Pakistan Arrests (Alleged) Times Square Bomber's Financial Backers - By Jove! I Think They've Got It!

This post is going to be a lot from the news, a little of my take on what's been happening.

First, my take.

I Try to Keep an Open Mind - But There are Limits

I've ranted, on occasion, about red, white, and blue-blooded American nitwits who don't seem to realize that most of the world isn't in the 48 contiguous states - and that although foreigners are, by definition, un-American: that's okay. When an American goes to another country, we're the foreigner. I also have little patience for the more 'sophisticated' folks who are equally convinced that America is the source of everything they don't approve of.

I don't usually say that I've got an "open mind," since I remember the old gag: "Don't be so open minded that your brains fall out."

Still, I try to take cultural differences and other points of view into account. I don't want to come across as one of those Frank Burns clones who seem convinced that there's a moral imperative to drive on the right side of the road.

That said, I think that piloting airliners into New York City's World Trade Center was a bad thing to do. Even if the terrorists felt that they were completely justified.

I'm also convinced that having a shot at blowing up an SUV near Times Square was not justified. But then, I don't think America - or 'the commies' - are to blame for everything that goes wrong.

"One-Off" Attempt by Someone Who Didn't do His Homework?

Back to that botched attempt. several points set Faisal Shahzad apart from the Oklahoma City bombers.

• Timothy McVeigh and company knew
  • Which sorts of fertilizers required careful handling
    • And which wouldn't explode
• Faisal Shahzad
  • Not so much
• The Oklahoma City bombers were a group of American citizens
  • With no discernible foreign backing
• Faisal Shahzad is an American citizen
  • With foreign backing

I haven't researched this, but my guess is that the Timothy McVeigh crowd wouldn't consider Faisal Shahzad to be a "real" American. Faisal Shahzad is an American citizen, by the way: even though he's obviously no WASP. For that matter, neither am I.

I see that some staunch defender of the fatherland came up with the bright idea of taking away Mr. Shahzad's citizenship. (CBS News (May 5, 2010)) And that there have been the standard-issue comments about how American Muslims better be careful or the conservatives will come after them.

Like I said, I'm not Anglo, so I'm a bit biased about whether or not letting all those 'foreigners' into the Anglo-Saxon States of America is safe. In my opinion, America isn't in dire danger from the:

• Irish
• Chinese
• Japanese
• Blacks

I would say that, of course, since I'm the son of an Irishman. And 'everybody knows' what we're like. Or did, before the Kennedy presidency. That's an oversimplification. And another topic.

Back to the Times Square car bomb: At first, there was no evidence that this was anything more than a one-off botched attempt from some 'regular American' with a few screws loose. Later, there still wasn't evidence that Faisal Shahzad was working with anybody.

The key phrase there is "no evidence." I might feel that Elvis is behind every terrorist attack on America - but without evidence, that's just be a feeling. And a fairly crazy one, at that.

Now, we've got evidence.

Pakistan, the Taliban, Terrorists, and a "Shazam!" Moment?

I've used "shazam! moment" to describe a person's sudden understanding of information that he or she already had. Organizations can have "shazam!" moments, too.

Judging from what I read in the news, I think the outfit that's nominally running Pakistan may have had a "shazam! moment recently.

Maybe, just maybe, a few key people in Pakistan's central government may have realized that those nice Islamic fellows who have been killing people they don't like in Pakistan's tribal regions are doing Pakistan no favors - and that America, un-Islamic as it is, isn't against Pakistan.

Shazam!

Here are a few excerpts from the news, plus my take:

"Times Square bombing plot has converged Pak-US' interests: Expert"
oneindia (May 15, 2010)

"Analysts believe that following the botched Times Square bombing plot which saw the United States' tirade against Pakistan asking it to transform its lip service into action and work to dismantle the terror breeding camps flourishing on its soil, Islamabad has begun to see and take seriously the threat posed to its government by the Taliban.

"The recent arrest of two men, who are said to be the failed Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad's accomplices shows how the US and Pakistan's interests have converged, said Stephen Biddle, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington.

"The big change in Pakistan is they have become much more aggressive against the Pakistan Taliban because they have come to see them as a threat to their regime," The Christian Science Monitor, quoted Biddle, as saying.

"The United States, for long, has been asking Pakistan to destroy the jihadi camps running inside its territory, and has been providing all monetary and military assistance, but years of continuous demands have resulted in little ground action...."

I'm not quite sure what to make of that phrase, "...the United States' tirade against Pakistan...." I wasn't aware that the United States had made "a speech of violent denunciation" against Pakistan. (Princeton's WordNet definition of "tirade")

It depends on your point of view, of course. While I was doing time in American academia, just about anything that the wrong sort said about America was supposed to be just simply fraught with violence and hatred. But I didn't detect that sort of 'sophistication' in the rest of the oneindia article.

Oh, well: one more unsolved mystery.

"How Times Square bomb arrests unite US, Pakistan"
The Christian Science Monitor (May 14, 2010 )

"Pakistan's arrests of at least two members of the Pakistan Taliban in connection with this month's attempted bombing in New York's Times Square reinforces how the interests of the US and Pakistan have begun to coincide.

"A senior military official confirmed Friday that in recent days Pakistan arrested at least two individuals who provided training and resources to Faisal Shahzad, the American from Connecticut who allegedly attempted to detonate a car bomb in Times Square earlier this month...."

This seems to be the CSM article cited by oneindia that mentioned Stephen Biddle. I'm inclined to agree: Pakistan's central government arresting someone just because that person paid to have Americans killed is a step in the right direction. From my point of view, of course.

Bottom line? Pakistan's apparent cooperation with American authorities is probably good news for America and Pakistan. The advantage for American interests is fairly obvious. For Pakistan's leaders, wrapping their minds around the idea that terrorists who want to kill them aren't safe to have around, and that Americans who are trying to restrain the terrorists aren't the enemy, may eventually lead to a Pakistan that's not as much of a mess as the country is now.

'Racial Profiling,' 'Cultural Insensitivity,' and Getting the Job Done

FBI agents, apparently following up on connections between the alleged suspect in the attempted Times Square car bomb attack in the alleged city of New York - sorry, that slipped out, but I'll let it stand - asked a distraught businessman a few questions.

He may not have anything in particular to do with the botched bombing: bit I'm inclined to think that the FBI agents were acting properly.

I'd think the same, if (this is a hypothetical situation) some blond guy named Johnson had been questioned by the FBI in connection with another attempted attack by Scandinavian Lutherans who were incensed over the West's lack of lefse-awareness. (August 1, 2007)

Investigations of attempted bombings have to follow all leads. It'd be nice if the FBI could ignore everybody who isn't directly connected - but they won't know who that is, until after they go through the investigative process.

Here's the news item that got me started on that topic:

"Camden businessman raided by FBI faces eviction"
The Philadelphia Inquirer (May 15, 2010)

"A Cherry Hill man whose condo was raided Thursday by FBI agents investigating the attempted bombing in Times Square faces eviction over unpaid rent.

"Court documents show that Iqbal Hinjhara and another resident are three months behind on the $1,285 monthly rent and have been served with an eviction notice. The landlord, Dana M. Covert, filed a complaint on April 22 in Superior Court in Camden County seeking $3,213 in rent and to have the tenants and their belongings removed.

"A hearing is scheduled for Thursday.

"The complaint doesn't spell out Hinjhara's relationship with the other person facing eviction, Assia Quadid. Hinjhara's brother Muhammad Fieaz lives at the condo but isn't listed on the complaint...."

From some points of view, the 'harassment' of Mr. Hinjhara is pure racial profiling and an example of the Gestapo tactics the FBI always employs because they're mean, icky people. To its credit, The Philadelphia Inquirer didn't take that line.

Quite a bit further down in the article, we get a look at what could be called the American justice department's cultural insensitivity:

"...Earlier on Friday, Hinjhara spoke to Fox 29 news.

"He said he didn't know Faisal Shahzad, the Pakistani-born suspect charged in the botched May 1 Times Square terror attack.

" 'We have very limited relationship with the community. We are busy in our work,' Hinjhara said.

"U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents detained three other Pakistani men, two in Boston and one in Maine.

"The federal agents were tracing financial connections to Shahzad.

" 'We are very simple. We do . . . international business and we do it through the bank and everything is OK,' Hinjhara said. 'We come home, go to work. That's it.'

"Hinjhara said the agents did not ask him about Shahzad.

"But agents did ask about the business that sells printing machines and ships equipment to Pakistan, India, and Europe.

"Hinjhara bought the Camden property in September from the Long View Publishing Co. for $237,000, according to tax records.

"He is listed in a state business database as agent for M.Y. Printing Equipment, which receives mail at the Cherry Hill condo.

"The state revoked the company's status as a corporation in 2006 for failure to file annual reports. Prompt Printing Press operated at the site for years before closing in early 2009.

"Hinjhara said investigators removed files from his Camden business.

"He said the agents were 'very friendly people.'

" 'We don't mind. We appreciate it they came . . . They're satisfied now,' Hinjhara told Fox 29.

"He said he understood that the FBI was doing its job...."
(The Philadelphia Inquirer) [emphasis mine]

I don't know anything about the Camden businessmen, apart from what I read in the news. I think it's possible that their either unfamiliar with the American preoccupation with paying bills on time and filing all those pesky tax and business forms.

Me? I was raised in America, so I know that it's a good idea to fill out and mail forms that the IRS expects. I'm also rather old-fashioned in my attitude toward paying my bills: partly for ethical reasons, partly because I realize that people will give me more leeway when I really can't pay, if I've got a record of prompt payment. Enlightened self-interest.

Or, it may not be cultural conflicts at all. Some - but not, I think, most - American businessmen and women get the bright idea that it's the little people who pay their bills. Then, a few months or years later, they get their names in the papers, for having failed to practice enlightened self-interest.

Related posts:

• " 'Loose Lips Sink Ships,' Times Square Bomber, and News Leaks"
  (May 11, 2010)
• "New York City Times Square, The Pakistani Taliban, and Being Prudent"
  (May 9, 2010)
• "Another Bomb Scare in New York City"
  (May 7, 2010)
• "New York City Times Square Wannabe Bomber: and We Still Don't Know Everything"
  (May 4, 2010)
• "New York City's Time Square: A Bomb, a Vietnam Vet, Electricity, and Congress"
  (May 2, 2010)
• "Car Bomb in New York City's Times Square: An Update"
  (May 2, 2010)
• "New York City's Times Square, a Smoking SUV, and Decisions"
  (May 1, 2010)

Background: posts about Pakistan:

• "Pakistan's Swat Valley: Civilians, Soldiers, and the Taliban"
  (May 31, 2009)
• "Pakistan, the Taliban, and Peace Through Diplomacy"
  (February 17, 2009)
• "Mumbai, India, Pakistan and a Breath of Common Sense"
  (December 7, 2008)
• "Pakistan, Terrorists, and the Mohmand Frontier Region: America is to Blame"
  (June 20, 2008)
  • Not
• "YouTube Banned by Pakistan"
  (February 24, 2008)
• "The War on Terror: India Has Troubles, Too"
  (January 1, 2008)
• "Pakistan is not America"
  (December 30, 2007)
• "Pakistan: Still a Mess"
  (November 17, 2007)
• "Pakistan: What a Mess"
  (November 12, 2007)
• "Pakistan, the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and Nuclear Weapons"
  (October 19, 2007)
• "Moderate Muslim Video from Pakistan: Very Good News"
  (August 7, 2007)

Another Bomb Scare in New York City

I'd have mentioned this earlier, but I've been - distracted - today.

"Another day, another scare in a cautious New York"
The Associated Press (May 7, 2010)

"Police cleared the streets around Times Square on Friday and called in the bomb squad to dismantle what turned out to be a cooler full of water bottles. Earlier in the day, police were called in to check a suspicious package that turned out to be someone's lunch.

"Since a Pakistani-American tried unsuccessfully to set off a car bomb in the heart of the city last weekend, false-alarm calls are up dramatically, nerves are jangled, and media and law enforcement are rushing to the scenes to make sure the reports aren't something bigger.

"More than 600 calls came in since Saturday's attempted car bombing of a busy street near Times Square — about 30 percent higher than normal, police said...."

"...On Friday, cable news channels went live with images of the false alarm on Times Square, focusing in on the light green cooler as police officials hauled it away from the area. Police don't know who left the cooler behind. The streets opened within an hour, and workers weren't told to evacuate.

" 'It was exciting, but it seemed a little silly, after all - a cooler that somebody left there,' said psychiatrist Thor Bergersen, of Newton, Mass., who watched the drama from the eighth floor of the Marriott Marquis hotel.

"But Times Square vendor Walter 'Candyman' Wells said the constant scares aroused more suspicion.

" 'I think they're testing us, whoever is doing this,' Wells said Friday, sitting on a stool near his table of T-shirts. 'They're playing chess with us right now, but they ain't gonna win. 'Cause we're the Bobby Fischers.'..."

Walter 'Candyman' Wells, by the way, isn't Duane Jackson, who reported the (real) car bomb.

With 20-20 hindsight, New York City authorities could have saved themselves a lot of trouble. But, with due respect to the eighth floor psychiatrist, I think Mr. Wells has a point.

I doubt that all of those 600 or so false alarms were terrorists probing NYC's defenses. But we'd better come to terms with the idea that Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and others aren't all uneducated nitwits. (July 8, 2007) A smart terrorist would want to know what effect a failed bombing has on New York City's response to threat, real or imagined. And yes: I think there are smart terrorists. I don't agree with their goals, and think their philosophies are not acceptable: but I don't think they're stupid. Crazy, maybe. But not stupid.

Related post:

• "New York City Times Square Wannabe Bomber: and We Still Don't Know Everything"
  (May 4, 2010)

In the news:

• "Another day, another scare in a cautious New York"
  The Associated Press (May 7, 2010)

The Marines Blew Up the Islamabad Marriott!

No, not really. But it looks like we'll be hearing that they're to blame.

Few things are simple, and Saturday's attack on the Islamabad Marriott hotel is no exception.

Just the Facts: And Innuendo

You've probably heard that the Marriott in Islamabad burned after a truck bomb attack last Saturday.

You may even have heard that it's America's fault. More specifically, it's the fault of the Marines.

Sure, the Anjuman Fidayeen-e-Islam, or The Fedayeen of Islam, a bunch that nobody seems to have heard of before, say they did it. But it was the fault of the Marines. Or America.

That seems to be the implication of an article in Prensa Latina, published today.

They could be right. I don't doubt the facts, as stated:

• "...The case emerged when Representative Mumtaz Alam Gilani denounced a mysterious and secret movement last Wednesday night by US Marines who supposedly were introducing iron boxes without being checked by security personnel of the hotel
• "This happened after the Chief of US Troops, Admiral Mike Fullen, had a meeting in Islamabad with the country's main military chiefs.
• "In a statement, the US embassy insists today that it was a support team that usually precedes or accompanies American authorities.
• "The News reports, however, that the government already had information that various rooms on the fourth floor of the Marriott were permanently occupied by US authorities and had equipment and other material used for espionage...."

("Mystery Shrouds Pakistan Iron Boxes" (Prensa Latina (September 23, 2008))

As I see it, Prensa Latina's facts are

• Marines "supposedly" carried boxes into the Marriott without having the house detectives look inside
• An unusually anonymous source in "the government" says that there's a nest of foreign (American, in this case) spies in the hotel
• Some time after the Marines took the boxes into the hotel, a truck blew up at the gate
• Then the hotel burned down

My hat's off to Prensa Latina, for the way they wrote the article. Specifying that the containers were iron boxes conjured visions of Fu Manchu-style intrigue, Humphrey Bogart movies, even secret pirate treasure.

It could be pure coincidence that the mailing address for Prensa Latina gives is "Calle 23 esq. N Vedado, La Habana - Cuba," but I think that Prensa Latina might have a well-defined editorial slant regarding America.

Good Guys, Bad Guys, and Everyone In Between

Secret agents and mysterious iron boxes aside, there's quite a great deal of uncertainty about Saturday's explosion.

One of the few things that are known is that it was a big explosion, a big fire, and that a lot of people got killed. Over four dozen, at least. One Pakistani official called it the biggest attack in seven years.

At best, I think it'll be years before we know who actually sent some suicide driver in that truck. The modus operandi suggests Taliban and/or Al Qaeda: both of which have reasonably secure bases in the tribal regions of Pakistan. But methods can be copied, so it's anyone's guess who is responsible.

According to CNN, Al-Arabiya TV reported that it, Al-Arabiya, got an audio recording from some groups calling itself "The Fedayeen of Islam," but noted that it, Al-Arabiya, couldn't tell if the recording was the real McCoy, or if the name of the group was for real.

Assuming that CNN's coverage of Al-Arabiya's reporting of a previously-unknown group's audio recording is accurate:

• The Fedayeen of Islam say that 250 U.S. Marines and other U.S. and NATO officials were inside the hotel when it burned
• The Fedayeen of Islam 'regretted the attack,' but that it was necessary - They've got demands
  • American-Pakistani joint efforts must end
  • All military operations in Pakistan's tribal regions must end
  • There's more, but CNN didn't go into that
  • "Mujahadeen" prisoners in American prisons must be released

CNN said that it "cannot independently verify the claim."

So far, we've got mysterious iron boxes, a claim of responsibility from an unknown organization that demands the release of prisoners that nobody else seems to know about. All the story needs now is the possibility that high-level Pakistani officials knew about the attack before it happened.

Dinner Plans, or No Dinner Plans: That is the Question

One of the questions, anyway.

Pakistan's Interior Ministry head, Rehman Malik, said that Pakistan's president, prime minister and other leaders had planned to dine at the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad on Saturday night. Then, President Asif Ali Zardari asked to move the event to the prime minister's compound.

Which was a good thing for President Zardari. If he'd been at the Marriott, he'd most likely be as dead as the Czech Ambassador, Ivo Zdarek.

The hotel management, on the other hand, insists that there were no dinner plans, changed or otherwise, for the Pakistani officials at the Marriott. And Pakistani Senator Javed Ashraf Qazi said he was invited to the dinner but it was always scheduled to be at the prime minister's office. Which could be true.

Even the professional and cautious CNN wrote that the lack of fit between the stories of the Pakistani Interior Ministry chief, a Pakistani senator, and the Marriott management "raised questions as to how much the government knew about the planned attack...."

Since the person who said 'plans were changed' was named, and since Rehman Malik is Pakistan's Interior Ministry head, I think there's a chance that plans were changed: possibly for innocent reasons. Innocent or not, if Senator Javed Ashraf Qazi's assertion isn't accurate, there's a whacking great coincidence here, at the very least.

With Friends Like These -

Like Yemen, Pakistan is an ally of America. With Al Qaeda and Taliban bases operating within its borders.

Pakistan either can't or won't remove those bases.

And, Pakistan's government doesn't want any help. Last week, we heard that a Pakistani leader gave Pakistan's troops orders to shoot America soldiers if they tried to deal with Al Qaeda or Taliban forces inside Pakistan.

On the other hand, maybe they didn't. Some Pakistani officials said it wasn't so.

Now, the Associated Press is saying that two American intelligence officials reported Pakistani troops and tribesmen shooting at American helicopters inside Pakistan. And, that the Pentagon said it wasn't so.

Looking for Certainty? Read a Spy Novel

As I said about another issue, "If you're not a bit confused...you're not paying attention."

Good guys? Bad guys? It isn't that simple. We've got a situation where

• National leaders in the Middle East are dealing with people living within their territory who don't like the idea of nations - and have the firepower to be more than annoying
• Terrorists (or activists, or whatever you want to call them) are as hard to keep track of as mercury that's been hit with a hammer - They
  • Aren't tied to one territory, as nations are
  • May have the support of people who think that Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and similar groups
    • Are defending Islam
    • Deserve support, based on tribal loyalties
  • May dissolve and re-form under new names
• Conflicting accounts are broadcast around the world before bureaucracies get facts through 'regular channels' and decide what to say
• News organizations, from The New York Times and Prensa Latina to CNN, are dealing with a world that doesn't fit their Cold War templates

And that's just scratching the surface.

Oh the other hand, although there probably aren't (purely) good guys and (purely) bad guys, I think there are (fairly) good sides and (decidedly) bad sides.

Al Qaeda, the Taliban, the Iranian regime, and other like-minded organizations, do seem to have a clear idea of what they want: a world that's run much more tidily, and according to their rules.

The burqa-yes, trouser-no dress code alone would hard for westerners to live with. Never mind what would happen to the status of women, and anyone who didn't see eye-to-eye with the local imam.

Americans, and quite a few other people, have gotten used to living with a degree of personal freedom that doesn't seem to be part of Al Qaeda's dream.

We won't find perfectly good guys in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Indonesia, or America. But I think there are people who are willing to keep followers of Osama bin Laden and Iran's ayatollahs from replacing the bikini with the burqa, and turning the clock back to the good old days, when the local despot had life-and-death control over his subjects.

In the news:

"Video emerges of Marriott bombing - 21 Sept 08"
YouTube video
video (1:49)

• "Unknown group claims responsibility for Pak bombings "
  Sahara Samay / Reuters (September 23, 2008)
• "Mystery Shrouds Pakistan Iron Boxes"
  Prensa Latina (Cuba)
• "Dinner plans save Pakistan's rulers from hotel bomb attack"
  CNN (September 22, 2008
• "Did Pakistan soldiers shoot at US helicopters?"
  Associated Press (September 22, 2008)
• "Deadly blast targets Marriott Hotel in Islamabad"
  CNN (September 21, 2008)
• "Officials: Taliban, Al Qaeda Behind Pakistan Hotel Bombing"
  FOXNews (September 21, 20008)
• "Official: Hotel blast 'biggest attack' in 7 years for Pakistan
  CNN (September 21, 2008)

Iraq: Car Bombs, Awakening Councils, and Hope

There's been another car bombing in Baghdad: a big one. At least 51 people were killed, 75 injured in a Shiite part of the city.

The blast hit a garage, a bus stop, an outdoor market and apartments. The loss of life is tragic.

There's been a "flurry" of attacks lately, according to CNN, mostly aimed at the Awakening Councils, or Sons of Iraq. CNN calls them "U.S.-allied Sunni fighters" - which is accurate, as far as it goes. The Awakening Councils do accept a coalition military presence, but they're not so much 'pro-America' as pro-Iraq.

Another thing: CNN calls the Awakening Councils "predominantly U.S.-allied Sunni fighters" - but last October, when ten Iraqi Sheiks who were part of an 'Awakening Council' were kidnapped, seven were Sunni and three were Shiite. Despite the impression CNN leaves, the Awakening Councils aren't all Sunni.

Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and a few things to say about the big Baghdad blast.

• It's the work of "the defeated remnants of terrorism" who are trying to whip up the sort of Sunni-Shiite violence that's part of Iraq's recent past
• "terrorists" and Islamic militants "returned to their old failing bet in trying to incite the sectarian strife" after they lost in Baghdad and other cities

I'm inclined to agree with him.

What I see as a major point in the story is down in the "Other developments" section: "An American-led coalition raid aimed at an al Qaeda in Iraq bombing network killed four 'suspected terrorists' Tuesday in Mosul, the U.S. military said. Coalition troops approached a building and ordered people there to surrender; four militants were killed when they refused, according to the military."

Another victory, a minor one, against a backdrop of terrorist bombings that kill Iraqis, but fail to whip up the 'kill my Shiite/Sunni neighbor' passions we were reading so much about.

Terrorism is loosing in Iraq, and Al Qaeda knows it. I'm sure there will be more bombings, but I'm also getting more confident that the Iraqi government will learn how to deal with its country.

More, in "Car bomb kills at least 51 Iraqis, official says" (CNN (July 17, 2008)).

No Casualties in Anbar - Violence Down in Iraq

Good news from Iraq.

Yesterday, for the first time since March of 2003, there were no military casualties in Anbar.

No American casualties, No Iraqi casualties.

None, zero, zip.

Joint Chiefs spokesman Major General Richard Sherlock made that statement Wednesday.

This looks impressive:

	Violence in and around Baghdad	down 59 %
	Car bombs	down 65 %
	Casualties from car bombs and roadside bombs	down 80 %
	Casualties from enemy attacks	down 77 %
	Operations against Iraqi security forces	down 62 %
	Assassination attempts for sectarian reasons	down 72 %

I may be over-simplifying, or being naive, but this really does look like good news. For America and Iraq, at least.

Two things happened in Iraq this year:

• The Anbar Awakening - sheiks decided that Al Qaeda in Iraq wasn't good for Iraq.
  (They were thinking about it before September, when Sheikh Abdul Sattar Abu Risha's assassination helped make up their minds.)
• The troop surge that peaked in June, 2007.

At the risk of being simplistic, I think that talking with the sheiks in Iraq, while making a determined effort to weed out terrorists who were beheading and blowing up Iraqis, may have resulted in today's good news.

"Long Live Bhutto" Banner: Why English?

I wondered about the "Long Live Bhutto" banner - in English - in photos

• After the explosions, sorting survivors out from parts of people, cars, and trucks.
• Later, with more of the fires out, still picking up bodies

My first thought was that the banner was intended for an English-speaking audience, probably the UK, the Commonwealth, or America. The Commonwealth was my best bet, since Pakistan is a member, again: I think. That country has popped in and out a couple of times.

A little checking showed that English is an official language of Pakistan:

48% Punjabi
12% Sindhi
10% Siraiki (Punjabi, with differences)
 8% Pashtu
 8% Urdu (an official language)
 3% Balochi
 2% Hindko
 1% Brahui
    English (also an official language, and 
    the lingua franca of Pakistani elite 
    and most government ministries)
 8% Burushaski and other languages

So, that banner is most likely a symbol of pan-Pakistani support, more than an effort to get on the evening news.

Related posts, on Individuals and the War on Terror.

Posts about Benazir Bhutto.

Boombus Busted in Turkey

Sniffer dogs in Ankara, Turkey, found a minibus packed with explosives, with a fake license plate. Foul play was suspected.

People living near the multistory garage with the boombus were evacuated, a bomb squad defused the explosives, and it's hoped that the incident ended with the drama of a damp firecracker.

Turkish police were concerned that someone might want to celebrate the 9/11 anniversary with a bang. Looks like they had a point.

Turkey had trouble like this in 2003. I think it was November of that year, when bombers linked to Al Qaeda killed 58 people in vehicle bomb attacks that hit two synagogues, the British Consulate and a British bank in Istanbul.

2003 was the year when America, the United Kingdom, Australia, Poland and Denmark unilaterally invaded Iraq. Plus other countries, but who's counting?

I suppose the Istanbul bombings of that year could have been connected with that.

Which brings up an interesting point.

Let's make this hypothetical.

Say a country, call it country A, is attacked by a loosely-organized group (we'll call it "Q") that gets help and shelter from other countries. Quite a few people from country A, along with people from a dozen or so other countries, died.

Country A, selfishly, would rather not be attacked again.

A little less than two years after the attack, Country A, along with B, C, D, and E, attacks country P, that's been giving support to Q.

A few months later, Q attacks some Jews and bankers in country T.

Would the Q-T attack be a good reason for countries A through E to stop trying to stop Q?

If it is, then WWII should have been stopped as soon as anyone shot at the Allies. I suppose there are people who would have preferred an outcome like that. Personally, I'm glad it didn't work out that way. I'm one of the kinds of people that were getting eliminated by the master race. Non-Aryan cripples weren't high on their 'preferred' list.

So, let's think about the possible consequences, the next time someone points to a terrorist attack, saying that it's proof that attacks on terrorists are wrong.

Lesson for Terrorism Investigators: Return Those Calls!

Investigations into who did what in the London/Glasgow car bombings of a few weeks ago will probably continue for months to come.

Although nearly a dozen people are suspected of being involved, one or more may be innocent.

Mohamed Haneef, arrested on July 2 as he tried to leave Australia, has been charged with recklessly leaving his mobile phone SIM card with a distant cousin. That cousin's brother was in the Glasgow Jeep, and the SIM card was found in the fire-damaged jeep.

Maybe I'm biased, since I belong to a large extended family, but this charge seems a little goofy. If I understand it, Haneef is charged with:

• Letting a distant cousin use his SIM card
• Being the owner of a SIM card that got left in a jeep on the other side of the world
• Still being the SIM card owner when someone tried to use the jeep to torch an airport terminal

It gets better. Haneef says he tried to call a British officer four times, to clear his name, and that his calls were not returned.

A likely story! However, a police investigation showed that Haneef did call the British officer's number four times on July 2.

At first, I thought that Australian authorities had demonstrated their investigative prowess by intercepting Haneef as he was boarding a plane headed for India: and with a one-way ticket!

It was good police work, in a way, but hardly the sort of thing that legends are made of. "Haneef told police he was leaving Australia to be with his family in Bangalore, where his daughter had been born just days before his arrest. Her stay in hospital was prolonged after complications arose during the Caesarean (!) birth." (AP/FOXNews.com)

I think even Inspector Lestrad might have been able to intercept the - fugitive? - under those circumstances.

Mohamed Haneef may be guilty of complicity in the car bombings. Or he may not.

I sincerely hope that, either way, he is treated better than Richard Jewell.

More about Mohamed Haneef: Suspect in Failed U.K. Terror Attacks Called British Investigator.

My views on rational investigations and Richard Jewell: Arrests, Doctors and Terrorists: Keeping a Cool Head

New Opportunities in Terrorism: Fanatic Doctors

Two of the seven people arrested in the United Kingdom in connection with the weekend car-bomb attacks are doctors. Make that three of eight. Another arrest was reported while I was writing this.

SkyNews reports that one of the people in the flaming jeep that crashed through the front door of Glasgow's Blackpool airport the day before yesterday (Saturday, June 30, 2007) is Dr. Bilal Abdulla, a doctor at Royal Alexandra Hospital.

Another doctor, Dr. Mohammed Asha, was arrested on the M6 near Sandbach in Cheshire after British police raided his office.

As I wrote this, the arrest of a third doctor was reported.

Any one of these people may turn out to have nothing to do with the weekend effort to turn a nightclub and an airline terminal into infidel incinerators. It isn't easy to come up with an innocent explanation for Dr Abdulla being in Glasgow's rolling firebomb: at least not one that doesn't sound like it was made up by a defense lawyer from the States.

In fact, despite what British authorities have said, those car bombs may have been the work of misguided practical jokers or disgruntled soccer fans. That's not likely, though, judging from the way one of the Glasgow door-crashers kept shouting "Allah!" as authorities rescued him from the fire he set and the people who might have died with him.

However, assuming that the obvious explanation is the true one, at least one doctor is involved in the weekend's terror attacks. A doctor working as point man may bring the War on Terror to a whole new level.

To date, Islamic fanatics have blown people up, burned people alive, blown people up and incinerated the pieces, and, now and again, beheaded the odd infidel.

These are all brute-force methods of killing people.

Doctors have been connected with the War on Terror, or the War on the West, depending on your point of view, for years: Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri and Dr. Amin al-Haq, for example.

Now, with doctors willing to get up close and personal, we could see a new kind of terrorist attack. Not being a medical professional, I don't know what a doctor with evil intentions in a hospital could do.

I came up with something psychoactive in the staff water cooler, or death by medication after about a half-minute's thinking: and I'd guess that a real doctor could come up with something much worse.

As Sherlock Holmes said, "When a doctor does go wrong he is the first of criminals. ...we shall have horrors enough before the before the night is over ...." ("The Adventure of the Scarlet Band" (1892) p. 270 in "The Complete Sherlock Holmes" (Doubleday & Company))