Terror plot to bomb planes foiled in the UK
-
HansMartin
- Professional
- Posts: 270
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 7:50 am
- Location: Back Home in CA
By posting this I am not indicating I agree with anything written apart from the very last sentance:
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/index.html
Craig Murray
*Writer and broadcaster*
As Britain's outspoken Ambassador to the Central Asian Republic of Uzbekistan, Craig Murray helped expose vicious human rights abuses by the US-funded regime of Islam Karimov. He is now
a prominent critic of Western policy in the region.
August 14, 2006
The UK Terror plot: what's really going on?
I have been reading very carefully through all the Sunday newspapers to try and analyse the truth from all the scores of pages claiming to detail the so-called bomb plot. Unlike the great herd of so-called security experts doing the media analysis, I have the advantage of having had the very highest security clearances myself, having done a huge amount of professional intelligence analysis, and having been inside the spin machine.
So this, I believe, is the true story.
None of the alleged terrorists had made a bomb. None had bought a plane ticket. Many did not even have passports, which given the efficiency of the UK Passport Agency would mean they couldn't be a plane bomber for quite some time.
In the absence of bombs and airline tickets, and in many cases passports, it could be pretty difficult to convince a jury beyond reasonable doubt that individuals intended to go through with suicide bombings, whatever rash stuff they may have bragged in internet chat rooms.
What is more, many of those arrested had been under surveillance for over a year - like thousands of other British Muslims. And not just Muslims. Like me. Nothing from that surveillance had indicated the need for early arrests.
Then an interrogation in Pakistan revealed the details of this amazing plot to blow up multiple planes - which, rather extraordinarily, had not turned up in a year of surveillance. Of course, the interrogators of the Pakistani dictator have their ways of making people sing like canaries. As I witnessed in Uzbekistan, you can get the most extraordinary information this way. Trouble is it always tends to give the interrogators all they might want, and more, in a desperate effort to stop or avert torture. What it doesn't give is the truth.
The gentleman being "interrogated" had fled the UK after being wanted for questioning over the murder of his uncle some years ago. That might be felt to cast some doubt on his reliability. It might also be felt that factors other than political ones might be at play within these relationships. Much is also being made of large transfers of money outside the formal economy. Not in fact too unusual in the British Muslim community, but if this activity is criminal, there are many possibilities that have nothing to do with terrorism.
We then have the extraordinary question of Bush and Blair discussing the possible arrests over the weekend. Why? I think the answer to that is plain. Both in desperate domestic political trouble, they longed for "Another 9/11". The intelligence from Pakistan, however dodgy, gave them a new 9/11 they could sell to the media. The media has bought, wholesale, all the rubbish they have been shovelled.
We then have the appalling political propaganda of John Reid, Home Secretary, making a speech warning us all of the dreadful evil threatening us and complaining that "Some people don't get" the need to abandon all our traditional liberties. He then went on, according to his own propaganda machine, to stay up all night and minutely direct the arrests. There could be no clearer evidence that our Police are now just a political tool. Like all the best nasty regimes, the knock on the door came in the middle of the night, at 2.30am. Those arrested included a mother with a six week old baby.
For those who don't know, it is worth introducing Reid. A hardened Stalinist with a long term reputation for personal violence, at Stirling Univeristy he was the Communist Party's "Enforcer", (in days when the Communist Party ran Stirling University Students' Union, which it should not be forgotten was a business with a very substantial cash turnover). Reid was sent to beat up those who deviated from the Party line.
We will now never know if any of those arrested would have gone on to make a bomb or buy a plane ticket. Most of them do not fit the "Loner" profile you would expect - a tiny percentage of suicide bombers have happy marriages and young children. As they were all under surveillance, and certainly would have been on airport watch lists, there could have been little danger in letting them proceed closer to maturity - that is certainly what we would have done with the IRA.
In all of this, the one thing of which I am certain is that the timing is deeply political. This is more propaganda than plot. Of the over one thousand British Muslims arrested under anti-terrorist legislation, only twelve per cent are ever charged with anything. That is simply harrassment of Muslims on an appalling scale. Of those charged, 80% are acquitted. Most of the very few - just over two per cent of arrests - who are convicted, are not convicted of anything to do terrorism, but of some minor offence the Police happened upon while trawling through the wreck of the lives they had shattered.
Be sceptical. Be very, very sceptical.
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/index.html
Craig Murray
*Writer and broadcaster*
As Britain's outspoken Ambassador to the Central Asian Republic of Uzbekistan, Craig Murray helped expose vicious human rights abuses by the US-funded regime of Islam Karimov. He is now
a prominent critic of Western policy in the region.
August 14, 2006
The UK Terror plot: what's really going on?
I have been reading very carefully through all the Sunday newspapers to try and analyse the truth from all the scores of pages claiming to detail the so-called bomb plot. Unlike the great herd of so-called security experts doing the media analysis, I have the advantage of having had the very highest security clearances myself, having done a huge amount of professional intelligence analysis, and having been inside the spin machine.
So this, I believe, is the true story.
None of the alleged terrorists had made a bomb. None had bought a plane ticket. Many did not even have passports, which given the efficiency of the UK Passport Agency would mean they couldn't be a plane bomber for quite some time.
In the absence of bombs and airline tickets, and in many cases passports, it could be pretty difficult to convince a jury beyond reasonable doubt that individuals intended to go through with suicide bombings, whatever rash stuff they may have bragged in internet chat rooms.
What is more, many of those arrested had been under surveillance for over a year - like thousands of other British Muslims. And not just Muslims. Like me. Nothing from that surveillance had indicated the need for early arrests.
Then an interrogation in Pakistan revealed the details of this amazing plot to blow up multiple planes - which, rather extraordinarily, had not turned up in a year of surveillance. Of course, the interrogators of the Pakistani dictator have their ways of making people sing like canaries. As I witnessed in Uzbekistan, you can get the most extraordinary information this way. Trouble is it always tends to give the interrogators all they might want, and more, in a desperate effort to stop or avert torture. What it doesn't give is the truth.
The gentleman being "interrogated" had fled the UK after being wanted for questioning over the murder of his uncle some years ago. That might be felt to cast some doubt on his reliability. It might also be felt that factors other than political ones might be at play within these relationships. Much is also being made of large transfers of money outside the formal economy. Not in fact too unusual in the British Muslim community, but if this activity is criminal, there are many possibilities that have nothing to do with terrorism.
We then have the extraordinary question of Bush and Blair discussing the possible arrests over the weekend. Why? I think the answer to that is plain. Both in desperate domestic political trouble, they longed for "Another 9/11". The intelligence from Pakistan, however dodgy, gave them a new 9/11 they could sell to the media. The media has bought, wholesale, all the rubbish they have been shovelled.
We then have the appalling political propaganda of John Reid, Home Secretary, making a speech warning us all of the dreadful evil threatening us and complaining that "Some people don't get" the need to abandon all our traditional liberties. He then went on, according to his own propaganda machine, to stay up all night and minutely direct the arrests. There could be no clearer evidence that our Police are now just a political tool. Like all the best nasty regimes, the knock on the door came in the middle of the night, at 2.30am. Those arrested included a mother with a six week old baby.
For those who don't know, it is worth introducing Reid. A hardened Stalinist with a long term reputation for personal violence, at Stirling Univeristy he was the Communist Party's "Enforcer", (in days when the Communist Party ran Stirling University Students' Union, which it should not be forgotten was a business with a very substantial cash turnover). Reid was sent to beat up those who deviated from the Party line.
We will now never know if any of those arrested would have gone on to make a bomb or buy a plane ticket. Most of them do not fit the "Loner" profile you would expect - a tiny percentage of suicide bombers have happy marriages and young children. As they were all under surveillance, and certainly would have been on airport watch lists, there could have been little danger in letting them proceed closer to maturity - that is certainly what we would have done with the IRA.
In all of this, the one thing of which I am certain is that the timing is deeply political. This is more propaganda than plot. Of the over one thousand British Muslims arrested under anti-terrorist legislation, only twelve per cent are ever charged with anything. That is simply harrassment of Muslims on an appalling scale. Of those charged, 80% are acquitted. Most of the very few - just over two per cent of arrests - who are convicted, are not convicted of anything to do terrorism, but of some minor offence the Police happened upon while trawling through the wreck of the lives they had shattered.
Be sceptical. Be very, very sceptical.
Jockey, I mis-read this at first and thought you were referring to the last paragraph? I assume you weren't?Jockey wrote:By posting this I am not indicating I agree with anything written apart from the very last sentance:
The last sentance:
Be sceptical. Be very, very sceptical.
If so, you would need a lot of explaining to do, as it is, if in general, this is where you are getting your insight from, then its you that should be the sceptic.
Talk is cheap
-
hollygolightly1
- Member
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:45 pm
No-one is disputing the cost in lives and obviously every loss of life is a tragedy for the people concerned; the point I made was - how many civilian lives (i.e. children included) were lost in Iraq and discounted by the U.S.A. as an unfortunate byproduct of war? A conservative estimate says at least 20,000. Or is it only American lives that count (by the way how did the figure alter from 2,900 to 290,000 within one paragraph?? )I don't know whether you are American, but please don't try and assert your viewpoint on behalf of all Americans; there were widows of 9/11 who were vocal in their unhappiness at the attack being used as justification for the war ("Not in our name" etc.). I certainly know Americans (New Yorkers admittedly, and perhaps they are a special breed because their city is more European in many ways than other parts of the U.S.) who understand the flaws in their country's foreign policy and are opposed to it.prcscct wrote:The cost to the US and about 20 other countries, including Thailand, was about 2,900 lives. Where the hell are you coming from? You almost mock 290,000,000 Americans with some of these words. Not only you but others with this branch of the thread. It's a free forum, continue if you feel so strongly about the issue. However, the gloves now come off if they must. Petehollygolightly1 wrote: Remember the site itself had already been targeted. The "cost" to the US is also difficult to assess because if you take the site of the world trade centre itself, it's worth more now in real estate terms.
From BBC News;
The White House has made light of reports alleging that John Prescott said George Bush had been "crap" on the Middle East peace process.
Labour MP Harry Cohen said the remark came during a private, "robust" meeting on Tuesday with fellow Labour MPs.
The Labour MP said he believed Mr Prescott's comment had been "an honest and good point, well made". Mr. Cohen said Mr. Prescott's "crap" comment had been specific to the US efforts on the road map.
Perhaps I had underestimated John Prescott. Yesterday he demonstrated a devastatingly insightful understanding of the world’s problems.
(No offence intended Pete, if you happen to be a fan of Bush.)
The White House has made light of reports alleging that John Prescott said George Bush had been "crap" on the Middle East peace process.
Labour MP Harry Cohen said the remark came during a private, "robust" meeting on Tuesday with fellow Labour MPs.
The Labour MP said he believed Mr Prescott's comment had been "an honest and good point, well made". Mr. Cohen said Mr. Prescott's "crap" comment had been specific to the US efforts on the road map.
Perhaps I had underestimated John Prescott. Yesterday he demonstrated a devastatingly insightful understanding of the world’s problems.
(No offence intended Pete, if you happen to be a fan of Bush.)
Back to the OP, SKY News has revealed major inconsitencies in the hand baggage rules between both UK and the rest of Europe, and the UK and USA.
The SKY reporter proved it by flying from Heathrow to Brussels with banned hand baggage items such as Hair Gel, Water, Toothpaste etc in his checked baggage. On arrival at Brussels, he simply removed the banned items from his checked baggage, and placed them in to his hand baggage. He then legally boarded the aircraft back to Heathrow. On the return flight, he filmed himself in the toilet with the various liquids at hand.
USA are complaining that the UK's restrictions are not strict enough.
The whole thing is a farce with rules varying from country to country. With such varying regulations according to which country you are flying from, there are still 2 major problems ie:
1. The terrorists will find a way through. They are generally cowards who pick soft targets. If they can't put a bomb on a plane from the UK, they'll simply move to where they can.
2. The Dunkirk spirit will soon wain if the UK is going it alone with these regulations.
The SKY reporter proved it by flying from Heathrow to Brussels with banned hand baggage items such as Hair Gel, Water, Toothpaste etc in his checked baggage. On arrival at Brussels, he simply removed the banned items from his checked baggage, and placed them in to his hand baggage. He then legally boarded the aircraft back to Heathrow. On the return flight, he filmed himself in the toilet with the various liquids at hand.
USA are complaining that the UK's restrictions are not strict enough.
The whole thing is a farce with rules varying from country to country. With such varying regulations according to which country you are flying from, there are still 2 major problems ie:
1. The terrorists will find a way through. They are generally cowards who pick soft targets. If they can't put a bomb on a plane from the UK, they'll simply move to where they can.
2. The Dunkirk spirit will soon wain if the UK is going it alone with these regulations.
Championship Plymouth Argyle 1 - 2 Leeds Utd 
Points 46; Position 23 RELEGATED
Points 46; Position 23 RELEGATED
The figure was 290,000,000, the population of the USA, and that's who I said you were mocking by saying the real estate is now more valuable than it was when the WTC's were standing on it. In addition, you say New York Americans are a special breed and are "more European" than the rest of America. Is that a good thing? You talk out of an orifice that is not your mouth. Yes, I am American and I'll speak for them as I please, it's called democracy, something foreign for sure to most muslims in the world.hollygolightly1 wrote: No-one is disputing the cost in lives and obviously every loss of life is a tragedy for the people concerned; the point I made was - how many civilian lives (i.e. children included) were lost in Iraq and discounted by the U.S.A. as an unfortunate byproduct of war? A conservative estimate says at least 20,000. Or is it only American lives that count (by the way how did the figure alter from 2,900 to 290,000 within one paragraph?? )I don't know whether you are American, but please don't try and assert your viewpoint on behalf of all Americans; there were widows of 9/11 who were vocal in their unhappiness at the attack being used as justification for the war ("Not in our name" etc.). I certainly know Americans (New Yorkers admittedly, and perhaps they are a special breed because their city is more European in many ways than other parts of the U.S.) who understand the flaws in their country's foreign policy and are opposed to it.
No one likes war, no one likes to see civilians and children getting killed. Make a choice. Do you honestly think that if we stop, they will stop? Should we just sacrifice Israel? Sure, what the heck, why not, the lesser of two evils. When the millitant muslims are marching down the street of London and New York, people will say "my God, how did this happen..?" How?... apathy and pipe dreams of flowers in your hair everywhere.
What the world is seeing today is a school yard spat as compared to what is coming. Do I want it...no. Does anyone want it..no. Make a choice, our way of life for our future generations, or theirs?
If you really want to think about something, think about China and Russia. Both have been sitting back, waiting to see if the USA, UK and other allies have the where with all to see this through. Once it is evident, we'll see a concerted effort by both of them to assist the USA and UK in finalizing it all, including North Korea, Iran and Syria. It's called world politics and economy. The USA and UK were not kind to the USSR or to China in the old days, this is payback so to speak, for a limited time only. They will not bite their noses off despite their faces.
So, you've had your rant and so have I. I hope we can agree to disagree that what happens in world history is not always pleasant. Again, make a choice. Pete
-
hollygolightly1
- Member
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:45 pm
Well, I see nothing democratic in one individual claiming to speak on behalf of the entire population of the USA. Nor is it mocking anyone to say the real estate is more valuable; it's a well-cited fact. Many Americans have never left their country so have no concept of what it means to exist beyond their experience, and don't even get me started on the Bible belt... As I pointed out earlier, the US are very selective in their labelling of terrorists and happily funded the IRA who engaged in exactly the same tactics, albeit on a smaller scale. So it's nothing to do with apathy it's to do with recognising that wars are fought for economic reasons; the American army is not even particularly respected because soldiers are trigger-happy. As for democracy, I think the existence of Guantanamo makes a joke of any pretensions to democracy. I am not anti-American; but as I said, I know Americans (liberals not "hippies") who feel this way and yet were made to feel that anti-war sentiments were a betrayal of their country (so much for democracy). Yes, we can agree to differ but I consider myself to have argued more fluently because I didn't resort to saying you were speaking out of an orifice other than your mouth...prcscct wrote:
The figure was 290,000,000, the population of the USA, and that's who I said you were mocking by saying the real estate is now more valuable than it was when the WTC's were standing on it. In addition, you say New York Americans are a special breed and are "more European" than the rest of America. Is that a good thing? You talk out of an orifice that is not your mouth. Yes, I am American and I'll speak for them as I please, it's called democracy, something foreign for sure to most muslims in the world.
Pete
Yes, you were more eloquent, although a bit nasal.hollygolightly1 wrote:Yes, we can agree to differ but I consider myself to have argued more fluently because I didn't resort to saying you were speaking out of an orifice other than your mouth...
Just an old soldiers viewpoint Holly. I went through a war where we were first abandoned by our people and then by our entire government. There's still thousands of veterans in mental institutions today because of all that. One would think that would have changed all of us into pacifists, it didn't for whatever reason. So, lets call a truce. I'm on enough other forums that argue these things and HHAD is my escape to a happpier place. 
Pete-
hollygolightly1
- Member
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:45 pm
Well said.prcscct wrote:Yes, you were more eloquent, although a bit nasal.hollygolightly1 wrote:Yes, we can agree to differ but I consider myself to have argued more fluently because I didn't resort to saying you were speaking out of an orifice other than your mouth...
