Western Resistance

« Book Review: Milestones | | Steyn: Don't Get Even, Get Mad »

April 30, 2007

UK: Islamists Convicted - 7/7 Links And MI5 Oversights

The men pictured above were today convicted at the Old Bailey, London, of plotting to set off bombs based on the fertilizer ammonium nitrate at various locations. All five were given life sentences.

They are (clockwise): Jawad Akbar, Omar Khyam, Waheed Mahmood, Anthony Garcia and Salahuddin Amin.

Two other people who were on trial with them - Shujah Mahmood, aged 19, and Nabeel Hussain, aged 21, were found not guilty. Shujah Mahmood of Crawley is the brother of Omar Khyam, the ringleader of the group.

All of the men found guilty, as well as Shujah Mahmood, had attended at least one terror training camp in Pakistan. Nabeel Hussain had not taken part in such training. A student from Brunel University, Hussain had been the only one of the seven accused to be allowed bail.

The seven people had been arrested after 600 kilograms of ammonium nitrate were found in a storage depot in Hanwell, west London. Most of the arrests had taken place on March 30, 2004. Mohammed Momin Khawaja, their Canadian associate who is currently awaiting trial in his native country, had been arrested the day before, on March 29. It has been alleged in the trial that Khawaja was to supply detonators for the group.

Another individual who gave evidence at the trial was Mohammed Junaid Babar, who had a house in Lahore, Pakistan. In August 2004 Babar, a US citizen, agreed to cooperate with terror investigators at a New York Court. On June 2, 2004, he had pleaded guilty on five counts of providing material support to terrorists. He admitted to sending money and supplies to a senior Al Qaeda member in Pakistan, setting up a jihadist training camp, and assisting in a bombing plot (this one) in London. Some of the convicted men had spent time in Pakistan, where they stayed at Babar's house. Babar and those convicted today were all connected with the UK extremist group Al Muhajiroun.

News of today's convictions can be found from the BBC, The Times, the Telegraph, Express and Guardian.

On Western Resistance, the following entries detail the history of the trial:

Trial starts, March 21, 2006
Plot to blow up "Ministry of Sound" nightclub
Discussions of plane attacks
Jihad book found at suspect's home, July 13, 2006
Trial hears of Canadian plotter's involvement
Omar Khyam's testimony
Evidence of fertilizer, stored in Hanwell, west London
Anthony Garcia's testimony

MI5 and the 7/7 bombers

I will be compiling a report on the trial, the plot and its participants later, but for the moment I wish to focus on the most serious allegations which have only emerged today, as the trial has now concluded and reporting restrictions have been lifted.

As reported in Telegraph and the Guardian, it was revealed today that group had been in contact with two members of the four man suicide team that committed the atrocities of 7/7, killing 52 people and injuring hundreds. These were the leader of the cell, Mohammed Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer.

A report on 7/7 was published in May 2006 by the parliamentary inquiry team, the Intelligence and Security Committee (ICS), which had claimed that MI5, Britain's homeland intelligence agency, had not been to blame for not identifying the seriousness of Mohammed Sidique Khan's intent.

On May 14, the Sunday Times made the claim that MI5 had failed to disclose to the ICS team some crucial information. MI5 had transcripts of Mohammed Sidique Khan, it was revealed, in which he was heard talking with suspects who were planning another separate bombing attack. These suspects were the ones among those convicted today. Mohammed Sidique Khan was heard discussing making a bomb, and also discussing plans to mount armed jihad and to go to Al-Qaeda terror training camps abroad. According to an (unnamed) member of the ICS committee, these transcripts were never presented before the committee. Instead, senior security officials had presented evidence which had been accepted at face value by the Tony Blair appointees on the committee.

On 11 July 2006, these allegations were discussed by the chairman of ISC, Paul Murphy MP in the House of Commons. According to Hansard (Column 1323) he said: "Our report was published on the basis of evidence given to us that was agreed by the agencies.

We found that the extent of home-grown extremism was underestimated by the agencies. We also recommended several changes to the threat and alert systems, so I was pleased that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary announced the necessary changes to the House only yesterday.

Some allegations have been made that material was withheld from the Committee during the course of our investigations into the events of July last year and, indeed, that we were misled by the agencies. We have examined each and every one of those claims, whether they were made verbally or in the media, and are satisfied that they are not true. Our report stands as an accurate representation of the facts as we saw them. Although we have investigated the claims over the past weeks, we are still of the opinion that the conclusions at which we arrived in our written report were right."

He also said, (Column 1324): "When the Committee compiled its report on the events of 7 July, several matters caused us concern. We were worried that the agencies had not really recognised the speed with which young Muslim men, in particular, were becoming radicalised. Although that is no longer the case, the situation came as something of a surprise. We were also worried that we had all underestimated the possibility of suicide bombings happening in our own country. It is good that MI5 is now reaching out into the regions of our country, especially our great cities, so that we are in a position in which we can, we hope, avoid such problems in the future."

MI5 had seen Sidique Khan and Tanweer almost 18 months before July 7, 2005. They were seen in the company of Omar Khyam, leader of the group convicted of plotting terror attacks. This evidence was suppressed by the judge in the case, Sir Michael Astill, who felt that disclosure of this information would prejudice the trial.

The first time Sidique Khan had been seen and photographed by MI5 agents was at the Toddington Service station on the M1 motorway, on February 2, 2004. Khan was driving a green Honda Civic vehicle, and had just met with other terror suspects.

Later in February, Khan and Tanweer had been followed for 15 hours as they drove in this vehicle. They traveled from Crawley, West Sussex, (a town where Omar Khyam, Waheed Mahmood, and Javad Iqbal lived at separate addresses), to Slough, Berkshire, to Wellingborough in Northamptonshire and then back to Slough. The Honda Civic was following another vehicle, a silver Suzuki Vitara, driven by Omar Khyam. The MI5 agents were officially tailing Khyam.

On February 21, 2004, Sidique Khan was heard discussing travel with Khyam. The latter individual had bought an airline ticket to Pakistan. Their conversation was recorded. Khan said: "This is a one-way ticket, bruv, yeah, you agree with that, yeah? You're happy with this... basically.. because you're going to leave now, you may as well rip the country apart economically as well. All the brothers are running scams. All the brothers that are leaving are doing it. That's all I've got to say, bruv. Is there anything you'd like to ask? Then fire away."

Mohammed SIdique Khan had enquired if he could delay leaving the country as his wife Hasina Patel was six months' pregnant. Khyam replied "No problem". Khyam had said that within two weeks of landing in Pakistan, he would be "at the front". Sidique Khan said "With regards to the babe, I am debating whether or not to say goodbye and so forth."

MI5 had denied after 7/7 that there had been any Al-Qaeda connection with the four killers, Sidique Khan, Tanweer, Germaine Lindsay and Hasib Hussain. However in September of that year, Al Qaeda released a video of Khan making his last testament. Shortly before the first anniversary, Al Qaeda released a video of Shehzad Tanweer.

The information now available in the media, which shows that MI5 had recorded and photographed Tanweer and Khan in connection with Omar Khyam and his cell, has spurred calls for an official inquiry. Home Secretary John Reid has said that an inquiry will be costly and will take agents away from their jobs tracking immediate terror threats.

Below are some of the official responses to the news today. I am reproducing them in their entirety, as under copyright law of the US there is "justifiable" reason for reproducing in full, and under UK law, reproducing entire articles can be done if justifiably for the purpose of review.

As what I intend to write later on this subject will require objective criticism of some of MI5's claims, I am reproducing firstly a statement from the new head of MI5, Jonathan Evans, from the MI5 website.

*****************************
MI5 Director General Jonathan Evans' Statement

CONVICTION OF FERTILISER PLOTTERS:
STATEMENT BY JONATHAN EVANS (30.04.07)

Today five individuals were found guilty of terrorist-related offences after a trial at the Old Bailey.

I welcome this outcome. It is recognition of the hard work put in by my staff, the police and other agencies, and represents another plot prevented - one of a growing number of potentially devastating attacks the Security Service has stopped.

But the severity of the threat facing our country means expanding counter-terrorist operations at an unprecedented rate just to keep pace. We calculate the number of those with similarly violent intentions to those convicted today has increased substantially since 2005.

My Service has never been complacent. The attack on 7 July in London was a terrible event. The sense of disappointment, felt across the Service, at not being able to prevent the attack (despite our efforts to prevent all such atrocities) will always be with us. The reality is that whilst we will continue to do everything in our power to protect the UK public, we must be honest about what can and cannot be prevented in a democratic society that values its freedoms.

We are today on our website providing more information to the public on the links between those convicted today and the 7 July bombers. The Security Service will never have the capacity to investigate everyone who appears on the periphery of every operation. I believe the account we are publishing here will make this clear.

************

MI5 -

LINKS BETWEEN THE 7 JULY BOMBERS AND THE FERTILISER PLOT

Introduction

The fertiliser plotters:

* Omar Khyam
* Jawad Akbar
* Salahuddin Amin
* Anthony Garcia
* Waheed Mahmood

This account sets out what the Security Service and Police knew of the links between those involved in the 2004 'fertiliser plot' - the trial of which ended on 30 April 2007 - and two members of the group responsible for the 7 July 2005 terrorist attacks in London. It has not been possible to make this information public until the end of the trial for legal reasons.

The Security Service and Police are publishing this account to provide an answer to the question: "If the Security Service and Police had already come across two of the bombers before 2005, why did they not prevent the attacks in London on 7 July?"

It also explains what the Security Service has done and is continuing to do to prevent further attacks. There is a brief summary at the end of this account to provide an update on our current work.

Why did the Service and the Police not prevent 7 July?

The Security Service and Police were appalled by the attacks of 7 July, and it is deeply frustrating that we were not able to prevent them. It is true that the Security Service and Police did come across two of the 7 July bombers - Mohammed Siddique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer - during the earlier investigation into the fertiliser plot. However, even with the benefit of hindsight, it would have been impossible from the available intelligence to conclude that either Khan or Tanweer posed a terrorist threat to the British public.

Khan and Tanweer were never identified during the fertiliser plot investigation because they were not involved in the planned attacks. Rather, they appeared as petty fraudsters in loose contact with members of the plot. There was no indication that they were involved in planning any kind of terrorist attack in the UK.

The intelligence leads generated by the investigation into the 7 July bombings enabled the Security Service and Police to go back over the fertiliser plot records and put names to voices and faces. The details below need to be read with these facts in mind.

The fertiliser plot

Omar Khyam with fertiliser intended for use in terrorism

Throughout 2003-4, the Security Service and Police undertook Operation Crevice, a large-scale investigation into a terrorist conspiracy known as the 'fertiliser plot' - so-called because a group of individuals planned to detonate a fertiliser-based explosive device in the UK. Despite the improvised nature of the device, success of the plot would have resulted in a huge loss of life as the possible targets included a nightclub and a shopping centre.

At the time, this was both the Security Service's and the Police's largest ever counter terrorist operation. The scale of intelligence gathering meant switching resources from other less urgent investigations. It also meant making judgements on a daily basis about where to concentrate resources based on who presented the greatest threat to the UK public.

It was in the investigation of this conspiracy that Khan and Tanweer first came to the Security Service's attention as unidentified individuals on the periphery of the plot. To give an idea of scale, the links between the fertiliser plot bombers and Khan and Tanweer represent less than 0.1% of all the links on record in relation to the fertiliser plot investigation.

Khan and Tanweer links to the fertiliser plot

1. Two men discuss fraud scams at fund raising meetings

During February and March 2004, an unknown man subsequently identified as Khan met with members of the fertiliser plot on five occasions. He was accompanied by another unknown man, subsequently identified as Tanweer, on three of these occasions. The meetings took place in Crawley, the home of several of the fertiliser plot conspirators.

There was no indication as a result of the intelligence available at the time on these meetings that either Khan or Tanweer were involved in terrorist plotting. These meetings appeared to centre on the raising of money. Conversations record Khan and Tanweer discussing how to raise cash through a variety of fraud scams, such as purchasing building equipment on credit, defaulting on payment and selling the goods on for cash. There is no record of Khan and Tanweer discussing terrorist activity or bomb building.

The Security Service did record another conversation involving an individual identified after 7 July as Khan. From the context of the recorded conversation it is possible that Khan was talking about going to fight with militia groups in the Pakistani border areas.

2. A man called 'Ibrahim'

"We conclude that, in light of the other priority investigations being conducted and the limitations on Security Service resources, the decisions not to give greater investigative priority to these two individuals were understandable."
- Intelligence and Security Committee Report into the London Terrorist Attacks on 7 July 2005.

It has become clear since 7 July that Khan was known to detainees held outside the UK in early 2004. Some detainees had mentioned men from the UK, known only by pseudonyms, who had travelled to Pakistan in 2003 and sought meetings with Al Qaida figures. In the aftermath of the 7 July attacks, Khan was identified by a detainee (who had seen a press photograph) as one of the UK men, known to him only as 'Ibrahim'.

Follow-up investigations in 2004 into the unidentified men on the periphery of the fertiliser plot included the circulation of photographs to foreign intelligence services in an attempt to identify these individuals. Photographs of Khan were shown to two detainees who had provided the earlier information, but without a positive result.

If Khan had been recognised, the Security Service might have allocated more resources to investigating him. However, given the operational priorities at the time, there is no guarantee that Khan would have been seen as a high priority target even then. In the event, the investigation was put on hold due to the need to focus on far more urgent cases posing potential large-scale threats to life.

3. Investigation of Khan and Tanweer post 7/7

Following the atrocities of 7/7, the Security Service and Police undertook a large-scale investigation into the perpetrators of the attacks. It was only at this point that the identities of Khan and Tanweer became clear.

Painstaking analysis of surveillance records following the attacks, in order to determine what - if anything - of the bombers was known to the Security Service and Police prior to 7/7, revealed their presence on the periphery of the fertiliser plot. Examination of Khan's telephone records showed his contact with Omar Khyam. This, along with a subsequent review of surveillance photographs taken during the fertiliser plot investigations, confirmed his presence in meetings with Khyam and others during February / March 2004.

What is the Service doing to prevent further attacks?
"My Service is dedicated to tackling the deadly manifestations of terrorism. Tackling its roots is the work of us all."
- Security Service Director General Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, speech at Queen Mary, London, 9 November 2006

The fertiliser plot, the 7 July attacks, and the other plots the Security Service has either disrupted or investigated all show that the threat from extremists has been growing since 9/11. As the then Director General Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller said in a speech to students of Queen Mary, University of London, last November: "Because of the sheer scale of what we face the task is daunting." When the fertiliser plot took place it was one of 50 networks of which the Service was aware. By the time of Dame Eliza's speech three years later the Security Service had intelligence on 200 networks involving some 1600 individuals.

Expansion of the Security Service to counter this threat to the UK has been under way since the attacks in the US in 2001. This has not only meant recruiting more staff and establishing an developing the Security Service's network of UK offices, but also increasing the capability of the organisation to gather and assess intelligence.

This is bringing successes, some public, some not. Most recently, there was extensive coverage of the disruption of an alleged plot to blow up passenger jets over the Atlantic. The increase in the conviction of people for terrorism offences since 7 July is evidence that the Security Service is not, as some have suggested, exaggerating the threat.

The creation of the Centre for the Protection of the National Infrastructure (CPNI) in February this year will improve the advice we provide to public and private sector industries on how to guard against terrorist attack.

It is only by working with others in this way, as Dame Eliza pointed out in her speech, that the Security Service can succeed against the scale of threat we face. This means working with the Police, other UK agencies, government and the private sector, security and intelligence services internationally - and, more broadly, with the help and support of the UK public.

***********************

Home Office Statement

Five convicted of UK bomb plot
30 April 2007

Five men have been convicted and given life sentences for a bomb plot that could have killed hundreds in Britain.

Jurors in the Old Bailey trial heard of plans to target a shopping centre, nightclub and the gas network with a fertiliser bomb.

The plot was smashed by police in 2004 and today, after a year-long trial, five men have been convicted and given life sentences.

Omar Khyam, 25, from Crawley, West Sussex, was found guilty of conspiring to cause explosions likely to endanger life between January 1 2003 and March 31 2004.

Also convicted were Waheed Mahmood, 35, and Jawad Akbar, 23, also of Crawley; Salahuddin Amin, 32, from Luton, Bedfordshire; Anthony Garcia, 24, of Barkingside, east London.

Two other men, Nabeel Hussain and Shujah Mahmood, were found not guilty.

The Home Secretary, John Reid, said, 'Five dangerous terrorists are now behind bars thanks to the hard work of our police and security services. I want to thank the men and women in the police and security service who have worked extremely hard to ensure the perpetrators of this plot have been brought to justice and a major terrorist attack that could have killed and injured many people has been averted.

'The government has invested heavily in counter-terrorism over the last five years. The Security Service will have doubled in size by 2008 but it is important to remember that 100 per cent commitment can never guarantee 100% success. Today's case reminds us all that the terrorist threat we face is real and severe.

'I want to take time now to reflect on the verdicts.'

****************

METROPOLITAN POLICE STATEMENT

Operation Crevice: MPS statement

Bulletin 0000000683
30 April 2007 

Deputy Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke, Head of the MPS Counter Terrorism Command and National Coordinator of Terrorism Investigations, said:

"We are pleased that the overwhelming evidence presented to the Court against these men enabled the jury to reach their decision.

"This case marked a new stage in our understanding of the threat posed by Al Qaeda to this country.

"The investigation showed the links that these men had with Al Qaeda in Pakistan.

"Most of them had attended a terrorist training camp in Pakistan in 2003, and were taught how to make explosives; some had been involved in extremism as far back as 2001.

"This was not a group of youthful idealists. They were trained, dedicated, ruthless terrorists who were obviously planning to carry out an attack against the British public.

"Operation Crevice is a landmark case for a variety of reasons, in particular the scale of the investigation that was needed to gather the evidence to bring these men to justice.

"The threat posed by this group of men demanded an unprecedented response from the police and Security Service. It was imperative that the public were protected from these men and their plans.

"At the time it was the largest counter terrorism operation ever seen in the UK. The success was achieved through close co-operation and sharing of intelligence between the UK, the USA, Canada and Pakistan.

"It was the first time since 9/11 that we in the UK had seen a group of British men intent on committing mass murder against their fellow citizens.

"They were involved in an international conspiracy, and the evidence showed that they would not balk at killing as many people as they could. We heard them praising the attacks in Madrid, saying that there were no such things as innocent victims. They had to be stopped.

"There is always a balance to be struck between allowing terrorists to go ahead with their planning, so that we can gather evidence, and making sure the public are safe. We will never gamble with public safety.

"In this case we decided to arrest the plotters when we feared that they were getting closer to mounting their attack. We could take no risks.

"While under surveillance they were heard discussing possible targets such as shopping centres, nightclubs, trains - all heavily crowded places where the loss of life and destruction could have been massive.

"We now know that two of the people who attacked London on 7th July 2005 met with Khyam's group during the Operation Crevice surveillance operation. They were not part of that plot, and at that time were not a threat to public safety. In every case, and Operation Crevice was no exception, decisions have to be made as to who poses a threat to the public, and how resources should be used.

"The decisions made during the investigation have been examined by the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee. Their report was published in May last year.

"It is a grave disappointment and a matter of great regret to everyone involved in counter-terrorism that we were not able to prevent the attack on 7th July 2005. What this case and others in the future will show is that we are dealing with a threat posed by interlinked networks of terrorists.

"We will continue to do everything within our power, and within the law, to keep the public safe from the threat of terrorism.

"Everyone involved in Operation Crevice - Police, Security Service and Crown Prosecution Service, can be proud of their role in helping to stop a terrorist atrocity and gathering and presenting the evidence which has led to these convictions."

"We will continue to do everything within our power, and within the law, to keep the public safe from the threat of terrorism.

"Everyone involved in Operation Crevice - Police, Security Service and Crown Prosecution Service, can be proud of their role in helping to stop a terrorist atrocity and gathering and presenting the evidence which has led to these convictions."

*********************

POLICE VIDEO

The Metropolitan Police have released a video (Windows Media Format), in which one of the men who was today convicted, Salahuddin Amin, is filmed being questioned. It is 4.1 mb in file size, and can be downloaded HERE

*********************

STATEMENT FROM THE FBI REGARDING MOHAMMED SIDIQUE KHAN

(This report came out after claims had been made in the book the One Percent Doctrine by Pulitzer Prize winner Ron Suskind. We at Western Resistance discussed the claims in this book on June 20, 2006. It is referred to in the section below this, in a list of "rumours" and "realities" put out on the MI5 website)

For Immediate Release
June 22, 2006

Washington D.C.
FBI National Press Office
(202) 324-3691

FBI Responds to Report on London Bomber

Washington, D.C. - In response to several news reports based on material from the book entitled "The One Percent Doctrine" the FBI would like to clarify some facts. The book asserts that Mohammad Sidique Khan, a suspect in the London subway bombings of July 7, 2005, was on the U.S. "No Fly List" and attempted to enter the United States three times. That reporting is inaccurate. There is an individual named Mohammed Ajmal Khan, who is currently incarcerated in the United Kingdom for providing material support to terrorism. Many of the facts the book inaccurately associates with Mohammed Sidique Khan do apply to Mohammed Ajmal Khan. It appears that the author has intertwined facts relating to both men causing some confusion.

International cooperation has been, and will continue to be, crucial to preventing and disrupting terrorist networks. We continue to work closely with our domestic and international partners to review and share intelligence information and to conduct investigations as necessary.

*********************

MI5 STATEMENT ON "RUMOURS AND REALITY"

(In relation to reports of the 7/7 bombers and the information disclosed today)

RUMOURS AND REALITY

Since the 7 July London bombings, a number of rumours and misunderstandings have emerged concerning investigations into the bombers and their links to other extremists, particularly the fertiliser bomb plotters. This page addresses a number of these rumours and provides the facts behind the myths.

Rumours
Khan and Tanweer were under surveillance by the Security Service before 7 July but this was called off before the attacks.
Reality
They appeared as unidentified contacts during surveillance of those central to the fertiliser bomb plot. They were not fully identified until after 7 July.

Rumours
The Security Service and Police had tapes of the 7/7 bombers discussing bombing attacks and tapes of Khan discussing the planning of terrorist attacks.
Reality
The Security Service did record conversations involving an individual identified after 7 July as Khan. However, he did not discuss either the planning or execution of terrorist attacks in these conversations. The only discussions of bombing attacks that were recorded involved the people who have just been tried/convicted for their participation in the fertiliser plot.

Rumours
Khan and Tanweer were closely involved with the fertiliser bomb plot and therefore known terrorists.
Reality
Neither Khan nor Tanweer were involved with the fertiliser bomb plot. They appeared as petty fraudsters in loose contact with members of the fertiliser plot and the intelligence collected on them gave no indication that they posed a terrorist threat.

Rumours
Khan's car was bugged by the Police/Security Service so why was he not prevented from carrying out an attack?
Reality
Khan's car was not 'bugged'. After 7 July, the Police identified material recovered from the bomb site at Edgware Road tube station as belonging to Khan. Because they suspected his involvement, they put a tracking device (not a listening device) in his car. Forensic evidence confirmed later that he had died in the attack.

Rumours
There were recordings of Omar Khyam (one of the defendants in the fertiliser plot trial) talking to Khan about bomb-making.
Reality
The Security Service did record conversations involving an individual identified after 7 July as Khan. However there is no recording of Khyam discussing bomb-making with Khan.

There does however appear to have been a misinterpretation, by some sections of the media, of a ruling given by the Judge at the beginning of the fertiliser plot trial. These stories misinterpreted the ruling to mean that Khan was present when the fertiliser bomb plotters discussed bomb making. In response, the Judge made a second ruling in June 2006 to make it clear that this reporting was 'based on a false interpretation' of his original ruling.

Rumours
Khan had visited the US to associate with Islamist extremists and planned attacks on US cities in 2003. The FBI had put him on their 'no fly' list - preventing any aircraft from landing in the US with him on board. He had also been refused a US visa.
Reality
The Security Service has no record of Khan ever visiting the US, nor is there any information to suggest he was planning attacks on US cities. These claims are likely to be based on misidentification as some of these circumstances are true of a Mohammed Ajmal Khan. The FBI has stated that Khan was not on their 'no fly' list. There is also no record of Khan ever having been refused a US visa. See the FBI's press release, "FBI Responds to Report on London Bomber", of 22 June 2006.

Rumours
A detainee, who identified Khan after the 7 July attacks from pictures in the media, was not shown a surveillance photo of Khan taken during the fertiliser bomb plot investigation.
Reality
The detainee was shown surveillance photographs of Khan but failed to recognise him. The same detainee went on to identify Khan from photographs in media reporting, but only after the 7 July bombings and only as 'Ibrahim'.

Rumours
Convicted terrorist Mohammed Junaid Babar had tipped off the FBI and New York Police about Khan.
Reality
Prior to 7 July 2005 here is no record of Babar (who was called as a prosecution witness at the fertiliser plot trial) identifying either to the FBI or NYPD someone called 'Khan' as a threat. Only after 7 July did Babar identify Khan as somebody he knew.

Rumours
Tanweer was identified by non-UK intelligence agencies as someone accessing radical internet websites.
Reality
No such report was received by any of the UK intelligence agencies.

Rumours
The Security Service held back intelligence information when giving evidence to the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) hearings into the 7 July bombings.
Reality
The Security Service did not withhold any evidence from the ISC. The chair of the ISC, Paul Murphy MP, made this clear when he spoke in the debate on the ISC Annual Report [Adobe PDF, 445 Kb] on 11 July 2006. He said:

"Some allegations have been made that material was withheld from the Committee during the course of our investigations into the events of July last year and, indeed, that we were misled by the agencies. We have examined each and every one of those claims, whether they were made verbally or in the media, and are satisfied that they are not true." (Hansard, 11 July 2006, column 1323).

Rumours
A criminal mastermind responsible for orchestrating the attacks left the UK the day before 7 July.
Reality
This is not the Service's current assessment. It was an initial strand of investigation in the immediate aftermath of the 7 July attacks but it was subsequently discounted.

Rumours
The Saudi authorities warned the UK agencies about the 7 July attacks.
Reality
No prior warning of the attacks was received from any source. The Saudis provided information about possible planning for an attack in the UK which was materially different from the attacks that took place in London on 7 July.

Rumours
A Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre* report was issued in May 2005 assessing that there was no danger of an attack in the UK.
Reality
A JTAC report was issued in May 2005 but it did not state that there was no danger of an attack. The text of the assessment is reproduced in paragraph 82 of the ISC report into the 7 July bombings [Adobe PDF, 661 Kb]. It includes the warning that there was 'a continued high level of threat and that an attack might well be mounted without warning'.

Rumours
In February 2004, the Security Service recorded Khan's wish to fight and him saying goodbye to his family - a clear indication that he intended a suicide mission.
Reality
The Security Service did record conversations involving an individual identified after 7 July as Khan. From the context of the recorded conversation it is probable that Khan was talking about going to fight with militia groups in the Pakistan border areas. He was not talking about acts of terrorism in the UK.

Rumours
Khan travelled to Indonesia and associated with known Jemaah Islamiyah extremists.
Reality
There is no intelligence to suggest this took place.

******************

Notes on the above -

*JTAC or the "Joint Terrorism Analysis Center" is based at MI5 headquarters at Thames House, Millbank London.

The last statement, that Khan had traveled to Indonesia (and also Malaysia and the Philippines) where he met with Al Qaeda-linked terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah was made by the Singapore-based terrorism consultant Dr Rohan Gunaratna. He made these statements in a BBC Newsnight Report, which was made by Richard Watson, one of the BBC's best reporters on terrorism affairs. The show was aired on October 25, 2005.

The claim that Saudi intelligence warned Britain about an imminent attack immediately prior to 7/7 was made in the Observer newspaper of August 7, 2005. In February 2006, "senior White House officials" were said to have confrmed that there was a warning from Saudi Arabia, according to the Observer of February 5, 2006.

***********

Footnote: Tomorrow, Family Security Matters and Western Resistance will be publishing an account of MI5's structure and history, which was completed this morning, before the news of today's trial and the removal of restrictions on details revealed at the trial.

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at April 30, 2007 6:40 PM

Comments

Post a comment