British Arrest 21 in Airline Terror Plot

As I understand it, this crackdown was spearheaded by Britain without US involvement. Also, blowing up several planes is still significant.

I don't think this entire thing has been cooked up.

i agree with leon. the threat was most likely real, but the political parties are going to exploit the event for all they can milk it as long as it brings them good PR.

Are you serious? This happened a few hours ago, the details are still coming in, and you are already yelling conspiracy.

"So what does blowing a plane up do besides taking out innocent civilians?"
It causes terror. That's why they are called terrorists.

Leon K...As I understand it, this crackdown was spearheaded by Britain without US involvement. Also, blowing up several planes is still significant....I don't think this entire thing has been cooked up.

I have no idea what the truth is but Blair and Bush have a long history of cooking together.

You are ridiculous. Killing innocent civilians is the only goal these people have. They want every citizen to live in fear. Blowing up government buildings isn't going to accomplish anything more than blowing up airplanes. What was the point of 9/11? Did they think our government or our economy would collapse? No they just want to kill.

Yeah, the War on Terror is the best thing that ever happened to autocrats, hands down. I figure in a few years we'll have to strip down to the bare nakedness and put on TSA approved Orange Jumpsuits to fly.

Of course, none of these rules will apply to the bigwigs; only the little guys will still be occasionally killed by "terrorists" so we'll remember our place and thank the Almighty State for the honor of taxing our income for their benevolent protection. Unless we disagree with the state and then we can live in Camp Guantanomo or you local equivalent.

No matter how you slice it, a racket is a racket.

The british dislike Bush and his policies just as much as any other european. I find it highly unlikely that they would do such a big favor for someone they dislike so much.

I do think it comes at a bad time, but the biggest issue still is the war in Iraq. I don't see how anyone can pin these arrests as proof the Iraq was was/is justified; unless they advocate the US invading the UK because there are obviously some terror cells. But we both know that is ridiculous.

I've never seen the word thwart used so often and universally among news reports.

It's unbelievable how many "terror plots" are being thwarted just in time for midterm elections. People in power are systematically using fear to manipulate the minds and hearts of people. Since they cant use the terror alerts anymore they have to uncover plots.

I find it funny that some of you are screaming that this has been cooked up. Anytime a plot has been intercepted, some people are so quick to cry that this is the government working their agenda.

The sad thing is that if this was indeed true, (and I am sure it is) and the terrorists actually carried the plan out and hundreds of people were killed, you guys would be the first to start crying that the government failed again to protect us. How could they let this happen? They've done nothing to make the world safer! They're not telling us the truth! blah blah blah.

Fact is, thousands of hard working people like you and I are at it everyday to ensure that these kinds of attacks do not come to fruition. When all their hard work pays off and hundred or thousands of lives (maybe yours) have been saved, they deserve some credit.

Who really has the agenda here?

Do you remember around this time 2 years ago before the presidential election, you had homeland security on tv every chance they got talking about the terror alerts, having them go up and down, creating a sense of panic and confusion. Bush gets elected and then what happens to the terror alerts?! They magically disappeared right! No mention, they just...stopped. Now fast forward 2 years and now you have "terror plots," replacing the terror alerts. If you have been watching the news you will notice that this is a pattern of uncovering terror plots recently, and this is no joke, at least the 5th or 6th terror plots uncovered within the last couple of months...convenient?

cordovas-- or maybe the terrorist are planning these around this time, if succeedingly, would def. oust any government party in right now. But your quickness to blame america first is quite bewildering, seeing as how they (and by they I mean the UK) uncovered a plan to blow up 10 planes, and all you can say is sarcastically "imagine that... right around election time"

Please open your eyes.

t's unbelievable how many "terror plots" are being thwarted just in time for midterm elections. People in power are systematically using fear to manipulate the minds and hearts of people. Since they cant use the terror alerts anymore they have to uncover plots.

Wow, that's rich. Keep on denying the reality until we all are blown up. Is that the way it should work?

Do you remember around this time 2 years ago before the presidential election, you had homeland security on tv every chance they got talking about the terror alerts, having them go up and down, creating a sense of panic and confusion.

Yes, Cordovas, I do remember the amount of time the terror level was raised. I also seem to remember that there were a significant amount of tapes and videos containing threats to national security. I believe that the panic and confusion might have been caused by that and not the response by DHS. Like I said before, if they had said nothing, and something happened, you'd cry, "they don't tell us anything! How could they not tell us? They're hiding stuff from us!"

And yes, it was close to election time. But you have to remember that the terrorist also have a stake in swaying elections as well. They have an agenda, not just DHS.

It's unbelievable how many "terror plots" are being thwarted just in time for midterm elections. People in power are systematically using fear to manipulate the minds and hearts of people. Since they cant use the terror alerts anymore they have to uncover plots. Now let's take a look at this situation. All airlines now have secured cockpits so someone intent on taking control of a flight wont be able to. So what does blowing a plane up do besides taking out innocent civilians? The news is telling me the supposed terroists the US "found" were very sophisticated and believed to be a large number of people involved. So does blowing up a plane crossing the atlantic really hurt the US? No, because if they had access to liquid explosives and "sophisticated" equipment then they would go after govt buildings right? I'm scrapping this threat as BS and another pathetic attempt to hold on to power...

Wow, my thoughts manifested through another.

I believe I posted something a week or so ago explaining how 911 was the pretext for this kind of psychological warfare. Who's at war you ask? The government (US and UK) and the citizens they supposedly represent. Who's going to win? That depends on how long it takes the people to WAKE THE FUQ UP!

Fact is, thousands of hard working people like you and I are at it everyday to ensure that these kinds of attacks do not come to fruition. When all their hard work pays off and hundred or thousands of lives (maybe yours) have been saved, they deserve some credit.

Cheers! I agree completely - and I'm one of those moderate-liberal wingnuts.

Unfortunately, there are several dozen folks doing the WRONG things, and putting us more at risk. Their clueless attempts at foreign policy, diplomacy, greed, and fear mongering have left us more vulnerable than we were five years ago.

Remember the overwhelming sense of grief and goodwill that was in the world the days after September 11th? Where is that now? All we've managed to do is cause more pain and grief in the world and galvanized more people against us.

Did we do it alone? No way. There are now dozens of crazy, manipulative, ideologues who are taking advantage of the situation and forming their own power bases through all of this. And we are helping them fuel their fires with each bomb Israel drops and every day that 100 civilians die on the streets of Iraq.

What we're doing now is NOT working. Things are not safer now than they were 5 years ago, no matter how many terror plots we stop. We need to change our tactics and figure out the right way to calm everyone down, which just might be pulling out of the immediate war zones and conceding that maybe, just maybe, we don't know everything there is to know about what's best for the middle east.

Then maybe we won't have 20 more terrorists willing to die just to cause us pain that we have to stop with the heroics of these folk who stopped this attack.

You all are giving cordovas just what he/she wants, a stink over the comment he/she made. Terrorist not only make the world unsafe but they also allow conspiracy minded individuals like cordovas to ramble off the first illegitimate thing that comes off their mind. Get a grip on reality and be thankful these idiots were stopped, not by the US, but by Britain. I don't think politician's need a vote from the European Union do they?

It's unbelievable how many "terror plots" are being thwarted just in time for midterm elections. People in power are systematically using fear to manipulate the minds and hearts of people. Since they cant use the terror alerts anymore they have to uncover plots. Now let's take a look at this situation. All airlines now have secured cockpits so someone intent on taking control of a flight wont be able to. So what does blowing a plane up do besides taking out innocent civilians? The news is telling me the supposed terroists the US "found" were very sophisticated and believed to be a large number of people involved. So does blowing up a plane crossing the atlantic really hurt the US? No, because if they had access to liquid explosives and "sophisticated" equipment then they would go after govt buildings right? I'm scrapping this threat as BS and another pathetic attempt to hold on to power...

I don't know what is worse. The fact that cordovas thinks this is true or that 14 other lunatics voted for his comment.

Or C:

That George Bush has fostered an environment of mistrust in America.

Ding Ding Ding!

Cordovas, I see where you're coming from with regard to misuse of terror threat levels, but that doesn't mean this time isn't real. Maybe this is just a case of having cried wolf — the wolf has shown up.

It's unbelievable how many "terror plots" are being thwarted just in time for midterm elections. People in power are systematically using fear to manipulate the minds and hearts of people. Since they cant use the terror alerts anymore they have to uncover plots.

Wow, that's rich. Keep on denying the reality until we all are blown up. Is that the way it should work?

A series of sad facts after reading this tread:
1. A large percentage of the people distrust the US administration MORE than they are afraid of terrorist threats that do threaten us;

2. The current Administration's has earned this distrust of over half the population of the the United States after 6 years of being told half-truths and lies;

3. Those that do trust the administration often believe untruths (i.e. over 50% of US residents actually believe Iraq had WMD - an increase from 2 years ago - despite the fact no WMDs were found). Studies show a large percentage of these same folks self-identify as conservatives and/or Republicans.

4. We, average citizens, spend more time arguing with each other than we do demanding the truth from those we elect to represent us. If they are lying to us about the facts, how can they implement our wishes? Its like someone asking if I'd like to eat a chocolate chip cookie, but failing to mention that its been poisoned. Of course I want a cookie - yumm...but I'll skip the cookie to avoid being poisoned. Likewise, I'd like terrorism to end, but not at the expense of our democracy being dismantled.

So basically there are no terrorist out there plotting to murder innocent people and the world really is a safe and happy place. Its all just a ploy by the republicans to bolster more votes. Your ignorance sickens me.

So what does blowing a plane up do besides taking out innocent civilians? The news is telling me the supposed terroists the US "found" were very sophisticated and believed to be a large number of people involved. So does blowing up a plane crossing the atlantic really hurt the US?

If planes begin blowing up in mid-flight, would you want to fly?

The airline industry in the U.S. still hasn't recovered from events that occurred on 9/11. I'm sure the goal of these terrorists planning to blow up planes is to strike fear into the hearts every consumer, every potential airline passenger. Barely a year ago a similar attack took place against the Underground in London, England. It seems to me that the motivation behind the Underground attack might be similar to that of the attacks that were thwarted yesterday. These terrorists are attacking the U.S. and U.K. where we are at our most vulnerable -- our economy.

I love to fly. I used to live in Europe, and would fly back and forth between there and the U.S. several times a year. But if there are innocent people losing their lives in mid-flight due to terrorist attacks, I'm not going to step foot on a plane -- I will stay at home. And, I'm sure that I'm not alone here.

cordovas

It's unbelievable how many "terror plots" are being thwarted just in time for midterm elections. People in power are systematically using fear to manipulate the minds and hearts of people.

Well it didn't take long did it? It's Bush fault! It just had to be!

Want some advice... see a doctor. As for this delusion: "So what does blowing a plane up do besides taking out innocent civilians?" I would think that is the terrorist stock in trades isn't it, to take out civilians?

Or maybe I'm mistaken. Maybe you haven't considered a successful plot such as this would virtually shut down international travel for a number or weeks and in the process cripple many smaller economies and hurt many large ones.

But that wouldn't matter to you would it, because what the hell their only civilians right? And BTW what if for example the plan wasn't to just explode the planes over the ocean but to do so as they attempted to land at JFK and LAX among other airports.

Oh... I forgot the potential loss of a few more hundred on the ground wouldn't matter either. After all they would only be civilians!

So basically there are no terrorist out there plotting to murder innocent people and the world really is a safe and happy place. Its all just a ploy by the republicans to bolster more votes. Your ignorance sickens me.

I don't think that anyone would disagree that there are terrorist out there plotting attacks, but that fact is not mutually exclusive from a perception that republicans (or rather this Administration) uses terrorism as a means to bolster more votes. Some people feel our democracy is more threatened by outside forces such as terrorism and other feel a larger threat is happening within our own government. I don't think either perspective believes the world is one happy, sing along, place. The difference is the Administration is under oath to protect our democracy, so people are upset when after five years in office the world is both perceived as a more dangerous place with an increase in terrorism and Anti-American sentiment AND the tenants of our democratic system have also been attacked by the very people suppose to protect it under the guise of terrorism.

Bad thing about reading comments like that- maybe she was being sarcastic or said it as a "half glass full" kind of sentiment.

whether it was a sarcastic quote or not, the relative uselessness it has in the entire context of the article is very irksome. to go from talking about potential death and mass fear to someone who can't live without their ipod for six hours is not a good segway for any article of this importance. it further shows the self-absorbed characteristic of our society when they complain about not being able to listen to their mp3 player and not the fact that they could have died in an explosion.

I think it's a choice by the reporter who didn't have a hard angle on the story or an editorial decision to show "resolve" in the face of terror.

Would it have been better if the quote was from someone who said, "This is terrible, I'm going to lose $5 million in sales because I can't get out of this airport"?

That story can't run because it shows the terrorists "won"

News articles are not nearly as objective as they seem, especially during a war.

Would it have been better if the quote was from someone who said, "This is terrible, I'm going to lose $5 million in sales because I can't get out of this airport"?

That story can't run because it shows the terrorists "won"

Ah, yes. I can already picture in my head the people dancing in the Arab street because Jim couldn't close the Kansas City deal.

Al-Qaeda's intent is not to cause inconvenience, it is to inflict large death tolls in spectacular fashion. Just to put that into perspective.

I think her comment was more of a "Thankfully I am alive and the only bad thing to happen to me was that my iPod ran out of battery so I am bored just sitting here in line."

Wrong perspective- it's not for the Arab man on the street. It's for your benefit. You're the one who can't be thinking that terror has impacts besides the loss of life and property and you're the one who can't be thinking that even when the terrorists don't succeed they can win.

Also, don't confuse the one time tactic with the overall goal- al-qaeda foght a traditional guerilla war in Afghanistan to kick the Russians out. That they used a spectacular attack against American targets doesn't mark a change in strategy but a targeted message that America's economy [as symbolized in the WTC] and military [Pentagon] were not safe.

Those attacks were followed by a wave of fearfulness in the US and among the big messages from Bush right after that attack was the following:

I ask your continued participation and confidence in the American economy. Terrorists attacked a symbol of American prosperity. They did not touch its source. America is successful because of the hard work, and creativity, and enterprise of our people. These were the true strengths of our economy before September 11th, and they are our strengths today.

Terror works not only by destroying targets by spreading fear - and fear kills economies. An American economy in deep recession is an economy that can't support military forces in the Middle East, and that's a goal of the terrorists.

Just for people's information: books ARE banned from the flight. Everything is banned, except for:

- flight documents & passport
- glasses (without their cases)
- contact lens "boxes" but no contact solution bottles
- baby food (must be tasted by accompanying passenger)
- a woman's necessities (tampons etc.)

..and all of this must be in a clear, transparent plastic bag. So yes, books really are in fact banned from being carried on.

Agreed. Ever try to get liquid through security on an international flight?

First comment on Newsvine: "Isn't it uncanny how we have planes are blowing up so close to elections? Politicians must have orchestrated this whole thing to get ahead in the polls and usurp power in the US."

I don't believe this was "cooked up" or timed by anyone. I think this just shows that certain aspects of the "improved" security we have since 9/11 is actually working, at least abroad.

I don't, however, trust the US government currently in power to stop anything, as I believe they are at least partially responsible for what happened 9/11. I guess I am a conspiracy nut though. I just get have this gut feeling that something is going to be revealed about the true "purpose" of 9/11 from the American political point of view.

I heard a great quote several years ago, don't remember where I heard it (probably on a TV show like The Daily Show with J. Stewart, or The O'Reilly Factor) and I also don't remember exactly how the quote went, but the essence of it went something like this: Democrats thrive when the Nation, and even the World, is in turmoil -- they'll spin anything bad that happens in their favor and point their fingers at the Republicans. Sound familiar to anyone?

My how the tides have turned. If O'Reilly said that, he deserves "Hypocrite of the Year", maybe century.

Yeah, I doubt this was cooked up -- and even if it was -- it was cooked up in another Country.

Bush had little to nothing to do with this and as far as I know, our security measures had nothing to do with thwarting the plot.

With that said -- it would not surprise me in the least if I found that Karl Rove thought that keeping threat levels elevated for a while might not hurt come November. Bush and Rove are not above exploiting our fears and no names I will be called (conspiracy theorist?) will make me believe otherwise.

With that said -- it would not surprise me in the least if I found that Karl Rove thought that keeping threat levels elevated for a while might not hurt come November. Bush and Rove are not above exploiting our fears and no names I will be called (conspiracy theorist?) will make me believe otherwise.

That's not being a conspiracy theorist, that's just common sense and politics.

There is a not so fine line though between saying that the administration is playing with terror levels and saying that the administration is purposefully creating fake terrorist attacks, especially in foreign nations.

Brian Ford

Bush and Rove are not above exploiting our fears and no names I will be called (conspiracy theorist?) will make me believe otherwise.

And that should be contrasted to what?

The three biggest names in the Democratic Party who couldn't wait for the story to be completely told before they started bashing Bush?

Harry Reid, John Kerry, and Ted Kennedy probably would have knocked each other down, if in the same room, attempting to get to the mic first to say something partisan rather than complement the British and MI5, MI6.

There is no Al Qaeda.

And Democrats wonder why they can't win elections over the issue of national security. Maybe it is because every time something does happen, you get comments like 1, 1.4 and 1.9 that deny the existence of terrorism and chalk it all up to one giant government conspiracy.

You automatically assume that those commenters are (a) Democrats and (b) they represent the opinion of the Democratic Party. Good grief.

That should ahve been the majority opinion of the Democratic Party.

You automatically assume that those commenters are (a) Democrats and (b) they represent the opinion of the Democratic Party. Good grief.

And you assume that I assume those commenters are so and so. No where did I make that claim. And it means little what their actual political affiliation is. I am not talking about reality here, I am talking about perception. Perception is what matters in politics. The perception is that these are the views of the Democratic party.

how "competent" the president is taking a vacation in a time of world unrest.

When exactly is the world ever not in unrest? Second a Presidential vacation is not the kind of vacation that you or I might take, but it involves almost as much work as a normal work day.

I don't want to rant and don't want to get involved in petty arguments over politics, but I'm just noting how oddly convenient these terror plots are being uncovered now.

By now I assume you mean, right before an election.

First when is it ever not right before an election anymore? Second, there are over 3 full months of news cycles left before that election, this incident will be long gone from most American minds by then.

I don't want to rant and don't want to get involved in petty arguments over politics...

You've come to the wrong place then ;)

If i was a betting man, I would say the US with or without the help of foreign agencies, will uncover at least two more plots before the election

I hope they do. More lives being saved is never a bad thing.

For such a "competent" government they sure are good at cooking up plots and covering them up.

You can't have it both ways. If they are as incompetent as you claim they are, how could they possibly orchestrate such grand conspiracies without anyone figuring it out. Oh, wait, you figured it out.

Another point, if President Bush wanted to cook up this scheme to make him and his party look better, don't you think he would time it for when he was not on vacation?

Adam,

If you can recall, the terror alerts were going on all during the summer so your supposition that "there are over 3 full months of news cycles left before that election, this incident will be long gone from most American minds by then," is unfounded. This does stay resident in the minds of the people. Blowing up a plane with only 200+ people on it isnt effective. There was a reason they flew the airplanes into buildings...to cause as much destruction and death as possible. So just taking out a plane is not as effective and efficient, so therefore not the best option.

cordovas, I am not exactly sure what you are arguing. At first you claim we will in fact remember the terror levels from the summer over three months from now, but then you argue that even a blown up plane is not effective.

Which one is it? You can't have it both ways.

Velocity... well said.

cordovas

I don't want to rant and don't want to get involved in petty arguments over politics, but I'm just noting how oddly convenient these terror plots are being uncovered now.

Then don't.

Second, there are over 3 full months of news cycles left before that election, this incident will be long gone from most American minds by then.

I think you underestimate the power of this story. Besides, now we have new airline regulations to remind us of it.

to get to the link go to youtube.com and type in The Nexus of Politics and Terror and you will find it since I do not know how to post a link in this site?

I also find it interesting that just as Lamont wins the primary in Conn, and the news agencies gain steam about the changing perspective of americans[sic] and the anti war feeling, here we go again with the terror alert levels (fear fear fear). I think this is just another example of the terror alert level raises corresponding to negative republican news, reflected well by msnbc[sic] in the link below

Wouldn't this have then been better to do the day before the Lamont/Lieberman primary rather that the day after if what you imply is true?

All I have to say is that considering a terrorist plot was thwarted, why is the alert level raised... are we not now SAFER??? should the alert level instead be lowered?

If you have been keeping up on the story, you will note that they don't know if they have everyone involved in custody.

I think this is just another example of the terror alert level raises corresponding to negative republican news...

Yes, I am sure the Repubs called MI5 yesterday to get this whole thing brewing...

Answer me a question, Stewart. If they hadn't raised it and something happened, how would you react?

A fifty person terror operation is BIG- operational security would have been close to impossible to maintain so there is a possiblity that this was a legitimate plot carried out by relatively inexperienced people who didn't have the skills needed to pull it off.

You know what to look for? Informants. If we get word that informants infiltrated the organization then we can start to ask the question if these people were steered by the informants towards trying an attack?

Adam - I do not think they would have done it before, if you watch that news clip, the government does it for political gain and because they are reactive not so much proactive. I do not mean that in the sense they are looking to fight terrorism, I mean that in the sense they use it for their own political gain.

Velocity - that is a good question, and in order for me to react, i had to think about how the bush admin knew that Osama was "determined to attack" prior to 9/11 and Ol Bushy spent 6 weeks tending to his plants in texas in order for me to respond.

So if they had known something was going to happen, why did they not raise the alert then (or create it to raise it), do they not want to freak people out? But why after? Considering the situaion, if they hadn't raised the alert level and something had happened, I would have thought (regardless of alert level) why did they not find out about this.

Basically the point I am trying to make is that the raising and lowering of alert level seems like it has little to do with the actual terrorism, and more with controlling people through fear.

Wouldn't this have then been better to do the day before the Lamont/Lieberman primary rather that the day after if what you imply is true?

No, the Liberman/Lamont race was a litmus test to gage the nation's support for the war. Liberman is still is a good position since the Republic running against Lamont and Liberman is a gambling addict and incompetent. Liberman will likely take most of the Republican votes and a portion of the Democratic votes, thus securing his seat in the Senate, support for the Iraq war, the Administration.

No, the Liberman/Lamont race was a litmus test to gage the nation's support for the war.

Something tells me that the votes of only Democrats from one of the most liberal states in the union have very little to do with a litmus test for the rest of the nation. Wow, liberals voted for the liberal candidate, surprise surprise.

StewartColbert08

to get to the link go to youtube.com and type in The Nexus of Politics and Terror and you will find it since I do not know how to post a link in this site?

What, that big button labled LINK has no meaning to you?

No wonder you're going off on some silly terror alert level rant.

You don't get the privilege to post links immediately. The button doesn't show up til you've posted a certain number of comments, seeded links, etc. Seems you were a little quick to judge StewartColbert08's intelligence. Speaking of silliness...

I suppose the fact that it's August, when half of Europe takes the entire month off, and the month Bush has gone to Crawford all or most of every year he's been president, isn't a sufficiently reasonable explanation?

Since they already have 21 peoples in custody, I would think that the plot was real, and that the 21 wasn't detained just to look good for the elections as some here apparently believes.

@troubleman: If they already were on vacation, what are they to do? Who says that they won't cut the vacation short?

Qoute Qordovas: So does blowing up a plane crossing the Atlantic really hurt the US?

I have no knowledge of flight patterns and such, but I do know the laws of physics, and if a plane is blew up in mid air it will come down on something, so there may be some extra damage added specially if they are flying over some dense populated areas. All that these terrorist are out to kill innocent people to create fear.

And unfortunately it seems like the terrorist leaders have no problem recruiting more volunteers for these apparent suicide acts.

This is not about someone liking the US government or not, this is about terrorists trying to create fear in the general public. Would it be less terrorism if someone else was leading the country? Probably not, the terrorist would find something else they would deem necessary to kill innocent for...

No. We are at war. The commander in chief should be on duty.

PERIOD

troubleman

Why are Bush and Blair both on vacation right now? Aside from conspiracy, doesn't a vacation seem just a little out of place right now? Of course I know their work never stops, but as a sign of confidence to their citizens shouldn't they postpone their vacations?

Maybe if you checked the history of Bush and the times he heads to the Texas ranch you might see a pattern there.

And if you had a clue about the EU you would know almost the entire Continent takes the month of August off (Check France and hundreds of deaths due to a heat wave and all the doctors being on vacation a couple years ago).

They all go on vacation, which just might be why the jihadist cut throats chose both Europe and this time of year to plot an attack.

That committee's final report was released in January of 2001, and Hart claimed he was blown off when he talked with Condi Rice on September 6, 2001.

Yeah, pretty amazing that when you say you are going to deal with a threat, and then are still attacked, people lose faith in your abilities...

The terrorists are not stupid.

Neither are the voters. If you have a tiger by the tail, and another tiger shows up it might just be time to let go of the tail and back up to fortify your position. (Or, for the hawks in the audience, go back to your tent for a bigger gun...)

Or cut, run, and hide. Eerily similar to the dems in the '70's.
Run Lamont, run.

Or cut, run, and hide.

Or do what? Stay and get eaten by the tiger? Let me put this very succintly: WE. AREN'T. WINNING. The middle east isn't any safer than it was pre-Saddam. Hundreds of Iraqi civilians are dying every week. The Taliban is coming back. We aren't ANY closer to winning this war on terror than when we started, in fact, we've basically shown the terrorists that while we can stop targetted threats that we manage to get the information on, we can't stop their growth in power.

We shouldn't "cut, run, and hide". First, we should get our troops out of the civil war that we've abetted in Iraq, by moving then back into friendly territory like Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Then we need to actually get some peacemakers involved to try to split Iraq into three states. (not an easy task at all.)

Or, another option is to get off our diplomatic asses and actually convince the rest of the world that yes, we f'ed up and shouldn't have gone in in the first place, but an unstable Iraq is bad for everyone and that we need a real coalition of forces again. If we could get another 200,000 troops in theatre between us and other nations, then we might be able to actually get everyone to stop shooting again.

At the same time, we need to strengthen our force in Afghanistan to put down the Taliban once and for all. We turn the economic screws on Pakistan to get them to either really go after Al Qaeda, or to let us in, on a large scale, to do it.

I wish I knew what to do about the whole Israel / Palestine / Lebanon thing. The best I can think of is fire a warning shots over their heads and drop an overwhelming U.N. force that will actually shoot people to make them realize everyone needs to drop their guns. The chances of that happening are about 100000 : 1 though.

While all of this is going on, we take some of that "war chest" money and start applying it to real humanitarian aid and comfort. If you want to fight radical Islam, you don't do it with a bullet - you do it with food and jobs. Do you think the terrorists that go to blow themselves up have well paying jobs, wives, kids, and a nice house? No. Generally, they have practically nothing.

Why is Hezbollah so popular now in Lebanon? Because while the Israelis are dropping bombs on them, they are risking their lives to get people the food and medicine they need, thus building community support. If we showed some compassion for once and actually tried to help these folks, on THEIR terms, we will win their loyalty over the long term and might actually win this "war" on terror.

Umm, I believe we are talking about this particular incident, post 9/11.

Many people immediately felt there was foul play.

You bet there was foul play...by Al Qaeda. I'm sorry to tell you, but that was the only foul play. Please don't talk to me about conspiracy theories.

Also, try clicking reply in the thread where the quote came from. It is easier to spot that way.

The only conspiracy is the 9/11 report. The authors of the 9/11 report have completely abandoned it as a result. They've gone so far as to write a book. Believing in it at this point is absolute absurdity.

You mean Tim Ossman?

First of all, this wasn't in the US. Second of all, the amt of work to "cook" something like this up would be incredible, and someone would raise flags, especially in today's age.

the amt of work to "cook" something like this up would be incredible, and someone would raise flags, especially in today's age.

If there can be a widespread liberal media conspiracy, there can be a conspiracy to cook up a fake terrorist attack.

Way to take two opposites and equate them.

If there were both a liberal media bias AND a conspiracy here, wouldnt you think the media would try to expose it?

You misunderstand me; I'm not insisting that either exists. I'm just pointing out that if one can believe in a liberal media conspiracy (of which there is no evidence), then one should allow for the possibility that this is a faked terror plot (which as of now has an equal amount of evidence).

What I want to see is that the evidence used to determine this plot was real be made public after a certain period of time.

Wouldn't work. I don't really take stock in any of the conspiracy theories mainly due to the overwhelming sense of incompetence that the Administration exudes, ergo, they are too "dumb" to pull something like that off. (And I'm just not going to go down the path of the Bushs' and the "new world order" line of reasoning.)

Anyway, releasing the "evidence" in 6 months wouldn't work - because those who choose to believe its a conspiracy would just say the evidence is cooked up too. I mean, if you can bring down buildings, then you surely can get a couple bottles of shampoo and say "These are the weapons!"

That's the @!$%# of proving / disproving conspiracy theories. Once you follow the white rabbit into "The Matrix", it nulls out all arguments for or against.

Sorry, but wide access to evidence is probably not good, here's why.

1st, what if there is hints at other things that would be ongoing? 2nd, what if it talked about ways around the system, etc.?

There is just too much to think about than just blurting "we dont believe you, show us all evidence right this minute or we don't believe you"..

I mean, there is still stuff from WWI not declassified

I take your point, though I'm clearly not blurting "show me right this minute or we don't believe you." Like I said, declassify the information after a period where it is safe to do so. I don't want other operations placed at risk by exposing this information.

If you don't want to show Joe Citizen like me the information, describe to me the oversight process so that I can be assured there is oversight by a third party. This same concept is why the phone tapping issue bugs me. Just get a warrant like you're supposed to, expedite the warrant process if you have to, but at least have some oversight!

That's all I'm saying. These guys stand up and say, "We foiled an attack. Man it was gonna be huge." And we just have to believe whatever they say? Screw that. I don't trust my government and I shouldn't be expected to. Checks and balances were built-in to the design of our government for that exact reason.

2nd, what if it talked about ways around the system, etc.?

Sorry, calling BS on that line of reasoning. We got the intelligence about how they were going to do this from Al Qaeda training manuals and videos from Afghanistan, and from the previously caught London Bombers. In fact, they showed them on CNN last night and today. (Or at least, similar training videos.)

I'm getting quite tired of the whole "loose lips" thing when it comes to the terrorists, its crap. These guys aren't stupid. Many of them live integrated into our society. They know the same things we do, and more - because they know how to get around our systems. Its not like they don't know that they are possibly being wiretapped, or can't search the Internet to find several dozen web sites about how to make liquid explosives.

You do have to understand that they had very specific evidence to think it would be liquid explosives, and had to quickly adjust to suit the threat.

I'm sorry that your day was so crappy though, SSDD I always say :/

Either way, we are still not prepared for events like this.

Agreed. Now, the terrorists don't even have to be successful and they still cause an awful mess.

Though, I'd still rather take being inconvienced at an airport over getting blown up any day, I have to sort of question the mass panic over those items in question that it seems you experienced. Yes, the attackers were going to use liquid explosives, but does that mean that you immediately make everyone in the country drop all of their own liquid off at the gate? What happens when the next terrorist manages to weave explosives into his clothing? Will everyone have to ride the planes buck naked?

The overwhelming and haphazard response doesn't make sense. A) we need better chemical detection devices and B) we need a little more common sense. Just about anything can be turned into a weapon if you try hard enough...

Pedro Gomez

The worst thing was we were not told ahead of time that we would have to dispose of all liquids in our carry-on bags including colognes, water bottles, cremes, lotions and what nots.

So you must have been totally isolated from all the cable and over the air new reports that detailed the restrictions as early as 9am on the 10th.

Ignorance is no excuse.

Two fat parents sit in their comfortable suburban home watching their three fat kids who are sitting on the floor watching TV.

Am I seeing a pattern here? If everyone is fat, then there would be no violence!

Let me have men about me that are fat,
Sleek-headed men, and such as sleep o' nights:
Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look;
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.
-Julius Caesar, 1.2

Obesity in America is not a problem, it's the solution!

Go ahead, deny you E.U. citizens have a racism problem.

Maybe if you ignore your racism long enough, it'll go away.

Racism exist everywhere in one form or another, and ugly bastard has a point. If you are welcomed to your new country, I think you're more likely to become a normal citizen, and less susceptible to radical ideas and become an "sleeper" terrorist.

Of course, as with everything else there are exceptions to this as well. Some people are just "born" evil.

Some people are just "born" evil.

Somebody's got to save us from all these evil babies!

Despite being a member of the EU, I agree with you that racism is prominent in Europe, particularly in the smaller countries.

It's accurate to say that 9/11 happened because of E.U. racism.

I do find this is a bit strong though, I think a lot more than European racism were behind those bombings although it probably contributed.

Having grown up as a muslim in the EU, and being the son of a very prominent muslim in the Netherlands who has worked very hard for the last three decades to try and get muslim communities in the Netherlands to integrate in society, I can verify this completely.

This being the anti-muslim racism that persists in the EU.

There are no long-term wins for Republicans here. Oil is down on fear that air travel will be too expensive or inconvenient for many travelers. People are going to be spending 3 hours in security lines during their vacation. And any bonus points the administration may have won for this will have disappeared three months from now.

If this were a conspiracy to bolster the Republicans, they pulled it off two months too early to make any difference in '06.