Terror Plot Suspects Planned 'Dry-Run' of Attacks in Next 2 Days, Sources Say

Thursday , August 10, 2006




LONDON — Suspects arrested Thursday for planning to stage a massive mid-air terror attacked were in the final stages of planning and planned to run a dry-run of the plan within two days, U.S. intelligence officers said Thursday.

One official said the suicide attackers planned to use a peroxide-based solution that could ignite when sparked by a camera flash or another electronic device.

The test run was designed to see whether the plotters would be able to smuggle the needed materials aboard the planes, these officials said. They spoke only on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject matter.

The development came as British authorities said they were "urgently" seeking the arrests of up to 10 more suspects in the terrorist plot uncovered early Thursday morning to blow up U.S.-bound flights with liquid explosives carried onto planes via carry-on luggage, FOX News learned.

Police arrested 24 main suspects were arrested earlier Thursday, according to Scotland Yard, in what U.S. officials suspect was an Al Qaeda-planned attack.

French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy said the suspects in an alleged plot to "appear to be of Pakistani origin," and Pakistani intelligence officials say they assisted in the arrests.

Pakistani intelligence officials helped British security agencies crack a terror plot to blow up U.S.-bound aircraft from Britain and arrested two or three suspects in recent days, authorities said Thursday. (Full story)

The intelligence official said an Islamic militant arrested near the Afghan-Pakistan border several weeks ago provided a lead that played a role in "unearthing the plot," that helped authorities arrest suspects in Britain.

President Bush called the plot a "stark reminder" of the continued threat to the United States from extremist Muslims. (Full story)

Britain disclosed no details about the plot or those arrested, although one police official indicated the people in custody were British residents. A French official in contact with British authorities described the arrested as originating from predominantly Muslim Pakistan.

Officials raised security to its highest level in Britain — suggesting a terrorist attack might be imminent — and banned carry-on luggage on all flights. Huge crowds backed up at security barriers at London's Heathrow airport as officials searching for explosives barred nearly every form of liquid outside of baby formula.

U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the terrorists planned to use liquid explosives disguised as beverages and other common products and set them off with detonators disguised as electronic devices.

An American law enforcement official who was briefed on the investigation said it appeared the liquid to be used was a "peroxide-based solution" to be detonated by an electronic device that was not specified, but could be anything from a disposable camera to a portable digital music player. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because British authorities had asked that no information be released.

The extreme measures at a major international aviation hub sent ripples throughout the world. Heathrow was closed to most flights from Europe, and British Airways canceled all its flights between the airport and points in Britain, Europe and Libya. Numerous flights from U.S. cities to Britain were canceled.

Washington raised its threat alert to its highest level for commercial flights from Britain to the United States amid fears the plot had not been completely crushed. The alert for all flights coming or going from the United States was also raised slightly.

Two U.S. counterterrorism officials said the terrorists had targeted United, American and Continental airlines. They spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case.

A U.S. intelligence official said the plotters had hoped to target flights to major airports in New York, Washington and California. A counterterrorism official said the plot involved 10 flights.

British authorities said 24 people were arrested in London, its suburbs and Birmingham following a lengthy investigation, including the alleged "main players" in the plot. Searches continued in a number of locations, and police cordoned off streets in several locations.

Bush said during a visit to Green Bay, Wis., that the foiled plot was a "stark reminder that this nation is at war with Islamic fascists." Despite increased security since Sept. 11, he warned, "It is a mistake to believe there is no threat to the United States of America."

While British officials declined to publicly identify the 24 suspects, French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy said in Paris they "appear to be of Pakistani origin." He did not give a source for his description, but said French officials had been in close contact with British authorities.

Pakistan's government said later its intelligence agents helped Britain crack the plot and had arrested some suspects.

"Pakistan played a very important role in uncovering and breaking this international terrorist network," Foreign Ministry spokesman Tasnim Aslam said, but she declined to give details.

The suspects arrested in Britain were "homegrown," though it was not immediately clear if they were all British citizens, said a British police official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case. Police were working closely with the South Asian community, the official said.

The suicide bombing assault on London subway trains and a bus on July 7, 2005, was carried out by Muslim extremists who grew up in Britain.

The police official said the plotters intended to simultaneously target multiple planes bound for the United States.

"We think this was an extraordinarily serious plot and we are confident that we've prevented an attempt to commit mass murder on an unimaginable scale," Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Stephenson said.

Prime Minister Tony Blair, vacationing in the Caribbean, briefed Bush on the situation Wednesday. Blair issued a statement praising the cooperation between the two countries, saying it "underlines the threat we face and our determination to counter it."

White House spokesman Tony Snow said Bush also had been briefed by his aides while at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, where he has been on vacation.

"We do believe the plot involved flights from the U.K. to the U.S. and was a direct threat to the United States," Snow said.

While Snow called the plot a serious threat, he assured Americans that "it is safe to travel."

Chertoff, the homeland security chief, said the plot had the hallmarks of an operation planned by al-Qaida, the terrorist group behind the Sept. 11 attack on the United States.

"It was sophisticated, it had a lot of members and it was international in scope. It was in some respects suggestive of an al-Qaida plot," Chertoff said, but he cautioned it was too early in the investigation to reach any conclusions.

It is the first time the red alert level in the Homeland Security warning system has been invoked, although there have been brief periods in the past when the orange level was applied. Homeland Security defines the red alert as designating a "severe risk of terrorist attacks."

"We believe that these arrests (in London) have significantly disrupted the threat, but we cannot be sure that the threat has been entirely eliminated or the plot completely thwarted," Chertoff said.

He added, however, there was no indication of current plots within the United States.

Chertoff said the plotters were in the final stages of planning. "We were really getting quite close to the execution phase," he said, adding that it was unclear if the plot was linked to the upcoming fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks.

A senior U.S. counterterrorism official said authorities believe dozens of people — possibly as many as 50 — were involved in the plot. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.

The plan involved airline passengers hiding masked explosives in carry-on luggage, the official said. "They were not yet sitting on an airplane," but were very close to traveling, the official said, calling the plot "the real deal."

Passengers in Britain faced delays as tighter security was hastily enforced at the country's airports and additional measures were put in place for all flights. Laptop computers, mobile phones, digital music players, and remote controls were among the items banned from being carried on board.

Liquids, such as hair care products, were also barred on flights in both Britain and the U.S.

In the mid-1990s, officials foiled a plan by terrorist mastermind Ramzi Youssef to blow up 12 Western jetliners simultaneously over the Pacific. The alleged plot involved improvised bombs using liquid hidden in contact lens solution containers.

Huge lines formed at ticket counters and behind security barriers at Heathrow and other airports in Britain.

Ed Lappen, 55, a businessman from Boston, who was traveling with his wife and daughter to Russia, found himself unable to travel further. "We're safe, we're OK," he said at Heathrow. "Now my daughter is going to get a shopping trip in London."

Hannah Pillinger, 24, seemed less concerned by the announcement. "Eight hours without an iPod, that's the most inconvenient thing," she said, waiting at the Manchester airport.

Most European carriers canceled flights to Heathrow because of the massive delays created after authorities enforced strict new regulations banning most hand baggage.

Tony Douglas, Heathrow's managing director, said the airport hoped to resume normal operations Friday, but passengers would still face delays and a ban on cabin baggage "for the foreseeable future."

Security also was stepped up at train stations serving airports across Britain, said British Transport Police spokeswoman Jan O'Neill. At London's Victoria Station, police patrolled platforms with bomb-sniffing dogs as passengers boarded trains carrying clear plastic bags.

Margaret Gavin, 67, waiting to board a train, said she wasn't scared. "Why should I change my life because some idiots want to blow something up?" she said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,207682,00.html

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/08/10/us.security/index.html

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14278216/?GT1=8404

No more liquids from what I hear except a few such as baby formulal, as it states in the article, and insulin. Better safe than sorry I guess.

Yep,

It sucks, but it is better than another 9-11. We can't prevent it 100 percent, but we can sure do our part.

One thing for sure, a sad day was pervented.


No more liquids from what I hear except a few such as baby formulal, as it states in the article, and insulin. Better safe than sorry I guess.

How about this. You carry nothing on a plane.
If you want baby formula or insulin let the attendants hold it until needed.
If you want feminine products, they're in the bathroom.
If you're bringing a pocketbook, put it in your luggage.
If you want water, the attendants have plenty.
Etc.....

We'll do this for 6 1/2 months, then it will be rescinded, and a peroxide bomb will eventually blow up a plane.

If you're that paranoid you should stay home.

If you're that paranoid you should stay home.

That's hilarious coming from someone who just suggested that people not be allowed to carry anything onto a plane.

I'm not paranoid, I just think that someone can give up their day planner for 4 hours without whining about it.

I'm not paranoid, I just think that someone can give up their day planner for 4 hours without whining about it.

Or 13. It matters where you're travelling. Like I said before though, it's better safe than sorry, at least IMO

Even better, all passengers on all flights should be required to travel nude. Clothes should also be checked. That should cut down on possible ways to sabotoge a plane.

naked plane rides are no fun without the hot oil...

Even better, all passengers on all flights should be required to travel nude. Clothes should also be checked. That should cut down on possible ways to sabotoge a plane.People could still hide explosives in their body cavities. That would lead to some very unpleasant security checks.

How about this. You carry nothing on a plane.
If you want baby formula or insulin let the attendants hold it until needed.
If you want feminine products, they're in the bathroom.
If you're bringing a pocketbook, put it in your luggage.
If you want water, the attendants have plenty.
Etc.....

We'll do this for 6 1/2 months, then it will be rescinded, and a peroxide bomb will eventually blow up a plane.

Brooks, that is really unworkable. There are people, me being one of them, who have to keep their medications with them. If my medicines are stolen I am up the proverbial shit's creek without a paddle. The same with women carrying purses. Purses are where money is kept and there is no way I would trust my money to the baggage department.

Besides, what's to keep a terrorist from setting off an explosion within the hold from his seat? For your solution to be workable passengers would have to travel on one plane and their luggage on another, non-passenger carrying plane.

The only real solution is much more stringent and effective screening processes and even that can't stop all attacks.

What we need to do is start racially profiling. I know people get up in arms about this subject for understandable reasons, but lets face it - it makes sense. It's not about being racist, it's about dealing with a real threat without having one hand tied behind your back.

The fact is that people who are going to blow up planes are most likely muslim middle eastern origin.

Currently my 2 year old son or an 85 year old grandma from small town USA gets the same level of security check as a muslim middle eastern male. That's nuts - its a complete waste of security resources.

The security procedure should be

- everybody gets the usual security that we had pre 9-11
- if you are middle eastern decent then everything you take on the plane handbaggage or in the hold is reviewed with a fine toothcomb, your bags get opened and every single item is looked at, scanned and bomb sniffed.

Chances are if we do that, security will not be overwhelmed (which lets threats slip thru) and no muslim sucide extremist is going to get a damn thing on a plane. Maybe people subjected to this more stringent security get a compensatory discount. Perhaps if ME origin people submit to a full background check prior they get to skip some of this added security.

People will be upset, but people get upset too when planes blow up and people fall 32,000 feet into the ocean.

One thing for sure, expecting security to be efficient by treating everybody the same and trying to do it all 60 mins before people get on a plane is totally inneficient and will never be a success. If they hadn't have broken up that plot - airport security would never have stopped those guys.

Of course we should use racial profiling. When one particular group is committing the vast majority of the crimes it is only common sense to pay closer attention to members of that group. We should not fail to check people who do not fit the racial profile but most of our attention should be placed on people of Middle Eastern or Indian sub-continent origin. While there are European Moslems who are capable of being terrorists the majority fit the profile of Arab/Afghani/Pakistani people.

It's already in the works and they talked about it on TV yesterday. Apparently, already approved for 2007, there will be a legal government racial profiling program.

Good.

And what do you do when terrorist groups start using white, black or Asian members to carry out their missions (as they already have done)? These people have already shown that they can get past any airport security measures in place. Bypassing racial profiling would be a piece of cake for them.

While you profile those who fit the pattern of terrorists you don't check only them. Racial profiling has to be combined with behavior profiling. If I see a nun with a moustache acting furtively I am not going to assume she has a moustache because she is Sicilian. I am going to check her more closely.

Even better, all passengers on all flights should be required to travel nude.

To quote my favorite talk show host, all passengers should be nude, except for their helmets, because you can't be too safe.

Even better, all passengers on all flights should be required to travel nude.
Unless they're fat. Or ugly. Or older than 25. Or male. Just a thought.

And what do you do when terrorist groups start using white, black or Asian members to carry out their missions (as they already have done)? These people have already shown that they can get past any airport security measures in place. Bypassing racial profiling would be a piece of cake for them.

Chances are these people are not going to be willing to blow themselves up.

Profiling would not be perfect but it's far more perfect than the current system.

The sooner racial profiling kicks into top gear the safer we will be. If people don't like it - tough titty.

Fully agreed.

Yep. We have just learned that all 21 of those arrested had Muslim last names.

No one is saying that we should stop checking Asian People, White People, EXC.

We need to do what works best, and racial profiling will work best.


What we need to do is start racially profiling. I know people get up in arms about this subject for understandable reasons, but lets face it - it makes sense. It's not about being racist, it's about dealing with a real threat without having one hand tied behind your back.

The fact is that people who are going to blow up planes are most likely muslim middle eastern origin.

Currently my 2 year old son or an 85 year old grandma from small town USA gets the same level of security check as a muslim middle eastern male. That's nuts - its a complete waste of security resources.

The security procedure should be

- everybody gets the usual security that we had pre 9-11
- if you are middle eastern decent then everything you take on the plane handbaggage or in the hold is reviewed with a fine toothcomb, your bags get opened and every single item is looked at, scanned and bomb sniffed.

Chances are if we do that, security will not be overwhelmed (which lets threats slip thru) and no muslim sucide extremist is going to get a damn thing on a plane. Maybe people subjected to this more stringent security get a compensatory discount. Perhaps if ME origin people submit to a full background check prior they get to skip some of this added security.

People will be upset, but people get upset too when planes blow up and people fall 32,000 feet into the ocean.

One thing for sure, expecting security to be efficient by treating everybody the same and trying to do it all 60 mins before people get on a plane is totally inneficient and will never be a success. If they hadn't have broken up that plot - airport security would never have stopped those guys.

The current system is about the worst possible system anybody could design. My son flew a few weeks ago - he's 2 and they had him take off his shoes to check for shoe bombs and had the metal detector all over him. That wasted time should be spent spreading out the baggage contents of any ME passenger on a 10 x 10 plastic sheet and looking at every item under a microscope.

1. There are people, me being one of them, who have to keep their medications with them.
2, Purses are where money is kept and there is no way I would trust my money to the baggage department.
3. Besides, what's to keep a terrorist from setting off an explosion within the hold from his seat? For your solution to be workable passengers would have to travel on one plane and their luggage on another, non-passenger carrying plane. 1. I said insulin as an exception. I think we can extrapolate that example to connote all medicine.

2.You can still carry money or passports (or papers) in your pockets. I said I didn't think we should "carry" anything onto a plane.

3. That's like saying if the solution is not 100% then we shouldn't try anything. All we can do is increase our chances of detecting contraband.

What we need to do is start racially profiling.
You racist. Americans should be prepared to die rather than offend.

And what do you do when terrorist groups start using white, black or Asian members to carry out their missions (as they already have done)?
They invested a lot of effort into this latest attempt. If Asians/whites were that available I think they would have used a few for this.

The security procedure should be

- everybody gets the usual security that we had pre 9-11
- if you are middle eastern decent then everything you take on the plane handbaggage or in the hold is reviewed with a fine toothcomb, your bags get opened and every single item is looked at, scanned and bomb sniffed.

Chances are if we do that, security will not be overwhelmed (which lets threats slip thru) and no muslim sucide extremist is going to get a damn thing on a plane. Maybe people subjected to this more stringent security get a compensatory discount. Perhaps if ME origin people submit to a full background check prior they get to skip some of this added security.

I like it. Seriously.

Sounds like a good system.

And what do you do when terrorist groups start using white, black or Asian members to carry out their missions (as they already have done)? These people have already shown that they can get past any airport security measures in place. Bypassing racial profiling would be a piece of cake for them.

Precisely Jester ... in fact, why even get on a plane ... just stand in line at LAX with 300 other people, mix-up the gator-aide, peroxide and mentos and detonate it with your Ipod while it's playing Eve of destruction. Shit, they can even get cheap parking so they can keep the project within budget ... get on Century Blvd., turn south on LaCienega, turn right on 111th St. and parking lot B will be off your starboard bow. $8/day -- can't beat that.

A stay of execution for laptops, Ipods and cell phones. Shampoo still going forward with the death sentence ... just on TV.

... get on Century Blvd., turn north on LaCienega, turn right on 111th St. and parking lot B will be off your starboard bow. $8/day -- can't beat that.

Earth to Dop. Come in Dop..

American's also thought it was a good idea to put Japanese Americans in interment camps..

Damned Democrats!

Chances are these people are not going to be willing to blow themselves up.


Why? Because only people from the middle east are stupid enough to do it?

While you profile those who fit the pattern of terrorists you don't check only them. Racial profiling has to be combined with behavior profiling.

Ok. Behavior profiling by whom? I'm sure you've travelled a great deal more than I have in the past ten years, have you been impressed by the analytical skills of the average TSA worker?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Because the plot involved taking liquid explosives aboard planes in carry-ons, passengers at all U.S. and British airports, and those boarding U.S.-bound flights at other international airports, are banned from taking any liquids onto planes."

(pic)

Sir, I'm going to have to take this bottle of water away from you since it might be a liquid explosive, and I'm going to have to mix it with all of these other bottles of possibly liquid explosive, and I'm going to have to dump them all in this trash can... together. Nevermind that the plot specifically mentions mixing chemicals and/or nitroglycerin... which explodes if handled too roughly.

http://www.xopl.com/blog/2006/08/10/crockofshit.html
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++

They invested a lot of effort into this latest attempt.

How do you know how much effort went into this attempt?

Why? Because only people from the middle east are stupid enough to do it?

Apparently so.

Apparently so.

Forgive me Drew, but that's not "apparent" to me at all. I think it would be very dangerous to fall into that particular trap.

It's not stupidity. It's mindset. Middle Easterners are inculcated with a martydom wish from early childhood. Westerners are not.

It's not stupidity. It's mindset. Middle Easterners are inculcated with a martydom wish from early childhood. Westerners are not.

Right.

Westerners are merely inculcated with the (insane) belief that if they adequately please some invisible Sky Father, they will live forever in Paradise after they die.

BWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!

Forgive me Drew, but that's not "apparent" to me at all. I think it would be very dangerous to fall into that particular trap.

What are you talking about? All the 9-11 plotters were middle eastern origin & so were all the guys in this new plot. All the guys in the subway bombings in Spain were, all the guys in the Jul7th London bombing were. How apparent do you need it to be?

I'm not saying non ME origin people are not capable of such things, but so far, all impacts on western soil were done by people of ME decent. It's radical Islamics that want to blow stuff up here & they tend to be of ME decent. To say it's not apparent seems totally weird to me.

Scrutinizing people wanting to fly that fit that profile makes sense. It'll cause upset no doubt - but so what? we are talking about preventing mass murder in the most efficient way possible. I think what would be a dangerous trap to fall into is trying to be politically correct instead of calling it how it is.

If you think our enemies are all of the same race then you simply don't know enough about them. I guess you've all forgotten about people like Richard Reid, Jose Padilla, and Adam Gadahn. Zacarias Moussaoui also looks more black than Middle Eastern. And members of Abu Sayyaf don't look like any Arabs that I know. These nutjobs come in all different colors.

Yet some will argue that only Arab and South Asian passengers should be subject to extra scrutiny, and that everybody else should only have to go through the minimal security checks that were in place before 9/11. Such an approach is simply dangerous and could get people killed. It's not about political correctness; it's about doing what's necessary to keep people safe.

On a separate point, what is the big deal about going through airport security? Is taking your shoes off or waiting in line for a little longer that big of a hassle? People will complain about such little things, and yet have no problem with others going through even greater inconveniences and delays, along with likely embarrassment and harrassment.

They invested a lot of effort into this latest attempt. If Asians/whites were that available I think they would have used a few for this.

Friday, Aug. 11, 2006
Muslim Converts Among Named Terror Suspects
Three men who reportedly came to Islam as teens or adults are reportedly among those held in connection with the airline bomb plot
By JUMANA FAROUKY/LONDON

The name Don Stewart-Whyte is an unlikely fit with any racial-profiler's description of your typical Qaeda-inspired terror suspect. Yet, Stewart-Whyte, aka Abdul Waheed, who is believed to be either 19 or 21 and to have converted to Islam within the past year after what some neighbors describe as a troubled adolescence, has been reported by the British media as one of the 24 people arrested in connection with a plot to blow up U.S.-bound airliners. Nor was he the only convert among the named suspects. Among those on a list of 19 suspects named by the Bank of England on Thursday (which did not include Stewart-Whyte) was Oliver Savant, 25, who now goes by Ibrahim Savant and is reportedly a newlywed and expectant father who converted around 8 years ago. The list also included Umar Islam, 28, who was reportedly born Brian Young. It was released by the Bank in a routine step announcing the freezing of their assets following their arrest under Britain's Terrorism Act.
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1225687,00.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now I'm guessing that people with names like Don Stewart-Whyte, Oliver Savant and Brian Young are not of Middle Eastern or South Asian descent. The article also mentions that one of the July 7 London bombers was Jamaican-born. It's clear that these terrorist groups do not discriminate based on race.

Again, I'm not arguing for the sake of political correctness but for an accurate assessment of our enemies.

What are you talking about? All the 9-11 plotters were middle eastern origin & so were all the guys in this new plot. All the guys in the subway bombings in Spain were, all the guys in the Jul7th London bombing were. How apparent do you need it to be?

There's Jester's examples and don't forget Mohammed Atta was an Egyptian. I believe that makes him an African, not a Middle Easterner.


I'm not saying non ME origin people are not capable of such things, but so far, all impacts on western soil were done by people of ME decent.

Like Timothy McVeigh?


It's radical Islamics that want to blow stuff up here & they tend to be of ME decent. To say it's not apparent seems totally weird to me.

Seems weird to me that you say it is apparent.


I think what would be a dangerous trap to fall into is trying to be politically correct instead of calling it how it is.

This has nothing to do with being PC Drew, that's a tired argument and it's beneath you.

The politically correct view that we shouldn't use racial profiling is a form of suicide. When the vast majority of malefactors are members of one particular group it only makes sense to profile that group. That does not mean, as some of our politically correct posters suggest that we ignore those who do not fit the racial profile. Racial profiling must be combined with behavioral profiling and with a continued use of random checks.

Yes, a few perpetrators do not fit the racial profile but the vast majority do and to say we should ignore that fact in the name of political correctness is the height of stupidity.

Yes, a few perpetrators do not fit the racial profile but the vast majority do...

I'm not interested in only being safe from the "vast majority".


...and to say we should ignore that fact in the name of political correctness is the height of stupidity.

No, the height of stupidity is not reading what other people post and slapping ridiculous labels on their motives out of ignorance, or personal bias.

There's Jester's examples and don't forget Mohammed Atta was an Egyptian. I believe that makes him an African, not a Middle Easterner.

I also believe that would make it very easy to see from his passport that he fell into the profile group

Like Timothy McVeigh? He wasn't a suicide bomber & he didn't blow up any planes.

This has nothing to do with being PC Drew, that's a tired argument and it's beneath you. To the contrary - it's an argument that makes absolute and perfect sense.

I also believe that would make it very easy to see from his passport that he fell into the profile group

Perhaps, but it does show you don't have to be from the ME.


He wasn't a suicide bomber & he didn't blow up any planes.

Sorry Drew, I thought we were talking about terrorism in general, not just suicide bombers who blow up planes. If that's the case then please refrain from mentioning the London or Madrid bombings as examples to support your views.


To the contrary - it's an argument that makes absolute and perfect sense.

I'm sorry Drew, but you're not qualified to speak about my motives for distrusting racial profiling as an efficient anti-terrorism method.

On the other hand, I think it's a good bet that you aren't supporting it because you think it will make us safer, I think you just hate Arabs. See how that works?

Racial profiling would have stopped this one dead in it's tracks (if done correctly)

Cross-posting from another thread I said ...

20 arabs booking flights on 2-3 day notice at top dollar (peek season) to the same destination at the same time would surely throw up a couple of flags.

Or so it seems.

Yet some will argue that only Arab and South Asian passengers should be subject to extra scrutiny, and that everybody else should only have to go through the minimal security checks that were in place before 9/11. Such an approach is simply dangerous and could get people killed. It's not about political correctness; it's about doing what's necessary to keep people safe.

I don't know that I've ever heard that argument. Greater scrutiny for a particular group does not mean no or minimal scrutiny for other groups.

On a separate point, what is the big deal about going through airport security? Is taking your shoes off or waiting in line for a little longer that big of a hassle? People will complain about such little things, and yet have no problem with others going through even greater inconveniences and delays, along with likely embarrassment and harrassment.

Is it a big deal? No, not really, but people complain about it (as do I) because it has little to do with making us safer and more to do with trying to look like they're really accomplishing something. The other problem I have with a lot of the security procedures is that they're always trying to stop the last attack (such as a shoe bomb) and never really trying to think what might happen next. No one has thought about a hat bomb?

You know what you can do with your phony high dudgeon, Vilepagan. Your arguement is a politically correct arguement and we both know it.

You know what you can do with your phony high dudgeon, Vilepagan. Your arguement is a politically correct arguement and we both know it.

Sure Frogger, just as we know you're just a bigot. :rolleyes:

You seem to know so much Vilepagan. Actually, you know as much about me as you know about Darwinian evolution, which is to say, nada.

Perhaps, but it does show you don't have to be from the ME. Not really, I would consider Egypt to be part of the profile. Pakistan is not in the ME and that is certainly part of the profile.

Sorry Drew, I thought we were talking about terrorism in general, not just suicide bombers who blow up planes. If that's the case then please refrain from mentioning the London or Madrid bombings as examples to support your views. Timothy McVie cannot be compared to radical Islamic terrorists. There will always be a risk of TMcV types - but the risk of them is very very low. On the other hand Islamic terrorists make no bones about their intents.

I'm sorry Drew, but you're not qualified to speak about my motives for distrusting racial profiling as an efficient anti-terrorism method. I'm not aware that I did make any mention of your motives apart from saying being PC isn't a very good reason. There is no system that is perfect, but it's hard to question that profiling wouldn't be an improvement. So far you haven't given a single reason why it wouldn't be an improvement & why it doesn't make sense.

On the other hand, I think it's a good bet that you aren't supporting it because you think it will make us safer, I think you just hate Arabs. See how that works? No, I don't see how that works. You can think what you want, but my interest is making us safer.

You seem to know so much Vilepagan. Actually, you know as much about me as you know about Darwinian evolution, which is to say, nada.

Yet somehow you know I'm motivated by wanting to be politically correct. Hypocrite.

I'm not aware that I did make any mention of your motives apart from saying being PC isn't a very good reason.

Ok. My apologies if I saw an implication that was unintended on your part.


There is no system that is perfect, but it's hard to question that profiling wouldn't be an improvement. So far you haven't given a single reason why it wouldn't be an improvement & why it doesn't make sense.

Considering the deplorable state of our security screening process it's likely that almost any change would be an improvement, but I don't think we have the neccessary tools in place to adequately profile people. Someone here even suggested we should profile people based on their behavior, and while that would be good, it would only work efficiently if their were highly trained individuals available to do so.


No, I don't see how that works. You can think what you want, but my interest is making us safer.

I have no doubt that's true Drew, and I don't question your motives. There are others here who believe their powers of mind-reading are up to the task however, and it pleases them to ascribe motives to others that don't exist in order to ridicule them. Again, my apologies for assuming you were doing so.

Cities are donating items taken from passengers. Also, placing some items on ebay. WTF?

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/08/how-can-they-give-confiscated-airport.html

Hypocrite.Uh-oh.

:ducks and covers under desk:

I would like to see some proof of your claim.

Sure Frogger, just as we know you're just a bigot. :rolleyes:

I would like to see some proof of your claim.

Frogger from the "Who were the four nations..." thread in the History forum.

"Vilepagan, I could be like some others and hide my true feelings. I choose to not do so. I have disliked the French ever since the time I visited their country. In the intervening years I have seen nothing in the French as a people and as a nation to make me change my mind."

To be frank sisko, I don't really think Frogger's a bigot at heart, I just think he occasionally posts regrettable comments out of anger or frustartion. That's why I put the :rolleyes: after my post. The point I was trying to make was that Frogger labels my argument "politically correct" in a feeble attempt to ridicule me, even though I have posted nothing about what my motives are. He on the other hand has posted unambiguously bigoted remarks, so I just treated him with same disrespect he treted me, and questioned his motives, but unlike him I can provide evidence to make my case.

Let's compare two airline passengers at an airport. One is a middle-aged, brown-skinned male travelling with his wife and kids. He has two pieces of checked-in luggage and a roundtrip ticket. The other is a young, white male, travelling alone on a one-way ticket with just a backpack. Neither of them have Muslim-sounding names.
Should either of these passengers be given extra scrutiny by airport security? If so, which one? Or should it be both of them?
And if a system of racial profiling was instituted, which one do you think the average TSA worker would stop and give extra scrutiny to?

Obviously a system of profiling would be designed to make sense. There could be a scoring system that determines the level of security checks. Racial profiling would be one aspect, obviously return ticket travelling with kids would improve the score, one way ticket travelling alone would degrade the score.

Profiling makes sense, I fail to see how anybody could say it doesn't. A 2 year old child is very low risk, a middle eastern / subcontinent male is much higher risk. Treating them both the same is incredibly stupid unless you expect people to wait 5 hours to get on a plane and you have 10x more security staff than you should really need. No system is ever going to be foolproof, because we are talking about managing risk, not eliminating risk, but profiling would be a dramatic improvement, offering a valid cost vs benefit in managing a risk that is already inherently low. The risk is low, but the severity is huge => The hardest combination of risk vs severity to mitigate.

No system is ever going to be foolproof, because we are talking about managing risk, not eliminating risk, which is exactly why the root causes of terrorism deserved to be looked at, because we will never be "safe". But far be it from me to call for an and to mass murder...that would be pandering to the terrorists that don't control governments....

which is exactly why the root causes of terrorism deserved to be looked at, because we will never be "safe". But far be it from me to call for an and to mass murder...that would be pandering to the terrorists that don't control governments....

I agree with you, of course the root causes should be addressed, but being weak & pandering to terrorists is not addressing the root cause. You act like their actions are all our fault.

Obviously a system of profiling would be designed to make sense. There could be a scoring system that determines the level of security checks. Racial profiling would be one aspect, obviously return ticket travelling with kids would improve the score, one way ticket travelling alone would degrade the score.Well now you're starting to make sense. I don't deny that race is one indicator of a potential threat; I'm just saying that it's not the best, the most effective, or the only indicator. Other factors are just as important in assessing the risk a passenger poses. Which leads me to wonder why other forms of profiling aren't advocated as vehemently as racial profiling is.

Well now you're starting to make sense. I don't deny that race is one indicator of a potential threat; I'm just saying that it's not the best, the most effective, or the only indicator. Other factors are just as important in assessing the risk a passenger poses. Which leads me to wonder why other forms of profiling aren't advocated as vehemently as racial profiling is.

Excellent post Jester.

Ok. Behavior profiling by whom? I'm sure you've travelled a great deal more than I have in the past ten years, have you been impressed by the analytical skills of the average TSA worker?No matter how fanatical and devoted one of these jihadists is to his cause, his behavior will have certain characteristics on the day of his suicide. I heard an expert say that by asking a few questions and studying his response, nervousness and studying his demeanor will give away any would be suicide bomber.
Since they can each only do it once, no amount of dry runs can ever fully prepare them for the actual event.

Well now you're starting to make sense. I don't deny that race is one indicator of a potential threat; I'm just saying that it's not the best, the most effective, or the only indicator. Other factors are just as important in assessing the risk a passenger poses. Which leads me to wonder why other forms of profiling aren't advocated as vehemently as racial profiling is.
Fully agreed, but racial profiling should place a larger weight on the screening process given similar flight scenarios. For example, a middle-aged Polish woman traveling on a one-way ticket with carry on baggage would definitely take a back seat to security checking a swarthy middle-aged man doing the same thing. It's pure logic.

Now I'm guessing that people with names like Don Stewart-Whyte, Oliver Savant and Brian Young are not of Middle Eastern or South Asian descent. Agreed. And based on my narrow statement, I guess you're right this time.
But realistically I don't think this country will stand for extra scrutiny for every single traveller, so we can only play percentages. Believe me, I would love it if every passenger got a background check and cavity search, but it's not going to happen. And the same people who would be against that, would also be against profiling.
It really has to be one or the other.

which is exactly why the root causes of terrorism deserved to be looked at, because we will never be "safe".
That's a nice thought, and it may actually work someday.
But in the meantime people are getting on planes today.

How do you know how much effort went into this attempt?
Please clarify. Do you think there wouldn't a lot of effort to blow up ten planes using multiple cells, chemicals, passports, dry runs etc., or do you think this plot never really existed"

Homeland Security sat on liquid explosive detection system for 7 months ...

http://jabbs.blogspot.com/2006/08/in-latest-example-of-incompetence-dhs.html

Talk about incompetent.

I agree with you, of course the root causes should be addressed, but being weak and pandering to terrorists is not addressing the root cause.
I suggested to you a little while ago to start a THREAD as to why "Terrorism or Guerrilla" exist, lets do some research and start one, the weight of the facts, and the reasonable arguments pro or against our views might help to understand them.

The US first became aware of this plan about twelve years ago (that's 6 years for Bush and 6 years for Clinton, so we can be bipartisan on this one). No one did anything about it.

The peroxide required is not what you buy at the drugstore (3% strength). The best peroxide to use is 100% concentration. It's dangerous and can only be bought industrially.

After knowing about this plot, how is anyone in the world able to acquire it?

After knowing about this plot, how is anyone in the world able to acquire it?Manufacture

Hydrogen peroxide is manufactured today almost exclusively by the autoxidation of 2-ethyl-9,10-dihydroxyanthracene to 2-ethylanthraquinone and hydrogen peroxide using oxygen from the air. The anthraquinone derivative is then extracted out and reduced back to the dihydroxy compound using hydrogen gas in the presence of a metal catalyst. The overall equation for the process is deceptively simple:

H2 + O2 → H2O2

However the economics of the process depend on effective recycling of the quinone and extraction solvents, and of the hydrogenation catalyst.

Formerly inorganic processes were used, employing the electrolysis of an aqueous solution of sulfuric acid or acidic ammonium bisulfate (NH4HSO4), followed by hydrolysis of the peroxydisulfate ((SO4)2)2− which is formed.

In 1994, world production of H2O2 was around 1.9 million tonnes, most of which was at a concentration of 70% or less. In that year bulk 30% H2O2 sold for around US $0.54 per kg, equivalent to US $1.50 per kg (US $0.68 per lb) on a "100% basis".

Concentration

Hydrogen peroxide works best as a propellant in extremely high concentrations. However, there are very few suppliers of high-purity hydrogen peroxide, and they are averse to selling to any but the largest institutions. As a result, amateurs wishing to use this for rocket fuel usually have to purchase 70% or lower-purity (most of the remaining 30% is water, and sometimes there are traces of stabilizing materials, such as tin), and increase its concentration themselves. Many try distillation, but this is extremely dangerous with hydrogen peroxide; peroxide vapour can detonate at a temperature of about 70 °C (158 °F). A safer approach is sparging, possibly followed by fractional freezing, but, even when using this method, contaminants may still often cause explosions.

In the 1950s, high-test peroxide was more readily available, but because of safety concerns bulk manufacturers have since switched over to handling lower concentrations of H2O2 whenever possible. Some amateur groups have expressed interest in manufacturing their own peroxide, for their use and for sale in small quantities to others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_peroxide#Manufacture

I agree with you, of course the root causes should be addressed, but being weak and pandering to terrorists is not addressing the root cause. If not "being weak and pandering to terrorists" means commiting the mass murder of innocent civilians then there is a severe conflict of ideas on solutions and causes of terrorism.

If not "being weak and pandering to terrorists" means commiting the mass murder of innocent civilians then there is a severe conflict of ideas on solutions and causes of terrorism.

You have it wrong - it's the terrorists that have the aim of committing mass murder of innocent civilians. Repeat that 5 times each day and maybe it will eventually sink in.

What does bought industrially mean?

You're right. I guess the adverb industrially, in this case, is describing a way of purchasing. Doesn't make sense really.

I agree with you, of course the root causes should be addressed, but being weak and pandering to terrorists is not addressing the root cause.


No group of terrorists on earth are "pandered to" to a greater degree than the nation of Israel. They are supplied billions of US taxdollars yearly so they can terrorize the neighboring ME countries into submission.

The Neo-Con agenda, clearly, is to supply Israel with the weaponry to make them the pit bull of the Middle East. Then too, the Conservative faction uses its ownership and control of the mainstream U.S. Media to keep Americans blinded to the genocide Israel is carrying out.

Prior to 1948, the US was not an enemy of a single Arab nation.

http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/08/the_uk_terror_p.html

Wednesday, August 16, 2006
The Alleged UK Terror Plot

16 Aug 2006 09:58 am

So far, no one has been charged in the alleged terror plot to blow up several airplanes across the Atlantic. No evidence has been produced supporting the contention that such a plot was indeed imminent. Forgive me if my skepticism just ratcheted up a little notch. Under a law that the Tories helped weaken, the suspects can be held without charges for up to 28 days. Those days are ticking by. Remember: the British authorities had all these people under surveillance; they did not want to act last week; there was no imminent threat of anything but a possible "dummy-run," whatever deranged guest-bloggers at Malkin say. (Correction, please.) Bush and Blair discussed whether to throw Britain's airports into chaos over the weekend before the crackdown occurred.

Then we have the following comment from Craig Murray. Craig Murray was Tony Blair's ambassador to Uzbekistan whose internal memo complaining about evidence procured by out-sourced torture created a flap a while back. He is skeptical:

None of the alleged terrorists had made a bomb. None had bought a plane ticket. Many did not even have passports, which given the efficiency of the UK Passport Agency would mean they couldn't be a plane bomber for quite some time.

In the absence of bombs and airline tickets, and in many cases passports, it could be pretty difficult to convince a jury beyond reasonable doubt that individuals intended to go through with suicide bombings, whatever rash stuff they may have bragged in internet chat rooms.

What is more, many of those arrested had been under surveillance for over a year - like thousands of other British Muslims. And not just Muslims. Like me. Nothing from that surveillance had indicated the need for early arrests.

Then an interrogation in Pakistan revealed the details of this amazing plot to blow up multiple planes - which, rather extraordinarily, had not turned up in a year of surveillance. Of course, the interrogators of the Pakistani dictator have their ways of making people sing like canaries. As I witnessed in Uzbekistan, you can get the most extraordinary information this way. Trouble is it always tends to give the interrogators all they might want, and more, in a desperate effort to stop or avert torture. What it doesn't give is the truth ...

We then have the extraordinary question of Bush and Blair discussing the possible arrests over the weekend. Why?

I'd be interested in the number of plotters who had passports. How could they even stage a dummy-run with no passports? And what bomb-making materials did they actually have? These seem like legitimate questions to me; the British authorities have produced no evidence so far. If the only evidence they have was from torturing someone in Pakistan, then they have nothing that can stand up in anything like a court. I wonder if this story is going to get more interesting. I wonder if Lieberman's defeat, the resilience of Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the emergence of a Hezbollah-style government in Iraq had any bearing on the decision by Bush and Blair to pre-empt the British police and order this alleged plot disabled. I wish I didn't find these questions popping into my head. But the alternative is to trust the Bush administration.

Been there. Done that. Learned my lesson. ---------http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/08/the_uk_terror_p.html