Terrorists 'plan attack on Britain with bombs INSIDE their bodies&

[jbg]

Above all, these are reasonable people. We must give them their legitimate rights. </sarcasm> Why doesn't anyone realize we must profile, at least behaviorally. This is war. Some people are at war with us; most are not. We are not going to ensure safety by making travel unbearable for law-abiding people. We must drop the patina of political correctness, pull of the gloves, and do things that are effective, not just things that look good but do nothing.

Additionally, we must follow the money and retaliate - hard - against their paymasters.

Terrorists 'plan attack on Britain with

bombs INSIDE their bodies' to foil new airport scanners

(link)

Britain is facing a new Al Qaeda terror threat from suicide ‘body bombers’ with explosives surgically inserted inside them.

Until now, terrorists have attacked airlines, Underground trains and buses by secreting bombs in bags, shoes or underwear to avoid detection. But an operation by MI5 has uncovered evidence that Al Qaeda is planning a new stage in its terror campaign by inserting ‘surgical bombs’ inside people for the first time.

*********************

Security services believe the move has been prompted by the recent introduction at airports of body scanners, which are designed to catch terrorists before they board flights.

It is understood MI5 became aware of the threat after observing increasingly vocal internet ‘chatter’ on Arab websites this year.

The warning comes in the wake of the failed attempt by London-educated Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to blow up an airliner approaching Detroit on Christmas Day.

One security source said: ‘If the terrorists are talking about this, we need to be ready and do all we can to counter the threat.’

A leading source added that male bombers would have the explosive secreted near their appendix or in their buttocks, while females would have the material placed inside their breasts in the same way as figure-enhancing implants.

Experts said the explosive PETN (Pentaerythritol Tetranitrate) would be placed in a plastic sachet inside the bomber’s body before the wound was stitched up like a normal operation incision and allowed to heal.

A shaped charge of 8oz of PETN can penetrate five inches of armour and would easily blow a large hole in an airliner.

Security sources said the explosives would be detonated by the bomber using a hypodermic syringe to inject TATP (Triacetone Triperoxide) through their skin into the explosives sachet.

(snip)

Edited February 1, 2010 by jbg

[Shakeyhands]

I had a plate in my leg, the scanner picked it up, my Mother has an artificial knee... the scanner picks it up. No worries, stow the fear.

[BubberMiley]

No worries, stow the fear.

Some people felt so humiliated by their stained gitch after 9/11 they feel it's necessary to pretend al-Qaeda is a much more formidable force than it actually is.

The Xmas day attempt demonstrated just how haphazard, ineffective and impotent radical islam is these days. I don't think I'll lose any sleep worrying about exploding boobs.

[DogOnPorch]

Meh...in our lifetimes there's an excellent chance we'll see the first use of an atomic weapon by terrorists. But i agree...why worry? If you're in the path of a terrorist's bomb it's just your rotten luck, really.

[WestViking]

Some people felt so humiliated by their stained gitch after 9/11 they feel it's necessary to pretend al-Qaeda is a much more formidable force than it actually is.

The Xmas day attempt demonstrated just how haphazard, ineffective and impotent radical islam is these days. I don't think I'll lose any sleep worrying about exploding boobs.

Perhaps you can explain how al Qaeda got to this deplorable state. Hint = it could have something to do with engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan, deployment of resources to combat NATO allies.

[Michael Hardner]

Perhaps you can explain how al Qaeda got to this deplorable state. Hint = it could have something to do with engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan, deployment of resources to combat NATO allies.

Maybe. Or maybe they were never that impressive to begin with.

[jbg]

Maybe. Or maybe they were never that impressive to begin with.

That's a hard argument for me since back in the day you could see the World Trade Center from our County Courthouse, 40 Trudeau Units (kms) away.

[maple_leafs182]

Perhaps you can explain how al Qaeda got to this deplorable state. Hint = it could have something to do with engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan, deployment of resources to combat NATO allies.

That is exactly the reason, now these foreign policies we have are raising the chances of another terrorist attack occurring.

We should be asking what motivates a terrorist to be a terrorist but a lot of us are blinded by rage and think that if we flex our muscles, the terrorists will go away.

Watch this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1pURIukrjw&feature=player_embedded

Helen Thomas asks security chief John Brennan what motivates the terrorists.

[bush_cheney2004]

...Helen Thomas asks security chief John Brennan what motivates the terrorists.

Gotta be her face!

[jbg]

That is exactly the reason, now these foreign policies we have are raising the chances of another terrorist attack occurring.

We should be asking what motivates a terrorist to be a terrorist but a lot of us are blinded by rage and think that if we flex our muscles, the terrorists will go away.

Here's the deal. Billet one or two of them in your house for a week or two and maybe they'll explain themselves. As Mark Steyn says, though you better hope that a terrorist activist doesn't "activate" himself in your house.

And do hide your young daughters (and sons) from them.

[maple_leafs182]

Here's the deal. Billet one or two of them in your house for a week or two and maybe they'll explain themselves. As Mark Steyn says, though you better hope that a terrorist activist doesn't "activate" himself in your house.

And do hide your young daughters (and sons) from them.

Ya your right, we should continue living our lives in fear and use terrorism to fight terrorism.

[Michael Hardner]

That's a hard argument for me since back in the day you could see the World Trade Center from our County Courthouse, 40 Trudeau Units (kms) away.

The argument can be made that the success of that particular endeavor was a one-time-only event.

[Michael Hardner]

Above all, these are reasonable people. We must give them their legitimate rights. </sarcasm> Why doesn't anyone realize we must profile, at least behaviorally.

We do profile them, despite assertions to the contrary. The underwear self-bomber should have been caught but he slipped through the system. Moreover, we should profile them. The system can't bear the resource requirements to check each passenger equally thoroughly.

[GostHacked]

This is quite laughable. I have my severe doubts about an even like this taking place.

[sharkman]

But I thought now that Obama was in office, refusing to use the phrase "war on terror", that his new leftwing approach was going to solve things. Weird. Maybe he should meet with some of the terrorist leaders and be seen bowing to them, it worked for China.

[bloodyminded]

But I thought now that Obama was in office, refusing to use the phrase "war on terror", that his new leftwing approach was going to solve things. Weird. Maybe he should meet with some of the terrorist leaders and be seen bowing to them, it worked for China.

First, Obama does not have a "leftwing approach." He's basicaly a Clintonesque triangulator.

Second, the laughable and stupid term "War on terror" was already being reconsidered by a chastened and massively unpopular White House...before Obama came along.

Edited February 1, 2010 by bloodyminded

[eyeball]

This is war. Some people are at war with us; most are not. We are not going to ensure safety by making travel unbearable for law-abiding people. We must drop the patina of political correctness, pull of the gloves, and do things that are effective, not just things that look good but do nothing.

Additionally, we must follow the money and retaliate - hard - against their paymasters.

You do realize the people retaliating against the west feel precisely the same for the very same reasons don't you?

[DogOnPorch]

You do realize the people retaliating against the west feel precisely the same for the very same reasons don't you?

In your terrorist luvin' opinion...perhaps.

Edited February 1, 2010 by DogOnPorch

[sharkman]

First, Obama does not have a "leftwing approach." He's basicaly a Clintonesque triangulator.

Second, the laughable and stupid term "War on terror" was already being reconsidered by a chastened and massively unpopular White House...before Obama came along.

Really? Clintonesque? Many were hoping he'd learn from Bill's mistakes after '94 when he moved to the center but Obama has recently re-affirmed that he is going to stay the course in his attempt to cram healthcare down American's throat, and also quickly had the senate approve a monsterous deficit before Brown was seated.

Secondly, Obama has recently admitted,"We are at war," in respnose to the underwear bomber, and although he couldn't choke out the words,"with terror", it's dangerously close to the old Bush mantra. It will be an interesting year.

[eyeball]

The Xmas day attempt demonstrated just how haphazard, ineffective and impotent radical islam is these days.

You're kidding right? I think a couple of hundred bucks worth of explosives, plane ticket and underwear compared to the cost of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of scanners and disruptions to the flow of air-travel demonstrates just how effective and potent radical Islam really is.

Don't forget all this is in addition to the trillions that have been spent to date reacting to a couple of bucks worth of box-cutters. It's phenomenal.

Edited February 1, 2010 by eyeball

[eyeball]

In your terrorist luvin' opinion...perhaps.

No, I can't stand the wests's military-industrial complex.

[Wilber]

This is quite laughable. I have my severe doubts about an even like this taking place.

Me to.

[DogOnPorch]

No, I can't stand the wests's military-industrial complex.

I understand. With those guys out of the way all the terrorism/wars would disappear.

[Michael Hardner]

Don't forget all this is in addition to the trillions that have been spent to date reacting to a couple of bucks worth of box-cutters. It's phenomenal.

It is phenomenal, however the effectiveness of the response has been equally phenomenal. There have been terrorist threats to the west before, but as of 2001 it had been a long while since anything substantial had happened from external agents. The end of the cold war, and engagement with Palestine are two factors that brought that situation about.

In the long term, the Borg that is the western Globalized ideal - with its religious freedom and its prosperity - appears to be the favoured mode of government, and therefore the most likely to succeed. There don't seem to be as many people interested in emigrating to religious republics and dictatorships.

[eyeball]

I understand. With those guys out of the way all the terrorism/wars would disappear.

There'd sure be a lot less of them being started or sustained in any case.