Mullah, May I?

In an article that leaves me virtually speechless, look what our British Cousins are going to try:

Police have agreed to consult a panel of Muslim leaders before mounting counter-terrorist raids or arrests. Members of the panel will offer their assessment of whether information police have on a suspect is too flimsy and will also consider the consequences on community relations of a raid.

Yep. It would appear that they are indeed planning to ask permission of the public or some portion of it, specifically linked to the special interest group which may be the target of said raid before going forward. OK, that’s unbelievable enough but the article continues:

Members will be security vetted and will have to promise not to reveal any intelligence they are shown. They will not have to sign the Official Secrets Act. [...] The idea came from the Metropolitan police and the Muslim Safety Forum (MSF), which works for better police-Muslim relations. It has been under discussion for two years and came to the top of the agenda after a police raid in Forest Gate, London, in June, in which a man was shot. Police were acting on a tip-off about a bomb. None was found.

I understand that tensions get heated when law enforcement acts on information which special interest groups do not favor. Either the intel "is not believable" or "doesn’t warrant the actions taken." But to ask permission of the special interest group, and only make them double-dog swear not to tell is beyond me.

Thank God, it seems to be "just" a pilot program:

The first panel, expected to consist of four people, will be set up initially in London. Tomorrow representatives from police forces across England and Wales will decide whether to make the scheme national.

Can we dare hope that the infamous British stiff upper lip will return, along with some sort of sanity?

As The Needle Bends

Technorati Tags: Life and Ramblings, Britain, Terror, Terrorism, Counter-terrorism, London, Muslim, Muslim Safety Forum, Official Secrets Act, Azad Ali, Sir Ian Blair

Reports of Bin Laden Death Likely Exaggerated

It was pretty difficult to read or hear anything else on the news sites and television on Saturday, September 23, besides the report in a regional French newspaper of Bin Laden’s supposed death from “a severe case of typhoid.” My reaction was much like that of Mark Vaile, Deputy Prime Minister of Australia, in the International Herald Tribune:

“It would be a great boost in the war against terror but it wouldn’t mean the war against terror is over,” Vaile told television’s Nine Network.

“The al-Qaida network is well established, we know that, and it’s going to be an ongoing battle,” he said.

The regional French newspaper l’Est Republicain printed a copy of a confidential document from the DGSE intelligence service on Saturday citing an uncorroborated report from a “usually reliable source” who said Saudi secret services were convinced that bin Laden had died.

Viewing the news of Bin Laden’s demise with the same skepticism I detected in Mr. Vaile’s statement, I started checking sources of generally reliable information and found this, at the Northeast Intelligence Network’s site:

You can’t believe all the news that’s originated from Saudi sources, printed in French newspapers, and broadcast on major news outlets throughout the U. S., Canada, and Europe.
That’s the word from Hamid Mir, Osama bin Laden’s official biographer and the only journalist to interview the elusive al Qaeda emir in the wake of 9/11.
[...]

In an exclusive release to the Northeast Intelligence Network and Canada Free Press, Mr. Mir called the report was “rubbish” and said that it represented “old wine in an new bottle,” an apparent allusion to Congressman Curt Weldon’s statement last March to The Philadelphia Inquirer that bin Laden had died in Iran.

Mir maintains that bin Laden is alive, well, and living the lawless frontier of Pakistan. He says that the al Qaeda leader completed his plans for an “American Hiroshima” – - a nuclear attack on major metropolitan areas throughout the U. S. and has gained the approval of some Muslim scholars to kill millions of American civilians.

That’s kinda what I figured. No offense to anyone but if we are unable to locate a live Bin Laden accurately, then how in the world are we to believe that the French equivalent of the Conroe Courier was able to verify a report of his death? Actually, I suppose that we weren’t suppose to believe the report was verified, because while virtually every news outlet in the world hopped on the bandwagon to report the report of his death, none that I read ever said that they had in anyway verified anything.

The article at Northeast Intelligence Network went on to state:

Mir says that Adnan el Shukrijumah, the al Qaeda agent who has been singled out by bin Laden to commandeer the American Hiroshima, has been given orders “to increase the level and the scope” of the attack.

Last week, Abu Dawood, the leader of al Qaeda in Afghanistan, warned U. S. Muslims that they must leave the U. S. without further warning.

As I stated in my last entry, I very likely will NOT start building a fallout shelter. However, this report, in addition to those about which I wrote last week,  was enough to prompt a family review of plans made after September 11, 2001 as to what we would do, and where we would meet, if we were in separate locations if something like a dirty bomb were to be detonated. No reason for panic – but preparedness, in today’s uncertain world, is not only a healthy reaction – it is a logical one.

As The Needle Bends

Technorati Tags: Life and Ramblings, Osama Bin Laden, Hamid Mir, Mark Vaile, Al-Qaida, L’Est Republicain, Northeast Intelligence Network, Canada Free Press, Curt Weldon, The Philadelphia Inquirer, Fallout shelter, Dirty bomb, Adnan el Shukrijumah, Abu Dawood, American Hiroshima