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
London bombers linked to Qaeda: UK
2006-05-12
Two of the suicide bombers behind last yearÂ’s deadly London transport attacks likely had contacts with Al Qaeda, but British security lacked resources to stop the atrocity, said an official report on Thursday. The report, by an influential parliamentary committee, cleared intelligence services of any culpable failings in preventing the four bombers carrying out BritainÂ’s worst terror attack, which killed them and 52 other people.

In the first full account of the events before and after the July 7 blasts, the document said Mohammad Siddique Khan (30) and Shehzad Tanweer (22) had appeared only vaguely on Britain’s intelligence radar. They were considered peripheral figures at the time and were not pursued, with agents pre-occupied with “more pressing priorities”, the report found. Afterwards, it emerged they had been to Pakistan. Khan visited in 2003 and again, this time with Tanweer, between November 2004 and February 2005. “It has not yet been established who they met in Pakistan, but it is assessed as likely that they had some contact with Al Qaeda figures,” the 44-page report by the Intelligence and Security Committee said. The two men, whose identities were only established after July 7, probably received “operational training” there, it added.

Nevertheless, the committee’s chairman Paul Murphy said the intelligence services were not to blame. “There was no evidence that these two men were involved in attack planning against this country,” he told a press conference. “There was no culpable evidence of failure on the part of the agencies. Our view is that it was understandable that the leads were not taken any further. Things may have been different - but they may not have been.” He denied criticism that the report amounted to a whitewash.
Posted by:Fred

#10  Poor Howard, what you Limeys get for loving 'em Pakis so much for so long? In the Far East we can recognise egotistic typos.
Posted by: Duh!   2006-05-12 14:36  

#9  Mew either.
Posted by: Half a Kat   2006-05-12 14:07  

#8  I don't get it
Posted by: Eisenburg   2006-05-12 13:11  

#7  Mr. Gromgoru, mentioning radioactive imagery in a topic about islamic terrorism doesn't particulary cheer me up, for some strange reason.
Posted by: anonymous5089   2006-05-12 12:28  

#6  Let us put this thing in a proper perspective. Consider a butch of radioactive material. Can you reasonably blame anyone for failing to predict which particular atoms will emit radiation at a particular time?
Posted by: gromgoru   2006-05-12 12:21  

#5  And you even visit Massachusetts if you get lonely for a corrupt, lefty hole. ;^)

I could even put you up. 8^(
Posted by: AlanC   2006-05-12 10:47  

#4  Now I'm persuaded.
Posted by: Howard UK   2006-05-12 09:50  

#3  We have Guinness and chips here as well Howard.
Posted by: Besoeker   2006-05-12 09:32  

#2  Deepest sympathies, Howard. That just depresses the hell out of me. Time to leave, maybe? Good swimmer / got passage? You know you'd be welcome among the Cowboys.
Posted by: Gleresing Jomolet9901   2006-05-12 04:18  

#1  The security forces were provided with everything they requested in the last public spending round. This is more about a reluctance to round up young British Muslims for fear of alienating ethnic communities. Whenever we try to round them up the Human Right's Lawyer's and Islamonazis cry foul and the Labour government backs down - hardly surprising when the PM is fanny-whipped by his HR Lawyer wifey.

The result of this diffidence : 50 dead Londoners. Could anyone in the UK really give a fuck? No.

Please stop the country I want to get off.
Posted by: Howard UK   2006-05-12 03:52  

00:00