Assange - The Stain of Blood Is Upon Their Hands

SCROLL down for blog comment & further information LINK to transcript of VIDEO - here COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news report Julian Assange to RT: WikiLeaks gives 'most accurate picture of war' Uploaded on 24 Oct 2010 SOURCE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBsMK1eQ7A8 ⟴   We Expect A Counter-Attack RT News Reporter Last question.  The Pentagon have put their PR machine into operation after you released the Afghan War Diaries.  What are you expecting from them this time around? Julian Assange, WikiLeaks Well, we expect a similar sort of counter-attack.  Every time you release something like this, we expect a counter-attack.  You're never quite sure what it is.  It tends to be a different thing, [that] each time is seized upon and then amplified [cough].  here ⟴ Sex Allegations Sweden ⟴ " ... Assange has previously suggested that the allegations are part of a smear campaign following his website's release of thousands of secret US Army documents relating to Afghanistan."  here ⟴ Stain of Blood On Their Hands ⟴ Well, it looks like America eventually found a less predictable and waaaaaay more creative solution, than mere propaganda as the follow-up, counter-response to WikiLeaks releases  ... ... or Sweden just happened to fortuitously and coincidentally oblige with: (a) a pretext to legally assault and decommission, WikiLeaks editor, Julian Assange (via Sweden police 'allegations', minus proper procedures, minus proper recording of prosecution witnesses, minus a key sworn statement, obtained as result of 'informal' interview between friends and police associates, police database tampering, dismissed by  Stockholm's chief prosecutor Eva Finne for lack of sufficient evidence, etc);  (b) arrest Julian Assange. Oddly, by proxy (UK authorities, on behalf of Sweden, on behalf of USA, rather than direct arrest by Sweden, on behalf of their acknowledged US masters - see links below), when Sweden had ample opportunity to interview and arrest, while Assange remained in Sweden, before asking Swedish authorities for permission to travel from Sweden). Allegations against Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, took an unexpected turn yesterday when Sweden's top prosecutor announced she was reopening a rape investigation. It is the second time the country's authorities have made a U-turn over whether the Australian-born journalist should face charges. The warrant was abruptly rescinded within 24 hours and last week Stockholm's chief prosecutor Eva Finne said all charges against the 39-year-old would be dropped. But Ms Finne's boss, Marianne Ny, Sweden's chief prosecutor, has overruled that decision after new information reportedly came to light on Tuesday.  [above, source - here] ⟴ It looks like the Stockholm prosecutor Finne has most likely been overruled from the top. And I'm not talking overruled merely by Ms Marianne Ny. Overruled by whoever Marianne Ny answers to in government, which has stake (and is lawfully entitled to intervene) in matters concerning the state and foreign diplomacy. ⟴ Perhaps arrest by proxy was chosen, in an attempt to mask this farce and to create an appearance of the assault on Julian Assange as a 'genuine' article, in a way that a direct Swedish arrest may not have conveyed. Delayed, proxy arrest (which included the spectacle of a EAW, Interpol Red Notice, Swedish leak to press, and a London arrest), was also possibly effected to get maximum PR mileage (propaganda, manufacture of consent, smear) out of staging a performance for all that fenzied (and expected) media coverage.  (c) de facto imprisonment of Julian Assange for almost 5 years in total now without charge, trapping WikiLeaks editor in the Ecuador embassy in London for 3 years now (where he has been granted political asylum), at the threat of arrest and extradition to Sweden (which would pave the way to subsequent extradition to USA). The arrest of Assange was executed to decommission Assange, while no doubt allowing the US time to build its 120-man taskforce case in America. Note:  Assange has committed no crime, so the US has to work towards creating such 'crime' - and that's heading in the direction of redefining journalism as 'terrorism').  I find it very hard to believe Assange has been detained for 5 years and is in grave danger of extradition to the US,  simply because of mere 'accident,' 'misunderstanding,' 'bad luck', or merely the result of jealousies which arose from obliging those Swedish women ... who were keen to bed Assange. I'm more inclined to believe  the events in Sweden were a set-up. ⟴ Breathtaking Hypocrisy & Flagrant Political Persecution British Foreign Office minister, Hugo Swire, hypocritically spoke of a 'stain' on Ecuador's reputation for (rightfully and lawfully) granting politically persecuted journalist, Julian Assange, political asylum:  British Foreign Office minister Hugo Swire said in a statement Thursday that it would make a formal protest to Ecuador over its decision to provide asylum to Assange. "Ecuador must recognize that its decision to harbor Mr Assange more than three years ago has prevented the proper course of justice," said Swire in a statement. British police have guarded Ecuador's London Embassy around the clock at an estimated cost of more than US$15.6 million, which has placed pressure on the British government to resolve the long-standing issue. Swire alleged that the harboring of Assange constituted an abuse of diplomatic relations and was a “growing stain on the country’s reputation." This content was originally published by teleSUR at the following address: http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Ecuador-Says-UK-Criticism-Over-Julian-Assange-Unacceptable-20150817-0021.html ⟴ As witnessed by the British Foreign Office propaganda attack on Educator, instead of censure of Sweden's refusal to progress this matter and to interview Julian Assange in London, it's plain to see that Britain and Sweden have obviously colluded (and continue to collude) with US authorities to deprive Julian Assange of liberty, with a view to eventually handing up Julian Assange to USA.  ⟴ From where I stand, Sweden's politicians and public servants - along with their British and US counterparts - collectively have the stain of Julian Assange's blood on their corrupt hands. By that I mean, theirs is the guilt of taking life - the life of Julian Assange, presently detained 5 years without charge, at the threat of arrest and extradition to a country in which he will be entombed alive, for daring to expose American war crimes. ⟴ The footsoldiers of the powerful have stolen 5 years of Julian Assange's life by imposing a corruptly engineered, and politically motivated, de facto captivity that is in flagrant breach of international law, aimed at only one thing:  extradition of Julian Assange to the United States to face life imprisonment or a death sentence, on trumped up 'espionage' charges or the like, that the US Dept of Justice team is probably banging out in some form or other, right now. (Hey, this contempt for international law and conventions, and the fondness for trumped up accusations, seems to be a recurring theme ... lol). The players also happen to be same footsoldiers of the powerful, who, in turn, are stained with the blood of tens of thousands of civilians killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Upon them is the stain of actual blood of war crimes (exposed by Assange), and they and their public representatives are grimly determined in their aim to put Assange away. So, behind the recent public propaganda statement attack on Ecuador, behind the pending official complaint/attack on Assange,  and behind the 5 year de facto without-charge imprisonment of Julian Assange,  are the same powers that are responsible for the war crimes in Iraq & Aghanistan exposed by WikiLeaks.  In the case of Iraq:  from war waged following US manufacture of false pretext for invasion  (ie 'weapons of mass destruction'). How psychopathic does this get? Rightfully, British Foreign Office ought to be condemning Sweden for its inaction and failure to progress this undemocratic and baseless legal assault on journalist-publisher, Julian Assange. Despite ample opportunity, it is Sweden that has failed to act - over the space of 5 years.  And the world knows it. ⟴ Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the British role in the political persecution of  journalist, Julian Assange (who was excluded in 2014 from changes in British law to prevent exactly this kind of without-charge unjust detention), the British Foreign Office has slunk as low as to resort to publicly smearing and condemning Ecuador. Perverse conduct, in the form of attack on Ecuador by the British, is a 'tell' that patently shows the British hand in this injustice and ongoing political persecution. With straight faces, British officials call for 'justice' as a leverage and as media smear, in an attempt to impose injustice upon Julian Assange, based on the falsehood of Sweden police allegations and the farce of Sweden government's and Sweden prosecution's failure to take appropriate action (carefully sidestepping even interviewing Assange during the 5 years he has been a political prisoner in England). The same British authorities that assault the sovereignty of Ecuador insult the intelligence of the watching world. But the world knows that these same colluding authorities are behind the Sweden set-up, the politician persecution, and denial of justice - and denial of rightful, internationally recognised, protections - to whistleblower journalist Julian Assange. Naturally, Ecuador rejects this outrageous political smear ⟴  ⟴ Bring the Sick Bucket ⟴ USA Threatens Sovereign Nations ⟴ USA Seeks to Influence Foreign Court Cases ⟴ USA Even Targets United Nations ⟴ Sweden Could Not Say 'No' To USA (Even If It Wanted To) ⟴ source | slate | here ⟴ ⟴ Sweden's US-Anglo Alliance Ties Sweden US Subservience & Collaboration A troubling History  ⟴ Sweden Secret Mass Spying Agreement With USA & UK After 50 years of secret cooperation, in 2004, Sweden established formal and even closer ties between the Swedish FRA (National Defence Radio Establishment - more info here) and the Authority's signal scout colleagues in the US:  namely, NSA (world famous for mass surveillance of entire countries, allied heads of government and corporate spying), and the British GCHQ - in direct cooperation. [here] ⟴ ⟴ LINK  |  Sweden's secret mass spying agreement with the US & UK http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.svt.se%2Fnyheter%2Fsverige%2Fdokument-avslojar-fra-s-hemliga-avtal-med-usa Sweden | More http://wikileaks.org/IMG/html/Affidavit_of_Julian_Assange.html [source:  here] ⟴ Sweden Joins 'Five Eyes' US, UK & Allied Intelligence Cooperative British investigative journalist Duncan Campbell gave an indication of the scale of collaboration between Sweden, the US and Britain at a European Parliament hearing on state surveillance in early September. “A new organization has joined the “Five Eyes” and is seen as the largest cooperating partner to [the UK’s Government Communications Headquarters] GCHQ outside the English-speaking countries—and that is Sweden,” he said. [here]  ⟴ Interesting that, journalist, Duncan Campbell makes an 'appearance'. Cambell revealed the existence of the ECHELON surveillance program in 1988 (US-Anglo 'Five Eye' alliance satellite trunk communications sweeping intercepts). Campbell knows all about intelligence, security, and British political persecution from up close and personal - here. ⟴ Sweden Bows to US Pressure Copyright Infringement According to an unreleased US Embassy cable in possession of Swedish Television, the US pressure on Sweden to deal with file-sharing issues continued in the years that followed. In the cable, which dates back to 2008, the US Embassy presented a list of six items that they wanted to see addressed, all related to online copyright infringement. A year later, five of these six items were indeed turned into action, including the appointment of more copyright police and prosecutors, backed up by educational anti-piracy campaigns. Of course, the Pirate Bay wasn’t left unmentioned in this cable either. The cable writer mentions that it was hard for the Embassy to get openly involved in piracy related issues, because most of the press coverage was unfavorable towards the copyright industry. “The Pirate Bay raid was portrayed as the Government of Sweden caving in to United States Government pressure. This delicate situation made it difficult, if not counter-productive, for the Embassy to play a public role in IPR issues,” it adds.  [here] Bear in mind, that the above Sweden-US (& allies) collaboration history is not  an exhaustive study in Swedish-US collaboration.  Even so, the above is sufficient as an indication of where Sweden likely stands with regard to USA and its 'problem,' WikiLeaks and journalist-publisher, Julian Assange. If Sweden bends to American pressure and will do so on relatively insignificant matters (ie not designated as 'national security' issues) such as copyright, imagine the pressure the US would bring down to bear.  And imagine the Swedish (& other government) inclination to bend to such US pressure ... if we pretend for one moment that Sweden (or UK) were an 'unwilling' accomplices in the persecution and de facto imprisonment of Julian Assange, publisher-journalist who exposed US and allied war crimes.  Defence Secretary Robert Gates on the arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange 7 December 2010 "Gates said it sounded good to him." 91,000 Afghans killed (incl. civilians, soldiers & militants) Number who have died through indirect causes related to the war est. additional 360,000 people [here] coalition forces have killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents (ie concealment of civilian casualties) ⟴ 6 US soldiers killed [ Sec Def Robert Gates Video 7/12/2010 ]  while Gates refers to 'serious losses' before telling us how he's revived by visiting the scene of mass scale death visited upon Afghanistan by USA US War Casualties - Afghanistan Total US Dead:  2,316 as at June 2015 [here] For some perspective on what may count as 'serious losses,' maybe Gates ought to take a look at the Afghan dead figures (*) 2010     30     31     24     19     34     60     65     55     42     50     53     33     2010 TOTAL:  496 Considering this is an invasion of another country, just shy of 500 dead in 2010 isn't exactly big numbers, when you compare this to losses on the other side. The grand total of US dead for the entire Afghanistan operation is: 2,316 But the US figures don't look so good when it comes to injuries sustained:  massive number of US injured, which comes at an immediate & long-term cost to the taxpayer. Military US War Casualties - Iraq 'Operation Iraqi Freedom'  - page 22 Total US Dead:  4,412 mostly Army then abt. 1/4 Marines as at Dec 2014 MASSIVE number of wounded US Wounded Total:  31,949 as at Dec 2014 [here] US War Casualties - Afghanistan Total US Dead:  2,316 as at June 2015 (ie During 14 Years of US Occupation) [here] Further Confirmation US Deaths -  here ⟴ [Note:  Above Nations Complicit] ⟴ WikiLeaks Exposes War Crimes IRAQ & AFGHANISTAN [ Slate  |  here ] ⟴ Arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange 7 December 2010 "Gates said it sounded good to him." ⟴  WikiLeaks Collateral Murder IRAQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0 Uploaded on 7 Dec 2010 Defence Secretary Robert Gates Afghanistan COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Robert Gates airforce |  recruited CIA 1966 Strategic Air Command as an intelligence officer intelligence briefings rejoined the CIA as an intelligence analyst left the CIA in 1974 > staff of National Security Council returned to the CIA in late 1979 [ Gates nominated as Director of CIA  1987 Withdrew his name after it became clear the Senate would reject the nomination due to controversy about his role in the Iran-Contra affair. ]  1991 -  nominated 2nd time by Pres George H. W. Bush confirmed & sworn Director of CIA (under President George H. W. Bush) "...former division chief Melvin Goodman testified that the agency was the most corrupt and slanted during the tenure of William Casey with Gates serving as Deputy. According to Goodman, Gates was part of an agency leadership that proliferated false information and ignored 'reality'. National Intelligence Council chairman Harold P. Ford testified that during his tenure, Gates had transgressed professional boundaries" close to many figures who played significant roles in the Iran-Contra Affair and was in a position to have known of their activities. served for 26 years in CIA and the National Security Council MA history Indiana Uni 1966 PhD in Russian & Soviet history | Georgetown Uni in 1974 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Gates I'm going to hazard a guess and say that US Secretary of Defence & CIA man Robert Gates knew exactly what kind of predicament Julian Assange was in when he was arrested on those rather handy Sweden police 'sexual misconduct' allegations  on 7 Dec. 2010. Mood Music   COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds Red Right Hand source:  https://youtu.be/RrxePKps87k ⟴  (I like the drama of this song & it fits in with vision I have of the entire across-borders psychopathic government alliance and political persecution of Assange. Mute Robert Gates & watch him while also listening to Nick Cave.)  ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- Other PLEASE SUPPORT Journalist, Julian Assange Under Siege Ecuador embassy, London (3 Years) Detained 5 Years No Charge FAQ & Support https://justice4assange.com/ Collateral Murder WikiLeaks Iraq https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0 ⟴ While I may have encountered Afghanistan war death figures in the media before, I don't have a recall of what little I may have read.  So this is probably the first time I've given the figures any real thought. I'm yet to read articles relating to WikiLeaks and the Afghanistan War Logs (although by now I must have encountered some, since forgotten, mentions in the press).  ꕤ

First NSA Mass Surveillance Legal Challenge - Portland, USA

Mohamed Mohamud appeal is first to challenge NSA surveillance in terrorism conviction 1 / 42 Mohamed Mohamud, after being sentenced to 30 years in prison on Oct. 1, 2014. Courtroom sketch by Abigail Marble. Mike Zacchino | The Oregonian/OregonLive Print Email Bryan Denson | The Oregonian/OregonLive By Bryan Denson | The Oregonian/OregonLive Email the author | Follow on Twitter on August 12, 2015 at 5:00 AM, updated August 12, 2015 at 5:01 AM The U.S. spy operations that once put Portland terrorist Mohamed Mohamud under FBI surveillance violated his constitutional right against unlawful search and seizure, two civil liberties groups contend in a federal appeals court filing. Lawyers for the ACLU and Electronic Frontier Foundation recently filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of Mohamud, who has appealed his 30-year-sentence for trying to detonate a bomb in downtown Portland four years ago. They have joined Mohamud's legal team in denouncing a law that has allowed the National Security Agency to collect troves of overseas communications by Americans through the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 provided the legal justification for the massive NSA surveillance programs exposed two years ago by Edward Snowden. To identify foreign terrorists, the U.S. has secretly collected records of communications between untold numbers of Americans and tens of thousands of people overseas. While the targets of those queries are foreign agents, the civil liberties groups wrote that the government has sometimes performed "backdoor searches," poring through electronic repositories of phone calls, emails and texts for information about U.S. citizens such as Mohamud. That violated Mohamud's Fourth Amendment rights, they argue. His lawyers filed an opening brief with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals this spring, opening the door for what is expected to be the nation's first appellate review of a criminal conviction resulting from the law. Their brief totaled 256 pages, and the court's commissioner ordered them to produce a slimmer version – no more than 180 pages – by this Friday. Government lawyers have until Dec. 7 to file their reply. Assistant U.S. Attorney Ethan D. Knight, lead prosecutor in Mohamud's criminal case, declined to comment on the appeal because it is pending. Lawyers have been arguing about Mohamud's case since the last Monday in November 2010, three days after he tried to detonate what he thought was a massive fertilizer bomb supplied by al-Qaida terrorists. The explosive was packed in a van near Pioneer Courthouse Square, where thousands of people gathered for Portland's holiday tree-lighting ceremony. The latest brief filed by Mohamud's lawyers describes his actions that night: "He pushed the buttons of a cellphone, twice, believing they would cause the explosion of a massive, nail-filled bomb capable of eliminating at least two city blocks. ... The bomb was a fake, created by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as the culmination of a sting operation they had started over a year earlier. "The defense at trial was entrapment: that the government had induced this teenager to attempt a crime he was not predisposed to commit." Mohamud was 19 at the time. On Jan. 31, 2013, a jury before Senior U.S. District Judge Garr M. King found Mohamud guilty of attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction, a charge that carried a potential life sentence. King sentenced him last October to 30 years in prison, and his lawyers filed a notice of appeal eight days later. Ten months later, the Department of Justice filed a court notice saying that the government had obtained permission – under the FISA Amendments Act – to eavesdrop and collect evidence on Mohamud. The 7-year-old law has allowed the NSA to vacuum up millions of ordinary Americans' telephone records. But it also has played a significant role in identifying and disrupting foreign spies and terrorists, national security experts say. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which signed orders that allowed the U.S. to eavesdrop on Mohamud, is the most secretive court in the land. Its written orders, unlike standard wiretap warrants, are classified and not disclosed to the defense. So Mohamud's lawyers never fully understood how the FBI came to investigate their client as a potential terrorist. As Mohamud sits in a federal prison in Victorville, California, his lawyers hope to persuade the appeals court to reverse his conviction and send the case back to Portland for dismissal or a new trial. As an alternative, they are asking the appeals court to vacate their client's sentence and send it back to U.S. District Court for evidentiary hearings or resentencing. Mohamud's lawyers raise 11 key issues in their appeal, pointing out that King had repeatedly turned down their requests for classified evidence. For instance, they wrote that the judge allowed the FBI's two key witnesses – undercover agents – to use their pseudonyms and wear light disguises as they testified before the jury. But their main point, the one that will keep national security scholars buzzing until the 9th Circuit rules in the Mohamud case, is the assertion that the FISA Amendments Act is illegal. One of those watching most closely is Tung Yin, a Lewis & Clark Law School professor who specializes in national security matters. "We shouldn't be putting someone in prison for 30 years if that conviction resulted in significant part from evidence that the government should not have had, which is what this case would determine," said Yin. Retired Federal Public Defender Steven T. Wax, who served on Mohamud's defense team and now works on his appellate team, said the government's use of the FISA Amendments Act should lead to reversal of his client's conviction. He remains troubled that the government might still possess classified evidence that could have helped Mohamud's case. "The way our system should work, the government is obligated by law to provide notice," he said. "They did not. That's a fundamental failing that should lead to throwing out the conviction." -- Bryan Denson bdenson@oregonian.com SOURCE http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2015/08/mohamed_mohamud_appeal_is_firs.html ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT What I got out of this (if I understand correctly): The following enabled the NSA to bulk collect data, in what amounts to the violation of the US  constitution: FISA Amendments Act of 2008 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court NSA conducted an illegal program that bulk collected the records of Americans, in violation of the Fourth Amendment rights enshrined in the US constitution. NSA conducted an illegal program that bulk collected the records of "tens of thousands" of non US citizens abroad (more like entire countries). FBI secures convictions on the basis of entrapment:  inducing targets to commit crime. Following civil liberties groups are mounting a legal challenge in respect of this conviction: ACLU Electronic Frontier Foundation  Law professor, Tung Yin:  "... if that conviction resulted in significant part from evidence that the government should not have had" - 30 year conviction a no go. The brief in defence was knocked back, with instructions to compile something scant (WTF?  A defence is a defence.  It's as long as it takes.) The secrecy surrounding the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is troublesome, because it prevents the defendant mounting a proper defence:   vital information is withheld, on basis of "classified" information justification, interfering with ability to defend. secret, disguised, key FBI witnesses testify. Under these circumstances, anybody could probably be convicted of anything.  No transparency and no accountability.  The accused is induced to commit crime and then denied information on 'classified' grounds and therefore denied the opportunity to properly defend. I don't understand the principles associated with evidence one is not supposed to have.  But I guess it has something to do with fair trials. As for FBI informants, they're not necessarily reliable.  Usually, these types are being blackmailed by the authorities into informing on others, so they're motivated by the opportunity to save their skin. ꕤ

SINGAPORE - SURVEILLANCE STATE

https://www.digitalnewsasia.com/digital-economy/singapore-is-using-spyware-and-its-citizens-cant-complain #WikiLeaks #HackingTeam #Singapore - #Surveillance state, NO: *privacy right *prior judicial auth. req. (leg'n) #Law #Privacy #Singapore regulatory structure re #surveillance = Executive branch controlled / little judicial oversight #Singapore #SURVEILLANCE incls: CCTV drones Internet / comm. / access SIM card reg. ID req. register websites big data analytics #Singapore #SURVEILLANCE 'PacketShape'  {Blue Coat Systems Inc, USA-based provider} monitoring various, incl: Facebook Twitter Google Mail Skype #Singapore * Has NOT ratified: International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights (ICCPR) https://www.digitalnewsasia.com/digital-economy/singapore-is-using-spyware-and-its-citizens-cant-complain --------------------- COMMENT Mass surveillance must be a given in a country like Singapore, with no constitutional or other legislative checks on monitoring of citizens (and no ratification of the human rights covenant, either). The degree of surveillance and the lack of civil rights goes back to colonial rule.   --------------------- Modern Singapore founded in 1819 as British colony (by Sir Stamford Raffles) wikipedia

Ineffective Mass Surviellance - 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai

Revealed: The hidden Western intelligence breakdowns behind the 26/11 Mumbai attacks Sebastian Rotella, ProPublica  · 21 April 2015 Why the David Coleman Headley story is still relevant. When Edward Snowden revealed the US  government's vast surveillance programmes in 2013, the Obama administration responded with a defence that sounded compelling: the high-tech spying apparatus had stopped terrorist attacks. In a rush to provide success stories, senior officials cited the capture of an American terrorist whose case I knew well. I had spent several years reporting about David Coleman Headley, whose reconnaissance for Pakistani spymasters and terrorist chiefs was crucial to the 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai that killed 166 people, including six Americans. Now the US intelligence community was claiming the National Security Agency had played a key role in preventing Headley's follow-up plot against a Danish newspaper in 2009. That surprised me. In a series of stories and in the 2011 PBS Frontline documentary, A Perfect Terrorist, ProPublica had detailed multiple breakdowns in the US counterterror system that allowed Headley to elude detection for years despite tips that could have prevented the attacks. I consulted with intelligence and law enforcement sources involved in the case, and they were mystified, too. "When I first heard that statement, I was scratching my head," a counterterror official told me. "I was trying to figure out how NSA played a role. My recollection is that it wasn't that much at all." Deepening mystery The mystery soon deepened when ProPublica gained access to a trove of Snowden's classified materials. Suddenly a new, previously hidden layer in the story emerged, one that largely contradicted the government's claims and revealed Mumbai as a tragic case study in the strengths and limitations of high-tech surveillance – a rare look at how counterterrorism really works. Our reporting airs on Tuesday in American Terrorist, a major update of the 2011 Frontline film. It details the story of Headley's eventual capture as well as the secret surveillance of Mumbai plotters that took place before and during the attacks. (We first reported some of the material in December with the New York Times.) The Snowden documents show that, months before Mumbai, British intelligence began spying on the online communications of Zarrar Shah, a key plotter who was the technology chief for the Pakistani terror group Lashkar-e-Taiba. Britain's General Communications Headquarters, or GCHQ, had the ability to monitor many of Shah's digital activities, including Web searches and emails, during weeks in which he did research on targets, handled reconnaissance data, and set up an internet phone system for the attack. But based on documents and interviews, it appears that the British spy agency did not use its access to closely analyse data from Shah until a Lashkar attack squad invaded Mumbai on November 26, 2008. Nor did the British tell the Americans they were watching Shah beforehand, despite the close alliance between GCHQ and the NSA. The British data could have complemented separate chatter that the NSA and Central Intelligence Agency were collecting about a potential attack on Mumbai, none of it related to Headley. Senior US intelligence officials gave us their first account of their warnings to India about a Lashkar threat to sites in Mumbai frequented by Westerners, including the Taj Mahal Palace Hotel, the eventual ground zero. Meanwhile, Indian intelligence had separately tracked Shah's communications before the attack, another layer of a complex international scenario. Real-time access Once the shooting started, the spy agencies went into high gear. The British realised that prior targeting of Shah gave them real-time access to the Karachi control room from which Lashkar chiefs directed the three-day siege using phones and computers. GCHQ and NSA pulled a haul of intelligence from the monitoring of Shah and others that enabled analysts to assemble a "complete operations plan" of the plot, according to an NSA document. The evidence helped the Western and Indian governments push Pakistan to crack down on Lashkar. U.S. officials emphasised that they had warned the Indians. British officials disputed the idea that they had information that could have prevented an attack; they said they would have shared such intelligence with India. The Indian government did not respond to requests for official comment, though an official in the Intelligence Bureau, India's counterterror service, told me his agency was not involved in monitoring Shah. As with past failures to prevent terrorist attacks, more aggressive analysis and better intelligence-sharing could have made a difference. But high-tech spying has its limits. "I'm not saying that the capacity to intercept the communications is not valuable," said Charles (Sam) Faddis, a former CIA counterterror chief. "Clearly that's valuable." Nonetheless, he added, it is a mistake to rely heavily on bulk surveillance programmes in isolation. "You're going to waste a lot of money, you're going to waste a lot of time," Faddis said. "At the end, you're going have very little to show for it." Headley represents another potential stream of intelligence that could have made a difference before Mumbai. He is serving 35 years in prison for his role. He was a Pakistani-American son of privilege who became a heroin addict, drug smuggler and DEA informant, then an Islamic terrorist and Pakistani spy, and finally, a prize witness for U.S. prosecutors. In recounting that odyssey, we previously explored half a dozen missed opportunities by US law enforcement to pursue tips from Headley's associates about his terrorist activity. New reporting and analysis traces Headley's trail of suspicious electronic communications as he did reconnaissance missions under the direction of Lashkar and Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate. Headley discussed targets, expressed extremist sentiments and raised other red flags in often brazen emails, texts and phone calls to his handlers, one of whom worked closely on the plot with Shah, the Lashkar communications chief targeted by the British. Suspicious emails US intelligence officials disclosed to me for the first time that, after the attacks, intensified NSA monitoring of Pakistan did scoop up some of Headley's suspicious emails. But analysts did not realise he was a US-based terrorist involved in the Mumbai attacks who was at work on a new plot against Denmark, officials admitted. The sheer volume of data and his use of multiple email addresses and his original name, Daood Gilani, posed obstacles, US intelligence officials said. To perfect his cover as an American businessman, Headley had legally changed his name in 2006. "They detected a guy named ‘Gilani' writing to bad guys in Pakistan, communicating with terror and ISI nodes," a senior US intelligence official said. "He wrote also in fluent Urdu, which drew interest. Linking ‘Gilani' to ‘Headley' took a long time. The NSA was looking at those emails post-Mumbai. It was not clear to them who he was." "They hadn't connected the dots," the official said. "They had only some of the puzzle pieces. They needed something external, like a specific entity helping us." In fact, it was the FBI and Customs and Border Protection which finally zeroed in on Headley – with foreign help. FBI agents in Chicago told us the story for the first time during our reporting for the film. On July 22, 2009, a lead landed on the desk of a youthful FBI agent named Jeremy Francis. He had joined a Chicago counterterror squad five days earlier. The tip was brief but specific: British intelligence was monitoring two suspected Al Qaeda militants in a northern city called Derby. The duo had received phone calls from a man in Chicago named David who planned to travel to meet them soon. Francis and his partner traced the calls to a pay phone on Chicago's north side. The agents worked with border protection analysts in Washington, D.C., who pored through flight manifests looking for passengers with the first name "David" who had imminent plans to fly Lufthansa from Chicago to Manchester via Frankfurt. Border protection analysts whittled down the list to Headley, whom airport inspectors had questioned in the past. The FBI relayed his identity to British counterterror officers as his flight was in the air on July 25. The British shadowed Headley in Derby. The suspected Al Qaeda men told him they couldn't give him the $20,000, guns and volunteers he wanted for an attack on a Danish newspaper that had published cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. European agencies monitored Headley as he traveled to Sweden and Copenhagen, where he did reconnaissance for the newspaper plot. He came home to Chicago. FBI surveillance teams deployed. The case grew. "At some point nearly every agent and analyst in the Chicago field office was working some aspect of this case," Francis told us. "There were hundreds of people back in FBI headquarters that were working this case." Their most urgent fear: a plot in the United States. Headley's simultaneous ties to Al Qaeda, Lashkar and Pakistan's ISI were unprecedented. "What's the ISI's role, what are they doing … is he working for them?" Robert J Holley, the special agent in charge of the FBI's Chicago Division, recalled thinking. "We don't know what we have here." Once Headley had been identified, the N.S.A. played a role in the investigation. But our reporting showed that its contributions were more modest than the accounts offered by the intelligence community in 2013. Denmark plot Senior officials had asserted that Headley's Denmark plot was stopped by the NSA's 215 programme, which involves bulk collection of U.S. phone records: date, duration, numbers called. When a White House-appointed panel reviewed the 215 program's role in counterterrorism investigations, however, it concluded the claim was wrong. "We are aware of no indication that bulk collection of telephone records through section 215 made any significant contribution to the David Coleman Headley investigation," David Medine, who chaired the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, told us in an interview. Senior officials also had suggested that the NSA's 702 programme, which collects the content of overseas emails and other communications, foiled Headley's plot. Interviews with counterterror officials showed that, in reality, it played only a support role. The 702 programmr was "a piece of the investigation" that helped to map out Headley's overseas contacts, Holley said. But he made it clear that the NSA did not crack the Denmark case or identify Headley. "This was not a plot, though, that is discovered by that programme?" I asked Holley. "That's correct," he said. Valuable work In interviews about our findings, US intelligence officials conceded that some of the assertions about the NSA's role in Headley's capture were overstated, though they insisted that the agency's work on the case was valuable. Officials reminded me of the super-heated atmosphere after the Snowden revelations. The Obama administration was under pressure to defend secret programmes that had never been discussed before. As a result, statements about Headley and other cases sometimes lacked nuance and accuracy, officials say. "These were highly classified programmes, and it took a while to analyse the benefits of the programmes and to articulate them publicly," Medine said. Experts say portraying bulk surveillance and other intelligence programmes as a magic bullet that can stop attacks is too simplistic. In reality, a mosaic of intelligence from multiple sources is usually required. "Most threats are not detected by this kind of bulk collection alone," said Andrew Liepman, a former deputy chief of the National Counterterrorism Center now with the Rand Corp. "Most of it is a combination of good work from the FBI, intel from human sources, and the product from NSA is essential in this mix."  ['Alone'?  Hello:  it's not DETECTED by NSA *at all* ... they come in after the event, so they don't appear to have a role in *detection*.] The NSA contributed to the massive amount of data investigators used to build a portrait of Headley during the weeks they shadowed him. As agents planned the arrest in early October of 2009, they consulted with an FBI behavioral specialist and Headley's former DEA handler. The assessment: Headley saw himself as a soldier. He responded with deference to authority and was likely to cooperate, as he had after past drug busts. The trick was to treat him with respect, like a worthy foe surrendering on the battlefield. Headley was planning to leave the US again. Holley's team decided to arrest him at Chicago's O'Hare Airport after he passed through a security checkpoint. They would approach him discreetly – no drawn guns, no shouted commands, no swarm of agents in body armor. It worked. He politely complied. The agents who escorted him to the interrogation room at the Chicago field office made his former DEA handler briefly visible. The message: time to change sides again. Two agents, military veterans chosen for their interrogation skills, sat down with Headley. He didn't stop talking for two weeks. Unprecedented evidence Although the communications surveillance had hinted at links to the Mumbai attacks, the agents were stunned by the extent of his role in the plot and his high-level contacts. He gave the FBI unprecedented evidence and intelligence about Al Qaeda, Lashkar and the hardest target of all, the ISI. His testimony resulted in the unprecedented US indictment of a serving ISI officer, known only as Major Iqbal, for the terrorist murders of the six Americans in Mumbai. Today, Major Iqbal and other fugitive masterminds are at large in Pakistan protected by the ISI, an intelligence service that is nominally a US ally, according to Western and Indian officials and court documents. Although Pakistan arrested a few Lashkar bosses, their trial remains stalled – six years later. In the latest display of impunity, two weeks ago Pakistani authorities released on bail Zaki ur-Rehman Lakhvi, the military chief of Lashkar. Even the defendants behind bars are still a threat. Shah, Lashkar's technology and communications chief, and his fellow militants continue to direct terrorist activity from the prison, according to current and former Western and Indian counterterror officials. "They're able to continue operating unfettered there," said Tricia Bacon of American University, a former State Department intelligence analyst. "The control room that they once had in Karachi to oversee the Mumbai attacks they essentially now have in the prison in the middle of the military capital in Pakistan." That's another reason why Headley's story is still relevant. Justice has not been done. http://scroll.in/article/722264/revealed-the-hidden-western-intelligence-breakdowns-behind-the-2611-mumbai-attacks COMMENT The Headley (Gilani) guy worked for the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) at some stage, as well as Pakistani intelligence (ISI) and terrorists (who were supported by Pakistani intelligence officers) ... and the FBI let him off the hook when others reported him: FBI, citing Gilani's work for the DEA, did not consider him a threat despite the accusations leveled against him in 2001 and 2002.  [wikipedia] Meanwhile, Gilani was also involved the drug trade. After he was finally busted: Some Indian analysts have speculated that David Headley was a double agent for the Central Intelligence Agency that had infiltrated LeT [the terrorist group], an accusation denied by the CIA.   [wikipedia] The investigation has confirmed that Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorists carried out the Mumbai attack under the "guidance" of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). Headley stated that the ISI was engaged with the Lashkar commanders responsible for the Mumbai deaths and injuries at each and every stage of the plot.   [wikipedia] The story's too complicated for me follow properly and I can't really get a handle on what's going on here or why.  Whatever it is, it seems very warped. And this guy's some kind of Houdini of getting busted:  he always seems to get away with doing a deal to get a lighter sentence, by informing on others. What's surprising is that this guy's father was a Pakistani diplomat and that his brother, Danyal Gilani, is (as at 2011): "posted as the spokesman at the Pakistani Embassy in Beijing." [1] Geez, how many twists and turns has this story got?  You couldn't make this up.  LOL Anyway, all that mass surveillance is looking pretty pointless. Terrorists aside, the mass surveillance is also lame in police state UK, when people can still pull off a massive heist such as this: Inside the Hatton Garden heist vault: First pictures show how gang drilled through concrete The gang escaped with gems and cash worth an estimated £60million which they stuffed into wheelie bins before loading them on to the back of a Ford Transit van. The CCTV appeared to show images of six gang members. http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/hatton-garden-heist-first-pictures-from-inside-the-vault-hit-in-60m-gem-raid-10194667.html