Thursday, August 10, 2006
HAVE THEY PREVENTED ANOTHER SEPTEMBER 11?
[Updates are newest first. And "Hello" Murdoc Online readers! And "Hello" Viking Pundit readers!]
UPDATE 16, 21:11: Time for the required neighbors' reactions, courtesy of the BBC:
Yes, certainly.
Of course.
Yes, definitely.
How wonderful.
That last bit overrides all else. It first became visibly, worryingly an issue 13 months ago. It is now beginning to seem to be the case that we are again seeing another "foreign policy" exercise undertaken by a number of arrogant, overly self-esteem laden, "angry, young" men who are members of the small British Muslim population. (There are some 60 million people in these islands; only some 1.6 million are believed to be Muslims.)
Somehow, it appears yet another bunch have gotten it into their heads to act upon the misplaced notion that they are entitled to show this country that it is THEY -- not the overwhelming majority of the country's population -- who are entitled to decide the course of Britain's foreign policy. And they will use whatever violent means suits them to get the country to follow the course they have chosen for it, and will move to do so whenever it damn well suits them . . . because THEY. ARE. ANGRY!
This must to be stopped now. It needs to be explained to such "angry, young" men in the strongest of possible terms that such behavior is not acceptable behavior in any democracy. Iraq is not a reason. Afghanistan isn't. Girls in swimsuits aren't. Simply put, if you don't like this or any government's foreign policy, you strive to change minds and persuade at the ballot box. You don't suicidally blow up those who disagree with you.
UPDATE 15, 19:45: CNN:
I haven't seen a specific reference to such a "British drink" in UK media as of yet. However, a British version of "Gatorade" sounds like maybe "Lucozade". It's a very common drink, easily gotten in any supermarket.
UPDATE 14, 17:45: The Guardian:
Interesting "theory". We also see that "theory" displayed publicly here, back in June. AFP, August 7:
A Muslim woman protests outside Scotland Yard in London, June 2006. British anti-terrorism laws discriminate against Muslims and law enforcement agencies are running a "real risk of criminalising" ethnic minority communities, a top police officer will say on Monday, according to The Guardian newspaper.
I'm sorry, but are we actually supposed to take such seriously? After all, he has no fear over spouting about "totalitarianism" to a national newspaper. And untroubled in posing for a nifty wire service photo, she has no problem slamming police while calmly standing right outside the main police office in the very heart of the capital of one of the world's liberal democracies: Oh, yeh, she definitely looks downright "terrorized", her civil liberties "usurped".
In light of events today, those views are interesting for another reason. AFP today:
An armed police officer patrols one of the runways on London's Heathrow airport in November 2005. Police have hinted that more arrests were likely after 21 people, most of them of Pakistani origin, were detained over an alleged plot to simultaneously blow up US-bound aircraft.
Essentially, a few members of that "community" blow up trains and buses, concoct chemical weapons, or plot to blow up aircraft, and some -- can you believe it!? -- actually get arrested. Yet that latter response some within that "community" then actually define as "terrorizing" them? Sorry, but from another perspective (and, of course, with all due respect) one might also just as well ask this: "Who's really terrorizing whom?"
UPDATE 13, 15:55: BAA's (the airports authority) main page tells us simply, in part:
That last one's really gotta be painful, though.
(Like I said, we have to try to laugh.)
UPDATE 12, 15:30: Reuters headline:
What do the geniuses at Reuters expect? Riots? Passengers burning down the terminals?
Oh, sorry, I forgot. It's Reuters. Any restraint surprises them.
UPDATE 11, 15:15: Another aside. We all know now about Britain's (and as a result Europe's and other destinations') problems today. But others elsewhere have other travel difficulties, of course. For example, consider Preya's:
Bad enough, but it could always be worse. She could also have been trying to make a Heathrow connection today.
UPDATE 10, 13:30: John Williams (Jack Straw's former press secretary at the Foreign Office) in the Guardian's "Comment is Free":
Very well put. And don't worry, we will continue to say it.
UPDATE 9, 12:45, The A.P.:
From what I've noticed after September 11, 2001, United and American at Heathrow (I don't know about Continental) had (whether they still do I don't know) some of the strictest hand luggage checks around. Of course, liquid explosives might slip through such.
UPDATE 8, 12:05: The BBC reports:
Just as we've seen many a time previously, the well-worn pattern continues to unfold. You know. Law enforcement makes arrests, and tells us the investigation is ongoing. Simultaneously, various lockdowns (in this case, airports closed, leading to travel chaos) take place. Then, shortly afterwards, we get officialdom's first public nods to the bringing in of the -- all together now -- "community leaders".
"Community leaders?! Woo! Hoo!"
But just what "community leaders" might those be? After all, all that we really know so far -- from the BBC, at least -- is that they are "British born" suspects in custody.
AFP:
This lesson on British multi-cultural lingo brought to you by AFP.
Anyway, so they aren't Methodists? Have we established that much?
UPDATE 7, 10:30: AOL UK News homepage:
However, one suspects that those involved had privately imagined something of the scale.
AOL probably got that insight from their "sources" at the BBC.
UPDATE 6, 9:40: The Guardian at 8:30, still in "factual mode", and not yet blaming the Bush administration:
Oh, well, so much for BA's "wellness" when travelling on board video -- in which we are told to use "lotions" and to try to stay "moisturized", while "avoiding alcohol".
In fact, one suspects they may need lots of extra alcohol aboard today, and over coming days.
Simply put, according to the BA web site this morning: NO HAND BAGGAGE. But you don't have to fly them today -- you can rebook or get a refund.
Anyway, you may not have much choice. . .
. . . since you may not be going anywhere anyway.
But if you are unable to leave outbound, or someone you love supposed to be inbound is stranded and can't get to Heathrow, take heart: these cancellations are at least helping battle "climate change".
UPDATE 5, 9:15: This isn't important, I know. It's just an aside. But I did what I think is a very nice, thoughtful post on Robert Capa and war photography . . . earlier this morning just before all THIS started. Please read it, too!
UPDATE 4, 9:08: The BBC now tells us:
Was Sky's Martin Brunt one of the "sources"? Okay, probably not. But the BBC appears now to be catching up, for that's part of what Brunt said a little while ago.
Let me emphasize: part.
UPDATE 3, 8:58: The BBC has recently added to its main page on this story:
Fiona must have herself been going on vacation this morning, or headed off on a previously planned assignment. For if the BBC has actually dispatched her to get passenger reaction at Heathrow's Terminal 1, that's a lot like rushing Katie Couric to LaGuardia. They don't have anyone else available? (I'm sorry, but we have to laugh about something.)
Actually, maybe not. I just found this about Fiona's duties:
Well, I guess this rates as a "live event"?
UPDATE 2, 8:34: In comparison to the BBC report below, Sky News provides slightly different info. For one, we get a reason for the banning of just about everything:
Also:
So, unlike the BBC's Daniel Sandford, Sky's Martin Brunt said the threat was thought to be "imminent", and he tells us that those arrested are . . . oh, well, you probably read that above already.
Interestingly, TOMORROW is the 11th of August.
Just how "imminent" is "imminent"?
If "over" is an accurate description of part of the plot, that seems to indicate a hope the planes would crash and kill many more on the ground. Charming.
UPDATE, 8:15: Home Secretary John Reid's statement is here in full, at the Home Office web site:
I think the Prime Minister, off in the Caribbean on vacation, must be quietly extra thrilled that earlier in the year he gave Reid the Home Office. Reid's pattern of succession to jobs in government is one that indicates he is more competent than most potential Labour cabinet secretaries. He has been successively "parachuted" into heading departments where there had previously been considered "problems" above and beyond the norm for government -- like at Health, then at Defence, and currently the Home Office.
Relatedly. In politics, timing means a lot. One Mr Jim Sheridan, MP obviously picked a lousy afternoon/evening to resign from the Government on "principle".
Oh, who was he, you ask? Does it matter?
[ORIGINAL POST, 7:48]
The BBC reports:
There is no suggestion as to whom those "arrested" might be as of now. Details will of course probably follow. And much as I hate to go out on a limb, I am willing to hazard a guess that it will shortly be revealed that those in custody are "angry, young" . . . Methodists.
The way this is being reported this is a MAJOR event. Scotland Yard has apparently "disrupted" a MAJOR ring. But by "disrupted" it could well mean that more plotters are out there, uncaptured as of yet. I'm sure we will find out more as the morning progresses.
What this also means is that if the plot has been smashed, we may well be witnessing now what would have happened had the F.B.I. been fortunate enough to have broken up the September 11, 2001 plot before it took place. So, watch the media reaction closely. As names and backgrounds are released, it will be interesting to see the reaction: "A post-graduate student in engineering", "a good boy", "a father", "a husband", a "weekend cricket player" . . .
. . . and "What's the evidence?" will probably become the cry. We know the pattern by now. If this is "big", there will be protests. And condemnation. And cries of "profiling". And claims that there are explanations. And then there will be talk of anger. And the Middle East. And Britain's role. And how this is all Blair's fault.
But how many people who might be dead within weeks, will now be alive for years to come, thanks to these arrests? As the media circus commences, we must always keep that in the back of our minds.
As to flying today, and I guess until we hear otherwise, on any flight commencing within the U.K. you can take NOTHING on board into the cabin but yourself:
But already there is reporting confusion:
Wallets, yes . . . or no?
In any event, yes, any one of us might come face to face with the enemy, at any time. . . ¶ by Robert, Thursday, August 10, 2006
[Updates are newest first. And "Hello" Murdoc Online readers! And "Hello" Viking Pundit readers!]
UPDATE 16, 21:11: Time for the required neighbors' reactions, courtesy of the BBC:
...He said: "I'm sure they used to foster children. They had five of their own, all girls I think, and then there were always little ones which they fostered."...
Yes, certainly.
...An elderly neighbour, who asked not to be named, said she was "shocked" to see police raiding the address.
She said: "It's a lovely family that lives there. They were Asian and very friendly to everyone. If ever I needed anything I knew I could ask even though I never did."...
She said: "It's a lovely family that lives there. They were Asian and very friendly to everyone. If ever I needed anything I knew I could ask even though I never did."...
Of course.
..."They've always been very pleasant.
"As far as I know, most of the family are in Pakistan for a wedding at the moment. I haven't seen them come back."...
"As far as I know, most of the family are in Pakistan for a wedding at the moment. I haven't seen them come back."...
Yes, definitely.
...He said: "They were teaching Koran and all that to the young kids, how they read the Koran, how they pray five times a day."...
How wonderful.
...Paul Goodman, the Conservative MP for High Wycombe, said he hoped the raid would not lead to reprisals.
"This is a heavy blow to the town where community relations have traditionally been very strong," he said...
..."First, that the vast majority of Muslims in High Wycombe and elsewhere are peaceful and law-abiding citizens - and that any hostile action towards them is reprehensible.
"Second, that all Muslims must strive ceaselessly to condemn, confront and root out support for terror from their communities.
"Loyalty to Britain and its way of life must come first."
"This is a heavy blow to the town where community relations have traditionally been very strong," he said...
..."First, that the vast majority of Muslims in High Wycombe and elsewhere are peaceful and law-abiding citizens - and that any hostile action towards them is reprehensible.
"Second, that all Muslims must strive ceaselessly to condemn, confront and root out support for terror from their communities.
"Loyalty to Britain and its way of life must come first."
That last bit overrides all else. It first became visibly, worryingly an issue 13 months ago. It is now beginning to seem to be the case that we are again seeing another "foreign policy" exercise undertaken by a number of arrogant, overly self-esteem laden, "angry, young" men who are members of the small British Muslim population. (There are some 60 million people in these islands; only some 1.6 million are believed to be Muslims.)
Somehow, it appears yet another bunch have gotten it into their heads to act upon the misplaced notion that they are entitled to show this country that it is THEY -- not the overwhelming majority of the country's population -- who are entitled to decide the course of Britain's foreign policy. And they will use whatever violent means suits them to get the country to follow the course they have chosen for it, and will move to do so whenever it damn well suits them . . . because THEY. ARE. ANGRY!
This must to be stopped now. It needs to be explained to such "angry, young" men in the strongest of possible terms that such behavior is not acceptable behavior in any democracy. Iraq is not a reason. Afghanistan isn't. Girls in swimsuits aren't. Simply put, if you don't like this or any government's foreign policy, you strive to change minds and persuade at the ballot box. You don't suicidally blow up those who disagree with you.
_____________________________
UPDATE 15, 19:45: CNN:
Terrorists planned to use MP3 players and energy drinks to blow up as many as 10 jetliners bound for the United States, authorities said Thursday.
A senior congressional source said it's believed the plotters planned to mix a "British version of Gatorade" with a gel-like substance to make an explosive that they would possibly trigger with an MP3 player or cell phone.
British and Pakistani authorities joined forces to block the plot to bomb the airliners, officials said...
A senior congressional source said it's believed the plotters planned to mix a "British version of Gatorade" with a gel-like substance to make an explosive that they would possibly trigger with an MP3 player or cell phone.
British and Pakistani authorities joined forces to block the plot to bomb the airliners, officials said...
I haven't seen a specific reference to such a "British drink" in UK media as of yet. However, a British version of "Gatorade" sounds like maybe "Lucozade". It's a very common drink, easily gotten in any supermarket.
_____________________________
UPDATE 14, 17:45: The Guardian:
...Dr Mohammad Naseem, chairman of Birmingham Central Mosque, said he remained circumspect about the basis on which today's arrests were made. "With the track record of the police, one doesn't have much faith in the basis on which people are detained," he said.
"And it poses the question whether the arrests are part of a political objective, by using Muslims as a target, using the perception of terrorism to usurp all our civil liberties and get more and more control while moving towards a totalitarian state."
"And it poses the question whether the arrests are part of a political objective, by using Muslims as a target, using the perception of terrorism to usurp all our civil liberties and get more and more control while moving towards a totalitarian state."
Interesting "theory". We also see that "theory" displayed publicly here, back in June. AFP, August 7:
A Muslim woman protests outside Scotland Yard in London, June 2006. British anti-terrorism laws discriminate against Muslims and law enforcement agencies are running a "real risk of criminalising" ethnic minority communities, a top police officer will say on Monday, according to The Guardian newspaper.I'm sorry, but are we actually supposed to take such seriously? After all, he has no fear over spouting about "totalitarianism" to a national newspaper. And untroubled in posing for a nifty wire service photo, she has no problem slamming police while calmly standing right outside the main police office in the very heart of the capital of one of the world's liberal democracies: Oh, yeh, she definitely looks downright "terrorized", her civil liberties "usurped".
In light of events today, those views are interesting for another reason. AFP today:
An armed police officer patrols one of the runways on London's Heathrow airport in November 2005. Police have hinted that more arrests were likely after 21 people, most of them of Pakistani origin, were detained over an alleged plot to simultaneously blow up US-bound aircraft. Essentially, a few members of that "community" blow up trains and buses, concoct chemical weapons, or plot to blow up aircraft, and some -- can you believe it!? -- actually get arrested. Yet that latter response some within that "community" then actually define as "terrorizing" them? Sorry, but from another perspective (and, of course, with all due respect) one might also just as well ask this: "Who's really terrorizing whom?"
_____________________________
UPDATE 13, 15:55: BAA's (the airports authority) main page tells us simply, in part:
Important Message
10th August 2006 13:55
Due to the heightened security at UK airports, the BAA website is currently experiencing a high level of people visiting the site. All BAA airports remain open but passengers should expect severe delays at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted.
In brief: Hand baggage restrictions are in place; Passengers will be handsearched; Footwear and all items (including pushchairs and walking aids) must be x-ray screened; Liquids will be removed from the passenger.
10th August 2006 13:55
Due to the heightened security at UK airports, the BAA website is currently experiencing a high level of people visiting the site. All BAA airports remain open but passengers should expect severe delays at Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted.
In brief: Hand baggage restrictions are in place; Passengers will be handsearched; Footwear and all items (including pushchairs and walking aids) must be x-ray screened; Liquids will be removed from the passenger.
That last one's really gotta be painful, though.
(Like I said, we have to try to laugh.)
_____________________________
UPDATE 12, 15:30: Reuters headline:
Passengers stay calm despite chaos at airports
What do the geniuses at Reuters expect? Riots? Passengers burning down the terminals?
Oh, sorry, I forgot. It's Reuters. Any restraint surprises them.
_____________________________
UPDATE 11, 15:15: Another aside. We all know now about Britain's (and as a result Europe's and other destinations') problems today. But others elsewhere have other travel difficulties, of course. For example, consider Preya's:
On top of battling treacherous Delhi traffic, almost missing my flight, and enduring total humiliation at the airport (I'll explain later), I arrived in Hanoi yesterday to find that an infected bug bite I'd received a few days earlier in India had transformed me into the Elephant Man...
Bad enough, but it could always be worse. She could also have been trying to make a Heathrow connection today.
_____________________________
UPDATE 10, 13:30: John Williams (Jack Straw's former press secretary at the Foreign Office) in the Guardian's "Comment is Free":
...John Reid's task, as he comes up on airport television screens, is to reassure the milling masses of grounded holidaymakers that the state has a grip of the situation. This is as much about tone and body language as about the precise words he uses.
The terrorist wants to hear the crack of uncertainty in his voice, and see a hesitation look in his eye. Reid is a good choice for this role. He has a natural authority.
My advice to him now would be to rein back his natural - occasionally splendid - aggression and use the quiet power of his voice to convey a solid competence. And I would advise him against rhetoric. Make no sweeping statements about the war on terrorism, arcs of extremism, axes of evil. This is what terrorists want to hear. It gives them status as ideological warriors, rather than squalid would-be killers.
Leave that kind of talk to columnists. Use understatement and let the public draw its own conclusions. Don't labour the point that this plot - which has the feel of something genuine and very serious - underlines what you've been saying about the nature of the threat. It does. Let others say that for you...
The terrorist wants to hear the crack of uncertainty in his voice, and see a hesitation look in his eye. Reid is a good choice for this role. He has a natural authority.
My advice to him now would be to rein back his natural - occasionally splendid - aggression and use the quiet power of his voice to convey a solid competence. And I would advise him against rhetoric. Make no sweeping statements about the war on terrorism, arcs of extremism, axes of evil. This is what terrorists want to hear. It gives them status as ideological warriors, rather than squalid would-be killers.
Leave that kind of talk to columnists. Use understatement and let the public draw its own conclusions. Don't labour the point that this plot - which has the feel of something genuine and very serious - underlines what you've been saying about the nature of the threat. It does. Let others say that for you...
Very well put. And don't worry, we will continue to say it.
_____________________________
UPDATE 9, 12:45, The A.P.:
...In Washington, two U.S. counterterrorism officials said the terrorists had targeted United, American and Continental airlines. They 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, all major summer tourist destinations...
A U.S. intelligence official said the plotters had hoped to target flights to major airports in New York, Washington and California, all major summer tourist destinations...
From what I've noticed after September 11, 2001, United and American at Heathrow (I don't know about Continental) had (whether they still do I don't know) some of the strictest hand luggage checks around. Of course, liquid explosives might slip through such.
_____________________________
UPDATE 8, 12:05: The BBC reports:
...It is thought the plan was to detonate explosive devices smuggled in hand luggage on to as many as 10 aircraft.
Police were searching premises with 21 people in custody after arrests in the London area and West Midlands...
...Metropolitan Police Deputy Assistant Commissioner Paul Stephenson said [that] ... Police had spoken to a "good number of community leaders to make them aware that a major operation was under way,"...
Police were searching premises with 21 people in custody after arrests in the London area and West Midlands...
...Metropolitan Police Deputy Assistant Commissioner Paul Stephenson said [that] ... Police had spoken to a "good number of community leaders to make them aware that a major operation was under way,"...
Just as we've seen many a time previously, the well-worn pattern continues to unfold. You know. Law enforcement makes arrests, and tells us the investigation is ongoing. Simultaneously, various lockdowns (in this case, airports closed, leading to travel chaos) take place. Then, shortly afterwards, we get officialdom's first public nods to the bringing in of the -- all together now -- "community leaders".
"Community leaders?! Woo! Hoo!"
But just what "community leaders" might those be? After all, all that we really know so far -- from the BBC, at least -- is that they are "British born" suspects in custody.
AFP:
Police have hinted that British Islamists were behind a major terrorist plot to blow up airlines flying to the United States.
Deputy Commissioner Paul Stephenson, from London's Metropolitan Police, stressed that the plot concerned "people who might masquerade within a community behind certain faiths".
The term "community" is often used in Britain to refer to people from the country's minority faiths and ethnic groups, particularly the Muslim population...
Deputy Commissioner Paul Stephenson, from London's Metropolitan Police, stressed that the plot concerned "people who might masquerade within a community behind certain faiths".
The term "community" is often used in Britain to refer to people from the country's minority faiths and ethnic groups, particularly the Muslim population...
This lesson on British multi-cultural lingo brought to you by AFP.
Anyway, so they aren't Methodists? Have we established that much?
_____________________________
UPDATE 7, 10:30: AOL UK News homepage:
...Metropolitan Police Deputy Commissioner Paul Stephenson said the plot was designed to cause "untold death and destruction''.
He added: "This was intended to be mass murder on an unimaginable scale.''
He added: "This was intended to be mass murder on an unimaginable scale.''
However, one suspects that those involved had privately imagined something of the scale.
Searches were on-going at a number of addresses, he added. Sources indicated that the majority if not all of those arrested were British...
AOL probably got that insight from their "sources" at the BBC.
_____________________________
UPDATE 6, 9:40: The Guardian at 8:30, still in "factual mode", and not yet blaming the Bush administration:
...There were reports from the US that UK security believed that the alleged plot involved using "liquid" based explosives. The US department of homeland security has barred passengers from carry any liquid or lotions onto flights...
Oh, well, so much for BA's "wellness" when travelling on board video -- in which we are told to use "lotions" and to try to stay "moisturized", while "avoiding alcohol".
In fact, one suspects they may need lots of extra alcohol aboard today, and over coming days.
Simply put, according to the BA web site this morning: NO HAND BAGGAGE. But you don't have to fly them today -- you can rebook or get a refund.
Anyway, you may not have much choice. . .
...All British Airways shorthaul (UK and European) inbound and outbound flights to and from London Heathrow up until 3pm (BST) this afternoon are cancelled...
. . . since you may not be going anywhere anyway.
But if you are unable to leave outbound, or someone you love supposed to be inbound is stranded and can't get to Heathrow, take heart: these cancellations are at least helping battle "climate change".
_____________________________
UPDATE 5, 9:15: This isn't important, I know. It's just an aside. But I did what I think is a very nice, thoughtful post on Robert Capa and war photography . . . earlier this morning just before all THIS started. Please read it, too!
_____________________________
UPDATE 4, 9:08: The BBC now tells us:
...According to BBC sources the "principal characters" suspected of being involved in the plot were British-born...
Was Sky's Martin Brunt one of the "sources"? Okay, probably not. But the BBC appears now to be catching up, for that's part of what Brunt said a little while ago.
Let me emphasize: part.
_____________________________
UPDATE 3, 8:58: The BBC has recently added to its main page on this story:
...At Heathrow Airport, BBC presenter Fiona Bruce said there were "ranks of people" unable to get into the terminal.
"Terminal One is completely at a standstill. Nobody is being checked in at all."
She said it was "jam-packed", but passengers were managing to remain "good natured"...
"Terminal One is completely at a standstill. Nobody is being checked in at all."
She said it was "jam-packed", but passengers were managing to remain "good natured"...
Fiona must have herself been going on vacation this morning, or headed off on a previously planned assignment. For if the BBC has actually dispatched her to get passenger reaction at Heathrow's Terminal 1, that's a lot like rushing Katie Couric to LaGuardia. They don't have anyone else available? (I'm sorry, but we have to laugh about something.)
Actually, maybe not. I just found this about Fiona's duties:
...She is also a key presenter in the BBC's live event team...
Well, I guess this rates as a "live event"?
_____________________________
UPDATE 2, 8:34: In comparison to the BBC report below, Sky News provides slightly different info. For one, we get a reason for the banning of just about everything:
...Sky News' Crime Correspondent Martin Brunt said there were concerns that certain explosives, possibly liquid, could be missed during x-ray screening of hand luggage.
Also:
Brunt said the threat was thought to be imminent and those arrested were mainly young, British-born Asian men.
So, unlike the BBC's Daniel Sandford, Sky's Martin Brunt said the threat was thought to be "imminent", and he tells us that those arrested are . . . oh, well, you probably read that above already.
Interestingly, TOMORROW is the 11th of August.
Just how "imminent" is "imminent"?
He said the plan allegedly involved people boarding flights and detonating explosives on planes over UK and US cities...
If "over" is an accurate description of part of the plot, that seems to indicate a hope the planes would crash and kill many more on the ground. Charming.
_____________________________
UPDATE, 8:15: Home Secretary John Reid's statement is here in full, at the Home Office web site:
'Overnight the police, with the full knowledge of Ministers, have carried out a major counter-terrorism operation to disrupt what we believe to be a major threat to the UK and international partners.
The police, acting with the Security Service MI5, are investigating an alleged plot to bring down a number of aircraft through mid-flight explosions, causing a considerable loss of life.
The police believe the alleged plot was a very significant one indeed.
At 2am this morning the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre raised the UK threat state to its highest level – “CRITICAL”.
This is now being publicly announced as I promised to Parliament last month.
This is a precautionary measure. We are doing everything possible to disrupt any further terrorist activity.
This will mean major disruption at all UK airports from today.
But as far as is possible we want people to go about their business as normal.
The police will provide an update on the operation later this morning and Ministers will keep the public regularly informed.'
The police, acting with the Security Service MI5, are investigating an alleged plot to bring down a number of aircraft through mid-flight explosions, causing a considerable loss of life.
The police believe the alleged plot was a very significant one indeed.
At 2am this morning the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre raised the UK threat state to its highest level – “CRITICAL”.
This is now being publicly announced as I promised to Parliament last month.
This is a precautionary measure. We are doing everything possible to disrupt any further terrorist activity.
This will mean major disruption at all UK airports from today.
But as far as is possible we want people to go about their business as normal.
The police will provide an update on the operation later this morning and Ministers will keep the public regularly informed.'
I think the Prime Minister, off in the Caribbean on vacation, must be quietly extra thrilled that earlier in the year he gave Reid the Home Office. Reid's pattern of succession to jobs in government is one that indicates he is more competent than most potential Labour cabinet secretaries. He has been successively "parachuted" into heading departments where there had previously been considered "problems" above and beyond the norm for government -- like at Health, then at Defence, and currently the Home Office.
Relatedly. In politics, timing means a lot. One Mr Jim Sheridan, MP obviously picked a lousy afternoon/evening to resign from the Government on "principle".
Oh, who was he, you ask? Does it matter?
_____________________________
[ORIGINAL POST, 7:48]
The BBC reports:
A terrorist plot to blow up planes in mid-flight from the UK to the US has been disrupted, Scotland Yard has said.
It is thought the plan was to detonate explosive devices smuggled on aircraft in hand luggage.
Police have arrested about 18 people in the London area after an anti-terrorist operation lasting several months...
It is thought the plan was to detonate explosive devices smuggled on aircraft in hand luggage.
Police have arrested about 18 people in the London area after an anti-terrorist operation lasting several months...
There is no suggestion as to whom those "arrested" might be as of now. Details will of course probably follow. And much as I hate to go out on a limb, I am willing to hazard a guess that it will shortly be revealed that those in custody are "angry, young" . . . Methodists.
The way this is being reported this is a MAJOR event. Scotland Yard has apparently "disrupted" a MAJOR ring. But by "disrupted" it could well mean that more plotters are out there, uncaptured as of yet. I'm sure we will find out more as the morning progresses.
...BBC home affairs correspondent Daniel Sandford says he does not think the police believe an attack is imminent.
"The reason for raising the threat level is in case there is some other sub-plot, back-up plot around this that the police aren't aware of," he said.
Home Secretary John Reid confirmed that there had been a plot "to bring down a number of aircraft through mid-flight explosions causing a considerable loss of life"....
"The reason for raising the threat level is in case there is some other sub-plot, back-up plot around this that the police aren't aware of," he said.
Home Secretary John Reid confirmed that there had been a plot "to bring down a number of aircraft through mid-flight explosions causing a considerable loss of life"....
What this also means is that if the plot has been smashed, we may well be witnessing now what would have happened had the F.B.I. been fortunate enough to have broken up the September 11, 2001 plot before it took place. So, watch the media reaction closely. As names and backgrounds are released, it will be interesting to see the reaction: "A post-graduate student in engineering", "a good boy", "a father", "a husband", a "weekend cricket player" . . .
. . . and "What's the evidence?" will probably become the cry. We know the pattern by now. If this is "big", there will be protests. And condemnation. And cries of "profiling". And claims that there are explanations. And then there will be talk of anger. And the Middle East. And Britain's role. And how this is all Blair's fault.
But how many people who might be dead within weeks, will now be alive for years to come, thanks to these arrests? As the media circus commences, we must always keep that in the back of our minds.
As to flying today, and I guess until we hear otherwise, on any flight commencing within the U.K. you can take NOTHING on board into the cabin but yourself:
...Only the barest essentials - including passports and wallets - will be allowed to be carried on board in transparent plastic bags...
But already there is reporting confusion:
...BBC journalist Joe Lynam encountered the increased security measures at Gatwick airport.
"I was handed a piece of paper saying that pretty much nothing could be taken on board the plane," he said.
"Everything had to be checked in and that includes mobile phones, ipods, wallets - even spectacle cases had to be checked in."
David Learmount from Flight International Magazine said he expected passengers to be searched much more carefully.
He added: "This is the first time this measure has actually been taken. Certainly I've never seen hand luggage banned."
"I was handed a piece of paper saying that pretty much nothing could be taken on board the plane," he said.
"Everything had to be checked in and that includes mobile phones, ipods, wallets - even spectacle cases had to be checked in."
David Learmount from Flight International Magazine said he expected passengers to be searched much more carefully.
He added: "This is the first time this measure has actually been taken. Certainly I've never seen hand luggage banned."
Wallets, yes . . . or no?
In any event, yes, any one of us might come face to face with the enemy, at any time. . . ¶ by Robert, Thursday, August 10, 2006
