“Unimaginable” terror attack foiled: denial
A planned terrorist attack to destroy airliners in flight through explosives hidden in carry-on luggage has been thwarted in Great Britain.
The police described the plot as involving “mass murder on an unimaginable scale.” My reaction: unimaginable to whom? Folks, where’ve you been for the past five years?
Of course, you might say it shouldn’t have been “unimaginable” even before 9/11. But for most of us, it was. At the time, it was easier to be in denial of the intent and the capability of the jihadis because they’d never managed to pull it off before.
But at this point, the use of the word “unimaginable” is either a case of rhetorical hyperbole, or the reflection of an attitude of unfortunate denial in the face of clear and uncontrovertible evidence and statements of intent. Nothing of this sort should be unimaginable these days, and one doesn’t even need a very active imagination to envision it.
It’s also true that some still find it almost impossible to do so. One of my first thoughts on hearing the news–after I’d heard some of the details of what, where, how, who (I didn’t need the “why” since we’re all-too-familiar with that)–was to wonder how long it would take for someone to imagine the whole thing a conspiracy by the authorities to scare the public.
Preliminary reports aren’t saying all that much about the perpetrators, except that they are “home-grown” and part of the Pakistani community. This is the trend in terror attacks lately–not foreign nationals but locals, which is especially worrisome to authorities and, I would imagine, to the local communities as well, who could experience a backlash against them by the public at large. Not that the perpetrators care; it’s not “unimaginable” to me that generating such a backlash might even be desirable to them. After all, if their own community feels more oppressed, it could gain them more dissatisfied and disgruntled potential jihadis to martyr themselves in the cause of blowing up innocents.
[ADDENDUM: Dean Bartlett wonders about that word “unimaginable” as well.
And Alexandra has a nice list of reactions from the Left that are about as predicted.]
Already happened Neo….have visited several sites so far this morning who profess no shock at all by this….it is simply to be expected as the election nears for “the evil Bush government” to find “an excuse” to raise the threat level to try and scare the bejesus out of all us lemmings. What’s interesting, as ever, is the fact that these men are ‘of Arab descent’….but of course they are not muslims or terrorists. Oh no, never that. They remain just poor disgruntled folks with no larger agenda.
It is going to take more than a few downed airliners to wake the West up to the threat of islamic fundamentalism. Efforts are underway as we speak to disconnect this attack from the scourge from which it is spawned. I give you five (5) reasons why this operation was a success:
1.) It clearly demonstrates the West’s total inability to deal with such attacks militarily.
2.) It clearly demonstrates to all terrorist groups that the cause is still vibrant and very real.
3.) It has caused economic damage to the West
4.) It keeps the West focused and expending resources on the disconnect, i.e. was this home-grown or how and by whom was outside assistance at play here?
5.)It gives impetus and energy to the people and forces that want to negotiate and placate terrorists and further entrenches them in the Jurisprudence mentality of dealing with terrorism.
This was not a plot, it was an attack and a successful one.
ginger is correct. Left wing sites are already “questioning the timing” of the foiling of this plot.
BTW – I give thanks, this morning, to the hardworking folks who do the foiling. I am thrilled that America hasn’t been victim of a large and successful attack since 2001. That is the result of diligent work by many, many persons. It’s amazing they were able to be successful while not violating constitutional rights. Kudos! Kudos, also, and always, to our military men and women. They’ve protected me, and my loved ones. Even if our nation is attacked on Aug. 22, I will still be grateful for what has been accomplished to this point.
Listening to the radio in Toronto, I’m hearing the details of the “alleged terror plot” and “we’ll bring more details about the terror scare….”
The use of the word “scare” just gives the game away for what the media thinks about the plot. Imagine for a moment the cops seizing a drug shipment and referring to it as “The drug scare”.
I’ve had it explained to me by a guy I work with how “there is no “war on terror”. I doubt this will even faze him….
What gcotharn said.
We know why, as you said. We also know who. When I turned on the radio this AM and heard that Heathrow and other UK airports were closed for security reasons, I knew it would be Muslim males 18-40 behind the problem.
In the US, the Posse Comitatus Act builds a wall between the military anti-terror resources, very good, and the HSA and the FEEBS, not so good.
I think that, short of public floggings of bureaucrats who drop the ball, it is going to take the kind of event that goesh has been fretting about to get things working as they should in terms of coordination.
Denial isn’t just a river in Egypt, it is a political strategy.
I’ve already seen several socialist-minded people try to keep this event, like other neutralized threats, at a distance with satire.
Unfortunately we cannot stop the global jihad against the kuffar with satire alone.
I’m reminded of one of Dr. Sanity’s posts about how many simply don’t want to believe that members of the Muslim community have put a jihad on us for superstitious reasons. If we could rectify a historical/economic injustice, or get rid of Bush, Blair, and Lieberman, fanatics will call off the global jihad. So the theory goes.
The liberal left media is attempting to portray author of The Green Wave, Environmentalism and its Consequences, Bonner Cohen as a crazy and corrupt scientist because he states that the majority of climatologist are “agnostic” on the global warming issue. Cohen appeared on C-SPAN’s National Journal Wednesday morning. He states that the climatologists need to study the issue more and can not draw any firm conclusions, and any that do draw firm conclusions are doing it based on politics and unreliable computer models. Cohen presents the interesting argument that the so called “global warming” is actually just part of a long cycle of the earth warming and cooling naturally that scientist do not fully understand yet. The liberals in their rush to condemn Cohen managed to get the facts wrong about whom Cohen wrote the book for. The liberal blog at thinkprogress.org (http://thinkprogress.org/2006/08/09/vast-majority-climatologists/) accuses the National Center of Public Policy Research for publishing the book and supporting Cohen. While Cohen is a senior fellow at the National Center he wrote the book for Capital Research Center (who also published the book), a non-profit think tank in Washington DC. Check out Capitalresearch.org for more information. The National Center first broke this story with its own blog entry, http://www.nationalcenter.org/Blog.html.
JCM
Way to stay on topic there, JCM.
We (the U.K. and the U.S.) are exactly analogous to the Lebanese. We have the Hezbos among us too. In the present U.K. matter, the (hopefully aborted)evildoers are “members of the Pakistani community”. In the U.S., who and where? In Dearborn? at C.A.I.R? Who and where?
They are among us, and unless we figure out how we deal with this, we must accept there will be “innocent civilian” losses, just as in S. Lebanon. Without more vigorous action, ultimately we are enablers of our own home-grown Hezbos, and thus forfeit any claims of innocence.
I think peace is possible – I for one can at least force the women in my extended family to wear burkas. I’m in pretty darn good shape and I have a strong arm for stoning and flogging.
Maybe it’s time to raise the stakes and do a little asymmetrical warfare ourselves. Suppose that every time we discover something like this, a couple of “fiery clerics” get smoked. It might help to impress the seriousness of the situation on the rest.
Maybe it’s time to raise the stakes and do a little asymmetrical warfare ourselves. Suppose that every time we discover something like this, a couple of “fiery clerics” get smoked. It might help to impress the seriousness of the situation on the rest.
Eventually these maniacs will pull something off, and then this will seem like less of a jest.
Mitch, terrorists need to be threatened with incarceration in a climate controled environment with 3 halal meals a day, access to a mosque, a quran in the cell, free education, a well stocked library, state of the art exercise equipment, free legal representation, total medical and dental care, television, DVDs, conjugal visits and free housing and food stamps for their dependents. Make it loud and clear that’s their fate if they continue to kill our women and children. Tough love is not always easy but is necessary under some circumstances.
atta’ boy, JCM! freezing islmaofacists into submission at the expense of our mother earth is another bushitler plot for christian domination of the world. Thanks for the expose’
Well, I don’t know about anybody else but I’m advising my grandchildren to invest in large, air mobile chippers that produce a rich, organic mulch. /sarcasm off.
Get real, because somewhere between this and Club Gitmo is where we will have to wind up.
I can remember, Cold War period, inventorying classified docs including the sealed envelope with the names and last known addresses of potential detainees we were to pick up and take to a judicial processing center upon declaration of a State of Internal Security Emergency.
And, once again there is serious discussion of just how such a program would work. They range from a sort of CCC camp right up to Super Max lockdown. Will it happen? Eventually, it has to. Will there be mistakes made? Of course, humans will be making the decisions. Will there be fuzzy standards for detention? Yes. Will grudges and paybacks figure in? Whatta ‘ya think? Will there be abuse and “profiling”? Yep. Will we be safer? If it’s done right, yes.
Will our freedom of movement, association and speech be impacted? Yeah. Will it be worth it? Your call.
CAIR is reminding us that at least these chaps were not trying to hijack the planes.
From an article at the UPI site, via Drinking From Home:
LONDON, Aug. 7 (UPI) — U.K. anti-terror laws are discriminating against Muslims and indirectly fuelling extremism, the country’s top-ranking Asian police officer said Monday.
Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur said that anti-terror practices such as stop and search tended “to be based more on physical appearance than being intelligence-led,” leading to a sense of anger and alienation among the Muslim community.
He told the National Black Police Association conference in Manchester: “Not only has anti-terrorism and security legislation been tightened across many European countries with the effect of indirectly discriminating against Muslims, but other equally unwanted practices have also emerged, including ‘passenger profiling’ as well as increased stop and search and arrest under terrorism legislation.”
There was a “very real danger” that law enforcement agencies were misusing the counter-terrorism label, with the effect of criminalizing minority communities, he said.
“The impact of this will be that just at the time we need the confidence and trust of these communities, they may retreat inside themselves.”
I can’t remember where I saw it, but there was this period piece on tv dating from WW2 days. In it, bearded Uncle Sam is getting dressed down by an off-camera voice who tells him to wake up, wise up, stop being a sap, get moving and round up those sneaky japs among us.
No doubt the motive in airing it was pedlogical: to show us how stupid and comical and racist we were back then.
In my case, the lesson didn’t stick. In times of peace and quiet it’s easy to snicker at what our grandparents thought and did to win a war.
Today, I’m not snickering. I bet I’m not alone.
Tarique is right. The fact that they didn’t plan to hijack the planes clearly shows that muslims in England are not yet fully behind the big plan to kill all infidels. Look out Big Ben if they ever get mad!
A few minutes ago on TV an “expert” on terrorism, whatever that is exactly except a good retirement gig for a lot of ex-government types–good, bad and indifferent–suggested that dreaded, rights-killing, next step to fascism profiling needed to be done by the airlines.
I really think that is where we need to be headed if we want a functional and relatively safe airline industry and international travel. It seems just common sense to me to look at what types of people are committing terrorist acts and to develop a profile–age (say late teens to late 30’s), race (people from predominantly Muslim countries or homegrown Muslim converts), sex (primarily males), behavior (the profile that has already been in force)–so that scarce resources can be concentrated on those with a high liklihood of being terrorists rather than spreading your efforts across the entire population to satisfy the god of political correctness. Given our current political climate though, infested as we are by PC and the victim industry, I don’t think this is possible yet.
anon 2:13,
goesh’s, Next Big One, which worries me some too, might just sweep a lot of PC cobwebs away and allow us to Do What Must Be Done.
Rest assured, what ever it might be it will still be derided and distorted by some.
Profiling is only temporary … there will not be a profile when the Islamofascist European crop ripens … at that point it could be anyone, dressed any way, of any age. I say check everyone — and continue to check everyone. If it’s inconvenient – then, well Good Morning America.
Funny, I just eavesdropped a jaw-dropping conversation today over lunch. In sum, you just gotta question the timing, and it’s all about who can frame the issues in the midterm election. I wonder if this guy said the same thing when Clinton fired rockets at bin Laden in the midst of his sex scandal. I also wonder when the timing is “right” for a terrorist attack so that there’s no chance that softer heads might confuse it for wagging the dog.
Just think of what that statement suggests: either a massive conspiracy to invent terrorist threats from whole cloth, or to time the release of information on genuine threats to the disadvantage of the Democrats. Both assume a level of expertise the Bush administration by all accounts lacks, and assumes similar competence on the part of Democrats who would surely win elections were it not for such ill-timed misinformation.
The other main issue with “timing is too good” is that the timing is, well, horrid.
So, Leiberman lost? Why should that have *anything* to do with staging one. MUCH MUCH better to talk up a terrorist threat for a month or two and then have one unfold right before the election (you know, when people might actually remember it). This will also only “deflect” attention from everything else for a few days at most – useless in affecting an election months away. You would want it foremost in thier minds as they are in the voting booth.
Right now it deflects attention away from nothing and will be forgotten. You must believe in people crafty enough to secretly create a global conspiracy yet stupid enough to not unviel it at the most opertune time.
BTW, you wonder how long before it is imagined as a conspiracy. The answer is before they even heard it. They have already decided that each and everyone is a conspiracy and upon hearing it the only decision is why the timing is too good and what issue is being deflected (Iraq is used when there is no more immediate concern to them – it’s always useful).
Need a little pick me up after the news today? Follow this link to LTC Randolph C. White’s speech to a graduating Infantry class at Ft. Benning.
Love that speech and have sent it all around the place. For those who have not viewed it…..take 12 minutes and enjoy. Back, again, to the shaking head and slack jawed mode, which seems to be my normal state of late. 🙂 Who ARE these people? No, not the Islamists, the left. They swear Bush is the world’s biggest idiot, then assign the most outrageous ‘plots’ to him. Can they simply not see what is going on these days in the world…..apparently their rabid hatred of ‘anything Bush’ overrides good old common sense. I mean, admittedly, I had a real hard spot for Clinton, but when it came to my own personal safety, heck, Clinton be damned and I’ll lock step along. Politics, although engaging, fails to matter when national, and personal, security is involved. These people want to KILL US. Why is that so hard to process for so many? I simply don’t get it.
Let’s have a police state and give up our rights, that way we’ll be safe.
Let’s have a Sharia State and stop eating pork, that way we’ll be safe.
Ginger:
I’m afraid the answer to your question is that if the Left actually had to admit there was a REAL problem with Islamic terrorists, it would also be admitting that they needed to have a rethink about so many other issues (Iraq, multiculturalism, Bush, Blair, “root causes”, Israel, America, the West etc etc) which they hold near and dear to their hearts. It would cause a complete melt-down.
There is a fundamental difference between the British approach to terrorist attacks, the processes that they use, and the results that they achieve when compared with the American.
The cause of the difference is probably both structural and systemic.
The Brits treat terrorism as a crime. They always have done. I hope that they always will so do.
That means the lead in any investigation is controlled within their police force. OK, they have or create specialist teams to undertake the job. They have input to the team from a wide range of other government agencies. They always have done. I hope that they always will so do.
I think that US law agencies would do well to send a couple or more teams to Britain to just sit and watch – see how it should be done.
Suggestion for you – give your next vote to the guy or party who proposes taking politics, politicians and political patronage out of your law enforcement agencies. Did you vote for Rumsfeld? Did anyone vote for Rumsfeld? Why is he Secretary of Defence then? Who is in charge of CIA? Who put him in the job? Is he the best person to do the job? Same for FBI. Same for your local police force…
In the meantime, remember that terrorists are criminals. They are not a “state”. They are international organised crime. They are not a religion. They are international criminals.
Treat them as such.
Hello Neo and your con pals
Unimaginable. Well, Neo, I think you got close to the point when you call that word, in the context of this breaking news story, hyperbole.
I understand you are a therapist so let me suggest this tact: it seems to me that 24 folks who are willing to drink an explosive soft drink high up in the sky, and who do not possess wings, are depressed.
Suicidally depressed. Perhaps we might spend some time exploring that angle as compared with the predictable here-come-the-jihadi song we are singing with ever increasing disonnance.
If not, if you insist on pumping up the us against Them Laden balloon, well it’s not shocking either. In the latest war Israel has out killed Hezbollah by an overwhelming margin. So there are some folks out there with a deadly combination of religious fanaticism and collective grievance.
Neo-con puppet…..I still don’t get it….and I am over 50 so please speak very slowly and clearly….are you telling me that had you been in Britain, or anywhere for that matter today, you would have casually gotten on an airliner without a care in the world because “bush and blair are evil’ and you hate the ‘war’. Is that what you are seriously proposing? That somehow, they will know you are on ‘their side’ and so you are safe? I’m serious here…please explain this thinking to me beacuse I just can’t understand this point of view. Do you actually think the jihadists give one shit what your politics are? That they will somehow ‘save’ you at the end of the day? I just keep shaking my head….maybe I am too ‘mature’ to grasp your views, I don’t know. Seems idiocy to this reader.
Yes, guys, how could we get it so wrong? They were only depressed young British criminals.
Move along, nothing to see here.
Leftist idiots.
the term “mass murder on an unimaginable scale” has been realized during the last 30 days in lebanon while the free world -led by Bush of course- was watching. In parts of Africa, Asia and Latin America around 6,000 children die on daily basis due to water borne diseases taht can be cured if Mr John Bolton and the UN can do a decent job in development. This is what I call “mass murder on an unimaginable scale”.
Batir:
Yes, mass murder on an unimaginable scale could also be prevented if the Muslim Janjaweed would stop murdering Christians in Darfur, too…but you wouldn’t care a fig about that, would you?
I am more and more convinced that half the world is beyond hopeless, and that Khruschev was right—the Socialists WILL bury us.
Probligo=problematic,
I’ve worked anti-terror and counter insurgency with the Brit’s back in the day and since.
Your assertion, That means the lead in any investigation is controlled within their police force is sheer crap. Home Office, Foreign Office, Ministry of Defense, Five, Six, Special Branch, SAS, SBS and the Bobby on the pedal bike in Lancs all have an oar in the water.
What they do do well is “secondment”, the assigning of people from other agencies to what we would call inter-agency task forces. That’s not to say that they don’t have turf wars too but they aren’t hampered by the Posse Comitatis Act and will assign military types with “special skills” to overtly civilian operations.
They also have their draconian and Byzantine Official Secrets Act.
Prob(lematic), pull the other one
In the meantime, remember that terrorists are criminals. They are not a “state”. They are international organised crime. They are not a religion. They are international criminals.
The problem is that many terrorists, while not a “state,” are aided, abetted and used by states to conduct proxy warfare against the West. If terrorists were simply “international criminals,” with no assistance from Islamofacist states, their murderous scope and effectiveness would be only a comparatively minor irritant similar to the ‘Crips’ or ‘La Eme,’ which would make them a law enforcement problem. In such a hypothetical case they could be safely consigned to Interpol or the NYPD.
But since they are largely funded, trained, armed and directed by Islamofascist states they must be considered military targets.
Of course they are not a religion, true enough. But they all belong to a religion and perform their murder in the name of a religion. There’s little use in trying to ignore the obvious when it keeps slapping you in the face.
The Brits treat terrorism as a crime. They always have done. I hope that they always will so do. That means the lead in any investigation is controlled within their police force.
There were 4 entities involved in the investigation: Scotland Yard, MI5, US Intelligence and Pakistani Intelligence. Note that 3 out of the 4 are not police forces. To speak of control by the British police is to simply split hairs.
BTW, Ginger, glad you enjoyed the speech. It was a barn burner, wasn’t it?
“Suggestion for you – give your next vote to the guy or party who proposes taking politics, politicians and political patronage out of your law enforcement agencies. Did you vote for Rumsfeld? Did anyone vote for Rumsfeld? Why is he Secretary of Defence then? Who is in charge of CIA? Who put him in the job? Is he the best person to do the job? Same for FBI. Same for your local police force…”
Probligo, sorry to say but that is really nonsense. Cabinet officials are Constitutional appointments, we “vote” for them when we elect Senators and Presidents. Any candidate who promised to take “the politics” out of this process would be an idiot. The process is supposed to be political.
“remember that terrorists are criminals. They are not a “state”. They are international organised crime. They are not a religion. They are international criminals.”
Probligo: the Mafia, the Yakuza, the Triad, the Russian Mafia are international crime syndicates. The Islamic fascists are a subset of a religion, with religious goals. To ignore that is, well, to be ignorant. You aren’t, so don’t be.
Now for agreement: the police powers are necessary in dealing with them. The disagreement: military force is also necessary. Both methods are needed, applied as needed. Personally, I believe we need to amend laws to single out the Islamic Fascists as a special case that should be meted the most draconian punishments. European, Australian, and Kiwi sensibilities notwithstanding. You guys like “Hate Crime” laws, perhaps Islamic Fascism should be considered the ultimate “hate crime”, as it is against all of Western Civilization and its ethnic groups (yeah, all of us are ethnic groups too, who would have thought we could be ethnic groups).
…and so we learn a little more about the avatar that is the old wasp…
No word from Yhamir? Was he/she/it picked up? Time to fill up Gitmo, again!
Yes, Batir, it’s John Bolton that has been holding up development in Africa. And only being overrun by Muslim fanatics can help them now.
Prob(lematic),
It should come as no surprise to anyone who has hung around Neo’s blog for a while. I’ve “disclosed” that I am a former counter intelligence, counter-insurgency type with academic attaboys,and languages in several areas. The kind of work I have done is a little bit like being in the Irish Republican Army; “Once in, never out.” There is usually a seat at high table for the “Old Boys”.
And, as you know, I have very little patience for “soft boys”. You would do well to view the video I linked to above to get some idea of how American’s feel.
One of the prouder moments of my life prior to the birth of my children, was graduating from an Infantry related school at Ft. Benning. Don’t judge us from the scummy crust that has built up on our coasts, in our Heartlands, we are slow to anger but once angry are implacable.
@John Daly: Time to go back to rehab for a refresher course, dude. When you can hit the ball a mile but the club head is all blurry, it’s time to get help.
@WearyG: What made you think I was joking? We are at war, and war requires killing. The various imams, muftis, and holy men are themselves staying at home but sending the suicide bombers on their missions. If anything, the ones who urge those stupid, fanatical losers to blow themselves up in a Sbarros are the ones most urgently requiring the application of a well-placed bullet. Let’s get them. I can’t imagine fighting a war in which the enemy’s command and information structure was exempt from attack. If you don’t like thinking about it this way, consider what these creatures consider a legitimate target. Hint: to them, legitimate targets have just started wearing big boy pants, and can sing “The Itsy-Bitsy Spider.”
Reality sucks, doesn’t it?
The New York Times editorial says:
“It comes like a punch to the gut, at times like these, when our leaders blatantly use the nation’s trauma for political gain. We never get used to this. It never feels like business as usual.
“On Wednesday, when the administration already knew that British agents were rounding up suspects in what they believed was a plot to blow up planes en route to the United States, Vice President Dick Cheney had a telephone interview with reporters to discuss the defeat of Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut in a Democratic primary. Mr. Cheney went off on a rather rambling disquisition, but its main point was clear: In rejecting Mr. Lieberman, who supported the war in Iraq, the Democrats were encouraging “the Al Qaeda types.”
“Here is what we want to do in the wake of the arrests in Britain. We want to understand as much as possible about what terrorists were planning. To talk about airport security and how to make it better. To celebrate what worked in the British investigation and discuss how to push these efforts farther. It would be a blessed moment in modern American history if we could do that without turning this into a political game plan.”
Re: NYT editorial
What “worked” was what the NYT is very much against – wiretapping the conversations of suspected terrorists.
grackle: You wrote: “What “worked” was what the NYT is very much against – wiretapping the conversations of suspected terrorists.”
The NYT was never against wiretapping. It was against wiretapping without warrants. If you are a true conservative, you’d value individual liberty and you would be against it too.
Warrants are easy to obtain from a judge and can be received within a few hours based on secret evidence presented to a judge. This kind of oversight by the judicial branch is essential because such checks and balances are the bedrock of our American democracy. Bush and the neocons, with their concept of the imperial presidency without any checks on the president’s power, is undermining that.
A few hours is much longer than most people speak on the phone.
The phone “thing” was politically opportunistic bull manure. It really and truely would have required those listening to foreign suspects in other countries to *hang up* if they didn’t have a warrent for a number called in the United States.
How do you solve that problem, Rock, if it’s so very easy? Get a warrent for the next call and figure any lost intelligence is just the price one pays for virtuous living?
I don’t think that anyone outside of the administration was interested in solving the problem. I think they were interested in the fabulous opportunity to score political points.
So what if the timing helps Blair or Bush? Like the boy who cried wolf, in the end there really was a wolf!
The bombings in London could have been avoided. Why didn’t we have screaming headlines when it was discovered that the cell responsible for the atrocities was the same one that orchestrated the suicide bombing of Mike’s Place Cafe in Tel Aviv one year before?
If we had recognised that the BRITISH perpetrators were NOT working alone and had followed up, all those dead and maimed would be alive today.
Why are we in denial? When will we believe that Muslim extremism is a threat to your world?
When will we understand that we are allowed to protect ourselves????
And if there are “many many good Muslims out there” as appalled as we are at the terror acts and atrocities carried out in the name of ISLAM, then NOW IS THE TIME FOR THEM TO STAND UP AND SAY SO, LOUDLY, CLEARLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY.
Not all authorities are trying to scare their citizens – some are trying to encourage them; look, for example, here: http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ai=214&ar=782wmv&ak=null
plaese see also :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WLoasfOLpQ
Excellent videos, thank you very much for providing them. And thank you Neo for the blog…stumbled across it and am enjoying the read and points of view. Tis a could thing to be informed and I appreciate what you all are providing in my search. Thanks again.
Chris
John Daly, you know nothing about depression. That’s clear. Otoh, you must certainly be expert on ignorance as a way of life. Please continue.
pete, and your point was …that we did not hear daily reports on the 100-300 Saddam was killing? Consult John Daly for assistance in his support group for those just such as you.
As a letter writer in today’s New York Times says:
“We are fortunate indeed to have averted an attack of such deadly magnitude as that apparently planned for flights departing London to the United States.
“Being fortunate, however, does not make us right.
“For the United States and Britain to “stay the course” we seem to have set for ourselves — in the Palestinian territories, in Iraq, in Iran and now in Lebanon — is to invite further such attempts, in some of which we may not be so fortunate.”
—
“Mass murder on an unimaginable scale”
Only if you have a really lousy memory and have forgotten the Lebanon, Iraq, Vietnam, Cambodia, the ‘disparus’ of South America in the 1970s and 80s, etc, etc.
It’s strange, because the British police are usually quite good at imagining things. Jean Charles de Menezes’s imaginary “heavy winter coat” and his imaginary “bomb belt with wires coming out” for instance.
Our government and police have told so many lies recently that few people still trust them. We’ll have to wait and see if any of those arrested on Thursday are successfully prosecuted.
In the meantime thousands of very real Israeli shells and bombs continue to rain down on her unfortunate neighbours.
For the United States and Britain to “stay the course” we seem to have set for ourselves — in the Palestinian territories, in Iraq, in Iran and now in Lebanon — is to invite further such attempts, in some of which we may not be so fortunate.
The anti-war crowd always seem to exaggerate. Britain and the US are not in Palestinian territories or Lebanon. Fact-based debate is not a strong point of the anti-war crowd. Something the anti-war crowd never seems to understand: To try to appease these murderers is to invite “further attempts” and their scorn for being feckless as well.
And through it all, Condoleesa Rice continues to insist that Israel must further “empower” the Palestinians. They already control land, which they have turned into the world’s biggest gun-running and car-stealing center. But it they get just a bit more “empowered” they are going to blow up the world.
But of course that is unimaginable, right? Ayala
The government and police have told so many lies that no one trusts them? Really? May I then make a large assumption that you find trustworthiness in, ah, say, the media? Particularly that regarding the many sins of the Israeli shells and bombs and the seemingly acceptability of the Hezbos’ armaments?
btw…..Daniel Henninger has a quite good piece in today’s Opinion Journal: http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/dhenninger/?id=110008779
I don’t care what you people say, Islam is a religion of peace. The acts of a few disgruntled, impoverished young men reacting to US aggression and domination cannot be applied to 99.9% of Muslims who only want to live in peace.
Fair enough J. Carter…..I’ll listen, but only after you adress a very growing list of terrorist and terrorist-wannabes that seem to all have ‘Islamic’ sounding names and orientations….and then, to prove your point to me, to paraphrase Boortz…show me the OUTRAGE by members of your religious orientation at being hijacked by the .01% that is decidedly NOT a ‘religion of peace’.
Oh….and one more thing….disgruntled, IMPOVERISHED young men? Huh? Many of them are driving beemers and according to the Bank of England had thousands of GBP in their bank accounts. Impoverished? How about the 2 in Ohio? They had over 11,000 IN CASH on them. Impoverished? With university degrees? Give me a damn break.
grackle–
But, but, *all* of Israel is occupied territory!
ginger–
Those terrorists will never harm me. Unlike big bad Bush, I support stem-cell research, abortion rights, and science education. The jihadists don’t have a religious agenda, and are merely alientated progressives that deserve our support! They’d never hurt a friend!
🙂
BWAHAHAHAHA! A friend? Ask the Lebanese children about that. Good lord….where do you all sit an incubate?
ginger–I like anon above is pulling your leg. Note the smiley.
With all the moonbats, running around with their hair on fire, irony may not be a good idea. But then, target discrimination is sometimes difficult in a target rich environment.
>red faced< If he was pulling my leg, I took the bait. If he is not.....good lord, the idiots are on the march. As wasp said....these days it is oftentimes difficult to discern satire. Sorry.
Today’s NYT editorial, quoted above, seeks “…to understand…to talk…(and) to celebrate….” HaHaHa. My son’s plastic action figures have more vigor than these latte drinkers.
J Carter: What alternative universe are you living in? Islam has NEVER been a religion of peace. Not ever! It’s mission since it’s inception – from day ONE – has been to convert as many as possible by any means possible. In its first fourteen hundred years, that was accomplished by the sword. Only in the last century or so, as the Islamic world really collapsed in on itself, has conversion been more “voluntary”.
I would also note that “Islam” does NOT mean peace, it properly translates as “submission”.
KAREN writes:
— “Mass murder on an unimaginable scale”
Only if you have a really lousy memory and have forgotten the Lebanon, Iraq, Vietnam, Cambodia, the ‘disparus’ of South America in the 1970s and 80s, etc, etc.–
Well, Karen, I haven’t the learning to list all of the Islamic Empire’s atrocities–from the recent ones of Iran trying to wipe out Israel (whose ‘unfortunate neighbors’ seem to choose guerrillas, military weapons and armed missiles as a means of friendship) to all the hundreds of thousands, who have died: in Algeria, Dafur, other parts of Northern Africa; India, Afghanistan, Iraq. Muslim terrorists menace SE Asia, from Indonesia to the Phillippines. Yes, War is the favorite sport of the Muslim world, without question, for they love killing, blowing up women and especially children.
How many innocent Muslims have the jihadi ringleaders murdered because such figures did disagree, believing Islam to be a religion of peace?
“The anti-war crowd always seem to exaggerate. Britain and the US are not in Palestinian territories or Lebanon. Fact-based debate is not a strong point of the anti-war crowd. Something the anti-war crowd never seems to understand: To try to appease these murderers is to invite “further attempts” and their scorn for being feckless as well.”
Who said Britain or the U.S are in Palestine or Lebanon?
Show us.
grackle said: The anti-war crowd always seem to exaggerate. Britain and the US are not in Palestinian territories or Lebanon. Fact-based debate is not a strong point of the anti-war crowd. Something the anti-war crowd never seems to understand: To try to appease these murderers is to invite “further attempts” and their scorn for being feckless as well.
suzy asks: Who said Britain or the U.S are in Palestine or Lebanon?
Show us.
As requested by suzy:
For the United States and Britain to “stay the course” we seem to have set for ourselves — in the Palestinian territories, in Iraq, in Iran and now in Lebanon — is to invite further such attempts, in some of which we may not be so fortunate.
grackle wrote: suzy asks: Who said Britain or the U.S are in Palestine or Lebanon?
Show us.
As requested by suzy:
For the United States and Britain to “stay the course” we seem to have set for ourselves — in the Palestinian territories, in Iraq, in Iran and now in Lebanon — is to invite further such attempts, in some of which we may not be so fortunate.
No, but Israel — which has been described as “the biggest unsinkable aircraft carrier of the USA in the Middle East” — is embroiled in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.
—
Someone commented: For the United States and Britain to “stay the course” we seem to have set for ourselves — in the Palestinian territories, in Iraq, in Iran and now in Lebanon — is to invite further such attempts, in some of which we may not be so fortunate.
grackle said: The anti-war crowd always seem to exaggerate. Britain and the US are not in Palestinian territories or Lebanon. Fact-based debate is not a strong point of the anti-war crowd. Something the anti-war crowd never seems to understand: To try to appease these murderers is to invite “further attempts” and their scorn for being feckless as well.
Roger responds to grackle: No, but Israel — which has been described as “the biggest unsinkable aircraft carrier of the USA in the Middle East” — is embroiled in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.
grackle: Roger can “describe” Israel any way he wants but the fact is that Britain and the US are not in the Palestinian territories or Lebanon. In debate the facts need to be given at least a passing nod.
Does anyone else find it amusing that the anti-war crowd alternates between vehemently declaring that terrorists are not a ‘real’ threat and cowering in fear lest we stir them up?
The US pays for the Israeli occupation and supplies ALL the weaponry. Over $10 billion in 2006. The US and Britain, by not seeking a cease fire, actively encouraged Israel in their destruction of Lebanon.
The US gives money to a lot of folks, including the Palestinians until recently(a government run by avowed terrorists needs to raise its own money, thank you very much). And yes, the US gives a boatload of money to Israel, a policy of which I wholeheartedly approve.
I guess it’s understandable that the anti-war crowd’s assertions have little basis in fact. Fact can be a dangerous thing to denial. Actually Israel manufactures most of its own weaponry.
Point of fact: The Merkava tanks were not supplied by the US. Ditto Israeli aircraft and all the small arms. Israel manufactures most of its own weaponry. All this is easily found on the internet. Would it be too much to ask that the anti-war crowd do a bit of research and fact-checking before regurgitating anti-war slogans?
The fact is that the US and Britain are not in Lebanon or the Palestinian territories, however much the anti-war crowd try to insist that they are.
Sorry, substitute weaponry for ordnance.
Israel’s arms industry was established by a special deal with the US and much underhanded dealing with apartheidt South Africa. Nice friends.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1209/p16s01-wmgn.html
What exactly do you get for all that money except for more costs and bigger tax bills? Do they actually do anything for the US aside from make you loathed in the very region that you need to court?
It is just bizarre.
_The US gives money to a lot of folks, including the Palestinians until recently(a government run by avowed terrorists needs to raise its own money, thank you very much_
Despite Hamas being encouraged to participate by the US? And, while 17 months into a unilateral ceasefire. Seems a bit confusing to me. Or was it all a plan to starve the Palestinians into eternal slavery to the Israeli master race?
Ever read about the Warsaw ghetto?
Despite Hamas being encouraged to participate by the US?
Justaboy keeps saying this but gives no real evidence. If he is referring to the fact that the US encouraged the creation of the democratic nationhood of Palestine, of course the US did. But that doesn’t constitute encouragement of Hamas. Who would have guessed that the process would have produced a Hamas-run government, a terror group dedicated to the eradication of Israel? Certainly not our CIA, a corrupt civil service too busy with its own political agenda to provide accurate intelligence.
And, while 17 months into a unilateral cease fire
Could ‘justaboy’ be referring to the Sharm el-Sheikh Summit of 2005? But that meeting resulted in a joint declaration of cessation of violence by Sharon and Abbas. It is sometimes difficult to figure out exactly what the anti-war crowd is talking about. Like justaboy’s reference to the Warsaw Ghetto. They are strong on obscurity, conspiracy theories, sloganeering and implication, but very weak on fact-checking and explicit treatment of an issue.
Or was it all a plan to starve the Palestinians into eternal slavery to the Israeli master race?
Mostly we humans are damned by our own words. Here the reader is made painfully aware of one of the more goofy anti-war poster-level slogans. I guess this is what passes for debate in their circles.
By the way, boiled down, what the article says is that the US provides substantial aid to Israel. Duh. If that’s the best justaboy can offer … When will the anti-war crowd stop offering up the obvious as if it furthered their arguments? May the aid continue – it’s money well spent.
Why is it well spent? What positives do you receive from it? It is an extraordinary amount of money for mostly military purposes.
What positives? One great positive: Israel still exists despite several attempts to destroy her. Money well spent.
No, the US encouraged Hamas to participate directly …
Again, ‘justaboy’ continues with his assertions. No link, though. Just his flat statement. Justaboy has been wrong about the facts of issues too many times for me to take this at face value.
… and blind Freddy’s dog could have predicted that they would almost certainly win a fair election. If Bush and the neocons didn’t know that, it is surely a stark reminder of their incompetence.
The whole Western world was surprised that an electorate would choose to become a terrorist state. In the West we tend to think evil leaders are entirely to blame for the perfidy of various belligerent states and forget(or deny) that most Muslims enthusiastically support terrorism. Indeed, “Freddy’s dog” could have predicted it. But Muslims don’t generally support terrorism … oh no, they just elevate it to governmental office.
… I was referring to Hamas’ unilateral cease fire, which the Israelis did not reciprocate.
Again, I was hoping for more than mere unfounded assertion, but I don’t think a link will be forthcoming no matter how much I hope. Justaboy has a set of treasured slogans that he likes to put forth, evidently believing they’ll be swallowed by the reader without challenge.
I believe it was you who brought aid into it.
No, it was justaboy: The US pays for the Israeli occupation and supplies ALL the weaponry. Over $10 billion in 2006.
BTW, Justaboy was wrong about the weaponry – Israel manufactures virtually all its own armament.
And you expect them to like you?
No, I don’t. I don’t even want them to “like” me. I figure if ‘they’ liked me then something would be drastically wrong with me. I would no longer be a civilized lover of freedom but some sort of cowed subject of the Caliphate. It’s good ‘they’ don’t like me. It means I’m still free.