Breaking news: Coast guard intercepted terrorist boat

d_berwal · Post by **d_berwal** » 05 Jan 2015 21:34

@ prahaar

DITOOOOO... actually "editorial decision" was made which was anti-INDIA and the anchor was happy to carry it forward and add fuel to fire... so as per my Thoughts alone such people and "editorial decision" makers should be sent to PK. land to serve their masters.

what is the MAIN purpose of such anchors? and what is their purpose to be active in BRF and swing a debate in favor of one particular Product/Country/etc... ?

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 Jan 2015 21:40

deejay wrote:Just heard Col Shook Law on the HT show of one K Thappad. He is completely gone the P Swamy way. And with such confidence.

Track 2 saar..Track 2..
All these chaps are from taht cesspool onlee..it warps their thinking on Pak.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 Jan 2015 21:41

deejay wrote:
Akshay Kapoor wrote:Well said Deejay. Chai, samosa and ego massage missed. These guys' egoes have become as big as their knowledge has become shallow.
Sir, your Chai- Samosa reminds me of one occasion I took some (approx 20) minor* journos to an encounter scene. The place was laid out well by the IA - the dead jeehardis, captured arms, equipment and money, a briefing podium for the Brigadier and of course Chai Samosa (not far from each other) .

The moment we landed there, not one, I repeat not one person headed for the anything other than Chai, Samosa. This when we had departed 'base' after sumptuous lunch and it was just 40 mins. flt time.

*minor because I had never heard of anyone of them before or since.
Sorry OT.

member_28911 · Post by **member_28911** » 05 Jan 2015 21:53

#Terrorboat was in constant touch with authorities in Pakistan: Parrikar

Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, in another statement on the boat, said, "The boat was in constant touch with various authorities which are located in Pakistan and linked with Pakistani naval maritime security agencies."

Parrikar also said that a report would be released in a few days after investigation. "I can't know what was in the boat. So, I don't want to speculate. But I'm sure about one thing: The people in the boat did not have noble intentions."

http://www.firstpost.com/india/live-peo ... 27425.html

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 05 Jan 2015 21:54

Tamang wrote:Karan Pappad is doing his show on HT. He says has India violated international law by acting 370 Km away from seashore which lies in international waters.

Then let the kith and kins of those dead terrorist sue GOI and collect the compensation taking same watery route.

member_28911 · Post by **member_28911** » 05 Jan 2015 21:57

https://twitter.com/gauravcsawant/statu ... 2472315904

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 05 Jan 2015 22:33

With regards to the Navy's involvement:

It is not necessary that the Navy be involved in every drug bust, or must be involved in any incident far from shore (such as this one). Navy being sought also probably requires internal escalations. This incident was important given the backdrop of 26/11. The boat was in touch with Pak Military and that alone warranted navy's involvement.

In past the Navy has sorted seemingly minor incidents at sea as the service has overlapping capabilities with ICG:

- Nov 201: INS Agray fires a warning shot across MV Dynamic Stryker forcing her to stop

- Oct 2011: INS Batti Malv captures 12 poachers

- March 2012: INS Baratang captures 9 Myanmarese poaches after being tasked by JOC (Coastal Security)

Official Lok Sabha records say:

The Indian Navy has been designated as the authority responsible for overall
maritime security which includes coastal security and offshore security. The
Indian Coast Guard has been additionally designated as the authority
responsible for coastal security in territorial waters including areas to be
patrolled by Coastal Police

Per my understanding all coastal security threats have to be routed thru the JOC (Coastal Security) of the area which is headed by Navy. The JOC has to further task available assets. Example news report:

A permanent joint operations centre (JOC) to synergise and coordinate coastal security operations among stakeholders is set to be operationalised at the Southern Naval Command in a fortnight.

Built at a cost of Rs 4.8 crore, the new JOC is equipped with state-of-the-art communication equipment, hotlines with other central and State agencies and surveillance radar and automatic identification system (AIS) feeds buttressed by back-end infrastructure facilities. While round-the-clock coastal monitoring would be carried out by Navy and Coast Guard personnel manning the centre, it was spacious enough to also house personnel from outside agencies who would be drafted in during operations, coastal security drills and exigencies, Naval sources said.

The command’s makeshift JOC, opened in 2009 to comply with measures taken by the Centre to address security issues along the coast, will shut shop once the full-fledged JOC becomes functional.

“The new JOC, one of the four in the country, will act as the nerve-centre of coastal security operations in the region. This is being set up in accordance with the steps prescribed in the wake of the Mumbai attack in 2008,” Vice-Admiral Satish Soni, the Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Southern Naval Command, told The Hindu.

A major step taken by the Centre soon after the Mumbai attack was to re-designate heads of the three naval commands in Mumbai, Vizag and Kochi and the commander-in-chief of the joint Andaman and Nicobar Command as Commanders-in-Chief, Coastal Defence, of their respective regions.

Sources said besides the Navy and the Coast Guard, personnel from the State Police, Port Trusts, Fisheries Department, Customs Department, Light House Authorities and intelligence agencies would man the JOC subject to requirements.

“There will be real-time relay of operational data from the surveillance assets of the Navy and the Coast Guard to the JOC. It will also receive slave imagery from the Vessel Traffic Management System (VTMS) operated by the Cochin Port Trust,” said a source.

....

Did NTRO contact JOC, or bypass it to involve ICG directly? We don't know. Should this operation have been handled by Naval fleet? In hind sight - yes, as they probably could have pressed in a larger fleet as well as better COMINT. This is a speculation as we dont have enough data.

As a side benefit the conspiracy theorists would have been more restrained as well. Navy commands much respect from citizens and press alike - anybody doubting their actions or intentions is automatically on defensive. The press releases are also 'tight' or not published at all. Unfortunately, in this incident the Navy's silence/absence was misused by Praveen Swamy (ack-thoo) and like to cast doubt on the official version from MoD.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 05 Jan 2015 22:35

Deejay wrote:
Sir, your Chai- Samosa reminds me of one occasion I took some (approx 20) minor* journos to an encounter scene. The place was laid out well by the IA - the dead jeehardis, captured arms, equipment and money, a briefing podium for the Brigadier and of course Chai Samosa (not far from each other) .

The moment we landed there, not one, I repeat not one person headed for the anything other than Chai, Samosa. This when we had departed 'base' after sumptuous lunch and it was just 40 mins. flt time.

*minor because I had never heard of anyone of them before or since.
Sorry OT.

I hope you did not get upset stomachs during the flt back. Buggers only wanted to fill their tummies with free food as much as they can. Just shows the mentality and this reflects in the work. Like the get extras in a movie, that's how these mushrooming TV channels pick journos. Aur koi naukri nahi mili to journalist bangaye. There are many such stories. That's why I call them chai samosa.

I heard a harrowing story from Col (Retd) V P (name can be supplied later if needed) who was in command of base hospital during Kargil ops. He is a Doc and served in PBG for many years so a para too. His wife was also an AMC Doc. He lives in Pune. During Kargil Ops a very well known female TV anchor (you know who) was thrown out of the Base Hospital by him. Why ? I don't recollect the exact story but IIRC she wanted to move casualties around and out of treatment areas so that her cameras and equipment could be accommodated ! Her career and TRPs were more important than Indian lives. He was still furious more than a decade later. You don't mess with fauji docs when they are treating casualties.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 05 Jan 2015 22:38

partha wrote:chackoji, good PR by GoI still won't prevent Praveen Swami types from coming up with imaginary grandma theories and creating confusion and doubt in the minds of Indian readers. How do we solve that problem? MOD could bar all agencies from talking to the media directly during these incidents and instead pass on all the data to MOD. MOD should be the single point of contact for journos to get info from.

Killing Pakis is always a good PR. Rest of the arguments is a hawa hawa.

Akshay Kapoor · Post by **Akshay Kapoor** » 05 Jan 2015 22:48

Hahaha, true.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 05 Jan 2015 22:51

Jhujar wrote:
Tamang wrote:Karan Pappad is doing his show on HT. He says has India violated international law by acting 370 Km away from seashore which lies in international waters.
Then let the kith and kins of those dead terrorist sue GOI and collect the compensation taking same watery route.

The Paki handlers already promised 5 lakhs based on the intercepts, no? Your joke might be taken seriously by journalists browsing BRF and very soon you will hear that line also on MSM TVs.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 Jan 2015 22:53

Aditya G wrote:With regards to the Navy's involvement:

It is not necessary that the Navy be involved in every drug bust, or must be involved in any incident far from shore (such as this one). Navy being sought also probably requires internal escalations. This incident was important given the backdrop of 26/11. The boat was in touch with Pak Military and that alone warranted navy's involvement.

In past the Navy has sorted seemingly minor incidents at sea as the service has overlapping capabilities with ICG:

- Nov 201: INS Agray fires a warning shot across MV Dynamic Stryker forcing her to stop

- Oct 2011: INS Batti Malv captures 12 poachers

- March 2012: INS Baratang captures 9 Myanmarese poaches after being tasked by JOC (Coastal Security)

Official Lok Sabha records say:

The Indian Navy has been designated as the authority responsible for overall
maritime security which includes coastal security and offshore security. The
Indian Coast Guard has been additionally designated as the authority
responsible for coastal security in territorial waters including areas to be
patrolled by Coastal Police
Per my understanding all coastal security threats have to be routed thru the JOC (Coastal Security) of the area which is headed by Navy. The JOC has to further task available assets. Example news report:

A permanent joint operations centre (JOC) to synergise and coordinate coastal security operations among stakeholders is set to be operationalised at the Southern Naval Command in a fortnight.

Built at a cost of Rs 4.8 crore, the new JOC is equipped with state-of-the-art communication equipment, hotlines with other central and State agencies and surveillance radar and automatic identification system (AIS) feeds buttressed by back-end infrastructure facilities. While round-the-clock coastal monitoring would be carried out by Navy and Coast Guard personnel manning the centre, it was spacious enough to also house personnel from outside agencies who would be drafted in during operations, coastal security drills and exigencies, Naval sources said.

The command’s makeshift JOC, opened in 2009 to comply with measures taken by the Centre to address security issues along the coast, will shut shop once the full-fledged JOC becomes functional.

“The new JOC, one of the four in the country, will act as the nerve-centre of coastal security operations in the region. This is being set up in accordance with the steps prescribed in the wake of the Mumbai attack in 2008,” Vice-Admiral Satish Soni, the Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Southern Naval Command, told The Hindu.

A major step taken by the Centre soon after the Mumbai attack was to re-designate heads of the three naval commands in Mumbai, Vizag and Kochi and the commander-in-chief of the joint Andaman and Nicobar Command as Commanders-in-Chief, Coastal Defence, of their respective regions.

Sources said besides the Navy and the Coast Guard, personnel from the State Police, Port Trusts, Fisheries Department, Customs Department, Light House Authorities and intelligence agencies would man the JOC subject to requirements.

“There will be real-time relay of operational data from the surveillance assets of the Navy and the Coast Guard to the JOC. It will also receive slave imagery from the Vessel Traffic Management System (VTMS) operated by the Cochin Port Trust,” said a source.

....
Did NTRO contact JOC, or bypass it to involve ICG directly? We don't know. Should this operation have been handled by Naval fleet? In hind sight - yes, as they probably could have pressed in a larger fleet as well as better COMINT. This is a speculation as we dont have enough data.

As a side benefit the conspiracy theorists would have been more restrained as well. Navy commands much respect from citizens and press alike - anybody doubting their actions or intentions is automatically on defensive. The press releases are also 'tight' or not published at all. Unfortunately, in this incident the Navy's silence/absence was misused by Praveen Swamy (ack-thoo) and like to cast doubt on the official version from MoD.

That is a big assumption there that the likes of Pravin Swami would be circumspect if it were the Navy involved.

he is a slimeball who revels in FUD against the services.

Check his record against the Army for instance.

He is basically well connected with the neta-babu nexus of the INC supporting crowd and they have used him in the past to run down the IA whilst he burnishes his own record as some expert on terror.

basically he is a canary who sings with his masters voice.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 05 Jan 2015 22:54

Akshay Kapoor wrote:
Deejay wrote:
Sir, your Chai- Samosa reminds me of one occasion I took some (approx 20) minor* journos to an encounter scene. The place was laid out well by the IA - the dead jeehardis, captured arms, equipment and money, a briefing podium for the Brigadier and of course Chai Samosa (not far from each other) .

The moment we landed there, not one, I repeat not one person headed for the anything other than Chai, Samosa. This when we had departed 'base' after sumptuous lunch and it was just 40 mins. flt time.

*minor because I had never heard of anyone of them before or since.
Sorry OT.

I hope you did not get upset stomachs during the flt back. Buggers only wanted to fill their tummies with free food as much as they can. Just shows the mentality and this reflects in the work. Like the get extras in a movie, that's how these mushrooming TV channels pick journos. Aur koi naukri nahi mili to journalist bangaye. There are many such stories. That's why I call them chai samosa.

I heard a harrowing story from Col (Retd) V P (name can be supplied later if needed) who was in command of base hospital during Kargil ops. He is a Doc and served in PBG for many years so a para too. His wife was also an AMC Doc. He lives in Pune. During Kargil Ops a very well known female TV anchor (you know who) was thrown out of the Base Hospital by him. Why ? I don't recollect the exact story but IIRC she wanted to move casualties around and out of treatment areas so that her cameras and equipment could be accommodated ! Her career and TRPs were more important than Indian lives. He was still furious more than a decade later. You don't mess with fauji docs when they are treating casualties.

wow, the woman in question - from ND**-- looks like she couldn't have fallen any lower.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 05 Jan 2015 23:05

Movie extras == journalists is very apt description. Every single detail related to movie extras apply to these.

yantra · Post by **yantra** » 05 Jan 2015 23:08

For all the doubters there - most of your questions answered:

http://www.rediff.com/news/report/exclu ... 150105.htm

Sunk Pakistani boat was no ordinary fishing vessel
(December 31, 2014) 0735 hrs: The National Technical Resource Organisation sends out a specific input marked to all those it is required to keep in the loop, giving exact lat-long (latitude-longitude) of a boat that had sailed from Keti Bunder near Karachi and was headed towards the Gujarat Coast. The input had a rough description of the boat too. The intelligence input was based on a communication interception that the NTRO had managed.
0855 hrs: COM-CG, Gujarat, the Coast Guard’s Gandhinagar-based regional HQ, received the details at 8.55 am from the Coast Guard HQ in Delhi.

0935 hrs: A Dornier aircraft of the Coast Guard located at Porbander takes off for the first sortie. After about 90 minutes, it sights the boat, bobbing around in mid-sea roughly at the spot that the NTRO had indicated. The Dornier crew relays the information back to Porbander and Gandhinagar. After a 3.40 minute sortie, the Dornier returns to Porbander.

1235 hrs: Another Dornier aircraft is airborne even before the first one lands back. It keeps a hawk’s eye on the boat and sends back detailed description.

1330-1400 hrs: NTRO listens in on another three-way conversation between the boat and presumably their handlers based in Karachi (probably personnel of the Pakistani Maritime Security Agency) and someone based in Thailand. Occupants of the boat are heard telling their superiors, ‘we are waiting.’ The Coast Guard decides to keep the air surveillance going by sending a replacement for the second aircraft and also divert a ship, ICG Rajrattan, which was on a task in a different area.

1730, 2030 and 2230 hrs: Coast Guard’s Dorniers are launched at these times to keep an eye on the boat which is neither fishing nor moving but is just hanging around.

2200 hrs: INS Rajrattan makes an RV (rendezvous) with the boat after travelling more than eight hours.

The crew tries to raise the boat and its occupants but the moment Rajrattan’s presence is noticed, the lights on the boat are switched off. The boat also tries to move away towards the International Maritime Boundary Line.

2330 hrs: The Rajrattan, aware of the possibility of explosives and arms stored onboard the boat, keeps circling it which nevertheless continues its dash towards the IMBL. After about an hour of the cat and mouse game, the Coast Guard ship fires several warning shots. Perhaps finding no other alternative, the occupants onboard the boat decided to set it on fire. Several loud explosions occur and a massive fire breaks out on the boat. At least four men were spotted on the boat before it sank, a ministry of defence statement had said.

(January 1, 2015) 0430 hrs-0630 hrs: The boat gradually sinks even as Rajrattan stays in the vicinity to look for any survivors.

Given that the terrorists in the 26/11 attacks had come into Mumbai via the sea, immediate parallels were sought to be drawn to that episode but on available evidence, it is still not clear if Mumbai was the target or if the occupants on the destroyed boat were assigned to carry out any terrorist attack. What is clear, however, is the boat was no ordinary fishing vessel.

member_28108 · Post by **member_28108** » 05 Jan 2015 23:10

O wish we cou;ld have a meme of Pravin swami and spread it virally

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 05 Jan 2015 23:15

This was posted earlier by someone, and I would like to re-iterate this possibility:

Based on the intel intercept (whatever it actually was, we wouldn't know), we probably did not want to show our hand, hence the emphasis on routine surveillance by ICG Dorniers, and deploying a single ICG patrol craft. Deploying the IN or a group of ships might have alerted the handlers that the game was up and removed any chances of intercepting the boats (they could have turned back in Paki waters before our force could arrived at the scene) - the lone ICG boat stood a better chance of boarding and confiscating whatever they were carrying.

It is possible that we didn't expect them to self immolate/set the boat on fire, otherwise the ICG might have been more aggressive in boarding the boat (by sending some commandos under the cover of darkness, f.e.)

In hindsight, I think the decision to send a single boat paid off to a certain extent, as we now know that a)a boat was sent from Pakiland, b)they were carrying some questionable cargo, and c)an attack was averted. The GoI hasn't said as much in clear text, but they have said enough for people to connect the dots. The only aspect I wasn't happy about was the revelation that we were listening to the boat's comms real time, and they were talking to some agency in Pak. Having been circumspect w.r.t. the boat and ICG deployment, we needn't have shown off our capabilities - just maintained it to be some fluke discovery. OTOH, maybe the Pakis know our capabilities already, and this is GoI's way of reassuring its own citizens that we have enough capability. I don't know, all possibilities onlee.

Finally, the resemblance of this incident to Vivek Ahuja's current scenario was uncanny - sort of reminds me of one of Mukul Deva's books where OBL is found in Pakiland. Prescient!

Comer · Post by **Comer** » 06 Jan 2015 01:11

Nirupama Subramanian
‏@tallstories
Err...doesn't terrorism allegation need more than circumstantial evidence,or this also like 7000-year-old planes? #terrorboat #VedicScience

Whole convo here:

https://twitter.com/tallstories/status/ ... 3909436417

Crux of it is unless CG and GoI proves it is a terrorist operation, Yindia would lose ground on political, dipolomatic and moral grounds onlee. Square one onlee.

Anindya · Post by **Anindya** » 06 Jan 2015 02:20

.doesn't terrorism allegation need more than circumstantial evidence,

Actually, action to prevent terror attacks is by definition based on circumstantial evidence...

In fact, most action against terrorists "after attacks" is also often based on circumstantial evidence.

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 06 Jan 2015 02:26

Pandyan saar, seems to be spear headed by PS in IndExp, and to an extent NDTV. TBH, my first reading of this incident was on The Hindu, and they hadn't put out these questions. In fact, their coverage seemed to be positive overall (see the 2nd link below). Then I watched Times Now, and no questions there either, similar positive tone. Only on browsing BRF did I see PS' article and the subsequent 'painting' of the incident (not to mention 2 pages of skepticism from a BRFite) which the congis picked up. It would be interesting to see how long IE will keep PS on its staff, if people start to unsubscribe like above.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/e ... 749167.ece
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/c ... elatedNews
http://www.timesnow.tv/videoshow/4472155.cms

What are the other news outlets saying, like Statesman, HT, Tribune, etc.? I know I can browse and find out, but will be useful to other posters' perspectives on how our media responded overall.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 06 Jan 2015 03:32

matrimc wrote:Brain leprosy == mad cow disease == mad people who want to protect cows
Brain replosy == MAD cows = mutually assured distruction indoo cows who want to challenge the dlagon's cHEla == the mad maulanas

Praveen Swami also seemed to agree with Germans who challenge why animal-sex is NOT OK if eating animals is OK? Putting 2 & 2 together, a reputed British journal concluded that the Mad Cow epidemic was created when Praveen Swami did *ahem ahem* to a cow while eating half-a-pack of Haldiram's. He fed the other half to the cow

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 06 Jan 2015 03:51

SSridhar wrote:I still do not get it. What are people, who are finding fault with the boat issue, trying to prove? That the GoI is lying, that the CG is lying?

Here is the pickle PS (Praveen Swami, not Piece of $hit) finds himself in: his "smuggling" myth goes for a toss, unless accompanied by a "Coast Guard destroyed the boat" myth. Without the latter, even on-the-wall people will wonder - boat commits soosai, 4 Paki smugglers dead, what's the big deal?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Jan 2015 04:10

saravana wrote:
Nirupama Subramanian
‏@tallstories
Err...doesn't terrorism allegation need more than circumstantial evidence,or this also like 7000-year-old planes? #terrorboat #VedicScience

Whole convo here:

https://twitter.com/tallstories/status/ ... 3909436417

Crux of it is unless CG and GoI proves it is a terrorist operation, Yindia would lose ground on political, dipolomatic and moral grounds onlee. Square one onlee.

Firstly, this linking of the sunken boat with the '7000-year-old planes' betrays an agenda.Secondly, in terrorism situations, none can give a 'convincing' proof. Thirdly, 'convince' whom? Nirupama Subramanian, Praveen Swami, Ajai Shukla? Fourthly, India cannot wait for the whole proof to emerge before acting. It will be too late. Fifthly, what is this idea of 'more than circumstancial evidence'. Does she want it to be like 26/11? That is, act after the terrorists invade, bomb and start killing people?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Jan 2015 04:13

arshyam wrote: In fact, their coverage seemed to be positive overall

Didin't you read their Editorial yesterday? They are all in that same boat (pun intended)

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Jan 2015 04:14

Anindya wrote:
.doesn't terrorism allegation need more than circumstantial evidence,
Actually, action to prevent terror attacks is by definition based on circumstantial evidence...

In fact, most action against terrorists "after attacks" is also often based on circumstantial evidence.

Anindya, absolutely.

Prem Kumar · Post by **Prem Kumar** » 06 Jan 2015 04:31

SSridhar:
a) Before a terrorist attacks, there is no proof that he/she is a terrorist. Mere "circumstantial evidence" is not enough
b) After a terrorist attacks, the terror-attack has not been prevented. Its an intelligence failure
c) Hence, terror-attacks cannot be prevented
d) QED

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 06 Jan 2015 04:35

moderator note

I have just had to warn a member and delete his libelous post against a journalist. A few minutes later I had to ban another member.

The forum is not a place where journalists can be subject to libel or where violence against them is advocated. The mods will not tolerate this nonsense.

Gentlemen, restrain yourselves.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 06 Jan 2015 06:24

saravana wrote:
Nirupama Subramanian
‏@tallstories
Err...doesn't terrorism allegation need more than circumstantial evidence,or this also like 7000-year-old planes? #terrorboat #VedicScience

Whole convo here:

https://twitter.com/tallstories/status/ ... 3909436417

Crux of it is unless CG and GoI proves it is a terrorist operation, Yindia would lose ground on political, dipolomatic and moral grounds onlee. Square one onlee.

This kind of tweet represents classic misdirection with the wrong question, of the "when did you stop beating your wife?" variety.

There is no "terrorism allegation" as premised in NS's tweet. There is only a well-founded suspicion of possible terrorist activity, as per the judgment of experienced , in-the-field security professionals, into which category NS does not fall.

That kind of suspicion, unlike an actual criminal charge brought in court, doesn't require "more than circumstantial" evidence. (For that matter, even an allegation or charge brought in court, doesn't require more than circumstantial evidence. Usually, but not always, securing a conviction on the allegation would require more than circumstantial evidence; sometimes, strong circumstantial evidence would be enough even for a conviction in court).

In fact, in the present scenario, the only possible evidence is circumstantial, as any other evidence could only have been gathered only after the CG completed its process of arresting the suspects, a process which ended prematurely due to factors entirely out of the CG's control.

Unfortunately, I see a good many patriots, including some on this thread, rising to the bait of this kind of misdirection, and engaging in endless speculative analysis with the intent of meeting the demand for evidence which cannot possibly fulfilled. There may be some residual material evidence from the flotsam and wreckage, but it will never be absolutely conclusive, unlike a detailed and corroborated confession by the suspect.

Because the quest to supply evidence is basically futile, the patriotic responders will find themselves on weak speculative grounds, or forced to resort to questioning the patriotism of the NSs or even resorting to abuse. All of these things are losing endeavors and will only serve the purpose of the original misdirection--to paint themselves as wise and courageous and their challengers as an ill-behaved mob of stupid persons, something which is very far from the truth.

Misdirection is a very hard propaganda strategy to counter and neutralize. But we might start with providing useful and logical responses directed, not at the misdirecters (because why on earth would they listen to us?) but at abduls who may be currently getting a their information and analysis from the misdirecters, by default.

If patriots want Truth, Justice and the Indian Way to prevail, they will need to learn to channel their passions and energies into well-conceived strategies to undermine and neutralize people like NS, so as to consolidate the Modi-ist Revolution. Simply letting off steam won't do it, in fact, it makes the task that much harder.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 06 Jan 2015 06:58

UBCN flash:

10 unidentified persons tracked by Mumbai ATF, wading ashore on Juhu Beach, wearing frogmen costumes and dragging several cellophane-wrapped BakPaks ashore. They unpack the BakPaks, pack their frogman suits into a locked telephone connection box at the beach, then are picked up in two black Toyota SUVs. They drive to Hotel InterContinental, and jump out of the two SUVs 100 yards outside the hotel entrance. The SUVs then form up and appear to prepare for a high-speed acceleration through the gates of the hotel in a classic suicide truck maneuver. Suddenly, two trucks pull across the gates, and ATF personnel leap out, guns at the ready and order the 'visitors' to surrender. The SUVs break out in flames, and explode, 100 m from hotel entrance. The 10 'visitors' shoot each other to death with their AK-56 rifles, then last one blows up a soosai vest, destroying the AK-56s.

Clearly a case of Tunisian Boy Scouts who lost their way, and getting kidnapped by smugglers.

Disclaimer: This is basically the state of Indian 'News Media'.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 06 Jan 2015 07:20

kmkraoind wrote:This truth is dedicated to Congis and to Sickular media pimps.

What for should I stand in phront, hain? I never asked you to start/stop shooting.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 06 Jan 2015 08:57

So what was really happening:

A boat with 04 on their way to 72 had a task to do. They started from Keti Bundar near Pakistan and this nobody disputes. They came in a fishing boat, this no body disputes. The boat got destroyed in fire with 'yellow' flames, this nobody disputes. The ICG ship was close by this nobody disputes. The boat was constantly under surveillance by a dornier since it entered Indian waters, this nobody disputes. NTRO was tracking their communications, this nobody disputes. There was communication with Pakis, boatmen and some one in Thailand and this nobody disputes.

So, what was this boat doing:
1) Smuggling:
i) Liquor from Pakistan to Pakistan (decoy route) or Liquor from India to Pakistan (awaiting the boat with supplies).
ii) Narcotics from Pakistan to Pakistan (decoy route) or Narcotics to Pakistan from India (awaiting the boat to transfer supplies).
iii) Gold from Pakistan to Pakistan (decoy route) or Gold from Pakistan to India (awaiting the boat to transfer supplies)or Gold from India to Pakistan (awaiting the boat with supplies).
iv)Diesel : The boat was not big enough, no barrels reported or large tanks not reported. Cost of shipping too high for quantity possible on this boat.

The Possibilities from 1 i) to iv) are severely dented by the fact the boat was destroyed and most probably the men on board died. In all possibilities above it does not make any sense for either the Coast Guard or the Paki boat people to light the match to boat and life.

Then from here let us think of conjectures / possibilities other than those listed above:

2) Explosives, weapons, communication equipment, cash, or all of these:
i) Pakistan was sending a consignment exclusively of explosives / weapons / communication equipment / cash.
ii) It was a combination of the above or was carrying all of the above.
iii) A possibility of at least one among the four Paki crew or more were also destined to India.
iv) the Paki boat was for part of the journey, the rest of it was to be done on an Indian boat. The goods had to be transferred on to this boat.

In all cases of 2 i) to iv) above the destruction of boat and material becomes necessary so that a track back to the official Paki machinery (ISI) is not possible.

3)What all could be targets:
i) Naval base at Porbandar (IMO least likely)
ii) Pravasi Bhartiya diwas ( likely)
iii) Republic Day celebrations anywhere in India (likely)

There could be other targets like specific individuals, schools (a la Peshawar) etc.

Another interesting data point is Thailand. What is common to Pakistan, the boat and Thailand. The NTRO guys have specifically said Thailand.

As far as the journalists go, whatever their individual motivations - Track thoo, anti GOI, in Paki payrolls (?), the whole group has been hit by something common to all of them. Remember, in the initial days how Bdutt complained for a seat on PM's aircraft.

Recently, a whole lot of NSA communication was leaked in the media that sensitive material is going to press and public. Well, me thinks, no, I am sure, the direct line to sensitive information on security related matters was cut out out from the domain of our def journalists. So, they cry with conspiracy theories.

Suddenly, our defence journalists will have to work for a living.

wilson_th · Post by **wilson_th** » 06 Jan 2015 10:51

deejay
Post subject:
Re: Breaking news: Coast guard intercepted terrorist boat
So what was really happening:

There is a chance of fake currency smuggling , but that also do not require martyrdom

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 06 Jan 2015 11:21

Or the boat caught fire due to over heating of the engines. The men went below deck in order to deal with the fire and were overcomee by heat and fumes.

Because nowhere has the CG stated they knew, how the boat caught fire. They have only reported that shots were fired across the bow and not at the boat in order to get the boat to stop.

The boat was inside the Indian EEZ, with questionable intent. The CG was doing its job. The men on the boat met their 72. End of the story.

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 06 Jan 2015 11:43

But what is the itch that caused Praveen to jump in with his 2cents.
The sheer haste with which the chestbeating started and then picked up by the Cong & media means there is something afoot.

Possible that Praveen is right, and the Coast guard was tricked into doing something to create a situation to criticise Modi.
perhaps Congi slaves in establishment engineered this

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Jan 2015 11:56

Another possibility that cannot be ruled out is using the route that was used during 26/11 in order to see how IN/CG reacts and changes made in terms of reaction and detection time.

Perhaps a decoy for real operation some where else along the lines of 26/11 or Kargil , we will see time will tell ISI wont leave modi government untested much like it did the BJP with Kargil/Parliament attack or UPA with 26/11 and other major explosion that occurred.

Shreeman · Post by **Shreeman** » 06 Jan 2015 12:03

couldnt resist:

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 06 Jan 2015 12:11

A decoy would have surrendered when pinned down unless the men or the material on board were deemed too valuable to allow capture by Indians in which case it was not a decoy but the real mccoy.

Innocent fishermen would have just invited the CG crew for chai/biscoot at the first instance and not taken them on a chase.

Smugglers with drugs or other typical contraband could have just dumped the whole stuff overboard when they couldn't outrun the CG and then would have invited the CG crew for chai/biscoot.

Could be the crew set the boat on fire accidentally but in that case *innocent fishermen* or *smugglers divested of their contraband magically transformed into innocent fishermen* would have swam towards the CG vessel to be rescued.

Or, the CG accidentally shelled the boat and had to cook up a story to coverup. BUT an easier coverup was to just keep the whole ops under wraps. Per one report, No fishermen out on the sea saw the fire. Also, CG claimed that the nearest fishing vessel was more than 40 miles away. Only the CG, Dornier and the intelligence would know of the goofup. So that too does not make sense.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 06 Jan 2015 12:39

IMHO if boat didnt blow itself up, CG hailed boat, boat fled, CG fired warning shots and boat caught fire. CGs part still SOP.

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 06 Jan 2015 12:42

yantra wrote:For all the doubters there - most of your questions answered:

http://www.rediff.com/news/report/exclu ... 150105.htm

Sunk Pakistani boat was no ordinary fishing vessel
(December 31, 2014) 0735 hrs: The National Technical Resource Organisation sends out a specific input marked to all those it is required to keep in the loop, giving exact lat-long (latitude-longitude) of a boat that had sailed from Keti Bunder near Karachi and was headed towards the Gujarat Coast. The input had a rough description of the boat too. The intelligence input was based on a communication interception that the NTRO had managed.
0855 hrs: COM-CG, Gujarat, the Coast Guard’s Gandhinagar-based regional HQ, received the details at 8.55 am from the Coast Guard HQ in Delhi.

0935 hrs: A Dornier aircraft of the Coast Guard located at Porbander takes off for the first sortie. After about 90 minutes, it sights the boat, bobbing around in mid-sea roughly at the spot that the NTRO had indicated. The Dornier crew relays the information back to Porbander and Gandhinagar. After a 3.40 minute sortie, the Dornier returns to Porbander.

1235 hrs: Another Dornier aircraft is airborne even before the first one lands back. It keeps a hawk’s eye on the boat and sends back detailed description.

1330-1400 hrs: NTRO listens in on another three-way conversation between the boat and presumably their handlers based in Karachi (probably personnel of the Pakistani Maritime Security Agency) and someone based in Thailand. Occupants of the boat are heard telling their superiors, ‘we are waiting.’ The Coast Guard decides to keep the air surveillance going by sending a replacement for the second aircraft and also divert a ship, ICG Rajrattan, which was on a task in a different area.

1730, 2030 and 2230 hrs: Coast Guard’s Dorniers are launched at these times to keep an eye on the boat which is neither fishing nor moving but is just hanging around.

2200 hrs: INS Rajrattan makes an RV (rendezvous) with the boat after travelling more than eight hours.

The crew tries to raise the boat and its occupants but the moment Rajrattan’s presence is noticed, the lights on the boat are switched off. The boat also tries to move away towards the International Maritime Boundary Line.

2330 hrs: The Rajrattan, aware of the possibility of explosives and arms stored onboard the boat, keeps circling it which nevertheless continues its dash towards the IMBL. After about an hour of the cat and mouse game, the Coast Guard ship fires several warning shots. Perhaps finding no other alternative, the occupants onboard the boat decided to set it on fire. Several loud explosions occur and a massive fire breaks out on the boat. At least four men were spotted on the boat before it sank, a ministry of defence statement had said.

(January 1, 2015) 0430 hrs-0630 hrs: The boat gradually sinks even as Rajrattan stays in the vicinity to look for any survivors.

Given that the terrorists in the 26/11 attacks had come into Mumbai via the sea, immediate parallels were sought to be drawn to that episode but on available evidence, it is still not clear if Mumbai was the target or if the occupants on the destroyed boat were assigned to carry out any terrorist attack. What is clear, however, is the boat was no ordinary fishing vessel.

This is a very cogent timeline which makes absolute sense.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 06 Jan 2015 12:53

No entity will sacrifice 4 jihadis for simply testing our defences.surveillance capability.All that the Pakis had to do was to send a genuine fishing boat or more with a selected crew to be innocently stopped and searched. The IN/CG would have to let them go as they would be in international waters. There was a recent report about the danger from the "floating armouries" being used in the anti-pirachy war,which could also be used for the illicit delivery of weaponry The US Seaman Guard vessel detained last year at Tuticorin which was found very suspicious,had been sailing for a long time off the Kudankumam N-Plant.The arms it was carrying could've been meant for a terror attack against the plant.The police also picked up a suspected foreign agent masquerading as a hippie with maps,etc. in his possession.allegedly with links to the PMANE supremo and other anti-nuclear NGOs.

With Gujarat being our PM's home state,the Pakis certainly would've wanted to conduct a terror op. most likely in this case at probandar,especially as a new naval facility is being established to plug a vital gap in our defences. This incident only underscores the relevance of beefing up maritime security all along the Gujarat/Maharashtra coast,not forgetting how the arms for the Bombay blasts were smuggled ashore apart from the 26/11 terror outrage.

The requirement of amphibians is urgently needed on both seaboards apart from the required numbers of fast craft and aircraft/UAV/UCAVs for the same. A closer coordination of all assets,IN,CG,IAF,etc,is required when suspicious vessels are detected so that such vessels cannot escape and can be prosecuted in the shortest time possible.