It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Report: Zarqawi is Now A Nuclear Threat

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 02:00 PM
link   
This amazes me.

The "Unintelligence" operations overseas are becoming funnier and funnier.

Everyone can acquire weapons, and everyone can release videotapes by the dozen and distribute leaflets and what not.

Zarqawi is supposed to be in Iraq, yet he owns a shiny new weapon in Afghanistan now.

And through all this, these two great and deadly villains who have been FAR from shy, are invisible.

Maybe instead of wasting millions of dollars on stupidity we can actually focus on finding these two and disposing of them.




posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 02:03 PM
link   
TheLibra, criticism of the news is by no means criticism of your reporting of it. I'm actually glad we have this story on TA-Alarm. More of these terror type stories should be reported here on Terror Analysis, that's the purpose of the board. It allows us to see the threats, analyze and criticize them for ourselves. So report on science and anything else good you find



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Remember the coinky dink nature of "Oh My GOD!!" sh**t your pants they've got (Fill in the blanks) !!! Corresponding with Patriot Act announcements, theft accounting, vote tabulation tampering?
You know, whenever something Bu#e occured, here was the drama on que?

I guess if they could prop up a one legged dead man to be a uncatchable, unsightable mastermind, it's not a stretch to make him also packing nukes?



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by worldwatcher
TheLibra, criticism of the news is by no means criticism of your reporting of it. I'm actually glad we have this story on TA-Alarm. More of these terror type stories should be reported here on Terror Analysis, that's the purpose of the board. It allows us to see the threats, analyze and criticize them for ourselves. So report on science and anything else good you find


I appreciate it, and like I said, I don't take it personally, I just find it terribly ironic.

I'm put in mind of the argument that die-hard UFO people use: "No matter how much evidence there is to suggest it, some people will simply never believe."

If I had included a photo of Zarqawi, standing next to an ICBM, holding the presidential football in one hand, and the launch codes in the other, the very first replies would have said "That looks photoshopped to me" and "those documents are obviously fake".

I could provide video footage, with notable landmarks, where Zarqawi demontrates his abilities on a village, and we watch it blown to smitherines... and the first replies would say it was a nice CGI animation...very realistic.

Yet the same people get infuriated by the fact that people won't believe their story about Chupathingy...

At least with Science, I can count on the people not believing because either A.) It was bad science -or- B.) They are a religious group that doesn't believe in science. They don't disbelieve just for the sake of disbelieving something someone they don't like (such as the government) said.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 02:24 PM
link   


I mean, I don't take the comments disregarding the alert personally; Lord knows our Government has given us plenty of reason to disregard such alerts. But it strikes me as ironic that people who are so fervently willing to believe that black triangles are being piloted by psychic reptillian vampires from Atlantis simply refuse to acknowledge that a person who exists in the real world, who has the capability to do so, might have actually developed a dirty bomb (the nuclear equivolent of a zip-gun).


Nor should you take it personally. While the possibility exists, and is certainly a real one...I just can't believe the original messenger (i.e. a US news publication mentioning un-named officials). The biggest thing against it is of course, that they'd use it asap, as the longer they sat on it, the more likely they'd get found out and taken out.

BTW, not sure a "zip-gun" is all common knowledge, but is basically a cobbled together gun (usually using a pipe), versus a production one, just for those who didn't know and didn't want to ask



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 02:43 PM
link   
I feel compelled to respond.

Firstly it is almost impossible to deny that the capability of someone, somewhere to procure the ingredients to a dirty bomb is either highly likely or has been already accomplished. I could go into detail regarding the ease with which the central ingredients could be obtained , but I feel as this is self evident to you all.

Secondly, the reality of logistics may or may not be formidable. With enough time, money, and like minded individuals delivery of such a weapon can be , if it hasn't already been done, accomplished with relative ease in relative secrecy.

Thirdly I come to the will of use. Threats made about the intent of using and the act of actually detonating such a weapon really must be considered. I feel it is rather well accepted that Al Queda and its operatives are more than willing to use such a weapon. If not for the immediate affects of destruction, then for the longer term social and economic fallout certain to be brought to bear upon the actual detonation of a dirty bomb. These men are terrorists and feed on our fear. I believe these men, and women are of the sort that the detonation of a dirty bomb on US troops, US homeland or that of an Ally would appeal strongly to them

I must conclude , therefore , that the means to procure and deliver a dirty bomb exsiist as a reality amongst our enemy. Also there willingness to use such a weapon can not be ruled out.

The intelligence of the US and her friends may or may not be as good as it should be, but here we are dealing with a clever enemy. I personally think that the detonation of a nuclear device is highly likely. I pray that it is of an IED charactersitic rather than a state developed nuclear device. Say what you will about the intent of our government, but certainly the reality of a radiological device being deployed merits our concern.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 02:55 PM
link   


If I had included a photo of Zarqawi, standing next to an ICBM, holding the presidential football in one hand, and the launch codes in the other, the very first replies would have said "That looks photoshopped to me" and "those documents are obviously fake".

I could provide video footage, with notable landmarks, where Zarqawi demontrates his abilities on a village, and we watch it blown to smitherines... and the first replies would say it was a nice CGI animation...very realistic.


It's an interesting point. But it isn't ignoring the evidence in this case, it's the fact that the source has an agenda that would be well-served by such an announcement. It's really more of a call for corraboration by those of us who feel more than a little silly about being hoodwinked by the Pentagon before the Iraqi invasion. I', like many others, and even other nations, took our Administration at their word, and I, like them, was duped before.

As the old saying goes..."fool me once, shame on you...fool me twice, shame on me".



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 03:02 PM
link   
well said gaz

I feel exactly the same, I think what most people fail to recognize is that many of us who now have "not so nice" opinions about the current administration is that all initially we supported this administration especially after 9/11.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
What better than a nuke going off in a US city as an excuse to declare martial law? - at which point any public anger at the US .gov would be moot.

Get real. It's impossible to put the US under "martial law".
The city that was nuked would rightfully be put under martial law, but that is nothing new. After strong hurricanes or other disaster, the area affected is usually put under a sort of "martial law". The country would be only high alert for weeks, months maybe? but what would you expect? If you were president of a country, and someone nuked your country...what would you do?


I am open to any enlightenment you may be able to give...Perhaps it is time that some of these success is made known.

They're not known for a reason, both how they work and their successes.



I also do not buy the whole "We cant reveal our knowledge without revealing our sources" nonsense. They can be more creative then that.

lol, it's a lot more complicated than that. Though that really is a factor. You may not believe it, but people's lives really are in put in jeopardy when they give any info.




It's an interesting point. But it isn't ignoring the evidence in this case, it's the fact that the source has an agenda that would be well-served by such an announcement. It's really more of a call for corraboration by those of us who feel more than a little silly about being hoodwinked by the Pentagon before the Iraqi invasion. I', like many others, and even other nations, took our Administration at their word, and I, like them, was duped before.

As the old saying goes..."fool me once, shame on you...fool me twice, shame on me".

What do you do if the source turns out to be correct?




2 choices:
Go against the grain and think that, hey maybe there really are terrorists out there who hate us.
Or follow the rest of ATS and blame the CIA or Bush admin for giving them the nuke(s).


TPL

posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 03:20 PM
link   
I'd rather have dirty bomb than a nuke anyday. Their easier to clean up.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 04:00 PM
link   


Go against the grain and think that, hey maybe there really are terrorists out there who hate us.


There are terrorists out there who hate us, I don't doubt that fo a second.

There are also fanatics right here who hate us, the "us" in question being anyone who threatens their dreams of global empire. And I have no doubt they're looking for ways to get rid of us. After all, they see us as traitors.

BTW I doubt the CIA would have anything to do with it.
The CIA is being purged and pushed aside right now because they weren't supportive enough of the neocon agenda during the buildup to the Iraq war.

If anyone, I'd expect it to come from cells of right wing elements in the military, operating outside the official chain of command.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by thelibra
To an extent, I agree. The problem is whether or not the previous thousand some-odd alerts are a "Boy Who Cried Wolf" or a Desensitizing Op.

If it's a case of "...Wolf" then we are setting ourselves up for a major disaster in the future. With all the previous terror alerts turning out to be nothing more than overblown reports, will we ever believe a "real" report? Probably not. While I realize the goal of ATS is to deny ignorance, are we sometimes denying truth as a result of overzealous skepticism?

If all the previous "wrong" reports have been Desensitizing Op, to reduce the chance of panic in the populace, then it's bloody brilliant, because apparently they can release a report saying the #2 terrorist has a dirty bomb, is preparing to use it against the U.S., and the most it merits is a few comments along the lines of "yeah, right. whatever"


Libra, I never mentioned anything about a Desensitizing Op. And I'm not writing this off along the lines of "yeah, right. whatever". All I'm saying is when I here these Terror Alerts, I can't help but think that there is an alternative motive. Much like what you wrote in the thread "Hard Evidence: Tip of the Pyramid, Gov. Contrator Conspiracies" in which I was the first to give you a "way above" which got you your medalian. I was using a different name then, and it's too bad I can't get to it any more. It was moved to RATS. I thought it was a good article. You did write it didn't you? I can't understand how you could write a thread questioning the motives behind this war, then complain when others do.



posted on Apr, 21 2005 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hal9000

Originally posted by thelibra
To an extent, I agree. The problem is whether or not the previous thousand some-odd alerts are a "Boy Who Cried Wolf" or a Desensitizing Op.

Libra, I never mentioned anything about a Desensitizing Op. And I'm not writing this off along the lines of "yeah, right. whatever".


Oh, no, actually I was just thinking that if all these terror alerts (like this one) were made with an alterior motive, then a Desensitizing Op would make sense, because it really has desensitized us. When I hear we're at "Terror Alert Orage" I don't even bat an eye. For about the first month after 9/11 I got a little freaked out when I heard we were at a high alert phase. I even got a bit wiggy with the whole Halloween Massacre that was supposed to happen... but as the months went by, and more and more terror alerts went by, and nothing happened, I really ceased to care.

However, I found out something interesting that I need to start a thread on. Apparently the current administration, in their great wisdom, has decided to stop the publishing of the global statistics and analysis on terrorist acts as of 2004, because the last journal stated that there were more terrorist acts since bush took office.

So yeah, I can totally buy that there's an alternate agenda. The Desensitizing Op just seems the most reasonable to me.


Originally posted by Hal9000
You did write it didn't you?


Yes, and then I bravely ran away...


Originally posted by Hal9000
I can't understand how you could write a thread questioning the motives behind this war, then complain when others do.


I wasn't questioning the motives behind the war, but rather the motives of the Government Contractors (especially criminal multinational companies) participation in it.

I do question the motives behind the war, but I also try to think about it from all angles. I make no secret of the fact that I don't like Bush, nor do I approve of his sending our troops to Iraq, but I also have to consider the fact that sometimes I do not have access to the same information as the administration.

I hate to admit it, but there are times when I wonder if perhaps Bush is doing the right thing. Granted, they are few and far between, but swinging too far to one side makes one just as ignorant as the other. It is only through an attempt at looking at the facts from all sides that any true sense of the picture can be garnered, and ignorance can be denied.




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join