New Terrorist Attacks?

For any of you who have had the opportunity (and clearance) to read secret or top secret message traffic, you know that the attacks we know about are the attacks that are successful. There are many more attacks which the public never finds out about.
 
All al-Qaeda (or any terrorist op) has to do is wait until the fall school year starts....

...full classrooms...

...high-school football stadiums...

...college dorms...

...and all unprotected (heck, you can't even CCW in these places! :mad: )

The terrorists don't need to make major hits like 9/11. Several small ones will do just as well to make people EVERYWHERE feel unsafe.

I'm just suprised that nothing has happened....YET.... :(
 
Fred,

Indignant? That's a howl. My father, uncle (who attends the British-Israel club in London) and a few of my other relatives would find it very amusing too. You have a hang up with this word "conspiracy" and "jew".

Edmund was the father of the settlements. It is well known and recorded their own written history. The "arabs" know this very well. Yet the Rothschild family lives a charmed life. If the "radical muslim jew haters" wanted to hurt "the jews", their leadership has been sitting there in places like England, and going without protection for the last 50 years of unrest (and now the "war") without even spitting at them.
 
Myopicmouse,

Among the few and only mainland targets that were hit by the "IRA" during the 1970s, 80s and 90s were some pubs, some commercial properties and supposedly the horsed military guard in London that were on parade. A half a million soft targets be they military bases, government establishments, police operations, crowded public venues were untouched. Hardly a "war" eh?
 
Hardly a war?...tell that to the maimed survivors and families of the dead.

Osama and his ilk declared war on us in the 90's. As was adequately illustrated in a previous post, we have been attacked repeatedly with alarming success for over a decade. What do you need for proof???

There will always be appeasers such as yourselves who would just as soon try and strike a bargain with murderers in the deluded hope that the carnage would pass them by. Sorry folks, these bastards want to kill us all. They will heap scorn on you as they slit your throats because you didn't have the backbone to stand for your beliefs. This is a 'no quarter' fight with absolutely no room for negotiation. WAKE UP.
 
gdburner,

I see, so it is not "the Jews" that the "radical muslim extremists" hate - it's us right? Then what has all this nonsense been about the "arab world" wanting to wipe out "the jews" and the State of Israel? Now which is it? Us? Or the "Jews"? Or both?

What have Al Kidya been doing for the last 3 years and 10 months? Well, I could could make a parallel observation here; Al Kidya has made about as much effort to hit the million and a half soft targets sitting like ducks here in the CONUS - as George Bush has done to seal our borders and get them all out. In other words - about nothing.

In the meantime, the administration spokespeople have been winding people up with terms like "chatter" - as if to bring a few cities into chaos and kill a few thousand people Al Kidya has to "get all worked up and talk about it" on telephones, e-mail and other interceptible systems before they can inflict the sort of carnage and disruption that a team of college students could figure out.

This government propaganda build-up and priming using tabloid language and phrases reminds me of the audio and visual cues in the typical Hollywood film made for people that have the intellect and attention span of a 3 minute pop single. Like the oversize pressure gauge with the red zone and the word "danger" in huge block letters.

I guess Al Kidya has spent the last 3 years and 10 months in Las Vegas having too good a time to do anything else.

The "war" with the "IRA" is an arms, drug and money-laundering business. The British gov has admitted that it's own agents have been directly involved in some of the murders and other activities. In 1991 there were six people acquitted of two pub bombings in Birmingham after spending 16 years in prison after being scapegoated by the British government.

That particular bombing killed 21 people in two pubs. Another device at a bank didn't go off. But that was the largest "IRA" attack on the British mainland in the whole history of the "IRA". Some "war" eh?

I lived near a British military base for a considerable time during the 70s and 80s when this stuff was going on. It was an open base, no entry control, and another sitting duck. I can also tell you for a fact, that the regional British police HQ in those days had uncontrolled entry into the complex, no armed police whatsoever, and was also a sitting duck that sat there day and night for several decades. This would have been duplicated in every region in the country with the possible exception of some of the major operation centers in London, Birmingham, Liverpool etc. This was no "secret", it was common knowledge - a literal joke. There were no armed police patrols in Britain at that time. None. Not one. This less than an hours drive from one, and a couple of hours from several inbound ports from Ireland in a coastal area that had enough inshore and offshore fishing boats afloat to put a daisy chain across the Irish sea and back.

These, and I could write a list just of catagories let alone individual subjects, were all untouched. A couple of bombs here and there and that was IT. For thirty years. From any rational standpoint it has been evident that this was no "war", but rather a controlled conflict.
 
Myopicmouse
After the SAS killed bombers in Gibraltar the republicans screamed bloody murder, apparently you should only arrest killers not kill them - that would be unfair! So what happened on a couple of occasions is that british intelligance leaked info to loyalist paramilitarys (UVF) about IRA members, who were then killed by the UVF. In it's own way, it 'saved' lifes, naturally you don't want to use one paramilitary force to kill the other, but they were left with no other choice, and better that than have these IRA members still operating. All the British were responsible for, was *collusion* not "terrorist" attacks.

I think there has been more to it than that. The whole bag hasn't been made public, and what was had to be squeezed out; in any theatre of ops where you have dope, arms and huge sums of money changing hands on a piece of prime real estate there is going to be more than "collusion" sooner or later. But for the sake of definitions, collusion is as good as murder, if the subject is murder.
 
I see many of you still don't actually know what terrorism is and assume that anything that happens bad and is scary might be terrorism. Just because an act or acts cause fright or terror does not make them terrorism.

The DC Snipers were not terrorists, but sequential mass murderers. The attack on the USS Cole was not terrorism, but essentially an act of war.

Terrorism is an act or acts against targets that are not military with the purpose of bringing out political, social, military, and/or religious changes by terrorizing non-combatants, often in such a manner for them to get their leaders to implement such changes.

The DC Snipers were no more trying to bring about any political, social, or religious changes in American society than Ted Bundy was. What they did was pretty scary, but they were simply lowly murderers. The act against the Cole was a military act against combatants (although not immediately engaged in combat).

More often than not, terrorist acts are smaller scale events (with exceptions such as the 9/11) where it is hoped that the resulting change will be much more significant than the size of the act. Take the kidnapping of civilians in Iraq. The Phillipino example is a good one. One of their non-military truck drivers was taken hostage and the hostage takers were demanding the Phillipines withdraw from Iraq if they wanted their person back alive. The event worked as the kidnapper terrorists were able to effect a military change by their attack on a non-military person.
 
LAK-
In 1991 there were six people acquitted of two pub bombings in Birmingham after spending 16 years in prison after being scapegoated by the British government.
Yes, they got other IRA members convicted of the crime instead of sending the informants to prison and/or not blowing their cover. Now tell me is it better to have your information on future attacks reduced by burning you informants or is it better to send people away who were lets face it, bad eggs who would/have killed anyway, so look at it in the long run, people in a illegal murdering orginisation were sent to prison - whilst informants who would provide info to save lifes go free. So tell me whos better to put in prison people who would take or save lifes? - notion to have proper 'justice' is reasonable, however narrow minded given the circumstances, anyway those people would have ended up in prison anyway.

But for the sake of definitions, collusion is as good as murder, if the subject is murder.
- Justifyable homocide.

Why are you talking about the mainland for? their operations were 99% in Northen Ireland. I do believe they tried to kill thatcher with Brighton bomb, and attempted to kill charlies & diana. They succeded in killing Lord Battenbu(SP) The way they see it, it certianly could be seen as a 'war' Their aim was a united Ireland, so they wern't trying to kill england, just get troops out of Ulster, which had more success if they kept attacks mainly in N.I so the British could WITHDRAW' whereas if they had sustained attacks all over the UK then the British couldn't withdraw so would just continue to battle and IRA wouldn't be able to acheive aim. Occasional attacks in england were only meant to highlight events in Ireland.



---------------------
Double Naught Spy - I agree with all you say in your post, the only thing I would say however is that terrorism is also against military targets, not just civilian.
 
00spy,

Not to nitpick, but the FBI defines terrorism as, the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. There is no requirement of non-military targets. Therefore the USS Cole attack was most certainly terrorism.
 
Myopicmouse
-Justifyable homocide.

... Nope. That's called execution without trial. Can not speak for the new europa, but in this country it's as good as murder.

The Birmingham six, regardless, were wrongfully convicted. That was proven, and there was a change in the law governing how such trials were conducted because of it.

Why are you talking about the mainland for? their operations were 99% in Northen Ireland. I do believe they tried to kill thatcher with Brighton bomb, and attempted to kill charlies & diana. They succeded in killing Lord Battenbu(SP) The way they see it, it certianly could be seen as a 'war' Their aim was a united Ireland, so they wern't trying to kill england, just get troops out of Ulster, which had more success if they kept attacks mainly in N.I so the British could WITHDRAW' whereas if they had sustained attacks all over the UK then the British couldn't withdraw so would just continue to battle and IRA wouldn't be able to acheive aim. Occasional attacks in england were only meant to highlight events in Ireland

.... If we are to believe this was a "war" in the context of an identifiable group of people with a grievance with the Crown, and that they had the objective of inflicting the maximum damage on the British government to get their way, then they showed bizarre restraint. Because, as I have pointed out, there was an enormous number of soft (very soft) but significant targets that were untouched.

I do not accept your explanation. Major disruptions on the mainland would have forced the government to devote more troops resources to the mainland, and the consequent presence and inevitable activity of having troops in their neighborhoods would have made the goverment's part in NI more unpopular with mainland Britain.

I am not convinced that it was the "IRA" who killed Lord Mountbatten, or who made the attempt on Thatcher. I have not looked into Mountbatten's later political history, but Margaret Thatcher had other enemies at the time - on a political level within and without the British government.
 
LAK,

Your grasp of the details and nuances of world events that escape the view of the rest of us is stunning. I salute you, sir!
 
After you finish saluting be sure you are prepated for the after effects of a large scale terrorist attack in your area.
At a minimum you should have food, water, a good firsy aid kit, weapons and a battery powered radio.
 
LAK-
... Nope. That's called execution without trial. Can not speak for the new europa, but in this country it's as good as murder.
The IRA THEMSELFS have said it was a 'war' hence the humger strikes tio get 'political status' in prisons, i.e no prison uniform, because they actions were not domestic crime. So lets say, WW2 people whouldn't have shot Germans, instead they should have arrested them?

.... If we are to believe this was a "war" in the context of an identifiable group of people with a grievance with the Crown, and that they had the objective of inflicting the maximum damage on the British government to get their way, then they showed bizarre restraint. Because, as I have pointed out, there was an enormous number of soft (very soft) but significant targets that were untouched.

I do not accept your explanation. Major disruptions on the mainland would have forced the government to devote more troops resources to the mainland, and the consequent presence and inevitable activity of having troops in their neighborhoods would have made the goverment's part in NI more unpopular with mainland Britain.
Unfortenatly incorrect, think of the public outcry all over the world from the Lord Mountbatten murder! if IRA was seens as just trying to kill english people they would lose support, as they would be seen as making war on the english, rather than fighting for 'freedom' in Ireland, and if they lost their support, especially in America, think of the millions of Dollors and guns from America that they just wouldn't have! - they had to keep world opinion sweet for their cause and future cause. Remeber, they wern't trying for english 'scalps, but a United Ireland.

I am not convinced that it was the "IRA" who killed Lord Mountbatten, or who made the attempt on Thatcher. I have not looked into Mountbatten's later political history, but Margaret Thatcher had other enemies at the time - on a political level within and without the British government.
Maybe it was the same guy on the 'grassy knol, who shot JFK? - that guy will travel!!!
 
Hard Ball
After you finish saluting be sure you are prepated for the after effects of a large scale terrorist attack in your area.

.... When the Ministry of Truth tells you who did it and how, don't forget to be prepared to grovel at the feet of the Ministry of Love; who are going to invite themselves into your life to look after you for the next decade or more.

Myopicmouse,

.... The word "war" is really not compatable with what has transpired to date. And regardless, for the few ideolistic individuals, propaganda agents, operators and provocateurs etc who may have used the term I would hardly expect a government to take it seriously in that context unless the other side had a genuine campaign of attacks. And there has been no shortage of arms, explosives etc even to this day in Ireland or mainland Britain.

It would be naive to suggest that attacks on government and major commercial center targets en mass on the mainland would have led people to believe that it was "the English" and not a goal of a "united Ireland". It was only the "English" that kept Ireland divided - the British government! Who else!?

But money and arms came through organized crime - everywhere - not "the Americans".

Lord Mountbatten's murder was a bit of a shock to many older people who were familiar with him. Thomas McMahon was the sole conviction in that attack, and it would be interesting to know why specifically he singled out Mountbatten as a target - if it was indeed McMahon alone who planned and executed the murder. I think he had pretty much retired a long time before it happened, and many younger people had never even heard of him when it happened.
 
But money and arms came through organized crime - everywhere - not "the Americans".
Sorry buddy, but thats where most of all weapons came from, like it or not. It's a "war" i nthe same way Kosovo was a war.

It would be naive to suggest that attacks on government and major commercial center targets en mass on the mainland would have led people to believe that it was "the English" and not a goal of a "united Ireland". It was only the "English" that kept Ireland divided - the British government! Who else!?
If that was the case, then during WW2 after mass bombings of london etc, they would have just said 'do what you want in poland, leave us alone' no, instead it created a spirit to accept no compirimise for the unconditional surrender of the axis.
 
There was much media attention on some arms coming from the United States; but they came from many sources. They were smuggled in, not ordered from legitimate wholesale dealers. The fact that many of them were American made means little as those guns have been shipped to countries and governments all over the globe.

I doubt that many would view IRA attacks on mainland Britain in the same way as the population perceived those of Germany during WW2. War had been declared, it was ongoing, and the nation was galvanized into fighting it to the end. And in any case, in the case of a concerted IRA effort, it would the presence and activities of the troops that would irritate people as much as the attacks. Despite being on a true war footing, many people were not that happy about having to deal with the Home Guard on a daily basis during WW2.
 
More than "interesting"...

I believe it's about time to to call in all MIdEast passports/visas, etc., detain every holder for questioning and sending most of the lot "home". Close the damn door!

-Andy
 
Back
Top