Al Qaeda foiled again!

[faceless]

Al-Qaeda terror plot to bomb Easter shoppers
An al-Qaeda cell was days away from carrying out an "Easter spectacular" of co-ordinated suicide bomb attacks on shopping centres in Manchester, police believe.
By Duncan Gardham,
Security Correspondent
telegraph.co.uk
09 Apr 2009

Sources told The Daily Telegraph that the arrests of 12 men in the north west of England on Wednesday were linked to a suspected plan to launch a devastating attack this weekend. Some of the suspects were watched by MI5 agents as they filmed themselves outside the Trafford Centre on the edge of Manchester, the Arndale Centre in the city centre, and the nearby St Ann's Square. Police were forced to round up the alleged plotters after they were overheard discussing dates, understood to include the Easter bank holiday, one of the busiest shopping weekends of the year.

"It could have been the next few days and they were talking about 10 days at the outside," one source said. "We had to act." Police are now engaged in a search for an alleged bomb factory, where explosives might have been assembled.

If such a plot was carried out, it would almost certainly have been Britain's worst terrorist attack, with the potential to cause more deaths than the suicide attacks of July 7, 2005, when 52 people were murdered.

------------------

I got as far reading the article before stopping at the bit I've highlighted. A newspaper is supposed to deliver news in it main articles, not idiotic speculation. They don't allow comments strangely enough...

[pirtybirdy]

I'd have to agree with you there. It seems that's all I see these days is opinions and what the author "thinks". I also just want the news and the facts that we have in front of us.

[luke]

Raids on 'bomb plotters' fail to unearth explosives

[luke]

Craig Murray: Politically Timed "Terror" Arrests - the Real Bob Quick Scandal

The mainstream media is in a flurry of excitement over the “Terror” arrests of students in the North West of England. Linked to this is the media feeding frenzy over the resignation of Bob Quick, Scotland Yard’s anti-terror chief. It is important to note that the Quick incident only brought forward the arrests by a few hours. Yet in all the acres of coverage in the newspapers, and all the hype on TV, nobody seems to have noticed the real story.

It was an accident that Bob Quick had his secret document on display as he was photographed entering Downing St.

But it was no accident that he was photographed entering Downing Street.

No 10 is a Tardis-like building which is far more impressive inside than out, and which seems impossibly large. Its secret is that it links straight through to No 11 and, more importantly, through to the huge Cabinet Office building that runs along Whitehall. The Cabinet Office is the central secretariat of the British government and in effect the office of the Prime Minister. The separation of the No 10 staff and the Cabinet Office staff is a polite fiction. The government’s major interdepartmental committees meet in the Cabinet Office, including the sexy Joint Intelligence Committee and its sub-committees. One of the fascinating things about the vast Cabinet Office building is that it incorporates parts of the original fabric of the Tudor Whitehall Palace.

In the first Iraq War I used to hand carry intelligence reports to No 10, and sometimes had to explain them personally to Mrs Thatcher. I never once took one in the front door. In fact I have only ever walked in the front door of No 10 when accompanying a foreign dignitary or attending a party. The front door is for people the government wants to be seen – hence the permanent stand of photographers which captured Bob Quick. People arriving to brief on secret matters go in through the back door, or more likely through the Cabinet Office.

So why did the government want us to see that Bob Quick was entering No 10? The only possible answer is that, had things gone more smoothly in the arrest of the “Terror suspects”, the government would have paraded the footage of Quick entering no 10 as evidence that it was really Glorious Gordon and Genius Jacqui who had directed the operation and saved the world - again.

It is very, very wrong – it violates the whole spirit of the constitution – for politicians to be involved in arresting people. If the police had real evidence that these people are terrorists, then of course they should have been arrested when the Police felt the right moment had come. That moment is when they have sufficient evidence, and are not putting the public at risk by undue delay. That is a technical decision requiring skill, expertise and experience in operational policing.

It is a matter of the criminal law. It is absolutely not the business of Jacqui Smith and Gordon Brown. But we know that under New Labour the politicians are deciding who should be arrested and when. We know that for sure because then Home Secretary John Reid said in terms that he decided when the arrests should be made in the farcical “Bigger than 9/11”, (though in the event non-existent), “Liquid airplane bomb plot” case.

If politicians are going to decide the timing of arrests, then they cannot be surprised or aggrieved if we suspect that the timing of arrests is political.

This was definitely the case in the “Liquid Bomb Plot”. I know for certain from my own sources that in that case the intelligence services believed they had been forced by politicians to act too soon. That was quite widely reported at the time.

The view that John Reid had acted too early appears proved by a complex series of verdicts brought in by the jury. Less than half of those arrested actually were brought to trial. The jury found that three of the accused did have an intention to commit terror, but had formed no definite plan and specifically cleared them of the charge of planning to down aeroplanes with explosives.

Why had Reid jumped the gun? Because the Americans asked him to. With Bob Quick’s predecessor, the disgraced Andy Hayman, giving an official Scotland Yard view that the “Liquid Bomb Plot” was “Bigger than 9/11” and involved plans to fly up to a dozen passenger jets simultaneously into different US cities, the resulting worldwide front page headlines were a Godsend for Bush in mid-term elections. They also enable the government to permanently ramp up the fear factor by the ludicrous toothpaste and shampoo searches that make flying so miserable.

In the liquid bomb plot do you remember the massive banner headlines – the full front page of every single tabloid in the UK -about the evil Muslim mother who planned to blow up herself and her baby along with the plane? There was no media reporting at all when she was cleared and released. The “Suspicious chemical” which police announced they had found in baby bottles was, errr, baby bottle sterilising solution.

The reasons why these “Terror raids” might be the subject of political timing could not be more obvious. Both Jacqui Smith and Gordon Brown were getting a well-deserved media pasting over the outrageous ripping off of the taxpayer for personal benefit through expense claims. The Metropolitan Police were under extreme criticism for their unprovoked killing of Ian Tomlinson.
So this morning, instead of the news headline being the disgraceful fact that the policeman who launched an unprovoked assault from behind on Ian Tomlinson has still not been arrested, the headline is that the police have saved us all from certain death.

Let me be plain. I am not saying that terrorism does not exist. I am not saying that those arrested are innocent. I do not know. I am saying that Brown and Smith’s involvement in operational police arrests, and the fact that less than 1% of those arrested under anti-terror legislation in the UK have ever been charged with anything connected to terrorism, gives me the right to be suspicious of what is undeniably, at the very least, politically very fortuitous timing.

It is also the arrest of alleged terrorists from Pakistan, at a time when the government is under both parliamentary and criminal investigation for participation in torture of terrorist suspects in Pakistan. The government has responded by arguing that intelligence from torture abroad is necessary to save lives in the UK. I have no doubt that we will find the government arguing that this “terror plot” justifies their case.
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/03/fco_finally_adm.html

Because of this suspicion, I will be setting a high test for evidence that these arrests really were needed at this time. The accusation is that a bombing campaign was ready for this Easter – ie now. If that is true, there must be explosives and detonators ready, or in the very final stages of preparation. We will see.

According to Sky News this morning, police searches so far have discovered photographs of leading buildings in Manchester taken by the students.

I studied Russian in St Petersburg. I have photographs I took of the Hermitage, of the Church on the Holy Blood, of the St Peter and Paul Fortress, of the bridges over the Neva, of the ornate underground stations. I studied Polish in Lublin. I have photographs of Lublin castle, of the main shopping street, of the Catholic University of Lublin...

I have, in fact, photographs of prominent buildings everywhere I ever studied. And photographis in bars and nightclubs.

Why do the police feel the need to feed out to the media the complete non-news of the non-evidence that they have discovered photographs of Manchester in Manchester? Why was it necessary for the Prime Minister to make a statement announcing the arrests? What does that do to the chances of a fair trial? Why was it never necessary to make a prime ministerial statement every time a suspected Irish terrorist – and remember they really did blow up the Arndale Centre in Manchester – was arrested?

There are many genuine and diligent people carrying out counter-terrorism work in the police and intelligence services, working the old-fashioned way with painstaking accumulation of evidence. They do save lives and they should be applauded and supported. They should be free from political interference and distanced from politicians.

They may have foiled a genuine plot here. If so they must be congratulated. The Home Secretary –who has not foiled any plots - should have been briefed after arrests were made, and there should be no room for suspicion that politicians had interfered.

That would have stuck to the cardinal rule of only telling people who actually have to know about an operation - and the rule of not carting around secret documents for no purpose.
The photo leak – which could indeed have jeopardised a security operation which may or may not prove to have been vital - was caused directly by the excessive and completely unnecessary involvement of the politicians in policing detail.

A police state is not a state where the police rule. It is a state where there is no distance between the politicians and police.

A police state is a state where a policeman can be caught on camera launching an unprovoked fatal assault from behind, yet not be arrested. A police state is a state where the police raid the parliamentary offices of opposition MPs. A police state is a state where it is the politicians who are making the decisions on who gets arrested and when.

from http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/04/politically_tim.html

[Brown Sauce]

more great insight from Mr. Murray. I'm pretty sure that he'd agree that it is sad that it's necessary.

[luke]

Bomb Squad in Desperate Race to Save Jacqui Smith's Job

The great "Easter Terror Campaign" scare launched by New Labour has been in desperate need of new impetus, given the failure to find any evidence of a terrorist operation. Fortunately police were able to stage an Army Bomb Squad raid on a flat in Liverpool yesterday to give the right wing press a chance to revive the story.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5149763/Manchester-terror-police-call-in-bomb-squad.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1169625/BREAKING-NEWS-Bomb-disposal-squad-called-site-centre-Liverpool-terror-arrests.html
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/95018/Bomb-squad-join-terror-hunt

The peculiar thing is that the address raided had been under search and cordoned off for 120 hours before the bomb squad were called in. Indeed, last Wednesday 50 (yes, 50) policemen swooped on the flat and searched it for six hours. It is therefore remarkable that the "Bomb" wasn't found for a further five days.

The official description of the Bomb Squad raid was "precautionary".

That is "Precautionary" in the sense of "Publicity stunt". What the mainstream media fail to report is that the bomb squad experts were able to tell the police that the suspicious substance was - table sugar. Whether cane or beet, doubtless intense forensic examination will tell us.

The United Kingdom is in breach of international law by refusing to allow the Pakistani High Commission consular access to check on the welfare of its nationals who are being held - and none of whom has been charged with any crime. They have even refused to give them a full list of names.

This kind of behaviour will backfire on British nationals who are arrested and held abroad. Our requests for access will be refused and our protestations - which I made in several cases - will be thrown back in our faces. New Labour's participation in the continual erosion of the fabric of international law is the real story here.

from http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/04/bomb_squad_in_d.html

[faceless]

That's shcoking that the Pakistani consulate have been refused access. What is the possible logic behind that? Mr Murray's bang on the nail about this being a bad thing for any British citizen who is caught up in any sort of crime over there. In fact, there was a recent high-profile case where some right nasty killers from Glasgow flew to Pakistan to hide, but as soon as it was known who they were the Pakistani authorities were more than happy to arrest them and send them back for trial.

[luke]

Gordon Brown and Jacqui Smith Terror Lies Revealed

Only two of the twelve people arrested in dramatic "terror raids" in the North West of England are still in police custody. Nine more were released from anti-terror detention on Tuesday. Their arrest was first headline on all news bulletins and announced by no less than the Prime Minister himself. Sky News is saying that despite the total lack of evidence against them, they are still regarded as a security threat and thus are being deported - thus getting rid of the embarassment of these innocent men being able to talk to the press..

This was the only major UK political blog which had the courage to stand against the manufactured terror panic and false patriotism, and point out that the whole Easter Bomb Plot story stunk to high heaven from the very first minute:

The reasons why these “Terror raids” might be the subject of political timing could not be more obvious. Both Jacqui Smith and Gordon Brown were getting a well-deserved media pasting over the outrageous ripping off of the taxpayer for personal benefit through expense claims. The Metropolitan Police were under extreme criticism for their unprovoked killing of Ian Tomlinson. So this morning, instead of the news headline being the disgraceful fact that the policeman who launched an unprovoked assault from behind on Ian Tomlinson has still not been arrested, the headline is that the police have saved us all from certain death.

Let me be plain. I am not saying that terrorism does not exist. I am not saying that those arrested are innocent. I do not know. I am saying that Brown and Smith’s involvement in operational police arrests, and the fact that less than 1% of those arrested under anti-terror legislation in the UK have ever been charged with anything connected to terrorism, gives me the right to be suspicious of what is undeniably, at the very least, politically very fortuitous timing.

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/04/politically_tim.html

There was in fact never any intelligence that there was going to be an Easter bomb plot. And vast expenditure of police and military resources failed to find anything more sinister than sugar, and some photos of Manchester taken by students in Manchester.
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/04/bomb_squad_in_d.html

The mainstream media and the so called parliamentary opposition are determined to keep the vast over-hype of the terror threat going.
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/04/jacqui_plays_th.html

But it is obvious from evey internet outlet that has a comment page, that they have lost a large proportion of the men and woman in the street. The government's desperate fallback position of branding them a security risk and deporting them absolutely without evidence, is a sickening abuse of power and evidence of a continued desire to ride a wave of xenophobia aimed at overseas students.

from http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/04/gordon_brown_an.html

[faceless]

I'm not keen on the way he seems to be claiming ownership on the story behind this - it's obvious to anyone who watches the media that it was a sham.

[luke]

Pakistani students' lawyer: 'They are neither extremists nor terrorists'
Full text of statement from Mohammed Ayub, who represents three men facing deportation after Operation Pathway arrests

This is the full statement from Mohammed Ayub, the lawyer representing three of the men – Sultan Sher, Mohammed Rizwan Sharif and Mohammed Umer Farooq – who were yesterday released by Greater Manchester police into the custody of the UK Borders Agency (UKBA) following their arrests on April 8.

I, Mohammed Ayub of Chambers Solicitors, Bradford, act for three young Pakistani men, all aged in their 20s, who were arrested on 8 April 2009 as part of Operation Pathway.

Today, after 13 days in custody, during which no evidence of any wrongdoing was disclosed, they have now been released without charge. Our clients were arrested in a blaze of publicity and speculation. Their release without charge and the wrong that has been done to them deserves to be accompanied by a similar amount of publicity.

Our clients have no criminal history, they were here lawfully on student visas and all were pursuing their studies and working part-time. Our clients are neither extremists nor terrorists.

Their arrest and detention has been a very serious breach of their human rights. Now, adding insult to injury, attempts are being made to deport them. We intend to challenge the deportation orders and, if necessary, will take our fight to the highest courts.

Our clients are entirely innocent and are entitled to complete the studies they came here for. We call for an independent inquiry into Operation Pathway so that lessons can be learned as to how this investigation could have got it so terribly wrong and so that no other innocent person should have to suffer the ordeal that our clients have.

The UK Border Agency has issued deportation orders on the basis of their being involved in Islamist extremist activity and therefore their presence in the UK is not conducive to the public good on the grounds of national security. It is intended to appeal the deportation orders and their basis for the orders is not accepted.

As a minimum our clients are entitled to an unreserved apology and no further action should be taken against them.

[pirtybirdy]

We have a similar situation here. I like that one line by the lawyer that says "They are entitled to complete the studies they came here for". I respectfully disagree with that. they are not entitled. I say the same for the guy in my country. Just because you have a visa, doesn't make one "entitled" to stay in said country. You are a visitor in said country and any visa can be pulled at anytime for any reason. Good luck to the lawyer trying to fight that in court. Maybe he'll have better luck in Britain.

[luke]

have you got a link to the story you're on about pirty? i've not heard of it ... is it a similar suspected terrorist thing?

the final two have just been released in this case

[faceless]

If you've been granted a visa, then you are legally entitled to stay. It's a legal agreement between two countries and you need legal reasons to cancel it. If the guy was involved in some terrorist plot then he should lose that entitlement, but if they can't prove he has been then they have nothing to go on.

If the government wants the rule of law to be observed then they must be the ones who follow it to the letter. If they break this law then, legally, any person could use it as an example of the government breaking the law in their own defence against some other crime.

I wouldn't be surprised if this whole case is designed to use as an example in order to tighten up controls with Pakistan and deem it a terrorist state or something like that.

[luke]