BBC : Terror raid duo back in Pakistan

Terror raid duo back in Pakistan

August 22, 2009

Two Pakistani students arrested over an alleged terror plot have returned to Pakistan after deciding to leave the UK voluntarily, the Home Office has said.

Abdul Khan, 26, and Shoaib Khan, 27, were among 12 people held by police after raids in north-west England in April, but the pair were never charged.

The Home Office tried to deport them, saying they remained a security threat.

It is understood the men decided to leave after being denied bail while appealing against deportation.

The appeal was due to be heard by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Siac) in March next year.

Both students, who had been Category A prisoners at HMP Manchester, arrived in Islamabad on Saturday.

Abdul Khan said his detention had been "like a hell" and his treatment showed the British authorities "do not know what justice means".

The men's solicitor, Amjad Malik, said his clients should have been freed instead of being held for months.

He said the students would continue to fight their case in Britain and had taken up the issue with Pakistan's interior ministry.

Mr Malik claimed both men had been frequently strip-searched, subjected to "searches by dogs" and served tainted food.

The British High Commission in Pakistan has rejected the allegations as "unfounded".

It said that apart from one incident of allegedly contaminated baked beans, no other complaints had been made during their detention.

"The UK government treats all those in detention in UK prisons fairly and humanely, regardless of their nationality, race or religion," a statement said.

'Visa irregularities'

Twelve students were arrested in the terror raids in Manchester and Liverpool as part of Operation Pathway, with three subsequently released.

The anti-terror operation had to be brought forward after Britain's most senior counter-terrorism officer, Bob Quick, was photographed with a secret document. He subsequently resigned.

The Home Office is attempting to deport two others, Sultan Sher and Janus Khan, on the grounds of visa irregularities after dropping claims that they posed a threat to national security.

Five more, referred to only as VE, UF, ZA, YB and XC, are to appear before Siac for their deportation appeal hearing on March 10.

Evidence passed to the tribunal claimed one of the men, who cannot be identified, exchanged e-mails with an associate of al-Qaeda.

MI5 analysis also suggested girls' names were used as code for bomb ingredients and that the mention of a wedding hinted at a planned attack.

Lawyers for the men said the emails were innocent and the security services' interpretation of the emails was "far-fetched".

London Evening Standard : Wedding emails sparked terror swoop

Wedding emails sparked terror swoop

Martin Bentham, Home Affairs Editor | August 14, 2009

Seven Pakistani terror suspects were arrested after MI5 decided that their emails contained codewords for a deadly bomb plot.

One email suggested that a girl called "Nadia" would be involved in a "nikah", a wedding, between 15 and 20 April this year - part of an exchange which defence lawyers claim was entirely innocent.

The message, and others sent between the alleged plotters, triggered a major anti-terrorist operation after MI5, which had been monitoring the men for some time, decided that the girls' names were code for explosive ingredients and the "wedding" was the intended attack.

The details were disclosed today following a hearing at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission last month at which five of the men, who are all facing deportation on the grounds that they pose a threat to national security, applied to be released on bail.

The judge in the case, Mr Justice Mitting, refused their application, saying there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that MI5's view was "plainly wrong", in a decision which means that the men will stay in custody until next year.

Giving the reasons for his decision today, Mr Justice Mitting said a series of emails exchanged between an address attributed to one of the men and another attributed to an al Qaeda associate were "central to the open case against the appellants".

The emails from the man, identified only as XC, to "Sohaib" appear to refer to a "nikah".

Mr Justice Mitting added: "They appear to refer to XC's interest in named girls and to a nikah (wedding) after 15th and before 20th April 2009 with one of them, Nadia.

The assessment of the security service is that references to named girls could be to ingredients from which an explosive device could be made and that the reference to the nikah is 'most likely' reference to an intended attack."

He continued: "The first, and ultimately determinative issue is, therefore: is the assessment of the security service plainly wrong?"

Richard Hermer QC, for XC, told last month's hearing the security service's account of the emails was far-fetched and the emails were no more than innocent social discussions.

Mr Justice Mitting said, however, that he could approve the men's release only if it was clear that MI5's judgment was "plainly wrong" and because this was not currently the case, the detainees would have to remain in custody.

He said the final interpretation of the emails would have to wait until a full Special Immigration Appeals Commission hearing takes place next year and added: "On the information, open and closed, which we have now, we are not satisfied that the assessment by the security service of their likely meaning is clearly wrong."

The men's bail application was opposed by the Home Office, which submitted evidence that the five attended one or both of two meetings on 23 March and 1 April in which the "nikah" was also discussed.

Of the five men, students Abdul Khan, 26, and Shoaib Khan, 27, from Liverpool, have waived their right to anonymity.

They were among 12 terror suspects arrested in April in a high-profile police operation across the North-West.

Three of the other men originally arrested were later released. A further two have also since been freed but have been electronically tagged and are due to be removed from the country for alleged visa irregularities.

The raids had been rushed forward after the Met's then anti-terror chief, Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, was photographed carrying details of the planned operation into Downing Street.

He resigned the following day because of the blunder.

The failure of the raids to result in any prosecutions led to concern from some critics that police and MI5 had overreacted and unfairly targeted the men detained.

But security sources insist that the raids successfully disrupted a potentially major plot.

Telegraph : Cars and girls: email 'codewords’ that put MI5 on terrorist alert

Cars and girls: email 'codewords’ that put MI5 on terrorist alert

By Duncan Gardham, Security Correspondent | July 30, 2009

A Muslim terrorist suspect sent coded emails to an al-Qaeda commander in which references to his impending marriage were in fact details of a planned bomb attack in Britain, MI5 has claimed.

The messages, intercepted by the security service, allegedly showed that an extremist cell in Manchester was communicating with a commander in Pakistan to execute an Easter bombing campaign.

The emails, written by a 23-year-old Pakistani student, appeared to refer to several girlfriends and plans to buy a car. But the Home Office claimed that the text was code for a car-bomb attack intended to take place within days.

It led to the largest terrorist alert in Britain for two years and a series of arrests, which were brought forward after Bob Quick, the then head of counter-terrorism at the Metropolitan Police, was pictured walking into Downing Street holding a piece of paper disclosing details of the operation, code-named Pathway.

Police across the North West moved in to arrest 11 students on April 8. During subsequent raids, officers found an A-to-Z with streets marked, photographs of shopping centres and a video of the men on a trip to the Welsh countryside. However, they found no evidence of bomb-making and none of the men was charged with terrorism offences.

On Monday, the eight emails were presented in evidence to a special hearing before a high court judge to decide whether the men should be deported.

MI5 believed that girls’ names were used to refer to chemicals and that talk of a “wedding” was actually a reference to the bombing itself. In one of the messages, allegedly sent to an al-Qaeda commander in Pakistan, the student, alleged to have been the leader of the cell, wrote that he planned to get married in 12 to 17 days. That caused alarm among the security services who feared an attack was imminent.

The Government is now attempting to have 10 men, who entered the country on student visas, deported to Pakistan, claiming they are a threat to national security.

In legal documents submitted by Robin Tam QC, for the Home Secretary, the Government maintained that the men were members of a “UK-based network involved in terrorist operational activity in the UK, most likely attack planning” and that the network was “directed by al-Qaeda based overseas”.

MI5 believes that the 23-year-old student, who cannot be named but is referred to as XC, was the “linchpin” of the group.

Eight men are appealing against deportation at the tribunal, including XC, Abdul Wahab Khan, Shoaib Khan, Mohammed Ramzan, Ahmed Faraz Khan and Tariq ur-Rehman, who has returned to Pakistan voluntarily.

Two others, Janas Khan and Sultan Sher, have been bailed pending deportation for visa irregularities, although the Government still maintains that they were “involved in an extreme Islamist network”. A British man, Hamza Shinwari, was released without further action being taken.

The men claim they were just friends and the trip to Wales was for sightseeing and playing cricket. Pictures in which they posed as “commandos” were just for fun, they said.

Richard Hermer QC, for XC, said that the Government’s evidence was of a “pitiful quality” and that the investigation by MI5 had been “at best incompetent”. “Despite what we assume was the most rigorous of counter-terrorism investigations, not one jot of evidence was found of bomb-making,” he said.

The Government’s case would “dissolve” if a thorough examination was made of XC’s internet use, which comprised hundreds of emails and visits to Muslim chat rooms in connection with a relationship, Mr Hermer said.

He added that, through text messages on XC’s mobile phone, police had traced a young woman who confirmed they were in a relationship and considering marriage.

The men were all denied bail yesterday pending a full hearing in March or April next year.

Sky News : 'High Risk' Pakistani Students Refused Bail

'High Risk' Pakistani Students Refused Bail

Tom Rayner, home affairs producer | July 29, 2009

Seven Pakistani students who "pose a high risk" to UK national security have been refused bail while they await deportation hearings next year.

The men were arrested during anti-terror raids as part of Operation Pathway, which took place across the North West of England in April.

The operation had to be brought forward when Britain's then anti-terrorism chief Bob Quick was photographed carrying clearly visible secret papers relating to the raids.

None of the men has been charged with terror offences, due to insufficient evidence.

Lawyers representing them argued it was unacceptable to remand them in custody while they awaited an appeal next spring, which will consider whether they can be deported to Pakistan.

But Mr Justice Mitting has delivered the judgement of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission which ruled in favour of the Government, agreeing that bail should not be granted.

Anonymity restrictions have been lifted in the cases of Ahmed Faraz Khan, Mohammed Ramsen, Abdul Wahab Khan and Shoaib Khan.

Three other men cannot be identified.

A Home Office spokesperson welcomed the decision, saying: "Protecting the public is the Government's top priority and we argued that this is best served by not granting these men bail while we seek their deportation on national security grounds."

Earlier this month it was revealed that two of the 11 men arrested in the raids across the North West were no longer considered a security risk.

Sultan Sher and Janus Khan, who have been bailed, now face deportation on the grounds of "visa irregularities".

The Hindu : Pak student was days away from terror attack: U.K. govt. London (PTI): A U.K.-based Pakistani student, one of the 12 alleged terror suspe

Pak student was days away from terror attack: U.K. govt.

July 29, 2009

London (PTI): A U.K.-based Pakistani student, one of the 12 alleged terror suspects arrested in April, was just "days away" from launching a major terror attack in the country, a secret immigration court has heard.

All the 12 suspects, including 10 Pakistani men, were released without any charge after the Scotland Yard could not produce enough evidence against them.

The Pakistanis were transferred to the custody of the U.K. Borders Agency and await deportation.

Details of the attack as planned by the Pakistani student were revealed during the immigration hearing here.

The student, identified only as 'XC', had used coded emails to discuss a terror plot, the government said.

The police had seized 64 computers in the operation and a number of "oddly-phrased emails" to and from 'XC' were noticed during investigation.

Some emails used the terms "crystal clear", which officials said referred to chemicals, and "weak and difficult to convince" referred to the concentration of the bomb-making chemical hydrogen peroxide, according to reports.

The terror arrests in April were embroiled in controversy even before they could begin. Britain's senior most counter-terrorism officer Bob Quick had to quit after he accidentally revealed details of a major anti-terror operation during a visit to Downing Street on April 8.

This forced the police to advance the planned anti-terror raids in northwest England, to thwart a possible al-Qaeda-linked terror plot.

No signs of any explosive material were found despite extensive searches in Liverpool, Manchester and Lancashire.

Channel 4 News Student was 'days away' from terror attack

Student was 'days away' from terror attack

By Channel 4 News | July 27, 2009

A secret immigration court hears evidence that a Pakistani student used coded emails to plan a major terrorist attack in Britain.

A Pakistani student was just "days away" from a major attack, an immigration court heard today, as intelligence officials alleged the man - named only as XC - had used coded emails to discuss a terror plot.

The student was detained during police raids in April, which were suddenly brought forward after former police chief Bob Quick inadvertently revealed the details on a document he was photographed carrying into Downing Street.

At a bail hearing, lawyers for XC said the case against him was "pitiful", with no evidence linking him to bomb making.

Asian News : 'Terror' arrest student tells of shock at arrest

'Terror' arrest student tells of shock at arrest

July 21, 2009

A student who had been accused of being part of an alleged terror plot spoke of his shock at being arrested.

Janus Khan from Pakistan was among 12 men held during raids in the north west in April.

He and another man, Sultan Sher who was arrested while working in an internet cafe in Cheetham Hill, were released from custody on Friday.

Mr Khan was arrested in Liverpool, where he lived.

He must now wear an electronic tag and is facing deportation.

He told how police officers burst in adding: "It was a scary and shocking moment."

The 26-year-old, who was studying at Liverpool Hope University, was friends with six of the original 12 detained.

He denied holding extremist views or discussing extremism among the group, he said.

Staying in a Manchester hostel following his release from prison, Mr Khan said he was interviewed by officers more than 10 times.

Mr Khan and Mr Sher, who was living in Manchester, were detained as the Home Office sought to deport, claiming they were a threat to national security.

But that allegation was dropped last week a solicitor for one of them has said.

Home Office officials said the government would seek to deport them for alleged visa irregularities.

Mr Sher and Mr Khan were arrested as part of Operation Pathway, which was launched early, after a senior police officer exposed details of the plans.

Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, who resigned from the Metropolitan Police over the incident, was photographed with a secret document on his way to Downing Street.

Local campaigning group, Justice for the North West 10 has welcome the release of the two men and has urged the Home Office to immediately release the seven students still in prison.

National co-ordinator of the j4nw10 campaign, Tariq Mehmood said: "The government now admits they are innocent and they are not ‘a threat to national security’.

"Why then are Janus and Sultan being humiliated by being tagged like animals? This is a clear breach of their human rights and an attempt to save face by the authorities, since it is now obvious to the public that there was no ‘terror plot’."

He said: "The deportation orders were to hide government and police embarrassment at the lack of evidence against the students and control orders will perform the same function. This government acts as though it is above the law and refuses to admit it has ruined innocent lives in this appalling affair.

"It's now clear that Gordon Brown has misled the nation. There was never any terror plot. He should publicly apologise and resign."

The group also want the government to apologise to all the students and their families and to compensate all the students for the time and money they have lost as a result of the disruption of their studies and for the 13 weeks they were held Category A prisoners.

Added Mr Rehman: "We will continue to campaign for these demands and for the immediate, unconditional release of all the students."

Telegraph : Pakistani student arrested during terror raids 'to be deported for visa irregularities'

Pakistani student arrested during terror raids 'to be deported for visa irregularities'

By Ian Johnston | July 20, 2009

A Pakistani student arrested at gunpoint during an anti-terrorism operation is facing deportation for "visa irregularities" despite not being charged after the raids, it was claimed.

Janas Khan, 26, was arrested along with 11 other foreign students in April during 'Operation Pathway'.

It had to be brought forward by police after Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick was photographed as he walked into Downing Street, holding a file displaying details of the planned operation.

Despite being released without charge Mr Khan, who was studying for a Masters of Business Administration at Liverpool Hope University, is now facing deportation because of "visa irregularities".

He has also been forced to wear an electronic tag.

Mr Khan, who also works as a part-time as a security guard, protested his innocence during a series of interviews at the weekend.

He said: "Growing up we heard that the UK was the one place that respected human rights and justice, which is why I wanted to study here. I'm shocked and angry. I am innocent and I still can't believe I was arrested on no evidence.

"We came to this country to make our future, not to ruin it, not to destroy it. Our family sent us to do our degrees so when we go back to our country we get a good job."

He denied he and the six other arrested men he knows had ever been involved in extremism and when asked if they had even talked about it, he told Channel 4 News: "No, not too much.

"It was the best of life we were mostly discussing - about girls and class fellows and about our studies."

He said when he was arrested armed officers burst in, saying "don't move" and "put your hands up".

"I don't have words to describe that moment. It was a scary and shocking moment for us," he said.

Mr Khan, originally from Peshawar, and another man, Sultan Sher, were released from custody on Friday.

Now staying in a Manchester hostel following his release from Woodhill Prison, Mr Khan said he was interviewed by officers more than 10 times.

"They were asking me about my friends," he said.

"There was some pictures put in front of me and they were asking 'who's this guy?', 'who's this guy?'...'how did you meet with him?"

Mr Khan and Mr Sher, from Manchester, were detained as the Home Office sought to deport them, claiming they posed a threat to national security.

But that allegation was dropped last week, a solicitor for one of the men said.

Home Office officials said the Government would now seek to deport them for visa irregularities.

A spokesman said: "These individuals no longer meet the required criteria for detention on the grounds of national security.

"They are currently detained pending removal on immigration grounds, but legally we cannot hold them indefinitely.

"We are therefore putting in place suitable and robust measures to ensure we are fully aware of their whereabouts as we progress their cases for removal."

Lawyer Mohammed Ayub said the terror allegations against his client were "groundless" and he would oppose the continuing attempts to deport him.

He said: "It beggars belief that the Secretary of State could behave like this. Why was my client held in custody for all this time?

"I wish to state my client is entitled to an unreserved apology and no further action should be taken against him."

Of the remaining men held during the raid, one has joint British and Pakistani citizenship and has been released.

Another has returned to Pakistan voluntarily and an Afghan man is in custody pending deportation for allegedly being in the UK illegally.

The remaining seven still face deportation on the grounds of national security.

Their case returns to court later this month.

Belfast Telegraph : Pakistani student 'shocked' at terror arrest

Pakistani student 'shocked' at terror arrest

July 20, 2009

A Pakistani student accused of being part of an alleged terror plot has spoken of his shock at being arrested.

Janus Khan was among 12 men held during raids in the north west of England in April.

He and another man, Sultan Sher, were released from custody on Friday.

Mr Khan, who has been made to wear an electronic tag and is facing deportation following his three-month ordeal, told Channel 4 News police officers burst in, saying "don't move" and "put your hands up".

He said: "I don't have words to describe that moment.

"It was a scary and shocking moment for us."

The 26-year-old, who was studying at Liverpool Hope University and worked part-time as a security guard, was friends with six of the original 12 detained, he told the programme.

He denied holding extremist views or discussing extremism among the group, chatting instead about girls and their studies, he said.

Now staying in a Manchester hostel following his release from Woodhill Prison, Mr Khan said he was interviewed by officers more than 10 times.

"They were asking me about my friends," he said. "There was some pictures put in front of me and they were asking 'who's this guy?', 'who's this guy?'...'how did you meet with him?"

Mr Khan and Mr Sher, from Manchester, were detained as the Home Office sought to deport them, claiming they posed a threat to national security.

But that allegation was dropped last week, a solicitor for one of the men said.

Home Office officials said the Government would now seek to deport them for visa irregularities.

A spokesman said: "These individuals no longer meet the required criteria for detention on the grounds of national security.

"They are currently detained pending removal on immigration grounds, but legally we cannot hold them indefinitely.

"We are therefore putting in place suitable and robust measures to ensure we are fully aware of their whereabouts as we progress their cases for removal."

Lawyer Mohammed Ayub said the terror allegations against his client were "groundless" and he would oppose the continuing attempts to deport him.

He said: "It beggars belief that the Secretary of State could behave like this.

"Why was my client held in custody for all this time?

"I wish to state my client is entitled to an unreserved apology and no further action should be taken against him."

Of the remaining men held during the raid, one has joint British and Pakistani citizenship and has been released.

Another has returned to Pakistan voluntarily and an Afghan man is in custody pending deportation for being in the UK illegally.

The remaining seven still face deportation on the grounds of national security.

Their case returns to court on July 27.

Mr Sher and Mr Khan were arrested on April 18 as part of Operation Pathway, which was launched early after a senior police officer exposed details of the plans.

Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, who resigned from the Metropolitan Police over the incident, was photographed with a secret document on his way in to Downing Street.

Channel 4 News : Interview with released terror suspect

Interview with released terror suspect

July 19, 2009

Arrested by armed officers on suspicion of terrorism, then held for three months in a high-security jail, a Pakistani student rounded up in April as part of an alleged terror plot has spoken exclusively to Channel 4 News about his ordeal.

Janus Khan was one of 12 students arrested in a police swoop suddenly brought forward after former anti-terrorism chief Bob Quick was photographed in Downing Street with documents revealing details of the operation.

No charges have been brought, and Janus Khan was told on Friday that he was no longer considered a threat to national security.

But he is still being made to wear an electronic tag and is facing deportation.

[video link]

Independent : Pakistani students launch legal action over arrests

Pakistani students launch legal action over arrests

By Emily Dugan | July 19, 2009

Janas Khan, one of two Pakistani students released from prison yesterday months after terrorism charges against them were dropped, has told The Independent on Sunday he was "shocked and angry" at his treatment by the UK Government. Lawyers acting for the remaining seven Pakistani students still held in prison have also announced they will launch a legal challenge against the Government this week.

The 26-year-old business student began to cry as he said: "Growing up we heard that the UK was the one place that respected human rights and justice, which is why I wanted to study here. I'm shocked and angry. I am innocent and I still can't believe I was arrested on no evidence."

Sultan Sher was also released from prison yesterday. The two were among 12 students who were arrested in April after the UK's most senior counterterrorism officer was photographed walking into Downing Street carrying highly sensitive documents revealing details of the operation. The details were visible, and a premature police operation against an alleged al-Qa'ida plot ensued. The officer responsible, Scotland Yard's Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, resigned.

Criminal charges against all the students were dropped in May because of insufficient evidence, but they have been kept locked in high-security prisons under immigration laws. "They never told us what it was that we were supposed to have done," said Mr Khan. His studies were due to finish in September, but the limitations of his parole conditions means it will be impossible to travel from Manchester to meet his tutors in Liverpool.

Legal challenges for the remaining students will now add to the authorities' embarrassment following the bungled terror case. Two lawsuits will contest the legality of the Government's use of secret evidence in their continued imprisonment as well as the lawfulness of the initial arrest.

The Herald : ‘Terror plot’ pair to go free as MP calls police operation a catalogue of errors

‘Terror plot’ pair to go free as MP calls police operation a catalogue of errors

July 17, 2009

Two Pakistani students accused of being part of an alleged terror plot are to be released from custody.

Sultan Sher and Janus Khan were among 12 men held during raids in the north west of England in April.

The pair, who are in their mid 20s, were detained as the Home Office sought to deport them, claiming they posed a threat to national security.

But that allegation was dropped yesterday, a solicitor for one of the men said.

Mohammed Ayub said the pair would be released subject to conditions, including wearing an electronic tag and reporting to police.

Home Office officials said the government would now seek to deport them for visa irregularities.

A Home Office spokesman said: "These individuals no longer meet the required criteria for detention on the grounds of national security.

"They are currently detained pending removal on immigration grounds, but legally we cannot hold them indefinitely.

"We are therefore putting in place suitable and robust measures to ensure we are fully aware of their whereabouts as we progress their cases for removal."

Mr Ayub said the terror allegations against his client were "groundless" and he would oppose the continuing attempts to deport him.

He said: "It beggars belief that the Secretary of State could behave like this.

"Why was my client held in custody for all this time?"

"I wish to state my client is entitled to an unreserved apology and no further action should be taken against him."

Of the remaining men held during the raid, one has joint British and Pakistani citizenship and has been released.

Another has returned to Pakistan voluntarily and an Afghan man is in custody pending deportation for being in the UK illegally.

The other seven face deportation on the grounds of national security. Their case returns to court on July 27.

Sher, living in Manchester, and Khan, living in Liverpool, were arrested on April 18 as part of Operation Pathway.

The operation was launched early after Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick of Metropolitan Police was photographed going in to Downing Street with a document giving details of the police plan. Mr Quick subsequently resigned.

Keith Vaz, chairman of the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee, called for Home Secretary Alan Johnson to make an urgent statement over the matter.

He said: "The release of two Pakistani students who were alleged to have been part of terrorist activity begs a number of questions as to why they were detained in the first place.

"There appears to have been a catalogue of errors.

"It is important that the Home Secretary makes a statement as a matter of urgency to clarify exactly what happened."

© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.

Telegraph : Pakistani men 'part of al-Qaeda network planning attacks in Britain'

Pakistani men 'part of al-Qaeda network planning attacks in Britain'

By Duncan Gardham, Security Correspondent | May 13, 2009

Ten Pakistani men released without charge after an investigation into an alleged plot to bomb shopping centres in Manchester were part of an al-Qaeda network planning attacks in Britain and should be deported, a tribunal has heard.

The men were arrested on April 8 after former Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick entered Downing Street with details of the operation against the men visible under his arm.

None of the men were charged with any crime but the government launched an attempt to have the men deported. ?THIS OK? [sic!]

Their lawyers are objecting to the deportation orders, arguing that they should be freed to continue their studies.

Robin Tam QC for the Home Secretary told the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) in London: "All the applicants were members of a UK based network linked to al-Qaeda involved in attack planning.

"Each therefore poses a risk to national security and deportation would be considered in the national good."

Mr Tam said there was a "high risk they would re-engage in their former activity to the detriment of national security" and there was a risk they would abscond if granted bail.

All the group were "young single men with no close family ties to the UK and each claims to have been a student", Mr Tam added.

Three of the men, Abdul Wahab Khan, Shoaib Khan and Tariq ur-Rehman, waived their rights to anonymity at the hearing.

The SIAC panel considered evidence behind closed doors before refusing bail for the three named men, along with a fourth, "XC."

Sibghat Kadri QC for Abdul Wahab Khan, 26, said the Pakistani High Commissioner in London had claimed the operation against the men was a "hoax" and added: "Other than what he was told upon arrest, that he was suspected to be a terrorist, he has never been informed of the substance of any allegations against him.

"During various interviews he was subjected to intensive interrogation. He was asked mostly about his association with friends, going to the mosque, meeting various friends and taking photographs."

He added that despite the police seizing computers, a TV and clothing which were subjected to forensic examination, "not a shred of evidence was found."

He added: "This case does not involve the liberty of the applicant but the wider question of trust that the community can repose in the security services in a multi-racial society and the subsequent faith in the Secretary of State to make a decision based on justice rather than fear of political failure."

Times : Ten arrested in anti-terrorism raids 'linked to al-Qaeda planning'

Ten arrested in anti-terrorism raids 'linked to al-Qaeda planning'

Fran Yeoman | May 13, 2009

The men arrested during anti-terror raids across the North West last month included members of a British-based network linked to al-Qaeda attack planning, an immigration hearing was told yesterday.

All 12 of those who were detained in Greater Manchester, Liverpool and Lancashire over a suspected bomb plot were released without charge.

The Home Office, however, is seeking to deport ten of them, all Pakistani nationals who are currently in immigration custody, on the ground that they pose a risk to national security.

Robin Tam, QC, representing the Home Secretary, said that there was a “high risk that they would re-engage in their former activities” if the men were released.

The ten are appealing against that decision. Four appeared before a Special Immigrations Appeals Commission hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice yesterday, at which their lawyers applied unsuccessfully for bail and claimed that despite an extensive police investigation there was no evidence that the men were involved in extremism.

The arrests, on April 8, were brought forward after Bob Quick, the Metropolitan Police assistant commissioner and Britain’s most senior anti-terrorism officer, revealed details of the operation by accident.

Stephanie Harrison, representing one of the men, who can be identified only as XC, told the commission that given the high profile of the arrests and the events before them “one cannot exclude political expediency as a factor” in the decision to deport the men rather than simply release them.

“Not a single piece of actual physical evidence has been produced” against her client, she said.

Sibghat Kadri QC, representing Abdul Wahab Khan, 26, said that he was a “genuine student” who is was in Britain with the sole purpose of obtaining a Masters degree. He said that during lengthy police interviews his client was never told of “the substance of any allegations against him”.

Mr Kadri said that Mr Khgan's arrest by the UK Border Agency immediately after he was released without charge by the police was causing a great deal of concern and unrest among both the Muslim community in the United Kingdom and the wider international community. He said: “Any miscarriage of justice will cause irreparable damage to race relations and consequently to the national security of the United Kingdom.”

Telegraph : Pakistani men 'part of al-Qaeda network planning attacks in Britain'

Pakistani men 'part of al-Qaeda network planning attacks in Britain'

By Duncan Gardham, Security Correspondent | May 12, 2009

Ten Pakistani men released without charge after an investigation into an alleged plot to bomb shopping centres in Manchester were part of an al-Qaeda network planning attacks in Britain and should be deported, a tribunal has heard.

The men were arrested on April 8 after former Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick entered Downing Street with details of the operation against the men visible under his arm.

None of the men were charged with any crime but the government launched an attempt to have the men deported.

Their lawyers are objecting to the deportation orders, arguing that they should be freed to continue their studies.

Robin Tam QC for the Home Secretary told the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) in London: "All the applicants were members of a UK based network linked to al-Qaeda involved in attack planning.

"Each therefore poses a risk to national security and deportation would be considered in the national good."

Mr Tam said there was a "high risk they would re-engage in their former activity to the detriment of national security" and there was a risk they would abscond if granted bail.

All the group were "young single men with no close family ties to the UK and each claims to have been a student", Mr Tam added.

Three of the men, Abdul Wahab Khan, Shoaib Khan and Tariq ur-Rehman, waived their rights to anonymity at the hearing.

The SIAC panel considered evidence behind closed doors before refusing bail for the three named men, along with a fourth, "XC."

Sibghat Kadri QC for Abdul Wahab Khan, 26, said the Pakistani High Commissioner in London had claimed the operation against the men was a "hoax" and added: "Other than what he was told upon arrest, that he was suspected to be a terrorist, he has never been informed of the substance of any allegations against him.

"During various interviews he was subjected to intensive interrogation. He was asked mostly about his association with friends, going to the mosque, meeting various friends and taking photographs."

He added that despite the police seizing computers, a TV and clothing which were subjected to forensic examination, "not a shred of evidence was found."

He added: "This case does not involve the liberty of the applicant but the wider question of trust that the community can repose in the security services in a multi-racial society and the subsequent faith in the Secretary of State to make a decision based on justice rather than fear of political failure."

Telegraph : Sir Paul Stephenson: police are failing the public on organised crime

Sir Paul Stephenson: police are failing the public on organised crime

Sir Paul Stephenson, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, believes Britain’s police forces are failing the public in their attempts to tackle organised crime.

By Andrew Alderson, Chief Reporter | May 9, 2009

The new Commissioner said the issue had to return to the political agenda because not enough progress had been made against crime gangs that cost the nation an estimated £40 billion a year.

“I am disappointed with the progress – or lack of progress – made since 2003 to impact significantly organised crime in the United Kingdom,” he said.

His research suggests that only six per cent of organised crime gangs have been disrupted by the “Police Service Plc” – all forces.

“We have to increase the national police capability to deal with serious organised crime. I don’t think we have made the progress that we should have done,” he added.

Violent organised crime gangs are involved in drugs’ rings, people smuggling, gun-running, fraud operations, prostitution and other offences. There are believed to be some 2,800 organised crime gangs in the UK.

Sir Paul accepts, however, that his suggestion in 2003, on behalf of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), that some of the 43 forces in England and Wales should be merged, has been debated and rejected.

Individual forces, supported by the Serious Organised Crime Agency (Soca), which is intelligence-led, currently tackle organised crime in the UK.

Some senior officers and politicians believe investigations need to be conducted by larger, more centralised crime-fighting units.

Sir Paul made his comments in a wide-ranging interview with The Sunday Telegraph to mark his first 100 days as Commissioner.

At his eighth floor office at New Scotland Yard, he shrugged off suggestions that he had taken on the most difficult – and politically sensitive – job in the country.

He was appointed by a Labour Home Secretary (Jacqui Smith) but is answerable to a Tory Mayor (Boris Johnson). Furthermore, in recent years, the largest police force in the country has been plagued by in-fighting, allegations of racism and low morale.

Sir Paul, 55, who took over as Commissioner from the embattled Sir Ian Blair, said of his £254,000-a-year post: "It's challenging, it's difficult, but I didn't expect anything else."

Those difficult and challenging moments have included the heavy-handed arrest of Damian Green, the shadow immigration spokesman; the death of a man at the G20 protests who appeared to have been manhandled by a police officer; and the careless – if accidental – leaking of a major investigation by Bob Quick, then the head of the Met's anti-terrorism unit.

Yet Sir Paul, 55, a straight-talking Lancastrian and undoubtedly more of a "coppers' copper" than his predecessor, is in no doubt that his greatest challenges lie ahead.

In three years' time, London will host the 2012 Olympics in the knowledge that al-Qaeda terrorists are almost certainly planning a "spectacular" strike when the eyes of the world will be on the capital for two months.

"We will be mounting the biggest security operation ever against what is uniquely the greatest terrorist threat. That is a very significant challenge," he said. "The chances of an attempt to commit further terrorist atrocities are high."

Sir Paul is adamant, however, that the Met can thwart any major terrorist strike, although he admits that some areas of policing may suffer as a result.

"I am confident that we will deliver a safe and secure Olympics. The issue for me will be how much of our 'business as usual' will be interfered with to do that. Undoubtedly, there will be significant interference."

Last month the Crown Prosecution Service ruled that Damian Green, the senior Conservative MP who was arrested over a series of Whitehall leaks, would not face charges.

Yet senior Tories remain incensed by the a manner in which Mr Green was detained by Scotland Yard. He was questioned for nine hours and had his homes and Commons office searched after being arrested.

Colleagues of Sir Paul have indicated privately that he was angered by the operation, once again headed by Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick, especially as it happened while he was Acting Commissioner and still under consideration for the top job.

A report into the investigation by Ian Johnston, the head of the British Transport Police, is to be published soon in redacted form: he is believed to have concluded the arrest was legal but questioned whether it was a proportionate response.

"There will be lessons learnt from this. I think Ian's advice [conclusion] on this is wise," Sir Paul said.

Mr Quick was at the centre of controversy again last month when he was photographed entering Downing Street carrying a secret briefing note on which details of an undercover terrorist operation – code-named Pathway – could be seen.

As a result, the operation had to be brought forward – and Mr Quick resigned.

Sir Paul said that Mr Quick had been guilty of "a serious mistake" but added his departure was "a sad loss to policing".

"I have no information that would indicate that the decision to go in early undermined that operation," Sir Paul stressed.

In the end, all 12 suspects were released without charge.

Yet Sir Paul has faced his biggest criticism over the police handling of the G20 protest, which led to the death of Ian Tomlinson, 47.

Video footage appears to show the newspaper seller being assaulted from behind by a baton-wielding officer. Sir Paul said: "It is sad that someone died.

The family want answers and it is right that they should get those answers and that there should be an independent investigation [by the Independent Police Complaints Commission]."

He said the video images were "concerning" and that police tactics are being reviewed.

However, Sir Paul said the Met had followed the right investigative procedures, and had been open and honest about events.

"This was the most large-scale and complex security operation we have ever done.

"Some of our international colleagues – particularly in Australia – found it incredible that we had managed to pull this operation off in such a short period of time. Thousands of people in the Met did a fantastic job."

Sir Paul's interview with The Sunday Telegraph came the day after it was announced that the DNA profiles of some 850,000 innocent Briton would – over the next 12 years – be wiped off the national database.

Acknowledging that a balance was needed between civil liberty and crime detection, he indicated, however, that he was reluctant to lose the useful "tool" as a result of the European Court ruling.

"My raison d'être as the most senior cop in the country is to save life and to prevent and detect crime. I do know that the DNA database in its current form has saved life and been instrumental in detecting crime."

Unsurprisingly, Sir Paul does not like the label of "institutionally racist" that the Met was given by the Macpherson report after the murder of 18-year-old Stephen Lawrence in 1993.

"I do not think it is a useful definition to drive change," he said, adding that significant progress has been made in this area in the past 16 years.

Of internal infighting and claims of racism from the National Black Police Federation, he said: "My job is to work with everyone who wants to make the Met a better organisation. And that includes working with people who do not always agree with me.

"But I reserve the right – and indeed I have the responsibility and duty as Commissioner – to say things as I see them."

Sir Paul has only just started his tenure, but what does he hope, many years from now, will be his legacy when he steps down as Commissioner?

"I would want to have made an impact on the perception and reality of violence. I would want us to have communities that are confident that we are on their side and doing their bidding.

"And I want us to display the highest levels of professionalism and pride, so that people have the right to feel that working for the Met is something quite special."

Times : Gordon Brown defends Pakistani terror deportations

Gordon Brown defends Pakistani terror deportations

April 27, 2009

Gordon Brown today defended plans to deport 11 Pakistani students who were arrested in a suspected terrorist plot even though no charges were brought against any of them.

The group, whose plight has provoked great anger in Pakistan, appealed against deportation today. The Pakistani Prime Minister raised the issue with Mr Brown at a meeting in Islamabad this afternoon.

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari delivered an apparent snub to Mr Brown by cancelling a joint news conference, leaving Yusuf Gaza Gilani, the Prime Minister, to take his place.

At the press conference, Mr Brown said: “I think we have got to recognise that we have both got problems that are affecting both the security of our citizens and the sentiments in our country, with terrorist plots that have been planned and some people are trying to execute.

“This terrorist threat that exists cannot be ignored, it cannot be wished away. Both the Prime Minister and I know that it is important that governments around the world take action to deal with violent extremism. Thousands of young people studying in Britain come from Pakistan and we welcome them but wherever there is a problem we have got to take action.”

But although he hailed a “new chapter” in the relationship between Britain and Pakistan, the episode appeared to have cast a shadow over his visit.

The Pakistani Prime Minister, standing alongside Mr Brown, confirmed that he had raised the case during their meeting and appealed to him to allow the men to continue their studies in Britain.

“We had a concern. We have discussed that whatever information is shared with us we will examine it, but at the same time there are institutions and we will work under that bit of the constitution,” Mr Gilani said.

“I think the law will take its own course and I would also request the Prime Minister that their studies should not be discontinued.”

All 12 suspects arrested in a Operation Pathway which was designed to thwart what the Prime Minister called “a very big terrorist plot” have been released without charge.

Eleven of the men, all Pakistani nationals, were transferred into the custody of the UK Borders Agency pending a deportation hearing.

Mohammed Ayub, a lawyer for three of the men, called for an independent inquiry into the operation.

The arrests were brought forward by 12 hours after Bob Quick, Scotland Yard’s head of counter-terrorism, accidentally disclosed details of the raids to Downing Street photographers while on his way to brief Gordon Brown and Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary.

It was hoped that the arrests and searches would produce evidence of bomb-making activity or components. But officers failed to find uncover enough evidence to result in any charges.

Police One : Disruption vs. prosecution and the Manchester plot

Terrorism Prevention and Response Article: Disruption vs. prosecution and the Manchester plot

By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart | | April 26, 2009

On April 8, British authorities mounted a series of raids in Merseyside, Manchester and Lancashire that resulted in the arrest of 12 men suspected of being involved in a plot to conduct attacks over the Easter holiday weekend. In a press conference the following day, Prime Minister Gordon Brown noted that the men arrested were allegedly involved in “a very big terrorist plot.” British authorities have alleged that those arrested sought to conduct suicide bombing attacks against a list of soft targets that included shopping centers, a train station and a nightclub.

The searches and arrests targeting the suspects purportedly involved in the plot, which was dubbed Operation Pathway, had to be accelerated after Bob Quick, the assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police in charge of terrorism investigations, inadvertently allowed reporters to see a classified document pertaining to the operation as he was entering 10 Downing Street to brief Brown and Home Secretary Jacqui Smith on April 8. An embarrassed Quick resigned April 9 over the gaffe.

In spite of the leak, the British authorities were successful in detaining all of the targeted suspects, though the authorities have reportedly not been able to recover explosive material or other bomb-making evidence they were seeking. British authorities arrested 12 suspects, 11 of whom were Pakistani citizens. Smith told British Parliament on April 20 that all 11 of the Pakistani nationals entered the United Kingdom on student visas. The youngest of the Pakistani suspects, who is reportedly still a teenager, was remanded to the custody of British immigration authorities to face deportation proceedings April 9. The rest of the 11 suspects were released by British authorities April 21, though ten reportedly were placed in the custody of immigration officials.

Many of the specific details of the plot have not yet come out, and due to the sensitive nature of the intelligence sources and methods involved in these types of investigations, more details may never be fully divulged now that there will be no criminal trial. However, when viewed in the historical and tactical context of other terror plots and attacks (in the United Kingdom and elsewhere), there are some very interesting conclusions that can be drawn from this series of events and the few facts that have been released to the public so far.

This case also highlights the tension that exists within the counterterrorism community between advocates of strategies to disrupt terrorist attacks and those who want to ensure that terror suspects can be convicted in a court of law.

Targets

Among of the most significant things that have come to light so far regarding the thwarted plot are the alleged targets. According to press reports, the British MI5 surveillance teams assigned to monitor the activities of the purported plotters observed some of them videotaping themselves outside of the Arndale and Trafford shopping centers in Manchester, as well as at St. Ann’s Square, which lies in the center of Manchester’s main shopping district. Other reports suggest that the plotters had also conducted surveillance of Manchester’s Piccadilly train station, an intercity train station that is one of the busiest in the United Kingdom outside London, and Manchester’s Birdcage nightclub.

These targets are significant for several reasons. First, they are all soft targets — that is, targets with very little security. As STRATFOR has pointed out for several years now, since counterterrorism efforts have been stepped up in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, and as the tactical capability of groups like al Qaeda has been degraded, jihadist operatives have had less success targeting hardened targets and have turned instead to striking soft targets.

While authorities have moved to protect high-value targets, there simply are far too many potential targets to protect them all. Governments are stretched thin just trying to protect important government buildings, bridges, dams, nuclear power plants, airports and mass-transit systems in their jurisdiction. The reality on the ground is that there are not nearly enough resources to protect them all, much less every potential location where people concentrate in large groups — like shopping centers and nightclubs. This means that some targets are unprotected and are therefore, by definition, soft.

The selection of soft targets in this case indicates that the alleged Manchester plotters did not possess the operational capability to strike more strategic, high-value targets. While attacks against soft targets can be tragic and quite bloody, they will not have the same effect as a successful attack on high-value targets such as Parliament, the London Stock Exchange or a nuclear power station.

It is also very interesting that the plotters were purportedly looking to hit soft targets in Manchester and not soft targets in London. London, as the capital and a city that has been the center of several plots and attacks, is generally on a higher alert than the rest of the country and therefore would likely be seen as more difficult to target. Additionally, many of the suspects lived in the Manchester area, and as we have previously discussed, grassroots operatives, who are not as well-trained as their transnational brethren, tend to “think globally and act locally,” meaning that they tend to plan their attacks in familiar places where they are comfortable operating, rather than in strange and potentially more hostile environment.

In addition to targeting locations like shopping centers and the train station, where there were expected to be large crowds over the holiday weekend, the alleged plotters also apparently looked at the Birdcage nightclub, an establishment that is famous for its “flamboyant and spectacular” shows featuring female impersonators. This is a location the alleged plotters likely considered a symbol of Western decadence (like establishments that serve alcohol in Muslim countries).

Flawed Tradecraft

As noted above, the alleged plotters had been under surveillance by MI5. This indicates that their operational security had been compromised, either via human or technical means. Furthermore, the suspects did not appear to possess any surveillance detection capability — or even much situational awareness — as they went out into Manchester to conduct pre-operational surveillance of potential targets while under government surveillance themselves. Furthermore, the suspects’ surveillance techniques appear to have been very rudimentary in that they lacked both cover for action and cover for status while conducting their surveillance operations.

This aspect of the investigation reinforces two very important points that STRATFOR has been making for some time now. First, most militant groups do not provide very good surveillance training and as a result, poor surveillance tradecraft has long proven to be an Achilles’ heel for militants. Second, because of this weakness, countersurveillance operations can be very effective at catching militant operatives when they are most vulnerable — during the surveillance phase of the terrorist attack cycle.

Media reports indicated that during Operation Pathway, British authorities intercepted a series of Internet exchanges between the suspects suggesting a terror strike was imminent. Furthermore, among the locations raided April 8 was the Cyber Net Cafe in Cheetham Hill, an establishment where British authorities observed the suspects using computers to communicate. Not only is this electronic surveillance significant in that it allowed the authorities to surmise the approximate timing of the attack, but perhaps just as important, this ability to monitor the suspects’ communications will allow the authorities to identify other militants in the United Kingdom and beyond.

Indeed, in several previous cases related to the United Kingdom, such as the investigations involving the U.S. arrest of Mohammed Junaid Babar and the U.K. arrest of Younis Tsouli, authorities were able to use communications from militant suspects to identify and roll up militant cells in other countries. Therefore, we will not be at all surprised to hear at some point in the future that British authorities were able use the communications of the recently arrested suspects to tip off authorities in the United States, Canada, other European countries or elsewhere about the militant activities of people the suspects were in contact with.

Links to Pakistan

And speaking of elsewhere, as noted above, 11 of the arrested suspects were Pakistani nationals who entered the U.K. on student visas. At this point it is not exactly clear if the British believe the 11 suspects were radical militants specifically sent to the United Kingdom to conduct attacks or if they arrived without malicious intent and were then radicalized in the Petri dish of Islamist extremism that so rapidly replicates inside the British Muslim community — what we have come to refer to as Londonistan.

Many British lawmakers and media reports have made a huge issue out of the fact that 11 of the alleged plotters entered the United Kingdom on student visas, but even if the suspects were radicals who used student visas as a way to enter the United Kingdom, this is by no means a new tactic as some are reporting. STRATFOR has long discussed the use of student visas, bogus political asylum claims and other forms of immigration fraud that have commonly been used by militants. In fact, there have been numerous prior examples of jihadist operatives using student visas, such as the following:

* While Sept. 11 hijackers Mohamed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi initially entered the United States on tourist visas, they were approved for M-1 student visas shortly before carrying out their attacks.

* Youssef Samir Megahed, who was arrested in possession of an improvised explosive device (IED) in August 2007 and later sentenced to a 15-year prison sentence, was a Kuwaiti engineering student who entered the United States on a student visa.

* Mohammed Aatique, a convicted member of the “Virginia Jihad Network” who was sentenced to 10 years in prison for conspiracy and weapons violations, also entered the United States from Pakistan as an engineering student.

In some ways, connections between the alleged plotters and militant groups in Pakistan such as al Qaeda or the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) would be more analytically significant than if they turn out to be grassroots operatives. The operational security, skills and terrorist tradecraft exhibited by the plotters are about what one would expect to see in a grassroots militant organization. This level of sophistication is, however, far less than one would expect from a transnational organization. Therefore, if this was an al Qaeda operation, it shows how far the group has fallen in the past eight years. If it was the TTP, it means that our previous estimate of their operational ability outside of Pakistan was fairly accurate.

Lack of Evidence

To date, the British authorities have not been able to find the explosive material and IED components they were expecting to find. This might mean that the materials may still be hidden somewhere and could be used in a future attack. It is also quite possible, and perhaps more likely, that this lack of evidence is an indication that the plot was not quite as far along as the British authorities believed. Perhaps the references the suspects allegedly made to launching the attack on a bank holiday pertained to a holiday later in the year.

While the plot as described by the British authorities would not have been a significant, strategic threat to the United Kingdom, it could have been quite deadly and could very well have surpassed the July 7, 2005, attacks in terms of final body count. Because of this potential destruction, it is quite possible that the British government decided to err on the side of disruption rather than on the side of prosecution. This is something we have seen in the investigation of several other plots in recent years in the United Kingdom and elsewhere, perhaps most notably in the August 2006 Heathrow plot, in which a cell of operatives was preparing to bomb a series of trans-Atlantic airline flights using liquid explosives.

It is much more difficult to obtain a conviction for a conspiracy to commit an act of terrorism than it is to obtain a conviction for an attack that was successfully conducted. Once the attack is executed, there is no longer much room to wrangle in court over things such as intent or capability. Governments also frequently know things via intelligence they cannot prove to the standards required for a conviction in a court of law.

This was seen in the Heathrow case, where only three of the eight suspects were convicted of the main charges during that trial, which ended in September 2008. (The other five suspects had pled guilty to lesser charges.) During that case there was reportedly some tension between the U.S. and British authorities over when to wrap up the Heathrow plotters — some of the British apparently wanted to wait a while longer to secure more damning evidence, while the Americans were reportedly more interested in ensuring that the plot was disrupted than they were in obtaining convictions. It is likely the same dynamic was at play during the investigation of the Manchester case.

Although Quick’s disclosure did hasten the launch of Operation Pathway by a few hours, it did not significantly alter the timing of the investigation — the British authorities were preparing to execute an array of searches and arrests. From an ethical standpoint (and, not insignificantly in this day and age, a political aspect) it is deemed better by many to disrupt a plot early and risk the terror suspects being acquitted than it is to accidentally allow them to conduct an attack while waiting to gather the evidence required for an ironclad court case. Disruption can have an impact on the success of prosecutions, but in the eyes of a growing number of policymakers, that impact is offset by the lives it saves.

~~~~

Fred Burton is one of the world’s foremost authorities on security, terrorists and terrorist organizations. In his capacity as Vice President for Counterterrorism and Corporate Security, Mr. Burton oversees Stratfor’s terrorism intelligence service and consults with clients on security-related issues affecting their organizations or personal safety. He leads a team of terrorism experts and a global network of human intelligence sources to analyze and forecast the most significant events and trends related to terrorism and counterterrorism. Before joining Stratfor, Mr. Burton served as a special agent in counterterrorism for the U.S. Department of State, where he was involved in many high-profile operations. He orchestrated the arrest of Ramzi Yousef, mastermind of the first World Trade Center bombing, and investigated cases such as the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, the killing of Rabbi Meir Kahane, al Qaeda’s New York City bombing plots before 9/11, and the Libyan-backed terrorist attacks against diplomats in Sanaa and Khartoum. He has also served as the U.S. liaison officer to several international security, intelligence and law enforcement agencies, providing consulting on global intelligence and threat identification. In addition, Mr. Burton has revolutionized the field of security by designing a unique and specialized protective program to safeguard CEOs, their families, employees and physical facilities. His strategy is highly valued and has been implemented by governments and a number of the world’s leading corporations. For a special offer to get a copy of GHOST, and to read additional information about Fred Burton and his role at Stratfor, please click here

Independent : Matthew Norman: Another police fiasco to divert attention from the last one

Matthew Norman: Another police fiasco to divert attention from the last one

What is unforgivable is that the Pakistanis haven't been released but held for deporting

April 24, 2009

Seldom since September 11 2001 has there been a better day than Wednesday for the burial of bad news. With the Chancellor borrowing from compatriot Private Frazer, an undertaker himself, to tell us we're all doomed (I paraphrase the Budget very slightly), the announcement that a huge meteor was on course to disrupt the London Marathon on Sunday would have passed by barely noticed.

If Jacqui Smith had coughed to claiming £120,000 for being impregnated with a foetus cloned from Osama bin Laden in a Torinese clinic, it would have been lost. Had it emerged that Gordon Brown has signed up for a sex change, followed by extensive cosmetic surgery and the loss of his legs below the knee, in the cause of becoming a Susan Boyle tribute act (the only way, according to leading pundits, he could win an election), it might have made a two-paragraph brief on page 27.

Consider yourselves forgiven, then, if the trumpets of the Four Horsemen of the Fiscal Apocalypse drowned out the noise of a less sensational news cadaver being lowered into the ground with half the ceremony lavished on Eleanor Rigby... the very bad, if unstartling, news that the British police have contrived another colossal fiasco.

As it proudly takes its place on the honours board of terrorist-related policing calamity, alongside the "Ricin plot" sans Ricin, the "airline bomb plot" involving no airliners, the "London Underground cyanide plot" devoid of cyanide and aimed at no Tube trains, and the shooting of an innocent Muslim in east London technically known as Forest GateGate, please give a warm, Independent readers' welcome to the "Easter bomb plot" with nothing to do with Easter and not the hint of an explosive.

The special appeal about this one is its exquisite symmetry. The arrests of a dozen Muslim men, 11 Pakistanis here on student visas and a lone British national, were rushed through on 9 April in the wake of former Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick's little faux pas with that top secret folder as he strode manfully towards Number 10.

Given that all 12 have now been released without charge, we ask ourselves why Mr Quick was in Downing Street at all. And the odds-on 2-9 favourite, we answer, is that the Government and Scotland Yard were desperate to flam up a "police triumph" story to divert outrage from the possible manslaughter of Ian Tomlinson at the G20 protest.

And a triumph, for a while at least, it was. Gordon was thrilled to bits by Operation Pathway, lauding the police for foiling what he assured us, with neo-Blunkettian contempt for the basic precepts of natural justice, was a "very big terrorist plot". So big, it transpires, that the police and security services, these brethren defenders of life and liberty now engaged in a ferocious game of buck-passing, had amassed zero evidence. Houses, cars and computers were searched, and not a carrot found.

Apparently there'd been a tip-off from our spooks in Pakistan, which is nice, although ever since MI6 failed to predict the collapse of Soviet Communism, common sense suggests their intelligence be handled with giant tongs. One person's common sense is another's venal cynicism, of course, and the security world's faith in its own competence does credit to its trusting nature, if only towards itself.

Now although we cannot be certain that these men were harmless, their release after less than a fortnight, when the law now allows suspects to be held for 28 days, entitles us to make the presumption; just as we may assume that they were arrested, despite being under 24-hour surveillance that had unearthed no imminent "bomb plot", to remove Mr Tomlinson's death from the front pages; and just as we must suspect that the timing of their release, on the eve of the Budget, was more than coincidence.

The creation of a fresh policing catastrophe in the attempt to divert public fury from a previous one is, as I said, gorgeously symmetrical. If royal protection officers had shot Prince Philip to deflect attention from their failure to keep Michael Fagan out of the Queen's bedroom, that would have done the trick too, but again you'd have wondered whether the game was worth the candle.

Yet however inured we've become to ministers and a frighteningly politicised police force crying wolf (you will recall the pre-election ringing of Heathrow with tanks for no other apparent reason than electoral gain), we cannot become blasé about the blithe vindictiveness that underscores this case.

Bending over backwards to be charitable, one might read the "Easter bomb plot" arrests as nothing more sinister than a loss of nerve... the blind terror, in a risk-averse world, that waiting to collect some evidence could lead to loss of life. It's very easy to be smug, sat behind a computer screen, about the nervous nelliedom of those responsible for keeping us safe. It isn't so easy, in truth, to imagine how men being followed round the clock, their phones and emails perpetually bugged, could hurriedly activate the plot to detonate so much as a stink bomb.

Lord Carlile, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, has promised a "snapshot review" of Operation Pathway, and if he sees fit to publish it perhaps we will learn more about the mechanics of this cock-up. Whatever his findings, however, and without excusing the evidently political nature of the timing or ignoring the damage all this premature incarceration does to relations with a justifiably livid and suspicious Muslim community, one does understand the general temptation to err on the side of caution.

What is utterly unforgivable is that the 11 Pakistanis have been released into not freedom but the unlovely arms of the immigration service, which will seek to deport them on the familiar catch that they are, in some nebulous manner of which they have no legal right to be informed so that they might defend themselves against the charge, a threat to national security. Having tainted them with the McBridean smear that they are would-be killers with his "very big terrorist plot" gibberish, in other words, Gordon Brown means to use their deportation as no-smoke-without-fire cover for a grave mistake in which he was complicit.

If an apology and compensation for their wrongful detention is an outlandish expectation from a government whose paramount concern remains the opinion of right wing tabloids, is it too much to ask that these chaps be spared the persecution they can, having been condemned as terrorists by a British PM, count on back in Pakistan?

Apparently it is. For far too long, idiots like myself have given Gordon Brown the benefit of every doubt, ever qualifying attacks on his abysmal leadership, relentless machine politician bullying and abundant cowardice in the line of fire with the rider that at least he, unlike his predecessor, is at heart a well-intentioned man. The sacrifice of these innocents to spare his blushes makes this a very good day to bury that credulous misjudgment in a concrete-lined coffin, never to be disinterred.

Nelson Mail (NZ) : Police defend terrorism raids as suspects freed

Police defend terrorism raids as suspects freed

Reuters | April 23, 2009

British police have denied making an embarrassing mistake after releasing all 12 men seized in raids to foil a suspected al Qaeda plot that were brought forward due to a security breach.

The 11 Pakistanis and one Briton were arrested around northwest England on April 8 as part of an operation against what Prime Minister Gordon Brown called at the time a "very big terrorist plot."

Police said all the suspects had been released although 11 had been handed over to immigration officials and face deportation on national security grounds.

Prosecutors said there was insufficient evidence to justify holding them any longer or bringing charges, Greater Manchester Police (GMP) said.

"This is not a mistake. I do not feel embarrassed or humiliated by what we have done because we have carried out our duty," GMP Chief Constable Peter Fahy told reporters.

"We do not carry out this sort of operation or make these sorts of arrests on a wing or a prayer or a whim. We can only operate to one standard, and that standard is that people are innocent until they are proved guilty."

The raids were mounted several hours ahead of schedule after a blunder by Britain's top counter-terrorism officer Bob Quick.

A document on the operation was photographed by journalists as Quick carried it to a briefing for Brown. Quick resigned a day later but Fahy said the mistake had not compromised the operation.

Police have been on high alert since the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States and especially after four young British Islamists carried out suicide bombings on London's transport network in July 2005, killing 52 people.

Dozens have been convicted of plotting bombings since 2001 and currently 68 people are on trial or awaiting trial for terrorism offences, said Fahy.

However, it is not the first time that suspects have been freed after claims that a major terrorism plot had been foiled.

In 2004, GMP arrested 10 people in raids involving some 400 officers amid media speculation of a plot to blow up Manchester United's Old Trafford stadium during a high-profile game.

They were all freed without charge.

The most notorious case occurred in 2006 when officers, some wearing chemical, biological and radiological protection suits stormed a house in east London looking for a suspected bomb, and shot one of the occupants.

No bomb was found and police later admitted their intelligence had been faulty.

"When we look at the record of the anti-terrorist police across the whole country but especially Scotland Yard, their record is actually very, very good," said security consultant Peter Ryan, a former national director of UK police training.

The Muslim Council of Britain said arrests were understandable but criticised Brown, who had also angered Pakistani officials by calling on Pakistan to do more to "root out the terrorist elements in its country."

"We would hope that senior ministers and the Prime Minister will understand that it is completely unfair to make prejudicial and premature remarks in cases like this," said spokesman Inayat Bunglawala.

He added the decision to deport the men following their release was "very dishonourable."

Mohammed Ayub, a defence lawyer for some of the suspects, said: "This seriously damaged police credibility. The arrests happened in a blaze of publicity but finally amount to nothing."