Monday, August 21, 2006

Was Plot To Blow Up Airplanes With Liquid Explosives Feasible? British Journalist Questions The Chemistry

In the days since the British foiled a plot to blow up U.S.-bound planes with liquid exposives, a lot of questions remain unanswered.

How close were the would-be terrorists from going forward with their plan? British officials say the plotters hadn't bought airline tickets, and some didn't have passports. Apparently, the question of how imminent the plan was led to a debate between British and U.S. officials as to the timing of the arrests.

Here in the U.S., why did the Department of Homeland Security issue new rules allowing some liquids and gels to be brought aboard airplanes, when it had no way to screen such explosives in U.S. airports? In light of the new rules, have Transportation Security Administration employees been given more training into such things as how to notice which passengers are questionably nervous?

But in spite of all those questions, the preface that terrorists want to use liquid explosives is clear. The media has told us repeatedly, via interviews with government officials and experts, that it would be easy for terrorists to make liquid explosives.

"A first-year chemistry student could do it," university professor Bob Burk told Toronto's Globe and Mail.

"You can find the recipe on the Internet if you look," David Williams, a retired FBI forensic explosives expert, told the Baltimore Sun.

Of course, that leads us to one other question: If liquid explosives pose such a threat -- at least three government agencies wrote prior to the recent terrorist threat that the U.S. should be concerned with such explosives -- why has DHS thus far failed to test technology provided by the Japanese in January that detects liquid explosives?

Could it be that the preface is wrong? Is it not feasible to bring chemicals onto a plane, mix them, and ultimately detonate them?

That's the conclusion of a report by British journalist Thomas C. Greene, based in part on a peer-reviewed 2004 study in the Journal of the American Chemical Society, "Decomposition of Triacetone Triperoxide is an Entropic Explosion."

As the Washington Monthly noted: "The good news is that it will make you feel a little more confident about the safety of flying overseas. The bad news is that it will make you feel a little less confident about the terror announcements of our national governments."

Here's the nut of what Greene wrote:

GREENE: Making a quantity of TATP ( triacetone triperoxide) sufficient to bring down an airplane is not quite as simple as ducking into the toilet and mixing two harmless liquids together. ... Take your hydrogen peroxide, acetone, and sulfuric acid, measure them very carefully, and put them into drinks bottles for convenient smuggling onto a plane. It's all right to mix the peroxide and acetone in one container, so long as it remains cool. Don't forget to bring several frozen gel-packs (preferably in a Styrofoam chiller deceptively marked "perishable foods"), a thermometer, a large beaker, a stirring rod, and a medicine dropper. You're going to need them. It's best to fly first class and order Champagne. The bucket full of ice water, which the airline ought to supply, might possibly be adequate -- especially if you have those cold gel-packs handy to supplement the ice, and the Styrofoam chiller handy for insulation -- to get you through the cookery without starting a fire in the lavvie.

Once the plane is over the ocean, very discreetly bring all of your gear into the toilet. You might need to make several trips to avoid drawing attention. Once your kit is in place, put a beaker containing the peroxide/acetone mixture into the ice water bath (Champagne bucket), and start adding the acid, drop by drop, while stirring constantly. Watch the reaction temperature carefully. The mixture will heat, and if it gets too hot, you'll end up with a weak explosive. In fact, if it gets really hot, you'll get a premature explosion possibly sufficient to kill you, but probably no one else. After a few hours - assuming, by some miracle, that the fumes haven't overcome you or alerted passengers or the flight crew to your activities - you'll have a quantity of TATP with which to carry out your mission. Now all you need to do is dry it for an hour or two. ... While it's true that a slapdash concoction will explode, it's unlikely to do more than blow out a few windows. At best, an infidel or two might be killed by the blast, and one or two others by flying debris as the cabin suddenly depressurizes, but that's about all you're likely to manage under the most favorable conditions possible.

22 Comments:

Anonymous We killed the Patriot Act! said...

Hey Jabbs, do you have any info on how to get this stuff through airport security?

It's great to see someone other than The New York Times that will give information to the terrorists that want to kill us.

Your a great american! NOT!

11:31 AM  
Blogger Libs Lie said...

If you want to get killed in a terrorist attack,
Vote democrat.

If you hate your country,
Vote democrat.

If you love the enemy,
Vote democrat.

If you feel the need to give terrorists constitutional rights,
Vote democrat.

If your brain has fallen out of place and ended up in your ass,
Vote democrat.

12:00 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

Two absolutely brilliant comments. The first one blames JABBS for repeating information from a newspaper. I suppose it would be better if we just trusted Michael Chertoff to tell us everything we need to know, right?

Libs lie offers a brilliant analysis, and we are all better off for it. It should how incapable some conservatives are to debate issues. Some conservatives are limited to name calling and gross hyperbolic stereotypes. After that, their brains shut off.

12:56 PM  
Blogger Libs Lie said...

rob says...Some conservatives are limited to name calling and gross hyperbolic stereotypes. You just keep repeating yourself.

My little synopsis is dead on accurate, and has everything to do with what you buddy here at JABBS has posted.

What is the need to kep on putting the info out there unless you hate your country and love thy enemy?

1:50 PM  
Blogger Libs Lie said...

And furthermore the first comment isn't laying blame on anyone. Its stating how in tune this site is with The NY Slimes. The Slimes and this site both hate America. You have proven it to be true.

2:09 PM  
Blogger thewaronterrible said...

I am hardly surprised by the utter emptiness and ignorance contained within the conservative talking points devoid of any fact or truth about liberals or anything else courtesy of "libs lie" and "we killed the patriot act."
You give conservatives/Republicans a bad name and make them look really stupid.
The JABBS site is for informed discussion only.

2:34 PM  
Anonymous We killed the Patriot Act! said...

rob of wilmington, del. said...
Two absolutely brilliant comments. The first one blames JABBS for repeating information from a newspaper. I suppose it would be better if we just trusted Michael Chertoff to tell us everything we need to know, right?

Libs lie offers a brilliant analysis, and we are all better off for it. It should how incapable some conservatives are to debate issues. Some conservatives are limited to name calling and gross hyperbolic stereotypes. After that, their brains shut off.


Funny how some Neo-Libs would rather be critical and intolerant of other points of view than comment on the post.

2:36 PM  
Anonymous We killed the Patriot Act! said...

I wonder how many kids will be burned or blow their hands off when they start experimenting with this stuff!

Jabbs and the MSM have done America a great disservice by making this detailed information as accessable as possible!

2:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I suppose "The New York Slimes" hated America when Judith Miller published story after story of Bush propaganda in favor of an U.S. invasion of Iraq in the run up to war.
I suppose the "New York Slimes" hated America when it published exposes on Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky.
The comments about the New York Times implying a liberal bias are conservative bullshit talking points and must be ignored on all levels by anyone with an IQ higher than a plant.

2:45 PM  
Blogger Libs Lie said...

Since when did Monica Lewinsky have anything to do with national security? This is why you people are so out of touch with reality. Why is it when we informed conservatives besmirch the Koran of the libs, the NY Slimes, you have to remind us the only time the NY Slimes went against your prophet, Bill Clinton, was to expose the fact that he, a sexual deviant, seduced a teenager.

3:08 PM  
Anonymous Slick Willie said...

She had a sore throat. I was trying to feel her pain.

3:18 PM  
Anonymous We killed The Patriot Act! said...

thewaronterrible said...
I am hardly surprised by the utter emptiness and ignorance contained within the conservative talking points devoid of any fact or truth about liberals or anything else courtesy of "libs lie" and "we killed the patriot act."
You give conservatives/Republicans a bad name and make them look really stupid.
The JABBS site is for informed discussion only.


Translation... We are intolerant to points of view that differ from ours.

We would rather criticise you than engage you in a debate on facts because liberalism is philosophy of the stupid, and we are liberals.

You are not welcome here.

3:32 PM  
Blogger ThankMe said...

In contrast, conservatives don’t hate liberals, we view them as entertainment!

Thank Me!

3:51 PM  
Blogger thewaronterrible said...

No, it's not that I am intolerant of differing points of view.
It's that I am intolerant of baseless conservative talking points about Liberals acting to assist terrorists, Liberals hating Democracy, etc. unrelated to the discussion.
If you want to engage on a debate on facts, then bring up some facts.

4:00 PM  
Anonymous Charles said...

Hey did you hear about members of the Council on American-Islamic Relations touring the Ohare Airport (Chicago) on June 21, 2006. Seems the CAIR did not want Moslems to have to go through the check points like regular folk so they copmplained about 'profiling' The Border Patrol invited the CAIR down to Ohare for a personnal guided tour of ALL the secure areas. Now they know how to get those liquids on board. My wife wants to know how she can get her shampoo and lipstick pass security too.

4:16 PM  
Blogger ThankMe said...

Here are some facts:

Liberals are Against the Patriot Act
Liberals are Against intercepting enemy communications.
Liberals are Against finding out what phone numbers the enemy uses.
Liberals are Against finding out the financial activities of the enemy.

Debate those facts!

Thank Me!

4:17 PM  
Anonymous Widget said...

Thank you, David R Mark for your lesson on how to blow up a plane full of infidels over the ocean. When I was in college we could go to the school library and get out a book about building a hydrogen bomb. One guy tried to do it. I think he needed distilled water or something and couldnt get enough or something Good thing he didnt blow up our Dorm.He went on to be get elected as a Democrat during Clinton's time. Had the right type of brains for that.
Now about your modern bomb. All a guy has to do is start earlier to assemble the components together. Charles said that the Islamics can get out of Chicago without being checked. Leave out of Chicago with most of the mixture done aloready. and in a ice thingy marked frozen heart or baby food Your children will be with ypou of course Mustnt drny the kiddies the privege of dying for the cause. just blow up the plane at your leisure. Thank me.

5:12 PM  
Blogger thewaronterrible said...

To thank me.
Don't believe everything you hear on FAUX News and from Mark Levin and Russ Limbaugh.

"Liberals are against the Patriot Act."
The Senate Voted 89-10 to renew the USA Patriot Act in March. The 89 included Democrats and your Liberals.
Five Republicans initially joined Democrats in December in blocking a renewal over concerns the act had overbearing restrictions on privacy. This movement resulted in placing privacy safeguards in the act.
Hardly Liberals.

"Liberals are against intercepting enemy communications. Liberals are against finding enemy phone numbers."
False.
"Liberals" are not against wiretapping terrorists. What we are against the Executive Branch intercepting of communications in violation of the FISA Act and the U.S. Constitution, the very foundation of our government.
FYI, the following is the list of Republicans who openly expressed the very same concerns, many of whom even called for congressional hearings on the matter:
Senators Chuck Hagel, Olympia Snowe, John McCain, Arlen Spector, Lindsey Graham, Richard Lugar, John E. Sunuru, Susan Collins.
The Office of Congressional Research is among the several bipartisan groups who have questioned the legality of the program.
Hardly Liberals.

So now you say that Bush illegal NSA spying program is necessary to capture terrorists.
There exists no evidence to support this statement outside of Bush spin, which conservatives blindly and obediently accept as truth (similar to Nixon's followers during Watergate).
FBI and CIA officials stated in media reports earlier this year the Bush NSA program was not doing anything to help capture terrorists, rather routinely drumming up thousands of false leads resulting in wasted time that could more effectively be put towards other methods in combating terrorism.
I will provide links later.
I suppose next you want to draw a connection between the NSA program and the recent capture of the alleged Al Queda terrorists plotting from London?
Chertoff himself stated in a Aug. 11 press conference that "we did not see any U.S. internal activity in this plot," and no evidence exists to suggest any of those captured had any links to any Americans.
Finally, it was good old fashioned police work that captured the bunch, contrary to Bush conservative statements downplaying such strategies in a "post-9-11 world."

"Liberals are against finding out the financial activities of the enemy."
Lawyers from the U.S. Department of Treasury and the U.S. Justice Department are among those who have questioned whether the program protects international bank privacy issues. A Belgium financial consortium Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications also has expressed concerns.
Hardly liberals.

6:21 PM  
Blogger thewaronterrible said...

Just to be clear: I was talking about in the final paragraph, as I'm sure ThankMe was also, the disclosure by the New York Times and The Wall Street Journal of the Bush Administration program of tracking international bank records.

6:31 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

It's kind of stupid to blame JABBS for reprinting an analysis questioning whether it's possible to carry out a plot using liquid explosives.

You can't seriously think that terrorists are reading western newspapers, or even less likely blogs, in order to learn how to carry out terrorist acts.

And use some reading comprehension skills, please. The point of the article is that it might be practically impossible to carry out a plan using liquid explosives. That's not telling the terrorists what to do.

Using this insipid logic, you should blame Michael Chertoff for helping the terrorists. After all, he told the terrorists that they could smuggle liquid explosives via diabetic medicine containers and baby food bottles -- things the DHS said were still ok to bring on board.

10:59 PM  
Anonymous liberal N proud said...

Finally, Finally, Finally, someone is asking about the absurdity of this

Some one finally is getting the balls to say what the f@#k!

11:01 PM  
Anonymous whoop4467 said...

From what I read of all the Repuke post is that they solve problems using their GUT just like all Busheys instead of their BRAIN. Using the Brain requires analysing facts while using the GUT requires analysing facts using feelings and is much easier for the Repuks.
I also believe the Repuks are trying to hide their "frustration" about having a Repuke president that can not speak English any better than my daughters' third grade math /science students. I worked for 2.5 yrs with a Medical Researcher from China that has been in the U.S. for only 4.5 years and he speaks and I dare say probably writes better English than does our current President( he programmed his laptop to say words in English and would repeat them many times). I worked with a Medical Researcher from Japan and she spoke better english than does our President and have no doubt she writes better than our President. I currently work with a Medical Researcher from Germany and she speaks better english than does our President. I even asked her how she learned Enlish so well and she said she studied it and practiced it for hours.

1:43 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Listed on BlogShares