Thursday, August 10, 2006

Terrorism via Liquid Explosives

An alleged plot to kill thousands of people by detonating explosions on up to 10 transatlantic flights from UK airports was disrupted Thursday morning. It is believed the intention was to set off near simultaneous blasts on flights, probably bound for the U.S., using explosives smuggled into passenger cabins inside hand luggage.

The apparent idea was to use a liquid-based explosive, to have been hidden in bottles of fizzy drink, lotion, etc.

Police were holding 21 people in custody in London following raids by anti-terror officers and MI5. A decision was made to move suddenly following months of surveillance.

US counter-terrorism officials told the Associated Press that three major US airlines - United, American Airlines and Continental - had been targeted in the plot.

For many, this will be an air travel inconvenience -- no carry-on baggage means longer check lines and more lost baggage (the reason I don't check bags).

The GWOT continues. This is global jihad. Were the perpetrators indigenous or main-stream terrorists from the likely sources? Doesn't really matter because we need to fight both. We need to fighting this war as if it were a real war and not some nightly news distraction. The unfortunate thing is that it will take multiple 911s for the allies to unit (if that is possible).

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

maybe you forget that europe has already had "multiple 9/11s" in the past and has adapted. The IRA, ETA, Algerian independence, and other movements in Europe have forced them to adapt proper security measures in their airports and other travel facilities years before the US was ready. Airports is Switzerland are far more advanced in terms of screening than the US. Our fallacy is that we believe "unity" involves only military campaigns, not a global collaboration to eliminate all forms of terror, not just extremists portraying themselves as Islamic. If we would join with the rest of Europe (and the rest of the world) in making it clear that terror (Arabic, Irish, Basque, Chechen, Afghan, Kurdish, Colombian, Peruvian, etc) is not an acceptable means of achieving political change, we could win. Currently, however, our policy and our leaders (which you apparently agree with) believes that we have to wipe out only Arabic extremists in a holy war. THE US IS NOT IN A HOLY WAR! We have principles of freedom and law, but winning does not require the sacrific of those principles. It involves changing tactics; we would gain more allies in GWOT on terror if we engaged more nations in fighting. Current policies push away nations who could help.