| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Lurid Crime Tales- |
| Doctors shocked at hostages's torture |
| 2008-11-30 |
| They said that just one look at the bodies of the dead hostages as well as terrorists showed it was a battle of attrition that was fought over three days at the Oberoi and the Taj hotels in Mumbai. Doctors working in a hospital where all the bodies, including that of the terrorists, were taken said they had not seen anything like this in their lives. "Bombay has a long history of terror. I have seen bodies of riot victims, gang war and previous terror attacks like bomb blasts. But this was entirely different. It was shocking and disturbing," a doctor said. Asked specifically if he was talking of torture marks, he said: "It was apparent that most of the dead were tortured. What shocked me were the telltale signs showing clearly how the hostages were executed in cold blood," one doctor said. The other doctor, who had also conducted the post-mortem of the victims, said: "Of all the bodies, the Israeli victims bore the maximum torture marks. It was clear that they were killed on the 26th itself. It was obvious that they were tied up and tortured before they were killed. It was so bad that I do not want to go over the details even in my head again," he said. The doctors who conducted the post mortem said the bodies of the terrorists were beyond recognition. "Their faces were beyond recognition." There was no way of identifying them," he said. Asked how, if this is the case, they knew the bodies were indeed those of the terrorists, he said: "The security forces that brought the bodies told us that those were the bodies of the terrorists," he said, adding there was no other way they could have identified the bodies. An intelligence agency source added: "One of the terrorists was shot through either eye." Jack Bauer? Check the knee caps. A senior National Security Guard officer, who had earlier explained the operation in detail to rediff.com, said the commandos went all out after they ascertained that there were no more hostages left. When asked if the commandos attempted to capture them alive at that stage, he replied: "Unko bachana kaun chahega (Who will want to save them)?" They got one thing right. I think we should give the lead in the WOT to the Indians. |
| Posted by:Nimble Spemble |
| #9 And they probably do have a few. One or two of those declared dead may be getting the third degree in some undisclosed location from which they will never return. |
| Posted by: john frum 2008-11-30 19:31 |
| #8 Afzal Guru, sentenced to death for the attack on the Indian Parliament is still alive because the Indian Government is wary of offending Muslim sentiment. His sentence will probably be commuted. Said Sheik and Maulana Afzar were both captured by Indian troops. Both were freed during the Indian Airlines hijacking in Kandahar. So you can understand why Indian forces have an unstated no capture policy... |
| Posted by: john frum 2008-11-30 19:29 |
| #7 mhw - how do you know they don't? 10 only? Convenient |
| Posted by: Frank G 2008-11-30 18:07 |
| #6 IMO, it would be better to have 2 or 3 captured. There is a good chance that different people know different things. Also, it allows for cross checking |
| Posted by: mhw 2008-11-30 17:52 |
| #5 these terrs were well trained and the Indians had already captured one alive. No need to take any others alive, they all knew the same things, it would just have been redundant and taken the fun out of killing the rest. The info taken from the live one can be verified by other sources later. Actually, it's better to have multiple live prisoners because discrepancies can be discovered within minutes, instead of having to deal with "other sources". Note that prisoners can always be killed at leisure after the interrogations are complete. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2008-11-30 17:51 |
| #4 these terrs were well trained and the Indians had already captured one alive. No need to take any others alive, they all knew the same things, it would just have been redundant and taken the fun out of killing the rest. The info taken from the live one can be verified by other sources later. |
| Posted by: Xenophon 2008-11-30 17:42 |
| #3 The term "torture of hostages" is misleading. As far as the Indian government and the MSM were concerned, the captives were "hostages." As far as the terrorists were concerned, the captives were "playthings." The terrorists were out to inflict maximum pain on their victims and on the society they attacked. This needs much more publicity. Maybe the next set of would-be "playthings" will rush their attackers and either go down fighting, or overcome them. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2008-11-30 16:50 |
| #2 When asked if the commandos attempted to capture them alive at that stage, he replied: "Unko bachana kaun chahega (Who will want to save them)?" How about for questioning? If the hostages are dead, it's not like there's any need to kill the terrorists to prevent harm to the hostages. These people are extremely unprofessional. (And I'm not saying this because I'm some kind of great humanitarian. Once they get everything they can out of the terrorists, they can always bury them alive. Or tie them up as animal feed in some tiger preserve). |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2008-11-30 16:43 |
| #1 Hmm... seems we might be able to learn a thing or three from the Indians. After Mimbai/Bombay has a long history with terrorists. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2008-11-30 14:44 |