Imminent Attack?

All sorts of rumblings the past few days if you're paying attention. The Brits up their terror warning level to "severe:"

• The British government has raised its terror alert level from "substantial" to "severe," the second highest level, but it's not divulging the exact reason behind the decision.

  Home Secretary Alan Johnson made the announcement Friday. He said it means his government considers an attack on British soil is likely and that security officials are heightening their vigilance. However, he stressed there is no intelligence suggesting an attack is imminent.

Well something certainly spooked them. Then bin Laden releases a statement referencing the failed Detroit bombing:

• Osama bin Laden endorsed the failed attempt to blow up a U.S. airliner on Christmas Day and threatened new attacks against the United States in an audio message released Sunday that appeared aimed at asserting he maintains some direct command over al-Qaida-inspired offshoots.
  
  However, U.S. officials and several researchers who track terrorist groups said there was no indication bin Laden or any of his top lieutenants had anything to do with or even knew in advance of the Christmas plot by a Yemen-based group that is one of several largely independent al-Qaida franchises.

And a close analysis of the bin Laden statement is triggering increased alarm in certain intelligence circles:

• Osama bin Laden's word choice in the latest audio message attributed to him is seen as a "possible indicator" of an upcoming attack by his Al-Qaeda network, a US monitoring group warned Sunday.

  IntelCenter, a US group that monitors Islamist websites, also said that manner of the release and the content of the message showed it was "credible" that it was a new release from the Saudi extremist.

  "The Osama bin Laden audio message released to Al-Jazeera on 24 January 2010 contains specific language used by bin Laden in his statements in advance of attacks," IntelCenter said in a statement.

And what better time to launch an attack? The president is severely damaged domestically by the ObamaCare fiasco, Wall Street is under attack by elements of Obama's left wing and lost 500 points last week, the job market continues to lurch and the economy is lagging, most likely headed for a "double dip" recession. One successful attack inside our borders and we're in a tailspin worse than September 2001.

Anyone still think we should be treating terrorism as a "law enforcement" problem rather than a war?