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.

 

Domodedovo airport: Blast rocks Moscow's main airport

page: 11
81
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by TheDeader
 


Both geographical areas being linked to the terrorst bombing suspect are muslim strongholds. Wow that's shocking. Interestingly, it appears that the media didn't want to mention that...

Whether you like Russia, or not (not), it is muslim extremists who are taking innocent lives! Remember all those school children blown up by terrorists? What did they call them in the media? "Czechan rebels". Yes, they were from the Czech Republic. But the media didn't mention that they were "muslim terrorists" which is EXACTLY what they were.

After all, we don't want to offend them by calling them exactly what they are, do we?
edit on 25-1-2011 by RealAmericanPatriot because: spelling




posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by muzzleflash
 




Terror is an indiscriminate attack against civilians who are not necessarily associated with any armed faction, govt or military. Therefore ALL WAR IS TERRORISM.


Terrorism is an INTENDED indiscriminate attack against civilians. Unintended collateral damage in war which the warring side is trying to minimize as much as possible is not terrorism.

Was allied attack on axis powers terrorism?


What about the fire-bombings of Dresden which made the whole city a burning inferno where innocent women and children's flesh melted away in the streets?

Dresden was NOT a military target and had no fighting German military troops stationed in the city.

Dresden was full of refugees fleeing the Red Army and had a few hospitals where wounded German soldiers from the Eastern front were treated, but isn't it against the Geneva Convention to attack hospitals anyway?

Can it then be argued that the INTENDED vicious allied attack on Dresden was an act of Terrorism and a war-crime?



You guys burnt the place down, turned it into a single column of flame. More people died there in the firestorm, in that one big flame, than died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined." --Kurt Vonnegut, Jr




On the evening of February 13, 1945, an orgy of genocide and barbarism began against a defenseless German city, one of the greatest cultural centers of northern Europe. Within less than 14 hours not only was it reduced to flaming ruins, but an estimated one-third of its inhabitants, possibly as many as a half a million, had perished in what was the worst single event massacre of all time.

Toward the end of World War II, as Allied planes rained death and destruction over Germany, the old Saxon city of Dresden lay like an island of tranquillity amid desolation. Famous as a cultural center and possessing no military value, Dresden had been spared the terror that descended from the skies over the rest of the country.

In fact, little had been done to provide the ancient city of artists and craftsmen with anti-aircraft defenses. One squadron of planes had been stationed in Dresden for awhile, but the Luftwaffe decided to move the aircraft to another area where they would be of use. A gentlemen's agreement seemed to prevail, designating Dresden an "open city."


The WWII Dresden Holocaust - 'A Single Column Of Flame'


February 13/14 1945: Holocaust over Dresden, known as the Florence of the North. Dresden was a hospital city for wounded soldiers. Not one military unit, not one anti-aircraft battery was deployed in the city.

Together with the 600.000 refugees from Breslau, Dresden was filled with nearly 1.2 million people. Churchill had asked for "suggestions how to blaze 600.000 refugees". He wasn't interested how to target military installations 60 miles outside of Dresden. More than 700.000 phosphorus bombs were dropped on 1.2 million people. One bomb for every 2 people. The temperature in the centre of the city reached 1600 o centigrade. More than 260.000 bodies and residues of bodies were counted. But those who perished in the centre of the city can't be traced. Approximately 500.000 children, women, the elderly, wounded soldiers and the animals of the zoo were slaughtered in one night.


On topic: this vile & vicious attack on innocent civilians at an International Airport is nothing else than an act of cowardice, a brutal barbarous savage act from a few who have a screw loose in their heads - there's absolutely no honour in actions attacking innocent civilians, it's not acceptable nor can it ever be justified.

I'll be cheering when they hunt down each one of those animals who were behind this attack - well, let's just hope that they don't end up chasing some of their own corrupt tail in that process though!


My heart goes out to all those who were affected, injured and those who sadly lost their loved ones yesterday!

Peace!
edit on 25-1-2011 by Chevalerous because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   
latest reports says it was female bomber:

news.sky.com... 09844?lpos=World_News_Carousel_Region_3&lid=ARTICLE_15909844_Moscow_Airport_Bombing%3A_Russia_On_High_Alert_After_Blast_Which_Killed_At_Least_35_Peopl e

so.... there you go.... more on the story above:

A female suicide bomber is thought to be behind a Moscow airport blast which killed at least 35 people including one Briton.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has described the attack at Domodedovo airport, which left as many as 180 wounded, as a "well-planned act of terror" and vowed to "liquidate" the militants responsible.

Russian authorities have said two Britons were among those killed but the Foreign Office says it is only able to confirm one

Mr Medvedev has said management at the airport should be held accountable for "clear security breaches".

"Someone had to try very hard to carry or bring through such a vast amount of explosives," he said.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

Originally posted by mike dangerously
Let's see how Putin and Medvedev and the rest of the Duma use this to expand their power.Sadly,any disaster you can expect to see some politician looking to take advantage of it to further their career and push an agenda.Look at Tuscon.

edit on 113131p://1726 by mike dangerously because: (no reason given)


Moscow gets hit by a major terrorist attack at least once a year.

When, in the last decade, has the Russian government ever assumed new authoritan powers after being attacked by terrorists?

They started a war over sketchy terrorist attacks during the 90s. A lot of people believe that this was the work of the FSB to create a reason to invade Chechnya, and I think that's a fair assumption to make. However, I really don't see why the hell people think the FSB would be killing their own people, IN THEIR OWN CAPITAL IN MODERN TIMES, when they face real terrorism produced by two bloody wars in Chechnya and supported by very real CIA, Georgian, and Islamic extremist elements?

Russia is not the US. Russia's 9/11 happened in the 90s and in effect, the 9/11 false flag operation was just a copy of the effective operation to justify invading Chechnya during the 90s.


I agree with most of what you say.

I don't agree with the last: "to justify invading Chechnya". Actually I don't know which one of the two positions you defend, anyway I will tell mine.

Chechnya is a part of Russia for centuries, from Tzar's time. There is no reason why should contemporary Russia cede territories here and there. The way USA will not give back the land to the Indians. Lacota (Dakota) declared "independence" some years ago, and sent the document to the UN, denouncing the 150 year treaties with the United States, because US failed to fulfill them. So what? Let USA first give 5 states to them, Arizona to the Apaches, and Utah to the Utah. And give Alaska back to Russia - its 100 year lease expired.

Contrary to the Alex Jones' view of FSB behind 1999 bombings in residential buildings, it seems just the opposite. It was CIA who posted a prediction in the newspapers how Siberia was too big for Russia and how it should be divided into 6 pieces given to other countries. US policy after the Cold War was not to have one equal partner, but to disintegrate more and more what was left of the empire. So whoever looks for FSB/KGB traces behind bombings or even Putin's footprint, looks in the opposite direction. By the way, Putin wanted to join EU and even NATO, before that CIA assessment of Siberia. The list of happenings in Russia is long. Here comes the fire in Ostankino TV tower - the tallest building in Europe, in 2000, other bombings including the train Moscow-St Peterburg, two planes, and the Moscow metro below FSB central. The accident in the biggest dam in Siberia, and the strange large fires in the torf area last summer. Also we may REEVALUATE the EVIDENCE of KURSK disaster. Why not to put Chernobyl in the long list too, despite it happened in another period.

Someone is doing all that behind scene, and that someone is not Russian. If it was KGB/FSB behind any of these, they would have used the "created by them" situation and would have invaded Iraq first, or probably another Gulf country. The reality shows otherwise - they did not, USA did using as a pretext 9/11.

At one point Russia will respond to the gross provocations that just don't stop year after year. Perhaps they are intended to draw the Russian response. From the mild reactions of today's Russian president, I guess that point hasn't come yet. At the same time Putin is pretty convincing in his reaction. Perhaps other stronger events are expected first, such as North-South Korean clash, or Iran-US war, before finally Russia to decide it is a time to defend the motherland from the inevitable next attack. Because Russia cannot afford to wait until attacked by nuclear surprising first strike with the US X-planes. Perhaps ET will come into the play too? Who knows? Only God knows the future.
edit on 25-1-2011 by Gliese581 because: adding more info



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Chevalerous
 




What about the fire-bombings of Dresden which made the whole city a burning inferno where innocent women and children's flesh melted away in the streets?


OK, point taken. That was definately a terrorist act. But the whole war was not. And current wars (Afghanistan, Iraq) are not terrorism, because even if sometimes collateral damage happens, its not intended.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   
www.foxnews.com... esses-hear-russian-airport-suicide-bomber-yell-ill-kill/

idk if anyone seen this yet, apparently a cab driver saw the suicide bomber yell "ill kill you all" before he blew himself up. said he was only a few yards away....



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Originally posted by maloy
I already voiced my opinion that I consider both of those attacks, just like the one in Moscow to be real terrorist attacks. I have not seen any proof to lead me to think otherwise.

Then you haven't looked. Typical. The implications are probably too upsetting.

Here's a hint: WTC 7 and the Pentagon.


I'VE looked. I've looked deeply. 9-11 was neither an "inside job", nor is it the topic of this thread.

Good lord, it looks like fantasies are as prevalent as false flag attacks!



This is a real gem right here folks.

"it looks like fantasies are as prevalent as false flag attacks!"

What does this mean? No really, what does it mean??


It means, sir, that there are a certain class of folk who see false flags flying from every tree here in LaLa Land. There's a CIA double-nought spy behind every doorpost to these folks. It means, sir, that just because they fantasize this does not make it so.



Both cannot exist at the same time!

If fantasies exist, than false flags do not exist (the false flags are our fantasy- we make believe it).
If false flags exist, than it's not a fantasy (because we were right that it was a false flag).


Quite obviously, fantasies DO exist. They have been studied ad nauseum, and there are certain corners of the internet one can go to in order to get a "fantasy fix". Since it's obvious that fantasies DO exist, then by your own logic false flags do not, so 9-11 could not have been one.

I don't happen to believe that. I know that false flags also exist, right along with fantasies. It's not an all or none proposition. They are not, however, anywhere near as prevalent as this class of True Believers would have us believe.



But our fantasies and false flags are equally prevalent? What???

Either we are fantasizing the false flags, or the false flags were not fantasies.

I am just showing the illogical nature of what we are dealing with here.
The indoctrination runs VERY DEEP.


Teach me something about logic. Start a thread where this is the subject, and let's have at it.

It's STILL not the topic of this thread.




edit on 2011/1/25 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Chevalerous
 


Before you start trying to beat somebody over the head with the heinous Dresden attack one should really keep it in it's historic context which has nothing to do with the topic.....

The Dresden bombings were in Retaliation for NAZI attacks by V-1 and V-2 rockets which killed indiscriminately. Enough historical revisionism. Both sides were guilty of such acts. Germany used their rockets to terrorize the English while the UK/US used their bombings to bring about an ending of the war through reduction of Germany's ability to maintain manpower and will to fight as Germany was taking a beating on their eastern front against the Soviets. I'm not justifying the attacks but AGAIN: placing in it's proper historic context.

Every city has hospitals. Pearl Harbor had a hospital so did London and Stalingrad etc.

The US conventional bombings of Japan was much worse. The US was already destroying a city a day at will over Japan with 500 to 1000 bomber raids not to mention the end use of the two Atomic bombs.

FYI....
edit on 25-1-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Security measures at Domodedovo Airport “clearly violated” - Medvedev




President Dmitry Medvedev has blamed the management of Domodedovo Airport for the terrorist attack that happened on Monday...what happened clearly shows that measures of ensuring security were violated...It is difficult to bring such a quantity of explosives...and who are connected with the company “should be called to account,”

rt.com...

Well it's quite clear to me that Medvedev is pointing directly to the security company who was at fault. After a bit of digging you found out that the security agency is none other than the infamous private 'security' agency ICTS.



ICTS Europe Newsletter QR1 2009
Opening of United Airlines flight in Moscow, Security Partners Ltd., the ICTS Europe subsidiary in Russia, was awarded a new contract with United Airlines to provide enhanced security services supported by the CPM at Domodedovo Airport.




edit on 25-1-2011 by reddpill because: additional content



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
War is a strategic attack against an armed organized faction (The Russian Federation).
Therefore today's bombing is War.



Well the Russian Federation wasn't hurt in this attack - it was the Russian and foreign civilians who are not associated with any political faction or military establishment. Strategic attacks in war are meant to achieve realistic goals - like weaken the enemy military or government, or their means to wage war. This cowardly terrorist attack served no purpose other than to kill civilians - that cannot be called war.

Your arguement falls flat.



Originally posted by muzzleflash
Terror is an indiscriminate attack against civilians who are not necessarily associated with any armed faction, govt or military.
Therefore ALL WAR IS TERRORISM.


Somebody else already answered this one - but the ultimate goal during attacks in war time are not to kill as many civilians as possible. Clearly you do not have a clear comprehension of the definitions of war and terrorism.



Originally posted by muzzleflash
Collateral damage is unavoidable. You said it yourself.


This terrorist attack was not collateral damage - its sole intent was to kill as many civilians as possible. No government or military installation was targeted. It is about intent.

You are still not getting it, so let me spell it out:

Collateral damage: targeting an armed warlord and his militants, and UNINTENTIONALLY killing civilians who are in close proximity or being utilized as human shields.

Terrorism: INTENTIONAL targeting of civilians purely to cause death, knowing that the attack serves no strategic or military purpose.



Originally posted by muzzleflash
So now maybe you can understand why what you did to Chechnya was unjustified in every possible way?


No, try again.



Originally posted by muzzleflash
Because BOTH the airport attacks and the bombing of grozny were TERRORIST attacks of warfare meant to frighten the enemy and force them to capitulate?


The airport attack would not force anyone to capitulate. The Russian government and the individuals behind the war were in no way impacted. It's sole purpose was to kill civilians. The military intervention in Chechnya had as its goal the uprooting of armed warlords and their militant groups, which engaged in organized criminal activity. The attacks and operations during the war were always aimed at the militants, and not the civilians, but the militants regularly used civilians as human shields. The militants organized their bases and fortifications in residential areas on purpose. They also prevented civilians from leaving the city, when the Russians allowed all civilians to evacuate before the bombing.



Originally posted by muzzleflash
Russia bombed Grozny to force them to capitulate and surrender.


No, they bombed targets in Grozny to eliminate armed militants and their commanders, first and foremost.



Originally posted by muzzleflash
A Chechen bombed Russia today to force them to capitulate and let Chechnya be free.


Every fool knows that no one is going to capitulate to acts of terror like this, especially not Russia. I repeat - the sole intent was to kill as many as possible. There is no other rationale for this attack, and this is the only outcome.



Originally posted by muzzleflash
You clearly admit that Chechnya IS a country here. Freudian slip..


It is a republic - always was since Soviet times, and is a partly autonomous republic even now - but a republic within the confines and laws of the Russian Federation. It was Russia that granted it such degree of autonomy, but it is still part of Russia. Dudayev's Chechnya was de-facto independent from Moscow for some time, but was not recognized as independent by any nation in the world. I was speaking generally by referring to "country", but since Dudayev's separatists were de-facto independent it can apply in that case.

I do not, and never have seen Chechnya as an independent nation.



Originally posted by maloy
You gotta be kidding. Chechnya = Nazi Germany in WW2??


No: both Chechnya and Nazi Germany were headed by armed fanatical zealots who initiated attacks on others both within and outside of their region of control.



Originally posted by maloy
Chechnya almost took over Europe???



Again you appear to be unaware of definitions and meanings of certain words and phrases that are key to this discussion. Look up the definition of metaphor and analogy. One need not draw an precise one-to-one parallel to make a logical comparison of circumstances.




Originally posted by maloy
Hindsight is 20/20. It wasn't the best analogy after all was it.


You tell me - open up a dictionary and find the word "analogy".
edit on 25-1-2011 by maloy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by mike dangerously
Let's see how Putin and Medvedev and the rest of the Duma use this to expand their power. Sadly, any disaster you can expect to see some politician looking to take advantage of it to further their career and push an agenda.

Here's your answer:


Putin vows revenge for Moscow airport bombing

...Following past major attacks, Putin has used the threat of terrorism as a pretext to consolidate his control and justify new curbs on democracy and civil rights.

news.yahoo.com...

Sound familiar?



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by nake13
If Chechen rebels are proven to be responsible for the Domenodovodo attack,Medvedev may,to a certain extent, wish to avoid further escallation of conflict in the Dagestan Region and may call for limited punitive attacks on known rebel strongholds ,however,it may be more likely that Putin will drive this one forward and literally bury Chechnya once and for all.


Putin does not want an escalation of violence and "burrying of Chechnya" either. His goals on the matter are pretty much the same as Medvedev's. It was under Putin that Chechnya started to be rebuild after the wars. It was Putin who strengthened ties between Moscow and the key pro-Russian Chechnya power groups in Chechnya. Currently both Chechnya and Dagestan are control by pro-Kremlin local powers, and a large part of the population has left the war behind them. It took Putin so long to bring stability to Chechnya - why jeopardize it over this? There were terrorist attacks under Putin, after the end of the war, and he never "buried" Chechnya in retaliation. His style of leadership is pretty pragmatic, so he has no intention of massive violence since for the sake of revenge.

Plus, I am willing to bet that Chechnya has little to do with this attack. Most attacks in recent years were carried out by Dagestanis recruited by the Islamic Militants. Chechnya itself is under very firm control by Kadyrov, and most militants were driven out of there.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 07:27 PM
link   
It was a terrible attack and my prayers goes to all te people that were affected by this bombing.

But, as all the terrorist attacks that happened to this day, it was a retaliation against a bigger country that has been doing something against the smaller's country will.

If countries like Russia, USA, China, and many others knew how to talk and cede some rights to the areas and people that they control, attacks like this would surely be avoided. But by doing this, their power would diminish, and that's something that they will never allow to happen.

Let it be clear that i don't support this kind of violence, but i also don't support countries that uses their power, their army and violence to control other people.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Canslli
But, as all the terrorist attacks that happened to this day, it was a retaliation against a bigger country that has been doing something against the smaller's country will.


That is not a valid "but". The terrorists are not retaliating against government or military targets - they are attacking innocent civilians who did not have anything to do with whatever action is the "retaliation" is for. There is absolutely no justification of any sort for attacks like this.



Originally posted by Canslli
If countries like Russia, USA, China, and many others knew how to talk and cede some rights to the areas and people that they control, attacks like this would surely be avoided.


Chechens have just as many rights as anyone else in Russia. And giving independence left and right will not solve any problems - only exacerbate them. Everyone everywhere will want independence, many for the wrong reasons.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by maloy
 


As i said, i don't support this kind of attack, but this was something called for. Every action has a reaction, and this is the reaction that the Chechens used.

And what would be a wrong reason for some country to want independence?

edit on 25/1/11 by Canslli because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by RealAmericanPatriot
reply to post by TheDeader
 


Whether you like Russia, or not (not), it is muslim extremists who are taking innocent lives! Remember all those school children blown up by terrorists? What did they call them in the media? "Czechan rebels". Yes, they were from the Czech Republic. But the media didn't mention that they were "muslim terrorists" which is EXACTLY what they were.


I think you mean "Chechen rebels" from "Chechnya." Czech Republic is a whole different country.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Canslli
And what would be a wrong reason for some country to want independence?


In the cases of the Chechen separatists, they wanted independence so they could make an ethnically homegenous nation. They began to cleanse all non-Muslims from Chechnya. Thousands of Russians who lived there were killed by the militants, and over one hundred thousand Russians were forced to flee the region. Their intent was also to impose Sharia law, and be a foundation for further spreading the holy war into other regions of Russia. The militants also used their de-facto independence to conduct criminal activity such money laundering, kidnapping, raids into neighboring regions, and arms and drug trafficking.



posted on Jan, 25 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Canslli
reply to post by maloy
 


As i said, i don't support this kind of attack, but this was something called for. Every action has a reaction, and this is the reaction that the Chechens used.



You "don't support" it, but "this was "called for"? Wait... what?

Can you translate that thought into English?

Why would you not support something you felt was necessary?

Why do you think killing off various traveling civilians form various countries, some, if not most, not even connected to Russia - much less the Russian government - was "called for"?



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Canslli
 




And what would be a wrong reason for some country to want independence?


Chechens got their independence in 1996. And what followed? Islamic invasion into Dagestan.



posted on Jan, 26 2011 @ 05:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Canslli
reply to post by maloy
 


As i said, i don't support this kind of attack, but this was something called for.


Let's begin with saying that we really don't know who is behind the attacks.
And anyhow, calling a brutal, bloody and torturous death of bystanders "the order of the day" is way beyond asinine.



new topics

top topics



 
81
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join