NationStates Jolt Archive

You know, ever since 9/11, I've basically been watching the news and seeing what the terrorist will do next. They attack Spain, Great Britain, and then we get a string of 'foiled' terrorist attacks in the planning stage, and then the attack at Glasgow happens today.

For those who don't know, here's the CNN link (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/06/30/london.alert/index.html) to the attack today.

Now since I've heard about the attacks today I've been wondering about something. What if, the plans that the UK and the US have been foiling were nothing more than just a distraction from the real attacks? Think about it, what if the terrorist actually set up the 'fake' planning to be foiled so that it would distract us from what they were really planning? I wouldn't put it past them to do this, I mean I would if I was a terrorist.

What do you guys think?

I think unfounded speculation is very unlikely to produce an accurate result

What if the terrorist attacks were conducted by Western intelligent operatives in an attempt to generate fear and antipathy towards the Middle East and Islam in particular so that the populations can be more easily controlled and distracted from other more important issues both domestic and abroad?

I mean, not that US intelligence agencies would ever do sneaky underhanded things in an attempt to support American dominion. That is clearly too difficult to believe!

If I were a terrorist with half a brain cell of the current calibre I would have also made damn sure I killed at least another person and not just myself.

Brown and his PR team must be heaven. They can make some awe inspiring speech about how we all need to stick together. My cynical alert has reached critical.

edit: and it appears I am far from the only one.

Today’s events were just a pathetic stage for Gordon Brown to do his I can be a tough "war" leader not just a Accountant thing on.

What if the terrorist attacks were conducted by Western intelligent operatives in an attempt to generate fear and antipathy towards the Middle East and Islam in particular so that the populations can be more easily controlled and distracted from other more important issues both domestic and abroad?

I mean, not that US intelligence agencies would ever do sneaky underhanded things in an attempt to support American dominion. That is clearly too difficult to believe!

You're not one of those loose change tin foil hat types are you?

I've just seen some pictures of Glasgow and oh God its terrible! September 11th X 1000 :p

and is it odd that I don't really care about this :confused:

You know, ever since 9/11, I've basically been watching the news and seeing what the terrorist will do next.
You might be comforted to know that terrorist exist only in your mind.

I've just seen some pictures of Glasgow and oh God its terrible! September 11th X 1000 :pWas that before or after the explosion?

Quite frankly, if a man crashing a car into a building really is Al Qaeda terrorism, they seem to be running out of both ideas and resources.

That's a pretty expensive and complicated diversion. I think a lot of folks don't realize that you can't just put together a car bomb on a whim. If it were easy enough that car bombs could be cost-effective diversions, I think you'd see a lot more of them in Western countries.

It's just the natural tendency to believe that we only have a few options while our enemies' options are limitless, I think.

I think unfounded speculation is very unlikely ...produce[,] an accurate result

I agree. It's all vegetables to me.

:sniper: anyone want to come live in Derry with us? :sniper:

You're not one of those loose change tin foil hat types are you?

Don't you think your proveing the point... They've created such an atmosphere of fear that people who dare question authority are accused of paranoia, isn’t it fundamental in a “free” society that people are free to question what they are told.

:sniper: anyone want to come live in Derry with us? :sniper:

Gun smilies on the first post, newbie!!! :p

Don't you think your proveing the point... They've created such an atmosphere of fear that people who dare question authority are accused of paranoia, isn’t it fundamental in a “free” society that people are free to question what they are told.

Yea, but Loose Change was such a bad and faulty film, hell even my 2 month old Nephew could tear it apart.

Don't you think your proveing the point... They've created such an atmosphere of fear that people who dare question authority are accused of paranoia

No. People who have nonsensicle, unsupported illogical opinions about what the Government supposedly did are accused of paranoia.


isn’t it fundamental in a “free” society that people are free to question what they are told.

Who said they arn't free to question.

Was that before or after the explosion?
Har

no im just pointing out the fact that we were also called terrorists not so long back for defending our civil rights, and we fought well, erin go bragh:sniper:

You know, ever since 9/11, I've basically been watching the news and seeing what the terrorist will do next. They attack Spain, Great Britain, and then we get a string of 'foiled' terrorist attacks in the planning stage, and then the attack at Glasgow happens today.

For those who don't know, here's the CNN link (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/06/30/london.alert/index.html) to the attack today.

Now since I've heard about the attacks today I've been wondering about something. What if, the plans that the UK and the US have been foiling were nothing more than just a distraction from the real attacks? Think about it, what if the terrorist actually set up the 'fake' planning to be foiled so that it would distract us from what they were really planning? I wouldn't put it past them to do this, I mean I would if I was a terrorist.

What do you guys think?


http://www.workingforchange.com/webgraphics/WFC/TMW09-27-06.jpg

I think Tom's got me covered on this one.

No. People who have nonsensicle, unsupported illogical opinions about what the Government supposedly did are accused of paranoia.
Are you sure of that, though??

Are you sure of that, though??

I know I am.

-snip-

I think Tom's got me covered on this one.

So you don't think that terrorist could've set up some fake operation to distract the US and UK intelligence from their real operations? Why is that not within the realm of possibility?

I know I am.

Then you're one of them. *shakes head*

Are you sure of that, though??

Yep.

Was that before or after the explosion?

its from 2002 :D

no im just pointing out the fact that we were also called terrorists not so long back for defending our civil rights, and we fought well, erin go bragh:sniper:

...but derry is in Northern Ireland no? and killing civilians to inspire fear = terrorism no matter what you do

So you don't think that terrorist could've set up some fake operation to distract the US and UK intelligence from their real operations? Why is that not within the realm of possibility?

*sigh*

You're determined to live in fear, aren't you?

No. People who have nonsensicle, unsupported illogical opinions about what the Government supposedly did are accused of paranoia.

What was nonsensical, unsupported or illogical in Greater Trostia post. Its just an option that differs from your own. Frankly I don't care what anyone thinks but why should people be labelled paranoid or worst cause of what the believe.........

*sigh*

You're determined to live in fear, aren't you?

So whenever someone thinks that terrorists might be up to know good it's ZOMG LIVING IN FEAR?

If you believe that "terrorists" are a type of person, then you already live in fear.

YOU make them terrorists.

*sigh*

You're determined to live in fear, aren't you?

Who says I'm afraid? I'm not exactly cowarding under my bedsheets, I still go about my daily business and such, I just think that we should examine all possibility if we're serious about this War on Terrorism, but apparently we aren't what with the Iraq War and such.

You haven't answered my question.

I don't think modern terrorists have enough resources at hand to be creating some massive master plot.

What was nonsensical, unsupported or illogical in Greater Trostia post. Its just an option that differs from your own.


Nothing, I was calling Short Change and similar beliefs illogical. I don't know if GT agrees with it.


Frankly I don't care what anyone thinks but why should people be labelled paranoid or worst cause of what the believe.........

How else do you label someone as paranoid other then what they believe?

its from 2002 :D



...but derry is in Northern Ireland no? and killing civilians to inspire fear = terrorism no matter what you do

which also makes the british government terrorists:eek:

I don't think modern terrorists have enough resources at hand to be creating some massive master plot.

Depends on whether it's the IRA, the Muslim extremist or homegrown terrorist like McVeigh really.

which also makes the british government terrorists:eek:

I don't remember the government killing anyone to create fear recently ..

Depends on whether it's the IRA, the Muslim extremist or homegrown terrorist like McVeigh really.

The IRA were freedom fighters mucker

...but derry is in Northern Ireland no? and killing civilians to inspire fear = terrorism no matter what you do

no, terrorism = believing whatever bad thing about people that terrorises you

What if someone saw the death of their son as something noble? Is their son a terrorist, no matter what he did? Is he a terrorist because of what he did to YOU?

So whenever someone thinks that terrorists might be up to know good it's ZOMG LIVING IN FEAR?

No, living in fear of the terrorists is ZOMG LIVING IN FEAR.


Obviously.

I don't think modern terrorists have enough resources at hand to be creating some massive master plot.

You don't need much resources for terrorism. If it's linked to Al Qaida, well they certainly have a huge amount of resources.

Terrorism's boring. I want a new fnord.

How else do you label someone as paranoid other then what they believe?

It not like any one here is claiming people are coming to get them (well, except the bailiffs). We just questioning the honesty of politicians, surely regardless of your opinion on this “War on Terror” you must acknowledge that politicians are opportunistic liars…….

No, living in fear of the terrorists is ZOMG LIVING IN FEAR.


Obviously.

So Wilgrove is not ZOMG LIVING IN FEAR then?

Terrorism's boring. I want a new fnord.

I dharma your fnord, and raise you.

So you don't think that terrorist could've set up some fake operation to distract the US and UK intelligence from their real operations? Why is that not within the realm of possibility?

Y'know something? I'll tell you why it's outside the realm of possibility: for the most part, life really isn't like a frickin' action flick, no matter how much you might wish it would be - you're not James Bond, Bin Laden isn't Blofeld, the Taliban isn't SPECTRE, and Condaleeza Rice sure as HELL isn't Pussy Galore.

You don't need much resources for terrorism. If it's linked to Al Qaida, well they certainly have a huge amount of resources.

I mean I doubt they have ebough to create some apocalyptic super plan. I know they have enough for basic terrorism but I greatly doubt they are forging a plan to conquer the world or completely ruin the enemie countries.

I don't remember the government killing anyone to create fear recently ..

i dont remember the government creating fear among us at all, i do remember them being brought to their knees though:D

It not like any one here is claiming people are coming to get them (well, except the bailiffs).

I take it you never saw "Night Court"? Baliffs rock.

Y'know something? I'll tell you why it's outside the realm of possibility: for the most part, life really isn't like a frickin' action flick, no matter how much you might wish it would be - you're not James Bond, Bin Laden isn't Blofeld, the Taliban isn't SPECTRE, and Condaleeza Rice sure as HELL isn't Pussy Galore.

You are probably right, but still there is no reason to rule it out completely.

I dharma your fnord, and raise you.

Haha :D

i dont remember the government creating fear among us at all, i do remember them being brought to their knees though:D

I remember the government having fear created among themselfs at the idea we didn't think they were doing a good job.

I mean I doubt they have ebough to create some apocalyptic super plan. I know they have enough for basic terrorism but I greatly doubt they are forging a plan to conquer the world or completely ruin the enemie countries.

I don't think that anyone is proposing thjat. But it is possible that a devestating attack may occur.

...Bin Laden isn't Blofeld, the Taliban isn't SPECTRE, and Condaleeza Rice sure as HELL isn't Pussy Galore.
I dunno, that's disputable. These people are what we make them to be.

It not like any one here is claiming people are coming to get them (well, except the bailiffs). We just questioning the honesty of politicians, surely regardless of your opinion on this “War on Terror” you must acknowledge that politicians are opportunistic liars…….

I'm not calling the people on here paranoid. I'm calling the people who support loose change paranoid. And yes many politicians are opportunistic liars, which means they don't need to destroy a very important part of their own city killing thousands to influence people into believing that Iraq is supporting terrorists and have wmds. They could easily just fake evidence instead.

I don't think that anyone is proposing thjat. But it is possible that a devestating attack may occur.

Well the OP was propsing something along those lines. Yes , a devastating attack may occur but then thats makes you think : Why bother using rather poor quality attacks when you could easily step it up a notch. If they could i think they would of done something along those lines recently rather than doign what they're doing.

of course a devastating attack will occur there are lots of unaccounted for nuclear warheads out there:headbang:

no, terrorism = believing whatever bad thing about people that terrorises you

eh?

What if someone saw the death of their son as something noble? Is their son a terrorist, no matter what he did? Is he a terrorist because of what he did to YOU?

yes if I guy kills a very nasty man he has still killed no matter how you look at it

i dont remember the government creating fear among us at all, i do remember them being brought to their knees though:D

I don't actually:confused: your not still living in the 80's are you?

edit:
of course a devastating attack will occur there are lots of unaccounted for nuclear warheads out there:headbang:

pfft Russian nukes, when was the last time anything Russian worked?

I'm not calling the people on here paranoid. I'm calling the people who support loose change paranoid. And yes many politicians are opportunistic liars, which means they don't need to destroy a very important part of their own city killing thousands to influence people into believing that Iraq is supporting terrorists and have wmds. They could easily just fake evidence instead.

Three big bombs, no explosions, no casualties... Coincidence or conspiracy?

So you don't think that terrorist could've set up some fake operation to distract the US and UK intelligence from their real operations? Why is that not within the realm of possibility?

It'd be an awful waste of scarce resources by people who are generally known for being resourceful. Sure, they could feasibly put together a couple car bombs and leave them to be discovered by police, but to what purpose? As a diversion to keep the police from finding out about... more car bombs? Train bombings? It's an unnecessary level of complexity for probably the same level of casualites, and it would increase the likelihood that they'd be exposed.

I'm not calling the people on here paranoid. I'm calling the people who support loose change paranoid.
Damn; I knew I shouldn't have made a place for loose change at the bottom of my pocket.

And yes many politicians are opportunistic liars, which means they don't need to destroy a very important part of their own city killing thousands to influence people into believing that Iraq is supporting terrorists and have wmds. They could easily just fake evidence instead.
Here's an idea.... let's not believe politicians? :)

eh?

yes if I guy kills a very nasty man he has still killed no matter how you look at it
Yes, indeed, and you are the one to label him "terrorist" (if you do).

Here's an idea.... let's not believe politicians? :)

Or, don't vote republican.

And also, don't fucking vote independent, voting for that bullshit gives the republicans the advantage. Just vote democrat, for nothing else then to not have the republicans in power.

Or, don't vote republican.

And also, don't fucking vote independent, voting for that bullshit gives the republicans the advantage. Just vote democrat, for nothing else then to not have the republicans in power.

Or let's not vote at all, and let anarchy rule! then we can complain when the person in charge that we didn't vote for screws up!

It'd be an awful waste of scarce resources by people who are generally known for being resourceful. Sure, they could feasibly put together a couple car bombs and leave them to be discovered by police, but to what purpose? As a diversion to keep the police from finding out about... more car bombs? Train bombings? It's an unnecessary level of complexity for probably the same level of casualites, and it would increase the likelihood that they'd be exposed.

First off, thank you for actually engaging me in intelligence discussion, I shall give you a slice of cheese cake.

Second, yea I could see how they wouldn't waste resource on a diversion and I could see how it could leave them to be exposed if they tried one. Like I said, it was just something that came into my mind when I look back on the previous terrorist attack and foiled terrorist attack plans.

Yes, indeed, and you are the one to label him "terrorist" (if you do).

Terrorist is just a term. No different from "communist" a generation before, or "unpatriotic" a generation before that. Though it is undoubtedly used to excess, it nonetheless reflects the concerns of the day.

Equally, I defy the will of any poster to suggest that those foiled recently in the UK were not terrorists.

What I think?

I think the whole point of terrorism is to make people over-react and make them afraid of dying, and I think the current crop of freedom-hating terrorists are doing a fine job of doing it.

I think that Europe as a whole as done a terribly shitty job (Excluding the UK) at dealing with terrorists, and is forgeting that they're a helluva lot closer to the Middle East than the USA and Canada.

I think that all of our armies (USA and Europe) are geared towards fighting large scale battles with hundreds of thousands of soldiers, and have been this way for more than a hundred years. Vietnam is a good example of this.

I think Americans are horribly unpatriotic. Even though we supported this stupid war at the begining, we pussy out and get upset when we see the president we elected do a nice job of fucking things up. And of course, a draft is simply out of the question. Don't mind the fact that every generation before our current 20-40 year olds have been in wars much larger and far more dangerous.

If America had a draft, and Europe gave us more support, I believe something could be accomplished.

Too bad that will never happen.

You know, ever since 9/11, I've basically been watching the news and seeing what the terrorist will do next.
What do you guys think?
I think the War on Terrorism is made of fail!! I noticed that you liked to use such terminology so I used it here to make it easier for you to relate.

2006:

Sharp rise in terror attacks, deaths in 2006: U.S. State Department (http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/04/30/attacksreport.html)

2005:

U.S. Figures Show Sharp Global Rise In Terrorism (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/26/AR2005042601623.html)

2004:

Worldwide terrorism-related deaths on the rise (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5889435/)

US foreign policy is made of fail.

The war on Iraq is made of fail.

First off, thank you for actually engaging me in intelligence discussion, I shall give you a slice of cheese cake.
*pshaw* Scotia. You win.

Yes, indeed, and you are the one to label him "terrorist" (if you do).

yes because it would be a crime against words to not do so :confused:

yes because it would be a crime against words to not do so :confused:

Equally a crime agianst your "self." *nod*

Equally a crime agianst your "self." *nod*

I don't see what you getting at, if I move I am moving if I use methods to spread terror what does that make me? cheesecake?

What I think?

I think the whole point of terrorism is to make people over-react and make them afraid of dying, and I think the current crop of freedom-hating terrorists are doing a fine job of doing it.

And I'd agree... If I watched the news. But I don't. And I'm not terrorised.

So go figure.

Now since I've heard about the attacks today I've been wondering about something. What if, the plans that the UK and the US have been foiling were nothing more than just a distraction from the real attacks? Think about it, what if the terrorist actually set up the 'fake' planning to be foiled so that it would distract us from what they were really planning? I wouldn't put it past them to do this, I mean I would if I was a terrorist.

What do you guys think?

Well, his idea would work. But it seems like a cinematic plot device.

I don't see what you getting at, if I move I am moving if I use methods to spread terror what does that make me? cheesecake?

I'm saying the true terrorists are the media who deliver the message to you --immediately as it happens, via direct satelite connection, right into your "living" room.

I'm saying the true terrorists are the media who deliver the message to you

no the media over emphasize things, use weasel words and ignore others

I have never heard of a media company orchestrating a plot to blow up a park or anything, though I'm sure fox is working on it

immediately as it happens, via direct satelite connection, right into your "living" room.

oh won't you save me from the news! its not like I can choose to watch or anything is it!?

and by your definition aren't you committing terrorism at the moment

My thoughts on the recent attempted terrorism in England/Scotland:

What an embarrassing weekend to be an islamic terrorist! :p

0/3. :p

no the media over emphasize things, use weasel words and ignore others

I have never heard of a media company orchestrating a plot to blow up a park or anything, though I'm sure fox is working on it
It's irrelevant who carries out the attack. The "terror" for you happens when you hear about it --or more signficantly that you hear about it.

oh won't you save me from the news! its not like I can choose to watch or anything is it!?

and by your definition aren't you committing terrorism at the moment
No; you can save you from the news. Turn off that television set or that radio, now. I dare you.

Yes, I'm terrorising you into being human (oh noes!).

Call to power, take a lesson from those in the 70's: Never trust anyone over 30!

First off, thank you for actually engaging me in intelligence discussion, I shall give you a slice of cheese cake.

Second, yea I could see how they wouldn't waste resource on a diversion and I could see how it could leave them to be exposed if they tried one. Like I said, it was just something that came into my mind when I look back on the previous terrorist attack and foiled terrorist attack plans.

I can understand why you might have thought that, since it does seem a little convenient for the terrorists to fail so completely and spectacularly. But diversions seem to me like the kind of thing you'd do if your enemy was ready for you. If you already have the element of surprise, as terrorists usually do, a diversion just squanders it.

Call to power, take a lesson from those in the 70's: Never trust anyone over 30!

And don't trust those damned dirty apes, either! :p

And don't trust those damned dirty apes, either! :p

I am not a number!

And don't trust those damned dirty apes, either! :p
Instead, always trust a speaking car

It's irrelevant who carries out the attack. The "terror" for you happens when you hear about it --or more signficantly that you hear about it.

there you go again living in a land without defined words and actions, a third party talking about an incident isn't terrorism its chit-chat

No; you can save you from the news. Turn off that television set or that radio, now. I dare you.

the fact that I'm on the internet right now might be a clue here, and I know you thinking your making some super awesome point but your not:

ter·ror·ism (tĕr'ə-rĭz'əm) pronunciation
n.

The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.


http://www.answers.com/terrorism&r=67

Yes, I'm terrorising you into being human (oh noes!).

which means your trying to talk me into following you into some la la land where words aren't clearly defined!

oh noez indeed

Call to power, take a lesson from those in the 70's: Never trust anyone over 30!

or 10!

Quite frankly, if a man crashing a car into a building really is Al Qaeda terrorism, they seem to be running out of both ideas and resources.

The car was filled with propane tanks which didn't even explode. Wasn't well thought out really.I mean the people thaat pulled of some other attacks really planned them out over years and years.

You know, ever since 9/11, I've basically been watching the news and seeing what the terrorist will do next. They attack Spain, Great Britain, and then we get a string of 'foiled' terrorist attacks in the planning stage, and then the attack at Glasgow happens today.

For those who don't know, here's the CNN link (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/06/30/london.alert/index.html) to the attack today.

Now since I've heard about the attacks today I've been wondering about something. What if, the plans that the UK and the US have been foiling were nothing more than just a distraction from the real attacks? Think about it, what if the terrorist actually set up the 'fake' planning to be foiled so that it would distract us from what they were really planning? I wouldn't put it past them to do this, I mean I would if I was a terrorist.

What do you guys think?

I sort of thought the same thing, like something really big is coming. Though I don't know, I guess will have to wait and see.

What do you guys think?

I think, "What if elephants could fly.?" :rolleyes:

I wouldn't put it past them to do this, I mean I would if I was a terrorist.

What do you guys think?
I think you seem to know an awful lot about the inner workings of the terrorist mind for an "innocent" person, Wilgrove.

It's possible they would try something like this. But then again, how can you tell when you've intercepted a real plot and when you've stopped a dud? The only way you could tell the difference was if the plot was successful, and then you would know it was real.
This reminds me of some scientific or mathematical law. Heisenberg, maybe? Can anyone remember the right one, where you can only tell the value of something by using it?

You know, ever since 9/11, I've basically been watching the news and seeing what the terrorist will do next.

Hang on....it only existed after 11/9?

:eek:

If there is one thing we're doing right, it's that we're making the terrorists less organized. These attacks, if they were to succeed, would doubtlessly be tragic, but not nearly as sophisticated as 9/11. That's why many of them are stopped early.
My question is why the UK? They seem to be the country of choice to attack in Europe, even though some other countries have comparable risk. France, for instance, has the largest Muslim minority in Europe, and they are not assimilated well, and face discrimination.

Three big bombs, no explosions, no casualties... Coincidence or conspiracy?What? There wasn't even an explosion?

Jeebus, what has the world come to. It's like some huge Charlie Chaplin film.

Hang on....it only existed after 11/9?

:eek:Indeed. Well known fact. It's like spontaneous generation or Abiogenesis. Classical spontaneous generation is the notion that living organism are generated by decaying things. Everyone knows that Europe and Asia were pillars of strength in this modern world. So no terrorists were generated there. However, moral decay was taking place in the USA and caused the very first terrorist to spontaneously generate. And that is story of how the first terrorist came into the world.

Hang on....it only existed after 11/9?

:eek:

Pffft some new kids on the block and Northern Ireland gets forgotten about straight away. I feel hurt

My thoughts on the recent attempted terrorism in England/Scotland:

What an embarrassing weekend to be an islamic terrorist! :p

0/3. :p

The UK is on full terror alert. Since the goal of terrorists is to cause terror I daresay they were successful.

Hang on....it only existed after 11/9?

:eek:

Yeah, it ain't terrorism if the Yanks help fund it.

What? There wasn't even an explosion?

Jeebus, what has the world come to. It's like some huge Charlie Chaplin film.

Yeah, it's pretty tragic really. Headline: NO EXPLOSIONS AT NIGHTCLUBS OR AIRPORTS. Yay.

Yeah, it's pretty tragic really. Headline: NO EXPLOSIONS AT NIGHTCLUBS OR AIRPORTS. Yay.I just remembered a spoof ad from a few years back. It suddenly seems quite relevant, and just as funny.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbcADoSz9bg

I think you've watched to much fearmongering news.

As a Brit I can wholeheartedly say that terrorists aren't scary, they're the comic relief are lives need.

Upon hearing one was stupid enough to ignite and take a swipe at a cop while shouting something about Woody Allen it warmed the cockles of my heart as more proof these supposed enemies of our way of life can't do anything right, not even tie their laces or punch a copper.

Good job they're useless mind, could've been a bit hair raising back there.

Sometimes you've just got to laugh.

I just remembered a spoof ad from a few years back. It suddenly seems quite relevant, and just as funny.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbcADoSz9bg

Hahaha, that is good :D

From the little I read, it seems like nothing much.

You know, ever since 9/11, I've basically been watching the news and seeing what the terrorist will do next.

And that's why the terrorists are winning.

How is a terrorist attack like that distract western intelligence agencies. They are not like the Eye of Sauron which can only look at one thing at a time.

All a distraction bombing do is to free up the agents trying to foil it in order to help out other agents trying to foil other potential terrorist attacks. If there are three agents trying to foil your main attack and two trying to foil your diversion, there are still three agents trying to foil your main attack, not zero.

Some personal opinions:

(This pertains to America)
1)Pre-1990s there were the Communists, before that it was Germans and Japanese people, before that it was those immigrants(I thought almost everyone was an immigrant), and before that it was Native Americans, and so on and so on. "Terrorists" are just the newest scapegoat for all of our problems. (I probably excluded a bunch of groups, sorry if i left your favorite scapegoat out.)
:rolleyes:

2)While the "terrorist" threat is real, i feel that it has been made bigger then it really is. I'm pretty sure that we won't be seeing any more 9/11s, but then the longer we stay and screw up the Middle East, the more likely we are to be attacked again.

3)Just some stuff on 9-11
a. Did the U.S. gov. plan/carry out the attacks. -Probably not
b. Was the U.S. gov. involved in a suspicious way. - Possible
c. Was the U.S. gov. not involved and did the terrorists manage it all by themselves. -Possible
d. Did the gov. use the attacks to justify wars of aggression and wars that have greatly benefited certain people in the government. - Yes

Were there no casualties other than the terrorists themselves? How do they expect to us to take them seriously if they aren't even willing to put in the necessary effort to gain their 72 virgins in Paradise?

Some personal opinions:

(This pertains to America)
1)Pre-1990s there were the Communists, before that it was Germans and Japanese people, before that it was those immigrants(I thought almost everyone was an immigrant), and before that it was Native Americans, and so on and so on. "Terrorists" are just the newest scapegoat for all of our problems. (I probably excluded a bunch of groups, sorry if i left your favorite scapegoat out.)
:rolleyes:

2)While the "terrorist" threat is real, i feel that it has been made bigger then it really is. I'm pretty sure that we won't be seeing any more 9/11s, but then the longer we stay and screw up the Middle East, the more likely we are to be attacked again.

3)Just some stuff on 9-11
a. Did the U.S. gov. plan/carry out the attacks. -Probably not
b. Was the U.S. gov. involved in a suspicious way. - Possible
c. Was the U.S. gov. not involved and did the terrorists manage it all by themselves. -Possible
d. Did the gov. use the attacks to justify wars of aggression and wars that have greatly benefited certain people in the government. - Yes

QFT

Were there no casualties other than the terrorists themselves? How do they expect to us to take them seriously if they aren't even willing to put in the necessary effort to gain their 72 virgins in Paradise?

This is a bit off topic, but the combination of your signature and this topic gives me half an excuse to post this picture.

http://www.sportsargumentwiki.com/index.php?title=Image:416_neverforget.jpg

Just wondering, what does QFT stand for/mean.

Just wondering, what does QFT stand for/mean.

Quoted For Truth.

And

Quoted For Truth

means...?

Sorry if i'm being stupid, i just don't get it.

And

Quoted For Truth

means...?

Sorry if i'm being stupid, i just don't get it.

It means you're quoting a post because you agree with what is being said.

You know, ever since 9/11, I've basically been watching the news and seeing what the terrorist will do next. They attack Spain, Great Britain, and then we get a string of 'foiled' terrorist attacks in the planning stage, and then the attack at Glasgow happens today.

For those who don't know, here's the CNN link (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/06/30/london.alert/index.html) to the attack today.

Now since I've heard about the attacks today I've been wondering about something. What if, the plans that the UK and the US have been foiling were nothing more than just a distraction from the real attacks? Think about it, what if the terrorist actually set up the 'fake' planning to be foiled so that it would distract us from what they were really planning? I wouldn't put it past them to do this, I mean I would if I was a terrorist.

What do you guys think?


There is no evidence for anything of the sort, anywhere.

"Terrorists" are not an army, they don't have a leader, they don't have an over-arching strategy.

20 Guys did 9/11. 20 guys. Maybe another 100 helped them. Maybe.

Some local idiot amateurs were responsible for the farce in the UK this week, end of story.

Nouvelle Wallonochia and Wilgrove

Thanks for the enlightenment.
:)