BBC Reports UK-U.S. Terror Plot Foiled 1792
j823777 was one of several readers to point out a BBC report that "A terrorist plot to blow up planes in mid-flight from the UK to the U.S. has been disrupted, Scotland Yard has said. It is thought the plan was to detonate up to three explosive devices smuggled on aircraft in hand luggage.
Police have arrested 21 people in the London area after an anti-terrorist operation lasting several months. Security at all airports in the UK has been tightened and delays are reported. MI5 has raised the UK threat level to critical — the highest possible."
spo0nman adds a link to the Associated Press's coverage.
Update: 08/10 12:57 GMT by T : Several readers have pointed out new restrictions imposed as a result of this plot on passengers' carry-on luggage. In the UK, nearly all possession (including laptop computers) must be carried in the cargo hold; while their rules don't yet go quite as far, U.S. airlines are stepping up their enforcement of carry-on-restrictions, including banning substances like toothpaste.
No hand luggage... (Score:4, Insightful)
Only passports, wallets.
The mind boggles. No computers, books, iPods, bottles of water, sunglasses?
Smoking, alcohol, and sex are already off-limits or difficult. I hope these are really short flights, and the planes have plenty of distractions for the passengers, otherwise we'll wonder if being blown up is not the better alternative.
Re:No hand luggage... (Score:5, Insightful)
You're allowed your wallet precisely so that you can buy all those things on board the plane. And then again on the next plane. Buy airline stock now.
Re:No hand luggage... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, they're the new 20 minute commuter planes from the UK to the US.
My god, is it really too much to ask to read the first sentence in the summary?
Re:No hand luggage... (Score:4, Funny)
I joined the half-mile high club. It is like the mile high club, but has half as many people.
Seriously, I heard that they were not even allowing books - that would be shit. Having to actualy watch those stupid emergency announcements.
Re:No hand luggage... (Score:4, Funny)
People who bring kids onboard a plane still aren't considered terrorists?
Questions (Score:5, Insightful)
First, congratulations to the Security Services for foiling this plot.
Did they need to detain someone for 90 days without trial to prevent this disaster?
Would ID cards have helped?
And how long before I can travel with my notebook onto an aeroplane again, as we all know a cargo hold is no place for a lithium ion battery?
Re:Questions (Score:5, Funny)
TSA just anounced the new restrictions on (Score:5, Informative)
No liquids or gels can be brought on board.
Reduce the "clutter" in your luggage so the inspectors have a clear view.
Medicine is ok and baby formula but be prepared to show it to the inspector.
Call carrier to see how early you have to arrive.
Have fun flying?!.
Re:TSA just anounced the new restrictions on (Score:5, Funny)
Re:TSA just anounced the new restrictions on (Score:4, Interesting)
Why oh why (Score:5, Funny)
WHY do these terrorists specifically hate those of us who are scared of flying??
Re:Why oh why (Score:5, Interesting)
That's not why they don't target Greyhound. They don't target Greyhound because we haven't made it fun yet. Blowing up an airplane is a game. We gave it rules. If you can get a bomb on without the screeners finding it, you win. And it's not that hard of a game to win if you're not an idiot and haven't already lost from the start by virtue of having talked to the wrong person while someone was watching, so they get the satisfaction of both crippling us and beating us at our game. It's not a conscious thing, but we gave them something to fixate on and obsess about, and that's not good.
Unfortunately, there's no going back. If we make flying like riding a bus now, the game doesn't just end. We lose 15 or 20 planes in the free-for-all before it gets boring for them, and obviously that can't happen. So we're screwed.
We might as well just move to the end right now: Everyone wears paper hospital gowns with no underwear on planes after having changed in front of an official, and all cargo is shipped seperately via UPS.
We'll still lose 2 planes to poison gas being blown into pilots' faces from regurgitated containers, but at some point you have to just say, "Meh." Of course, if it were me, that point would have been a long time ago.
Latest (Score:5, Informative)
Explosives are suspected to have been carried on in hand luggage as liquids, suggesting that they were planning to use binary agents (where two non-explosive chemicals are mixed to form a 3rd reactive substance).
Currently travelers from the UK are being told that (IIRC) they may board the planes with absolutely no more than 7 carryon items, limited to a select list such as:
- 1 book
- 1 newspaper
- wallet
- passport
etc.
Re:Latest (Score:4, Funny)
I can picture the result now: planeloads of people sitting wide-eyed and paranoid while shivering in little paper gowns - the kind with the backsides missing like you get at the hospital. The terrorists will not be able to stop laughing.
Not foiled - disrupted (Score:4, Interesting)
Mind you, it might actually serve some interests better for tens of millions of people to be worried, inconvienced, or annoyed than for airliners to explode.
No, it's a good thing (for us) (Score:5, Interesting)
Nah. They'd rather that the planes had exploded. That plays much, much better on Al Jazeera. This cannot be cited as a "victory" by the jihaddis backing it, and if they had knocked the planes down, they'd also have the extra inconvenience and worry, as frosting on that cake. No... this is a win for the good guys, and probably really frustrating to the backers that obviously put a lot of time and effort into recruiting all of these would-be suicide bombers, training them, supplying them, etc. You can bet that there are some pre-recorded Zawahiri video tapes that will now not be seeing airtime since this attack was stopped.
So, for several months... (Score:4, Interesting)
Now, the perpetrators have been arrested, and anyone else who may have been involved is potentially compromised, so will probsbly not risk carrying it out. As a result, an attack is less likely. So the alert level has gone up.
Security (Score:4, Funny)
Ed Almos
Re:In the US, I drive instead of fly. (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, I wish it were true, that I didn't have to connect anywhere. This is how they getcha into buying a higher-priced ticket.
Also, my time measurement was for door to door, and with normal delays. An actual direct flight is only like an hour and a half. But, when you consider these factors:
Besides, I get to see the countryside, do some wardriving, and discuss many things with my SO. No security theatre, plenty of cargo area, far cheaper. Cruising through the amber waves of grain, and purple mountain's majesty -- *that* is part of the American Dream that I was taught, not this Orwellian nonsense.
No carryon soda... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not trying to suggest that this is some sort of plot by the airlines to charge higher drink prices. I don't think any such thing. I'm simply saying that this is the likely result of the inane government action that will innevitably follow: banning all carryon fluids on all commercial flights.
Is anyone else... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't feel any safer by having my liquids/toenail clippers/pocket vibe/ipod/laptop taken away from me, when there are plenty of other ways to kill/be killed that airlines have no control over. I am more angry at terrorists for making American privacy close(er) to extinction than anything else. With a "war" on "terror" there are going to be casualties, my water consumption/music listening/laptop using/game playing/phone usage habits shouldn't be at the top of the list.
Why does the scapegoat have to be the common citizen?
Blanket Measures. I'd get smothered. (Score:5, Interesting)
Unless these restrictions are lifted, I don't think I'll ever be able to fly anywhere. Yes, I understand the need to a sensible level of security, but I see this as going too far.
I used to suffer from depression, and it has left me with the remnants of social anxiety. I can function out and about quite easily, but with very definite limits. Crowds still mess my head up. Queues fill me with dread. I need to travel with something to take my mind of things - often to shut out the world and people around me.
I also have a fair bit of not-exactly-cheap equipment that goes with me everywhere. There are things that do not get let out of my site. My laptop, for example, comes to work with me when I have a house-inspection. I trust my colleagues more than an inspector I've never met. Yet I'd be expected to fly long-haul without carrying it in my arms?
Yes, I know I'm probably slightly paranoid. But for one thing I've had things broken before when they were with people I didn't know or trust. And secondly, it's another holdover from my depression.
And right this very minute I feel extremely uncomfortable. I see an all-too-possible threat of increased security measures invading our lives to a greater extent, where the existing ones already feel too much.
Plus the idea of being stuck taking my holidays without ever leaving the UK[*] kinda fill me with dread.
[*] 'Cos I can't see these measures not spreading to Eurostar, somehow.
Government was already seeding their messages... (Score:5, Insightful)
See: Terror 'may force freedom curbs' [bbc.co.uk].
Why Planes? (Score:4, Informative)
Why are planes and airports apparently such an appealing target for terrorism? If I really wanted to do some damage to civilians i'd go to a sold out college football game (very little security) and blow a chunk out of the stadium. If I wanted to do some damage to the government then I'd find some fairly small military building to blow up. And lastly, if I wanted to do something that would get a ton of media attention, i'd blow up a water tower or some sort of public monument.
The only reason I could think that planes are so attractive is that you only have to overtake several people and once you are in the cockpit, you are free to do whatever you want without revolt. Unless you have specific plans to use the plane (not just blow it up while its in flight) or hold the passengers hostage, it doesn't seem like a very great capture. I suppose one other advantage is that the terrorist doesn't have to worry about being stabbed to death with nail clippers that bystanders had on them since you can be sure the airport security took those all away.
nightmare scenario (Score:5, Funny)
I suspect the rest of the plane would prefer a terrorist attack.
Re:nightmare scenario (Score:4, Funny)
Or just duct tape their mouth shut and put them in a dog costume then ship them in the hold.
Stephen
PS I don't like children
PPS Actually doing the above may be illegal, check with the airline first
I felt... naked (Score:5, Interesting)
I didn't take my flight in the end, despite it being one of the few that wasn't cancelled - when I finally got to the gate they still had an additional delay of over an hour and I was only due to be there one day. With half of it gone, and the prospects of being able to fly back to the UK this evening looking distinctly dubuious, I offloaded myself.
This was obviously an inconvenience for me, but I have nothing but praise for our security services who foiled this and the airport staff who managed to handle the whole thing pretty well, considering.
As has been reported, items allowed were limited to wallets/travel documents and baby/health-specific products. However, many of us brought books and papers with us also. Interestingly, Duty Free shops were open airside - although I didn't see if any electronics shops were. The focus this morning was really on what can be brought from landside to airside and they didn't seem to have thought about what you buy airside so much (although I would speculate that electronic items bought airside do not pose such a threat in that trrrsts would use pre-modified devices to detonate explosives). The search at security was a remove shoes, belts etc. job - rather like being in the US
It will be very interesting if this policy is made permanent. Like many companies mine has a policy of not putting laptops into checked luggage - for good reason. And when you are on the move much of the time you need your tools to keep productive - I've previously found time in the lounge or on board to be really valuable sometimes. However, I think in light of all the other ways that security can be compromised this can't continue as an indefinite measure - the risk:hassle/cost ratio is all wrong.
So... (Score:4, Funny)
The Scottish Home Secretary (Score:5, Funny)
At the risk of being accused of covert racism, it's perhaps worth pointing out just how much of the UK government is controlled by Scots, from the Prime Minister down. The Scots have something of a reputation for violence and aggression, and if you want to point out that the Rt Hon Anthony Blair, MA, Barrister-at-Law is an upper class Scottish lawyer, it was just such an upper class Scottish lawyer that organised the Glencoe massacre, for his own advantage.
Actually, I think our police and security services on the whole do a pretty good job, especially outside London (where there is a lot of institutional corruption.) But they deserve better politicians.
What is the goal behind terrorism? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What is the goal behind terrorism? (Score:5, Informative)
The main goal as far as the US is concerned is to push the US out of the middle east. Bin Laden specifically stated his goal was to get the US to stop propping up dictators in the middle east, supplying weapons to Israel, and basically, to stay out of their business.
Terrorism typically works on an invading force, especially when that force is relucatant to kill civilians. Once the price in blood is too high, the invading force will usually pull out. It has worked in the past.
If you want to understand what Bin Laden wants, read his Fatwah. Here is a brief part of it from wikipedia:
1998 Fatwa
In February 1998, another Fatwa was issued that was signed by Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and others.
Published on the 23rd February in the Al-Quds Al-Arabi independent newspaper, it lists three grievances:
* U.S. occupation of the Arabian Peninsula
"First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples. If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless."
* U.S. devastation of the Iraqi people and humiliation of their Muslim neighbors
"Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million... despite all this, the Americans are once again trying to repeat the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation. So here they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors."
* U.S. support of Israel
"Third, if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper statelets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel's survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula."
"The International Islamic Front for Jihad against the U.S. and Israel has issued a crystal-clear fatwa calling on the Islamic nation to carry on jihad aimed at liberating holy sites. The nation of Muhammad has responded to this appeal. If the instigation for jihad against the Jews and the Americans in order to liberate Al-Aksa Mosque and the Holy Ka'aba Islamic shrines in the Middle East is considered a crime, then let history be a witness that I am a criminal."
Propaganda (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Propaganda (Score:4, Insightful)
Govt said Saddam had WMD. Govt said Saddam was Bin Laden's friend. Govt went to war. Saddam had no WMD. Saddam and Bin Laden hated each other.
Govt said it had "irrefutable evidence". It was not irrefutable. It was not evidence either. Downing street memo says "intelligence and facts are fixed around the policy".
Govt said Iraqis would welcome soldiers with flowers and chocolate. Iraqis sent road side bombs and mortar shells.
Govt said Mission Accomplished. It was 3 years ago. Mission still not accomplished.
Govt said it's spreading democracy in the middle-east. The whole region is spiralling into chaos and mayhem (Iraq, Palestine, Lebanon, Iran...)
Election time comes. Govt changes alert levels repeatedly. Population is scared into trusting the Govt. Govt wins elections. Nothing happens. Nothing is revealed.
Govt said Abu Graib was "bad apples". Govt fights anti-torture law. Anti-torture law passes. Prez's signing statement says he will ignore it.
Govt says it needs secrecy to defend America. Govt classifies each and every instance it breaks the law.
Shall I go on?
In general, it's healthy to distrust the government. In this particular case, it's a necessity.
Re:Propaganda (Score:4, Interesting)
The whole reason we have a government with checks and balances is because the framers knew there will be issues with people correctly interpretign and applying laws...as well as abusing power.
and it's failed,
-lobbyists have infiltrated our government on all levels
-because our system only allows 2 parties to exist, the current 2 parties have so locked out the potential of any third party that several candidates in the last elected were arrested
also consider that most of the "abuses" you THINK you know about are part of the FUD spread by meembers of the press (and the legislature) with an agenda.
No, the media does not have a "liberal bias". Those accusations come from right wing extremists who consider the center to be "left".
The best example would be the 2000 election. Gore got WAY more negative press than bush did, and bush got more positive press than gore did. Yep, that dirty liberal media really were exercising an agenda of getting gore into office nitpicking him for things like taking credit for pushing to fund the development of the internet while refusing to scrutinize bush's many more serious flaws.
Just reread 1984 (Score:5, Insightful)
We're at war with the Soviets^D^DTerrorists...
And we just has a glorious victory !
next up the 20 minutes of hate?
then back to work, business as usual..
We don't even need a war, just the illusion of one, thank you minitrue for real and complete reports of whats going on, and thank you miniplenty for lowering the oil prices to a historic low of 20$ pr gallon...
the current war on terror is quite like the war in 1984. Where the main purpose of the war was not to capture territories or resources, but rather to reduce the freedoms of the populaces. after the liberation of iraq, iraqies gained some and lost some, but people of the eu and us lost freedom. This victory will no doubt show that our forces are good and fine and great, and with more funding they'd be even better. now they have tightened airport security, most notably by requiring all carryons to be carried in clear plastic bags.
They're no doubt already discussing how to make security even better, as we speak. I'm not saying terrorism isn't real, but it's certainly been boosted since we started taking it seriously. I'm not saying the government is trying to take away your freedoms, but I do think they're forgetting what it is the silverware of civilisation that they're remoulding to shoot werewolves (monsters none of us really know much about). The governments are more worried about the deaths of a max. 5000 citizens the last five years, than meeting the big challenges we're facing (reducing bureaucracy, informing the intolerant, helping developing countries, improving pluralistic democracy, increasing education levels, getting humans to think)
So what if they kill a few of us, including some leaders, democracy is strong because it is NOT dependant on one person, but when too few cares, it becomes a defacto oligarchy.grass roots anti-war (Score:5, Insightful)
Joe got the boot from a grass roots movement.
The spin machine reminds people that democrats are left wing radicals that are weak on homeland security.
A convenient terror plot spoiled so soon after is suspicious.
Re:Just in time for U.S. Mid-Term Elections (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Just in time for U.S. Mid-Term Elections (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Just in time for U.S. Mid-Term Elections (Score:5, Informative)
I have been watching BBC news for the last 30 minutes (I live in the UK). Considerable detail has already been released and it's still the first day of the operation.
We have been told:
* Liquid explosives were planned to be hidden in soft drinks bottles (hence the ban on liquids).
* The explosives would be detonated over the atlantic (to ensure maximum fatalities).
* The attack would come in waves. As things start to clam down after the first wave, another wave was to be launched.
* The deah toll would be greather than 9/11.
According to US spokespeople:
* The investigation has been "critical" for about 2 weeks.
Compared to the vague information you hear from US alerts, this seems *much* more credible.
Some numeric speculation (Score:5, Insightful)
News are saying that 21 people have been arrested, and 9/11 death toll was 2976 people (according to wikipedia, other sites I saw gave similar numbers). To attain this number, each of the 21 attackers would have to kill 2976/21 = 141 people per plane, which seems reasonable. That, of course, is assuming only 1 attacker per plane... Wouldn't it be more probable that there were at least 2 attackers per plane? In that case, killing 283 people per plane seems too much... Which might indicate that not all the attackers are under custody.
Re:Just in time for U.S. Mid-Term Elections (Score:4, Interesting)
actually, it's far more effective to detonate them over land when they are at cruising altitude... remember Lockerbie... I certainly do... I did not enjoy my Christmas that year as I was a member of the search parties for the bodies... a right mess that was... spread over hundreds of square miles...
Re:Just in time for U.S. Mid-Term Elections (Score:4, Insightful)
The attack would come in waves. As things start to clam down after the first wave, another wave was to be launched.
On the radio this morning (a Washington, D.C., news station) there was reference to a planned 3 attacks over 3 days. I found that odd--if successful simultaneous detonations were carried out, wouldn't the plotters assume that security would immediately be tightened to the point where the chances of succeeding on subsequent days would be much lower?
Re:Just in time for U.S. Mid-Term Elections (Score:4, Interesting)
And why wouldn't these have been caught by the chemical sniffers in the security check points? The hidden drug/bomb dogs in the airport? Why all the new security? Why wouldn't our normal airport security have caught these guys in the airport?
Note: You need a sizable hole punched in a plane to make it break up. An entire chunk of the fuselage needs to be removed. Explosive decompression doesn't occur from small basketball sized holes.
Chemistry / Physics and Liquid Explosives (Score:4, Informative)
- Are there liquid explosives whose components are (relatively) safely drinkable? I say relatively because, if you're a suicide bomber, it really doesn't matter if it will kill you in 24 hours, you just have to be conscious for 2 or 3 hours after drinking the stuff for the security staff.
- Are there liquid explosives which can be made from a drinkable component (or two or three) and (ewwww) urine?
How far do we go with this?Re:Its not fear mongering (Score:4, Insightful)
As a matter of fact, the immediate goals of radical islam are to take over control of the arab nations, by destroying the pro-west and secular governments.
Osama Bin Laden is on record for his demands against the Saudi government. His primary goal early in his career was to remove the US presence from Saudi Arabia and especially the holy cities of islam.
The Taliban were not planning to attack any western country - they were quite happy running their own, that is what they had always wanted.
The hatred for the west emerged as a secondary goal, because the west kept interfering with those goals. For example, by supporting the secular Iraq during the first gulf war (Iran-Iraq).
Re:Wonderful (Score:5, Funny)
Not if your airplane breaks the time barrier and lands in 1986.
Re:Good work (Score:4, Insightful)
This is Scotland Yard, this is the UK secret services, this is reality. In a few months, if we are lucky, we will know the truth. And it will turn out that a few people had sent each other emails talking about blowing up planes, or some vague threats, nothing more.
I have no confidence in the UK, USA or even the Australian government. I suggest you question everything they do, and all that they report as fact.
There were no WMDs, Jean Charles de Menezes was not a terrorist, Mohammed Abdul Kahar and Abul Koyair were not planning on bombing anybody at all!
Re:Good work (Score:5, Insightful)
If there is actually a fair and public trial, that is. Many people don't realize that the government's interest in detention without trial (or secret trials) for terrorists may have more to do with a desire to manipulate public opinion and cover its own incompetence than with real security concerns.
In an environment where proof isn't necessary and questions are never asked, you can expect a lot of spectacular plots to be uncovered, especially in election years. I'll believe this stuff when it's proven in a court of law.
Re:Good work (Score:5, Insightful)
If someone is killed by a terrorist it is bad, but if an innocent person is killed by the police, it is a lot worse. A society where innocent people are terrified of terrorism has a minor problem. A society where innocent people live in fear of the police has a major problem. Hint: it's because the police is the major social institution with legal backing for use of force, and the terrorists aren't. It's a lot easier to convict a terrorist for killing someone than it is sometimes to even get a fucking apology from the police.
Re:Good work (Score:4, Informative)
In the head. Nine times. Accident, eh?
How about I chase you around, trying to shoot you in the head "by accident", and then we'll see how well you accept my humble apologies...
Re:Good work (Score:4, Insightful)
I have already moved once, I am running out of places that speak english. I also have no reason to think any other government would be any better - governments are just a bunch of people who are ungoverned, by defintion.
I think the best idea would be to stay here for the meanwhile, and try to change things.
Re:Good work (Score:5, Informative)
Now we have a situation where the only hand luggage allowed is medicines, wallets, baby food (must be eaten/tasted by parent in front of security staff), sanitary products (unboxed), etc. Shoes must be removed and X-rayed.
Anything electronic must go in the hold (laptops, cameras, gameboys, etc)
No liquids are allowed on US bound flights, due to tip off that liquid explosives would have been involved.
Full info on restrictions [dft.gov.uk]
Makes you wonder where they'll be trying to hide explosives next. Full body cavity search for all passengers? It's only a matter of time...
Re:Good work (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe they should just face the truth and rename the 'alert level' system to 'scare-the-shit-out-of-the-public-to-push-our-pol
Re:Good work (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Good work (Score:5, Insightful)
course if they didn't raise the alert level and a plain blew up i'm sure people would be yelling just as loud that they didn't do enough to prevent it... just can't make people happy either way.
Re:Good work (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good work (Score:5, Insightful)
Raising the alert level makes good tactical sense. Perhaps you have not thought it out fully.
Let's look at it from the aggressor point of view. They have a plan. This plan includes things like social engineering materials into position, explosives, detonation systems, and other details which have been painstakingly worked out. They have stockpiles of equipment which can be used in an attack. They are merrily moving along toward H-Hour.
Then, along comes Scotland Yard. In one fell swoop, they arrest some percent - let us say, for the sake of argument, 80% - of the people with enough knowledge of the plan and the materials to make the attack happen. They also capture 80% of the materials storage sites.
What is the next thing Scotland Yard will do?
They will perform forensic analysis on the materials and on any computers or plans left lying about. They will reconstruct the plan and the tools to be used in enough detail that detailed information and alerts can be formulated and handed out to sister agencies and airlines. They will gather the information required to track down the remaining 20% of the aggressor forces and materials. They will, in effect, provide the information required to precisely and correctly (if such a thing is possible) set the alert level.
This will take time. The forensic analysts on the computers may need to break encryption. The forensic analysts for the explosives won't be cutting any corners to save time, for the obvious reasons. From the aggressors point of view, there is a narrow window of opportunity - let us say, 24-48 hours - in which it is unlikely law enforcement will know enough details to be there waiting for you.
If you were the aggressor, what would you do in this case? Sit and wait for Scotland Yard to connect your name to the plot and come arrest you, or try to mount what small corner of the attack you can given the remaining available resources?
If you were the defender, what would you expect the aggressor to do? To sit and wait to be arrested? To panic (or not) and try to run? Or to attempt a very probably suicidal attack? Bear in mind that the aggressor profile matters - the IRA is not known for suicide missions, but Islamic terrorism is.
In short, the arrests are a stroke. The appropriate next step for the defender is to expect a counterstroke. Unfortunately, the counterstroke is both most likely and most dangerous right away, when the defender has the least information with which to fine-tune their defensive measures (read, "alert level"). Therefore the appropriate reaction is to raise your defenses, erring on the side of caution even if it means seeming to over-raise the alert level. Even if it gets you criticised by the crucial Slashdot block 8).
Re:Good work (Score:5, Insightful)
Trying to use logic and reason to predict the actions of someone who is willing to blow himself up in a plane full of people is a dangerous game.
Re:Good work (Score:4, Insightful)
Or is all this "they're terrorists, who knows what they were thinking" just an excuse to not have to question what you're doing?
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Good work (Score:5, Insightful)
It is easy to call someone insane if you get to make up the proof yourself. But even then, your proof of "insanity" sure is close to western ideals. Consider all the honor reserved for "fallen heroes" who "gave their lives defending their country." It's the same damn thing, just with an ameliorative spin instead of pejorative.
They have sane goals, but their methods are not. Their methods are cowardly and counterproductive.
Sure. Seems to me their methods work exceptionally well. The response to 9/11 has been to cause self-inflicted economic wounds in the trillions of dollars. The US military doesn't call terrorism "asymmetric warfare" for nothing, its a war and so far we are losing big time. Calling the enemy insane just plays into their hands.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good work (Score:5, Interesting)
The first rule of chess is this:
You're still thinking like a Westerner - you still look at behavior and expect to see behind it, the attempt to gain something or improve one's position.
Let's try thinking about it another way.
Imagine for a moment that you live in a country filled with impoverished people, a country whose only natural resource is owned by foreign corporations and protected by foreign militaries. Recall that your region of the world has been sliced, colonized, re-sliced, and re-colonized by those same foreigners more times than you can count.
Now imagine that every attempt your government has made to carve itself out a small piece of the world's ever-shrinking pie of resources and wealth, has failed miserably, that you are surrounded by poverty and misery everywhere and have absolutely no confidence that your life, or the life of anyone you know and care about, will ever be any better.
Anyone's worst enemy is a person who has nothing left to lose.
There's such a thing as a point of no return, where one's lot is concerned - where you no longer care about your life, or the lives of those you care about, being better - you want only to take mete out justice [or vengeance] to those who made it this way. The saying, "I don't care if I die, so long as I take you with me" applies.
And now examine the actions and behaviors of so many thousands of people and groups in the Middle East. So many have given up hope of life there ever being better, that their only resort is to destruction.
The terrorists are NOT trying to make their lives better, nor get anything in return for their efforts (claims to the contrary notwithstanding) - from their position, it makes sense simply to inflict as much damage as possible, because there's little else left for them to do.
I am neither advocating nor decrying that belief, state of mind, or behavior. I am only saying that that is what happens to humans who have been oppressed and who have suffered for too long and have no confidence that life will ever be different.
Re:Good work (Score:5, Insightful)
A percentage of the Palestinian suicide bombers do actually fall into the "nothing to lose" category where the prospect of their families being rewarded for their deaths is actually part of their motivation but that does not apply to the majority of the terrorists.
You're still trying to think about this from the point of view of a westerner when you assume that you would only do something suicidal if you had nothing to lose.
Re:Good work (Score:5, Insightful)
no terrorist **in his right mind** would try to put his "sub-plot" into action
I have emphasized the part that may have caused your misunderstanding.
Re:Good work (Score:5, Interesting)
He did exactly that, a trial run...
He was using a contact solution bottle (with liquid explosives) and a casio watch as the detonator. He did a trial run to see if it would work, it did.
His plan was to hit 13 (if i recall correctly) planes at once. It was a bit of dumb luck that the plot was exposed and luckily it was prevented.
Now you are correct no one would try now, but without the new security enforcement + the massive coverage, it is very possible someone would still give it a shot. Also they are not claiming they ABSOLUTELY foiled the plot, maybe the terrorists were gonna try some other method that may not be completely known which could be quite powerful from their perspective. "Even with all the security we still managed to attack..." Look at some of the major terrorist plans, you can stop part of it, or you can stop ALL of it, and that is the most difficult. If part of the people were gonna use xyz explosives disguised in one form, and the other was using explosives disguised as a pair of sunglasses, the plan could quite easily go ahead.
It does seem like the govts are going full disclosure, particularly in the banned items and what is now gonna have to be in the cargo hold, because you cant keep those a secret and still be effective.
So hopefully they manage to get everyone that was going to be involved.
Re:Good work (Score:4, Insightful)
Better for whom? Certainly not me, if those measures are completely ineffectual in that they don't increase actual security, but only the appearance of security. I'm surprised that no terrorists have attacked the ridiculous lines of people waiting to go through security. How are you going to prevent that, have security checkpoints before you can queue for the security checkpoints?
The whole thing is ridiculous. They do things merely to be seen doing something, which is often worse than doing nothing at all.
Re:Good work (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, I dunno, how about all the curtailments of civil liberties they've been pushing since 9/11 in the name of preventing terrorism - things like the ID cards and database (which are pretty much universally agreed to be totally useless against terrorism), biometrics, etc.
Are you so cynical that you don't think they might have an 'alert system' just to alert the public?
If the alert system was actually there to alert the public, it would've gone up _before_ the arrests were made and gone down again a bit after the arrests were made (you know, when the threat has been reduced by arresting a bunch of evil terrorists). As it was, they only bothered to 'alert the public' after the matter, and at that point they put it up to it's highest level even though they said they had no evidence to suggest there would be any further attacks.
Re:Good work (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe. But do you want to tip off the people you're about to arrest that they should really, really think about getting on that small boat they've got hidden on the coast right about now? If you're watching them and they vanish - then you whack up the alert level. As long as you know where they are, there's no need to warn them that you're in a van near to their house with all your cameras and listening gear.
So how come the PM flew out on holiday two days ago?
And how come he's still not back?
I think that the PM's plane will be subject to tighter security checks and a normal flight.
And the same logic applies - if he cancels his holiday because he knows there will be an anti-terror swoop, then you just tipped off the baddies quite well. The whole press corps would want to know what the emergency is going to be, and he won't be able to provide an answer. Which the press will assume means that there's a classified reason, which probably means an imminent terror attack. About which the PM can do absolutely nothing, as he's not involved in the operational aspect.
And I don't see a reason why he should be back already. This only happened in the last few hours, after all. Does he need to return at all? The country is being run by his deputy; the guy ought to be able to run the country (even in a time of a minor emergency) in the absense of Mr Blair.. if he can't, then he's got not business being deputy PM.
Last time, of course, he was "caught" playing golf, and there was a screaming session. But IIRC, there wasn't anything he could have actually done in that case, other than.. not be playing golf. The whole thing was silly.. what was he meant to do? Sit at home, wringing his hands?
In this case, it's in the hands of the relevant authorities. A clear picture won't emerge for quite a few hours yet. Even if the PM was here, all he could say was that he doesn't know much about the operational details yet, and as soon as he's fully briefed, the press will be too.
There isn't a great deal any politician can do right now.
Re:Good work (Score:5, Funny)
Perhaps there aren't enough steps in the scale.
We need 'like, really severe', and 'almost critical -no really!' as well.
Re:Good work (Score:5, Funny)
What we need is a scale that goes all the way up to eleven. You see previously they'd be at level 10 and thinking they need a little bit more but with no where to go ...
Re:Good work (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Good work (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Good work (Score:5, Insightful)
Ever wonder why women take handbags to the bathroom every time?
It's so we won't know if she is on her period. never mind what type/brand sanitary products she uses or when it is being changed etc... Women are more secretive about this stuff than guys are about jerking off. A lot more secretive.
I can just picture the kind of hell that will break louse when they start suggesting "You have to put your Tampax in a clear plastic bag".
Remember that old saying "Hell hath no fury..." ?
Re:Good work (Score:5, Informative)
From http://www.dft.gov.uk/ [dft.gov.uk] - airline security statement.
Also note it's only "sufficient and essential for the flight".
What you do for the several hours people are waiting to get on the flight is anybodys guess.
Note also the bit about having to drink any baby milk - previously held to be only an urban legend http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/milk.htm [snopes.com]. Fiction becomes reality.
completely secure! (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, terrorists don't drink unhealthy substances in the last hours before a suicide attack.
Re:completely secure! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:completely secure! (Score:5, Funny)
Apparently you're not using a very good toothpaste. You wouldn't believe how white my teeth are. (My gums are a little red though.)
Re:completely secure! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Good work (Score:4, Insightful)
The real problem with airport security is that they fear what they don't know, and typically being the low-wage uneducated types they don't know much...
Re:Good work (Score:5, Funny)
Please don't change the subject. We're talking breast milk, not American beer.
Re:Good work (Score:4, Interesting)
I was just chatting with some of my co-workers who are heading out of country soon on business travel about having to check laptops. In our case, the laptops go through an export control process both from the US side and the country we travel too. We're supposed to be in control of the laptops in order to comply with the export license so I wonder how this change in carry on luggage affects export control.
I can't recall the specific Star Trek Voyager episode to link it but what happens when we start finding explosives surgically embedded into the terrorist? If terrorist are already willing to give their lives, they are just as likely to embed the explosive compounds into their body.
Right. (Score:4, Funny)
And the U.S. will have t' do without toothpaste, emulating the dental characteristics that make us in the UK world famous.
I disagree (Was Re:Slashdot's too late to be...) (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Again, probably a non-existent terror plot (Score:5, Informative)
No, [scotsman.com]He [bbc.co.uk] wasn't [timesonline.co.uk] fleeing from the police.
You should really try and get your facts right before you accuse other people.
Re:Again, probably a non-existent terror plot (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I'm sorry I'll have to say this but... (Score:4, Interesting)
In case they are fabricated, it means that there is a group of people with access to power in the country, the likes of people that can do anything to do what is in their and their supporting circle's best interests, no matter what and how it is being done or who gets harmed.
this is way more dangerous than external terrorist threat, which can be avoided with adequate security.
It is much harder to get rid of the 'terrorists' at home.
Re:It was sure this would happen (Score:5, Insightful)
And, given the repeated circumstances in which plots that were "staged up" actually ended up in shredded bodies in London, Madrid, and elsewhere, you don't see people who have actually chosen their flights and are in possesion of actual explosives to be worth stopping?
In this case, I would rather believe the conspiracy theorists -- no sane intelligence agency would wait until the terrorists are about to board the planes.
As you've perhaps noticed, they were not walking up to or sitting down on airplanes at the time. They made the arrests before that stage, but only after they were comfortable with having as many of the people in the cell as possible accounted for. If they'd acted sooner, they may have lost more of the cell. There are thousands of variables at play here, and the number of people in intel and law enforcement that have to coordinate on such a thing (including the ones who have to be ready to capitalize on the international communications and other business that would have immediately erupted the moment this hit the news) is enormous.
Re:Good bye, laptop! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This is how terrorism is fought against (Score:5, Insightful)
You're completely right - this is merely wimpy, pussy-like reactive defence.
We should be out there like real men, pro-actively fighting the terrorist threat... by educating people, improving their quality of life, allowing them self-determination and treating them fairly - that's how you stop terrorism, by taking away its recruits.
Oh, sorry, you meant we should be go stomping into countries which might or might not even support them and blow up or shoot a lot of brown people. I can see how that would stop all the other brown people who weren't terrorists before. And it'll certainly not prompt any of them to become terrorists. Good plan!
Thoughts for the day:
Terrorism's only raw material is recruits.
You can kick over snowmen all day long - they'll keep popping because anyone can make them. However, remove the supply of snow and there will be no more snowmen.
Re:This is how terrorism is fought against (Score:4, Insightful)
Not entirely true. Western culture is a very seductive culture- lots of people want to partake in it. We have the coolest gadgets, we have flashy, entertaining movies, we have catchy pop songs, and we even occasionally have decent food. Our popular culture indulges in a good bit of hedonism as well.
This pisses off those who would impose islamic rule to no end- given the choice, most people choose to partake in Western society at some level, and leave the trappings of Islam alone.
The troubles are admittedly all tied in with Oil, but not in the way popularly believed. The west needs oil- no argument. We can find it in the middle east- no argument. Western companies make deals with whoever is in power to extract this oil. The deal? A steady income for those in power. What do they do with it?
Partially at least they buy and import western gadgets and culture. What else would they do with it in the middle east? This culture that they import is at quite often completely at odds with Islamic practices and theology, but it's wanted by the people themselves.
This creates a problem for those who want to impose Islamic rule, and also creates a good deal of Shame for the same people, because they are incapable of producing anything as desirable as the west gladly sells to anyone.
Re:After reading the dreck on here (Score:4, Insightful)
1) 1979 Iranian hostage affair
2) 1983 U.S Embassy bombing in Beruit
These were the beginnings of Middle East terrorist organizations specifically targetting the U.S. You can try to blame it on the U.S meddling in Mid-east affairs, but that is a cover-up for the real reason. The fact is, Islam has not progressed beyond the time of the Crusades and anyone who does not follow Islam must be converted or killed. Yes, there was a time that Christianity followed a similar precept, but they finally moved on. Unfortunately, there is no way to win against this type of belief except by killing them all.
I hate to break it to you Bush-haters, but the only thing Kerry could have done to change things is establish Islam as the new national religion of the U.S. You people need to get your heads out of the political trash heap and realize that none of this is about what we've done -- it's about who we are. These people don't care about your political leanings except as a tool to build sympathy for the devil. They would just as soon see you lying dead next to W.
THAT is the reality we face.
Re:Threat Level? (Score:4, Funny)
Tuesday: The thread level has been raised to level 12.
Wednesday: The thread level has been raised to level 25.
Thursday: The thread level has been raised to level 148.
Friday: The thread level has become a super-sayan.
Re:Hmm. (Score:4, Insightful)
Spoken like a true American. We tend to forget pretty quickly. Umm... remember this [washingtonpost.com] from October? Probably not. In fact, I couldn't remember any of the specific plots we foiled, other than Richard Reid (if we can even count the Brits acting on US intel as a win for us).
I think its more a cultural difference, though. American journalists like panic! blood! chaos! I bet you might remember the UNC student who ran down some of his fellow students, or the Muslim fellow in Seattle that shot 6 people (including a pregnant woman) attending synagogue, or the other guy that shot up El Al... Notice that we are enemy #2 (sandwiched between Israel and the UK), but of these, we've had the fewest terrorist acts in our country since 9/11. That means we are stopping attacks. The reason we only hear about failures and not successes is that our media doesn't report when our side wins, they only report catastrophes (I recommend Michael Crichton's State of Fear -- it's well researched and covers this and quite a few other topics).
that is silly (Score:5, Interesting)
I think you could make an explosive that is not a fast poison. If it is foul-tasting and you make a funny face, oh well... people do that with baby formula and saved breast milk too.
Basically: suspend a powdered high-explosive in something thick and colorless, like glycerin. (a powdered oxidizer should work well too, but I can't think of one that wouldn't be a fast-acting poison)
Sheesh... how hard is that?
Probably you could make an explosive mouse pad or keyboard rest.
Re:Election Time? convenient (Score:4, Interesting)
Has it ever occurred to you that election time is exactly when these clowns would deliberately seek to launch such an attack? Have you completely forgotten how Al Qaeda directly, and in their own favor, manipulated Spanish elections by being willing to slaughter Spaniards?
Re:Where's the logic in attacking planes? (Score:4, Insightful)
Higher kill ratio.
Spectacular.
Passengers on a plane tend to be more affulent.
The monetary loss of the plane itself is very high.
Disrupts air travel leading to wider economic perturbations.
I guess that is why they are after planes. But also they go for busses and trains and nightclubs.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I would LOVE to see carry-on luggage banned (Score:4, Funny)
Terrorist A: Praise Allah! Are you ready to do this?
Terrorist B: God is great! Yes, I'm ready. Bring on the virgins.
Terrorist A: (pours a bottle of green liquid into a large cup) Okay, pour yours in here, too.
Terrorist B:
Terrorist A: What's the matter?
Terrorist B:
Terrorist A: Dammit! You weren't supposed to drink the whole thing!