The article (http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=32e9f0ed-a53c-4356-877c-765bb51f50dc&k=68291)


British authorities thwart terror plot to blow up several aircraft
Passengers wait for their flights at Terminal One Heathrow Airport on August 10, 2006 in London, England. London Airports have been thrown into chaos as Airport security has been heightened to critical after a terrorist plot to blow up planes in mid-flight from the UK to the US was disrupted by police.

Danica Kirka, Canadian Press
Published: Thursday, August 10, 2006

LONDON - British authorities said Thursday they thwarted a terrorist plot to simultaneously blow up several aircraft heading to the United States using explosives smuggled in hand luggage, averting what police described as �mass murder on an unimaginable scale.�

Police arrested 21 people, saying they were confident they captured the main suspects in what U.S. officials said was a plot in its final phases that had all the earmarks of an al-Qaida operation. U.S. President George W. Bush called it a �stark reminder� of the continued threat to the United States from extremist Muslims.

Officials raised security to its highest level in Britain - suggesting a terrorist attack might be imminent - and banned carry-on luggage on all flights. Huge crowds backed up at security barriers at London�s Heathrow airport as officials searching for explosives barred nearly every form of liquid outside of baby formula.

U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the terrorists planned to use liquid explosives disguised as beverages and other common products and set them off with detonators disguised as electronic devices.

The extreme measures at a major international aviation hub sent ripples throughout the world. Heathrow was closed to most flights from Europe, and British Airways cancelled all its flights between the airport and points in Britain, Europe and Libya. Numerous flights from U.S. cities to Britain were cancelled.

Tony Douglas, Heathrow�s managing director, said the airport hoped to resume normal operations Friday, but passengers would still face delays and a ban on cabin baggage �for the foreseeable future.�

�At this point in time it is unclear how long these restrictions will remain in place,� he said.

Washington raised its threat alert to its highest level for commercial flights from Britain to the United States amid fears the plot had not been completely crushed. The alert for all flights coming or going from the United States was also raised slightly.

Two U.S. counterterrorism officials said the terrorists had targeted United Airlines, American Airlines and Continental Airlines. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case.

A U.S. intelligence official said the plotters had hoped to target flights to major airports in New York, Washington and California.

British Home Secretary John Reid said the 21 people were arrested in London, its suburbs and Birmingham following a lengthy investigation, including the alleged �main players� in the plot. Searches continued in a number of locations.

The British Broadcasting Corp. said police were evacuating homes in High Wycombe, a town 48 kilometres northwest of London, near one of the houses being searched. Police refused to confirm the report or to discuss any details of the searches.

Bush said during a visit to Green Bay, Wis., that the foiled plot was a �stark reminder that this nation is at war with Islamic fascists.� Despite increased security since Sept. 11, he warned, �It is a mistake to believe there is no threat to the United States of America.�

While British officials declined to publicly identify the 21 suspects, French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy said in Paris Thursday that they �appear to be of Pakistani origin.� He did not give a source for his description, but said French officials had been in close contact with British authorities.

The suspects were �homegrown,� though it was not immediately clear if they were all British citizens, said a British police official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case. Police were working closely with the South Asian community, the official said.

The suicide bombing assault on London subway trains and a bus on July 7, 2005, was carried out by Muslim extremists who grew up in Britain.

The police official said the plotters intended to simultaneously target multiple planes bound for the United States.

�We think this was an extraordinarily serious plot and we are confident that we�ve prevented an attempt to commit mass murder on an unimaginable scale,� Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Stephenson said.

Prime Minister Tony Blair, vacationing in the Caribbean, briefed Bush on the situation overnight. Blair issued a statement praising the co-operation between the two countries, saying it �underlines the threat we face and our determination to counter it.�

White House spokesman Tony Snow said Bush also had been briefed by his aides while at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, where he has been on vacation.

�We do believe the plot involved flights from the U.K. to the U.S. and was a direct threat to the United States,� Snow said.

While Snow called the plot a serious threat, he assured Americans that �it is safe to travel.�

Chertoff, the homeland security chief, said the plot had the hallmarks of an operation planned by al-Qaida, the terrorist group behind the Sept. 11 attack on the United States.

�It was sophisticated, it had a lot of members and it was international in scope. It was in some respects suggestive of an al-Qaida plot,� Chertoff said, but he cautioned it was too early in the investigation to reach any conclusions.

It is the first time the red alert level in the Homeland Security warning system has been invoked, although there have been brief periods in the past when the orange level was applied. Homeland Security defines the red alert as designating a �severe risk of terrorist attacks.�

�We believe that these arrests (in London) have significantly disrupted the threat, but we cannot be sure that the threat has been entirely eliminated or the plot completely thwarted,� Chertoff said.

He added, however, there was no indication of current plots within the United States.
Chertoff said the plotters were in the final stages of planning. �We were really getting quite close to the execution phase,� he said, adding that it was unclear if the plot was linked to the upcoming fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks.

A senior U.S. counterterrorism official said authorities believe dozens of people - possibly as many as 50 - were involved in the plot. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.

The plan involved airline passengers hiding masked explosives in carry-on luggage, the official said. �They were not yet sitting on an airplane,� but were very close to ravelling, the official said, calling the plot �the real deal.�

Passengers in Britain faced delays as tighter security was hastily enforced at the country�s airports and additional measures were put in place for all flights. Laptop computers, mobile phones, iPods, and remote controls were among the items banned from being carried on board.

Liquids, such as hair care products, were also barred on flights in both Britain and the U.S.

In the mid-1990s, officials foiled a plan by terrorist mastermind Ramzi Youssef to blow up 12 Western jetliners simultaneously over the Pacific. The alleged plot involved improvised bombs using liquid hidden in contact lens solution containers.

Huge lines formed at ticket counters and behind security barriers at Heathrow and other airports in Britain. Most European carriers cancelled flights to Heathrow because of the massive delays created after authorities enforced strict new regulations banning most hand baggage.

Security also was stepped up at train stations serving airports across Britain, said British Transport Police spokeswoman Jan O�Neill. At London�s Victoria Station, police patrolled platforms with bomb-sniffing dogs as passengers boarded trains carrying clear plastic bags.
� Canadian Press 2006


As this is breaking news I thought it might be prudent to post quickly as the faster all of us know about this the faster we can try to find out just what liquid explosives they were using. Some sort of NM mix? I doubt it would be EGDN because IIRC it is so volitile it is used as a taggent itself.

I wonder what sort of detonators they were going to use?

Liquid explosive mixtures containing nitrates could be easily detected..by sophisticated detectors now in place in modern airports.so theoritically NM and "its relatives" are unlikely candidates...

Well I’m thinking it could be MEKP or MEKP/AP mixture having readily available precursors and being easy to make.

I did a quick search to find many other explosives and explosive mixtures which can be used. Oxyliquits, nitroglycerin, tetranitromethane, PLX liquid explosive (http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/high-explosives/191-plx-liquid-explosive.html?highlight=Liquid+explosives), astrolite.

Although many of these may not be suitable for that sort of attack, for obvious reasons (such as instability).

I remember some time ago (before 9/11) some Pakistani guy, who I saw on a documentary, was making liquid explosives out of stabilized NG, it was very effective and it nearly took the plane down.

He had hid detonators and electronics in the sole of his shoe, left it on the plane and got off. If there wasn’t a guy behind him to take the hit the plane would have crashed.

Later he compiled a terror plot to attack many planes (like this new one) but he got caught as well.

There are also many other explosive mixtures that could be used not yet discussed on the forum, the list just goes on and on.

EDIT: Liquid explosive mixtures containing nitrates could be easily detected..

If the container was sealed, there was no leaking through the plastic (glass used), and the out side was cleared of any nitrate traces, then it could be kept from detectors until it had entered the plane. From there detonators could be fitted and ready to use.

Easily doable especially if there was no warning given.

"The bombs were to be assembled on the aircraft apparently using a peroxide-based solution detonated by such devices as a disposable camera or a music player, two American law enforcement officials told The Associated Press."

By JENNIFER QUINN, Associated Press Writer

I found this on Yahoo.

Fox's Greet VanSustran is running a spot right now on what types of explosives it could have been and the fact that there is lots of information on the net.:cool:

I'd presume we'll see lots more of this type of reporting but what was mentioned was an 800 page training manual on explosives maufacture that the bad guys circulate and that lots of what is on the net isnt that accurate.
While I don't agree with all of that statement, this was the first place I wanted to come to to see what the general consensus was on what they (the bad guys) may have planned on using. Right now I am shaking my head when I see news clips of people throwing out their oil of Olay, and Gatorade and the like, but of course, no planes came down today either thank goodness.

A peroxide-based liquid solution? Probably acetone (or similar volatile ketone) peroxide, dissolved in the ketone. That sort of explosive (along with perchlorates) would not be picked up by detectors set to detect the IR spectrum of nitro-compounds (probably the N-O stretching frequency of a bond with bond order 1�). It was intended by the Muslim suicide bombers that the liquid explosive be disguised as "fizzy drinks", probably containing a cordial dye. But what sort of detonator could be used to sert off a liquid solution? A conventional detonator which would set a solid explosive off through shock waves in it would not work in a liquid, so it would have to be something producing flame or sparks, like matches or a lighter (not normally allowed in aircraft passenger cabins), or a small but fairly high-voltage battery e.g. the 9 volt "dry-cell" type.
I understand that the four Pakistani Muslim suicide bombers in London on 7/7/2005 used solid acetone peroxide in back-packs. The other four a fortnight later, who failed to pull off a repeat performance in London, also used it, but it was a "wet" batch of it that failed to go off although the detonators went off "like firecrackers" (attracting attention to themselves but causing no injuries). The 20 or so terrorists arrested in the latest incident in England were also Pakistani Muslims, so I hear, and there were also arrests in Pakistan itself in connection.
But what I find disgraceful about the whole episode was how quickly Bu$h tried to make cheap political capital about the arrests, to justify his oppressive Patriot Act legislation at home and his wars/whores abroad, and distract public attention away from his disastrous domestic (economic and fiscal etc.) policies, obviously with the November Congressional elections in view.

"The bombs were to be assembled on the aircraft apparently using a peroxide-based solution detonated by such devices as a disposable camera or a music player, two American law enforcement officials told The Associated Press."

By JENNIFER QUINN, Associated Press Writer

I remember in a recent thread, not sure if the post was recent. I saw that quite stable liquid explosives were made from a mixture of MEKP and AP. The person who made it said it was powerful and easily detonated.

Bush stated that it was an attack planed to take the freedom from American citizens (or similar, I don’t remember exactly).

The purpose that terrorists are attacking America and British people isn’t to take their freedom, it’s for their own religious beliefs and to strike fear into the people and their governments.

Bush just uses words to exaggerate and give false view into the situation to make it look more dramatic. Some people believe his bullshit :mad:.

The explosive wouldn't have to be stable, as no doubt the individuals planned to commit suicide in the attack. Niether would it nessicarily have to be nitrate free to avoid detection.

Airport security may seem tight, but it is always possible to beat it, as it is designed to create a sense of saftey, but not actually do much.

The explosive wouldn't have to be stable, as no doubt the individuals planned to commit suicide in the attack. Niether would it nessicarily have to be nitrate free to avoid detection.


Depends on what you mean by "stable" - it must be able to be transfered into the bottles, taken to the airport, taken on the plane and attached to the detonators without exploding obviously.

I think "detonator" here may be code for a powerful E-match if the explosive needs flame to detonate.

It was Methyl Ethyl Ketone Peroxide dyed red like Gatorade, they were planning on using the flash from a disposable camera it ignite the MEKP. The plan was Ingeniously simple!

I think "detonator" here may be code for a powerful E-match if the explosive needs flame to detonate.

Well then MEKP would be out unless they were using a detonator to set it off. I think this is just another mix up by the media (who make it look like they know everything but really don’t).

At the start of channel 9 news I saw them state "the do-it-yourself explosive at 40,000 ft.” with the image of them pouring red liquid through a funnel into a bottle.

Then when it go to that part of the news they said how easy it was to make, saying it can even be seen in videos on the internet.

The moron’s then showed a k3wL pressure bomb (such as a NaOH and Al bomb) harmless to panes, showing how much more the media know about everything :D [hint of sarcasm].

I think "detonator" here may be code for a powerful E-match if the explosive needs flame to detonate.

Well then MEKP would be out unless they were using a detonator to set it off.

Silly c tech, MEKP is a primary explosive and does not need a detonator to bring about detonation. A mere spark or the kiss of a flame will cause deflagration to detonation, especially in large quantities.:rolleyes:

Regardless of WHAT they were planning on using, it's HOW they'd get it on the plane that matters.

Since they've got female jihadi's too, the best way to bypass all security measures would be to have saline breast implants inserted into the females, the kind which are filled by injection after implantation, and replace the saline with a liquid explosive just prior to leaving for the airport.

This gives little time for any to leak out and cause illness to the female, nor dog/machine detectable odor since it's internal, and millimetric bodyscanners/X-rays will detect nothing hidden under the clothes.

Once on board the plane, the jihadi simply stabs the detonator (contained within a spike-like implement) into her breast (deep enough to pierce the implant sac) and fires. Close proximity of the explosive filled sacs to each other (wonderbra?) ensures sympathetic detonation.

2x 375mL @1.1SPG= 825gms of HE. :)

Larger implants equal greater boom.

Or, substitute a binary CW, and have the jihadhi slit both sacs open, forming the binary agent on the plane.

I could even imagine replacing the nipples with valves.

If a line of big-bosomed burkha-wearers is in que for the airplane, you might want to wait for the next flight. :D

Some examples of implants:
http://www.locateadoc.com/gallery.cfm/Action/CO/ProcedureID/85

Silly c tech, MEKP is a primary explosive and does not need a detonator to bring about detonation. A mere spark or the kiss of a flame will cause deflagration to detonation, especially in large quantities.:rolleyes:
I didn�t seem to explain my point of view clearly.

I already knew that most organic peroxides, including MEKP and AP need only a flame to detonate and are very sensitive. You seemed only to look at my first sentence.

In my second sentence I stated how it would have had to been a mix-up in the media by using the wrong words. As the terrorists would probably only need a flame to detonate it, why use a detonator?

I've realized something I missed before. The detonator was the flash from a disposable camera it ignite the MEKP
So they were detonating it by igniting it... :confused: When the media said �detonate� they must have immediately thought �detonator�, the camera flash was a �detonator�. Boy this gets confusing when the wrong words are used.

I hope I�m on the right track here. To put it into an understandable sentence. �The liquid MEKP was going to be ignited with a flash of a disposable camera, causing it to detonate.�

I hope that clears up any confusion, mostly to myself :D.

It was Methyl Ethyl Ketone Peroxide dyed red like Gatorade
To make it all the more convenient for them then MEKP would already be red, no need to dye, unless they got the other clear isomer.

And nbk, love your idea of the wonderbra, nobody would touch their breasts without strong suspicion of them having drugs or explosives in them.

I've heard of drugs being in bras, but never in the breasts themselves. ;)

I really wonder if there was a terrorist plot at all. Anything in the press so far is very obscure and imprecise.

They all talk about the arrest of several Pakistanis and Brits, who alledgedly planned a terror attack on planes with liquid explosives but there's nothing about explosive devices acutally being discovered or how far the terrorist plot has advanced.

The Home Office record on uncovering terrorist plots isn't great either, last time they raided a house and shot an innocent guy.

And some days before the uncovering of the newest plot Home Secretary John Reid held a speech on how important it is to infringe on civil and human rights for the war on terror, because of the actuall discussion going on about disproportionality of Anti-Terror-Laws.

My guess is this is much more of a political campaign (don't forget free falling Labour opinion polls) and a PR stunt of the Blair Government, so they can take the discussion away from their blundering in Iraq and Lebanon.

NBK, you'd have to make sure that it wasn't radio opaque. It'd be a bit curious if a woman walked through an xray scanner and all that showed up was floating blobs of liquid...

Most x-ray scanners wouldn't show anything at all, even if they were imaging. They use very, very low power levels to avoid the cancer risk, and the images are greyscale. Not likely to be picked up, as they mostly are used to find metals.

As for this whole thing, it's a crock of shit IMO. Until I see some evidence that they had a proper plan or some way of carrying it out, I remain unimpressed. You would cause far more terror with a group of 24 people by getting a load of guns and ammo and trying to wipe out a small town one evening, than by some weird idea which involves making a bomb from basic chemicals to make a few planes fall out the sky, that probably isn't going to work.

And why explosives? Any nasty caustic fuming agent would do the job, as would any nerve agent or even just a load of parathion bug spray. Plus there are dozens of ways to knock a plane or 200 out of the sky without even being caught (until they do traffic analysis later on!) As long as you bring it down over the Atlantic, little is going to be found anyway.

But what I find disgraceful about the whole episode was how quickly Bu$h tried to make cheap political capital about the arrests, to justify his oppressive Patriot Act legislation at home and his wars/whores abroad, and distract public attention away from his disastrous domestic (economic and fiscal etc.) policies, obviously with the November Congressional elections in view.
I find that an amusing statement, since it seems quite obvious that if he HADN'T made any comment about it, he'd have been ridiculed for ignoring such an obvious threat.

That said, and back to the topic, the first thing I thought of when I heard the news report was NBK's thread on explosive sex-lube. "Holy crap! The terrorists are reading RS; they DO know where the information is at!"

It was Methyl Ethyl Ketone Peroxide dyed red like Gatorade, they were planning on using the flash from a disposable camera it ignite the MEKP. The plan was Ingeniously simple!
What is your source? While it does seem possible, I have found no mention of MEKP in the news (though they claim it was peroxide based).

Some "experts" seem to think the plan was to bring TATP precursors on board and synthesize it in flight. Mixing the chemicals can be done undetected, but filtering and drying? Even using 100% hydrogen peroxide the product wouldn't be dry.

My paper said TATP as well, they were going to bring on board: bleach, acetone, drain cleaner :confused:, and use a catalyst such as lemon juice.

They also said it was called the mother of Satan, sounds like something from totse to me.

What they could do is wash the AP with something such as ethanol or methanol. They both evaporate quickly and take the water away.

Although if they used AP then they aren�t using liquid explosives are they?

Unless they mixed it with MEKP it can be done, "We used 200 ml 1:1 MEKP:AP solution" (http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/other-explosives/349-methyl-ethyl-ketone-peroxide-3.html?highlight=MEKP). Down the bottom of the page, the post with the picture.

It would seem to be a plan to do an explosive synth. on-board the plane. Yes, it's a plan so k3wl as to be painful!

Anyone recall how much this stuff smells? Are they going to use tupperware or plastic cups from the stewardesses, or bring the labware with them?

The only way to do this would really be to bring a bottle of pre-mixed acids and some glycerine, and some kind of water cooling system, so you could make nitroglycerine. (But if you could get that much acid on-board, you could destroy the plane anyway, more than likely. Best bet would be to use a respirator and a sprayer, though. A bottle of nitro wrapped up and placed in a medicine bag as cushioning, then carefully carried as hand lugage would also work.) AP wouldn't work in time, not without spending an hour or two in the loo.

You might be able to do ANFO... not sure if they really do have explosives sniffers yet, so you could test and find out. Just a little AN sprinkled in a few people's bags would tip you off when you read about the airport being closed in the paper the next day. Trivial to do, if it wasn't picked up.

Still, it's not like anyone will be flying through free choice again any time soon, so the terrorists have won (again) with the government reaction doing the real work.

A hilarious cartoon that completely explains the REAL terror behind such incidents.

http://www.wondermark.com/d/220.html

All of these terrorists are one trick ponies, and they are beating a dead horse.

This analogy sums up how I feel about the situation. What is quite possibly the most heavily guarded and secured civilian infrastructure in the world? The airlines. Why are the terrorists one trick ponies? Because they keep hurling themselves at the same targets over and over again.

Their explosives of choice have been for awhile peroxide based. That�s beating the dead horse. Your average raghead seems to be of quite diminutive intelligence because they keep hitting the same targets with the same weapons.

The rags seem to have an almost dronish devotion to their plans. They stick with what once worked over and over and over and over again. They have no creativity, no originality, and no ingenuity whatsoever.

If past performance dictates future performance, than one should be able to say with a high degree of certainty that this was an actual terrorist plot, and not some government scheme to promote the virtues of the patreRAT act. This plot was a variation on a theme: me blow up airplane with peroxide. They demonstrated some adaptation in using sport drink bottles and ipod detonators, but it is still a variation on the same theme. This same plot is a recycled plan from umpteen years ago, classic terror 101.

The terrorists need to check their Sun Tzu and attack where the enemy is weakest, not strongest a la airport security. Hit the substations, not the power plants, hit the little bridges, not the Lincoln Tunnel, blow up a gas station, not the refinery, attack a school, not a military base, destroy the airport, not the airplane.

The Beltway sniper caused more havoc with just one man, a boy, and his gun (sounds like the tag line for a movie). Those terrorists could have done significantly more damage by blowing up the airports rather than trying to sneak on the plane. With all those long lines and crowds they could take out just as many people. The terror effect would still be the same, if not greater: all US airports get shut down, no flights to or from anywhere, and now the feds are faced with the added challenge of screening not just passengers, but EVERYONE who sets foot inside the airport. Hell, I�m surprised a suicide bomber hasn�t waltzed into a synagogue or church during Sunday mass and launched himself on the path to paradise (and all those virgins).

My paper said TATP as well, they were going to bring on board: bleach, acetone, drain cleaner :confused:, and use a catalyst such as lemon juice.

That's strange, as both drain cleaner and lemon juice could be catalysts, why bring two? (You'd need a lot of lemon juice.)


They also said it was called the mother of Satan, sounds like something from totse to me.

According to the following, two sites, Mother of Satan is AP.
http://www.worldpress.org/Mideast/2033.cfm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetone_peroxide


megalomania-
Fortunately, people who are stupid enough blow themselves up are not smart enough to conduct all out warfare on democracy. Btw, I believe the IRA and Chechen terrorists fight more of in the manner you described?

That's strange, as both drain cleaner and lemon juice could be catalysts, why bring two? (You'd need a lot of lemon juice.)


Well by drain cleaner I though they were referring to NaOH, not the sulfuric acid ones which are very rare in Australia.

If they were referring to NaOH being used it would just react with the acid neutralizing it, now the peroxide would take days to form.

If they were using a catalyst such as lemon juice it would most probably slow the reaction compared to a stronger acid. Also the impurities in the lemon juice could interfere with the reaction (heard from another thread) probably by releasing the oxygen in the H2O2 causing it to become H2O.

Article I got from the paper, at bottom.

So, they were obviously making meth with it, if not something else. Or they’re making 1080 bombs :rolleyes:. Anything would make more sense than that.

What’s next, a teacher getting arrested for purchasing 20 or so 9-volt batteries for a class project?

Jeez, is the world that hard up for lithium? I would think there must be an easier way. Heck, for all the money they just wasted on phones they could have opened their own cell phone kiosk, or even started a battery recycling center :)

You can't use the batteries for making meth AND still use the phones for detonators. :rolleyes:

I love pig logic.

And how is buying a buttload of phones "Supporting Terror"? If these guys had that many jihadis needing to make calls, then surely they'd be able to round up half the worlds supply with the information they could squeeze out of these guys.

But obviously not...

I love the governments idea of news by formula:

We've arrested (#) 'suspected' terrorists just moments before they could (absurd/illogical plot) in (city/plane/boat/train).

For security reasons, we can't tell you their names, or any provable details of any sort. If you doubt us, you're one of them.

I love the governments idea of news by formula:

We've arrested (#) 'suspected' just moments before they could (absurd/illogical plot) in (city/plane/boat/train).

For security reasons, we can't tell you there names, or any provable details of any sort. If you doubt us, you're one of them.
HAHAHAHA, but the sad side of it is, its true :(.

I could get arrested tomorrow for AP being found in my backyard, if I'm 18 or older my face could be all over the press and I could be branded a terrorist, it could happen to any of us, it could destroy lives.

______
Note: There are no emotions for laughter. Also the thumbs up and thumbs down post icons should be smilies. I've needed to use these on many occasions.

Why is there an absence in emotions? Do you think the forum will turn into one of those where entire posts are consisted of random pointless emotions?

There's not a shitload of emo-cons, especially the animated ones, because we don't want the board to become an all-signing/all-dancing sideshow of kissing/hugging/laughing emo-cons.

Been there, done that.

I wouldn't underestimate these fellows. They seem to be getting more advanced as time progresses. Eventually they will figure out that they could just spray any variety of explosive with windex bottles on to hundreds of peices of other peoples luggage before they moved through security. Talk about a security nightmare.

Hey, I think nbk2000 is on to something. Government press-release MadLibs! Insert an adjective here and a terrorist plot there, and you can recycle the same story over and over again. No wonder they always sound rather funny :)

If you wish to inject emotion into your posts then you will have to do it the same way Shakespeare did, by using words in the English language. Funny thing about writing, it alone can articulate thought and emotion by a suitable combination of letters. Is there an emoticon for sarcasm?

Thank you Tomu for being the first to realize the obvious! Was there actually any plan? Let us examine the FACTS, not that drivel we get from the media etc.

1-Government ‘security forces’ (an acronym for these people is S.H.I.T.H.E.E.L.S) announce terrorist plan to attack flights mid-air. No proof presented (not that they couldn’t/wouldn’t have faked any that they did present to the world, I mean pull out a hat)
2-Government all but shuts down world-wide flights. Only desperate people get flights, and these are well planned in advance in order to actually get clearance for the flight to go ahead
3-Government just seized more power over the sheeples lives by once again beating the dead horse of fear for safety
4-me234 re-reads fact 2 and remembers reading Ira Levin’s “This Perfect Day” and recalls how sheeple in the book were only allowed to apply for travel once in a while, and only then were allowed to go if there was already a lift-club type effort going to the same place and Uni felt like letting them go. Now people can only get a flight by begging for one, and only if the government feels like letting them travel. Freedom of movement has just been evoked people. Now I’m just waiting on restrictions on car movements. They’ll probably use gasoline scarcity to initiate that one.
5-Another blow for essential safety is struck against those pesky freedoms by the ever vigilant and wonderful government(s). Hooray for slavery.

If a government can send thousands of people to there deaths (don’t ask me for an example, read just about any not-too-biased history book) for no better reason than they feel like forcing some silly trade agreement, then do you guys honestly believe that the government would be beyond faking a couple emergencies or killing a couple dozen people if it helps them seize ultimate control?
No they aren’t. They’ve done it before, I’ll bet you guys three chocolates a piece they’ll do it again! A “terrorist” plot with no casualties? Shit, they’ve faked so many “terrorist” attacks with casualties that people shit their pants just hearing that buzzword; they’ve got people so scared that you don’t need casualties anymore for people to throw their freedom away and beg for safety, just some lie in the papers is sufficient these days to impose “A Brave New World” and “1984” like circumstances, with the sheeples blessing no less. Actually, at their insistence.

Ok guys, try this out tonight: walk down the street, any street, walk up to some arbitrary person, look them in the eye like you’re about to flash them or something, and say “terrorist”, then sniff the air and count what percentage of people physically shit themselves. And no 30 year old career women with babies in prams either, that’s too easy, it’s cheating.

Same plot, different day

"And how is buying a buttload of phones "Supporting Terror"?"

Well, I suppose the courts might say much the same way this man is "Supporting Drugs" :

"Federal Appeals Court: Driving With Money is a Crime"
8/19/2006

Eighth Circuit Appeals Court ruling says police may seize cash from motorists even in the absence of any evidence that a crime has been committed.

A federal appeals court ruled yesterday that if a motorist is carrying large sums of money, it is automatically subject to confiscation. In the case entitled, "United States of America v. $124,700 in U.S. Currency," the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit took that amount of cash away from Emiliano Gomez Gonzolez, a man with a "lack of significant criminal history" neither accused nor convicted of any crime.

On May 28, 2003, a Nebraska state trooper signaled Gonzolez to pull over his rented Ford Taurus on Interstate 80. The trooper intended to issue a speeding ticket, but noticed the Gonzolez's name was not on the rental contract. The trooper then proceeded to question Gonzolez -- who did not speak English well -- and search the car. The trooper found a cooler containing $124,700 in cash, which he confiscated. A trained drug sniffing dog barked at the rental car and the cash. For the police, this was all the evidence needed to establish a drug crime that allows the force to keep the seized money.

Associates of Gonzolez testified in court that they had pooled their life savings to purchase a refrigerated truck to start a produce business. Gonzolez flew on a one-way ticket to Chicago to buy a truck, but it had sold by the time he had arrived. Without a credit card of his own, he had a third-party rent one for him. Gonzolez hid the money in a cooler to keep it from being noticed and stolen. He was scared when the troopers began questioning him about it. There was no evidence disputing Gonzolez's story.

Yesterday the Eighth Circuit summarily dismissed Gonzolez's story. It overturned a lower court ruling that had found no evidence of drug activity, stating, "We respectfully disagree and reach a different conclusion... Possession of a large sum of cash is 'strong evidence' of a connection to drug activity."

Judge Donald Lay found the majority's reasoning faulty and issued a strong dissent.

"Notwithstanding the fact that claimants seemingly suspicious activities were reasoned away with plausible, and thus presumptively trustworthy, explanations which the government failed to contradict or rebut, I note that no drugs, drug paraphernalia, or drug records were recovered in connection with the seized money," Judge Lay wrote. "There is no evidence claimants were ever convicted of any drug-related crime, nor is there any indication the manner in which the currency was bundled was indicative of
drug use or distribution."

"Finally, the mere fact that the canine alerted officers to the presence of drug residue in a rental car, no doubt driven by dozens, perhaps scores, of patrons during the course of a given year, coupled with the fact that the alert came from the same location where the currency was discovered, does little to connect the money to a controlled substance offense," Judge Lay Concluded.

The full text of the ruling is available in a 36k PDF file at the source link below.
http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/2006/moneyseize.pdf

I wonder if they'll ever bother establishing a lower limit for such seizures.

Probably not, as why should they limit themselves to just the occasional big haul when they can nickel-and-dime themselves rich on everyone with a Benjamin in their pocket?

The police have a long history of seizing private citizens’ properties for their own profit. Property seized must be regained through civil court, at your expense. Many don't bother, or don't have enough money left. Police are only one step away from criminals.

There was a man who was on his way to an equipment auction to buy a backhoe. He had $40,000 on him when he was pulled over and searched. The cops charged him with being a drug lord and destroyed his life.

It is a travesty of justice that a man can be accused of being a drug dealer simply because they have some cash on their person. The stink of drugs, once the charge is levied, will stick with you for the rest of your life. The war on drugs is expensive and can be counted in the ruined lives and reputations of the innocent.

Keep in mind there is a legal requirement for all persons carrying over $10,000 in cash. They must sign a document at the bank. Failure to possess this document is what gets the people in trouble. You would only find this out if you withdrew the funds from the bank in the US. I would say then, nbk, that $10k is the lower limit.

Possessing a few hundred dollars and some drugs automatically makes you a drug dealer in the laws eye.

Re the Gonzolez case ruled on above:
The police action and court majority ruling are clearly contrary to the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which requires that people must be "... be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures"; and the Fifth Amendment, under which people shall not ".... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation"; and the Fourteenth Amendment, under which ".... nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without the due process of law ....". It is to be hoped that Gonzolez appeals against the unjustified and unlawful search and seizure, without his being guilty of any associated crime, to a higher court.

Of course, in all practicality, a mexican with $100k in a cooler heavily laced with drug residue is more than likely a drug dealer. Of course the burden of proof is on the cops considering the lack of actual drugs.

The cops do the same thing if they catch you with a ton of ephedrine cold capsules, matchbook strikers, and iodine. What do they care if you are innocent or guilty? They get credit for the bust, the fact you even got arrested is a black mark against you, and then you are the courts problem.

Many of the crimes you get arrested for eventually get dropped while in court for these vague arrests, but that depends on how good your lawyer is. Are you a meth head with a bored overworked public defender, or a responsible citizen that has retained the services of Jewey, Kikey, and Stieny?

Firstly, the entire US money supply is tainted with drug residue.

Unless you get the cash directly from the Mint, it's tainted by transfer of residue through contact with tainted bills in handling, as well as through the high-speed sorting/counting machines, which spreads the residue even further.

In large quantities of bills, there's enough residue for a dog to signal on. I think even single bills are capable of being signaled on by a sensitive dog. So, technically, everyone with a few used bills in there pocket could be potential victims of a dogs nose, just waiting to get busted through the ever moving definiton that the government uses, of what constitutes a drug crime.

If the limit is $10K, and you have $8K, they seize it and say you were 'structuring' the money transfer to avoid the reporting limit. Prove you weren't. :p

The real crime isn't the supposed drugs, but the crime of dealing outside the system.

See, the government wants a cashless society SOOO badly. This way, at the press of a button, they can seize your assests and render you a non-person if you ever disobey.

But cash means that they don't know how much you have (thus no taxes!), who you gave it to, or what you bought with it.

Not knowing who is doing what is the worse thing in the world to Big Brother.

So it doesn't matter what you do in trying to obey the law.

Trying to obey the laws of a corrupt system is just chasing your own tail...an exercise in futility. As soon as you think you're legal, they change the rules and don't bother telling you. :)

I have contacts in the security field. They tell me it was triacetone triperocide (TATP - aka: AP) and Hexamethylenetriperoxidediamine (HMTD). Gatorade contains citric acid (for the TATP synthesis).

3% Hydrogen peroxide looks like water, and I do not believe it is that toxic, so citric acid and hydrogen peroxide could have been combined in a gatorade bottle.

Acetone is nailpolish remover. Hexamine could be mixed with water to make a paste, and loaded into a toothpaste tube.

Because they planned to carry the ingredients on board as liquids and pastes, the newspeople call it "liquid explosive" even though TATP (AP) and HMTD are solids.

My question is why these? The plane would be landing by the time the TATP (AP) was ready to filter off and dry. The HMTD wouldn't be ready until well after the return flight. It would have been faster to make RDX on board, if you can get the concentrated sulfuric acid, KNO3 and Hexamine on board (not that difficult to do).

Even better, make RDX, mix with mineral oil to make PIPE, and load the PIPE into a toothpaste tube. Put a bead of PIPE around a window, set it off, and you have explosive decompression that will likely do serious structural damage to the aircraft.

Another trick is to disolve RDX or PETN in warm acetone with a little mineral oil. Soak newspaper or clothing in it, and let dry. It is cap sensitive, and not that irritating to the skin. The process also makes for large crystals, which do not get up into the air that well, making it harder to detect. The government does not want to spend the money on the technology (infrared scanning, NMR chemical analysis, etc.).

I've been in battle. There is nothing more important than your comrade-in-arms. You will sacrifice your life to keep them alive. The terrorists have this, plus the fanatical fervour of religeous belief, driving them. You must understand your enemy before you can defeat them.

nbk: my understanding is about 20 milligrams of cocaine on each $20 bill that has been in circulation for a while in NYC.

Meawoppl: spray the airport seats. The bomb sniffing dogs become butt sniffing dogs. That was suggested some time ago as a way to tie up airport security to let real bombs get through, according to my contacts in the security field. They were afraid of that idea getting out. You now have forced them to confront it. Wonderful!

I have already been visited by the neo-Gestapo of Homeland Security. They came to the office where I have my library, and spend my remaining days. Someone had turned me in for "receiving too many large packages." They thought it a joke. Then they began to notice the titles on my books. Panic!

Nearly 90% of my library is on military related subjects at an advanced level, as I was an engineer designing military weapons and equipment, after leaving the Army, where I taught explosives, CBR and other subjects. They watch me, but they are totally afraid of me. Even police officers have backed down from confrontations. I have no illusions that if they get the chance, I am toast (some incidents with medicine that became toxic, hit and run driver, etc., in the past few years)

They fear people with knowledge. They fear people without fear. As one general once told an interviewer, they do not want fearless soldiers, they cannot be controlled. It is the responcibility of us old-timers to pass on our knowledge to the young, and teach them to question authority. But be careful, I fear we are headed for a new Dark Age.

As Benjamin Franklin said: "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."

Sheep and sheep dogs both hate freedom. It is this about the wolf that they fear, not his teeth.

Organic acids don't work for making AP, only mineral acids. I know because I've tried both citric and ascorbic acids in AP synthesis, and got nothing.

AP can be synthed in about 15 minutes if you're not too concerned about safety, so time isn't an issue, just having a place to do the reaction without the smell giving the game away.

Why make primary explosives like AP and HMTD?

No nitro-groups for the baggage scanning machines to detect. :)

But they've known about this for years.

As for hiding the real bomber amoungst a crowd of spritzed innocents...again...old news amougst us here. :) UTFSE should reveal something of interest in that regards. I believe drug cartels have used such tactics before at borders.

AP can be synthed in about 15 minutes if you're not too concerned about safety, so time isn't an issue, just having a place to do the reaction without the smell giving the game away.

That was also my concern about the possibility of making those explosives during flight, queer odors will give way, I was wondering if these so called UK experts really made a dry run on the process in a simulated conditions that occur in an aircraft.
More likely its paranoia that drove them to conclude that there is much a likelihood of it from happening than based on actual or verified experiments.;)

Or these concerned people are pressured in giving (or even concocting evidence or scenario ) to prove that they are doing their jobs properly ?:p
Its is already known fact that the press will bloat the news to the advantages of their organization coupled by the fact that they talk much on things that they don't know about:(

I just don't understand why 'terrorists' would bother to blow up, or damage commercial airline flights in the first place. It seems foolish when they could easily kill ten times the amount of people, and cause ten times the amount of damage by detonating something more substantial in a low security area.

And to the guy that said a plane window being taken out would cause damage to a large airliner, think again. Airplanes are designed to be remarkably strong.

If the plane can stay together while hurtling through the atmosphere at extreme speed, I'm sure a little piece of glass missing on the side isn't going to be catastrouphic.

There was a plane flying from california to hawaii that had a huge section of it blow off mid-flight. Something like 30 feet of the top half ripped off and the plane STILL made it to hawaii. :)

Planes are really over-engineered for safety. So blowing a window out won't do much more than suck out a person who isn't buckled in, and maybe not even that.

Now, granted, it'll be a definite emergency, and it'll be on the news, but it's not the same as pulling a Lockerbie.

Perhaps the terrs could use activated charcoal shoe-inserts and such as odor absorbers to prevent strange odor detection during their suicide synth. Roll it up and use it as a stopper for the bottle mouth.

You read my mind nbk :p I was going to post that when I got home.

Did you see it on air crash investigations? I recommend that show to anybody who has a chance to watch it.

I'm basing my thoughts on an edition of the TV show "Mythbusters" where they fired a 9mm through a pressurized airliner hull - virtually no effect. An explosives tech took a cone made of detcord, placed it next to the window and set it off. It took out several rows worth of windows, well beyond that much PETN would do with no pressurization. What these people do with energetic compounds, it is a wonder that they still have limbs, let alone 10 fingers.

The TATP (AP) I made too many years ago used citric acid. After about 4-5 hours at 0* C, very poor yield. Enough for a single detonator, maybe. Has anyone made this using both the organic and mineral acid methods? How do the two compare? I read the threads, but no one seems to have compared the two quantitatively.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwMXZ0VdqvI&NR
Some more bullshit from the media, some of these statements are hilarious.

�explosives now are the gravest threat posed by terrorists in the sky.� � No shit.

I would think terrorists are the gravest threat in the skys, although I would be willing to lay odds that you have a greater chance of dieing in a plane crash from mechanical failure. I suppose that would make Boeing the gravest threat in the skys.

If it was "terrorists"(I put this word in quotes because no matter who does the "attacks", whether it be the US gov. or an Islamic extremest, its all about perspective honestly), they go for airports because it is a target that causes a great disturbance, impacting the world - not just America.

It is an attack on the way we live, an attack on our ability to function as a nation, and an attack on the sheeple's false sense of security... all with a single man. Maximum disruption(well, I can think of some more creative targets) with the least ammount of effort. Even if the attack fails, it succeeds.

What I don't understand, is why they don't get on the road/freeway at the end of the runway/a mile or so away, pull over, and just put some rounds into the turbines while the plane is still taking off. The plane is going to go down if it loses it's left engine while still climbing, and you don't need a .50 to do it. I'm sure some people with Ruger mini-14s(.223) and a few hundred rounds of ammo could take down a plane, if they fired at the engines. Or hell, even some people with 10-22's(.22lr) could do it.

The UK police claimed to have arrested some people with a missile launcher loitering outside Heathrow a while back (a year or so?). Nothing more made the news, so I can only assume it was a couple of fireworks, or one of those empty fibreglass tubes that bazookas come in ("A hollow plastic tube! Run for your lives!!")

You could get yourself a high-powered laser pointer and burn the pilots eyes out just before landing, you could set a nice fire inside the cabin, or, in some places, you could throw a frisbee into the engine intake (on take-off or landing) as it came in 30 yards up over the beach... There are hundreds of ways.

Banning every possible way isn't the answer, and all it will cause is bigger disasters further down the line - 9-11-01 could never have happened if the sheeple on board hadn't been sheared years before, and trained to do as they were told by whoever was in power at that moment.

Lieutenant-Colonel (ret.) Nigel Wylde, a former senior British Army Intelligence Officer, suggested that the police and government story about the "terror plot" apprehended on 10th August was part of a "pattern of lies and deceit".

British and American government officials have described the operation, resulting in the arrest of 24 mostly British Muslim suspects, as a resounding success. Thirteen of the suspects have been charged and two released without charge. According to security sources, the terror suspects were planning to board up to ten civilian airliners and to detonate highly volatile liquid explosives on the planes in a spectacular terrorist operation.

The TATP (Triacetone Triperoxide), DADP (diacetone diperoxide) or the less sensitive HMTD (hexamethylene triperoxide diamine) liquid explosives were reportedly to be made on the planes by mixing sports drinks with a peroxide-based household gel, to be detonated using an MP3 player or mobile phone. But Lt. Col. Wylde, who was awarded the Queen's Gallantry Medal for his command of the Belfast Explosive Ordnance Disposal Unit in 1974, described this scenario as a "fiction". Creating liquid explosives is a "highly dangerous and sophisticated task" that requires not only significant chemical expertise, but appropriate equipment.

Terror Plot Scenario "Untenable"

"The idea that these people could sit in the plane toilet and simply mix together these normal household fluids to create a high explosive capable of blowing up the entire aircraft is untenable", said Lt. Col. Wylde, who was trained as an ammunition technical officer responsible for terrorist bomb disposal, at the Royal Army Ordnance Corps in Sandhurst. "So who came up with the idea that a bomb could be made on board? Not Al Qaeda for sure. It would not work. Bin Laden is interested in success not deterrence by failure." After working as a bomb defuser in Northern Ireland, Lt. Col. Wylde became a senior officer in British Army Intelligence in 1977. During the Cold War, he collected intelligence as part of an undercover East German "liaison unit", then went on to work in the Ministry of Defense to review its communications systems.

"This story has been blown out of all proportion. The liquids would need to be carefully distilled at freezing temperatures to extract the required chemicals, which are very difficult to obtain in the purities needed." Once extracted, the process of mixing the fluids produces significant amounts of heat and vile fumes. "The resulting liquid then needs some hours at room temperature for the white crystals that are the explosive to develop." The whole process, which can take between 12 and 36 hours, is "very dangerous, even in a lab, and can lead to premature detonation", said Lt. Col. Wylde.

If there was a conspiracy, he added, "it did not involve manufacturing the explosives in the loo" as this simply "could not have worked". The process would be quickly and easily detected. The fumes of the chemicals in the toilet "would be smelt by anybody in the area." They would also inevitably "cause the alarms in the toilet and in the air change system in the aircraft to be triggered. The pilot has the ability to dump all the air from an aircraft as a fire-fighting measure. Leaving people to use oxygen masks. All this means the planned attack would be detected long before the queues outside the loo had grown to enormous lengths."

Government Silent on Detonators

Even if it was possible for the explosive to have been made on the aircraft, a detonator, probably made from TATP, would be needed to set it off. "It is very dangerous and risky to the individual", he said. "As the quantity involved would be small this would injure the would-be suicide bomber but not endanger the aircraft, thus defeating the object of bringing down an aircraft."

Despite the vacuity of this scenario, it has been used to justify wide-ranging new security measures that threaten to permanently curtail civil liberties and to suspend sections of the Human Rights Act 1998. "Why were the public delicately informed of an alleged conspiracy which the authorities knew, or should have known, could not have worked?" asked Lt. Col. Wylde. "This is not a new problem", he said, noting that 'shoe-bomber' Richard Reid had attempted to use this type of explosive on a plane in December 2001. "If this threat is real, what has been done to develop explosive test kits capable of detecting peroxide based explosives?", said Lt. Col. Wylde. "These are the real issues about protecting the public that have not been publicised. Instead we are going to get demands for more internment without
trial."

Lt. Col. Wylde also raised questions about the criminal investigation into the 7th July terrorist attacks on London last year. He noted that police and government sources have maintained "total silence" about the detonation devices used in the bombs on the London Underground and bus at Tavistock Square. "Whatever the nature of the primary explosive materials, even if it was home-made TATP, the detonator that must be used to trigger an explosion is an extremely dangerous device to make, requiring a high level of expertise that cannot be simply self-taught or picked-up over the internet." The government's silence on the detonation device used in the attacks is "disturbing", as the creation of the devices requires the involvement of trained explosives experts. He speculated that such individuals would have to be either present inside the country, or outside, perhaps in Eastern Europe, where they would be active participants in an international supply-chain to UK operatives. "In either case, we are talking about something far more dangerous than home-grown radicals here."
Spy Slams Police Inaction against Terrorists

Such concerns are echoed by others familiar with British terrorism-related intelligence operations. Glen Jenvey, who is profiled in the bestselling book, The Terror Tracker, by terrorism investigator Neil Doyle, worked for several military attaches monitoring terrorist groups in London, and obtained crucial video and surveillance evidence used by British police to arrest radical cleric Abu Hamza al-Masri, who was convicted earlier this year in February. "I've been closely monitoring the internet communications of extremist Muslim groups inside the UK both before and after 7/7, and they are intimately interconnected", said Jenvey, who is affiliated to the London-based terror watch group VIGIL. "We've identified a coordinated leadership of at least 20, and up to 60 people, extremist preachers with blatant international al-Qaeda terrorist connections". He noted that despite being known to, and monitored by, the authorities for breaking the law with impunity, particularly in their closed sermons, the police have failed to take appropriate action against them. "The police don't need to round up and detain thousands of British Muslims. If they only arrested, charged and prosecuted these 20 key terrorist leaders, they will have a struck a fatal blow against the epicentres of al-Qaeda extremism in the UK. But they're sitting on this."

Jenvey points out that Omar Bakri Mohammed, a colleague of Abu Hamza who heads the banned al-Muhajiroun, continues to communicate with UK-based extremist groups operating under new names, including the Saved Sect and al-Ghurabaa, despite being exiled to Lebanon. British security sources have confirmed that the 7/7 bombers were associates of Omar Bakri's network, and Bakri himself publicly boasted a year before the London bombings that an al-Qaeda cell in London was planning a terrorist strike.

An investigation by the counterterrorism unit in the New York Police Department (NYPD) found that Bakri's al-Muhajiroun had formed 81 front groups and support networks in six countries, mostly based in London, the home counties, the Midlands, Lancashire and West Yorkshire. By the time Home Secretary Dr. John Reid moved to proscribe the latest incarnation of al-Muhajiroun, al-Ghurabaa, this sprawling interconnected network was fully functioning, continuing to operate namelessly, despite proscription. Bakri's network has recently adopted the name "Al Sabiqoon Al-Awwaloon".

Despite the arrest of radical cleric Abu Abdullah, Hamza's successor at the Finsbury Park Mosque, in early September, Jenvey complains that a "hardcore group of 20 or more extremists operating around Omar Bakri" remains at large. "The police have every reason to act, and they know who these people are. Their failure to do so has only exacerbated unjustified demonization of Muslims. These extremists are not Muslims in any meaningful sense, they are simply terrorists obsessed with violence."


MI5, MI6 Recruiting Extremists?

Even the arrest of Abu Abdullah only occurred after his support for terrorism was widely reported in the British and American media in late August. On 23rd August, he justified the killing of Westerners and told CNN correspondent Dan Rivers that Tony Blair is a "legitimate target" of jihad. The Sunday Times (27.08.06) remarked that he "is apparently being allowed to operate unchecked by the authorities five months after a law was passed making it a criminal offence to glorify terrorism."

Torture may have been used to extract evidence for the weekend police raids which resulted in the arrest of 14 British Muslims, including Abdullah. Sources confirm that information came from detainees in Camp X-Ray in Guantanamo, where interrogation techniques classified as torture under international law are routinely used.

The reluctance to take decisive action against the leadership of the extremist network in the UK has a long history. According to John Loftus, a former Justice Department prosecutor, Omar Bakri and Abu Hamza, as well as the suspected mastermind of the London bombings Haroon Aswat, were all recruited by MI6 in the mid-1990s to draft up British Muslims to fight in Kosovo. American and French security sources corroborate the revelation. The MI6 connection raises questions about Bakri's relationship with British authorities today. Exiled to Lebanon and outside British jurisdiction, he is effectively immune to prosecution.

Other London-based radical clerics with terrorist connections also had a relationship to the security services. Abu Qatada, described as al-Qaeda's European ambassador, was according to French sources a long-time MI5 informant. Pakistani government insiders similarly believe that Ahmed Omar Sheikh Saeed, the British al-Qaeda finance chief from Forest Gate, worked not only with the ISI, Pakistani's military intelligence service, but was also recruited by the CIA as an informant. Saeed, who reportedly wired several hundred thousand dollars to alleged chief 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta, is currently in Pakistani custody for the murder of Wall Street Journal journalist Daniel Pearl.

Omar Bakri regularly uses the internet to communicate with his followers in Britain. On Sunday evening, 3rd September, Omar Bakri told participants in an online chat forum that he had been pulled in by the Lebanese authorities at the request of the US and British governments, and questioned in relation to the "terror plot". Although he denied involvement in the plot, he claimed that some of the 24 British Muslim suspects were known to him. When asked to confirm or deny whether Bakri had indeed been arrested at the request of the British, the Foreign Office had no comment. Bakri said that he was regularly questioned by Lebanese officials on behalf of the British government.

The official reluctance to act against Bakri and his active associates in the UK does not match the government's willingness to act pre-emptively to foil a plot of doubtful reality. Official reluctance to acknowledge the significance of the detonators used in the 7/7 terrorist operation suggests that the threat is far more sophisticated than authorities have admitted, and that emphasis on home-grown amateurs is mistaken. Lt. Col. Wylde's observations suggest that the terror-threat narrative is being manipulated for political expedience.

The evidence shows that the government continues to play political games with the terrorism threat, games that are undermining, not serving, our safety; while consolidating the unaccountable powers of a compromised "security" bureaucracy. What is needed now is not simply to throw more money and power at such a deeply-flawed system, but to hold an independent public inquiry into 7/7 that will facilitate the implementation of reforms that will protect the integrity of our intelligence services.

Acknowledgements:

This is a Raw Story exclusive:
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/sources_august_terror_plot_fiction_underscoring_09 18.html

Thanks to Graham Ennis, Nigel Wylde and Glen Jenvey for their research assistance and contribution to this story. They bear no responsibility for any errors therein. An abridged version of this story will be printed in The Muslim News, UK on 29th September 2006.

Initially I felt this article may be accurate, an expert claiming the whole liquid explosive on a plane scare is just bunk. After reading his comment that preparing AP requires “significant chemical expertise” I am inclined to disregard him as either ignorant of exactly how AP is made, or he wants to downplay sheeple fears about how easy making AP is.

Perhaps he was misquoted because he goes on to accurately describe making AP as a time consuming task. It’s not complicated, it just needs time. You don’t need freezing temperatures, just if you want TATP instead of DADP. A little ice from the drink cart and a few packets of salt would make a reasonable salt-ice bath in a pinch. It’s not rocket science, it’s chem. 101. Snakes on a plane man, snakes on a plane.

I feel somewhat personally responsible for the media now correctly referring to acetone peroxide as TATP. It is unfortunate that the bastards at wiki now how the top result for TATP considering how they stole some of the information directly from my website without the decency to cite me as a source.

It seems they will ban a wiki on The Forum and megalomania’s Controversial Chem Lab, but they are more than happy to steal my hard work and pass it off as their own to get top google rankings.

If anyone wishes to do whatever it is you do with wikis (edit them, file an appeal, start a complaint thread, etc) the specific address is http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Acetone_peroxide_synthesis

you could throw a frisbee into the engine intake (on take-off or landing) as it came in 30 yards up over the beach...QUICKLY! WE MUST BAN FRISBEES!

I am 1/2 km from the enterance to the local commercial airport. 2 km from here is the end of the main runway, the end of which is 100 m and 200 m from two major roadways having heavy traffic, including trucks - a truck depot less them 1 km from there. You cannot park directly under the flight path, but there are businesses, including a bank, restaurant and (welfare) motel no more than 200 m from the end of the runway. The single chain link fence around the airfield has been pried up in places by the homeless gaining access to the woodlands on and around the airfield. While it doesn't have the air traffic of Chicago's O'Hare, there are a lot of commercial passenger and freight flights as well as private planes and corporate jets.

A jet engine is designed to take a lot of abuse and remain functional. The turbine blades I saw (still have one) 40 years ago were so heavily made from titanium alloy that they would likely stand up to a 5.56 mm round. I do not know how they would fare under full power stresses when shot at. I suspect the engine would 'eat' the bullet with no harm, most of the time.

(I was working as an analytical chemist, putting myself through college. This company gave us about 50 blades, and asked if the heat stains could be removed using a tertiary amine detergent we sold. They later were nailed for cleaning up used aircraft engine parts and selling them as new. Fortunately, we were unable to clean the parts, some titanium alloys will resist aqua regia, corroding at about 1/10 mm in 1000 years.)

A frisbee may be more effective than a rifle bullet. The plastic would melt in the combustion chamber, and coat the flame catcher, causing a flame-out. You also need to take out more than a single engine, as commercial passenger aircraft are designed to continue flying with one engine out. Even on takoff, a good pilot should be able to recover, and bring the aircraft back to the ground safely. Do we have any pilots or A&P's out there who can tell us more?

Mega, according to the FAA, it's the pilots who cause the most crashes. Personnally, I agree with you, far too much blame is placed on pilot error, and not enough on poor aircraft design and defered maintenance. Also thanks for the post, I've already printed it out and given it to a number of people.

CNN several weeks ago had a quick video of UK police carrying a box out of the 'terrorists' appartment house, saying it was bomb-making material. The largest bottle looked like a red 1 liter bottle of hydrogen peroxide. In fact, the contents of the box looked like most people's medicine cabinet. It was like someone decided to 1) stampeed the sheeple; 2) restrict their freedoms still more to make them feel more 'secure'; 3) gain more control over the sheeple and everyone else.

I also dislike organic peroxides due to an experience when I was 19. The chem professor I had, who also was the dean of chemistry, warned us to report any bottle of organic solvent with crystals growing around the cap. One bottle of MEK had these crystals, and he cleared the lab and called the fire department and police CBD's. I had put out a lab fire a month before when everyone else paniced or frooze, so he had me at the door to the lab to keep everyone else out. A Smerf (uniformed police) showed up to evaluate the problem, and before anyone could stop him, he picked up and openned the bottle. There was a loud snap, and the cap shattered, cutting open his hand. The Dean had me go outside to direct the fire rescue people into the lab as he washed the MEK out of this genius smerf's wound. At least he didn't lose any fingers, but from the look of it, it likely didn't fuction very well after then. Also fortunately, it was his trigger finger.

As for the World Trade Center, if it wasn't for the horrendous loss of life, damage to property and financial losses, I would have applauded the bringing down those two hideous examples of modern architecture. They had as much character as two shoeboxes stood up on end. They also ruined free TV for the entire metropolitan area.

Here is a more accurate article mega, it has some mistakes as does many but I believe it is the best article yet on the liquid explosives terrorist plot.

Instead of writing just on if the plot was possible it reflects on the whole terrorist situation in general.

Article from here.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/17/flying_toilet_terror_labs/

Mass murder in the skies: was the plot feasible?


Let's whip up some TATP and find out

Analysis The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air;
And a loud voice came forth out of the temple of Heaven,
From the throne, saying, "It is done!"
--Revelation 16:17

Binary liquid explosives are a sexy staple of Hollywood thrillers. It would be tedious to enumerate the movie terrorists who've employed relatively harmless liquids that, when mixed, immediately rain destruction upon an innocent populace, like the seven angels of God's wrath pouring out their bowls full of pestilence and pain.

The funny thing about these movies is, we never learn just which two chemicals can be handled safely when separate, yet instantly blow us all to kingdom come when combined. Nevertheless, we maintain a great eagerness to believe in these substances, chiefly because action movies wouldn't be as much fun if we didn't.

Now we have news of the recent, supposedly real-world, terrorist plot to destroy commercial airplanes by smuggling onboard the benign precursors to a deadly explosive, and mixing up a batch of liquid death in the lavatories. So, The Register has got to ask, were these guys for real, or have they, and the counterterrorist officials supposedly protecting us, been watching too many action movies?

We're told that the suspects were planning to use TATP, or triacetone triperoxide, a high explosive that supposedly can be made from common household chemicals unlikely to be caught by airport screeners. A little hair dye, drain cleaner, and paint thinner - all easily concealed in drinks bottles - and the forces of evil have effectively smuggled a deadly bomb onboard your plane.

Or at least that's what we're hearing, and loudly, through the mainstream media and its legions of so-called "terrorism experts." But what do these experts know about chemistry? Less than they know about lobbying for Homeland Security pork, which is what most of them do for a living. But they've seen the same movies that you and I have seen, and so the myth of binary liquid explosives dies hard.

Better killing through chemistry

Making a quantity of TATP sufficient to bring down an airplane is not quite as simple as ducking into the toilet and mixing two harmless liquids together.

First, you've got to get adequately concentrated hydrogen peroxide. This is hard to come by, so a large quantity of the three per cent solution sold in pharmacies might have to be concentrated by boiling off the water. Only this is risky, and can lead to mission failure by means of burning down your makeshift lab before a single infidel has been harmed.

But let's assume that you can obtain it in the required concentration, or cook it from a dilute solution without ruining your operation. Fine. The remaining ingredients, acetone and sulfuric acid, are far easier to obtain, and we can assume that you've got them on hand.

Now for the fun part. Take your hydrogen peroxide, acetone, and sulfuric acid, measure them very carefully, and put them into drinks bottles for convenient smuggling onto a plane. It's all right to mix the peroxide and acetone in one container, so long as it remains cool. Don't forget to bring several frozen gel-packs (preferably in a Styrofoam chiller deceptively marked "perishable foods"), a thermometer, a large beaker, a stirring rod, and a medicine dropper. You're going to need them.

It's best to fly first class and order Champagne. The bucket full of ice water, which the airline ought to supply, might possibly be adequate - especially if you have those cold gel-packs handy to supplement the ice, and the Styrofoam chiller handy for insulation - to get you through the cookery without starting a fire in the lavvie.

Easy does it

Once the plane is over the ocean, very discreetly bring all of your gear into the toilet. You might need to make several trips to avoid drawing attention. Once your kit is in place, put a beaker containing the peroxide / acetone mixture into the ice water bath (Champagne bucket), and start adding the acid, drop by drop, while stirring constantly. Watch the reaction temperature carefully. The mixture will heat, and if it gets too hot, you'll end up with a weak explosive. In fact, if it gets really hot, you'll get a premature explosion possibly sufficient to kill you, but probably no one else.

After a few hours - assuming, by some miracle, that the fumes haven't overcome you or alerted passengers or the flight crew to your activities - you'll have a quantity of TATP with which to carry out your mission. Now all you need to do is dry it for an hour or two.

The genius of this scheme is that TATP is relatively easy to detonate. But you must make enough of it to crash the plane, and you must make it with care to assure potency. One needs quality stuff to commit "mass murder on an unimaginable scale," as Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Stephenson put it. While it's true that a slapdash concoction will explode, it's unlikely to do more than blow out a few windows. At best, an infidel or two might be killed by the blast, and one or two others by flying debris as the cabin suddenly depressurizes, but that's about all you're likely to manage under the most favorable conditions possible.

We believe this because a peer-reviewed 2004 study in the Journal of the American Chemical Society (JACS) entitled "Decomposition of Triacetone Triperoxide is an Entropic Explosion" tells us that the explosive force of TATP comes from the sudden decomposition of a solid into gasses. There's no rapid oxidizing of fuel, as there is with many other explosives: rather, the substance changes state suddenly through an entropic process, and quickly releases a respectable amount of energy when it does. (Thus the lack of ingredients typically associated with explosives makes TATP, a white crystalline powder resembling sugar, difficult to detect with conventional bomb sniffing gear.)

Mrs. Satan

By now you'll be asking why these jihadist wannabes didn't conspire simply to bring TATP onto planes, colored with a bit of vegetable dye, and disguised as, say, a powdered fruit-flavored drink. The reason is that they would be afraid of failing: TATP is notoriously sensitive and unstable. Mainstream journalists like to tell us that terrorists like to call it "the mother of Satan." (Whether this reputation is deserved, or is a consequence of homebrewing by unqualified hacks, remains open to debate.)

It's been claimed that the 7/7 bombers used it, but this has not been positively confirmed. Some sources claim that they used C-4, and others that they used RDX. Nevertheless, the belief that they used TATP has stuck with the media, although going about in a crowded city at rush hour with an unstable homebrew explosive in a backpack is not the brightest of all possible moves. It's surprising that none of the attackers enjoyed an unscheduled launch into Paradise.

So, assuming that the homebrew variety of TATP is highly sensitive and unstable - or at least that our inept jihadists would believe that - to avoid getting blown up in the taxi on the way to the airport, one might, if one were educated in terror tactics primarily by hollywood movies, prefer simply to dump the precursors into an airplane toilet bowl and let the mother of Satan work her magic. Indeed, the mixture will heat rapidly as TATP begins to form, and it will soon explode. But this won't happen with much force, because little TATP will have formed by the time the explosion occurs.

We asked University of Rhode Island Chemistry Professor Jimmie C. Oxley, who has actual, practical experience with TATP, if this is a reasonable assumption, and she tolds us that merely dumping the precursors together would create "a violent reaction," but not a detonation.

To release the energy needed to bring down a plane (far more difficult to do than many imagine, as Aloha Airlines Flight 243 neatly illustrates), it's necessary to synthesize a good amount of TATP with care.

Jack Bauer sense

So the fabled binary liquid explosive - that is, the sudden mixing of hydrogen peroxide and acetone with sulfuric acid to create a plane-killing explosion, is out of the question. Meanwhile, making TATP ahead of time carries a risk that the mission will fail due to premature detonation, although it is the only plausible approach.

Certainly, if we can imagine a group of jihadists smuggling the necessary chemicals and equipment on board, and cooking up TATP in the lavatory, then we've passed from the realm of action blockbusters to that of situation comedy.

It should be small comfort that the security establishments of the UK and the USA - and the "terrorism experts" who inform them and wheedle billions of dollars out of them for bomb puffers and face recognition gizmos and remote gait analyzers and similar hi-tech phrenology gear - have bought the Hollywood binary liquid explosive myth, and have even acted upon it.

We've given extraordinary credit to a collection of jihadist wannabes with an exceptionally poor grasp of the mechanics of attacking a plane, whose only hope of success would have been a pure accident. They would have had to succeed in spite of their own ignorance and incompetence, and in spite of being under police surveillance for a year.

But the Hollywood myth of binary liquid explosives now moves governments and drives public policy. We have reacted to a movie plot. Liquids are now banned in aircraft cabins (while crystalline white powders would be banned instead, if anyone in charge were serious about security). Nearly everything must now go into the hold, where adequate amounts of explosives can easily be detonated from the cabin with cell phones, which are generally not banned.

Action heroes

The al-Qaeda franchise will pour forth its bowl of pestilence and death. We know this because we've watched it countless times on TV and in the movies, just as our officials have done. Based on their behavior, it's reasonable to suspect that everything John Reid and Michael Chertoff know about counterterrorism, they learned watching the likes of Bruce Willis, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Vin Diesel, and The Rock (whose palpable homoerotic appeal it would be discourteous to emphasize).

It's a pity that our security rests in the hands of government officials who understand as little about terrorism as the Florida clowns who needed their informant to suggest attack scenarios, as the 21/7 London bombers who injured no one, as lunatic "shoe bomber" Richard Reid, as the Forest Gate nerve gas attackers who had no nerve gas, as the British nitwits who tried to acquire "red mercury," and as the recent binary liquid bomb attackers who had no binary liquid bombs.

For some real terror, picture twenty guys who understand op-sec, who are patient, realistic, clever, and willing to die, and who know what can be accomplished with a modest stash of dimethylmercury.

You won't hear about those fellows until it's too late. Our official protectors and deciders trumpet the fools they catch because they haven't got a handle on the people we should really be afraid of. They make policy based on foibles and follies, and Hollywood plots.

Meanwhile, the real thing draws ever closer. �

The only mistake I managed to pick up in the article (that wasn’t later corrected by other sentences) from when I read it (a while ago) was that the drying time for TATP would be longer than 2 hours in an aeroplane toilet. But that’s not taking into consideration the reduced pressure.

Any comments?

EDIT: Last night after re-reading the article I realised that they have practically the same information about making AP referring to the fumes and other things.

But none the less it’s still a good read and gives a insight to the ‘real’ terrorist situation.

I've updated the thread title, since that "1 hour ago" is now so long ago that we have had the trials of those accused. (Guilty, but not of trying to down airplanes.)

Ok, so, it seems that everyone was barking up the wrong tree, including me. The terror they were averting was not of a liquid explosive, nor of someone doing a TATP synth in the toilets. The plan, if you can call it that, was to use pressure-containing bottles and hydrogen peroxide to make a "bottle bomb"!

Now, you can all laugh along with me on this one. I've set off a great many devices of a higher sophistication level than this, which wanted to use Snapple bottles to contain the pressure.

My method of choice was to use liquid gasses and trap them inside of the far stronger sculpted plastic Coke bottles. Even at this higher level of power, the "shrapnel" - mere bits of plastic - was thrown perhaps 25 feet for the bottles that went more like a rocket. Very loud and impressive, but very safe, since the worst that could happen, as long as you were more than 5 feet away, was ringing in the ears. To see how safe it is, look to http://www.springerlink.com/content/g115m40v42548161/ where an 8y.o. child managed to blow a bottle bomb up in his mouth and survived.

This is not something that could bring down a large aeroplane. Run the calculations, and the worst that could happen is that the "bomber" ends up being beaten to death by the passengers and crew.

Assume a 0.75l bottle (these are stronger by far than the larger types) with a rupture pressure of 100 atmospheres (totally over the likely fail of about 170PSI or 11.5 atmospheres, according to http://www.hydroflite.net/Safety.html : "The PET plastic bottles are designed to hold pressure and are proof tested to 170 psi at the factory.") This gives a volume of (0.75*100=) 75l of gas at STP, or for the "proof" case a mere (0.75*11.5 =) 8.6l @ STP.

Airline toilets are barely big enough for two, but are still about 2.25m tall, by lets say 1m wide by 1.5m deep. This gives a volume of 3.375 cubic meters.

Ok, so 75 litres of gas is only 0.075 m^3 of gas. Expand that rapidly into a volume of 3.375m^3 and you get... a 2.2% increase in pressure! Ow, your ears are going to sting a bit, but that's not even going to blow the bloody (bathroom) doors off! And that 2.2% increase is the *worst case* of some kind of mega bottle!

The feds say large planes must take without failure:
(ii) A 15-pound per square-inch pressure {1.02 atmospheres} load if the projected surface area of the component is greater than 4 square feet.

We have a pressure change of far below that. In fact, more like the .02 part of that allowance above, and that's just in the loo. Outside the loo, not a lot would be noticeable, bar the commotion from the bang! To succeed the bombers would, in fact, need a "bottle" that was about 8% the internal volume of the plane at the burst pressure of a standard bottle.

So, this whole thing was classic misdirection, and I'm annoyed that I didn't see through it, what with the whole "liquids in bags" being allowed.

I'm going to ask that someone send this in to MythBusters, and see if they will put this crap on the TV for the world to see. Because then I might be able to take my bottle of water onto the plane again.

Gatorade bottle, dry ice, and water. At one job I briefly held, we used dry
ice to keep meat, poultry, and fish frozen during long transports. The
dry ice bomb makes a hell of a bang but very little in terms of destruction.
IIRC, the state of Utah classifies them as "infernal devices" and said offender
can go to prison. The worst that happened to us was the local pork
threatening us with "disturbing the peace" charges.

I agree, that a lot of these people arrested on terrorism and conspiracy
charges are idiots who watched too many Hollywood movies. Ditto for the
assholes arresting them.

Jack, Yes basically their so called "Liquid explosive plot" was pathetic. But there isn't a chance in hell they are going to let you start taking liquids back on planes. Why? Because if there was someone who had half a brain and knew what they were doing, they wouldn't fill the containers with something as useless as hydrogen peroxide. They would fill it with a high explosive like NG, which is obviously quite easily capable of taking down a plane. Just becuase their plan was useless and uncapable of damage, doesn't mean the next persons would be. Lets be honest, 250ml of NG placed correctly could easily remove a plane from the sky. Once you are at 35,000 feet and you have a hole in the body about the size of a car, you have no chance.

The only chance for you to be able to take your water back on the plane, is with these new machines they have gone and bought a load of. If I'm correct, the overall idea is that these machines basically scan your luggage and are specially designed to measure the density of the liquids. They can tell from different density levels if there is anything out of the ordinary in your luggage. In this article they seem to speak of some hand held device, but the ones I saw being purchased for use at Hethrow were large stationery units.

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2007-05-22-tsa-liquid-explosives_N.htm

Overall I think a machine which measured density could be foiled somewhat, what if the density of your liquid explosive is near that of water?? A detection system which incorporates using the liquids vapour to determine what the substance is is useless. Even the morons we talked of above were able to think round this. You would basically buy a drinks bottle, leave the lid untouched, and feed your liquid in through the bottom before gluing it back up. This way your bottle you are taking on, remains unopened and the seal un broken.

I do enjoy chuckling at these "terrorists" though. If they are so thoroughly linked to Al queda and all that crap, how come they are always so useless. The authorities really have nothing to worry about when it comes to terrorism, becuase the terrorists are always so stupid there plots don't work anyway. It reminds me of the attempted bombing a couple of weeks after 7th July in London. There were four terrorist bombers basically copying the guys who suceeded. They all had backpacks with a pretty much similar setup to the other guys. Their bombs failed to detonate apparently due to faulty detonators. Well beings as the explosive being used was apparently AP, is there really any need for a detonator. You would merley have to kick the damn bag and it would detonate. So I mean these guys can't even synthesize basic explosives for god sake. They probably realised they had run out of citric acid, and instead thought they would use flour or something. Damn rag heads.

And of course lets not forget about the "Glasgow terror attacks" last year I believe, where a couple of rag heads drove into the front door of an airport with a jeep full of gasoline, all that happened is they just set themselfs alight and burned to death. :D

Even the 2 Mercedes benz parked up in London with Propane tanks in them, the list just goes on and on. My damn dog could think up a better plot than these morons.

Emil,
No, you are wrong. The reason that you cannot take liquids onto the 'plane, even with a sealed bottle, is because of the lack of Duty Free sales. Once the "powers that be" realised that they could strip everyone of any liquid, and then sell it back to them on the other side of the gate, they were provided with a huge increase in income. Not even allowed the option to re-fill an empty water bottle, they are free to charge as much as they want for soft drinks, alcohol and even tap water. In the case of the UK, where Duty Free has vanished due to the free trade in the EU, it has ensured that the low cost airlines and big players alike are far happier.

As for the nitro in a bag thing, any fool could take it on board in a plastic carrier bag. Just because it was limited to 100ml, how would anyone tell it apart from heart medicine or cough linctus? Say 200ml of nitroglycerine and some in-flight magazines for tamping...

As for how to stop anyone from blowing anything up? Simple.

"You want to take a drink on board? Certainly sir. Break the seal, and drink two mouthfuls of it for me. Thanks, sir, that's fine, enjoy your pop."

"You want to take a drink on board? Certainly sir. Break the seal, and drink two mouthfuls of it for me. Looking a bit dead there sir, was the H2O2 a bit strong for your stomache?"

"You want to take a drink on board? Certainly sir. Break the seal, and drink two mouthfuls of it for me. Well sir, I'll have to take it off you then. Sorry, that's the rules. You can buy more 121 proof alcohol in the Duty Free."

See, *I* can solve the problem in a few minutes of thought. They could too. But they don't want to.

You would have to be beyond insane to try bring 250ml of nitroglycerin on board a plane, you have to get the bottle to the airport in the first place. Better hope that your cousin Abdul knows how to work the clutch on your shitty merc.

You would have to be beyond insane to blow yourself up on a plane to begin with, getting pink misted a little sooner is just the cost of doing Allah's business.

Nitroglycerin could be frozen until it is time to board as it is very stable in this state. However, once nitroglycerin begins to thaw it is especially dangerous, but as long as Abdul goes off in or around the airport it is Mission Accomplished for the visiting team.

Pardon me if this is an obtuse question, but being new to the chemistry game, I'm rather unsophisticated.

It seems to me that to make and employ an explosive damaging enough for a Jihadi's purpose would be a simple matter. Is there any explanation for why this isn't happening, other than maybe there aren't massive sleeper cells of Afghani freedom-haters?

Emil,
No, you are wrong. The reason that you cannot take liquids onto the 'plane, even with a sealed bottle, is because of the lack of Duty Free sales. Once the "powers that be" realised that they could strip everyone of any liquid, and then sell it back to them on the other side of the gate, they were provided with a huge increase in income.


Is there any evidence to back that theory up, or is it just mere conspiracy like speculation?? As much as that might be the case, I am pretty sure they actually do not want liquid explosives on planes...for the overly obvious reasons.

But yeh actually you could quite easily disguise the NG as a heart medicine or diabetes medicine etc etc. Im sure 100ml will sufficiently take a plane down if placed right. Actually if you were just about to be a complete idiot and blow yourself up, you probably wouldn't give a damn what you had just drunken. As long as you wern't going to break down in instant pain or black out due to what you have just swallowed, there shouldn't be a problem with drinking your material. Whats the big fuss, your going to be dead in less than an hour anyway right? I'm not quite sure what would happen if you were to ingest 2 mouth fulls of NG or PLX. Does anyone actually have a realistic and accurate acount of what is likely to happen ingesting something along these lines? Is it just going to give you a really bad stomach ache, or likely to slowly kill you?

3287:

I am not actually to sure really, most of these so called terrorists we seem to get in our countries seem to be complete idiots (Forgetting the fact that they are terrorists in the first place). You would of thought pretty much anyone with some basic common sense and some light experience and research into the field could synthesise a very decent explosive. However every time we seem to see displays of imcompetence. Not that I pay a blind eye to what the media says, but even in media reports you will hear of the terrorists making shed loads of AP, with tonnes of hydrogen peroxide (of which they usually have CCTV footage of the idiot buying it), and then they will say some other weird material like "bleach" or something like this. You think to yourself "hang on", bleach isn't used in the manufacture of AP. Is this the reason the material didn't detonate, because they jsut made something completely different in the first place.

You would of thought with the shear amount of hate the east portrays against the west, there would be alot more terrorist attacks. I'm not sure, I mean these guys are pretty lousy when it comes to thinking up a plan. If they aren't thinking of blowing up a plane at a very high security airport, they are usually making other dead obvious mistakes. You always seem to hear "Mr ahmed abdul and Jita mohammed were captured after police found detailed plans on their laptops to blow up a London shopping centre." Anyone with any common sense wouldn't plan a terrorist attack on their laptop in the 21st century anyway. Our computers really aren't safe enough for such a thing. Maybe coming from low end poor countries, they under estimate the technologies and threats that exist from leaking infomation in the slightest.

3287 - To accurately address your question, just have a think about the kind of people that would become suicide bombers. Their intelligence doesn't lend them to the making of anything more sophisticated than my Big Mac. Even then they fuck that up.... Assholes....

Emil: I'm not quite sure what would happen if you were to ingest 2 mouth fulls of NG or PLX

Where would you possibly find the toxicity and effects of something that has use in industry? Here is a hint. Starts with M.....ends with SDS....

3287, I'm quite sure that 90%+ of the so called "terrorists" that you see caught on any news media outlet is a complete fabrication by one government or another to make it look like our freedoms have been given up for a "good cause".

The fact that X chemical + Y does NOT equal Z... well, either the media has enough problems telling the truth to care or they think that anyone who has truthful information about such things is GUARANTEED to blow something important up. Afterall, we "commoners" just cannot be trusted with genuine information.

Emil, you explain it then.

There are no liquid explosives that would pass a sniff test, and none that I know of that would let someone drinking a mouthful of it live for more than a minute. Nitroglycerine lowers blood pressure. It is very rapidly absorbed. They would die in front of you, and perhaps explode if you tried chest compressions.

Frozen nitro might work, but then that's not a liquid, is it? Also, they are taking lipgloss away, along with lots of other things that are not liquids. It's about control and spending patterns.

I was writing off your theory, I was just saying that there is also the obvious reason they do not want liquid explosives on planes because it is an easy route for terrorism on a big level. As much as the I don't trust the Government and they probably are doing it for money, I'm sure the guys who work at the airlines don't want their planes coming down every month or two because of some arab boarded the plane with NG in his hip flask.

Actually I am very suprised there haven't been more cases like this in the past. I suppose terrorists on the whole are just greatly incompetent when it comes to such a plan, even though it is incredibly basic. How hard is it for authorities mind you when they lay it all our for you, in a convinient little file on their laptop desktop.

Filename "Bomb Plot"
Description: "Me and my four brothers plan to board Planez at Heathrow airport with liquid explosivez stashed in bottles on the 25th July at about 5pm."

Actually I am very suprised there haven't been more cases like this in the past.

I don't confess to know the answer, but it might even be that terrorism like that is a bit of a fabrication? Scare people so they don't fly, scare them so you can have power over them.

After all, as far as the sheeple are concerned, what difference is there between having your drinks checked at the airport and having your car searched? Having RF ID on you at all times? Being detained to make sure you aren't illegal in anyway? Not much difference at all, they say.