Indian government is giving a lot of weight to whatever the captured terrorist is telling them.
Should we believe into everything the terrorists tell us? Thats an interesting question.
During the Mumbai attacks, another terrorist, during his telephone conversation with the Indian TV channel told the anchor that he is from Hyderabad Deccan, India. If we are to believe in whatever one terrorist is telling us, then why not believe the words of the other terrorist? A terrorist, who knew he was going to die. It is a common belief that a dying man does not lie. The telephone conversations clip is listed at the bottom of this post.
Note how the Indian media, even at that point of time, tried to link the attackers to Pakistan and how the terrorist clarified it to the anchor that he is from the Indian Hyderabad, not the Pakistani one. This raises another question. If lying about the native city, why would the terrorist pick a city name which exists in both India and Pakistan? Wouldnt it be easier for the terrorist to simply lie and chose another citys name? Also note that previously the Indian media reported that some of the terrorists e-mails were intercepted and they originated from Russia. As of today these claims have changed. Now it is reported that some e-mails originated from Pakistan.
I am also posting another clip, which has recorded the live telephone conversation from a third terrorist. Pay special attention to his language and accent. His choice of words like itihaas instead of tareeqh and other Hindi words that I dont understand, have made me to believe that he is not from Pakistan. The other thing is his accent. Note that sometimes (not always) he cant pronounce Z in his words. Instead he produces the sound of J. An attribute hat is common in a lot of my Indian friends when they communicate with me in Hindi. Especially the ones that have Indian Gujrati background.
I dont know whether I should believe one terrorist or the other. But I am sure of one thing. India will have to give concrete and reliable evidence to prove that these guys were Pakistanis or had Pakistani links. So far the evidence does not support India. Credibility of one terrorists words over the other will be highly debatable.
I think that Indias end game will be that these guys were a mix of Indians, Pakistanis and may be people from some other countries. However, India will say that they were all trained by some terrorist group in Pakistan. This will open another Pandora box. India will have to globally accept the atrocities against the Muslims and Pakistan will have to go against any such groups who were behind this incident (if proven). Pakistan should do that. No specific group has the right to bring Pakistan to a brink of war and put us behind on the road of development. We already have enough domestic issues to deal with. However, India should do a good job on providing the related evidence to Pakistan.
I also think that both the countries should consider sharing their deserving blames for sorry incidents like Mumbai. This will be a good start of a prosperous South Asia, which has a potential to become stronger than Europe.
But his process will be made difficult by the Hindu nationalists in India and Islamists in Pakistan.
What do you guys think?
Sher Khan
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVI4Mdf1tE4[/video]
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhO6rynb1C8&feature=related[/video]
Should we believe into everything the terrorists tell us? Thats an interesting question.
During the Mumbai attacks, another terrorist, during his telephone conversation with the Indian TV channel told the anchor that he is from Hyderabad Deccan, India. If we are to believe in whatever one terrorist is telling us, then why not believe the words of the other terrorist? A terrorist, who knew he was going to die. It is a common belief that a dying man does not lie. The telephone conversations clip is listed at the bottom of this post.
Note how the Indian media, even at that point of time, tried to link the attackers to Pakistan and how the terrorist clarified it to the anchor that he is from the Indian Hyderabad, not the Pakistani one. This raises another question. If lying about the native city, why would the terrorist pick a city name which exists in both India and Pakistan? Wouldnt it be easier for the terrorist to simply lie and chose another citys name? Also note that previously the Indian media reported that some of the terrorists e-mails were intercepted and they originated from Russia. As of today these claims have changed. Now it is reported that some e-mails originated from Pakistan.
I am also posting another clip, which has recorded the live telephone conversation from a third terrorist. Pay special attention to his language and accent. His choice of words like itihaas instead of tareeqh and other Hindi words that I dont understand, have made me to believe that he is not from Pakistan. The other thing is his accent. Note that sometimes (not always) he cant pronounce Z in his words. Instead he produces the sound of J. An attribute hat is common in a lot of my Indian friends when they communicate with me in Hindi. Especially the ones that have Indian Gujrati background.
I dont know whether I should believe one terrorist or the other. But I am sure of one thing. India will have to give concrete and reliable evidence to prove that these guys were Pakistanis or had Pakistani links. So far the evidence does not support India. Credibility of one terrorists words over the other will be highly debatable.
I think that Indias end game will be that these guys were a mix of Indians, Pakistanis and may be people from some other countries. However, India will say that they were all trained by some terrorist group in Pakistan. This will open another Pandora box. India will have to globally accept the atrocities against the Muslims and Pakistan will have to go against any such groups who were behind this incident (if proven). Pakistan should do that. No specific group has the right to bring Pakistan to a brink of war and put us behind on the road of development. We already have enough domestic issues to deal with. However, India should do a good job on providing the related evidence to Pakistan.
I also think that both the countries should consider sharing their deserving blames for sorry incidents like Mumbai. This will be a good start of a prosperous South Asia, which has a potential to become stronger than Europe.
But his process will be made difficult by the Hindu nationalists in India and Islamists in Pakistan.
What do you guys think?
Sher Khan
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVI4Mdf1tE4[/video]
[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhO6rynb1C8&feature=related[/video]
