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.

 

TA-ANALYSIS: Tom Ridge Warns of 'Credible' Al-Qaeda Plot

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:11 AM
link   
The Department of Homeland Security Secretary, Tom Ridge, gave a breiefing on current threats to the homeland. Speculation grows over an imminent attack before or during the political conventions. Mr. Ridge also layed out the newly operational DoHS Nerve Center, which is "Live" 24-7.
 



www.dhs.gov
July 8, 2004 - Good morning. You have heard me and other senior administration officials the National Security Adviser, Director of the FBI and the Attorney General -- discuss with the American people the increased risk of a terrorist attack this summer. I wanted to take this opportunity to update Americans on both the status of that threat, as well as the efforts of law enforcement and homeland security professionals across the country, under the Presidents leadership, to increase security.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Most of the ATS community has been discussing the possibility of a terrorist attack to swing the election. My view of this is that the government believes it is going to happen. With the reference to the Madrid bombings, it seems to me that an attack will indeed happen, and will be allowed to happen. I am not saying that their is a conspiracy behind this, but security in the past has proven to lack.


[edit on 8-7-2004 by Banshee]




posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:27 AM
link   


but security in the past has proven to lack.

I'm assuming you're talking about the security at the political conventions...

They may have been lack in the past, but the last ones were in 2000 - pre 9/11.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:35 AM
link   
I'm mainly talking about stolen Nucleur fuel rods, tanker trucks, fertelizer, rheocrete, 200 pounds of high explosives, the list goes on. The biggest task is keeping materials out of their hands, without these materials an attack is highly unlikeable. Their is nothing security can do on the ground to stop say, an airliner approaching the convention center, or cooridnated car bombings, or even RPG's.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 11:53 AM
link   
Yep, the Government is preparing for the staged terrorist attacks to come before the elections. In my opinion, this whole staged terrorist attack is already going to happen, Al-CIAda is just wondering where they should strike and how much innocent lives they should eliminate.

This is going to benefit G. W. Bush immensely in his war on terrorism campaign.

The Government even has a networked command center for Homeland Security. Maybe they'll be using this for the possiblity of Martial Law as well, to operate the Concentration Camps for the dissidents.

Yep, G. W. Bush's Government is up to some dirty tricks for him to become the Dictator.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by IMMORTAL
This is going to benefit G. W. Bush immensely in his war on terrorism campaign.


I allways thought this to. But, How? I am looking at it as, hey wait a minute, you spent all this money, invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, Put the Patriot Act in effect, well maybe you are not the right one for the job. He has claimed that America is a safer place from those who want to harm us, yet we could allow another attack?



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 12:07 PM
link   
It would make sense for there to be a 'Madrid II' in the coming weeks/months.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Trick, how many stolen/lost trucks/tankers/etc have eventually been recovered though? I'm not sure about the ones from NJ but I thought the TX ones were recovered less than a week later.

A lot of those cases point to lax recordkeeping and worker incompetencies.

Or, were these all tests to see how easy it could be done prior to the real event?

Regardless, I think they know something is up but don't know what it is. They're covering their bases and will only use an attack to push for more control and funding. I'd bet Patriot Act II will pass with no problem after such an attack.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrickmastertricK
I allways thought this to. But, How? I am looking at it as, hey wait a minute, you spent all this money, invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, Put the Patriot Act in effect, well maybe you are not the right one for the job. He has claimed that America is a safer place from those who want to harm us, yet we could allow another attack?
It'll benefit him by keeping him in power, possibly suspending the elections and in the meantime creating the next Country where the terrorist attack originated from. For example, it will not be Afghanistan or Iraq this time, but a different Country that they'll pin the blame on.

Another terrorist attack would show the people of the United States that the terrorist is still out there, that Americans are not safe at home, that Americans must give up more of their freedoms to catch the terrorists.

Because this whole war on terror campaign is Bush's campaign, he needs another terrorist attack to justify keeping him in office because he knows and the people know that Bush will respond swiftly to the terrorist attack, i.e. more war campaigns overseas, as well as taking more freedoms away from the people. After the shock of this terrorist attack, the people are not going to want to vote, they are going to be afraid, the fear factor will play to Bush's side. The people are not going to want to vote for Kerry because they have more faith in G. W. Bush to carry on fighting the terrorists.

Yep, if this terror attack does happen, in which I believe it will, it'll go to show that the laws are not strict enough and that the next Patriot Act 2 will pass easily through the legislative system.

These are the plans of the Elite Cabal within the United States and they are the ones that will allow this terrorist attack to happen in which more innocent lives will be lost.

The question is, will the people react the way Bush wants them to, or will more people realize that the terrorist attacks are allowed to happen like they did with 9/11.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Wouldn't it make more sense to stage a 'foiled' attack plot? You know hype it up that there will be an attack and then rah rah rah for Homeland Security and Bush if the world gets to watch them roll with a plan to 'foil it' just in the nick of time?
Sure there is alot of room for error with this sort of thing but it could happen.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 12:27 PM
link   
I will bet there is a huge attack this summer.. Forget election day, it's too obvious a target...
This summer, DC or Florida or LA or LV or NY will be hit hard...
I dont know, I'm not 'in the know' here, just.. What I'd do if I was him...
Dirty bomb or straight nukes..



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by titian
Trick, how many stolen/lost trucks/tankers/etc have eventually been recovered though? I'm not sure about the ones from NJ but I thought the TX ones were recovered less than a week later.

Or, were these all tests to see how easy it could be done prior to the real event?


The ones from Jersey were never found, they could have been tests. I'm sorry but the government should have enforced strict guidelines as to security for things like this. We still have missing Nucleur fuel rods from the Yankee reactor in Vermont. As I had sted in my OP/ED piece-Is the Stage being set?, God only knows what might have been in place pre-911, and thousands of people croos the US/Mexico border each week.

9-11 was what, 5-6 years in the planning? I'm sure they had a plan B and C.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by daedenfach
Wouldn't it make more sense to stage a 'foiled' attack plot? You know hype it up that there will be an attack and then rah rah rah for Homeland Security and Bush if the world gets to watch them roll with a plan to 'foil it' just in the nick of time?
Sure there is alot of room for error with this sort of thing but it could happen.


I had spoke of this before as an election tool. Like see the things I put in place are working, I should stay in power type of thing. The Government seems to be the best conspiracy theorists out there, so anything seems possible.

IMMORTAL:

I agree with what you have said, as I said before I thought this way, i'm trying to look at it from a different angle. The Madrid Bombings changed the election. The took the FOR the war on terror out of power and put in the government that is there now, who is less aggressive against the war on terror. I'm wondering if it could have the same ramifications here. If they took out the Bush Admin, the next would not be as Strong against this.

[edit on 8-7-2004 by TrickmastertricK]



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Although the majority seem to feel another attack will secure GWB in the election I believe it will do the opposite.

All this time, all this money and two wars and we still get hit? It will be easy for Kerry to show that the diversion of our military and resources to Iraq instead of using them here at home to secure the country led to the attack. It would be very hard in my opinion for Bush to counter that aurgument. Everyone will recall how there was such an outcry to deploy the military along our borders, to lock them down (basically do what the INS is supposed to be doing and only let those who are supposed to come in enter).

If Kerry/Edwards were to play the situation right, they could win it.

Bush standing up and saying "See they hit again and I can protect you better" will seem like an awefully foolish aurgument. Now the theory of a foiled attack, totally to bush's favor.

[edit on 7/8/2004 by nativeokie]



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Remember after 9-11 the people didn't want Bloomberg to take over, they wanted Guiliani to contnue on until ground zero was situated?

The elections will continue. However, the fear tactics will go a long way in Bush's favor during the elections as the people won't want the administration to change hands during a time of crisis, even though they may truly want a new administration.

I don't think this crisis is over by far.

The current administration is calling upon former military for active duty. Those who have been called to active status have been gone since the war started, including one of our local school's principal. People are still being deployed to Iraq despite reports to the contrary.

The reports of the uranium located, etc.. are important to leak to the media to inform the "folks back home" the US is doing it's job by stopping the terrorists.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by daedenfach
Wouldn't it make more sense to stage a 'foiled' attack plot?
That would not work in favour of the Bush regime. I think there are a lot of those that we don't know about, so something like stopping a terror attack from happening wouldn't do much.

As well, after this terror attack happens, I believe there will be a lot of angry people and possibly large scale marches and riots all across the Country. I'm sure the Government is preparing for that scenario as well.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrickmastertricK
IMMORTAL:
I agree with what you have said, as I said before I thought this way, i'm trying to look at it from a different angle. The Madrid Bombings changed the election. The took the FOR the war on terror out of power and put in the government that is there now, who is less aggressive against the war on terror. I'm wondering if it could have the same ramifications here. If they took out the Bush Admin, the next would not be as Strong against this.
[edit on 8-7-2004 by TrickmastertricK]
From a different perspective on the Madrid Bombings: I've read that this terror attack was supposed to have the desired effect of getting the people of Spain to become 'Patriotic' against the terrorists and to keep the current Government at that time in power, much the same way Americans became after 9/11. But, it did not, as the Spanish people did not fall for this terror attack that was plotted by the Intelligence Agencies and so Spain's people got rid of that Government.

It's quite possible that Madrid was a test scenario on what they could achieve in terms of elections in this regard. My thinking is that they will do the same in the United States, with the plan of keeping Bush's regime in power. I mean, are the American people just going to scrap the War on Terrorism after all this time, after invading so many Countries and killing so many innocent live in the process, not to metion the Soldiers who have served? The Intelligence Agencies and Bush knows that he will not get booted out of the Government and that the people are not going to give up on the generated War on Terrorism, which the upcoming terror attack is going to help solidify.

This is Bush's last chance, I believe, in securing his next 4 years. The people are going to want to vote for Bush to protect them because everybody will be too afraid. Bush has fought the terrorists in the voters' eyes, and after this terrorist attack, they're going to want him to keep fighting the terrorists for another 4 years, and Bush will be just pleased with that.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 01:01 PM
link   
It still sickens me to see anyone write or say the phrase 'staged terroist attack'. I believe daily we are stopping attacks on our own shores. From what you say IMMORTAL, you know all about al-qeada and the secret CABAL in America. Why don't you drop a line to the CIA to help out us fellow Americans.

There is no doubt in the mind of most Americans that there will be another attack, more than likely worse than that of 9/11. Instead of pointing fingers at secrect gov't agencies, we should start preparing ourselves. These are different times we live in. This is not the 50's.

What would Bush gain in the war on terror campaign? It would show he was not going forward, but going backward.

Trust me, I live across the water from Macdill AFB and the Port of Tampa. 2 in my opinon big targets. I think these plans were laid a long time ago and i just hope I am with family when it happens.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Most people aren't informed- they rely heavily on the news media reports-true or not, and then base their opinions on whatever information they receive without knowing all the details.

The majority of average citizens isn't searching for reports on any of this stuff.



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Can someone define "CREDIBLE"?



posted on Jul, 8 2004 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by mako0956
Can someone define "CREDIBLE"?
1. Capable of being believed; plausible.
2. Worthy of confidence; reliable.

Definition taken from here.

The Government is preparing for it. I'ts only a matter of time of where and when.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join