terror plot

pilcrow · Post by **pilcrow** » Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:33 am

Gyu wrote:I agree that I can't think of any movies with this in but the article still contained relevant information.

maybe.. but it's obvious the guy doesn't know movies, something you and I DO know about. Why are people so quick then to accept his ideas about chemistry? It seems that if it's truly a practical impossibility to blow up a plane this way, there'd be more than one nutjob squawking about it.

pilcrow · Post by **pilcrow** » Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:38 am

deva wrote:The U.S. and U.K. governments are sending agents out to try to find some disaffected nuts, convince them to take some action and then arrest them as terrorists cause they are desparate to try to keep people afraid and thus pliable to their agenda.

Yeah, no doubt that's the way it works. Without US or UK intervention, no group of disaffected nuts would ever succeed in blowing anything up or killing people, would they?

dj superflat · Post by **dj superflat** » Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:43 am

there are a lot of objectively knowledgeable, sane, etc. folk who have pointed out the difficulty of what they were attempting (as a matter of chemistry, the amount of time you'd need to spend in the lavatory mixing stuff, etc.). that doesn't mean they wouldn't try it (see the shoe bomber), or that some of them might not have succeeded.

subterFUSE · Post by **subterFUSE** » Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:53 am

Well.... we do know one thing, for sure.

There will never again be a successful hijacking of an airplane in the USA. Forget air marshals.... The passengers will fucking pummel anyone who tries.

We're talking serious beat-down. Tackled, punching, kicking, biting, poking out of eyeballs.... Your everyday Joe Schmo will turn into the most viscious psychopathic killer imaginable, for about 30 seconds. Long enough to take out any would-be hijacker.

pilcrow · Post by **pilcrow** » Wed Aug 23, 2006 1:02 am

dj superflat wrote:there are a lot of objectively knowledgeable, sane, etc. folk who have pointed out the difficulty of what they were attempting (as a matter of chemistry, the amount of time you'd need to spend in the lavatory mixing stuff, etc.). that doesn't mean they wouldn't try it (see the shoe bomber), or that some of them might not have succeeded.

OK. I'd just as soon see these folks taken out of the equation (keep 'em off planes) rather than let them try this thing, even if it does have a low chance of success. Somebody might have a hard time killing me with a wiffleball bat, but I'm not gonna let 'em try.

pilcrow · Post by **pilcrow** » Wed Aug 23, 2006 1:03 am

subterFUSE wrote:Well.... we do know one thing, for sure.

There will never again be a successful hijacking of an airplane in the USA. Forget air marshals.... The passengers will fucking pummel anyone who tries.

We're talking serious beat-down. Tackled, punching, kicking, biting, poking out of eyeballs.... Your everyday Joe Schmo will turn into the most viscious psychopathic killer imaginable, for about 30 seconds. Long enough to take out any would-be hijacker.

Yeah, they may bomb it somehow, but any plan that relies on passenger compliance should face considerable opposition, including the complete Three Stooges treatment you describe.

glu · Post by **glu** » Wed Aug 23, 2006 2:07 am

I would be more concerned with biological attacks.

One thing I have learned from my grandmother who was a nurse, was never to trust the government. She treated a group of many ill patients, all with the same very odd symptoms, later to realize these people were having a reaction to toxins in the water that the government knew about but never warned or disclosed.

glu · Post by **glu** » Wed Aug 23, 2006 6:42 am