ENN DAILY REPORT
EmergencyNet NEWS Service
Wednesday, July 24, 1996
Vol. 2 - 206
THE LONG LIST OF SUSPECTS ...
Possible Theory of Motivation
By Steve Macko, ENN Editor
As the investigation into the cause of the downing of TWA Flight 800 continues, those who are officially in charge
say the same thing while the cameras and microphones are on -- they say that they are "keeping an open mind."
However, sources say that once the lights for the cameras are off, those same officials are telling a different story.
ENN is hearing a lot of rumbling from the intelligence community. Overseas, operatives for the U.S. Central
Intelligence Agency (CIA) have been extremely busy. It is known that the CIA has sent secret communiqués to its
foreign stations requesting that intelligence officers check their street level sources for any leads. The Athens
international airport, where the plane for TWA Flight 800 had originated from, has been checked for possible
security breaches. The names of all the passengers who flew on the Athens-to-New York leg, as well as everyone
who boarded the airliner in New York have been run through computer databanks for any known links to terrorist
groups.
U.S. intelligence agencies aren't the only ones who are being kept busy. Assisting U.S. intelligence are the Israeli, the
Egyptian and the Jordanian intelligence services. The CIA has been chasing down a large number of leads. They've
looked into the possibility of a disgruntled airline employee may have planted a bomb. They have also looked into the
possibility of involvement by Colombian drug cartels.
But as investigators and analysts are sifting through the piles of intelligence -- the focus seems to keep coming up to a
possible Middle East connection.
U.S. diplomats, in recent years, have been saying that they are very concerned about the intensity of anti-American
resentment in Arab countries. Much of the resentment and anger comes from the support that the U.S. gives to the
state of Israel. Since the early 1980's, the United States has been forced to close several of its embassies in the Arab
world. Closed have been the embassies in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Libya and Sudan.
The other embassies in the Middle East have been turned into fortresses. Whenever the U.S. ambassador to
Lebanon has to travel through the streets of Beirut, he is protected by a military convoy. Parts of the Embassy in
Cairo are said to be able to withstand the effects of a nuclear bomb.
One U.S. official, who is stationed in the Middle East, said, "It has been a long time since I have seen such strong
anti-American feelings in the Middle East."
Possible Perpetrators of Attacks on America
Yousef
All of the above preamble is important as we look at the list of possible suspects. Among the more serious
candidates are supporters of Ramzi Yousef, who is currently on trial in New York City. Yousef is described as a
new breed of Islamic zealot. He was trained during the Afghan War and was captured and extradited to the United
States from Pakistan in 1995. His trial in federal court is now into its eighth week. Many counterterrorism experts
feel that supporters of Yousef are very good suspects. They have the motive, the know-how and the means.
Hizbollah
Next on the list is the pro-Iranian Hizballah guerrilla organization. Hizballah has restricted its operations to southern
Lebanon and to Israel, but some U.S. analysts say that Hizballah may now be seeking the extract revenge on the
U.S. for supporting Israel. They certainly have the motive and probably the know-how, but what about the means?
al-Gama'a al-Islamiya
Another contender is the Egyptian terrorist organization known as al-Gama'a al-Islamiya (Islamic Group or IG).
They have a very good motive. The U.S. has imprisoned their spiritual leader, Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman. Rahman
was convicted in 1995 for plotting to bomb the United Nations and several other New York landmarks. He is
currently serving a life sentence in a federal prison in Springfield, Missouri. This group, again, most certainly has a
strong motive. They have connections in New York. They have the know-how. And they may have the means to be
able to pull off such a plot. This group is a very strong suspect.
Hamas
Also on the list is the HAMAS terrorist organization. HAMAS has reportedly vowed to attack the U.S. for agreeing
to extradite a known terrorist by the name of Musa Abu Marzouk to Israel. Again, this case also has a New York
connection, because Marzouk was arrested at John F. Kennedy International Airport, last year. And was held and
faced extradition hearings in New York. HAMAS is known to have strong connections in the U.S.
Islamic Movement For Change (Saudi Splinter Groups)
The only group known to claim any responsibility is the shadowy group known as the Islamic Movement for Change.
This group, if it is a group, is said to have ties in Saudi Arabia. They have also claimed responsibility for the
bombings of the U.S. facilities in Riyadh in November 1995 and in Dhahran on 25 June 1996. Little is currently
known about the Islamic Movement for Change.
Independent 'Sapper Squads'
In keeping with recent patterns of terrorism, ERRI analysts suggest that it is likely that the perpetrators of a number
of recent acts against the United States, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and other allies consisted of a specially put together
"cells" of terrorist specialists that were brought together just for the purposes of each individual act and then
disbanded to their host countries. It is also likely that the "specialist" are of a similar extremist ideological./religious
bent and may act in manner consistent with previously identifed "mercenary groups", even though they are not
committing the acts for money. While they may be financially supported, equipped, and motivated by a "sponsor
country" or countries, no direct ties can be drawn to any single state. This kind of compartmentalization makes
capture of the terrorists difficult and placing direct responsiblity for the act even more troublesome.
Any of the above suspects are a possibility. But behind the terrorist organization there most probably is the specter of a certain foreign government that is known to sponsor, finance and assist a number of Islamic extremist groups who are viewed to be determined to oppose the presence of the United States in the Middle East. We, of course, are talking about leader of state-sponsored terrorism, the outlaw state of Iran.
Motivation--Attempt to Destabilize Peace and Influence American Elections??
In a meeting with ERRI counterterrorist analysts on Tuesday, a theory was brought up by the author of this article.
One of the questions that must be asked is: If this was a terrorist bombing, why was it done? Some of the above
groups have very good motives. But let's say the bombing was done by supporters for Ramzi Yousef or by
al-Gama'a al-Islamiya. It would be expected that a message would be sent saying: "The bombing was done because
you put Yousef on trial -- that'll teach you Americans." Or "This is retaliation for convicting our great spiritual leader
Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman. Let him go or we'll blow up another plane." But no such messages have been received
-- as far as we know. Why bomb the plane without telling the world why you did it?
No, the motivation may be deeper than that. A motivation that isn't necessary to send a message about.
Let's look what has happened in Israel in recent months. Israel now has a new prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.
It has been widely said, and former Prime Minister Shimon Peres has confirmed, that the reason why Peres lost his
re-election bid was over the subject of security for the state of Israel. In the months leading up to the Israeli election,
Israel became the target of a number of terrorist bombings.
Shimon Peres was pushing the peace process between Israel and its Arab neighbors very hard. But the militant
forces in the Muslim world, led by Iran, wanted to kill the peace process in any way that they could. Helping to
defeat Peres in the Israeli election by working on the fears of the Israeli public was step one -- and it worked.
Step two is the upcoming November elections in the United States. President Bill Clinton is a huge supporter of the
Middle East peace process. In order to really derail the peace process, the defeat of Clinton would be in the best
interest of Iran and its Islamic followers.
If creating fear in the minds of Israelis worked, why wouldn't the same terrorist campaign work in the U.S? Stage a
number of attacks against the U.S. and make it appear that President Clinton is ineffectual and can do nothing to stop
the attacks. Make it appear that Americans are no longer safe to fly on a passenger plane -- make it appear that the
Clinton administration is unable to keep Americans safe.
Once Clinton is out of office -- the Middle East peace process really comes to a screeching halt. The Iranians, in the
past, were smart enough to help defeat President Carter in 1980 by holding American hostages for 444 days in
Tehran. So, the Iranians are politically savvy enough to pull off such a plan.
If this theory is true, there are many dangers ahead. First, ENN has received intelligence that another Iranian
sponsored terrorist conference was due to begin on 21 July 1996. It is being said that leaders and representatives of
the world's leading terror organizations are attending this second known conference.
Certain acts may take place in the coming weeks. A very good confirmation of this theory will probably occur
around the time of the upcoming political conventions in August. It may also be expected that a series of acts against
the U.S. will probably take place just before the November elections. If these events come to pass, this theory is
ssentially confirmed; if not...it was just that...a theory. This remains to be seen.
Retaliation; Military Action?
Another issue that may become apparent is; What would the United States do if it were to obtain evidence that
confirms that Iran was involved and responsible? What would the response of the U.S. be? A simple
recommendation would probably be to bomb the military and intelligence headquarters' in Tehran, Iran. However,
the problem would arise that Iran and its surrogates would then up the ante and retaliate with more terrorist attacks
against U.S. interests. In that case, the U.S. would need to be prepared to go to war. But in an election year? That
scenario is most improbable.
The more likely response, though probably not the most satisfying, is that the U.S. will present its evidence to the
United Nations and then attempt to obtain the harsh economic sanctions that it has been attempting to impose on the
rogue state Iran for quite a while now. The U.S. would be desirous of putting Iran amongst the pariah states of Iraq
and Libya. This would probably be the safest course of action.
(c) Emergencynet News Service, 1996, All Rights Reserved.