Sunday, August 13, 2006

Terror arrests timed under US pressure?

MSNBC:
A senior British official knowledgeable about the case said British police were planning to continue to run surveillance for at least another week to try to obtain more evidence, while American officials pressured them to arrest the suspects sooner. The official spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the case.

In contrast to previous reports, the official suggested an attack was not imminent, saying the suspects had not yet purchased any airline tickets. In fact, some did not even have passports.
(via)

Massive disruption to our travel industry, terror alert to "critical", airports at a standstill. Why? Because the US intelligence community wanted to arrest people early when there is no immediate threat.
The British official said the Americans also argued over the timing of the arrest of suspected ringleader ***** in Pakistan, warning that if he was not taken into custody immediately, the U.S. would "render" him or pressure the Pakistani government to arrest him.

British security was concerned that ***** be taken into custody "in circumstances where there was due process," according to the official, so that he could be tried in British courts. Ultimately, this official says, ***** was arrested over the objections of the British.
So, that could even cover arrested without due process and with the possibilty that a trial may not now be possible. I've deleted his name from the US based report as UK law is very strict about possibilities of prejudicing a trial.

I'm at work (see disruption to travel industry, above), so no analysis. Not sure I can be coherent about this one at the moment anyway.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Err. Is that his name in the 1st line of the 2nd paragraph? 

Posted by Dave Petterson

Anonymous said...

Ah, yes. However, his name has also now been published by the Independet, amongst others, so perhaps my concerns were misplaced. I'll edit it later, thanks - was exhausted when posting that. 

Posted by MatGB

Anonymous said...

what confuses me is that the British media tries to play down terrorism and the threat of terrorism at home.... witness the nedless news reports of people saying those arrested are just normal guys.... though worryingly, they then add the epitaph of serial killers everywhere, by adding "they kept themselves to themselves."

Yet when discussing events overseas, they ramp up the odds to make things seem far worse than they are....
http://www.blogcharm.com/eeore/43070/Reuters+and+the+BBC..+who+next%3F.html

Is it any wonder that the public are confused? 

Posted by eeore

eeore said...

the above comment was by me btw

jeremy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
jeremy said...

why does America torture a man for 23 years? I thought America was fair and equal Democracy?, in Irvine, California Usa. a American man was held hostage by the Irvine police and local government, in a high class hotel, for 8 years. with out making it obvious, they had used his mom to feed him, and to make it look like everything was okay. their victim was not allowed to work or hold employment for himself. he was given some jobs, but later scammed and fired, for strange reasons. their victim also was not allowed to have any kind of social attention, or any friends. their victim was only allowed to be scapegoated and humiliated in public.(Social economic) torture. this man was given different kinds of torture treatments for strange reasons by the rich and powerful. the city was suppose to be some kind of prison. someone rich and powerful wanted him in prison, but he didn`t want to go. so they made the whole city a prison for their victim, for 8 years. their victim ( D____s M____n) was not allowed to work, and was not allowed to have a woman or family, and not allowed any friends, for 8 years. I think the city of Irvine, California. USA. needs to stop making the decision, to design a city for social economic torture on its citizens of America.