PDA

View Full Version : Car Bomb Found In Times Square!



scumonkey
May 2nd, 2010, 05:04 AM
May 2, 2010, 3:56 a.m. EDT



Car bomb in NY's Times Sq. prompts police to evacuate area


By MarketWatch
TEL AVIV (MarketWatch) -- Times Square in Manhattan, one of New York's top tourist areas, was evacuated Saturday night by the police after they found a car bomb at West 45th Street and 7th Avenue, media reports say.
The bomb did not explode and no one was injured. The police used a robot to check the car, reports say.


http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/MWimages/MW-AE494_NY_car_MD_20100502034325.jpg Reuters

A NYPD officer in a bomb suit examines a Nissan Pathfinder SUV parked in New York's Times Square May 1, 2010.

Around 6:30 p.m. U.S. Eastern Time, a mounted police officer reported a black Nissan Pathfinder had smoke coming out of it, the reports said.
The vehicle contained propane tanks, powder, gasoline and a clock attached to wires, a Police Department spokesman told The New York Times.
The spokesman told the paper that no one was in custody and the police had no motive as yet. He said the police were checking security cameras, investigating reports that someone had been seen running from the car.
At a news conference early Sunday morning, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said investigators believed that the car's owner had nothing to do with the bomb, The Wall Street Journal reported. The paper quoted the mayor as saying "there's no more danger here than in any other city."
The Associated Press reported that President Barack Obama was being briefed on the investigation. A White House statement said Obama ordered his homeland-security and counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, to advise New York officials that the U.S. government would provide support if necessary.

scumonkey
May 2nd, 2010, 05:06 AM
http://snsimages.tribune.com/media/photo/2010-05/314920880-01225306.jpg
http://snsimages.tribune.com/media/photo/2010-05/264896220-01222742.jpg

http://snsimages.tribune.com/media/photo/2010-05/267172780-01222809.jpg
Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images

Daquan13
May 2nd, 2010, 09:28 AM
I saw that.

Seems like the bad stuff always happens in Yew York City!

ablarc
May 2nd, 2010, 10:19 AM
^ Also Louisiana, huh?



And how about Haiti?

lofter1
May 2nd, 2010, 12:09 PM
A reminder of how easily something dastardly could be made to happen in our midst. Thankfully this one didn't turn into something horrifying.

stache
May 2nd, 2010, 02:42 PM
We've been pretty lucky. Plus I picked an excellent day to be out of town! :cool:

scumonkey
May 2nd, 2010, 04:58 PM
http://s.huffpost.com/images/social-profile/lightbox/huffpo_logo_lightbox_beta.png
Times Square Bomb Investigation [UPDATE: 'It Appears To Be A Car Bomb,' Police Say] (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/01/times-square-bomb-investi_n_559905.html)

TOM HAYS and DEEPTI HAJELA (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/01/times-square-bomb-investi_n_559905.html#) | 05/ 2/10 04:43 PM | http://www.huffingtonpost.com/images/v/ap_wire.png
NEW YORK Police investigating the failed car bomb left in Times Square have videotape of a possible suspect shedding clothing in an alley and putting it in a bag and found a substance that resembled fertilizer in the parked SUV, Commissioner Raymond Kelly said Sunday.
Kelly said officers were on the way to a Pennsylvania town to talk to a tourist who might have recorded the suspect on his video camera. The video shows a white man in his 40s taking off one shirt, revealing another underneath.
The commissioner said there's no evidence that a Pakistani Taliban videotaped claim to the failed car bombing is valid.
Police found the SUV parked on one of the prime blocks for Broadway shows such as "The Lion King" on Saturday night. Thousands of tourists were cleared from the area for 10 hours. The bomb was dismantled, and no one was hurt.
The SUV contained three barbecue-grill-sized propane tanks, fireworks, two filled 5-gallon gasoline containers and two clocks with batteries, electrical wire and other components, police said. Timers were connected to a 16-ounce can filled with the fireworks, which were apparently intended to set the gas cans and propane afire, Kelly said.
"Clearly it was the intent of whoever did this to cause mayhem, to create casualties," Kelly said at a news conference at police headquarters. "It's just a sober reminder that New York is clearly a target of people who want to come here and do us harm."
He said New Yorkers are lucky that the bomb did not fully detonate because it "looks like it would have caused a significant fireball." He said the vehicle would have been "cut in half" by an explosion and people nearby could have been sprayed by shrapnel and killed.
"It wasn't an accident," he said. "It was somebody who brought this to the location to send a message to terrorize people in the area."
Police also found eight bags of an unknown substance in a gun locker that was in the smoking SUV, Kelly said. The substance "looks and feels" like fertilizer, he said, but tests were pending.
Kelly said surveillance video shows the vehicle entering the area at 6:28 p.m. Saturday, and a vendor pointed the SUV out to an officer about two minutes later, at the height of dinner hour before theatergoers head to Saturday night shows. He said the license plate on the SUV belongs to a car that is being repaired in Connecticut.
Duane Jackson, a 58-year-old handbag vendor from Buchanan, N.Y., said he noticed the car and wondered who had left it there.
"That was my first thought: Who sat this car here?" Jackson said Sunday.
Jackson said he looked in the car and saw keys in the ignition with 19 or 20 keys on a ring. He said he alerted a passing mounted police officer.
They were looking in the car "when the smoke started coming out and then we heard the little pop pop pop like firecrackers going out and that's when everybody scattered and ran back," he said.
"Now that I saw the propane tanks and the gasoline, what if that would have ignited?" Jackson said. "I'm less than 8 feet away from the car. We dodged a bullet here."
After the Connecticut license plates on the vehicle did not match up, police interviewed the Connecticut car owner, who told them he had sent the plates to a nearby junkyard, Bloomberg said.
Heavily armed police and emergency vehicles shut down the city's busiest streets, choked with taxis and people on one of the first summer-like days of the year. Times Square lies about four traffic-choked miles north of where terrorists bombed the World Trade Center in 1993, then laid waste to it on Sept. 11, 2001.
___
Contributing to this report were Associated Press writers Cristian Salazar, Michael Kuchwara and AP Radio correspondent Julie Walker in New York, AP Washington bureau chief Ron Fournier, AP writers Eileen Sullivan, Pete Yost and Kimberly Dozier in Washington, Colleen Long in North Carolina and Robert H. Reid in Kabul.

BBMW
May 2nd, 2010, 07:30 PM
If the bomb maker was competent, this could have been very bad.


A reminder of how easily something dastardly could be made to happen in our midst. Thankfully this one didn't turn into something horrifying.

antinimby
May 2nd, 2010, 10:18 PM
Speculation is that this may have been by a local Muslim group that was mad about a recent South Park episode.

lofter1
May 3rd, 2010, 12:07 AM
Speculation shmeckulation.

It's also being said that it's a complete ruse / set-up to garner more of our tax payer dollars for Homeland Security efforts.

Similarly, a certain President supposedly blew up the oil well in the Gulf all by his self.

And that a Presidential spouse performed some voodoo rain dance in the Red Room causing massive flooding in Tennessee.

Let's wait for the facts.

stache
May 3rd, 2010, 01:40 AM
I heard it was a protest against gladiator sandals.

Ninjahedge
May 3rd, 2010, 08:16 AM
I would think it more likely to be a group in our own country pissed at Obama AND the muslim religion in general (not that the two have any direct link) and figuring that setting a bomb off in TS would do two things:

1. Kill "liberals".
2. Make people scared and blame the Muslims, thus validating more military action both home and abroad.


There may be many other reasons, but this smelled more like a Timothy McVeigh (sp) than a suicide type bombing. (I am talking in its motivation and basic implimentation, not its plan of attack...).


BTW, did anyone else find it ironic to see the man in the bomb suit standing in front of a rack of "I <3 NY" shirts?

MidtownGuy
May 3rd, 2010, 09:34 AM
The New York surveillance video, made public late Sunday, shows an unidentified white man apparently in his 40s slipping down an alley and taking off his shirt, revealing another underneath. In the same clip, he's seen looking back in the direction of the smoking vehicle and furtively putting the first shirt in a bag. Police hoped to interview the tourist who took the video.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/03/times-square-car-bomb-sus_0_n_560592.html

lofter1
May 3rd, 2010, 11:24 AM
I saw that vid ^

Looked to me more like some guy leaving work on a very hot evening and pausing to take off a top shirt, revealing a t-shirt underneath.

No doubt they'll track him down and the facts will emerge.

Ninjahedge
May 3rd, 2010, 11:33 AM
I HOPE the facts will emerge.

If they don't, an innocent may pay for a failed attempt at chaos and destruction, and we will be none the safer because of it.

scumonkey
May 4th, 2010, 12:24 AM
Suspect arrested in NYC bomb attempt

Man is a Connecticut resident who bought the SUV at center of probe


BREAKING NEWS
msnbc.com news services
updated 4 minutes ago

NEW YORK - Authorities arrested a suspect in the attempted weekend car bombing in Times Square, NBC News' justice correspondent Pete Williams reported early Tuesday morning.
A U.S. citizen of Pakistani descent, Shahzad Faisal, was arrested Monday night in Long Island, Williams reported.
Earlier, an official told The Associated Press that the potential suspect recently traveled to Pakistan. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the case was at a sensitive stage.
The officials said the man was a Connecticut resident who paid cash weeks ago for the SUV parked in Times Square on Saturday and rigged with a crude propane-and-gasoline bomb. NBC's Williams reported the man's name was on an e-mail that was sent to the seller of the car last month, as well as other evidence suggesting he had a role in the attempted bombing.
Meanwhile, the Washington Post reported on Monday that an FBI-led terrorism task force has taken over the investigation of the failed car bombing in Times Square because of indications it was connected to international terrorism, a senior law enforcement source said.
The probe had been overseen by the New York Police Department. Responsibility for it shifted to a Joint Terrorism Task Force as Obama administration officials said the incident increasingly appears to have been coordinated by more than one person in a plot with international links, the Post reported on its Web site.
The White House, according to the Post, intensified its focus on the failed bombing Saturday in New York City, in which explosives inside a Nissan Pathfinder were set ablaze but failed to detonate at the busy corner of Broadway and 45th Street. Emerging from a series of briefings, several officials told the Post it was too early to rule out any motive but said the sweeping investigation was turning up new clues.
Sold for cash
A law enforcement official says the registered owner of the SUV used in the botched bombing told investigators he sold it for cash three weeks ago.
The official told The Associated Press that the Connecticut owner questioned Sunday about what happened to the SUV says he sold the vehicle to a stranger.
Officials continued to look into the history of the vehicle as one way to crack the case. The vehicle identification number had been removed from the Pathfinder's dashboard, but it was stamped on the engine and axle, and investigators used it to find the owner of record.
Investigators tracked the license plates to a used auto parts shop in Stratford, Conn., where they discovered the plates were connected to a different vehicle.
They also spoke to the owner of an auto sales shop in nearby Bridgeport because a sticker on the Pathfinder indicated the SUV had been sold by his dealership. Owner Tom Manis said there was no match between the identification number the officers showed him and any vehicle he sold.

Daquan13
May 4th, 2010, 05:26 AM
The suspect, a Pakistan man, was caught and apprehended. He was traced through an e-mail.

He almost made it out of the country. He was on a plane at JFK Int'l Airport that was headed over to Dubi.

The plane had already left the gate and was headed over to the runway when it was summoned back to the gate, or stopped on the taramac.

He was arrested, taken off the plane and is in custody. Sick basterd!! Wonder if he's from that sick al Quaeda network.

Meanwhile, and as usual, more crap to friggen go through at the airports!! They've supposedly stepped up security there.

Ninjahedge
May 4th, 2010, 07:59 AM
Why would they need to step up security at the airports if this was a car-bombing attempt at TS?

The two would have no correlation....

By "stepping up security" does that mean detaining and harassing every middle-eastern looking passenger?

stache
May 4th, 2010, 08:34 AM
Yes, and also raking in lots of overtime a la post 9/11.

hbcat
May 4th, 2010, 10:02 AM
Imagine the reaction if a bomb-plot suspect did succeed in escaping via a US (especially NY-area) airport. Plus: the security apparatus is in full CYA mode.

lofter1
May 4th, 2010, 10:06 AM
Indications are that they waited until the last minute to close in on the guy so they could see if others connected to him were boarding / arriving at JFK in an effort to flee the country.

Ninjahedge
May 4th, 2010, 10:11 AM
^^ Again, what does that have to do with security?

Have you flown recently? You can't just sprint through an airport and jump on a plane ahead of police. Having more "security" will do jack if no-one knows what they have done before they come to the airport.

I can imagine the reaction being very simple. Having authorities in Dubai hold him until we extradite him (if we have a good enough connection after all the construction/etc). I would also imagine a bunch of mis-informed people thinking that having an armed soldier in the airport would have somehow stopped that from happening.

You know they are telepaths, right? ;)

It is similar to having soldiers in Grand Central. They do nothing but make people feel safer. Some of them, at least. They make me feel like Big Brother is coming. If someone walked in and lit themselves, the only thing those soldiers would be is another body to count.

stache
May 4th, 2010, 10:35 AM
I'm inclined to agree. I don't see the point of military at Atlantic terminal, either.

Daquan13
May 4th, 2010, 01:19 PM
Well Ninja, think about it. Not trying to say or imply that you might be dumb, but....;

The guy WAS trying to flee the conuntry, and what better and faster way to do that than to hop on a plane? The fastest thing smoking. He almost beat the system. Probably because the guy went through the terminal to get on a plane to get out.

All of which again brings to mind, how & WHY are terrorists STILL able to get aboard commercial airliners? You'd think that they'd have learned their lesson when Umar Farouk Abdulmatallab tried to blow up the plane he was on on Cristmas Day. Another close call!

Which also once again, raises the question; Are we any safer now than we were before 09-11? Apparently NOT if this guy sprinted through the terminal and was almost getting away scott-free!

So those new supposedly high-tech body scanners did no good this time. He might not have had anything on him, but his files, I think, this time, wasn't enough info to try to detain him. What if he DID have something on him and was plotting to bring the plane down over the Atlantic Ocean?

It certainly is a sad state of affairs when a suspected terrorist successfully gets on a plane when he should have been on the no-fly list.

And BTW, info has surfaced that another man already in Pakistan is said to be connected with the plot. He was nabbed as well.

It's just too bad that they weren't this quick trying to stop the terrorists on 09-11-01.

stache
May 4th, 2010, 01:54 PM
Post # 16 is saying the man in question is a U.S. citizen, apparently not on a watch list(?)

scumonkey
May 4th, 2010, 01:59 PM
...sprinted through the terminal and was almost getting away scott-free!
Almost only counts with horseshoes and hand grenades...

Ninjahedge
May 4th, 2010, 02:08 PM
Well Ninja, the guy WAS trying to flee the conuntry, and what better and faster way to do that than to hop on a plane? The fastest thing smoking. He almost beat the system. Probably because the guy went through the terminal to get on a plane to get out.

That was not my point. My point was, what would security have done if he was not doing anything wrong? Increasing security would have done nothing. The security there was enough to stop him. There is no "what if". If we had the whole National Guard in the airport, would he, with a ticket and a passport, be able, as a US citizen, to get onto the plane and take off if nobody called ahead?

He was not threatening the airport, so security at the airport would have no reason to do anything unless ANOTHER security/police force let them know otherwise.


All of which brings to mind, how & WHY are terrorists STILL able to get aboard commercial airliners?

Because they are not terrorists until they do something. You want the airline to know what movies you have watched in the past year? How much you drank last Friday? Who you have slept with all your life? How else will they know what your intensions are unless they know everything about you?


Which also once again, raises the question; Are we any safer now than we were before 09-11? Apparently NOT if this guy sprinted through the terminal and was almost getting away scott-free!

Innaccurate. Again you are lumping things together. If he had no bomb making equipment, no APB, no record, nothing on him, how would security know? Again, telepathy?


So those new supposedly high-tech body scanners did no good this time. He might not have had anything on him, but his files, I think, this time, wasn't enough info to try to detain him. What if he DID have something on him and was plotting to bring the plane down?

Again with the what if's. So someone is now guilty before he even does anything to accomplish a foul deed. If you THINK you want to hurt someone you should be arrested? He did NOT have any intension to do anything to the plane, he HAD NOTHING ON HIM, therefore a panicky paranoid "arrest everyone you THINK could ONE DAY hurt you" position is very very scary Daq.

Lets put it this way, and I know it will get sparks. Should all black men in Newark be stopped by traffic cops because they COULD be on their way to shoot someone? Should all hispanics be stopped on the highway because they COULD be illegal immigrants? Should all "suspicious" people be stopped because they might be thinking of doing something bad even when they have no means of doing so when they are stopped?


It certainly is a sad state of affairs when a suspected terrorist successfully gets on a plane when he should have been on the no-fly list.

He was not really suspected until he did this.


And BTW, info has surfaced that another man already in Pakistan is said to be connected with the plot. He was nabbed as well.

It's just too bad that they weren't this quick trying to stop the terrorists on 09-11-01.

Again, you are lumping things together. Use your head man. Seperate this act from 9-11. Seperate it from any other act and look at it for what it was, a failed attempt.

The only thing that is scary is that there really is no real way of stopping things like this without giving up our freedoms. If you want to live in a police state, you are more than welcome to (there are plenty in this world). But the rights and freedoms you give up are just not worth the "security" you are given.

Seriously, go read 1984.

stache
May 4th, 2010, 02:58 PM
Who you have slept with all your life?

Not enough memory storage in the computer banks, lol! ;)

ablarc
May 4th, 2010, 03:42 PM
... there really is no real way of stopping things like this without giving up our freedoms. If you want to live in a police state, you are more than welcome to (there are plenty in this world). But the rights and freedoms you give up are just not worth the "security" you are given.
Sacre bleu: n’est rien faire !!

Daquan13
May 4th, 2010, 08:11 PM
Lumping things together?

Those are the facts as they presented themselves.

He might not have had anything on him, but desparate people do desparate things.

Not for nothing, but why are YOU the only one who is objecting to what I said and no one else? You got your opinions, I got mine.

The gov't suspects EVERYONE when it comes to getting on a flight.

It IS a proven fact that once you go through security, they own you. They practically follow you around in the terminal, and they come back to screen you in the gate room.

scumonkey
May 4th, 2010, 09:16 PM
but why are YOU the only one who is objecting to what I said and no one else?]
he's not the only one...most of us have just given up. (no offensive intended- just a fact)

Daquan13
May 5th, 2010, 03:41 AM
Good, because I don't want to talk about it any more.

My opinion is my opinion. It is what it is. Deal with it.

Washing my hands.

stache
May 5th, 2010, 04:43 AM
Yeesh...

Fabrizio
May 5th, 2010, 04:49 AM
Daguan is absolutly right in his concerns and I really don't understand the impatience and hostility to what he has written.

Lapses Allowed Suspect to Board Plane
By SCOTT SHANE
Published: May 4, 2010


WASHINGTON — Why was Faisal Shahzad permitted to board a flight for Dubai some 24 hours after investigators of the Times Square terrorism case learned he might be connected to the attempted bombing?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/05/nyregion/05plane.html?ref=global-home

Daquan13
May 5th, 2010, 05:09 AM
Thank you, Fabrizio.

I knew that I was right all along.

As I said in another thread, it's a damn shame that every time I post something, it is treated with scorn, negative talk and so much blasted hostility! They act like I'm making blanket statements, but I'm NOT!

And BTW, it was just said that the guy was placed on the no-fly list HOURS before he boarded that plane. Proof that we are STILL not safe when it comes to flying. There DEFINITELY IS a severe lapse in the security system at the airports! All this high-tech stuff in place, yet individuals on the no-fly list are STILL getting aboard commercial jetliners.

Your furnishing of that link further confirms my statement & suspicions that this coward should NOT have been allowed to board the plane to Dubai, or ANY flight!

Daquan13
May 5th, 2010, 06:36 AM
Also, the guy has ADMITTED that he made the bomb and was plotting to dentonate it.

He paid cash for the vehicle as well as for the plane ticket.

ZippyTheChimp
May 5th, 2010, 07:45 AM
Two things:

1. As I've said many times, much of the security apparatus we see is Security Theater.

2. As Lofter alluded to in post 21 (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=23654&p=324297&viewfull=1#post324297), there's a lot that goes on that we never know about.

It seems highly suspect to me that the Lone Ranger arrived in the nick of time and saved the day.

Ninjahedge
May 5th, 2010, 08:22 AM
Lumping things together?

Those are the facts as they presented themselves.

No, you are lumping a palestinian born American Citizens attempt to light off a car bomb in TS to the Al Queda 9-11 attacks. that is lumping. You are also making it sound like security at the Airposr would have stopped him if it was stronger, even though they had no clue what the guy had done (nobody did until just before takeoff, and THEN they stopped him). You are lumping.


He might not have had anything on him, but desparate people do desparate things.

No "but". They had no proof. Tell me, how would they have picked out a middle eastern man, going to DUBAI, with no weapons or criminal record as a possible threat? Strait answer. No "but"s, no "what if"s, no "could have"s.


Not for nothing, but why are YOU the only one who is objecting to what I said and no one else? You got your opinions, I got mine.

See Scum's comment. I am just trying to get you to see what you are suggesting in the light of someone who has seen the abuse of authoritative power.


The gov't suspects EVERYONE when it comes to getting on a flight.

No, it doesn't. I do not know where you got that from, but that is preposterous. The "government" isn't even the agency responsible for a lot of this stuff. It helps, but there are different agencies that do many of teh security details on planes, in airports and other areas.


It IS a proven fact that once you go through security, they own you. They practically follow you around in the terminal, and they come back to screen you in the gate room.

What? they OWN you? Where do you get this? Screen you in the gate room? I have never been screened after going through the security gate. Also, this has NOTHING TO DO WITH A MAN WITH NO WEAPONS AND NO RECORDS GETTING ON A FLIGHT!!!

Hell, he wasn't even going to a known "hotbed". Dubai is a middle eastern resort town in development! There may be connections there, but he wasn't trying to book a direct line to Afghanistan!

Ninjahedge
May 5th, 2010, 08:35 AM
Daguan is absolutly right in his concerns and I really don't understand the impatience and hostility to what he has written.

Lapses Allowed Suspect to Board Plane
By SCOTT SHANE
Published: May 4, 2010


WASHINGTON — Why was Faisal Shahzad permitted to board a flight for Dubai some 24 hours after investigators of the Times Square terrorism case learned he might be connected to the attempted bombing?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/05/nyregion/05plane.html?ref=global-home


At a news conference in Washington, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/h/eric_h_holder_jr/index.html?inline=nyt-per) said that despite the break in physical surveillance, he had never been concerned that Mr. Shahzad would get away.
“I was here all yesterday and through much of last night, and was aware of the tracking that was going on,” Mr. Holder said. “And I was never in any fear that we were in danger of losing him.”



Workers at Emirates evidently did not check the list, because at 6:30 p.m., Mr. Shahzad called the airline and booked a flight to Pakistan via Dubai, officials said. At 7:35 p.m., he arrived at the airport, paid cash for his ticket and was given a boarding pass.
Airlines are not required to report cash purchases, a Homeland Security official said.



As is routine, when boarding was completed for the flight, Emirates Flight EK202, the final passenger manifest was sent to the National Targeting Center, operated in Virginia by Customs and Border Protection. There, at about 11 p.m., analysts discovered that Mr. Shahzad was on the no-fly list and had just boarded a plane.
They sounded the alarm, and minutes later, with the jet still at the gate, its door was opened and agents came aboard and took Mr. Shahzad into custody, officials said.

Yep. Absolute failure.

If they just used Twitter he never would have gotten past the check-in! :rolleyes:

Fabrizio
May 5th, 2010, 08:57 AM
Or is it Eric Holder covering his ass?

If we are going to quote the article then let's include this also:

"Though Mr. Shahzad was stopped before he could fly away, there were at least two significant lapses in the security response of the government and the airline that allowed him to come close to making his escape, officials of the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other agencies said on Tuesday."

So who should we believe? Eric Holder or officials of the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other agencies?

And:

"Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, while saying he was reluctant to criticize those in charge of airport security, added: “Clearly the guy was on the plane and shouldn’t have been. We got lucky.”

Whether the airlines and gov, did their job properly or not, is up for debate, but why the fellow was allowed on the plane is a legitimate question that not only Daquan is asking.

ZippyTheChimp
May 5th, 2010, 09:12 AM
If we've going to quote the article, maybe we should include:

While the officials emphasized the successful outcome to the chase, a more detailed account, in interviews with officials who spoke of the continuing investigation mostly on condition of anonymity, gave a mixed picture. I think Wiki calls this weasel words.


It IS a proven fact that once you go through security, they own you. DQ, this is absurd.

Daquan13
May 5th, 2010, 09:37 AM
Ninja, would you please stop that?!

It matters done about his nationality or his race or even where he was born. Fact is, he's a suspected terrorist who had no business being cleared for the flight. And you know this, man.

But it seems to me as though you might be trying to protect this individual or a least condone his trying to get the hell out of Dodge before his cover was blown.

Thank God though, that the bomb didn't detonate, but only smoked up.

Your opinion is your opinion, but so is my opinion mine. Stop shooting me down because of MY opinion. Think what you want to. I'm still not changing it one bit.

Zippy, you're right, it IS absurd.

Actually, it starts when you are about to go through the security checkpoint. If you don't do everything that they want you to do, including emptying your pokets multiple times, letting them tell you that the medicine that you have to have with you is not allowed on the flight, taking off your shoes, going back through the metal detector a 3rd or 4th time, or submit to being scanned with the wand, and lastly, if you are one of the ones randomly selected for another screeniong in the gate room and you refuse, guess what? "Sir, if you don't let us do this, you can't get on the plane."

They are playing; "Who's Your Daddy?". That is why I said they own the travelers.

Ninjahedge
May 5th, 2010, 09:39 AM
@Fab...

Fair enough, but notice only one name was given, the others were just "officials". People are willing to say many things when their names are not on the credits.....

And you are quoting Bloomie? What the hell does he have to do with this? He is also the one squawking about less Homeland Security funds coming to us next year. Big Surprise, nothing terrible happens, we hit a recession and nobody wants to pay to wrap the Xth largest city in bullet proof Teflon.



On the fair side, do I think there may have been mistakes? Yes, but a mistake does not mean that the system itself is inadequate. If you upped security, you would STILL be prone to mistakes, and in the meantime every innocent person would be subjected to many unnecessary checks, probes and policies.

The best defense has been, so far, being able to stop something before it happens, not AS it happens.

Ninjahedge
May 5th, 2010, 09:47 AM
Ninja, please stop that!

Your opinion is your opinion, but so is mine. Stop shooting me down because of MY opinion. Think what you want to. I'm still not changing it.

And I will not stop posting. You are the problem with national security and defense spending. You and people like you will have arabs stopped in the street merely because they LOOK suspicious. The more I hear you say it, the more I am driven to change your perspective before you, and people with the same attitude, strip us of the freedoms we gained 250 years ago.


Zippy, you're right, it IS absurd.

Actually, it starts when you are about to go through the security checkpoint. If you don't do everything that they want you to do, including emptying your pokets multiple times, letting them tell you that the medicine that you have to have with you is not allowed on the flight, taking off your shoes, going back through the metal detector a 3rd or 4th time, or submit to being scanned with the wand, and lastly, if you are one of the ones randomly selected for another screeniong in the gate room and you refuse, guess what? "Sir, if you don't let us do this, you can't get on the plane."

That uis not owning you. You are applying superlatives to something that does not apply. If you are already saying that security is so extensive, then what other "searches" do you think would have made it harder to flee? A mandatory 24 hour stopover for all international flights! OOH THE FUN!!!!


They are playing; "Who's Your Daddy?". That is why I said they own the travelers.

Re-read your context Daq. You skip back and forth between saying that there is not enough and "there is so much how did this happen". It is difficult when you do not maintain a singular line of reasoning through a discussion. This is not a crime, but it just makes it hard to converse with you when you seem to take differing positions on the same subject.

BTW, when you express an opinion on something, do NOT state it as a "proven fact". You may feel they "own you" but they do not. You are exaggerating for illustrative effect, but doing so to such an extent that it makes it sound like you are jumping up and down and yelling rather than talking sensibly...

Relax. You are entitled to your opinions just like everyone else, but being unwilling to accept anything to the contrary does not say much about yourself.

Daquan13
May 5th, 2010, 09:57 AM
Hence why I said that no matter how much they call themselves trying to beef up security with those high-tech devices, there are still lapses in the system in other areas.

Remember, those new body scanners were put in place to help detect and stop hidden explosives from being smuggled onto the flights. That may have work if he weren't carrying anything suspicious, and it appears that he weren't.

The screw-ups that had occured along the way are what caused things to go awry. But he's in custody now.

stache
May 5th, 2010, 10:02 AM
So maybe this discussion can move forward?

Daquan13
May 5th, 2010, 10:03 AM
Hopefully.

lofter1
May 5th, 2010, 10:22 AM
Playing here at WNY would be far more interesting if folks would PLEASE refrain from going after each other ad infinitum and simply respond with Facts, Links, Opinions.

Of course sometimes we all go at it :o , but the on-going tit for tat is TEDIOUS as hell to sift through. A little self-restraint never hurts.

Back on topic:

This, if actually true, is ridiculous + bone-headed + bureaucratic BS of the worst sort:




... Mr. Shahzad called the airline and booked a flight to Pakistan via Dubai ... he arrived at the airport, paid cash for his ticket and was given a boarding pass.

Airlines are not required to report cash purchases, a Homeland Security official said.

ZippyTheChimp
May 5th, 2010, 10:46 AM
Zippy, you're right, it IS absurd.I wasn't agreeing with you. The absurdity of some airport security procedures is not "owning you." Much of it is to fulfill job descriptions.

The suspect that got on the plane may have been "owned."


The screw-ups that had occured along the way are what caused things to go awrySince he was apprehended, how do you know anything went awry? Suppose he had an accomplice who was a passenger on the flight, but never boarded after the other was arrested.

stache
May 5th, 2010, 11:15 AM
So much for moving forward!

ZippyTheChimp
May 5th, 2010, 11:22 AM
^
What are you talking about?

Whether or not the suspect was deliberately allowed to board the plane seems to me to be an important and relevant issue.

Ninjahedge
May 5th, 2010, 11:30 AM
Meh. I kind of agree with Zip's second post item there. We are getting back into "what if"s though, which do not have much ground in a discussion and only provoke further speculation.

We can leave all that to the Professionals at Fox! ;)

What REALLY annoys me, however, and I do not know if I have said this already, is how we seem to like to say exactly how the perp did everything wrong. They say where the VIN's are located, how he was tracked, what went wrong with the bomb.

TMI!!!!!!!!!

We need to know some details, but you give too many and we end up doing the "beta testing" and troubleshooting for the terrorists (and yes, I just grouped and generalized with my appelation... :( ).

We need to say what happened and not a detailed report of how to get it right next time.....

Daquan13
May 5th, 2010, 11:39 AM
Ninja, HELLO, the lapses that occured with the info sent from the gov't with while trying to keep him from getting through security and onto the plane!! What part of this are you not getting?!!

Good. I'm done.

You were right, Stache!

I'm tired of trying to explain it.

ZippyTheChimp
May 5th, 2010, 11:44 AM
They say where the VIN's are located, how he was tracked, what went wrong with the bomb.The only standard for all vehicles is that the VIN is located on the drivers side dash.

There is no standard from model to model as to where else it might be. Engine block is common, but there can be additional locations - firewall, suspension, body shell.

Ninjahedge
May 5th, 2010, 12:55 PM
The news report I heard started listing where the specific areas he missed on the Nissan Pathfinder were.

With the right amount of research, mistakes like this do not happen. The key is, why make it any easier for them and let them know where they screwed up? The fertilizer was another thing. I will not say anything about that, but suffice to say we do not need to tell anybody what the problem was.....

lofter1
May 5th, 2010, 01:26 PM
Audio from Alleged Bomber's Plane (http://www.slatev.com/video/audio-alleged-bombers-plane/) via SLATE V

May 04, 2010

In this audio clip, air traffic control at New York's JFK Airport recalls Emirates Flight 202 to the gate shortly before it is about to take off. Faisal Shahzad, the suspect in the Times Square bombing case, was removed from the plane. Audio via LiveATC.net

CNN reports Shahzad was actually pulled off the plane before it left the gate, but the aircraft was turned around later so authorities could question two other passengers.

scumonkey
May 6th, 2010, 09:27 PM
The Times Square Bomber: What we thought we knew

Posted By Joshua Keating (http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/blog/68) http://www.foreignpolicy.com/images/091022_meta_block.gif Thursday, May 6, 2010 - 12:12 PM


As the story of the failed Times Square bombing has unfolded, a number of theories and even purported facts have fallen by the wayside:


The bomber was a "lone wolf." (http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/05/05/what_the_secretary_meant_to_say) Or maybe he was actually trained in Pakistan.
The bomber was a "white male." (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/03/nyregion/03timessquare.html) Or a light-skinned South Asian.
The guy taking off his shirt in the video was involved.Probably not (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/03/AR2010050304522.html?hpid=topnews).
Vietnam veteran Lance Orton (http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/36911051/ns/today-today_people/) first noticed the smoking van. Or maybe it was Senegalese immigrant Aliou Niasse (http://www.theroot.com/buzz/man-who-first-noticed-car-times-square-senegalese-and-muslim).
The bombing was in response (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/7668606/Times-Square-car-bomb-police-investigate-South-Park-link.html) to South Park's depiction of the Prophet Muhammed. Or U.S. foreign policy (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/06/nyregion/06profile.html?pagewanted=3&hp).
Faisal Shahzad was arrested with two other men. But they didn't do anything (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/04/national/main6460022.shtml).
Faisal Shahzad is from Karachi. Or maybe it was (http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/05/05/where_is_faisal_shahzad_from) Peshawar. Or Kashmir.
Faisal Shahzad's father was a Pakistani military official. Or maybe it was his grandfather (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/06/nyregion/06profile.html?pagewanted=3&hp).
The Pakistani Taliban took credit (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/03/hakimullah-mehsud-video) for the attempt. Until they denied it (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20004298-503543.html). But it still kinda seems like (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/06/nyregion/06bomb.html?hp) they did it.

These are just off the top of my head. Readers are invited to add any others that I missed.
Moral of the story: more reporting in the wake of an event like this doesn't necessarily mean more reliable information. Take it all with a grain of salt.

ablarc
May 7th, 2010, 07:18 AM
Do you ever really find out the truth about something like this?

This will eventually harden into an official story, but that's likely to be nine parts lie.

Ninjahedge
May 7th, 2010, 08:02 AM
ABL, you only hope that that those 9 parts have MANY other parts of truth in with them.

9 parts lie are the worst when that is all you have to your story.

ablarc
May 7th, 2010, 12:38 PM
Tell us who was behind the assassinations of John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King ...

Tell us who paid the losers to perform these acts.

Daquan13
May 7th, 2010, 12:47 PM
And also Malcom X.

lofter1
May 7th, 2010, 01:26 PM
Here we go again:

TS Evacuated Friday @ 1 PM (http://newsolio.com/times-square-evacuated-friday-may-7,9915)

Daquan13
May 7th, 2010, 05:42 PM
Link is ok, but I friggen HATE that Walmart pop-up and those Netflix ads that you can't get rid of!! Advertising cell phones and movies.

Not your fault though.