Terror Plot Foiled

[Kodemaster]

Taken from: http://www.wstm.com/Global/story.asp?S=5263869

Flights coming from Britain to the U.S. are on red alert this morning after security officials foiled a major terrorist plot out of London. Terrorists had targeted United, American and Continental airlines, according to counterterrorism officials. They say they planned to blow up planes using some form of liquid. All beverages, hair gels, and lotions are banned from international and domestic flights. Flights to multiple American cities are on alert. American and United were the planes that were highjacked nearly five years ago on the September 11th terrorist attacks. Homeland Security defines the red alert as designating a "severe risk of terrorist attacks."

Homeland Security officials are expected to make an announcement later this morning. Flights from Britain to the U.S. have been raised to the highest "severe or red" level, and domestic flights are on the orange level. Officials believe dozens of people and as many as 50 were involved or connected to the overseas plot that is unraveling this morning.

[malganis]

Yeah, the public must be afraid 

[thesickmoon]

One more step closer to martial law and total enslavement.

[Arn de Gothia]

Yeah I can't believe that people actually falls for this scam fear mongering

[no_leaf_clover]

Someone with chemical experience has actually posted somewhere online, showing that the alleged explosives would not have worked. For someone to attempt them, they would have to be clueless as to what they were doing. For example, the ingredients would have to be mixed on the plane, and are extremely unstable, boil and quickly heat to extremely high temperatures, and could not be spilled without causing serious injury, etc.

An additional issue that has been raised, is the question of why liquid substances are being combined for security when the combination of the involved chemicals was allegedly the whole mechanism for explosive initiation in the first place.


It really does amount to fearmongering, and pointless security. The said chemicals could, in all likelihood, not be used to create an on board explosive. You would have more of a chance of someone smuggling in thermite (which you COULD NOT DETECT), and eating a hole through the frame of the aircraft. Or setting the plane on fire from the inside, with the in-flight magazines and etc. It's ridiculous.

Unless people fly butt-naked, and are cavity searched, there are always going to be ways to cleverly compromise an aircraft's flight. The real question is, why? How many times does this happen? Many more people die in automobile accidents every year than have died as the result of terrorist attacks in the past 50 years combined in the US, or some figures to that effect. So then why is everyone being disallowed from bringing on trivial items that are much less harmful than things they could never detect, and would be much easier to implement? It's all the hype is just to enfore stricter security.

In 5 five years, everyone may have forgotten this incident, but who's willing to bet that these extra "security" measures will still be in effect? These things are gradual. They wouldn't try to pull a police state on you overnight, as rational citizens would immediately reject it. It has to be built up over time, and this has been going on for decades already. Little events like this, under contexts of bigger threats, like the USSR,or communism, or drugs, or terrorism.

[MisterJingo]

Someone with chemical experience has actually posted somewhere online, showing that the alleged explosives would not have worked. For someone to attempt them, they would have to be clueless as to what they were doing. For example, the ingredients would have to be mixed on the plane, and are extremely unstable, boil and quickly heat to extremely high temperatures, and could not be spilled without causing serious injury, etc.

An additional issue that has been raised, is the question of why liquid substances are being combined for security when the combination of the involved chemicals was allegedly the whole mechanism for explosive initiation in the first place.


It really does amount to fearmongering, and pointless security. The said chemicals could, in all likelihood, not be used to create an on board explosive. You would have more of a chance of someone smuggling in thermite (which you COULD NOT DETECT), and eating a hole through the frame of the aircraft. Or setting the plane on fire from the inside, with the in-flight magazines and etc. It's ridiculous.

Unless people fly butt-naked, and are cavity searched, there are always going to be ways to cleverly compromise an aircraft's flight. The real question is, why? How many times does this happen? Many more people die in automobile accidents every year than have died as the result of terrorist attacks in the past 50 years combined in the US, or some figures to that effect. So then why is everyone being disallowed from bringing on trivial items that are much less harmful than things they could never detect, and would be much easier to implement? It's all the hype is just to enfore stricter security.

In 5 five years, everyone may have forgotten this incident, but who's willing to bet that these extra "security" measures will still be in effect? These things are gradual. They wouldn't try to pull a police state on you overnight, as rational citizens would immediately reject it. It has to be built up over time, and this has been going on for decades already. Little events like this, under contexts of bigger threats, like the USSR,or communism, or drugs, or terrorism.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/17/flying_toilet_terror_labs/

[the_earth_inherit]

Ahhhhh! We're all gonna die! We're all gonna die!

(runs to the polls to vote republican.)