| Author |
Message |
    
themp
Supporter
Username: Themp
Post Number: 3194
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 11:29 am: | 
|
From Kevin Drum:
THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING BOMB PLOT....The Associated Press provides the latest news on the airline bombing plot:
Home Secretary John Reid, Britain's chief law-and-order official, acknowledged that some of the suspects would likely not be charged with major criminal offenses, but said there was mounting evidence of a "substantial nature" to back the allegations.
"Mounting" evidence? Shouldn't we already have lots of evidence after over a year of intensive surveillance? WTF is going on here? And then there's this:
Two top Pakistani intelligence agents said Wednesday that the would-be bombers wanted to carry out an al-Qaida-style attack to mark the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 strikes, but were too "inexperienced" to carry out the plot.
The two senior agents, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that if the terror cell members arrested in Pakistan and Britain had appropriate weapons and explosives training, they could have emulated massive attacks like those five years ago in New York and Washington as well as the July 7, 2005, London bombings.
Sure, and if I had an IQ of 200 and a PhD in oncology maybe I could find a cure for cancer. But since I don't, no one should stay up nights waiting for me to produce one. Likewise, there are lots of dimwit copycats who'd like to be the next Osama bin Laden, but they're not worth more than a routine roundup unless they have the serious operational capacity to do something about it. These guys, on the contrary, "had not attended terror-training camps in Pakistan or Afghanistan and had relied on information gleaned from text books on how to make bombs."
So: was this a serious conspiracy? Or was it like the plot to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge that turned out to be a mentally disturbed dude with a blowtorch? Or the financial district alert in New York City that turned out to be based on information more than three years old? Or the plot to blow up the Sears Tower that turned out to be "more aspirational than operational"? Or Jose Padilla? What news about this plot are we going to discover buried on page A13 a couple of weeks from now?
I won't pretend to know what to think about the way this has been handled. Was it about winning elections? Building public support for draconian security legislation? Plain old bureaucratic incompetence?
Or was it real? |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1926
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 11:55 am: |
|
Hopefully what we have here is a real plot foiled by good police work and international cooperation and not another bogus terror threat bust made for political gain.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5544
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 1:20 pm: |
|
All of the broken-up plots mentioned by themp have an important common thread: They were announced at critical times in the political calendar. The latest one, which the British had been following for a year and showed no signs of being imminently executed (some of the plotters didn't even have passports), just by sheer coincidence was announced the day after the critical Connecticut primary.
Just like the two Orange Alerts issued during and right after the Democratic Convention in 2004 were mere happenstance. It's interesting that there haven't been any alerts since then, other than the very credible one after the 7/7 British train bombings. Now that we're in an election season again, it looks like the warnings are going to start popping up again.
They're going to have to push harder; Bush got no bump at all from this week's announcement. |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3722
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 3:27 pm: |
|
Hoops, I've got to disagree a bit on this one. My hope is that this IS a completely bogus plot that was contrived purely for political gain, and which will become fully known to the public as such. |
Joanne G
Citizen
Username: Joanne
Post Number: 520
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 4:20 pm: |
|
Timing also seems to support the shaky political stance of our Prime Minister, too, who was being forced to make some heavy concessions for local issues such as fuel pricing, national water policies, foreign policy esp regardless refugees and humanitarian intake, and industrial relations policies. The one thing he is able to do consistently is play on the fear/safety factor: it always boosts his ratings if a threat is uncovered and supposedly thwarted.
We have elections in three States before the end of the year, and a national election next year. |
3ringale
Citizen
Username: Threeringale
Post Number: 352
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 8:22 pm: |
|
I consider the Nation to be a rather left-of-center publication, but this is a pretty interesting article:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060828/groundhog_day
Cheers |
joel dranove
Citizen
Username: Jdranove
Post Number: 900
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 8:28 pm: |
|
What physical evidence was there against the 9/11 teams on 9/10?
jd |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2374
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 8:29 pm: |
|
I think they all had plane tickets, at the very least. which apparently puts them way ahead of this latest group of plotters. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5558
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 8:35 pm: |
|
Unlike a bomb plot today, hijacking a plane on 9/11/01 merely required boxcutters and muscle. Relevant physical evidence would have included, well, boxcutters.
The Nation article is pretty interesting. Whether or not the author's suspicions end up being well-founded, the logic is hard to argue with. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1462
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 9:16 pm: |
|
"critical Connecticut primary"
This was worth my time reading. Pure genius. Nothing like a democratic primary in a small state that has provided nothing on a national level for a long, long time.
Wait until you see what we have planned the second week of November! |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5560
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 9:23 pm: |
|
There are no "small states" in the Senate. |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 3005
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 9:25 pm: |
|
Third week in November I plan to eat Turkey Dinner. (Or is that the fourth week?). |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1464
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 9:34 pm: |
|
I agree tom. Can you honestly say that it was a big win for the Democrats when a Democrat won the Democratic Primary? Believe me, if my neo-con pals were doing high fives because we felt like we were going to keep a red seat red, then I'd smack them upside the head and say, no sh%t sherlock. I notice true libs on this board who really want to win back power aren't really posting on these threads because they are smart enough to realize this Connecticut thing means nothing to the final score. But I do love how it is taking so much spotlight and energy from other more pertinent races. When you libs lose by 2 or 3 Senate seats I will be here to remind you that you shouldn't have wasted so much time and energy on Connecticut. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5561
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 9:53 pm: |
|
Well no less informed and influential persons as Dick Cheney and Orrin Hatch see within it the seeds of the Nation's destruction. I had always considered it an intramural Democratic Party thing, but a lot of Republicans see it as very significant.
But if you tell me they're badly mistaken I'll take your word for it. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1465
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 10:16 pm: |
|
They are. Who cares who wins a Democratic scrimmage other than Democrats. As far as the spin by Cheney/Hatch this is what politicians do. They spin. I am going on record as saying I don't care who wins. I don't live their and I won't get excited, happy or mad, with what the voters in Connecticut do. If they want to elect a loser lib to promote the loser lib agenda they have that right. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5562
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 10:31 pm: |
|
Thanks -- and I'm serious here -- for not jumping on the "be afraid" bandwagon. |
Michaela
Citizen
Username: Mayquene
Post Number: 243
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 1:40 am: |
|
"There are no 'small states' in the Senate. There are no "small states" in the Senate."
Precisely.
Southerner, what 2 to 3 seats do you predict Dems will loose?
Because right now it looks like Dems will pick up Pennylvania, and perhaps Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Rhode Island and Tennessee. The GOP could pick up Minnesota. (www.cookpolitical.com)
It's incredibly disturbing that we have no idea if or to what degree this administration is playing up terrorist threats for political advantage, but since they are already on the record distorting intelligence to justify a mass invasion their credibility is, shall we say, ... lacking.
I fear what the GOP has "planned" for the second week of November could amount to election fraud, though I hate to be a conspiracy theorist. That said, I am one in this instance.} |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5563
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 1:47 am: |
|
Not for nothing, but seeing an election stolen is not like seeing little green men, and having your vote abducted is far more possible than being abducted by aliens. I think as soon as we allow ourselves to discuss it as though it were something from an X-Files episode, we've lost.
Stealing elections is common throughout the world and in our own history; it's seriousness and the very real possibility of it happening need to be played up, not made into the fodder for paranoids. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1467
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 7:35 am: |
|
Michael,
The current makeup of the Senate is 55 Repubs, 44 Dems, and 1 Ind. I think when all is said and done the Repubs won't pick up any net seats but they will win by 2-3 seats overall. Meaning the makeup will be something like 52-46-2. Or 52-47-1 or 51-47-2, or 51-48-1. All I care about is keeping control so if we lose a few net seats but still have the majority by 2-3 seats then I'm a happy camper and you libs can celebrate that you picked up some seats. We both win, except my boys will still be able to bury the liberal agenda in the committees. |
Twokitties
Citizen
Username: Twokitties
Post Number: 494
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 8:48 am: |
|
Redundant AND Boring. |
Chris Prenovost
Citizen
Username: Chris_prenovost
Post Number: 1038
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 9:00 am: |
|
Southerner, 'your boys' are the most incompetent, maladroit, downright evil men to ever occupy positions of high office. A dozen times in the last five years they have raised the 'terror alert level' to orange or red or whatever for purely political reasons. There has never been any evidence of any serious terror threat. Just a lot of innuendo and outright lies. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3760
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 9:59 am: |
|
Chris, you are assuming he cares about any of that, which he does not. The ends justify the means, and no matter what must be done for them to retain power is acceptable. I have little doubt that if it came to choosing between removing this administration from office or killing 25 million people in this country, Southerner's online persona would laugh, say kill the 25 million people, and claim that he loves it.
Or claim he is kidding. Or make some other inane comment.
He has become the eyespy of the Soapbox. Though eyespy is at least entertaining. |
Shanabana
Citizen
Username: Shanabana
Post Number: 941
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 10:10 am: |
|
Getting back to the original point: the speciousness of this "plot" was driven home to me by the fact that Bloomberg calims he knew about it for a couple of weeks, and yet they didn't alert homeland security to do extra checking and chucking of liquids at the airports until last week! That is either a SERIOUS bad judgement call by HS, if there was indeed a real threat, or a crafted announcement of a far less threatening situation than we were led to believe. |
Michaela
Citizen
Username: Mayquene
Post Number: 245
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 11:38 am: |
|
Southerner expects Republicans to lose seats?! Woah. |
Michaela
Citizen
Username: Mayquene
Post Number: 246
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 11:39 am: |
|
(P.S. It's MichaelA)
 |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 15379
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 3:51 pm: |
|
Hoops and notehead, I disagree with both of you. I can't be happy about a distortion made for political reasons, and I can't be happy about a terrorist plot. I can't think of which is worse. Do I have to decide?
|
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1469
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 9:27 pm: |
|
Rastro,
You're partially right. Your darn right I want to win at any cost. The cost of losing is just too high a price for my side to pay. I think many of you libs are starting to realize this.
Michael,
Yes, I expect the Repubs to lose some seats. I may be a neo-con homer but I'm not blinded like all the Kerry wannabe's on this board. It's like this. I don't care if my team gets outscored in the 3rd or 4th quarter as long as we win the game. You libs can pick up a seat or two and then celebrate. I'll be celebrating everyday when Stevens and the like don't let your bills see the light of day. |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 3006
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 11:00 pm: |
|
The cost of losing is just too high a price for my side to pay.
WHY? What could a Dem majority of 51-49 or 52-48 accomplish given the rules of the Senate and a Republican President?
I'll be celebrating everyday when Stevens and the like don't let your bills see the light of day.
That's not the way the Senate works. Besides what good is a bill seeing "the light of day" if it can't get passed?
I still say the Dems are better off not winning a majority but coming close. That way they can continue blaming the GOP for " the mess in Washington" and look forward to 2008. |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 3007
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 11:08 pm: |
|
Southerner: I'm surprised at what you posted because you always seemed to understand that the other side's winning doesn't mean the end of the world and your side's winning doesn't mean the advent of the messianic era! You take politics as a game to be enjoyed. That pisses off a lot of "serious" folks.
They seem to forget that if the 2000 election had gone "the other way" Lieberman would be VP, or maybe President or at least a leading candidate for President. How different would US foreign policy be under "Gore-Lieberman" instead of "Bush-Cheney"? |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 5428
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 11:44 pm: |
|
"How different would US foreign policy be under "Gore-Lieberman" instead of "Bush-Cheney"?"
...and thank God, we'll never know! |
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 10533
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 11:54 pm: |
|
We'd have $300 billion to waste on schools, health care and tax reduction. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5574
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 12:44 am: |
|
Yeah, if Gore had been elected terrible things might have happened.
We might have been subjected to a series of disastrous terrorist attacks on major cities, been unable to capture the perpetrators, had biological weapons loosed upon our citizens and again been unable to catch the criminals, found ourselves alienated from our allies and in an unaffordable, unpopular and unwinnable war.
Meanwhie, our economy would have been flat while an irresponsible Democratic administration spent us into a deficit the likes of which the world has never seen.
What a nightmare.
Oh wait... |
3ringale
Citizen
Username: Threeringale
Post Number: 357
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 8:01 am: |
|
I have no idea how accurate this article is, but it seems plausible:
Mass murder in the skies: was the plot feasible?
By Thomas C Greene in Washington
Published Thursday 17th August 2006 09:42 GMT
The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air;
And a loud voice came forth out of the temple of Heaven,
From the throne, saying, "It is done!"
--Revelation 16:17
Binary liquid explosives are a sexy staple of Hollywood thrillers. It would be tedious to enumerate the movie terrorists who've employed relatively harmless liquids that, when mixed, immediately rain destruction upon an innocent populace, like the seven angels of God's wrath pouring out their bowls full of pestilence and pain.
The funny thing about these movies is, we never learn just which two chemicals can be handled safely when separate, yet instantly blow us all to kingdom come when combined. Nevertheless, we maintain a great eagerness to believe in these substances, chiefly because action movies wouldn't be as much fun if we didn't.
Now we have news of the recent, supposedly real-world, terrorist plot to destroy commercial airplanes by smuggling onboard the benign precursors to a deadly explosive, and mixing up a batch of liquid death in the lavatories. So, The Register has got to ask, were these guys for real, or have they, and the counterterrorist officials supposedly protecting us, been watching too many action movies?
We're told that the suspects were planning to use TATP, or triacetone triperoxide, a high explosive that supposedly can be made from common household chemicals unlikely to be caught by airport screeners. A little hair dye, drain cleaner, and paint thinner - all easily concealed in drinks bottles - and the forces of evil have effectively smuggled a deadly bomb onboard your plane.
Or at least that's what we're hearing, and loudly, through the mainstream media and its legions of so-called "terrorism experts." But what do these experts know about chemistry? Less than they know about lobbying for Homeland Security pork, which is what most of them do for a living. But they've seen the same movies that you and I have seen, and so the myth of binary liquid explosives dies hard.
Better killing through chemistry
Making a quantity of TATP sufficient to bring down an airplane is not quite as simple as ducking into the toilet and mixing two harmless liquids together.
First, you've got to get adequately concentrated hydrogen peroxide. This is hard to come by, so a large quantity of the three per cent solution sold in pharmacies might have to be concentrated by boiling off the water. Only this is risky, and can lead to mission failure by means of burning down your makeshift lab before a single infidel has been harmed.
But let's assume that you can obtain it in the required concentration, or cook it from a dilute solution without ruining your operation. Fine. The remaining ingredients, acetone and sulfuric acid, are far easier to obtain, and we can assume that you've got them on hand.
Now for the fun part. Take your hydrogen peroxide, acetone, and sulfuric acid, measure them very carefully, and put them into drinks bottles for convenient smuggling onto a plane. It's all right to mix the peroxide and acetone in one container, so long as it remains cool. Don't forget to bring several frozen gel-packs (preferably in a Styrofoam chiller deceptively marked "perishable foods"), a thermometer, a large beaker, a stirring rod, and a medicine dropper. You're going to need them.
It's best to fly first class and order Champagne. The bucket full of ice water, which the airline ought to supply, might possibly be adequate - especially if you have those cold gel-packs handy to supplement the ice, and the Styrofoam chiller handy for insulation - to get you through the cookery without starting a fire in the lavvie.
Easy does it
Once the plane is over the ocean, very discreetly bring all of your gear into the toilet. You might need to make several trips to avoid drawing attention. Once your kit is in place, put a beaker containing the peroxide / acetone mixture into the ice water bath (Champagne bucket), and start adding the acid, drop by drop, while stirring constantly. Watch the reaction temperature carefully. The mixture will heat, and if it gets too hot, you'll end up with a weak explosive. In fact, if it gets really hot, you'll get a premature explosion possibly sufficient to kill you, but probably no one else.
After a few hours - assuming, by some miracle, that the fumes haven't overcome you or alerted passengers or the flight crew to your activities - you'll have a quantity of TATP with which to carry out your mission. Now all you need to do is dry it for an hour or two.
The genius of this scheme is that TATP is relatively easy to detonate. But you must make enough of it to crash the plane, and you must make it with care to assure potency. One needs quality stuff to commit "mass murder on an unimaginable scale," as Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Stephenson put it. While it's true that a slapdash concoction will explode, it's unlikely to do more than blow out a few windows. At best, an infidel or two might be killed by the blast, and one or two others by flying debris as the cabin suddenly depressurizes, but that's about all you're likely to manage under the most favorable conditions possible.
We believe this because a peer-reviewed 2004 study (http://www.technion.ac.il/~keinanj/pub/122.pdf) in the Journal of the American Chemical Society (JACS) entitled "Decomposition of Triacetone Triperoxide is an Entropic Explosion" tells us that the explosive force of TATP comes from the sudden decomposition of a solid into gasses. There's no rapid oxidizing of fuel, as there is with many other explosives: rather, the substance changes state suddenly through an entropic process, and quickly releases a respectable amount of energy when it does. (Thus the lack of ingredients typically associated with explosives makes TATP, a white crystalline powder resembling sugar, difficult to detect with conventional bomb sniffing gear.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mrs. Satan
By now you'll be asking why these jihadist wannabes didn't conspire simply to bring TATP onto planes, colored with a bit of vegetable dye, and disguised as, say, a powdered fruit-flavored drink. The reason is that they would be afraid of failing: TATP is notoriously sensitive and unstable. Mainstream journalists like to tell us that terrorists like to call it "the mother of Satan." (Whether this reputation is deserved, or is a consequence of homebrewing by unqualified hacks, remains open to debate.)
It's been claimed that the 7/7 bombers used it, but this has not been positively confirmed. Some sources claim that they used C-4, and others that they used RDX. Nevertheless, the belief that they used TATP has stuck with the media, although going about in a crowded city at rush hour with an unstable homebrew explosive in a backpack is not the brightest of all possible moves. It's surprising that none of the attackers enjoyed an unscheduled launch into Paradise.
So, assuming that the homebrew variety of TATP is highly sensitive and unstable - or at least that our inept jihadists would believe that - to avoid getting blown up in the taxi on the way to the airport, one might, if one were educated in terror tactics primarily by hollywood movies, prefer simply to dump the precursors into an airplane toilet bowl and let the mother of Satan work her magic. Indeed, the mixture will heat rapidly as TATP begins to form, and it will soon explode. But this won't happen with much force, because little TATP will have formed by the time the explosion occurs.
We asked University of Rhode Island Chemistry Professor Jimmie C. Oxley, who has actual, practical experience with TATP, if this is a reasonable assumption, and she tolds us that merely dumping the precursors together would create "a violent reaction," but not a detonation.
To release the energy needed to bring down a plane (far more difficult to do than many imagine, as Aloha Airlines Flight 243 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Flight_243) neatly illustrates), it's necessary to synthesize a good amount of TATP with care.
Jack Bauer sense
So the fabled binary liquid explosive - that is, the sudden mixing of hydrogen peroxide and acetone with sulfuric acid to create a plane-killing explosion, is out of the question. Meanwhile, making TATP ahead of time carries a risk that the mission will fail due to premature detonation, although it is the only plausible approach.
Certainly, if we can imagine a group of jihadists smuggling the necessary chemicals and equipment on board, and cooking up TATP in the lavatory, then we've passed from the realm of action blockbusters to that of situation comedy.
It should be small comfort that the security establishments of the UK and the USA - and the "terrorism experts" who inform them and wheedle billions of dollars out of them for bomb puffers and face recognition gizmos and remote gait analyzers and similar hi-tech phrenology gear - have bought the Hollywood binary liquid explosive myth, and have even acted upon it.
We've given extraordinary credit to a collection of jihadist wannabes with an exceptionally poor grasp of the mechanics of attacking a plane, whose only hope of success would have been a pure accident. They would have had to succeed in spite of their own ignorance and incompetence, and in spite of being under police surveillance for a year.
But the Hollywood myth of binary liquid explosives now moves governments and drives public policy. We have reacted to a movie plot. Liquids are now banned in aircraft cabins (while crystalline white powders would be banned instead, if anyone in charge were serious about security). Nearly everything must now go into the hold, where adequate amounts of explosives can easily be detonated from the cabin with cell phones, which are generally not banned.
Action heroes
The al-Qaeda franchise will pour forth its bowl of pestilence and death. We know this because we've watched it countless times on TV and in the movies, just as our officials have done. Based on their behavior, it's reasonable to suspect that everything John Reid and Michael Chertoff know about counterterrorism, they learned watching the likes of Bruce Willis, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Vin Diesel, and The Rock (whose palpable homoerotic appeal it would be discourteous to emphasize).
It's a pity that our security rests in the hands of government officials who understand as little about terrorism as the Florida clowns who needed their informant to suggest attack scenarios, as the 21/7 London bombers who injured no one, as lunatic "shoe bomber" Richard Reid, as the Forest Gate nerve gas attackers who had no nerve gas, as the British nitwits who tried to acquire "red mercury," and as the recent binary liquid bomb attackers who had no binary liquid bombs.
For some real terror, picture twenty guys who understand op-sec, who are patient, realistic, clever, and willing to die, and who know what can be accomplished with a modest stash of dimethylmercury.
You won't hear about those fellows until it's too late. Our official protectors and deciders trumpet the fools they catch because they haven't got a handle on the people we should really be afraid of. They make policy based on foibles and follies, and Hollywood plots.
Meanwhile, the real thing draws ever closer.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/08/17/flying_toilet_terror_labs/print.html
|
Twokitties
Citizen
Username: Twokitties
Post Number: 496
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 8:40 am: |
|
Tom:  . |
John Caffrey
Citizen
Username: Jerseyjack
Post Number: 491
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 8:44 am: |
|
Southerner, $10. of mine to a cup of coffee from you at the Village Diner says there is a major terrorist threat between October 15 and the election. Criteria: elevation of the code level from Dufay Blue or whereever it is now, to at least orange.
I just know those terrorists won't give up that easily. |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1934
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 12:13 pm: |
|
3ring - thankyou can not be said enough for your posting of that article.
It is a must read for all of us and if you have only skimmed past it, I suggest you read it critically.
The question is really still
WHY IS OUR GOVERNMENT TRYING TO SCARE US?
While you consider the answer to that question remember that we are still free. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5575
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 1:21 pm: |
|
It sure seems like a clever way to look like you're doing something without actually inconveniencing any important contributors like shippers, cellphone purveyors, or chemical plant operators. It's of a piece with the myth that this brave administration is protecting us by the extraordinarily vital step of not filling out a form after listening in on terrorists' plots.
It's incredible that allowing cellphone use on planes is still on the table, but if you fill out a form the terrorists win. |
John Caffrey
Citizen
Username: Jerseyjack
Post Number: 493
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 2:27 pm: |
|
Hoops wants to know why our government is trying to scare us. The answer comes in the form of a BBC documentary, "The Power of Nightmares." It traces the historial use of fear as a deliberate means of unifying the nation at the beginning of the cold war. It continues with the expansion of the fear principle during Nixon and St. Ronald's administration.
It is a three hour presentation and is available from Amazon and will soon be available on Netflix.
A summary is offered by googling the title. This would also be a good one for the anti-war series at The Goat. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1472
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 3:50 pm: |
|
John,
I agree with you so we'd be betting on the same side.
anon,
You know I agree with you on this. I think your analysis is right on. As a good lib you are one of the few who see the big political picture. In my opinion, the best thing that could happen to the Democrats is a close loss because, as you stated, they could run against "Washington" and win everything in 2008. Why other libs don't understand this makes me chuckle. If we win in November by a slim margin, I will be very, very nervous heading into 2008 if Iraq doesn't turn around.
And you're right about my post being a little overstated with the "cost is too high" statement. I retract it. As you know, I ultimately want gridlock and for many government programs to cease to exist. Starve the beast is me. Therefore, as long as either side can obstruct I'm pretty happy. I'd just rather us be in power because, as you know, it sucks to be totally cowtowed like the Dems did to us for decades and what we are currently doing to the Dems.
But, no matter, who ultimately has the majority, I'll be pretty happy. Life is freakin great and MOL is fun reading. If the Dems do take control, I'll be waiting for the Democrat scoreboard watchers to emerge. Probably the same guys who have been telling me how immature it is! |
Michael Paris
Citizen
Username: Publius
Post Number: 41
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 3:56 pm: |
|
Thanks John. I'll bring it up at our next meeting.
The September 21 film is set--Morris's "The Fog of War."
Our group, the South Orange-Maplewood Committee to Stop the War, www.SOMAstopthewar.org, plans to join several other NJ groups for a vigil/demonstration in Summit, NJ, on Saturday, September 16th. We want to remind people living in the NJ's 7th congressional district that their representative, Republican Mike Ferguson, supported and still supports the Bush Administration's war in Iraq. We'll be posting flyers around South Orange/Maplewood for the event. We'll gather here and go over to Summit as a group.
I agree with you and others here that we'll all be on high alert come October. The Miami arrests are looking more and more like classic counter-intelligence BS. Way too early to say about the recent ones, in my humble opinion. Life sure is grand when there is absolutely no good reason to trust anything your government says.
Best,
Michael Paris
|
3ringale
Citizen
Username: Threeringale
Post Number: 358
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 6:30 pm: |
|
 |
John Caffrey
Citizen
Username: Jerseyjack
Post Number: 499
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, August 20, 2006 - 11:59 am: |
|
Michael, you might also want to carry a couple of signs drawing attention that Mike Ferguson and Rodney Frelinghuysen haven't returned the $36,000 of Tom Delay's dirty money they received. Nor have they given it to charity.
Southerner, Damn. I would have enjoyed meeting you. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page