It is a week since news broke in London about an alleged plot to blow up nine
commercial jetliners and there are emerging indicators that Bush and Blair
exaggerated the truth about the actual readiness of the so-called plot.
And yes, I mean so-called plot. Why would Bush and Blair hype a terrorist
threat? A very simple answer. The White House was on notice that Seymour Hersh’s story that the Bush Administration encouraged
Israel to invade Lebanon as part of a broader scheme to set the stage for war
with Iran. Tony Blair, Bush’s enabler, went along with the ruse.
The initial story out of London gave the average traveler the clear
impression that Muslim terrorists were thwarted at the last minute from planting
bombs made of liquid explosives on board aircraft. Since then, the facts
about the story shifted significantly. It is true that some of the people
in the custody of British and Pakistani security forces had thought about
bombing airplanes. But there is substantial evidence that the plot was far
from implementation.
First, no evidence has emerged that the plotters had in hand a functioning
prototype of the device they wanted to take on board a plane. That’s an
important point. The Bojinka plot of 1994–when Ramsi Yousef, Khalid
Sheikh Mohamad, Walid Khan, and Hakim Murad planned to blow up 12 jumbo jets in
the Pacific–was preceded by Ramsi Yousef’s December 1994 success in testing a
bomb that exploded on a Philippine Air flight and killed a Japanese man.
Yousef, Mohamad, and Murad are in jail. Walid Khan is dead. No one
from that group is around to provide technical advice on the amount of explosive
required to down a plane. <!–
D(["mb","
n
There is a press report from Pakistan that monitoring of one of the plotters, na fellow named Rauf, revealed that:
n
n
the plotters had tested the n explosive liquid mixture they planned to use at a location outside Britain. n NBC News has previously reported that the explosive mixture was tested in n Pakistan. The source said the suspects in Britain had obtained at least some n of the materials for the explosive but had not yet actually prepared or mixed n it.
n
We’ll say it again–the plotters had not yet actually prepared or mixed a npotential explosive. More importantly, they did not have a working nprototype of a viable explosive charge that would pass muster at a screening ncheckpoint. The British plotters reportedly did have hydrogen nperoxide. Big deal. Go to your local drug store and you too can buy nsome. Hydrogen peroxide is not an explosive and there is no easy, safe way nto make an explosive with it. The plotters in Britain still had alot of nwork to do in order to carry out their plot.
n
I’m also struck by the fact that more then twenty people were allegedly ninvolved in this plot. The Al Qaeda of Ramsi Yousef’s day had a viable nplan for blowing up 12 planes using only 5 people. Now we learn that the nradical Islamic copycats need 20 folks for at least 6 planes. Is this nevidence of Al Qaeda’s degraded capability?
n
Second, no evidence has emerged that the group had purchased tickets or even nhad passports that would allow them to board a plane to the United States. nHow exactly were they supposed to bomb planes that they could not even nboard.
n
Third, British police are still scrambling to come up with evidence to keep nthese guys in jail. If the plot was well advanced that would not be a nproblem. If they had tickets, passports, and explosives in hand that would nbe, shall we say it. . . A SLAM DUNK!
n
Fourth, there is the curious response of the Bush Administration to this nnews. Instead of coming to the White House Briefing Room to announce new ninitiatives to develop technology to detect liquid explosives at passenger nscreening checkpoints or to close loopholes posed by unscreened cargo, the Bush nWhite House attacked Democrats for making America vulnerable to nterrorists. Last I checked, Howard Dean was not in London trying to put a nbomb on an airplane. And Dick Cheney is still on the campaign trail nplaying the fear card.”,1]
);
//–>
There is a press report from Pakistan that monitoring of one of the plotters,
a fellow named Rauf, revealed that:
the plotters had tested the
explosive liquid mixture they planned to use at a location outside Britain.
NBC News has previously reported that the explosive mixture was tested in
Pakistan. The source said the suspects in Britain had obtained at least some
of the materials for the explosive but had not yet actually prepared or mixed
it.
We’ll say it again–the plotters had not yet actually prepared or mixed a
potential explosive. More importantly, they did not have a working
prototype of a viable explosive charge that would pass muster at a screening
checkpoint. The British plotters reportedly did have hydrogen
peroxide. Big deal. Go to your local drug store and you too can buy
some. Hydrogen peroxide is not an explosive and there is no easy, safe way
to make an explosive with it. The plotters in Britain still had alot of
work to do in order to carry out their plot.
I’m also struck by the fact that more then twenty people were allegedly
involved in this plot. The Al Qaeda of Ramsi Yousef’s day had a viable
plan for blowing up 12 planes using only 5 people. Now we learn that the
radical Islamic copycats need 20 folks for at least 6 planes. Is this
evidence of Al Qaeda’s degraded capability?
Second, no evidence has emerged that the group had purchased tickets or even
had passports that would allow them to board a plane to the United States.
How exactly were they supposed to bomb planes that they could not even
board.
Third, British police are still scrambling to come up with evidence to keep
these guys in jail. If the plot was well advanced that would not be a
problem. If they had tickets, passports, and explosives in hand that would
be, shall we say it. . . A SLAM DUNK!
Fourth, there is the curious response of the Bush Administration to this
news. Instead of coming to the White House Briefing Room to announce new
initiatives to develop technology to detect liquid explosives at passenger
screening checkpoints or to close loopholes posed by unscreened cargo, the Bush
White House attacked Democrats for making America vulnerable to
terrorists. Last I checked, Howard Dean was not in London trying to put a
bomb on an airplane. And Dick Cheney is still on the campaign trail
playing the fear card.<!–
D(["mb","
n
I have no doubt that British intelligence had succeeded in penetrating a ngroup of Muslim extremists who had big dreams about hurting the United States nbut they lacked a viable terrorist plan ready for execution. We also know nthat the Bush Administration, who was being regularly briefed by the Brits about nthe plot, pushed London to act prematurely. What is particularly galling nis that no one at the Bush White House apparently felt compelled to look for nways to boost aviation security in the United States. Instead, they sought nto create a firestorm of fear in order to distract public attention from the ndevastating article written by Sy Hersh. One of Sy’s key points:
n
n
The Bush Administration, however, was closely involved in the planning of n Israel’s retaliatory attacks. President Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney n were convinced, current and former intelligence and diplomatic officials told n me, that a successful Israeli Air Force bombing campaign against Hezbollah’s n heavily fortified underground-missile and command-and-control complexes in n Lebanon could ease Israel’s security concerns and also serve as a prelude to a n potential American preëmptive attack to destroy Iran’s nuclear installations, n some of which are also buried deep underground.
n
That is the kind of news the White House would like to bury, particularly as na ceasefire took hold in Lebanon that left Hizbullah standing ten feet ntall. As Keith nOlberman showed the other night, the Bush Administration has been zealous nabout trotting out bogus threats when there is political bad news afoot. nIf I’m right about this latest incident, Keith Olberman has a new item to add to nhis list of ten.
