Monday, July 05, 2010

ishrat jehan was LeT terrorist: headley; the wonders of love jihad

jul 4th, 2010

no reason to doubt headley, is there? he has no axe to grind in lying about ishrat jehan. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Ishrat-Jahan-was-an-LeT-fidayeen-Headley/articleshow/6129125.cms 

anyway, on day one, LeT had accepted her as a 'martyr'. they went into denial mode later in the pursuit of al-taqiya. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow/778241.cms they also said that pranesh/javed was her husband! 

but we have been fed the line that ishrat was a virginal innocent 17-year-old who was falsely dubbed a terrorist. 

isn't there some dissonance in all this? if pranesh/javed had actually married ishrat, then why is this not trumpeted? after all, the fact that he had another wife, sajida, should not be any hindrance to him marrying ishrat: he is allowed four wives. 

why is this interesting fact covered up? i suspect the reason is that in fact ishrat was *not* married to pranesh/javed.

also see praveen swami's article. http://beta.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article33104.ece 

based on this, the innocent ishrat was pretty much living as man and wife with pranesh/javed, and also she was traveling with two other mohammedan men (pak terrorists). by mohammedan standards, this is enough to dub her a fallen woman -- being in the close proximity of several unrelated men -- and stone her to death for fornication. by mohammedan law, ishrat was a very bad girl and a 'honor killing' of her would be entirely justified.

why is this technicality never noted by the ELM, which is otherwise very voluble about mohammedan rights? any mohammedan would have been within his rights to kill ishrat, as she was a 'fallen woman'. 

so here's my theory -- ishrat was actually killed by an incensed mohammedan, who was offended that she was dishonoring mohammedan law and bringing disgrace to her family. the pak terrorists and the love-jihadi pranesh/javed terrorist just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time: they were collateral damage. sad, but what can you do? they must have interfered in the mohammedan's righteous pursuit of sharia regarding ishrat. so he had no option but to shoot them too.

all that remains is to find that highly religious mohammedan, who was upset at the rules of his sharia being violated. end of case. QED.

RajeevSrinivasa 
praveen swami showed that 'innocent' ishrat was living in sin with javed alias pranesh (a love-jihad victim). stoning in sharia for adulter
RajeevSrinivasa 
the sainted ishrat jehan was an LeT terrorist: says headley. so that's why ELM supported her so much. figures. 
http://bit.ly/...

also, let's note pranesh/javed's trajectory. this is what happens to hindu love-jihad victims. just like this hindu boy was turned into a terrorist by his mohammedan sweetheart, a lot of the hindu girls who are duped by love-jihadis will end up as female terrorists and suicide bombers. such a win-win for the love-jihadis -- these hindu girls become wombs to manufacture new jihadis, and they are available as free suicide bombers!

1 comment:

Anand Rajadhyaksha said...

Modi should invite Headley as a state guest for this favour :)