McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 01:30 pm
I had no idea you 2 were so tight with al Qaeda.

Excuse me now while I make some calls...
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 01:39 pm
What kind of response is that?

Oh, I get it. It's the response people give when their argument has been blown to sh*t.

Frankly I'm not afraid of your police-state 'time to make some calls' tactics. Oh, you were joking? Ha ha ha! Incredibly funny.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 01:39 pm
They do still have a point, McG, in that historically Al Qaeda has waited several years before attacking again.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 01:40 pm
Now you've done it...McGentrix is calling the Adirondack Americans For Liberty Miiltia and Bait Store....keep an eye out for those black duck blinds....
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 01:41 pm
Quack! Gotta go.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 01:59 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
What kind of response is that?

Oh, I get it. It's the response people give when their argument has been blown to sh*t.

Frankly I'm not afraid of your police-state 'time to make some calls' tactics. Oh, you were joking? Ha ha ha! Incredibly funny.

Cycloptichorn


Oh get over yourself. Your talking out your ass on this issue. You and your ilk have no idea what al Qaeda is up to or what they are planning. You can guess, hypothesize, sum up, assume whatever you want, but you have no facts to back up what you are saying.

Have you or your posse of "me too's" any idea how many probable al Qaeda attacks have been stopped? Do you even care?

The threat of terrorism is real. One bomb is all it would take to drastically change the lives of millions of Americans. Would you rather the US administration ignore that threat?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:01 pm
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Now you've done it...McGentrix is calling the Adirondack Americans For Liberty Miiltia and Bait Store....keep an eye out for those black duck blinds....


[size=7]*snort*[/size]
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:02 pm
I think, McG, that the point was that it isn't likely that the reason there has not been another terrorist attack is that Bush threatened to nuke Mecca, and not that the US is should ignore the threat of terrorism.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:09 pm
There have been many reports "attacks" by al-queda that have not been to the scale of the WTC.

They are not patient, they are active but somewhat "scattered".

Those of you who think otherwise are just plain wrong.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:14 pm
True, Freeduck.

McG, I don't know any more about the reality of AQ than you do. All we can go off of is their history of attacks, which support my thesis.

As I said earlier,
Quote:
Also, let's think logically: attacks are meant to succeed. AQ is up against a giant opponent with tons of resources. They have to be careful. Better to take things slow than to rush and ruin plans.


All you have to do is try to put yourself in their shoes for a minute, and ask yourself, would you rather take the time to do the job right, or not? Then see how silly what has been proposed is, that we've somehow scared them into stopping. Yeah f*cking right.

Any AQ plot that was stopped, a major one, would be all over the media as the Bushco trumpets how effective all their new systems have been at stopping terrorism. You know this; they'd even have a hard time covering it up if they wanted to, as the DHS needs to show some successes, and the leaks to the media these days seem to be everywhere (even in Bush's own cabinet, sometimes).

We can fight terrorism and protect civil liberties and dignity simultaneously. But, given that you think that terrorism is our number one concern, where are the articles posted by you screaming about how open our borders are? What have we really done to prevent further attacks? Questions we have no answers to. Despite the umbrella excuse of 'n'tnal security,' we still have a right as citizens to know how our money is being used to prosecute this war on terror. AND a responsibility.

Plenty of fear still around, though. Makes for great 'political capital,' know what I mean?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:16 pm
Quote:
There have been many reports "attacks" by al-queda that have not been to the scale of the WTC.

They are not patient, they are active but somewhat "scattered".

Those of you who think otherwise are just plain wrong.


Links! To attacks upon America! Back up these foolish words of yours!

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:18 pm
woiyo wrote:
There have been many reports "attacks" by al-queda that have not been to the scale of the WTC.

They are not patient, they are active but somewhat "scattered".

Those of you who think otherwise are just plain wrong.


OK. So we'll put you down for 'no, I don't think Bush promised to nuke Mecca'. Welcome aboard.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:18 pm
in todays paranoia driven society I'm sure an Iraqi with a beard in Patterson New Jersey who is overheard calling bush a doo doo head counts as an
Al Queda attack.....
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:23 pm
Here's one.

Here's another
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:31 pm
McGentrix wrote:

Have you or your posse of "me too's" any idea how many probable al Qaeda attacks have been stopped? Do you even care?


How many?
Can you verify any of the intel.
I find the raising and lowering of the terror threats to be an insult to any Americans intelligence.
If so many legitimate al Qaeda threats have been filtered out of the CIA's "noise", why has Bushco. not gone into Afghanistan guns-a-blazin looking for this guy and his thugs?
Why is this such a sticking point for the war hungry right?

McGentrix wrote:
The threat of terrorism is real. One bomb is all it would take to drastically change the lives of millions of Americans. Would you rather the US administration ignore that threat?


It has been real for a very long time...its' just taken a while for it to reach your doorstep.
Now, as a result of this administrations actions, it is very real, and you should be scared.

No one is saying that the war on terror should be ignored, dropped, abandoned, or aborted. I think many of us "me too's" would have preferred a logical assessment of threat, a logical focus of action, and a logicalmeans to a desired end.

If Clinton would have done what Bush did, I'd be all over his back too. Don't keep making this a Bush-hating expedition by trolling lefties.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:33 pm
McGentrix wrote:


So we can put you down for 'no, Bush didn't threaten to nuke Mecca' too? Great. So far it's 5 to 1.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:36 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
McGentrix wrote:


So we can put you down for 'no, Bush didn't threaten to nuke Mecca' too? Great. So far it's 5 to 1.


Oh, by all means add me to that list.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:38 pm
You really should read things before you link them, McG.

From your first link:
Quote:
Clark County Undersheriff Douglas Gillespie said Tuesday that while two of his officers had indeed seen the footage, authorities didn't see an imminent threat. "At no time did the information gleaned from these videos change the threat level in Las Vegas," Gillespie said, adding that he believed his department handled the information correctly.

Sharon Lever, an assistant U.S. attorney in Las Vegas, offered another reason in an e-mail she sent Detroit prosecutors in fall 2002 shortly after they alerted Las Vegas to the first tape.

"The FBI here has looked at the tape. ... They said it is not a surveillance tape," Lever wrote.

Officials are at a loss to explain some of the references in Justice Department documents from 2002 and 2003, except to say various officials had differing recollections or incomplete information and some of the prosecutors in the Detroit case are now under investigation.


So, yeah, no. Not an AQ plot that was busted up. Thanks for playing!

Your second link is better, but sure doesn't show what the US did to break up an AQ operation whatsoever. It also doesn't say anything at all about the time frame of attacks. So it really doesn't apply to this conversation at all.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:44 pm
You only get what you look for Cyc.

Here's another

And another...

One more...
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 03:00 pm
Gotta read those links, McG.

From yer third:
Quote:
Captured al Qaeda operations chief Khalid Sheik Mohammed has told interrogators that his organization had plans to attack the Metrorail system in Washington, possibly by igniting a fire, according to law enforcement officials.

Law enforcement and intelligence sources said that Mohammed, the self-described architect of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, provided vague information about the plot along with plans to attack other U.S. targets at home and abroad, including the U.S. Capitol, and the Israeli Embassy in Washington.

During interrogation sessions conducted after his March 1 capture in Pakistan, Mohammed did not provide details about a terrorist strike on the Metro system, and authorities have been unable to determine whether there is any credible threat to mass transit here, two U.S. officials said yesterday.

They cautioned that although Mohammed appears to be cooperating, he may be trying to mislead officials. He and other detainees may be providing false information to cause panic, misdirect intelligence agencies or curry favor with captors without actually giving up any secrets, they said.


These things you are posting don't really support your (or Woiyo's) end of the argument very much, do they? This certainly wasn't a broken up attack.

What exactly is the point you are trying to make, here? That AQ wants to attack us? Or that there have been a bunch of attempts that were stopped? If it's the first, well, as the kids say, duh. If it's the second, you've failed to do that.

The stopped flights you've listed in your first link are the right sort of thing, and the only link out of the five which is really material... As for the second link, I would direct you to http://www.chargepadilla.org/ , where they discuss the fact that Padilla still has not been charged with any crime after two years of sitting in a military prison. Something about a 'lack of evidence.'

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/21/2024 at 09:31:36