Mumbai: Tortured Confessions and The Justification For War
By Steve Hynd Wednesday Dec 03, 2008 11:00am
Dittoheads on CNN's Late Edition, Sunday. Sajjan Gohel agrees the Mumbai culprits are the Lek, even though he told the WaPo the day before it was definitely Al Qaeda, and former CIA DDI John McLaughlin, with a straight face and without challenge, says Pakistan's ISI is "very responsive" to civilian authority.
The international community and media appear to have accepted India's allegations of Pakistani involvement in the Mumbai bombings, via an ISI proxy terror group. Yet no-one is mentioning India's atrocious record of widespread torture or the questionable nature of confessions gained by such methods.
The Washington Post's editorial today leads:
WITH EACH passing day, suspicions of a Pakistani link to the slaughter of 174 people, including six Americans, in Mumbai grow stronger -- and more plausible. A captured terrorist has reportedly confessed to Indian officials that he received training in Pakistan from Lashkar-i-Taiba, a guerrilla organization that was nurtured by Pakistani military intelligence to fight India in the disputed Kashmir region.
But really, that confession by one captured terrorist is the only evidence thus far advanced, and (until late Tuesday) everything we know about it has been leaked by unofficial officials rather than with the full backing of the Indian government.
We only have this detainee's alleged word that all the attackers were from Pakistan, that there were only ten of them, that the attacks were funded with Saudi money, that they trained at an LeK camp inside Pakistan, that they hijacked a single Indian vessel to transport then to Mumbai or that they had hoped to kill 5,000 rather than the 200 or so they did murder. All of this relies on the confession of one man, presumably not one of the attacks leaders because that possibility hasn't been mentioned at all and certainly would have been if it were there. The leaked details of his confession have then been amplified and added to by rumor and speculation, particularly by the understandably angry Indian press.
Yet many analysts, including former White House homeland security advisor Fran Townsend on CNN's Late Edition this Sunday, have been openly sceptical about that number of ten terrorists and some reports have said five or more attackers are still quietly being sought while others have reported the involvement of Mumbai locals and links to previous attacks by indigenous militants. If the Indian authorities are sure of the vessel used to sail into Mumbai, as alleged, why are they rumored to be still looking for a possible two more ships? And why is there no sign that the captured terrorist, variously identified as Ajmal Amir Kamal, Azam Amir Kasav, or Azam Ameer Qasab, has ever been near the Pakistani village he told his interrogators was his home?
What India most wants to hear is that Pakistan is complicit and culpable in the Mumbai attacks. Interrogators have delivered exactly that, by way of unofficial leaks. Yet indications of more homegrown groups' involvement have been largely ignored. The tactics used in Mumbai are far more reminiscent of the indigenous communist Naxalite insurgency of India's poorest regions while the dock at which the terrorists landed, perhaps co-incidentally, is one controlled by the D-Company criminal organisation and has been used to smuggle arms into Mumbai in the past. The reality, to my mind, is most likely to be that of elements from homegrown groups reaching out to bigger fish for aid, and those bigger fish having historic connections to the Pakistani establishment. As Mark Sageman wrote in a seminal report on post 9/11 terror networks in 2003: "The network is now self-organized from the bottom up, and is very decentralized. With local initiative and flexibility, it’s very robust."
Right now, accusations concerning the LeK and Pakistan suit everyone. India wants Pakistan to be involved not only because it has a justifiable institutional paranoia where Pakistan is concerned but also because it takes the focus off its own internals feuds and enables it to maintain a facade of an intergrated nation beset from outside. The US and its Western allies want to use such allegations to pressure the Pakistani government to crack down on its shady ISI intelligence service and to pressure Pakistan to expel or crack down on terror groups it has sheltered up until now. And Pakistan wants to use these accusations to bang its own domestic drum about the perrenial Indian threat and to provide a convenient excuse for giving up the reluctant war against militants it has been conducting in regions bordering Afghanistan.
I've one word of caution for those reading about culpability for Mumbai - and that word is "Gitmo." Western readers are already familiar with the stories of "enhanced interrogations" there and at other US-run sites around the world in pursuit of the "war on terror", and have read in detail about how such interrogations produce intelligence that is entirely untrustworthy because tortured suspects will tell their questioners whatever they want to hear. Well, India has an even bigger torture problem than Bush's US does.
A recently released report titled "Torture in India 2008: A State of Denial" - the first-ever nationwide assessment on the use of torture in the world's largest democracy - by the Hong Kong-based Asian Center for Human Rights (ACHR) contains disconcerting facts about the blatant and widespread use of the practice by Indian authorities in prisons and police custody.
The ACHR report found that 7,468 persons, or an average of 1,494 persons per year (four persons daily), have died or been killed in Indian prisons and police custody during the period 2002 to 2007. An equal number of persons, if not more, have been killed in the custody of the army, central armed forces and states' paramilitary forces in insurgency-ravaged areas, according to the report. Worse, a large number of these deaths are allegedly triggered by torture.
ACHR stated that unless India addresses human rights violations and brings suspects to court, the prospects for counter-insurgency success will plummet and the scope for more violent and extreme Armed Opposition Groups (AOGs) will expand. Existing conditions are facilitating those who commit appalling acts of torture with impunity.
India, it seems, is in a worrying state of denial about torture.
If, outside the apologists of the rabid Right, we in the West feel that the taint of torture makes it impossible to justify the rule of law and so justify imprisonment of the tortured, even if they're guilty - then how much more should that moral taint affect our thinking when we consider evidence gained through torture as a justification for war?
Obama, and others who would talk glibly of "sovereignty", should be sure of their moral footing before they shoot.
Keith Olbermann talks to Steve Clemons about the tensions between India and Pakistan and whether our country can has any standing to tell India they don't have a right to pre-emptive strikes after what we did in Iraq and Afghanistan.
(Crossposted from Newshoggers, with videos added. Hat tip to Heather for the vids.)
Login or Register to post comments.
Frahnkensteen!!!
call me crazy, but don't you think that the US is involved with torturing the guy right now?
On top of that, there was an article that said the bodies of the other terrorists were unrecognizable. Wouldn't surprise me that those other guys are alive somewhere and being tortured too.
Hmmm, this kinda makes me think of the post 9/11 atmosphere.
I bet India is ready now to carry out preemptive strikes against Pakistan---thank you very much for leading by example Dubya.
Now they feel like they have the perfect excuse to do everything they have ever dreamed of doing to the Pakistanis and more
Where is Bin Laden? Pakistan
Who helped train the Taliban? Pakistan
Who gave Mohamed Atta $100000 on 9/10/2001? Pakistan
Who did we give $4+ billion dollars to fight terror? Pakistan
Where is THE place to buy wmds, besides the US? Pakistan
Canada
You know what India dreams of doing to Pakistan? Enjoying peaceful, normalized, friendly relations. Fostering trade, diplomacy and cultural exchange. A future where the tension stays on the cricket field and doesn't spill blood in the streets.
But the re-emergence of the chauvinistic BJP tells me that there is a significant population of Indians whose means-to-ends aren't necessarily pacifistic. India, as a whole, can still claim the moral high ground in its argument with Pakistan, but it's not like that high ground is atop Mt. Everest.
You are applying labels to a political party you know nothing of.. My views in India are "far right wing".. here I am center left (agree with liberal positions on everything except immigration and terrorism; thought the iraq war was immoral and unjustified)..
The "left" or center "left" in India is truly the communists of the past, they even call themselves CPI (M) and CPI (ML) where M and L stand for Messrs Marx and Lenin respectively.. The Congress party in india, is the most corrupt party (kind of like the neocons of the bush era).. I am not saying BJP is a paragon of virtue.. but it is certainly not "chauvinistic".. unless you think polygamy should be allowed, oral divorce should be allowed (all "rights" conferred to Muslims by the Indian 'secularists')..
Also, "preemptive"? If the evidence shows that Pakistan is involved, then any action would be retaliatory and a measure to protect India; not "preemptive".
I'm certain that these aggressors had a contingency plan if indeed they were captured and subsequently tortured for information.
Valid point. Its too bad only one was captured; they can't compare stories and find gaps.
Condi Rat said yesterday the group has "owl-kater like thinking". Investigators should look to see who got money from who in the ISI. This reeks of state funded false flag ops. The killing has to be big enough, but not too big. These false flag operations and planned killings will keep happening until people get their head out of their ass. Oh no our governments would never do such a thing, that would be a "conspiracy", and therefore cannot be. Is it not dark in there people? The only reason that the whole thing was not put on owl-kater was because too much info leaked from outside the controlled media into public view. CEO,citizens,eyes,open.
What's horrible about this Bush regime's crimes, atrocities, and treason is that the regime has made the United States the one of the world's worse human rights violators, allowing China and various third world shithole dictators to point at our nation as a whole and rightfully denounce our idiot posturing of being the world's great human rights advocates.
Not only did 10 lone terrorists bring an entire city to its knees for 3 days their goal was to kill 5,000 people with guns and grenades. Yea, right.
hey, this guy's name wouldn't happen to be curveball, would it?
Tortured Confessions sounds like one of those teen girl gossip magazine titles from the 50's and 60's.
http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/USPics5/92178...
The ISI is very responsive to civilian authority. It's just that their response is generally assassination.
Cernig, yet again you sympathize with a failed state whose fragmented government has elements that finance and support terrorism. I hope the best for you and yours, I really do, but C, God forbid, if one of your loved ones died in a terrorist attack, then you would be thinking differently. Your point about home grown terror is not entirely valid either. While the bodies may be from India, the ideology, training, support and supply are likely not. It is a lot more likely that Pakistan had a role in this than not. Also, you say that there is no evidence beyond the attacker's confession, and as such all reports in the matter are speculative. I ask you, what evidence do you have, beyond speculation, that he was tortured? Your rebuttal may be historical examples, but again, if we use that same logic, attacks in India in the past have also been financed by Pakistani elements. Ultimately C, your own logic undermines your arguments.
Like you did on Friday's post.
This post isn't sympathetic to Pakistan at all. Cernig is simply pointing out that there is what seems to be a rush to judgement- and quite probably a pre-ordained judgement.
Do you recall the day the Murrah Federal Building (in Oklahoma City) was bombed? If you had asked, in the few hours after the attack, 10 people who they thought were the likely culprits that day, 9 of them would have told you it was the A-Rabs. Had Timothy McVeigh not been caught that day, you can be pretty sure that a lot of Arabs would have been rounded up in short order.
Pakistan is very likely to be involved in this attack in Mumbai, and no one is denying that here- not me, you or Cernig, anyway. But likely is not guilty. And making a leap from likely to guilty so quickly- a knee-jerk reaction- may very well create a needlessly more heightened tension between Indians and Pakistanis than would a cool-headed, leak-free investigation.
It's not that I'm misreading. Its that I'm reading between the lines and considering the source (or am attempting to based on posting history). Are you misreading? I never said "guilty". Let may just ask this: if it turns out that support for this attack came from Pakistan, will Cernig acknowledge this and admonish Pakistan? Or will he blame innocent Indian Hindus, like he suggested in previous posts?
Links, please.
http://crooksandliars.com/cernig/mumbai-attac...
http://crooksandliars.com/2008/09/29/zardari-...
http://crooksandliars.com/2008/09/21/islamaba...
http://crooksandliars.com/2008/09/17/that-pak...
http://crooksandliars.com/2008/08/20/the-paki...
No, I'm not ignorant of the connections. You'll find links in those posts to older posts I wrote when few in the West wanted to acknowledge them.
Now jump down of your nationalist hobby-horse.
And how the f--- would you know if I've ever lost anyone to terrorism? I have, as it happens, a friend died in one of the IRA's bombings in London. The folks who headed the IRA are now peaceful co-governors of N. Ireland. Eventually, you have to talk to terrorists.
Regards, C
Hey C,
I am very sorry for your friend, and I did not mean to imply you would not know the pain of such a loss. But you cannot always talk to terrorists. I am not on a "nationalist hobby horse". I just think that it is a little disingenuous to say you can talk to terrorists by citing one case. The IRA scenario follows the Ross Model of co-optation of moderates, while providing a combination of disincentives and political alternatives to extremists--which is what India has done (electing Congress and having a Muslim President is just one example). I just don't understand why you chastise others for rushing to blame Muslims when you rush to defend them.
Let the people who got attacked decide how they want to react.. If the indians want to make highly focussed targetted attack to take down terrorist breeding grounds.. let them.. Their lives are on the line.. your ideology doesnt matter
You're definitely forgetting that many on this website ARE Indians.
I am Indian.. I am saying let those that actually live in India make that decision without being judged by any external standards....
That's an old Hindu idiom. Let me show you what it means. [Deleted. Sitemonitor]
Firstly, DNI John Michael McConnell clearly implicated LeT in the attacks (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/...).
Secondly, the confession of the captured terrorist. Now, it is true that his statements may have been made under coersion. However, by many accounts, he told nurses and doctors to "put me on saline. I do not want to die." (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/30/m...) Therefore, it is clear that he wants to live, and the best way to do that is to cooperate. Al-Qaeda operatives usually are more defiant as martyrdom is their ultimate goal. LeT--not so much.
Thirdly, U.S. Intel had specifically warned India that a maritime attack on Mumbai was imminent. By estimating the position of the Indian vessel that was hijacked, it is clear that the terrorists had to have set sail from the port of Karachi. Evidence from the recovered GPS unit on the Indian vessel may provide more clues. Who knows, the RAW and the CIA are probably making LeT assertions after combing through such evidence that is not yet public?
Fourthly, I don't think anyone is questioning how truthful P.M. Giliani or Pres. Zardari are being on this matter. It is a simple fact that the Pakistani military (ISI is a part of the military) is almost a separate faction in the government, not accountable to the people. This is how Gen. Musharraf become a dictator in the first place, displacing P.M. Sharif. Even Zardari on Larry King Live acknowledged that the ISI has not made good decisions in the past: "In the past, lots of mistakes have been made, I cannot deny that." The extent of ISI's power is even more obvious when one looks at how Zardari's promise that the ISI chief would travel to New Delhi was quickly squashed by the generals. No politician likes to be put in this situation if it is, at all, under his power to avoid it. Zardari obviously could not.
I think 7MGE is the closest to getting the truth her. Andy K is trying too hard to be deductively valid--remember, no court in the world holds that high of a standard, just beyond a reasonable doubt, or even probable cause.
Always hard to know what is really going on. There could be Pakistan involvement or there may not be? Hard to know.
You would think they might be able to identify the attackers like they did with the 9-11 attackers. Look at video, trace personal items, etc., although I am sure the Pakistanis are not being particularly helpful.
to find more evidence linking Saudi funding to this. fuck Saudi Arabia.
No choice now, move in and monitor the movement of every citizen.
China did it via the Olympics, u.s. (so many plans too little time), uk (kameras on every korner, micros in vaginas) nationalize banks to clean 'em out and turn 'em off, but always always SHOCK 'em first.
Cernig has done it again.. In fact this time his O'Reilliness has let him contradict himself. In his last post he said "... It is not the rogue elements within ISI but that ISI itself controls terrorist groups operating in the valley (Kashmir)..." And today he says India is torturing this innocent guy to make him say pakistan... Hmm... I remember all the libruhls getting worked up over imaginary scenarios that the Bushies would pose to justify torture and say "... ohh that can never happen.. " Well something has happened... this guy along with others has killed 170 people in cold blood (or do you think this is a Hindu Zionist conspiracy?) and if your own contention is right, there are 5 missing then I dont care if they torture him till eternity... we need to catch those 5 guys. I would say the same if it was US that was attacked. I agree with the liberal position that you can not torture someone based on suspicion (of him being a bad guy or him having some info)... but here *we do know* he is a bad guy, even by libruhl standards he is a bad guy and when lives hang in the balance.. what do you do? Impose your sense of moral outrage on a country that obviously doesnt have the funds or the resources to counter terrorism like US & UK...
The next point.. have you been sleeping? They discovered sim cards and phone numbers and satellite phones and they traced those calls and found they were made to the head of LeT and found that he is in Pakistan... Indian newspapers have published the address of other terrorists that Pakistan is harboring.. Masood Azhar, Dawood.. But in your playbook Hindu, Christian lives dont matter.. only muslim terrorists have that right.. This junk has infuriated me so much.. John, if you care one fig about the opinions of old time readers.. you will stop this nonsense.. Where was cernig's outrage on 9/12/01? It is easy to judge someone from 10000ft, why not go visit the people who have lost their lives and ask them if they would rather see those 5 others caught or have the terrorists rights upheld.
Also, I know Cernig, [Deleted-Sitemonitor] what proof do you have this guy was tortured?
Stop feeding him.
[You've been registered here for under 30 minutes and you are calling one of the regular C&L contributors a troll? First, you don't seem to understand the meaning of the word "troll" to be able to apply it in context; second, that's just plain rude. You may engage in polite argument here, but any more of this and you WILL be on the outside looking in. Thank you. Site Monitor]
[Deleted. Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. You know, if you keep making stuff up about the contributors on this site, you won't be allowed to post here. You are unaware of Cernig's background, think you know it all and that's fine. Just don't post it here. It's rude and off topic.
'He gets his info from wiki' that's just BS and you know it. If you want to accuse him of all sorts, put it in an email to John or the Site Team-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. Off topic. If you have a complaint, for the umpteenth time, put it in an email. The warning wasn't for you to shut up, it was for you to stop making unfounded accusations and being rude, which you were, in and of itself 'disgusting' to use your word for it.
We value opposing viewpoints, just don't be rude to the contributors, the Site Team or other posters. I think 99.999% of our posters can handle that and work well within those loose parameters. I don't think I'm asking too much of an intelligent passionate person such as yourself to follow the same rules we impose on all of our posters-Sitemonitor]
and cool down. No ad hominem attacks here, as per the commenting rules. To be fair, elint6 may have genuinely believed that Cernig's posts are intended only to provoke. In that case, let's attack the arguments (and NOT the people behind them) with all ferocity.
thought. I don't always agree with the man but his posts are always well researched and insightful.
I hate hominy grits
And no ad will convince me otherwise.
You are right, ignorance should be eliminated through discussion and that is what I tried to achieve (look at my comments on the last 3 posts he has made).... I even wrote an email... so that his posts might actually be based on some reality... I also suggested to not use any labels or obtain information from wikipedia.. I truly am reminded of O'Reilly.... because like him, Cernig is a mystery to me... He is definitely not an ideologue but never lets facts get in his way of establishing a narrative (this posts narrative was how India is 'rushing' to attack Pak and how India can not be called on it by the Bushies because of their own wars and therefore, Bush is bad..) I think he forgot what he himself wrote sat... What does make me lose temper is the persistent boneheadedness of many in the msm and some bloggers like cernig who refuse to see the pakistan connection. Does that mean we believe all Pakistanis are bad? No. Does that mean we think some in the govt and military and ISI were complicit.. Definitely (just google Kargil and establish a timeline of what was happening when Vajpayee and Mushy were shaking hands in Lahore). Do we want to destroy all pakistanis. No. Should we "blame" pakistan more than we blame India? No! Congress, CPI, SP, BSP all should share this blame for abolishing POTA. Pakistan is only second to India when it comes time to apportion blame.
Again, I did call him out previously but this is just continuation of ignorance, in my opinion....
:bow to the site monitors:
[We appreciate your point of view, and know that it comes from knowledge-Sitemonitor]
...you just ignore what cernig posted at 16:11?
Jesus, you're getting denser and denser as this goes along. If you think the guy supports Pakistan over India you're just plain nuts.
Here's the problem: There are two neighboring countries with thermonuclear weapons who are going back and forth with each other. Right now, with the rate of provocations and righteously indignant replies skyrocketing, it doesn't seem like a question of "if" there will be a war, but "when" there will be a war. And if you think that this war won't involve the rest of the world negatively, think again. I don't like the idea of waking up to a morning snowfall consisting of radioactive flakes. I wasn't alive during the Cuban Missile Crisis, but I can't imagine that a nuclear exchange was any more imminent then than it is now- in fact, it was probably less likely in '62.
It's time to ratchet down the bellicosity. I don't care which side starts using it's fucking brains first, but it has got to STOP!
Are you getting this yet?
Are you kidding me? I said he is overlooking (maybe out of ignorance) facts to make up a narrative.. Does that mean I think he supports pakistan? No.. please reread.. before you call someone dense.. I apologize for calling cernig a name in one of my previous posts..
I dont think there will be a war (of course I should be more concerned because my parents are in India).. no.. there will be no war.. The most I expect is a strongly worded letter to the UN and pakistan... I really dont think war with pakistan is the answer either...
Considering the triangle of alliance between Indian, the U.S. and Israel, it's hard to know if either of those three is telling the truth, especially when their interests converge regarding Pakistan.
Why in the hell do you think those two nations were in such a rush to join the nuclear club? Just for the status?
There's a thousand pound gorilla in the room- it's wise not to poke it with sticks until you analyze the situation thoroughly.
Thank you! I agree with you 100 percent! I have been reading this blog since 2004. Cernig's posts don't make sense and don't mesh with the views of most who read this blog. He is a sympathizer of terrorism. He blames others of jumping the gun and blaming Muslim, when he does the same thing defending them at every turn!
Nowhere has he stated that this can't be Muslims. The closest thing Cernig has stated to "blaming" Hindus is that the RSS/BJP have fostered tensions between Hindus and Muslims in Mumbai. That is not sympathy, that is pointing at a very probable cause of last weeks terrorism.
He had expressly said not to make haste in accusing Islamic terrorists and pointed to SIMI, Naxalites and BJP.... And to put a major political party in that mix is the first thing that made my blood boil.. Are you kidding me? That would be like saying the republicans are responsible for race riots... So NO! I will not have that kind of comparison thrown around in my presence.. Do you know the first two kill people and the latter wants to abolish polygamy and hence is a "right-wing, anti-secular" party in India...
Ohh and BTW what proof do you have that BJP fostered Hindu-Muslim divide in Mumbai (Actually cernig hallucinated Gujrat and when I asked him for the date the supposed statement was made, he couldnt provide us that)..
so, I understand as an outsider you want to take a neutral, politically correct, balanced view.. But I will not have you draw comparison between people that kill other people willy nilly and people who have only cotributed to India's development and dont like to dole out sops to particular religious communities..
Andy, look up probable cause unless you mean to use that phrase as a provocation of terrorism. In that case you are still wrong. Congress, not the BJP is in power. And you are wrong about Mumbai as well. It is a major metropolis. People may harbor some hatred, but they set it aside, the same way people in New York interact with each other regardless of race, religion, etc. What ever the case, there is NEVER a justification for terrorism. Why? Because it targets innocent civilians.
The US and India both had wire intercepts of telephone calls coming in and out of Pakistan during the raids. Let alone there were warnings before the incident of just such an incident. Finally, while I am not privy to classified information, I believe the US and India are capable of listening into probably every communication that takes place in Pakistan (except for those in the proverbial bubble and maybe even those too). The US knows what is going on in Pakistan, I can almost guarantee it. I understand the apprehension of believing what a supposed lone suspect, who was probably tortured is telling us, but that doesn't stop you from citing the WaPo, which is an inkwell for Republicon talking points.
You, too, cite Fran Townsend as if she were credible, reputable or trustworthy? Being that she works for Bush, she should definitely not be believed except with a health does of skepticism.
Full Disclosure: I am an Indian person who has been raised in America since the age of 4, and am now a US citizen.
I was outraged when MSNBC sounded almost dismissive when comparing the non-Western casualty count with the Westerners. I was as outraged when I first read this piece by Cernig. In both cases, a little breathing did a lot to diffuse me.
I would like to challenge Cernig's assertions though. I'll try to keep this point by point.
1) "But really, that confession by one captured terrorist is the only evidence thus far advanced, and (until late Tuesday) everything we know about it has been leaked by unofficial officials rather than with the full backing of the Indian government."
There have been several comments on this post pointing to evidence that goes beyond the gunman's confession. I do agree that all information we've received should be colored with the agendas of those who are reporting. I'll come back to that statement later.
On this point though, you said everything we know has been leaked by unofficial officials. You seem to be faulting them for taking more time before making an official declaration. If I'm not mistaken, the whole point of this post is to urge everyone to NOT jump to conclusions. You see the contradiction?
2) "Yet many analysts, including former White House homeland security advisor Fran Townsend on CNN's Late Edition this Sunday, have been openly sceptical about that number of ten terrorists and some reports have said five or more attackers are still quietly being sought while others have reported the involvement of Mumbai locals and links to previous attacks by indigenous militants."
There are numerous possible explanations, but none that are definite. The gunman might have only been aware of those who participated in the attacks that day. The gunman might have been instructed to only cite ten attackers, so as to provide cover for the rest. This is all conjecture though, I just wanted to point out that there is no absurdity in him getting the wrong number (if it is the wrong number).
3) "And why is there no sign that the captured terrorist, variously identified as Ajmal Amir Kamal, Azam Amir Kasav, or Azam Ameer Qasab, has ever been near the Pakistani village he told his interrogators was his home?"
The McClatchy article you site starts like so:
"For the past three days Pakistani intelligence agents and police have been combing this sleepy village in search of clues to the identity of the lone gunman captured in the Mumbai terror attacks, residents said on Monday."
Remember, all reported information should be colored with the agendas of those reporting. If the ISI is a suspect in this attack, and then they "find nothing" in their search -- you'd trust that as gospel truth? The man who is interviewed even says the authorities were there before the interviewers got there. No definite evidence of any wrongdoing, yet you must exercise the same caution you want everyone else to use when judging this situation.
As far as slightly different names/spellings, I can only think of the different ways I've seen Al-Qaeda spelled. Possibly something lost in translation?
I'm unable to see any other points in your article I'd like to comment, except to say thank you. Thank you for making sure that we don't mindlessly march to the war drums when we feel our security is threatened. It is an important point, but I think your article has a condescending tone it can do without.
I sincerely hope this incident has nothing to do with Pakistan, if only to stop more needless violence. However, we cannot allow stateless organizations to attack innocent people and then hide in otherwise peaceful nations. Those peaceful nations have a duty to assist the world in our endeavor to stamp out radicalism. If those nations are "reluctant", as you said Pakistan was, then when do we say enough is enough? I forget the exact quote but it is something like "All evil needs is for good people to stand by and do nothing".
Violence is a blight on humankind, and in extreme cases it can only be quenched with more of the same. It is a horrible truth, but a truth nonetheless.
Just as a side note, an interesting article I ran into while researching my response: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articlesho...
Aha. In other words, you're just looking for a green light to go and 'kick some Pakistani butt', aren't you? Do you want them nuked? And then what? Of all the accusations being thrown around that Cernig has his mind made up, you're the one with the blinders on, refusing to acknowledge inconsistencies in the Indian government's story no matter what evidence is put forth.
YOU need only look in the mirror to see who's got his mind made up and it is YOU. You were also the same one trumpeting against Pakistan from day one. How is it that Pakistan's culpability was so clear to you even at that early stage? It boggles the mind. No, wait, don't tell me. You're psychic.
Hey Loom, that's not really fair. You know a lot of Indians still feel that the partition was brutal and tore neighbors and loved ones apart. I think most Indians--and Pakistanis--would do anything to avert a war, especially a nuclear one, because at the end of the day, South Asians are a common people with a common history. The comments I've read don't reflect a "green light to 'kick some Pakistani butt'". But what is is sought is accountability and full cooperation from the Pakistani government. This means that they must admit they don't have full territorial control of their state, and need help (from the US, India, Afghani authorities, and even Russia and China) to strengthen their legitimate rule and crack down on terrorism. Ultimately, this is a lot more about cooperation than conflict.
Personally, Cernig's got it all wrong. There is a lot of evidence pointing to Pakistan influence direct or indirect to terrorist activities in India and elsewhere. I believe America is very much aware and conveniently looked the other way especially during the Reagan/Bush administrations. India does not want to have war with Pakistan. Unlike USA we are not capable of a one sided war. War is extremely expensive and we do not necessarily want to push back development another 20 years. A strong and stable Pakistan is very much in our interests.
Torture is very much part of our law enforcement system, and the modus operandi after a terrorist attack is to round up a few minority youth stick electrodes to their testicles and try to get them to confess. How ever in this case the physical evidence and trail speaks volumes.
The BJP is a very right wing political party and like their counterparts in the rest of the world exploit fears and prejudices. They effectively use their more extreme brothers like the RSS, VHP to create communal disharmony and exploit the anger. Like the other gentleman is obsessed with polygamy, but not bothered that Hindu lower castes and women are still exploited and abused and killed. However I doubt the BJP has the stomach for a full scale war too.
Dude, you do know that lower caste people have reservations... A brahmin male can effectibely compete for only 3% of seats in education and government jobs in India. I am not going to debate the merits or demerits of that situation. My point is casteism is illegal (unless of course it is institutionalized reverse casteism) and so is taking dowry. I totally support those laws and am in favor of a "Common Civil code" that the BJP had proposed. Of course you people (Indian pseudo secularists) think that having a common civil code that everyone obeys is somehow wrong and exploiting the 'difference' between different communities... Remember BJP nominated a Muslim for president... I would like to see Congress or CPI nominate one so called 'right winger'...
Have you seen any torture that you can claim so boldly that is exactly what happens in all cases?
First of all, as a long time reader of this blog, I was really disappointed with Cernig's recent posts regarding the Mumbai Attack.
Though I refrained from commenting to display my disappointment, my thoughts were expressed by various other readers in the comments section.
Anyhow, the investigative work done by reporters from Observer
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/07/m... clearly demostrates that the lone terrorist captured did indeed come from the place, he confessed to indian police.
It is really surprising that, while Pakistan goverment was hell-bent on denying any links to the terrorists with unforutunately Cernig has also bought in to, couple of journalists doing a hard job in a hostile country was able to come up with the definitive proof.
Hats off to Observer team.
On a related note, see how news broadcasts from around the world are talking about the roots of the Mumbai terror attacks in the long-running conflict between India and Pakistan over the territory of Kashmir.
http://www.linktv.org/globalpulse
Watch Global Pulse to know what the rest of the world is saying. I'm an intern working with them.
From LinkTV, a nonprofit TV channel dedicated to world news, documentaries, cinema and programming.
www.linktv.org
Login or Register to post comments.