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.

123 of 1,792 comments (clear)

  1. Good work by ManoSinistra · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Good work over there at Scotland Yard!

    1. Re:Good work by Flibz · · Score: 5, Informative

      To be fair the target aircraft (apparently up to 10 flights were being targeted for timed explosions) where all bound for the US.

      Now we have a situation where the only hand luggage allowed is medicines, wallets, baby food (must be eaten/tasted by parent in front of security staff), sanitary products (unboxed), etc. Shoes must be removed and X-rayed.

      Anything electronic must go in the hold (laptops, cameras, gameboys, etc)

      No liquids are allowed on US bound flights, due to tip off that liquid explosives would have been involved.

      Full info on restrictions

      Makes you wonder where they'll be trying to hide explosives next. Full body cavity search for all passengers? It's only a matter of time...

    2. Re:Good work by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Speaking of evidence... There's not a single mentioning of explosives discovered, which would be the kind of thing they would widely publish.

      So I'm guessing they once again did their usual thing, let's just hope they manage without shooting or incarerating innocent people for a year, again. Sure this might have been a real plot, but their credibility is wearing thin.

      --
      - These characters were randomly selected.
    3. Re:Good work by FireFury03 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm a bit confused about the 'alert levels'... They claim that the attack they have stopped wasn't going to happen today, are aware of no other impending attack and that the security measures are just precautionary and there is nothing to worry about. Yet they have used the highest alert level... Shouldn't that kinda be reserved for when they know an attack is about to happen?

      Maybe they should just face the truth and rename the 'alert level' system to 'scare-the-shit-out-of-the-public-to-push-our-poli tical-agenda-o-meter'

    4. Re:Good work by mgblst · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I am sorry, but with the last two excuses for terror attacks here in London, both where innocent people were shot for no good reason, I have my doubts. Both cases, the police held out on the facts, and continued deceiving people about what really happened for weeks. Each time, they mislead the media and the public by publishing lies, so that they could try to cover up their mistakes.

      This is Scotland Yard, this is the UK secret services, this is reality. In a few months, if we are lucky, we will know the truth. And it will turn out that a few people had sent each other emails talking about blowing up planes, or some vague threats, nothing more.

      I have no confidence in the UK, USA or even the Australian government. I suggest you question everything they do, and all that they report as fact.

      There were no WMDs, Jean Charles de Menezes was not a terrorist, Mohammed Abdul Kahar and Abul Koyair were not planning on bombing anybody at all!

    5. Re:Good work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative
    6. Re:Good work by Flibz · · Score: 3, Informative
      The threat levels are: -
      • critical - an attack is expected imminently
      • severe - an attack is highly likely
      • substantial - an attack is a strong possibility
      • moderate - an attack is possible but not likely
      • low - an attack is unlikely

      For threat level breakdown etc, go http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/security/current-thre at-level/
    7. Re:Good work by Jahz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Also, you forgot to mention that they raised the alert level to "Critical" only *after* the 21 terrorists were captured... Should'nt it have been raised before? In short, no. Why? Because it means absolutely nothing. Security at airports, seaports and sensitive buildings remains in alert mode all the time (or at least its supposed to). It makes little sense to have heightened security only after we know something was going to happen. Like you said, the alert levels are more of a publicity-political thing than a real preventive measure.

      --
      There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who do not.
    8. Re:Good work by Admiral+Ag · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, you're the one that's nauseating.

      If someone is killed by a terrorist it is bad, but if an innocent person is killed by the police, it is a lot worse. A society where innocent people are terrified of terrorism has a minor problem. A society where innocent people live in fear of the police has a major problem. Hint: it's because the police is the major social institution with legal backing for use of force, and the terrorists aren't. It's a lot easier to convict a terrorist for killing someone than it is sometimes to even get a fucking apology from the police.

      --
      "by that I mean people who don't sit on slashdot all day wondering why everyone else isn't building robots" DECS
    9. Re:Good work by saintory · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think it is time for a paradigm shift in travel.

      Long security lines, sneakier ways to get harmful equipment on and off the plane, these could all be resolved by forcing all luggage, save for your id and boarding pass, through baggage checkin. This also alleviates the resources (personnel, scanning equipment) needed at the security checkpoints.

      Getting on and off the plane would be faster, as there would never be another wait for the people in front of you to get their luggage and then get off the plane; they just stand and go. Not to mention the fact that you never have to worry again about foot- and head-room problems. And how about cabin turnaround? The faster people get off the plane the faster the crew can turn around the plane for another flight.

      Since using this plan infrastructure and maintenance costs could be reduced at the checkpoints, this money could be diverted by the airport to better baggage check-in and claiming areas. Maybe more seats, an RFID tag within an airline attached, removeable tag to let you know when your baggage has come off the ramp and into the area?

      "So what do we do on a flight if we cannot bring MP3/Laptop/videogame onboard?" Up to the airlines, although to make travel more appeasing on longer flights I would suggest they look at their entertainment infrastructure within the planes. You can already do video on demand, and some flights have video games on demand. There is also music on demand, mostly for all genre. Maybe they could start to offer entertainment on demand based on your input before the flight.

      For example, when you book your flight you can go online to pick your seat. Choose nothing else and get the default entertainment selections. If you want to be more specific, you can also pick from a vast selection of electronically delivered movies, games or music you want available to you during your flight. You pay the small rental fee (US$0.99 per item?) and you then access it via the seatback video screen and embedded controller. Of course they pass out headsets for privacy; they already do this! Get the basic ones for free and charge a rental fee for premium ones. Now everybody has some entertainment and no one has nothing, unless of course they choose nothing (a nap, perhaps?).

    10. Re:Good work by Harlockjds · · Score: 5, Insightful

      actually they havent said that "it's nothing to worry about" instead they've said they don't know if they have actually gotten everyone involved in the plot... thus the alert level.

      course if they didn't raise the alert level and a plain blew up i'm sure people would be yelling just as loud that they didn't do enough to prevent it... just can't make people happy either way.

    11. Re:Good work by stevetherobot · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Why the hell does anyone need more than their book & a passport anyway?
      Because airlines lose luggage all the time. If I'm traveling with checked luggage, I put at least one change of clothes and things I'll need right away in my carry on. If I am traveling light, I only take a carry on. That way I avoid waiting at baggage claim and don't have to worry about my luggage getting lost.
      --
      "If less is more, then eventually nothing will be everything."
    12. Re:Good work by bcattwoo · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Especially as they've arrested 21 people and no terrorist in his right mind would try to put his "sub-plot" into action with the headlines full of this news.

      Trying to use logic and reason to predict the actions of someone who is willing to blow himself up in a plane full of people is a dangerous game.

    13. Re:Good work by FireFury03 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And what is the "political agenda" you are going to claim they are advancing?

      Oh, I dunno, how about all the curtailments of civil liberties they've been pushing since 9/11 in the name of preventing terrorism - things like the ID cards and database (which are pretty much universally agreed to be totally useless against terrorism), biometrics, etc.

      Are you so cynical that you don't think they might have an 'alert system' just to alert the public?

      If the alert system was actually there to alert the public, it would've gone up _before_ the arrests were made and gone down again a bit after the arrests were made (you know, when the threat has been reduced by arresting a bunch of evil terrorists). As it was, they only bothered to 'alert the public' after the matter, and at that point they put it up to it's highest level even though they said they had no evidence to suggest there would be any further attacks.

    14. Re:Good work by mdwh2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      On a side note - thank christ for the reduced on board luggage rules. Why the hell does anyone need more than their book & a passport anyway?

      I'd be happy with just that, but according to http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4778615.stm, you aren't even allowed to take a book.

      Personally, I'd consider "food and drink" to be pretty essential, but strangely that's not on the list. Of course that could be provided by the airline, but note that the "cheap" airlines (e.g., RyanAir) do not provide this as part of ticket, and charge highly. I would hope they'd make an exception here, rather than taking the opportunity to profit from such an event.

      Also, one of the main reasons I have things in hand luggage is to reduce what I have to put in the checked-in luggage. There's both the issue of weight, and in some cases you get charged per bag (RyanAir charge an extra £5 per bag per one-way flight, independent of how much they weigh). So I would seriously hope they are waiving those charges in this time of crisis.

      Other people pointed out the risk of fragile or expensive items - according to http://www.ryanair.com/site/EN/conditions.php , they are only liable up to £820. Furthermore, they aren't liable at all if they decide the baggage is "defective" - and in my experience, they do that even if the material is slightly worn, in a manner which clearly wouldn't affect the contents.

    15. Re:Good work by Forge · · Score: 3, Funny

      This is REALLY depressing.

      I landed in Haiti yesterday on a 3 month work assignment. My baggage is missing so all I have are the gadgets (including laptop) cloths (Hains Tagless shirts fold real small) and toothpaste, toothbrush, comb etc... that I carried in my hand luggage.

      If these rules were in place I would be the stinkiest engineer in Port-Au-Prince.

      PS: It takes 6 to 10 hours to fly from Jamaica to Haiti. KIN to MIA then MIA to PAP with enough time tacked on to clear Baggage check, Security screen, customs and immigration... Twice.

      --
      --= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
    16. Re:Good work by IngramJames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If there was a critical threat to the UK today, surely there was a critical threat for the last few days.

      Maybe. But do you want to tip off the people you're about to arrest that they should really, really think about getting on that small boat they've got hidden on the coast right about now? If you're watching them and they vanish - then you whack up the alert level. As long as you know where they are, there's no need to warn them that you're in a van near to their house with all your cameras and listening gear.

      So how come the PM flew out on holiday two days ago?
      And how come he's still not back?


      I think that the PM's plane will be subject to tighter security checks and a normal flight.
      And the same logic applies - if he cancels his holiday because he knows there will be an anti-terror swoop, then you just tipped off the baddies quite well. The whole press corps would want to know what the emergency is going to be, and he won't be able to provide an answer. Which the press will assume means that there's a classified reason, which probably means an imminent terror attack. About which the PM can do absolutely nothing, as he's not involved in the operational aspect.

      And I don't see a reason why he should be back already. This only happened in the last few hours, after all. Does he need to return at all? The country is being run by his deputy; the guy ought to be able to run the country (even in a time of a minor emergency) in the absense of Mr Blair.. if he can't, then he's got not business being deputy PM.

      Last time, of course, he was "caught" playing golf, and there was a screaming session. But IIRC, there wasn't anything he could have actually done in that case, other than.. not be playing golf. The whole thing was silly.. what was he meant to do? Sit at home, wringing his hands?

      In this case, it's in the hands of the relevant authorities. A clear picture won't emerge for quite a few hours yet. Even if the PM was here, all he could say was that he doesn't know much about the operational details yet, and as soon as he's fully briefed, the press will be too.

      There isn't a great deal any politician can do right now.

      --
      'No rational religion claims "supernatural" exists, that's an atheist slander.' - seen on slashdot.
    17. Re:Good work by Jester6641 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Here's the thought. Are we sure there were only 21 people involved? I mean dang sure? Because if there were 22 and that one guy happens to have a bottle of whatever and sees all his buddies go down, there's a good chance he'd try to get on a plane and go for it, especially if they got everyone else and he figures he's next. Kinda the "go down swinging" approach. They're not trying to foil the large scale attack anymore, they did that (at least they think they did, and I really hope that's true), they're trying to lock down the loose canon who may or may not exist. That's why there's a large blanket security upgrade, and why you can't get a bottle on any flight anywhere, even though the threats were against certain airlines going certain places.

      --
      Jester

      Warning: This sig may be legally binding in England.
    18. Re:Good work by brainburger · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think the problem there is that we have been at level 'severe' for some time. The danger is believed to have gone up, and they need to show this.
      Perhaps there aren't enough steps in the scale.
      We need 'like, really severe', and 'almost critical -no really!' as well.

    19. Re:Good work by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 5, Insightful

      no terrorist **in his right mind** would try to put his "sub-plot" into action

      I have emphasized the part that may have caused your misunderstanding.

    20. Re:Good work by NSIM · · Score: 3, Funny

      > Makes you wonder where they'll be trying to hide explosives next. Every time I take my shoes off going through security I'm reminded how grateful I am that it was the "shoe bomber" not the "underpants bomber"

    21. Re:Good work by mgblst · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Is not having confidence in the government enough of a reason to leave? An even better question, will it actually solve anything if I left? Is there a government that I would trust, no... and you probably never should!

      I have already moved once, I am running out of places that speak english. I also have no reason to think any other government would be any better - governments are just a bunch of people who are ungoverned, by defintion.

      I think the best idea would be to stay here for the meanwhile, and try to change things.

    22. Re:Good work by Forge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It gets worse. Those Slashdotters who have female friends or who are women themselves think about this.

      Ever wonder why women take handbags to the bathroom every time?

      It's so we won't know if she is on her period. never mind what type/brand sanitary products she uses or when it is being changed etc... Women are more secretive about this stuff than guys are about jerking off. A lot more secretive.

      I can just picture the kind of hell that will break louse when they start suggesting "You have to put your Tampax in a clear plastic bag".

      Remember that old saying "Hell hath no fury..." ?

      --
      --= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
    23. Re:Good work by ray-auch · · Score: 4, Informative
      "when they start suggesting" !? - they already are, and not just suggesting but demanding.


      All cabin baggage must be processed as hold baggage and carried in the hold of passenger aircraft departing UK airports.

      Passengers may take through the airport security search point, in a single (ideally transparent) plastic carrier bag, only the following items. Nothing may be carried in pockets:

      [...snip...]
      for those travelling with an infant: baby food, milk (the contents of each bottle must be tasted by the accompanying passenger) and sanitary items sufficient and essential for the flight (nappies, wipes, creams and nappy disposal bags).

      female sanitary items sufficient and essential for the flight, if unboxed (eg tampons, pads, towels and wipes).


      From http://www.dft.gov.uk/ - airline security statement.

      Also note it's only "sufficient and essential for the flight".

      What you do for the several hours people are waiting to get on the flight is anybodys guess.

      Note also the bit about having to drink any baby milk - previously held to be only an urban legend http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/milk.htm. Fiction becomes reality.
    24. 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

    25. 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
    26. Re:Good work by AGMW · · Score: 4, Funny
      Perhaps there aren't enough steps in the scale.

      What we need is a scale that goes all the way up to eleven. You see previously they'd be at level 10 and thinking they need a little bit more but with no where to go ...

      --
      Eclectic beats from Leeds, UK
      handmadehands.co.uk
    27. Re:Good work by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      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.

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

      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.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    28. Re:Good work by bourne · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I'm a bit confused about the 'alert levels'... They claim that the attack they have stopped wasn't going to happen today, are aware of no other impending attack and that the security measures are just precautionary and there is nothing to worry about. Yet they have used the highest alert level... Shouldn't that kinda be reserved for when they know an attack is about to happen?

      Raising the alert level makes good tactical sense. Perhaps you have not thought it out fully.

      Let's look at it from the aggressor point of view. They have a plan. This plan includes things like social engineering materials into position, explosives, detonation systems, and other details which have been painstakingly worked out. They have stockpiles of equipment which can be used in an attack. They are merrily moving along toward H-Hour.

      Then, along comes Scotland Yard. In one fell swoop, they arrest some percent - let us say, for the sake of argument, 80% - of the people with enough knowledge of the plan and the materials to make the attack happen. They also capture 80% of the materials storage sites.

      What is the next thing Scotland Yard will do?

      They will perform forensic analysis on the materials and on any computers or plans left lying about. They will reconstruct the plan and the tools to be used in enough detail that detailed information and alerts can be formulated and handed out to sister agencies and airlines. They will gather the information required to track down the remaining 20% of the aggressor forces and materials. They will, in effect, provide the information required to precisely and correctly (if such a thing is possible) set the alert level.

      This will take time. The forensic analysts on the computers may need to break encryption. The forensic analysts for the explosives won't be cutting any corners to save time, for the obvious reasons. From the aggressors point of view, there is a narrow window of opportunity - let us say, 24-48 hours - in which it is unlikely law enforcement will know enough details to be there waiting for you.

      If you were the aggressor, what would you do in this case? Sit and wait for Scotland Yard to connect your name to the plot and come arrest you, or try to mount what small corner of the attack you can given the remaining available resources?

      If you were the defender, what would you expect the aggressor to do? To sit and wait to be arrested? To panic (or not) and try to run? Or to attempt a very probably suicidal attack? Bear in mind that the aggressor profile matters - the IRA is not known for suicide missions, but Islamic terrorism is.

      In short, the arrests are a stroke. The appropriate next step for the defender is to expect a counterstroke. Unfortunately, the counterstroke is both most likely and most dangerous right away, when the defender has the least information with which to fine-tune their defensive measures (read, "alert level"). Therefore the appropriate reaction is to raise your defenses, erring on the side of caution even if it means seeming to over-raise the alert level. Even if it gets you criticised by the crucial Slashdot block 8).

    29. Re:Good work by babbling · · Score: 4, Informative

      The police shot one guy by accident...

      In the head. Nine times. Accident, eh?

      How about I chase you around, trying to shoot you in the head "by accident", and then we'll see how well you accept my humble apologies...

    30. Re:Good work by drooling-dog · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In a few months, if we are lucky, we will know the truth.

      If there is actually a fair and public trial, that is. Many people don't realize that the government's interest in detention without trial (or secret trials) for terrorists may have more to do with a desire to manipulate public opinion and cover its own incompetence than with real security concerns.

      In an environment where proof isn't necessary and questions are never asked, you can expect a lot of spectacular plots to be uncovered, especially in election years. I'll believe this stuff when it's proven in a court of law.

    31. Re:Good work by twistedsymphony · · Score: 3, Insightful

      According to the link provided the consern wasn't about taste but contamination. Aparently Siliva can contaminate brest milk and spoil it in a matter of hours. Meaning that a few hours after the taste test it would have been useless. Also the security refused to allow her to squirt it on her wrist and lick it off to help prevent contamination.

      The real problem with airport security is that they fear what they don't know, and typically being the low-wage uneducated types they don't know much...

    32. 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

    33. Re:Good work by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Alzheimer's patients, sociopaths, serial killers and others are all clinically insane, yet we can and do predict their actions on a regular basis. What's so different about predicting how terrorists behave? Does joining Al-qaeda mean that you have suddenly morphed into a life-form so alien that no one should even try to predict what you're doing?

      Or is all this "they're terrorists, who knows what they were thinking" just an excuse to not have to question what you're doing?

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    34. 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.
    35. Re:Good work by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My baggage is missing so all I have are the gadgets (including laptop) cloths (Hains Tagless shirts fold real small) and toothpaste, toothbrush, comb etc... that I carried in my hand luggage.

      I was just chatting with some of my co-workers who are heading out of country soon on business travel about having to check laptops. In our case, the laptops go through an export control process both from the US side and the country we travel too. We're supposed to be in control of the laptops in order to comply with the export license so I wonder how this change in carry on luggage affects export control.

      I can't recall the specific Star Trek Voyager episode to link it but what happens when we start finding explosives surgically embedded into the terrorist? If terrorist are already willing to give their lives, they are just as likely to embed the explosive compounds into their body.

    36. Re:Good work by finkployd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That isn't to excuse the targeting of civilians by either side, but to say that pretending only one side is targeting civilians is beyond ignorant.

      Yes it would be, fortunately that is not remotely what I was doing.

      Let me spell it out, the terrorists are specifically targeting innocent civilians as a strategy of war. The WTC is not a military barracks or rocket launch site that happens to have businesses in it. The airplanes were not military transports which happened to have civilians on them, nor are the any of the sites the sectarian groups are targeting in Iraq of military significance. Now you may (some do) believe that the US and Israel are specifically targeting civilians and civilian buildings for no reason other than to kill civilians, but it seems pretty clear that when that happens it is either (a) an accident or (b) in most cases, the terrorists using human shields to protect rocket launch sites and such. The two hated militaries have nothing to gain by taking out civilians, but they do have interest in hitting rocket launch sites and military relates supply lines and such. Should they cease as soon as the terrorists move their sites to civilian areas or move civilians in? Imagine if WWII were fought that way.

      Look, civilian death is the worst thing that happens in war, and should be avoided. However it does happen and it would be intellectually dishonest to pretend that there is no difference between specifically targeting civilians and hitting civilians while targeting military targets.

      Finkployd

    37. Re:Good work by pianophile · · Score: 5, Funny

      Nobody's asking you to drink a big foamy glass of piss here.

      Please don't change the subject. We're talking breast milk, not American beer. ;-)

      --

      'Your brain is God.' -- Dr. Timothy Leary
    38. Re:Good work by holt · · Score: 3, Insightful
      In addition, it's better to be seen taking some kind of measures than to just sit back and say "See, we're doing our jobs. This one didn't succeed." Even if it's true.

      Better for whom? Certainly not me, if those measures are completely ineffectual in that they don't increase actual security, but only the appearance of security. I'm surprised that no terrorists have attacked the ridiculous lines of people waiting to go through security. How are you going to prevent that, have security checkpoints before you can queue for the security checkpoints?

      The whole thing is ridiculous. They do things merely to be seen doing something, which is often worse than doing nothing at all.

    39. Re:Good work by donutello · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most of the 9/11 terrorists were actually from relatively wealthy Saudi Arabian families.

      A percentage of the Palestinian suicide bombers do actually fall into the "nothing to lose" category where the prospect of their families being rewarded for their deaths is actually part of their motivation but that does not apply to the majority of the terrorists.

      You're still trying to think about this from the point of view of a westerner when you assume that you would only do something suicidal if you had nothing to lose.

      --
      Mmmm.. Donuts
    40. Re:Good work by HTTP+Error+403+403.9 · · Score: 3, Funny

      It looks like most of those arrested are Pakastani's so I am guessing the U.S. will be bombing Iran shortly.

      --
      I'm not a Troll, it's reverse psychology.
  2. No hand luggage... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From TFA: "Passengers are not allowed to take any hand luggage on to any flights in the UK, the department said."

    Only passports, wallets.

    The mind boggles. No computers, books, iPods, bottles of water, sunglasses?

    Smoking, alcohol, and sex are already off-limits or difficult. I hope these are really short flights, and the planes have plenty of distractions for the passengers, otherwise we'll wonder if being blown up is not the better alternative.

    1. Re:No hand luggage... by Hope+Thelps · · Score: 5, Insightful
      No computers, books, iPods, bottles of water, sunglasses?

      You're allowed your wallet precisely so that you can buy all those things on board the plane. And then again on the next plane. Buy airline stock now.
      --
      To summarise the summary of the summary: people are a problem. ~ h2g2
    2. Re:No hand luggage... by geoffspear · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I hope these are really short flights

      Yeah, they're the new 20 minute commuter planes from the UK to the US.

      My god, is it really too much to ask to read the first sentence in the summary?

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    3. Re:No hand luggage... by mgblst · · Score: 3, Funny

      As for sex, most of us don't find it all that difficult you know...
       
      I joined the half-mile high club. It is like the mile high club, but has half as many people.

      Seriously, I heard that they were not even allowing books - that would be shit. Having to actualy watch those stupid emergency announcements.

    4. Re:No hand luggage... by Lars+T. · · Score: 3, Funny
      Toys for the kids, baby food, medicine...

      People who bring kids onboard a plane still aren't considered terrorists?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  3. Questions by ettlz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First, congratulations to the Security Services for foiling this plot.

    Did they need to detain someone for 90 days without trial to prevent this disaster?
    Would ID cards have helped?

    And how long before I can travel with my notebook onto an aeroplane again, as we all know a cargo hold is no place for a lithium ion battery?

    1. Re:Questions by geoffspear · · Score: 4, Funny

      One can only wonder how long it will take some bright airport security guard to realize that blood is a liquid and insist that all passengers be cryonically frozen before boarding.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    2. Re:Questions by timeOday · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Did they need to detain someone for 90 days without trial to prevent this disaster? Would ID cards have helped?
      My guess is if they can tie controversial police actions to this successful bust in any way, they will do it. Some official will testify that "the provisions of the [patriot act, whatever you call yours] were essential in foiling this terrorist plot" likely without any specifics as to the connection.
  4. TSA just anounced the new restrictions on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    luggage.

    No liquids or gels can be brought on board.

    Reduce the "clutter" in your luggage so the inspectors have a clear view.

    Medicine is ok and baby formula but be prepared to show it to the inspector.

    Call carrier to see how early you have to arrive.

    Have fun flying?!.

    1. Re:TSA just anounced the new restrictions on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      They better ban snakes too

    2. 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?

  5. Re:Just in time for U.S. Mid-Term Elections by tsa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, maybe this time there was really something. Let's wait a week or so until things are more clear before shouting things like this.

    --

    -- Cheers!

  6. Re:Wonderful by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 4, Funny

    I wonder if the mousse in my hair will get me a trip to gitmo...

    Not if your airplane breaks the time barrier and lands in 1986.

  7. Why oh why by kahei · · Score: 5, Funny


    WHY do these terrorists specifically hate those of us who are scared of flying??

    --
    Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
    1. 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.

  8. Re:Correction to the subject by Andy+Gardner · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The threats have not been "avoided", merely "postponed", until the terrorists have another/different idea, and/or security gets a little lax again.

    Or, you could say, until we stop bombing the shit out of/subjugating/exploiting the third world in general...

  9. Latest by argStyopa · · Score: 5, Informative

    Current information coming over the Beeb is that the plot may have included up to 9 planes simultaneously or in successive waves.

    Explosives are suspected to have been carried on in hand luggage as liquids, suggesting that they were planning to use binary agents (where two non-explosive chemicals are mixed to form a 3rd reactive substance).

    Currently travelers from the UK are being told that (IIRC) they may board the planes with absolutely no more than 7 carryon items, limited to a select list such as:
    - 1 book
    - 1 newspaper
    - wallet
    - passport
    etc.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:Latest by cap0ne · · Score: 4, Funny

      The only thing left for the terrorists will be explosive clothing. They'll find a way to weave C4 right into their shirts in a visually pleasing plaid pattern. But instead of actually carrying out their mission of martyrdom, they will simply mail a sample to CNN, have Bin Laden make a vague recording about it.

      I can picture the result now: planeloads of people sitting wide-eyed and paranoid while shivering in little paper gowns - the kind with the backsides missing like you get at the hospital. The terrorists will not be able to stop laughing.

  10. Not foiled - disrupted by akadruid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Please note that MI5 said 'disrupted', not 'foiled'. The impact that this event has caused can definitely be considered a significant success by the planning organisation or anyone aligned with their goals, if not as much as they wished.

    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.

    --
    "Those who cast the votes decide nothing; those who count the votes decide everything." (attrib. Joseph Stalin)
  11. All simplistic theories aside.... by krell · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Or, you could say, until we stop bombing the shit out of/subjugating/exploiting the third world in general..."

    That is quite simplistic. Did you realize that the main beef of the Madrid bombers was that Spain had driven out Muslim invaders hundreds of years ago? It's too easy to dismiss everything as "the oppressed Third World being forced to strike back at First World oppressors", especially if you subscribe to very simplistic Marxist world-views and lack critical thinking.

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
  12. 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.

  13. Security by Ed+Almos · · Score: 4, Funny

    Security at airports is not 'tightened' it's fucking impossible. Anyone travelling from the UK to the USA will find that it's quicker to walk.

    Ed Almos

    --
    The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws. - Tacitus, 56-120 A.D.
  14. Re:After reading the dreck on here by socalmtb · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing occured during Clinton's Presidency. Also the USS Cole. I think there were a few more.

  15. I disagree (Was Re:Slashdot's too late to be...) by Billosaur · · Score: 3, Insightful
    This has been on CNN for the last 8 hours. I think that Slashdot's entire story submission process is to slow to effectively cover breaking news, since it just isn't news anymore.
    1. Thank god Slashdot is not CNN; they tend to take one little piece of news with very few details and rake it over the coals for hour after hour after hour until you are so sick of it you want to puke.
    2. Not news anymore? Hello, McFly?!?!? According to news sources, these people were going to blow up trans-Atlantic flights bound for the US filled full of people. How does that stop being news in just 8 hours? Have you become so inured to the whole terrorism thing that you can't see an important piece of news when it's right in front of you?
    --
    GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
  16. Re:Again, probably a non-existent terror plot by Alranor · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you really remember, you will recall certain facts you left out, such as the man was fleeing from police. He created the dangerous situation. If you do such things, especially in a security-critical transportation environment, don't be surprised if you get shot.

    No, He wasn't fleeing from the police.

    You should really try and get your facts right before you accuse other people.

  17. Flag by Damastus+the+WizLiz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why an American flag on a post about a British event?

    --
    I often have trouble remembering which way is out of bed in the morning.
  18. Re:Again, probably a non-existent terror plot by bytesex · · Score: 3, Informative

    Uhm no. He was quietly sitting inside the carriage; he hadn't jumped the tollbooths, he wasn't wearing a bulky jacket, he wasn't running. Then they pulled him to the ground and shot seven rounds in his head from about ten centimeters distance. Check the facts, man. Also, the guy was called Jean Charles de Menezes and he continues to be a nasty smudge on the reputation of the London Metropolitan Police, who have otherwise made sure, after an internal investigation, that they're not to blame at all for his death.

    --
    Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
  19. No carryon soda... by mjh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course, what will happen now is the the TSA or the FAA is going to ban all carryon liquids on air travel, and just for good measure will throw in food. So now that the airlines don't offer free food on flights, anyone want to start a pool on when the free sodas on the airplane will suddenly become very expensive? Put me down for Aug 18, 2006.

    I'm not trying to suggest that this is some sort of plot by the airlines to charge higher drink prices. I don't think any such thing. I'm simply saying that this is the likely result of the inane government action that will innevitably follow: banning all carryon fluids on all commercial flights.

    --
    Key to financial independence: Spend less than you earn. Save and invest the difference. Do it for a long time.
  20. Re:Just in time for U.S. Mid-Term Elections by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The wolf likes it when the boy cries out, it makes things so much easier.

    --
    - These characters were randomly selected.
  21. Is anyone else... by Null537 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...more angry about the hassle this causes, than anything else? Terrorists spread terror, so they've hit their mark. By being foiled the plot does an amazing amount of damage on its own, spreading FUD.

    I don't feel any safer by having my liquids/toenail clippers/pocket vibe/ipod/laptop taken away from me, when there are plenty of other ways to kill/be killed that airlines have no control over. I am more angry at terrorists for making American privacy close(er) to extinction than anything else. With a "war" on "terror" there are going to be casualties, my water consumption/music listening/laptop using/game playing/phone usage habits shouldn't be at the top of the list.

    Why does the scapegoat have to be the common citizen?

    1. Re:Is anyone else... by tecnopa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      terrorists have not made American privacy close(er) to extinction, American government has made American privacey close(er) to extinction.

  22. Its not fear mongering by Shivetya · · Score: 3, Insightful

    when you are reporting the truth.

    The fact is and has always been the same. Radical Islam wants to destroy the West. The best way to bring down their target is through fear. Ignoring it got us in the mess in the first place.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Its not fear mongering by Tom · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The fact is and has always been the same. Radical Islam wants to destroy the West.

      As a matter of fact, the immediate goals of radical islam are to take over control of the arab nations, by destroying the pro-west and secular governments.

      Osama Bin Laden is on record for his demands against the Saudi government. His primary goal early in his career was to remove the US presence from Saudi Arabia and especially the holy cities of islam.

      The Taliban were not planning to attack any western country - they were quite happy running their own, that is what they had always wanted.

      The hatred for the west emerged as a secondary goal, because the west kept interfering with those goals. For example, by supporting the secular Iraq during the first gulf war (Iran-Iraq).

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  23. Re:Just in time for U.S. Mid-Term Elections by mallardtheduck · · Score: 5, Informative

    >One thing that's almost certain is that no official will release any detail on that plot

    I have been watching BBC news for the last 30 minutes (I live in the UK). Considerable detail has already been released and it's still the first day of the operation.
    We have been told:

    * Liquid explosives were planned to be hidden in soft drinks bottles (hence the ban on liquids).
    * The explosives would be detonated over the atlantic (to ensure maximum fatalities).
    * The attack would come in waves. As things start to clam down after the first wave, another wave was to be launched.
    * The deah toll would be greather than 9/11.

    According to US spokespeople:

    * The investigation has been "critical" for about 2 weeks.

    Compared to the vague information you hear from US alerts, this seems *much* more credible.

  24. 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..."
  25. Government was already seeding their messages... by David+McBride · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just yesterday, the UK Home Secretary was in the news saying that "we may have to modify some of our freedoms in the short-term" to protect us from evil terrorists. Given the degree of preparedness demonstrated by various services today, it seems pretty obvious that he was aware of the current situation when he made those remarks -- thus it also seems clear that he was shape people's opinion in preperation for the events that are now unfolding in public today.

    See: Terror 'may force freedom curbs'.

  26. Why Planes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why are planes and airports apparently such an appealing target for terrorism? If I really wanted to do some damage to civilians i'd go to a sold out college football game (very little security) and blow a chunk out of the stadium. If I wanted to do some damage to the government then I'd find some fairly small military building to blow up. And lastly, if I wanted to do something that would get a ton of media attention, i'd blow up a water tower or some sort of public monument.

    The only reason I could think that planes are so attractive is that you only have to overtake several people and once you are in the cockpit, you are free to do whatever you want without revolt. Unless you have specific plans to use the plane (not just blow it up while its in flight) or hold the passengers hostage, it doesn't seem like a very great capture. I suppose one other advantage is that the terrorist doesn't have to worry about being stabbed to death with nail clippers that bystanders had on them since you can be sure the airport security took those all away.

  27. nightmare scenario by Bazman · · Score: 5, Funny

    friends of mine are flying home from UK to Australia soon. With two small kids. And under the restrictions, no kids toys. 18 hours with two kids and nothing to keep the occupied.

    I suspect the rest of the plane would prefer a terrorist attack.

    1. Re:nightmare scenario by stephenbooth · · Score: 3, Funny

      Or just duct tape their mouth shut and put them in a dog costume then ship them in the hold.

      Stephen

      PS I don't like children

      PPS Actually doing the above may be illegal, check with the airline first

      --
      "Don't write down to your readers, the only people less intelligent than you can't read" - Sign on Newspaper Office Wall
  28. 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.

  29. Re:Just in time for U.S. Mid-Term Elections by jimmichie · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The Fearmongering must stop !

    That's a good point, actually - does this situation really merit that the "UK threat level" to be set to "critical -- the highest possible"? At the highest possible threat level I'd really expect to be worried for my life the moment I stepped out of the front door, anywhere in the UK. No, inside my house - at the highest possible threat level I should be scared to make a cup of tea in case the water supply is poisoned or look under the bed in case there's a monster.

    We are not being shelled, we are not being invaded, we are not under attack, we still have a higher risk of dying from heart disease. By calling this situation "the highest possible threat level" the government is whipping up fear and paranoia, and MI5 runs the very real risk of inuring people to any real UK-wide dangers that may come along.
  30. So... by Anonymous+Cowtard · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wonder what they were planning to use? Pop Rocks and soda or the new hotness of Mentos and soda?

  31. Re:It was sure this would happen by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And, like with falsifying creationism, there is no way to be certain the plot was genuine -- at most, you can prove a given plot was staged up.

    And, given the repeated circumstances in which plots that were "staged up" actually ended up in shredded bodies in London, Madrid, and elsewhere, you don't see people who have actually chosen their flights and are in possesion of actual explosives to be worth stopping?

    In this case, I would rather believe the conspiracy theorists -- no sane intelligence agency would wait until the terrorists are about to board the planes.

    As you've perhaps noticed, they were not walking up to or sitting down on airplanes at the time. They made the arrests before that stage, but only after they were comfortable with having as many of the people in the cell as possible accounted for. If they'd acted sooner, they may have lost more of the cell. There are thousands of variables at play here, and the number of people in intel and law enforcement that have to coordinate on such a thing (including the ones who have to be ready to capitalize on the international communications and other business that would have immediately erupted the moment this hit the news) is enormous.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  32. The Scottish Home Secretary by Flying+pig · · Score: 4, Funny
    Announces that us liberal left wingers just don't get it on terrorism. Judges refusing to convict without evidence, evidence which they are not allowed to see because those lefty judges are themselves security risks. Ridiculous human rights legislation that prevents him from simply locking up anybody he feels like. Over-zealous government agencies that want to investigate how the police came to shoot an unarmed man sitting harmlessly in a train and then spread FUD about it afterwards. The same idiot left wing liberals who think that perhaps if we had a more even handed and rational policy in the Middle East we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.

    At the risk of being accused of covert racism, it's perhaps worth pointing out just how much of the UK government is controlled by Scots, from the Prime Minister down. The Scots have something of a reputation for violence and aggression, and if you want to point out that the Rt Hon Anthony Blair, MA, Barrister-at-Law is an upper class Scottish lawyer, it was just such an upper class Scottish lawyer that organised the Glencoe massacre, for his own advantage.

    Actually, I think our police and security services on the whole do a pretty good job, especially outside London (where there is a lot of institutional corruption.) But they deserve better politicians.

    --
    Pining for the fjords
  33. 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.
  34. What is the goal behind terrorism? by portwojc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Honestly what is the goal behind terrorism? Has it done anything for their cause besides rain more crap down on the people they claim they are fighting for?

    1. Re:What is the goal behind terrorism? by f1055man · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I was going to insult you for being slow, but considering our politicians haven't even bothered to ask the question I guess you're doing alright. The point is to eliminate Western (mostly the U.S.) hegemony in the middle east. Those that use terrorism to achieve their goals can't beat us, but they can bait us into committing international relations suicide. It seems to have worked. We (well half a dozen of us anyway) really fucked ourselves over. We now occupy a country with greater allegiance to Iran and Hezbollah than us, forced our lackeys in the region to distance themselves, all for the small cost of $500b and 2800 dead.

    2. Re:What is the goal behind terrorism? by JavaLord · · Score: 4, Informative

      Honestly what is the goal behind terrorism? Has it done anything for their cause besides rain more crap down on the people they claim they are fighting for?

      The main goal as far as the US is concerned is to push the US out of the middle east. Bin Laden specifically stated his goal was to get the US to stop propping up dictators in the middle east, supplying weapons to Israel, and basically, to stay out of their business.

      Terrorism typically works on an invading force, especially when that force is relucatant to kill civilians. Once the price in blood is too high, the invading force will usually pull out. It has worked in the past.

      If you want to understand what Bin Laden wants, read his Fatwah. Here is a brief part of it from wikipedia:

      1998 Fatwa

      In February 1998, another Fatwa was issued that was signed by Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and others.

      Published on the 23rd February in the Al-Quds Al-Arabi independent newspaper, it lists three grievances:

      * U.S. occupation of the Arabian Peninsula

      "First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples. If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless."

      * U.S. devastation of the Iraqi people and humiliation of their Muslim neighbors

      "Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million... despite all this, the Americans are once again trying to repeat the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation. So here they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors."

      * U.S. support of Israel

      "Third, if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper statelets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel's survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula."

      "The International Islamic Front for Jihad against the U.S. and Israel has issued a crystal-clear fatwa calling on the Islamic nation to carry on jihad aimed at liberating holy sites. The nation of Muhammad has responded to this appeal. If the instigation for jihad against the Jews and the Americans in order to liberate Al-Aksa Mosque and the Holy Ka'aba Islamic shrines in the Middle East is considered a crime, then let history be a witness that I am a criminal."

  35. Propaganda by N8F8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cynicism in the US is reaching an all-time high. Half the population blames the government or accuses it of conspiracy no matter what the government does. We need more effective ways of countering the enemy's FUD. We have multiple CSPAN channels broadcasting government live and embedded reporters and still most of the citizenry would rather read and believe tabloids, kooks and extremist blogs. Guess what, you are the government. You are the military. Look at the history of the world and realize that there ARE people who will kill you because they don't like your GOD or covet what you have or have been taught since childhood to hate you out of existence.

    --
    "God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
    1. Re:Propaganda by plasmacutter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      2800 dead is less than the number of fatal accidents each month on americas highways, maybe we should start banning cars too?

      The whole reason we have a government with checks and balances is because the framers knew there will be issues with people correctly interpretign and applying laws...as well as abusing power.

      and it's failed,
      -lobbyists have infiltrated our government on all levels
      -because our system only allows 2 parties to exist, the current 2 parties have so locked out the potential of any third party that several candidates in the last elected were arrested

      also consider that most of the "abuses" you THINK you know about are part of the FUD spread by meembers of the press (and the legislature) with an agenda.

      No, the media does not have a "liberal bias". Those accusations come from right wing extremists who consider the center to be "left".
      The best example would be the 2000 election. Gore got WAY more negative press than bush did, and bush got more positive press than gore did. Yep, that dirty liberal media really were exercising an agenda of getting gore into office nitpicking him for things like taking credit for pushing to fund the development of the internet while refusing to scrutinize bush's many more serious flaws.

      --
      VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
    2. Re:Propaganda by ThinWhiteDuke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Half the population blames the government or accuses it of conspiracy no matter what the government does

      Govt said Saddam had WMD. Govt said Saddam was Bin Laden's friend. Govt went to war. Saddam had no WMD. Saddam and Bin Laden hated each other.

      Govt said it had "irrefutable evidence". It was not irrefutable. It was not evidence either. Downing street memo says "intelligence and facts are fixed around the policy".

      Govt said Iraqis would welcome soldiers with flowers and chocolate. Iraqis sent road side bombs and mortar shells.

      Govt said Mission Accomplished. It was 3 years ago. Mission still not accomplished.

      Govt said it's spreading democracy in the middle-east. The whole region is spiralling into chaos and mayhem (Iraq, Palestine, Lebanon, Iran...)

      Election time comes. Govt changes alert levels repeatedly. Population is scared into trusting the Govt. Govt wins elections. Nothing happens. Nothing is revealed.

      Govt said Abu Graib was "bad apples". Govt fights anti-torture law. Anti-torture law passes. Prez's signing statement says he will ignore it.

      Govt says it needs secrecy to defend America. Govt classifies each and every instance it breaks the law.

      Shall I go on?

      In general, it's healthy to distrust the government. In this particular case, it's a necessity.

      --

      It would be nice to be sure of anything the way some people are of everything.
  36. Re:Good bye, laptop! by digitalsushi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    dude, it's a laptop, not a spleen. yeah it's retarded and we shouldn't have to, but being distracted by the real world for 6 hours isn't going to kill you. it can't, i mean you won't have anything on your person to do it with anyways.

    --
    slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
  37. Re:This is how terrorism is fought against by Shaper_pmp · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This is DEFENDING against terrorism.


    You're completely right - this is merely wimpy, pussy-like reactive defence.

    We should be out there like real men, pro-actively fighting the terrorist threat... by educating people, improving their quality of life, allowing them self-determination and treating them fairly - that's how you stop terrorism, by taking away its recruits.

    Oh, sorry, you meant we should be go stomping into countries which might or might not even support them and blow up or shoot a lot of brown people. I can see how that would stop all the other brown people who weren't terrorists before. And it'll certainly not prompt any of them to become terrorists. Good plan!

    Thoughts for the day:

    Terrorism's only raw material is recruits.

    You can kick over snowmen all day long - they'll keep popping because anyone can make them. However, remove the supply of snow and there will be no more snowmen.
    --
    Everything in moderation, including moderation itself
  38. Re:After reading the dreck on here by moracity · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I realize you are a troll because no one could possibly be THAT ignorant, but we also have:

    1) 1979 Iranian hostage affair

    2) 1983 U.S Embassy bombing in Beruit

    These were the beginnings of Middle East terrorist organizations specifically targetting the U.S. You can try to blame it on the U.S meddling in Mid-east affairs, but that is a cover-up for the real reason. The fact is, Islam has not progressed beyond the time of the Crusades and anyone who does not follow Islam must be converted or killed. Yes, there was a time that Christianity followed a similar precept, but they finally moved on. Unfortunately, there is no way to win against this type of belief except by killing them all.

    I hate to break it to you Bush-haters, but the only thing Kerry could have done to change things is establish Islam as the new national religion of the U.S. You people need to get your heads out of the political trash heap and realize that none of this is about what we've done -- it's about who we are. These people don't care about your political leanings except as a tool to build sympathy for the devil. They would just as soon see you lying dead next to W.

    THAT is the reality we face.

  39. Re:Threat Level? by Patrik_AKA_RedX · · Score: 3, Funny

    Monday: The thread level has been raised to level 5

    Tuesday: The thread level has been raised to level 12.

    Wednesday: The thread level has been raised to level 25.

    Thursday: The thread level has been raised to level 148.

    Friday: The thread level has become a super-sayan.

  40. Just reread 1984 by Xiph · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We're at war with the Soviets^D^DTerrorists...
    And we just has a glorious victory !
    next up the 20 minutes of hate?
    then back to work, business as usual..

    We don't even need a war, just the illusion of one, thank you minitrue for real and complete reports of whats going on, and thank you miniplenty for lowering the oil prices to a historic low of 20$ pr gallon...

    the current war on terror is quite like the war in 1984. Where the main purpose of the war was not to capture territories or resources, but rather to reduce the freedoms of the populaces. after the liberation of iraq, iraqies gained some and lost some, but people of the eu and us lost freedom. This victory will no doubt show that our forces are good and fine and great, and with more funding they'd be even better. now they have tightened airport security, most notably by requiring all carryons to be carried in clear plastic bags.

    They're no doubt already discussing how to make security even better, as we speak. I'm not saying terrorism isn't real, but it's certainly been boosted since we started taking it seriously. I'm not saying the government is trying to take away your freedoms, but I do think they're forgetting what it is the silverware of civilisation that they're remoulding to shoot werewolves (monsters none of us really know much about). The governments are more worried about the deaths of a max. 5000 citizens the last five years, than meeting the big challenges we're facing (reducing bureaucracy, informing the intolerant, helping developing countries, improving pluralistic democracy, increasing education levels, getting humans to think)

    So what if they kill a few of us, including some leaders, democracy is strong because it is NOT dependant on one person, but when too few cares, it becomes a defacto oligarchy.

    /rant over
    --
    Blah blah sig blah blah blah irony blah blah
  41. Re:Hmm. by enharmonix · · Score: 4, Insightful
    To be honest, I really wish I heard more of these stories here in the States. I think no news is bad news.

    Spoken like a true American. We tend to forget pretty quickly. Umm... remember this from October? Probably not. In fact, I couldn't remember any of the specific plots we foiled, other than Richard Reid (if we can even count the Brits acting on US intel as a win for us).

    I think its more a cultural difference, though. American journalists like panic! blood! chaos! I bet you might remember the UNC student who ran down some of his fellow students, or the Muslim fellow in Seattle that shot 6 people (including a pregnant woman) attending synagogue, or the other guy that shot up El Al... Notice that we are enemy #2 (sandwiched between Israel and the UK), but of these, we've had the fewest terrorist acts in our country since 9/11. That means we are stopping attacks. The reason we only hear about failures and not successes is that our media doesn't report when our side wins, they only report catastrophes (I recommend Michael Crichton's State of Fear -- it's well researched and covers this and quite a few other topics).

  42. Re:Election Time? convenient by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Gotta love it.. absofreakinglutely nothing happens until election time. Whatever happened to the Florida terrorist group that made headlines last time the prezs numbers were hitting the floor?

    Has it ever occurred to you that election time is exactly when these clowns would deliberately seek to launch such an attack? Have you completely forgotten how Al Qaeda directly, and in their own favor, manipulated Spanish elections by being willing to slaughter Spaniards?

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  43. Re:Again, probably a non-existent terror plot by Alioth · · Score: 3, Informative

    The man was NOT fleeing from the police, he was running to catch a train that was about to leave. The police didn't shout at him until after he was *seated* in the train, and the police had to put a foot in the sliding door of the tube train to prevent the door closing because it was on the verge of leaving - that's why Menezes was running for the train. He didn't start to run, according to witnesses, until he saw that there was a train in the platform. He didn't vault a ticket barrier (he used his Oyster card to enter the station). He wasn't wearing heavy winter clothing; he was wearing a denim jacket (as the photographs in evidence show).

  44. Re:Where's the logic in attacking planes? by gatkinso · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I wonder this too, but a bomb on a plane in flight will probably kill everyone on board - not so in a shopping mall.

    Higher kill ratio.
    Spectacular.
    Passengers on a plane tend to be more affulent.
    The monetary loss of the plane itself is very high.
    Disrupts air travel leading to wider economic perturbations.

    I guess that is why they are after planes. But also they go for busses and trains and nightclubs.

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  45. Some numeric speculation by rbarreira · · Score: 4, Insightful
    * The deah toll would be greather than 9/11.

    News are saying that 21 people have been arrested, and 9/11 death toll was 2976 people (according to wikipedia, other sites I saw gave similar numbers). To attain this number, each of the 21 attackers would have to kill 2976/21 = 141 people per plane, which seems reasonable. That, of course, is assuming only 1 attacker per plane... Wouldn't it be more probable that there were at least 2 attackers per plane? In that case, killing 283 people per plane seems too much... Which might indicate that not all the attackers are under custody.
    --

    The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    1. Re:Some numeric speculation by absinthminded64 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Then it won't come as a surprise that 300 people seems too much while you're on the plane as well.

  46. Re:Just in time for U.S. Mid-Term Elections by advocate_one · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The explosives would be detonated over the atlantic (to ensure maximum fatalities).

    actually, it's far more effective to detonate them over land when they are at cruising altitude... remember Lockerbie... I certainly do... I did not enjoy my Christmas that year as I was a member of the search parties for the bodies... a right mess that was... spread over hundreds of square miles...

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  47. Re:Just in time for U.S. Mid-Term Elections by Creosote · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The attack would come in waves. As things start to clam down after the first wave, another wave was to be launched.

    On the radio this morning (a Washington, D.C., news station) there was reference to a planned 3 attacks over 3 days. I found that odd--if successful simultaneous detonations were carried out, wouldn't the plotters assume that security would immediately be tightened to the point where the chances of succeeding on subsequent days would be much lower?

  48. Re:I'm sorry I'll have to say this but... by unity100 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Actually what i think is there is a great deal of difference between plots being fabricated or not.

    In case they are fabricated, it means that there is a group of people with access to power in the country, the likes of people that can do anything to do what is in their and their supporting circle's best interests, no matter what and how it is being done or who gets harmed.

    this is way more dangerous than external terrorist threat, which can be avoided with adequate security.

    It is much harder to get rid of the 'terrorists' at home.

  49. 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.

  50. Re:This is how terrorism is fought against by dfenstrate · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We should be out there like real men, pro-actively fighting the terrorist threat... by educating people, improving their quality of life, allowing them self-determination and treating them fairly - that's how you stop terrorism, by taking away its recruits.

    How does any of that change the ideological basis for most of today's current terrorism? IE, Islam, literally, submission.

    Your theory might work for gang-banging ghetto thugs, but for murderers who think they're doing Allah's work your view is entirely naive. This is ideological war, make no mistake. I'm not saying every Muslim is a terrorist or even sympathetic to them but you're being willfully blind of the common thread between them all.

    Moreover, many US Muslims, despite having everything you wish to give terrorists, sympathize with or outright finance terrorists. The guy who just went on a shooting spree in a Jewish community center was apparently very well employed, and what came of it? Murder.

    We are fighting people who think it is the will of Allah to convert you to Islam, make you submit as a Dhimmi, or kill you. If you think American ultra-right religous conservatives are so evil, why is it such a stretch to see that taken much further , 'faith' can lead to murder?

    --
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
  51. Re:Just in time for U.S. Mid-Term Elections by twifosp · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I'm a bit shaky on my chemical engineering and what liquid explosives could have been used. But let's take an average 16oz bottle of liquid explosives. How much damage could that actually do? Liquid explosives are a lot less explosive than solid ones. Sure a couple oz of the plastic variety, centex / c4, would blow the plane to bits. But what liquid explosives in that quantity could blow a sizable hole in an airliner? Liquid explosives burn slow, they don't punch with a lot of force. At least ones stable enough to consider transporting on to a plane. Not that the terrorists care, but whats the point of the plan if it blows up in the car on the way to the airport.

    And why wouldn't these have been caught by the chemical sniffers in the security check points? The hidden drug/bomb dogs in the airport? Why all the new security? Why wouldn't our normal airport security have caught these guys in the airport?

    Note: You need a sizable hole punched in a plane to make it break up. An entire chunk of the fuselage needs to be removed. Explosive decompression doesn't occur from small basketball sized holes.

  52. Right. by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 3, Funny

    Trumped up nonsense, generatetd by our "gurdians".

    And the U.S. will have t' do without toothpaste, emulating the dental characteristics that make us in the UK world famous. :-)

    --
    "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
  53. Re:Now, what conclusions can you draw from this by finkployd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Insightful? Jesus.

    How about an attack every five days if we lets those cocks have free reign?


    That sentence does not look right, let's fix it.

    How about an attack every five days if we lets our citizens have civil liberties?

    If we as a country valued safety above all else in the 1700s, we would never have broken away from England. We would have BEGGED the British to quarter troops in our homes and tax the daylights out of us just as long as the promised to keep us safe from Indian raids.

    Finkployd

  54. completely secure! by jesterpilot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Note also the bit about having to drink any baby milk - previously held to be only an urban legend

    Of course, terrorists don't drink unhealthy substances in the last hours before a suicide attack.

    --
    Trust me, I work for the government.
    1. Re:completely secure! by kalidasa · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Depends upon how toxic it is. If it will burn their esophagus out on the spot and cause them to cough up blood on the screener, that might just be a clue for the screeners that the substance isn't really toothpaste.

    2. Re:completely secure! by giafly · · Score: 4, Funny
      <sarcasm>Of course, terrorists don't drink unhealthy substances in the last hours before a suicide attack.</sarcasm>
      Proof: "Suicide bomber Hasib Hussain ate a last meal at McDonald's before blowing up the No. 30 bus on 7 July, killing 13 people." - Bus bomber stopped for a Big Mac
      --
      Reduce, reuse, cycle
    3. Re:completely secure! by raehl · · Score: 4, Funny

      If it will burn their esophagus out on the spot and cause them to cough up blood on the screener, that might just be a clue for the screeners that the substance isn't really toothpaste.

      Apparently you're not using a very good toothpaste. You wouldn't believe how white my teeth are. (My gums are a little red though.)

  55. Re:I would LOVE to see carry-on luggage banned by Dachannien · · Score: 3, Funny

    Perhaps seat 12C's cold drink is Binary Part A (which is reasonably safe to drink) and seat 20D's cold drink is Binary Part B (which is also reasonably safe to drink, although it tastes worse than Part A).

    Terrorist A: Praise Allah! Are you ready to do this?
    Terrorist B: God is great! Yes, I'm ready. Bring on the virgins.
    Terrorist A: (pours a bottle of green liquid into a large cup) Okay, pour yours in here, too.
    Terrorist B: ...
    Terrorist A: What's the matter?
    Terrorist B: ...
    Terrorist A: Dammit! You weren't supposed to drink the whole thing!

  56. Re:In the US, I drive instead of fly. by drewzhrodague · · Score: 4, Insightful
    It takes you 11 hours to fly between Pittsburgh and Boston? You know, you don't have to connect through Denver...

    You know, I wish it were true, that I didn't have to connect anywhere. This is how they getcha into buying a higher-priced ticket.

    Also, my time measurement was for door to door, and with normal delays. An actual direct flight is only like an hour and a half. But, when you consider these factors:
    • Pittsburgh's airport is nowhere near Pittsburgh
    • It is designed as a mall, complete with Victoria's Secret, the Gap, Godiva, and other mall-like things
    • Checkin line for the cheap flights is like downloading your favorite distro at 1200 baud
    • Cheap flights are always connecting somewhere, and have a layover
    • Leaving Boston's Logan Airport is a challenge, and a fight to the death
    ...then it is actually far worse. I've had shorter flights before, too, but the norm is a hassle, uncomfortable, and demeaning.

    Besides, I get to see the countryside, do some wardriving, and discuss many things with my SO. No security theatre, plenty of cargo area, far cheaper. Cruising through the amber waves of grain, and purple mountain's majesty -- *that* is part of the American Dream that I was taught, not this Orwellian nonsense.
    --
    Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
  57. Re:Desperation by jakarta-milwaukee · · Score: 3, Informative

    I live in a country with the highest number of muslim population in the world (Indonesia). There is some logic to what you say, but I don't feel that it's the main reason, not in Indonesia's case anyway.

    The terrorists here don't seem to be motivated by economic reason. Some were already rich and educated. And I don't hear the poor people here blaming western countries for their poverty. Concepts such as global equality and obesity in the US are not their concerns. If you gave them a large sum of money, they would not suddenly become moderates.

    I think they are motivated by their extreme view of Islam and the values that go with it. Those who don't share that view and values (like the US) are seen as the enemy and must be eliminated.

    --
    google: verb - to search for information on the Internet.
  58. Chemistry / Physics and Liquid Explosives by zentinal · · Score: 3, Informative
    Actually the Beeb does a pretty good at explaining this. My concerns:
    • Are there liquid explosives whose components are (relatively) safely drinkable? I say relatively because, if you're a suicide bomber, it really doesn't matter if it will kill you in 24 hours, you just have to be conscious for 2 or 3 hours after drinking the stuff for the security staff.
    • Are there liquid explosives which can be made from a drinkable component (or two or three) and (ewwww) urine?
    How far do we go with this?
  59. grass roots anti-war by Tsiangkun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm running late, so I'll just put the lines on the page and leave space to read between them.

    Joe got the boot from a grass roots movement.

    The spin machine reminds people that democrats are left wing radicals that are weak on homeland security.

    A convenient terror plot spoiled so soon after is suspicious.

  60. Re:Snakes on a Plane by kz45 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "You are ignorant. You methods breed new fundamentist muslim terrorists."

    if you do nothing, there will still be new fundamentilist muslim terrorists. So why not at least try to do something? It's foolish to sit back and let someone attack you.

    "The correct way is not using any force at all. If you know where they are, send that region economic help. Do everything to increase happiness in that region, and take no violent action whatsoever. If they blow up a plane, just shrug and say "losers", then move one. Don't pay alot of attention to it, they are, just losers after all."

    Hehe, you're funny. Take a look at all the countries that did that during WW2. Hitler rolled his tanks in and the US ended up having to use force to bail them out. The world does not work the way you think. Leaders and extremists are not rational and they will not listen.

    "Unless you take away the reasons they exist, they will exist. Violence can only take away these reasons by killing everyone, innocent civilians included. And that is not an expectable way."

    The reason goes beyond the US. Their religion has existed for thousands of years. This is their reason, which may not stop until the entire world is muslim and under their control. Would that satisfy you?

  61. Re:This is how terrorism is fought against by dfenstrate · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Both want to make you 'right' at the barrel of a gun, or explosion of a bomb.

    Not entirely true. Western culture is a very seductive culture- lots of people want to partake in it. We have the coolest gadgets, we have flashy, entertaining movies, we have catchy pop songs, and we even occasionally have decent food. Our popular culture indulges in a good bit of hedonism as well.

    This pisses off those who would impose islamic rule to no end- given the choice, most people choose to partake in Western society at some level, and leave the trappings of Islam alone.

    The troubles are admittedly all tied in with Oil, but not in the way popularly believed. The west needs oil- no argument. We can find it in the middle east- no argument. Western companies make deals with whoever is in power to extract this oil. The deal? A steady income for those in power. What do they do with it?

    Partially at least they buy and import western gadgets and culture. What else would they do with it in the middle east? This culture that they import is at quite often completely at odds with Islamic practices and theology, but it's wanted by the people themselves.

    This creates a problem for those who want to impose Islamic rule, and also creates a good deal of Shame for the same people, because they are incapable of producing anything as desirable as the west gladly sells to anyone.

    --
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
  62. Three actually by mcpheat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You're forgetting Harry Stanley, an "Irish terrorist" who turned out to be a Scottish guy walking home from the pub. They got away with claiming he was pointing a table leg at them despite the fact that they shot him in the back of the head.