FOI request 4 evidence that making liquid explosives is poss

[truthmonger]

This is the response I havbe received from the Home Office to my FOI request for the scientific evidence that it is possible to make liquid explosives on a plane:



Direct Communications Unit
2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4DF
Switchboard 020 7035 4848 Fax: 020 7035 4745 Textphone: 020 7035 4742
E-mail: public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Website: www.homeoffice.gov.uk

Mr P Carline
paul.carline@tiscali.co.uk



Reference: T46826/6

Dear Mr Carline,

Thank you for your email of 6 December 2006. I apologise for the delay in sending you a full response.

Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) you have requested all relevant information that is held by the Home Office regarding the scientific basis for the assertion that liquid explosives with the power to bring down airplanes could be secretly mixed onboard an airplane (in a toilet) to produce explosives which could then be detonated by mobile phone, MP3 player or the like; specifically the assertion that the explosive known as TATP could be produced in this way.

In reliance on sections 23(5), 24(2) and 31(3) we can neither confirm nor deny whether any information relevant to your request is held. To the extent that section 24(2) and 31(3) of the Act applies, we have determined that in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exclusion of the duty to confirm or deny outweighs the public interest in confirming whether the Home Office holds the information.

Whilst we recognise that there is a public interest in reassuring the public that Her Majesty’s Government is taking all necessary steps to ensure their safety whilst on board an aircraft, this is outweighed by the damage to national security, police investigations and law enforcement that would be caused by confirming or denying whether this information is held.

If we were to confirm or deny whether information existed in this case, this would prejudice a police investigation and criminal trial that is currently pending. Furthermore, to confirm or deny whether information of this type exists would reveal the level of Her Majesty’s Government's awareness of particular forms of explosives and methods of their use, which could be exploited by those seeking to damage national security.

For those reasons, we consider that in this case the public interest favours neither confirming nor denying whether information is held. This is in line with usual practice in not commenting on the existence of information on matters relating to the security and intelligence agencies or national security and should not be taken as evidence that any such information does or does not exist.

If you are dissatisfied with this response you may request an independent internal review of our decision. During the internal review the department’s handling of your information request will be reassessed by staff who were not involved in providing you with this response. An internal review can be requested by submitting your complaint to:

Information Policy Team
Record Management Service
Home Office
4th Floor, Seacole Building
2 Marsham Street
London, SW1P 4DF

Should you remain dissatisfied after this internal review, you will have a right of complaint to the Information Commissioner as established by section 50 of the Freedom of Information Act.

Information Commissioner
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire, SK9 5AF

Or via their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk

Yours sincerely,

J Fanshaw


More predictable bs from the Office of Disinformation.

Paul

[paul wright]

They obviously think we're idiots, either that or they are if they believe we would believe that constitutes a proper reply.
Great submission anyway - anything we can do to back this up, Paul?

[Sherlock Holmes]

I salute you for filing this request, regardless of the response, it serves as a document that is on the public record!

Well done mate, it's obvious the whole thing is a load of old bull and this kind of horse manure response basically confirms that it is.

[locsen]

SO.... just to make sure i understand the above article...



are they confirming or denying that you can?


im a bit unsure.




more waffle from the office of flim flam stuff and nonsense

[Disco_Destroyer]

Sure the letter wasn't intercepted by the Python Crew?

[Zabooka]

Well, from what I can see, it seems more likely that they are hiding the fact that you can not create liquid explosives as they are accusing those people who are now free without charge from what I know of.

This is more likely, than them saying oh yes we know how they did it, but we can't tell you or them that now can we?

Again, I will reiterate as those above, WICKED WORK on getting this FOI thing done on this. What a great idea, why didn't I think of it?

I need to learn more about this Freedom of Information Act, so that I can pull on them to see what sort of illegal surviellance and information gathering they are preforming upon me.

[Leiff]