Ram:

The point is that killing a couple of guys, or even a few dozen, or
hundreds are not going to reduce terrorism -- if they are NOT the
terrorists.


Maybe, these two guys WERE terrorists. But the story given by the police to
prove that they were, don't add up. Not by a long shot.

That leaves a reasonable person wondering, if the police actually did get a
couple of terrorists, or they just made up  the story.

If they made it up, staged a fake encounter; would that enhance the law
abiding citizens' sense of security? Or make it worse?

You tell me.


c-da






At 8:07 AM -0500 11/19/02, Ram Dhar wrote:
>
>
>Yes saar , a plot near Vegas will be great from me ...
>
>
>
>So are you saying that all those suicide bombers, the parliament attack,
>attack in the J &K assembly , the temple attack were not sponsored by our
>neighbors ?
>
>
>
>You expect indian security forces to be just a mute spectator and react to
>each and every terrorist activity ? I am glad that you didn't write the
>civil service exam in India to become a IPS officer. Killing two 
>terrorists for that matter whether it's fake or real is the right thing
>police has done, it's as good as what CIA did  in Yemen. Indian public
>fully sympathies with the police action in  Ansal plaza .
>
>
>
> The chapter is closed now.
>
>  >From: Chan Mahanta  >To: "Ram Dhar" , [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Subject: Re: ansal plaza incident  >Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 15:55:15 -0600
>>  > >MEA has proof that they were Pak nationals....  >  >  >Of course!
>What could be more daminig than diaries with contact names in  >Pakistan
>and other telltale evidence, as were found on the 'terrorists'  >bodies,
>who have been evading police for months?  >  >  >If you believe that Ram,
>I have a choice acreage for sale in the Nevada  >deserts for a resort, for
>you :-). How gullible could we get?  >  >  >cm  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >  >
>>At 4:33 PM -0500 11/18/02, Ram Dhar wrote:  > >  > >  > >>>>Where are the
>friends and relatives of the victims?  > >  > >  > >  > >No one came fwd
>to bury the dead, they were handed over to WAQT board  > >(??) or whatever
>that Muslim org is ...they did the last rites .Govt of  > >India wanted to
>hand over the bodies to Pak but they refused. MEA has  > >proof that they
>were Pak nationals....that's however a different story and  > >Mr K Nayar
>will write on this next year marking the anniversary of Ansal  >
>>shooting!  > >  > >  > >  > >Having said that it will be a good idea
>actually to CHECK , RE - CHECK  > >and CHECK the FACTS again with our CM
>saar, his excellency Kuldip Nayar  > >and Bidwai where the friends and
>relatives of the victims are actually  > >from ?  > >  > >  > >  >
>>According to the sources -- Many of their friends and relatives are  >
>>enjoying a "stud muffins " healthy life in heaven with 72 virgin angels
>> >, some of 'em are still awaiting orders from Mullahs to cross over to
>> >India from Pakistan and kill the kafirs before they retire at their  >
>>'play boy mansion' in heavan .  > >  > >  > >  > >  > >  > >  > > >From:
>D Deka >To: Chan Mahanta , Alpana Sarangapani , AssamNet  > >>Subject:
>ansal plaza incident >Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 12:57:12 -0800  > >(PST) > >
>>Debating on these issues is healthy. Even if it doesn't  > >solve the
>real problem back home, it clears the conscience of the  > >participants
>in the debates. >I have a very simple question to the  > >sleuths of the
>net. Where are the friends and relatives of the victims?  > >Normally
>after such an incident, the journalists find the relatives,  > >friends or
>neighbors to interview. I have scanned the Indian newspapers  > >but
>haven't read any such interview. Were the victims local to Delhi? Or  >
>>is it simply that I missed the reports? >Dilip Deka > Chan Mahanta  >
>>wrote: > >Could Pakistan, Iraq, Iran or countries that are run by  >
>>dictators, boast of > >such freedom? > >Actually you can add many more:
>> >China, Russia, Taiwan, Myanbmar -- what >have you. > >But a very low  >
>>threshold of a benchmark to weigh the largest democracy in >the world.  >
>>Besides, imagine the elation of the victims at what a fine >country India
>> >is. > > > > > >It is heartening to know that in India people like  >
>>Nayar and others who can > >easily voice their opinions against the  >
>>establishment without being > >harrassed, do exist. > >Wake up A. What  >
>>do you call the following? > > >> The issue has got politicised with BJP
>> >general secretary Arun > >> Jaitley accusing Nayar, me, and other  >
>>'so-called human rights > >> activists' of being 'the overground face of
>> >the underground'. The > >> VHP wants us prosecuted as 'terrorist  >
>>accomplices'. Equally nasty > >> statements have come from other Sangh  >
>>Parivar figures. The VHP has > >> even demanded that the NHRC be renamed
>> >National Terrorists' Rights > >> Commission. > >Those from the ruling
>> >party and its supporters. Add to that what Assam >Netters branded them
>> >recently fo that matter. And that what we know of. > > > > > > >This  >
>>is the only way when the government goes wrong it > >can be righted. >  >
>>>Let us not count the chickens before they are hatched. We know of  >
>>countless >such abominations that have been exposed, but NOTHING has ever
>> >changed. > > >c-da > > > > >At 1:21 PM -0600 11/18/02, Alpana  >
>>Sarangapani wrote: > >It is heartening to know that in India people like
>> >Nayar and others who can > >easily voice their opinions against the  >
>>establishment without being > >harrassed, do exist. This is the only way
>> >when the government goes wrong it > >can be righted. > > > >Could  >
>>Pakistan, Iraq, Iran or countries that are run by dictators, boast of >
>> >>such freedom? > >On a side note, Pakistan probably has more supporters
>> >in India (including > >this net) than in Pakistan itself. > > > > >>  >
>>Praful Bidwai > >> > >> Encounters, Real and Fake > >> > >> It is not  >
>>usual for journalists, even those holding strong beliefs, > >> to become
>> >public-interest litigants. So it is only with considerable > >>  >
>>deliberation that Kuldip Nayar and I decided last fortnight to > >>  >
>>approach the National Human Rights Commission with a complaint > >>  >
>>concerning what the police call their 'encounter' at Ansal Plaza, > >>  >
>>New Delhi's posh shopping mall, on the Diwali weekend, in which two > >>
>> >'Pakistani terrorists' were gunned down. > >> > >> The last time I  >
>>initiated public interest litigation was 21 years > >> ago, when I moved
>> >the Bombay high court in the pavement dwellers' > >> case. What
>impelled  > >me this time was the extraordinary nature of the > >>
>circumstances of  > >the Ansal Plaza 'encounter'. Both Mr Nayar --- one >
>>> of our most  > >respected journalists, with a distinguished record of >
>>> defending  > >human rights --- and I had been uneasy about the police >
>>> version of  > >the events. Then, on November 6, The Asian Age published
>> >> a story  > >quoting a Dr H Krishna who claimed to be an eyewitness to
>> >> the event.  > >He was emphatic that the 'terrorists' did not come to
>the > >> Plaza in a  > >Maruti car as alleged; they were brought by the
>police; > >> they were  > >unarmed, barely able to walk; the police killed
>them at > >> point-blank  > >range. > >> > >> Our complaint said that the
>salient facts, including Dr  > >Krishna's > >> account, are disturbing
>enough to warrant an impartial  > >inquiry. The > >> NHRC chairman,
>Justice J S Verma, passed an order  > >within minutes of > >> our meeting
>him. He issued notice to the Delhi  > >police commissioner > >> and
>'anti-terrorism' Special Cell to respond to  > >the adverse > >>
>allegations, and directed them to provide 'immediate and  > >adequate > >>
>protection' to Dr Krishna. > >> > >> Since then, the  > >'encounter'
>controversy has become more heated --- > >> and murky. Doubts  > >have
>been cast on Dr Krishna's integrity and > >> character by raking up  >
>>old (apparently long-closed) cases filed by > >> estranged relations. But
>> >the central issue is not his character, but > >> his role as a witness,
>> >hinging on his presence at Ansal Plaza. The > >> Special Cell insists
>he  > >was not present in the Plaza basement. It > >> backs its stand by
>citing  > >'technical information' from a cellular > >> telephone company.
>The  > >police haven't disclosed the material facts. > >> Rather, they
>have been  > >leaking them selectively to 'sympathetic' > >> publications
>and  > >reporters. > >> > >> The issue has got politicised with BJP
>general  > >secretary Arun > >> Jaitley accusing Nayar, me, and other
>'so-called  > >human rights > >> activists' of being 'the overground face
>of the  > >underground'. The > >> VHP wants us prosecuted as 'terrorist  >
>>accomplices'. Equally nasty > >> statements have come from other Sangh  >
>>Parivar figures. The VHP has > >> even demanded that the NHRC be renamed
>> >National Terrorists' Rights > >> Commission. And now, Prime Minister  >
>>Vajpayee himself has > >> rationalised human rights violations by saying
>> >(November 11) that > >> 'tough decisions' have to be taken while
>fighting  > >terrorism, > >> sometimes 'even infringing some of our
>freedoms and  > >abridging some > >> of our human rights temporarily... so
>that our future  > >generations > >> can live in peace and harmony.' > >>
>> >> This is a  > >remarkably frank admission of what the Indian State
>(like > >> some  > >others) practises. Clearly, the Parivar has made the >
>>> 'encounter' a  > >loyalty test: Patriotism requires that we support the
>> >> police; those  > >who don't are working hand-in-glove with
>terrorists. > >> The posture ---  > >that you are either with the VHP-BJP,
>or against the > >> Indian nation  > >--- is rooted in unspeakable
>arrogance. It equates > >> crass Hindutva  > >with genuine patriotism,
>based on India's > >> pluralist-secular  > >Constitution. But let's leave
>aside the BJP-VHP's > >> defamatory  > >statements. What matter now are
>the numerous > >> contradictions in the  > >'encounter' theory --- even if
>it is assumed > >> that Dr Krishna is an  > >unreliable witness. Consider
>the following: > >> > >> * Police  > >Commissioner R S Gupta said the
>police didn't have the > >> registration  > >number of the terrorists' car
>(The Times of India, > >> November 6).  > >Joint Commissioner Neeraj Kumar
>told The Indian Express > >> (November 4)  > >they had no details on 'the
>make or... number... [only] > >> a rough  > >description of the two
>men...' But hands-on Assistant > >> Commissioner  > >and 'encounter
>specialist' Rajbir Singh said: 'We had > >> ... the car  > >number" (ToI,
>November 4). The car was stolen in July, > >> but the FIR  > >for the
>theft was lodged two days after the 'encounter'. > >> > >> * The  >
>>police claimed the terrorists had two pistols, an AK-56 rifle > >> (in a
>> >bag) and only 60 rounds of ammunition. If they wanted to wreak > >>  >
>>large-scale havoc in a prime shopping mall, why didn't they carry > >>  >
>>RDX, grenades, and more AK-56s? The two men were clever enough to > >>  >
>>enter India, travel to Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, and Kashmir in > >>  >
>>disguise, and concoct false identities, but so stupid as to leave > >>  >
>>their diaries in their pockets! > >> > >> * The police say the  >
>>terrorists fired 24 bullets, but they haven't > >> shown any spent  >
>>cartridges. No policeman suffered even a scratch. > >> Worse, contrary to
>> >all professional and ethical norms, the police > >> handled the alleged
>> >terrorists' weapons without gloves in the full > >> glare of television
>> >cameras. As even a schoolchild knows, this is > >> not done if you want
>> >to preserve fingerprints. > >> > >> * The police first claimed that the
>> >encounter lasted 15 to 20 minutes > >> and involved 30 to 35 Special
>Cell  > >operatives using AK-56 guns. > >> Although these have small
>(30-round)  > >magazines, they fire at the > >> very rapid rate of 600
>bullets a minute!  > >But instead of the huge > >> number of holes such
>firing should have left  > >in the basement walls, > >> there are only 13
>such holes. Later, the  > >police disclosed that they > >> fired a total
>of 52 rounds, and the  > >'terrorists' another 24. But > >> they still
>cannot account for a good 41  > >of the 76! > >> > >> * The police delayed
>ordering autopsy on the two  > >bodies by over 72 > >> hours. They claimed
>there was a month's delay in  > >the December 13 > >> case too. In fact,
>that autopsy was done on December  > >17. They said > >> they referred the
>present matter to the home and  > >foreign ministries; > >> the clearance
>would take 20 days. Then, on  > >November 9, they hastily > >> ordered an
>autopsy. The only publicly  > >disclosed sentence in the > >> autopsy
>report gives an extra- medical  > >opinion --- that fatal > >> 'shock' and
>'haemorrhage' were caused by  > >'firearms', and 'could have > >> been
>sustained in a police encounter'.  > >Doctors cannot determine > >> this.
>> >> > >> * The police claim that  > >19 eyewitnesses 'confirm' their
>account. But > >> none of those paraded  > >on television say they
>actually saw the > >> terrorists shooting. > >>  > >The police failed to
>summon independent ballistic experts. They > >>  > >claim they were
>tracking the terrorists for three months. But they > >>  > >didn't know
>their whereabouts even a few days before the shootout > >>  > >--- despite
>cell phone tracking! > >> > >> * Pictures show one dead man  > >clutching
>his pistol. Ballistic experts > >> and physiologists say that  > >under
>heavy fire, the victim's first > >> reaction 'is to release  > >whatever
>they are holding'. It is hard to > >> believe the weapon wasn't  >
>>planted after the event. > >> > >> The Delhi police have a lot of  >
>>answering to do. They claim, on the > >> strength of cell phone records,
>> >that Dr Krishna only reached Ansal > >> Plaza two hours after the  >
>>encounter. According to an IIT Madras > >> telecom expert, cell phone  >
>>records can only give the approximate > >> location (with 1 to 1.5km) of
>> >a user. More precise information > >> (within, say, 100 to 150 metres)
>> >can only be obtained if calls are > >> tracked on the basis of advanced
>> >authorisation --- impossible in Dr > >> Krishna's case, short of an  >
>>odious deal with the police. The fact > >> that the user's record shows
>> >s/he accessed one cell (one of many > >> transceivers in a mobile  >
>>network) does not prove s/he was nearest > >> that cell. If one cell is
>> >busy, the call is diverted to another. > >> > >> The murky nature of  >
>>these events has impressed itself firmly on the > >> public mind.  >
>>Thinking people everywhere are asking: was this > >> encounter calculated
>> >to spread fear and insecurity, and thus > >> 'normalise' the use of  >
>>indiscriminate force? Why does the home > >> minister appear at the site
>> >of each terrorist event? Is he trying to > >> create the impression
>that  > >he alone can defend citizens against > >> terrorism? Is there a
>deeper  > >game? Why should a policeman, even Mr > >> Rajbir Singh ---
>involved in  > >six of seven 'encounters' in 2000 --- > >> risk an
>'encounter' without  > >the assurance of apex-level political > >>
>support? > >> > >> These  > >troublesome questions must not be ducked. Too
>many people are > >> being  > >killed after being designated 'terrorists'.
>In J&K, no fewer > >> than  > >1,296 have been shot dead this year. Andhra
>Pradesh alone > >> records  > >250 'encounters' a year. In Uttar Pradesh,
>there were 150 > >> custodial  > >deaths in 2000. In India, each year,
>over 2,000 habeas > >> corpus  > >petitions are filed, but largely
>ignored. This is > >> unacceptable.  > >Terrorism must be fought --- one
>might even say, on > >> war footing. But  > >only a lawless, barbaric,
>State fights it with > >> summary, brutal and  > >cruel methods --- which
>are the terrorist's own > >> evil hallmark. > >>  > >> >> Even wars have
>to be fought lawfully. Rules of warfare are > >>  > >incorporated in
>various Geneva Conventions and international > >>  > >treaties. The State
>cannot summarily extinguish human life. The > >>  > >police have no right
>whatever to do so. That is the function only of > >>  > >a court of law. A
>State that kills terrorists on mere suspicion > >>  > >itself practises
>terrorism. Many condone this on the assumption that > >>  > >a few
>'excesses' are permissible because the real enemy is Pakistan. > >>  >
>>This view is dangerously wrong. Tomorrow's 'terrorist' --- the > >>  >
>>Special Cell's target --- could be you. Citizens are no more secure > >>
>> >against State brutality than against militant terrorism. > >> > >> -- >
>> >>> saurav > >> > > > > > >--------------------------------- >Do  > >you
>Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site  > >MSN 8 with
>e-mail virus protection service:  > >2 months FREE*
>Add photos to your messages with  <http://g.msn.com/8HMUEN/2021>MSN 8.
>Get 2 months FREE*.



Reply via email to