I will say this Page One Wash Post piece struck me as questionable:
LONDON, July 23 -- The back-to-back nature of the deadly attacks in Egypt and London, as well as similarities in the methods used, suggests that the al Qaeda leadership may have given the orders for both operations and is a clear sign that Osama bin Laden and his deputies remain in control of the network, according to interviews with counterterrorism analysts and government officials in Europe and the Middle East.
It's not that the thesis is wrong. Maybe Osama is sending out detailed to-dos lists. I don't know--and neither the Post. The thesis is entirely based on speculation. How exactly is "it clear" that Bin Laden is still in control? Consider this passage, far down into the story:
Counterterrorism investigators and analysts said it was highly unlikely that the people who organized the July 7 London bombings were directly involved in the Sharm el-Sheikh attacks. But they predicted that both plots would eventually be traced directly to al Qaeda.
The honest headline would have been: "EXPERTS GUESS AL QAEDA LEADERS ARE IN CONTROL AND ORDERED LONDON, EGYPT BOMBINGS."
The Post does eventually made a good observation, it's just a slightly more limited picture. Investigators have found links between the attacks in Casablanca, the ones in Madrid, and a set of attacks in Saudi Arabia. Maybe London and Egypt will join that list. In any case, the first three connections do suggest that there seem to still be a cadre of global jihadists rather than the local franchisees model of AQ that has been in vogue. That's worth knowing.
Comments