The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
That's a completely factless speculation which is as far from reality as "What IF Shah Rukh Khan was flying to Chicago to plot with Headley their next move together with Rahul who is actually a ARAAW/KGB double agent, and hence the trouble at US airport?"
The real story behind all this is that IPS officers and Army officers pay for their lives whereas IAS(Home secretary) and IFS(Consul-generals) officers get scott free even while politicians are dining with Ramu and his B-Grade actresses.
The incompetence of IFS officers in not doing due diligence should not be swept under carpet, so the blame is only on IPS officers.
26/11 was failure of IAS/IPS/IFS and Politicians but only IPS and Army lives were lost, and blame mainly went to Police and Navy.
Acharya wrote:
What IF they wanted the public to think that way
Mahendra wrote:Rah-ul Butt was questioned by FBI
Rahul Bhatt should thank himself that he is not being deported and extradited to USA.
What are the chances that Headley guy was active within quite few Secular, CAG, India Uity type groups? The reason i ask this is because many of the folks in these groups coordinate many seminars,functions, demonstartions etc with Paki "community" with primary agenda of india and Indics as main target of their criticism. Bhutt Family connection to these groups should be invetigated . Chicago is a major hub for Pakis of Indian origin and real good chance Indian Consulate Geneal Atri was played by these groups to attend Paki organized Independence day function while missing the event organized by Indian community. If anything , more than LET etc , Indian's or other anti terrorist agencies should keep eye on the social facilitaters of Headley type terrorist agent.
The ones who are always sypathetic to Paki cause at the cost of Indian interests. The self declared South Asians, ever eager to provide comfort and aid to Pakiland, our mortal civilizational enemy . There are many individual groups who come under this cateorgy. No-coincident SIMI leadership feel at home in Chicago.
There are numerous people who have one parent from TSP and one from India but were born in Gulf or outside south Asia. These people themselves don't know which country they actually belong to.
Adnan sami is one of the more famous of these kind. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adnan_Sami
.....
“I don’t want to comment on the double agent issue. It will not be professional on my part,” Rao said when asked about Headley.
“The investigations are under way, and I want to emphasise that we have got very good cooperation from the US, and our agencies concerned are in touch with them.”
Stressing on the close cooperation between Indian and FBI investigators, she said, “so far, we have got access to documents and information from the FBI.”
Asked if India would want access to Headley and his associate Tahawwur Rana, Rao said: “At some stage, we would like to have access to them.”
.....
“I am aware of these reports[Papers missing in Chicago]... I want to tell you that I have sought a factual report from our consulate in Chicago in this regard.”
Headley and Rana, arrested by FBI for plotting terror attacks in India, were issued multi-entry visas by the Indian mission in Chicago. Headley got a five-year multi-entry business visa (No. Z314473) on July 18, 2007; Rana got a one-year business visa (No. AF232384), valid up to March 3, 2011.
Rana’s wife, Samraz Akhtar Rana, was granted a five-year tourist visa valid up to August 2012. The MEA has cancelled all three visas.
Earlier in the day, External Affairs Minister S M Krishna said New Delhi was awaiting more information on Headley. “The investigations are on and we are looking forward to getting some information with reference to this from US intelligence agencies. We will wait for that,” Krishna told reporters outside Parliament House.
Sources in the Home Ministry said the government was going to ask the US government to clarify on reports that Headley, who is in FBI custody, was an agent for the Drug Enforcement Administration and at the same time worked with a Pakistan-based terror organisation.
“We are going to wait for the response of the US government before deciding anything,” said a senior Home Ministry officer.
Growing Indo-US cooperation on counter-terrorism notwithstanding, Indian agencies have been wondering if the US has shared all it has on Headley and Rana. The US is, on the other hand, learnt to be peeved that classified information gets out in the public domain within days of it being passed to the Indian side.
It is understood that access to Headley for Indian agencies will be considered after some mandatory legal steps related to the indictment process are over. The impression in Delhi is that this could take another 4-6 weeks. There is, however, no official commitment on this from Washington.
What is also rankling the Indian side is the fact that it was not taken into confidence during the year-long probe, and was informed only after Headley and Rana were arrested. Regardless of these doubts and concerns, however, Home Ministry sources said, India would work closely with the US to complete the legal process.
Some of our posters were called CT for suggesting Headley was double agent. Looks like thats also the opinion in official circles in India. in fact and ex-official says he is 'quadruple' agent.
Some of our posters were called CT for suggesting Headley was double agent. Looks like thats also the opinion in official circles in India. in fact and ex-official says he is 'quadruple' agent.
I think a poster was called a CT for suggesting that 26/11 was a CIA / ISI joint operation.
The CG at Chicago claims that Rana submitted all documents and he was convinced it was a genuine case deserving multiple visit visa. Apparently, Rana applied and was granted visa in circa 2006. The CG should have extraordinary memory to remember these details 4 years later especially when the papers are now missing and there is no way for the CG to refer back to the file.
Besides, the CG's claim that Rana had become a Canadian citizen recently and hence his Pakiness would have disappeared is extremely naive and dangerous. Are these IFS officers for real ?
Another confusing thing for me is why is the present CG defending Rana's visa if he assumed the Chicago post only in 2007 and Rana was given visa in 2006 itself ? Am I missing something ?
ramana wrote:Some of our posters were called CT for suggesting Headley was double agent. Looks like thats also the opinion in official circles in India. in fact and ex-official says he is 'quadruple' agent.
I think a poster was called a CT for suggesting that 26/11 was a CIA / ISI joint operation.
SSridhar wrote:Another confusing thing for me is why is the present CG defending Rana's visa if he assumed the Chicago post only in 2007 and Rana was given visa in 2006 itself ? Am I missing something ?
Counter-intel guys should be breathing down his neck.
enqyoob wrote:The counterfeit cash thing, if true, is terribly scary.
There is one reason why his handlers would have given him PakiCash - to make sure he drew attention.
No, not at all - ask your friend the SRR Editor. A certain someone wrote an article published in Bharat Rakshak Monitor a decade ago that pointed out that Pakistan's fake currency was largely aimed at subsidising the cost of their intelligence and covert warfare operations, much like the way the SS operated in WWII and Iran and Hezbollah in the 1980s and 1990s. He also pointed out that this would remain a viable strategy as long as businesses were unable to distinguish between real and fake currency, given that the Pakistani currency printing operations have access to most of the same technology and skill sets as the RBI.
What's wrong with being a "CT" I wonder? There's room at the Top in any speciality, and CT is no exception. We just insist on quality in CT as in everything else.
An added thought (CT): Wonder if the Indian Consulate in Chicago takes cash payment for visas. I mean through the front desk.
As for Gilani/Headley and Rana: wonder if some kind source could check google cache etc. for the following for affiliations:the Investigating Agencies, esp. desi, with all due respect seem to be completely "404" given their generous business visa policies towards Pakis.
1. NRI-SAHI (NRIs for a Secular and Harmonious India)
2. Kashmir Conference (this one is near 100% certainty - please check)
3. Vaishnava Center for Enlightenment (what Hindu organizations did Rana claim to patronize?)
4. Sterling Associates, East Lansing, Michigan
5. Pakistan-American Association
6. CAIR
7. IMC-USA
8. FOSA (Fiends of South Asia)
9. FOIL
10. CSFH (Citizens to Stop Funding Hatred) (and fund terrorism instead)
11. CAG (Citizens Against Genocide) (Why kill quickly when torture is so much more fun?)
12. (Gee! Memory failure. Need to look up old articles to find all the gazillion mutations)
Please list all the associations with these turds that you can find. Their names are sure to show up, even photos are sure to show up.
Here is a start. From Google Books "The Jihad Factory: Pakistan" (can't copy-paste):
".. In 1990 we organized the Kashmir Conference attended by the Amir of Markaz-ul-Dawa, Hafeez Saeed.."
Check "Kashmir Conference" in recent times and you'll see that the sponsorship is the same (ISI) and the present advocates include several "Indian" names like Angana Chatterji, Shalini Gera, Akhila Raman, etc. etc.
Source is Amir Rana, who is presumably a fine anti-terror Pakistani. Wonder if the other one is his cousin.
So then check the unusual visas favours granted by ALL indian counsulates ALL OVER THE WORLD.
This visa liberalism is no doubt the result of the "bharat-paki-bhai-bhai" and "Bharat-Paki-both-victims-of-terror" nara.
While the whole world was tightening visas to pakistanis, India, the one country that is worst affected by pakistan sponsored terrorism grants them special favours in out of turn visas.
And these out of turn visas go not to the ordinary pakistanis who want to come to india for non-terrorist reasons (say medical treatment, marriages etc), no, they go to the Headleys, because he is oh so TFTA and Angrez looking, and I am sure he pleased the counsel staff the way N^3 suggested.
SSridhar wrote:The CG at Chicago claims that Rana submitted all documents and he was convinced it was a genuine case deserving multiple visit visa. Apparently, Rana applied and was granted visa in circa 2006. The CG should have extraordinary memory to remember these details 4 years later especially when the papers are now missing and there is no way for the CG to refer back to the file.
Besides, the CG's claim that Rana had become a Canadian citizen recently and hence his Pakiness would have disappeared is extremely naive and dangerous. Are these IFS officers for real ?
Another confusing thing for me is why is the present CG defending Rana's visa if he assumed the Chicago post only in 2007 and Rana was given visa in 2006 itself ? Am I missing something ?
Rana and his wife got their multi entry visa last year. links here
While Rana had been given a multi-entry business visa for a period of one year, his spouse Samraz Rana Akhtar was given a five-year multiple-entry visa by the Consulate last year, which enabled them to visit Mumbai and several other places in India days before the 26/11 terror strikes in the financial capital of the country.
Co-accused in the terror plot David Headley, born to a Pakistani father, was also issued a five-year multi-entry business visa in July 2007.
Rana, a Pakistani-born Canadian citizen and a woman who he claimed to be his wife, Samraz Rana Akhthar, were issued multiple entry visas by the Indian consulate in October 2008.
The visas were valid from October 31, 2008 through October 30, 2009.
Ambassador Ashok Kumar Attri came to Chicago as the Consul General of India in June 2007.
Wow checked out the people who run this "SINGH foundation" wonder why the academia types suddenly got this urge to raise funds for the one's displaced from SWAT , and what is noteworthy is the page for the pledge actually only talks about Godhara and alleged atrocities committed by VHP.
I highly doubt if the money raised on basis of false rhetoric is meant for the displaced .
The Kerala Police has learnt that certain Malayalee agents of the LeT operating in foreign countries had close connections with Tahawwur Hussein Rana, the main perpetrator behind the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack. They have received clinching evidence to prove that KK Sabir alias Ayub of Kannur was a close associate of Rana.
According to sources in the police, Sabir, 13th accused in the Kalamassery bus-burning case, had visited Rana in his hotel room in Iran prior to his arrest by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. An Indian passport in the name of Shamir had been confiscated from this hotel room, and it is assumed that this was one of the passports used by Sabir for his travels abroad.
Reports say that the association was so close that the duo had made several journeys together. It is also said that Sabir, who had kept close contact with T Nazeer, LeT’s South India commander, used to visit Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan. Sabir is said to be hiding in Dubai presently, and the Kerala Police has already started efforts to smoke him out of his den.
The terror operative from Kannur is said to be one of the four main Malayalee agents of the LeT working in the Gulf and West Asia. The others in the group are, according to police, Shafiq Tandon from Kannur, Omar Farooq, a native of Parappanangadi, Malappuram and KM Anup of Ernakulam. Farooq is also one of the accused in the Kalamassery bus-burning case.
Patni wrote: Rana and his wife got their multi entry visa last year. links here
While Rana had been given a multi-entry business visa for a period of one year, his spouse Samraz Rana Akhtar was given a five-year multiple-entry visa by the Consulate last year, which enabled them to visit Mumbai and several other places in India days before the 26/11 terror strikes in the financial capital of the country.
Co-accused in the terror plot David Headley, born to a Pakistani father, was also issued a five-year multi-entry business visa in July 2007.
Patni, thanks. The question then is who issued him visa in 2006 ? All reports have talked of Rana making multiple vists to India since 2006. For example,
The Indian consulate in Chicago issued visas to Rana and Headley to travel to India. Both made several trips between 2006 to 2008 to various cities in India.
When did MHA put limits on visas for TSP origin people? And when were consul generals given discretionary powers? And were the limits on those powers spelled out?
ramana, the reports talk of a circular being issued in 2004 regarding tightening of visas for Pakistanis. AFAIK, the CG's discretionary powers have always existed. IMO, the GoI must have withdrawn the discretionary powers from the CGs/Ambassadors for people of Pakistani orign.
Even if one grants the CG his discretion in giving visa, why should he exempt him from the regular reporting to police station ? Besides, the CG took the extraordinary step of issuing clarifications through a press release when the story broke out.That's unheard of. Did he even talk to Ms. Meera Shankar and get her approval ?
enqyoob wrote:What's wrong with being a "CT" I wonder? There's room at the Top in any speciality, and CT is no exception. We just insist on quality in CT as in everything else.
12. (Gee! Memory failure. Need to look up old articles to find all the gazillion mutations)
Please list all the associations with these turds that you can find. Their names are sure to show up, even photos are sure to show up.
ASHA ( run by Sandeep pandey) was circulating map of India without J&K . Investi-"gators" need to take a stab at it to finf out weather these 2 terorrists were the conduit to funnel money to this endeavour. I am waiting for news and its a matter fo time before Azamagarhi HR ( not Human Resource but Headley and Rana) link surface.
I have kept the map with me as proof for the last 3 years or so.
Last edited by Prem on 17 Dec 2009 09:34, edited 2 times in total.
Sabir is said to be hiding in Dubai presently, and the Kerala Police has already started efforts to smoke him out of his den.
Well, another mallu being arrested "while loitering around near a city bus stand" doesnt seem to be far off now (like how Sarfaraz was picked up from "City market bus stand")
This episode, with its double and triple agents, is one more demonstration that intentions of foreign governments cannot be taken at face value. Somebody who is deemed to be "friendly" may well throw you under a bus if it suits him at the moment.
This should certainly be taken into account while purchasing defense electronics, planes for Prime Ministerial travel, microcontroller chips for Electronic Voting Machines, and so on.
Unfortunately, for most Indian politicians, the kick-back is all that matters.
A Trojan horse kill switch may already have been used. A 2007 Israeli Air Force attack on a suspected partly constructed Syrian nuclear reactor led to speculation about why the Syrian air defense system did not respond to the Israeli aircraft. Accounts of the event initially indicated that sophisticated jamming technology was used to blind the radars. Last December, however, a report in an American technical publication, IEEE Spectrum, cited a European industry source in raising the possibility that the Israelis might have used a built-in kill switch to shut down the radars.
FRANCE was Britain's greatest ally during the Falklands war, providing secret information to enable MI6 agents to sabotage Exocet missiles which were desperately sought by Argentina, according to Sir John Nott, who was Defence Secretary during the conflict.
SSridhar, Dont understand his rationale. Its possible that visas are issued to unsavory folks as they could be under watch. This way one knows their existence. The ball might be dropped on the internal side in this case. Even google reveals a lot of suspicious activity on these two guys. So when the guy makes multiple visits he should be under scanner.
As Gagan says what about other consuls in other areas and countries? Am sure a lot of sleepers are suffering from insomnia.
Atri could become the fall guy for H&R fiasco. I think he is 5% of the problem but a crucial one for it enabled the visits.
Rahul Bhatt never told about Headley's ravings.
BTW is there a clear picture of Headley aka Gilani?
BTW, Hind Times quotes PTI to say the consulate found the papers for Headley.
A week after he was arrested in Chicago on Oct. 3, David Coleman Headley was charged in a federal criminal complaint with conspiring to commit terrorist attacks outside the United States and providing material support to terrorist organizations. The charges alleged that Headley was involved in a plot to attack a newspaper in Denmark that had published a collection of cartoons satirizing the Prophet Mohammed in September 2005.
Since Headley’s arrest, there have been almost daily disclosures of new information regarding his activities and those of his co-conspirators. These new details have emerged during court proceedings and from leaks by U.S., Indian and Pakistani government officials. On Dec. 7, new federal charges were filed against Headley alleging that he had conducted extensive surveillance against targets in Mumbai, India, that were attacked during the November 2008 armed assault in that city, which resulted in the deaths of some 170 people. Headley reportedly became an informant for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) after being arrested and charged with smuggling heroin into the United States from Pakistan in 1997. Following the 9/11 attacks, he allegedly worked for the FBI as a terrorism informant. Now, following his arrest on Oct. 3, he is reportedly again cooperating with the U.S. government. Read more »
A week after he was arrested in Chicago on Oct. 3, David Coleman Headley was charged in a federal criminal complaint with conspiring to commit terrorist attacks outside the United States and providing material support to terrorist organizations. The charges alleged that Headley was involved in a plot to attack a newspaper in Denmark that had published a collection of cartoons satirizing the Prophet Mohammed in September 2005.
Since Headley’s arrest, there have been almost daily disclosures of new information regarding his activities and those of his co-conspirators. These new details have emerged during court proceedings and from leaks by U.S., Indian and Pakistani government officials. On Dec. 7, new federal charges were filed against Headley alleging that he had conducted extensive surveillance against targets in Mumbai that were attacked during the November 2008 armed assault in that city, which resulted in the deaths of some 170 people. Headley reportedly became an informant for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) after being arrested and charged with smuggling heroin into the United States from Pakistan in 1997. Following the 9/11 attacks, he allegedly worked for the FBI as a terrorism informant. Now, following his arrest on Oct. 3, he is reportedly again cooperating with the U.S. government.
From the information that has emerged so far, it appears that Headley, who was born Daood Gilani in 1960 in Washington, D.C., to a Pakistani father and American mother, worked as a surveillance operative and operational planner for the Pakistan-based militant groups Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Harkat-ul-Jihad e-Islami (HUJI). In 2006, Headley legally changed his name from Daood Gilani to David Coleman Headley, anglicizing his first name and taking his mother’s maiden surname. He apparently did this to disguise his Pakistani heritage and Muslim faith while traveling to places such as India and Denmark.
Details of this case will continue to emerge as the court proceedings against Headley and his co-conspirators progress, but the information released to date reveals a great deal about Headley and about LeT and HUJI.
What We’ve Learned About Headley
First, it is evident that Headley was not merely a low-level cannon fodder-type operative. Most of the men who attend jihadist training camps are taught basic infantry and guerrilla-warfare skills such as hand-to-hand combat and how to fire an AK-47 and throw a hand grenade. A handful of the best and brightest of these students are then selected to attend additional training in advanced combat skills that often include terrorist tradecraft, which is the set of skills required to conduct a terrorist attack. Terrorist tradecraft includes things like surveillance, bombmaking and covert communications and is quite distinct from basic infantry skills.
In his Dec. 7 indictment, we learned that Headley reportedly attended LeT training camps in Pakistan in February and August of 2002 and in April, August and December of 2003. This indicates that Headley progressed far beyond basic militant training, and it is likely that he was taught during his later training sessions the tradecraft required to conduct preoperational surveillance for terrorist attacks and to participate in the operational planning for such attacks.
One element of terrorist tradecraft that was evident in the indictment and the Oct. 11 criminal complaint is Headley’s careful use of language and of multiple methods of communications, including the use of cell phones and using long-distance calling cards, e-mail communication (using a variety of accounts) and face-to-face briefings. For the most sensitive communications and planning activities, Headley traveled to Pakistan to meet in person with LeT and HUJI leaders, a very secure way to communicate. He also had numerous phone and e-mail conversations in which he discussed the status of his work or planned reconnaissance trips. During such conversations, Headley would use terms to disguise the true objective of his work. For example, when referring to attack plans, Headley and his alleged co-conspirators reportedly called them “investment plans” or “business plans,” and when discussing the plot against Jyllands-Posten, the newspaper that published the Mohammed cartoons, Headley and his co-conspirators referred to it as the “Mickey Mouse Project,” the “MMP” or “the Northern Project.”
Headley also used a common militant communication method of creating messages and then saving them in the drafts folder of a Web-mail service rather than sending the message. The person creating such a message can then provide a colleague with the user name and password for the Web-mail account, which enables the second person to log on and read the communication in the draft folder without an e-mail having been sent. This procedure is referred to as an “electronic dead drop.”
In addition to facilitating communication, these dead drops can be used to save notes that a terrorist operative does not want to physically carry on his person for fear of being caught with them. In September, we noted that Najibullah Zazi used this method to send his bombmaking notes from a training camp in Pakistan to himself rather than risk physically carrying the notes into the United States, where they could have been found during a search of his belongings.
According to the Oct. 11 criminal complaint, before leaving Pakistan for the United States in December 2008, Headley used this process to save a list of taskings he had received for his surveillance work in Denmark. The list, which was entitled “Mickey Mouse,” included the following entries (presented here as contained in the complaint, verbatim and unedited):
* Route Design (train bus air)
* Cross (cover authenticator)
* Trade? Immigration?
* Ad (Lost Luggage) (Business) (Entry)?
* King’s Square (French Embassy)
* YMCA
* Car Trip + Train Option (Nufoozur Rehman) (Weekend?)
* Residence for clients
* Complete Area Coverage (P.S. e.t.c.)
* Countersurveillance (magic eye)
* NDC option; Lunch + coffee spots
* Security (armed?)
* Foreman residence
* Zoom; Entry and exit method in the house
* Feasible plan
* On return, procurement of machinery
* Uniform
* Mixed fruit Dish
* Cell phone and camera
* Border Crossing
* City Guide Map
* Alternate Investment
* Got Papers? (Clients)
* Make Visiting Cards
We’ve included all the items listed in the complaint to demonstrate the depth of the surveillance work he was tasked with by his contacts in Pakistan. These responsibilities included determining the best way to get the attack team (“clients”) into the country, finding them a place to stay, procuring weapons (“machinery”) and conducting thorough surveillance of the newspaper and its surroundings. This would have included security in the area, countersurveillance activity and closed-circuit television cameras in place. Headley may also have been tasked with locating the residence of the newspaper’s editor.
According to the Oct. 11 federal complaint, Headley traveled from Chicago to Copenhagen in January 2009 to conduct surveillance of the Jyllands-Posten offices in Copenhagen and Aarhus, Denmark, and to photograph and videotape the surrounding areas. He then traveled to Pakistan, where he met with his co-conspirators to brief them on his surveillance operations and to construct a plan for the attack. Following his return to Chicago, Headley traveled back to Copenhagen in August 2009 to conduct additional surveillance (presumably to address issues that arose during the operational planning session in Pakistan). During this second trip, Headley made some 13 additional videos and took many photos of the potential targets and the areas around them.
In the Dec. 7 indictment, the U.S. government alleges that in order to conduct surveillance for the Mumbai attacks, Headley made five extended trips to Mumbai: one in September 2006, two in February and September of 2007 and two in April and July of 2008. During each of these trips Headley reportedly took pictures and made videos of various targets, including those attacked in November 2008. He also reportedly traveled to Pakistan after each of these trips to brief his co-conspirators there and to provide them with his maps, sketches, photos and videos. In March 2008, Headley and his co-conspirators reportedly discussed potential landing sites for a team of attackers who would arrive by sea in Mumbai, and he was instructed to take boat trips in and around the Mumbai harbor and make videotapes of the area, which he allegedly did during his visit to India in April 2008.
During much of his surveillance activity, Headley identified himself as an employee of the immigration services company First World, but there is no evidence that Headley ever worked for that company. There is also no information in the documents released so far that would explain how Headley paid for his extensive international travel, much less earned money to cover his day-to-day expenses.
Finally, there is the issue of Headley’s alleged work as a DEA and FBI informant (which could help explain at least some of the financial mysteries discussed above). Given the demonstrated — and considerable — nexus between heroin trafficking and terrorism funding for the jihadist groups operating in Pakistan and Afghanistan, such a crossover of an informant from narcotics to terrorism is no surprise — especially following the incredible push by the U.S. government to recruit human intelligence sources with links to the jihadist world following the 9/11 attacks.
If Headley were reporting to the FBI, it could also explain the very specific warnings that the U.S. government gave to the government of India about plans to attack hotels in Mumbai in September 2008. Following the warning, the government of India initially increased security measures at these sites, but the measures were dropped before the attacks were launched in November 2008.
At present, it is very difficult to ascertain if Headley was a double agent who was really reporting to LeT and HUJI the entire time he was ostensibly working for the U.S. government or if he was merely a rogue informant who was playing both ends against the middle for his own personal benefit. Such rogue sources have been seen in jihadist cases before. If Headley was either a double agent or a rogue source, there may be some significant blowback for the U.S. government as further revelations are made about the case.
What We’ve Learned About LeT and HUJI
First of all, this case demonstrates that LeT and HUJI have each developed a sophisticated central-planning apparatus. This is something they needed to do as they drifted out from under the wings of the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) directorate, though undoubtedly they learned a lot about planning from their long association with the ISI. Second, the Headley case shows that as of October 2009 (almost a year after the Mumbai attacks), LeT and HUJI still enjoyed a great deal of operational freedom in Pakistan. They were able to travel, raise funds, communicate, train and plan operations with seemingly little interference. This is a stark contrast to al Qaeda, which is hunted, on the run and experiencing a great deal of difficulty moving operatives, communicating, raising funds and conducting operations. The links between Headley and his associates to current and former Pakistani military officers and government officials are likely what is affording LeT and HUJI their operational freedom.
As far as targeting, we have seen LeT and HUJI shift away from strictly Indian targets and toward more of a transnational al Qaeda-like target set. Not only did they attack Western interests and a Jewish target in Mumbai, but they were also planning to conduct an attack against a newspaper in Denmark that had absolutely no relation to the cause of Kashmiri independence from India. That said, despite having a highly trained surveillance operative and operational planner living inside the United States, these groups did not appear to task him to use his terrorist tradecraft to conduct target surveillance or plan and conduct attacks inside the United States.
According to court documents, HUJI leader Ilyas Kashmiri appears to have been the force driving the Denmark attack plans, and Headley seems to have been frustrated when his LeT contacts did not want to proceed with the Denmark attack after Kashmiri was reportedly killed in an American unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) strike in Pakistan. LeT wanted Headley to help them plan another attack in India instead. The report of Kashmiri’s death was ultimately proved false, but the UAV attack apparently caused Kashmiri to go to ground and for Headley and his LeT contacts to lose communication with Kashmiri for a period of time. It is known that Kashmiri is closely affiliated with al Qaeda, and the plans for the Denmark attack are an indication that HUJI has become more closely aligned with the transnational jihadist targeting philosophy as a result of Kashmiri’s contacts with bin Laden and company. It appears that LeT, on the other hand, has retained more of a focus on India. So, while the two organizations continue to cooperate, they do have some differences in targeting philosophy, and it would seem that HUJI is creeping further into the al Qaeda orbit than LeT.
The information released to date in this case also underscores the importance of interpersonal relationships in the jihadist milieu and how these relationships, which are based on family, friendship and trust, often lead to an overlap in which people interact with different groups, and groups such as LeT and HUJI share resources and work together. The jihadist world can be a very murky place and operatives can work with different “companies,” to use Headley’s term.
Protective Intelligence Implications
This case also has some significant protective intelligence implications, and it underscores much of what we have been saying about surveillance and countersurveillance for several years now.
While Headley is a U.S. citizen and changed his name in order to camouflage his heritage and religious affiliation, he conducted an inordinate amount of surveillance activity by himself. Conducting a surveillance operation with only one person is among the most difficult — and risky — activities that any surveillance operative can be tasked to perform. Any time a person conducts surveillance he or she is vulnerable to detection. That vulnerability is mitigated somewhat if the surveillance is conducted by a team of individuals and the team members can take turns exposing themselves to potential countersurveillance. Doing a solo surveillance operation means that the surveillance operative is forced to show his face time and again to anyone watching.
Furthermore, activities such as taking photographs and making video recordings are far riskier than simply observing a target. Having one single surveillance operative visit two offices of the same newspaper and then take dozens of photos and make 13 video recordings of the offices — in a one-week span, no less — is terrible surveillance tradecraft. Had someone been conducting countersurveillance on one of the targets Headley was studying — or, better yet, countersurveillance of more than one of these potential targets — the countersurveillance assets almost certainly would have noticed his abnormal behavior. American tourists may frequently take photos and shoot videos while visiting foreign capitals, but they do not take the time to capture extensive still and video images of newspaper offices.
Even people who have conducted thousands upon thousands of hours of surveillance would have a hard time creating cover for action and status that would justify that much surveillance activity — especially when the surveillant is a foreigner and working alone. The only rational explanation for why Headley was not noticed while conducting his surveillance is that nobody was looking.
The use of an American citizen to conduct surveillance once again illustrates the importance of focusing on the “how” of terrorist attacks and not just the “who.” And when considering the actor, the focus must be placed on his or her behavior, not just nationality or religious creed.
ramana wrote: . . .As Gagan says what about other consuls in other areas and countries? . . .
As I posted before, sometimes Indian diplomats recommend the Pakistani spouse of an Indian to be exempted from normal visa processes and police procedures, if the Indian is well known to them. Knowing that all Pakistanis work diligently for the downfall of India, they are all potential sources of worry. The situation had become too dangerous even by c. 2002 that I am surprised that it took GoI another year or so to issue a circular asking Indian diplomatic missions to refer 'Pakistani' cases to the Home Ministry.
Washington: The Indian government has cancelled visas of Pakistani-origin terror suspects David Coleman Headley and Tahawwur Rana, according to sources.
Arrested by the FBI in October, Headley has been charged with criminal conspiring in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks which claimed 166 lives. Rana, who has also been denied bail, faces charges that he provided support to Headley in plotting attacks against a Danish newspaper.
Headley in particular made several trips to India to secretly capture videos and photographs on behalf of the Lashkar-e-Taiba of the prospective targets of their attacks in India.
Authoritative sources told PTI that the Indian visa of Rana and Headley along with two others were cancelled a day after the FBI filed the case against them in a Chicago Court.
. . . First of all, this case demonstrates that LeT and HUJI have each developed a sophisticated central-planning apparatus. This is something they needed to do as they drifted out from under the wings of the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) directorate, though undoubtedly they learned a lot about planning from their long association with the ISI. . . .
That is patently incorrect. There are several pointers to the contrary. For example, serving officers and retired officers (normally these are seconded to the ISI for reasons of 'plausible deniability') have been arrested in Pakistan in connection with the Headley case. There were 5 officers who were reported arrested. We also know, from Pakistani newspapers themselves, that the PA's Lahore Corps Commander hosted an Iftaar party for Hafeez Saeed even while he was being embroiled in the arrest drama. Kasab has given clear indications of the Army and the Navy being involved in planning of 26/11. That tallies with Headley's admission now of the PA working with LeT and JeM jihadists in the 'Karachi Project'.
The FBI interrogation of David Coleman Headley alias Daood Gilani has, for the first time, confirmed what India has always known: A "section of serving Pakistan army officers" are working in collaboration with India-specific jehadi groups like LeT and JeM.
Sources said this was revealed by Headley to his FBI interrogators in what is the first confirmation by an independent probe agency of the involvement of Pakistani army officers in planning and executing terrorist operations against India.
This, sources said, had been conveyed to the Indian side by the FBI team which visited India to share information on Headley’s questioning. While Pakistan has explained away the instances of the involvement of army officials calling them “aberrations”, this has exposed the jehadi infiltration of the Pakistani army and their collaboration with terrorist outfits in anti-India operations.
Sources said the officials identified by Headley were working with Lashkar on ‘Karachi project’ as part of a larger campaign against India. This project involves using jehadi fugitives from India sheltered in Pakistan to draw in vulnerable Indian Muslim youth.
The FBI interrogation of David Coleman Headley has revealed a Lashkar training project involving jehadi fugitives from India. The youth, after they are trained by Pakistani army officials, are sent back to India as part of the gameplan to conceal the Pakistani involvement and pass off the terror in India as a home-grown phenomenon.
During their discussions with FBI, the Indian side told them about their strong suspicion that Headley was present in the Karachi control room from which the Lashkar leadership choreographed the 26/11 terror attacks. The FBI team said this was not borne out by the evidence in their possession but the Indian side has asked the US agency to check a few facts which they have promised to do.
The details of the Karachi project, revealed by FBI, corroborates India’s own findings. Agencies here have established that a number of absconding terrorists — Aamir Raza Khan, Mufti Sufi Patangiya and Rasool Parti and the remnants of Shahid Bilal gang from Hyderabad — have been luring Muslim youth to be trained as jehadis before being sent to India.
The launch of Indian Mujahideen, which tormented India with a wave of bombings, was part of the plan to erase Pakistan’s fingerprints and pass off the attacks as resulting from the disaffection of a section of its own population.
Even 26/11 attackers, armed with fake IDs of a Bangalore engineering college, had planned to mask their nationality. One of them had called up a TV channel introducing the gang as Deccan Mujahideen.
Rahul Bhatt, son of ace film director Mahesh Bhatt, was questioned by FBI and also CIA to probe his association with David Headley during the Pakistani-American terror suspect's stay in Mumbai.
The junior Bhatt was called by the officials of National Investigation Agency (NIA) twice for detailed questioning on
Headley and what was the basis on which he found him to be an undercover sleuth of US spy agency CIA, official sources said today.
FBI questions Rahul Bhatt in Mumbai
Sources tell TIMES NOW that Rahul Bhatt was also questioned by the FBI. The interrogation happened when an FBI team visited India recently. Mahesh Bhatt's son was quizzed specifically about his links with the 26/11 accused David Coleman Headley.
During questioning by NIA officials, Bhatt said Headley had been often talking about commando training and
skills, clearing obstacles. Headley had also boasted about his swift responses to any situation, the sources said.
Bhatt was also asked about the places he visited along with Headley and the nature of his conversation he had with the terror suspect, the sources said. A formal statement of Rahul Bhatt was however yet to be recorded and would be done so once other things fell in place, the sources added.
Rahul's father Mahesh Bhatt said that he had been called by the NIA officials to understand the basis of his claim that Headley was a CIA agent.
Bhatt has been maintaining that his son had done a duty what every citizen is expected to do but voiced his displeasure over some reports which had projected his son in a bad light.
NIA, which was set up in the aftermath of 26/11 Mumbai attacks, has registered a case against Headley and his accomplice Tahawwur Rana.
Pakistan's link to the 26/11 attacks have now clearly been established. Links have now been traced to Zarar Shah, who is one among the alleged planners of the attacks. The US has indicted Headley for his role in the attacks. The US has also charged Abdul Rehman, a former Major in the Pakistani army. Rehman has been charged on two counts of conspiring in a terror attack with David Headley. Rehman is believed to be none other than Zarar Shah, the man beleived to be a co-conspirator behind the terror attack.
