Skip to comments.
Captured Qaeda Figure Led Way to Information Behind Warning
New York Times ^
| 08/02/04
| DOUGLAS JEHL and DAVID ROHDE
Posted on 08/01/2004 7:50:32 PM PDT by conservative in nyc
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-99 next last
More info on where the information causing the threat level to be raised may have come from. What purpose does it serve to be so specific? Why let the bad guys know how we know?
To: conservative in nyc
No problem here since it was reported by the uncredible NY Slimes.
2
posted on
08/01/2004 7:53:43 PM PDT
by
rj45mis
To: conservative in nyc
it demonstrated that Qaeda plotters had begun casing the buildings in New York, Newark and Washington even before the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.Ouch
3
posted on
08/01/2004 7:54:14 PM PDT
by
NautiNurse
("I served in Viet Nam, and we have better hair"----John F'n Kerry campaign platform)
To: conservative in nyc
Because the NYSLIMES doesn't give a S*** if this country is hit again! Notice how the reporter says UNCONFIRMED, that's a dead give away!
To: conservative in nyc
I QUESTION THE TIMING! YEEEEARGH!
5
posted on
08/01/2004 7:57:25 PM PDT
by
inkling
To: conservative in nyc
Why let the bad guys know how we know? Passive surveillance. We're watching for their next moves to identify and locate cells.
6
posted on
08/01/2004 7:58:59 PM PDT
by
TADSLOS
(Right Wing Infidel since 1954)
To: conservative in nyc
Amazing what some panties on the head can produce.
7
posted on
08/01/2004 8:02:34 PM PDT
by
finnman69
(cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestus globus, inflammare animos)
To: conservative in nyc
Two schools of thought here
1. Tell all you can so we all can stop the terrorists, i.e. maybe a citizen spots them, All hands on deck approach.
2. Don't tell anything and hope you catch them in time. Don't tip them off to what we know approach.
I vote for #1. Dot connecting is hard before you know what is going to happen. Easy afterwards.
8
posted on
08/01/2004 8:03:33 PM PDT
by
snooker
To: conservative in nyc
What purpose does it serve to be so specific?
A reminder to the voters that the grownups are in charge.
To: finnman69
Sounds like they put the panties on the computer and it coughed up the info.
10
posted on
08/01/2004 8:07:02 PM PDT
by
snooker
To: conservative in nyc
What purpose does it serve to be so specific? Why let the bad guys know how we know? My thoughts exactly - and there are plenty of criminal statutes under which the NYT could be prosecuted for having released this info.
To: conservative in nyc
Could be Worse I guess the ACLU could be there during interrogation
12
posted on
08/01/2004 8:11:01 PM PDT
by
Fast1
To: conservative in nyc
I didn't notice any mention of the S. Africans we've caught lately and the passport problem. I think they also had a direct bearing on the raise in threat level.
13
posted on
08/01/2004 8:14:00 PM PDT
by
nuconvert
(Everyone has a photographic memory. Some don't have film.)
To: conservative in nyc
"Why let the bad guys know how we know?"
The bad guys know who has been arrested.
14
posted on
08/01/2004 8:15:55 PM PDT
by
nuconvert
(Everyone has a photographic memory. Some don't have film.)
To: conservative in nyc
'The intelligence official provided information describing Mr. Khan as having assisted in evaluating potential American and Western targets for terrorist attacks, and as being representative of a "new Al Queda."'
A "new Al Queda"? But read further and...
'The Pakistani official described Mr. Khan as a fluent English speaker who had told investigators that he had visited the United States, Britain, Germany and other countries. Mr. Khan was one of thousands of Pakistani militants who trained in Afghanistan under the Taliban in the 1990's, the Pakistani official said.'
1990's?? Looks like the "new Al Queda" has been around since the Clinton Administration. The legacy continues.
15
posted on
08/01/2004 8:16:57 PM PDT
by
airborne
(Death From Above)
To: Dog; jeffers; AdmSmith; Boot Hill; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Coop
16
posted on
08/01/2004 8:18:09 PM PDT
by
nuconvert
(Everyone has a photographic memory. Some don't have film.)
To: airborne
Looks like the "new Al Queda" has been around since the Clinton Administration. The legacy continues. Enough Clinton bashing already. Or have you not seen the list of terrorist attacks on Americans that dates back to at least 1979 ?? Or if you have, do you want to blame all of those on Clinton also? Give it a rest.
17
posted on
08/01/2004 8:25:29 PM PDT
by
BagCamAddict
(I support my Troops and my President!)
To: BagCamAddict
Clinton lied, people died.
To: BagCamAddict
I know, but the article refers specifically to "a new Al Queda" and that was what I was specifically pointing out.
19
posted on
08/01/2004 8:33:21 PM PDT
by
airborne
(Death From Above)
To: BagCamAddict
clinton deserves all the bashing gets--and more.
But having said that, we must recognize this enemy has been studying and planning for years. They intend to use America's freedoms to destroy America. If they get a nuke, they will not hesitate to use it. They mean business. And the voters better mean business this November and not let kerry anywhere near the White House.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-99 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson