UK counter-terrorism op foils aircraft explosion plot

by **Et in Arcadia ego** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 4:39 am

And by the way, since I'm overtly indulging my extreme disgust in this whole thing, can someone here tell me how these terrists planned to execute a 'dry run'? "Terrorists in liquid-explosives plot were planning dry run, U.S. government sources say" Does that mean, like, they were gonna blow themselves up without a plane, or ride a plane without blowing it up, or what?  WTF? ____________________ Some are born to sweet delight, some are born to endless night.

by **Gouda** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 7:15 am

Reports of money being wired from Pakistan, again. Would that be a SWIFT transaction, or one cleared by Clearstream? Why, you'd think the wire-ers would be more careful about that since everyone knows international bank transfers are being monitored. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Two of the suspects recently traveled to Pakistan and later received money wired from there, senior U.S. government sources said.<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/08/11/terror.plot/index.html">CNN Link</a> HMKGrey say: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>And, yes, sounds like Pakistan had better prepare itself for some shock and awe, civil strife, sectarian violence and no electricity for 3 years. Not.<hr></blockquote> Heh heh. Exactly. Rather: <a href="http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/29062006/2/world-u-s-administration-notifies-congress-5-billion-arms-deal.html">Yahoo/AP Link</a> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>U.S. administration notifies Congress of $5 billion US arms deal with Pakistan The Bush administration has notified Congress it has approved the sale of 18 new F-16 fighter jets to Pakistan as part of a $5 billion US weapons deal...as well as logistical and other support was quietly sent to Congress on Wednesday... ...a State Department spokeswoman, Julie Reside, said the two actions are unrelated. "We believe in treating each country individually," Reside said. "Each faces defence issues different from the other." <hr></blockquote> Did congress approve this deal though? I know they were inclined to.

by **blanc** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 7:48 am

empty sports drink bottle obviously

by **Gouda** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 8:09 am

Meanwhile, East of Iran and Foul with Pakistan, another beneficiary of america's corporate-military largesse... <blockquote>Quote:<hr>US embassy warns of [more] terrorist attacks in India NEW DELHI (Reuters) - The U.S. embassy in India has warned American citizens of likely terrorist attacks in or around New Delhi and Mumbai in the run-up to the country's Independence Day celebrations next week, a spokesman said on Friday. "We have urged U.S. citizens to keep a low profile, be alert and attentive to their surroundings," he said. "We have learned that foreign terrorists may carry out attacks in or around New Delhi and Mumbai."<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=newsOne&storyID=2006-08-11T060606Z_01_DEL210439_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-INDIA-USA.xml&WTmodLoc=Home-C1-TopStories-newsOne-1">Reuters</a>

by **snowlion2** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 8:53 am

I have two small children who, when they feel their parent aren't paying enough attention will do something to BE SURE we pay attention. I hope I don't have my tinfoil hat on too tight here, but a day after President Bush is whining in Green Bay that Americans aren't paying enough attention to his "war on terror" ("We’ve taken a lot of measures to protect the American people, but obviously we are still not completely safe…. It is a mistake to believe there is no threat to the United States of America.’’) and things are going less than splendidly in Iraq and elsewhere, an agency that answers directly to him institutes insane and illogical rules about what can and can't be taken on board airplanes assures that everyone is paying attention. Knitting needles and small knives are ok but a bag of Fritos isn't? As of this morning..no food...no beverages. Did Haliburton just get the contract for in-flight coke and peanuts?

by **chiggerbit** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:18 am

So, the US has made a 5 billion dollar deal with Pakistan for Pakistan's defense. Defense from....? India. Yikes, I'll bet India isn't too happy. And I see this morning that the US has warned India of a possible terrorist plan there. Do you think Bush has a clue how this is going to play out in that region?

by **chiggerbit** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:55 am

This writer seems to think that the conflict between the West and Islam will leave both groups in a weakened state, much to the benefit of India and China, if I read this right: clips Part 1 <a href="http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/HG25Aa02.html">www.atimes.com/atimes/Fro...5Aa02.html</a> "....There are today not enough Christians or Muslims in China to push the country in the direction of supporting either the West or Islam in any global conflagration. However, a resurgent West poses more of a threat to China's patriarchal culture, which is not very different from the centralized authority-driven culture of Islam. Given that, it is more likely that China would tilt toward supporting Islam, as its weapons-proliferation efforts over the past few years have shown. The missile used by Hezbollah this month to sink an Israeli ship was an Iranian variant of a Chinese Silkworm; similar ancestries can be established for many of the medium- and long-range weapons currently in the hands of Islamic tyrants. It is also noteworthy that the only working nuclear weapons in the Islamic world belong to Pakistan, and are almost entirely reverse-engineered from actual Chinese bombs. This leads me to conclude that an escalation of the conflict in the Middle East would eventually necessitate the West to demand adequate support from China, failing which the country itself could become a target. The waxworks of Beijing are likely to grant enough concessions to the West to avoid being attacked, and then lie in wait for their revenge. The Indian situation is more precarious. While much of the country's right-wing intelligentsia would push it to war against Islam, there is enough of a fifth column in place to thwart the country's historic quest for vengeance. India's Muslims number more than any other country's in the world with the exception of Indonesia. Add to these the populations of both Pakistan and Bangladesh, and Indian military might is in essence boxed in. Neither the Indian air force nor the army can offer much assistance to the West. The only aspect of Indian military that the West may benefit from is also its least developed one, namely the Indian navy. I do not see the likelihood of India playing any role in a direct confrontation between Islam and the West, and therefore it is more likely that it sits on the sidelines waiting for the West to do its job. " Part 2 <a href="http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/HG26Aa01.html">www.atimes.com/atimes/Fro...6Aa01.html</a> ".....Assuming that the US does attack Iranian facilities, how does the progress to an all-out war between Islam and the West take place? We have to recognize that no established Islamic power has the ability to strike outside of its immediate border. The armed forces of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran have no capacity to inflict meaningful harm on the West. The sole exception is Pakistan, which is why the global terrorist brotherhood will probably focus more of its attention on this country than any other in the next few months. The key strategic aim here would be to secure a working nuclear weapon. Sensing an opportunity to unite against greater enemies, we have seen in July cooperation not only between Hamas and Hezbollah, but also potentially with bin Laden, if the recent train bomb attacks that killed almost 200 in India were orchestrated by al-Qaeda as is being claimed. It appears more than a coincidence that both Israel and India were attacked at the same time - I expect that moves to drag Pakistan into outright war against the West are already under way. Perverse logic Pakistan is ruled by President General Pervez Musharraf, who is focused almost exclusively on his own survival. Casting his tent with the West after September 11, 2001, was a stroke of genius that immediately opened up Western coffers that had been unavailable since the country's nuclear tests in 1998. Still, keeping local militants on his side has involved the obvious barter of border peace with India, in other words by leaving the Kashmir issue unresolved. This serves as a rallying call for the faithful, and to the extent that disaffected youth plan carnage in India rather than in Karachi, the general is left with breathing room. In return for letting them operate, it appears the terrorists promised to keep a relatively low profile until the end of this year - that is, after the US elections in November. However, I believe that the plan has backfired. Just as Syria failed to show much control over Hezbollah, Pakistan has lost control of its militants, who now appear to work directly with al-Qaeda command structures. The turning point could well have been the Pakistani army attacks in the Pashtun areas that were undertaken to keep the US happy in its "war on terror". Disenchanted that the Pakistani army could kill its own creations, Kashmiri militants appear to have bypassed the army, going straight to the Taliban and perhaps even to bin Laden. This explains the attacks on both Srinagar (grenade explosions that killed nine) and Mumbai on the same day, a move that seems to have caught even the Pakistani army by surprise, if its state of readiness in the days preceding the attacks is any indication. A continuation of such attacks on Indian targets will embarrass the Pakistani army, while any ham-fisted attempts to collar the terrorists will likely backfire in a similar way the conflict in Waziristan did. (The conflict began in 2004 when the Pakistani army began its search for al-Qaeda in the mountainous Waziristan tribal areas.) The Pakistani army will find soon that the costs of keeping Musharraf in power outweigh the benefits, particularly if no arms supplies materialize from the US. At that juncture, and disguised as a coup, there is every chance that a nuclear weapon will go missing. This weapon will be to World War III what Serbian nationalist Gavrilo Princip was to World War I. ...." Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=chiggerbit@rigorousintuition>chiggerbit</A> at: 8/11/06 9:57 am

by **Byrne** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:21 pm

Doesn’t make sense….. & this, From <a href="http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1149482006" target="top">news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1149482006</a> Flight turned around after 'terrorist' passenger spotted A FLIGHT from London to Boston was turned around after the crew realised a suspected terrorist was on board. United States authorities realised the man was on their no-fly list - a list of suspected terrorists - and recalled the American Airlines Boeing 777 to Heathrow Airport. Four passengers - the man and three women, believed to be his wife and sisters - were then escorted off the plane by security staff. An American Airlines spokesman said: "The flight returned to Heathrow due to a security issue that needed to be resolved in London. "It was not a security threat to the aircraft. The flight was in no danger." One passenger said: "They [security officials] pointed to this gentleman, and they escorted him off. There were three women with him. They escorted them off. It was very quiet, very peaceful." Phil Orlandella, a spokesman for the Massachusetts Port Authority, which runs Boston's Logan Airport, said staff were told at a meeting yesterday morning that the name of a passenger on the flight matched one on the no-fly list. He had no further information. The four were held for questioning on their arrival in the UK.

by **chiggerbit** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:27 pm

Well, let's face it, being on a no-fly list does not make one a terrorist.

by **nomo** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:55 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>"Terrorists in liquid-explosives plot were planning dry run, U.S. government sources say" Does that mean, like, they were gonna blow themselves up without a plane, or ride a plane without blowing it up, or what?<hr></blockquote> I'm guessing they were trying to get on a plane with a bottle of shampoo and an iPod in their carry-on. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/eyes.gif ALT=":rolleyes">

by **StarmanSkye** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 2:00 pm

"So, if the plot was foiled, why was the terror alert raised?" Damn-straight, bang-on Sunny. (Would make a GREAT parapolitical t-shirt; Perhaps, the message on one side, and on the another, 'Report Suspicious Thoughts to Your Officials.' or: 'Support Your Local Homeland Security Terror Experts.') Paraphrase 'reply' re: Why was terror alert raised by the so-called Security 'experts'?: "Dere wuz a coupla bad-guys we, uh, lost track of (even tho the UK and Pakistan had been 'monitoring' and keeping track of these presumed 'plotters' for the past 2+ months, and the US was well-briefed & providing communication intercepts -- so they should have had this 'situation' well and thoroughly in-hand -- IF this was a real deal), and they coulda gone-ahead with the plot on their own, or a back-up plan -- we just didn't KNOW." SO: Having all air-travelers throw their potentially explosive products into large, common cans -- THAT was being 'safe' and prudent? Cripes, hearing Bush and the blathering-idiot talking heads going-on about how we're 'safer' today than before 9/11 while at the same time the danger is greater and we're at more risk -- Do they think the public is SO braindead most folks won't say, "Wait a minnut -- how can we be safer if the risk is higher?" (Mebbe they're right -- why DON'T more people see how transparently illogical and manipulative and contradictory this 'message' is?) <roll eyes> (Ha-ha-ha-ha, so it tragifarcically goes ...) Starman ***** Craig Murray was the British Ambassador to Uzbekistan. He was hounded from office after he blew the whistle about the fact that there were no actual Islamic terrorists in Uzbekistan. His investigations showed that the alleged terrorists were merely innocent local Muslim people who were being systematically tortured into signing false confessions. These confessions were then gleefully received by the US and the UK despite the fact they knew them to be false. For these and other favours from the Uzbek dictatorship the US paid a lot of money and supported the regime. ======== As Britain's outspoken Ambassador to the Central Asian Republic of Uzbekistan, Craig Murray helped expose vicious human rights abuses by the US-funded regime of Islam Karimov. He is now a prominent critic of Western policy in the region. August 10, 2006 www.craigmurray.co.uk Craig Murray on the UK Terror Scare No dead Lebanese children on TV today George Bush is just following John Reid in ensuring any trials following today's arrests are irretrievably prejudiced. It is a fact that only the closest Blair circle bothers to deny, that if young British Muslims are turning to terrorism, it is the Blair-Bush foreign policy of war on Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine that has driven them to it. The majority of British people share their outrage at our foreign policy. That is not to condone the response of irrational violence. Terrorism is plain wrong. But it is Blair who has, through his evangelical embrace of the neo-con foreign agenda, massively increased any current threat of terrorism to the UK. But let us do what none of the 24 hour news channels are doing; draw breath and count up to ten. What has actually happened so far? There have been, reportedly, 21 people arrested. There have been no terrorist attacks, no explosions. US sources are reported as saying that explosive devices have been found, but no news from the Police as yet. I am reminded of the Forest Gate arrests and the notorious "Chemical weapon vest" which was threatening London and required 270 policemen and a four mile air exclusion zone to deal with. The media was shoving that out just as uncritically as it is shoving out this air attack, even though it made no sense. Anyone who knows anything about weapons knows that for a chemical weapon you want maximum dispersal - the last thing you are going to do is wrap it in fabric around a human body. And why the air exclusion zone? Were they going to throw the vest at a passing jet? The media never did ask any of those questions. Similarly, I recall the famous ricin plot, where again police and the professional pundits said millions could have been killed. In the event, of course, it turned out there was no ricin and no plot. And I remember Jean Charles De Menezes, the "suicide bomber", with his "bulky jacket", with "wires sticking out", who "leapt" the ticket barriers and "raced" onto the tube. All lies. So I am waiting with a little healthy scepticism to see the truth of this "al-Qaida plot" bringing "Mass murder on an unprecedented scale". Of course, it helps New Labour look Churchillian, and explains why Israel had to be supported in the ethnic cleansing of South Lebanon, part of the "Arc of extremism". it is interesting that the timing of these arrests exactly today, after "months" of surveillance, was determined by the Prime Minister - the CO in COBRA, the operational command, stands for Cabinet Office. The political timing could not have been more convenient - a junior minister had resigned over arms to Israel, and the backbench rebellion demanding a recall of parliament over Lebanon will now be containable in the name of standing together in the War on Terror. And the news agenda has been seismically shifted. The public mood is instantly tilted from sympathy for the people of Lebanon, leading to questioning of the War on Terror, to renewed fear that "Islamic fascists" are planning to kill us all. So to recap: Blair's crazed foreign policy has made us a genuine potential target for terrorist attack. The government manipulates and spins that threat to political advantage. We wait for the court system to show whether this was a real attempted attack and, if so, it was genuinely operational rather than political to move against it today. But the police' and security services' record of lies does not inspire confidence. Posted by craig on August 10, 2006 05:33 PM in the category 7 UK Policy <a href="http://www.craigmurray.co.uk/archives/2006/08/no_dead_lebanes.html">www.craigmurray.co.uk/arc...banes.html</a>

by **dugoboy** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 2:16 pm

"So, if the plot was foiled, why was the terror alert raised?" hehe. ___________________________________________ "BUSHCO aren't incompetent...they are COMPLICIT." -Me "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act" -George Orwell

by **nomo** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 2:19 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr><a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1885269&mesg_id=1885269">www.democraticunderground...id=1885269</a> MadHound Fri Aug-11-06 10:46 AM Original message A couple of interesting loose ends on the bombing plot I've yet to make my mind up concerning this bombing plot. I can easily see something like this happening, it is, after all, the times we live in, and lord knows, the US and UK have pissed off enough people who would pull this sort of plot off. However I'm also a deep skeptic, primarily because my government and corporate America has lied to me time and again throughout the years, with the pace picking up drastically since Bushco has come to power. Therefore I've withheld judgment on this bombing plot, waiting for more information. And as more information has come trickling in, some distinctly odd loose ends have shown up. The first one was yesterday evening. It was finally confirmed that the liquid explosive that was supposed to be used was TriAcetone TriPeroxide, TATP. Having a large background on hazardous materials/explosives both through my current work and from past work as a firefighter, this struck me as a bit odd yesterday, since TATP is a *very* unstable substance to just be carrying around. It is as unstable as nitroglycerin, if not more so. Thus least bump, shock, heat, etc. can set the stuff off. Granted, it can be refined down to an explosive powder and used safely, as happened with last years London train blasts, however all news reports are stating that the explosive to be used would be in *liquid* form. Hmmm. OK, perhaps they were to mix it up on the plane, as certain reports stated yesterday. However, after chatting with a biochem friend of mine, I realize that this would require some serious equipment, that it isn't just a matter of mixing contents of bottle A with the contents of tube B and voila. This was confirmed this morning as news reports stated that the plotters planned to *assemble* the bomb onboard, ie connect the already viable TATP explosive with wires to a watch as a timing device, all carried on separately. This gets us back to the fact that the plotters would have to carry on the explosive which again, is highly unstable. Just seems like it would be too big a risk that the explosive would blow up prematurely in the airport, or the taxi ride over. Hmmmm. Then this morning at 5 am I heard another snippet of information on NPR. Apparently most of the suspects that were picked up yesterday are married. Odd, since every single terrorist profile states it is highly likely that a terrorist will be *unmarried*<<a href="http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/frd.html">www.fas.org/irp/threat/frd.html</a> > In fact these suspects seem to defy a lot of the typical terrorist characteristics. They already had, or were expecting children, decent jobs, a few were even wealthy, and were surrounded by family and friends. And apparently their actions and day to day lives didn't arouse the suspicion of their neighbors, who were actually quite shocked and in disbelief concerning the whole matter<<a href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/tm_objectid=175...">www.mirror.co.uk/news/top...tid=175...</a> > Again, Hmmmm. And then there is the fact that their names were released. It seems, at least according to NPR, for suspects' names to be release at this point. Even odder is that it wasn't Scotland Yard or the London police who released the names, it was the Bank of England, on the authority of Chancellor Brown. Hmmm. I am still withholding judgment on this case, it is still too early to come to any conclusions yet either way, there is simply not enough information. This entire situation could be on the up and up, exactly as the various new agencies are reporting. Almost any sort of plot like this is bound to have strange odd coincidences. But how far and how many coincidences do we allow before we call bullshit? I suppose that is up to each of us individually. And like I said, it is really too early to pass judgment one way or the other. But strange oddities and loose ends are already piling up, and cracks in the official story are starting to appear. So all I will do for now is wait, watch and wonder. Hmmmm!<hr></blockquote>

by **Byrne** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 2:21 pm

Craig Murray's speech at the recent London Demo against Israeli aggression towards Lebanon, is on Youtube at the excellent <a href="http://antagonise.blogspot.com/" target="top">Antagonist Blog</a>. (CONTROL+F to beneath the text courtesy of Ady Cousins) (While you're there at the Antagonist's site, sign the petition for the release of the 7/7 evidence)

by **Byrne** » Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:30 pm

From <a href="http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2006/110806linkstruthers.htm" target="top">www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2006/110806linkstruthers.htm</a> <img src="http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/august2006/110806cnn.jpg" style="border:0;"/> CNN's Amanpour Links 9/11 Truthers With Sky Terrorists Says Muslims, "succumbing to the conspiracy theories" Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | August 11 2006 CNN reporter Christiane Amanpour equated yesterday's alleged sky terrorist liquid explosive plotters with the 9/11 truth movement, the latest brazen attempt to vilify anyone who disagrees with the official 9/11 fairytale. Here's the quote in full. "And there is some evidence that is coming out now, five years after 9/11, that many, many Muslims in England and around the world, according to documentaries that have been produced, are really succumbing to the conspiracy theories. They're really now saying that 9/11 was not al Qaeda; it was a U.S./CIA, Mossad/Israel, Zionist plot, basically designed to cause a war against Islam." Taken on its own, one would think Amanpour was saying Muslims are embracing 9/11 'conspiracy theories,' not necessarily terrorists. However, viewed in context of the fact that Amanpour made the statement on an Anderson Cooper special entitled 'Sky Terror,' which was solely about yesterday's alleged plot, the intended meaning becomes clear. 'Muslims' is Amanpour's euphemism for terrorists. Other recent 9/11 hit pieces have slandered the 9/11 truth movement as having a violent extremist undertone. No incidents of violence at any 9/11 truth convergence or protest have ever occurred and organizers consistently advocate purely peaceful demonstrations. During a recent appearance on Fox News, Newt Gingrich said that opponents of pro-war candidates and their supporters were "insurgents," equating anyone that disagrees with the Bush administration's foreign policy with terrorists. After making myself a cup of tea I sat down to read my e mail this morning. One individual had taken the trouble to explain his contention with some of the points raised in my articles. "You should be shot for treason you irresponsible piece of garbage." The extremist branch of the Neo-Con puss slugs advocate killing people who have a different opinion to the government. They should no longer be referred to as Neo-Cons - let's call a spade a spade. They are Neo-Fascists. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=byrne@rigorousintuition>Byrne</A> at: 8/11/06 4:31 pm

UK counter-terrorism op foils aircraft explosion plot

Re: UK counter-terrorism op foils aircraft explosion plot

Re: UK counter-terrorism op foils aircraft explosion plot

dry run

Re: dry run

Attention deficiet

Re: Attention deficiet

Re: Attention deficiet

Re: Attention deficiet

Re: Attention deficiet

Dry run

Re: UK counter-terrorism op foils aircraft explosion plot

Re: UK counter-terrorism op foils aircraft explosion plot

Re: UK counter-terrorism op foils aircraft explosion plot

Re: UK counter-terrorism op foils aircraft explosion plot

Re: UK counter-terrorism op foils aircraft explosion plot

Who is online