Presumably to bolster its credibility in the face of doubts about terror alerts, the bush administration has revealed the name of a mole in pakistan, thereby throwing off important intelligence about the al-qaida network

Doubts still loom large as to whether the warnings ied by the u.S. Department of homeland security on sunday, 1. August, was the terror warning a sensible step or was it not mainly a result of political calculations?. In new york, washington and newark, the alert level was changed from elevated to high, since attacks against financial institutions are supposedly to be expected (code orange for new york, washington and newark). However, after doubts quickly arose and it became clear that the warnings were based on information that was largely three or four years old and predated the 11.9. Were coming from the united states, there may have been a misjudgment that must be embarrassing, especially for the bush administration.

Stupidity or yet another political coup?

Time in its current ie, despite the dubiousness of the information, focuses on the fear and fascination character of terrorism. The question it asks, namely if "we" catching them before they strike again could be tricky for the bush administration in the case it is trying to highlight as a particular success of the enlightenment

On monday, reporters from the new york times and the washington post were told by intelligence officials or other "officials" more information provided. Whether these were to confirm or undermine the suspicion of terrorism is hard to decide. Since apparently only one of the documents was recent and dated january 2004, it could be amed that the information leaked to the media was not necessarily what the bush administration wanted the public to know. But who knows what is being hatched in the strategic communications offices?? However, it still works, as demonstrated by the new ie of time, which wants to achieve a quota by scaring the americans.

However, in order to increase the threat probability and as a success of the anti-terrorist policy, it had already been announced that a key al-qaeda member had been arrested in pakistan on july 13, and this success eventually led to the arrest of ghailani, one of the most wanted al-qaeda terrorists, who was then appropriately presented at the democratic national convention (on-time delivery of a top terrorist ordered by the u.S. Government). Both arrests are also being hailed by the bush administration as proof that its policy on pakistan was correct and that the country is now a major player in the war on terrorism. It was pointed out that this 25-year-old named muhammad naeem noor khan was a representative of the "new al-qaeda", a well-traveled, well-educated, and computer-literate young man who speaks english fluently. From him, who acted as a sort of communications center "unusual concrete" the clues to terrorist targets that had been found on laptops and cd-roms had come from him.

Shortly thereafter, 12 suspected al-qaeda members were arrested in the united kingdom for allegedly plotting an attack on heathrow airport. Here, too, it remained uncertain how concrete the plans were and whether they were still up to date at all. Among those arrested was abu eisa al-hindi, who – as has so often been done to add significance – is said to be the head of british al-qaida and to have traveled to the u.S. In early 2001 to scout out targets for attacks such as financial institutions. He may have had other aides and may have been the author of the documents found in pakistan that led to the terrorist alert. Al-hindi is also said to be responsible for khalid shaikh mohammed, who in turn is said to be the "mastermind" for the 11.9. Is considered to have been an important link. It may also be strange that al-hindi has long been under observation by british security authorities on the basis of american tips.

However, as is almost natural in terrorism and intelligence news, there are other reports to form a close link between pakistan, the uk and the us. Khan, according to the telegraph, is said to be the one who carried out an attack with a "huge bomb" at heathrow. He had gone to the uk several times, most recently eight months ago, and had lived near the airport (with his aunt and grandmother in reading) and scouted it out. However, the telegraph reports that khan apparently worked with pakistani intelligence after his arrest and sent coded e-mails to other al-qaida members asking for their whereabouts in order to catch them.

So khan, as has now been confirmed by other reporters who have contacts with pakistani intelligence officials, was working as a double agent after his secret arrest-which he could do until the bush administration or "officials" whose arrest and identity were leaked to the media. Thus, the mole was exposed and useless. The hasty arrests in great britain can be explained against this background. They did not want to wait until those with whom khan had been in contact went into hiding. After khan was still emailing them on sunday and monday, they had to know, if they were following the news, that this was a traitor from their point of view, since he had been in captivity for several weeks already.

With the unmasking of khan, therefore, the latter became useless, and one of the most important sources of concrete information about the al-qaeda network, if not the most important one, dried up. He is rumored to have been in contact with people in the u.S. Who want to plan an attack before the presidential elections (which was also part of the terror warning ied by the u.S. Government, is now being discussed again by time, and is related to the possibility of postponing the elections). The question is, of course, why american intelligence officers or even members of the bush administration did this, after all, the lack of information from the al-qaeda circle was one of the intelligence agencies’ major shortcomings.

Still, the bush administration is trying to portray the arrests in pakistan and great britain as gross successes, but it will be hard to avoid keeping the embarrassing setback out of the grosser public eye. For the bush administration, two possible explanations for the blunder could prove to be extremely unpleasant. If the revelation was made only out of stupidity, then three years after the 11.9. The competence of the intelligence services, and with it the bush administration, which prides itself on progress in the fight against terrorism and many reforms, at least tarnished. But the revelation could of course have been made for political reasons, which would make the position of the bush administration even worse. If khan was sacrificed in order to make the terrorist warning more credible, then khan’s contacts, with whom he had communicated via websites and e-mails, were allowed to become even more cautious. In any case, the chance to penetrate the current core of at least part of the al-qaida network has been lost for the time being.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.