What's new

The Truth About Mumbai Attacks (Indias Hindu Radicals Responsible)


28 November 2008
Scotsman UK

UNCERTAINTY is a key weapon in the armoury of Islamic fundamentalist terror. As investigators, experts and analysts grope for the truth, someone somewhere is taking satisfaction from the horrified confusion the Mumbai attacks have caused.

Analysts are divided over whether the hand of al-Qaeda can be detected. The only claim of responsibility comes from a group that may not even exist: an e-mail message claiming responsibility and sent to Indian media on Wednesday night said the attackers were from a group called Deccan Mujahideen.

Deccan is a neighborhood of the Indian city of Hyderabad. The word also describes the central and southern region of India, which is dominated by the Deccan Plateau. Mujahideen is the commonly used Arabic word for holy warriors.

But Sajjan Gohel, a security expert in London, called it a "front name" and said the group was "nonexistent."

Alex Neill, head of the Royal United Services Institute's Asia security programme, believes the attacks were probably carried out by local jihadists linked to the radical Students Islamic Movement of India (Simi), a banned Islamic fundamentalist organisation which advocates the "liberation of India" by converting it to an Islamic state.

One possible mastermind and Simi member is Abdul Subhan Qureshi, a 36-year-old computer engineer suspected of being behind multiple bombings in Delhi, Jaipur, Bangalore and Ahmedabad earlier this year.

Qureshi, also known as Tauqeer, is from Mumbai and his expertise with internet security could have played a vital part in pulling off such an ambitious plot, said Mr Neill.

"He is an IT whizz-kid so it is quite possible he is the person investigators will be concentrating on. This is a great embarrassment to the Indian security services because it has been pulled off right under their noses."

Simi has declared jihad on India, the aim of which is to establish Dar-ul-Islam (land of Islam) by forcefully converting everyone to Islam.

Mr Neill said Deccan Muhajideen would be a militant offshoot of Simi which has carried out attacks across India. He added: "The perpetrators have obviously been highly trained and would have been sent to al-Qaeda training camps to prepare. I would be astonished if any of them are from Britain – they were probably recruited from the Mumbai region."

He reckons up to 100 terrorists would have been involved in the planning and execution of the attack and said it was surprising they had managed to keep it a secret.

Other analysts say that while it is not clear whether the Deccan Mujahideen claim is genuine, the attacks may have been carried out by a group called the Indian Mujahideen – also an offshoot of Simi and blamed by police for almost every major bomb attack in India, including explosions on commuter trains in Mumbai two years ago that killed 187 people.

Police said the Indian Mujahideen may also include former members of Bangladeshi militant group, Harkat-ul-Jihad al Islami. In an e-mail in September, the group denounced Mumbai's police anti-terrorist squad (ATS), accusing them of harassing Muslims.

"If this is the degree your arrogance has reached, and if you think that by these stunts you can scare us, then let the Indian Mujahideen warn all the people of Mumbai that whatever deadly attacks Mumbaikars will face in future, their responsibility would lie with the Mumbai ATS and their guardians," it said.

The Mumbai attacks appear to have been carefully coordinated, well-planned and involved a large number of attackers. A high level of sophistication has also been a hallmark of previous attacks by the Indian Mujahideen.

The Mumbai attacks also focused clearly on tourist targets, including two luxury hotels and a famous cafe.

In May, the Indian Mujahideen made a specific threat to attack tourist sites in India unless the government stopped supporting the United States in the international arena.

The threat was made in an e-mail claiming responsibility for bomb attacks that killed 63 people in the tourist city of Jaipur. The e-mail declared "open war against India" and included the serial number of a bicycle used in one bombing.

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has blamed a group with "external linkages" for the attacks. He said: "It is evident that the group which carried out these attacks, based outside the country, had come with single-minded determination to create havoc in the commercial capital of the country."

He could have been referring to either Pakistan or Bangladesh, which has also been accused by India of harbouring militant groups. Some security specialists believe there is likely to have been a degree of inspiration from, or link with, external groups allied to al-Qaeda, such as the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba, which wants to see India expelled from Kashmir.

Eyewitnesses have reported hostage-takers speaking with a Kashmiri accent. However, Lashkar-e-Taiba yesterday denied any role in the Mumbai attacks.

Henry Wilkinson, a senior analyst with Janusian Security Risk Management, a London-based consultancy, said the tactics are different from the more common, post-9/11 attacks seen in Iraq and Afghanistan, but bear similar hallmarks. He said: "It's very interesting that they didn't go in using car bombs; it was more of a direct armed assault on a city. It's very reminiscent of the attacks in Saudi Arabia in 2003, when the gunmen were going around trying to find Westerners and kill them."
 
yous should update your flash player

Video is working fine. Thank you was for posting such a great video. I suggest every member should watch it.

I wish this information was available in 'written' form for posting.
 
Terrorism in India | The Pakistan connection | The Economist

The Pakistan connection

Dec 3rd 2008
From Economist.com
Where the terror trail so often leads

IT MAY have been a slip of the tongue. But there was something very revealing about a remark that Pakistan’s president, Asif Ali Zardari, made in an interview with an Indian television channel on November 30th. Asked about allegations that Pakistan was involved in the murderous onslaught on Mumbai, he promised, before the world, strict action “if any evidence points towards any individual or group in my part of the country”.

The (perhaps unintended) implication that Mr Zardari is in control of only part of Pakistan is all too true. And that helps explain why it is so difficult for India to respond.

India’s leaders seem convinced—and American intelligence officials reportedly concur—that there was some Pakistani involvement in the attack.

Specifically, they blame Lashkar-e-Taiba, which along with Jaish-e-Mohammad was one of the two most notorious militant groups set up with the connivance and help of Pakistan’s military-intelligence outfit, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), to help wage an insurgency against Indian rule in the part of Kashmir it controls. These groups now seem allied with a broader jihadist movement along the Afghan-Pakistani frontier.

The groups are alleged to have been behind—or at least lent a helping hand in—a series of bloody attacks on India: the attempt in 2001 to kill India’s leaders in a raid on parliament in Delhi; the bombing in 2003 of parts of Mumbai, including the Taj Mahal hotel, a target in the latest attack; the even bigger slaughter entailed in the co-ordinated bombing of Mumbai’s commuter rail-network in July 2006.

The first of those attacks, the assault on parliament, initially seemed to threaten all-out war. India mobilised its troops to go to the border. Foreign governments advised their citizens to avoid the subcontinent. Public opinion in both countries became alarmingly bellicose.

America, however, did not want Indo-Pakistani tension to distract Pakistan from the war on its other frontier, with Afghanistan. It put pressure on Pervez Musharraf, then Pakistan’s president, who banned the two militant groups. But they survived under different names and continued to sow violence in Kashmir and elsewhere.

Yet in 2003 when Atal Behari Vajpayee, then India’s prime minister, made friendly overtures to Pakistan, it seemed hugely popular in both countries.

Since then, when figurative Pakistani fingerprints have been found all over terrorist attacks on Indian soil, huge efforts were made not to let them derail the peace process Mr Vajpayee set in train. Promises of anti-terrorist co-operation were made; a joint commission was set up; and a gradual thawing of relations continued regardless.

By attacking India’s commercial hub and luxury hotels where many foreigners stay, the latest atrocity was designed to cause maximum damage to India’s image. It pushes India’s remarkable forbearance to its limits.

But there are two huge obstacles to India’s mounting a robust response. First, to the extent that the attackers can be said to have anything that can be dignified with the name of a strategy, it must be to provoke just the sort of confrontation that followed the 2001 raid on parliament. Pakistan has already said it would move troops to its frontier with India if need be. That would ease pressure on the Taliban and their allies on the other border.

Second, there is the problem Mr Zardari alluded to. There are large swathes of Pakistan where his writ does not run—notably in the tribal areas, but even in parts of the North-West Frontier Province.

And he is a civilian president. It is not certain the army or the ISI will follow his orders unquestioningly. An early promise to send the ISI’s chief to Delhi turned out to be a “miscommunication”.

Moreover, it does not seem in India’s interests to weaken Mr Zardari. Politically shaky at home, he has been reaching out to India: calling militants in Kashmir “terrorists”, promising no first-use of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, urging bigger commercial links, and insisting that terrorists are his enemy as much as India’s.

The trouble is, the terrorists are not, so to speak, from his part of the country; and there seems little he can do about them—even if, as seems likely, he wants them roundly defeated.
 
Last edited:
First of all, u dont know Chanakya, so better not talk about him........

And secondly i was talking about CHANGES INSIDE INDIA, NOT IN INDO-PAK relations......... and who give a damn what u and ur govt think...... y r u even replying when u r not understanding the context of the post......

And if India wants friendship with u then it's for ur benefit......

But enough of friendship now......

Intt ka jawaab, pathar se ni, pathron se denge.....

And i am not referring to pakistan here, but, to our any enemy......

here is your chanakya exposed:enjoy:
Exposes Mumbai Fraud & Chankeya Policy & Indian relation with Pakistan

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Terrorism in India | The Pakistan connection | The Economist

The Pakistan connection

Dec 3rd 2008
From Economist.com
Where the terror trail so often leads

IT MAY have been a slip of the tongue. But there was something very revealing about a remark that Pakistan’s president, Asif Ali Zardari, made in an interview with an Indian television channel on November 30th. Asked about allegations that Pakistan was involved in the murderous onslaught on Mumbai, he promised, before the world, strict action “if any evidence points towards any individual or group in my part of the country”.

The (perhaps unintended) implication that Mr Zardari is in control of only part of Pakistan is all too true. And that helps explain why it is so difficult for India to respond.

India’s leaders seem convinced—and American intelligence officials reportedly concur—that there was some Pakistani involvement in the attack.

Specifically, they blame Lashkar-e-Taiba, which along with Jaish-e-Mohammad was one of the two most notorious militant groups set up with the connivance and help of Pakistan’s military-intelligence outfit, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), to help wage an insurgency against Indian rule in the part of Kashmir it controls. These groups now seem allied with a broader jihadist movement along the Afghan-Pakistani frontier.

The groups are alleged to have been behind—or at least lent a helping hand in—a series of bloody attacks on India: the attempt in 2001 to kill India’s leaders in a raid on parliament in Delhi; the bombing in 2003 of parts of Mumbai, including the Taj Mahal hotel, a target in the latest attack; the even bigger slaughter entailed in the co-ordinated bombing of Mumbai’s commuter rail-network in July 2006.

The first of those attacks, the assault on parliament, initially seemed to threaten all-out war. India mobilised its troops to go to the border. Foreign governments advised their citizens to avoid the subcontinent. Public opinion in both countries became alarmingly bellicose.

America, however, did not want Indo-Pakistani tension to distract Pakistan from the war on its other frontier, with Afghanistan. It put pressure on Pervez Musharraf, then Pakistan’s president, who banned the two militant groups. But they survived under different names and continued to sow violence in Kashmir and elsewhere.

Yet in 2003 when Atal Behari Vajpayee, then India’s prime minister, made friendly overtures to Pakistan, it seemed hugely popular in both countries.

Since then, when figurative Pakistani fingerprints have been found all over terrorist attacks on Indian soil, huge efforts were made not to let them derail the peace process Mr Vajpayee set in train. Promises of anti-terrorist co-operation were made; a joint commission was set up; and a gradual thawing of relations continued regardless.

By attacking India’s commercial hub and luxury hotels where many foreigners stay, the latest atrocity was designed to cause maximum damage to India’s image. It pushes India’s remarkable forbearance to its limits.

But there are two huge obstacles to India’s mounting a robust response. First, to the extent that the attackers can be said to have anything that can be dignified with the name of a strategy, it must be to provoke just the sort of confrontation that followed the 2001 raid on parliament. Pakistan has already said it would move troops to its frontier with India if need be. That would ease pressure on the Taliban and their allies on the other border.

Second, there is the problem Mr Zardari alluded to. There are large swathes of Pakistan where his writ does not run—notably in the tribal areas, but even in parts of the North-West Frontier Province.

And he is a civilian president. It is not certain the army or the ISI will follow his orders unquestioningly. An early promise to send the ISI’s chief to Delhi turned out to be a “miscommunication”.

Moreover, it does not seem in India’s interests to weaken Mr Zardari. Politically shaky at home, he has been reaching out to India: calling militants in Kashmir “terrorists”, promising no first-use of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, urging bigger commercial links, and insisting that terrorists are his enemy as much as India’s.

The trouble is, the terrorists are not, so to speak, from his part of the country; and there seems little he can do about them—even if, as seems likely, he wants them roundly defeated.


i know the bullshit you post on another forum
 

The Mumbai attacks were "the kind of terror in which al Qaeda participates," U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has told a press conference in India.

However, The Associated Press also reported Rice said that it was too early to say who was responsible.

Rice arrived in New Delhi on Wednesday amid rising tensions between India and its nuclear neighbor Pakistan in the wake of last week's deadly terror attacks. She was expected to meet with Indian officials later in the day.

She said Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari had pledged to follow leads in last week's terrorist attacks "wherever they go."

"I think that is a very important commitment on the part of Pakistan," Rice said. But she said Pakistani authorities must move with "a real sense of transparency, a real sense of action, a real sense of urgency."

At least 179 died when a band of gunmen attacked 10 targets in Mumbai. Most of the deaths occurred at the city's top two hotels, The Oberoi and the Taj Mahal. The attacks sparked three days of battles with police and Indian troops in the heart of the city. Watch the significance of the Taj hotel »

Memorial rallies were scheduled Wednesday in Mumbai and in several other Indian cities, including New Delhi, Kolkata, Hyderabad, Bangalore and Chennai.

India says the coordinated strikes originated in Pakistan, and has renewed its call for Pakistani authorities to hand over about 20 wanted Indian militant leaders who have taken refuge in Pakistan. It has been demanding the extradition of some of those leaders since a 2001 attack on India's parliament that brought the South Asian nuclear rivals to the brink of war.

The list includes Hafiz Mohammed, the head of Lashkar-e-Tayyiba. The Islamic militant group, now banned in Pakistan, is also blamed for the 2001 Parliament attack.

While Rice was in New Delhi, the top-ranking U.S. military officer, Adm. Mike Mullen, was in Islamabad for meetings with Pakistani officials, the U.S. Embassy there reported Rice's visit also came as Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari told CNN's Larry King he believed the perpetrators were "stateless actors who have been operating all throughout the region."

"The state of Pakistan is in no way responsible," Zardari told King. "... Even the White House and the American CIA have said that today. The state of Pakistan is, of course, not involved. We're part of the victims, Larry. I'm a victim. The state of Pakistan is a victim. We are the victims of this war, and I am sorry for the Indians, and I feel sorry for them." Watch Zardari discuss Pakistan's stance »

Indian officials said the lone suspect in police custody is Pakistani and was trained by Lashkar-e-Tayyiba -- a Pakistan-based terror group allied with al Qaeda. The group -- banned since 2002 in Pakistan after the Indian parliament attack -- has denied responsibility for the Mumbai attacks.

Meanwhile, Indian officials were under pressure to explain the lapse of security that allowed the siege to occur. Watch as Mumbai tries to return to normal »

Indian security forces have told CNN that U.S. officials warned the Indian government in New Delhi on two occasions about a waterborne attack in Mumbai, India's financial capital. And according to a U.S. counter-terrorism official, New Delhi was warned about a potential maritime attack on Mumbai at least a month before the massacre.

But Mumbai's police chief said that he never received a warning of an impending seaborne attack.

"(The warning) that terrorists could arrive by sea was from an intelligence report of last year that only said terrorists could attack Gujarat or industries in the south," Hasan Gafoor said. Mumbai is located in Maharashtra state, which borders Gujarat state.

Gafoor said security was recently boosted at the city's hotels, but that was a precautionary move after a September attack on a Marriott Hotel in Pakistan's capital Islamabad.

He said the 10 attackers hijacked a trawler in the Pakistani port city of Karachi -- about 575 miles (925 km) north of Mumbai -- and came ashore at Mumbai in dinghies.

Gafoor said a global-positioning system, or GPS, found with the attackers showed they had come from Pakistan.

Intelligence officials told CNN-IBN that the captain of the trawler was found dead, lying face down with his hands bound behind his back. Four crew members who had been on board were missing, they said.

Gafoor said Indian officials will provide evidence backing their conclusions "once the investigation is complete
 

3 Dec 2008

Police found explosives hidden in a bag in Mumbai's main train station Wednesday, which they said were left over from last week's attacks.

While searching 150 bags at the station, police found one that looked suspicious and called the bomb squad. They found two bombs of 4 kilograms (8.8 pounds) each inside and defused them, said Assistant Commissioner of Police Bapu Domre.

The news comes as Indian authorities face a growing wave of criticism about intelligence failures and bungled security that let 10 gunmen terrorize India's largest city for 60 hours, killing at least 171 people.

It was immediately clear why the bombs hadn't been found earlier.


Authorities reopened Chhatrapati Shivaji train station and declared it safe Thursday morning, hours after the gunmen sprayed it with gunfire in one of their first attacks.
 

2 Dec 2008

Guardian UK

A sleepy village in Pakistan has found itself at the centre of the Mumbai terror plot, leaving locals bewildered.

Faridkot, a settlement in the south of the Punjab province, has been overrun by Pakistani intelligence agents and police for the past three days after it was reported by Indian officials that the lone gunman captured alive in Mumbai came from a place called Faridkot.

Agents from Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) were still questioning locals yesterday.

"All the agencies have been here and the (police) special branch," said village elder Mehboob Khan Daha. "We have become very worried. What's this all about?"

A dusty backwater, the inhabitants are peasant farmers who own small parcels of land and are poorly educated. Water buffalo and goats roam the dirt tracks of the village.

Men sit around gossiping on traditional woven rope beds, placed out in the open, wearing the usual baggy shalwar kameez pyjama suits, some with turbans. Roughly built small brick homes and little mud huts are dotted around the village, which has a population of about 3,000. It is 34 miles east from the nearest large city, Multan.

"There are no jihadis here," said Ijaz Ahmed, 41. "I can think of maybe 10 or 20 people here who have even been as far as Multan."

The Faridkot link is a key plank of India's accusations against Pakistan. The captured gunman, variously named as Ajmal Amir Kamal, Azam Amir Kasav or Azam Ameer Qasab, is said to come from Faridkot, which is described as being near Multan. He is said to speak fluent English and a clear photograph of him shows a young man in western clothes. Shown a picture of the alleged militant, Daha said: "That's a smart-looking boy. We don't have that sort around here."

In Faridkot, no one appeared to be able to speak much English; most could only converse in a dialect of the provincial language. None of the villagers recognised the face in the photograph.

They said the intelligence agents wanted to know if there was any presence of the radical Deobandi or Al-Hadith religious movements in the village, to which they were told "no". The agents mentioned five names, villagers said, including Ajmal, Amir, Kamal and Azam, all common names in Pakistan. There were five Ajmals in the village, all present except one who is living in provincial capital Lahore, and none fitted the description of the militant. The Azam in the village is a 75-year-old retired railway worker.

One of the Ajmals, a man who thought he was about 30, has worked in a nearby tea factory for the past 12 years, he said. The police and intelligence agencies have been asking his whereabouts.

"All I ever do is go to work, which is about 3km away. I have never been beyond Kanewal (the closest town)," said Muhammad Ajmal. "I'm uneducated."

Faridkot lies in a part of Punjab known for extremist activity but the village itself did not show any signs of being a hotbed of militancy. Written on a board at the entrance to the village mosque, it is declared that members of the hardline Tablighi Jamaat "are not permitted".
 

3 Dec 2008

Mumbai: It was revealed that the terrorist who killed ATS chief Hemanth Karkare, ACP Ashok Kamte and Encounter Specialist Vijay Saleskar conversed in very fluent Marathi.

According to Maharashtra Times, a Marathi daily, the terrorist entered the Kama hospital and gunned down two ward boys who were dressed in the hospital uniform. One of the terrorist pointed an AK 47 rifle towards the third ward boy and asked him in fluent Marathi whether he is an employee in the hospital. The ward boy kneeled and pleaded, saying he is not an employee and he is here for his daughter who is admitted because she had a heart attack. The terrorist inquired again if he is lying. The Ward boy confirmed that he is telling the truth and he was spared.

View attachment 5545f552fb05182bffffd05c4eddc8f3.jpg
 
How Can Terrorists Speak Marathi if they came from Pakistan ???
 
Back
Top Bottom