Posted on 05/25/2004 4:52:15 PM PDT by Wolfstar
17 minutes ago (at time of posting) The intelligence does not include a time, place or method of attack but is among the most disturbing received by the government since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, according to a senior federal counterterrorism official who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity Tuesday.
Of most concern, the official said, is that terrorists may possess and use a chemical, biological or radiological weapon that could cause much more damage and casualties than a conventional bomb.
"There is clearly a steady drumbeat of information that they are going to attack and hit us hard," said the official, who described the intelligence as highly credible.
The official declined to provide any specifics about the sources of the information but said there was an unusually high level of corroboration.
Despite that, the official said there was no immediate plan to raise the nation's terrorism threat level from yellow, or elevated, to orange, or high. The threat level has been at yellow — midpoint on the five-color scale — since January.
Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller plan a news conference Wednesday to outline an intensive effort by law enforcement, intelligence and homeland security officials to detect and disrupt any potential plots. And the FBI plans to dispatch a bulletin to some 18,000 state and local law enforcement agencies warning of the threat.
Beginning with Saturday's dedication of the new World War II Memorial in Washington, the summer presents a number of high-profile targets in the United States. They include the G-8 summit in Georgia next month that will attract top officials from some of America's closest allies, the Democratic National Convention in Boston in July and the Republican National Convention in August in New York.
The FBI and Homeland Security Department also are concerned about so-called soft targets such as shopping malls anywhere in the United States that offer a far less protected environment than a political convention hall.
U.S. authorities repeatedly have said al-Qaida is determined to mount an attack on U.S. soil, in part to announce to the world that it remains capable of doing so despite the money and effort that has gone into homeland security in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks.
There also is concern terrorists might try to mount an attack to coincide with the November election. The political fallout from the March 11 train bombings in Spain taught al-Qaida that an attack timed to an election can have a major impact. Spain's former ruling party was ousted in the voting that followed the bombing, which killed 191 and injured more than 2,000.
The official did not say how many suspected al-Qaida or other terrorist operatives are believed in the country, whether they made their way into the United States recently or have been here for some time. The FBI has warned in the past that Islamic extremist groups may attempt to recruit non-Middle Easterners or women for attacks because they would be less likely to arouse suspicion.
Special security attention already is being focused to the nation's rail, subway and bus lines. The FBI last week sent out an intelligence bulletin to law enforcement agencies urging vigilance against suicide bombers, who have been used by terror groups worldwide to devastating effect but not so far in the United States.
Separately, Immigration and Customs Enforcement chief Michael Garcia told reporters Tuesday that some 2,300 of its agents are being deployed to assist in security for the high-profile events scheduled this summer in the United States. These include as many as 20 agents each day working with the Secret Service to protect the campaigns of President Bush (news - web sites) and Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites), the Democratic presidential candidate.
Garcia said his agency also is working to "tighten the investigative system" to ensure that terrorists do not enter the United States by way of human smuggling operations or through the vast, largely unprotected border with Canada.
Yet we are 10,000 miles away in Iraq trying to make those religious fanatics a democratic society? If we can't protect ourselves, how in hell are we ever going to secure places like Iraq? LOL!
We didn't go with the aim of making Iraq secure. It won't be secure, ever. Neither will this country, ever.
Joe, please think what you're asking. Freedom is much more important than security. The draconian security you want would be impossible, unless we become the USSR. And even they were not secure.
Are you seriously worried about being a victim of terrorism? Is it because of where you live, or what you do? Do you think that the President can make every single border of this country secure, even by fiat? How? And international airports? How?
Our job is to get Iraq to secure themselves eventually. We have killed thousands of terrorist in Iraq and will kill many more that are potential threats to us here. This war has educated many Americans as to what we are facing.Before 911 I would wager only 1 out of a hundred people could tell you anything about fanatical islamist and what they stand for. Yes we are gonn be hit again but we are gonna win this thing, if not , we will die trying. We are never and can never be 100% safe from danger at all times. It is up to each and every one of us to secure our persons, family and property.
Yes, I should be ashamed for thinking our leaders should secure our country from the endless millions entering illegally from who knows where.
I don't know what I was thinking. Forgive me.
Oh, that's our job? LOL!
Lots of luck.
Instead of nation building, let us have some nation destroying.
Good night everyone. May I suggest that you ALL pray for our country?
Joe, I've asked it before, and you've just gotten all emotional on me. How would you secure every in of every border? How would you get rid of every potential terrorist IN the country, especially if they were born here? How is it possible to make us "secure"?
It's impossible, Joe. A better question would be, do you think security is more important than freedom? Because perfect protection--or even the level of protection that the old USSR had--involves a significan tradeoff in liberty for the average "Joe."
As another poster said, we are responsible for our own personal security. Not even a dictator of the US could make us "secure."
There are more Asian and Hindu looking Muslims in this world then Arab, At the same time, there are blond haired blue eyed Muslims in Kosovo.
The terrorist getting off the plane could look like a member of the Norwegian Ski Team, a Japanese business man or a Hindu cab driver (I'm not saying that in a mean spirited way).
Did I mis-state the facts? Was that Bush in stocking feet on 9-12 or not? Were those terrorists standing next to him or not? Some of whom are most likely in the country illegally. Was there a Ramadan celebration at the "People's House" or not? Seems like the only ones being comforted after 9-11 were those responsible for 9-11, lol.
You gonna sit there and tell yourself that "everything possible is being done to protect you", when the president, the congress, the senate, and the Supreme Court, flaunt our immigration laws, refuse to inforce them, and to the contrary promote more illegal immigration? I find hero worship ammusing, just can't resist sharing the laugh.
It irks the crap out of you that this country belongs to all the people, doesn't it? I know you'd prefer it be just whites, but that isn't the way it is.
It gives me great comfort to realize just how uncomfortable other ethnicities make you feel.
I find hero worship ammusing, just can't resist sharing the laugh.
Heroes aren't a bad thing to have; who's yours, David Duke?
Yes, agreed.
Good night, all. I guess I won't get an answer to my question from Joe, so....
Just a final thought: If the Founding Fathers had been more interested in security than in liberty, this would NOT be the United States of America.
God bless us all, especially President Bush.
Good evening Miss Judith...pleasure reading your posts.
The only display of emotion I see here is you, with your lame questions. Don't you get it? DC has no desire to secure our border, or our sovereignty. Hello?
How would you secure every in of every borders? How would you get rid of every potential terrorist IN the country, especially if they were born here? How is it possible to make us "secure"?
Man, you can't be this dense. Again, the government has no desire to secure anything crossing our borders. I mean, with millions entering illegally, routinely, at will, why would you think the US government has any desire to secure our sovereignty or our borders? LOL!
Same here. ;-D
Again, Joe, HOW? And what do you want to give up for security? Liberty?
I'll look for your answer tomorrow. Good night.
Yeowza!
Again Judy, just for you, what I want is meaningless. You just don't seem to get the fact that our government has no desire to implement any real security as far as immigration and our borders are concerned.
There are thousands of way to beef up our security, starting with *real* immigration reform and border security. But again Judy, they have no desire to do this. We now have upwards of 15 *million* people in this country illegally. We haven't a clue who most of these people are. LOL! Is it not clear to you yet that securing our sovereignty, and borders is not part of our governments agenda? I am confident that even you can see this.
And please, stop trying to make me the issue and wake up.
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.