If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS News)   Fruit of the Boom: CIA thwarts a new al-Qaida underwear bomb plot to destroy a U.S.-bound airliner. The attack was planned around the one-year anniversary of the killing of Osama bin Laden   (cbsnews.com) divider line 186
    More: News, Northwest Airlines Flight 253, Osama bin Laden, CIA, al-Qaeda, U.S., Katherine Jenkins, fruits, CIA thwarts  
•       •       •

6725 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 May 2012 at 8:20 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



186 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-07 11:22:14 PM  

Jaws_Victim: LadyBelgara: Jaws_Victim: I guess we can count the total number of plots thwarted by the TSA to 1 now. Complain some more.

The hell we can. CIA got this one.

But the TSA will use it as an excuse to make you take off your underwear to go through security.

Sounds kinky.


The super secrety UberAgency (tm) has just thwarted a plot by bad guy inc. to plant explosives in the urethra of males. I demand my TSA blowjobs!!!! safety first!
 
2012-05-07 11:26:01 PM  
Well the bright side of this is the TSA will be instrumental in finding cancerous lesions on testicles and malignant polyps in colons! Think of the lives they will save!
 
2012-05-07 11:39:38 PM  
No worries, I'm our diligent and necessary TSA would have caught him for sure!

/feels unclean
 
2012-05-07 11:45:00 PM  

Nem Wan: This is how it's supposed to work. The CIA catches them over there so the TSA shouldn't have to molest grandma over here.


Actually... yeah.

Far better system.
 
2012-05-07 11:47:53 PM  

Jensaarai: Jaws_Victim: I guess we can count the total number of plots thwarted by the TSA to 1 now. Complain some more.

It says it was thwarted by the CIA. The TSA would've been too busy groping that cute blonde or harassing that person who makes a fuss about getting irradiated to actually catch the guy with the bomb.


And the TSA isn't posted at extra-national airports.
 
2012-05-08 12:10:04 AM  

base935: /Can't imagine what won't be allowed on a commercial airliner in a few more years.


I'm going to go with "people." Cargo-only, starting in 2018.
 
2012-05-08 12:22:32 AM  

Fuggin Bizzy: I'm going to go with "people." Cargo-only, starting in 2018.


Naw man, people *as* cargo. Honestly? I could go for that. Flying sucks anyways, I want to get from point A to point B in the shortest time possible.

Step into a capsule of some kind, you're knocked out for the duration, wake up at the destination. Ala "The Jaunt", but with less going crazy if you don't get KO'd.
 
2012-05-08 12:36:04 AM  
Mad Tea Party:Whatever happened to that color-coded terror alert thingy? Did the US officially disband it, or did we just all agree to quietly ignore it?

They ditched it, about a year and a half ago:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j4jVmMvd0grzQ2cm5y M rHggs8EgQ?docId=CNG.b27ce982d5a2c46fdde0c964ca0fcea9.f51

It had been stuck at "yellow" for over half a decade. It's been replaced by the National Terrorism Advisory System, which is actually more or less the same, minus the color scheme, plus the admission that nothing is ever going to "green" ever again.
 
2012-05-08 12:44:51 AM  
So now we're going to have to remove our underwear to go through airport security? Nuts!

Coming up on Fark: An article about how going commando will save you time and frustration at airport security checkpoints!
 
2012-05-08 01:12:02 AM  
Yawn
 
2012-05-08 01:15:15 AM  
i1199.photobucket.com
 
2012-05-08 02:10:26 AM  
Didn't he get the memo? Barry says WOT is over.
 
2012-05-08 05:33:02 AM  
Yawn.
 
2012-05-08 06:09:37 AM  
Realistically, the idea of the alphabet agencies not flagging every airline ticket to the USA for that day as "suspicious - keep an eye on them" would indicate gross incompetence.
 
2012-05-08 06:29:18 AM  
Lies, lies, lies, lies, more lies.....Keep believing Al-Qaida actually exists and continue buying into all these conjured stories to make you think your government is winning a "war" on your behalf. Freedom is fleeting faster and faster...
 
2012-05-08 06:43:14 AM  
Underwear, detonators, yeah, whatever. A couple of weeks ago, an anonymous poster on Slashdot suggested something that would absolutely bring an airliner down, or at least set it on fire and/or blow a goddamned big hole in the side. I hope that not many people saw that post. The necessary material doesn't violate any TSA regulations, doesn't involve traditional explosives, and couldn't reasonably be detected by scanners. it could be used by anyone with no special skill or training, and can be legally purchased all over the USA and other countries for $10-$20 per package at the very most.

I'm still freaked way out by the sheer evil perfection of the idea... and simultaneously kicking myself for not thinking of it. If someone really wants to bring a plane down, this trick wiil either do the job as intended, or make a huge, scary mess.
 
2012-05-08 07:06:01 AM  

Jaws_Victim: I guess we can count the total number of plots thwarted by the TSA to 1 now. Complain some more.


Still 0. Counterterrorism busted this, not the TSA.
 
2012-05-08 08:12:08 AM  
What is this? I don't even ........... Oh. It's election year.
 
2012-05-08 08:16:42 AM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: CapnBlues: it turns out that when the government pays attention to terrorism, they can do a pretty good job of fighting it. unlike the Bush administration, which almost completely ignored terrorism until 9/11.

Good point. If only he had lobbed some more Tomahawks at a few more tents, I wouldn't have to be giving you a B...Bu..but Clinton too. Dumbass.


The republicans cried louder than anyone when Clinton did that...dumbass.
 
2012-05-08 08:16:54 AM  
Someone must have threatened TSA's funding. Kind of like when fires pop up when you threaten firefighter's salaries or pensions.
 
2012-05-08 08:19:01 AM  

SmithHiller: My guess it is another terror plot coordinated by the United States. US agents most likely recruited and supported a so called terrorist and then chose a time and place to thwart the plot.


yup, just like all the other 'busts' they've done. If you created the damn plot, it's pretty easy to foil it.
 
2012-05-08 08:30:11 AM  

Madbassist1: yup, just like all the other 'busts' they've done. If you created the damn plot, it's pretty easy to foil it.


So is there any proof whatsoever that this is an inside job, or do you need to adjust your tinfoil hat?

/I bet you believe 9/11 was an inside job too
//"Truthers" is already taken, what do we call this brand of stupidity?
 
2012-05-08 08:37:38 AM  
Do you have any proof it wasn't?

For the record, I'm not a 'truther' or whatever, and since this is CIA and not FBI, there may be something to it, however the news report I saw had so much "possibly, unconfirmed, some say, etc." as to be totally unreliable.

also,

In the last decade the FBI has not publicized a terrorist action they twarted that they didn't originate. Sorry, but it's true.
 
2012-05-08 08:56:47 AM  

Madbassist1: Do you have any proof it wasn't?


No, see, it doesn't work that way. I don't have to prove it was legitimate, you have to prove that it wasn't. Nice try shifting the burden of proof.

Madbassist1: In the last decade the FBI has not publicized a terrorist action they twarted that they didn't originate. Sorry, but it's true.


"It's true"? Then prove it. Should be easy.
 
2012-05-08 09:42:23 AM  

Jaws_Victim: I guess we can count the total number of plots thwarted by the TSA to 1 now. Complain some more.


Nope, try reading the headline.

Actually, this is more proof of the absolute waste that is the TSA. The plot was foiled by real intelligence officers doing their job in the field. All the rest have been foiled by real intelligence services or real law enforcement officers working in the world.

If an attacker ever makes it to a TSA checkpoint and thinks he's about to be detected (yeah, I know thinking they'd actually find it is a major stretch but humor me) the news story will simply be that a suicide bomber blew up an airport terminal instead of an airliner. Once a terrorist makes it into the airport, your defense has failed.
 
2012-05-08 10:27:51 AM  

TsukasaK: Madbassist1: Do you have any proof it wasn't?

No, see, it doesn't work that way. I don't have to prove it was legitimate, you have to prove that it wasn't. Nice try shifting the burden of proof.

Madbassist1: In the last decade the FBI has not publicized a terrorist action they twarted that they didn't originate. Sorry, but it's true.

"It's true"? Then prove it. Should be easy.


yup

should be

That's just one swipe of the google, the first being an internationally respected news organization.

fark you.
 
2012-05-08 05:40:46 PM  

James Scameron: CIA thwarts a new al-Qaida underwear bomb CIA plot to destroy a U.S.-bound airliner. The attack was planned around the one-year anniversary of the killing of Osama bin Laden to take away more domestic civil rights and ramp up domestic spying and surveillance.


ftfy subby

/show me the body of Bin Laden....

//more america neo nazi hogwash.

///yeah, you live in a fascist state.


If someone high up in the ranks gets nervous and calls off the whole wag the dog operation, they can always just turn the plans into a great story to scare everyone with almost as much as if it had happened. If even that doesn't fly, turn it into a season of 24.

/Don't agree that Bin Laden isn't dead. Even if he was all part of a conspiracy, he outlived his usefulness.
 
2012-05-08 06:47:29 PM  

TsukasaK: So is there any proof whatsoever that this is an inside job,


As Madbassist1 points out, the Feds have engaged in borderline entrapment several times in an obvious attempt to gin up scary news stories, egging on various losers and malcontents who would otherwise never have gotten beyond talking tough in a Fark thread. The burden of proof is on the government at this point.
 
2012-05-08 08:00:48 PM  

Madbassist1: That's just one swipe of the google, the first being an internationally respected news organization.


Yeah, an op-ed, you lying fark. And the second one is a reprint of a Russia Today article. Got anything substantial?
 
2012-05-08 08:13:55 PM  

TsukasaK: Madbassist1: yup, just like all the other 'busts' they've done. If you created the damn plot, it's pretty easy to foil it.

So is there any proof whatsoever that this is an inside job, or do you need to adjust your tinfoil hat?

/I bet you believe 9/11 was an inside job too
//"Truthers" is already taken, what do we call this brand of stupidity?


How the FARK wasn't it an inside job? You are a clueless asshat.
 
2012-05-08 09:46:02 PM  

smittyg: How the FARK wasn't it an inside job?


So is there anyone in this thread that understands the bloody concept of "burden of proof" or...?

Difficulty: Opinion pieces and stories from notoriously anti-american news sources don't count. If this is as obvious as you are all claiming, surely there must exist a well sourced and rational story about it somewhere?
 
2012-05-08 10:50:50 PM  
And... I called it!

Bomber was a CIA agent only pretending to be a bomber...great job, CIA!
 
2012-05-09 02:44:53 AM  

TsukasaK: So is there anyone in this thread that understands the bloody concept of "burden of proof" or...?


Yes. Next question?
 
2012-05-09 08:22:34 AM  

TsukasaK: Madbassist1: That's just one swipe of the google, the first being an internationally respected news organization.

Yeah, an op-ed, you lying fark. And the second one is a reprint of a Russia Today article. Got anything substantial?


You farking idiot. It's an opinion piece because it's position is by definition subjective. That makes it an opinion piece. The genius of it is, that to substantiate his opinion, he cites a myriad of FACTS thus doing the work for me, dumbass.

Don't you ever call me a lying fark. I just know what I'm talking about, unlike you. As far as substance, do your own damn research, why not chase down the citations in the 'opinion' piece, dummy?
 
2012-05-09 08:52:22 AM  

Madbassist1: The genius of it is, that to substantiate his opinion, he cites a myriad of FACTS thus doing the work for me, dumbass.


You mean how the judge in the case dismissed the man's entrapment claim? You mean how the suspects lose on any entrapment claim the great majority of the time? I'm sorry, I don't see how finding people who want to do something evil, leading them along, and then bagging them before they can is somehow wrong or makes the threat "made up". Perhaps these poor innocent men shouldn't have ached for a way to blow shiat up and kill people?

Madbassist1: Don't you ever call me a lying fark. I just know what I'm talking about, unlike you.


You are a lying fark. Why else would you submit a farking opinion piece and an RT article when asked for proof that the FBI is "originating" these plots? The facts do not submit the author's conclusion, period. Putting out low hanging fruit to catch nutjobs is not "originating" shiat.
 
2012-05-09 02:03:39 PM  

TsukasaK: You are a lying fark. Why else would you submit a farking opinion piece and an RT article when asked for proof that the FBI is "originating" these plots? The facts do not submit the author's conclusion, period. Putting out low hanging fruit to catch nutjobs is not "originating" shiat.


You are wrong. Period. Engaging someone in radical conversation, suggesting illegal activity, then providing means to accomplish said activity IS originating the plot, you moron.

You mean how the judge in the case dismissed the man's entrapment claim? You mean how the suspects lose on any entrapment claim the great majority of the time? I'm sorry, I don't see how finding people who want to do something evil, leading them along, and then bagging them before they can is somehow wrong or makes the threat "made up". Perhaps these poor innocent men shouldn't have ached for a way to blow shiat up and kill people?

Ha Way to move the goalpoasts, dumbass. who said anything about entrapment?

You are a lying fark. Why else would you submit a farking opinion piece and an RT article when asked for proof that the FBI is "originating" these plots? The facts do not submit the author's conclusion, period.

Uh...yes they do. did you even read the article or follow up on the cites? No? Oh, then STFU, asshole.
 
Displayed 36 of 186 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report