While listening to C-Span a couple of days ago on their Washington Journal I heard this topic come up when they were talking about WMD, but was dumb-founded why I did not hear it on any of the regular cable news stations. Especially since this happened back in May 2003 and more information has come out in Nov and Dec 2003. This was very important inside the government that it was part of the presidents daily briefings.

http://cbs11tv.com/investigations/local_story_330180036.html



It seems like we not only have to worry about foreign terrorists but also domestic terrorists again, especially when this got little if no sound bites from the media or our government.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/terror/tyler-terror.htm











Ill take the question right from the quote and alter it a little bit.

Why have the media and our adminstration decided that this is a non-story?
Does this actually scare you more than anything we could have ever found in Iraq since this was built within our borders?
Is 5 and 10 years long enough for domestic terrorists to spend in jail?

The reason is that Bush and his administration want you all to believe that the bigest enemy of Americans is Islamic Fundamentalism and Communism. Even though the bigest enemy is really the people in the whitehouse and right wing christian malitia types at home doing things like sending anthrax to abortion clinics! And there's McVeigh. And there's all the terrorists that are being bred on a daily basis due to your foreign policy.

Just like Nazi Germany after the Reichstag Fire. Bush with his Reichstag fire called 9/11 needs a foreign enemy to lull his people into a state of submision to carry out his evil imperialist foreign policy!

Is it not a bit harsh to parallel the US Administration whit Nazi Germany ?

Yes, they have done there share of wrong doings. But they have done this in the name of freedome. Not only for United States, but also for the world.

War in the name of freedom may be your opinion, but not necessarily others.

If it were as simple as freedom, we wouldn't be putting barb wire fences around entire Iraqi communities and shoot the citizens if they attempt to breach the fence.

If it were as simple as freedom, Iraq would not be even close to the top of the list of countries affecting our homeland security because of dictatorships and their actions.

Bush has not sent an entire race of people off to concentration camps and/or started exterminating masses of people. So, that comparison cannot be made.

As far as political and foreign policy actions, I think the comparison can be fairly debated - but not fairly discounted.

Thats because unfortunately many ignorant people don't understand WW2 at all and the rise of the Nazi party. People keep trying to draw parallels but, alas it is mearly ignorance and really stretching. Some will even try and write 5000 word essays they shows how much knowledge they have but no way to apply it correctly thus making themselves look intelligent but ignorant of reality.

cusbilla

The current administration isn’t giving this any play because we already have the oil secured in Texas. If Texas were an independent country our President would be shoving misinformation down our throats about how there are clear links between Texas and Al Qaeda and they’re also in the process of developing a nuclear program.

Is 5-10 years an adequate penalty for domestic terrorism? Absolutely not. These animals should receive the harshest penalty allowed. Life sentence in solitary confinement with no cable tv, cigs, a Spartan diet with no chance of parole and no visitation rights. Confiscate all their assets, sell them and put the money into our Homeland defense fund.

A practical comment: The reason that the "Chemical wepon" of a sodium cyanide bomb did not make high media is because anybody with access to the internet or the 'Anarchist's Cookbook' can make Sodium Cyanide in their kitchen for about 20 dollars. It is extremely easy to produce, also quite easy to buy as it has other uses, such as metal plating, gold mining, dyes and pharmaceuticals.

As chemical weapons go, it is a first generation chemical wepon, and not terribly efective at that. Very good at making a lot of people sick, not so good at killing people.

There are a lot of first generation Chemical weapons that can be easily manufactured. Chlorine gas, the staple of early WWI, is a joke to produce, and many people (pool owners in particular) get sick every year from producing it accidentally. Even mustarrd gas, the ultimate first generation chemical wepon can be made with a basic chemistry set.

Thats why the media tends to not care much unless second generation chemical weapons are found (nerve and blood gases).

To date, third generation chemical weapons (supertoxins) have never ben deployed, and are owned, as far as anyone knows, only by Russia and the US. Russia pioneered these weapons, it was ne of the areas where they were well ahead of the US at the end of the Cold war.

The administration almost certainly ignored it because it doesn't fit the idea that terrorism is an Arab/Islamic problem and that per-emptive armed action is the only possible response. (Which perhaps also explains why they rarely mention Northern Ireland, where 30 years of armed response failed to stop the bombs and bullets, but five years of adult, sober conversation that recognises that the terrorists may have had some legitimate grievances have silenced them.)
I have no idea why the media didn't pick up on it, other than that they have swallowed the administrations line as comfortably as most of the rest of America seems to have done, because it is easier to believe terrorism is:
a ) a threat from outside America
b ) unconnected to America's actions
c ) something that can be beaten
d ) to beat it, you must use guns and bombs.


Definitely. They actually found the materials in Texas, something the coalition hasn't managed to do in Iraq in almost a year of looking. And even if the Iraqis had such weapons at the time of the war, they would have had to somehow get them to America to pose a substantial threat to Americans - a problem the Texan group would not have faced.


Compare these sentences to that of Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber", who got life at his trial. Imagine that Reid had succeeded and had managed to emulate the 9-11 crashes. his was just one plane, so let's be generous and say he may have killed up to 2,000 people. Pretty bad, and certainly worth at least a life sentence for even trying. This looks something like justice.
Now imagine what might have happened if the white supremacists cyanide bomb had gone off inside, say, a large government building or a football stadium or something. It's not hard to see how that could have led to many more deaths, perhaps five or even ten thousand. And this guy gets to serve 5-10 years. This doesn't look much like justice to me.
To paraphrase Eli Wallach in The Magnificent Seven:
It is clear to me - in Texas, only Texans can build bombs!

Exactly Julian they had more then just one bomb they had a whole lot of other itmes to add to their arsenal. Which according to the the report could have killed everyone within a 30,000 square foot building. As well if this is a who cares story why was it in the President daily intelligence briefing?

Why have the media and our adminstration decided that this is a non-story?
Well, I don't suppose it could be because the "liberal media" doesn't cover things which run counter to the focus of the ruling class, could it? This must be a fake story - white Christian Americans don't do that sort of thing.

Does this actually scare you more than anything we could have ever found in Iraq since this was built within our borders?
Well, since we have yet to find anything within the borders of Iraq, I suppose that something scares me a bit more than nothing. I've always been a bit more uneasy about domestic terrorists than foreign ones, but - hey - they're generally patriots, right? I mean, I'm sure Krar and company oppose affirmative action and the right to choose and gay civil unions and support the death penalty and the individual right to bear automatic weapons and chemical bombs and, hell, they chose to live in Texas - these guys should be senators, not prisoners.

Is 5 and 10 years long enough for domestic terrorists to spend in jail?
Well, if that's all we'll be seeking as a penalty for, say, Saddam Hussein, I guess it's fair enough...

At this point I am professionally prevented from getting into specifics, but let me reiterate a couple things:

1) There is no way a Sodium Cyanide bomb could kill that many people, not unless is was the size of a van. It would be hard pressed to even make that many people ill. The media seems to consistently overestimate the effect of chemical weapons, in particular first generation chemical weapons.

2) In the Us as in Canada, there are certain issues red-flagged for inclusion in the daily brief. The discovery of chemical, biological, radiological or atomic weapons certainly qualifies. Regardless of the actual significance of the discovery.

Here's a handful of straws, Wertz. Want to keep grasping for them?

One; Texas is not full of white seperatists. To label the entire state as accepting of such sounds more like Bush-hate then actual logic (not to mention how Wertz's avatar diminishes just about any anti-Bush arguments he has, on a side note, any of Clinton smoking joints?).

Two; Seperatist movements are not limited to whites. There are hispanic, black, etc movements to. Bustamante was afiliated with one such group, barely muted cries of outrage there though.

Three; As someone said, you can pull this recipe off of the internet (or Anarchists Cookbook). It is not hard to create, actually using it though is a different story considering the security around crowded areas now (hell, during the Alamobowl game here, cops were everywhere)....

Why?

I don't know but I am sure glad they haven't because it seems it is the news media that perpetuate these crimes. Look at the school shootings in the past, the sniper killings in (please don't fault me if I'm wrong) Ohio? And the plane that hit the Suntrust building in Florida after 9/11?

These same people we call crazy also seems to thrive off attention. Remember the high school kid who started the computer virus?

If we continue to give little attention (of course we can't say as much for 9/11) to these heinous and "totally awesome" (in their minds) acts, then maybe people will stop trying to get on TV.

Is it enough time?

Seeing the its Texas, they may just mean these people have 5 and 10 years to live... , but no I don't think so. If something had really happened everyone across the country would be pointing directions to the maximum security prison, or even the gas chambers. I'm not sure I know enough to make a good ruling, but I think they should be judged as to what was prevented and not what didn't happen.

One; I never said Texas was full of white seperatists. I did not mention the name Bush once. My avatar is not part of the content of my posting.

Two; I did not mention seperatist movements at all.

Three; The "recipe" for chemical bombs - and where it can or cannot be found - has nothing to do with the case. Or with my response.

If you are going to reply to a quoted posting, wanderer, you should make some effort to relate your response to that posting. Otherwise it is off-topic, unconstructive and, well... grasping at air.

Um, the questions for debate here were:

Why have the media and our adminstration decided that this is a non-story?
Does this actually scare you more than anything we could have ever found in Iraq since this was built within our borders?
Is 5 and 10 years long enough for domestic terrorists to spend in jail?

Would you maybe like to address them?

In this I disagree. As I already posted, I am pretty sure that the reason this is not a big deal in the media is that this is an easily made and commonly purchasable and available product. It is not really news.

It is not as dangerous as that article leads one to believe, and it is used for literally dozens of legal and normal applications. Finding this substance simply does not have the media impact of finding a non-first-generation chemical weapon.

Vermillion, while I'm glad to know that first generation chemical weapons are less of a threat to me than second generation chemical weapons, that doesn't seem to suggest that cyanide or a sodium cyanide bomb isn't a threat to my life or the lives of other citizens. Terrorism is terrorism regardless of whether your primitive explosive device kills 10 people or 100. Couple with this the fact that there were "at least 100 other bombs, bomb components, machine guns, 500,000 rounds of ammunition and chemical agents" found alongside documents of an advanced plot and it certainly seems newsworthy to me.

Ted Kaczynski was deemed newsworthy as a result of rudimentary pipe bombs which sometimes failed to kill a single person. Similarly, it is deemed newsworthy whenever a high school student is discovered with even the components for explosives with related plans to use them at school.

Despite being only a first generation chemical bomb, it's still a bomb that was seemingly intended for use against citizens. While it may have made more people sick than it killed, it seems likely that fatalities would have been linked to its use and that its use, regardless of casualties, would have undeniably been an act of domestic terrorism.

More directly to the specific questions posed:
Why have the media and our adminstration decided that this is a non-story?
All any of us can do is speculate, but I personally find it worrisome that an administration so vocally dedicated to terrorism that it would endanger international relations didn't consider such a domestic find worthy of mention without prior media coverage. After all the lame ducks they pounced on in Iraq and on alleged Al Qaeda operatives within our borders, I would think they would relish the opportunity to disclose the discovery of a very real threat to American lives.

Does this actually scare you more than anything we could have ever found in Iraq since this was built within our borders?
Yes. As Wertz touched on earlier, something is scarier than nothing. Even had we found any weapons in Iraq, any Iraqi in possession of such weapons would face the daunting task of actually delivering those agents to American citizens. These citizens in Texas needed to merely drive around the block.

Is 5 and 10 years long enough for domestic terrorists to spend in jail?
Not at all. How anybody could possibly deem 5 to 10 years for a crime intended to purposely kill numbers of innocent people and give lengthier sentences to victimless crimes is beyond me.

I do not believe the sarcasm was warranted.

Regardless, I am not saying Sodium Cyanide is not dangerous or potentially lethal, of course it is. Nor am I saying that this guy should not be tossed in jail. The question was why did the media not turn this discovery of chemical weapons into a media circus, and my answer was that there was not enough here to turn it into front page news. His weapons were, though plentiful and impressive, fairly run of the mill, and they were all unused.

Perhaps a better question would have been, why should this have BEEN a front page story?

Unlike Kazinsky, it wasnever put into effect, or even started, it did not take place in a high school, it did not target a minority, in the end it was just yet another nutter, of which I suspect quite a few exist in the back hills of montana and georgia, probably with similar stockpiles of weapons.

There wasn't any sarcasm intended in my post, Vermillion. If you took something I said to be sarcastic or demeaning of your position, I apologize. Nothing was intended as such.

As to your question:
Perhaps a better question would have been, why should this have BEEN a front page story?

It seems to me that as run of the mill as their other weapons may have been, most people in the United States are not in possession of, or in the market for, sodium cyanide bombs, large stocks of machine guns with thousands of rounds of ammunition or other chemical agents. That's not a typical American home or a run of the mill news story.

And while they were still unused, they were discovered in correlation with documents of an advanced plot which sparked a national domestic terror investigation involving hundreds of subpoenas. There is also the belief that other conspirators are still on the loose with the ability and plans to enact a domestic act of terror.

Changing our terror level is a front page news event, and one which typically interrupts television broadcasts, so it would seem to me that such a discovery with the intent of domestic terror attacks and agents still on the loose might make it into the mainstream media or at least be addressed by those in the government whose job it is to protect us from terrorism.

Why have the media and our adminstration decided that this is a non-story?

I remember CNN reporting this for a couple of days: ...

It could be that because there is still an ongoing investigation to connect the dots, that authorities have requested the media not to beat this to death (actually they do share in mutal co-operation, especially when it is in the interest of national/domestic security) and the media is sitting on it.



I would be willing to bet and take my winnings to the bank on the fact that although the discovery and investigation updates seem to be a non issue with the media, that our authorities are in hot pursuit to connect the dots on this homegrown threat.


Does this actually scare you more than anything we could have ever found in Iraq since this was built within our borders?

It affirms my belief that terror which has been going on in other countries for decades could become a common reality in our own back yard-whether it be caused by international terrorists or homegrown terrorists-if we don't go out and hunt them down. Terror is terror whether it has the capability to terrorize, maim, and kill a few or a few hundred or a few thousand. It also affirms my belief that we have plenty of wackos and radical anti-government people right under our noses that deserve the same intense focus of our local/state authorities as do the foreign terrorists outside our borders.

Is 5 and 10 years long enough for domestic terrorists to spend in jail?

These are the charges thus far for possession, trying to purchase, and aiding and abetting. More charges can be added as the investigation and evidence gathering moves forward. If I am not mistaken, the Judge has to adhere to the law in determining the sentence to fit the crime.

Sure, whatever. I'm sure the comment that since these people espouse white seperatist values, that since all of Texas is a bunch of racist whites, they would be elected to be state senators. Sure, that isn't a broad-reaching generalization of the state of Texas as a bunch of racists. Bet it doesn't even matter that they came from New Hampshire, right? That Klar was in effect a 'traveling salesman' for this sort of stuff that traveled up and down the east coast selling pipe bombs and so forth, he was just finally caught in Texas.

As for your avatar, the appearance of credibility is an important factor to an arguement and since you choose to display images of Bush snorting cocaine or with his face plastered over Hitler, it tends to show your hatred for the man. Hard to take someone seriously who behaves in such a manner, but hey, go at it.

As for your arguements, they're so ridculous that isn't wasn't worth responding to. But I will respond to the question originally posed, and I won't infer that the residents of the state of Texas would support such miscreants.

One it isn't a non-story, at least in Texas, it was on the news and in the papers here for awhile. General reaction is that these are a bunch of nutcases. Just like the sniper in Ohio and other recent events.

As for is it scary, of course it is. But it just shows the goverment is doing it's job in curbing these sorts of people. Who knows what methods were used, but they were caught in the end before they could do any great harm. Not like these types people are just exclusive to the United States either.

As for their trial, the domestic terrorism charge is but one of many, as Desert Resident said. Klar will get far more then 5 - 10 yrs.

Desert Resident if you read my original post which stated those are the sentences from the plea deals period no more time will be added to these 3 people according to the plea deal



As to wanderer this was a generalization question as to why the cable media has made this a non-story which I took the question idea directly from the sites I provided which one is from Texas.

I don't understand the reference to the "administration". It's not their job to decide what a "story" is or isn't. They didn't talk about this one apparently because, as the article you cited states......



They don't want to let the ones that are on the loose know they are aware of them. Seems like a reasonable and responsbile thing to me for them to keep it a secret. Under the previous adminstration we didn't find out about this sort of thing until stuff like Ruby Ridge, Waco and Oklahoma City happened. At least this time, nobody was killed. Who has a problem with that?

Second question.....

Doesn't scare me more or less. We have known about domestic terrorism here for some time and we've seen foreign terrorism in operation here in the US as well as elsewhere, including Iraq. It's a dangerous world, and we are doing what we can I think. This was a win, no question about it.

Third question......

Bad question, too general. For these specific terrorists, or in general? McVeigh got death, Terry Nichols got life and he's still facing a possible death penalty. They were domestic terrorists. I don't know what the circumstances of these particular people are, how involved, how much cooperation they are giving to finding others. If they can help to prevent something like OKC, then yes, I'd trade 10 years to save the lives of 168 people.

For those who want to try to turn this into some sort of a political issue, I would strongly suggest that under the previous administration, we found these sorts of people after they killed innocent people. This time, we got them before they were able to do that. Seems to me like a solid win for the Bush administration. Keep up the good work!

Aquilla if you read the threads that I had offered for further follow up it says they are not cooperating. When it comes to something like this I would imagine the adminstration yelling it from the top of the White House, because if we go by your logic why did we change to Yellow terror threat level like the adminstration said to let people know of the potenial threat as well as to deter potential threats since we don't have any exact intel. If they did not change the threat level then the potential threats might not know that our intelligence agencies were on to them.

If the adminstration was trying to hide this then they did a bad job when it comes to the Texas media finding out about it, and then me being able to enlight all of you because I heard it discussed on C-Span a couple of days ago.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/terror/tyler-terror.htm

Sorry if I misunderstood Cadman. In my response to their sentencing, I was responding to the fact that so far the three were not talking and therefore not taking advantage of the plea deal...thus further charges could be added increasing their current sentence.



IMO, there is a network and a master plan that hasn't surfaced because part of the network was discovered and the plans were interrupted. The fact that the three haven't accepted a plea deal almost is a lead balloon hint that either they are afraid to talk, refuse to help the government they detest, or they don't want to sabotage the network's agenda which sounds like it may be quite a fortunate catch if the authorities can connect the dots that leads to the top dogs.

Which why I think if they involved the public like they do when the threat alert changes so that the citizens knows what possibly to look for like suspicious people scoping areas could bring up red flags, but with the little domestic coverage this gets when something goes down people that might have been in a position to notice suspicious people might not be looking. Especially since this is domestic terrorist instead of what sadly to say people only looking for the foreign terrorist with arabic characteristics.

As I have already mentioned in a PM to wanderer, my reference to Krar and company having chosen to live in Texas was meant to ironically imply that (as with those who support the death penalty, etc.) they should automatically be presumed to be "patriots". I was trying to suggest that those whose policies, including their choice of state, were in line with those of the powers-that-be were less likely to be classified as terrorists.

My (now public) apologies to wanderer - and to anyone else who similarly misunderstood my intent. I would never make "white supremacist" generalizations about the state which has given us Anne Richards, Jim Hightower, Molly Ivins, Michael Lind, and a very hot theatre director with whom I had a two-year affair.

And that's the last time I will attempt untoward irony in a posting here.


Well, okay, maybe not the last time...

One As for the media I dunno. You would think they would hammer this. Especially since most of them dislike Bush.
The Administration. Basically because we are now only really resuming life as normal. To add a great scare on top of everything would be catastophic. Especially if they are confident they can stop it. I am sure there are also reasons related to an oncoming election. Any political candidate regardless of party would do the same. I however think that this is being covered heavily. Lots of actual investigation going on by the FBI and several organizations. People like this are usually stupid, sneaky as all hell and can do great damage if undetected, but once discovered easy to track down and dismantle.

Does it scare me more than anything in Iraq. I was never worried about Iraq. I never found them to be a threat. Does it scare me. Of course. When the Oklahoma bombing happened I was a traveling. I was on my way through Tennessee at the time and as soon as I heard I knew it was domestic. Up until 9/11 no terrorist organization would ever think of harming American children. Maybe a strange thing to believe but I think they believed that as long as they kept it to Soldiers and the occasional businessman or tourist we would never really go after them all that hard. They could run to their hidey holes and we would not cross borders and follow. I mean c'mon Reagan did NOTHING about Beruit. What was the line said by that Japanese Admiral after Pearl Harbor. I fear we have awoken a sleeping tiger. I believe they knew we would tear apart heaven and earth for such people. No place would be safe. And there would be complete backing for it here in this country. So they were always careful to limit their attacks.
Maybe I'm out on a limb here but I think that was the case pre 9/11.
but I don't think ours have that fear. They know they can plead insanity and possibly only have to do time.
Same as any loser inbred ignorant coward fanatic that you can find elsewhere in the world we have plenty who believe it their right to harm any who disagree with them and that any method to acheive their goals is permissible and not even cause for any regret. casualties of war sacrificed to renew the tree of liberty or whatever crap quote these scum whip out to justify their inferiority complex derived pshycotic homicidal urges.


what is scary is they can be our neighbors. or my kid could be in their range.


People like this deserve to be walled up in a pit and left to rot.

Well, the administration wasn't "yelling anything" from the top of the White House and why should they? They made three arrests back in May and as a result of those arrests determined that subsequent investigation was required. So, I wonder what the purpose of your first question in this thread really was......

Why have the media and our adminstration decided that this is a non-story?


Yet, the media knew about it, at least the Texas media knew about it and reported it. That information is in the articles you cite. So, there obviously was no cover-up on the part of the Bush administration. What are you implying with this question for debate? That the news media is only going to report specifically what Ashcroft says in a press conference? I repeat again, it's not up to the White House to determine what a story and a non-story is. And, they didn't.



It seems to me that in these times, people who pay attention to suspicious activities aren't going to worry too much about who is conducting those activities. Those who are informed and concerned are going to report them whether or not "arabs" are involved. That was the precise claim made in the article you cited.

It is somewhat ironic that people claiming that the US Justice Department isn't looking hard enough at domestic terrorist groups would use the capture and conviction of three domestic terrorists as "proof"... Actually, that's not ironic, that's flat goofy.

I agree with you Cadman...the best the general public can do is always-regardless of the terror alert level- be on the alert for anything that looks, sounds, or smells suspicious and report it.

The more I think about this, the more I think the reasons for the sparse amount of media attention can be: there is no "new" news about it, the authorities are keeping it under wraps because they don't want to tip off the network to their activities; and while this seems like a priority issue to us in the general public, it is one of thousands of tips or leads the authorities are following up on.

IMO...regardless of the lack of media coverage, the authorities remain in hot pursuit.

Wow, that is scary. This story should of been reported to the fullest extent. If one of these domestic terrorists wanted to 'retire', he could sell em on the black market. Hell, maybe to someone from Al Qaeda.

Maybe they didn't want to create a panic. But If you ask me, I would of wanted to know, so I could become more aware of domestic terrorists. Domestic terrorists, by the way, need at least 20 years in maximum security lockup. And when they get out, hard core survailance on em till they die.

What my question would be is: Exactly how many and what form of WMD's would be considered satisfactory to the majority of people screaming "Where are the WMD's?"

In Texas?

Perhaps I'm missing something in your question.