CIA warns France of threat to attack Paris rail network

Agence France-Presse | 4/09/04

[kattracks]

Paris city rail traffic was temporarily brought to a halt and five stations evacuated evening following a CIA alert of a possible bomb attack, police said.

The CIA (The US Central Intelligence Agency) had warned French domestic counter-intelligence of a threat to carry out an attack Thursday on either the Paris suburban rail network or the subway, they said.

Traffic was temporarily halted on the A line of the Paris regional suburban rail network, the RER, which also runs through the city centre.

Police evacuated the stations after the CIA informed the French of an anonymous message it had received from Madrid warning of a possible attack between 1830 and 1930 GMT.

The RER stations affected included one at the Gare de Lyon mainline rail station.

Police later announced they had ended the state of alert at 9:30 pm after an interruption of about one hour and a half.

"Following systematic searches of stations on RER A line, the police prefecture has requested the RATP (Paris region transport authority) to resume normal traffic," a police spokesman said.

Police said the warning to the CIA came in an anonymous e-mail message from Madrid, where massive bomb attacks at rail stations left 191 people dead on March 11.

A US government official confirmed Washington had passed on uncorroborated information to France concerning the threat of an attack.

"The US government did pass some uncorroborated information to the French," the official, who asked not to be named, told AFP.

He said the information was transmitted "due to time sensitivity," despite the fact that "it wasn't necessarily verifiable at the time."

He did not specify the source of the information or the precise time it was given.

Paris police said Thursday's state of alert caused disruption to traffic during the rush hour.

But there was no panic during a period of the day when some 40,000 commuters were using the A line running acros Paris from east to west and serving major business districts such as La Defense and the Champs-Elysees, as well as Chatelet-Les Halles, the capital's biggest urban communications hub.

A large police turnout carried out searches, including tight inspections of passengers' luggage.

On March 12 the French authorities raised to the security alert to red at railway stations and airports.

Last December 24 and 25, the French government cancelled six flights from Paris to the United States after American security authorities provided warnings of possible bomb attacks.

Two unexploded bombs were found in February and March next to busy French rail lines. Investigators said they could have been made only by people who had trained as military personnel or engineers.

Last month French police and intelligence urgently launched a hunt for clues to a mysterious group calling itself AZF that tried to blackmail the authorities for money, threatening bomb attacks on railways that it said would outdo even Madrid's March 11 bombings.

AZF later sent a letter to the interior ministry saying it was suspending its threat because of technical and logistical problems, but that once it returned with a demand for money this must be paid "without discussion".

The group, which initially carried on an exchange with authorities through coded messages in newspaper classified advertisements after first surfacing in mid-December, set a price of four million dollars and two million euros in cash.

It warned it was capable of making sure "France will surpass ingloriously the sad records of Spain" -- a reference to the March 11 train bombings thought to have been carried out by Al-Qaeda.

[tiki]

But why would they target the French? They're not against terrorism as far as I can see. France is their friend.

[Support Free Republic]

[steve86]

Some comemnts on the situation today earlier here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1113885/posts

[Azzurri]

They're not against terrorism as far as I can see. France is their friend.

Well, they won't let the jihadists wear head scarves to carry out their attacks and so the terrorists are in a huff about that.

[Cobra64]

"France will surpass ingloriously the sad records of Spain"

Because France will race to raise the White Flag faster than Spain?

[Jet Jaguar]

Al qaeda know France is scared of them. Remember when they blew up a french oil tanker? Response=None.

[oolatec]

Here is what is going to happen... France will find no evidence of a pending attack, and blame us for scaring them unnecessarily. A few weeks from now, they will actually be attacked (a few weeks, or whenever), and they will blame us for not warning them sufficiently... mark my words.

[teldon30]

Let me see here....the CIA has intelligence on Paris railways...but well armed Iraqi militias crawl out of the woodworks and our military is caught offguard.... soemone explain to me how i should feel confident about the CIA.

[DoughtyOne]

Sounds about right.

[DoughtyOne]

Remember 'War Games' the movie? Remember the big computer that ran war game scenarios day in and day out, called something like W.H.O.P.E.R., or some such? The idea was that every scenario known to man would be studied and counter tactics instigated. I guess the C.I.A., the N.S.A. and the F.B.I. never saw the movie.

Speaking of movies, I guess none of the employees of these agencies saw 'Executive Decision' either. In 'Executive Decision' a deranged middle-eastern character loaded the plane with some exotic 'botulism' derivitive, and was going to crash the plane in a suicide attack that would take out a significant sector of the easter seabaord populas.

I'm sorry, but if the braintrusts in Hollywierd could see something like this coming, why couldn't our national securtiy agencies?

I forget the airport where the president's aircraft is stationed. Is it Andrews? What I find just astounding is that our major cities didn't have aircraft ready to scramble to defend them. Now if someone wants to make the case that New York, Chicago, LA and other cities arust too numerous to defend, I could possibly buy into the arguement. I'd at least find it a valid retort. I can tell you that ultimately it wouldn't sell with me.

Even if it did sell with me, who could make the same arguement about Washington, D.C.? I mean, come on folks. When the Pentagon was attacked, we didn't have fighter aircraft that could get to the capital in under 20-30 minutes. Even after a small plane crashed into the White House in a suicide attack, our national security agencies didn't see fit to set up a small air strike force in close proximity to the capital.

Now I'm not pointing the finder at the President, but somewhere along the line, with tens of thousands of national security officers scurrying around D.C., wouldn't you think even one persuasive person would see a risk, advise of an easy solution and get the thing ramrodded through? Why don't we have a small presence of fighter aircraft that can rotate out of Andrews, so that they'll be just five minutes from the capital in an emergency?

Someone today mentioned a national security breakdown. I don't see how anyone could state otherwise. Those of us on this forum know about the intellectually vacant White House of the 1990s, but few of us are willing to state that the national security agencies were totally screwing up as well.

I'm not sure what the priorities in the national security agencies were in the 1990s, but I'd think protecting the capital might rank right up there. I'd think protecting the American public might rank right up there. I'd think getting their thumb out of their --- might rank somewhere near the top.

[struwwelpeter]

Sounds more like a case of "Hey Achmed, think this phone is bugged?" "One way to find out, Makhmood"