Look at the photos here.
What's left to say?
Manipur is in an uproar over this. No surprise there. As long as all of us wink at "encounters", pretend they are somehow justified, celebrate the men who carry them out -- we're going to see more of them. Eventually inevitably, it will touch you. You prepared for that?
Remember Kausar Bi. Khwaja Yunis. Budhan Sabar. Ishrat Jahan. Pradeep Goyal and Jagjit Singh. Jawed Fawda. Pinya Hari Kale.
And now Chongkham Sanjit.
Roadrunner on Amazon!
Buy Roadrunner, Indian sites
Travel: Our Judgement Free
My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die. (Listen)
It was January the thirtieth/And everybody was feelin' fine.
Yo!
Good times!
TwitTwotTwet
Some of my writing
Asirgarh, Narbona, towelsTsunami reports
Girls of his (my) dreams
Winner, Outlook/Picador 2004/5
'74 Bra Flinging Story
Not just about tennis
My books
Branded by Law | The Narmada Dammed | RoadrunnerSome of my photographs
Worth your time
Ramani's fieldnotesTom Pietrasik | Abi
Annie | Shivam V
Bombay Addict
Uma MD | Amitava Kumar | John Naughton
Amin for your travel needs
40 comments:
I have no words. thanks for posting this Dilip.
Frightening.
Thanks for the links.
Horrific.
Really sad.!!!
Peace.
Kshitij
Dilip,
Do you know if something is being done? A PIL? Anything?
Interesting. I wonder what the reaction would be if Ajmal Kasab had decided to 'reform' himself, and was killed in a similar manner later....
It's great that all of you can sit here and debate the rules of democracy, but if you lost your 5 year old daughter to this group of terrorists like me, you would be thinking differently about this murder. Those people who defy the democratic process to achieve their goals also deserve to die outside it. But one would hardly expect any sympathy for Chongkham's victims in all this.
It's great that all of you can sit here and debate the rules of democracy...
Who's "all of you", actually? You mean it doesn't include you, even though you leave a comment?
Whether Kasab or Sanjit or anyone is essentially immaterial. One mark of a functioning society that has use for the idea of justice is that it applies that justice even to those who we think deserve it least.
That we are giving Kasab a trial rather than taking him into a pharmacy and shooting him says something about us that makes me proud.
That we took Sanjit into that store and shot him dead says something about us that makes me cringe.
So it goes.
Suresh, apparently the CM of Manipur has ordered a "judicial probe". Whatever that means.
In the article that you link to, this Chongkham is just described as a 'youth'. He is not just a youth. The PLA, the organisation that he belongs to is responsible for many atrocities across the state of Manipur. Did the article you linked to mention his crimes - even once? Apparently they don't matter. Did the fact that this Chongkham had not actually given up arms matter? Does the Tehelka article give you any proof that he had given up his activities except for what his family tells the press? The Tehelka article is completely biased, and does not display any facts - just pictures, without knowing a thing about the ground reality of any of these counter-terrorism operations. Again, it is easy to sit here from your armchairs and criticise the army based on some photos somebody put up. But one has to ask the question, if this Chongkham is not a monster who deserved to be murdered, then maybe the policemen who killed him are also rational human beings and may have been operating under some particular set of conditions. But the article you link doesn't tell you any of that. Apparently, the police forces operating in the area are just full of psychos terrorising innocents. There are no terrorist insurgencies going on there oh no. It is very easy to comment on a set of pictures, than to actually try and get some information about what is going on there, on the ground.
The article is biased beyond belief. it amazing that you give this any credibility Dilip.
1)How can a State justify such a war against its own people, asks TERESA REHMAN
First what the hell is this author talking about? Is fighting terrorists considered 'a war against its own people?'
2) Is there a single picture showing even one of the security forces pointing a gun at the victim? Of shooting the victim? What evidence do you have that there was no real encounter? Note how nobody mentions any talk about gunshots. Even if the only people who were doing the shooting were security forces, the photographer would have heard gunshots? But no mention of that in this article anywhere. You talk about trials and democracy - do the photos conclusively prove the man who died was shot without provocation?
3) How did the photographer get such close access to the bodies, without the security forces permission? Look at the angles that these photos are taken from - the photographer would have had to stand almost on top of the bodies to get these photos - in which case where were the security forces, and if they have done something illegal, why weren't they trying to cover it up? And if they let the photographer take these photos as part of their fake encounter story, why then is the photographer afraid to release these pictures in Manipur? And if s/he is afraid to release these pictures 'in Manipur', doesn't it make less sense to release them on a globally accessible medium like the Internet or to a media outlet?
4) If any picture can speak a thousand words, these photos — available exclusively to TEHELKA — could fill volumes. They capture a shootout that happened in the heart of Imphal, Manipur’s capital, barely 500 metres from the state assembly, on July 23
First Tehelka says that these pictures are exclusive - yet, when you look at their photos, there are other people standing there with video cameras and digital cameras - Tehelka does not mention which photos are exclusive.
Second, the author uses the word 'Shootout'. She does not say 'execution' or 'fake encounter'. She says 'shootout'. One would assume that when you are making serious accusations against the authorities, you proofread and edit your work. In which case, let us assume that the choice of words is deliberate, much like the you assume that the security forces shot Chongkham. In that case - the word 'shootout', by dictionary definition refers to:
a gunfight that must end in defeat for one side or the other, as between gunfighters in the Old West, criminal groups, or law-enforcement officers and criminals.
(continued)
Even this was a slip, we refer to the next para:
5) here is a grotesque and brutal history to the bullets that killed this young man. For years, decades even, security forces in Manipur have faced allegations of human rights violations and extrajudicial murders committed under cover of the draconian Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA).
Does the author mention why Manipur is under the AFSPA? Could it be that there is a terrorist insurgency going on there? No mention of that. Or any of the atrocities comitted by the terrorists. It seems the only terrorists there are the security forces.
The police claim Sanjit was a member of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), a proscribed insurgent outfit. Chief Minster Okram Ibobi Singh also made a controversial statement in the assembly that day, asserting that there was no other alternative but to kill insurgents.
Sanjit was indeed a former PLA cadre. He was arrested in 2000 but freed. In 2006, he retired from the outfit on health grounds. In 2007, though, he was detained again under the NSA and was only released a year later.
This part of the article is interesting. The first 8 paras only talk about security force atrocities - then, when we finally start talking about the victim, the first mention of him attempts to put some doubt in the the readers mind about whether this man was actually a terrorist or not. Then in the next para, the author grudgingly admits that yes, the victim did belong to a terrorist organisation, but as far as the author knows, all terrorist activies had been stopped.
Did the author mention why this man was put in jail in the first place?
But even if Sanjit was a former militant, he should not have have been killed in a false encounter. The photos show him talking to his killers, calmly, without offering any resistance. He was frisked moments before the shootout. He was not an insurgent on the run.
So what if the victim was talking to the security forces 'calmly'. Again, what does this prove? Resistance offered or not, based on this article at least, one cannot say whether a) Chongkham was truly unarmed, and b) also that there wasn't something else going on inside the pharmacy where the 'fake' encounter...or is shoutout... occured. But the media, and now you have already pronounced your judgement.
On the one hand, you claim to be proud of the fact that Qasab has been brought to trial and is being convicted in a court of law - on the other, you choose to emotionally inflame with a biased article, and no real proof. Hypocrisy, at its best.
"Emotionally inflame" and "hypocrisy". Right.
Sanjit's past is immaterial.
The ideal any reasonable society must strive for is to arrest criminals, swiftly and firmly try and punish them (if they are found guilty). This is the guarantee that its citizens will live secure and dignified lives.
When instead its own law and order forces kill people they arrest, without a trial, that undermines that guarantee.
This should worry and frighten anybody who thinks even a little about its implications. Because, for one thing and to put it simply, what if they surrounded you tomorrow and killed you in a store?
Carrying out and applauding "encounters" is the route to destroying any hope for justice for us all.
Yet somehow making this point gets described as "emotionally imflaming" things.
What proof do you have that this man was killed unarmed? How do you know he didn't draw a gun on the forces? Did you search him yourself? Are you an expert at determining when somebody is a hiding a gun on their person? The author of the article herself uses the term 'shootout'. Not execution. You see photos of 'before' and photos 'after', but nothing about during. You have already decided the security forces are guilty. Are you a lawyer? A judge? Were you a witness? No you just believe what you want to believe. You have not answered even one of the questions that were asked, but decide to just give a pithy answer.
That is what it means to 'emotionally inflame'. Nobody is 'applauding' an encounter. Where have I said that I am applauding it? But the article alluded to is full of bias, no objectivity, and it is tendency to look for conspiracies when none exist that weaken the state institutions and make it harder for them to do their job. You have already pronounced them guilty based on nothing but inflammatory text and photographs which exist in the ether, without any context. Well done.
1) No mention of gunshots
2) Use of the word 'shootout'
3) No photographs of the actual shooting
4) Openly letting people photograph the dead bodies
5)Attempting to extrapolate innocence from 'calm behaviour' and 'lack of resistance'.
What nonsense. It is a shame that most people are sheep, without a critical bone in their body.
Ah, the old chestnut: "weaken he state institutions and make it harder for them to do their job". No doubt that other old chestnut, that equally tired one about "reducing police morale", is on the way.
I don't have to offer you proofs, because I did not claim he was innocent. The point is, that is immaterial.
Let me repeat, whether you pronounce it pithy or not, what I said earlier on this page: The ideal any reasonable society must strive for is to arrest criminals, swiftly and firmly try and punish them (if they are found guilty). This is the guarantee that its citizens will live secure and dignified lives.
That's what should have been done with this guy.
Plenty of people applaud encounters. Police officers are feted for being "encounter specialists", as I'm sure you've heard.
Darkim
Please do not expend more effort on this. Dilip is simply earning his daily bread. He has to pimp for people who provide him his 'rozi roti'.
Where I have objection to Dilip is when he ascribes motives to the rest of ús'the silent majority. The people who wink at "encounters", pretend they are somehow justified, celebrate the men who carry them out'.who are anti minority and full of bigotry -though he has never provided concrete evidence of how he derives these conclusions.
I repeat - once you interfere in a legal process as in case of Mohammed Afzal Guru, the people will always end up justifying encounters.
Similar to your explanation of how lack of justice causes people to carry out 26/11. As you mentioned even ghouls do not decide one fine morning to bomb places and kill people.
BTW Kasab wants somebody to tie him a rakhi
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/Will-anyone-tie-me-a-rakhi-Kasab-asks-lawyer/articleshow/4861656.cms
Dilip - Vibha to volunteer for this? or others here Aditya, K, KM, Suresh any of your wives, sisters or mothers to volunteer for this?
After all charity begins at home.
Ah, first the old chestnuts emerge, then the old lurkers emerge. Making their empty accusations about "pimping", and demonstrating -- with rakhis this time -- the bareness of their argumentative cupboards.
Who belongs to this "silent majority"? You? You are by no means silent, and you have no claim on any majority that I can think of, any more than I do.
The men who carry out encounters are automatically "anti-minority"? Please spell out: Which minority does Kausar Bi belong to? Budhan Sabar? Jawed Fawda? Pradeep Goyal? Pinya Hari Kale? Ishrat Jahan? Chongkham Sanjit? (And I'm only using names I've mentioned in this post. There are others).
Please surprise me for the first time ever by answering the question.
How has the legal process in Afzal's case been interfered with, can you please explain? Do you know something none of us do?
Please surprise me for the first time ever by answering the question.
And Afzal's case "justifies" the killing of Sanjit? Care to explain?
Please surprise me for the first time ever by answering the question.
Finally, all this is from a man who pronounced, when a Muslim organization refused to accept terrorist bodies for burial, that "Indian muslims by taking such actions - show that they are Indians first."
In other words, that Indian Muslims must be assumed to be not Indians first -- until a few among them refuse to bury terrorist bodies.
There was no explanation of that bigotry then, only increasing anger at it being pointed out. Why am I not surprised that that same anger manifests itself again now?
Dilip - Vibha to volunteer for this? or others here Aditya, K, KM, Suresh any of your wives, sisters or mothers to volunteer for this?
Wonderful. You're telling us males to "volunteer" our wives, sisters, mothers to tie a rakhi on Kasab? Sorry, but the women in my life don't take very kindly to my ordering them around. All of them have minds of their own and make their own decisions. By the way, what makes you think that my wife, sister and mother share my political views?
Many thanks, though, for revealing your attitude towards women. Now, tell me again, why are you against the Islamic fundamentalists?
Wow, somebody coherent actually nailed D'Souza to the wall, and D'souza you crafty squirrel you, all you could do is talk about chestnuts.
Darkim, as I am sure you have noticed now, that D'Souza is judge jury and executioner of the world, therefore, he has already pronounced the armed forces guilty, because you see he was there during the killing, it's just that the pictures don't show it. In fact, I suspect he probably let it happen so that he could blog about it. Proof of this? Why it is among the same photos which show the security forces shooting Sanjit. Oh yes... those specific photos don't exist. But no bother, we can extrapolate, just like D'Souza has done, so no worries.
Oh wait, I almost forgot, at some point, D'Souza goes:
WHERE HAVE I SAID that the security forces murdered Sanjit? Nowhere, D'Souza, nowhere.
Ishrat Jehan!
The girl was killed in retaliatory fire after men in her car opened fire at a police vehicle. They were armed and were using their arms against the police.
Any reasonable human would assume that all the occupants of the vehicle were terrorists, since three of the four opened fire on uniformed men who wanted to search their vehicle. I think the case was inconclusive http://www.rediff.com/news/2004/jul/01flip.htm
India is the most terror and separatist afflicted *democratic*, pluralistic country on earth. There are at present a minimum of 4 extremely violent separatist movements, and one vicious insurgency( the Naxalite) going on in different parts of the country. Into this horrific situation walk the Indian security forces, who are overstressed, underpaid, under-appreciated, often unacknowledged, and insufficient in numbers, relative to the population. Of course, you are going to get the odd reaction like the one described in this article. Before rushing to judge- and no one is of course lauding the behaviour of trigger happiness- name some other country that has a similar predicament, and yet has dealt with the putative problem far more humanely and successfully. Not qualifying would be the US, UK, France, Japan, Canada.
Ah, first the old chestnuts emerge, then the old lurkers emerge. Making their empty accusations about "pimping", and demonstrating -- with rakhis this time -- the bareness of their argumentative cupboards.
Sorry for using such a harsh word here. Apologize for that. But you do have financial links with Tehelka.- I believe you gave them a donation. But when you quote an outfit that used prostitutes for its sting operations, I simply could not resist using the word that resonates with the profession.
empty accusations bareness of their argumentative cupboards.
Excellent prose I say
Who belongs to this "silent majority"?
The people who wink at "encounters", pretend they are somehow justified, celebrate the men who carry them out'.
You? You are by no means silent, and you have no claim on any majority that I can think of, any more than I do.
I have never made any claim on any majority. However I assumed that we were a majority as you linked to the article and wrote such a piece that was so alarmist in nature. , I thought that a majority of us were like that. If we are not then we are just an irritant and society is safe. So please ignore us if we are not the majority. I take it back. Thank god for Dilip and his likes that society is so safe. Hear hear.
The men who carry out encounters are automatically "anti-minority"? Please spell out: Which minority does Kausar Bi belong to? Budhan Sabar? Jawed Fawda? Pradeep Goyal? Pinya Hari Kale? Ishrat Jahan? Chongkham Sanjit? (And I'm only using names I've mentioned in this post. There are others).
Not the men who carry out encounters – but again The people who wink at "encounters", pretend they are somehow justified, celebrate the men who carry them out'.
Please surprise me for the first time ever by answering the question.
How has the legal process in Afzal's case been interfered with, can you please explain? Do you know something none of us do?
Please surprise me for the first time ever by answering the question.
Go through your own archives. Afzal was sentenced to death and this has been lying in limbo ever since. Hell – even a bestselling book has been written on this subject.. See the pieces linked to below: Anyway there are many other commentators who have dissected your pieces on Afzal Guru.
And Afzal's case "justifies" the killing of Sanjit? Care to explain?
Please surprise me for the first time ever by answering the question.
Did I say that. In your style, please point out that. I am referring to the sentiment when people see the justice system being shorted by bleeding hearts
Finally, all this is from a man who pronounced, when a Muslim organization refused to accept terrorist bodies for burial, that "Indian muslims by taking such actions - show that they are Indians first."
In other words, that Indian Muslims must be assumed to be not Indians first -- until a few among them refuse to bury terrorist bodies.
My my my Dilip – such unique talent of drawing conclusions and then putting in your own assumptions.
You conveniently and deliverately omitted 2 realities in this:
This is the first such case in India
The terrorists are not Indian nationals but Pakistanis who perceive Indian muslims as waiting to be liberated.
continued
There was no explanation of that bigotry then, only increasing anger at it being pointed out. Why am I not surprised that that same anger manifests itself again now?
All my explanations are there and you are the one who kept on running round in circles trying to be clever.
Anger – dear me I am too old for that and why should I feel anger against you? I cannot help it or change your mind if you have already decided I am a bigot.and are twisting all statements to justify conclusions you have already made. It was only when Darkim wrote such a huge piece about inaccuracies that I gave some friendly advice. I think pity not anger is a more appropriate sentiment. Esoecially when you end up with egg on your face below:
http://retributions.nationalinterest.in/dear-dilip/
http://retributions.nationalinterest.in/dilips-response/
Any coincidence why you have targeted this person after this incident – I am referring to the post of vicious comments earlier.
Suresh
Wonderful. You're telling us males to "volunteer" our wives, sisters, mothers to tie a rakhi on Kasab? Sorry, but the women in my life don't take very kindly to my ordering them around. All of them have minds of their own and make their own decisions. By the way, what makes you think that my wife, sister and mother share my political views?
Many thanks, though, for revealing your attitude towards women. Now, tell me again, why are you against the Islamic fundamentalists?
Volunteering same as ordering around? News to me. Sorry for lack of knowledge in English. Guess I should take some private tution. So when I requested my wife if she would help in some volunteer work I was ordering her around Then it is true -----my attitude towards women is disgusting. -
But you do have financial links with Tehelka.- I believe you gave them a donation.
Picking two at random, I have given donations, and written about, a school for tsunami-affected kids in TN and an organization working on housing for earthquake victims in Kutch.
Therefore I must be pimping for them.
I have never made any claim on any majority
No claim? Your previous comment had this phrase: "he ascribes motives to the rest of us the silent majority."
You didn't answer this: Please spell out: Which minority does Kausar Bi belong to? Budhan Sabar? Jawed Fawda? Pradeep Goyal? Pinya Hari Kale? Ishrat Jahan? Chongkham Sanjit? (And I'm only using names I've mentioned in this post. There are others).
Afzal was sentenced to death and this has been lying in limbo ever since.
You still didn't answer: How has the legal process in Afzal's case been interfered with, can you please explain?
Did I say that [Afzal's case "justifies" the killing Sanjit].
Actually, yes. Here: once you interfere in a legal process as in case of Mohammed Afzal Guru, the people will always end up justifying encounters.
All my explanations are there.
Ok, where?
It is interesting to see that this debate has gone off-topic, but the one thing that I can see clearly is Dilip makes no genuine attempt to debate or engage, and simply finds ways to twist things and change subject.
The simple argument I made was that on the basis of a bunch of photos and inflammatory text, who are we to judge what really happened. But Dilip has already taken a stance, that Chongkham Sanjit was gunned down in cold blood.
When we asked for proof, Dilip's response was:
I don't have to offer you proofs, because I did not claim he was innocent. The point is, that is immaterial.
If that is the case, then what the hell are you arguing about Dilip? The proof I asked you to show me is that this man didn't draw a gun on the security forces or provoke them into shooting him. Do you have any proof for or against that? How about any proof that he was shot in cold blood? Any definitive proof? But again, you have already made up your mind that there is something shady going on. Because you know in your 'heart of hearts'. Instead, you choose to tackle all sorts of other subjects on the periphery - but not the main one - that you don't know what really happened that day. If this was an execution, why had the security forces left that man alive for so long? He had been to court, to jail, and was now just working in a hospital apparently. There could have been ample opportunities to kill him earlier - all they had to do was track him going about his daily business and run him over with a truck. Why on that specific day? And why the need for so many military forces? Why? Do you have any answers for this?
this debate has gone off-topic...
The one thing I agree with you about, and I regret getting into the trap of letting it happen.
what the hell are you arguing about Dilip?
This much: his innocence and guilt is irrelevant to what happened to him. It's the reason I mentioned those other encounter deaths.
This is hardly a peripheral issue, it is the main one when it comes to encounters. It's my concern with every encounter death.
If you choose to see this as an unwillingness to debate and engage, you're welcome to do so.
Sorry Mayuresh, I meant to reply.
The problem, it seems to me, starts when we accept encounters as a valid way to deal with suspects. The very idea of there being "fake encounters" and "not fake encounters" seems crazy to me. The ideal to strive for is that every suspect faces the process of justice and law and order.
This is regardless of whether the suspect has a past criminal record, or is a member of some dreaded organization, or in fact turns out to be completely innocent. Every failure to reach that ideal must by definition raise questions. (There may be answers, that does not mean the questions are by themselves illegitimate).
I don't know of too many encounters where the police has not claimed that the suspects fired at them and they fired back in self-defence.
About IJ in particular, there's also this recent news.
This much: his innocence and guilt is irrelevant to what happened to him. It's the reason I mentioned those other encounter deaths.
This is hardly a peripheral issue, it is the main one when it comes to encounters. It's my concern with every encounter death.
So if I understand you correctly, the issue at hand is 'loss of life'? The fact that this man died? It doesn't matter if he pulled out a gun, pointed at the security forces and tried to shoot one of them, but just that he died? This is a shockingly immature reaction.
But I sense that under all of this is a belief that whatever happened that day was some sort of conspiracy against him. Of which, I state again , you have no proof. Simply listing anybody who died at the hands of the authorities is foolish, not to mention your list is far too small and selective, simply because those few names got on the media.
In the end, all you have is some wooly notion of 'justice' which you think you are fighting for. Good day sir, and goodbye.
It doesn't matter if he pulled out a gun, pointed at the security forces and tried to shoot one of them.
You have proof of this?
(I ask because you've been wondering about proof repeatedly).
your list is far too small and selective.
It is. But I also know of a list that mentions numbers in the hundreds, and that from just one state. Would that be a little better for you than "far too small"?
all you have is some wooly notion of 'justice'.
I'll take woolly over none.
I think encounter is some kind of state propagated genocide against its own people, specially the minorities. First they brand minorities as BAD people and then encounter and since they are now branded as bad and it is now justified to kill them. This happens to not just minorities but to Dalits and tribal people in India who do not have voice. Only cowards can justify encounter. I doubt how Darkim,Nikhil and "The Real Azous D'Pilid" respond if there were encounters of kanchi matadipati or some satya sai... or some hindu seer. For that first we are going to brand these people as bad and then we will justify killing bad people is good.
I think killing any human being is bad and that too with tools like encounter is like misuseing the power and it sends a wrong signal to the society i think for that very reason there is no incentive to be a normal citizen in such situation, this person would have been alive and enjoying life if he still continued to be with seperatists or whatever. I want to see if this poor man had the same strength in terms of numbers as the police had how would such an encounter be?
Encounter is something coward and people who justify it are cowards too.
this debate has gone off-topic...
The one thing I agree with you about, and I regret getting into the trap of letting it happen.
Wow - coming from somebody who regularly creates strawman arguments.
You have proof of this?
Strange you are asking Darkim this, but when Darkim asked you the same thing you keep going round in circles.
Hell you are the one making the accusation and have taken a report by a shady outfit as gospel truth and are reproducing this on your blog. So you should be the one with proof.
Darkim
Correction - the word is not woolly but selective expecially if the victims are his favorites - minorities, insurgents, terrorists etc.
Blueshift
First they brand minorities as BAD people and then encounter and since they are now branded as bad and it is now justified to kill them. This happens to not just minorities but to Dalits and tribal people in India who do not have voice.
In Dilip mode - please show proof.
I doubt how Darkim,Nikhil and "The Real Azous D'Pilid" respond if there were encounters of kanchi matadipati or some satya sai... or some hindu seer.
First these people are not carrying out anti- national or secession activities and are following the law. They are not part of groups that go around killing people nor the institutions they run at war with the state. UNless you are from Mars, did you not see what happened to the seer and that too when there was no proof. Where were you and Tehelka when that happened Dilip?
Now - please say no different strokes for different folks.
Very interesting. I get asked for proof for things I didn't claim ("What proof do you have that this man was killed unarmed?"). Naturally, I offer none because I didn't make such a claim.
In turn, the same man actually makes a claim ("he pulled out a gun, pointed at the security forces and tried to shoot one of them"), so I ask for proof for this claim.
His friend jumps in and says "Strange you are asking Darkim this, but when Darkim asked you the same thing you keep going round in circles."
Very interesting, but hardly surprising.
The day we all acknowledge that massacring many hundreds -- as in Delhi in 1984, or Bombay in 1992-93, or Gujarat in '02 -- are "anti- national or secession activities" just as much as the terrorism of last Novemeber, is the day we'll make some progress towards justice.
Hi Dilip,
I agree that encounters (the colloquial Indian term) are not the way a suspect should be dealt with.
At the same time, the police have a right to retaliatory fire if a suspect starts firing at them (for whatever reason). In Ishrat jehan's case, three men from the Indica opened fire at the police. What could the police have done in such a case, where the suspect opened fire using automatic weapons?
Coming to the larger point of asking questions about encounters. Yes, questions may be asked in all cases where the ideal is not met, and most of them shall have legitimate answers, like in the case of Ishrat Jahan.
1. Why was she killed?
Ans. She was traveling with a group of terrorists who fired on the police and the police had no way of selectively knowing who in the car was a terrorist and who was not.
2. Ishrat had no links to terrorists, unless proved.
Ans. ishrat has a very high probability of being a terrorist because:
a. Ishrat was married to Praneshkumar Pillai, an LeT operative who had received training in Pakistan (confirmed in police investigations).
b. She had stayed with him and 2 other confirmed LeT operatives in various hotels (I think in Pune and Ahmedabad) just before the encounter and had seen the guns they carried. and police have proof of this.
c. She knew fully well before getting into the car that the men were terrorists (no one other than a terrorist would carry AK-47 in an Indica without any reason)
Thus, using Occam's Razor, Ishrat was probably a terrorist herself, or a terrorist sympathizer
3. Police claim in all encounters that the suspects fired at them and they fired in retaliation
Ans. Give the same benefit of doubt to the police and prove that their claims are false before assuming them guilty of an encounter.
3. No police officer is ever killed when suspects fire at them!
Ans.
a. Mr. Kamte, Salaskar and Karkare were killed when suspects opened fire!
b. Mr. M.C. Sharma of Delhi Police was killed in the Batla house encounter
I have seen the news, so we can wait for the probe to end and release the findings. Till such time, the people should believe the earlier verdict of the court.
Oh dear, Nikhil, Darkim, Mayuresh, you people are making amateur mistakes here in dealing with D'Souza. You are trying to fight stupidity with reason. That never works. Never, and nowhere. If it did, George Bush would never have become president, and D'Souza would have retreated to his cave long ago. Have none of you noticed the 'debating' style yet? How D'Souza picks out some one specific sentence that you made, takes it completely out of context to accuse you of being something else, then waits for you to tie yourself up in knots re-contextualising what you've already said? In this way, he deflects full attention from his own idiocies. The best way to fight D'Souza is to linger around his blog like a troll, insulting most of his chamchas. Guys, you're wasting your time. When a rational mind meets D'Souza, the result is usually an explosion - finally you will get frustrated and say something in Anger, and then D'Souza will have trapped you and then harp on that in his next newspaper article about how violent and rude internet debates are. Get out while you still can, with your sense intact.
I think this real azoos is correct. Won't be wasting my time here. Just for the record, I have no idea this Nikhil is, he is not my 'friend'. You may find this hard to believe, but more than one person can hold the same (or similar) opinion, they don't have to be cronies, or gangmembers, but as you have already shown, you are not interested in debating anything reasonably and rationally.
Nikhil
Minorities are branded as terrorists in India by linking them to all sorts of terror activities in Pakistan. This happens all the time.
I think these people like kanchi matadipati ...n hindu seers etc are doing the same thing as does any maula in pakistan. Some of them want to turn India into a hindu nation and others want it to be a muslim nation and some others want it to be secular and some others communist. Its all in this game. Some loose some win not sure when this is going to end and what will India be ...its all in this game.
As strongly as one force tries to flex its muscle u will see reaction from other.
Comming to encounters it weakens the state. Sate exists because its citizens trust it. Encounters destroys this trust.
Already now the situation is like minorities lost trust and now state/majority thinks its now legitimate to kill minorities since they are anti-national.
I have problem with definition of anti-national. Is it anti-national or anti-hindu ?? both sound same to me????
The day we all acknowledge that massacring many hundreds -- as in Delhi in 1984, or Bombay in 1992-93, or Gujarat in '02 -- are "anti- national or secession activities" just as much as the terrorism of last Novemeber, is the day we'll make some progress towards justice.
Aah Dilip
Back to your old tricks. When you do not have any arguments, go back to the usual guilt inducing.Here is a sample. I leave it to the readers to go through it - the point I was making and your replies. Illuminating enough
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8070362&postID=114746447425993973
Second how did you assume that I am Darkims friend. The only thing I have offered is some 'firendly advice'Surely as a professional writer you know the difference between being somebody's friend and giving some firendly advice. Curous how you jumped to the conclusion that we are friends.
So you see who is the person doing the 'branding'- something you call lazy thinking. Heck - Darkim and I are talking completely different things. But just because we do not agree with you, we are considered 'friends'.
Good day and good luck
I am Darkim. I am Azous (tho' I tried to fool you by writing "azoos"). I am Phoenix. I am TTG. I am Tarun Pall. Philly, Delhi, Melbourne and now back in the states.
I will post under other pseuedonyms!! Watch this space.
"Phoenix", I meant to tell you this after your other previous comments. Looks like you have nothing to contribute besides this. Therefore please stay away.
Thanks.
> When you do not have any arguments.
Here's my argument, once more. It is not an attempt to induce guilt. It is just my argument, stated as simply as I can. I believe it is the root of our inability to tackle terrorism. Do attempt to engage with it, rather than dismiss it. If you don't agree, please explain why. Here it is:
The day we all acknowledge that massacring many hundreds -- as in Delhi in 1984, or Bombay in 1992-93, or Gujarat in '02 -- are "anti- national or secession activities" just as much as the terrorism of last Novemeber, is the day we'll make some progress towards justice.
Haha, D'Souza thinks I am someone else. I love this. Who are you telling to stay away, D'Souza? This Pheonix, who you hate so much as to attribute every comment against you to him or me or this Darkim fellow? My gosh, so many identities, all from the same person. I/We/Them/Us/Him/Her must be a many headed Ravan.
why feel pity for someone who is a traitor in the first place.. he did not think twice before killing other innocent people ... those who want to break india through violence should be shot in public.. let this be a lesson for everyone who wants to disturb the peace of this land!
It is nearly two years since Chongkham Sanjit died. For those who remember, a "judicial probe" was announced by the Chief Minister of Manipur in the wake of the uproar that followed his death.
A news item in Tehelka (see below) reminded me of Chongkham Sanjit and I did a brief web search to see if there were any further developments. The search revealed the expected unhappy truth that our "mainstream" media has simply forgotten the incident. However, there is a report in the Imphal Free Press about the probe. Apparently, the probe has submitted its report but the contents have not been public. (Why?) The following in the report make for sad reading, and is unfortunately, true of most such "probes" or "inquiries":
What has however become evident to those who have been following the commission’s enquiry is that many of the key witnesses have not deposed before the panel’s hearings. In fact, the term of the commission had to be extended several times on account of this. Among those who refused or else inordinately delayed deposing before the commission are the members of the families of the two victims of the incident as well as the police commandos and police officers who were either key witnesses, or were accused in the crime, or else by the position they occupy in the Manipur Police would have known of the details of the incident. This is unfortunate, and even before the seal of the report is broken, we can already sense the report is likely not able to draw any definitive conclusion on the subject of their probe.
In Dilip's original article, he had mentioned the names of others who had met a similar fate to that of Chongkham Sanjit. I suppose they are also now forgotten. I think that we should start a website -- if there isn't one already -- to ensure that the names of those who died in the hundreds of "riots" "encounters" etc. are at least not forgotten. If we can't get justice for them , we should at least ensure that their names are not simply forgotten.
Also concerning Manipur, here's another story from Tehelka which accuses the Assam Rifles of being involved in the kidnapping and extortion racket that plagues that state..
I am not hopeful but I do hope that those in charge of the army or paramilitary organizations realize that it is in their own (and the nation's) interest that such stories be thoroughly investigated.
Post a Comment