'Al-Qaeda links' suspect probed over US plane 'attack'

[Technologic]

A Nigerian reported to have links to al-Qaeda is being questioned after an attempted act of terrorism on a plane arriving in the US, officials say.
They say the 23-year-old man was trying to ignite some kind of explosive device as the airliner approached Detroit.
The flight from Europe landed safely after the man was overpowered by passengers and crew.
Witnesses said he burnt his leg but no-one else was hurt among the 278 passengers and 11 crew on board.
Officials have described the device as a mixture of powder and liquid which failed to go off properly.
One terrorism expert said it looked as though a new way of concealing explosives on the body was involved.
President Barack Obama, on holiday in Hawaii, has ordered increased security for air travel.
White House spokesman Bill Burton said the president was monitoring the situation.
'Terrorist connection'
The Nigerian, named as Abdul Mudallad, had third-degree burns, said Peter King, a Congressman on the US House of Representatives Homeland Security Committee.



AIRLINE TERROR PLOTS
1995: Al-Qaeda plots to blow up US airliners over the Pacific in "Operation Bojinka"
2001: Briton Richard Reid tries to blow up a Paris-Miami flight with 197 people on board using explosives hidden in his shoes
2006: UK police foil attacks on transatlantic flights using liquid bombs disguised as soft drinks

'Smoke and screams' on plane
The suspect's name was in a database indicating "a significant terrorist connection" although it did not appear on a "no-fly" list, said Mr King.
Mr Mutallab reportedly told investigators he had links to al-Qaeda and had received the explosives in Yemen.
According to some US and Dutch media reports, he is a student at University College London.
Mr King also said investigators were looking into whether the incident was part of a larger plot and a "worldwide alert" had been raised.
The Department of Homeland Security said "additional screening measures" had been put into effect since the incident.
'Lot of panic'
Northwest Airlines Flight 253 had begun its descent towards Detroit Metropolitan Airport on Friday afternoon when the incident occurred.
The Airbus 330, which had originated in Amsterdam, was about 20 minutes from landing when passengers noticed something was wrong.
One of them, Syed Jafri, said he had been seated three rows behind the suspect and had seen a glow and smelt smoke.

Then, he said, "a young man behind me jumped on him".
"Next thing you know, there was a lot of panic," Mr Jafri added.
As the suspect was being tackled, he was reportedly shouting and a passenger said she had heard the word "Afghanistan".
Another unnamed passenger heard a "little pop", then saw "a bit of a smoke and then some flames".
After "yelling and screaming", the passenger added, "they took him out and it was really quick".
Fellow passenger Melinda Dennis said the man had been severely burned on one leg, and a fire extinguisher and water were used to put out the fire.
The suspect later told the US authorities he had had explosive powder taped to his leg and used a syringe of chemicals to mix with the powder that was to cause explosion, the ABC television network reports.
Dr Sally Leivesley, an adviser on terrorism and public protection, told the BBC: "This has looked as though it's a first attempt of a new way to use the body to conceal explosives."
"They may be concealing the explosives on the human body - but on the inside upper leg, and we only know this by seeing a very badly burnt leg on the suspected perpetrator."

Firecrackers? Imo this guy must have mental issues

Edit: Forgot link http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8430699.stm

[cocaine]

yeah apparently it was a firework of some sort. how did he manage to get this on board, jesus christ there surely can't be anything more obvious than gunpowder!?

[BeanEgg]

Well knowing Nigeria and the corruption, you could probably bribe them.

[Technologic]

Well knowing Nigeria and the corruption, you could probably bribe them.
The flight was from Amsterdam

[BeanEgg]

My bad, never read that part.

[xxMATTGxx]

yeah apparently it was a firework of some sort. how did he manage to get this on board, jesus christ there surely can't be anything more obvious than gunpowder!?

Just been reading on a forum and the "firecracker" is now something more serious?



The flight was from Amsterdam

Indeed but the guy was from there. Me thinks someone slipped up or he was clever got passed, considering he was suppose to be on a no-fly list. I'm glad no one got injured, terrorist attacks are upsetting.


They say the 23-year-old man was trying to ignite an explosive device as the jet approached Detroit from Amsterdam.

He was overpowered by some of the 278 passengers and 11 crew. Reports say he burnt his leg. No-one else was hurt.

Police in London are conducting searches and inquiries into the man, believed to be a London student.

Interesting. Must say, well done to the passengers and crew on that flight though.

[StefanWolves]

Yeah, its been confirmed by a passenger that is wasn't a firework now. He strapped some liquid on the inside of his leg at the very top (by his balls), and tried to inject another liquid into it with a syringe, hence why he was third degree burns in that area.

Source; check the link at the start of this thread, it has recently been updated.

I'm now ******** myself - I fly in two days to Florida, stuff like this doesn't do my nerves any good at all. :(

[Nixt]

Primitive method really, as shown by the way in which he royally ****** up. Probably nothing to really worry about, especially seeing as Homeland will up security as will airports around the world. We don't really have to worry about these failed attempts; it's the things we don't hear about that we have to worry about :P.

[Jordy]

The UK just had to get involved didn't it? The Nigerian guy was studying at University College London.

Seems like they've came up with a new method for detonating bombs, something about injecting liquids into his leg to cause an explosion? Now they seem to know what happened they can work to prevent it which is surely a good thing.

[StefanWolves]

Surely this will mean more thorough and intimate searches at airports? if so I want a good looking women not an old fat beer belly.

[xxMATTGxx]

The UK just had to get involved didn't it? The Nigerian guy was studying at University College London.

Seems like they've came up with a new method for detonating bombs, something about injecting liquids into his leg to cause an explosion? Now they seem to know what happened they can work to prevent it which is surely a good thing.

He could have other people working with them. That is probably why they got involved. Terrorism is a big network. Since he has a house in London surely it would be our right to search it to find any more information on other plots and any links to other people. Then to prevent it if needed.


Surely this will mean more thorough and intimate searches at airports? if so I want a good looking women not an old fat beer belly.

On all flights to U.S., in the hour before landing all passengers must be seated and no pillows or blankets allowed, NBC News learns.

^ Not sure how true this is but there you go.

[Jordy]

He could have other people working with them. That is probably why they got involved. Terrorism is a big network. Since he has a house in London surely it would be our right to search it to find any more information on other plots and any links to other people. Then to prevent it if needed.Yeah definitely, taking his computer etc could lead to others. Rarely is terrorism down to one individual alone.

It's potentially embarrassing for UK Intelligence agencies though if it's shown that they could of intercepted this attempt.

[Technologic]

It seems this is more serious than first thought...

[Orangeesh]

what a failure of a terrorist lol

[Seatherny]

The security on planes suck "/
My dad always keeps a few pen knifes in his laptop bag (as his company uses a lot every day for packing etc and sometimes he needs it in emergencies), and he was able to fly without them detecting it "/.

I am sorry, but wasnt 9/11 due to terrorists having knives? If my dad was able to take them without being detected, these terrorists easily can.

[xxMATTGxx]

A Nigerian man has been charged with attempting to destroy a plane after he allegedly tried to detonate a bomb on a passenger jet arriving in the US.

Members of a wealthy Nigerian family have confirmed to journalists that he is the son of the former chairman of First Bank of Nigeria, the BBC's Caroline Duffield reports from Lagos.


Souce: BBC.

So he has now been a charged and seems to be related with a probably rich family?

[Jordy]

Members of a wealthy Nigerian family have confirmed to journalists that he is the son of the former chairman of First Bank of Nigeria, the BBC's Caroline Duffield reports from Lagos.

Souce: BBC.

So he has now been a charged and seems to be related with a probably rich family?Resembles Osama Bin Laden who was from an incredibly rich and powerful family in Saudi Arabia, and he left all that to pursue his extreme muslim views. And this guy was prepared to blow himself up for Al Qaeda, presumably he had an okay life too. There's something odd about these people from rich families getting involved with terrorism, I suppose the money and influence helps?

[xxMATTGxx]

Resembles Osama Bin Laden who was from an incredibly rich and powerful family in Saudi Arabia, and he left all that to pursue his extreme muslim views. And this guy was prepared to blow himself up for Al Qaeda, presumably he had an okay life too. There's something odd about these people from rich families getting involved with terrorism, I suppose the money and influence helps?

Money helps I suppose but its a bit odd and worrying at the same time.

[Seatherny]

What I fail to understand is why they would rather give up their life (and quite a rich one in this case), education, family to blow a plane up. They may believe it might help stop the invasion of Afghanistan, but it won't.

Brainwashed.

[-:Undertaker:-]

A young extremist who was in Britain for a short period - a potential terrorist!? - surely not!

[xxMATTGxx]

What I fail to understand is why they would rather give up their life (and quite a rich one in this case), education, family to blow a plane up. They may believe it might help stop the invasion of Afghanistan, but it won't.

Brainwashed.

That's what they do though, they get brainwashed by the training camps and wherever else they go to etc. Its good news he failed badly at it though and the passengers were not letting him do anything else. Just goes to show on what 9/11 has done to the world, people are more aware and are willing to stop these people. Then again, I do believe on one 9/11 flight that the passengers tried to get into the cockpit and get the terrorist out but it was too late. I do wonder if the British Police have found anything interesting in the guy’s house, like more plots or other people connected to it. I wonder if it’s time for these scanners which are at Manchester Airport to go around more airports now, basically they aren't like normal X-Ray machines they scan the whole body and you basically get a sort of naked picture. I wonder if the type of scanner will show what he had hiding?


------------------

"It's reportedly a bottle or pouch of some sort of powder, and he injected liquid into it which caused the chemical reaction."

I also believe this the sort of same thing Richard Reid tried to use, if you don't know who he is. He's the "Show Bomber".

[Seatherny]

That's what they do though, they get brainwashed by the training camps and wherever else they go to etc. Its good news he failed badly at it though and the passengers were not letting him do anything else. Just goes to show on what 9/11 has done to the world, people are more aware and are willing to stop these people. Then again, I do believe on one 9/11 flight that the passengers tried to get into the cockpit and get the terrorist out but it was too late. I do wonder if the British Police have found anything interesting in the guy’s house, like more plots or other people connected to it. I wonder if it’s time for these scanners which are at Manchester Airport to go around more airports now, basically they aren't like normal X-Ray machines they scan the whole body and you basically get a sort of naked picture. I wonder if the type of scanner will show what he had hiding?


------------------

"It's reportedly a bottle or pouch of some sort of powder, and he injected liquid into it which caused the chemical reaction."

I also believe this the sort of same thing Richard Reid tried to use, if you don't know who he is. He's the "Show Bomber".

*Shoe ;)

Not used Manchester Airport for ages, but good to know they have added security in place. Would make me feel much safer if I ever fly.

Either way, security sucks. Like I said, they didn't even detect pen knives "/ And I believe that is what they used for 9/11.

[xxMATTGxx]

*Shoe ;)

Not used Manchester Airport for ages, but good to know they have added security in place. Would make me feel much safer if I ever fly.

Either way, security sucks. Like I said, they didn't even detect pen knives "/ And I believe that is what they used for 9/11.

Thanks :P. I haven't used it for ages either but if we are suppose to stop these from happening then we need to have good security. I will copy this guys post from another forum and I really think its disgraceful on how the airport did this.


I just came from amsterdam a couple days ago. I was just pointing out to my wife that we walked into the departure gate, the xray machine was off, then 30 mins before boarding, the staff came, we had to go back out, then they searched the room, switched on the xrays and we went back in. It was a very thourough search they done, bins emptied, plants checked etc but still, if you had a gun, you had a couple of hours to hide it somewhere in the room!

IMO, them scanners should of been on straight away and all passengers should of been searched, checked and cleared before even allowing them to go any further.

[Seatherny]

Don't they usually search you instantly if the x-ray goes off?

[xxMATTGxx]

Don't they usually search you instantly if the x-ray goes off?

I think so. Or you have to go back through it and take anything out and try and again. I remember my cousin set it off once due to his belt. :P

[Nixt]

*Shoe ;)

Not used Manchester Airport for ages, but good to know they have added security in place. Would make me feel much safer if I ever fly.

Either way, security sucks. Like I said, they didn't even detect pen knives "/ And I believe that is what they used for 9/11.

Remember they also had mock bombs. If they only had knives, one would assume passengers would be far more willing to attempt to tackle them.

[Seatherny]

Remember they also had mock bombs. If they only had knives, one would assume passengers would be far more willing to attempt to tackle them.

Ahh. Well taking a few pieces which you can join together in a plane to make it look like a mock bomb shouldn't be too hard.

I don't think knives should be allowed in hand luggage at all.

I was shocked when I last flew 2 years ago and they gave us metal knives with our meal. I was like :|

[StefanWolves]

Tbh Saurav I have to agree. This time last year I went to Florida, and my nan who is in her 80s came because my mom and dad were getting married their. We went through all the checks, x-ray machines and what not, half way through the flight my mom goes to get some tablets out my nans bag to give to her, and what does she find? A pair of scissors?? which were not picked up? Like what the hell. How is that possible? God only knows why she was carrying scissors? But that's not the point.

I'm now ******** myself big time about flying on Tuesday.

[Seatherny]

I am actually suprised how they have more security in one of the Airports in India.
There, when you actually walk through the door of the Airport, you have to put in every luggage you have and they scan it there. Then they put a seal around it so you cant open it and add things.
If you open it, they won't let it on the plane unless you get it rechecked.

Then obviously it gets rechecked as it does here when you check in. But it just means its double checked and is more secure.

In a way thats so much better as it means there is a lesser chance of the terrorists actually attacking the Airports too.

[Robbie]

When I went to Greece, they weren't even sending people through the baggage scanners or the walk through detector things because of the backlog of people.

[xxMATTGxx]

Everyone has different experiences. I remember in 2005 my family went to Orlando in December and once we have landed we all had to line up. We had to have our picture taken, finger prints taken etc. Then get scanned, scanned again before we could even get our luggage. But on the way back my auntie bought this dragon knife thing (to put on show obv) but due to that, her suitcase got broken into by security staff and I think it was taken out. I'm not sure but once we got back to Manchester the case had the homeland security tape or whatever is around us. But then they were pretty peeved off because they damager the case.

Just goes to show doesn’t it?

Security needs to be high, aviation is a very big target for terrorism and it can cause a lot of damage. We need to be strict all year round.

[Jordy]

A young extremist who was in Britain for a short period - a potential terrorist!? - surely not!Well the intelligence agencies do seem to of failed in this respect. However it seems it might of only been recently he became extreme and then went to Yemen, Ethiopia etc to undergo Al Qaeda training. And bare in mind he only went to those countries in the last few months. Oh and it's been quite a bit of time since he was in the UK so you can kind of see how he remained below the radar.

[StefanWolves]

Well if its that easy to 'remain below the radar' then I fear for the UK' and US' airports.

[xxMATTGxx]

Well if its that easy to 'remain below the radar' then I fear for the UK' and US' airports.

We don't know when the last time he was in the United Kingdom so I don't think we have any major blame here. But what I have been reading some mistakes have been popping up within the US and other countries.

[Hitman]

Tbh Saurav I have to agree. This time last year I went to Florida, and my nan who is in her 80s came because my mom and dad were getting married their. We went through all the checks, x-ray machines and what not, half way through the flight my mom goes to get some tablets out my nans bag to give to her, and what does she find? A pair of scissors?? which were not picked up? Like what the hell. How is that possible? God only knows why she was carrying scissors? But that's not the point.

I'm now ******** myself big time about flying on Tuesday.
Oh come on, stop making a big drama about flying you big girls blouse. There are hundreds, maybe thousands of flights daily. Not very often does something like this occur, it's very rare. Then the chances of a terrorist getting onto your flight is tiny, you'd probably have more chance of winning the lottery. Also, security will probably be upped now so nothing to worry about.

I'm not being mean or trying to cause trouble but honestly, you sound silly. :P

[StefanWolves]

I sound silly for being worried that the plane I'm going on may be blown up in mid-air by some Islamic extremist, so that's being a big girls blouse? Also when you said 'There's more chance of winning the lottery', what? how did you work this out? I was only saying it because I am flying to America on a transatlantic flight, like the one that only two days ago nearly got blown out of the sky.

Forgive me for being a little worried that I may die. (but yeah I agree, it'll probably never happen! ;))

[Seatherny]

If he was worrying about flying to any other country than USA, I would ask him to stop worrying.

Worrying about flying from UK to USA is understandable, especially after this event.

[Jordy]

I sound silly for being worried that the plane I'm going on may be blown up in mid-air by some Islamic extremist, so that's being a big girls blouse? Also when you said 'There's more chance of winning the lottery', what? how did you work this out? I was only saying it because I am flying to America on a transatlantic flight, like the one that only two days ago nearly got blown out of the sky.

Forgive me for being a little worried that I may die. (but yeah I agree, it'll probably never happen! ;))I know your only human but think of it this way. Why is there any more chance you'll be blown up this week than last week? Last week it would of probably crossed your mind briefly but never really occurred to you much. Just cause there's been one last Friday doesn't mean there's anymore of a chance of an attack than there was last week. It's not like other terrorists will set them off to make up for his failure, oh and also there's temporarily heightened security, technically just after a terrorism attack, is one of the safest times to fly. So there's probably less chance if anything.

Hopefully that'll calm your fears a little but y'no, I'm not good with that stuff :P

[-:Undertaker:-]

Well the intelligence agencies do seem to of failed in this respect. However it seems it might of only been recently he became extreme and then went to Yemen, Ethiopia etc to undergo Al Qaeda training. And bare in mind he only went to those countries in the last few months. Oh and it's been quite a bit of time since he was in the UK so you can kind of see how he remained below the radar.

This country has absolutly not control over whos coming in or whos going out, so i'm hardly suprised that this guy has been in the United Kingdom before, and think of how easy it could of been for him to just blow up a bus or a building - nothing will get done about all this until someone important (an MP or an MPs' relative) is injured or killed, and then we'll all notice a crackdown.

On the airports, most of it makes no sense anyway as shown in Michael Moore's Farenheit 9/11 - people were allowed to travel after 9/11 with boxes of matches on the planes so in all its just a total joke, not to mention when they take time out to search old people for bombs - I mean, when was the last time a grandmother from the United Kingdom attempted to blow up a plane?

All in the name of Labour's multi-culturalism though hey, can't sterotype or that'd be racist!!

[Jordy]

This country has absolutly not control over whos coming in or whos going out, so i'm hardly suprised that this guy has been in the United Kingdom before, and think of how easy it could of been for him to just blow up a bus or a building - nothing will get done about all this until someone important (an MP or an MPs' relative) is injured or killed, and then we'll all notice a crackdown.

On the airports, most of it makes no sense anyway as shown in Michael Moore's Farenheit 9/11 - people were allowed to travel after 9/11 with boxes of matches on the planes so in all its just a total joke, not to mention when they take time out to search old people for bombs - I mean, when was the last time a grandmother from the United Kingdom attempted to blow up a plane?

All in the name of Labour's multi-culturalism though hey, can't sterotype or that'd be racist!!Luckily my memory has served me correctly. As soon as there is terrorism you talk of crackdowns and you go on about easy it is to travel in airports.

Yet when Manchester introduced new "Naked scanners" in their airports earlier in the year. First of all you say;

One more step towards a police state.And then you go on to say...
It is also known as common sense, with the level security at airports and the fact there has been no terrorist attack on a plane in the United Kingdom in recent years proves it is working, so why would the government take very extreme steps to protect us when there is very little to protect us from. The government allows criminals into the country, along with allowing islamic extremists to preach hate in the country and not be deported - so ask yourself are they genuinely protecting us or what.

My point is that democracy should be preserved and that we should avoid using the tools and techniques that Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Chairman Mao could only of dreamed of.You talk of a lack of threat seeing as there's been no "terrorist attack on a plane in recent years" and then go on to say this proves the current method is "working". This only shows that it is not the case.

I'm afraid there's no pleasing you as the government are always wrong when it comes to surveillance in your eyes.

And although you say it's not surprising he came into the country as we can't control our borders, he came to the UK to legitimately study, which is of course a fine reason to come into the UK, he was paying to attend our Universities. However you will be surprised to learn that earlier this year he tried to re-enter the UK and said that he would be attending some college, which later to be a fake college and he was rejected from entering the UK. Our immigration system is by no means perfect, but it isn't as bad as you claim. He was also flagged up by the UK intelligence agencies a long time ago, however he wasn't worthy of surveillance. For over two years the US also had their eye on him too. There is obviously many failings here for the UK & US intelligence agencies, and for the Dutch airport security however it is not as bad as you make out.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Luckily my memory has served me correctly. As soon as there is terrorism you talk of crackdowns and you go on about easy it is to travel in airports.

Yet when Manchester introduced new "Naked scanners" in their airports earlier in the year. First of all you say;
And then you go on to say...You talk of a lack of threat seeing as there's been no "terrorist attack on a plane in recent years" and then go on to say this proves the current method is "working". This only shows that it is not the case.

You use one example of a terrorist attack to erode civil liberties, what the hell is the point in fighting islamic extremists if we then introduce a basic police state where all its citzens are suspected terrorists?.

I don't want intrusion into peoples lives.
I don't want everyone treated as suspected suspects.
I don't want naked body scanners in airports.
I don't want ID cards.

I want common sense security, body searches and bag searches by using scanners which can detect suspicious items.

I want common sense to be used, that means don't go searching old age pensioners for weapons/bombs - it doesn't even need explaining, its beyond stupid.


I'm afraid there's no pleasing you as the government are always wrong when it comes to surveillance in your eyes.

Actually yes they are, the idiots in office preach to us how we need survellience and a PC state, yet keep the borders open - hello has nobody realised the flaw in that tactic?. The simple truth is, they dont really care about security, they dont really care about whether they can do their job right or not - all they care about is going ahead with building their big government databases, leaving office and then going on to another organisation which offers them a very generous salary so they can retire quite nicely.

A simple outlook but the sad thing is that its true, thats all they care about. They are all rotten to the core.


And although you say it's not surprising he came into the country as we can't control of borders, he came to the UK to legitimately study the first time, which is of course a fine reason to come into the UK, he was paying to attend our Universities.

I don't have a problem with this, what I wish to know is if the authorities checked his background or not.


However you will be surprised to learn that earlier this year he tried to re-enter the UK and said that he would be attending some college, which later to be a fake college and he was rejected from entering the UK. Our immigration system is by no means perfect, but it isn't as bad as you claim.

They do not know who is here and who is not, we don't have an immigration system. There is no system, hence why the government just doesn't know or have the means to know who is here and who is not.


He was also flagged up by the UK intelligence agencies along time ago, however he wasn't worthy of surveillance. For over two years the US also had their eye on him too. There is obviously many failings here for the UK & US intelligence agencies, and for the Dutch airport security however it is not as bad as you make out.

They failed in their job to prevent an attack which could of easily of happened, even though his father apparently even altered security services about his sons growing extremism.

[Jordy]

You use one example of a terrorist attack to erode civil liberties, what the hell is the point in fighting islamic extremists if we then introduce a basic police state where all its citzens are suspected terrorists?.

I don't want intrusion into peoples lives.
I don't want everyone treated as suspected suspects.
I don't want naked body scanners in airports.
I don't want ID cards.

I want common sense security, body searches and bag searches by using scanners which can detect suspicious items.

I want common sense to be used, that means don't go searching old age pensioners for weapons/bombs - it doesn't even need explaining, its beyond stupid.

Actually yes they are, the idiots in office preach to us how we need survellience and a PC state, yet keep the borders open - hello has nobody realised the flaw in that tactic?. The simple truth is, they dont really care about security, they dont really care about whether they can do their job right or not - all they care about is going ahead with building their big government databases, leaving office and then going on to another organisation which offers them a very generous salary so they can retire quite nicely.

A simple outlook but the sad thing is that its true, thats all they care about. They are all rotten to the core.

I don't have a problem with this, what I wish to know is if the authorities checked his background or not.

They do not know who is here and who is not, we don't have an immigration system. There is no system, hence why the government just doesn't know or have the means to know who is here and who is not.

They failed in their job to prevent an attack which could of easily of happened, even though his father apparently even altered security services about his sons growing extremism.Well the altering of security services in Nigeria is of no concern to us, the concern is why wasn't he flagged up more severely and how he got past Dutch security. Sadly it's a fact with the vast majority of poor nations, you can pay your way to do anything in these countries. There's always corrupt officials, however it's not viable to stop every flight going to these nations because of this.

Both UK & US intelligence agencies for the record flagged him up in the past, just neither of them saw it serious enough to put him on No-Fly lists or surveillance.

What is so wrong with naked body scanners? It doesn't immediately make everyone a suspect, it makes it fair seeing as everyone goes through one. It's a much more reliable method of security, there is of course the chance that a Dutch official waved him through security regardless, hence how he got a bomb on the plane. However if there had been a naked airport scanner, I think a bomb in his underpants would show up quite clearly.

The current metal detectors don't seem to work all that well as people in this thread have said. And a 'pat-down' clearly doesn't work as the pat-down doesn't involve security sticking their hands in your underpants to see if there's a bomb in there.

Borders do need tackling but this is an example of it working in part, seeing as the UK refused him entry a second time.

As for only searching select people, how fair would it be to go to Dubai and there's a queue where white people are vigorously searched while Arabs are waved through no trouble. There has been white terrorists before, the IRA for example. There's no way that is fair.

And of course, if you have an official deciding who warrants a search or not, e.g. the person who will say the granny won't be a bomber so don't bother searching her. If there's an official deciding these things, all it takes is one corrupt guy to let through a terrorist and a plane load of people die. That's probably what happened in this scenario.

[-:Undertaker:-]

What is so wrong with naked body scanners? It doesn't immediately make everyone a suspect, it makes it fair seeing as everyone goes through one.

It is treating people like they are suspects, that is the crucial point.


It's a much more reliable method of security, there is of course the chance that a Dutch official waved him through security regardless, hence how he got a bomb on the plane. However if there had been a naked airport scanner, I think a bomb in his underpants would show up quite clearly.

It perhaps is, but its at the expense of what we are supposedly trying to protect from these nut cases, freedom.


Borders do need tackling but this is an example of it working in part, seeing as the UK refused him entry a second time.

Indeed it is, still nowhere near good enough.


As for only searching select people, how fair would it be to go to Dubai and there's a queue of where white people are vigurously searched while Arabs are waved through no trouble. There has been white terrorists before, the IRA for example. There's no way that is fair.

It is fair, and it would be fair in Dubai if they wished to do this because it is their sovereign country, their sovereign rights i'd accept if I was on my way to Dubai because if you go to another country you have to abide by their way of doing things and their situation.

Who is more likely going to be a terrorist?

A young nigerian man or a old aged british woman?


And of course, if you have an official deciding who warrants a search or not, e.g. the person who will say the granny won't be a bomber so don't bother searching her. If there's an official deciding these things, all it takes is one corrupt guy to let through a terrorist and a plane load of people die. That's probably what happened in this scenario.

If there is a corrupt guy then it won't matter if hes searching old women or not, because hes still corrupt so regardless of whether he is searching old woman or not he is still going to let the terrorist through isn't he.

[Jordy]

It is treating people like they are suspects, that is the crucial point.

It perhaps is, but its at the expense of what we are supposedly trying to protect from these nut cases, freedom.

Indeed it is, still nowhere near good enough.

It is fair, and it would be fair in Dubai if they wished to do this because it is their sovereign country, their sovereign rights i'd accept if I was on my way to Dubai because if you go to another country you have to abide by their way of doing things and their situation.

Who is more likely going to be a terrorist?

A young nigerian man or a old aged british woman?

If there is a corrupt guy then it won't matter if hes searching old women or not, because hes still corrupt so regardless of whether he is searching old woman or not he is still going to let the terrorist through isn't he.It may well be eroding a little bit of freedom but I'd still rather someone see me naked for a split second (and bare in mind they'd see thousands of naked bodies on a daily basis) than die by blowing up on a plane. These things can be prevented, it's no ideal way but it does work.

If EVERY person was forced to walk through a naked body scanner, there would be no chance for a corrupt official and this could of been prevented.

Bare in mind the people looking at what goes through naked body scanners, are based at an external location. You also don't choose which scanner to go through, and at most airports I've been to, it could be any one of ten, you just go where your directed to. Even if a corrupt official was working on monitoring the naked body scanners, it would be a very small chance that they would have the terrorist go through the same naked body scanner they're monitoring.

I would be somewhat disgusted if someone searched me for a bomb based on my skin colour. However I couldn't care less if someone searches me for a bomb if everyone else is also being searched.

[Seatherny]

I agree with most of Jordy's points and I will +rep them when I next can.
There is just no pleasing undertaker.

You say what are the chances of a granny blowing up a plane? What are the chances of the son of a rich nigerian becoming a terrorist? I mean he can get whatever the hell he wants he is so rich.

Fact is, yes there is less chance of a granny being a terrorist, but anyone can be a terrorist regardless of their age and skin colour.

What they need is naked body scanners in all airports. Like Jordy said, if you set the xray alarm off, the security guard doesnt put his hands near your private parts.

[-:Undertaker:-]

It may well be eroding a little bit of freedom but I'd still rather someone see me naked for a split second (and bare in mind they'd see thousands of naked bodies on a daily basis) than die by blowing up on a plane. These things can be prevented, it's no ideal way but it does work.

If EVERY person was forced to walk through a naked body scanner, there would be no chance for a corrupt official and this could of been prevented.

Bare in mind the people looking at what goes through naked body scanners, are based at an external location. You also don't choose which scanner to go through, and at most airports I've been to, it could be any one of ten, you just go where your directed to. Even if a corrupt official was working on monitoring the naked body scanners, it would be a very small chance that they would have the terrorist go through the same naked body scanner they're monitoring.

I would be somewhat disgusted if someone searched me for a bomb based on my skin colour. However I couldn't care less if someone searches me for a bomb if everyone else is also being searched.

A terrorist attack would still happen regardless of what security you put in place, as I have said before; if another big attack happens it will be an attack from inside (something you can not really prevent) rather than a simple terrorist boards an plane with a bomb.

Liberty comes before it all, and the path we choose to take.


I agree with most of Jordy's points and I will +rep them when I next can.
There is just no pleasing undertaker.

You say what are the chances of a granny blowing up a plane? What are the chances of the son of a rich nigerian becoming a terrorist? I mean he can get whatever the hell he wants he is so rich.

Fact is, yes there is less chance of a granny being a terrorist, but anyone can be a terrorist regardless of their age and skin colour.

What they need is naked body scanners in all airports. Like Jordy said, if you set the xray alarm off, the security guard doesnt put his hands near your private parts.

Well the chances of the nigerian becoming a terrorist are pretty high, as he held extremist view whereas the old granny doesn't seem to have much sway of being a terrorist don't you think?. Of course anyone can be a terrorist regardless of their age or skin colour, but the fact is that most terrorists nowadays are now black/brown, are islamic extremists and are typically in their 20's - there is no escaping that fact.

I am for security, but not at the cost of liberty and I just find it stupid when older people are searched like criminals in airports. Why fight islamic extremism when we have laws and practices in this country which rival those of communist Chinas?. This is only a small part of the whole picture, our liberties are being eroded at an amazing pace, such as the longer detention scheme brought in by this government which is a disgrace.

We have more CCTV than China which is a non-democratic socialist state - what does that say about us both to ourselves and to the rest of the world?

[Seatherny]

A terrorist attack would still happen regardless of what security you put in place, as I have said before; if another big attack happens it will be an attack from inside (something you can not really prevent) rather than a simple terrorist boards an plane with a bomb.

Liberty comes before it all, and the path we choose to take.



Well the chances of the nigerian becoming a terrorist are pretty high, as he held extremist view whereas the old granny doesn't seem to have much sway of being a terrorist don't you think?. Of course anyone can be a terrorist regardless of their age or skin colour, but the fact is that most terrorists nowadays are now black/brown, are islamic extremists and are typically in their 20's - there is no escaping that fact.

I am for security, but not at the cost of liberty and I just find it stupid when older people are searched like criminals in airports. Why fight islamic extremism when we have laws and practices in this country which rival those of communist Chinas?. This is only a small part of the whole picture, our liberties are being eroded at an amazing pace, such as the longer detention scheme brought in by this government which is a disgrace.

We have more CCTV than China which is a non-democratic socialist state - what does that say about us both to ourselves and to the rest of the world?

You say increase security but do not search older citizens? :S
They should be allowed to search anyone, regardless of their age.

[alexxxxx]

airport security not in the UK is a sham. in switzerland they let me through when i beeped in the metal detector.. :S

[Jordy]

A terrorist attack would still happen regardless of what security you put in place, as I have said before; if another big attack happens it will be an attack from inside (something you can not really prevent) rather than a simple terrorist boards an plane with a bomb.

Liberty comes before it all, and the path we choose to take.

Well the chances of the nigerian becoming a terrorist are pretty high, as he held extremist view whereas the old granny doesn't seem to have much sway of being a terrorist don't you think?. Of course anyone can be a terrorist regardless of their age or skin colour, but the fact is that most terrorists nowadays are now black/brown, are islamic extremists and are typically in their 20's - there is no escaping that fact.

I am for security, but not at the cost of liberty and I just find it stupid when older people are searched like criminals in airports. Why fight islamic extremism when we have laws and practices in this country which rival those of communist Chinas?. This is only a small part of the whole picture, our liberties are being eroded at an amazing pace, such as the longer detention scheme brought in by this government which is a disgrace.

We have more CCTV than China which is a non-democratic socialist state - what does that say about us both to ourselves and to the rest of the world?Liberty does not became above all. The fact a government has done all it can to prevent me from dying is what I want, and that includes scanning everybody. If you have a system everyone has to go through it reduces the risk of tampering, unlike your suggestions of certain people not being scanned based on appearance, age etc. Just months ago you were claiming the current security in Airports worked.

And you may well be right, perhaps the next big terrorist attack will come from the inside, however until security in airports in increased by better naked body scanners, there will be more attempts to blow up planes by simple terrorists, that needs to be eradicated.

[Jordy]

A terrorist attack would still happen regardless of what security you put in place, as I have said before; if another big attack happens it will be an attack from inside (something you can not really prevent) rather than a simple terrorist boards an plane with a bomb.

Liberty comes before it all, and the path we choose to take.



Well the chances of the nigerian becoming a terrorist are pretty high, as he held extremist view whereas the old granny doesn't seem to have much sway of being a terrorist don't you think?. Of course anyone can be a terrorist regardless of their age or skin colour, but the fact is that most terrorists nowadays are now black/brown, are islamic extremists and are typically in their 20's - there is no escaping that fact.

I am for security, but not at the cost of liberty and I just find it stupid when older people are searched like criminals in airports. Why fight islamic extremism when we have laws and practices in this country which rival those of communist Chinas?. This is only a small part of the whole picture, our liberties are being eroded at an amazing pace, such as the longer detention scheme brought in by this government which is a disgrace.

We have more CCTV than China which is a non-democratic socialist state - what does that say about us both to ourselves and to the rest of the world?Liberty does not became above all. The fact a government has done all it can to prevent me from dying is what I want, and that includes scanning everybody. If you have a system everyone has to go through it reduces the risk of tampering, unlike your suggestions of certain people not being scanned based on appearance, age etc. Just months ago you were claiming the current security in Airports worked.

You may well be right, perhaps the next big terrorist attack will come from the inside, however until security in airports is increased by better naked body scanners, there will be more attempts to blow up planes by simple terrorists, that risk needs to be eradicated

[-:Undertaker:-]

You say increase security but do not search older citizens? :S
They should be allowed to search anyone, regardless of their age.

Yes they should, but only with reason. I do not see the possibility of a British 80 odd year old being an islamic terrorist whos planning to blow everyone up. If they are acting suspicious, then yes by all means search them.. but come on - a bit of common sense please.


Liberty does not became above all. The fact a government has done all it can to prevent me from dying is what I want, and that includes scanning everybody. If you have a system everyone has to go through it reduces the risk of tampering, unlike your suggestions of certain people not being scanned based on appearance, age etc. Just months ago you were claiming the current security in Airports worked.

And you may well be right, perhaps the next big terrorist attack will come from the inside, however until security in airports in increased by better naked body scanners, there will be more attempts to blow up planes by simple terrorists, that needs to be eradicated.

Liberty does come before all, millions across the Empire gave their lives so that we could stay free. Afterall thats what Conservatism is, small state. On the current security, it does work yes although as I have said, older people being searched it just ridiculous.

[Jordy]

Yes they should, but only with reason. I do not see the possibility of a British 80 odd year old being an islamic terrorist whos planning to blow everyone up. If they are acting suspicious, then yes by all means search them.. but come on - a bit of common sense please.

Liberty does come before all, millions across the Empire gave their lives so that we could stay free. Afterall thats what Conservatism is, small state. On the current security, it does work yes although as I have said, older people being searched it just ridiculous.I seriously don't think the people who have given up their lives for us would of cared all that much about national databases, DNA and airport scanners. It's brought security they've never had. And at the end of the day we still are free, just because someone has seen you naked for a split second, does not mean that we've lost the vote etc.

This attempted terrorism attack is evidence that current security does not work and that we need to be more open to new ideas and technologies.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I seriously don't think the people who have given up their lives for us would of cared all that much about national databases, DNA and airport scanners. It's brought security they've never had. And at the end of the day we still are free, just because someone has seen you naked for a split second, does not mean that we've lost the vote etc.

This attempted terrorism attack is evidence that current security does not work and that we need to be more open to new ideas and technologies.

I do - just because we have advanced in technology does not mean liberty and rights can be sanctioned in the face of a very low threat, especially when you have no idea whos coming in or out or whos staying in the country. One step forward and two steps back.

We should not sanction liberty for security. You say its only 'for a second' and 'its only a scanner' but all these things add up, more CCTV than communist China which has more than 10 times our population? - absurd to say the least.

[Hitman]

I sound silly for being worried that the plane I'm going on may be blown up in mid-air by some Islamic extremist, so that's being a big girls blouse? Also when you said 'There's more chance of winning the lottery', what? how did you work this out? I was only saying it because I am flying to America on a transatlantic flight, like the one that only two days ago nearly got blown out of the sky.

Forgive me for being a little worried that I may die. (but yeah I agree, it'll probably never happen! ;))
Yes, because the chances of it happening are so very tiny! You wouldn't have been worried a month ago, or when there was no attack. What was so hard to understand about the lottery statement? You have a 1 in 14 million chance of winning the lottery. Now look how many times per year there are terrorist attacks on planes that cause fatalities... many years there are 0, some years there are one or two, but look at how many flights there are... millions. Look, take the amount of flights in the past 10 years and count how many terrorist attacks happened. There will be millions of flights and hardly any attacks in comparison.

You could die getting out of the bath. You could die crossing the road. Do you worry then? If so then you worry too much. But in all honesty we can die doing anything. You probably have more chance of slipping in the bath and breaking your neck than being blown up by terrorists on a plane. ;)

I understand that you may be a bit more worried by this, but you shouldn't be "********" yourself over it.

[StefanWolves]

Terrorists are more likely to attack a transatlantic flight from Europe rather than a flight from Paris to Athens. So you're more chance in winning the lottery quote is a bit off the mark (I'm sure there have been hundreds of thousands of flights to the USA from the UK, but not millions).

[xxMATTGxx]

Terrorism is always going to be around and affecting us all no matter what. You can't just stop it, but you can prevent it. Being in the EU or out of it won't stop it anyway. What we need to do is have very good security. CCTV helps no matter what some people say, we may have too many cameras in this country but it helps when you want to track down a person.

Naked body scanners > This is a must thing for all airports around the world that have airliners flying in and out of them. I think we these it would of stopped that guy entering the plane with the device in his boxers. Yes, people don't like it because of the "naked" bit. But I rather be safe on an aircraft then having a huge risk of the plane being blown up in mid-air.

Everyone should be searched > I'm sorry but it doesn't matter how old they are, or what their skin colour is or religion. Anyone can be a terrorist and searches and so on should be made on any person they feel that is a risk.

If we want to prevent serious attacks, we need the security in place.

Kinda did this in a rush.

[Hitman]

Terrorists are more likely to attack a transatlantic flight from Europe rather than a flight from Paris to Athens. So you're more chance in winning the lottery quote is a bit off the mark (I'm sure there have been hundreds of thousands of flights to the USA from the UK, but not millions).
They probably are, but that doesn't mean there's a higher chance that they will within the next few days just because there was a botched attack the other day. As for that quote, okay, I can't get an exact statistic, but I'm sure it'd be not too far off. My original point is that you still shouldn't be ******** yourself because it'd be very very very unlikely that the terrorist gets on your exact flight at the exact time on the exact day to the exact destination. So many factors come into play. Like I said before, you probably have more chance of slipping in the bath and breaking your neck than getting blown up on a flight by terrorists. Don't forget security will be upped now as well.

[StefanWolves]

Terrorism is always going to be around and affecting us all no matter what. You can't just stop it, but you can prevent it. Being in the EU or out of it won't stop it anyway. What we need to do is have very good security. CCTV helps no matter what some people say, we may have too many cameras in this country but it helps when you want to track down a person.

Naked body scanners > This is a must thing for all airports around the world that have airliners flying in and out of them. I think we these it would of stopped that guy entering the plane with the device in his boxers. Yes, people don't like it because of the "naked" bit. But I rather be safe on an aircraft then having a huge risk of the plane being blown up in mid-air.

Everyone should be searched > I'm sorry but it doesn't matter how old they are, or what their skin colour is or religion. Anyone can be a terrorist and searches and so on should be made on any person they feel that is a risk.

If we want to prevent serious attacks, we need the security in place.

Kinda did this in a rush.
People who don't like those naked body scanners are obviously embarrassed about their package size down below :rolleyes:

Only joking.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Terrorism is always going to be around and affecting us all no matter what. You can't just stop it, but you can prevent it. Being in the EU or out of it won't stop it anyway. What we need to do is have very good security. CCTV helps no matter what some people say, we may have too many cameras in this country but it helps when you want to track down a person.

You can't have any real security when you don't have control over your European borders. On the CCTV point, it was recently found out that something like only 1 in 1000 cameras catch a crime a year, they do not work. What works is putting police on the streets and harsher penalties for crime, thats works.

[StefanWolves]

Putting extra police on streets wouldn't work, you'd need a million police officers to stop all crimes. Fact is, if crime didn't exist, some people would be a lot poorer, people make money out of it, for some people it makes there worlds go around - its what they do. If you were to stop all crime, whilst we knows its bad, it can never be stopped and people depend upon it to live.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Putting extra police on streets wouldn't work, you'd need a million police officers to stop all crimes. Fact is, if crime didn't exist, some people would be a lot poorer, people make money out of it, for some people it makes there worlds go around - its what they do. If you were to stop all crime, whilst we knows its bad, it can never be stopped and people depend upon it to live.

Extra police on the streets do work, people see the police and don't mess with them, or at least thats how it used to be before we had Blunketts Bobbies put on the beat who are just as useful at policing as a sandbag would be. Its not about stopping crimes, its about preventing crimes and thats exactly what it would do.

On crime, I couldn't care less if someone needs to make a living out of it, its wrong and why should some people be able to not work and steal off others who work and make a living for themselves - you just described socialism and it does not work.