NYC Bomber is just another attack from AQ.

Honest folks, the war on terror is just getting started.

No, no, no.  YOu have this all wrong.  The NYC bomber was distraught because he lost his house during the Bush recession.  All the MSM pundits are saying so.  It is Bush's fault.

Poor man was whipped into a frenzy by irresponsible talkers like Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck and Sarah Palin.

It seemed to be an attack from an amateur terrorist wannabe. Lack of skill and organisation. Extremely hard to track-down for any intelligence agency, and it steemed from the complete decentralisation and fragmentisation of global terrorism, which occured because of the effectiveness of your intelligence agencies.

It ain't close to ending, but it is somewhat a good news to see that organised terrorism seems incapable of even coming close of achieving their strikes. Also, the speed at which they aprehended the wannabe is to be commended. I doubt we'll get much intel out of him, as he is probably, as stated, a poor amateur who had delusion of being a Great Jyhadist.

I am also very, very grateful it didn't turned out to be domestic terrorism against Wall Street as a symbol.

Geesh Cikomyr!  You sure get things all wrong!  It is clear that you do not know ANYTHING about terrorists.  As I stated and Anthony R added to, the causes had nothing to do with "Extremeist Muslim males, generally aged 17-40".  It had everything to do with the evil Man taking his home, his poverty, and of course the hate talkers on the radio and TV.

[/sarcasm]

BTW:  Good to see you back.  And in my most un-PC analysis, you are very accurate.  But then that is hate speech, so I cannot say it in good company.

How is that hate speech?

Some nuts wants to kill a lot of people, for whatever reason they might wanna rise. Your intelligence agencies are making sure these nuts never make contact with people who have the skill and organisation to allow them to be good at it.

So they are reduced to hitting what is known as "soft targets" = unguarded, public areas. We have been lucky on that one, but one day, a random nut will succeed, and no one will be to blame, as it's close to impossible to be able to trackdown individuals working alone on such projects, trying to hit a no-security area.

When that will happen, it's gonna be stupid to blame the CIA. Or the FBI. Or the President. We can, at least, be happy that they worked so hard to prevent massive terrorist attack that would be much more dangerous for your population.

Right Chuck, I said I am HAPPY that american lives are preserved. Try not to choke while reading this.

Absenture for study reason (darn SoA's impossible exams) and I moved to a new place during the week-end, and I.. err.. I should have called to have the internet installed earlier.

Seems there may be a Pakistani Taliban connection here...the story unfolds.

The Taliban took credit for it early on while the Obama admin showed surveillance pics of a white guy changing his shirt. It was quite the dilemma. Should I believe the Taliban reports, or the Obama admin? 

It is hate speech because the person was not a WASP.  If he had been, you could say anything about his motives, methods and opportunity.  But if you want to be PC, since he was not, you must depict him as a persecuted minority that snapped under the Man's oppression.

If you do not believe me, just listen to the American MSM "Oh, if only he was a white male....", "His house was foreclosed, another example of the terrible consequences of the Bush policies...."

I am switching Friday - going to FiOS.  I got tired of cable, but then I am hedging my bets.  I am not turning off Cable until AFTER FiOS is working.

I would've too, if it hadn't been for this exam. It took literally all of my brainpower capacity of the past week. I will now have the upmost respect for those achieving the title of FSA.

Was that comment meant for me? Have you become a mind reader (wannabe) all of a sudden? Ina  way I agree with your comment, they are desperate, unorganized and in many cases stupid. But these are the most dangerous ones, because they are the ones who are totally unpredictable, hard to track and are likely to hit the least likely places.

The way I see it, there is no such thing as soft targets. Whether I am in the Empire State Building or the local 7-11 during a terrorist attack, the actions and results are the same, an attack and death of American citizens. To be honest I don't understand 2 things:

1) Why they are not doing these kinds of attacks more often? Makes more sense to attack the least likely place in a country that values each of it's citizens individually.

2) Why are some of them not killing themselves in the process? I kinda noticed some of these attacked had the terrorist leaving the scene, not going up with the bomb. Interesting. Not only are they stupid and disconnected, but they are also cowards?

So did you pass?  Can you respect yourself now?

Taliban, has never lied to us, Mr. Obama has. With that track record I would have to go with the Taliban. Reports say he was AQ not Taliban.

It has little to do with the terrorists and everything to do with DHS, DIA, CIA, and FBI

Thanks, the story on that won't come out for 25 years but it was fun to watch real time.

You would be wrong here. Until he was read his rights he was spilling his guts. The same Imam that set up the Fort Hood shooting was running this guy.

Because your government is hard at work in spite of our leadership. Just like what we are doing to stop the attacks on our oil wells.

They are running out of "true believers", five years ago they started recruiting women and used them all up. Now you have people that hate but not enough to die for their cause.

Yhea, but there is already a warrant to arrest that Imam. And we'd be ending up arresting their motivator. I'd rather we neutralise the terrorist's technical supports, the ones who actually know how to blow shit up, rather than their chaplain.

Problem is, it has become extremely hard for them to contact each other, as our intelligence counter-effort has been very effective. So less contact, less likely to make a good catch. At least, we safer that way against large-scale attempts, as they are restricted to small-time terrorism.

I wasn't trying to say otherwise, I hope it didn't came across as that. The intel agencies have done an overall terrific job at limiting these.

However, I would be curious to know what part of the procedures put in place are really giving us protection. Has Guantanamo's interrogation techniques and/or other torture methodologies really yielded results? Or is it merely the good work of tracking and monitoring suspicious activities inside the ground of the U.S.?

Ultimately, how much can you squeeze out of somebody after you arrest him, compared to when you are monitoring him?

Only as much as you. Your previous comments regarding what you precieved as my sentiments left me with no other possible conclusion that you leap at every possibility to decry me as somebody who cheers at the deaths of americans, and the destruction of the U.S.

Actually there is an SOS on him. (Shoot on Sight) President Obama last month ordered his death.

This Imam has been the one to give the go order for the pantie bomber, the Fort Hood shooting and the NYC bombing. He has passed the point of being a chaplain or a cheerleader and is a terrorist plotter.

Not really, The Fort Hood shooter was in E-mail contact up to the day he started shooting. The pantie bomber was trained and sent out to do his thing. The NYC bomber was trained in Pakistan and waited for the go order before he did his thing. It does not sound like it is difficult at all to communicate with them.

Here is a little factoid for you. Every year twice a year hundreds of people go through sea and air ports testing and probing the system to see if it is safe to play terrorist again. What I mean is that every single airport and seaport in the world are probed and tested. Not just the US or UK. They are looking for weaknesses that are systemic so they can make a grand play like on 9/11. That plan had them taking twelve to twenty-five planes and slamming them into buildings all over the country, only three made it to their targets. On 9/11 there were at last count 900+ AQ terrorists in the USA for that mission. You have no idea how deep this thing goes.

That would be the patriot act. No defense is perfect, the patriot act is designed as a layered defense.

We are still getting good data from them. You need to understand that interrogation does not involve torture. The USA does not torture people, Mr. Reagan put a stop to that when he took office. Up to that point it was done behind the scenes with a wink and a nod, but it has always been illegal to torture prisoners. Here is how it works in a nutshell. We capture the bad guy. We know that if he has any critical information we have to get it in the first 48 hours. If the person is high enough on the totem-pole we water-board him, if not then we use standard interrogation methods. We talk to them for years. We don't threaten or beat them we just talk to them. Since President James Earl Carter Jr. and the Congress at that time approved water-boarding for our Spec Ops people and all fighter pilots as part of their training it has been used on thousands of US, UK, Canadian, Mexican, and Spanish special operations forces and oh yeah, three terrorists in the last 40 years. I am a graduate of 30 day Escape and Evasion school, all they do is splash water in your face for a minute or so. It does not cause fear, or damage to you. Now on the other hand the terrorist captured the CIA station chief in Beirut, according to some captured bad guys they used a drill to put holes through his knee caps, elbows, and shouders before he spilled his guts, then they killed him by strangulation. How about the Marine General that they tortured and then hung and released the video of it all that was played on ABC news. Given the choice I would rather have water splashed in my face. I've taken showers and been out in the rain. Being wet is easier to recover from than a one inch drill bit through the knees.

Monitoring them only gets you his playmates. Once arrested the suspect becomes useless for many reasons. Captured illegal combatants has the best intelligence. Since they don't have a lawyer, and the enemy does not know we have them the plans they were working on don't get changed much. Canada and the USA have an agreement. Since it is illegal to spy on our own citizens, we spy on Canada and they spy on us, we then trade the intelligence. This has been in effect since around the Carter Administration maybe before, my research has not cleared that up yet.

I agree with many of your posts, except for that part. Water-boarding is torture in my book. I don't have a problem with interrogation. I don't have a problem with interrogation under durness. I don't have a problem with psychological harassment that doesn't degrade your country in the end (dog-rape is out).

While I agree he motivated them into making a terrorist strike, I don't think he was the mastermind behind that strike. He just tells them: "You gotta do something, because Islam tells us X, Y and Z". The rest is up to the terrorist's imagination and capacity.

He is a brainwasher/motivator that will make somebody strike. Relatively low-profile target, except for the symbolism attached to him. Terrorists can fin motivations a dime the dozen. However, I doubt the technical experts in bombmaking are that common nor as easy to contact. These are the critical targets.

But if you have managed to center on a suspect terrorist, isn't catching his playmates the key figure, so you can see exactly who are connected to the whole web?

Do you mean wait to see who is in the whole gang, while maybe his bomb does go off in the mean time? We have ways of making one talk, only problem is some vocal people love to protect and coddle those that would do us harm for some strange reason. The terrorist know their "moral defenders" have their back and use that to their advantage...go figure. Why won't they play by the darn rules?

Don't be stupid. No one in the Intel business actually believes this. You watch him until you manage to catch intel about his sources, and eventually try to arrest him or neutralise him without causing an intel breach that would tip-off the very contacts you've been painstakingly trying to identify.

You watch him. If he procure himself explosive, you make sure he only get his hand on dummy ones, or you arrest him at the convenient time. In the meanwhile, you watch and take notes.

Cikomyr, you have too much common sense for your own good.  You have to put it on a table and walk away to understand the idiots in charge of the US these days.  Instead of doing what would seem obvious (and you stated), they would make sure it makes front page news in the Ny Crimes!

Stupid is as stupid does.  And this administration is as stupid as they come.

You know who you remember me of?

Liberals during the Bush year.

Seriously. The people in charge of your Intel are intelligent people. And they will take the intelligent decisions. They've always had, and always will. There is little margin of available decisions anyway.

You don't climb to the top spot as a dummy.

So now you have special insight on the "Intel business"? I recommend you take your own advice (in bold above).

Well according to the President of the United States of America, the United States Congress, and the international Geneva Conventions on the treatment of prisoners, signed by most contries including Canada, it is not torture. But, you are free to think and believe what you wish.

But that was not what he was doing. He is giveing the orders to do it. You should do something is different from do this now.

It is such a pity you do not read or watch the news. The NYC bomber was trained in Pakistan and sent back to the USA to await orders. When he got them from the dear sweet innocent IMAM he did what he was trained to do. His only mistake was he set the timer for 7 AM instead of 7 PM or their would be a lot of dead people. He was trying to kill people who were out on the town, sightseers, tourist. That does not make him a bad bomb maker it makes him a typical person that did not pay attention to one small part of his mission. He was suspposed to be in the air on his way home when the bomb went off. Other than that one mistake the bomb would have worked. Where the hell are you getting your news from?

Looking at it your way means a lot of wasted time and effort. When you monitor someone you have to check out each and every person he comes in contact with. Look he bumped into that lady on the street, was that a bump pass of information? Do a background check on her and her family. Look he bought a news paper at that stand. Check out everyone that uses that news paper stand. Do you see how time consuming that can be? It means the government has to get warrents for each and every peorson he comes in contact with the entire time he is being watched. On the other hand if you pull the mutt in and interrogate him, he will tell you the names of all the people he works with.

Funny you should say that. I know at least two people at JU that are in the Intel business, They must be stupid along with everyone that works at DIA, CIA, FBI, DHS and NSA because they all beleave it. It is basic policy.

Now that you mentioned this, you are right they are that stupid. they watched a guy in NYC, he flew to Denver to buy and test his bomb. While watching him they did a background check on him and one of the people that we interviewed happend to be a terrorist working with him and he tipped him off to the investigation so we had to arrest him. That was in the news about a few months ago? That did not work so good and we ended up losing not gaining terrorists.

Don't be too hard on him Doc, he really does not understand, he was brought up to think the way he does and the facts are a cold hard slap in his face.

Oh, how I wish that were true. This is the resume of the Director of Homeland Security

In 1991, while a partner with the private Phoenix law firm Lewis and Roca LLP, Napolitano served as an attorney for Anita Hill. Anita Hill testified in the U.S. Senate that then U.S. Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas had sexually harassed her ten years earlier when she was his subordinate at the federal EEOC

In 1993, Napolitano was appointed by President Bill Clinton as United States Attorney for the District of Arizona. As U.S. Attorney, she was involved in the investigation of Michael Fortier of Kingman, Arizona, in connection to the Oklahoma City bombing. She ran for and won the position of Arizona Attorney General in 1998. Her tenure focused on consumer protection issues and improving general law enforcement.

While still serving as attorney general, she spoke at the 2000 Democratic National Convention just three weeks after having a mastectomy. Napolitano recalls that the pain was so unbearable that she couldn't stand up. "Work and family helped me focus on other things while I battled the cancer," says Napolitano. "I am very grateful for all the support I had from family, friends and Arizonans."

Please show me where she had any intelligence training, My first class of over 300 classes on Counter-terrorism in the Marines makes me more qualified than she is and she is my current boss. Does she listen to people with experience? NOPE! She sets policy that we all have to follow. She sets the pace, she defines what is important. Did she serve in the military, did she work for CIA, FBI, NSA? no. She is a political appoitee who got the job because she is a woman that lost her last election to a republican. Please tell me what great accomplishments got her to the positon of Director of my nations security?