Posted on 01/19/2005 1:44:33 PM PST by RWR8189
Federal and state authorities are investigating a nuclear terrorist threat against Boston after a man calling from Mexico told California police that he smuggled two Iraqis and four Chinese over the border, the Boston Herald has learned.
``They got a call from across the border in Mexico to the California Highway Patrol and he said he brought two Iraqis and four Chineses (individuals)across the border and according to him, they stated soon to follow behind them would be some sort of material,'' said a law enforcement source familiar with the investigation.
``He refers to some sort of nuclear material that will follow them through New York up into Boston.''
According to the source, the caller has not identified himself and did not show up for a meeting with federal investigators in California but he did leave pictures of four Chinese men and some names at a ``drop'' site at the Mexico-California border.
``They were dropped by the source at a location. He literally threw them over a fence from Mexico to the U.S. side,'' said the source. ``There are pictures of the four Chinese and some names but just how accurate they are remains a question''
Massachusetts law enforcement officials were notified of the threat at 5:30 a.m. today through the FBI and Boston Police Joint Terrorist Task Force.
The threat was serious enough that Mayor Menino ordered the Fire Commissioner and the state's Homeland Security Chief into his office at City Hall, where they met with officials from the CIA, FBI, and Homeland Security Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, a high-ranking city official told the Herald.
``They are desperately trying to piece it together,'' said the offial, who added that if the threat is real it is ``very scary.''
A company that trains explosive-sniffing dogs said it was alerted that the canines would be searching for a ``dirty bomb,'' a New York City law enforcement official said yesterday.
The Massachusetts investigator said much of the man's information sounds far-fetched and investigators have some doubts about the caller's validity because he has not identified himself.
``A lot of it doesn't make sense and some of it does,'' said the source. ``It's totally uncorroborated. This all began several days ago as a series of phone calls and they don't know who the caller is. There are some parts of it that just don't make sense and other little pieces of it that fall into place. The information is these people that came into the country are going to New eYork into Boston and the (nuclear) material will follow them.''
The source said there is speculation the caller may have been ripped off by illegal immigrants he helped over the border and is now trying to exact revenge.
``It's very weird. Even if (the Iraqis and Chinese) were going to do something why would they be blabbing to the yahoo smuggling them across the border? You have to wonder if they screwd him on a deal but you have to treat it seriously and the issue is how do you put it out to the public and not get everybody (in a panic)?''
The source said the information will soon ``come out over police channels and BOLOs (be on the lookout).''
The source added the FBI office in San Diego is leading the investigation. ``The FBI in San Diego is the originating office so they are driving the investigation. The FBI in Boston is in a tough position because they are waiting for information''
The caller has not given investigators any means to contact him.
``They tried to set up a meet with him but he didn't show up.''
(this post repeat as many times as the VISABLE pings so that you get the point: don't ping in a list of allies after 250 posts. If you feel that you are losing the argument, maybe you are)
I see you realize that you have been backed into several corners and now you are pinging a huge list of allies. I have a standard rule. When losers do this I leave the thread so I don spend days answering the same dumb questions over and over again. I am satisfied with what I have said on this thread. The logic is simple, straightforward, and easily verified. My advice to you is to cut down on the Tom Clancy novels.
(this post repeat as many times as the VISABLE pings so that you get the point: don't ping in a list of allies after 250 posts. If you feel that you are losing the argument, maybe you are)
I see you realize that you have been backed into several corners and now you are pinging a huge list of allies. I have a standard rule. When losers do this I leave the thread so I don spend days answering the same dumb questions over and over again. I am satisfied with what I have said on this thread. The logic is simple, straightforward, and easily verified. My advice to you is to cut down on the Tom Clancy novels.
(this post repeat as many times as the VISABLE pings so that you get the point: don't ping in a list of allies after 250 posts. If you feel that you are losing the argument, maybe you are)
I see you realize that you have been backed into several corners and now you are pinging a huge list of allies. I have a standard rule. When losers do this I leave the thread so I don spend days answering the same dumb questions over and over again. I am satisfied with what I have said on this thread. The logic is simple, straightforward, and easily verified. My advice to you is to cut down on the Tom Clancy novels.
(this post repeat as many times as the VISABLE pings so that you get the point: don't ping in a list of allies after 250 posts. If you feel that you are losing the argument, maybe you are)
I see you realize that you have been backed into several corners and now you are pinging a huge list of allies. I have a standard rule. When losers do this I leave the thread so I don spend days answering the same dumb questions over and over again. I am satisfied with what I have said on this thread. The logic is simple, straightforward, and easily verified. My advice to you is to cut down on the Tom Clancy novels.
(this post repeat as many times as the VISABLE pings so that you get the point: don't ping in a list of allies after 250 posts. If you feel that you are losing the argument, maybe you are)
I see you realize that you have been backed into several corners and now you are pinging a huge list of allies. I have a standard rule. When losers do this I leave the thread so I don spend days answering the same dumb questions over and over again. I am satisfied with what I have said on this thread. The logic is simple, straightforward, and easily verified. My advice to you is to cut down on the Tom Clancy novels.
I reported you but had to do it through the back door.
RE: (this post repeat as many times as the VISABLE pings
Bwaaaahhaaaahaaaa!
How old are you? Gonna take your bat and ball and go home? I pinged those folks so they could see our debate. I don't care if a single one of them writes a single word. Have you ever heard of an interest list? Jeeez.....
Pinging in the goon squad is a time-honored tactic of desperate protectionists and legalized drugs fanatics. If you are too stupid to see that I have systematically refuted every point that you have made, I really don't have time to keep banging your head against the wall. It's not a case of taking my ball and going home. I'm just tired of repeating myself. The facts are quite simple.
RE: I see you realize that you have been backed into several corners
In that case, why have you failed to respond to the points I made in #235?
RE: I am satisfied with what I have said on this thread
Well I am not satisfied with it, and heartily refute most of it.
RE: The logic is simple, straightforward, and easily verified.
Then provide or allude to sources.
RE: My advice to you is to cut down on the Tom Clancy novels.
I must sheepishly admit that I have yet to read a single Tom Clancy novel.
Good day.
Knock it off.
FYI, FWIW:
http://www.freeman.org/m_online/bodansky/beijing.htm
* The Strait of Malacca is one of the world's hottest and most crucial strategic choke points. It is considered by experts to be one of the ten most vulnerable objectives which neutralization by hostile forces not only will cause tremendous harm to the well being, perhaps very existence, of the economy of the West, but is also very easy to accomplish. Controlling the Strait of Malacca is presently a key strategic objective of the PRC to the point of risking armed conflict with the regional states and even the US.
* The Strait of Malacca dominates more than the commercial and economic life lines into and out of the rapidly expanding economies of East Asia. The global strategic growth and expansion of aspiring powers can be contained and regulated through the mere control over the movement of their naval forces through the Strait of Malacca.
* The case of the Islamist terrorism in and around the Strait of Malacca is extremely important not just because of the strategic ramification of the distabilization of such countries as the Philippines and Thailand. Taken together, this terrorism campaign is a classic case of the true meaning of state-sponsored terrorism. In this specific case, the Islamist subversion of several countries is intensified because of the strategic interests of a third party -- the PRC -- and, to a lesser extent, of its close allies. However, it is the close allies -- Pakistan and Iran -- who bear the brunt of the sponsorship of, and support for the terrorist escalation. They do so more because of the strategic calculations concerning the PRC than having vital interests in the Far East.
* The mere presence of operatives and terrorists of the sponsoring states in the ranks of the local organizations legitimizes and sanctifies the close cooperation in what is essentially the furthering of the global strategic interest of the PRC and the Trans-Asian Axis (of which the Islamists are a major component). As will be discussed below, one of the outcomes of this state-sponsored escalation is the consolidation of a major forward base for exporting Islamist terrorism into the United States itself.
* The younger "Fourth Generation" of Chinese leaders come to power assertive and self-confident about a very strong China. They are committed to "renewing China," which, according to Wang Jisi of the Chinese Academy of Social Science, means building "a politically, economically and culturally unified nation-state when foreign and largely Western influences are seen as eroding the nation-state's very foundation." The young leaders are preoccupied with finding for their China the appropriate place at the top of world affairs -- a dominant power leading the Trans Asian Axis on land and surging into the southern oceans. These up and coming military leaders have already defined their political theories justifying China's inevitable expansionist surge. "The military has no interest in war, but they have an interest in a permanent state of instability in the region" if only "for ensuring their irrefutable place in the power structure," argues a former Beijing-based diplomat. Indeed, in early November 1995, Hong Kong based experts warn that "China's neighbours fear a growing assertiveness on territorial claims, especially in the South China Sea."
* These are not unfounded fears. Back in early 1995, Lt.Col. Cui Yu Chen at the Research Office of the Chengdu Military Region authored a book called A New Scramble for Soft Frontiers which reflects the thinking of the PLA's elite about the PRC's national interests and spheres of influence. Lt.Col. Cui Yu Chen distinguishes between the reaches of a state's hegemony and influence -- which he defines as "soft frontiers" -- and the limits of state sovereignty by "geographic frontiers." He stresses the difference between the two concepts. "Expansion of frontiers is the driving force of human history. Changes in soft frontiers often precede achievements in technology, culture and other areas. While geographic frontiers are fixed, soft frontiers are variable." What Cui means is that before the PRC can leap forward technologically, economically and culturally to become the global power it deserves to be, it must expand its "soft frontiers" through a hegemonic surge.
* The younger leaders in Beijing are convinced that the near future provides a historic window of opportunity for such an expansionist and hegemony-consolidating surge. In the spring of 1995, in a conference in Bangkok, a Chinese scholar named Chen Qimao delivered a paper that amounted to presenting Beijing's view of the strategic future of the Asia-Pacific region. Chen explained that the "relative decline of America's economic strength" means that the "heyday of US hegemony has gone."
* By the summer of 1995, Beijing already resigned itself to the fact that irrespective of the posture of Sino-US economic relations and political rhetoric, the respective national and vital strategic interests were conflicting and essentially irreconcilable. Therefore, there is no escape from continued deterioration of US-Sino relations to the point of adverse impact on national security posture. Beijing resolved to center the overt component of Sino-US relations on economic issues for as long as it is advisable to postpone confrontation. Li Zhongcheng, a leading Chinese expert on US-Sino relations explained the inherent contradiction in this approach:
** "The Sino-US relations have entered a new phase where economics holds the central stage and where the bilateral relationship moves in a zigzag pattern as the two countries desire cooperation with one another and, at the same time, tend to antagonize each other. The bilateral relationship, however, will face a new period of difficulties in the future. On the one hand, the United States of America is now the only superpower in the world; on the other, China is emerging to be the largest developing country. Having completely different social systems, even though the two countries share common economic, political, and security interests, they also differ in their policy goals, which leads to a complicated situation where the two countries want dialogue and cooperation with one another but also tend to contradict and antagonize each other."
* The multitude of potential threats and the lingering possibility of an active US resistance to the PRC's global ascent convinced Beijing that only a proactive strategy might ensure the PRC's ability to realize its national potential and prevail in the next 15 years. Beijing's approach to the post-cold war security strategy stresses active confrontation with a US-inspired containment strategy. "The rapid expansion of China's overall power after the Cold War has caused widespread concern around the world. For their own respective reasons, politicians everywhere have been pondering a single question: Will a resurgent China adopt an expansionist foreign policy? Since 1992 the 'China peril' theory has gained currency among China hands world-wide." At the same time, Beijing stresses that there are unique opportunities for the PRC to surge strategically. "It [Russia] has neither the will nor the power to expand its sphere of influence in Asia. As for the United States, its power has declined in relative terms and isolationism is on the upswing at home where political forces opposed to US involvement in overseas military conflicts are getting stronger by the day." It is therefore imperative for Beijing to overcome its apprehensions about growing external threats and self-restraining circumstances, and act resolutely and boldly.
* What the PRC now calls "the active defense strategy" amounts to a spread of regional hegemony based on the presence of military might, long-range military intervention and power projection capabilities, and the creation of conducive political environment, namely, the eviction of hostile Western powers, mainly the US, from East Asia.
* In October 1995, Beijing returned to examining the role and position of the United States in this vision of the future. Beijing concluded that while the US will remain a central and focal player in the evolving strategic dynamics, there is a limit to what the US could do to the PRC even in cases of a major strategic setback for the US. Beijing's threat analysis now stressed that "the United States does not have the power to encircle and contain China." The main challenge ahead, Beijing reasoned, is the Sino-US struggle for regional hegemony. "If US relations with China deteriorate and Washington adopts Cold War tactics to contain Beijing, both China and the United States will have to seek supporters from Asia to start a fierce diplomatic contention, and it is not certain that the United States will be the victor!"
* Consequently, Beijing is increasingly tempted to assume the middle way -- conduct an incremental, though resolute, escalation; to sustain the strategic push through a myriad of means short of a major war -- terrorism, subversion, raw pressure, etc. The aggregate impact of such a posture can be of global strategic significance. Moreover, Beijing is convinced that by the time the PRC is in a position to exert real pressure for tangible strategic gains, the countries surrounding the Strait of Malacca will have been either overtaken by, or thoroughly subverted and terrorized by, the PRC's Islamist allies. Incapable of calling in on the US to save them, for fear of untenable domestic ramifications, these governments will succumb to Beijing's pressure and the PRC will be in a position to consolidate its hegemony even through the use of incomplete and somewhat backward military forces.
I am just here to watch, but I can't help observing that your opponent has not answered ONE of those highly specific refutations, but seems intent on shrilly, and repetitively, asserting his dubious claim that you are losing...merely by virtue of your advertising the poor sod's denouement. T'sk, t'sk.
His opponent lost the arguement as soon as he used the R-word back in 156.
Good point, I completely missed that:
BOSTON - The tipster who told federal officials about a potential terrorist plot involving Chinese and Iraqi immigrants may have fabricated the story out of revenge, a federal law enforcement official said Friday
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050122/ap_on_re_us/terror_suspects_26
So you think the FBI has some sort of political goal here and not the security of the Nation in mind?
There IS no terrorist threat from the Mexican border. None. Zip.
And you can prove this right? I doubt President Bush evens believes that.
Wrong again. Why should they care if they get checked. By the time the FBI of the ATTF figures out that these people are terrorists, they're already dead.
You're still missing the point; they have no clue if they are on the terrorist watch list. If they try and enter through a legitimate entry point, they will get stopped and questioned. If they are on the list, they get arrested.
Possibly, but not immigration from Mexico, which is what this is about.
It's only immigration to you, for the majority of America, it's about terrorism.
What are the chances the forgeries will be caught? What are the chances that the fact name may be a close match to a name on the watch list.
Odds are in their favor, moving across the border and not being scrutinized by professional LEO's.
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.