The randomness of al-Qaeda's evil
Fraser Nelson 9:05am
After all the nerves and security in New York, Washington and London, the only attempted
terror plot on the anniversary of 9/11 appears to have been foiled outside an arts centre in Gothenburg. The Swedish press says that the four people arrested on Saturday night are believed to belong to a cell linked to al-Qaeda.
There are no more details yet, but it's a reminder that the al-Qaeda threat has not gone away. Its Arabian Peninsular
division is still active, responsible for the underpants bomber and the bomb bound for Detroit, intercepted in London. This is also a reminder of how chillingly random its attacks are.
This matters because there is a school of thought in the West that 9/11 and 7/7 attacks were somehow punishment for foreign policy, and the best way of insulating a country against terrorism is to change foreign policy. This was precisely Bin Laden's message, and in a videotape seven years ago he even used Sweden as an example. "Bush says and claims that we hate your freedom," he said. "If that were true, then let him explain why did we not attack Sweden?" But there is no such logic to al-Qaeda's strategy, or Islamic terror attacks in general. Last December a suicide bomber named Taimour Abdulwahab al-Abdaly blew himself up in downtown Stockholm, injuring two people.
The truth is that Islamic terrorism is an utterly random evil, which will strike where it can. As Al-Qaeda starts to disintegrate, it is encouraging its agents to take what security officials call a "Nike approach" to terror: i.e. 'just do it'. That is to say, carry out a crude and quick attack before the authorities can find you. This new development in terrorism means that the plots will be smaller-scale, but harder to intercept. They also mean that terror attacks are likely to become more arbitrary, senseless and indiscriminate than ever before. It could well be that Gothenburg has just managed to thwart such an attack.
Previous
Vulture
September 12th, 2011 9:24am Report this commentForget Al Quaeda, who have not mounted a serious successful strike in years. What we have to worry about today is the laughably misnamed Arab Spring.
The truth ( as the weekend's events in Cairo underlined) is that the whole Muslim world in the Middle East, including the previously 'reliable' western allies Turkey and Egypt, including LIbya ( newly 'liberated' by NATO as a helpful gesture toward
the Islamists); including Pakistan and Afghanistan, including above all Iran, including Syria, are on a high road towards becoming Islamist, terror-oromoting; west-hating, Sharia-practicing, Christian murdering, gay persecuting; women oppressing; ignorance promoting failed states whose swarming masses are swarming our ( your) way.
Forget the Panglossian optimists like Korski and useful idiots of the left people. WE are at war, and have been since 9/11, And until we replace our present set of Neville Chamberlains at the top its a war we are losing,.
Ron Todd
September 12th, 2011 10:33am Report this commentWith increased security attacks will be by necissity carried out by Muslims already resident in the target country. The fanatics rather than travel to their prefered targets will strike closer to home.
Being fanatics any country that deviates from Islamic ideals which is all of them will be a legitimate but second choice target.
TomTom
September 12th, 2011 10:52am Report this commentThere we have it in a nutshell the bureaucratic Western analysis. "Al-Qaeda" - "The Base" - a frontier post for preparing Jihadis in Afghanistan for The West is now the Bogeyman as if it were a Corporation.....but now that the Chairman/CEO/COO has been killed it is following "Nike" corporate strategy and behaving randomly (just as it always did). The Western mind cannot handle sporadic and random violence "without a cause" because it wants a negotiating partner to bribe or co-opt. Try negotiating with Nihilists - the West is besotted with lawyers and beset with knaves
Colin Cumner
September 12th, 2011 10:59am Report this commentI agree with Nelson's analysis of the situation. Al-Qaeda targetting well-protected and security-savvy gatherings makes no tactical sense - better to wait until complacency sets in then strike. These people may be barbaric and amoral assassins but fools they are definitely not. It is an unpalatable thought but as Goering once said 'the bomber will always get through'.
Viv Evans
September 12th, 2011 12:26pm Report this comment"there is a school of thought in the West that 9/11 and 7/7 attacks were somehow punishment for foreign policy, and the best way of insulating a country against terrorism is to change foreign policy."
Why so mealy-mouthed?
This 'school of thought' are the dear socialists, here and elsewhere.
Here's a paraphrase of something I read on an American blog yesterday:
'Actually, the socialists are the ones who, with their policies of promoting sexual libertinage and moral equivalency, have fuelled the belief of islamists that the West must be punished for its decadence.'
Makes sense to me ...
EC
September 12th, 2011 12:36pm Report this commentAlthough infamous, Al-Qaeda forms only a small part of the overall islamic jihad, which is proceeding apace and, inspired by the koran, it is anything but random.
Vulture
September 12th, 2011 12:37pm Report this comment"C.Cumner
Goering did NOT say 'the bomber will always get through' it was our own Stanley Baldwin.
If Goering had said that he would have been wrong anyway as his bombers did not always get through.
Baldwin was a complacent, appeasing dolt very similar to the present incumbent in Downing Street.
Ron Todd
September 12th, 2011 12:53pm Report this commentEC
I agree that there is a common philosopy underlying Muslim aggression against the west and against non-Muslims and women in their own societies.
The result of that hatred when it is not organised from above will be random.
Our sexual freedom and I accept that not all people will use that freedom in a good way, is never the whole reason for hating us.
We can only have sexual, political or personal freedom because we are not an Islamic society.
Tom Gallagher
September 12th, 2011 1:24pm Report this commentIf the mainstream security community in Washington DC was aware that under Fraser's editorship, the London Spectator increasingly resembled the Nation and the National Interest, highly misleading titles for American political magazines, i wonder would quite so many doors have been open to him during his East Coast sojourn?
victor jara 67
September 12th, 2011 6:33pm Report this commentNeo Liberal tosh Nelson. You sound like Tony Blair. The attacks against Sweeden were due to their involvement in the Occupation of Afghanistan. Its simple no invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq the 56 people killed on 7th July 2005 would still be with us
The al qaeda credo has always been about fighting and removing the infidels from muslim lands.
The war on terror is self perpetuating and a gift to the Jihadi's as Eliza Manningham Buller stated at the Reith lectures.
9/11 was a crime not an act of war
Colin Cumner
September 12th, 2011 9:15pm Report this commentVULTURE - oops, yes you're right. Baldwin it was. Sorry about that gaffe. Sentiment of my posting remains the same, however. It is when our guard is down that the enemy will strike and remember, the IRA adopted similar tactics with deadly results.
Archibald
September 12th, 2011 11:07pm Report this commentFraser, stop farting around with the table decorations and start dealing with the main course.
It's becoming clear to anyone and everyone who comes to this site that you're apparently too scared to touch the EDL and have some proper hard discussion around them and Muslim extremism in the UK, and for that you should be ashamed.
Instead we get this flower arrangement of a blog. How long will you run scared? We've had precisely nothing on the EDL march in Tower Hamlets. We've had precisely nothing on the MAC yesterday. After all the challenges to yourself, Bright, and Massie you suddenly went completely quiet on the EDL altogether, too scared even to mention May's ban extensions despite all three of you mentioning it before and getting huge responses.
You pay lip service to wanting to respond to our opinions. Well, the table is set, we're all sat around it, and we're banging our knifes and forks on it.
Why are we waiting?
Back to top