Author: Oliver Hair ASyI,
Threat Analyst
Read Time: 3 minutes
On 02 July 2024, Mohammad Farooq, 28, of Hetton Road in Leeds, was found guilty of preparing for an act of terrorism. Prior to the trial, Farooq had pleaded guilty to possessing an explosive substance with intent to endanger life, firearms offences, and the possession of terrorist material. Farooq had identified two potential targets for an attack; RAF Menwith Hill in North Yorkshire and St James’s Hospital in Leeds where he was a student nurse. He conducted hostile reconnaissance at the RAF base on three separate occasions but found the site to be too well guarded {1}. Farooq later decided to target the “softer and less well-protected target” of St. James’s Hospital to pursue a long-standing grievance against staff at the hospital {2}{3}.
Farooq was found in the grounds of St James’s Hospital in the early hours of 20 January 2023, in possession of a viable Improvised Explosive Device (IED), knives, and an imitation firearm. The device – a pressure cooker bomb – was reportedly designed to be twice as powerful as those used by the Boston Marathon bombers in 2013 and contained almost 10kg of explosives {4}. Prosecutor Jonathan Sandiford KC stated that Farooq’s plan was to detonate the device, then attack as many people as possible with knives before using the imitation firearm to incite police to shoot him dead, “seek his own martyrdom” {5}.
Farooq had initially sent a bomb threat to an off-duty nurse in order to lure people to the car park and then conduct his attack. The message was reportedly not seen for almost an hour, and so the full-scale evacuation did not happen. CCTV showed Farooq then conducting hostile reconnaissance inside the ground floor of the hospital, where he reportedly planned to conduct his attack in a hospital café during a shift-change. Upon returning to his car to retrieve the pressure cooker bomb, Farooq was discovered by a hospital patient who persuaded him to not go through with the attack and call the police {6}.
The investigation demonstrated that Farooq had self-radicalised using online material, primarily Islamic State-related propaganda. The investigation found that Farooq had watched antisemitic videos on TikTok and had taken a photograph of a plaque which commemorated Jewish links to the hospital {7}. Farooq had obtained bomb-making instructions in a magazine published by al-Qa’ida named “lone wolf mujahideen and small cells” {8}. Head of Investigations for Counter Terrorism Policing North East, Detective Superintended Paul Greenwood, said that Farooq was “primarily motivated by a Daesh-inspired ideology, but also by his own, deep-seated grievances” {9}.
Farooq is set to be sentenced at a later date.
Event Assessment
- The viable pressure cooker bomb constructed by Farooq demonstrates the realistic possibility that terrorist actors in the UK could have the capability to conduct high-sophistication attacks at this time. E.g., Improvised Explosive Device (IED), Person-Borne Improvised Explosive Device (PBIED), or Firearms.
- While this plot was not detected during the manufacturing of the Improvised Explosive Device (IED), the complicated nature of plotting a high-sophistication terrorist attack makes it highly likely that there will be greater opportunity for UK police and security services to disrupt potential attacks.
- It is almost certain that terrorist actors would have the intent to conduct attacks against hospitals in the UK due to their position in the UK’s Critical National Infrastructure (CNI) and their easily accessible, and often crowded, public waiting areas. Any terrorist attack conducted at a hospital would have high symbolic value and result in significant media coverage due to the targeting of vulnerable individuals. Terrorist actors in the UK have previously demonstrated the intent and capability to conduct attacks against hospitals, including:
- 2021 – Liverpool – A Person-Borne Improvised Explosive Device (PBIED) detonated within a taxi outside of the maternity ward at Liverpool Women’s Hospital. It is believed that the configuration of the device was unstable and it is likely to have exploded earlier than planned. Superintended Andy Minks stated that “it is believed the motive was likely driven by anger towards the British state for repeated rejections of his asylum claim and exacerbated by his own mental health struggles”. The attacker was killed, and the taxi driver was injured {10}.
- Whilst it is almost certain that terrorist actors would have the intent to target military bases in the UK, Farooq’s decision to target the less well-guarded hospital demonstrates the intent of terrorist actors in the UK to target “soft”, publicly accessible locations at which they are less likely to face significant resistance.
- Farooq’s online history, the documents he possessed, and the steps he took in attack preparation demonstrate the continued threat posed by the radicalisation of vulnerable UK-based individuals by Islamist terrorist groups. It is highly likely that any Islamist-inspired terrorist attack conducted in the UK at this time would be conducted by a self-initiated individual, rather than a coordinated, directed attack by groups including Islamic State or al-Qa’ida.
- There is a realistic possibility that Farooq’s consumption of antisemitic online content and surveillance of a Jewish plaque at St James’s hospital contributed to his radicalisation and target selection. Although not demonstrated explicitly in Farooq’s own radicalisation pathway or motivations, it is highly likely that the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict will act as a driver of Islamist terrorism threat in the UK in the long term as individuals may become inspired to conduct attacks in response to the current conflict.
- Whilst global Islamist terrorist groups, such as al-Qa’ida and Islamic State, almost certainly maintain the intent to project threat toward the UK, it is unlikely that such groups would currently have the capability to conduct a direct, coordinated attack against the UK mainland due to diminished organisational structures and continued global counterterrorism operations against their leaders.
- Farooq’s decision to target St James’s hospital in-part as a result of a long-standing grievance against staff at the hospital, paired with his adherence to an Islamist ideology, demonstrates that it is likely that certain individuals in the UK would increasingly adhere to ideologies that overlap, converge, or even in some cases contradict. Rather than adhering solely to traditional terrorism ideologies (E.g., Islamist, Extreme Right-Wing, etc.), it is likely that individuals would adhere to a range of mixed ideologies that align with their own perceived frustrations and grievances.
- It is highly likely that any terrorist attack conducted in the UK at this time would be conducted by an individual or small cell using a low sophistication methodology. E.g., Bladed or Blunt Force Weapons, Vehicle as a Weapon, Fire as a Weapon given the low level of expertise and resources necessary to conduct such an attack.
Intelligence Cut-Off Date: 03 July 2024
PHIA Scale
The “Probability Yardstick” (below) is a standardised instrument used to provide professional intelligence assessments. Judgements made using the yardstick are relative and reflect the analyst’s confidence in their findings and assessments.
-
- Almost Certain: An event is assessed to have a greater than 90% chance of occurring.
- Highly Likely: An event is assessed to have a 76% to 90% chance of occurring.
- Likely: An event is assessed to have a 55% to 75% chance of occurring.
- Realistic Possibility: An event is assessed to have a 40% to 54% chance of occurring.
- Unlikely: An event is assessed to have a 25% to 39% chance of occurring.
- Highly Unlikely: An event is assessed to have an 10% to 24% chance of occurring.
- Remote Chance: An event is assessed to have a less than 10% chance of occurring.
Time Spans
-
- Short Term: 0 – 6 Months.
- In the next 12 months.
- Medium Term: 12 months – 5 Years.
- Long Term: 5+ Years.
Author: Oliver Hair ASyI,
Threat Analyst