The airplane bombplot
In August, 2006, airline security was suddenly increased around the world, including the prohibition of carrying liquids aboard planes. This resulted from the arrest of 24 Muslims around London who were charged with terrorism, including a plot to blow up seven specific airplanes en route to the USA and Canada from London using liquid bombs. The main sites of arrests were at a flat in Walthamstow, London, and in High Wycombe, where bomb making equipment was found. Arrests were also made in Birmingham and in Pakistan. Eventually 8 men were put on trial in London on a variety of charges.
The counter-terrorism police had been watching two young British-born Muslims, Ahmed Ali and Tanvir Hussein, both of whom had made trips to Pakistan and were suspected of having undergone terrorist training in camps there. The plot thickened when they were joined by a man named Mohammed Gulzar who was known to police and who travelled to the UK on a forged South African passport. The police also observed Mohammed Rauf, a known British-born contact with al Qaeda, who had flown in from Pakistan made contact with the suspects and returned to Pakistan before the British arrests. In fact, Rauf's arrest in Pakistan, probably initiated by the CIA, triggered the British arrests. However, Rauf subsequently managed to escape captivity in Pakistan (!)
Surveillance of these suspects starting in May 2006 lead the police to the actual bomb-maker, Assad Anwar, who was born in and lived in High Wycombe. He was seen touring London buying up small amounts of hydrogen peroxide (HP) in different places and he was observed combining these in a garage and distilling it to make more concentrated HP as the actual explosive.
Meanwhile, the other two main culprits, Ahmed Ali and Tanvir Hussein were observed with hidden cameras to be preparing bottles of Lucozade and other high sugar drinks by drilling holes in the bottom of the bottles removing some liquid with syringes and replacing it with the concentrated HP. It is important to note that the holes were re-sealed and the cap seal had not been broken. By adding dye to the HP it was almost impossible to detect that the bottles had been tampered with. Also, they prepared detonators that would be kept separate, and would be detonated with disposable cameras next to the HP-containing bottles by suicide bombers on the flights. The explosion would have been enough (in tests) to blow a hole in an airliner and cause the deaths of all the passengers. Nothing used for the bombs (drinks, batteries, disposable cameras) would ordinarily arouse suspicion. The suspects were also caught videotaping suicide messages for release after the bombings. If ever there was an airtight case this was it!
Some aspects of this plot are quite sophisticated, and undoubtedly emanated from al Qaeda in Pakistan, and possibly from Osama bin Laden himself and his assistant Abaida al Masri, who is also credited with initiating the 7/7 underground bombings in London. On the other hand, other aspects of the plot were stupid, and the plotters had no idea that they had been detected and were being watched continuously.
The verdicts in the trial were handed down last week. However, incredibly, the jury found one man, Mohammed Gulzar not guilty, because his role in the plot was unclear, and they could not come to a decision on four of the eight men put on trial. Only the three main plotters were found guilty, but on a general charge of conspiracy to murder. The jury was not convinced on the charge of terrorism, since although the plotters downloaded information about specific flights, they had not actually bought tickets. The plotters said they they only planned to use their bombs to protest the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan on non-lethal targets. I suppose the jury wanted the police to wait until they actually blew up at least one airliner.
There were some strange aspects of this trial. The jury requested and got a two week break in the middle of the trial for vacations. Also, because several of them had medical appointments, the deliberations were suspended periodically by the judge. Reporters who attended the trial noted that some of the jurors did not seem to be taking the proceedings very seriously. It was speculated that this might have been as a result of general opposition to the wars and scepticism at the role of the anti-terrorism forces due to the prior fiascos of the arrests in Forest Gate and the murder of Jean Menendez, both of which were unjustified.
The problem is that shouting wolf too often may lead to scepticism when the wolf is actually at the door. The Crown Prosecution Service now has to decide whether or not to retry the suspects.
(This is based partly on the BBC Panorama program "Terror in the skies" at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/7540926.stm )
The counter-terrorism police had been watching two young British-born Muslims, Ahmed Ali and Tanvir Hussein, both of whom had made trips to Pakistan and were suspected of having undergone terrorist training in camps there. The plot thickened when they were joined by a man named Mohammed Gulzar who was known to police and who travelled to the UK on a forged South African passport. The police also observed Mohammed Rauf, a known British-born contact with al Qaeda, who had flown in from Pakistan made contact with the suspects and returned to Pakistan before the British arrests. In fact, Rauf's arrest in Pakistan, probably initiated by the CIA, triggered the British arrests. However, Rauf subsequently managed to escape captivity in Pakistan (!)
Surveillance of these suspects starting in May 2006 lead the police to the actual bomb-maker, Assad Anwar, who was born in and lived in High Wycombe. He was seen touring London buying up small amounts of hydrogen peroxide (HP) in different places and he was observed combining these in a garage and distilling it to make more concentrated HP as the actual explosive.
Meanwhile, the other two main culprits, Ahmed Ali and Tanvir Hussein were observed with hidden cameras to be preparing bottles of Lucozade and other high sugar drinks by drilling holes in the bottom of the bottles removing some liquid with syringes and replacing it with the concentrated HP. It is important to note that the holes were re-sealed and the cap seal had not been broken. By adding dye to the HP it was almost impossible to detect that the bottles had been tampered with. Also, they prepared detonators that would be kept separate, and would be detonated with disposable cameras next to the HP-containing bottles by suicide bombers on the flights. The explosion would have been enough (in tests) to blow a hole in an airliner and cause the deaths of all the passengers. Nothing used for the bombs (drinks, batteries, disposable cameras) would ordinarily arouse suspicion. The suspects were also caught videotaping suicide messages for release after the bombings. If ever there was an airtight case this was it!
Some aspects of this plot are quite sophisticated, and undoubtedly emanated from al Qaeda in Pakistan, and possibly from Osama bin Laden himself and his assistant Abaida al Masri, who is also credited with initiating the 7/7 underground bombings in London. On the other hand, other aspects of the plot were stupid, and the plotters had no idea that they had been detected and were being watched continuously.
The verdicts in the trial were handed down last week. However, incredibly, the jury found one man, Mohammed Gulzar not guilty, because his role in the plot was unclear, and they could not come to a decision on four of the eight men put on trial. Only the three main plotters were found guilty, but on a general charge of conspiracy to murder. The jury was not convinced on the charge of terrorism, since although the plotters downloaded information about specific flights, they had not actually bought tickets. The plotters said they they only planned to use their bombs to protest the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan on non-lethal targets. I suppose the jury wanted the police to wait until they actually blew up at least one airliner.
There were some strange aspects of this trial. The jury requested and got a two week break in the middle of the trial for vacations. Also, because several of them had medical appointments, the deliberations were suspended periodically by the judge. Reporters who attended the trial noted that some of the jurors did not seem to be taking the proceedings very seriously. It was speculated that this might have been as a result of general opposition to the wars and scepticism at the role of the anti-terrorism forces due to the prior fiascos of the arrests in Forest Gate and the murder of Jean Menendez, both of which were unjustified.
The problem is that shouting wolf too often may lead to scepticism when the wolf is actually at the door. The Crown Prosecution Service now has to decide whether or not to retry the suspects.
(This is based partly on the BBC Panorama program "Terror in the skies" at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/7540926.stm )
posted by Jack Cohen at 8:02 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home