Authorities Covering Up Terrorism-Related Activities, Keeping Us In Dark

...and feeding us shee-it. What are we, mushrooms? Do they think we're stupid and can't see what's going on for ourselves by piecing together the puzzles? What do we care about the "minority" status of perpetrators, when our lives are endangered, fofecksake?

I've long said I'm sure that the authorities are conspiring (yes, conspiring, as people can and DO conspire, despite the supposed reputation for the concept of conspiracy to be virtually impossible and never-happening, and despite the word being used to attempt to discredit and discourage folks who can see what's obviously going on and say so) to cover up evidence found and conclusions made in investigations of incidents that appear for all the world, for all logic and reason, to be dry runs for terrorism or even attempted terrorism.

Now let's again look at the case of the guy who stole the little plane in Canada, crossed the border and led a couple of American F-16 Fighting Falcons on a four-state chase before landing for lack of fuel.

U.S. federal prosecutors, who have charged Leon with transportation of stolen property and illegal entry, said Leon told them he flew the plane into the U.S. expecting to be shot down. The federal complaint also says Leon told authorities he recently was being treated by a psychiatrist.

Hmm... could claimed/alleged insanity be a cover for sinister intentions? Wouldn't surprise me if terrorists and other baddies were pretending to be insane (how hard is it to pretend to be insane, if one knows what one's doing, how psychiatrists make diagnoses, etc.?) to eventually get off scot free before too long (they don't keep nutcased incarcerated anymore, really, and just let 'em go after telling them to keep taking the drugs, which they often don't, and end up becoming even worse with withdrawal). Hell, maybe the guy who beheaded a passenger on that bus in Canada and ate him isn't insane, but only pretending to be, and he commited the evil act for some other reason we don't know; can't logically rule out the possibility of enemy-state involvement in anything, and one shouldn't be ridiculed for pondering the possibilities (but of course, politically-correct left-wing activists will prefer to believe the easiest thing, which is, "Well, he's crazy, it's not his fault. Let's believe what he claims. Let's believe he's not faking insanity and fooling the guillible psychiatrists. It's impossible for there to be any deliberate intent, and besides, hey, he's a visible-minority immigrant, and, as all visible-minority immigants are always necessarily innocent, we mustn't be hateful, right?").

“He didn’t have a lot of friends. He kept to himself, but to know him as depressed? Definitely not,”

“He was a very nice kid.”

Right. That's what is also said by the neighbors of Adnan el-Shukrijumah, aka Jaffer the Pilot, bin Laden's handpicked "nuclear lieutenant" and mastermind of the "American Hiroshima" plot.

Keeping to himself isn't uncommon amongst Islamic supremacists and terrorists. They're told by their Imams to not be friends with the Kaffirs, for it's un-Islamic to be friends with non-Muslims, except when one must pretend to be so.

Remember, appearances can be deceiving. Whoever would've thought a white guy, a gulf war veteran, an American-born dude who served his country, would blow up a federal building, killing many? Well, that's what Timothy McVeigh did. (I understand that al Qaeda's Number Two, Ayman al-Zawihiri, was in the city shortly before the incident, for some reason, not that any connection was directly demonstrated, but it does raise suspicions as to possible AQ involvement).

Just because someone seems too nice and kind and happy doesn't mean they don't have a hidden agenda (like, you know, Barack Hussein Obama). After all, spies, saboteurs and terrorists are trained to deceive, to make others not think they're up to anything sinister. You just can't know just by interacting socially with folks, for some are masters of acting and deception, by virtue of training and/or experience.

“He was described as being an excellent student by his faculty members,” said Lang, who called Leon personable, polite, pleasant and engaged.

Sounds exactly like the friendly-seeming, observedly-sweaty chameleon, Adnan el-Shukrijumah, who's still at large after nuclear material was stolen from a lab at the Canadian university he attended.

Background shows "no connection to terrorism". None that they can see so far, that is.

The pilot flew erratically and didn’t communicate with the fighter pilots, Kucharek said at Norad headquarters. The pilot acknowledged seeing the F-16s but didn’t obey their non-verbal commands to follow them, Kucharek said.

Said he "wanted to commit suicide but was too chicken to do it himself". So, logically, he goes out of his way to learn to fly, steals a plane, and deliberately provokes friggin' F-16 warplanes to shoot him down? Yeah, that's how people commit suicide. That'd be the most elaborate, premeditated suicide ever. I just don't believe it. He was trying to do something else, something which one needs to think about. Perhaps operating on some kind of orders.

Why did he change his name? This isn't uncommon for terrorists to do.

Be sure to read the bizarre circumstances of the perp's arrest at a convenience store, where the owners had heard of the plane theft/chase and armed themselves just in case. Well, the perp literally showed up... Why was he so happy to be arrested? WTF is his agenda? If he really wanted to kill himself, why is he so happy? It's illogical. Happy people don't kill themselves, unless they're looking at the prospect of ending up in Paradise with 72 virgins...


Flashback: The Syrian "musicians" on Northwest Flight 327

Jihad Watch confirms that it was indeed terrorism. (Thanks, Maz2, for running that by me. I belive I missed that post!)

Flight 327 Update. Will all those who ridiculed Annie Jacobsen for "hysteria" over "musicians," and derided her for "racism," now apologize? What do you think?

And what about those who think the Flying Imams case is a legitimate one of racist profiling? Will they now acknowledge that there is a genuine threat to American air travel? Again, what do you think?

And why has DHS covered up all these probes and dry runs? Are they more concerned about a fictional "backlash" against Muslims than about preventing another jihad terror attack? Do they think that keeping the public ignorant, fat, and happy will help prevent another jihad terror attack? This goes hand-in-hand with the polite fictions about Islam and jihad that dominate the public discourse -- it's as if in both cases that the truth is just too terrifying to contemplate, and so we'd rather play pretend.

Well, if we wish to survive, maybe it's time to grow up.

Note- the article to which the Jihad Watch post links is no longer there, probably moved to a different location. But they did copy and paste from the Washington Times what it said.

An air marshal who told The Times that he has been involved personally in terror probes that were ignored by federal security managers, called such behavior typical.

"Agency management was not only covering up numerous probes and dry-run encounters from Congress and other federal law-enforcement agencies, it was also hiding these incidents from their own flying air marshals," said P. Jeffrey Black, an air marshal stationed in Las Vegas.

(Details... read at Jihad Watch)

The inspector general's two-year investigation was originally released in April 2006 but was then wholly redacted except for two sentences. The re-release stems from a Freedom of Information request by The Times on April 25, 2006, which was answered Friday.

Portions of the report remain redacted. However, current and former air marshals who reviewed a copy provided by The Times say the activities of the men details a dry run for a terrorist attack.

Yes... grow up and start using our brains. And take the authorities' claims of "not terrorism-related" with a grain of salt, especially when they say it almost immediately after they arrive on the scene of an incident (and haven't even had a frickin' chance to investigate yet!) and are questioned by the Big Media, who is as guillible as they come and who will not bother to ask tougher questions, you know, like tough questions they ask of, say, conservative politicians, of whom they're always suspicious and biased against. How about some suspiciousness and bias against authorities who incredibly seem to know the answers before they can even possibly see the evidence? And how about some suspiciousness and bias against evildoers' claims? Why trust everything the evildoers say, including "they just wanted to commit suicide but were too chicken" or that they're crazy and therefore not responsible for chopping off peoples' heads and eating them on buses? Damn, all you need to be excused from anything bad is to pretend to be frickin' nuts. It helps to "see a psychiatrist" prior to doing the bad thing, to establish a "history" for optics and to manipulate the thinking and perceptions of others. How clever! Anyone can make others think they're nuts... how hard is it to act like a nut even though one's perfectly sane, although still evil?

Of course, the hard-left propagandists lurking around this site will hate what I'm saying, and probably talk amongst themselves in their glorified echo chamber, saying, "Hey, another Muslim-hating redneck! Doesn't he know that Islam's a religion of peace and that only about a couple or three or four Muslims out of billions are terrorists and that the rest of 'em are the nicest, most tolerant, most peaceful, non-hateful, non-supremacistic, non-imposing, non-entitlist people on earth? Is he nuts? All Muslims except for two or three or four are nicer and way better than we are and so on and so forth... Just look at the Christians, the Jews, America and Israel... now there's baddies, eh! Ok, pass the joint, man; my brain ain't numb enough yet!"