Islamic Terror: Lessons From the London Attack

The barbaric attack in London near the iconic Parliament building was followed by the usual outpouring of sympathy.  Governments worldwide, including the U.S., expressed solidarity. Perfunctory tributes for the victims rolled in.  However, the moral outrage was eerily muted.

After the world was shaken by the events of September 11, 2001, leaders and ordinary citizens were angry.  They demanded retribution for the senseless killing of 2,996 people.  Since that tragedy, each new assault is greeted with somber public expressions before fading from the world's spotlight.

It raises a troubling question: Have world leaders and global citizens been desensitized to terrorist killings? There appears to be an almost grim acceptance that extremist violence is now a normal part of society. Resignation has become the enemy of action.  

No democratic society should ever, ever tolerate terrorism as the price of freedom. Once a country concludes it is helpless to defend itself against the evil of terror, then it invites violence. Soon the terrorists will rule the nation through fear and intimidation the way drug cartels control Mexico.

Clearly, world leaders are tiring of the seemingly endless battle against terror.  Too many believe threatening words are a substitute for a military campaign to eliminate ISIS and its Islamist-inspired offshoots.  It is not working.  The terrorists are winning.  Something must change and soon.

Another clear lesson from the London attack is the ongoing failure of counter-terrorism intelligence organizations to deal with the threat.  In the days after the brutal siege, it was learned that the killer Khalid Masood had an extensive criminal record and was once investigated for extremism.

Despite his past, Masood was not considered a threat by British intelligence. That has become a familiar pattern after each terrorist ambush both in Europe and the United States.  Violent criminals with jihadist backgrounds are escaping detection because of inexplicable intelligence bungling.

For example, the thug who murdered 50 people and injured 53 last year at an Orlando gay night club had been "on the radar" of the FBI since 2013.  The perpetrator  Omar Mateen had made inflammatory comments about terrorism to co-workers and surfaced in an FBI investigation in 2014.

It was a similar scenario in the San Bernardino slaughter in 2015 when a man and a woman gunned down 14 and wounded 22 in California.  The duo, Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik, had contacts with at least five people under FBI investigation for possible terrorist activities.

In the aftermath of the 2015 carnage in Paris, investigators discovered the mastermind of the massacre Oussama Atar had been arrested and imprisoned by the U.S. in Iraq in 2005.  He was incarcerated in three different prisons, but was freed for humanitarian reasons to return to Brussels.

Intelligence impotence is a disturbing pattern that must be reversed if future terrorist attacks are to be prevented. In their defense, counter-terrorism officials are always quick to point out how many plots have been foiled.  However, even one murderous rampage is one too many.

Terrorism demands a swift and lethal response, supported by a robust and effective intelligence effort designed to keep the world safe. Public indifference to the massacre of other human beings is the kind of defeatism that will undermine a country's freedom and embolden its enemies.