Al Queda's Specific Intention to Hit the United States Hard

BS, Trader_J.
adeelsiddiqui was a real gentleman about it, which is more than you deserved. You have a history of throwing personal information about posters around here. One of these days it's going to get you booted. That's my opinion.

 

You know very well what original post I was referencing.

No. You asked the question that was on your mind and phrased it in a way that everyone knew what you were implying while still maintaining room in your mind for "plausible deniability."

I'm quite amazed that you aren't one of those young Republicans hired by the CPA to run Iraq's finances into the ground... your mindset, your language, and your morals seem to be in line with those folks.

 

It's not really about what other countries think about us... it's much more about what we think of ourselves. Do we just represent raw power or is there something more... you know, stuff like freedom and democracy.

 

I heard an interesting report on NPR. Their man was in Damascus, and had no problems with the Syrians. He said that the Syrians often stated that they wanted Americans to know that they had no problem with the American people, just our government.

 

From today's Washington Post

Ashcroft Assailed on Terror Warning


By John Mintz and Susan Schmidt
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, May 28, 2004; Page A04


Some allies of the Department of Homeland Security within the Bush administration and members of Congress criticized Attorney General John D. Ashcroft yesterday for issuing terrorist threat warnings at a news conference on Wednesday, contending he failed to coordinate the information with the White House and with Homeland Security, which has the job of releasing threat warnings.

With FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III by his side, Ashcroft said at a news conference two days ago that "credible intelligence, from multiple sources, indicates that al Qaeda plans to attempt an attack on the United States in the next few months. . . . This disturbing intelligence indicates al Qaeda's specific intention is to hit the U.S. hard." He added that the information has been "corroborated on a variety of levels."

Under the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and Bush administration rules, only the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can publicly issue threat warnings, and they must be approved in a complex interagency process involving the White House. Administration officials sympathetic to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said he was not informed Ashcroft was going to characterize the threat in that way -- an assertion that Justice officials deny.

Earlier Wednesday, Ridge appeared on five news shows saying that although the prospect of a terrorist attack is significant, Americans should "go about living their lives and enjoying living in this country," as he said on CBS.

Last night, the White House played down the turf battle. Deputy White House communications director Brian Besanceney said Mueller, Ashcroft and Ridge, who meet with President Bush every day, "discussed this issue with the president on more than one occasion and they agreed on the strategy and the seriousness of the threat. There was agreement on the way forward."

Yesterday, Rep. Christopher Cox (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Select Committee on Homeland Security and a guardian of Ridge's turf within the administration, released a statement criticizing Ashcroft.

"Dissemination by our government of sensitive terrorism warnings must be closely coordinated across our intelligence and law enforcement communities," Cox said. "In the Homeland Security Act, DHS was assigned the central coordinating role in this process. The absence of Secretary Ridge from yesterday's news conference held by the attorney general and the FBI director, and the conflicting public messages their separate public appearances delivered to the nation, suggests that the broad and close interagency consultation we expect, and which the law requires, did not take place in this case.

"The American public, state and local law enforcement, governors and mayors, and private sector officials with responsibility for critical infrastructure all deserve crystal clarity when it comes to terrorism threat advisories," Cox said.

FBI spokeswoman Donna Spiser said that the purpose of the news conference was to build public awareness about what the FBI is doing to try to stop terrorist plots. Over the past two to three months, she said, "there has been a stream of information coming in and there is corroboration for the information more than ever before," she said.

While publicly professing only collegiality and cooperation, Ridge and Ashcroft have occasionally struggled for two years. They argued for months over whether Homeland Security agents should investigate terrorism financing, and last year Ridge agreed they could do it only under the FBI's lead.

Some administration officials also complained yesterday that Justice Department or FBI officials in private conversations with reporters may have suggested that the latest evidence of a terrorist attack is new, when it is about six weeks old, officials said.

An administration official sympathetic to Ridge said, "There's a concern that this wasn't coordinated by the system DHS has in place to communicate this kind of sensitive information."

Under administration procedures, DHS informs governors, mayors and other elected officials when threat information is to be released so they can coordinate security efforts. This week many local officials complained they had not been informed about these threats as they usually are, administration officials said.

Administration officials have been discussing for weeks whether to raise the threat alert level from yellow, or elevated risk, to orange, or high risk, but they have decided not to take the step at this point, informed sources said.

----------------------------------

Assmunch needs to go...

 

Mystery of Pak terror lady deepens

ANI[ FRIDAY, MAY 28, 2004 12:40:50 PM ]

KARACHI: Aafiya Siddiqui, the Pakistan-born woman suspected of al-Qaeda links whom the FBI has put up in its Most Wanted list, is reported to be already in the custody of US secret agencies for the past one year.

Though the FBI believes her to be in Pakistan, the Online News quoted intelligence sources in Pakistan as saying that though Aafiya had come to Pakistan in January 2003, she had been handed over to US authorities.

Aafiya stayed with her friend in Islamabad for a few days and later went up to Karachi to see her mother settled there. Soon after landing at Karachi Airport, she was picked up by secret agency personnel and handed over to the FBI.

Aafiya's mother, a resident of Karachi's Gulshan Iqbal area, also confirmed the arrest reports of her daughter, but added that she was threatened and asked to keep mum over the matter.

Mrs Siddiqui denied her daughter's links to any terrorist outfit, saying that Aafiya was a divorced mother of three.

 

Do you really think that we're so stupid that we can't see through your intentions? Either way he answers, whether it be yes, no, or not answering you at all, the damage is already done; the implications already made. The so called "question" you imposed was rhetorical and meant for one purpose alone, to draw a connection from his heritage to terrorism and to intimidate him. To make someone feel as if they do not belong simply on the basis of race, religion, or culture, is a form of discrimination because it only promotes different and unequal treatment of others based on their inherited traits.

What's worse is that you remain unapologetic for your abuse. Were you expecting adeelsiddiqui to apologize for his name heritage for having struck "fear" in you? This may be a game you play to flare tempers and bring the D&D forum into an even greater comical chaos, but you have taken it too far: this character you play is no longer a role but has actually taken over your personality whether you like it or not, because now you are actually harming fellow members. This is not a news item to spin and this is no longer a joke. You owe adeelsiddiqui and the board a sincere apology for your actions.

I suggest anybody else who is offended by Trader_Jorge's post to report his actions to the moderator: not for his politics but because his discriminatory actions seek to divide us on a personal level. If this post does not demand a report to the moderator, then I don't know what the button is for...

 

You just don't get it, do you? People reacted not because they don't like your politics or even your personality, it's because they dont' like the way u got a fellow member involved in your little theory. Hell, i have no idea what your political views are, and what kind of man u are. As u can see, i don't post here quite often. But, i felt i had to to let u know this time that it's not right to openly imply someone is a terrorist based on his race and religion regardless of ur true intention.

 

T_J I think everybody just wants to know you're views on peeing in the shower.