|
samcol:
As I see it, it makes sense. Two groups looked at the (as he said: "logical") way of staging a terror attack in London and both came to similar conclusions.
Of course, we don't hear about any other exercises (which I have no doubt are run frequently all over the Western world) which dealt with other possible targets. For instance - pulling a scenario out of a hat - I'd be very hard to convince that no exercises have taken place where Buckingham Palace is the target. It's just that we'd only hear about it if it were right, in which case we wouldn't have heard about this one - though it certainly was run.
As for the timing - if it happened a week after the exercise, people would be saying "... there was this exercise about EXACTLY THE SAME THING only a WEEK before!!!" Same goes for a month, or even months. Basically, I'm saying that the timimng was mostly luck - but not really surprising in the scheme of things. With the continuing conflict in the Middle East and everyone knowing that England was in the running for the Olympics would have made people more likely to have more of these exercises than they (perhaps) would have six years ago. The more exercises running, the higher the chance that one will co-incide with an actual event.
The point is that running these exercises, and in scenarios that are as plausible a threat as possible, is these people's JOB. If they didn't get it right at least once THEN there should be eyebrows raised. Basically I don't think it points to a conspiracy, more to competent people doing their jobs well and at appropriate times (which applies equally well to the people responsible for the bombing as to the people running the exercise).
|