Explosive smuggling

[Tim May]

On Thursday, December 27, 2001, at 02:34 PM, Anonymous wrote:

>>> A good plastic (haha) surgeon might be able to implant 10lbs or more,
> easily enough to bring down a plane.  Breast implants would be the
> obvious place to put it, because they certainly can't open up every
> woman who wants to get on a plane with "augmentation" so what can you
> do? <<
>

Gives new meaning to "Show us your tits!"

Having seen a bunch of bad boob jobs, where they look like they're read 
to explode even without HE in 'em, I don't envy the job of the Bod Squad.

> It takes a few weeks to heal from
> abdomen surgery that could be done
> in a field hospital.  How to sleep
> without rolling over on the lump
> which is the activator is the tough
> part.

Easy to imagine safer activators. A magnet arrangment, where an external 
magnet pulls something. A dual activator system, where two switches must 
be closed simultaneously, ampoules to be broken or pierced under the 
skin, and so on.

A person willing to martyr himself is almost assured of being able to 
take down a plane. Here's something I wrote in another, more subversive 
forum:

"
For people willing to martyr themselves, there is very little hope that
these suicide bombings can be stopped. Planes are just too easy to
destroy (not being armored and all).

Think about mules carrying balloons of cocaine into the U.S. Now think
of those balloons carrying C4 or Semtex instead. Now think of ways to
dissolve those balloons with the right intake of food. (This is already
an issue with coke mules, who cannot eat certain foods as the acids
produced will degrade/rupture the latex condoms and suchlike that they
use.)

Think of those explosives not being a shoe but being anally or
vaginally carried. Not that difficult to pack several ounces of high
explosive this way.

As for sniffers finding these things...the signals are already being
lost in the noise. Dogs can find certain kinds of explosives, but are
fooled by others. And the vapor emissions can be very, very low.
(Nothing is ever "zero" on a log scale, of course, but something sealed
inside a glass ampoule and very thoroughly rinsed with water and
alcohol and benzene and such is about as close to "no emissions" as one
can imagine.)

If I were an attacker trying to cripple the U.S. and European airline
industries--thus dealing a devastating economic blow--and I had a ready
supply of mules willing to martyr themselves, I would find this a rich
hunting ground of potential attacks.

Planes have always been soft targets. The insurance-related bombs of
the 1950s and 60s, the hijackings of the early 70s, and the various
bombings of several planes in the 80s and 90s (Lockerbie, Air India, a
few other unexplained "energetic disassemblies"). And now the 911
events and the shoebomber.

Me, I haven't flown in a few years. Nothing has needed it. And with the
police state search procedures and potential dangers, I plan to avoid
flying for as long as I can. Fortunately, here in California, nearly
any kind of recreation or family event (in my case) can be reached
easily enough by car, or by rail.
"

>
--Tim May
"If I'm going to reach out to the the Democrats then I need a third 
hand.There's no way I'm letting go of my wallet or my gun while they're 
around." --attribution uncertain, possibly Gunner, on Usenet