Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Today
Feds Discuss British Arrest of Terror Suspect
Aired August 06, 2004 - 10:08 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: We now go to a news conference with federal authorities talking about the arrest of a British suspect on terrorism charges. Let's listen in.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
KEVIN O'CONNOR, U.S. ATTY. FOR CONNECTICUT: This morning a hearing was held in London to determine the status of holding Mr. Ahmad. The court concluded there that they were going to hold Mr. Ahmad pending a more formal bail hearing next week. So he currently is in custody in London. We have, in connection with that hearing this morning, unsealed our criminal complaint, a 31-page affidavit from a special agent in the Bureau of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. I believe many of you already have copies of that.
Before going into the specifics of this matter, which I promise you I will not detail to the same extent as found in the complaint, I want to begin by thanking our colleagues in Great Britain, particularly the agents of New Scotland Yard for their tremendous help and cooperation in this matter.
This matter involved extensive coordination, communication between federal law enforcement in the United States and our counterparts in Great Britain. For that, we are truly grateful for everything they've done to date and continue to do.
Mr. Ahmad is charged with the following offenses: conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists, an offense that carries a maximum possible penalty of life imprisonment; conspiracy to launder money, with intent to support the Taliban; to kill persons in a foreign country; and to provide material support to terrorists, including the Taliban and Chechen mujahedeen. This offense carries a maximum possible penalty of 20 years imprisonment.
He's also charged with conspiracy to support designated terrorist organizations, an offense carrying a maximum possible penalty of 10 years imprisonment.
Finally, he's charged with solicitation to commit crimes of physical violence, an offense that carries a maximum possible penalty of 20 years imprisonment should he be convicted.
The factual basis for these charges, as I said before, is set forth in extensive detail in the unsealed complaint. I will, however, briefly summarize some of the more pertinent allegations. The complaint alleges that between 1997 and 2003, Mr. Ahmad, through various entities, including Azzam publications, created, maintained and operated certain Web sites via Internet service providers located both in Connecticut, Nevada and outside of the United States. These sites included azzam.com, oqaz.com (ph) and wahia.com (ph).
The main purpose of all of these sites was to solicit financial support for terrorist organizations, including the Taliban and the Chechen mujahedeen, as well as to recruit individuals to travel to Afghanistan and Chechnya for the purpose of waging jihad against the perceived enemies of Islam, including the United States.
The sites also instructed visitors on how to obtain and send needed supplies, including gas masks, night vision goggles, and clothing and hand-warmers to these organizations, amongst other things.
The sites did more, however, than simply solicit financial support or recruit fighters. They also instructed visitors in precise detail on how to get into Afghanistan through Pakistan without being detected, as well as how to smuggle currency and other goods into those countries for those fighters.
The complaint also details the numerous steps taken by Mr. Ahmad and others to conceal his and others' involvement in these activities. For example, numerous mirror Web sites were created; aliases were used; post office boxes were used; false identities were used; sophisticated encryption methods were used; and the hawala system, a recordless financial transaction system, was used to transfer funds both to Pakistan and to the Taliban.
Finally, numerous computer files were deleted intentionally, but through good law enforcement in both Great Britain and the United States, those files were restored, recovered and make up a good portion of the criminal complaint.
The complaint also details numerous searches conducted by law enforcement both in the United States and outside the United States, including Great Britain, in connection with this matter.
The evidence obtained to date, and as set forth in the complaint -- and that's all I'm going to comment on today -- demonstrates numerous e-mails and other communications in support of our material support allegations.
However, in addition to substantial evidence to support charges of material support of terrorism, additional evidence was obtained from a floppy disk found in Mr. Ahmad's residence that set forth classified plans, then-classified plans, for a U.S. naval battle group operating in the Straits of Hormuz in April of 2001.
O'CONNOR: In particular, the document discussed the battle group's planned movements roughly two weeks later and included a drawing of the group's formation as well as the names of each ship therein and where they would be in that formation. Most important, the document specifically described the battle group's vulnerability to terrorist attack, including how to stop, quote, "a small craft with rocket-propelled grenades" -- excuse me -- that these ships might be attacked since they, quote, "have nothing to stop a small craft with rocket-propelled grenades except their SEAL (ph) Stinger missiles."
In addition, the document specifically noted that the battle group was tasked both with enforcing sanctions against Iraq and with conducting operations against Afghanistan and Al Qaeda.
The complaint also alleges that Ahmad received an e-mail correspondence in July 2001 from a U.S. naval enlistee on active duty on the USS Benfold, the substance of which was sympathetic to the jihad movement.
Before I take questions, let me conclude by saying, we hear often in the United States how patient and persistent terrorists are. Cases like this demonstrate that we are more patient and more persistent. And we will continue to do so.
So no matter where they're hiding, be it a cave, be it in the ground, be it in a safehouse or in the dark corners of cyberspace, law enforcement is there as well.
And we will continue the tremendous forensic and other investigative work done by the agencies represented here today, as well as our British counterparts, to continue to engage in the war of terror, no matter where it takes us -- cyberspace, holes in the ground or anywhere else.
Questions?
QUESTION: Have you guys arrested and questioned this naval enlistee about him being sympathetic while he was on active duty? And obviously, this Ahmad having naval information, is that part of this case?
O'CONNOR: It's part of this case. I'm not at liberty to comment, other than to say we've identified the individual, and no charges have been announced against that individual at this time. But this remains an active investigation. QUESTION: Is he still in the Navy?
O'CONNOR: I can't comment.
QUESTION: Any indication how Connecticut was chosen? And was this man or any of his associates ever here?
O'CONNOR: We do not allege that this man, in the complaint, or his associates -- well, no, excuse me, we do not allege that Mr. Ahmad was physically in Connecticut, in the context of this complaint.
O'CONNOR: We do allege that he used an Internet service provider, OLM, in, I believe, Trumbull, Connecticut, as the conduit to maintain these sites. We do not allege, nor am I going to comment as to, why he may have chosen that site, other than to say, in fairness to that organization, they are not a target or a subject of this investigation.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) evidence that this man ever traveled to the United States?
O'CONNOR: I didn't say that. I said we do not allege in the complaint that this man traveled to the United States, nor do we allege that any such travel to the United States is relevant to the specific charges of this complaint.
QUESTION: Kevin, the two individuals that you have identified in the complaint sending e-mails from New Jersey and Connecticut, have those two individuals been identified?
O'CONNOR: Again, I'm not going to comment on that. But obviously, I think it's fair to say that we've identified those individuals, but we are not going to publicly name them at this time.
QUESTION: There was some indication in some reports that Ahmad might be related to the guy who was arrested in Pakistan. Do you have any information on that?
O'CONNOR: I cannot comment on those reports.
QUESTION: Any relationship with the timing of this arrest and (OFF-MIKE)?
O'CONNOR: Well, this is a long-term investigation. I'm not going to comment as to why things happened today or yesterday or the day before. That's sensitive law enforcement material, and those judgments are made all the time. I'm just going to say simply that this investigation was commenced in early 2002.
A tremendous amount of work goes into even getting a complaint through the Department of Justice, through all the other agencies. So this is not something that happened overnight. But as to when, where and why, I'm not going to elaborate further.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) to have him extradited here to the United States?
O'CONNOR: We're realistic. Extradition is a lengthy process.
You know, frankly, our biggest concern, at this point, was arresting him. Hopefully we'll detain him beyond the one-week period that the court has held over the detention hearing. We'll deal with extradition.
We have 60 days to submit the requisite materials under our treaty with Great Britain, which we will do probably well in advance of that. And then the process is going to take its course.
But we're realistic to know that extradition does not move as quickly as any of us would like.
QUESTION: Mr. O'Connor, this comes on the heels of several arrests in London and Albany -- some considered big victories; some considered small. In the larger scheme of things in the war on terrorism, how big a victory is this?
O'CONNOR: I don't want to overstate it, frankly.
This is an important case to the people who worked on it. I can tell you something. There were long hours, very tedious forensic analysis to just get to this point.
So, you know, I don't want to overstate it. I think I'll let the public decide the importance of this case.
But I will tell you one thing. I'm very proud of the efforts of law enforcement. When you look at that complaint, and you see the amount of analysis and effort that went into obtaining that material, not just in Connecticut, not just in the United States, but all over the country.
So I'll leave it up to others to decide the importance of this. I'm certainly not overstating it. But I do think it's important that folks know, particularly terrorists, that if you're going to use cyberspace, we're there, and we're paying attention. And we're going to continue to pay attention. And we've got the talent in these agencies, here and in Great Britain, to basically follow you.
So that's the message I hope this sends.
QUESTION: Do you have a sense, from the documents in April of 2001 on the U.S. battle group plan, how close this man may have been allegedly to carrying out an attack?
O'CONNOR: Well, fortunately no attack occurred. I can say that, thank God. But I cannot really comment any beyond that.
QUESTION: Can you tell us how much money -- I've read quickly through that. I just saw the word "cash." Are we talking $1 million, $2 million, just thousands of dollars?
O'CONNOR: Well, the investigation is ongoing. And, as you can imagine, trying to track down all the different leads when you're dealing with cyberspace and e-mail is a very cumbersome process.
I'll just say -- I won't quantify it. I'll say it was a significant amount of money. But I don't want to put a dollar figure on it because our investigation is continuing.
QUESTION: But have you shut down, like, a big funnel of money?
O'CONNOR: Well, I don't know, to be honest with you. Certainly these sites are no longer operated. But have other sites sprung up in other parts of the world? I don't know.
I know that these sites are not operating. And I know, I think we've done a great job shutting it down. But now we're trying to go back and figure out what happened when.
So going forward, I think the answer is yes. But going back, we still have a lot of work to do.
QUESTION: Are you trying to determine what if any U.S. citizens sent money via these Web sites? And could they possibly face some kind of charges for supporting terrorism?
O'CONNOR: Well, we have determined that some U.S. citizens, through these sites, have sent money. And I believe the complaint details one or two that have done that.
And we're going to continue to run down every lead. Again, it takes time, but we're going to do it to see if there are other U.S. citizens, as well as British or other nationalities, that may have been involved in raising funds.
So that's the goal to continue to do it. And that's what we're going to continue to do.
QUESTION: Did he take PayPal, American Express? I mean, how was the money...
O'CONNOR: Well, I think in the complaint you'll see the money -- there was an elaborate scheme that was at least presented to people. But I cannot comment beyond the four corners of the complaint to give you the specific details, other than to say they used various avenues to get the money from the United States, in some instances, into Afghanistan and other places.
QUESTION: One last question. The home that he stayed in in London was raided in December of '03, so last December. Is that when the Web sites came down? Has he been under tight surveillance since then?
O'CONNOR: Well, the question presumes that they were still up. I think a lot of them came down. I think the complaint alleges that, right after 9/11, there was quite a bit of moving around: The names changed; the service providers changed.
The Connecticut service provider, which many people are wondering, why Connecticut? Well, that's the venue issue right there, that he was using service providers in Connecticut. That wasn't in operation the entire six-year period, '97 to 2003.
These folks were sophisticated. As soon as they suspected surveillance, they would shut it down and go with another ISP and another domain name.
So at certain points in time, the answer is yes. But I think, as of now, at least with respect to this one individual, we're pretty comfortable that we've found out what he's been doing to date.
QUESTION: Kevin, is this a case that was generated out of investigators in this district, or was this a case that when it moved... KAGAN: We've been listening in to a news conference with the U.S. Attorney's Office in New Haven, Connecticut. They are talking about the arrest in Britain of a man -- a 30-month-old man name Babar Ahmad. He has been arrested on terrorism charges. They believe that he used an Internet site based in Connecticut to raise money to support terrorism activities in Chechnya and Afghanistan.
Interesting in this Internet age, there is no allegation that this man has ever been to the U.S. That he's been to Connecticut. But because the Internet site that he used is based in Connecticut, that is why these charges are coming from there. Extradition procedures are under way, and they're trying to bring Ahmad -- Babar Ahmad back here to the U.S.
We'll have much more on that story ahead. Our Alina Cho was in that news conference and she'll be joining us when it wraps up.
Meanwhile, I want to show you another story that we're watching out of Florida. Just outside of Orlando, Florida -- Deltona, Florida getting word from the Associated Press, multiple bodies were found inside a home that we're looking down on. It happened early today. And authorities say they're investigating the death as homicides.
The exact number of dead in the house is not known at this time. They discovered the bodies about 6:30 a.m. Eastern this morning. Apparently a coworker of one of the victims called a friend asking that person to visit the home when the person did not show up for work. So that's just outside of Orlando, Florida. Deltona, Florida. Much more on that story as well.
Kicked off this Friday with a lot of news. We had President Bush; we had the news out of New Haven, Connecticut, now that news out of Florida. Let's fit in a break, we'll regroup and be back after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KAGAN: Here at home, disappointment on Wall Street. The government says just over 32,000 new jobs were created in July. Analysts had expected more than 215,000. Details and financial news this hour.
And later, some tips for landing that hard-to-find job. We want to personalize it for those of you at home who are really trying hard to find that the next job
Meanwhile, let's get back to politics and get some perspective on the Bush and Kerry campaigns, where their trails cross, where the issues divide.
And for that, we turn to CNN senior political analyst Bill Schneider in Washington.
Bill, good morning.
BILL SCHNEIDER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Good morning, Daryn.
KAGAN: First, just off the top, what about that jobs report? That can't be the kind of news that the Bush administration will be looking to tout.
SCHNEIDER: Very bad news for President Bush, because he has been promising all year that his tax cut and his economic program would put the country on the road to recovery. He expected to recover almost all of the jobs that were lost during his administration before Election Day. And they seem to be earlier this year on the road to doing that.
But this latest job news indicates it is now very unlikely that the jobs lost during the Bush administration are going to be recovered by the time of the election. Which will give this administration -- it will not give it one of its main talking points, that it expected to run for reelection on.
KAGAN: Well, a talking point for us in the media this week has been isn't it interesting how these candidates show up at much the same places, almost at the same time. We saw it earlier in Iowa. And then this week, yesterday, we saw Senator John Kerry at the Unity Convention, the gathering of minority journalists there in Washington. Just a few minutes ago, we saw President Bush.
Unofficial feel here, but it seems like Senator Kerry got a warmer reception than President Bush did at that. Does that support the idea that there's a liberal media out there. That people -- some people believe they would rather see a Democratic president?
SCHNEIDER: Well, remember that this is a convention of minority journalists. And minorities, mostly African-American, Latinos, some Native Americans, Asian Americans, they tend to vote very strongly Democratic. So this is likely to be a very Democratic group, simply because minorities are very Democratic, not because they're journalists.
But they gave Mr. Bush a polite reception. But clearly, there was skepticism about what his programs have done for minorities. He defended his administration record of diversity, but he would not sign on, for instance, to a constitutional amendment guaranteeing voting rights. And Kerry was the one who argued that government needs to step in and do more to protect and advance the interests of minorities. Which is, frankly, what a lot of these voters, not just journalists, but voters want to hear.
KAGAN: Other news of the day out there. There's this new ad that's going to come out, veterans -- swift vote veterans that are not for Kerry, trying to challenge his record -- trying to challenge his record and what he says is how things unfolded in Vietnam. Interesting debate earlier today on "AMERICAN MORNING." You have those who are for Senator Kerry and those who are against him.
SCHNEIDER: Well, as you might expect, this has become a deeply partisan issue. With some veterans, critical of Kerry's record, in fact, attacking Kerry's record. It was interesting; Senator John McCain stood up yesterday and attacked those who ran this ad. It's an ad run by an independent committee, with no coordination with the Bush/Cheney campaign. Essentially accusing Senator Kerry of lying about his military record. Senator McCain said it was dishonorable. It was disgraceful. He criticized it, even though he is a strong Bush supporter, who will speak at the Republican convention.
And now today, "The Boston Globe" learned that one of the veterans who criticized Senator Kerry and said he did not deserve the Silver Star, I believe in the end he got a Bronze Star, has now recanted his statement, and said that he regrets he said that.
KAGAN: Bill Schneider in Washington. Bill, thank you for that.
SCHNEIDER: Mm-hmm.
KAGAN: Once again, we want to get back to our developing story. That is the job reports just out this morning with numbers far lower than originally predicted by the Bush administration.
For a little more perspective on that, what the numbers are, what they mean, let's bring in Gerri Willis -- Gerri.
GERRI WILLIS, CNN-FN PERSONAL FINANCE EDITOR: Hey, Daryn. Good to see you. These numbers we're looking at very disappointing for Wall Street this morning. The overall rate, 5.5 percent it's the number the administration is focusing on right now. That's the top line number. But the number that the traders, Wall Street pays attention to is job creation, just 32,000 for the month of July. Very disappointing. Daryn, their expectations that 228,000 jobs would be created. So a big difference there. Market sell-off this morning, and a little recovery here close to midday.
KAGAN: So how do you explain the discrepancy there? Where were the jobs supposed to be that they didn't show up?
WILLIS: I think it was a misreading by the economists, that this economic recovery was stronger than it has been. Questions now about the pace of that recovery, now, what it's going to continue to look like. Could we be headed for a double-dip? All kinds of questions being asked this morning. Also, keeping in mind here, Daryn, the Federal Reserve meets Tuesday, and as you know, the Federal Reserve controls rates. A lot of people paying attention to that. Expectations of a quarter-point rate hike. That probably will still happen is what the economists are saying. But it could be the case that the Fed could slow down its rate hikes later in the year. And, Daryn, I guess good news for people looking for a mortgage out there.
KAGAN: OK, Gerri Willis, thank you so much for that.
WILLIS: You're welcome.
KAGAN: We have a lot of news to get to overseas as well, fighting flares again in Iraq, as one respected cleric leaves the country. We'll get a live report from Baghdad. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired August 6, 2004 - 10:08 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: We now go to a news conference with federal authorities talking about the arrest of a British suspect on terrorism charges. Let's listen in.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
KEVIN O'CONNOR, U.S. ATTY. FOR CONNECTICUT: This morning a hearing was held in London to determine the status of holding Mr. Ahmad. The court concluded there that they were going to hold Mr. Ahmad pending a more formal bail hearing next week. So he currently is in custody in London. We have, in connection with that hearing this morning, unsealed our criminal complaint, a 31-page affidavit from a special agent in the Bureau of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. I believe many of you already have copies of that.
Before going into the specifics of this matter, which I promise you I will not detail to the same extent as found in the complaint, I want to begin by thanking our colleagues in Great Britain, particularly the agents of New Scotland Yard for their tremendous help and cooperation in this matter.
This matter involved extensive coordination, communication between federal law enforcement in the United States and our counterparts in Great Britain. For that, we are truly grateful for everything they've done to date and continue to do.
Mr. Ahmad is charged with the following offenses: conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists, an offense that carries a maximum possible penalty of life imprisonment; conspiracy to launder money, with intent to support the Taliban; to kill persons in a foreign country; and to provide material support to terrorists, including the Taliban and Chechen mujahedeen. This offense carries a maximum possible penalty of 20 years imprisonment.
He's also charged with conspiracy to support designated terrorist organizations, an offense carrying a maximum possible penalty of 10 years imprisonment.
Finally, he's charged with solicitation to commit crimes of physical violence, an offense that carries a maximum possible penalty of 20 years imprisonment should he be convicted.
The factual basis for these charges, as I said before, is set forth in extensive detail in the unsealed complaint. I will, however, briefly summarize some of the more pertinent allegations. The complaint alleges that between 1997 and 2003, Mr. Ahmad, through various entities, including Azzam publications, created, maintained and operated certain Web sites via Internet service providers located both in Connecticut, Nevada and outside of the United States. These sites included azzam.com, oqaz.com (ph) and wahia.com (ph).
The main purpose of all of these sites was to solicit financial support for terrorist organizations, including the Taliban and the Chechen mujahedeen, as well as to recruit individuals to travel to Afghanistan and Chechnya for the purpose of waging jihad against the perceived enemies of Islam, including the United States.
The sites also instructed visitors on how to obtain and send needed supplies, including gas masks, night vision goggles, and clothing and hand-warmers to these organizations, amongst other things.
The sites did more, however, than simply solicit financial support or recruit fighters. They also instructed visitors in precise detail on how to get into Afghanistan through Pakistan without being detected, as well as how to smuggle currency and other goods into those countries for those fighters.
The complaint also details the numerous steps taken by Mr. Ahmad and others to conceal his and others' involvement in these activities. For example, numerous mirror Web sites were created; aliases were used; post office boxes were used; false identities were used; sophisticated encryption methods were used; and the hawala system, a recordless financial transaction system, was used to transfer funds both to Pakistan and to the Taliban.
Finally, numerous computer files were deleted intentionally, but through good law enforcement in both Great Britain and the United States, those files were restored, recovered and make up a good portion of the criminal complaint.
The complaint also details numerous searches conducted by law enforcement both in the United States and outside the United States, including Great Britain, in connection with this matter.
The evidence obtained to date, and as set forth in the complaint -- and that's all I'm going to comment on today -- demonstrates numerous e-mails and other communications in support of our material support allegations.
However, in addition to substantial evidence to support charges of material support of terrorism, additional evidence was obtained from a floppy disk found in Mr. Ahmad's residence that set forth classified plans, then-classified plans, for a U.S. naval battle group operating in the Straits of Hormuz in April of 2001.
O'CONNOR: In particular, the document discussed the battle group's planned movements roughly two weeks later and included a drawing of the group's formation as well as the names of each ship therein and where they would be in that formation. Most important, the document specifically described the battle group's vulnerability to terrorist attack, including how to stop, quote, "a small craft with rocket-propelled grenades" -- excuse me -- that these ships might be attacked since they, quote, "have nothing to stop a small craft with rocket-propelled grenades except their SEAL (ph) Stinger missiles."
In addition, the document specifically noted that the battle group was tasked both with enforcing sanctions against Iraq and with conducting operations against Afghanistan and Al Qaeda.
The complaint also alleges that Ahmad received an e-mail correspondence in July 2001 from a U.S. naval enlistee on active duty on the USS Benfold, the substance of which was sympathetic to the jihad movement.
Before I take questions, let me conclude by saying, we hear often in the United States how patient and persistent terrorists are. Cases like this demonstrate that we are more patient and more persistent. And we will continue to do so.
So no matter where they're hiding, be it a cave, be it in the ground, be it in a safehouse or in the dark corners of cyberspace, law enforcement is there as well.
And we will continue the tremendous forensic and other investigative work done by the agencies represented here today, as well as our British counterparts, to continue to engage in the war of terror, no matter where it takes us -- cyberspace, holes in the ground or anywhere else.
Questions?
QUESTION: Have you guys arrested and questioned this naval enlistee about him being sympathetic while he was on active duty? And obviously, this Ahmad having naval information, is that part of this case?
O'CONNOR: It's part of this case. I'm not at liberty to comment, other than to say we've identified the individual, and no charges have been announced against that individual at this time. But this remains an active investigation. QUESTION: Is he still in the Navy?
O'CONNOR: I can't comment.
QUESTION: Any indication how Connecticut was chosen? And was this man or any of his associates ever here?
O'CONNOR: We do not allege that this man, in the complaint, or his associates -- well, no, excuse me, we do not allege that Mr. Ahmad was physically in Connecticut, in the context of this complaint.
O'CONNOR: We do allege that he used an Internet service provider, OLM, in, I believe, Trumbull, Connecticut, as the conduit to maintain these sites. We do not allege, nor am I going to comment as to, why he may have chosen that site, other than to say, in fairness to that organization, they are not a target or a subject of this investigation.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) evidence that this man ever traveled to the United States?
O'CONNOR: I didn't say that. I said we do not allege in the complaint that this man traveled to the United States, nor do we allege that any such travel to the United States is relevant to the specific charges of this complaint.
QUESTION: Kevin, the two individuals that you have identified in the complaint sending e-mails from New Jersey and Connecticut, have those two individuals been identified?
O'CONNOR: Again, I'm not going to comment on that. But obviously, I think it's fair to say that we've identified those individuals, but we are not going to publicly name them at this time.
QUESTION: There was some indication in some reports that Ahmad might be related to the guy who was arrested in Pakistan. Do you have any information on that?
O'CONNOR: I cannot comment on those reports.
QUESTION: Any relationship with the timing of this arrest and (OFF-MIKE)?
O'CONNOR: Well, this is a long-term investigation. I'm not going to comment as to why things happened today or yesterday or the day before. That's sensitive law enforcement material, and those judgments are made all the time. I'm just going to say simply that this investigation was commenced in early 2002.
A tremendous amount of work goes into even getting a complaint through the Department of Justice, through all the other agencies. So this is not something that happened overnight. But as to when, where and why, I'm not going to elaborate further.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) to have him extradited here to the United States?
O'CONNOR: We're realistic. Extradition is a lengthy process.
You know, frankly, our biggest concern, at this point, was arresting him. Hopefully we'll detain him beyond the one-week period that the court has held over the detention hearing. We'll deal with extradition.
We have 60 days to submit the requisite materials under our treaty with Great Britain, which we will do probably well in advance of that. And then the process is going to take its course.
But we're realistic to know that extradition does not move as quickly as any of us would like.
QUESTION: Mr. O'Connor, this comes on the heels of several arrests in London and Albany -- some considered big victories; some considered small. In the larger scheme of things in the war on terrorism, how big a victory is this?
O'CONNOR: I don't want to overstate it, frankly.
This is an important case to the people who worked on it. I can tell you something. There were long hours, very tedious forensic analysis to just get to this point.
So, you know, I don't want to overstate it. I think I'll let the public decide the importance of this case.
But I will tell you one thing. I'm very proud of the efforts of law enforcement. When you look at that complaint, and you see the amount of analysis and effort that went into obtaining that material, not just in Connecticut, not just in the United States, but all over the country.
So I'll leave it up to others to decide the importance of this. I'm certainly not overstating it. But I do think it's important that folks know, particularly terrorists, that if you're going to use cyberspace, we're there, and we're paying attention. And we're going to continue to pay attention. And we've got the talent in these agencies, here and in Great Britain, to basically follow you.
So that's the message I hope this sends.
QUESTION: Do you have a sense, from the documents in April of 2001 on the U.S. battle group plan, how close this man may have been allegedly to carrying out an attack?
O'CONNOR: Well, fortunately no attack occurred. I can say that, thank God. But I cannot really comment any beyond that.
QUESTION: Can you tell us how much money -- I've read quickly through that. I just saw the word "cash." Are we talking $1 million, $2 million, just thousands of dollars?
O'CONNOR: Well, the investigation is ongoing. And, as you can imagine, trying to track down all the different leads when you're dealing with cyberspace and e-mail is a very cumbersome process.
I'll just say -- I won't quantify it. I'll say it was a significant amount of money. But I don't want to put a dollar figure on it because our investigation is continuing.
QUESTION: But have you shut down, like, a big funnel of money?
O'CONNOR: Well, I don't know, to be honest with you. Certainly these sites are no longer operated. But have other sites sprung up in other parts of the world? I don't know.
I know that these sites are not operating. And I know, I think we've done a great job shutting it down. But now we're trying to go back and figure out what happened when.
So going forward, I think the answer is yes. But going back, we still have a lot of work to do.
QUESTION: Are you trying to determine what if any U.S. citizens sent money via these Web sites? And could they possibly face some kind of charges for supporting terrorism?
O'CONNOR: Well, we have determined that some U.S. citizens, through these sites, have sent money. And I believe the complaint details one or two that have done that.
And we're going to continue to run down every lead. Again, it takes time, but we're going to do it to see if there are other U.S. citizens, as well as British or other nationalities, that may have been involved in raising funds.
So that's the goal to continue to do it. And that's what we're going to continue to do.
QUESTION: Did he take PayPal, American Express? I mean, how was the money...
O'CONNOR: Well, I think in the complaint you'll see the money -- there was an elaborate scheme that was at least presented to people. But I cannot comment beyond the four corners of the complaint to give you the specific details, other than to say they used various avenues to get the money from the United States, in some instances, into Afghanistan and other places.
QUESTION: One last question. The home that he stayed in in London was raided in December of '03, so last December. Is that when the Web sites came down? Has he been under tight surveillance since then?
O'CONNOR: Well, the question presumes that they were still up. I think a lot of them came down. I think the complaint alleges that, right after 9/11, there was quite a bit of moving around: The names changed; the service providers changed.
The Connecticut service provider, which many people are wondering, why Connecticut? Well, that's the venue issue right there, that he was using service providers in Connecticut. That wasn't in operation the entire six-year period, '97 to 2003.
These folks were sophisticated. As soon as they suspected surveillance, they would shut it down and go with another ISP and another domain name.
So at certain points in time, the answer is yes. But I think, as of now, at least with respect to this one individual, we're pretty comfortable that we've found out what he's been doing to date.
QUESTION: Kevin, is this a case that was generated out of investigators in this district, or was this a case that when it moved... KAGAN: We've been listening in to a news conference with the U.S. Attorney's Office in New Haven, Connecticut. They are talking about the arrest in Britain of a man -- a 30-month-old man name Babar Ahmad. He has been arrested on terrorism charges. They believe that he used an Internet site based in Connecticut to raise money to support terrorism activities in Chechnya and Afghanistan.
Interesting in this Internet age, there is no allegation that this man has ever been to the U.S. That he's been to Connecticut. But because the Internet site that he used is based in Connecticut, that is why these charges are coming from there. Extradition procedures are under way, and they're trying to bring Ahmad -- Babar Ahmad back here to the U.S.
We'll have much more on that story ahead. Our Alina Cho was in that news conference and she'll be joining us when it wraps up.
Meanwhile, I want to show you another story that we're watching out of Florida. Just outside of Orlando, Florida -- Deltona, Florida getting word from the Associated Press, multiple bodies were found inside a home that we're looking down on. It happened early today. And authorities say they're investigating the death as homicides.
The exact number of dead in the house is not known at this time. They discovered the bodies about 6:30 a.m. Eastern this morning. Apparently a coworker of one of the victims called a friend asking that person to visit the home when the person did not show up for work. So that's just outside of Orlando, Florida. Deltona, Florida. Much more on that story as well.
Kicked off this Friday with a lot of news. We had President Bush; we had the news out of New Haven, Connecticut, now that news out of Florida. Let's fit in a break, we'll regroup and be back after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KAGAN: Here at home, disappointment on Wall Street. The government says just over 32,000 new jobs were created in July. Analysts had expected more than 215,000. Details and financial news this hour.
And later, some tips for landing that hard-to-find job. We want to personalize it for those of you at home who are really trying hard to find that the next job
Meanwhile, let's get back to politics and get some perspective on the Bush and Kerry campaigns, where their trails cross, where the issues divide.
And for that, we turn to CNN senior political analyst Bill Schneider in Washington.
Bill, good morning.
BILL SCHNEIDER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Good morning, Daryn.
KAGAN: First, just off the top, what about that jobs report? That can't be the kind of news that the Bush administration will be looking to tout.
SCHNEIDER: Very bad news for President Bush, because he has been promising all year that his tax cut and his economic program would put the country on the road to recovery. He expected to recover almost all of the jobs that were lost during his administration before Election Day. And they seem to be earlier this year on the road to doing that.
But this latest job news indicates it is now very unlikely that the jobs lost during the Bush administration are going to be recovered by the time of the election. Which will give this administration -- it will not give it one of its main talking points, that it expected to run for reelection on.
KAGAN: Well, a talking point for us in the media this week has been isn't it interesting how these candidates show up at much the same places, almost at the same time. We saw it earlier in Iowa. And then this week, yesterday, we saw Senator John Kerry at the Unity Convention, the gathering of minority journalists there in Washington. Just a few minutes ago, we saw President Bush.
Unofficial feel here, but it seems like Senator Kerry got a warmer reception than President Bush did at that. Does that support the idea that there's a liberal media out there. That people -- some people believe they would rather see a Democratic president?
SCHNEIDER: Well, remember that this is a convention of minority journalists. And minorities, mostly African-American, Latinos, some Native Americans, Asian Americans, they tend to vote very strongly Democratic. So this is likely to be a very Democratic group, simply because minorities are very Democratic, not because they're journalists.
But they gave Mr. Bush a polite reception. But clearly, there was skepticism about what his programs have done for minorities. He defended his administration record of diversity, but he would not sign on, for instance, to a constitutional amendment guaranteeing voting rights. And Kerry was the one who argued that government needs to step in and do more to protect and advance the interests of minorities. Which is, frankly, what a lot of these voters, not just journalists, but voters want to hear.
KAGAN: Other news of the day out there. There's this new ad that's going to come out, veterans -- swift vote veterans that are not for Kerry, trying to challenge his record -- trying to challenge his record and what he says is how things unfolded in Vietnam. Interesting debate earlier today on "AMERICAN MORNING." You have those who are for Senator Kerry and those who are against him.
SCHNEIDER: Well, as you might expect, this has become a deeply partisan issue. With some veterans, critical of Kerry's record, in fact, attacking Kerry's record. It was interesting; Senator John McCain stood up yesterday and attacked those who ran this ad. It's an ad run by an independent committee, with no coordination with the Bush/Cheney campaign. Essentially accusing Senator Kerry of lying about his military record. Senator McCain said it was dishonorable. It was disgraceful. He criticized it, even though he is a strong Bush supporter, who will speak at the Republican convention.
And now today, "The Boston Globe" learned that one of the veterans who criticized Senator Kerry and said he did not deserve the Silver Star, I believe in the end he got a Bronze Star, has now recanted his statement, and said that he regrets he said that.
KAGAN: Bill Schneider in Washington. Bill, thank you for that.
SCHNEIDER: Mm-hmm.
KAGAN: Once again, we want to get back to our developing story. That is the job reports just out this morning with numbers far lower than originally predicted by the Bush administration.
For a little more perspective on that, what the numbers are, what they mean, let's bring in Gerri Willis -- Gerri.
GERRI WILLIS, CNN-FN PERSONAL FINANCE EDITOR: Hey, Daryn. Good to see you. These numbers we're looking at very disappointing for Wall Street this morning. The overall rate, 5.5 percent it's the number the administration is focusing on right now. That's the top line number. But the number that the traders, Wall Street pays attention to is job creation, just 32,000 for the month of July. Very disappointing. Daryn, their expectations that 228,000 jobs would be created. So a big difference there. Market sell-off this morning, and a little recovery here close to midday.
KAGAN: So how do you explain the discrepancy there? Where were the jobs supposed to be that they didn't show up?
WILLIS: I think it was a misreading by the economists, that this economic recovery was stronger than it has been. Questions now about the pace of that recovery, now, what it's going to continue to look like. Could we be headed for a double-dip? All kinds of questions being asked this morning. Also, keeping in mind here, Daryn, the Federal Reserve meets Tuesday, and as you know, the Federal Reserve controls rates. A lot of people paying attention to that. Expectations of a quarter-point rate hike. That probably will still happen is what the economists are saying. But it could be the case that the Fed could slow down its rate hikes later in the year. And, Daryn, I guess good news for people looking for a mortgage out there.
KAGAN: OK, Gerri Willis, thank you so much for that.
WILLIS: You're welcome.
KAGAN: We have a lot of news to get to overseas as well, fighting flares again in Iraq, as one respected cleric leaves the country. We'll get a live report from Baghdad. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
