Secret Cabinet memo admits Iraq is fuelling UK terror

#1
Telegraph Online said:
Secret Cabinet memo admits Iraq is fuelling UK terror

Tony Blair's claim that there is no link between Britain's foreign policy and terrorist attacks in this country is blown apart by a secret cabinet memo revealed today.

A classified paper written by senior Downing Street officials says that everything Britain does overseas for the next decade must have the ultimate aim of reducing "terror activity, especially that in or directed against the UK".

The memo, circulated in recent weeks to ministers and security chiefs and seen by The Sunday Telegraph, outlines an extraordinary "wish list" of how the Government would like world troublespots to look in 10 years' time. It also signals a drive to reduce Britain's military commitments around the globe.

It admits that, in an ideal world, "the Muslim would not perceive the UK and its foreign policies as hostile" – effectively accepting the argument that Britain's military action in Iraq and Afghanistan has served as a recruiting sergeant for Islamist terrorist groups. Publicly, Mr Blair has resisted this line fiercely. During his final speech as leader to Labour's annual conference last month, he described such claims as "enemy propaganda".

Full text here: Telegraph Online
Not so secret now! And are they now hunting the "enemy propgandists" hiding under the bed? :twisted:
 
#2
Now You may call me a 'Red Under the Bed' :roll: again - but why do I find this kind of reporting so suspicious???

Could it be because the authors name hasn't been given (what would be more destroying to this government than to expose the person who wrote the email), or perhaps because of the supposed recipients - security chiefs and ministers??? Apart from the very broad distribution, what ministers???. Wouldn't it be just as advantageous to be able, when a minister denies the relationship of the wars to UK terrorists going at it, to point to the email and say "how can You deny the relationship when YOU received this message from the man" Finally, why do they not give the name of the 'Downing Street spokesman' :roll: - it would add authenticity where at the moment there is non.

All in all another supposed leak which more than likely originated in a Torygraph reporters fevered imagination
 
#3
Well, Labour seem to be taking it seriously...
From 'the Scotsman'
..Downing Street declined to comment on the leaked documents last night. However, a spokesman said: "We recognise that people have used Iraq as an excuse for terrorist activity, but clearly plenty of terrorist activity against the UK and its citizens has pre-dated that."

http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=1600402006

You will note there is no denial of the veracity of these papers.
 
#4
"We recognise that people have used Iraq as an excuse for terrorist activity, but clearly plenty of terrorist activity against the UK and its citizens has pre-dated that."
Can someone just remind me of an Islamic terror attack on the UK that pre-dates Iraq please? I have a hangover and I'm not thinking clearly this morning.
 
#5
PartTimePongo said:
"We recognise that people have used Iraq as an excuse for terrorist activity, but clearly plenty of terrorist activity against the UK and its citizens has pre-dated that."
Can someone just remind me of an Islamic terror attack on the UK that pre-dates Iraq please? I have a hangover and I'm not thinking clearly this morning.
A foiled attack against Birmingham in 2000
 
#6
PartTimePongo said:
"We recognise that people have used Iraq as an excuse for terrorist activity, but clearly plenty of terrorist activity against the UK and its citizens has pre-dated that."
Can someone just remind me of an Islamic terror attack on the UK that pre-dates Iraq please? I have a hangover and I'm not thinking clearly this morning.
The attack on Bali killed UK citizens. An attack on Australian citizens and UK holidaymakers is enough of an attack "on the UK" for me. Not, however, an attack "in the UK".

Did the report make it clear which we are now more at risk from?
 
#7
Sven said:
PartTimePongo said:
"We recognise that people have used Iraq as an excuse for terrorist activity, but clearly plenty of terrorist activity against the UK and its citizens has pre-dated that."
Can someone just remind me of an Islamic terror attack on the UK that pre-dates Iraq please? I have a hangover and I'm not thinking clearly this morning.
A foiled attack against Birmingham in 2000

Terror police target 70 'plots'

Daily Telegraph Link

Mr Reid also disclosed that the al-Qa'eda threat to Britain dated from a planned attack on Birmingham which was thwarted in 2000.
Haven't found anything earlier than that yet, perhaps I was talking out of my bottom!

(edited to add) On a similar vein:

Training camps for terrorists in UK parks
Guardian Online Link

The former imam at Finsbury Park mosque Abu Hamza, serving seven years for inciting murder and race hate, is also alleged to have organised camps in the Brecon Beacons, south Wales.

Prisoners held at Guantánamo have also told counterterrorism officials that Abu Hamza organised exercises. The first, in 1997, are said to have been at a monastery near Tunbridge Wells, Kent, and at a farm in Kent. Next year he is said to have run an exercise in the Brecon Beacons at which two men, who claimed to be former members of British special forces units, were paid to explain how to maintain firearms, and gave counter-surveillance training.
 
#8
Sorry folks but as far as I am concerned this story falls in to the "No Sh1t, Sherlocks" catagory.

Anyone really surprised out there?
 
#9
Secret cabinet memo - Tony they are not buying the crap we spun to get I.D cards accepted so maybe we should try the terrorism angle again?
 
#10
Mr Reid also disclosed that the al-Qa'eda threat to Britain dated from a planned attack on Birmingham which was thwarted in 2000.
I'd love to know more about this. Al-Qa'eda were going to strike Birmingham in 2000? Why exactly? in 2000 we weren't in Afghanistan or Iraq, and we weren't yet quite part of the 'Great Satan's' coterie.

How would this have been useful to Al-Qa'eda's grand strategy?

Well between CIRA (proven and attempted) and Al-Qa'eda (Eh?) Birmingham was certainly due a shafting from some religous extremists.

Still, it's a lovely place to live :D
 
#11
A foiled attack against Birmingham in 2000
Is that like the supposed "foiled" attack on Manchester United a few years later? In other words a tinfoil-hat non-event?

What cannot be denied is that there may have been an Islamic terrorist threat to the UK prior to 2001. However, this threat has been greatly inflamed by the participation of the UK in the Iraq invasion, as recognised by the Joint Intelligence Committee prior to Telic. The Dear Leader disagreed with this analysis.

The role of the UK in the airstrikes against Iraq in late 1998 ("Desert Fox" I recall) will also have increased the terrorist threat.

It is correct to point out that foreign policy should not be determined by terrorists. However, fundamentally flawed foreign policy that increases the terrorism threat should not be pursued blindly using the same excuse to suppress dissent!
 
#12
Which of Al Qs stated aims are You referring to PTP??

Are YOu referring to the Driving the Great Satan out of Saudi???

Are You referring to the rather understated aim of having a Sharia ruled world????

Or do You refer to the latest reason Al Q gives for having a go.



Now, I'm not silly enough (unlike Tony) to claim that the wars in the Middle East are not aggrevating A; Qs war on th West, but likewise I am not silly enough (unlike certain august sections of the press) to suggest that the War on Terror is the first or only reason for our country being a target.
 

Nehustan

On ROPS
On ROPs
#13
hansvonhealing said:
Well, Labour seem to be taking it seriously...
From 'the Scotsman'
..Downing Street declined to comment on the leaked documents last night. However, a spokesman said: "We recognise that people have used Iraq as an excuse for terrorist activity, but clearly plenty of terrorist activity against the UK and its citizens has pre-dated that."

http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=1600402006

You will note there is no denial of the veracity of these papers.
Its like GWI, European influence in the wider Magrib (i.e. Algeria etc), Aden/Yemen, Suez, the mandates post WWI and all 'nation building' associated has slipped by Tony Bliar and Dubya. Its like all these hard feelings just appeared out of thin air and had nothing to do with previous foreign policies over the last 100 years....maybe they think if they ignore it nobody will pick up on it. Perhaps true for somebody who's about to settle down with their family for a Sunday Roast, maybe not so true for people in situ.
 
#14
Sven said:
Now You may call me a 'Red Under the Bed' :roll: again - but why do I find this kind of reporting so suspicious???
I assume, it is because this article doesn't fit your construct of how the current government acts and wishes to be seen to be acting. QED, there must be something wrong with the article, not your construct!

Sven said:
Could it be because the authors name hasn't been given (what would be more destroying to this government than to expose the person who wrote the email), or perhaps because of the supposed recipients - security chiefs and ministers???
Under this government, anonymous but official briefings have become the main source of 'original' information imparted by HMG to the eager media hacks. If these 'official' spokesman are not prepared to go 'on the record', why should the unofficial leaks have to put their heads above the paraphet?

Have a listen to this Radio 4 programme on listen again: Corridors of Power Interesting part is where Nick Robinson and an American hack discuss the differences between US on the record live briefings and UK calls in the middle of the night by un-named spokesmen!
 
#15
merkator said:
Sven said:
Now You may call me a 'Red Under the Bed' :roll: again - but why do I find this kind of reporting so suspicious???
I assume, it is because this article doesn't fit your construct of how the current government acts and wishes to be seen to be acting. QED, there must be something wrong with the article, not your construct!

Sven said:
Could it be because the authors name hasn't been given (what would be more destroying to this government than to expose the person who wrote the email), or perhaps because of the supposed recipients - security chiefs and ministers???
Under this government, anonymous but official briefings have become the main source of 'original' information imparted by HMG to the eager media hacks. If these 'official' spokesman are not prepared to go 'on the record', why should the unofficial leaks have to put their heads above the paraphet?

Have a listen to this Radio 4 programme on listen again: Corridors of Power Interesting part is where Nick Robinson and an American hack discuss the differences between US on the record live briefings and UK calls in the middle of the night by un-named spokesmen!
With regard to Your second observation

If my point was about the briefing that goes on then Your comment might have some kudos, but it wasn't. My comment was about the author of the supposedly leaked email.

I will reiterate - there is more political gain to be made by exposing both the emails author and the ministers receiving that email than there is by covering those names up. That the Telegraph didn't give up those names does not prove that there is no email, but is a damned good indication!!!
 
#16
PartTimePongo said:
Still, it's a lovely place to live :D
Oh now you're just taking the p!ss. :)

Random_Task said:
Why attack the US in 1993? and then in 2001?
I'm guessing because they didn't like what the US was doing in the Middle East and the wider world in general? That and support for Israel porbably narked them off a bit as well.
 
#17
Sven wrote:- ''That the Telegraph didn't give up those names does not prove that there is no email, but is a damned good indication!!! ''

I haven't seen any denial from the government that the email originated from the Cabinet Office - surely a pretty good indication that it exists!
 
#18
Sven said:
If my point was about the briefing that goes on then Your comment might have some kudos, but it wasn't. My comment was about the author of the supposedly leaked email.

I will reiterate - there is more political gain to be made by exposing both the emails author and the ministers receiving that email than there is by covering those names up. That the Telegraph didn't give up those names does not prove that there is no email, but is a damned good indication!!!
Why are you banging on about the existance, or non-existance of an email?

FFS Sven, have you actually bothered to read the Telegraph article properly, or did you just skim it and jump to the wrong conclusion? Or worse still, jump to the defence of HMG without even reading it at all?

OK. I accept that the standard method today in 'circulating' memos is by email, and it was probably an email with an attachment that arrived on the Telegraph newsdesk, but so what? If what agitates you is the person that leaked the 'memo' onto the Telegraph, then this is EXACTLY the same as the anonymous, but official, briefings given by HMG spokesmen - since neither are likely to be the authors...

Before I go into a lengthy explanation as to how 'serious' consultation papers are written, drafted, editted and submitted, can I ask whether you genuinely have no idea how this is performed or whether you are being deliberatly evasive?

Why? Because, if you know the system already, you know it is not possible to name the probable 100+ authors/analysts/editors involved and as regards the recipients, although not named by the Telegraph, we know who they are: the cabinet and security chiefs - and doubtlessly several score more government officials.
 
#19
Random_Task said:
Sven said:
PartTimePongo said:
"We recognise that people have used Iraq as an excuse for terrorist activity, but clearly plenty of terrorist activity against the UK and its citizens has pre-dated that."
Can someone just remind me of an Islamic terror attack on the UK that pre-dates Iraq please? I have a hangover and I'm not thinking clearly this morning.
A foiled attack against Birmingham in 2000
Terror police target 70 'plots'
Daily Telegraph Link

Mr Reid also disclosed that the al-Qa'eda threat to Britain dated from a planned attack on Birmingham which was thwarted in 2000.
Haven't found anything earlier than that yet, perhaps I was talking out of my bottom!
Ahhhh! The infamous "attack on Birmingham" - spoken by a man whose intelligence brief suggested that 16AA Bde could do a tour in Afghanistan without firing a shot, maybe (or was he just lieing?), and by a government who not only gave us Iraqi WMD, but also played up the idea that they could use them within 45 mins.

If this government had a reputation for providing solid, reliable and accurate information - I would be inclined to believe this allegation. They don't.

Lets try to look at this from a satirical perspective. Imagine the location: unknown cave or training camp in Afghanistan circa 1999. Table with 4 individuals sitting around drinking strong black coffee, smoking hubba-bubba pipes and musing over the state of the world.

Character 1 (Ayman): So Khalid, what ideas do you have to improve the world?

Character 2 (Khalid): Well Ayman, I was thinking of recruiting a group of chaps, teach them to fly, nick a few aircraft, and crash them into various buildings.

1: Ooooh! That sounds good. What buildings did you have in mind?

2: Ahhhh! The symbols of the infidels economic power - the WTC; the symbol of the infidels military power - the Pentagon; and the symbol of the infidels political power - the Senate.

1: Brilliant idea Khalid, may Allah be with you. Here's a lots of $$$ to make it happen.

1: Now Abdul, what ideas do you have to improve the world?

Character 3 (Abdul): Well Ayman, I was thinking of recruiting a group of chaps, teach them to drive, nick a few JCBs, and crash them into various buildings.

1: Hmmmmm! What buildings did you have in mind?

3: Ahhhh! The symbols of the infidels economic power - the Bullring; the symbol of the infidels military power - the Army & Navy store; and the symbol of the infidels political power - The Council House.

1: Hmmmmm! I think the plan needs a little more work Abdul. Here's $50 to go and buy yourself a new camel.

Characters 2 & 3 exit.

Character 4 (Usama): Ayman. Abdul is an embarrasment to our cause. Have a chat with that mate of yours in MI6 and have him picked up before he causes any trouble.

:twisted:
 

Top