Deafening Silence Before Thwarted London Bombing

The defusing of a large car bomb set to detonate outside one of London’s most popular night clubs early this morning is naturally the story of the day, and media reports are saturated with mostly similar summaries of what is known at this point about the incident. The Associated Press, not surprisingly, reported earlier that there was no known link to terrorism, while more responsible news outlets obtained information connecting the construction and materials used in the foiled bomb to a known al Qaeda bomb maker. Conflicting media reports are not unusual in the early stages of a significant terrorist plot investigation, and rather than dwell on media inconsistencies I offer a few observations on this morning’s bomb discovery.

1. Those who have read the author’s bio here know that I work directly in this field, and without getting into any details of how, if there had been any prior warning or indications of a potential bombing in London today I would have known about them. The silence, in this case, was truly deafening. Ordinarily prior to terrorist attacks, even of small magnitude, “chatter” increases and analysts in my line of work warn of the change in activity levels. That did not happen in this case. Whether through evolving terrorist strategies, exposed government surveillance techniques, or a combination of the two (the most likely), the cell that planned, constructed, and attempted to deliver and detonate today’s bomb kept a sophisticated silence. They may yet be identified and arrested through Britain’s effective metropolitan closed circuit TV camera systems standing guard on nearly every street corner, but the key point to this attempted bombing is that there were no warning signs. America and her allies have improved communication and information sharing between intelligence and law enforcement agencies somewhat since 9/11, but if the enemy provides no pre-operation signs of activity, information sharing is a moot point.

2. As one of my favorite fellow bloggers pointed out today at his site In From the Cold, perhaps the only reason hundreds of night club patrons in London are still alive today is because an ambulance crew responding to a call in the area noticed something unusual about the car containing the bomb, and notified the police. We should never underestimate our “gut instincts.” Every day, we see unusual behavior or something that just seems amiss, and we have to make judgments regarding the nature of what we have seen and evaluate whether it warrants alerting authorities. In this case, the ambulance crew was en route to render emergency assistance to someone and could have ignored the silver Mercedes parked sloppily on the curb. No one would have thought less of the crew had they proceeded on to perform their duty. However, by taking the time to make that one radio call to the police, hundreds of lives were likely spared. They did not know that at the time, they simply followed their “street smarts” or if you prefer, “intuition.”

If you see something or someone that just doesn’t look right, follow your instincts, trust them, and make that call to the authorities. If it turns out to be nothing, you can chuckle about it later. If it turns out to be a bomb made of gasoline, propane, and nails intended to maximize casualties, and you chose not to make the call for fear of embarrassment, you will be devastated by your inaction. Police, firemen, and EMTs are not the only first responders when it comes to public safety. More often than not, ordinary citizens will be first to witness something unusual or come across someone in need of assistance. As the Boy Scout motto urges, “Be Prepared!”

3. As we move closer to our July 4th festivities, we should keep in mind the events in London today. Large gatherings of reveling westerners are a particularly attractive target for radical Islamic terrorists. Our celebrations are representative to them of our decadence, and parades, concerts, and fireworks extravaganzas offer a banquet full of tasty terror choices. Extensive camera surveillance systems are not yet the norm in America as they are in Britain, and so we must rely on our intelligence agencies to provide us advance warning. Advance warning, however, does not always come, as today’s events proved yet again. Three hundred million Americans are the best anti-terror tool available to us today. They possess six hundred million eyes and six hundred million ears looking out for or listening to each other and not ignoring that object, vehicle, conversation, or person who seems out of place or suspicious.

If “to err is human,” then “to err on the side of caution” should be our duty.


Diagram map of London courtesy of BBC

Technorati Tags:
London Car Bomb, Piccadilly, Haymarket Bomb, Tiger Tiger Nightclub, IED, Scotland Yard, Counterterrorism

Killing of Terror Chief in Iraq Must Shock Hagel

Yesterday I wrote about Senator Chuck Hagel’s (R-NE) “expert” opinion published in the Washington Post that al-Qaeda and terrorists are not the core problem in Iraq. On Monday, the “not a core problem” al Qaeda groups killed nine 82nd Airborne soldiers in a massive attack, but that was not likely sufficient to change Hagel’s mind about his assessment of the situation in Iraq. Today, U.S. command announced that in its recently expanded operations in Baghdad’s suburbs, Muhammad Abdullah Abbas al-Issawi was killed during an extended encounter with coalition forces. This will come as a great shock to Senator Hagel, since al-Issawi was al Qaeda’s chief tactician in the Anbar Province and was reportedly the mastermind behind al Qaeda’s recruiting of twelve year-old Iraqi boys to serve as suicide car bombers in Baghdad.

If al Qaeda and terrorists are not the core problem in Iraq, perhaps Hagel can explain al-Issawi’s stature and “accomplishments” there. It seems that no sooner had Hagel returned from his latest trip to Iraq and ran to the Post to dismiss al Qaeda’s presence and role in Iraq, al Qaeda demonstrated that it is in fact responsible for much of the so-called insurgency. Hagel insisted that Iraq is mired in a civil war, but how can that be true when the vast majority of VBIEDs, IEDs, and suicide bombings are planned, funded, and executed at the behest of al Qaeda and other non-Iraqi terrorist groups? Would Iraqi boys line up to serve as suicide bombers without the influence of terrorist groups?

The purpose of the Petraeus surge strategy is to provide Baghdad with sufficient security for the parliament to carry out its functions and build a united Iraq. Hagel sees bombings and casualties and in a knee-jerk reaction assumes that Iraqis, without the insidious influence of outside elements, are at war with each other and thus the cause is hopeless. That view, while politically opportunistic, is not corroborated by reports from the Armed Forces. Hagel should read a few military blogs before sharing his “expertise” with the media.

Hagel wants to wash his hands of this war by inaccurately portraying it as a civil war, thus placing blame on Iraqis for the socio-political disaster that will occur if America withdraws from Iraq before the Iraqi government is capable of sustaining and defending itself from overt and covert interference from its neighbors. Like Macbeth, however, Hagel will find that the blood never quite washes clean from guilty hands. America made a commitment to the Iraqis, but Pelosi, Reid, Hagel, and others want to place restrictions on our patience and declare our commitment not to be open ended. Under political pressure, even President Bush has been forced to promise that troops will not be in Iraq indefinitely. As Americans, our commitment to freedom and democracy must be open ended and unquestioned by our allies and enemies alike. If Hagel wonders why Americans never seriously considered him as presidential timbre, he need look no further than his willingness to turn his back on a newly freed nation under siege by terrorists.