News Commentary — July 31, 2018
The following news item is a diversion, otherwise known in intelligence jargon as a “limited hangout“; wherein a small part of the truth is admitted to distract attention from a larger reality, which for the authorities at least, is potentially dangerous.
In this case it is being reported that Manchester bomber Salman Abedi was rescued from Libya as the situation in the country deteriorated in 2014.
While this story might be partially true it helps conceal a bigger, far uglier reality. It is, in effective, a limited hangout.
What is not mentioned in the following article is the fact that Salman Abedi was a frequent visitor to Libya where his father, Ramadan had originally been an officer in Colonel Gaddafi’s intelligence. Even more significantly, it also omits to mention that Ramadan had been recruited by MI6 in 1991 in an attempt to overthrow Gaddafi.
When that failed Ramadan and his family fled to Saudi Arabia from where they were granted asylum in the UK, in part one assumes because of Ramadan’s cooperation with MI6 in the initial but failed attempt to oust Gaddafi.
In the years that followed Salman and his brothers frequently travelled between the UK and Libya, where they had suspected links with the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), which was fighting to oust Gaddafi. The LIFG, which in 2011 fought alongside ISIS in Syria against forces loyal to President Assad, was covertly supported by Britain in its campaign to oust Gaddafi.
On their return from Libya Salman and his brothers would be met by MI5 officers who helped them pass through customs and immigration control.
As the Daily Mail reported in May 2017:
“Rebels living in England claim UK government let them travel to Libya to fight Gaddafi – even though they were subject to counter-terrorism orders – as investigators probe Abedi’s visits to Tripoli…
Former fighters including Libyan exiles and British-Libyan residents described how MI5 ‘sorted’ their travel
British government is said to have adopted an ‘open door’ policy for fighters willing to travel to “fight Gaddafi”
So while there may be an element of truth in the following it is being used to distract attention from the fact that British intelligence actively assisted the militants who were later responsible for the Manchester suicide bombing.
The idea seems to be to pin the blame on “migrants” and “refugees”, using them as bogeymen to divert scrutiny from MI5’s dealings with the bombers themselves.
All of which begs an even bigger question. If MI5 actively colluded with Libyan dissidents in a campaign to oust Gaddafi; what role did it have — if any — in the later Manchester suicide bombing?
The fact that the following “limited hangout” is getting widespread coverage suggests that some in UK security are working with their media friends to keep whatever really happened in the Manchester bombing hidden. Ed.
Act of betrayal: Manchester bomber was rescued by the Royal Navy from Libyan warzone and evacuated back to Britain – three years before he slaughtered 22 people at a pop concert
Larissa Brown in Tripoli, Libya — Daily Mail July 30, 2018
The Manchester suicide bomber was rescued by the Navy from war-torn Libya three years before his pop concert atrocity, the Mail reveals today.
HMS Enterprise plucked Salman Abedi, then 19, from the Libyan coast and took him to Malta for a flight home to Britain in August 2014.
Last May he set off a bomb in Manchester Arena that killed 22, including seven children.
Abedi’s younger brother, Hashem, who is in jail in Tripoli facing trial over the attack, was also rescued by HMS Enterprise.
The pair had been caught up in fighting in Libya and were among more than 100 British citizens taken to safety.
Photographs released by Ministry of Defence officials at the time showed the group being brought on board the Navy vessel.
A Whitehall source said: ‘For this man to have committed such an atrocity on UK soil after we rescued him from Libya was an act of utter betrayal.’
The revelation will enrage families who lost loved ones in Abedi’s despicable attack. It is also likely to raise fresh fears over possible intelligence failures.