Thread Options 
|
#596257 - 08/11/06 06:17 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
10K Club
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 10,124
Way, way south.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Honestly, as far as radicals in nearly any religion, I think it's as much of a cult mentality by other radicals as it is a mental issue on the part of the new member.
I cannot think of another radical religious group that is interested in maximizing carnage of innocent people.
I agree (and I didn't mention any religious group at all.)
I think that is what needs to be said, but hasn't been said enough.
_________________________
Giddy up.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596258 - 08/11/06 06:17 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
New Poster
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 16
|
Quote:
Quote:
They had a man inside this network, which has been in planning for five years
Pardon me if I sound disingenuous, but 5 years? I find that extremely hard to believe. Do you have real evidence to back this up? Or is that the headline on the Star in the checkout line today?
Unless you are Muslim, you can read as much about us as possible, but we know who we are. A Muslim is loyal to Islam first and then to the country they live in. Islam comes before anything for us which means we will be required to fight for Isalm even if we have to take arms against the country we live in. Whether we chose to do so is another matter but we will be required to or else we will be killed by our own people if we don't.
I guess people have forgotten that this plan was once in the process of being carried out in Phillipines - in the dry run, a Japanese tourist dies on board a Singapore Airliner when the chemical exploded. The blast was not enough to puncture a hole in the plane. Ten planes were to be blown over the Pacific Ocean.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596259 - 08/11/06 06:18 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Quote:
One of the key reasons given for the arrest is the human intelligence factor that the Brits have. They had a man inside this network, which has been in planning for five years.
No, from today's story in the Washington Post: "In the aftermath of the July 7, 2005 , suicide bombings on London's transit system, British authorities received a call from a worried member of the Muslim community , reporting general suspicions about an acquaintance.
From that vague but vital piece of information, according to a senior European intelligence official, British authorities opened the investigation into what they said turned out to be a well-coordinated and long-planned plot to bomb multiple transatlantic flights heading toward the United States -- an assault designed to rival the scope and lethality of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackings."
Muslim phone call
Quote:
While we were dismantling our covert operations in the ninety’s (under Clinton because of ALCU an ilk[sic]
Actually, according to the 9/11 Commission report the "FBI’s counterterrorism budget tripled during the mid-1990s".
The budget may have increased, but didn't the covert activities get cut back substantially?
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596260 - 08/11/06 06:21 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Actually, according to the 9/11 Commission report the "FBI’s counterterrorism budget tripled during the mid-1990s".
The 9/11 Commission was the biggest scam and cover up in recent history. No one was asked tough questions and nothing of substance came out of it.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596261 - 08/11/06 06:23 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Quote:
Actually, according to the 9/11 Commission report the "FBI’s counterterrorism budget tripled during the mid-1990s".
The 9/11 Commission was the biggest scam and cover up in recent history. No one was asked tough questions and nothing of substance came out of it.
Oh wow, I guess that redifines "scam".
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596262 - 08/11/06 06:24 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
WTC was first bombed in 1993 and then the plan for the next stage took 8 years to bring to fruition.
The fact that there was a period of eight years between the two doesn't mean it took eight years to plan the second. The two attacks were by unrelated groups, and al-Qaeda didn't engage in it's first attack until 1998, according to the 9/11 report.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596263 - 08/11/06 06:28 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
The budget may have increased, but didn't the covert activities get cut back substantially?
No. Do you have a credible source for thinking that they did?
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596264 - 08/11/06 06:33 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Quote:
The budget may have increased, but didn't the covert activities get cut back substantially?
No. Do you have a credible source for thinking that they did?
No, that is why I posted this in the form of a question. I remember hearing that they moved toward fewer covert agents and more bureaucrats in the 90s.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596265 - 08/11/06 06:35 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
The fact that there was a period of eight years between the two doesn't mean it took eight years to plan the second. The two attacks were by unrelated groups, and al-Qaeda didn't engage in it's first attack until 1998, according to the 9/11 report.
Well, remember what they say about diet books - be careful, you can die because of a misprint.
How the heck multi-millionaire senators who are aloof and out of touch with the grassroots and not street wise know what Al Qaeda is planning to do? You are putting too much faith in the government! 
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596266 - 08/11/06 06:40 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
New Poster
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 16
|
Quote:
No. Do you have a credible source for thinking that they did?
I am from PAkistan and my bother (now dead) worked as a covert officer in Pakistan and was a bad a@@ guy but provided great intel to USA. He was told to "disappear" becuase the USA was no longer going to pay "bad people" when Clinton became president.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596267 - 08/11/06 06:41 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Quote:
The budget may have increased, but didn't the covert activities get cut back substantially?
No. Do you have a credible source for thinking that they did?
Here is a source I found by doing a Google search. You will probably not consider it credible--NewsMax (speaking to an anonymous source--just like the NYT and others do--all the time):
Quote:
"Roger," was a CIA spy in the Mideast.
I met him almost two years ago. Roger wanted to tell me why a gung-ho American quit the CIA in disgust.
Roger said the CIA was not interested in recruiting spies.
Clinton and company knew they could not just tell the CIA to stop recruiting spies. That would look stupid and embarrassing.
So they just changed the rules of how spies are recruited, raising the bar on requirements to such a high degree that the most valuable spies could never meet CIA standards and couldn't work for us.
Previously, I wrote how Clinton effectively stopped the recruitment of Chinese nationals by demanding that only high-ranking embassy officials could be recruited – knowing this is almost impossible. Roger told me that. Roger reminded me again of this today.
He noted that Clinton policies reached their zenith under CIA Director John Deutch and his top assistant, Nora Slatkin. The pair ran Clinton's CIA in the mid-1990s and implemented a "human rights scrub" policy.
Here's how Roger described it in an e-mail Tuesday evening: "Deutch and Nora, Clinton's anti-intelligence plants, implemented a universal 'human rights scrub' of all assets, virtually shutting down operations for 6 months to a year. This was after something happened in Central America (there was an American woman involved who was the common law wife of a commie who went missing there) that got a lot of bad press for the agency.
"After that, each asset had to be certified as being 'clean for human rights violations.'
"What this did was to put off limits, in effect, terrorists, criminals, and anyone else who would have info on these kinds of people."
Roger says the CIA, even under new leadership, has never recovered from the "Human Rights Scrub" policy.
Perhaps that was the intention.
But we, the American people, Congress, and honest media need to examine all of these issues, now and quickly. If we don't, we risk even more grave dangers than those that we just lived through.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596268 - 08/11/06 06:42 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Wow! Right after I posted the NewsMax story, I read Saifkhan's post confirming exactly what "Roger," the former CIA agent told NewsMax about Clinton.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596269 - 08/11/06 07:48 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
How the heck multi-millionaire senators who are aloof and out of touch with the grassroots and not street wise know what Al Qaeda is planning to do?
Clearly you have no idea what the 9/11 report was. It was a report from a bipartisan commission that took testimony under oath from virually everyone with knowledge. It did not involve what al Qaeda was planning, but rather what had happened in the past. They had a large staff of professional investigators and produced an extensively documented and footnoted account of what led up to 9/11.
The people criticizing it should actually read it first: 9/11 report
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596270 - 08/11/06 07:50 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
You will probably not consider it credible--NewsMax
This is the understatement of the year. NewsMax is simply a propaganda machine.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596271 - 08/11/06 07:52 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Quote:
You will probably not consider it credible--NewsMax
This is the understatement of the year. NewsMax is simply a propaganda machine.
As is the NYT.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596272 - 08/11/06 07:53 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Quote:
You will probably not consider it credible--NewsMax
This is the understatement of the year. NewsMax is simply a propaganda machine.
I did another Google search for this and you can pick your source. There are many.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596273 - 08/11/06 08:01 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
10K Club
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 19,857
Pulling people out of the ditc...
|
Quote:
Pardon me if I sound racist, but many folks, particularly Caucasians, are too naive or too cultured to fathom what the enemy can do
I fail to see what race has to do with this. As a caucasian, I'm fully aware of what sick individuaals can do, reagrdles of their religious addiliation.
_________________________
Providing alternative truths since the invention of time
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596274 - 08/11/06 08:09 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
Clearly you have no idea what the 9/11 report was. It was a report from a bipartisan commission that took testimony under oath
So they took oath and that makes it gospel or all knowing? It is still a qualified report - which mean to the best of their knowledge, they think it is such and such. Do you think if the planes had exploded, these commissions would have ever figured out how the explosives got on board. Never.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596275 - 08/11/06 08:27 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Excert from the 9/11 preface, with my comments( )added for clarity.
"Our aim has not been to assign individual blame (because we did not want to offend anyone, especially Clinton under whose administration the sores were allowed to fester).
Our aim has been to provide the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11 and to identify lessons learned (which we have mostly based on assumptions since we never spoke with anyone who is in Al Qeada).
We learned about an enemy who is sophisticated, patient (can wait for years before they strike), disciplined, and lethal.The enemy rallies broad support in the Arab and Muslim world by demanding redress of political grievances (we think, although their intent is to rule the world), but its hostility toward us and our values is limitless. Its purpose is to rid the world of religious and political
pluralism, the plebiscite, and equal rights for women. It makes no distinction between military and civilian argets. Collateral damage is not in its lexicon.( they are happy to kill you)".
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596277 - 08/11/06 11:44 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Quote:
What do you mean by "tough questions"?
Although you replied to me, I never used that term. An anon above simply said that no one asked tough questions, but it is clear that that poster was simply parroting what they had heard without actually knowing anything about either the questioning by the commission or its investigators.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596278 - 08/12/06 03:20 AM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
You just seem brittle. Please warn me before I meet you.
I don't want to break anything!
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596280 - 08/13/06 03:22 AM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Since you seem to be the most resilient, I guess you don't care about reality. You make jokes, but would you really joke if your mother's stomache was thrown to this side of the room while her head rolled across the floor? You may be that tough, but, if so, I really don't want to be around you because you are creepy!
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
#596281 - 08/14/06 01:12 PM
Re: UK - US Terror Threat
|
10K Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 12,846
|
Noted in the ABA's 'lighter side' portion of their daily news e-mail: Quote:
"British authorities said they were able to detect the terrorist plot using a surveillance program that the New York Times hadn't got around to exposing yet." – Jay Leno
Heh.
|
|
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Thread
Index