[spacefreak]

I wish we could get some details on the type of horrific attack this man is talking about. Will it be a nuke? Use of a bio/chem agent? 1000 simultaneous plane hijackings?

Also, when does Ramadan officially end? I was able to find out a lot about the traditions of Ramadan, but had trouble finding the exact date that Ramadan ends.

Thursday, November 13, 2003

Al-Qal'a (The Fortress) an Islamist Internet forum, posted the first of a two-part interview with a person who introduced himself as Abu Salma Al-Hijazi, one of the Al Qaida commanders closest to Osama bin Laden.(1) The interview was conducted in Iraq, south of Faluja. The article notes that Al-Hijazi was surrounded by five masked men carrying missiles as well as personal weapons. The following are excerpts from the interview:

In regard to rumors about a large-scale attack against the U.S. during the month of Ramadan, Al-Hijazi said that "a huge and very courageous strike" will take place and that the number of infidels expected to be killed in this attack, according to primary estimates, exceeds 100,000. He added that he "anticipates, but will not swear, that the attack will happen during Ramadan."

He further stated that the attack will be carried out in a way that will "amaze the world and turn Al Qaida into [an organization that] horrifies the world until the law of Allah is implemented, actually implemented, and not just in words, on His land... You wait and see that the balance of power between Al Qaida and its rivals will change, all of a sudden, Allah willing."

Regarding Al Qaida detainees, Al-Hijazi said: "We follow their situation closely... the collaborating governments will pay the price for capturing these heroes who want to revive the glory of their nation and shake off the dust of humiliation and disgrace."

Al-Hijazi added that the "collaborating and treacherous" governments should know that Al Qaida has a long reach and its members enjoy popularity that will not end just because apostate governments detain hundreds of Al Qaida's members. "As soon as the governments detain one of our people, ten like him join us... this is no secret."

Al-Hijazi said that Al Qaida instructed its members not to confront the governments of Islamic countries and clarified that Americans are the main target of the organization, wherever they may be, in order to cause their disintegration and collapse, even if it takes a long time. "We are patient," he added, "our patience will only end with the collapse of America and its agents."

Al-Hijazi also said: "There is no doubt that the demise of America and its collapse will lead to the collapse of these fragile regimes that depend on it... We will not stop until we establish the Islamic Caliphate and until Allah's law is implemented in His land."

When asked about the recent bombing in Riyadh, Al-Hijazi referred to Saudi media reports — which claimed that in the attack Muslim women and children were killed — as "merely media deceit." He added: "This place was under surveillance for many months. Following a thorough investigation, it became perfectly clear to us that the people living there were at least 300 Americans and a large group of Lebanese Christians who had tortured Muslims there, in Lebanon, during the civil war. After consultation, we decided it was appropriate to attack this place and destroy it, including the people who lived there, because it housed Americans and a large majority of Christians holding Lebanese citizenship.

"Since the Saudi government is aware of the sensitivity of this place and that it is a declared target for Al Qaida, it surrounded it with very heavy security. However, we gave our people in Riyadh a green light to destroy it on top of those inside. Allah facilitated breaking into the place and bombing the part in which mostly Americans stayed. As a result, praise Allah, at least 40 Americans were killed, as well as 27 Christians from Lebanon, and a group of citizens who were Muslim; also, at least 70 Americans were injured, as well as more than 30 citizens of other countries, most of them Christians from Lebanon."

According to Al-Hijazi, a Saudi religious scholar who is wanted by Saudi authorities will claim responsibility in a televised communiqué for the bombing "and for other operations to come." He added that the wills of the attackers will be published, apparently, in the month of Shawwal — the month following Ramadan according to the Muslim calendar - when Al Qaida's main website, Al-Nida, is due to be reactivated.

Al Qaida commander anticipates 100,000 Americans dead in attack

[thunderous_funker]

Normally I'd dismiss it as a total terrorist pipe-dream, but I have to admit I'm edgy about it. I guess all this constant fear peddling in the media are taking their toll on me....

<sigh>

If anyone wants to join me at Philly West Bar & Grill on Westwood blvd, I'll be happy to buy you a drink and talk of happier days gone by.

Stay safe, everyone.

[Krusty]

http://www.ace-travel.com/ramadancalender.htm

[spacefreak]

I'd join you, but I don't want to be on one of those 1000 planes.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by Krusty:
http://www.ace-travel.com/ramadancalender.htm

Thanks. Looks like Nov. 24th is the last day.

[lil'babykitten]

In regard to rumors about a large-scale attack against the U.S. during the month of Ramadan, Al-Hijazi said that "a huge and very courageous strike" will take place and that the number of infidels expected to be killed in this attack, according to primary estimates, exceeds 100,000. He added that he "anticipates, but will not swear, that the attack will happen during Ramadan."

He further stated that the attack will be carried out in a way that will "amaze the world and turn Al Qaida into [an organization that] horrifies the world until the law of Allah is implemented, actually implemented, and not just in words, on His land... You wait and see that the balance of power between Al Qaida and its rivals will change, all of a sudden, Allah willing."

Where's that BS sign eklipse?

I doubt there is any truth to this whatsoever.
But what complete morons. I guess they didn't hear the Malaysian PM's speech. Friggin' idiots, what the f*** would attacking America again achieve except another knee jerk attack on a middle eastern country?
Insh'allah he'll see the light at that very long dark tunnel he is in at the moment.

Anywho I think it's total crap, I don't buy it.

[Krusty]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
Where's that BS sign eklipse?

BS that its going to happen or BS that this guy said its going to happen ? I'm not really worried/anticipating anything either -- but I wouldn't doubt some dude saying it. Apparently, saying stuff like that gets you all sorts of chicks in the Al-Qaeida clique.

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
Thanks. Looks like Nov. 24th is the last day.

Just duck and cover™ until then and you'll be safe.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by kvm_mkdb:
Just duck and cover™ until then and you'll be safe.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
Anywho I think it's total crap, I don't buy it.

You likely wouldn't have bought the 9/11 attack had it been announced similarly in the days prior, either. I probably wouldn't have.

Perhaps it is recruiting rhetoric. Regardless - in order to attract financial donors and recruits, their mission is going to need another high-profile attack on Americans on their soil.

I'm still wondering about Saddam's missing bio/chem stocks. We have yet to find a shred of evidence that they were destroyed. From what I have gathered, of all the Iraqis scientists and officials interviewed, none have been able to verifiably say where and when such agents were destroyed. Soil samples taken at the few locations where some suggested the destruction could have taken place didn't even show a trace of these agents.

So here we have an Al Qaida commander, stationed in Iraq, talking of an upcoming, "horrific" attack on Americans that will, by their estimates, claim at least 100,000 lives. And we haven't found Saddam's bio/chem stocks.

We need to find those damn barrels.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by Krusty:
Apparently, saying stuff like that gets you all sorts of chicks in the Al-Qaeida clique.

Actually, it is the martyrdom-style attack on infidels that gets you the chicks.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
You likely wouldn't have bought the 9/11 attack had it been announced similarly in the days prior, either. I probably wouldn't have.

Good point. I wouldn't have either.

Originally posted by spacefreak:
I'm still wondering about Saddam's missing bio/chem stocks.....

Meh. I'm much more worried about bio/chem stocks from the former Soveit bloc than anything from Iraq.

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
Al Qaida commander anticipates 100,000 Americans dead in attack

Bah. Posted on a dubious bulletin board, spread by MEMRI. Not exactly a reliable source.

Besides - between the Al Quaeda commander in Falluja, Saddam's WMDs and a few more details, smells like unadulterated BS to me.

[eklipse]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
Where's that BS sign eklipse?

(Sorry I'm late - I was putting together my DIY-nuclear-bunker-kit - but the bastards left a piece missing - hopefully they'll send me the replacement parts before Eid)

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by kvm_mkdb:
Bah. Posted on a dubious bulletin board, spread by MEMRI. Not exactly a reliable source.

The commander must have had something against appearing on Dateline. Maybe he doesn't like their NY studios.

[Mister Elf]

Dammit, if it happens I want to be long out to sea. I don't want to have to shoot down friendly airliners, hell no.

[adamk]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
You likely wouldn't have bought the 9/11 attack had it been announced similarly in the days prior, either. I probably wouldn't have.

don't worry, i've contacted the white house and homeland security. they'll be able to put 2 and 2 together.

Perhaps it is recruiting rhetoric.

i agree. if you are really trying to make an impression, you don't let the cat out of the bag before hand.

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
Thanks. Looks like Nov. 24th is the last day.

Happy birthday to me.

How many people died in the WTC attacks? Less than 10,000, right? If they manage to kill 100,000 Americans, I shudder at the carnage that would be, and that would follow.

A guy on blogforamerica (BobbyO), in talking about rough politics said he had this rule - "One of ours in the hospital, three of yours in the morgue."

I'd wager that if you looked at the body count, that's about what it has amounted to.

It's working great for the Israelies, too.

From where I'm sitting right now, the problem seems intractable.



BlackGriffen

[adamk]

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:

A guy on blogforamerica (BobbyO), in talking about rough politics said he had this rule - "One of ours in the hospital, three of yours in the morgue."

I'd wager that if you looked at the body count, that's about what it has amounted to.

three to one sounds awfully low.

in iraq, there have been +400 coalition casualties. there have been a minimum (i would say very conservative) 8,000 civilians. i am not sure that a count exists for soldiers who fought but you'd have to imagine that is a whole lot more. given that maybe 1/3 of coalition casualties are not combat related, the 3:1 ratio is not even close (even if you are inclined to place the WTC victims in that equation).

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by eklipse:
(Sorry I'm late - I was putting together my DIY-nuclear-bunker-kit - but the bastards left a piece missing - hopefully they'll send me the replacement parts before Eid)

Originally posted by spacefreak:
You likely wouldn't have bought the 9/11 attack had it been announced similarly in the days prior, either. I probably wouldn't have.

That's the difference right there- the 9/11 attacks were not announced, as far as I recall there were no hints to suggest anything was about to happen. The reason being once you say such a thing it puts everyone on alert, makes your 'mission' more difficult. That's when you need the FBI and CIA to know wtf they are doing.

It's a good scare tactic, I mean look at some of the responses in here. If anything it will put Americas security agencies on alert-which doesn't really play to Al Queda's advantage.

[rjenkinson]

Originally posted by kvm_mkdb:
Just duck and cover™ until then and you'll be safe.

duck and cover was not meant to save people from the blast itself, but to minimize the number of people injured from debris flying through the air.

-r.

[gadster]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
... as far as I recall there were no hints to suggest anything was about to happen.

Well there was this . . . http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0517/p01s02-usju.html

[Lerkfish]

well, whether this current threat bears evil fruit or not, it highlights how ineffective the war on terror actually is.

[Spliffdaddy]

yeah, now the terrorists must rely on merely threatening to do something bad.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
yeah, now the terrorists must rely on merely threatening to do something bad.

well, if the WOT were as effective as Bush portrays it, they'd be afraid to do even that, and their threats would receive no notice.
Yet, they continue to threaten, and those threats continue to terrorize people.
and, we do not know as of yet whether these threats will bear evil fruit....
however, the threat is terrorism enough.

[Spliffdaddy]

As long as you count threats as terrorism I reckon we'll never win the war on terrorism.

I think most everyone would be satisfied if terrorist acts become simply terrorist threats.

After several years of threats - and no action - I think it's safe to say that American citizens are on their way to being satisfied.

[gadster]

It's on the record that the US was repeatedly warned about 9/11. That they chose not to scramble the airforce when 4 big planes were AWOL is just confounding. Particularly since the hijacked planes lumbered right over US military airspace.

But back on topic, I suspect US Allies are in for it this time. There are many references to US collaborators in the statement. 100,00) people are expected at the Rugby World Cup final. 23/11/03 Sydney, Australia.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
As long as you count threats as terrorism I reckon we'll never win the war on terrorism.

I think most everyone would be satisfied if terrorist acts become simply terrorist threats.

After several years of threats - and no action - I think it's safe to say that American citizens are on their way to being satisfied.

your lips to God's ears, then.
However, I take a more realistic view.

[Troll]

Originally posted by gadster:
It's on the record that the US was repeatedly warned about 9/11. That they chose not to scramble the airforce when 4 big planes were AWOL is just confounding. Particularly since the hijacked planes lumbered right over US military airspace.

But back on topic, I suspect US Allies are in for it this time. There are many references to US collaborators in the statement. 100,00) people are expected at the Rugby World Cup final. 23/11/03 Sydney, Australia.

Yeah but with the stadium filled with Kiwi and French fans, why would they attack that?

[kvm_mkdb]

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by gadster:
Well there was this . . . http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0517/p01s02-usju.html

Yeah I know about this, I was referring to public awareness of the attacks, but your point still stands.
The FBI and CIA et al better be way on top of it this time, just incase.

I still doubt there is any truth to these threats.
Apparently Britain is at the top of the list of targets by Al Queda....

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
As long as you count threats as terrorism I reckon we'll never win the war on terrorism.

.....and as long as you continue to pursue the WOT as you have been, you will never be fully certain that the threats are empty.....

[theolein]

The source of this wonderful communiqué </sarcasm> are dubious to say the least. The original is from an Arabic forum (I pity the poor buggers who have to code html in Hewbrew or Arabic-backwards, forwards, backwards, forwards etc) and that hardly counts as a reputable news source, but it sounds like a fine place to generate propaganda for all conspiracy fans and other wet dream artists.

A lot of Arabs (I worked with a particularly slimy example in my last job, who conspired to get me fired) support Al-Qaida, often it seems because the Arabs are so frustrated by just about everything, including their repressive religion, repressive society, repressive government and need some outlet to vent, and being the phneominal genii that they are, they support an organisation that would repress them even more. It reminds me of penis envy, and, just like little boys everywhere, even on MacNN, they will propagandise their favourite football team.

Fact: Al-Qaida has never announced an attack before. Al-Qaida may be a bunch of raving lunatics, but they're not that stupid. For the most part they haven't even claimed responsibility for most of their attacks. And killing 100'000 people in one attack is a big attack.

Could it be true? It is possible, and if Al-Qaida had the means I'm sure they would do something like that. But what kind of weapon would they need to be fairly certain of killing 100'000?

Remember that Iraq used chemical weapons for years in the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-1988. In full scale battles chemical weapons seldom killed more than 4000 unprotected Iranians at once. Winds push the chemical weapons away, the sun destroys them etc. I doubt that Al-Qaida could have the tons of chemcial weapons or the logistics to transport them.

So, what about biological weapons? The biggest problem is that these tend to infect anyone, including good Moslems. The chances of these backfiring on the Arab populations would be large, and also here, huge quantities would be needed to kill 100'000 people. Some bioweapons such as botulism are more like chemical weapons but they also have the above mentioned problems.

That leaves atomic weapons. If Al-Qaida managed to get it's hands on an old Soviet weapon or a stolen Pakistani one they could do a massive amount of damage and this would be certainly the only type of weapon that could be reasonably certain of killing 100'000 people in one go.

Would they do it? They certainly are crazy enough to do it, as shown by the 9/11 attacks. I don't think however, that Al-Qaida really realises the retribution that would befall them if they were to use such a weapon, because if they did do such a thing, I'm pretty sure that that there would be many more than 100'000 killed in revenge.

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally posted by theolein:
A lot of Arabs … being the phneominal genii that they are …

While I understand your frustration about the job, etc., I would have never expected to hear something like this from you.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by theolein:
A lot of Arabs..... support Al-Qaida, often it seems because the Arabs are so frustrated by just about everything, including their repressive religion, repressive society, repressive government and need some outlet to vent, and being the phneominal genii that they are, they support an organisation that would repress them even more.

Smells like a broad sweeping generalisation....
surprised that it came from you.

Originally posted by theolein:
So, what about biological weapons? The biggest problem is that these tend to infect anyone, including good Moslems. The chances of these backfiring on the Arab populations would be large, and also here, huge quantities would be needed to kill 100'000 people.

Recent events would appear to demonstrate that they don't give a crap about the Arab populations. I don't think it would be something that would prevent them from using biological weapons.
I'm not quite sure exactly what Al-Qaida is aiming for now. Their attacks on the WTC brought nothing but more misery for the Arab world so such a statement now shows they haven't learnt a thing.

[Mister Elf]

Originally posted by theolein:
The biggest problem is that these tend to infect anyone, including good Moslems.

The problem here is that they think all good Muslims should die for their cause...

[mr. natural]

I tend to think this is pure BS. Effective only as terrorist propaganda only if you think there are boat loads of missing Iraqi biologocal/chemical "barrels" that we need to scour the earth looking for.

Then again, if this is one's fancy, the smart money would be on not using the imaginary WMD of Saddam, but rather taking over one of our biological/chemical weapons facilities.

However, rather than using bio/chem agents, and if the number of casualties is to be taken seriously, I tend to worry about an attack or take-over of one of our many nuclear power facilities. They wouldn't even have to breach the core of the power plant either, just one of the spent rod storage pools to unleash a good radioactive cloud.

Apparently, even though the Nuclear facilities knew when a mock terrorist raid was coming, they lost control of the facility 50% of the time.

Now, there's a number to lose some sleep over.

And to think, all kinds of WMD are located across the breadth and width of our land. It's like the old bank robbery saying: That's Where The Money Is!

[theolein]

Originally posted by kvm_mkdb:
While I understand your frustration about the job, etc., I would have never expected to hear something like this from you.

I think I might have been misunderstood. I meant that those who support Al-Qaida are my mind as stupid as any who would support an organisation or philosphy who would not make their lives any freer or better if that organisation or philosophy were to rule over them. That applies to the Patriot Act and those would give up their freedoms in your country and mine for a lie of better security just as much as it applies to Al Qaida.

As for living in Arab countries, to be honest, no I don't think I'd like to live in most of those countries. I find most of them very conservative and repressive socially. But I'd probably feel the same way in some protestant theocracy as well.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by BlackGriffen:
A guy on blogforamerica (BobbyO), in talking about rough politics said he had this rule - "One of ours in the hospital, three of yours in the morgue."

Actuall, I believe that's a Regan quote. On which he based his foreign policy. I think it was Ronny. One of them based their foreign policy on it. It's not a new line.

Remember, Al Qaida warned of attacks a few weeks prior to 9/11. It was picked up by several news wires, as a tiny story.

Al Qaida always warns before their attacks, it's their signature mark. The first WTC attack, also had a warning. Ignored? Yes. But was the warning put out? Yes.


It's the first sign of a real risk. Does it mean it's going to happen? No. Does it mean it's possible? Of course.


Also note, if it happens, this warning will have never been given.

[petehammer]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
Actuall, I believe that's a Regan quote. On which he based his foreign policy. I think it was Ronny. One of them based their foreign policy on it. It's not a new line.

Jim Malone (Sean Connery): You wanna know how you do it? Here's how, they pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send on of his to the morgue! That's the Chicago way, and that's how you get Capone! Now do you want to do that? Are you ready to do that?

The Untouchables. Great film. That's where I think this line comes from, but I could be wrong.

Though it seems like the 3:1 ratio has certainly guided foreign policy in the past.

[swrate]

Originally posted by theolein:
The source of this wonderful communiqué </sarcasm> are dubious to say the least. The original is from an Arabic forum (I pity the poor buggers who have to code html in Hewbrew or Arabic-backwards, forwards, backwards, forwards etc) and that hardly counts as a reputable news source, but it sounds like a fine place to generate propaganda for all conspiracy fans and other wet dream artists.

A lot of Arabs (I worked with a particularly slimy example in my last job, who conspired to get me fired) support Al-Qaida, often it seems because the Arabs are so frustrated by just about everything, including their repressive religion, repressive society, repressive government and need some outlet to vent, and being the phneominal genii that they are, they support an organisation that would repress them even more. It reminds me of penis envy, and, just like little boys everywhere, even on MacNN, they will propagandise their favourite football team.

Fact: Al-Qaida has never announced an attack before. Al-Qaida may be a bunch of raving lunatics, but they're not that stupid. For the most part they haven't even claimed responsibility for most of their attacks. And killing 100'000 people in one attack is a big attack.

Could it be true? It is possible, and if Al-Qaida had the means I'm sure they would do something like that. But what kind of weapon would they need to be fairly certain of killing 100'000?

Remember that Iraq used chemical weapons for years in the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-1988. In full scale battles chemical weapons seldom killed more than 4000 unprotected Iranians at once. Winds push the chemical weapons away, the sun destroys them etc. I doubt that Al-Qaida could have the tons of chemcial weapons or the logistics to transport them.

So, what about biological weapons? The biggest problem is that these tend to infect anyone, including good Moslems. The chances of these backfiring on the Arab populations would be large, and also here, huge quantities would be needed to kill 100'000 people. Some bioweapons such as botulism are more like chemical weapons but they also have the above mentioned problems.

That leaves atomic weapons. If Al-Qaida managed to get it's hands on an old Soviet weapon or a stolen Pakistani one they could do a massive amount of damage and this would be certainly the only type of weapon that could be reasonably certain of killing 100'000 people in one go.

Would they do it? They certainly are crazy enough to do it, as shown by the 9/11 attacks. I don't think however, that Al-Qaida really realises the retribution that would befall them if they were to use such a weapon, because if they did do such a thing, I'm pretty sure that that there would be many more than 100'000 killed in revenge.

Population's forums, in all langages are sources: propaganda, information and exchanges.

Frustration, maybe, but more much more lately.
!
penis envy? I doubt it, you dont kill yourself for penis envy.
it has to do with repression.

you wrote:"they support an organisation that would repress them even more"
at the beginning, one dosn't realize one is being repressed.
one wants to believe in a better program.
People get the general image of someone fighting for the rights of the Ummah,

Masses follow leaders they can identifie with.
without being aware of their very strict interpretation Of the Coran.

I wouldnt focus on the 100 000, its a figure of speech imao

and the army does spend trillions for protection,


Nukes, contracts, working with so and so.....
btw pakistan saudia and sudan had a weapon program together.

quite a lot of material for WMD from the cold war has not yet been tracked.



Moujahedeens to keep the Believers on their side,
would make a mistake, to attack loads of foreign innocents instead of being on the battle ground.
I think and hope they are aware. (even though you will argue about II

Threatening to obtain... Jeddah and all the rest they have been asking and the deals we will only know about (if we are lucky) in 50 years.
The danger of extrems.

is the danger containable? on all sides?



Fear is also a weapon.
Jihad dosn't stop on the battle ground...

[spacefreak]

Just a thought: The Al Qaeda commander quoted stated his estimates of this attack were 100,000 dead, and that the attack will happen during Ramadan (which ends Nov. 24th).

Reading up on the planned protest for Bush's visit to London, where some Muslim radical warned fellow Muslims to steer clear of downtown,

Organizers expect 100,000 anti-war demonstrators to cap their protest by toppling a giant statue of Bush in central London's Trafalgar Square.

Regarding the protest, the date and expected turnout number seemed to fit the threat in an eerie sort of way. Perhaps coincidence, perhaps it is only a threat, but just the thought of something happening is scary.

[eklipse]

Organizers expect 100,000 anti-war demonstrators to cap their protest by toppling a giant statue of Bush in central London's Trafalgar Square

LMAO!

That would be more people than there were cheering the toppling of the statue of Saddam Hussein.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by eklipse:
Organizers expect 100,000 anti-war demonstrators to cap their protest by toppling a giant statue of Bush in central London's Trafalgar Square

LMAO!

That would be more people than there were cheering the toppling of the statue of Saddam Hussein.

Yes, there are never any loss of idealistic anti-war and violence nuts that show hypocrisy at any chance they get.

Someone once told me Bush HAD to be the worst president because of all the protesters.

That isn't true.

Liberal hippy anti-war mongers have ALWAYS been louder and more obnoxious than most groups. Including the KKK.

[eklipse]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
Just a thought: The Al Qaeda commander quoted stated his estimates of this attack were 100,000 dead, and that the attack will happen during Ramadan (which ends Nov. 24th).

Reading up on the planned protest for Bush's visit to London, where some Muslim radical warned fellow Muslims to steer clear of downtown,

Regarding the protest, the date and expected turnout number seemed to fit the threat in an eerie sort of way. Perhaps coincidence, perhaps it is only a threat, but just the thought of something happening is scary.

1. Why would al-Qaeda kill 100,000 anti-war protestors?
2. Britain isn't an American state (yet) - hence a distinct lack of 100,000 Americans.

[Spliffdaddy]

Organizers expect 100,000 anti-war demonstrators to cap their protest by toppling a giant statue of Bush in central London's Trafalgar Square.

And not a damn one of them could offer an alternative solution to the US-led liberation of Iraq.

[Sherwin]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Organizers expect 100,000 anti-war demonstrators to cap their protest by toppling a giant statue of Bush in central London's Trafalgar Square.

And not a damn one of them could offer an alternative solution to the US-led liberation of Iraq.

And... I wonder if they realise that to topple a stature of the Pres in Trafalgar Square they'd have to erect one first. Which would probably screw up their message a little.

Doh!

[Millennium]

I believe that the statement is the attack. In other words, nothing more than a hoax.

Think about it. al-Qaida is still riding high on the coattails of 9/11; everyone is scared to death of them. In a case like that, hoaxes scare people just as effectively as a "real" attack, but they're cheaper, take less time to prepare, and don't cost you a handful of your best recruits. From an economic standpoint, if you can pull off a hoax -and they can right now- it makes much more sense than an attack, if your goal is to dominate through fear.

[Sherwin]

Originally posted by Millennium:
I believe that the statement is the attack. In other words, nothing more than a hoax.

Think about it. al-Qaida is still riding high on the coattails of 9/11; everyone is scared to death of them. In a case like that, hoaxes scare people just as effectively as a "real" attack, but they're cheaper, take less time to prepare, and don't cost you a handful of your best recruits. From an economic standpoint, if you can pull off a hoax -and they can right now- it makes much more sense than an attack, if your goal is to dominate through fear.

No, it doesn't work like that. Constant "all gob no trousers" as we say here doesn't work. People start to no longer worry about it - they become hardened to it. Heck, even if you make the occasional attack people start getting to a point where they're not bothered about it.

There's been at least three IRA bombs within a half-hour drive of me. Nobody was bothered except the direct victims. People get to the mentality where they say "sh*t happens".

I've personally driven under a freeway bridge 20 minutes before the IRA took it down. Was I bothered? No. Sh*t happens.

If the terrorist doesn't wage a regular campaign they find themselves up against the peoples' apathy.

[Face Ache]

Originally posted by Troll:
Yeah but with the stadium filled with Kiwi and French fans, why would they attack that?

Umm...