NationStates Jolt Archive

Formal charges for 14 in the terror plot.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1231663,00.html

And they have "substantial evidence"

http://www.breitbart.com/news/na/cp_p082104A.xml.html

We haven't seen the evidence publicly yet. But, I would believe it's likely that they have some evidence, if they're able to bring charges against so many people.

It remains to be seen how many of the others will be charged formally.

We haven't seen the evidence publicly yet. But, I would believe it's likely that they have some evidence, if they're able to bring charges against so many people.

It remains to be seen how many of the others will be charged formally.
You've got to hope so. If not all of the others currently detained are charged then I hope there isn't a massive backlash among the Muslim community against the police. If the police had reason to believe that anyone was involved in this 'plot' then they were perfectly within their rights to arrest them - although obviously some people may have problems in accepting that.

I guess this is good news then.

can't help but think that this is link to this...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5271196.stm

And she has also now been 'charged'...what with who knows...what the evidence is ..... who knows...

But my bullshit detector is still twitching like a bastard...

edit - charge is conspiracy to murder...nice wide ranging law...not terror specific...which is nice

Of course there has been no disclosure of what or how they intended to blow up the planes besides "liquid explosives." What liquid explosives? The kind already banned on planes?

BBC says it was 11 charged...

re the 'explosives'...

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

You've got to hope so. If not all of the others currently detained are charged then I hope there isn't a massive backlash among the Muslim community against the police. If the police had reason to believe that anyone was involved in this 'plot' then they were perfectly within their rights to arrest them - although obviously some people may have problems in accepting that.
IMHO, any Muslims who would backlash already hate the UK government, and already want sharia law.

In fact, they've already demanded it.

Muslim leaders summoned to talks with the Government on tackling extremism in their midst called for public holidays to mark their religious festivals.

The Whitehall meeting was set up in response to last week’s airline bomb plot discovery.

Communities Secretary Ruth Kelly had prepared an uncompromising message on the need to tackle dangerous radicalism.

But, in what she admitted were ‘sharp’ exchanges, some senior Muslim figures turned the tables yesterday and made a series of demands which also included the introduction of Sharia law for family matters.

Dr Syed Aziz Pasha, secretary general of the Union of Muslim Organisations of the UK and Ireland, said: ‘We told her if you give us religious rights, we will be in a better position to convince young people that they are being treated equally along with other citizens.’

Of course there has been no disclosure of what or how they intended to blow up the planes besides "liquid explosives." What liquid explosives? The kind already banned on planes?
Banned after the plot was discovered, or haven't you been around reading news for the past few weeks?

IMHO, any Muslims who would backlash already hate the UK government, and already want sharia law.
I'm not so sure. Some Muslims may hate the government's foreign policy, but that doesn't necessarily mean they hate the government, nor that they hate the police. I think there could be a backlash against the police, which will not exactly be the most constructive thing Muslims could do...

Banned after the plot was discovered, or haven't you been around reading news for the past few weeks?
No.
Water and Coca-Cola were banned after the plot was discovered. All explosive chemicals and objects were either limited to cargo hold in small quantities in a safe container provided you have authority to bring it or not allowed at at all.

Good. Hopefully they don't fuck up the trial like in the States with Moussaoui.

No.
Water and Coca-Cola were banned after the plot was discovered. All explosive chemicals and objects were either limited to cargo hold in small quantities in a safe container provided you have authority to bring it or not allowed at at all.

Lots of chemicals are explosive that were not previously conceived as such.

Peroxide products in cosmetics, for example. Harmless when in cosmetics, lethal when combined with other substances.

Combining them on board was the plan.

So these new chemicals were banned. Very, very recently.

Good. Hopefully they don't fuck up the trial like in the States with Moussaoui.
What was fucked up? It took time, which is ok.

He was convicted, which is OK.

He got life in a supermax, which is OK.

No.
Water and Coca-Cola were banned after the plot was discovered. All explosive chemicals and objects were either limited to cargo hold in small quantities in a safe container provided you have authority to bring it or not allowed at at all.

The point is, they sneak in explosives undetected. Like in drinks bottles etc...

They are hardly going to say to them "excuse me is it allright if I bring my explosive on board".

The point is, they sneak in explosives undetected. Like in drinks bottles etc...

They are hardly going to say to them "excuse me is it allright if I bring my explosive on board".

Indeed. And since we can't detect the individual NON-EXPLOSIVE components, we have to ban all liquids in bottles.

Peroxide products in cosmetics, for example.
That is more asinine than the ban on cosmetic items.
Are you asserting that cosmetic items could be used to blow up planes.
Oh yes, you are.

Peroxide products in cosmetics, for example. Harmless when in cosmetics, lethal when combined with other substances.
You fucking fail chemistry.
Of course one could possibly take some into the bathroom and spend a couple hours purifying and cooking out some tiny ass amount of a dangerous chemical, but what are they going to do with .2oz of peroxide? Make a neat little fire and entertain children for .2 seconds?

Combining them on board was the plan.
Unfeasible, unrealistic, and sensationalized.


So these new chemicals were banned. Very, very recently.
There were no chemicals banned. They just banned any container of liquid or gel. Unless you assert Pepsi can be used to blow up planes as well.

The point is, they sneak in explosives undetected. Like in drinks bottles etc...

They are hardly going to say to them "excuse me is it allright if I bring my explosive on board".
Then this of course explains why items bought in duty free airline shops are banned.

This does not make us safe. THis does not hinder terrorists. This only hurts normal people. Period.

That is more asinine than the ban on cosmetic items.
Are you asserting that cosmetic items could be used to blow up planes.
Oh yes, you are.


You fucking fail chemistry.
Of course one could possibly take some into the bathroom and spend a couple hours purifying and cooking out some tiny ass amount of a dangerous chemical, but what are they going to do with .2oz of peroxide? Make a neat little fire and entertain children for .2 seconds?


Unfeasible, unrealistic, and sensationalized.

[quote]
So these new chemicals were banned. Very, very recently.[/quote[
There were no chemicals banned. They just banned any container of liquid or gel. Unless you assert Pepsi can be used to blow up planes as well.

They banned liquids because they can't detect the individual components.

Acetone peroxide or TATP can be made a variety of ways. And, if you don't care if it goes off while you're making it (i.e., you leave out a few precautions because you can't build an ice bath in the airplane lavatory), it's very, very workable.

So workable in fact, that it was probably more dangerous for the Tube bombers to make it at home and THEN carry it somewhere.

The terrorists call it "mother of satan" for a reason. It's incredibly unstable.

YOU fail chemistry.

What was fucked up? It took time, which is ok.

He was convicted, which is OK.

He got life in a supermax, which is OK.

Remember the whole thing about the prosecution "coaching" certain witnesses? Fucking up a slam dunk case like that in Britain would result in a mistrial- 100% of the time.

Do you people assert that a group of individuals capable of orchestrating a major attack on the nation through the crashing of airlines - a feat you also insist our own government is too incompetent to create as a conspiracy - are incapable of sneaking a fucking coke bottle past security?

They banned liquids because they can't detect the individual components.

Acetone peroxide or TATP can be made a variety of ways. And, if you don't care if it goes off while you're making it (i.e., you leave out a few precautions because you can't build an ice bath in the airplane lavatory), it's very, very workable.

So workable in fact, that it was probably more dangerous for the Tube bombers to make it at home and THEN carry it somewhere.

The terrorists call it "mother of satan" for a reason. It's incredibly unstable.

YOU fail chemistry.
You fail Chemistry and reading comp.

Yes, they can be made a variety of ways - none of which could be pulled off in an airport bathroom without the total incompetence of everyone on the plane. Read the article the other guy posted about TATP

Remember the whole thing about the prosecution "coaching" certain witnesses? Fucking up a slam dunk case like that in Britain would result in a mistrial- 100% of the time.
Then all the more reason the police need to keep their mouths shut and not reveal any details of their case until well after the appeals.

Do you people assert that a group of individuals capable of orchestrating a major attack on the nation through the crashing of airlines - a feat you also insist our own government is too incompetent to create as a conspiracy - are incapable of sneaking a fucking coke bottle past security?

Our government couldn't conspire to do it without everyone and their mother knowing about it. Not that they couldn't crash planes - heck, the military does that by accident on a regular basis. But we would all know about it, very, very clearly.

The reason you have to go through security several times right now at Heathrow is that they're thinking you COULD get a coke bottle through. And an old woman with a penchant for pissing herself got a water bottle past.

It's still risky. Attempts are made to mitigate risk. Are you saying we should do NOTHING? Because that's the logic of your position.

Yes, they can be made a variety of ways - none of which could be pulled off in an airport bathroom without the total incompetence of everyone on the plane. Read the article the other guy posted about TATP

I could easily make TATP in my lap, if I didn't care if it blew up while I did it. And I could do it in a small cup.

If you were sitting next to me, you wouldn't know what I was doing until it exploded.

Then all the more reason the police need to keep their mouths shut and not reveal any details of their case until well after the appeals.
:confused:

Well, I was thinking more along the lines of having solid case with which to prosecute..... and not hiding stuff.

:confused:

Well, I was thinking more along the lines of having solid case with which to prosecute..... and not hiding stuff.
Here in the US, the more the prosecution blabs to the press, the more a defense attorney can say that the pool of potential jurors is poisoned.

You end up with jurors who are dumbasses who haven't seen news in 50 years.

[QUOTE=Teh_pantless_hero]That is more asinine than the ban on cosmetic items.
Are you asserting that cosmetic items could be used to blow up planes.
Oh yes, you are.


You fucking fail chemistry.
Of course one could possibly take some into the bathroom and spend a couple hours purifying and cooking out some tiny ass amount of a dangerous chemical, but what are they going to do with .2oz of peroxide? Make a neat little fire and entertain children for .2 seconds?


Unfeasible, unrealistic, and sensationalized.



They banned liquids because they can't detect the individual components.

Acetone peroxide or TATP can be made a variety of ways. And, if you don't care if it goes off while you're making it (i.e., you leave out a few precautions because you can't build an ice bath in the airplane lavatory), it's very, very workable.

So workable in fact, that it was probably more dangerous for the Tube bombers to make it at home and THEN carry it somewhere.

The terrorists call it "mother of satan" for a reason. It's incredibly unstable.

YOU fail chemistry.


Deep Kimchi...

Please have a read of this article and post your comments which dispute the contents of the article.

Basically how would you make this explosive on board and inflight.

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

It's still risky. Attempts are made to mitigate risk. Are you saying we should do NOTHING? Because that's the logic of your position.
We should stop asinine bullshit like banning items bought in duty free airline shops and still sealed bottles, or gel insoles, or containers of gel. It is pretty easy to tell the idfference between facial cream and acetone.


I could easily make TATP in my lap, if I didn't care if it blew up while I did it. And I could do it in a small cup.
Sure you could, you might get a fraction of the way through it (provided you had the materials) before it blew it with negiglible force because a) the small quantity and b) you wern't half way through it.

Maybe you should research before talking out of your ass.

I could easily make TATP in my lap, if I didn't care if it blew up while I did it. And I could do it in a small cup.

If you were sitting next to me, you wouldn't know what I was doing until it exploded.

LOLOL!!!!!

bullshit.

[QUOTE=Deep Kimchi]


Deep Kimchi...

Please have a read of this article and post your comments which dispute the contents of the article.

Basically how would you make this explosive on board and inflight.

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


You will note that it requires an ice bath - ONLY if you don't want to die mixing it.

If you don't care if it goes off while you mix it, you just pour it all together. Shake well.

If I have three people on board, each with an individual component, we meet at the bathroom, and one of us does the deed in there.

News reporters have a vested interest in not dying while mixing. Terrorists are glad, because they don't need a detonator.

LOLOL!!!!!

bullshit.
Don't mind him, he paid the nerdy guy to do all his Chemistry work for him.

Terrorists are glad, because they don't need a detonator.
Then they damage the bathroom. Poor, poor bathroom.

[QUOTE=Rubiconic Crossings]


You will note that it requires an ice bath - ONLY if you don't want to die mixing it.

If you don't care if it goes off while you mix it, you just pour it all together. Shake well.

If I have three people on board, each with an individual component, we meet at the bathroom, and one of us does the deed in there.

News reporters have a vested interest in not dying while mixing. Terrorists are glad, because they don't need a detonator.

How about reading the article first before commenting Shallow Fermented Cabbage'd One.

:rolleyes:

LOLOL!!!!!

bullshit.
Not bullshit. Sure, the yield is lower (in terms of pure TATP), but the heat of the reaction is more than enough to make it go all the way.

You only need the complicated method if you're going to do it with a mind to staying alive.

Not bullshit. Sure, the yield is lower (in terms of pure TATP), but the heat of the reaction is more than enough to make it go all the way.
TATP explosions are entropic.

The amount of TATP that could be produced in a fucking cup is maybe enough to fuck up the window if you are close enough to it.

Not bullshit. Sure, the yield is lower (in terms of pure TATP), but the heat of the reaction is more than enough to make it go all the way.

You only need the complicated method if you're going to do it with a mind to staying alive.

Sorry...suggest you read the article son...

Seeing as you are not willing to do so...here is a relevent point...

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 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Flight_243) neatly illustrates), it's necessary to synthesize a good amount of TATP with care.

But hey....lets not let science get in the way of Deep Kimchi's bizzarro world 'eh?

Sorry...suggest you read the article son...

Seeing as you are not willing to do so...here is a relevent point...

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 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Flight_243) neatly illustrates), it's necessary to synthesize a good amount of TATP with care.

But hey....lets not let science get in the way of Deep Kimchi's bizzarro world 'eh?

That article only refers to one type of explosive.

As well as that it is possible that the terrorists were misinformed.

There are a variety of other liquids that would do well as innocuous components combined with zero skill to form explosive compounds.

No, I don't have to pick the one that uses hydrazine as a component, either.

Additionally, it's possible to combine two fairly innocuous chemicals (not detectable by current scanners) to produce a small quantity of lethal gas.

In the confined, recirculated air of a passenger aircraft, it would be lethal. Eventually the plane would crash after running out of fuel.

Sorry...suggest you read the article son...

Seeing as you are not willing to do so...here is a relevent point...

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 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Flight_243) neatly illustrates), it's necessary to synthesize a good amount of TATP with care.

But hey....lets not let science get in the way of Deep Kimchi's bizzarro world 'eh?


Let's not let a chemistry professor get in the way of someone who was trained to make improvised explosive by the US Army.

There are a variety of other liquids that would do well as innocuous components combined with zero skill to form explosive compounds.

No, I don't have to pick the one that uses hydrazine as a component, either.

Additionally, it's possible to combine two fairly innocuous chemicals (not detectable by current scanners) to produce a small quantity of lethal gas.

In the confined, recirculated air of a passenger aircraft, it would be lethal. Eventually the plane would crash after running out of fuel.
And then we could play the magic flute that pisses off Godzilla and he could rise of of the sea and tear the plane's fucking wings off because he is Godzilla and the only way to stop him is to call Samuel L Jackson.

Let's not let a chemistry professor get in the way of someone who was trained to make improvised explosive by the US Army.
If by which you mean you, God help the US army.

That article only refers to one type of explosive.

As well as that it is possible that the terrorists were misinformed.

Indeed....the same one that DK insists is the one they were going to use...DK is very good with talking points...Not.

And then we could play the magic flute that pisses off Godzilla and he could rise of of the sea and tear the plane's fucking wings off because he is Godzilla and the only way to stop him is to call Samuel L Jackson.

If by which you mean you, God help the US army.

I do mean me. If the stuff didn't go off, you didn't pass the class.

How hard do you think it is to raise the concentration of a specific chemical in the air to around 50 ppm in an enclosed airliner? One made with two simple chemicals - requiring a very small container indeed.

Name a chemical that would be lethal to everyone on board at that level (or perhaps lower, if the duration is longer).

A chemical that would smell, but has the distinct property of rapidly desensitizing the nose and becoming odorless - just before you die.

One without an antidote, other than evacuating the plane in mid-air.

Let's not let a chemistry professor get in the way of someone who was trained to make improvised explosive by the US Army.

BWWWWAAAHAHAHAHAHA

the last resort of the 101st Fighting Keyboarder....

Talking utter bollocks.

Lets play your game then....prove it.

Oh...you can't. Makes your claim rubbish son.

BWWWWAAAHAHAHAHAHA

the last resort of the 101st Fighting Keyboarder....

Talking utter bollocks.

Lets play your game then....prove it.

Oh...you can't. Makes your claim rubbish son.
Sure I could prove it.

I have a certified copy of my DD214. Want to see it?

I do mean me. If the stuff didn't go off, you didn't pass the class.
I guess any idiot who failed Chemistry can be a bomb expert in the US army.

I guess any idiot who failed Chemistry can be a bomb expert in the US army.
Just improvised explosives...

Just improvised explosives...
Improvised from what? Already flammable household objects? Not things you actually have to make?

You still know shit about TATP and you are just changing the topic to try and make people forget you know shit about it.

Improvised from what? Already flammable household objects? Not things you actually have to make?

You still know shit about TATP and you are just changing the topic to try and make people forget you know shit about it.
Nope. Improvised from a variety of (in most cases) innocuous materials.

And I have made TATP before in class.

You don't know shit about it - you've never seen it, made it, or handled it. Never received any instruction in improvised explosives. At all.

Sorry...suggest you read the article son...

Seeing as you are not willing to do so...here is a relevent point...

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 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Flight_243) neatly illustrates), it's necessary to synthesize a good amount of TATP with care.

But hey....lets not let science get in the way of Deep Kimchi's bizzarro world 'eh?
Even a small explosion could be used as a distraction, and it could confuse the passengers and crew enough for the terrorists to be able to highjack an airplane.

It's not always necessary to blow shit up.

Nope. Improvised from a variety of (in most cases) innocuous materials.

And I have made TATP before in class.

You don't know shit about it - you've never seen it, made it, or handled it. Never received any instruction in improvised explosives. At all.
I have a basic understanding of Chemistry and can read just fine. Between those two abilities, I know what you are saynig is bullshit.
Peroxide you can go buy in the store isn't concentrated enough to make it, and even if it was, the amount of TATP to be made in a little cup would at best make a neat little fire in your cup if jittered. Even at 100% yield, it wouldn't be dangerous enough to take down a plane.

Even a small explosion could be used as a distraction, and it could confuse the passengers and crew enough for the terrorists to be able to highjack an airplane.
Oh yeah, I forgot. TATP is codeword for "Flashbang" and everyone will be so fucked up by it, they won't notice some idiot trying to get in the cockpit.

You might as well just take over the fucking plane with Fourth of July Snaps. You could just hide the things in a raisin box.

Sure I could prove it.

I have a certified copy of my DD214. Want to see it?

No...what I want is you (self styled expert) to refute the points made in the article.

Regardless of arcane discussions over 'what explosives you can pretend is really just Ribena', I'm relieved they're actually going to prosecute, that they've got enough evidence to do so.

Win-win-win-etc. situation; stops those directly involved, validates the intelligence services and police, a (hopefully) transparent trial shows muslim community that a fair investigation was carried out, justification for the disruption.

I was half convinced it was going to be a total fuck-up, like those 2 brothers the police raided earlier this year.

Regardless of arcane discussions over 'what explosives you can pretend is really just Ribena', I'm relieved they're actually going to prosecute, that they've got enough evidence to do so.

Win-win-win-etc. situation; stops those directly involved, validates the intelligence services and police, a (hopefully) transparent trial shows muslim community that a fair investigation was carried out, justification for the disruption.

I was half convinced it was going to be a total fuck-up, like those 2 brothers the police raided earlier this year.

no.

What they have is charged them. The decision to prosecute is with the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service)...and they cannot procede until charges have been laid.

All this means is that the Police think they have a case. However the final decision to go to court is with the CPS.

And I bet that the cases will collapse.

And I bet that the cases will collapse.

politically thats not an option. these guys will be stiched up if the evidence isnt there.

no.

What they have is charged them. The decision to prosecute is with the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service)...and they cannot procede until charges have been laid.

All this means is that the Police think they have a case. However the final decision to go to court is with the CPS.

And I bet that the cases will collapse.

Teaches me for skimming over the topic rather than the article, sorry!

It's still looking more hopeful than the earlier case though; whether or not it collapses... well, either way, dare say we'll be discussing it here :p

Teaches me for skimming over the topic rather than the article, sorry!

It's still looking more hopeful than the earlier case though; whether or not it collapses... well, either way, dare say we'll be discussing it here :p
I doubt they will collapse.

Shall we all make bets on this? So sure are you?

Oh, and by the way, as far as learning how to make improvised explosives goes, where do you all think Tim McVeigh, an ordinary infantryman and Bradley crewman, learned how to make improvised explosives?

The US Army.

I doubt they will collapse.

Shall we all make bets on this? So sure are you?

Oh, and by the way, as far as learning how to make improvised explosives goes, where do you all think Tim McVeigh, an ordinary infantryman and Bradley crewman, learned how to make improvised explosives?

The US Army.
Are we confusing ANFO (a mixture of ammonium nitrate and fuel) with TATP (a chemistry project involving a bunch of bullshit) now?
Those two arn't even the same. I pity the fool who can't make an explosive out that involves fuel.

I doubt they will collapse.

Shall we all make bets on this? So sure are you?

Oh, and by the way, as far as learning how to make improvised explosives goes, where do you all think Tim McVeigh, an ordinary infantryman and Bradley crewman, learned how to make improvised explosives?

The US Army.

How did the IRA learn to make fertilizer bombs?:rolleyes:

I am still waiting for your refutation of the article I posted...unless all you really do is rehash talking points...put your money where your mouth is Deep Kimchi....

If you are able to...

Are we confusing ANFO (a mixture of ammonium nitrate and fuel) with TATP (a chemistry project involving a bunch of bullshit) now?
Those two arn't even the same. I pity the fool who can't make an explosive out that involves fuel.

No, I'm not confusing the two. You are.

I'm saying where did he learn how to make improvised explosives?

And no, it wasn't a simple fertilizer bomb. It was sensitized nitromethane (of which fertilizer is only one component).

They teach you how to make that in the Army.

Sensitized nitromethane detonates, rather than burning. Pity the fool who doesn't know the difference.

politically thats not an option. these guys will be stiched up if the evidence isnt there.

Well it happened with the Ricin plot...

Well it happened with the Ricin plot...
So, you're saying that there's no terrorist plot at all, and these are all just completely innocent people?

No, I'm not confusing the two. You are.

I'm saying where did he learn how to make improvised explosives?

And no, it wasn't a simple fertilizer bomb. It was sensitized nitromethane (of which fertilizer is only one component).

They teach you how to make that in the Army.

Sensitized nitromethane detonates, rather than burning. Pity the fool who doesn't know the difference.

still waiting DK...unless you were talking bollocks...please...prove me wrong...

still waiting DK...unless you were talking bollocks...please...prove me wrong...
What form of proof would you like?

Would you like to come to the NS General meet here in the DC area, and see my DD214, which shows the training I received?

Or would you like to see a demonstration of the mix?

I'll be glad to let you purchase the materials, and combine them yourself in a cleared field.

So, you're saying that there's no terrorist plot at all, and these are all just completely innocent people?

What I am saying is that its about time you answered my first question....please refute the article I posted....

No, I'm not confusing the two. You are.
Not hardly Captain Chemistry

I'm saying where did he learn how to make improvised explosives?
The two are entirely different.

And no, it wasn't a simple fertilizer bomb. It was sensitized nitromethane (of which fertilizer is only one component).
So now you don't know what ANFO is either?

Not hardly Captain Chemistry


The two are entirely different.


So now you don't know what ANFO is either?

I asked the question:

"Where did Tim McVeigh learn how to make improvised explosives".

I did not ask where did he learn to make TATP.

You conflated them, not me.

ANFO is ammonium nitrate/fuel oil mix - but that's not what McVeigh used.

So, you're saying that there's no terrorist plot at all, and these are all just completely innocent people?

quite possibly. this 'plot' was nowhere near an imminent attack. still no bombs or bombmaking equipment yet.

too many innocent irish ended up in prison to claim its beyond the brits to play dirty.

btw you seem to think it would be better if there was a plot.

What form of proof would you like?

Would you like to come to the NS General meet here in the DC area, and see my DD214, which shows the training I received?

Or would you like to see a demonstration of the mix?

I'll be glad to let you purchase the materials, and combine them yourself in a cleared field.

So are you telling me that you are incapable of refuting the article I posted? Or are you telling me that you do not know how to refute a propostion?

Seems to me you are not willing to because you have been caught out. Mix in a cup indeed LOL

So are you telling me that you are incapable of refuting the article I posted? Or are you telling me that you do not know how to refute a propostion?

Seems to me you are not willing to because you have been caught out. Mix in a cup indeed LOL

I can certainly refute it by demonstration.

You can be the volunteer, since you're anxious to learn.

I can certainly refute it by demonstration.

You can be the volunteer, since you're anxious to learn.

So as you are unwilling to refute the article it is therefore true and you were talking crap.

Cheers then.

In future leave the adult threads like this for the adults, son.

So as you are unwilling to refute the article it is therefore true and you were talking crap.

Hardly
In future leave the adult threads like this for the adults, son.
I bet I'm older than you by quite a bit.

So as you are unwilling to refute the article it is therefore true and you were talking crap.

Cheers then.

In future leave the adult threads like this for the adults, son.

For gods sake it is impossible to refute that article without a demonstration. Anything he says will be replied with ZOMG u n0 n0th1ng b0ut chem1stry!

For gods sake it is impossible to refute that article without a demonstration. Anything he says will be replied with ZOMG u n0 n0th1ng b0ut chem1stry!

The other fallacy operating here is "just because you can't prove the assertion of a chemistry professor, his assertion is therefore true".

It remains an assertion, unless he can show me a controlled, repeatable experiment.

I believe, that is the underlying principle behind science.

Show me. Make it work.

For gods sake it is impossible to refute that article without a demonstration. Anything he says will be replied with ZOMG u n0 n0th1ng b0ut chem1stry!

He could begin to refuted it by giving an explaination of how a sufficient amount of TATP could be produced to disable an aircraft without the use of an ice bath.

Sticking acetone, sulphuric acid and peroxide in a coke bottle, shaking it up and leaping into the aisle shouting allah ackbar will probably produce a bang big enought to take off the guys hand but the heat produced by the reaction will have tiggered the TATP before the reaction has produced nearly enough to do any real damage.

Even if they are found guilty, the sentences will be pitiful. The typical British way of doing things is giving them a few years in easy conditions with TVs in their cells before they're on the streets again. Particularly the 17 year old, the lawyers will argue that he was young and naive, and hey presto off to a cushy young offenders institute and out by the time he's 20.

He could begin to refuted it by giving an explaination of how a sufficient amount of TATP could be produced to disable an aircraft without the use of an ice bath.

Sticking acetone, sulphuric acid and peroxide in a coke bottle, shaking it up and leaping into the aisle shouting allah ackbar will probably produce a bang big enought to take off the guys hand but the heat produced by the reaction will have tiggered the TATP before the reaction has produced nearly enough to do any real damage.

Thanks! We have a winner!

It could be refuted by him giving an explaination of how a sufficient amount of TATP could be produced to disable an aircraft without the use of an ice bath.

Sticking acetone, sulphuric acid and peroxide in a coke bottle, shaking it up and leaping into the aisle shouting allah ackbar will probably produce a bang big enought to take off the guys hand but the heat produced by the reaction will have tiggered the TATP before the reaction has produced nearly enough to do any real damage.

You don't need pure TATP to do damage. All you need is an explosion.

The skin of an aircraft is pre-stressed by the internal pressurization and the aerodynamic load on the exterior.

It doesn't take much of a change - just a rapid one - to blow a hole in the plane.

There wasn't more than a few grams of pure TATP in Richard Reid's shoe - yet that would have been enough to blow the floor out where he was sitting.

Another thing that seems to be lost in this thread is that I don't even need an explosive to bring down a plane. All I need is a suitable poison that disperses in air - one that can be made from fairly common chemicals that would not trigger any detector. Kill the crew and passengers, and the plane will eventually crash.

I believe that the reason for the liquid and gel ban is that you can spend the rest of eternity thinking of combinations that would work - and since we don't have an effective detection system for EVERY possible combination, a blanket ban was necessary.

You don't need pure TATP to do damage. All you need is an explosion.

The skin of an aircraft is pre-stressed by the internal pressurization and the aerodynamic load on the exterior.

It doesn't take much of a change - just a rapid one - to blow a hole in the plane.

It takes alot more than you seem to think to take out an airliner. I'll provide a source in a minute.

Edit: Here we are, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Flight_243

It seems more than a few grams would be needed wot?

There wasn't more than a few grams of pure TATP in Richard Reid's shoe - yet that would have been enough to blow the floor out where he was sitting.

No there wasn't, in fact there was no TATP. He had C4 in his shoe.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1729022.stm

Another thing that seems to be lost in this thread is that I don't even need an explosive to bring down a plane. All I need is a suitable poison that disperses in air - one that can be made from fairly common chemicals that would not trigger any detector. Kill the crew and passengers, and the plane will eventually crash.

Great except it has no relevance to your claim that you can make TATP in your seat in a cup on an aircraft. You claim knowledge of IEDs yet when challenged to demonstrate it you go off on a tangent and avoid the question. I know how difficult it is to make, I did it during A-level chemistry.

Great except it has no relevance to your claim that you can make TATP in your seat in a cup on an aircraft. You claim knowledge of IEDs yet when challenged to demonstrate it you go off on a tangent and avoid the question. I know how difficult it is to make, I did it during A-level chemistry.
And I made it in a class on improvised explosives.

You only use the water bath if you want a high yield and don't want to blow yourself up.

They demonstrated what happened if you just mixed the stuff together. Sure looked like a detonation to me.

And what was in Richard Reid's shoe?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/tatp.htm

TATP has been used by suicide bombers in Israel, and was chosen as a detonator in 2001 by the thwarted "shoe bomber" Richard Reid.

And what was in Richard Reid's shoe?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/tatp.htm

Oh, he used it as a detenator, not as the explosive. Its a little disingenuous of you to imply that it was there as the main explosive don't you think?

Oh, he used it as a detenator, not as the explosive. Its a little disingenuous of you to imply that it was there as the main explosive don't you think?
No. The TATP was quite enough to damage the aircraft.

If the plane was sitting still on the ground, that's one thing.

At 540 knots at 35,000 feet, it's quite another.

Richard Reid's shoe had 8 or 10 ounces of triacetone triperoxide and PETN

PETN is the ingredient found in detcord. It has an extremely high velocity of detonation (high brisance) but not too strong in what might be termed the "lifting" department.

Both are essentially detonator material in a more ordinary situation - not primary explosives.

And I made it in a class on improvised explosives.

You only use the water bath if you want a high yield and don't want to blow yourself up.

They demonstrated what happened if you just mixed the stuff together. Sure looked like a detonation to me.

Yes, a small detonation. Not enough to bring down an airliner.

You need the ice bath to allow the reaction to continue long enough to produce a viable amount of explosive, it is that simple. It is an exothermic reaction that produce heat at a prodidgous rate while at the same time forming a very unstable compound, whether you care about blowing yourself up is irrelevent, whether you would succeed in your mission is and these guys would have failed.

Yes, a small detonation. Not enough to bring down an airliner.

You need the ice bath to allow the reaction to continue long enough to produce a viable amount of explosive, it is that simple. It is an exothermic reaction that produce heat at a prodidgous rate while at the same time forming a very unstable compound, whether you care about blowing yourself up is irrelevent, whether you would succeed in your mission is and these guys would have failed.

It's less efficient, I admit - but you still can get enough.

I believe, however, that the reason for the liquid ban is that someone in the government realized that a lot of liquids could be brought on the plane, and they don't even have to be combined to form explosives to bring down a plane.

You don't have to be an A-level chemistry student to make hydrogen sulfide and have it reach 100ppm concentrations in cabin air. And no one would survive the flight.

PETN is the ingredient found in detcord. It has an extremely high velocity of detonation (high brisance) but not too strong in what might be termed the "lifting" department.

Both are essentially detonator material in a more ordinary situation - not primary explosives.

See your source says that and mine says C4. It might just be the British in me but I take the BBCs word.

Incidentally, it was your quote that said the TATP was being used as a detonator, it's generally considered a poor debating tactic to quote something to support your position and the argue with it later.

See your source says that and mine says C4. It might just be the British in me but I take the BBCs word.

Incidentally, it was your quote that said the TATP was being used as a detonator, it's generally considered a poor debating tactic to quote something to support your position and the argue with it later.

You have to agree that 8 to 10 ounces of any explosive (dry weight) is very small.

Well, with the exception of Astrolite...

You don't need pure TATP to do damage. All you need is an explosion.

The skin of an aircraft is pre-stressed by the internal pressurization and the aerodynamic load on the exterior.

It doesn't take much of a change - just a rapid one - to blow a hole in the plane.
Alot more than you think.


There wasn't more than a few grams of pure TATP in Richard Reid's shoe - yet that would have been enough to blow the floor out where he was sitting.
Even if, so what? You realize all airline planes are two leveled and the bottom level is the cargo hold, right?

Another thing that seems to be lost in this thread is that I don't even need an explosive to bring down a plane. All I need is a suitable poison that disperses in air - one that can be made from fairly common chemicals that would not trigger any detector. Kill the crew and passengers, and the plane will eventually crash.
Totally irrelevant.

I believe that the reason for the liquid and gel ban is that you can spend the rest of eternity thinking of combinations that would work - and since we don't have an effective detection system for EVERY possible combination, a blanket ban was necessary.
If you ever figure out how to turn Pepsi or plain water into an explosive on a plane, let me know. Bringing on pure sodium doesn't count.

TATP has been used by suicide bombers in Israel, and was chosen as a detonator in 2001 by the thwarted "shoe bomber" Richard Reid.
Are you telling me you don't know what a detonator is now? Good grief.

Are you telling me you don't know what a detonator is now? Good grief.
I love how you draw witless conclusions about what I'm saying...

You have to agree that 8 to 10 ounces of any explosive (dry weight) is very small.

Well, with the exception of Astrolite...

Astrolite G isn't that impressive, its' detonation velocity is only slightly higher than PETN and it's density is too low. Astrolite A is a little better but still not all that impressive.

8 to 10 ounces is very small and it is also an order of magnitude larger than the amount any of the terrorists could have produce on the aircraft using the amount of raw materials they had available and without out some fairly bulky lab equipment.

Astrolite G isn't that impressive, its' detonation velocity is only slightly higher than PETN and it's density is too low. Astrolite A is a little better but still not all that impressive.

8 to 10 ounces is very small and it is also an order of magnitude larger than the amount any of the terrorists could have produce on the aircraft using the amount of raw materials they had available and without out some fairly bulky lab equipment.

Just read another article that had Reid's device at a total of 100 grams of TATP and PETN.

If they (the terrorists) really knew what they were doing they could have made the tetrameric version or "DPPP". I'm surprised they didn't say anything about APAN; that would make much more sense.

For Pantless, who thinks I have no idea what explosives exist, APAN is ammonium nitrate/TATP mix - and I won't say the percentage here.

Astrolite G isn't that impressive, its' detonation velocity is only slightly higher than PETN and it's density is too low. Astrolite A is a little better but still not all that impressive.

8 to 10 ounces is very small and it is also an order of magnitude larger than the amount any of the terrorists could have produce on the aircraft using the amount of raw materials they had available and without out some fairly bulky lab equipment.
Astrolite A-1-5 is pretty impressive in the "lifting" department to me.

Just read another article that had Reid's device at a total of 100 grams of TATP and PETN.

If they (the terrorists) really knew what they were doing they could have made the tetrameric version or "DPPP". I'm surprised they didn't say anything about APAN; that would make much more sense.

I'm sorry, I don't understand the relevance of this. How does it help your argument that the terrorists in the incident we are discussing would have been able to carry out their mission with the equipment they had?

I'm sorry, I don't understand the relevance of this. How does it help your argument that the terrorists in the incident we are discussing would have been able to carry out their mission with the equipment they had?

If it were me, I would have made something different with the same materials, beforehand. Since the police have not explicitly released the exact recipe they planned on using, we can't say for sure which one of these they might have intended to make.

Hard to say without pulling out their fingernails.

If it were me, I would have made something different with the same materials, beforehand. Since the police have not explicitly released the exact recipe they planned on using, we can't say for sure which one of these they might have intended to make.

Hard to say without pulling out their fingernails.

If the terrorist had been planning to make APAN then it would make little sense to ban liquids as it is a solid. The banning of liquids and the names of the chemicals been found so far strongly imply that TATP is the way the terrorists were going.

Incidently, why was Richard Reid using TATP in his shoes? It's incredibly unstable, all he would have needed to do is stub his toe and he'd have blown himself up. The use of a match in the plane to ignite the bomb seems a bit superflous as well, a good stamp on the floor and bye-bye Richard.

If the terrorist had been planning to make APAN then it would make little sense to ban liquids as it is a solid. The banning of liquids and the names of the chemicals been found so far strongly imply that TATP is the way the terrorists were going.

Incidently, why was Richard Reid using TATP in his shoes? It's incredibly unstable, all he would have needed to do is stub his toe and he'd have blown himself up. The use of a match in the plane to ignite the bomb seems a bit superflous as well, a good stamp on the floor and bye-bye Richard.

I couldn't figure that out either. PETN is shock sensitive. Of course, that might mean a ball peen hammer.

Some good static from the rug in the passenger terminal and he might have been al-Qaeda's first astronaut.

For Pantless, who thinks I have no idea what explosives exist, APAN is ammonium nitrate/TATP mix - and I won't say the percentage here.
That has nothing to do with telling me ANFO is a fertilizer bomb or that because some one learned to mix amonnium nitrate and fuel to make a bomb, they can create TATP.

That has nothing to do with telling me ANFO is a fertilizer bomb or that because some one learned to mix amonnium nitrate and fuel to make a bomb, they can create TATP.

No, the improvised explosive class covers an extremely wide variety of products. Including ANFO, sensitized nitromethane, and TATP.

Among others.

That's where both I, and Tim McVeigh, and a lot of current infantrymen learned how to make them.

By doing it and detonating them.

No, the improvised explosive class covers an extremely wide variety of products. Including ANFO, sensitized nitromethane, and TATP.

Among others.

That's where both I, and Tim McVeigh, and a lot of current infantrymen learned how to make them.

By doing it and detonating them.
I doubt it's very hard to figure out to replace diesel in ANFO with a highly reactive fuel or fuel substitute. But that is nothing like TATP and I highly doubt you could make it in labratory conditions due to your so far exemplified "knowledge" of it.

And TATP is an "improvised" explosive device like methamphetamine is an improvised drug. It requires lab conditions to make a worthwhile sample, and that is after you manage to extract the chemicals required from casual objects.

I doubt it's very hard to figure out to replace diesel in ANFO with a highly reactive fuel or fuel substitute. But that is nothing like TATP and I highly doubt you could make it in labratory conditions due to your so far exemplified "knowledge" of it.
I'm not saying it's "like TATP" nor have I ever said that in this thread, contrary to your belief, and much to your disappointment.

Gee, I guess I took all those chemistry courses in university for nothing, including organic and p-chem. And I got all that training in improvised explosives for nothing - including having to demostrate successful detonation.

And TATP is an "improvised" explosive device like methamphetamine is an improvised drug. It requires lab conditions to make a worthwhile sample, and that is after you manage to extract the chemicals required from casual objects.

You can make bangers out of TATP in the field. It would be fun, you could entertain the troops :D

I'm not saying it's "like TATP" nor have I ever said that in this thread, contrary to your belief, and much to your disappointment.

Gee, I guess I took all those chemistry courses in university for nothing, including organic and p-chem. And I got all that training in improvised explosives for nothing - including having to demostrate successful detonation.
Apparently you did take all those chemistry classes for nothing.

Time to hijack plains with Fourth of July Snaps.

You can make bangers out of TATP in the field. It would be fun, you could entertain the troops :D
Funny, I've never had a problem buying organic peroxides here in the US.

Funny, I've never had a problem buying organic peroxides here in the US.

Ermmm, I don't follow...

Ermmm, I don't follow...
Most of the precursors you might want to obtain for some things are readily available in the US.

You can buy hydrazine, or nitromethane, or organic peroxides, or sulfuric acid without much trouble. If one needed material, they don't need to separate and purify very much.

Pantless seems to think that I'd have to make my own sulfuric acid or something. I could go out this afternoon and buy a bottle of 18 M sulfuric right off the shelf.

My favorite purchase in recent years was a carboxylic acid ion-exchange resin. Quite useful.

Maybe it's impossible to buy these things in the UK, and Pantless may be thinking they would have to make picric acid out of aspirin or something.

Most of the precursors you might want to obtain for some things are readily available in the US.

You can buy hydrazine, or nitromethane, or organic peroxides, or sulfuric acid without much trouble. If one needed material, they don't need to separate and purify very much.

Pantless seems to think that I'd have to make my own sulfuric acid or something. I could go out this afternoon and buy a bottle of 18 M sulfuric right off the shelf.

My favorite purchase in recent years was a carboxylic acid ion-exchange resin. Quite useful.

Maybe it's impossible to buy these things in the UK, and Pantless may be thinking they would have to make picric acid out of aspirin or something.

I wouldn't know. My mum is a lab tech at a high school, anything I want she gets and I have most of the compounds we've dicussed under the sink or in the garden shed.

Most of the precursors you might want to obtain for some things are readily available in the US.

You can buy hydrazine, or nitromethane, or organic peroxides, or sulfuric acid without much trouble. If one needed material, they don't need to separate and purify very much.

Pantless seems to think that I'd have to make my own sulfuric acid or something. I could go out this afternoon and buy a bottle of 18 M sulfuric right off the shelf.

My favorite purchase in recent years was a carboxylic acid ion-exchange resin. Quite useful.

Maybe it's impossible to buy these things in the UK, and Pantless may be thinking they would have to make picric acid out of aspirin or something.
I'm sorry, who was asserting that peroxides in bathroom products could be used on a plane to make a bomb? Oh right... You.

If Kerry was "waffler," he has nothing on your practice of making a statement then later pretending some one else made the same statement and attacking them for it as a ridiculous idea.

I apologize for trying to stay on track and not jumping around between your numerous completely contrary positions and assertions.

hmmmmm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/text/print.html?in_article_id=401426&in_page_id=1770

Pakistanis find no evidence against �terror mastermind�
By GLEN OWEN

The Briton alleged to be the �mastermind� behind the airline terror plot could be innocent of any significant involvement, sources close to the investigation claim.

Rashid Rauf, whose detention in Pakistan was the trigger for the arrest of 23 suspects in Britain, has been accused of taking orders from Al Qaeda�s �No3� in Afghanistan and sending money back to the UK to allow the alleged bombers to buy plane tickets.

But after two weeks of interrogation, an inch-by-inch search of his house and analysis of his home computer, officials are now saying that his extradition is �a way down the track� if it happens at all.

It comes amid wider suspicions that the plot may not have been as serious, or as far advanced, as the authorities initially claimed.

Analysts suspect Pakistani authorities exaggerated Rauf�s role to appear �tough on terrorism� and impress Britain and America.

A spokesman for Pakistan�s Interior Ministry last night admitted that �extradition at this time is not under consideration�.

Rauf�s arrest followed a protracted surveillance operation on him and his family which, The Mail on Sunday has established, dates back to the 7/7 bomb attacks on London.

The possible link between 7/7 and the alleged plot emerged when this newspaper spoke to Rauf�s uncle, Miam Mumtaz, in Kashmir.

Mumtaz was approached by two members of ISI, the feared Pakistani security service, as he nervously denied any knowledge of his nephew�s alleged activities.

One ISI man said it had been monitoring all movement by Mumtaz and the rest of Rauf�s relatives since the 7/7 attacks.

It is the first official acknowledgement of any suspected link between the London bombings and the plot to blow up planes flying from Britain to America.

But it comes against a welter of claims made by Pakistani security sources about Rauf, who is being interrogated by British and Pakistani agents in Rawalpindi.

The sources believe Rauf went to Afghanistan twice, where he made contact with senior Al Qaeda commanders. They also say he visited the border city of Quettain, where Taliban and Al Qaeda have a heavy presence.

They believe that at least seven of the suspects in custody in Britain travelled to Pakistan while planning the bombings.

Rauf left for Pakistan four years ago after another uncle was stabbed to death in Birmingham following an alleged dispute over an arranged marriage.

Meanwhile, Rauf�s 54-year-old father Abdul was held at Islamabad airport as he tried to leave the country yesterday.

He was involved in setting up Ilford-based Crescent Relief, which is being investigated by the CharityCommission over claims that money donated for victims of the Kashmir earthquake last October could have been diverted to extremist groups.