Birmingham Mail : Al-Qaida terror plots on New York and Manchester linked to Alum rock murder suspect Rashid Rauf

Al-Qaida terror plots on New York and Manchester linked to Alum rock murder suspect Rashid Rauf

Amardeep Bassey | January 6, 2013

A suspected Islamic terrorist accused of plotting attacks in the UK and the New York subway was being directed by a Birmingham Al Qaida mastermind, security sources claim.The allegation comes after the USA successfully applied for Pakistani student Abid Naseer to be extradited to face terror charges.

Naseer, 26, had originally come to Britain from his native Pakistan on a student visa to study in Manchester.

But US prosecutors believe they can prove Naseer was part of an Al-Qaida cell sent to the UK and US by former Alum Rock murder suspect Rashid Rauf, who planned for them to attack targets on both sides of the Atlantic.

The Americans claim Naseer had shopped for bomb ingredients, conducted reconnaissance and was in frequent contact with other al-Qaida operatives as part of a foiled plot to kill Easter shoppers at the Trafford and Arndale centres in Manchester in 2009, and a second suspected plot to blow up the New York subway.

An FBI source told the Sunday Mercury that investigators believe that both plots were directed by Birmingham baker’s boy turned terrorist Rauf, who had climbed the Al Qaida ranks to become a chief planner of its operations in the West.

He said: “It is highly likely that it was Rauf who briefed and sent the two teams to launch attacks in the US and the UK.

“Messages from Pakistan were remarkably similar in content and tone, suggesting they were emanating from the same person, namely Rauf, who had a very distinct and colloquially English style.”

Rauf is believed to have been killed by the CIA in a drone attack in Pakistan’s tribal areas in 2008. He fled the UK to join Islamic terror groups in Pakistan in 2002 after being implicated in the murder of his uncle in Alum Rock.

Security service investigators believe he was a vital link for foreign Al Qaida recruits because of his Western background and upbringing.

The Portsmouth University drop-out is said to have been the point of contact for the London 7/7 bombers, as well as being implicated in several Al Qaida plots across Europe.

The US source said: “Evidence suggests Rauf was directing a terror cell in the US which was eventually smashed after it was discovered they were planning to bomb the New York subway.

“Rauf was killed in late 2008 but by then the terror cells had been dispatched and briefed.”

After two years of legal arguments stalling his extradition, Naseer was finally taken from his cell at Belmarsh high security jail and put on a plane at Luton airport by officers from the Metropolitan police extradition unit last week.

Naseer was one of 12 people arrested in April 2009 in co-ordinated raids in Liverpool and Manchester after police uncovered the alleged Manchester plot. But all were released without charge because of lack of evidence.

They were ordered to leave Britain, but Naseer escaped deportation to Pakistan after a judge ruled it was likely he would be mistreated if he were sent home.

Naseer was re-arrested in July 2010 at the request of the prosecutors in Brooklyn where a federal indictment named him as a co-defendant with Adis Medunjanin.

In January 2011, a British judge approved Naseer’s extradition but acknowledged there was a “very real risk” Naseer would be tortured if the US ultimately returned him to Pakistan.

US authorities allege Medunjanin and his former high school friends Najibullah Zazi and Zarein Ahmedzay travelled to Pakistan in 2008 to seek terror training from al-Qaida.

Authorities say the trio were planning co-ordinated suicide bombings on Manhattan subway lines during rush hour near the eighth anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks in what Zazi called a “martyrdom operation”.

The alleged plot was disrupted when police stopped Zazi’s car as it entered New York.

Times : 7/7 bombers could not have acted alone

7/7 bombers could not have acted alone

Commentary: Andy Hayman | April 29, 2009

The acquittals of three men on charges of helping the July 7 suicide bombers leave me with a sense of bitter disappointment. I suspect that feeling is shared by the families of the victims, the survivors and the police investigation team.

These charges would not have been brought unless police and prosecutors were satisfied that there was significant evidence implicating the defendants in the preparation of the 7/7 attacks.

I have no doubt that Mohammad Sidique Khan and the other three bombers had significant assistance from others here and overseas.

There were several sets of fingerprints, other than those of the four dead bombers, in the bomb factory in Leeds. There was extensive telephone contact with other people, here and in Pakistan. In my mind, it is inconceivable that the only people involved in planning these attacks were the four who carried them out.

The end of this trial probably represents the last throw of the dice for the police investigation into 7/7. It is extremely frustrating to reach this milestone knowing that people who aided and abetted the murders of 52 innocent people remain at large. I remain firmly of the view, however, that everything that could possibly be done was done and every lead was pursued.

The scale of the investigation was immense: more than 37,000 exhibits were examined, 4,700 telephones seized, producing more than 90,000 numbers requiring analysis and 24,000 people to be traced, interviewed and eliminated. Officers from Scotland Yard relocated to West Yorkshire to conduct inquiries.

This investigation was conducted by counter-terrorism units that were stretched to their limit and ran alongside inquiries into 11 other high-profile terrorist cases. But at the end of that inquiry the evidence that could be put before the court was circumstantial. Perhaps that is the only evidence there was to be found. A brave choice was made to put it before a jury and let justice take its course.

This was no half-baked police operation. I know that the officers involved had the grief of the bereaved etched on their minds. However, despite their best efforts, the evidence was not convincing enough.

Andy Hayman was Assistant Commissioner Special Operations in the Metropolitan Police 2005-07

Guardian : Timeline: The 7/7 London bombings

Timeline: The 7/7 London bombings

The 7 July attacks took the conspirators repeated trips to Pakistan and Afghanistan, and years, to plan

Rachel Williams | April 28, 2009

~~~

1999

Mohammed Shakil attends three-day militant training camp in Kashmir, where he learns to fire a gun. He describes the thrill as being "like a bungee jump".

July 2001

Mohammad Sidique Khan and Waheed Ali travel to Pakistan, where they spend a fortnight at a training camp in Kashmir before travelling into Afghanistan to a base camp a mile behind the frontline. They return to the UK a week before the September 11 attacks on the US.

July 2003

Khan and Shakil travel to Pakistan. They meet Mohammed Junaid Babar and the fertiliser bomb plotter, Omar Khyam, telling them they are on a fact-finding mission. They are persuaded to attend a training camp, however, and there they take part in firearms training using light machine guns, AK47s and rocket-propelled grenades.

February 2004

Khan, Shehzad Tanweer, Ali and Khyam meet several times in the UK and are captured on police surveillance discussing how to raise money for jihad by defrauding builders' merchants and banks.

November 2004

Khan makes home video recordings for his baby daughter, Maryam, saying goodbye before he goes to fight jihad. In one, he introduces the six-month-old to her "uncles": Tanweer, fellow 7 July bomber Hasib Hussain, and Ali. Days later, he and Tanweer fly to Pakistan. At the end of the month Khan's wife records in her diary that he may be back by February.

December 16 2004

Ali, Sadeer Saleem and Shakil drive from Leeds to London with Hussain on a trip described by the prosecution as a reconnaissance mission. They spend time in east London, where Ali, by his account, stays in the afternoon to visit his sister and her children. Saleem, Shakil and Hussain go to the Natural History Museum. They are joined in the evening by Jermaine Lindsay. All five stay the night at the Journey's Hostel, King's Cross.

December 17 2004

Lindsay leaves early in the morning; Ali, Saleem, Shakil and Hussain go on the London Eye and to the London Aquarium. They leave the city at lunchtime.

December 2004

Ali and Saleem fly from Manchester to Islamabad. They claim that while in Pakistan they spent several weeks at a training camp, where they say they were visited by Khan and Tanweer, and were told the pair were returning to the UK to "do a couple of things for the brothers".

February 2005

Khan returns to the UK; Ali and Saleem come home later in the month.

April to June 2005

Khan, Tanweer, Hussain and Lindsay are captured on CCTV visiting the second bomb factory, in Chapeltown Road, Leeds.

June 28 2005

Khan, Tanweer and Lindsay make a final reconnaissance trip to London.

July 7 2005

Khan, Tanweer, Lindsay and Hussain detonate suicide bombs on London's transport system, killing 52 people.

October 2006

"Cell site analysis" of mobile phone calls alerts police to the December 2004 trip.

March 2007

Ali and Shakil are arrested as they prepare to board a flight to Pakistan. Saleem is taken into custody at home in Leeds.

Guardian : Trio not guilty of helping 7/7 London bombers

Trio not guilty of helping 7/7 London bombers

Jury clears men of conspiring with four bombers over London 2005 explosions that killed 52

Rachel Williams | April 28, 2009

Three British Muslims were today cleared of helping the 7 July bombers choose their targets by carrying out a reconnaissance mission in London seven months before the attacks that killed 52 people and injured almost 1,000.

A jury at Kingston crown court unanimously found Waheed Ali, 25, Sadeer Saleem, 28, and Mohammed Shakil, 32, all from Beeston, Leeds, not guilty of conspiring with the four bombers to cause explosions, after deliberating for eight days.

They are the only people to be charged over the attacks in 2005, which prompted the biggest criminal investigation in British history – more than 18,450 statements were taken and at least 37,000 exhibits were collected.

Ali and Shakil were, however, convicted of conspiracy to attend a place used for terrorist training. They were about to board a flight to Pakistan when they were arrested in 2007. The pair will be sentenced tomorrow afternoon.

The home secretary, Jacqui Smith, welcomed those guilty verdicts, which she said "clearly demonstrated the determined stance the UK takes against those suspected of involvement in terrorism".

As the verdicts were read out, Ali smiled broadly, Saleem wiped his eyes and Shakil leant forward, mouthing "thank you" to the jury. The trio had been retried after a jury failed to reach a verdict on the charges relating to the 7 July attacks last year after about three weeks of deliberations.

Survivors of the attacks and family members of those who died said today's verdicts strengthened the case for an independent inquiry into the bombings.

The end of the trial clears the way for the publication of a long-awaited report into whether the attacks could have been prevented, which is expected to be critical of the way MI5 and West Yorkshire police responded to earlier intelligence linking some of the suicide bombers with a group who were plotting to explode a series of huge fertiliser bombs.

The two key bombers, Mohammad Siddique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer, crossed MI5's radar several times in 2004 as the security service watched the gang that was later convicted of plotting to blow up Bluewater shopping centre in Kent and south London's Ministry of Sound nightclub.

Ali was also present when Khan and Tanweer met the leader of that cell, Omar Khyam, and Shakil and Khan trained with him at a camp in Pakistan in 2003.

But after the fertiliser plotters were arrested in March 2003, Khan and Tanweer, who had been judged to be peripheral figures because they only seemed interested in committing fraud to fund overseas jihad, were not followed again by M15 and were not identified by the service.

Khyam was referred to as "Ausman" during the trial for fear that revealing his true indentity to the jury would prejudice the case.

Graham Foulkes, whose 22-year-old son David worked for the Guardian in Manchester and was killed in the Edgware Road tube explosion, said: "For almost four years, we have been asking for an inquiry into what led up to 7/7.

"We are not looking for people to blame, but we also know that we have not been told the whole truth. We believe that crucial lessons need to be learned. If mistakes have been made, they should be put right, not covered up. This is not a witch-hunt, it is simply about saving lives."

Police have said they know others were involved in the attacks and believe there are still people in Beeston with significant information who have never come forward.

Deputy assistant commissioner John McDowall, the head of the Metropolitan police's counterterrorism command, said he believed others were involved in planning the attacks.

"I would urge anybody who has any information about 7/7 to come forward and contact police," he said. "I do understand that people may have concerns about the impact of giving us information, but it is the right thing to do."

Speaking about Ali and Shakil, he said: "These two men learned to fight at training camps attended by other terrorists. Mohammed Siddique Khan and Mohammed Shakil told other attendees that their aim was to fight in Afghanistan. They were proficient in the use of, and handling of, terrorist weapons and were certainly not enjoying a day out in a beautiful and mountainous area of Pakistan, as was suggested in court.

"Shakil himself accepted that the camp at Malakand was a serious business, whose purpose was to train willing volunteers to fight and kill in Afghanistan on behalf of the Taliban, a cause to which both he and Ali were, and remain, sympathetic.

"Ali and Shakil clearly associated with, and shared the terrorist beliefs of, the London bombers."

Ali, Saleem and Shakil spent two days in London with the bus bomber, Hasib Hussain, in December 2004 and were joined there by another of the attackers, Jermaine Lindsay, who killed 26 people on a Piccadilly line underground train.

The trio had denied the charges and said they were on a sightseeing trip. They went on the London Eye and visited the Natural History Museum and the London Aquarium as they travelled around the capital.

The prosecution alleged they conducted a "hostile reconnaissance" of potential targets, claiming it was "an important first step in what was, by then, a settled plan to cause explosions in the UK".

Interviewed by police shortly after the bombings, Ali, Saleem and Shakil distanced themselves from the bombers but, in the year that followed, DNA and fingerprint evidence linked them to the two bomb factories in the city and made them "persons of interest".

Detectives first realised the trio may have been to London with Hussain and Lindsay while analysing the details of 4,700 phone numbers and 90,000 calls. Cell site analysis, pinpointing the location of a mobile phone when a call is made, revealed that all five men had been in the capital on 16-17 December. The analysis allowed the group's movements across London to be mapped.

But there was no CCTV footage to show what they had been doing and no proof they had even been on the London underground, where three of the four bombs exploded.

The trio argued during the trial that the items carrying their DNA had been taken to the bomb factories by the bombers, not them.

The jury was warned not to think that they must be guilty just because they were friends with the bombers, with whom they attended the same mosques, gyms and community organisations growing up in Beeston.

The Crown Prosecution Service later defended its decision to prosecute the three men and to go for a retrial following the first court case, although it "fully respected" the jury's verdict.

Sue Hemming, the head of the counterterrorism division, said: "Although there was no direct evidence that these men were involved in the terrible events of 7/7, we felt there was sufficient evidence to show they were involved in reconnaissance and planning for an attack of some kind and it was in the public interest that such a serious matter should be put before a court."

Saleem, who was cleared of all charges, called for an inquiry into his prosecution.

In a statement read by Imran Khan, his solicitor, on the steps of Kingston crown court, Saleem said: "I have lost over two years of my life which I will never get back. Even though I have been acquitted, some people will always connect me with these events.

"I want people to know I am totally innocent and I want there to be an inquiry into why I was prosecuted on the flimsiest of evidence. Nobody should be put through what I have gone through."

Guardian : Four years, 52 dead, £100m - no convictions

Four years, 52 dead, £100m - no convictions

Police say further 7/7 charges unlikely
Security officials say little chance of 7/7 bombing charges as three cleared

Sandra Laville, Rachel Williams and Richard Norton-Taylor | April 29, 2009

Senior security officials conceded last night that it is likely no one will be brought to justice for the 7 July bombs that killed 52 people in London in 2005, despite their belief that more than 20 people were involved in the attacks.

The admission came shortly after the only three men to be charged in connection with the suicide bombings were acquitted yesterday.

After a £100m criminal investigation, the biggest police inquiry in modern times, the trio were cleared by a jury at Kingston crown court of helping to plan the attacks by carrying out a reconnaissance mission with two of the bombers.

The men, Waheed Ali, 25, Mohammed Shakil, 32, and Sadeer Saleem, 28, had already been tried once last year, when a jury failed to reach a verdict.

Peter Clarke, former head of the Metropolitan police's anti-terrorism branch, who led the inquiry until his retirement last year, told the Guardian: "Every possible line had been followed and there didn't seem to be any fresh new lines. The core of the investigation was the people that were in court over the last few weeks."

Another senior source said the investigating officers were now at a loss where to turn. The Guardian understands that counter-terrorism officials believe around 20 people were involved, from those associated with the bombers to those who helped them plan the attacks.

The three men acquitted yesterday became "persons of interest" when officers discovered DNA and fingerprints linking them to the two bomb factories in Leeds. Detectives first realised they had been to London with bombers Hasib Hussain and Germaine Lindsay while scrutinising the details of 4,700 phone numbers and 90,000 calls. Cell site analysis, pinpointing the location of a mobile phone when a call is made, revealed that all five men had been in the capital on 16-17 December.

But during the trial they insisted that they had been on a sightseeing trip, visiting the London Eye, the London Aquarium and the Natural History Museum, and were opposed to suicide bombings. No CCTV of the visit remained. At least 10 sets of fingerprints found at the bomb factories have never been identified.

The verdict opens the way for fresh and highly damaging disclosures by the parliamentary intelligence and security committee (ISC) about how MI5 and West Yorkshire police missed opportunities to follow - and possibly stop - two of the 7 July suicide bombers.

A report by the ISC, which the Guardian has been told describes in detail how MI5 and West Yorkshire police failed to intercept the attackers, was withheld in case it prejudiced the trial but will be released next month. Campaigners said it had been described to them as "devastating".

More intelligence is also believed to have emerged about what the security and intelligence agencies knew about the training camps in Pakistan, the number of people connected with the 7/7 bombers who visited them and how many times.

The Guardian understands the ISC report details how MI5 officers monitored four meetings in early 2004 between Mohammed Siddique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer - the ringleaders of the 7/7 attacks - and Omar Khyam, the ringleader of a plot to blow up shopping centres and nightclubs who was jailed for life in 2007. Ali was also at some of the meetings.

Crucial questions that have not been answered include:

• Why MI5 and police did not take more urgent steps to identify Khan and Tanweer, whom they had photographed and bugged.

• Whether Scotland Yard's anti-terrorism branch or MI5 alerted West Yorkshire police about everything they knew.

• Has the ISC now been given all the new evidence, including about links between the plotters here and camps in Pakistan?

Survivors and family of those who died stepped up calls for an independent inquiry, saying that if the report fails to answer "key questions" they will push ahead with a judicial review into the government's refusal to order one. They called for inquests to be arranged as soon as possible, and voiced fears the hearings could be held in secret under the coroners and justice bill going through parliament.

Robert Webb, whose 29-year-old sister Laura died in the Edgware Road bombing, said: "The trial ... raises again the awful question of whether the bombings could have been prevented."

Saleem, 28, spoke outside court to say he was "totally innocent" yesterday. "I have lost over two years of my life which I will never get back," he said.

Ali and Shakil were convicted of planning to attend a terrorist training camp, charges added at the retrial. They were arrested on their way to Manchester airport to fly to Pakistan in March 2007.

Times : British trio cleared of helping to plan 7/7 London attacks

British trio cleared of helping to plan 7/7 London attacks

David Brown | April 28, 2009

Three British Muslims were cleared today of helping to plan terrorist attacks on London that killed 52 people and injured almost 1,000.

Waheed Ali, Mohammed Shakil and Sadeer Saleem are the only people to have been prosecuted over Britain's first suicide bomb attacks, on July 7, 2005

They were accused of carrying out a reconnaissance mission to identify targets for the 7/7 gang but were found not guilty of conspiracy to cause explosions after a three-month trial at Kingston Crown Court.

Ali and Shakil were convicted of planning to attend a terrorist training camp when they were arrested on their way to Manchester Airport for a flight to Pakistan in March 2007.

Senior police officers have admitted that no one else is likely to be charged in connection with the London attacks despite evidence that other people were involved.

Andy Hayman, Britain’s most senior anti-terrorism police officer at the time of the attacks, told The Times: “We must respect the verdict of the jury but, rather than it starting to bring a small degree of closure, we are instead left with a deep sense of emptiness.

“I have no doubt in my mind that Mohammed Sidique Khan and the other three bombers had significant assistance from other people in this country and overseas.”

Mr Ali, 25, Mr Shakil, 33, and Mr Saleem, 28, admitted that they had been committed jihadists and had previously attended training camps in Pakistan. They insisted that they had no knowledge of the planned attacks on London and said that it was against their faith to attack civilians.

The men – all from Beeston, Leeds – travelled to London in December 2004 with two of the 7/7 gang, Jermaine Lindsay and Hasib Hussain. During the two-day trip they visited the Natural History Museum, the London Eye and the London Aquarium, as well as the eventual targets chosen for the attacks.

The men insisted that they had visited to capital so that Ali could see his sister before flying to Pakistan to join a terrorism training camp. They said that they were sightseeing.

Seven months later their friends detonated explosives on three packed Tube trains and a bus at the height of the morning rush hour.

Hussain killed 13 passengers on a bus in Tavistock Square and Lindsay killed 26 people on a Piccadilly Line train at Russell Square.

Mohammad Sidique Khan killed six people on a Circle Line train at Edgware Road and Shezhad Tanweer killed seven people at Aldgate.

Mr Justice Gross had told the jury that they should not convict the men simply because they were outraged by the events of July 7 and could not punish the dead bombers.

A previous jury last year failed to reach verdicts on the charges of conspiracy to cause explosions.

Today’s acquittals after two trials estimated to have cost at least £5 million will lead to renewed calls for a public inquiry into events leading up to the 7/7 attacks.

The Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee, which had previously defended the failure to identify the bombers before they struck, has completed a report that is expected to be more critical of the missed opportunities to stop the attacks.

Mohammad Sidique Khan, the leader of the 7/7 gang, his fellow bomber Shezhad Tanweer and Ali had appeared four times in M15 surveillance more than a year before the attacks.

They were spotted after meetings with another terrorist gang in Crawley, West Sussex. But the jury was not told that the other gang planned to attack a London shopping centre or nightclub with a massive fertiliser-based bomb.

Ali, who was born in Bangladesh, boasted in court that his “ultimate aim” was to fight coalition forces in Afghanistan and kill British soldiers. He described civilian deaths as “collateral damage”.

He attended a jihadist training camp in Pakistan with Khan in 2001 and both men served with the Taleban in Afghanistan for two weeks. He attended another jihad camp in Pakistan from December 2004 to March 2005.

Shakil, also a father of three, was born in Pakistan. He had worked with Mohammad Sidique Khan as a youth leader at the Hardy Street Mosque in Beeston.

He attended a jihad training in Kashmir in 1999 and in 2003 travelled to Pakistan with Khan to take part in another camp, were they met members of the fertliser-bomb gang.

Attendance at a terrorism training camp abroad was made illegal by the Terrorism Act 2006.

Times : 7/7 bombings: end of the road

7/7 bombings: end of the road

Sean O’Neill and David Brown | April 29, 2009

No one will be brought to justice for the mass murder of 52 people in the 7/7 London bombings, security sources conceded last night as three men were acquitted of helping the terrorists.

After a massive security operation, a four-year investigation and two trials costing well in excess of £100 million, three friends of the lead suicide bomber, c, were cleared by a jury of being part of his support cell. Sadeer Saleem, 28, left court a free man but Waheed Ali, 25, and Mohammed Shakil, 32, were convicted of attending terrorist training camps and will be sentenced today.

Detectives are certain that the bombers received help from within the Muslim community in Beeston, Leeds, which, they say, is reluctant to co-operate with police. Sources said that potential witnesses had been “actively dissuaded” from helping police. As many as ten sets of unidentified fingerprints were found in bomb factories used by Khan, 30, and the three other men who killed themselves in the attacks on three Tube trains and a London bus on July 7, 2005.

Deputy Assistant Commissioner John McDowall, of the Scotland Yard Counter Terrorism Command, said: “While those directly responsible for the bombings died in the attacks, we remain convinced that others must have been involved in the planning.”

Mr McDowall appealed for witnesses to come forward, but Andy Hayman, the Yard’s head of counter-terrorism in July 2005, writes in The Times today that the trial was “the last throw of the dice” for the 7/7 investigation.

Survivors and relatives of the victims accepted the verdicts with resignation and demanded immediate publication of an Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) report into 7/7, the urgent opening of inquests and an independent inquiry with powers to summon witnesses.

“We want an inquiry which can get to the bottom of what went wrong and why Khan wasn’t stopped. We don’t want a witch-hunt, we just want the truth,” said Rachel North, who was injured in the blast at King’s Cross.

The ISC report is expected in two weeks. The key issue for the relatives will be the fate of a fax message sent by MI5, which watched Khan in 2004 as he associated with another British terrorist, to West Yorkshire Police asking for his movements to be watched.

Informed sources say that receipt of the fax was never acknowledged. Police did not monitor Khan and he flew to Pakistan where he was groomed by al-Qaeda leaders to become a suicide bomber.

Graham Foulkes, whose son David, 22, died on a Circle Line train at Edgware Road, said that the trial revealed that there had been significant pre-attack intelligence about Khan.

He said: “Immediately after the bombings the Home Secretary, Tony Blair and other politicians were saying these men were ‘clean skins’ and the attacks came ‘out of the blue’. Either they were lying, or the intelligence community lied to the politicians.”

Independent : Bombings spooked security services

Bombings spooked security services

By Robert Verkaik, Home Affairs Editor | May 21, 2009

Al-Qa'ida's attacks on London in the summer of 2005 exposed Britain's vulnerability to a new kind of terrorism.

The discovery that the July bombers and their accomplices were home-grown meant the police and the Security Service needed to rethink their counter-terrorism tactics. The subsequent hunt for groups of British-born men who might be planning similar attacks was given the highest priority.

Key to the new approach would be deeper penetration of Muslim communities. The police worked to gain the confidence of Muslim leaders; the Security Service stepped up its recruitment of informers.

Some of the intelligence obtained was key to foiling major terrorist attacks but there were also mistakes. The raid on the home of two brothers in Forest Gate, London, resulted in one of them being shot and both being exonerated. This year, the arrests of 11 Pakistani students and one British student ended in embarrassment when the raids were brought forward and the men were all released without charge.

Undaunted by the errors and damaging impact these tactics were having on Muslim communities, MI5 has pressed on with its recruitment drive.

While a few of these "spies" will be crucial to counter-terrorism operations, many will be of little or no intelligence value while others targeted will be hostile to the crude approaches of MI5 officers. The six north London men who say they have been targeted allege they have been blackmailed and intimidated by the Security Service.

For months, the men kept their contact with MI5 secret and did not even confide in their families. "No one wants to be accused of spying on their own community, people would never trust you," said Mohamed Nur, one of the men that MI5 approached. "I would not be able to work or live here again."

Only when Abshir Mohamed decided to tell the chairman of a north London community centre about his MI5 encounters did the scale of the intimidation and harassment emerge.

Shaharbeen Lone, a Kentish Town Community Organisation leader, said: "Abshir called me when he reached home [from Heathrow, where he was quizzed], extremely worried and very anxious. His mother and wife, who has just had heart surgery, had been travelling with him and had to wait throughout his ordeal. Abshir is a senior youth leader who works hard to stop young Muslims getting involved in crime."

Mr Lone called a youth leader meeting to see if others had similar experiences. What he heard appalled him. Two men said they had been detained abroad and interviewed by MI5 upon their return to the UK. Another was questioned when he returned from his honeymoon to Saudi Arabia. Two more were visited by MI5 agents at home.

MI5 wanted to use the men as informers. Those who refused to co-operate received threatening phone calls.

Born in Somalia, the men had all come to Britain as children. Growing up in north London, they had overcome troubled backgrounds, which had occasionally brought some of them to the attention of the police. To escape these influences, their families sent them to study Arabic in Cairo. But none of them, says Mr Lone, who has known them for years, has held extremist views or had links to terrorism. Today they lead exemplary lives. The organisation's chairman complained to the local MP, Frank Dobson and to police. The police told him they would tell MI5 of his concerns.

Mr Lone says by the end of last year the message seemed to have got through and the intimidation ended. Then last month, MI5 agents questioned Mahdi Hashi at Gatwick and told him if he didn't spy on his friends, he could expect to be locked up at airports for hours. "It has started again. There seems to be nothing we can do to stop them ruining these young men's lives," says Mr Lone.

Independent : Pauline Neville-Jones: MI5 must use persuasion – not coercion

Pauline Neville-Jones: MI5 must use persuasion – not coercion

May 21, 2009

When I read the Intelligence and Security Committee's report on the July 7 terrorist attacks that was published this week, two points struck me.

The first is that the Security Service did not give due attention to key indicators which would now flash red lights. For example, that two of the would-be attackers had travelled to Pakistan and Afghanistan. The second is the Security Service's assertion that they did not actually have sufficient resources to devote attention to these individuals and had to prioritise other investigations that were considered more pressing.

The Committee said that for the Service to achieve coverage of all targets, it would need "to be a very different organisation, both in terms of its size and how it operates, which would have huge ramifications for our society and the way we live". This is undoubtedly true.

But recruiting or using informants is unlikely to produce a sufficiently rich picture or provide full coverage. When recruiting informants and making use of the information they provide, we must bear in mind three potential problems.

First, there is always a risk that human sources might be unreliable. Secondly, there is always a risk that they might have ulterior motives. Thirdly, it is unlikely that they will reflect all the complexities and diversities of the communities from which they come.

At worst, if known, people might resent the fact that the Security Service is recruiting informants specifically from their community. It could create a perception that they are all being stigmatised and spied on, and this could in turn create a culture of mistrust.

This is not to say that traditional intelligence methods have no place. But I would suggest that the aim should be to reach a situation in which people come of their own accord to the authorities – to the police, local councils, schools – with any concerns about those in their neighbourhoods. In this situation there would be less need for informants. Why is this point important? Changes in behaviour and in attitudes can be subtle and gradual, and communities and families are best placed to notice early on any behaviour that is out of the ordinary.

They can, for instance, help the authorities understand the significance of a recent visit to Pakistan. Information forthcoming in this way would fill intelligence gaps and provide context.

It would help with the early identification and intervention of individuals at risk. It would also help the security services better prioritise resources and investigations.

To get to this point, great attention will need to be paid over the coming years to integrate counter-terrorism work into an effective system of community policing. It also follows from all this that counter-terrorism programmes and tactics must be assessed against their likely effect on community relations.

Today's Independent contains allegations from young Muslim men that they have been harassed by the Security Service to become informants. I have no knowledge of the validity of these complaints but it is clear that promising initiatives can be easily wrecked in their implementation, resulting in the reverse effect from the one desired and intended – a reduction in trust and communication between communities and police.

In what is without question a delicate and difficult challenge for our security services, great skill will be need to be shown over the coming years to effectively integrate counter-terrorism work into successful community policing.

The author is the shadow Security minister and former chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee

Asian Image : Calls for answers as three are cleared of terror plot

Calls for answers as three are cleared of terror plot

April 28, 2009

Relatives of those killed on July 7 2005 demanded answers as three men were cleared of helping the bombers plan the attacks.

Campaigners said the verdicts mean no one has ever been brought to justice for the attacks on London’s transport network.

They said it strengthened their case for a full independent inquiry into the deadly London terrorist attack.

Bereaved families and survivors called on the Government to publish a second Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) report into the bombings without delay.

And they said inquests into the deaths of all 52 victims, plus the four suicide bombers, should be held in public as soon as possible.

Graham Foulkes, whose 22-year-old son David was killed in the Edgware Road Tube explosion, said now is the time for a public inquiry.

He said: “For almost four years we have been asking for an inquiry into what led up to 7/7.

”We are not looking for people to blame, but we also know that we have not been told the whole truth.

”We believe that crucial lessons need to be learned. If mistakes have been made, they should be put right, not covered up. This is not a witch hunt, it is simply about saving lives.”

A jury at Kingston Crown Court today cleared three men of helping the July 7 bombers plan their attacks by carrying out a reconnaissance mission in London.

But two of the men, Waheed Ali and Mohammed Shakil, were convicted of a second charge of conspiracy to attend a place used for terrorist training.

Ali, 25, Shakil, 32, and Sadeer Saleem, 28, all from Beeston, Leeds, were re-tried after an earlier jury failed to reach verdicts.

They were accused of visiting the London Eye, Natural History Museum and London Aquarium to identify potential targets seven months before the 2005 atrocity.

Suicide bombers Mohammed Siddique Khan, Shehzad Tanweer, Hasib Hussain and Germaine Lindsay detonated rucksack devices packed with explosives on three Tube trains and a bus.

The trial heard that the three defendants travelled from Leeds to London on December 16 2004 with Hussain, who went on to detonate his bomb on the No 30 bus in Tavistock Square, claiming 13 lives.

There they met Lindsay, who killed 26 people on a Piccadilly Line underground train.

The prosecution alleged they conducted a “hostile reconnaissance” of potential targets during a two-day visit, claiming it was “an important first step in what was, by then, a settled plan to cause explosions in the UK”.

Detailed cell site analysis of mobile phone use, including calls to the London Tourist Board and various attractions, allowed the group’s movements across London to be mapped.

The three defendants admitted making the visit but claimed it was an entirely innocent social outing and the purpose was for Ali to visit his sister.

They said they had used the opportunity to see some of the capital’s landmarks at the same time.

Guardian : King claims terror warnings ignored

King claims terror warnings ignored

Press Association | October 29, 2007

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia arrived in Britain for a state visit which threatens to be overshadowed by his claim that Britain failed to act on information passed on by his country which could have averted the July 7 suicide bombings in London.

The Foreign Office played down the king's remarks, insisting that no information was received ahead of the 2005 attacks which could have prevented them.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia's foreign minister Prince Saud al-Faisal pulled out of a "curtain-raiser" conference in London after Foreign Secretary David Miliband announced he was unable to attend because he is adopting a child in the USA.

This week's trip is the first state visit by a Saudi monarch for 20 years, and is regarded as "extremely important" by the Government, because of the desert kingdom's pivotal role in vital global issues including counter-terrorism, the Middle East peace process, Iraq and Iran.

But it has revived controversy over Saudi Arabia's human rights record and the Government's halting of a Serious Fraud Office bribery inquiry into the massive al-Yamamah arms deal.

Liberal Democrat acting leader Vince Cable announced he would boycott the visit, while backbench Labour MPs are planning to join human rights demonstrators staging a protest outside the Saudi embassy on Wednesday.

The Foreign Office said that human rights issues will not "dominate" ministerial talks with the visiting Saudi delegation, which culminate with face-to-face discussions between Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Abdullah on Wednesday.

A senior official said "very substantive political discussions" are expected at the talks in 10 Downing Street, as Britain and Saudi Arabia share "common interests and common views" on the key regional and global issues, including counter-terrorism.

In an interview with the BBC ahead of his visit, Abdullah said the fight against terrorism needed much more effort by Western countries such as Britain and that al Qaida continued to be a big problem for his country. "We have sent information to Great Britain before the terrorist attacks in Britain but unfortunately no action was taken. And it may have been able to maybe avert the tragedy," he said, speaking through an interpreter.

A senior Foreign Office spokesman suggested that reports of the king's comments may have "skewed" his meaning, and pointed to a report last year by the parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee which found that there was "no specific intelligence" of the July 7 plot.

Copyright (c) Press Association Ltd. 2007, All Rights Reserved.

Mathaba : Lessons not learnt from London bombs, report warns

Lessons not learnt from London bombs, report warns

October 3, 2007

Britain remains open to another attack, due to a defunct and dangerous intelligence paradigm that has paralyzed this country's national security system, according to a new report published Wednesday.

The report by the Institute for Policy Research and Development (IPRD) criticises the government's refusal to investigate the July 7 bombings in London two years ago, warning that unresolved security loopholes increase the likelihood of another attack in future.

It calls for urgent reforms in security policy and resources, saying that the "moral and professional standards amongst our intelligence services have declined as a direct consequence of politicization".

"Collaboration with Islamist extremists in the UK for domestic and international intelligence purposes has been so extensive, it has obstructed security services from shutting down terror networks in this country even now," the report's author, Nafeez Ahmed said.

"We can keep extending the anti-terror laws as much as we like, but this won't make us any safer until such policy is scrutinized and reformed," argued Ahmed, who is also executive director of the independent think-tank for interdisciplinary security studies.

The report, which calls for a full inquiry into the 7/7 bombings, was said to have been backed by survivors and bereaved relatives of the series on attacks on London's transport system that killed 56 people and injured hundreds of others. --IRNA

Reuters : London bomb survivors begin legal fight for inquiry

London bomb survivors begin legal fight for inquiry

By Michael Holden | August 30, 2007

LONDON (Reuters) - Survivors and relatives of those killed in the London bombings of July 7, 2005, began legal action on Thursday to force the British government to hold an independent inquiry into the capital's worst peacetime attacks.

The group argues official accounts of the suicide bombings on London's transport system carried out by four young British Islamists have been insufficient, inaccurate and misleading.

Fifty two commuters died in the attacks.

The 7/7 inquiry group, made up of bereaved relatives and those who escaped the bombings, says the refusal to hold a public inquiry breaches the European Convention on Human Rights and intends to seek a judicial review of that decision.

Lawyers for the group said the papers were being served at the High Court on Thursday.

"Firstly we say that the decision of the former Home Secretary (interior minister) not to order an inquiry was irrational," Cliff Tibber, head of litigation at Oury Clark, told Reuters.

"Secondly there is a positive duty under article 2 of the Human Rights Act in these circumstances to order an inquiry." The first hearing at the High Court is unlikely to take place until October.

The government has rejected demands for an independent review of the bombings, which opposition politicians have also called for. It says an inquiry would distract stretched security services when Britain is at serious risk of attack.

"As we have consistently maintained, experience has shown that a fuller public inquiry can take years and divert huge resources," a Home Office spokeswoman said earlier this month.

VITAL QUESTIONS

Britain is at its second highest threat level, "severe", meaning an attack is highly likely. In June, a jeep laden with petrol canisters was rammed into Glasgow Airport, just days after two cars packed with gas canisters, petrol and nails were found in London.

The 7/7 inquiry group says there are vital unanswered questions that need to be addressed, particularly how much the authorities knew about two of the bombers, ringleader Mohammad Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer, before the attacks.

They were photographed, recorded and followed by intelligence operatives several times in early 2004 in the company of plotters who have since been jailed for planning attacks using fertilizer-based bombs.

The government said in the aftermath of the July 7 strikes that all the bombers were "clean skins" who had not previously crossed the authorities' radar.

The group says that means an inquiry is needed to determine whether the government had failed in its duty to protect life.

"We would very much like answers to the questions we have raised. We don't understand why we haven't received them," Jacqui Putnam, who was on board the train blown up by Khan, told Reuters.

© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.