[Reader-list] doubt about what, javed.?

[Pawan Durani]

Dear Javed,

There is no denying the fact that geelani was acquited by Hon Court. Also
there is no denying that he was a acquited on technical grounds , though his
involvement was supposed to be still suspucious.

What is beyond doubt that even in the judgement when it was discussed , it
was proved that Geelani laughed when asked over the phone about the
terrorists acts in Delhi . Infact he was on record to have said that these
acts were necessary to be done.

Is it not a shame that the same person who laughs and enjoys the terrorist
violence in India is being given honor and is expected to give a speech on
communalism and fascism.

And the likes of Arti and Shuddha continue to think that this Geelani is a
champion !

Pawan

Jai Andhra ! Jai Hind




On 11/8/08, Javed <javedmasoo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Rajendra Bhatt
> This must be the most absurd logic I have ever heard about any
> judicial matter. If this piece of evidence was to be kept
> confidential, then how do you know about it?
> And in any case, when has public been shown any piece of evidence
> claimed by the police in so many cases. In the Jamia Nagar case, they
> said they have found AK-47 - did they show it to public. They said
> they've found a laptop in L-18 Batla House with photos of Osama - did
> they show it to public? And in your example, why couldn't only the
> judge and lawyers be shown the evidence and a decision be made based
> on that? I just don't believe the logic you have presented. Can you
> give a source for this?
>
> You said that even google does not show the detailed floor plan of the
> parliament. Guess what, I just saw Indian parliament on the google in
> as much detail as they show anything else on earth (this the maximum
> they show of anything). You are welcome to see it at the following
> link (please use the entire URL even if looks broken into 2-3 lines):
>
>
> http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Delhi&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=39.780156,86.572266&ie=UTF8&ll=28.617255,77.209189&spn=0.002698,0.005284&t=k&z=18
>
> Also, if Geelani had access to the detailed floor plans of parliament
> (which could be used to destroy the place), what a damp squib they
> finally achieved - they could not even enter the parliament or harm
> any MP? They were trying to the premises in a white ambassador? What a
> stupid use of having detailed floor plans.
>
> Let me know if you have any other technical reasons for absolving Geelani.
>
> J
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 2:24 PM, rajendra bhat <raja_starkglass at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > Friend,
> >    if you have any doubts about the accused, be they muslims or hindus,
> the laws clearly state that  the accused are innocent till proved guilty.If
> you have doubts about those in Jamianagar, you should doubt that Geelani,
> who  is a terror sponsor, but not the other detainees. Geelani escaped with
> the help of a "criminal" lawyer paying hefty fee for the technical error of
> presented evidence. many may not even know that evidence, let me explain, in
> the mahazar signed by Geelani with two witnesses the plans of Parliament
> which are not in public domain were found, with all miniscule details and
> the prosecution had a tricky isue to present this evidence in the court of
> law, as once presented in court of laws, geelani would be convicted as he
> was in possession of plan and elevation of parliament which is considered as
> confidential, not in public domain, but once in documents of the court as
> evidence any one can access this piece of evidence and the
> >  parliament will be open to scrutiny by all including teorror planners.!
> This is the "technical" aspect of evidence as CBI and prosecution decided
> not to present this peice of evidence as to how he Geelani could obtain this
> evidence is million dollar issue as even google does not give this detailed
> floor plan of parliament.!
> >
> >   Such a person who planned and conspired to execute the attack is now
> "innocent" and specially invited to talk of communalism when he is muslim
> communal, terror sponsor.! Ofcourse there are many "secular" who love to
> love him for his handsome looks, and also are bordering on fascism to defend
> him.?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>