Ishrat Jahan, Narendra Modi and the IB: How Not to be Non-Non Terrorist

The CBI charge-sheet in the Ishrat Jahan encounter case and its aftermath has led the BJP and supporters of Narendra Modi (within and without the Intelligence Bureau) to discover the joys of time travel. Apparently, David Coleman Headley’s testimony in 2010 (which says that Ishrat Jahan was an LeT operative) has given the Gujarat police officials a means to tell us why they killed Ishrat Jahan in 2004. Or, following on from Shivam Vij’s recent tweets, we could say: “The IB says that Headley says that Ishrat Jahan was a non-non terrorist…”

We will discuss more about this heady Headley testimony and ‘non-non terrorism’ later, but for now, let us admit that the secret of how a statement in the future can influence the unfolding an event six years in the past is known only to those who are partisan to Mr. Modi and his party. It is not for nothing that they call him a Yug Purush (‘The Man of Time’)- all times, past, present and future, can do his bidding, or so thinks the BJP.

Narendra Modi, the Yug Purush himself, has not however, been saying much about Ishrat Jahan lately. He is letting others (some journalists, a few of his colleagues in the BJP, some retired intelligence bureau officers, and assorted NaMo-Maniacs like Madhu Mausi, Nirmala Bhabi, Kiran Didi, Meenakshi Tai, Rajnath Chacha and Arun Bhayya) do the talking, which is perhaps wise, because it is difficult at present for Narendrabhai to open his mouth about Ishrat Jahan (or Sohrabuddin, or Khalid Jamal, or Prajapati, or Haren Pandya for that matter) without implicating himself in the process. The past has a bad habit of catching up, not just with the present, but even with the future.

It was not always so. Narendra Modi has talked about Ishrat Jahan in the past. Here he is, for instance, on the 17th of July, 2006 addressing the Maharashtra state BJP on the war against terror at the Shanmukhananda Hall in Mumbai.

Watch him carefully. Listen to him. “…Ishrat Jahan naam ki ek aatankvaadi ladki, jiska HAMARE Gujarat Police ke saath encounter hua…(wipes his face)…aur use maar giraya.” (“this terrorist girl Ishrat Jahan, OUR Gujarat Police had an encounter with her, they shot her down…”). He goes on to berate the ‘five star’ activists who made a noise about Ishrat Jahan, saying how they were forced to keep mum once a Lashkar e Toiba website owned Ishrat Jahan as one of their own. Two full years after the Ishrat Jahan encounter, Narendra Modi has nothing less than pride in the fact that ‘HIS’ Gujarat police shot this nineteen year old woman.

If you hear the rest of his speech, which is available on Youtube, you will learn that Narendrabhai thinks that had the Maharashtra Police shot a few girls pre-emptively like the Gujarat police did then there would have been fewer bomb blasts in Mumbai, because after all, there were reports that burqa-clad girls were said to be planting bombs. All you need to do is to shoot a few burqa clad girls on their way home. Philip K. Dick, the science fiction writer who wrote about ‘pre-cognitive and predictive policing’ in ‘Minority Report’ would be pleased to know that his peculiar brand of visionary dystopia has such ready takers in Gujarat and the BJP. Narendra Modi would have cut a fine figure in a Philip K. Dick novel.

If, as the CBI charge-sheet details, a Gujarat Police Deputy SP called D.H. Goswami did in fact say that he heard the encounter specialist  Vanjara say that Narendra Modi and his minister of state for Home Amit Shah had given him the clearance to ‘encounter’ Ishrat Jahan before the 15th of June, 2004 (the date on which the young woman was shot) , we will have unravelled an interesting twist to this sordid tale.

If Modi knew of the plan to kill Ishrat Jahan in advance, and did not stop his police officers from actualizing this plan, then there is simply no conclusion to reach other than that of Modi’s culpability . If not an actual conspirator, Modi becomes at least an accessory to murder. The wannabe prime minister of this country will then have proved himself to be little more than a common assassin’s accomplice, or, at best, the man who hands out the reward for a supari, a contract killing. In common parlance such a man is called a thug, a criminal, a mafia don.

Naturally, today, in the wake of the CBI charge-sheet, Narendra Modi has reason to be quiet. The  BJP, which has all but anointed Modi as it’s prime ministerial candidate in the forthcoming elections is trying to say mainly one of two things in order to cover for Modi and his eloquent silence.

One – Ishrat Jahan was a terrorist, and she was planning to kill Modi anyway, and so she had to be eliminated.

Two – The central government, knew everything about the plan to kill Ishrat Jahan and had okayed the operation because the senior most echelons of the IB regularly brief the Union Home Minister and the Prime Minister’s Office, and there is no way that they would not have done so in this case. Responsibility for the event of the encounter is shared between the Gujarat Government and the Central Government, between Chief Minister Modi and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh

The problem with the first  line of argument is that she was killed way before anything happened to Modi. In other words she was killed before she could do the killing for which she was killed. In still other words, Ishrat Jahan and four others (and we know now how exactly they were killed) were murdered in cold blood. There is no room left any longer for the argument that the Gujarat police had to shoot in self defense. We know now how arms were procured from the IB arsenal and placed on the dead bodies to ‘dress’ the scene of the crime. We even know that Ishrat was drugged and tranquilized before being shot.

In order to deal with the problems posed by this line of argument, the BJP and its friends have deployed the second argument – which says – “well she was killed in this way because she was a terrorist and we know this from the IB inputs, and the IB informs the Central Government, so the Central Government is as implicated in this as the Gujarat Government. In other words, the responsibility for the extra-judicial assasinaion of the ‘terrorist’ Ishrat Jahan is not Modi’s alone, but stretches, via the IB, right up to the prime minister and the union home minister.

Further, the BJP is trying to argue that the CBI is a tool of the Central Government and is being used to malign Modi and his government in Gujarat. Unfortunately, it is not the Central Government which ordered the CBI inquiry in this case, it is the Gujarat High Court, and no amount of trying to deflect attention towards the centre can take away from the fact that the most damaging testimonies and indictments of the Gujarat Government’s conduct in this case have come from its own officials.

It is not my case that the Central Government cannot be implicated in the Ishrat Jahan case. And yes, the IB is a ‘central’ agency. Politicians belonging to the UPA coalition and its lynchpin the Congress Party, its allies and other political parties,  are implicated, routinely, in many fake encounter cases, in Delhi, UP, Punjab, Maharashtra, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir and  Manipur . Like riots, as far as ‘encounters’ are concerned, the Congress is no better than the BJP, and we should have no hesitation in saying so.

We can cite any number of cases from Manipur, from Kashmir, from Delhi’s Batla House to Ansal Plaza – as instances of extra-judicial assassinations. The human rights activists and lawyers who are talking about Ishrat Jahan and Gujarat today have talked about all these other encounters in the past, so we do not quite understand exactly who the BJP is trying to fool in this matter. We do know that the Gujarat Chief Minister took an inordinate interest in encounter killings and was in the habit of bragging about his police force’s track record. Is it unnatural then for the heightened interest in encounters in Gujarat not to reflect on to the Chief Minister’s role in desiring their execution ?

Madhu ‘Mausi’ Kishwar, for instance, is crying hoarse over Omar Abdullah’s ‘encounter’ track record on TV (which is somewhat embarrassing to her new found friends in the BJP, because as far as they are concerned, the number of encounters in Kashmir has never been a problem) as a way of shoring up her pathetic and spineless defense of the murderous Modi dispensation. She neglects to mention that many of those who are willing to be counted in the Ishrat Jahan case have  spoken about gross human rights violations in Kashmir, and have in fact pointed out the abusive nature of the Omar Abdullah regime, not once, but repeatedly. But Madhu Mausi does not like taking cognizance of facts that are inconvenient to her. She has other fish to fry.

Various BJP leaders, from Nirmala Sitharaman to Meenakshi Lekhi to Kirron Kher to Rajnath Singh have said – the IB reports to the Prime Minister’s Office, and so, the PMO is as implicated in this as anyone else. Fine. No problem.

We need to then also ask who from the IB did the reporting to the PMO. According to this narrative, the senior most officers of the IB would be the people who would interface with the highest levels of the executive. Who was amongst the highest echelons of the  IB at that time?  A gentleman named Ajit Doval was Special Director of the IB at the time of the Ishrat Jahan encounter and was also the chief of the Multi-Agency Centre within the IB – charged with integrating intelligence gathering at the highest levels. It is reasonable to say that he must have been among those briefing the PMO, or at least, he would have been aware of what the PMO was being told about the encounter. A little later in 2004 he became the chief of the IB itself.

Who is Mr. Doval, and where is he now?

Following his retirement from government service, Mr. Doval has become the  director of the Vivekananda International Foundation, a New Delhi based think-tank close to the BJP and the RSS. The foundation is staffed by many former officials from the ‘intelligence community’. And it regularly advises the BJP on matters of national importance. Mr. Doval himself has conducted workshops on ‘national security related issues’ for BJP legislators and party workers. So, the person who would have supervised and handled the ‘Ishrat Jahan’ case at the central level is now a person very close to the BJP. It would indeed be a good idea to ask him a few questions.

Not that he is not talking. He has been consistently saying that the IB was aware of the fact that Ishrat was an LeT operative. He has said so on a show called ‘Views Hour’ on NWR, an online radio channel that is part of the Niti Central network (Niti Central is a group blog close to the BJP, run by Kanchan Gupta). He has also appeared on an NDTV programme, ‘Trending This Week’ aggressively defending the IB’s role. During this program, when asked about the fact that those killed in the encounter (Sadiq Jamal, Ishrat) were shown not to be terrorists, he says the following gem –

“You never know about your ignorance. If I say that I do not know that a man is terrorist he does not become a non-terrorist. An ignorance of a thing does not prove anything. It is the knowledge that proves him. Ask those who say that he is a terrorist why they say that he is a terrorist. “

So, according to the former director of the Intelligence Bureau, which, in all fairness, should now be renamed the Idiocy Bureau, if the IB does not know that any one of us is a terrorist, it can still not rule out that we are not non-terrorists. A non-non-terrorist is a terrorist. No other evidence is necessary. Hence any of us could be a terrorist, and so fair game for trigger happy cops and spooks. This is why Ishrat Jahan had to end up the way she did.

There is something distinctly peculiar in a section of BJP’s dragging in of the central IB in the discussion whilst simultaneously trying to shield Rajendra Kumar, the agency’s principal protagonist in Gujarat.

What after all can be so worrisome in any move to investigate Rajendra Kumar ? Especially if the BJP sees no problem in saying that – “if the IB is involved, so must the centre be”. Is it simply that the degree of proximity that Rajendra Kumar enjoyed with Modi is embarrassing and can cause a lot more trouble, especially if Kumar decides to talk in order to defend himself and his chances in a possible murder trial by saying that he did what he did at Modi’s behest and in Modi’s interests ?

WIll this spill the beans on the public secret of the degree to which hard line Hindutva is already in bed with the deep state – the shady depths of the civil and military  intelligence community. We already know from the Samjhauta Express, Malegaon and the Mecca Masjid cases that there is enough material pointing towards a deep symbiosis between rightwing politics and segments within the labyrinthine world of Military Intelligence as represented by Lieutenant Colonel Purohit and his liaison with the ‘Abhinav Bharat’ module. Will the Ishrat Jahan case establish the degree to which sections within the IB, right up to its highest ranks, are, or have been, or appear to be complicit with the BJP’s agenda ?

Is this why Ajit Doval has to be so enthusiastic in propagating his theory of ‘non-non terrorism’ on television?

Finally, we come to the matter of the so-called Headley Report  a document prepared by the Indian NIA (National Investigation Agency) following its interrogation of David Coleman Headily, a suspect turned witness in the Mumbai – 26/11 case, currently in US custody.

Much has been made about the apparent references to Ishrat Jahan as an LeT operative in this document, just as much was made of a recording of a tapped telephone conversation between Headley’s handlers and the Lashkar ‘terrorists’  that was presented under the slug of ‘Ishrat Jahan’s LeT Links’ on the Headlines Today TV Channel and some newspapers like the Times of india and the Hindustan Times.

Like the NIA report, the taped conversation actually has NO mention of Ishrat Jahan and it is mystifying as to how those who thought it fit to make these ‘leaks’ about Ishrat Jahan’s involvement in the LeT did so without verifying the fact that her name does not figure in either trace. It is not in the phone tap recording. And contrary to what Rahul Kanwal might have said on Headlines Today, or Bharti Jain might have reported in the Times of India, neither paragraphs 158 and 159 (in Kanwal’s account) nor paragraphs 168 and 169 (in Bharti Jain’s account) have any mention of Ishrat Jahan. Kanwal and Jain quote a non-existent document to the effect that (in these paragraphs of the report) a man called Zaki introduced Headley to a man called Muzammil Butt who then told him (Headley) that Ishrat Jahan was part of the LeT module. The ‘Chinese Whisper’ slip between 158 and 159 on the one hand and 168 and 169 on the other  in two reports suggests a set of hurried phone conversation with a not very careful IB handler desperate to get a story planted in the media rather than a verifiable account from a reliable source.

The NIA report, contrary to what the IB may think is actually now available in the public domain and people can read it and match what they read with what is being ‘leaked’ about its contents.

The NIA report is organized chronologically. Paragraphs 158, 159, 168 and 169 refer to events that take place in 2009 and 2010, not in the vicinity of 2003, 2004 and 2005. Headley talks about visiting Delhi-Jaipur-Pushkar-Goa and Pune in March 2009 and England, Sweden and Denmark in paragraphs 168 and 169. There is a reference to the possibility of staking out a refinery in Gujarat for a future operation, but no suggestion of anything to do with Ishrat and the events of 2004. There is no internal narrative logic that can enable us to suppose that the original paragraphs have been dropped or substituted by other material. For that to be the case, the substitution would have to appear much earlier, in consonance with the chronology that places the events of 2004-2005 before 2009-2010.

Moreover, contrary to Kanwal’s and Jain’s account, Zaki does not introduce Muzammil to Headly in 158-159/168-169, simply because Headly already describes, much earlier in the report, in paragraphs 17, 18 etc how he got to know Muzammil in 2002. It makes absolutely no sense for the same person to be introduced twice to someone. (I would like to thank Mukul Sinha for pointing this out to me). Clearly, something is fishy about this business of  chronologies.

Actually, there seems to be mounting evidence to suggest that the reference to the NIA report was a badly timed untruth, a piece of amateur psy-ops conducted by the Idiocy Bureau in a desparate effort to regain some control on a narrative that was rapidly spinning out of its orbit.

The Ishrat Jahan case is teaching the value of nuanced reporting to many journalists. Even Praveen Swami, well known for his ‘sources’ within the deep state cautions us about taking the Ishrat Jahan case without a necessary degree of skepticism in First Post.

He argues for the accountability of intelligence agencies through a mechanism of oversight. What he does not tell us today, is about how he had referred to the case in 2004 and 2005. In an article published in the Frontline magazine shortly after the murder of Ishrat Jahan, he gestured towards the fact that the IB had successfully penetrated the LeT and that it was using a compromised former LeT operative, a  Gujarat based lawyer, as a double agent  – to brainwash and recruit young Jehadis and make them undertake missions at it’s (the IB’s )behest.

According to Swami, Javed Sheikh aka Pillai (who some others claim was an IB informer) and the two other men killed in this operation were all contacts of this lawyer. Ishrat happened to be in the way, in the wrong place at the right time,  and so had to be eliminated.

According to this theory, offered up by Swami, The IB’s modus operandi in this case is as follows – it traps an LeT operative, forces him to act as a sort of double agent, recruits people through him for a terrorist operation, gives them a target, and then kills them before they can do the job. Then it takes the credit for the whole operation. Modi gets strengthened (as a tough guy who takes action against terror) and the IB earns kudos. Its just that in the process a nineteen year old woman ends up dead. And then it all starts to unravel, all over again. If Narendra Modi does succeed in winging his way into power, all nineteen year old women would be well advised to learn how not to be a non-non terrorist.

—————-
For further resources on this case – read the excellent series of notes on evidence in the Ishrat Jahan case being put out by Mukul Sinha on his Facebook page.

60 thoughts on “Ishrat Jahan, Narendra Modi and the IB: How Not to be Non-Non Terrorist”

  1. Congratilations! Excellent piece.Javed was killed because as an IB informer privy to the killing of the other two he became expendable and an avoidable future nuisance to the police. Ishrat had to be killed because she witnessed the cutody of the two victims and and would know the encounter was fake. Therefore after releasing Javed and Ishrat and detaining the other two, eventually all four were nabbed and killed.

  2. ” In other words she was killed before she could do the killing for which she was killed.” That is the way successful anti -terror ops are conducted . Wish we could do it more often maybe we could prevent events like 26/11 , Parliament attack , Rajiv and& Indira assassinations .

    1. Says someone who has never lost a dear one to a random encounter by the police in search of a ‘terrorist.’ Be careful what you wish for.

    2. First of all you have no idea of the number of terror plots being foiled by the govt and the intelligence agencies.You are alive and kicking doesn’t mean nobody is targetting you.you are safe because someone else is keeping you safe . some sense

  3. Unfailingly fine piece, Shuddha, superbly researched. But, for once, you seem to be guilty of understatement. The operative line is, “If not an actual conspirator, Modi becomes at least an accessory to murder.” This statement is based on Goswami’s statement under oath regarding what he heard Vanjara say. You summarised Goswami’s statement in the previous paragraph. But according to Goswami Vanjara actually said that he obtained CLEARANCE from Modi. This established the chain of command and makes Modi the mastermind, not just an “accessory” and a thug.

    The point needs to be emphasised. As Mukul has fully clarified in his blog, Goswami’s statement, filed by the CBI, unambiguously mentioned CM and HM, not just sundry colours of beard. I do not know if this clinching affidavit is enough to charge and arrest Modi and Amit Shah. I only hope so.

    I must also emphasise that, according to the Gujarat High Court giving directions to CBI, the issue of whether the four people murdered had terrorist links or not does not pertain to the case in hand. The only case is whether they were first arrested and then murdered in cold blood. THAT CASE seems to have been established beyond doubt, as you mention only passingly.

    1. Dear Nirmalangshu da,

      Guilty as charged. Yes, it is an understatement. But I wanted this to be pointed out by astute readers like you. CLEARANCE, as you rightly point out, does not imply assistance, it implies command. The person who gives CLEARANCE to a killing is effectively the author of the murder. The actual hands that pulled the trigger – Vanjara and Co. are simply his instruments. If this were a real murder trial – Modi would not be a mere witness, he would be the principal accused.

  4. There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.

    Donald Rumsfeld

  5. Shuddha, “In other words she was killed before she could do the killing for which she was killed.” Is it a typo? Think, there is something wrong with that sentence. It does not go with the tenor of this superbly articulated piece of analysis. All modi worshippers here are going to base their venom spilling on that slip.

    1. Dear Verghese, no, it is not a typo. It is just an instance, by way of illustration, of the absurd logic of Modi worshippers and all those trying to justify a fake encounter. You cannot be killed to prevent a killing that you haven’t yet committed. But that is what those who are trying to defend Modi are saying. According to them, had the Gujarat Police and the IB officials not acted to kill Ishrat, she would have assisted in killing Modi, or maybe have killed Modi herself. Their rationale is that by killing Ishrat, they stopped her from killing Modi, but they killed her because she was Modi’s killer to be. So they used an event that had not yet happened in the future in order to enact an event in their (then) present, but based on their assumption that the future was already determined. In other words they sought to cancel an event that they say they were certain was going to happen. You can do this sort of thing (perhaps) in a movie in the ‘Terminator’ franchise. But it is difficult to rationally justify in real life.

      1. I understood your explanation, but had difficulty with accepting it. Pre-emptive defence is just that: killing a person before he/ she kills you. Even courts admit that defence. I think in the instant case, it was not preemption, because, this girl apparently had nothing to do with any plan for killing anyone. She just happened to be in the wrong place when murderers were afield.The sentence used by you does not bring out this point, but plays into the hands of those who want to defend the killings.

        1. I second that, i also feel that the modi apologists will use (rather misuse) this sentence to satisfy their agendas, but let us hope justice prevails. Being a kashmiri, i understand justice n india dont go hand in hand but still trying to be optimistic.

          1. Hi Asgar, I really got caught in your statement “Being a kashmiri, i understand justice n india dont go hand in hand but still trying to be optimistic.”

            Why would you say so? If so would that mean the people from Jammu are happier that those from Kashmir in J&K. Can you tell us any particular experience which led you to believe in this emotion?

            1. Dear Prashant, It doesnt need any rocket science, common sense and knowledge of ground reality is all it takes, if u are referring to Jammu city then lemme inform that definitely people in jammu are happy as they dont have to go through the torture the people of kashmir and some districts of jammu province witness, they are not seen as terrorists or for that sake as pakistanis by the brutal Indian troopers. I have a house in Jammu city aswell where we put up during winters. While in Jammu, if I dont return home even till 10Pm my mom doesnt get worried but she starts ringing me repeatedly if i dont make it to home by 7Pm while in srinagar. If i make u count the personal experiences then i might need large space and i guess u wont be interested in reading long stories, or else i cud tell u how many times indian troopers have barged into my home at midnight, how many times we have been made to sit in sun whole day without access to food and water, how often we are being imprisoned inside our homes for weeks together with no access to essential supplies, i cud tell u how i have witnessed a childrens’ park near my home getting converted into a graveyard in a span of few hours. Before asking questions u shud try to educate urself about kashmir as they say ‘a little knowledge is a dangerous thing’, why not start with kunan poshpora, ever heard the name? Once u are done u can read about mass graves & massacres of kashmir like gawkadal massacre, tengpora massacre, sopore massacre, bijbehara massacre, handwara massacre, zakoora massacre, nadimarg, sangrama, lalchowk, khaniyar, pathribal, chapnari, chatisingpora massacres and the like. U can also read about forced disappearances, more than 10,000 rapes, custodial killings, fake encounters etc etc. If u manage to read abt even only a few, u’ll feel ashamed of being an Indian if u dont happen to hide under the blanket of nationalism.

      2. The author did a good job in articulating his arguments but in order to defend it he/she is not making any sense… most of government(s)’s (democratic or communist) actions (in present) are based on the forecast (future). Mr./Ms. Author please mind the gap and put rational thoughts.

  6. I think you are missing the point that Mr. Doval is making. Another analogy to his remark would be: if someone says I do not know if India won (a cricket match) – does not mean that India lost the match. It just means that person does not know. If someone is claiming that he knows India has won the match – then you should rather ask that person to know the truth.

    Ignorance of a fact does not prove the counter fact.

  7. @Sachin Ignorance of a fact does not prove the counter fact – true true – so why if we know nothing about Ishrat, we know that she is non-non-terrorist – why does she have to be made non-living for our non-knowledge of the a non-truth… I can go on as in non-sachin called Ajit Doval

    1. @altshillong I think you still missed the point. CBI said that it does not know or (did not investigate) whether Ishrat is a terrorist or not. That statement does not prove anything about Ishrat’s culpability or innocence. She may or may not be a terrorist. So CBI’s charge-sheet should not even matter when talking about the alleged terrorist links of Ishrat Jahan.
      However, IB did claim and continues to claim that Ishrat Jahan had terrorist links and was in Gujarat for this purpose. So when talking about her innocence, only statements and facts that you need to focus on and prove to be incorrect – should be the ones that IB made. She may be (and most likely is) innocent- but CBI chargesheet does not come into play when arguing for it.
      This is how I interpreted Mr Doval’s statement – and it seems pretty consistent and logical to me.

      1. @sachin so we don’t know what Ishrat was? If we don’t know what she was then why kill her. So doval is basically batting for this being a fake encounter?

  8. Great piece. Good you pointed out the antecedents of Ajit Doval and his association with the VIF, the Sanghi think tank created by L K Advani and company

  9. Well, one can’t expect better article from a person with typical communist mindset. You have tried to link up the unrelated threads and presented your $hit conclusion. By the way, you have named the BJP Members and some journalists, it clearly shows your journalism standard. Well, if we look up the encounter history in India. I am not aware of your physical appearance i.e. ur age, but I assume that being a journalist you must have read or heard about the various terrorism, gangwar scenario in India. Let us start with militancy in Punjab region. Whether you are aware or not, PM, HM used to directly pay money to IB agents and Police forces before and after shooting militants. Underworld Gangwar in Mumbai led to formation of Encounter squad which did more than 200 killings all in either Hot or Cold blooded. Common people like you or myself are breathing peacefully its because of these IB officers, Encounter Squads not because of CBI (which has so far very EXCELLENT record in cracking cases). As far as your vague statement that its Gujarat High Court gave CBI to enquire, let me put it for you that one of judge is Abhilasha Kumari , daughter of HP CM Veerbhrasht Singh. So, there is direct case of conflict of interest. You have hidden this point beautifully while complete exposing Ajit Doval. If you don’t know the record of Ajit Doval. Please go through his service record or in fact check central govt version for Ajit Doval. He was awarded by Indira Gandhi within 6 years of service that too out of norm because of his excellent works. So, making doubt on such a reputed person of high integrity can only counter that you can make doubt on your actual parents, whether you are born out of them or from others. So, please refrain from making such a disgusting statement.
    Last but not least, in the name of human rights and courageous journalism, a gutter level journalist like you are living a legend life paid from Gandhi family and overseas NGO.

    The best thing Narendra Modi has done so far is that he has forced the Pseudo-Secular, Intellectual and Human Rights activists to openly accept their Anti-National stand.

    I doubt whether you will publish my comments or not. But, if you have guts to listen the truth then you will definitely publish it otherwise you will simply give reason for not posting comment as it falls under religious harassment.

    1. What is your religion Ravi? Encounterism? Modiana? Dovalitwa? IBiator? Mithraism? Bonkerism? Just asked in order to understand under which religious harassment should I file non-publication of your comment

      1. My Religion is Indian. you may choose to file non-publication of my comments. I can understand you have been deputed to counter comment or recomment on the comments. People like you are responsible for such killings as you are real traitors of this country who shields terrorists like Afzal Guru, Kasaab, Ishrat Jaha, Madani, Owaisi. Have guts to write about Naxalites. Have guts to write about involvement of Ajit Jogi in Naxal attack in which Mahendra Karma, Nandkumar Patel and others were killed. You won’t dare to write as your sonia amma will put nails in your behind. So, be pragmatic and maintain the level and respect for journalism.

          1. Yes. Given a chance, my rituals will be sacrificing terrorists and traitors like you and wiping the face of widows, kids, parents who have lost their husbands, fathers, sons. Did you ever see any blast? I have seen Mumbai blast exactly 7 yrs ago. I have seen the dead bodies, pain of their near and dear. Don’t live in hypothetical world by getting paid from some NGOs and Congress. Have guts, give me reply on my second comment. By the way, why don’t you show your true identity with name and place? Why are you hiding? It shows your fake personality.

            1. I can understand your sentiments. Saw hyderabad blast. Was shaken to very soul at site of horror. Is it any less of cold blood murder. Don’t people how even plan(“In other words she was killed before she could do the killing for which she was killed.” ) Deserve to be killed in encounter(be it staged or geniune)

  10. A on Mars fish committed suicide by jumping in water. We all ‘know’ that Modi is responsible for that. LOL

  11. There is a hysteric anti-Muslim phobia that only ends up in killing. Modi and his accomplices satisfied their thirst for blood by their genocidal work. Killing Ishrat has been a little piece in their larger grand plan of ethnic cleansing. In both small and big ways, events of 2002 revealed how determined Hindutva forces can deploy all means to accomplish what satisfies their desire to supremacy.

  12. Well it seams a very nice and impressive way of creating a false conscience among readers by misinterpreting facts……..i was unable to even read for 2-3 min. , it looks completely biased ……& by the way am certainly not a NaMo-Maniac as you may assume.

  13. What a SICKENING Piece,a fake analysis by a Fake Journalist from Fake Organisations.
    What a Sick Mind set,One sided view,trying to glorify a terrorist and insulting the institutions on whose brave work this Sick Journalist Shuddha (should be called a man from Gutter).
    Stop falsifying evidences and misusing freed om of expression to target the people who u have hated since you took birth,we know your SICK Mindset.Shuddha – u stink

      1. Are u kidding me? Do u really think tht the poop has got the balls to rebut shudha’s post? As they say ‘barking dogs seldom bite’. This article cant go well down the throats of namo maniacs, the poops need swami cowdung’s ‘sourceful’ material to satisfy their saffaron “souls”

        1. I thought Shivan Vij would counter Asgar as well for the mannerisms of his comments, irrespective of other considerations. Objectivity. Would you Shivam?

  14. I am seeing a trend. There are so many Bengali pseudo-intellectuals who are writing such pieces in pakistani/arabic newspapers. Somebody should do deep research on this trend as I have an intuition about something very devious being afoot. Its an irony that a land which produced a giant in Swami Vivekananda is now known more for these leftist-pseudo seculars who are out to break India.

    1. Then I suggest you read a little more about Vivekananda himself.
      But you know what? You must be right!! So many Bengali pseudo-intellectuals.. as opposed to real intellectuals. (Might they be Bengali too? Maybe not.) And in Arabic papers too, gasp!!! That really is a sign of a conspiracy. The Idiocy Bureau will look into this matter, rest assured. Shuddha has gone too far this time, he has named the IB for what it is. Just you see, he will suffer. Now take your prozac and sleep peacefully. These leftist pseudos will soon be gone, now that NaMo is on his way to Indraprastha :D

  15. Javed Shaikh, alias Pranesh Pillai,was an IB informer. He was the mole in the group of four who were killed in the fake encounter,” as per HT

    When HT contacted CBI’s spokesperson Dharini Mishra about Shaikh, she said, “Our investigations are on in the fake encounter case.”

    Shaikh, thought by the IB to be a Lashkar-e-Taiba logistics provider who was radicalized and inducted into the organization during his stay in the Gulf, was a business partner of Ishrat’s deceased father, and became her employer.

  16. This is only food for thought for readers , they can make their choice themselves.

    1. Doctors believe in “Prevention is better than cure”. The antibiotics can be used for both to inhibit bacterial growth or kill the bacteria after disease has been contracted .What would you prefer? One can argue the person has not yet contracted disease and hence by prescribing a person anti-biotics assuming that he is a would be patient during a rainy season a doctor is serving his monetary interests.

    2. The Indian IB contrary to popular perception is among top five Intelligence agencies in the world. The top officers in IB are some of the finest brains in the world for counter terrorism.Here, we have to make discrimination between a petty criminal and terrorists.When IB as an institution on record by affidavits from successive directors say someone is terrorist , I will go by their word. Readers can make their own choice.

    3. I also do not subscribe Liquidation as state policy. But I am outraged when NO HUMAN-RIGHT ACTIVIST gets outraged when petty criminals are liquidated by local police at alarmingly regular intervals by the state but when an LeT sleeper cell gets liquidated by Indian IB with clearance from the top, entire HUMAN RIGHTS bogey gets activated.

    4. Terrorism is an act of WAR. I agree Geneva Conventions mandate certain protocols even during the emergencies of war. A soldier will follow Geneva Conventions when the matter relates only with his life. But when the moral choice is between honoring human rights of few terrorists or those of hundreds of potential innocents they planned to bomb (Citizens too have right to live) , a soldier/an Intelligence officer has to take that moral call.

    5. Unfortunately India is not blessed with demographic dividends of either United States or United Kingdom where you are surrounded by water/ friendly nations. We border with Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan ,Nepal all safe -heavens/transport hubs for dreaded terrorist organisations.

    Make no mistake about it, it is because of the Indian IB and R&AW officers and their judicial/extra-judicial behavior the likes of us have luxury to sit in front of desktops and express our opinions about their moral pointers. INDIA has too may external/internal enemies and too few officers to do the duty. If you hound them also, one day will come when every man/woman/child will have to fend for themselves & their families and we would become next Afghanistan/Pakistan.

    I recommend the readers to go though the articles by Praveen Swami on Firstpost and Shekhar Gupta in Indian Express to read more.

    Finally ,An eminent Criminal lawyer once said ” YOU CAN NOT FIGHT TERRORISM WITH LAWS MADE FOR PICKPOCKETS.”

    1. Your notion of eminence is such a sham that you cannnot distinguish between an antibiotic and quack’s gel! Your hoodledee my Lord the Vault of mortuary should look inside to see how a crime needs to be distinguished from terrorristic patriotism of Modi kind. All the patriot terrorists non-human non-right non-non-Muslim anti-hindu pick the pocket supporters of laws that do support insanity behave in an extra-Modi way to write their balderdash.

    2. 1. Good thing you’re not a doctor because, given your understanding of antibiotics and how they work, you would have done your patients a lot more harm than any disease can.

      2. This analogy – of antibiotics – is quite bad.

      3. I’m very curious about this obviously very reliable ranking system you’ve quoted, which lists IB as one of the top five in the world. Pray tell us more so that we can also cite it in similar debates online.

      4. Thank you for the prophecy of doom that you’ve so eloquently described for us but, yeah, we’d like to still go ahead and prosecute those who indulge in encounters of this type. Even if these people happen to belong to the Intelligence set-up or the security forces.

      5. If you want to be taken seriously, try putting your real name to whatever you dish out. Calling yourself Lord Voldemort doesn’t help.

    3. O you who can not be named – as on sort of a vagueo sais “YOU CAN NOT FIGHT PREJUDICED IGNORANCE WITH RATIONAL ARGUMENTS” – or as IB said dream on baby, dream on

  17. It has not yet been established it as a fake encounter .It is CBI which is saying that is fake encounter ? What is the credibility of caged parrot. CBI has not yet been released from cage . High court has not taken affidavit from CBI ,PM ,HM, and home secretary that they have not influenced the case in any way.In Rail gate Bansal is not corrupt bansal ‘s nephew is corrupt. If Bansal’s nephew says I have no power to appoint and I have taken just loan, what happens to the case.

    Now Nitish can also say he has not trusted IB inputs and did not provide any security. We should appreciate Gujarat has taken proactive steps in eliminating people before committing the crime.
    Osamabin laden was killed while he is sleeping with his wife. is it encounter or fake encounter ? Why there is no hue and cry

  18. Master piece. So may be Anil Dovel also may have hand in this fake encounter. Mushrif prediction as in his book ‘who killed karkare ‘ about IB and its many officers RSS link stands ground.ANIL Dovel needs to be investigated for his role in Karkare killing and all fake encounters in Gujarath.

  19. @Shuddhabrata Sengupta

    The biased , subjective article you wrote shows us , your attempts of diverting our attention from serious and much larger problems our country is facing. You wanted to Vilify a single person. You want to portray how wrong the state machinery is functioning. But, why?? Instead you could have provide some solution to such situations and make it more interactive and constructive. Always keep in mind WE ARE INDIANS and if there is terrorism in our country it is OUR problem . We must unite and solve it. If some of our own country had solved it and saved us, why are you questioning them? It is not the case that some innocent has been victimized. Do you want that these law enforcing agency should be punished so that next time they wait till some hundreds or our countrymen are killed and their families suffer. Do you?? What motivated you to write such an article? It is a shame that you are using your communication skills to disturb the fabric of India. I feel Sad for the lack of responsibility you have shown. If possible try to Unite us and not divide.

  20. The article is well detailed and creates a narrative of the life and times of the Ishrat Jahan case. I have a couple of contentions on which I would love the author to respond, if possible.
    Point 1, as parties squabble over the larger implications of this case to gain brownies points we largely observe an anti Gujarat CM narrative across the board. There has been no narrative from the pro Modi campaign which can detail out the circumstances and help us understand why the police force and political class of Gujarat be not involved. All the propositions for an anti Modi campaign seem to be cobbled up in a strange manner, just as the author cites the speech the Gujarat CM is giving at a Maharashtra BJP function. Why is there a tendency to psycho analytically devise what he meant as mentioned by the author?

    Point 2, why is it not being analyzed as to the institutional reasons for such an incident in the country. This case gives us the opportunity to do so. The writer refers to how the Gujarat CM could be a co conspirator in the case. Why are we in a hurry to draw such conclusions? Why can’t we focus on the procedural lapses, organizational fault lines and political decision making ways? Why are we constraining ourselves to the Ishrat ( I am sure referring to her religion has been done a lot in this article as well) itself? I think that all of this will be taken care off automatically if the focus is apt. Is it that it does not make a good story that way?

    Point 3, I am a little surprised that if this is meant as a serious piece there should be no mention of the senior IB officer joining a foundation which ever it may be. This makes me believe that now we are trying to ascertain conclusions out of contentious psychological arguments. Or are we saying that the bureaucratic structure has been functioning all this while with leanings which harm our country. A little tough as this without any proof throws bad light and also at the same time makes me believe that this is exactly like the BJP points fingers at CBI and other such officers. Should journalists be deciphering such inputs. I think such write ups should be substantiated by facts with stats and not inferences.

    Point 4, to me it seemed a little strange that the author has linked the Military Intelligence with right wing extremism in a two sentence argument, with one example. Strange I would be expecting some inside information, statistics, details and other such inputs. This is like what India took pains to prove with respect to Pakistan (read ISI and extremists) was done by one example for our country. Strange. I think it should take more than that, it is somewhere questioning the patriotism of the Military to have leanings to Right (political influence). Why it is said so?

    Point 5, now to the last point where in the writer refers to the NIA, Headley and media outlets over the course of the discussion. I am a little perturbed with the manner in which the NIA reports are cited in this case, be as it may be and are dismissed or accepted depending on what they wish to perceive. I think the what will do more good is to work on the narrative given by the Ishrat Jahan family. It would be of good journalistic sense if once can prove the narrative of the family for their girl with respect to Javed, who has been termed a dreaded terrorist. It would do good to the family than trying to work around intelligence of NIA or IB which is open to scrutiny. No one can be sure. Why not help the family prove what they are saying that she worked as a employee with him? This will be alternate view helping the cause of the case. Why ponder on IB and NIA? Does it make good reader stuff? It brings more sensationalism to the whole episode, is it?

    Last but not the least, I too read the Praveen Swami narrative over a period of time and felt what he was trying to say is that the IB was deliberately working around with these people to reach a point where in they could have all of them together. In his piece he has detailed out how the IB waited and watched to let the whole episode unfold and then keep a tab on all those involved. But what I see is that it has been spun off very well in this article, why? If so was Praveen Swami consulted before doing so? Praveen Swami hold a lot of credibility on the internal and external security point of views in this country, would be great if he can approve the point with reference to what he has said and how it has been interpreted, possible?

    Thanks for reading and replying in advance if you do.

  21. Dear Lord,

    just finished going through the Swami article and would say this upon reading: ‘Intelligence’ over epistemology could make for acute embarrassment. Warding off embarrassment requires more assertion of ‘authenticity/objectivity’ (and whatever else it may take).
    Dizzy with this and other social, geographical or temporal analyses, one was surprised that he veered off (to sign out) on a note few would have a problem with: “Of this keystone for rebuilding faith, there is still no sign”_ s’what obvious, eh Master?
    An analysis intended to lead up to the ‘real’ problem?
    How many marks/$Rs for this, O Lord?..and for still not (re)’solving’ that ‘problem’ but instead becoming further embroiled?

  22. I think the write up has missed one crucial point – even if you know they are terrorists, does the State have the right to kill in cold blood? Does the State in this case have the details and modalities of the “planned act of terror” which led them to believe it could only be stopped by killing these people? Can we give the state the right to decide who is dangerous and when to eliminate them?

  23. Some of the comments above stated clearly indicate how naive the people of this country have become. Every view has to be necessarily laced with a hint of communalism and mislead skepticism. Bias apart, I do not understand how can the people of this country simply consider a man as a prime ministerial candidate in spite of the fact that this man is responsible for death of subjects of his state (muslims and hindus alike). In his tenure, the women were raped and babies were ripped from their wombs to be cast into fire and men were mercilessly butchered. Even I were to take gujarat riots as a justification for godhra carnage, does that refute that fact hundreds of thousands who were affected by these incidences were not responsible for the igniting the train. The people of this country are becoming ridiculously biased and thick headed day by day. Tomorrow if a sociopath or extremists men walks in the mall and kill all the people they find, does that mean that my family is to be mercilessly butchered and thrashed into pieces because the unreasonable population of India deems me to be responsible for having the same ethnicity, religion or caste as that of those extremists. I do not support Congress in any manner but what choice do I have- between the mass murderer and a corrupt government, I still want my family to be save from the wrath of barbarians be it Muslim or Hindus (usually it is only these two communities) who have never learned the decency and the very objective of following a religion.
    Even keeping these views aside, let me point out a fact for the ignorant people of this country who entirely blames the incident regarding godhra carnage on ‘Muslims’, kindly take the pains of doing a little research before letting your reactionary views take the control, two commissions were set up before Nanvati Shah Commission for investigation of godhra carnage and both contended that train caught fire from within (which probed upon the possibility of an accident), the third Commission set up by the Gujarat Government itself after accomplishing the ‘divine deed’ which ruled otherwise. So far as the incident itself is concerned, I do not know who was responsible but surely the people who were mercilessly killed could not have been.And for people who think that annihilating the muslims is righteous deed, the children who were killed in those riots did not even know their religions.
    Last but not the least, I came across a comment in context of Ishrat Jahan encounter, which stated that this is the way terrorist should be executed, and not protected like Kasab. Let me remind you Sir/ Ma’am, it is fault of people like you who are so shortsighted and who cannot understand the intricacies of the law and its ardent requirement to be that way. If extra judicial killings are allowed openly, our country in another 10 years will be facing humanitarian crises like those in syria wherein people like you and me without lawful justification will be killed by the state authorities and will be conveniently branded as terrorist. I do not find that an honorable death in anyway. And as for Kasab, the moment he is hanged, you and me can expect another 26/11 after which another ‘muslims are terrorists’ movement will be launched and again some civil crises shall threaten the country. The Government does not have adequate means and intelligence to defend itself and on the top of that, it is a representative of mindless blabberers who do not even think before they speak……some provision of public opinion we have made, with a public like this placing religion, ethnicity and caste even above the law of the land as if we were in dark ages of the 15th century England, I would say the makers of the Constitution entirely wasted their time in doing anything for this ‘vibrant secular democracy’.

We look forward to your comments. Comments are subject to moderation as per our comments policy. They may take some time to appear.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s