And now something to make everyone a little furious. Since he is the reason for the new, contraversial airport security measures, there are alot of things about the Tighty Whitey Bomber that needs to be discussed more in the press and the American people need to be reminded about in order to put everything in context. The Underwear Bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (Piss Be Upon Him) was known to and allowed to operate freely by the CIA, DHS, and MI5. Before you think I'm a conspiracy theorist, know that everything below comes from Congressional Record, DHS Press Conferences, and "legit" news agencies. The underwear bomber, who is the justification of these new techniques, was known to both MI-5, the State Department, and the CIA as having multiple links to known Jihadi Terrorists. In college, he was the President of the Islamic Society, and was openly defending Jihad on the TV, Debates, and the Internet. He travelled to Yemen to train with Al-Queda. He had close ties with one of the central figures in the London Bombings. I can't stress this enough: all of this was known fact to the people charged with protecting us, but they intentionally let Abdulmutallab obtain a Visa and move freely around Europe, and to the US. His father even went to the US Embassy in London and informed two CIA agents of his sons activities leading up to the attempted bombing. The State Department urged the CIA to revoke his visa, but this was refused because they were concerned about tainting a larger investigation into Al-Queda. The British, for their part, did revoke his visa. He was put in the National Counterterrorism Center's database. However, he wasn't entered into the FBI Database, which feeds the no-fly list (what was the Patriot Act for again?) and the Secondary Screening Selectee List. The noise about these screening techniques is just that: noise. The flight was not at risk because of lax airport security methods; it was because our own government allowed it to happen. I mean, what's a planeload of dead people compared to capturing top Al-Queda members, and possibly the big tuna himself? He was known by our government, who is supposedly in the business of protecting us, to have terrorist ties, and was an open radical. He was turned in by his own father; and yet he was allowed to retain his visa and to fly with no hassles, while there are 5 year olds on the No-Fly List. Again, all of this info comes from Congressional Records, DHS Press Conferences, and other legit sources, even though it sounds like it could be the ramblings of idiots who use the word "sheeple". But you never hear about this behind the roar of outrage by people who are correctly concerned about the erosion of the 4th Amendment and the overreaching arm of the Govt. My opinion and speculation on all of this is that in the weeks following the bombing attempt, Obama and the Congress were getting hammered in the polls after passing the "Stimulus Bill", and the Healthcare Bill was the top item in the press. He was also getting alot of flack for his Afghan policy, and public sentiment was turning against the war. If the purported larger investigation into Al-Queda was successful, and Bin-Laden was killed or captured, it would be an instant, massive boost for Obama, a potential boost to the mood of the average American about the condition of the country, and would help him to continue his political agenda. So while I don't think for a minute that anyone intentionally allowed this event to happen, I do think that the main directive to the intelligence community was to do what Bush couldn't: get Bin Laden. When mid-level CIA agents saw the potential of the underwear bomber to somehow let higher-level members of Al-Queda know that they were being watched, they let the guy off the hook. Either that, or he was a spy for the CIA who had a moment of Jihadi clarity... Either way, the guy was allowed to board the aircraft by the intentional inaction by our government. And some of you still trust it to keep us secure by fondling children? The "you shouldn't be alarmed if you have nothing to hide" attitude is the pre-cursor to Totalaristic Governments. People in uniform with a badge aren't always the good guys. Here are a few links that verify what I posted... Newsweek: Saudis briefed top Obama official about “underwear bombers” in October; Update: MI5 knew of bomber three years ago « Hot Air [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umar_Farouk_Abdulmutallab]Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame] Napolitano admits: U.S. government knew 'Underwear Bomber' was an extremist - National Law Enforcement | Examiner.com U.S. Intelligence Agencies Investigate Broader Terror Plot - ABC News
Wait a minute, wait a minute........."briefed" about the underwear bomber? That's funny, I don't care who you are. :lol:
I'm trying to figure out why you think this is outrageous, amigo. It's a standard intelligence technique to get to the head of the snake. Intelligence sources must be safeguarded. If we sweep up every foot soldier we know about, we cannot use them to track their connections back to their leaders. We cannot turn any of them into double agents and infiltrate. Of course, it's a calculated risk that some of these terrorists being watched might be able to pull off a bombing. But I think the CIA was doing its job here. It's not a pretty job but necessary if we are to eliminate Al Qaeda. Covert operations are often distasteful and dangerous. We do not want to stop important covert intelligence operations because someone doesn't want his junk touched.
Based on his history, if I was this guy, I would be more suspicious about NOT being on the no-fly or secondary screening list. That would be more of a tell to me.
