The Curious Case of Daood Gilani alias David Headley & co

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 20 Dec 2009 16:09

Indian-US ties soured by suspicion Chicago terror operative was US double agent

DEBKAfile Special Report

December 18, 2009, 10:02 PM (GMT+02:00)
David Headley of Chicago accused of terror

Courts documents in the criminal case against the David Headley, who was arrested in Chicago in October for suspected involvement in the Mumbai terrorist siege, suggest the Chicagoan US citizen may have been a double agent for the al Qaeda-linked Pakistani Lashkar e-Taibe and US intelligence. This suspicion, also the subject of leaked media reports from US, Indian and Pakistani intelligence sources, is severely straining relations between New Delhi and Washington.

DEBKAfile's counter-terror sources report that New Delhi suspects the CIA knew in advance about the Mumbai attack, in which 177 people died and 500 were injured, and were aware of Headley's links with its LeT perpetrators, al Qaeda's operational arm in Pakistan, but omitted to forewarn Indian authorities for fear of touching off a military showdown between India and Pakistan.

Israel was not tipped off either although the Chabad Center of Mumbai, where six people were killed, was a special target

Rancor against Washington was registered in New Delhi where an official at the Indian Ministry of the Interior confirmed Wednesday, Dec. 16, said that his government "is looking into whether Headley worked as a double agent." A former counter-terrorism officer in the Indian foreign intelligence service said: "The feeling in India is that the US has not been transparent."

The atmosphere between the two countries is not helped by the FBI's refusal to let Indian anti-terror officers question Headley, who is believed to have led a Chicago-based cell which set up Islamist terrorist operations world-wide.

DEBKAfile's sources add: The court records show that the Chicago-based Headley was pressed into service by the US Drug Enforcement Agency in 1977 after he was caught smuggling heroin from Pakistan to America. They also show that he became an FBI informant after al Qaeda's 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington. After that outrage, the FBI and CIA were directed to coordinate their counter-terror work. The Indians assume that the CIA must have been aware of the Chicagoan's existence, and certainly picked up on his frequent trips to India with side trips to Pakistan to meet his Lashkar e-Taibe associates.

Whether he worked directly for the CIA will probably never be proven.

Indian security authorities are also asking who paid for Headley's frequent trips to Europe and India on missions to locate targets for terrorist attack, gather intelligence and chart Lashkar e-Taibe routes to target. He would then carry the information and guidelines to the Pakistani LeT operations headquarters.

The Chicagoan was clearly a staff member of the group and participated in its planning conferences. Some Western intelligence sources believe he may have been pulling the strings from Pakistan during the three-day terrorist siege of Mumbai in November 2008.

Indian counter-terror sources believe that data which Headley may have leaked from his Pakistan conferences to his American controllers may have prompted a US warning to New Delhi in July 2008 that a large-scale terrorist operation was in store for Mumbai. When two months went by and nothing happened, the Indians relaxed and lowered their security alert level.

Headley stands accused of making five reconnaissance trips to India to set up the Mumbai attack in September 2006, February and September 2007, and April and July 2008.

On one or more of those trips he traveled disguised as a religious Jew, scouting the Chabad Center and other Jewish locations. Israel was never informed that Lashkar e-Taibe had set its sights on Jewish and Israel centers in India.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 20 Dec 2009 17:52

Headley surveilled BARC & RK Studios

Piecing together the investigations on terror suspect David Headley, investigators have found that he had conducted a proper reconnaissance of not only Bhaba Atomic Research Centre but also of some Bollywood studios in north-eastern suburb of the city.

The 49-year-old Headley, who has been under arrest in the U.S. since October 3, had travelled to Chembur and Trombay many times and filmed the exits and entries of the BARC besides the entry of employees, official sources said here on Sunday.

The terror suspect, who has been charged by the FBI with being part of the conspiracy in 26/11 Mumbai attacks, had also taken video shots of the nuclear installation by hiring a boat from Gateway of India. The rear side of the BARC, located on a hill top, can be seen from the Arabian Sea.

The investigators also comprising officials of National Investigation Agency (NIA), probing the role of Headley and his accomplice Tahawwur Rana in India, suspect that Headley, during his boat ride, may have surveyed the mangroves located near the coastline.

The security around the nuclear installation has been tightened and efforts were on to ensure proper cover in the mangroves located below the BARC, the sources said.

Security of NTPC’s cold storage plant in the area was also being reviewed as the security agencies were apprehensive that while filming BARC, Headley may have explored it as well. The terror suspect was trained by Lashkar in clandestine filming of vital installations.

LeT has always spoken against the film culture and their first target in Jammu and Kashmir were the cinemas.

The investigators were also trying to ascertain whether he had met any other Bollywood personality other than Rahul Bhat, son of noted filmmaker Mahesh Bhat.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 20 Dec 2009 22:29

Was he liaison with L-e-T?

Note while the targets he surveilled are of interest to TSP they are to others also: BARC etc.

RK studios might be to get Kasab a job!

Nandu · Post by **Nandu** » 20 Dec 2009 22:41

N^3, re: your theory of 9/11 presented in the last page, how do you reconcile the fact that cockpit voice recorders showed the hijackers tacking to each other in Arabic, and not Urdu or Punjabi?

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 20 Dec 2009 22:59

If they went to all the trouble of sending these military pilots to "flight school" etc. to cover their true ID/skills, they could also figure out not to talk in Urdu, hey?

My guess is that they killed off some Saudi guys and took over their identities.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 Dec 2009 02:46

enqyoob wrote
IOW, it is their Pakiness. College students in American universities, brought up on CNN and Disney, and with halal Coca Cola running in their veins, suddenly "come of age" as Pakis, and go off on a pilgrimage to Pakistan to attend terror camps. How can one explain this other than by Pakiness?

Is this Pakiness an inherited trait? Genetically handed from parent to children? As otherwise, early childhood conditioning, or adult seduction in the land of "Satan" (as they call it sometimes in forums) appear to have no effect on flourishing of eventual "Pakiness". (Headley falls into the second group). Moreover, does Pakiness accrue from mere citizenship of TSP? So Balochis, Sindhis etc, not of that "one religion", or Sikhs and Hindus still remaining in TSP are also inheritors of the "Pakiness" gene? After all, identification appears to be by nationality.

But if it is not influenced by contradictory environment, then it creates a problem for the "dissolution/implosion" theory for TSP. For it will mean that even if TSP dissolves, Pakiness will carry on. I thought you supported "doing away with TSP".

I once asked this question to a Jewish lady sitting next to me on a long and very informative flight across the Evil Land of Great Satan, and the lights absolutely went on in her mind and she asked what I thought should be done to General Musharraf.

She was obviously far smarter than many of our postors here, who after years of reading BRF, cannot figure this out on their own.

This is an interesting theory, and no wonder that a "Jewish" lady picked up on this type of genius mentality immediately if we go by "national sterotypes" like the concept of "Pakiness". So all the state sponsored terrorism, can be solved, simply by eliminating a few key individuals? Israel has been carrying that policy out for a long time. Does not appear to have solved the problem. Any particular reason, why it will be spectacularly successful in case of India?

Well.. I can't make you guys think, but I sure can make sure the forum doesn't keep getting polluted by thoughtless rants by people with a single-point agenda- spread hate against one religion.

So you will have no problems if people have single-point agenda-spread hate against any ideology/belief which is not that "one religion"?

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 21 Dec 2009 02:54

enqyoob wrote:If they went to all the trouble of sending these military pilots to "flight school" etc. to cover their true ID/skills, they could also figure out not to talk in Urdu, hey?

My guess is that they killed off some Saudi guys and took over their identities.

Here's the problem with that thesis. Saudi Arabia has got a *tremendous* bad rap in the US following the public revelation that 16 of its citizens perpetrated 9/11. A complete P.R. disaster for a supposed "ally", and one which sits on so much of the world's oil. Indeed, the whole contention that "we must reduce our dependence on foreign oil so as to avoid funding terrorists who hate us" has become a political touchstone of enormous proportions. The Bush family's association with the Saudis was milked by Democrats in their presidential campaigns; the Republicans' case for drilling in ANWR leaps off from the same argument. To some extent, the "Saudi hijackers-Saudi oil" story fueled even the drive towards alternative energy, "green" technology etc. that we're seeing today. Tremendous political/economic impact, and catastrophic institutional upsets all the way round.

Don't you think that, if there were the slightest chance that hijackers were *not* Saudi, huge well-funded efforts by very influential circles would have been employed overtime to dispel that idea? Not just the formidable Saudi lobby, but the American oil lobbies, automobile lobbies, industrial lobbies, what have you? I mean, do you think the mighty Saudis (on whose largesse the Pakis in large part survive) would be willing to let *themselves* become the scapegoats for those despicable SDRE foot-soldiers of jihad? Because from the Saudi POV it is the Pakis who are SDRE

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 21 Dec 2009 02:56

OT I think,

But N^3, why would Saud take so much of blame (15 of 19). Three other countries lebenon, UAE and Egypt have the ignominy of being the other host (origin) countries. Why would they all keep silent?

There have been reports of US flight instructor saying something to the effect of "The guy wasn't much interested in learning to land the plane". Ofcourse that is only one person, but there were atleast a couple, can't recollect on top of my head!!

Yes, the Mohajir's statement supports "active involvement theory". But, is it through training/planning or actual foot soldiers? Former line of thought can be sold and fits the complete post (??), but the latter is a little thin IMHO!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Dec 2009 05:54

Karan Dixit and SSridhar, when was Rahul Bhatt's first contact with Headley and subsequent ones?

And KD can I mail you my list?

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 21 Dec 2009 06:07

Yes, OT.. but I will risk one more post on those things, since ppl even on BRF have forgotten the relevant points. The only question is "why did KSA remain quiet and take the enormous PR damage?"

1. (Maybe) No question that Atta was Atta, and a couple of others were Saudi. Here again, right after the event, Atta's daddy (OK, uncertain here) claimed that his son was in Bilayat, nothing to do with this. Likewise for a couple of others (one Yemeni I think). Never heard that again. But Atta was caught on airport TV, and had enough interactions with a lot of people, so that his identity seems fairly certain. Or else, the ID called "Atta" had already been replaced at the Hamburg Terroristen HochSchule or wherever they were all supposed to have done the pre-US planning. In fact this is quite likely.

2. For the rest, you have to agree that some extremely interesting gymnastics occurred in the WHOTUS/SDOTUS on 9/12/2001 to deflect the military commanders' eagerness to launch the retaliation (same guys who launched the SLCMs against "OBL" bases in POK and Waziristan in 1999 were still around, they knew who the enemy was, and they were ready with coordinates), and come to the Amirtaraj GUBO Agreement with Gola. The public perception based on the external IDs of the guys taking "flight lessons" etc. was clearly that several were KSA, and no question that OBL was KSA.

3. The part that requires some thought, and results in a 100% certainty, is the part where "flight students" where Al Qaeda planners depended on their pilots learning enough about flying (several different) airliners without a great deal of prior skill and experience. Try it on a reasonably sophisticated FlightSim with pedals and stick and multi-engine controls, even without the myriad switches and dials to confuse you, and with only The Boss at home screaming to get off that and go take out the garbage. Try convincing someone else that, given the controls at some point and attitude in the airspace over New York or New Jersey, you are 99.5% likely to be able to swing the plane around, maintain level flight, and pin-point the second floor from the top of a given skyscraper, at the end of a banked, coordinated turn. Or try that 100-foot skim over the parking lot in DupleeCity at 400 knots to hit a 5-floor bldg. These are so laughable that only the GOTUS would come out with such explanations. Only expert military pilots can fly large airplanes as if they were fighter planes, and do it with total precision under imminent death.

3. Also note the substantial missing (censored) parts of the 9/11 Commission Report dealing with TSP involvement.

4. So why did KSA quietly take the rap? What was the alternative? KSA is a "US Al-Lie" and is the only country in the MidEast that is reasonably safe from "arms delivery" visits by B-2s. Besides, the GOVERNMENT in KSA had full deniability. Of course they would have known who did it, and looked at the sweet alternatives, and all decided on the story. On 9/12, the GOTUS decided that they were not going to make the world blow up - which of course was the intent of the planners of 9/11.

5. What would have been the result of a KSA campaign to "clear the KSA"? A total expose of who actually runs global terror. This would have resulted in the total elimination of the real terror enterprise. Has that happened in the years since? Has "Al Qaeda" been rooted out?

6. Anyway, 8 years of watching the GOTUS covering up for Pakistani terrorism in the face of all reality, including the subject of this thread, should be enough to prove for us that the GOTUS on 9/1/2001 was not ready to accept that TSP is the problem with only one real solution, hey?

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 21 Dec 2009 06:34

911 then seems to be joint operation by the pious rulers of Saudia and Pakudia i.e Pakistan . The suprise is not that Islamist terrorists did the Karnama but how come US let them get away with it. Anyhow, Headley or Headley's Masters , they are fighting a religious war against their kaffir enemies. IF pawn like Headley had the habit of spitting upon seeing Indu Kaffir then we can just imagine the poisonous nature of the fathers of his ideological doctrine. We cant let our guards down or worry about coutseyes while dealing with these kinds of animals.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 21 Dec 2009 07:40

No no.
9/11 was a OBL / ISI job.
The reason arabs were used, was that this was OBL's flagship operation. He would not have trusted those gulaam race Pakjabis with this. Those days the pakjabi military were still lovey dovey with massa and OBL would have been suspicious.

So he gets his own arab boys, people who can be traced by his arab network, who are vouched for etc.

A few things should be understood.
1. The flight paths the aircraft took were said to be very sophisticated. In the sense that these were first time pilots, for them to fly the planes for a few hundred kms and then maneuver it to just the right spot means that a very experienced navigator coached the flight path to them. The flight path had to be a 3D info set. At what altitude to fly, when to dip below a certain altitude, where did the aircorridors to JFK and LaGuardia lie and how to avoid a midair collision with aircraft there. Possible a PIA pilot / Navigator with intimate knowledge of the skies over New York and Washington gave his inputs.
This is where the Pak Fizzaiya / PIA come in.
2. The pakistanis helped with actually deputing two (at least one) pak fizzaiya pilot to be Atta's room mate to coach him, who knows possibly to be a part of 911 or some future action against India. Maybe this was the navigator we are speculating about.
3. The money trail leads all the way to the ISI chief Lt Gen Mahmood Ahmed via Omar sayeed sheikh.

Now why did the US respond the way it did.
I am sure that those intelligent enough to understand what all needed to fall into place for something this complex to happen, knew that this was not planned in a cave. But I am sure in the immediate days, there was no defenite intel of pakistan's direct involvement. The ISI chief Lt Gen Mahmood Ahmed was in washington on that day, something that only later as more intel came in, did they realize the depth of the pakistani involvement. Then mahmood ahmed was forced to retire for one. Weather he ended up in guano bay is not known.

The KSA clammed up because the arabs still live with this tribal mentality. Arabs did this so they expected the west to take all arabs out, since most of them were Saudi nationals, they fully expected to be vapourized the next morning. It is the system they've lived their lives by, if a similar attack had happened in KSA and the kabila or tribe involved had been identified, the saudis would have wiped out that tribe from the face of the earth. These guys must have thought that all their oil wealth was lost and no more going to the west for aiyaashi any more.

To what extent the Saudis intel was involved, we will never know. But it doesn't seem they were significantly involved. No one even whispers their name in connection with 9/11, whereas all this info on pakistan and the ISI's involvement is open source info.

JMT

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 21 Dec 2009 08:24

ramana wrote:. . when was Rahul Bhatt's first contact with Headley and subsequent ones?

Between 2006 & 2009, Headley ran the Immigration Law Centre out of Tardeo AC Market. He stayed as a paying guest at Breach Candy area for a couple of months in 2007-2008. Headley was a member of Moksh gym between October 2006 and October 2007. Though Rahul Bhatt was not working in Moksh at that time, this was the likely period the two of them met. Headley was in Mumbai in February & September 2007 and then in April & July 2008. What we don't know how long he stayed in Mumbai in each of his visits. We also know that Headley was asking Rahul Bhatt about when his debut movie 'Suicide Bomber' would be released. Since the movie was announced in 2006, I would put the first contact between Headley & Rahul to have taken place in February or March 2007.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 21 Dec 2009 08:38

enqyoob wrote:The desi Consul-Jarnail's actions suggest that there was maybe a phone call from the GOTUS DEA or someone to let Gilani travel in India.

If that had been the case, the Indian intel agencies would have followed him carefully, provided the CG conveyed the information through proper channel to the Home Ministry. That would have been the standard operating procedure.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 21 Dec 2009 08:43

I do not see the relevance between Headley's case and 9/11 discussions going on here. The latter may please be moved to 'Pakistani global terror' thread.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 21 Dec 2009 08:48

Look at how this american casually says that its "understandable" that India would like to have Headley but they wont succeed and he completely brushes off all Indian reports as "rumours".

An American interpretation about Indian press "rumors" on Headley

I previously analyzed the rumors, centered around the Indian press, that David Headley had penetrated Lashkar-e-Taiba as a CIA asset. These rumors generally hold that Headley then "went rogue" and become committed to LeT's mission before his involvement in the Mumbai attacks. Although I argued that these rumors should not be regarded as credible, the Indian media is now accepting Headley's continued work for the US government as proven fact. (He is known to have worked for the DEA in Pakistan in 1999, but there is no concrete proof that he worked for any other US government agency thereafter.)

Further, claims about Headley grow more outlandish by the day. By far the most bizarre is that Headley was part of an FBI team that quizzed Sabahuddin Ahmed in the wake of the Mumbai attacks. The Indian Express claims:

Sabahuddin Ahmed, one of the three arrested accused in the 26/11 terror attack case, has claimed that alleged Lashkar operative David Headley had interrogated him while he was in the custody of the Mumbai Police. According to Ahmed, Headley was part of an FBI team that had interrogated him while he was in police custody. He is also likely to move a plea before the Esplanade court seeking appropriate action against Headley.
It goes without saying that I do not find this latest claim credible. The fact that Ahmed waited until Dec. 15 (i.e. after the conspiratorial rumors were already flying) to air this claim even though Headley and Tahawwur Rana were both arrested in October is indicative of the falseness of his claims.

But what is going on overall? Is the Headley reporting a simple case of bad reporting by the Indian press?

In fact, an Indian journalist has confirmed to me that the country's home secretary told reporters on deep background that he thinks Headley was a CIA double agent. There are also other indications that the Indian government is actively propagating dubious claims about Headley's work for the US government. I suspect that this is part of a ham-handed attempt on the Indian government's part to pressure the US to turn Headley over to them. Moving forward, it is best to regard Indian press reporting on Headley with caution given the Indian government's endorsement of some questionable rumors (although the Indian press has had some legitimate scoops, such as Headley's presence in the LeT "control room").

The reasons that India would like to have Headley in its custody are entirely understandable; but equally understandable is the fact that such tactics are exceedingly unlikely to succeed.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 21 Dec 2009 09:03

Major Abdur Rehman Hashem Syed released by Pakistan
Excerpts

In a stunning revelation, according to sources in Islamabad, retired Pakistani Army Major Abdur Rehman Hashim Syed, a key link between David Coleman Headily and his backers inside Pakistan was arrested during this summer by Pakistani agencies but was later released for his 'devotion' to Pakistan.

"Pakistani authorities arrested him in summer this year but during investigation Syed revealed that the focus of his activities was India not Pakistan. Subsequently he was immediately released in an honorable way", well-placed sources told rediff.com.

According to the sources, "In summer, Pakistani security agencies had arrested Anjum Iqbal, another suspected terrorist and recovered a number of suspicious items from his possession. A map was showing how to enter India via Nepal was recovered. The detainee also revealed that the well-sketched map was prepared by Major Syed for him. That led to Syed's arrest. At early stage the agencies believed Hashim was a member of Ilyas Kashmiri's 313-Brigade, that targets both American and Pakistani forces. When it was revealed that Hashim aims to target Indian installations and was not antagonistic to Pakistan, he was released in a dignified manner." Thus Hashim was released and just like 'good Pakistani Taliban' restarted his terrorist activities.

Hashim, who hails from Lahore, is also charged with participating in planning a terrorist attack in Denmark. "Major Hashim also was in Helmand (Afghanistan) for long time and organized the Punjabi Taliban {He must be a top gun in HuJI} against the foreigner occupants on behalf of the Afghan Taliban.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 21 Dec 2009 09:07

Did America keep mum on 26/11?

So all we have is the theory of the Indian investigators. It goes like this:

In the aftermath of 9/11, the US was desperate for spies it could sent into Pakistan. Headley was sprung from jail and asked to infiltrate terror groups. Assisted by the US government (new passport etc.), he worked for the LeT using his American passport to gain access to places where he would normally have been treated with suspicion if he had revealed his Pakistan roots.

He came to Bombay not just to check out the Taj but do a recon of Nariman House. He posed as an American Jew and sent back detailed reports. Along the way, he revealed details of the 26/11 plot to his American handlers. The US was caught in a bind. If it told us everything, the LeT would know that Headley was the source and his cover would be blown. Yet, it could not sit by. So, it compromised by giving us some intel about the attack that could not be traced back to Headley. And Headley continued to operate as a US asset inside LeT.

A few months ago, Indian agencies began tracking a Bangladeshi with US links. That trail led to an American who was involved with LeT. They asked the US for help. Headley was arrested soon afterwards.

The arrest took India by surprise. The way these things work is that if the US knows about a terrorist, it allows him to fly to Pakistan or India (both frequent Headley destinations) and then tips off the local intelligence service. The terrorist is arrested and tortured to extract information. (Americans are now banned from using torture.) When the terrorist has been wrung dry, he is handed over to the US, along with his confession.

In this case, however, the Americans arrested Headley before he could fly out. He was formally charged, allowed to appoint a lawyer and is now entitled to all the protections of the US Constitution: he would be within his rights to tell Indian investigators to take a flying jump.

Why would the US treat a 26/11 suspect with such consideration?

The only explanation that fits is this: he was an American agent all along. The US arrested him only when it seemed that Indian investigators were on his trail. He will be sentenced to jail, will vanish into the US jail system for a while and will then be sprung again — as he was the last time.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 21 Dec 2009 09:13

US playing own game in sharing intel with India

India's intelligence and security establishment is searching for answers as it looks deep into the concerted US assistance over the past few years, especially after the Mumbai attacks of November 2008. The worrylines have become deeper in the wake of the arrest of the mysterious David Coleman Headley who, reports and sources suggest, could well be an American agent who turned rogue.

Dependable sources told DNA that almost 80% of the intelligence alerts and leads on Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and other 'foreign' terror groups after the 26/11 attacks last year had originally come from the US. The alerts have mostly turned out be false or unsubstantiated. The latest was last week's warning about Pashtun-looking suicide bombers trained by the Taliban, planning to attack Delhi, Kolkata and Mumbai.

In the post-26/11 days, instead of improving its intelligence gathering and analytical capabilities, India let the US 'intelligence pipeline' gather prominence and tighten its grip on the country's terror intelligence, officials now admit. Most of them regret it.
The US agencies, both the FBI and CIA, have been regularly giving Indian agencies warnings about imminent terrorist attacks. These alerts have been used by the security establishment to issue warnings to the state polices and other agencies. These have also significantly contributed to public hysteria, and deployment of hundreds of security personnel.

Sources say that the motive behind American warnings has come under greater scrutiny after Indian intelligence agencies became convinced that Headley was an American mole who managed to penetrate the LeT network. The warning that the US gave India in September 2008, just two months before the Mumbai attacks -- about the terrorists planning to target Mumbai landmarks and their reconnaissance of the targets -- may well have come from Headley, the officers now believe.

However, suspicion of the US agencies did not start with the Headley case. Many who handled the investigations into the curious case of Ken Haywood -- the US citizen whose internet connection was allegedly used by Indian Mujahideen operatives to send out an email warning of the Ahmedabad serial blasts in July 2008 -- have had doubts since then.

While he was still under investigation by the anti-terror squad in Mumbai, Haywood managed to slip out of India despite a lookout notice against him in all Indian airports.

Sources say that the American agencies are providing "some or the other" intelligence input almost every alternative week. Officials also suspect a strategy behind the "random distribution of information" by the US agencies into the Indian system. They provide it to either IB and RAW in Delhi, or to Indian operatives outside India.

Just two weeks before the first anniversary of 26/11, India's DIA was told by US military officials that some al Qaeda terrorists were planning attacks in India. It was surprising that such sensitive information should be passed on to the DIA, because otherwise the US cooperation on terror front is with the R&AW and IB.

In August, the US agencies issued a warning about a North Korean vessel MV Mu San, saying it was carrying suspected material for nuclear weapons or other suspect cargo. The ship was forced to berth at Kakinada, and a massive security operation was carried out. Worse, the entire cargo of the ship was offloaded and a team of nuclear scientists flown in from Mumbai to inspect the cargo. Nothing suspicious emerged.

In November, yet again, the American agencies alerted India about a suspicious ship of Malta registration, carrying radioactive material. The ship was detained in Chennai, but this time instructions were sent out not to offload the cargo.

More than one source told DNA that none of the Indian intelligence agencies have a consistent and independent watch on LeT. In effect, the Indian perceptions and public posturing on the militant group is mostly "shaped by the American inputs," says a senior official. Such dependence "is a dangerous game," says a former chief of an intelligence agency.

As the Americans started feeding the Indian system on a regular basis, the post-26/11 terror watch of India came to be heavily dependent on the US inputs, sources now admit. And instead of improving themselves, Indian intelligence agencies increasingly leaned on the US inputs. The only visible improvement was the system of collating terror alerts at IB's MAC (multi agency centre), but most of the alerts they send out are flowing from the US.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 21 Dec 2009 09:21

US playing own game in sharing intel with India wrote:Dependable sources told DNA that almost 80% of the intelligence alerts and leads on Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and other 'foreign' terror groups after the 26/11 attacks last year had originally come from the US. The alerts have mostly turned out be false or unsubstantiated. The latest was last week's warning about Pashtun-looking suicide bombers trained by the Taliban, planning to attack Delhi, Kolkata and Mumbai.

In the post-26/11 days, instead of improving its intelligence gathering and analytical capabilities, India let the US 'intelligence pipeline' gather prominence and tighten its grip on the country's terror intelligence, officials now admit. Most of them regret it.

When will these idiots learn? We have to do our own work.

niran · Post by **niran** » 21 Dec 2009 10:08

my take
OBL a KSA would have planned the original idea
then the menial job of implementing was outsourced
to ISI. KSA will not do the menial jobs but will gladly
take the glory of the deed coming, so KSA citizen IDs
are taken, while the real pilot were some PAF ready
to attain shadat and 72+28.

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 21 Dec 2009 10:23

HEADLEY'S CASE: IMPACT ON INDO-US INTELLIGENCE CO-OPERATION - B Raman

According to the FBI, after each of his five visits to India, Headley went to Pakistan to hand over to the LET the video-recordings made by him in India. It is amazing that none of the Indian officials noticed his frequent toing and froing between India and Pakistan and questioned him on that.

I have been thinking about this since my last post in Indo-US thread where I explained it away as stamps being obscure/hidden away. But the scale didn't record in my mind, until I read B Raman's post.

Everytime I fly back, I feel that they are going overboard with checks of my PP (Maybe its my picture in the PP!). But here is one person who got away with 5 red flags. The pattern (India visit followed by Pakistan visit) repeated 5 times.. and immigration still didn't catch it!!

Or Was he using more one passport?

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 21 Dec 2009 11:56

Most probably he was caught for questioning , but got off using some high level contact or using some other means

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Dec 2009 12:17

With friends like the US,who needs enemies? The Headley tale only reinforces the need for us not to subcontract our intel work to "friends" like Uncle Sam,whose relationship with POak is and has been far closer for ecades than it has been with India.The current's dispensation's love affair with its patron is becoming very sour indeed.

Raju · Post by **Raju** » 21 Dec 2009 12:27

Raju wrote:

X Do not insert comments

{OK, have it your way. Reader reported post as calling for/threatening violence against citizens of a friendly democracy. I agree. I tried the gentle route, but your response defeats that.

Post deleted, postor warned, any further such stuff will result in ban. Thanks. - Admin}

R Vaidya · Post by **R Vaidya** » 21 Dec 2009 22:27

The following assumptions require re-look
1. All organs of US state work in unison and all of them are against terrorism anywhere in the world including India
2. All organs of US state work in unison and they are against terrorism within USA
3.USA- or atleast some organs of it- is not using Pakistan as a terror laboratary to perpetrate terror where ever it wants or it suits eventhough sometime it hurts USA also.
We are in bizzare times and linear thinking may not help.
Story of bhasmasura to be remembered where the boon giver was terrorised for long and he did not find any immediate recourse.There was no coordination in the kingdom of gods.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 21 Dec 2009 22:34

a_kumar wrote:Or Was he using more one passport?

Pakistan allows Dual Citizenship so does Massa.

..... that is the one way to avoid tracking I suppose. Fly to Dubai swap passports exit country.

sarah · Post by **sarah** » 21 Dec 2009 23:13

Look at how this american casually says that its "understandable" that India would like to have Headley but they wont succeed and he completely brushes off all Indian reports as "rumours".

An American interpretation about Indian press "rumors" on Headley

There has been a lot of heartache in Indian Media and on this forum about this saga, mainly centered on following points. Some of it may be due to inadequate understanding US legal system.

1: Access for Indian investigators to Headley.
2: Delay in sharing information and doubts that some is not shared.
3: Extradition to India for trial.

May give my 2 cents on it? Even if there is no nefarious reason for US, It would be very difficult if not impossible for US to do above under current US law.

As US citizen he is fully protected under US constitution and law. So here is my 2 cents on it.

1: Access for Indian investigators to Headley.

Won’t happen period.

Headley and Rana were arrested and will be detained and tried in civilian system. They had Miranda and have Fifth Amendment rights so they now do not have to make any statement. They also have right to have attorney and have lawyered up. Considering resources and support they have, it will be high power defense not unlike OJ’s dream team.

Now this practically shuts down access to him for Indian Investigators. They will not agree to meet Indian investigators. They just will not volunteer any information in any thing they did in India. They simply will dare Indian and US authorities to find evidence and connect the dots. There is not a lot FBI can do to force him while he is still in the can. Heck they don’t even control the prison they are housed in. Prisons in US are controlled by Marshalls [federal] or Corrections departments [State]. FBI or PD is not in control of prisons. In fact bureau agents are visitors to facility not unlike others. They can talk to him only if he agrees and only with attorney present and in monitored room with prior arrangement. They just can’t barge into his cell and start aggressively questioning him whenever they feel like. Interrogations as done by Indian Police simply are not possible here. As detainee under trial and not a convicted criminal, he has presumption of innocence and will be less restricted in prison. It may sound like cliché but he is not violence prone inmate and unless he breaks prison rules, authorities cannot make his life in prison unduly hard.

2: Delay in sharing information and doubts that some is not shared.

Rules regarding full disclosure [implications for Sharing of Information with India]:

As of now case is going through various pretrial stages.

Arrest – Only probable cause needed.

Indictment – more evidence as to reasonable chance of conviction needed, joke is that a DA can indict even Ham Sandwich for murder if he wants to but jokes aside, indictment becomes basis of charges that would have to be proved and DA can not be completely reckless in this regard.

Bail hearing – more evidence that charges are serious and there is good chance of conviction. Also the evidence that person is flight risk.

As the case goes through those stages, so far AG is not required to disclose all the evidence. But he surely will have to as discovery process proceeds. Prosecutors are under law required to disclose everything they have on the case to defense attorneys whether they plan to use it in trial or not.

For now I believe they are going through boxes of paperwork and evidence that would be scrubbed for relevance to the case. India will have access to all the evidence that will be disclosed as the trial proceeds. However no good prosecutor will risk showing his cards prematurely.

3: Extradition to India for trial.

Nearly impossible. US law prohibits extradition of US citizen to another country for trial. Even if GOTUS try, his attorneys can walk in to any federal court and stop it in no time.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 21 Dec 2009 23:22

^
The takleef is not so much what happened after the arrest but before it.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 22 Dec 2009 01:53

Little progress in U.S.-India liaison on Headley case - Praveen Swami

More than two months after Pakistani-American jihadist David Headley was held in Chicago, India’s intelligence services are divided on whether they were told the whole truth about the Lashkar-e-Taiba clandestine agent’s operations
...
...
But there is mounting concern in New Delhi that the U.S. may prove reluctant to fully explore Headley’s links in the Lashkar—links, which they believe could implicate Pakistan’s military and its ISI Directorate.
...
...
India was told, one official present at the meeting told The Hindu, that Headley was legally entitled to reject interrogation by foreign agencies. Pressure from India for this outcome, the U.S. officials said, would likely compromise the FBI’s efforts to reach a deal with Headley – a deal offering him a reduced sentence in return for full disclosure of his role in Mumbai attacks.
...
...
Indian investigators think questioning Headley may help them understand why the plot was revived, but seem unlikely to ever get the opportunity.

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 22 Dec 2009 04:33

ramana wrote:Karan Dixit and SSridhar, when was Rahul Bhatt's first contact with Headley and subsequent ones?

And KD can I mail you my list?

Yes, please:

karan.dixit at live dot com.

Thanks!

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 22 Dec 2009 04:37

Patni wrote:
Karan Dixit wrote: Karanji, will try and help by providing information to fill in the table you have started. If you read through some of the posts in thread it will save your some efforts. I have listed address and contact numbers of rana's businesses as well as information as when he migrated to canada and that he surrendered his paki passport etc. I will start to leave some information with dates etc in comments on your blog. I have a suggestion that you also please list all known associates/family connections with names and context where ever possible.

Thanks Patni Jee!

Ramana,

I will start modifying the structure of the table as advised by you.

Thanks!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 Dec 2009 05:07

OK. I think youll see something.

All its now getting curiouser. Now most of Ind establishment thinks its a mess.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 22 Dec 2009 05:59

sarah wrote:
There has been a lot of heartache in Indian Media and on this forum about this saga, mainly centered on following points. Some of it may be due to inadequate understanding US legal system.

Sarah, Many of the members in this forum reside in US since long time and have quite an understanding of US legal system. That is not the point. Many of the terrorists who are in guantanamo bay are also citizens of various countries and hence should not be in US in the first place, held up there without any trail.There are many media reports even within US which says those terrorists were simply "handed over" to the CIA without due legal process. Then why should it be any different when it comes to other way round ? Headley is also as dangerous a terrorist as those in guantanamo bay.David Headley is not an ordinary criminal.He is an international terrorist who knew the nuts and bolts of the mumbai terror attacks.By extension it is fair to assume, his American handlers would also be knowing the details, if not all, the majority of it. But still the Americans are not forthcoming as they should have been.Simply denying that headley is not an American mole is not going to cut ice.We already know he worked as an informant to American DEA.Compare this American reluctance to give access to headley with the India granting access to FBI to question Kasab or the Indians sharing their intelligence on Taliban in Afghanistan.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 22 Dec 2009 06:09

.There are many media reports even within US which says those terrorists were simply "handed over" to the CIA without due legal process. Then why should it be any different when it comes to other way round ?

Because 2 wrongs don't make a "right"? The media reports of such incidents are there because citizens of free democracies saw something wrong with such tactics. Apparently the countries which casually handed over their citizens to foreign agencies for torture did not see any need to abide by the law.

India allowed access to Kasab, who is not an Indian, but someone who entered India illegally to commit terror. If India is allowing US agencies to interrogate Indian citizens arrested in India, then I think some Indian "law enforcement" types need to be arrested as traitors and violators of the law, and all cases against such persons dismissed.

Headley/Gilani is "presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty before a court of law by a jury of his peers after due process". Until then he has the same rights as any other US citizen. If his defense lawyers can show that the authorities violated his rights, the case won't even go to a jury, the guy will go free, and will escape to Pakistan.

What's so hard to understand about this?
************************************

Well.. in practical terms,
1. the guys who came up with the "rendering" bright idea are now facing the prospect of prison terms themselves, a welcome change from the Dubyan Empire's bungling.

2. As long a India keeps requesting extradition, Gilani will sing because "freedom" means immediate arrest for extradition. If the guy is wanted for murder (and BTW, has India filed charges in India against him?) in India, then the US court has to extradite him per international agreements. Provided the Indian agencies don't make a dog's breakfast of the extradition request like what was done in Argentina with Quattrocchi.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 22 Dec 2009 06:47

enqyoob wrote:
Because 2 wrongs don't make a "right"? The media reports of such incidents are there because citizens of free democracies saw something wrong with such tactics. Apparently the countries which casually handed over their citizens to foreign agencies for torture did not see any need to abide by the law.

It is this same kind of self serving logic which pakistan uses when its citizens commit terrorist acts and hide in pakistan.Since they are pakistani citizens, irgo we cant hand them over to India, irrespective of the size of your dosseir.The Americans also know that they are wrong when they illegally took control of the terrorists from foreign countries, but that does not stop them from commiting that wrong again and again while at the same time using this moral logic when it comes to their side of the bargain.The Americans have leverage on Indians at this point of time and hence they can do what ever they like and get away with it . While it is not the same case with the Indians.India at this point still does not have any leverage on Americans to make them behave. Lets agree upto here but let us not give ridiculous explanations about 'democracy' 'american legal system' 'free press' etc. As Indians, we have been there, seen that.

Anantha · Post by **Anantha** » 22 Dec 2009 07:00

One thing that is not being mentioned is:
The main export of Afghanistan- Who are the players controlling it?
If you know this answer you can connect the dots.

niran · Post by **niran** » 22 Dec 2009 07:20

enqyoob wrote:
.There are many media reports even within US which says those terrorists were simply "handed over" to the CIA without due legal process. Then why should it be any different when it comes to other way round ?
If the guy is wanted for murder (and BTW, has India filed charges in India against him?) in India, then the US court has to extradite him per international agreements. Provided the Indian agencies don't make a dog's breakfast of the extradition request like what was done in Argentina with Quattrocchi.

AFAIK USA have no extradition treaty with India, it is only a MOU onlee.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 22 Dec 2009 09:20

sarah wrote:

3: Extradition to India for trial.

Nearly impossible. US law prohibits extradition of US citizen to another country for trial. Even if GOTUS try, his attorneys can walk in to any federal court and stop it in no time.

I disagree. Current as of Jan 5, 2009:
Cornell Univ Law Site

TITLE 18 > PART II > CHAPTER 209 > § 3196
Prev | Next
§ 3196. Extradition of United States citizens
How Current is This?
If the applicable treaty or convention does not obligate the United States to extradite its citizens to a foreign country, the Secretary of State may, nevertheless, order the surrender to that country of a United States citizen whose extradition has been requested by that country if the other requirements of that treaty or convention are met.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 22 Dec 2009 09:21

As Indians, we have been there, seen that.

But that does not seem to induce any learning, hain? Desi Babus throwing tantrums won't convince US Federal judges. Presenting solid legal arguments and evidence might.

Bottom line here is that as it stands, from pov of US court, some foreigners want custody of an American citizen, without any proof that he has committed crimes in that country. This is called a "fishing expedition", and said country is known for keeping people without trial for years as standard practice, though they wax pompous in lecturing other nations. Also, people arrested for even minor crimes in said country come out sometimes years later, unable to walk etc because of the "questioning" tactics of the police. And those are the ordinary police, not the all-powerful Anti_Terrorist Police.

What sane judge would agree to such a request? What appeals court would uphold such a decision?