Operation Sindoor
Army Pics Show Terror Camps Struck In Pakistan
The precision strikes were carried out using niche technology weapons with careful selection of warheads, said the officers.
Nine terror camps used by groups like the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad to carry out attacks in India were destroyed in overnight aerial strikes in Pakistan and Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK).
Colonel Sofiya Qureshi and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh along with Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri briefed the media on the precision strikes on terror camps.
The targets struck in Pakistan included Sarjal camp in Sialkot, Mehmoona Joya and Markaz Taiba, Muridke, and Markaz Subhanallah in Bahawalpur. In POK, the targets included Sawai Nala and Syedna Bilal in Muzaffarabad, Gulpur and Abbas camps in Kotli, and Barnala camp in Bhimber.
Muzaffarabad (POK)
The Sawai Nala camp in Muzaffarabad, located in POK, about 30 km from the LoC, was a key training facility of the Lashkar-e-Taiba. Terrorists trained here had carried out attacks on civilians and security forces in Gulmarg and Sonmarg last year, and the Pahalgam attack.
The Syedna Belal camp in Muzaffarabad was used as a staging area by the Jaish-e-Mohammad to carry out attacks across the LOC. Here, terrorists were given training in weapons and explosives, and in jungle survival.
Kotli (POK)
The Gulpur camp in Kotli, located 30 km from the LoC, was the base camp for Lashkar-e-Taiba. Terrorists trained here operated in the Rajauri-Poonch her, and had carried out attacks in Poonch in 2023 and on a bus of pilgrims last year. Mumbai attacks mastermind Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi reportedly frequented this camp for indoctrination purposes.
The Abbas camp in Kotli was located about 13 km from the LOC and was known as the nerve centre for training Lashkar's suicide bombers. This camp had the capacity to train about 50 terrorists.
Bhimber (POK)
The Barnala camp in Bhimber was located 9 km from the LOC and was used for giving weapons and explosives training to terror recruits. They were also taught jungle survival techniques.
Sialkot (Pakistan)
The Sarjal camp in Sialkot was located about 6 km from the International Border. The attack that left four policemen dead in Jammu and Kashmir in March was carried out by terrorists trained here
The Mehmoona Joya camp near Sialkot was located around 12 km from the International Boundary. It was a training facility of the Hizbul Mujahideen and was also used for spreading terrorism in the Kathua-Jammu region. The 2016 attack at the Pathankot airbase was directed from this camp.
Muridke (Pakistan)
The Markaz Taiba camp in Muridke, located around 25 km from the border, was the headquarters of Lashkar-e-Taiba. Ajmal Kasab, the terrorist who was caught alive during the Mumbai attacks, had confessed that he was trained here. David Headley also reportedly trained here.
Bhawalpur (Pakistan)
About 100 km from the border, the Markaz Subhan camp in Bhawalpur was the headquarters of Jaish-e-Mohammad. It was used for recruitment, training, and the indoctrination of potential recruits. Terror commanders like Masood Azhar frequented this camp.
The precision strikes were carried out using niche technology weapons with careful selection of warheads that ensured no collateral damage, said the officers, adding that the point of impact in each of the strikes was a specific building or a group of buildings.
No military establishment was targeted, and there has been no report of collateral damage, they added
(INDIA)
The Indian armed forces early Wednesday carried out 24 precision missile strikes on nine terror targets in Pakistan and Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK), including Muridke and Bahawalpur - strongholds of terror groups Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), respectively.
More than 70 terrorists were killed and over 60 wounded in the strikes, sources said, as India significantly degraded the operational capability of these outfits. JeM chief Maulana Masood Azhar claimed that 10 members of his family and four of his aides were killed in the strikes.
The attacks, which were carried out at 1:44am, were in response to the terror attack in Pahalgam in Jammu & Kashmir's Anantnag district that claimed 26 lives - 25 Indians and one Nepali citizen - on April 22. In a statement, the Ministry of Defence confirmed targeting terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and PoK "from where terrorist attacks against India have been planned and directed".
India's strikes came hours before a planned security drill across the country for "effective civil defence in the event of a hostile attack", across 244 districts. Prime Minister Narendra Modi had vowed to pursue the perpetrators of the attack and those who took part in its conspiracy to the "ends of the earth" to inflict punishment on them "beyond their imagination".
About the Creator
Keep reading
More stories from Tasnimul Tonon and writers in Criminal and other communities.
FARMING
The global financial crisis was still three years away, but in 2005 a financial pall was already hanging over Bradwell Grove Estate in the Cotswolds. Rising oil prices – affecting in particular chemical fertiliser, had rocketed while crop prices stayed low. Manager of the 3500-acre farm, Charles Hunter-Smart, found that “revenues were not covering high running costs,” largely due to the substantial cost of the chemicals used to drive crop productivity.
By Tasnimul Tonon8 months ago in Families
Minneapolis ICE Shooting Updates
In recent weeks, Minneapolis has found itself at the center of a growing legal and political controversy following a shooting involving Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. What initially appeared to be a straightforward federal use-of-force investigation has evolved into a broader dispute between state authorities and federal officials, raising serious questions about transparency, jurisdiction, and accountability. The most significant development so far is the state’s claim that it has been denied access to key evidence related to the incident. As public attention intensifies, the case is no longer just about what happened during the shooting. It is increasingly about who controls the facts, who gets to investigate them, and how justice is supposed to function when federal and state systems collide. What We Know About the Minneapolis ICE Shooting The shooting occurred during a federal immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis. ICE agents were reportedly conducting official duties when gunfire erupted, resulting in injuries and immediate emergency response. Federal authorities confirmed the incident and stated that internal protocols were activated, including an automatic review by federal oversight bodies. From the beginning, details were limited. Officials cited the ongoing nature of the investigation and concerns about officer safety. This lack of information, while not unusual in federal cases, quickly became a point of friction for Minnesota state authorities, who argued that the public deserved clarity and that the state had a legal role to play in examining the incident. State Authorities Push for Transparency Minnesota state officials, including investigators and legal representatives, formally requested access to evidence connected to the shooting. This evidence reportedly includes body camera footage, surveillance recordings, forensic reports, and internal communication logs from the operation. According to state representatives, these requests were either delayed or denied outright. The state has since gone on record stating that it cannot independently assess the legality of the shooting without full access to the materials. This denial has fueled concerns that federal agencies are operating without sufficient external oversight, especially in incidents involving potential civilian harm. State leaders emphasized that their position is not adversarial by default. Rather, they argue that cooperation between federal and state agencies is essential to maintain public trust, particularly in communities already wary of immigration enforcement. Federal Response and Jurisdictional Limits Federal officials, for their part, maintain that the investigation falls squarely under federal jurisdiction. ICE operates as a federal agency, and shootings involving federal officers are typically reviewed internally and, when appropriate, by federal prosecutors or inspectors general. In statements released following the controversy, federal representatives cited legal restrictions that limit the sharing of evidence during an active investigation. They also stressed that premature disclosure could compromise witness testimony or investigative integrity. This explanation, while legally grounded, has done little to ease state frustrations. Critics argue that “ongoing investigation” has too often been used as a blanket justification for withholding information, even in cases where transparency could prevent misinformation and public unrest. Community Reaction and Public Trust The Minneapolis community has responded with a mix of concern, anger, and fatigue. For many residents, particularly in immigrant and marginalized communities, the shooting has reopened long-standing fears about aggressive enforcement tactics and lack of accountability. Community leaders and advocacy groups have called for the immediate release of non-sensitive evidence, arguing that transparency is a prerequisite for trust. Peaceful demonstrations and public forums have highlighted a broader demand: that no law enforcement agency, federal or otherwise, should be beyond scrutiny. Local officials echoed these concerns, noting that Minneapolis has spent years attempting to rebuild trust between residents and law enforcement. The perception that evidence is being withheld threatens to undermine that progress. Legal Implications of Denied Evidence From a legal standpoint, the state’s inability to access evidence raises complex questions. While federal agencies do have authority over their operations, states also have a responsibility to investigate deaths or injuries occurring within their borders. Legal experts suggest that this dispute could set a precedent. If states are routinely blocked from reviewing evidence in federal use-of-force cases, it may limit their ability to pursue independent inquiries or bring charges under state law when applicable. Some analysts believe the issue could ultimately be resolved in court, with judges determining whether the state has a legal right to access certain materials. Such a ruling could have national implications, influencing how future federal-state conflicts are handled. Political Dimensions of the Case The Minneapolis ICE shooting has also taken on a political dimension. Immigration enforcement remains a deeply divisive issue, and incidents like this tend to amplify existing ideological divides. State officials critical of federal immigration policies view the denial of evidence as symptomatic of a larger lack of accountability. Meanwhile, supporters of strict federal enforcement argue that state interference could hinder effective operations and put officers at risk. This political tension complicates the path forward. What might otherwise be a procedural disagreement risks becoming a symbolic battle over immigration, law enforcement authority, and states’ rights. What Happens Next? As of now, the investigation continues under federal oversight, while the state explores its legal options. Negotiations between state and federal officials have reportedly not been ruled out, suggesting that a compromise could still be reached. Potential next steps include limited evidence sharing under confidentiality agreements, congressional inquiries, or judicial review. Each option carries its own risks and consequences, both legally and politically. What remains clear is that public pressure is unlikely to fade. Minneapolis residents, like many Americans, are demanding clarity, fairness, and accountability in cases involving law enforcement use of force. A Broader Conversation About Accountability The Minneapolis ICE shooting is no longer just a single incident under investigation. It has become a lens through which broader issues are being examined: the balance of power between federal and state authorities, the limits of transparency, and the role of public oversight in a democratic society. Whether or not the state ultimately gains access to the evidence, the controversy has already sparked an important conversation. How that conversation translates into policy, practice, or reform remains to be seen, but its impact will likely extend far beyond Minneapolis. In the end, accountability is not only about assigning blame. It is about ensuring that systems function openly and fairly, especially when lives are affected. The outcome of this case may help determine how well those principles are upheld in the future.
By Saboor Brohi 6 days ago in Criminal
Violence Begets
"Any last words, cowboy?" "None you'd understand, sodbuster." "Funny. That's Marshall Sodbuster to you. But I meant some last nugget that would help us in the adjudication of the myriad offenses counted against you and your gang. I wasn't asking for penitence."
By Adam Diehl7 days ago in Fiction
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.