Despite the UK government?s protestations of innocence, it may not entirely be a coincidence that on the same day that the Queen opened Parliament with a speech that highlighted new security initiatives, two British media outlets have reported that a 9/11 (Terrorist Incident)-style attack on London skyscrapers has recently been thwarted. The government denied that the leak of information related to the thwarted attacks was a deliberate attempt at scaremongering but at the very least, the timing is unfortunate given the focus of the Queen?s speech. In that speech, the Queen confirmed that a new bill to introduce an ID card would be submitted to Parliament. The possession of these cards would be voluntary at first but would later become compulsory. Other measures unveiled included plans to establish an FBI-style Organized Crimes Agency and a new counter-terrorism bill, which is thought to include plans for terrorism trials without juries, similar to the so-called Diplock courts of Northern Ireland, where a panel of judges–not a jury–deliberates terrorism cases. Another provision of the bill would be to allow phone-tapping evidence to be used in court without the need for corroboration. Given the contentious nature of many of these policies, a conspiracy theorist might, therefore, argue that leaking information about a major terrorist operation would help to reinforce in the public?s mind the very real threat posed by international terrorism, thereby make the passage of such measures that much easier.

With regard to the thwarted attacks, the media has provided very few details other than that the list of intended targets included the three main towers of the 11-tower Canary Wharf London complex, often referred to by developers as Manhattan on the Thames, and Heathrow airport. It was also revealed that the attacks were to be mounted 9/11-style, with commercial aircraft being flown into the buildings and that training programs for suicide pilots had been disrupted. Informed TRC sources suggest that whilst certain UK-based Islamic terrorist groups had explored the possibility of conducting such attacks, these plans had been disrupted months previously. It is also uncertain how mature these plans actually were and whether the groups in question could have executed such complex attacks. Given the dated nature of these threats and the possible immaturity of the plots, it is easy to see why the UK government would be accused of seeking to exploit these occurrences at this particular time. However, if proven, this would be a surprisingly crude attempt to manipulate the public by a government that has previously proved itself most adept at such shenanigans, a move that might suggest that the leak was entirely coincidental. However, unless new information is released, these suggestions are likely to persist. That said, whatever the motives of the person who leaked this information, there is no doubt that the plots did exist and that this is further evidence if any were needed that Islamic groups continue to plan operations of mass destruction against the United States and its allies in the Global War Against Terrorism.

<