Times UK: Bombs find shows outrages on 7/7 and 21/7 were linked

[StrafingMoose]

Bombs find shows outrages on 7/7 and 21/7 were linked
By Sean O’Neill and Daniel McGrory

The discovery that the two suicide gangs used devices built by the same person suggests there is a wide support network for the terrorist cells.

THE same prolific bombmaker built the deadly devices used by the two suicide squads that attacked London this month, security sources have told The Times

snip

The nature and number of bombs point to the existence of a large and well-equipped terrorist cell intent on a sustained campaign of attacks.

snip


A security source said: “This completes the circle. The bombmaker used the same constituents in the devices used in the fatal first attacks and the abortive attempts a fortnight later.”


More at:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1711357,00.html

[krkaufman]

1. Actually, the opposite could be concluded

If just one person built both sets of bombs, that means there's fewer bomb makers -- and the skill of this particular bomb maker is low enough that his bomb quality is inconsistent.

Personally, I view it as a positive that fewer potential terrorists know how to make bombs, and that the cells were linked. (As lack of linkage would mean they were individually inspired.)

[StrafingMoose]

2. point.

[Igel]

5. But at the same time, it implies there's a network that

includes, at a minimum, Leeds and Birmingham, some 90 miles distant from each other. I'd feel more confident if the two plots could be reduced to having a rather smaller geographic connection.

Otherwise we're left with with a few problems:
--how the two groups tie together;
--whether there are other groups;
--where the bomb-maker himself is, Leeds, Birmingham, elsewhere.

The idea of two bombmakers is no less disquieting, IMHO. (Although my personal suspicion is that there are two--one from outside, that came in, trained, and supervised the first batch; and then the local boy, who apparently wasn't a quick study. But the only evidence I have is the uneven quality of the output, which can be interpreted in a few different ways.)

[Lexingtonian]

3. it's curious

why the first batch of bombs exploded and the second batch didn't, if that is so. Not that they're going to tell us what they determine to be the how and why in the near future.

This story doesn't add up in the way the writer tries to make it add up. I'd guess the second group didn't assemble their bombs correctly or the initiator explosive got wet at some point, or something of that order.

[Guy_Montag]

4. The initial speculation

and I want to highlight that this, like most else round here is speculation - was that the explosive has a short shelf life, and "went off" in the two weeks.