Skip to main content

BOSTON BOMBING: Terrorists are the unknown enemies within

ON Monday, the United States was under siege again. In Boston, two bombs detonated within a span of 17 seconds. Three people were killed, including an 8-year-old child. More than 140 people were injured, with some in critical condition. This is the worst terrorist attack in the US since Sept 11, 2001. Interestingly, the Boston mayor and other relevant authorities have confirmed that there was no prior threat or indication that an attack was imminent. The bombs were placed near the finish line. The authorities also found two more bombs at the site. This reminds me of how Sept 11 and the London bombings (July 7, 2005) were executed. The Boston attack was well planned by a terrorist group. According to the authorities, it could have been al-Qaeda or home-grown terrorists. The video footage of the incident is shocking. The attack was executed dramatically to impact American society. The terrorists succeeded in this mission. Again, the issue of lax security and intelligence will be discussed widely. The attack occurred despite the US government's heightening of homeland security and integrated cooperation between enforcement and intelligence agencies, like the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Central Intelligence Agency. This shows that the terrorists can acquire the intelligence they need and infiltrate national security to launch their attack with the small funds they have. As for now, the attackers have not been identified. Before the Boston bombing, the relevant authorities believed that the measures and mechanisms they had created and implemented were working. Terrorists never die. Even when they are sent to maximum security prisons, their ideas and ambitions do not fade. They will be carried forward by their followers. Terrorists are the unknown enemy within. To identify and eliminate them is a mammoth task for security and intelligence agencies in any country.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Brexit: A lesson for Malaysians

Yesterday, Britons through a referendum made a decision to leave European Union. The ruling Conservative Party divided on this referendum and David Cameron in favour of ‘Remain’ was defeated outright. Even though he is disagreed with the decision of Britons, he announced that he is resigning from his premiership in respect of people’s decision. We can expect in a mature democracy country like United Kingdom this is vastly anticipated to be transpired.   A few days ago, the current Chief Commissioner of Malaysian Anti-Corruption of Commission made a statement that he is stepping down from his position and there are some rumours indicating that a few prominent officers from the said Commission will either resign or retire. It’s very eccentric news for Malaysians as it will have a profound impact on bribery and corruption issues in Malaysia as a whole. Recently, the results of two by elections were won by Barisan Nasional, the ruling party of Malaysia. Many promises had been...

Constitution of Malaysia: An Introduction Part 5

7 (1) No person shall be punished for an act or omission which was not punishable by law when it was done or made, and no person shall suffer greater punishment for an offence than was prescribed by law at the time it was committed. (2) A person who has been acquitted or convicted of an offence shall not be tried again for the same offence except where the conviction or acquittal has been quashed and a retrial ordered by a court superior to that by which he was acquitted or convicted.

Trump's role in the Israel-Hamas ceasefire

As the Israel-Hamas ceasefire, scheduled to commence on Jan 19, 2025, approaches, it is essential to examine the potential impact of president-elect Donald Trump on this event and Middle East security. Considering Trump’s past foreign policy actions, especially those concerning Israel, alongside the wider geopolitical environment, his prospective role in shaping the ceasefire and future peace initiatives is intricate and layered. Historical influence Trump’s initial term as president was characterised by a robust endorsement of Israel, a position that resonated with his domestic political supporters and simultaneously altered US foreign policy, thereby impacting the wider dynamics of the Middle East. Key actions during this period included the formal acknowledgement of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, the transfer of the US embassy to that city, and the withdrawal from the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement. These measures solidified his rapport with Israeli leadership and exemplified his ...