taken in by Moditva. Madhu Srivastava and his people made Zahira Shaikh turn hostile. She went to jail but they are still free. Of the accused and convicted for life in prison now another witness has turned hostile. The case must reopen again and this would continue ad absurdum.
The obvious reason is that the endeared chote sardar of Gujarat is also capable of becoming the Prime Minister! Therefore the judicial process must continue as it is going until more hurdles come in the way and the courts prolong to kingdom come!
The crimes Modi has committed are like a hippopotamus clearly seen trampling the grass on the lawn and yet the investigators are holding the magnifying glass close to their eyes and prying into the roots of the grass as if watching the movement of an ant. The fun is that Modi knows that we know it that Modi knows it!
The impotency of everyone in the face of all this is a tribute to those who had gathered at Janter Manter for a revolution to usher in. Exceptions are there to prove the rule.
Modi brought in a reign of terror, in the words of Zakia Jafri. He conspired, he executed the conspiracy and is busy in what Shanti Bhushan calls cover-up job. The courts like the Chief Minister are vying with each other to go to infinity in time. Will nine years that Sanjiv Bhatt took slide into nine decades before justice is delivered?
Earlier report of SIT submitted in November 2010 had found insufficient evidence against Modi and amicus curaie Raju Ramchandran objected to “no prosecutable evidence against Modi.” SC asked SIT to probe further.
However SC hints at the fact that SIT has not come up with any change in the second report submitted to it. It has given 8 weeks time to Ramchandran to study all the evidence and suggest if any offence can be made out against anyone. Next hearing is on July 28. Thus the slow movement of the judicial process makes one wonder whether the adage justice delayed is justice denied is still true.
This has been going on in Gujarat for more than ten years now. It is proudly passed off as Moditva, unrepentant hijacking of the state to commit atrocities and still go scot free. The best example is Babu Bhai Bajrangi. The crimes he committed speak loudly for the heaven to hear and yet we on the earth have not heard it so far! The courts also seem to be taken in by Moditva. Madhu Srivastava and his people made Zahira Shaikh turn hostile. She went to jail but they are still free. Of the accused and convicted for life in prison now another witness has turned hostile. The case must reopen again and this would continue ad absurdum.
The obvious reason is that the endeared chote sardar of Gujarat is also capable of becoming the Prime Minister! Therefore the judicial process must continue as it is going until more hurdles come in the way and the courts prolong to kingdom come!
The crimes Modi has committed are like a hippopotamus clearly seen trampling the grass on the lawn and yet the investigators are holding the magnifying glass close to their eyes and prying into the roots of the grass as if watching the movement of an ant. The fun is that Modi knows that we know it that Modi knows it!
The impotency of everyone in the face of all this is a tribute to those who had gathered at Janter Manter for a revolution to usher in. Exceptions are there to prove the rule.
Modi brought in a reign of terror, in the words of Zakia Jafri. He conspired, he executed the conspiracy and is busy in what Shanti Bhushan calls cover-up job. The courts like the Chief Minister are vying with each other to go to infinity in time. Will nine years that Sanjiv Bhatt took slide into nine decades before justice is delivered?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
