LONDON, England — In the late 1990s, getting permission to visit former Soviet nuclear sites was relatively easy and after to speaking to scientists still at work in them, the security was rather shocking. But what has alarmed me more over the years was realizing that North American and European research and academic facilities could do with a security audit themselves.

British regulators have routinely outlined security lapses and in the United States nuclear research labs have been penetrated with relative ease by nuclear safety campaigners posing as students. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has found that a radioactive source is lost or stolen in the United States almost every day.

In the words of President Barack Obama, "loose nuclear materials could exterminate any city on earth." So the effort to secure those materials needs to be a global one. The U.S.-led megaports system is a frontline defense for a non-proliferation strategy.

The program is seven years old and aims to equip 100 seaports by 2015 so that they can screen ship, rail and truck traffic through monitoring portals looking for radiological and nuclear material.

In one megaport in Antwerp, Belgium, port authorities say they are currently screening about 70 per cent of all traffic, 80 per cent of which ends up on North American soil.

"We seized 50 containers in 2008 with all kinds of nuclear and radioactive sources and that's all kinds of travel coming from all kinds of containers," says Noel Colpin, Director-General of Belgium’s Customs and Excise authority.

None of those incidents posed a serious terror threat but security officials say screening all container cargo is still a key goal.

"I think it’s very important because before we didn't know it, now we can do the screening and we are indeed surprised by the number of seizures and the importance," adds Colpin.

Since 2001, databases kept on behalf of the International Atomic Energy Agency indicate roughly a doubling of illicit trafficking in materials that could be used in dirty bombs using radioactive material or in a few cases for nuclear devices.

One favoured route, through Russia, into Georgia and on to Turkey, means cargo gets an easy ride through to Europe and ports like this one in Belgium. While incidents involving weapons-grade nuclear material are rare, guarding against them is worth doing whatever it takes.

"It’s a game changer, it will change everything we take for granted for a very, very, long time. It’s lives lost, infrastructure damage, counting to billions, but you also have the political fallout, who knows what happens next," says Andreas Persbo, a nuclear researcher with Vertic.

Experts point out, we are still vulnerable, an IND, or Improvised Nuclear Device, could be shielded after being encased in lead and uranium and doesn’t even carry a signature.

"We’re not complete with our mission yet, and we have a ways to go to get to our ultimate goal which is protecting maritime traffic anywhere that it’s going," says William Kilmartin, a program director with the Megaports Program.

And what worries security authorities most is a tangible nexus between arms-dealers, organized crime and terrorists who would seek out insiders from state-sponsored nuclear weapons programs. It’s a deadly combination that experts say could slip through even the best of defenses.

London, England—Slick and accessible, one of the latest offerings from Somalia’s Al Qaeda backed Al-Shabab looks more like a reality TV show than a recruitment tool for terrorists.

And then there’s the English—American English.

“Away from your family, away from our friends, away from ice, candy bars, all those things is because we’re waiting to meet the enemy.” says a man reported to be Abu Mansoor al-Amriki. Al Qaeda propaganda refers to him as ‘the American” and it is one of the first times he has ever shown his face. He is now apparently in Somalia training and counselling Somalis from North America and Europe.

And then there’s the jihad call to arms with a hip-hop vibe.

“Mortar by mortar, shell by shell, only going to stop when I send them to hell” raps the unidentified voice-over of the video.

“We’re seeing perhaps their most sophisticated attempt so far to really reach an audience of potential recruits in America and that’s one of the things that made that video very significant” says Ben Venzke of the IntelCenter, a Washington-based research group that tracks Al Qaeda’s development and messages.

“They’re casting it in a way that’s going to speak to the youth of today,” says Venzke who adds, “Most of the time what we’re seeing in their videos directly parallels what the groups are doing operationally, what they are targeting, where they’re recruiting.”

Sheik Ahmed Matan says he knows that firsthand. The respected member of Britain’s Somali community says he knows of hundreds of young Somali men who have returned to Somalia for terrorist training.

“A lot of young people from here, from America, from Canada, from everywhere from Europe they went there, ” he says adding these men are capable of being sent back home to conduct terrorist operations, even suicide bombings.

“It can be, they can train anytime and send them here, anytime,” says Sheik Matan.

Somalis from North American and Europe are beginning to come to terms with the problem of recruitment. The U.S. and British governments say Somalia is an emerging terror hot spot, which can pose a threat beyond its borders.

Sheik Matan says he often challenges ‘recruiters’ at mosques and elsewhere in Britain demanding they stop brainwashing younger Somalis about Islam. He says the government should play a greater role in monitoring what is said and done at these mosques but doing so has proved highly controversial in Britain and throughout Europe.

But there is evidence that Al Qaeda is successfully preying on some of those with Western backgrounds. One of them was a business student from London who suddenly left for Somalia and only surfaced about 18 months ago on this martyrdom video just before blowing himself up in Southern Somalia killing at least twenty people.

In an off-the-record briefing with CNN, U.S. Defence officials told CNN months ago that one of their worst nightmares would be Al Qaeda operating freely in Somalia. Now that nightmare continues, with Somalis in North America and Europe admitting Al Qaeda’s reach is spreading to their communities.

LONDON, England – It could be labelled a triumph for the British judicial system: Preventing three innocent men from going to prison for a crime they didn't commit.

That's certainly the way the jury saw it.

The only suspects ever charged in connection with London's 7/7 attacks have been found not guilty of conspiring with the bombers in 2005.

Waheed Ali, 25, Sadeer Saleem, 28, and Mohammed Shakil, 32, admitted being close friends of the bombers but through two trials they have denied ever knowing about the plot or helping them carry it out. The men were originally tried in 2008, but the first jury deadlocked and failed to reach a verdict.

For the victims' families, both trials have disclosed painful reminders of how and why the four suicide bombers were so intent on killing as many as possible on that day.  The three defendants always maintained they did not believe in suicide bombings.

But as Ali put in courtroom testimony: "If I agreed with [the bombings], I would have been there on 7/7 with the brothers, with a rucksack on my back...I would have killed hundreds," Ali told the jury before adding, "They didn't stop them, they wouldn't have stopped me. Not your MI5, not your MI6, not nobody."

Ali and Shakil were found guilty during this second trial of plotting to attend a terrorism training camp in Pakistan at the time of their 2007 arrest. They will be sentenced on Wednesday.

Still, Ali repeatedly accused the prosecution of being on a "witch-hunt" and of pursuing charges against him purely for political reasons.

While Scotland Yard's commanders would deny those accusations they will now face more scrutiny not just about this investigation, but their entire posture towards counter-terrorism investigations.

For years Scotland Yard has been trying to prove that the London bombers did not act alone. They gathered thousands of pieces of evidence that in the words of prosecutors, "fit together like a jigsaw to produce a compelling picture of guilt."

But they have failed to prove that in court.

Add to this failure, the release of 12 suspects last week after a high-profile investigation into a so-called ‘Easter-Plot.' Police here have yet to press a single charge in connection with an incident that the British government continues to describe as a "serious terrorist plot."

That investigation was brought forward after Britain's top counter-terrorism cop, Bob Quick, nearly blew the case by being photographed holding clearly legible briefing notes on the operation. Quick was forced to resign.

And then there is the airline plot now currently being re-tried in Britain. Seven men stand accused of plotting to blow up transatlantic airliners using liquid bombs. But again, the prosecution failed to win convictions last year after the jury deadlocked and authorities were forced to prosecute the case from scratch.

All of this has served to undermine the credibility of Britain's counter-terrorism strategy.

The government has spent billions on fighting and prosecuting terror but Britain remains a significant global frontline. With all the adversity and scepticism it is now receiving in prosecutions and investigations, security authorities are open to new scrutiny about whether they are up to the job or even irresponsibly exaggerating the terror threat.

LONDON, England – A few months ago I wrote a short item suggesting that radical Muslim preacher Anjem Choudary might usefully be compared with Johnny Rotten. Thinly argued - if widely slammed - as that post was, it's a comparison that retains value.

A protest against British soldiers in Luton, England.

The real argument, though, as I attempted to clarify in the comments to the original article, is not over the use of the acronym "UK," but rather over the media, and the symbiotic relationship Choudary enjoys with certain sections of it.

CNN itself has not stood entirely above the fray on this, and there's an argument, of course, that this post itself is just adding to the exposure. But I don't see a way round that given the point I wish to make here.

Like Rotten and the Sex Pistols, Choudary knows the media loves nothing more than the opportunity to express outrage. The trick is then to exploit that outrage and fold it back into the greater narrative: the core message aimed at the real audience.

Punk, in its early days, traded on its outlaw status, which gained greater and greater currency the ruder and more shocking the Pistols became. The media lapped it up because they could portray it as a simple story of moral decline and social decay. It sold newspapers, which in turn helped sell records. Which then sold more newspapers, which sold even more records. Everyone was happy.

Choudary and his group, known once as Al-Muhajiroun until it was banned, play a similar game. Last year I attended two of its meetings within the space of a couple of weeks. It's not hard to get in to these events and reporters who suggest otherwise are being disingenuous.

Most, if not all, will have received an SMS from Choudary inviting them to come. Even so, some prefer to come incognito. I've had a cameraman at one event telling me he worked for Hungarian television and a reporter at another purporting to write for the Irish Times newspaper. Both later turned out to be working for British tabloids.

At the first event, held to mark the anniversary of 9/11, the message from the platform was a familiar one. The 9/11 perpetrators were described as "disciplined role models" responsible for a "great day in history." The people of Britain would "one day live under the sharia – so get used to it!" More than enough material for the assembled journalists, perhaps half a dozen in number, to get their story in the paper.

At the next event, a week or so later, this time highlighting "Muslim Youth - Spark of the Fire," those very news stories arising from the first meeting were brandished from the platform like evidence planted on a dupe: "See how they twist our words! This is not a war on terror, this is a war on Muslims!"

Choudary's expertise in all of this has come to the fore yet again with the excessive coverage given to the protest in Luton last week during the parade by British soldiers returned from Afghanistan. A small, though provocative, demonstration, which solicited an angry response from some of those who turned out to salute the infantrymen, garnered acres of coverage in the press and on TV. The Evening Standard, London's main local newspaper, even devoted three pages to an interview with Choudary, including the front-page splash "I want to see flag of Allah flying over Downing Street."

There will be plenty of winners from this. The papers, presumably, were happy with their stories. Choudary and his followers must be absolutely delighted: they can mine this one for weeks, if not months. And the far-right British National Party, the BNP, are exploiting it heavily as well: the story is all over the front-page of its Web site.

The main losers are the vast majority of people - Muslims and non-Muslims alike - who are getting a highly-skewed picture of what constitutes Muslim opinion in the UK. Because no matter how sincerely Choudary and his acolytes may hold their views, their support within Muslim communities is paltry.

Indeed, it's been suggested to me by people intimately involved in de-radicalization that Al-Muhajiroun is losing ground, its followers' heightened public presence over the last six months or so actually born out of frustration over lost momentum.

If that is indeed the case then it's surely time for the media to move on and stop over-inflating the importance of these particular proponents of division and separatism.