Posted on 06/02/2007 9:53:35 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
This is an ap wire piece, probably the same that fox and other news sources have been using as well.
I often wait until the dust clears and then post a clean thread with a lead article, typically ap, and tac on pics if available.
The Live Breaking thread is great but they can get filled up pretty quick with all kinds of stuff.
besides, I like to see follow-up threads to see how the media reports it.
One is reported to be a former parliament member of - Guyana(sp??)
What a country!
did they have names like: 1. Pete, Joe, Larry
2. Hakmed, Hakeem,
3. Jose, Julio,
No, the poster was asserting that the nationality of the suspects was being witheld. It was not.
Oh, one was a naturalized citizen. The others were arrested outside the United States, therefore their status is irrelevant at this point.
The flaw, as some have pointed out, is that our naturalization cannot catch terrorists with the low numbers being screened now. They will never catch terrorists if they have to process 12 million.
Save your trolling.
Read this page.
Several of the 9-11 hijackers were legal immigrants who had mererly overstayed their visas.
BTW, can you tell me the visa status of these plotters and/or the Fort Dix Six?
Nice try, though.
Nah . . . maybe the Swedish Lutherans ?????
HAHAHAHAHA
However, I think these guy were slightly overestimating the damage they could cause. "very few survivors"...not likely. The terminals aren't sitting on top of the fuel tanks. And it's not as easy as they think to make a large fuel tank explode. Rupture and burn, no problem, but a massive explosion like they are envisioning is just Hollywood nonsense.
On a side note, Yahoo news has a picture with this story with this caption, "A plane departs JFK International Airport in New York en route to Chicago O'Hare International..."
It's an Airbus A380...not exactly in commercial service yet. Did it make a flight to O'Hare from JFK at some time, or did the reporter just pull a file picture of a random airplane?
Hey, genius. The post was to someone who claimed that the authorities did not ID the nationality of those planning to attack JFK.
I pointed out that authorities were completely upfront about their nationality and immigration status, hence no need to launch into a tangent.
I guess reading the origins of a post is not your strong suit, is it?
Two Domestic Jihadist Plots In Two Months
Posted by Hugh Hewitt | 2:05 PM
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/a32e3b1b-3504-4eee-936f-fbe6085000ee
(click for links)
It must be time to issue probationary 601(h) visas to millions of illegals in the country regardless of their country of origin or their ideology.
The New York Times notices the deep split in the GOP ranks (and also reports that the Wall Street Journal’s Paul Gigot has rejected the National Review’s invitation to debate the immigration bill.)
The big split within the GOP is over the security provisions of the bill which are simply not serious, and the arguments in their defense which aren’t persuasive.
The Fort Dix Six and the Kennedy Airport Four (plus one TB patient) are illustrating in serial fashion that the U.S. has a huge security problem that begins with its porous borders. Legitimizing hundreds of thousands of hostiles in our midst —even though the vast majority of 601(h)ers are here just to work and raise families— is a non-starter to every realist about the terrorist threat facing the country.
I agree that illegals are certainly a security threat. But that doesn’t mean that we should turn this into an immigration thread, since illegality does not seem to be a problem with any of the people in this case.
IMHO, the real danger is that legal, naturalized or even native-born citizens are dabbling in this stuff. I think our next big attack here is probably going to involve some of our own, particularly from the Black Muslim or convert sector of Islam. So far, while they’ve tried, they’ve been too dumb and careless to actually pull it off. But one of these days they will.
Aptitude for Destruction, Volume 1
Organizational Learning in Terrorist Groups and Its Implications for Combating Terrorism
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG331/
By: Brian A. Jackson, John C. Baker, Peter Chalk, Kim Cragin, John V. Parachini, Horacio R. Trujillo
Continuing conflicts between violent groups and states generate an ever-present demand for higher-quality and more timely information to support operations to combat terrorism. Better ways are needed to understand how terrorist and insurgent groups adapt over time into more-effective organizations and increasingly dangerous threats. Because learning is the link between what a group wants to do and its ability to gather the needed information and resources to actually do it, a better understanding of the group learning process could contribute to the design of more-effective measures for combating terrorism. This study collects and analyzes the available information on terrorist groups’ learning behavior, combining input from the organizational learning literature, published literature on terrorist and insurgent groups, and insights drawn from case studies and workshop discussions. It describes a model of learning as a four-part process, comprising acquiring, interpreting, distributing, and storing information and knowledge. This analytical framework, by providing a fuller picture of how terrorist groups try to adapt and evolve over time, may help in understanding the behavior of individual groups and the level of threat they pose; in developing effective counterstrategies to detect and thwart their efforts; and in appropriately allocating resources to counter potential and proven adversaries. A companion report, Aptitude for Destruction, Volume 2: Case Studies of Learning in Five Terrorist Organizations, MG-332-NIJ, examines in detail the learning activities of five major terrorist organizations and develops a methodology for ascertaining what and why groups have learned.
Calling concerns about foreign nationality "immigration hysteria" seems to me to be neglecting the origins of a potential national security thread...
I pointed out that authorities were completely upfront about their nationality and immigration status, hence no need to launch into a tangent.
But it's NOT a tangent: if we had stricter immigration policies (as opposed to the Kennedy-penned 1965 bill which gave the finger to Europeans), and if we had the pre-Clinton regulations governing potentially sensitive positions, this threat would not have materialized in the firstplace.
The old Calvin and Hobbes strip will describe our situation, if this goes on. (Think of old ladies in wheelchairs, strip searches on blonde women with babies, etc. ) Calvin would be the US government and Hobbes, natural-born citizens. "Putting away the toys" would be better immigration control.
Cheers!
Fox news just interviewed Duncan Hunter and he said sealing our Southern Border with Mexico is a matter of extreme National Security. We need that fence NOW.
These aren't just Mexicans taking that easy route to cross into the US. You'd think team Bush would be just a tad concerned about it!
sw
Yeah..this will be turned into a TV movie with the terrorist plotters transformed into ‘right wing Christian extremists’.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.