The London Bridge attack story continues to spin wildly out of control, as the third attacker named in the terror atrocity, another known wolf, was placed on an EU-wide database and according to security officials, openly acknowledged the will to carryout terror in March of 2016.
The UK’s prior warning of the third London attacker only raises more questions about the intelligence world at large and the true nature of terror in the West. Here at 21WIRE, we’ve outlined key elements in the London Bridge attack narrative and have analyzed the last three UK attacks in great detail, as the relationship between MI5 British security services and the European Union was found to be inextricably linked to two of the three terrorists involved in the London Bridge terror event.
Let’s take a look at some of the latest details in this case, while examining the historical bond between terror, security and media…
‘PRIOR WARNING’ – The London Bridge attack revealed two Known wolf terrorists (Photo Illustration 21WIRE’s Shawn Helton)
After two identities of the three involved in the London Bridge terror event were released earlier this week, British authorities announced the identity of the third attacker, an individual already well-known to security, 22 year-old Youssef Zaghba. In addition to being another ‘known wolf’ Zaghba, also openly acknowledged his ambition to commit an act of terror to airport security officials.
“Two former European intelligence officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the case, confirmed that Mr. Zaghba had been stopped by the authorities at the airport near Bologna, Italy, in March 2016 while he was trying to travel to Turkey and on to Syria to fight for the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL. He was carrying an electronic device with Islamic State propaganda, they said.
Mr. Zaghba told a security guard that he was “going to be a terrorist,” according to Giuseppe Amato, the chief prosecutor in Bologna. The police arrested him, and also flagged Mr. Zaghba as a “suspicious person” to the British and Moroccan authorities, according to Mr. Amato, but there was not enough to justify criminal charges.”
According to Giuseppe Amato, the chief prosecutor in Bologna, Italy, authorities did everything they could, as Zaghba was only a “suspicious person” and “there was no proof he was a terrorist.” This prompted the media to focus their attention on alleged ISIS propaganda on the attacker’s cell phone as his main offense, most likely in an effort to rally public support for new sweeping security changes, as well as gain further access into personal devices as pursued in the aftermath of the dubious San Bernardino shooting case.
This directly dovetails PM Theresa May‘s recentdeclaration’s concerning ‘online extremism’ – a vague concept that could be loosely applied to all kinds of acts, beliefs or statements – whether criminal or not.
During the apparent encryption saga between Apple and the FBI, we stated that there are no guarantees in the security world, especially if a digital master-key were to be used, as it would potentially make it easier for invaders (either the government, or various hackers) mining for data moving forward into the future.
While prosecutor Amato attempted explain the release of Zaghba over the perception of Italian law, it appears according to Italian anti-terror measures on the books since 2015, police may have been able to prevent Zaghba. Most notably, Italian officials may have had the ability to detain him for further questioning, in addition to potentially drafting charges for his attempt to join and support ISIS, as well as withdrawing his passport. One could argue that a tough prosecutor could have made this case.
Here’s a screenshot of the anti-terror legislation in Italy for review…
Given Zaghba’s terror declarations and his plan to join ISIS, it seems based on Italian law, one of the main suspects in the London Bridge attack very well could have been charged with a serious crime prior to committing terror.
While mainstream media outlets appear to deflect security responsibility over Zaghba, as he was not a ‘subject of interest’ to MI5 or London police, the fact remains he was on an EU-wide database, and based on what we’ve shown above, should have had his passport revoked at the very least, in addition to being detained with the threat of other terror-related charges. While the legal wrangling may have not entirely prevented a crime, it would have certainly been a huge roadblock for Zaghba’s involvement in the London Bridge attack.
In addition to the unexplained security links to known wolves in the UK and the laws that failed to prevent terror, it appears that once again Britain’s Channel 4 is at the forefront after revelations of Zaghba’s accomplice, Khuram Butt (well-known to MI5),had been featured in the documentary ‘The Jihadist Next Door’ that airedin the UK in 2016. Not only was this whole aspect to the case reminiscent of the Orlando shooting saga, where the apparent Pulse nightclub shooter Omar Mateen,was found to have been featured in two high-profile documentaries, it also recalled Channel 4’s links to Mohammad Emwazi, the man purported to be the terror avatar Jihadi John in 2015. Curiously, we find UK mainstream media outlet Channel 4 at the center of the known wolf web. Here’s a passage from our unmasking of Jihadi John in 2015 for comparison:
“Back in 2009, UK intelligence services in partnership with Metropolitan Police, announced the existence of a covert social engineering effort known as the The Channel Project, which was being run in hopes to target children with traits which may indicate an attraction to “extreme” views and a susceptibility to being groomed by “radicalisers” in the future. It goes without saying, that a secret program of this kind could just as easily be used to groom future ‘radicals’ and informants too.”
Here’s a video provided by Britain’s Channel 4, that depicted a camera shy Emwazi in his teenage years…
Surrounding many large-scale terror incidents in the West these days is the strange existence of suspected terrorists being attached to the entertainment industry, other past terror connections, while simultaneously linked to various ongoing terror operations.
This was certainly the case as Emwazi’s longtime West London associate, former UK rapper (turned Jihadist) Abdel Bary, the initial ‘Jihadi John’ suspect, had also been linked to the ‘London Boys’ terror network, along with Emwazi.
In early 2013, we were told that Emwazi had “fled the gaze of MI5” to head for Syria, at that same time the BBC Radio 1 featured Bary, disappeared from London – as another high-profile suspect, Ahmed Mohamed (tied to Somali militant group al-Shabab), the man who allegedly recruited Emwazi in 2012, gave MI5 the slip after changing into a ‘burka’ at a mosque.
In 2011, the Daily Mail reported the following regarding the sleeper cell known as the London Boys:
“A group of terrorists who trained in Somalia returned to Britain to carry out a wave of attacks which were demanded by Osama Bin Laden before his death.
The gang, dubbed the ‘London Boys’, were taught by a top Al-Qaeda explosives expert in the war-torn country and include Reza Afsharzadegan, a former IT student from Ladbroke Grove, West London.”
The article continued, stating the following:
“Leaked documents reveal how the ‘sleeper operatives’ were trained by an Al-Qaeda official who is wanted by the FBI with a £3m ($5m) reward for his capture.”
As we’ve stated many times, Western political leaders and their media publicly discuss the idea of so-called terror‘sleeper cells’ hiding in a nation near you, but none of them acknowledge the historical fact that they themselves have helped to harbor, grow, foment and radicalize individuals through various secret counter-terrorism operations. Allied nations of course, will bring up the fact that Western intelligence regularly uses double agents and informants, under the banner of ‘security’ to obfuscate the true intentions of such programs – always careful as to how they paint Western foreign policy aims.
QUESTION: Are we seeing a new network of London and ‘Manchester Boys’ sleeper cells in the UK today, if so, why?
Recently the well-known Australian journalist and documentary film maker John Pilger also weighed in on the collusion of terror and security in an article that was republished here at 21WIRE:
“In 2011, according to Middle East Eye, the LIFG in Manchester were known as the “Manchester boys”. Implacably opposed to Mu’ammar Gadaffi, they were considered high risk and a number were under Home Office control orders – house arrest – when anti-Gadaffi demonstrations broke out in Libya, a country forged from myriad tribal enmities.
Suddenly the control orders were lifted. “I was allowed to go, no questions asked,” said one LIFG member. MI5 returned their passports and counter-terrorism police at Heathrow airport were told to let them board their flights.
The overthrow of Gaddafi, who controlled Africa’s largest oil reserves, had been long been planned in Washington and London. According to French intelligence, the LIFG made several assassination attempts on Gadaffi in the 1990s – bank-rolled by British intelligence. In March 2011, France, Britain and the US seized the opportunity of a “humanitarian intervention” and attacked Libya. They were joined by Nato under cover of a UN resolution to “protect civilians”.”
The London Bridge attack leaves a number of questions unanswered – will we ever know the complete story for an event that lasted only 8 minutes total?
Featured image: credits to the 21st Century wire
Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article.