NY Terror Plot Foiled

reply to post by TurkeyBurgers

WOW. That is awesome. I laughed like crazy. You make such valid points. Maybe these guys are that dumb? I do not know. Watching James Bond goes against their belief system? LOLOL.

Well all I know is the one James Bond movie he was in Afghanistan and the Mujadeen and the Snow Leapords (Opium Smugglers) helped him attack a Russian Air Base...I have to think the Islamists at least saw that one!

Just guessing mind you, these though were the people who advanced science, medicine, astrology, and astronomy while Papal dominated Europe suffered through almost a 1,000 years of the dark ages where all those things were repressed.

I suspect it's us in the west that's probably a brick or two shy of a full load. After all we are the ones who beleive all these nonsensical plots.

And then there's the possibility this group were under surveillance for months in the hope that they were making contact with significant parallel operation or sources abroad. The arrest report does not indicate either way if there is something beyond a plot to destroy what was mentioned.

Possible the agencies involved wanted a solidified case with unambiguous evidence to ensure successful prosecution. This is becoming an increasing concern as intent and planning only can be considered insufficient grounds.

Many will gravitate to the conclusion a bunch of incompetent aspiring terrorists were set up. Maybe. But maybe not.

There might be a lot more to this case. Remember the seemingly unimportant attempt to blow up the WTC in 1994.


Mike

Originally posted by Crakeur

they were, it seems, upset with the US involvement in Afghanistan. Thus, they wanted to blow up a couple of synagogues.

Makes perfect sense to me.

One more reason we should rein in the PTB and pull our troops out of the countries we don't belong in (which would be most countries)... It is our imperialistic meddling that gets us attacked in the first place and makes us hated around the world (as well as putting massive strain on us financially), the terrorists even tell us that and yet we thick headed ignorant Americans don't do anything about it. We ask for solutions to the threat and the government comes up with more fraudulent war and more meddling along with less liberty and the illusion of safety built up here at home...

It's like we're all living in a bizzaro reality where up is down and down is up and where the maniacal psychos are the ones we go to for policy while the voices of reason like Ron Paul are shunned and forgotten...

And now this story, honestly I don't know what the PTB want our reaction to this to be, lull us into a false sense of security?

Thank goodness these terrorists were taking their time on this one Honestly, a year long investigation it took them a year to set up a sting where they sold them fake explosives?

[edit on 21-5-2009 by Titen-Sxull]

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull


One more reason we should rein in the PTB and pull our troops out of the countries we don't belong in (which would be most countries)

... It is our imperialistic meddling that gets us attacked in the first place and makes us hated around the world (as well as putting massive strain on us financially),

the terrorists even tell us that and yet we thick headed ignorant Americans don't do anything about it.

So you're saying the US must base it's foreign policy and international relations on what pleases or displeases terrorists.

The US did not have a large military presence in the Middle East in early 2001. Unless it was a contrivance as some claim, there was a major
terrorist attack on the US that year, financed and planned in the region.

Should the US do a polling survey of what terrorists do and don't want?


Mike



[edit on 21-5-2009 by mmiichael]

reply to post by mmiichael


No I don't think we should choose to placate the terrorists but going over to the Middle-East and meddling allows more terrorists to be recruited... This Imperialistic policy complicates and accelerates things, we make the world dangerous by poking our nose where it doesn't belong. Being completely ignorant of why the terrorists attacked us isn't smart and pretending that it was some BS like "they hated our freedoms and way of life" is just laughable...

Even if we did pull all our troops out of all these nations there still would be a dedicated handful of extremists who truly believe in their causes against us "infidels" but who would screw with the US if we had all our troops here? Who would even consider the possibility of launching an attack against us if we weren't spread thin around the world? It would make it a lot more difficult to recruit people willing to blow themselves up if we were minding our business, it would also be economically feasible compared to the massive spending we wrack up with these wars and this empire we've built...

Or would you rather we continue agitating the hive by mucking around where we don't belong?

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull


One more reason we should rein in the PTB and pull our troops out of the countries we don't belong in (which would be most countries)

... It is our imperialistic meddling that gets us attacked in the first place and makes us hated around the world (as well as putting massive strain on us financially),

the terrorists even tell us that and yet we thick headed ignorant Americans don't do anything about it.

So you're saying the US must base it's foreign policy and international relations on what pleases or displeases terrorists.

The US did not have a large military presence in the Middle East in early 2001. Unless it was a contrivance as some claim, there was a major
terrorist attack on the US that year, financed and planned in the region.

Should the US do a polling survey of what terrorists do and don't want?


Mike



[edit on 21-5-2009 by mmiichael]

The US did have a large military presence in the middle east prior to 9/11 including around 5,000 troops in Saudi Arabia.

And forget about polling terrorists. Let's poll Americans and see if they want SEVEN HUNDRED foreign military bases or universal health care, competitive public schools, and social security.

This story seems quite absurd. I don't understand what blowing up a few churches would do for their cause. I don't see a gain, politically, monetarily, public-relations wise, it doesn't make sense. It took them a year to get up to it? How hard is it do that?

Originally posted by milesp

The US did have a large military presence in the middle east prior to 9/11 including around 5,000 troops in Saudi Arabia.

And forget about polling terrorists. Let's poll Americans and see if they want SEVEN HUNDRED foreign military bases or universal health care, competitive public schools, and social security.

The US had troops in Saudi Arabia, invited there initially due to the attempt of Iraq to invade Kuwait and possibly elsewhere. They were asked to leave - and did.

The US is a democracy. Sometimes polling is done on certain issues. As imperfect as the system may be, the way it works is that officials are elected. It is hoped that these people are more capable of assessing data and situations and determining solutions far better than the less informed general public.

Your either/or options are not the only possiiblities. The thinking is Americans need to have certain security provided, whether they realize it or not.

An open poll of what what Americans want most could turn out to be no military presence abroad, no modified domestic policies, but things like no work, no taxes, unlimited credit, free beer, etc.


Mike


[edit on 21-5-2009 by mmiichael]

Originally posted by mmiichael

Many will gravitate to the conclusion a bunch of incompetent aspiring terrorists were set up. Maybe. But maybe not.

knowing how our government operates, they where probably baited for their cause. I wonder how many $$millions was offered?

I'm watching this on Sky News today, and i'm very interested in why they are using the terminology "WMD"?

Terrorists have used car bombs for years, and even the odd AA missile now and again, but i can't remember when i've heard them being called WMD's?

I thought that term was reserved for the larger weapons, nukes, NBC weapons and the likes?

Do you think this is just a term being used to get the public more fearfull and horrified at the charges?

CX.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
The question is, did this same agent spend a year inciting these people to violence first because of their personalities, educational, political, or religious background suggested they were exploitable.

the answer is no. an informant at a mosque heard that some members of the mosque were looking for explosives. He alerted the authorities and then, it seems, the feds stepped in. I might have read (pre-coffee so might be off here) that the informant sold them the inert explosives or the informant put them in touch with people who were posing as pakistani militants.

the four accused terrorists were prison converts who felt that the US should get out of Afghanistan and they would blow up a military transport plane heading for the middle east simultandeously with the detonation of car bombs outside two synagogues in the Riverdale area.


They had the stinger missile in the back of the car and the bombs were in the process of being put in place.



For those that feel we should pull out of the middle east, we can't.

If we do, it gives the terrorists the appearance of victory. Back in the 80's, a military barracks bombing in Beirut resulted in a total withdrawal from the region. The result? More terror attacks. The appearance of victory makes people bold. When you push the giant and it steps back rather than fight, it shows weakness. This weakness gives the small warrior strength.

We made this bed, we need to lie in it. A total isolation policy might work for the region but not in a manner that will work for anyone.

Let's say we pull out entirely. No troops, no bases, no business dealings whatsoever with any of the nations in the middle east. Then what?

Israel will wind up fighting with the surrounding nations. Nukes will, inevitably, be used in the region and whole nations might disappear.

If anyone were to win, my money would be on Israel but what, exactly, will they win? Radiation wasted strips of sand?

Back to the foiled attack:
I can't imagine these four guys raised the money and did all this by themselves. The news here is calling them a cell and, to me, a cell is a group that is in place to commit an act on behalf of a larger group. It'll be interesting to see how much news is devoted to these guys in the near future. If they fade fast, they're connected to other folks and the feds want the memory to fade so they can go after the others. If they remain on the front pages, they are being treated well, there's no borderline tactics being used to uncover more operatives.

And oddly enough, as the number of H1N1 school closings in the area approaches 50, the papers forgot to mention the flu today.

I don't believe it for a second
If these people truly wanted to attack the "regime"

attacking places of worship, thereby making their own coumunity look bad makes no sense.

Seriously, even if these are truly frustrated people then why use futile tactics that would only hurt your cause?

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Seriously, even if these are truly frustrated people then why use futile tactics that would only hurt your cause?

I'm sorry, have you not seen the news out of the middle east the last few years? They're willing to blow up mosques for their cause. Why? Because, in their eyes, anyone who dies for the cause goes straight to heaven I guess.


Anyone willing to kill or die for their faith scares me.

Is it just me or is it that anytime something is planned, plotted or discussed which goes against Israel/Jews it's considered "terrorism".

If this plot was against a church in Hoboken would it simply be considered a "hate crime".

I honestly think we've been led through a time of preconceived conditioning where we subconsciously subscribe terms, phrases and thought patterns to 1 scenario which invokes deeper reactions than thoughts prescribed to other, similar events.

Originally posted by Crakeur
the story, as it was reported minutes ago:
they were, it seems, upset with the US involvement in Afghanistan.

LMAO!!! You mean the war that practically dropped off the radar for eight years? The forgotten war. So they weren't mad about the loss of job opportunities in their own community or economic collapse, just Afghanistan - the war we are trying to ramp up. How convenient.

In this weeks news:

- Obama back-peddling on closing Gitmo and sticking with a tweaked version
of military tribunals for detainees...(Supposedly these guys were "radicalized" in U.S. prisons so God forbid we put any more foreign detainees from Gitmo there to incite inmates further)

- Much criticism of torture and an outcry against Pelosi regarding who knew what/when about torture...

- People deriding Cheney, saying he is losing it with his fear mongering about how we're not safe...

...Iran suddenly test fires a missile despite all other indications of warming to negotiations...

- Obama tells Netanyahu that the Israelis must stop expanding into Palestinian areas...

...What to do, what to do. How do you reign in all of these inconvenient happenings...

Oh! I know, let's catch some "home grown" terrorists, in New York no less, so we can scare the be-jeezuz out of everyone and have them practically beg to maintain Bush-era policies and make these little irritations drop out of the news cycle.

The men behind the curtain always find a way to get what they want. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. I can't believe people are still buying this crap. I'm quite sure it will all get wrapped up neat and pretty during Obama's speech today on National Security. How coincidental, if you believe in that sort of thing.

[edit on 21/5/2009 by kosmicjack]

Originally posted by Crakeur
I'm sorry, have you not seen the news out of the middle east the last few years? They're willing to blow up mosques for their cause. Why? Because, in their eyes, anyone who dies for the cause goes straight to heaven I guess.

Yes I have seen the propoganda you speak of coming out of the news

You know there's this comedian called Russel Peters.

He's funny, and he once said: "I recently went to Iraq, I saw some really sexy girls, went to some clubs but it's not what I expected. Where were all the crazy people that the media keeps talking about? All I saw were fairly modern people wanting to have fun or spend time with families.
I guess the media portraying them as such is the same as if middle-easterners came to the U.S. and ONLY put rednecks on video screaming Yeehaawww let's go kill some [N-word] or some mulims or brown people. If they did that then all middle easterners would think all americans are rednecks"

Originally posted by TXRabbit
Is it just me or is it that anytime something is planned, plotted or discussed which goes against Israel/Jews it's considered "terrorism".

they were going to blow up two synagogues while they simultaneoulsy took down a military flight enroute to the middle east.

last I checked, the military didn't classify their planes or troops as Israel/Jews.

This is, actually, the first case I've heard of that was specific to a jewish target (along with the aforementioned military target).

Some other "terrorism" cases in the recent history:
1993 WTC
1998 palestinian convicted of plotting to blow up a pipe bomb in NYC subways, hoping to kill as many jews as possible. Note, the subways are not solely used by jews. He must have read Jesse Jackson's hymie town comment and figured it's all jews here.
9/11/01 - WTC part 2.
04/06 - man sentenced to 5+ years for trying to obtain stinger anti-aircraft missiles for the taliban and al qaeda
June 2006 - 7 men parrested for plotting Sears Tower and other building attacks in Chicago and Miami (lots of jews in Miami but this was the summer and everyone knows, the jews head back north in the summer)
June 2007 - 4 men arrested for plotting to blow up the gas supply at JFK airport (didn't specify if they were the Israel/Jew supplies)
April 2009 - conviction of 5 men plotting an attack (May 07) at Fort Dix.

Tell me, of these targets, how many Israel/Jew targets were there? The only one that was seeking to take jewish lives was still an attack on a public subway.

None of the above mentioned attacks were listed as hate crimes or anything else.


I think that, if some pro-lifer decided to blow up a clinic, he should be charged with terrorism. I think that if some lone kook decided to blow up a church or a synagogue because the demons told him to, it isn't terrorism.

hopefully we don't have to hear about a plot to blow up a church in Hoboken (or anywhere else) in an effort to get the right wing fundamentalists out of gov't. If we do, it's terrorism.

Last I checked, they also call it terrorism when a suicide bomber blows himself up in a mosque.

Originally posted by Crakeur
they were going to blow up two synagogues while they simultaneoulsy took down a military flight enroute to the middle east.

Crackeur, no offense but I think you watch too much msm

Tell me something, the msm has been "reporting" about terroism in high gear for about a decade now.

During that entire almost a decade, didn't you ever find it odd that they never spoke about the reason for "terroism"? The cause of terroism?

Originally posted by Crakeur
I think that, if some pro-lifer decided to blow up a clinic, he should be charged with terrorism. I think that if some lone kook decided to blow up a church or a synagogue because the demons told him to, it isn't terrorism.

I think that pro-lifers are already considered terroists by the DHS by not even doing anything.

Doesn't that perhaps make you wonder?

I mean they called almost everyone in the middle east a terroist, didn't you ever think it's only a matter of time until they do it domestically as well?

Originally posted by Crakeur
Last I checked, they also call it terrorism when a suicide bomber blows himself up in a mosque.

Last time I checked if you had concerns on abortion or illegal immigration you were also a potential terroist.

Thinking needs to become popular again!

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Last time I checked if you had concerns on abortion or illegal immigration you were also a potential terroist.

no, having concerns on abortion etc does not make you a terrorist. when you plan on blowing up a clinic to scare people who believe that the choice is theirs, not some book's, then you have moved into terrorist territory.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Thinking needs to become popular again!

I fear that it thinking for oneself, being able to read the news, main stream and otherwise, is something that is lacking in society. you see, if you ignore the main stream media and only follow alternative news sites, you only get one side of the news. If it's slanted one way or the other, it's still slanted.

read it all and make your choices.

I can, and do, just that.

when I see footage of the carnage of a suicide bomb at a mosque or an Israeli retaliation in Gaza, I see what happened as it is being presented to me and I make my own assumptions and decisions. I don't disregard the entire event because it was on NBC.

When you see a mosque blown to pieces with men, women and children strewn about the street, do you assume the image is fake?

Do you just ignore everything that doesn't come from, say Alex Jones?

I sure hope not.

please excuse my itchy trigger finger

[edit on 21-5-2009 by Crakeur]