The Foiled London Plan

By now you all surely are aware that British authorities have thwarted a major planned terrorist attack that was in the late stages of preparation. I've received several emails this morning and as you might imagine have read quite a bit, and I have a few thoughts.

The first is, good for the British officials who consistently seem to do due diligence and who seem far less cynical in their approach to terrorism than ours do. I was in England in the summer of 2005 and wrote a good deal about those attacks, and so I have seen up-close the response of the Brits and was able to get a strong sense both of feelings on the ground but also of the ways in which british officials and police dealt with a serious attack against civilians and infrastructure. Terrorism alert levels have gone up in both the UK and the US after this latest news, and rightfully so, but the remarkable thing to me is to reflect on what appeared to be the very cynical manipulation of the terror alert levels by the Bush administration in 2004. This administraton has consistently used terrorism threats as a political tool, which is at best distasteful and at worst baldly irresponsible. Of course we shall see how the Bush administration deals with these attacks rhetorically and operationally.

One emailer this morning asked a logical question: Why did this take so long? he thought that al Qaeda might want to take a more scattershot approach, to make as many attempts as possible because any damage keeps them in the headlines. But I believe, and all evidence points to this being the case, that al Qaeda is more than happy to be in this for the long haul, and that they do have a plan that relies on more than merely attacking for the sake of attacking. they are a serious and formidable enemy, all the more dangerous because of their shadowy nature and their patience.

Judith Klinghoffer emailed me to give a heads up about her latest post at Deja Vu. She makes a provocative argument that warrants mentioning, even if I do not fully buy its premise. I'll simply quote her:

Shia Hezbollah was getting too much attention for Sunni Al Qaeda to take lying down. Bin Laden and company need to undertake a major operation to prove its superiority in the Islamist terrorist realm and stop the ascendency of Nasrallah. Al Qaeda felt time was NOT on their side and they had to act if they wished to stay in the game.

I am not certain that the neat sectarian breakdown works either descriptively or as an explanation, but it is a fascinating consideration: That internecine rivalries among jihadists fueled al Qaeda's latest attacks. But I think this underestimates the seriousness with which al Qaeda pursues its goals. Nonetheless, what Judith draws from this is spot on: "In other words, give out a sigh of relief but do not let down your guard. They will try again and soon. This has just begun."

In a moment of levity, which may or may not be appropriate, another person emailed, probably inevitably: "Liquid esxplosives are scary. But what are they going to do when terrorists unleash motherfucking snakes on the motherfucking plane." But pop culture joking aside, don't the 9/11 attacks and the concomitant anxiety that has resulted justify the only reason this silly little film with a seemingly absurd premise able to resonate, beyond the fact that Samuel L. Jackson is a cartoon character?

We will learn much more in the days, hours, and weeks to come, but once again we have been awoken from any somnolence that might have set in. the threat is real. It is active. And its perpetrators always act with malice aforethought.