Internal Security Watch

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 29 May 2011 17:38

For example -

(i) suppose if someone publishes a story about Mother Teresa taking spiritual advice from notorious pedophiles (which is in fact true, see - http://www.sfweekly.com/2009-07-29/news ... as-sinned/), or

(ii) suppose if a person stands outside a Church distributing pamphlets with quotations from Gandhi and Ambedkar, criticizing conversions, or

(iii) publish a story critical of any prophets or religious doctrines, ....

- these sorts of things have to be explicitly allowed. In the present bill, as per clause 3 (f) (5), creating a “hostile” and “offensive environment” against a "minority institution" is criminal offense.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 29 May 2011 17:55

Arjun wrote:Regarding blasphemy, Section 295 A of IPC is known as India's own blasphemy law...When the Statesman of Calcutta published Johann Hari's article critical of Prophet Mohammed - there were riots in Cacutta in response. The editor & publisher were arrested based on a case filed under this act by the Muslim community.

Because Wikipedia says so? As always, a problematic source...

Quoting cases is problematic in itself. The test of the validity of a law is not on "charges", but conviction...Has Ravindra Kumar been convicted? Arresting someone on the basis of an interpretation of the law is the easiest thing in the book, for politicians lokoing to make an optical point...

On the other hand, actual interpretation of 295A, in India it is governed by the Supreme Court judgement in 1957, that says.

In a landmark case in 1957, the apex court ruled, “Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings… do not come within the section. It only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion

Or what the Cal HC said while deciding on the case of the banning of Nasreen's Dwikhondito..

If it (an insult) is inflicted in good faith by an author in his/her endeavour or object to facilitate some measure on social reform by administering such a shock to the followers of the religion, as would ensure notice being taken by any criticism so made, (it) would not attract the mischief of Section 295A by reason of the phrase ‘with deliberate and malicious intention’

We know the history of judgements in Pakistan under blasphemy...So I guess, by "common sense", India 295A IPC is the same in "letter" as the Paki law!

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 29 May 2011 17:59

Pranav wrote:A very valid question which Somnath chose not to answer. Despite all our pretensions, we're not that much better than the Packees when it comes to anti-blasphemy laws

Of course I did...Refer back to the post..

the import and interpretation of laws is not just a function of (similarity or otherwise) of the letter with another law...As I said before, both Saudi Arabia and Australia have laws on decency with certain common semantics - does it mean they are the same?!

Applicability of the law and its interpretation is a function of "spirit", which is what lawyers belabour over in my office (and everywhere else I am sure) all the time..Fundamentally, the socio-political praxis of the country defines what the law is supposed to actually do...For India, refer to Supreme Court and High Court judgements on 295A quoted above..

To blithely conclude that we are "no better" is an amusing conclusion from someone who otherwise is convinced of superiority of "societal liberlism"!

Lastly,

I think this law might be a good opportunity to insert similar clauses in India, explicitly saying that abuse, criticism and ridicule of historical and religious figures is not a violation. Also, interpretation and discussion of historical events, and criticism of conduct of minority individuals and institutions should be explicitly allowed, unless it violates existing defamation laws

Howsoever desirable, laws and their applications cannot be divorced from the realities of society...Just as our laws are definitely not like the Pkais', they in all cases cannot conform to the value systems of powst modern Europe either...(and even there, other countries have similar provisoins - Ireland, France and possibly others)...In India, there are laws against conversion, there are laws against cow slaughter - in many ountries, these can be considered "illiberal" and agaionst "freedom" as well...So it is difficult to do "copy paste" jobs of statutes in all cases - either in letter or importantly in spirit..

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 29 May 2011 18:06

Pranav wrote:I think this law might be a good opportunity to insert similar clauses in India, explicitly saying that abuse, criticism and ridicule of historical and religious figures is not a violation. Also, interpretation and discussion of historical events, and criticism of conduct of minority individuals and institutions should be explicitly allowed, unless it violates existing defamation laws.

I would agree but at the same time, the article I enclosed throws up some interesting revelations. The Church was extremely concerned that their right to evangelize and even their right to say at their own Sunday morning sermons that Jesus is the only saviour and path to God - would be under threat if the word 'insulting' were retained.

I see two choices - one is either the hate speech regulation in India be restricted to 'threatening' language and expressions only. Alternately if the current broad brush definition of hate speech is to continue what stops a case being filed against Christian / Islamic preachers in India for the same reason that they are insulting Hinduism by claiming only their God was true. Since Indian law is modeled on UK law, surely if the Church thought there could be a valid case if the word 'insulting' was retained - that should apply to India as well.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 29 May 2011 18:22

somnath wrote:It is a good find...It does mean that the UK law went through a tighter deliberative process...However, that still doesnt mean that the Indian law becomes similar "in letter" to the Paki blasphemy law..Nor does it mean that other countries do not have similar semantics..

Since you have harped on the 'similarity in letter' phrase between Indian and Paki blasphemy laws - can you let me know when I have used that phrase that you so love to pick on?

The point is that Section 295 A has tremendous scope for misuse (and that could also be by Hindu groups) and there are a number of voices that are asking for its repeal. Its the closest India has to a blasphemy law. As regards the issue of 'deliberate and malicious intent' - that does not change anything. Are you suggesting the Statesman should not have published Johann Hari's article if they had known the contents?

As regards other countries 'hate speech' laws - fine, lets retain the current formulation for hate speech in India. Wouldn't you agree then that Christian / Islamic preaching of any God other than their own being false- is insulting to everyone other than their co-religionists and therefore these preachers need to be taken to court based on current laws?

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 29 May 2011 18:39

Arjun wrote:Since you have harped on the 'similarity in letter' phrase between Indian and Paki blasphemy laws - can you let me know when I have used that phrase that you so love to pick on

I am not "picking on" a phrase - I dont like points scoring..Its a point that you have consistently made and implied, ie the Indian law is similar to the Paki blasphemy law..But here is where you said it first..

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... start=3040

whatever can get a person into trouble in Pukistan under its blasphemy law is also outlawed under the letter of Indian law -

The point is that Section 295 A has tremendous scope for misuse (and that could also be by Hindu groups) and there are a number of voices that are asking for its repeal. Its the closest India has to a blasphemy law. As regards the issue of 'deliberate and malicious intent' - that does not change anything. Are you suggesting the Statesman should not have published Johann Hari's article if they had known the contents

All laws by definition have potential of misuse..Which is why democracies have an elaborate system of checks...About 295A and Kumar, refer to what I said earlier - arrest/chargesheet does nto define the scope of a law, convicion/judgemetns do...Look at what SC and Cal HC said on the law, and also what they actually decided w.r.t the same..The HC overturned the WB gvt ban on Nasreen's Dwikhondito, and the case was registerd preciely under 295A - refer to their comments...THIS is what defines the scope of the law, not what random state actions of convnenience (which as I keep saying, does not need any special law in any case)...I see nothing wrong in what Statesman did, and most likely its fate isnt going to be different from Nasreen's...

But you see there was no problem under the "law" that Nasreen had - the courts saw to that...Her predicament was finally a function of the spine, or the lack of it of our polity...Hence, it is that we have to worry about, not the law...

Arjun wrote:As regards other countries 'hate speech' laws - fine, lets retain the current formulation for hate speech in India. Wouldn't you agree then that Christian / Islamic preaching of any God other than their own being false- is insulting to everyone other than their co-religionists and therefore these preachers need to be taken to court based on current laws

The fact that the case you mention, ie, of Christian evangelical narrative, hasnt created a mass of convictions (or at least charges) under 295A, means that the Indian law/police/judiciary actually to a large extent interpret the law in its most liberal form!

If interpreted in the Paki format, as someone said, there might be cases against the Quran itself by adventurous folks, and creative ones might try their luck against the national song too! So you see the importance of "spirit" fo the law!

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 29 May 2011 18:46

somnath wrote: All laws by definition have potential of misuse...

You are saying it's fine to have laws that criminalize blasphemy, and let the courts interpret them in a more liberal way.

Case laws are always considered weaker than the bare text of the law ... a judge is not obliged to follow previous interpretations. A good law is precisely worded.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 29 May 2011 18:54

Pranav wrote:You are saying it's fine to have laws that criminalize blasphemy, and let the courts interpret them in a more liberal way.

Case laws are always considered weaker than the bare text of the law ... a judge is not obliged to follow previous interpretations. A good law is precisely worded

?I mean, if you really want to cavil over semantics, "malicious acts" to insult = blasphemy?

You make an interesting claim (the bolded section)..AFAIK, an interpretation by a superior judiciary (HC or SC) becomes the precedent, and subordinate (or contemporary) judges are obliged to follow the same..The interpretation can be overturned only by a higher judiciary (or larger bench)...There are lots of laws who application are determined by SC interpretation...

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 29 May 2011 19:05

somnath wrote:I am not "picking on" a phrase - I dont like points scoring..Its a point that you have consistently made and implied, ie the Indian 295A is similar to the Paki blasphemy law..But here is where you said it first..

So if I say something is outlawed under the letter of Paki law as well as Indian law, are you taking that to imply that Paki law is exactly same in letter as Indian law? I find that amusing....Obviously there are differences between the two laws - but the point remains that IPC Section 295 A is fundamentally a blasphemy law.

Please look up the history of Section 295 A. Why do you think the Section numbers are the same for the two countries? The IPC Section 295 A was brought in by the British, and was known as the blasphemy law even when it was introduced by them. Out of the 8 clauses in Pakistan's blasphemy laws, 6 of them have qualifiers that are similar to what you mention for India - ie phrases such as "with deliberate and malicious intent'. And even the fact that the qualifier is present in Indian law does not change the fact that it is a blasphemy law.

The fact that the case you mention, ie, of Christian evangelical narrative, hasnt created a mass of convictions (or at least charges) under 295A, means that the Indian law/police/judiciary actually to a large extent interpret the law in its most liberal form!

I am not talking of 295 A for going after the evangelists. 295A is a blasphemy law...the hate speech laws are 153A and maybe some others - that's what I am suggesting be used. If the evangelists were worried that without modification of hate speech laws they would be open to court proceedings in the UK - it is logical that the same should apply to India.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 29 May 2011 19:17

Arjun wrote:Obviously there are differences between the two laws

My position exactly - that the laws are different and cannot be compared, even if certain sections are similar...In case you agree, we have no disagreement..But doesnt seem so, given,

Arjun wrote:but the point remains that IPC Section 295 A is fundamentally a blasphemy law.

Please look up the history of Section 295 A. Why do you think the Section numbers are the same for the two countries? The IPC Section 295 A was brought in by the British, and was known as the blasphemy law even when it was introduced by them. Out of the 8 clauses in Pakistan's blasphemy laws, 6 of them have qualifiers that are similar to what you mention for India - ie phrases such as "with deliberate and malicious intent'

Again, says who? The constitution enshrines certain fundamental rights, inclduing freedom (Art 19)...It also specifically DOES NOT have a blasphemy law..Courts have interpreted it in a specific way...If you still insist on saying its a blasphemy law, then its a POV, not a fact...

IPC is a British era statute, so both India and Pak inherited it..Question is, how were these statutes implemented in refernce to the Constitution? India's, with Art 19, against Pak's, as an Islamic Republic with a state religion...I reiterate, the letter of the law isnt nearly as important as the socio-political praxis of its implementation...

For someone "convinced about the logic of hindu societal superiority of liberalism", its amusing that you think that the law in India is a "blasphemy law"!

Arjun wrote:the hate speech laws are 153A and maybe some others - that's what I am suggesting be used. If the evangelists were worried that without modification of hate speech laws they would be open to court proceedings in the UK - it is logical that the same should apply to India

295, 153 - whichever section you want to choose...The record of both cases filed, as well as most importantly judgements delivered, show that your "fear of what the law means" is very different from how the Indian system "interprets the law to be"....Again, a POV versus a fact!

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 29 May 2011 19:32

somnath wrote:For someone "convinced about the logic of hindu societal superiority of liberalism", its amusing that you think that the law in India is a "blasphemy law"!

Firstly my argument was not relating to Hindu societal superiority wrt liberalism, but Hindu doctrinal superiority wrt liberalism. There's a difference. As regards societal superiority - there are ways in which Hindu society is more liberal than others, but the picture is not so clear-cut.

Secondly, it is precisely because of this belief that I am calling for removal of 295A.

295, 153 - whichever section you want to choose...The record of both cases filed, as well as most importantly judgements delivered, show that your "fear of what the law means" is very different from how the Indian system "interprets the law to be"....Again, a POV versus a fact!

What fear ? I want it to mean that calling other's Gods as false be recognized as insulting to non co-religionists and against Indian liberal tradition. Anyhow the courts will opine - but there needs to be a movement so the judiciary can take a stand. It will be a long process.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 29 May 2011 19:39

somnath wrote: You make an interesting claim (the bolded section)..AFAIK, an interpretation by a superior judiciary (HC or SC) becomes the precedent, and subordinate (or contemporary) judges are obliged to follow the same..The interpretation can be overturned only by a higher judiciary (or larger bench)...There are lots of laws who application are determined by SC interpretation...

No, a judge can always say that the present case is somewhat different than previous ones. That is why the bare text of the law remains supreme over case laws.

Sushupti · Post by **Sushupti** » 30 May 2011 01:07

Stern signal on broadcast of ‘sensitive’ channels

The target of this provision is a list of 25 channels prepared by the Intelligence Bureau, which are said to be illegally broadcast in different parts of the country. Prominent among them are channels like Iran’s Press TV, Pakistani Islamic channel QTV and Mumbai-based Zakir Naik’s Peace TV which is broadcast from Dubai.

While these channels are banned, the enforcement of the ban has become a problem for district authorities. In one case, a district official was transferred due to public outrage caused by his decision to act against cable operators broadcasting one of these channels.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/stern ... s/797070/0

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 30 May 2011 11:04

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/qaeda-pfi-li ... 269-3.html

Qaeda, PFI 'link' arrested; will PFI be banned?

Indian national Mohammed Niaz Abdul Rashid was arrested in Paris for his alleged al Qaeda connection. Authorities in Paris have so far remained tight lipped about what charges they would slap against Niaz but Indian investigators say Niaz was trying to set up a branch of this organisation - the Popular Front of India in France.

Will MMS lose sleep? Will UDF which has won on religious polarization take as strong steps as Comrade Achyutanandan?

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 30 May 2011 15:38

‘Communal violence bill based on past riots’

Even as the NAC member stated the intention of the bill as to correct 'the system biased against the minorities in the country, while existing provisions of IPC are working to satisfaction of the majority' the BJP states are set to oppose the bill on law and order — a State subject.

Raghavendra · Post by **Raghavendra** » 30 May 2011 18:27

NAC’s Draft Communal Violence Bill – An Analysis http://blog.offstumped.in/2011/05/26/na ... -analysis/

9 reasons why the Communal Violence Bill is itself communal http://www.firstpost.com/politics/9-rea ... 17573.html

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 01 Jun 2011 09:08

A dangerous twist

While the SAD has pitched it as “another discriminatory” act by the Congress-led government at the Centre, the Congress too has not been able to find its voice, with Amarinder Singh, former chief minister and chief of the party’s state unit, saying in his personal capacity that he is opposed to the death sentence. Choosing a side on this debate is one thing; but the motive behind one’s stand and the manner in which it is justified should be watched. Therefore, buying into and endorsing the argument that the rejection of Bhullar’s petition “shall give a signal that... Dara [Singh] was pardoned because he belonged to the majority community while Bhullar is from a minority community” is unbecoming of a governing party.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 01 Jun 2011 11:05

An incident which is never front page news

Man's palm severed in attack

Sources said Ponnumon, a glass trader and an activist of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), was attacked by a gang of seven unidentified persons at about 3.30 p.m.

The assailants came in an autorickshaw. Sources said the assailants were suspected to be activists of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) who had come in search of Mr. Ponnumon's brother-in-law Arun Thampi, also a BJP activist. On seeing the gang, Mr. Arun fled the spot. They barged into the shop and attacked Mr. Ponnumon.

I guess as far as the intelectuals in this country since the victim was a BJP activist it was Kosher for Palm to be cut off.

Sushupti · Post by **Sushupti** » 01 Jun 2011 15:23

Illegal Bangladeshi immigrant Rafiq becomes Rahul for a job

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 876939.cms

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 01 Jun 2011 18:18

B Raman's perspective on Bhullar's hanging..

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?272061

Not entirely without merit..

Raghavendra · Post by **Raghavendra** » 01 Jun 2011 18:37

Aditya_V wrote:An incident which is never front page news

Man's palm severed in attack

Sources said Ponnumon, a glass trader and an activist of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), was attacked by a gang of seven unidentified persons at about 3.30 p.m.

The assailants came in an autorickshaw. Sources said the assailants were suspected to be activists of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) who had come in search of Mr. Ponnumon's brother-in-law Arun Thampi, also a BJP activist. On seeing the gang, Mr. Arun fled the spot. They barged into the shop and attacked Mr. Ponnumon.

I guess as far as the intelectuals in this country since the victim was a BJP activist it was Kosher for Palm to be cut off.

Killing and torturing people, that's what communists are renowned for world over. An anti-communism bill is the need of the hour, humane provisions like free permanent hostel facilities in agra ka pagalkhana must be provided to all communists irrespective of their castes. Certainly communists of maoist and marxist castes will fight and demand better facilities claiming to be a true communist and accusing other of being a capitalist dog, but such bickerings must be disregarded and both should be provided equal facilities as it is the right of every pagal to be resident of pagalkhana.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 01 Jun 2011 23:54

Must read on our response to PNS Mehran and thoughts on TSP.
Link

The attack on the Pakistan naval base last week went on to show how fragile the situation in that country is and once again after 26/11 it showed to the world how vulnerable the seas were. Security experts post 26/11 had warned always that the seas continued to be the biggest threat.

Indian officials who were traveling with the Prime Minister to Africa last week had informed that on their return to New Delhi they would hold discussions in order to review the attack at Pakistan and what the impact it would have on India. With this team returning to New Delhi the situation is being assessed and the threat factor to India is also being calculated. The biggest worry however that was expressed during these meetings was threat was being posed to the nuclear establishments in Pakistan. The meeting of security experts also discussed that such threats through the sea continued to pose a danger to India and today a high alert has been sounded across all coasts in India. The meetings also discussed that terrorists from Pakistan would attempt to use the sea more often since they do realize that it is difficult to man the coast. Moreover the situation in Pakistan continues to be extremely fragile and there were a series of attacks expected in retaliation to the death of Osama Bin Laden. Although India was not a direct target in this Osama affair, Indian agencies are taking no risks since they are aware that terror groups can go bersek in order to prove their point and more often than not they have defied everyone’s logic while staging an attack.

India is also reviewing the situation and has concluded that more than security the intelligence along the coasts needs to be beefed up since it is extremely difficult to man the coasts without proper intelligence. Hence it has been decided that more resources would be put into intelligence along the coasts. The process to involve fishermen to provide intelligence along the coast has already begun and sources say that there are nearly 800 fishermen across the country who are today providing intelligence to security agencies. Take for instance the coasts of Karnataka especially the Mangalore coast which is considered to be one of the most vulnerable coasts. There are around 200 fishermen who are today on the rolls of the state government. They have been asked to provide information on every detail in the sea and also report even small suspicious movements.

The security agencies feel that they are the best suited for the job since they know their way around the coast better than anyone else. Moreover they have been born and brought up in these areas and hence it is always better to employ them than use men who have just been trained. These fishermen all across the Indian coasts would work in tandem with the coastal security agencies.

While reviewing the situation along the coast, senior officials said that when compared to our coastal security two years back we are in a much better position today. While there is much more that we can do, we could still say that we have done a good job so far. There is a lot that state governments too have to do and one cannot rely entire on the centre for this purpose. Most of them have set up coastal police stations and some are yet to do so.

Today with coastal security becoming such an important issue, the coast guards are relying heavily on local intelligence. The fishermen in particular are being trained on intelligence gathering, sources also pointed out. These persons would have to alert the coast guards about new entrants, new ships and based on this the coast guard would do a verification of the situation. In addition to this, they have been given phones and they will have to stay regularly in touch with the local police as well. Mock drills are being conducted on a regular basis to man the coasts.

Indian agencies have not taken lightly the Karachi incident and have sounded a red alert along all coasts. There is 24/7 vigil on the coasts and off shore patrol vessels have been deployed along the coast line. The coast guards are in regular touch with the locals living along the coast who are in turn coordinating with the local police and providing regular updates, sources also pointed out.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Jun 2011 00:09

So they think another 26/11 type of attack will come? What about terrorist comingling with sleeper cells and coming from land? And why reveal the role of fishermen as eaarly warning tripwires. Already their lives are in jeporady from TSPN kidnapping them in high seas and claiming terroritial waters incrusion.

To me looks like they still have police mentality, reflecting the police origns of Indian intel set-up. These TSP groups are enemy soldiers without uniforms and not criminals.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 02 Jun 2011 00:16

This is going to be total war against India. These are foot soldiers who want to come inside India.

One option is for India is to have the territorial army foot soldiers to wage war against the enemy soldier. India TA work with Indians inside Indian border and wage the war against the enemy

By having territorial army cantonment near the coastal area it can increase the density.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 02 Jun 2011 00:51

ramana wrote:So they think another 26/11 type of attack will come? What about terrorist comingling with sleeper cells and coming from land? And why reveal the role of fishermen as eaarly warning tripwires. Already their lives are in jeporady from TSPN kidnapping them in high seas and claiming terroritial waters incrusion.

To me looks like they still have police mentality, reflecting the police origns of Indian intel set-up. These TSP groups are enemy soldiers without uniforms and not criminals.

The first worry was Indo - Nepal border. That was secured up (well to a certain extent). Next worry is sea - this is being strengthened.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 02 Jun 2011 01:08

Acharya wrote:This is going to be total war against India. These are foot soldiers who want to come inside India.

One option is for India is to have the territorial army foot soldiers to wage war against the enemy soldier. India TA work with Indians inside Indian border and wage the war against the enemy

By having territorial army cantonment near the coastal area it can increase the density.

Is the training and arming coastal law and order machinery better than creating a militia?

Sachin · Post by **Sachin** » 02 Jun 2011 21:27

Aditya_V wrote:I guess as far as the intelectuals in this country since the victim was a BJP activist it was Kosher for Palm to be cut off.

From what I have seen in Kerala for some time now. BJP as a party does not do much for its own cadre who are victims of such attacks. Where as the CPI(M) has a "mafia like" organisational setup, which takes care of the family of cadres who land up in prison. The various commie governments also work over time to get an early release for the cadre now holed up in prisons etc. In places like Kannur, thanks to all this bomb making, target killings etc. are now a very well paid, professional trade. BJP on the other hand has nothing similar. 90% of the whining happens on Internet only.

And off course, intellectuals sympathising with any BJP cadre, it is like expecting sun to rise in the west

.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 03 Jun 2011 08:12

3 LeT pigs gunned down in J&K.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 04 Jun 2011 08:58

Madhya Pradesh ATS constable killed by suspected SIMI men

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 04 Jun 2011 10:21

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 718818.cms

Cops in soup as proof against Dawood's man erased

Jai HO Shiela Dixit

Raghavendra · Post by **Raghavendra** » 04 Jun 2011 11:35

^Since dawood's lawyer is a cabinet minister in UPA, this sabotage of evidence is a natural outcome of such relationship

Congress ka Haath, Dawood ke Saath

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 04 Jun 2011 11:37

Is there any way we can access NDTV documentaries from 2002 on how a social organisation like SIMI was being victimised by the Anti-minority NDA Government?

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 04 Jun 2011 17:47

ravi_ku wrote:http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 718818.cms

Cops in soup as proof against Dawood's man erased

Jai HO Shiela Dixit

Ravi ji , Just for your information Delhi Police does not report to Delhi govt.Instead it comes under Union Home ministry.Hence atleast for this case we cannot blame Sheila dikshit.Although congress administration at centre is definitely responsible for this fiasco.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 04 Jun 2011 17:49

Raghavendra wrote:^Since dawood's lawyer is a cabinet minister in UPA, this sabotage of evidence is a natural outcome of such relationship

Congress ka Haath, Dawood ke Saath

Not only his lawyer but also his mentor(hint : SP)

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 05 Jun 2011 13:08

BIGGGGG news from the 10 truck arms haul case in Chittagong:

The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) showed 11 new accused including former state minister for home Lutfozzaman Babar and former minister for commerce and industries Matiur Rahman Nizami in the memorandum of evidence (ME) of the cases.

The other new accused are India's United Liberation Front of Asom (Ulfa) leader Paresh Barua, former director general (DG) of National Security Intelligence (NSI) Brig Gen (retd) Abdur Rahim, the then director of the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI) Maj Gen (retd) Rezzakul Haider Chowdhury, who was later appointed as DG of NSI, former NSI director Wing Commander (retd) Shahab Uddin, former deputy director of NSI Maj (retd) Liakat Hossain, former NSI field officer Akbar Hossain Khan, former additional secretary of industries ministry Nurul Amin, former managing director (MD) of Chittagong Urea Fertiliser Limited (CUFL) Mohsin Talukder and former CUFL general manager (admin) Enamul Hoque.

So SHW is finally nailing the goose of JeI-BD one step at a time. Hopefully she can hang em all before her session runs out in 2012-13. I am waiting to see some more big fish like Tareq Rahman or Arafat Rahman Coco. In abstentia could suffice too.

Meanwhile, ForSecN Rao will have a chance to prove that she is Forsaken Rao when she goes to finalize the barter on contentious territories. Its gonna be a net loss on India's side, the question is how much, not whether it will be a loss or a gain. Welcome to a third time when we will see a Katchhatheevu done on India for the sake of propping up a friendly regime so that this regime can win a re-election bid.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 05 Jun 2011 21:36

Nepali national held for ISI links

Manzoor Mian was arrested by the Uttar Pradesh Police's Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) in Shastri Nagar late Saturday, said a press release issued by the state police.

"Manzoor Mian was in touch with ISI agent Mohammad Saifi, who till now has supplied him fake currency notes worth Rs.1.5 crore for circulation in different parts of the country," the release said.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 05 Jun 2011 22:53

Stan_Savljevic wrote:BIGGGGG news from the 10 truck arms haul case in Chittagong:
The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) showed 11 new accused including former state minister for home Lutfozzaman Babar and former minister for commerce and industries Matiur Rahman Nizami in the memorandum of evidence (ME) of the cases.

The other new accused are India's United Liberation Front of Asom (Ulfa) leader Paresh Barua, former director general (DG) of National Security Intelligence (NSI) Brig Gen (retd) Abdur Rahim, the then director of the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI) Maj Gen (retd) Rezzakul Haider Chowdhury, who was later appointed as DG of NSI, former NSI director Wing Commander (retd) Shahab Uddin, former deputy director of NSI Maj (retd) Liakat Hossain, former NSI field officer Akbar Hossain Khan, former additional secretary of industries ministry Nurul Amin, former managing director (MD) of Chittagong Urea Fertiliser Limited (CUFL) Mohsin Talukder and former CUFL general manager (admin) Enamul Hoque.
So SHW is finally nailing the goose of JeI-BD one step at a time. Hopefully she can hang em all before her session runs out in 2012-13. I am waiting to see some more big fish like Tareq Rahman or Arafat Rahman Coco. In abstentia could suffice too.

Meanwhile, ForSecN Rao will have a chance to prove that she is Forsaken Rao when she goes to finalize the barter on contentious territories. Its gonna be a net loss on India's side, the question is how much, not whether it will be a loss or a gain. Welcome to a third time when we will see a Katchhatheevu done on India for the sake of propping up a friendly regime so that this regime can win a re-election bid.

This attempt on SHW part will backfire. Widening the case to include people like Nizami or Tareq will only consolidate the pro-Islamist section within the BD ruling system as well as commons. The swing vote percent of roughly 10% and mainly in the NW-SE urban corridor that gave SHW such a majority, is likely to swing again.

As for territorial gains by BD I would not be so sure of GOI really "giving in" that much. They will hedge and haw - and especially in demarcation conflicts it is the middle bureaucrats who hold the fly-in-the-ointment. Having said that Indian border states with BD have pliable or Islamist leaning state regimes and may actually be used by the centre to implement any "bargaining" they have in mind. Especially, will be a good opportunity to cut WB a bit to the size. Especially some of the border districts of WB, and Assam are already Muslim dominated in the border villages and townships, so Congress may calculate relatively low electoral repercussion if they conceded.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 05 Jun 2011 23:12

Sachin wrote:
Aditya_V wrote:I guess as far as the intelectuals in this country since the victim was a BJP activist it was Kosher for Palm to be cut off.
From what I have seen in Kerala for some time now. BJP as a party does not do much for its own cadre who are victims of such attacks. Where as the CPI(M) has a "mafia like" organisational setup, which takes care of the family of cadres who land up in prison. The various commie governments also work over time to get an early release for the cadre now holed up in prisons etc. In places like Kannur, thanks to all this bomb making, target killings etc. are now a very well paid, professional trade. BJP on the other hand has nothing similar. 90% of the whining happens on Internet only.

And off course, intellectuals sympathising with any BJP cadre, it is like expecting sun to rise in the west .

Sachin ji,

for that to happen, one needs tacit govt/police support or a sieze mentality.

The rashtriya framework in kerala, which vacillates between the communists and the congress will crush any and all such "rescue" attempts and will make BJP an example. The best way for BJP to grow exponentially in kerala is to tactically join communists and then ditch them later.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Jun 2011 07:26

Considering the number of dossiers sent to Pakistan I just wonder why the Indian government did not send a dossier to Baba Ramdev? More force has been used against a critic of government corruption than against Pakistani terrorists. The government wants to talk peace with Pakistan, but uses force to end a meeting that calls for an end to corruption.

For my country - this is not right. Someone will have to pay for this. If not now - the price should be extracted in the next election.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 06 Jun 2011 11:17

shiv wrote: For my country - this is not right. Someone will have to pay for this. If not now - the price should be extracted in the next election.

Boss, Sirji, Was any price extracted for the torture on Sadhvi Pragya Sinh? For screaming that "RSS killed Karkare" for pussy footing against terrorists in Deoband?

Why will this end? Enough of our country men actually support this.