US fourth on terrorism list

by Shakita 11 Replies latest jw friends

  • Shakita
    Shakita

    From the New York Times:

    Report Calls U.S. a Top Target for Terror Attack Within a Year

    By DON VAN NATTA Jr.

    LONDON, Aug. 16 — The United States is the fourth most likely of 186 countries to be the target of a terrorist attack within the next 12 months, a research company based in London says in a report to be released on Monday.

    The company, World Markets Research Center, ranks Colombia, Israel and Pakistan as the only countries with a greater terror risk than the United States in the report, called the World Terrorism Index. The company provides research on the risk of terrorism for 500 public and private multinational clients. They include the European Commission, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, General Motors , Microsoft , Intel , Pfizer , Procter & Gamble , and Shell Services International.

    "Another Sept. 11-style terrorist attack in the United States is highly likely," the report states. "Networks of militant Islamist groups are less extensive in the U.S. than they are in Western Europe, but U.S.-led military action in Afghanistan and Iraq has exacerbated anti-U.S. sentiment."

    Guy Dunn, a company director and the author of the report, described the following as criteria used for the rankings: motivation of terrorist groups, the presence of terror cells, the scale and frequency of past attacks, the ability of terror groups to organize and obtain weapons, and the ability of the government to prevent the attacks. Each of the five categories is weighted, he said, with the motivation of terrorist groups receiving the most emphasis.

    Colombia, whose government has struggled to control acts of violence by warring leftist guerrillas and rightist paramilitary groups, is at the top of the index. Israel, the report says, was ranked in second place despite a shaky cease-fire and continued international peace efforts.

    Pakistan, whose government has struggled to stop the activities "of individuals and cells that espouse and pursue terrorism," is in third place, the report says. Ranked after the United States are the Philippines, Afghanistan, Indonesia, Iraq and Britain.

    "Iraq was actually in the bottom 10 before the war," Mr. Dunn said. "But now with a political vacuum existing, and heavily armed factions, the climate is ripe for terrorism."

    Ufi Ibraham, a vice president at the World Travel and Tourism Council, said the index would "have a bearing on the decisions taken by the private sector," in terms of whether they invest in a destination. Her organization represents the presidents and chief executives of 100 corporations, including some of the world's largest. Terrorism experts said the index could help corporate clients gauge security risks but cautioned that it was nearly impossible to predict terrorist attacks.

    Magnus Ranstorp, the director for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence at the University of St. Andrews, called the index "a useful tool to gauge what has happened in the past" but added: "I think it is extremely difficult, with a single index, to predict how terror cells make decisions about what to attack, when and where."

    Britain is ranked 10th, the highest of any European country. "Motivation for such an attack among Islamic extremist groups is very high owing to the U.K.'s close alliance with the U.S.," the analysts wrote, "while sophisticated militant networks are known to be present within the country."

    In 186th place, is North Korea. "Despite being a member of the so-called Axis of Evil," Mr. Dunn said, "North Korea's repressive state has basically made it impossible for terrorists to function."


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I have a family relative who works in a building next to the WTC site. When the blackout happened last week, the first thing the employees did in the office was to get their parachutes in case they had to jump from the building. Turns out that they did not need their parachutes, this time. But, it just shows you how much terrorism is on the minds of those who work in New York City. I hope and pray that this article is wrong, but my gut feeling tells me different.

    The Department of Homeland Security is making headway into arrrested suspected terrorists, especially here in New Jersey, but getting one or two here and there will not dismantle the terror cells that are reported to be here in the US.

    Mrs. Shakita

  • Simon
    Simon

    Is this a totally independant study or is it sponsored by the government? Does the government fund the establishment for instance and grant it's budget?

    (just interested)

    I agree with the bit about the UK being the highest target in Europe ... thanks to our illustrious leader Tony !

    In 186th place, is North Korea. "Despite being a member of the so-called Axis of Evil," Mr. Dunn said, "North Korea's repressive state has basically made it impossible for terrorists to function."

    Maybe that is the inspiration for a lot of the new legislation?

  • Hamas
    Hamas

    How many times have you heard this.

    Yawn, terorrist attacks always liekly to gain sympathy for some people, as the media and nitwit public swallow the idea whole.

  • Shakita
    Shakita

    Simon:

    The article was printed in the New York Times, but the information was from the World Market Research Center which is not a government organization. The articles are written by economists, political analysts and industry specialists. More on this organization at: http://www.wmrc.com/

    Mrs. Shakita

  • Blueblades
    Blueblades

    I'm going to repeat the question asked earlier.Why was there no terrorist's attacking the U.S.A. during the blackout this week.Even if you suspect that the blackout was caused by a terrorist attack,which officials are denying,why didn't the terrorist's do much more damage at this time of vunerablilty?They had about 12 hours to do some more damage during this blackout.

    I don't have the answer to the question,who knows what is going on in their mind as to the timing of their terrorist acts.I'm glad that there was no terrorist acts at this time.

    Blueblades, who witnessed the plane crashes into the WTC.

  • DakotaRed
    DakotaRed
    Yawn, terorrist attacks always liekly to gain sympathy for some people, as the media and nitwit public swallow the idea whole.

    Yes, they sure did a fantstatic job faking those planes hitting the buildings, the suicide bombings in Israel and catching suspected terrorists at the Canadian border with explosives in the trunk of their car. What will Hollywood come up with next? Then, to railroad a poor innocent guy like they did the one who they claimed had a shoe bomb. Bet they really sent him on a lifelong Caribbean Cruise and not to prison.

    In fact, I bet was really the GIs that just sabotaged the oil pipeline in Iraq, all in hopes of garnering sympathy from gullible people. But, what else do we expect from such "nitwits?"

    Yes, we'll fall for anything. Good thing we have intellectual elites around to let us know none of it really happened or will ever happen.

  • reporter
    reporter
    I'm going to repeat the question asked earlier.Why was there no terrorist's attacking the U.S.A. during the blackout this week.

    That's a good question. I've seen you ask it on another thread, too. Nobody wants to answer that. Why?

    My theory is that the U.S. government, or elements within, either just let September 11 events occur, or had contributory roles therein. Other times, perhaps security is normally excellent, and that prevented foul play during the blackout. That's just a calculated hunch. I hope I'm wrong.

    But there's rheams of redacted statements and omissions in the official 9/11 commissions' "investigation". Even the victims' families are mad as hell and smell something fishy about the whole damn thing. There's STILL unanswered questions, giving birth to much suspicion. I posted sometime ago on a different thread, but got attacked and flamed from asking unanswered questions. There you go.

    Keep asking that question, blueblades. It deserves an answer.

    One thing is, whether it is 9/11, Pearl Harbor, or the Holocaust, you can always find agendaed groups or governments willing to overtly milk those disasters for all the sympathy they can muster. How else can a buffaloed public allow stuff like the Patriot Act to pass without dialog or debate?

  • DakotaRed
    DakotaRed
    How else can a buffaloed public allow stuff like the Patriot Act to pass without dialog or debate?

    Could this be the same "buffaloed public" that sits by and allows the ACLU to deny the Boy Scouts use of a Public Park they built and paid for, allows some appointed Federal Judge to hold the State of Alabama in contempt over their showing of the Ten Commandments, that sits back and allows Flag Burners more freedom than those who honor their own flag, who abhores the public display of crosses or any religious matter associated with Christianity, yet fights for the right of a small religion in Florida to be free to slaughter animals for their religious expression and freedom, who also fought for free expression of public display of " any symbol that arouses anger, alarm or resentment in others on the basis of race, color, creed, religion or gender," and who are currently fighting for the freedom of speech of groups like NAMBLA to openly advocate "intergenerational intimacy" between adults and children?

    It would seem to me that this "buffaloed public" has a lot to wake up to in addition to matters as the Patriot Act. It also seems to me that the Patriot Act might not be the most severe thing they need to wake up to, either.

  • rem
    rem

    Reporter,

    I'm going to repeat the question asked earlier.Why was there no terrorist's attacking the U.S.A. during the blackout this week.
    That's a good question. I've seen you ask it on another thread, too. Nobody wants to answer that. Why?

    Um... no. Actually it's a stupid question. That's probably why nobody has bothered to answer it.

    DakotaRed,

    Sounds like you have major issues with separation of church and state. Can't you see this is for your protection too? How would you like to have a monument of the Koran or a statue of Buddah in the Courthouse? The separation of church and state is a good thing that has unfortunately been eroded by Christian fundamentalists in office over the years. I'm sure you'd be singing a different tune if it were an Islamic fundamentalist Judge instead of a Christian fundamentalist judge asserting his religious beliefs on public property. The same is true with the boy scouts, as has been discussed on another thread.

    Also, the American flag is not sacred. Freedom of speech is a good thing. Freedom of speech will necessarily allow some despicable (to some people) acts. It's one of the great things about this country that we are able to express ourselves with much freedom without the government interfering in our lives.

    Of course, that's not to say that I agree with everything the ACLU fights for.

    rem

  • DakotaRed
    DakotaRed
    Sounds like you have major issues with separation of church and state.

    No, just issues with how far they wish to take it. Actually, the words "separation of church and state" are nowhere in the US Constitution, but are a later interpretation.

    Can't you see this is for your protection too?

    Protect me from what?

    How would you like to have a monument of the Koran or a statue of Buddah in the Courthouse?

    Actually, it wouldn't bother me a bit. Just because there is a monument somewhere doesn't mean it is being shoved down my throat. Besides, I have a copy of the Qu'Ran already.

    The separation of church and state is a good thing that has unfortunately been eroded by Christian fundamentalists in office over the years.

    I have no argument with there being no State Sponsored Religion, which was the actual intent. But, to deny any expression and to go so far as to include schools as government? Will they totally ban Military Chaplains next, under the same pretext? Have no Military Chapels?

    Why are religious turbans allowed to be shown and worn in public places, yet, not other expressions?

    I'm sure you'd be singing a different tune if it were an Islamic fundamentalist Judge instead of a Christian fundamentalist judge asserting his religious beliefs on public property.

    Don't be so sure of what I would do. There are several Islamic communities in our country and I have yet to see anyone stopping them from any public displays of what they believe. Just because they express their beliefs does not threaten me at all.

    If an Islamic Judge, or Jewish Judge, displayed some symbol of their belief in their courtroom, I see that as a right of their freedom of expression. After all, the first admendment does include the words "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;." To me, "free exercise" means we all are entitled to public displays of our beliefs.

    It's one of the great things about this country that we are able to express ourselves with much freedom without the government interfering in our lives.

    Unless, of course, your expressing yourself as to your beliefs on Christianity?

    Of course, that's not to say that I agree with everything the ACLU fights for.

    Good to hear. Let me also say that I don't disagree with everything they have fought for.

    Getting back to terrorism, let me ask, why have so many condemned the Bush for administration for failing to stop or warn about Sept 11, yet, now when warnings are given out, they also laugh at and condemn them? There is a possibility that past warnings might have stopped some, although we'll never know. Terrorists don't operate by an organized set of rules, they just operate.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit