The Curious Case of Daood Gilani alias David Headley & co

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 22 Dec 2009 09:24

Indian Embassy, Washington DC

"Salient Points of the Extradition Treaty signed between India and the U.S.
June 25, 1997 Washington, DC"

Extraditable offenses:

The offense is extraditable if punishable under the laws in both contracting parties by imprisonments for more than one year or by a more severe penalty. This applies:

a) whether or not the laws in the contracting state place the offense within the same category of offenses or describe the offense by the same terminology;

b) whether or not the office is one for which United States federal law requires the showing of such matters as interstate transportation, or use of the mails or of other facilities affecting interstate or foreign commerce, such matters being merely for the purpose of establishing jurisdiction in a United States federal court; or

c) whether or not it relates to taxation or revenue or is one of a purely fiscal character.

Extradition shall be granted for an extraditable offense regardless of where the act or acts constituting the offense were committed.

While extradition shall not be granted for a political offense, the following shall not be considered to be political offenses:

Murder or other willful crime against a Head of State or Head of Government or a member of their family, aircraft hijacking offenses, aviation sabotage, crimes against internationally protected persons including diplomats, hostage taking, offenses related to illegal drugs, or any other offenses for which both contracting states have the obligation to extradite the person pursuant to a multilateral international agreement.

Procedures:

All requests for extradition shall be submitted through the diplomatic channel and be supported by required documents, statements, information describing the facts of the offense, statements of the relevant provisions of the law regarding the offense as well as the punishment, a copy of the warrant or the order of arrest, and such information as would justify the committal for trial of the person in the requested state. For those already convicted of an offense, extradition request shall be supported also by a copy of the judgement of conviction or a statement by a judicial authority that the person has been convicted.

In case of urgency, a contracting state may request the provisional arrest the person sought pending proposal of the request of extradition.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 22 Dec 2009 09:26

The US-India extradition treaty was ratified and went into effect July 21, 1999.

http://www.indianembassy.org/pic/PR_199 ... _1999.html

Navtej Sarna
Counsellor (Press & Information)
Washington, DC
(202) 939-7041

Following is a Joint India-US Communique issued in New Delhi

Joint India-US Communique on the Exchange of the
Instruments of Ratification of the Indo-US Extradition Treaty

July 21, 1999

The Governments of India and the United States today exchanged instruments of ratification for the bilateral Extradition Treaty which was signed by both countries in June 1997. The exchange has brought this treaty into force from today.

The new extradition treaty has replaced the 1931 Extradition Treaty between the United States and the United Kingdom which was, till date, also in force between the United States and India.

The treaty is an important step in India-US law enforcement cooperation and cooperation in the area of counter-terrorism. This exchange constitutes yet another milestone in the continuing cooperation between our two democracies to promote the continued growth of our contacts and exchanges in different areas on the basis of mutual benefit and goodwill.

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 22 Dec 2009 10:03

Ramana,

I uploaded the file you sent me. Please check the blog:

http://karandixit.wordpress.com/

I will edit the table as we gather more information. At least now we have the desired format of table.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 22 Dec 2009 10:04

enqyoob wrote:
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.

'Evidence' which the Americans already have and refuse to disclose fully to India. So its like a circle. The american citizens commit terrorist attacks on India.Their intelligence and investigative agencies knew about it all along but refuse to give full details to India.And when it comes to bringing people to justice, they ask for "more proff" from Indians. Where did we hear this before. Yes, the pakis behave in exactly the same way. Did the americans learned these tricks from pakis or is the other way round

BTW, Headley associate Rana is not a American citizen but a Canadian citizen held by the Americans. so there goes the theory of 'we cant hand over our terrorist citizens to India ' .

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 22 Dec 2009 10:21

Headley's Case : India has a soft state

In protecting its national interests and national security, India is perceived as a soft state not only by large sections of its population, but also by intelligence and security professionals in many countries of the world. Many Governmental and non-Governmental professionals in different countries of the world strongly believe that India has not been able to deal effectively with the problem of terrorism of foreign origin because of the lack of security consciousness in large sections of our administration and political class and the permissive nature of our administration. Terrorists such as David Coleman Headley, mafia leaders such as Dawood Ibrahim and intelligence agencies such as Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) are aware of this and take full advantage of it.

2. During the investigation into the Mumbai blasts of March,1993, orchestrated by the ISI with the help of Dawood Ibrahim, it came to notice through intercepted telephone conversations that the members of Dawood's gang used to get logistics help for their stay during their visits to Delhi through the Personal Assistant to a senior member of the Cabinet of Narasimha Rao, the then Prime Minister. This PA had helped an associate of Dawood stay in the New Delhi guest house of a public sector corporation.
3. Another glaring example of the way we function in national security related matters relates to the air dropping of arms and ammunition to some extremists or terrorists by an aircraft piloted by a British pilot in December,1995, in the Purulia area. The moment this pilot was approached by the unidentified extremists for his help in the air drop, he immediately informed the British Defence Ministry through the headquarters of the Royal Air Force. After consulting the Indian authorities, the British asked the pilot to keep passing on information about the air drop to enable the Indian authorities to lay a trap. He reportedly did, but the Indian authorities botched up the operation so badly that the air drop could not be prevented. The extremists managed to collect the air-dropped arms and ammunition and disappear. Till today, we have not been able to identify them though the crew of the aircraft were arrested and prosecuted.

4. The Headley case is yet another glaring example of the permissive nature of our Administration. It will only confirm the already widely prevalent impression in the professional world that India is a soft state. The massacre of 166 persons--- 141 of them Indian citizens--- by the 10 terrorists of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) between 26 and 29 November of 2008 was the culmination of a conspiracy, which had two places of origin---- the Pakistan end from where the actual executioners were selected, trained and launched and the Chicago end from where the collection of all pre-attack information which made the terrorist attack possible was orchestrated by Headley, an American citizen of Pakistani origin, who used to live and work in Philadelphia as a Muslim under his original name of Daood Gilani and shifted to Chicago and started living there under the changed Christian-sounding name of David Coleman Headley. He shifted from Philadelphia to Chicago in February, 2006, after getting his name changed before a Philadelphia court and applied in the Indian Consulate in Chicago for a visa on June 30, 2006.

5. When a person changes his name and applies for a new passport, his new passport is supposed to carry an endorsement to the effect that "this person previously travelled under the name with the passport No ". If the Indian Consulate-General in Chicago had carefully scrutinised his passport and his visa application as they were supposed to under the rules, they might have noticed the following things: Firstly, he had changed his residence from Philadelphia to Chicago just before applying for an Indian visa. Secondly, he had changed his name and obtained a new passport just before applying for an Indian visa. Thirdly, his father was a Muslim with a Muslim-sounding name even though the visa applicant himself had a Christian-sounding name.

6. This should have immediately resulted in a personal interview with the applicant in order to question him on these points. We know how many of the applicants for foreign visas before missions in India are called for a personal interview and grilled because of suspicious circumstances coming to notice during the scrutiny of their passports.

7. Anyone who changes his name in order to obtain a new passport is immediately viewed as a suspect by the consular and immigration authorities of all countries of the world. Hard States , which give no quarters to terrorist suspects, have two specific columns in their papers which are to be filled by the applicants: Question No.1: Have you ever travelled by another passport? If so, give particulars. Question No.2: Have you ever travelled under a different name? If so, give particulars. The moment the answers to these questions create any suspicion he has to face an interview.

8. It is immaterial whether Headley is a Pakistani citizen or an American citizen born in Pakistan or an American citizen born in the US. The most incriminating evidence at the very starting point of this conspiracy is the fact that he changed his name in order to conceal his Muslim background. This could have been found out only in Chicago, the starting point of his journey, and not in India after his arrival.

9. Even if he is an American citizen born in the US that should not prevent us from questioning him. We saw the way Shah Rukh Khan, the film actor, was questioned for nearly an hour by the US immigration. The fact that he is an honoured Indian citizen and that the US has close relations with India did not inhibit them from questioning him.

10.All applicants for visas---tourist or business--- are required to submit certain documentation along with their passport. These include a to and fro air ticket, particulars of the cities he intended visiting and the places where he will be staying and a letter of sponsorship from someone in India knowing him---whether he be a friend or a relative or a corporate house. Without this documentation, no visa can be given unless the applicant is personally known to the Consul-General and he is in a position to vouch for his reliability.

11. The scrutiny of the additional documentation is more strict when the applicant applies for a business visa.

12. The Chicago end of the conspiracy, which led to the massacre of 166 persons by the terrorists, started on the day Headley walked into the Consulate-General with a changed name to conceal his Muslim identity and a new passport with which he had not travelled anywhere before and applied for a business visa. All the papers relating to his visa become important material evidence to reconstruct this conspiracy. The moment the FBI informed the Government of India about the arrest of Headley and his travels in October the MEA should have asked the Consulate-General to put all his papers in a sealed cover and send them to Delhi for scrutiny by the investigating agency. It is surprising this was not done for nearly two months.
13. We are now given an unconvincing story about the difficulties of retrieving applications from the archives of Indian missions abroad. I had worked as a visa officer abroad for eight years. It should not take more than a few minutes to take out the papers and send them to Delhi. You take out the visa register, find out the number under which the visa was issued to him and take out the application and other papers with the help of that number.
14. Apart from investigating the circumstances under which the visa application of Headley was processed, the relatives of those killed by the terrorists should consider suing the MEA for acts of alleged negligence which enabled Headley to come to India and set in motion the conspiracy. It was reported that after the 1988 Lockerbie tragedy, in which a Pan-Am aircraft was blown up by the terrorists over Europe, relatives of some of those killed sued the State Department for perceived acts of omission and commission, which resulted in the deaths of their relatives. This had a salutary effect.

15. It is time for us to have such victim activism in India.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 Dec 2009 12:04

Karan Dixit wrote:Ramana,

I uploaded the file you sent me. Please check the blog:

http://karandixit.wordpress.com/

I will edit the table as we gather more information. At least now we have the desired format of table.

Karan the word is Praetorization or Militarization. The idea is that TSP was changing in Ayub khan's time. Military takeover of the state was getting legitimate. So it makes sense for this DG/DH to join a cadet college.

Add in the comments section when he meets Rahul and later contacts if any.

One thing odd is DG/DH is a drug smuggler and caught twice on drugs charges. He turns approver for DEA. Yet when he is released he joins L-e-T and gets advanced trg! Subsequent to that he returns to US and then scouts for the outfit in India! And this is going on since 2006 at least.

This is where the US did not care to inform India. Why?

The inference of his release after 9/11 is he is being tasked by his releasers to go back to TSP and do something for them. Instead of doing more in his area of expertise he joins a terrorist outfit.

What made him an ideal recruit for the L-e-T?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 22 Dec 2009 13:14

ramana wrote:. . . Instead of doing more in his area of expertise he joins a terrorist outfit.

IMO, he joined LeT with the complete understanding and support of his US handlers whoever they were. I also believe that the DEA handed over their 'asset' to the CIA. Otherwise, Headley could not have covered up his visits and stay in Pakistan to his handlers back in the US, especially when things were very hot in 2001, 2002 etc. Besides, narcotics would have taken a backseat after 9/11.

One thing we normally overlook is the likely close connection between LeT and IIF. After all, Hafeez Saeed and Abdullah Azzam co founded 'Al Maktab Al Khidmat' in Peshawar in 1979 to help the Mujahideen during those heydays. After Azzam's assassination, Al Maktab became Jama'at-ud-Dawah. The Ahl-e-Hadees ideology on which LeT is based is practically the same as wahhabi/salafi/takfiri brand of Islam that Al Qaeda follows. Probably, the US, aware of the deep connections, wanted to infiltrate the LeT. Up until late 2001, they might have ignored LeT under the false impression that they were fighting India only. Of course, later events - when a number of top Al Qaeda terrorists were arrested from LeT-maintained safe houses all over Pakistan, and when terrorists arrested abroad implicated LeT for training and handling - proved conclusively the links that always existed.

My theory is that after having infiltrated LeT, Headley wanted to help that organization in attacks against India hoping either that the US handlers won't mind his little moonlighting or he was confident that he could hide that part from his US handlers.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 22 Dec 2009 13:24

If the guy is/was an agent, why are they now exposing him? Also, his lawyers don't seem to be using that line in their arguments. How come?

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 22 Dec 2009 13:40

Rony wrote:
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.

Justice department ruled that Guantanamo Bay is outside US legal jurisdiction. That's the reason why the prisoners are kept in Guantanamo Bay rather than the mainland US, because otherwise they would have to go through the regular US court justice system and a smart lawyer could have possibly got them off on some minor technicality.

Have an uncle who works in the county police system here and he told me about this one criminal who got his case thrown out because the guy didn't get his rights recited to him at arrest time (The lawyer claimed that the guy only spoke Spanish and thus didn't understand his rights because the officer arresting him recited them in English)

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 22 Dec 2009 13:41

The Headley affair surfaced about the time of the planned attacks on the US embassy in Bangladesh. Three Pakistanis and a few Bangladeshis were picked up and the attack was positively linked to LeT in Pakistan. When the news broke out first, only the Indian embassy was mentioned but later reports identified planned simultaneous attack on the US embassy as well. It was a major plot that involved Thadiyantavide Naser as well. I suspect Headley's hand in this and this was what caught the US goat, perhaps. They determined perhaps that he has become a rogue, as all Pakistanis are wont to at some point of time or the other.

The lawyers may not use the 'agent' line of argument because he was never an agent in that sense. He was probably more than an informant but less than an agent. Any digression into those grey areas may be too dangerous for everyone involved and may not help the plea bargain, perhaps.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 22 Dec 2009 14:09

This morning's media have reports that the reason why the US is protecting their double-agent and rationing information to India gleaned from him,is because the entire ramifictaions of 26/11,where the ISI/Paki military planned the entire affair with Gen.Kill-any role as the mastermind and the close ties between the CIA and ISI will be exposed.The US desperately needs to keep shut gight all info regaindg the Paki military's role in 26/11 so that the Pakis play ball in their Af-Pak strategy.One hopes that by now the GOI and the security apparatus of the country realise the futility of trusting the US which has its own gameplan that is executed at the cost of India.

Pak's latest attempt to push over 70+ terrorists last night and firing at Indian positions is an attempt to increase the tension yet again so that they can "legitimately" divert their troops from fighting their own kith and kin (Paki Taliban) at Uncle Sam's behest.In this game of hunting with the hounds and hiding like the hare,both the US and Pak are at it ultimetly at India's expense.Eead the report below from DNA.

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_us ... ia_1325837

US playing own game in sharing intel with India
Josy Joseph / DNAMonday, December 21, 2009

New Delhi: Is a grand American intelligence game unfurling in India? Is there a motive behind US agencies' regular alerts and inputs on terrorist activities? Is a larger, murkier conspiracy at play?

Mumbai under attackIndia'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.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 22 Dec 2009 16:59

For once, I am glad we have DDM types like Josy Joseph. He and the MEA are "Made For Each Other". Gives "404" a whole new meaning.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 22 Dec 2009 17:01

The Americans, just like the Brits - use infiltration of organizations they deem "dangerous and useful" for them - as a standard tool. The Brits did this a lot in India, and failed to get consistent information in this way only against very few orgs. But analyzing the Brit style of such ops, as well as the way the US gov broke up say the mining "mafia" in the early days -especially the labour union based ones recruiting mainly from the immigrant Irish - certain patterns emerge.

(1) They infiltrate using someone who is likely to be trusted by the org. The various factors considered would be ethnicity, temperaments, and "weaknesses" that would make the recruit manipulable. For Jihadi recruits, the very "affiliation" to Jihad could be a weakness that can be exploited.

(2) For this they need to allow the recruit to operate in favour of the org for some time, to increase the trust factor. The Americans could very well have expressed sympathies and support for Jihadi activities against India, to both manipulate DG, as well as make him more trustworthy to the Jihadi orgs. They would have to provide real inputs and support for such Jihadi activities in India or elsewhere through DG to ensure that DG's prestige increases within the org to be infiltrated.

(3) Here comes the most important difference from mere intelligence gathering. One curious factor that emerges when one goes through the court proceedings of various trials of "armed insurrectionists" against the Brits in India, is the level of details they provide about day to day actrivities and substance or minutes of meetings and exchanges bewteen memebers of the underground org. They had to have people within the innermost circles, and probably among the very leadership of the org on their payroll- or blackmailroll. Such key activists come under the spell of the agencies, because either the agency has evidence for things that would destroy the position of that leader if made public or because the leader thinks he can use his gov-connection to eliminate rivals.

The Brits, and likely the Americans, also use these contacts and influence to further their own state interests. The Brits in India most likely manipulated their contacts and "leaders" into provoking or urging the orgs to make "public outrages" or attempts at spectacular action that would help the gov to nab the whole org and destroy it if they feel that continuation of that org is against their state interests.

On the other hand they could calso use the "outrage" to silence resistance to more draconian control or intervention measures from civil society - measures that they had wanted to have anyway.

Third, they may only capture and destroy a part of the org, but allow its remanant or a new version to survive - for future use.

The longer Qasab stays in Indian custody, or LeT operatives get caught around in the subcontinent outside of TSP protection cover, greater was probably the danger of this game being exposed. It is a better option to make a very public "exposure" of DG to create the impression that this was an one-off case. This would clear DG's image within Jihadi circles - as a diehard Jihadi and not a stooge of "satan". Which would also imply that there are more such assets still deep undercover or operating within the LeT or other Jihadi orgs against India.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 22 Dec 2009 18:33

Perhaps it is that perceived Indian softness that results in Musharraf dreaming of raising the Pakistani flag over Srinagar (as related by Benazir Bhutto in the TSP thread).

Tanaji · Post by **Tanaji** » 22 Dec 2009 18:35

enqyoob wrote:For once, I am glad we have DDM types like Josy Joseph. He and the MEA are "Made For Each Other". Gives "404" a whole new meaning.

Care to clarify?

Patni · Post by **Patni** » 22 Dec 2009 21:47

IMHO David Headley seems to have some sort of cover/protection, not unlike what is mostly is provided in witness protection cases. Its a documented fact that he helped nab quiet a few drug smugglers, working with DEA. Its very curious that despite such a huge interest he has generated in both US and Indian media, No details what so ever has came out on his current home address or no reactions sought from his Pakistani wife, not even her name is mentioned any where in any media report. No asking his neighbours for their reaction about having a terrorist next door! Compare this to torrent of information being brought out on Rana, including his siblings etc. IMHO its quiet apparent that power that be has strong inclination towards controlling very tightly what information comes out about David Headley. It will be interesting if there are any sealed documents that arrive for judge's eyes only during his trial when it starts.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 23 Dec 2009 00:16

del

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 23 Dec 2009 02:15

ramana wrote:
Karan the word is Praetorization or Militarization. The idea is that TSP was changing in Ayub khan's time. Military takeover of the state was getting legitimate. So it makes sense for this DG/DH to join a cadet college.

Add in the comments section when he meets Rahul and later contacts if any.

Took care of it. Also, I added Headley's boat trip in Mumbai and his establishment of a branch of Rana's business in India.

I think we should create a separate bio for Rana. I am strongly convinced that Rana is the one who pulled Headley to the world of ISI/L-e-T. Rana was a captain in Pakistani army. So, he had right kind of connections with Pakistani army. It seems like ISI/L-e-T used Headley through Rana to penetrate one or more of the US intelligence agencies.

Patni · Post by **Patni** » 23 Dec 2009 07:43

Chicago mission missed Headley clues

TNN 23 December 2009, 04:15am IST
NEW DELHI: The Indian consulate may have finally traced David Coleman Headley's visa papers but this has failed to unravel the mystery shrouding the issuance of visa to the terror accused. A number of unanswered questions remain, lending strength to the suspicion that either the Indian consulate in Chicago completely failed to scrutinise Headley's visa application properly or there is more to it than what appears on the surface.

While the foreign ministry has not announced any official inquiry into the case, it is obvious that the consulate ignored at least three things which could have been really helpful in exposing Headley in the very beginning.

Headley changed his name through an affidavit in a court in Philadelphia and shifted to Chicago just before applying for an Indian visa. His passport when he applied for visa was new and he had not travelled anywhere before going by that passport. Apart from this, the fact that the applicant had a Christian name even as his father had a Muslim one failed to evoke any suspicion in the minds of those who processed the application.

All these developments took place in 2006 just before he applied for visa. In normal circumstances, these are enough reasons to call for an interview with the applicant but this clearly did not happen in the case of Headley.

Indian intelligence agencies now admit that Headley travelled to India as many as five times and after each India visit, he went to Pakistan. It is believed that he met LeT operatives during his stays in Pakistan and discussed ways to carry out the attack in Mumbai. He also handed over information collected from his reconnaisance of targets in Mumbai to his Pakistani handlers.

According to noted security expert B Raman, this could mean only three things. Either the immigration authorities in India were negligent or Headley had another passport which he used to enter Pakistan or he was helped by the ISI in entering Pakistan without any entry on his passport. So far, the government has maintained complete silence on the issue.

"Apart from investigating the circumstances under which the visa application of Headley was processed, the relatives of those killed by terrorists should consider suing the MEA for acts of alleged negligence which enabled Headley to come to India and set in motion the conspiracy," Raman said.

Then there is also the question of the delay in locating Headley's visa papers. It is still unknown why the foreign ministry didn't ask the consulate to trace his visa application immediately after US authorities informed India about Headley. Instead, the process was started almost two months after information was received about Headley.

If Headley had indeed changed his name and then acquired a fresh passport, his new passport should have carried a note on his previous passport mentioning where all he had travelled. It is not known if this was verified. It's also not known if Headley had attached all requisite documents needed for applying for visa or if certain conditions were waived off for him as is the case when the applicant knows the consul general personally.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 23 Dec 2009 09:12

Tanaji: Going by the long history of Josy Joseph's articles against all Indian indigenous defense development, when he was the Defence Specialist for Rediff, it is safe to say that his "reliable inside sources" are as bogus as his "facts" and data.
OTOH, the MEA has, as B.Raman points out, shown itself to be "404" as usual.

So what is the MEA's tough reaction to protect India from Gilani? Per today's newspapers, India has banned people from visiting India more than once in 2 months!!! Applies to PIOs, and "all foreigners". Does not specify if OCIs are exempt.

Apparently Gilani types are welcome to visit once every 61 days.

munna · Post by **munna** » 23 Dec 2009 09:17

enqyoob wrote:So what is the MEA's tough reaction to protect India from Gilani? Per today's newspapers, India has banned people from visiting India more than once in 2 months!!! Applies to PIOs, and "all foreigners". Does not specify if OCIs are exempt

Err Enqyoob saar as per the grapevine and jurisdiction wise too the 2 months stipulation is the work of Home Ministry. MEA is truly "404" and clueless in this whole fiasco. MEA is as much clued into the matters as my paper weight.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 23 Dec 2009 09:22

But visa issuance is MEA's aangan, hain?

munna · Post by **munna** » 23 Dec 2009 09:33

enqyoob wrote:But visa issuance is MEA's aangan, hain?

Issuance yes (but in case of bakis they have to seek concurrence of HM) but beyond that the control over immigrants and foreign nationals becomes Home Ministry's domain. Therefore the officers manning the "Immigration" at our airports are affiliated to Home Ministry and that is how the stapled visa controversy for Indian Kashmiris was caught since MEA mandarins chose to sleep over the issue!
Hence I feel HM might be a better place to petition for relief rather than the rudderless MEA composed of two gents utterly clueless and featherweights in the union government.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 23 Dec 2009 10:11

I'll bet the reported restrictions on PIOs are a case of DDM. If restrictions are being imposed on tourists, how does that drag PIOs into the net?

Patni · Post by **Patni** » 23 Dec 2009 17:07

Lucky to have no terror strikes: PC

There has been no major terror strike in the country ever since the 26/11 attacks last year. But Home Minister P. Chidambaram credits that to luck.

"The first credit goes to luck. One has to be lucky every time a terror plot is hatched. On the other hand, the terrorist has to be lucky just once," Chidambaram said on Wednesday.

Chidambaram, however, said that intelligence sharing too had improved and the results were beginning to show. "Intelligence sharing is much better today. This year, we have neutralised 12 or 13 potential terror strikes," he said.

Chidambaram also announced a new roadmap for fighting terror. Among the steps was the setting up of a National Counter Terrorism Centre by the end of 2010.

Chidambaram said the entire intelligence set-up needed to be restructured. Terror suspect David Headley's ability to get visa had exposed gaps in the visa system and these needed to be plugged.

He said the Mission Mode Project on Immigration would be set up in two years to register and track foreigners coming to India.

Posting in the thread as fallout from Headley issue.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Dec 2009 23:01

Karan, Add another column for Rana and fill in the details. If we make a new table for him we lose the connections.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 24 Dec 2009 03:51

One would think PC would have enough sense to thank law enforcement and security personnel that they have done well over the last year, and the public expects them to do well, but nothing is ever a guarantee.

His statement sounds more like CYA in the event there is an incident.

arun · Post by **arun** » 26 Dec 2009 08:50

Two serving officers of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan with the rank of Major have been implicated by the US’s FBI in funding Pakistani origin terrorist Daood Gilani aka David Coleman Headley.

The Majors of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan have been identified by the US’s FBI as Sameer Ali and Iqbal:

2 Pak Army officers gave Headley $25,000 for India trip: FBI dossier

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 26 Dec 2009 10:41

The above report posted by Arun says that Headley joined LeT in 1999.

Why was Headley granted a month's unusual absence from the US correctional facility in Aug 1999 ? Then, why was he released early in 1999 after that leave of absence ? The only terrorist incident of significance had taken place in 1998 (Kenya, Tanzania attacks) and by the time Headley was released from the prison and goaded into joining LeT, even the failed Tomahawk attacks were a year old.

The only other significant event about to happen was the proposed visit in March 2000 of President Clinton to the Indian subcontinent. Was Headley used to ensure safety of Pres. Clinton ? This would mean DEA handing over its asset to CIA. Considering the extent to which the US went in protecting the President when he visited Pakistan (like travelling from Oman in an unmarked Gulfstream preceded by a decoy plane, fortified airbase where it landed etc.) for a mere four hours in March 2005, I believe this is a possibility.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 26 Dec 2009 11:24

arun wrote:Two serving officers of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan with the rank of Major have been implicated by the US’s FBI in funding Pakistani origin terrorist Daood Gilani aka David Coleman Headley.

The Majors of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan have been identified by the US’s FBI as Sameer Ali and Iqbal:

2 Pak Army officers gave Headley $25,000 for India trip: FBI dossier

Its a zionist-yindu plot.

There is no concrete evidence that can be accepted by the sharia courts in porkland.

This does not mean that the porki army is officially involved.

It is at best an isolated case by rogue elements and does not reflect the official position of the government of the islamic republic of pakistan.

You are trying to delay the composite dialogue. Terrorism has been de linked from talks.

Let us have more (ISI) people to people (of India) contacts.

Let our friends in India gather in large numbers and light candles to protest Indian atrocities on kashmir and baluchistan.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 26 Dec 2009 12:31

Have they gone thru the records to see if Daoud Gilani visited India on earlier occassions before his name change? And have the talked to the Consul General about the discretionary issuance of visa?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 26 Dec 2009 14:09

Headley hid Pakistani origin from Indian Consulate
Excerpts

Headley, charged with scouting targets for the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks blamed on Pakistan based terror outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), gave his name in the visa application form as “David Coleman Headley.” He wrote ‘last name at birth’ as “Headley” only, his father’s name as “William Headley” and nationality as “US”.

As the mentioned American name and the nationality in the visa application form were matching the information on his US passport, and his name did not figure on any black list with the consulate, his application could not have alerted the processing officials, say diplomatic sources familiar with the case.

Headley’s Pakistani origin cannot be traced from his passport either as the US passport, it was pointed out, does not show “Parents’ names, previous nationality of the passport holder or parents’ previous nationalities, address of the passport holder and previous name”.

Not only is Headley’s place of birth, according to his US passport, in the USA, he also submitted a business sponsor letter from the Immigrant Law Centre owned by Raymond Joseph Sanders, a US national.

Pakistani-Canadian businessman Tahawwur Hussain Rana, accused of helping Headley in the Mumbai attacks conspiracy, and his wife Samraz Rana Akhtar disclosed their Pakistani origin. However, as per a Ministry of Home Affairs circular of 2005, no prior reference to New Delhi was required for Canadian Nationals of Pakistani origin. {Pakis are Pakis, irrespective of whether they later became citizens of Canada or Timbuctu}

Sanders, a US national, submitted a business sponsor letter and his driver’s license as an address proof.

The names of all four - David Coleman Headley, Tahawwur Rana Hussain, Samraz Rana Akhtar and Raymond Sanders - do not appear in the black list provided to or maintained by the Indian mission.

Sanders needs to be investigated too.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 26 Dec 2009 18:30

How did the Hindu get hold of this story? Did the Indian intel agencies release this? Or is this from the court proceedings in Chicago?

If this has been released by Indian intel, this could mean that this aspect has been covered,

OR

that indian intel feels that this aspect needs to be covered but access to the Sanders fellow is a problem in the US.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 26 Dec 2009 19:09

Gagan wrote:How did the Hindu get hold of this story? Did the Indian intel agencies release this? Or is this from the court proceedings in Chicago?

If this has been released by Indian intel, this could mean that this aspect has been covered,

OR

that indian intel feels that this aspect needs to be covered but access to the Sanders fellow is a problem in the US.

Praveen Swami is an associate editor of The Hindu and also writes for its sister publication the Frontline magazine. He seems to be heavily connected to intel and associated govt sources.

This article from the Hindu could have had inputs from him.

arun · Post by **arun** » 26 Dec 2009 20:41

arun wrote:Two serving officers of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan with the rank of Major have been implicated by the US’s FBI in funding Pakistani origin terrorist Daood Gilani aka David Coleman Headley. ................... l:

2 Pak Army officers gave Headley $25,000 for India trip: FBI dossier

Reviewing the case, whatever happened to the suspected involvement of officers holding a higher rank than Major in the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan?

The New York Times in an article datelined Nov 18, 2009 reported that one of the suspected co-conspirator was “said to have recently left the Pakistani Army and held the rank of colonel or brigadier general”. (NYT) The only recently retired Pakistan Army officer that has come to light is the more lowly ranked Major Abdur Rehman Hashim Syed , named in US court filings as a conspirator as well. Anyway Rediff reported in an article datelined Dec 20, 2009 that the Pakistani’s have released him. (Rediff).

Then there is the case of Brigadier Mohawat Rana, a brother of the Tahawwur Hussain Rana (Rediff)

One wonders if these two Majors are being setup to take the rap, if the push to do something atually came to the shove and enable Pakistan to claim that this was a “rogue” action carried out without sanction.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 26 Dec 2009 20:55

Army majors in any nation do not have access to $25000 of their own cash to hand over to anyone. So this is as good as saying that the funds for the Mumbai attack came from TSPA HQ, not "rogue" anything.

Any other nation would take this as sufficient proof of TSP govt sponsorship of the mass murder, and take action.

Shankk · Post by **Shankk** » 26 Dec 2009 22:24

Here are Jinnah's view on {deleted}

Being a junior member by virtue of number of posts I know people don't care much about my opinions but anyway I would say I agree with Jinnah {deleted}

{Thank you. Please read BR forum guidelines and the Constitution of India, not necessarily in that order. And don't worry, we care about your opinions and are watching their expression to see if we should care even more. }

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 26 Dec 2009 22:38

Shankk wrote: {deleted}

{Please don't quote Shankk.

Acharya: Worried that Mods have nothing to do, hain? }

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 26 Dec 2009 23:22

enqyoob wrote:Army majors in any nation do not have access to $25000 of their own cash to hand over to anyone. So this is as good as saying that the funds for the Mumbai attack came from TSPA HQ, not "rogue" anything.

Any other nation would take this as sufficient proof of TSP govt sponsorship of the mass murder, and take action.

There is a precedence to this.

Mohd Atta getting the $100,000 wire transfer from Omar Saeed Sheikh at the ISI Chief Lt Gen Mahmood Ahmed's behest.

Shankk · Post by **Shankk** » 27 Dec 2009 00:47

What really gets my goat is {Deleted. What really gets MY goat is postors acting like Pakistanis - disregarding basic guidelines, and deliberately steering into bigotry. Please think before posting again. Like I said, We Care. Enough to make some notes under User Notes}