'Plot to blow up planes' foiled - Page 17 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-12-2006, 11:08 PM   #241
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
angelordevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Inside a sound
Posts: 5,827
Local Time: 03:47 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by trevster2k
I was thinking about other tactics and places terrorist could hide liquids. Why not under a false skin in plastic pouches? Our current security scans are looking for metal not hidden items on a person. Barring a physical search, it would probably go unseen. What if they inserted objects anally? What if they hid things inside a prosthetic limb if a person had one? What about hidden inside a hairpiece? There are so many ways which can fool our present systems. Although, technology is coming like in the above article which could prevent such attempts however the costs associated could make flying an extremely exclusive privilege.

If authorities discover plots which possibly use these methods, are we to expect anal cavity searches or will they force people who have prosthetic limbs or even wheelchairs to undergo scans? Such methods sound outrageous but I could see them considering it. Barring complete scans like in the article above, there are still holes in the security system.

I can't even begin to process stuff like this. Your post made me think of the new Transport Canada ads that are running, warning people of what's not acceptable to bring on board. It's all very sad to me, the fact that we've arrived at the point where terrorism is the new norm.
__________________

__________________
angelordevil is offline  
Old 08-13-2006, 07:07 PM   #242
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 05:17 PM
Quote:
A HUSBAND and wife arrested in the British terror raids allegedly planned to take their six-month-old baby on a mid-air suicide mission.

Scotland Yard police are quizzing Abdula Ahmed Ali, 25, and his 23-year-old wife Cossor over suspicions they were to use their baby’s bottle to hide a liquid bomb.

The theory is one of the reasons security chiefs are now insisting mothers taste babies’ milk at check-in desks before allowing them to take bottles aboard flights.

The pair are among up to 23 suspects being questioned over a plot to bring down nine airliners over five US cities, killing thousands of people in the air and on the ground.
link

Not cool
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 08-13-2006, 07:44 PM   #243
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 07:17 AM
Good Lord. Now I've heard it all.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 08-14-2006, 10:17 AM   #244
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:17 AM
^ That is incomprehensible, but at the same time I am not really surprised. It makes me so sad to say that.

I like this column

By Jules Crittenden
Boston Herald City Editor
Sunday, August 13, 2006 - Updated: 07:07 PM EST

Do you know anyone whose Sept. 11 fears have returned? 
Someone with a sick feeling and a tightening of the chest, bordering on panic? 
Someone distraught or perhaps just withdrawn and distracted in the past few days?
What do you say to calm their fears? 
We drive each day on highways where the likelihood that a dumptruck will veer into our path far outstrips the possibility that we will find ourselves on an airplane targeted by terrorists. The chances that we will get it in any number of benign but equally deadly ways are exponentially higher than the chances that those who want to kill us will, in any given case, succeed.
Logic is irrelevant in combating these fears, as it is with children who fear monsters under the bed. This is not to disparage these fears. The threat is real. And while statistically remote, there is a factor that elevates terrorism beyond the many mundane fates we all dodge daily. It is the malice.
There are men out there who want us dead. This is undeniable. They want to see us all dead. Each and every one of us. They don’t know our names, they don’t know what our thoughts are about their grievances. They don’t know what our actions are and how we’ve lived our lives. They don’t care. They just want us dead.
I wish I had a sweet, comforting post-Sept. 11 lullaby to sing the ones I love to sleep when they experience fear of these evil men. But I don’t. Lullabies combat false monsters. Real monsters require something different.
Psalms, like lullabies, give comfort. But they don’t mask or deny the threat. They embrace it, and show the way to strength and ultimately comfort from within. What might a psalm say to anyone whose 9/11 fears have been reawakened 
Strong, ruthless men and women go long hours without sleep for you. They do everything they can to keep you safe. They are your shield. They will kill for you, and die for you.You can take comfort from that knowledge and draw strength from their example.
But that is not enough. There is something you have to find within yourself. It may be that one day, our shield will fail, and the insidious foe that operates from beyond our borders and even within them will penetrate that shield and kill some of us again.
You must decide for yourself that you will not let them deter you from your path. If they rise against you, you must be prepared to meet them. Prepared to be ruthless in defense of what you love. It may mean that you will die. We all do someday. As a friend of mine who knew what he was talking about once said, it’s not a matter of whether we will die, but how we will die. And when the time comes, the best we can hope for in this life, the one thing we might be able to control, is that we die well.
Each of us must look within ourselves for the strength that pushed the passengers of United Flight 93 forward against their hijackers on Sept. 11, in a successful if tragic assault that prevented further death and destruction.
We must look to the bravery of men such as Rick Rescorla, the British-American security executive and Vietnam war hero who shepherded thousands of people out of the World Trade Center but who stayed back himself with the last and ultimately died in the wreckage.
They are towering figures, but each of us has a little, just enough of that in us that we can draw on, to carry us through. We honor them by endeavoring to live up to their example. It begins by repeating to ourselves the words from which others have drawn comfort in time of war and peril for more than 2,500 years.
I will fear no evil.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 08-14-2006, 01:14 PM   #245
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:17 AM
by Deepak Chopra

www.intentblog.com

In the wake of the thwarted plot to explode bombs on flight from Britain to the U.S., several commentators echoed Pres. Bush's slogan that fighting terrorism is going to be a long war, the defining struggle of this generation. No one mentioned striving for a long peace with the Arab world, which will also take a generation.

The roots of terrorism are not insane. Real conditions gave rise to a huge disaffected segment of Muslims, mostly young and male. From northern Africa across the entire Middle East to Pakistan, there has been a population boom without much hope that any child will receive adequate education, except in the Koran, or adequate work. The governments are either militaristic or dominated by reactionary royal families.

In other words, terrorism grew out of poverty, ignorance, and a sense of hopelessness about the future. Hating America and Israel is also complex, but these other factors made a huge contribution. Therefore, since Islam isn't going to change, and since this new wave of the dispossessed isn't going away, the West has two choices. We can keep supporting the conditions that inflame radical Islam, or we can move positively to bring the Muslim world into a global alliance.

Terrorism is global because national boundaries don't hold back anger and hopelessness anymore. Unlike Communism, terrorism can't be contained. To win a long peace will be difficult because of the deep roots of the problem. But we make it more difficult by being militaristic, by supporting reactionary regimes, by making oil the centerpiece of our foreign policy in the Middle East, by engendering bogeyman hatred of Arabs, and by refusing to see that peace is achievable without annihilating the enemy. The administration's attitude that only total victory is acceptable amounts to saying that every radicalized Muslim male must be killed or neutralized. The war between Israel and Hezbollah is quickly dismantling that fantasy.

The time is dark right now, and a new scare like the airline bombing plot galvanizes fear and anger. But retaliation isn't going to work in the long run. Our only alternative is the long peace, and we have to hope that this idea begins to take root soon, or else we will be trapped in an endless cycle of attack and response just as we are today.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 08-14-2006, 10:35 PM   #246
Refugee
 
tpsglick2424's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,434
Local Time: 01:17 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
link

Not cool


This really has to stop...
__________________
tpsglick2424 is offline  
Old 08-15-2006, 08:52 AM   #247
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:17 AM
Make no mistake, the terrorists are well aware of all the loopholes and have been for some time. This is all old news to them.

By Scot Lehigh, Boston Globe Columnist | August 15, 2006

Last week provided not just a welcome counterterrorism success, but a wake-up call as well.

Smart intelligence work averted a terrorist plot that could have resulted in mind-numbing horror.

But with the thwarted scheme reminding everyone yet again of the peril from implacable foes, it's time to plug the remaining gaps in airport security, for this plot shows that current measures haven't deterred terrorists' hopes of targeting passenger planes. Instead, it has them searching for ways around security procedures.

It's notable that the liquid-explosives idea is not a new one. Indeed, back in January 1995, Al Qaeda had plans to use liquid bombs to target 12 jetliners over the Pacific. That plot was discovered after a fire led authorities to the plotters' Manila apartment-turned-bomb-factory.

Yet until last week, our airline security had not adjusted to deter a scheme based on a liquid bomb assembled aboard a plane.

It's high time to address other vulnerabilities in our security system as well.

Airports have worked hard to make sure that, in addition to carry-ons, all checked bags are now screened. There, Logan Airport has done admirably. It became the first major US airport to have an in-line system that automatically routes checked baggage to screening rooms.

But one well-known hole in security is the cargo shipped in the belly of passenger airliners, only a fraction of which is screened.

``Cargo is the last big gap in airport security," says Thomas Keane, chairman of the 9/11 Commission.

Under federal regulations, so called ``known shippers" -- established companies that regularly ship freight -- are allowed to send unscreened cargo on airlines. That program is meant to ensure that cargo comes from reputable firms that have filled out necessary paperwork, but ``on the other hand, they [the Transportation Security Administration] have no idea who packed it, or who you have hired in the last six months in your plant to do the work," points out US Representative Edward Markey, the third-ranking Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee. ``They are depending on you having security in your facility."

And there's another troubling loophole. Packages that weigh under 16 ounces can be shipped without even filling out any paperwork, Markey says. ``It is just, `Give us the money and you can put it on,' " the Seventh District congressman says.

The plastic explosives that brought down Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988 weighed less than 16 ounces, says Markey, as did the explosive that shoebomber Richard Reid had in his sneakers in his December 2001 attempt to bring down American Airlines Flight 63.

It makes little sense to have mounted a major effort to screen all passenger bags but to continue to allow unscreened cargo to be loaded on the same plane -- cargo that, if small enough, doesn't even require paperwork identifying the shipper.

So why hasn't that happened?

The principal reason is that the federal government doesn't require it. The Bush administration, like the airlines themselves and the cargo-shipping companies, opposes such a mandate, mainly because of cost concerns.

It's not that there is no examination of airline cargo. Random screening is done, even on small packages, the transportation agency says. Still, almost all of the 6 billion pounds of cargo shipped each year on passenger airliners goes unscreened, says Markey.

Without a federal mandate, the system clearly has a serious weakness.

Meanwhile, airlines are reluctant to move beyond the letter of the law, analysts say, because by doing so they might assume responsibility they otherwise wouldn't have.

``If an airline says, `we are going to 100 percent check all of our air cargo,' and there is no federal mandate or standard, they assume a liability they don't currently have," says one airport security specialist.


We clearly need federal action here. Markey has introduced legislation to require that, within three years, all such cargo be screened.

Yes, it would cost more, but this is no time to be pennywise and pound foolish.

And actually, estimates aren't that bad: perhaps $10 billion to set up cargo screening at airports nationwide, and then $1.5 billion or so a year to operate it, Markey's office says. Some other nations, such as Israel, Great Britain, Singapore, and the Netherlands, screen all or most of airline cargo.

With the United States a primary focus of Islamic extremists' ire, it's time that we followed their lead.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 08-15-2006, 09:29 AM   #248
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:17 AM
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1...C-RSSFeeds0312

March 2, 2006 — Pakistani officials told ABC News that they believe they have indications that a new terrorist attack against the United States is being planned there. They told ABC News that while their intelligence does not give any specific details as to a target or time, it does indicate that an emerging al Qaeda figure is making plans.

Pakistani military officials say Matiur Rehman, 29, a Pakistani militant, is behind the new plans for an attack against the United States. Pakistan has posted a 10-million rupee (about $166,000) award for his capture.

"He is probably Pakistan's most wanted right now," says Alexis Debat, a former adviser in the French defense ministry and now an ABC News consultant. "He is extremely dangerous because of his role as the crucial interface between the brains of al Qaeda and its muscle, which is mainly composed these days of Pakistani militants."
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 08-15-2006, 11:21 AM   #249
Refugee
 
tpsglick2424's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,434
Local Time: 01:17 AM
__________________
tpsglick2424 is offline  
Old 08-15-2006, 12:28 PM   #250
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 01:17 AM
Imagine the screening machinery we could have developed by now with the $300 Billion we've spent in Iraq.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 08-15-2006, 12:33 PM   #251
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,294
Local Time: 02:17 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
Imagine the screening machinery we could have developed by now with the $300 Billion we've spent in Iraq.
Yes:

Quote:
The government's new order that all airline passengers put their shoes through X-ray machines won't help screeners find a liquid or gel that can be used as a bomb.

The machines are unable to detect explosives, according to a
Homeland Security report on aviation screening recently obtained by The Associated Press.
Yahoo.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 08-15-2006, 03:10 PM   #252
Refugee
 
tpsglick2424's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,434
Local Time: 01:17 AM
__________________
tpsglick2424 is offline  
Old 08-15-2006, 04:30 PM   #253
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 03:17 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by silja


Islamic extremism surely hurts the good name of Islam but what’s hurting Islam even more is the constant linking between terrorism and Muslims in general.
This is the only point you made in that entire post that I disagree with.

Why's the spotlight put on those who define the enemy openly and honestly, rather than the creeps who believe that God wants them to strap bombs and cowardly hide behind women and children among the civilian population?

Be assured that I know you take it very seriously, as well as myself. I know it offends people when the question arises - how often are these acts committed by "infidels"? But it remains a valid question if you are serious about an open debate.

The voice of anti-terrorism within the Islamic community is relatively silent as a whole. England just recently had a bunch of Islamic religious leaders blame Tony Blair for the destruction that the fascists caused. Worse yet, we have a bunch of appeasers everywhere you turn that don't take terrorism seriously.

When we fail to define our enemies, they have the undeserved privelidge of hiding among the civilian population, while 80 year old white women are being searched. Not very smart.

Too often, we blame those who condemn the violence, rather than those who commit it. This post is a great example of that.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 08-15-2006, 05:28 PM   #254
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,685
Local Time: 01:17 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
This is the only point you made in that entire post that I disagree with.

Why's the spotlight put on those who define the enemy openly and honestly, rather than the creeps who believe that God wants them to strap bombs and cowardly hide behind women and children among the civilian population?

Be assured that I know you take it very seriously, as well as myself. I know it offends people when the question arises - how often are these acts committed by "infidels"? But it remains a valid question if you are serious about an open debate.

The voice of anti-terrorism within the Islamic community is relatively silent as a whole. England just recently had a bunch of Islamic religious leaders blame Tony Blair for the destruction that the fascists caused. Worse yet, we have a bunch of appeasers everywhere you turn that don't take terrorism seriously.

When we fail to define our enemies, they have the undeserved privelidge of hiding among the civilian population, while 80 year old white women are being searched. Not very smart.

Too often, we blame those who condemn the violence, rather than those who commit it. This post is a great example of that.
This has almost nothing to do with the line you quoted.

Are you saying there is nothing wrong with linking terrorism and Muslims in general?
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 08-15-2006, 10:00 PM   #255
ONE
love, blood, life
 
zoney!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: six metro locations
Posts: 11,293
Local Time: 01:17 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen


By Scot Lehigh, Boston Globe Columnist | August 15, 2006
COLUMNIST usually means OPINION.

yes..16 ounces of PLASTICS were used by Richard Reed...but you still need something to set it off. How are you going to do that in a package under 16 ounces?

I bring up the COLUMNIST thing because it is not very factual. Shipments from "Known Shippers" are still screened. He also uses the same quotes that I debunked in an earlier post.

If it is randomly screened, how would a terrorist know if the one package that has the planted explosive is not part of what is screened? The "known shippers" have hiring requirements, similar to airlines, that are fairly strict, and are often audited by the federal government.

Sounds like a columnist not doing their homework...
__________________

__________________
zoney! is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com