quote:

---

The Brits and Yanks knew about this purported group of hijackers for months, maybe more than a year, as they had a mole inside.
However, the plotters were apparently allowed to continue their planning, unmolested, until suddenly, purportedly, this gang of wiz chemists and gadget designers dramatically went from null threat to operationally dangerous in a matter days forcing the issue of intervention.

So, just who was in control of this operation anyways?

We can see the Republicans are sure getting good mileage out of this, and what better time for it.

At the very least we can assert that was heavily stage-managed for propaganda value.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lard Tunderin' Jeezus:There is much reason to be sceptical. Take, for example, the "threat" posed by 'liquid explosives'. I have now heard several experts say that such explosives, in the quantities that could be smuggled, have no capacity to structurally damage an aircraft.

---

[ 12 August 2006: Message edited by: farnival ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by farnival:
very interesting clip. today on cbc radio one...as for the cell being known about for ages because of a mole, isn't that suspiciously similar to the now 18 "terror" suspects rounded up in Toronto? the RCMP and CSIS apparently knew about them for a while and let them proceed until they did something "arrestable"...smacks of a set up for propaganda purposes to me too.

---

quote:

---

There is much reason to be sceptical. Take, for example, the "threat" posed by 'liquid explosives'. I have now heard several experts say that such explosives, in the quantities that could be smuggled, have no capacity to structurally damage an aircraft. Why, here's an expert now. Another on the CBC said that such an explosive used in 2003 in Japan (IIRC?) blew up a seat, killing one man. Brings a whole new meaning to the term 'suicide bomber', doesn't it?

---

I'll start out with disclosure by saying I find the idea that this is a hoax to be extremely implausible, suitable mostly for those concerned with tinfoil garments.

Your link doesn't work for me (unless it's supposed to prompt a SMIL file download), but do you have any good references on that?

The last part comes from a piece I also heard on the CBC news (a BBC feed, IIRC) that the arrests might have been rushed because members of the 'cell' were getting cold feet and backing out.

[ 12 August 2006: Message edited by: Lard Tunderin' Jeezus ]

quote:

---

I perhaps would claim that the arrests were deliberately turned into a media circus, that the threat was grossly exaggerated, and that the 'terrorists' were a bunch of terribly flaky amateurs.

---

quote:

---

(odd we don't seem to have any women 'terrorists'

---

There actually were some women among those arrested. But according to Islam all the fun stuff in life is the purview of men, women have to stay home wrapped in endless layers of clothes - that makes it tough to blow up planes.

There is a cultural war in the world between enlightened pluristic small "l' liberalism and the forces of cruel, harsh, evil, pitiless religious fanaticism. The Christian Right and the muslim theorcrats and the Jewish religious freaks all pretend to be opponents but they are really allies in the battle to destroy liberal values in the world.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:

There actually were some women among those arrested. But according to Islam all the fun stuff in life is the purview of men, women have to stay home wrapped in endless layers of clothes - that makes it tough to blow up planes.

Apparently some of those arrested were men who grew up WASP and converted to Islam. I guess you can't argue that they did this in reaction to a lifetime of discrimination as a result of being Muslim!!

---

quote:

---

I did not claim it was a hoax. I perhaps would claim that the arrests were deliberately turned into a media circus, that the threat was grossly exaggerated, and that the 'terrorists' were a bunch of terribly flaky amateurs.

---

Well of course the circus was deliberate -- on the part of the media. I'm sure the authorities knew it would be a circus beforehand, but how could they have stopped it from being so? Announcing terrorists were planning to down 10 trans-Atlantic flights is going to make a few headlines, even if the attacks were likely to fail (which I don't think they were).

Anyway, there's apparently a link being established (phone calls and a wire money transfer) between some of the detained and a known Al-Qaeda explosives expert in Pakistan. We'll see how this goes.

I guess since time immemorial, a segment of young men in almost every society get nuts enough to want to find something "absolute" to believe in and they relish the idea of dying for something seemingly omnipotent.

Liquid containers are one, but if you block that, there are still lots more. A block of C-4 in your rectum, maybe? The shoe bomb idea has already been taken.

quote:

---

I have trouble seeing how anyone can credibly claim that it's impossible to destroy a plane with a liquid explosive, given the number of very potent liquid explosives available, some of them easily obtained.

---

quote:

---

they should have kept it a little more on the QT and just lets us know they where doing their jobs instead of the 3 ring circus it has become.

---

quote:

---

What do you suppose would motivate an English WASP to convert to Islam and then apparently try to kill himself along with hundreds of other people?

---

[ 12 August 2006: Message edited by: Lard Tunderin' Jeezus ]

quote:

---

If you have no particular example to provide, I'm afraid your 'very potent' imagination is all we are left with. Forgive me if I discount your opinion against that of recognised experts in the field.

---

I did give examples: nitroglycerin and the 'fertilizer bomb' (ammonium nitrate mixed with nitromethane). I've since read that another potential culprit is called TATP, made from mixing hydrogen peroxide with acetone.

As for not being able to destroy an airplane, the Mythbusters did it with a 100g shaped charge in the 'Explosive Decompression' episode. They demonstrated that a bullet couldn't do it, but a small explosive could.

I'm interested in you explaining better why you think liquid explosives couldn't harm an airplane, given that it was a liquid explosive that destroyed a building, killing 168 people, in Oklahoma City in 1995.

quote:

---

If they truely cared about it they should have kept it a little more on the QT and just lets us know they where doing their jobs instead of the 3 ring circus it has become.

---

Regardless, the very fact that we are compelled to doubt the lines we are fed is a serious issue. Its the boy who cried wolf, but this ain't no nursery time.

Look, its indisputable that these events have been politicized to nth degree since day 911. It is entirely plausible that politicization is actually occuring prior to the actual event's public unveiling.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Proaxiom:
[QB]
But I do know that liquid explosives were used...by Timothy McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.

---

If they can get barrels (yes, barrels) full of a gasoline and fertilizer mix onto a plane, I'll be impressed...

quote:

---

There is also nitroglycerin.

---

Which is so bloody unstable that virtually no one [not even ex-WASPs-gone fanatics for 72 virgins ] would dare carry it around in a backpack or hand-luggage.

Next....

[ 12 August 2006: Message edited by: B.L. Zeebub LLD ]

The most significant of the new explosives are Astrolite A-1-5, said to
be the world's MOST POWERFUL NON-NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE, and Astrolite-G, claimed to
be the world's highest detonation-velocity liquid explosive. Both explosives
are remarkably safe to handle and are unusually versatile. Both also can be
mixed from nondetonable components.

Astrolite explosives are a product of advanced rocket propellant
technology. They were discovered quite by accident in the 1960's by
research personnel investigating a so-called rocket propellant that proved
so powerful that it consistently destroyed rockets on the test stand.

Astrolite explosives are formed when ammonium nitrate is mixed with
anhydrous hydrazine. Extensive solvolysis occurs with the liberation of
large amounts of ammonia gas and a new compound (hydrazonium nitrate) is
formed and remains in solution. This produces a clear liquid explosive called
Astrolite G. When aluminum powder (100 mesh or finer) is added, it forms
Astrolite A-1-5.

Formula:
-------

Dislaimer: Ok you guys, I refuse to take any responsibility for any events
incurred by or as a result of the following formula below. This is shown
solely for educational purposes and it is not the author's intent to encourage
anarchy, vandalism, or destruction in any way. (C'mon guys, this is serious
now.)

Here's what you've been waiting for:

[ The actual how-to part removed by moderator]

[ 12 August 2006: Message edited by: oldgoat ]

Please, can you remove or edit the post above so it is rendered inert (pun intended).

you're welcome

[ 12 August 2006: Message edited by: oldgoat ]

If you try to put it back, or put back something similar, you're gone.

[ 12 August 2006: Message edited by: oldgoat ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by oldgoat:
I'm inclined to see blogbarts point of view. Astrocreep, the actual recipe was not necessary or central to your point, which I suppose is that liquid explosives are indeed a threat.

If you try to put it back, or put back something similar, you're gone.

[ 12 August 2006: Message edited by: oldgoat ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by astrocreep2000:

Sorry it wasn't intentional.In any case it shows how easily anyone can acess this type of information.

---

It wasn't intentional??

Like "oops! I accidently posted a recipe for high explosives, why silly me, I'll be misplacing my car keys next!"

I agree. If you have a "black box" into which goes something, later something else comes out, you can make some reasonable deductions about what happened inside the black box. However, it is not necessary to understand the workings of the black box, because, as you noted, you can see what comes out.

Another related issue, which arises from astrocreep2000's publicizing a bomb recipe, helps to illustrate the insane shortsightedness of trying to "capitalize" (I am being very generous by characterizing it as such), for any objective, too much on terrorism.

quote:

---

Originally posted by astrocreep2000:

Sorry it wasn't intentional.In any case it shows how easily anyone can acess this type of information.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by S1m0n:
Here's Gwynne Dyer on the strange coincidence...

---

quote:

---

A Massive distraction
Cynicism rules

By Gwynne Dyer | Morocco TIMES 8/12/2006 |

.......................
Hundreds of flights delayed or cancelled. Twenty-four alleged conspirators arrested in East London, Thames Valley towns and Birmingham, many of them described by neighbours as bearded Muslims wearing traditional dress. Shocking revelations that they had a new technique for blowing up to ten aircraft on the heavily travelled London-US routes out of the sky simultaneously by smuggling explosive liquids aboard. All cabin baggage banned on flights out of Britain. And in a classic case of panic envy, the US Department of Homeland Security declares a red alert in the United States, too.

That should scare the public into supporting the "war on terror" a bit longer, even if the real wars are about something else, and are going seriously wrong: Iraq sliding into civil war, the Taliban coming back in Afghanistan, Israel flattening Lebanon without making any significant dent in Hezbollah's capabilities. Most people will assume that with all that smoke, there must be some fire.
...................

They really aren't that stupid. They have been checking liquids that people want to carry aboard flights at airport security checkpoints for years. There would be no need for drastic new security measures even if the alleged British terrorist ring were still on the loose. This is all hype, designed to frighten the British and American publics into supporting the wars of their deeply unpopular governments (and the war of their
Israeli ally as well).

Or am I being too cynical? Maybe they're just stupid. I really don't know any more.

---

And in another part of the world, in "a classic case of panic envy" the Harpercrites squeal, "terriers!!".

I don't know if Dyer is right or wrong on this issue, but he has a very impressive track record.
Really, what does targeting planes flying between the US and the UK have to do with Canada's flights?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lard Tunderin' Jeezus:
,,,considering that a Google search brings up 66 references to Astrolite in Canada in .39 seconds, I'm rather certain that the experts in the field are well aware of it - and that it, too, would not be able to cause any structural damage to a passenger plane.

---

How are you so certain?

I'm really fishing for links on the impossibility of this. Mythbusters destroyed a plane with an explosive that would fit in a woman's purse (they had pressurized the inside of the plane to get the air pressure differential of high altitude). It peeled back a hull segment like it was an orange.

You know that airplane hulls are about 3mm of aluminum alloy, right?

This whole line of criticism is patently absurd. Figuring out a type of explosive that could be smuggled onto a plane and detonated is fairly easy. A little research and creativity should be able to accomplish it. The harder part would be planning the attack and acquiring components without detection (which, apparently, these guys failed to do). Even if you constrain yourself to liquid explosives (which they wouldn't do -- it's just that the explosive they chose happened to be a liquid), there are still dozens to choose from. They would just look for one with reasonable potency in small quantities, simple enough that it could be mixed from components in flight.

quote:

---

"A first-year chemistry student could do it," said Bob Burk, an associate professor of chemistry at Carleton University.

But Dr. Makhija says putting together such bombs isn't that easy.

"Those who do this, they do a lot of practice first," he said. "This is done by professionals."

A variety of store-bought chemicals and products can be used to create explosives, with blasts ranging from the harmless to the very powerful. In a contained space, such as an aircraft toilet, an explosion triggered by a physical or electric shock could easily create a gaping hole in the pressurized airframe, analysts said.

"There are lots of explosives that are in liquid or gel form and all they need is some sort of spark," said Jay Siegel, director of the forensic and investigative sciences program at Indiana University. "Anything that can generate electricity can be used to set off explosives. They use cellphones . . . now."

---

quote:

---

Penetrating an aircraft's fuselage isn't difficult, according to Martin Rudd, director of the Canadian Centre of Intelligence and Security Studies. "You can picture a terrorist doing this mixture in the washroom, leaning against the fuselage, creating a puncture. At 30,000 feet you get an explosion by the on-rush of air and fracture the fuselage."

---

quote:

---

By Gwynne Dyer:
They really aren't that stupid. They have been checking liquids that people want to carry aboard flights at airport security checkpoints for years. There would be no need for drastic new security measures even if the alleged British terrorist ring were still on the loose. This is all hype, designed to frighten the British and American publics into supporting the wars of their deeply unpopular governments (and the war of their
Israeli ally as well).

---

Is there a lack of common sense here? "They have been checking liquids"???

Are we assuming that the terrorists are going to be carrying backpacks with drinking bottles labelled "ACETONE" and "HYDROGEN PEROXIDE", so the screeners can just read the labels? How on Earth are the screeners supposed to recognize liquid bomb components when they pass through the X-Ray machines?

Wired had a thing talking about a system that might be able to detect such things, but it is extremely expensive and therefore not used.

quote:

---

Dr Clifford Jones, reader in engineering, University of Aberdeen, said a colourless liquid fuel component of an explosive, such as gasoline or kerosene, could be disguised as mineral water and an oxidant such as ammonium nitrate could be passed off as sugar.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lard Tunderin' Jeezus:
Right. Because gasoline and kerosene are completely odourless, and perfectly colourless. No one could ever tell them apart from water.

And ammonium nitrate tastes just like sugar, doesn't it?

---

I can give a number of times I have brought a liquid in my carry-on (I think I've had aftershave with me pretty much every time). Nobody looked at them, never mind opening them to smell them.

quote:

---

Originally posted by siren:

And in another part of the world, in "a classic case of panic envy" the Harpercrites squeal, "terriers!!".

I don't know if Dyer is right or wrong on this issue, but he has a very impressive track record.

---

"Panic envy" is a beautiful turn of phrase.

Here's Dyer accurately forecasting the outcome of Olmert's assault on lebanon three weeks ago:

quote:

---

So one way or another, Israel will fail to achieve its war aims --
but this could be a good thing, for it will bring the fall of prime
minister Ehud Olmert's government and his project, inherited from the
stricken Ariel Sharon, to impose a "final peace settlement" on the
Palestinians that incorporates East Jerusalem and large chunks of the West
Bank into Israel.

---

An editorial in Yesterday's Haaretz

[ 12 August 2006: Message edited by: Lard Tunderin' Jeezus ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lard Tunderin' Jeezus:
BTW, Proaxiom, the rest of the tripe you've presented is just as inane. For example, Martin Rudd is not an explosives expert; indeed, he seems to lack a basic grasp of physics.

---

quote:

---

The question of whether Osama bin Laden still maintains control over active terrorist operations around the world is one of constant debate and analysis within the US intelligence community.

---

quote:

---

So one way or another, Israel will fail to achieve its war aims --
but this could be a good thing, for it will bring the fall of prime
minister Ehud Olmert's government and his project, inherited from the
stricken Ariel Sharon, to impose a "final peace settlement" on the
Palestinians that incorporates East Jerusalem and large chunks of the West
Bank into Israel.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by gram swaraj:
Hard to tell these days between different types of terrorists...
The question of whether Osama bin Laden still maintains control over active terrorist operations around the world is one of constant debate and analysis within the US intelligence community.

---

Second, a very small explosive is needed to damage an airliner. The force of the blast, coupled with the damage caused by over-pressure in a pressurized environment, make airliners susceptible to small devices.

Third, airlines have not been checking liquids for a long time. That's why this was a clever plot. I fly all the time and I have never, once, had any liquids I was carrying in hand luggage checked by anyone. Once a Bangladeshi tried to steal my toothpaste, but that doesn't really count.

Fourth, kudos to Stockholm for reducing all of this to the bare essentials: there is a conflict, not between Islam and the West, but between progressive and reactionary forces.

Sadly, and strangely, the reactionary forces dominate many Islamic governments and societies, a number of Western ones, including elements of the US government, and also big chunks of the Western left, which increasingly confuses protection of individual rights with the defense of reactionary culture.

[ 13 August 2006: Message edited by: Cardy ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cardy:
Third, airlines have not been checking liquids for a long time. That's why this was a clever plot. I fly all the time and I have never, once, had any liquids I was carrying in hand luggage checked by anyone. [ 13 August 2006: Message edited by: Cardy ]

---

Ditto. The one exception was a flight to Reagan in Washington in 2002.

[ 13 August 2006: Message edited by: Joel_Goldenberg ]

Anyone remember this fellow?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Proaxiom:

I can give a number of times I have brought a liquid in my carry-on (I think I've had aftershave with me pretty much every time). Nobody looked at them, never mind opening them to smell them.

And security screeners aren't in the habit of tasting things out of passengers' bags.

---

I think this is an interesting point or angle to all of this, and even more interesting that it is brought to light by proaxiom, who seems to be a PR person for the offical line. I would like to disclaim too that i have no doubt that there are terrorists, and they would like nothing other than to blow something up, but i have serious doubts that there are any more or less than there were in the 70's when there were actual hijackings and bombings , just more media coverage and official hype, as this has been found to be a handy and inexpensive way to cause fear and panic in the public and smooth the curtailing of civil liberties, as well as providing justification to hyper-ramp up our police and military apparatuses.

why is it that after all of the terrorist threats to air travel and the subsequent "crackdowns" on material allowed to be brought onto airplanes, airport security firms are still private, for profit, non-union, low wage paying, "service industry" type jobs? (and just to pre-derail the expected anti-union diatribes, the reason i mention that is the lack of job security in such jobs, as in you can be let go without any notice or explanation, lack of benefits or seniority, etc. which definately, combined with the low wages paid and the incredibly high work load and responsibility expected of the employees, breeds a time proven apathy towards the job, not to mention high stress).

it strikes me as seriously counter productive and dangerous to have undertrained, low wage, service workers, responsible for the world's safety from terrorists, and then essentially make the travelling public suffer for the cheapness of the corporations and state agencies that run airports and airlines, because it would ultimately be too expensive to have professional, highly trained security services staff every and all screening and security jobs at these facilities.

i recently traveled to the prairies for nearly all of july with two big duffle bags of outdoor gear and a carry on of all my valuables. i left all of the "suspect items" like my pocket knife, lighters, electric razor and axe (yes i travelled with an axe!) in my checked baggage, but in my carry on, which i was nervous about so i went to the airports super early, i had a whole host of electronic gadgets: ipod, cell phone, solar charger for both, numerous cables and cords for both, stainless steel thermoses of soup and tea, a whole bag full of toiletries that was essentially a field medical kit. i could go on.

my belt buckle made not a peep at the metal detector. nobody asked about what looked to my paranoid eye like bomb components in hard cases. nobody asked me to open my tea or soup. traveling in the early 90's, it was standard proceedure to expect this. not now. deregulation and outsourcing of security jobs have made this type of scrutiny too expensive and time intensive.

my point to all of this is that the governments of the day and companys controlling airports and airlines, have so dismantled and diminished the public sector (safety apparatus) and contracted it out to the lowest private sector bidder, that they now must absolutely rely on massive media hysteria to do the job that well paid people who cared about thier work used to do.

I may be off on a bit of a tangent here, but if it is so terribly imminent that terrorists may bring our world crashing down around us with simple techniques and tactics, why does it not happen every day, and why entrust the scrutiny of such threats to minimum/low wage earners who have little or no training for it, and given their level of compensation and job security, why should they be expected to shoulder that burden for 10 bucks an hour or less?

i still think that this overreaction to the situation and the banning of liquid consumer goods will last only as long as the bottom lines on airport authorities and airlines stay fine. the second this impacts on profits, poof, everything back to normal. terrorists? what terrorists? oh, that was all sorted out sir. now, that looks like a nice bottle of scotch from our duty free...is that a 10 or 15 year old Macallan? next.

[ 13 August 2006: Message edited by: farnival ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Proaxiom:

Please elaborate. You seem to be trying to say 3mm of aluminum is impregnable to high explosive, and then accusing others of not grasping physics. But it's hard to argue with you when you don't provide any real evidence, and dismiss everything I post without providing rationale.

---

Is a punctured hull problematic at high altitudes? Absolutely. But we are not talking about problematic, we have been discussing fatal - blown out of the sky.

You have implied that there is some kind of denial at work here. Yet you typify the groupthink that does not accept the facts - any facts that contradict the official story in the mass media.

This thread is about healthy scepticism.

[ 13 August 2006: Message edited by: Lard Tunderin' Jeezus ]

quote:

---

farnival said:
I think this is an interesting point or angle to all of this, and even more interesting that it is brought to light by proaxiom, who seems to be a PR person for the offical line.

---

That's not accurate. I am not at all afraid to say that the majority of airport security measures are shite. I've already agreed with that in another thread. The security is largely a facade, designed to make people feel safe while doing very little for their actual safety.

I'm also not going to dispute that events like this provide fodder for propaganda purposes. All I'm saying is that the conspiracy angle -- the idea that this was either a manufactured incident or a minor incident that isn't concerning -- doesn't add up.

quote:

---

if this recent threat was so horrendously serious, wouldn't this be a gross missplacement of priorities from the leader of a potentially target nation? if not, why the liquid bans on our domestic flights if not a PR exercise?

---

Good question. I think the answer is an uncomfortable one: there isn't a lot we can do to stop bad guys from blowing up planes. It's just too difficult. How hard would it be for a terrorist to get a job with a cleaning company that cleans airplane interiors, and plant a bomb somewhere (inside the septic tank, maybe)? They have the attackers' advantage: while the security people have to protect against every single possible way to down an airplane, the terrorists only have to find one way that isn't adequately protected against.

The reality is that our best line of defence is counter-terrorism. We have to figure out what they're doing before they do it, and stop them before they reach the planes.

quote:

---

Is a punctured hull problematic at high altitudes? Absolutely. But we are not talking about problematic, we have been discussing fatal - blown out of the sky.

---

I understand what you are saying a little better now.

To start with, we have seen that decompression in and of itself can be fatal. But on the other, hand it often isn't, so we can assume that the terrorists do want to compromise the airframe to make the plane no longer flight capable.

Notice the picture in the second link there:

That's an example of explosive decompression. It was caused by a cargo door breach at 22,000 feet. When the Mythbusters did their experiment with a small shaped charge, the damage was worse. Flight 811 survived, but it may not have had it been at 40,000 feet.

So it is certainly true that the airframe, though also made of aluminum, is harder to destroy than the skin.

How hard is it to cause an airplane to destroy or crash with a bomb?

The Lockerbie bombing involved a 747 being destroyed by an explosion that opened a 20 inch hole on the left side of the fuselage. The plane broke up.

Korean Air Flight 858 was destroyed by 350g of C-4 and a liquor bottle containing 0.7L of PLX in an overhead rack.

The Air India bombing was similar, though I can't find the type or size of bomb used, other than that it was in a Samsonite suitcase. It detonated in the cargo compartment, causing rapid decompression, and then the break-up of the plane.

[ 13 August 2006: Message edited by: Proaxiom ]

[ 13 August 2006: Message edited by: Proaxiom ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Proaxiom:
...so our only choice is to actively seek out the terrorists and block their plans before they are set in motion.

---

and hopefully that would include infrastructure assistance to people bombed into the stone age with sewer, water, agricultural reconstruction, money and bricks for schools, and trauma counselling for the people and families devastated by the "measured" response by first-world nations to the never ending threat of terrorists.

at the risk of drift, the globe and mail had an in depth articlein Saturday's Focus section on Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah's leader. I learned alot, but what struck me most was that Hezbollah held two cabinet positions, which i had heard, but is elected to 30 seats in the 128 seat legislature. That is 24% of the seats. It also mentions that there were discussions about disarming its fighters by folding the militia into the proper Lebanese Army. This is roughly about the same support the Reform and Canadian Alliance Parties had prior to merging with the PCs, members of which are opposed to gun control in any form and quite vocally trumpet the right to own a firearm, and actually do. Could these folks be terrorists too?

the reason i mention this is because of the use of the words terrorist, terrorism, and the phrase terrorist threat. It is interesting because it seems fine to have a domestic milita (reserves) to be called up for military service, but if you are resisting a western or western backed country, that reserve militia is called a terrorist cell or army.

I think there is growing fatigue with this overhyping of the threat levels, and people know that to question it in person is to risk being seen as "helping terrorism" or even worse, inviting suspicion on themselves. Better to just go along with it and hope it is better next time. Perhaps it isn't apathy, but the myriad of contradictory examples of what a terrorist is has made people throw up their hands in frustration and give up resisitng.

edited to ad the fancy url link. it seems to work! thanks michelle.

[ 13 August 2006: Message edited by: farnival ]

[ 13 August 2006: Message edited by: farnival ]

The terrorism stuff in your post is thread drift, though you're right that the definition of the word has been blurred by most people lately. Terrorism is a tactic, and terrorists are those who employ it. Hezbollah has engaged in terrorism in the past, but not everything they do is terrorism. Rolling the Hezbollah troops into regular army would make a lot of sense, but only if it meant they were truly under the control of the Lebanese government.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Proaxiom:
If Hezbollah was Lebanese army, then the attack and kidnapping of Israeli soldiers would have been an act of war between two sovereign nations.

---

i agree, though i imagine that the Lebanese army wouldn't have done that for that very reason, so there is enough reasonable doubt present that the formal army uses the militas as proxies to do thier dirty work. it seems that all militaries do this these days (yes, an exaggeration to make a point) to avoid formal war declarations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Proaxiom:

If Hezbollah was Lebanese army, then the attack and kidnapping of Israeli soldiers would have been an act of war between two sovereign nations.

---

quote:

---

Source: U.S., U.K. at odds over timing of arrests
British wanted to continue surveillance on terror suspects, official says

5:13 p.m. PT Aug 12, 2006

A senior British official knowledgeable about the case said British police were planning to continue to run surveillance for at least another week to try to obtain more evidence, while American officials pressured them to arrest the suspects sooner.

..the official suggested an attack was not imminent, saying the suspects had not yet purchased any airline tickets. In fact, some did not even have passports.

The source did say, however, that police believe one U.K.-based suspect was ready to conduct a "dry run." British authorities had wanted to let him go forward with part of the plan, but the Americans balked.

The British official said the Americans also argued over the timing of the arrest of suspected ringleader Rashid Rauf in Pakistan, warning that if he was not taken into custody immediately, the U.S. would "render" him or pressure the Pakistani government to arrest him.

British security was concerned that Rauf be taken into custody "in circumstances where there was due process," according to the official, so that he could be tried in British courts. Ultimately, this official says, Rauf was arrested over the objections of the British.

The official shed light on other aspects of the case, saying that while the investigation into the bombing plot began "months ago," some suspects were known to the security services even before the London subway bombings last year.

..revealing that the plotters had tested the explosive liquid mixture they planned to use at a location outside Britain. NBC News has previously reported that the explosive mixture was tested in Pakistan. The source said the suspects in Britain had obtained at least some of the materials for the explosive but had not yet actually prepared or mixed it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by S1m0n:

Israel and Lebanon have been AT WAR for the past 24 years.

---

However, clearly NOT “terrorists,” are, for example, unarmed protesters marching in streets, someone stickering a Humvee, Palestinian youths throwing rocks at occupying Israeli tanks, etc.

[ 14 August 2006: Message edited by: gram swaraj ]

quote:

---

You want to wait and see “if it happens”? How would you ever know if you followed your own advice and prohibited the use of those means of electronic monitoring???

---

Lolz! Go read Catch-22, Sven.

What I think is missing here are klaxons. I think all airports and other public buildings, and all large workplaces, should have klaxons in the corridor that can be periodically sounded to indicate a terror alert. I'd feel a lot safer with those klaxons sounding.

[ 14 August 2006: Message edited by: rasmus raven ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Proaxiom:
I understand what you are saying a little better now.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lard Tunderin' Jeezus:
I rather doubt that, as you missed the point entirely.

I was not conceding the point that a hull breach was a major possibility, I was pointing out the reality distortion field you deliberately generate.

---

Of the 1.6 million Muslims in Britain, 750,000 are of Pakistani descent, and young Muslim men angry at the West gravitate toward the violent madrassas in their parents' home countries, Dr. Shaikh said:

quote:

---

“Pakistan is an incubus of terrorist activity,” said Farzana Shaikh, a professor at the Centre of South Asian Studies at Cambridge University. “The nexus of alienated British Muslims and locally based Pakistani groups with alleged links to al-Qaeda has fuelled fears that Pakistan is a hub of terrorist activity.”

The mastermind is thought to be Matiur Rehman, who is on the run in Pakistan and wanted in connection with the July 11 train bombings in Mumbai that killed more than 200 people and the beheading of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in 2002.

Mr. Rehman is accused of wiring money to pay for the British suspects' plane tickets. Four have also allegedly spent time in the madrassas (religious schools) of Pakistan.

Pakistan's intelligence service set up the training camps in the 1980s with money from Saudi Arabia and the United States to help Afghanistan fight the Soviets. In the 1990s, the mission of the camps and madrassas was expanded to include fighting with India in the disputed territory of Kashmir.

The situation is also inevitably tied to the turbulent domestic politics of Pakistan, where President Pervez Musharraf's military rule lacks credibility and is forced to rely on the religious right to bolster his support base.

But, as Dr. Shaikh pointed out, the religious right has links with violent anti-Western groups such as the Lashkar Jhangvi, to which Mr. Rehman belongs.

“One doesn't know how far [General Musharraf's] regime can crack down on the terrorists without losing support from the religious right,” she said.

---

Yet the media somehow assume that these guys are motivated mainly by events in the middle east.

Lashkar Jhangvi was promoted and supported by the Musharraf regime:

quote:

---

Whatever lessons he learnt as a young officer in the Army, President Musharraf began to put them into action with a feverish passion as soon as he ousted a democratically elected government and anointed himself the Chief Executive.

One of his first acts was to court the mullahs. He offered Kashmir to the mullahs and told them he would extend all help to their jihad. The mullahs, who were fast losing ground to democracy and liberal religious beliefs, found an able and willing ally in the General. Madarsas and mosques flourished. Mullahs became regular visitors to the President's House.

General Musharraf's motive in courting the mullahs was two-fold. Besides garnering support for his forced regime, he wanted a covert base to revive terrorism in Kashmir. Madarsas and mosques became recruitment and training centres. Many of the mosque heads became rabble-rousers, motivating youngsters to join the jihad, luring them with an attractive salary and a place in the heaven. Training camps were set up with the help of the Pakistan Army and ISI. Funds earned from illicit drug trafficking were diverted to these centres of terrorism. It was this religious-military-terror nexus that masterminded the Kandahar hijacking of December 1999.

The hijacking of IC-814 Indian Airlines flight from Kathmandu to New Delhi was not an isolated incident. It was part of Operation Revival. There is enough evidence to pinpoint the involvement of terrorist groups which were sustained by the intelligence agencies. For instance, one of the hijackers was Amjad Farooqi, an active member of Lashkar Jhangvi, who was recently shot dead in an encounter.

Three of the hostages who General Musharraf and the mullahs wanted were Maulana Azhar Masood and his acolyte Syed Omar Sheikh and Mushtaq Ahmed Zargar, a serial killer of Srinagar. All three were in Indian jails for indulging in subversive activities. Within days of his release, the Maulana floated a terrorist outfit, Jaish-e-Mohammad and made known his agenda to the world: To free Kashmir.

Jaish was only part of the overall Kashmir Plan drawn up by General Musharraf. He promoted another terrorist outfit, Lashkar-e-toiba, with equal munificence. Both Jaish and Lashkar were established to create mayhem in Kashmir and force India to come to the discussion table with Pakistan. Two other outfits promoted and supported by the Musharraf regime were Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Sipah-e-Saheba.

These groups had a hidden aim as well. They recruited men for Jaish and Lashkar under the pretext of running religious schools. There is mounting evidence that Lashkar Jhangvi, despite being officially banned, has now taken the responsibility of helping the fleeing Al Qaeda members regroup in Pakistan-a fact that only confirms the irrefutable link between these groups and the military-intelligence establishment headed by President Musharraf. The regularity with which Pakistan security forces have, since September 11, 2001, produced some of the top Al Qaeda leaders from Karachi and other towns, proves beyond doubt, the existence of a network of terror groups that has been able to exploit a colluding establishment and a huge support base of the religious groups that has grown quite rapidly in the past five years.

The sudden flare up of sectarian violence in the recent months should be viewed in this context. For the past five years, the military regime has been manipulating various religious and sectarian groups to undermine the growing clout of the religious political alliance, MMA, at the centre, often pitting one against one another to whittle down their strength and keep them engaged against each other. This certainly gave enough space and breathing time to the military regime to look for ways to consolidate its hold over the country, especially in times of crisis. The Musharraf regime, for instance, was under tremendous pressure after the WTC attack. The US wanted President Musharraf to join the war on terrorism by allowing the use of airfields and air space to launch attacks on the Taliban and Al Qaeda strongholds. Though President Musharraf gave in under pressure, he kept his domestic constituency happy by turning a blind eye to Al Qaeda and Taliban groups taking shelter with religious and sectarian organisations like Sipah-e-Sahaba and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi in cities like Karachi, Quetta and Peshawar. Today, these terror groups, morphed with local extremist organisations, are poised to unleash a new wave of terror across the world.

---

The Colder War - John Pilger

quote:

---

Brzezinski not long ago revealed that on July 3, 1979, unknown to the American public and Congress, President Jimmy Carter secretly authorized $500 million to create an international terrorist movement that would spread Islamic fundamentalism in Central Asia and "destabilize" the Soviet Union.

The CIA called this Operation Cyclone and in the following years poured $4 billion into setting up Islamic training schools in Pakistan (Taliban means "student"). Young zealots were sent to the CIA's spy training camp in Virginia, where future members of al-Qaeda were taught "sabotage skills"-terrorism. Others were recruited at an Islamic school in Brooklyn, New York, within sight of the fated Twin Towers.

In Pakistan, they were directed by British MI6 [Britain's foreign intelligence agency] officers and trained by the SAS [Britain's elite Special Air Services].

The result, quipped Brzezinski, was "a few stirred up Muslims'-meaning the Taliban.

At that time, the late 1970s, the American goal was to overthrow Afghanistan's first progressive, secular government, which had granted equal rights to women, established health care and literacy programs, and set out to break feudalism

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Briguy:
If it comes out that illegal wiretapping (or newly-'legal' monitoring of every-bloody-phone-call-on-Earth) caught this conspiracy, I'll reconsider my position.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
the CIA, Pentagon and military industrial complex were running out of enemies after the Soviets stabbed them all in the back by ceding the cold war.

---

But as the above quote notes, they were then (after the Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan) turned toward the Kashmir struggle, and still are.

The media does not pick up on Kashmir largely because the west was not formative in the creation of the problem through our direct support for a European colonial population.

Hence we (Western Europeans) were always more interested in South Africa than Russian colonialization of the Stans. Something which never gets talked about at all. Even less than Kashmir, where we at least have some interest because of British imperial rule in India.

It is not as if Muslim Chechyn rebels don't conform to the profile, yet we simply do not percieve ourselves as fundamentally involved in the problem, so it doesn't get the coverage.

Funny thing that, isn't it?

[ 15 August 2006: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilf Day:
And our media are not picking this up, because our audiences are more interested in Palestine? Or what?

---

Mainstream media in North America will seldom be on the cutting edge of a story, in-depth, as these days it simply propagates the viewpoints of the powerful rather than inform members of the public of anything that they really need to know as citizens interested in building a better society for themselves and for all.

The point I’ve been trying to make above is that the apparent rise of Lashkar Jhangvi or a “Pakistanized” al-Qaeda does not disprove the piles of evidence that the WTC tragedy was caused by USian state-corporate terrorism. Likewise, the terrorism of the Cheney Gang does not disprove the possibility of a ‘bona fide’ small terrorist group independently plotting to blow up 10-12 planes.

[ 15 August 2006: Message edited by: gram swaraj ]

quote:

---

Or would have needed, as it seems we are on the way of running out of time.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lard Tunderin' Jeezus:
...and the particular kind of wealth native to the middle east.

---

quote:

---

So, just who was in control of this operation anyways?

We can see the Republicans are sure getting good mileage out of this, and what better time for it.

At the very least we can assert that was heavily stage-managed for propaganda value.

---

apply equally to

quote:

---

Brzezinski not long ago revealed that on July 3, 1979, unknown to the American public and Congress, President Jimmy Carter secretly authorized $500 million to create an international terrorist movement that would spread Islamic fundamentalism in Central Asia and "destabilize" the Soviet Union.

---

I am not the first to make the observation that Osama Bin Ladin was one of those funded by the CIA. Like in the case of the would be Britain plane exploders, where does foreknowledge and assistance (with moles inside likely acting to move event forward) end, and control begin? Is OBL still a CIA asset?

In my mind, it is clear that this is much more than simple "blowback".

To repeat, at the very least we can assert that was heavily stage-managed for propaganda value.

[ 15 August 2006: Message edited by: blogbart ]

web page

quote:

---

Here is a checklist of some things we should shortly be hearing about. Bombs. Chemicals. Detonators. Labs. A testing ground. Airline tickets. Passports. Witnesses. Suspicious neighbors. Suspicious parents. Suspicious friends. Threats. Confessions. Let me spell this out: By definition, you cannot bomb an aircraft unless you have a bomb. In this case, we are told that there were no bombs; rather, the conspirators planned to bring on board the makings of a bomb: chemicals and a detonator. These would be mixed on board.

---

quote:

---

Exactly what the chemicals were remains unclear. Nitroglycerin has been suggested, but it's too likely to go off on the way to the airport. TATP, made of acetone and peroxide, has been suggested, but there are two problems. One is that the peroxide required is highly concentrated--it's not the 3 percent solution from the drugstore. The other is that acetone is highly volatile. As anyone who flies knows, you can't open a bottle of nail polish remover on an airplane without everyone within twenty feet knowing at once. It's possible to imagine one truly dedicated and competent bomber pulling this off. But it is impossible to imagine twenty-four untrained people between the ages of 17 and 35 all getting away with the same trick at once.

---

quote:

---

So, there must have been training. That means there must be a lab, or labs. There must have been trial bombs. There must be various bits and pieces of equipment used to mix the chemicals and set them off. There must be a manual. There must be a testing ground. And each one of the young men under arrest must have been to these places. Interestingly, it must have all happened, too, without a serious accident, injury or death among the conspirators. If so, they are a lot more competent than the Weather Underground ever was, in my day.

---

quote:

---

Apparently, not one ticket had been purchased by the detainees. One little-known feature of airline security (in the United States, anyway) is that people traveling on one-way tickets bought at the last minute get special scrutiny at the gate. Those tickets are also (a lot) more expensive. If you want to pass unnoticed, you will buy your ticket round-trip, in advance, and also save money like everyone else. Actually, if you didn't know this already, you're not fit to be let out of the house.

---

quote:

---

In short: Could this case blow up? Could it turn out to have been an overreaction, a mistake--or even a hoax? Yes, it could, and it wouldn't be the first one, either. I'm not saying it will, necessarily. I'm not accusing the British authorities of bad faith. I'm not suggesting the plot was faked--at least, not by them. But dodgy informants and jumpy politicians are an explosive mixture, easily detonated under pressure. Everyone knows that.

---

UK paper The Independent is careful to refer to this thing as an "alleged terror plot." What recourse do the accused have?

It could well be a real terror plot, going by my rough definition of 'state-corporate terrorism'

[ 18 August 2006: Message edited by: gram swaraj ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cardy:
First, congratulations to the British and whoever helped them for preventing these attacks. Hopefully those alleged to be responsible will be quickly and publicly tried.

---

The timing is political

quote:

---

We should be sceptical about this alleged plot, and wary of politicians who seek to benefit

Craig Murray
Friday August 18, 2006
The Guardian [UK]

Nine days on, nobody has been charged with any crime. For there to be no clear evidence yet on something that was "imminent" and would bring "mass murder on an unbelievable scale" is, to say the least, peculiar. A 24th person, arrested amid much fanfare on Tuesday, was quietly released without charge the following day.

Media analysis has been full of information from police and security sources. By and large journalists are honourable in this kind of reporting. Their sources, unfortunately, are not - viz the non-existent ricin, the Forest Gate "chemical weapons vest", or Jean Charles de Menezes leaping the barriers. Unlike the herd of security experts, I have had the highest security clearance; I have done a huge amount of professional intelligence analysis; and I have been inside the spin machine. And I am very sceptical about the story that has been spun.

None of the alleged terrorists had made a bomb. None had bought a plane ticket. Many did not have passports.... Many of those arrested had been under surveillance for more than a year - like thousands of other British Muslims. And not just Muslims. Like me. Nothing from that surveillance had indicated the need for early arrests.

Then an interrogation in Pakistan revealed this amazing plot to blow up multiple planes. Of course, the interrogators of the Pakistani dictator have ways of making people sing like canaries... You can get the most extraordinary information from people desperate to stop or avert torture. What you don't get is the truth.

We also have the extraordinary question of Bush and Blair discussing arrests the weekend before they were made...

In all of this, the one thing of which I am certain is that ... this is more propaganda than plot. More than 1,000 British Muslims have been arrested under anti-terrorist legislation, but only 12% have been charged. That is harassment on an appalling scale. Of those charged, 80% were acquitted. Most of the few convictions - just over 2% of arrests - are nothing to do with terrorism, but some minor offence the police happened upon while trawling through the lives they have wrecked...

Be very wary of politicians who seek to benefit from terror.

Be sceptical. Be very, very sceptical.

---

UK police hit out at FBI over leaks

quote:

---

Anti-terror police in Britain have made an angry request to their US counterparts asking them to stop leaking details of this month's suspected bomb plot over fears that it could jeopardise the chances of a successful prosecution and hamper the gathering of evidence.
The British security services, MI5 and MI6, are understood to be dismayed that a number of sensitive details surrounding the alleged plot - including an FBI estimate that as many as 50 people were involved - were leaked to the media.

FBI sources confirmed to The Observer that the bureau had been ordered to stop briefing at the request of the British authorities. 'The shutters have come down,' a bureau source said. 'We have been told not to discuss the case any more.

---

So, is the world really safer under the Bush administration and are the GOP and the Bush administration really the best to lead the war on terror?

-Eleven charged over 'plot to blow up aircraft'
-Muslim pilot reveals shock at being ordered off flight
-Trial will be one of most costly in Britain
-Leading article: Do we really want to give ammunition to the fanatics? (paid)

I've only read the one about the Muslim pilot so far. Unnerving and outrageous. How far is this demonization to go? Is someone trying to build something up against people with brown skin, or a certain kind of name? How far will the world, starting with those in the supposedly free west, let this racism go?

From Eleven charged over 'plot to blow up aircraft'

quote:

---

Eleven people, including a woman and a 17-year-old, have been charged over their alleged involvement in a plot to bring down transatlantic airliners. Eight men have been charged with conspiracy to murder and the new offence of preparing acts of terrorism. It is alleged that they plotted to manufacture bomb parts and smuggle them on board planes before assembling and detonating the devices.
[…]The charges came as Scotland Yard announced that it had carried out 69 searches since the suspects were arrested on 10 August.Deputy Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke, who is the head of the Anti-Terrorist Branch, describing the "immense scale'' and "enormity'' of the alleged plot, said that police had discovered bomb-making equipment that included "chemicals, hydrogen peroxide, electrical components, documents and other items".
[..]DAC Clarke said that the police and the Security Service were doing everything possible to enable the public to live "without being in constant fear".However, he continued: "We must be realistic. The threat from terrorism is real, it is here, it is deadly and it is enduring."

---

quote:

---

Under the strict rules of the Contempt of Court Act, editors face fines and possible imprisonment if they print or broadcast anything that might seriously prejudice the trial.And the Home Secretary, John Reid, and the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, have already issued a joint statement reminding the media to "exercise considerable restraint".

---

On ammunition to fanatics:

quote:

---

On a flight from Malaga to Manchester, two men were singled out for humiliating treatment solely because of their appearance. Six passengers refused to board when they saw the pair enter the cabin. After the passengers' concerns were brought to the attention of the pilot, the two men were marched from the plane by the Spanish Civil Guard...Any passengers making a fuss based on nothing except the appearance of a fellow passenger - as happened in Malaga - should be told that all the proper security checks have been made. And if they still have a problem, the complainant should be given the option of leaving the plane...But the response of the authorities should be to attempt to counter such suspicions, rather than stoke them as they appear increasingly willing to do. If we submit to the temptations of racial profiling and mob rule, we merely give the fanatics one more propaganda victory. We will give credence to the idea that it is not terrorists who are our target, but Muslims in general. In the long term there is nothing that could put us more at risk.

---

[ 22 August 2006: Message edited by: gram swaraj ]

A UK daily the Register had a story that details how difficult it would be to actually mix/assemble the liquid explosive on a plane, demonstrating that the fear of it should be tempered.

quote:

---

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/17/flying_toilet_terror_labs/

---

As an example of one of many complex steps required:

quote:

---

Once your kit is in place, put a beaker containing the peroxide / acetone mixture into the ice water bath (Champagne bucket), and start adding the acid, drop by drop, while stirring constantly. Watch the reaction temperature carefully. The mixture will heat, and if it gets too hot, you'll end up with a weak explosive. In fact, if it gets really hot, you'll get a premature explosion possibly sufficient to kill you, but probably no one else.

---

Like was pointed out the potential for the liquid explosive to actually cause "unimaginable damage" (as said by authorities) is questionable:

quote:

---

We asked University of Rhode Island Chemistry Professor Jimmie C. Oxley, who has actual, practical experience with TATP, if this is a reasonable assumption, and she tolds us that merely dumping the precursors together would create "a violent reaction," but not a detonation.

---

quote:

---

While it's true that a slapdash concoction will explode, it's unlikely to do more than blow out a few windows. At best, an infidel or two might be killed by the blast, and one or two others by flying debris as the cabin suddenly depressurizes, but that's about all you're likely to manage under the most favorable conditions possible.

---

quote:

---

Police and prosecutors were locked in crisis meetings last night after what they believed to be the strongest terrorism case ever presented to a court was rejected by a jury.

At the end of a £10 million investigation and trial lasting more than two years, jurors were unable to decide whether or not a group of British Muslims were part of a plot to blow transatlantic airliners out of the sky.

The outcome of the case - which featured al-Qaeda-style martyrdom videos made by six defendants - will be seen as a severe blow to Britain’s anti-terrorist effort.

Three men were convicted of conspiracy to murder, but the jury was deadlocked on the central allegation, that terrorists planned to use liquid bombs to destroy aircraft en route from Heathrow to cities in the United States and Canada....

The discovery of the plot, in August 2006, led to a global security clamp-down at airports that paralysed international travel. The alert resulted in restrictions on carrying liquids in cabin baggage that remain in force and are unlikely to be relaxed....

The jurors also failed to reach verdicts on serious terrorist charges against four other men, who had recorded al-Qaeda-style suicide videos and admitted charges of conspiring to cause a public nuisance.

Another defendant, described in court as a shadowy figure with terrorist connections, was acquitted of all charges and cannot be retried.

The jurors deliberated for 52 hours, but their discussions were disrupted by a two-week holiday, frequent sickness breaks and other commitments....

Andy Hayman, former assistant commissioner for special operations, said: “This was one of our strongest cases – there will have to be an intensive debrief. But now is not the time for that, now is the time to prepare for retrials.”...

Four further trials related to the alleged airline plot are pending.

---

----
Link to prior thread

[ 09 September 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by laine lowe:
Speaking of terror charges, how go the trials of the Mississauga 17? Isn't that Canada's equivalent terror trial of the new century?

---

This is off topic, I know, but there are no current threads and thought it was interesting.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
Landmark Russian TV debate about 9/11 cosmonaut watched NYC's smoke plumes, and some other "highly interesting things"

---

quote:

---

Tarpley is a former acolyte of crackpot and convicted felon Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. You remember LaRouche. He is generally described as a perennial Presidential candidate who once said the Queen of England ran the global drug trade. Tarpley may have left the LaRouche group, but it has not left him. Tarpley acts as a sockpuppet for LaRouche, spreading delirious venom throughout the antiwar movement. The LaRouche group has a long history of conning people into signing statements based on misleading descriptions of the actual text. Déjà vu. - Source

---

[ 09 September 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

And the British court findings don't surprise me either. A phony colder war on terror needs a legit enemy. They still don't have one.

[ 09 September 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by M. Spector:
How about ZMagazine? Is that left enough for you?

Or do you think you can just smear everybody who criticizes Lyndon Larouche as "right-wing whackos"?

---

ZMag has very many articles written by bonafide lefties, for sure. However, at first and 2nd glance, I see they mention the current global financial crisis, and lo and behold, un-socialists like like Tony Blair and George Soros and a host of other well-respected financial institutions recommending Keynesian fixes to repair the broken neoliberal ideology. I think one article describes the BIS as a possible key to reforming the whole mess. But Keynes actually called for an end to the BIS because of its very undemocratic existence, as well as the BIS being a group of money launderers for the Nazis leading up to and during WW II. I dunno though, it's a huge subject for which I am definitely not an authority.