×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Bush Causes Cell Phone Ban

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the security-through-headlines dept.

Security 588

An anonymous reader writes "When President George Bush visits Sydney, Australia for the APEC Summit in September, all cell phone calls within the radius of a football field will be suppressed. The president's motorcade will be shadowed by a helicopter equipped with signal-jamming equipment. Terrorists have used mobile phones to detonate remote-controlled bombs in Iraq and elsewhere in the world." There are other ways to detonate explosives remotely. Doesn't seem like the smartest thing to let potential enemies know of such plans in advance.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

588 comments

Should read... (5, Funny)

Magada (741361) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159555)

Title should read "Al-Qaeda scare causes widespread FUD in US and Aussie govts".

Re:Should read... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159669)

Either that or "Yippee! Slashdot Editors Find Yet Another Lame Excuse to Bash Bush Administration"...from the 'Anything-we-can-get-our-hands-on' department.

It's *really* getting old.

Re:Should read... (3, Funny)

canUbeleiveIT (787307) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159895)

Either that or "Yippee! Slashdot Editors Find Yet Another Lame Excuse to Bash Bush Administration"...from the 'Anything-we-can-get-our-hands-on' department.
Having Borderline Personality Disorder [aapel.org] is a prerequisite to being a /. editor. Apparently you didn't get the memo.

Re:Should read... (2, Insightful)

theStorminMormon (883615) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159697)

And the response is FUD from the security officials. It's not stupid to leak plans like this. It saves actually having to put jamming equipment on the helicopter.

Re:Should read... (4, Insightful)

Architect_sasyr (938685) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159865)

I'm not likely to be a terrorist soon, but don't these people know what REDUNDANT control's are?

That said, I have no doubts that said helicopter will also take out 802.11 signals because only a really dumb team would jam only mobile signals. As far as I am concerned the only reason these plans have been "leaked" is because people would otherwise be calling their Telco going "WTF MY PHONE DROPPED OUT".

So yeah, ten points for a great idea, but try and think like a terrorist, and then how would you defend against that. I'm happy enough to bash the administration as much as the next guy (personally I think Howard [aussie PM] is a dick, but better than the alternatives), but sometimes we need to step back from the abuse and look at what we're really talking about...

My $0.02 AU

"Movie plot" security (4, Informative)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 6 years ago | (#19160129)

This is a perfect example of what Bruce Schneier calls "movie plot security" - looks good to have black helicopters flying around but doesn't really achieve much.

http://www.google.com/search?q=movie+plot+security [google.com]

PS: Yes, the Madrid bombers used cell phones to detonate the bombs, but they didn't do it by calling the 'phone. They used the alarm clock function.

PPS: How till this prevent suicide bombers, etc.?

Uhm.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159563)

If you wanted to put a bomb... then you will make it detonate when it receives the jamming signal...... DUH!

Re:Uhm.. (4, Interesting)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159615)

Unless your talking about a really big fing bomb (which these terrorist generally don't use and if they had wouldn't need cellphones etc to use) the blast range is a few feet at best. Meaning it will receive the jamming long before there is anything interesting to blow up.

Re:Uhm.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159625)

So that it blows up half a football field away?

Sure its not exclusive (5, Insightful)

gravesb (967413) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159567)

I am sure that this isn't the only countermeasure that they are taking. Its good to publish this one, though, so people know in advance their cell phones won't work. The other counter measures probably don't affect personal electronic devices in the same manner.

Re:Sure its not exclusive (1)

drgonzo59 (747139) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159733)

It's also good to know if you are a terrorist that you should switch frequencies...you know...turn the knob to the left or right just a little.


Also, let's hope that nobody has any emergencies while they wait for Bush to pass by...

Re:Sure its not exclusive (1)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159769)

Yeah, I was going to say - why not use an AM radio to control the trigger? With a decent antenna and a few watts of power you could trigger the bomb from literally hundreds of miles away. The mobile phone jammers are going to be so far out of the passband they won't make a difference.

Re:Sure its not exclusive (2, Interesting)

stuntpope (19736) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159885)

I'm mostly ignorant of the subject, but I believe cell phones are used as detonators by calling the phone, which then detonates the explosion. How would an AM radio be used for detonation purposes? If it's switched on, it's constantly getting signals. How would it know which signal was the instruction to spark the explosive?

Re:Sure its not exclusive (2, Informative)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159987)

the crudest method is to trigger when some threshhold is reached, and the detonator is just a powerful transmitter. a better, but somewhat more complex method would be to detect a particular tone over x time, such as 120hz for 1 second.

Re:Sure its not exclusive (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19160037)

In other news, terrists switching to walkie-talkies.

I vote that, for his own protection, Bush be locked up in a bunker until January 20, 2009 (I think Cheney already pretty much does that of his own volition to start with). Seriously, pretty much nobody outside the US wants the guy around, and if he has to meet people, they can go to him or he can get Halliburton a cost-plus deal for a bitchin' videoconference setup.

Re:Sure its not exclusive (1)

mustafap (452510) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159995)

Because a small, simple mcirocontroller connected to it is listening for a coded signal. RC aeroplanes use this technique. Any electronics enthusiast could build such a device.

Maybe I shouldn't have said that :o)

Re:Sure its not exclusive (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 6 years ago | (#19160025)

i forgot to mention, the tone method is how many R/C cars were controlled back in the 90's. haven't had one since i was a kid so i don't know what they use nowadays.

Re:Sure its not exclusive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19160121)

Story goes, this blind kid they called Cap'n Crunch used to be able to steal R/C cars just by whistling. Don't know if it's true of course.

Re:Sure its not exclusive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159899)

This doesn't look too good. I've never seen so many discussions how bombs should be implimented for ANY leader of ANY country.

Re:Sure its not exclusive (2, Interesting)

CmdrGravy (645153) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159869)

Well I shouldn't imagine there will be many people lining the route waving to him and throwing garlands of flowers ( apart from maybe members of the government waiting to lick his boots ) so it will just be the normal people going about there jobs which this will interfere with.

I don't see why he should need all this security though, even if the worst does happen and someone blows him sky high it's not like he's even remotely irreplacable and someone else can take over his job a couple of hours later without anything disasterous occuring.

You could say this would be a major coup for whatever terrorist organisation pulls it off but it wouldn't be if you didn't let it and just shrugged your shoulders "So, you killed the president. So what ? Someone else is doing his job now". This is beside the fact that were I terrorist looking for some good publicity for myself to help my recruitment drive killing Bush is probably the last thing I'd do considering all the good things he's done for me already.

Re:Sure its not exclusive (5, Insightful)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 6 years ago | (#19160137)

You fail to realize that the "someone else" would be Cheney. I think Americans are more afraid for Bush's life right now than Bush himself could possibly be.

isn't it interesting... (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159569)

isn't it interesting that the US president is obviously so welcome in one of the US' closest allies?

what type (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159581)

Would that be an 'Aussie Rules' football field, or an American football field.. or a British football field ?? It's these sort of oversights that cause accidents !

Re:what type (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159985)

Well, Aussie Rules is played on an oval, so two radii, and they don't have a fixed size. If it's the others I'd like to know the radius of a rectangle.

Just curious (5, Insightful)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159583)

What's the legality of using signal-jamming equipment? I mean for non-presidents. Obviously, whatever the president does is always legal.

Re:Just curious (1, Insightful)

badfish99 (826052) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159685)

Obviously, whatever the president does is always legal.

The propaganda has had its effect on you, then. But some of us are still resisting it.

Re:Just curious (1)

CaptainPatent (1087643) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159737)

It isn't legal at all in the US or Australia (check the legality section of this wiki article [wikipedia.org]

Re:Just curious (1)

allscan (1030606) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159909)

You seem to forget that the Executive Branch (i.e. President) is supposed to enforce the laws. Just because there is a law saying they are illegal doesn't mean they are going to enforce laws on themselves. Plus, most laws are written so they exempt government agencies/branches especially for matters of national security (I don't really like that term, but I haven't found a better one).

Re:Just curious (1)

CaptainPatent (1087643) | more than 6 years ago | (#19160007)

Actually the original post was wondering if this was illigal for a normal person so I really didn't forget anything.

Nothing screams low key approach... (2, Funny)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159585)

Nothing screams low key approach like a helicopter blaring above.

Wasn't Bush given a mobile phone after 9/11?

How would they inform him if a problem occurs?

Re:Nothing screams low key approach... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159829)

My guess? Encrypted two-way radio. Want even more fun? I'd bet that frequency hopping will be a part of their loadset.

tell all (1)

spamking (967666) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159587)

Doesn't seem like the smartest thing to let potential enemies know of such plans in advance.

That's what we do best here in the US.

Helicopter (4, Funny)

MECC (8478) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159591)

Will people be able to hear anything he says in the open with a helicopter overhead?

Oh wait that's right - it won't matter.

Helicopter? (3, Funny)

carpe_noctem (457178) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159593)

The president's motorcade will be shadowed by a helicopter equipped with signal-jamming equipment.

I'm just hoping it's not black, for the sake of the tinfoil-hat crowd...

Re:Helicopter? (1)

camusflage (65105) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159959)

I'm just hoping it's not black, for the sake of the tinfoil-hat crowd...

Only the mind control ray helicopters are black. Sheesh, I thought everyone knew this already!

I've wondered about this... (4, Insightful)

SCHecklerX (229973) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159605)

With the terrorists probably not using the most advanced triggering mechanisms, couldn't the jamming itself cause a bomb to go off? Anybody who understands how it all works, please comment.

Re:I've wondered about this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159747)

we had to give up on the cellphone-triggered-bomb because it might... oh wait

Re:I've wondered about this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159763)

They usually hook up the ringer on a phone to a detonation wire. So unless the jamming causes phones to ring, which it wouldn't, it won't cause the bombs to go off.

Re:I've wondered about this... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159765)

It will blow up at a random time instead of the worst possible time which makes it possibly 10x less lethal.

Re:I've wondered about this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159793)

I'm no expert, but I really don't see how it can possibly be complicated to wire something to trigger based on the absence of a signal rather than a signal. You could even keep the mobile phone method.. simply make a call to the device, leave it off the hook, and set it to go off when the call is terminated.

Or, you could use the jamming itself as the trigger. I imagine the type of signal they'll need to kick out to jam that wide an area pumps tons of crap into the waveband, just set your gadget to wait for high-intebnsity EM garbage instead of a call.

Cellphone bomb FUD news (1, Informative)

packetmon (977047) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159609)

Triggering Bombs by Remote Key Entry Devices

I regularly read articles about terrorists using cell phones to trigger bombs. The Thai government seems to be particularly worried about this; two years ago I blogged about a particularly bizarre movie-plot threat along these lines. And last year I blogged about the cell phone network being restricted after the Mumbai terrorist bombings.

Source [schneier.com]

Re:Cellphone bomb FUD news (1)

strider44 (650833) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159683)

On Schneier's blog today on this topic there was one smart commenter with an interesting idea. What the terrorists should do is still rig a phone up to a bomb that detonates a second after phone signal is lost. This way you can plant a bomb and you know you only need to blow up an area the size of a football field!

Isn't it wonderful that the terrorists have time to prepare now with so much warning? This is a movie plot threat straight out of James Bond. Security theatre at best.

Re:Cellphone bomb FUD news (3, Funny)

errxn (108621) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159777)

What the terrorists should do is still rig a phone up to a bomb that detonates a second after phone signal is lost.
They'd better hope they're not using Sprint.

Re:Cellphone bomb FUD news (1)

bcattwoo (737354) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159941)

On Schneier's blog today on this topic there was one smart commenter with an interesting idea. What the terrorists should do is still rig a phone up to a bomb that detonates a second after phone signal is lost. This way you can plant a bomb and you know you only need to blow up an area the size of a football field!

Isn't it wonderful that the terrorists have time to prepare now with so much warning? This is a movie plot threat straight out of James Bond. Security theatre at best.
It is conceivable that someone might be able to conceal a bomb along the motorcade route big enough to blow up Bush's limo as it passes by. A bomb big enough to blow it up while a football field length away should easily be detected by security when they pre-sweep the area along the route.

Credible? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159619)

There are other ways to detonate explosives remotely. Doesn't seem like the smartest thing to let potential enemies know of such plans in advance.

Assuming, of course, it's true. Which is hardly certain--the Bush administration is certainly not above putting out misinformation...

And clearly there's some advantage gained by getting hypothetical bad guys to rule out a potentially easy way to do things.

But seriously (5, Interesting)

Magada (741361) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159633)

Security theater at its very best, folks... Only there may be an ulterior motive here. The Seattle WTO riots were co-ordinated via cellphone. Someone has taken the lesson to heart. Oh well, it's back to walkie-talkies for the concerned activists.

Re:But seriously (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159717)

Doubtful. Assuming the article is accurate, a 100 yard/meter radius is hardly sufficient to keep a crowd from organizing effectively.

Now, taking the entire cell infrastructure offline WOULD do that, but that's hardly similar.

Re:But seriously (1)

Magada (741361) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159811)

Walk a city block in Sidney. How long is it? If you can keep rioters from organizing effectively inside a circle which covers one major road intersection in every direction from your motorcade, you win, without causing too much disruption. How are they supposed to re-deploy to follow you if spotters can't report the direction you're taking?

Re:But seriously (2, Insightful)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159785)

I agree, many people felt the restrictions imposed when he visited London, particularly those which kept the public away from him were driven more by the desire to keep anti-war/anti US policy protesters out of sight than any real security concerns. God forbid the propaganda machine be exposed to a divergent public opinion.

Re:But seriously (2, Informative)

dr_dank (472072) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159965)

The Seattle WTO riots were co-ordinated via cellphone. Someone has taken the lesson to heart. Oh well, it's back to walkie-talkies for the concerned activists.

Don't take the propaganda bait by lumping in legitmate activists with those who destroy property and incite riots.

Re:But seriously (3, Insightful)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 6 years ago | (#19160101)

Don't take the propaganda bait by lumping in legitimate activists with agents provocateurs sent by the government.

Golly gee (2, Insightful)

Psx29 (538840) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159639)

that's great and all but I was under the impression most serious terrorists didn't really care if they die or maybe even intent on blowing themselves up anyway.

Re:Golly gee (1)

sane? (179855) | more than 6 years ago | (#19160127)

Jamming remote control bomb detention, because the typical attackers aren't known to detonate the bomb by hand...

You've got to say Idiocracy is more a documentary than a work of fiction. The reality is, if any smart attacker wanted to off Bush, they could handle it easily. However, any smart attacker knows their biggest supporter is Bush himself. Why attack the person that helps you year after year and acts as your greatest recruitment poster? He might get replaced by someone with a clue (OK, not likely, but the risk is there).

Bush and Islamic extremists are a symbiotic pairing. He could wander around any part of the middle east and be safe. The biggest danger to Bush is Bush himself.

Also, With Plants ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159645)

The article forgot to mention that the president's mere presence causes plants to wilt and die within a football field's length of the president.

Incidentally, this is the same buffer area that animals naturally keep from Bush. His pets are robots.

Re:Also, With Plants ... (2, Funny)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159679)

The article forgot to mention that the president's mere presence causes plants to wilt and die within a football field's length of the president.

You're thinking of Cheney...

Re:Also, With Plants ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159907)

The article forgot to mention that the president's mere presence causes plants to wilt and die within a football field's length of the president.

You're thinking of Cheney...
That's funny, I don't recall Cheney's stance on the Kyoto Treaty ... I do, unfortunately, recall Bush's attitude towards it.

A more useful application (5, Insightful)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159647)

Put this technology into cinemas.

Re:A more useful application (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159867)

No way. Then theaters will have to pay millions upgrading audio systems to drown out the helicopters.

I say we just punch the fuckers.

Until you need to call 911 (1)

kt0157 (830611) | more than 6 years ago | (#19160079)

Nice one. Yes, let that poor bastard with a heart attack not be able to make a 911 call.

In most countries this kind of jamming is illegal. For good reason.

What?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159649)

First he causes Hurricane Katrina, now this?! THE HUMANITY!

Speaking of more than one way... (5, Informative)

rjamestaylor (117847) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159655)

There are other ways to detonate explosives remotely. Doesn't seem like the smartest thing to let potential enemies know of such plans in advance.
What makes you think this is the only countermeasures they are employing? Perhaps they just want to get the word out about why a helicopter is tailing the President and why people's cell phones seem to be losing signal in his powerful presence. That is, maybe they want to explain the obvious stuff in advance.

Sounds pretty mild (4, Interesting)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159657)

They practically wanted to take over London when he visited. US agents were to be armed and given ridiculous powers (the we can shoot who we want and are not to be held accountable was particularly amusing). The usual visiting dignatary events were ignored and large portions of the city were closed to the public if Bush was anywhere near.

The heavy handed approach is a really good way to make a very poor impression with the citizens of nation you are visiting.

Re:Sounds pretty mild (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159783)

Gotta love it. I have lived here all my life, abided by all the important laws (well, I have a string of speeding fines... thanks to the Vic Govt). Pay my taxes, support Australian companies and do the right thing. But the next thing is, I am being alienated out of my own country.

Personally, why spend all this excess cash on someone. Why treat a country's citizens who as a majority do the right thing as second class.

Re:Sounds pretty mild (2, Insightful)

CmdrGravy (645153) | more than 6 years ago | (#19160051)

Exactly, why should ordinary people have these hassles foisted on them because someone else thinks they are special and requires ridiculous levels of security. If he wants to talk to anyone in Australia he can either use the phone or turn up like anyone else without the need for huge motorcades, helicopters and the like.

I don't know how he travels about in the US but I'm sure that Sydney isn't inherently any more dangerous than Washington ( how many terrorist attacks have there been in Australia ? ) so if you ask me all these ridiculous measures are more to do with him emphasising his own importance and the fact places he visits are willing to accede to his demands.

Re:Sounds pretty mild (1)

Silver Sloth (770927) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159795)

Maybe this is because we Brits are so under the US thumb - sorry, enjoy a special relationship - that they can get away with it whereas no-one tells an Ausie what to do!

Re:Sounds pretty mild (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159963)

The heavy handed approach is a really good way to make a very poor impression with the citizens of nation you are visiting.
That's ok, I doubt he's about to start worrying about the impression he's making now.

Oh, did you think these visits were for the benefit of the visited? Haha! They're so he can come back home and fill the news with stories about how he was welcomed by the fur'ners with open arms and open wallets, and how they joined with him in pledges to fight the evil turr'ists, and how they agree that every civil liberty he takes from us really wasn't that important anyway, and in fact he can have some of theirs as well, and how everyone loves us really. You Aussies get as outraged at us and our thief-in-chief as you want, 99% of our people will never hear word one about it.

Dude, you are in Australia (0)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159677)

Why not avail yourself to the local explosive-sniffing koalas and ass kicking kangaroo bodyguards? No need for anything fancy.

Re:Dude, you are in Australia (0)

unfunk (804468) | more than 6 years ago | (#19160049)

Warning: This is off-topic, but amusing...

Koalas consume only Eucalyptus leaves. When there is a bushfire, Animal Rescue people are instructed not to rescue burned Koalas because they have a tendency to explode from all the Eucalyptus Oil in their systems...

Other Methods? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159691)

Presumably the question about other methods of detonating a hypothetical device is with regards to how effective jamming the mobile net would be, so I would say it is effective in removing one potential threat, however if the mobile net is down I would assume that there are still a plethora of options, although none probably quite as attractive. You could use a different radio frequency, manual detonation (popular at the moment), infra red (needs line of sight), land line phone + cable (so its not wireless), an old fashioned timer or you could have a combination of them. I guess for a real treat you could set it to detonate once the source of the jamming is close to your device...

So does it eliminate the risk? no, does it reduce it and get rid of a really attractive method of remote detonation? Probably. You just have to weigh the safety of one man against the disruption that will be caused, (in a smallish area) to many.

Cant think why but I got the urge to post anonymously

fi8st posT (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159741)

racist? How Is Opinion] in other

911 (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159749)

Help, i need the police! The presidents motorcade is approaching and I can see a sni.. hello? hello?!

Typhoid Mary has nothing on GWB. (1)

Brissie_lad (523538) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159761)

I can tell you this - GWB can bloody keep the hell away from where I live if his presence means I can't use my mobile, what if it's an emergency call and his block means the difference between life and death?

(Disclaimer) I live in Brisbane, not Sydney, however I used to live in Sydney - then I saw the error of my ways and moved north to the land of bent coppers and cane toads.

Re:Typhoid Mary has nothing on GWB. (2, Insightful)

cliffski (65094) | more than 6 years ago | (#19160135)

thats a good point. who is responsible if a missed phone call means an accident victim doesnt make it?
I think we would be better off in the US president just stays in the USA where he is safe and people love him.

If you're that hated then stay home George (1)

gelfling (6534) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159789)

Seriously if can't move around outside a bubble like that then maybe you should think seriously of staying home. John Howard is one of your biggest friends. It's not like you're going to a Muslim Lesbian rally in Afghanistan or anything.

Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen (1)

Gordonjcp (186804) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159807)

You'd just need one traffic accident with someone unable to summon help because their phone was jammed...

Scene: Sydney Australia (1)

rlp (11898) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159839)

The following occurs between 02:00 and 02:01 UT

(Presidential motorcade passing by)
Secret Service Agent: (Opens cell phone) "Hello, get me Jack Bauer. ... Hello ... HELLO"

Hang on... (3, Insightful)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159843)

a helicopter equipped with signal-jamming equipment

So much for mobile phone radio frequencies interfering with saftey-critical avionics! I guess milirtary helicopters don't have the most vulneable equipment (namely the credit card readers in seatback phones).

In other news: President stung to death by bees driven into a frenzy by mobile phone radiation... (Yes, yes I know the mobile phones affect bees thing has been debuinked).

I for one welcome our... (1)

drewzhrodague (606182) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159859)

I for one welcome our new presidential cell-phone jamming overlord. Actually, I just wish he'd go away, and not come back. And I want a refund on my taxes. Make that two of 'em.

r u kiddin? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159863)

Oh! Riiiight, and when everyone got pissed making up emergencies that were not prevented because of unexpected phone outage, I'm sure NOBODY would blame bush for that.

Iraq (1)

ChiefArcher (1753) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159873)

Doesn't make sense... In Iraq, they installed cellphone jammers on the HUMV's... and it worked for about a month..
Now the bombs look for the LACK of cell phone signals to go off.

This is stupid.

Why not a UAV? (1)

jpellino (202698) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159875)

You need helicopter- horsepower to carry something that has to over-ERP 3 watt cell signals for a few hundred yards?

Not the smartest thing? (1)

Keyslapper (852034) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159883)

There are other ways to detonate explosives remotely. Doesn't seem like the smartest thing to let potential enemies know of such plans in advance.

Well, this is George W. Bush we're talking about ...

I wonder.. (1)

nullfork (1089929) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159889)

Wonder if they'll publish the SAR rating of the jamming equipment?

I'm sure they would in America to stop all the lawsuits..

There's a couple of things from this (1)

Centurix (249778) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159927)

1. Develop bomb which detonates when it loses the signal
2. I want him and his entourage to wait outside my local cinema for about 2 hours while I watch a film.

I love the spin (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19159945)

If there was a visit by our speaker of the house, the headline would read, "Cell Phone's blocked due to Speak of the House's visit". But it's popular to say that Bush is responsible. Not that the "visit of a President or other political figure" is responsible. When it's an unpopular leader, we make the leader responsible not the requirement for security.

bah, let Bush do what he wants (1)

weighn (578357) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159967)

I live in Sydney and I can see how the subj could appear trollish, but we've been given a one-off public holiday for this. I don't care what the fuck Bush or Howard or any of their cohorts do for just those 4 days. Howard has abolished the "Land of the Long Weekend" so lets make this a send off. As an added pinko idealistic nostalgia dream - how about us mere consu^H^H^H^H^H pions make it the start of an annual boycott from dronedom?

Does it matter..... (2, Informative)

chrism238 (657741) | more than 6 years ago | (#19159983)

That this article [abc.net.au] solidly refuses the claim? (of course, you have to believe another politician from the Coalition of the Killing).

Too easy to turn around on them.... (1)

Churla (936633) | more than 6 years ago | (#19160003)

1. Build bomb
2. Attach a mobile phone running windows mobile
3. Attach triggering to a process which polls a website, if it can't reach the website it sets the timer to go off in 30 seconds.
4. Jamming devices blocks cel signal..
5. 30 second countdown to detonation activates, giving enough time for the motorcade to get closer.

And letting people know about this ahead of time is the worst part... I'm not a huge fan of security through obscurity, but there's a difference between being obscure and telegraphing your methods.

The symbolism is gorgeous (5, Insightful)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 6 years ago | (#19160041)

To have Bush covered in a cone of reduced civil liberties is perhaps the most honest herald to ever signal a leader's presence.

His "legacy" practically writes itself.

F:AILZORS (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19160063)

number of FreeBSD BE IN A SCENE AND arseholes At Walnut

If it happned (1)

Nitack (1046362) | more than 6 years ago | (#19160087)

If the terrorists succeeded in killing Bush we would have an interesting series of events. First most of the world, including the US would be happy (look at his approval ratings) Then, we would realize that Chaney is our new President, and the entire world would cringe...

Famous quote (2, Insightful)

scottennis (225462) | more than 6 years ago | (#19160109)

There really isn't any need for bloodshed
Just do it with a little more finesse
If you can slip a tablet into someone's coffee
Then it avoids an awful lot of mess


I guess the point of terrorism is to make a really big bang, not just commit "murder by numbers".

Are you stupid, OP? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19160113)

*** There are other ways to detonate explosives remotely. Doesn't seem like the smartest thing to let potential enemies know of such plans in advance. ***

If you think this will be the only thing they jam...

of course, an actual wire and a plunger/physical switch is always a possibility...but c'mon, OP....are you really THAT dense?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...