The State Department has issued a travel advisory to Americans traveling in Europe:
The State Department alerts U.S. citizens to the potential for terrorist attacks in Europe. Current information suggests that al-Qa’ida and affiliated organizations continue to plan terrorist attacks. European governments have taken action to guard against a terrorist attack and some have spoken publicly about the heightened threat conditions.
Terrorists may elect to use a variety of means and weapons and target both official and private interests. U.S. citizens are reminded of the potential for terrorists to attack public transportation systems and other tourist infrastructure. Terrorists have targeted and attacked subway and rail systems, as well as aviation and maritime services. U.S. citizens should take every precaution to be aware of their surroundings and to adopt appropriate safety measures to protect themselves when traveling.
We continue to work closely with our European allies on the threat from international terrorism, including al-Qa’ida. Information is routinely shared between the U.S. and our key partners in order to disrupt terrorist plotting, identify and take action against potential operatives, and strengthen our defenses against potential threats.
The warning expires on January 31st, 2011. ABC News reports ominously:
Strong concerns that terrorist teams in Europe have selected their targets, completed their surveillance, eluded capture and are now ready to strike at airports and tourist attractions have prompted the State Department to ready a highly unusual travel advisory for Europe, multiple law enforcement and intelligence sources tell ABC News.
Intelligence and law enforcement officials have information that the teams could at any time launch a “Mumbai style” terror attack that targets civilians for death or hostage taking. The 2008 Mumbai attack used small arms and explosives to kill 175 people and paralyze the Indian city for days.
The current concerns are for scenarios that include opening fire at airports in Europe as well as executing similar attacks at “soft” targets like tourist attractions or hotels.
I recall that a lot of the pre-9/11 intelligence suggested an attack would happen in Europe, too. So, just because this advisory is issued for travelers to Europe, we shouldn’t think that we don’t face an increased threat here at home.
This is pure crap. Create fear in Europe and the UK has followed suit. In its illustrious and inimitable insularity, the BBC reports that the UK goverment warns about possible attacks in EUROPE—as if the UK is not part of Euorpe and the EU. There you have the whole distortion in a nutshell again: Anglo-American = the invasion of Iraq. Has anyone heard about a country called Iran? It’s very nice that Egypt and Iran have resumed direct flights. It will give Washington an acute hissy fit. May it need a triple bypass to recover. Americans are told to be vigilant. Can anyone tell me what ‘vigilant’ means?
what would you do if you had intelligence that a terrorism attack was in its final planning stages but you didn’t know the exact target?
Be vigilant.
One of the things I’ve been wondering for the past nine years is: What would have happened if the Bush administration had heeded the warnings of the Clinton administration with regard to Al Qaeda, and done due diligence (beefing up intelligence gathering, listening to the Richard Clarkes and Colleen Rowleys, and paying attention to things like the August PDB) and managed to stop the 9/11 perpetrators in their tracks – arresting, prosecuting, convicting, and imprisoning them? I realize the frustrating pointlessness of “what if” ruminations, but I’ve often wondered if the spectacular nature (and success) of the 9/11 attacks provided an inspirational fuel rod for Al Qaeda and its ideological clones. If it hadn’t been successful, but rather an acute embarrassment for its masterminds and their hangers-on, would it have significantly decreased the likelihood that we would be talking about a general terror advisory for an entire continent? Would Bush have been able to invade and occupy Iraq, further fanning the flames?
I don’t see that the authorities have any choice in the matter of issuing a travel advisory, especially as security precautions will be markedly and visibly stepped up. We can imagine the criticism that would likely ensue if something on the order of Madrid or Mumbai happened and the public was informed after the fact. And it certainly can’t hurt to have an informed, aware, and vigilant public. Outside of its scope, I don’t see this advisory as being much different from other kinds of warnings or alerts – flood, hurricane, Amber, etc.
An aware and vigilant public. Aware and vigilant of what exactly? Not stepping in dog shit. Every police state in history has told its citizens to be aware and vigilant. Watch your neighbor, watch the man or woman walking down the street, watch the teacher, the candlestick maker, the dog of the man who lives a thousand kilometers away. What is everyone supposed to watch out for? What is everyone so afraid of? Violence is a fact a life, part of human behavior and no one, no matter how vigilant, will change that. The Iraqis were aware and vigilant when the bombs of the Anglo-American Axis of Evil began to fall on their heads. It’s about time the US government understands that their tough guy stance is counterproductive and start recognizing that they are themselves a substantial part of the problem.
I can easily believe my government is capable of fear mongering and sowing panic for its own ends. But if they are actively pursuing leads about an attack on their citizenry, and they don’t tell us, I am sorry, but I think that is worse. I don’t want to be protected from that kind of information. I may not be able to do a damn thing about it, and maybe it would be best if I just went shopping, but I still want to know, if they think there is a problem. I like to be able to form my own judgments.
Booman, I would do nothing. If such an attack is in the making, am I really supposed to believe that it can be uncovered or prevented by the public? This is just a way for the self-annointed ‘experts’ to cover for themselves if such an attack takes place. How could they ever have known? Well then, what good are they? They get all the praise and the cash and in the worst case the public is expected to take the responsibility for not being on their toes, for not performing their voluntary work competently.
Of course I would still keep trying to find out what was going and, if the suspicion is founded, identify the people involved in the target. Above, by ‘nothing’ I meant not sow fear and panic among the general public. What good does it do? Like taking off your shoes at the airport.
There was no US State Department warning on Pan Am Flight 103.
They had information. but said nothing.
Is this what you are advocating? People unaware that a plausible threat has been made and the US keeps mum?
I don’t see the Obama administration talking about duct tape and waving color-coded charts around and yelling ‘terror’ every two seconds. Seems to me like this is a last ditch effort to avert an attack that they feel is imminent. Maybe the Bush administration should have tried that before 9/11.
Advisory also could make a big difference in how ppl react if something were to take place.
Thanks for not being one of the many liberals who pooh-pooh terrorist warnings like this. It always made me angry when Bush was pres, and it still makes me angry now.
Not only is it politically stupid–sure, let the conservatives think we’re soft on terror–but there really is such a thing as useful, actionable intelligence.
(It reminds me of right wingers who make fun of scientific evidence of global warming, or who ignore economists’ best advice. Experts in their field usually do know more than Joe Public.)
And I’m not really changing my behavior, but then I don’t go to the popular tourist attractions anyway. And fortunately I’m not flying anywhere soon either. But we had friends of friends who were trapped inside their hotel in Mumbai, and the thought of going through that is really truly frightening.
Willing to admit I’m a chicken 🙂
Great, my first visit to Europe in 30 years, and this. We’re booked for full-day tours in Rome and Florence to boot. Saved for a year and prepaid everything. I don’t think there’s a “terrorism warning ” clause in the trip insurance.
Interestingly, both the German intelligence and the French one have said there is nothing new. And the alert level remains as it has been for two years…