MI5: British Muslim Terrorists More Numerous, Getting Younger

[Ambiorix]

http://www.westernresistance.com/

November 8, 2007

MI5: British Muslim Terrorists More Numerous, Getting Younger

This article by Adrian Morgan (Giraldus Cambrensis of Western Resistance) appeared earlier today in Family Security Matters and is reproduced with their permission.

First Interview With A Working MI5 Agent

In fiction, such as James Bond movies and the BBC's drama show MI-5 (known as Spooks in the U.K. and currently in its sixth series), MI5 has been portrayed as glamorous, its agents living a life filled with action-packed adventure. The reality is obviously more prosaic.

On Tuesday (November 6), a serving MI5 agent gave an interview to Angus Walker of ITV News. This was the first time that an active MI5 officer was authorized to talk to the media. Her voice was disguised and she did not appear on camera. She said: "I've spent time in investigations, countering the threat from international terrorism. I've also worked in the counter-espionage section, as well as spending time in serious crime."

She spoke of MI5 reactions to 7/7, the suicide bombings of July 7, 2007, which killed 52 innocent people on London Transport. "Like most of the public, we were shocked. It was a huge event. What we had to do was pull ourselves together. On the 8th of July, our previous director-general, Eliza Manningham-Buller, called a meeting in our staff restaurant. She said that this was a big event, something terrible, but we must remember that we were trained to do this. This was what our job is, and this is what we're prepared to do."

The interviewer referred to revelations that the leader of the 7/7 attack (Mohammed Sidique Khan) had been bugged and watched by MI5 in the months preceding the bombings, but had not been stopped. MI5 had been severely criticized for this.

"I think sometimes we do get a bad press," the agent responded. "But I think that's understandable, given that we can't be open about methods that we use, and some of the work that we do. We naturally have to be secretive about some of the work that we do, because we don't want to compromise our methods."

When Angus Walker asked her: "Why work as a spy?," she answered: "I work with people who don't seek public recognition for what it is they do. We want to protect national security, and that is the satisfaction that I get from my job - knowing that I can go home at the end of the day, and that I , together with my colleagues, have played our part in helping to keep our country safe."

Though no great secrets were revealed on ITV News, the fact that the current head of MI5 had authorized this interview - the first of its kind - signals a new direction by MI5 - an attempt to become media-friendly. In part, this may be connected with the agency's long-standing attempts to recruit new members. It may also be an exercise in damage limitation. This year, MI5 received unprecedented media criticism.

On April 30, 2007 a trial concluded at the Old Bailey. Five British Muslim men were convicted of plotting terror attacks against various British targets using ammonium nitrate fertilizer as an explosive. The men were given life sentences. The MI5 and police surveillance of this group had been code-named "Operation Crevice". With the trial over, media restrictions were lifted, and MI5's surveillance of Mohammed Sidique Khan and his deputy, Shehzad Tanweer, was officially discolsed.

The current director-general of MI5, Jonathan Evans, publicly acknowledged that Khan and Tanweer had been under surveillance. On the MI5 website (now removed) was written: "It is true that the Security Service and Police did come across two of the 7 July bombers - Mohammed Siddique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer - during the earlier investigation into the fertiliser plot. However, even with the benefit of hindsight, it would have been impossible from the available intelligence to conclude that either Khan or Tanweer posed a terrorist threat to the British public."

"Khan and Tanweer were never identified during the fertilizer plot investigation because they were not involved in the planned attacks. Rather, they appeared as petty fraudsters in loose contact with members of the plot. There was no indication that they were involved in planning any kind of terrorist attack in the UK."

Khan and Tanweer had met Omar Khyam and others from the Operation Crevice plot on at least four occasions between February 2, 2004 and March 23. A week after their last meeting, on March 30, 2004 Omar Khyam and other "Crevice" plotters had been arrested. A few weeks after the Crevice arrests a plot to build a "dirty bomb" (involving Dhiren Barot and his associates) and with resources diverted to this end, attention was drawn away from the activities of Khan and Tanweer.

MI5 had been so unprepared for the events of 7/7 that on the morning before the attacks, the then-director general, Eliza Manningham-Buller told senior members of parliament that there was no imminent terrorist threat to London or the rest of Britain. During her leadership of MI5, Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller had argued for more funding for the service and for more recruits - particularly for its counter-terrorism wing, known as G-Branch.

Young Terror Suspects

The day before the ITN interview, on Monday, November 5, the current head of MI5, Britain's homeland intelligence service, gave his first public speech since his tenure began in April this year. Jonathan Evans was addressing the 2007 Manchester-based conference of the Society of Editors, a professional grouping of editors and publishers in print and broadcast media.

The speech was entitled "Intelligence, counter-terrorism and trust". Evans' full speech can be found here and on the MI5 website. The main details of this speech filled press and broadcast news reports over Monday and Tuesday.

The most important of Evans' revelations were his claims that the agency was now monitoring "at least 2,000" British potential terrorists, and that an increasing number of school-age young people were being recruited into "al Qaeda-related" terrorism. Some of these were as young as 15 and 16.

As Evans noted, his predecessor Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller had made a speech on November 9, 2006 at Queen Mary College, London. At this time she had said that MI5 were monitoring 200 cells involving 1,600 individuals. Four months before that, in July 2006, MI5 had been monitoring only 1,200 potential terror plotters, but maintained that these came from a larger base of 400,000 extremist "sympathizers" living in Britain. In April 2006 Manningham-Buller had claimed that at least 400 potential terrorists, and maybe even 600, were at large in Britain. In 2005, Lord Stevens, who had been the Metropolitan police commissioner, had claimed that there were only 200 potential Islamist terrorists in Britain.

It is obvious that estimates of the number of identified potential terrorists has increased dramatically since 2005, though not at a steady rate. Over the past 12 months, MI5 has increased its number of watched suspects by only 400, an increase of 125% from the number monitored a year ago. The figure is now "at least 2,000", but Evans added in his speech: "And we suspect that there are as many again that we don't yet know of."

Evans said: "This growth, which has driven the increasingly strong and coordinated government response, is partly because our coverage of the extremist networks is now more thorough. But it is also because there remains a steady flow of new recruits to the extremist cause. And it is important that we recognise an uncomfortable truth: terrorist attacks we have seen against the UK are not simply random plots by disparate and fragmented groups. The majority of these attacks, successful or otherwise, have taken place because Al Qaida has a clear determination to mount terrorist attacks against the United Kingdom. This remains the case today, and there is no sign of it reducing. So although MI5 and the police are investigating plots, and thwarting them, on a continuing basis, we do not view them in isolation."

On the issue of young people being drawn into terrorism, he said: "As a country, we are rightly concerned to protect children from exploitation in other areas. We need to do the same in relation to violent extremism. As I speak, terrorists are methodically and intentionally targeting young people and children in this country. They are radicalising, indoctrinating and grooming young, vulnerable people to carry out acts of terrorism. This year, we have seen individuals as young as 15 and 16 implicated in terrorist-related activity."

The issue of young people becoming embroiled in terror has already been shown from court convictions. On July 26 this year, a young man from London named Mohammed Irfan Raja was sentenced to two year's detention. He had been found guilty of possessing extremist material on the hard drive of his computer. This offense had happened when he had been aged 17, and officially enrolled at school. He had run away from his home to join a cell of four Islamist students in Bradford, who were also convicted. Raja had left a farewell note that indicated he would be going off to fight jihad abroad.

Abdul Muneem Patel had been among several young people who had been arrested in August 2006, in connection with a plot to blow up several U.S. bound planes using liquid explosives. The plot had been broken as a result of cooperation between British, American and Pakistani intelligence agencies. Patel had been born on April 17, 1989, making him 17 at the time of his arrest. He was convicted a few weeks ago for possessing a document likely to be useful for terrorism. He was given a six month's custodial sentence.

Though Evans claims that "children as young as 15 and 16" are becoming recruited into terrorism, so far there are no publicly recorded cases of anyone of that age being arrested or convicted on terrorism charges.

Dangerous Influences

Jonathan Evans claimed that since 2002, much of Al Qaeda's influence on plans of terror attack which have been happening in Britain has derived from its bases in Pakistan. He also said that: "But worryingly, we have more recently seen similar processes emerging elsewhere."

"For instance, there is no doubt now that Al Qaida in Iraq aspires to promote terrorist attacks outside Iraq. There is no doubt that there is training activity and terrorist planning in East Africa - particularly in Somalia - which is focused on the UK. And there is no doubt that the extension of what one might call the 'Al Qaida franchise' to other groups in other countries - notably in Algeria - has created a significant upsurge in terrorist violence in these countries. It is no coincidence that the first suicide bombing in Algeria followed the creation of the new 'Al Qaida in the Lands of the Islamic Maghreb'."

"This sort of extension of the Al Qaida brand to new parts of the Middle East and beyond poses a further threat to us in this country because it provides Al Qaida with access to new centres of support which it can motivate and exploit, including in its campaign against the UK."

There are, however, some fundamental flaws in Evans' account. There are several other individuals in Britain who belong to Islamist terror groups which are not directly linked to Al Qaida, even though they may share some similar aims. The Finsbury Park Mosque under Abu Hamza encouraged London to become a hub for terrorists with links to numerous Islamist groups from North Africa, Yemen, Chechnya and Kashmir. To label all these as "Al Qaeda" misleads both the press and the public.

As Melanie Phillips points out in the Spectator: "Astoundingly, he makes no mention of the words 'Islamic', 'Islamist' or 'Muslim' at all, and mentions 'Islam' only once at the end of his address - to explain why he has avoided all mention of the religion that actually drives the terrorism he has spent the past decade fighting."

Evans tries to explain this by saying: "We must also pay close attention to our use of language. It is easy to forget, in talking of actions, aims and approaches, how what is said affects what is done. Yet you will be as conscious as I am of the consequences of words. And we are tackling a threat which finds its roots in ideology, so words really do matter. This is not political correctness. We cannot create hard and fast rules but we must recognise the extremist message for what it is. Anything which enables it to claim to be representative of Islam; anything which gives a spurious legitimacy to its twisting of theology will only play into its hands. One of Al Qaida's key aims is to provoke divisions within and between communities, and we have seen their own media department - to which they attach great importance - seeking to do this. So we've got to be sure that what is said neither explicitly nor implicitly makes this easier for them. The terrorists may be indiscriminate in their violence against us, but we should not be so in our response to them."

Melanie Phillips describes this approach as "dangerous" and "absurd". She also states that division between communities is essential, creating a sharp division between the genuinely moderate Muslims and those that support extremism and terror.

On June 27, two months after Evans became director-general of MI5 (he had been deputy head of the group since 2005) the leadership of the British Labour government changed. The unelected prime minister Gordon Brown replaced Tony Blair. Brown's political approach has been marked by extreme political correctness and a lurch to even more left-wing social policies. Brown has issued orders to his cabinet ministers not to mention the "war on terror", even though his predecessor Blair, as did Evans' predecessor Eliza Manningham-Buller, warned a year ago that the war on terror would last for at least a generation.



When Brown came to power, he brought in a new cabinet, which included a new Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith. She admits that she has avoided the mention of a "war on terror" when she spoke to Parliament after the car bomb plots of July 29-30. Smith said of the term: "It is not one that I used. It seems to me that what we should be doing is emphasising the values that we share which are under attack from terrorism, rather than trying to create a battle or war between those who oppose the terror and those who want to carry it out."

When one reads Evans' entire speech, the stamp of the Brown government's approved dogma makes itself plain. As I wrote earlier on FamilySecurityMatters.org, MI5 is directly accountable to the Home Secretary. Jacqui Smith gives her own introductory message on the MI5 website, and here, her language employs "Brownite" politically correct terminology: "The major threat which the UK faces today is from international terrorism. Groups inspired by or with links to Al Qaida are intent on causing indiscriminate injury to all communities in the UK, and seek to jeopardise our way of life. Events in the last 3 years have shown that this threat is real, serious and deadly."

When she addressed the UK Parliament in July in the aftermath of bomb attacks, Smith said: "Let us be clear - terrorists are criminals, whose victims come from all walks of life, communities and religions." Such political correctness does not describe the terrorist threat accurately, as the only religion that currently has terrorist followers threatening the West (and also threatening moderate Muslim societies) while finding its justification from religious scriptures is Islam.

This evasive and unrealistic Labour government dogma, employing a censored lexicon, has also infected Jonathan Evans' speech. As a result, his speech is useless as a guide to where the country is in its battle to counter the current threats of terrorism. Not all Muslim terrorists are Al Qaeda-based, and to use the term Al Qaeda as a catch-all term to describe Islamist terrorism is dangerously misleading. Islamism as a term does not appear once in Evans' speech, even though at ground-level, potential Muslim terrorists are inspired by Islamist ideologues and are mostly drawn from groups and mosques that uphold or support Islamism.

Many of Britain's Muslim "representative groups" are closely linked with Islamist bodies. The Muslim Association of Britain is closely linked to the Muslim Brotherhood. Its founder was Kemal al-Helbawy, who co-founded the Muslim Council of Britain, a body which has acted in an advisory capacity to the Labour government. The MCB has senior members who support the Muslim Brotherhood, the terror group Hamas, and also the Islamist Jamaat-e-Islami party.

There are hints in Evans' speech that he understands the root causes of extremism. He stated: "And the prognosis for the medium term? I do not think that this problem has yet reached its peak. Speaking after the London and Glasgow attacks earlier this year, the Prime Minister said that: 'our country - and all countries - have to confront a generation-long challenge to defeat... terrorist violence'."

"He is of course correct. And it means that the work of the intelligence and security agencies will not be enough. We will do our utmost to hold back the physical threat of attacks, but alone, this is merely containment. Long-term resolution requires identifying and addressing the root causes of the problem. This is not a job only for the intelligence agencies and police. It requires a collective effort in which Government, faith communities and wider civil society have an important part to play. And it starts with rejection of the violent extremist ideology across society - although issues of identity, relative deprivation and social integration also form important parts of the backdrop."

"This will not, however, happen overnight. I have been directly engaged in work against this violent extremist threat for most of the last decade, and I believe that terrorism inspired by it is likely to dominate the work of my Service well into the future."

Dealing With The Future

Tackling extremism, according to Evans, will include public cooperation. He stated: "My Service is grateful for all the offers of information that we receive on a daily basis. But we also need to maintain the wider trust and support of everyone in this country. In tackling this public threat, we are most effective when we are working with the grain of public opinion, not against it."

Unfortunately, there appears to be no consensus on what the public opinion really is in Britain as it now stands, infected by multiculturalism imposed from above, and reactionary attitudes proliferating at "street-level". Evans urges journalists to continue to act in ways that do not compromise security operations. He stated: "I am, on the whole, impressed with the media's sense of responsibility and its understanding of our concerns. And as the demand for news increases, we cannot afford to let this understanding fall away. Because there is no contract between the security and intelligence agencies and the media. There is no memorandum of understanding between us. It is a matter of trust."

There is already a system by which "sensitive" areas of reporting are highlighted by a government-sponsored body, the Defense, Press and Broadcasting Advisory Committee. These are called Defense Advisory Notices (DA-Notices). These indicate what can or can not be safely reported, with journalists advised to consult the committee for guidance.

Currently, there are 3,000 employees at MI5. In her introductory statement on MI5's website, Jacqui Smith stated that the government had increased resources for the Security service, and by the end of 2008 it will have more than 3,500 staff, more than twice the number it had in 2001. In Monday's speech to the Society of Editors, Jonathan Evans claimed that he wanted to see MI5 having 4,000 staff, with a quarter of these working outside of London. MI5 has established several regional offices in Britain in Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Birmingham, Glasgow, Wales and the SouthWest.

Jacqui Smith wrote that: "The security Service would be keen to hear from anyone who feels they may be able to assist in their work, and you can contact them via their public telephone number or email - details of which are available on this website."

In Monday's speech, Evans reiterated the need to have more recruits. He did not mention Muslim recruits, though these are needed. He said: "The difficulty here, of course, will be to ensure we get not just more people, but more of the right people. It is important for us to have a diverse workforce. Without this breadth of experience, attitude and perspective, we will not be as effective as we can be. And I am encouraged by the numbers of black and minority ethnic recruits joining us. But I am concerned that we are seeing fewer female applicants to the service than we did during the 1990s - this is a paradox, considering that two of the last three directors-general were women."

His cautions of the "'quality" of recruits are based on real concerns. In April 2006, an unnamed government minister told the Sunday Mirror that extremists had applied for MI5 jobs: "The truth is that it has now been discovered that some of those people have strong links with al-Qaeda. There was always a risk that with such a speedy and widespread recruitment some would turn out to be bad eggs. But the recruitment has meant we are now in a much better position to stop al-Qaeda attacks than we have ever been before. Several planned attacks have already been stopped thanks to the high quality of our intelligence."

In his Monday speech, Evans also stated: "This year, yet again, there have been high levels of covert activity by foreign intelligence organisations in our country. Since the end of the Cold War we have seen no decrease in the numbers of undeclared Russian intelligence officers in the UK - at the Russian Embassy and associated organisations conducting covert activity in this country. So, despite the Cold War ending nearly two decades ago, my service is still expending resources to defend the UK against unreconstructed attempts by Russia, China and others, to spy on us. A number of countries continue to devote considerable time and energy trying to steal our sensitive technology on civilian and military projects, and trying to obtain political and economic intelligence at our expense."

Evans stated that these additional aggravations are causing a drain on MI5 resources. According to the Daily Mail, Evans' mention of Russia and China is "understood to have caused consternation at the Foreign Office. It could deal a blow to Gordon Brown's hopes to visit Beijing in the New Year."

On Tuesday, the Queen's Speech at the State Opening of Parliament outlined some of the Brown government's proposed bills for the upcoming parliamentary session. This stated that a new counter-terrorism bill would be introduced to parliament before Christmas. This would propose extending police powers to detain terrorism suspects for more than the current maximum of 28 days. On November 9, 2005, Tony Blair tried but failed to introduce a maximum detention limit of 90 days. It is believed the proposed bill would raise the limit to 56 days. Additionally this new bill will establish a register of people convicted of terrorism charges. Even after their release, such individuals would be legally required to inform police of any changes of their address or name, and they would be prevented from traveling overseas.

No matter how forward-thinking or original Evans and MI5 may be in their plans relating to terrorism, they are still employees of the government. And the Labour government, in power since May 1997, has made some appallingly bad decisions concerning how it deals with terrorism. Tomorrow I will show some of the recent blunders in anti-extremist policy made by the Brown administration. Additionally, using cases that have recently concluded or are currently continuing in British courts, I will show just how far extremism has been allowed to flourish in Labour's Britain.

Adrian Morgan

[newman]

They're closing the barn door AFTER the horse has bolted. Britain's finished!

[Ambiorix]

Yomann, itza  gonna be BIg boom
we gonna kill th'indifiels crack down the whietie kuffar!

[Mstislav]

Yomann, itza  gonna be BIg boom
we gonna kill th'indifiels crack down the whietie kuffar!

It is not only the non muslim whites they will go after in Europe. They will target everyone, but they like to go after the local indigenous population more often.

[Electra]

They're closing the barn door AFTER the horse has bolted. Britain's finished!

Yes it is. And the worse is yet to come, and I can't bare to watch.