http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/07/terror/main1783061.shtml

Thank you to those of you stopping what could have been a terrible loss of life.

Fandros

Nothing like good old fashioned police work.

The Hoovers deserve a bunch of credit for this.

I find it odd that the article waffles between it being all talk and no action or the real thing. Still though either way, all the better that it didn't happen if it was going to.

See how jaded we all become? It's only a good thing if we rush in at the last moment and defuse all the bombs at the same time...

As L2 said, good old fashioned police work saves the day.

The more we catch of these yahoo's in the planning stage the less effective they seem and the less youths they inspire.

Not too inspiring looking like an fumbling boob!!

Fandros

True that.

Like L2 says, it is the good old fashioned investigative police work that will keep people safe.

Good ole police work for the win indeed. Real question is was any of this information obtained via the shady domestic surveilance. If not, its just further proof that we don't need to encrouch on civil liberties to get the job done.

Yeah, the disparity between what the "senior official" and the FBI say is odd, but at the very least a possible threat has been thwarted.

It is a good thing if this was a real threat thwarted. It is strange that the FBI and the senior official seem to be at opposite ends on the level of threat that was there, also this is something that happened about 4 months ago or so.

I read a few other articles about this, it seems they were supposed to plant the explosives under the holland tunnel which would seem to be a monumental task requiring at the very least some type of large digging or drilling machine along with some pretty sophisticated scuba gear (the tunnels is under dirt which is under water) and I'm not quite sure how they would have flooded the financial district which is above the level of both the Hudson and East rivers. Maybe they had intended to dig under lower Manhatten so when they detonated the explosives in the tunnel it would have caused the city to drop below the level of the flood waters thereby flooding lower Manhatten.

News this morning said authorities now are confirming that the "alleged" leader of this plot did have detailed maps of the river and tunnels on his computer harddrive, which may lend support to the "intent" issue.

I don't care if it were bravado or real.

"CBS News correspondent Jim Stewart has learned that the plans were mere "jihadist bravado," according to one senior official. "

Are you kidding me?
CBS worries me.

But nonetheless a potential threat was stopped no matter how real or how close they were towards doing the deed.

Yeah, the disparity between what the "senior official" and the FBI say is odd, but at the very least a possible threat has been thwarted. Please. You guys are just now noticing all the anonymous "senior official" parts of these stories? They always contradict what the administration is trying to say... It's like the journalist has to get the opposing view into their article... no matter how rediculous (this case in point.)

Please. You guys are just now noticing all the anonymous "senior official" parts of these stories? They always contradict what the administration is trying to say... It's like the journalist has to get the opposing view into their article... no matter how rediculous (this case in point.)

The Senior offocial is from the administration, the FBI is supposed to be independant of any administration.

I'm with Akipt on this, "Senior Offical" doesn't cut it as a source. Senior official of what?......the DNC. :rolleyes:

Great to find these plots whenever...way to go FBI!!!

*warning Sarcasm ahead*

It's always "Jihadist bravado" till things start exploding....
Then it's G.W.'s fault....

"Real question is was any of this information obtained via the shady domestic surveilance. If not, its just further proof that we don't need to encrouch on civil liberties to get the job done."

Come again? Why is that the "real" question? Whether a terrorist surveillance program is "shady" or not does not hinge on its results. I assume by shady you are referring to the program's constitutionality. You might question whether it's a useful allocation of limited resources, but certainly not "proof" one way or another whether the program is legitimate. Put another way, if some of the information was obtained via various terrorist surveillance programs would you consider it proof that it's ok to encroach on civil liberties? I certainly wouldn't.