Enough evidence of Indian involvement in Balochistan, Waziristan

[LaBong]

Actually there was a report that the US was not pleased with the Indian government allegedly making these claims to the media, because of the terms of Headley's plea agreement.

As far as I remember US wasn't pleased about the allegation that United States overlooked repeated warnings about Mr. Headley’s terrorist activities because of his links to both American law enforcement as well as to officials in Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate.

 

[sparklingway]

Its not about 'covering up' since I in fact point out how the article distorted claims about another Indian general and applied them to Singh, but about putting the issue in context.

That is one tiny little thing. All other claims attributed to the cables are lies. The Mumbai coverup, etc? Lies, damn lies.

Whatever he is, traumatic childhood or not, paid or not, he is in essence a response to the drivel, propaganda, hate and bigotry coming out of the Indian media.

They have theirs, we have ours.

I disagree. We have born bigots like Majeed Nizami whose paper posted the headline "Hindu extremists more dangerous than Al Qaeda" (translated) and sourced it to wikileaks and the paper has been posting downright pathetic politico-religious stuff for 63 years now. These are NOT responses to the bigots of their land.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

That is one tiny little thing. All other claims attributed to the cables are lies. The Mumbai coverup, etc? Lies, damn lies.

Did I contest that? Did you read my first post in this thread?

I disagree. We have born bigots like Majeed Nizami whose paper posted the headline "Hindu extremists more dangerous than Al Qaeda" (translated) and sourced it to wikileaks and the paper has been posting downright pathetic politico-religious stuff for 63 years now. These are NOT responses to the bigots of their land.

Sure, we have born bigots as do they - the Gujarat riots, Babri Mosque riots and the extremists spewing poison against Pakistan are not exactly paragons of tolerance and acceptance.

The Indians have their own media outlets, blogs and forums devoted to bigotry and hate, but that was not my point in relevance to the propaganda material carried in the mainstream media in both countries.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

As far as I remember US wasn't pleased about the allegation that United States overlooked repeated warnings about Mr. Headley’s terrorist activities because of his links to both American law enforcement as well as to officials in Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate.

That is a separate issue, they were not pleased with the continuous claims being attributed to Headley in the Indian media allegedly sources to the Indian government, and they indicated that they would not be saying anything in public on those claims given Headley's plea agreement with US authorities.

Even a denial of an allegation can result in implying the veracity of another allegation.

 

[LaBong]

That is a separate issue, they were not pleased with the continuous claims being attributed to Headley in the Indian media allegedly sources to the Indian government, and they indicated that they would not be saying anything in public on those claims given Headley's plea agreement with US authorities.

Even a denial of an allegation can result in implying the veracity of another allegation.

American officials cannot say anything publicly about the allegations because of Headley's plea agreement.

Technically, since the US has not confirmed any of the claims made by the Indians, the Indians are as usual talking out of their rear ends. Let me know when India can actually support those claims with any evidence rather than the typical official GoI flatulence.

And why is none of this so called information in the briefings given to Pakistani officials in wikileaks, or in Headley's deposition?

Indian officials interrogated Headly in presence of US officials, so any official statement made by GoI about the interrogation means US officials conforming the claim, unless off course they explicitly deny the statement. US needn't confirm the statement to make it anymore valid than what it is now.

Wikileaks not having it doesn't prove anything. It could be because of many reason, the documents related to it could be more classified thus beyond the access of the whistle blower for all we know.

 

[Bang Galore]

Originally Posted by AgNoStIc MuSliM View Post
Its not about 'covering up' since I in fact point out how the article distorted claims about another Indian general and applied them to Singh, but about putting the issue in context.

That is one tiny little thing. All other claims attributed to the cables are lies. The Mumbai coverup, etc? Lies, damn lies.
.

Actually SW, it isn't one tiny little thing. Merely using the same words as used by a blog while referring to a completely different individual does not make the statement an innocent one. The point here was that the statements were both attributed to U.S.officials & said to be sourced from actual cables which we know wasn't the case. That statement too was rubbish as was the rest of the article. There was no context to put them into. Who would have cared if a columnist had passed these judgments, that's pretty much par for the course. A brazen, stupid attempt at propaganda was made here & which has now damaged the credibility of the paper concerned.

 

[Bang Galore]

American officials cannot say anything publicly about the allegations because of Headley's plea agreement.

Headley's lawyer sat through the interrogation. Haven't heard anything from him contradicting the Indian statements.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Headley's lawyer sat through the interrogation. Haven't heard anything from him contradicting the Indian statements.

The same logic presented earlier applies to him - there is a plea agreement in place, based around Headley's confession, and neither the US Government nor Headley and his Lawyer are going to go around contradicting every or any nonsensical allegation made.

None of what the Indian media and the GoI are claiming has any legal standing - why would Headley's lawyer choose to get involved?

And again, why on earth is none of the information in the Indian media attributed to Headley not in Headley's deposition to the US LEA's or in the records of the briefing given to the ISI by US officials that was revealed in the wikileaks cables? The latter was a classified meeting - surely US officials would have raised any such glaring issues or claims with ISI officials.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Indian officials interrogated Headly in presence of US officials, so any official statement made by GoI about the interrogation means US officials conforming the claim, unless off course they explicitly deny the statement. US needn't confirm the statement to make it anymore valid than what it is now.

The silence of US officials proves no such thing. Headley is being tried in the US and the only thing that matters there is his deposition to US LEA's and his plea agreement. What the Indian media claims or what the GoI claims Headley said carries no legal standing since it is unverified speculation, and it certainly carries no standing in US courts.

US officials and Headley therefore have no interest or need to comment on anything claimed by the Indians, since saying anything by a US official or Headley, denial or claim, could possibly be used in the US courts, and both sides are satisfied with the plea agreement and the direction that would take Headley's prosecution.

wikileaks not having it doesn't prove anything. It could be because of many reason, the documents related to it could be more classified thus beyond the access of the whistle blower for all we know.

Not just wikileaks, but Headley's deposition to US LEA's as well - it refers to some possible Army officials, but nothing along the lines of the Indian media claims. The same is reflected in the briefing mentioned in wikileaks cables.

The Pakistani position has documented evidence supporting it - the Indian position has nothing but unsubstantiated claims and allegations likely blown out of the rear end of some babu in the GoI.

 

[sparklingway]

Pakistani media publish fake WikiLeaks cables attacking India
Comments alleged to be from WikiLeaks US embassy cables say Indian generals are genocidal and New Delhi backs militants​

Declan Walsh in Islamabad
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 9 December 2010 16.29 GMT
Article history

They read like the most extraordinary revelations. Citing the WikiLeaks cables, major Pakistani newspapers this morning carried stories that purported to detail eye-popping American assessments of India's military and civilian leaders.

According to the reports, US diplomats described senior Indian generals as vain, egotistical and genocidal; they said India's government is secretly allied with Hindu fundamentalists; and they claimed Indian spies are covertly supporting Islamist militants in Pakistan's tribal belt and Balochistan.

"Enough evidence of Indian involvement in Waziristan, Balochistan," read the front-page story in the News; an almost identical story appeared in the Urdu-language Jang, Pakistan's bestselling daily.

If accurate, the disclosures would confirm the worst fears of Pakistani nationalist hawks and threaten relations between Washington and New Delhi. But they are not accurate.

An extensive search of the WikiLeaks database by the Guardian by date, name and keyword failed to locate any of the incendiary allegations. It suggests this is the first case of WikiLeaks being exploited for propaganda purposes.

The controversial claims, published in four Pakistani national papers, were credited to the Online Agency, an Islamabad-based news service that has frequently run pro-army stories in the past. No journalist is bylined.

Shaheen Sehbai, group editor at the News, described the story as "agencies' copy" and said he would investigate its origins.

The incident fits in with the wider Pakistani reaction to WikiLeaks since the first cables emerged.

In the west, reports have focused on US worries for the safety of Pakistan's nuclear stockpile, or the army's support for Islamist militants such as the Afghan Taliban and Lashkar-e-Taiba, the group blamed for the Mumbai attack.

But Pakistan's media has given a wide berth to stories casting the military in a negative light, focusing instead on the foibles of the country's notoriously weak politicians.

Editors have pushed stories that focus on president Asif Ali Zardari's preoccupation with his death, prime minister Yousaf Raza Gilani's secret support for CIA drone strikes and tales of a bearded religious firebrand cosying up to the US ambassador.

Among ordinary citizens, the coverage has hardened perceptions that Pakistani leaders are in thrall to American power.

Pakistan has become "the world's biggest banana republic", wrote retired diplomat Asif Ezdi last week.

Military and political leaders, portrayed as dangerously divided in the cables, have banded together to downplay the assessment.

"Don't trust WikiLeaks," Gilani told reporters in Kabul last weekend. Beside him president Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan, also tarred in the dispatches, nodded solemnly.

On Saturday the army, having stayed silent all week, denied claims that army chief General Ashfaq Kayani "distrusted" the opposition leader Nawaz Sharif. Kayani "holds all political leaders in esteem", a spokesman said.

Meanwhile conspiracy theorists, including some journalists, insist Washington secretly leaked the cables in an effort to discredit the Muslim world; the Saudi ambassador described them as propaganda.

But senior judges favour their publication. Dismissing an attempt to block WikiLeaks last week, justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed said the cables "may cause trouble for some personalities" but would be "good for the progress of the nation in the long run".

The lopsided media coverage highlights the strong influence of Pakistan's army over an otherwise vigorous free press.

This morning's stories disparaging Indian generals – one is said to be "rather a geek", another to be responsible for "genocide" and compared to Slobodan Milosevic – is counterbalanced by accounts of gushing American praise for Pakistan's top generals.

The actual WikiLeaks cables carry a more nuanced portraits of a close, if often uneasy, relationship between the US and Pakistan's military.

But the real cables do contain allegations of Indian support for Baloch separatists, largely sourced to British intelligence assessments.

Pakistan's press is generally cautious in reporting about its own army. But some internet commentators said the latest WikiLeaks story was a bridge too far.

Noting that the story was bylined to "agencies" – a term that in Pakistan means both a news agency and a spy outfit – the blogger Cafe Pyala asked: "How stupid do the 'Agencies' really think Pakistanis are?"

Pakistani media publish fake WikiLeaks cables attacking India | World news | The Guardian

 

[Kinetic]

lol This is stories are going well in Pakistani media. Don't they think that these are reducing their credibility?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistani media publish fake WikiLeaks cables attacking India
Comments alleged to be from WikiLeaks US embassy cables say Indian generals are genocidal and New Delhi backs militants​

But Pakistan's media has given a wide berth to stories casting the military in a negative light, focusing instead on the foibles of the country's notoriously weak politicians.

Editors have pushed stories that focus on president Asif Ali Zardari's preoccupation with his death, prime minister Yousaf Raza Gilani's secret support for CIA drone strikes and tales of a bearded religious firebrand cosying up to the US ambassador.

The lopsided media coverage highlights the strong influence of Pakistan's army over an otherwise vigorous free press.

Pakistani media publish fake WikiLeaks cables attacking India | World news | The Guardian

And the West continues to be obsessed with bashing the Pakistani military, and rather annoyed that the Pakistani press isn't completely towing their line on bashing the Pakistani military.

Quite frankly, other than the direct quote attributed to Kiyani about 'reluctantly making Zardari resign' given the potential for widespread anarchy on the streets as a result of the Long March, there is little that is highly damaging to the military.

Most people already realize that the military played a positive role in defusing the crisis sparked by Zardari through his disqualification of the Sharifs and dismissal of the Punjab government.

If any thing, the wikileaks have exonerated to some extent the PA and ISI from charges of 'supporting the Mumbai attacks' and highlighted the role of the Afghans and Indians in supporting and sheltering terrorists, something IMO that has not gotten as much play as it should have in the Pakistani press.

 

[Yeti]

‘How I waged war on India’The following is a first-hand representation of what David Coleman Headley, a Pakistani-American terrorist in a US prison, confessed to the sleuths of India’s National Investigation Agency in June this year. It was obtained by Dinesh Sharma of Zee News from highly placed sources in the agency and is being reproduced in a two-part series on the second anniversary of Mumbai terror attacks.



The David Headley Confessions: How I waged war on India

People should read this to see who this chap really was.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

‘How I waged war on India’The following is a first-hand representation of what David Coleman Headley, a Pakistani-American terrorist in a US prison, confessed to the sleuths of India’s National Investigation Agency in June this year. It was obtained by Dinesh Sharma of Zee News from highly placed sources in the agency and is being reproduced in a two-part series on the second anniversary of Mumbai terror attacks.



The David Headley Confessions: How I waged war on India

People should read this to see who this chap really was.

'based on sources in India's national Investigation Agency' - that is hardly an independent and credible source. How do we know it isn't all concocted, since there is nothing to back up the NIA's so called claims?

Why is this information not in the official and publicly available Headley deposition made to US authorities, or in the classified briefings made by US officials to the ISI, as observed in the leaked wikileak cables?

 

[Yeti]

'based on sources in India's national Investigation Agency' - that is hardly an independent and credible source. How do we know it isn't all concocted, since there is nothing to back up the NIA's so called claims?

Why is this information not in the official and publicly available Headley deposition made to US authorities, or in the classified briefings made by US officials to the ISI, as observed in the leaked wikileak cables?

What about his right hand man Tahawwur Hussain Rana who faces trial if he is found guilty there must be evidence against him especially as this trial is being held in Canada of all places.

OTTAWA — A Canadian citizen facing terrorism charges in the U.S. for what prosecutors say was his role in the Mumbai terror attacks will go on trial Feb. 14.

Tahawwur Hussain Rana lived in Chicago but still ran an immigration consulting business in Toronto at the time of his arrest in 2009. Rana stands accused of plotting, along with David Headley, to attack the Jyllands-Posten newspaper in Denmark because of its decision to publish the Prophet Mohammed cartoons in the fall of 2005.

The cartoons, published to illustrate the issue of self-censorship and freedom of speech in relation to Islam, set off a spasm of protests around the world with several people dying in the ensuing violence.

Prosecutors believe Rana financed Headley’s trips to Denmark to plan an attack. After the pair were arrested for the newspaper plot, accusations also surfaced that they were involved in plotting the Mumbai terror attack in November 2008.

Prosecutors in the U.S. claim Rana “provided material support” for the Mumbai attack, which saw at least 160 people killed and more than 300 injured as gunmen stormed several popular tourist spots and Jewish locations in the city. Islamic terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba carried out the attack.

Headley, who changed his name from Daood Sayed Gilani in 2006, pleaded guilty to several charges, including participating in the Mumbai attacks, and is now co-operating with police.

Rana was born in Pakistan and immigrated to Canada in 1997. He became a citizen four years later. He then moved to the U.S. and established businesses in Chicago and New York. Rana also co-owns a home in Ottawa.

Canadian terror suspect faces Valentine's trial | Canada | News | Toronto Sun