Arrests of al Qaeda terrorists disrupt plans for attack Al Qaeda is planning a mass-casualty attack to rival September 11, but preparations have been disrupted by arrests of terrorists during the past several months, according to U.S. intelligence officials. Recent intelligence reports indicate that communications among clandestine cells of al Qaeda members are being restored gradually, the intelligence officials said. "The attack will be large-scale," one official said. Additionally, the intelligence reports stated that any major attack is likely to be preceded by smaller-scale strikes, including assassinations of prominent people in the United States, the official said. full story
What a coincidence, the al-Bushies are also planning a mass casualty attack and will strike at a country's political leaders.
Re: Re: Al Qaeda planning mass casualty attack Funny, but that's also the solution to the North Korean nuke crisis, America's spluttering economy, corporate malfeasance and a whole host of other problems. Who'da thunk it?
Re: Re: Re: Al Qaeda planning mass casualty attack I wish we had Clinton back. There would be no problem whatsoever, just the cigar and dress stuff...
Re: Re: Re: Re: Al Qaeda planning mass casualty attack [waxing nostalgic] Those were the days... [/waxing nostalgic]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Al Qaeda planning mass casualty attack I'm sure none of this stuff would have ever happened if Clinton was still in office.
I'm not sure who in this thread said none of these problems would have happened if Clinton were president still. If someone did, please point it out. I made a flippant remark about Bush's responses to these problems. That is where I fault Bush, he's isn't responsible for many of the problems, but he doesn't do anything to make them better.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Al Qaeda planning mass casualty attack I agree. The smart course of action for the Bush administration would be to launch some cruise missles and weaken the CIA. At that point Al Queda and Saddam wouldn't stand a chance.
Sure he did...just point me to those exact words ("no longer an issue") refering to all of Al Qaeda coming from his mouth. State of the Union transcript: There are days when our fellow citizens do not hear news about the war on terror. There's never a day when I do not learn of another threat, or receive reports of operations in progress, or give an order in this global war against a scattered network of killers. The war goes on, and we are winning. (Applause.) To date, we've arrested or otherwise dealt with many key commanders of al Qaeda. They include a man who directed logistics and funding for the September the 11th attacks; the chief of al Qaeda operations in the Persian Gulf, who planned the bombings of our embassies in East Africa and the USS Cole; an al Qaeda operations chief from Southeast Asia; a former director of al Qaeda's training camps in Afghanistan; a key al Qaeda operative in Europe; a major al Qaeda leader in Yemen. All told, more than 3,000 suspected terrorists have been arrested in many countries. Many others have met a different fate. Let's put it this way -- they are no longer a problem to the United States and our friends and allies. (Applause.) Reading (and listening) comprehension continues to drop. We really need to focus more on education.
Reading comprehension? When you put something in quotes, like I did, it's a quote. You know, like "on the run". When you don't use quotes, it's not a quote. I could use direct quotes, like when an unnamed defense dept official said "Everybody wants to know where Osama bin Laden is. The next question is, who cares?" Or, I could have quoted an Afghan official (working in close contact with US military for over a year) who said "We all believe the situation is stable enough, and al Qaeda is not a threat anymore to stability in Afghanistan or elsewhere." Or this CS Monitor article that has defense dept people saying how Al Qaeda has "clearly been diminished". Those are exact words, hence they're quotes. I suggest you go back to your remedial English teacher and apologize.
I realize you liberals have difficulty multi-tasking, so please stop chewing your gum before you read this. That's why we have a Republican in the White House...to clean up the multiple messes caused by the preceding occupant. Repeat after me...Iraq and Al Qaeda can be dealt with simultaneously. You don't send hundreds of thousand man armies to chase terrorists...that's the job of the intelligence agencies. The military goes after regimes supporting terrorism. Okay, back to the gum chewing for you guys.
You again seem to have missed the point. You can't find a single quote where Bush said they were no longer an issue or anything to that effect. If you had said, "An unnamed source in DoD or some Afghan guy told me they were no longer an issue" then you'd be right and I'd apologize. It is your tough luck that you didn't say that. Originally posted by obie But.... but.... but my President said they were "on the run" and no longer an issue You said "my president." Silly me I thought you meant the president of the USA, obviously you have some other president. Thus you either lied, can't read, or were refering to some other personal president of your own. You're choice. Feel free to apologize once you find someone to explain this reply to you...
Well judging by results thus far, your Republican in the White House and his intelligence services have made a right old foobar of "multitasking" the War on Terror and the impending War on Tangent, Ian. But thanks for letting us peep at the world through them milk-bottle glasses of yours. Amusing as always.
Al Qaeda planning mass casualty attack?! I say we immediately invade Saudi Arabia to cut off their funding!
i believe that is thanks to clinton "double dipping" in the intelligence bowl. but who's keeping count anyways. because that was the past and this is now. so it must be the fault of who ever is there. right now. at this moment. edit- you also have to remember almost all intel. resources have had to be pressed into iraq due to the UN wanting the smoking gun, the shooter, and the company who made the gun. which limits the capabilities of the other intel when we're 70/30.
Er, no. Check the "on the run" link. It seems to be congruent with what Obie originally said. He never quoted "no longer an issue", and is therefore not obliged to provide you with a source for this phrase. He may well be paraphrasing the Bush administration's current attitude toward Al Qaeda et al. with his own words. You seem to be the one who decided to extract and quote "no longer an issue" from his post and it should therefore be obvious to you what source that came from. However, Obie seems to have furnished you with a proper source that quotes "on the run" from the president in a similar manner. In any case, that doesn't change the fact of the matter that Bush or anyone for that matter has yet to produce "dead or alive" OBL, who masterminded 9/11 while shifting all focus (or most of it at the very least) to the war on Iraq after less than 17 months. We have Powell trying to convince the world about Iraq's guilt, Rumsfeld throwing temper tantrums with Germany and France while magically shifting the center of gravity in Europe, and troops shipping out to the Middle East. In this case, it seems that Al Qaeda are indeed no longer an issue with this administration. By the way, Tom Ridge recommends that we change from magnolia to puce. But we can do that after we invade Iraq.
Thanks for nothing - you know gum loses flavor when you stick it to the bottom of a desk. Bastard. I like Orbit gum.
Originally posted by Mitre Er, no. Check the "on the run" link. It seems to be congruent with what Obie originally said. He never quoted "no longer an issue", and is therefore not obliged to provide you with a source for this phrase. He may well be paraphrasing the Bush administration's current attitude toward Al Qaeda et al. with his own words. You seem to be the one who decided to extract and quote "no longer an issue" from his post and it should therefore be obvious to you what source that came from. However, Obie seems to have furnished you with a proper source that quotes "on the run" from the president in a similar manner. Er, no. I never argued that the direct quote was off. It was the rest of the setence that was false. Can't anyone read anymore? Here is what I said: Sure he did...just point me to those exact words ("no longer an issue") refering to all of Al Qaeda coming from his mouth. Read it and weep. I never argued about the direct quote so that is not an issue. (Plus it is hard to argue that they're not on the run when they've lost their stronghold in Afghanistan, we've been arresting and killing them off, etc...) I should have said "just point me to any words Bush said that mean Al Qaeda is no longer an issue" but that doesn't change the fact that obie was just making that up. He has no source of Bush even implying that they're no longer an issue. Originally posted by Mitre blah..blah..In this case, it seems that Al Qaeda are indeed no longer an issue with this administration. Don't tell me that you seriously think that the war on Iraq means we're just halting anti-Al Qaeda operations. The war on terror has minimal need for much of our conventional forces so their use in Iraq should do little to hamper the war on terror. I guess that some intel assets will be busy on Iraq but that doesn't come close to your and obie's conclusion that "Al Qaeda are indeed no longer an issue with this administration."