Former Irish terrorist attack comments in the Minsk metro.
OKalagan Sean (Sean O'Callaghan) joined the Irish Republican Army (IRA) in 1969, when he was 15 years old. In 1976, he left the IRA and went to England, where he later became an informant for British intelligence on the activities of the Irish rebels of the IRA. It is assumed that his information security services have helped prevent a planned terrorist attack during a concert in London in 1984, which was attended by «Duran Duran» and «Dire Straits», and the audience included Prince Charles and Princess Diana. In 1988, OKalagan admitted that during the two terrorist attacks in 1974, he scored two man-woman soldier (who, as it turned out after the attack, was pregnant) and police. On the basis of this recognition OKalagana sentenced to eight years in prison. In prison OKalagan wrote an autobiographical book titled "The Informant."
Sean OKalagan agreed to comment on the attack in the Minsk metro for our radio. Interview took Charles Reknagl and Jan Maksimyuk.
Radio Liberty: Belarusian investigators say that the subway was used quite sophisticated explosive device that had no parallel in previous terrorist attacks. Allegedly, the person put a bomb, found information on how to do on the web. Investigators also said that the alleged terrorists just finished vocational school, one as an electrician, and the second as a turner. In your opinion, can such people make complicated bomb?
Sean OKalagan: In this context, I am inclined to doubt it. It is understood that when an electrical structure of the explosive device has the advantage that it understands the electrical circuits. But where in Belarus, these young people have taken the stuff? Where they made this adjustment, the way they've set in motion an explosive mechanism? It's in my head it fits. Where the material? Where explosives, which they have used? Of course, the internet can get the necessary information, I agree, but finding information on the Internet and production material and production of sophisticated bomb it — they are two completely different stories. And where they did — in the shop? It's very strange.
Radio Liberty: In the case of the Minsk terrorist attack every day there are more questions than answers. Questions that still remain unclear, there are circumstances in which these young people have been indicted, pleaded guilty in an explosion in the subway, and even admitted to two other attacks in 2005 and 2008. According to investigators, one of the men carried a heavy bag on the platform, and then left without a bag with the platform, totally oblivious to the camera at the station. Perpetrators have found yet because they allegedly left fingerprints on the explosive device, which did not work in the previous attempt to attack. How can you explain this behavior alleged terrorists?
Sean OKalagan: Sometimes we need to agree with the fact that people who are in a situation behave very deftly and cleverly, the other to be rather careless. What I find very special in this whole scenario is the fact that there is not seen no strategic benefit. If this was an operation which was carried out group, what they wanted to achieve? What did they mean? Or they just wanted to kill their neighbors for no reason?
If you go into the subway to plant a bomb, but today, no matter where in the world you want to do this, you need to know about covert surveillance camera system. You must understand this. Something very strange, because if you think about the people who do various other crimes — rape, kill for love or hate — I always think of the motive, the reason for which someone committed such a crime. And then you master the complicated bomb in the country, to be honest, is not the first in some areas, and you can do it and you kill these bombs its neighbors. And there is no obvious reason for it. No, it does not make sense.
Radio Liberty: So for you it means a "normal" part of the terrorist? Or do they need a safety net, ideological, to have confidence that what they did was not murder, and that they made to serve a higher purpose, and thus exempt them from the general rules?
Sean OKalagan: If you keep in mind the Irish context, so I was raised with the belief that killing a British soldier in Ireland — it's not a crime, and not a sin. So in that sense, you are killing, as if you were in the war. In this context, these things are justified by themselves, which, of course, very important. All I did in his youthful years, could not be considered murder. Murder would be something very bad, so that none of those things was not murder. So if you are involved in zabitstsi military or police, it was not murder, it could be a murder. If it was murder, it is, of course, would be bad. If you thought that you just kill, you would go astray. That's all you can stretch and a bunch of other stuff, all of this context. What aglamazhzhvae man whose head has at least Klek baby, it's a feeling that this particular event Minsk NO context.
Radio Liberty: Many of the bloggers suggests that in fact the bomb could put a special service.
Sean OKalagan: No matter how things turn out, with this particular bomb is something very, very strange. It somehow does not develop into something plausible at all levels. Does not add up. I thought about it more than one hour, and then when it happened, and when, and to me it does not fit in with each other. I mean the fact that the bomb kills civilians for no reason, and the context in which the economy goes into the pipe. To me it does not come to me, it just does not get it. And to me does not come as quickly as people can admit this fact. And the man gets drunk — listen, if you get drunk to the point that you can not be questioned for at least the next day. And if you knock people out of the recognition of five in the morning, what happened during all those hours in front of recognition? Even in the case of anarchists, anarchist Russian or American anarchists in the early twentieth century, there was always at least some context. And even hermits in those freak and who held small terrorist campaign, even they had some kind of context, there were any specific target in mind. And it looks like this: we want to plant a bomb in Minsk tomorrow morning and want to kill a bunch of civilians. And then I want to get drunk. And the bomb is going to be very tricky. And for what? I mean, who are you, why are you doing this? This does not add up.