Terrorists Linked To July 7 Bombings

A USNews exclusive - apparently some of the terrorists recently arrested had ties to those involved in the July 7 bombing of the London subways.

Terrorism suspects plotting to blow up American planes headed from the United Kingdom to the United States were planning to smuggle hydrogen peroxide-based liquid/slurry explosives in modified sports drinks bottles, U.S. News has learned.

At least some of the suspects had ties to those involved in the July 7, 2005, coordinated bombings on the London subways, a law enforcement source told U.S. News. British police were watching the suspects for weeks and had to make some "gut-wrenching" decisions on how long they could wait before making the arrests, this law enforcement source said. Several of the plotters made trips to and from Pakistan for meetings, recruiting, and training. British police decided to make the arrests after some of these men, believed essential to the plot, returned to the U.K. This source told U.S. News that the British police realized that the suspects were "accelerating" their efforts "quicker than we realized" and that the subjects were close to "getting ready to get on planes to do it."

Story here Meanwhile, Charles picks up on yet more propaganda disseminated by the media.

Comments

[rwilymz]

Lies, damned lies and "the mainstream media"?

[xxx]

Makes you wonder if we should be taking our anti terrorism counsel from the Brits afterall.

They ain't got no problems with the Geneva Conventions, ain't got no new homeland security billion dollar boondogle, ain't got no private torture gulogs, heck, they ain't even got guns...

And yet, they appear to be quite competant in this anti terrorism stuff.

[Wild Thing]

I am just so glad we have blogs like yours, if we had to rely on only the media all the time we would go nuts. haha I mean it, thank God for some sanity and people saying things that make sense and not kissing up to the terrorists.

So far I have yet to hear complaints from the people in England about what they have to do to board planes. But they do complain here in America and I have to wonder why. Don't they want to be safe?

Thanks again for your blog, I love it.

[splashtc]

I couldn't believe what Shepard Smith started ranting about-"...If they knew it might be toothpaste tubes.... then why didn't they start checking toothpaste tubes as soon as they knew..." Yea Shep then they'd switch to another method-unknown to us.

[SinCerely]

They ain't got no problems with the Geneva Conventions, ain't got no new homeland security billion dollar boondogle, ain't got no private torture gulogs, heck, they ain't even got guns...

And yet, they appear to be quite competant in this anti terrorism stuff.

Posted by: xxx | Thursday, August 10, 2006 at 04:00 PM

They "ain't got no guns"? Are you freaking nutz. Did you see the big guns pulled out on the rail terrorist? I mean, hell it was on national television. Torture gulogs? Where is the proof on that? What they do have is citizens who realize a terrorist attack in the making when they see one.

MoveOn.......Org.....

[kate]

shep smith is a fool, i would so fire him. the uk has more cases than we do concerning mistreatment in iraq (check out their online newspapers like the scotsman, telegraph, etc). so far all their soldiers have won in court. photo shopped pictures to blame in some of the cases (sound familiar). their police can carry guns after two years with special certification (at least that's how it was about ten years ago when i was a student over there). and remember x, the police ran afoul shooting and killing the wrong suspect after the subway bombings. we do work with them on all this, they just don't ever talk about it (and they shouldn't). they do a wonderful job staying on top of all this even though their press and lefties are horrid.

[Phoenix]

"...Yea Shep then they'd switch to another method-unknown to us."

This is why the public's right to know is expropriated by the need for secrecy. I do not get that people don't understand this. A free press is great, but not when it helps the enemy.

Kate - Yes, the British press is vicious and soooo petty. Maybe I shouldn't complain about ours.

[old trooper]

After watching Shep`s rant on site in the aftermath of Katrina, I do change the channel on his "war coverage" He is just a very excitable boy and lacks perspective. If he has issues with security measures taken by the Host Nation he needs to get his cornbread ass back to New York.

News, for me, does not have the taint of opinion or some drama created by a reporter that has no understanding of what he is witnessing. I know the difference. I have participated in three wars in my lifetime, spent 12 years in the middle east, three years in Bosnia and Kosovo. I always ran "newsies" off when they wandered into risky places. Curiosity has killed more than just the cat.

Shep is most likely well meaning but not as emotionaly together as their guys Harrigan or Tobin. Shep should be back in New York. I`d prefer to watch Harrigan or Tobin. They are descriptive enough, and far more objective than Shep.

Right to Know? If you honestly believe that you have a "right to know" get your ass over there and you will see a snapshot in time, a gnats ass view and the larger picture will overwhelm you. Media Characters trumpet your "right to know" as they furnish news, editorially emhanced, to get a Pulitzer and a Fat Pay Raise.

The Media shows you what it wants you to see and hear. Be careful, as in the case of Reuters, about accepting it as presented.

[Phoenix]

I am linked out. But I have one dumb gripe that has little to do with all the 'news' about the media: I read the word "postmodern" on every link. 'This is post-modern warfare.'

Modern is a continuum. How can it possibly BE 'post'? This drives me nuts. Who decided when 'modern' stopped and when everything that came after that moment was 'post' modern?

So, will some avant garde, clever fellow decide when post-post-modern comes about? Argh....

[jeena]

I think the terrorist plot is a false story because Bush is scared about what is going to happen to the Republican Party on Election Day. Does anyone think it is mere coincidence that the day after Joe Lieberman, a pro-war candidate, is defeated in Connecticut, this story comes to light?

Tony Snow mentioned Lieberman in his press conference yesterday, and today we have Bush making comments in the media that we are still not safe from terrorism to advance his pro-war agenda.

Bush must think we are all idiots, he treats us like two yeard olds by going to the media whenever things don't go his way.

[Phoenix]

Ooh yeah.... I think I just figured out the meaning of 'post-modern'.... The above post by jeena shows that her metacognition engaged in 'after' faux-modern recognition of events that never made it to modern reality. She missed the Continuum Bus to Sanity.

D'oh.

[kate]

jeena> "I think the terrorist plot is a false story because Bush is scared about what is going to happen to the Republican Party on Election Day".
me> if you ever really studied bush, you would realize that he believes in the two party system and the balance that goes with it. while i'm sure he'd like a republican win, he's not "scared". the liberal government in the uk doesn't think it's a false story. you must think we never landed on the moon either.

jeena> "Does anyone think it is mere coincidence that the day after Joe Lieberman, a pro-war candidate, is defeated in Connecticut, this story comes to light?
me> yes. this happened in the uk, not our country.

jeena> "Tony Snow mentioned Lieberman in his press conference yesterday"
me> sad wasn't it that a lock step liberal was stabbed in the back for wanting to defend the us and israel.

jeena> "and today we have Bush making comments in the media that we are still not safe from terrorism to advance his pro-war agenda".
me> he's correct, we aren't safe and we are at war.

jeena: "Bush must think we are all idiots,"
me> yes, it's a pity he has to explain it to people like you.

jeena> "he treats us like two yeard olds
me> if the shoe fits.

jeena> "by going to the media whenever things don't go his way".
me> a terror attack on the scale of 9/11 deserves a statement from the commander in chief.

jesus jeena, i can't believe you are such a mental midget. they have drugs for that now.

[jeena]

Thanks for the comments to my post, even the one that called ma a two year old!

Anyway, I live in the state where 9/11 occured, and many people from my county did not come home from work that day, and I very rarely go into NYC any longer because it upsets me to think about the attack when I go there. In addition, my cousin helped with the rescue efforts on 9/11, was injured in Iraq, and came home with a permanent disability and can't get any benefits from the government who sent him there because he is a reservist!

The war in Iraq is obviously not making us any safer if the terrorist story out of London is to be believed, and even if it is true, the story was released at the most opportune time, after Joe Leibernman's defeat. I'm sure that was not a coincidence, and even one of the reporters was asking
why this story was released yesterday, telling me he was thinking the same thing as I was.

Before 9/11, threats to airlines were kept from the public, except for the chosen few who were warned, now because the threats fits into an agenda, we are told when the time is right.

I always thought Bush was sincerely devastated by the events on 9/11 and did what he thought was best to retaliate, but Bush himself admits there were mistakes made in Iraq and we are paying for it financially and with American lives.

[rwilymz]

"even if it is true, the story was released at the most opportune time, after Joe Leibernman's defeat"

After, therefore caused by?

"even one of the reporters was asking why this story was released yesterday, telling me he was thinking the same thing as I was"

So there's two paranoiacs with sloppy logical processors, then.

"Before 9/11, threats to airlines were kept from the public"

They were? Or are you engaging conveniently selective memory?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_Front_for_the_Liberation_of_Palestine

"The hijacking of a TWA flight from Los Angeles to Damascus on August 29, 1969 by a PFLP cell... "

"The bombing, with a barometric pressure device, of a Swissair flight bound for Israel, killing 47, on February 21, 1970..."

"On September 6, 1970, the PFLP (including Leila Khaled) hijacked four passenger aircraft from Pan Am, TWA and Swissair on flights to New York from Brussels, Frankfurt and Zürich; and on September 9, 1970, hijacked a BOAC flight from Bombay to Rome. The Pan Am flight was diverted to Cairo; the TWA, Swissair and BOAC flights were diverted to Dawson's Field in Zarqa, Jordan. The TWA, Swissair and BOAC aircraft were subsequently blown up by the terrorists on September 12, ..."

I knew about these; why didn't you? I'm not among the "chosen few"...

"because the threats fits into an agenda, we are told when the time is right"

Like, when it happens, you mean.

"Bush himself admits there were mistakes made in Iraq "

Well, duh. War means mistakes. One mistake -- during **training** -- in WWII cost more US lives in 20 minutes than than were taken in 18 months in Iraq.

"we are paying for it financially and with American lives"

War also costs money and takes lives. Again, you get no points for being impertinent. The only measure of "costly" you could validly make is to frame the costs we're paying, across whatever medium you wish to choose, in comparative historical terms.

Moeny? in real dollars, and for the ultra-modern equipment we're using, this war is about average.

Lives? find any other nation, kingdom, empire, anything, which conquered a nation of 25 million with a force of 250,000 in 6, 7 weeks, with as few casualties, enemy and friendly, military and civilian, and occupy that nation for 3-1/2 years with as few ditto. G'head. I'll wait.

[Rick]

"They ain't got no problems with the Geneva Conventions, ain't got no new homeland security billion dollar boondogle, ain't got no private torture gulogs, heck, they ain't even got guns...

And yet, they appear to be quite competant in this anti terrorism stuff."

Posted by: xxx

The more you post, the more I question whether you even own a television or read anything but High Times. Let's start by throwing out the fct that the UK has been fighting terrorism, globally and at home for over 800 years. Just forget that part. Here's what matters; they ARE NOT hamstrung by an ACLU, a hateful press or many other of OUR problems. Scotland Yard, Mi5 & Mi6 all used American technology/techniques (including profiling) which they can get by with in the UK. Then let's attempt to remember that the Pakistanis were very insturmental in breaking this case. Lastly, only the Bobbies do not carry guns (openly), the rest of the police are very well armed and backed up by the army/SAS.

[Phoenix]

Hmmm. So Jeena figures Bush, within hours of Lieberman's defeat, managed to engage Pakistan and Britain to go along with a plan to make up a terrorist plot. Britain cooperated by sending out massive police presence and actually arrested a whole pile of people with Muslim names. They were, what? Actors? And then Bush managed to shut down the largest airports in the world and piss off thousands of people to say nothing of causing huge financial cost to four airlines - all because a pantywaist named Ned won a primary?

Yeah. Makes sense. Bad Dubya.

[Phoenix]

Come to think on it - it should be MAGIC DUBYA for gettin' all that together so fast. Wow. I'm impressed.

[kate]

jeena, a lot of us know at least one person who died in 9/11. some of us have family and friends fighting in iraq (i have several that signed up after 9/11). we are all in this together. i think that you are letting your emotions and imagination get away from you.