Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BRITAIN ON STANDBY FOR NUKE STRIKE; SECRET PLAN TO EVACUATE MILLIONS IN TERROR ALERT
August 17, 2002 | August 17, 2002 | John Twomey

Posted on 08/17/2002 2:17:45 PM PDT by Wallaby

Not for commercial use. Solely to be used for the educational purposes of research and open discussion.

BRITAIN ON STANDBY FOR NUKE STRIKE; SECRET PLAN TO EVACUATE MILLIONS IN TERROR ALERT

By John Twomey
The Express; NEWS; Pg. 8 9
August 17, 2002


PLANS to move millions of people out of Britain's major cities in the event of a terrorist attack have been secretly drawn up, it was revealed yesterday.


The Al-Muhajiroun group, whose leading supporters include controversial Sheikh Abu Hamza alMasri, has warned Britons that they will "choke on the smoke" of revenge attacks if a strike against Saddam is launched.
The mass exodus would be launched at centres of population around the country if there was a nuclear or biological strike. In London, emergency nerve centres for the Government, the police and vital financial services have already been built and equipped. They would be ready within hours of a terrorist outrage. The move is in direct response to the September 11 atrocities and a possible terrorist backlash after any military strike against Iraq.

But police stress there is no specific intelligence about an imminent attack. The authorities say they are responding to a general threat.

Details of the emergency plans emerged as pressure was mounting for the deportation of extremist Muslims who openly support the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

The Al-Muhajiroun group, whose leading supporters include controversial Sheikh Abu Hamza alMasri, has warned Britons that they will "choke on the smoke" of revenge attacks if a strike against Saddam is launched.

It is understood Scotland Yard's Anti-Terrorist Branch is examining material - including videos - linked to the group in case they breach the Terrorism Act. The extremists, who are condemned by the vast majority of Muslims in Britain, want the UK to be incorporated into an Islamic state in Europe.

Emergency plans have been drawn up for major UK cities to ensure that local government and the police can operate effectively in the event of a terrorist attack. They include new measures introduced since September 11 such has no-fly zones over power stations and other vital sites.

A major element of each plan is understood to cover supplies of crucial drugs - including antidotes to known biological weapons - and medical services.

The existence of London's postSeptember 11 plan was revealed in a letter to the all-party Commons Defence Committee by Judith Mayhew, chairman of London Corporation's policy and resources group. "London is currently looking at methods of mass evacuation in certain geographical areas, " she wrote. Details of the exodus plans would be broadcast on radio and TV in a way which would not "overdramatise" the crisis.

Police chiefs believe there could be mass panic if London or other major cities came under attack, particularly from chemical weapons. Areas of dense population or with poor road and rail links would create additional problems.

Methods of dealing with possible outbreaks of public disorder at railway stations and other transport terminals also feature in the plans.

Home Secretary David Blunkett is in overall command of the emergency planning as head of the newly-created Civil Contingencies Committee. But in the event of a disaster the Prime Minister would be in charge, working from the Cobra nerve centre in Whitehall.

Tony Blair recently ordered a GBP 1.4million re-fit of Cobra. It is understood the money will be spent on upgrading communication equipment to link the centre to a network of regional government bunkers dotted around the country. He has ordered the work to be completed before any military action against Saddam.

One expert said last night: "Planning of this kind has been going on for decades, particularly in the face of a Cold War nuclear attack. It is only right that Government is prepared for any nightmare scenario."



TOPICS: Anthrax Scare; Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-144 next last
To: Hitlerys uterus
They've been there, done that: You forgot Toulouse.
81 posted on 08/17/2002 6:41:34 PM PDT by eno_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: balls
Ask anybody who has a 401K/403b plan and is near retirement what their biggest concerns are. There are a heck of a lot of boomers out there who are wondering how they are going to support themselves in the coming years. These are folks who were in their prime years during the Cold War and Vietnam, and probably also remember the Korean War and the Suez Crisis.

Do you seriously think that the majority of investors with 401K type plans didn't have the foresight to adjust the balance of their investments as they neared retirement so that they wouldn't be heavily leaning towards riskier investments? Do you have any evidence of this epidemic besides, perhaps, anecdotes?

The reason I ask this is that virtually all 401K plans provide ample information on how to balance risk in a stock program. And nearly all offer a multitude of investment options, with the exception of the corporate contribution which is often required to be in company stock.

82 posted on 08/17/2002 6:43:22 PM PDT by meyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Cachelot
A bømbe? What kind of bømbe?
83 posted on 08/17/2002 6:46:30 PM PDT by balls
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Hitlerys uterus
PLEASE GOD, LET IT BE FRANCE!

Mais d'accord.
84 posted on 08/17/2002 6:47:21 PM PDT by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: balls
I'm merely saying that most people have other things on their minds than the so called "War on Terrorism".

If you had merely said that, I wouldn't have taken you to task. But to the extent that your remark implies that the US isn't actively engaging the organized terrorist networks aggressively, that's simply not the case. We are.

It's not the only concern of our President. His radio address today was about budgetary matters. Hardly the stuff of Wag the Dog.

We face challenges on many fronts. Most are unrelated to the War on Terrorism. Many liberals are uncomfortable with the fact that Americans support the President, and they attribute that to the war efforts. Undoubtedly, they are partially correct, at least.

The next step for liberals is to argue that the war itself is phony, and something the President is using to boost popularity levels. This is the argument of Cynthia McKinney and now you.

It's not a particularly persuasive argument.

85 posted on 08/17/2002 6:53:52 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: meyer
Are you serious? Are you suggesting most retirement accounts moved from equities to fixed income securities, money market funds, or cash, in the nick of time? It's an empirical fact that most people stayed with stocks. Let's not use hindsight to debate what they should have done, because they didn't do that.
86 posted on 08/17/2002 6:57:15 PM PDT by balls
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: balls
A bømbe? What kind of bømbe?

The exploding kind.

87 posted on 08/17/2002 7:01:27 PM PDT by Cachelot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: balls
Terrorism is less of a problem now, but that is all GWB talks about.

Where have you been? For the last month W has mostly been speaking about the economy with a few words about Iraq thrown in. He has not just been talking about terrorism. Besides - if he was - so what? Terrorism is what a President has more impact on than the economy. As far as the economy is concerned, W and Congress should be talking about tax cuts. As far as the House goes - that's the House Republican's problem and they should out there beating the living crap out of these traitorous democrats. Gephardt and Co have opened themselves wide open by playing politics when national security is at stake. They should called to task. One man, even a President, can only do so much in carrying and dragging his teammates down the field.
88 posted on 08/17/2002 7:05:08 PM PDT by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: mlocher
"i was going to reem you on this, but i see that enough other people have taken you to task already."

Ream me? OH, please no! In case you hadn't noticed, it was just two name calling, personally attacking posters who took issue. Seems they look up to the french for some inexplicable reason. Twice that number commented affirmatively so far.

"but i would wish that you would get a decent screen name."

As for my name, it is my swipe at hillery klintoon. In 3.5 years I have used it I have recieved many compliments and positive feedback regarding it. Far more than the few negative comments such as yours. Even were that not the case, I would still be unlikely to change it for you. You see, I like it.

89 posted on 08/17/2002 7:22:34 PM PDT by Hitlerys uterus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
But where would such a nuke strike come from? Is it accurate to call it a nuke strike threat? Or are they talking dirty bombs for the UK as well? I see this nowhere in the article though.
90 posted on 08/17/2002 7:28:43 PM PDT by Donna Lee Nardo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Donna Lee Nardo
Saudi Arabia has long range missiles. Didn't you know?
91 posted on 08/17/2002 7:44:53 PM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Hitlerys uterus
Seems they look up to the french for some inexplicable reason.

they are, after all, part of western civilization that we should all be trying to protect from a common evil in central asia and the middle east. besides anyone who will eat snails, frog legs and lamprey is not someone i personally would mess with...

You see, I like it.

as long as it is not immoral, illegal or fattening, that is all that matters as my idol wc fields once said.

92 posted on 08/17/2002 7:48:36 PM PDT by mlocher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: MissAmericanPie
I am not sure I did for certain, no. I do remember hearing something recently about the Saudis, but now I know for sure. So they do have long range missiles, okay, but that is not a nuclear weapon necessarily. I thought that the most difficult step to make a nuclear weapon was getting your hands on the fissile material needed to, in this case, tip the missiles with. Is it thought that the Saudis may possible have this material as well?
93 posted on 08/17/2002 7:50:46 PM PDT by Donna Lee Nardo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: xJones
Yes, I think that must be a different Twomey. This one is crime correspondent for The Express and has hundreds of bylines over the past few years.
94 posted on 08/17/2002 7:52:50 PM PDT by Wallaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: justshe; Dog Gone; The Great Satan
Ignore the title. They are selling papers. Pay attention to the phrase "biological strike."
95 posted on 08/17/2002 7:56:19 PM PDT by Wallaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Donna Lee Nardo
I'm not sure, how would Britian know really until it's too late? I think we should have a plan for the USofA also because we are in no way safe either.

Fox news just reported busting a guy in Roswell, N.M. that trained government agents in anti-terrorism attempting to sell about 2,300 missiles that can be used on tanks to the United Arab Emerients. The question is, were they to be shipped or distributed in our country?

96 posted on 08/17/2002 7:58:09 PM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: justshe
But read on: "The move is in direct response to the September 11 atrocities and a possible terrorist backlash after any military strike against Iraq." The problem with the title is not with the word 'standby' it is with the word 'nuke'.
97 posted on 08/17/2002 8:02:32 PM PDT by Wallaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Wallaby
You are right, of course, as both logic and perusal of the details of this article affirm. And this is not the first time in the last ten months that the word "nuke" has been used as a nicely-hypothetical proxy for a much more concrete threat -- one that starts with an "A" and ends with an "X."
98 posted on 08/17/2002 8:06:41 PM PDT by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
"Do the Saudis have evacuation plans for Mecca and Medina?"

Yes, they're going to turn to dust and ride the winds...


99 posted on 08/17/2002 8:08:39 PM PDT by PLMerite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
Terrorism *is* less of a threat than it was during the Clinton years, mostly because the Clintons, political terrorists that they are, no longer hold the office of President.

If terrorism by foreigners against Americans has diminished, it's because Bush - a real president - has actually done something about it.

100 posted on 08/17/2002 8:21:45 PM PDT by PLMerite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141-144 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson