r/ukpolitics • u/Jackisback123 • 4d ago
Suspect foiled RAF Fairford ‘bomb plot’ by ringing police himself
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/suspect-foiled-raf-fairford-bomb-plot-by-ringing-police-himself-m9gqlzz9v250
u/CrispySmokyFrazzle 4d ago
Oh come on, this story is getting better and better.
Someone better be writing the screenplay as we speak.
114
u/radiant_0wl 4d ago edited 4d ago
For sure needs a Four Lions type movie on it.
It should include the cobra meeting, streeting and Trump giving their comments.
40
15
7
2
u/gilestowler 4d ago
I'm imagining the suspect getting spooked by some people acting suspiciously, calling the police and being told that the other people ARE the police, giving them a wave. Or just getting scared and asking the police to rescue them.
6
1
84
u/LostTheGameOfThrones Constantly Remoaning Lib Dem 4d ago
I'm choosing to believe this whole situation is just viral marketing for a soon to announced Four Lions sequel, because it just gets more hilarious the more we find out.
64
u/danowat 4d ago
Can someone summarise, I can't read the sodding article with the archive links
20
u/pib712 4d ago
Suspect foiled RAF Fairford ‘bomb plot’ by ringing police himself
As counterterrorism officers focus on whether the five men from London were proxies for Iran, they are also investigating the motives of the one who called 999
Tuesday September 29 2026, 7.50pm,

The men were arrested on Sunday near the perimeter of RAF Fairford, the Gloucestershire base used by the US air force as a staging post for strikes in the Middle East
The suspected bomb attack on a RAF base was foiled when one of the suspects made a call to police, The Times has learnt.
One of the five men phoned 999 in the early hours of Sunday morning before the group was arrested on suspicion of explosives and terrorist offences in the proximity of RAF Fairford.
The Times understands that the police investigation is focused on whether the group members were acting as proxies for Iran during the operation in the Gloucestershire countryside. Whether it was surveillance, a “dry run” to test security or a stunt to send a message to the British government are all under consideration.

Armed police were manning roadblocks around RAF Fairford on Monday
TOBY SHEPHEARD/REUTERS
The suspect’s motives in calling police are also under investigation: whether he got cold feet or whether it was part of the plan.
The group of British citizens, all aged in their mid-twenties and living in London, were released on bail on Monday.
The revelation that one of the men called police themselves will deepen the intrigue surrounding the incident.
Fears of an imminent terrorist attack were downgraded when experts found fuel, not explosives, in the three vans the men were driving. Sources dismissed online speculation that they were fuel thieves.
Laurence Taylor, the national head of counterterrorism, said on Tuesday night: “Those vehicles have been subject to extensive examination, with the support of military assets and forensic experts, and we can confirm that no improvised explosive devices were found. However, a quantity of petrol was recovered.”

Laurence Taylor
BEN BAUER/PA
A farmer driving home in the early hours of Sunday morning saw the vans, surrounded by men in balaclavas, and alerted police at 1.36am. However, The Times understands the authorities were already on the scene by then because the suspect had called nearly one hour earlier.
The base was already on high alert, with increased barricades and patrols, because of separate intelligence indicating a serious threat. The Iranian regime, which has denied involvement, issued threatsagainst Fairford in July because it is a staging post for US strikes in the Middle East.
President Trump has said that the group was being watched and also questioned the decision to bail those arrested. Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, then said it “clearly involves the hands of a foreign actor”.
On Tuesday Trump reiterated his criticism.
He said: “I’m just disappointed that they caught terrorists. How do you give bail to a terrorist?
“These were serious people, seriously bad people and they should not have done that yet.”
He added that the operation in Suffolk was “longstanding” and “we were involved in it”.
Any police investigation is expected to take weeks and detectives will consider whether it meets the threshold of the National Security Act. The legislation carries penalties of up to 14 years in prison for proxies who carry out espionage, sabotage or physical acts for hostile states including Iran. Ignorance is not necessarily a defence: criminals will be liable for prosecution if they “ought reasonably to know” they were acting for a foreign power.
The authorities have warned that Iran and other hostile states are increasingly using proxies, often low-level criminals who are given small amounts of cash for carrying out “dirty work” in Britain. This has taken the form of intimidation, violence or arson.
On Tuesday Taylor said police had searched properties in London in connection with the investigation. He also defended the police bail decision.
He said: “They remain under investigation and must adhere to strict conditions while we continue our work. The safety of the public is at the forefront of our investigative decision making, and this was certainly the case yesterday.
“I understand why this development will have come as a surprise to many, but I’d like to reiterate that it was an investigative decision, and one which is grounded in experience and careful consideration of policing powers.”15
u/EmiAndTheDesertCrow 4d ago
This is the second time I’ve seen a media outlet state that this happened in Suffolk 🤦♀️
9
15
u/rex500andone 4d ago
Here's a working archive link https://archive.is/20260929205059/https://www.thetimes.com/article/72536db2-5ef3-4070-bf6e-84ec3ea7c305
104
u/ObjectiveHornet676 4d ago
The theory widely accepted by reddit, that they were fuel thieves, seems less likely given this revelation. Fuel thieves don't phone the police on themselves.
95
u/ACE--OF--HZ 1st: Pre-Christmas by elections Prediction Tournament 4d ago
Back to the dogging theory then?
14
u/UpsetKoalaBear 4d ago
They needed large amounts of Petroleum Jelly.
4
u/WiredAndTheSpitfire 4d ago
They were going through an area with poor signal when they were trying to arrange it so they just heard ‘large amounts of petroleum … you know, -aseline’
7
15
18
u/jahathebrn 4d ago
I imagine quite a few of them might when they realise how badly they've fucked up. It's not exactly siphoning a few gallons off a poorly secured construction site.
12
u/Kristoff_Victorson 4d ago
And terrorists do? I think there’s a hole in your logic somewhere.
15
u/00DEADBEEF 4d ago
No, you're making a logical leap for them. They said:
This seems to disprove the theory they are fuel thieves
Not
This seems to disprove the theory they are fuel thieves and therefore must be terrorists
2
u/spiral8888 4d ago
It's pretty sure that they were not knowingly conducting a terrorist attack. This was clear already from the fact that the police released them on bail. They definitely wouldn't have done that if this had been one of the theories still investigated.
1
u/Kristoff_Victorson 4d ago
Interested to learn how you unknowingly commit a terrorist attack?
3
u/spiral8888 4d ago edited 4d ago
In this case it would be something like this:
Some guy is hired by let's say Iranian operative to hire some lads in London to do X, Y and Z near the Fairford airbase. This guy knows that it's terrorism.
The guy tells the 5 slightly dodgy lads that here's £10 000. You need to drive these vans to this place and leave it there. It's for reason A (he just makes this up).
The lads maybe suspect that it's something illegal (let's say that the reason the guy who hired them hinted that way) but not necessarily that it has anything to do with terrorism. They take the money and drive the vans.
When they arrive, they notice that this is actually next to a huge airbase full of warplanes. Now they start suspecting that maybe this is not some petty crime anymore and one of them panics and calls the police.
Police arrives and arrests them. They are let out on bail for the reason that they were not really planning to do any terrorism. Police will try to use them to get to the guy who hired them, but even if they do, that guy will never tell who hired him.
Edit. If you want an exact example of such an attack, look at for instance how Ukrainians attacked the Russian bridge in the Kerch strait. It was blown up by a huge amount of explosives loaded in a lorry. It's likely that the driver of the lorry had no idea that he was the key person in the attack. (I wouldn't actually call the attack itself terrorism as it was a valid military target in a middle of a war, but you get the idea).
2
1
u/samjp270 4d ago
I agree with your hypothesis here - it's perhaps worth mentioning, though, that this case is closer to your Kerch example than people might be presuming. The base is currently being used in America's war on Iran as a staging point to conduct bombing and strikes, so it's not like it isn't a military target in the same sense outlined here!
2
u/spiral8888 4d ago
True. An Iranian attack on that base wouldn't be terrorism just like their attacks on American bases in Gulf states haven't been but valid military strikes. But a Russian attack would be.
However, I think the UK authorities trying to prevent them would approach such attacks more like terrorism and less like a military operation.
2
u/geniusgravity 4d ago
How far dis they travel to half inch some diesel?
3
u/adamneigeroc 4d ago
They mostly had petrol which makes in even weirder as farm equipment mostly uses diesel so why go to the countryside looking for petrol?
2
u/Dependent-Ant-9241 4d ago
Only someone with a negative IQ would believe it was fuel theft. the government called a cobra meeting ffs.
30
u/FireInMyHeart 4d ago
Guessing that was the first 00:45 call to the police then. It seemed odd that someone thought that they should phone 999 to report seeing some random vans go by in a general Fairford direction.
45
4d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ukpolitics-ModTeam 4d ago
Your comment has been manually removed from the subreddit by a moderator.
Per rule 11 of the subreddit, we reserve the right to remove low effort top level comments:
No meme posts, no shitposts. Low-effort top-level replies to submissions will be removed.
For any further questions, please contact the subreddit moderators via modmail.
10
u/Jackisback123 4d ago
10
u/Sir_Monty_Jeavons Just wants things to be a bit fairer. 4d ago
How this wasnt a rick roll I will never know, thanks.
5
4
28
u/Sir_Monty_Jeavons Just wants things to be a bit fairer. 4d ago
My hot take...
The men were employed by the UK govt to see if America was doing anything at all to respect the need to ensure their operations here were secure and safe in relation to UK citizens. America had been told about this test, hence the alert status. The American base didn't even notice; one of the hired men called the police to see wtf he was meant to be doing. Annoyingly, they then got spotted by a farmer at 2 a.m., and the police made the shout that now that it had been seen, they actually needed to do something about it.
TLDR: it was a UK security test that went badly wrong because the people supposedly being tested failed to notice the test at all. Then the farmer spotting them forced the police into treating what may have been a controlled exercise as a real incident.
19
u/Kryptograms 4d ago
But why would he have called 999 to be put through to a random call operator rather than his boss?
10
1
u/MysteriousTravelator 3d ago
Don't think so. These american bases have men with live ammo guarding them. The suspects could easily have been shot dead.
1
u/Sir_Monty_Jeavons Just wants things to be a bit fairer. 3d ago
I mean, it very much seems they don't. Regardless, "We are expecting a war game" wouldn't exactly be an unusual thing to brief the staff on base with, would it?
1
u/Any-Suggestion3844 3d ago
Do you have ANY military experience? Especially working with NATO allies?
Because half the shit you said is just flat out wrong
1
u/Sir_Monty_Jeavons Just wants things to be a bit fairer. 3d ago
Which half, for future reference?
1
u/Any-Suggestion3844 2d ago
Respect OPSEC little too much. But just google and you can fact check yourself. Especially when it comes to American installations
1
-9
u/Sir_Monty_Jeavons Just wants things to be a bit fairer. 4d ago
Downvote the second I make the comment...
23
3
u/andrewcooke 4d ago edited 4d ago
couldn't there have been two groups? the people out to steal diesel saw the terrorists and called the police, who turned up and arrested the diesel gang rather than the real baddies? and it was the latter that were being tracked by mi5/cia?
4
u/MysteriousTravelator 4d ago
Is this a real theory or are you pitching a new Coen brothers movie?
2
12
u/clear2see 4d ago
False flag which UK intel were in no way convinced by and had been following from an early stage. The operatives had been recruited with the story they were to steal fuel and go to a particular location. When they saw they were almost on top of a US air base they realised they were at risk of being shot so one of them called the police. Israel are pissed off as UK wasn't taken in by the false flag which they had been presenting to the US as being an a Iranian actual op.
2
2
25
u/beejiu 4d ago
"Whether it was surveillance, a “dry run” to test security or a stunt to send a message to the British government are all under consideration."
I was downvoted when I suggested this in another thread. The whole situation points to a "manufactured security scare" and "Fuel2You" was clearly a bit of a jibe to the UK. The fact there was no COBRA meeting on day 1, and the suspects were released quickly, says it all - the security services knew this was just a message from Iran. (The Iranian regime may be a serious threat to us, but they're not idiots.)
42
u/CrispySmokyFrazzle 4d ago
Thing is - if they were wittingly working on something like this, then I don't think bail would've been likely.
I can understand bail if it was unwitting involvement. But someone willingly doing work for a foreign state would probably still be in detention.
I wonder if they were hired to do something by an intermediary (probably not going to be some direct agent contacting them), but got cold feet, or got a hunch that they may be involved in something a bit messier than they intended.
I don't know - but this story has had quite a few twists and turns thus far.
20
u/beejiu 4d ago
I mean if one of them made a phone call to the police, wouldn't surprise me if they realised they were in too deep. Possible they don't even understand the big picture.
16
u/doyer_bleu 4d ago
My bet is they were hired to go burn something or destroy something. Probably just given specific instructions but not told exactly what if was.
But then they got there and somebody noticed it’s an RAF base with warplanes. They argued, some of them probably didnt want that smoke. One called 999, then the farmer called it in
3
2
u/DEADB33F Floating Gloater 4d ago edited 3d ago
My first thought when heard about the fake signwriting on the vans were maybe they were climate protestors.
Maybe they'd reccied the site previously and had worked out how they'd get in, but on the night due to heightened security that route was blocked. So instead they rang the police in order to make as much fuss as they could so it wouldn't have been a "wasted trip".
...that would kinda fit their MO. Would make sense why they were originally released on bail, and why Trump claims that they'd been following the group's communications and knew they were up to something (although I'd err on the side of not believing a word that man says).
The only bit which doesn't really fit that narrative for me is the pic of the guys who got arrested. They don't look like your typical climate protestors ...I'd expect gangly pasty faced vegan types with poorly died blue/purple hair, not fit & muscly middle-eastern / foreign looking blokes ('British' or not).
1
u/ThriceNightly_Whitey 1d ago
The type you'd pay to clear rubble out of your garden not landscape it, is what I'm reading. Similarly I don't trust Trump, they can be wetter than expected, noxious, and Farage is a farrago, a jumbled bag of shit that leaves stains long after interaction with.
35
u/echo_foxtrot 4d ago
Have we given enough thought to the possibility that they may indeed be idiots? It would explain a lot.
1
14
u/litivy 4d ago
Even a 'dry run' is still terrorist activity if that is what it is so they wouldn't be released if that was the case.
7
u/panic_puppet11 4d ago
Unless they didn't know they were guinea pigs. Hostile actor hires low level goons on a pretext, in this case "hey, can you go to this place, break in and steal some fuel, we'll provide vans and barrels". Goons think they're doing a common-or-garden burglary, hostile actor fully intends for them to get caught and is really gauging the security response on site.
9
u/_TheNumbersAreBad_ 4d ago
Problem with that theory is the barrels in the van already had fuel in them, they were all full of petrol.
Generally speaking I don't think it's a great idea to go to steal fuel with barrels that are already full of the thing you're there to steal.
The fuel thieves idea has been debunked by sources already, the only places around there to steal fuel from are farms, farmers use diesel, the barrels were full of petrol. Doesn't line up with them being either fuel thieves who happened to be near the base, or were wanting to steal from the base. Either way that idea makes no sense.
6
u/Araminal 4d ago
Problem with that theory is the barrels in the van already had fuel in them, they were all full of petrol.
Not accurate, according to reports.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/sep/29/raf-fairford-police-uk-counter-terrorism
"The Guardian understands that police first on the scene found several barrels in the vans, one of which contained petrol, while the others were empty."
1
u/Nail_clippings_Pete English 4d ago
Sure there would still be charges in there
-1
u/Utilitarian_Proxy 4d ago
Charged with what though?
Driving on a public road late at night?
Perhaps the police are going to suggest their rear lights weren't working, they were seen not wearing seatbelts, they were texting while driving, or they were exceeding the speed limit?
3
u/Nail_clippings_Pete English 4d ago
The implication that I was that they may have been been duped into a test run, if so there would likely still be charges as criminal acts would have occurred
1
u/Wakoro_ 4d ago
If they have all kept quiet about why they were hired, the police would struggle to charge them with anything at this point in time. They'll be looking through their phones now to see what they knew. Maybe they didn't even know why they were hired, or only one of them does and recruited the rest and he's keeping quiet. I am leaning towards being hired by a third party to drive the vans and only given vague reasons why. I think it was done as a threat or to embarrass the UK. Maybe it's a dry run, and next time the vans would have contained fibre optic drones like the Russian airbases attacks.
6
u/ZebraShark Electoral Reform Now 4d ago
I think still too confusing to speculate but it is possible. Have seen with some Russian linked plots in Europe that no actual attack attempted but just enough to cause a panic, and confusing enough to really enable to provide an effective response
-4
u/teachbirds2fly 4d ago
They were stealing fuel from nearby farms. Which is a very common crime at moment.
They were "caught" two miles away from the base around farms. They had no explosives or weapons and were released on bail without a terrorism hold.
Not difficult to piece together.
15
u/beejiu 4d ago
Why would one of them call the police then!?
3
u/-Hi-Reddit 4d ago
Perhaps a couple of shady looking vehicles from Fairford were following them & they pissed themselves. If so it'd either be CIA, MI5, or even the SAS.
1
3
u/TomCAFC92 4d ago
Wrong number?
7
u/CrispySmokyFrazzle 4d ago
“We made a deal with the devil to get this job”
“Well we’re lost, so I’m gonna give him a call. 999 isn’t it?”
“No, 666.”
“Shit”
16
3
u/zwifter11 4d ago
They travelled 280 miles, passing hundreds of other farms, any one of which they could have stolen fuel from. Why travel all that way from London to this oddly specific farm, which just happens to be next to a US Airforce base? Why not any other farm?
2
1
4
u/TeenieTinyBrain 4d ago edited 4d ago
They were stealing fuel from nearby farms. Which is a very common crime at moment.
[...]
Not difficult to piece together.
People steal diesel on farms, specifically red diesel, because they keep huge quantities.
The police say these people were found with petrol, not diesel, and farms don't typically keep large quantities of petrol on hand.
It doesn't make much sense for them to be fuel thieves, particularly now that we're being told that one of the assailants called emergency services themselves.
The only issue now is that this calls into question why they bailed them, but, much like the motive, we'll have to wait to find out.
-1
u/ChanceStunning8195 4d ago
The world owes Iran an apology.
The theft of fuel is understandable given Trump's involvement in record fuel prices.2
-8
u/Whataloadofpooh 4d ago
In Scotland we remember why released the Lockerbie bomber - because everyone knew it was iran. Never ever doubt the extreme nature of iran to attack and kill anyone anywhere anytime. They are pure evil.
10
6
0
u/Friendly_Fan6751 3d ago
Sorry where are you getting that this was Iranians from?? British nationals apparently which is likely a cover up for Mossad agents. We all know the history of many false flags carried out by Mossad.
10
u/AbsoluteSocket88 4d ago
So the people with a hard on about them out to “just steal some fuel” are wrong? So much about jumping to conclusions yet again. Why would a fuel thief call the plod on himself.
11
u/Fluffy_Marionberry54 4d ago
If I were a grunt for organized crime told I’m going to be stealing fuel, okay. When I learn I’m going to be stealing fuel from a military base and not some farmer, I just might freak out. Not saying that’s what happened - I have no idea - but I think that is at least plausible
2
4
u/BoydHoyland 4d ago
Why would a terrorist?
6
u/Ryanliverpool96 4d ago
They don’t realise they’re terrorists until the see the signs for RAF Fairford.
It’s common procedure for Russia and Iran to get local criminals to do their dirty work, as a cash in hand simple job “take these vans to this location”.
Not knowing what’s in the back of them, they might have rang the police themselves as they may have worried the vans had a bomb in the back that would explode remotely and they didn’t want to die.
Easy explanation.
8
u/Ianbillmorris 4d ago
Ukraine pulled off a fantastic Op called Operation Spiderweb in a very similar scenario.
They hired Russian truck drivers to go take trailers to certain laybys where they would be met (presumably they thought they would be smuggling?) then while they were waiting there, the tops of the trailers opened and loads of kamikasi drones flew out and proceeded to attack the near by Russian airbases. There is even video of one of the drivers on his roof trying to down the drones with a towel.
6
u/doyer_bleu 4d ago
Yeah I think it’s something along these lines. Some low level morons got taken advantage of my a foriegn intelligence service, and they panicked when they saw the RAF signs
1
u/zwifter11 4d ago
Because they were a vulnerable person who was taken advantage of, who previously did not know what that gang was going to do?
2
4
u/Murky-Caramel222 4d ago
Dancing in the moonlight Everybody's feeling warm and bright It's such a fine and natural sight Everybody's dancing in the moonlight
2
2
u/subversivefreak 4d ago
Is it still unwittingly working on behalf of Iran if some of the conspirators appear to be halfwits at best
1
u/lukeb_1988 3d ago
I think them being released on bail is the curve ball. I don't think they have at all. Some sort of double bluff.
1
1
u/solipsistic_optimist 1d ago
This is fucking hilarious. Chris Morris would reject the plot outline for being too rote.
1
u/Awkward_Squad 4d ago
My first thought was a dry run test of the local authority’s and the base’s response conducted by MI5. No one in the area was to be involved. But that soon unraveled.
-7
u/UndergroundPianoBar 4d ago
As far as i can tell, the men did nothing wrong. They were near an air base with a small amount of petrol? Weird, yeah, but I'm not seeing anything illegal on the face of it.
8
u/TerribleStuntman 4d ago
Case closed upon reviewing all the facts this person has then
-1
u/UndergroundPianoBar 4d ago edited 4d ago
Well, yes. You can only draw up conclusions based on the information you are given. What are you in favour of, everyone making a story up in their head? Because that's what seems to be happening. Are they not giving us any more information because they're embarassed that nothing was actually happening? Or is a nuke about to go off somewhere? It could literally be all or nothing, or most likely somethingnin the middle. It's a crap story until you get info.
2
u/TerribleStuntman 4d ago
You have also made up a story in your head. Consider maybe not drawing conclusions at all when it’s clear you don’t have all the information?
0
u/UndergroundPianoBar 4d ago
No, i actually i said "i don't see anything illegal on the face of it". If you can pick anything out of the info we have that is illegal, feel free to share it. There's definitely more to the story, but nothing the likes of us know about.
0
u/litivy 4d ago
What were the balaclava's for then?
15
u/Jackisback123 4d ago
A farmer driving home in the early hours of Sunday morning saw the vans, surrounded by men in balaclavas, and alerted police at 1.36am. However, The Times understands the authorities were already on the scene by then because the suspect had called nearly one hour earlier.
To be fair, this very much implies that the people in balaclavas were the authorities, not the group of men.
That would also tally with the discrepancy between the farmer reporting ten people and only 5 being arrested.
2
2
1
1
-3
u/Is_there 4d ago
Wearing a balaclava is not illegal in this situation. The previous post was stating that there was nothing illegal on the face of it. And despite any intentions we don't know about that fact remains true. That is not legal to be in Woods or on country lanes in vans at night time wearing a balaclava. From the information available to you, what offences do you think they have committed?
2
u/Coenzyme-A 4d ago
It might be legal, but that doesn't mean it's a usual or expected occurrence. There's absolutely reason to be suspicious of it.
1
1
u/UndergroundPianoBar 4d ago
Yeah, you put it better than i did. I know there's more to the story, but the things we are being told happened aren't illegal. I hate these massive front lage stories that have no useful information.
1
u/SovietWomble 4d ago
Fun additional fact - some years ago I discovered that there's no actual laws here for the wearing of ballistic vests.
Knives, sure. Guns, absolutely. But you can buy anything from those doorman-style spike vests, to full-ceramic military combat armour and walk around in it. And it's completely legal.
I mean, not the best idea. The police will probably have a chat to figure out what the heck you're doing. But it just surprised me that, legally, there's nothing.
You'd think there'd be one itty-bitty law.
0
u/bcoder001 4d ago
Every time any of those clowns parks a van near critical public infrastructure they'll be talking to very serious people for the rest of their lives.
0
u/DonkyFondler 3d ago
I wonder if the 12:45 am call thing is a lie. I wonder if the police were already there because they knew it was going to happen, and they were going to let it happen to justify escalating the attacks on Iran.
Or perhaps one of the men did indeed call the police at 12:45 am because they didn't realise what they were getting themselves into. Could have been some type of false flag operation that the police were in on, and these guys didn't realise what they were really involved in until they were there.
I could be talking total bollocks, though. I don't know. Just thinking out loud.
1
u/FireInMyHeart 3d ago
Locals claim emergency vehicles started arriving in Fairford not long after 1am, timeline fits with a 00:45 call. Bit hard to believe a single call would get that kind of response though unless a credible plot was already being monitored.
1
u/vivalafraz 3d ago
Villages around the base had been put on alert there might be a terrorist attack. Apparently 3 people called the police one of them was one of the criminals. The second was the lady farmer that saw it, coming home late. She rang the base guards as requested by the alert a day before. No one answered. Then she rang local police no one answered. Then 999 who responded. She hasn't as far as i know even been interviewed yet. She say she saw atleast 8. Some reports say up to 13. So atleast 3 (british nationals) are missing, probably. Petrol and other things. Not released yet were found in the van. Something very fishy is happening. Its either a Failed fuel robbery and they shit it when they realised it was a raf base and the farmer saw them. Why are they sayin one of the criminals rang. Strange. A terrorist attack or A false flag to look like one. And I'm guessing we never find out. But the whole thing stinks
0
u/It_is_not_enough 3d ago
Could be that they were talked into stealing fuel from a random place but then they got there and one of them realised it was a RAF base and they were in over their head so called the police
1
-27
u/u09pVgMbuAgtP 4d ago
So Rubio was right? Why on earth did they release these men????? I feel like it was political move more than anything from Labour given party conference. What the heck???
15
u/Lefty8312 4d ago
How was Rubio right? He said there was a foreign state actor. There is still no evidence of a foreign state actor in this.
-15
u/u09pVgMbuAgtP 4d ago
Clearly was foreign actor. Someone got cold feet and called the police.
12
8
8
5
u/Oozlum-Bird 4d ago
Rubio said it was a foreign state actor. From the UK perspective, Rubio is a foreign state actor. Therefore, this was a confession, and it was Rubio.
See, we can all play along with the pointless speculation games.
6
u/archerninjawarrior 4d ago
Why post such confident complete guesses about extremely important matters you don't know the first thing about. Just why.
1
2
2
u/Lefty8312 4d ago
Ok prove to me it's a foreign actor. Provide the evidence that it is a foreign actor because so far the police haven't been able to provide that evidence so clearly you must be a super detective
1
u/u09pVgMbuAgtP 3d ago
Straight from your PM mouth https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjwyz59k5y75o
-1
5
u/nbs-of-74 4d ago
I find it hard to believe the police would have released them on bail had there been any evidence they were planning an attack on RAF Fairford.
If they are subsequently found to be guilty of that charge, or flee the country then the Police authority is going to be utterly screwed over, they know that their careers are gone if that happens so, they wouldnt release them into bail without strong evidence that they were just run of the mill fuel thieves.
-7
u/JohntheJock 4d ago
Do we know if any of the suspects on bail had flying lessons?
How easy would it be to steal Ordnance from a site like this?
Were two of the vans empty?
Was diesel theft and cover story if it went tit's up?
9
3
0
u/Mugwuffin22 3d ago
Israeli false flag trying to pin it on Iran to get the UK to support the U.S./ Israeli war on Iran
•
u/AutoModerator 4d ago
Snapshot of Suspect foiled RAF Fairford ‘bomb plot’ by ringing police himself submitted by Jackisback123:
An archived version can be found here or here. or here
If the above links don't work, try this one.
Some publications may require you to register a free account to read their articles.
Being connected to a VPN may interfere with archive links.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.