The "King Of The North" Is Coming!

[Mary]

TERRORISM: AL-QAEDA WEB MONTHLY BACK AFTER YEAR'S BREAK

Source of Article

Riyadh, 8 Feb. (AKI) - After more than a year's absence, the jihadi propaganda monthly "Voice of Jihad" (Sawt-al-Jihad), edited by the Saudi cell of the al-Qaeda terrorist network, has reappeared on the Internet. The new issue - the 30th - opens with an editorial threatening the Saudi regime and welcoming the birth of "an Islamic emirate" in Iraq by local al-Qaeda cells. "Voice of Jihad" was launched in 2003 covering mainly ideological and doctrinal issues concerning the mujahadeen in the Arabian Peninsula.

"As for us, we have begun a new year and we ask Allah that it be a year of victory," reads the editorial. “For some time now we have been preparing important operations which will make the crusader (i.e. American) bases on the Arab peninsula tremble and the aim of the mujahadeen will be to cleanse the peninsula of the pagans and the crusader bases" - a reference to US military posts in the region.

The editorial concludes with a message to the leader of al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden. “We say to our emir, Sheikh Osama bin Laden, that we will continue on his path. Your soldiers are working, planning and preparing something which will make him and all true believers very happy. We pray to Allah that all will go well until the arrival of zero hour," it added.

The magazine also carries a claim of responsibility for an attack by Islamist terrorists against a Saudi oil refinery at Baqiq, on 24 February 2006.

It concludes with an interview with a doctor of Moroccan origin living in France, who in the 1990s decided to fight alongside the Bosnian mujahadeen, and a corner dedicated to readers, who are invited to write to the jihadi publication on the site http://contactus.arabform.com.


(Ham/Aki)
Feb-08-07 17:21

***

[Mary]

U.S. MILITARY: IRAN ARMING IRAQ MILITIAS


By STEVEN R. HURST
Associated Press Writer
Source of Article
Sun Feb 11, 5:08 PM ET


BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S. military officials on Sunday accused the highest levels of the Iranian leadership of arming Shiite militants in Iraq with sophisticated armor-piercing roadside bombs that have killed more than 170 American forces.

The military command in Baghdad denied, however, that any newly smuggled Iranian weapons were behind the five U.S. military helicopter crashes since Jan. 20 — four that were shot out of the sky by insurgent gunfire.

A fifth crash has tentatively been blamed on mechanical failure. In the same period, two private security company helicopters also have crashed but the cause was unclear.

The deadly and highly sophisticated weapons the U.S. military said it traced to Iran are known as "explosively formed penetrators," or EFPs.

The presentation was the result of weeks of preparation and revisions as U.S. officials put together a package of material to support the Bush administration's claims of Iranian intercession on behalf of militant Iraqis fighting American forces.

Senior U.S. military officials in Baghdad said the display was prompted by the military's concern for "force protection," which, they said, was guaranteed under the United Nations resolution that authorizes American soldiers to be in Iraq.

Three senior military officials who explained the display said the "machining process" used in the construction of the deadly bombs had been traced to Iran.

The experts, who spoke to a large gathering of reporters on condition that they not be further identified, said the supply trail began with Iran's Revolutionary Guards Quds Force, which also is accused of arming the Hezbollah guerrilla army in Lebanon. The officials said the EFP weapon was first tested there.

The officials said the Revolutionary Guard and its Quds force report directly to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

The briefing on Iran was revised heavily after officials decided it was not ready for release as planned last month.

Senior U.S. officials in Washington — cautious after the drubbing the administration took for the faulty intelligence leading to the 2003 Iraq invasion — had held back because they were unhappy with the original presentation.

The display appeared to be part of the White House drive that has empowered U.S. forces in Iraq to use all means to curb Iranian influence in the country, including killing Iranian agents.

It included a power-point slide program and a handful of mortar shells and rocket-propelled grenades which the military officials said were made in Iran.

The centerpiece of the display, however, was a gray metal pipe about 10 inches long and 6 inches in diameter, the exterior casing of what the military said was an EFP, the roadside bomb that shoots out fist-sized wads of nearly molten copper that can penetrate the armor on an Abrams tank.

"A normal roadside bomb is like a shortgun blast. But these are like a rifle. They're focused and they're aimed. ... It's going to take anything out in its way, go in one side and out the other," said 1st Lt. Zane Galvach, 25, of Dayton, Ohio, a soldier with the Army's 2nd Division, based in Baghdad.

Skeptical congressional Democrats said the Bush administration should move cautiously before accusing Iran of fomenting a campaign of violence against U.S. troops in Iraq.

Senate Intelligence Committee member Ron Wyden (news, bio, voting record), D-Ore., said "the administration is engaged in a drumbeat with Iran that is much like the drumbeat that they did with Iraq. We're going to insist on accountability."

On the Republican side, Sen. Trent Lott (news, bio, voting record) of Mississippi said he did not think the United States was trying to make a case for attacking Iran. Lott said the U.S. should try to stop the flow of munitions through Iran to Iraq but that "you do that by interdiction ... you don't do it by invasion."

The EFPs, as well as Iranian-made mortar shells and rocket-propelled grenades, have been supplied to what the military officials termed "rogue elements" of the Mahdi Army militia of anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. He is a key backer of Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

The U.S. officials glossed over armaments having reached the other major Shiite militia organization, the Badr Brigade. It is the military wing of Iraq's most powerful Shiite political organization, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, whose leaders also have close ties to the U.S.

Many key government figures and members of the Shiite political establishment have deep ties to Iran, having spent decades there in exile during Saddam Hussein's rule. The Badr Brigade was formed and trained by Iran's Revolutionary Guard.

An intelligence analyst in the group said Iran was working through "multiple surrogates" — mainly in the Mahdi Army — to smuggle the EFPs into Iraq. He said most of the components are entering the country at crossing points near Amarah, the Iranian border city of Meran and the Basra area of southern Iraq.

The analyst said Iraq's Shiite-led government had been briefed on Iran's involvement and Iraqi officials had asked the Iranians to stop. Al-Maliki has said he told both the U.S. and Iran that he does not want his country turned into a proxy battlefield.

"We know more than we can show," said one of the senior officials, when pressed for tangible evidence that the EFPs were made in Iran.

U.S. officials have alleged for years that weapons were entering the country from Iran but had until Sunday stopped short of alleging involvement by top Iranian leaders.

During the briefing, a senior defense official said that one of the six Iranians detained in January in the northern city of Irbil was the operational commander of the Quds Force.

He was identified as Mohsin Chizari, who was apprehended after slipping back into Iraq after a 10-month absence, the officer said.

The Iranians were caught trying to flush documents down the toilet, he said. They had also tried to change their appearance by shaving their heads. Bags of their hair were found during the raid, he said.

The dates of manufacture on weapons found so far indicate they were made after fall of Saddam Hussein — mostly in 2006, the officials said.

In a separate briefing, Maj. Gen. Jim Simmons, deputy commander of Multinational Corps-Iraq, said that since December 2004, U.S. helicopter pilots have been shot at on average about 100 times a month and been hit on an average of 17 times in the same period.

He disclosed a previously unknown shootdown, a Blackhawk helicopter hit by small arms fire near the western city of Hit. The craft crash-landed but there were no casualties. Simmons was on board.

The major general said Iraqi militants are known to have SA-7, SA-14 and SA-16 shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles but none of the most recent five military crashes were caused by those weapons. He said some previous crashes had been a result of such missiles but would not elaborate.

North of Baghdad, a suicide truck bomber crashed into a police station, killing at least 30 policemen. A total of 76 people were killed or found dead across Iraq. The U.S. military said Sunday a soldier was shot and killed the day before in volatile Diyala province northeast of the capital. A second soldier was reported killed Sunday in western Baghdad.

***

[Mary]

AL-QAEDA'S RESURGENCE, Part 1

READY TO TAKE ON THE WORLD


Middle East
Mar 2, 2007
Source of Article
By Syed Saleem Shahzad

KARACHI - Al-Qaeda will this year significantly step up its global operations after centralizing its leadership and reviving its financial lifelines. Crucially, al-Qaeda has developed missile and rocket technology with the capability of carrying chemical, biological and nuclear warheads, according to an al-Qaeda insider who spoke to Asia Times Online.

While al-Qaeda will continue to operate in Afghanistan and Iraq, it will broaden its global perspective to include Europe and hostile Muslim states, Asia Times Online has learned. For the first time since its attacks on the US on September 11, 2001, this could be al-Qaeda's year on the offensive.

According to the contact, "The time has come for a message to be communicated to Europe." Asked what kind of message this would be, the contact simply smiled.

Nevertheless, he stated that with Western forces trapped in Afghanistan and Iraq, it was time to open up new fronts in Somalia, Algeria, Egypt, Palestine and other places.

"In each place, al-Qaeda has its own command and control apparatus, including Palestine, and all those fronts will be opened up very soon," the contact said.

At the same time al-Qaeda is planning this offensive, it has received something of a setback in Afghanistan, where its alliance with the Taliban is under strain. The Taliban have struck a deal with Pakistan over mutual cooperation, which is anathema to al-Qaeda (see Pakistan makes a deal with the Taliban, Asia Times Online, March 1).

Osama in the shadows
Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden has not appeared in a video since October 2004 or on an audio tape since January 2006. He is by no means out of the al-Qaeda picture, although his deputy, Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri, claims the media spotlight.

Reportedly recovered from ill health, bin Laden - possibly even sporting a trimmed beard - is active in al-Qaeda's planning, according to the contact Asia Times Online spoke to. "He could be in Chechnya, Somalia or Iraq," the man said coyly, obviously not about to divulge bin Laden's whereabouts. Or even in Iran, some insiders hint.

Over the course of many hours of conversation and information exchanges in several locations, the contact - who has a sound track record of being informed of developments within al-Qaeda - explained how bin Laden and Zawahiri had rebuilt al-Qaeda over the past year or so.

Since 2005, the al-Qaeda leadership had been talking to many groups, including Egyptians, Libyans and the takfiri camp (which calls all non-practicing Muslims infidels). Al-Qaeda paid for differences in tactics and ideology among these groups as its structure unraveled and the organization developed into an "ideology" rather than a cohesive group.

As a result, al-Qaeda's global agenda was largely shelved and the international community's financial squeeze definitely hurt. This problem has been overcome, according to the contact, although he would not give any details. Even US intelligence agencies concede that the group's finances have improved, but they have no idea how. All the same, they have pressured Pakistan to clamp down on some charitable organizations in that country.

The Jamiatul Muqatila (Libyan) led by Sheikh Abu Lais al-Libby, the Jabhatul Birra of Ibn-i-Malik, also Libyan, the Jaishul Mehdi, founded by slain Abdul Rahman Canady, an Egyptian, and now led by Abu Eza, the Jamaatul Jihad, an unnamed Libyan group once led by Sheikh Abu Nasir Qahtani from Kuwaiti, who has now been arrested, and the takfiris under Sheikh Essa, an Egyptian, have once again joined forces with "Jamaat al-Qaeda" under the leadership of bin Laden.

The contact insisted that since two major tasks - regrouping and finances - had been completed, major operations could now be planned. But in addition to this, to ensure that 2007 would be "the year of al-Qaeda", a "great compromise" had to be made.

Deal with the devil
Before the "Mother of all Battles", the Gulf War of 1991, bin Laden offered to help the Saudi monarchy fight Saddam Hussein's forces in Kuwait. The Saudi royalty ignored the offer and opted instead for US military assistance. The presence of these troops in the land of the sacred cities of Mecca and Medina inflamed bin Laden, and he split with the Saudi royalty.

Nevertheless, the growing influence of Shi'ite Iran in the Middle East, especially in Iraq after the US invasion of 2003 and Lebanon, concerned al-Qaeda and the anti-Shi'ite Salafi Saudi [continued below]

Part 2
Page 2 of 2

Pakistan Makes A Deal With The Taliban

South Asia
Mar 1, 2007
Source of Article (Part 2)
By Syed Saleem Shahzad

[continued from above] ...by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) would be forced into a position to talk peace - and who better than Pakistan to step in as peacemaker and bail out its Western allies?

The next logical step would be the establishment of a pro-Islamabad government in Kabul - delivering a kick in the strategic teeth of India at the same time. After all, Pakistan invested a lot in Afghanistan after the Soviet occupation in the 1980s yet itreceived little in return. Whether it was former Afghan premier Gulbuddin Hekmatyar or Taliban leader Mullah Omar, they refused to be totally Pakistan's men.

A man for all seasons
Mullah Dadullah, 41, comes from southwestern Afghanistan, so he is "original Taliban", and has a record of being a natural leader in times of crisis.

Mullah Dadullah made a name for himself during the Soviet occupation, during which he lost a leg. And with victories against the Northern Alliance after the Taliban took over Kabul in 1996, he pushed the alliance into the tail end of Afghanistan. This made him Pakistan's darling from Day 1.

He was Mullah Omar's emissary in the two Waziristan tribal areas before the spring offensive of last year. Here he brokered a major deal between the Pakistani armed forces and the Pakistani Taliban. Pakistan had lost more than 800 soldiers in operations against the Pakistani Taliban and al-Qaeda and it needed a face-saving way to extricate itself from the mess.

Mullah Dadullah's peace deal provided this, and the army made an "honorable" withdrawal from the volatile semi-independent region. Whenever the ceasefire was violated, Mullah Dadullah would settle things down.

The 2006 spring offensive was veteran mujahideen fighter Jalaluddin Haqqani's show. Nevertheless, the main areas of success were not Haqqani's traditional areas of influence, such as southeastern Afghanistan's Khost, Paktia and Paktika. The Taliban secured major victories in their heartland of the southwest, Helmand, Zabul, Urzgan and Kandahar. And their leader was Mullah Dadullah, whose men seized control of more than 12 districts - and held on to them.

Pakistani strategic circles are convinced that as a proven military commander, Mullah Dadullah will be able to work wonders this spring and finally give the Taliban the edge over the Kabul administration and its NATO allies.

This, ultimately, is Pakistan's objective - to revive its role in Kabul - and Islamabad is optimistic that Dadullah's considerable diplomatic skills will enable him to negotiate a power-sharing formula for pro-Pakistan Afghan warlords.

Even if Mullah Omar disagrees about any major compromise, Islamabad believes that Dadullah would by then have made such a name for himself in the battle against NATO that Omar would have little option but to accept whatever terms were agreed on.

A new string in the Taliban bow
A notable addition to what can only be described as a limited Taliban arsenal this year is surface-to-air missiles, notably the SAM-7, which was the first generation of Soviet man-portable SAMs.

The Taliban acquired these missiles in 2005, but they had little idea about how to use them effectively. Arab al-Qaeda members conducted extensive training programs and brought the Taliban up to speed. Nevertheless, the SAM-7s, while useful against helicopters, were no use against the fighter and bomber aircraft that were doing so much damage.

What the Taliban desperately needed were sensors for their missiles. These detect aircraft emissions designed to misdirect the missiles.

And it so happened that Pakistan had such devices, having acquired them from the Americans, though indirectly. The Pakistanis retrieved them from unexploded cruise missiles fired into Afghanistan in 1998, targeting bin Laden. They copied and adapted them to fit other missiles, including the SAMs.

Now that the Taliban and Pakistan have a deal, these missiles will be made available to the Taliban. Much like the Stingers that changed the dynamics of the Afghan resistance against the Soviets, the SAMs could help turn things Mullah Dadullah's, the Taliban's and Pakistan's way.

Syed Saleem Shahzad is Asia Times Online's Pakistan Bureau Chief. He can be reached at saleem_shahzad2002@yahoo.com.

***

[Mary]

US SENATORS CALL FOR DIRECT STRIKES ON AL-QAEDA INSIDE PAKISTAN


Malaysia Sun
Saturday 3rd March, 2007
Source of Article
(ANI)


Members of the US Senate have reportedly urged the Bush administration to launch direct military strikes at alleged al-Qaeda targets inside Pakistan.

This has, in turn, prompted the Pakistani envoy in Washington to warn that such an attitude could bring down the present set-up in Islamabad.

Senior Pentagon officials added fuel to the fire by claiming that their troops have already targeted Taliban and al-Qaeda sites inside Pakistan and that they have an agreement that allows them to do so.

Senator Carl Levin, Democratic chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said that the panel would press the Defense and State departments to consider taking military action against alleged al-Qaeda camps inside Pakistan "if they learn that attacks inside Afghanistan have been planned at these sites."

"It's a critically important point, and I think we've got to insist, on this issue, that we be given a clear answer," the Dawn quoted Levin as saying.

Lt-Gen Douglas Lute, chief operations officer for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, however, told the committee that US soldiers could target terrorist sites inside Pakistan if there's an imminent threat. "We have all the authorities we need to pursue, either with (artillery) fire or on the ground, across the border. If just across the border, inside Pakistan, we have surveillance systems that detect a Taliban party setting up a rocket system which is obviously pointed west, into Afghanistan, we do not have to wait for the rockets to be fired. They have demonstrated hostile intent and we can engage them."

Retired US Marine Gen. James Jones, former top NATO operational commander in Afghanistan, also told the panel that forces under the US command called Operation Enduring Freedom have a legal right to strike across the border.

"That mission, everybody agrees, could be done," he added.

Lt-Gen Lute, however, clarified that they would have to seek the Pakistan government's permission to go after a munitions factory further inside the Pakistani border.

Pakistan remained the target throughout the debate, with both Democrat and Republican senators claiming that the country is either unwilling or unable to prevent the Taliban and al-Qaeda insurgents from establishing camps inside the tribal zone.

Republican Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama said that if international laws allowed the US invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the same laws could be applied to take actions against al-Qaeda and Taliban sanctuaries inside Pakistan.

Democratic Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana said that the Pakistani leaders "need to contemplate which is harder for them, acting to do something about this, or us acting to do something about this."

The only person who spoke for Pakistan was the committee's former chairman, now senior Republican Party member John Warner. "I think under the leadership of Musharraf, they're doing the best they can, but the realities are there's fragility in the political system in Pakistan," he explained.

Senator Warner said that the situation would be much worse for the United States and its allies if Islamists came to power in Pakistan.


***

[Mary]

UK SAILORS CAPTURED AT GUNPOINT

Story from BBC NEWS:
Source of Article
Published: 2007/03/23 17:22:17 GMT

Commodore reacts
Fifteen British Navy personnel have been captured at gunpoint by Iranian forces, the Ministry of Defence says.
The men were seized at 1030 local time when they boarded a boat in the Gulf, off the coast of Iraq, which they suspected was smuggling cars.

The Royal Navy said the men who were on a routine patrol in Iraqi waters, were understood to be unharmed.

Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett has demanded the immediate and safe return of the HMS Cornwall servicemen.

She added that she had called for a "full explanation" from Iran and had left them in no doubt that she wanted the group and their equipment back immediately.

The frigate's commander, Commodore Nick Lambert, said he was hoping there had been a "simple mistake" over territorial waters.

"There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that they [British personnel] were in Iraqi territorial waters. Equally, the Iranians may claim they were in Iranian territorial waters.


"We may well find that this is a simple misunderstanding at the tactical level."

Helicopters had reported seeing two British boats being moved along the Shatt al-Arab waterway to Iranian bases and there had been no evidence of fighting, he added.

He said that despite scant communication, the 15 people were understood to be safe and had reacted in an "extremely professional way, in line with the rules of engagement".

HMS CORNWALL FACTS
Multi-national force flagship in the northern Gulf
Type 22 frigate
Crew: 250 (Max 301)
Length: 148.1m / 485.9ft
Speed: 30 knots
Source: Royal Navy

Mrs Beckett said: "We understand that they were in two boats that were operating in Iraqi waters in accordance with the Security Council Resolution 1723 in support of the government of Iraq to stop smuggling."

On Friday afternoon, the Iranian ambassador in London, Rasoul Movahedian, met permanent secretary, Sir Peter Ricketts, at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

The foreign secretary said the meeting had been "brisk but polite" and said the British ambassador in Iran had also been speaking to officials in Tehran.

There has been no immediate response so far from Iran, where many ministries and official buildings were closed for a public holiday.

Shadow foreign secretary William Hague and Sir Menzies Campbell, leader of the Liberal Democrats, have both backed the call for the group's immediate and safe return.

Commodore Kevin Aandahl, of the US Navy Fifth Fleet based in the same region, backed the Royal Navy's claims that their boats had been in Iraqi waters.

He added that the Royal Navy personnel should be given credit for a "very cool" response and not escalating the situation.

The incident comes at a time of renewed tensions with Iran over its nuclear programme and follows claims that most of the violence against UK forces in Basra is being engineered by Iranian elements.

British Army Colonel Justin Maciejewski, who is based in Iraq, said Iran was providing "sophisticated weaponry" to insurgents and "Iranian agents" were paying local men to attack British troops.

FAMILY INFORMATION LINE
0845 7800 900

Iranian officials have in the past denied such claims.

In 2004, Iran detained eight British servicemen for three days after they allegedly strayed over the maritime border.

The UK claimed the men were "forcibly escorted" into Iranian territorial waters.

The men were paraded blindfolded and made to apologise on Iranian TV before their release was agreed.

The BBC's diplomatic correspondent James Robbins said the difference this time is that the present Iranian government under President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was much more hardline.

"The political climate is worse with Britain among those confronting Iran over its controversial nuclear programme," he added.



***

[Mary]

RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE SEES U.S. MILITARY BUILDUP ON IRAN BORDER

27/03/2007 17:31
MOSCOW
Source of Article

(RIA Novosti) - Russian military intelligence services are reporting a flurry of activity by U.S. Armed Forces near Iran's borders, a high-ranking security source said Tuesday.

"The latest military intelligence data point to heightened U.S. military preparations for both an air and ground operation against Iran," the official said, adding that the Pentagon has probably not yet made a final decision as to when an attack will be launched.

He said the Pentagon is looking for a way to deliver a strike against Iran "that would enable the Americans to bring the country to its knees at minimal cost."

He also said the U.S. Naval presence in the Persian Gulf has for the first time in the past four years reached the level that existed shortly before the invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

Col.-Gen. Leonid Ivashov, vice president of the Academy of Geopolitical Sciences, said last week that the Pentagon is planning to deliver a massive air strike on Iran's military infrastructure in the near future.

A new U.S. carrier battle group has been dispatched to the Gulf.

The USS John C. Stennis, with a crew of 3,200 and around 80 fixed-wing aircraft, including F/A-18 Hornet and Superhornet fighter-bombers, eight support ships and four nuclear submarines are heading for the Gulf, where a similar group led by the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower has been deployed since December 2006.

The U.S. is also sending Patriot anti-missile systems to the region.


***

[Mary]

UK/IRAN BILATERAL LINKS SUSPENDED

Published: 2007/03/28 13:10:15 GMT
Story from BBC NEWS
Source of Article

The UK government has suspended bilateral relationships with Iran until a dispute over the seizure of British sailors from Iraqi waters is resolved.
Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett told MPs that diplomatic efforts were continuing with Iranian officials to release the 15 navy personnel.

However, other business has been suspended, with "aspects of our policy towards Iran under close review".

Iran seized the personnel five days ago, saying they were in their waters.

Earlier the Ministry of Defence had shown satellite data which it said proved the personnel were 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi waters when they were seized.

Vice Admiral Charles Style said the sailors had been "ambushed" after the search of a vessel and that their detention was "unjustified and wrong".


UK VERSION OF EVENTS

• UK government says merchant vessel boarded by crew from HMS Cornwall was 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi territorial waters
• HMS Cornwall was south-east of merchant ship, inside Iraqi waters
• Iranian government initially told UK that merchant vessel was at a point still within Iraqi waters
• After UK pointed this out, Iran provided alternative position, within Iranian waters

Mrs Beckett, making a statement to the House of Commons on Wednesday, repeated the prime minister's position that the situation had reached "a different phase".

"That is why MoD have today released details of the incident and why I have concluded that we need to focus all our bilateral efforts during this phase to resolution of this issue.

"We will, therefore be imposing a freeze on all other official bilateral business with Iran until this situation is resolved."

'Serious situation'

Iran has failed to agree to British demands, she said, although she added it had made no demands.

Britain had asked for information on the personnel, consular access to them and their release.

"No one should be in any doubt about the seriousness with which we regard these events," Mrs Beckett said.

The Iranians have said the incident is not linked to any bilateral, regional or international issue, she added.

The US, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and other British allies had given support to Britain in demanding the release of the 15.

"I am particularly grateful to my colleague, Hoshyar Zebari, the Iraqi Foreign Minister, who has confirmed publicly that the incident took place in Iraqi waters, calling for the personnel, who are acting in Iraq's interests, to be released."

Strong moral position

Speaking after the Ministry of Defence released the co-ordinates of the incident, Mrs Beckett said the information was being publicly discussed to get both the British and Iranian accounts on the public record as "behind-the-scenes diplomacy" had failed to resolve the issue.

Shadow foreign affairs secretary William Hague praised the "firm but measured" approach the government had taken.

"The seizure of our personnel was clearly unjustified and the evidence the Foreign Secretary and the MoD has presented shatters the credibility of any claim they were operating in Iranian waters."

He added: "If this did turn into a protracted dispute, this country is placed in the strongest moral and legal position in having approached the issue in this way,"


***

[Mary]

BLAIR: IRAN MUST FREE NAVAL PRISONERS IN DAYS


By Christopher Hope, Whitehall Editor
Source of Article
Last Updated: 2:28am BST 27/03/2007

• Intelligence assets listen in to Teheran
• Leader: Britain must leave Iran in no doubt of its anger

Britain has continued to pressure Iran to release the 15 arrested Navy personnel as the UK's ambassador to Teheran met officials there for the second time in two days.

Teheran is not planning to swap the 15 Britons for the five Iranians arrested in northern Iraq, a spokesman for Mehzi Mostafavi, the deputy foreign minister of Iran, said today on Iranian television.

Geoffrey Adams spent an hour at the ministry of foreign affairs as Teheran signalled that the Britons were being interrogated over allegedly entering Iranian waters.

Today's meetings followed Tony Blair's warning last night that Iran has only a few days to find a diplomatic solution to the escalating crisis over the 15 missing British sailors and Marines.

Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett held talks with her Iranian counterpart, Manouchehr Mottaki

As the tension grew, the first direct high-level talks took place between Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, and Iran's foreign minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, to press Britain's concerns.

The moves came as the Foreign Office admitted it had no idea what has happened to the 15 Navy personnel seized by the Iranian military on Friday. The Prime Minister, in his first public comments since the incident, appeared to signal a hardening of attitudes after more than 48 hours of low-level diplomacy.

Speaking in Berlin last night, Mr Blair said he still hoped that there could be a diplomatic solution.

"I hope that this is resolved in the next few days," he said. "The quicker it is resolved, the easier it will be for all of us.

"We have certainly sent the message back to them very clearly indeed. They should not be under any doubt at all about how seriously we regard this act, which is unjustified and wrong."

The seizure of the 14 men and one woman by Iran was a "very serious situation", Mr Blair added.

He warned Teheran that it was a "fundamental" issue for Britain and insisted that the personnel had not strayed into Iranian waters.

He said: "I have not been commenting up to now because I want to get it resolved in as easy and diplomatic a way as possible, because it is the welfare of the people that have been taken by the Iranian government that is most important. But this is a very serious situation."

The sailors and Marines were seized from the Shatt al-Arab waterway south of the Iraqi city of Basra. Teheran claimed the patrol encroached on its territorial waters in an act of "blatant aggression".

But this was disputed strongly by Mr Blair. He said: "There is no doubt at all that these people were taken from a boat in Iraqi waters.

"It is simply not true that they went into Iranian territorial waters and I hope the Iranian government understands how fundamental an issue this is for us."

Downing Street sources denied that Mr Blair's comments should be read as an ultimatum to the Iranians or that any sort of military option was under consideration.

But the intervention does mark a shift in the language being used.

Mrs Beckett continued the pressure, "making very clear" in a phone call to Mr Mottaki that no violation of Iranian waters had occurred. And she repeated still unanswered demands for information on the whereabouts of the 15 and for consular access to them.

Britain's position received support from other European Union countries yesterday. President Jacques Chirac of France said Britain had the "complete solidarity" of all EU leaders over the sailors.

"It seems clear they were not in the Iranian zone at the time," he said.

The German presidency of the EU issued a statement calling for their immediate release.

Diplomats are hoping that there may be more movement today from Teheran as Iranians return to work after a public holiday.

Yesterday the British ambassador, Geoffrey Adams, met his counterpart in the Iraqi foreign ministry seeking access to the prisoners.

A Foreign Office spokesman said: "We are waiting to get a response to that. At the Ambassador's request he went to a meeting at the Ministry of Foreign affairs in Teheran to press again for the release of our personnel, ask where they are being held and ask for consular access."

Last night it was reported that Iran may give consular access once an investigation is completed.

Lord Triesman, a Foreign Office minister, said: "We don't know where they are. We wish we did. We are asking whether they are being moved around inside Iran."

The Foreign Office refused to comment on reports that the Iranian military had extracted confessions from the team from the frigate Cornwall, saying this was "speculation".

The team was seized on the eve of Saturday's UN security council vote to impose further sanctions on Iran over its nuclear programme

Relations between Britain and Iran have deteriorated recently, partly because of the row over Iran's nuclear programme and partly because of Iraq.

But Foreign Offices sources said Iran was viewing the prisoners and its dispute with the UN as separate issues.



***

[Mary]

IRANIANS PROTEST OUTSIDE BRITISH EMBASSY

POSTED: 1602 GMT (0002 HKT), April 1, 2007
Source of Article
CNN


Story Highlights
• Hundreds of protesters gather outside the UK embassy in Tehran
• "The Iranians must give back the hostages," U.S. president says
• Bush calls detention of Britons "inexcusable behavior"
• U.S. president says sailors were taken from Iraqi waters


TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Hundreds of Iranian students crowded outside the British Embassy in Tehran on Sunday, setting off firecrackers and hurling projectiles toward the compound, an embassy spokesman said.

No one was injured and there was no damage in the protest, which continued into the late afternoon, the spokesman said.

The students are protesting the alleged trespass of 15 British marines and sailors into Iranian waters on March 23.

Britain and Iraq say the Britons were well inside Iraqi waters, and London is demanding the release of the 15 detainees.

Iran has not allowed British ambassadors access to the Britons, who are being held at an undisclosed location in Iran.

Video from earlier in the day showed Iranians of all ages crowded around the embassy while Iranian forces maintained a cordon around the peaceful crowd, which chanted and waved flags.

U.S. President George W. Bush called Iran's detention of the sailors "inexcusable behavior" and called for their release, referring to them as "hostages."

"The Iranians took these people out of Iraqi water," said Bush, speaking Saturday at Camp David with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. "And it's inexcusable behavior."

The U.S. government had been notably quiet on the subject from the beginning, but Bush voiced strong opinions Saturday.

"The Iranians must give back the hostages," he said. "They were innocent. They were doing nothing wrong. And they were summarily plucked out of water." (Watch President Bush's address)

Also Saturday, an Iranian official said his country had started a legal process to determine the guilt or innocence of the detainees.

If they are not guilty, they will be freed, said Ambassador Gholam-Reza Ansari, who is in Russia.

"But the legal process is going on and has to be completed, and if they are found guilty, they will face the punishment," he said on Russian TV. (Watch Iranian ambassador call British sailors 'invaders')

Ansari -- speaking to the TV news channel Vesti-24 -- also hinted that there could be a diplomatic settlement, according to the Islamic Republic News Agency in Iran.

"If the UK government admits its mistake and apologizes to Iran for its naval personnel's trespassing of Iranian territorial waters, the issue can be easily settled."

Iran's president called Britain "arrogant" Saturday for not apologizing, media in Iran reported.

British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said Saturday that Britain has written to Iran to seek a peaceful resolution to the standoff.

Third letter released

On Friday, Iran released a third letter purportedly written by detained British sailor Faye Turney, in which she claimed to have been "sacrificed" by British and U.S. policies and urged both countries to withdraw their troops from Iraq. (Full story)

The letter, the authenticity of which CNN cannot independently determine, followed two previous letters said to be written by Turney and released separately this week. (Watch Turney say what happened when she was captured )

Friday's letter was released just hours after Turney appeared with two other Britons in new video aired by Arabic language network Al Alam. (Text of letters)

In the video, one of the 15 detained service personnel held in Iran confessed to "entering your waters without permission."

"On the 23rd of March 2007 in Iranian waters we trespassed without permission," said Nathan Thomas Summers. The third detainee in the video has not been identified. (Watch detained British sailor make his 'confession')

Summers said the Britons were being treated well, as did the Turney letter.

CNN's Shirzad Bozorgmehr contributed to this report


***

[Mary]

SYRIA: WE HELPED IN IRAN-BRITAIN DISPUTE


Wed Apr 4, 2:48 PM ET
Source of Article
Associated Press

DAMASCUS, Syria - Syria played a key role in resolving the standoff over the 15 British sailors and marines held by Iran, two government officials said Wednesday.

"Syrian efforts and the Iranian willingness culminated with the release of the British sailors," said Information Minister Mohsen Bilal.

He said Syria had been asked "to help positively in the issue of British" crew members since their March 23 seizure by Iran in the Persian Gulf.

He did not elaborate.

Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem told reporters that "Syria exercised a sort of quiet diplomacy to solve this problem and encourage dialogue" between Britain and Iran.

Al-Moallem, who also did not give any details on the Syrian mediation, spoke at Damascus international airport before the departure of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) for Saudi Arabia.

A Foreign Ministry official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media, said Iran's decision to release the Britons was "right," and that Syria "sees it as an example of the positive results for adopting dialogue and diplomacy among states."

Syria has long been the Arab country with the closest ties to Iran, a non-Arab state. The two have moved toward each other as they were shunned by the United States and the European Union for their alleged interference in Iraq and Lebanon, and their support of Palestinian militant groups regarded as terrorist in the West.


***

[Mary]

AL-QAEDA ‘PLANNING BIG BRITISH ATTACK’

Times Online
April 22, 2007
Source of Article
Dipesh Gadher


AL-QAEDA leaders in Iraq are planning the first “large-scale” terrorist attacks on Britain and other western targets with the help of supporters in Iran, according to a leaked intelligence report.

Spy chiefs warn that one operative had said he was planning an attack on “a par with Hiroshima and Nagasaki” in an attempt to “shake the Roman throne”, a reference to the West.

Another plot could be timed to coincide with Tony Blair stepping down as prime minister, an event described by Al-Qaeda planners as a “change in the head of the company”.

The report, produced earlier this month and seen by The Sunday Times, appears to provide evidence that Al-Qaeda is active in Iran and has ambitions far beyond the improvised attacks it has been waging against British and American soldiers in Iraq.

There is no evidence of a formal relationship between Al-Qaeda, a Sunni group, and the Shi’ite regime of President Mah-moud Ahmadinejad, but experts suggest that Iran’s leaders may be turning a blind eye to the terrorist organisation’s activities.

The intelligence report also makes it clear that senior Al-Qaeda figures in the region have been in recent contact with operatives in Britain.

It follows revelations last year that up to 150 Britons had travelled to Iraq to fight as part of Al-Qaeda’s “foreign legion”. A number are thought to have returned to the UK, after receiving terrorist training, to form sleeper cells.

The report was compiled by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC) - based at MI5’s London headquarters - and provides a quarterly review of the international terror threat to Britain. It draws a distinction between Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda’s core leadership, who are thought to be hiding on the Afghan-Pakistan border, and affiliated organisations elsewhere.

The document states: “While networks linked to AQ [Al-Qaeda] Core pose the greatest threat to the UK, the intelligence during this quarter has highlighted the potential threat from other areas, particularly AQI [Al-Qaeda in Iraq].”

The report continues: “Recent reporting has described AQI’s Kurdish network in Iran planning what we believe may be a large-scale attack against a western target.

“A member of this network is reportedly involved in an operation which he believes requires AQ Core authorisation. He claims the operation will be on ‘a par with Hiroshima and Naga-saki’ and will ‘shake the Roman throne’. We assess that this operation is most likely to be a large-scale, mass casualty attack against the West.”

The report says there is “no indication” this attack would specifically target Britain, “although we are aware that AQI . . . networks are active in the UK”.

Analysts believe the reference to Hiroshima and Naga-saki, where more than 200,000 people died in nuclear attacks on Japan at the end of the second world war, is unlikely to be a literal boast.

“It could be just a reference to a huge explosion,” said a counter-terrorist source. “They [Al-Qaeda] have got to do something soon that is radical otherwise they start losing credibility.”

Despite aspiring to a nuclear capability, Al-Qaeda is not thought to have acquired weapons grade material. However, several plots involving “dirty bombs” - conventional explosive devices surrounded by radioactive material - have been foiled.

Last year Al-Qaeda’s leader in Iraq called on nuclear scientists to apply their knowledge of biological and radiological weapons to “the field of jihad”.

Details of a separate plot to attack Britain, “ideally” before Blair steps down this summer, were contained in a letter written by Abdul al-Hadi al-Iraqi, an Iraqi Kurd and senior Al-Qaeda commander.

According to the JTAC document, Hadi “stressed the need to take care to ensure that the attack was successful and on a large scale”. The plan was to be relayed to an Iran-based Al-Qaeda facilitator.

The Home Office declined to comment.


***

[Mary]

FBI's Mueller:

Bin Laden Wants to Strike U.S. Cities With Nuclear Weapons


Ronald Kessler
Source of Article
Tuesday, May 15, 2007

Osama bin Laden and his terrorist group desperately want to obtain nuclear devices and explode them in American cities, especially New York and Washington, D.C., FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III tells NewsMax.

In an exclusive interview, Mueller also acknowledged that bin Laden is still active, though isolated. The director revealed that the Bureau believes the terrorist leader continues to communicate with al-Qaida cells, some of which remain in the U.S.

Mueller declined to say how often bin Laden communicates or to elaborate on the substance of his communications.

Other intelligence sources tell NewsMax that U.S. security efforts have forced bin Laden to return to "horse-and-buggy days" — avoiding electronic communications in favor of using trusted couriers.

But Mueller says though hemmed in, al-Qaida's paramount goal is clear: to detonate a nuclear device that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans.

In contrast to homegrown terrorists, al-Qaida is far more likely to be able to pull off such an attack.

Mueller admits the nuclear threat is so real he sometimes wakes up in the middle of the night worrying about that possibility.

"I think it would be very difficult to wipe out the United States, but you'd have hundreds of thousands of casualties from a nuclear device, depending on the size of that nuclear device," Mueller tells NewsMax.

A Lust for Destruction

Al-Qaida could obtain such a device in one of two ways.

"One is to obtain a nuclear device that's already been constructed from one of the former Iron Curtain countries, and the other way is to put together the fissile material and the expertise and do an improvised nuclear device," Mueller says.

"And there's no doubt that al-Qaida, if it had the capability, would go down either route to get a nuclear device."

Mueller also has little doubt as to al-Qaida's likely targets.

"It would be someplace in the United States, in most likely Washington and or New York, depending on how many devices they have. Or both cities," Mueller says.

Because the U.S. has not been attacked in almost six years, Mueller worries that "we are in danger of becoming complacent."

"Al-Qaida is tremendously patient and thinks nothing about taking years to infiltrate persons in and finding the right personnel and opportunity to undertake an attack.

"And we cannot become complacent, because you look around the world, and whether it's London or Madrid or Bali or recently Casablanca or Algiers, attacks are taking place."

Mueller adds the U.S. must remain vigilant. He says our security efforts must "adapt to the new threat landscape."

He then adds: "We are going to be hit at some point. It's just a question of when and to what extent."

The Real Robert Mueller

In the conference room adjoining his seventh floor office at FBI headquarters, Mueller sits down for this interview in his shirt sleeves, a G-man-white oxford cloth with a subdued Brooks Brothers tie. When he appears on television, the camera gives his face an angular look. In person, his features are softer.

Handsome with silvery hair that he smooths down thoughtfully as he speaks, Mueller captivates his guests with his commanding presence. He has the demeanor of a square-jawed FBI agent combined with a tough talking prosecutor, which he once was.

Clearly, the enormous responsibility he carries shows in dark circles under his heavy-lidded brown eyes.

When he utters the words "nuclear device," he knits his brow and clenches his teeth.

However, Mueller is far more relaxed now than when I interviewed him a few months after Sept. 11, 2001. At the time, he was preoccupied trying to prevent a feared "second wave" of attacks on the West Coast.

Back then, Mueller declined to describe why, when he was in the Marines during the Vietnam War, he was awarded both the Bronze Star and the Purple Heart. A man who hates to talk about himself or use the word "I," he said only that he "got into some firefights."

Recently, I obtained from the Marine Corps the citation that went with the Bronze Star. It says that on Dec. 11, 1968, the platoon that Mueller commanded came under a heavy volume of small arms, automatic weapons, and grenade launcher fire from a North Vietnamese army company.

"Quietly establishing a defensive perimeter, Second Lieutenant Mueller fearlessly moved from one position to another, directing the accurate counterfire of his men and shouting words of encouragement to them," the citation says.

Disregarding his own safety, Mueller then "skillfully supervised the evacuation of casualties from the hazardous area and, on one occasion, personally led a fire team across the fire-swept terrain to recover a mortally wounded Marine who had fallen in a position forward of the friendly lines," the citation adds.

Sitting in his conference room, Mueller commands the head of a long conference table. Against one of the room's walls stands a wooden sign. The gold lettering reads: "Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation." The sign used to stand outside the director's office when the Bureau was located in the Department of Justice across the street on Pennsylvania Avenue.

That was a more innocent time, when anyone could walk into the building without a security check. Now the director's office is in a secure wing, sealed off behind electronic doors with security cam and a keypad with a code. Even most Bureau execs — who must have a top secret clearance to enter the building in the first place — don't have access.

A New View of Terrorism

The FBI is changing the way it looks at terrorism, Mueller explains.

Instead of categorizing the problem by individual cases, the Bureau is focusing on threats. Using Jamaat al-Islamiya or Hezbollah as examples, Mueller says, "In the past, when you asked what's the presence of these groups in the United States, analysts would come in and say, ‘OK, we've got cases open down here and up in Detroit and in Chicago and the like, and that is the picture of Hezbollah.'"

While the Bureau targets individuals who may be dangerous, it is more focused on the networks these individuals operate within and their often hidden activities.

"What's most important is not what we know but what we don't know," Mueller says.

"What is the presence of Jamaat al-Islamiya? What is the presence of Hamas or Hezbollah?

"And if you don't know the presence, What are the gaps? And then fill those gaps with collectors, which are basically agents. It's an analytical approach, and it's a threat-driven approach, an intelligence-driven approach."

Those who advocate creating a new domestic counter-terrorism agency similar to Britain's MI5 don't recognize the value of having a law enforcement agency combined with one that uses intelligence to uncover threats, Mueller argues.

As outlined in an Aug. 21, 2006 NewsMax article, "An American MI5 Is the Wrong Approach," MI5 is envious of the FBI because, when an arrest must be made, it has to convince a police force that there is enough evidence to make the arrest.

"A critical difference I think people don't focus on between ourselves and the U.K. is the fact that the criminal justice system here disseminates intelligence by reason of its plea bargaining capability," Mueller says.

"If you look at what's happened in the U.K. over the last three or four years, it has arrested probably a hundred individuals in various terrorist operations, and of those hundred, maybe one or two have cooperated.

"And in almost every case that we've had in the United States, one or more have cooperated and given us the full picture of the cell. And that's intelligence."

A Presidential Briefing

Mueller briefs President Bush in person every Tuesday at the White House.

"He's interested in the same issue that he was interested in on Sept. 12, 2001," Mueller offers.

"What's the FBI and the rest of the law enforcement community doing in the United States to make certain that there will not be another September 11?

"He asks penetrating questions, the types of questions that one would hope that I and others would ask of our own people: not only how a particular case is developing, but what have we learned from a particular case?"

Mueller kept Bush informed, for example, on the FBI's 16-month investigation of a group allegedly plotting to attack Fort Dix and kill U.S. soldiers.

After the arrests, Bush wanted to know what had been done to assure that such military targets are protected and whether the FBI has focused on the possibility of similar groups attacking other targets.

In the Fort Dix case, five of the men who were arrested were born in Jordan, Turkey, and the former Yugoslavia. They were radical Islamists training at a shooting range to kill "as many soldiers as possible" at the Army base 25 miles east of Philadelphia, according to the charges against them.

A sixth man was charged with helping them obtain illegal weapons.

The investigation began with a tip from a store clerk who told police that one of the men brought in a video tape that he wanted copied to a DVD. The video showed the men firing assault weapons, calling for jihad, and yelling "God is great" in Arabic. The FBI then infiltrated the group using two paid informants.

"Before September 11, we would have been probably inclined to disrupt them earlier than we did," Mueller says. Instead, the Bureau waited to pounce on the Fort Dix group "to determine what ties they may have had to other individuals in the U.S. or overseas."

Mueller says the FBI made the arrests when the group began looking to buy weapons from sources other than the FBI informants.

"The fear being that if they purchased weapons from others and we did not know about it from our sources inside, they could undertake the terrorist attack without us knowing about it," Mueller says.

Critics routinely knock the FBI for either making terrorist arrests too soon or too late.

Last June, for example, the FBI arrested seven men in Miami for plotting to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago. Some wondered if the FBI rolled up the plot too early. Others claimed the men never could have pulled off the plot, dismissing the arrests as simply a Bureau publicity stunt.

"We exhausted every possibility for intelligence there," Mueller says defending the FBI's actions, adding, "And it's a substantial commitment involving thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars and man hours to conduct surveillance and make sure that there is not a terrorist attack."

"And if we let 'em walk, who is to say that two or three months down the road they don't go to somebody who actually will provide the weapons or the explosives or what have you and you've got a terrorist attack that we've walked away from? Can't do that," Mueller says. "I have no apologies whatsoever on the Miami case."

Mueller believes a vigorous counter-terrorist effort has been effective. The U.S. has not been attacked in almost six years and Administration insiders say that this due to the periodic arrests by the FBI and roll-ups of terrorists overseas by the CIA and foreign intelligence services.

National Security Letters

Mueller says the reason the FBI did not keep proper track of requests for national security letters is that no separate system had been set up to keep track of them.

National security letters are issued in international terrorism and espionage investigations. They are similar to grand jury subpoenas, which are normally issued at the direction of a prosecutor and allow the FBI, in criminal investigations, to obtain financial records and records of calls, e-mails, and Internet searches.

"What we did not have is a compliance program or a mechanism to test the procedures we put in place," Mueller says. "The biggest fix in my mind cuts across not just NSLs but across the organization," he said.

"We need a compliance entity that looks at the weak points in terms of our procedures, does red-cell testing of those procedures to see where the weaknesses are, and makes certain that the procedures are being followed."

Strangely, even when telephone companies or Internet providers gave the FBI information about the wrong person in response to an NSL, Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine still classified their error as an FBI deficiency.

Mueller brought that up with Fine, who insisted he was right to do so. In the end, Fine concluded, the FBI was entitled to the information it obtained in almost all cases he cited.

The FBI is constantly being accused of abuses, but does Mueller consider any actions by the FBI to have been abuses?

"In the wake of September 11, every individual who was detained was detained on valid charges," he says. "But those who were detained on immigration charges waited longer because we had to clear them of other charges. And in the future, I'd want to focus on more swiftly making that determination for those who are detained on immigration charges."

Mueller's biggest frustration is that, despite the calls for the FBI to act more like an intelligence organization, when it comes to its budget, the Bureau is still considered a law enforcement organization. For fiscal 2007, the budget is $6.1 billion, equal to the cost of a few Stealth bombers.

"The country wants us to build a domestic intelligence capacity, but it costs money," Mueller says. "And we are still perceived as being in the law enforcement community and not necessarily in the intelligence community."

Mueller says he has told National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell, "Just give me the rounding errors off of the intelligence budget, and I would be very happy."

Mueller doesn't smile often, mostly a pleasant half smile for emphasis. He does laugh, however, when he mentions his fantasy budget.

Pamela Kessler contributed to this article.
Reprinted from NewsMax.com


***

[Mary]

chicagotribune.com >> Nation/World
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cheney: Threat of Nuclear Attack in U.S. City 'Very Real'

By Mark Silva
Washington Bureau
Source of Article
Published April 16, 2007


WASHINGTON -- Vice President Dick Cheney, often called upon to deliver the administration's toughest talk about the wars abroad, now says this about the threat of terrorists detonating a nuclear bomb in an American city: "It's a very real threat. ... Something that we have to worry about and defeat every single day."

Cheney's warning about what's at stake for the U.S. in withdrawing from Iraq, delivered in a TV interview Sunday and coupled with a speech in Chicago on Friday and a war statement that President Bush plans to make Monday, is part of an escalating chorus of pressure that the White House hopes to exert on Democrats to approve a new war-spending bill.

Vowing to veto any spending bill that includes a timeline for withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq, which the Senate and House have approved in varying forms, the Bush administration believes it ultimately will win a "clean" bill -- predicting that Democratic leaders will buckle after Bush vetoes their bill.

"I'm willing to bet" the Democrats eventually will concede, Cheney said in an interview on CBS News' "Face the Nation" recorded the day before.

"If they don't have the votes to override the president's veto ... they will not leave the troops in the field without the resources they need to be able to carry out their mission," Cheney said. "There may be some people who are so irresponsible that they wouldn't support that, but I think the fact of the matter is that the majority of Democrats ... will in fact give us the bill that's absolutely essential."

Cheney, who accused Democratic leaders of reverting to an "early 1970s" sense of "abandonment and retreat" in his speech Friday, said in his CBS interview that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has taken an "irresponsible" stance in insisting upon attaching an autumn 2008 timeline for withdrawal to the war spending bill.

"He's done a complete 180 from where he was, in five months," Cheney said of Reid. "He cannot make the basic, fundamental decisions that have to be made, with respect to the nation's security, given everything that's at stake in the war on terror and what we're doing in Iraq and with 140,000 American troops in the field in Iraq, in combat, every day, and call that kind of rapid change in position anything other than irresponsible."


Reid hits back

Reid rejected the criticism.

"Vice President Cheney has long since lost credibility, so it should be no surprise that he would spend time this morning continuing to mislead us about the war in Iraq," Reid said in a statement released Sunday. "The American people know that the height of irresponsibility is to put this country at risk by mismanaging a war from day one, drawing our troops further into a civil war.

"Democrats are determined to make sure the troops have the funds they need," Reid said, maintaining that a timeline for withdrawal would force the Iraqis to take responsibility for the fight.

The administration's underlying argument for the combat in Iraq is that it is central to a global war against terrorism. And Bush has repeatedly attempted to attach the Iraq conflict to a threat of terrorism at home.

"I have told the American people often it is best to defeat them there, so we don't have to face them here," Bush said this month.

And it is an argument that Cheney made in the interview aired Sunday, a conversation between Cheney and host Bob Schieffer, who asked the vice president if he has changed in some fundamental way since taking office. What has happened, Cheney said, is "9/11."

Sept. 11 "did have, I think, a remarkable impact on the threat to the United States on what we were required to deal with as an administration," Cheney said.

'Greatest threat we face'

"The fact is that the threat to the United States now of a 9/11 occurring with a group of terrorists armed not with airline tickets and box cutters, but with a nuclear weapon in the middle of one of our own cities, is the greatest threat we face," he said. "It's a very real threat. It's something that we have to worry about and defeat every single day."

The administration has confronted questions about Bush's warnings about terrorists "following us home" if not defeated in Iraq, despite his assertion that security tactics have made the nation safer.

Asked about that, the president downplayed a specific threat. "I'm not going to predict to you the methodology they'll use," Bush said. "Just you need to know they want to hit us again.

"We spend a lot of time trying to protect this country," he said. "But if they were ever to have safe haven, it would make the efforts much harder. That's my point. We cannot let them have safe haven again."

Iraq will become that haven, Cheney said in the interview aired Sunday, if the U.S. withdraws without leaving an Iraqi government capable of sustaining and defending itself.

"There's a fundamental debate going on here, in terms of whether or not our objective in Iraq is to withdraw, or whether our objective in Iraq is to complete the mission," Cheney said. "And I think a majority of Americans would prefer the latter, if we can get it done."

Pressed about the suicide bombing in the Green Zone last week and death tolls across Iraq, Cheney insisted that the U.S. is making progress there.

"Of course it's hard," he said. "But it's absolutely essential that we get it right. There's an awful lot riding on it, not only in Iraq, but in terms of the efforts we're making in that part of the world to deal with this global war on terror."

***

[WiseButPoorOldMan (Ecclesiastes 9:13-16)]

Weapons of mass destruction a threat from desperate al-Qaeda
By Tom Allard
Source of Article
May 24, 2007

THE likelihood that al-Qaeda and its fellow travellers will use chemical, biological and radiological weapons is growing, a counterterrorism adviser to the White House believes.

"For terrorists, the likelihood of using these weapons grows because they believe that they can have very significant and corrosive psychological impacts on society," Georgetown University's Bruce Hoffman told the Herald. He pointed to al-Qaeda's long history of pursuing unconventional weapons and recent trends in Iraq.

"Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, before 9/11, was pursuing research and development programs, not just with chemical weapons, not just with biological weapons, not just with radiological, but across all three."

Documents obtained after the invasion of Afghanistan showed Osama bin Laden had two laboratories competing to "weaponise" anthrax, as well as revealing that al-Qaeda hosted two Pakistani nuclear scientists, he said.

The most likely form of an unconventional attack was a radiological or "dirty" bomb, Mr Hoffman said. Such weapons could more accurately be described as "weapons of mass disruption", but they would have a devastating effect if successfully used, spreading panic, forcing people from homes and businesses in the affected area and undermining public confidence in governments and public authorities.

In a city like New York or Sydney, the economic impact would be immense, he said.

Mr Hoffman cited the recent use in Iraq of chlorine bombs, which burn the lungs of victims, as an example of al-Qaeda's intent to use unconventional weapons. Moreover, it illustrated the disproportionate effect such weapons can have.

"There are an endless number of truck bombs that have killed in the hundreds but look at the reaction of Iraqis [to chlorine bombs]. They are absolutely panicked," he said.

Mr Hoffman has been brought to Australia by the NSW Police Force's counterterrorism command to "expand the horizons" of police officers, Assistant Commissioner Nick Kaldas said.

Mr Hoffman has also advised commanders in Iraq. He said the war "must be salvageable" but the conflict had given al-Qaeda time to regroup. The most notable trend in terrorism in recent times had been the re-emergence of the terrorist group as an organisation that was centrally planning spectacular attacks. The foiled plot to blow up 10 planes over the Atlantic last year was hatched by al-Qaeda commanders hiding on the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan, he said.

Al-Qaeda was weaker than before the September 11 attacks but "it's ironically more dangerous today because it's more desperate".

***

[WiseButPoorOldMan (Ecclesiastes 9:13-16)]

GROUPS: BIN LADEN PLANS VIDEO ON 9/11

AP Press release 9/6/07

Source of Article

CAIRO, Egypt - Terror mastermind Osama bin Laden plans a new video addressing the American people regarding the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, terror monitoring groups said Thursday.

SITE Intelligence Group said an Internet announcement of the plan included a photo of the al-Qaida leader from the upcoming video — his beard, which in previous messages had been streaked with gray, was entirely dark.

Intelcenter, which is based in Alexandria, Va., and also monitors Islamic Web sites, said the video was expected within the next 72 hours, or by Sunday. That would come before the sixth anniversary next Tuesday of the World Trade Center attack. The last bin Laden video was in October 2004, shortly before the U.S. presidential elections.

Rita Katz, director of the Washington-based SITE Institute, said bin Laden's beard appeared to have been dyed, which she said is a popular practice in the Middle East.

"I think it works for their benefit that he looks young, he looks healthy," Katz said of the new image.