Sunday, May 5, 2013

Al-Qaeda’s India focus - The New Indian Express

Al-Qaeda’s India focus - The New Indian Express:

Al-Qaeda’s India focus

11th October 2012 11:10 PM
In recent years, India has been frequently mentioned in Al-Qaeda’s literature, but a September 30 statement by a senior militant in Pakistan indicates that the terror group is evolving its strategy on the Myanmar-Assam region. In the statement, Ustad Ahmad Farooq, who was appointed as Al-Qaeda’s head of preaching and media department for Pakistan in 2009, warned that the recent killings of Muslims in Myanmar and Assam “provide impetus for us to hasten our advance towards Delhi”. He noted: “I warn the Indian government that after Kashmir, Gujarat… you may add Assam to the long list of your evil deeds.”
Al-Qaeda’s emerging thinking on the Myanmar-Assam region is consistent with its new jihadi framework on South Asia. From 2008 onwards, after Al-Qaeda militants were tortured in Pakistani prisons, it produced academic research, arguing that the Pakistan Army is an apostate force and eligible to be annihilated for supporting the United States war on terror. The Pakistan Army has been involved in killing Muslims — Al-Qaeda argued in videos and statements — through the past three centuries: notably as part of Indian units of the British colonial force in 1757 war, against Mughal rulers in 1857 and during British military expeditions to Baghdad and Jerusalem before the second world war; and after 1947, in the 1971 Bangladesh war, in toppling the Taliban regime in 2001 and in the Pakistani tribal region and Balochistan recently. To advance its jihadi framework, Al-Qaeda relies on an Islamist interpretation that a Muslim ‘assisting infidels even partly’ has left Islam and is therefore liable to be killed.
Another factor injecting an element of India perspective into Al-Qaeda’s strategic thinking is its recruitment of Pakistani militants to top operational and organisational positions, for example Ilyas Kashmir and Mansoor Badr, both of whom were killed in US drone strikes. Ustad Farooq, the first Pakistani national to be promoted to a leadership position in Al-Qaeda, has emerged as its sole spokesman on South Asia. Early this year, Farman Ali Shinwari, a key militant commander, was appointed as head of Al-Qaeda’s Pakistani branch, replacing Mansoor Badr. According to Pakistani author Amir Mir, Shinwari’s three brothers were involved in Kashmir jihad during the 1990s. Although Al-Qaeda has been led by Arab fighters, its recruitment of local militants means that the group has a ready historical-jihadi framework on India, where it sees a large presence of disaffected Muslims.
Following the killing of Osama bin Laden, the US has given an impression that Al-Qaeda has been largely defeated. However, ground realities are otherwise: hordes of Al-Qaeda terrorists can be seen roaming publicly in Somalia, Yemen, Syria, Libya, Iraq and Egypt. The Taliban and Al-Qaeda videos emerging from Afghanistan and Pakistan on jihadi Internet forums reveal a similar pattern: in these videos, militants are not seen hiding in caves and mountains, but they appear in droves and pass through villages led by their commanders.
In recent months, Afghan soldiers defecting to the Taliban were garlanded at public ceremonies in remote villages where presence of children was visible. Some US analysts have sought to present Mullah Mohammad Omar as leader of the Taliban whose focus is limited to Afghanistan. In reality, all jihadist groups in the Middle East and the Caucasus have offered, like Osama bin Laden did, their bai’yah (oath of allegiance) to Mullah Omar, who is deemed as Emir-ul-Momineen, leader of the faithful, leading the global jihad.
In Pakistan, there is a worrying pattern in counter insurgency: while several Taliban and Al-Qaeda militants have been killed in US drone strikes, the Pakistani military operations have invariably avoided killing or capturing any top Taliban commander — except for two Taliban spokesmen, Maulvi Omar and Muslim Khan, who were detained. Pakistan does not need to kill thousands of militants to win this war and curb Islamic extremism: it merely needs to kill or arrest the top 25 commanders, including Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, Fazlur Rehman Khalil and Maulana Masood Azhar. However, this is unlikely to occur, as the Pakistan Army, once a strong force, is too weak now to confront them. Currently, the Taliban militants are recuperating and strengthening their fighters in the hope of the US troop withdrawal from Afghanistan by 2014 and for a new era of jihad to begin.
In his statement, Ustad Farooq mentioned the issue of Muslim minorities in Thailand, Burma, India and Sri Lanka, and in a bid to recruit Pakistani soldiers to Al-Qaeda’s cause, argued that Muslims who had been supporting Pakistan migrated to Assam and Burma due to Pakistani Army’s failure to win the 1971 Bangladesh war. The lower ranks of Pakistan Army remain influenced by the jihadi message. Over the past three decades, soldiers recruited into Pakistani Army were influenced by a jihadi culture and into the next three decades they will be moving into decision-making positions in the military.
Notwithstanding India’s unilateral drive to better relations with Pakistan, it is unlikely that the Pakistani military’s jihadi impulse will permit democratic forces to assert control in Islamabad. This complicates the scenario in South Asia, as Al-Qaeda’s central leadership in Pakistan is known to have worked with and without the support of the jihadi forces in Pakistani military.
In addition to the India-specific threat, Ustad Farooq also warned Buddhists in Thailand, Myanmar and Sri Lanka. Urging Islamic scholars in Bangladesh “to step forward and help the oppressed Muslims living in their neighbourhood”, he also warned the Burmese government: “Don’t think that the blood of Muslims will continue to flow like this.”
The September 30 statement is also perhaps the most detailed policy document to emerge from Al-Qaeda’s top leadership in Pakistan with regard to South Asia. On the 9/11 anniversary this year, Al-Qaeda leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri vowed to liberate “occupied Muslim lands”, including India. In short, Al-Qaeda is developing its look-east policy for South and Southeast Asia. Amid a series of Indian intelligence failures over the recent decades such as those leading to the Kargil War and the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, India is totally unprepared to prevent terrorism on its soil.
Tufail Ahmad is Director of South Asia Studies Project at the Middle East Media Research institute, Washington DC

'via Blog this'

Friday, March 15, 2013

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan - COMMENT : Democracy and Indian Muslims — Tufail Ahmad

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan - COMMENT : Democracy and Indian Muslims — Tufail Ahmad:

Daily Star, Lahore, Pakistan
Saturday, March 16, 2013

Democracy and Indian Muslims 
By Tufail Ahmad

Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, the self-confessed leader of the banned outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba, may think that Pakistan is the best Islamic nation for the Bollywood star, Shahrukh Khan to move to, but it is India that is arguably the best Muslim country today. Muslims in India enjoy complete political and religious liberty, a free legislative environment to undertake economic and educational initiatives, a vibrant television media and cinema that teach liberal coexistence, and access to a vast number of universities and institutes of modern education. There is absolutely no Muslim country that offers such a vast array of freedoms to its people.

India is able to offer these freedoms to its citizens because it is a successful democracy. It was good for India to lose the 1857 war; if the British had lost, Indians would have continued to be governed by kings and nawabs, and under shari’a courts that existed during the Mughal era. At the time of independence, the British left behind a justice system that was blind to religious and caste inequities in Indian society, an inclusive democracy that guaranteed equal rights and religious and political freedoms for all; English language that opened doorway to enlightenment and scientific education; and a civil service that treated everyone as Indians rather than Muslims, Hindus or Christians. Muslims in India enjoy these freedoms because India is a thriving democracy, unlike Pakistan that chose a discriminatory constitution, barring its own citizens from holding top positions such as the president of Pakistan because they are Hindus or Christians. Over the past half century, hundreds of millions of Dalits and women have found political empowerment and social freedoms in Indian democracy.

Religion cannot be a good model of governance for modern times because it fails to imagine situations in which non-Muslim citizens could be trusted to govern a Muslim country. Conversely, democracies trust their citizens irrespective of their faith. In a democracy like India, any citizen could compete to be the elected ruler. As democracy matures, India has appointed its Muslim citizens to top positions, currently Hamid Ansari as vice president, Salman Khurshid as foreign minister, Justice Altamas Kabir as Chief Justice, and Syed Asif Ibrahim as the chief of the Intelligence Bureau. It is also true that Muslims lag behind in India’s collective life, but this is because they are under the influence of orthodox ulema or because Muslim politicians fail to imagine themselves as leaders of all Indians. A Muslim politician will be the country's prime minister the day Indian Muslims begin to view themselves as leaders of all Indians and not only of Muslims, much like Barack Obama who imagined himself as a leader not only of blacks, but of all Americans.

Effectively, India is a ‘western’ country. In the popular imagination, the west is viewed as a geographic concept, covering mainly the United States, Britain and parts of Europe. However, the ground realities are otherwise. Several countries, notably Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea, are situated in the east, but in terms of their values and politics are firmly part of the west. Conversely, countries such as Russia and some in Latin America are geographically in the west but cannot be called a western country as their citizens do not enjoy the social and political freedoms available to free people in the west. The organising principles of Indian polity and society are the same that define a western country: a multi-party system, individualism, liberty, a free press and rule of law. As in a western country, consensus about governance, politics and society is moderated by media and political parties and is derived from differences rather than similarities of religion and ideology as in Saudi Arabia or North Korea.

Early this year, Shahrukh Khan wrote a long article in which he discussed how “stereotyping and contextualizing” determine the way societies treat us as individuals as we interact with others. Khan narrated that he is loved as a Bollywood star in every country, but is also questioned by officials at US airports over links to terrorists, as his surname is shared by an unknown terrorist. Khan also observed: “There have been occasions when I have been accused of bearing allegiance to our neighbouring nation [Pakistan].” Hafiz Saeed reacted to this statement, suggesting that Khan, and presumably all Indian Muslims, should move to Pakistan. If Khan were to move to Pakistan, think of the images he would witness everyday: the genocide of Shia Muslims; the Taliban bombers shooting girls and namazis; Karachi up in flames and Pakistani businessmen leaving the country; plight of Hindus and Christians and lawlessness everywhere.

Saeed and his cohorts must bear in mind that terrorism that affects Muslims in India originates from Pakistan: the jihad in Kashmir through the 1990s or the attacks by Indian Mujahideen collaborating with their controllers in Pakistan. Like any country, India has its own share of extremist Hindus as well as Islamic and naxalite militants, but the courts are taking care of them.

Indian democracy is a model for all Islamic countries. It is the only country where Muslims have experienced democracy solidly for more than half a century; the other countries where Muslims have had some democratic experience are Indonesia and Turkey but their experiences have been limited to just a few decades. Democracies trust their citizens and are accountable to them. Democracies also bring freedom and economic prosperity for their people. In his book, Development as Freedom, Nobel laureate Amartya Sen demonstrated that famines have occurred only in countries governed under authoritarianism while freedom available to people in democracies has ensured economic welfare of their entire populations. Indian democracy has a large Muslim population, about the same as in Pakistan. As democracy matures and economy prospers, Muslims in India are beginning to benefit from a sea of economic and educational opportunities opening before them.

Islamic and authoritarian countries like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and North Korea do not trust their own people. Islamic terrorists, jihadists like Hafiz Saeed and other Taliban-like Islamists think of defending their religions and ideologies rather than the interests and welfare of their people. It is due to such thinking that 180 million people of Pakistan are today literally buried under the weight of a failed education system, a rapidly collapsing Pakistani economy that is forcing business leaders to move their money to countries such Sri Lanka, lawlessness that makes common Pakistanis insecure in their own homes and a future that fails to offer hope. The Inter-Services Intelligence, a friend of Saeed that imagines itself as the ideological guardian of the Islamic state of Pakistan, could do a favour by trusting the Pakistani people and letting them decide their own course of life and governance.

'via Blog this'

Monday, March 11, 2013

Pakistan’s cultural crisis

Pakistan’s cultural crisis:

Pakistan’s cultural crisis

We adopted a legacy where dogmas, beliefs and predetermined thought patterns replaced free thinking and scientific approach towards life. Aesthetically stale and intellectually bankrupt we are a society which aspires to dominate the world by adopting an abstract religious philosophy which nobody has so far been able to even define
From a diverse and tolerant culture of fertile lands which characterized dance and music on festive occasions like holi and basant we transitioned to a culture of vast deserts where blood flows to commemorate celebration. While performingsadqa or on the occasion of eid-ul-azha the victim is always a fellow creature. While associating with values of a different culture, romance and beauty of life was to be replaced by a stiff and sober attitude governed by pride superiority and self righteousness laced with intolerance with an exclusivist outlook towards the out-group. Pleasure and fun in this life was to be sacrificed for a luxurious life in the hereafter as the “real” life was supposed to begin after death. The society gradually became repressive and presently a large part thereof considers “pleasure seeking” a sin. During the New Year night when the entire world is having fun, the large majority in our society rejects the onset of the New Year. Our new year, as they say, begins with the first of Muharram with wailing and crying, an activity which then continues for the rest of the year. Basant used to be a festive occasion, which today is no more permissible under various pretexts. Pleasure- seeking is being restricted to mehfil-e-naat, participation in eid-e-milad or attending the tableeghi ijtamah. A few days back the goons of Jamaat-e-Islami threatened to attack a humorous poetry recitation session to be held on world population day i.e. July 11th. It was cancelled as the Punjab government backed out.
Presently another source of pleasure is discussing the destruction of the former Soviet Union, the US, India and Israel, while dreaming about the renaissance of Islam when Muslims would rule the world. Looking at models of missiles and mountains of Chaghi also gratifies our sensibilities. Some even advocate the use of nuclear weapons to annihilate the enemy while more than half the world is our enemy. We can also give them the choice of either embracing Islam, or observe complete submission and pay jazia or be prepared to die.
We also adopted a legacy where dogmas, beliefs and predetermined thought patterns replaced free thinking and scientific approach towards life. We often refer to Muslim scientists in history and their contributions but seldom mention as to what treatment was meted out to them by the state and society. Jabir Bin Hayan the chemist was placed under house arrest where he expired later. All books of al-Kindi the great philosopher were confiscated. Ibn-e-Haitham the great physicist had to pretend that he was a madman so that he could save his skin, while he was put under house arrest. Averros was banished and Avicenna kept moving from city to city to avoid persecution. A society progresses only when there is freedom to ask questions without any fear or restraint. Cultures where restrictions are imposed and you cannot say what you want to, the society stagnates. Today a large majority cannot even critically examine the blasphemy law which is man made. Perhaps it has also become difficult to call Mumtaz Qadri a murderer for he is hero to many. A large part of our intellectual discourse revolves around the question: Islam allows and Islam does not allow, Islam does not allow and Islam allows, so on and so forth. Ad hoc circular reasoning is applied to seek predetermined answers and to many this constitutes creation of knowledge. At the same time a large segment of the society considers worldly knowledge subservient to heavenly knowledge contained in one book which covers every conceivable aspect of life, except how to make polio vaccine.
Aesthetically stale and intellectually bankrupt we are a society which aspires to dominate the world by adopting an abstract religious philosophy which nobody has so far been able to even define. While part of a closed society which is averse to any new ideas we have steadily transitioned from a vibrant sub-continental culture to Kalashnikov culture to drug culture to thana culture and now jehadi culture. Manifestations of jehadi culture are visible in our streets where one frequently comes across posters signifying panjtan pak and char yaar, donations for Jamaat-ud-Dawa and jehad against the infidels.
On 16th of July 2011, the Sikh community in Lahore was barred from organizing a religious ceremony at a gurdwara after a religious group persuaded authorities that celebrating the Muslim holy day of “Shab-e-Barat” was more important than the Sikh festival. The musical equipment of the Sikhs was thrown out and their entry to the gurdwara barred due to the efforts of the Dawat-e-Islami, a Barelvi proselytizing group.
While heritage sites are fast disappearing in the land of the pure without leaving a trace, numerous monuments are in a state of total disrepair. The tangible and intangible aspects of our folk heritage are in complete disarray. Performing arts, which were once an integral part of our culture, are now controversial. The society today is deeply divided where liberals are significantly outnumbered by the forces of conservatism which apparently are poised to take over the entire civil society. What kind of culture and life is envisaged by these proponents of Islamic renaissance can be gauged by one of their leader’s lifestyle who expired recently in a fortified house in the garrison town of Abbotabad.
Osama Bin Laden was living with his four wives in a 6.7 kanal compound with 13 children who perhaps never went to school, more than 100 chickens, 2 cows, some rabbits and may be some other domesticated animals. It appeared that since he never left the premises during his five-year stay and with probably no other productive activity, he was deeply involved in his libidinous activities, while rabbit meat would act as a strong aphrodisiac.
We have also seen some footage of the interior of the compound. It was filthy and rotten to the core. It was also learned that the family would burn the trash at an open place rather than dispose it off in a proper way, causing hazardous pollution in and around the surrounding areas.
There were no telephones, internet etc to link up with the rest of the world. However AK-47's and ammunition was found in sufficient quantity. The house was isolated from the rest of the locality and had a grotesque architecture so that nobody from outside could have a glimpse of who lived inside.
A weird house with a man who constantly thought of violence, death and destruction, with four illiterate yet young wives to have sex with, plus 13 children, littered with animal waste, and polluted with burnt out trash, without any modern gadgetry but guns, perhaps no books on modern knowledge barring some on  "methods of making explosives with household items" isolated from the rest of the world, gives us a picture of  the culture Osama and thereafter his followers have envisioned to enforce in the entire world.
Waseem Altaf is a human rights activist.                                                                                                       

'via Blog this'

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

"Zero Dark Thirty" and the Mysterious Killing of Osama bin Laden | Mother Jones

"Zero Dark Thirty" and the Mysterious Killing of Osama bin Laden | Mother Jones:


"Zero Dark Thirty" and the Mysterious Killing of Osama bin Laden

The Oscar-nominated film resurrects questions about the Al Qaeda leader's death—all six versions of it.

| Fri Feb. 22, 2013 3:01 AM PST
Navy SEALs outside Osama bin Laden's compound in Zero Dark Thirty 
Zero Dark Thirty is a gripping Hollywood epic, but the Oscar-nominated film has become best known for setting off a torrent of debate about whether torturing prisoners helped in the hunt for Osama bin Laden. Its opening sequence announces that the film is "based on firsthand accounts of actual events." There is pretty clear evidence, however, that it gets the torture question seriously wrong, as more than one journalist has laid out in detail.
Then there is the matter of exactly how the Navy SEALs killed bin Laden. Ironically, a movie famously described by its director as a "journalistic account" gets little help on this front from practitioners of the trade. In the nearly two years since the mission, several respected journalists and even members of SEAL Team 6 itself have put forth different versions of how the killing went down. Since I first documented some of these divergent stories, more have piled up. The so-called fog of war is surely a factor; even America's most highly trained warriors are bound to have faulty memories of such a heart-pounding, high-stakes mission. But from conflicting reports about real-time footage to various rundowns of the number of shooters, bullets fired, and witnesses present, the collection of accounts makes for aRashomon-style epic of its own.
The basic facts are clear enough: On May 2, 2011, the SEALs stormed bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, shot him dead, and departed with his corpse by helicopter. The US military soon transported the body to a naval ship, where it was given Muslim burial rites anddumped into the ocean. Thus concluded an unambiguous and essential victory in the decade-old war on terrorism.
So why do the particular details of bin Laden's death matter? For starters, questions still linger as to whether the Obama administration intended to capture or kill bin Laden. The White House maintained that taking him alive was a potential outcome of the raid, but as one special operations officer told journalist Nicholas Schmidle in The New Yorker, "There was never any question of detaining or capturing him…No one wanted detainees." According to a report from the Associated Press, "to some in government and intelligence circles, the operation bore the hallmarks of a pure kill mission." Some questioned whether bin Laden was killed illegally under international law, and in that regard the details of his demise potentially become crucial: Did the world's most-wanted terrorist lunge for a gun in the moment of reckoning, or did he act "completely confused" and "cowardly" and offer no resistance? Did he shove his wife between himself and the SEALs, or did his wife throw herself into harm's way to protect him?
The confusion flowing from official sources also points to the issue of government transparency—a balancing act with matters of national security, to be sure, and one where the White House has drawn no shortage of criticism. The news media, meanwhile, boasts apretty lousy track record since 9/11 when it comes to vetting official claims about national security issues.
But judge for yourself: What follows are excerpts from six different accounts of bin Laden's death. Together they reflect how murky the precise circumstances of his killing remain, particularly regarding key questions about whether the raid was filmed, who shot bin Laden, and which members of his family witnessed his death.
Account #1
Helmet cameras: Yes 
OBL shot by: Multiple SEALs
Witnessed by: A wife and daughters
In May 2011, two weeks after the raid, CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reported that the entire 40-minute sequence at bin Laden's compound was "recorded by tiny helmet cameras worn by each of the 25 SEALs."
The SEALs first saw bin Laden when he came out on the third floor landing. They fired, but missed. He retreated to his bedroom, and the first SEAL through the door grabbed bin Laden's daughters and pulled them aside. When the second SEAL entered, bin Laden's wife rushed forward at him—or perhaps was pushed by bin Laden. The SEAL shoved her aside and shot bin Laden in the chest. A third seal shot him in the head.
Account #2
Helmet cameras: No
OBL shot by: One SEAL, with two shots

Witnessed by: Two wives
If only some real-time footage were available, it would be easy enough to clear things up. However: "The SEALs were not wearing helmet cams, contrary to a widely cited report by CBS," Schmidle wrote in The New Yorker in August 2011. According to his description of the killing:
The Americans hurried toward the bedroom door. The first SEAL pushed it open. Two of bin Laden's wives had placed themselves in front of him. Amal al-Fatah, bin Laden's fifth wife, was screaming in Arabic. She motioned as if she were going to charge; the SEAL lowered his sights and shot her once, in the calf. Fearing that one or both women were wearing suicide jackets, he stepped forward, wrapped them in a bear hug, and drove them aside…
A second SEAL stepped into the room and trained the infrared laser of his M4 on bin Laden's chest. The Al Qaeda chief, who was wearing a tan shalwar kameez and a prayer cap on his head, froze; he was unarmed…The first round, a 5.56-mm. bullet, struck bin Laden in the chest. As he fell backward, the SEAL fired a second round into his head, just above his left eye.
Account #3
OBL shot by: Unspecified
Witnessed by: One wife
In his May 2012 book ManhuntPeter Bergen gave an account similar to Schmidle's, but his only had one of the wives present and he didn't specify who put the bullets into bin Laden:
Hearing the sounds of strange men rushing into their room, Amal screamed something in Arabic and threw herself in front of her husband. The first SEAL who charged into the room shoved her aside, concerned she might be wearing a suicide bomb vest. Amal was then shot in the calf by another of the SEALs and collapsed unconscious onto the simple double mattress she shared with bin Laden. Bin Laden was offering no resistance when he was dispatched with a "double tap" of shots to the chest and his left eye. It was a grisly scene: his brains spattered on the ceiling above him and poured out of his eye socket. The floor near the bed was smeared with bin Laden's blood.
Account #4
OBL shot by: Three SEALs, with two shots outside the bedroom, then multiple shots inside the bedroom
Witnessed by: Two women

According to the September 2012 book No Easy Day by "Mark Owen"—later identified as SEAL Team 6 member Matt Bissonnette—three different SEALs shot bin Laden, who was already in his death throes when they entered the bedroom and pumped additional rounds into his body:
We were less than five steps from getting to the top when I heard suppressed shots. BOP. BOP. The point man had seen a man peeking out of the door on the right side of the hallway about ten feet in front of him. I couldn't tell from my position if the rounds hit the target or not. The man disappeared into the dark room.…
We didn't rush. Instead, we waited at the threshold and peered inside. We could see two women standing over a man lying at the foot of a bed…The women were hysterically crying and wailing in Arabic. The younger one looked up and saw us at the door. She yelled out in Arabic and rushed the point man. We were less than five feet apart. Swinging his gun to the side, the point man grabbed both women and drove them toward the corner of the room…
With the women out of the way, I entered the room with a third SEAL. We saw the man lying on the floor at the foot of his bed. He was wearing a white sleeveless T-shirt, loose tan pants, and a tan tunic. The point man's shots had entered the right side of his head. Blood and brains spilled out of the side of his skull. In his death throes, he was still twitching and convulsing. Another assaulter and I trained our lasers on his chest and fired several rounds. The bullets tore into him, slamming his body into the floor until he was motionless.
Account #5
OBL shot by: One SEAL, with one shot each in the chest and left eye

Witnessed by: One wife
With the first edition of his book, The Finish, published in October 2012, journalist Mark Bowden was compelled to include an insert explaining discrepancies between his account and Bissonnette's, which had been published the prior month. "I assume [his] account is accurate though the account here was reviewed at the highest level of Special Forces Command and confirmed as accurate before the book went to press," Bowden wrote. From his book:
Three SEALs came up those stairs, scanning different angles, searching while protecting each other. The first man up spotted a tall, bearded, swarthy man in a prayer cap wearing traditional flowing Pakistani clothes, the knee-length skirt worn over pajama-like bottoms. The man retreated quickly and the SEAL followed, with the other two close behind. As the first entered the bedroom he saw bin Laden, but first had to contend with Amal, who shouted and moved in front of her husband. The SEAL knocked her aside as his teammate shot bin Laden in the chest. The Sheik fell over backward, faceup. The SEAL who had shot bin Laden was over him instantly and shot him once more through the left eye.
Account #6
OBL shot by: One SEAL, with three shots to the forehead

Journalist Phil Bronstein's much-discussed story, recently published by Esquire and the Center for Investigative Reporting, relied on a series of interviews with a source identified only as "the Shooter." It was billed as "the most definitive account of those crucial few seconds when bin Laden was killed." Bronstein noted: "Not in dispute is the fact that others have claimed that they shot bin Laden when he was already dead, and a number of team members apparently did just that." The story offered yet another version of the kill shots, in the Shooter's own words:
I'm just looking at him from right here [he moves his hand out from his face about ten inches]. He's got a gun on a shelf right there, the short AK he's famous for. And he's moving forward. I don't know if she's got a vest and she's being pushed to martyr them both. He's got a gun within reach. He's a threat. I need to get a head shot so he won't have a chance to clack himself off [blow himself up].
In that second, I shot him, two times in the forehead. Bap! Bap! The second time as he's going down. He crumpled onto the floor in front of his bed and I hit him again, Bap! same place. That time I used my EOTech red-dot holo sight. He was dead. Not moving. His tongue was out. I watched him take his last breaths, just a reflex breath…
His forehead was gruesome. It was split open in the shape of a V. I could see his brains spilling out over his face. The American public doesn't want to know what that looks like.
Unsurprisingly, Zero Dark Thirty uses its own amalgamation of similar details for bin Laden's final moments, and then some. (Look for the SEAL trying to soothe a child terrified by the carnage with a glow stick.) But the filmmakers apparently agreed with the Shooter's sentiment: They never give viewers a direct look at bin Laden's dead visage. (The Obama White House also refused to provide one to the public.) As the credits rolled at the screening I attended in San Francisco, an audience member behind me commented, "I wonder how much of it was true." With a laugh, his friend replied: "Well, they say the whole thing is."

'via Blog this'

Friday, February 1, 2013

'Kargil was a disaster, Musharraf tried to cover it up' - Rediff.com India News

'Kargil was a disaster, Musharraf tried to cover it up' - Rediff.com India News:

'Kargil war a disaster, Musharraf tried to cover it up'

January 27, 2013 20:54 IST
Debunking Pakistan's claims about the Kargil [ Images ] conflict, Lieutenant General (Retired) Shahid Aziz, then head of the Inter Services Intelligence’s Analysis Wing, has said regular soldiers, not rebels fighting for Kashmir [ Images ]’s independence, took part in the "meaningless" 1999 war.
The former officer also accused the then Pakistan Army [ Images ] chief General Pervez Musharraf [ Images ] of a "cover-up".
"There were no mujahideen, only taped wireless messages, which fooled no one. Our soldiers were made to occupy barren ridges, with hand held weapons and ammunition," Lieutenant General Aziz wrote in his article in The Nation.
Headlined, 'Putting our children in line of fire', the Pakistani official, who retired in 2005, wrote, "The whole truth about Kargil is yet to be known. We await the stories of forgotten starved soldiers hiding behind cold desolate rocks, with empty guns still held in their hands. Such precious blood spilled without cause!"
The Pakistani officer said whatever little he knew, took a while to emerge, "since General Musharraf had put a tight lid on Kargil".
"Three years later, a study commenced by GHQ to identify issues of concern at the lowest levels of command, was forcefully stopped by him. ‘What is your intent?' he asked. His cover-up was revealed many years later, on publication of his book," Aziz said.
He said Kargil, an "unsound military plan" based on invalid assumptions, was launched with little preparation and in total disregard to the regional and international environment. It was bound to fail, said Lieutenant General Aziz.
"That may well have been the reason for its secrecy. It was a total disaster," he said and underlined that soldiers were sent as "war fodder".
Pakistan has always maintained that Kargil was fought by mujahideens.
Aziz said that the intrusion was clearly intended to dominate the supply line to Siachen and "force the Indians to pull out".
Aziz wrote, "It certainly wasn't a defensive maneuver. There were no indications of an Indian attack. We didn't pre-empt anything; nothing was on the cards. I was then heading the Analysis Wing of the Inter Services Intelligence and it was my job to know”.
"To say that occupying empty spaces along the Line of Control [ Images ] was not a violation of any agreement and came under the purview of the local commander is astounding. This area was with the Indians as a result of the Shimla Agreement, and there had been no major violation of the Line of Control since 1971," he said.
It was assumed that the Indian Army [ Images ] would not be able to "dislodge us and the world would sit back idly".
"The entire planning and execution was done in a cavalier manner, in total disregard of military convention. In justification, to say that our assessment was not wrong, but there was, 'unreasonably escalated Indian response', is a sorry excuse for not being able to assess the Indian reaction," he said.
He said the “boys” were comforted by their commander's assessment that no serious response would come.
“But it did -- wave after wave, supported by massive air bursting artillery and repeated air attacks. The enemy still couldn't manage to capture the peaks, and instead filled in the valleys. Cut off and forsaken, our posts started collapsing one after the other, though the general publicly denied it," he said.
Lieutenant General Aziz added, "We continue to indulge in bloody enterprises, under the hoax of safeguarding national interest. How many more medals will we put on coffins? How many more songs are we to sing? And how many more martyrs will our silences hide? If there is purpose to war then yes, we shall all go to the battle front. But a war where truth has to be hidden makes one wonder whose interest is it serving?" 

'via Blog this'

Musharraf crossed LoC, spent night in India in 1999 - Rediff.com News

Musharraf crossed LoC, spent night in India in 1999 - Rediff.com News:

Musharraf crossed LoC, spent night in India in 1999

Last updated on: February 1, 2013 15:04 IST
     Next

Next
Weeks before hostilities erupted between Indian and Pakistani troops in the Kargil sector in 1999, Gen Pervez Musharraf crossed the Line of Control in a helicopter and spent a night at a location 11 km inside Indian territory, a former aide to the military ruler has said.
Col (retired) Ashfaq Hussain, who was a senior officer in the Pakistan Army's media arm, said Musharraf flew across the LoC on March 28, 1999 and travelled 11 km into the Indian side.
Musharraf, who was accompanied by Brig Masood Aslam, then commander of 80 Brigade, spent the night at a spot called Zikria Mustaqar, where Pakistani troops commanded by Col Amjad Shabbir were present.
Musharraf, who was then army chief, returned the next day. Hussain first made the revelation in his book 'Witness to Blunder: Kargil Story Unfolds', which was published in late 2008.
He repeated the assertion last night on a television talk show on the Kargil episode in the wake of Lt Gen (retd) Shahid Aziz's assertion that the intrusions by Pakistani troops were planned by a group of four generals led by Musharraf.

'via Blog this'

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

Pakistan: Osama bin Laden paid Rs 50,000 bribe to build his Abbottabad house - Pakistan - IBNLive

Pakistan: Osama bin Laden paid Rs 50,000 bribe to build his Abbottabad house - Pakistan - IBNLive:

Pakistan: Osama bin Laden paid Rs 50,000 bribe to build his Abbottabad house 

PAKISTAN, Updated Dec 26, 2012 at 05:08pm IST
Islamabad: Even the world's most wanted terrorist could not escape the bribery dragnet. Osama bin Laden's safe-house in Pakistan's garrison city Abbottabad was built after paying a bribe of Rs 50,000 to a revenue official, a media report on Wednesday said. The bribe was paid to the 'patwari' so that bin Laden could construct the compound with a three-storey building, a 14-foot boundary wall and an iron fence, the Urdu daily Jang said in a report.
Details of the bribe emerged after Pakistani officials translated a diary that was purportedly kept by bin Laden. Bin Laden, 54, was killed by US commandos during a raid on the compound, located a short distance from the Pakistan Military Academy, on May 2, 2011.
The compound was demolished by the Pakistan Army earlier in 2012. Officials found the diary along with 137,000 documents in the compound. Bin Laden used to write in the diary every day, the report said.
The al-Qaeda chief reportedly described in the diary how he had to bribe revenue officials for constructing his compound. The patwari, who was later arrested by Pakistani security agencies, was completely ignorant about the identity of bin Laden when he took the bribe. The diary reportedly revealed that bin Laden was well aware of the practice of revenue officials seeking bribes and even gave his permission for paying off the patwari.
A judicial commission that investigated bin Laden's presence in Pakistan and the US raid has pointed out "weaknesses" in state institutions in its report and "delineated the poor performance" of these organisations, the Jang reported. The commission's report is yet to be presented to the government and officials have not said whether it will be made public.
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on FacebookTwitter,Google+ and Pinterest)

'via Blog this'