US Thwart's al Qaeda Terrorism in L.A.

Solaris said:

lol. Good find. There was more printed in the LA Times that I got this morning. Bush even called the building "Liberty Building" instead of the real name, Library Building. If it was so significant how is it that he doesn't even know the correct name?

I think Bush missed the bible school lesson about greed and lies.
 
He's so stupid.

He would of informed the mayor of LA if it was really true, I read the Capitol blue hill article and the mayor sounded pretty pissed, and rightly so.
 
clarky003 said:
He would of informed the mayor of LA if it was really true
It just goes to show you that the lack of communication in the "intelligence" community trickles down from the top. Wasn't the Ministry of Homeland Security supposed to ensure proper communication between all levels of government? And we wonder why our agencies can't get any coherent analysis of the situation!
 
VictimOfScience said:
No, of course it didn't start with this war. Its hard to say exactly when it started, but my point is that everyone is always going to be most critical of the biggest power. Now that the Cold War is over and the USSR is no longer around to balance global power, the world is left with a tremendously huge power vaccuum and no one, let alone us, is exactly sure how to deal with it as such. Yes, please, level all the criticism you see fit--hopefully some of it will make sense to those with the power here! But please don't act like the US is the only country that has a foreign policy that could be considered "meddling." I hate to even bring it up, but was our involvement in WWII (not the Pacific front mind you) considered "meddling?" The role we played there played a big part in determining our foreign policy thenceforth and I am not entirely convinced that it is a bad thing....

World War II. It all started with the World War II.
 
DeusExMachinia said:
World War II. It all started with the World War II.
Nah, it was before that (Through the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, it strove to be the dominant influence in the Americas, trying to weaken European influence in Latin America and occasionally intervening to establish puppet governments in weak states--source), but it also depends on your definition of "meddling" according to Stern.
 
Ome_Vince said:
Like i said, its weird that al Qaida states "we havent tried anything in the USA, thats why there hasnt been an attack, so you americans dont go feeling your safe".

Few weeks later -> Bush: "blabla we've stopped an Al Qaida attack back then"

There's bigger issues involved here, the Bush administration's motive would be to make the people think they were/are doing good work to protect America. Al Qaida's motive would be let fellow terrorists know they're still the top-monkey and no security can stop em.
:smoking:

BTw, im not stating what I believe here, just giving motives. Personally i dont know what to believe anymore in these matters...
That would make sense if they'd said they stopped it. The story states the entire thing was stopped because LUCKILY a Southeast Asian nation captured one of the key players. In other words the US govt. was bumbling about that. There was no "LOL US PWNED THEM" it was more "Thank God that nation caught the guy"

Edit: seems they've even released the nation since I first read the story:

Hambali was arrested in 2003 in Thailand, five months after Mohammed was arrested in Pakistan.
 
Right, that makes sense.
Although they could have just linked the guy to it just to make Al Qaeda look bad :p
For some strange reason whatever comes out of Mr Bush's mouth sounds like a spell from Mordor.. :p
Hence i "doubt" most stuff that came out of his mouth :)
 
Agreeing with most of his policies or not is one thing, but it gets rediculous when people call the most basic things lies.

"WELL, YOU HOPE THIS BILL CAN RELEASE FUNDS TO KANSAS FOLLOWING THAT MASSIVE TORNADO HUH? LIAR YOU WANT IT FOR YOUR ILLUMINATI PLANS!!!"
 
RakuraiTenjin said:
Agreeing with most of his policies or not is one thing, but it gets rediculous when people call the most basic things lies.

I think it's quite rediculous to blindly accept what he says as the truth. The man has no credibility and has a rather long list of lies he's pushed on the people of this country. Plus, officials in the intelligence community have disputed his claims.
 
Back
Top