Al Qaeda-linked websites suggest Ramadan attacks

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

this is the only major media story, noting that websites warn muslims to leave DC, NYC and LA. of the few people who seem to be paying attention to this, many are treating it with skepticism - no change in the official threat level, why would warnings be given, etc. - but some aren't. on the web there are prior analyses done by non-governmental people who find these websites, warning of something during Ramadan, but they may warn of stuff like this all the time.

― paranoianeb (gabbneb), Thursday, 6 November 2003 22:44 (twenty-two years ago)

Did you know that the hotel chain, Ramada Inn took its name from the Muslim practice? See, you learn something new every day.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Thursday, 6 November 2003 22:47 (twenty-two years ago)

and Ramada is owned by the mormons!

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 6 November 2003 22:56 (twenty-two years ago)

"Our Muslim brothers in America, we ask you to immediately leave the following cities: Washington, D.C., New York, and Los Angeles," reads the communiqué, which frequently quotes the Quran.

And go where? America has already seen that when it comes to terrorism, no location is safe. Big cities get hit first, sure. But there are risks wherever particular groups accumulate; revenge hits are fun (to the insane)! 'Islamic group attacks major cities. Ignorant hillbillies attack transplanted Muslims.'

News at 11.

― Nichole Graham (Nichole Graham), Thursday, 6 November 2003 23:06 (twenty-two years ago)

one story from an untrustworthy source about websites that may or may not be connected with al'quaeda.

― Ed (dali), Thursday, 6 November 2003 23:09 (twenty-two years ago)

true, this IS from fox news, folks...

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Thursday, 6 November 2003 23:38 (twenty-two years ago)

I downplayed the connection to indicate skepticism in general, but I think the connection is pretty well-established. Here are some other, perhaps even less reputable sources: the original here and also here.

Note: I have no idea who any of these people are and am more than willing to believe that they are attention-seekers, hobby-needers, wingnuts, DoD contractors, Mossad, what-have-you. But I find it interesting that most people expect another major attack but are quick to discount any given threat.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 6 November 2003 23:54 (twenty-two years ago)

I think that's because it might be a better (if depressing) conclusion to assume that the next attack, if it ever happens -- I sometimes have my doubts -- will not come with any warning.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 6 November 2003 23:55 (twenty-two years ago)

Nah, it'll just be immersed in so many other warnings, it'll get overlooked.

― bnw (bnw), Thursday, 6 November 2003 23:57 (twenty-two years ago)

I agree with Ned on both fronts, but I also think that wishful denial/displacement has something to do with it. bnw may be otm as to wolf-crying, but may also be otm as to volume of intel.

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Thursday, 6 November 2003 23:59 (twenty-two years ago)

meanwhile

― gabbneb (gabbneb), Friday, 7 November 2003 00:41 (twenty-two years ago)

I think that's because it might be a better (if depressing) conclusion to assume that the next attack, if it ever happens -- I
sometimes have my doubts -- will not come with any warning.

Sadly, Ned is (as he so often) OTM.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Friday, 7 November 2003 03:38 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.