Terrorist plot in NYC foiled

Formaldehyde said:
Yeah, but they were real bombs which he apparently made himself.

Yeah, but I thought you would be the one to claim all 'bombs' that suspects have are merely 'harmless' pipe bombs and used to launch toy rockets. Or at the very least you'd be saying he's being prosecuted for a 'thought crime' because he wasn't actually caught in the process of placing the bombs.

Doesn't matter that in this current case it was fake bombs, the suspects used them thinking they were REAL bombs.

I bet this case turns out to be like the Miami "terrorists" who were talked into doing everything by an "informant", who also happened to supply them with all the arms and supplies they had.

But since the Miami group never had a chance to actually place the 'bombs' at any locations, that was likely one of the reasons their case kept ending up in a hung jury (the "We weren't seriously going to do that" defense worked). This current case is different in that they actually placed the devices at the locations and will more likely result in convictions the first time around.
 
Formaldehyde said:
We've always had homegrown terrorists:

You beat me to the punch!

Shylock said:
Was there any doubt?

Could have been militant atheists for all we know :p
 
You've got to be kidding. Bush, McCain, and Sept 11th have nothing to do with that story. It's pure political propaganda, which is the same thing that you're doing.

So....we didnt do anything at all to increase our security after 9/11?

Interesting.
 
I'm not really sure the fact that Bush increased security in the US after 9/11 is really a credit to him. I mean pretty anybody capable of basic thought could come up with the idea that increased security measures were needed.
 
So....we didnt do anything at all to increase our security after 9/11?

Interesting.
Unbelievable. You are genetically incapable of not defending Fox "News" or anybody with an (R) next to their names.

Obviously -- OBVIOUSLY -- Bush, McCain, and September 11th have nothing to do with the story. Just give it up.

AND, if Bush, McCain, and September 11th had something to do with the story, then Fox "News" shouldn't have edited their article on it to remove that idiotic quote.
 
Phlegmak said:
Unbelievable. You are genetically incapable of not defending Fox "News" or anybody with an (R) next to their names.

Does that include Ron Paul? (judging by the signature apparently(?)).
 
Unbelievable. You are genetically incapable of not defending Fox "News" or anybody with an (R) next to their names.

Obviously -- OBVIOUSLY -- Bush, McCain, and September 11th have nothing to do with the story. Just give it up.

AND, if Bush, McCain, and September 11th had something to do with the story, then Fox "News" shouldn't have edited their article on it to remove that idiotic quote.

Apparently you dont want to answer the question because it means you have to admit something you rather wouldnt.

As for news outlets.../meh. Last month I was viewing a CNN story when Obama was meeting with the President of Mexico and they had a typo with Bush's name as president still. The point being, ALL the news outlets do that. Big whoopee. As I said in another thread, Foxnews is as legit as any other major news outlet...if you want to cry about it feel free to waste your time - its not going to change anything.
 
Apparently you dont want to answer the question because it means you have to admit something you rather wouldnt.
To answer your question intended to confuse the issue and to uselessly defend Fox "News": I'm unsure anything the Bush administration did made the country safer against terrorism.

As for news outlets.../meh. Last month I was viewing a CNN story when Obama was meeting with the President of Mexico and they had a typo with Bush's name as president still. The point being, ALL the news outlets do that. Big whoopee. As I said in another thread, Foxnews is as legit as any other major news outlet...if you want to cry about it feel free to waste your time - its not going to change anything.

This is wrong. Fox "News" fought a court case for the right to lie and they won. I've yet to hear of CNN or BBC doing the same.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-smith/monsanto-forced-fox-tv-to_b_186428.html

And again, you're trying to confuse the issue. You're equating mistakes with multiline propaganda. Fox "News" can't accidently make a typo or something and include several lines praising Bush.

You're right about one thing: sheeple will continue believing that Fox "News" is a legitimate news organization.
 
Yeah, but I thought you would be the one to claim all 'bombs' that suspects have are merely 'harmless' pipe bombs and used to launch toy rockets.

No, only in cases such as that where it should be obvious to even a fairly intelligent 8-year-old what actually happened and how harmless the "pipe bombs" actually were after prolonged testing by the FBI.

Or at the very least you'd be saying he's being prosecuted for a 'thought crime' because he wasn't actually caught in the process of placing the bombs.

Having numerous actual pipe bombs in your home no longer makes it a "thought crime". Once again, that should be obvious to all but the most brain-addled or deluded.

Doesn't matter that in this current case it was fake bombs, the suspects used them thinking they were REAL bombs.

However, it does matter that it was quite likely the FBI informant's idea all along, and that he was apparently trying to trap a crack addict, a petty thief, and other miscellaneous idiots who all met in prison into performing acts they did not do on their own:

http://www.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_12425278

NEW YORK — For the past two years, people at the small mosque in Newburgh, N.Y., were suspicious that a government informant was in their midst.

The man talked about violent jihad, took people to lunch to push his beliefs and even offered some money. Salahuddin Muhammad, the imam of the mosque, said he warned people away.

But four members were apparently taken in, by either him or someone else, and were arrested around 9 p.m. Wednesday in the Bronx as they planted what they thought were bombs in the heavily Jewish neighborhood of Riverdale. The suspects reportedly planned to detonate the devices remotely and then drive to the Air National Guard base in Newburgh, about 60 miles north, to shoot down military aircraft with a missile.

The suspects were unaware that the bombs were fake and the missile faulty and that the man who provided them was an FBI informant, according to a criminal complaint. Muhammad said he suspected the informant was the man who showed up suddenly at his mosque, Masjid al-Ikhlas, about two years ago.

In a news conference at the Riverdale Jewish Center, an Orthodox synagogue that was a target, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly told reporters that the four defendants had met in prison and now live in Newburgh, according to wire reports.

So who are the real criminals here? The four dupes, or the US goverment for apparently intentionally fomenting terrorism and then arresting anybody who went along with it?

Nobody else has pointed out these were again Black Muslims like the group in Miami. When was the last time you heard of them engaging in terrorism all on their own? Never?
 
:lol:

I've previously commented that Muslim terrorists are less common than violent schizophrenics, and then it turns out that one of the Muslim terrorists WAS a schizophrenic (and possibly a violent one).
 
You've got to be kidding. Bush, McCain, and Sept 11th have nothing to do with that story. It's pure political propaganda, which is the same thing that you're doing.
Isn't it a little late for that? Bush is out and McCain lost.
 
Nope. You (and me) didnt lose a single 'civil liberty'. Your life today is the exact same thing you had prior to Bush. Same with me. I didnt have any liberties stripped away at all.

What did occur was a lot of the hurdles that stood in the way of our law enforcement entities were removed so they could share information easier. And thats a good thing actually.

That's a load of pee in a jar!!! Do illegal wiretappings mean anything? Types hurtles should remain in place. That's part of the Bill of Rights that protects us from illegal and unwarrented searches. It's a bad thing that law enforcement had freereign to spy on their own citizens.

You may think you have not lost any civil liberties, but the fact remains that we have lost them in the name of security. Your phones could be wiretapped without a warrant nor your consent.
 
That's a load of pee in a jar!!! Do illegal wiretappings mean anything?

Oh, come off it. It's pretty obvious we should simply start repealing our rights one by one until it is generally agreed we should stop. Just because people shed blood - and our country was founded - for those rights doesn't mean we have to be stuck with them. In such matters we should be no more bound to blindly follow the past than we are with issues like sumptuary laws, human sacrifice, slavery, or torture.

I freely admit - while I still can - that there are some practical difficulties with stopping the loss-of-rights... lets call it the gaining-of-security... at the proper time. As security is gained the possibilities for local, state, and federal government abuse will increase considerably. The full possibilities for government abuse will also lag considerably behind the laws granting extra security. (IIRC it was at least 2 years between the Patriot Act and local-police seminars on how to take advantage of the PA in their routine activities.) And while most people won't directly suffer because of increased security those that do - opposition leaders and the like - will leave all those most likely to speak out or suffer abuse powerless, frightened, and disorganized.

And since control of the information is important to security it'll be hard to know just how secure we are, or to organize any movements meant to limit security.

But... actually, if they're movements meant to limit security I guess we won't want them to organize anyway. So what's the problem? Why don't you like security?
 
Back
Top Bottom