Posted on 07/06/2002 7:53:57 AM PDT by TLBSHOW
Now why would our F.B.I. cover up the terrorist attack at LAX?
I mean they tell us we will be attacked and then we are attacked and then they say this was not a terrorist attack. Now why would our F.B.I. cover up the terrorist attack at LAX?
The PEOPLE WHO WERE ATTACKED knows what it was and IT WAS a TERRORIST ATTACK.
We are either being played for fools or the terrorist just maybe are within the FBI. We know the democrats are terrorist helpers so maybe just maybe the FBI HAS BEEN SUBVERTED TOO!
Just a question for comments.
1) The power structure is terrified of the possibility that there will be a popular groundswell of anger against moslems.
2) The power structure is also unwilling to risk a general war of islam versus the West.
3) The power structure is well aware that Americans value a strong economy over other factors, and a perception that we aren't safe anymore is likely to degrade economic activity.
Please note that I use the term "power structure", since this is not a matter of political party. It isn't just the politicians either - lots of voters and political contributers feel the same way. For that matter, very few would be willing to openly advocate the methods necessary to fight and win a general was against islam.
Now, as to the question of whether a lone individual can be a terrorist. Yes, absolutely. In fact, they make the best kind of terrorist, because that way there is no organization to pursue, no assets to seize, no comrades to compromise. It's called leaderless resistance. You can read a lot more about it HERE. (Note: Louis Beam is an ambassador at large for the Aryan Nations, and established a point system for assassination of federal officials. As such, his perspective may have some correlation with terrorist attitudes in general.)
Don't miss this one.
The only one of the things you believe you've refuted with this that actually came from a DEBKA report is Hadayet's possible Egyptian Jihadi links.
There were definitely bomb-sniffing dogs at the airport and the apartment... Why would you think otherwise?
Here's a non-DEBKA report of the INS denying Hadayet permanent residency ...
"The Immigration and Naturalization Service rejected Hesham Mohamed Hadayet's request to remain in the country in February 1996, INS spokesman Ron Rogers said in Saturday's Orange County Register. It wasn't clear why.
I was transcribing local news reports for the live thread of the shooting on FR. There were numerous reports of a 2nd suspect, who was taken into custody here.
I saw news footage of the guy in the back of the LAPD car, after he was apprehended at the Delta terminal. He was seen by witnesses talking with Hadayet prior to the shooting, was questioned by authorities, and released. He had dark hair and eyes, but I couldn't make out his ethnicity, other than that he wasn't black or Asian.
Was he Middle Eastern? We don't know. We haven't heard much of anything about why he was talking to Hadayet, only that authorities don't believe he was involved.
Or is that, "have no reason to believe he was involved at the current time?" Was he released only to be kept under surveillance? If he were still being held, would the FBI and Ari Fleischer get away with their "no reason to believe this is terrorism" song and dance?
Frankly, the FBI and the White House have played way things too cute since 9/11, where domestic terror incidents have occured. They've done a good job at thwarting a number of plots, many of which we don't hear about. But they aren't perfect, so when something happens, they ought not undermine their credibility by going to such lengths to avoid the obvious...
Hadayet was an Egyptian Moslem, in the 18 to 40 (plus a day) age group, who hated Jews and yet instead of killing his neighbors, he went on a shooting spree at El Al on July 4th in the midst of numerous threats and a heightened terror alert... in other words, Hadayet was a terroist.
Earlier in the day, our local talk show host (don't know where he got this info) claimed that he parked his limo outside El Al to pick up passengers and they asked him not to park there because he looked Arab. He may have been losing business.
Please don't answer...it will spoil my image of you.
Lame, lame, lame, try to attrack attention from what you posted....Once again, you said this:
and when he got into trouble he fought with the knife...theguy wasn't a terrorist...he was nuts.
And now claim you were just kidding?
Sure as heck reads as if you meant it, and are now trying to weasel away from just how stupid that statement was.
ever hear of a guy that takes a knife to a gunfight?
That is only relevant if your goal is to survive the fight.
Please don't answer...it will spoil my image of you.
What you think of me is the least of my concerns...
This action was obviously planned! Send family back to Egypt - have TWO handguns and a knife (to kill and maim as many as possible) - Go to Israeli Airline counter where mostly Jews will be present - kill as many as possible before dying (as he undoubtedly knew that was what was going to happen there). Nutcase? "Beam me up Scotty!" - only as nutty as are all these barbarians that delight in murdering innocent and defenseless men, women and children.
The real question as has been asked is why our government tries to obfuscate the obvious truth. Neutrino has succinctly answered that for any who care to use their common sense.
I have a simple theory: 9/11 set the standard for terrorism. Anything less than tall buildings falling, will not be treated as terrorism. What do you think?
You continue to impose artificial limits in your attempt to frame the discussion.
Does an event have to occur at an airport for your criteria to be satisfied?
Does it have to occur in the US?
Did it have to occur on 7-4?
Several other incidents have occurred this week. (Ukraine - missile & Algeria - bomb)
IMO It's safe to say that several common threads will be proven to have run through these events.
If it is a question of semantics, for future reference, I'll be using the (blunt & direct) Israeli definition of terrorism when I address this issue.
As for your comment on a terrorist. You are wrong. Don't let that stand in your way of attacking TLBSHOW.
Talk about drama queens. My observation on the subject was clear. You are going to great lengths to rabble rouse on an issue that is clearly open to any number of interpretations.
Not wrong on stupid guys who hate people and kill them...and the overuse of the word 'terrorist' almost as much as 'hero' in the sky.
What else? Well now, tlbshowoff, when you refer to yourself in the third person you probably want some professional to note you are in need of therapy. When you also conclude that 'no one asked me to attack' you both prove you are not paranoid but delusional.
In case you have missed my point, the FBI is going to act like they have two left feet because they want to for reasons well beyond your capacity to fathom.
You guys will admit that something happened on 9/11/01 or do you think that this was business as usual?
I believe that we are in a war against forces that wish to see us dead and our way of life dismantled.
The questions that have to be answered, and quickly, are who is doing this to us and what form will future attacks take. Every attack or attempt must be examined with these questions in mind and to dismiss out of hand any questionable event as unrelated to a larger pattern is sheer folly.
As much as we wish that such a thing as Moderate Islam as a religion of peace and brotherhood exists we may well be deluding ourselves. If the shooter's only link to any outside influence is his Mosque and his Muslim friends then this relationship must be scrutinized closely.
When all other conclusions are eliminated the one remaining, no matter how implausible, distasteful or politically incorrect must be true.
You don't win many of these, do you.
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.