Posted on 05/28/2004 9:03:44 PM PDT by FairOpinion
It is likely that an attack would be intended to kill thousands, though an attack remains conjecture at this point, based on intelligence gathered by our agencies and other nations.
Headlines tell us of government predictions that al Qaeda may intend to mount an attack on the US this summer. Soldiers in Iraq recently found an explosive in Iraq filled with Sarin, a deadly chemical capable of killing many people. The widely expressed doubt that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction should end.
In a recent Washington Times column by John McCaslin, he cited a poll by the National Association of Chiefs of Police, “Because of the ‘current political polarization’ in America today, the United States will suffer another ‘large scale’ terrorist attack within the next year."
McCaslin reported the poll revealed, “that 95 percent of the nation's police commanders and security directors expect a ‘catastrophic’ terrorist incident within the continental United States. "If Americans believe we're not being targeted for terror in the near future, they are fooling themselves," says NACP Vice President Jim Kouri, who predicts the killers, among other dastardly missions, will be attempting to influence this November's presidential election. It worked for them in Spain.”
It is the opinion of many counter-terrorism experts that al Qaeda will attack America again and many believe it will come before the elections in November. Their thinking is that the success it had in Spain can be repeated here and their aim is to elect Senator John F. Kerry. The objective will be to demoralize the resolve of Americans to support the occupation of Iraq until it can establish a democratic form of government.
It is likely that an attack would be intended to kill thousands, though an attack remains conjecture at this point, based on intelligence gathered by our agencies and other nations.
Here are some targets al Qaeda might have in mind.
If Al Qaeda wants to kill a lot of people to ratchet up our level of terror, New York remains a prime target and there are recent reports of empty suitcases showing up in its subways and other locations as a possible test run on the delivery of a WMD.
What other city would be a likely target? One answer is Los Angeles and, in particular, Hollywood. Radical Muslims regard the films and television shows coming out of Hollywood as a direct attack on their sense of moral superiority. A dirty bomb or bioterror in Los Angeles would have the desired effect. Remember, too, that a terrorist was caught in the run-up to Y2K when he crossed the border from Canada with a car full of explosives. His target, we were told, was the LA Airport.
Recently, Jordanians thwarted a plot to attack the US embassy and other targets there with poison gas. The estimated casualties are estimated to have been as many as 20,000. A similar target in the US would reap a similar result. Again, the belief that Iraq did not have WMDs should be put to rest. The belief that it was not cooperating with al Qaeda should have been dispelled by now. Supporters of the deposed Saddam Hussein are continuing their insurgency against our troops and would surely want to strike at the American homeland.
If I were Osama bin Laden, a trained engineer, what might be another likely target in America? One answer is oil refineries. There hasn’t been a new refinery built in the US since the 1970s and the ones we have are strained to capacity. When even one is closed down for routine maintenance, the price of gas spikes. Imagine if two, maybe three, were destroyed? The highways would empty out, followed by the office buildings and just about every other enterprise that depends on workers who drive to work. That includes schools, hospitals; just about everything, everywhere. America would have to declare martial law.
Another likely target would be the disruption of the aging electrical grid that distributes this vital source of energy around the nation. Remember when the grid failed a year or so ago? It shut down the entire East Coast from Ohio to New York. Destroy key components of the grid and people will be cooking dinner over an open fire in the backyard.
The plane that crashed in Pennsylvania on 9-11 had a destination about which we can only speculate. But let’s say it was the Capitol Building and a direct hit could take out a major number of Senators and Representatives? Our Constitution does not make provision for the killing of enough members of Congress to render it unable to function. Congress, however, is debating legislation that would allow for emergency elections in the event that should occur.
While America remains a target, so are Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey, England and just about every other nation around the world. We are dealing with people willing to kill anybody for their crazed notion of protecting a failed way of life, a belief that Islam must dominate the world and be practiced in a fashion Osama bin Laden dictates.
It should never be forgotten that bin Laden has already issued a fatwa, an Islamic edict, calling for the deaths of all Americans.
As our level of anxiety rises, al Qaeda has already achieved one of its objectives. The question, if an attack occurs, is whether Americans will deepen their resolve to destroy its enemies or seek to withdraw from the fight?
Alan Caruba is the author of Warning Signs, published by Merril Press. His weekly commentaries are posted on the Internet site of The National Anxiety Center.
Oh brother. . .TSA, goons all.
To you and to me this is blatant on ol'Feckless's part, but to the average blind partisan Democrat it is the answer to ending the war on terrorism ... withdraw to the U.S. borders and wait. And yes, Jeff, it is a very blatant invitation for al Qaeda to launch massive attacks here this summer and leading up to the elections. But the DNC has been dividing this nation along their partisan lines since at least 2000 and are now magnifying the hate they've ginned up. Al Qaeda was likely to exploit this DNC fomented hatred anyway, to break the will of America to fight these terrorists. Al Qaeda believes America is like the clintons, soft, deceitful, and deabuched, unwilling to fight their fundamentalist goons. And al Qaerda is right as far as the typical democrat voter is concerned. Let's pray there are enough conservatives to go to the polls and cancel the democrat hatemongering and steel our resolve to kill al Qaeda and all other Islamic jihadis. If not, our nation is gone.
None of the 9-11 terrorists used false or stolen ID's, probably because they might work where people aren't suspicious, but under any kind of scrutiny, false ID's raise red flags all over the place.
It's easier and more effective to enter the country legally under a student visas, work permits etc and exploit the system in a manner that gives you cover.
No terrorist wants a false ID that can get them busted at any time, especially getting stopped for a simple traffic violation. That would be dumb.
Thanks for the ping
and the info, Jeff.
The first bombers a few years earlier were trying to shear the foundation of the WTC and send it toppling over. Visualize the devastation of an occupied WTC toppling over and crashing into lower manhatten
If he is enough of an engineer to know that the airplanes would bring the towers down, he is also enough of an engineeer to know that an air-coupled bomb in the parking garage would not topple the WTC.
I suspect the purpose of the first bomb was to do enough damage to make the building unsafe and force its demolition & reconstruction. I think this would have been economically very disruptive. Sure, toppling would have been a bonus from their perspective, but I doubt they counted on it.
There were a lot a variables with the airplane crashes that just were unknowns. Yes, the building construction is different, but remember a plane once crashed into the Empire State building with no real lasting damage to the building.
I think he was looking for a few hundred casualties to show the US that we were vulnerable, but not enough to start a war.
I trust you were not aware that one of Osama's closest aides has said that OBL wanted the tower to topple into other structures. And as to OBL being an engineer, he is more acquainted with concrete stresses and squatty construction, with, as far as I'm aware, no education in skyscrapers.
Controlling who enters at each and every inch of the borders, of course. We should be aware of who is coming through into our country. We have lots of enemies in the world. We need to verify somehow if entrants mean harm to Americans, and legal residents. All need to be protected.
I have a friend from Morocco. She was brought to this country when her husband purchased her from her father at the age of 14. Her husband died 8 years ago. She informed me that often people from her country illegally enter through Mexico. I also understand the problems associated with Canadian border. We need to protect our homeland. America is a sovereign nation. We have people from all corners of the earth here (legally, and illegally). However, we must realize too many enemies are within our borders, and we need to protect citizens, and legal residents alike. I am not in charge, so I do not know the best way to handle this, however, something needs to be done. Even the Special order number 40. The Los Angeles police mandate put in place in 1979, by Chief Darrel Gates. Most people know that it is a mandate prohibiting Lapd from working with INS in reference to immigration. Unfortunately, we are facing dangerous times, and I feel exceptions should be allowed if people suspected of behaving suspiciously in a way related to terror, the police should have the ability to take care of the problem, and employ the help from DHS, Department of homeland security.
Explain what you would have the government do to "close the borders".
OK, I missed this response.
Now, we have the borders with Mexico, the border with Canada, the border with Alaska.
Then we have thousands of miles of shorelines, as well as places like Puerto Rico, a sovereign nation whose citizens are U.S. citizens, so people who enter Puerto Rico legally, are for all intent and purposes on U.S. soil.
Then we have airports and seaports.
Securing our nation's borders is an immense task. The United States shares some 7,400 miles of patrolable international boundary with Canada and Mexico. More than 25 Indian tribes govern lands that are either adjacent to borders or directly accessible by boat from the border. These tribal lands encompass over 260 miles of international borders -- a distance 100 miles longer than California's border with Mexico. Tens of thousands of illegal migrants cross these borders and disappear into the heart of our nation every year.
Along our southern border, for example, the Tohono O'odham [ TOE-HOE-NO OTH-EM] Nation in Arizona shares a 75-mile boundary with Mexico. Traffic across the tribe's desert lands accounts for an estimated 700 to 1000 illegal entrants each day from Mexico.
Along our Northern Border, the Blackfeet Nation shares approximately 63 miles of border with Canada. These border lands are comprised of vast expanses and remote passes. -- Source
Now, in 1999 over 30 million people visited the U.S., either on business or pleasure. These people are vital to our economy.
People who demand or suggest that the government "close the borders", MUST take into consideration all aspects, including shorelines, and the impcat that making the nation difficult to access for business would have on our economy.
Now, what's your plan?
And who would watch "every inch of our borders"?
The coastline goes without saying as well. We have troops all over the world. Protecting borders of various countries, such as Afghanistan. Yet we fail to protect ourselves from outside forces.
I also told you I was not in charge, I don't know how to do it, which is why I am not in charge. It just hast to be done. Again, we are protecting borders all over the world, yet our own go unprotected.
The shoemakers children have no shoes.
We need to take care of ourselves first.
any Muslim = a time bomb..
this would be more in keeping with their choice of the WTC.
Hollywood? I suspect they are somewhat tempted by the large Jewish population and its role in promoting corrupt Western culture, but since Hollywood are leftist appeasers and fellow travelers, they probably get a bye from being targets...
So, you're calling for something that as far as you're concerned can't be done?
Is that it?
The shoemaker's children may not have shoes, but at least he's aware that they have feet.
You on the other hand...
Here's a hint: did we "close the borders" during WWII?
you do not go out and fight a war and allow the enemy into your country.
Beat your enemies on their home turf, and don't wait until they're at your borders to fight them.
Would you forego police and replace them with home security alarms?
They are here. Only 2% of alquaeda are in Iraq. The numbers from what I've heard are growing faster in our own home turf, and our troops are over there.....
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.