Headley: ISI had no links to 26/11

[Meengla]

ey marwari o ey marwari, headley was protecting ISI but giving false statements against them, and in US he is threatened by ISI wierdest indian logic ever, EPIC

Poor Marwari ended up posting some info hardly convincing of his own 'case'. Tut. Tut. Tut.

 

[Solomon2]

How do you know they haven't, and have simply been unsuccessful?

I don't, but Pakistan doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt anymore.

 

[ares]

'Prime Witness against the ISI' has turned out to be rotten tomatoes and scuttered India's propaganda and lies .....

Indians and Pakistan hating Yanks, live with it and just accept the facts

It fails me how you came to the above conclusion ..forget the twisting of facts by media or catchy headlines

here is what headely actually said.

"that no more than a handful of ISI agents were involved in the plot."

“The colonel might have known and someone in the group might have known,”

How does this prove that ISI was not involved..what it surely proves that according Headely few members of ISI were definitely involved..

Where does it say ISI as an organisation could not have been involved??

 

[Hammy007]

I don't, but Pakistan doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt anymore.

solomon, you naughty crying baby ooaain ooaain

 

[Hammy007]

solomon2 is like

daddy banned me from PDF

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

here is what headely actually said.

"that no more than a handful of ISI agents were involved in the plot."

“The colonel might have known and someone in the group might have known,”

How does this prove that ISI was not involved..what it surely proves that according Headely few members of ISI were definitely involved..

Where does it say ISI as an organisation could not have been involved??

What Colonel?

Headley himself said that he wasn't even sure if 'Major Iqbal' was the real name of the individual he was dealing with. If he wasn't sure of the name of 'Major iqbal', how could he be sure that he was even a 'Major'? And if he had no clue about 'Major Iqbal's' real identity, how on earth can he speculate on some 'Colonel'?

Headley's testimony proves nothing. The news reports suggest that the American investigators are convinced 'Major Iqbal' is real, so I am assuming they have more evidence related to that. We will have to wait and see what they have, because basically Headley just admitted that he has no idea about the real identity of the people he was dealing with.

 

[lkozhi]

isi "retires" officers who work with terrorists. People like headley giving certificate to isi itself is good enough to show the state of affairs.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I don't, but Pakistan doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt anymore.

You, and the Indian and Western media, for the most part, never gave Pakistan the 'benefit of the doubt'.

Given that the 'Headley Confessions' have now turned out to be bald faced lies, and wikileaks has indicated that US officials supported the Pakistani position that India had not provided convincing evidence against those she wished Pakistan to take action against, I say that it is about time that Pakistan haters and anti-Pakistan propagandists such as yourself accept the facts and start extending Pakistan the 'benefit of the doubt'.

NO EVIDENCE AGAINST THE ISI/PA/PN or any other State institution supporting Al Qaeda, Taliban or the Mumbai attacks.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

isi "retires" officers who work with terrorists. People like headley giving certificate to isi itself is good enough to show the state of affairs.

It isn't about Headley 'giving the ISI a certificate of innocence', it is about the fact that all those lies that the Indian and Western media and Indian officials were propagating in the media, about so called 'Headley Confessions', have now been exposed for the lies they were.

Indians loved ranting about 'Headley confessed to this and Headley confessed to that, implicating the ISI', well, it was all Jack Shite.

 

[ares]

What Colonel?

Headley himself said that he wasn't even sure if 'Major Iqbal' was the real name of the individual he was dealing with. If he wasn't sure of the name of 'Major iqbal', how could he be sure that he was even a 'Major'? And if he had no clue about 'Major Iqbal's' real identity, how on earth can he speculate on some 'Colonel'?

Headley's testimony proves nothing. The news reports suggest that the American investigators are convinced 'Major Iqbal' is real, so I am assuming they have more evidence related to that. We will have to wait and see what they have, because basically Headley just admitted that he has no idea about the real identity of the people he was dealing with.

You should atleast keep a uniform approach ..in one post you are claiming that Headley's statement has shattered Indian propaganda...and in very next post you are claiming that Headley is not a credible source.

So which one is it ?

Besides Headley's credibility is for Chicago court to decide and not us.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

You should atleast keep a uniform approach ..in one post you are claiming that Headley's statement has shattered Indian propaganda...and in very next post you are claiming that Headley is not a credible source.

So which one is it ?

Besides Headley's credibility is for Chicago court to decide and not us.

I am keeping a uniform approach.

It is India, Indian officials, Indian media and Indians who chose to propagate the stories of 'Headley Confessions to Indian investigators' as convincing evidence implicating the ISI. Now whether Headley is credible or not, his testimony has exposed those lies for what they are.

 

[ares]

I am keeping a uniform approach.

It is India, Indian officials, Indian media and Indians who chose to propagate the stories of 'Headley Confessions to Indian investigators' as convincing evidence implicating the ISI. Now whether Headley is credible or not, his testimony has exposed those lies for what they are.

Now you are venting frustration against Indians..where as this news is neither orginates from India or an Indian source.

Could you please elaborate, which Indian lie has been exposed out here?

 

[lkozhi]

what if ISI got in touch with him through his lawyer. The question "Who benefits?" always gives you good answers.

just to add i dont think isi is bad because they do what is right for their nation. Only our countrys organization has to do some catching up. Otherwise why the hell this guy is sitting in chicago and giving all this announcements. he should be in indian prison. sad for us.

 

[ares]

You guys are taking the innovative headline from Pakistani newspapers way too seriously.

Ok lets for minute assume that Headley is credible source ..other wise this enitre thread is moot

This is what Headley exactly said.

1. The leadership of Pakistan’s ISI agency was not involved in planning the deadly 2008 Mumbai attacks, self-confessed plotter David Coleman Headley testified Tuesday.

2. no more than a handful of ISI agents were involved in the plot.

3. “The colonel might have known and someone in the group might have known,”

4. But when asked by Rana’s defense attorney if he meant that neither the head of the ISI nor its senior leadership were involved Headley testified “Yes.”

Only conclusion one can draw is that.. Headely says that ISI head was not involved in planning of the attack but lower level ISI agents were involved in planning.

So does it mean ISI as an agency is not involved..afterall how many times does head spy agency comes directly in contact with terrorists?..It is always the low level guys, who do the dirty work..but offcourse orders come from above.

 

[Meengla]

what if ISI got in touch with him through his lawyer. The question "Who benefits?" always gives you good answers.
.

Yeah, really, that should be the starting point for any criminal investigation.
So how exactly would Pakistan benefit by sending armed people into India barely three months after 9/11 to mount a frontal attack against the heavily protected Indian Parliament? But India turned that into an opportunity to raise the temperature so much that a war almost broke out.
You Indians give too much credit to your govt. while Pakistanis, as this forum and other online news sources tell you, are in hypercritical mode of their govt; military, and the society at large.
Making noise--however loud, however much backed by the current American-led media, does not make the noise 'truth'.
Provide solid proof of 'Pakistani' involvement. Till then, learn to understand that, yes, there are some bad people in Pakistan but they are being sorted out gradually.