Airline-bomb plot discovered by US tapping internatl calls

Little-Acorn

Gold Member
Jun 20, 2006
10,025
2,410
290
San Diego, CA
Q.: How did the authorities discover the recent plot to blow up airliners in flight with liquid explosives?

A.: By the U.S. tapping into international calls and sharing the results with the British government.

You know, the program to tap into calls going between the U.S. and known Al Qaeda numbers in Europe and vice versa? The one the leftists screamed bloody murder about, and tried to mischaracterize as "domestic wiretapping" as though any of the calls were totally inside the U.S., as an excuse to shut it down?

The plot was evidently to blow up 10 airliners gong between England and the U.S. Airliners following that route aren't little. Some hold as many as 300 or even 400 passengers each. They probably wouldn't all be full, but it's reasonable to guess that they probably would have averaged 200 passengers each or so. Times 10 is around 2,000 people or more on those planes.

If the Democrat extremists had been successful in their efforts to shut down the program last year, it's possible that this terror plot might never have been discovered in time to do anything about it, before 2,000 people were blown up and fell flaming into the ocean.

I don't know if authorities have found out which flights on which dates were targeted. If they have, it might be interesting to get the passenger lists when the flights finally take off, and contact the people who were on those flights, and their loved ones waiting for them at home. Some would probably be Americans, some British, and some from other countries.

If we could contact them all and take a poll, how many do you suppose would now say they will still vote for the Democrat party, or whichever party in their country harbors the extreme-left don't-fight-the-terrorists crowd? How many would have voted for them last week before the plot was revealed, and how many would change their votes now?

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

P.S. MODS: If an article is used only for supporting evidence, but the post isn't really about the article itself, does the title of the thread still have to match the title of the article anyway?

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

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1225453,00.html

Thwarting the Airline Plot: Inside the Investigation

Exclusive: U.S. picked up the suspects' chatter and shared it with British authorities

Posted Thursday, Aug. 10, 2006

Wednesday night was a long and troubling one for Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. A bubbling plot by British citizens to blow up airplanes had come to a boil in the past three days, and as British authorities arrested dozens of suspects around London, it was Chertoff's job to coordinate the U.S. defenses. Scary intelligence reports pop up all the time, but this particular terror operation got close enough to being carried out that it rattled even the normally sedate Chertoff. "Very seldom do things get to me," he told Rep. Peter King, the Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, in a phone call late Wednesday night. "This one has really gotten to me."

Britain's MI-5 intelligence service and Scotland Yard had been tracking the plot for several months, but only in the past two weeks had the plotters' planning begun to crystallize, senior U.S. officials tell TIME. In the two or three days before the arrests, the cell was going operational, and authorities were pressed into action. MI5 and Scotland Yard agents tracked the plotters from the ground, while a knowledgeable American official says U.S. intelligence provided London authorities with intercepts of the group's communications.


(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)
 
Q.: How did the authorities discover the recent plot to blow up airliners in flight with liquid explosives?

A.: By the U.S. tapping into international calls and sharing the results with the British government.

You know, the program to tap into calls going between the U.S. and known Al Qaeda numbers in Europe and vice versa? The one the leftists screamed bloody murder about, and tried to mischaracterize as "domestic wiretapping" as though any of the calls were totally inside the U.S., as an excuse to shut it down?

The plot was evidently to blow up 10 airliners gong between England and the U.S. Airliners following that route aren't little. Some hold as many as 300 or even 400 passengers each. They probably wouldn't all be full, but it's reasonable to guess that they probably would have averaged 200 passengers each or so. Times 10 is around 2,000 people or more on those planes.

If the Democrat extremists had been successful in their efforts to shut down the program last year, it's possible that this terror plot might never have been discovered in time to do anything about it, before 2,000 people were blown up and fell flaming into the ocean.

I don't know if authorities have found out which flights on which dates were targeted. If they have, it might be interesting to get the passenger lists when the flights finally take off, and contact the people who were on those flights, and their loved ones waiting for them at home. Some would probably be Americans, some British, and some from other countries.

If we could contact them all and take a poll, how many do you suppose would now say they will still vote for the Democrat party, or whichever party in their country harbors the extreme-left don't-fight-the-terrorists crowd? How many would have voted for them last week before the plot was revealed, and how many would change their votes now?

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

P.S. MODS: If an article is used only for supporting evidence, but the post isn't really about the article itself, does the title of the thread still have to match the title of the article anyway?

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

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1225453,00.html

Thwarting the Airline Plot: Inside the Investigation

Exclusive: U.S. picked up the suspects' chatter and shared it with British authorities

Posted Thursday, Aug. 10, 2006

Wednesday night was a long and troubling one for Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. A bubbling plot by British citizens to blow up airplanes had come to a boil in the past three days, and as British authorities arrested dozens of suspects around London, it was Chertoff's job to coordinate the U.S. defenses. Scary intelligence reports pop up all the time, but this particular terror operation got close enough to being carried out that it rattled even the normally sedate Chertoff. "Very seldom do things get to me," he told Rep. Peter King, the Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, in a phone call late Wednesday night. "This one has really gotten to me."

Britain's MI-5 intelligence service and Scotland Yard had been tracking the plot for several months, but only in the past two weeks had the plotters' planning begun to crystallize, senior U.S. officials tell TIME. In the two or three days before the arrests, the cell was going operational, and authorities were pressed into action. MI5 and Scotland Yard agents tracked the plotters from the ground, while a knowledgeable American official says U.S. intelligence provided London authorities with intercepts of the group's communications.


(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)

Acorn your title does not have to match exactly the article being used for support, you are good to go with this.

Anyway this is just more evidence of the value of the NSA terrorist wiretapping program, suck on it libs.
 
Is anyone but me going to point out the last flap about taps was NOT about the international taps, but domestic? State to state, house to house records, just turned over to the gov. without cause. I'm no lib, but I had and do have problem with that.
 
Is anyone but me going to point out the last flap about taps was NOT about the international taps, but domestic? State to state, house to house records, just turned over to the gov. without cause. I'm no lib, but I had and do have problem with that.

Possibly "sleeper cells" talking to each other?
 
Possibly "sleeper cells" talking to each other?

Or possible drug smugglers, or ma an pa just calling around to the same people and forming a pattern. If there is cause, take out a warrant and tap.

The point is, this thread is misleading in regard to the last flap about turning over customer records without cause. That is my only point.
 
Or possible drug smugglers, or ma an pa just calling around to the same people and forming a pattern. If there is cause, take out a warrant and tap.

The point is, this thread is misleading in regard to the last flap about turning over customer records without cause. That is my only point.

If my memory is correct, several phone companies named did NOT turn the records over, and only phone numbers were disclosed. The liberal media hyped the story big time
 
If my memory is correct, several phone companies named did NOT turn the records over, and only phone numbers were disclosed. The liberal media hyped the story big time

Most turned them over as I recall. Regardless, there was no cause. I like the legal process, although I sometimes don't agree with it. There was no process.

Again the point is the thread is misleading. Nothing I remember challenged interception of international calls. Actually, I believe that was established as being totally legal. No problem. This thread starts by mixing apples and oranges. That’s a dishonest spin of facts.
 
Actually, it was BRITISH (NOT U.S.) intelligence that disclosed the airline bomb plot. And it came from leads given to the Brits by Pakistan after they arrested someone who gave up certain info.

I do wish you'd get your propaganda...er...facts...straight.

Unbelievable.
 
Actually, it was BRITISH (NOT U.S.) intelligence that disclosed the airline bomb plot. And it came from leads given to the Brits by Pakistan after they arrested someone who gave up certain info.

I do wish you'd get your propaganda...er...facts...straight.

Unbelievable.

They were on to these pigs months ago. The Brits also used the "seek and peek" method (go into the homes, look around, and do not leave a trace) and wiretaps.

I hope the libs keep running on their cut and run plan for Iraq, and the terrorist's bill of rights
 
They were on to these pigs months ago. The Brits also used the "seek and peek" method (go into the homes, look around, and do not leave a trace) and wiretaps.

I hope the libs keep running on their cut and run plan for Iraq, and the terrorist's bill of rights


If you have proof of that, I'm sure we'd all love to see it. Not what any credible source is saying.

As for the brits using what you call "sneak and peak", I'm sure you can prove that, too? And was that before or after they had probable cause?
 
If you have proof of that, I'm sure we'd all love to see it. Not what any credible source is saying.

As for the brits using what you call "sneak and peak", I'm sure you can prove that, too? And was that before or after they had probable cause?



Here you go...........

http://newsbusters.org/node/6921
Thank NSA Wiretapping for Foiled Terror Plot?
Posted by Greg Sheffield on August 11, 2006 - 15:28.
Will the New York Times write stories on how eavesdropping is what alerted U.S. authorities to the terrorist airplane attack? Time magazine reported in an exclusive that the "U.S. picked up the suspects' chatter and shared it with British authorities."
The operation involved cooperation between British and American authorities.

Britain's MI-5 intelligence service and Scotland Yard had been tracking the plot for several months, but only in the past two weeks had the plotters' planning begun to crystallize, senior U.S. officials tell TIME. In the two or three days before the arrests, the cell was going operational, and authorities were pressed into action. MI5 and Scotland Yard agents tracked the plotters from the ground, while a knowledgeable American official says U.S. intelligence provided London authorities with intercepts of the group's communications.
The Wall Street Journal says media and Democratic opposition to the programs now looks foolish after the foiled terror plot.

The plot was foiled because a large number of people were under surveillance concerning their spending, travel and communications. Which leads us to wonder if Scotland Yard would have succeeded if the ACLU or the New York Times had first learned the details of such surveillance programs.
Will there be the same opposition to surveillance programs in the future?
Democrats and their media allies screamed bloody murder last year when it was leaked that the government was monitoring some communications outside the context of a law known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. FISA wasn't designed for, nor does it forbid, the timely exploitation of what are often anonymous phone numbers, and the calls monitored had at least one overseas connection. But Mr. Reid labeled such surveillance "illegal" and an "NSA domestic spying program." Other Democrats are still saying they will censure, or even impeach, Mr. Bush over the FISA program if they win control of Congress.
This year the attempt to paint Bush Administration policies as a clear and present danger to civil liberties continued when USA Today hyped a story on how some U.S. phone companies were keeping call logs. The obvious reason for such logs is that the government might need them to trace the communications of a captured terror suspect. And then there was the recent brouhaha when the New York Times decided news of a secret, successful and entirely legal program to monitor bank transfers between bad guys was somehow in the "public interest" to expose.
 
A CREDIBLE link, cookie. Newsbusters is a joke.

Now how about a real source instead of more propaganda?

Yea, Jilly; they only print their exact words - word for word (as well as thier source TIME mag)

Of course to tin foil hat libs like you - that is propaganda
 
I sware to god, RSR does not even read the articles that he cites. Where in there does it mention them using "sneak and peek?" Last time I checked it didnt. Moreover the credibility of the article has already been called into question.

I still have yet to hear a valid reason why warrants could not be obtained to tap these people's calls? Did the Brits use due process? If so, why can we not?

If you ask me, the whole dragnet idea is a tantamount admission by our intelligence agencies that they have no clue what they're doing.
 
I sware to god, RSR does not even read the articles that he cites. Where in there does it mention them using "sneak and peek?" Last time I checked it didnt. Moreover the credibility of the article has already been called into question.

I still have yet to hear a valid reason why warrants could not be obtained to tap these people's calls? Did the Brits use due process? If so, why can we not?

If you ask me, the whole dragnet idea is a tantamount admission by our intelligence agencies that they have no clue what they're doing.

I disagree…I think they know very well what they’re doing. It takes time to regain what we used to have, what they (CIA, FBI, NSA etc) used to do, before the handcuffs of pc came along. In this day and time a “dragnet” is the best that we can do for the moment. It seems to be working too, a bit rough sometimes, but working. IMO
 
I sware to god, RSR does not even read the articles that he cites. Where in there does it mention them using "sneak and peek?" Last time I checked it didnt. Moreover the credibility of the article has already been called into question.

I still have yet to hear a valid reason why warrants could not be obtained to tap these people's calls? Did the Brits use due process? If so, why can we not?

If you ask me, the whole dragnet idea is a tantamount admission by our intelligence agencies that they have no clue what they're doing.

We're at WAR against people who will blow themselves and a plane load of people to smithereens without even the slightest hesitation. Fuck due process. I expect our government and any other government opposed to terrorists to take any and all actions necessary to keep everyone safe from them. If that means monitoring all phone calls or searching all passengers or screening all bank transactions in order to intercept the REALLY important ones (those of the terrorists in case there's any doubt), then I'm all for it. While you're jerking off trying to obtain a warrant, they're in the process of implementing their next plan.
 
Well, you know how it is. The more times he thinks you can post a lie, the more he thinks that makes it true,

I seem to have heard about a similar tactic used elsewhere. Hmmmmmmmm

yes it was very poplular during the blow job years
 

Forum List

Back
Top