Bharat Rakshak

Karna_A wrote:I bet pretty soon more smoke will come out of him than ever came out of the SUV. If history is any indication as below, he will ride more F-16s on his back side than his dad ever did.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/04/ ... 8023.shtml

Before going to his cell, Omar says prison officials videotaped him as he was stripped naked and given a rectal exam in front of an audience of male and female agents.
“I don't feel like a man, you know, once they're searching me like this,” says Omar. “I don't feel like a man.”

[Terrorism suspect Faisal] Shahzad was placed on a "no-fly" list Monday after he was identified as the buyer [of the Nissan Pathfinder], [FBI official John] Pistole said. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declined to say how Shahzad was able to board the flight if he was on the "no-fly" list.

In September 2009, Mr. Shahzad was sent a letter notifying him that he was being sued over a $218,400 loan from a mortgage arm of Chase bank. The mortgage covered the single-family home with an assessed value of $242,690 on Long Hill Avenue in Shelton. The bank took Mr. Shahzad and his wife, Ms. Mian, to court. One or both appeared before the court last fall and filed affidavits about their debts that were entered in the court record as recently as last month.

NBC's Jim Miklaszewski reports that a senior U.S. official familiar with events surrounding the capture of Shahzad says if the security system had worked properly, "He should have never been able to get on that airplane."

According to the official, Shahzad's name was put onto the U.S. "no-fly list" about 11 a.m. Monday, some 12 hours before he was taken into custody aboard that United Arab Emirates flight that pulled away from the gate at JFK, bound for Dubai. As required, once the plane was locked up and started to pull away from the gate, the airline submitted the final manifest to customs. According to one official, "We're extremely fortunate that alert agents caught the name, and ordered the plane to return to the gate."

"Instead, the airline noted that Shahzad made his reservation on the way to the airport and paid cash for the flight, alerting U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the source said."

the Post reported. Reports said he had one U.S. and two Pakistani passports.

Last week, before the Times Square incident, I was talking with a former U.S. intelligence officer who worked extensively on jihadi cases during several overseas tours. He said that when a singleton of Shahzad’s profile—especially a U.S. citizen—turns up in a place like Peshawar, local jihadi groups are much more likely to assess him as a probable U.S. spy than as a genuine volunteer. At best, the jihadi groups might conclude that a particular U.S.-originated individual’s case is uncertain. They might then encourage the person to go home and carry out an attack—without giving him any training or access to higher-up specialists that might compromise their local operations. They would see such a U.S.-based volunteer as a “freebie,” the former officer said—if he returns home to attack, great, but if he merely goes off to report back to his C.I.A. case officer, no harm done.

Manny wrote:His father is a ret air force officer!

praksam wrote:Pakistan is 'epicenter of Islamic terrorism'


http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/05/05/z ... an.terror/

Philip J. Crowley
Assistant Secretary
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC
May 5, 2010 ………………………….

QUESTION: Can you be a little bit more specific about these conversations that Ambassador Patterson had and Ambassador Holbrooke had with their interlocutors?

MR. CROWLEY: In what respect? Well, I mean, the investigation is obviously ongoing. The FBI and Justice Department are in the lead. Pakistan is taking its own steps and we expect we’ll do more as more information is yielded through this investigation. So I think we have a full and complete pledge of cooperation from Pakistan. We’re heartened by that. And we will move forward step by step as we go through this and try to determine who else might be implicated.

QUESTION: Yeah, but what did they talk about?

MR. CROWLEY: I mean, the –

QUESTION: Did Patterson walk into Zardari’s office and he said “We’re going to cooperate fully,” and she said “Great, thanks,” and then left? What did they – can you – I mean, is there any substance there?

MR. CROWLEY: Of course there’s substance there, but – I mean, we will be exchanging information as the investigation is ongoing. Whatever leads are generated –

QUESTION: Okay. Well, was there an exchange?

MR. CROWLEY: -- here in the United States, we would fully expect Pakistan to follow up on. Pakistan, as you’re seeing, has already taken its own steps. I’ll defer to the Pakistani Government to describe what it is doing. So we are touching all the right bases. You have law enforcement, intelligence officials that have established contact with their counterparts in Pakistan. And I mean, remember, we are still in the early stages of this investigation.

QUESTION: Right. I guess – but I just – what was the purpose of these meetings?

MR. CROWLEY: The purpose of the meetings was to operationalize that as we have an investigation here, it is to inform Pakistan that we – there are clear links to Pakistan and that we would fully expect them to do what they should do and what they have been doing. I mean, as you know, Pakistan has itself faced this significant threat. Probably in the last year, there have been more Pakistanis killed by terrorists than in any other country. We’ve long recognized that this is – it’s a shared threat, it’s a shared responsibility, and there’s a commitment on both sides to fully cooperate as this investigation unfolds.

Once you get that kind of political commitment, then it moves down through the relevant agencies. And we are encouraged by Pakistan’s response since the bombing happened, or the attempted bombing happened on Saturday.

QUESTION: That means that you’re pleased with what they’ve done so far?

MR. CROWLEY: I’ll defer to Pakistan to –

QUESTION: I’m not asking what they’ve done.

MR. CROWLEY: Yeah. I mean –

QUESTION: Are you happy with what they’ve done so far?

MR. CROWLEY: I think it’s more a matter of what we do from this point forward.

QUESTION: P.J., let me try it a little different way. Did they talk about arrests that the Pakistanis had made?

MR. CROWLEY: I will defer to – we are certainly aware of various reports of arrests. We don’t have a number that we can verify. That really is for Pakistan to announce. Obviously, the individual in custody had links to Pakistan, has family members in Pakistan, and I think we understand that there are – that law enforcement have made contacts with family members and are questioning them and are (inaudible) taking their own steps to do their part of this investigation.

QUESTION: Look. Ambassador Patterson was in a meeting with senior Pakistani officials.

MR. CROWLEY: We are not –

QUESTION: I’m not asking you to –

MR. CROWLEY: Okay.

QUESTION: -- announce arrests. You say you’ve seen reports of arrests. Did the subject of arrests come up in a meeting that your ambassador was in -- or in the meetings?

MR. CROWLEY: I happened to talk to Ambassador Patterson this morning myself. I asked her about that issue. And she indicated, at this point, we are not in a position to verify any number of arrests by Pakistan.
Yes.

QUESTION: There have been some reports about ties between Pakistan’s ISI and militants in Waziristan. Did this come up at all with Ambassador – did Ambassador Patterson bring this up at all?

MR. CROWLEY: I mean, without prejudicing the current investigation, let me take it slightly higher. This has been a topic of conversation between the United States and Pakistan for several years. And obviously, Pakistan in the last couple of years has recognized that elements in the past that Pakistan has supported and links – potential links between terrorist networks or terrorist organizations now threatens not only regional security, but Pakistan itself.

So – but let’s not jump ahead of the current investigation. Clearly, there are international implications to what occurred in Times Square. We are investigating those. We would expect Pakistan – and would fully expect Pakistan will help us with that. But as to where that investigation takes us, this is still way too early to make that judgment.

Jill.

QUESTION: P.J., a change of subject?

MR. CROWLEY: Go ahead.

QUESTION: No, wait. Can we stay – can we please stay on this?

MR. CROWLEY: Sure.

QUESTION: Are you seeking access to anyone who might be detained by the Pakistanis? Have you requested –

MR. CROWLEY: Since – we are not aware of any specific arrests at this point, but I think you safely – safe to say that our law enforcement-intelligence relationship is very strong. Should there be arrests and should we see clear links to what happened here – we have, in the past, asked for that kind of access, but that’s more an issue for Justice.

QUESTION: Well, but wouldn’t the request come from you? And in the past, you asked – you have asked for access, and you’ve been turned down.

MR. CROWLEY: Yeah. Well, all right. This is part of the investigation, and for that, I would defer to Justice. But I think we are confident in our – the relationship we have, and let’s let the investigation take its course.

QUESTION: Well, but the record isn’t – the record of cooperation in this area is not – I mean, you haven’t yet ever been able to talk to A.Q. Khan.

MR. CROWLEY: I think – put it – rest assured that Pakistan understands that this investigation is important to the United States, it is important to Pakistan. We will expect full cooperation. There has been a pledge of full cooperation. And now as we go forward, I think based on those strong political commitments, I think we are confident that we can work through those issues together.

QUESTION: Did the ambassador – when she met with Zardari and Qureshi, did she give a – sort of a list of things that the U.S. would consider full cooperation? You say we expect to have it in (inaudible) future. Is there a game plan for how this goes forward – that she was bringing to them?

MR. CROWLEY: I think that – I mean, as our investigation here proceeds, and to the extent it points to possible events in Pakistan, I expect we will make specific requests of Pakistan in terms of cooperation. But we’re still very early in the investigation.

QUESTION: Just following up, did the ambassador give a list of names of associates of the suspect Shahzad here, to check out?

MR. CROWLEY: I mean that – those are the kinds of things that are – that can be done at that level, but it also can be done at a working level.

QUESTION: So you –

MR. CROWLEY: Again, I’m just trying to say, look, I’m not going to get into the tos and fros of the investigation of itself. We are confident that we have a pledge of cooperation from Pakistan. I think there’s a mutual recognition of why this is important to both countries. And now, we’ve got to let the investigation take its course.

QUESTION: So is that essentially what the meeting – the two meetings were, is just getting a pledge of cooperation?

MR. CROWLEY: I’m not going to – I wasn’t in the meetings with the ambassador and the president and the foreign minister.

QUESTION: Well, you spoke to Ambassador Patterson.

MR. CROWLEY: I understand that. I’m just – I’m telling – but –

QUESTION: When you came out and you announced that these meetings had happened, it was the first thing you said.

MR. CROWLEY: We came away from these contacts today with full confidence that we are on the same page in terms of how this investigation will proceed.

QUESTION: Just to pin something else down, did Ambassador Patterson have any meetings with Pakistani officials yesterday as well, or just today? And the same for Ambassador Holbrooke, in addition to the (inaudible).

MR. CROWLEY: I think yesterday, Ambassador Holbrooke talked with Ambassador Haqqani, the Pakistani ambassador to the United States. I’m sure that Anne Patterson had contacts with Pakistani officials yesterday. I mean, she meets with them all the time, so it could well be that she had regularly scheduled meetings and then this issue was part of that discussion.

US State Department

Sometimes, I long for the blurry cultural identities of the 80s, when elementary school friends lumped all Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan and Egyptian immigrants in one brown-hued bucket: "India." Who wouldn't rather be affiliated with "Slumdog Millionaire," Metro PCS's Ranjit and Chad, Chicken Tikkah Masala, Bhangra remixes and Bollywood instead of religious extremism and Al Qaeda?

Sri wrote:Shahzad Case Shines Spotlight on Pakistan's Jihad Tourism

Pakistan a breeding ground for Islamism

By SALIM MANSUR, QMI Agency
Last Updated: May 8, 2010 2:00am ..........................

Pakistan is the fertile breeding ground of Islamism for reasons that are intrinsic to its history and politics. It is the only country forcefully established with Islam as a nationalist ideology that a majority of Muslims in undivided India — including Muslims of what constitutes present-day Pakistan — rejected.

Since Britain conceded to the demand for Pakistan in the face of religious frenzy pushed by middle- and lower-class Muslim activists, the country’s history has been a series of failures of its own making. These failures have deeply embittered the thinking of that class of Pakistanis from whose rank the ruling elite comes, and whose regular pastime is to parcel blame to others for their part in making Pakistan a terrorist-exporting rogue and failed state. ………………….........

Toronto Sun

jrjrao wrote:MEMRI can save itself some translation trouble by just opening up the earth-e-shaster rag:

There smells a Pak-bashing rat
Exclusive
Tanvir Siddiqi
http://pakobserver.net/detailnews.asp?id=29879

slamabad—The arrest of Faisal Shahzad, a US citizen of Pakistan origin in connection with Saturday’s failed New York Times Square car bombing might well be a conspiracy hatched by India to tarnish image of Pakistan and force the US to put more pressure on it in the fight against terrorists. According to leading analysts, Faisal Shahzad’s prompt confession shows that the failed plot was certainly part of a wider conspiracy. Faisal Shahzad seems to have been lured by Indian and Zionist agents to achieve their nefarious designs. Pakistan, the only nuclear power in the world, is an eye-sore for both Israel and India whose animosity towards the Islamic countries is well known to every one.

The handling of the case by India-born US Federal Attorney Preet Bharara, who was also spearheading the prosecution of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed leaves no doubt about the outcome of the trial as he would be guided more by allegiance to his country whose bellicosity towards Pakistan is well known.

Handling of the case by an Indian-born Hindu establishes the conspiracy theory against Pakistan. On the one hand it might be aimed at tarnishing Pakistan’s image as a front line state against terrorism and on the other an attempt to dub the Kashmiris, struggling for their right to self-determination as terrorists. It is no more a secret that in view of its sinister designs against Pakistan, India is fully siding with the terrorists.

Educated and radical: Why Pakistan produces Faisal Shahzads

In Pakistan, educated middle-class youths such as Faisal Shahzad, the accused Times Square car bomber, have ready access to jihadist and other radical, anti-American resources.

By Issam Ahmed, Correspondent / May 10, 2010

Islamabad, Pakistan

What turns the affluent and educated offspring of the Pakistani middle-classes – young people such as Faisal Shahzad – toward militancy?

That’s a question some Pakistani analysts are mulling following the arrest last week of Mr. Shahzad, the accused Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad. If found guilty, he would add to a string of high-profile college-educated terrorists of Pakistani origin, including “Lady Al Qaeda” Aafia Siddiqui and 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

While the United States and the international community attempt to combat religious extremism through economic development, such as a recent American aid package to Pakistan pledging $7.5 billion of nonmilitary aid over 5 years, some argue that fighting poverty and illiteracy are not enough. Instead cultural factors, such as a virulently anti-American media, “toxic” syllabi at public schools, and the general availability of jihadist material may have become dangers as well. ……………………

CSM

Karna_A wrote:From 1990 onwards, comparing the terrorist strikes in US or West vs. India, there is one remarkable difference.

(a) All strikes in India had direct ISI hand. The piglets were directly trained by Military and sometimes used TSP military equipment. There was NO spontaneous terrorism whatsoever.
(b) All strikes on US were spontaneous, with home grown Jihadis with no direct support from ISI.

Conclusions:

(a) It is therefore theoretically relatively easy for India to fend of attacks as pressure on ISI will stop attacks. The attacks on India are more effective due to better training and better equipment.
Also for India the enemy is clear. Its TSPA and ISI.
(b) It is more difficult to stop attacks on Western targets as the terrorism is more home grown and spontaneous, though less effective due to less formal training.
For West, the enemy is more diffuse broadly militant Islam.

India is therefore in a War with ISI, whereas West is in War with Radical Islam.

Rogue Pakistani intelligence agents 'involved in Times Square plot'

American investigators believe rogue Pakistani intelligence agents may have been involved in the Times Square bomb plot, a potentially devastating blow to the country's shaky anti-terror credentials.

Rob Crilly, in Islamabad
Published: 6:00AM BST 11 May 2010

They are probing a possible connection between Faisal Shahzad and Pakistan's powerful military and intelligence establishment.

His background as the son of a senior Air Force officer may have brought him into contact with intelligence agents who helped build the Afghan Taliban and who have channelled cash and training to home-grown Jihadis, according to a source familiar with the investigation.

You don't know who he might have been introduced to in that sort of military environment," said the source.

Such a connection would be desperately embarrassing to the government in Islamabad, which is under pressure to demonstrate its commitment to tackling terrorism.

But it would help investigators make sense of how a boy raised in the secular, moderate environment of Pakistan's military schools could stand accused of terrorism.

Investigation teams, which have been arriving from the US since the start of the week, are at work in Peshawar, close to Shahzad's family home, Karachi, where he spent time as an adult as well as in Rawalpindi, where the Army and intelligence agencies are based, according to the source.

They believe he may have used colleagues of his father – Air Vice Marshal Baharul Haq – to make contact with the Pakistan Taliban.

Pakistan has a history of using Jihadi groups as a tool of its foreign policy. Its Inter-Services Intelligence agency helped equip and train Afghan Mujahideen fighting Soviet occupation during the 1980s and then used the Taliban to fill the resulting vacuum. They have supported militant groups in Indian-controlled Kashmir. ………………...............

The Telegraph, UK

ramana wrote: ...
Very good analysis. Bilkul satya vachan.

And on the contrary the Indian elite thinks its at war with radical Islam and gets paralyzed.

KLNMurthy wrote:For one perspective of Indian Muslims vis-a-vis Pakistan, see here:

kya aap musalmaan hain?