Timing of U.K. arrests raises eyebrows

August 14, 2006

The initial charge from many Bush critics last week was that the arrests of suspected terrorists by British officials may have been timed for political purposes. The GOP, on the heels of the Connecticut Senate primary, wanted to aggressively push the argument that the Dems were somehow “weak” on national security, and they wanted to use the hijacking plot to bolster their case. (The argument was nonsensical, but that’s not the point.)

I don’t expect much from the Bush gang, but I found the argument a little far fetched. That is, until this NBC News report.

NBC News has learned that U.S. and British authorities had a significant disagreement over when to move in on the suspects in the alleged plot to bring down trans-Atlantic airliners bound for the United States.

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.

Now, it’s possible the Bush administration believed it was wise not to take any chances. Even if intelligence showed the plot wasn’t going to be executed in the immediate future, perhaps U.S. officials urged the British to apprehend the suspects quickly, before the alleged terrorists could get away, change their plans, identify a leak, etc.

And then, of course, there’s the other explanation.

Maybe British officials wanted to wait to glean even more valuable information about the suspects’ contacts, funding sources, and future plans, but faced resistance from their American counterparts who saw a partisan political opportunity to seize.

Paul Krugman seems to be leaning in one direction.

More fecklessness, and maybe more cynicism, too: NBC reports that there was a dispute between the British and the Americans over when to make arrests in the latest plot. Since the alleged plotters weren’t ready to go — they hadn’t purchased airline tickets, and some didn’t even have passports yet — British officials wanted to watch and wait, hoping to gather more evidence. But according to NBC, the Americans insisted on early arrests.

Suspicions that the Bush administration might have had political motives in wanting the arrests made prematurely are fed by memories of events two years ago: the Department of Homeland Security declared a terror alert just after the Democratic National Convention, shifting the spotlight away from John Kerry — and, according to Pakistani intelligence officials, blowing the cover of a mole inside Al Qaeda.

As a rule, cynicism is frequently rewarded by the Bush White House.

This is getting tiresome. Another “breaking story” is the arrest of some Palestinian-Americans for the purchase of 1000 disposable cellphones. This is not the first time such arrests were made. Back in January, when BushCo was in the middle of defending its domestic spying program, similar arrests were made.

Here is my suggestion to the MSM: how about a little follow-up on the arrests reported in January. Anyone want to bet that nothing came of them?

  • It’s hard to believe that the Bush regime would manipulate national security to effect a Dem party primary. A national election, sure – but a Dem primary? But after the sheer hysteria that greeted Lieberman’s loss, I really do wonder.
    I’d like to know how long they bickered with England over the timing, and when they originally wanted the arrests made.

  • For me this confirms, once again, that they are far more craven and unscruprulous than we could ever give them credit for. Although the timing makes little sense, the only thing it did was take the media’s roving eye away from all the (excessive) Lieberman-Lamont coverage.

    Or maybe it was just a different kind of dry run of their own– weekend polls show that Bush got a 5 point “terrorism bump.” The GOP’s real motto should be “We Win Elections By Keeping ‘Em Rattled.”

  • Two thoughts- 1) given the receny outbreak of the GOP kissing Lieberman’s pinky ring would an arrest on the eve on the election been better so he would hve won the primary? I suppose you cannot openly support a Democrat if there is a Republican in the race but you can support an independent. 2) At what point does the fact that acts of terrorism and plots are increasing under Bush become a waekness and not a stregnth? If the Dems were in power you know Rove would be smearing innocent blood on every Democrat eacj time a bomb exploded.

    BONUS THOUGHT! B) Shouldn’t the Brits be in charge of arresting terroriats in their own country? They have much more anti-terrorism experience than we do. Why would Blair allow Bush to decide when it was right to arrest plotters?

  • I’ve heard that the British can’t stand to share any information with the US just because of the administration’s need to hurry up and do something with it. Everything is a biggie to these yahoos!

    It’s no wonder we are ‘losing the war’ ……JEEZ

  • rege:

    “Here is my suggestion to the MSM: how about a little follow-up on the arrests reported in January. Anyone want to bet that nothing came of them?”

    All bets are off.

    However here is a counteroffer:

    How much do you want to bet that the Republican think tanks of the 80s and 90s realized that a quick way to seize control of the media was to seize control of its headlines?

    “Seize the day” became “Seize the day’s headlines.” Better yet, was this deeply cynical understanding: The lack of follow up on nearly ALL news stories will render false headlines into hard truths… You could count on people NOT to know the “rest of the story.” Thus for most Americans… Saddam clearly had WMD–ipso facto–the headlines themselves…

    Of course… now that the headlines… or if you will… the sharp edge of human gossip/communication has shifted to the internet… well… they’ve got to figure out a way to extend eyeball control to that domain too.

    They are working on it in their think tanks right now…
    Sotto voce…

    Wanna bet?

  • I don’t know why but, when I started reading this, the opening scene from “Gladiator” flashed through my mind. The Roman army was about to begin another massive attack on (in this case) fierce German warriors shouting defiance. The Romans disposed of the Germans methodically, as if it were just another day at the office. Their skill was killing, and they demonstrated it ruthlessly for centuries.

    In that context I pictured members of the GOP Lie Machine coming to work in the morning. Oh well, another day in the White House. What do we have to lie about today? Orange alert? Okay, been there, done that. Outing an agent? Unpassported “terrorists”? Okay, etc. Sure wish we could do something that mattered for once (this last thought kept sotto voce, of course). Yawn. Okay, bingo … launch the report the Brits begged us not to.

  • I read something over the weekend that talked about the US’s techniques vs. the British techniques. The UK tends to work slowly on these things, gathering evidence and watching patiently, whereas the US likes to move quickly as soon as they see something. I think Jose Padilla is a good example of this in the US – he had virtually nothing, and was not a threat to anyone, but instead of waiting to see what he was up to, or following him, perhaps to find more people, they grabbed him up and got the quick score. Waiting may or may not have helped. Now, in the case of (say) Massauoi (sp?) waiting would not have been good either, although in the case of the UK, they knew who the people were and were following them carefully.

    One thing to remember is that the US knew very little of this, and had very little involvement, so anyone who tells you your phone is tapped so they can find people in the UK is wrong.

  • The US seems to hacve this mad urge to show some immediate bottom line profit for the quarterly report: ie get them budding terrorists…whereas the Brits work on building a company from the ground up: ie, lets get all the info we need in order to get the whole plotting network in hand.

    I woouldn’t want to hazard a guess as to which group has the more respect worldwide: the CIA or MI5

  • They have much more anti-terrorism experience than we do. Why would Blair allow Bush to decide when it was right to arrest plotters? -MNProgressive

    Of course, don’t forget we’re talking about the same people who recently gunned down an innocent bystander because he had brown skin and a backpack. Mistakes we’re made.

    I started off listening to these headlines last week with a healthy (read heaping) dose of skepticism and it’s only grown steadily since. This post just piled on another spoonful.

    One question I want answered: how powerful is a “bomb” made from a sports drink and an iPod really going to be? Would it have taken gallons and gallons to destroy a plane or would they have just ended up damaging a few seats in a vain attempt?

    I can easily picture these guys sitting around making shit up about what to pretend to use next just to see if they can get people to overreact. “Okay, we got liquids banned….um, let’s tell them the next one will be made from pants! No more pants on planes! Hahaha.”

    Sigh.

  • I am no expert – but wouldn’t getting a passport and applying for a visa to travel to the US be an important indicator of when the attack was to occur?

  • Carol (#11) – Excellent point about our “short-term bottom-line” urges. In a younger nation it could describe the rootless enjoyment of a frontier experience, naive exuberance, or idealistic utopianism. Now it’s more like a near-geezer trying to dress like a teenager and thinking nobody’ll notice the liver spots.

  • I’m not too sure about this. There are reports that Pakistan arrested a conspirator unexpectedly, and that triggered a “go” order to the British group, which made Britain move faster than they were planning. We do know Pakistan did arrest some people b/4 Britain did, so this story seems believable. The U.S. may have been pressuring, but events may have made it academic anyway.

  • One thing that we should have all learned from the Bush admin and Repubs is that the truth never has mattered to them. Anyone with an ounce of knowledge should know by now that anything this WH says is a LIE or at the very most a half truth. I would imagine that most of the people that even were the least bit concerned by last weeks bust were those traveling for the weekend on a plane. If Bush Co told me a bomb was under my desk set to blow in 5 seconds I would have to look for myself. The sooner the american people get rid of the gang that can’t shoot straight the better and safer the good ole USA will be.

  • At this point, I don’t see the US desire move to arrests more quickly as a political move — although they made the whole affair a political issue afterwards. At least for now, I’m willing to accept that the difference between British and US methods is a matter of style. Determining the best time to move on these things are tough calls. All that aside, there does seem to be conflicting info as to just how close these guys were to operationalizing their plans.

  • “We do know Pakistan did arrest some people b/4 Britain did, so this story seems believable. The U.S. may have been pressuring, but events may have made it academic anyway.” – Brian

    And it may be that the Bushites, unable to pressure the Brits into moving to their timetable, talked the Pakistanis into breaking the plot early before the Brits wanted to.

    As for the possibility of U.S. wiretapping. It could (and I believe reported that it was) have been done legally under FISA because it would not have been hard to get a warrant. Therefore the ‘warrantless’ wiretapping program would not apply.

  • Perhaps the Cheney administration needed a WELL TIMED event to change the narrative and keep the proles in line. Cable news has been telling us all weekend that we MAY have all died, at least that’s the theme from the American versions of Pravda. Faux spews has been foaming at the mouth like rabid dogs.
    But the fact remains, the alleged attack wasn’t imminent, OUR government pressured the British(for political reasons) and now the Fox “news” watching sheeple are convinced that without Bush and his rubber stamp congress WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE……unless we give them free reign to shred the constitution. The real message is….vote Democratic, and DIE!!!!!!! And our “free press” falls in line again. Welcome to the Rovian/Cheney vision of Amerika.

  • One question I want answered: how powerful is a “bomb” made from a sports drink and an iPod really going to be? Would it have taken gallons and gallons to destroy a plane or would they have just ended up damaging a few seats in a vain attempt?

    12 to 16 oz of explosives smuggled in a radio brought down a 747 (Pan Am 103 — Lockerbie).

    I realize there is probably a big difference between plastic explosives and liquid, but it only took a small rupture in the fuselage to set off the chain reaction that destroyed the plane over Scotland. Altitude, air pressure and high speed were just as important as the explosion in bringing down the plane.

    I learned all of this here.

  • One cannot be too cynical about this administration, a lesson many are having a hard time learning.

  • I think Lance nails it. The arrest in Pakistan by Pakistanis didnt happen by accident. The US (or maybe I should say Cheney and Addington) most likely realized they couldnt directly twist the Brits arms, but they know they have much more leverage with Pakistan. What would be Pakistans incentive to bust that guy at just this time? How much did Pakistan communicate with the Brits? Too many unknowns here, but it smells fishy, or should I say Bushy?

  • I have no doubt whatsoever that the Bush crowd pressured the U.K. to make the arrests to serve its political agenda. Lamont’s victory over Lieberman has sent a strong message to the WH and the GOP that voters are very angry and that they want change. The powers-that-be are running very scared that the Democrats will retake control in November and start investigating and exposing the nefarious deeds of the Bush WH.

    If you doubt for one second that this was not politically motivated, then you are not cynical enough. This Administration is totally devoid of integrity, shame, and moral compass. Anthing goes as long as it keeps it in power.

  • 12 to 16 oz of explosives smuggled in a radio brought down a 747 (Pan Am 103 — Lockerbie). -Mr Furious

    Thanks for the link Mr Furious. Still, I’m cynical about a “bomb” that inlcudes a sports drink at an ingredient, unless it’s an o-bomb (Bacardi O and Red Bull). Mmmm.

    🙂

  • Curiouser and curiouser, it seems. Last week, we were receiving news straight from London, in which the spokespersons for the London Police Department acknowledged that the decision to make the arrests was based on intelligence from Pakistan that indicated this was moving into the “execution” phase.

    Now, we find ourselves being told by “some official” that there was a bit of a tiff between the Brits and the US over when to make the arrests? I keep looking at what was said—and how it was said, and by whom it was said—last week, then looking at what’s being said today—by people who were nowhere near this investigation, and by “un-named senior sources.” In the end, what I’m seeing today is comparable to the iceberg taking credit for all the Titanic passengers who survived. The GOP can’t use it against the Dems, and they can’t use it for themselves….

  • Plese forward this information to old george will, since he was anticipating some blog would make these charges.
    Iraq is a catastrophic foreign policy debacle. Bush idiocy, his inestimable incompetence, has alienated us from our allies and generated hatred among Muslims across the world. He has weakened our military, forcing our troops into an extended occupation in the midst of a growing civil war for which they have neither appetite nor training. He has created a recruiting boon for al-Qaida. He has sorely weakened our foreign policy influence, as demonstrated graphically in the current conflict in Lebanon. He has cost nearly 2,700 American lives, over 20,000 Americans wounded — and an estimated 150,000 Iraqi deaths. He has compromised our budget priorities, spending about $400 billion on this ill advised war already — with the estimated cost likely to exceed $1 trillion. The budget is a statement of our moral choices — and this is a deeply immoral choice. You cannot resurrect a proverbial dead conservative elephant by beating it. Hell, can we cut and run from this Bush idiocy?

  • As did others, I have been trawling through various info sources over the weekend (with the result that I now don’t remember where I’d read what). But somewhere — possibly Guardian? — I read that Brits did move into the arrest mode faster than they’d intended and that the spur were the arrests in Pakistan.

    But the rationale given was not that they (UK) feared the Pakistani arrests would blow the lid off the UK’s proceedings. What they feared was the US intervention and the possibility of their suspects being “rendered” to god knows where, for god knows how long. So they moved to prevent that.

    Of course, if I had read it in Guardian… It’s a “lefty” paper and, possibly, their “un-named official”, might have been hand-picked to bolster their preconceived POV

  • As some blogger – Theresa Nielsen Hayden? – said a while ago, I resent the way this administration has made me into a conspiracy theorist.

    • Comments are closed.