Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Indian Muslims wrongly arrested; Proof Hindu Terrorist Group Abhinav Bharat involved

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Indian Muslims wrongly arrested; Proof Hindu Terrorist Group Abhinav Bharat involved


    ================================================== ==

    Indian Muslims wrongly arrested;
    Proof Hindu Terrorist Group
    Abhinav Bharat involved

    ================================================== ==


    Uma Sudhir, Sudhi Ranjan Sen, Rajan Mahan
    , Tuesday May 4, 2010, Hyderabad, New Delhi, Rajasthan

    When the Ajmer Dargah near Jaipur and then the Mecca Masjid in Hyderabad were targeted by bombs five months apart, the police and the government immediately blamed Pakistani-based terror groups like the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) and Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HuJi).

    The attacks in Ajmer and Hyderabad took place in 2007. Three people were killed in the Ajmer attack in October; another nine had died in May in the Hyderabad explosion.

    Three years later, new evidence suggests that the investigating agencies and the government got it all wrong. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) says it now believes that radical Hindu groups planned those blasts.

    What's led to this new theory is the arrests last week of three men by the Rajasthan Anti-Terror Squad. They were tracked down because they were using SIM cards found in the debris after the attack at Ajmer.



    The men arrested are all Hindus, and are believed to be associated with Abhinav Bharat, a Hindu radical group that allegedly planned and executed a terror attack in Malegaon in Maharashtra in 2008. Six people were killed, and more than one hundred injured.

    Among those arrested for that attack were Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur and an army officer, Lieutenant Colonel S P Purohit for the Malegaon attack. Their alleged agenda: to target Muslim crowds.

    Purohit, in recent interrogation, has allegedly said that a man named Sunil Joshi was behind the Ajmer blast of 2006. That's what the Rajasthan police also suspects.

    Joshi allegedly knew Sadhvi Pragya well. He died in December 2007, but phone records show that he was in touch with one of the three men arrested for the Ajmer blasts last week.

    "Colonel Purohit, arrested for Malgaon blast, has confessed that Sunil Joshi had organised the Dargah operation with the help of Devendra Gupta," Rajasthan Home Minister Shanti Dhariwal told The Hindu newspaper on May 2.

    The CBI says that in both the Ajmer and Hyderabad blasts, identical explosives were used. Cellphones triggered both bombs.

    The initial allegation that Pakistan-based groups were behind the Ajmer and Hyderabad blasts of 2007 meant that young Muslims paid the price. Muslims like Ibrahim Junaid, who, along with 25 others, was picked up from the Old City of Hyderabad and accused of terror links. They were reportedly tortured in illegal custody. There was no chargesheet accusing them of links to the Mecca Masjid attack. Instead they were accused of conspiring to wage war against the state, of preparing and playing out CDs of the Gujarat communal riots of 2002 to create communal tension.

    "Without proof, they arrested our children. They didn't even inform us. We didn't know their whereabouts for 7-8 days," said Arifunnisa, Junaid's mother.

    All 26 men were later acquitted but they say the stigma never goes away. Junaid says, "When there is a blast, youth of a particular community are targeted. They are playing with our lives. That happened to me. I lost a year in college. I was not able to do my MD because of this.''

    Junaid and some of the other Muslims who were arrested have gone to court against their arrests.

    "We are demanding compensation from the police officers who tortured us. That they should be made to pay compensation from their salary, says Rayeesuddin.

    ================================================== ==

    Hyderabad blast: More proof they were wrongly arrested

    ================================================== ==

  • #2
    thank u for the post Khushal Khan Khuttak... this what i was talkingabout in one f ur recetly posted threads.....

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by shlombay
      Racism, why do Indian hindus have to be like this for?
      Malgariya, don't be mislead by this Pakistani inferiority complex of India. The Indian State is a secular and democratic entity. Moslems have more rights in India than the Moslems Pashtuns and Balochs have in Pakistan.
      I see many Pakistani apologists using these terrorist groups in India as a propaganda tool. There is one big difference. The Pakistani terrorist groups are all state-sponsored and those in India are not. In other words, India is a victim of terrorism while the Pakistani state is, in essence and in totality, a terrorist state.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Ianus Da Baakhtar View Post
        Malgariya, don't be mislead by this Pakistani inferiority complex of India. The Indian State is a secular and democratic entity. Moslems have more rights in India than the Moslems Pashtuns and Balochs have in Pakistan.
        I see many Pakistani apologists using these terrorist groups in India as a propaganda tool. There is one big difference. The Pakistani terrorist groups are all state-sponsored and those in India are not. In other words, India is a victim of terrorism while the Pakistani state is, in essence and in totality, a terrorist state.
        IDB, thanks for this post of yours. And you are absolutely right about Hindu groups and their terrorism related activities. I find that some members here are particularly keen on posting anti-India articles. They use it as a sort of justification to say that "Look, if Pakistan and Taliban isnt good, India and Hindus are no better".

        India is a secular and being a Sikh I thank my fortune for that everyday.

        Comment


        • #5
          ^The reasons for partition are complex, but we can't rule out Muslim insecurity. The question is WHY did *some* Muslims opt for Pakistan? Surely it was more than just a power trip - and the fear - of unsympathetic Hindu domination was part of this.

          I'm not keen on the anti-India politics played out in Pakistan, but being Pashtoon, I have every sympathy for the argument of not being dominated by unsympathetic forces. We can say it is a bygone, but today it is our reality - I have family who took the train to Pakistan from their homes in Calcutta and Bombay and I would never describe them as pro-Pakistan - but they left because safety became an issue.

          Comment


          • #6
            Indian hindu are really racist people, they are full of suspicion.
            every bomb attacks in India are blamed on Pakistanis, to them every pakistani is a terrorist, deer da na sari khalak dy.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by tor_khan View Post
              ^The reasons for partition are complex, but we can't rule out Muslim insecurity. The question is WHY did *some* Muslims opt for Pakistan? Surely it was more than just a power trip - and the fear - of unsympathetic Hindu domination was part of this.

              I'm not keen on the anti-India politics played out in Pakistan, but being Pashtoon, I have every sympathy for the argument of not being dominated by unsympathetic forces. We can say it is a bygone, but today it is our reality - I have family who took the train to Pakistan from their homes in Calcutta and Bombay and I would never describe them as pro-Pakistan - but they left because safety became an issue.
              Malgariya, we need to move beyond the Mutaliya ye Pakistan propaganda and *******dization of history.
              In the 1946 elections, the Unionists won Punjab, the KKs won Pakhtunkhwa and Illahi Baksh Soomro won Sindh. The Kalat Jirga opted against partition and Pakistan. You cannot claim that the Moslem League was the representative of Moslems and that a body of Moslems wanted Pakistan because in the 1946 elections, siginificant communities of Moslems in British India rejected both the Moslem League and Pakistan.
              Secondly, about the much hyped bloodshed during the Partition. I lay the blame squarely on Jinnah, Moslem League and Pakistan. The first killings of the Partition took place in Hassan Abdaal when 2500 Sikhs were massacred. The Direct Action Day (Yawm ye Raast Ighdaam) cost some 4000 lives in Bengal.
              Moslems in India, including Kashmir, have more rights and freedoms than the Pashtuns and Balochs of Pakistan have ever had.
              Moslems insecurity was misplaced and misfounded. It was a ploy of the colonial British to divide and rule. Hence they supported the communalist Arya Samaj, Hindu Mahasabha and Moslem League and oppressed the nationalists of the Indian National Congress and KK.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Master Khan View Post
                Indian hindu are really racist people, they are full of suspicion.
                every bomb attacks in India are blamed on Pakistanis, to them every pakistani is a terrorist, deer da na sari khalak dy.
                Malgariya, the sarhee zaaman China and Iran are also blaming Pakistan and ISI for trouble in their countries. Are they also non-Moslem Hindu racists?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Master Khan View Post
                  Indian hindu are really racist people, they are full of suspicion.
                  every bomb attacks in India are blamed on Pakistanis, to them every pakistani is a terrorist, deer da na sari khalak dy.
                  How about we turn this thing around? Dont the Pakistanis think all Indians and Hindus as terrorists? Dont they blame all their bomb blasts on Indians? Even though many of them are caused by their own creations like the Taliban!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Ianus Da Baakhtar View Post
                    Secondly, about the much hyped bloodshed during the Partition.
                    Nadir Shah Jana, people are changed by their experiences. My grandfather's younger brother was killed by Hindus and it is precisely this event that forced my family to scramble for safety in "Pakistan" - whilst today we can look back at partition through a different lense, it is deeply insensitive to dismiss the bloodshed as hype.

                    More than a million dead and 15 million displaced is significant.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by tor_khan View Post
                      Nadir Shah Jana, people are changed by their experiences. My grandfather's younger brother was killed by Hindus and it is precisely this event that forced my family to scramble for safety in "Pakistan" - whilst today we can look back at partition through a different lense, it is deeply insensitive to dismiss the bloodshed as hype.

                      More than a million dead and 15 million displaced is significant.
                      Malgariya, O Brother of Mine. Aren't you listening? The starters of the voilence in India were the Moslems and the Moslem League. The Moslem League had 4000 people killed in Calcutta in 1946 just to pressurize the Congress for their illegal demands. Had this Pakistan non-sense not been started, perpetuated and supported by the Moslem League, there would have been no Hindu-Moslem voilence.
                      I am talking about the Pakistani state perspective of the histroy. We are made to believe that the Sikhs and Hindus killed Moslems while the Moslems heralded the Hindus and Sikhs safely acroos the border to India with gifts and cakes. The voilence was started by Moslems, then it became two-sided and the Moslems lost in numbers because they were the minority, something which those who wanted Pakistan should have thought of.
                      Your family was the colateral damage of the Partition. Nothing more, nothing less. And Pakistan and the Moslem League are to be blamed again. Those who wanted Pakistan should have realized that partitioning India along communal lines was impossible, illogical and totally baseless. You cannot expect us to blindly follow Pakistani version of history because of an isolated, misinterpreted event.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Ianus Da Baakhtar View Post
                        Malgariya, O Brother of Mine. Aren't you listening? The starters of the voilence in India were the Moslems and the Moslem League. The Moslem League had 4000 people killed in Calcutta in 1946 just to pressurize the Congress for their illegal demands. Had this Pakistan non-sense not been started, perpetuated and supported by the Moslem League, there would have been no Hindu-Moslem voilence.
                        I am talking about the Pakistani state perspective of the histroy. We are made to believe that the Sikhs and Hindus killed Moslems while the Moslems heralded the Hindus and Sikhs safely acroos the border to India with gifts and cakes. The voilence was started by Moslems, then it became two-sided and the Moslems lost in numbers because they were the minority, something which those who wanted Pakistan should have thought of.
                        Your family was the colateral damage of the Partition. Nothing more, nothing less. And Pakistan and the Moslem League are to be blamed again. Those who wanted Pakistan should have realized that partitioning India along communal lines was impossible, illogical and totally baseless. You cannot expect us to blindly follow Pakistani version of history because of an isolated, misinterpreted event.
                        Nadir Jana, what makes you think I'm not listening?

                        I don't accept the received wisdom in Pakistan on the events around partition. I actually still hold a lot of respect for India and my grandmother's brother remained there only coming to Pakistan periodically to see his family.

                        Again, I'm not sure about the collateral damage statement. People deserve more respect.

                        I feel like my question to KhalsaWarrior may have been hijacked by your own feelings.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by tor_khan View Post
                          Nadir Jana, what makes you think I'm not listening?

                          I don't accept the received wisdom in Pakistan on the events around partition. I actually still hold a lot of respect for India and my grandmother's brother remained there only coming to Pakistan periodically to see his family.

                          Again, I'm not sure about the collateral damage statement. People deserve more respect.

                          I feel like my question to KhalsaWarrior may have been hijacked by your own feelings.
                          Malgariya, I dont think your respect for India is the issue here. I just want people to think beyond the animalistic confines of Mutlaliya ye Pakistan.
                          Secondly, about your family. As humans, they deserve respect and they certainly have mine. They did not deserve to be killed. They were the collateral damage of the designs of the Moslem League and of the illigitimate state of Pakistan. There are no two ways about this. Secondly, and this may seem inhumane but these are not the times for sentiments and emotionalism but of a revolutionary struggle, the family members you lost in 1947 are not of 'value' (not literal, value as in the value according to William James) to the Pashtun cause, hence this would be labeled as a human tragedy, nothing more. But, if you want to use this human tragedy to sell the Pakistani ideology and justify the 63 years of Pakistani oppression of the Pashtuns then, I think we have a problem.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Ianus Da Baakhtar View Post
                            Secondly, about your family. As humans, they deserve respect and they certainly have mine. They did not deserve to be killed. They were the collateral damage of the designs of the Moslem League and of the illigitimate state of Pakistan. There are no two ways about this. Secondly, and this may seem inhumane but these are not the times for sentiments and emotionalism but of a revolutionary struggle, the family members you lost in 1947 are not of 'value' (not literal, value as in the value according to William James) to the Pashtun cause, hence this would be labeled as a human tragedy, nothing more. But, if you want to use this human tragedy to sell the Pakistani ideology and justify the 63 years of Pakistani oppression of the Pashtuns then, I think we have a problem.
                            It is right to ask questions of Pakistan. It is also right to ask questions of India.

                            I never intended to make any mileage out of a personal family tragedy to make a political point nor to sell the "Pakistani" ideology - not in the way you seem to have understood this. I sought a simple answer to what I felt was a valid question.

                            My bias? I'm a Gandhiite and a Bacha Khaniite. Enough said, I guess.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by tor_khan View Post
                              It is right to ask questions of Pakistan. It is also right to ask questions of India.

                              I never intended to make any mileage out of a personal family tragedy to make a political point nor to sell the "Pakistani" ideology - not in the way you seem to have understood this. I sought a simple answer to what I felt was a valid question.

                              My bias? I'm a Gandhiite and a Bacha Khaniite. Enough said, I guess.
                              Malgariya, I am a big fan of uncomfortable and difficult questions. But questions should be based on rational and historical grounds. You can blame India for it's vast economic disparity and unequal development but you cannot come straight out of Mutaliya Pakistan and PTV Khabarnama, distort historical facts and create cheap sentimentalism.
                              Malgariya, my answers are not directed at you personally. The 'you' in use is rhetorical except where obvious.
                              The discourse you propagate and follow makes you a Jinnahite or worse, neither a Jinnahite nor a 'Pashtun-ite', which is sad.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X