Posted on 03/14/2004 2:48:02 PM PST by Blindboy16
OBL and Al-Qaeda Warnings: An Update Compiled By: Ryan Mauro tdcanalyst@optonline.net
As expected, WorldThreats.com come under fire for my warnings of Al-Qaeda plots in February. First, let me clear up, we never said an attack would be successful. That would be extremely irresponsible. We still believe my warnings were accurate.
The efforts of WorldThreats.com and the Northeast Intelligence Network (HomelandSecurityUS.com) showed a dramatic, and quite frightening, increase in terrorist “chatter”, along with many signs of terrorist attacks. We saw increased overseas attacks, terrorist propaganda, and suspicious activity in the US by law enforcement signaling to us that terrorists had attempted, or were about to attempt, a major attack.
As for our warnings about an uprising in Saudi Arabia during the Muslim pilgrimage, that was not incorrect. Anyone reading the news saw how many terrorists plotting attacks were arrested and how many weapons caches were seized. Indeed, the Northeast Intelligence Network did receive confirmations that attacks were thwarted. We saw indications of plots to assemble bombs aboard airplanes, use truck bombs, hijack airliners, and to use divers. Those following the Northeast Intelligence Network’s work saw the strange coincidences of three “mystery divers” turning up dead. Seeing as there were no major attacks on the homeland, WorldThreats.com believes that the worldwide jihad movement has had a significant blow.
Despite their some of their most intensive, secretive, and aggressive efforts to pull off an attack in Europe or the US, they failed. It also greatly damaged the credibility of propaganda and recruitment efforts by Al-Qaeda-tied sources, as they’re warnings were shown empty. Other groups will likely use Al-Qaeda’s destructive expertise, manpower, and ideology, and rise up. From now on, it is most likely that major attacks will be carried out by regional groups using the hired skills of Al-Qaeda.
During this time period, we also saw high-ranking terrorists fall into the hands of anti-terrorism authorities around the world, as the result of some event that revealed a load of actionable intelligence. WorldThreats.com, due to what we will explain further, still believes it is most likely that Osama Bin Laden is in custody, or that the West is somewhat aware of his location, awaiting the right moments to scoop him up—dead or alive. Either way, it is more than obvious that the noose is tightening around Osama, and that the chances are very high we will get him within the next six months, or at least, by the end of the year. To help readers understand why WorldThreats.com and the Northeast Intelligence Network reached these conclusions, we are putting together this report.
Confirmations
On January 22, 2004, confirmations were received by unconnected sources that Osama Bin Laden was in custody, after American Special Forces launched a secret raid into Iran. WorldThreats.com has consistently reported his presence in Iran, although sometimes traveling to the Pakistani-Afghan border areas occasionally. Monsoor Ijaz, a very well-connected Fox News analyst, has repeated the same thing. NEIN was able to confirm “unusual movements” of American personnel, such as special forces, in the area that day in the days before (before the supposed capture), but declined to provide further information due to the obvious safety concerns. This is standard procedure, as with the many cases of captured operatives, it has been weeks before their capture was announced.
WorldThreats.com and NEIN received five confirmations of Osama’s capture between January 21 and 23—two from the CIA, two from military intelligence, and one from the Department of Defense. In mid-February, another source “who was in the position to know”, also claimed to know of his capture, but we refrain from calling it a “confirmation” as it did not come directly to us from an inside source. The sources all said the same thing, and Mr. Douglas Hagmann, head of the NEIN, spoke with them on the phone, cross-checking their stories. No contradictions were found. Further checkups with more inside sources resulted in non-denials. A week later, our initial sources all went silent, saying they wouldn’t deny it, but couldn’t say anything anymore. They did say however, to stick with the story. Of course, there certainly is a possibility of this being an intentional leak. Further investigation into the rumor by NEIN confirmed that the rumor emanated from our own military, not from a civilian source, or an overseas foreign source. It should also be noted that one of the confirmations came from a source that gave the NEIN advanced knowledge of the capture of Saddam Hussein, which wasn’t reported due to the lack of a significant number of confirmations. Contrary to the allegations of some, we do much cross-checking and investigation into the reports published. Rumors of Osama’s capture have been received constantly by NEIN and WorldThreats.com, but this one continues to stand out.
How He Was Located
First off, according to Monsoor Ijaz, we may have been able to capture Osama Bin Laden in late 2001 or early 2002. In reports from then, he said that there was evidence of an agreement between the US and Pakistan where, while some terrorists would be captured, there’d be no major sweeps until the situation died down. After the war in Afghanistan, Islamic anger in Pakistan was at a tremendous height, easily threatening Musharraf’s rule. Now that this has died down a bit, perhaps now is why there is a new effort on the part of Pakistan. The threat of a civil war is less likely, meanwhile, Al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives are trying to assassinate Musharraf, so he has to act. This should be mentioned not because it is crucial to understanding the case about the potential capture of Osama, but to explain why there is a new effort. This also confirms what was recently written by Barry Farber in Newsmax.com, about if Osama is in custody, or if we know where he is (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/3/5/173111.shtml).
The event that likely resulted in the intelligence flow leading to locating Al-Qaeda’s head man probably emanated, originally, from the interception of a vehicle from a convoy of trucks entering northern Iraq from Iran. Upon intercepting the one truck, the Kurds, who captured the driver, found a warhead with advanced C-4 explosives. The driver was found to be an Al-Qaeda member. The terrorist went on to explain that his vehicle was part of a convoy, carrying up to 30 warheads, some with chemical substances in them. The story was first publicly mentioned by Monsoor Ijaz, a Fox News analyst.[1] Ijaz said the event occurred on January 10, 2004. NEIN’s interceptions of terrorist communications seemed to confirm this event, as they mentioned the shipment of similar missiles for upcoming attacks.
However, general information about Osama’s location in Iran may also have come from a sighting in late December. On December 23rd, it was reported that a group of Arabs that spent time in the desert triple-border area (where Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran intersect), claim that Osama was “definitely in Iran”. The Arab sources, as well as other intelligence sources, reported that Osama was in the Iranian side of the border where it meets Pakistan, and has the help of radicals in Pakistan’s intelligence services.[2] Monsoor Ijaz also confirmed this, saying that Osama went onto the Iranian side of the border in order to escape sweeps by the Pakistani army made over the summer of 2003. In a follow-up report, it was said that “The US has already confronted Iran diplomatically about this issue, but needs verification in order to take stronger diplomatic measures.”[3]
Between January 16th and 20th, military sources told the NEIN that information from that obviously big catch was being used, and that locations and routes of travel were revealed for high-level Al-Qaeda (and Al-Qaeda-linked) operatives in Iran, Pakistan and Iraq. It was also around this time that NEIN began noticing the peculiar movements of Special Forces in the region. It should also be noted that Lebanese television also reported that Osama was in US custody on January 15, 2004 (captured from Tripoli, Lebanon). The event was later called a “spoof”. Of course, it is entirely possible it was just a spoof. It is really hard to explain what this means, if anything.
On January 20th, the Pakistani press reported that five Al-Qaeda terrorists were captured in Karachi, including one of the FBI’s most wanted fugitives. The report said that sources close to the manhunt confirmed that this group was in direct contact with senior Al-Qaeda operative. The report says, “Without naming the leader, the official said: ‘We believe that he is in Karachi and we are tightening the noose around him.’”[4]
On January 22nd, the German press (specifically “Die Welt”) said that it had an unconfirmed report that Osama Bin Laden was in custody. If we receive so many claims of him being either dead or captured, imagine what a major newspaper receives. Apparently, “Die Welt” had some reason to choose this rumor for publication, as we also did. This same day, three of the sources (2 intelligence, 1 military) contacted the NEIN reporting that the Special Forces had conducted a major “Grab and Go” mission in southern Iran between January 20 and 22. They confirmed it was a “high value target”, and that it was not to be announced for a bit because of actionable intelligence gathered from the capture. Of course, the State Department immediately denied the rumors, as we would expect.
Signals That This Was More Than A Rumor
What was most interesting about this ordeal of events was the turn the War on Terror took after the events. Much similar to what happened after Saddam Hussein was captured; we saw a sudden surge in anti-terrorism activity, apparently occurring on the basis of new intelligence. The jihad network connected to Al-Qaeda soon began collapsing, and we saw high and mid-level operatives being killed or captured. In the words of one colleague, “They’re being torn down from the top-down, which only occurs when a very senior, or the most senior, associate is gone.”
On January 22nd, Hasan Guhl, known as “The Gatekeeper”, in the top 20 leaders of Al-Qaeda, was confirmed to be in custody, after a raid in Iraq.[5] He was a prominent leader of the jihad effort in Iraq, likely very closely connected to the plot mentioned above involving missile transportation.
On January 23rd, the US confirmed that around January 14-16, Husam al-Yemeni, a leader of Ansar al-Islam (basically Al-Qaeda’s branch in Iraq) had been captured. He also was “the right-hand man” of Abu Musab Zarqawi, another senior Al-Qaeda operative with direct contact with Osama Bin Laden. In any effort like the incident described above involving the transportation of missiles into Iraq, Zarqawi would be the centerpiece making it all flow. Israeli intelligence has also listed him as in the top ten leaders of Al-Qaeda, despite the fact that he is known as a “contract terrorist”.
On February 8th, the US announced it had captured in Iraq a courier for Zarqawi who was passing a message to senior Al-Qaeda leadership, asking for reinforcements for Iraq and discussing a new strategy to cause civil war. This capture likely allowed the identification of other couriers, and likely increased our knowledge of how the network communicates and moves around. If Osama was not captured by now, this likely plays a dramatic piece in the puzzle for locating him.
We could go through a whole list of other captures that occurred around then, and since then. Those were only a select few we chose as they were the most likely to be directly connected to the intelligence gathered from the “high value target” taken out of Iran. The rest may or may not be connected directly to the capture, or through captures that resulted from the initial capture. If readers are interested in this aspect of the case, a simple search on the web will provide a dramatic picture of the operatives dropping like flies.
The time period around the rumored capture of Osama Bin Laden is one of the most successful weeks for the War on Terror. Why?
Other Interesting Pieces of Evidence
The Northeast Intelligence Network and WorldThreats.com have seen increasing signs that Ayman al-Zawahiri is the directing force of the Al-Qaeda network. Although this has been said before the rumored capture of Osama Bin Laden, the signs were much more distinct after mid-January. Of course, the signs alone are not proof Osama is in custody or isolated, but coupled with the other indications, it does add merit to the rumors.
On January 28th, on a terrorist message board frequently used by jihad operatives, “Abu Bantar” posted the following (translated):
"A Simple Demand We Must Consider"
You, my brothers, it is imperative that we join Sheikh Osama Bin Ladin's network and Sheikh Yousef Aleiiri together. It is our delusion of their return; their return is denied us; And that is not said by the grandsons of the internationals.[6]
Clearly, some terrorist insiders felt Osama was also isolated, dead or captured. Either way, they believed he was out of the picture. Although we can’t know if this poster is in a position to know, the timing is what is so interesting.
Another question is, what suddenly happened, simultaneously as all this was going on, to push a US military spokesman to boldly say that by the end of 2004, Osama Bin Laden would be caught?[7] Afghanistan’s President Karzai also said Osama would be caught “soon”. In a separate New York Times report, on February 28th, details of a new effort to get Osama were mentioned, and in a different press report, one Pakistani official even said, “I think he’ll be caught in June”, due to the weather improving.
Other reports also indicated that Osama was “out of the picture”, either by being in custody or surrounded. On January 28th, just a week after his rumored capture (and the beginning of dialogue with Iran via Italy), it was reported in The Chicago Tribune (resulting in many, many follow-ups by other papers) that US special forces were preparing for a much-hyped “spring offensive” in Pakistan aimed at capturing Osama Bin Laden in the spring.[8]
On February 22nd (exactly one month after the NEIN report), The Sunday Telegraph reported that Osama had been located, and was surrounded by US forces in an area between northwest Pakistan and Afghanistan, specifically in the mountains north of Quetta. The paper said a “well-placed intelligence source” said he was “boxed in”, and that they are waiting for the best time to grab him. This report was in mostly every major newspaper the next day.
According to one theory, Osama is in custody and will be “found” in Afghanistan or Pakistan at the best time (once actionable intelligence is used up and diplomacy is finished) due to the obvious results it would have for Iran. If this theory is true, then it is likely that this was an intentional leak made to The Sunday Telegraph in order to set the stage for his capture. This is speculation though, and readers should take it as that.
Potential Diplomatic Maneuvering
Naturally, the thought of possible disinformation crossed all of our minds. However, then we learned about an emergency dispatch of Italian foreign minister Frattini to Iran, almost immediately after the rumored capture. Italy is a US ally, and has diplomatic ties to Iran (which we don’t have). This makes Italy the most likely messenger for the US in any session of Iran-US dialogue. And only in a very important situation would the US need such dialogue. It was also confirmed that Frattini planned to inform Colin Powell, the head of the State Department (the exact dept. that would handle such a situation involving dialogue through Italy) on the details of the talks. It is almost obvious that for whatever reason, the US immediately began dialogue with Iran for some reason. Is it a coincidence this emergency dispatch occurred right after the rumored OBL capture?
In such an event, the US would not want to immediately announce the capture at all, much less in Iran. It is a no-brainer that the US would not want to admit that secret operations were going on inside Iranian territory. Should Iran not want this information out, we are unprepared to handle an Iranian-sponsored Shi’ite uprising in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Afghanistan, etc. We also know that this capture alone could quite easily lead to an Islamic uprising—an event we’d want to prepare for. Then of course, is the actionable intelligence gained from the capture. The last thing we’d want to do is prematurely announce the capture and sacrifice potential victories in the War on Terror. Finally, particularly in an election year, there is the worry that this would drive people to demanding action against Iran. We are hardly prepared for that, and politically, it would cause trouble for the Bush Administration. They have enough crises to handle.
Following what Monsoor Ijaz said, it actually seems like the US was pressuring Iran in the months ahead of the rumored capture (it was well-known in the mainstream press that we were pressuring Iran to hand over unnamed Al-Qaeda figures). Before I noted how Ijaz confirmed this, and said we needed proof in order to, basically, get the upper-hand diplomatically. What would the US get from this deal with Iran? We could speculate, but it could be anything between helping calm the Shi’a in Iraq, to stop assisting opposition forces in Afghanistan, or to restraining terrorists aiming to attack Israel or the US. It’s anybody’s guess.
On February 28, 2004, Iranian state-controlled radio reported that Osama Bin Laden had been captured in Pakistan. The US and Pakistan denied this, and later that day the station apologized. The radio said he had been captured “a long time ago”, and just wasn’t announced. Although we should always remain suspect of what the Iranian government says, it is interesting as this is one of the scenarios we offered. There are several reasons this may have occurred:
A: Iran wanted to use propaganda to potentially spark an Islamic uprising against the Musharraf government in Pakistan.
B: It was the result of diplomatic maneuvering between the parties involved in the rumored capture of Osama Bin Laden, as debate goes on about how, and when to announce the capture.
C: Iran was attempting to pre-empt any announcement, should the US or an ally like Pakistan decide to announce that Osama was captured in Iran.
It appears either we are truly close to grabbing Osama Bin Laden, OR setting the stage for his “capture”. Bill Gertz of The Washington Times has reported in his “Inside the Ring” report that we are getting closer to Osama, because of newly-gained sources of information. However, in the same report, the notion of Osama being in custody or surrounded is dismissed.
Ayman Al-Zawahiri
The confirmations we received did not mention Zawahiri. Again, nor was it denied he was in custody. However, from the intelligence we have gathered and what we’ve observed, it appears that Zawahiri is indeed in control, taking a more prominent role in the network by substituting for the lack of Osama Bin Laden’s presence. Is Osama not taking a prominent role due to security concerns, or because he is dead or captured? There is no sure way to know, but it is obvious that for whatever reason, Zawahiri is taking some of Osama’s duties.
If Osama Bin Laden is in custody, and there was any chance of getting Zawahiri as a result (arguably the more dangerous of the two), the authorities would definitely wait as long as they needed to. If the rumors are true, will the announcement be made once Zawahiri is captured? Or will we do it when most actionable intelligence has been used, and it seems less than likely that the capture will lead to Zawahiri? Faced with that question, most would agree that the authorities would hold onto Osama Bin Laden.
Interestingly, the US recently began asking Egypt for custody of Zawahiri’s brother. He has long been in custody, but this had never been fully announced until March 4th. Why then? We know that on February 25th, a foreign newspaper reported that Zawahiri’s son, Khalid, was captured on the Afghan border. A few days later, sources also told the Northeast Intelligence Network this was true. Ten days later, the government still had not confirmed it officially (again, likely to use actionable intelligence). Additionally, just three days later on March 7th, The Telegraph reported that this was indeed true (still no confirmation from the government though). The British paper confirmed that Khalid’s capture had resulted in new information on senior Al-Qaeda leaders, assisting in the hunt for senior Al-Qaeda including Osama Bin Laden. This assumes that Osama is not in custody, so naturally a newspaper would include his name among the senior members we hope to capture. Already, the paper said, Khalid’s capture led to the capture of at least 9 other terrorists and new anti-terrorism raids.
Newsweek has reported that US intelligence has spotted Ayman al-Zawahiri from a Predator drone. The report also mentioned that we are getting closer to Osama and Zawahiri due to captured messengers, and new information from human intelligence.[9]
Could we be close to capturing Ayman al-Zawahiri? Could all the hype about an increased likelihood of capturing Osama really be aimed at Zawahiri? If so, this would explain why the capture of Osama Bin Laden, if true, was not announced for such a long time. Or is this genuine, and we really are close to capturing Osama and Zawahiri, with neither already being in custody?
Conclusion
The conclusion WorldThreats.com has reached is that either Osama Bin Laden is in custody (alive or dead), OR we have a general idea of where he is, and we will likely nab him within six to eight months. If he is in custody, this will be announced either when Zawahiri is caught, or when all actionable intelligence from his capture is used up (which will take a bit of time). If Osama is caught, and held, and the US decides to “pick” a place where to “find” him, WorldThreats.com believes that the most likely scenario would be to say he was on the Afghan side of the Pakistani border. This would be the best approach, as saying he was in Iran would create major foreign policy problems, while saying he was in Pakistan could likely result in an uprising against Musharraf. For this reason, it is most likely he will have been said to be in Afghanistan. Already, if the theory about him being captured awhile ago is true, then we may see signs of the stage being set. Recently it was leaked, almost certainly intentionally; to the major media that there were signs Osama was moving into Afghanistan very soon.
Now, you may ask, why did WorldThreats.com issue this report now? On March 8, 2004, the Northeast Intelligence Network was told by one of the inside sources that the announcement of Osama Bin Laden’s capture or suspected death will be made within 15 to 20 days by the head of Task Force 121, Admiral Bill McRaven. “It could be sooner or it could be later, but not much later”, the intelligence source said.
UPDATE 3.14.4: Two high-ranking sources have claimed that OBL will be announced found dead in Afghanistan from "ill health".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] On Special Report with Brit Hume, January 15, 2004.
[2] WorldNetDaily.com, December 23, 2003, Sherrie Gossett.
[3] Fox News, November 22, 2003, Ijaz: More About Bin Laden in Iran
[4] “The News” (Pakistan), January 20, 2004. http://jang.com.pk/thenews/jan2004-daily/20-01-2004/main/main17.htm
[5] MSNBC.com, January 23, 2004.
[6] Intercepted by NEIN, http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/OBLCustody.htm
[7] The Australian, January 28, 2004.
[8] WorldNetDaily.com, January 28, 2004 citing Chicago Tribune
[9] New York Post, March 8, 2004. Citing Newsweek.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldthreats.com ...
It is my considered opinion that the announcement would best be done in a simple and low-key manner, no bragging or unneccessary detail: just Osama's head on a pole.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.