![]() |
TATP, Synthesis, and the British Plot: An Analysis
Great article at the Reg this morning.
http://www.theregister.com/2006/08/1...t_terror_labs/ Binary liquid explosives are a sexy staple of Hollywood thrillers. It would be tedious to enumerate the movie terrorists who've employed relatively harmless liquids that, when mixed, immediately rain destruction upon an innocent populace, like the seven angels of God's wrath pouring out their bowls full of pestilence and pain. SPONSORED LINKS The funny thing about these movies is, we never learn just which two chemicals can be handled safely when separate, yet instantly blow us all to kingdom come when combined. Nevertheless, we maintain a great eagerness to believe in these substances, chiefly because action movies wouldn't be as much fun if we didn't. Now we have news of the recent, supposedly real-world, terrorist plot to destroy commercial airplanes by smuggling onboard the benign precursors to a deadly explosive, and mixing up a batch of liquid death in the lavatories. So, The Register has got to ask, were these guys for real, or have they, and the counterterrorist officials supposedly protecting us, been watching too many action movies? We're told that the suspects were planning to use TATP, or triacetone triperoxide, a high explosive that supposedly can be made from common household chemicals unlikely to be caught by airport screeners. A little hair dye, drain cleaner, and paint thinner - all easily concealed in drinks bottles - and the forces of evil have effectively smuggled a deadly bomb onboard your plane. Or at least that's what we're hearing, and loudly, through the mainstream media and its legions of so-called "terrorism experts." But what do these experts know about chemistry? Less than they know about lobbying for Homeland Security pork, which is what most of them do for a living. But they've seen the same movies that you and I have seen, and so the myth of binary liquid explosives dies hard. |
Thanks for the excellent article! ^
Now, if only the nervous Nellies out there would give it a read and understand why some of us are less worried about TATP being made in the lav than they are... :rolleyes: Here's a point I have made several times recently:
Originally Posted by Article
Watch the reaction temperature carefully. The mixture will heat, and if it gets too hot, you'll end up with a weak explosive. In fact, if it gets really hot, you'll get a premature explosion possibly sufficient to kill you, but probably no one else.
I also loved this bit: asking an expert who has experience in TATP what would happen:
Originally Posted by article
We asked University of Rhode Island Chemistry Professor Jimmie C. Oxley, who has actual, practical experience with TATP, if this is a reasonable assumption, and she tolds us that merely dumping the precursors together would create "a violent reaction," but not a detonation.
|
No problem. :)
Here's the prof's profile from the article. I think she knows what she's talking about, and she's very well published. http://www.chm.uri.edu/urichm/brochure/people/jo.html |
A very good article and I am glad to see that a media outlet (tragically, still not mainstream) has finally put some effort into collecting all of the facts.
As I have noted before, if there were a clear and present danger from liquid explosives, flight crew would absolutely not be allowed to carry liquids onboard either, and the government would be providing demonstrations for the media (amazing so few have noticed this missing item) of the efficacy of binary liquid explosives. There is a reason special forces prefer solid explosives - and notice that the end product of the magical binary mixture is a...solid explosive :rolleyes: . |
Based on their behavior, it's reasonable to suspect that everything John Reid and Michael Chertoff know about counterterrorism, they learned watching the likes of Bruce Willis, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Vin Diesel, and The Rock (whose palpable homoerotic appeal it would be discourteous to emphasize). It's a pity that our security rests in the hands of government officials who understand as little about terrorism as the Florida clowns who needed their informant to suggest attack scenarios, as the 21/7 London bombers who injured no one, as lunatic "shoe bomber" Richard Reid, as the Forest Gate nerve gas attackers who had no nerve gas, as the British nitwits who tried to acquire "red mercury," and as the recent binary liquid bomb attackers who had no binary liquid bombs. For some real terror, picture twenty guys who understand op-sec, who are patient, realistic, clever, and willing to die, and who know what can be accomplished with a modest stash of dimethylmercury. You won't hear about those fellows until it's too late. Our official protectors and deciders trumpet the fools they catch because they haven't got a handle on the people we should really be afraid of. They make policy based on foibles and follies, and Hollywood plots. |
Glad to see the scientific analyses are starting to come out. Of course, there's ample, unrefutable documentation that scientific evidence is not used by the US government to make decisions, so I'm not sure this information is relevant. :(
|
To summarize...
So basically, the likelhood of someone actually smuggling in enough TATP and other stuff and managing to combine all of the stuff together without premature explosion or any other accidents, and without attracting any notice from anyone else in the few hours it take to prepare is just about very low then??
In other word, banning liquid is WAAAY overreaction to this remote possibilty and waste everyone's time and money for something that hardly add any security at all? :td: |
That's the three strikes:
- No tickets, - No passports, - No explosives. They are out. Can we go back to the old securtity rules now? |
Originally Posted by exerda
Now, if only the nervous Nellies out there would give it a read and understand why some of us are less worried about TATP being made in the lav than they are... :rolleyes:
Sorry if I'm letting my cynicism show. :( |
You'd be better off smuggling snakes on the plane! :D
|
Originally Posted by Superguy
With its high viscosity and low volatility, it has the texture and feel of high-grade motor oil (gel like). This makes it especially dangerous, as it has a high persistence in the environment. It is odorless and tasteless, and can be distributed as a liquid. |
It can also be delivered in binary form in which two chemicals are mixed to form this prior to release.
|
Originally Posted by exerda
...Now, if only the nervous Nellies out there would give it a read...
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by Yaatri
It can also be delivered in binary form in which two chemicals are mixed to form this prior to release.
|
Originally Posted by UA_Eagle
So basically, the likelhood of someone actually smuggling in enough TATP and other stuff and managing to combine all of the stuff together without premature explosion or any other accidents, and without attracting any notice from anyone else in the few hours it take to prepare is just about very low then??
In other word, banning liquid is WAAAY overreaction to this remote possibilty and waste everyone's time and money for something that hardly add any security at all? :td: BAA and the TSA/DHS would rather be stupid than actually provide security. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 5:23 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.