Terror Attacks in Mumbai - IV

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Dec 2008 23:13

Rye, Brilliant. Now put those ideas of ppt so we can distribute widely. Or do you have objection if anyone else puts that together? Will you collaborate?
ramana

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 04 Dec 2008 23:22

MMS proves that he can be cool even with a large red-hot iron rod up his musharraf

http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/dec/04m ... attack.htm

Looks like madamji is ok with hijj pefarmance and hence he does not feel the plain of the iron.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 04 Dec 2008 23:23

Ok
So we know the role of unkil and what TSp is upto, does anybody know what India is upto please?
D+10

samuel · Post by **samuel** » 04 Dec 2008 23:24

Very well done, Rye, I think you are on to something, please continue on those lines. it is helping me think more clearly. Thanks.

S

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Dec 2008 23:27

milindc wrote:As Singha and others rightly speculated, it is becoming more and more obvious that Amerikhan knew about these attacks including the minute operational details.
There is someone in upper echelons of GoI who let it happen as well, that a*hole needs to be found and shot.
It is becoming obvious by the day as various intel agencies are running like head chickens trying to pass the blame.
If RAW guys knew about the precise coordinates and intercepted the call, then Amerikhan with its SIGINT abilities must have definitely tracked the scums all the way to Sasoon port. Bear in mind that the Satellite phone was still in Kuber 5 miles off the coast.

Khan wants to put us forward and squeeze the Pakis into action including purging the ISI elements unpalatable to them. With economic and military pressure, the Pakis will squeal and release some scums in our list including some others in Khan's list.
But they will be handed over to Khan and not to us so as to preserve the Paki H&D, hence noises from Khan's Attorney General about US jurisdiction.
Aam Janta will be happy even if some scums are delivered to Khan and not to us claiming that our politicians are incompetent to prosecute the terrorists.
In fact, most of the Janta in India look up to Khan for bringing Justice and believe me, there will be dances on street.
Congress will be elected back because Khan will leverage its Media assets and claim that it projected strong power and brought justice to perpetrators of attacks.

All in all an excellent plan from Khan while we got raped by Jihadis.
Someone from GoI signed off on these attacks, WHO?

MKN, Thats why MMS kept him. MKN initially resigned but MMS said he didnt have direct control over things. And might spill the beans or lose immunity. MMS despite his mumbleness isnt commited to INC to pull this off. MKN is the grand eminence of INC sort of the Lawyer/Consigliore in Godfather.

It looks to me the Maharastra govt being under INC is a key factor.

Track his travels and contacts for last 20 months.

Who ordered the security beefup at Taj to be scaled back a week before the attacks?

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 04 Dec 2008 23:39

If there is someone in the Indian political system working with the Pakis in India, such person(s) are part of the Maharashtra govt. not the central govt. -- certainly do not think the NSA would be involved --- that is just silly.

Wasting the ATS's efforts on "hindu terrorism" in the crucial weeks before this terror attack seems like the handiwork of some paki-loving rat in the Maharashtra govt. who fed the ATS with "evidence" to waste time on -- the person who was putting pressure on the ATS (to the point where shri Hemant Karkare (RIP) considered resigning) can also have gotten these officers killed so that they cannot reveal who put such pressure on the ATS and why. Secondly, the ATS has been the bane of the mumbai underworld, which needs to be activated to escalate terror attacks on Indian territory, and now the entire top echelon of the ATS has been decimated by Pakis.

Ramana, need to dig up all the citations for the articles/events I mentioned (from memory), specifically the one where the British police arrested several LeT footsoldiers on information from the ISI in 2007 -- it was reported on one of these threads but is probably gone by now. Also, no problems with people using any of the posted ideas, glad some of it makes sense to someone.

Saral · Post by **Saral** » 05 Dec 2008 00:29

Mumbai after-shocks rattle Pakistan
By Syed Saleem Shahzad

KARACHI - Ten young men from the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LET) were sent on a "sacrificial" mission to Mumbai. Nine of them were killed - as they were expected to be - in battles with Indian security forces during their three-day rampage last week.

What did not go according to plan was the capture of 21-year-old Ajmal Amir Kesab, who has given details of the militants' plot that was hatched by elements of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and the LET, including the training of the mission's members at PNS Iqbal (a naval commando unit in Karachi) and at Mangla Dam near the capital Islamabad.

...

At the same time, because of the threat of Indian strikes, all militant training camps in Muzzafarabad, the capital of Pakistan-administered Kashmir, were evacuated.

...
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JL05Df01.html

Rahul Shukla · Post by **Rahul Shukla** » 05 Dec 2008 00:40

WORLD AT RISK - The Report of the Commission on the Prevention of WMD Proliferation and Terrorism (Clicky)

"It is more likely than not that a weapon of mass destruction will be used someplace in the world prior to the end of year 2013," the commission's chairman, former Senator Bob Graham, told journalists in Washington on December 3.

"We also found that it was more likely that that weapon would be biological than nuclear."

"Were one to map terrorism and the weapons of mass destruction today, all roads would intersect in Pakistan," the report says.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 05 Dec 2008 00:54

nsriram wrote:Mumbai after-shocks rattle Pakistan
By Syed Saleem Shahzad

KARACHI - Ten young men from the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LET) were sent on a "sacrificial" mission to Mumbai. Nine of them were killed - as they were expected to be - in battles with Indian security forces during their three-day rampage last week.

What did not go according to plan was the capture of 21-year-old Ajmal Amir Kesab, who has given details of the militants' plot that was hatched by elements of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and the LET, including the training of the mission's members at PNS Iqbal (a naval commando unit in Karachi) and at Mangla Dam near the capital Islamabad.

...

At the same time, because of the threat of Indian strikes, all militant training camps in Muzzafarabad, the capital of Pakistan-administered Kashmir, were evacuated.

...
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JL05Df01.html

That article is extracted from the musharraf of the author.
1. He claims knowledge about the goings on in Office of Strategic Organization.

2. Apparently Hafiz Saeed reassured the armed forces bigwigs "LET would be the first line of defense against the Indian navy in the Arabian Sea through its marine operations"

3. Apparently Hafiz Saeed would "tell militants in Pakistan's troubled North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) to hold their fire against the Pakistani security forces." And then, the Pashtoons all hugged and danced with the Pakjabis with tears in their eyes.

4. The terrorists were trained at PNS Iqbal, but neither the Paki army nor ISI knew about it or were responsible for it.

And then he concludes his anal-e-sys thus "If the authorities start to mess with the LET, beyond the routine rhetoric, all hell could break loose inside the country. Similarly, if pressure is placed on the ISI, there could be a severe reaction from the more hardline elements in that organization, as well as in the military."

Nice. Asia times now smells like a pakistan.

Sumeet · Post by **Sumeet** » 05 Dec 2008 01:05

Rice satisfied with Pakistan's anti-terror stance

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan – Pakistan's leaders know what's at stake after the terror attack in Mumbai and have acknowledged their duty to evict terrorists and prevent future attacks, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Thursday.

"I found a Pakistani government that is focused on the threat and that understands its responsibilities to respond to terrorism and extremism wherever it is found," Rice said following sessions with the country's powerful army chief and civilian leaders.

The U.S. wants broader sharing of intelligence and a commitment by Pakistan to root out terror groups that have found a comfortable haven in the Muslim country. To stress that message and heighten pressure on Pakistan's new civilian government, the administration sent both Rice and its top military officer to seek Pakistani aid in uncovering the origins of the Mumbai attack that India blames on Pakistani militants.

Rice was in Pakistan for only a few hours after expressing U.S. condolences in India for more than 170 deaths in Mumbai. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen met a day earlier with key Pakistani leaders.

The Americans carried a message both blunt and subtle: There's no denying the Pakistani fingerprints in the coordinated attack on India's financial capital Mumbai, and the terrorist threat could just as easily be turned inward.

"There is a lot of information about what happened," Rice told reporters at the conclusion of her visit, "a lot of information."

Her emphasis on the word "lot" left little doubt that there is a rich intelligence trail. U.S. officials have said the same thing the Indians are saying, that the trail leads to terror groups based entirely or partly in Pakistan.

"That information needs to be used now to get the perpetrators and prevent them from doing this again," Rice said.

Evidence collected in probes so far has pointed to two members of outlawed Pakistani group Lashkar-e-Taiba as masterminds in the attacks, according to two Indian government officials familiar with the matter.

The men are believed to be in Pakistan, the officials said.

The Indian officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to publicly discuss the details.

Airports in India went on high alert Thursday following fresh warnings. The new alert that warned of possible airborne attacks focused on three major airports — New Delhi, Bangalore and Chennai — but security was stepped up across the country. No details about the threat were released.

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, who has vowed full cooperation with India, told Rice the attacks provide a chance to strengthen efforts against terrorism.

"We are looking at this as an opportunity and I intend to do everything in my power," Zardari said.

Pakistan's army remains the country's most powerful institution, even after the election of Zardari's civilian government this year. Rice began her meetings in Islamabad with the man sometimes described as Pakistan's shadow ruler, Army chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.

The United States is hopeful that the reform-minded Kayani will be able to make progress against terrorism and shake up a vast intelligence network that the U.S. has long claimed has murky ties to militants. But the media-shy general was his country's strongest voice criticizing U.S. terrorist-hunting raids into Pakistan from Afghanistan this fall.

After a U.S. ground raid in September, Kayani said Pakistan would defend its sovereignty and that there was no deal to allow foreign forces to operate inside its borders. He said unilateral actions risked undermining joint efforts to battle Islamic extremism and warned that "the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country will be defended at all cost."

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Dec 2008 01:15

So Pakiban is evacuating the FATA/WANA as only Pakjab is safe and the dregs are evacuating POK as they will be targetted there? That means the Pakiban are now East of Indus and soon the celebrations will start in La(w) hore!

Can we hope for this?

And sumeet, the Indian officials are anonymouses that are scared to tell the truth and still draw govt of India tanka.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 05 Dec 2008 01:18

"That information needs to be used now to get the perpetrators and prevent them from doing this again," Rice said.

All the world and specially the leadership have been made "Choo%$#s, because it means let it go this time agle baar dekha jaya.
This is a moral victory for our brilliant leaqdership of MMS and Rajmata and some ADC will chime in "war is expensive"
And our PM will do bangra dance as nothing to shake or damage downstairs except a leg to stand.

Bale Bale ahauhun aha oohun I join him on D +10 day shradh cermony.

Jason_B · Post by **Jason_B** » 05 Dec 2008 01:20

Outside View: Pakistan's Mumbai alib

Manipal, India (UPI) Dec 1, 2008
Since the terror attacks on Mumbai five days ago, Indian security sources have promoted evidence that the attackers were trained by elements of the Pakistani military.
While the field training took place at a camp run by Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency near Muzaffarabad in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, fluency in the handling of ordnance was taught at another ISI safe house on the outskirts of Karachi.

Pakistan has done little to create deniability about these connections or earlier links discovered by U.S. intelligence agencies between the ISI and the July 7 bombing of the Indian Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan.

Many analysts see the top priority of Pakistani intelligence as reversing India's path toward social stability and economic growth. Still, why were so many telltale clues left behind in these attacks that enraged the Indian public and made the world aware that India is among the softest terrorist targets of the major democracies?

The hope of those who planned last week's attack was that India would respond to the attacks the way it did to the attack on its Parliament in 2001 -- by mobilizing troops on the Pakistan border and creating an expectation that a full-scale, conventional India-Pakistan war was imminent. At that time Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee's unwise decision to "bluff" the Pakistanis into cooperating with India by the threat of war boomeranged on New Delhi. Foreign missions evacuated their nationals in a panic and business confidence plunged.

Even at that time, it was known to policymakers in most major capitals that India was bluffing, and that the genial Vajpayee would never actually go to war. Yet they participated in the hysteria, especially the United States, where there is a thriving industry of so-called conflict-resolution specialists whose declared mission is to stop India and Pakistan from going to war with each other.

Both countries are aware that a war would be suicidal for Pakistan and severely damaging for India. So the specialists will be able to toast their imagined success in keeping the peace, thereby securing more funding from their less-informed patrons.

Those within the military establishment in Pakistan who enabled the Mumbai operation are now waiting for the government of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to go the way of Vajpayee and send additional Indian troops to the border. In anticipation of such a move, they already have frozen selected deployments of reinforcements to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas -- the frontier region of Pakistan that has become the new home of al-Qaida -- and issued provisional orders for sending additional forces and equipment to the border with India.

The reason is simple: Having no desire to eliminate al-Qaida, these military commanders are seeking to use the "threat from India" as an excuse for inaction on the western frontier. They will seek to explain their patent unwillingness to engage the terrorists by pointing to the need to bolster defenses against an Indian attack.

Unfortunately for them, this time around there is zero chance of India repeating the mistake of 2001, which was to mobilize when it was clear that war was never going to be an option. Also, intelligence agencies worldwide have better reach into the Pakistan military than previously.

In reality, the next war involving Indian and Pakistani troops is likely to be both sides acting together to take out the jihadis. But this will have to await a cleansing of the pro-jihadi elements from the officer corps of the Pakistani army, a necessary process that the present army chief is resisting.

Those Western commentators and analysts cultivated by the Pakistani army have begun churning out analyses speaking of "heightened tensions" between India and Pakistan. Foolishly, U.S. President George W. Bush has fanned the flames of such inspired speculation by inserting Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice into the region, rather than adopting an attitude of "business as usual." Rice, in desperate need of some -- any -- perceived diplomatic success, can be expected to follow the playbook of the South Asia crisis management specialists by hinting at substantive tensions that do not in fact exist, at least on the Indian side.

Aware that both Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani are blameless with regard to the Mumbai attacks, the Indian government of Manmohan Singh has been careful not to place any blame on the civilian leadership in Pakistan.

The Mumbai attack was a Pakistani military operation, in which even the navy was involved, as reported by India Today. The civilian government had no role in it, nor was it informed of the planning and execution of the attack.

By continuing to regard the present Pakistani military as part of the solution to the problem of global terrorism rather than as a principal target, the United States and its NATO allies are creating the conditions that will allow jihadis to breed in the region in sufficient numbers to be able to launch attacks against targets in the United States and Europe.

The civilian administration in Pakistan, led by Zardari, needs assistance to secure control over the military. Next the jihadi elements must be purged from the Pakistan officer corps if the country is to be rescued from the jihadist nightmare into which it has fallen, undoubtedly due to major policy errors of the Western powers since the 1980s.

Recent statements by U.S. President-elect Barack Obama reveal a dangerous incomprehension about ground realities in the region. No solution is possible over Kashmir or other pending India-Pakistan issues until the Pakistani military comes under civilian control and is cleansed of the jihadi elements that control much of its officer corps.

Those who planned the Mumbai attacks to create an alibi for their refusal to take out al-Qaida in the tribal regions will be disappointed. This time India will not fall into the trap laid by the Pakistani military by sending additional troops to the border and creating war hysteria that would divert attention away from the ongoing campaign against al-Qaida.

(Professor M.D. Nalapat is vice chair of the Manipal Advanced Research Group, UNESCO peace chair and professor of geopolitics at Manipal University.)

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Dec 2008 01:23

Need a Flash cartoon of that bhangra.

anishns · Post by **anishns** » 05 Dec 2008 02:01

According to Rediff and TOI(let)
Firing at IG International Airport

So, now do we start a
'Terror Attacks in Delhi - XX' thread?

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 05 Dec 2008 02:07

‘Pakistani Army wants diversion from Afghan war’

‘Pakistani Army wants diversion from Afghan war’

Siddharth Varadarajan

America has levers of influence but will not necessarily do what suits India

A major “disconnect” between the government and the Army over how Islamabad should react

Sources say India has no intention of sharing evidence with Pakistan

NEW DELHI: Keenly aware of the Pakistani military’s desire to generate tension on the Indo-Pak border, India is calibrating its response to the proof it has gathered linking the Inter-Services Intelligence to the recent terrorist attacks in Mumbai so as to avoid the political and diplomatic trap that has been laid for it, authoritative sources said here on Thursday.

Giving an account of the diplomatic contacts India had with the civilian leadership of Pakistan in the aftermath of the attacks, the sources said it became quickly apparent that there was a major “disconnect” between the civilian government and the Army over how Islamabad should react to Indian calls for action against the perpetrators.

In the Indian account, the picture that emerges is one of the Pakistani military using the Mumbai incident to pursue multiple goals such as diverting attention from the disastrous war the United States has made it wage near the Afghan border, reviving its sagging reputation as the custodian of Pakistan’s national interest and re-establishing its status vis-a-vis President Asif Ali Zardari and the civilian government as the final arbiter of official Pakistani policy on relations with India.

As the attacks unfolded on the night of November 26, it became clear this was coming out of Pakistan, the sources said. The pieces fit too well for this to be slapped together on the spur of the moment. “It was a pretty complicated plot that was not put together by chance. Even the hijacking of an Indian vessel was most probably not a chance occurrence. We are still investigating this but it could be that [the ‘Kuber’] was used by smugglers who were merely told there would be contraband involved.”

On Friday, when Pakistan’s civilian leaders were in touch with India, they did not seek to contest the Indian claim that the attackers had come from Pakistan. “[Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood] Qureshi had been telling us for some time that the Director-General of the ISI and the head of our Research & Analysis Wing should meet to discuss the terrorism issue and when this incident happened, he went public,” the sources said. External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee telephoned Mr. Qureshi. “The EAM spoke from a written note. He did not say the Government of Pakistan was involved. But he identified the Lashkar-e-Taiba and said India expected Pakistan to take action. Qureshi said that Pakistan would act once it had seen the evidence.”

The DG ISI fiasco

In their telephone calls to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, President Zardari and Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani noted that their government had already suggested a DG level meeting between the ISI and the R&AW. “So they said, let’s do this meeting and let’s have a joint investigation,” the sources said. On his part, Dr. Singh said India would investigate matters on its own side but that once this was done, Pakistan could send the DG ISI over to see the evidence.

India was surprised when Pakistan later went public about this, the sources said, putting out not one but two press releases. Later that night, however, the Army chief forced the government to rescind the decision. The Indian side was told at 2 a.m. on Saturday that Pakistan was sending its army chief’s plane later that morning to pick up Mr. Qureshi, who was still in India, and taken by surprise by the summons he received.

It was precisely at this time, the sources said, that stories began appearing in Pakistani newspapers like the Frontier Post and Pakistan Observer that Mr. Mukherjee had been peremptory and rude in his telephone call. And then Geo TV ran a story about troops being moved to the border.

“It was clear to us that the Pakistan Army was trying to create a sense of military hysteria.”

According to the Indian sources, the military in Pakistan appears to be acting out of three motivations. First, they wish to divert international concern away from the Mumbai attacks and the role of Pakistan-based terrorists towards a more general concern about India-Pakistan tension.

Second, they wanted to send a message to India that “you can talk all you like to Zardari and the civilian government but nothing will change.”

The third reason, the sources said, was that the Pakistan army “needs a way out of the unpopular war it is fighting under U.S. pressure in FATA and Wana. They really have a problem and need a diversion. Thanks to the war on terror and the Musharraf legacy, for the first time in the history of Pakistan, the army is unpopular inside the country. They are in trouble.” India was determined to take these broad motivations into account as it crafted its response to Pakistan, the sources said. “We believe the civilian government is not involved. And it could be that the ultimate aim of this entire exercise could also be for the military in Pakistan to take power again in the name of dealing with an India crisis.” Though this would not happen overnight, the sources said this “would be the wrong outcome for [India] and so we are not going to [help them escalate].”

India’s goals were narrowly focused on getting the Jamaat-ud-Dawa — the parent organisation of the LeT — banned as a terror organisation and its leader, Hafiz Saeed, dealt with. It was significant that unlike other groups such as the Jaish-e-Mohammed, the LeT had never attacked Pakistan establishment targets. “So the relations between the LeT and the ISI are very intimate,” the sources added.

While the U.S. had shared crucial intelligence with India, the sources said no one should overestimate what Washington was likely to do. They said U.S. Joint Chief of staff Admiral Mike Mullen had delivered a tougher message to Islamabad than even Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. “Don’t argue with me, he told them when they denied responsibility,” the sources said, “I have the proof.” “At the same time, this is an administration that worked with and invested in [Pakistan army chief] Ashfaq Parvez Kayani. So you can’t expect them to admit they were wrong to have faith in him.”

India had no intention of sharing the evidence it had with the Pakistani side, the sources said.

“We will leave it to the Americans to show them any proof they want.” Dr. Rice had been told during her visit to New Delhi on Wednesday that America had levers of influence over Pakistan which India didn’t. “So please use them,” we told her.

Even though American citizens had been killed in the Mumbai attacks, the sources said India “can’t expect the U.S. to do what suits us.” The Americans, they said, would play this for what suits them — to say, “OK, little boys, don’t fight, we’ll help you sort things out.”

sudeepj · Post by **sudeepj** » 05 Dec 2008 02:08

Video of a firefighters account of the Rescue operations at the Taj hotel.

http://ishare.rediff.com/filevideo-Sanj ... 521718.php

Towards the end he says, (paraphrasing) "I blame the media for spreading rumors, reporting first and checking facts later. After the operation was over I told my family that the operation was over. The NSG were trying to defuse some explosives and there were some explosions resulting from that, which the media reported as a fresh fighting. My family was very worried because of that..."

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 05 Dec 2008 02:16

Rye wrote:If we analyze the key motivations of USA and Pakistan (which are different) *before* the Mumbai terrorist event event, and then tie it to their actions *after* the event -- one notices that neither of them have changed their motivations, while they both try to steer India into doing what's best for them (so what's new, you say? nothing). Also, the timeline to be considered starts from mid-2007 (when Riedel and Rashid wrote the "Give Cashmere to Pakistan for World Piece" article -- this was the time (a) the pakis allegedly started training pakis for this Mumbai terror op (b) The ISI sold out some of its L-e-T footsoldiers in the UK to the police. (c) Election campaigning had started in the US and Obama was already understood as the winner given the anti-incumbent mood in the USA

US's motivations: Harden the LoC to an International border to keep India out of Central Asia in the long term. Provide freebies to pakis at India's cost in order to "win the cooperation of the pakis" (an idea that shows up every day in the newspapers nowadays). (3) " FBI assist" in the investigation of the terrorist act with the intention of cleaning up any inconvenient facts that will undercut US interests in Pakistan (4) Keep pakistan as a unified entity so that it can be a successful "foil" in the so-called "great game".

US's motivations are NOT to (1) solve India's pakistan problem (2) assist India in retaining control of Indian territory (3) assist India in exposing Paki perfidy (quite the opposite -- hope the "cooperation with the FBI" is not repeating the "grenade cap went missing" BS from the FBI).

Pakistan's motivations: Provide a plausibly deniable excuse to the US for not assisting in the GOAT in SWAT/Western Pakistan. (2) reinforce the notion that "Solving Cashmere" is essential to "lasting peace in the subcontinent". (3) Create a "nukular flashpoint in south asia" situation that assorted oiseaules of the Halfbright/clinton mold can then use to push their PoK agenda. (4) Ahmed Rashid's essay with Bruce Riedel was scripted in May 2007, so clearly the paki RAPE establishment figured that the democrats would be in power in the next administration and figured that the new regime would change the paki game plan.

The Paki game plan (as has been noted by KS and MD Nalapat) is to kick off this "internationalization of the Cashmere Issue" by creating a war-like situation with India, so that USA will get involved. The game plan they will follow will be (a) fake a "clean up" of the ISI (b) tell India that it is because of US assistance that Pakistan behaved (c) demand a Cashmere Quid-pro-quo for services rendered.

The lines of this MO are already showing up given the recent conferences in DC involving Riedel, Uneven Cohen, and such "luminaries" -- these turds surely dis cussed the game plan to "solve Cashmere in order to win Pakistan's cooperation". Note the tone of this article by Riedel after the Mumbai terror attack.

http://www.brookings.edu/articles/2008/ ... iedel.aspx

Much still needs to be learned about the Mumbai attacks. According to some Indian accounts, a captured terrorist has already confessed to being a member of LeT. Several Indian (B. Raman for example) and Pakistani (Ahmad Rashid) experts have suggested an al Qaeda hand in the attacks behind LeT. But we should be careful not to draw conclusions too early from an incomplete investigation. There is considerable confusion and contradiction in the press accounts of what transpired. The good news is that Pakistan has offered to assist in the investigation which could help prevent the very crisis between India and Pakistan that the plots masterminds may have wanted.
Note how Riedel completely ignores the fact that Pakistan is NOT cooperating with India in this investigation -- the pakis are overplaying their hand here, which is the only bright spot in this horror show. "Al Qaeda" is intimately known to the US/CIA since the cold war days, so the US govt.'s game plan is to pretend that "fighting al-qaeda" requires making "lasting peace with pakistan"....yes, such statements do smell like an uncleaned horse barn.

Rye,

In the American view, any crisis between India and Pakistan is bad for American objectives. This was true before 9-11, and become especially true since the campaign in Afghanistan-FATA began.

They've focused on several different ways to prevent and mitigate crises. The GoI has had no problem with 3 out of 4 of these, and didn’t have much difficulty blunting the 4th given the Bush administration's world view.

- Increased intelligence sharing with India since the Parliament-Kalachuk attacks.

The Americans do *not* want to see Pakistani terrorist attacks succeed, lest they lead to crises that shift Pakistani troops away from the western areas.

There have been limits to its effectiveness given issues within the Indian govt setup, plus of course the volume of warnings from all sources.

- Encouraging confidence building measures between the Indian and Pakistani governments

- Pressure on the Pakistanis to shut down ISI links to jihadi groups like the LeT that havent joined the Pakiban, and to shut down camps, shut down these groups public fundraising and recruiting. Given the American inability to force the ISI to break links with the Taliban with existing levels of pressure, its not surprising that this has only produced limited results.

- Encouraging India and Pakistan to work towards a comprehensive peace between India and Pakistan that would settle the border between India and Pakistan - i.e. Kashmir. The Bush administration put far less efforts in to this, but Obama is likely to want to see for himself how far this could go. Its going to hit the same issues it always did, and then Obama will let it go.

Clearly, unless GoI's approach towards internal security transforms itself the Americans have to find a way to do better at preventing terrorist outrages, and the inevitable crises that follow.

I expect no matter what, the Americans are going to offer India assistance in terms of training, equipment, liaison etc for Indian state and city police forces. Some will welcome this, others in India will see it with great suspicion.

They will find this easier than open confrontation and breach with the Pakistani military, which would leave them very exposed in Afghanistan and with substantially less access within Pakistan. However, any improvement in Russian-Western relations which allows the resumption of cooperation on Afghanistan (and Iran) -which is certainly possible, although serious differences elsewhere will remain- would give the US greater latitude in applying pressure to the Pakistanis.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 05 Dec 2008 02:23

There is complete congruency in American interests and those of TSP inspite Johanns doosra.
They deliberately built the monster, feed it use it and will continue to nurture it.

Johann you are one super man, I dont know what you do. Looks like 'Eats Shoots and Leaves' for people to fall (at you feet) to your spin. What is that Elixir you drink taken away by British for good from India?

Give it back atleast some so that we can stand the onslaught of HM agents please

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 05 Dec 2008 02:37

Spinster,

I'm only pointing out the obvious here.

The Americans dont want terror attacks in India succeeding because they dont want crises that drag the Pakistan Army away from its assigned tasks. Nor do they want damage to Indo-US ties which have grown in value to them across the board.

Why do you think the NDA's relations with the US deepened after Parakram? Because on the whole they found America's approach useful.

However what remains Pakistan Army's fundamental nature, which America would rather not think about, and therefore will not address.

Beyond that is India's inadequate internal security approach.

Those are the pillars framing the gap in the triangle here between India, the US and Pakistan through which attacks take place.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 05 Dec 2008 02:49

sunilUpa wrote:Sigh I used to think ATS is good at leaking stories to press. They suck even in that! The leaks/press conference of last three days are contradictory. They should stop this now and make sure they have detected all bombs.

The lives of thousands of commuters are too unimportant to bother with bomb detection ... why they have narcoanalysis to perform... then brain mapping.. and probably psychic viewing... who knows ... Lt.Col. Purohit's name may emerge from all this...

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 05 Dec 2008 02:52

Johann has made a Gunga Din of 90% of the forumites on BRF.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 05 Dec 2008 02:55

Johann wrote:The Americans dont want terror attacks in India succeeding because they dont want crises that drag the Pakistan Army away from its assigned tasks.

Ah,
We are going to talk around circles for a long time. Everyone agrees "Unkil doesnt want terror attacks to succeed".

Americans dont want "the terror attacks to succeed in provoking an Indian response", Indians dont want "the terror attacks to succeed in taking Indian lives".

Thus, claiming that Americans and Indians have the same objectives because "they dont want terror attacks to succeed" is lahori-logic.

archan · Post by **archan** » 05 Dec 2008 02:56

Paul wrote:Johann has made a Gunga Din of 90% of the forumites on BRF.

By that, I suppose you mean that 90% ofr the BRFites believe that unkil wants the TSP terrorists to succeed in India?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Dec 2008 03:12

So all those attacks on NATO/US troops in Afghanistan are all happening despite the TSP troops in the adjacent areas or they are happening because of the sanctuary provided to the dregs because of the presence of the TSP troops? I think its the later. There are innumerable reports of Afghan & US troops chasing miscreants to the border and facing covering fire from TSP troops. And the so called troops in FATA WANA are the second rung Pak Rangers and other para-mlitary troops. The first line are not there ever or marginally effective if they are there.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 05 Dec 2008 03:14

archan wrote:
Paul wrote:Johann has made a Gunga Din of 90% of the forumites on BRF.
By that, I suppose you mean that 90% ofr the BRFites believe that unkil wants the TSP terrorists to succeed in India?

Can you prove that its is otherwise?

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 05 Dec 2008 03:21

Know-all India whispers- ‘Sources’ have field day with attack proof

Know-all India whispers
- ‘Sources’ have field day with attack proof
SANKARSHAN THAKUR

New Delhi, Dec. 4: India today fired a fresh, though familiar, salvo against the hardening Pakistani wall of denial, saying it had proof that the ISI was involved in planning last week’s terror attack on Mumbai and training the men who effected it.

Select journalists were also told in an unattributable briefing this afternoon that New Delhi refused to believe the Pakistan Army was not aware of the strike.

PTI quoted the unnamed sources as saying that the government was also aware of the names of trainers and the places where “meticulous training” took place. “The attack was planned, equipped and organised in Pakistan where the terrorists were trained and provided logistical support,” the sources said. They provided no proof to back their assertion, or even clues to the nature of evidence they had gathered, stating only that the “United States is believed to have even more evidence, some of which it has shared with India”.

India had made similar claims of Pakistani complicity in the Kabul embassy blasts but it cut no ice with Islamabad.

The US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, and the Chairman of the Joint US Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, have been on a New Delhi-Islamabad crisscross over yesterday and today, but there is no specific information on what manner of data was shared on the Mumbai attack.

While Rice was quoted from Islamabad as saying that there was “enough information available” to move on, the sources here said Admiral Mike Mullen told his Pakistani interlocutors in Islamabad that Washington had “enough evidence” to show a Pakistani hand in the attack. Mullen, who was in Delhi for high-level meetings today, said nothing to confirm or deny that.

The strictly anonymous nature of the information handed out today, and the absence of anything to back it, at once made it convenient for sceptics on both sides of the border to raise questions.

Ahmed Rashid, Lahore-based journalist and authority on al Qaida, told The Telegraph: “I do not doubt that this attack has originated in Pakistan and has Pakistani actors, but the manner of Indian revelations today, which come without any substantiation, goes down badly here. I do not think the Pakistani authorities have even been briefed yet. This is a serious situation for the whole region and whatever is said should be said responsibly and with proof. We need to know the firm truth, and world needs to know, but unless there is evidence, these remain loose allegations and are easily rebuffed by those that are happy to rebuff them.”

The retired diplomat and former high commissioner to Pakistan, G. Parthasarathy, was cryptic but duly sceptical in tone. “I think it will be unprofessional of me to comment on things that unnamed sources have said, if there is evidence let it be brought forth,” he said.

But another retired diplomat, who wouldn’t be named, was more cautious and understanding of the manner in which New Delhi had upped the ante. “Often it is not wise to make such evidence public, because then all manner of public pressure begins to mount,” he said. “And giving out unattributable material is something all governments do in such delicate situations. Perhaps this is a warning shot in what New Delhi understands to be a long-drawn affair. I am sure, for instance, we have shared much more with Rice than has been given out to the media.”

That New Delhi might be playing out a more finely calibrated strategy than mere conventional trading of charges is probably evident from the way it has sought to make a distinction between the Asif Ali Zardari-led civilian government and the Pakistani military-intelligence complex.

“We do not believe that the civilian government in Pakistan is involved in the attack,” the sources were quoted as saying. “In fact, one view is that the civilian government itself may be a target of the strike which may be used by the army to heighten tensions with India to return to power.”

This splintered view of the Pakistani establishment was sought to be supported on two counts --- Pakistan’s quick U-turn on the decision to dispatch the ISI chief to New Delhi in the immediate aftermath of the terror attack, and the sudden evacuation home of Pakistan’s foreign minister, Shah Mehmood Qureshi, in a specially flown military aircraft.

When the terror attack took place, Qureshi was in India and had consciously decided not to cut short his visit. However, the Indian government was told at 2:30am that a special aircraft was being sent in less than four hours to fly him back; Qureshi left at 7 in the morning on the Pakistan army chief’s plane. This is being seen by New Delhi as a “clear message from the Pakistani army to the civilian government”.

On their part, though, the Pakistani establishment isn’t betraying any signs of a civilian-military schism, and unanimously refusing to countenance Indian allegations. What has probably helped their stone-walling is the fact that since the attacks, there have been several unsourced media leaks, most of them yet unsubstantiated and several of them contrary.

Today, for instance, the sources told the media that contrary to “versions” that the terrorists had used a fishing boat to reach Mumbai after sailing from Karachi, “more sophisticated means were used”. This leaves the entire sequence of events related to the use of the fishing boat Kuber and its slain captain --- a version given by the security agencies, none else --- muddied and sheds little light on what may have been the terrorists’ mode of arrival.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 05 Dec 2008 03:37

http://www.watoday.com.au/opinion/the-f ... tml?page=3

The fall out of the Mumbai crisis

* Kim Beazley
* December 5, 2008 - 6:46AM

The last time Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), the Army of the Pure, conducted a similar assault to the Mumbai outrage by gunmen on a civilian population outside Kashmir, India and Pakistan approached five minutes to midnight on the South Asian nuclear war clock.

That was in 2002. The crisis followed an attack by LET gunmen on the Indian parliament in 2001. Then, 10 died. It was a dramatic shock to the Indian government and people given the intensely symbolic character of the target.

We are some way from that boiling point, but we are on the same line now.

Australia’s interest lies not only in the human devastation such a conflagration would cause in India and Pakistan. Though wind systems keep the toxic detritus of nuclear explosions within the hemisphere in which they occur, some high altitude materials, under certain weather conditions, could drift south over WA. In nuclear war, no man or woman is an island.

Until the parliamentary outrage, the LET trademark attack was confined to Kashmir. In that beautiful but blighted state, LET gunmen in groups of two to five organised attacks on Indian security forces and frequently entered the Hindu areas of Kashmir to kill civilians in pure terrorist crimes.

Mumbai is their most audacious assault so far and represents a blending of extremist ideological motives applied to Kashmir, and India more generally, with Al Qaeda’s global agenda.

Agmal Amir Kasab, the lone known surviving gunman, has indicated to his captors his Pakistani and LET links.

The methodology in any case is straight LET. There are numerous and continuing Islamist bomb outrages in India. These actions have killed some 5,000 in recent times (the death toll in Kashmir is much higher). In all probability, however, most of those attacks can be put down to diverse indigenous and Pakistani fundamentalist groups. Bombs are a secondary attribute of LET methodology.

The Pakistani government’s efforts to control LET and other groups range from the scandalously negligent to the probably complicit. That Pakistan is not on the US State Department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism is largely a product of a historical hangover of joint activities in the insurgency against Soviet occupation of Afghanistan; global indifference to Kashmir; longstanding Pakistani, Western and Chinese alignment; and recent Pakistani engagement in the struggle with Al Qaeda/Taliban.

Defensive actions such as the previous Pakistani president’s banning of LET in 2002 has mollified critics. That action is now demonstrated to have been farcical.

The South Asian terrorism portal of the New Delhi-based Institute of Conflict Management contains, among other sites, good information on the LET – a group proscribed by the UN in 2005.

LET’s founder Hafeez Muhammed Saeed inaugurated it as a Deobandi-type seminary in the 1980s. It was militarised with the help of the notorious Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) agency of the Pakistani armed services in 1991. It commenced ISI sponsored terrorist operations in Kashmir thereafter.

LET reportedly has a main training base near Lahore, new bases in the tribal territories in Western Pakistan, charitable organisations, offices, some 135 madrassas, a newspaper, and numerous propaganda outlets.

While banned, it was allowed by the Pakistani government to set up a charitable front for victims of the recent Pakistan earthquake. It reportedly has collection points in every Pakistani market. Recently it refocused operations to the Afghanistan border. It has reportedly reprioritised its target list, previously focused on Kashmir, to the broader objectives of Al Qaeda globally and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

If India decides on active retaliation as opposed to criminal investigation, LET provides a target-rich environment for special forces and the Indian airforce. Such actions will, however, bring us closer to that possible nuclear horror. They would also attract Pakistan forces away from the Afghan border. There, some 100,000 Pakistani troops seem at last to be making a stand. Not least among the motives of the possible official supporters of the Mumbai atrocity would be just such an outcome.

The Pakistani civilian government does not control the ISI. The military does not either, in all circumstances. The military is involved in a lethal tug of war between their Islamist component and their opponents. Who is winning at any point of time is opaque to the outside world and probably also the Pakistani government.
It remains important that the government and those elements of the military leadership who have sought a rapprochement with India and engagement against Al Qaeda are encouraged, but they cannot be let off. They have an absolute obligation to at least drive LET underground, disrupting their overt activities including the charitable ones, and surrendering the culprits.

In the meantime, it would be useful to silence those in the US intelligence community who have humiliated India by leaking the fact that warning was given of the possibility of the Mumbai attack.

It is highly probable that those officials have predicted at least 50 of the last 3 attacks. They might do something useful by properly arming and equipping, and helping with training (if the Indian government accepts it), India’s state-based first responders and the Indian government’s elite units. The Indian government needs some runs on the board if they are going to keep political control of this mess.

At the same time, Pakistan needs to be pressured to deliver on the cooperation they have promised. The situation has gone beyond the niceties of not embarrassing good friends.

Given what is at stake, some Chinese engagement would be useful here too. Any conflict that moved towards anything like the crisis of 2002 will deeply affect them as well.

If we might experience some problems with the fall out of such a war, imagine the circumstances of neighbouring southern China.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Dec 2008 03:40

If anyone has th patience to go thru the archieved Mumbai terrorist attacks thread I said in the first or second thread that these attacks clearly show that TSPA is trying to get out of its commitments in FATA/WANA. If a dumb a** like me can figure that out it doesnt need unnamed sources with access to all sorts of secret intelligence or sacred poop to make similar statements.

Now is not the time to hide behind anonymouse tactics but make the case clear. And who do they serve the Indian people or someone else? This is for the unnamed former official who defends the anonmice that they might have to take action. What does he want sit on it? Scoundrel is drawing pension also.

It is to take action that eveidence is collected and presented. The choice for the action is for the TSP failing which its for India.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 05 Dec 2008 03:47

'Non-State Actors'
http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/vi ... 55456.html

Thursday, December 04, 2008 3:04 PM
(Source: Providence Journal)trackingThe murderous three-day assault on India's financial and entertainment capital of Mumbai (formerly Bombay), in which about 200 people were killed, points to the extreme danger posed by Pakistan. That nation is a frighteningly unstable nuclear power that functions less like a country than "chaos with a parliament," in the memorable phrase of military analyst/columnist Ralph Peters.

The attack, U.S. and Indian investigators believe, was the work of Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistani militia group with links to al- Qaida and to Muslims fighting India over the disputed region of Kashmir. The group's members practice Wahabism, a radical form of Islam born in Saudi Arabia and devoted to the hatred and conquest of those who are not Muslim fundamentalists.

The militia has also received direct support from Pakistan's rogue Inter-Service Intelligence agency, despite the Pakistan government's nominal attempts to ban the group under pressure from the Bush administration after 9/11. Lashkar-e-Taiba operates essentially as a "state within a state" in Pakistan, providing a wide array of services to its constituents, from medical care to training in mass murder

Investigators see its imprint on the Mumbai operation. Though the terrorists used relatively simple weapons in the attack -- machine- guns and explosives (rather than, say, hijacked passenger jets) -- complex planning was obviously involved. They hit numerous targets at once. And to get into position without being detected until the last possible moment, investigators say, some of the terrorists commandeered an Indian fishing vessel, murdered its captain and crew, and used it as a platform from which to launch inflatable boats off Mumbai.

The usual blame-the-West-first crowd branded the attacks as more evidence that America has not done enough to lift the Muslim people out of poverty and free them from their corrupt leaders. But isn't it Muslims' job to do that?

America was clearly in the periphery of the terrorists' thoughts, if there at all. The assaults seemed aimed at India, which at least until recently had been booming economically (and thus, almost inevitably, militarily) because of its education, work ethic, rising democratic values, rule of law and generally Western focus. The idea was evidently to humiliate India, expose its vulnerability and undermine its economy.

The big question now is: What can be done to make Pakistan's shadow government less of a threat to its neighbors? U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice backed up India's call for "strong action" against terrorists harbored by Pakistan, a country that has long been a U.S. ally and enjoys substantial aid from American taxpayers. Secretary Rice called for a thorough investigation, adding, "This is a time for complete, absolute, total transparency and cooperation, and that's what we expect."

That is a tall order in a country where elements of the government cannot be trusted and many political leaders face assassination.

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, whose hold on power may be tenuous, insisted that the attackers were "non-state actors." But the outgoing and incoming U.S. administrations should put intense pressure on Mr. Zardari to work at rooting out the terrorists that Pakistan has long harbored.

(c) 2008 Providence Journal. Provided by ProQuest LLC. All rights Reserved.

A service of YellowBrix, Inc.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 05 Dec 2008 03:52

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/st ... 56:00%20AM

Mubarakmand also dismissed a US commission's report that highlighted Pakistan as the weakest link in world security and also warned terrorists were likely to use nuclear or biological weapons in the next five years.

The report, ordered by the US Congress, said: "Were one to map terrorism and weapons of mass destruction today, all roads would intersect in Pakistan...There is a grave danger it could also be an unwitting source of a terrorist attack on the US, possibly with weapons of mass destruction."

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 05 Dec 2008 03:53

http://online.wsj.com/video/deepak-blam ... A3D03.html

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Dec 2008 03:56

So folks are begining to understand the ISI and the jihadi nature of the TSP Army and its medeival mindset. It wont let the camp dwellers settle down till they expand all over Hindustan.

And ISI derives its powers from the reason it was founded. Its a Cold War tool for the Great Game founded by the Brits and nurtured by the US. Take away its purpose it will whither and die.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 05 Dec 2008 04:09

lakshmic wrote:
Johann wrote:The Americans dont want terror attacks in India succeeding because they dont want crises that drag the Pakistan Army away from its assigned tasks.
Ah,
We are going to talk around circles for a long time. Everyone agrees "Unkil doesnt want terror attacks to succeed".

Americans dont want "the terror attacks to succeed in provoking an Indian response", Indians dont want "the terror attacks to succeed in taking Indian lives".

Thus, claiming that Americans and Indians have the same objectives because "they dont want terror attacks to succeed" is lahori-logic.

And who here has claimed that the US and India see eye to eye on anything else regarding Pakistan?

The Americans dont want terror attacks to succeed, but are afraid of the consequences of pushing Pakistan too hard.

The obvious corollary of my post, (which no one on this thread has yet pointed out) is that the more afraid the Americans are that India will create a crisis in response to terrorism, the more likely they are to operate outiside their comfort zone in dealing with the Pakistanis.

What India needs in addition to co-opting the Pakistani political class, in addition to real seriousness about internal security is a cross-party commitment to Cold Start.

Chinmayanand · Post by **Chinmayanand** » 05 Dec 2008 04:16

To all the strategists here ,
Pakistan has played its cards ... India or War on Terror . As usual , Unkil will choose war on terror . Since , US is of no use to us in such matters and has never been , why not we also blackmail Unkil .
Force Pakistan to hand over those terrorists and shun them down ....or we are going to spoil your party as well ... we are moving our troops to the border ... We must remember , when US can't get Pukis to do wht it wants , India is much powerful than Pakistan militarily and economically .
And if we do move our forces and start the war , what can Unkil do if we reject to listen to his SANE advice ....

Unkil can attack from Afghan side and we can open the entire western front ...from gujjuland to kashmir ...

All strategists , pls post your wise comments ... anyways we donot have many options left

archan · Post by **archan** » 05 Dec 2008 04:56

They can only give their SANE advice to someone who is willing to listen. Indians for whatever reason (sold out or whatever) listen a lot and do little. Pakis know it, the west knows it, the whole world knows it. Pakis know they can get away with just about anything when it comes to India, thanks to Gandhian genes.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 05 Dec 2008 05:01

archan wrote:They can only give their SANE advice to someone who is willing to listen. Indians for whatever reason (sold out or whatever) listen a lot and do little. Pakis know it, the west knows it, the whole world knows it. Pakis know they can get away with just about anything when it comes to India, thanks to Gandhian genes.

IG was an exception.

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 05 Dec 2008 05:05

spine-less neta excuse when Pakistan is under civil rule
We can't retaliate because it will strengthen the hands of pakistani military as opposed to civilian government.

spine-less neta excuse when pakistan is under military rule
We can't retaliate because it will weaken the hands of the fledgling democracy movement in Pakistan.

Today's award for not having any spine goes to Mr. Arindam Sen Gupta and his article http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Batt ... 794488.cms

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Dec 2008 05:09

Most of the US responses have been gamed. Rick Inderfurth in a war game wanted to nuke India after TSP has nuked India. Early on in 1990 confrontation the Pentagon general wanted to suggest BARC as a target for the TSP nuke crazed GI Khan instead of Delhi.

So most Indians know what tis the comfort zone that US operates under or without.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 05 Dec 2008 05:15

Most of the US responses have been gamed. Rick Inderfurth in a war game wanted to nuke India after TSP has nuked India. Early on in 1990 confrontation the Pentagon general wanted to suggest BARC as a target for the TSP nuke crazed GI Khan instead of Delhi.

critical mass ?
were there other sources ?