[Closed] Not heard much from Al Qaeeda for a bit, let's have a travel alert panic...

It is surprising, given the scope of the NSAs data collection, that they cannot narrow things down a bit from 'worldwide'.

Cheers,

Danny B.

[url= http://swampland.time.com/2013/05/06/chances-of-dying-in-a-terrorist-attack-number/ ]chances of dying in terrorist attack (in the us) [/url]

[url= http://www.medhelp.org/general-health/articles/The-25-Most-Common-Causes-of-Death/193?page=1 ]what will actually get you[/url]

Rachel the terrorists are the ones who would cut off your head for being infidel/independent female/gay/blasphemous etc. . Flawed as all western democracies are and short of being perfectly tolerant, they/we have still made significant progress in terms of being a liberal democracy.

Turned the news over after a 1min. Filled that one under "politics", news for agender rather than the good of the population.

Maybe the various security organisations operate in the same way as local council depts. They have to be seen to be doing something or they lose budget for the next year. This is probably them just keeping THE FEAR on a low simmer.

Annoying really - negotiating airports into africa next week for work just became a pain in hoop

Be glad they haven't identified extra terrestial terrorists yet. Alert could go to solar system or universe wide. Does worldwide just cover the surface? or does it include atmosphere and oceans?

Its the end of Ramadan, they reckon trouble is due...

I'd have thought during would be worse. i get proper grumpy when I'm hungry and looking at the unified prayer times you'd not want to be near me about 4pm BST.

Its [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt ]FUD[/url] thats all. Once you know that, you act appropriately.

I wouldnt worry too much about either..

Why don't we get our fearless warriors for democracy, The Mujahadeen , to hunt down the Taliban.
The mujas must owe us a few favours and they are our mates after all.

Rachel the terrorists are the ones who would cut off your head for being infidel/independent female/gay/blasphemous etc.

So you don't think that terrorising populations through overwhelming firepower, threats of [url= ]shock and awe[/url], imprisonment and torture, and indiscriminately killing people through the use of drone predators operated from a comfy chair in an air conditioned room somewhere in the Neva Desert isn't terrorism ? Why ?

And btw we in the West don't have the slightest problem with people being beheaded for things such as adultery, apostasy, drug smuggling, kidnapping, rape, witchcraft and sorcery.

It's merely a question of who's doing it.

[url= http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/saudi-arabia-five-beheaded-and-crucified-amid-disturbing-rise-executions-2013-05-21 ]Saudi Arabia: Five beheaded and ‘crucified’ amid ‘disturbing’ rise in executions[/url]

Rachel the terrorists are the ones who would cut off your head for being infidel/independent female/gay/blasphemous etc.

Yes, going to war repeatedly over 'resource security' and killing many orders of magnitude more people than Al-Qaeda ever could in their wildest dreams, then using them as an excuse to suspend basic human rights - much more morally justified eh?

[img] [/img]

So you don't think that terrorising populations through overwhelming firepower, threats of shock and awe, imprisonment and torture, and indiscriminately killing people through the use of drone predators operated from a comfy chair in an air conditioned room somewhere in the Neva Desert isn't terrorism ? Why ?

No I don't because it's not terrorism, it's war and we didn't start it. Plus I don't agree with that the use of drones is indiscriminate. It might not be 100% accurate but that's not the same thing.

8 people were murdered in Nigeria yesterday with Boko Haram warning of "massive" attacks in the days to come - al queda have also warned of imminent punishment for the west's role in Syria so combined with the end of Ramadan let's all hope the nay sayers on here know more than then intelligence services who look at this thing all year for a living.

No I don't because it's not terrorism, it's war and we didn't start it.

It's designed to terrorise people into submission and achieve political ends - terrorism.

And we did "start it". We attacked Afghanistan and Iraq despite the fact that they had not attacked us.

We hear a lot, from the likes of the idiot Anjem Choudhary and the Woolwich murderers about how "the West" is killing their "brother Muslims" in the middle east and so on. Why is it there's no protesting about their "brother Muslims" killing their other "brother Muslims" I wonder?

I think Afghanistan was complicit in many attacks on the west as it permitted terrorist training camps. They knew full well what those guys were training for. However, I agree that Iraq is the most shameful entry into our recent history.

So you think muslims aren't bother by the daily terrorists killings in Iraq Woppit ? 🙄

Boko Haram

Didn't they do 'Whiter Shade of Pale'?

I think Afghanistan was complicit in many attacks on the west as it permitted terrorist training camps.

Oh ffs, Osama bin Laden's training camps in Afghanistan were built by the CIA.

The Afghan government were not behind any attack on the UK.

It is surprising, given the scope of the NSAs data collection, that they cannot narrow things down a bit from 'worldwide'.

Equally possible its a potential solution to the Coventry Dilemma, they do know what the target it, but to reveal that reveals the source. So in amongst the massive smoke screen of 'many embassies' is one specific one they are worried about.

I think Afghanistan was complicit in many attacks on the west as it permitted terrorist training camps. They knew full well what those guys were training for.

Surely we'd have been better off invading Saudi Arabia? Seeing as they are the main funders of worldwide Islamic extremism/terrorism and most of the hijackers and the mastermind were Saudi.

Oh ffs, Osama bin Laden's training camps in Afghanistan were built by the CIA.

I dont know about international terrorism however I really do think the use of drones to be despicable and cowardly and because you are not landing on foreign soil .......boots on the ground as they say, you can carry out these acts of terrorism relatively easy, therefore the more often this is carried out the less questioning we ask, it then becomes the norm, if you have to deploy troops who will possibly be killed and become injured apart from creating more media interest you also need to justify to a greater and more questioning audience, therefore your justification needs to be better, there is no justification for either Iraq or Afghanistan at all IMO.
The lack of any real time served ex military men in modern politics also accounts for many of the actions sanctioned by an army of shine arsess

So?

So the CIA brought Osama bin Laden over to Afghanistan, built his training camps, financed him, and supplied him with highly sophisticated weapons. Eventually Osama bin Laden and his Arab volunteers became by far the best and most effective fighters in Afghanistan, what did you expect the Afghan government to do ? Kicking Al-qaeda out of Afghanistan isn't easy - the US has spent 10 years with all the resources at their disposal trying to do it.

And btw, we didn't decide to bomb the **** out of Northern Ireland or attack Irish wedding parties because of the activities of the IRA or protestant paramilitaries.

Back in the '90's, a communications provider had several of it's engineers kidnapped whilst abroad, by Islamic thugs who then beheaded the engineers, leaving their heads at the side of the road.

After the firm later went in to liquidation, one of it's previous members (a bit of a technical whiz) put his mind to inventing a system for the military where any mobile phone call, anywhere, could be monitored and located using the technology available in GPS satellite tracking. Boastful Taliban and Al-Qaeda franchisees who previously thought themselves untouchable in remote desert areas, suddenly found themselves being targeted and killed.

The technology is still in use today, using drones to execute the miscreants.

Let's call him "Clive".

Well done, "Clive" - a real and productive legacy. 🙂

The technology is still in use today, using drones to execute the miscreants.

And their families. And lots of other innocent people. Including medical staff treating the wounded from the first attack.

If only drone technology was around when Che was mounting his failed revolution.

Not heard much from Al Qaeeda for a bit, let's have a travel alert panic...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23558930

There'll be a load of people in Jalalabad going "... now why did allthegear have to go and say it was too quiet...."

The reason why its been so quiet in the west is because our intelligence services are doing a good job. The police are very active on a weekly basis carrying out raids based on communications intercepts. And god knows what 'black ops' we're engaged in around the world, let them get on with it I say. All this call for less monitoring of emails, phone calls and other things that is the only way for us to combat these cretins are ridiculous - google does it anyway, our society is hardly free and open, it can never be. This is an intelligence war, not a 'boots on the ground' war, so lets get those drones up there and keep an eye on them. Al Qieda certainly are not quiet in other countries and regions of the world. I've a friend who lives in Karachi and there are pretty much daily bombings horrendous attrocities carried out there, he's too scared to leave his own house, so they are still very active. They want to turn every country in the Middle East into an extreme Islamic state. But as far as we're concerned their strategy appears to be let things quieten down, lull us into a false sence of security, hope we'll let our guard down, then hit us. They thrive on the illusion of a threat rather than real threats.

We can't give these bastard an inch, and it is a war that can't be won by any side, so this is it for the foreseeable future. These guys believe they are doing God's work so the only way this can be settled is to irradiate religion. Obliously that isn't going to happen.

And so what if in the past we've cosied upto these idiots. That's politics, you can't live In a dreamworld where you play by the book according to your morals. Today's allies are potentially tomorrow's enemies. We have global interest and we can't fight all the wars and conflicts around the world we have an interest in, so we pay other people to fight our wars. We funded and trained the Taliban when the Russians invaded. That was a smart move as it halted the Ruskies progess and preventing them from dominating that region and having a platform to go further into south east Asia. Now we're fighting the Taliban. That's the world we've created for ourselves, unfortunately.

Rachel the terrorists are the ones who would cut off your head for being infidel/independent female/gay/blasphemous etc. . Flawed as all western democracies are and short of being perfectly tolerant, they/we have still made significant progress in terms of being a liberal democracy.

that's interesting, as not long ago a terrorist could be farely accurately defined as someone prepared to involve innocent civilians in an act of aggression and/or violence to forward their political agenda..
hundreds of terrorist groups from all over the world, east and west, that didn't necessarily have anything whatsoever to do with religious fundamentalism..

now it seems from geetee's post that Muslim fundamentalist and terrorist are terms that are interchangeable for your basic media quaffing joe public..

maybe it's time that the situation was clearly redefined before the xenophobia gets out of hand..?
or is the xenophobia a useful part of the mechanism..?

it's very easy to see why folk get confused about who, what or where the threat of terror is coming from

Drones aren't fair?
I'm not a fan of drones, but one side pointing and shouting "no fair" whilst behaving in the manner AQ/terry does is necky.

Oh, and blaming the Americans for AQ is inaccurate. The northern alliance is not AQ. The mujahideen are not AQ. Most of AQ are foreigners (referred to by locals as "the foreigners")

The technology is still in use today, using drones to execute the miscreants

Execute, normally applies only when a fair trial has been carried out and normally doesn't include the relatives of the alleged miscreants, if the act committed justifies a response then it is up to the aggrieved country to build a case and then pursue through internationally agreed methods, incursions into other countries using robotic killing machines is cowardly terrorism, bullying terrorism, the upshot of which will only create greater resentment throughout the world, the end result it is it us who suffer, the perpetrators who live within a fortress will never answer for horror they have created for the poor folk in foreign lands or the lack of liberty imposed within their own countries.

maybe it's time that the situation was clearly redefined before the xenophobia gets out of hand..?

After all the shenanigans at tubes stations over the last few days I fear, unfortunately, we may be a bit late for that

wrecker - Member

Drones aren't fair?
I'm not a fan of drones, but one side pointing and shouting "no fair" whilst behaving in the manner AQ/terry does is necky.

It may be necky but that's the way guerilla armies p.r work, PIRA frequently made play of extra-judiciary offings (Gib, Loughall, etc) and one has to ask if the drone strikes are a call to arms for the locals

Miscreants? Don't you mean enemy combatants?
You don't need trials to decide wether to kill the enemy.

it's war

No, it's not. Wars are between countries.

You don't need trials to decide wether to kill the enemy

Who decides who is the enemy ?

Who justifies killing ?

We need Andy McNab on this thread !

Will John Wayne do? He seems to be here already.

Lol.i don't think they're picking names out of a hat.
I'd sooner be john Wayne than cherie Blair eh lifer?

Wasn't the Duke a draft dodger ?

Shit! Can I be clint instead? 😀

No, it's not. Wars are between countries.

What about civil war?

Oh, and blaming the Americans for AQ is inaccurate. The northern alliance is not AQ. The mujahideen are not AQ. Most of AQ are foreigners (referred to by locals as "the foreigners")

It is extremely accurate to point out that the US financed, armed, and trained, Osama bin Laden and his Arab volunteers in Afghanistan.

Of course for extremely obvious reasons some people would rather forget it/ignore it/pretend it never happened.

wrecker - Member
Lol.i don't think they're picking names out of a hat.
I'd sooner be john Wayne than cherie Blair eh lifer?

Oh no that's a lady 😥

But if we're choosing I'll go with Richard Feynman.

Well, OBL is dead and those Arabs armed by the CIA are not the same people fighting at present.
It's a bit tenuous IMO, like blaming the Czechs for making most of the AKs being used over there.
I do agree that we are far too cosy with Saudi though. A despicable regime and founders of terrorism. Do you think we should invade?

But if we're choosing I'll go with Richard Feynman

Start by looking up definitions in the dictionary peeps.

War
Noun
A state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state.

Apologists and war mangers welcome to bat it out in the safety of your wiki world. 🙄

Well, OBL is dead and those Arabs armed by the CIA are not the same people fighting at present.

What do you mean "those Arabs", don't you mean "those terrorists" ?

But yeah, you're right, Osama bin Laden is dead, which presumably means that it's now OK to arm and support Al Qaeda on Syria ?

The West gave money, arms, and political power, to fundamentalist Islamic terrorists, and still does. It also has, and still does, fully support totalitarian and brutal regimes in Islamic countries. Brushing it under the carpet and pretending it never happened, and isn't still happening, isn't useful.

Drones aren't fair?
I'm not a fan of drones, but one side pointing and shouting "no fair" whilst behaving in the manner AQ/terry does is necky.

I think the point here is we claim they are terrorists and maintain that we are civilised , democratic , fair and reasonable unlike them

I doubt anyone really thinks there is much difference between using a bomb to blow up a house or using a drone to blow up a house - though of course we claim our version is "surgical" and the inevitable collateral deaths[ murders] " accidents" where as they meant theirs and they really are murderers

It always heartening to see the **** them they deserve what they get brigade who are much more like the enemy than they actually realise- both do exactly the same just for different sides.

After the firm later went in to liquidation, one of it's previous members (a bit of a technical whiz) put his mind to inventing a system for the military where any mobile phone call, anywhere, could be monitored and located using the technology available in GPS satellite tracking. Boastful Taliban and Al-Qaeda franchisees who previously thought themselves untouchable in remote desert areas, suddenly found themselves being targeted and killed.

I'm not sure any of that is true.

Most of the mobile location technology was driven by the E911 directive which was to locate mobile phone users in the US rather than Afghanistan, so they knew where you were when you call 911. It doesn't use GPS tracking as GPS is read only - and most phones don't have GPS receivers in them. Most of it is done by triangulating the signal either from cell towers in dense areas or from overhead eg Nimrods, drones etc.

As for knowing who is calling who, all the MNOs in Afghanistan have had all their calls tapped by the NSA and GCHQ for years, so they know who is calling who when and then just locate the SSID from the triangulation.

The locals have got wise to this though and for a while forced the MNOs there to switch off their networks at night, so they could move around undetected. (They were not smart enough to just take the battery out their phone, then move around, blow something up, go home and then put the battery back in).

Also, if you meant Granger Telecom, their staff were killed in Chechnya rather than Afghanistan: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/231570.stm

I doubt anyone really thinks there is much difference between using a bomb to blow up a house or using a drone to blow up a house - though of course we claim our version is "surgical" and the inevitable collateral deaths[ murders] " accidents" where as they meant theirs and they really are murderers

I think the general rules is that if the bomb is placed on the ground it is the work of a terrorist,
if the bomb falls from the sky it is the work of peace-loving democratic politicians.

Rather my point, I think.
drones are at least as legitimate as IEDs. Neither side can moan about it. It's a dirty business.

Wrecker you are missing the point. Our govt does not consider itself nor the army to be terrorist or their behaviour to be similar to AQ.
Simply we are the goodies and they are the baddies
We are battling tyranny with our bombs where as they are killing us because they are evil.

They do not accept that our ways of killing folk are similar to terrorism at all

Of course in a "was" both sides will do bad things - not least because the main point/goal is to kill each other which is bad whoever does it

I see what you are saying, but the allied military operate to very different rules to AQ. Yes there has been allegations of torture etc, but they don't make gopro edits of chopping civilians heads off or plant car bombs in packed city markets. I'd love to see AQs rules of engagement cards!
The playing field has to be levelled somehow. I can't see AQ signing the genera convention any time soon!

Given the US circumvent it with illegal combatants I wonder why they signed it
AQ has yet to blow up a wedding party
We find atrocities on both sides [ as we would in any war no doubt]

I can't see AQ signing the genera convention any time soon!

Bearing in mind that the West are responsible for this :

[img] [/img]

I take that is some sort of ironic joke ?

wrecker - Member

The playing field has to be levelled somehow.

It really, really doesn't.

It does if the allies want any chance of "winning".
I'm pretty comfortable with Gitmo (flame away), so no there was no joke.
Anyhoo, I'm off out. You all have fun.

then you must be comfortable with many of the AQ tactics as well as they like delivering "justice" without trial as well

As for winning it is a hearts and minds operations not one of just crushing them...we could nuke them from orbit to do that.

PS Careful you dont get sun stroke ...though I am not sure how we would tell 😉

'Pretty comfortable' with Guantanamo? Despite over half detainees being found to have committed no hostile act against the US or it's allies?

What benefits has it brought to 'us'?

I'm pretty comfortable with Gitmo (flame away), so no there was no joke.

So you want to castigate the terrorists for not respecting the Geneva Convention, but you don't have any problem with Western governments ignoring it ?

It is precisely that level of hypocrisy and double standards which has got us in the present global mess.

You say that you're not comfortable with the cosy relationship which the West has with Saudi Arabia, and yet that relationship goes to the very heart of Western strategy - a strategy which is entirely built on double standards. If you take away the double standards the strategy unravels.

So what is it - do you support hypocrisy and double standards, or not not ?

You can't support "some" hypocrisy and double standards, and not others, that would be, well, hypocritical.

I have not castigated AQ for not being GC compliant, I have just pointed out that they aren't and that the allies are, so there are inconsistencies. This means that they don't want to comply, but expect us to. More double standards? Even hypocrisy? Seems to be a lot of it around 😀
I'm not sure how western govts are ignoring it. The prisoners at Gitmo certainly dont qualify as prisoners of war according to the GC qualifications.
Guys, the weathers lovely. Come on out!

This means that they don't want to comply, but expect us to.

Since when ? Provide me some evidence.

I find it extremely hard to believe that Al Qaeda terrorists expect to be treated under the rules of the Geneva Convention.

I on the other hand, along with probably the majority of people in the West, expect the Western governments to comply with the basic rule of law. Maybe you're getting confused with that ?

Also, if you meant Granger Telecom, their staff were killed in Chechnya rather than Afghanistan

Yes I did.

Yes, I know.

What's happened at Tube stations? I need to use the Tube prolifically over the next few days so I'd like to know

A) what I could be in for
B) whether I should use something alternate to a rucksack to carrying laptop.

I need to use the Tube prolifically over the next few days so I'd like to know

I suggest carrying a pressure cooker in a rucksack, running lots and jumping over barriers...

NB If this post doesn't get flagged by NSA, nothing will!

This means that they don't want to comply, but expect us to.

As for the non combatants thing being legal - can you imagine the US reaction if Iraq/Syria did this with US citizens then sent them to North Korea?
It may comply with the letter of the law [ bet it took the ;lawyers and double speakers ages to work out some ruse tbh- but it does not comply with the spirit of the law ;it is basically state sponsored kidnapping of largely innocent individuals.

Whilst we berate them for not respecting human rights and their treatment of people.

As for the non combatants thing being legal

Of course it's not legal. The US government knows full well that it's not legal.

That's precisely why they have gone to a great deal of trouble to place them beyond the jurisdiction of US courts.

Or does anyone think that Cuba was chosen for it's pleasant most agreeable climate and invigorating sea breezes ?

Easier than debating the (interesting) moral issue of drones, the simpler example is torture. Clearly forbidden under international law and yet we (and other western governments) feel justified in ignoring this as suits the "perceived" need........so we ignore both human rights and international law?

It's not just the moral issue of drones, there are also legal issues under international law. US drones strikes on ****stan territory violates ****stani sovereignty under international law. There is also a legal requirement under international law to minimize civilian casualties - predictor drones have a history of indiscriminately killing civilians.

Isn't it all about Snowden? Justifying spying on the allies as well as everybody else. Killing people with drones seems a good way to get the people you are killing to attack your embassy to me.