Enemies of Reason Poundshop potshots at the media moral maze.

What happened to the ‘Terrorist Brit’?

I wrote the other day about how terror suspects are often described in terms of their ethnicity - the six Algerian men arrested for a plot to 'blow up the Pope', which turned out to be, well, not a plot to blow up the Pope. As Tabloid Watch pointed out, papers often go big on the accusation and sprinkle in a bit of thinly veiled racism - in the Express's case, saying it was a 'Muslim plot to kill Pope' in enormous letters on the front page - but not quite so big on the reality (the Express blobbed a story revealing that all of the arrested men were released without charge on page nine).

So, that British terror suspect arrested at Schiphol airport in the Netherlands the other day, revealed to be 'of Somali descent' by the media... what happened to him? Well, papers were pretty quick to put the boot in, even though he'd been arrested, and not charged with anything. The Sun said:

They went further, saying that the man was 'suspected of having links to a terror organisation'. And then there came a rather strange article in the Telegraph on the back of the arrest, joining a lot of dots:

Last night Dutch security officials were continuing to question a British man of Somali origin who was arrested on a plane at Schiphol airport on his way from Liverpool to Entebbe.

Dutch prosecutors said they were investigating the man for links to a terrorist organisation but had not found any explosives.

A European diplomat in Kampala, Uganda's capital, said the man arrested in Amsterdam could have been acting as a copycat after the publicity following the Ugandan attack, which was blamed on the presence of Ugandan troops in Somalia under an African Union peace keeping mandate.

"Could have been", yes. But the whole Telegraph piece seems to be total speculation - with a helpful nudge from someone somewhere - about Al-Qaeda expanding into Africa, all on the back of one arrest:

But he added: "Then you see someone who's raised an alert being arrested on their way to Entebbe, and it sets off a lot of alarm bells. There may be no evidence yet that al-Shabaab is bedding down cells in Uganda for more attacks – but that doesn't mean they are not doing it."

There's no evidence for a lot of things. And yes, a complete and utter lack of evidence doesn't necessarily mean that something isn't happening. Call me naive if you like, though, but I am not entirely sure if one arrest should lead anyone to draw any conclusions - particularly if no charges have come as a result of it. And did any charges result from it...?

The Netherlands has freed a Somali-born Briton who was arrested at Schiphol airport on suspicion of terrorism en route to Uganda from the UK.

He was freed on Wednesday morning and allowed to leave the country, Dutch prosecutors said.

The man was arrested after a tip-off that he was planning to engage in terrorism in Somalia, they added.

However investigators "failed to confirm the information", they said.

The BBC have reported the man being released, which happened yesterday afternoon. Which is quite correct, given that they reported the initial arrest in the first place. I've looked through the Sun and Telegraph today, both of which were keen to fly out of the traps with the original story, but I haven't been able to locate any news of the man's release without charge. Which isn't to say that they won't be reporting on it, of course; just that they don't seem to be in much of a hurry to do so.

I imagine Duncan Gardham, who wrote the original piece off the back of the arrest claiming links between Al-Qaeda and Uganda, was too busy writing this piece, which appears in today's Telegraph:

...French national police chief warned of a "peak threat" particularly from the North African group al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).

Frederic Pechenard said that tip-offs from "friendly" intelligence services have put the country on high alert.

"I'm not here to frighten people," Mr Pechenard told Europe 1 radio, "but we have serious evidence coming from reliable intelligence sources telling us that there is a risk of a major attack."

Mr Pechenard said he feared two scenarios: the attempted assassination of a public figure or an attempted strike on a crowded public area like a metro train or department store.

In evidence submitted to the senate hearing, Robert Mueller, the director of the FBI, warned that al-Qaeda's intent was "unwavering."

You could argue that would be a perfect place for a bit of context - to say that, while there are more dire warnings about Al-Qaeda in Africa, the man who was arrested as a suspect, mentioned in an article by the same journalist the other day, was released without charge.

I don't doubt that there are terrorists planning atrocities in Africa and elsewhere, and I don't doubt that it's right to be vigilant. But the facts are that someone who was suspected of being a terrorist has been released without charge and allowed to continue on his way. You wouldn't necessarily know that if you'd only read the stories about the 'Terrorist Brit' being arrested and suspected, and hadn't heard anything following it up.

No related posts.