Posted on 08/03/2004 7:36:03 AM PDT by gopwinsin04
More financial institutions than previously disclosed may be at risk of attack and an Al Qaeda operative has told British intelligence that the groups target date is early September, intelligence sources said yesterday.
The operative, described as credible by British intelligence, told his debriefers that the attack would take place '60 days before the US presidential election' on November 2, according to a former National Security Council official.
On September 2 President Bush is expected to address the Republican National Convention at Madison Square Garden.
Counter terrorism officials are analyzing data from a computer siezed in Pakistan last month to see if financial instutions in addition to the five disclosed last Sunday are at risk of attack, US officials said yesterday.
A US official familiar with the ongoing analysis of the computer said, 'There are reference to other buildings in the Al Qaeda computer data including a picture of the Bank of America building in San Francisco. 'There is mention of other places.'
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
They planned the 9/11/01 attacks for years before they executed them. If we had found a laptop in August 2001 that had 1998 data on it, we could still have prevented those attacks.
I'd happily shoot the horse if the government would just close the d*mned door!
Sometimes Boortz is out to lunch. This is one of them.
Also, he seems to be getting his information exclusively from the New York Times. He, of all people, should know better. Even the WashPost was concerned and realistic about the threat.
Say what??? The administration IS out in front on this, they are taking the war on teror directly to the enemy while strengthening our posture here at home, we are safer as a result of the actions of this President.
Libs/Dems took Iraq War away from GWB and made it an albatross for him (true or not). You can bet they will plaster this all over the media, if it has potential (true or not)
What on earth are you smoking? Bush is ahead in the polls because the majority of Americans support our actions in Iraq and believe in George W. Bush's approach to the war on terror.
People still trust Bush more than Kerry with terrorism. I doubt that an attack would suddenly make swing voters think "well Kerry will fix this" and pull the lever for Hamster Boy and the Breck Girl.
While still a biased story, at least they quote somebody saying Al Queda takes years to plot things.
The Wash Post didn't even do that, so I wrote the writers and asked why.
Typically, they actually do respond to me since I identify myself as a collegiate journalist, not just any old writer. They seem to like to respond to me more since I come up with a good critique instead of just an e-mail rant.
But seriously, the Wash Post was just awful today on this....made the NY Times look fair.
That was September of 2001, folks.
Move along.
Early September? The timing is suspicious.
It looks like Al Qaeda has more respect for McCain/Finegold CFR then the Democraps do!
"Old data" refers to the fact that the data was collected by the terrorists before the 9/11 attacks - not that we knew about it before then. That does not make it out of date - how long were they planning for 9/11? Probably since 1993, if not before.
And would they still if the Dems and their complicit media friends day after day showed another attack [God forbid] as being preventable had only Bush done xxxxxx or yyyyyyy? I have viewed this scenario as a wildcard for about three years now. I'm just not sure which candidate, if either, would benefit.
And I sincerely hope we don't get the opportunity to find out!
Sure! It's not like our troops are stretched thin or anything. I know quite a few that still get to sleep at night!
Yea, right. Besides, the time to seal the borders was years ago.
Just how does anyone seal off the continual boarders of Canada and Mexico? How much money, personnel and technology would this take?
Easy to say, but not that easy to do. A fence - they climb over, we don't have that many soldiers and they are needed for fighting. We don't have the funds to pay salaries and benefits for all the men needed and where would the men be found that could not so very easily be bought off or terrorized to allow passage?
So - when we put in place something, the terrorists either bribe, terrorize or cut through or under our enforcement technique. Remember, the goal is financial ruin for America as well as death to America's citizens. Next option?
"Sounds like Bush needs to seal the borders up.
Why don't you tell us how to get that done?"
Call the Israelis.
We gotta kill'em everywhere we can verify their presence. That means here, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, Iraq... anyplace where the radical bastid's have set up shop.
Islam cannot be accepted by the civilized world until it cleans its halls of this pestilence on mankind!
Wonder what they would be saying if their building was part of the list.
True or not true.....
This is why John Kerry is shamelessly hammering GWBush on terrorism prevention and trying to pin any blame in advance. Trying to make the USA like Spain where domestic terror works for the socialist opposition
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.