British Muslim Convert Pleads Guilty to Bomb Plot

Dhiren Barot, a British Muslim convert, has pleaded guilty to plotting to explode bombs in New York, Washington, and New Jersey, targeting financial institutions and to plotting to set off a dirty bomb and car bombs in Britain. At the time of Barot's arrest in 2004 near the US presidential election, Howard Dean and other Democrats accused Republicans of exploiting the threat for political advantage.



Although, the plot was foiled before reaching an advanced stage, clearly an attack such as was planned would have had a devastating effect on the US and Britain. British intelligence agencies are to be commended for their work in arresting this individual before the damage could have been done. At the time of the arrest in 2004, US authorities believe that the threat was imminent.

Related News Links:
www.washingtonpost.com
www.washingtonpost.com
news.bbc.co.uk
www.msnbc.msn.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
TA-HISTORY: Three Arrested for Summer Plot Against Financial Sites

...plotting to explode bombs in New York, Washington, and New Jersey, targeting financial institutions and to plotting to set off a dirty bomb and car bombs in Britain.

Looks like he had quite the busy schedule set up for his lonely old self.

Too bad we don't get to see any evidence since a trial is not needed now.

Amazing that it only took two years of waterboarding to get him to confess to all charges eh?

Just in time for the next election.
See we are winning the war on terror!


.

Did you read any of the links I provided, Gools? Is that the best response you could muster? Where are your links to substantiate that the defendant was illegally interrogated in any way?

British authorities charged eight alleged al Qaeda operatives yesterday with conspiracy to commit murder and other counts in connection with a reported plot to attack the International Monetary Fund building in Washington and other sites in New York and Newark.

One of those charged was Dhiren Barot -- known publicly until yesterday as Eisa Hindi -- who is suspected of conducting surveillance of U.S. financial buildings that was detailed in computer files seized recently in Pakistan. The discovery of the computer documents led the U.S. government on Aug. 1 to raise the terrorism alert to orange, or "high risk," for the financial sectors in Washington, New York and Newark.

Britain Charges 8 In Alleged Terror Plot

Many converts have become trusted operatives at the highest levels of al Qaeda. Christian Ganczarski, a Polish-born German who trained in Afghanistan and met Osama bin Laden, was arrested in Paris in June 2003. Investigators said he was in direct contact with Khalid Sheik Mohammed, organizer of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, and helped plan at least two attacks in Africa.

Dhiren Barot, a British citizen and alleged ringleader of a scheme uncovered in 2004 to attack financial targets in New York and Washington with weapons of mass destruction, was born to Hindu parents but converted to Islam at age 20. U.S. investigators say Barot took orders from Abu Feraj Libi, a high-ranking al Qaeda planner captured in Pakistan last year.

Other converts who allegedly reported to the top tier of al Qaeda include Jose Padilla, a U.S. citizen, and Binyam Mohammed, an Ethiopian-born resident of London, both of whom are accused by Pentagon officials of planning "dirty bomb" attacks and other plots against the United States. Richard Reid, convicted of trying to blow up an American Airlines jet in December 2001 with explosives stuffed in his shoes, is another convert who was assigned his mission by top al Qaeda leaders.

Trial of French Islamic Radical Sheds Light on Converts' Role

Dhiren Barot, 32, Qaisar Shaffi, 25, and Nadeem Tarmohammed, 26, all of Willesden, north-west London, were arrested in August 2004.

US charges that they plotted chemical or radioactive attacks on the buildings carry possible life sentences.

UK trio face US terrorism charges

The suspect at the center of new terror charges filed today in Great Britain once traveled with Osama bin Laden’s former bodyguard to Malaysia at the time of a crucial Al Qaeda summit where U.S. intelligence officials believe the September 11 attacks were planned, NEWSWEEK has learned.

The suspect charged was identified publicly today as Dhiren Barot, a 32-year-old resident of London who once fought with mujahedin forces in Kashmir and served as an instructor at an Afghan training camp. Barot and seven other suspects were charged by British authorities with “conspiracy to commit a public nuisance” by launching a terror attack in the United Kingdom using radioactive materials, toxic gases and chemicals. Barot’s lawyer did not return calls seeking comment.

Barot, who was arrested on Aug. 3, was also accused of possessing reconnaissance plans of the New York Stock Exchange, the Citigroup building and other offices in New York, Washington and Newark, N.J. These were the same plans as those discovered on a computer in Pakistan in July, prompting U.S. officials to issue a public terror warning on Sunday, Aug. 1.

Bin Laden’s Mystery Man

It is obvious to anyone who does the research that this was no lone nincompoop with delusions of grandeur.

Did you read any of the links I provided, Gools? Is that the best response you could muster? Where are your links to substantiate that the defendant was illegally interrogated in any way?

Nope! You got me! I just posted the first thing that popped into my conspiracy filled head.

[sarcasm...
That's become the modus operandi around here hasn't it?
/sarcasm]
.

No he was not alone, however his so called confession does NOT implicate the guilt of the 7 others who will face trial next year.

This so called plot caused massive security alert when it first emerged, however this appears to have been a complete over reaction.

This so called plot was little more than the ideas of one delusional man, there is no reason to believe that this was a creadible threat.

"The Crown could not dispute claims from the defence that no funding had been received for the projects, nor any vehicles or bomb-making materials acquired, he said. "

BBC Link

Further there is no connection to the mythical Al Qaeda or any other terrorist network.

The focus is on so called plans (delusional writings) of this man with the emphasis being on that theyCOULD or would have resulted if deaths of many IF they ever got to an unlikley stage of fulfilment.

There is no suggestion that this is likley.

Just looking at the plans it is clear that this is a delsuional wannabe, they were over egged, over hyped & in the main overly stupid.

Elohim2006

Further there is no connection to the mythical Al Qaeda or any other terrorist network.

It is agreed that the plot had not yet received funding and that his confession did not include the other seven defendants. These facts are not really significant and of course, we will see what happens when the others go to trial.

I have already supplied a link and a quote that ties Barot to al Qaeda.

You may read it in its entirety here:

www.msnbc.msn.com...

I have already supplied a link and a quote that ties Barot to al Qaeda.

I think we need to make differance between sensational, unproven news headlines, written at the time to sell newspapers & the facts that come out during any trial.

The prosecution in this trial has not suggested any inviolvement or ties to Al Qaeda, therefore we should assume this is not a submissable fact & will not be written in the realms of time as what occured.

Newspapers, media & us all speculate at the time of breaking news, however if these are not relied upon or brought forth in anyway during a trial then I would suggest that they are no longer relevant.

A case in point, the link which you quoted from Msnbc stated the following headline:

"British authorities provide details of a terror plot narrowly averted—and the Al Qaeda operative at its center"

MSNBC Link

While this article may or may not have been written in good faith (I doubt it), we now know from the FACTS of the trial that these were just plans or as the prosection conceeded.....


"The Crown could not dispute claims from the defence that no funding had been received for the projects, nor any vehicles or bomb-making materials acquired, he said. "

BBC Link

Does that sound like a plot that has been narrolwy averted?

Given the above & the omission by the prosection of any Al Qaeda link, the speclative suggestion of link to Al Qaeda should be seen for what it is.

Hype, speculation, hystiria & now deemed evidence in a court of law.

Elohim2006

It has been confirmed, and I provided a link to substantiate the fact, that the plot was not narrowly averted. That does not prove that the plot was not a serious threat to British and US national security.

Where are your links to substantiate your claim that the defendant is a delusional nobody?

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
It has been confirmed, and I provided a link to substantiate the fact, that the plot was not narrowly averted.

How do you justify calling it narrowly averted when there was no funding and no bombs?

Originally posted by Jamuhn
How do you justify calling it narrowly averted when there was no funding and no bombs?

Reread my post. I think you'll find the answer to be obvious.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by Jamuhn
How do you justify calling it narrowly averted when there was no funding and no bombs?

Reread my post. I think you'll find the answer to be obvious.

I'd like to understand why you think so, but you only go on to say that those facts are insignificant. It may be that this person had the will along with others to cause so much destruction, but his will alone cannot carry out such plans.

Even you state in your original post..."the plot was foiled before reaching an advanced stage". So, how can you agree with the media frenzy that it was narrowly averted when you even admit yourself that there was no funding, no bombs, and it wasn't even in an advanced stage of planning?

I think the point is that the media is significantly overhyping how immediate the threat was.

Please show me where I said the threat was narrowly averted.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Please show me where I said the threat was narrowly averted.

Ok, so it seems you do agree it's sensationalist hype...

Well, then,

Originally posted by Jamuhn
Ok, so it seems you do agree it's sensationalist hype...

No, I do not agree. I believe that the plot was real and significant and that good law enforcement and intelligence stopped the plot before it became imminent. Hindsight affords you the luxury of your simplistic tripe, but such was not evident two years ago.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
I believe that the plot was real and significant and that good law enforcement and intelligence stopped the plot before it became imminent. Hindsight affords you the luxury of your simplistic tripe, but such was not evident two years ago.

Tell me what I wrote that is simplistic tripe. Your lack of comprehension does not make it so.

We are not talking law enforcement here, we are talking about the media overhyping the situation to pander to the "politics of fear." The media, even after the facts were known, continued to follow the doctrine of heightened fear that helps manipulate people into conformity. And there are plenty of examples for this, sometimes they'll look right back in the mirror at you Grady.



[edit on 12-10-2006 by Jamuhn]

Originally posted by Jamuhn
...we are talking about the media overhyping the situation to pander to the "politics of fear."

No, that's what you are talking about. That was then and this is now. I'm tired of arguing with someone who won't bother to read my posts properly and can't let go of the past and won't discuss the situation as it exists today.



[edit on 2006/10/12 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by Jamuhn
...we are talking about the media overhyping the situation to pander to the "politics of fear."

No, that's what you are talking about. That was then and this is now. I'm tired of arguing with someone who won't bother to read my posts properly and can't let go of the past and won't discuss the situation as it exists today.

OK, well, I don't think it makes sense to answer my questions by going off into a different subject.

What is it about your posts that answers my question? Why do you think the fact there was NO funding and NO bombs is an insignificant detail here? Because you think these were insignificant, do you think the press would act responsibly in saying "Another Close Call! World Almost Killed By Terrorist Brit!"?

Jamuhn,

If you read my original post and it's references and my subsequent posts, you'll see that you are arguing with yourself about issues that have been already been clarified.

That's my last response to you on this matter.