Mumbai attackers’ phones traced to Italy, US

[sabra]

Source: Reuters

ROME - Militants behind last year’s attacks on Mumbai used cell phones that were activated in the United States and paid for with funds sent from Italy, an Italian newspaper reported on Tuesday.

Corriere della Sera daily said India sent the intelligence information to Italy and other countries so anti-terrorism investigators could attempt to expose any ties to the network behind the November assault that killed at least 179 people.

Islamabad acknowledged for the first time this month that the November assault was launched from, and partly planned in, Pakistan.

Corriere said Italian authorities were investigating a wire transfer sent to the United States from the northern Italian city of Brescia by a Pakistani-born suspect.

The suspect, named as Javaid Iqbal, sent the funds via Western Union to pay for five cell phones with Austrian country codes—three of which were used by the attackers, Corriere said, citing the Indian dossier.

Read more: http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticle08.asp?xfile=data/international/2009/February/international_February1840.xml§ion=international

[cosmicone]

1. This very strongly indicates complicity of the Paki government

and the intelligence apparatus. If it was a "home grown" Paki group, they didn't need to hide behind layers like this. Only a government like Pakistan which desires to insulate itself from any blame and who uses terrorism as an official state policy would do such elaborate deception.

[closeupready]

2. No it doesn't. No more than Richard Reid's plot indicates complicity of the UK government

and MI6. But keep believing your conspiracy theories. :rofl:

[cosmicone]

6. Richard Reid was Al Q'aeda and was financed by

Al Q'aeda. He didn't try to hide that he was Al Q'aeda. In this case, multiple Pakistani nationals around the world acted in coordination with wire transfers specifically to hide the fact that the perpetrators of terrorism in Mumbai were Pakistani nationals with full support of the ISI and Pakistani government. No one in the world believes that this rag-tag bunch of terrorists could put together a sophisticated operation of terror without state support.

Pakistan's fig leaf is shrinking by the day.

[closeupready]

7. Behind your looking glass?

:rofl:

[closeupready]

8. Look. I know you must think you are making a difference here, posting your "hate Pakistan" garbage,

but the unspoken reality is that on a scale of one to ten, Pakistan will ALWAYS rank higher than India with regard to who are America's closest allies. Maybe you don't care, maybe you do, it doesn't matter. I'm just telling you the facts, and the sooner you face that, the better off you'll be, and more constructive with regard to putting your energy to useful purposes, rather than this stuff going on in your head. And further, aside from your use of slurs, anyone who's seen "Slumdog Millionaire", particularly the segment about the question regarding what the deity is holding in his right hand, knows full well what is really motivating your calls to destroy/balkanize/annex Pakistan.

[cosmicone]

9. Pakistan is no ally of the US

a) It is a religious extremist state founded solely on the basis of religion.
b) It has been undemocratic and ruled by military generals throughout most of its existence
c) It has no democratic institutions that have any stability or authority. Even supreme court justices can be fired by the generals.
d) It is not secular. Shias, Ahmadiyas and Sikhs are a very very tiny minority and get slaughtered routinely.
e) It is at the forefront of the world heroin trade.
f) It has created, funded and trained Taliban for its "Strategic Depth Policy" (Google it)
g) It has exiled or outright hanged democratically elected prime ministers. (Remember Zulfikar Ali Bhutto?)
h) It has brutally suppressed the Bengali people - resulting in the liberation of Bangladesh by India.
i) The ISI has funded and trained terrorists to serve in Bosnia, Xin Jiang, Chechnya, Dagestan, Kashmir and Mindanao. (Google this)

Pakistan is more of a coolie for the US, surviving on handouts. Now Pakistan has another master, China, which is using Pakistan in exchange for a few crumbs.

If Pakistan is such a big ally of the US, how come Pakistan didn't get a nuclear cooperation treaty like India did despite all the whining and begging? The answer is simple. The US views Pakistan as a coolie -- throw a quarter and get some tasks done.

India on the other hand is considered a "natural ally" of the US (Google that phrase.) It is democratic, with strong institutions, a rule of law, secularism (India has had two muslim presidents) and a commitment to peace.

I don't know which material you use as source but even Irfan Hussein of the Dawn newspaper agrees with ME.

[Kalyan]

10. Why?

Can you explain why Pakistan should rank higher than India for US? It makes no sense to me that US should put Pak before India? Is it a vestige of cold war era thinking?

[closeupready]

11. To some extent, yes, I suppose it is a vestige of cold war era thinking.

But also, strategically, in an important resource-rich region, it will always remain true that we NEED Pakistan and Pakistan needs us, because Pakistan's neighbors, India, Iran and China have all told the US, at some point or other, to fuck off and die, and they would do so again, if their interests would be best served by doing so. Make no mistake about it. Pakistan can't do that, or not nearly as effectively. India will take care of itself, deal every bit as duplicitously with us as anyone else.

[Kalyan]

12. still doesn't add up .. does it ...

India takes cares of itself as much as US takes care of itself. What startles me is that US knows that Pak is not a natural ally. They promoted Pak to counter USSR's influence on India. Now that Cold War is history, India a growing economic power and Pak become this decade's version of 1980s Afghanistan, it is surprising that US is stuck to ancient ideas ...

but hey, everyone has choices - if US doesn't differentiate between Pak & India, they will be the (economic) losers

[Luminous Animal]

3. "Paki" is a slur.

If you want anyone to take your comments seriously, I suggest you cease using slurs.

[cosmicone]

4. I apologize

I didn't mean it as a slur because where I come from, "desi" and "paki" are respectable designations. I'll try to not use it again.

[cosmicone]

5. Dupe n/t