• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Bark louder, little dog.

They think we are photo bombing their nice little lives.

Proof that we need a blogger ethics panel.

Everyone is in a bubble, but some bubbles model reality far better than others!

In my day, never was longer.

Republican obstruction dressed up as bipartisanship. Again.

Sadly, there is no cure for stupid.

Let’s finish the job.

I didn’t have alien invasion on my 2023 BINGO card.

Ah, the different things are different argument.

A snarling mass of vitriolic jackals

That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.

Never entrust democracy to any process that requires republicans to act in good faith.

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

Stop using mental illness to avoid talking about armed white supremacy.

The GOP couldn’t organize an orgy in a whorehouse with a fist full of 50s.

“woke” is the new caravan.

Let me eat cake. The rest of you could stand to lose some weight, frankly.

I conferred with the team and they all agree – still not tired of winning!

It’s the corruption, stupid.

Make the republican party small enough to drown in a bathtub.

Not so fun when the rabbit gets the gun, is it?

So many bastards, so little time.

You come for women, you’re gonna get your ass kicked.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable VA House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / War on Terror / War on Terror aka GSAVE® / London Terror Arrests

London Terror Arrests

by Tim F|  August 10, 200611:21 am| 287 Comments

This post is in: War on Terror aka GSAVE®

FacebookTweetEmail

I don’t know anything more than today’s news, so for now all I can give you is links to the latest:

British Police Thwart Aircraft Bomb Plot
How terrorists could have made a ‘liquid bomb’ (I’m sure that Chertoff appreciates that)
Foiled plane bomb plot suggestive of Qaeda-Chertoff

That last part confuses me. ‘Suggestive’ of al Qaeda? If the British police have suspects in custody then they should know whether there is some Qaeda connection. Strange.

What do you know? If anybody is traveling right now (with WiFi, obviously), what are things like? Discuss.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Shoe Drops
Next Post: Kevin’s Law »

Reader Interactions

287Comments

  1. 1.

    DougJ

    August 10, 2006 at 11:36 am

    The Lieberman campaign is saying that the people who were arrested all worked for the Lamont campaign.

  2. 2.

    Pb

    August 10, 2006 at 11:39 am

    The suspects are apparently Pakistani British nationals. What I question is first, whether the ridiculous rhetorical attacks and 9/11 fear-mongering by the Bush administration yesterday were done with foreknowledge of this bust today. Talk about ratcheting up the fear level–the coverage of this foiled suspected plot is off the friggin’ charts! Karl Rove told us he was going to keep playing that 9/11 card, but boy was he not kidding.

  3. 3.

    DougJ

    August 10, 2006 at 11:52 am

    The suspects are apparently Pakistani British nationals.

    Hmmm….the computer system where I work was hacked by Pakistanis a few years ago. These have gotta be the guys that hacked Joe’s website.

  4. 4.

    Ancient Purple

    August 10, 2006 at 11:52 am

    I just got off the phone with one of our consultants who called to say he is delayed.

    He said the lines at security are long as are the ticket lines as people are checking their baggage more so than usual.

    He also said they are making lots of announcements that no liquids of any kind are allowed in carry-on bags, including cologne, make-up, and toothpaste. A lot of people are angry they are having to throw away a lot of stuff to board their planes.

    Other than that, he said most people are taking this in stride.

  5. 5.

    Nutcutter

    August 10, 2006 at 11:55 am

    I wonder if these new terror threats are related to the Miami gang?

  6. 6.

    DougJ

    August 10, 2006 at 12:01 pm

    I’m talking to a friend who is actually in London right now. He seems surprisingly optimistic about getting back soon.

  7. 7.

    Mr Furious

    August 10, 2006 at 12:04 pm

    Those Euro-pussies, treating terrorism like a law-enforcement issue…

  8. 8.

    DougJ

    August 10, 2006 at 12:06 pm

    If we’d invaded Pakistan, none of this would be happening right now.

  9. 9.

    Mr Furious

    August 10, 2006 at 12:06 pm

    I love how anything above the level of having a cell phone or a watch means “an al queda degree of sophistication”

  10. 10.

    DougJ

    August 10, 2006 at 12:09 pm

    Hate to keep pimping TPM, but Josh is right on again

    These are homegrown Brits apparently trying to blow up planes over the Atlantic. Good thing we’ve got a 150,000 or so troops in Iraq to take the fight to them.

  11. 11.

    neil

    August 10, 2006 at 12:15 pm

    If the British police have suspects in custody then they should know whether there is some Qaeda connection. Strange.

    What, do you think they have ID cards or something? It’s not _supposed_ to be easy to trace a terrorist cell back to higher-ups.

  12. 12.

    Pooh

    August 10, 2006 at 12:17 pm

    Maybe related, maybe not, but this seems both plausible and frightening.

    U.S. intelligence got its first inkling of the plot from the contents of a laptop computer belonging to a Bahraini jihadist captured in Saudi Arabia early in 2003. It contained plans for a gas-dispersal system dubbed “the mubtakkar” (Arabic for inventive). Fearing that al-Qaeda’s engineers had achieved the holy grail of terror R&D — a device to effectively distribute hydrogen-cyanide gas, which is deadly when inhaled — the CIA immediately set about building a prototype based on the captured design, which comprised two separate chambers for sodium cyanide and a stable source of hydrogen, such as hydrochloric acid. A seal between the two could be broken by a remote trigger, producing the gas for dispersal. The prototype confirmed their worst fears: “In the world of terrorist weaponry,” writes Suskind, “this was the equivalent of splitting the atom. Obtain a few widely available chemicals, and you could construct it with a trip to Home Depot — and then kill everyone in the store.”

    As TPM Josh says, good thing we’re fighting them over there…

  13. 13.

    DougJ

    August 10, 2006 at 12:18 pm

    Uh, Neil, I think they can recognize them from that pack of cards they carry around. One of these guys was the Jack of Spades, I hear.

  14. 14.

    DougJ

    August 10, 2006 at 12:20 pm

    Sounds like typical Sully paranoia to me.

  15. 15.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 12:27 pm

    Sounds like an election year.

  16. 16.

    Pooh

    August 10, 2006 at 12:32 pm

    Sounds like typical Sully paranoia to me.

    My first reaction as well. That said, to paraphrase Catch-22, just because our leadership is cynical and manipulative* doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get us.

    * Or, as generously as I can possibly be, woefully misguided as to strategy and completely incompetent as to execution.

  17. 17.

    slickdpdx

    August 10, 2006 at 12:32 pm

    Pooh: Nice insight. I bet you are right. If you are not, you should be. Law enforcement spokespersons should be tightlipped, especially early on before investigation is complete. So, I wouldn’t read too much into “suggestive” as of yet. I’m assuming pb’s comment is supposed to be funny? Sometimes its hard to tell…

  18. 18.

    jcricket

    August 10, 2006 at 12:32 pm

    As TPM Josh says, good thing we’re fighting them over there…

    Right on. Good thing we’re drawing all the terrorists to Iraq and Afghanistan. Or Florida or the UK or Malaysia.

    It’s obvious there is a threat from Islamic terrorists out there. And I’m willing to support extra security, more police, added intelligence capabilities, etc. It’s just obvious that the war in Iraq was unnecessary and unrelated to the WOT, reducing our ability to focus on what really matters. Not to mention that war in Afghanistan (actually part of the WOT) is being poorly prosecuted, risking its aim to actually reduce terrorism.

    What we needed to do instead was build international “bridges” to improve intelligence gathering and police cooperation in places like Spain, UK, France, Malaysia, Indonesia, etc. That’s how we reduce the threat of terrorism.

    That and not propping up dictators in the middle east – but still being willing to deal with the fallout when those countries start electing terrorists/radicals to their government. It’s inevitable, might as well cut to the chase before it gets worse (see Hezbollah)

  19. 19.

    SeesThroughIt

    August 10, 2006 at 12:34 pm

    Have you read The One Percent Doctrine, Pooh? If not, you really should (so should everybody, actually). It’s a pretty amazing book, and it does help those moments when the Bush administration does shit that makes normal say, “What the fuck is he doing?” make sense. Demented, destructive sense, but sense nonetheless.

  20. 20.

    Nutcutter

    August 10, 2006 at 12:45 pm

    Only a few weeks ago, the scary Miami gang was “connected to Al Qaeda” and plotting our destruction.

    Can you name even one of these fiends? What happened to that scary threat? Or most of the Ashcroftian false alarms we have gotten over the years? Or the perpetual Yellow Terror Alert code thing, that never changes?

    Before I take any of this crap at face value, I am going to need to know more.

    All of a sudden in August 2006 we discover that bottles of hair gel are possible explosives?

    WTF? We JUST NOW discovered the danger of liquid explosives? So we JUST NOW will start looking for them?

  21. 21.

    Pooh

    August 10, 2006 at 12:54 pm

    Have you read The One Percent Doctrine, Pooh? If not, you really should (so should everybody, actually). It’s a pretty amazing book, and it does help those moments when the Bush administration does shit that makes normal say, “What the fuck is he doing?” make sense. Demented, destructive sense, but sense nonetheless.

    On the book pile. I’m currently finishing up this one as well as Hayek’s “Constitution of Liberty”

  22. 22.

    Ancient Purple

    August 10, 2006 at 1:12 pm

    All of a sudden in August 2006 we discover that bottles of hair gel are possible explosives?

    WTF? We JUST NOW discovered the danger of liquid explosives? So we JUST NOW will start looking for them?

    Nutcutter,

    You might be interested in reading Larry Johnson’s take on this:

    The last significant, successful plot to bomb a plane was in January 1995, when a group linked to Osama Bin Laden (this group included Ramsi Yousef, mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and Khalid Sheik Muhammed, nephew of OBL) had devised a way to carry on a liquid explosive disguised to look like water. The detonator was a combination of gun cotton (looked like cotton balls), a small light bulb, a nine volt battery, and a Casio data watch. Ramsi Yousef conducted a successful dry run of this device and planted one on board a Philippine Airline flight in December 1994. That bomb killed one man (a Japanese citizen) and almost brought down the plane. The plan was to blow up twelve US jets transiting the Pacific basin. It was disrupted when an informant, Ishtiak Parker, walked into the US Embassy in Pakistan and ratted out Ramsi Yousef.

    11 years ago and, as you say, we are just now discovering the dangers of liquid explosives.

  23. 23.

    neil

    August 10, 2006 at 1:15 pm

    All of a sudden in August 2006 we discover that bottles of hair gel are possible explosives?

    No. From Larry Johnson:

    The last significant, successful plot to bomb a plane was in January 1995, when a group linked to Osama Bin Laden (this group included Ramsi Yousef, mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and Khalid Sheik Muhammed, nephew of OBL) had devised a way to carry on a liquid explosive disguised to look like water. The detonator was a combination of gun cotton (looked like cotton balls), a small light bulb, a nine volt battery, and a Casio data watch. Ramsi Yousef conducted a successful dry run of this device and planted one on board a Philippine Airline flight in December 1994. That bomb killed one man (a Japanese citizen) and almost brought down the plane.

  24. 24.

    Nutcutter

    August 10, 2006 at 1:16 pm

    “This country is safer than it was prior to 9-11,” Bush said from the airport tarmac here where he was appearing at events focused on the economy. “We’ve taken a lot of measures to protect the American people but obviously we’re not completely safe. … It is a mistake to believe there is no threat to the United States of America.”

    The president laid the blame for the would-be attack squarely on al-Qaida-type terrorism.

    I feel so much better now. Just knowing that this asshole is on top of things makes me sleep better at night.

    11 years ago and, as you say, we are just now discovering the dangers of liquid explosives.

    Do these DHS types have any idea on earth what they are doing?

    I gave up trying to figure out how stupid they are. My main concern now is how stupid they think we are.

  25. 25.

    neil

    August 10, 2006 at 1:17 pm

    Dammit. 3 whole minutes.

  26. 26.

    Steve

    August 10, 2006 at 1:18 pm

    Every time intelligence and law enforcement agencies stop another terror plot, the idiots who criticized Kerry for seeing terrorism as a “law enforcement problem” just look stupider and stupider.

  27. 27.

    Punchy

    August 10, 2006 at 1:20 pm

    He also said they are making lots of announcements that no liquids of any kind are allowed in carry-on bags, including cologne, make-up, and toothpaste.

    Toothpaste??? Makeup? Yes, b/c Al Q has a HISTORY of hot chicks in bright pink lipstick blowing up planes…

    Unfuckingbelievable.

  28. 28.

    Ancient Purple

    August 10, 2006 at 1:25 pm

    Dammit. 3 whole minutes.

    bwahahahahah.

  29. 29.

    Ancient Purple

    August 10, 2006 at 1:27 pm

    Toothpaste??? Makeup? Yes, b/c Al Q has a HISTORY of hot chicks in bright pink lipstick blowing up planes…

    We were just talking about that in the break room.

    Is there a point to making the 80-year-old grandma throw her liquid rouge and blue-hair rinse in the trash prior to getting on her flight from Fresno to Albuquerque?

    If our DHS and TSA people can’t do better than that, we are in worse trouble than anyone ever thought.

  30. 30.

    RSA

    August 10, 2006 at 1:34 pm

    Foiled plane bomb plot suggestive of Qaeda-Chertoff

    I just want to know about this new Chertoff branch of al-Qaeda. Sounds scary.

  31. 31.

    Pooh

    August 10, 2006 at 1:35 pm

    We were just talking about that in the break room.

    Is there a point to making the 80-year-old grandma throw her liquid rouge and blue-hair rinse in the trash prior to getting on her flight from Fresno to Albuquerque?

    If our DHS and TSA people can’t do better than that, we are in worse trouble than anyone ever thought.

    I disagree, to an extent. If beyond, say today and tommorow, they can’t do better, well we have problems. But in the absence of any real information other than what we already know, this is potentially the kind of situation where it is better to ask for forgiveness than permission, you know?

    (FWIW, I felt roughly the same way about the NSA thing, I would have had little problem with ‘tap everything’ approach that lasted until about Sept. 20, but “permanent emergencies” are not ok.)

  32. 32.

    Bombadil

    August 10, 2006 at 1:38 pm

    Every time intelligence and law enforcement agencies stop another terror plot, the idiots who criticized Kerry for seeing terrorism as a “law enforcement problem” just look stupider and stupider.

    You mean like this?

    (Extra points if you can guess who’s post I’m linking to.)

  33. 33.

    Bombadil

    August 10, 2006 at 1:41 pm

    Make that “whose”, not “who’s”. I do know better, honest.

  34. 34.

    Punchy

    August 10, 2006 at 1:43 pm

    But in the absence of any real information other than what we already know, this is potentially the kind of situation where it is better to ask for forgiveness than permission, you know?

    The plot was quite specific. It was for planes going TO the US to be blown up in-flight. So, I ask: why are TSA agents, FBI, etc. in US airports freaking out? Why are flights FROM the US to the US being held under such scrutiny? That’s not part of the plot as described by our leaders.

    I’ll tell you why–fear mongering, pure and simple. Put mean-looking military guys where Aunt Bettie and Uncle Charlie can see them…and then remember to vote for Republicans so Mean Military guy doesn’t have to shoot a bunch of terrorists the next time they’re at the airport.

    If you think the Repubs wont use this IMMEDIATELY to smear the Dems…well…you haven’t been listening to talk radio today…

  35. 35.

    John S.

    August 10, 2006 at 1:45 pm

    (Extra points if you can guess who’s post I’m linking to.)

    I’m going to go with Darrell.

    His compendium of stupid statements is legendary.

  36. 36.

    Pb

    August 10, 2006 at 1:50 pm

    slickdpdx,

    Nice try at trolling, but no cookie for you–if you had been paying attention, then you should know what I’m talking about.

  37. 37.

    Bombadil

    August 10, 2006 at 1:51 pm

    I’m going to go with Darrell.

    His compendium of stupid statements is legendary.

    Yup. That’s why it took only a few minutes to find.

  38. 38.

    DougJ

    August 10, 2006 at 1:56 pm

    This is proof that the strategy in Iraq is working. We’ve flushed the terrorists out of Iraq into Britain, where they can be caught by the police.

    I may have to post that at JustOneMintute if they let me in.

  39. 39.

    Pooh

    August 10, 2006 at 1:57 pm

    The plot was quite specific. It was for planes going TO the US to be blown up in-flight. So, I ask: why are TSA agents, FBI, etc. in US airports freaking out? Why are flights FROM the US to the US being held under such scrutiny? That’s not part of the plot as described by our leaders.

    Sometimes “don’t know” means don’t know. On balance, are they overreacting? Probably, but erring on the side of caution is usually best. (Though not to One Percent Doctrine degree, or anywhere close to that)

  40. 40.

    Steve

    August 10, 2006 at 1:57 pm

    I disagree, to an extent. If beyond, say today and tommorow, they can’t do better, well we have problems. But in the absence of any real information other than what we already know, this is potentially the kind of situation where it is better to ask for forgiveness than permission, you know?

    I’m down with this, and frankly, I don’t think most people have a problem with a little extra hassle in an emergency situation. It’s when it’s been 5 years since 9/11 and they still can’t think of anything better than confiscating your nail clippers that you start to wonder about these guys.

    We know from experience that these initial news reports often get things wrong. Generally, it’s in the direction of overhyping the threat, but more fundamentally, details simply have a way of being wrong. If they know definitively that only UK->US flights are at risk, of course they shouldn’t impose additional restrictions on the US side, but if there’s any doubt I’d rather they err on the side of caution. I’d rather send too much drinking water to New Orleans than too little.

  41. 41.

    Punchy

    August 10, 2006 at 2:07 pm

    Probably, but erring on the side of caution is usually best.

    Fine. But they’re taking makeup from women and deoderant sticks from everyone. Ridiculous. Honestly, I could probably make a dirty bomb out of a bowel movement, so whats the next step? Ex-Lax each passenger?

  42. 42.

    ThymeZone

    August 10, 2006 at 2:11 pm

    Senator Joseph I. Lieberman seized on the terror arrests in Britain today to attack his Democratic rival, Ned Lamont, saying that Mr. Lamont’s goals for ending the war in Iraq would constitute a “victory” for the extremists who are accused of plotting to blow up airliners traveling between Britain and the United States.

    Also in the Guide The Race for the U.S. House Governors’ Races “If we just pick up like Ned Lamont wants us to do, get out by a date certain, it will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England,” Mr. Lieberman said at a campaign event at lunchtime in Waterbury, Conn. “It will strengthen them and they will strike again.”

    NYT.

    You just cannot make this stuff up. Spoofers can’t invent this shit. Lieberman, and the Republicans, are the “Real Deal.”

    See, a terrorist can blow up a plane. But that doesn’t destroy America.

    But the politics of blaming a Senatorial candidate who just won a primary, and by proxy, blaming the people who voted for him, for terrorist attacks ….. that can destroy America.

    I can stay off a plane. But how do I avoid these lying shitheads?

  43. 43.

    Pooh

    August 10, 2006 at 2:13 pm

    Fine. But they’re taking makeup from women and deoderant sticks from everyone. Ridiculous. Honestly, I could probably make a dirty bomb out of a bowel movement, so whats the next step? Ex-Lax each passenger?

    Look, it’s a balancing act between security and convenience. Yes, it’s annoying to have to dump out your deoderant, and at a certain point it becomes both silly and counterproductive (as in, manpower could be better spent doing useful things, but that assumes you have information as to what would or would not be useful), but a little annoyance isn’t that bad, as far as such things go.

  44. 44.

    ThymeZone

    August 10, 2006 at 2:13 pm

    Honestly, I could probably make a dirty bomb out of a bowel movement

    Some of us blog during lunch.

    Fine. My bowel movement beats your bowel movement.

  45. 45.

    ThymeZone

    August 10, 2006 at 2:18 pm

    The thread has taken on a certain fecal quality now.

  46. 46.

    Pb

    August 10, 2006 at 2:21 pm

    ThymeZone,

    It’s official, Joe is the GOP candidate now.

    Senator Joseph I. Lieberman seized on the terror arrests in Britain today to attack his Democratic rival, Ned Lamont, saying that Mr. Lamont’s goals for ending the war in Iraq would constitute a “victory” for the extremists who are accused of plotting to blow up airliners traveling between Britain and the United States.

    He’s parroting the very self-same despicable Republican talking points that I’ve been talking about. Fuck him for letting Osama bin Laden dictate his national security strategy too, the cowardly, fear-mongering little prick.

  47. 47.

    ThymeZone

    August 10, 2006 at 2:22 pm

    Why would Karl Rove offer help to Lieberman?

    Lieberman seems to have Rovian politics down pat, without any further help.

    If I were Lamont, I’d walk right up the microphones today and ask Joe to stop blaming Americans for terrorism.

  48. 48.

    Punchy

    August 10, 2006 at 2:23 pm

    a

    nd at a certain point it becomes both silly and counterproductive

    That’s my whole point. We’re already at that point. It’s both silly and counterproductive to be asking women to throw out make-up. It’s silly and insane to ask passengers to throw out water bottles that clearly haven’t broken the seal.

    This plot was for British “agents” to fly planes FROM GB to other locales here in the US. There’s absolutely NO BASIS for the US airports’ response.

    Analogy–if a child is kidnapped and killed 1500 miles away at a playground, should you ban your child from all playgrounds? Are you “just being safe”, or is that way overkill and silly? Hell, you could ban your kid from ever leaving the house, “just to be safe”, but is that overboard?

    At what point are US officials being silly just to instill fear?

  49. 49.

    ThymeZone

    August 10, 2006 at 2:24 pm

    Pb, word. In fact, Crack-Smokin Joe is already parroting the horseshit that Mehlman was spweing all day yesterday.

    Just about word for word.

    Mehlman and Lieberman. What a pair to draw to.

  50. 50.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 2:26 pm

    I may have to post that at JustOneMintute if they let me in.

    Can I use that at QandO? Apparently the “Libertarians” over there think the GWOT is the bestest thing evar and GWB is the bestest president evar.

  51. 51.

    RSA

    August 10, 2006 at 2:28 pm

    Look, it’s a balancing act between security and convenience.

    The problem is that it’s a secret balancing act, sometimes fair, sometimes with the Bush administration putting its thumb on the scales for political reasons. And if you disagree with the implementation (e.g., saying, “This is totally stupid, my having to take off my shoes and dump out my toothpaste,”) you’re under suspicion for disagreeing with the goals (e.g., “What, now you’re on the side of the terrorists?”)

  52. 52.

    ThymeZone

    August 10, 2006 at 2:31 pm

    At what point are US officials being silly just to instill fear?

    Bush and his cronies certainly would. And have.

    But when it comes to DHS and TSA, I start with complete incompetance as the most likely explanation.

    When TSA goes all “No-Shampoo” on us, I see it as nothing but pure ass-covering on their part.

    Feelgood security measures that accomplish nothing. If Shampoo was the threat, why the FUCK didn’t we ban it years ago?

  53. 53.

    Mr Furious

    August 10, 2006 at 2:45 pm

    Who’s this new ThymeZone guy? Good stuff.

    [clicks link]

    Oh. Hi.

  54. 54.

    Punchy

    August 10, 2006 at 2:52 pm

    When TSA goes all “No-Shampoo” on us, I see it as nothing but pure ass-covering on their part.

    If I’m going to die from a shampoo bottle, at least I’ll go out smelling like peaches and cream…

    I’m curious about meds. Are people forced to chuck their balms, creams, and prescription lotions? If not, why? Can’t terra-ists make a mean London Screamer from some lookalike gelatin and nitroglycerin?

  55. 55.

    Pooh

    August 10, 2006 at 2:55 pm

    The problem is that it’s a secret balancing act, sometimes fair, sometimes with the Bush administration putting its thumb on the scales for political reasons. And if you disagree with the implementation (e.g., saying, “This is totally stupid, my having to take off my shoes and dump out my toothpaste,”) you’re under suspicion for disagreeing with the goals (e.g., “What, now you’re on the side of the terrorists?”)

    I don’t disagree with a word of this. But let’s not lump silly stuff like 15 minutes longer in the security line with rendition to Gitmo without trial. Our response to everything can’t be “fucking Bush,” especially in a situation where the more likely culprit is some TSA flunking playing CYA.

  56. 56.

    jaime

    August 10, 2006 at 2:57 pm

    Screw bombs…I, like Debbie Schlussel, am worried about terrorists getting the motherfucking snakes on the motherfucking planes

  57. 57.

    Pooh

    August 10, 2006 at 3:01 pm

    That should read:

    Our response to everything can’t be “fucking Bush,”

    Our responses to many things certainly can be…

  58. 58.

    LITBMueller

    August 10, 2006 at 3:07 pm

    why are TSA agents, FBI, etc. in US airports freaking out?

    Worse yet, why in the great blue fuck are Governors calling in the National Guard to patrol airports? Talk about a wild overreaction!!!

    Just another example of the increasing acceptance of the militarization of our society.

    FUBAR.

    Oh, and I’m really getting sick of “Islamofascist” – Bush used that term today. Would someone (Darrell around?) please explain to me how a political system that has to do with centralized government and corporatism can ever be associated with religious zealotry???

  59. 59.

    Pooh

    August 10, 2006 at 3:08 pm

    Jaime sez:

    I, like Debbie Schlussel, am worried about terrorists getting the motherfucking snakes on the motherfucking planes

    After worrying herself into a tizzy that SOaP will inspire copycat terrorism, Lil Deb, er, whines:

    A couple of left-wing websites made fun of me over this.

    Why would they possibly do that?

    Just to ask, Debbie, are our ships in the Hormuz Straight endangered by sharks with frickin laser beams on their heads?

  60. 60.

    Andrew

    August 10, 2006 at 3:08 pm

    How fun and crafty would it be if terrorists actually got snakes on a plane?

  61. 61.

    jaime

    August 10, 2006 at 3:12 pm

    how a political system that has to do with centralized government and corporatism can ever be associated with religious zealotry???

    It doesn’t. It’s a play to compare the GSAVE to WWII. Islamic leaders to Hitler. Bush to Truman/Roosevelt/Churchill. It’s a rightwing Frank Luntz-ism. If he didn’t create the term, he should have. It’s almost as obnoxious and inane as “Democrat Party” and “Homicide Bomber”.

  62. 62.

    slickdpdx

    August 10, 2006 at 3:13 pm

    pb: calling me a troll is a joke, your paranoia and belligerence undermine the few good points you’ve ever made!

    Those quoting Larry Johnson: so should we have banned hair gel/liquids long ago? or is it ridiculous to do so now?

  63. 63.

    jaime

    August 10, 2006 at 3:14 pm

    endangered by sharks with frickin laser beams on their heads?

    I snarked that quote on her blog. I’m sure her ALL CAPS response would be to call me a terrorist.

  64. 64.

    Ancient Purple

    August 10, 2006 at 3:15 pm

    I’m curious about meds. Are people forced to chuck their balms, creams, and prescription lotions? If not, why? Can’t terra-ists make a mean London Screamer from some lookalike gelatin and nitroglycerin?

    Here’s what DHS and the FAA state on their websites:

    NO LIQUIDS OR GELS OF ANY KIND WILL BE PERMITTED IN CARRY-ON BAGGAGE. ITEMS MUST BE IN CHECKED BAGGAGE. This includes all beverages, shampoo, suntan lotion, creams, tooth paste, hair gel, and other items of similar consistency. Exception: Baby formula, breast milk, or juice if a baby or small child is traveling; prescription medicine with a name that matches the passenger’s ticket; and insulin and essential other non-prescription medicines.

    I still don’t understand the shampoo and sun tan lotion issue. Any chemists out there that can tell us why shampoo is a potential element in causing an explosion?

    Also, I don’t understand this restriction:

    Beverages purchased in the sterile area must be consumed before boarding because they will not be permitted onboard the aircraft.

    Um. Okay. So, if I buy a plastic cup of Coke at the little stand right next to the gate as I am in line to get on the plane, I have to drink it up first. But then, 10 minutes later I can get a plastic cup of Coke on the plane?

    If I have passed through security and screening why would purchasing a cup of Coke at the stand next to the gate be a security threat?

    If it is because the workers there might be a security risk, why are they in the “sterile” area?

  65. 65.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 3:17 pm

    Those quoting Larry Johnson: so should we have banned hair gel/liquids long ago? or is it ridiculous to do so now?

    That depends on if you want to give into the goals of terrorism.

  66. 66.

    Steve

    August 10, 2006 at 3:20 pm

    I think the point is that nobody knows what’s in your shampoo bottle, not that shampoo itself is dangerous.

  67. 67.

    Nutcutter

    August 10, 2006 at 3:24 pm

    not that shampoo itself is dangerous.

    Proving yet again that no point is too obvious to be missed on the Internets.

    “No shampoo” doesn’t literally mean no hair surfactants.

    It sorta kinda means “no containers that might be easily taken to be surfactant stores, but may in fact be devices for concealing materials that are not just surfactants but are in fact weapons.”

    I’ll submit the full brief before court tomorrow.

    { gags }

  68. 68.

    Ancient Purple

    August 10, 2006 at 3:26 pm

    Those quoting Larry Johnson: so should we have banned hair gel/liquids long ago? or is it ridiculous to do so now?

    How strange that you are concerned about people quoting Larry Johnson, and yet not a word from you on the bizarre actions of our government that bans liquids and hair gel 11 years after they were used in a bombing plot.

  69. 69.

    LITBMueller

    August 10, 2006 at 3:27 pm

    I was thinking of all those folks dumping out personal hygiene products, and I thought to myself, “This seems…familiar…” Then, a movie came to mind:

    BATMAN: The police have got it wrong. They’re looking for one product. It’s much bigger than that. The Joker’s tainted hundreds of basic chemicals at the source.

    VICKI: But… then whole shipments of every product would be poisoned? We’d all be dead.

    BATMAN: No. Each product only contains one component. The poison only works when they’re mixed. Hair spray won’t do it alone. But…hair spray and perfume and lipstick will be toxic and — untraceable.

    I had NO IDEA Homeland Security were such Tim Burton fans!!!!

  70. 70.

    Andrew

    August 10, 2006 at 3:27 pm

    Wait, has DHS investigated the possible uses of diet coke and mentos by terrorists?

  71. 71.

    Nutcutter

    August 10, 2006 at 3:29 pm

    If it is because the workers there might be a security risk, why are they in the “sterile” area?

    It’s really hard to look closely at the things TSA does and arrive at the conclusion that they are making you safer.

    Later, maybe. Tireder. Madder. But safer?

  72. 72.

    Pooh

    August 10, 2006 at 3:32 pm

    Wait, has DHS investigated the possible uses of diet coke and mentos by terrorists?

    Honest to god, this morning my boss asked me if that’s what they were caught with. I think he was joking.

  73. 73.

    srv

    August 10, 2006 at 3:33 pm

    Those quoting Larry Johnson: so should we have banned hair gel/liquids long ago? or is it ridiculous to do so now?

    Just like not being given the details of the Bojinka Plot made us all safer on 9/11, finally finding them out ex post facto has made us safer today.

    The more secrets there are, the safer we are. And it is treason to suggest otherwise.

  74. 74.

    Steve

    August 10, 2006 at 3:35 pm

    I’ll submit the full brief before court tomorrow.

    { gags }

    Why do you have to be an ass to me, when all I did was explain to someone what you meant?

  75. 75.

    Nutcutter

    August 10, 2006 at 3:38 pm

    Why do you have to be an ass to me, when all I did was explain to someone what you meant?

    I’m not giving that information away, Steve.

    Please send for my informative booklet, “Why I Am So Mean To You”, just $19.95 plus shipping.

  76. 76.

    srv

    August 10, 2006 at 3:38 pm

    Prediction: Jihadi Boobs

    Surgically implanted liquid explosives…

  77. 77.

    Ancient Purple

    August 10, 2006 at 3:39 pm

    I think the point is that nobody knows what’s in your shampoo bottle, not that shampoo itself is dangerous.

    Except that the ban says that includes “other items of similar consistency.” Two points here:

    1) You can buy shampoo in pre-sealed foil packets (with the notch near the top that so you can rip it open). I travel with those because they are convenient, disposable, and cost pennies at my local drugstore.

    2) I can think of several things that I can take on a plane right now that could hold liquids (pen casings, etc.).

    Not trying to be pointed here. I really am just trying to understand.

  78. 78.

    DougJ

    August 10, 2006 at 3:41 pm

    If you use shampoo, you’re objectively pro-terrorist.

  79. 79.

    jaime

    August 10, 2006 at 3:42 pm

    Prediction: Jihadi Boobs

    Surgically implanted liquid explosives

    Now THAT is something Debbie Schlussel should investigate.

  80. 80.

    srv

    August 10, 2006 at 3:43 pm

    Not trying to be pointed here. I really am just trying to understand.

    You seek to know that which is unknowable. God isn’t dead. Reason is.

  81. 81.

    Punchy

    August 10, 2006 at 3:44 pm

    Consider what it’s like today for a Middle Eastern-looking guy who needs to spend more than 5 minutes in the lavoratory. Not to gross anyone out, but can you imagine the stares, the tenseness, the stare-downs this guy gets after he emerges from the lavoratory after 5 minutes, God forbid his cell phone or whatever is bulging out his front pocket and/or he’s carrying a tube of medication in his hands…….

  82. 82.

    Ancient Purple

    August 10, 2006 at 3:45 pm

    Wait, has DHS investigated the possible uses of diet coke and mentos by terrorists?

    No, no, no, no, NO!

    Pop Rocks and 7-Up are the real killers. Mixed in combination, they have been known to take out uvulas with reckless abandon.

  83. 83.

    RSA

    August 10, 2006 at 3:50 pm

    Middle Eastern-looking guy who. . .emerges from the lavoratory after 5 minutes, God forbid his cell phone or whatever is bulging out his front pocket and/or he’s carrying a tube of medication in his hands.

    I don’t care what the guy looks like, but if he comes out of the john with his whatever bulging out and a tube of ointment in his hand, I’m not going to want him sitting next to me on a plane.

  84. 84.

    Andrew

    August 10, 2006 at 3:57 pm

    OMG, Ancient Purple, what if the terrorists use a coke and mentos primary to ignite the pop rocks and 7-up secondary stage in a Teller-Ulam design? Such a thermopoprockulartos weapon could have devastating effects, stretching from three to FIVE rows of coach seating.

  85. 85.

    neil

    August 10, 2006 at 4:09 pm

    I can’t wait for someone to get caught trying to blow up a plane with a bomb hidden in their butt.

    Let’s see how far they’re really willing to take this. If we don’t all have cavity searches before boarding, the terrorists win.

  86. 86.

    SeesThroughIt

    August 10, 2006 at 4:10 pm

    Prediction: Jihadi Boobs

    Surgically implanted liquid explosives…

    Osama bin Pamela Anderson?

  87. 87.

    Pb

    August 10, 2006 at 4:19 pm

    slickdpdx,

    calling me a troll is a joke

    If you don’t want to be called a troll, then don’t troll. Calling you a troll isn’t a joke, *you’re* a joke. Now respond to what I actually said, or shut the fuck up.

    your paranoia and belligerence undermine the few good points you’ve ever made!

    Aha, *that’s* what undermines them! And here I thought you might have an actual *counter-argument* that would undermine them. Yawn. Wake me up when you have one. Troll.

  88. 88.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 4:22 pm

    This is really a quite rational response, proportional to the threat. 20-odd guys in Britain wanted to execute a decades old plot, so obviously we need to ban all liquids on flights in the US and dispatch the National Guard to airports.

    Strong. Smart.

  89. 89.

    slickdpdx

    August 10, 2006 at 4:28 pm

    Ancient Purple: I don’t have a Larry Johnson agenda and didn’t advance one. I want to know which you all advocate. Should liquids have been banned long ago or are they ridiculous to ban now? If only snide comments kept the wolves at bay, the BJ comments crew would have our backs.

  90. 90.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 4:29 pm

    Should liquids have been banned long ago

    No.

    are they ridiculous to ban now?

    Yes.

    hth

  91. 91.

    Nutcutter

    August 10, 2006 at 4:50 pm

    So, how long before this big “threat” turns out to be more bullshit like the Miami “Al Qaeda” guys?

    Or is this a real threat with real explosives ready to board real planes? And if it is, when is the public stoning of the TSA officials who have been ignoring the Head and Shoulders — er, shampoo — threat all these years?

  92. 92.

    RSA

    August 10, 2006 at 4:54 pm

    Here’s what I find most bothersome about the current situation. The Brits break up a terrorist plot. How far advanced it is, we don’t yet know; when our government found out about it, we don’t yet (and may never) know. What we do see is that the response in the U.S. comes after the news is made public: the TSA introduces new security measures, destined to be put in the same category as “buy duct tape” advice; millions of aggregate hours are lost; flights are canceled; etc. If this is our response to a failed plot that already seems to be pretty much over, what’s going to happen if the terrorists actually do succeed with something horrible? Recent events don’t inspire confidence.

  93. 93.

    Nutcutter

    August 10, 2006 at 5:00 pm

    Love this blurb from Hunter at DKos:

    the British are a hell of a lot more competent in wrapping potential terrorism up than we seem to be, and that the British have accomplished this via normal law enforcement techniques coupled with apparently excellent human and signals intelligence. It’s also worth noting that at present, foreign involvement with the plot seems at this early stage to be primarily Pakistani in origin — one of those countries that has unambiguous ties to terrorism, as opposed to oh, say… Iraq.

    That seems to be one big difference between U.S. and U.K. efforts in the War on Terror. Despite the obvious political and strategic bungles of the Blair government, the U.K. is beginning to show a history of wrapping up terror plots and arresting those involved, and seems even to have managed to have done so within the context of law.

    The rather less serious and competent

    U.S. response, on the other hand, seems to be to reduced to making sure that from now on, nobody can take bottled water onto airplanes.

    Just knowing that TSA is handling this makes it all seem just warm and soft and safe.

  94. 94.

    Pb

    August 10, 2006 at 5:02 pm

    RSA,

    when our government found out about it, we don’t yet (and may never) know

    Perhaps, but if you’re willing to believe Chertoff on Hardball, he said they found out 10-14 days ago.

  95. 95.

    The Other Steve

    August 10, 2006 at 5:05 pm

    It’s obviously time to invade Great Britain, so we’re fighting the terrorists over there instead of here.

  96. 96.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 5:44 pm

    It’s obviously time to invade Great Britain, so we’re fighting the terrorists over there instead of here.

    Now, that’s obviously a sarcastic overreaction. But isn’t it fair to note that by fomenting a culture of excessive tolerance of Islamic fundamentalism, Britain has, in a sense, abetted its own domestic terrorism? And how long until the British recognize the threat posed by these Islamofascists and take corrective measures to offset the inroads Islamists have made into British society? (That final question could be extended to the other nations of Europe, BTW. Their permissive immigration policies have weakened their fundamental national characters, perhaps beyond the point of no return.)

  97. 97.

    Pooh

    August 10, 2006 at 5:54 pm

    But isn’t it fair to note that by fomenting a culture of excessive tolerance of Islamic fundamentalism

    Objection, assuming facts not in evidence.

  98. 98.

    slickdpdx

    August 10, 2006 at 6:03 pm

    pb: I’d be happy to respond if this

    The suspects are apparently Pakistani British nationals. What I question is first, whether the ridiculous rhetorical attacks and 9/11 fear-mongering by the Bush administration yesterday were done with foreknowledge of this bust today. Talk about ratcheting up the fear level—the coverage of this foiled suspected plot is off the friggin’ charts! Karl Rove told us he was going to keep playing that 9/11 card, but boy was he not kidding.

    was anything but so nutty I thought you were trolling. Additionally, you were asking questions, so I’m not sure why you expected a “counter-argument”.

  99. 99.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 6:05 pm

    I’m sorry but I’m not buying this. How long before this is shown to be a hoax? I heard about this on the radio this morning and immediately thought “bullshit.”

    What I heard was speculation about that some kind of explosive liquid would be hidden in sports drink bottles possibly dyed red to make it look plausible.

    This sounds like the plot by the “terrorists” in Florida — still in the daydream stage. Isn’t Blair (Bush’s poodle) in political trouble?

    “A very close call.” “Just days away.” So there was going to be a trial run in two days? I can’t help wondering if this was another “plot” encouraged by intelligence agents within the group of conspirators. Hasn’t this kind of thing occurred before?

    What was this mysterious explosive liquid anyway? Molotov cocktails? Call me cynical, but I’m not buying it.

  100. 100.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 6:07 pm

    US Patriot, should we just erradicate all the scary Musims, er, Islamofascists? Kill them all, because we’re the good guys and they are not.

  101. 101.

    Paul Wartenberg

    August 10, 2006 at 6:16 pm

    The liquid bombs were going to be based on a sports drink.

    A Sports drink can be combined with other chemicals to make an explosive?!?!

    Gatorade has just become a lethal weapon. May God have mercy on us Gators… :(

  102. 102.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 6:19 pm

    Above all else, BE SCARED!

    If you aren’t terrified, the terrorists have already won.

  103. 103.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 6:19 pm

    Objection, assuming facts not in evidence.

    Overruled. This is a blog, not a courtroom. But if you want supporting evidence, here’s a few tidbits. From a leftist British news source, no less. Enjoy.

  104. 104.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 6:21 pm

    Apparently these conspirators were fans of McGuyver, Paul Wartenberg.

    Bolding commenter names is a trademark of Par Rot.

  105. 105.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 6:25 pm

    US Patriot, should we just erradicate all the scary Musims, er, Islamofascists? Kill them all, because we’re the good guys and they are not.

    Yes, because obviously a society’s only choices are embracing a suicidal overinclusiveness and embracing genocide. How very reality-based of you.

    Look, it may be too late for Britain to repair some of the damage that excessive influxes of radical Islamic elements have caused to their society. But does that make it totally irrational for the British government to adopt a more hardline stance against persons living on sovereign British territory and advocating the overthrow of the established British government, followed by the establishmenbt of a statist religion involving sharia law?

    Does Britain have to embrace that fate, or can they take corrective countermeasures short of cribbing pages from the Third Reich playbook? Do they have your permission to neither kill everyone in sight, nor to passively await the glorious future where homosexuals are stoned in the streets and women are shot in the head for refusing to don burqas?

  106. 106.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 6:26 pm

    Bush said this plot was a “reminder.” Truer words were never spoken. Was it real? Who cares? Apparently what we need is a reminder. Especially right before an election.

  107. 107.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 6:29 pm

    Above all else, BE SCARED!

    If you aren’t terrified, the terrorists have already won.

    Yes, because obviously demonstrating fright at the narrow avoidance of thousands of deaths is hopelessly irrational. The correct response is to sigh, shrug one’s shoulders, concede that everyone has to die of something someday, and wait for an opportunity to surrender to the first authoritarian who happens along.

  108. 108.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 6:29 pm

    How very reality-based of you.

    Uh oh. Darrell has a new handle.

  109. 109.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 6:32 pm

    Uh oh. Darrell has a new handle.

    Uh oh. Perry Como beat me to it.

  110. 110.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 6:35 pm

    Bush said this plot was a “reminder.” Truer words were never spoken. Was it real? Who cares? Apparently what we need is a reminder. Especially right before an election.

    As someone pointed out above, there is always an election going on somewhere in the world. Terrorist attacks, of necessity, coincide with some democratic event or other. Democracy continues to happen, all day every day, somewhere on Planet Earth. Terrorists undoubtedly hope to disrupt this, but for them NOT to have their attacks occur during a democratic event would require scheduling rigors far more onerous than I’m sure most terrorists would be willing to accept.

    If it’s silly for Lieberman to take advantage of the timing of this attack to lambast Lamont, surely it’s at least of equal silliness to accuse Bush of engineering terror plots to occur during elections.

  111. 111.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 6:35 pm

    Yes, because obviously demonstrating fright at the narrow avoidance of thousands of deaths is hopelessly irrational.

    The group was being monitored for months. Whew, close call.

    The correct response is to sigh, shrug one’s shoulders, concede that everyone has to die of something someday, and wait for an opportunity to surrender to the first authoritarian who happens along.

    So you support the Bush administration?

    The correct response is to say, “Good job Scottland Yard”, then get back to work, vacation, whatever-you-were-doing-before the group was arrested. Instead we have governors mobilizing their National Guards and the TSA banning liquids on flights. Brilliant! Long security lines, delayed flights, wall to wall news coverage… I wonder how much this is costing businesses?

    The terrorists don’t even need to attack. Whiny ass titty babies are already pooping their diapers because of a foiled plot overseas.

    Strong. Smart. Waaah.

  112. 112.

    Ancient Purple

    August 10, 2006 at 6:36 pm

    Yes, because obviously demonstrating fright at the narrow avoidance of thousands of deaths is hopelessly irrational.

    That would be fine if it was restricted to fear. However, The Dolt In The White House would have you believe that the only way to reduce that fear is to treat the Constitution as a page of helpful hints.

    Fear? Fine. Giving up liberty for a little protection? Only for cowards.

  113. 113.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 6:38 pm

    If it’s silly for Lieberman to take advantage of the timing of this attack to lambast Lamont

    It is clear that if the US hadn’t invaded Iraq, the Brits would have never uncovered this plot.

    Smart. Strong. Non-sequitur.

  114. 114.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 6:40 pm

    …surely it’s at least of equal silliness to accuse Bush of engineering terror plots to occur during elections.

    Get your red hot strawman righchere!

  115. 115.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 6:40 pm

    Uh oh. Perry Como beat me to it.

    Altough it could be DougJ doing a Darrell impersonation. Hmm….

  116. 116.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 6:41 pm

    Uh oh. Darrell has a new handle.

    Snark over substance, as usual. When you can’t debate or discuss, it’s all you’ve got left.

  117. 117.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 6:44 pm

    US Patriot, you forgot to add “it’s who they are.”

    And “reread this thread to see how unhinged you moonbats really are.”

    And “keep screaming this so voters know how tolerant the reality based community really is.”

    I hope that helps.

  118. 118.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 6:46 pm

    Don’t forget “unserious.”

  119. 119.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 6:48 pm

    The group was being monitored for months. Whew, close call.

    There are varying levels of “monitoring”. Some of the 9/11 hijackers were being “monitored”, for example, in the sense that they were on terror watch lists; but I’d hardly say the monitoring was effective.

    So you support the Bush administration?

    No, not always. I think they need to do a better job of securing our ports and infrastructure, but at least Bush has the moral clarity of vision to recognize a threat and respond to it. That’s far more than I’d expect from the snarkists of the loony wing of the Democratic Party, although far less than I think the American people deserve.

    The correct response is to say, “Good job Scottland Yard”, then get back to work, vacation, whatever-you-were-doing-before the group was arrested. Instead we have governors mobilizing their National Guards and the TSA banning liquids on flights. Brilliant! Long security lines, delayed flights, wall to wall news coverage… I wonder how much this is costing businesses?

    Obviously, America should show no heightened alert when a plot is foiled that comes from a terrorist group with a lengthy history of synchronizing terrorist attacks worldwide. The appropriate response is to follow Kerry’s advice, regard terrorists as a “nuisance,” and go about your daily business.

    The terrorists don’t even need to attack. Whiny ass titty babies are already pooping their diapers because of a foiled plot overseas.

    Yes, again, the appropriate response to threats is to ignore them or surrender to them, not to take rational stock of them or to feel natural emotional responses to them.

  120. 120.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 6:50 pm

    Yes, again, the appropriate response to threats is to ignore them or surrender to them, not to take rational stock of them or to feel natural emotional responses to them.

    Liberal.

  121. 121.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 6:51 pm

    Obviously, America should show no heightened alert when a plot is foiled that comes from a terrorist group with a lengthy history of synchronizing terrorist attacks worldwide.

    And what group would that be?

    The appropriate response is to follow Kerry’s advice, regard terrorists as a “nuisance,” and go about your daily business.

    Yeah, that exactly what sKerry said.

  122. 122.

    Ancient Purple

    August 10, 2006 at 6:55 pm

    Ah, the great moral minds of President Dolt and the people who surround him.

    “Weeks before September 11th, this is going to play big,” said another White House official, who also spoke on condition of not being named, adding that some Democratic candidates won’t “look as appealing” under the circumstances.

    Link.

    Nothing like using terror for political gain.

    How noble.

  123. 123.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 6:57 pm

    That would be fine if it was restricted to fear. However, The Dolt In The White House would have you believe that the only way to reduce that fear is to treat the Constitution as a page of helpful hints.

    I disagree with some of the measures taken by the Bush administration, but does that mean that every time they try to prevent a terrorist attack they have to be hamstrung by legal niceties extraordinarily applied to terrorists (particularly those among them who aren’t American citizens)?

    Fear? Fine. Giving up liberty for a little protection? Only for cowards.

    Yes, but refusing to give up any liberty at all for the slightest bit of protection is only for idiots. (If you disagree, I presume that you’d prefer we deploy Buddhist monks instead of soldiers and marines the next time our nation is attacked. You must also prefer a police department which is completely unarmed, and “advisory” self-penalization for criminal violations in lieu of jail time or the death penalty.)

  124. 124.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 6:57 pm

    I wonder if this could be the much vaunted Darrelltron 2000. Let’s see.

    There are varying levels of “monitoring”. Some of the 9/11 hijackers were being “monitored”, for example, in the sense that they were on terror watch lists; but I’d hardly say the monitoring was effective.

    Actually, let me revise that. British authorities were monitoring the group for a year and they had infiltrated the group. Again, close call…

    No, not always. I think they need to do a better job of securing our ports and infrastructure, but at least Bush has the moral clarity of vision to recognize a threat and respond to it. That’s far more than I’d expect from the snarkists of the loony wing of the Democratic Party, although far less than I think the American people deserve.

    Yes, Bush has the moral clarity to invade Iraq in order to fight British terrorists. Smooth. Smart.

    Obviously, America should show no heightened alert when a plot is foiled that comes from a terrorist group with a lengthy history of synchronizing terrorist attacks worldwide. The appropriate response is to follow Kerry’s advice, regard terrorists as a “nuisance,” and go about your daily business.

    Which terror group would that be? The 20 British citizens they just arrested in Britain? That they had been monitoring for a year and had infiltrated? Rational. Proportional. Strong.

    Yes, again, the appropriate response to threats is to ignore them or surrender to them, not to take rational stock of them or to feel natural emotional responses to them.

    What do Bush supporters wear when they hear about overseas terror plots? Depends.

  125. 125.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 6:57 pm

    It is clear that if the US hadn’t invaded Iraq, the Brits would have never uncovered this plot.

    Smart. Strong. Non-sequitur.

    What has Iraq got to do with anything I just said? Can we please have one discussion at a time?

  126. 126.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 6:59 pm

    Get your red hot strawman righchere!

    Yes, how dare anyone accuse liberals of overreaction or hyperbole! Shame on me!

  127. 127.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:00 pm

    US Patriot, you forgot to add “it’s who they are.”

    ???

  128. 128.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 7:02 pm

    What has Iraq got to do with anything I just said?

    Haven’t you heard? It’s the central front in the GWOT. We are fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here. Or fight them in a flat in London. Or something. Smooth. Strong. Snark.

  129. 129.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:02 pm

    And what group would that be?

    I’ll tell you the initials: A. Q.

    Yeah, that exactly what sKerry said.

    “sKerry.” Good one. I never heard that before.

  130. 130.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:04 pm

    Nothing like using terror for political gain.

    How noble.

    If true, it’s deplorable.

    But what does that have to do with the fact that terrorists are trying to kill Americans? Are you insinuating that Osama Bin Laden is on the White House payroll or something? I’m sure Michael Moore and Oliver Stone would agree with you, but that’s hardly conclusive evidence.

  131. 131.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 7:06 pm

    I’ll tell you the initials: A. Q.

    Albert Queen?
    Alameda Quotes?
    Amber Quince?

    This was such a close call that the plotters didn’t have any explosives. This close!

  132. 132.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 7:06 pm

    Other than Chertoff asserting that this is suggestive of Qaeda what makes you say the responsible terror group has the initials A.Q.? Are they the only ones who hate us for our freedom?

  133. 133.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 7:07 pm

    I’m sure Michael Moore and Oliver Stone would agree with you, but that’s hardly conclusive evidence.

    Strawman! Strawman! Git em while they’re hot!

  134. 134.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:09 pm

    I wonder if this could be the much vaunted Darrelltron 2000. Let’s see.

    Very funny. I don’t suppose it would interest you to know that I disagree with Darrell almost as often as I disagree with the unhinged liberals on this site. It wouldn’t comport with your narrative.

    Actually, let me revise that. British authorities were monitoring the group for a year and they had infiltrated the group. Again, close call…

    And the US had probably infiltrated Al Qaeda before 9/11, but again, that hardly makes the prevention of a terrorist attack 100% certain. These people are dangerous, paranoid, and unstable, and you can never predict with absolute certainty what they’re going to do.

    Yes, Bush has the moral clarity to invade Iraq in order to fight British terrorists. Smooth. Smart.

    In my opinion, the jury is still out on the Iraq war. But even if it was a mistake, better a well-intentioned mistaken decision in time than a correct decision taken 10 years too late.

    Which terror group would that be? The 20 British citizens they just arrested in Britain? That they had been monitoring for a year and had infiltrated? Rational. Proportional. Strong.

    Al Qaeda, probably. I don’t know, I guess they could be an Islamist offshoot of the IRA, but somehow I doubt it.

  135. 135.

    ThymeZone

    August 10, 2006 at 7:15 pm

    Did you hear Bush’s remarks today?

    He sounded drunk.

    Seriously. Listen to the audio, and tell me he wasn’t drunk.

  136. 136.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 7:16 pm

    Very funny. I don’t suppose it would interest you to know that I disagree with Darrell almost as often as I disagree with the unhinged liberals on this site. It wouldn’t comport with your narrative.

    Turing complete!

    And the US had probably infiltrated Al Qaeda before 9/11, but again, that hardly makes the prevention of a terrorist attack 100% certain. These people are dangerous, paranoid, and unstable, and you can never predict with absolute certainty what they’re going to do.

    Sort of. We had informants that knew some of the 9/11 shitheads, but that’s neither here no there. British intelligence knew about this group for a long time. It appears that when these guys started shopping for airline tickets, that’s when they were picked up.

    In my opinion, the jury is still out on the Iraq war. But even if it was a mistake, better a well-intentioned mistaken decision in time than a correct decision taken 10 years too late.

    Color me unimpressed. 2,500 dead American troops; 20,000 wounded; tens of thousand dead Iraqis; $1 trillion down the tubes; Well intentioned, my ass.

    Al Qaeda, probably. I don’t know, I guess they could be an Islamist offshoot of the IRA, but somehow I doubt it.

    You should let Scotland Yard know.

  137. 137.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 7:17 pm

    Did you hear Bush’s remarks today?

    He sounded drunk.

    He’s just sad that he only gets 10 days of vacation this summer.

  138. 138.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 7:20 pm

    In my opinion, the jury is still out on the Iraq war. But even if it was a mistake, better a well-intentioned mistaken decision in time than a correct decision taken 10 years too late.

    Hooray for your opinion! So what the hell do you mean by “10 years too late?” What scary thing would Iraq have done in 10 years? A cover of “Ten Years Gone” by Led Zeppelin?

    But this thread isn’t about Iraq. Can’t we just have one discussion at a time?

  139. 139.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:22 pm

    Albert Queen?
    Alameda Quotes?
    Amber Quince?

    Ha. Ha. How about Airline-Exploding Quarantined-Material-Detonating-Islamists?

    This was such a close call that the plotters didn’t have any explosives. This close!

    You wouldn’t think it was very funny if it had worked. But then, people used to laugh at the idea of hijacking planes with boxcutters, too.

  140. 140.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 7:23 pm

    These people are dangerous, paranoid, and unstable, and you can never predict with absolute certainty what they’re going to do.

    Yes, US Patriot and Darrell are and you can’t. But again, that’s not the subject of this thread.

  141. 141.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 7:25 pm

    Albert Queen?
    Alameda Quotes?
    Amber Quince?

    Ha. Ha. How about Airline-Exploding Quarantined-Material-Detonating-Islamists?

    Ha, ha. Charade you are. But you said the initials were A.Q., not A.E.Q.M.D.I., silly boots.

  142. 142.

    Andrew

    August 10, 2006 at 7:25 pm

    Quick! Deploy DarrellTron9000 to counter the intruder!

  143. 143.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:26 pm

    Did you hear Bush’s remarks today?

    He sounded drunk.

    Do you have a link?

  144. 144.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 7:27 pm

    You wouldn’t think it was very funny if it had worked. But then, people used to laugh at the idea of hijacking planes with boxcutters, too.

    Some still do. Have we seen any of the boxcutters that were used? But nobody could have predicted that terrorists would use planes as missiles. Kamikazes are so 1941.

  145. 145.

    Pooh

    August 10, 2006 at 7:30 pm

    Bush has the moral clarity

    OBJECTION, assuming facts not in evidence. Find me some links THIS TIME. Hinderaker doesn’t count…

  146. 146.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 7:31 pm

    Do you have a link?

    I saw an excerpt earlier so haven’t bothered to watch this. But you can find video here.

    Bush on the British Terror Plot.

  147. 147.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:31 pm

    Turing complete!

    What does this mean?

    Sort of. We had informants that knew some of the 9/11 shitheads, but that’s neither here no there. British intelligence knew about this group for a long time. It appears that when these guys started shopping for airline tickets, that’s when they were picked up.

    You should let Scotland Yard know

    I’m sure they’d be highly amused, if nothing else.

    So it worked. This time. What does that prove?

    Color me unimpressed. 2,500 dead American troops; 20,000 wounded; tens of thousand dead Iraqis; $1 trillion down the tubes; Well intentioned, my ass

    Yes, but if it works, history will absolve Bush for the onus of those horrendous figures. That’s not an approval or a disapproval, merely an observation. How many of you are still burning effigies of George Washington for the losses his army suffered in Brooklyn and at Valley Forge?

  148. 148.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:32 pm

    Hooray for your opinion! So what the hell do you mean by “10 years too late?” What scary thing would Iraq have done in 10 years? A cover of “Ten Years Gone” by Led Zeppelin?

    I won’t get into it:

    But this thread isn’t about Iraq. Can’t we just have one discussion at a time?

  149. 149.

    Richard 23

    August 10, 2006 at 7:34 pm

    Yes, but if it works….

    But it won’t. The ends would justify the means? Lying us into an unnecessary and costly war? How did Vietnam work out anyway? Gulf of Tonkin anyone?

  150. 150.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:36 pm

    Quick! Deploy DarrellTron9000 to counter the intruder!

    That’s a pretty funny image, Andrew.

    Isn’t one Darrell already 9,000 too many, most days?

  151. 151.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 7:36 pm

    What does this mean?

    So coy.

    So it worked. This time. What does that prove?

    That good police work can stop terrorists.

    Yes, but if it works, history will absolve Bush for the onus of those horrendous figures.

    If what works, exactly? If we find the WMDs? Bwahahaha.

    How many of you are still burning effigies of George Washington for the losses his army suffered in Brooklyn and at Valley Forge?

    Awesome. That has got to be the most absurd comparison I’ve seen anyone ever make.

  152. 152.

    tBone

    August 10, 2006 at 7:38 pm

    In my opinion, the jury is still out on the Iraq war. But even if it was a mistake, better a well-intentioned mistaken decision in time than a correct decision taken 10 years too late.

    I’m sorry, I couldn’t read your whole post. The aroma of spoof rising off it made my eyes water too much.

  153. 153.

    Andrew

    August 10, 2006 at 7:39 pm

    Isn’t one Darrell already 9,000 too many, most days?

    That’s a nice Zen koan, in it’s own way.

  154. 154.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:40 pm

    Some still do. Have we seen any of the boxcutters that were used? But nobody could have predicted that terrorists would use planes as missiles. Kamikazes are so 1941.

    Yes. Again, Oliver Stone and Michael Moore among them.

  155. 155.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:41 pm

    OBJECTION, assuming facts not in evidence. Find me some links THIS TIME. Hinderaker doesn’t count…

    I’m sorry, I can’t go into it:

    But this thread isn’t about Iraq. Can’t we just have one discussion at a time?

  156. 156.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:42 pm

    I saw an excerpt earlier so haven’t bothered to watch this. But you can find video here

    Thanks. I’ll watch it once this thread dies down a bit…

  157. 157.

    Ancient Purple

    August 10, 2006 at 7:42 pm

    Yes, but refusing to give up any liberty at all for the slightest bit of protection is only for idiots.

    And with one sentence, US Patriot kicks Benjamin Franklin in the balls and calls him an idiot.

    Congratulations, USP. You win the “Moron of the Month” prize at Balloon-Juice.

  158. 158.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:44 pm

    But it won’t. The ends would justify the means? Lying us into an unnecessary and costly war? How did Vietnam work out anyway? Gulf of Tonkin anyone?

    Well…

    But this thread isn’t about Iraq. Can’t we just have one discussion at a time?

  159. 159.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:49 pm

    That good police work can stop terrorists.

    Sure, sometimes. Other times, not so well. Sometimes the cops nab the robber, sometimes the robber gets away. Now, why are we discussing this again? Are you trying to assert infallible policework on this thread? The same thread where people are saying the whole foiling of the plot was a political stunt?

    If what works, exactly? If we find the WMDs? Bwahahaha.

    Don’t be ridiculous. Obviously, there are no WMDs. Everyone who reads the newspaper has known that as of August 2003 at the latest. But what if we stabilize Iraq and help found a stable democracy? Isn’t that worth something? Are you prepared to write it off as hopelessly quixotic at this point? Are you prepared to face the ramifications of that decision, if it were taken on the national policy level?

    Awesome. That has got to be the most absurd comparison I’ve seen anyone ever make.

    Okay… I’ll try another one.

    How many people are still mad at Grant for losing 10,000 men in 10 minutes in the heart-rending, fruitless, pointless, WWI-esque assault at Cold Harbor?

  160. 160.

    Pb

    August 10, 2006 at 7:51 pm

    slickdpdx,

    Ok, against my better judgement, I’ll give you one last chance to give me a straight answer, or to make a factual argument of any sort whatsoever.

    I’d be happy to respond if this […] was anything but so nutty I thought you were trolling. Additionally, you were asking questions, so I’m not sure why you expected a “counter-argument”.

    What, exactly, do you find “so nutty” about it? I recently saw the same sort of thing mentioned on cable news, by the way–it seems quite plausible to me.

  161. 161.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:53 pm

    I’m sorry, I couldn’t read your whole post. The aroma of spoof rising off it made my eyes water too much.

    Well, you’re the expert scrutator there, aren’t you?

  162. 162.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:54 pm

    That’s a nice Zen koan, in it’s own way.

    Thanks, I guess.

  163. 163.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 7:56 pm

    And with one sentence, US Patriot kicks Benjamin Franklin in the balls and calls him an idiot.

    If he was so infallible, why wasn’t he ever made President by his peers? Why is one remark, taken out of context, touted so fiercely by the civil libertarians of today?

    Congratulations, USP. You win the “Moron of the Month” prize at Balloon-Juice.

    Considering the people bestowing it, I’ll wear it with pride.

  164. 164.

    Andrew

    August 10, 2006 at 7:57 pm

    I’d be more impressed by a decent spoof in limerick form or iambic pentameter though. You gotta step it up for this crowd.

  165. 165.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 8:03 pm

    I’d be more impressed by a decent spoof in limerick form or iambic pentameter though. You gotta step it up for this crowd.

    I’m not here to amuse a jaded assortment of left-wing snarkists. I’m here to discuss the issues. I consider myself a reasonable man. Yes, I am somewhat right of center, but hardly to the extent of Darrell.

    If any of this renders my comments unwelcome, I’ll humbly take my leave of you all. Then you can get back to the chest-thumping-over-Lamont contest.

  166. 166.

    Pb

    August 10, 2006 at 8:30 pm

    US Patriot,

    I’m not here to amuse a jaded assortment of left-wing snarkists.

    That’s good, because if you were, you’d be doing a piss-poor job.

    I’m here to discuss the issues.

    That’s bad, because you’re doing a piss-poor job.

    I consider myself a reasonable man.

    Who doesn’t. David Horowitz probably considers himself a reasonable man. Maybe David Duke, too.

    Yes, I am somewhat right of center, but hardly to the extent of Darrell.

    Well I guess you’d know.

    If any of this renders my comments unwelcome, I’ll humbly take my leave of you all.

    The main thing that generally renders your comments unwelcome are the comments themselves. They can stand or fall on their own.

    Then you can get back to the chest-thumping-over-Lamont contest.

    Is that what we’re supposed to be doing now? Thanks for informing us, I guess.

  167. 167.

    Ancient Purple

    August 10, 2006 at 8:37 pm

    If he was so infallible, why wasn’t he ever made President by his peers?

    He didn’t want to be President. He was an anti-Federalist.

    Sweet Jesus, are you really that ignorant of history?

  168. 168.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 8:38 pm

    That’s good, because if you were, you’d be doing a piss-poor job.

    Why should I care?

    That’s bad, because you’re doing a piss-poor job.

    Look who’s talking.

    Who doesn’t. David Horowitz probably considers himself a reasonable man. Maybe David Duke, too.

    Not to mention Ward Churchill. Or Karl Marx.

    Well I guess you’d know.

    My record, albeit somewhat brief, speaks for itself.

    The main thing that generally renders your comments unwelcome are the comments themselves. They can stand or fall on their own.

    The main thing that generally renders my comments unwelcome are that they challenge you to think outside of your preconceived notions and entrenched dogmatic positions. You inability to do so for even a moment, even for argument’s sake, speaks volumes far more eloquent than any comment ever could.

    Is that what we’re supposed to be doing now? Thanks for informing us, I guess.

    You’re welcome. Carry on, for the next few days or so.

  169. 169.

    Krista

    August 10, 2006 at 8:39 pm

    How many of you are still burning effigies of George Washington for the losses his army suffered in Brooklyn and at Valley Forge?

    Oh. Please tell me you’re not comparing George W. Bush to George Washington. Please.

    /bangs head on keyboard

  170. 170.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 8:40 pm

    He didn’t want to be President. He was an anti-Federalist.

    And you WORSHIP this moron?

  171. 171.

    Pb

    August 10, 2006 at 8:42 pm

    Krista,

    Name That Pre-9/11 Moonbat: The Dangers of Partisanship:

    It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.

  172. 172.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 8:42 pm

    Oh. Please tell me you’re not comparing George W. Bush to George Washington. Please.

    History will, if he succeeds. We are in the eye of the storm, we cannot gauge its passage as of yet.

    Please don’t tell me that George Washington didn’t have his detractors amongst his contemporaries. (For example, 1/3 of the country. They were called Tories.)

  173. 173.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 8:46 pm

    Name That Pre-9/11 Moonbat: The Dangers of Partisanship:

    King George III. What the hell, it was worth a shot.

  174. 174.

    ThymeZone

    August 10, 2006 at 8:49 pm

    It was Dinah George Washington.

  175. 175.

    jaime

    August 10, 2006 at 8:51 pm

    History will, if he succeeds.

    Yes. Don’t judge Bush by what he’s done or what he’s doing. Judge him by what someone might say after we’re dead. A cop out designed to absolve him of the incompetence he’s exhibited and will exhibit in the future.

  176. 176.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 8:52 pm

    It was Dinah George Washington

    At least I got the first name right.

  177. 177.

    Krista

    August 10, 2006 at 8:53 pm

    Oh. Please tell me you’re not comparing George W. Bush to George Washington. Please.

    History will, if he succeeds. We are in the eye of the storm, we cannot gauge its passage as of yet.

    And that, boys and girls, is why I would never want to be immortal. To live through this, only to realize, 200 years down the road, that an inarticulate, arrogant, incompetent asshat like Dubya is revered as some sort of visionary leader…

    Ugh. My cheeseburger is doing flipflops in my tummy just thinking about the possibility.

  178. 178.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 8:55 pm

    Yes. Don’t judge Bush by what he’s done or what he’s doing. Judge him by what someone might say after we’re dead. A cop out designed to absolve him of the incompetence he’s exhibited and will exhibit in the future.

    Today never knows tomorrow. Do you really want to argue the contrary? If so, how come you didn’t prevent the 9/11 attack, nor the Rigelian destruction of Saturn on 10/14 in the year 3167? And does that second incident happen, or did I just make it up?

  179. 179.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 8:57 pm

    And that, boys and girls, is why I would never want to be immortal. To live through this, only to realize, 200 years down the road, that an inarticulate, arrogant, incompetent asshat like Dubya is revered as some sort of visionary leader…

    If Gore Vidal is to be believed, that’s how Aaron Burr would have felt about the whole thing. If Anne Rice is to be believed, the Vampire Lestat probably feels that way now. (Well, to be fair, I only saw the movie…)

  180. 180.

    Pb

    August 10, 2006 at 8:58 pm

    3167? At the rate we’re going now… yeah, you made it up.

  181. 181.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 9:00 pm

    3167? At the rate we’re going now… yeah, you made it up.

    Probably. But that’s just a guess, you see. Who knows? I mean, really KNOWS?

  182. 182.

    Krista

    August 10, 2006 at 9:01 pm

    I think it would take a minor miracle for someone as reviled as Bush to wind up being looked upon kindly in the history books. Besides…what does that matter right now? You guys are all being affected by his policies and administration right now, not 50 years into the future. And from what I’m seeing, most of your countrymen think he’s doing a piss-poor job, and don’t like the direction in which the country is going, and do not think that their lives have benefited any from this presidency.

  183. 183.

    Pb

    August 10, 2006 at 9:02 pm

    Krista,

    And in 50 years, when history is judging, I’ll be laughing my ass off, because I can already tell that in that period, Clinton will stand out as a God among men.

  184. 184.

    Krista

    August 10, 2006 at 9:03 pm

    Pb – in 50 years, we’ll both be laughing, ’cause we’ll be so damn senile that we won’t have realized that we’ve just shat ourselves.

  185. 185.

    Pb

    August 10, 2006 at 9:04 pm

    But that’s just a guess, you see. Who knows?

    I’d be willing to bet your life on it.

  186. 186.

    Pb

    August 10, 2006 at 9:05 pm

    Krista,

    That’s already pretty funny. :)

  187. 187.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 9:06 pm

    I think it would take a minor miracle for someone as reviled as Bush to wind up being looked upon kindly in the history books. Besides…what does that matter right now? You guys are all being affected by his policies and administration right now, not 50 years into the future. And from what I’m seeing, most of your countrymen think he’s doing a piss-poor job, and don’t like the direction in which the country is going, and do not think that their lives have benefited any from this presidency.

    I think it would take a major miracle for Iraq to turn out well. But who knows? Maybe a major miracle will happen. Weirder ones have happened, like the Japanese defeat at Midway or the Carthaginian victory at Lake Trasimene.

    Anyway, most Americans at the time thought Lincoln was doing a piss-poor job, too. What does a contemporary poll ever prove?

  188. 188.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 9:06 pm

    I’d be willing to bet your life on it.

    I’d gladly give your life for this country.

  189. 189.

    Krista

    August 10, 2006 at 9:11 pm

    I guess it raises the question of what’s more important in regards to a country’s leader: the opinion of the people whose lives the leader affected directly, or the opinion of history and those who write it. To some leaders, history’s opinion would be more important, as they are concerned with how they will be remembered. To others, the opinion of their current constituents is more important, as they are concerned with how they can actually improve the lives of those constituents. I’d much rather have a leader with a little less “vision” and a lot more heart.

  190. 190.

    Pb

    August 10, 2006 at 9:12 pm

    US Patriot,

    I’d be willing to bet your life on it.

    I’d gladly give your life for this country.

    I think you got the better deal there.

  191. 191.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 9:13 pm

    Ok, so my friends often wonder why I’m so cynical about the government. This is why:

    Although reports that Mr Bush was woken at his ranch in Texas yesterday morning by a call from Tony Blair were denied by the White House, the two leaders had been in regular touch — as recently as Sunday — about British police efforts to track and capture those behind the aircraft plot.

    American authorities were told about a fortnight ago of an “accelerating plan” to target US airlines flying from Britain to Los Angeles, Washington and New York.

    The US government knew about this for TWO WEEKS! And today, after they had nabbed the guys in the UK, they ban liquids on US flights.

  192. 192.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 9:13 pm

    Pb – in 50 years, we’ll both be laughing, ‘cause we’ll be so damn senile that we won’t have realized that we’ve just shat ourselves.

    A wise man’s thoughts on the matter.

  193. 193.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 9:14 pm

    I think you got the better deal there.

    The neocons may be many things, but “stupidly reckless with their own physical well-being” is not traditionally numbered among them.

  194. 194.

    Pb

    August 10, 2006 at 9:16 pm

    US Patriot,

    Agreed. And, yay, Red Meat!

  195. 195.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 9:16 pm

    The US government knew about this for TWO WEEKS! And today, after they had nabbed the guys in the UK, they ban liquids on US flights.

    If they’d done something sooner, maybe it would’ve tipped off some of the London terrorists. Maybe the British weren’t willing to move against them yet, and they would’ve had a chance to hightail it.

  196. 196.

    Krista

    August 10, 2006 at 9:22 pm

    A wise man’s thoughts on the matter

    Twisted.

    I like it.

  197. 197.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 9:24 pm

    Red Meat: the comic all Americans can agree on. Except theocons and Tipper Gore, probably.

  198. 198.

    Krista

    August 10, 2006 at 9:27 pm

    I like how “theocons” has made it into the common lexicon. It’s a great term.

    Red Meat is pretty great. I do also enjoy Tom the Dancing Bug, but I can see how he might not be everybody’s cup of tea.

  199. 199.

    US Patriot

    August 10, 2006 at 9:35 pm

    Red Meat is pretty great. I do also enjoy Tom the Dancing Bug, but I can see how he might not be everybody’s cup of tea.

    He’s usually pretty good. I don’t always agree, but I almost always get a chuckle out of him.

  200. 200.

    Ancient Purple

    August 10, 2006 at 9:36 pm

    And you WORSHIP this moron?

    Yeah, because you have a link to where revering someone is the same thing as worshiping.

    Well, you have outdone yourself, USP. You have managed to show yourself ignorant of history and theology, not to mention a clear failure in the use of the English lexicon.

    But fear not, you always President George W. Bush to guide you on your path to brilliance, complete with strategery and the Internets.

    God bless you.

  201. 201.

    Ancient Purple

    August 10, 2006 at 9:37 pm

    *always have

  202. 202.

    ThymeZone

    August 10, 2006 at 9:54 pm

    Okay, which one of you trolls is USP?

  203. 203.

    Perry Como

    August 10, 2006 at 10:04 pm

    Okay, which one of you trolls is USP?

    I have a good idea.

  204. 204.

    ThymeZone

    August 10, 2006 at 10:22 pm

    Me too.

  205. 205.

    demimondian

    August 10, 2006 at 10:25 pm

    which one of you trolls is USP?

    Sorry, TZ, but I looked at your comment and thought “Which of us meets US Pharmacopaeia standards? Why, obviously, none of us..”

    I’m innocent, by the way. Whoever he or she is, though, he or she is *good*…

  206. 206.

    Some Other Brian Guy

    August 10, 2006 at 10:53 pm

    Now, that’s obviously a sarcastic overreaction. But isn’t it fair to note that by fomenting a culture of excessive tolerance of Islamic fundamentalism, Britain has, in a sense, abetted its own domestic terrorism?

    You’ve never been to Britain, have you?

    The Brits aren’t very tolerant of anyone who isn’t British. Now, granted, they do tolerate people to a certain degree, especially if they’re willing to do shitty jobs for not much money. But it’s not the type of toleration which really makes people feel like they’re part of the team. i.e. British. So they don’t really have a stake in the game.

    Now let’s compare to the American experience, where we don’t give a rats ass where you came from, what your fathers name was, what language you spoke when you got off the boat. You come here, you work productively and contribute to the society. You are an American. The Great Melting Pot, the land looked over by our Lady of the New York Harbor. Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free!

    But that’s not how it is in Europe. See over there, you are either British or not, French or not, German or not, Russian or not. It does not matter if your family has lived in Moscow for 5 generations, you’re not Russian unless you are Russian.

    The Brits are more tolerant than most, don’t get me wrong, but they aren’t immune from the intolerance.

    (BTW, in Britain… Asian means Indian or Pakistani)

    This whole subclass has been a boiling pot waiting to explode for years.

    And here’s the secret… you can’t conquer them through fear, through beating them to death, through subjugating them further. None of those tactics work to beat people of a want for liberty, despite our conservative friends whining to the contrary.

    No, to eliminate the problem you have to embrace them.

    It might not be human nature.

    But interestingly, it’s the Christian thing to do.

  207. 207.

    Some Other Brian Guy

    August 10, 2006 at 10:59 pm

    Anyway, most Americans at the time thought Lincoln was doing a piss-poor job, too. What does a contemporary poll ever prove?

    The Civil War was over in 4 years.

    Maybe because Lincoln was smart enough to fire people who weren’t doing their jobs.

  208. 208.

    ThymeZone

    August 10, 2006 at 11:40 pm

    Bush knew about the terror alert on Sunday?

    Was there any doubt that they’d politicize this event? They’ve been doing it all week while we didn’t know about it yet.

    Is there any level to which these buttheads won’t stoop to make themselves look good?

  209. 209.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 12:01 am

    Well, you’re the expert scrutator there, aren’t you?

    Ha ha, charade you are. Go away GOP4Me. You gave it away.

  210. 210.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 12:10 am

    ppGaz, er, Nutcutter, er, ThymeZone, I missed the reason why you’ve changed your name yet again. Does it have anything to do with Time Zone’s World Destruction? I love that song!

  211. 211.

    scs

    August 11, 2006 at 12:17 am

    I just saw the headlines tonight about the wanna- be bombers, and I was almost bored. Terrorism is so yesterday, isn’t it?

  212. 212.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 12:19 am

    scs please bless us with more of your wisdom.

  213. 213.

    scs

    August 11, 2006 at 12:21 am

    Ask away my pupil.

  214. 214.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 12:27 am

    haha scs. do you believe this plot was for real?

  215. 215.

    scs

    August 11, 2006 at 12:29 am

    Ok, here’s more. You know, my Euro cousins are so annoying with their holier-than-thou attitudes, it kind of makes me feel like mixing up some peroxide bombs myself every now and then. I can kind of understand what these Euro Muslims go through. Too bad though we are the ones who usually suffer for it.

  216. 216.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 12:29 am

    and…have you seen the Time Zone video?

  217. 217.

    scs

    August 11, 2006 at 12:31 am

    Sure I beleive it was real. Bombing infidels is the muslim zealots video game or paintball. It passes the time I guess.

  218. 218.

    scs

    August 11, 2006 at 12:33 am

    and…have you seen the Time Zone video?

    Umm no. No clue what that is. Must read above I guess.

  219. 219.

    tBone

    August 11, 2006 at 12:34 am

    Well, you’re the expert scrutator there, aren’t you?

    Ha ha, charade you are. Go away GOP4Me. You gave it away.

    Nah, stick around. I’m enjoying the centrist spoof. It’s a nice change of pace. You need to work “we’ll know in six months” in there somewhere, though.

  220. 220.

    ThymeZone

    August 11, 2006 at 12:39 am

    I think David Letterman has the right idea on this whole Middle East/terror crisis thing: It’s time to issue a desperate plea to Superman.

    Discuss.

  221. 221.

    ThymeZone

    August 11, 2006 at 12:42 am

    I missed the reason why you’ve changed your name yet again

    My booklet, “Why I Changed My Handle — Not My Name — Yet Again” is yours for just $19.95 plus shipping.

    { Add to Cart }

  222. 222.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 12:45 am

    Oh, and while I was searching for Time Zone I came across Terror at 20,000 Feet, the classic Twilight Zone episode!

  223. 223.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 12:46 am

    Well my booklet, “Why I haven’t changed my handle in over a decade” is only $9.95.

    {Add to Cart}

  224. 224.

    ThymeZone

    August 11, 2006 at 12:53 am

    Well my booklet, “Why I haven’t changed my handle in over a decade” is only $9.95.

    Overpriced.

    Besides, it took you ten years to write that?

    Jesus. I crank a booklet every three, four days.

  225. 225.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 1:04 am

    Besides, it took you ten years to write that?

    Jesus. I crank a booklet every three, four days.

    Quality over quantity. For example, see Chick Tracts.

    scs the sinner would probably benefit from these.

  226. 226.

    scs

    August 11, 2006 at 1:08 am

    scs the sinner would probably benefit from these.

    If what I’m blogging is wrong, I don’t wanna be right.

  227. 227.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 1:11 am

    Don’t worry, you’re wrong.

  228. 228.

    scs

    August 11, 2006 at 1:16 am

    Or right.

  229. 229.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 1:28 am

    Or not.

  230. 230.

    Ancient Purple

    August 11, 2006 at 1:29 am

    Or right.

    Right as in “the sun will come up tomorrow” right?

    Or right as in “Mesa, Arizona is a liberal bastion” right?

  231. 231.

    scs

    August 11, 2006 at 1:41 am

    Or right as in “Mesa, Arizona is a liberal bastion” right?

    You know I’m still not 100% convinced it’s not. What did it vote for as a county last time – Dem or GOP? Anyway, I will have to go there myself to see. And then I will stop in and call on our fav Arizona blogger for a cup of tea. Kumbaya.

  232. 232.

    scs

    August 11, 2006 at 1:55 am

    Okay, well according to this it’s not. Link and linkette, so I can admit when I am wrong. However, Tempe is very liberal. Aren’t they just a mile apart? Strange.

  233. 233.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 2:47 am

    Not again.

  234. 234.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 3:41 am

    Well I still don’t get it. Sports drink bottles filled with some kind of liquid explosive were going to be detonated on planes using the flash from a camera. And I’m supposed to believe this?

    Can someone please point me in the direction of an article detailing the physical evidence? I have yet to hear what this mysterious liquid was. Gasoline and styrofoam? Toothpaste and mouthwash?

    I know I’m too cynical but I’d really like to know about what evidence has been found. Other than some terror group that was infiltrated by British intelligence. Who came up with the terror plot? The islamofascists or MI6?

    Inquiring minds want to know.

    I’m serious about this. Where’s the evidence that such a plot existed and was feasible?

  235. 235.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 6:56 am

    Yeah, because you have a link to where revering someone is the same thing as worshiping.

    You speak about Franklin in awed tones that seem to go well beyond “mere” reverence.

  236. 236.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 7:05 am

    “Awed tones?” You “can” tell “all” that from “plain text?”

  237. 237.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 7:06 am

    You’ve never been to Britain, have you?

    No.

    This whole subclass has been a boiling pot waiting to explode for years.

    That’s probably true. But it seems that on the one hand, the British antagonize Muslims into extremism, while on the other they passively tolerate the growth of this extremism. Sort of the parallel mistakes made by the Left and Right in this country- the Republicans stir up trouble overseas while trying to do the right thing, and the Democrats augment, foment, and abet that trouble by excessive tolerance and by passive indifference. If the Right’s problem is overreaction, the Left’s problem is no reaction at all.

    And here’s the secret… you can’t conquer them through fear, through beating them to death, through subjugating them further. None of those tactics work to beat people of a want for liberty, despite our conservative friends whining to the contrary.

    I agree. But deporting the troublemakers would at least be a start. And if Britain doesn’t want them, they should deport them all. It’s not fair to anyone to put them through this kind of cultural intolerance.

    No, to eliminate the problem you have to embrace them.

    Ideally, yes. In practice, that never happens. European nations have muddled, hypocritical positions on this, and many other, issues. Racist xenophobia may not be a solution, but neither is sweeping the problem under the carpet and ignoring it. Ideally, I’d expect them to punish the extremists and embrace the rest, but Europe is not, as you point out, as tolerant of diversity as is America.

    That was an excellent post, by the way. I very much enjoyed it.

    It might not be human nature.

    But interestingly, it’s the Christian thing to do.

    Whatever yanks your crank, I suppose.

  238. 238.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 7:16 am

    The Civil War was over in 4 years.

    Maybe because Lincoln was smart enough to fire people who weren’t doing their jobs.

    Well, you may be right. But you’re stuck with the President the American people elected, not the idealized, rosy-tinted-history-viewed President you wish you had.

  239. 239.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 7:21 am

    “Awed tones?” You “can” tell “all” that from “plain text?”

    The awed tones are demonstrated by emphasis, repitition, and the use of a quote book as a political cudgel.

  240. 240.

    The Other Steve

    August 11, 2006 at 7:30 am

    Oops, posted as SomeOtherBrianGuy even though I wasn’t ridiculing.

    That’s probably true. But it seems that on the one hand, the British antagonize Muslims into extremism, while on the other they passively tolerate the growth of this extremism.

    What would you have them do? Take away suspects with black bags on their heads and toss them in the Gulag? That’s the tactic Britain used(recently in Ireland even), it didn’t really work well as it just creates a new generation of people pissed off at you and doesn’t solve the problem.

    I would say they’ve shown no tolerance to the idea, but have rather been actively speaking out and trying to counter it since at least the underground bombings if not before. That they’ve engaged with these communities is most likely evidenced by the tips which led them to these arrests.

    If the Right’s problem is overreaction, the Left’s problem is no reaction at all.

    Interesting.

    The left reaction has always been to counter extremism through counter-example and counterpoint, rather than to reinforce the extremism through action.

    Racist xenophobia may not be a solution, but neither is sweeping the problem under the carpet and ignoring it.

    How is that going to help? You think that the solution is to escalate the intolerance? To make those people fear the police state?

    Again, I point out the main difference between right and left is the right do not tolerate people, the left do not tolerate an idea. I would say the overreaction, the intolerance of people, the violence towards an idea displays cowardice.

    If there is any lesson here, it is that this struggle with islamofascist extremists is one of ideas. It will only die when the better ideas win out. The strength through cowardice approach will never end, and is in fact weakening us over time.

  241. 241.

    The Other Steve

    August 11, 2006 at 7:31 am

    Well, you may be right. But you’re stuck with the President the American people elected, not the idealized, rosy-tinted-history-viewed President you wish you had.

    So it’s impossible for the President to fire Rumsfeld?

  242. 242.

    chopper

    August 11, 2006 at 7:45 am

    The left reaction has always been to counter extremism through counter-example and counterpoint, rather than to reinforce the extremism through action.

    i dunno. the left’s reaction has always been to go after terrorism just like the british did here, with good old fashioned intelligence and police work. not invading some random arab country under the idiotic pretense that all the terrorists in the world will now flock here, to one place. seriously, how many bong hits were bush, rummy and cheney on when they came up with that one?

    the democrats have a golden opportunity with this event, to come out strongly for national defense and at the same time distance themselves from bush’s anti-terror doctrine.

    i doubt they’ll do it tho.

  243. 243.

    The Other Steve

    August 11, 2006 at 7:54 am

    Well I still don’t get it. Sports drink bottles filled with some kind of liquid explosive were going to be detonated on planes using the flash from a camera. And I’m supposed to believe this?

    Can someone please point me in the direction of an article detailing the physical evidence? I have yet to hear what this mysterious liquid was. Gasoline and styrofoam? Toothpaste and mouthwash?

    I was trying to figure that out. The mention of hydrogen peroxide seemed to suggest perhaps it was triacetone triperoxide which is a homemade plastic explosive made by cooking down acetone(finger nail polish) with hydrogen peroxide and is common amongst the Palestinians and was used by Richard Reid(the shoebomber). (interestingly, the process for doing this is posted on the internet in a variety of places)

    But that wouldn’t be transported as a liquid per say, as they couldn’t prepare that mixture on the plane. That suggests something else that when mixed with the peroxide causes a chemical reaction binding with the hydrogen and releasing the oxygen possibly.. I guess you’d probably want something like the ammonumium nitrate/diesel bomb used by McVeigh… a reaction which draws out the oxygen… resulting in something which burns + extra oxygen = big fire… contained = explosion

    Interesting… reading more sources, there are a variety of ways to do this, and most of them are common products not readily detected by the security machines.

  244. 244.

    The Other Steve

    August 11, 2006 at 7:56 am

    i dunno. the left’s reaction has always been to go after terrorism just like the british did here, with good old fashioned intelligence and police work. not invading some random arab country under the idiotic pretense that all the terrorists in the world will now flock here, to one place. seriously, how many bong hits were bush, rummy and cheney on when they came up with that one?

    True. I did not mean to imply you can stop terrorists with ideas, meanly that you can counter an idea with a better idea, rather than blind violence.

    The key to fighting terrorist actions is through actionable intelligence. i.e. not something you get through random torture.

  245. 245.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 8:00 am

    What would you have them do? Take away suspects with black bags on their heads and toss them in the Gulag? That’s the tactic Britain used(recently in Ireland even), it didn’t really work well as it just creates a new generation of people pissed off at you and doesn’t solve the problem.

    Last time I checked, the IRA disarmed and Ulster still flew the Union Jack.

    I would say they’ve shown no tolerance to the idea, but have rather been actively speaking out and trying to counter it since at least the underground bombings if not before. That they’ve engaged with these communities is most likely evidenced by the tips which led them to these arrests.

    Then that’s a step in the right direction. I’m optimistic for Britain’s future, but they have a lot of ground to cover to make up for lost time, squnadered opportunities, and the cancer they allowed to fester in their midst for the better half of two decades.

    The left reaction has always been to counter extremism through counter-example and counterpoint, rather than to reinforce the extremism through action.

    Well, that’s another way of looking at it. But it’s slow, pedantic, condescending, and unproductive no matter how you slice it. Whereas the extremist neocons and the other far-right loons always err on the side of incaution by actively creating new enemies, rather than inactively allowing those enemies to grow strong.

    How is that going to help? You think that the solution is to escalate the intolerance? To make those people fear the police state?

    I’m not necessarily saying that. But obviously, you have to isolate the problem-causing elements of the community, and you have to make an example of them. Pretending they aren’t a problem is no more sane or realistic than is pretending every member of the community is a problem.

    Again, I point out the main difference between right and left is the right do not tolerate people, the left do not tolerate an idea. I would say the overreaction, the intolerance of people, the violence towards an idea displays cowardice.

    I’m not sure I follow. It seems to me that on both sides of the spectrum, intolerance toward both people and ideas is manifest. Hitler threw Communists and labor organizers into the concentration camps alongside the Jews, while Stalin was perfectly willing to mass deport Chechens or allow every Ukrainian of woman born starve to death. (And interestingly, he himself was apparently preparing to have a Third Reich-scale pogrom-genocide against the Jews, when he died in 1953.)

    If there is any lesson here, it is that this struggle with islamofascist extremists is one of ideas. It will only die when the better ideas win out. The strength through cowardice approach will never end, and is in fact weakening us over time.

    It’s not cowardice to be afraid of people trying to kill you. That’s realism. It IS cowardice to ignore those people and hope they go away. Moral cowardice, just like the townspeople in “High Noon” who refused to help Gary Cooper.

    As for the epic struggle for ideas- there will always be poor and oppressed people, and there will always be bad ideas propogated by agitators among them. These agitators, invariably seeking to advance their own personal interests at the expense of society at large, will always endanger the security of the existing social order.

    That’s all well and good, I suppose; to some extent, it’s almost to be expected in a democratic society. But the problem is when Britain allows the twin-headed demon of demographic imperative and social injustice to wed itself to a violent, extremist ideology that advocates the mass slaughter of otherwise-innocent civilians.

    At times like this, Europe finds itself at a crossroads- do they punish all for the sins of a few, or punish none to the detriment of the many? In and of itself, this presents another crisis of ideas; but one must also remember the admonishment of Barry Goldwater, that extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, just as moderation in its defense is no virtue.

    How does a “better” idea win out? In the public forum? This isn’t a debating club, this is a vibrant, living society. Which ideas are embraced and rejected depends on a lot more than the inherent value of the ideas themselves. Surely you’ll concede that much.

  246. 246.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 8:01 am

    So it’s impossible for the President to fire Rumsfeld?

    No, but it’s pretty unlikely. I’m not defending this Administration; I think Rumsfeld has made some bad mistakes, too. But at the same time, I think we have to wait at least 20 years before anything is accurately judged in the history books.

  247. 247.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 8:04 am

    i dunno. the left’s reaction has always been to go after terrorism just like the british did here, with good old fashioned intelligence and police work. not invading some random arab country under the idiotic pretense that all the terrorists in the world will now flock here, to one place.

    It’s natural to give your side credit for this success, but please bear in mind that the left makes mistakes, too. Plenty of terrorist attacks occurred on Clinton’s watch, despite the fact that some were prevented.

    seriously, how many bong hits were bush, rummy and cheney on when they came up with that one?

    547? It certainly does sound like a flimsy rationale for the war, a post hoc rationale at that. Building a new model democracy is a much more compelling basis for remaining in Iraq, IMHO.

    the democrats have a golden opportunity with this event, to come out strongly for national defense and at the same time distance themselves from bush’s anti-terror doctrine.

    i doubt they’ll do it tho.

    Agreed.

  248. 248.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 8:08 am

    True. I did not mean to imply you can stop terrorists with ideas, meanly that you can counter an idea with a better idea, rather than blind violence.

    Sorry. I didn’t see this earlier. Apologies for misconstruing your position.

    The key to fighting terrorist actions is through actionable intelligence. i.e. not something you get through random torture.

    Probably true. But on the other hand, random torture is fun! According to some of the eminent crazy right-wing voices, it’s no more extreme than a fraternity hazing.

  249. 249.

    The Other Steve

    August 11, 2006 at 8:19 am

    Last time I checked, the IRA disarmed and Ulster still flew the Union Jack.

    Sigh… The Global War Against Obtuseness.

    It’s not cowardice to be afraid of people trying to kill you. That’s realism. It IS cowardice to ignore those people and hope they go away. Moral cowardice, just like the townspeople in “High Noon” who refused to help Gary Cooper.

    The Global War Against Strawman is waged.

    Cowardice is the advocation of fighting against something.

    Courage is the necessity to fight for something.

    Notice your language, it is always about fear… fear of being killed, fear of extremists, fear of whatever. You fear, and your fear causes you to want to lash out like a cornered animal.

    What differentiates human kind from animals is our ability to think, to understand that fear is not our motivating factor.

    No, my friend, I’m afraid it is you who advocates fear and cowardice.

  250. 250.

    The Other Steve

    August 11, 2006 at 8:29 am

    No, but it’s pretty unlikely. I’m not defending this Administration; I think Rumsfeld has made some bad mistakes, too. But at the same time, I think we have to wait at least 20 years before anything is accurately judged in the history books.

    Would you say the same thing if your pitcher was giving away runs in the 7th inning?

    We must let history decide if our pitcher is tired. To replace him now would give aid and comfort to the opposing team.

    What an utterly stupid response.

    We must let history decide if Meade is up to the task of taking the battle to the Confedarcy. It would be wrong to replace him with Grant.

  251. 251.

    Pb

    August 11, 2006 at 8:40 am

    US Patriot,

    That’s a doozy… both sides of the spectrum, Hitler *and* Stalin! Yeah, that’s both sides of the extreme authoritarian spectrum, maybe. US politics exists within a much narrower range, but most of the hardcore authoritarians in politics are the ones running today’s Republican party.

  252. 252.

    chopper

    August 11, 2006 at 8:41 am

    It’s natural to give your side credit for this success, but please bear in mind that the left makes mistakes, too. Plenty of terrorist attacks occurred on Clinton’s watch, despite the fact that some were prevented.

    well, i’m also not talking merely of the ‘left’ as limited to america. the british government is quite ‘leftist’ from an american perspective, and has been effectively fighting terrorism for a long time. just goes to show that ‘leftists’ can fight terror just as, if not more effectively.

  253. 253.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 8:46 am

    Well I still want proof that this terror plot was beyond the daydreaming stage.

  254. 254.

    ThymeZone

    August 11, 2006 at 9:14 am

    Quality over quantity.

    Not for me. I’m out to turn my experiences into fast cash.

    I have a wife who likes to shop and a mortgage to feed.

  255. 255.

    RSA

    August 11, 2006 at 9:20 am

    Pb:

    Perhaps, but if you’re willing to believe Chertoff on Hardball, he said they found out 10-14 days ago.

    Yeah, I got that wrong.

  256. 256.

    ThymeZone

    August 11, 2006 at 9:22 am

    I’ve now heard Bush’s remarks from yesterday about ten times.

    Has anyone noticed what he actually said? He sounds like a hand-wringing nervous old lady, nothing but fear-mongering.

    “They want to destroy us?” This is the best this fucking moron can do? This is his message to the nation?

    How about a real man … a real president … who gets up and says “Here’s what happened, and here’s what we are doing about it.” Isn’t that what a real leader would do?

  257. 257.

    Ancient Purple

    August 11, 2006 at 9:34 am

    “They want to destroy us?” This is the best this fucking moron can do?

    Yes.

  258. 258.

    ThymeZone

    August 11, 2006 at 9:54 am

    An Associated Press-Ipsos poll conducted this week found the president’s approval rating has dropped to 33 percent, matching his low in May. His handling of nearly every issue, from the Iraq war to foreign policy, contributed to the president’s decline around the nation, even in the Republican-friendly South.

    More sobering for the GOP are the number of voters who backed Bush in 2004 who are ready to vote Democratic in the fall’s congressional elections – 19 percent. These one-time Bush voters are more likely to be female, self-described moderates, low- to middle-income and from the Northeast and Midwest.

    Gee, do you think that blubbering “They want to destroy us!” maybe isn’t enough any more?

    While our military is hunkered down in Iraq green zones tyring to stay out of the way of sectarian violence, the Middle East is going up in flames and lunatics are trying to blow up airplanes … and this worthless empty suit can do nothing but stand there and squeeze out yet another episode of “They hate us for our freedom?”

    Why don’t the people rush Washington DC with pitchforks and throw all these sorry motherfuckers into the Potomac?

  259. 259.

    Par R

    August 11, 2006 at 10:23 am

    Why don’t the people rush Washington DC with pitchforks and throw all these sorry motherfuckers into the Potomac?

    As a general rule, Republicans are not inclined to commit such illegal acts against elected representatives, even when they are comprised in significant measure of such total scumbags such as John Kerry, Harry Reid, Barnara Boxer and Ted Kennedy.

  260. 260.

    Andrew

    August 11, 2006 at 10:45 am

    As a general rule, Republicans are not inclined to commit such illegal acts against elected representatives, even when they are comprised in significant measure of such total scumbags such as John Kerry, Harry Reid, Barnara Boxer and Ted Kennedy.

    Let’s see if I can equal this stupidity.

    Shorter Par R:
    Republicans are too lazy to go all the way to Washington, and are instead content to drag black people behind their pickup trucks near home.

  261. 261.

    Nutcutter

    August 11, 2006 at 10:58 am

    Republicans are not inclined to commit such illegal acts against elected representatives

    Yeah, they’re too busy committing them against us.

  262. 262.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 11:06 am

    Sigh… The Global War Against Obtuseness.

    Are you too obtuse to see the IRA is out of the picture?

    Cowardice is the advocation of fighting against something.

    Courage is the necessity to fight for something.

    No. Courage is fighting for something. Cowardice is being too afraid to fight. Wishing a problem away is cowardice.

    Notice your language, it is always about fear… fear of being killed, fear of extremists, fear of whatever. You fear, and your fear causes you to want to lash out like a cornered animal.

    Well, they are called “terror”ists. You have to discuss fear when discussing people whose preferred tactic involves fear. If their preferred tactic involved the illicit sale of ice cream, I’m sure our discussion of them would take a markedly different approach.

    No, my friend, I’m afraid it is you who advocates fear and cowardice.

    I want a sane, just, and sensible approach to combatting the problem of rampaging conspiracies of lunatic murderers. If that’s an advocation of cowardice, then Churchill was a puss-puss too.

    Would you say the same thing if your pitcher was giving away runs in the 7th inning?

    History isn’t a clearly-delineated time frame like a baseball game. Who are you to decide what inning it is? Was Vietnam lost by 1963? Was 1965 the seventh inning of the Vietnam “game”?

    What an utterly stupid response.

    Yes, the appropriate response is to fly off the handle and try to score political points off of national mishaps and tragedies.

    We must let history decide if Meade is up to the task of taking the battle to the Confedarcy. It would be wrong to replace him with Grant.

    I think history has rendered a fairly conclusive judgment on that matter by now. Dissenting voices, such as those of the men killed for no purpose whatsoever at Cold Harbor, will not be heard.

  263. 263.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 11:09 am

    That’s a doozy… both sides of the spectrum, Hitler and Stalin! Yeah, that’s both sides of the extreme authoritarian spectrum, maybe. US politics exists within a much narrower range, but most of the hardcore authoritarians in politics are the ones running today’s Republican party.

    So, within the narrow spectrum of American politics, only Republicans are racists? I’ll be sure to inform Louis Farrakhan of his newfound political status the next time I bump into him. Ward Churchill, too. (And if you like, we can throw in right-wingers who despise ideas every bit as much as they may or may not despise people. Ann Coulter springs immediately to mind as someone who hates thought of any kind.)

  264. 264.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 11:10 am

    Sorry, to make clear: Ward Churchill hates people in general. He’s not a racist. Not as far as I know, anyway.

  265. 265.

    Nutcutter

    August 11, 2006 at 11:11 am

    USP, I think you are Darrell on Paxil.

  266. 266.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 11:16 am

    well, i’m also not talking merely of the ‘left’ as limited to america. the british government is quite ‘leftist’ from an american perspective, and has been effectively fighting terrorism for a long time. just goes to show that ‘leftists’ can fight terror just as, if not more effectively.

    When they set their minds to it, sure. But setting their minds to it is the problem.

  267. 267.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 11:18 am

    Well I still want proof that this terror plot was beyond the daydreaming stage

    So go join Scotland Yard and get assigned to the case.

    Or, wait a little while. If they draw hefty jail time, it was pretty advanced planning. Minor jail time, it had only just entered the “conspiracy” phase. No jail time, it was daydreaming.

  268. 268.

    Punchy

    August 11, 2006 at 11:23 am

    My booklet, “Why I Changed My Handle—Not My Name—Yet Again” is yours for just $19.95 plus shipping.

    ‘

    My handle? Handle???? What are you, a truck driver?

    10-4 good buddy.

  269. 269.

    Ancient Purple

    August 11, 2006 at 11:26 am

    Or, wait a little while. If they draw hefty jail time, it was pretty advanced planning. Minor jail time, it had only just entered the “conspiracy” phase. No jail time, it was daydreaming.

    I am sure that leaving out that whole “trial by jury” thing was just an oversight.

  270. 270.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 11:29 am

    As a general rule, Republicans are not inclined to commit such illegal acts against elected representatives, even when they are comprised in significant measure of such total scumbags such as John Kerry, Harry Reid, Barnara Boxer and Ted Kennedy.

    This kind of lazy stupidity is why I no longer consider myself a Republican. My vote is available to be won back, once the GOP regains its collective marbles and stops fighting insane sub-wars like the War on Social Security and the War on Doctors Who Treat Illegal Immigrants. It’s sad that the party of the Great Communicator, Ronald Reagan has become so bitter and partisan. A sure sign of its decline is that it’s led by a shrivelled whiner like George Bush. But, one never knows what history will make of all this, so final judgment must be reserved.

    Still, I have to say that my current judgment is that the GOP will lose the Congress in six months. Then the Democrats will overexult, and push too many investigations, and the American people will quickly turn against them. In time, this may even absolve Bush of many of his foibles and misdeeds.

  271. 271.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 11:31 am

    USP, I think you are Darrell on Paxil.

    Nutcutter, I think you are Stalin on Rohypnol. Or maybe Ralph Nader on cat tranquilizers, it’s hard to render a final decision.

  272. 272.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 11:31 am

    I am sure that leaving out that whole “trial by jury” thing was just an oversight.

    This is Britain. I’m pretty sure they won’t ship their citizens off to rot in Guantanamo. Or are you advocating that sort of thing?

  273. 273.

    Par R

    August 11, 2006 at 11:35 am

    Andrew:

    Republicans are too lazy to go all the way to Washington, and are instead content to drag black people behind their pickup trucks near home.

    This is about typical for what passes as insightful commentary on this site in recent months. It is abundantly clear that all the commenters blocked from posting their drivel at other sites have migrated to this one…a site that is, as noted on another blog recently, rapidly becoming the home of every rabid anti-Semite in the blogosphere.

  274. 274.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 11:38 am

    This is about typical for what passes as insightful commentary on this site in recent months. It is abundantly clear that all the commenters blocked from posting their drivel at other sites have migrated to this one…a site that is, as noted on another blog recently, rapidly becoming the home of every rabid anti-Semite in the blogosphere.

    They are amazingly nasty and quick to make snap judgments about the political leanings of others, aren’t they? I’m inclined to wait and see what I think of this place, but some of the loonier loons here (like you seem to be- no offense) might still manage to drive me out.

  275. 275.

    Todd

    August 11, 2006 at 11:39 am

    Did anybody see that the TSA has reclassified human bladders as carry-on baggage?

  276. 276.

    tBone

    August 11, 2006 at 11:41 am

    But at the same time, I think we have to wait at least 20 years before anything is accurately judged in the history books.

    Positively spoofalicious. Carry on, my good man.

  277. 277.

    Punchy

    August 11, 2006 at 11:42 am

    So it’s impossible for the President to fire Rumsfeld?

    Yes. Firing The Rums would imply that he fucked up the war, which would imply he sucks, which would imply that he should exit stage left. While all of the above are actually true, none of the above are true in Bush’s World. Therefore, through an odd ex post facto, quid pro quo, and semper fi mixture, Rumsfeld’s a hero.

    And I’ll bet the dickens you can’t prove me wrong….

  278. 278.

    chopper

    August 11, 2006 at 11:47 am

    When they set their minds to it, sure. But setting their minds to it is the problem.

    well, the dems are the minority party and don’t control the FBI, CIA and federal police and intelligence apparatus of the US.

    and while terrorism may not have been fought with such gusto under clinton, the pre-9/11 george bush couldn’t have possibly cared less about it. so pre-9/11, the democratic president was more inclined to fight terrorism, comparatively.

    post 9/11, you can’t really compare since the dems haven’t had the reins yet. i personally believe that if the dems took over tomorrow, terrorism would be fought more like the british example as opposed to implementing wild theories like ‘invade iraq and pray to god that all the terrorists in the world follow us there’.

  279. 279.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 11:49 am

    Positively spoofalicious. Carry on, my good man.

    So we SHOULDN’T wait 20 years before rendering the judgment of history? How long should we wait, then? Six hours? Twenty minutes? First impression on hearing of the matter?

  280. 280.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 11:51 am

    Yes. Firing The Rums would imply that he fucked up the war, which would imply he sucks, which would imply that he should exit stage left. While all of the above are actually true, none of the above are true in Bush’s World. Therefore, through an odd ex post facto, quid pro quo, and semper fi mixture, Rumsfeld’s a hero.

    Sadly, yes.

    And I’ll bet the dickens you can’t prove me wrong….

    We just have to wait and see. In twenty years, we’ll know. I know that doesn’t sit well with Democrats eager to score political points against this Administration, but it’s the only sensible response to the madness coming from both sides of the aisle.

  281. 281.

    Punchy

    August 11, 2006 at 11:51 am

    Todd–

    That shit is halarious. I love the term “de-shoeing”. I’m going to jack that expression.

    And this:

    “Nitrates, ammonia, urea! It could be the Mother Lode of combustible constituents in them thar bladders if combined with other readily available personal care products. Heck, can you imagine the sheer destructive forces emitted by the mixing of such with, say fluoride, in an Aqua-Fresh tube bomb?

    That is comedy genius.

  282. 282.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 11:56 am

    well, the dems are the minority party and don’t control the FBI, CIA and federal police and intelligence apparatus of the US.

    True, but there’s a reason they ended up this way, that’s my point.

    and while terrorism may not have been fought with such gusto under clinton, the pre-9/11 george bush couldn’t have possibly cared less about it. so pre-9/11, the democratic president was more inclined to fight terrorism, comparatively.

    Also true. If Bush was as asleep at the wheel as it’s been alleged he was prior to 9/11, I think he should be impeached. But the thing is, I don’t believe most of the partisan allegations I’ve read on that score. I need more concrete proof than what Michael Moore insinuates in “Fahrenheit 9/11.”

    post 9/11, you can’t really compare since the dems haven’t had the reins yet. i personally believe that if the dems took over tomorrow, terrorism would be fought more like the british example as opposed to implementing wild theories like ‘invade iraq and pray to god that all the terrorists in the world follow us there’.

    Yes, but too many Americans remembered pre-2001 Democratic control to be willing to turn over the reins of the War on Terror to them in 2004. Now, the GOP has managed to swing the pendulum the other way, and the Dems will get a crack at the matter again. We’ll see what they do with it. I’m hoping for the best, but experience tells me that neither party is adequately prepared for the job at hand.

    I think a new party, coming from the middle and embracing the sensible moderates on both sides, needs to be formed. I think such a party could easily resolve problems such as this. The problem with such a party is that it could never be formed. That leaves us with the existing two-party system, and the hopes that the sane moderates like the DLC and the oft-ridiculed “RINOs” take back the power in their respective organizations.

    This is why I view Lamont’s victory with a great deal of trepidation.

  283. 283.

    tBone

    August 11, 2006 at 12:05 pm

    So we SHOULDN’T wait 20 years before rendering the judgment of history? How long should we wait, then? Six hours? Twenty minutes? First impression on hearing of the matter?

    I already told you. Six months. That’s the magic number.

    I know that doesn’t sit well with Democrats eager to score political points against this Administration, but it’s the only sensible response to the madness coming from both sides of the aisle.

    Great stuff! I had my doubts but this centrist angle really does open up a whole avenue of spoofing.

  284. 284.

    US Patriot

    August 11, 2006 at 12:12 pm

    I already told you. Six months. That’s the magic number.

    So, was your impression of the 9/11 attacks six months after the attack the one you think history should hold forever? I think Bush’s approval rating was about 70% at that point, BTW.

    Great stuff! I had my doubts but this centrist angle really does open up a whole avenue of spoofing.

    I know there’s a certain fixation on spoofing that goes on at this site, but could you please stick to the points at hand?

  285. 285.

    chopper

    August 11, 2006 at 12:22 pm

    well, the dems are the minority party and don’t control the FBI, CIA and federal police and intelligence apparatus of the US.

    True, but there’s a reason they ended up this way, that’s my point.

    but the reason they ended up that way isn’t about actual terror-fighting ability. the reason they ended up that way was based on the perception of an admittedly easy-to-influence electorate. i mean, most all of us with a few firing synapses knew that invading iraq was going to do nothing to reduce terror.

    Also true. If Bush was as asleep at the wheel as it’s been alleged he was prior to 9/11, I think he should be impeached. But the thing is, I don’t believe most of the partisan allegations I’ve read on that score. I need more concrete proof than what Michael Moore insinuates in “Fahrenheit 9/11.”

    there are plenty of first-hand accounts from people who left the WH since 9/11 regarding the administration’s lackadaisical approach to the threat of al qaeda.

    Yes, but too many Americans remembered pre-2001 Democratic control to be willing to turn over the reins of the War on Terror to them in 2004.

    as i said, the electorate is easily influenced. politically-staged terror alerts etc have a not-so-subtle effect of shutting down the opposition party’s attempts to get the people to listen to their arguments.

    plus, the war in iraq was used as a club by the administration seeking reelection, with the whole ‘changing horses midstream shows weakness to the terrorists. doesn’t matter that the horse is drowning’ angle.

    people didn’t remember things about the pre-9/11 democratic administration, such as successfully waged wars, stopping terrorists at the border, shooting missiles at OBL, catching those that attacked the WTC and OKC, etc. they were too busy being scared sh1tless by another orange alert and pleads to buy duct tape and plastic sheeting.

  286. 286.

    The Other Steve

    August 11, 2006 at 2:49 pm

    I’m convinced US Patriot is a spoof

  287. 287.

    Richard 23

    August 11, 2006 at 4:01 pm

    Well I still want proof that this terror plot was beyond the daydreaming stage

    So go join Scotland Yard and get assigned to the case.

    Or, wait a little while. If they draw hefty jail time, it was pretty advanced planning. Minor jail time, it had only just entered the “conspiracy” phase. No jail time, it was daydreaming.

    How long should I wait before asking questions? Say, 20 years or so?

    The burden of proof is on our magnanimous protectors, not me.

    Of course I’m still waiting for the incontrovertable proof that Condoleeza Rice said that our government has that Osama bin Laden was behind 9/11. Something other than his confession tape. She promised it was forthcoming nearly five years ago. As far as I know the evidence was never given. Maybe I missed it.

    The last thing I read on the subject was that the FBI wants bin Laden for the embassy bombings but he was not charged in connection with 9/11.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

VA Purple House Delegates

Donate

Political Action

Postcard Writing Information

Recent Comments

  • jonas on Prime Time Viewing Open Thread: ProPublica Interviews President Biden (Oct 2, 2023 @ 11:52pm)
  • eclare on Prime Time Viewing Open Thread: ProPublica Interviews President Biden (Oct 2, 2023 @ 11:51pm)
  • RandomMonster on Prime Time Viewing Open Thread: ProPublica Interviews President Biden (Oct 2, 2023 @ 11:42pm)
  • NotMax on Prime Time Viewing Open Thread: ProPublica Interviews President Biden (Oct 2, 2023 @ 11:40pm)
  • Steeplejack on Prime Time Viewing Open Thread: ProPublica Interviews President Biden (Oct 2, 2023 @ 11:39pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
What Has Biden Done for You Lately?

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Cole & Friends Learn Español

Introductory Post
Cole & Friends Learn Español

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!