Slashdot Mirror


BBC Reports UK-U.S. Terror Plot Foiled

j823777 was one of several readers to point out a BBC report that "A terrorist plot to blow up planes in mid-flight from the UK to the U.S. has been disrupted, Scotland Yard has said. It is thought the plan was to detonate up to three explosive devices smuggled on aircraft in hand luggage. Police have arrested 21 people in the London area after an anti-terrorist operation lasting several months. Security at all airports in the UK has been tightened and delays are reported. MI5 has raised the UK threat level to critical — the highest possible." spo0nman adds a link to the Associated Press's coverage. Update: 08/10 12:57 GMT by T : Several readers have pointed out new restrictions imposed as a result of this plot on passengers' carry-on luggage. In the UK, nearly all possession (including laptop computers) must be carried in the cargo hold; while their rules don't yet go quite as far, U.S. airlines are stepping up their enforcement of carry-on-restrictions, including banning substances like toothpaste.

11 of 1,792 comments (clear)

  1. So, for several months... by 91degrees · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We've known about a likely plot to blow up several planes.

    Now, the perpetrators have been arrested, and anyone else who may have been involved is potentially compromised, so will probsbly not risk carrying it out. As a result, an attack is less likely. So the alert level has gone up.

  2. Blanket Measures. I'd get smothered. by TiggsPanther · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Unless these restrictions are lifted, I don't think I'll ever be able to fly anywhere. Yes, I understand the need to a sensible level of security, but I see this as going too far.

    I used to suffer from depression, and it has left me with the remnants of social anxiety. I can function out and about quite easily, but with very definite limits. Crowds still mess my head up. Queues fill me with dread. I need to travel with something to take my mind of things - often to shut out the world and people around me.
    I also have a fair bit of not-exactly-cheap equipment that goes with me everywhere. There are things that do not get let out of my site. My laptop, for example, comes to work with me when I have a house-inspection. I trust my colleagues more than an inspector I've never met. Yet I'd be expected to fly long-haul without carrying it in my arms?

    Yes, I know I'm probably slightly paranoid. But for one thing I've had things broken before when they were with people I didn't know or trust. And secondly, it's another holdover from my depression.

    And right this very minute I feel extremely uncomfortable. I see an all-too-possible threat of increased security measures invading our lives to a greater extent, where the existing ones already feel too much.
    Plus the idea of being stuck taking my holidays without ever leaving the UK[*] kinda fill me with dread.

    [*] 'Cos I can't see these measures not spreading to Eurostar, somehow.

    --
    Tiggs
    "120 chars should be enough for everyone..."
  3. Re:Why oh why by CosmeticLobotamy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, they "hate" (i.e. target) those that can afford to fly. Do you think the hype would fly that high if they targeted, say, Greyhound?

    That's not why they don't target Greyhound. They don't target Greyhound because we haven't made it fun yet. Blowing up an airplane is a game. We gave it rules. If you can get a bomb on without the screeners finding it, you win. And it's not that hard of a game to win if you're not an idiot and haven't already lost from the start by virtue of having talked to the wrong person while someone was watching, so they get the satisfaction of both crippling us and beating us at our game. It's not a conscious thing, but we gave them something to fixate on and obsess about, and that's not good.

    Unfortunately, there's no going back. If we make flying like riding a bus now, the game doesn't just end. We lose 15 or 20 planes in the free-for-all before it gets boring for them, and obviously that can't happen. So we're screwed.

    We might as well just move to the end right now: Everyone wears paper hospital gowns with no underwear on planes after having changed in front of an official, and all cargo is shipped seperately via UPS.

    We'll still lose 2 planes to poison gas being blown into pilots' faces from regurgitated containers, but at some point you have to just say, "Meh." Of course, if it were me, that point would have been a long time ago.

  4. I felt... naked by ShootThemLater · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I arrived at Heathrow for an early flight to Frankfurt just as news was breaking for this at about 06:00. It was a tough decision to part with my laptop, PDA and mobile but I decided to take my chances. It only really then dawned on me the extent to which I depend on these items when I was waiting for hours to clear security... While I could have found a public payphone, all my phone numbers are stored in my mobile & PDA and I actually remember very few of them. I could speak to people, after somehow getting their numbers, but they could not call me back. All the usual channels that are normally avalable to me to get information about a delay were unavailable to me - no web access or even SMS messages to friends with access. You just have to stand in a queue like a sheep.

    I didn't take my flight in the end, despite it being one of the few that wasn't cancelled - when I finally got to the gate they still had an additional delay of over an hour and I was only due to be there one day. With half of it gone, and the prospects of being able to fly back to the UK this evening looking distinctly dubuious, I offloaded myself.

    This was obviously an inconvenience for me, but I have nothing but praise for our security services who foiled this and the airport staff who managed to handle the whole thing pretty well, considering.

    As has been reported, items allowed were limited to wallets/travel documents and baby/health-specific products. However, many of us brought books and papers with us also. Interestingly, Duty Free shops were open airside - although I didn't see if any electronics shops were. The focus this morning was really on what can be brought from landside to airside and they didn't seem to have thought about what you buy airside so much (although I would speculate that electronic items bought airside do not pose such a threat in that trrrsts would use pre-modified devices to detonate explosives). The search at security was a remove shoes, belts etc. job - rather like being in the US :)

    It will be very interesting if this policy is made permanent. Like many companies mine has a policy of not putting laptops into checked luggage - for good reason. And when you are on the move much of the time you need your tools to keep productive - I've previously found time in the lounge or on board to be really valuable sometimes. However, I think in light of all the other ways that security can be compromised this can't continue as an indefinite measure - the risk:hassle/cost ratio is all wrong.

  5. No, it's a good thing (for us) by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Mind you, it might actually serve some interests better for tens of millions of people to be worried, inconvienced, or annoyed than for airliners to explode.

    Nah. They'd rather that the planes had exploded. That plays much, much better on Al Jazeera. This cannot be cited as a "victory" by the jihaddis backing it, and if they had knocked the planes down, they'd also have the extra inconvenience and worry, as frosting on that cake. No... this is a win for the good guys, and probably really frustrating to the backers that obviously put a lot of time and effort into recruiting all of these would-be suicide bombers, training them, supplying them, etc. You can bet that there are some pre-recorded Zawahiri video tapes that will now not be seeing airtime since this attack was stopped.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  6. Re:TSA just anounced the new restrictions on by scorpionsoft.be · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From the report: "Baby food is allowed IF the mother tastes some of it" Assuming you don't get killed immediatly by eating (half)liquid explosives, why would someone that is willing to blow herself up be afraid to eat some explosives?

  7. that is silly by r00t · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you're blowing yourself up anyway, you don't give a damn about long-term poisonous effects.

    I think you could make an explosive that is not a fast poison. If it is foul-tasting and you make a funny face, oh well... people do that with baby formula and saved breast milk too.

    Basically: suspend a powdered high-explosive in something thick and colorless, like glycerin. (a powdered oxidizer should work well too, but I can't think of one that wouldn't be a fast-acting poison)

    Sheesh... how hard is that?

    Probably you could make an explosive mouse pad or keyboard rest.

  8. Re:Good work by finkployd · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If desiring to kill oneself and take out innocent people to make a political point about US presence in the middle east is not insane, I don't know what is. The part about the promised virgins in the afterlife does not help either.

    They have sane goals, but their methods are not. Their methods are cowardly and counterproductive.

    Finkployd

  9. Re:Good work by Tweekster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Have you heard of Ramzi Yousef and the Bojinka plot which is the same plan was being implemented and hopefully stopped today.

    He did exactly that, a trial run...

    He was using a contact solution bottle (with liquid explosives) and a casio watch as the detonator. He did a trial run to see if it would work, it did.

    His plan was to hit 13 (if i recall correctly) planes at once. It was a bit of dumb luck that the plot was exposed and luckily it was prevented.

    Now you are correct no one would try now, but without the new security enforcement + the massive coverage, it is very possible someone would still give it a shot. Also they are not claiming they ABSOLUTELY foiled the plot, maybe the terrorists were gonna try some other method that may not be completely known which could be quite powerful from their perspective. "Even with all the security we still managed to attack..." Look at some of the major terrorist plans, you can stop part of it, or you can stop ALL of it, and that is the most difficult. If part of the people were gonna use xyz explosives disguised in one form, and the other was using explosives disguised as a pair of sunglasses, the plan could quite easily go ahead.

    It does seem like the govts are going full disclosure, particularly in the banned items and what is now gonna have to be in the cargo hold, because you cant keep those a secret and still be effective.

    So hopefully they manage to get everyone that was going to be involved.

    --
    The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
  10. Re:Good work by finkployd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It is easy to call someone insane if you get to make up the proof yourself. But even then, your proof of "insanity" sure is close to western ideals. Consider all the honor reserved for "fallen heroes" who "gave their lives defending their country." It's the same damn thing, just with an ameliorative spin instead of pejorative.

    I admit the concept is similar, but western heroes are generally considered to be those who gave their lives fighting against an enemy who wanted to kill them (us). No matter how you stretch it, women and children on a plane are no threat whatsoever to the Islamic nations or their people. So perhaps insane is not the right label, but certainly their is a demonstration here of utter disregard for any life (including their own) to achieve their means. We are certainly not celebrating the disgraced soldiers who murdered and raped Iraq women, while it seems in Islam they would be revered as heroes for the cause.

    Furthermore, there is an effort to downplay any religious "jihad" reasoning that may be behind these attacks and portray them as intelligent and subtle masterminds of global policy. That argument flies in the face of the sectarian violence occurring in Iraq right now, where they are killing each other randomly not for worshiping the wrong god, but for belonging to the wrong subtle subgroup within Islam. It is not hard for Joe Six-pack to just assume "them islams" are just attacking us for religious reasons as well.

    Sure. Seems to me their methods work exceptionally well. The response to 9/11 has been to cause self-inflicted economic wounds in the trillions of dollars. The US military doesn't call terrorism "asymmetric warfare" for nothing, its a war and so far we are losing big time. Calling the enemy insane just plays into their hands.

    I would make the argument that it is hurting the regular people of the middle east more, the ones the terrorists are supposedly fighting for. Since you have obviously thought about this, what do you feel the end goal of the terrorists are? Realistically, not "eradication of America" because that is simply not going to happen with a couple of AK47s and IEDs. I have a few theories, but they lend themselves to the "insane" theory which probably does stem from my western bias. I can imagine them wanting to draw the US into full scale nuclear war where they all die in a glorious stand against the west. Or wear us down to where we say "fuck it" and leave Israel and Iraq to their own devices, but the best way to do that would be to stop the terror attacks against civilians completely and let people ask why they hell we are still fighting when they have stopped. Actions like this most recent one just play right into Bush's hands (and approval rating) by reminding people we are fighting an enemy that wants you dead for no reason other than to make a statement.

    Finkployd

  11. Re:Good work by BalanceOfJudgement · · Score: 4, Interesting
    And yet they have in no way improved their own lot. You would think there would be some "try to improve the situation for ourselves" angle but they seem perfectly happy to kill themselves, draw their enemies into conflicts where their homes are destroyed, and alienate those who would have otherwise supported their cause. Just exerting the effort to try and target only military targets would gain them widespread support in the world, and even quite a bit in the US. If it is a war of attrition, they are in a very bad position to last that out. Even if their goal was to turn public world opinion against the US and have us pull out on peer (and local US) pressure alone, continuing the terrorist attacks on innocent people (like this last attempt) is short circuiting that.

    The first rule of chess is this:

    Learn to think like your opponent, or you will be defeated every time.


    You're still thinking like a Westerner - you still look at behavior and expect to see behind it, the attempt to gain something or improve one's position.

    Let's try thinking about it another way.

    Imagine for a moment that you live in a country filled with impoverished people, a country whose only natural resource is owned by foreign corporations and protected by foreign militaries. Recall that your region of the world has been sliced, colonized, re-sliced, and re-colonized by those same foreigners more times than you can count.

    Now imagine that every attempt your government has made to carve itself out a small piece of the world's ever-shrinking pie of resources and wealth, has failed miserably, that you are surrounded by poverty and misery everywhere and have absolutely no confidence that your life, or the life of anyone you know and care about, will ever be any better.

    Anyone's worst enemy is a person who has nothing left to lose.

    There's such a thing as a point of no return, where one's lot is concerned - where you no longer care about your life, or the lives of those you care about, being better - you want only to take mete out justice [or vengeance] to those who made it this way. The saying, "I don't care if I die, so long as I take you with me" applies.

    And now examine the actions and behaviors of so many thousands of people and groups in the Middle East. So many have given up hope of life there ever being better, that their only resort is to destruction.

    The terrorists are NOT trying to make their lives better, nor get anything in return for their efforts (claims to the contrary notwithstanding) - from their position, it makes sense simply to inflict as much damage as possible, because there's little else left for them to do.

    I am neither advocating nor decrying that belief, state of mind, or behavior. I am only saying that that is what happens to humans who have been oppressed and who have suffered for too long and have no confidence that life will ever be different.
    --

    We are the fire that lights our world.. and we are the fire that consumes it.