Radical clerics, some with overt al-Qaeda ties or membership, have operated in the United Kingdom for years. Three in particular have spent years recruiting terrorists for al-Qaeda and other Jihadist organizations and churning out a new generation of Islamic extremists from among the local population. The laxity with which Britain handled its Islamic extremists, even giving a number of them amnesty so that they could avoid standing trial for terrorist attacks and activities in their home country, prompted French authorities in the 1990s to accuse the UK of striking a unspoken deal with the extremists: you don?t attack here, and we we?ll let you continue to operate. In all fairness, it is pretty unimaginable that the conscious intentions of the British government were that insidious; but such was the extent of Islamic extremism in Britain that it may have appeared this way to the outside.

Britain has hosted these individuals for years without being attacked ? partially because of the diligent efforts of British security bodies, but also probably because the extremists did not want to put pressure on their own operating environment. When the British government began cracking down — at the international community?s behest and also because of the September 11 attacks and Madrid train attacks ? and entered the Iraq war, London became a more appealing target. However, both the fiery sermons and actions of Britain?s three biggest radical preachers indicate that the United States has long been Islamist enemy Number One, and efforts on their part to attack it predate the targeting of their own English turf. It is hard to escape the conclusion that London was something of a target of opportunity and that the real enmity of the radical Islamist population, in addition to resources and recruitment efforts, may still be the United States.