The White House announced attacks by Al-Qua'dah: true of false?

[fable]

The White House claims it has evidence of Al-Qua'dah attacks against major US events scheduled this summer, but critics point out that the color-coded "terrorist alert status" has not been raised by the administration. These same critics claim that the White House is playing on public fears of terrorism for political gain. What do you think?

[Xandax]

It is impossible to know or guess, unless the reasons for the warnings becomes public availble.

Both scenarios are possibe and plausible, imo.
However if it is the White House playing on peoples fears; to gain from it, in the upcomming election, isn't that rather ... well - ilegal in some manner? Even if it isn't - then such a thing should not go un-punished, but again - currently, there is little way of knowing what is true or false.

How long time is there to the election "over there" by the way?


Edit: no "blank" vote possible, so I've not voted

[CM]

Xandax it isnt illegal. Rather it is unethical.

For all of Bush's faults and the actions of the current administration, i would find it very unlikely that the US government would stoop so low. Even if it isnt the powers to be, the average american working at the State Dept or any other ministry has the good of the american people at heart.

Plus with Al Qaeda you never know. They are supposedly regrouped and ready to attack according to the International Strategic Studies (the name is something like that) in England. Those guys are the best at what they do. So i would personally trust them.

So if its a vote, no i dont think its a tactic to gain votes for the election.

[RandomThug]

I voted no. As CM put it I doubt with all sincerity they would stoop so low... it seems plausable of course... but if I really sit down and think about it. It took Al Qua`dah, if I remember correctly, four years to plan the Twin tower attacks. Its been about three years... perhaps they've bumped up progress since then or not... All I know is I sure to god f'n hope IM not breathing in toxins...

Just curiosity where do you all think the next viable target would be.

[CM]

LA. That is my personal opinion. After NY and DC, LA is the next most famous city of the US. They chose the twin towers and NY as they stood as an image of the US. LA is another such a city.

Thug, i doubt it took Al Qaeda 2 years to plan the Madrid bombings. Nearly 200 plus dead in just 4 bombs. I wouldnt under-estimate their bloodlust nor their insanity and desire to hurt innocents.

[Gauda]

The white house did also initially claim that they were absolutely sure that Saddam Hussein possessed som of the most dangerous weapons of mass-destruction created in history, which they could launch at USA any time. An exegerration? I don't really know, I think, and I'm sorry if I offend anyone now, but I think that Bush, not to speak of Rumsfield, have used 11. september for all it's worth for political gain, and still is. Sorry, that's just the way I feel, I don't claim to know this though, for I can't say for sure.

[Weasel]

Undecided at the moment...

Will the group with no name except the name the US intelligence gave them try again...no doubt.

Does the US intelligence people know when...I doubt it. My faith in their intelligence is gone and hopefully they will begone soon as well. In a country of 300 million finding someone with the intelligence to run these "intelligence" groups should not be a problem...though it sure seems like it is.

An attacking helping Bush...I would call it his death nail. His education junk has failed. The war in Iraq has (IMHO) failed. The war in the forgotten country where the group with no name, but the name the US intelligence gave them, has failed. Letting an attack occur in the US will just show another failure on his part.

[fable]

FWIW, I wish poll creators could edit polls. Then I'd be able to add a third "I'm undecided" category for the poll I created a couple of hours ago; but I can't.

[Weasel]

No big deal Fable. I myself, am only waiting to see how much of a big deal Bush makes of these warnings before I decide. Where as RT and CM think the government wouldn't fall this low (which I have to agree with), I sadly believe some people in the government can.

Targets: (IMHO)

(1) DNC (Democratic)
(2) RNC (Republican)
(3) 4th of July
(4) Sears Tower

[Moonbiter]

Disney World. The most American of everything American.

[Sojourner]

Quote:

Originally posted by CM Xandax it isnt illegal. Rather it is unethical. For all of Bush's faults and the actions of the current administration, i would find it very unlikely that the US government would stoop so low. Even if it isnt the powers to be, the average american working at the State Dept or any other ministry has the good of the american people at heart.

I've got some property on the moon to sell ya.

[fable]

Quote:

Originally posted by CM For all of Bush's faults and the actions of the current administration, i would find it very unlikely that the US government would stoop so low.

This is the same US administration that deliberately revealed to Robert Novak, columnist and CNN talkshow host, that the wife of a former highly placed Bush official, former ambassador Joseph Wilson, was in fact a very senior CIA agent. (Wilson had publically challenged Bush's claims that Iraq had tried to buy unprocessed uranium ore from Africa.) It wrecked her contacts, her job, and endangered their lives and hers. Novak admitted his source was two senior administration officials, who said Wilson's wife was "fair game."

Oh, yeah. *This* administration would definitely stoop that low, because it already has.

[CM]

Ouch Another victim of Fables vicious tongue

I agree with what you say, but this is the US administration, forget Bush or Rusmfeld. The Directors, Under Secretaries etc. They are not all in to get the american people. I agree Bush should go. But there are so many that affect policy, i doubt these guys are involved in stooping this low.

If it was/is a hoax for votes, someone will blow the lid off of it.

Sojourn, does it have a view of the sea?

[fable]

Quote:

Originally posted by CM Ouch Another victim of Fables vicious tongue

Um, me? My remarks above certainly weren't vicious, and the content was provided courtesy of the current US administration. I've savaged their elsewhere in SYM, but this isn't one of those places.

I agree with what you say, but this is the US administration, forget Bush or Rusmfeld. The Directors, Under Secretaries etc.

@CM, this is the most leakproof US administration of all time. Bush laid down the law right from the start with a series of memos to all administrative staff regarding the penalties that would occur for leaks, and they were extremely severe. The only leaks that have occurred were those that were officially sanctioned from the top tier, meaning Bush or one of his Cabinet members.

In this case, subsequent evidence pointed to Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, both of whom were good friends with Novak, and had passed along deliberately leaked information before. Both wisely chose to give no comment on the allegations, and Novak has too much influence in Washington (he's among the richest men in the country, and a NeoCon) to be forced before Congress to reveal any details. Cheney has also been fingered, since his involvement in previous unethical attacks on former administration "friends" has been proven. (For example, he masterminded the media attempt to smear former Republican Senator Jeffrys as a far-left radical, when Jeffrys was in fact a moderate-to-conservative Republican all his life.)

[dragon wench]

I think both are probable...

Recent events in Spain suggest that those nations involved in Iraq are likely targets.

However, there is a US election coming up and I suspect that as much as anything this is a ploy to detract attention away from the reprehensible abuse of Iraqui prisoners....