A couple of points having quickly looked through the comments here, after the Fort Dix verdicts. I've also looked at the article cited by Steve Metz, after the London and Glasgow attacks in July 2007: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews
The article looks rather different after the trial of one bomber (who survived the Glasgow airport attack and found guilty) and a suspected accomplice (found not guilty). There are many articles on the case and one nearly slipped past that one of the bombers had appeared in a Security Service / Police surveillance of suspects and had been excluded as a person worth investigating: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...wn-to-MI5.html
Behind all the policy announcemets over prevention at home, part of the UK's CT strategy (known as Operation Contest), there is a fine plan largely borrowed from the UK model of intervention with prolific / persistent criminals (often juveniles) and INHO little practical knowledge. I liken this to a desperate search for the right "tools" and the correct "repair" manual. As you may detect I am not convinced a national bureaucratic response is the answer.
davidbfpo
Bookmarks