Posted on 09/11/2004 12:09:10 AM PDT by nwctwx
FYI RESOURCE:
REPORT IT!
http://www.fbi.gov
http://www.dhs.gov
http://www.rewardsforjustice.net
*If you see something suspicious NOW or a crime in progress NOW; pick up that phone NOW and dial 9-1-1.
If you saw something suspicious or saw a crime; pick up that phone and call your local law enforcement agency.
Are you prepared for a terrorist attack and/or other emergency situations?
The first step to being prepared is to have a plan.
Here's a starting point....
READY.GOV
http://www.ready.gov
bookmark...
FBI.gov - Seeking Information: "ADNAN G. EL SHUKRIJUMAH" (ALIASES: "Adnan G. El Shukri Jumah; Abu Arif; Ja'far Al-Tayar; Jaffar Al-Tayyar; Jafar Tayar; Jaafar Al-Tayyar") (VIEW POSTER. Click Here.)
Hi DC.
Red Mercury
The WMD no one wants to “officially” talk about… Its deadly potential cannot be ignored!!!
On Friday, September 24, 2004, British police arrested 4 suspects for allegedly trying to purchase a ‘highly powerful, radioactive material, originally made in Russia, know as’ Red Mercury’.
These four supposedly were willing to pay $ 541,000 a kilogram, on behalf of a Saudi Arabian, (described as sympathetic to the Muslim cause’), whose name was not disclosed.
“The News of the World said that the material was developed by Soviet scientists during the Cold War for making briefcase nuclear bombs that could kill people within a few city blocks.”
Sam Cohen, the physicist who invented the neutron bomb, sheds a little more light on the destructive power of red mercury. As quoted from a June 15, 1997 article by Christopher Ruddy of the Tribune-Review, it states:
‘Most frightening for Cohen is the relative ease by which neutron bombs can be created with a substance called red mercury. Red mercury is a compound containing mercury that has undergone irradiation. When exploded, it creates tremendous heat and pressure – the same type needed to trigger a fusion device such as a mini-neutron bomb.
Before, an obstacle to creating a nuclear bomb was the need for plutonium, which when exploded could create a fusion reaction in hydrogen atoms. But red mercury has changed that. The cheap substance has been produced in Russia, Cohen said, and shipped on the black market throughout the world.
Cohen said that when UN inspectors went to Iraq to examine the Iraqi’s nuclear weapons capabilities, the U.N. team found documents showing that they had purchased quantities of red mercury. The material means that a neutron bomb can be built “the size of a baseball” but able to kill everyone within several square blocks.”
Another article, “The Balance of Terror and the Red Mercury Nightmare” states that ‘Iraq possesses “s-megaton” micro-nuclear warheads. These are softball sized two-megaton fusion bombs triggered by an irradiated and compressed compound of mercury antimony oxide. This device doubles the nuclear yield with a hundredfold reduction in weight. Using heavy hydrogen instead of uranium or plutonium to fuel its explosive reaction, this handheld nuclear weapon cannot be detected by U.S. sensors.’
Red Mercury….The CIA says that it does not exist, yet terrorist organizations worldwide are willing to pay outrageous amounts of money to procure it…Scientists have alluded that nuclear weapons containing red mercury, can enter the United States, UNDETECTED, be placed in cities all across the country, and cause cataclysmic destruction…from a nuclear bomb, of incredible power, the size of a softball…I don’t know about you folks, but this REALLY scares me!
Now, what bothers me even more, is that last year, confidential intelligence sources informed me that a Special Ops unit in Iraq had lost track of about a ton of red mercury. I have not heard anything to the contrary, so I am assuming that it is still missing. How could that happen???
According to the research that I have done and talking to the contacts that I have in the Intelligence community, red mercury not only destroys human life, but kills every living thing in its path for eternity!!! In other words, where its destructive energy has touched, NOTHING will ever live again, not at least in our lifetime!
Let me go one further, my sources inform me that it would only take a teaspoon of red mercury to kill all living creatures in the Great Lakes.
So now that I have your attention….think about this…..We have all seen or heard about the posts from the Arabic forums that indicate that an American city will disappear (to refresh your memory click here), are these threats really that far-fetched????
Think again!
http://www.homelandsecurityus.net/red_mercury.htm
FWI...Gold at $411.10. USD at $88.46.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200409/s1208965.htm
Latham dismisses latest poll
Federal Labor leader Mark Latham is playing down the latest opinion polls, which are showing varying results.
Newspoll, published in The Australian newspaper today, shows Labor in front on 52 per cent with the Coalition four points behind after the distribution of preferences.
It is in contrast to the AC Neilson poll, published in Fairfax newspapers on the weekend, that found the Coalition ahead and on track to win with an increased majority.
Mr Latham has dismissed the polls.
"On the 10th of October either Labor's won or Liberal's won," he said. "I think in the polling stakes where you get these radically different results, either Newspoll or Neilson will be out of a job, so that's the other certainty we've got."
Federal Treasurer Peter Costello has warned voters against lodging a protest vote against the Government, saying it is too risky with the polls so close.
"The reality is that Mark Latham could be elected and that's enough to send a shiver down anybody's spine," he said.
JP, just one of those days yesterday. I kept the scanner going all evening because of the constant drone of the sirens. Yesterday was a collection of car accidents and ambulance assist calls, and "pot of meat on the stove" calls. It seemed that from 5:00 on the sirens were almost constant. Actually, by and large, the last week or so has been quieter than usual and very routine on the scanner.
TERRORISTS RECRUITED IN JAILS; N.J. LAWMAKERS UPDATED ON SECURITY
http://www.app.com/app/story/0,21625,1063736,00.html
FYI
"One of my gravest concerns is that Al Qaeda will attempt to seriously unhinge the U.S. economy by endorsing a surprise WMD attack on Japan via North Korea."
WMD detonated in NYC with a simultaneous launch of WMD-laden missiles at Tokyo would be designed to attack the financial capitals of the first and second largest economies on the planet.
"The U.S., of course would have to respond in defense of Japan, but in doing so, would be sacrificing Seoul, as well."
I disagreed with the timing of the announcement of the scheduled U.S. troop reduction in the ROK, but the southward redeployment from Seoul was overdue.
Our military has spent much effort at dealing with the artillery problem on the DMZ, but no matter how well JDAM works, Seoul will sustain incredible damage. The issue is only the extent of the destruction. U.S. troops trying to defend Seoul from a static position does not make sense. Pulling them back to more defensible positions south of Seoul now makes more sense than a defensive repositioning under fire later.
"The world economy would be in a shambles, not only based on the physical attack of Japan, but also due to the realization that the nuclear line had been crossed and would inspire further attacks by other rogue nations."
When the global taboo of a nuclear exchange is broken, we will all face apocalyptic peril. It will be such a different world that 9/11 will pale in memory as OKC did after 9/11. Once the genie is out of the bottle, it will be nearly impossible to put back.
"Given the current state of affairs, would a nuclear Iran be impeded if they moved conventionally into that region?"
DPRK went to a "state of semiwar" during the 1991 Gulf War. Then, during the last conflict, DPRK declared the breach on reprocessing in October 2002 (as the President went to Congress for authorization for force against Saddam if things did not work out at the UN), and began this same type of bloodcurdling missile and nuclear threats in the weeks before the beginning of the Iraq War
The point is we came up with the pre-9/11 two major region conflict/major theater war force sizing construct, not from a vacuum, but hard evidence. When we are tied down or perceived to be tied down in the mideast (Gulf War I, Gulf War II, and now Iran), other adversaries (namely DPRK) tend to exploit our distraction.
We are at the verge of the two MRC/MTW scenario being realized, but it is Iran and North Korea (plus Iraqi chaos), not Iraq and North Korea. I think the Seattle and London ranges are based on "proven" capability (the 1998 test). What remains in question is not whether they (Iran and North Korea) physically possess a missile that can strike all areas of the U.S. (It must be assumed they could as evidence emerged during the 1998 crisis that they were 5-10 years ahead of where the CIA thought they would be). The Rumsfeld Commission also determined that a rogue nation with foreign assistance could obtain an ICBM capability within 5 years of a decision to do so *without* testing. The only question is the reliability of the missiles, not their existence. It is why Iran has begun to act confident. They have had the ability to hit Israel and our bases in the region for a few years. They recently announced they will launch their first satellite within the next six months . . .
The reason Iran and North Korea have *jointly* developed these missiles and their nuclear warheads is to deter U.S. intervention as they try to realize their respective regional ambitions.
"In Iran, we are dealing with a terrorist state. There are no "rules" when it comes to terrorism. There are no noncombatants in Western society, therefore, all men, women, and children are "legitimate" targets."
Which is why we cannot adopt that same mindset (no distinction between combatants and civilians in targeting the adversary) as will be the temptation among many Americans once a WMD war breaks out and we suffer extensive casualties. I am for disproportionate retaliation, but not against civilian targets (even if our civilian population centers were the initial targets). We have far more WMD capability than they ever will, but we do not want to go down that road of fighting their WMD jihad/clash of civilizations.
It is the same reasoning why Nixon put an end to our bioweapons program in the early 70s. When you play it out, and the arms race accelerates, once the weapons are used, everyone ends up dead. He pulled the plug for good reason so as not to encourage a biological arms race. The Soviets cheated to some extent, but they too recognized the dangers. Unfortunately, today we are dealing with madmen who have no value for human life and relish the death of the innocent, even their own innocent, as it justifies their hatred and supports their martyrdom theology.
"We can't "nuke" Tehran when there is a willing, educated populace ready to embrace democracy."
A good answer for why we haven't brought the war to the streets of Iran just as the hard-liners in that government has brought terror and carnage to the streets of Iraq. We want to patiently play this out and let nature take its course. It is what Kennan advocated in the early days of the Cold War (and Iran is already ripe for a revolution). It will be much more difficult today to keep this from escalating given what we are up against. The Iranians and North Koreans are *together* trying to force an early confrontation as they see time is not on their side. Iran sees itself with democracies on either side and the revival of moderate, historically non-violent Shi'ism in Najaf (Sistani and the Hawza) which as an ideology is a mortal threat to the Iranian regime and its "Islamic revolution" of theocratic Shi'ism. North Korea is imploding and sees its survival only in a coerced or forcible reunification with the South as any political reform risks the survival of the regime. The nukes were built with the coming reunification war in mind. They were never "bargaining chips" as both administrations seemed to maintain. North Korea is ultimately intent on threatening, and if necessary, waging nuclear war. In the end, this is not about brinkmanship. That is what it has been so far, but in the end, they will not give it up (or at least the current regime will not).
"Pakistan. Musharaff's a goner. It's just a matter of time. That's a situation we cannot comprehend, if the Islamists take over. Not only for us, but for India. Syria/Israel. Any recommendations?"
My recommendation on Syria:
For Syria it is the same as for Pakistan. Both Musharraf and Assad are walking a tightrope. Musharraf has more internal problems (jihadis), Assad has internal (Muslim Brotherhood) and external problems (get too cozy with us and the Iranians will put a contract out on him). Whether either can survive, both are being "co-opted" by our pressure. We gave Pakistan an ultimatum after 9/11 (be with us or against us), the same is now happening to Assad. If either of them go, their successors should get the same consistent message that is now our policy.
Libya delivered its nuclear program to Oak Ridge, Tennessee and Saudi and Pakistan have (albeit reluctantly, partially and under great pressure), at least relative to the time prior to 9/11, moved from bankrolling terrorists towards hunting them.
Let's hope Assad goes down the Libya, Saudi, and Pakistani road rather than the Afghan or Iraqi one. My only idea is to keep turning up the pressure on him to do the right things (as time is rapidly running out), give him the positive incentive to do the right things, and keep the Israelis from derailing this last-ditch effort by coming in after them (like the Indians wanted to come after Pakistan after the attack on their parliament in December 2001).
Give him an incentivized "road map" like we gave Libya of what life will be like for them if they choose to come in from the cold. If Assad won't play ball, then write him off, but it seems on the surface as if he is doing just enough to keep walking the fence. Time has run out. He has to decide which side he wants to fall on, because the fence is about to give way. Iran is trying to pull Israel into a regional war through Syria just as Saddam tried to pull Israel into a regional war through SCUDs. So until and unless we determine that Assad is not serious and is playing us, we go "SCUD-hunting" (disarming Syria as a terrorist and WMD threat) while sitting on the Israelis (persuade them to get the big picture and do a deal with Syria while it is still there).
It should be "Golan first" not "Gaza first". The Syrians need to set the stage for a real and full peace by a systemic demilitarization and terrorist neutralization as an example for a new "road map" for the Palestinians later on. States are the oxygen and terror groups are the fire. Cut off the fuel and the fire will go out. Solve Golan and the fuel for Gaza will go out. And Golan gets you peace. Gaza gets you nothing but more violence.
Syria is the missing link now. If they fall our way (rather than Iran's way in a regional war), we could go from facing a regional war to seeing the possibility of a regional peace for the first time in modern history. That may sound insane, but it is true.
Israel has proven that it *will* exchange the Golan for a real regional peace (they were a few hundred meters and an early warning station or two away from a deal with his father in the mid-90s). But Assad has to choose whether he will learn from Sadat's mistake in 1973 (getting into an unwinnable regional war with Israel to vainly try to gain a better bargaining position for the Golan as Sadat did with the Sinai) because this time the regional war will probably go nuclear. That gambit will not work this time, because there will be little left of Damascus after that kind of war. The Yom Kippur War itself in 1973 almost went nuclear (Dayan was discussing it with his generals when their backs were against the wall). This one will almost certainly do so. So, we cannot let it happen.
Assad will soon be forced to respond meaningfully to the recent attack on Syrian territory and (depending on the severity of the retaliation) Israel will in response either take out yet another leader (after Yassin, Rantisi, and now Khalil) or it will again attack Syrian territory, and then it will escalate again.
We have to intervene and put a stop to the escalatory process.
Or else, at some point, full scale conventional war will break out, one side (Syria) begins to lose and resorts to WMD, or Iran comes to Syria's aid (per their treaty) with their own arsenal of WMD while hitting Israel with short range Hezbollah rockets from south Lebanon and medium range missiles from Iran. (It is like our homeland defense - - the Israeli antimissile defense has to work 100% of the time, the terrorists (and their missiles) only have to be lucky once.)
This is also not 1973 as the region is radicalized by a jihadi phenomenon that did not exist during the last regional war. America is also literally in the middle of the region and this antagonizes the situation even further given the degree of anti-Americanism. WMD is proliferating as never before (A.Q. Khan may have been dealing with the Syrians and the Saudis). And the intifadeh has stoked regional rage against Israel to a point not seen before. This will be like WWI if it happens. Moderate regimes will fall (AQ is counting on it) and the war will expand to include a widening circle of nations like a forest fire that only ends once it burns itself out.
Much depends on whether we can short-circuit the process. If we take Syria off the board by their taking the Libyan route, Iran becomes isolated and Israel is taken off the board as well and made more immune as a geopolitical target as it becomes "encircled" in a positive way by somewhat "friendly nations" (who must commit to disarm, and if necessary, destroy terrorist groups). Syria (and with it Lebanon) would complete the circle.
However, if Syria puts itself into play as the lead aggressor in a regional war, then this becomes a mini "Gog and Magog" (or as Muslims would say - - "Juj and Majuj").
That does not have to happen. Not today. It is not preordained. We have a choice.
Assad is on thin ice, we have to throw him a rope if his actions are for real.
It is time to force a settlement (rather than mediating one).
The Golan in return for Syrian demilitarization, WMD disarmament, active participation in a regional anti-terror coalition with nations such as Israel, Egypt, Iraq, and Jordan, and the realization of a full peace with Israel. An American brigade-sized force could guarantee the settlement.
The Syrian framework would be the model that could be used with the Palestinians.
You should get something in exchange for withdrawal (land for peace). Not what the Israelis are now doing with their "disengagement" (land for more terror). It is Lebanon all over again.
The only things Israelis are getting for the planned "disengagement" from Gaza are bullets and bombs. It will be like their withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000. Their enemies will sense weakness. Negotiated settlements bring lasting peace (Egypt and Jordan). Retreat under fire brings more terrorist savagery (Lebanon and now Gaza).
It should be Golan *then* Gaza. Not the other way around.
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040926-103904-7454r.htm
Assad's conciliation puzzles diplomats
By Andrew Borowiec
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published September 27, 2004
(snip)
NICOSIA, Cyprus -- Conciliatory moves by Syria have left many Middle East diplomats puzzling over the motives of Syrian President Bashar Assad.
One diplomatic assessment speculated that Mr. Assad was impressed with Libya's emergence from international isolation and would like to follow a similar path. Others simply see a cosmetic effort to get out from under U.S. sanctions.
Mr. Assad's decisions include a promise to increase cooperation with the United States and Iraq to control the 370-mile-long Syria-Iraq border, a favorite crossing area for "death volunteers" from across the Arab world, and a redeployment of Syrian troops in Lebanon.
Israeli and some other Western critics dismiss the moves, pointing to Syria's continuing domination of Lebanon, where the Damascus government pressured the parliament to extend the term of office of pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud by three years.
"Syria's tampering with the presidential election is not an existential threat to Lebanon," said the English-language Beirut Star daily. "But it is a serious threat to Lebanon's capacity to enhance the rule of law as a foundation for continued national rejuvenation."
Israel, which sees Syria as one of the major obstacles to a Middle Eastern solution, voiced skepticism and caution, particularly about the removal of 3,000 Syrian troops from the outskirts of Beirut.
The Israeli daily Ha'aretz reported that Mr. Assad "is hoping for an American defeat in Iraq, but fears he will be incriminated as an accomplice to the violent subterfuge there. ... With its new military configuration, Syria is not giving up control over Lebanon but seeking other means of maintaining control."
"I just read a book by "anonymous" (?) about why we are not winning the war on terror. He was claiming that when we initially attacked Afghanistan- we did not do so overwhelmingly and as a result a large number of AQ and Taliban escaped."
Mr Schuer (his name leaked) ran the CIA hunt for UBL in the late 90s. I haven't yet read the book but saw some of his interviews. He believes that the clash of civilizations is inevitable which is why he wants to see more force applied.
He seems to advocate total war (which a lot of freepers would seem to support). I think we owe it to our children to see if there is any other way for that cup to pass from us. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy - - just like a temptation to cut and run in Iraq - - if you think something is inevitable, you start behaving like it is and recommending actions that fit your preconceived notions, and those biased actions bring about the very situation that could have been avoided.
indeed.
Snip: WASHINGTON - Government intelligence agencies continue to collect fresh information reaffirming earlier government warnings that terrorist groups are intent on launching an attack aimed at “affecting the democratic process,” an FBI official said Monday.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6117399/
Cat Stevens was guest of Canadian Hamas front
and another thread
Cat Stevens was guest of Canadian Hamas front
...The expulsion was criticized by Muslim groups, and Mr. Islam denies any ties to terrorism. "I never knowingly gave any terrorist group money," he said after being deported from Israel in 2000. "I've given to poor people and hospitals. I've helped to buy ambulances in the Holy Land. Obviously quite clear and supportable aims."
But on June 20, 1998, Mr. Islam gave the keynote address at a Jerusalem Fund fundraising dinner held in Toronto. The event was videotaped, and a copy was obtained by the SITE Institute, a U.S. terrorism research organization.
The video opens with a scene of Niagara Falls, overlayed with the Jerusalem Fund logo, which features the al-Aqsa Mosque and the maple leaf. It begins with an unidentified man explaining the activities of the Jerusalem Fund, which he describes as "helping the Muslims in Palestine" by financing hospitals, health clinics, families in need and orphans.
"Palestine is close to the heart of each and every Muslim. What the Muslims of Palestine have been doing for many years now has been that bright light shining, that hope ... that they are still believers that can raise the banner of jihad in the most difficult of circumstances."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
link to National Post article with more information
Mr. Islam then begins a 45-minute speech in English in which he says it is "intolerable" for Muslims to "stand and watch" the situation in the Middle East. He describes Jerusalem as the centre of a land that is holy because of its connection to Allah.
"So this city which is blessed because of its religious nature. Therefore, what we see today is the result of the departure of religion from this area, of the uprooting of religion. So many of the people of the faith have been exiled from this region, moved on, to make way for what? Strangely and ironically, they moved on in the name of so-called religion, on behalf of ... the Jews.
"Of course, that would explain what is happening. Because the moment that religion and religious virtues disappear, there for sure follows trouble, tyranny, oppression," he says. "So what do we see then today? The concoction of a so-called new society based on an old society."
He says there could be "no redeemer except Allah. No political concept or construct or treaty or agent except the laws of Allah, which he instructed for this world. Jerusalem is that, the symbol of that. Out of the hands of the righteous then it falls into disrepute and blood.
"Jerusalem, al-Quds, it is a mirror reflecting the reality ... If it is dark, if it is bloody, then so too is the world. Today it reflects injustice of the secular man over the religious man. And how can the secular man be given the control and the sanctuary of the divine place of worship when he doesn't even respect what is holy? How? And how can those of faith allow that to happen? Therefore, peace will not return until we return to the Holy Land."
bookmark
As hard as learning Polish is for me, I couldn't begin to tackle Arabic ;)
The only thing I would worry about is that maybe the language changes a persons brain synapses so that it is impossible to not love death satan.
Does make one wonder doesn't it?
I mean a big arsonist can be a fireman
A criminal profiler can be a serial killer etc.
The mindset of what you learn, that is a thought Selene
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.