The State of Security in America

[saif]

Current polling suggests that Americans remain unscathed from fears of imminent and future terror attacks on U.S. soil. Since November 2001, the Gallup Poll has questioned Americans about their thoughts regarding terrorism occurring within the United States. At any given time, only about 5 - 14 % of Americans polled have said that they are Very worried that they or someone in their family would become a victim of terrorism. Around 55% answered that they were either not to worried, or not worried at all. When asked if they felt that there would be further acts of terrorism in the United States the majority responded that it wasn't too likely or not likely at all. When polled regarding what the priorities for Congress and the President were, National Security was rated seventh falling behind the environment and pollution. In a news briefing on July 17th 2007, Homeland Security Advisor Frances Townsend expresses that Americans should feel safer due to "Our greatly increased worldwide counterterrorism efforts since September the 11th." He further states that it is because of this effort that "we have constrained the ability of Al Qaida to attack the U.S. again and have led terrorist groups to view the homeland as a harder target to strike than it was on 9/11." However, Townsend also explained that "Al Qaida will continue to attempt visually dramatic mass casualty attacks in the homeland. And they will continue to acquire and employ chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear materials and will not hesitate to use them if they develop sufficient capability." These statements were based upon the newly released national intelligence estimate of the terrorist threat to the United States homeland. The first ever of its kind, this estimate is "intended to provide a strategic understanding of the terrorist threat to the homeland over the next three years and to give the intelligence communities baseline judgments in order to help policy-makers develop and prioritize government actions." But do Americans trust the intelligence gathered by the various agencies of the federal government to be credible?

For many years some have felt that the Bush administration have used terror threats as a way to manipulate the media by creating a distraction from negative press. Other claims have included that Bush has used the threat of Domestic terrorist attacks as a means to demonstrate our need to continue the war in Iraq and engage the enemy abroad. However, Senator Barack Obama expressed today that the national intelligence estimate demonstrates "a chilling reminder of what we have feared all along. After almost six years, awesome sacrifices by our brave men and women in uniform, and hundreds of billions of dollars spent, we are no safer than we were on 9/11." Supporting that notion Senator Russ Feingold said that "``The NIE confirms that al-Qaida is the most serious threat to the United States, and that key elements of that threat have been regenerated or even enhanced. ... The administration's policies in Iraq have also allowed the emergence of an al-Qaida affiliate that didn't exist before the war.'' Both parties recognize the report's serious threats of plans by al-Qaeda and other terrorist networks - which including homegrown terrorists, to inflict mass casualties through new attacks on the United States. Frances Townsend reiterated this feeling in his press briefing saying "We are facing a persistent terrorist enemy led by Al Qaida that remains driven and intent on attacking the homeland and that continues to adapt and improve its capabilities... There should be no question in anybody's mind: Despite our successes, this is an enemy that remains determined. And it remains determined to try and understand if there are vulnerabilities that they may exploit. It requires us to be equally adaptive at capturing or killing them." Although Townsend adds that there has been no "credible information pointing to a specific imminent attack", what serious security threats do we face as a Nation?

According Paul Williams, seasoned investigative reporter and former FBI consultant, al-Qaida is not content with detonating just one nuclear devise inside the United States but multiple detonations simultaneously in seven cities. He reveals in his recently released book "The Day of Islam: The Annihilation of America and the Western World", that New York, Washington, D.C., Las Vegas, Miami, Boston, Houston, and Los Angeles are all targets for what he calls is an inevitable "American Hiroshima". According to Williams, former CIA Director George Tenet informed President Bush one month after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that at least two suitcase nukes had reached al-Qaida operatives in the U.S. "Each suitcase weighed between 50 and 80 kilograms (approximately 110 to 176 pounds) and contained enough fissionable plutonium and uranium to produce an explosive yield in excess of two kilotons," wrote Williams. "One suitcase bore the serial number 9999 and the Russian manufacturing date of 1988. The design of the weapons, Tenet told the president, is simple. The plutonium and uranium are kept in separate compartments that are linked to a triggering mechanism that can be activated by a clock or a call from the cell phone." He asserts that the nuclear weapons have already been smuggled into the United States over the Mexican border with help of the MS-13 street gang. Can this be true? Williams's explosive revelations cannot be construed as just mere speculation; in fact, there are many top level government officials which have been mentioned as his sources. This list includes current FBI Director Robert Mueller who verifies Williams' that al-Qaida is poised "to detonate a nuclear device that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans" - and that, they seek to simultaneously detonate these devices in multiple cities. A Senior CIA official named Michael Scheuer, confessed to Williams that the CIA ""found that [bin Laden] and al-Qaida were involved in an extraordinarily sophisticated and professional efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction - in this case, nuclear weapons." Other Revelations include:

• In 1996, al-Qaida's "paymaster" and a top lieutenant for bin Laden walked into a U.S. embassy in Africa and spilled the beans on the terror group's activities - including that al-Qaida had purchased nuclear material in the Sudan.

• The story of a Brooklyn, N.Y., mosque that was receiving "stipends" from the federal government for more than $2 million a year up until 1993 - when it was discovered that the mosque was the nerve center for the first attack on the World Trade Center.

• The case of a Chicago charity that raised millions for bin Laden and even paid for one of his operatives whose sole job was to acquire nuclear weapons.

• Evidence the Saudi intelligence service claims bin Laden has an arsenal of between 40 and 70 tactical nuclear weapons.

• Russian sources that claim bin Laden bought 12 to 15 fully assembled nuclear weapons.

• Ties between al-Qaida and the Chechen rebels who allegedly acquired nuclear suitcase devices.

• Bin Laden's claim to a Pakistani journalist two months before 9/11 that acquiring nuclear was "not difficult" - claiming they were available from Russia for between $10 million and $20 million.

• Evidence bin Laden spent between $60 and $100 million to build nuclear devices with the help of scientists from Pakistan, Russia, and China.

• The damage even a low yield "junk" nuclear device would do to New York - with an estimated 250,000 dead in several days.

• The remarkable story of two British secret agents who penetrated al-Qaida's camps in Afghanistan - and reported to Britain that the terror group was finishing work on radiological weapons.

• The stunning admission of the head of Britain's MI5 who confirmed that "renegade" scientists had provided al-Qaida with the knowledge they needed to build a nuclear device.

• New Jersey: the strange case of a Pakistani who died of radiological poisoning soon after 9/11, a man who had apparently served as a "mule" to transport the deadly material into the U.S.

• Axis of Evil: the secret alliance between al-Qaida and Iran that brings together two religious groups with one common goal: destroying the U.S.

Continues....

[saif]

Interestingly, Williams claims that despite Homeland Security Advisor, Frances Townsends July 17th assertion that we have captured or killed two-thirds of Al-Qaida's leadership from 9/11, "only one member of bin Laden's shura - or high command - has been killed." So again I ask, can Americans trust the intelligence gathered by the various agencies of the federal government? Is there credible evidence that al-Qaida currently possess nuclear weapons within the United States?

Recently, a Virginia company was able to acquire a nuclear license granting them the permission to purchase machines containing Americium 241 and Cesium 137. Both are radioactive elements that could too easily create a non-fissible bomb that spreads radiation over an extensive area. Although this company was set up by the U.S. government to test the ability of individuals to purchase enough nuclear material to build a bomb, it demonstrates that there still remains serious safety concerns post 9/11. "Although we (Investigators from the Government Accountability Office) had no legitimate use for the machines, our investigators received, within days of obtaining a license from NRC, price quotes and terms of payment that would have allowed us to purchase numerous machines containing sealed radioactive source materials."

This disturbing news comes after a June 2007 report in which the FBI revealed the name of Adnan Gulshair el-Shukrijumah being al-Qaida's operational leader on a nuclear plot targeting the United States. Authorities believe that El-Shrukrijumah is "reportedly the man Usama bin Laden tapped to lead a previous plot to detonate nuclear bombs simultaneously in several U.S. cities." However Intelligence officials claim that "although al-Qaida created a team to develop nuclear terror plots targeting American cities, the organization has to date been unable to acquire the key materials necessary to carry out such attacks." Adnan Gulshair el-Shukrijumah is a Saudi Born al-Qaida operative who currently remains at large and quite possibly residing within the United States. The State Department is offering up to $5 million dollars for information about current location through the Rewards for Justice Program however, they have yet to receive any pertinent information. El-Shrukijumah has reportedly spent fifteen years in the United States and has a mother who currently resides in Florida. Although the FBI is not sure whether el-Shrukrijumah is working alone or if he is acting in concert with others as part of a terrorist cell, they believe that "he may play a large and leading role in the next set of terrorist attacks inside the United States."

With all of these revelations, as well as the recently foiled terrorist attacks here and abroad; how is it that the majority of Americans remain confident that our National Security is sufficient enough to prevent another atrocity from occurring on U.S. soil? Can we currently afford to allow politicians on both sides of the isle to use the Intelligence agencies as a tool to cast blame and create fear? Has the Iraq War Issue completely taken our focus off of protecting the United States from an even larger, more horrific terrorist attack then that of 9/11? How can we continue to support our elected officials when they hold our very lives with contempt?

As a Nation we must not fail to recognize the serious and explicit threats to our homeland. We must not allow the media and politicians to hijack and streamline their rhetoric on the back of what is believed as credible intelligence. These strategic assessments should be used as they were purposely designed, which is to help policy makers develop and prioritize government actions. Furthermore, we as a Nation must quickly come to grips with regard to the overall safety of our daily lives. We must not forget that there are still many issues such as Immigration Reform and Border Patrol that are vitally important to the direct safety of our cities and villages. We must do this with constant regard to maintaining the delicate balance between civil liberties and the ability of the government to protect American Lives.

[SoylentGreen]

Sources say a lot of things, they can afford to because really no one can prove its true.
And the more of these sources the government can leak to the people the more hopeful the government is of scaring people into believing they know what there doing.

Quoting unsubstantiated rumours about terrorists with nuclear bombs just makes me laugh.
Prove its true, but why bother asking its not proof you want to give us , its a good scare.

[saif]

Quote by: SoylentGreen Sources say a lot of things, they can afford to because really no one can prove its true

What are you talking about? That is one of the more baseless statements ever to be posted on Volconvo! Congratulations!!!!
.

And the more of these sources the government can leak to the people the more hopeful the government is of scaring people into believing they know what there doing.

Just a curious question... do you have a source of that information or are you again repearting something you have heard? Obviously you havent read the entire post..

Quoting unsubstantiated rumours about terrorists with nuclear bombs just makes me laugh.

unsubstantiated then equals video tapes and credible intelligence!?!?!?! Perhaps you should just place your head in the sand... Can you honestly say that there may never be another terrorist attack upon the US? incredible...

Prove its true, but why bother asking its not proof you want to give us , its a good scare.

prove its true!?!?! are you serious? I believe I have offered some substantial evidence, Obviously by statments of both democrats and republicans the threat is real... And as far as trying to "scare people" you need to realize that its the rhetoric from both sides of the aisle that scares me.. while they are playing games our homeland remains open to future attacks... Is that unsubstantiated? or do illegals cross our borders daily in flocks? is that unsubstantiated or are those recently foiled terrorist plots a conspiracy by the government? It may do you some good to go back and read the entire post... or do u and keep your head in the sand!

[jose]

[saif]

Please dont try to hijack my post with this bubblegum-bshish (but I am rofl)

[SoylentGreen]

saif For many years some have felt that the Bush administration have used terror threats as a way to manipulate the media by creating a distraction from negative press. Other claims have included that Bush has used the threat of Domestic terrorist attacks as a means to demonstrate our need to continue the war in Iraq and engage the enemy abroad. However, Senator Barack Obama expressed today that the national intelligence estimate demonstrates "a chilling reminder of what we have feared all along. After almost six years, awesome sacrifices by our brave men and women in uniform, and hundreds of billions of dollars spent, we are no safer than we were on 9/11.

That sounds about right. If they can't produce any evidence then make up some stories and hope people will be scared enough to fall for it.

Russian sources that claim bin Laden bought 12 to 15 fully assembled nuclear weapons

Now how easy is it to buy a nuclear bomb. I think I saw one at the local school flea market last week sitting next to the dreadnought.
And of course how useful a bomb built back in what, the sixties would be. Because russians build things to last especially nuclear bombs because they knew they would still be around 40 years later.

Ties between al-Qaida and the Chechen rebels who allegedly acquired nuclear suitcase devices

Right and the chechens who have been trying to blow up russia for awhile now wouldn't need or use those suitcases themselves because there moral standard is so high.

The stunning admission of the head of Britain's MI5 who confirmed that "renegade" scientists had provided al-Qaida with the knowledge they needed to build a nuclear device.

Which of course can be done in the back of a cave somewhere in the afghan mountains. All you need is two sticks and a rubber band and some old reruns of mcgyver.

prove its true!?!?! are you serious? I believe I have offered some substantial evidence,

Evidence, what evidence. The bush admin says so thats credible.

How hard would it be to sneak something into america. Put it on a boat drop it into the ocean just off the coast and have another local boat pick it up one dark night. Millions of $s of drugs come in to the country that way all the time. But the terrorist don't need to do it they only need suggest it. And bush willingly takes up those suggestions and probably produces a few himself.

A Senior CIA official named Michael Scheuer, confessed to Williams that the CIA ""found that [bin Laden] and al-Qaida were involved in an extraordinarily sophisticated and professional efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction - in this case, nuclear weapons." Other Revelations include:

No doubt they were buying them from saddam hussein. Because the CIA was so sure he had them to.

I did read all your post and find nothing credible there. Its on the level of we heard from a guy whose a friend of a cousin type stuff.
I haven't got my head in the sand I just don't waste my time with those who have their head in the clouds.

[saif]

Quote by: SoylentGreen That sounds about right. If they can't produce any evidence then make up some stories and hope people will be scared enough to fall for it.

You did see that it was a democrat saying that right? I think you missed the point. At what point do we except the intelligence as credible or not?

Now how easy is it to buy a nuclear bomb. I think I saw one at the local school flea market last week sitting next to the dreadnought. And of course how useful a bomb built back in what, the sixties would be. Because russians build things to last especially nuclear bombs because they knew they would still be around 40 years later. [/qoute] I think you are truly ignorant in this regard, perhaps you should think of retracting that statement. They could be dismantled to extract weapons-grade plutonium, which could then be used in a cruder nuclear device or for a "dirty bomb" Right and the chechens who have been trying to blow up russia for awhile now wouldn't need or use those suitcases themselves because there moral standard is so high. A confirmed case of attempted nuclear terrorism occurred in Russia on November 23, 1995, when Chechen separatists put a crude bomb containing 70 pounds of a mixture of cesium-137 and dynamite in Moscow’s Ismailovsky Park. The rebels decided not to detonate this “dirty bomb,” but instead informed a national television station to its location. Perhaps they do not have the convictions of that as al-qaida does for crumbling the US. Which of course can be done in the back of a cave somewhere in the afghan mountains. All you need is two sticks and a rubber band and some old reruns of mcgyver. Evidence, what evidence. The bush admin says so thats credible. How about if Barrack Obama, or Hillary Clinton says it? or someone not associated with the government? when is it credible? How hard would it be to sneak something into america. Put it on a boat drop it into the ocean just off the coast and have another local boat pick it up one dark night. Millions of $s of drugs come in to the country that way all the time. My point exactly... are you sure you read my post ? No doubt they were buying them from saddam hussein. Because the CIA was so sure he had them to. So you dont trust intelligence gathered by the US whatsoever? I did read all your post and find nothing credible there. Its on the level of we heard from a guy whose a friend of a cousin type stuff. I haven't got my head in the sand I just don't waste my time with those who have their head in the clouds.

hahahaha, too funny. honestly I think you missed the point of my original post.

[SoylentGreen]

No I got the point.
And the point is it's scare mongering.
In california people live with the threat of a major earthquake, but they don't leave because of it. They prepare as best they can and the government doesn't enact laws to change the constitution or put out advertising to try to scare people or make them vote for the president because of it.
But an earthquake is just as likely as a bomb.
Same in washington where there is an semi active volcano.
Yes I agree that it could happen that a terrorist might sneak a dirty bomb in. and like a earthquake or a eruption the people should be aware of it and get on with there lives. The government and those responsible for border protection should do there jobs.

But when government sources leak information that has no purpose but to scare and is based on nothing but hearsay then the only purpose of that is to intimidate.

It is not the credibility that is in question it is the motivation behind such leaks that are questionable.
This is nothing more than propaganda, made to give the governments war for oil a legitimacy that it does not have.

Even Al Qaida, just like the chechens know and realise the consequences of their trying to set off a nuclear bomb. They would not only loose whatever support the world has given them but would face a similar response if not from america but from any other country that has nuclear weapons . Israel alone is just itching for an excuse to nuke any of the middle east countries,
The Al Qaida don't need nukes, just the threat of them is enough to get your president to destroy enough of the constitution and declare himself emperor and there job is done.
And unfortunately it appears to be working.

[saif]

I suppose that the following news story is just more scare mongoring...

Probe finds major security gaps along U.S.-Canada border

[SoylentGreen]

Praxius just did a thread on this. you may want to read it.
I tend to agree with his view.

Canada's nasty reputation

[Praxius]

Enjoy:
Canada's nasty reputation

The leaks are BS, and you can also read further opinions I have on this here:
Border fails the test of undercover U.S. investigators:

Fear Mongering is what it is, plain and simple.... in fact here.... I'll shed some common sense on the above:

* Evidence the Saudi intelligence service claims bin Laden has an arsenal of between 40 and 70 tactical nuclear weapons. * Russian sources that claim bin Laden bought 12 to 15 fully assembled nuclear weapons. * Ties between al-Qaida and the Chechen rebels who allegedly acquired nuclear suitcase devices. * Bin Laden's claim to a Pakistani journalist two months before 9/11 that acquiring nuclear was "not difficult" - claiming they were available from Russia for between $10 million and $20 million. * Evidence bin Laden spent between $60 and $100 million to build nuclear devices with the help of scientists from Pakistan, Russia, and China.

Please tell me something.... if he has such a large arsenal of nuclear weapons, how come he hasn't used any of them yet on your country or anybody else's for that matter? He apparently has had them for years by what your above article states.... and it's claiming some of those nuclear weapons are right inside the country as we speak....

like OH MY GOD!!! There's one behind my couch!!! No wait, that's my dad's old suitcase.

If these weapons were already in the US, and they were planning such an attack, don't you think that the sooner he set them off the better? I mean.... the longer you got those things lying around, the greater the chance someone's gonna stumble apon them and report them.

And if these officials have all this evidence about this big scary attack on you guys.... why don't they get off their sorry asses and do something about it rather then bitch and scare you guys with it about to happen?

Inevitable they say? I always thought Inevitable meant something you can not stop.... so if your officials are claiming they can't stop them from blowing a big hole into your country, doesn't that kinda tell you something directly about their effectiveness and their ability to collect information, let alone their devotion to protecting your country?

[Dieval]

It's all fear mongering...until something happens.

[Technosoul]

In the O.P. article the Homeland Security Department said that we should feel safer due to their "inceased counterterrorim efforts internationally".

What is our homeland security doing in other countries? Instead of here at home?

Are they pretending to take credit for the arrests that were made by agents of other countries?

It they had suitcase nuclear bombs here in the USA why have they not used them, or what can't they not use them yet? Why would terrorists want to wait around and risk getting caught before they could use such WMDs if they in fact have them ready to use? This seems ill logical to me.

[Dieval]

Quote by: Technosoul What is our homeland security doing in other countries?

Terrorism doesn't have to originate in the US for it to affect us.
Plot to Bomb U.S.-Bound Jets Is Foiled

[donfie]

Is it me or does this seem a lot like deja vue?

Wasn't there masses of evidence stating that Saddy had a load of big bombs?

I have a sneaky suspicion that a few on here might have been proclaiming "Of course it's true", "What are you talking about?????" and "Get the shotgun, ma, the (insert newest bad guys here) are coming".

Now, all that absolute evidence has been shown to have been a load of walloping-cods.

What's the response? This has to be true because the same agencies and leadership that told us it was true last time when it wasn't says it is.

In the spirit of deja vue, might I add:

Sources say a lot of things, they can afford to because really no one can prove its true.

And here are your options for responce for you to cut and paste to save you time:

WTF??!!
Are you stupid??!!
Of course it's true??!!
It has to be true. A politician said it was!!
Intelligence is never worng!!
We're the ones who'll be laughing when the world is destroyed!!!