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-THREATS: Possible Terrorist Attack for CA and NM

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 01:14 PM
link   
An official with the FBI, who would only speak on the condition of anonymity said that a possible terrorist attack is considered unsubstantiated and uncorroborated for CA and NM but still there was a warning issued. Possible Al Qaeda are allegedly trying to disrupt the upcoming elections. California and New Mexico were among the few Western States with this warning.
 



www.usatoday.com
WASHINGTON (AP) The FBI warned police in California and New Mexico that it received information about possible terrorist activity in their states. However, the warning wasn't specific about particular targets or a method of attack, a federal law enforcement official said Thursday.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Hopefully this will turn out to be nothing. Just another threat that doesn't happen.


[edit on 29-7-2004 by Banshee]




posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 01:26 PM
link   
I'm in NM. We have a lot, A LOT of refineriers and oil & natural gas wells here. There is a BIG refinery smack dab in the middle of my town. And a small municipal airport less then 3 miles away. When ever I notice a plane flying over downtown, I always watch.

Other then that, there's not many other targets in New Mexico. So why us?



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 01:39 PM
link   
I too live in NM. I think NM may be targetted because it's easy. It's got wide stretches of nothing and it's right next to mexico. You can get in, hide and do what you will.



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by phreak_of_nature
Other then that, there's not many other targets in New Mexico. So why us?


Holy geography lessons Batman, what about Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque? Los Alamos National Laboratories? White Sands Missile Range? Holloman AFB (home of the F-117)? Cannon AFB? Kirtland AFB? Manzano WSA (thought to be the largest repository of nuclear devices/material in the world)? WIPP? The constant DOE traffic via SST's (Secure, Safe, Transport... how "nukes" make it from one place to another)? Sam Donaldson's Ranch? Ted Turner's (largest private landowner in NM) Ranch? Okay, I know the terrorist would never attack Ted's Ranch, train there maybe...

In all seriousness, most of these targets are "Hard", but a host of soft targets are available, the first that comes to mind is "The Big I" (that would be the interchange between I-40 and I-25, I-40 being the the highest East West traffic artery in the Western U.S.


[edit on 29/7/2004 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Hmmmmm

Why just Cali and NM, is there anything which is only found in these western states which could be a potential target? The the threat information is so vague, the why just these states?

Interesting...



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 02:23 PM
link   
The story states that the anonymous official would only name NM and CA, but there were other western states that the warning was issued for.



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by deeprivergal
The story states that the anonymous official would only name NM and CA, but there were other western states that the warning was issued for.



Hmmm, yes that is true. Well that makes it even more broad. If it's that vague and in such a wide area it makes you wonder what kind of information the FBI could have....



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
A Phreak Less Traveled??


Impressive list, and if I was a real hard charging terrorist, I would love to hit a few if not all of them.

But yes, you are correct, and why I didn't even think to list them, they are hard targets. I'm down in the SE corner, so the first thing that comes to mind here is oil. Especially when I look to the east and see the big derrick sticking up out of our sky line.

Couple weekends ago, I was out riding my Harley. I stopped at a park to drink some water, and smoke. About 400 yards past the tree line I was under, was a refinery. A thought occured to me, "If I had 6 or 8 RPG's, I could fire them from here, and never be seen" I know, sick mind.

OK, so I will retract my previous statement, and say that I based it on my immediate surrondings being down here in oil country.



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Some new information from Reuters

From about 30 mins ago:




Peter Olson, a spokesman with the New Mexico Department of Public Safety, said the FBI had contacted state officials about possible terrorist threats in the state.

He said the FBI asked New Mexico officials to be extremely vigilant and the state has passed the warnings over to its appropriate agencies. But he said the state has not changed the way it provides domestic security because of the FBI warning.



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 03:40 PM
link   
I disagree that Los Alamos is a "hard" target. It is not. I have visited there and was amazed at the lack of security throughout the city. I had no difficulty whatsoever talking with workers at local coffee shops and no difficulty getting near sensitive installations (for photos).

Having used rocket launchers in the Army, I could envision any of the high security installations being easy targets for a terrorist.

And of these or a natural gas plant would be a cinch for a terrorist with a drivers license.

The most sensitive areas of NASA at KSC on the coast of Central Florida is a hard target but I haven't seen anything in NM that would be difficult to penetrate.

NM is as perfect area for a disruptive destructionist as any I've ever seen. The only easier and logical areas I can imagine are most seaports. I would be glad to accompany Mr. Olson (NM Dept of Public Safety) around the community any time he wishes.



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Alarmist that I am, I think if CA and NM are targets, AZ (where I live) must be a target also. We have Luke AFB and the largest nuclear power plant in the country right outside of Phoenix.
Strange thing: this morning, before I read this thread, my husband and I both commented on the fact that we heard a large number of military jets flying over us today and flying low.
I'm keeping my eyes open..though it's awfully damn hot for anyone to want to get out in this sun and commit any mayhem.
always agitated,
Joey



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 04:14 PM
link   
If you want to disrupt our economy you hit for the under belly. In this case it would be an oil refinery. Disrupt our gasoline production and you have severed a vital artery in the nations well being.
Face the reality of the situation, it will happen and I'll name the month of September. The date will be either be on the 28th or 29th of this month.


TPL

posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 04:19 PM
link   
This month being July or August?



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Codemaster_01
I disagree that Los Alamos is a "hard" target. It is not. I have visited there and was amazed at the lack of security throughout the city. I had no difficulty whatsoever talking with workers at local coffee shops and no difficulty getting near sensitive installations (for photos).
The most sensitive areas of NASA at KSC on the coast of Central Florida is a hard target but I haven't seen anything in NM that would be difficult to penetrate.

NM is as perfect area for a disruptive destructionist as any I've ever seen. The only easier and logical areas I can imagine are most seaports. I would be glad to accompany Mr. Olson (NM Dept of Public Safety) around the community any time he wishes.


This is a free country, and yes at lunchtime in Los Alamos you can "rub elbows" with just about anyone in the LANL hierarchy (I suggest the China Moon Buffet to be exact), but you did not get anywhere near a sensitive Tech Area... really. The truly sensitive areas are so far removed from what appears to be the entrance, are underground, and not accessible or vulnerable to clandestine efforts.



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Anybody got any guesses as to possible targets in California? Would the "terrorists" potentially want to blow up an international airport (LAX?). If this is indeed NWO sponsored terrorism in the guise of religious fanaticism, would they not try to maximize their agenda - With crude oil prices at an all time historical high, and Exxon/Mobil showing a 40% profit increase in the last six months, terrorism against domestic oil refineries seems to be a good guess -

Are there not giant refineries in southern california too? - Wilmington / City of Industry area?

Would the main goal of pre-election terror really be election related? Kerry/Bush seem like two sides of the same coin to me. If they really want to disrupt the election, capitol hill seems the best target.

If the goal is chaos/fear/marshall law and sympathy for the energy cartel, even better than refineries would be the power grid. Maybe the blackout in ohio last year was a prep/rebuild for a major terrorist blackout.



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 05:43 PM
link   
bunkbuster, While I have trouble agreeing with you on how you got to the targets, I still agree with you on the targets. One of the things that both NM & CA have in common are refineries. But then again, I also think that LANL is operated by a CA university?

I also don't think that to disrupt the elections, you have to neccesarily attack DC. Try having small hit teams blowing up polling places, which coincidentaly, in my neck of the woods are often churches.

Obviously they have been moving enough people across the Mexican border to have a small army in place by now.



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 06:05 PM
link   
My guess, and this is just a hunch, is 1) pipelines or 2) power plants or 3) both. If the oil and electricity were cut, there would be total chaos. We are in a climate that is dependent upon gasoline and electricity. Witness the pipeline break, last summer, in Arizona. Prices were driven up astronomically, gas became virtually unavailable and a panic mentality overtook most of us. Of course, there are the global implications of a disruption in oil/gas too.
Power distribution, being cut, would be chaotic as well. No air conditioning? No lights? No gas? To me, this would be something that would achieve several goals: disrupt the economy, cause chaos and fear, and also lead to probable fatalities. Just what the Al-Queda would like to see.
I agree that, in order to disrupt the elections, the AQ doesn't have to hit D.C. Actually, if they were to hit the heartland or an out of the way place, it would be even scarier and/or more effective from their point of view. People living away from DC, LA, and NYC feel vulnerable but not personally vulnerable (at least not as much as residents of those cities).
joey



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 07:21 PM
link   
Do you think terrorism is all psyop, not actually perpetrated by the factions that are identified in the press?

In my mind, I have to first speculate as to who the terrorists actually are, then try to speculate as to the motives for staging the terror.

I guess I now interpret "terror warnings" as psyop maneuvers furthering the agenda already in progress - what I call the "Patriot I" agenda.

I expect further acts of terror to be the precursors to instigating a new "phase" of the agenda - i.e. start a new war, rush facist legislation thru congress - what I call the "Patriot II" agenda.

My hunch is that terror warnings are going to increase dramatically - fear fear fear. We won't let them evildoers disrupt our democracy, though, and although it 'll be close, we'll get our new JFK, with the boy wonder VP showing heretofore unimaginable foreign policy aplomb.

The "bad guys" will be "gone", leading economic indicators will start to "look good", tensions will calm down, and consumer confidence will skyrocket, and we'll all go christmas shopping.

Then, when we're not on the "lookout for suspicious activity", we may well be blindsided by some serious terrorist acts, followed by kneejerk imperialist activity and freedom robbing legislation.

I don't like my hunches either - but I still get em. Thanks to ATS and all for an opportunity to do more than simply bite my nails over em.

I'll be happy to be proved wrong so..

PHREAK - I don't know anything about armyloads of people crossing the mexican border. Can you fill me in or point me in the right direction to learn more? thx.



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Check these threads.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Non Mexican men have been flowing over the AZ - Mexican border for over a year. Scary, Scary stuff.



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 11:18 PM
link   
Additional information about the threat from KOB TV in Albuquerque, NM.

Apparently the FBI informed state officals that they believe an attack planned for May was twarted. The FBI was not specific to the nature, location or method of attack that was stopped. But they stated that the heightened awareness of local and state authorities was responsible for Al Qaida scrubbing their plans.

www.kobtv.com



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join