Anyone else feel the missile sting is totally manufactured?

I mean, stings usually do have an element of pre-fabrication. The authorities have to contribute to the scenario somewhat for there to be a set-up.

But in this case, the set-up came from both ends. The Russians (in cahoots with us) provided the material, in the form of the (disarmed) missile, and transferred it to the U.S. (always under the watchful eye of U.S. and Russian agents). The U.S. provided the "customer", in the form of an undercover agent posing as an Al Qaeda operative.

In fact, the only hint that there was even the desire to commit any crime before-hand is the following according to the New York Times: "The officials said the arrested man was not a well-known arms trader, but had told associates in the New York area in the last year that he could obtain arms, including shoulder-fired missiles, from military stocks in countries like Russia. Other officials said the Russian authorities had received the first tip in the case, a feeler from the arms dealer trying to buy a shoulder-fired missile." (http://nytimes.com/2003/08/13/international/worldspecial2/13TERR.html?hp)

If you believe that, British intelligence says they also have some rock-solid info on a uranium deal between an African nation and a certain Mid-East one (details to come).

Also adding to the suspicious nature of the sting is the fact that "the investigation was carried out by a somewhat new grouping of American law enforcement agencies... which is part of the Homeland Security Department."

I find it interesting, too, that yesterday, the buzz was that it was an assassination plot against Bush, aimed at Air Force One. Yet today, we don't hear a peep about this. I guess they realized they were pushing the spin too far.

There are also conflicting stories about the man's background as an arms dealer. USA Today says that the man "is an independent arms dealer who has sold weapons to terrorist cells, Muslim extremists, and 'rogue nations'". Yet later in the same article, they say that the suspect "did not appear to be connected to al-Qaeda or any other known terrorist group." (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-08-13-missile-plot_x.htm) The New York Times says that the man "had been motivated by profit and that he was not directly involved in terrorist operations," and that "no real terrorists were ever connected to the plot."

Hmmnnn. No terrorists. No weapons that weren't provided by us. Perhaps even no real arms dealer, depending the version of the story you read, until we made him one. Certainly no actual arms deal a priori, except what was manufactured by us on both ends.

The administration would like us to believe that the purpose of this sting was to keep us safe from terrorists. But there are other goals they are after. The administration is very eager to look as though they're doing something to make us safer . They're also very interested in encouraging the impression that we are ALL at war, even here at home. That is what this spin is all about. That was the real purpose of this sting.

Today, USA Today is hyping the missile threat as "no longer theoretical". Yeah, the sting has served it's purpose alright.

Wait, considering who did it, an episode of "Punky Brewster."

Especially if they *GASP* do business in foreign countries!!

but what I'm really upset with is the way the law enforcemnt guys always come in front of the cameras and congratulate themselves for doing their jobs! To me, that is hysterical. I mean, do any of you ever get an "adda boy" when you finally do your job right? Probably not. You'd be long-time gone!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Of course, I tend to think most "stings" are fishy. While the police are setting up fake crimes, then the real criminals -- as opposed to self-appointed loudmouths -- can quietly go about their business.

But at best, this case means that the U.S., in an effort to show they are saving us from terrorists with missiles, is arresting a man who is "not a well-known arms trader" who is buying a weapon from us (Russia) and selling it to us in a case where "no real terrorists were ever connected to the plot."

Just how exactly does that protect us from terrorists armed with shoulder-mounted missiles? Especially when, according to the Times article, "Intelligence agencies say Al Qaeda already has dozens of missiles..." and "Hundreds of other surface-to-air missiles are reported to be circulating on the black market."

Yet the only shoulder-fired missile that we've managed to confiscate from the black market is one that WE put there for the express purpose of confiscating it! Doesn't sound like we're being very effective at halting the black market missile trade, does it?

(i.e. missiles) that the * administration has completely blown off.

Something that underscores this treat was not part of the plan.

Keep an eye on the coverage: If it's all about the super-efficient G-men nabbing a shifty miscreant before he could wreak unspeakable havoc on a peace-loving American public, it's stage-managed. If the coverage veers uncomfortably toward the idea that there's no way to provide 100% security no matter how much money is spent, then it might actually do some good.

However, my money's on the former. If I was a bettin' man, that is.

... the very fact that we know there are missiles on the market out there (and we even know that Al Qaeda has some of them), and the best we can do is set up a sting in which there are no suppliers (except us), no customers or terrorists (except us), and arguably not even a real arms dealer, indicates that we are not doing much to counter this threat.

The fact that this is being hyped to high heaven also indicates that it is a PR attempt by the administration to convince us they ARE doing something. The fact that yesterday, it was being hyped as an assasination attempt on the president (even with no terrorists involved) further proves that it is a PR stunt. Like all their PR stunts, however, the Bush admin has had to backtrack on this one when they realize belatedly that they were going too far.

i.e.

the trailer for the REAL event.

More likely, they're trying to cover their asses.

In case there is an actual missile attack (which IS a possibility), they can say "but we WERE doing something about it! Remember the sting? We just can't stop EVERY terrorist!" Forgetting, of course, the fact that there was no actual terrorist involved in this case.

You mean you took your hat off??

I didn't know we were allowed to do that!!

very difficult from what I've read.

Like the boy who called wolf, the misadministration is lulling the public into dismissing that there are genuine threats out there in the world. All of their smoke and mirrors attempts to deflect attention when they are in PR trouble are dangerous in that people will become less responsive to real dangers.

Part of the plan and just more evidence or their malfesance.

The crime is created, and managed all the way through.

That's a good description.

Suppose I'm his lawyer (if indeed he's allowed to have one). My defense goes something like this:

BUT, FOR the intervention of the Americans wiith the Russians, my client would have had absolutely no access to illegal weapons.

Interesting defense.

Perfect timing, huh ?

but seriously... the whole set up doesn't make sense. Like it was engineered for headline value alone... to laud the fair and balanced accomplishments of the fair and balanced bush regime in defending the US from Terra-ists.

it stinks.

I get that vibe also but I don't think that was the only reason they cooked this up. I think they were trying to send a message to the real arms dealers that they can't find that their new clients might be undercover.

Like that guy who they caught supposedly planning to blow up that bridge. The whore media would still dutifully hype it for propaganda, with the very last line of the story in very small type on page 37 reading: "No real criminals were ever connected to the plot."

The whole thing is fake. We used this guy as a middle man between us and ourselves, there was never any terrorist connection. As mentioned above Al Qaedia already has SAMs so this does very little to help the "War on Terra".

Having said that anyone who would try to smuggle or sell a SAM deserves to be in jail.

Like those guys who are constantly sneaking through airport security they are constantly shrieking about on the news. All the more reason to enforce police state policies?

The biggest weapon in the war against terrorism is to nip it in the bud at the source by minimizing the causes of it---rather than dealing with the symptoms. The symptoms increase the Right's military response as a solution, which they herald as strength - but ultimately escalates the threat and risk of terror as retribution, causing endless cycles---which only serve to justify the use of force as another show of stregnth.

nt

Just a matter of time before Calico Johnnie and Tommy Timber-Toes come out tag-teaming with the new "Security measure" that would cordon off wedge-shaped "Security Zones" off the ends of all runways.
Nobody would be allowed in these zones. People would be displaced, businesses closed, and everything bulldozed or burnt to the ground and troops and firepower stationed at each one.

You wander in (hard to do, it'll be fenced off) you Die.

All because somebody "MIGHT" have a SAM that could bring down a DC-9...

many newspaper articles outing Bush & Co's lies (check out the Editorials Forum here at DU) and military families are getting angry.

So, take a "little truth" (arms dealers, stinger missles, sinister operatives)mix it with a lie and you succeed in puting terror back into peoples lives and remind them that Bush is all we've got to keep us safe.

Also, someone did a study that peoples fear level was going down and they were going back to their normal lives....on Monday on CNBC.

Bush doesn't like people going back to their "normal lives" where they don't sit glued to CNN.

Yes......it's hokey. Sad, that some of us don't believe anything they say anymore. Maybe we have a lot of company lately out there.

dreamed up by the spooks in intelligence? Now we are supposed to be impressed that we are making progress on the "war on terrorism"? Now we can give some money for their little war with a big price?

These kinds of things turn up periodically. They happened well before 9/11. Of course, all of the cases that make the news tend to be "stings"...with one side or the other actually working for the "G".

I've been approached before in obvious "sting" operations, and once by a sicko terrorist (outstanding terrorist warrants in Belgium, of all places) who wanted me to violate a bunch of laws for him. I can tell the difference between the stings and the real cases because, when reported to the police, the "sting" cases don't go anywhere, while the real ones end up with arrests almost instantaneously. They took the terrorist guy into custody in under 20 minutes from my "making the call". BTW, the terrorist guy was never tried (ATF would have to subpoena me if they did) or extradited....he was found to be mentally incompetent and is still in a mental hospital. He'll probably be there until he dies, a nice "side-step" around a troublesome trial. :eyes:

But, like a Soviet Citizen, circa 1978, I am compelled to view everything coming out of the Imperial State Pravda suspiciously.

We are now so jaded and cynical by this government and their obedient media lapdogs , that we can no longer trust anything we are told. It took me about 30 years to reach this point, but after Iran Contra, Vietnam, 2000 Selection, and 9/11 (no real investigation), Iraq War (I and II), I am saddened to admit that I no longer believe that our government works in the interests of all Americans.

How can one disinfect themselves from feeling this way, 'eh?

A fox never tells the hens what's about to happen. So if this is the nature of truth, then we live another day to hear
another lie and know 'tis the nature of man, 'eh? Then greed and power are good, and lies are the order for the truely
great men, such as junior.

The Lamplugh incident, Waco, Ruby Ridge etc.

What is the Lamplugh incident?

I don't believe anything which comes out of their mouths. App. 55% do, however, because they're frightened. It's really depressing.

cynicism and reality are one and the same to me any more - as far as *co productions is concerned.

There is no terrorist at the center of this incident, yet the media is making it sound like a terrorist plot was foiled. This whole thing is manufactured right before our eyes, but most people don't even get it.

it's highly exaggerates to be sure

If you're still posting/reading here, jump to this thread. They've already backtracked as far as admitting it's mainly PR.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=64692

If this guy is a "is an independent arms dealer who has sold weapons to terrorist cells, Muslim extremists, and 'rogue nations'". you have to ask just who are these "to terrorist cells, Muslim extremists, and 'rogue nations'" that he has sold weapons to in the past?

Then you have to ask who is his suppler for these weapons?

The answer to the suppler question has to be Russia because that's where he went to get these missiles. There are plenty of other countries that make SA-18s if he had other arms contracts going to Egypt, Syria, China, North Korea would have been cheaper and less risky security wise and also easier to laundry the money from these sales. he went to the seller where he had already established a relationship with.


So Russia knows that this guy "is an independent arms dealer who has sold weapons to terrorist cells, Muslim extremists, and 'rogue nations'" His prior sales had to have been known about by the Russians(the Russian military weapon industry is still state run). So right here we have proof that Russia is working against US interests in the "war on terror".

My last Question, why are the Russians getting off so easy? They have been indirectly selling weapons to "terrorist cells, Muslim extremists, and 'rogue nations'" using this half wit as a proxy.

I think that the US and Russia are using this idiot as a fall guy to "preserve the special relationship we have with the Russians" just like the censoring of the 9/11 report was to "preserve the special relationship we have with the Saudis"

Britain's Tony Blair was about the only world leader to back pResident Turd's war on Iraq...and even helped the unelected drunk manufacture evidence.

But then post war, the Brits get shut out of the "rebuilding (looting)."

Now the occupation grows into a bigger disaster daily...Blair is on the verge of being pushed out in disgrace...

So suddenly one of Britain's top arms experts turns up mysteriously dead...and another Brit is caught trying to sneak a hand-held missile into the US to whack Chimpy...

Couldn't be a little payback from British intelligence, could it? Or a squabble between our spooks and theirs?