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.

 

Al-Qaeda planning big British Attack

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 04:50 AM
link   
It reminds me of the many stories about so-called sleeper cells hiding in the US until the time is right. Or the supposed attack on the last superbowl in the US. Is this different because it talks about Great Britain? Does Al-Aqaeda have more chance to blow up a nuke/dirty bomb in the UK then they have in the US? Or is it as much bluff as the stories described above?


AL-QAEDA leaders in Iraq are planning the first “large-scale” terrorist attacks on Britain and other western targets with the help of supporters in Iran, according to a leaked intelligence report.

Spy chiefs warn that one operative had said he was planning an attack on “a par with Hiroshima and Nagasaki” in an attempt to “shake the Roman throne”, a reference to the West.

Another plot could be timed to coincide with Tony Blair stepping down as prime minister, an event described by Al-Qaeda planners as a “change in the head of the company”.

Source

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Please base the discussion on the possible fact that it is a standalone organization on itself, not a CIA trained/funded one. It has been calm since 2001 and i've seen that the Al-Qaeda needs another major attack to hold their credibility. Blowing up a nuke the strength of a Hiroshima attack in the UK, that could cause major changes in the world. Remember, it just takes one.

-Mammoth



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 05:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mammoth
Please base the discussion on the possible fact that it is a standalone organization on itself, not a CIA trained/funded one. It has been calm since 2001 and i've seen that the Al-Qaeda needs another major attack to hold their credibility. Blowing up a nuke the strength of a Hiroshima attack in the UK, that could cause major changes in the world.


so this is hypothetically speaking thread then, is it, an imaginery situation that Al-CIAda is not a CIA/MI6 organization.

And Britain to be targetted again, just like the 7/7 London Bombings, should we also ignore that the London Bombings were the work of elements within the British Government

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by golddragnet

Originally posted by Mammoth
Please base the discussion on the possible fact that it is a standalone organization on itself, not a CIA trained/funded one. It has been calm since 2001 and i've seen that the Al-Qaeda needs another major attack to hold their credibility. Blowing up a nuke the strength of a Hiroshima attack in the UK, that could cause major changes in the world.


so this is hypothetically speaking thread then, is it, an imaginery situation that Al-CIAda is not a CIA/MI6 organization.


Correct, but if you must then feel free to concider it a part of CIA or whatever you afiliate it with. No need of me to place restrictions upon a discussion. I was just wondering how others would think of the chances such a organization has, to pull something like that off by itself. And how serious this is, concidering the fact that i have seen many similiar stories like this, only the difference was that it was called American Hiroshima and it concerned America, and was concidered by many to be a story of bluffs.

I'd now think that a thread with restrictions would only draw people from one side, so that was wrong of me.



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by golddragnet
should we also ignore that the London Bombings were the work of elements within the British Government


:shk: Yes. Please ignore that paranoid tripe.

According to this article, immigration is so out of control for the Brits that political turmoil and a breakdown of society is sure to come soon -

Immigration at tipping point

Borders aren't protected ... immigration is out of control ... assimulation doesn't happen ... OF COURSE there is going to be lawlessness and terrorist attacks. And it won't be the government pulling them off.



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
According to this article, immigration is so out of control for the Brits that political turmoil and a breakdown of society is sure to come soon -

Immigration at tipping point

Borders aren't protected ... immigration is out of control ... assimulation doesn't happen ... OF COURSE there is going to be lawlessness and terrorist attacks. And it won't be the government pulling them off.




Do you really think that immigrants coming here looking for opportunity are going to also want to blow it up and cause lawlessness? That doesn't make much sense imo.

[edit on 22-4-2007 by Xeros]



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 07:19 AM
link   
well, it's no secret that the world's nuclear stockpile is not accounted for. this is probably one of the biggest issues in the world we face today - wether or not missing nukes have fallen into the wrong hands.



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 07:47 AM
link   
If terrorist have nukes, then what are they waiting for? Why didn't they use them on 9-11 and 7-7 instead of planes and conventional explosives?

A thread about terror attacks, that ignores obvious evidence of false flag operations and pretends alCIAda is real, is a waste of time imo.

We have been in Iraq for the 'war on terror' for over 5 years now, what are these terrorist cells waiting for?

I guess my Muslim neighbours must be a terrorist cell with a nuke under their beds?


This is nothing but more fear mongering designed to remind us to be in fear.

Go out and befriend some local Muslims, get to know them, and quit living in ignorance.



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
If terrorist have nukes, then what are they waiting for? Why didn't they use them on 9-11 and 7-7 instead of planes and conventional explosives?

A thread about terror attacks, that ignores obvious evidence of false flag operations and pretends alCIAda is real, is a waste of time imo.

We have been in Iraq for the 'war on terror' for over 5 years now, what are these terrorist cells waiting for?

I guess my Muslim neighbours must be a terrorist cell with a nuke under their beds?


This is nothing but more fear mongering designed to remind us to be in fear.

Go out and befriend some local Muslims, get to know them, and quit living in ignorance.


I take it that this was meant for me, very well.

First off, like anyone else, i just grab a story and provide the space for people to discuss the topic. The thread wasnt made with any pre-judgment about Muslims or their belief, which i have enough of in my neighbourhood, so i know how they are. So to call me ignorant (if that was your intention) is a stupid thing to do, especially if you dont even know how i think about the topic myself.

And, like you, i agree that there's alot going on that the media isnt telling us and that alot of things have happened way different than the official story tells us. Regardless of that, i look at the topic from all points of view and simply ask around if it is possible for such an organization to detonate a nuke in the UK by itself.

I dont pretend the existence of anything, i just 'hypothetically' discuss their existence just to see how people think about it themselves. If you want to know why terrorists didnt used nukes in those events, dont ask me, ask the terrorists, if they even exist.

To end my questioning post, Why call the thread a waste of time? The fact that i'm pretending that Al-Qaeda is real is because i'm willing to see people debunk a story directly presented by the media, you could help, or just clutter the thread which is of no use to those willing to discuss. Lastly, if you would've read my second post, you can see that i would let people see Al-Qaeda as part of CIA and use that as ground to continue the debate with.

There's a whole lot of difference between having an open mind (seeing things from the world of lies and truth) and being ignorant.


There's no danger to present a fear-mongering story, because ATS exists to discuss about the potential danger and see for themselves if it's indeed dangerous or not.



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 03:27 PM
link   
why would people in Iran want to help al qaeda i thought that Iran are shia muslim whereas as al qaeda are sunni muslim, i thought these two groups hate each other



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mammoth
I take it that this was meant for me, very well...


It wasn't really meant for you per se, just people in general who have Islamaphobia. Pls don't take it personally.

Why is it a waste of time? Cause it doesn't address the reality, you wanted us to imagine a situation some of us don't agree with. When someone dictates what you should think when replying to a thread is a red flag to some of us.

Yes ATS exists to discus, and I'm entitled to my opinion. I like to offer an alternative to the usual hate that is present in these kind of threads (again not you). I believe my post does help, hopefully it will prompt some people to re-think their position, or piss 'em off...


No there's no danger in discussing the story, it should be discussed. My post wasn't designed to stop the discussion.



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by Mammoth
I take it that this was meant for me, very well...


It wasn't really meant for you per se, just people in general who have Islamaphobia. Pls don't take it personally.

Why is it a waste of time? Cause it doesn't address the reality, you wanted us to imagine a situation some of us don't agree with. When someone dictates what you should think when replying to a thread is a red flag to some of us.

Yes ATS exists to discus, and I'm entitled to my opinion. I like to offer an alternative to the usual hate that is present in these kind of threads (again not you). I believe my post does help, hopefully it will prompt some people to re-think their position, or piss 'em off...


No there's no danger in discussing the story, it should be discussed. My post wasn't designed to stop the discussion.


Look, the purpose of it was to debate a story directly true to how the media tells it. I admitted that trying to have people look at this from one side, even hypothetically, was wrong, and i will refrain from asking that in the future on ATS because i've noticed that it wont work, and people will discuss more free that way.

Clearly i took your post the wrong way. If you dont want to imagine a situation, you dont have to. I often just question the credibility of stories like in the first post, like nuclear terrorism in America. I figure that such a thing would be hard to imagine if you've figured out how it all fits together behind the scenes, maybe you have seen the movie "Who Killed John O'neill". But i brought up this story up, for arguments sake.

But let's get ontopic, whatever or however you want to debate it. My personal opinion? That terrorism is fear, government instilled, and functions as a scapegoat and excuse to attack any country that harbours so-called terrorists.

So, what are the chances of a nuke detonating in the UK?



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 04:49 PM
link   
I hear ya Mamoth. I misunderstood your motive, and when it comes down to it, it's obvious we both have the same opinion.

It's a very emotional and touchy subject. There's so much ignorance on these boards when it comes to this topic, and I'm sometimes guilty of jumping the gun.

Please except this as an apology...



You have voted Mammoth for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.


Chances of a nuke in the UK? Well anything is possible, but like I said, I don't buy this media sensationalising. If Islamic terrorists were really planning attacks on the UK, or the US, why haven't they done it yet?
They have been telling us this for years now but we've yet to see it happen. (save 7-7 and 9-11 which I don't believe were Islamic terrorists).

If these attack threats were real then why did the authorities have to stage attacks to start their war on terror in the first place. They could just have opened the door for the real thing.



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 04:58 PM
link   
I think mainland Europe would be most vulnerable to a big N-B-C attack just from a logistical point of view. If they get a device, why risk trying to transport it to the UK or the U.S. when they could just drive it to anywhere in Europe with very little chance of detection.



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 05:17 PM
link   
I wouldn't believe The Times btw,

Those guys will write anything to sell papers in the UK, bunch of paranoid right wing idiots.

No other British media outlet has this story, wasn't even on the news stations.



Borders aren't protected ... immigration is out of control


Well, we don't really have borders. Only one with the Republic of Ireland with Northern Ireland (which is apart of the United Kingdom).

Thats the only border we have.



So, what are the chances of a nuke detonating in the UK?


99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% unlikely.



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by infinite

99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% unlikely.



Creepy. Thats like .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% it could get through. That means it ain't perfect.



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 05:33 PM
link   
I don't want to give anyone ideas, but it seems to me that if their were many people out there intent on causing panic and terror, not only in the capital, but the whole of the South East, they wouldn't need a nuke.

Just a barge with an autopilot and a cargo of concrete.

The wreck of the Robert Montgomery is sat in about 20 metres of water in the Thames Estuary. It was an American ship that was bringing over munitions in the convoys during WWII. It ran aground in a storm and sank just where the river Medway joins the Thames. Its cargo of 1,400 tonnes of high explosive is still in its holds. Apparently a collision with the ship (its mast still stick out above the surface) could be enough to set it off.

I have to avoid it anytime I cross the estuary, and its only marked by a few buoys.

As far as the threat from Al-Qaida in Iraq, I acn't understand why its perceived as being so much more terrible than the threat of the IRA during the last few decades. Just because the IRA bombers planned on surviving the attack?



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Karilla
Just a barge with an autopilot and a cargo of concrete.

The wreck of the Robert Montgomery is sat in about 20 metres of water in the Thames Estuary. It was an American ship that was bringing over munitions in the convoys during WWII. It ran aground in a storm and sank just where the river Medway joins the Thames. Its cargo of 1,400 tonnes of high explosive is still in its holds. Apparently a collision with the ship (its mast still stick out above the surface) could be enough to set it off.

I have to avoid it anytime I cross the estuary, and its only marked by a few buoys.


Sounds like a plan.... But eh, the barge being under water and all, wouldn´t the damage/impact be minimal? Even if and when those 1400 tons go off (being soaked to the core)?

Unless these high explosives are isolated from the water think is very unlikely.



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 06:24 PM
link   
Al Qaeda is CIA/Mossad/MI6

What we have here is the secret intelligence agencies of the world against the populations of the world. There's even evidence that the Japanese or Chinese gang did some kind of deal in teh World trade centers before it blew up.

The intelligence agencies and mafia's of the world have become a killing machine. They will stop at nothing simply because they out wit the ordinary. They have geniuses working for htem. Evil genius's!



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 06:37 PM
link   
No, not unlikely at all I'm afraid. All the explosives are in the form of bombs, with the fuses stored seperately in watertight containers. The fuses are the biggest risk (most volatile), but if they go, the whole thing goes. The MOD sent divers down a couple of months ago to check on the integrity of the fuse boxes, and apparently they're OK. What they're worried about is a big storm dislodging the front half of the ship and allowing all the bombs to roll out.

The MOD also warns that the explosion would be as great as a small nuclear explosion, say Nagasaki, and the shock wave would reverberate twice around the globe.

www.ssrichardmontgomery.com...

Heres a link to an article on the ship, including a breakdown of all the munitions aboard. I got the name wrong. Richard, not Robert. He was some actor or other. I always confuse the two. Like the Dimblebys.



posted on Apr, 22 2007 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by golddragnet
should we also ignore that the London Bombings were the work of elements within the British Government


:shk: Yes. Please ignore that paranoid tripe.

According to this article, immigration is so out of control for the Brits that political turmoil and a breakdown of society is sure to come soon -

Immigration at tipping point

Borders aren't protected ... immigration is out of control ... assimulation doesn't happen ... OF COURSE there is going to be lawlessness and terrorist attacks. And it won't be the government pulling them off.




Duhhh, thats exactly WHY the goverment over there needs to stage attacks--to garner public support for immigration crack-downs. Sheeple, sheesh.


[edit on 22-4-2007 by MystikMushroom]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join