UK Terror Alert Downgraded Less Than a Month before Attacks (moved from ATSNN), page 1

posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 11:53 AM

link

For the first time in Four years, the British Government downgraded the Terrorist threat assessment warning by one level, less than a month before the attacks on the 7th of July. Authorities based the decision after a terror threat assessment by the Joint Terrorist Analysis Centre concluded that there were currently no groups with the intent or capability to pull off a Terrorist attack on British soil.

www.msnbc.msn.com
NEW YORK - Britain’s top intelligence and law enforcement officials concluded less than a month before the London bombings that there was no group with current intent and the capability to attack the United Kingdom, the New York Times reported on Tuesday, citing a confidential intelligence report.

The Times said authorities made their conclusion in the wake of a terror threat assessment by the Joint Terrorist Analysis Center, which includes officials from Britain’s top intelligence agencies, as well as Customs and the Metropolitan Police.

The Times said the tersely worded threat assessment was particularly surprising because it stated that terror-related activity in Britain was a direct result of violence in Iraq.

“Events in Iraq are continuing to act as motivation and a focus of a range of terrorist related activity in the U.K.,” said the report, a copy of which was made available by a foreign intelligence service and was not disputed by four senior British officials who were asked about it, the Times said in its article.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

I know what people will think, the fact that the Terror alert was only downgraded one level from "severe defined", to "substantial" makes this a bit of a no issue, but the fact that the alert remained at a constant level for a considerable amount of time and was only downgraded a month before the attacks is unusual to say the least. Could a genuine error have been made? Or was something more sinister intended? I mean, it's a pretty big mess up by the Joint Terrorist Analysis Centre to state there are no groups able to attack at this time, since it contains the highest officials from British Police, Intelligence agencies, and Customs. Time will tell with this story.

Related News Links:
www.nytimes.com
news.yahoo.com
news.ft.com

[edit on 20-7-2005 by MERC]

shots

posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 12:23 PM

link

Story was already submitted by someone yesterday

www.abovetopsecret.com...

MERC

posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 01:26 PM

link

I sincerely apologise to the Author of that submission! I genuinely overlooked it, if the Author wishes me to remove mine then I will certainly do so, but I will leave it here until he/she or somebody else suggests otherwise.

To the person who voted NO on this submission due to a lack of credibility within the source, I wondered the same thing actually, because the Intelligence report is confidential, and one of the "Senior British officials" spoke under anonymity, but what about this quote contained within the original article?;

the report, a copy of which was made available by a foreign intelligence service and was not disputed by four senior British officials who were asked about it, the Times said in its article.

No?

[edit on 20-7-2005 by MERC]

Nygdan

posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 02:07 PM

link

This just shows that its pretty much immpossible to predict when or where terror attacks will occur, and that in order to prevent the nation from being on permanent red alert, you have to defeat the enemy in the field.