Re: US, Khaddafy, and ObL
A more interesting question is, assuming that the US could have prevented 9-11 from happening, what happened in the national security state from 1998 to 2001 that led up to the conditions that allowed 9-11 to happen. Direct blowback theory: that Al Qaeda people infiltrated a covert operation--for example, preparations for a major campaign against Iraq was the trojan horse that allowed them into the US in numbers sufficient to pull off 9-11. The reason they went 'unnoticed' is that they were there for some other official reason--such as personnel with Egyptian or Saudi military getting ready for the post-Hussein Iraq. Indirect blowback theory: that the US military and intelligence establishment was so busy getting ready for the coming invasion of Iraq, that they forgot that OBL was in Afghanistan, capable of pulling off missions worldwide, and was at war with the US--with the US even bombing Afghanistan in 1999, remember? You can be sure that key figures in the Senate will not be telling us the truth about 9-11 if it is blowback from their anti-Hussein efforts. Interesting background reading, a Washington Post article that now covers history. CJ - February 26, 1998 C.I.A. Drafts Covert Plan to Topple Saddam By TIM WEINER WASHINGTON -- The CIA has drafted plans for a major program of sabotage and subversion against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, U.S. officials say. Four prior covert operations, involving everything from radio propaganda to paramilitary plots, have failed to dislodge the Iraqi leader, just as smart bombs, cruise missiles and stiff economic sanctions have failed. The CIA's new plan, months in the making, must still be approved by President Clinton. That approval is by no means certain, and some of his key advisers are skeptical of the plan. The debate over the need for new covert action has intensified in the last few weeks, with senior members of Congress openly calling for the CIA to destabilize Saddam. But some of the president's advisers consider the new plan no more likely to succeed than the agency's earlier efforts, and they are likely to argue against approving it, the officials said. The plan, still in the draft stage, has not yet been put into final form for a decision by the president. The fact that officials are disclosing it shows the depth of their doubts. The director of Central Intelligence, George Tenet, has told Clinton that the plan is risky, the officials said, and national security adviser Samuel Berger is skeptical of the CIA's ability to undermine Saddam. The plan calls for enlisting Kurdish and Shiite agents to destroy or damage key Iraqi pillars of economic and political power, like utility plants or government broadcast stations, the officials said. At the same time, the plan calls for increasing political pressure on Iraq through propaganda programs like a Radio Free Iraq broadcast to Baghdad. The plan aims to try to undermine Saddam by showing Iraqi citizens that he is not invincible, strengthening his opponents inside Iraq and trying to ignite a rebellion within his inner circle. This is not a propaganda operation, one senior government official said of the CIA's plan. This is a major campaign of sabotage. For the plan to go forward, the president must sign a written order, known as a finding. If it is approved as now conceived, it could become one of the biggest covert actions since the end of the Cold War, costing tens of millions of dollars a year, officials said. Since the Persian Gulf war in 1991, the agency has backed Kurdish dissidents in the north of Iraq, Shiite Muslim groups in the south, Iraqi exiles in London and Iraqi military defectors based in Jordan. These operations, which have cost about $100 million, have had little or no success. Most recently, in August 1996, Saddam sent tanks into northern Iraq to destroy a CIA base staffed by U.S. intelligence officers and Kurdish agents, arresting and executing scores of Kurds. But now influential senators -- notably John McCain, R-Ariz.; John Kerry, D-Mass.; and Arlen Specter, R-Pa., a former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee -- are calling on the agency once more. It may well be that a covert action or covert actions might succeed in deposing Saddam Hussein, Specter said Monday on the Senate floor. He said a covert action -- along with the establishment of an Iraqi government-in-exile, expansion of no flight zones to cover all of Iraq and a naval blockade -- could help bring Saddam Hussein to his knees. But the Iraqi opposition is fragmented, plagued by divisions, in the words of Wafiq Samoraei, a former head of Iraqi military intelligence based in London. It is lacking in sufficient support in Baghdad-controlled Iraq to be a significant factor in internal
Re: US, Khaddafy, and ObL
And then there is the alleged meetings between Atta and an Iraqi diplomat in Prague. The US government was real keen on the story when it was thought to show links between Hussein and Al Qaeda terrorists, but now they disavow the story. Funny though, the Czechs don't. What if Atta had indeed been working for the anti-Hussein covert ops? Then one mission he might have had in Prague would be to contact high ranking Iraqis to try and turn them to work against Hussein. There was a major defection from the Iraqi diplomatic mission to Prague. CJ -- UN envoy confirms terrorist meeting Kmonicek says Al-Ani, Atta spoke in Prague By Frank Griffiths FOR THE POST The Czech envoy to the UN has confirmed that an Iraqi agent met with suspected Sept. 11 hijacker Mohamed Atta, in the latest rebuke to widespread U.S. media reports dismissing the Prague encounter as a fabrication. The meeting took place, Hynek Kmonicek, a former deputy foreign minister, told The Prague Post flatly in a New York City interview. Czech Interior Minister Stanislav Gross announced last fall that Atta and Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani, a second consul at the Iraqi Embassy in Prague, had conversed at least once, in April 2001. Gross would not rule out other encounters. The controversial meeting became known as the Prague connection and was mentioned frequently as a possible pretext for renewed hostilities between the United States and Iraq. Al-Ani was expelled from the Czech Republic April 22, 2001 -- less than a month after the conversation -- for engaging in activities beyond his diplomatic duties, a phrase usually reserved for allegations of spying or terrorist-related activities. Kmonicek, the Czech Republic's UN envoy since October, is the most senior government official to openly confirm the encounter since unnamed U.S. intelligence officials began challenging it in anonymous comments reported last month by Newsweek magazine, The Washington Post and The New York Times. Kmonicek, considered a Middle East expert, once directed the Middle East department of the Foreign Ministry. In the interview, Kmonicek said he ordered al-Ani's expulsion after failing to receive answers from the Iraqi chief of mission regarding al-Ani's role in Prague. He didn't know [what al-Ani was up to], Kmonicek said. He just didn't know. Kmonicek refused to label al-Ani a spy, however. Last fall, international media widely reported that Atta, a 33-year-old Egyptian who allegedly piloted one of the hijacked Sept. 11 jetliners, and al-Ani had spoken in Prague -- though the subject of their meetings was never positively revealed. The rendezvous between the al-Qaida operative and the Iraqi intelligence agent was confirmed by Prime Minister Milos Zeman, who told CNN in October that the two men were scheming to destroy the headquarters of U.S.-funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Zeman later backtracked, saying he was describing only one possible scenario. In recent weeks, unnamed U.S. law enforcement and intelligence sources have been quoted as saying the Czechs may have made up the encounter or at the very least confused the dates. Although Atta flew from Prague to the United States in June 2000, the sources said that the Czech intelligence apparatus, the Security Information Service (BIS), had failed to convince them Atta and al-Ani ever came face to face. The Newsweek report hinted that the Czech government might actually have retracted the allegation and apologized to the United States for making the error. But Kmonicek, a government official with top security clearance, was adamant that al-Ani and Atta met in April 2001, as Czech officials have stated repeatedly. At the time [of the meeting] I was in Prague, he said. It's not like they [the Czech government] sent me a cable saying, 'Say this because you are our ambassador.' It's not like that. I was the person who had to [expel] al-Ani. Last October, in an interview with The Times of London, Kmonicek raised alarm bells about the possible significance of the meeting. It is not a common thing for an Iraqi diplomat to meet a student from a neighboring country, he said. He made similar remarks to Newsweek, which apparently did not seek him out when it reported the recent U.S. rebuttals. Atta was an architecture student and draftsman in Hamburg, Germany, during the 1990s. He is believed to have visited Prague at least twice in 2000 and 2001. One senior Czech official familiar with details of the Atta/al-Ani matter and who requested anonymity speculated that the media reports dismissing the meeting were the result of a guided leak. This source said officials determined to influence President George W. Bush away from entering into renewed conflict with Iraq could have provided such a leak. The Prague meeting has been mentioned as a possible smoking gun directly linking Baghdad with the Sept. 11 attacks, though Bush said as recently as May 28
Re: US, Khaddafy, and ObL
Michael Perelman asks: Does anyone know about this or is it just conspiracy fodder? http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/10/09/1034061258269.html The Age (Melbourne) October 10 2002 Media gag on alleged plot to kill Gaddafi By Paul Daley Mr Shayler - a 36-year-old former MI5 officer who is accused of disclosing government secrets to the media and in a book By bringing this charge, the British Government is in fact admitting the truth of the allegation London The British media have been gagged from reporting sensational courtroom evidence of former MI5 spy David Shayler, including his alleged proof that the British secret service paid $270,000 for al Qaeda terrorists to assassinate Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 1986. In its efforts to contain Mr Shayler's allegations to the privacy of the court, the government has even stopped the media from reporting its successful attempt to win a gag order. The decision by an Old Bailey judge to stop the media from reporting parts of Mr Shayler's evidence came on Monday after two senior ministers, David Blunkett and Jack Straw, signed Public Interest Immunity certificates. The certificates, which were submitted to the court, insisted that the media and the public leave the court if the activities of the security and intelligence agencies were raised by the defence. The then Labour opposition strenuously opposed the Tory government's use of the certificates during the arms-to-Iraq prosecution in the early '90s. Some guilty verdicts were subsequently overturned on appeal because the defence successfully argued that it had been deprived of relevant information. When such certificates are issued, it is standard practice for the judge to read the applications and publicly hear the arguments for and against a gagging order, before ruling. But in the case of Mr Shayler - a 36-year-old former MI5 officer who is accused of disclosing government secrets to the media and in a book - the government wanted the judge, Justice Alan Moses, to consider the application in private. The British media widely reported on Monday that lawyers acting for Mr Shayler had accused the government of trying to intimidate Justice Moses. But on Tuesday the newspapers - many of which had mounted their own legal case against the application of the certificates - reported simply that the court had heard legal arguments relating to Mr Shayler's trial. The judge ruled that they (the legal arguments) cannot be reported, The Guardian reported. Although Mr Shayler's jury trial is expected to begin next week in the Old Bailey, any evidence relating to sensitive security or intelligence matters will be kept private. After the judge's ruling on Monday, several articles detailing Mr Shayler's anticipated evidence - and the government's efforts to keep it secret - were withdrawn from newspaper websites across the country. It is believed the government successfully applied to have parts of the trial heard in camera. This applies to evidence on sensitive operational techniques of the security and intelligence services. It is also believed that the court agreed to keep the identities of MI5 agents secret and to allow them to give evidence from behind screens. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chico, CA 95929 530-898-5321 fax 530-898-5901
Re: Re: US, Khaddafy, and ObL
On 13/10/2002 1:54 PM, Shane Mage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mr Shayler - a 36-year-old former MI5 officer who is accused of disclosing government secrets to the media and in a book By bringing this charge, the British Government is in fact admitting the truth of the allegation Not necessarilly: Perhaps the allegations are embarassing rather than true. Perhaps they are false but the British Government does not wish to have a former official lend them credibility, or perhaps they are unsubstantiated but their release would indicate how MI5 goes about its business. In any case, ex-spies's oral testimony and government denials are not particularly trustworthy sources in my opinion. I'd use them for corroboration, but wouldn't stake an argument on them. Thiago - This mail sent through IMP: www-mail.usyd.edu.au
