 |
|
Topic started on 20-9-2004 @ 11:20 PM by loam
|
Drudge is reporting the following....
GERTZ: Al Qaeda seen planning for 'spectacular' attack; Intelligence agencies think danger is high to Inauguration Day... Developing...
www.drudgereport.com...

These get more and more disturbing. If something were to happen, would this be an event helpful or hurtful to Bush's reelection campaign?
Thoughts?
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 20-9-2004 @ 11:24 PM by taibunsuu
|
[edit on 20-9-2004 by taibunsuu]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 20-9-2004 @ 11:25 PM by Netchicken
|
arn't they always?
we have had these predictions for every major event in the past 2 years.
Still, beter to be safe than sorry...
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 12:08 AM by IMMORTAL
|
Originally posted by loam
These get more and more disturbing. If something were to happen, would this be an event helpful or hurtful to Bush's reelection campaign?
Thoughts?  I think that something out of the ordinary will happen which will benefit the current Government--terror attack, or something along
those lines. Up to this point, there seems to have been a conditioning of the public to some anticipated terror attack before the elections. Al-Qaeda
this, Al-Qaeda that, influence elections, vote for Kerry and you'll be attacked by terrorists, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if a terror attack
happened to "influence" the elections.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 12:17 AM by 27jd
|
Originally posted by IMMORTAL
I wouldn't be surprised if a terror attack happened to "influence" the elections. 
There would go Cheney's claim that the wrong decision will mean a catastrophic attack on us, it will have happened on Bush's watch, so it could
undermine Bush's track record on terror and Cheney's prediction, it may actually harm Bush. It's hard to say one way or the other what would happen
for sure, but I don't think a pre-election attack would mean a guaranteed victory for Bush.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 12:27 AM by Weller
|
I think after Spain any attack before the election would help Bush. Regardless of it being a sign of his utter failure to stop terrorism. He
has played the fear card to a tee effectively keeping a slight majority from caring about anything else and thinking they can actually win any war
against it.
As much as I hate to say it, he has the election in the bag more than likely.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 12:48 AM by IMMORTAL
|
Here is a quote from the detailed report:
Thus, details of the possible attack remain murky, but analysts say it is planned to be bigger and deadlier than the September 11 attacks, which
killed 3,000 people.

Link
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 01:53 AM by loam
|
Originally posted by 27jd
It's hard to say one way or the other what would happen for sure, but I don't think a pre-election attack would mean a guaranteed victory for Bush.

Before, I was sure that it would. Now I realize that it would be an opportunity for Kerry to charge that the attack was Bush's fault for diverting
attention and resources away from the REAL war on terrorism. That type of argument would channel America's anger like a lightning rod towards this
Administration. They would be hard pressed to defend.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 01:54 AM by et is dead
|
This is just more fear being pumped into our society.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 07:26 AM by Mainer
|
Wolf? I don't see any wolf.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 07:46 AM by FlyersFan
|
Originally posted by Netchicken
we have had these predictions for every major event in the past 2 years.

actually .... for the past three years
But yes, every major event IS a target,
and I'm sure inauguration day is a HUGE
target for the terrorists. It's just common sense.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 07:48 AM by Shadowtrooper90
|
then the U.S. would have been a smoking mound of Rubble two years ago.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 08:00 AM by SupaFly
|
According to Drudgereport, Al-qaeda wants Kerry in office. If this is true and they decide to do something before election time, then Al-qaeda must
think that another act of terrorism before the election will get Bush out of office.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 08:12 AM by Joe Cat
|
IMO, the question is:
who wants you to think that al-qaed wants kerry in office??
al-qaeda?? dont think so....
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 08:45 AM by LazarusTheLong
|
I have not felt this safe in years....
I think the whole world wants Someone besides Bush in office...
i.e.: Our main ally Britian/Blair has to distance itself from us so he can be considered re-electable...
Most of the "coalition of the Willing" has become the coalition of the "not payed enough to put up with Bush".
An attack before the election will be played off as a reminder that we have to have a strong stance on the war on Terror...(elect Bush)...
so unless the GOP has a dirty ace (bomb) up their sleeve, then we will not see any attacks on US soil until after/IF he is re-elected... then they
(terrorists) will have nothing to lose by an all out onslaught...
If Kerry is elected, then the Terrorists will see it as an opportunity to test the new administrations stance.
so either way... I feel that we are safe until the election...
If there was an attack, i think it would be even more suspect than 9-11...
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 08:17 PM by loam
|
Originally posted by SupaFly
According to Drudgereport, Al-qaeda wants Kerry in office. 
I doubt that. Bush is much better at helping them recruit members...
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 09:34 PM by taibunsuu
|
According to other reports, terrorists want Bush in office.
They've turned Iraq into what they call 'Rummy World.' It's terrorist Disneyland where they get live fire practice on real US targets.
Terrorists are having a field day with Bush in charge. They haven't had an Evil Empire to fight since the Soviets left Afghanistan, and they
haven't been able to cut off so many heads since Russians kicked the crap out of them in Chechnya.
Why would terrorists want Kerry if he's not going to provide them with more opportunities to exercise terrorism?
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 10:21 PM by Weller
|
Originally posted by taibunsuu
According to other reports, terrorists want Bush in office.
They've turned Iraq into what they call 'Rummy World.' It's terrorist Disneyland where they get live fire practice on real US targets.
Terrorists are having a field day with Bush in charge. They haven't had an Evil Empire to fight since the Soviets left Afghanistan, and they
haven't been able to cut off so many heads since Russians kicked the crap out of them in Chechnya.
Why would terrorists want Kerry if he's not going to provide them with more opportunities to exercise terrorism? 
That was my thinking as well. The more extreme elements want a war monger like him in charge because he justifies their ideas of a West bent on
destroying or occupying the 'holy land' or at the very least gives them more fuel for their jihad...
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 10:24 PM by BeMoreCynical
|
As long as bush leads in the polls then there won't be a terrorist attack. If Kerry beats Bush horribly in the debates and it affects the polls then
there will be a terrorist attack.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-9-2004 @ 10:41 PM by edsinger
|
I am very saddened to think that people are actually this stupid....Here are the reasons:
(1) The radical's want Kerry in office BECAUSE he will not fight them, simple as that.
(2) They do NOT want Bush because they know that when re-elected, he does to have to worry about polls etc. Cheney will not be running so that gives
him 4 years to kick the crap out of them.
(note) Iran and North Korea also want kerry for the same reasons
(3) I feel safe until after the elections
(a) Bush win - Its all out war, they want it, they will get more than they anticipated. The countries who have stood buy us will continue to do so.
It will not be pretty for the areas in IRAQ that have been "off Limits" to US soldiers. Casulties will increase in the short term, but fall
dramatically 4 weeks after the offensive begins....
(b) Kerry wins, the terorists wait a bit and find out that Kerry himself can not give away the store, CONGRESS will NOT allow it, it becomes a lame
duck Presidency, then they attack harder knowing that Kerry will not go to war unless the French are on board. Saudi Arabia falls, then the domino
effect takes hold and radical fundementalism goes really global, Indonesia, maylaisia etc etc etc.........and yes Europe will now experience this
firsthand.....an the civilized world decends into caos as the Fundementalists try to convert the masses by the sword.
TAKE NOTE AND WARNING, if they get the bomb, they will USE it. That is what scares me so bad about Pakistan.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |