Liquid Terror Charges Dropped

A Pakistani judge has decided to drop terrorism charges against the man described as a "key figure" in the alleged plan to blow up flights out of London using liquid explosives. Instead of facing charges of terrorism for the plot, which forced many travelers to follow strict guidelines with respect to liquids, Rashid Raud now faces charges such as forgery. From the article: "Several commentators said the threat was deliberately exaggerated to bolster the anti-terror credentials of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and that it helped to demonise British Muslims of Pakistani origin. The Crown Prosecution Service in the UK said the dropping of charges against Mr Rauf in Pakistan would "make no difference" to the case against the men charged in Britain."

Comments

Re:Awesome

[clark0r]

You would have thought that after the whole threat was rubbished by just about anybody with any basic knowledge of classroom chemistry, the home office and BAA would have downgraded the threat. I must say though, I flew from Gatwick 1 week after the plot was 'uncovered' and it didn't really affect me in the slightest. The queues were orderly and moved at quite a good pace, but the security staff didn't have a clue what they were doing. One woman performing searches on people let several people through with cigarette lighters and cigarettes, both clearly not allowed through the checkpoints. Shambles.

Re:Awesome

[glesga_kiss]

You would have thought that after the whole threat was rubbished by just about anybody with any basic knowledge of classroom chemistry, the home office and BAA would have downgraded the threat.

I thought it was now common knowledge that the whole thing was a sham. It was to get another embarrassing item off the news at the time; our ongoing support for the bombardment of Lebanon when every other country in the world was crying out for a ceasefire. It was getting pretty embarrassing for them just as this story "broke".

UK intelligence agencies have said (off-the-record of course) that they wanted to continue observing the group and taking notes, getting contacts and so on. There was never any danger; not only did they not have any chemicals or plane tickets, most of those involved did not even have passports!! It was amateur hour and I believe that the intelligence agencies were waiting to see if they actually knew anyone relevant that they could further investigate.

It was said at the time that the push to make arrests came from the US intelligence service and that this was in spite of vocal opposition from those watching "the group". Now, from what I understand, the only reference to actually attacking planes comes from the torture of someone in Pakistan. The person in question had fled the UK on suspision of murder charges. So, what do you get when you combine an untrustworthy person with torture? Fairytales.

Further reading:

A chemists view

Opinion on those involved

More on the chemical side

This was a non-story and I am amazed that the sham has held so long. I'd make a point of arguing the banality of it when passing through an airport, but it's just not worth the cavity search. I guess I should just be a nice, compliant citizen and be afraid and keep my mouth shut.

Re:Awesome

[jandrese]

I dropped a brand new box of those strike anywhere matches on the floor once when I was a kid. It was still pretty tightly sealed so after the heads burned the wood didn't go anywhere, but it was still pretty scary.

Re:This liquid bomb this is such a joke

[Anonymous Coward]

Last week I was on a short business flight within Canada.

When I went through security I had to give up my ***potentially explosive*** 1L plastic bottle of Pepsi, and be hassled about wearing steel toed shoes (regulation work issued footwear).

After clearing security and getting into the holding pen..err...Lounge area, I went to a vending machine and purchased a GLASS bottle of orange juice.

Now, I'm not the stereotypical terrorist type, but yeah, I could kill a pilot or a couple stews with a broken bottle. It makes me so appreciative of the safety provided by those airline security fees I paid for, knowing they are being circumvented by the Coca-Cola delivery guy ;).

Re:This liquid bomb this is such a joke

[TheRaven64]

In the article you linked to, one person died as a result of the bomb. One. You could quite easily kill one person on a plane without a bomb, although injuring 10 others might be a bit more effort. The only advantage this had was that the bomber was not on the plane when it went off, although not dying doesn't seem to be much of an issue for most terrorists these days. The plot in question, however, was not about taking a liquid explosive on the plane. It was about taking a bunch of different chemicals which would not show up as explosives and mixing them together. The compound that the government claim was going to be made:

1. Requires longer than a transatlantic flight to make, and
2. Will explode if shaken (e.g. by turbulence) at several stages, although the explosion will only be big enough to kill the person mixing it.

Even discounting the fact that most flight attendants would probably be suspicious of someone spending eight hours in the toilet, it doesn't seem entirely feasible.