we stand with your

On 2/6/11, Ghulam Muhammed <[email protected]> wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Razi Raziuddin <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 8:18 PM
> Subject: [nrindians] Swami's confession
>
>
>
>
>  [image: Frontline]
> *Volume 28 - Issue 03 :: Jan. 29-Feb. 11, 2011*
>
> *TERRORISM*
>
> *Swami's confession*
>
> VENKITESH RAMAKRISHNAN
>
> *Swami Aseemanand's confessions on the involvement of Hindutva outfits in
> terror attacks leave investigating agencies red-faced.*
>
> THE HINDU ARCHIVES
>
> *Swami Aseemanand, a file photograph. He was originally arrested in
> connection with the 2006 Malegaon blasts but his reported confessions of
> December 18, 2010, point to his involvement in as many as five terror
> attacks.*
>
> WHATEVER the final verdict on the reported confessions made recently by
> Swami Aseemanand, leader of Abhinav Bharat, a Hindutva extremist
> organisation, the fact is that they have raised vital questions about
> terrorist activity in India. The most important of these relates to the
> process that security agencies adopt for investigating terrorist attacks and
> the projections they make as part of it.
>
> The confessions also suggest that a widespread network of Hindutva terror
> groups has advanced its extremist activities systematically over the past
> six to seven years with help from many leaders in mainstream Hindutva
> organisations as also groups within these organisations that are a part of
> the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS)-led Sangh Parivar.
>
> Another important question relates to the responsibility of the government
> and the larger judicial establishment towards persons found to have been
> implicated wrongly and arrested in many terror-related cases that have taken
> a dramatic about-turn as a result of new revelations such as the one made by
> Swami Aseemanand. This also raises the question as to how the government and
> other institutions plan to redress the wrong done to these innocent persons.
>
> On the central question raised by Swami Aseemanand's confessions, that is,
> of the process of investigation into a terror attack, administrative and
> political authorities claim that the multidimensional investigations carried
> out by a clutch of agencies, including the Central Bureau of Investigation
> (CBI), working together or separately, are done secretly and confidentially.
>
> However, it has been the practice in the immediate aftermath of almost every
> attack to blame “jehadi groups” working within the country or their
> so-called cohorts based in different parts of the world, including
> neighbouring countries. The experience has been that investigating agencies
> and those who wield control over them in the security establishment or the
> Home Ministry at the Centre or in the States help in the propagation of such
> jehad-oriented stories. Aseemanand's reported confessions raise questions
> about this practice as well as the line of investigation that has been
> adopted in many cases over the past decade.
>
> Aseemanand was originally arrested in connection with the 2006 Malegaon
> blasts but his reported confessions of December 18, 2010, point to his
> involvement in as many as five terror attacks. According to the reported
> confession, Aseemanand and his associates, who were members of Hindutva
> terror outfits, were involved in the many terror attacks, including the bomb
> blasts in the Samjhauta Express (February 2007) and those at Hyderabad Mecca
> Masjid (May 2007) and Ajmer dargah (October 2007). The associates apparently
> included Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, Lokesh Sharma, Lt Col Prasad Shrikant
> Purohit, Retired Major Ramesh Upadhyay, Swami Dayanand Pandey (all of whom
> were arrested during the course of the investigations) and Sandeep Dange,
> who is absconding, and Sunil Joshi, who was apparently killed by a few of
> his own associates. The name of Indresh Kumar, a member of the RSS national
> executive, also finds mention in the recorded confession.
>
> According to it, these Hindutva activists had joined hands to carry out
> attacks at Muslim places of worship or in areas with a significant
> population of Muslims. A common feature of the terror strikes was that a
> large number of the victims were Muslims. The deadliest attack by this group
> was on the Samjhauta Express on the night of February 18-19, 2007, in which
> 68 persons were killed.
>
>  Significantly, in all the terror attacks referred to in Aseemanand's
> confessions, the line of investigation by different agencies focussed only
> on “jehadi terror groups” and their national and international associates
> such as the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), the Lakshar–e-Taiba
> (LeT) and the Harkat-ul-Jehad-e-Islami (HuJI).
>
> The Samjhauta Express blasts, for instance, were described as a macabre
> attack by the LeT. This line of investigation and the projections made on
> that basis found such widespread currency that this was highlighted even in
> international forums such as the United Nations. The U.N.'s listing of the
> LeT as a terror outfit in its international watch list made a specific
> mention of the Samjhauta Express blasts. Similarly, it was widely propagated
> that the Mecca Masjid blasts were planned and executed by the HuJI. Hundreds
> of people from different parts of the country were arrested in these cases
> as part of the investigation, which has now been exposed as fallacious, and
> kept either in custody or in jail for long periods of time.
>
> For example, as many as 60 persons were arrested immediately after the Mecca
> Masjid blasts following the HuJI attack theory. The line of investigation
> advanced at that time by the Hyderabad police and broadly supported by
> Central investigating agencies was as follows: Shahid Bilal, a resident of
> Moosrambagh in the old city of Hyderabad had carried out these blasts in
> order to create communal tension. There were two first information reports
> (FIRs) in this case, one dealing with the blasts and the other dealing with
> the recovery of unexploded explosives.
>
> Charges ranging from involvement in seditious activity to conspiracy were
> brought against all the 60. The viewing of recordings of the demolition of
> the Babri Masjid was held to be an act that spurred the suspects into
> indulging in terrorist acts.
>
> The investigation into the Samjhauta Express blasts has also been nothing
> short of a roller coaster ride. The attack on the train named after the Urdu
> and Hindi word for accord or compromise was perceived as an attack on the
> efforts to strengthen India-Pakistan cooperation. The train connects New
> Delhi to Lahore and passes through the India-Pakistan border in Punjab at
> Attari.
>
> On the basis of the perception that the blasts were perpetrated by those who
> wanted to scuttle or at least impair India-Pakistan cooperation, both the
> Indian and Pakistan governments condemned the attack. A day after the
> bombings, Indian investigating agencies said it was a suitcase bomb attack
> carried out by five people associated with the LeT. The agencies even
> released sketches of two suspects. Later, some people who allegedly sold the
> suitcases to the alleged attackers were arrested from Indore. But that was
> about all in terms of concrete progress.
>
> R.V. MOORTHY
>
> *THE DEADLIEST ATTACK by Aseemanand and his associates, according to his
> confession, was on the Samjhauta Express in February 2007, in which 68
> persons were killed. Here, an NSG commando inspects a bombed out coach of
> the train near Panipat station, 80 km from New Delhi.*
>
> Things started to unfold differently in November 2008 when the interrogation
> of Lt Col Purohit revealed that there could be a Hindutva terror dimension
> to the attack. This aspect gained momentum in October 2010 when the charge
> sheet prepared by the Rajasthan anti-terrorism squad stated that a meeting
> of Hindutva bomb makers in February 2006 discussed the Samjhauta Express as
> a potential target for attack. In yet another development, WikiLeaks linked
> David Headley, the suspected brain behind the Mumbai attacks of November 26,
> 2008, to the bombing. Aseemanand's confessions have come as the latest twist
> in this series of events.
>
> The Sangh Parivar as a whole, and specifically the RSS and its political arm
> the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), have pointed to the changing facets in the
> investigations to claim that the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance
> (UPA) government at the Centre is using various agencies to prop up a
> “misnomer” called “Hindu terror”. According to an editorial in Organiser,
> the journal of the RSS, Aseemanand's confessions are nothing but the
> concoctions of the investigating agencies to suit the political needs of the
> Congress.
>
> The editorial stated: “So far there has been no instance of any Hindu
> organisation boasting credit for a terror strike anywhere in the world. So
> far no outfit has claimed to work underground to advance a Hindu agenda
> through arbitrary force, undemocratic means or through intimidation.
> Normally gangs resort to such methods when they are in a miserable minority
> and have no hope of achieving their goal through democratic, constitutional
> methods. Or when they are not confident of the support they enjoy in
> society. In any case, even home-grown terrorism cannot sustain without
> technical and logistic support and funds from outside the country. By
> general consensus there is no religion or colour for terrorism. But the
> jihadi outfits do not make any secret of the religious agenda they want to
> enforce. By all these parameters Hindu terror is a misnomer.”
>
> It also wondered why “only the persons named in alleged Hindu radicalism
> seem to be making ‘confessions'” and why “we have not heard of a [Ajmal]
> Kasab, [Mohammad] Afzal [a.k.a Afzal Guru] or Geelani or such other jihadi
> terrorists making any confession”. The Sangh Parivar leaders, including BJP
> president Nitin Gadkari, have made bold to absolve RSS national executive
> committee member Indresh Kumar of all culpability and have appeared along
> with him in several public functions.
>
> Notwithstanding such protestations, there is enough evidence to show that
> Hindutva terror groups have time and again received overt or covert support
> from mainstream Hindutva organisations. Not only the cases cited by
> Aseemanand but also a number of untoward happenings in Maharashtra
> underscore this point. Independent civil society investigations into the
> blast in the house of an RSS worker in Nanded, which resulted in the death
> of two Sangh Parivar activists, and the attacks later in Pabhani, Beed and
> Jalna have underscored the collusion between leaders and activists of
> mainstream Hindutva organisations and peripheral Hindutva terror units.
>
> Incidentally, Aseemanand himself came into prominence within the Hindutva
> fold when he organised a massive Hindutva-oriented conference in the
> tribal-dominated Dangs district of Gujarat in 2006. That conference, where
> plans were made for the coming decades, was perceived by Sangh Parivar
> observers as a milestone event. Aseemanand worked closely with the BJP's
> Hindutva icon, Chief Minister Narendra Modi, and his ministerial colleagues
> in convening the conference. A similar meeting is being organised in 2011,
> obviously without the presence of Aseemanand, but of course with the
> blessings of Narendra Modi. Clearly, these connections and the push they
> give to fringe Hindutva groups cannot be wished away.
>
> According to the Lucknow-based political observer Indra Bhushan Singh, who
> is also a senior lawyer in the Lucknow High Court, the trajectory of
> terrorism of different hues can be distilled and identified properly only if
> such organisational activity, too, is monitored properly.
>
> He said: “Only such scrutiny will lead to correct investigations and correct
> conclusions. Unfortunately, our investigating agencies seem to be
> perennially in reaction mode and not in a proactive mode. That is why we
> have spectacles such as the investigation into the 2006 Varanasi blasts,
> where a man was arrested and even convicted but a couple of years later new
> accused were discovered and paraded from different parts of the country.
> Clearly, this is an issue involving basic human rights and demands serious
> attention and concrete action from different sections of society, including
> lawmakers. “
>
> Indra Bhushan Singh's contention has special relevance in the context of
> Aseemanand's confessions and the effect it will have on people linked to the
> several attacks he has mentioned. However, given the track record of the
> investigating agencies and their political bosses, it may be too much to
> expect concrete measures to correct the flip-flop methods that drive terror
> investigations.
>
> --
> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~----~----~----~
> Getting out of this group is easy. Just send an email to
> [email protected]
> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~-----~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~----~----~----~
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "humanrights movement" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/humanrights-movement?hl=en.
>
>


-- 
Regards,
Arshad  Sulahri
President
Amnesty Pakistan
Sulahria House Lane No10.Sadiq Town, Dhamah Adyala Road Rawalpindi.Punjab
Pakistan-46000
Ph:092515383452
cell:0923455279224
Email:[email protected]
web:www.amnestypakistan.com

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"humanrights movement" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/humanrights-movement?hl=en.

Reply via email to