Terror suspect is a convicted mugger
One of the four suspects in the attempted suicide bombings in London last week spent several years in prison as a mugger, the Telegraph can reveal.
The large pool of young men on the border between society and criminal life serve as foot soldiers for the terrorists – think Richard Reid.
The pool is too large – sadly – to drain, but it is the ideologs who draw them into fundamentalist belief – and beyond, into readiness for terrorist action – who will be the schwerpunkt for this battle.
You can correct my broken English several times, but I think it is _Schwer_, heavy. _Schwerpunkt_, gravity center, but _Schwein_, pig.
Enjoy the UK, very nice country in summer!
Spelling corrected…
A.L.
What you are seeing is exactly what is happening, they deliberately develop the criminals as these people are the first wave. The criminal gets the misguided opinion that he can steal and rob and rape as long as they are not Muslims and this is helping to weaken the society that is under attack.
Of Mission Creep and Metrics: Can the GWOT (or whatever new term it is) stop these kind of “home-grown” terrorists? They’re not necessarily poor, they’re not necessarily uneducated, and they only developed later on as islamofascists in a first world country.
When is the “mission completed”? What (if any) are the objective measures to say we are done with developing nation and what are the criteria for being a candidate for pre-emption?
And when is using the “Vietnam Quagmire analogy” allowed in discourse?
“Can the GWOT (or whatever new term it is) stop these kind of “home-grown” terrorists?”
Possibly. If you buy the bernard lewis thesis, that the problem with Islam is civilization humiliation, and that democracy and development can bring the Islamic heartland into the modern world – maybe muslims in the West, seeing that, will be less drawn to the terrorists vision of Islam.
Forgive my ignorance of the educational and social support structures in the UK but possibly someone can answer the following questions.
bq. _”He attended Canons High School, a comprehensive in Edgware, north London, until he was 16. A year after leaving he was arrested with four other youths in Royston, Herts, after a street robbery. Members of the gang, who are understood to have included a man arrested in connection with the bomb inquiries, were jailed for terms ranging from two to four years at Luton Crown Court in 1996 after admitting five robberies in the Welwyn Garden City and Stevenage areas.”_
What is meant by a _comprehensive_? Did he serve his full sentence? The time line concerning his conviction, sentence, and release if fully served seems to extend beyond May 2000.
bq. _”In May 2000 he was granted indefinite leave to remain and for five years he claimed housing benefit estimated at £24,000 to rent a north London tower block flat where police believe the bombs may have been made. He also received income support.”_
Is that £24,000 per annum or is it over the extended period 2000 – 2005? What exactly did he do to earn this type of support and how much did he receive in income support? Could this be a serious case of idle hands allotted to tax payer expense?
I can only imagine the answers concerning the granting of his passport and citizenship would be those of inept comprehensive background checking. I’m not saying the US is any better in our efforts either but rather that it seems to me information gathering and sharing between government agencies has serious flaws on a national and global level.
usmc:
_”comprehensive”_: a standard, non-selective, co-educational (and in this case I’d assume not C.-of-E.) state secondary school, ages around 12 to 18.
_Did he serve his full sentence?_: It is to laugh (humourlessly). Plead guilty + young offender + first offence + “good behaviour” + parole = out in two to three.
_”£24,000″_: That would be over the five years. IIRC average housing benefit in London is £75 per week.
_”Income support”_: Basic welfare (as opposed to time-limited unemployment insurance benefit); can be an income supplement for people on low wages (unusual if without dependants, IIRC); should NOT be available to people capable of working: that’s “Jobseekers Allowance.”:http://www.jobcentreplus.gov.uk/cms.asp?Page=/Home/Customers/WorkingAgeBenefits/493
I suspect (hope!) the _Telegraph’s_ confusing the two.
If the latter, it’s about £55 per week for over 25’s, and you’re damn well _supposed_ to be “looking for work.”:http://www.jobcentreplus.gov.uk/cms.asp?Page=/Home/Customers/WorkingAgeBenefits/497
_”Could this be a serious case of idle hands allotted to tax payer expense?”_ You can say that again.
john:
_”when is using the “Vietnam Quagmire analogy” allowed in discourse?”_
When it makes sense?
Joe A:
_”…very nice country in summer!”_
Well, it has been. AL turns up, it drops to 60 and starts raining 🙁
Hey, I like _schweinpunkt_! It fits 😉
‘Schwerpunkt’ is from the work of Prussian military theorist Karl von Klauswitz, who apparently borrowed the term by analogy from classic mechanics. A literal translation might be ‘strong point’, but the American military instead seems to use the equivalent mechanical concept of ‘center of gravity’ as the translation. I also seen/heard ‘center of mass’.
[/more than you wanted to know]