http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-16399275
A fairly unsurprising list of speculative terror 'flashpoints'.
All Islamist, except perhaps the last two.
More cyber attacks? Probably.
I do think that if the British establishment need an excuse to invade somewhere, say Somalia, any attack on the Olympics in London is more likely to be outright false flag. Do al Qaeda have the means and organisation? Do MI5? What about the likes of the Real IRA? Bombing a packed Olympic stadium, worst case scenario, is huge. I just can't see it.
Trouble... as in riots, not bombs... is, I think, more likely to come from the domestic protestors. The Republican or Democrat conventions in the US, maybe. Sure the powers that be would like to have some more ammo to throw at the Occupy movement. But it doesn't benefit them to have people's attention turned toward Yemen or Pakistan. Troubles in such places will undoubtedly continue, but as for attacks on western shores, no. They'll want American eyes on the election.
What's your view?
So, before it even happens, you're already paranoid about some nefarious conspiracy from 'the-powers-that-be' whoever the hell they are?
AntwortenLöschenAmmo for the OWS'ers? Why? These clowns are rebels without a purpose. This has to be the most self-destructive movement in the history of 'movements'. 'While your enemy is busy destroying himself, try not to interrupt' ~Sun Tzu.
When public opinion turned against them for trying to close the Brooklyn Bridge, they said they were 'lured' there by the police. Really? The unions joined in solidarity with these foot shooters screaming that the financial crisis was caused by Wall Street greed. The irony here is that these unions had just won fat salary hikes of 11% over three years, just as the financial collapse was throwing private-sector employees (mostly from Wall Street) out of work.
Talk about greed. These weak minded, ironic imbeciles are hard at work planting land mines in their own area of operation. Why does anyone need more ammo against them?
Looking at your list, these so-called 'hot-spots' have been experiencing hostility from one another for thousands of years long before the existence of Western Civilization. What extraneous, nefarious conspiracy was responsible then?
History has to count for something.
No, not paranoid at all. All I'm saying is that if the Olympics or one of the US conventions are attacked, it is likely to come from a domestic cause like the IRA (if 'terror'), or Occupy (if 'civil disobedience'). If Washington or Downing Street want an excuse to crack some nuts, that's where I think they will provoke, or even stage an event. History has to count for something.
AntwortenLöschen"that's where I think they will provoke, or even stage an event" = paranoia.
AntwortenLöschenDefinition; Paranoia:
A tendency on the part of an individual or group toward excessive or irrational suspiciousness and distrustfulness of others.
Why would anyone need to provoke or stage an event that is already CLEARLY on the verge of happening unsolicited?
Why go through all the logistics and participatory risk of discovery?
It's not rational.
Any resulting tragedy or crisis will invariably reflect more poorly on, as you say, 'the-powers-that-be' rather than the perpetrators.
Ok, I take your point. I do think the Olympics are relatively safe, though. If some domestic would-be Jihadist from Oldham or somewhere wants to come to London and have a go, they might get a bus or a train, but I can't see anyone getting explosives inside a stadium, not unless they either have help or are 'allowed' to.
AntwortenLöschenCivil disobedience of whichever partisan variety at one of the conventions... more likely. What do you think of that? I imagine the security is pretty tight at those, also.
I would agree with that. I think the British have consistently demonstrated a keen aptitude for that sort of thing. They have thwarted a number of attempts. One a year ago, I believe saw the arrest of 12 bomb planners before they were even able to obtain sufficient material.
AntwortenLöschenNevertheless, no security measure can be 100% effective. American Football games are prime targets and security is very tight. In spite of that effort and technology, still some turkey was able to defeat the measures and get into a San Diego stadium with a Stun-Gun and use it.
I would just caution against jumping to a conclusion that some event such as that has the earmarks of a 'false-flag' conspiracy.
We might find ourselves in a 'Cry-Wolf' scenario.
If I were a terrorist organizer, I would find joy in taking advantage of paranoia directed at officials and deflected from my own activities.
We should take care not to find ourselves complicit in that free ride.