The Student Room Group

US forced to admit Yemen 'Al Qaeda bomber' was actually a CIA operative

After announcing they had thwarted a new terrorist attack against America and captured a terrorist red-handed, the CIA now claim that it was actually their mole in Al Qaeda, who managed to persuade the group he wanted to carry out a suicide bombing. A highly sophisticated underwear bomb was designed, then whilst carrying the bomb the CIA operative was apprehended by his superiors before the bomb could board a plane destined for America.

The bomber's name has been made secret and is now said to be taking safe haven in Saudi Arabia. Fresh urgent calls for tighter airport security have been made to be able to examine contents of all passengers' underwear and more stringent screening in airports.

The State Department and the White House had assured the American public that they knew of no al-Qaeda plots against the U.S. at all around the anniversary of bin Laden's death. The operation was carried out over the past few weeks, officials said. "We have no credible information that terrorist organizations, including al-Qaeda, are plotting attacks in the U.S. to coincide with the anniversary of bin Laden's death," White House press secretary Jay Carney said on April 26. On May 1, the Department of Homeland Security said, "We have no indication of any specific, credible threats or plots against the U.S. tied to the one-year anniversary of bin Laden's death."

However now Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has admitted she was aware “for some time” of a foiled terrorist plot to blow up a U.S. airliner and said she’s “known about the efforts to do something like it even longer.”

And then the White House revealed Obama was briefed about the plot in early April. The Associated Press learned of the plot last week but only broke the story late Monday after being censored and told by the White House that they couldn't publish it for several days.

Obama has been recently celebrating the anniversary of his successful assassination of Osama Bin Laden and his family, this latest news he hopes was timed well and will boost his popularity for the upcoming 2012 elections, and serve as a reminder that the age of terror and fear is not yet over.

Thoughts?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18000351
http://www.globalnews.ca/al+qaida+bomb+plotter+was+cia+informant+officials/6442637254/story.html
(edited 11 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Original post by Algorithm69
So are you afraid to post the actual source of what you posted? I cannot find it online anywhere. Did you write it yourself? Neither of your links say he helped Al-Qaeda actually design the bomb, or that he attempted to board a plane and was apprehended, but that he delivered the bomb to the CIA himself. Your post above makes it seem as if he was a double-agent or something, and was actually going to carry out the attack. Thanks to this operation, America now not only has a device they can study, but they also have information on the members of the group, and the operative's intelligence helped kill Fahd al-Quso.

So my thoughts are well done to America for a very well-executed mission.


My rep weapon has jammed...
Great post buddy.
For the record the terrorist's family was not killed in the raid on his sordid lair.
Mr Obama is doing a great job fighting the enemies of freedom
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 2
Stefan your a massive terrorist. You defeneded Abu Quatada and now you're defending this guy.
Reply 3
Original post by Algorithm69
Your post above makes it seem as if he was a double-agent or something


He WAS a double agent, this has already been admitted now. Read the articles.

Original post by Algorithm69

So my thoughts are well done to America for a very well-executed mission.


Well done for attempting to bomb themselves? :confused:
That's an odd thing to say.
Reply 4
Original post by BusheSCFC
Stefan your a massive terrorist. You defeneded Abu Quatada and now you're defending this guy.


It's "you're" a massive terrorist. Not "your". And it's "defended", not "defeneded" whatever that means.
Also it's not "Quatada". No such person exists. It's "Qatada".

Anyway, where am I defending anyone? :confused: Are you getting a bit confused with another thread?
Not sure how you managed to infer that from me paraphrasing the articles. Read/spell carefully.
Reply 5
Original post by Stefan1991
Thoughts?


Double agents are part and parcel of intelligence community life. That the Americans will use anything for propaganda shouldn't surprise anyone. The CIA are doing their job when all these type of bombs are getting collected by their agents rather then by real terrorists who'd use them.

It's not really that interesting tbh Stefan.
Reply 6
Original post by the bear

For the record the terrorist's family was not killed in the raid on his sordid lair.
Mr Obama is doing a great job fighting the enemies of freedom


Sorry to be a nitpicker, but yes Osama's young son was murdered when armed soldiers raided their home.

Also his friend and his family - his brother and brother's wife - were murdered in the home invasion. Osama's 12 year old daughter and her mother were also seriously injured and emotionally scarred after watching their father and husband shot in the head in front of them, and his bloody corpse dragged out of their home.
Reply 7
CIA in keeping things secret shocker.

Next week we find out the Pope is reported to be Catholic.
Reply 8
Original post by RyanT
Double agents are part and parcel of intelligence community life. That the Americans will use anything for propaganda shouldn't surprise anyone. The CIA are doing their job when all these type of bombs are getting collected by their agents rather then by real terrorists who'd use them.

It's not really that interesting tbh Stefan.


So what is the CIA's "job"? Because it doesn't seem to be that benevolent or specific, they seem to be a above-the-law rogue agency with free reign to do what they want.

I just think it's a bit ironic that you say the CIA's job is to prevent terrorism. :smile:

And if it's not that interesting no one is forcing you to comment on the article, I am just dismayed at this dumbing down of society where potential terrorist atrocities and CIA involvement is not interesting enough for this X factor generation.
Reply 9
Original post by Algorithm69
Except the agent never attempted to bomb anyone. The agent delivered the bomb to the CIA for analysis and intelligence collection.


How do you know this?
Reply 10
Original post by Stefan1991
Sorry to be a nitpicker, but yes Osama's young son was murdered when armed soldiers raided their home.

Also his friend and his family - his brother and brother's wife - were murdered in the home invasion. Osama's 12 year old daughter and her mother were also seriously injured and emotionally scarred after watching their father and husband shot in the head in front of them, and his bloody corpse dragged out of their home.


so his family was not killed
Reply 11
Original post by the bear
so his family was not killed


:facepalm:

What part of "his son was murdered" do you not understand? Or do you not consider someone's son part of one's family...? :lolwut:
Reply 12
Original post by Algorithm69
It's right there in the articles you posted...

In an apparent intelligence coup, the agent left Yemen with the device and delivered it to the CIA.

The agent was given the device which he then delivered to the CIA and Saudi officials.

FBI analysts are studying the device.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18000351


Yes it says that, but how do you even know it really happened for sure? The only source are the CIA officials themselves... they're just relaying what they've been told to say.

How can you "foil a plot" when you were instrumental in carrying out that plot?
It's like me claiming credit for single-handedly capturing a ruthless serial killer, if I go out and kill a few people and then give myself in.
Reply 13
Original post by Stefan1991
Yes it says that, but how do you even know it really happened for sure? The only source are the CIA officials themselves... they're just relaying what they've been told to say.

How can you "foil a plot" when you were instrumental in carrying out that plot?
It's like me claiming credit for single-handedly capturing a ruthless serial killer, if I go out and kill a few people and then give myself in.


Shall we make this simple for you.

-Terrorists plan to bomb America
-CIA agent infiltrates the cell, convinces them to use him as a bomber, stops bombing and delivers intel.

Understand? Or are you trolololing?
Reply 14
Original post by Algorithm69
I really have no interest in debating a conspiracy theorist, which you are turning out to be. If you don't trust the official sources, fine, but provide your own evidence. This does not include inferences or speculation.


Wtf?... please point me to this "conspiracy theorising" you are referring to and accusing me of? :confused:

Where exactly did I supply this "conspiracy theory"? :lolwut: You are the one who is claiming a CIA double agent infiltrated the most dangerous terrorist group in the world, fooled AL Qaeda into thinking he was going to bomb US planes and then single-handedly sabotaged the plot, stole the bomb and defected to the CIA.

Whereas I'm merely relaying what was said in the articles without immediately taking it as the infallible truth without question, which one sounds more like conspiracy theorising?

Original post by Algorithm69

If you seriously cannot comprehend how infiltrating a terrorist organisation, gaining a key position in the execution of a terrorist plot, and then stealing key materials and delivering them to the other side, along with substantial evidence on the terrorist organisation, is not foiling a plot then there's little else I can say to you.


Interesting conspiracy theory you have there, have you any evidence to back up these claims?

Original post by Algorithm69
The agent was not in charge, the agent did not create the terrorist organisation, the agent did not come up with the plan, the agent did not build the bomb.


Again, how do you know this? Do you have any solid evidence to back up these claims? Or are you just going off what the CIA who were themselves involved in the plot said...

Original post by Algorithm69

These things would have happened without him being there.


Again, how do you know all this? Where are you getting your information from. This is all a load of wild speculation and conspiracy theorising. Please stick to the facts because you are beginning to sound like a nutjob.

Original post by Algorithm69

What he did do, is gain a position where he was able to completely destroy the plot. So no, your analogy fails on every level.What he did do, is gain a position where he was able to completely destroy the plot. So no, your analogy fails on every level.


Infiltrating Al-Qaeda must be so easy....
Reply 15
Original post by Steevee
Shall we make this simple for you.

-Terrorists plan to bomb America
-CIA agent infiltrates the cell, convinces them to use him as a bomber, stops bombing and delivers intel.


Another gullible conspiracy theorist. :rolleyes:

This would all be a lot less embarrassing if you had anything credible to back up what you were saying. I, myself, like to stick to real world facts.
Original post by Stefan1991
Infiltrating Al-Qaeda must be so easy....


It is.
Reply 17
Original post by Stefan1991
Another gullible conspiracy theorist. :rolleyes:

This would all be a lot less embarrassing if you had anything credible to back up what you were saying. I, myself, like to stick to real world facts.


Yes, the fact that there are terrorist plots is a conspiracy!

The facts? :lolwut: Ny dear, the facts are what I am going on, based on what appears to have happened and what the CIA and press have told us. I don't know what you're going on, but it most certainly is not 'the facts'.
Reply 18
Original post by Stefan1991
Wtf?... please point me to this "conspiracy theorising" you are referring to and accusing me of? :confused:

Where exactly did I supply this "conspiracy theory"? :lolwut: You are the one who is claiming a CIA double agent infiltrated the most dangerous terrorist group in the world, fooled AL Qaeda into thinking he was going to bomb US planes and then single-handedly sabotaged the plot, stole the bomb and defected to the CIA.

Whereas I'm merely relaying what was said in the articles without immediately taking it as the infallible truth without question, which one sounds more like conspiracy theorising?



Interesting conspiracy theory you have there, have you any evidence to back up these claims?



Again, how do you know this? Do you have any solid evidence to back up these claims? Or are you just going off what the CIA who were themselves involved in the plot said...



Again, how do you know all this? Where are you getting your information from. This is all a load of wild speculation and conspiracy theorising. Please stick to the facts because you are beginning to sound like a nutjob.



Infiltrating Al-Qaeda must be so easy....


This post is hilarious.





That is all.
Reply 19
Original post by Steevee
Yes, the fact that there are terrorist plots is a conspiracy!

The facts? :lolwut: Ny dear, the facts are what I am going on, based on what appears to have happened and what the CIA and press have told us. I don't know what you're going on, but it most certainly is not 'the facts'.


By definition, terrorist plots are a criminal conspiracy. However if you are going to make such claims you need credible evidence to back up your conspiracy theory.

Taking the word of the CIA on what was their exact involvement in the criminal conspiracy, is rather like taking the word of a murder suspect on their involvement in a murder.

Since the CIA are known for staging terrorist attacks, you are basically immediately accepting on face-value and taking the word of a convicted murderer with a history of crime on whether they have committed a crime. I don't think it would be so eagerly accepted in a court of law.
(edited 11 years ago)

Quick Reply

Latest