Europe
<http://intellibriefs.blogspot.com/2007/07/europe-and-nature-of-terrorist-th
reat.html> and the nature of the terrorist threat in 2007 


 <http://www.eng.gees.org/articulo/219/> GEES - Strategic Studies Group
By Julian Richards
Collaborations nº 1828 | July 16, 2007
http://intellibriefs.blogspot.com/2007/07/europe-and-nature-of-terrorist-thr
eat.html

In April 2007, Europol issued the latest version of its “EU Terrorism
Situation and Trend Report”. Widely reported across the world, the report
painted a picture of a range of currently active groups and threats across
European countries. One area in which the report provoked particular debate
was on the question of how significant the Islamist terrorist threat is
compared to other forms of terrorism, such as nationalist or
anarcho-communist violence.

The report concluded that, over 2006, EU countries experienced just under
500 terrorist “attacks”. Most of these were symbolic attacks causing small
amounts of damage and no major casualties, although two foiled Islamist
attacks in the UK and Germany appeared to have had the intention of causing
mass casualties. The picture of arrests and convictions of terrorist
suspects painted a picture of geographical clustering of much of the
terrorist activity in UK, France and Spain. It also showed that these and
other countries appeared to consider the Islamist threat the most dangerous
and pressing one, despite the nature of most of the actual recorded attacks.
Half of the 706 arrests in the EU during 2006 were of Islamist terrorist
suspects, while Islamist-authored attacks accounted for less than 1 percent
of the recorded incidents over the same period. France, Spain, Italy and the
Netherlands recorded the highest numbers of Islamist-related terrorist
arrests. 

It is worth noting in considering these facts and figures that Europol is
not privy to the full range of information available from member states on
terrorist attacks and incidents, primarily because some states such as the
UK are reluctant to share details of ongoing operations, including arrests
of suspects. The recently departed Director-General of the UK’s Security
Service has suggested there are approximately 200 active Islamist jihadist
networks active in Britain, comprising 30 known plots, and involving 1600
identified individuals[i]. These statistics should be considered in
conjunction with those made available to Europol. 

Despite the low number of actual Islamist terrorist attacks in 2006, The
Europol report did note that there was a marked increase in propaganda
activities by Islamist groups, notably in the shape of video statements by
the senior Al Qaeda leadership and affiliated groups. Such videos are
becoming more professional, and could point to “..a coordinated global media
offensive from Islamist terrorists”[ii]. However, EU countries showed a
small number of suspects arrested and charged with the spreading of
propaganda, reflecting ongoing legal difficulties in defining this offence. 

The Non-Islamist Threat

Europe is still suffering a high degree of activity by nationalist and
separatist groups, and has seen a small resurgence in the activities of
anarchist and extreme left-wing groups over the last year. The latter
carried out 55 attacks in 2006, mostly in Greece, Italy, Spain and Germany.
In May 2006, the Greek organization Epanastatikos Agonas (Revolutionary
Struggle) narrowly failed to assassinate the Greek Minister of Culture. In
Italy, the Red Brigades appear to be still active, and have successfully
assassinated government officials twice since 1999. In February 2007, the
Italian police arrested 19 members of a breakaway group called the
Political-Military Communist Party, and uncovered a large cache of
weapons[iii]. 

Some observers have equated these organizations, and others across the world
such as the Revolutionary Army (Kakumeigun) in Japan, to a rise in
“retro-terrorism”, based on a resurgent anti-Americanism fuelled by
interventionist conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, and by the entrenchment
of globalization. When a rocket-propelled grenade was fired at the US
Embassy in Athens in January 2007, Epanastatikos Agonas claimed
responsibility, and said in a statement to a local newspaper that the strike
was “..our answer to the criminal war against ‘terrorism’ that the US has
unleashed over the entire planet”[iv]. In this way, the anarcho-communist
groups have an affinity with the Islamist jihadists, although in most other
ways their missions are not aligned. 

In France, Corsican separatists have proved very active in the past year,
having formally announced the end of a ceasefire in March 2005[v]. The
Corsican National Liberation Front (FLNC) was responsible for a large number
of small scale bombings, mostly directed at symbols of French authority on
the island. Most of these attacks were designed to be of nuisance value
rather than to kill people, although in early May a large 10-litre
improvised explosive device was deposited outside a bank in Porticcio, but
failed to detonate. It seems only a matter of time before such reckless
attacks claim casualties. In the meantime, feuds between factions of the
FLNC are threatening to spill over into another bout of civil strife on the
island, an earlier episode of which claimed 25 lives in the 1990s[vi].

Spain is suffering a particularly complex blend of terrorist preoccupations
at present. While many eyes have been on the trial of the Madrid train
bombings of March 2004, the year 2006 saw a controversial period of
attempted rapprochement between the Prime Minister Zapatero and the Basque
separatist group ETA. This led to the announcement of a ceasefire by ETA in
March 2006, which was dramatically broken by the group’s largest ever bomb
on Spanish soil, at Madrid airport on 30 December 2006, which killed two
people. On 5 June 2007, ETA formally announced the end of its ceasefire with
the Spanish government, after the latter broke off negotiations in the wake
of the Madrid airport attack. 

The fortunes of ETA have not been good in recent years. It has suffered a
number of arrests and disruptions by the authorities in both France and
Spain, to such an extent that it was postulated that the number of active
members of the organization could have been as low as 30 at the beginning of
2007[vii]. Public opinion in the Basque region has also drifted away from
the terrorist group’s demands for full independence achieved through violent
means, with more of the local population now expressing satisfaction with
the level of provincial autonomy currently enjoyed within the Spanish
structure[viii]. There is some thought that the Madrid airport attack could
have reflected an internal split in the organization between those willing
to consider political negotiation and those committed to an ongoing armed
struggle. In this way the attack could have parallels with the IRA bomb
attack in Omagh in August 1998, which was the single most lethal attack by
the organization throughout the period of the “Troubles” in Northern
Ireland, but came after serious and lasting negotiations with the British
government had commenced. If so, the portents are promising in that Northern
Ireland has seen steady if stilted progress towards lasting peace since that
time. 

For the time being, however, ETA remains stubbornly a feature of the Spanish
political and terrorist landscape, and will probably continue to plan and
execute attacks in the immediate future following its announcement of its
resumption of the armed struggle in June 2007. 

The Islamist picture

The picture in the UK currently looks very different, in that the Islamist
terrorist threat is the largest and most significant, and is driving
counter-terrorism policy and indeed politics generally to a certain extent.
(Both the new incoming Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, and the Leader of the
Opposition, David Cameron, have recently made statements on their security
and counter-terrorism policies ahead of many other policy concerns.) The
Northern Ireland problem has continued to move slowly but surely towards a
politically negotiated peace, with power-sharing between the two opposing
sectarian communities in a devolved Northern Ireland Assembly restored once
again in May 2007 after five years of direct rule from London. Around the
same time, the loyalist paramilitary group the Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF),
which has been responsible for more than 500 sectarian murders, formally lay
down its arms and claimed to have disbanded[ix]. 

In the meantime, the British Security Service claims to be investigating
more than 1000 Islamist-related terrorist suspects. The headline case during
2006 was the disruption of an apparent multiple transatlantic airline
bombing plot in August, which, had it been successful, could have caused
casualties on the scale of the September 2001 attacks in the US. In Germany,
an attempted bombing of two passenger trains near Cologne was foiled when
the improvised devices failed to explode. Again, the casualty count could
have been very considerable had the attack succeeded. 

The 23 suspects arrested across Britain at the time of the airline plot were
not included in the figure of 706 individuals arrested across the EU for
terrorist offences over 2006, as Europol was not supplied with the relevant
data by the UK. For the other EU members, Europol reported that
approximately half of the 706 arrests were related to Islamist terrorist
offences. In seven of the 13 EU countries supplying data on arrests,
Islamists constituted the largest block of terrorist suspects, ranging from
3 arrests in each of Sweden and Slovakia to 51 in Spain. In France, there
were 139 arrests of Islamist terrorist suspects over the year, representing
just over 40 per cent of all terrorist arrests in the country for the year.
One estimate of the number of Islamist terrorist arrests in the UK over the
same year is 156[x], which, if added to the arrests across the rest of the
EU would mean that almost two-thirds of all terrorist arrests were
Islamist-related during 2006. 

The mismatch between the number of arrests of Islamist-related terrorist
suspects and the number of actual Islamist terrorist attacks recorded across
the EU over the last year has caused some to question the West’s
interpretation of the terrorist threat. Ziauddin Sardar, for example, noted
in reviewing the Europol Terrorism Situation and Trend Report that:

The Europol report makes it clear that Muslims are responsible for very
little terrorism in Europe, but they are the group most likely to be
arrested on suspicion of terrorism. In Britain, a long beard or headscarf
spells terrorism. In France and Spain, being Moroccan or Tunisian or
Algerian is enough for you to be classified as a terrorist[xi].

This leap in logic is not supported by an analysis of the facts. If the
British Security Service’s estimates are correct about the number of serious
extremists plotting terrorist attacks in the UK, then in this country at
least, the Islamist threat not only greatly eclipses threats from other
forms of terrorism, but is in many ways fundamentally different from
nationalist or anarcho-communist threats. 

2007 has seen the conviction of five members of the “Operation Crevice” gang
after the longest criminal trial in British legal history. The gang,
interdicted in 2004, possessed a large amount of fertilizer-based explosive
and were planning to attack public places such as shopping centres,
nightclubs, and sites critical to the national infrastructure[xii]. As with
other extremist Islamist terrorist groups, the gang’s attack plans were
indiscriminate and designed to cause the maximum degree of casualties and
disruption. The group were interdicted after a lengthy police and
intelligence operation, details of which have since revealed that the group
had semi-regular contact with two men (Muhammad Siddique Khan and Shehzad
Tanweer) who later went on to successfully execute the July 2005 bombings on
the London transport system (with two accomplices) which killed 56 people.

Over the same period, a Hindu convert to Islam and resident of the UK
(Dhiren Barot) was successfully convicted for 40 years for planning to kill
“thousands” in terrorist attacks in the UK and US, using a range of
conventional and radiological devices[xiii]. At the time of writing, two
devices similar to some of those envisaged by Barot have been interdicted in
London, one of which was primed to explode outside a nightclub but failed to
do so[xiv]. 

The Cologne “trolley bomb case” of July 2006[xv] was clearly modeled on the
Madrid train attacks of 2004 and threatened to have caused a similar degree
of casualties, had the devices not failed to detonate. In Spain, meanwhile,
despite 2006 being a year for much analysis and debate about ETA, it was
also a time that the trial of those accused of the Madrid train bombings of
March 2004 which killed 191 commuters commenced, and reopened memories of
the seriousness of the threat from Islamist terrorism. More recently, the
shadowy group Abu Hafs al Masri Brigades, which has claimed responsibility
for a range of attacks and incidents from the Madrid train bombs to attacks
in Iraq, Kenya and Turkey (most of which probably spuriously), has
threatened France with a “bloody jihadist campaign” on its election of
Nicolas Sarkozy as President[xvi]. Whatever the nature and provenance of the
group, and its connections with Al Qaeda, it is clear the sentiments are
those of Al Qaeda and the message is that of serious extremist Islamist
threat. 

What these attacks demonstrate is that there are important differences
between the threats posed by Islamist terrorism, and those posed by other
forms of terrorism such as separatist or extreme left-wing violence.
Certainly all forms of terrorism are murderous by definition, and, to some
extent, it is not always useful or morally appropriate to differentiate
between terrorisms on the basis of the numbers of lives they claim. Nor can
it be said that there are not important parallels between many of these
terrorist groups in modalities and attributes such as the age and gender
profile of the protagonists (usually young males, often serving or recent
university or college students) and connections, in some cases, to organized
crime and factionalism. The March 2004 bombings in Madrid are a fascinating
example of where Islamists may have come into contact with non-Islamist
terrorists in the procurement of explosives, if only for pure business
reasons. 

However, there are important differences. Chief among these is the fact that
the Islamist terrorists are bent on causing the maximum number of civilian
casualties, as shown by their liking for soft targets such as public
transport and other public places, and are prepared to consider
unconventional attacks such as radiological, chemical or biological methods
of killing in so doing. Generally speaking, separatist and left-wing
terrorism is far more “targeted” in its actions, in that it will aim for
assassination of government or authority figures, or to damage official
property or infrastructure. In most cases, the general public is not at
serious risk of mass casualties (although ETA’s bombing of Madrid airport in
December 2006 and numerous earlier attacks by this group and by the likes of
the IRA have strayed into targeting civilians). Secondly, the non-Islamist
terrorist groups tend to have specific, geographically defined and
potentially negotiable objectives. In the case of ETA, the question is one
of independence for Basque territories. For the Red Brigades in Italy, much
of the preoccupation is with specific labour laws and with the government’s
approach to them. The Islamists, however, have a much wider and more
amorphous aim to bring down Western society in general. In so doing, they
have little regard for specific geographical definitions (the modern
nation-state being a Western Christian invention after all) or for specific
targets among the population – the general public and figures of authority
are treated with similar disdain. 

In these terms, the Islamist threat can be seen - potentially – as a much
more serious and wide-reaching one than posed by other terrorist groups and
ideologies. Tony Blair observed at the time of the 2005 London bombings,
drawing reference to the 2001 attacks in the US: 

I don’t think you can compare the political demands of republicanism with
the political demands of this terrorist ideology we are facing now ... I
don’t think the IRA would ever have set about trying to kill 3,000
people[xvii].

I would argue that these factors give rise to the picture described in the
Europol Terrorism Situation and Trends Report. Thus, while the great
majority of terrorist attacks and incidents in Europe relate to non-Islamist
groups, at the risk of appearing complacent, most of these attacks lead to
relatively low numbers of casualties and disruption, and the threat is
relatively “contained”. It is also the case that governments have tangible
enemies and demands with which to negotiate in the non-Islamist terrorist
arena, and are prepared to do so in many cases such as those concerning the
IRA and ETA, albeit indirectly. The perceived scale and seriousness of the
Islamist threat, however, as evidenced by the very high number of casualties
and disruption caused by the few attacks that have been successfully
executed in Europe, and the lack of a political focus on which to direct
governmental energies in resolving the crisis, have given rise to the
Islamist constituency being very much the most significant for arrests and
police action generally. The authorities in many EU countries are clearly
devoting a lot of energy and resource into disrupting what they perceive to
be the serious - and ongoing, as the events in London at the end of June
2007 demonstrate - threat of mass-casualty attacks emanating from extremist
Islamist groups, in a way that does not apply to the likes of the Red
Brigades or Corsican separatists. Ironically, never have the words of the
IRA in the aftermath of the Brighton attack on the UK government in 1984
been more appropriate to the current Islamist threat: 

Today we were unlucky, but remember, we only have to be lucky once; you will
have to be lucky always[xviii].

>From a pan-European perspective, legal responses and experiences to the
terrorist threat have been varied, and further work is needed to find the
best legal approaches and to harmonise them as far as possible across the
EU. This important to ensure that the terrorists cannot take advantage of
differing legal jurisdictions between states. 

On a positive note, the lengthy sentences for the “Crevice” terrorist group
and Dhiren Barot and associates in the UK, have allowed the authorities to
have confidence that such trials can be brought to successful conclusions,
even where an actual attack has not yet occurred but was only in the
planning stages. Similarly in Germany, Mounir al-Motassadek received the
maximum 15 year sentence in January 2007 for involvement in the September
2001 attacks in the US, overturning a previous successful appeal against his
initial conviction[xix]. 

However, against these successes, the authorities are also suffering
setbacks. At the time of writing, four terrorist suspects on “control
orders” under the UK Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005[xx] have absconded in
the space of a few weeks. Over a third of all terrorist control orders have
now been breached in this way. A further six cases have been quashed by the
courts on the grounds of being incompatible with the European Human Rights
Convention.

In Spain, the leader of ETA’s political party Batasuna, Arnaldo Otegi, was
acquitted of the charge of praising terrorism, during March 2007. The
Europol Terrorism Situation and Trend report noted that “..the small number
of suspects arrested for dissemination of propaganda may indicate the lack
of legal basis and difficulty in investigating these types of crimes” across
Europe[xxi]. The report also noted that in many EU countries, specific
terrorist offences are not yet on the statute books, meaning that suspects
often have to be charged with other criminal offences. 

Counter-terrorism laws vary greatly across the EU. In France the legal
period in which a suspect can be held before charge is four days, while in
the UK the period has been increased to 28 days, itself considerably less
than the 90 days requested in a new government bill which was defeated in
Parliament in 2006. There is some evidence that terrorist groups are taking
advantage of lax counter-terrorist regimes in countries such as Belgium, and
choosing to locate there to organize attacks elsewhere in Europe, notably
the Madrid attack of 2004. Belgium has been criticized by the UN Human
Rights Committee for failing to implement clear anti-terrorism law[xxii]. 

While harmonizing legal and law enforcement instruments to use against the
terrorists across Europe is imperative, as is ensuring that such measures
are effective and sufficiently targeted, the UK’s experience in particular
shows that the civil libertarian lobby is a powerful one ranged against the
government’s efforts to enhance its counter-terrorism mechanisms. Both high
court judges and civil liberties pressure groups such as “Liberty” have been
vocal opponents of measures such as the Control Orders. Such bodies claim
that these mechanisms are neither fair, just or effective, yet they are
explicitly recognized as being an imperfect solution to the problem of
detaining terrorist suspects on thin evidence. Tony Blair has recently
commented that he believes it “misguided and wrong” to tip the balance
towards the rights of the individual suspected of being involved with
terrorism , and away from the “safety of the public”[xxiii]. The balancing
act involves addressing these concerns, undoubtedly shared by many in the
public, while not alienating the Muslim communities who feel threatened by
perceived erosions of civil liverties. This is a task for all EU nations and
one that must be approached in unison if it is to be truly effective. 

Conclusions

The Europol Terrorism Situation and Trends Report for 2006 identified that
the terrorist picture across EU countries is a multi-faceted and complex
one. Foes that might have been considered to have been defeated, notably
extreme left-wing groups originally formed in the 1960s and 1970s, are still
in existence and showing signs of continued activity. Indeed, there is some
evidence that these groups are enjoying a small resurgence in the wake of
the US’s activities in its War on Terror, a picture mirrored elsewhere in
the world. Nationalist and separatist groups such as ETA and FLNC, far from
giving up the armed struggle against their host nations, have vowed to
return to it recently. Such groups have been responsible for the vast
majority of the 498 terrorist incidents recorded across the EU in 2006. 

Standing at apparent right-angles to this picture is the trend in arrests of
terrorist suspects, the majority of which, according to Europol’s figures,
have been of Islamist terrorist suspects. There is no doubt that in some
parts of Europe, notably in Eastern European countries, the Islamist
terrorist threat must seem very different and much smaller than would be the
case in Spain or the UK, to name but two countries. Some observers have also
argued that the disparity between actual incidents in the EU and the nature
of most of the people being arrested points towards an institutional racism
towards Muslim people and a belief that Islam equals terrorism. 

It can be argued, however, that the Islamist terrorist threat is much
greater and fundamentally different in nature and scope from that faced in
European countries from other groups such as nationalists and
anarcho-communist organizations. Where the Islamist terrorists have
succeeded in Europe, they have put their ideological terrorist colleagues in
the shade in terms of indiscriminate killing and destruction. The high level
of arrests of Islamist terrorist suspects rightly reflects the level of the
threat faced, and the fact that Islamist attacks are very much worth
disrupting and halting. 

An area where EU countries seem to be struggling is in the formation of
legislative mechanisms to fight terrorism, their harmonization across EU
countries, and their ability to deal with complex crimes such as the
dissemination of propaganda and radicalization. Much more work must be
pursued in these areas and could usefully be conducted at the pan-European
level. Obstacles to progress in these areas will remain until we can make
collective progress in Europe in our definition of freedom, human rights,
and the fundamental principles of a liberal European democracy.




Dr Julian Richards is Research Fellow at the Brunel Centre for Intelligence
and Security Studies (BCISS)


Notes



  _____  



[i] The Times Online (2006, November 10). Blair backs MI5 chief over terror
warning. From http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article632849.ece
accessed 22 June 2007
[ii] Europol (2007). EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report 2007. Europol,
The Hague. p. 4
[iii] The Economist (2007, February 15). Back to the Past: an apparent
revival of 1970s-style terrorism in Italy. From
http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8707490,
accessed 17 June 2007
[iv] Quoted in Jane’s (2007, March 14). New wave of retro-terrorism. Jane’s
Terrorism and Security Monitor, para 4.
[v] Jane’s Intelligence Review (2005, May 1). Corsican separatists break
truce.
[vi] Jane’s Intelligence Review, ibid
[vii] S Kern (2007). ETA: the beginning of the end? Grupo de Estudios
Estrategicos GEES, en letra impresa numero 684, p. 4. 
[viii] Kern, ibid, p.2
[ix] BBC News Online (2007, May 3). UVF calls end to terror campaign. From
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6618371.stm accessed 18 June
2007
[x] Z Sardar (2007, May 21). Lies, damned lies and terrorists. New
Statesman, from http://www.newstatesman.com/200705210023 accessed 11 June
2007. 
[xi] Sardar, ibid, para 7
[xii] P Naughton (2007, April 30). Five given life for fertiliser bomb
terror plot. The Times Online, from
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1725608.ece accessed 16 June
2007
[xiii] BBC News online (2006, November 7). Al Qaeda plotter jailed for life.
>From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6123236.stm accessed 21 June 2007
[xiv] S O’Neill (2007, June 30). How carnage in clubland was averted by a
bump on the head. The Times Online, from
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2007890.ece , accessed
30 June 2007
[xv] Europol, ibid, p.18
[xvi] Jane’s Terrorism Watch Report (2007, May 16). Group threatens ‘bloody
jihadist campaign’ in France. 
[xvii] BBC News Online (2005, July 26). IRA are not Al Qaeda, says Blair.
From: http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/, accessed 14 March 2007
[xviii] BBC News Online (2007). On this day: 12 October 1984: Tory Cabinet
in Brighton bomb blast. From
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/12/newsid_2531000/2
531583.stm accessed 22 June 2007
[xix] Jane’s Terrorism Watch Report (2007, January 9). Germany jails
Moroccan as accessory to 11 September attacks. 
[xx] The Control Orders were a compromise offered by the government when its
proposals for longer periods of detention before charge were rejected in
Parliament. The orders stipulate restrictions on a suspect’s movements and
daily curfews. 
[xxi] Europol, ibid, p.3
[xxii] United Nations, International Covenant on Human and Political Rights
(2004). Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Belgium,
12/8/2004. CCPR/CO/81/BEL. Geneva, para.24
[xxiii] Sunday Times (2007, May 27) Shackled in the War on Terror. p.19
(F)AIR USE NOTICE: All original content and/or articles and graphics in this
message are copyrighted, unless specifically noted otherwise. All rights to
these copyrighted items are reserved. Articles and graphics have been placed
within for educational and discussion purposes only, in compliance with
"Fair Use" criteria established in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976.
The principle of "Fair Use" was established as law by Section 107 of The
Copyright Act of 1976. "Fair Use" legally eliminates the need to obtain
permission or pay royalties for the use of previously copyrighted materials
if the purposes of display include "criticism, comment, news reporting,
teaching, scholarship, and research." Section 107 establishes four criteria
for determining whether the use of a work in any particular case qualifies
as a "fair use". A work used does not necessarily have to satisfy all four
criteria to qualify as an instance of "fair use". Rather, "fair use" is
determined by the overall extent to which the cited work does or does not
substantially satisfy the criteria in their totality. If you wish to use
copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you
must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 

THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION IS
PROHIBITED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS.

 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to