June 18, 2006
Al Qaeda Called Off a 2003 Cyanide Attack on NYC Subways
A new book claims that Al Qaeda was 45 days away from attacking the NYC subway system with cyanide gas, but then, for an unknown reason, decided not to. Um, phew? The One Percent Doctrine by Ron Suskind is being excerpted in Time magazine this week, and yesterday, Time teased the excerpt with a "web exclusive" (Ali is an Al Qaeda operative/nformant to the U.S.; Ayeri is "Yusuf al Ayeri, "bin Laden's top operative on the Arabian peninsula"; Zawahiri is Ayman Zawahiri, Bin Laden's deputy):
Ali revealed that Ayeri had visited Ayman Zawahiri in January 2003, to inform him of a plot to attack the New York City subway system using cyanide gas. Several mubtakkars were to be placed in subway cars and other strategic locations. This was not simply a proposal; the plot was well under way. In fact, zero-hour was only 45 days away. But then, for reasons still debated by U.S. intelligence officials, Zawahiri called off the attack. "Ali did not know the precise explanation why. He just knew that Zawahiri had called them off."Yesterday, the NYPD told the media, "We were aware of the plot and took the appropriate precautions," but didn't elaborate further. The NY Times has a quote from an official briefed at the time of the supposed threat:
"This is a simple cyanide thing, two chemicals mixed together, and it releases cyanide gas," he said. "They'd be lucky if they killed everybody on one car — you can do that with a 9-millimeter pistol." He added, "None of it has been confirmed in three years, who these guys were, whether they in fact had a weapon, or whether they were able to put together a weapon, whether that weapon has been defined and what it would cause or whether they were even in New York."The chemicals would have been put in beer cans and the like, which makes us wonder if the MTA has heavier-duty Roomba type cleaners to sweep the subway cars. Remember when Mayor Bloomberg freaked out the city about a possible terror threat, right before mayoral debates? And do we thank Zawahiri for calling things off?
Here is Time's excerpt of The One Percent Doctrine.
Photograph of people leaving a 7 train platform by Travis Ruse
|
Advertisement: Gothamist Continues Below!
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
This reminds me of Micheal Moore in his document: "There is no terror threat. No threat".
Of course, this is repeated by almost every democratic politician ("Bush admin is hyping up the terror threat even we KNOW there is no threat").
The attack would have weakened the democratic party and there was a good probability that weak-on-security party had gained power in 2004 making life much easier for Al-Qaida.
This reminds me of Micheal Moore in his document: "There is no terror threat. No threat".
Of course, this is repeated by almost every democratic politician ("Bush admin is hyping up the terror threat even we KNOW there is no threat").
The attack would have weakened the democratic party and there was a good probability that weak-on-security party had gained power in 2004 making life much easier for Al-Qaida.
we knew about this years ago, blah blah blah blah blah
we have smart people overseas on terror cases,
blah blah blah blah.
but we still arrest bicycle riders.
And a cop in podunk cty gets paid more.
Thank god we have ACLU fighting the evil NYPD and taking a stand against those awful subway searches.
Any particular reason we are looking at a middle eastern looking woman in the photo?
It's all I can do to curb my paranoia (and, let's face it, personal racial profiling) whenever I see a woman in a veil on the subway and not get off the train and wait for another one.
The reason I stopped, was because there was always another one in the next train!
Are we perhaps working people's nerves with that shot? If anyone's going to sneak gas into the subway, it'll probably be someone in western attire, looking as nondescript as possible.
And by the way, I've maybe seen 5 subway searches, and I'm on the subway at least 5 to ten times a day, particularly in midtown. Where is this all supposed to be going on? I'm paying for these extra police officers to stand around getting fat?
I don't think the photo was used to get a rise out of people.
It's the 7 train, remember?
Lot's of Indian women wear them, especially as the weather get's warmer. Some are quite beautiful.
I don't trust the NYPD enough to find a well hidden, concealed and developed biohazard device. (especially from countries who churn out engineers like an assembly plant)
I will trust them to beat you up for no reason and call it resisting arrest.
Yeah, she is beautiful. I take Air India whenever I go to London because the stewardesses are all beautiful in a similar way that's a pleasure to be stuck with for 7 hours.
I don't trust the NYPD to find their own asses! The ones I've seen hanging around the subway are fat, slow-moving, and seem more interested in looking at skirts than in their surveillance duties.
And by the way, what's up with all the overweight, slovenly looking cops? Aren't they obliged to conform to a certain level of physical fitness?
newyorkette: You're a very ignorant racist, but at least you figured out that 'middle eastern-looking women' are not trying to kill you.
The next thing you need to figure out is that India is not in the Middle East, it's Asia. Although the map on the subway does not show this.
I'm not a very ignorant racist, i'm just bad at geography and have some of the preconceptions common to many westerners.
I'm sorry if I offended you, and I take your correction to heart, and will remember it.
There's no need to be aggressive, especially since I was actually defending middle-eastern women, by asking why this photo was being used. Honest. I thought, why are they picking on her?
Sorry again, but please, I do believe you've misunderstood me.
PS-I'm sorry if I offended anyone with my idiot mistake, not just the person who addressed it.
I'll try and review my geography before I make future remarks.
I do still want to know what's with all the unfit cops.
Confusing a burka and veil uniform of a Middle Eastern or Muslim woman with a sari from an Indian woman is pretty weak.
I think you need to review a little more than geography. I'd suggest watching Frontline every week instead of reruns of 'Friends' and 'Sex in the City'. And subscribe to the Economist instead of 'Tiger Beat' and 'Spin'.
Duderinoo, chill out. While there were obviously things in newyorkette's first comment, she clearly seems open to being educated.
We're not going to get anywhere if we can't stay calm.
Duderinoo, that is not a sari either, it's a salwar kameez.
That woman is also, most likely, not Indian either. She's probably Bangladeshi and probably Muslim, but that doesn't explain why the hell this photo was chosen for this story, other than racism and trying to associate everyone brown with terrorism.
Now you're being deliberately contrary, because I didn't confuse a sari with a burhka at all. I only said that there was a point that a veiled woman on the subway pushed my buttons. I was just admitting to an irrational fear. Maybe I should have actually SAID the word "irrational" but I thought it was pretty obvious.
Ignorance isn't the same as being mistaken. If I were a professor of Asian or Middle Eastern Studies, you'd be right to jump down my throat. But I'm an ordinary person with knowledge in completely different domains, making no claims to expertise.
And I have never watched Sex And The City, nor Friends! I didn't even know Friends was and American show. I happen to be very educated in some things, and weak in others, that's all. I have two Masters Degrees, which attest to the fact that I'm knowledgeable in some things but not in others. Too bad for me. I count on people to tell me a thing or two that I need to know. What's wrong with that?
Why don't you tell me about the Ural Mountains which I've been looking up since making the Asian/Middle Eastern mistake, if you're so smart?
There's a lot of stuff to know out there, and I can't cover them all. Can you, smart person who never made a mistake about someone else's culture? I bet you can't tell the difference between a native Peruvian and an Ecuadorian on sight or by their accent, but I can. Because that is part of my base of knowledge. Not because you're a racist.
And as for the Economist, I don't care for it.
But Tiger Beat? Where do you get off being so sarcastic? I've been very polite and unassuming in the face of a really petulant tone while pointing out the admittedly obvious holes in my knowledge of the world. I don't mind being wrong.
I'm beginning to think the majority of Gothamist commenters are just out to have an argument at any cost. If it spares your dog or hubby from being beaten, fine, vent all you want at people for their innocent errors (even after they apologize, what grace!). But I'm out of here.
And ANONYMOUSE, thank you: that's exactly what I'd been trying to say in the first place.
And yes, I didn't know the difference between all the different garments or regions, but that's EXACTLY what I was getting at.
Irony? The Economist is only slightly less conservative than the Wall Street Journal.
And that girl at the New School that dissed McCain said something along the lines of "nobody in the world wants to hurt us."
I really just made my comments to get a rise out of you and others; I really didn't expect to see you inject your academic credentials, but I'm glad you felt my purposefully jerky comments were worth defending yourself against. For the record, though, I'll admit my comments were not worth your long response.
I'll also admit that I like your blog better than most.
I think that it has already been explained as to why the attack was called off. It wasn't worth it! Yes, it wouldn't have killed "enough" people for all the trouble Al Qaida had to go through.
Aren't those people nice, no?
Interesting choice of pictures to use...an Indian woman dressed traditionally. Editorial discretion perhaps???