Resident Brits, please let us know what the sense is in public.
CNN's Peter Bergen, who interviewed Bin Laden and is really good on terrorism, points out that this is probably al Qaeda because they had a similar plot in the Pacific in the mid-90s and they had a similar bomb contruction method at one point.
Well, glad my UK trip was last month and not this month.
Yep, gonna be some serious time spent sittin' around.
CNN's Peter Bergen, who interviewed Bin Laden and is really good on terrorism, points out that this is probably al Qaeda because they had a similar plot in the Pacific in the mid-90s and they had a similar bomb contruction method at one point.
Operation Bojikna
"The two had already converted fourteen bottles of contact lens solution into bottles containing nitroglycerin, which was readily available in the Philippines. Yousef taped a metal rod to the arch of his of foot in place of the detonators. Yousef and Mohammed wore jewelry and clothing with metal to confuse airport security. They packed condoms in their bags to support their story that they were meeting women."
My understanding is that the explosive in this case was two components that would pass screening individually but were to be reacted in flight.
Nitroglycerine certainly will not pass a screen.
The only people I know who have been affected are my niece and nephew - new security guidelines mean that when they fly to Greece for their holiday (next week I think) they can't take any toys with them. I assume my sister called some sort of hotline to find this out.
An interesting programme on Channel 4 this week suggested that British born Muslims are more at odds with the British way of life than their immigrant parents or grandparents. It was suggested that immigrants came to this country to find a better way of life, and that their offspring, freed from the struggle simply to stay alive are able to study harder and take a more religious view of life. Leading (in some cases) to a rejection of the country they were born in and feel no loyalty to.
http://www.channel4.com/news/microsites/D/dispatches2006/muslim_survey/#
It's thought provoking at least, without being sensationalist.
This is the survey results (it's an Adobe document, don't know if that makes a difference)
http://www.imaginate.uk.com/MCC01_SURVEY/Site%20Download.pdfNitroglycerine certainly will not pass a screen.
Not only that, but isn't nitroglycerine pretty difficult to carry? I had to look up how to make the stuff stable and it doesn't sound like a plausible component of this supposed plot:
Early in the history of this explosive it was discovered that liquid nitroglycerin can be "desensitized" by cooling to 5 to 10 °C (40 to 50 °F), at which temperature it freezes, contracting upon solidification. However, later thawing can be extremely sensitizing, especially if impurities are present or if warming is too rapid. It is possible to chemically "desensitize" nitroglycerin to a point where it can be considered approximately as "safe" as modern High Explosive formulations, by the addition of approximately 10 to 30% ethanol, acetone, or dinitrotoluene (percentage varies with the desensitizing agent used). Desensitization requires extra effort to reconstitute the "pure" product. Failing this, it must be assumed that desensitized nitroglycerin is substantially more difficult to detonate, possibly rendering it useless as an explosive for practical application.
Liquid explosives
" The best known "liquid bomb" is nitroglycerine, commonly thought of as a deadly material that will detonate with the slightest movement.
This idea is a myth, said Dr Alford, chairman of the explosives company Alford Technologies.
In fact nitroglycerine, kept properly, is relatively stable and will not explode unless "you whack it quite hard," he said. Usually mixed with another material, such as nitroglycol, it would have to be ignited with a detonator."
Remember - it is only the mint mentos that work!
Funny how being a suicide bomber simplifies safety concerns.
What, that isn't obvious? You thought there might be some concern for the life of a person about to kill themselves? I thought that, given the voltile nature of the explosive, that transporting it without setting it off early was an issue. Interesting link, Hippikos.
Most news sources are saying that the Brits foiled the plot through deep covert intelligence. If that's the case, well done Britannia. The world owes you a round!
[SIZE=1]Uh, we'll make it good old Whitbread, though, none of that "sports drink" nonsense.[/SIZE]
Kitsune,
Hilarious.
You da bomb.
I expect the airline industry will take another hit in loss of business due to fear. I'd never fly!!!! Always hated it but it keeps getting worse.
The news said three of the terrorists had made a trip to Pakistan to meet with persons unknown but authorities suspect it was Osama's boys. :neutral:
I expect the airline industry will take another hit in loss of business due to fear. I'd never fly!!!! Always hated it but it keeps getting worse.
You'd honestly give up and let the terrorists, well, terrorize you so easily?
This one is probably... overstated. Eleven Egyptian students failed to find their way from NYC to Montana fast enough. Nothing to see here, I think, move along.
From your link:
Missing Egyptian Students - Never Intended to Attend University
This is nation wide, with specific region of interest is the eastern seaboard--from Maine to Florida. The predicate for this action is that these individuals are in the U.S. illegally and are wanted for questioning. Approach with caution.
Note: Two actually surrendered; they were not captured. Also, don't be confused by the domain name. "HomelandSecurityUS.com" is not DHS.
You'd honestly give up and let the terrorists, well, terrorize you so easily?
It's really airplanes I hate, the feeling of helplessness up there. I have flown to Europe and Mexico and did not like flying one bit.
Add the risks now and it's over the top scary.
I'm sure the amount of fuel they burn so high up is a big factor in global warming...so I say: ban all airplanes!!! LOL
It's really airplanes I hate, the feeling of helplessness up there. I have flown to Europe and Mexico and did not like flying one bit.
Add the risks now and it's over the top scary.
You might want to consider a forum that helps people with their fear of flying, such as
this one.
Really, even after this supposed threat there is still little reason to fear getting on an airplane. You'll find more rationale to fear driving a car or riding a bicycle if you're really concerned about injury or death. In fact, you take more of a chance with your life by simply walking out the door each morning. If you take that risk, why not enjoy life and travel a bit? A fear of flying is never fun, but it is irrational and it can be treated, even on your own.
I find it amazing, though, what a mere threat can do. Terrorists don't even need to actually attack people, anymore, to disrupt life, instill fear, and damage economies. They can do all of this, along with changing our political stance, values, and laws by merely making a threat or starting a rumor. We fear terrorists changing our world, but they don't need to. We do it just fine on our own at the mere mention of a potential attack.
If they really wanted to take lives, they would have strolled into the unsecure, now extremely crowded areas of Heathrow wearing explosives wrapped in ballbearings and pushed a button. Why do that when the effect of panic and fear without death is just as bad?
We do it just fine on our own at the mere mention of a potential attack.
More accurately, the authorities do it for us.
I don't like to fly because it's a fucking hassle to get through security. I fly less now, especially along the East Coast. Sometimes it's almost as fast to drive, once you factor in the hassle time.
Terrorists have not caused me to change my lifestyle much. We did avoid taking our kids to the playground when the DC sniper was picking random people off every couple of days. But I still presented myself as an exposed target as I walked to and from work each day.
From CNN.com, this morning: "London police guard a house raided in the probe."
This is how London police guard the house of a suspected terrorist? No offense to the Brits, but I would have expected trooper-like guards in armor standing at the ready instead of someone dressed in a tap dancing cabbie outfit gnawing their nails in worry.
It's hardly likely other terrorists are going to stop by when the occupants have already been taken into custody (and probably cordoned off outside the picture?) I would assume the WPC is simply there to check credentials of officials who need to enter.
Anyway, we need all our trooper-like armoured guards to make sure there's no pushing in at Heathrow - airport crowds can get pretty tetchy.
I find it amazing, though, what a mere threat can do.
"How many mines does it take to close a chokepoint?"
"None, and one press release"
If they really wanted to take lives, they would have strolled into the unsecure, now extremely crowded areas of Heathrow wearing explosives wrapped in ballbearings and pushed a button. Why do that when the effect of panic and fear without death is just as bad?
Because anything that happens on/with an airplane gets ten times as much publicity as it would otherwise.
That, and they want to make us all believe that air travel is vulnerable. Terror, remember?
My wife's boss just cancelled a flight to the East Coast today because of this.
From CNN.com, this morning: "London police guard a house raided in the probe."
She's just shooing away tourists and reporters. Why should she worry? She's probably surrounded for blocks with London's finest.:D
No offense to the Brits, but I would have expected trooper-like guards in armor standing at the ready instead of someone dressed in a tap dancing cabbie outfit gnawing their nails in worry.
None taken.
We learned our lesson the hard way with the accidental shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, and the recent bungled raids in Forest Gate. Doing things the 'American way' would just exacerbate an already delicate balancing act with ethnic minority communities who feel let down and persecuted by the police.
It's interesting to note that Tony Blair continues to fanny about on a yacht in Barbados whilst his country remains on 'critical' state of alert. Hopefully his and Bush's days in office are numbered.
I would have expected trooper-like guards in armor standing at the ready instead of someone dressed in a tap dancing cabbie outfit gnawing their nails in worry.
Well, bear in mind you're seeing a carefully composed and cropped photo; she's probably not the only cop there. But she's only guarding a crime scene to preserve evidence...how much force does that take in a London suburb, with backup a radio call away? On a day when a hell of a lot else is going on that requires manpower?
I don't know whether this is indicative of my own overpowering cynicism or the general mistrust with which our government and security forces are viewed generally these days....But the first thing that crossed my mind was "yeah right. I'll believe it when I see someone in court". We get that many people 'arrested' for supposed terrorist plots in this country only for them to be quietly released due to there being no actual evidence against them, or for them to end up being charged with video piracy, or growing pot.
I'm not the only one who felt instantly suspicious when this hit the news. I said to mum, have you heard about the terrorist threat? she just rolled her eyes. A work colleague shrugged and said "yeah, almost justifies our having to give up a 'little of our freedoms' huh?" (this was said in a voice dripping with sarcasm)
All the news reports are very careful to refer to it as an 'alleged terrorist threat' or some other such caveats. Yeah man, they've been burned before.
It could all turn out to be an actual threat and our security forces could have protected us from bloody slaughter. But I have my doubts and so do a lot of people in the UK. My guess is they got all this from *ahem* "a usually very reliable source".
Here's an idea: Let's say you are really mistrustful of this whole 'rounding up the terrorists' thing AND you're pissed about the long lines at the airport, etc. Completely understandable. We could create an airline that does NOT security screen at all and the people who are upset about the fantasy of threat or the length of time it takes to get thru the airport could fly this line.
hahahahah Good idea Bri:)
Here's an idea: Let's say you are really mistrustful of this whole 'rounding up the terrorists' thing AND you're pissed about the long lines at the airport, etc. Completely understandable. We could create an airline that does NOT security screen at all and the people who are upset about the fantasy of threat or the length of time it takes to get thru the airport could fly this line.
Would that be a smoking allowed airline?
DanaC has a point though; several "terrorist" cases in the UK turned out to be a mistake with completely innocent people being killed and/or injured.
Would that be a smoking allowed airline?
No. No smoking, no drinking and your women must cover up.
Why is this such a dismissive idea? Put your money where your mouth is.
IF the planes had been blown up over the Atlantic, the cries would be, "WHY OH WHY DIDN'T OUR GOVERNMENTS
KNOW ABOUT THIS?" etc. Can't really have it both ways, eh? Even you must know that.
We could create an airline that does NOT security screen at all and the people who are upset about the fantasy of threat or the length of time it takes to get thru the airport could fly this line.
Or you can fly with me, and I don't search you at all. Carry a concealed handgun: fine with me, I've got mine too.
The fact is, if I wouldn't trust you in my airplane
[B]with [/B]a weapon, I wouldn't trust you in it
without one anyway.
Drawback: Limited destinations and schedules available, and no lavs.
No. No smoking, no drinking and your women must cover up.
No topless service then I presume. Sorry, I'll make reservations with Hooters Air.
Hell, I would fly on an un-checked aircraft.
I mean damn, the terrorists themselves are going to use it with their photoshopped Visas & passports and concealed weapons. Probably safer than the usual flights, where no matter what colour, nationality, religion or age you are simply seen as available statistics for international blackmail.
At least I would be able to take a cheap bottle of vodka & a bottle of Diet Coke on with me and forget the danger 30 minutes into the flight. What member of cabin crew would berate me for being peacefully drunk knowing I might have a home made vest underneath my top? And I don't mean one knitted by my Gran.
I always get crotchety when I've got my semtex knickers on....
I might consider topless service in warm weather. :-)
Alrighty then, where can I check in?
mmmm..... how about Orlando? by Value Jet.....
I always get crotchety when I've got my semtex knickers on....
Can you get a synthetic semtex-cotton shirt that is wrinkle free? I'm not good with an iron.
Even before this 'Brit foiled' plot, I have been hearing (and have not supporting facts) that the private 'business jet' business is booming. With so much security and so much time waiting in airports, the private jet business flying from Teterboro and NE Philly is said to be a major growth industry. This only because commercial airlines service has become so inconvenient and so challenging.
Do numbers or other trends to confirm this?
I don't know whether this is indicative of my own overpowering cynicism or the general mistrust with which our government and security forces are viewed generally these days....But the first thing that crossed my mind was "yeah right. I'll believe it when I see someone in court".
Here come the charges. So far it looks very real, with actual physical evidence, bomb-making materials, and martyrdom videos.
Yep. At the same time, this week, I saw three apolgies in national newspapers for wrongly *identifying* terrosist suspects.
Yes, they might actually have foiled a plot this time. But there have been over 400 muslim men arrested in the last 3 years on suspicion of involvement in 'terrorist' activities and of them less than 20 have been charged with anything. Of those 20, most have been charged wth unrelated crimes (stuff that the cops found in their flats or houses during their fishing expedition such as potplants or pirate cds.)
Maybe this one was real.
OMG. I can't believe you all arrested innocent Muslim men.
Shame, shame on you.
I'm waiting, Dana, et. al., to fly my airline.
You're full of it. even with evidence you refuse to believe. Good luck to you. When radical Muslims say they hate the West they mean YOU, too. YOU. you all live in a world where muslims hate only the US.
They are coming for you, too.
Savor that for a bit.
I'm sure, Nay, I am CERTAIN, that radical muslim means you, danaC, and all those 'enlightened' females (who so laughably think muslim cares about them--) are at risk! Sign on up! We welcome your sacrifice! Where do we strap on the bomb? the cloak of holes?
mmmmm..... does your plane fly out of Ohio City, Brianna?
if so, maybe I'll pass....
You're full of it. even with evidence you refuse to believe. Good luck to you. When radical Muslims say they hate the West they mean YOU, too. YOU. you all live in a world where muslims hate only the US.
They are coming for you, too.
Ya know what Brianna? The Muslims say exactly the same about the West. Hey, your own Chief has repeatedly told that in his "Axis of Evil" speeches, the Iraq invasion and with his ridiculous "Bring em on" quotes. But what else can you expect from a President whose intelligence goes as deep as a saucer?
Question: How many new terrorist plots will need to be uncovered to ensure a Republican triumph in Novermber? I would not be shocked to see no one ever convicted in the (alleged) plot by British muslims to bring down planes. But by the time the cases are dismissed, another white girl will be abducted and killed and the media will not pay any attention.
Question: How many new terrorist plots will need to be uncovered to ensure a Republican triumph in Novermber?
That depends on how much cred the Dems are able to build around security issues. Tough row to hoe.
Question: How many new terrorist plots will need to be uncovered to ensure a Republican triumph in Novermber?
Still waiting for that al Qaeda attack on the Prudential Building in Newark NJ. Oh. Information on that attack was obtained by torture in Guantanamo. Torture is so acceptable and obtains such reliable information that we went to Orange Alert. Clearly the Prudential Building will be attacked. After call, credibility is George Jr.
That depends on how much cred the Dems are able to build around security issues. Tough row to hoe.
Democrats cannot even decide to be for the war or against the war. Sound like John Kerry playing politician? Democrats under Nancy Pelosi are so disfunctional as to not even frame an obvious issue - George Jr corporate welfare for the drug industry in a latest modification to Medicaid. Democrats first have to learn how to use the hoe - they are currently that disfunctional.
I would not be shocked to see no one ever convicted in the (alleged) plot by British muslims to bring down planes.
I really don't think you can argue that there was no plot, or that it was all orchestrated by the US government in order to boost support. Well, not without decending into conspiracy theories more ridiculous than government mind-control devices.
Shame, shame on you.
I'm waiting, Dana, et. al., to fly my airline.
You're full of it. even with evidence you refuse to believe. Good luck to you. When radical Muslims say they hate the West they mean YOU, too. YOU. you all live in a world where muslims hate only the US.
They are coming for you, too.
Savor that for a bit.
I'm sure, Nay, I am CERTAIN, that radical muslim means you, danaC, and all those 'enlightened' females (who so laughably think muslim cares about them--) are at risk! Sign on up! We welcome your sacrifice! Where do we strap on the bomb? the cloak of holes?
a) I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that radical muslim groups hold as much hatred for my country as they do for yours; as evidenced by the London bombings. I have been under no illusion that we can stand 'shoulder to shoulder' and yet somehow be seen as entirely different and therefore deserving of different treatment:P
b) At what point did you get the impression that I thought radical Moslem men had any sympathy whatsoever for my feminist leanings? I would imagine your average radical Moslem, or even not-so-radical Moslem (along with quite a few other faiths) would consider my feminism disturbing, possibly revolting and certainly not something deserving of respect. Does this therefore mean I should develop an abiding hatred of Moslems?
c) Britain is clearly a target for terrorist acts. Any country engaged in the current 'Crusade' has made themselves a target by their involvement. To be entirely honest, terrorism isn't really a new phenomenon in the UK and the level of security hysteria seems entirely at odds with the level of the threat.
This does not mean that I don't see the threat.
Of course there is the possibility of this threat having been a genuine one. The fact that my (and many others) first response was ....yeah, believe it when you give me proof......is indicative of how many false alarms and fishing expeditions our security services have indulged in. Often these occur close enough to a vote on new security measures as to raise an eyebrow or two.
Still waiting for that al Qaeda attack on the Prudential Building in Newark NJ. Oh. Information on that attack was obtained by torture in Guantanamo. Torture is so acceptable and obtains such reliable information that we went to Orange Alert. Clearly the Prudential Building will be attacked. After call, credibility is George Jr.
Right area, wrong building, it will be a little closer to the water. A nondescript chlorine manufacturing plant. :eek3:
Any country engaged in the current 'Crusade' has made themselves a target by their involvement.
No, any country guilty of existing has made themselves a target. The US and UK have not been the only nations targeted by terrorists and not all nations targeted have been standing shoulder to shoulder with us.
The US and UK have not been the only nations targeted by terrorists and not all nations targeted have been standing shoulder to shoulder with us.
Examples? Supporting facts? Details that would also put that post into a perspective that was intended.
In March 1992, Muslims attack and kill an Archpriest, a Monk, and three laypersons at the St. Mary’s Monastery, El-Mouharak, Asyut.
In October 1992, Islamics attack, destroy and loot homes in El-Qousya, Asyut.
In February 1993,a Cairo café attack slew three via bomb.
In June 1993, Islamics ambush UN peacekeeping personnel, killing 23.
In December 1994, an Islamic bomb on Philippine Airlines Flight 434 killed Haruki Ikegami, Japanese businessman.
In that same month, Armed Islamic Group took hold of Air France Flight to Algeria.
In November 1995a suicide bomber killed 16 at the Egyptian Embassy, Islamabad, Pakistan.
In February 1996, Muslims in Egypt took a Coptic village, leveling homes, animal, crops and fields.
In August 1996, French Archbishop of Oran’s home was bombed, slaying him and his chauffeur. The Algerian Armed Islamic Group did it.
In December 1996, a Paris subway train was exploded, killing four, wounding 86.
In February 1997, a dozen Coptic Christians are killed while worship in their Abu Quorcas church.
In November 199758 were slain by murderers at the Hatshepsut’s Temple, Egypt.
In October 2001, Muslim murderers slay worshipers in Tomata Indonesian church
In the same month, Muslim killers shoot into church, slaying 18, in Bahawalpur, Model Town, Pakistan.
In December 2001, Muslim murderers slay Christian community, killing five, in Vwang, Nigeria.
In February 2002, worshipers in a Coptic Church in Egypt were set afire.
In that same month, three Christians were murdered by Islamics in Ilorin, Nigeria.
In that same month in Amman, Jordan, a vehicle was blown apart via car bomb, slaying an Egyptian and Iraqi laborer. The car was owned by the wife of the head of the Jordanian Anti-Terrorism Unit.
In March 2002 in Islamabad Pakistan, five are slain via grenade in a church. Forty-seven are wounded.
In April 2002 in Tunisia, Islamic suicide bombers kills 26 in historic synagogue. Islamic Army for the Liberation of the Holy Sites says they did it.
In the same month, Muslim killers slay twelve worshipers in a Christian village, leaving six wounded.
In May 2002 in Pakistan, a bus exploded, murdering 12 and wounding 19. Al-Qaida was suspected.
In the same month in Kapiisk, Russia, Muslim murderers set loose a bomb in the bushes that slew 42, wounding 150 others. Islamic al-Qaida suspected.
In June 2002, Islamic killers fired into a Neelum Valley, Pakistani bus, forcing it over a cliff, killing 10 persons, injuring 12 others.
In July 2002, grenades thrown into tourists in Mansebra.
In August 2002, six missionaries taken, two beheaded, in the Philippines. In Jhika Gali, Murree, Pakistan, at a Christian missionary school six are slain and four wounded in Islamic murdering attack against believers.
In August 2002, Kabul Afghanistan witnesses bomb explosion outside UN guesthouse, two wounded. Muslim killers suspected.
In September 2002 in Ahmedabad India, Muslims attack and slay Hindu monks and dozens of worshipers in a temple. Lashkar-e-Toiba takes responsibility.
In October 2002 in Dhabbah, Yemen, explosives kill one and wound four on French oil tanker Limburg.
In October 2002 in Bali, 187 tourists are slain by Muslim murderers at San Club on Legian Street. Al-Qaida told press they did it.
In November 2002 in Mombaasa Kenya, 15 killed by suicide bomber, 40 wounded. Al-Ittihad suspected.
In the same month in Mombasa Kenya, two SA-7 Strela antiaircraft missiles were launched but missed downing a Arkia Boeing 757. Al-Qaida, the Government of Universal Palestine in Exile, and the Army of Palestine claimed they did it.
In December 2002 in Makassar Indonesia, McDonald’s restaurant is exploded via bomb, 3 killed, 11 wounded. Laskar Jundullah did it.
In December 2002, three worshipers are slain and fourteen wounded in church in Daska Pakistan. Muslims are suspected.
In February 2003, Muslims kill fourteen and wound 8 worshipers in Christian village in Philippines.
In March 2003 in Mindanao, Philippines, a bus is attacked by Moro Islamic Liberation Front, killing nine and injuring four.
In April 2003 in Davao Philippines, a bomb kills 15 and wounds 55. Jemaah Islamiyah is responsible.
In May 2003, suicide bombers storm a residential complex in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, leaving 35 dead, wounding 200. Al-Qaeda suspected.
In May 2003, bomb attacks in Casablanca fly into restaurant, hotel, Jewish cemetery, Jewish Community Center and Belgian Consulate, leaving 33 dead and 101 wounded. Salfiya Jihadiya suspected.
In July 2003, a Catholic priest in Ranala Kot, Pakistan, was shot and slain in his home. Muslim "fundamentalists" are said to have done it.
In August 2003, Jakarta, Indonesia, Marriott hotel is bombed, killing 10, wounding 150. Jemaah Islamiyah suspected.
In January 2004 in Marathiwat, Thailand, Islamic killers stormed an armory, setting it on fire as well as burning 18 schools, leaving four dead and an unknown number wounded.
In February 2004, In the same month, Muslim murderers slay 49 farming community laborers in Nigeria. They had taken refuge in a church.
In the same month in Manveles, Philippines, Abu Sayyaf’s group bombed a ferry, killing 200.
In May 2004 In the same month, 11 Christians were burnt alive by Islamics in two churches in Nigeria.
In the same month, in Ambon, Indonesia, bombs kill one and injure 13 in a Christian neighborhood. Another bomb goes off near a church.
In the same month in Barentu Nrritrea, seven are slain and 80 wounded by bomb blast.
In the same month in Pattani Thailand, Islamics kidnap Buddhist civilian, then behead him.
In the same month in Turbat Pakistan, Islamics kill a 14-year-old boy and dozens are injured in a rocket attack against the Minister of Education.
In June 2004, Zainapora India, Lashkar-e-Toiba murders kidnap two, later slitting their throats.
In July 2004 in Jakarta Indonesia, a priest was slain and four wounded when gunmen attacked their church. It was near the site where over 2000 Christians have been slain by Muslims. :eyebrow:
When radical muslims say they hate the West they mean YOU, too. YOU. you all live in a world where Muslims hate only the US.
Then finish her incomplete thought. When radical Muslims say they hate, they hate the north, the south, the east, and the west. They hate anything that does not conform to strict Muslim teachings. So what was Brianna's point? To encourage fear? To advocate war and torture? To blame only Muslims for death, murder, and arson? This justifies UG advocated totalitarianism. Clearly we should be arresting and torturing more Muslims just so Brianna feels safer in an airliner.
In this case, bomb making equipment was found hidden. In this case, a terrorist plot was probably uncovered. A plot by Britains against Britains. A plot in the same vein as Timothy McVey and Egyptians who assassinated Sadat. A risk one inherits if one wants a free and open society. Sometimes terrorism succeeds. That justifies totalitarism?
As depmats noted and as xoxoxoBruce demonstrates with examples, it happens. It rarely happens but it happens. It is attempted more frequently against countries that foolishly try to impose will and order when peace and order is not yet wanted. Does that mean we should suspect every Muslim as Brianna advocates? We imprisoned and tortured about 700 Muslims in violation of American principles. Only 8 and maybe 40 were dangerous. Is this what Brianna advocates only because some terrorism is normal in society – as xoxoxoBruce demonstrates by example? Sorry. For an open society to exist, Brianna and everyone else must be at risk. A risk that approaches zero. A risk that does not justify totalitarianisms advocated by UG.
Still waiting for that al Qaeda attack on the Prudential Building in Newark NJ (because, in such fear, we tortured in Guantanamo and Abu Ghriad).
tw, even though we do run a risk of terrorism by running our society the way we do it we would be fools to just roll over and explain away the slaughtering of innocents as 'collateral damage'. There is a cohesive group performing these attacks, all muslims are not looking to destroy western civilization, but the people who ARE are overwhelmingly muslim. The unwillingness of muslim sects in the affected countries to condemn extremest groups is what has largely destroyed their reputations since it denotes tollerence of their actions.
What would you have us do? The attacks must stop, so how do you propose to root out the perpetrators with minimal collateral damage? I suppose one idea would be a psychological campain aimed at shaming anyone even remotely associated with the extremests. Force people to cut their ties and sever their support chains of sympathizers by promoting the attitude that the extremests and anyone who supports them are absolute, complete scum. People start to notice when others cross the street to avoid passing them on the sidewalk.
I didn't read tw's post (I never do) but I did catch my name in there as I rolled my eyes in a downward motion to the next post.
I think tw likes me.
tw, even though we do run a risk of terrorism by running our society the way we do it we would be fools to just roll over and explain away the slaughtering of innocents as 'collateral damage'.
As I expected, someone would completely misinterpret what I posted into the extreme. Let's take the obvious example: 11 September. At least four FBI teams were on the trail of 9/11 highjackers. In each case, superiors blocked those FBI investigations. As a result, 3000 people died. Why then should we turn the US into a totalitarian society as UG advocates.
Notice what I said we don't need - a totalitarian society. Why then do you post as if I said all FBI and other police units should be restricted from investigating crimes? Why do you post in response to something I did not say? Why do you post to something that is completely contrary to every one of my posts for a past 10 years?
What would you have us do?
Put back laws the existed in 2000 AND replace inferior management in places such as the FBI with people who come from where the work gets done. Another classic example of "85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management".
The president is told, "A second plane has just hit the World Trade Center. America is under attack." So what does he do? He sits for 15 minutes reading a children's book. We don't need totalitarianisms. We did not need more bureaucracy - Fatherland Security. We did not need more laws - Patriot Act. We needed people who would not stifle four FBI investigations into the 9/11 highjackers before highjackers could even get into planes.
Our top people so lied as to proclaim no one suspected terrorists would crash planes into buildings. And yet five years previously, even a best selling novel from Tom Clancy did that in Chapter One. Years previously, highjackers tried to do same to crash an airliner into the Eiffel Tower. Two famous examples of terrorists crashing planes into buildings and our leaders did not know? This is called competance - or preaching the president's spin? Our leaders lied to us and we did not fire them for saying, "no one suspected terrorists could crash planes into buildings". Instead we let them create many more layers of bureaucracy: Office of Fatherland Security.
The naive would advocate totalitarian and draconian laws when previous laws were more than sufficient. This so that we forget what George Jr, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Jane Garvey, etc all did on 11 September. They did nothing.
Can you answer the question "What would you have us do" without altering history, preventing elections, or denying the general public the vote?
Can you answer the question "What would you have us do" without altering history, preventing elections, or denying the general public the vote?
"85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management." In law enforcement - especially in the FBI and among their bosses - top management is reason for repeated failures.
Look back at history. Translators that have work erased just to slow down operations. Translator is even the girlfriend of the suspect whose conversations are being translated. The whistle blower Sibel Edmonds was instead fired. An FBI regarded with such suspicion (and justifiablely so) that people with skills (such as Arabic speakers) will not apply for jobs that are desperately needed. A crime lab that routinely mishandled evidence. Robert P. Hanssen who investigates spying is a Russian spy for decades. FBI agents do not even have access to computers found in most all homes - cannot even send e-mail from work. Colleen Rowley was named the “Time” person of the year when she went from F.B.I informant to F.B.I. whistleblower. This nation's #1 anti-terrorist investigator force out of a job only for political reasons. FBI has virtually no useful computer system. The SAIC replacement does not work because of top FBI mismanagement and will be scrapped after spending $170 million on an open ended project. It even suggests that Ruby Ridge and Oglala Lakota Pine Ridge events may need be reexamined.
So what did we do? We put the FBI beneath a man who advocates torture.
What would you have us do? Amazing that I should answer that question again especially when FBI top management incompetance has been reported in waves.
Put back laws the existed in 2000 AND replace inferior management in places such as the FBI with people who come from where the work gets done.
So, "No" would be a simpler and just as accurate answer to my question.
So, "No" would be a simpler and just as accurate answer to my question.
No is what a mental midget might answer. "No" obviously does not answer "What would you have us do".
If you were joking, well, "Hah, hah".
Alright. Alright. The solution is to elect the right people. Fair enough. Agreed, even.
Making any contingency plans, in case that doesn't work out?
Alright. Alright. The solution is to elect the right people. Fair enough. Agreed, even.
Making any contingency plans, in case that doesn't work out?
And so we made contigency plans: a secure court to handle emergency wiretapping situations that require judicial review. And yet even that legal principle (judicial review) was violated by a president who should be considered for impeachment. Impeachment - just another law already existing in the Constitution.
Alright. Alright. The solution is to elect the right people. Fair enough. Agreed, even.
Making any contingency plans, in case that doesn't work out?
you're the ones advocating democrocay and freedom as the universal panacea.... you work it out. Not my problem.