A few updates in the thus-far failed mail bomb plot that the President spoke about on Friday. (By the way, notice how that wasn’t a feature of this midterm election campaign whatsoever, that the fear card was never played, even with the announcement of an attack on the Friday before the election?)
First, investigators are searching for two dozen other mail packages that they think were mailed from Yemen en route for the United States. Some remained in Yemen while others were in various cargo holds across the country, though none have been found in the US. These packages did apparently include explosive material:
In Dubai, where one of the two bombs was found in a FedEx shipment from Yemen, police said it contained PETN, a powerful industrial explosive, and bore the hallmarks of al-Qaida.
The white powder explosives were discovered in the ink cartridge of a computer printer, said a police statement carried by the official state news agency WAM. The device was rigged to an electric circuit, and a mobile phone chip was hidden inside the printer, the statement said.
The police said the bomb was prepared in a “professional manner.”
It’s unclear how these packages were expected to lay dormant throughout the shipping process and then suddenly detonate upon arrival at their intended target. Some were rigged with a timer, and others with a cell phone detonator (does that mean someone would have to be on the scene to detonate it?). Police in Dubai said the bombs bore the “hallmark” of Al Qaeda, and one female suspect was originally arrested in Yemen, but then let go. Apparently her identity was used to mail the packages.
At least one of the packages traveled on a passenger flight before making it to the cargo plane. And this brings up a larger point, one that was made repeatedly as far back as the 2004 Presidential campaign – we still don’t have an airtight cargo screening system globally.
The mail bombs discovered aboard cargo jets in England and Dubai could very easily have ended up on passenger planes, which carry more than half of the international air cargo coming into the U.S., experts say.
And experts caution that cargo, even when loaded onto passenger planes, is sometimes lightly inspected or even completely unexamined, particularly when it comes from countries without well-developed aviation security systems [...]
Most countries require parcels placed on passenger flights by international shipping companies to go through at least one security check. Methods include hand checks, sniffer dogs, X-ray machines and high-tech devices that can find traces of explosives on paper or cloth swabs.
But air shipping is governed by a patchwork of inconsistent controls that make packages a potential threat even to passenger jets, experts said Saturday. Security protocols vary widely around the world, whether they’re related to passenger aircraft or cargo planes.
FedEx and UPS have suspended service from Yemen temporarily, but that’s not the point – cargo is still not really secure, and is often subject to lax enforcement. Even if this package were scrutinized it would not necessarily have been caught in the screening by either X-rays or bomb-sniffing dogs – in this case, human intelligence led to the finding. This is apparently why the Emirates Airlines flight was accompanied by fighter planes to New York – they wanted to check the cargo.
There’s a profit motive here – airlines take money from UPS and FedEx to ship cargo, and they don’t want to lower that profit margin, so they don’t submit that freight to extra safety checks. Rules mandating the checking of every piece of domestic cargo for explosives just took effect in August – thank you, Democratic Congress – but they don’t apply to cargo from abroad.
Maybe it’s impossible to properly check every single piece of cargo and baggage coming into the United States, but let’s be very clear who values this simple defense against threats and who doesn’t. In that 2004 Presidential debate, George W. Bush said it cost too much to screen every bag in the cargo hold:
Kerry: The president — 95 percent of the containers that come into the ports, right here in Florida, are not inspected.
Civilians get onto aircraft, and their luggage is X- rayed, but the cargo hold is not X-rayed.
Does that make you feel safer in America?
This president thought it was more important to give the wealthiest people in America a tax cut rather than invest in homeland security. Those aren’t my values. I believe in protecting America first [...]
Bush: I don’t think we want to get to how he’s going to pay for all these promises. It’s like a huge tax gap. Anyway, that’s for another debate.
Six years later, we still have to have that debate. A Democratic Congress passed into law legislation that fixes this somewhat, but leaves a whole lot out. And with a Republican Congress looming, one that has demonstrated a desire to cut funding and certainly not expand it, I don’t see these challenges being met.




35 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
I’m waiting for someone to confirm that these packages from Yemen weren’t screened. I’m thinking they were screened and the screening doesn’t work. But of course they’d never admit that.
I mean, if you were implementing a plan to eventually screen all air cargo, where is the first place you’d start? Much of the shipping from Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Saudi Arabia goes through UAE and Qatar. Those are rich countries which could easily implement a cargo screening program. It’s so obvious I can’t believe it hasn’t been done already.
See the screening didn’t work until the U.S. told British officials to look for a printer cartridge:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/31/AR2010103101388.html
The screening of passengers has nothing to do with keeping us safe. It is simply conditioning us to live in a police state where authorities can subject you to search without cause, and detain you if you object.
The screening of cargo would actually contribute to safety without intruding on our freedom, so the only thing they care about is the handful of shekels it would cost.
What exactly are the “hallmarks of al Qaeda?”
Do they spray paint their logo on the otherwise unremarkable explosive device?
This whole plot seems bogus to me.
I first thought it was a CIA false flag attempt to keep the U.S.ians askeered so it’s easy to keep the warz going in ME & accelerate the one O started in Yemen.
Evidence doesn’t seem entirely consistent with that hypothesis, so I’m keeping an open mind on what it might actually have been.
As usual, the one thing we know for sure is that it wasn’t anything the USG said it was.
I’m not convinced this was a real “attack”. It just seems to pat to start beating the drums of war with Yemen and then suddenly packages with explosives appear. Several packages, none of which actually exploded. It’s all very convenient.
That’s “too” pat… I miss edit!
Agree. Don’t know what it was, but am pretty sure it wasn’t an attack.
Bingo.
Democrats wasted a grand opportunity to one-up Republicans and National Security in a truly meaningful way that would save lives. The Obama Admin. could have done it with 51 votes in the Senate. Instead they kicked the can.
Now we should vote for more Democrats so the scary Republicans don’t undo their watered-down half measures? WTF?
Who appointed a “Deficit Commission” (against the will of Congress) stacked with Republicans intent on “austerity measures” for us while the MIC continues to run hog wild?
I’d love to see a big jobs program started because of this. We know cargo screening is something that isn’t being done that well, why not employ people and get it done at the same time?
Just reading that should make any American cringe with shame.
That’s what I was thinking too. We know the US has got third parties to engage in fake terror attacks, so why not get third parties to do convenient things at convenient times in order to wage war or further deprive us of our rights.
I don’t believe a goddamn thing these bastards tell me, period.
And terrorist banksters are gonna kill me way before some Al Kayda™ asshole does.
As usual, back in the day when a few people were still reasonable, someone explained why a cargo attack is extremely unlikely. The core of the argument against it, which showed up in this instance, is who, intent on being an evil doer, would relinquish all is tools to some system out of his control? That, of course, is particularly relevant to any kind of nuclear material, be it dirty bomb or worse. If terrists actually had such resources, can you imagine they would put such a valuable cargo into the hands of strangers?
Doesn’t pass the giggle test.
Not since the “invasion” of Grenada will we have so thoroughly embarassed ourselves.
I don’t know enough about it to make any judgments. About the only thing I’m certain of is that it seriously smells. I don’t like coincidences. There have been far too many where “terrorism” is concerned. And hark how the media was so eager to disseminate rumors. No, I don’t like it at all.
We fight a covert war in a country that didn’t attack us on 9/11 and we are shocked and shaken when people in said country lash out against us? We really haven’t learned anything since 9/11, have we? The whole “birds coming home to roost” thing just really never got through our thick skulls.
They attack us for 50+ years of oppression in the Middle East, we invade them, kill countless hundreds of thousands of them, and we get scared when they attack us.. no no, that’s too generous when they make insane stupid sophmoric attempts at lashing out?
Well we had better clamp down on subway, train and air travel. Better do rectal exams starting next week. You never know.. After all, if they can send a FedEx package, who knows what they’re capable of now!!
This is all for our own safety.
Give me a break.
You got that right.
I’m actually happy to see that at least the folks I know were skeptical right from the start. It’s a beginning, though admitedly a small one.
Agree with that. A device that stands any chance at all of reaching it’s intended target represents a significant investment in time and resources. There is just too much that can go wrong with overseas shipping. There are too many chances for it to get properly inspected. And then there’s the whole thing of saying that Yemen could be a developing terror threat and presto! Packages from Yemen appear.
Um, I think the purpose is to provoke ME folks to justify more warz, as I typed earlier. “We” learned that lesson well.
Yep, yep, and yep again. Waaay too convenient.
This is their clue, from the article:
A favorite al Qaeda tactic, apparently: “hey buddy, can we use the school’s FedEx account to send a package?”
That sounds like a sure way to hit the target. /s
Night all. There’s only so late I can stay up after a bizzy day, pointing out all the stupidity of what the USG claims about terrists.
Right? every FedEx package has a UBC that will allow anyone to trace it all the way back to it’s origin. Somebody had to agree to send it, to weigh it and to bar code it. If this was a real “attack”, why haven’t we heard yet what their origin was and how arrests have been made?
When it absolutely, positively has to get detected en route, just post it from a Yemen school addressed to a Chicago Synagogue. And send it FedEx!
They say in the article that their was a phone number on the package, traced back to a girl attending the school. Yemeni authorities are questioning her, (no doubt with great gentleness and care) but report that they have no evidence linking her to any radical political activity. Well, duh, guys.
G’night.
Bar codes and tracking numbers – heck, snail-mail packages have tracking data. Not to mention that sending anything by FedEx or Brown requires filling in a waybill right at the start.
Teddy Partridge is upstairs!
Sunday Late Night: Happy Hallowe’en
Maybe not. She could be a clever Al Qaeda agent putting her address and phone number on the package. She must be very busy being an engineering student. Her fellow students demonstated in support. But the Yemen authorities have released her in Yemen.
duncan @28
right.
why the attention seeking address?
furthermore, why did some u. s. officials say the packages were designed to destroy a plane in flight? if so, no need for a scrutiny-invoking address.
this has the ear-marks of a set-up – possibly a joint saudi/ american set-up.
the saudis fear the influence of the yemeni revolutionaries and the u. s. would like the yemini gov’t to be more “co-operative”.
as i have thought about this matter throughout the day,
i keep thinking about the anthrax letters -
the attention-drawing letters to prominant democratic members of congress,
the “clues” incriminating a non-participant (dr. stephen hatfield),
our fbi’s incompetence in finding the perps, possibly politically ordered.
all things considered,
this event seems like an effort to influence the impending u.s. elections.
All true, but the sad thing for them is that people are so freaked out about the economy that terrorism isn’t the hot button it once was. Besides, hearing that a FedEx plane was almost blown up evokes fear of what, exactly? People freaking out that their Land’s End package won’t arrive?