It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


US Warns New Attacks on London Possible!

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 11:32 PM

The Sunday Times - Britain

US warns of new attacks on London
Read the document
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 “no other intelligence exists to corroborate this specific threat”, the intelligence report is highly specific.



The Sunday Times - Britain

At least we are warning our Allies! This would make sense to hit both and the similar warning came for the US last week. Its says leaked.....I wonder why they had to leak it? Has there been any feedback in the UK over this?

[edit on 13-8-2005 by edsinger]

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 01:02 AM
I've been watching BBC News 24 for the last hour or so and there's been no mention of such planned attacks...

[edit on 14-8-2005 by xeroxed88]

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 02:19 PM
Its just scaremongering, this has always been a possibility, why bring it up now?

This is just Murdoch (owner of the times) blowing a routine message out of all proportion to sell more papers, the Times is always full of bull****.

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 02:27 PM
I was crossing the Triboro bridge into Manhattan the other day and a truckdriver was being arrested at the checkpoint. The back of the truck was open and it contained 4 or 5 50 gallon drums with wires sticking out of them.

Would it be that obvious?

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 02:28 PM
20:45pm here and no hint of this on any other U.K news channel.

Might make it on the 10pm (Main news) tonight but I agree with what Uncle Sam says.

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 02:38 PM
Just done a bit of leg work here.....

1st link

2nd link

I'm not sure if these are credible enough for us to worry about, but it was all i could find.

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 02:38 PM
Just a bit of useless info about "Rupert Murdoch" for you guys to chew over !!!!

Murdoch moved to Britain in the mid 1960s and rapidly became a major force there after his acquisitions of the News of the World, The Sun and later The Times and The Sunday Times, which he bought in 1981 from the Thomson family, who had bought it from the Astor family in 1966. Both takeovers further reinforced his growing reputation as a ruthless and cunning business operator. His takeover of The Times aroused great hostility among traditionalists, who feared he would take it "downmarket." This led directly to the founding of The Independent in 1986 as an alternative quality daily.

Murdoch has a particular genius for tabloid newspapers. The Sun in London, The Post in New York, The Herald Sun in Melbourne and The Daily Telegraph in Sydney are among the most successful, profitable and influential tabloids in the world. Despite his personal conservatism, he allowed his editors (particularly in Britain) to exploit the selling power of soft-core erotica in the form of topless page three girls (such as Samantha Fox) to increase circulation. As a result, Auberon Waugh of Private Eye dubbed him The Dirty Digger, a name that has endured.

In 1986 and 1987, Murdoch moved to adjust the production process of his British newspapers, over which the printing unions had long maintained a highly restrictive grip. This led to a confrontation with the printing unions NGA and SOGAT. The move of News International's London operation to Wapping in the East End resulted in nightly battles outside the new plant. Delivery vans and depots were frequently and violently attacked. Ultimately the unions capitulated and other media companies soon followed Murdoch's lead.

Before the Wapping dispute, most British newspapers were chronically unprofitable, partly (though not entirely) because of inefficient and restrictive work practices imposed by the printing unions. These included overstaffing, inheritance of jobs by family members and most importantly resistance to the introduction of new printing technology which would have caused both job losses and the reduction in the power of the unions. The high-tech Wapping plant—the first newspaper office in the world to be totally computerized—was planned and built in strict secrecy, and its very existence was kept hidden from the unions until it was ready to go into operation. Murdoch and the Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher collaborated during this affair and the Thatcher government provided heavy police protection for the new plant—dubbed "Fortress Wapping" by its detractors—during the sometimes violent demonstrations at the site.

Rupert Murdoch

[edit on 14-8-2005 by blackwidow666]

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 02:42 PM
Sorry, but what has the above got do with 'US Warns New Attacks on London Possible!'?

Ok, its about Murdock, but i fail to see the connection with the topic. Correct me if im wrong.

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 02:44 PM

Originally posted by Uncle Joe
Its just scaremongering, this has always been a possibility, why bring it up now?

This is just Murdoch (owner of the times) blowing a routine message out of all proportion to sell more papers, the Times is always full of bull****.

Eddie is my opinion on the veracity of this story. Hence the info on Murdoch.

Thank you for that Widow.

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 02:53 PM
OK, I'm going to stand being corrected here. I still fail to see what the above link has to with the topic at hand.

I understand that Murdock is good at scaremongering, but please enlighten me.

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 02:57 PM
I dont think that this warning is any more exciting than any other warning that barely recieve any press.

However in this case Rupert Murdoch's broadsheet in England (the Times) has chosen to make a big fuss out of something that every other media source seems to have ignored.

This would coincide with Murdochs support for everything to do with the war on terror, and help put further pressure on the government to bring in new anti terror laws by portraying the idea that there are threats everywhere.

Also, and perhaps more importantly terrorism sells papers and it gives the Times a story that has a chance of competing with the Observer's story regarding the Muslim Council of Britian being funded by Pakistani extremists.

This is just my personl belief, so i cant really provide any proof, but several years of media studies suggests to me that this is the case.

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 03:00 PM
Don't always believe what you see and hear on the etc, everything comes down to money in the end !

Couldnt have put it better myself lov

[edit on 14-8-2005 by blackwidow666]

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 03:01 PM

Originally posted by TruthWithin
I was crossing the Triboro bridge into Manhattan the other day and a truckdriver was being arrested at the checkpoint. The back of the truck was open and it contained 4 or 5 50 gallon drums with wires sticking out of them.

Would it be that obvious?

Yes maybe it would be that obvious. Here's another story of a man arrested on the 12th. He was caught entering the UN parking lot with weapons.

Maybe they were a team

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 04:28 PM
Your first reply was very educating blackwidow666. The fact Murdoch owns 172 newspapers worldwide, fox news, sky news and all supported the war in Iraq sums it up. In addition he owns over 200 other sky channels.

But back to the thread subject did anyone notice the source? Why the US Department for Homeland Security! This is the same government body which has kept many Americans in a constant state of fear since the September the 11th attacks. And as there has been not one attack on U.S soil since 9/11 not one of its raising and lowering the terrorist threat level has turned out to be correct. With hindsight it should have been green or whatever for the first two years after 9/11 at least.
But they're saying terrorist attacks could be possible. Wow! Fancy that terrorist attacks possible hay! I mean who would of thought that terrorist attacks where actually possible? Isn't it supposed to be against the laws of physics or something? And with petrol tankers as well!!! Kind of scary to think what terrorist could do with them. But I didn’t know it was possible. Thanks US Department for Homeland Security.

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 06:18 PM

This was reported last week on CNN but was confined to American cities. After that warning sank like a stone they now expand it to British cities?

I'll recieve my warnings from Scotland Yard thank you very much.

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 06:24 PM
Could it ever occur to you that the government is asking for help and diligence from it citizens?

You complain when they say nothing and yet complain when they pass out information. Sad.

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 06:27 PM
Here's the text of the original warning for US cities. Supposedly this memo was "leaked". I guess the news is that now they're stepping it up to the UK too.

The Sunday Times - Britain

August 14, 2005

Leaked US intelligence document warning of terrorist attacks on London and America using fuel tankers

(Fuel Laden VBIED)

Advisory General
New York State Office of Homeland Security

August 11, 2005

This communication from the New York State Office of Homeland Security is Sensitive. The New York State Office of Homeland Security in conjunction with the Upstate New York Regional Intelligence Center, issues the following advisory to the Oil, Gas, and Transportation sectors:

George Pataki - Governor
James Kallstrom - Advisor on Counter-Terrorism

The United States Intelligence Community has repeatedly advised of threat streams suggesting al Qaeda and affiliated groups have considered using a Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Device (VBIED) in a US-based attack.

There are numerous historical and current threat streams to suggest the terrorist use of tanker fuel trucks, among other vehicle types, to facilitate a major explosion targeting critical infrastructure and designed to create mass casualties or economic destruction.

Senior al Qaeda operational planner Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, captured in Pakistan in March 2003, has told interrogators that he had developed terrorist plots targeting gas stations due to their apparent vulnerability and the potential destructive force of a fuel-driven explosion. Terrorists in Tunisia, Saudi Arabia and Iraq have effectively used large fuel trucks as VBIEDs against military and civilian coalition targets.

The following tear line information, provided by the Intelligence Community, identifies a possible threat to the United States involving the use of fuel tankers as Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Devices. This tear line has been widely disseminated throughout law enforcement channels, generating numerous inquiries regarding the imminent nature of the threat.

Although this report makes an attack appear imminent, no other intelligence exists to corroborate this specific threat stream. This scenario represents just one of many possible methods of attack known to be considered by terrorist organizations.

Begin tear line:

1. (FOUO) Al 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 19 September. 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.

2. (FOUO) Some 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.

3. (FOUO) The attackers will be members of small Al Qaeda cells which are spread throughout the US. The cell responsible for the specific attack will execute the plan upon receipt of an order.

4. (FOUO) It is possible that the tape recently released on television by Zawahiri was meant as the activation signal to the cells and not so much as an indictment to Bush or Blair.

End tear line:

In light of a potential VBIED threat in the US, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has disseminated bulletins incorporating the advantages for terrorists in using large, official looking vehicles, and suggested measures for owners and operators of facilities where large vehicles are housed.

Excerpts of FBI Bulletin #166, dated May 10, 2005 are included below:


On January 12, 2005, DHS and the FBI published Joint Bulletin 162, titled "Terrorist Tactics: Analysis of the Surveillance Notes Concerning Certain U.S. Financial Buildings." This bulletin provides information on VBIED attacks using a limousine, to which security personnel provide some degree of deference, or in a service/delivery vehicle, because they do not attract unwanted attention. Exploding a device in an underground parking lot, VIP area, or near the main entrance or a support column were the main attack options offered in the notes. Terrorists have shown creativity in their VBIED platforms, ranging from tanker trucks (Khobar Towers in 1996) to rental trucks (World Trade Center in 1993). A delivery vehicle acquired through a legitimate source could provide the following advantages when deployed as a VBIED:

Heavy/large payload capacity.
Vehicle interior and contents are not visible.
Vehicle, due to its size, could ram security barriers.
Access to high value symbolic or economic targets.
Can fit in parking garages (based on the size of the vehicle).
Easy licensing procedures (based on the size and purpose of the vehicle).
Delivery vehicles can typically remain stationary for extended periods without drawing suspicion.
Public perception as a recognized entity (recognized company delivery van).
Rigging vehicle for VBIED use in privacy (e.g. at night, in a private garage after hours).


The Office of Homeland Security, in cooperation with the Upstate New York Regional Intelligence Center, encourages owners and operators of fuel depots, truck companies and gas stations to report any of the following activities to the UNYRIC Counter Terrorism Center at 1-866-SAFE-NYS.

Individuals videotaping or photographing premises for no apparent reason.
Suspicious individuals apparently surveilling delivery of fuel from tanker-trucks.
Inquiries regarding the frequency of fuel deliveries to your business.
Any information regarding the loss, theft or attempted theft of any tanks, vehicles, or driver's license credentials or licenses used in the transportation of bulk fuel to your station.
Theft of fuel or unexplained loss from your business inventory or tractor-trailer-tanker.
Customer requests to purchase unusual amounts of fuel, not typical of most transactions, or an unusual method of payment.
Unusual inquiries from strangers concerning how to store bulk fuel or handle it on premises.


The following are the recommended general protective measures that apply to facilities with both controlled and uncontrolled access, and specific protective measures recommended for soft targets with controlled access.

General Protective Measures for Controlled and Uncontrolled Access:

Security personnel and private citizens should be advised to remain vigilant in ensuring that large vehicles of any kind in the vicinity of critical infrastructure facilities are viewed as a security risk until proven otherwise.
Ensure all personnel are provided periodic security briefings regarding present and emerging threats.
Specific Protective Measures for Soft Targets with Controlled Access:
Be alert to the necessity for thoroughly checking large vehicles of any kind attempting to gain access to controlled critical infrastructure facilities.
Review existing vehicle bombing prevention procedures to incorporate thwarting the use of a moving vehicle bomb, and consider adjusting buffer zones further from potential targets.
Adjusting buffer zones further from potential targets.
Periodically rearrange exterior vehicle barriers, traffic cones and road blocks to alter traffic patterns near facilities.
Limit the number of access points and strictly enforce access control procedures.
Approach all illegally parked vehicles in and around facilities, question drivers and direct them to move immediately; if the owner cannot be identified, have vehicle towed by law enforcement.
Provide vehicle inspection training to security personnel, and institute a robust vehicle inspection program to include checking the undercarriage of vehicles, under the hood and in the trunk.
Deploy explosive detection devices and explosive detection canine teams.
Institute/increase security patrols varying in size, timing and routes.
Increase perimeter lighting and maintain/remove vegetation in and around perimeters.
Encourage personnel to be alert and to immediately report any situation that appears to constitute a threat or suspicious activity.
Guard force turnover and personnel authentication procedures.
Implement random security guard shift changes.
Deploy visible security cameras and motion sensors - review security camera footage daily to detect possible indicators of pre-operational surveillance.
As always, observance of suspicious individuals and activities, or any threats received should immediately be reported to the Upstate New York Regional Intelligence Center, Counter Terrorism Center, at 1866-SAFE-NYS.
Please treat this and all other communications from the Office of Homeland Security as SENSITIVE

Care to theorize what buying gas will become like if this succeeds? Picture snipers on the roof of every gas station, aiming for the head of every delivery guy or limo that drives by.

Here's hoping this doesn't come to pass.

[edit on 14-8-2005 by smallpeeps]

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 06:49 PM

Originally posted by edsinger
Could it ever occur to you that the government is asking for help and diligence from it citizens?

It would occur to me if a US official made an official release asking for help and diligence. 'Leaked' memos published in a paper known for supporting the war on terror (by fearmongering) just doesn't scream 'HELP!' sorry it just doesn't.

You complain when they say nothing and yet complain when they pass out information. Sad.

Mixed messages don't help out any relationship. This reminds me of 'The Boy Who Cried Wolf' anecdote

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 06:55 PM
Agree it's just scaremongering. The Govt that cried 'Wolf!' too often?

There's undoubtably a possibility of it, but of lots of other things too!

The London thing is just IMO an attempt to link US worries with the latest Islamic bombing.

We're cool here - waiting for the next one, and the one after but not panicking and certainly not afraid (unlike Sharon Stone - we're all laughing here as she thinks Belgravia's just not safe enough even though she's got 4 bodyguards 24/7 - wimp!)

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 07:24 PM
Well you can dismiss this as scaremongering all you want, I do not think it is and by the government releasing this intel, maybe one of their sources has been compromised. Who knows but at least they are trying to do something about it instead of sitting back and balming Bush and the Americans for all the worlds problems.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in