FYI

Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION

Boston bombs show how lucky we've been

  • Print

WASHINGTON -- Every once in a while, a terrorist sets off a fatal bomb in the United States. In 1993, it was the World Trade Center. In 1995, it was Oklahoma City. In 1996, it was the Atlanta Olympics. Now it's Boston. Each time it happens, we're shocked.

But the attacks we see or hear about on TV are just the surface. The FBI is constantly tracking bomb plots. If you look at the bureau's most recent cases, you'll discover that since the beginning of 2012, Boston is the 21st case involving explosives. And when you study these cases, you realize how lucky we've been.

Here are some of the patterns in the FBI case list:

1. Diverse targets. We expect attacks on big, iconic buildings, such as the Pentagon and the World Trade Center. Some of the recent plots fit that pattern: The perpetrators reportedly targeted or considered targeting the U.S. Capitol, the New York Stock Exchange, Grand Central Terminal, Times Square, the New York Federal Reserve Bank, a federal courthouse and George W. Bush's home. But others picked softer targets: electrical plants, bridges, synagogues, restaurants, bars, nightclubs, malls and a Christmas tree-lighting ceremony. Good luck protecting those places.

2. Bomb size. Three of the 20 previous cases involved car bombs. All were inoperative, thanks to prior infiltration by law enforcement. One plotter thought he was detonating a 1,000-pound bomb. Another thought he was detonating an 1,800-pound bomb. Another tested his device at a quarry and said he wanted a bigger blast. The carnage in Boston could have been worse. Much worse.

3. Everyday ingredients. Two plotters connected to al-Qaida used high explosives. But many cases involved common household items (clocks, phones, Christmas lights, auto wire, fishing weights, soda bottles) or chemicals that weren't inherently suspicious (acetone, hydrogen peroxide, rat poison). Even the gunpowder used in one explosive device was extracted from common shotgun shells. Nails and other types of household shrapnel are also common.

4. Backpacks. Their use to deliver the Boston bombs shouldn't surprise us. Three other plotters on the 2012-13 list used them, too. One left her pack at the front doors of a courthouse. Another placed his pack along a parade route, positioned to explode into the marchers.

5. Luck. In three of the 20 cases, the plotters had prior contacts with al-Qaida or other known terrorist groups outside the U.S. In five other cases, the plotters reached out to fellow jihadists or jihadist wannabes, either online or through other unspecified channels. This seems to be how we infiltrated and disarmed those plots. We're plugged in to the jihadist network.

Of the 12 remaining cases, one was an AWOL soldier, which presumably made him a hunted man. Another was a bush-league pipe-bomb maker, apparently for hire. Another was a bunch of anarchists who discussed their scheme with one person too many. We were in on those plots, too.

That leaves nine cases. In two of them, the defendants had explosives but no known targets. How did we discover the explosives? Dumb luck. One guy alarmed his neighbours by shooting at bottles from his back door. When the cops showed up, they found chemicals and devices they recognized, according to an indictment, as bomb components. Another woman shot at two utility workers who ventured onto her property to turn off her water for nonpayment. A search of her home turned up 122 improvised explosive devices.

In a third case, a former chemical engineering student who was assembling explosives for a violent jihad campaign needed one final chemical, phenol, to complete his recipe. The supplier shipped it, but the freight company felt uneasy about delivering it to a home address, so they alerted police. In a fourth case, a former army artilleryman managed to place his bomb along a parade route. He was foiled only because "alert city workers discovered the suspicious backpack before the march started."

In the remaining five cases, we were at the bombers' mercy. Two of them, it turned out, were just using the bombs to extort or intimidate. They gave warnings, and their devices were intercepted or disarmed. The other three bombs went off. One caused an unspecified "permanent bodily injury." Another blew out the doors of a courthouse, but nobody was around to receive the shrapnel. Two other bombs, loaded with acid, blew up in the car of the intended victim, but through freakishly good timing, one went off before she arrived, and the other failed to explode until she had fled.

When you look at the 20 cases, you realize Boston is just the tip of the iceberg. What's surprising isn't that the marathon bombing succeeded, but that so many other plots failed. In most of these cases, the culprits didn't tap the jihadist networks we've infiltrated. Some of them did stupid things that caught our attention. Others, apparently unserious, tipped us off. Others botched their work.

 

-- Slate

Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition April 20, 2013 J12

Fact Check

Fact Check

Have you found an error, or know of something we’ve missed in one of our stories?
Please use the form below and let us know.

* Required
  • Please post the headline of the story or the title of the video with the error.

  • Please post exactly what was wrong with the story.

  • Please indicate your source for the correct information.

  • Yes

    No

  • This will only be used to contact you if we have a question about your submission, it will not be used to identify you or be published.

  • Cancel

Having problems with the form?

Contact Us Directly
  • Print

You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

You can comment on most stories on winnipegfreepress.com. You can also agree or disagree with other comments. All you need to do is be a Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscriber to join the conversation and give your feedback.

Have Your Say

New to commenting? Check out our Frequently Asked Questions.

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press print or e-edition subscribers only. why?

Have Your Say

Comments are open to Winnipeg Free Press Subscribers only. why?

The Winnipeg Free Press does not necessarily endorse any of the views posted. By submitting your comment, you agree to our Terms and Conditions. These terms were revised effective April 16, 2010.