Pakistani Taliban behind failed New York attack: US

[mehru]

One thing that i don't understand that if Shehzad got his training from Pakistani taliban then how the hell he was not able to make a proper bomb? Taliban here are very accomplished in these cases.

 

[karan.1970]

One thing that i don't understand that if Shehzad got his training from Pakistani taliban then how the hell he was not able to make a proper bomb? Taliban here are very accomplished in these cases.

may be he was a bad student who couldnt learn despite accomplished teachers....

 

[Areesh]

may be he was a bad student who couldnt learn despite accomplished teachers....

Or he wasn't a student at all.

 

[karan.1970]

Or he wasn't a student at all.

Either can be true.. Unfortunately none of us has the facts and are dependent of News and media to provide.. Currently, they seem to be favoring my line of thought....

But we all know how media is.. So its a bunch of may be's at this time

 

[Vassnti]

Ah everything going according to script. First a fail bomb attack. Then a Pakistani. Then HakimUllah video. Now TTP. And then some ISI or Pakistani army individual involvement in the future. Don't americans think this story is very primitive. They should have created something better. Should have taken help from Hollywood.

Perhaps you might like to provide some evidence if you think the americans are planting bombs in their own cities just to have an excuse to pressure pakisan?
Seriously if you think about the "false flag" garbage it is rediculous, if the US wants to bomb the crap out of some one they will, they dont need to fake a bombing for an excuse.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Perhaps you might like to provide some evidence if you think the americans are planting bombs in their own cities just to have an excuse to pressure pakisan?
Seriously if you think about the "false flag" garbage it is rediculous, if the US wants to bomb the crap out of some one they will, they dont need to fake a bombing for an excuse.

Actually right now, given contradictory statements out of US officials, my suspicions are that a false connection, or a connection based on poor evidence, is being made in order to pressure Pakistan to act in accordance with US desires.

It appears more or less a propaganda effort in full swing to pressure Pakistan to launch more military offensives, whether it is prepared or not, and whether launching more offensives would be counter productive to existing operations and holding actions in Swat, SW, Bajaur etc.

The NYT, specially on matters related to Pakistan, indulges in little more than trashy tabloid "journalism". Here we go again... for all the headlines regarding "mounting evidence" of a connection between Shahzad and the Taliban, it appears there never was anything significant. Shahzad, just like the Austin IRS plane bomber, appeared to be someone who had lost his mind. Completely.



Shahzad And Taliban: New York Times Jumps The Gun

Shahzad And Taliban: New York Times Jumps The Gun

McClatchy Newpapers is reporting that "U.S. officials" are contending that there is "no credible evidence" that would-be Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad was trained by foreign terrorists. But, wait wait! I would have sworn that two days ago, the New York Times was reporting that evidence of such a linkage was "mounting?" Looks like somebody jumped the gun!

Indeed, on May 5th, the Times published an article entitled "Evidence Mounts for Taliban Role in Bomb Plot". That would have sort of led you to believe that readers would soon enjoy a detailed accounting of some sort of evidence.

Basically, here it is:

American officials said Wednesday that it was very likely that a radical group once thought unable to attack the United States had played a role in the bombing attempt in Times Square, elevating concerns about whether other militant groups could deliver at least a glancing blow on American soil.
"Officials" would go on to reiterate that "evidence was mounting," that Shahzad "discussed his contacts with the group," and that there was "other evidence" that officials "would not disclose."

Of course, who's to say that a "discussion" of Faisal's "contacts" with the Taliban wasn't limited to the lack thereof? The Times either doesn't know or can't say. And coupled with the dramatic mention of undisclosable evidence, you have a "senior Obama administration official" saying "'there are no smoking guns yet' that the Pakistani Taliban had directed the Times Square bombing."

On the other hand, McClatchy reports:

No credible evidence has been found so far that the Pakistani-American man accused in the Times Square bombing plot received any serious terrorist training from the Pakistani Taliban or another radical Islamic group, six U.S. officials said Thursday.

"There is nothing that confirms that any groups have been found involved in this for certain," one U.S. official told McClatchy. "It's a lot of speculation at this point."

Story continues below

Faisal Shahzad may have, at the most, had "incidental contact" with a terrorist organization, and he may have been encouraged to act, said one of the officials, who declined to elaborate further.

What follows in the McClatchy piece is a full blow-by-blow of Shahzad's incompetence, from his use of the "wrong kind of fertilizer" to his failure to conceal his identity to his bungled escape attempt to the fact that he "hadn't even removed the plastic caps on the propane tanks' valves before he abandoned the vehicle." All of which led to the rather obvious supposition that Shahzad "never received even rudimentary terrorist training or instructions on how to evade arrest."

Perhaps the Times should pay closer attention to the reporting being done at their City Room blog, which got the scoop on Shahzad's trip to a Pennsylvania fireworks shop, where he purchased "a package of M88 Silver Salute firecrackers," believing them to be an effective means of igniting his bomb.

McClatchy takes an opportunity to say, HA HA SNACK ON THIS, NEW YORK TIMES:

Several news reports on Thursday, though, said that U.S. officials had gathered "mounting" evidence that the Pakistani Taliban had trained Shahzad.

"Officials said that after two days of intense questioning of the bombing suspect, Faisal Shahzad, evidence was mounting that the group, the Pakistani Taliban, had helped inspire and train Mr. Shahzad," The New York Times reported.

It's the same old story, really. There's a big war on terror story -- say, a drone strike or some such thing -- and a passel of reporters run to "officials" and write down whatever they say. "Oh, yeah," Anonymous Source will say, "We got some really bad guys with that drone attack!" Only later, when the reporters take over the ball from the stenographers, do we learn that none of that is actually true, and there's no way to hold any officials accountable, because they've been granted anonymity.

But I think this is my favorite part of this whole saga. In their premature ejaculation, the Times mentions that in "a video on Sunday, the Pakistani Taliban claimed responsibility for the attempted bombing." (Follow that link if you like! It's in the original, and takes you to another page on the Times website with the exact same sentence and link, which, if followed, keeps taking you back to the second page.)

If you want to know what the Pakistani Taliban actually said, here you go:

The group yesterday reversed that earlier position, with one spokesman saying the Pakistani Taliban had nothing to do with the attempted bombing, but adding: "Such attacks are welcome."

"We have no relation with Faisal. However, he is our Muslim brother," Taliban spokesman Azam Tariq told the AP in Pakistan by telephone from an undisclosed location. "We feel proud of Faisal. He did a brave job."

Tariq said the Taliban only knew from media reports that Shahzad had told authorities he learned how to make bombs in Waziristan, an autonomous tribal region of Pakistan seen as a terrorist stronghold.

You shouldn't believe everything you read in the papers, Azam!

 

[Vassnti]

Actually right now, given contradictory statements out of US officials, my suspicions are that a false connection, or a connection based on poor evidence, is being made in order to pressure Pakistan to act in accordance with US desires.

It appears more or less a propaganda effort in full swing to pressure Pakistan to launch more military offensives, whether it is prepared or not, and whether launching more offensives would be counter productive to existing operations and holding actions in Swat, SW, Bajaur etc.

While i would agree that it seems unlikley the bomber was "trained" by anyone, after all how could some one make so many mistakes in one attempt, wrong detonator, wrong explosives etc.

Certainly the evidence released so far is contradictory and much would seem to be creative attempts by journalists to be first with the news rather than good reporting. If there was a full scale propoganda effort you would think there would be one story with nice consistent evidence rather than a different story each day contradicting the last.

 

[peace prophet]

finish pakistani taliban we will thankfull to you uncle sam

Finish Afg-Taliban, LET, JUD, JEM,HM,HUA, etc etc and we will be thankful to nephew pakstan.