Testing the tensile strength of public gullibility

Ciggie

On ROPS
On ROPs
#1
According to CNN plans were found for Al Quaida to attack the US rail system. By putting obstacles on the tracks in order to derail trains. It was also said that these plans were 'only on paper'. Well, good Golly Gosh, the big, high tech terrorist monster threat, bombing everyone and possibly seeking briefcase nuclear weapons seems to be down on it's luck to be merely speculating chucking a few bits of debris on a railway line, especially considering how few people travel by rail in the US. Commerce ? I think God has recently done more damage to transport-related commerce in the USA than a few bits of concrete on a main line. How much bollocks can a person take ?
 
#2
Good plan.
Whilst all the attention is being directed to airports,seaports etc a crowded commuter train derailed in a suburb could kill hundreds of people.
Cheap,quick and easy to implement.
 
#3
Makes perfect sense actually although not as easy to pull off as one might think.

Even purpose built portable train de-railers fail as was proved in the CSX 8888 incident.
 
#4
According to CNN plans were found for Al Quaida to attack the US rail system. By putting obstacles on the tracks in order to derail trains. It was also said that these plans were 'only on paper'. Well, good Golly Gosh, the big, high tech terrorist monster threat, bombing everyone and possibly seeking briefcase nuclear weapons seems to be down on it's luck to be merely speculating chucking a few bits of debris on a railway line, especially considering how few people travel by rail in the US. Commerce ? I think God has recently done more damage to transport-related commerce in the USA than a few bits of concrete on a main line. How much bollocks can a person take ?
Its a perfectly viable operation, how many thousands of miles of unmonitored and unpatrolled track do we have in this country, let alone the distances involved in the United States. Taking a train off a track at strategic locations could kill thousands, and it depends what type of train they attack (freight, fuel, passenger or even Nuclear Waste).
 
T

Tinman74

Guest
#5
Its a perfectly viable operation, how many thousands of miles of unmonitored and unpatrolled track do we have in this country, let alone the distances involved in the United States. Taking a train off a track at strategic locations could kill thousands, and it depends what type of train they attack (freight, fuel, passenger or even Nuclear Waste).
only if they have good intelligence!
 
#6
only if they have good intelligence!
Given that AQ has always exploited weaknesses in the security system at airports, and once did so very successfully, working out what trains run at what times is hardly going to be difficult. While its difficult to take photographs of infrastructure (stations, depots etc) without attracting unwanted attention from the police, monitoring train running times is pretty simple. After all its what train spotters do every day of the week.
 

Ciggie

On ROPS
On ROPs
#7
The strange thing is, it smells more local. Backaways I narrowly missed being on a train into London that was derailed. Someone put a large concrete block on the lines, followed by a railway rail across them, just ahead of a bridge where, had everything gone right, train would have hit block at high speed, block would have connected with rail, which would have stopped dead against bridge bits, leaping train into cutting below. Except it didn't quite work. Driver was on the ball, 3 carriages fell over, minor injuries from passengers. Bit of a coincidence it happened during an industrial dispute invovling railway workers. Blamed on hooligans. Pretty smart hooligans in my opinion.
 
#8
The way to measure the success of any attack, is to think back exactly 10 years ago, who would have imagined that hijacking planes could take down the World Trade Centre in less than 2 hours, and cause immense damage to the US Defense hub?

As Gerry Adams told us, they only have to get it right once!
 
T

Tinman74

Guest
#9
Given that AQ has always exploited weaknesses in the security system at airports, and once did so very successfully, working out what trains run at what times is hardly going to be difficult. While its difficult to take photographs of infrastructure (stations, depots etc) without attracting unwanted attention from the police, monitoring train running times is pretty simple. After all its what train spotters do every day of the week.
Bang for buck for me, more cost effective is to have a number of suicide bombers walk into a large shopping centre on a saturday before xmas and pull the plug! job jobbed.
 
T

Tinman74

Guest
#10
The way to measure the success of any attack, is to think back exactly 10 years ago, who would have imagined that hijacking planes could take down the World Trade Centre in less than 2 hours, and cause immense damage to the US Defense hub?

As Gerry Adams told us, they only have to get it right once!
immense damage to the US defence hub??? how? please explain.
 
#13
The way to measure the success of any attack, is to think back exactly 10 years ago, who would have imagined that hijacking planes could take down the World Trade Centre in less than 2 hours, and cause immense damage to the US Defense hub?

As Gerry Adams told us, they only have to get it right once!
Some of the comments concerning this quote seem to have forgotten that one of the planes crashed into the Pentagon, certainly a "US Defence hub"
Lower casualties than NYC but 184 dead and hundreds injured is not insignificant. Amazing thing is that much of the Pentagon was able to keep functioning.
 

Ciggie

On ROPS
On ROPs
#14
Standard police statement now being prepared : Sorry, too busy to look into your burglary/mugging/assault/horrific neighbours who have a crack den/ chavs - we are monitoring the terrorist threat down the railway buffet, sorry, yard.
 
#15
There's no particular reason why such a scheme should not be contemplated. Apart from any other issues there is the question of quality of personnel. It seems to me that the 9/11 attacks used up a large proportion of the best operators AQ had access to. Finding some fanatic beardman willing to blow himself up at a bus queue isn't as easy as all that - hence the use in both Palestine and Iraq of the mentally handicapped as delivery systems. Finding someone both willing to die and capable of carrying out a successful operation is no easy matter. In the UK, four fanatics blew themselves up in London - the second wave made their explosives badly and failed. Even the 9/11 criminals couldn't get firearms on the planes and contented themselves with Stanley knives as weapons - one air marshall on board and their plans would have miscarried in less than a minute.

They dredged up a halfwitted jailbird and put explosives in his shoes, but he was so stupid it didn't even occur to him to go to the bogs before setting his Nikes alight. Then there was the meltdown who merely managed to singe his nadgers with non-functioning exploding underpants, and a dribbler from Plymouth who succeeded only in blowing a few bits off himself in the lavatory of an Exeter cafe.

Given these difficulties in the quality of human and material resources, why is it so hard to imagine that they might try the relatively simple means of attack, of putting obstacles on train tracks?
 

maguire

LE
Book Reviewer
#16
Some of the comments concerning this quote seem to have forgotten that one of the planes crashed into the Pentagon, certainly a "US Defence hub"
Lower casualties than NYC but 184 dead and hundreds injured is not insignificant. Amazing thing is that much of the Pentagon was able to keep functioning.
funny how you couldnt see a plane on the cctv...
 
#19
redundancy is the key word here,
As I remember there was the equipment in the North Tower, given that it also housed a major telecoms mast on the roof...

AT&T have a building in the district, 60 Hudson Street is less than half a mile away, that is also a major Telecoms/Internet facility where multiple operators meet. 111/8th Avenue is another massive hub within a mile of the WTC. You couldn't have built in much more redundancy.
 
T

Tinman74

Guest
#20
maybe because it would be a less than significant event, AQ are in the business of big events, headline making events... derailing a train happens everyday and the aftermath is less than significant in the big picture.
 

Latest Threads