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.


Name 2 places you think terrorist will attack and why

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 26 2004 @ 07:38 PM
What 2 places do you think the terrorist will attack and why. Also do you think that only arabs will be involved or could it be groups like Nazis helping?

posted on May, 26 2004 @ 07:43 PM
To get the message across symbolically probably...
NYC - economic (also large populace)
DC ( demonic control)
- seat of government /power

posted on May, 26 2004 @ 07:49 PM
Why do I get the feeling I'm doing homework? I'll give you one. The Olympics, it's an international forum.

posted on May, 26 2004 @ 07:58 PM
I am new here and I am pleased to find some freethinking people left in the world.
I am an Independent Conservative Christian.
I have been with my wife for 16 years.
She is Jewish born and of Christian faith and we hate no one.
She is more liberal than I am, we balance each other.
I have a question for the good people here in this place of ideas.

Have you heard of the PNAC document?
Check this out and let me know what you think.
I got this information from this web site.

From page 50 through 51 of PNAC:
“A transformation strategy that solely pursued capabilities for projecting force from the United States, for example, and sacrificed forward basing and presence, would be at odds with larger American policy goals and would trouble American allies.

Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor.”

Gasp! You say?

So, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event, the march to empire and US global domination would be a long one in coming, the authors of PNAC admit. Did they say to themselves?: "Well, let's cook up a catastrophic and catalyzing event---a new Pearl Harbor---to assure and fulfill our plans for oil and empire building."

The Project For The New American Century (PNAC) is the blueprint of the illegitimate Bush regime. PNAC is about empire building, world domination by the Bush regime and remaking the Middle East in "America's Image."...Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt and others.

PNAC was written long before 11 September 2001. PNAC started with Wolfowitz in 1991, Richard Perle did a think tank piece in 1995 in which he said the US had to get rid of Saddam Hussein, then “we” have to go after Syria and Iran to protect the military supremacy of Israel.

Here’s the list of the evil people of PNAC. These are the evildoers who signed PNAC's Statement of Principles:

Elliott Abrams, Gary Bauer Bennett, Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Eliot A. Cohen, Midge Decter, Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes, Aaron Friedberg, Francis Fukuyama, Frank Gaffney, Fred C. Ikle, Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad, I. Lewis Libby, Norman Podhoretz, Dan Quayle, Peter W. Rodman, Stephen P. Rosen, Henry S. Rowen, Donald Rumsfeld, Vin Weber, George Weigel, Paul Wolfowitz

Please keep an open mind if you think what we're about to say is unconscionable. It is indeed our opinion (we repeat, this is our opinion) that the Bush regime cooked up and pulled off 11 September, and from listening to talk show programs many other people are now coming to this same conclusion, based on what we know so far. Also, please read:

Rose: Arrogance, or something darker?
Excerpt: If you want to know why 9/11 was allowed to happen you may not have to look any further than the Oval Office... PNAC, Project for the New American Century, was organized in 1997 by Zionist neo-cons Robert Kagen and William Kristol. It is funded by three foundations closely tied to Persian Gulf oil and the weapons and defense industries. Members of PNAC included Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush and Paul Wolfowitz, a director of the organization. All signed a statement of principles, one of which was to promote "American global leadership" with special emphasis on Arab countries. Another was to "transform" the U.S. military with huge increases in defense spending. Here's the chilling kicker: To convince the American people to spend extra billions for defense instead of on Social Security, Medicare, etc., PNAC suggested it would take a "catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor." (PNAC's exact words.) [End of Excerpt]

First, let's look at the type of people we're dealing with here. Let's go back to the 2000 presidential election/selection. We put absolutely nothing past these repugnant Bush people after they stooped to the level of the gutter, demanded to stop the counting of votes in Florida, and stole democracy from the people during the rigged 2000 presidential election which ended in the 2000 Judicial Coup. We remember that it was Jeb Bush (Governor of Florida), who assured his brother (George War Bush) that he (Jeb) would "deliver Florida" to his brother in the 2000 presidential election-selection. Very convenient considering Jeb Bush is one of the signatories of PNAC. These repugnant people HAD to get back in the White House by hook and crook---it was a must for them---in order to accomplish the goals of PNAC. Following the Judicial Coup which launched our website, we said “Expect the very worst from this crowd, this illegitimate Bush regime. These arrogant and dictatorial people will do anything and we mean anything, regardless, because they think they are above the law; they have nothing but contempt for the law and democracy as was exhibited during the 2000 presidential election.” It was not within the law of the land—the US Constitution—for five right-wing fundamentalists ("Conservative Republicans") on the US Supreme Court (appointed by Reagan and Bush Sr) to select their favorite presidential candidate, this Bush, to reside in the White House. No court in this land is to have a role in a presidential election according to the US Constitution. A disputed presidential election is to be decided by the House of Representatives, not by a court.

Secondly, have you read the Project For The New American Century (it's a PDF file) and Project For The New American Century Statement of Principles where the authors of that document, as we said earlier, speak of needing a "new Pearl Harbor” in order to begin putting PNAC in to place? That Pearl Harbor occurred on 11 September 2001, just nine months after Bush was selected to occupy the White House. Was this "Pearl Harbor" a coincidence? We don't think so. The goal of PNAC is for US world domination and empire building. Oil and empire. Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt and on and on.

As Dr Bernard Weiner writes:

"But, in order to unleash their foreign/military campaigns without taking all sorts of flak from the traditional wing of the conservative GOP -- which was more isolationist, more opposed to expanding the role of the federal government, more opposed to military adventurism abroad -- they needed a context that would permit them free rein. The events of 9/11 rode to their rescue. (In one of their major reports, written in 2000, they noted that "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor.")"

Before 11 September, Bush desperately needed a war somewhere to get his popularity up and to appear legitimate and “presidential” in the role of “Commander & Chief.” How else could the Bush regime justify a war in order to begin the goals of PNAC without the States supposedly being attacked? As the authors of PNAC write in that very document, they need another Pearl Harbor to kick-start the goals of PNAC. The events of 11 September were also the kick-start for Bush's phony "war on terrorism" which is really a "war" on civil liberties and the erosion and shredding of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights through the Patriot Acts. Please read:Amnesty: US 'War on Terror' Has Made World Worse.

Cheryl wrote in her email:

"That would be much more than an impeachable offense, it would be treason for a president [sic] of a country to kill over 3000 of its residents."

We would just respond to that by saying that if anyone thinks George War Bush has any regard for life, they should think again. As governor of Texas, Bush was proudly known as the "killing'st" governor (pro-death penalty), and in just two years as White House resident he's already taken the States on two terrorist attacks---he calls them wars, we call them what they are, since war is terror---of Afghanistan and Iraq killing thousands of innocent people and other animals. A regard for life? We don't see it. Ask the innocent civilians of Afghanistan and Iraq if they think this so-called "Christian" Bush is "pro-life," as he claims he is after he's killed thousands of men, women, children, pregnant women and other animals. And US service people are being killed every day in Iraq because George War Bush is willing to keep them in harm's way for the purposes of PNAC. The war in Iraq has just begun contrary to the claims from this Bush that the war in Iraq is over. (For a first-hand account of what is happening in Iraq on a daily basis, please read "Where is Raed?")

As a prominent San Francisco talk show host has said:

September 11th was the best thing to happen to George W Bush (politically speaking),and that is absolutely correct.

In addition, as you will recall, the horrible events of 11 September 2001 occurred just like clockwork. Is was extremely well planned. Why is that? Because it was an “inside job?” The hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and Egypt. And the Bush Family has financial ties to the Bin Laden Family. But did Bush launch a war (his terrorist attack) in response on Saudi Arabia following 11 September? No, he bombed the hell out of Afghanistan. Why would he do that? Because there's an oil and gas pipeline needed through the mountains of Afghanistan (again PNAC). Please read: BBC News: A war for the pipelines? and Afghanistan plans gas pipeline.

And why has Bush blocked any serious investigation into 9/11 if the Bush regime has nothing to hide? Furthermore, check this out from the corporate media (MSNBC):

Classified: Censoring the Report About 9-11?
Bush officials are refusing to permit the release of matters already in the public domain—including the existence of intelligence documents referred to on the CIA Web site.

Why is the Bush regime refusing to release the report about 9/11 if they have nothing to hide? Anyone have a clue?

And what about the families of those killed on 11 September?:

Lingering Questions. The families of 9-11 victims are still raising pertinent issues about the intelligence failures that led to the attack. Plus, Is Washington hyping the Qaeda threat?
In a long-awaited, closed-door meeting, FBI director Robert Mueller ran into a buzz saw of criticism this week from irate family members of September 11 victims over the bureau’s handling of a range of matters relating to the terror attacks.---Freedom of Information Center (Newsweek)

We, at, have never said that it is a fact that the Bush regime was responsible for the events of 11 September 2001. What we have said very clearly on our website is that it is our opinion that the Bush regime cooked up and implemented 11 September, or at least they knew it was coming, welcomed it and allowed the events of that morning to take place for their own (personal) political goals and agenda.

This Bush himself made the following repugnant and disgusting comment where he said he had hit the “Trifecta” shortly after 11 September and we quote:

How Bush Hit the 'Trifecta' on 9/11--and the Public Lost Big-Time
“Bush, in the weeks before September 11, pledged to honor the sanctity of the Social Security lockbox except in the event of recession, war, or a national emergency. But after "everything changed" on 9/11, he reportedly gloated to his budget director, Mitch Daniels, "Lucky me--I hit the trifecta!" At the time, this comment (a variation of which is being recycled for laughs at current GOP fundraisers) seemed merely offensive. But in light of revelations that Bush's August 6 briefing memo was titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike U.S.," Bush's "luck" and weird prescience are worth more than passing scrutiny.”—Baltimore Chronicle

You will recall that during the morning of the 11 September attacks, Bush was reading to school children. When a Bush aide whispered in Bush's ear that a jetliner had crashed into the first WTC tower, Bush responded by continuing to read to school children. His facial expression was not of surprise in the least. Instead, his facial expression showed that he was thinking, "Good, things are going just as planned." Would you have continued to read to school children (for approximately 20 minutes more) if your country was supposedly under attack?

"On the morning of the attack, you and members of your staff were fully aware of the unfolding events yet you chose to continue on to the Emma E. Booker Elementary School to proceed with a scheduled event and "photo op". While our nation was under attack you did not appear to blink an eye or shed a tear. You continued on as if everything was "business as usual"."---Ellen Mariani in her open letter to this Bush

We firmly believe there was too much at stake---as we’ve already explained repeatedly above---for the Bush regime not to have been involved or created the events of that day themselves.

Yes, as Cheryl mentions in her email, this would certainly be an impeachable offense and also a capital offense, but as there is no opposition party in the States any longer, impeachment is not about to happen. It looks like the investigations of 11 September have pretty much been conveniently and forcefully swept under the rug by a giant Repugnicrat broom, although the UK is still investigating PM Tony Blair's role in PNAC.

Clare Short of the British Parliament recently said that PNAC is why the UK went to war in Iraq, and not the phony excuse Bush and Blair gave of WMDs.

Yes, we do indeed think that # needs to hit the fan and hard and splatter all over the place, but somebody has got to turn on the switch to the fan first, and that somebody needs to be the public.

The Marketing of Terror by the Lying Bush Regime
To quote from the following article: "The prevalent view in this country is that they can strike again, anywhere, anytime, and the government can't stop it." And we would add especially when the world's #1 terrorist resides in the White House: Why Is the Bush Regime Terrorising the States?

Living in 'apocalyptic fear'
Americans more scared than ever
"Fear is something this administration [sic] has been selling for two years. You sedate the populace with the drug of fear and maybe the electorate won't notice what a mess you have made, not only of domestic

Scared Crapless?

politics, but also our international relations. In order to conceal, disguise, dress up their own incompetence, they beat the constant threat of war and fear.---Lewis Lapham Editor/Harpers magazine

Also, please use Google for more searches on this subject. Google will provide you with ample credible information and opinions on this topic.

"It is time for a non-violent revolution by the millions of Americans who are tired of their rights being diminished by the Bush Administration [sic]; tired of the lies of the Bush Administration [sic]; tired of the lies about Iraq; and tired and disgusted with the lies about 911. Now is the time to stand tall together and bring back our freedoms as they stood under the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States."---from 911 for the truth

Related Link:
If People Weren't Wusses

US arms group heads for Lisbon,
Excerpt from article: The American based Carlyle Group is heavily involved in supplying arms to the Coalition [sic] forces fighting in the Iraqi war...The SBC is headed up by members of Osama bin Laden’s family, who played a principle role in helping George W. Bush win petroleum concessions from Bahrain when he was head of the Texan oil company, Harken Energy Corporation - a deal that was to make the Bush family millions of dollars...The connection between the Bush and bin Laden families can also be traced to the collapse of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) in the 1990s. Members of the Anglo Pakistani bank’s board of directors included Richard Helmes and William Casey, business partners of George Bush senior and former CIA agents. During their time at BCCI both Helmes and Casey worked alongside fellow director, Adnan Khasshoggi, who also represented the bin Laden family’s interests in the US.)

Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting MEDIA ADVISORY: Media Silent on Clark's 9/11 Comments: Gen. says White House pushed Saddam link without evidence
Excerpt from article: But the June 15 edition of NBC's Meet the Press was unusual for the buzz that it didn't generate. Former General Wesley Clark told anchor Tim Russert that Bush administration [sic] officials had engaged in a campaign to implicate Saddam Hussein in the September 11 attacks-- starting that very day. Clark said that he'd been called on September 11 and urged to link Baghdad to the terror attacks, but declined to do so because of a lack of evidence.

We received this follow-up email from Cheryl after she read the above article:

"Wow! I just cannot believe it. I understand how hateful these guys are, and how nasty they are. I can see that really well, but to create a situation like 9/11 is just beyond me. What do you know about the rumor that after all the planes were grounded in the US, that Air Force One was flying all over the country picking up members of the bin Laden family to get them out of the US and back to Saudi Arabia so that the FBI could not speak with them? I have never been able to substantiate this. It is true that within an hour or so, Osama bin Laden's face was appearing in the newspapers and on the other media outlets. Our attention was on him immediately and who knows whether he even planned this.

Another rumor is that on 9/11 right after the two towers were hit in NYC, whereas the Air Force is ready for immediate action in terms of getting into the air and taking out planes which they knew were deviating from their course, a command was given for the Air Force to NOT get into the air and not do anything. Some folks are saying that they could have blown up the one that eventually crashed into the Pentagon out of the sky, but didn't. Was there a command from higher up not to do this?---Cheryl"

**Opinion: A personal belief that is not founded on proof or certainty. A message expressing a belief about something

posted on May, 26 2004 @ 08:05 PM
Thanks for the link and hello from another newbie & Independent Conservative Christian. !
Hope to find time to go thru the site this weekend.

posted on May, 26 2004 @ 09:00 PM
Iraq and Iraq, why because the terrorist are there and in business !

Too much "hype" with terrorist warnings, etc.. I pray to God that the USA or any other country is ever attacked again.

posted on May, 27 2004 @ 01:14 AM
I have to agree with elevatedone.

However, I pray to God that he would just go ahead and wipe us all off the face of the Earth and press restart

posted on May, 27 2004 @ 07:03 AM
In the United States I would say the places with the highest risk is the state of CA, DC, and NYC.

posted on May, 27 2004 @ 11:56 PM
I dont know where, but I suspect because of past patterns, NYC, and LAX or The Seattle Space needle possibly.

I did have a series of dreams about a nuclear incident, in the prt city of Duluth MN, but that could be a symbol for any port city. So One attack will be on a port for major shipping.

Also I suspect a nuclear terrorist attack of some kind, which could be as simple as attacking a nuclear power plant, and a biological attack as well.

Hope to hell I am way wrong, but these are the things my mind points me to. Could be because of the media scares. I'm tainted...need a media cleansing shower.

top topics


log in