| Submit your comments on this article |
| Britain |
| US warns of new attacks on London |
| 2005-08-14 |
| AMERICAN intelligence chiefs have warned that Al-Qaeda terrorists are plotting to drive hijacked fuel tankers into petrol stations in an effort to cause mass casualties in London and US cities in the next few weeks. The leaked warning, contained in a bulletin issued by the US Department for Homeland Security last week, says the attacks aim to create catastrophic damage at about the time of the fourth anniversary of the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington. The warning came as it emerged that the British Department for Transport had for the first time issued guidelines ordering a tightening of security around the UK road tanker fleet. The US warning has been circulated among law enforcement agencies and fuel transport agencies. Although a preamble states that âno other intelligence exists to corroborate this specific threatâ, the intelligence report is highly specific. It says: âAl-Qaeda leaders plan to employ various types of fuel trucks as vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIED) in an effort to cause mass casualties in the US (and London), prior to September 19. Attacks are planned specifically for New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. It is unclear whether the attacks will occur simultaneously or be spread over a period of time. The stated goal is the collapse of the US economy.â The document goes on to suggest that the proposed methods will involve suicide drivers: âSome of the vehicles used will be hijacked. The type of vehicle may be anything from gasoline tanker trucks to trucks hauling oxygen and gas cylinders. Water trucks filled with gasoline or other highly combustible material may also be used. The detonation of the vehicles will be carried out by driving them into gas stations or ramming explosive-laden vehicles into the trucks carrying the fuel.â The intelligence report says that the terrorist cells thought to be planning the attack will âexecute the plan upon receipt of an orderâ. It goes on to speculate that the videotape released last week by Ayman al-Zawahiri, Al-Qaedaâs deputy leader, may have been meant as âthe activation signal to the cellsâ. In the video al-Zawahiri warned that attacks would continue in Britain until it pulled out of Iraq. The report says that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, one of the alleged masterminds of the September 11 attacks, has told US interrogators that he had developed plans for targeting petrol stations. This was âdue to their apparent vulnerability and the potential destructive force of a fuel-driven explosionâ, it says. The use of petrol tankers as mobile bombs has been a well-tested Al-Qaeda tactic in the Middle East. Terrorists in Tunisia, Saudi Arabia and Iraq have all used large fuel tankers against military and civilian targets. A fuel tanker attack on the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia in 1996 killed 19 US servicemen. Four weeks ago terrorists exploded a fuel tanker in a busy market town 25 miles south of Baghdad killing nearly 100. Although the specific threat of a tanker attack on London is thought to be new, Scotland Yard and MI5 have long feared that Al-Qaeda would try vehicle attacks on key targets in the capital. Last year police disrupted an alleged plot to bomb a âsoft targetâ â thought to be a Soho nightclub â with a truck bomb. More than half a ton of fertiliser, which can be used to make explosives, was recovered in a raid in north London. Security sources say that fears about the use of fuel tankers has led to them being closely monitored when they enter the City of London. Concrete security barriers have been placed in other key locations across the capital to stop vehicles packed with explosives reaching buildings such as parliament. more at the link |
| Posted by:Phomose Thromose9419 |
| #10 So if London or the UK keeps on getting attacked how long do you give it before raving mad anti arab/muslim/pakistani mobs are out on the streets torching premises? I don't support that behaviour but I think people are starting to get a little fucked off with the governmentâs lack of potency in dealing with things correctly. Just for the record; instead of giving our social benefit money to immigrants coming to the UK why doesn't it go to the people who made this country what it is! Forget the outsiders for once. |
| Posted by: dom 2005-08-14 18:15 |
| #9 Damn, can't spell this morning, more Coffee needed (Slurp, Aahhhh) |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2005-08-14 13:15 |
| #8 Thinking eurther about it, a few years ago a tanker filling a station's tanks in Mississippi overflowed and a passing car set the gas running across the road afire, not as bad as a deliberate explosion of the tanker, but 3 motorists died. This method of "Boomerism" seems unproductive, hijacking tankers is a hard job, and srations are designed to have the gas flow away from the pumps in case of spillage. (Slanted Concrete) |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2005-08-14 13:13 |
| #7 And would the media alert authorities before or after getting the film? That's called "Accesory" and should result in the same criminal charges as the perp would get. First time it happens the cameraman/reporter better have a damn good legitimate reason for being there and setup. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2005-08-14 13:00 |
| #6 And would the media alert authorities before or after getting the film? Do you REALLY need to ask that question about the MSM? Their motivations and (dis)loyalties should be pretty obvious to everyone by now. |
| Posted by: DMFD 2005-08-14 12:43 |
| #5 Aw shucks... I just placed a bet on Strategy Page's Prediction Market that their wouldn't be any. These goofballs are really skewing my losses. |
| Posted by: 3dc 2005-08-14 10:11 |
| #4 A full tanker with an IED would make a pretty good explosion, even if it didn't blow the in ground tanks. The real question is, would the media be alerted so that it could get pictures of the truck going off? And would the media alert authorities before or after getting the film? |
| Posted by: Eason Jordan 2005-08-14 09:54 |
| #3 The stated goal is the collapse of the US economy As ignorant about the outside world as the women they like to keep in purdah. Even if the effects of this effort were as spectacular as in the American action films they appear to model themselves on, we would simply run serious background checks on all truck drivers, post armed guards around gas stations (most likely privately hired in most cases, or local volunteers -- I hear the National Guard units are a bit preoccupied these days), and carry on driving the world's economy. Oh yes, and accelerate the transition to hybrid vehicles, which don't need to be refueled nearly as often. If 9/11 didn't do any permanent damage to our economy, what makes them think booming a bunch of gas stations would? |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-08-14 09:48 |
| #2 ...What raptor said. It is extraordinarily difficult to get a gas station burning. There was an instance back in OH some years ago that bears mentioning - a gentleman was refueling his car when some jackass lost control of his and slammed into it, igniting a fire. Despite the fact that there were six cars refueling - and the damaged one did catch fire - the only cars that burned were the ones immediately involved in the accident, and although there was heat/smoke damage to the canopy over the pumps, the only gas that burned was that in the struck vehicle. This isn't to blow off a possible threat, far from it - it's just that this won't do much except make people very vigilant while tanking up. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2005-08-14 09:30 |
| #1 Gas stations will probably not blow-up like they think.Here in the U.S. the tanks are buried(not only to save space,it's safer),they are double hulled,they are not preasurized,and are equiped with preassure relief(to relieve preassure build-up from heating and cooling) valves. |
| Posted by: raptor 2005-08-14 08:27 |