“If Headley were reporting to the FBI, it could also explain the very specific warnings that the US government gave to the government of India about plans to attack hotels in Mumbai in September 2008. Following the warning, the government of India initially increased security measures at these sites, but the measures were dropped before the attacks were launched in November 2008.”

 The very specific warnings included information about Headley’s surveillance of the sea coast around Mumbai and included warnings that the attack could come from the sea aimed at the two hotels that were eventually targeted. 

Is this report correct? If not, the government must issue a denial.

The Statesman of December 20th carried a page one report by Raju Santhanam pointing out the security lapses on 26/11. He wrote: “Had 26/11 occurred on 29/11, the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh, would have been at Mumbai’s Trident Hotel. On the very day that the attacks took place, India’s top security agencies, including Intelligence Bureau and the Special Protection Group, had “cleared” Dr Singh’s engagement there, that was scheduled three days later.”

Is this report correct? If not, the government must issue a denial.

The government that claims to be vigorously fighting a war against terror is silent. For the sake of national security, of its own security, the government must clear the air. 

If the above quoted reports are correct, who took the decision to lift security from the targeted hotels before 26/11? Was the decision to clear the Prime Minister’s engagement in the Trident Hotel on 29/11, which was cleared on 26/11, within the knowledge and consent of the National Security Adviser? If not, why not? These are questions that Home Minister Chidambaram cannot evade. With regard to national security the government is either criminally negligent or criminally subverted. 

Will the government respond?