'Indian hand can't be ruled out'

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Look who’s talking my Pakistani brothers. It was Indian who made clams with in 2 hours of Mumbai attacks that Pakistan was behind these attacks with out any investigation.

Not just there - attacks prior to the Mumbai ones followed the same pattern of blaming Pakistan.

It got to the point where the FO spokesperson said that Indian investigators must have supernatural powers that allow them to identify the type of explosive, who carried out the attack, and who sponsored it (always Pakistan), while en route to the crime scene.

Now these same people have the gall to say Pakistanis push 'conspiracy theories'.

Fix yourselves first and admit your own 'denial and blame game' before accusing Pakistanis of it.

 

[Goodperson]

Well that's my point jey. There is all this hoopla over how 'sophisticated and advanced' the Mumbai attacks were, and how 'well trained' the terrorists were, and the implication is that it would not be possible without ISI involvement.

I just pointed out how one could argue the same exact thing about the attacks in Lahore, and the insurgency in FATA, which are in many ways a lot more advanced and sophisticated operations, with excellent intelligence to boot.

So long as Indians and Indian apologists continue to push the canard of ISI involvement in Mumbai without any evidence on the basis of spurious argument, there is no need to complain about Pakistanis accusing India of sponsoring terrorism in Pakistan using rationale similar to that used by India.

But Mumbai attacks were carried out by Pakistani citizens who were not natives. Taliban have native connections in recent blasts. The activities do ge monitored. What happened to the terrorists caught during Lahore police attack ? Did he mention Indian connections like native place in India? Even if he does its quite easy to brand him a non state actor.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

But Mumbai attacks were carried out by Pakistani citizens who were not natives. Taliban have native connections in recent blasts. The activities do ge monitored. What happened to the terrorists caught during Lahore police attack ? Did he mention Indian connections like native place in India? Even if he does its quite easy to brand him a non state actor.

Some of the people arrested by Pakistan in the Lahore attacks were Afghans, recruited in Afghanistan - that does not automatically link the GoA to the attacks, just as the Pakistanis involved in the Mumbai attacks do not implicate the Pakistani establishment, nor the Saudis involved in 911 implicate Saudi Arabia.

The Indians could be primarily involved in funding, providing expertise and intelligence.

And please read the previous posts, the point has been made quite clearly.

 

[Energon]

Right, and that is why there has been absolutely no evidence implicating Pakistani institutions in the Mumbai attack.

The Pakistani leadership has already been accosted with the origins and nature of the attackers and their long standing relationship/patronage with parts of the state's apparatus which albeit isn't a monolith by any means. Consequently it has been made clear to them that they will not recieve resuscitative aid for their survival unless they comprehensively dismantle the terrorism set up aimed at India which in turn could not exist without some level of patronage or tacit approval from state agencies. For the first time this has been turned into international policy; and none of this would be possible unless there were findings which could be used to pressure the Pakistani leadership.

The attacks and the training of training of the terrorists is not dissimilar.

I'm sorry I did a poor job of addressing this earlier. I'm not saying that the training these people received was different. Chances are the training is standardized for most of these groups since they have a substantial level of interaction amongst themselves. The nature of the attacks however were different. The Lahore attack is most probably a reprisal for the military action in western Pakistan; the attacks in Mumbai were very specific with a variety of foreign policy, economic/macroeconomic, and tactical objectives in mind. Most of all the conditions surrounding the attacks were very different. The GoI came to know pretty early on that the attacks originated from Pakistan.

The only major distinction between the Indian attacks and the Pakistani ones is the logistics involved in transporting the men to Mumbai, and that too was nothing earth shattering or well planned - they got lucky and the Indian Navy and CG weren't as thorough.

I understand that everythign in India is soooooooo 'sophisticated'

Again, this is most probably a difference in perspective or standards. Perhaps people coming in on hijacked boats transversing hundreds of nautical miles from another country, splitting into groups, hitting very specific targets, slaughtering people in a very dramatic fashion in order to get media coverage; finding a specific building and murdering its occupants as a statement of third party foreign policy and then virtually holding a packed and chaotic foreign city hostage for days on end, is all very common place to you. A highly banal occurrence, one that children can pull off as an after school special... maybe its really all that simple to you.

That however doesn't seem to be the case for the rest of the world which is perhaps why they "whine" and engage in such "dramatics" and "outrage" when something this simple happens to them or that it sets off a chain reaction not just regionally but worldwide. They don't think they're being naive for believing that laymen could pull something like this off; and as long as experts from some of the most sophisticated military establishments in the world think this is true, I'm inclined to believe them.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The Pakistani leadership has already been accosted with the origins and nature of the attackers and their long standing relationship/patronage with parts of the state's apparatus which albeit isn't a monolith by any means. Consequently it has been made clear to them that they will not recieve resuscitative aid for their survival unless they comprehensively dismantle the terrorism set up aimed at India which in turn could not exist without some level of patronage or tacit approval from state agencies. For the first time this has been turned into international policy; and none of this would be possible unless there were findings which could be used to pressure the Pakistani leadership.

None of that address the fact that there is absolutely no evidence that the Pakistani establishment was involved in the Mumbai attacks, and that that lack of evidence did not prevent the political and military leadership, and the media, from blaming the Pakistani establishment without evidence.

Your argument continues to be an extremely speculative one.

I'm sorry I did a poor job of addressing this earlier. I'm not saying that the training these people received was different. Chances are the training is standardized for most of these groups since they have a substantial level of interaction amongst themselves. The nature of the attacks however were different. The Lahore attack is most probably a reprisal for the military action in western Pakistan; the attacks in Mumbai were very specific with a variety of foreign policy, economic/macroeconomic, and tactical objectives in mind. Most of all the conditions surrounding the attacks were very different. The GoI came to know pretty early on that the attacks originated from Pakistan.

The point being that you yourself argued that the 'training and characteristics' indicated that Pakistani military and intelligence was involved. However these tactics and training have been on display in FATA for a long time now, and now can be seen applied in Lahore as well.

Your argument of 'training' indicating Pakistani establishment involvement is therefore a spurious one.

Again, this is most probably a difference in perspective or standards. Perhaps people coming in on hijacked boats transversing hundreds of nautical miles from another country, splitting into groups, hitting very specific targets, slaughtering people in a very dramatic fashion in order to get media coverage; finding a specific building and murdering its occupants as a statement of third party foreign policy and then virtually holding a packed and chaotic foreign city hostage for days on end, is all very common place to you. A highly banal occurrence, one that children can pull off as an after school special... maybe its really all that simple to you.

That is what terrorists do - acts for the maximum effect. What is banal is arguing that somehow the 'training & characteristics' of the Mumbai terrorists were something special and therefore only possible through Pakistani establishment involvement, despite the fact that such 'training' has been evident in FATA for years.

That however doesn't seem to be the case for the rest of the world which is perhaps why they "whine" and engage in such "dramatics" and "outrage" when something this simple happens to them or that it sets off a chain reaction not just regionally but worldwide. They don't think they're being naive for believing that laymen could pull something like this off; and as long as experts from some of the most sophisticated military establishments in the world think this is true, I'm inclined to believe them.

I see no experts or governments, including the GoI, having presented any evidence indicating Pakistani institutional involvement. And since India was on a diplomatic offensive to malign Pakistan and put it under pressure, why would it hide such evidence? There was none- because the Pakistani establishment was not involved, and so the banality of 'sooo sophisticated and advanced' was trotted out.

If you find solace in your conspiracy theories and blame game you are welcome to it, but don't accuse Pakistanis of pushing conspiracy theories when you cling to spurious theories yourself.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Pakistan's institutional role in Mumbai 26-11

1) Allowing the LET - an organisation Pakistan (under international pressure) banned as a terrorist organisation - allowing the same people to run another organisation (JUD) in the same compound.

2) Blocking India's efforts to ban JUD in the UN with help from China, all along using the flimsy technical excuse that JUD is a different organisation, when the same people running an organisation in the same compound can only be called a front at the best, all this while international media raised concerns regarding JUD's role after the earthquake.

3) Hiding Ajmal's tracks - Pakistan kept denying Ajmal is Pakistani for 40 days. This included the President going on BBC and lying through the teeth that Ajmal is not pakistani (17th December 2008). All these games to hide tracks / destroy evidence, why else, it does not take 40 days to go to Faridkot and verify, infact pakistani and other newspapers had already done it, who were the GOP protecting?

Add to it the fact that LET is a creation of pakistani agencies, later renamed and allowed to operate by the same agencies, are they NOT responsible? HOW?

 

[Energon]

None of that address the fact that there is absolutely no evidence that the Pakistani establishment was involved in the Mumbai attacks, and that that lack of evidence did not prevent the political and military leadership, and the media, from blaming the Pakistani establishment without evidence.Your argument continues to be an extremely speculative one.

No, all it does is indicate that no evidence has been released to the public to settle internet debates. If there was absolutely no evidence, critical policy wouldn't be written the way it is now, nor would there be any pressure applied upon the GoP from the leaders of the international community.

The point being that you yourself argued that the 'training and characteristics' indicated that Pakistani military and intelligence was involved. However these tactics and training have been on display in FATA for a long time now, and now can be seen applied in Lahore as well.

Your argument of 'training' indicating Pakistani establishment involvement is therefore a spurious one.

Its actually the other way round. All of these operatives hail from terrorist institutions that were set up by the Pakistani state apparatus. Their training is bound to be standardized up to a certain degree and evident in all the areas where they're involved in combat, which first and foremost includes Pakistan. But that also makes the state culpable for starting and in some cases perpetuating all of these proxies to begin with. There are undoubtedly some areas of western Pakistan which the state does not control availing some measure of deniability; that however is not the case for many parts of Eastern Pakistan that are well under government control and where these large institutions operate with impunity in and around major cities. This is primary issue with the state of Pakistan being held responsible for the export of terrorism. Nobody is saying that the GoP ordered a hit on India.

If you find solace in your conspiracy theories and blame game you are welcome to it, but don't accuse Pakistanis of pushing conspiracy theories when you cling to spurious theories yourself.

What I say on a random discussion board is irrelevant. For its connections to terrorism and the recent attack upon Mumbai, Pakistan has been isolated globally; and every other day influential think tanks and people who effect global opinion through official policy or have executive powers themselves make references to Pakistan and terrorism and how the consequences will be severe unless cross border terrorism into India stops. I'm merely supporting all these statements, decisions and conditions to aid.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Energon:

Sorry, but your entire argument is absurd.

There is apparently all this damning evidence indicating Pakistani involvement in Mumbai, its available to all these nations, organizations, think tanks, analysts, legislators, researchers etc. etc., yet it remains a Top Secret source of information!

The insertion of India specific conditions in the US aid bill (not sure if they remain in the latest version) had more to do with effective Indian lobbying than any supposed 'evidence' that has somehow remained a secret despite all of the above mentioned knowing about it.

Pakistan's 'isolation' has more to do with effective Indian diplomacy on the back of the large economic and strategic interests and potential she shares with the West, and the accompanying reluctance of Pakistan to act aggressively against the Taliban in FATA (for various reasons we continue to explore elsewhere), than any actual evidence indicating Pakistani involvement.

As I said before, given the diplomatic offensive India mounted against Pakistan, and continues to, had any such evidence existed, it would have been shared with the world to nail the case shut against Pakistan and force it to act against the concerned entities - nothing like that happened because there was no evidence and their was no involvement by the Pakistani establishment.

The IAF chief just stated that India was close to carrying out strikes in Pakistan - it beggars belief that air strikes were being considered, and the GoI continued to sit on evidence that would have provided the justification for such a move had it been given the green light.

In addition, any such damning evidence would have also been used by the US to get Pakistan to change its policy in FATA, before it gave a hoot about what Pakistan did with the LeT and whether or not it addressed India's concerns. Nothing like that happened.

The facts just do not add up in terms of the argument you are making. All we have is speculative and spurious arguments that continue to be pushed in the Western press and by myriad 'think tanks' and 'analysts' - none of these arguments is backed by an iota of evidence.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistan's institutional role in Mumbai 26-11

1) Allowing the LET - an organisation Pakistan (under international pressure) banned as a terrorist organisation - allowing the same people to run another organisation (JUD) in the same compound.

The LeT was largely shut down. LeT cadres and junior leadership was interviewed in Indian and Pakistani papers and they expressed their frustration at not being able to function as they used to.

There is no evidence the JuD was involved in terrorism, and it was not given a trial nor any evidence presented to establish its guilt before banning it in the UN.

2) Blocking India's efforts to ban JUD in the UN with help from China, all along using the flimsy technical excuse that JUD is a different organisation, when the same people running an organisation in the same compound can only be called a front at the best, all this while international media raised concerns regarding JUD's role after the earthquake.

Again, when no evidence indicating JuD involvement is presented, why should Pakistan merely go along?

3) Hiding Ajmal's tracks - Pakistan kept denying Ajmal is Pakistani for 40 days. This included the President going on BBC and lying through the teeth that Ajmal is not pakistani (17th December 2008). All these games to hide tracks / destroy evidence, why else, it does not take 40 days to go to Faridkot and verify, infact pakistani and other newspapers had already done it, who were the GOP protecting?

Pakistan did not hide Kasab's tracks - India refused to cooperate with Pakistan in terms of sharing evidence establishing identy etc. Once India shared evidence, Pakistan accepted kasab's identity.

Had India shared the evidence sooner, Pakistan would have acted sooner. India was to busy scoring political points domestically and demonizing Pakistan for not acting while she was the one refusing to cooperate and share evidence.

Add to it the fact that LET is a creation of pakistani agencies, later renamed and allowed to operate by the same agencies, are they NOT responsible? HOW?

No we are not responsible since large amounts of LeT infrastructure and funding networks (in the LeT's own words) had been dismantled, and Pakistan had exercised influence to ensure that the LeT did not act against India - the drop in cross LoC infiltration and the Kashmir insurgency is clear evidence of that.

Pakistan is responsible in terms of prosecuting any alleged perpetrators that may be on Pakistani soil based on information provided by India.

Unfortunately, as can be seen from the terrorist attacks in Pakistan, a developing nation with weak institutions, especially law enforcement, cannot offer fool proof guarantees of preventing terrorist attacks to even its own people. India herself continues to struggle with homegrown terrorism, and has failed to completely dismantle DI's network.

 

[Kasrkin]

"No, all it does is indicate that no evidence has been released to the public to settle internet debates..."

They haven't released said information to the Pakistani government either. India took a very vocal and pro-active approach that involved attempts to humiliate Pakistan internationally as a matter of policy after the Mumbai attacks. Thus your insisting on the notion of India ‘withholding’ critical and irrefutable evidence of Pakistani state involvement in the attacks is not only overly speculative, but also illogical. Political curtsies are hardly a factor that dictate India’s conduct when it comes to their coercive diplomacy against Pakistan.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I really find this clinging to the notion that the Pakistani establishment was behind Mumbai, in the absence of any evidence indicating so, indicative of an deep rooted irrational hostility to Pakistan.

Why is it so hard for Indians to accept that there was no evidence linking the Pakistani establishment to Mumbai?

And since you essentially follow that line of argument on the basis of faith rather than fact, why criticize Pakistanis for doing the same?

 

[MilesTogo]

-------------------------------------------------------------------

I really find this clinging to the notion that the Pakistani establishment was behind Mumbai, in the absence of any evidence indicating so, indicative of an deep rooted irrational hostility to Pakistan.

Why is it so hard for Indians to accept that there was no evidence linking the Pakistani establishment to Mumbai?

And since you essentially follow that line of argument on the basis of faith rather than fact, why criticize Pakistanis for doing the same?

 

[notsuperstitious]

The LeT was largely shut down. LeT cadres and junior leadership was interviewed in Indian and Pakistani papers and they expressed their frustration at not being able to function as they used to.

There is no evidence the JuD was involved in terrorism, and it was not given a trial nor any evidence presented to establish its guilt before banning it in the UN.

Again, when no evidence indicating JuD involvement is presented, why should Pakistan merely go along?

I completely do not agree, if the same people are allowed to run an organisation in the same famous compound, thats not the same as banning them, doesn't wash. LET mediamen complaining to media that they can't operate is just that, PR. I know a pakistani journalist who had got JUD collection camp from his locality in lahore removed for inciting hatred against india (he's also commented on it in certain respected blogs too, need link?), so anyone who wanted to go beyond 'plausible deniability' knew what sort of org they were running, so should pakistan have 'merely gone along' (what i call - done its sovereign duty of stopping non state actors from attacking neighboring countries) to stop the murder of civilians, YES.

Pakistan did not hide Kasab's tracks - India refused to cooperate with Pakistan in terms of sharing evidence establishing identy etc. Once India shared evidence, Pakistan accepted kasab's identity.

Had India shared the evidence sooner, Pakistan would have acted sooner. India was to busy scoring political points domestically and demonizing Pakistan for not acting while she was the one refusing to cooperate and share evidence.

A proper investigation was done and evidence handed over, as was promised by indians, however ajmal kasab's name and address were public domain almost immediately, what stopped pakistan from doing preliminary examinations (if done,why lies were told on BBC?) to quicky apprehend the perpetrators so that they did not get time to cover their tracks? Mind you, Zardari did not say he did not know Ajmal's name, he said he did not 'think' Ajmal was pakistani.

No we are not responsible since large amounts of LeT infrastructure and funding networks (in the LeT's own words) had been dismantled, and Pakistan had exercised influence to ensure that the LeT did not act against India - the drop in cross LoC infiltration and the Kashmir insurgency is clear evidence of that.

LET's PR is no evidence. Yes the incidents in Kashmir did fall, yes 26-11 happened, so was it a case of controlling the tap as per requirement?

Pakistan is responsible in terms of prosecuting any alleged perpetrators that may be on Pakistani soil based on information provided by India.

Unfortunately, as can be seen from the terrorist attacks in Pakistan, a developing nation with weak institutions, especially law enforcement, cannot offer fool proof guarantees of preventing terrorist attacks to even its own people. India herself continues to struggle with homegrown terrorism, and has failed to completely dismantle DI's network.

I don't agree pakistan is not responsible for creating the monster of LET (call it JUD if you want), its just against all available data. Their main office was not shut down, who's responsible?

I agree with the last para, though that does not automatically rule out institutional role.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I completely do not agree, if the same people are allowed to run an organisation in the same famous compound, thats not the same as banning them, doesn't wash. LET mediamen complaining to media that they can't operate is just that, PR. I know a pakistani journalist who had got JUD collection camp from his locality in lahore removed for inciting hatred against india (he's also commented on it in certain respected blogs too, need link?), so anyone who wanted to go beyond 'plausible deniability' knew what sort of org they were running,

Organization was banned and leadership that formed JuD has yet to be shown to have been involved in Mumbai. So yes, so far most of the controls Pakistan put in place to restrain the JuD have worked. The controls on the LeT failed, and Pakistan is therefore taking stronger action against them this time.

As far as 'inciting hatred against India', protected by freedom of speech. There are organizations in India, elected to parliament even, that I would argue 'incite hatred against Pakistan'.

should pakistan have 'merely gone along' (what i call - done its sovereign duty of stopping non state actors from attacking neighboring countries) to stop the murder of civilians, YES.

Your argument is a non-sequitur - You suggest that Pakistan had a responsibility for stopping the perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks from carrying it out - of course Pakistan had that responsibility, just like any police organization has a responsibility to prevent crime, but crime occurs despite the best efforts of law enforcement. Pakistan did not know Mumbai was going to take place.

Pakistan has helped almost eliminated cross-LoC infiltration and the insurgency in Kashmir, and it has done so for several years now. That indicates the level of control Pakistan exercised over these groups in order to prevent any acts that would vitiate the atmosphere (remember that the two nations were engaging in a very positive back channel dialog).

A proper investigation was done and evidence handed over, as was promised by indians, however ajmal kasab's name and address were public domain almost immediately, what stopped pakistan from doing preliminary examinations (if done,why lies were told on BBC?) to quicky apprehend the perpetrators so that they did not get time to cover their tracks? Mind you, Zardari did not say he did not know Ajmal's name, he said he did not 'think' Ajmal was pakistani.

India used the excuse of a 'completing a proper investigation', which is fine, but why then expect Pakistan to act without providing any proper evidence to base its own investigation on? It is absurd to suggest that Pakistan take action on the basis of media reports, and it is absurd to suggest that because Pakistan did not take action on the basis of media reports, and waited till India completed investigations and shared information, that Pakistan was somehow 'hiding Ajmal's tracks'.

Whether Pakistan investigated or not on the basis of media reports is irrelevant - what is important is that once evidence related to the perpetrators was shared, Pakistan acted. You cannot construct a case in court based on, "well I arrested so and so because the Times of India quoted anonymous GoI sources as saying he was involved".

If India was concerned about the perpetrators getting away, it should have shared its preliminary findings immediately and through official channels with Pakistan. Pakistan was the one continuously calling for a joint investigation and immediate information sharing. You cannot accuse Pakistan of 'delaying' or 'hiding things' when our position was clear from the get go and India was the one refusing to cooperate.

LET's PR is no evidence. Yes the incidents in Kashmir did fall, yes 26-11 happened, so was it a case of controlling the tap as per requirement?

No one can prevent a hundred percent of crimes - Mumbai fell into the category of crimes that slipped under the radar.

I don't agree pakistan is not responsible for creating the monster of LET (call it JUD if you want), its just against all available data. Their main office was not shut down, who's responsible?

I agree with the last para, though that does not automatically rule out institutional role.

Now you are making a different argument than earlier - Pakistan may have created the LeT to fight Indian occupation of Kashmir, and Pakistan acted to significantly limit the groups activities and control them after the parliament attacks, but the argument raised was that Pakistan was responsible for the Mumbai attacks, which I disagree with.

Pakistan is responsible in terms of prosecuting any and all people involved in that attack within Pakistan, and ensuring that those people and their organization do not have an opportunity to do so again.

 

[ironman]

News update... restart required.

JuD has links with al-Qaeda, says Pak govt


M Zulqernain
Lahore, May 30 (PTI) For the first time, Pakistan government today admitted that the Jamaat-ud-Dawah, blamed for the 26/11 attacks, has "prima facie" links with al-Qaeda, as it justified the detention of JuD chief Hafiz Saeed and another top leader after the terror strikes on Mumbai.

Submitting his arguments on Saeed -- also the founder of Lashkar-e-Toiba -- and Col (retd) Nazir Ahmed's petition against their detention, Attorney General Latif Khosa told the Lahore High Court that the government had received "evidence" that showed the JuD "prima facie has links with al-Qaeda." Khosa said the government had "classified information" that would justify the detention of the JuD leaders.

On his request, the three-member bench, headed by Justice Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry, had a closed-door meeting with him where he apprised them of the classified information in this regard.

The court adjourned the hearing till Monday.

A K Dogar, counsel for Saeed and Nazir, protested against the in-camera briefing, saying that it was the right of his clients to know about the grounds of their detention. He said if the government had any "legal justification", it must be provided to them as well.

Responding to Dogar's statement, Khosa said the judicial review board had extended the detention period of the JuD leaders and also provided legal grounds in this respect. PTI

Govt has ‘enough material’ against JD