Bombay bombings of 1993

Bombay bombings of 1993

The 1993 Bombay bombings were a series of thirteen bomb explosions that took place in Bombay (now Mumbai), India on March 12, 1993. The coordinated attacks were the most destructive bomb explosions in Indian history. The single-day attacks resulted in up to 250 civilian fatalities and 700 injuries. The attacks are believed to have been coordinated by Dawood Ibrahim, don of the organized crime syndicate named D-Company, which had operated as a terrorist organization. It is believed that the attacks were carried out in retaliation for widespread massacre of Muslims in Mumbai during December and January, and also the demolition of the Babri Masjid.

Background

In December 1992 and January 1993, there was widespread rioting in Bombay following the December 6 destruction of the Babri Mosque in Ayodhya by extreme Hindu groups. Although there was no loss of life in the incident at the Babri Mosque, a series of riots soon erupted throughout the nation, most notably in Bombay. After five years following the December-January riots, the Srikrishna Commission Report stated that nine hundred individuals lost their lives and over two thousand were injured, most of them Muslim, in the riots.

The bombings

At 1:30 p.m. a powerful car bomb exploded in the basement of the Bombay Stock Exchange building. The 28-story office building housing the exchange was severely damaged, and many nearby office buildings also suffered some damage. About 50 were killed by this explosion. About 30 minutes later, another car bomb exploded elsewhere in the city, and from 1:30 p.m. to 3:40 p.m. a total of 13 bombs exploded throughout Bombay. Most of the bombs were car bombs, but some were in scooters.

Three hotels, the Hotel Sea Rock, Hotel Juhu Centaur, and Hotel Airport Centaur, were targeted by suitcase bombs left in rooms booked by the perpetrators. Banks, the regional passport office, hotels, the Air India Building, and a major shopping complex were also hit. Bombs exploded at Zaveri Bazaar, area opposite of Century Bazaar, Katha Bazaar, Shiv Sena Bhawan, and Plaza Theater. A jeep-bomb at the Century Bazaar exploded early, thwarting another attack. Grenades were also thrown at Sahar International Airport and at Fishermen's Colony, apparently targeting Hindus at the latter. A double decker bus was very badly damaged in one of the explosions and that single incident accounted for the greatest loss of life - perhaps up to ninety people were killed.

Buildings attacked include

• Bombay Stock Exchange Building
• Hotel Sea Rock
• Hotel Centaur, Juhu
• Hotel Centaur, Santa Cruz
• Plaza Cinema
• Shiv Sena Bhawan
• Zaveri Bazaar
• Area opposite of Century Bazaar
• Passport Office
• Air India Building
• Sahar Airport

Aftermath

The official number of dead was 257 with 1,400 others injured (some news sources say 317 people died; this is due to a bomb which killed 60 in Calcutta on March 17). Several days later, unexploded car bombs were discovered at a railway station. Terrorist groups based in Pakistan were suspected to be responsible for these bombings, and evidence uncovered pointed to the involvement of underworld don Dawood Ibrahim.

On August 25, 2003, two large and destructive bombs left in taxis exploded in south Mumbai - the Gateway of India and Zaveri Bazaar in the busy Kalbadevi area - killing 52 people, again entirely Hindus and wounding more than a hundred others. Two Pakistan based militant groups, Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Toiba, were found to be responsible for the attacks. Along with the July 2006 train bombings in Mumbai, these attacks are believed to be in retaliation for the 2002 Gujarat riots in which more than a thousand persons, mostly Muslims were killed, though the Gujarat government denies such a connection.

On August 11, 2006, the Chief Minister of Maharashtra during the blasts, Sharad Pawar, admitted, on record, that he had "deliberately misled" people following the 1993 Bombay blasts by saying there were "12 and not 11" explosions, adding the name of a Muslim-dominated locality to show that people from both communities had been affected. He tried to justify this deception by claiming that it was a move to prevent communal riots by falsely portraying that both Hindu and Muslim communities in the city had been affected adversely. He also admits to lying about evidence recovered and misleading people into believing that some of it pointed to the Tamil Tigers as possible suspects.

Arrests, convictions and verdict

Many hundreds of people were arrested and detained in Indian courts. In 2006, 100 of the 129 finally accused were found to be guilty and were convicted by the specially designated TADA court. Many of the 100 are still missing including the main conspirators and masterminds of the attacks - Tiger Memon and Dawood Ibrahim. On September 12, 2006, the special TADA court hearing the case convicted four members of the Memon family for their involvement in the 1993 Bombay bombings.

Three other members of the Memon family were acquitted by the special TADA court with the judge giving them the benefit of doubt. The four members of the Memon family are being held after being found guilty on charges of conspiring and abetting acts of terror. All four of them face jail terms from five years in prison to life imprisonment, that will be determined based on the severity of their crime. A day later, the TADA court announced that it would start pronouncing the verdict of the thirty-one people charged with transporting and planting bombs.

Yakub Memon, the brother of prime accused Tiger Memon, was charged for possession of unauthorised arms. After the blasts, family members of Tiger, including Yakub, escaped from Bombay to Dubai and Pakistan. Correspondents say Tiger Memon owned a restaurant in Bombay and was allegedly closely associated with Dawood Ibrahim, the chief suspect.

Except for Tiger and his brother Ayub, the entire family returned to India and was prompty arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation in 1994. Since then, Yakub has been in custody and is undergoing treatment for depression. The Memon family was subsequently tried in court and found guilty of conspiracy. The defense lawyers have asked for leniency in the sentencing and have caused delays in the process.

Dawood Ibrahim, believed to have masterminded the terrorist attacks, was the former Don of the Mumbai organized crime syndicate D-Company, largely consisting of Muslims. He is suspected of having connections to several Pakistan based terrorist groups, such as al-Qaeda and its leader, Osama bin Laden, as well as Lashkar-e-Toiba and was declared a terrorist by the governments of India and the United States in 2003. Ibrahim is now wanted by Interpol as a part of the worldwide terror syndicate of Osama bin Laden. He has been in hiding since the blasts and is believed to be hiding in Pakistan, which the Pakistani government denies. The Bush administration in the United States imposed sanctions on Ibrahim in 2006.

The penalty stage of the longest running trial in India's history is still ongoing. In February 2007, prosecutors asked for the death penalty for forty-four of the hundred convicted. The prosecution also requested the death penalty for those convicted of conspiracy in the case.

The Memons

Yakub Memon has spent approximately 15+ years in prison. He was sentenced to death by hanging by the Judge, Ashish Roy Pillai.

Convicted for conspiracy.

Arranging finance and managing its disbursement through co-accused, Mulchand Shah and from a firm, Tejarath International, owned by absconding accused, and brother, Ayub Memon to achieve objectives of conspiracy.

Arranged for air tickets through Altafali Mushtaqali Sayyed, East West travels for the youths who were sent for arms and ammunition training to Pakistan. Also made arrangements for their lodging and boarding.

Purchased motor vehicles which were used while planting bombs.

Requested co-accused, Amjadali Meherbux and Altafali Sayyed, to store suitcases containing arms, ammunition, hand grenades and detonators.

Essa and Yusuf Memon, brothers of Yakub

Both charged for allowing their flat in Al-Hussaini building, Mahim to be used for terrorist activities.

Essa has already spent about 12 years in prison.

Yusuf is a schizophrenia patient, but has spent less than a year in prison.

For both Essa and Yusuf, the prosecution sought the death sentence.

Rubeena her Maruti car was the first piece of evidence in the trial. The prosecution has sought a lesser sentence for her.

The Planters

Prosecution has sought the death sentence for all except Imtiaz Ghavate as he suffers from AIDS. The prosecution has sought a lesser sentence for him.

Shoiab Ghansar planted an RDX-laden scooter in Zaveri Bazaar that killed 17 and injured 57 others

He was also guilty of filling RDX in the scooter the previous night at Al-Hussaini building that killed 17 people and injured 57. He is Asghar Mukadam's cousin.

He was sentenced to death by the court on the counts of murder and participating in terrorist acton July 19, 2007

Asghar Mukadam planted an RDX-laden van in Plaza Cinema with Shahnawaz Qureshi that killed 10 and injured 37 others

Participated in the loading of RDX in vehicles, on March 11

Collected money from Mulchand Shah and facilitating disbursement of money to other accused

Sentenced to death on July 19, 2007.

Shahnawaz Qureshi planted an RDX-laden van at Plaza Cinema with Asghar Mukadam, killing 10 and injuring 37others

Guilty of taking arms training in Pakistan via Dubai and of loading the contraband in Al-Hussaini building on March 11, 1993.

Sentenced to death on July 19, 2007.

Abdul Gani Turk guilty of parking RDX-laden jeep at Century Bazaar killing 113 and injuring 227

Filling RDX in vehicles killing 113 and injuring 227

Sentenced to death on July 18, 2007.

Parvez Shaikh guilty of parking a bomb in Katha Bazaar that killed four.

Guilty of planting bomb in Hotel Sea Rock, destroying property worth nine crores.

Sentenced to death on July 18, 2007.

Mohammed Iqbal Mohammed Yusuf Shaikh convicted for throwing hand grenades in Sahar airport; parking an unexploded RDX-laden scooter in Naigaon

Obtaining arms training in Pakistan, loading RDX in vehicles on the night of March 11

Sentenced to death on July 20, 2007.

Naseem Barmare guilty of hurling hand grenades at Sahar airport, parking unexploded scooter at Naigaum, taking training in Pakistan

Mohammed Farooq Pawale planting an RDX-laden car at Air-India building killing 20 and injuring 84.

Parking an RDX-laden van near Sena Bhavan with approver killing 4 and injuring 50

Participated in arms training in Pakistan

Participated in the landing of arms and ammunition at Shekhadi

Sentenced to death on July 25, 2007.

Mustaq Tarani participated in a meeting at hotel Taj Mahal. He did a recce of the sites for the blasts.

Planting at Hotel Juhu Centaur injuring 3 and causing loss of property worth Rs 2.10 crore

Planting an unexploded scooter at Sheikh Memen street in Zaveri Bazaar

Sentenced to death on July 18, 2007.

Imtiaz Ghavate only one who did not face death planted unexploded RDX-laden scooter at Dhanji street. He also participated in the landing of arms and ammunition at Shekhadi

Accused involved

Mohammed Moin Qureshi , Feroz Amani Malik , Bashir Khairulla , Zakir Hussain and Abdul Akhtar Khan had pelted handgrendes in Mahim Causeway causing three deaths and injuring six. The driver Salim Shaikh , did not pelt any handgrenades.

Bashir Khairulla convicted for his participation in arms, ammunition and explosives training conducted by Tiger Memon in Sandheri and Bhorghat

Convicted for participating in the conspirator's meetings in the house of Mubina Baya and for participating in the filling of RDX in the vehicles

Zakir Hussain was convicted for participating in the arms, ammunition and weapon training in Pakistan, for participating in conspirator's meetings and participating in the filling of RDX

Sentenced to death on July 24, 2007.

Abdul Akhtar Khan convicted for taking arms, ammunition and explosives training in Pakistan.

Sentenced to death on July 24, 2007.

Firoz Amani Malik convicted for taking arms, ammunition and explosives training in Pakistan

Sentenced to death on July 24, 2007.

Moin Qureshi convicted for participating in the arms, ammunition and explosives training, participating in the conspirator's meeting and participating in the filling of RDX in vehicles on March 11.

Was also found guilty for being in possession of 17 handgrenades.

Sentenced to life imprisonment on July 24, 2007.

Landing agents

Dawood Phanse in his 60s, he is guilty of conspiracy. Guilty of organising the landing of arms and ammunition in Shekhadi; attending a conspiracy meeting in Dubai with Dawood Ibrahim

Dadabhai Parkar, landing at Shekhadi, showed training camps at Sandheri and Bhor Ghat, transportation of consignment.

Acquitted of conspiracy, the prosecution has sought life imprisonment

Customs officials

S N Thapa, former additional customs collector, preventive

Accused of being Guilty of conspiracy. Convicted for getting the information about the landing at Shekhadi and that the main exit point could be in Mhasla Shrivardhan area. He is alleged to have laid a trap at Purarphata on Mhasla-Goregaon road on January 30. Besides that, his team gave up the vigil after February 2 in spite of the warnings [confessions of co-accused in TADA Court shows that landing actually took place many days after team lead by S N Thapa had left for Mumbai and that the smugglers, in fact, postponed the landing as they heard from sources that an ambush had been laid for them by S N Thapa]. These accusations stand to be the same even though confessions of others convicted say otherwise. To quote "He (Phanse) also confessed that the duo (Phanse and Parkar)bribed all Customs officers except for additional collector S N Thapa, who incidentally is an accused in the case." [ http://www.rediff.com/news/2006/sep/22sheela.htm]. In the 10,000 page judgement copy provided, TADA Court judge, P.D. Kode resons that even though there is no direct or in-direct evidence against Mr. S.N. Thapa, he is awarded a term of life imprisonment because he was the seniormost customs officer and thus must be knowing about the conspiracy. Till his last days S N Thapa proclaimed his innocence and was confident that the greater conspiracy of his wrongful arrest,trial and conviction would be unveiled in the Supreme Court who, in 1994 granted him bail after going through all evidence stating that there is no direct or in-direct evidence to prove that Mr. S.N. Thapa was part in planning, landing or transportation of contraband substances nor that was he aware of any such conspiracy for blasts in mumbai.

S N Thapa died due to lung cancer on 11th April 2008. His family hopes that the supreme court will entertain their quest for the truth.

R K Singh, Former assistant commissioner of customs,

convicted for facilitating RDX landing in Shekhadi after accepting bribe of more than 7.8 lakh Rupees.

Had meetings with the accused.

Mohammed Sultan, Sayyed former customs superintendent.

Convicted for facilitating RDX landing in Shekhadi after accepting bribe of more than 7.8 lakh.

Had attended meetings with the accused.

Jaywant Gurav, former customs inspector.

Convicted for allowing passage of RDX from Raigad to Mumbai

S S Talwadekar, former customs superintendent.

Convicted for allowing passage of RDX from Raigad to Mumbai

Policemen

Vijay Patil, ex police sub-inspector

Guilty of conspiracy and taking bribe to allow passage of RDX from Raigad to Mumbai

Has been sentenced to life imprisonment and 1 lakh rupees fine by TADA court on 22 May 2007

Ashok Muleshwar, P M Mahadik, Ramesh Mali and S Y Palshikar; all Police Constables

Guilty of allowing passage of RDX of arms from Raigad to Mumbai.

All four sentenced by TADA court to six years' imprisonment and a fine of Rs 25,000 each on May 21,2007

Sanjay Dutt and friends

Sanjay Dutt, convicted and sentenced to 6 years in prison

Yusuf Nulwalla, convicted for trying to destroy Sanjay's arms. He has been sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment with two years further for destroying the arms. Also, he has to pay Rs 25,000 as fine.

Kersi Adajenia, convicted for trying to destroy Sanjay's arms. He has been sentence to two years rigorous imprisonment. He too has been slapped with a fine of Rs. 25,000 fine.

Rusi Mulla, convicted for trying to destroy Sanjay's arms. He has been freed by the court but has to pay Rs. 1 lakh to the court.

All four have been convicted under Arms Act and had applied for release under Probation of Offenders Act

Others

Zaibunnisa Kadri guilty for storing AK-56 and handgrendes at the instance of Anees Ibrahim and Abu Salem, she faces a minimum of five years RI.

Mansoor Ahmed convicted for carrying weapons from Sanjay Dutt's house to co-accused's house has already spent 9 years in prison

Samir Hingora convicted for conspiracy. For supplying 3 AK-56 rifles, its magazines and ammunition, hand grenades to Sanjay Dutt's residence at told to by Anis Ibrahim. Prosecution has sought the death sentence

Ibrahim Musa Chauhan alias Baba Chauhan convicted for supplying AK-56 rifles, its magazines, ammunition, and hand grenades to Sanjay Dutt and Salim Kurla as told to by Anis Ibrahim. He was also convicted for being in unauthorised possession of one AK 56 rifles, 635 ammunition, 10 magazines, and 25 handgrenades, which were recovered by the police

Ejaz Pathan extradited from Dubai in 2003, participated in Dubai meetings, provided men for landing of arms and ammunition at Shekhadi, for being in possession of arms and sending youth to Dubai for arms training.

TADA: The Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act

Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act

The Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, commonly known as TADA, was an Indian law active between 1985 and 1995 (modified in 1987) for the prevention of terrorist activities in Punjab. It was renewed in 1989, 1991 and 1993 before being allowed to lapse in 1995 due to increasing unpopularity due to widespread allegations of abuse. The Act's third paragraph gives a very thorough definition of "terrorism":

"Whoever with intent to overawe the Government as by law established or to strike terror in the people or any section of the people or to alienate any section of the people or to adversely affect the harmony amongst different sections of the people does any act or thing by using bombs, dynamite or other explosive substances or inflammable substances or lethal weapons or poisons or noxious gases or other chemicals or by any other substances (whether biological or otherwise) of a hazardous nature in such a manner as to cause, or as is likely to cause, death of, or injuries to, any person or persons or loss of, or damage to, or destruction of, property or disruption of any supplies or services essential to the life of the community, or detains any person and threatens to kill or injure such person in order to compel the Government or any other person to do or abstain from doing any act, commits a terrorist act."

It had a conviction rate of less than 1% despite the fact that, under criminal law, a confession before a police officer, even though being given under torture, was admissible as evidence in court. A special court known as TADA court was set up to hear the cases and deliver judgments pertaining to

1993 Bombay bombings

The legislation was ultimately succeeded by the controversial Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act (2002-04) which was scrapped by the UPA government.

Pakistan Claims to Retake Town From Taliban

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — After a week of strong criticism here and abroad over its inaction, the Pakistani military claimed on Wednesday to have reasserted control of a key town just 60 miles from the capital in the strategic district of Buner which was overrun by hundreds of Taliban militants last week.

The development came one day after the military deployed fighter jets and helicopter gunships against the insurgents. It was not immediately clear what level of resistance the Taliban had offered.

Pakistan also agreed to move 6,000 troops from its Indian border to fight militants on its western border with Afghanistan, according to a Pakistani official who did not want to be identified discussing troop movements in advance.

But American officials, who welcomed the redeployment, said Pakistan was still not doing enough to fight the insurgents, who are tightening their hold on the country. The Americans expressed frustration that Pakistan was still rebuffing their offers to train more Pakistanis to fight Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

News reports on Wednesday quoted an unidentified military spokesman as saying government troops dropped from helicopters near Daggar, the administrative center of Buner, to link up with other government forces in the region. There was no immediate word on casualties.

The campaign in Buner began Tuesday after government forces completed a two-day operation against Taliban militants in Dir, a neighboring district, said a military spokesman, Maj. Gen. Ather Abbas.

The Taliban advance into Buner has brought heavy pressure on the military from the United States and other Western countries. It has also fortified a growing consensus among Pakistani politicians and the public that the Taliban have gone too far and that the military should act to contain the spread of the insurgency.

Under threat of military action, the Taliban staged a show withdrawal from Buner at the end of last week, General Abbas said. But he said the militants were trying to expand the space they controlled beyond the Swat Valley, which borders Dir and Buner.

At a news conference, he played three tapes of what were described as telephone intercepts of the main Taliban leader, Mullah Fazlullah, talking to one of his commanders about making a show withdrawal for the news media while telling the fighters to put away their weapons and lie low.

“In Buner, people are living under coercion and in fear,” General Abbas said. “There was no reason to intimidate people in Buner, and the militants started intimidating people and forcibly recruiting young people to take them back to Swat for military training.”

“The government acted with patience,” he added, “but eventually there was no other way except to launch an operation.”

Earlier in the day, the new interior minister, Rehman Malik, said the Taliban had ignored repeated requests from the government of President Asif Ali Zardari to leave Buner. “I warn them to vacate the area,” Mr. Malik told reporters. “We are not going to spare them. Action will be taken if anyone tries to block our efforts to re-establish the writ of the government in Buner and other areas.”

Several events contributed to the shift among politicians and the public. Video of the flogging of a 17-year-old woman in Swat by the Taliban several weeks ago shocked many in the country. A radical cleric who helped negotiate the peace deal in Swat, Maulana Sufi Muhammad, said recently that Pakistani institutions like Parliament and the high courts were un-Islamic, a comment that angered politicians from all parties.

Finally, the militants’ move into new districts last week impelled the Pakistani Army to move against the Taliban.

The 6,000 troops to be shifted had originally been on Pakistan’s western border but were sent to the Indian border in December, after the terrorists’ attack in Mumbai in which 163 people were killed the previous month. India had responded to the attack, which Indian and American officials concluded was planned in Pakistan and carried out by Pakistanis, by massing troops on the Pakistani border.

The promised redeployment, which will essentially return Pakistan’s military presence in the northwest to pre-Mumbai levels, comes as American and Pakistani officials are preparing for what are likely to be tense meetings in Washington next week between President Obama, President Zardari and President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan.

American officials have alternately criticized and praised Pakistan, in the hope of goading it into taking tougher action against the Taliban, and on Tuesday they engaged in both strategies.

Early in the day, a senior military official, one of several American officials who spoke on condition of anonymity in order to discuss the security strategy of an ally, expressed anger about what he saw as Pakistan’s fecklessness in trying to combat militants within its borders.

“It is reasonable for Pakistanis and Americans alike to ask why there has not been a more robust, sustained and serious response to elements that assassinated Benazir Bhutto, blew up the Marriott Hotel, attacked a visiting cricket team and assaulted a police academy,” the official said, ticking off a series of violent events that began with the killing of the former prime minister. He said it was “inexplicable” that the incidents had not “galvanized the Pakistani military and civilian leaders to link arms in a comprehensive, sustained campaign to fight back.”

But later in the day, after the United States received word of the troop movement, the official took a different tone. “It’s too soon to say how it’s going to turn out,” the official said. “But it’s a promising sign that they finally recognize the existential threat to their country.”

American officials said they were continuing to press Pakistan to accept more American trainers, an issue likely to come up in the meetings next week. More than 70 American military advisers and technical specialists are already working in Pakistan to help its armed forces battle militants in the lawless tribal areas, but the United States would like to expand the effort.

Pakistan has balked, American officials said, because it does not want a large American presence in its country.

“There’s a red line about our advisers and any foreign boots on the ground in Pakistan right now,” a senior administration official said. He said that the United States was “doing everything we can within the constraints that are currently placed on our engagement to be as helpful as we can.”

The Pakistani military may have a difficult fight ahead. The Taliban have already been digging trenches and fortified positions, General Abbas said.

There are indications that the fighting in Dir has been heavier than Pakistani officials have acknowledged, and that the civilian cost has been high. The military said some 70 militants had been killed in three days of fighting.

But more than 30,000 civilians have fled their homes in the region, and some of them reported seeing bodies lying in the streets and the fields as they fled, Amnesty International said Tuesday.

“Neither the Taliban nor the government forces seem to care about the well-being of the residents of Lower Dir,” Sam Zarifi, Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific director, said in a statement.

Carlotta Gall reported from Islamabad, and Elisabeth Bumiller from Washington. Helene Cooper, Mark Mazzetti and Mark Landler contributed reporting from Washington. Alan Cowell contributed from London.

Terror Gift to Pakistan

2011 World Cup shift will cost PCB 10.5 million dollars

KARACHI - With the International Cricket Council (ICC) deciding to shift the 2011 cricket World Cup matches from Pakistan, the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) is set to suffer a whopping 10.5 million dollar loss.

“We lose out on earning the hosting fees of the matches. The ICC pay out the host country 750,000 dollars for each match,” PCB’s Chief Operating Officer Saleem Altaf said.

Altaf said the loss could be much more than what has been estimated.

He added that the board has already suffered huge financial set backs due to the cancellation of Australian and Indian tour.

The eight nation Champions Trophy was also shifted from the country by the ICC in the wake of precarious conditions.

Officials of the PCB marketing department estimated that the overall loss could be around 40 million dollars, The News reported. (ANI)

Terror on Cricket: Malaysia offers Pakistan two alternative playing venues

The impact of Terrorism on Cricket.

KUALA LUMPUR - Malaysia has offered two of its ICC-recognised venues to Pakistan so that it can fulfil its international commitments and hold matches that were cancelled in the aftermath of the terror attack on Sri Lanka team.

According to The Nation, Malaysia is ready to become the alternative venue for Pakistan’s cricket matches so that all their international matches that were cancelled due to safety reasons can be played here, Malaysian Cricket Association (MCA) honorary secretary C Sivanandan said.

Since Malaysia already has two world class cricket venues, certified by the International Cricket Council to host Test matches and One-Day Internationals, MCA has made the offer to Pakistan, he said.

“The Bayu Emas Oval in Klang and the Kinrara Oval in Puchong have already staged world class international matches and we already have the facilities, expertise and the people to assist Pakistan in hosting matches,” Sivanandan was quoted as saying by the official Bernama news agency.

However, MCA has not yet received any feedback on the offer from the Pakistan board, he said.

After the March 3 terror attack on the visiting Sri Lanka team in Lahore, foreign countries and teams are reluctant to travel to Pakistan.

Pakistan’s hopes of jointly staging the World Cup with India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh have dimmed after gunmen attacked the visiting Lankan team bus in Lahore on March 3, killing seven people and injuring six players ahead of the third day of the second Test. (ANI)

al-Qaeda: The Many Faces of an Islamist Extremist Threat

REPORT OF THE



U.S. HOUSE PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE





APPROVED: JUNE 2006



TOGETHER WITH ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS



SUBMITTED: SEPTEMBER 2006

Understanding the Strategic Threat

Today, the remnants of al-Qaeda and radical Islamist terrorist groups with like-minded goals and ideologies remain the single most important threat to the national security of the United States. Although al-Qaeda has suffered significant setbacks since 9/11, the organization is constantly evolving, and its leaders patiently wait for the right opportunity to direct another attack against the United States. As evidenced by Usama bin Laden's statement from January 2006, al-Qaeda's leadership still possesses the desire to carry out further attacks. Breaking a fourteen-month silence, bin Laden said:

"As for similar operations taking place in America, it is only a matter of time. They [the terrorists] are in the final stages, and you will see them in the heart of your land as soon as the planning is complete."⁵

The enemy we face today is not the same enemy that attacked the United States in 2001. Al-Qaeda has been forced to adapt to its changing environment and has relinquished some of its operational control to an extended network of like-minded terrorist groups to ensure the movement's longevity. Today, the war on terrorism is being fought on multiple fronts. First, we are fighting al-Qaeda, the terrorist organization led by Usama bin Laden. Usama bin Laden formally declared war against the United States in a 1996 letter urging Jihad against America. In his 1996 letter, and in subsequent statements, Usama bin Laden cites the United States and its allies for their military presence in the Middle East, support for Israel and the occupation of Iraq as reasons to attack the U.S. His 1998 statement expanded on the 1996 fatwa to sanction attacks on all Americans, including civilians. Usama bin Laden justified attacks against the American people because "they are the ones who pay the taxes which fund the planes that bomb us in Afghanistan, the tanks that strike and destroy our homes in Palestine, the armies which occupy our lands in the Arabian Gulf, and the fleets which ensure the blockade of Iraq" He further states, "The American people are the ones who employ both their men and their women in the American Forces which attack us."⁶

Successful operations against al-Qaeda's core have created new problems in the sense that al-Qaeda is no longer a hierarchical organization run by bin Laden. Rather, the terrorist threat has evolved into what some experts refer to as "franchised" terrorism. In this new phase, previously identified al-Qaeda leaders serve as examples and provide ideological rather than organizational and material support to terrorist operatives around the world. Al-Qaeda acts as an inspiration to groups from Chechnya to the Palestinian territories, as well as to individuals in Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom that have minimal contact with the network.⁷

Al-Qaeda's ability to export its ideology to terrorist organizations around the world has created a second front in the war on terrorism. In addition to the central group, "al-Qaeda" has become a network of loosely affiliated individuals that subscribe to its ideology, but have little, if any, contact with its core leaders and sometimes differ on end goals and agendas.⁸ In Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed by Coalition forces on June 8, 2006, declared allegiance to bin Laden, al-Qaeda and an extreme interpretation of Islam. Although bin Laden and al-Zarqawi's supporters in Iraq have their differences, they share the same end goal and are willing to put these disagreements aside as they work to create a Muslim state under a new Caliphate.⁹ Al-Qaeda has also benefited from the rise of homegrown terrorist cells in Europe and North America, as well as its ability to exploit the Internet to increase support among Muslims and other sympathizers worldwide.

We are no longer fighting a war against just al-Qaeda. Rather, we are now fighting a war against various entities inspired by al-Qaeda and radicalized in various areas around the world, including in the United States. Al-Qaeda's ability to recruit large support networks should not be overlooked. As long as al-Qaeda can spread its ideology to other groups, the movement will continue to grow and threaten to change the way the Islamic world is governed. To win the war on terrorism, the United States and our allies will have to not just kill and capture key terrorist operatives, but also identify ways to discredit the radical ideology that supports these groups. Organizations like Jemaah Islamiyah, the Libyan Islamic

Fighting Group and the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat have shown willingness to support al-Qaeda's global operations. Although the core element of al-Qaeda is still dangerous, it may increasingly look to leverage support from affiliates to carry out attacks against the United States. Today, al-Qaeda and al-Qaeda associated groups maintain a presence in dozens of countries worldwide, including the United States (See Figure 1).

Of particular concern is a relatively new phenomenon-the rise of homegrown Islamist extremism. In London, Casablanca, Madrid, the Netherlands and elsewhere, homegrown terrorist cells comprised of second and third generation radicalized Muslims have proven difficult for authorities to track or preempt their activities.¹⁰ Such homegrown cells have been able to train and prepare in secrecy, escaping detection even from the local community. Although the United States has not yet seen this phenomenon on the same scale as our European allies, the potential for America to face homegrown terrorism is real. This threat calls for a more robust, capable, and empowered Intelligence Community.

Islamist extremism, as it is discussed throughout this report, refers to the political philosophy that says that, in order to defend a carefully defined vision of Islam and protect pious Muslims around the world, one has to impose, essentially, a 7th century political structure over the people of the Islamic world, and that this political structure must be implemented by violent jihad, or Holy War. We are not looking at Muslims who practice their faith fundamentally -there is nothing wrong with practicing religion in a fundamental way. ¹¹

In preparing this report the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence held numerous hearings (both open and closed), briefings and meetings with representatives from the Intelligence Community, academia, and the private sector to enable Members and staff to better understand the threat presented by Islamist extremist groups. Due to the unclassified nature of this report, the Committee has only drawn from publicly available sources. In no way does this undermine the threat facing the United States-the Committee would reach the same findings and conclusions using classified information.

Jihad in Afghanistan

Jihad in Afghanistan

The origins of the group can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan. The United States viewed the conflict in Afghanistan, with the Afghan Marxists and allied Soviet troops on one side and the native Afghan mujahedeen on the other, as a blatant case of Soviet expansionism and aggression. The U.S. channelled funds through Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency to the native Afghan mujahedeen fighting the Soviet occupation in a CIA program called Operation Cyclone.^[41][42]

At the same time, a growing number of foreign Arab mujahedeen (also called Afghan Arabs) joined the jihad against the Afghan Marxist regime, facilitated by international Muslim organizations, particularly the Maktab al-Khidamat,^[43] whose funds came from some of the $600 million a year donated to the jihad by the Saudi Arabia government and individual Muslims - particularly wealthy Saudis who were approached by Osama bin Laden.^[44]

Maktab al-Khidamat was established by Abdullah Azzam and Bin Laden in Peshawar, Pakistan, in 1984. From 1986 it began to set up a network of recruiting offices in the United States, the hub of which was the Al Kifah Refugee Center at the Farouq Mosque in Brooklyn's Atlantic Avenue. Among notable figures at the Brooklyn center were "double agent" Ali Mohamed, whom FBI special agent Jack Cloonan called "bin Laden's first trainer,"^[45] and "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdel-Rahman, a leading recruiter of mujahideen for Afghanistan.

The Afghan Mujahedeen of the 1980s have been alleged to be the inspiration for terrorist groups in nations such as Indonesia, the Philippines, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Chechnya, and the former Yugoslavia.^[46] According to Russian sources, the perpetrators of the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 allegedly used a manual allegedly written by the CIA for the Mujihadeen fighters in Afghanistan on how to make explosives.^[47]

Al-Qaeda evolved from the Maktab al-Khidamat (Services Office), a Muslim organization founded in 1980 to raise and channel funds and recruit foreign mujahadeen for the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. It was founded by Abdullah Yusuf Azzam, a Palestinian Islamic scholar and member of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Maktab al-Khadamat organized guest houses in Peshawar, in Pakistan, near the Afghan border, and paramilitary training camps in Afghanistan to prepare international non-Afghan recruits for the Afghan war front. Azzam persuaded Bin Laden to join MAK, to use his own money and use his connections with "the Saudi royal family and the petro-billionaires of the Gulf" to raise more to help the mujahideen.^[48]

The role played by MAK and foreign Muslim volunteers, or "Afghan Arabs", in the war was not a major one. While 250,000 Afghan Mujahideen fought the Soviets and the communist Afghan government, it is estimated that were never more than 2000 foreign mujahideen in the field at any one time.^[49] Nonetheless, foreign mujahedeen volunteers came from 43 countries and the number that participated in the Afghan movement between 1982 and 1992 is reported to have been 35,000.^[50]

The Soviet Union finally withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989. To the surprise of many, Mohammed Najibullah's communist Afghan government hung on for three more years before being overrun by elements of the mujahedeen. With mujahedeen leaders unable to agree on a structure for governance, chaos ensued, with constantly reorganizing alliances fighting for control of ill-defined territories, leaving the country devastated.

Expanding operations

Toward the end of the Soviet military mission in Afghanistan, some mujahedeen wanted to expand their operations to include Islamist struggles in other parts of the world, such as Israel and Kashmir. A number of overlapping and interrelated organizations were formed to further those aspirations.

One of these was the organization that would eventually be called al-Qaeda, formed by Osama bin Laden with an initial meeting held on August 11, 1988.^[51] Bin Laden wished to establish nonmilitary operations in other parts of the world; Azzam, in contrast, wanted to remain focused on military campaigns. After Azzam was assassinated in 1989, the MAK split, with a significant number joining bin Laden's organization.

In November 1989, Ali Mohamed, a former special forces Sergeant stationed at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, left military service and moved to Santa Clara, California. He traveled to Afghanistan and Pakistan and became "deeply involved with bin Laden's plans."^[52].

A year later, on November 8, 1990, the FBI raided the New Jersey home of Mohammed's associate El Sayyid Nosair, discovering a great deal of evidence of terrorist plots, including plans to blow up New York City skyscrapers.^[53] Nosair was eventually convicted in connection to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and for the murder of Rabbi Meir Kahane on November 5, 1990. In 1991, Ali Mohammed is said to have helped orchestrate Osama bin Laden's relocation to Sudan.^[54]

Al-Qaeda

Al-Qaeda, alternatively spelled al-Qaida and sometimes al-Qa'ida, (Arabic: القاعدة‎; al-qāʿidah; translation: The Base) is an Islamist multinational^[5] and extremist Sunni movement founded sometime between August 1988^[6] and late 1989/early 1990.^[7]

Al-Qaeda has attacked civilian and military targets in various countries, the most notable being the September 11 attacks in 2001. These actions were followed by the US government launching a military and intelligence campaign against al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations called the War on Terror. As of 2009, the group is believed to have between 200 and 300 members.^[8]

Characteristic techniques include suicide attacks and simultaneous bombings of different targets.^[9] Activities ascribed to it may involve members of the movement, who have taken a pledge of loyalty to Osama bin Laden, or the much more numerous "al-Qaeda-linked" individuals who have undergone training in one of its camps in Afghanistan or Sudan but not taken any pledge.^[10]

Al-Qaeda's objectives include the end of foreign influence in Muslim countries and the creation of a new Islamic caliphate. Reported beliefs include that a Christian-Jewish alliance is conspiring to destroy Islam,^[11] and that the killing of bystanders and civilians is Islamically justified in jihad.

Its management philosophy has been described as "centralization of decision and decentralization of execution."^[12] Following 9/11 and the launching of what's called the War on Terrorism, it is thought al-Qaeda's leadership has "become geographically isolated", leading to the "emergence of decentralized leadership" of regional groups using the al-Qaeda "brand name."^[13][14]

Al-Qaeda has been labeled a terrorist organization by the United Nations Security Council,^[15] the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Secretary General,^[16][17] the Commission of the European Communities of the European Union,^[18] the United States Department of State,^[19] the Australian Government,^[20] Government of India,^[21] Public Safety Canada,^[22] the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs,^[23] Japan's Diplomatic Bluebook,^[24] South Korean Foreign Ministry,^[25] the Dutch Military Intelligence and Security Service,^[26] the United Kingdom Home Office,^[27] Russia,^[28] the Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs,^[29] Turkish Police Forces^[30] and the Swiss Government.^[31]

CAN INDIA ENGAGE ITSELF IN COUNTER TERRORISM?

The concept of anti-terrorism emerges from a thorough examining of the concept of terrorism as well as an attempt to understand and articulate what constitutes terrorism in Western terms. It must be remembered that in military contexts, terrorism is a tactic, not an ideology. Terrorism may be a tactic in a war between nation-states, in a civil war, or in an insurgency.

Counter-terrorism refers to offensive strategies intended to prevent a belligerent, in a broader conflict, from successfully using the tactic of terrorism. The U.S. military definition, compatible with the definitions used by NATO and many other militaries, is "Operations that include the offensive measures taken to prevent, deter, preempt, and respond to terrorism."[1] In other words, counter-terrorism is a set of techniques for denying an opponent the use terrorism-based tactics, just as counter-air is a set of techniques for denying the opponent the use of attack aircraft.
United States Customs and Border Protection officers.

Anti-terrorism is defensive, intended to reduce the chance of an attack using terrorist tactics at specific points, or to reduce the vulnerability of possible targets to such tactics. "Defensive measures used to reduce the vulnerability of individuals and property to terrorist acts, to include limited response and containment by local military and civilian forces." [1]

To continue the analogy between air and terrorist capability, offensive counter-air missions attack the airfields of the opponent, while defensive counter-air uses antiaircraft missiles to protect a point on one's own territory. The ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict,[2] Sri Lankan Civil War,[3] and Colombian Civil War[4] are examples of conflicts where terrorism is present, along with other tactics, so that a participant uses counter- and anti-terrorism to limit the opponent's use of terror tactics.



Legal contexts
Main article: Anti-terrorism legislation

In response to the growing threat of international terrorism many countries have introduced anti-terrorism legislation.

* United Kingdom
o The United Kingdom has had anti-terrorism legislation in place for more than thirty years. The Prevention of Violence Act 1939 was brought in response to an Irish Republican Army (IRA) campaign of violence under the S-Plan. This act had been allowed to expire in 1953 and was repealed in 1973 to be replaced by the Prevention of Terrorism Act a response to the Troubles in Northern Ireland. From 1974 to 1989 the temporary provisions of the act annually.
o In 2000 the Acts were replaced with the more permanent Terrorism Act 2000, which contained many of their powers, and then the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005.
o During The Troubles, authorities in Northern Ireland were accused of employing a shoot-to-kill policy
o The Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 was formally introduced into the Parliament November 19, 2001 two months after the September 11, 2001 attacks in America. It received royal assent and went into force on December 13, 2001. On December 16, 2004 the Law Lords ruled that Part 4 was incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, but under the terms of the Human Rights Act 1998 it remained in force. The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 was drafted to answer the Law Lords ruling and the Terrorism Act 2006 creates new offences related to terrorism, and amends existing ones. The Act was drafted in the aftermath of the 7 July 2005 London bombings, and like its predecessors some of its terms have proven to be highly controversial.
o Great Britain dealt with internal threats from terrorism through a secret law enforcement training program known as Operation Kratos.
* United States
o U.S. legal issues surrounding this issue include rulings on the domestic employment of Deadly force by law enforcement organizations.
o Search and seizure is governed by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
o The US passed the USA PATRIOT Act after the 9/11 attacks, as well as a range of other legislation and executive orders.
o The Department of Homeland Security was established to consolidate domestic security agencies to coordinate anti-terrorism, as well as national response to major natural disasters and accidents.
o The Posse Comitatus Act limits domestic employment of the United States Army, requiring Presidential approval prior to deploying the Army. Pentagon policy also applies this limitation to the United States Marine Corps, United States Navy, and United States Air Force. The Department of Defense can be employed domestically on Presidential order, as was done during the Los Angeles riots of 1992, Hurricane Katrina and the Beltway Sniper incidents.
o External or international use of lethal force would require a Presidential finding.

* Australia
o Australia has passed several anti-terrorism acts in 2004 three acts Anti-terrorism Act, 2004, (No 2) and (No 3) were passed. The Attorney-General, Philip Ruddock, introduced the Anti-terrorism bill, 2004 on March 31. He described it as "a bill to strengthen Australia's counter-terrorism laws in a number of respects - a task made more urgent following the recent tragic terrorist bombings in Spain." He said that Australia's counter-terrorism laws "require review and, where necessary, updating if we are to have a legal framework capable of safeguarding all Australians from the scourge of terrorism." The Australian Anti-Terrorism Act 2005 supplemented the powers of the earlier acts. The legislation in Australia allows police to detain suspects for up to two weeks without charge, and to electronically track suspects for up to a year. The Australian Anti-Terrorism Act of 2005 included a "shoot-to-kill" clause. In a country, with entrenched liberal democratic traditions, the measures have been controversial and have been criticized by civil libertarians and Islamic groups.
* Israel
o On December 14, 2006 the Israeli Supreme Court ruled targeted killings were a permitted form of self defense.[6]







Terrorism and human rights

One of the primary difficulties of implementing effective counter-terrorist measures is the waning of civil liberties and individual privacy that such measures often entail, both for citizens of, and for those detained by states attempting to combat terror. At times, measures designed to tighten security have been seen as abuses of power or even violations of human rights.

Examples of these problems can include prolonged, incommunicado detention without judicial review; risk of subjecting to torture during the transfer, return and extradition of people between or within countries; and the adoption of security measures that restrain the rights or freedoms of citizens and breach principles of non-discrimination. [7] Examples include:

* In November 2003 Malaysia passed new counter-terrorism laws that were widely criticized by local human rights groups for being vague and overbroad. Critics claim that the laws put the basic rights of free expression, association, and assembly at risk. Malaysia persisted in holding around 100 alleged militants without trial, including five Malaysian students detained for alleged terrorist activity while studying in Karachi, Pakistan. [7]
* In November 2003 a Canadian-Syrian national, Maher Arar, alleged publicly that he had been tortured in a Syrian prison after being handed over to the Syrian authorities by U.S. [7]
* In December 2003 Colombia's congress approved legislation that would give the military the power to arrest, tap telephones and carry out searches without warrants or any previous judicial order. [7]
* Images of unpopular treatment of detainees in US custody in Iraq and other locations have encouraged international scrutiny of US operations in the war on terror. [8]
* Hundreds of foreign nationals remain in prolonged indefinite detention without charge or trial in Guantánamo Bay, despite international and US constitutional standards some groups believe outlaw such practices. [8]
* Hundreds of people suspected of connections with the Taliban or al Qa'eda remain in long-term detention in Pakistan or in US-controlled centers in Afghanistan. [8]
* China has used the "war on terror" to justify its policies in the predominantly Muslim Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region to stifle Uighur identity. [8]
* In Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Yemen and other countries, scores of people have been arrested and arbitrarily detained in connection with suspected terrorist acts or links to opposition armed groups. [8]
* Until 2005 eleven men remained in high security detention in the UK under the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001. [8]

Many would argue that such violations exacerbate rather than counter the terrorist threat. [7] Human rights advocates argue for the crucial role of human rights protection as an intrinsic part to fight against terrorism. [8] This suggests, as proponents of human security have long argued, that respecting human rights may indeed help us to incur security. Amnesty International included a section on confronting terrorism in the recommendations in the Madrid Agenda arising from the Madrid Summit on Democracy and Terrorism (Madrid 8-11 March 2005):

"Democratic principles and values are essential tools in the fight against terrorism. Any successful strategy for dealing with terrorism requires terrorists to be isolated. Consequently, the preference must be to treat terrorism as criminal acts to be handled through existing systems of law enforcement and with full respect for human rights and the rule of law. We recommend: (1) taking effective measures to make impunity impossible either for acts of terrorism or for the abuse of human rights in counter-terrorism measures. (2) the incorporation of human rights laws in all anti-terrorism programmes and policies of national governments as well as international bodies."[8]

While international efforts to combat terrorism have focused on the need to enhance cooperation between states, proponents of human rights (as well as human security) have suggested that more effort needs to be given to the effective inclusion of human rights protection as a crucial element in that cooperation. They argue that international human rights obligations do not stop at borders and a failure to respect human rights in one state may undermine its effectiveness in the international effort to cooperate to combat terrorism. [7]