Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

zynner · Sep 7, 2006, 08:08 pm

Seems like an absurd question to many. I realize that. But take a look around you.

Why don't we see terrorist acts on a regular basis? After all, the definition of terrorism is an act of violence, usually against civilians, for a political purpose. It's used to send a message. That's why terrorists take credit/blame for their acts. They want it KNOWN that they are pissed off about something. Interestingly, Osama bin Laden said he had nothing to do with 9/11 and the FBI seems to agree.

Anyway, why is it that we have this massive, well-coordinated, well-orchestrated, seemingly impossible-to-pull-off act on 9/11, yet no random bombs at Little League games? Why no shootings in at the local mall parking lot? Why no mail bombs? There are millions and millions of things a small group of terrorists could do that would wreak havoc on the masses and really terrorize the public. Yet, nothing.

The US borders are a joke. Any terrorist worth his salt should be able to sneak across the low level security. We are told there are lots of cells in the US. Yet, nothing.

Could it be that terrorism as described by the US/UK governments does not really exist?

If their description of what and who these terrorists are were true, wouldn't we see actual acts of ... umm... terrorism?

Why is it that almost all the people in the US and UK who have been arrested for terrorism have been released without charges? Why have most of the ones not released been, at most, charged with non-terrorism charges?

Why is it that the London bombings on 7/7 just so happen to have occured at the exact same time that security drills of bus and subway bombings were also going on? Wow, what a coincidence.

Why is it that the 9/11 events just so happen to have occured at the exact same time as military drills of hijacked airliners and planes being flown into buildings were also going on? Wow, what a coincidence.

In fact, have there been ANY acts of terrorism that did NOT also occur when a government entity was performing a drill regarding the exact same subject matter and at the exact same time? I dunno. I'm wondering if such a thing exists.

Why ... do we see no attempts to engage in all sorts of little acts all over the country and world that would really terrorize people -- remember the shootings in DC or Phoenix?

Is it possible that this terrorism thing is just a scam to gain power over the people -- to wage war AGAINST the public and get draconian laws passed that violate fundamental rights and that rally support for war in the Middle East?

Why did a high-level official in the Pakistani government (US ally) wire $100,000 to Mohamed Atta in the days before 9/11?

Why did the Bush administration actually fight against any investigation of 9/11 and then make sure it was headed by people who would make it a whitewash?

Why did the 9/11 Commission clearly state that knowing who funded 9/11 is not important (to the commission)?

Why are the US borders not defended?

Why do you have to have a microchip in your passport?

The more you look into all this stuff, the more you have to ask yourself...

Where are the terrorists?

WHO are the terrorists?

~ zynner

RVonse · Sep 7, 2006, 08:39 pm

Quote:

Quote by: zynner

Why do you have to have a microchip in your passport?

~ zynner

I did not know passports had microchips in them. When did they start doing that? I have a 2 year old passport, are you saying it has a chip in it?

As for the rest of your OP, I agree 100%. But the worst of the problem (not mentioned) of our country right now IMO is a voting system that is obviously flawed that nobody wants to investigate. I fear a soft dictatorship already exists in the U.S.

leftcider · Sep 7, 2006, 09:25 pm

Good post... have you ever heard the explanation that al Qaeda doesn't want to do small attacks because they feel the need to "outdo" 9-11 to demonstrate an increase, and not lessening, of strength?

Also, what about the recent "foiled attack" on transatlantic jetliners?

I think that how widespread "the terrorists" are is exaggerated, but that doesn't mean that there's no threat at all.

ibm · Sep 8, 2006, 12:30 am

zynner, good post. i see your points and i think they are mostly valid.

imo terrorists do exist - both domestically and overseas. depending on how you define a terrorist, obviously you will have different answers to the question of who are the real terrorists or bigger threat to american people. but in any case, i think they do exist.

dreamer · Sep 8, 2006, 04:45 am

Quote:

Quote by: zynner

Why is it that almost all the people in the US and UK who have been arrested for terrorism have been released without charges? Why have most of the ones not released been, at most, charged with non-terrorism charges?

Good post bye the way,This is allso how i see it fear more powerful than terrorism.

Quote:

Quote by: zynner

Why is it that the London bombings on 7/7 just so happen to have occured at the exact same time that security drills of bus and subway bombings were also going on? Wow, what a coincidence.

This is allso true, good way to get to the peoples fears.

Quote:

Quote by: zynner

Why is it that the 9/11 events just so happen to have occured at the exact same time as military drills of hijacked airliners and planes being flown into buildings were also going on? Wow, what a coincidence.

wow your good.

Quote:

Quote by: zynner

In fact, have there been ANY acts of terrorism that did NOT also occur when a government entity was performing a drill regarding the exact same subject matter and at the exact same time? I dunno. I'm wondering if such a thing exists.

I look at this as fear on top of fear it becomes more scary to the public.

Quote:

Quote by: zynner

Why ... do we see no attempts to engage in all sorts of little acts all over the country and world that would really terrorize people -- remember the shootings in DC or Phoenix?

To much means that the goverments are not in control

Quote:

Quote by: zynner

Is it possible that this terrorism thing is just a scam to gain power over the people -- to wage war AGAINST the public and get draconian laws passed that violate fundamental rights and that rally support for war in the Middle East?

How true.

Quote:

Quote by: zynner

Why did the Bush administration actually fight against any investigation of 9/11 and then make sure it was headed by people who would make it a whitewash?

To many lies to hide.

Quote:

Quote by: zynner

WHO are the terrorists?

Bush and Blair in my eyes with there lies.

zynner · Sep 8, 2006, 11:53 am

RVonse --

You can check out a CNN article I found on Google -- there are better ones out there but I don't have any handy links: CNN.com - Passport chips raise privacy concerns - Jan 6, 2005

- - - - -
leftcider -

The jury is still out on the so-called liquid bomb conspiracy (a government approved "conspiracy theory," I might add). Most of those in question had no passports. How were they to board transatlantic flights? The process necessary to do what they are said to have wanted to do would be impossible in an airliner bathroom. They would need very cold temperatures, more than 24 hours for the solution to "cure," etc. Not just difficult but impossible from what I've read.

- - - - -
ibm -
Yes, I agree that there are individuals around the world who are willingly engaging in acts of violence (which are being labled as acts of "terrorism"). What I'm questioning is who are their real leaders and what are the leaders' real purpose(s)? Is the leadership really a few guys in the Middle East or is it far more sinister than that?

I'm also questioning the US & UK govts' official story of who the leaders really are and what the real purposes are of the various acts of "terrorism" we see.

I'm not questioning, for example, that the gov't says Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK. I'm questioning whether or not that story is really true (as it realates to today's issue of terrorism).
- - - - -
dreamer -

FDR said all we have to fear is fear itself.

Bush, on the other hand, has nothing to offer but fear. Well, fear and unprotected borders. Something obviously does not add up in this whole thing.

~ zynner

Alive · Sep 8, 2006, 12:09 pm

It's definitely a little strange. Compare the terrorist attacks against Israel--random bus bombs, suicide bombs in crowded cafes, basically anything to induce the maximum fear and casualties. Al-Quada and similar anti-Western terrorist organizations seem to only focus on the really big things. Planes, trains, large buildings. They don't attack easy targets.

Maybe the terrorists are competing for some kind of rep. Maybe it's sort of a game to them, let's show the West how weak all their security measures are by attacking at its strongest point. Or maybe there's a bigger conspiracy somewhere. I don't know.

Sep 7, 2006, 08:08 pm	#1 (permalink) (top)
zynner Hot Lava Posts: 817	Terrorists - Do They REALLY Exist? Seems like an absurd question to many. I realize that. But take a look around you. Why don't we see terrorist acts on a regular basis? After all, the definition of terrorism is an act of violence, usually against civilians, for a political purpose. It's used to send a message. That's why terrorists take credit/blame for their acts. They want it KNOWN that they are pissed off about something. Interestingly, Osama bin Laden said he had nothing to do with 9/11 and the FBI seems to agree. Anyway, why is it that we have this massive, well-coordinated, well-orchestrated, seemingly impossible-to-pull-off act on 9/11, yet no random bombs at Little League games? Why no shootings in at the local mall parking lot? Why no mail bombs? There are millions and millions of things a small group of terrorists could do that would wreak havoc on the masses and really terrorize the public. Yet, nothing. The US borders are a joke. Any terrorist worth his salt should be able to sneak across the low level security. We are told there are lots of cells in the US. Yet, nothing. Could it be that terrorism as described by the US/UK governments does not really exist? If their description of what and who these terrorists are were true, wouldn't we see actual acts of ... umm... terrorism? Why is it that almost all the people in the US and UK who have been arrested for terrorism have been released without charges? Why have most of the ones not released been, at most, charged with non-terrorism charges? Why is it that the London bombings on 7/7 just so happen to have occured at the exact same time that security drills of bus and subway bombings were also going on? Wow, what a coincidence. Why is it that the 9/11 events just so happen to have occured at the exact same time as military drills of hijacked airliners and planes being flown into buildings were also going on? Wow, what a coincidence. In fact, have there been ANY acts of terrorism that did NOT also occur when a government entity was performing a drill regarding the exact same subject matter and at the exact same time? I dunno. I'm wondering if such a thing exists. Why ... do we see no attempts to engage in all sorts of little acts all over the country and world that would really terrorize people -- remember the shootings in DC or Phoenix? Is it possible that this terrorism thing is just a scam to gain power over the people -- to wage war AGAINST the public and get draconian laws passed that violate fundamental rights and that rally support for war in the Middle East? Why did a high-level official in the Pakistani government (US ally) wire $100,000 to Mohamed Atta in the days before 9/11? Why did the Bush administration actually fight against any investigation of 9/11 and then make sure it was headed by people who would make it a whitewash? Why did the 9/11 Commission clearly state that knowing who funded 9/11 is not important (to the commission)? Why are the US borders not defended? Why do you have to have a microchip in your passport? The more you look into all this stuff, the more you have to ask yourself... Where are the terrorists? WHO are the terrorists? ~ zynner

Sep 7, 2006, 09:25 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
leftcider Lord Teh Location: Seattlul, WA Posts: 486	Good post... have you ever heard the explanation that al Qaeda doesn't want to do small attacks because they feel the need to "outdo" 9-11 to demonstrate an increase, and not lessening, of strength? Also, what about the recent "foiled attack" on transatlantic jetliners? I think that how widespread "the terrorists" are is exaggerated, but that doesn't mean that there's no threat at all. Last edited by leftcider; Sep 7, 2006 at 09:53 pm.

Sep 8, 2006, 12:30 am	#4 (permalink) (top)
ibm Igneous Magma Posts: 672	zynner, good post. i see your points and i think they are mostly valid. imo terrorists do exist - both domestically and overseas. depending on how you define a terrorist, obviously you will have different answers to the question of who are the real terrorists or bigger threat to american people. but in any case, i think they do exist. economic left/right: -3.38 social libertarian/authoritarian: -3.59

Sep 8, 2006, 11:53 am	#6 (permalink) (top)
zynner Hot Lava Posts: 817	RVonse -- You can check out a CNN article I found on Google -- there are better ones out there but I don't have any handy links: CNN.com - Passport chips raise privacy concerns - Jan 6, 2005 - - - - - leftcider - The jury is still out on the so-called liquid bomb conspiracy (a government approved "conspiracy theory," I might add). Most of those in question had no passports. How were they to board transatlantic flights? The process necessary to do what they are said to have wanted to do would be impossible in an airliner bathroom. They would need very cold temperatures, more than 24 hours for the solution to "cure," etc. Not just difficult but impossible from what I've read. - - - - - ibm - Yes, I agree that there are individuals around the world who are willingly engaging in acts of violence (which are being labled as acts of "terrorism"). What I'm questioning is who are their real leaders and what are the leaders' real purpose(s)? Is the leadership really a few guys in the Middle East or is it far more sinister than that? I'm also questioning the US & UK govts' official story of who the leaders really are and what the real purposes are of the various acts of "terrorism" we see. I'm not questioning, for example, that the gov't says Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK. I'm questioning whether or not that story is really true (as it realates to today's issue of terrorism). - - - - - dreamer - FDR said all we have to fear is fear itself. Bush, on the other hand, has nothing to offer but fear. Well, fear and unprotected borders. Something obviously does not add up in this whole thing. ~ zynner

Sep 8, 2006, 12:09 pm	#7 (permalink) (top)
Alive Human Posts: 679	It's definitely a little strange. Compare the terrorist attacks against Israel--random bus bombs, suicide bombs in crowded cafes, basically anything to induce the maximum fear and casualties. Al-Quada and similar anti-Western terrorist organizations seem to only focus on the really big things. Planes, trains, large buildings. They don't attack easy targets. Maybe the terrorists are competing for some kind of rep. Maybe it's sort of a game to them, let's show the West how weak all their security measures are by attacking at its strongest point. Or maybe there's a bigger conspiracy somewhere. I don't know.