Has sort of a familiar ring to it, yes? The dirt bags arrested in a planned attack on Fort Dix.
Officials identified the men as Dritan Duka, Eljvir Duka, Shain Duka, Serdar Tatar, Mohamad Shnewer and Agron Abdullahu.
Time was when you could drive right through the base and McGuire Air Force Base next door. They closed that road almost immediately after 9/11 and all but closed down an entire town. You really couldn't get to it. I believe they are consolidating them, or plan to.
Federal investigators last night arrested six Islamic radicals who were planning a heavily armed attack against soldiers at Fort Dix as part of a jihad against America, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office.
The planned attack has a wiki already. And what Dix soldier or McGuire will ever forget the Satelite Lounge. Grand? Not exactly ... but good music and, well, hot! Assuming you didn't get shot, of course. Which didn't really happen, much.
This once grand nightclub located in Cookstown, NJ opened sometime in the early 1960's and closed in the early 1990's. Such stars as Chuck Berry, Bruce Springteen, Foghat, Outlaws, Molly Hatchet, Ten Years After, Twisted Sister, Ace Frehley and hundreds of others played there over the years.
The terrorism complaint is here. Allah has a host of links at Hot Air.
ABC News has learned the army base at Fort Dix was target number one because one of the alleged terrorists, claims his family owned a nearby pizza joint. And as a deliveryman, he had unrestricted access to Fort Dix.
So it would seem. I would imagine the media has or is trying to talk to the parents so we can learn how these boys would never hurt anyone.
Your Host(s): Dritan Duka


I think this just proves that if we don't fight them somewhere, we'll need to fight them somewhere else.
Or is it that if we left Iraq we'd be less safe because these men wouldn't have been caught without Abu Garab and Gitmo?
Or... wait... hmm... did they have any WMDs? Cause I heard this was a military problem, not a law-and-order problem, and that conventional police work and investigation could never protect us from terrorists.
If Hillary Clinton had been elected President, would these attackers have succeeded, like Guiliani said?
Posted by: Zifnab | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 11:56 AM
"Or is it that if we left Iraq we'd be less safe because these men wouldn't have been caught without Abu Garab and Gitmo?"
How about; Al Qaeda's ability to finanace and coordinate terrorist attacks on the US and its interests outside the war zones is so degraded, the actual planning and execution is left to "jihadists" like these, who turn in their "death to america" tapes to a local store for copying. ?
Unless you have a better reason there hasn't been a terrorist attack outside Iraq and Afghanistan in six years? Why couldn't Clinton accomplish that?
Posted by: TomB | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 12:35 PM
You must have missed the reports that terrorism around the world increased by 25% in 2006, that's the strange fruit from Bush's war on terror: more terror attacks.
My guess, given past behavior of the Bushites is that since the six alleged terrorists are from the former Yuguslavia the anticipated action would be to invade and occupy Poland or Hungary.
Posted by: nowinger | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:04 PM
"Cause I heard this was a military problem, not a law-and-order problem, and that conventional police work and investigation could never protect us from terrorists."
Nobody claimed that police work would never protect us in any instance, merely that police work was insufficient to deal with the total threat.
Posted by: pst314 | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:05 PM
"You must have missed the reports that terrorism around the world increased by 25% in 2006, that's the strange fruit from Bush's war on terror: more terror attacks."
You must have missed what I asked. Why hasn't there been a terrorist attack on the US outside of Iraq and Afghanistan since 9-11? Given your claim of a 25% increase, that makes it even more impressive.
Posted by: TomB | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:12 PM
"My guess, given past behavior of the Bushites is that since the six alleged terrorists are from the former Yuguslavia the anticipated action would be to invade and occupy Poland or Hungary."
psssst.....we did that under slick willie (well Yugoslavia anyway), that's how these "refugees" got here in the first place.
Tenet says that FBI stopped 20 attacks in the US, 21 now? There has been a 25% rise in attacks...in the Sudan, Darfur, Arabia and a couple in Europe..........Not so many in NYC though.
Posted by: imaginewhirledpeas | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:16 PM
Your entire premise is nonsensical. There were no foreign terrorist attacks on U.S. soil during any previous administration, thus, by your reasoning that makes Bush the biggest failure in the war on terror, since the ONLY foreign terror attack occured on his watch.
Unfortunately, the Bush administration, FBI, DOJ and DOD have 'misstated facts' so much about terrorists that its impossible to know how many legitimate terrorists or terrorist attacks have been thwarted and how much is exxagerated or patently false. They are the boy who cried wolf, I no longer believe anything they say without independent verification or publication of the evidence.
Posted by: nowinger | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:24 PM
So the first world trade center bombing was the work of Cheney's ninjas too? And of course all the planning, training and preparation it took to fly aircraft into buildings only took Chenney's Ninjas less than nine months? Man I wish we could have these geniuses in offcie longer. Anybody with that kind of godlike power should be retained.
Posted by: imaginewhirledpeas | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:29 PM
"Your entire premise is nonsensical. There were no foreign terrorist attacks on U.S. soil during any previous administration"
I said specifically "on the US", don't try to move the goalposts by adding "soil" to the claim. It still doesn' hold water because WTC1 was exactly that.
1993: WTC1
1995: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: car bomb exploded at U.S. military headquarters, killing 5 U.S. military servicemen.
1996: Dhahran, Saudi Arabia: Khobar Towers U.S. military base
1998: Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: truck bombs exploded almost simultaneously near 2 U.S. embassies
2000: Aden, Yemen: U.S. Navy destroyer USS Cole
Posted by: TomB | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:34 PM
"Unfortunately, the Bush administration, FBI, DOJ and DOD have 'misstated facts' so much about terrorists that its impossible to know how many legitimate terrorists or terrorist attacks have been thwarted and how much is exxagerated or patently false."
Interesting that you failed to mention Tenent and the CIA. I guess now that he has a book out critial of the administration, you are forced to trust him.
Posted by: TomB | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:37 PM
When you add in the rest of the world, you further undercut your argument, since there have been MORE terrorist attacks worldwide since Bush took office.
In fact, since the Iraqi insurgents are often called "terrorists" that would mean you have to add almost all the US soldier deaths in Iraq and Afganistan to the tally of American terrorist casualties further demonstrating George Bush's absolute failure to protect Americans from terrorists everywhere.
Posted by: nowinger | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:38 PM
"In fact, since the Iraqi insurgents are often called "terrorists" that would mean you have to add almost all the US soldier deaths in Iraq and Afganistan"
Good God, nw, you aren't very bright, are you? This is what I wrote above:
"You must have missed what I asked. Why hasn't there been a terrorist attack on the US outside of Iraq and Afghanistan since 9-11?"
Do you even read the posts?
Does this mean that you are withdrawing your silly claim that "There were no foreign terrorist attacks on U.S. soil during any previous administration"?
Posted by: TomB | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:42 PM
translation = i have no idea what i'm talking about so i'll just make some shit up
Posted by: charles | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:44 PM
You got me on the first WTC attack in 93. I guess you are right, Bush has made America safer! He is a great patriot and savvy leader. American power is at its apex! This is the New American Century! When the terrorists attack us after Bush leaves office that will be someone else's fault, probably Bill Clinton's fault. Its all good. Yeah Bush.
Posted by: nowinger | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:46 PM
"You got me on the first WTC attack in 93. I guess you are right, Bush has made America safer! He is a great patriot and savvy leader. American power is at its apex! This is the New American Century! When the terrorists attack us after Bush leaves office that will be someone else's fault, probably Bill Clinton's fault. Its all good. Yeah Bush."
translation: " i have no idea what i'm talking about, so I'll just stomp my feet and rant a while hoping everybody will go away."
nw, people will take you more seriously if you actually learn something before you post.
Posted by: TomB | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:49 PM
translation = you're right i've got nothing, and i'm too embarassed to make a cogent point so i'll just obfuscate as usual
Posted by: charles | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:50 PM
nowings, it makes no sense to argue with someone who denies that wtc1 was an attack on American soil. Then after being faced with the knowledge that 21 attacks on american soil have been averted still uses terms like "absolute" to claim Bushe's failure. You cannot even concede that none have occured in the states in that time. You're impossible in your hatred for GW and only capable of parroting your air america talking points. Of course the "increase" in terror attacks includes those in Iraq, the media claimed that outright. But they also include every civil war on the planet. What is truly sad is that there are legitimate arguments to be made against the GWOT, etc but you people cannot get beyond what Al Franken told you to believe. BTW, Rosie's an idiot, fire will melt steel.
Posted by: imaginewhirledpeas | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:51 PM
tomb, i bow to your superior typing skills and faster internet connection
Posted by: charles | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:52 PM
Nowinger's Bush-hatred is an OCD with him. You've just witnessed it for the hundreth time. It is something for the DSM IV to use as an example of obsessive compulsive disorder taking over reality-based thinking.
Posted by: Phoenix | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 01:55 PM
Why should I believe anything George Tenet or the FBI or the President says about how many terrorist attacks have been prevented?
The old legal saying goes that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.
I believe the terrorist threat has been completely exxagerated so I'm not surprised that there haven't been any more attacks on American soil, since other than Al Quada, pre-Bush's pre-emptive war on terror no other islamic groups wanted to kill Americans in America. I never expected hundreds of terrorist cells to be uncovered, I knew they never existed in the first place. Bush's war on terror and invasion of Iraq has given Al Quaeda time to regroup, change their hierarchy and most likely put into place plans for a future succesful attack.
Considering that the wingers won't admit things in Iraq have not gone as planned, you don't have much credibility talking about reality based thinking.
Posted by: nowinger | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 02:02 PM
Wasn't the blind sheik working for HAMAS? I dont remeber if anyone died in WTC1 so I guess you're right. They exploded the bomb to scare us rather than hurting anyone.
Name a "winger" who claims there have been no mistakes in Iraq. Comon, I'll give you an hour to find just one.
Posted by: imaginewhirledpeas | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 02:14 PM
Hamas is on record saying they don't support killing Americans in America, they want to kill Jews in Israel and the Occupied Territories. If you don't bother to find out what the terrorists groups actually say and believe and who it is they are on record as wanting to kill, how are you going to fight them? Hamas and Al Quada are not the same. Hezbollah and Al Queda are not the same. Freelance Pakistanis living in the London and Hamas are not the same. This is winger's number one problem, you are so full of hate for muslims you can't be bothered to do any research so your strategies will be effective, the only strategy you endorse is 'kill them all'
I have read ad naseum that Saddam DID have weapons of mass destruction, but for some odd reason he sent the WMD out of the country, instead of using them against our troops. I've also read numerous passionate defenses of our invasion of Iraq on all kinds of grounds that have been totally disproven. Wingers won't admit we should never have invaded Iraq in the first place. This is the core winger philosophy, NOT LOSING is more important than anything else, more important than peace in the ME, Israel's actual security or anything else.
Posted by: nowinger | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 02:22 PM
too.dense.for.words.
Posted by: charles | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 02:26 PM
You're correct wingless:
"Instead of state sponsorship (Clinton's FBI thought Iraq sent them), a large body of evidence indicates that the WTC conspirators were “transnational terrorists”—inspired and assisted by several Islamic militant groups operating in the United States and abroad, but not a formal part of any of them...
In 1995, investigative journalist Steven Emerson noted that federal investigators had identified links between the WTC bombers and at least five Islamic organizations: the Gama al-Islamiya, Islamic Jihad, Hamas, the Sudanese National Islamic Front, and al-Fuqrah.[6] He observed that these groups work together more closely in diaspora communities outside the Middle East “because they feel they are surrounded by a common enemy: Westerners and their values.”..." Of course none of those organizations wants to kill Americans.
Yes, there have been many defenders of our invasion of Iraq and yes, you're NON-ANSWER is mostly correct. The question was to name ANYONE who says there have "been no mistakes". Of course you could not, hell even Hannity admits mistakes. ANd sir, there will be no peace in the ME until Israel is destroyed............
Posted by: imaginewhirledpeas | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 02:38 PM
In 1995, investigative journalist Steven Emerson noted that federal investigators had identified links between the WTC bombers and at least five Islamic organizations: the Gama al-Islamiya, Islamic Jihad, Hamas, the Sudanese National Islamic Front, and al-Fuqrah.[6]
I wonder if these 'links' are the same kind of 'links' that Cheney finds between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 terrorists, that would be imaginary ones.
There is a huge difference between some guy who belongs to Hamas being at the same meeting or in the same city as some guy who belongs to Al Quaeda and a cooperative, operational relationship between Hamas and Al Quaeda, or any of the various terrorist organizations that exist.
Posted by: nowinger | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 02:52 PM
Here wingless, go busy yourself:
http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/reports/wtc93.htm
Posted by: imaginewhirledpeas | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 02:59 PM
Steve Emerson is a hatefilled crack pot with no credibility outside wingerverse.
Posted by: nowinger | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 03:08 PM
Moon god worshippers planning to kill Americans. That is a first. Meanwhile, leturds blame Bush for those terrorist being in America planning death.
I suggest everyone get ready in your own way. Me, I like the gym, and buying ammo. Lefturds, try and do something other than wet your pants when you are asked to believe in Allah, or get your head cut off.
ROPMA
Posted by: Leatherneck | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 03:52 PM
This story smells. I doubt what the news is reporting is correct. I know what the government is saying is wrong.
Looks like another fake "terrorist attack plan" stopped.
In fact, the more I do research on the story the more laughable it becomes.
Posted by: James | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 04:42 PM
"This story smells"
as bad as you? why don't you post some links to the massive research you have done to make you believe this story is laughable
if you think it's because of the ineptness of the suspects allow me to remind you that they believe their god is protecting them and if their faith is strong enough they can accomplish anything
afterall they're on a divinely ordained mission from god
Posted by: charles | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 04:59 PM
The lefties on this site leave a lot to be desired.
It would be nice for them to factually support at least ONE thing they allege, instead of just telling us what they "feel" or, better yet, "think" (heh).
Posted by: TomB | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 05:14 PM
(Leftist mode)-TomB, the lefties here believe in conspiraciies/fake incidents crafted by the chimperor (9/11, any terror plot foiled, the kidnapping of Brit Sailors) who is an idiot and genius at the same time. Plus he's under the control of either Cheney and/or Rove (unless he isn't) who control the weather (hurricane Katrina/global warming), unless Bush does since he was blamed for the hurricane. It's also his fault that terrorists exist since they clearly didn't before he was elected.
Also, those lines in the sky? They aren't vapor trails from planes. They are chemtrails being sprayed by the chimperor's planes to get the populace to vote for him. (google chemtrails for a laugh) Or it's the real cause of global warming...or Al Gore.
Posted by: Hard Right | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 06:31 PM
why don't you post some links to the massive research you have done to make you believe this story is laughable
if you think it's because of the ineptness of the suspects allow me to remind you that they believe their god is protecting them and if their faith is strong enough they can accomplish anything
Well? Where is YOUR research to suggest these individual persons truly thought they could do something so dumb, and get away with it. That their God would 'protect' them - as you stated. Lets see...Terrorists who don't have shoes, but they are gonna blow something up, terrorists with a blowtorch going to down the brooklyn bridge, luis padilla - well, W. Is he a terrorist or not? - don't think the legal system thought he was. So on and on it goes - almost always corresponding to a threat (or perceived threat) to the Bush administration (abu-gate, maddams, etc). No. We have all been thrown this bone before, and it still looks chewed on.
Posted by: Tom | Tuesday, May 08, 2007 at 09:38 PM
"Well? Where is YOUR research to suggest these individual persons truly thought they could do something so dumb, and get away with it." by Tom. No, see, Tom, when the media are full of a story, it isn't up to those who accept it to prove it is true. It is the deniers who have to show it is not true. It's like the moon landing or 9/11, these things happened. If you say they didn't it is up to you to do the work of proving it.
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Wednesday, May 09, 2007 at 09:42 AM