The Next Attack on the US

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.

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.

Can't disgree with anything you've said, Jeff. This is something I have been giving a good deal of thought to as well – especially since the President endorsed Arlen Specter for re-election over genuine conservative Pat Toomey (an endorsement without which Toomey would now be on the ballot in November, and would have a good chance of assuming a Specter-vacated senate seat come January).

There are many other issues on which I disagree with the President as well – mostly socialist/entitlement spending issues, amnesty for illegals, monetary policy, some trade policy issues, campaign finance reform, his insistence that Islam is a ‘religion of peace’, and the tendency to compromise and surrender conservative ground when compromise is dangerous (as in the Specter/Toomey race).

With that said, I do believe he is a Christian, and I do believe he seeks guidance and strength from the Lord. Even when we look to the Lord for wisdom, sometimes we are so wrapped up in worldly concerns, and so used to listening to human advice (both that little voice within ourselves, and the din caused by worldly advice-givers), that we are not quiet enough to hear Him speak (‘Be still and know that I am God’).

Some of the most vicious attacks on the President that I have read over the past four years have had to do with the fact that he does not hide his Christianity. We live in an era when most people are unsettled by public statements of private religious beliefs. The media, especially, have an aversion to anything resembling Christian talk. Nothing invites political ridicule more than religion. Yet the President is not intimidated. He often states that he looks to the Lord for direction, he immediately named Jesus Christ as his favorite ‘philosopher’ during one of the presidential debates, he attends church regularly – and apparently actually opens the Bible that he carries, unlike his predecessor, to whom it served as nothing more than a photo-op prop. And the fact that such public statements of faith anger the left so much is all the more reason to lean toward believing that his professions must be genuine. The left is horrified that the leader of the free world does not hide his light under a bushel basket.

When it was disclosed last year that Bible study classes are held in the White House, I remember reading an article that said something to the effect, ‘from the reaction in liberal America and much of Europe, one would have thought they were bringing back witch trials in Massachusetts.’

Neither do many leftists like the simple fact that he often uses the word 'evil' (a terminology that they have ruled is decidedly too Christian).

If Bush’s professions of faith are genuine (and I believe they are), I, for one, am thankful that he acknowledges his own humility before the Lord. It is a refreshing diversion from most in high public office. He is not foisting his religious beliefs on anyone else, or allowing them to dictate policy. His faith simply seems to be a source of personal and moral guidance, comfort and strength.

~ joanie

Well well, the great and grand poop hizself. WHERE do we begin?

EAST COAST, WEST COAST

There are about 30+ AWAC's right here in the states that could use a bit of airtime. I figure no more a threat than the east and west coastllines present, 4-5 in the air on each coast ought to do it. Beyond that, there is that U.S. Navy thingy that is known for keeping a few boats in the water. Perhaps you have heard of them? I hear they are actually pretty good. Might even be able to handle a few targets spotted by the AWACs. Ya think, poopmaster?

MEXICO.

Ahhh, the war in my backyard. I was running surveillance ops on the Texas border in `86 - `88 and then it was cake. No probs from the local LE, they seemed to welcome any help. Now days, probably would have to make the local LE work for it. Which, in all probability, would be the end of their enthusiasm. Not to say it would be difficult today by any means to close even the most select areas of the border favored by the coyotes. For the right team. That is motivated. And not being held back with a truckload of pee-cee Bull$hit. And corrupt local LE taking being payed off to give them grief. NO SIR, mister poopster, not a problem.

As for the rest of the border? The u.S./mexico border could close in 24 itty bitty hours, given the correct resources. And deploying the correct resources is merely a matter of motivation. Resources that are ready to go right now. Resources that only require a general mission statement and offical sanction. The remaining question is, whom do we need to motivate? And just what resources you have asked. There is more than enough to handle all of Texas(and more) in Ft. Hood. There should be no problem locating appropriate forces for the remaing u.S. / mexico border states.

Effective strategy? Remember, this is border CLOSURE. Not control. Not checking ID's and sorting through thousands of sob stories and accessing databases. Closure. Checking ID's and paperwork should only occure at designated locations. In Texas there are only about 14 locations which should be open legit. They are Brownsville, Los Indios, Progreso, Hidaigo, Los Ebanos, Rio Grande City, Roma, Falcon Heights, Eagle Pass, Del Rio, Presidio, Fort Hancock, Fabens and El Paso.

Anywhere else? Well, the idea is denial of access. That should make the course of action in any area not included in the list of controlled bridges, and the correct response for violations, fairly simple to asertain. And the correct response is what will hault the illegal traffic. Deploying such a response is what will require the above mentioned motivation. Which is what is not currently occuring.

Of course there is the cost factor. To maintane such a response is not cost effective. The cost effective response? I have posted that so many times it should not be necessary to do it again. However just for you, and hopefully, once and for all here it is. It will requite a bit of time to inact, but then again, it is a long term response, not an emergency measure.

Ahhh, but how do we get from immedeat responst to long term closure? Interim modified response. Give me 100 miles of border. Here is what I will successfully accomplish.

I want full company, Airborne infantry. Nothing fancy they just need to be able to exit the aircraft and not shoot each other once they get on the ground. This will represent a single position guarding a single 100 mile stretch of border. Space them at 100 mile intervals. Each instalation consists of 2 airstrips, a small controll tower, electrical power, fuel tanks, generators, enough hanger space to contain 2 C-130s, 4 Squad bays with showers, 1 admin building with mess hall. With 2 of those new 130J's at ready / alert parked 100 yards from the squad bays Time to Target could be measured in 10's of minuets. Spot a mass of illegals being escorted by mexican troops break across the border on foot and the blocking forces would be in place waiting before they made 2 miles from the border.

Long Term Control.

Let us visualize a real live controlled border. That would require a fairly large construction project to build semi-sunken border stations at one mile intervals from end to end across the southern border with Mexico. By placing them at one mile intervals no point on the border is more than 30 seconds from a border station. By sinking them into the ground, one level is completely protected against almost all man-portable weapons and the second level (ground level) can be bermed on three sides except for the horizontal observation and firing ports along the east, south and west sides. the north side would extend out to include a 3 sided, covered bay where the interceptors will sit at the ready.

Each such station will be staffed by five three man teams. As this is a closed border plan, there is no need for more than three per station. Allowing 5 shifts per station, the three normally needed for 24 hour staffing at 8 hour shifts, plus two ?weekend? shifts that could rotate out with a weekday shift, giving the week day workers opportunity for time off, vacation, backup for sick days, etc.

Then there is the eternal question, how much?

Ahhhhhhhh, there is the beauty. ZERO. This will not add a single dime to the budget. WHY? The money is currently being pi$$ed away for nothing and where it is going will only get worse. Allow me to rub salt here . .

""When approving the Medi care bill last month, Congress allocated $1 billion to help border hospitals cover those costs. President Bush is expected to sign the bill Monday.""

Which he did. So the money is there, it is just being spent in a reactionary mode. In a proactive mode most of the money will only be spent only in the first year, after that the cost would drop dramatically.

OK, lets do the numbers.

1990 miles from Atlantic to Pacific ='s 1990 stations.

1 station initial construction 165,000

1 electronics and weapons 40,000

3 trucks @ 40,000 each 120,000

15 staff, 5 shifts at 3 per shift 630,000

utilities (water, electricity) 12,000

Total for one station for the first year (including construction)

$967,000

Total for the 1990 stations required

$1,837,300,000

and that is including construction cost.

After the initial construction,

Back out 90% of 165,000 to = 16,500, or annual maintaining

apply the same 10% maintaining to the other front end expenses

and the total annual bill is . . . $1,653,668,800

Case Closed.

The only reason the border is NOT closed is the fed WANTS the criminal invaders here.

the only question is . . . WHY?

Many will argue that they are just poor "immigrants" and we should welcome them. We already welcome immigrants, NOT illegal border busters. If they are "immigrating" why are they crossing the border at night, paying other criminals thousands of dollars each to smuggle them into the u.S.

SMUGGLING IS NOT IMMIGRATING.

And as for this BS about them only committing a mistomeanor by crossing the border illegally, there is another school of thought. Lets take a look at that, shall we?

Just a thought, what if the IRS began to receive reports regarding the transfer of funds to locations outside of the united States and it became apparent that is is a nationwide trend.... therefore invoking conspiracy laws.

Say for example, an individual living in the united States ILLEGALLY had conspired with other individuals living in the united States ILLEGALLY to create a hideout from the investigative branch of INS or whatever the heck they are called these days. They have rented the hideout under a fake name and all of the conspirators chipped in to pay the rent on the hideout. Then, in order to avoid local law enforcement agents, all of the ILLEGAL Aliens live in the hideout, thereby circumventing the reporting regulations for an alien ILLEGALLY living in the u.S. That would be a crime, right?

OK, let's say those same aliens living ILLEGALLY in the u.S. all had jobs and because they are paying very little to support themselves, (they are all living in the hideout, thereby paying 1/5 to 1/10 what the average American pays in rent and lest than 1/20 what the average home owner pays in monthly mortgage payments) they are sending regular sums of money out of the county, money that was earned during the course of ILLEGAL ACTIVITY, i.e. not reporting there illegal status, hiding their address from law authorities, and falsifying federal IRS forms with fake SS numbers. This would all constitute crimes, right? Well, what kind of a crime?

STRUCTURING, IE money laundering......

4.18.1956(a)(1)(B)(ii) Money Laundering-Illegal Structuring,

18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1)(B)(ii) See Statute

[Defendant] is charged with violating that portion of the federal money laundering statute that prohibits structuring transactions to avoid reporting requirements. It is against federal law to engage in such conduct. For [defendant] to be convicted of this crime, you must be convinced that the government has proven each of the following things beyond a reasonable doubt:

First, that [defendant] entered into a financial transaction or transactions, on or about the date alleged, with a financial institution engaged in interstate commerce, involving the use of proceeds of unlawful activities, specifically, proceeds of the [insert crime here(illegal alien) ];

Second, that [defendant] knew that these were the proceeds of unlawful activity;

Third, that [defendant] knew that the transaction or transactions were structured or designed in whole or in part so as to avoid transaction reporting requirements under federal law. ------- The defendants are also charged with knowingly conducting and attempting to conduct financial transactions that involved the proceeds of specified unlawful activity, knowing that the transactions were designed in whole or in part to avoid a transaction reporting requirement and while conducting and attempting to conduct such financial transactions, knowing that the property involved in the financial transactions represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956(a)(1)(B)(ii).

The Treasury Department has published a booklet entitled, "Money Laundering: A Banker's Guide to Avoiding Problems," which contains a list of suspicious activities that the Treasury Department says fit the profile of a "money launderer." These activities include: 1) Paying off a delinquent loan all at once; 2) Changing currency from small to large denominations;3) Buying cashier's checks, money orders, or traveler's checks for less than the reporting limit (i.e., under $10,000); 4) Acting nervous while making large transactions with cash or monetary instruments; 5) Opening an account and using it as collateral for a loan; 6) Presenting a transaction that involves a large number of $50 and $100 bills; and 7) Presenting a transaction without counting the cash first. . . .

"Structuring" is defined by the IRS as any effort to avoid reporting cash or other monetary transactions over $10,000 by breaking them down into smaller "related" transactions over any 12-month period (defined by USC 31, Sec. 5322-5324-Money Laundering Control Act of 1986, as amended). A structuring violation carries with it a criminal penalty with a mandatory prison term, heavy fines, and confiscation of structured funds and money "connected" to them. (A civil penalty of a $25,000 fine with confiscation of structured funds also exists.) Monetary instruments included in structuring are cash, cashier's checks, money orders, and traveler's checks.

"Structuring" is now defined as money laundering, and is a criminal offense. You can now go to jail for dealing in cash to protect your financial privacy, if the IRS thinks you're trying to hide or structure your transactions or monetary instruments.

It seems to me that that the above is describing a nationwide conspiracy of ILLEGAL ALIENS that are defrauding the government and a guilty of a long list of federal conspiracy crimes.

It also occurred to me that the crime was committed, or rather, under the definition of conspiracy, the crime began when the illegal alien set foot on u.S. territory with the intention of getting a job "that nobody else wanted."

Well well, let us review the facts.

1. All the illegals KNOW what they are doing is against u.S. law.

2. The border an be closed for .10 cents on the dollar of what it costs PER YEAR, that would be 22 Billion, due to their presence. It would cost less than 2 Billion to close it.

They are in fact criminals and were felons by their own admission the moment they set foot on u.S. territory. What is government is thinking? By allowing this to go on in the face of such universal opposition of the wishes of the Americans will be political genocide if just one of the annual two million criminal border crossers are involved in a major terrorist event. That is not pubies or dems, just politicians and gubbermnt in general.

So . . . how do we sum this up?

Over 2 in 10 ILLEGALS apprehended while crossing our borders have the phone numbers and addresses of social service agencies in their possession when apprehended.

Last I heard that is premeditation. Also known as intent to fraud. They KNOW they are illegal and not elegible. They crossed the United States International border to commit fraud. That is a Federal Felony.

So much for poor honest hardworking " just want the work Americans will not do " BS.

This also negates the "they are only tresspassing and can not be detained by a land owner or American citizen." They are committing a felony and a felony in progress can very much be subject to citizen arrest.

NO reason to not close the mexican border.

MANY reasons to close the border NOW.

Does this current government really believe all Americans are so stupid as to let this go on?

Perhaps we will all go back to our AC and Buds if they put a few troops on the border to let the media snap a few thousand pics?

Perhaps the fed.gov should bash itself in the head with a brick, too.

Moving on . . . .

CANADIAN BORDER

This one is so easy it just beggs doing it. Let about two or three hundred mexican troops that were escorts for (and include) about five hundred coyotes wind up in federal prison chopping trees with hand axes on the canadian border in January. Videotape this and send copies to the mexican comanders and troops on the border. That border escort/crossing bs would clear riiiight up.

Then distrubute information to the Canadians near the border that the reverse will be true for anyone caught assisting anyone busting the Canadian / US border. They will be sent to the mexican border in the summer to clear brush by hand. One will see a whole new attitude.

As for your Post.

Lets see . .

""Put up or shut up: explain how the federal government would shut down "the border" (presumably ALL of the borders, including coastlines). Outline the CONOPS. Identify resources required. And explain how everything would be on line "tomorrow" assuming a go-ahead decision today.""

Let me be quite frank here. I have focused on the u.S./mexican border. There is a reason for that. Your silly distractions regarding east and west coast - Canadian border indicate an avoidance/diversion from my post. The OBVIOUS focus of that post was the mexican border. You introduced a distraction to that point. Is this an indication of how you conduct yourself in other matters? Avoiding reality? Indulging in unreal theory, not light of day facts and reality? MEXICO is the issue. Invasion is the problem. Closing the border is the answer and anyone that wants to avoid the reality of how to get that done is a fool. A simple CLOSING of access to the border states is EASILY accomplished. All that is required is demonstrating beyond any doubt the level of intolerance to infractions. That level must be 100% Anything less will be a waste of MY tax money.

As for your demands of the structure of my post, what to include and to parrot back a step by step procedure, son, I am not about to reinvent the wheel for your smartmouth remarks. I have been in the u.S Security game face to face for 21 years. That is 6 regular and 15 more off and on, returning by repeated invitations, working IN THE FIELD, rifle in hand. Six of it was spent learning what is crap from what works from Vet Nam Special Forces and Rodesian Light Infantry veterans. The rest was polishing the fine points and by invitation, teaching others what I know. I expect to keep it up for about another ten years.

Do not tell me to put up or shut up here EVER again.

T L I

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.