It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Terror attacks that should have happened.. but have not..

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 04:19 PM
Speed boats with reinforced hulls.. loaded with explosives. Two at a time. One rushes toward a supertanker.. with another right behind it. First one impacts the tankers, second one impacts the impact point.. breaking through any double hulls.

Tell me that would not really really really screw things up. And like, as if this would be hard to pull off. If they can do the Cole, they can do a supertanker. And another and another, until supertankers all need escorts or phalanxes on them... oil would rise to like.. $1000 a barrel or something over here anyways.


Fly a plane in to the WTC to cause fear and scare the crap out of the world eh? How about this...

... I live in a huge apartment complex with three 20 story buildings all facing each other.

You (as a terrorist) rent an apartment. You let the owner know that you'll be coming in in the early morning to move in the furniture so that you have easy access to the elevators and don't disrupt the normal routine around the complex... the owner is cool with that.

So you are 'moving in on the first'. On the 31st.. a giant moving van (one of the big long ones) pulls in to the center parking lot at about 4am. And loaded down with explosives... detonates... wiping out 3 cement buildings and 10,000 people in their sleep.

Much easier to pull off... and no one living in a complex would ever feel safe again. All large trucks moving towards any apartment complex would have to be inspected before moving towards the building.. OR, for that matter in to the underground parking lot.. a la WTC in 93.

Imagine this happening in several states at once... in one evening.


The London bus bombing... uh... why not hit the Live8 concert that went down a few days earlier? Why not hit every concert? It makes no sense at all that "Mr Bomb Maker" didn't want to put his explosives to the most efficiant use possible. Blow up people at the of the stage, then as everyone rushes to the rear, blow up that area too. Etc..etc.. just keep the presure on the event... all the other events would instantly be evacuated... and never another mega concert is ever held... not without major, airport like security at each one (like in the end, that would be very effective - sure).

Here on Canada day... (and in Canada.. you are allowed to roam around the parlement buildings.. get as close to it as you want... unlike the White House, you can have a picnic on the lawn of of our countries HQ) ... there were police checking bags as we entered the concert area... doing a total half assed job at it too... in fact.. they looked in ONE pocket in my saddle bag, when there were 3 or 4 that could have had a layer of explosive in it and a layer of nuts and bolts on top of it. NO dogs at all.

Easy kills.

30 shopping days left until Xmas.... hit ....several WalMarts all at once across several states... boom.... do it again a few days later.

There goes the economy that year. The Internet becomes the safest way to shop all of a sudden... go figure.


Remember the belt way sniper? Remember the disruption it caused? Okay, well imagine that going down in 50 states all at once. 50 shooters, 50 spotters. All you gotta do is get from "Syria" (or whatever) and in to Mexico (or canada), and then cross the boarder and then get your 50 cal off the street.... or from a store in some cases in some states.

Hell, just send ONE at a time... make it so that there is ALWAYS one sniper lurking around in one state... when he gets caught...activate or send another.

OR... just get a team together in the US.. go get some AKs from the local mosque (lol yeah, whatever) and do small raids on small towns. 3am, with silencers on the weapons.. the team breaks down in to seperate teams.. and each team goes from farm to farm slowly wiping out each family one at a time. Leave a bomb in each home, timed to go off when the operation is completed and your ready to egress. That'll leave the authorities thinking that something went down ... that the perps are still around, even though they have moved on to the next rural community or suberbia... or perhaps then do a suicide run down Wall Street.

OR, disguise yourself as a rival LA gang.. do a drive by on one gang... then dress up as the other gang and "retaliate".. gang wars explode all over the US.

Poison a drug supply with Ricin or Anthrax.. this has been discussed.

FIVE (complicated0

Get your 'nukes' all in line (hey.. apparently there are 50 ready to go anyways right.. so says WND). Stick one in each SEMI major city. Park a control van near the White House, or CNN for that matter. Send a message to Wolf Blitzer that Detroit has about 15 minutes longer to exist... and then 15 minutes later call back and say "Its me again.. okay.. THAT was an act of mercy, because we know... we know how much your auto industry needed to be 'put down' and out of its misery.. but next one ain't going to be so kind, and trust me.. there are a few more cities that are about to be turned in to large holes (not that anyone would really notice the difference actually).. here is what has to happen.. Bush has to walk out on to the White House front lawn to be executed by a man who will be waiting there for him. Actually.. send Dick too. Screw it... send out all of them, there is a man with a enough clips for all of them standing by... if you do this, then in 30 minutes one of the populations of one of your cities will be spared for a bit longer.. if the executioner is harmed or if our control vehical is attacked.. we'll just vaporise DC and ya know.. we get what we wanted anyways... actually.. if anyone or anything tries to approach our control van, we'll just detonate ALL of the nukes all at once... so don't bother, you've lost the war on terror that you have declared... but you should be use to losing these make believe wars by now anyways... so since we don't REALLY want to kill anymore innocents.. lets just get this over with now okay? OH! And btw, once the US leadership is completely wiped out (we also have agents standing by to take everyone out at the local state level... they should be saying their goodbyes at this point - just to let you know) everything will be directed from then on from an undisclosed location in the M.E. and the American citizens (providing the leadership surrenders RIGHT NOW) have nothing else to fear from us... nothing will be done to them that was not done to us in our home countries... so you have nothing to lose in this situation and everything to gain from here on in... hell, you should be thanking us."

30 minutes goes by... and OF COURSE.. the cowards say "We don't negotiate with terrorists."

So Houston disappears.

Now there are riots in every major US city, and people are storming the White House to drag 'the fearless leaders outside' to put an end to the nuclear attacks.

You get the picture.. one by one, the cities are turned to rubble. Perhaps the whole thing was financed by Russia or China in the first place, you can not tell me that they wouldn't prefer that the US was removed from face of the planet. And you can't tell me that they couldn't set this up.

Either way "OBL" (or whoever) would have won at this point.

I actually don't know why this script hasn't been made in to a film yet actually. Probablly because its on the drawing board somewhere.


For now. What do you think? Any scenarios to add to the list of things that should have happened but have not?


PS: Any idea as to why 9-11 happened and there WAS NO follow up like this? I mean besides the fact that the whole thing was a fix... yeah, you don't have to remind me about that.

[edit on 9/8/2005 by Vis Mega]

posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 04:23 PM
i think the terrorists have already thought of those but aint worth it, they prefer to kill more than wat u brought up already. those scenarios are boring to the terrorists not to mention the American people who wont be awe or even impressed by those attacks. gotta think harder that would be more horrendous that would inflict maximum damage. and very surprise to the public that never thought of it before.

posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 04:38 PM
Number 5 doesn't cover major damage?

Terror isn't about "killing" its about creating fear. KILLING creates FEAR, and you don't have to kill that many to create the fear. 10,000 dead ordinary joes would create a lot of fear. Shopping malls blowing up Moms as they shop for their kids would create a lot of fear.

I don't get your point, sorry... I don't think that the terrorists (that don't exist, which is the point of the post.. to prove that SINCE these simple types of attacks have not happened.. it goes to show that there really are no REAL terrorists.. its all a big sham) ... care about how boring the attack itself is... if it makes the US give in... and hurts it... then who cares if it isn't spectacular like 9-11 was... (lol).

So the terrorists want to create terror and kill Americans.. but only if they find the attack interesting? Okkkkkkkaaaaaaaay. Sure.

Next reply please... one more, one a little more well thought out.

posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 04:44 PM

Originally posted by Vis Mega
Next reply please... one more, one a little more well thought out.

maybe u like to remember Osama's dream to kill as many Americans as possible. not to kill one or 10 or 100. Osama wont be impressed because he believes that the Americans would shrugged off it one or a dozen Americans are killed. maybe the media would cover it that makes it important but to Bin Laden and his group, it doesnt satisfied them. remember that back in 95 i believe wen some terrorist wanted to crash planes into the CIA building as well as others. well that inspired Bin Laden. he does want to kill as many as possible.

posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 04:57 PM
I got one, now don't get me wrong on this one, but why not blow a freight train up in a major american city.

posted on Aug, 9 2005 @ 11:04 PM
I think the media is portraying Al Queda to be some sort of "Boogeyman" which is isn't. The reason they have not attacked us in almost four years to the date is simply because they lack the resources to do so. Sure, there are members/cells hiding in this country but if someone were to blow themselves up in a public place, there would not be a replenishment, like there is in the Middle East.

As the years continue to pass and our country (hopefully) remains attack free while strengthening our counter terrorism aparatus, Al Queda's "warnings and threats" will become even more pathetic.


posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 12:15 AM
Terrorists only need about $100 to scare the hell out of people or about $500 to kill about 20 people a month in a very visual way. $100 buys alot of flour and a way to deploy it from a roof on a windy day.
$500 buys a used 100W CO2 laser that can go many miles and shatter high rise windows, they also set fires and can't be traced too well, if at all.

posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 01:36 AM
The fact that 9/11 should of failed in every aspect of it's progression but instead went perfectly at odds to ALL security and intelligence in place for America's security should tell people something about the situation.

As Vis Mega has pointed out, there's hundreds of ways terrorists could attack people (especially innocent people if that's what you believe is their goal) in ways which are much much more effective, much much cheaper and less suspcious plus without risking utter failure at the hope of the worlds biggest intelligence and security agencies NOT doing their job that day in complete harmony with each other.

The London bombing confirmed this. That bombing was nothing more than distraction, disruption and fear with deaths being 'unfortunate'. The police were blocking people from catching trains into the city BEFORE anything happened that morning, they were trying to minimise causalties.

If 'terrorists' really wanted innocents dead in mass numbers, it would be happening. An average of 70 attacks a day in Iraq yet in the west, somehow only the most Hollywood of scenarios manage to take place even when all logic before hand would tell you it's most likely not going to come off. In the case of London, terrorists were 2 days late on that one if their idea was to kill, worked great thou for Blair, Howard and Bush.

posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:13 AM
how about dropping something ultra-lethal into the water supply? even woody from "toy story" knows about that.

or anything lethal and RANDOM.
typical tactics of "those people". it's all about the bottom line for "them".

you know what's really scary? .....the unknown.
i find the mad cow too late warnings, e-coli, ground water contamination, unfettered executive orders, BIG BUSINESS(military, pharmeceutical and media ESPECIALLY) and whatnot, MUCH scarier than a few random bombings.

the terrorists are winning.

we'll see, ya puny, cowardly, weak, insecure, bastard shyte heads.

wow, it's all just like ayn rand said it would be in "atlas shrugged", where rampant nepotism amongst financial elites(second and third generation, generally) leads to a total decay of society.

not to mention "the fountainhead", where an architect(howard roark) blows up his own skyscaper because suits screwed with it too much.

posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 08:06 AM
They waited 10 years to attempt the WTC attack again. They will wait as long as it takes, and it is about fear, not so much death. That is just icing on the cake.

I still think that the best point of attack for terrorists domestically is Wal-Mart (commercial infrastructure, look what the Beltway sniper did) on a sunday afternoon, or even a few high school or college football games(they would love to sacrafice 2 or 3,000 kids to their cause). They want us to fear for our lives, our children and to learn to fear our government, which creates sympathizers.

Numerous terror attacks have been prevented in the US that we never hear about. The bombings in London came and went, and already life is back to order. It is not about how, but when, and when the time is right, we will know....

posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 09:57 AM
vis mega - I'm not quite sure what you are getting at with your post.

Are you suggesting that because none of these "mega" atrocities have been committed there is no Islamic terrorism? The IRA didn't ever commit a terrorist act of this size in the UK either - did they not exist? With this logic ETA obviously don't exist in Spain and FARC do not exist in Columbia.

Islamic terrorists have not carried out these huge scale attacks as they are not capable of doing so (at least at the moment), or they don't have the inclination. Look at the second lot of attempted bombers in London - a bunch of jokers, whatever the police might say about them

Where did you get this stuff from about 50 nukes? I've never heard anyone suggest that Islamic militants might have 50 nukes. If you can find me anyone sensible who says they do I'm going to change into my brown trousers.

The threat from these Islamists has undoubtedly been exagerated for various reasons, some benign, some not. However it is ridiculous to say there is no threat.

There quite cleary are Muslims who would like to cause death and destruction in the name of Islam, and are happy to die while doing so. Otherwise who are the people blowing themselves up daily in Iraq killing civilians as well as US/UK troops? Who are the people with bomb belts exploding in Tel Aviv bars? Who are the guys be-heading people in propoganda videos? Who are the preachers telling their students to cause death and destruction in the West?

Oh, of course it's Mossad/The Jews. They do get around don't they?

posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 12:02 PM
There was a Chuck Norris movie back in the 80's called 'Invasion USA' where terrorists moved from suburban town to town randomly launching rockets or grenades into homes. That would certainly create panic and undoubtedly a panic reaction by the government. Of course to up the ante they could kidnap some government people (police, security, military, whatever), kill them and leave them at some of the attack sites. The government would clamp-down for security reasons and the population would be distrustful of the government believing they are involved.

posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 12:11 PM
Can I even ask why on earth you would think of these strategies...

posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 12:32 PM
It's pretty disturbing that you think these up!
Hopefully not too many terrorists reading it being given ideas huh?

posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 12:53 PM
If you are looking for the psychological profile of a terrorist I'd hardly think giving them ideas is a wise thing to do so I'll refrain from adding my worries.
As to the psychology of your subject line, what strikes me is the word "should have" and not could have. It kind of tells me you are leaning towards wanting a major attack in the scenarios you depict.

I may be wrong but I suspect your post is drawing a lot of attention and if it was made merely for knee-jerk reactive replies for a point grab I only have one thing to say... you are responsible for your words. Should the scenarios you depict come to happen, could you live with yourself? Could you provide comfort to the victims or their families?
How about this scenario, America gets hit hard and another major world power takes over... do you think they wouldn't have their sites on Canada next?
Terrorism isn't a border crossing, its a humanity invasion. The only solution to terrorism is negotiating a middle ground which by all accounts looks like the Israeli/Palestinian crisis. (or oil) Had you provided any viability towards resolving the tinderbox of the Middle East instead of suggesting more volatile/fatalistic means perhaps this war would be one step closer to ending? As far as the OBL's of the world, taking him out won't end the terror. I stated this quote on another thread and will repost it here...

If only we could look instead of gawking,
We'd see the horror in the heart of farce.
If only we could act instead of talking,
We would not always end up on our arse.
Do not rejoice in his defeat you men,
For tho' the world stood up and stopped the bastard,
The bitch that bore him is in heat again.
Morris West

What is this saying? It says that you can win the battle but the war goes on. The only resolution to any war is by peace, plain and simple. All parties must remain peaceful and the only way to get the terror bent of the world to want peace is to understand their wants and see if you can get them to tolerate our differences and as a society pull towards a common goal, the betterment of humanity and not the downfall.


posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:30 PM
I give possible scenarios because I think the PTB may read this and might outwardly look for terrorists instead of controlling the public. But then its always fun to irk any one who blindly supports US tactics and war (fear-death). The terrorists seem happy using bombs and may not be smart enough to use an industrial laser, but then there were the lasers in cockpits thing (not terrorists).

posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:40 PM
This post makes me nervous, some of the USA haters that post here all day long may get some new ideas. You may have inspired them to stop wiring IED's and persue grander plans...

posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 03:58 PM
The thing is, like someone pointed out to me, is that a lot of intelligence gained by the 'enemy' these days isn't by tapping your phone, or scouting an area, or getting to know you personally, etc.
It's by people on the interent looking at the information other's give out. We sit here and dicuss our countries weaknesses even to the details of our local disclosed towns.

People often like the excuse 'Well if I thought of it, they will have' but that's not always true. What is obvious to us is not always obvious to them. We are our own worst enemy, along with the media, because we divulge so much information and our curiousness encourages others too as well. The 'enemy', whoever they are, can find out so much now by just observing forums, becoming established and then planting seemingly harmless seeds to harvest information, using on-line mapping and photographs.

We have to be vigilant in our actions and never take our own knowledge and ideas for granted, we are our own worst enemy.

posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 04:19 PM
Err, surely this post is pretty harmless, isn't it ?

If you are a terrorist organisation with enough resources to pull any of this stuff off, then is it not tempting to suggest that you'd have a strategist with the wit to have thought this kinda stuff out anyway ... rather than having to read it from an internet conspiracy site.

posted on Aug, 10 2005 @ 04:25 PM

Originally posted by 0951
Err, surely this post is pretty harmless, isn't it ?

If you are a terrorist organisation with enough resources to pull any of this stuff off, then is it not tempting to suggest that you'd have a strategist with the wit to have thought this kinda stuff out anyway ... rather than having to read it from an internet conspiracy site.

Thats exactly the sought of attitude that allows this sort of thing to happen. It has the potential to give people ideas, what we take for granted does not always occur to other people. It's all these tiny little lapses in security that allow these people to collect information while barely lifting a finger.
Trust me on this, people let pieces of info slip without thinking, they assume that 'well surely they will have thought of it' or 'it's out there if you look', anyone that believes that nothing they can say can make a difference or give people ideas is naive beyond belief.

If your an 'enemy' what better source of ideas than the fears of their 'enemy'.

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in