Super Genius
Posts: 1,274 
August 21st, 2006, 01:26 PM
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publ...cle_1123.shtml
This article tells of the recent terrorist threats that have caused the coded threat lights to go from green to red. None of the listed events had any bombs, nothing was ready to go, there was no actual threat.
The recent London Airliners hijacking "threat" saw America go to the highest level of alert, meaning som,ething is about to happen. That was impossible, nothing could have happened for many weeks from this group. The British Foreign office warned that "other groups are still out there" as further evidence of this impending threat.
The Toronto 17 in Canada were the same thing - just plans.
The Los Angeles plot of 2002 to take down L.A. skyscrapers "was proudly announced by George W. early this year. It has since been totally discredited. Declared one senior counterterrorism official: "There was no definitive plot. It never materialized or got past the thought stage."
There was also this announcement:
"British police arrested suspected terrorists in London and discovered a quantity of ricin, one of the world's deadliest poisons."
It turned out there was not only no plot, there was no ricin. The Brits discovered almost immediately that the substance wasn't ricin but kept that secret for more than two years
- ARE WE SEEING A PATTERN HERE YET????
"more aspirational than operational" has become the buzzword for these events, yet the real-world responce has been to lock-down airports and raise public fears about pending attacks on them.
It used to be that when scary things happened, honorable national leaders would come out to say:
"please don't panic, the likelyhood of any individual person being harmed is very very low" , and things like "have courage, this will not shake our faith in our way of life".
No, now we hear Peter MacKay and Cheny coming out and saying the opposite!! "Be afraid, be VERY afraid, this threat is real and it is about to happen and our way of life is under attack".
I mean really, how many of you would swallow that?
Oh, you did? Sorry, I didn't mean to make it sound so demeaning, like you are a huge fool or something, for allowing yourself to feel fear when there is no threat, and if it were real there is so little chance of you being caught up in it as these are all almost allways localised attacks affecting less than 100 people.
Except 9-11 of course, which killed over 100,000 by the time Bush whacked the Arabs in Iraq for some un-linked association with 9-11. Where is the real threat coming from?
Karlin
PS -
Is global warming actually a more real threat on a much larger scale?
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publ...cle_1123.shtml
This article tells of the recent terrorist threats that have caused the coded threat lights to go from green to red. None of the listed events had any bombs, nothing was ready to go, there was no actual threat.
The recent London Airliners hijacking "threat" saw America go to the highest level of alert, meaning som,ething is about to happen. That was impossible, nothing could have happened for many weeks from this group. The British Foreign office warned that "other groups are still out there" as further evidence of this impending threat.
The Toronto 17 in Canada were the same thing - just plans.
The Los Angeles plot of 2002 to take down L.A. skyscrapers "was proudly announced by George W. early this year. It has since been totally discredited. Declared one senior counterterrorism official: "There was no definitive plot. It never materialized or got past the thought stage."
There was also this announcement:
"British police arrested suspected terrorists in London and discovered a quantity of ricin, one of the world's deadliest poisons."
It turned out there was not only no plot, there was no ricin. The Brits discovered almost immediately that the substance wasn't ricin but kept that secret for more than two years
- ARE WE SEEING A PATTERN HERE YET????
"more aspirational than operational" has become the buzzword for these events, yet the real-world responce has been to lock-down airports and raise public fears about pending attacks on them.
It used to be that when scary things happened, honorable national leaders would come out to say:
"please don't panic, the likelyhood of any individual person being harmed is very very low" , and things like "have courage, this will not shake our faith in our way of life".
No, now we hear Peter MacKay and Cheny coming out and saying the opposite!! "Be afraid, be VERY afraid, this threat is real and it is about to happen and our way of life is under attack".
I mean really, how many of you would swallow that?
Oh, you did? Sorry, I didn't mean to make it sound so demeaning, like you are a huge fool or something, for allowing yourself to feel fear when there is no threat, and if it were real there is so little chance of you being caught up in it as these are all almost allways localised attacks affecting less than 100 people.
Except 9-11 of course, which killed over 100,000 by the time Bush whacked the Arabs in Iraq for some un-linked association with 9-11. Where is the real threat coming from?
Karlin
PS -
Is global warming actually a more real threat on a much larger scale?
House Member
Posts: 2,505 
Location: SW Ontario
Location: SW Ontario
August 21st, 2006, 04:55 PM
I'm much happier that they err on the side of caution. A false positive is much preferable to a successful attack.
And don't worry, you're in no danger of making me feel the fool for believeing there's a threat out there. Quite the opposite actually, it's foolish to believe there is no threat just because of some false positives. Lets keep squashing the aspirations while they remain just that, shall we.
I'm much happier that they err on the side of caution. A false positive is much preferable to a successful attack.
And don't worry, you're in no danger of making me feel the fool for believeing there's a threat out there. Quite the opposite actually, it's foolish to believe there is no threat just because of some false positives. Lets keep squashing the aspirations while they remain just that, shall we.
Super Genius
Posts: 1,274
August 22nd, 2006, 12:49 PM
Justthe facts, I didn't wish to make a fool of you. I prefer it didn't.
It came out today that the LONDON airliner hijacker threat recently was non-operative, "more inspirational than operational" is the buzz word for the new "threats".
Mass murder in the skies: was the plot feasible?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08...t_terror_labs/
Justthe facts, I didn't wish to make a fool of you. I prefer it didn't.
It came out today that the LONDON airliner hijacker threat recently was non-operative, "more inspirational than operational" is the buzz word for the new "threats".
Mass murder in the skies: was the plot feasible?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08...t_terror_labs/
Liquer'd Up & Lash'n Out!
Posts: 186
Location: Pennsylvania
Location: Pennsylvania
August 22nd, 2006, 01:34 PM
Everything starts with an idea, then tests and trial runs...If we can stop it in its inphancy and expose the problem then why not do it.
I am saying there may be some self-serving agendas, and look at me now attitudes, but they ar edoing the job.
Everything starts with an idea, then tests and trial runs...If we can stop it in its inphancy and expose the problem then why not do it.
I am saying there may be some self-serving agendas, and look at me now attitudes, but they ar edoing the job.
House Member
Posts: 2,505
Location: SW Ontario
Location: SW Ontario
August 23rd, 2006, 01:39 PM
That's a very interesting article, but I just came across this summary today:
This evidence presumably includes intercepted emails and wiretapped phone conversations, but also large sums of money, weapons and bomb-making chemicals. A suitcase containing explosive chemicals was found in woods near High Wycombe on Thursday. Videos featuring the likely martyrs surfaced on Friday, and on the same day authorities in the Pakistani city of Bahawalpur arrested Matiur Rehman, a high-ranking al-Qaida terrorist believed to be behind the thwarted attack.
I realize nothing is proven yet, but so far the weight of evidence seems to squash some guys opinion that a suicide bomber would never risk a mission where he might blow up in the taxi on the way to the airport.
It's sounding a lot like the plot was very much operational.
Quoting
Thanks, but don't worry, there's no danger of that.
Justthe facts, I didn't wish to make a fool of you. I prefer it didn't.
That's a very interesting article, but I just came across this summary today:
This evidence presumably includes intercepted emails and wiretapped phone conversations, but also large sums of money, weapons and bomb-making chemicals. A suitcase containing explosive chemicals was found in woods near High Wycombe on Thursday. Videos featuring the likely martyrs surfaced on Friday, and on the same day authorities in the Pakistani city of Bahawalpur arrested Matiur Rehman, a high-ranking al-Qaida terrorist believed to be behind the thwarted attack.
I realize nothing is proven yet, but so far the weight of evidence seems to squash some guys opinion that a suicide bomber would never risk a mission where he might blow up in the taxi on the way to the airport.
It's sounding a lot like the plot was very much operational.
