Rawstory: Al Qaeda bragged of infiltrating Emirates government

[Coexist]

http://rawstory.com/news/2006/Al_Qaeda_bragged_of_infiltrating_Emirates_0302.html

<snip>
Al Qaeda bragged of infiltrating the United Arab Emirates government, according to a 2002 letter posted on a U.S. military site and discovered by ThinkProgress.

In the letter, dated in May or June of 2002 and translated by the U.S., al Qaeda declares that the Emirates is "committing acts of injustice" in order to "appease the Americans' wishes which include: spying, persecution and detainment." In return, the group says they have infiltrated the Emirate government. The letter can be seen here.

"You are well aware that we have infiltrated your security, censorship and moetary agencies along with other agencies that should not be mentioned," the authors write. "Therefore, we warn of the continuation of practicing such policies, which do not serve your interests and will only cost you many problems that will place you in an embarrassing state before your citizens."

<snip>
Another assessment by the General Accountability Office -- which has received scant attention -- concluded that the Committee for Foreign Investment, the arm of the Treasury Department that approves such deals, could not possibly conduct a thorough intelligence review in 30 days. It adds that the U.S. has put pressure for the reviews to be conducted faster.

[Coexist]

1. Lawmaker: Port deal never probed for terror ties

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/01/port.security/index.html
<snip>
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A review of a United Arab Emirates-owned company's plan to take over a portion of operations at key U.S. ports never looked into whether the company had ties to al Qaeda or other terrorists, a key Republican lawmaker told CNN on Wednesday.

Rep. Peter King of New York, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said officials from the Homeland Security and Treasury departments told him weeks ago that their 30-day review of the deal did not look into the question of links between DP World and al Qaeda.

King said the officials told him after he asked about investigation into possible terrorist ties: "Congressman, you don't understand, we don't conduct a thorough investigation. We just ask the intel director if there is anything on file, and he said no."

"There was no real investigation conducted during the 30-day period," King, who has been a vocal critic of the deal, told CNN. "I can't emphasize this enough,"

[Coexist]

2. Bin Laden's operatives still using freewheeling Dubai

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-09-02-terror-dubai_x.htm

Posted 9/2/2004 2:02 PM

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Osama bin Laden's operatives still use this freewheeling city as a logistical hub three years after more than half the Sept. 11 hijackers flew directly from Dubai to the United States in the final preparatory stages for the attack.

The recent arrest of an alleged top al-Qaeda combat coach is the latest sign that suspected members of the terrorist organization are among those who take advantage of travel rules that allow easy entry. Citizens of neighboring Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia can come to Dubai without visas, which other nationalities can get at the country's ports of entry.

<snip>
While the Emirates has taken concrete steps to fight terrorism since Sept. 11, 2001 — including making high-profile arrests, passing an anti-money laundering law, and imposing close monitoring procedures on charity organizations — the characteristics that make it an ideal place for legitimate business also attract militants and others with suspect motives.

<snip>
Dubai still "plays a key role for al-Qaeda as a through-point and a money transfer location," Kohlmann said, although he also noted the country could be working to combat such activity with "an aggressive but low-profile intelligence strategy."

[benburch]

3. K&R. nt

[Coexist]

4. Al Qaeda's Road Paved With Gold

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A22303-2002Feb16?language=printer

Secret Shipments Traced Through a Lax System In United Arab Emirates

By Douglas Farah
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, February 17, 2002; Page A01

Exempt from international reporting requirements for financial transactions, gold is a favored commodity in laundering money from drug trafficking, organized crime and terrorist activities, U.S. officials said. In addition, Dubai, one of seven sheikdoms that make up the United Arab Emirates, has one of the world's largest and least regulated gold markets, making it an ideal place to hide.

Dubai is also one of the region's most open banking centers and is the commercial capital of the United Arab Emirates, one of three countries that maintained diplomatic relations with the Taliban until shortly after Sept. 11. Sitting at a strategic crossroad of the Persian Gulf, South Asia and Africa, Dubai has long been a financial hub for Islamic militant groups. Much of the $500,000 used to fund the Sept. 11 attacks came through Dubai, investigators believe.

<snip>
Pakistani financial authorities said that $2 million to $3 million a day is usually hand-carried by couriers from Karachi, Pakistan, to Dubai, mostly to buy gold. Late last year that amount increased significantly as money was moved out of Afghanistan, they said. Pakistani and U.S. officials estimate that about $10 million from Afghanistan was taken out by courier over three weeks in late November and early December. The Taliban fled Kabul, the capital, late on Nov. 12 and abandoned Kandahar on Dec. 7.

One of the couriers of cash and gold to Dubai was the Taliban consul general in Karachi, Kaka Zada, who took at least one shipment of $600,000 to Dubai in the last week of November, according to two Pakistani sources who witnessed him carrying the money.

... who was saying that Dubai has been on our side since 9/11???

[KittyWampus]

5. Now there's a real monkey wrench into the BFEE system

Leslie Blitzer's staff is furiously searching for an appropriate talking head to rebute this FACT. They might have to call Rove and request he provide one suitable.

[Coexist]

6. when I started researching this, I was amazed at all the articles

that were out there.

I chose the best of these - honestly - I wish I could snip more than four paragraphs - I know a lot of people just read the snips and don't go to the article.

They are pretty damning.

[KittyWampus]

7. you are doing an exemplary job too! Thank You

:thumbsup:

[Coexist]

8. Bush on terrorists" "The people who feed them will be held accountable"

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/17/bush.powell.terrorism/

<snip>
The people who think they can provide them safe havens will be held accountable. The people who feed them will be held accountable.

...that would include Dubia and the UAE, right??!

[Coexist]

9. "they are equally guilty of murder"

http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/fs/54395.htm

<snip>
"The United States makes no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and harbor terrorists, because they are equally guilty of murder."



...Have I made the case yet, that Dubai supports terrorists??

[Wordie]

10. Story broken by NY Post on 2-25, BUT letter is not confirmed as genuine!

Here's a link to the NY Post article:
http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/64126.htm

The article also says this:
"Little is known about the origins or authorship of the message."

So, there's no confirmation that the letter is real! Doesn't it seem to you that if it was real that the experts would have been able to verify it by now??? Is there any mention of results of analysis or even that an analysis was done??? The letter was written in 2002, and nothing has happened to the UAE in all the time since, so that leads me to think it's probably a ruse.

We need to be careful not to take information that is unverified and spread it around as if it were, imho. In order to form accurate opinions about the issues, accurate information is crucial.

...and I also just happened to observe that if it was true, and the letter could be verified as really having come from al Qaida, doesn't it suggest that the UAE is on our side, and that ObL and al Qaida are common enemies of both our countries? After all, in the letter, al Qaida is threatening the UAE! That would kinda undermine the truth of all the stories we see about the UAE having "ties to terror," and other such nonsense.

[Coexist]

12. NOT confirmed false either; it was "captured by U.S.forces"

http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/64126.htm
<snip>
The document was among a batch of internal al Qaeda communications captured by U.S. forces in the war on terror.

They were declassified and released earlier this month by the Center for Combating Terrorism at West Point.

"If it's real, the document shows that the UAE really is trying to cooperate with the U.S. in the war on terrorism, because they were being threatened by al Qaeda," said terrorism expert Lorenzo Vidino.


... I don't see this article as doing anything but raising some questions. If if was false, why would they release it?

But, if they did allow their organization to be infiltrated, friend or not - they carry risk with them, don't they?

<snip>
"But it also reveals that even though they are our friends, al Qaeda seems to have people on the inside in the UAE, just as it has in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Qatar and Kuwait."

[Wordie]

13. To say that the letter "hasn't been proved false" is just not enough!

The problem is, many aren't making the distinction. I even heard a US Representative yesterday bring it up as if it were 100% accurate, in the debate on the House floor!!!

And the OP, and perhaps some of the online stories on this aren't as even-handed as the NY Post article (Yikes! Imagine being LESS accurate and even-handed than the NY Post!), and don't even mention that the accuracy and source of the document haven't been confirmed.

Don't you remember that false "Niger yellowcake" forged documents are what justified the Iraq war? Hasn't it occured to you that a similar trick may be at play here? That this could just be an effort to smear the UAE? I want no part it. To say they haven't been established as false isn't really relevant. If they haven't been established as TRUE, then that caveat needs to be front and center in any discussion of them, imho. Otherwise, we risk just adding more to the tons of bullshit information floating around about the UAE, and making an analysis of the deal on its actual merits just that harder to achieve.

[Coexist]

15. Okay - but the Post is the only one questioning authenticity

on its home site, the West Point site, they do not question its authenticity. I cannot find anyone else questioning this. Would this not be accompanied by a disclaimer if it was NOT authentic? Serious question. I am not an investigative journalist.

The Post is not quite top notch journalism to me.

http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?action=detail&pk=SCHRAM-02-28-06
<snip>

This document was not exactly a tip top government secret. U.S. officials could find and read it (in its original Arabic or English translation) in the files of various government counter-terrorism agencies. But you can find and read it too. Just check out the Web site of the Combating Terrorism Center at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and peruse the list of unclassified documents.

[Wordie]

17. OK...now you've got me curious, FLDem5...

Since it is a scholarly institution, could it be that it is made available just so scholars can take a look at it in order authenticate it? I searched around the West Point site a bit, and couldn't really find anything about it at all. Do you have a link to the page on which you found it? I was able to get the article itself by clicking on a link in the Think Progress article, but it was a pdf download, and didn't take me to the actual West Point site. I had to google to find it. I'm not really certain exactly how a research institution like the West Point site would handle the issue of authentication. It's a very good question.

I completely agree that that Post isn't exactly the creme de la creme of responsible journalism; that's why when DU first had posts citing that article, back on the 25th of Feb., I was so annoyed that it seemed the Post had buried the qualifying statements about the letter not being authenticated further down in the article, while giving it a splashy, fear-instilling headline. I'm just a little concerned that the later articles about the letter purported to be from al Qaida may have grabbed the Post's headline, and just omitted the caveat, although it would surprise me for Think Progress to do that. One thing that does seem odd is that Think Progress says that the Scripps Howard article about the letter was the first published(on Feb. 28), but the NY Post was actually several days earlier (on Feb. 24). Whether there is any significance in that I just don't know.

It also seems to me that given the Post's reputation, they would be unlikely to add on their own anything that might reduce the shock value of their article, which the bit about no authentication did do. The Post would be more inclined to leave something like that out, rather than add it. So, I'm still more inclined to think it hasn't been authenticated, because of that.

And there is also the possibility that the letter was really from al Qaida, but wasn't true. The "infiltration" part could have been just a threat. Since nothing has apparently happened in the nearly four years since it was written (and I'm just presuming that the UAE did not accede to the demands to release al Qaida prisoners), it seems to argue against the idea that the UAE was infiltrated. Or, maybe it had been at one time, but the UAE took steps in the interim to weed out any possible infiltrators.

But your comments about not finding any disclaimers sure do give me a bit of pause, too. I'm hardly an investigative journalist either. It really has me curious now... I wonder what the best way of tracking down a bit of info like that would be...

[Coexist]

18. the letter is an addendum to a report entitled:

Harmony and Disharmony:
Exploiting Al-Qa'ida's Organizational Vulnerabilities
http://www.ctc.usma.edu/aq.asp

It is simply listed as a released document - as if it is indeed fact.

http://www.ctc.usma.edu/aq_603856.asp

(in Arabic)
http://www.ctc.usma.edu/aq/AFGP-2002-603856-Orig.pdf

(English translation)
http://www.ctc.usma.edu/aq/AFGP-2002-603856-Trans.pdf

What do you think??

[Wordie]

19. Well, I did find this...

The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and not of the U.S. Military Academy, the Department of the Army, or any other agency of the U.S. Government.

http://www.ctc.usma.edu/aq_exsum.asp

The statement is at the bottom of the Executive Summary. So, they say the study was: conducted by the faculty and research fellows of the Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) at West Point, serves multiple purposes, the most important of which is contributing to the depth of knowledge about the al-Qa’ida movement.

That doesn't give us anything concrete, but I'm still digging around...

On edit: Well, I didn't find anything that definitively says one way or another. One does certainly get the impression that those who posted the documents certainly believe they are authentic, but there isn't anything mentioned about any process of authentication, either by the West Point center, or by the intelligence people from whom they recieved the documents.

On second thought, I did notice this:

Doc ID: AFGP-2002-603856
Date: 14/May/June 2002 (sic)
Author: Al-Jihad Qa’ida Organization
Length: 2 pages
Title: Get the Idolaters out of Arab Island (Gulf Countries)
Full Text: English Arabic

Back to Document List

Synopsis: A warning to the officials of the United Arab Emirates to stop detaining Mujahideen sympathizers.

Key Themes: This letter signed by the Al-Jihad Qa’ida Organization warns officials that they risk retribution if they keep arresting and detaining Mujahideen sympathizers. The author boasts that the security agencies of the emirates have been infiltrated, and if the Americans are vulnerable so are they.

The tourist industry is described as shameless and the area is considered an easy target. Al-Qa’ida does not want to attack the Emirates, but policy in the area will compel an attack.

http://www.ctc.usma.edu/aq_603856.asp

So, now I am beginning to wonder if the intent of the sentence I quoted from the NY Post article was more to indicate that a specific al Qaida author was not identified, rather than to indicate that the document had not been authenticated.

It still seems unclear to me overall and I now have more questions than when I began digging. But I have to acknowledge that you may be right about this.

[Fla Dem]

11. Haven't we been told that Al Qaeda plans very long range?

Hasn't this been drummed into us every time there is a security alert when they find intel that's years old? Like all those pictures of buildings in NY and Newark they found that had been on someone's computer, but they went ito high alert.

So why shouldn't we think that this whole Dubai plan hasn't been in the works for years? That Al Qaeda has infiltrated this company and now is ready to implement their plan?

Isn't it strange that after so many years of being in the port terminal business, NOW they want to run some of our ports?

[BushOut06]

14. Shhhh....Bush is keeping us safe

There's a local RWer talkshow guy who keeps bragging that "Bush has kept us safe for ---- days", or "---- days since the last terrorist attack", as if that means something.

How many days was it between the first WTC bombing and 9-11? I think that "terror free" stretch was quite a bit longer than the one we're on now.

[RB TexLa]

16. They also said

that an attack was comming like two years ago that would make 9/11 look like nothing