Contradictions,
Anomalies, Questions Mount In UK Terror Scare
By Julie Hyland
17 August 2006
World
Socialist Web
A
British court on Wednesday extended the warrants for 23 people held
since August 10 in connection with the alleged plot to blow up commercial
airliners flying from Britain to the US. An additional person was arrested
Tuesday. The judge issued his ruling late in the evening following a
closed-door hearing that lasted most of the day.
Under Britain’s recently
passed anti-terror law, suspected terrorists can be held for up to 28
days without being charged. Amid growing indications that the authorities
lack firm evidence to back up their claims that the arrested men and
women were on the verge of executing a terror attack on the scale of
9/11, there had been speculation in the press that at least some of
the prisoners would be ordered released.
In the event, the judge gave
the police more time to question the suspects, but refused to extend
the warrants for the full period allowed by the anti-terror law. A police
statement said the warrants for 21 of the suspects were extended until
August 23 and for 2 others until August 21.
It is fair to surmise from
the unusual length of the hearing and the limited extension of the warrants
that the evidence presented by the authorities fell considerably short
of constituting a hard and convincing case.
Indeed, one week on, it seems
that the current alert is unravelling, and that it is of a similar type
to previous “terror plots” that subsequently proved to involve
nothing concrete, with much of the supposed evidence resulting from
the activities of police informants working as agent provocateurs.
In this case, it transpires
that not only were no bombs actually assembled, but none of the British-born
Muslims being held had purchased airline tickets, and some did not even
possess passports. Despite a massive trawling operation by police involving
days of extensive searches at 46 separate locations, no trace has been
found of chemicals that were supposedly to be used as explosives.
Yet on August 10, Home Secretary
John Reid claimed security services had successfully foiled a terrorist
conspiracy to “bring down a number of aircraft through midflight
explosions” on the eve of its execution. Paul Stephenson, deputy
commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, said chillingly, “This
was intended to be mass murder on an unimaginable scale.”
In the US, Homeland Security
Secretary Michael Chertoff told a news conference that the plot was
“a very sophisticated plan and operation” in which the suspects
had “accumulated the capability necessary and they were well on
their way,’’ while President George Bush said it was a “stark
reminder that this nation is at war with Islamic fascists.”
As the UK’s terror
alert was raised to “critical” and airports across the country
ground to a halt, stranding tens of thousands of passengers, the claims
and rumours from largely unidentified sources continued. According to
one account, two of those held—apparently husband and wife—plotted
to use their six-month old baby as a decoy for their suicide mission
above the Atlantic.
This, and similar lurid claims,
were repeated by the establishment media as good coin, with no attempt
made to substantiate them. Self-censorship on the part of the media
played a major role, with the Guardian, for example, informing its readers
that it knows “the precise location” of terror camps in
the UK countryside, “but cannot disclose it.”
Now, at least some sections
of the media feel obliged to acknowledge widespread doubts as to the
veracity of such claims. Yesterday’s Guardian reported that the
announcement of the alleged plot had caused broadcasters and newspapers
to be “barraged with a wave of sceptical views” from “thousands
of ordinary people.” The same day, NBC’s early morning “Today”
programme in the US led its show with the question: “Is there
a case?” Reporter Lisa Myers stated baldly that “there is
no evidence that a bomb was tested in England or that explosives were
prepared.”
If some are beginning to
distance themselves from the wild assertions made by the British and
US authorities, it is with good cause. In addition to the absence of
concrete evidence, many questions remain unanswered—not least,
why the terror alert was raised only after large numbers of arrests
had already been made?
With each passing day, the
spectacular claims of a week ago look less and less convincing.
On August 15, the UK’s
Channel 4 News broadcast an exclusive interview with Amjad Sarwar, whose
brother Assad was one of those arrested in the August 10 police raids
in High Wycombe. For days, the media had reported that Amjad was also
in detention, and his photograph had been splashed across the newspapers.
But Amjad had never been arrested, much less questioned. He asked pointedly,
“If they got this wrong, what else have they got wrong?”
His brother’s arrest
was also a mistake, Amjad insisted. “They’ve got it all
wrong. He is an innocent guy....There is no way he could have anything
to do with terrorism. He condemns terrorism.” The police had “picked
up an innocent person just because he had a beard,” he said.
A neighbour of the Sarwars
told the Daily Mirror, “They are perfect neighbours.”
Other information suggests
that the terror plot was concocted at US urging, utilising the willing
services of the Pakistan government and its security services, which
themselves are well known to have links with various terrorist organisations.
On August 13, the Observer
newspaper published a timeline of the run-up to the terror raids. If
its account is to be believed, neither the head of the Metropolitan
Police’s Special Operations department nor Britain’s transport
secretary had been informed until the last moment that a terrorist attack
was “imminent.”
According to the Observer,
Transport Secretary Douglas Alexander was holidaying in Scotland when
he was contacted on August 7 by an official in his office, advising
him there’s “something you need to know.” A civil
servant was apparently sent to Scotland to brief the minister on “an
urgent terrorist threat—although at that stage it was not considered
immediate.”
Until late on Wednesday,
August 9—only hours before the police raids and mass arrests—few
outside an “elite” had any inkling “something was
up,” the newspaper continues. Amongst those in the dark was Andy
Hayman, head of Special Operations with the Metropolitan Police, who,
the Observer reports, was in Spain with his family. Late that evening,
“colleagues rang to suggest he return immediately. His flight
touched down shortly after 3 am on Thursday, soon after the majority
of suspects had been picked up.”
Yet President Bush had “known
about the plot for some time,” as did “City officials in
New York,” who, “several months ago...had been told that
there was a major investigation going on in Britain.”
The Observer states that
Prime Minister Tony Blair had also discussed the alleged plot with Bush
on Sunday, August 6, and again the day before the raids. Strangely,
this did not prevent Blair leaving for his Caribbean holiday on Tuesday,
August 8—just as his transport secretary was returning early from
his own vacation.
Just as extraordinary is
the fact that since then, apart from a few lines praising the security
forces, the prime minister has not made any statement regarding what
has been described as some of the “gravest” days ever experienced
by the UK. Even as the airline carriers, which have lost millions of
pounds, line up to denounce “nonsensical” security measures
and demand an independent inquiry into the way the alleged terror threat
was handled, Blair has remained silent.
A spokesman for the prime
minister merely said, “If he had known on Monday night what he
knew on Wednesday night, I don’t think he would have gone on holiday.”
This means either that earlier
claims that Blair was in the loop and was briefing the US were false,
or that the prime minister had reason to believe no major threat really
existed, and/or that he was unaware that a major police operation would
be mounted within 48 hours of his departure.
The alleged Pakistan connection
In so far as there is any
effort to account for the fact that leading figures within the British
government and police were apparently taken by surprise at developments,
they revolve around the arrest of a Briton, Rashid Rauf, in Pakistan.
It is claimed that Rashid,
described as the alleged plot’s “mastermind,” was
detained late on Wednesday, August 9, causing an accomplice to make
a “panicked telephone call to a British suspect, directing him
to go ahead with the airliner plot,” several reports said. The
government and police, the story goes, had to take urgent measures to
avert this disaster.
However, there are numerous
conflicting accounts as to the timing of Rashid’s arrest, with
several reports that he has been in custody in Pakistan for more than
one month. Similarly, the location of his arrest has been given variously
as Karachi, Lahore, Bahawalpur and the Afghan border.
Moreover, as of yesterday,
Pakistani authorities reported that there had been no request from Britain
for Rashid’s return. There is no extradition treaty between Britain
and Pakistan, but such a request could be made under international conventions.
The so-called “Pakistan
connection” raises even more questions.
Reports of the number of
those detained by the Pakistani authorities vary from 7 to 17. The Independent
newspaper noted, “Remarkably little information has emerged from
Pakistan about the arrests. Well-connected journalists are complaining
that their usual sources have dried up, which is unusual in Pakistan,
where the intelligence services like to boast to journalists of their
successes.”
Any “details”
that are supplied by Pakistan must be regarded as suspect. Notorious
for its use of torture, it is one of the favoured destinations for CIA
“rendition” flights. The Guardian cited Ali Hasan, a researcher
for Human Rights Watch, that “torture was endemic and that there
was no doubt it would have been used on Mr Rauf.”
The Pakistan government has
used its role in the alleged terror plot to curry favour with Washington.
Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz told a rally marking Pakistan’s 59th
anniversary of independence that his government’s role in disrupting
the alleged plot proved it was fighting terrorism “along with
the world community.”
This has not stopped government
and intelligence agencies of various countries briefing at odds with
one another. Pakistan officials have been keen to insist that Rashid
was arrested on the Afghan border as he crossed into Pakistan, but this
has been flatly rejected by the Afghan authorities and British security
sources, who told the Independent that some of the statements from Pakistani
officials should be “treated with circumspection.”
Britain and Pakistan are
also at odds over allegations that the terror plot was to be financed
through charitable donations for the victims of last October’s
devastating earthquake in northern Pakistan.
News reports in the UK suggested
that monies intended to finance terrorist activity had been transferred
between Britain and Pakistan, disguised as charitable donations to the
earthquake relief fund. Rashid and his brother Tayib, who was amongst
those arrested in Birmingham last Thursday, are reportedly involved
in the charity Crescent Relief, which raised funds for the earthquake’s
victims.
If confirmed, this would
be of no surprise. Those of Kashmiri origin make up the largest number
of Pakistani immigrants to Britain, and this was the area hit especially
hard by the quake. Tens of thousands made donations and organised collections
for the victims, and hundreds more travelled to the region to help directly.
The British press has stated
that there was “no suggestion” that Crescent Relief was
“aware that funds may have been siphoned off.” It has been
less cautious as regards another earthquake charity, Jumaat ud Dawa,
which the Independent described as “the charitable arm of a Kashmiri
terrorist group, Lashkar-e-Taiba, which has been banned by the Pakistani
government after pressure from the US government.”
Yahya Mujahid, from Jamaat
Ud Dawa, issued an angry denial, stating, “We have nothing to
do with this alleged plot and have no link to this. There is no logic
to what the US is doing.”
On August 15, Tasnim Aslam,
for Pakistan’s Foreign Office, described the charge against the
charity as “absurd.” He said, “These are all absurd
stories, and the objective is to malign Pakistan and to cast a shadow
on efforts made by Pakistan to uncover and foil this terrorist plot.”
She told a news briefing,
“Rashid Rauf has nothing to do with any charity involved in the
earthquake relief work or with any relief work as such. There is absolutely
no connection.” According to other reports, British intelligence
is said to be trying to establish if there is a connection between those
detained in last Thursday’s raids and the July 7, 2005, bombings
in London. Why, after those arrested were reportedly tailed for one
year, and their e-mails, phone calls and Internet connections intercepted
and scrutinised, police would still be “trying to establish”
such a connection is again not explained.
But the Los Angeles Times
noted another anomaly. Regarding claims that the plot was to involve
20 suicide bombers on board up to 10 aircraft, it states that “some
intelligence analysts in the US and Europe wonder whether the alleged
operatives, who included a 21-year-old who converted to Islam only six
months ago, had the expertise to pull off the ambitious attack under
pressure.”
Indeed, details on those
held seem widely at odds with the claims made by government and the
police, and repeated by the media.
Aside from their youth—the
oldest is 35 and the youngest 17—and the fact that most are British-born
Muslims of Pakistani descent, there does not appear to be a single consistent
link between any of them. And in many instances, friends, relatives
and acquaintances have categorically rejected all allegations of terrorist
involvement.
Tayib Rauf, 22, works in
his father’s cake business. On Tuesday, his friend, Mohammed Nazam,
released video footage of Tayib taken just hours before his home was
raided. It shows him strolling through Nazam’s store discussing
business matters. Nazam said he had been with Tayib until 2:30 a.m.
the day of his arrest.
“He probably still
had my check in his pocket when he was picked up—around four in
the morning—from his home. If he were a person involved in a gang,
he wouldn’t be sitting with me chatting, would he?”
Umar Islam, 28 (born Brian
Young), converted to Islam two or three years ago. He is married and
has a young child. The Sun newspaper reported that Umar “helped
shield the public” during the London bombings, hunting for other
bombs in his job as a bus ticket inspector.
“His actions are at
dramatic odds with allegations he now faces of being part of a plot
to blow transatlantic jets out of the sky,” the Sun acknowledged.
The newspaper cited a work colleague reporting, “He was certainly
committed to what he was doing. You couldn’t fault him at all.
On that day he was trying to save lives, not destroy them.”
Waheed Zaman, 22, a biomedical
science student, is head of the Islam Society at London Metropolitan
University. His childhood friend, Kamran Siddique, described him as
a football fan “who dreamed of being a doctor,” who dressed
in “a combination of Western and Islamic attire,” had “many
white, Asian and black friends,” and who had been elected head
of the Islamic society “because of his moderate ways.”
Waheed Arafat Khan, 24, is
also described as having the “appearance of being perfectly integrated
into Western society.” Neighbours reportedly described him as
“thoughtful, considerate and polite.”
Ibrahim (formerly Oliver)
Savant, another recent convert to Islam, is a secretary with an East
London music firm. Described as an avid England football supporter,
he lives with his wife and his English mother Marilyn and Iranian father
Ibrahim, whose name he is believed to have taken when he converted.
His brother, Adam, also a company director, described himself as “outraged,
shocked and angry” at the arrest.
Abdul Waheed (born Don Stewart-Whyte),
21, is the son of a Conservative Party agent, Doug Stewart-Whyte, who
died nine years ago. A former art student, he had a reputation as a
playboy until converting to Islam approximately six months ago, along
with his sister Heidi, and marrying a Muslim girl.
Two brothers arrested, Shazad
Khuram Ali, 27, and Haider Ali, 30, run their own business importing
sports cars. They are said to be close friends with Waseem Kayani, 29,
a taxi driver who was also arrested. A friend said, “There is
no way he would blow himself up. He just got married.”
Osman Adam Khatib, 20, was
described by his English neighbour as “someone with a good heart.”
It is such gaping discrepancies
that are now leading to open speculation that there might be another
reason for last Thursday’s alert.
Craig Murray was the British
ambassador to Uzbekistan until his removal in 2004, he says for criticising
the Uzbek regime’s human rights record. In a commentary posed
on the Global Research web site, he writes: “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.”
He notes that British Home
Secretary John Reid had made a speech just hours before the raids “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.”
Writing in the Daily Mail,
Stephen Glover worried lest “it transpires that the plot was less
advanced, and less potentially apocalyptic in its effects, than Dr.
Reid has suggested.”
If so, it would mean not
only that “this government’s already shaky credibility would
be shattered,” but “the effect on public opinion of ‘crying
wolf’ once again would be disastrous.”