Were Russian Planes Detonated by Al Qaeda Women Smuggling Bombs Inside Their Genitals?

Ace of Spades HQ ^ | August 31, 2004 | Ace of Spades HQ

[Warhead W-88]

We now know the Russian planes were blown up by 1) women 2) from the toilets.

This dovetails ominously with a six month old report from US intelligence that Al Qaeda was recruiting female terrorists to smuggle 8-12 ounces of explosives inside their vaginas, then extract them and assemble the bomb and detonate it from toilet.

More here, including the likely effect on the racial profiling debate.

[TXBSAFH]

I have asked that one too.

[anonymous_user]

the old Ham-lick

That's so awful, I wish I'd thought of it! :)

[Bacon Man]

YOU! Go sit in the corner!

Well ok but I'm not gonna think about what I did. I have a strict no thinking policy when I'm at work.

[NJ_gent]

"We have GOT to get this figured out before it happens here."

You bring up an interesting point, and I agree that we've got to figure this out before our enemies start using it. I think we probably have a lot to learn from the Israelis when it comes to airport security, but I also think we need to implement the security the American way. By that I mean keeping government out of it as much as possible while respecting the Constitutionally protected rights of each individual. Security tends to be the single biggest area where the rights of citizens disappear. It's like a Constitutional Bermuda Triangle. Should someone develop a 'miracle' technology that detects explosive compounds and pre-cursors while being non-invasive, I think they'd stand to make a whole lot of money.

[Thrusher]

I've just seen much milder threads get pulled in the first 15 secs. Drop the f-bomb once, and... holy crap, did I just say "f-bomb"???

This thread gives a whole new meaning to "F-bomb"...

[RightOnline]

How sweet.

"I only regret that I have but one ****** to give to my country and to Allah."

What a truly accursed people.

[RightOnline]

If you're an Arab, you need to be strip-searched to fly on ANY aircraft. That's the price you pay for tacitly supporting this murderous s**t around the world.

Reap the glories of your "religion", Islam. Know that you brought it entirely upon yourselves.

[COBOL2Java]

It will not just be women. Men and women could have things surgically implanted inside them. Detonator and everything. A few days time and there would be no residue I imagine to detect. Just a stitched up wound on the belly. Maybe a string to pull to set it off, internal switch to press

This guy could be packin' an A-Bomb...

[NJ_gent]

"Counter propaganda came out about that today. I heard several times this morning about full body scans causing cancer and such."

Which is ridiculous because it merely shifts the debate to a point where they back themselves into a corner. The simple question to ask then is, "so if it were safe, then you'd be ok with it?". Oops

[biblewonk]

OK, Now I know what my next job is going to be. When in doubt.

[azhenfud]

This guy could be packin' an A-Bomb...in each cheek

[Yo-Yo]

All I wanna do is zoom-zoom-zoom-zoom and a boom-boom

[xsmommy]

that has really got to smart something fierce....

[newgeezer]

Well, I wonder where my fellow "liberty before security" preachers are on this one. Is a (swarthy-looking, er, Muslim -- oops, either one would be profiling, now, wouldn't it?) woman's liberty more important than the passengers' security? Betcha it is. (But, to be fair, they'll surely cite her "right" to privacy.)

If we can't find a non-invasive way to detect this threat, hundreds of Americans will die before these searches ever happen. Then, once again, the airline industry is toast, TOAST I tell ya. Hugh [sic] layoffs loom ahead.

[harrycarey]

Ugghhh!

You know how many germs that would spread?

[Sender]

It's more like a hot flash.

[antivenom]

Lick-the-ham...you no licky, hand over your ticket...ro get in line for the "mega no cavity spared" search...

[M. Dodge Thomas]

Counter propaganda came out about that today. I heard several times this morning about full body scans causing cancer and such.

Well, it's true that there's no free lunch when you are dealing with humans and radiation.

To take a very simple example, the lifetime increase in cancer risk from a "simple" x-ray to the central body mass is generally estimated at between 1 in 100,000 and 1 in 10,000, and there are currently around 600,000,000 domestic US airline passengers a year.

The two types of risk aren’t strictly comparable (for instance a flight is either bombed or not, while the cancer risk is spread out over a lifetime) IMO it appears likely that yearly fatalities compared to a single aircraft bombing per year are roughly similar if you assume the lower radiation risk and considerably higher if you assume the greater.

And there are lots of other variables; the currently higher dosage associated with a "full body scan", the current difficulty of automated analysis of the results and the likelihood that human readers would overlook positives, the posibility that improved technology will reduce these doses, the risks to the screeners themselves, the high likelihood that if such technology was placed in wide use there would be mechanical and/or human mistakes that produced significant incidents involving excessive dosage (I very much doubt that you will, find many radiologists who think this would be good idea) and the like. So I don’t think one should assume that people advancing such concerns cam be dismissed out of hand.

[Trillian]

Wow, that is just gross.

Although reading the comments on this thread make reading it very worthwhile lol..

[Ciexyz]

Those fourteen "musicians" on that US flight could have extracted explosive material from their anal cavity and compiled a bomb in the toilets.