California Terror Cell

[Imudman]

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/natio...ylist=national

Who do you believe, the FBI or the accused and their friends...?

[rmnunez]

I believe the FBI, the son did go to an Afghan Madrassa, expressed a desire to attack targets in the US and then returned to the US. Whether its as his friend says and the felow just hung out in town, never met anyone, didn't get any training, wasn't trying to join in some jihad, become a martyr and join some effort to attack the US, then its just a terrible coincidence that can be cleared up.

Nice touch from Bush:

"I was very impressed by the use of intelligence and the follow-up," Bush said. "And that's what the American people need to know, that when we find any hint about any possible wrongdoing or a possible cell, that we'll follow up — by the way, honoring the civil liberties of those to whom we follow up."

[Imudman]

Quote by: rmnunez I believe the FBI, the son did go to an Afghan Madrassa, expressed a desire to attack targets in the US and then returned to the US. Whether its as his friend says and the felow just hung out in town, never met anyone, didn't get any training, wasn't trying to join in some jihad, become a martyr and join some effort to attack the US, then its just a terrible coincidence that can be cleared up. Nice touch from Bush:

Yeah, I believe the FBI too. This happened fairly close to where I live, so the local TV news covered it. I really can't stand the news team. Anyway, in the interest of fairness, they decided to give equal time to both sides, as if the FBI couldn't be trusted. It's what made me post the story - I was wondering whether I was the last one with any common sense...

[Dieval]

Well, you know, all the FBI did was check their library and medical history, without getting a court order, and came to the conclusion that they were working with al qeada..Don't you know how the FBI operates?? haha

[RickSp]

It is hard to know who to believe. The story has shifted since it first came out. The FBI has softened some of its claims. The location of the camp near near Rawalpindi, the headquarters of the Pakistani army seems odd. I heard one analyst compare locating an Al Queda camp near Rawalpindi to be like locating a White-seperatist militia training camp in Langley VA.

Only time will tell whether this is a good bust or another fiasco like the arrests in Detroit.

[Dieval]

Quote by: RickSp Only time will tell whether this is a good bust or another fiasco like the arrests in Detroit.

Just curious, which fiasco in Detroit?

[RickSp]

Federal judge drops Detroit terrorism charges - Justice Department admits widespread prosecutorial misconduct

[Imudman]

Quote by: RickSp It is hard to know who to believe. The story has shifted since it first came out. The FBI has softened some of its claims. The location of the camp near near Rawalpindi, the headquarters of the Pakistani army seems odd. I heard one analyst compare locating an Al Queda camp near Rawalpindi to be like locating a White-seperatist militia training camp in Langley VA. Only time will tell whether this is a good bust or another fiasco like the arrests in Detroit.

A trial will be a search for the truth - no doubt about that. But I was asking for your gut instinct first impression. I guess I should've been more clear about that...

[Imudman]

Quote by: Dieval Well, you know, all the FBI did was check their library and medical history, without getting a court order, and came to the conclusion that they were working with al qeada..Don't you know how the FBI operates?? haha

Yeah, I've known a few g-men in my time. And all of them were honest to a tee...

[rmnunez]

The g-men are notoriously honest, its their bosses whose integrity seems to be in doubt.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Imudman Yeah, I've known a few g-men in my time. And all of them were honest to a tee...

I've know several prosecuters who thought that the FBI were a bunch of bumblers. The individual agents may or may not be competent but the overall bureaucracy could be a horror show. Then again, the FBI and local law enforcement have a long history of poor cooperation, so what I have heard might reflect those conflicts. The agency overall has not had an unblemished record of veracity.

[Dieval]

Quote by: RickSp The agency overall has not had an unblemished record of veracity.

No one has an unblemished record of anything..

[Technosoul]

Here in California I watched some of the local news reports on TV and apparently this one person when to Pakistan (spelling?) and spent some time at a terrorist training camp (which was located next to a military base). At first he denied the charge but failed a lie detector test - at which time he confessed to being involved in the training and that he was instructed to return to the USA and to blow up large supermarkets and/or hospitals. It seems after his return he did not (or was not able) to carry out those objectives. He was one individual and not a "cell" (more then one) as far as arrest records indicate but they are investigating to see if he attempted to inlist others here or if he did in fact find others to join such a operation.

The interesting fact is he was not trained nor knew of any training that would involve weapons of mass distruction or some big scale plan to out-do the 9-11 incident. Just the smaller car bombs which is in fact bad enough but not as scary as we are led to expect. Seems the terrorist network is back to doing the smaller stuff like they did in the basement of the World Trade Center before the airplane attacks - not much more of a threat then oil refineries accidently blowing up in Texas.

That is my opinion based loosely on local TV coverage.

Technosoul.

[Zeebadee]

This whole story will turn out to be nothing more than crap. The FBI has already backed off the charges involving hospitals and supermarkets. They've had these guys under surveillance for more than 3 years, at who knows what cost to the taxpayer. Now they need to provide justification for those costs. By the time this story drifts into obscurity, the perps will be charged with something like conspiring to steal cable tv service, the Bureau will be portrayed as Heroes, and all agents involved will be promoted and awarded extra large, hanging, swinging medals to wear.

[Prometheus]

Yet again, we can form opinions, but do we really have enough data to make a judgement? The FBi may know more than they can reveal. The news may be slanting everything. I have trouble forming opinions of issues where my only info comes from the mass media. Can you really form a valid opinion when your data in questioinable?

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Prometheus Yet again, we can form opinions, but do we really have enough data to make a judgement? The FBi may know more than they can reveal. The news may be slanting everything. I have trouble forming opinions of issues where my only info comes from the mass media. Can you really form a valid opinion when your data in questioinable?

Why not? Bush formed an opinon about Iraq based on questionable information. That is our new national policy ya know. And where did Bush get some of his phoney information - was it from the FBI or from Dan Rather?

Or from the other F.B.I. ( Family Bush Insitute ).

If they don't give us all the right facts then they cannot gripe about our opinions. And without opinions democracy cannot operate. (assuming we are still of the opinion that it is still a democracy).

Technosoul.

[Zeebadee]

"The Los Angeles Times reports that the Federal Bureau of Invesigation apparently gave the media a different, far more damaging version of an affidavit against a Lodi, California father and son charged with lying to federal officials than the one that was finally given to a court in Sacramento Thursday. The affidavit filed Thursday did not contain any of the sensation material from earlier in the week which said the son's "potential terrorist targets included hospitals and groceries, and contained names of key individuals and statements about the international origins of 'hundreds' of participants in alleged Al Qaeda terrorist training camps in Pakistan."

"The FBI said the different versions were the result of "unfortunate oversight due to miscommunication." http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0610/dailyUpdate.html

I am rapidly losing what little faith I have left in our government's ability and willingness to simply tell the truth. The Army lies about Pat Tillman, the FBI lies about these guys, the President lies every time he opens his mouth, it's always some "mistake" not a real lie. No one is ever punished, fired, or otherwise held accountable in any way. These two saps supposedly lied to the FBI, they're terrorists, and gonna go straight to jail.

I take everything I hear from the government now with a hefty dose of skepticism, there're just too many "mistakes" and "miscommunications" occurring these days.

[Imudman]

Quote by: Zeebadee I am rapidly losing what little faith I have left in our government's ability and willingness to simply tell the truth. The Army lies about Pat Tillman, the FBI lies about these guys, the President lies every time he opens his mouth, it's always some "mistake" not a real lie. No one is ever punished, fired, or otherwise held accountable in any way. These two saps supposedly lied to the FBI, they're terrorists, and gonna go straight to jail. I take everything I hear from the government now with a hefty dose of skepticism, there're just too many "mistakes" and "miscommunications" occurring these days.

You are rapidly falling under the spell of mass media manipulation. The media exist for sole purpose of fomenting hate and discontent for profit, not to inform an ignorant public. There's no incentive for them to report that, "..all is well at home tonight."

Which sells more papers, "Terror Charges Disappear From Ruling" or "Terror Charges Irrevelent to Proving Case Against Lodi Man"? Why did the Christian Science Monitor choose to word their headline that way? Why did they omit this, "Sacramento FBI spokesman John Cauthen said the deletions in the document were made because the original details were "not relevant or not accurate in context" for the purpose of proving a probable cause to arrest Hamid Hayat and his father ." http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm..._terror10.html

You must always remember that sensationalism is nothing more than twisting facts in a way to entice you into buying information at a higher price. You said you take everything you hear from the government with a healthy dose of skepticism. But in reality, you're taking everything you hear from the media with skepticism, yet ascribing it to someone else. Why...?

[rmnunez]

The media exist for sole purpose of fomenting hate and discontent

This is a very jaundiced view. The media does broadcast with a single purpose aimed at profit, what they broadcast is meant to sell advertising by holding their audience's attention. This is why when we see the news anywhere it will include up front the pictures of burning buildings, dramatic crashes or catastrophic events, like they say in the news, "if it bleeds it leads".

If you have a story about a suspected Pakistani terrorist in the US and pitch it leading with a lengthy cautionary analysis of the potential interpretations for the circumstances explaining the suspicions, it becomes much less interesting or likely to hold anyone's attention. If instead you can show some pictures of exotic places allegedly visited, some shots of exploding car bombs and maybe some scary-looking Pakistani terrorists, then its more likely people will keep watching and maybe see the broadcaster's advertisers. This isn't something advertisers do to "sell" the public government policy, endorse the FBI's practices or convince them Muslims are terrorists.

[Imudman]

Quote by: rmnunez If you have a story about a suspected Pakistani terrorist in the US and pitch it leading with a lengthy cautionary analysis of the potential interpretations for the circumstances explaining the suspicions, it becomes much less interesting or likely to hold anyone's attention. If instead you can show some pictures of exotic places allegedly visited, some shots of exploding car bombs and maybe some scary-looking Pakistani terrorists, then its more likely people will keep watching and maybe see the broadcaster's advertisers. This isn't something advertisers do to "sell" the public government policy, endorse the FBI's practices or convince them Muslims are terrorists.

So we agree, at least in part. But I think what you're missing is the very real presence of people who want to advance their agenda. What you describe about journalism is something seen only in academia. In the real world, people use their influence to advance their power in society first, then to make money. You're forgetting the Dan Rather episode...