The bombings on 7 July last year killed 52 people
Al-Qaeda has become more organised and sophisticated and has made Britain its top target, counter-terrorism officials have told the BBC.
Security sources say the situation has never been so grim, said BBC home affairs correspondent Margaret Gilmore.
They believe the network is now operating a cell structure in the UK - like the IRA did - and sees the 7 July bomb attacks "as just the beginning".
Each cell has a leader, a quartermaster dealing with weapons, and volunteers.
According to our correspondent, each cell works on separate, different plots, with masterminds controlling several different cells.
Those involved in the cells were often aware they were being followed and so were meeting in public spaces.
In addition, training is taking place in the UK and Pakistan.
They set up groups a bit like Boy Scouts or Boys' Brigade... totally legitimate
It was thought that five years ago al-Qaeda was a number of "loosely-connected organisations" with common aims, but it is now more organised, she said.
Security officials are concerned the group is targeting universities and the community, and are "less worried" about mosques, she added.
The network is targeting men in their late teens and early 20s, according to our correspondent.
"They set up groups a bit like Boy Scouts or Boys' Brigade... totally legitimate.
"Those who are particularly interested they start giving religious indoctrination.
"Then those who are very interested they start introducing to political teachings, anti-Western rhetoric.
"And those who are still interested they then start giving technical training.
"They also start sending them on bonding sessions to things like white-water rafting.
"You end up with a small team of people - the cell is prepared.
"A lot of this is happening outside London," our correspondent added.
Joint regional offices of MI5 intelligence gatherers and anti-terrorist police officers have been set up in Manchester, Birmingham and Sheffield.
The leadership of al-Qaeda does appear to ... be more coherent and organised than had been thought in recent years
BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera said the view was Britain was particularly vulnerable because "it may be easier for al-Qaeda to strike the UK than other targets".
He said these views were "based on activity they are actually seeing. Plots they're disrupting, trials which might be coming up soon".
"There is hard evidence behind it, rather than just theories," said our correspondent.
"That's based partly on what they are seeing, in terms of the types of activity, and partly based on the coincidence, that al-Qaeda's leadership is based in the tribal areas of Pakistan where there are links to the UK and flows of people going back and forwards.
"It makes it easier to make the UK a target than the other countries it might wish to target."
The network also appeared to be better organised, he continued.
"The leadership of al-Qaeda does appear to have been re-grouping and to be more coherent and organised than had been thought in recent years.
"The view is it clearly was an organised group before 9/11, but the campaign in Afghanistan disrupted that leadership very heavily.
It is no longer about looking for a needle in a haystack
"But in recent years, particularly in the tribal areas between Pakistan and Afghanistan, the al-Qaeda leadership has been able to re-group and re-organise itself.
"In doing so it's able to open up channels of communication, contact, recruitment and planning around the world, and operate those in a more coherent fashion than maybe we were seeing three years' ago."
However, intelligence analyst Crispin Black said another attack in the UK "was not inevitable", citing the UK's "considerable successes against the IRA".
He said the security services had a good idea about who they were dealing with, saying: "We still have that expertise and training present within our military forces and intelligence."
"It is no longer about looking for a needle in a haystack. We have some pretty good clues and information on where we should be looking."
There is a good reason why the U.K has "become" the #1 target for Al-Qaeda, and that is simply because there is more radicalism in the U.K. It is much easier to plan and organize attacks in the U.K. because the groundwork for extremism already exists. In other words, Al-Qaeda doesn't have to sneak terrorists into the country when many willing terrorists already live there.
Our Lord! Verily, we have heard the call of one calling to Faith: 'Believe in your Lord,' and we have believed.
Our Lord! Forgive us our sins and expiate from us our evil deeds, and make us die (in the state of righteousness) along with Al-Abrar
Well to tell you the truth...I've seen many people....rather heard... Non-Muslims saying that they are interested in these terrorist groups and would like to become members and carry out attacks...as it makes them look 'good'...or in modern terms 'gansta'.
Surely there will be 'Muslims' among them, but what I'm trying to say is, media portrays these Muslims and non Muslims to be one body...hence showing that the only people involved in these bombings/wrongful acts as to be Muslims, And ONLY muslims......
Think about it.....Chavs....All they want to do is create havoc....
Well to tell you the truth...I've seen many people....rather heard... Non-Muslims saying that they are interested in these terrorist groups and would like to become members and carry out attacks...as it makes them look 'good'...or in modern terms 'gansta'.
Surely there will be 'Muslims' among them, but what I'm trying to say is, media portrays these Muslims and non Muslims to be one body...hence showing that the only people involved in these bombings/wrongful acts as to be Muslims, And ONLY muslims......
Think about it.....Chavs....All they want to do is create havoc....
Actually, here in the U.S. we are well aware that Al-Qaeda would love to use Hispanic and black men(and women) to carry out attacks with less danger of being discovered. Usually they are recruited in prison. Padilla is a good example. The problem with this is that these people aren't exactly the most intelligent members of society, and they are usually picked up before long.
Just to clarify, my statement of "these people aren't exactly the most intelligent members of society" wasn't in relation to their ethnicity, just the fact that they are institutionalized and "gangsta", not professional terrorists.
Non-Muslims saying that they are interested in these terrorist groups and would like to become members and carry out attacks...as it makes them look 'good'...or in modern terms 'gansta'.
You know, that's an excellent point. In America people began to copy the Mafia, even though their motives were completely different. But there was an old Mafia saying that became a way of life here, that went: The Enemy of my enemy is my friend. It's carried on since then too.
Now, Columbine, and the thousands of kids who began wearing black London Fog trench-coats, and the beat goes on.
Ninth Scribe
Last edited by Ninth_Scribe; 10-21-2006 at 03:33 PM.
Labels only mean what the person using them desires them to mean. Who I call an extremist will be a freedom fighter to somebody else. What I see as moderate may be either liberal or fanatical to another.
The author of the article is calling the UK the no. 1 target, yet from another view the UK can be seen as the no. 1 aggressor.
I believe what we are seeing is that a very large segment of the population does not feel as if they are part of the UK. Each segment is viewing the other as the aggressor and themselves as being the victim.
Each are seeing themselves as being the target of potential agression and fear a possibility that somebody will act upon it. Often times when we act upon our views of other people and believe we are protecting our safety, we are being the agressor and doing what we fear is going to be done to us.
So yes I agree the UK is a no. 1 target, while at the same time those they see as the aggreessors are also no. 1 targets. Fear of being a target is resulting in all becoming agressors.
Who is the no.1 target and who is the no. 1 agressor, will depend on who you are.
The country that prides themselves as the bastian of freedome of expression feels there is something wrong with the niqaab, the niqaab which is seen as obligatory by a lot of sisters and is a very valid islamic opinion !
Who will take down those terrorists :anger:
-
My tears testify that i have a heart
yet i feel me and shaytan never part
-
The country that prides themselves as the bastian of freedome of expression feels there is something wrong with the niqaab, the niqaab which is seen as obligatory by a lot of sisters and is a very valid islamic opinion !
Who will take down those terrorists :anger:
Although I agree with your statement and understand where you are coming from. we are both looking at it from the viewpoint of a Muslim. A non-Muslim will see the same thing and say:
"and also now uk's being victimised by Muslims.
The people that pride themselves as the bastian of freedome of expression feels there is something wrong with showing their faces, the niqaab which is seen as obligatory by a lot of Muslims, are violating the very laws that protect them !
Who will take down those terrorists :anger:"
There will be constant problems until all people can see and understand each other. Inability to be tolerant results in misunderstanding and distrust. I believe if we could somehow spread understanding of the Niqab, this is one issue that can be resolved. The non-Muslims need to be aware of what it means to us, we need to be aware of why it is feared by some.
Perhaps there are areas where it would be a hinderance for a Muslimah to wear it and then I believe we need to look at it and consider if that is even an area we as Muslims would even consider walking into.
Think of what good could come if these terrorists put all of that energy and effort into making dua for peace instead of concentrating on killing people.
Think of what good could come if these extremists were to instead make a peaceful campaign against the USA and the United Kingdom by bringing to the public eye all that they disagree with.
THEN that would hilight that they are the peaceful ones and that the US and the UK are the true bullies.
Unfortunately though it does not seem like they can try to be the better person in this case. It's really sad because it means it won't end until everyone's gone.
Which leads me to another issue I have a problem with. From posts like Woodrow's, and many others, it seems that when Al-Qaeda or terrorism is brought up many Muslims will automatically throw themselves in the same boat with them. Not by saying "I support them" obviously, but by this moral relativism. Woodrow mentions that to "some" the U.K. is seen as the #1 aggressor. What exactly does that mean in the context of this conversation? Is that supposed to be a defense for people who WANT to blow up women and children? I know Woodrow doesn't mean it in that way, but what other way can I look at a statement like that? Because the U.K. has trust issues with the Muslim community they are being aggressive? Again, a cause and effect in play there. I'm not trying to offend anyone, and I hopefully I was able to make my point in the right way.
^ We dont defend anyone who kills innocent people with no good reasoning, but we certainly arent happy with the US or UK and everytime i see that condoleeza rice lice or wateva i jus get :anger:
-
My tears testify that i have a heart
yet i feel me and shaytan never part
-
^ We dont defend anyone who kills innocent people with no good reasoning, but we certainly arent happy with the US or UK and everytime i see that condoleeza rice lice or wateva i jus get :anger:
lol I know how you feel. My dad starts growling at the TV everytime she comes on.
I really hate the way people feel Islam teaches such horiffic acts. It's disgusting.
^ We dont defend anyone who kills innocent people with no good reasoning, but we certainly arent happy with the US or UK and everytime i see that condoleeza rice lice or wateva i jus get :anger:
"We don't defend anyone who kills innocent people with no good reasoning"?
Interesting statement. I'm not sure what the rest of the post is getting at however.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
among them, but what I'm trying to say is, media portrays these Muslims and non Muslims to be one body...hence showing that the only people involved in these bombings/wrongful acts as to be Muslims, And ONLY muslims......
Well to tell you the truth...I've seen many people....rather heard... Non-Muslims saying that they are interested in these terrorist groups and would like to become members and carry out attacks...as it makes them look 'good'...or in modern terms 'gansta'.
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks