Air travel and security

Post by **clv101** » 11 Aug 2006, 23:08

I've quoted this post from another forum - I think it shows just how preposterous the media can be.

Shamefully, there is some evidence to suggest those cut-aways are of Brit origin. Gawd 'elp us.:

Times of London - November 29th, 2001

The Lair of bin Laden
I particularly like the boxes that say:

caves cut deep inside the mountain to avoid the possibility of detection by thermal sensing equipment

... and

The comples of caves is carved into a 13,000ft mountain and can accommodate up tp 1,000 people

... and

System of ventillation ducts brings air into the caves and provides alternative exits.

Ah yes, it has all been thought of ... apart from the small matter of a covert way of exhausting the combined body heat and bum gas of 1,000 sweaty Kofta-nakhod-chomping Taliban with horses in tow ...

YossarianUK · Post by **YossarianUK** » 12 Aug 2006, 01:22

mikepepler wrote:A case of deja vu here, regarding the latest terror scare:
Terror plan to shoot down plane (February 2003)
The BBC has learnt that security services received information at the start of the week about a missile attack at Heathrow. The following morning, 1,700 police officers and 450 troops were deployed to Heathrow Airport, while armed police patrolled other UK airports. An Algerian network of hardened fighters, linked to al-Qaeda, is believed to be behind the plan.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2759157.stm

I can't find any trace on the BBC website of a follow up to this. No arrests, no trials, just a big scare, and some new contracts for people making missile countermeasure equipment to be fitted to airliners...

How many foiled terrorist plots can we name?

There was the suicide bombings planned for Old Trafford ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3641547.stm ) which turned out to be lads going to watch football.

The Ricin plot ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4249516.stm )

The Forest Gate raid ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5066470.stm )

The "terrorist" with the "padded jacket" ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4714173.stm )

Why, now, after one "successful" terrorist plot in the UK in the past 15 years do we need to give up our civil liberties, when from 1970-1990 the IRA regularly exploded bombs in Northern Ireland and the mainland, including coming close to killing Mrs Thatcher, and we didn't then need ID cards, etc. etc.?

Why do most foiled terrorist attacks turn out to be nothing?

BBC News, less than 24 hours before the alleged plot came to light, said:

The UK might have to modify its freedoms in the short term in order to prevent their "misuse and abuse" by terrorists, John Reid has said.

He conceded that was never an easy request, but it was up to everyone to ask: "What price our security, at what cost can we preserve our freedoms?"

The UK faced its "most sustained period of severe threat since the end of World War II", the home secretary warned.

George Bush, immediately after 9/11, said:

You're either with us, or with the terrorists

And all this happening within a couple of weeks of the new, highly publicised, alert system being launched.

On an unrelated matter:

"Goering: Why, of course, the people don't want war .... That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.

Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.

Goering: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

Gustace Gilbert interviewing Hermann Goering, Nuremberg 1946

enso · Post by **enso** » 12 Aug 2006, 09:35

clv101, was that really in the Times? That must be one of the most outrageous pieces of journalistic licence ever in a broadsheet.

When they said Bin Laden was hiding in caves I didn't realise it was Dr Evils lair! I'm surprised that with such a complex HQ Osama was getting around on horseback - surely there must be a launchpad for Thunderbird 2 in there?

GAZ · Post by **GAZ** » 12 Aug 2006, 10:20

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com for more on the latest ludicrous "terror plot".

Post by **clv101** » 12 Aug 2006, 10:29

Friday, 11 August 2006, 22:49 GMT
One of the 24 suspects arrested in the UK was released without charge on Friday, but the rest remained in police custody.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4785807.stm

enso · Post by **enso** » 12 Aug 2006, 10:43

GAZ wrote:http://www.waynemadsenreport.com for more on the latest ludicrous "terror plot".

Nice yarn, but where are the quoted sources for this "coup" theory?

Have to say I did wonder what Blair was doing meeting Murdoch et al last week but I think this theory is a case of 2+2=5 - fill in the gaps of knowledge with paranoia.

GAZ · Post by **GAZ** » 12 Aug 2006, 11:37

As i understand it most of Madsen's sources are in the "intelligence" community as Madsen himself once was.(US Office of Naval Intelligence and National Security Agency)

So if you had people in the NSA,CIA,FBI,DIA,ONI and other agencies leaking you classified info would you reveal them as a source? I sure as hell wouldn't.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 12 Aug 2006, 11:47

Why has last Sunday's Flight 109 London - Boston not received greater attention?
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1046646

Or was it Monday?
http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/11/r ... on-flight/

Though the incident did not result in any arrests:

A spokesman for Scotland Yard said four people were being interviewed under port and border controls, but nobody had been arrested.

here
And
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 02,00.html

enso · Post by **enso** » 12 Aug 2006, 11:56

GAZ wrote:As i understand it most of Madsen's sources are in the "intelligence" community as Madsen himself once was.(US Office of Naval Intelligence and National Security Agency)

So if you had people in the NSA,CIA,FBI,DIA,ONI and other agencies leaking you classified info would you reveal them as a source? I sure as hell wouldn't.

Well, you could describe them simply as an "intelligence source" I suppose. That might make it look a bit less like you had just made it all up!

Don't get me wrong, I'm as sceptical as many about the official spin/propaganda we are fed on these matters. I'm just equally sceptical of some of the alternative theories that are thrown around without any evidence presented.

On this topic of official stories and political shennanigans I'm always reminded of a talk a then-recently retired British intelligence officer gave to my sixth form back in 1994/95. Don't remember his name but he was an old university friend of our headmaster at the time and was invited to give us a talk about his career.

The one thing I remember from that talk was what he told us about Lockerbie - that British intelligence were convinced it was a Syrian-backed plot but the US wanted to pin it on Libya because of an agreement leading to the inclusion of Syria in the coalition during the first Gulf War. My scepticism about what we are told by governments was born that day.

GAZ · Post by **GAZ** » 12 Aug 2006, 16:16

enso wrote:
GAZ wrote:As i understand it most of Madsen's sources are in the "intelligence" community as Madsen himself once was.(US Office of Naval Intelligence and National Security Agency)

So if you had people in the NSA,CIA,FBI,DIA,ONI and other agencies leaking you classified info would you reveal them as a source? I sure as hell wouldn't.
Well, you could describe them simply as an "intelligence source" I suppose. That might make it look a bit less like you had just made it all up!

Don't get me wrong, I'm as sceptical as many about the official spin/propaganda we are fed on these matters. I'm just equally sceptical of some of the alternative theories that are thrown around without any evidence presented.

On this topic of official stories and political shennanigans I'm always reminded of a talk a then-recently retired British intelligence officer gave to my sixth form back in 1994/95. Don't remember his name but he was an old university friend of our headmaster at the time and was invited to give us a talk about his career.

The one thing I remember from that talk was what he told us about Lockerbie - that British intelligence were convinced it was a Syrian-backed plot but the US wanted to pin it on Libya because of an agreement leading to the inclusion of Syria in the coalition during the first Gulf War. My scepticism about what we are told by governments was born that day.

Totally fair point.While i agree about maintaining an air of scepticism on any reporting i just find Wayne Madsen to be more reliable about reporting what's really going on than the Main Stream/Corporate Media who lets face it couldn't find their arse with both hands tied behind their back,a torch and a copy of Grey's Anatomy.

skeptik · Post by **skeptik** » 14 Aug 2006, 00:38

Bozzio wrote:I was much relieved to hear one reporter on Radio 4 this morning describing the liquid explosives as being similar to the liquid explosives used on 7/7. Phew, I was getting worried that the propaganda machine had lost its momentum. Utter rubbish of course - can TATP come in liquid form?.

FOr more info on 'liquid explosive' see this page

link is not intended as a site endorsement. Alex Jones is slightly nutty American radio demagogue who prefers to see a good conspiracy where a simple explanation will do. Caveat Emptor. He does however come up with some useful links and info.

-------------------

Unlike Mr Jones who has liking for conspiracy theories I adhere to the "Cockup Theory of History" - that there's nobody in charge, no secret stringpullers behind the arras. Nobody, including our leaders (and myself) , has got a a clue what's going on (reality being too chaotic and complex to grasp en toto), and that history proceeds via missunderstandings, plans (including conspiracies) that go wrong, unexpected consequences, random events, chaos & accidents, intersecting with the slow inexorable grinding advance of science and technology.

Reality is not as simple as fiction which has to 'make sense' and have a beginning a middle and an end. I think this is where a lot of people go wrong. They get reality mixed up with the comforting structures of fiction.

I think my position is basically a varient of Sturgeon's Law - "90% of everything is crap"

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 14 Aug 2006, 07:31

skeptik wrote:Unlike Mr Jones who has liking for conspiracy theories I adhere to the "Cockup Theory of History" - that there's nobody in charge, no secret stringpullers behind the arras. Nobody, including our leaders (and myself) , has got a a clue what's going on (reality being too chaotic and complex to grasp en toto), and that history proceeds via missunderstandings, plans (including conspiracies) that go wrong, unexpected consequences, random events, chaos & accidents, intersecting with the slow inexorable grinding advance of science and technology.

Reality is not as simple as fiction which has to 'make sense' and have a beginning a middle and an end. I think this is where a lot of people go wrong. They get reality mixed up with the comforting structures of fiction.

I think my position is basically a varient of Sturgeon's Law - "90% of everything is crap"

Just thought I'd like to repeat that fine collection of words.

rs · Post by rs » 14 Aug 2006, 09:04

Latest news from BBC:

After the success of liquid bins at airport check-in desks, United Airlines this morning has declared it will install them on its fleet of Boeing 747's by the end of the month.

A spokesman for the company said "We are glad to be doing our part on the war against terror and at the same time, help to ensure a pleasant experience for our customers". When asked whether it was a good idea for customers to be mixing unknown liquids on planes, the spokesman said "We have total confidence in our ABS-plastic bins and they have been through extensive safety-testing last bonfire-night with youths and fireworks."

hatchelt · Post by **hatchelt** » 14 Aug 2006, 09:07

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4789633.stm

Airlines have been asked to cut 20% of flights from Heathrow on Monday, amid a continuing row over how best to cope with increased security checks.

MacG · Post by **MacG** » 14 Aug 2006, 10:36

hatchelt wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4789633.stm

Airlines have been asked to cut 20% of flights from Heathrow on Monday, amid a continuing row over how best to cope with increased security checks.

Well, that should translate to roughly 20% less jet fuel beeing needed. Hmmm....