Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Response to "underwear bomber" fits pattern of "war on terror"

The pattern is that the US attacks mankind in the guise of going after terrorists (of its own creation, or that of its British masters), whether or not the terrorists actually cause any harm to the US. So, a "botched" terrorist incident becomes an excuse to impose more abuse upon Americans at airports and to bomb yet another country, as well as several other items on the fascist or Satanist wish-list. It's amazing how much mileage they can get out of one guy whom they obviously deliberately allowed onto the aircraft despite plenty of warning that he had been radicalized. What ever happened to facial recognition software? It would have worked in this case, if the security agencies had just gotten a photo of the "bomber" from his father (who had warned them about his son) and loaded it into their database. It might not work in every case, but this doesn't mean it shouldn't be in their bag of tricks.

In the course of all the media coverage of this incident, we were treated to a terrorism expert on The Newshour (PBS) telling its viewers how to circumvent security measures and successfully bomb an aircraft:

"LARRY JOHNSON: Well, we have improved our capability in some areas. You know, at least now we have professionals in TSA at security checkpoints. Before, we were using the equivalent of McDonald's workers. We now check -- all checked baggage gets subjected to an investigation by C.T. technology that can detect explosives.

"But Doug is exactly right. When it comes to the kinds of components that Ramzi Yousef took on board a plane in 1994, successfully built a bomb, you can do that today. You could put in those quart bags that you are allowed to take on, which can have three ounces, you can get six of those in a quart bag.

"You can put one pound, three ounces worth of liquid or two ounces of liquid explosive in that bag, take it on board. The detonator Ramzi Yousef used was guncotton. It was a cellulose material treated with nitroglycerine. He used a little light bulb from a dashboard and a D-cell battery. That was enough. Sparked it, detonated it, it blew up.

"That could be done today. And, unfortunately, they have not deployed the type of -- there are two types of explosive detection systems, trace and bulk. They have not been deployed with any kind of systematic purpose to -- to prevent these kinds of incidents. So, it is possible."

Another terrorism expert, Douglas Laird, also indicated that the TSA might have gone out of its way to prevent the Dutch authorities from using technology which would have prevented the incident:

"I have heard some disturbing news on the blogs -- and I'm not sure it is correct -- but that the TSA had banned the Dutch authorities from using body scanning technology at Schiphol Airport. If this is true, that -- is someone needs to look really seriously at how that happened."

If this is true, then this would seem to be a smoking gun of a plot to deliberately allow the "bomber" aboard.