The UK Plot- One Week Later: Don't Believe The Hype?

When I first wrote on the breaking news from London last week, I stated that it was clear that was a very legitimate plot, but also noted many suspicious aspects of the news, particularing the political timing of it. An observer with a good memory could name countless plots that the U.S. government tried to hype up as the next 9/11 (Jose Padilla and his 'dirty bomb', Richard Reid the shoe bomber, the Brooklyn Bridge blowtorch plot, the Lakawanna terror cell case, the chemical attack/duct tape announcement, the Citibank building plot, the Liberty Library Tower plot, the Miami 'terror' group, etc), but turned out to be minor schemes with little evidence that they were as grand as advertised. One week later, many are wondering whether the U.K./U.S. plane plot will eventually be lumped into that pile.

John at Americablog was the first to raise questions last Thursday about the seriousness of the plot, but as the evidence- or lack thereof?- grows, many others are suspicious. These concerns gained legitimacy earlier this week when Craig Murray- Britain's Ambassador to Uzbekistan- wrote in detail why people should be skeptical.

Conservative blogger Andrew Sullivan sums up where this stands-

So far, no one has been charged in the alleged terror plot to blow up several airplanes across the Atlantic. No evidence has been produced supporting the contention that such a plot was indeed imminent. Forgive me if my skepticism just ratcheted up a little notch. Under a law that the Tories helped weaken, the suspects can be held without charges for up to 28 days. Those days are ticking by. Remember: the British authorities had all these people under surveillance; they did not want to act last week; there was no imminent threat of anything but a possible "dummy-run," whatever deranged guest-bloggers at Malkin say....

...I'd be interested in the number of plotters who had passports. How could they even stage a dummy-run with no passports? And what bomb-making materials did they actually have? These seem like legitimate questions to me; the British authorities have produced no evidence so far. If the only evidence they have was from torturing someone in Pakistan, then they have nothing that can stand up in anything like a court. I wonder if this story is going to get more interesting. I wonder if Lieberman's defeat, the resilience of Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the emergence of a Hezbollah-style government in Iraq had any bearing on the decision by Bush and Blair to pre-empt the British police and order this alleged plot disabled. I wish I didn't find these questions popping into my head. But the alternative is to trust the Bush administration.

Been there. Done that. Learned my lesson.

Here's the official AP report on the status of the suspects:
British judge mulls status of suspects

In my initial post last week, I expressed hope that this story was everything we were told it was- a great foiling of a major plot by British officials- and that it would not require our usual cynicism. Clearly, we should all be thankful that the British authorities stopped this plot, no matter what the level. I asked this question at the end- "[I]s that what it seems? Very likely. But it'd be stupid/lazy not to ask questions." And now that many very important questions have popped up, it appears that cynicism is justified. Our leaders are the boys who cried wolf... they've lied to us so many times, that when they finally tell the truth, it may understandably fall on deaf ears. Did the British police really stop the wolf from eating the sheep? Maybe. But they should also be understanding that many are approaching this story with caution and skepticism.

It is also a given we can expect at least one more story like this before November.

[PS- Further reading on the history of the Bush administration's political (ab)use of terrorism:
-Time magazine (Josh Marshall): Toying With Terror Alerts?
-Keith Olbermann/Countdown: The Nexus of Politics and Terror (Video)
-Robert Scheer: Spinning Old Threats Into New Fears]