The LWOT: Al-Qaeda acknowledges bin Laden death

Foreign Policy and the New America Foundation bring you a twice weekly brief on the legal war on terror. You can read it on foreignpolicy.com or get it delivered directly to your inbox -- just sign up here.

BY ANDREW LEBOVICH | MAY 6, 2011

Al-Qaeda acknowledges bin Laden death 

Al-Qaeda offered the first confirmation of the death of its leader today, saying in a statement posted to a jihadist Internet forum that the group will continue to target Americans and America's allies, and that bin Laden's blood, "will not be wasted" (AP). For a full collection of news on bin Laden's death, the political debate and regional responses to the killing, see Katherine Tiedemann's AfPak Channel Daily Brief here, here and here. 

Intelligence officials yesterday indicated that initial information gleaned from a store of papers and files taken from Osama bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan indicate that the deceased al-Qaeda leader stayed in contact with the terror network, and played a direct, operational role in planning attacks (NYT, Washington Post, Guardian). Pakistani officials asserted that bin Laden was marginalized in al-Qaeda and split with bin Laden six years ago, a claim U.S. officials dispute (WSJ).

The information gathered in the raid has already prompted an attack warning from the Department of Homeland Security, which cautioned yesterday in a release that as late as February 2010 al-Qaeda contemplated an attack on U.S. rail systems, though a DHS spokesman deemed the plot to be aspirational (CNN, Guardian, WSJ, AP). Officials have been concerned about the threat of a retaliatory attack since bin Laden was killed by Navy SEALs last Sunday (early Monday in Pakistan), as the FBI went back on "war footing" and senior officials indicated that arrests of terror suspects may be accelerated, while additional names may be added to terrorism watch lists and "no fly" lists (National Journal, Washington Post, CNN, ABC, NYT). British and French officials have also expressed concern about possible retaliatory attacks (Le Monde, BBC, Telegraph).

The news comes as the White House has had to alter its account of the raid that killed bin Laden, as officials told reporters this week that bin Laden was unarmed when he was killed, toned down earlier statements about the intensity of fighting in the house, and debated and then rejected releasing photos of bin Laden's body (NYT, Washington Post, Telegraph). The Washington Post has a must-read series on the hunt for bin Laden, and the New York Times reports on a raid carried out in 2007 in Afghanistan based on intelligence that bin Laden would be in the country (Washington Post, NYT). And Indonesian officials said this week that Indonesian terrorist Umar Patek was going to meet bin Laden when he was arrested in Abbottabad earlier this year (AP, TIME).

Bin Laden killing sparks debate on Guantánamo, torture, and targeted killings

Bin Laden's death has fueled debate about how the information leading to the terror leader was gathered, as leading Republicans like Rep. Peter King and former Bush administration officials insisted this week that the harsh interrogation of terror suspects in CIA prisons and Guantánamo Bay, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Faraj al-Libbi, helped lead to bin Laden's trusted courier, Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti, who owned the house in which bin Laden was killed (WSJ, NYT, LAT, CNN, New Yorker, Toronto Star, FT, CBS, TIME). White House and Democratic members of Congress, as well as some Republicans, have disputed this claim, arguing that the courier's identity was known before the capture of KSM or al-Libbi, and that it took years of intelligence gathering from myriad sources to find al-Kuwaiti's real name and track him down (NYT, CNN, AFP, National Journal). Additionally, key information in the investigation seems to have come from cooperative detainees, such as Hassan Ghul, captured in 2004, as well as detainees seized after the most brutal interrogation practices of the Bush administration had been discontinued, such as important militant Abdul Hadi al-Iraqi, who was captured in 2007 (Guardian).

International experts and officials also continue to question the legality of bin Laden's killing, as the UN high commissioner for human rights Navi Pillay indicated that she would like a "full disclosure" of details surrounding the operation (CNN, Guardian, Reuters, The Atlantic). U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder told a Congressional committee on Wednesday that the raid was "lawful" and that the United States was acting in "national self-defense" by targeting bin Laden, and implied that the Navy SEALs would have been allowed to shoot bin Laden even if he had indicated a desire to surrender (Politico, AFP). Surrenders must be accepted under international law, though Holder and others pointed to the possibility of a fake surrender as grounds for using lethal force if the SEAL team perceived bin Laden as a threat.

Many experts, however, have concluded the raid and killing was legal even if bin Laden was unarmed, pointing to the Authorization of the Use of Military Force that allows for the targeting of al-Qaeda commanders and the possibility that the room in which bin Laden was found had been booby-trapped (WSJ, Lawfare Blog). U.S. officials also assert that a plan was in place to interrogate bin Laden had he been taken alive, a move that would have doubtless raised further questions over how bin Laden would be held and eventually tried (LAT, Washington Post, National Journal)

In other al-Qaeda news...

A German-Syrian man, Rami Makanesi, confessed in a Frankfurt court on May 5 to being a member of al-Qaeda as well as receiving training from the group in Pakistan's tribal areas (Deutsche Welle, AP, Reuters). Makanesi, who was arrested last year by Pakistani authorities and may have provided some of the information that led German authorities to issue terrorism alerts last fall, was reportedly sent back by a senior al-Qaeda member to raise funds in Germany.

Saudi Arabian officials announced on May 4 that an al-Qaeda member on the Kingdom's most wanted list, Khaled Hathal Abdullah al-Atifi al-Qahtani, had turned himself in to Saudi authorities (Guardian, AP). And a U.S. drone has reportedly killed two brothers and members of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) in Yemen's Shabwa province, the first drone strike to target Yemen since 2002 (Washington Post, CNN, FT).

Moroccan authorities have arrested three people in connection with last Friday's deadly bombing of a popular café in Marrakesh, saying that at least one was "loyal" to al-Qaeda, and had tried to travel to Chechnya and Iraq (Guardian, AP). They also said the man had learned to fabricate explosives over the Internet.

Anarchy in the UK

The coroner conducting the inquest into the 7/7 London transit bombings announced the results of her findings (available here) today, formally recording verdicts for "unlawful killing" for the four suicide bombers who killed 52 commuters, and offering a series of recommendations for improving the practices of the internal security agency MI5 as well as London's emergency responders (Guardian, Telegraph, BBC, AP).

British police this week arrested five men near a nuclear power plant under anti-terrorism laws, a move that prompted several raids in London but ended with the men's release on May 4 (Guardian, NYT, WSJ). And a Manchester court heard arguments yesterday in the case of a former Taliban fighter who allegedly tried to recruit undercover security officers to fight for the group in Afghanistan and Pakistan (BBC). The man's son and two others are also on trial.

Finally, the trial for four British police officers accused of beating a terrorism suspect began this week in London (Reuters, BBC, Independent).

Trials and Tribulations

  • ProPublica reports this week that the trial of Canadian-born Chicago man Tahawwur Hussain Rana, scheduled to begin this month, will bring out new details about the alleged terrorist ties of Pakistan's powerful Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) (ProPublica).
  • A New York judge on May 3 upheld the verdicts of four men convicted of plotting to attack Bronx synagogues and an Air National Guard base, in what turned out to be a government sting operation (NYT, Bloomberg, Courthouse News). The men alleged that they were entrapped by a government informant who offered them money and a luxury car for their participation in the plot. 
  • Czech police this week arrested nine people on charges that they helped terrorist activities in the North Caucasus region (RFE/RL).

ASIF HASSAN/AFP/Getty Images

 

Andrew Lebovich is a program associate in the National Security Studies Program at the New America Foundation.

ROMAN GIL

12:07 PM ET

May 8, 2011

The "Osama Is Dead" Story Needs To Be Investigated

The “Osama Bin Laden Is Dead Story” Has Many Questions That Need To Be Investigated.

May 4, 2011

Osama Bin Laden was a terrorist and deserved the death penalty. This is why the media must investigate this story instead of merely parroting the information that was provided by the government.

Based on my experience as a decorated US Army combat veteran, this story has credibility problems. I tried to post these questions in the comments section of several mass media publications and they did not get posted. A free press is essential in a free society because it has a duty to investigate what the government is doing and it must educate citizens. A free media must publish all responsible questions from the public and be open to debate. Thomas Jefferson said that given the choice between government and a printing press, he would take the printing press.

1. Why they did not show Osama’s body publicly? In 1967, Che Guevara the Communist guerrilla was captured alive wounded in Bolivia, interrogated, killed and his body was displayed to the world media. A responsible government would display Osama’s body to the media and to a panel of international physicians to prove without a doubt the death of the most wanted terrorist in the world. The government version that Osama’s head was too damaged to show the public is not credible. Morticians can prepare a body for public display. Media and international physicians would be welcome to take DNA samples from the body as total proof of Osama’s demise.

2. Osama was unarmed when they shot him? Osama was a terrorist veteran of the Afghan Soviet war that was waged in the 1980s between Islamist guerrillas and the Soviet Union. Anybody with his background would have alarmed, mined and booby trapped his house. Weapons would be in his possession at all times and in every room of the house, including hand grenades. He had plenty of time to install command detonated mines everywhere outside and inside the compound. I have problems believing that the most wanted terrorist in the world was killed while unarmed. When I was in a war zone, my weapon was with me at all times and I slept with it and lots of ammo and hand grenades, could Osama be so foolish that he did not have weapons in his room?

3. There were no American casualties? This is simply not credible because attacking a compound that is occupied by dangerous men that had plenty of time to prepare for defense, makes it certain that the attackers must sustain casualties. Osama’s terrorist group specializes in suicide bombers of both sexes. They could not spare even one of them to protect their leader?

4. Why did we spend $1.5 Trillion dollars occupying and "nation building" Iraq and Afghanistan instead of targeting Osama's less than 1,000 terrorists?. We could have got Osama 10 years ago at a reasonable cost. When American troops landed in Afghanistan after the 9/11 terrorist attack, the Afghan Northern Alliance had already overthrown the Taliban government that harbored Osama. It was not necessary to occupy the country. A war using Special Forces would have been sufficient

5. Why are we still involved in the Israeli-Muslim conflict? This is the cause of the war on terror. We inherited Israel’s enemies and they struck us on 9/11. The effects of our involvement will continue until we divorce from the Muslim world and focus on killing the actual terrorists until they are finished. Our absence from the Muslim world will make Muslims eventually stop provoking us with terrorism because they will want to keep us out. It is common sense that it would be in the Muslim interest to stop terrorism against America to keep America from coming back to their lands. With America out of the Israeli-Muslim conflict, the Muslims will be free to focus on their affairs and their problem with Israel. Israel has nuclear weapons and a strong military that assures it that it can survive any war without America. The only beneficiaries of the present war on terror are the war contractors and the special interest groups.

Some possible explanations for this unusual story;

a) The government killed Osama Bin Laden but it believes that it is not necessary to provide conclusive proof of their actions because they are universally loved and trusted. This means that they are incompetent because they did not prove their story.

b) Osama Bin Laden was hooked on opium and developed a false sense of security. His followers shared this drug problem and failed to fortify and provide guards for the Osama compound.

c) The masses are so stupid that they will accept without question anything that the government and media tells them, so why bother with proof?

d) Osama Bin Laden died years ago, and now it is a convenient time to bring him back to distract the masses and continue the hugely profitable war on terror and gain mass support for a government that cannot exist without debt and financial dependency on special interest groups.

e) This story is a case that simply shows the irresponsibility and incompetence of the American government.

The $6 Trillion spent on the war on terror (direct and indirect costs)continues to pile additional debt and there is no end in sight. The money that was wasted on fighting this war with a wrong strategy could have been wisely invested by loaning it to private enterprise companies that would be protected from cheap imports. A new industrial policy like South Korea’s would reconstruct and protect a new American industrial base that would replace the industry and technology that global corporations exported to China and other Third World countries under the globalization false ideology that has ruined America and Europe and created millions of permanently unemployed people. America would be able to replace imports with nationally produced products and services. The trade losses would end and careers in science, engineering, chemistry and skilled jobs would be abundant in an industrial economy.

With a new industrial base, America would be independent of imports and global debt financing. Presently, the Federal government needs to annually beg and borrow $1.65 Trillion a year from international capital and US investors because the industrial base of the American economy is only 9%.

There are not enough corporate or individual taxpayers to support the huge Federal, State and local governments, plus their armies of government contractors. In any case, the American governments must reduce their size and expenses by 40% to balance their budgets and avoid digging America deeper into debt and dependency on the kindness of creditors.

The present economic and political dependency of the American economy on debt, special interest groups and imports makes a continuation of the present globalist war on terror fatal for America. It’s a choice of nation building America before it becomes a terminal case of financial and social cancer, or continue to dig the debt and dependency grave deeper until we end like other failed world powers, including the British Empire, the French Empire and Soviet Union.

Roman Gil
http://roman-gil1.blogspot.com
www.facebook.com/roman.gil1
http://twitter.com/RomanGil1

 

DANNCLI379

4:23 AM ET

June 4, 2011

Good point

I'm talking about this comment above: The $6 Trillion spent on the war on terror (direct and indirect costs)continues to pile additional debt and there is no end in sight. The money that was wasted on fighting this war with a wrong strategy could have been wisely invested by loaning it to private enterprise companies that would be protected from cheap imports. A new industrial homeschooling policy like South Korea’s would reconstruct and protect a new American industrial base that would replace the industry and technology that global corporations exported to China and other Third World countries under the globalization false ideology that has ruined America and Europe and created millions of permanently unemployed people.