New York Subway Threat A Hoax

CNN reports the informant who provided the tip there was a terrorist plot against New York's subways admitted he gave false information.

This information is sure to renew the debate about whether Mayor Michael Bloomberg overreacted. Nevertheless, it is a relief that it was a hoax.

UPDATE: The New York Post has more information:

An informant — who is believed to be from Pakistan — had told authorities that three men in Iraq were plotting to bomb the subways via remote-controlled devices hidden in baby strollers and briefcases.

One source said the snitch has even admitted to interrogators he made it up. But authorities said they're now satisfied that the three suspects, arrested in Iraq last week, are not al Qaeda members, as the informant indicated.

They also have never been to an Afghani terror training camp and are not pharmacists, as was originally alleged by the informant, according to sources.

"They know each other, they're real people," said a law-enforcement official, adding that no evidence exists the men had any terror training — and that all three passed polygraph tests with flying colors.

Meanwhile, the snitch failed his polygraph, sources said.

According to the sources, the snitch — who is presumed to be overseas — may have plucked the men's names from the Internet and made up the bogus tip in hopes of getting a quick pay day for the information.

Another theory, the official said, is that he took random chatter from the three out of context.

"The threat has washed out," the official said, adding that security sweeps of the suspects' homes and cellphones came up empty. "If there was something going on, it was disrupted."

Authorities noted that the snitch had provided them with information in the past — some on the money, some not.

Comments

[Robin Munn]

Magically-morphing news articles strike again! :-)

Seriously, though, I wish the MSM would take a cue from blogs and start leaving first drafts intact, with "UPDATE: This information is no longer accurate. We have now learned..." below or something. Ah well, no harm done.

[California Yankee]

Robin, I agree that the CNN article now only says "officials have determined the informant gave false information." I hope I didn't make such an error in the post. Perhaps the inconsistency has something to do with the fact that I first saw the article around 1:00 p.m, and the link finds an article which was "Posted: 5:49 p.m."

[Robin Munn]

Ah. Never mind. I hadn't seen the New York Post article yet.

[Robin Munn]

"[T]he informant ... admitted he gave false information."

That's not how I read the article. The lead paragraph of the CNN article says "... officials have determined the informant gave false information." Nothing about the informant himself 'fessing up.

Or did you read a different version of the article than the one you linked to?