August 13, 2006
According to most Democrats we apparently are not more safe. The proof they give is that these terrorists were within a few days of bombing these planes. Of course it doesn’t seem politic for the Republicans to argue and say that it really wasn’t that close. The picture presented is of a terrorist cell which is found out and busted within a few days just in the ‘tada’ nick of time. The reality is far different. Pretty soon after the London train bombings the police got a tip from a Muslim (reason #538 why this shouldn’t become a war on Islam) who wanted to save lives. The intelligence in Britain knew about this plot for a long time and tried to get more connections. The chances for this plan to suceed were at zero for a whole year. They decided that they had got as much of the group of conspirators as possible. To put it in another way, if they had tried this plan a month earlier they still would have failed. This strikes me as an intelligence sucess rather than a failure. It also demonstrates that terror can only be stopped by proactive action. Any terrorist can kill around ten people if we just wait for them to attack. Killing the money and the leaders swiftly and efficiently is the only way we can win.
The New York Times would no doubt disapprove about the surveillance which caught the plot, but it seems that they have lied about far more than the President about the U.S. wiretapping as Captain’s Quarters reports. It seems that they were ready to run this story right before the election as 2004’s DUI story. However, the New York Times wasn’t stupid enough to think that this wouldn’t help Bush at the polls tremendously.
As to the issue of security I would say that the answer is a definitive yes. Their hasn’t been a major attack on American soil since 9/11 and the terrorists are caught in a killing field in Iraq.
August 10, 2006
Police in Britain uncovered a major plot to blow up several airplanes in midair with chemicals which combine to be powerful explosives. The terrorists planned to take flights to the U.S. from Heathrow and blow up 6 or 7 planes. It’s hard to understand why the terrorists try so hard to target planes. 9/11 made sense there was no way to kill so many people without using planes as missiles. Also the airports were relatively safe targets, and the passengers were trained to obey the hijackers. But blowing up planes seems peculiarly inefficient. An attack on a movie theatre or Broadway would be relatively easy to commit and would require only a few terrorists with sub-machine guns. Here are the possibilities that I can think of for targeting planes.
- The terrorists wanted to send a message to America and Britain, namely that no matter how much you try to stop us we’ll get through your security screening. The major problem with that reason is that if you’re going to wait 5 years for your next major terror attack you want to have a large chance of a major success.
- The terrorists felt that once they got on the planes they’d be certain of success while shooting people up has risks to the very end.
- Most jihadists have a strong suicidal streak running through them. Therefore, a key component of their plan may be to kill themselves at the same time as their victims.
- The terrorists are rather desperate to get the U.S. out of Iraq quickly and therefore they wanted to make an attack specifically on those two countries.
- The terrorists who planned this attack were not the highest level terrorists. These people wanted to do an attack which felt like them as terrorism rather than the common murder of shooting up a mall.
As an aside this story demonstrates the importance of wiretaps and intelligence surveillance. The fact is that no security check would have got them if they had made it undetected up until then. How many security guards could be trained to recognize certain chemicals in their liquid form.