Dec 22 2006
UK Faces Probable Terrorist Attack
I noticed this Powerline post which linked to an article on Brian Ross’ ABC News The Blotter site which describes the enivitability of a terrorist attack in the UK around Christmas:
British intelligence and law enforcement officials have passed on a grim assessment to their U.S. counterparts, “It will be a miracle if there isn’t a terror attack over the holidays in London,” a senior American law enforcement official tells ABCNews.com
British police have been quietly carrying out a series of key arrests as they continue to track at least six active “plots” tied to what they call “al Qaeda of England.”
Officials said they could not cite any specific date or target but said al Qaeda had planned previous operations during the Christmas holidays that had been disrupted.
“It is not a matter of if there will be an attack, but how bad the attack will be,” an intelligence official told ABCNews.com.
Authorities say they are seeking at least 18 suspected suicide bombers.
Connecting this dire picture to the fact we have Polonium-210 running around London at this very moment and our British friends are facing a real problem. Authorities admit there were three rounds of smuggling Polonium-210 associated with Litvinenko’s death. And we know that the deadly dosage Litvinenko ingested was the size of a grain of salt. So we have a disconnect between the three smuggling efforts and the result, to date, being a couple of grain’s of salt (no news on how much Polonium 210 was detected at the hotels Lugovoi stayed at when he visited Litvinenko). It seems we might find out soon enough, though some UK authorities are saying the threat may not be targetted at Christmas.
Update: I have been predicting a major Al Qaeda attack would come to remind the Democrats of their promise to surrender Iraq to Al Qaeda. Christmas is the perfect PR time for the Jihadis to hit the “Crusadors” – as they like to call us. It seems London is not the only country bracing for attack. Now
It is probable that the UK has good intelligence that the terrorists are about to strike. I also think, on balance, that there is or was a Polonium smuggling ring operating in London. However, for that very reason I don’t think that a Polonium bomb will debut any time soon, in London. This is where Berezovsky and Litvinenko are and were operating. The Polonium had another destination. Because several of the Russian contacts are from Moscow (making Moscow, by the same logic, a remote likelihood), it is very possible that the Polonium is destined for the US.
I am sure it must have something to do with the Jews in London.
Given the half-life of Polonium, I would bet long odds that whatever is going to happen will happen before 2 January.
The obvious attack would be a dirty bomb attack on a New Year’s Eve crowd….preferably (from the terrorist standpoint) in Times Square. Maybe London.
Secondary probability would be to dust the passenger terminal of a major airport. And Heathrow is one of the biggest international terminals in the world.
Mike M I think the airport scenario makes sense. They could dust a location like that and it would be weeks or months before anyone even found out.
Don’t assume that because it had a half-life of roughly 4 months, that it must be used in that time. I believe polonium based nuke triggers were good for a longer period, something like 6 to 9 months.
Also, if it were going to be used as a mass terror weapon, it could have already been used and we might not know about it for months or even years in the future.
If I were the British, I would be monitoring the waste water stream.
Just listening to Rush Limbaugh regarding Abu Graib…makes me so angry what the media did to hurt our mission and image in this War on Terror…
So I want to say to all those who jumped on the Abu Graib bandwagon, don’t ask me to help you when the bombs go off in the cities of your elite offices…no fire engines, no money…nada. You have brought it on yourselves….and all those around you. You disgust me and I consider you my country’s enemy. (Enemedia) Got that?
But to my friends in those cities, you have my eternal help.
So we have these “authorities” that KNOW an attack is “probable” – yet they do nothing to warn the public?
No broadcasts to stay off public transportation if possible.
No broadcasts to be alert to any thing suspicious.
No broadcasts to dissuade large public gatherings.
No broadcasts that the threat level is extrodinarily high.
Just let it happen and deal with it after?
The terrorists win either way – alert the public so they win the “scared ya” media war.
Don’t alert the public and let the even occur. Pathetic.
The public has the right to know and make up their minds how they want to proceed. Here we go again – terrorists shaping public policy.
Strata
You do realize that IF Britain is attacked it will be because of
Poodle Tony Blair following the lead of your dear leader in
lying Britain into an unnecessary, sinister conflict?
No,Ken is the result of liberal imigration policies that allowed your fellow muslims come in and allowed them to be terrorists in the UK.It’s time to kick them out.
Enlightened,
If the authorities shut down transit and had the population shelter in their homes, the terrorists wouldn’t need to actually carry out an attack, they could shut down the UK by simply threatening to.
“No broadcasts to be alert to any thing suspicious.”
Untrue. There have been constant public service warnings, television ads, posters, warnings broadcast in transit stations, etc. to be aware of suspicious activity.
“No broadcasts that the threat level is extrodinarily high.”
Also untrue. The threat level in Britain is mentioned often in the news, is posted on a public website, and is talked about by people both presenting and commenting on the news.
“No broadcasts to dissuade large public gatherings.
No broadcasts to dissuade large public gatherings.”
That will never ever happen. You would be asking them to shut down the city transit, shopping areas, sporting and cultural events … all because of some nebulous perception that has a good chance of being real but nobody knows for sure. The British have more courage than that. If you were to shut down the country every time someone made a threat, then there would be no end to the threats.
You have a better chance of being killed in an automobile accident than in a terrorist attack and I don’t see them banning cars.
Around 3000 were killed at World Trade.
About 190,000 Americans have died from automobile accidents since September, 11 2001.
Good Doctor
Are you British? If not, why are you telling Britain what to do?
Doesn’t America have enough of its own ethnic powderkeg brewing?
Who cares…
I’m yawning. who really cares? lets say there is one an a few londoner’s go down. so what. what exactly are we going to do about it? come on folks, you know. spit it out. that’s right NOTHING.
bush and Blair are going to jump up and down in their playpens and make idle threats that have no meaning. korea has nukes and iran is getting theirs.
the leaders of iran, syria, hamas, hezzbollah etc are the terror generals and leaders. everyday they get up and sip their lattes’ and arrange for a few more infidels to be killed. we let them live. we deserve everything that happens to us. sorry london, but it’s your turn.
Patrick, it is worse than that.
Blair and Bush have been sounding the alarm but are hamstrung by a political opposition that is willing to see their own citizens die in order to make Bush and Blair look bad.
Patrick,
30,000 to 50,000 Americans die from flu each year. About the same amount die from traffic accidents. The Democrats are not likely to get serious about terrorism until the annual death rate approaches those levels in the US. Until we see something on the order of a 9/11scale attack every month, I doubt the Democrats will do much.
The Iraqi army today assumed control of Mosul and Ninewa Province. The other day it was Najaf. Yet more territory under Iraqi army control, meaning we can concentrate our forces even more in the tougher spots. My guess is we just “surged” in al Anbar province without having to send a single extra troop to Iraq.
Crosspatch
My guess is the Iraqi Army is already defecient in reference to your
goals anyway, including being thoroughly infiltrated and generally fighting (with inadequate arms) for a collection of ethnic rather
than national interests. In other words, your three year
Pollyanna-ing continues…
Patric Neid
Don’t be so gloomy. We finance state terrorism which keeps the Palestinians in oppressed squalor.