Posted on 02/15/2011 8:07:12 AM PST by conservativegramma
The probability that the U.S. will be hit with a weapons of mass destruction attack at some point is 100 percent, Dr. Vahid Majidi, the FBI’s assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate, tells Newsmax.
Such an attack could be launched by foreign terrorists, lone wolves who are terrorists, or even by criminal elements, Majidi says. It would most likely employ chemical, biological, or radiological weapons rather than a nuclear device.
“While all of these guys are still interested in potentially using chemical, biological, or radiological weapons wherever it is possible, the pragmatic approach that they have taken is to use what has worked for them best, which is various forms of explosives and improvised explosives,” Majidi says.
“The latest round is concealing explosives coming through the commercial shipping environment,” Majidi notes. “That brings to the fore the fact that explosives are something that we’re not going to get away from any time soon. It’s the modality that is most often preferred by a pragmatic adversary.”
Given the sensitivity and complexity of the subject, Majidi says he tries to present all the issues in context: “One of my jobs is to make sure I put all of these things in an appropriate light, because if you were in my job you would see that everyone always tries to elevate things to a tremendous level.”
Of one thing Majidi is sure: “There’s a probability of 100 percent that a WMD event will happen.”
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Hmmm. Take out the president-elect and vice president-elect by having them killed in major attacks, just part of the collateral damage docha know?
Declare a State of Emergency.
“Temporarily” suspend elections and civil rights for a few decades.
Yeah, that could work, or at least make a good novel. Where is Tom Clancey when you need him?
I know a few people that work in those organizations and they are not crooked politicians. They work hard and they are honest in their intentions. Don’t get me wrong, I am not so naive to think that none are ever turned to the wrong side, but, by and large, these are good people.
And those nice people don't know and/or don't want to know about the others, but they are there.
Hmmm, almost sounds like they’re preparing us for something....
Oh that makes me feel sooo much better /s
'A weapon of mass destruction was found in the U.S.': Shock confession of Customs officer
Weapons of Mass Effect??????
before you know it, they will be saying our ports in.....ohhhhhh ....San Diego have found something .- imagine that. /s
My sentiments exactly. It is much better to fight them over there with the military than here at home with police.
I think they know we have an army in America..
Oh, and the dammed borders will still be wide open
If there is another attack, Big Sis will still announce "The system worked". That is what scares the daylights out of me.
I don’t believe the terrorists care who our President is. They hate the U.S. because we are a mostly christian nation that has supported Israel and our culture (and power) offends them. No nation does more to spread the gospel across the globe in nations where christianity competes with islam.
The hardcore jihadists want to kill us in the name of Allah and that will not change no matter who our President is. While this board is political in nature so we often focus on politics and partisanship the majority of the world has a formed opinion of America that does not change much after any election cycle. This is especially true in the Muslim world where many have been taught we are the “Great Satan” since childhood.
Our politicians like to bring up security issues during election cycles because fear sells. The sheeple are very responsive to fear and it’s not just terrorism. The left, right, NRA, ACLU, religious, and athiest all practice it.
That is the unspoken danger we face. Our politicians think you can fix everything with money, government agents, and new agencies. While it looks good on the surface, this type of response is unsustainable economically, leads to the erosion of freedoms, and further burdens an economy that is already weak.
One bomb on an Amtrak, freight train, or rail line and they would fall over themselves hiring TSA workers to “secure” the problem. A very difficult proposition that would cost our nation tens of billions of dollars over many decades. Same with a subway, cruise ship, electrical grid, mall, football stadium, etc etc etc.
We might be hit once in 20 years on something but the hit last forever when thousands of people make 80-120k a year to secure the asset before retiring with a taxpayer pension. A 20 dollar bomb in the right spot could create a 20 billion dollar response over two decades. We can’t afford this type of reactionary/preventative response and too few of our leaders realistically discuss this in their rush to do something that looks good in the short term.
Yeah. Only 9 of the 10 cities they planned to attack were rendered uninhabitable.
“The system Worked” my @ss.
Asymmetric warfare at it’s finest.
Just out of the blue, one wonders what would have happened if FDR had ever said, “Yes, there’s a one hundred percent chance that the naval and air forces of the empire of Japan will attack us in the foreseeable future.”
Times have certainly changed.
If we have an army in America, where the heck is it?
Why isn’t it down there securing the border??
For that matter there isn’t even any border state’s national guard down there securing the border.
If I were a terrorist.....I’d think we were a wide open soft target without any defense. (And we are).
And those nice people don’t know and/or don’t want to know about the others, but they are there.””
Do you have a measure of proof outside a novel you read?
My point was that this administration is trying on the job training, and not one is qualified for their position. Big Sis has used that phrase several times, and been wrong for the most part.
My point as well. A civilian or a beat cop will stumble on the would-be terrorists and save one of the ten target cities and Big Sis will declare that The System Worked.
Asymmetric warfare at it’s finest.
____________________________
Exactly. Studied at the war colleges every year but completely ignored in the MSM and halls of power in D.C.
We also largely ignore the negative impact of political correctness in our security plan. It’s a very difficult issue that will continue to evolve over our lifetimes. Profiling is essential to the fight on terrorism but we are so paralyzed by political correctness we can’t use it so Mrs. Nonstatistic Grandma gets the pat down while Mr. Statistal High Risk gets the wand. If, God forbid, another McVeigh comes along who is typified as the “conservative white male” we will see more scrutiny and we will all complain.
It’s a difficult topic because we believe America is a land of equal rights under the law but reality does not conform to our world view and it is undeniable that muslim males are the highest risk demographic for terror. Therefore, many of us correctly feel they should get more attention at the airport but I do sympathize with the many law abiding ones who are offended.
It’s finding the balance that preserves the individual freedoms we cherish with a common sense security plan that is crucial. I doubt any would be 100% happy with the result and it will never be 100% effective. We have to try though because we can’t afford the blanket big government response everytime something bad happens like 9/11, Katrina, snowstorms, floods, Tucson, Virginia Tech, and the list goes on. This systemic failure in our responses to everything create more chaos, more laws, and more expense to the taxpayer. This insatiable appetite for government to fix everything is so ingrained we don’t even see or understand where we get it wrong.
I would love to see our government leaders spend more time studying all of the above and how to respond to it when nothing is happening. This is a common practice at the war colleges and it is extremely effective because when things happen strategically you often get executive military leadership that has thought about different scenarios ahead of time in an unemotional environment looking beyond the day or week. The results are much better when you planned and thought about it ahead of time.
If this approach was practiced by our leaders it would be less likely that you would have a GOP critter proposing a high capacity magazine ban following a tragic failure of mental health, the creation of a rarely used FEMA fire department after a Katrina, or the massive rush to create a multi-billion dollar agency in response to a 9/11.
Bad things happen and Murphy can bite anything but those who mentally prepare, plan ahead of time, and look beyond tomorrow will usually prevail. A lesson our politicians and nation as a whole would do well to learn.
Run for office. Please.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.