The fact that he didn't have a warm coat is absolutely irrelevant. We had high-quality intelligence against him but failed to act upon it in any way. We need to worry less about whether someone looks shifty at an airport and worry more about keeping tabs on people who we have strong intelligence on.
It is also worth stating that his attack failed and he was unable to damage anything other than his own groin.
The recent cargo bomb was missed despite multiple tips about that specific item as well!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umar_Farouk_Abdulmutallab#The_a...
Terrorist attacks increase the funding of the intel and security institutions, so they have a vested interest in them occurring (and a state willing to kill tens of thousands of civilians in Iraq to advance its objectives likely has little problem sacrificing the odd planeload of its own citizens to maintain public support for its ambitions).
Right, you're carrying something. It seems like the Christmas Day bomber wasn't carrying anything (aside from his bomb).
So, the red flags are noticed at least sometimes.
it does make you wonder to what extent such decoys have been accounted for in the overall security strategy.
Carrying explosives onto a plane most certainly is a red flag...
A 17" MacBook Pro battery contains 95 watt hours = 342 kilojoules. Effectively using the battery as a weapon would require some creativity, but the battery contains almost 30 times as much energy as the bullet. And lithium ion batteries are known to explode in extreme circumstances.
But the point I would like to make is that it is inappropriate to make important decisions on vocabulary. Is an unused bullet any more of an "explosive" than a laptop battery? Is a long piece of broken glass a "blade over 3 inches"? These screening guidelines are simply guidelines, to be used in context. Should you allow someone to take live ammunition on a plan? Of course not. But when we expect customs officers to strongly interrogate someone who has already landed about a travel souvenir, the terrorists have already won.
Even GSR on your hands will get you grilled at Heathrow, I speak from experience there.
You're over-generalising; I reckon there are plenty of idiots in Al-Quaeda.
Does people carrying bullets constitute everyone?
If he'd come from North America with a balaclava, copy of the hackers handbook, candy box featuring a picture of David Koresh and a bullet do you think he wouldn’t have been searched and added to a watch-list?
Unfortunately there's no way to conduct surveillance only on guilty people.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/07/the-case...
and there is plenty of reason to be afraid of an idiot if they have access to bombs.
The obvious red flags aren't red flags because they're obvious. If someone isn't smart enough to realise that, they're not smart enough to pose any real threat. We're dealing with focused people who know that huge resources are going into finding them. What we're looking for is people trying to conceal their actions and obfuscate their movements. By jumping on a chair and screaming "Aaaagh, terrorist!" every time we see a piece of Islamica, we're just reinforcing the idea that people are suspicious for 'looking Muslim'.