NationStates Jolt Archive

Some pretty severe incongruities in the US and UK concerning the "foiled terrorist plot."

Namely: If the plot was indeed foiled, before any bombs were made, while it was still in the "hey lets blow something up" phase, there is no reason for this media-show airport "terror alert" circus.


If there is justification for this media show airport "terror alert" circus, then some plot wasn't really foiled.

Some pretty severe incongruities in the US and UK concerning the "foiled terrorist plot."

Namely: If the plot was indeed foiled, before any bombs were made, while it was still in the "hey lets blow something up" phase, there is no reason for this media-show airport "terror alert" circus.


If there is justification for this media show airport "terror alert" circus, then some plot wasn't really foiled.
Fearmongering sells.

Fearmongering sells.
Yep. As with any issue.

And sex.

I agree that something seems fishy, but I don't quite understand your point. The police claim to have recovered specific details about the attack, so it makes sense to exhert caution with regards to potentially involved third parties such as the airline companies and airport security.

Some pretty severe incongruities in the US and UK concerning the "foiled terrorist plot."

Namely: If the plot was indeed foiled, before any bombs were made, while it was still in the "hey lets blow something up" phase, there is no reason for this media-show airport "terror alert" circus.


If there is justification for this media show airport "terror alert" circus, then some plot wasn't really foiled.

1. There are still five known to be at large. So, even one could still blow up a plane.
2. They aren't sure if there are parallel cells. So, it could still happen.
3. And if they didn't call the alert, and a plane blew up, you would blame Blair and Bush for not being secure enough.

Just be on your guard. I don't trust what they say either.

My uncle worked for the FBI, now for Homeland Security, and my mom just asked a generic question (we can't ask specifics, obviously) about just how much have they done with regard to thwarting terror inside this country (even in Utah) and he said that if the we knew even a third of what they knew and were dealing with, we would live in a constant state of panic and fear. We'd be absolutely paralyzed.

So, I just accept for the time being that the gov't isn't telling us much, and that what ever they DO tell us isn't the whole truth. I sometimes wonder if I really even WANT to know.

Some pretty severe incongruities in the US and UK concerning the "foiled terrorist plot."

Namely: If the plot was indeed foiled, before any bombs were made, while it was still in the "hey lets blow something up" phase, there is no reason for this media-show airport "terror alert" circus.


If there is justification for this media show airport "terror alert" circus, then some plot wasn't really foiled.
a simple case of "Better safe then sorry." they may have caught one plot, but that doesn't mean it was the only plot.

the foiled 'Plans' (since it sounds like that was the phase it was on) just remineded the Gov of the threat "out there."

All the reports said they werent' sure if they had caught all the conspirators. Just seems prudent to me.

Fun fact: in the USA you are more likely to be struck by lightning than being killed in a terrorist attack.
Allright, slightly offtopic. But only slightly.

Fun fact: in the USA you are more likely to be struck by lightning than being killed in a terrorist attack.

That doesn't make being killed by a terrorist any more desirable. Lightning generally strikes one person at a time- terrorists kill anywhere from dozens to thousands in one strike.

As a matter in fact they just caught three more.

Fun fact: in the USA you are more likely to be struck by lightning than being killed in a terrorist attack.
Allright, slightly offtopic. But only slightly.

More likely to fall down and be killed in your house, than shot with a gun. But I keep hearing people try to ban guns...

Fun fact: in the USA you are more likely to be struck by lightning than being killed in a terrorist attack.
Allright, slightly offtopic. But only slightly.
That may be true now, but all it takes is one attack on something like an LNG carrier, use of a dirty bomb, use of a bio-weapon, etc to change that stat.

Just be on your guard. I don't trust what they say either.

My uncle worked for the FBI, now for Homeland Security, and my mom just asked a generic question (we can't ask specifics, obviously) about just how much have they done with regard to thwarting terror inside this country (even in Utah) and he said that if the we knew even a third of what they knew and were dealing with, we would live in a constant state of panic and fear. We'd be absolutely paralyzed.

So, I just accept for the time being that the gov't isn't telling us much, and that what ever they DO tell us isn't the whole truth. I sometimes wonder if I really even WANT to know.
what was that quote from 'Global Frequency'?

"If you knew all the things the Governments around the world were involved with, you would do nothing but curl up in a little ball under your bed weeping and wait for the inevitable apocolypse to come."

Fun fact: in the USA you are more likely to be struck by lightning than being killed in a terrorist attack.
Allright, slightly offtopic. But only slightly.

That gives undue credit to lightning for being able to strike everywhere. :p



It was a precaution. And it seems no one has a straight story quite yet, so I doubt the validity of news, any news, for some time.

As a matter in fact they just caught three more.
Not to mention the ones in Pakistan.

I wouldn't be surprised if more were in other countries.

They may have closed the airports to prevent them from leaving the island.

Any news on whether the Eurotunnel is open right now?

So, I just accept for the time being that the gov't isn't telling us much, and that what ever they DO tell us isn't the whole truth. I sometimes wonder if I really even WANT to know.
I, for one, would rather help to shoulder the burden of responsibility with regards to vigilance against future attacks than to leave it all in the hands of those who won't tell me what's going on.

Why should I be allowed to sit on my arse and expect everything to be taken care of for me? I should be kept up to date with the latest information so that, where possible, I can lend a hand. Furthermore, it prevents me complaining whenever things don't quite work out, and also prevents others from deliberately hiding potentially vital details from the public eye. I would rather stop it before it started than let it escalate and catch it at the last minute like the current trend seems to be.

I, for one, would rather help to shoulder the burden of responsibility with regards to vigilance against future attacks than to leave it all in the hands of those who won't tell me what's going on.

Why should I be allowed to sit on my arse and expect everything to be taken care of for me? I should be kept up to date with the latest information so that, where possible, I can lend a hand. Furthermore, it prevents me complaining whenever things don't quite work out, and also prevents others from deliberately hiding potentially vital details from the public eye. I would rather stop it before it started than let it escalate and catch it at the last minute like the current trend seems to be.


Ah, but aren't a lot of people wanting the police to be responsible for all of their security, and haven't I heard that "guns should only be in the hands of the police and military". Anyone who has said that can't suddenly ask the police and military to share the burden of protecting the country - they are unarmed and incapable of acting if they do see something in progress.

I'm sure that both Gov'ts are doing what they can under the circumstances- but there's only so much they can do. Prudence from both sides of the ocean is the better course, and though it does involve not spilling the whole story, and though I don't completely trust the gov't, It's better if we just have patience and cooperate. If your immediately stuck in this mess, that is. We can ask the standard questions of what went on later.

Bush, despite his blunders, said something that is very true
The terrorists have to get it right once. We MUST be right every time.

But by the same token, after catching so many plots before they happen, even after the best efforts- something is going to slip through- we've been told before, it isn't a matter of IF, but WHEN.

Fun fact: in the USA you are more likely to be struck by lightning than being killed in a terrorist attack.
Allright, slightly offtopic. But only slightly.
addition.

most people will take steps to avoid being struck by lighting... what do people normally do before 9/11 to avoid terrorist attacks?

I, for one, would rather help to shoulder the burden of responsibility with regards to vigilance against future attacks than to leave it all in the hands of those who won't tell me what's going on.

Why should I be allowed to sit on my arse and expect everything to be taken care of for me? I should be kept up to date with the latest information so that, where possible, I can lend a hand. Furthermore, it prevents me complaining whenever things don't quite work out, and also prevents others from deliberately hiding potentially vital details from the public eye. I would rather stop it before it started than let it escalate and catch it at the last minute like the current trend seems to be.

You are very right- don't sit on your hiney and be inactive, expecting Big Brother to take care of you and have everything under control. Be on your guard and keep you and your family and friends safe. The gov't can only do so much.

it is a bit of a dog and pony show

i assume they are worried that the arrests will cause other conspirators to decide to get on a plane NOW and try to blow it up.

That may be true now, but all it takes is one attack on something like an LNG carrier, use of a dirty bomb, use of a bio-weapon, etc to change that stat.

But when will it actually become significant ?
Assume three big terrorist attacks a year, killing 2000 people each. Add quite a few smaller ones, so you end up with 10 000 dead people due to terrorism a year.
That still makes terrorism a neglible death risk.

everybody is liying.
the one believing ,voting can change it
are first to blame

Ah, but aren't a lot of people wanting the police to be responsible for all of their security, and haven't I heard that "guns should only be in the hands of the police and military". Anyone who has said that can't suddenly ask the police and military to share the burden of protecting the country - they are unarmed and incapable of acting if they do see something in progress.

I, personally, believe that the general populace should be armed. Most people are responsible, and can handle it.

Kinda hard to rob a bank or hijack a plane when the accountants, customers, flight attendants, pilots, and passengers are all armed.

But when will it actually become significant ?
Assume three big terrorist attacks a year, killing 2000 people each. Add quite a few smaller ones, so you end up with 10 000 dead people due to terrorism a year.
That still makes terrorism a neglible death risk.
If they blow up an LNG carrier in Boston Harbor, they can kill over 100,000. If they use a dirty bomb in a city, they can kill 25,000 easily. Bio weapons can kill millions as they spread. The threat is very real. Just because they have failed in most of their attempts doesn't mean that the potential isn't there.

If they blow up an LNG carrier in Boston Harbor, they can kill over 100,000. If they use a dirty bomb in a city, they can kill 25,000 easily. Bio weapons can kill millions as they spread. The threat is very real. Just because they have failed in most of their attempts doesn't mean that the potential isn't there.

Again- the Terrorists only have to get it right ONCE

We MUST get it right EVERY TIME. Except that that's impossible. You can do a real good job, but something is going to slip sooner or later- which is why we need to proactively prepare ourselves. The gov't isn't going to be able to stop everything. They'll do what they can, but the rest is up to one's own self.

what was that quote from 'Global Frequency'?

"If you knew all the things the Governments around the world were involved with, you would do nothing but curl up in a little ball under your bed weeping and wait for the inevitable apocolypse to come."
indeed.

I thought that same thing when I read it.


oh, and yeah, I think that it's a combo of being careful and trying to scare the crap out of the general population.

indeed.

I thought that same thing when I read it.


oh, and yeah, I think that it's a combo of being careful and trying to scare the crap out of the general population.

While at the same time trying to keep them from panicking and from curling up into a ball and suck your thumb.

While at the same time trying to keep them from panicking and from curling up into a ball and suck your thumb.
whatever.

While at the same time trying to keep them from panicking and from curling up into a ball and suck your thumb.
"...Whoops, too much...
better hold our breath while it's starting to tick
Better hold my hand I'm feeling Sick..."

:D

and one person didn't get the reference... its part of a song for an Old Cartoon. :D

\/

"...Whoops, too much...
better hold our breath while it's starting to tick
Better hold my hand I'm feeling Sick..."

:D

Stay with me, breath- in-out in-out.
Relax. "I'm not dead yet", say it with me "I'm not dead yet".:p

Sorry I didn't "get it".

Fun fact: in the USA you are more likely to be struck by lightning than being killed in a terrorist attack.
Allright, slightly offtopic. But only slightly.


Smart people take precautions when caught in a lightning storm, should we not take precautions when dealing with terrorist threats also???

That had to be one of the dumbest things I have ever read.

Ah, but aren't a lot of people wanting the police to be responsible for all of their security, and haven't I heard that "guns should only be in the hands of the police and military". Anyone who has said that can't suddenly ask the police and military to share the burden of protecting the country - they are unarmed and incapable of acting if they do see something in progress.
There is a difference between "Collective Responsibility" and "Vigilante-ism". Teamwork, not heroism, is the name of the game here. Give a man a gun and he will try to stop a group of armed terrorists singlehandedly. Give a man a walkie-talkie instead and he will tell others exactly how to do it.

That had to be one of the dumbest things I have ever read.
it's because you are new to NS General...:p

There is a difference between "Collective Responsibility" and "Vigilante-ism". Teamwork, not heroism, is the name of the game here. Give a man a gun and he will try to stop a group of armed terrorists singlehandedly. Give a man a walkie-talkie instead and he will tell others exactly how to do it.

How's about we give him a walkie-talkie AND a gun. I'm not for fighting armed people without being armed myself. See, we aren't giving ONE person a gun, we're arming the entire country. That's alot different. Just give 'em all walkie-talkies to, and we should be fine for a while.

There is a difference between "Collective Responsibility" and "Vigilante-ism". Teamwork, not heroism, is the name of the game here. Give a man a gun and he will try to stop a group of armed terrorists singlehandedly. Give a man a walkie-talkie instead and he will tell others exactly how to do it.
I am always carrying a pistol and five magazines (one in the pistol, four on my belt) and a radio.

And I am not a policeman. I also have a flashlight and pepper spray.

So I have options that the typical unarmed civilian does not.

I am always carrying a pistol and five magazines (one in the pistol, four on my belt) and a radio.

And I am not a policeman. I also have a flashlight and pepper spray.

So I have options that the typical unarmed civilian does not.
and You just gave this unarmed civilian another option... hiding behind you for protection. :p

I am always carrying a pistol and five magazines (one in the pistol, four on my belt) and a radio.

And I am not a policeman. I also have a flashlight and pepper spray.

So I have options that the typical unarmed civilian does not.

How can I do that?

You should really let us know what we have to do in order to arm ourselves. The legal hoops, the requirements and whatnot. It'd be helpful for me later in life (I'm still 18).

and You just gave this unarmed civilian another option... hiding behind you for protection. :p
If you live in Virginia, you can do the same thing.

If you live in Virginia, you can do the same thing.
What about Utah? Can I do it in Utah? Or do I have to go find out myself and report back?

How can I do that?

You should really let us know what we have to do in order to arm ourselves. The legal hoops, the requirements and whatnot. It'd be helpful for me later in life (I'm still 18).
There are 35 states in the US where, if you are NOT a felon, and have NOT been involved in any acts of domestic violence (i.e., wife beating), and you pass a class on concealed carry, they SHALL (that is they have no choice) issue you a concealed carry permit.

If you live in California, you can get a permit like that only if you're Sean Penn (only famous rich people get permits from the LA Sheriff's office).

If you live in New York or New Jersey, you're screwed. Better to learn how to run really, really fast.

In Vermont, you don't even need a permit.

In Virginia and Arizona, if you want to carry openly (that is, not concealed), you need no permit.

Below is the answer to stopping Foreign terrorists from attacking the Western World, and thus no more media driven panic attacks:

LEAVE THEM THE FAWK ALONE!!!!!!!!!

What about Utah? Can I do it in Utah? Or do I have to go find out myself and report back?
http://bci.utah.gov/CFP/FIREARMS_LAWS_FOR_INSTRUCTORS.pdf

I think its a catch 22 kinda thing on many levels

if you foil a plan you might alert others that you are on to them, but then again if they know that you are on to them, they may make drastic unplanned moves because of it then you could possibly draw them out quicker or just catch them doing something stupid.

also isn't it annoying when they say that they foiled a plan but they dont give any details? grrrrrrrrrrrr *shakes fist* I just figure they are fear mongering. BUT I certainly don't want them giving the terrorists ideas on ways to bypass security (mix two liquids together and you have a bomb, or possibly a corrosive acid that will eat thru the plane or whatever).

Then again the information can give us extra security measures which could protect us, but not getting to bring any carryons/beverages is quite an annoyance and the time it takes to get thru security sucks more than ever.

back to giving terrorists ideas of holes in security - did they really need to publish the fact that port security sucks and anyone can get thru with fake id or no ID at all? then again....... doesn't 13 million illegal immigrants already say that?

Also if they dont tell us about the terrorist plot and somethign happens we will blame them for endangering us and when they do tell us we blame them for fearmongering and whatnot.

This post has more twists than a Mission Impossible movie.

If you live in Virginia, you can do the same thing.
ahh, but... 1) I don't live in Virgina... which makes me running behind you a marathon event... at least :D

and 2) while I do believe in Gun ownership, I myself, do not own guns nor will I own a gun. but that is my choice. ;)

http://bci.utah.gov/CFP/FIREARMS_LAWS_FOR_INSTRUCTORS.pdf

Thank You.

Below is the answer to stopping Foreign terrorists from attacking the Western World, and thus no more media driven panic attacks:

you are so naive.

Zilam, just a question, hope it's not too personal- How old are you?

you are so naive.


Am i really? Do you honestly beleive they want to attack the west, just for the hell of it? No, the Qur'an permits violence in defense, and thats what this "worldwide jihad" against the west is, a defensive measure for the year and years of western interference in the Middle East. I can say with an honest heart, that I believe they wouldn't attack us if we didn't have anything going on in the Middle East. They don't hate our freedoms, they hate our foreign policy.

Zilam, just a question, hope it's not too personal- How old are you?


Nineteen. And does age really have anything to do with enlightenment?

Am i really? Do you honestly beleive they want to attack the west, just for the hell of it? No, the Qur'an permits violence in defense, and thats what this "worldwide jihad" against the west is, a defensive measure for the year and years of western interference in the Middle East. I can say with an honest heart, that I believe they wouldn't attack us if we didn't have anything going on in the Middle East. They don't hate our freedoms, they hate our foreign policy.

That's not what they write. Maybe you should read the stuff they write, not just the Qur'an.

That's not what they write. Maybe you should read the stuff they write, not just the Qur'an.


Let me give you some examples:

Why does Osama hate America- American troops being placed in Saudi Arabia
Why did 9-11 happen? I read a report once that Osama said it was in retalition for the US letting Israel occupy southern lebanon in the 80s(ill have to find the source for that)
Why does Iran hate america? Because we are constantly threatening to attack them if they don't stop their nuclear research.

See, it all involves us interfering in other people's business. it'd be a different story if we were mildly isolationist, and they were blowing busses up left and right in our streets.

Let me give you some examples:

Why does Osama hate America- American troops being placed in Saudi Arabia
Why did 9-11 happen? I read a report once that Osama said it was in retalition for the US letting Israel occupy southern lebanon in the 80s(ill have to find the source for that)
Why does Iran hate america? Because we are constantly threatening to attack them if they don't stop their nuclear research.

See, it all involves us interfering in other people's business. it'd be a different story if we were mildly isolationist, and they were blowing busses up left and right in our streets.


I guess you're skipping over the part where Osama says that the ultimate goal is the destruction of the West in its entirety - not the enslavement of its people, not the conversion of its people, but their annihilation. And then the Caliphate will be restored, and the entire world will be Dar al-Islam.

Don't forget that part.

Nineteen. And does age really have anything to do with enlightenment?

Yes it very much does. I'm 18. I have some knowledge, yes, you aren't that much older than me, I turn 19 in two months. You and I, for all the headbutting we do on this forum (to each other and with other people) until we become grandparents, we really are rather pathetic and ignorant. Some ignorant about this, some ignorant about that. We haven't provoked any war with terrorists, they started the war themselves, and in order to preserve ourselves, we must win.

If you review the BIG picture (from 2000 B.C. to the present) you would better understand the mess we're in. This isn't some separate part of history- nothing is. It's all part of a larger picture, and in order to understand the here and now, we must understand the Big Picture. You don't seem to understand the Big Picture yet. It's not because you're dumb. You just don't understand, because, well, apparently nobody has taken the time to explain it to you. I have. I've had several wonderful mentors and teachers. I see what is going on more clearly than I used to. I used to have the same mentality you do now. But things aren't that easy or simple. If life were easy, it wouldn't be hard. Do not be so quick to tell us off on something you don't yet understand as fully as you could. When you understand history better, then come and let us know how you feel then. The world is much more complicated than one sentence solutions.

You may feel I'm ragging on you and what do I know because (I'm younger than you). You will come to understand once you become a parent, a grandparent, and when you develope a more personal relationship with God than you have before. From what I can tell, the last one you're doing very well on. Go get a serious education on the matter, and then it will be easier to understand. Right now, most people are confused, and just need the muck to be cleared. Once it's cleared, then can we see clearly to move forward.

Yes it very much does. I'm 18. I have some knowledge, yes, you aren't that much older than me, I turn 19 in two months. You and I, for all the headbutting we do on this forum (to each other and with other people) until we become grandparents, we really are rather pathetic and ignorant. Some ignorant about this, some ignorant about that. We haven't provoked any war with terrorists, they started the war themselves, and in order to preserve ourselves, we must win.

If you review the BIG picture (from 2000 B.C. to the present) you would better understand the mess we're in. This isn't some separate part of history- nothing is. It's all part of a larger picture, and in order to understand the here and now, we must understand the Big Picture. You don't seem to understand the Big Picture yet. It's not because you're dumb. You just don't understand, because, well, apparently nobody has taken the time to explain it to you. I have. I've had several wonderful mentors and teachers. I see what is going on more clearly than I used to. I used to have the same mentality you do now. But things aren't that easy or simple. If life were easy, it wouldn't be hard. Do not be so quick to tell us off on something you don't yet understand as fully as you could. When you understand history better, then come and let us know how you feel then. The world is much more complicated than one sentence solutions.

You may feel I'm ragging on you and what do I know because (I'm younger than you). You will come to understand once you become a parent, a grandparent, and when you develope a more personal relationship with God than you have before. From what I can tell, the last one you're doing very well on. Go get a serious education on the matter, and then it will be easier to understand. Right now, most people are confused, and just need the muck to be cleared. Once it's cleared, then can we see clearly to move forward.


Well, its not like i haven't studied and Islamic texts, i mean with me desiring to move to the Middle east and become a muslim outreach missionary. Hmm..maybe i just have too much faith in humanity. Maybe I desire to see the good in everything. Maybe I just want to treat them as equals with me, because i know calling them terrorists and evil and so on, will only further Isolate them, back them into corners, and make for more hostility. But thats just me.

I guess you're skipping over the part where Osama says that the ultimate goal is the destruction of the West in its entirety - not the enslavement of its people, not the conversion of its people, but their annihilation. And then the Caliphate will be restored, and the entire world will be Dar al-Islam.

Don't forget that part.

And then again he isn't a true muslims ;). I beleive i remember the part of the Qur'an stating not to harm the peopl of the book, and not to kill innocents.

Well, its not like i haven't studied and Islamic texts, i mean with me desiring to move to the Middle east and become a muslim outreach missionary. Hmm..maybe i just have too much faith in humanity. Maybe I desire to see the good in everything. Maybe I just want to treat them as equals with me, because i know calling them terrorists and evil and so on, will only further Isolate them, back them into corners, and make for more hostility. But thats just me.
We'll be seeing you as a hostage on al-Jazeera.

We'll be seeing you as a hostage on al-Jazeera.


Well, then I know my mission will have been fulfilled. :) And honestly, losing my head for the cause of Christ, exactly isn't that bad of a thing.

Well, its not like i haven't studied and Islamic texts, i mean with me desiring to move to the Middle east and become a muslim outreach missionary. Hmm..maybe i just have too much faith in humanity. Maybe I desire to see the good in everything. Maybe I just want to treat them as equals with me, because i know calling them terrorists and evil and so on, will only further Isolate them, back them into corners, and make for more hostility. But thats just me.

Nobody wants to put a hamper on your dreams in life. But by the same token, please allow the rest of us to defend oursleves the was we feel we need to. Some of us really do see a threat from radical Islam. Not all Muslims- just a Muslim majority and a fiery Muslim minority.

If you look at Europe they have large Muslim minorities- they are having issues with Muslims disturbing the peace. You look at Muslim nations, they're stuck in the Dark Ages still. America has a tiny Muslim minority- we aren't having as many problems with them. We're having problems with them abroad.

Please, go enlighten them. Bring them into the 21st century- PLEASE. Don't let anyone stop you.

And then again he isn't a true muslims ;). I beleive i remember the part of the Qur'an stating not to harm the peopl of the book, and not to kill innocents.

It doesn't matter. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslim. They don't have an organized religion, and have no way of saying who is Muslim and who isn't.

Nobody wants to put a hamper on your dreams in life. But by the same token, please allow the rest of us to defend oursleves the was we feel we need to. Some of us really do see a threat from radical Islam. Not all Muslims- just a Muslim majority and a fiery Muslim minority.

If you look at Europe they have large Muslim minorities- they are having issues with Muslims disturbing the peace. You look at Muslim nations, they're stuck in the Dark Ages still. America has a tiny Muslim minority- we aren't having as many problems with them. We're having problems with them abroad.

Please, go enlighten them. Bring them into the 21st century- PLEASE. Don't let anyone stop you.


You know why they have problems with muslims in europe(especially france)? The same reason we have "race" riots and crap in america: Poverty! it has nothing to do with religion inherently. That just becomes a common rally cry as things continue to get worse. I see some muslim nations that are progressive, UAE, Kuwait, and a few others. But, you wanna know the rest are oppressed and crap? I severly think its because of Western Influences. think about it; in the middle ages, the Islamic world was the center of intelligence and progression.

If they blow up an LNG carrier in Boston Harbor, they can kill over 100,000. If they use a dirty bomb in a city, they can kill 25,000 easily. Bio weapons can kill millions as they spread. The threat is very real. Just because they have failed in most of their attempts doesn't mean that the potential isn't there.

Now, I won’t deny that there’s a threat from terrorist, but this is just scaremongering. The numbers you use are vastly exaggerated. In fact, a dirty bomb in unlikely to kill anyone except those caught in the initial blast. As for the carrier – how the *bib* would any terrorist be able to blow one up?
I won’t comment on the bio-weapons as I’m not very knowledgeable on them. But I must admit that your numbers sounds way too high…

Remember, the best terrorist weapon is not a pistol, nor a rifle or a bomb – it’s the fear itself…

You know why they have problems with muslims in europe(especially france)? The same reason we have "race" riots and crap in america: Poverty! it has nothing to do with religion inherently. That just becomes a common rally cry as things continue to get worse. I see some muslim nations that are progressive, UAE, Kuwait, and a few others. But, you wanna know the rest are oppressed and crap? I severly think its because of Western Influences. think about it; in the middle ages, the Islamic world was the center of intelligence and progression.

But there's a reason they're in poverty. People often say things without explaining why. The question we must ask ourselves is "Why are they in poverty". And I'll give you a hint, it isn't the European's or the Capitalist's or the American's fault.

True, it was the center of Knowledge while Europe was in the dark. But they stopped there. They haven't progressed hardly at all from the Middle Ages. Boy, if I had limitless time, space, energy, and attention, I could give such a great history lesson- then explain what affect it has on you.

You know why they have problems with muslims in europe(especially france)? The same reason we have "race" riots and crap in america: Poverty! it has nothing to do with religion inherently. That just becomes a common rally cry as things continue to get worse. I see some muslim nations that are progressive, UAE, Kuwait, and a few others. But, you wanna know the rest are oppressed and crap? I severly think its because of Western Influences. think about it; in the middle ages, the Islamic world was the center of intelligence and progression.

You're right. 800 years ago, several ME countries were the height of progression.

Then they stopped.

Now could you explain to me why different ethnic groups in the US riot and/or commit crimes at greatly different levels while having the same poverty rates? If of course your hypothesis holds true.

But there's a reason they're in poverty. People often say things without explaining why. The question we must ask ourselves is "Why are they in poverty". And I'll give you a hint, it isn't the European's or the Capitalist's or the American's fault.

True, it was the center of Knowledge while Europe was in the dark. But they stopped there. They haven't progressed hardly at all from the Middle Ages. Boy, if I had limitless time, space, energy, and attention, I could give such a great history lesson- then explain what affect it has on you.


IDk, france's labour laws really do prohibit minorities from getting good jobs, or jobs period. And if you feel the need to further explain yourself, you can go right ahead and do it. Im all up for a "lesson" and see how we differ in "knowledge";)

You're right. 800 years ago, several ME countries were the height of progression.

Then they stopped.

Now could you explain to me why different ethnic groups in the US riot and/or commit crimes at greatly different levels while having the same poverty rates? If of course your hypothesis holds true.


Its a well known fact that high crime happens in poor areas right? Now, what if you are a poor person that is white, and there are a majority of whites aroudn you, would you feel....persecuted? nope, not one so bit. It is obvious that things just went bad. But say you are black or mexican, or arab or native american, and you are poor, and you see rich white people all around, aren't you bound to think that there is some sort of wrong doing going on. That is the mindset of poor minorities, they believe that the white person has kept them down..or something:p

Its a well known fact that high crime happens in poor areas right? Now, what if you are a poor person that is white, and there are a majority of whites aroudn you, would you feel....persecuted? nope, not one so bit. It is obvious that things just went bad. But say you are black or mexican, or arab or native american, and you are poor, and you see rich white people all around, aren't you bound to think that there is some sort of wrong doing going on. That is the mindset of poor minorities, they believe that the white person has kept them down..or something:p

Now, once again, I'll ask. Hispanics have the same poverty levels as AA's. Hispanics commit crimes at a significantly lower level than AA's. If your hypothesis is true, the levels should be the same. Why aren't they?

Now you're adding racism into the mix. First you said poverty.

Now, I won’t deny that there’s a threat from terrorist, but this is just scaremongering. The numbers you use are vastly exaggerated. In fact, a dirty bomb in unlikely to kill anyone except those caught in the initial blast. As for the carrier – how the *bib* would any terrorist be able to blow one up?
I won’t comment on the bio-weapons as I’m not very knowledgeable on them. But I must admit that your numbers sounds way too high…

Remember, the best terrorist weapon is not a pistol, nor a rifle or a bomb – it’s the fear itself…
LNG carriers are quite vulnerable. The explosion of one would be greater than a MOAB's detonation. A Cole type attack or crashing a plane into one would easily blow an LNG carrier. LNG cariers are civilian ships that are quite vulnerable. The destruction of one would create a much larger explosion than the one created by the 1917 Halifax explosion. If it happened in Boston , the death toll would break 100,000.

LNG carriers are quite vulnerable. The explosion of one would be greater than a MOAB's detonation. A Cole type attack or crashing a plane into one would easily blow an LNG carrier. LNG cariers are civilian ships that are quite vulnerable. The destruction of one would create a much larger explosion than the one created by the 1917 Halifax explosion. If it happened in Boston , the death toll would break 100,000.

You've been thinking about this Waaaaaaaay to much. :)

Now, once again, I'll ask. Hispanics have the same poverty levels as AA's. Hispanics commit crimes at a significantly lower level than AA's. If your hypothesis is true, the levels should be the same. Why aren't they?

Now you're adding racism into the mix. First you said poverty.


Well both are equally bad are they not?

Now what is your hypothesis? Everyone has the same chance? Bull crap. I will bet my life against that.

IDk, france's labour laws really do prohibit minorities from getting good jobs, or jobs period. And if you feel the need to further explain yourself, you can go right ahead and do it. Im all up for a "lesson" and see how we differ in "knowledge";)

No, France's labor laws don't prohibit anyone from being employed (save children- called child labor laws). What happens, is that, for the most part, these communities of immigrants (mostly from ME and N. Africa and Muslim) do not absorb themselves into French society. They cut themselves off and have their little communities and they keep to themselves, mostly. Most of these communities are in the inner, run down parts of the city, for they can't afford much when they first come. But because they don't weld themselves into their society (don't learn French, don't attend French schools, refuse to have at least SOME form of separation of church and state in public) and thus, employers don't hire them. They don't bother to get an education, and really don't care to work hard to change their own circumstances. When you refuse to follow company standards because the Koran forbids you from picking up paper that's been touched by a woman, you're going to have a hard time finding a job. Plus, their women aren't treated well in these communities. They're oppressed the same in France as they were in their previous homes. But they do it to themselves. They don't allow the police in their mosques, they just refuse to become part of their new society, and then, when their situation goes bad, they blame their neighbors, and riot, and do things like that. When someone breaks away from these communities, they are liable to be killed by their friends and family in these communites for being traitors to Islam. The French used to have a policy where everyone served in their military, and it proved very useful in fusing the children of immigrants into French society. They no longer do so.

Hence, the problems.

Well both are equally bad are they not?

Now you're dodging. Are you saying it isn't "just" poverty now?


Now what is your hypothesis? Everyone has the same chance? Bull crap. I will bet my life against that.

You can beat that strawman all you want. Have fun.

There's more than one or two factors in my hypothesis, unlike your belief.

Poverty
Racism
culture
education
religious beliefs

to name but a few.

You've been thinking about this Waaaaaaaay to much. :)
I didn't have to, HIstory Channel did a special about this on their "Mega Disasters" series.;)

Now you're dodging. Are you saying it isn't "just" poverty now?




You can beat that strawman all you want. Have fun.

There's more than one or two factors in my hypothesis, unlike your belief.

Poverty
Racism
culture
education
religious beliefs

to name but a few.

Well actually I would agree with most of those on the list. I think poverty is on top of it though, and thus needs to be dealt with the most. and I don't think religious beleifs really don't need to be on there.

And speaking of poverty, I must go to my Min. wage job now, to support my poor college ass.

You know why they have problems with muslims in europe(especially france)? The same reason we have "race" riots and crap in america: Poverty! it has nothing to do with religion inherently. That just becomes a common rally cry as things continue to get worse. I see some muslim nations that are progressive, UAE, Kuwait, and a few others. But, you wanna know the rest are oppressed and crap? I severly think its because of Western Influences. think about it; in the middle ages, the Islamic world was the center of intelligence and progression.
If that is the problem then what good is going and preaching Christianity going to do? There is an intrinsic link between the Church and Western Society (not tying Jesus into this in the slightest, by the way), and attempting to drag people into what is predominantly a Western ideology is unlikely to help them out of their localised Poverty Trap.

If that is the problem then what good is going and preaching Christianity going to do? There is an intrinsic link between the Church and Western Society (not tying Jesus into this in the slightest, by the way), and attempting to drag people into what is predominantly a Western ideology is unlikely to help them out of their localised Poverty Trap.

No, but it could help.

First off,
Good job the security services, the dedications and professionalism is a stark contrast to much of the political apparatus they opperate under.

Secondly,
Anyone watching the news conferences given by John Reid and by the US Homeland Security guy (forgotten his name) will have seen some very interesting uses of classic PR techniques.

A brief overview of Reid's speech to Demos yesterday and his comments in the press over the last four weeks combined with the recent prominence given to security ratings in the public eye will also provide an interesting backdrop to the way that these events have been handled. As will a cursory examination of the legislation schedule for the next three months and the figures on court cases and charges involving anti-terror legislation.

Of course, the fact that the national aspects of the government's continued press releases on terror alerts in the UK through out today were not supported by actions or terror alert levels within civil service buildings will also give a clue as to what state the government is trying to encourage in its civilians.

I would be laughing if it wasn't real life and if these people were not running the country I am living in.

LNG carriers are quite vulnerable. The explosion of one would be greater than a MOAB's detonation. A Cole type attack or crashing a plane into one would easily blow an LNG carrier. LNG cariers are civilian ships that are quite vulnerable. The destruction of one would create a much larger explosion than the one created by the 1917 Halifax explosion. If it happened in Boston , the death toll would break 100,000.

Ok, I’ll concede that one. I was thinking of terrorist actually boarding the ship and planting charges throughout it.

But I would like to point out, that flying a plane into such a ship would probably not be very devastating as LNG in not, generally, explosive. It would have to be released, given time to mix with the air, and then finally ignited.
Also, does such ships not usually dock by a refinery and not inside a port? And finally, do such ships not have onboard systems to make the gas inert and to dampen a fire and / or explosion should the worst happen?

But ok, you’re right. There might, just might, be a release of LNG and a subsequent fire and possibly an explosion as a result of a terrorist attack. But I find it to be extremely unlikely…

No, but it could help.
Not it, as he's suggesting, Western attitudes are to blame for the problems in the first place.

(This is more a challenge to the consistency of his intentions than to the idea itself, by the way. Though, incidentally, I do have issues with Christianity, Western attitudes and Middle Eastern social structure all at the same time.)

-Snippage-
I did think it a bit too coincidental that this Terrorist Attack just happened to unearth itself a day after Reid made public a statement that the public were going to be expected to "sacrifice some of its liberties". Perhaps, though, rather than the threat being smaller, the Government simply knew about it earlier than it was letting on? Knowledge of such a threat and the manipulation of that knowledge seems more like Blairite policy than "let's forge a national panic and make off with the political gold". Blair cares too much about public opinion to risk a scandal like that.

Now, I won’t deny that there’s a threat from terrorist, but this is just scaremongering. The numbers you use are vastly exaggerated. In fact, a dirty bomb in unlikely to kill anyone except those caught in the initial blast. As for the carrier – how the *bib* would any terrorist be able to blow one up?
I won’t comment on the bio-weapons as I’m not very knowledgeable on them. But I must admit that your numbers sounds way too high…

Remember, the best terrorist weapon is not a pistol, nor a rifle or a bomb – it’s the fear itself…

It always surprises me that people are quite willing to believe that terrorists could obtain high grade weapons of massdestruction, representing millions of dollars - and then believe that extremely wealthy and resourceful group cannot think of anything better than to board a commercial airline.

All those anti-terrorist actions and restrictions work against the smallfry that is unable to wreck mass havoc. Not against the really big boys. And the damage the smallfry can actually do is pretty limited.

True.

I am going to have to wait and see what comes to light as all I am doing is speculating.
The erosion of our liberties really concerns me though. Far more than the terrorist threat currently does. That may change one day but, right now. I am ashamed that I didn't do more to combat some of the legislation that the Blairite government has rammed through in the past and I will be doing what I can to curb its more extreme/ridiculous legislation in the future (which admittedly won't be much in this joke of a democracy).

True.

I am going to have to wait and see what comes to light as all I am doing is speculating.
The erosion of our liberties really concerns me though. Far more than the terrorist threat currently does. That may change one day but, right now. I am ashamed that I didn't do more to combat some of the legislation that the Blairite government has rammed through in the past and I will be doing what I can to curb its more extreme/ridiculous legislation in the future (which admittedly won't be much in this joke of a democracy).
We live in an Ironicacy; a nation governed by Irony. We have an Authoritian leader for a Socialist party, a Liberal leader for a Right-wing party and a Three Party System with a totally inept Third Party. In our system, to vote for the party whose ideals you like the most is to elect a government whose ideals you despise. Where radical new security measures are being introduced, suddenly, to be liberal and to be conservative are one and the same. And, ultimately, it is our stagnant old Autocrats in the House of Lords who provide the only real defence for what little democracy we have left.

Honestly, I'm surprised the British public hasn't thought of directly petitioning Her Royal Majesty and requesting a surprise election. The House of Commons needs a little reminding what it's there for, I reckon.

Some pretty severe incongruities in the US and UK concerning the "foiled terrorist plot."

Namely: If the plot was indeed foiled, before any bombs were made, while it was still in the "hey lets blow something up" phase, there is no reason for this media-show airport "terror alert" circus.


If there is justification for this media show airport "terror alert" circus, then some plot wasn't really foiled.


UM...have you watched any of the news stories? If you had you would have found out that on the 12th there was supposed to be a dry run attack to test out their bombs. on a commerical airliner. Thats in 2 days.

WAIT, your right, its still 2 days away, no reason to be scared. but tomorrow we should probably have shit a brick.

idiot.

UM...have you watched any of the news stories? If you had you would have found out that on the 12th there was supposed to be a dry run attack to test out their bombs. on a commerical airliner. Thats in 2 days.

WAIT, your right, its still 2 days away, no reason to be scared. but tomorrow we should probably have shit a brick.

idiot.
in other words, tomorrow, many people will be "dropping bombs" :D

It always surprises me that people are quite willing to believe that terrorists could obtain high grade weapons of massdestruction, representing millions of dollars - and then believe that extremely wealthy and resourceful group cannot think of anything better than to board a commercial airline.

All those anti-terrorist actions and restrictions work against the smallfry that is unable to wreck mass havoc. Not against the really big boys. And the damage the smallfry can actually do is pretty limited.

Unless they get a small vial of smallpox, which is not all accounted for.

Doesn't cost millions of dollars, and you can pay for the same airline tickets you would have used for a suicide bombing.

Some pretty severe incongruities in the US and UK concerning the "foiled terrorist plot."

Namely: If the plot was indeed foiled, before any bombs were made, while it was still in the "hey lets blow something up" phase, there is no reason for this media-show airport "terror alert" circus.


If there is justification for this media show airport "terror alert" circus, then some plot wasn't really foiled.

Given the tone of the whole thing, it would be a rather disgusting episode were there no evidence. Certainly they've been guilty of overhyping before. I find it hard to believe that this is the case now, as no bills are being passed in Britain at the moment. Time shall tell.

Yep. As with any issue.

And sex.
So the ultimate marketing tool would be a sexy terrorist, then.

Sort of like, "Hmmmm...look at my huge breasts jiggling up and down. Don't you just want them going flubflubflub in your face? Of course you do. If you buy <product insertion> you can pretend they are. And if you don't...I WILL KILL YOU ALL IN AN UNHOLY REIGN OF TERROR, UNBELIEVERS!!!"

If you live in California, you can get a permit like that only if you're Sean Penn


.

Bullshit

"...Whoops, too much...
better hold our breath while it's starting to tick
Better hold my hand I'm feeling Sick..."

:D

and one person didn't get the reference... its part of a song for an Old Cartoon. :D

\/

Milton the Monster

Some pretty severe incongruities in the US and UK concerning the "foiled terrorist plot."

Namely: If the plot was indeed foiled, before any bombs were made, while it was still in the "hey lets blow something up" phase, there is no reason for this media-show airport "terror alert" circus.


If there is justification for this media show airport "terror alert" circus, then some plot wasn't really foiled.


Don't know if this has been mentioned, but they had recieved their 'do your attacks now' go code from the Pakistan - 3 days ago.

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/08/11/terror.details/
http://lfpress.ca/newsstand/News/International/2006/08/12/1750666-sun.html
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=3a60a429-974d-49f7-b4a5-fdd8e9b80636&k=18747

It always surprises me that people are quite willing to believe that terrorists could obtain high grade weapons of massdestruction, representing millions of dollars - and then believe that extremely wealthy and resourceful group cannot think of anything better than to board a commercial airline.

All those anti-terrorist actions and restrictions work against the smallfry that is unable to wreck mass havoc. Not against the really big boys. And the damage the smallfry can actually do is pretty limited.

A bottle of hydrogen peroxide and some alcohol (booze, rubbing alcohol) or acetone (nail polish remover) are not high grade WMDs and don't cost millions. Look what the terrorist did with those exact ingredients on 7/7.

Fairly obvious to me what its all about - lies and propoganda to keep people scared so they can carry on the bogus war on terror.

9/11
Madrid bombings
07/07

Lies, all lies!!

Wake up people!

Fairly obvious to me what its all about - lies and propoganda to keep people scared so they can carry on the bogus war on terror.

9/11
Madrid bombings
07/07

Lies, all lies!!

Wake up people!
The response of the government and media is no reason to belittle the sacrifice of the victims. No matter how much we may disagree with how they have been handled, it is unfair to dismiss the loss of life as mere propaganda.