> The question confronting American policy makers is: Are
> we prepared to stop this threat before it becomes a
> terrible reality?
Allow me to venture a guess.
No.
While the Democrat party communists continually rail at the Republican administration as their biggest threat, the real threat continues to grow, apparently unabated.
A deadly reality few Democrats are willing to acknowledge.
Some lessons have to be learned the hard way.
I’m glad my family and I don’t live in a large city...
He wouldn’t dare do it before an election, but would he do it if there were a democrat in the WH? All of his threats are becoming uninteresting.
Not at all. How many tons of drugs make it in?
For all we know, the tacticians may be prepared to sacrifice a city just so we can finally end this menace. There are those who argue that Pearl Harbor did not have to happen.
No matter what the Government does or does not do, were it to happen, this will not be a good place to be Muslim.
Fair enough. There are plenty of places where it is not good to be anything else.
Good Muslims need to ponder deeply about getting thier crazies under control, really, but we have been saying this for years.
We have not had an attack on our soil since 9/11. Who knows what has been thwarted? However, could this be because Al Qeada is simply concentrating on the BIG ONE?
The first World Trade Center bombing occured just after Clinton got into office. The 9/11 attacks occured 8 months after Pres Bush started. Is this a pattern? Sometime next year might be D-Day/H-Hour....
Those FBI agents who dropped the ball on the terrorist call in Denver should have been fired or reassigned to the Pr Barrow, Alaska office to investigate blubber thefts.
Should the US suffer a nuked city, I should hope that every muslim city on the globe would be erased.
From what I have read about suitcase nukes, there are serious impediments to any plan to use nuclear bombs. The first is that the radioactive material needed for the bomb has a very short half-life. Governments are able to replenish their supplies easily, but it would mean any bomb made of stolen materials would have to be set off in a short time after stealing the substance. Secondly, the stuff is highly poisonous, making its construction very very dangerous to the bomb makers who would be constructing the bomb under less than ideal conditions. Thirdly, nuclear bombs are heavy, making them not really “suitcases” and requiring Olympian heavy weight champions in order to move them around, plus they are radioactive, leaving a signature behind. It seems to me that these factors - if true - put a serious handicap into Ben Laden’s plan of setting off multiple bombs in various cities across the US and might be the reason why Homeland Security isn’t focusing on this type of bomb being used by terrorists.
That’s a very serious and sobering article. Thanks for sharing it with us rdb3.