Plot to blow up facilities at Kennedy Airport
 

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/03/ny...hp&oref=slogin

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/03/nyregion/03pipe.html

yeh totally making my decision for me on the NOT coming to new york now!!!!

If that pipe had gone up that would have completely fucked up the whole airport.

Praise Allah it didn't happen.

i tried following this story the yesterday, but it was fox news and they just kept yelling about things that didn't even matter.

sounds like a bunch of morons.

It's scarey that it seems only a matter of time before something else happens.

something is always going to happen. in the u.s., every 30 minutes a person dies from drunk driving. probably more on weekends. So right now the hospitals are packed with victims, and nobody gives a shit.

i mean, sure nobody wants to get attacked by some random motherfucker. but death happens constantly and i don't see people getting up in arms about it. or about malaria either. or hunger.

sounds like the plot wasn't going to work either. not sure if you guys read about the valve system etc.

--
ps - every time people give undue publicity to these people, they are encouraged to do more. they are caught, good riddance. now can we please get out of iraq?

no.

I'm surprised you of all people would be scared of such a thing. The war on terror is a joke. Yes, things will blow up and there will be victims one day .But since when has this not happened on a much more regular basis than a few Muslim fanatics making a carnage of it?

True, in the overall view, the "War on Terror" is a bumper sticker-variety slogan utilized by conservatives to further their agenda, but as Giuliani oftimes notes, there are more attacks coming.

>conveniently in time for the upcoming presidential election<

=Initially to me, an Italian president sounds fine, but R.G. is some bad news/
It disturbs me greatly that two of my friends are talking Giuliani and thinking he is a good, moderate choice....(because of his pro-choice position)

Wherever you stand, please read the new Rolling Stone article by Matt Taibbi, (& the reader comments too, please) because this is good info:
"Giuliani: Worse Than Bush"
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...orse_than_bush

You are completely right.

My question is how are you really going to stop terrorists? Their problem at the moment is probebly too much organization. What would be really scary was if they started attacking smaller targets. Small towns, schools, anything deemed unimportant. They won't of course because these people are giving up their lives and wanna take as many people down with them as possible. But the very idea that an attack could happen anywhere, that if you lived in some desert town you were no more safe than if you lived in New York or Washington DC would drive society into chaos. How could you stop bombs going off in resturants, barbers, town meetings? This is the reason ive always been logically opposed to the current administration's methods. Its very difficult to stop terrorists but you can stop doing things to antagonize them (like going into Iraq). I'm not saying the blame is totally on the side of the US (and places like the UK) either, i'm merely suggesting there are reasons why people get pissed off with each other and things like 9/11 happen. Dealing with those reasons is probebly a lot more helpful than crusading around the world telling everyone how great we are and how they should be more like us.

terrorists are shit, they always get caught i reckon i could do a heaps better job, they spend so much time planning it, just sit around one day say we are going to blow up a bridge then go do it, dont piss fart around planning it.

Exactly. The reason they have to plan so much at the moment if because they choose targets that will result in the highest death count and thus these targets are usually well protected. We are lucky in a way they are so damn predictable.

There are reasons why people become islamic terrorists. The reasons differ from the region, though. The reasons for muslims in Europe to become terrorists are different from those in the developing world. A key factor in the developing countries seems to be demographic, i.e. the youth bulge of the islamic world and the lack of positions for the mass of young people in their economically underdeveloped countries. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youth_Bulge#Youth_bulge
In Europe, it seems to be more a problem of weakness of western civilisation and failed integration, which roots in western cultural exhaustion and identity crisis. (I don't really have time to get into this right now, maybe I will write more later)

But back to the reasons most people think of.. So, what are the jihadists fighting for? Why do they fight the West (and "westernized", i.e. democratic and/or secular muslim countries)?

9/11 didn't happen because of US foreign policy. America was attacked for what it is, not what it did. Secularism, women's rights, freedom of speech, religious freedom, gay rights, etc. are the reasons why jihadists fight it.

They want the caliphate back. They want sharia law in every country, religious and gender apartheid, and in the end islamic rule over the world. It's a religious supremacy movement, it doesn't need real world events to fuel it's ideology.

It doesn't matter whether the US goes into Iraq or chooses to be isolationist. As long as America, Europe or any place else is not part of the "House of Islam" and doesn't bow down to jihadism and islamic rule, it's the enemy for the jihadists.

So, how to deal with those reasons? Abolish democracy and introduce sharia law to the West? Convert to Islam? Accept dhimmitude if you want to stay christian or jew? Rather not.

I hope that's a joke...

Well said.

Innarestin'

Just what the Rethuglicans want.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++===
In his first interview as the chairman of the Arkansas Republican Party, Dennis Milligan told a reporter that America needs to be attacked by terrorists so that people will appreciate the work that President Bush has done to protect the country.
"At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001]," Milligan said to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, "and the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country."
Milligan, who was elected as the new chair of the Arkansas Republican Party just two weeks ago, also told the newspaper that he is "150 percent" behind Bush in the war in Iraq.

who's afraid of the big bad jihadi? (LAWL)

no really. this is the single biggest effect terrorism has had on my life.....

it's time for a fatwah on idiots.

Thats not absolutely true, they hated America's Foreign policy pre 9/11:

1. Support of Israel
2. Control over Saudi royals
3. Support for torturing and decadent govts like Egypt and Iran.