TruthofGujarat targets nation's Intelligence, innocent leaders, defends terrorists, despite lies of relatives caught red-handed!

As we have seen, the major force behind TruthofGujarat.com is Mukul Sinha. He is the lawyer of Javed Sheikh, who along with Ishrat Jahan was killed on 15 June 2004 with 2 other Pakistani terrorists.

TruthofGujarat ofcourse has always tried to frame Narendra Modi and Amit Shah in this Ishrat Jahan 'fake' encounter case.

   On 15 June 2004, 4 suspected terrorists were gunned down on the outskirts of Ahmedabad. They included 19 year old Ishrat Jahan and 3 other men, 2 of whom were Pakistani nationals. After that, (as expected) the Leftist liberals in the media started claiming that the encounter was fake and 19-year old Ishrat Jahan was 'innocent' without any evidence to it. Their hatred for Narendra Modi is so much that they simply cannot digest the fact that a 19 year old girl attacked and tried to kill Narendra Modi, and would rather claim that the opposite is true. This howling lasted for a few days. 1 day the Marathi edition of The Indian Express, Loksatta reported on 14 July 2004 headlined: "Yes, Ishrat indeed was a terrorist". The next day Lashkar-e-Toiba admitted on 15 July that Ishrat was indeed its member.

http://www.hindu.com/2004/07/15/stories/2004071515561100.htm

   What the confession said was: “In a news report published in Lahore-based Ghazwa Times , mouthpiece of the LeT, Lashkar said "the veil of Ishrat Jehan, a woman activist of LeT, was removed by Indian police and her body was kept with other mujahideens (terrorists) on the ground."

  "Ishrat was with her husband, sitting on the front seat of the car," said the newspaper report published in the Jamat-ul-Dawa website, the new name of Markaz-ad-Dawa Wal Arshad (parent organisation of the LeT), which was changed after the US banned it in 2002.

  Besides Ishrat from Mumbra in Mumbai, others killed were Javed Sheikh of Pune, Jishan Johar alias Abdul Ghani from Gujranwala (Pakistan) and Amjad Ali Akbarali Rana alias Salim of Haveli Diwan (Pakistan).

  The killing of Ishrat sparked a major debate with some groups claiming her to be innocent. However, the findings of the Gujarat and Mumbai police had pointed to her involvement in militant and anti-national activities.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2004-07-14/india/27158324_1_ishrat-jehan-lashkar-woman-activist

 The confession said that SHE WAS MARRIED TO ONE OF THE THREE OTHERS IN THE CAR who is Javed Sheikh. Her mother had admitted that Ishrat had gone to other cities with Javed Sheikh. This confession of LeT was very accurate, and it shows that Ishrat was married to Javed and the other 2 were Pakistanis. 

What “TruthofGujarat” (in reality “Terrorists’Lawyers’Mouthpiece”) writer Mukul Sinha says:

“In this case, there is absolutely no connection of Ishrat with any dubious outfit and same is the case with Javed Sheikh also. Other two guys were from Kashmir but no conclusive proof is available to link them with any terror outfit. But there were intelligence inputs that said these people were terrorists. Even the CBI charge sheet acknowledges at least one of them was a terrorist. The most shocking part of all these fake encounters is that a few rogue officials of the intelligence establishment played a vital role in facilitating these extra judicial killings. Rajinder Kumar’s role in crucial.”

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/gujarat-fake-encounters-are-similar-mukul-sinha/article1-1088835.aspx

   In June 2004 itself, not only the Gujarat Police, but even the Mumbai Police (which works under Congress in Maharashtra) also said that there were sufficient leads to know Ishrat Jahan's LeT links. Note the line in The Indian Express' report of 15 July 2004: "However, Gujarat and Mumbai police had said there were sufficient leads to suspect her involvement in militant activities".

 Then the SIT was asked to probe this case, and it is reported to have said in 2011 that the encounter was fake, without knowing what it said about whether the people were terrorists or not. But The Times of India reported on 24 October 2011 that the SIT agreed that all 4, including Ishrat Jahan indeed had terror links.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-10-24/india/30316217_1_ishrat-jahan-encounter-case-pranesh-pillai-jisan 

But the Ex-Home Secretary during the Congress-UPA rule is on record saying that that Ishrat Jahan is indeed a Terrorist, the day after the SIT was reported to have said that the encounter was fake.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAJCjxbJodk&feature=player_embedded

But former IB chief A K Doval said that the UPA put tremendous pressure on SIT to call the encounter fake! http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/former-ib-chief-centre-pressure-sit-officers-influence-probe-ishrat-jahan-case/1/286850.html

In 2009 the Centre's (UPAs) affidavit to Gujarat HC was full of contradictions and confusing. But the UPA said in an affidavit that Ishrat was a terrorist indeed!

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/centres-affidavit-confirmed-let-links-of-ishrat/article17172.ece 

In 2010 David Headley also admitted that Ishrat was Lashkar's terrorist.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-07-05/india/28275895_1_ishrat-jahan-javed-sheikh-alias-pranesh-pillai

(In between, in 2007, the Lashkar-e-Toiba 'retracted' its confession! On May 2, 2007, the Jama't-ud-Da'wah carried an apology to Ishrat's family on its website. The apology was by its spokesperson Abdulla Muntazir on the internet edition of the paper saying he was on leave when this admission was published and called it a "journalistic mistake by my staff". Apologising to her family and all Indian Muslims, he wrote, "It has now been proven that Ishrat Jahan was not a member of Lashkar-e-Toiba and she was an innocent Muslim girl who was murdered by the Modi Sarkar." What took the Lashkar three years to make the amendment is not explained.

The timing of the apology was significant. It came just before Gopinath Pillai, father of Javed Sheikh alias Pranesh Pillai who was killed along with Ishrat, filed a petition in the Supreme Court, demanding a CBI probe into the encounter. This shows that they were all indeed linked to LeT, with LeT withdrawing its confession just before his father filed a case.

Of course, it is common sense that you cannot acquit a criminal after he has confessed, and takes 3 years to retract his confession. The confession of 2004 was very accurate providing details that Ishrat was married to one of the 3 others in the car and was sitting with her husband which shows that LeT's confession was very true. Also, the excuse given in the 'retracting of confession' that 'I was on leave that day and it was a journalistic mistake' is rubbish. If that was the case, it would have been retracted within 1-2 days, it doesn't take 3 years to make correction to a mistake. The LeT retracted when it understood that it will be easier to put Narendra Modi in difficulty by accusing his government of murdering an 'innocent' girl rather than confessing that she was their terrorist. No one can, anyway, acquit a criminal after he has confessed. In 2004, when the Leftist-liberals were howling against Narendra Modi, there was absolutely no reason for LeT to falsely confess Ishrat as its member).

It is absolutely clear that Ishrat Jahan was a terrorist, since the UPA Government said this in a signed affidavit. It is absolutely impossible that the UPA Government would falsely call an 'innocent' Muslim girl as a 'terrorist' in 2009 that too in case of its bitter enemy Narendra Modi.

But how naive does TruthofGujarat think we are? 


Let us look at the contradictory statements made by the relatives of the terrorists.

Let us see what her mother said on 18 June 2004:

“Answering questions by mediapersons, Ms. Shamima denied reports in a section of the Mumbai press that Ishrat had twice left her house without the knowledge of the family members. She also contradicted her earlier statement that the family members were unaware about her whereabouts when she left home on June 12 morning. She claimed that Ishrat had left Thane to go to Mumbai to appear in an "interview." Ms. Shamima disagreed that she suspected her daughter's involvement with Javed, driver of the car carrying the four from Mumbai to Ahmedabad. Neither Javed nor the two other alleged terrorists who the police claimed hailed from Pakistan, had ever come to her place. She denied that Javed and Ishrat were ever trailed by the intelligence personnel in the past as reported in a section of the press.”

http://www.hindu.com/2004/06/19/stories/2004061904981100.htm

What her mother said later was different. In her petition to the Gujarat High Court, Ishrat's mother Shamima Kausar had disputed the version of the Gujarat police as well as the Centre, claiming that her daughter was a saleswoman working for Javed Sheikh who dealt in perfumes. Javed's father told the SC that his son was innocent and sought a central probe.

Both Gujarat police and Centre pointed to infirmities in their version. Centre told Gujarat HC that Javed had been recruited by LeT when he was in Dubai. Gopinath Pillai had not disclosed criminal cases pending against his son, or the fact that he had obtained a different passport using his original name even though the one issued to him was still valid.

The Centre also disputed the claim of Gopinath Pillai, supported by Ishrat's mother, that he was in the business of perfumes and that this required him and Ishrat to travel across the country.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-07-05/india/28275895_1_ishrat-jahan-javed-sheikh-alias-pranesh-pillai

But in 2013 Javed Sheikh’s father said he went to Gujarat to meet a policeman (no mention of the perfume business!) His father said Javed had paid her college fees 1 week before! (But Ishrat's mother told the media on 18 June that Javed didn’t know Ishrat at all- but Javed's father says he paid her fees! )

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/ishrat-case-encounter-victim-s-father-says-son-was-in-gujarat-to-meet-cop-390046
 
Mukul Sinha, lawyer of Gopinath i.e. father of Javed, said the killings were part of a conspiracy and claimed Javed had no links with terror activities. How naïve he thinks we are!

So- her mother first says that she did not know Javed. Then she says she knew Javed and worked under him for a perfume business. First she says she went away from home to give an ‘interview’. Then she said she went away from home for job requirements of a ‘perfume business’. Anyone with an iota of common sense will know that this shows that her mother fully knew that her daughter was a terrorist and was fully involved with her. How naïve can one be to not see through such cunning claims? The so-called ‘perfume business’ turned out to be non-existent later!

In June 2004 Police called the statements made by Ishrat's mother, Shamima Raza, before the media after taking her daughter's body to Mumbra in Thane, a "lie". What she revealed before the Ahmedabad police during questioning corroborated some of the facts mentioned in the diary.

She had told police that Javed lived in Mumbra for about three years in the late 1990s during which time they had "family relations."

http://www.hindu.com/2004/06/21/stories/2004062104171200.htm

Senior Coumnist T V R Shenoy wrote: “Everybody agrees that Ishrat Jahan disappeared from her house on June 12. Her mother Shamima Jahan Sheikh says she kept quiet about her daughter going missing because she didn't want a scandal. This is understandable enough (although some parents might have consulted the authorities to make sure that a child was safe, scandal be damned). But it begs the question: what was Ishrat Jahan doing between June 12, when she disappeared from her mother's house, and June 15, when she was shot in the company of alleged terrorists?

One theory doing the rounds is that the young lady was kidnapped by the Gujarat police for use in their 'false encounter.'

Let us assume for argument's sake that the Gujarat police wanted dead bodies to file a charge of an 'encounter.' Why on earth would they choose a completely unknown girl from Thane as a victim? I am sure there are other, far more likely candidates, grown men with a known criminal background, in Gujarat itself. The Gujarat police could have plausibly chosen any of them and there would have been nary a murmur.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2004/jul/01flip.htm
 
Only such people can exhaust all resources in attacking Intelligence Bureau, and defending such terrorists against whom there is a truckload of evidence in public domain itself. Lawyers of terrorists running LiarsofGujarat!