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.

 

If Al Qaeda Really Attacked the US, Then...

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 10:36 PM
link   
I was thinking about this in my car yesterday, and decided to share my thought with you lovely people.

If Al Qaeda really did have anything to do with the attacks on september 11th, then obviously they have easy access to the United States. Thats why the govt. was worried for so long about splinter cells etc (which btw, they never found any. Every "splinter cell" they found in the US were found not guilty in court). These people trained to fly planes on American soil yada yada yada, you ALL now the story...

So, Al Qaeda is bent on the destruction of the US and has somewhat easy access to our country.., then why the hell has there not been a single car bomb?
Why has there not been a Mall bombing, a theatre bombing, a friggin IED bike bomb on the side of the road?

Do you honestly believe that they are only holding out for "big time" attacks like Sept. 11th?
No! These are the same people supposably blowing themselves up all around the middle east, causing terror etc.
I tell you what, I would be scared to go out if all of a sudden malls, busses, cars on the side of the road, or movie theaters were being targeted, and isnt that what a terrorist organization is supposed to do, cause terror?

Just use your common sense. Its been 8 years since Sept. 11th and nothing?
I mean come on. Putting a bomb in a car and driving into a building is easy! Taking a plane hostage and flying it precisely into specific targets is not!

If Al Qaeda really attacked the US, then there would have been countless other bombs going off all across the US. There is no way the govt. would be able to track those people. Ever seen the Denzel Washington movie? The negotiator right? The one with Bruce Willis? Yeah, that would be a much more likely scenario. A few bus bombs go off and no one wants to go outside.

Jesus, its so easy to see the truth.
Sept. 11th was OVER THE TOP. Why would someone do something so OVER THE TOP? To get people to agree with them. The US wanted to go to war, for whatever reasons, sept. 11th happens and bam, we're at war.
This common sense stuff should work on its own, but no, we have tons of proof that 9/11 was an inside job to put on top of it! it's too bad lots of people have forgotten about september 11th... Time makes it so much easier to look back and go "duh" about whats going on in our country.




posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 04:55 AM
link   
I feel ya, we waste so much money keeping the evil mexicans from working hard in american factories that we even create NAFTA to put the jobs they're after IN Mexico. Then 9/11, we're told that these hijackers were from Saudi Arabia so we send our troops to... Afghanistan, then scratch that and go for Iraq, and soon back to Afghanistan again. I'm curious to how many radical islamic terrorists were sent to commit the horrible acts of 9/11. Surely 100% of them didn't make it I'd hope, especially with all the intel we had that led to such a quick naming of all 19 hijackers in a matter of 72 hrs...



posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 12:17 PM
link   
It should be obvious by now that America IS NOT under attack from terrorists, but now all anyone can think about is the crashing economy and have forgotten as to why we're really in this situation and how corrupt the US is.



posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 12:17 PM
link   
I agree 100%

As I've said on another board numerous times. If those terrorists are hell bent on killing us infidels, there is no way we can stop them, no way.

I live within a 20 minute drive of an enormous mall, perhaps you may have heard of, the Mall of America. A terrorist could probably kill dozens of people there before the police could even be called. The Bloomington police dept even has a station there (last I heard) but, a terrorist could kill dozens before anyone could yell help.

Now, you'll have those that will claim George Bush kept us safe. To that I'll say? Are you serious? Yea, sure Bush kept us safe. They'll say, well......there hasn't been an attack since, and I'll say...........since you claim it was Bush, then prove it was all George's doing.



posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Odessy
 


The whole idea of sleeper cells is waiting and planning the big one. Sure their access to the US is some what easy. They get school, work and what ever other visas the US offers these days. But access to this country in the numbers needed to pull off the attacks you suggest is simply not the case. if they started the attacks you mention the would not be able to sustain them for any amount of time. The low scale attacks you mention are not worth the loss of the few people they have here. Exposure for such a small attack just dosent make much sence. They just simply do not have the man power here yet to pull it off. Also I believe if they did start doing their access to the US would then be so greatly limited their war, would no longer exsits.

The other theory i have on this also ties into the one above. With US forces fighting in Iraq and Afganistan. They just dont have the man power to fight us over here and over there. i just dont believe there enough religous nuts to pull it off.



posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Odessy
 


Hi,

Totally agree. Again I would ask people to look at the difference between 9/11 and the attacks in London.

The latter were individuals intent on causing a loss of life and fear - which they did - but not on the scale nor with the 'theatricals' achieved in the US.
But then the 'theatricals' brought in so much more money.....for some.

Peace!



posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 02:18 PM
link   
DaleGribble,

I disagree with you 100%, and here's why. First of all, they do have the numbers. The terrorists aren't fighting our army overseas, our army is fighting civilians, ex-military, and the group that was fighting the ex-militants in the first place.
You see, when we went to Iraq, the military over there was already fighting rebels. When we demolished the country and basically took over (before resembling it), we said that anyone who was in the old regime can no longer be in the new military. stupidest thing ever, because people in the military love their country, I'm sure many of them would have loved to be part of the group that rebuilds it from scratch. Then, on top of that, over a million civilians have been killed during the whole process. There isn't one family who hasn't had a relative killed, so now they are bearing arms against our soldiers. SO yeah, our soldiers are fighting a lot of people over there, most of whom are NOT terrorists... especially since Al Qeada is supposed to be in Afghanistan anyway and we havent really fought too many of them over there.
Next, we get to the sleeper cell operations... I get the idea, but they just aren't happening. Think about how many people we claimed to be involved with the plane hijackings. there were like 20 names listed of the people over here planning and carrying out the missions. 20 people! If one two of them teamed up and said, "hey, lets blow up a mall, or a theater, or a bus across america for the next 10 months, people wouldn't go outside! Imagine if a terrorist explosion occurred on US soil once a month... chaos, and much, MUCH, easier to pull off than hijacking these big planes.
You say that they are waiting to pull of BIG stunts, well, why? Look at 9/11! everyone here has forgotten. No one is scared to walk the streets. But look at the middle east where a few people die every month due to a terrorist explosion...
This is just using common sense, we're obviously not under attack... yet at least. And with all the other HARD EVIDENCE pointing to 9/11 being an inside job, well, I just dont know why anyone would believe that the US is under terrorist threat.

 


The Wave,

You should look into those london bombings... they were also an Inside Job.
In fact, they were almost an exact copy of the attacks on 9/11.
On the day of 9/11, as I'm sure you probably know, our govt. was involved in a training exercise for the exact situation that was actually taking place. This left our air forces unable to detect what what was actually happening and what was the training exercise.
On the day of the london bombings, the exact same thing was happening! They were training for subway bombings, and as such, could not decipher between what was really happening and the training exercise.
After the London Bombings, England was even more gun ho' behind the War on Terror.



posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odessy
It should be obvious by now that America IS NOT under attack from terrorists, but now all anyone can think about is the crashing economy and have forgotten as to why we're really in this situation and how corrupt the US is.



Enough said.



For the orchestrators, it's like a board game.........and we're the pieces...

And if you have money.........you even get the "Get Out Of Jail" cards.






posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Odessy
 


Hi!,

I understand where you are coming from - especially when the police in the UK shoot dead a terrified innocent.... But a few individuals filmed with rucksacks... come on!

And the technology in the 9/11attack was so different - and the symbols were so overt - not underground. War/insurance/funding for weapons/oil...

Imcidently, I worked in London when the IRA bombed it and though a worry - bombs aren't all that problematical - life went on.

What is odd is the lack of Norad's capability.... maybe that's what's being hidden - the US govenment's incompetence. Great at escorting a rogue Cessna but unable to track 4 hi-jacked flights?

I don't think so!

Peace!


[edit on 17-4-2009 by The Wave]



posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Odessy
 


your post proved my point. in a war lossing 2 people if all you have is 20 is a whole lot. why would you sacrefice your force before you had a sustainable one. I.E. stay quiet before you start showing yourself. I can tell you have no military experince. at the risk of repeating my self re read my post with the mind set that im not trying to argue or even prove you wrong im simply stating my thoughts. i wont be drug into philoslysopical debate about if us being there is right or wrong. this is not the thread there are many on that subject.



posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   
IF they attacked, they lost 20 in one day to an incident soon forgot.
If they had spaced them out over the course of say 10 months, causing explosions in various locations, people would be terrified... which is what terrorists want.
They dont want to go to war with our army. They dont have enough people for that!

but hey, lets agree to disagree

[edit on 17-4-2009 by Odessy]



posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odessy
They dont have enough people for that!



im not going to agree to disagree that is my point. Terror is not their goal. we call them terrorists sure and that is what they do. however extremest goals are to KILL EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US. they do have acess to the country but they cant get all the people they need here in one trip. so they trickle in lay in wait and launch an attack when their numbers are high enough. i will add to the statment that you know nothing about military tactics, by saying you really know nothing about religous extremism. no fault of yours though, there is much i dont know.

[edit on 15pmu82007 by DaleGribble]



posted on Apr, 18 2009 @ 01:28 AM
link   
I just thought I'd toss this out there. I'm sorry if someone already mentioned this, I have a tendency to just skim these threads.

They did try a car bomb. A very big car bomb. The 1st time they tried to blow up the towers.
They obviously had very lofty goals. When that failed they took a different approach. Once they had a better way to do it and realized how easy it would be, they decided to up the ante. The WTC, the Pentagon and the white house (presumably)
If you had such a goal in mind, would you waste any effort or resources on anything less? Not to mention drawing attention to yourself.
It wasn't about terrorizing the people here as much as tearing down some very powerful symbols and showing our weakness to the world.
It's no different than the Doolittle raid on Japan.
Absolutely no strategic value other than showing the weakness of your enemy and boosting the morale of your cause.
Just my thoughts on the subject.



posted on Apr, 18 2009 @ 02:09 AM
link   
They already hit us at OKC this was all premeditated from the start from a level far beyond the US government look at all the corporations who benefited from 9-11 and the so called war on terror the Military/Industrial Complex had a hand in all of this.Look at the 9-11 Commission it was made up of people who were known to be very shoddy investigators in D.C. same as the Warren Commission it was designed to make this all go away but it has not much to their dismay.



posted on Apr, 18 2009 @ 11:29 AM
link   
You wont agree to disagree? Well, I disagree with you... and you dont agree with me... but you wont agree that thats the case?

Listen man, I'm just pointing to an obvious conclusion one makes AFTER they've accepted all of the other facts pointing this to being an inside job. Take with it what you like, but your not changing my mind.

[edit on 18-4-2009 by Odessy]



posted on Apr, 18 2009 @ 11:35 AM
link   
everything that points to this NOT being Osama or a "Terrorist" attack, or Al-Qaeda is amazing how people can still be so ignorant and deny it..

i mean look back in history, the Illuminati/NWO have been doing this since they started, False attacks for there own agenda, they needed a base in the middle East, and Israel needed air space



posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grimstad
I just thought I'd toss this out there. I'm sorry if someone already mentioned this, I have a tendency to just skim these threads.

They did try a car bomb. A very big car bomb. The 1st time they tried to blow up the towers.
They obviously had very lofty goals. When that failed they took a different approach. Once they had a better way to do it and realized how easy it would be, they decided to up the ante. The WTC, the Pentagon and the white house (presumably)
If you had such a goal in mind, would you waste any effort or resources on anything less? Not to mention drawing attention to yourself.
It wasn't about terrorizing the people here as much as tearing down some very powerful symbols and showing our weakness to the world.
It's no different than the Doolittle raid on Japan.
Absolutely no strategic value other than showing the weakness of your enemy and boosting the morale of your cause.
Just my thoughts on the subject.




a bomb made by the FBI



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join