You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Britain
Into the Crevice of 7/7
2006-02-06
British authorities had at least two of the terrorists who bombed London last July 7 under surveillance in 2004. In an official document examined by NEWSWEEK, a British judge reports that U.K. investigators had pictures and voice recordings of Mohammed Siddique Khan—believed to have been the plot leader—and another suicide bomber, Shahzad Tanweer, meeting several times in February and March 2004 with suspects in an earlier, separate terror plot that U.K. authorities investigated under the code name Operation Crevice. The evidence includes recordings of Khan in a car driven by one Crevice suspect, and evidence showing Khan and Tanweer getting out of a Crevice suspect's car. British media have made only limited references to the evidence because a trial of Crevice suspects is pending, and pretrial publicity is restricted under U.K. law.

After July 7, investigators claimed the four suspected suicide bombers were previously unknown to British intel. But as the investigation evolved, authorities quietly made it known that antiterror investigators, presumably working for the secret counterintelligence agency M.I.5, had run across Khan and Tanweer; British authorities decided at the time that they weren't dangerous enough for continuing surveillance. U.S. law-enforcement officials, who asked not to be named because the investigation continues, told NEWSWEEK the name of a third bomber, Germaine Lindsay, also came up tangentially in Crevice. British authorities initially denied they had heard of him before July 7 but now concede they may have. A U.K. official said Tony Blair's government wouldn't comment for legal reasons.
Posted by:Dan Darling

#11  ... as expected, the moderate muslims' silence is deafening. Indeed, when they have spoken their views have been most ambiguous.

And I say this will be the death of them. Silence is consent and consenting to Islamist terrorism is enough to get you killed. My belief in the "Moderate Muslim" is nearly extinguished. No amount of persuasion from my side is going to change that. Only Muslims acting en masse to bring about positive change will alter things and I most definitely do not see it happening.

Quite agree - time for assassination squads like we used against the IRA (and Mossad against the Paleos).

Glad to see more people on board with the hunter - killer wetwork teams, Howard UK. Beyond immolating several Middle East countries as an example to the rest, snuffing all of the top tier imams and mullahs is the only solution. Spreading this pathological Islamist meme needs to become a fatally dangerous activity.
Posted by: Zenster   2006-02-06 12:19  

#10  I just think these assclowns wanted to provoke the police into taking action. There would have been far more gloating on Islamicist websites had they received the beating they so deserve - and the pictures would be round the 'Umma' in a flash. What we have to do now is show that the due process of the law is occurring - which I'm not sure it will. These protests also serve as good monitoring opportunities as no raving jihadi could resist staying away from a potential scrap in central London - but again as the article suggests intelligence gathering is flawed. Maybe next time we just shoot 'em..
Posted by: Howard UK   2006-02-06 08:59  

#9  I think the writer meant to say 'Into the Crevasse of 7/7' but with CNN chasing the Middle East market, editorial standards seem to be a unnecessary expense.
Posted by: phil_b   2006-02-06 08:23  

#8  Howard, that's my concern as well. In avoiding the shortterm risk (by not arresting those dressed as suicide bombers - indeed, letting them post next to police vehicles - but arresting those with the Mohammed cartoons) your authorities have greatly encouraged real violence down the road.

You get what you subsidize. In this case, the police are penalizing speech and subsidizing threats.
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2006-02-06 08:23  

#7  Make him fight on his turf, force him to fight your battle, not his. Your local and even national police can not do that job.

Howard, that's my concern as well. In avoiding the shortterm risk (by not arresting those dressed as suicide bombers - indeed, letting them post next to police vehicles - but arresting those with the Mohammed cartoons) your authorities have greatly encouraged real violence down the road.

Go read the gloating on Islamic sites about this.
Posted by: lotp   2006-02-06 08:20  

#6  as expected, the moderate muslims' silence is deafening

Hard to hear what isn't there.

(And before someone jumps on me, let me point out the latest data in the moderates-are-mythical argument. The largest mosque in the Chicago area has been taken over by Islamists; one member has been resisting them, fighting them in court and trying to expose their activities in funding terrorism. By his own admission he's the only person putting up a fight. Yeah, he's a moderate -- but he's the only one.

The Moderate Muslim Myth posits that the majority of Muslims are moderates opposed to the jihadists; it has become harder and harder to square that theory with reality. I don't consider someone a "moderate" in any meaningful sense if they accomodate the radicals. It's like finding a Chicago-area megachurch has been taken over by Christian-identity nuts with no resistance from the congregation; would you give them the benefit of the doubt?)
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2006-02-06 07:53  

#5  Quite agree - time for assassination squads like we used against the IRA (and Mossad against the Paleos).
Posted by: Howard UK   2006-02-06 05:52  

#4  When you're on the defense, the enemy chooses the time, place and location of the attack. If you limit your defense to your wire [borders], it gives the enemy the opportunity to maneuver and dictate the battle. You have to take the battle to the enemy. Make him fight on his turf, force him to fight your battle, not his. Your local and even national police can not do that job.
Posted by: Snung Throsh9980   2006-02-06 05:40  

#3  When it is left to law enforcement it doesn't get done. Dealing with terrorism is not a "law enforcement task. You will get will get more incidents like Madrid, London and New York of it.
Posted by: Sock Puppet O´ Doom   2006-02-06 05:23  

#2  A serious problem of Manpower methinks. Looks like in preventing one attack, another got through. Keep up the hard work and stay out of the pub!

WT - I think the Police will choose the time and place for having a word with this guy - and will hopefully show him the due respect he deserves(!).

The police did well not to intervene last Friday - UK muslim extremists have shown themselves to be a bunch of murderous thugs - and, as expected, the moderate muslims' silence is deafening. Indeed, when they have spoken their views have been most ambiguous.

Posted by: Howard UK   2006-02-06 04:11  

#1  More of them where those came from
Posted by: Whutch Threth6418   2006-02-06 03:27  

00:00