As Real Threat from Al-Qaeda Fades, Is FBI Stepping Up Set-Ups?

[The Straight Story]

As Real Threat from Al-Qaeda Fades, Is FBI Stepping Up Set-Ups?

Al-Qaeda is far from being the threat it used to be, according to U.S. intelligence officials. But the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is still foiling plenty of domestic terrorism plots, some of which they’ve helped hatch.

This week, the nation’s top intelligence officials testified before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and the surprising revelation was how much people such as James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, talked about budgets and cyber attacks instead of threats posed by al-Qaeda.

According to Clapper (pdf), al-Qaeda’s main operation, located in Pakistan, is in such bad shape that it is “probably unable to carry out complex, large-scale attacks in the West.”

Furthermore, the terrorist organization’s regional spinoffs in the Middle East and Africa may pose trouble locally, but aren’t in a position to carry out attacks on American soil.

http://www.allgov.com/news/controversies/as-real-threat-from-al-qaeda-fades-is-fbi-stepping-up-set-ups-130314?news=849428

[graham4anything]

1. no. HOWEVER, on the other hand

I think the rightwing extremists and others are attempting to start a race war by their overexaggerations like in Katrina and Sandy of there being riots, when in fact there were none and it was attempting to make it so, so the ones with the guns(who are indeed terrorists of the extremist homeland style), would be given Zimmerman like carte blanche to shoot them up and then hope for retalliation so they could enflame and incite even more.

and indeed, anything done on the net, affects 320 million Americans, and if it is from terrorists they could, like happened on 9-11, bankrupt America for another decade or worse, ruin the great economic recovery we are having currently, so as

Benjamin Franklin stated "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure".
Might even be worth a TON of cure, or ten thousand tons of cure, or ten billion tons of cure.

[el_bryanto]

2. I guess the question is whether one trusts the FBI or not

Or where on that spectrum you fall. If you think they are a flawed but generally good organization, you'd probably want them going after domestic terrorists which are, as you say, a potentially big problem. If you think they are a corrupt organization doing the bidding of the 1%, than you are probably more concerned over how a decision to go after domestic terrorism could turn into an attack on civil liberties and groups working for positive change on behalf of the 99%.

Bryant

[graham4anything]

4. All depends on IF Karl Rove is the secret unnamed person on the other end

I have no proof that Karl Rove himself is NOT the evil genius mastermind manipulating the hate Obama movement from all sides.
Just like the Bush family did in 2000 and other times past and present.

It's too nice and tidy to have every single fracture of the democratic party directly benefit the Bush family.

I would prefer to trust President Obama over Karl Rove.

In chaos, Rove wins. In chaos the Bush's win.
In chaos, the democratic party lost in 1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000, 2004.
(being seated=winning).

So, it actually is best to look at WHO BENEFITS and apply it backward.
And apply dirty tricks to anything.

The FBI and the CIA don't trust each other.
However, I trust Janet Napolitano and the President's team.
(and isn't it great that the title "All the President's Men" is now obsolete, but that it is telling that Jefferson said "All men are created equal" and he meant just that.

[leveymg]

3. The real question is, what AQ operation wasn't?

The guy at the center of every major AQ operation against the US -- including 9/11 -- was a double-agent, al-Awlaki. They'll need a new recruiter-provocateur. But, I think the problem is really the programs managed by the CIA CTC. Please, see: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2486002