Shootout in Lahore

[Top_Cat]

Tharanga was hit in the chest by a bullet but it somehow didn't penetrate his sternum. If they meant not to kill anyone they either have a ridiculously top-notch aim or got extremely lucky.

Yep. Not to mention that's a hell of a lot of warning shots they pumped into the bus aside from all the ammo they had with them.

They intended to take it hostage, I reckon.

 

[Uppercut]

Yep. Not to mention that's a hell of a lot of warning shots they pumped into the bus aside from all the ammo they had with them.

They intended to take it hostage, I reckon.

I doubt even that, I'm not willing to buy that they launched a rocket that deliberately missed and loaded up on dud grenades. They were trying to kill these guys, and they didn't due to complete and utter fluke.

 

[Top_Cat]

I doubt even that, I'm not willing to buy that they launched a rocket that deliberately missed and loaded up on dud grenades. They were trying to kill these guys, and they didn't due to complete and utter fluke.

Yeah I certainly thought that when I first heard what happened. It just seems a weird thing to do, to blow up a bus yet only be a few metres away from the explosion. Little risky for guys who clearly wanted to live through the experience, don't ya think? If all they wanted to do was kill them, why not just load up on rocket-launchers and hit the slow-moving-thanks-to-the-roundabout bus from all sides? It's also possible that they meant to do as you said but, failing that, the backup plan was a hostage takeover but they were thwarted somehow.

Ah, who knows? It's all guesswork.

 

[Uppercut]

Yeah I certainly thought that when I first heard what happened. It just seems a weird thing to do, to blow up a bus yet only be a few metres away from the explosion. Little risky for guys who clearly wanted to live through the experience, don't ya think? If all they wanted to do was kill them, why not just load up on rocket-launchers and hit the slow-moving-thanks-to-the-roundabout bus from all sides?

Ah, who knows? It's all guesswork.

Yeah, i suppose you're right. We can only speculate.

 

[silentstriker]

Re: Crowe, I wonder how many others feel that way. The next tour to the subcontinent by a non-subcontinental team isn't until August, when New Zealand come to Sri Lanka, followed by Australia coming to India in October for ODIs. We'll see what happens there.

Interestingly, the only Tests scheduled to be played in India this year is Sri Lanka in India and they'll likely tour (odd considering it was they who were actually attacked). So it won't be until Feburary 2010 when SA are scheduled to land in India that we'll see a real test of that. Of course, there are a couple teams scheduled to go to Pakistan before that, but I think that's over for the foreseeable future. India and SL are more interesting, particularly India.

 

[jeevan]

Yep. Not to mention that's a hell of a lot of warning shots they pumped into the bus aside from all the ammo they had with them.

They intended to take it hostage, I reckon.

The bus apparently had 25 bullet holes, from 12 guys with assault rifles who had total surprise on their side. That is not even one trigger pull per gunman.

While we are speculating...

Taking the cricketers hostage is certainly quite plausible, and the most likely intent IMO. If (as is mentioned in a couple of Pakistani reports) the terrorists belonged to the LeT, capturing an international cricket team gets a heck of a lot of your guys out of jail. There would be some insider support to such an operation, as LeT leaders were mentored by Pakistani security forces.

Killing the cricketers makes very little sense. It puts more pressure on the government to do something real with the investigation and possibly exposes your inside collaborators to investigations, however small the possibility of real action.

 

[Jono]

Crowe is arguing against all tours to any country in the subcontinent.

In his words its the 'end for world cricket as we know it'.

 

[Top_Cat]

The bus apparently had 25 bullet holes, from 12 guys with assault rifles who had total surprise on their side. That is not even one trigger pull per gunman.

According to the article by Chaminda Vaas, their guns were set to single-shot bursts. Hardly the actions of guys who were intending to wantonly spray the bus and massacre the entire team bus so I think you're right. Looks like they wanted to scare the SL team members to hit the deck and take out anyone who popped their head up but save ammo for the long haul. In my view, the bus driver saved the SL team not just from being killed but from a long drawn-out scenario in which negotiators have almost no control over unless the bad guys have intentions of handing themselves over.

While we are speculating...

Taking the cricketers hostage is certainly quite plausible, and the most likely intent IMO. If (as is mentioned in a couple of Pakistani reports) the terrorists belonged to the LeT, capturing an international cricket team gets a heck of a lot of your guys out of jail. There would be some insider support to such an operation, as LeT leaders were mentored by Pakistani security forces.

Killing the cricketers makes very little sense. It puts more pressure on the government to do something real with the investigation and possibly exposes your inside collaborators to investigations, however small the possibility of real action.

In theory I reckon that sounds right but I wonder, if the worst had happened and Pakistan were forced to conduct an investigation, no matter how cursory, if they then covered things up, who would call them on it? And let's say that it was an inside job and that was exposed, who would be able to do anything about it? Pakistan are already not going to see a touring side for a while so unless someone decides to overthrow the government, not a lot would happen I reckon. Someone correct me if there's an angle I'm missing here.

 

[Johnners]

Single shot bursts hey? Semi-Auto maybe

 

[jeevan]

According to the article by Chaminda Vaas, their guns were set to single-shot bursts. Hardly the actions of guys who were intending to wantonly spray the bus and massacre the entire team bus so I think you're right. Looks like they wanted to scare the SL team members to hit the deck and take out anyone who popped their head up but save ammo for the long haul. In my view, the bus driver saved the SL team not just from being killed but from a long drawn-out scenario in which negotiators have almost no control over unless the bad guys have intentions of handing themselves over.



In theory I reckon that sounds right but I wonder, if the worst had happened and Pakistan were forced to conduct an investigation, no matter how cursory, if they then covered things up, who would call them on it? And let's say that it was an inside job and that was exposed, who would be able to do anything about it? Pakistan are already not going to see a touring side for a while so unless someone decides to overthrow the government, not a lot would happen I reckon. Someone correct me if there's an angle I'm missing here.

You're right. I have nothing on this to indicate any rationale to fear investigation or exposure. The investigations into the assasination attempts on Musharraf at the height of his power and the assasination of Bhutto at the height of her popularity have come to nothing.

Perhaps the terrorists are cricket fans after all, and perhaps chose not to kill the cricketers after it seemed the bus driver was going to try to drive away. They probably kept occasionally popping away at the stranded van with umpires in it just long enough for TV crews to get some footage.

How were they so certain that no one was going to chase them is still a question

 

[jeevan]

yeah that actually makes sense....may have been meant as a warning to pakistan not to try and suppress fundamentalist elements in their society...if it is true, it is still appalling that they thought sacrificing the lives of their own countrymen(security personnel) of no consequence and they cut it rather fine with the players' lives as well...but then terrorism and morality don't exactly go together anyway...

In that bizzare world, popping off policemen appears to be quite routine. Seems to have happened twice more after the Lahore cricket attack.

Speculating: If there was any inside coordination, the ordinary policemen in the convoy were certainly not in on it and a few may have had to go just so the Lahore police folks didn't look like total jackasses.

There is at least one report of a civilian running up to a pair of policemen near a police vehicle pointing to where a few of the attackers were driving away, they called their superiors and then apparently did nothing. Then there is the police station that is supposed to be half a mile from the roundabout, the "firing" went on for about 15 min, reinforcements should've come from there and made a difference. Neither of these things add up to an appropriate response to a major incident.

 

[Fusion]

A Lahore Landing. Rahul Bhattacharya's account of the Indian team's arrival in Pakistan in 2004. The kind of security described here is what I would consider to be "Presidential" level. Why the **** was this type of security not there for the SL team? Some highlights from the article:




Wednesday, 10 March, the Indian cricket team were to land in Pakistan. Perhaps I had romanticised it too much. I had wanted to be on this side for the arrival, the extraordinary emotional historic arrival. Instead I found a great array of security personnel, two young girls with a chart, and one man from Sialkot.

It was a hot, dry, cactus kind of day. On the way I had asked the driver if he might switch on the air-conditioner. Gruffly he said it did not work. Soon he learnt I was Indian. At once he switched on the a/c. He felt ashamed. He did not charge me extra for the a/c.

The pampering would not cease over the coming weeks. Friends and family in India had advised before leaving that better to be inconspicuous and try to pass off as Pakistani; by the end of it Pakistanis were contemplating posing as Indians and reaping the rewards. I had not been made to feel so welcome anywhere in the world.

The first indication of the security web that lay not just round this corner but the next six weeks came when the taxi was halted at two places well before the terminal, for a boot and undercarriage scan. And at the terminal, a variety of security units made themselves conspicuous.

Catching the eye first were the all-black Elite Force, their sporty logoed caps and t-shirts at odds with their thumping boots, their silver buckles on leather belts, the semi-automatic pistols hitched on to their waists, the rifles in their hands. What appeared from a distance to be a phoenix on the front of their t-shirts was two pistols in profile facing away from one another; the No Fear tagline on the back had been nicked from an Australian surfwear company. The Elite Force, I was told by a journalist on security affairs, was a unit of the Punjab Police set up in 1998 to combat growing sectarian terrorism in the state.

The other slick lot appeared to be the Tiger Force, many of them with 250cc Honda motorcycles in tow. The Tigers, I was told, were conceived as the Elites of the Sindh Police, and largely employed in urban areas, and thus the bikes. On closer inspection there also emerged a Mujahid Force. This was a paramilitary unit derived from the civilian population as well as the armed forces, and usually assigned to national security installations.

As the tour went along, two more units would make their presence felt at the grounds. Deputed at Lahore and Peshawar were the grandly titled, grandly attired, Frontier Constabulary, a force of tribal men from the regions by the Afghan border, trained by the army, deputed to patrol the western boundary. At Karachi there would be the Pakistan Rangers (Sindh), another paramilitary force whose primary function is border patrolling. Out and about at the moment were also a number of airport security staff, all of them carrying weapons, and a smattering of plainclothesmen. Altogether, the men were in their hundreds. The Indians were in many safe hands. And they were travelling with two security men of their own.

The players did not arrive at the appointed hour. Their takeoff had been pegged back by thirty minutes. This was a ruse, to throw off any time-activated bombs. Ruse after such ruse and arrangement after arrangement had been devised for the next month and a half. There were to be multiple options for each land route the team took, with decoy motorcades sometimes sent out on the false one. All stadiums and hotels would be searched for explosives by sniffer dogs. A helicopter would monitor activity on high-rise buildings around the National Stadium at Karachi. At Karachi and Peshawar, safe houses had been identified should the situation come to it. Already confined to a bubble, would the next step for the Indian cricketer entail living in a bunker? The players were provided a USD 500,000 insurance cover against a terrorist attack, twice the usual amount.

I had immersed myself in the Karachi game when I felt a sudden rush. Cameramen and photographers bustled to get to the upper tier of the terminal. The bystanders were trying to follow. All but one stairwell and elevator had been put out of limits, so a fervent scramble ensued. I managed to squeeze my way up.

Another ruse: the Indians were to exit from the arrival lounge. The arrangements below, the security, the vehicles, the coach, were all a decoy. Thrice the number of everything awaited upstairs. Things happened rapidly now. Shutters began going off everywhere as the players emerged, through layers of human chains formed by the commandos, led by a smiling Sourav Ganguly, captain of India. In brisk strides, the squad covered the 30 metres out from the doorway of the terminal to the coach, some like Rahul Dravid and the physio, Andrew Leipus, filming, some like Mohammad Kaif playfully engaging the cameras, some like Sachin Tendulkar inscrutable behind tinted glares. As they zipped past, one by one, the only thing that struck me was the youngness of the bunch, the fresh-facedness of Irfan Pathan and Laxmipathy Balaji and Parthiv Patel and Ramesh Powar and Yuvraj Singh.

Would they be up to these weeks?


Down in the distance, the motorcade powered on in formation, the bullet-proof coach led by a jeep and a stagger of bikes, flanked by bikes, and brought up on the rear by a set of jeeps and a fire engine. It picked up pace and grew smaller and smaller till it pulled away from the airport site, turned right at the yellowgreen fields across the road, and headed, purposefully, towards the city of Lahore.

 

[Sanz]

Quite Simple. It has been 5 years, World is much more dangerous than it was 5 years ago, a whole new generation of Jehadis has come on board, government in Pakistan has become weaker. Even in 2004, despite all the hoopla about security, it was a relaxed environment, games were played in a much friendlier fashion than one had ever witnessed in the history of the two countries.

As an Indian fan, in 2004, I did not fear for the safety of Indian Cricketers. Sadly, in 2009, I did and hence I was happy that tour didn't take place. We all know why but I dont want to get into it all over again otherwise I will be called a bigot, a terrorist and what not.

 

[Precambrian]

Is it rocket science to deduce that SLs were treated at a far lower level of importance as compared to Indians?

Pakistani security screwed up. SL Board screwed up in security assessment (Thanks to Ranatunga's come-at-all-costs project to undermine BCCI). PCB screwed up everything it touched, and perhaps not touched also. ICC screwed up big time once again by being the silent spectator.

 

[Sanz]

Well, If we look at the broader picture, The whole region (south Asia) is a lot more unsafe. I dont know know how can one convince any team to come to anywhere in the subcontinent.

I said in the past, India should build its borders so strong that no single living being can cross into the country illegally. It should disassociate itself with countries that are heading into stone age and start making association with progressive nations. Until we do that we will be unsafe too.


And until that happens, the world cup and every other cricket series should be moved to a country or countries that can handle the security stuff and where all the players can play their cricket freely without having to worry about their safety.

 

[haroon510]

Quite Simple. It has been 5 years, World is much more dangerous than it was 5 years ago, a whole new generation of Jehadis has come on board, government in Pakistan has become weaker. Even in 2004, despite all the hoopla about security, it was a relaxed environment, games were played in a much friendlier fashion than one had ever witnessed in the history of the two countries.

As an Indian fan, in 2004, I did not fear for the safety of Indian Cricketers. Sadly, in 2009, I did and hence I was happy that tour didn't take place. We all know why but I dont want to get into it all over again otherwise I will be called a bigot, a terrorist and what not.

it is not the right word to use Jihad to describe terrorism of Al. Qaida.. i would strongly recommend U to look at the definition of Jihad first before U use it.

i would say during 1979 afghan people used jihad when poor civilians in the country side raised and were tired of the oppression of Russians inside Afghanistan on afghan people and start fighting to defined themselves.. that is what is the defination of Jihad.. and if you R describing the acts of the Al. Qaida as Jihad then.. as an afghan i will take that as an insult.. because we did Jihad and our war was right and it isn't fair to describe that as an act of terrorism..

we didn't blow the buildings with Air Planes full of innocent people, we didn't go in the streets and start shooting at random people..we didn't do socide bombing inside a city full of thousands of people.. yet.. what we did are describe by the same words that U R describing terrorism and those people who did all those.. that is what i think is wrong..

I said in the past, India should build its borders so strong that no single living being can cross into the country illegally. It should disassociate itself with countries that are heading into stone age and start making association with progressive nations. Until we do that we will be unsafe too.


.

What about those Terrorist organaizations that are inside India.. what is ur all mighty solution for that? it seems like you R saying that these terrorist only come from outside.. while it is proven that there are not only Muslims but Hindu Terrorist groups also inside India..
so your solution is if India disassociate themselves from those "stone age" countries.. these organizations will die out and we won't have these attacks?

 

[Fusion]

Excellent article by Kamran Abbasi on cricinfo:

March 9, 2009

An atrocity without answers

Posted by Kamran Abbasi at 1 day, 3 hours ago in Ethics and morality

A week after the Lahore atrocity we are left without answers. Who were these attackers? How did they manage to annihilate the "security" forces? How did they all manage to escape unscathed? Instead of answers, we have witnessed unseemly and offensive posturing from the Pakistan Cricket Board and a perplexing silence from the President of Pakistan, who also happens to be the Patron of the PCB.

Apart from establishing the cause and the identity of the attackers, the main objective must be to dream up a formula that avoids the isolation of Pakistan cricket and nurtures an environment that facilitates the return of international teams. It is hard to understand how the approach of the PCB chairman, Ijaz Butt, is enabling any of those desirable outcomes? The tragedy of the Lahore attacks is followed by a frightening realisation that the salvation of Pakistan cricket lies in the hands of Butt.

Aakash Chopra's recent blog explained what presidential level security really is. It highlighted the complaints of match officials and the evidence of our own eyes that security was woefully inadequate. Instead Butt defended the security presence. Policemen died, is his limp argument. Nor will he accept any responsibility for the security arrangements, choosing to pass the buck to the Pakistan government. Yet he expects international cricket to return to Pakistan in six to nine months. How?

With all this nonsensical chest-thumping, Butt simply exposes his own inadequacies in heading an organisation of immense national importance. Frankly, no cricket board could contemplate sending a team to Pakistan while the PCB is under Butt's self-deluded leadership. Butt and Javed Miandad are confusing patriotism with insult. There is no pride in defending incompetent security arrangements and berating victims of a terrorist attack.

The only clear answer we have had this week is that the current PCB management and the Pakistan government are, surprise surprise, ill equipped to deal with this calamity. Not even a single official has offered to resign despite the catastrophic failings. How will these organisations inspire the confidence of a sceptical international cricket community when they can't even convince supporters of Pakistan cricket? How hard can it be to find a few good men of competence and common sense to shepherd Pakistan cricket back from the wilderness?

As with much of this decade of Pakistan cricket, it only ever gets worse.

 

[Sanz]

it is not the right word to use Jihad to describe terrorism of Al. Qaida.. i would strongly recommend U to look at the definition of Jihad first before U use it.
i would say during 1979 afghan people used jihad when poor civilians in the country side raised and were tired of the oppression of Russians inside Afghanistan on afghan people and start fighting to defined themselves.. that is what is the defination of Jihad.. and if you R describing the acts of the Al. Qaida as Jihad then.. as an afghan i will take that as an insult.. because we did Jihad and our war was right and it isn't fair to describe that as an act of terrorism..

I couldn't care less about your definition or the so called 'right' definition of 'Jihad', it is of no use to me or the world. There is no excuse for terrorism anywhere in the world. You can keep making your excuses and keep changing your definition of 'Jehad', It will not change the fact that terrorists have been killing innocent people all over the world and they are calling their heinous attack as some sort of 'Holy War' aka Jehad. You can keep your head buried in the sand and keep getting offended while the terrorists are pissing over your definition of 'Jehad', Day in and Day out. It has become a fashion to blame Al Qaida for every terrorist act, but it has been proven beyond doubt that in the India-Pak conflict, Al Qaida plays a very little part in it and most of the groups are homegrown.

we didn't blow the buildings with Air Planes full of innocent people, we didn't go in the streets and start shooting at random people..we didn't do socide bombing inside a city full of thousands of people.. yet.. what we did are describe by the same words that U R describing terrorism and those people who did all those.. that is what i think is wrong..

First of all you have to define 'WE'. Who is this 'WE' that you are talking about ?

What about those Terrorist organaizations that are inside India.. what is ur all mighty solution for that? it seems like you R saying that these terrorist only come from outside.. while it is proven that there are not only Muslims but Hindu Terrorist groups also inside India..
so your solution is if India disassociate themselves from those "stone age" countries.. these organizations will die out and we won't have these attacks?

Did you read my post at all ? Did I not mention the word 'Subcontinent' ? I couldn't care less about where the terrorists come from, it is the duty of those, who are inviting (in some cases forcing) other teams to play in their country, to arrange for a safe and secure environment, if they can't then no team should be forced to come and play cricket in Subcontinent, every series should be moved out of India/Pakistan/SriLanka/Bangladesh.

 

[Evermind]

it is not the right word to use Jihad to describe terrorism of Al. Qaida.. i would strongly recommend U to look at the definition of Jihad first before U use it.

i would say during 1979 afghan people used jihad when poor civilians in the country side raised and were tired of the oppression of Russians inside Afghanistan on afghan people and start fighting to defined themselves.. that is what is the defination of Jihad.. and if you R describing the acts of the Al. Qaida as Jihad then.. as an afghan i will take that as an insult.. because we did Jihad and our war was right and it isn't fair to describe that as an act of terrorism..

we didn't blow the buildings with Air Planes full of innocent people, we didn't go in the streets and start shooting at random people..we didn't do socide bombing inside a city full of thousands of people.. yet.. what we did are describe by the same words that U R describing terrorism and those people who did all those.. that is what i think is wrong..




What about those Terrorist organaizations that are inside India.. what is ur all mighty solution for that? it seems like you R saying that these terrorist only come from outside.. while it is proven that there are not only Muslims but Hindu Terrorist groups also inside India..
so your solution is if India disassociate themselves from those "stone age" countries.. these organizations will die out and we won't have these attacks?

 

[masterblaster]

it is not the right word to use Jihad to describe terrorism of Al. Qaida.. i would strongly recommend U to look at the definition of Jihad first before U use it.

i would say during 1979 afghan people used jihad when poor civilians in the country side raised and were tired of the oppression of Russians inside Afghanistan on afghan people and start fighting to defined themselves.. that is what is the defination of Jihad.. and if you R describing the acts of the Al. Qaida as Jihad then.. as an afghan i will take that as an insult.. because we did Jihad and our war was right and it isn't fair to describe that as an act of terrorism..

we didn't blow the buildings with Air Planes full of innocent people, we didn't go in the streets and start shooting at random people..we didn't do socide bombing inside a city full of thousands of people.. yet.. what we did are describe by the same words that U R describing terrorism and those people who did all those.. that is what i think is wrong..




What about those Terrorist organaizations that are inside India.. what is ur all mighty solution for that? it seems like you R saying that these terrorist only come from outside.. while it is proven that there are not only Muslims but Hindu Terrorist groups also inside India..
so your solution is if India disassociate themselves from those "stone age" countries.. these organizations will die out and we won't have these attacks?

Umm, what?

Terrorism is terrorism my friend, no matter what way, shape, form or who does it for that matter.