The Curious Case of Daood Gilani alias David Headley & co

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 25 Jun 2010 09:41

archan wrote: Might have forgotten to put on the lens.

Remember from a long time ago. I saw a cute pup with the same eye combo as DCH, one blue and one brown.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 30 Jun 2010 18:38

-self deleted-

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 30 Jun 2010 21:25

Great, now which senator do you have in mind?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Jul 2010 05:49

Mahendra wrote:Ishrat Jahan was an LeT fidayeen: Headley

X-posted from the Internal Security thread.
That bit about Ishrat Jehan is great news. The above news item says

Pakistani American terrorist David Headley has said that Ishrat Jahan, the Mumbai girl who was killed along with three alleged terrorists in 2004 in a police encounter, was indeed a Lashkar-e-Taiba fidayeen.

Sources said Headley told interrogators from the National Investigation Agency that Ishrat, a resident of Mumbra in Thane, was recruited by top Lashkar commander Muzammil who was in-charge of LeT's operations in India till 2007.

It further says

The statement, while confirming that Headley is a trove of information on Lashkar's plans against India. . . Sources described the information given by the Pakistani American terrorist as "vital inputs".

I am sure the US investigators would not have ferreted out these bits of information because they simply lack knowledge about all these cases and do not have the bigger picture that India has. That was why there was an Indian demand to investigate Headley eventhough it was getting delayed and delayed.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 07 Jul 2010 01:24

X Posting from TSP thread

Pakistan's competing Jihadists

Born in Pakistan-administered Kashmir in 1964, Kashmiri fought with Qari Saifullah Akhtar's Harkat ul-Jihad-e-Islami. Early in 2000, Harkat leader Maulana Masood Azhar — released from jail in a hostages-for-prisoners swap that followed the hijacking of an Indian Airlines flight to Kandahar — founded the Jaish-e-Mohammad. Kashmiri, who believed that the group was too close to Pakistan's military establishment, refused to join. From 2007, following the use of force against jihadists who had taken control of the Lal Masjid in Islamabad, Kashmiri began working closely with the jihadists opposed to the Pakistani state.

Investigators in both the U.S. and India say Headley made contact with Kashmiri after the Lashkar proved unwilling to commit resources to an attack on the offices of the Jyllands Posten in Copenhagen — a newspaper that incensed many Muslims across the world by publishing cartoons they felt were blasphemous.

Having joined the Lashkar in 2000, Headley went on to play a key role in its operations, among other things collecting the video footage that helped to guide a 10-man assault team to its targets in Mumbai in November 2008. But Headley became increasingly frustrated with the Lashkar's unwillingness to support operations against the West — the priority, he believed. He railed against the Lashkar's leadership, saying it had “rotten guts.” “I am just telling you,” he hectored a Lashkar-linked friend during an intercepted September 17, 2009 phone call, “that the companies in your competition have started handling themselves in a far better way.”

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Jul 2010 01:30

Was he an agent provocateur trying to egg L-e-T to turn its attention to the West and they saw thru it and were relecutant to depart for core mission against India?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 07 Jul 2010 01:49

Ramanaji,

- DH was trying to penetrate all Paki-shops to expose anti-west feelings/resources. As part of it he tried to check the dark-horse LET as well and ISI saw thru it and used him against India. I think this is a ISI +1 and CIA -1. I have a strong feeling that LET, being a TSPA controlled shop has good amount of resources in western-hemisphere; as an insurance I guess

- Other Jihadist shops realize that TSPA/ISI will not mind selling them out to their national-bird if they do not play against India and focus on west/pakis alone. This is what causing the increased marketing campaigns against India. We all know how Pakis/West feel about it. LET might not like to share their protected market with other Jihadi shops and we can see marketing-wars (of course involving India) in near future.

- DH has multiple uses. He can provide list of anti-west resources living in the west. He can also provide list anti-india resources living in India. I guess US is interested in the first list alone; and use the second list to squeeze India as needed. India must do the exact opposite, but doesn't have the list and any interest to bleed west.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Jul 2010 02:35

Looks like DCH has spilled a lot of stuff to NIA

LINK

Maybe ISI used him in India to keep him away from finding stuff in TSP? If he got caught uncle would be the embarssed one.

Too bad Mumbai ATS was busy chasing ghosts instead of real terrorists. Would have had a different ending if he were caught by Mumbai Police.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 07 Jul 2010 12:27

ramana wrote:Looks like DCH has spilled a lot of stuff to NIA

There were quite a few in BRf who felt that NIA interrogating DCH was a waste, too little and too late.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 07 Jul 2010 20:24

SSridhar wrote:
ramana wrote:Looks like DCH has spilled a lot of stuff to NIA
There were quite a few in BRf who felt that NIA interrogating DCH was a waste, too little and too late.

True or not, NIA has certainly spilled lot of beans in the media. Pak spin is yet to come.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 07 Jul 2010 20:34

SSridhar wrote: There were quite a few in BRf who felt that NIA interrogating DCH was a waste, too little and too late.

In fact the assertion was that India would never get access to Headley

That is the best part about bullshitting is that it can be denied. Bullshit today. Stonewall tomorrow.

When I was in Std 4 in Pune - we used to see Shaktiman trucks of the army roll past. A classmate of mine told me that those trucks could run on honey, water, milk, anything. Much later when we met an army driver I asked him about that in the presence of my classmate and the driver obviously laughed. When I pointed out to my classmate that what he had said was a lie he taught me a lesson. He told me "Rubbish. I never said any such thing. You said it"

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 07 Jul 2010 20:48

shiv wrote: In fact the assertion was that India would never get access to Headley .

Do you call this access? They were not even allowed to ask him questions.

Jul 7, 2010,

The NIA moved a trial court for the issuance of non-bailable warrants (NBW) against Headley and others ‘‘in order to take necessary steps for further investigations like issuing a Red Corner Notice through Interpol’’.

And what new information was provided to India ?

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 07 Jul 2010 21:03

shravan wrote: Jul 7, 2010,
The NIA moved a trial court for the issuance of non-bailable warrants (NBW) against Headley and others ‘‘in order to take necessary steps for further investigations like issuing a Red Corner Notice through Interpol’’.
And what new information was provided to India ?

This is the next step, after interrogating DCH. Once NBW is issued and interpol circulate RCN m the process of extradition request (or further interrogation of DCH) would be next logical step. India has give six more names to PK , ostensibly , based on DCH interrogation. However , if PK does not do anything, what leverage India has to coerce PK to bring conspirators to book? This is a question, one would like to get answer to, rather than frothing at mouth in impotent rage and meaningless rants and absurd speculations.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Jul 2010 22:19

A key input from the DCH de-briefing is the fact that there are numerous L-e-T foot soldiers already in India busy scanning targets. How many are TSP/Indian operatives and how many are from other countries?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 08 Jul 2010 02:22

^^^ koi shak?

sum · Post by **sum** » 08 Jul 2010 09:08

From GPs article on Haqanni:

There now appears to be recognition in New Delhi that direct allegations against Pakistan of sponsoring terrorism only invite bland and self-righteous denials. But the tone of India’s approach has changed after Daood Gilani aka James Headley spoke candidly to Indian investigators in the presence of ISI officials and revealed substantive details of how the plot to attack Mumbai was hatched and about the role of Hafiz Mohammed Saeed, other senior members of the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba and serving and retired Army officials, some of whom hid their true identity.

NIA was made to interview Gilani in the presence of ISI?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 08 Jul 2010 09:19

shravan wrote:
shiv wrote: In fact the assertion was that India would never get access to Headley .
Do you call this access? They were not even allowed to ask him questions.

Jul 7, 2010,
The NIA moved a trial court for the issuance of non-bailable warrants (NBW) against Headley and others ‘‘in order to take necessary steps for further investigations like issuing a Red Corner Notice through Interpol’’.
And what new information was provided to India ?

No no. I am sure that whetever you have written and whatever you have not written are all 100% correct. Don't allow my opinions about the Headley interrogation to upset whatever you feel about it.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 08 Jul 2010 19:39

I don't know if the ISI officers were present when NIA talked to DCH, but it is certainly not a bad thing. There are many reasons why. For one, there would certainly also have been US officials of various agencies present. Consider the implications of the Q&A session, in view the answers that DCH was giving. Does the mastermind enjoy being present when the murderer leaks the details in the presence of the accuser and the judge? Plus, I would expect the whole thing was recorded for everything from video to audio to emissions

Raja Ram · Post by **Raja Ram** » 08 Jul 2010 19:58

Whenever a triple agent like Daood Gilani are unmasked, there will be a process of covering trails by the entities that ran him. In this case, definitely the US entities that have cut a deal with this man, would have ensured that the trails to them are neutralized.

Given the way the access was organized, the questioning done etc., it is very much likely that the revelations made have been scripted. That is not to say nothing of value will come of it.

As part of the deal, this guy would be very careful about revealing just how much did the US agencies that ran him knew and at what point in time. He would have also been instructed as to what to reveal about ISI involvement. In addition, if he is a trained and loyal to his other masters, the ISI, he would indulge in a lot of misinformation supply as well.

In any case, when an asset is compromised, the entity running that asset would invoke SOP to quickly change/withdraw other assets that this comprised asset would know about. Both the US and ISI are well run professional institutions and would have done enough between the time Gilani was arrested and when the Indians got a chance to question him.

What we have got now has to be carefully analysed, the misinformation part checked out. What India can do is to run past the information spilled against other sources of information to see for pattern matches. This is then normally cross checked and verified with our own network. There could be still a lot hard intelligence value leveraged. It will not be easy to do, but Indian authorities do have a good database and analysis capabillities. They should be able to derive value.

At the same time, it will be unrealistic to imagine that NIA was got hard intelligence, given the fact that this guy was a possible triple agent and the entities that ran him had enough time and motive to ensure that Indian intelligence did not get any information that can link these entitites to him as well as protect their other assets in India with whom this person would have interacted.

At best, we will get some limited value from this access.

This is what I believe is a realistic assessment.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 09 Jul 2010 04:52

I think it belongs here.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/07/08/1 ... error.html

Tindall, now based in Hawaii as the FBI's liaison to the U.S. Pacific Command, said that a Mumbai-style attack in the United States would not likely cause as much death and destruction because local, state and federal law enforcement would be better coordinated.
After his presentation, a few members of the 130-strong Joint Terrorism Task Force echoed that view.
``Half of these guys weren't armed'' during the initial assault in Mumbai, said Coral Gables Sgt. Alan Matas. ``That's half the battle.''``If something like this happened here, we would respond with a more organized attack,'' said Coral Gables Det. Ivan Cabrera.Still, the FBI's chief of counterterrorism in South Florida warned everyone in the audience to be ready for any assault like Mumbai's, noting it was ``deceptively simple and highly coordinated with little money expended.''
``It's something to think about as you go about your business,'' said Erin Beckman, assistant special agent in charge of counterterrorism. ``It could happen in Seattle, San Diego, Manhattan and even Miami.''

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 09 Jul 2010 12:20

^^^ that's fair, but with a tactical jehadi hat on, wouldn't they strike multiple soosai-bummers into police control nodes before attacking the primary target with foot soljah's...?

even in Mumbai, most of the killings happened early on, once the authorities mobilised, the rate of killing slowed down. possibly at CST a more effective police response would have saved more lives

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 10 Jul 2010 03:20

NIA seeks warrants against Headley, Rana, Saeed
http://news.rediff.com/report/2010/jul/ ... -saeed.htm

National Investigation Agency has moved a Delhi [ Images ] court for issuance of non-bailable warrants against Pakistani-American terror suspects David Headley [ Images ], Tahawwur Hussain Rana and Pakistan-based Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi and Hafiz Saeed [ Images ] on the charge of plotting terror attacks in India [ Images ]. Two senior officers of Pakistani army are among those against whom the NBW has been sought by the NIA.The accused have been booked under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and SAARC Convention (Suppression of Terrorism [ Images ]) Act, dealing with waging war against the government of India, conspiracy and procuring arms and ammunitions.

"

All the accused are at present residing outside India. The investigation in the case is at a crucial stage and thus, it is imperative for the NIA to seek issuance of NBWs in order to take necessary steps towards further investigation like issuance of Red Corner notice through the Interpol," the plea filed by Sawyam Praksh Pani, Superintendent of Police of the NIA, said.
Besides Headley and Rana, who are now in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Investigation at Illinois in the USA, the NIA has made Pakistan-based Lakhvi, Saeed, Major Iqbal and Major Sameer Ali of Pakistani army, Sajid Mir and Abdul Rehman accused in the FIR lodged on November 11 last year."The present case is of immense national importance and investigation conducted so far has revealed extensive roles played by these accused towards commision of offences alleged in the FIR," the agency said.District and Sessions Judge S P Garg, who has been empowered through the Centre's notification to hear the NIA's plea, is likely to hear the application for issuance of NBWs.The NIA, in the FIR, discussed the inputs provided by the FBI saying a detailed probe was required to unravel the entire conspiracy hatched by Headley and others to foment trouble and carry out terror attacks in India.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 10 Jul 2010 04:00

Prem wrote:I think it belongs here.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/07/08/1 ... error.html
Tindall, now based in Hawaii as the FBI's liaison to the U.S. Pacific Command, said that a Mumbai-style attack in the United States would not likely cause as much death and destruction because local, state and federal law enforcement would be better coordinated.
After his presentation, a few members of the 130-strong Joint Terrorism Task Force echoed that view.
``Half of these guys weren't armed'' during the initial assault in Mumbai, said Coral Gables Sgt. Alan Matas. ``That's half the battle.''``If something like this happened here, we would respond with a more organized attack,'' said Coral Gables Det. Ivan Cabrera.Still, the FBI's chief of counterterrorism in South Florida warned everyone in the audience to be ready for any assault like Mumbai's, noting it was ``deceptively simple and highly coordinated with little money expended.''
``It's something to think about as you go about your business,'' said Erin Beckman, assistant special agent in charge of counterterrorism. ``It could happen in Seattle, San Diego, Manhattan and even Miami.''

I dont know whether he is talking sense or it is true. may be better informed brfites can shed light on this.
Even in hollywood movies there are bickerings among all agencies.

IIRC-- about mumbai attacks,
gravity of the efforts of Indian forces- unparalled in the world- urban warfare in a dense concrete jungle with no proper rules of engagement.
consider this- 10 places attacked in a heavily populated city with indiscriminate firing by highly trained men.- 2 hotels with 400 and 800 rooms, and over 27 floors in one hotel and 4 floors in a jewish centre . No other force in the world has done it( including usa and israel) highly scary and frightening - under 300 commandos have fought against all odds with little knowledge of floor plans and whether they will come out alive or not.
They also have to minimise civilian casualties. The casualties could have been in 700-1000 easily.

sample this- in plain fields 1 terrorist requires 3 defenders, in jungle warfare 1 terrorists require 5-10 defenders depending on foliage. In urban warfare we dont know?

countries all over the world are learning from this terrorists attack to improve their intelligence and defence preparedness.

Tamang · Post by **Tamang** » 12 Jul 2010 20:59

Posted?

26/11: FBI officer highlights sloppy response

merlin · Post by **merlin** » 15 Jul 2010 17:24

NIA drops plea for warrant against Headley

arun · Post by **arun** » 16 Jul 2010 07:01

X Posted.

Excerpt from interview of US National Security Advisor James L Jones by CNN-IBN:

Rajdeep Sardesai: What we have gathered from the confessions of David Coleman Headley has suggested that Pakistani state actors were involved in 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks. Have these concerns been registered by Washington with Islamabad because India has registered them. But has Washington also registered those concerns with Islamabad?

James Jones: First of all Headley interview with India are a manifestation of the growing good state of relationship between our two countries We have to have more co-operation on intelligence matters so that we can be successful in defeating terror where ever it presents itself. In our bilateral relationship with Pakistan, we have expressed our strong concerns over the existence within the borders of Pakistan of terrorist organisation that goals to destabilize and attack our way of life, your way of life, to prevent our strategic goals from being achieved in Afghanistan. This is in violent conflict with how we see the world collectively and bilaterally in the 21st century. Pakistan must recognise that it is a contrary to their own interests for the future in the stability of the region to continue to tolerate the existence of insurgents within their borders. So, the first means of correcting that and as a first means of showing that Pakistan wants the same thing that we want they have to make a tough decision to go after these terrorist organisations. Moreover, they need to state concretely and publicly that this is a matter of policy and this cannot be tolerated.

Rajdeep Sardesai: India has made Hafeez Saeed, the Lashkar chief - the one of the most wanted as a test case; for Pakistan's ability to act on terror. Headley specially named Saeed as the mastermind behind the 26/11 attacks. He is roaming freely in Pakistan and he is making anti-India speeches. Would that be a test case also in a sense when we say Pakistan should also act against terror and stop making it an instrument of state policy in any form, must address India's concern. Would that be a test case to you that if Pakistan wants to act against someone like Saeed? Would that reassure Washington that Pakistan is serious. Would you like to see Pakistan do that?

James Jones: Yes. We want to see a more comprehensive programme that addresses all aspects of terrorism. Because all of these groups that we are finding out are linked. They are not necessarily targeted one nation or the other. They are terrorist organisations that have in mind to disrupt India, to disrupt our way of life and they are actively planning to do that.

CNN-IBN

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Jul 2010 02:33

ISI financed 26/11: Headley told NIA

...
According to officials, India had already informed Headley’s confessions exposing the role of ISI in masterminding 26/11 attacks to Pakistan. “For rest of the information, India has told Pakistan to get in touch with the US Department of Justice and FBI,” they added.

Indian investigators have learnt that that starting as a CIA’s mole in LeT, Headley gradually changed the side, became a jihadi and started spying for the LeT. He was very useful for the LeT because of his American passport, which helped him travel across the world without arousing any suspicion.

“Headley has been taking instructions from his ISI handlers for the past four years. He confessed to the investigators that he was asked by the ISI to survey the key installations in New Delhi and other parts of the country,” said officials.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 17 Jul 2010 03:28

ramana wrote:ISI financed 26/11: Headley told NIA

...

Indian investigators have learnt that that starting as a CIA’s mole in LeT, Headley gradually changed the side, became a jihadand started spying for the LeT.

You heard it on BR first!!

My post on 15th March 2010

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 76#p839276

The longer this Headley drama goes on, the more I have to wonder why he was really arrested. Is the US doing to India with Headley, something like the ISI is doing to the US with Mullah Baradar? Have they locked him up to keep him out of our reach, because of what he could tell us about the Americans' own connections via the CIA and ISI to LeT?

Here's the thing. Despite these sporadic panels of Washington "experts" coming up with bhashans about LeT in public, nothing they say is any great revelation to the American national security apparatus. The CIA has known exactly what LeT is, what they do and whom they do it to for a very long time.

The LeT is intimately familiar to the national security apparatus of the United States; Unkil has been in AfPak for too long a duration, and the CIA has too many connections with the ISI not to know exactly what is going on with LeT.

It was Vikram Sood, IIRC, who related in an article how the CIA regularly inspects LeT camps in Pakistan and PoK to make sure that no "foreigners" (I guess meaning white guys) are being trained there. Unkil has clearly drawn redlines with respect to the LeT and doesn't care what LeT gets up to outside those redlines.

Unkil's counter-LeT actions, in fact, have been restricted specifically to situations where Americans or Europeans were seen to be involved with LeT. Alexandria, Virginia; Willie Brigitte; and of course, David Coleman Headley (who can apparently pass for white).

The US national security apparatus knew Headley very well. They were running him themselves for many years, ostensibly as a DEA informant, but possibly as far more than that. He could very well have been the CIA's liaison with LeT, or CIA's mole within LeT, or something in between (a double agent). He could have been one of many such CIA operatives embedded within LeT.

Unkil has been "playing dumb" with regard to Headley's actual role in the scheme of things. They say he was just a DEA informant who went astray and got co-opted into LeT jihad, and they never realized it until they stumbled upon his Jyllands Posten plans. I don't believe that for a minute. Unkil has been playing dumb for too many decades about too many things, and its way past time we stopped extending our gullibility to swallow his denials on everything regarding Pakistan.

The Americans were admittedly running Headley as an agent; were they so daft that they let him get indoctrinated and play his own game year after year without watching him at all? IMO total rubbish.

What I believe: At the very least Headley was a deliberate CIA plant in the LeT... maybe even one of the "white guys" sent to LeT training camps to make sure they weren't training any other Americans. Meanwhile, to maintain his cover within the LeT (and probably to satisfy his own personal jihadi tendencies) Headley was allowed to become involved with LeT ops against India. Since those kinds of ops did not cross Unkil's redlines, Unkil had no problem with them, upto and including 26/11.

Given that Headley was even allowed to visit Mumbai after the 26/11 attacks, I don't think even the deaths of Americans in that incident, or the massacre at the Chabad House crossed Unkil's redlines.

After all, a few Americans dead in an attack against SDREs is tragic, but as you say, SDREs will dust off their Dhotis and move on. It was far more important for the CIA to keep Headley in place in the LeT, so as to detect and pre-empt any LeT attack on Western interests. Headley's involvement in the Mumbai attack was far from sufficient reason for the CIA to withdraw such an important mole.

So that brings up the question of why Unkil finally arrested him.

The official version is that they stumbled upon his plot to blow up Jyllands Posten, and that until this point they had no idea that he was anything but a hard-working DEA informant.

Again, IMO rubbish.

Headley may well have been involved in a plot to blow up the Jyllands Posten, as part of his cover within the LeT. His role in the Jyllands Posten plot may even have been that of a CIA mole trying to unearth other Jihadis based in the US who were willing to target Western interests (remember Osama Eldawoody and the NY Subway plot?) But I don't think that was the reason he was arrested at all.

It simply doesn't fit together with how Unkil has kept him shielded from India since his arrest, to claim that he was a straightforward American Jihadi of the Jose Padilla variety who got caught out planning an attack on a Western interest. It doesn't fit together with the rest of the story (DEA informant for many years) either.

The only reason I can think of for the Americans to arrest Headley, which makes sense given (a) the available information about him and (b) the extremely tight shield under which the Americans have concealed him from us, is that Indian intelligence was on to him. That the next time he made a trip to India, he would have been busted, and then the entire truth of the CIA's extent of accommodation and understanding with the LeT would have come out.

And probably other BRF-ites came to the same conclusion independently as well!

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 17 Jul 2010 19:38

It was mentioned on here a few months back, do you guys still think there may be a chance DCH was coached to give these responses? I find it curious that after being in US custody (in spite of?) all this time he seems to be singing pretty much what India has been claiming.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 17 Jul 2010 20:52

Coaching might not work with Indian investigators, for two reasons. One, the Indian investigators have means to cross-check with data gathered from other sources. Second, Indian investigators have a lot more information about the Pakistani terrorists that will be used as waypoints during interrogation to ensure that Headley is speaking the truth.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 17 Jul 2010 21:28

Carl_T:

Thats what even puzzles me. I thought he would have spun a web around the SDREs and made a chutiya out of them like TSP RAPE often do in their dealings with SDREs. Instead he did, at least Prima Facie, confirm TSPA/ISI role etc. To this end, contrary to what I was arguing with Vaadyaar SSridhar, I stand corrected and indeed access to Headley did fetch India something. To me what is interesting though is that even after his revelations, US wants to protect TSP. If he spilled the beans on ISI involvement, why is US not going public with it. Reality is that US's word will carry more weight than Pillai, which TSP and Indian WKKs and RNIs dimissis as the equivalent of Hafeez Saeed's depravity.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Jul 2010 21:33

If they did that the TSP will claim betrayal again.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 17 Jul 2010 22:41

So TSPA/ISI role is clear, US won't publicly acknowledge it, pressures India to talk to TSP, TSP does brazen grandstanding, and yet its equal equal in USA's eyes. I wonder when MMS meets Obama or Hilary, does he even exhude an ounce of anger, an ounce of disgust; at least make it knwon to US, face-to-face, how disgusting it is to see not only TSP getting away with murder but being rewarded.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 18 Jul 2010 11:13

http://news.outlookindia.com/item.aspx?687780

26/11 Braveheart Nanny to Get Israeli CitizenshipMumbai |
Jul 18, 2010

Nanny Sandra Samuel, who saved Baby Moshe from the clutches of terrorists during the November 26 terror attack in 2008, will be granted Israeli citizenship.

The official website of the Chabad House quoted Interior Minister Eli Yishai as saying that it has been decided to confer citizenship upon Samuel, an Indian national, in recognition of her heroism.

He said the move was as "a humanitarian step".

Carl_T · Post by **Carl_T** » 19 Jul 2010 05:55

CRamS wrote:Carl_T:

Thats what even puzzles me. I thought he would have spun a web around the SDREs and made a chutiya out of them like TSP RAPE often do in their dealings with SDREs. Instead he did, at least Prima Facie, confirm TSPA/ISI role etc. To this end, contrary to what I was arguing with Vaadyaar SSridhar, I stand corrected and indeed access to Headley did fetch India something. To me what is interesting though is that even after his revelations, US wants to protect TSP. If he spilled the beans on ISI involvement, why is US not going public with it. Reality is that US's word will carry more weight than Pillai, which TSP and Indian WKKs and RNIs dimissis as the equivalent of Hafeez Saeed's depravity.

Maybe the the idea is to let TSP know, "we know exactly what you're up to". I think the US may let the threat of Indian retaliation to terrorist attacks hang over their heads. At the same time the US needs to still maintain the official policy to TSP of "we're on your side" so it will not actually acknowledge any TSP involvement.

maitya · Post by **maitya** » 19 Jul 2010 21:31

One more revealation ...

Pakistan Navy frogmen trained Kasab, other terrorists

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 19 Jul 2010 21:46

^^^

It is only a confirmation of the fact already revealed by K Sahab during his questioning by Mumbai police. He had informed the interrogators that 24 boys (including 11 sent to Mumbai) were trained at Mangla Cantonment. The reservoir city had been selected specially to simulate Mumbai coastline along with its urban setting.After training the chosen group was sent to Karachi safe-house to await further deployment.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 21 Jul 2010 09:40

Disclosures on Headley upset US: Sources

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/discl ... rces-38688

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 22 Jul 2010 10:39

abhishek_sharma wrote:US on Headley issue: Expect India to live up to responsibility

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 199257.cms

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 22 Jul 2010 18:43

^^^^ Indian retaliation for terrorist attacks? Please, next time warn me that a joke is coming, I just spat up my coffee all over my keyboard.