Thank You Bush & Blair

August 10, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

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

U.S. Says Terrorists Planned Dry Run

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

The terrorist attack foiled by British authorities on Thursday was aimed at blowing up as many as 10 airplanes on trans-Atlantic flights, and plotters hoped to stage a dry run within two days, according to U.S. intelligence officials.

The actual attack would have followed within days.

Hunt For Terror Suspects

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Terrorists had apparently planned to smuggle explosives aboard 10 airliners as hand luggage - which could have been missed during x-ray screening.

The planes would then have been blown up in flight. Five US cities are thought to have been among the targets, including New York, Washington and Los Angeles...

US Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the conspiracy was sophisticated, well-advanced and well-planned and "suggestive of an al Qaeda plot".

Whatelse can be said?

August 10, 2006

A congressman in an interview I heard stated this was discovered by the Brittish intelligence using American technology and had the plot been made in the US, it may have been succussful since there is more protection of civil rights here than in the UK. The UK's threshold is "reasonable suspicion" while the US's is "probable cause".

Luckly the no one leaked the story to the NY Times. While it may have been a good story to sell a few papers, it would have tipped off the terrorists.

I have read some "radical" conservative now calling for war with Iran and some "wacko" liberals minimizing the threat and the US' involvement in breaking the plot. Seems both extreames are using the event to fuel their fire.

Well, I am thankful that the two nations working together stopped the plot before it happened and many people didn't have to lose their lives.

August 11, 2006

What stopped the plot was simply that it was too big - too many people knew about it, and it leaked - apparently in Pakistan, maybe in England

Yes, it is fortunate that it was stopped - assuming that it ever actually was going to get off the ground. We will know more once charges are laid and court appearances start happening.

I am fed up with my government lying to me and treating me like an idiot. Claiming that we are safer is simply lying. We have more enemies, and we have not significantly reduced the number of targets. Bush has wasted $billions and not really addressed the problem at all.

The situation is going to get worse, not better. Bush is creating more enemies, and the enemies are getting better technology, every year.

The delusion that we can shut down most ways of causing mass casuality incidents is simply Bush lying trying to justify his folly.

Sit down and ask yourself how you could cause a mass casuality incident. It isn't that hard to think of at least one bad one.

Then ask yourself how Bush can possibly claim that we can protect against most of them. Only by being stupid or lying - both of which he excels at.

/Bevin

August 11, 2006

The evidence is to the contrary. We discovered the plot because the Brittish were able to infiltrate the radical muslims and use American technology. Everything that happened will not be known for some years but we do know that Stockland Yard, MI5 and the CIA were working together.

Liberals have bought the idea that America's War on Terrorism has increased the terrorist threat and not decreased it. That is quite debatable and there is no way for either side to prove the other wrong. Repeating the same stuff over and over simply fails to prove anything.

President Bush has made the War on Terror an offensive one. President Clinton had to deal with terrorism too. However he dealt with it in a defensive way and not an offensive way. Terrorists have been after the US for decades and until they were able to kill 3,000 of us in one day, the US dealt with them in a defensive manner.

If our War on Terrorism is creating so many more enemies, it makes one wonder why more of them are not sneaking accross our southern border and we are not seeing more buses, trains and shopping malls blow up. It seems to me that the phone taps, the Patriot Act and our interigation of prisoners is keeping us realatively safe.

I do not buy into the conspiracy that our government is lying to us. I believe that the government elected by the people to serve the people is doing its best to protect us. My hat is off to them here. Job well done! I am afraid they may not always have this much success.

August 11, 2006

Bevin,

You want to crack this nut or shall I?

Oh, what the heck...you can have your turn tomorrow. <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Liberals have bought the idea that America's War on Terrorism has increased the terrorist threat and not decreased it. That is quite debatable and there is no way for either side to prove the other wrong. Repeating the same stuff over and over simply fails to prove anything.

First off, it aint ONLY the "liberals" that are questioning the terrorism threat....Many people outside of the US, [and I say this as an observer who has recently traversed two countrys] are questioning the safety of americans on foriegn soil. Considering that there are reports that you ignore that many AMERICAN journalists are threatened by terrorists, suprises me, Shane.

As for the "repeating the same stuff over and over", I suggest that you combat that propoganda, if it IS propoganda, with the facts instead of saying things that indicate that we must put our trust in you. Saying things like, "I am not a top. Do not spin me." doesn't endear you to anyone, nor does it cause one to trust you more.

Come on, Shane...Show us that intelligence that you claim that you have...Dazzel us with your brilliance, your mind numbing logic...Quit playing children games, like 'spin the top'.

August 11, 2006

I've never expressed this anywhere else besides my own home, but I like many of Prez Bush's foreign policy moves. I voted for Clinton twice. Voted for Gore too. Still, all during Clinton's 8 yrs in ofc, I was frustrated by his namby pamby, pc way of handling things. I mean, terrorists were going for the jugular, in the killing of 200 + us marines in Beirut, in the bombing of the world trade center, back in the mid 90s. Clinton's only response was a few tomahawk missiles and some slobber about how the muslims had a right to be mad at the West because of the crusades. That's a bunch of nonsense.

August 11, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

I've never expressed this anywhere else besides my own home, but I like many of Prez Bush's foreign policy moves.

Sorry, can't agree with you here...

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

I voted for Clinton twice. Voted for Gore too. Still, all during Clinton's 8 yrs in ofc, I was frustrated by his namby pamby, pc way of handling things.

I admit, I wasn't too enthused by his handling of things...However, I also have to admit, he endeared a lot of our foriegn friends while doing it.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

I mean, terrorists were going for the jugular, in the killing of 200 + us marines in Beirut,

Um, you may not remember this, but that WAS during Regans watch.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

in the bombing of the world trade center, back in the mid 90s. Clinton's only response was a few tomahawk missiles and some slobber about how the muslims had a right to be mad at the West because of the crusades. That's a bunch of nonsense.

I have to admit, looking back now, Clinton should have bombed these terrorist camps and sent the SeeBees and Seals in to clean up [aka kill all in these terrorist camps] without much diplomacy. However, being the only superpower on the block comes with some major responsibilities...And one of them is not over reacting to a threat. History would be repeated, once again, if we, the super power, took every economic advantage and strong armed every country into submission. Look again at your European history where countries like france or germany were once super powers in thier times....When they took advantage, all the other countries were aligned against them and sought thier down fall. Remember Napolean? King Charles II. Charlemain? It may have been PC, but Bill Clinton policies didn't kill 100000 of local populace and nearly 3000 of our men and women in the military.

Heck, Bill Clinton is a heck of a lot better leader than Bush ever could hope for...

August 11, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Shane said:

...has made the War on Terror an offensive one.

Well I, for one, am certainly offended.

Graeme

August 11, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

The evidence is to the contrary. We discovered the plot because the Brittish were able to infiltrate the radical muslims and use American technology. Everything that happened will not be known for some years but we do know that Stockland Yard, MI5 and the CIA were working together.

The ONLY way that we are going to live relatively secure lives is if each of us keeps an eye on our neighborhood.

In this case what you describe as 'infiltration' and 'using American technology' could more likely be described as the plot leaking because people who were near enough to see it happening did not want it to happen.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

It seems to me that the phone taps, the Patriot Act and our interigation of prisoners is keeping us realatively safe.

What is keeping us relatively safe is one simple fact. Our enemies are not trying to hit us with small things. They are looking for a few big hits that make good psychological warfare.

Bush is lying to you about the benefits of his Big Brother program, and is spinning you like a top.

Ask yourself three questions

(1) What is stopping IRA-style mortar attacks, such as London faced?

(2) What is stopping King David Hotel attacks, such as the Jews did against the British? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing

(3) Why don't we have people searching your bags outside every MacDonalds and Shopping Mall, like the Israeli's do to stop Palestinian attacks?

It is not the technology you describe above - none of that would stop these.

/Bevin

August 11, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

he endeared a lot of our foriegn friends while doing it.

And what did that get us? 9-11

August 11, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

The ONLY way that we are going to live relatively secure lives is if each of us keeps an eye on our neighborhood.

We no longer live in a world where we can be isolationists. This libertarian ideal isn't without value but is no longer practical in the global econmomy each nation now participates in.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

In this case what you describe as 'infiltration' and 'using American technology' could more likely be described as the plot leaking because people who were near enough to see it happening did not want it to happen.

We only know what is being released to us. However these same people got away with 9-11 and made many of the same kind of "leaking" mistakes. The difference is that no one was paying enought attention before and now they are. 9-11 could have been avoided and would have been if our intelligence agencies would have been looking for the same kind of things they are looking for today. So they deserve a big <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif" alt="" /> Good job!

August 11, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

terrorists were going for the jugular, in the killing of 200 + us marines in Beirut

Hindsight is 20/20. It is easy to look back at what we could have and should have done. When this happened the Cold War was going on. The USSR was the big threat. We were just getting out of an energy crisis which had been started by a war in the Middle East. The decision was made to just get out and focus on the communist threat to Europe and in the western hemisphere.

August 11, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

The ONLY way that we are going to live relatively secure lives is if each of us keeps an eye on our neighborhood.

We no longer live in a world where we can be isolationists. This libertarian ideal isn't without value but is no longer practical in the global econmomy each nation now participates in.

We are soon going to be living in a world where a small group of university graduates can build a guided unmanned aircraft capable of flying thousands of miles and placing on that aircraft some nasty biological agents.

I am actually amazed that the Hezibollah missiles are as INaccurate as they are. Guidance systems are not that difficult to make any more.

We can't be isolationist, but we can't rule the world either. We depend on New Zealanders to police NZ, Iraqi's to police Iraq, on Israeli's to police Israel, and on the North Koreans to police North Korea.

Similarly we will rely on YOU to help make sure your neighbors aren't loading their car with diesel and fertilizer and driving it into an apartment building.

Bush can't do it - and his nonsense about high tech and increased security is exactly that, nonsense.

/Bevin

August 11, 2006

The current terrorist threat comes from a fantical religious sect of Islam. That has to be recognized and dealt with. This is hard to do without stepping on religious liberty. Yet that is the issue we deal with. What complicates this is that this fanatcal sect of Islam desires control over civil gornments. They want to contol the Middle East as well as Africa. If and when they achieve that, who is to say they will not set their sites on Europe and the Far East next?

August 12, 2006

THERE IS NO WAR ON TERROR!!

And it's not just the extreme muslims. It's the extreme jews, the extreme christians, etc etc etc.

August 12, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

The current terrorist threat comes from a fantical religious sect of Islam. That has to be recognized and dealt with.

I was interested in the CNN discussion of the origins of this week's attackers and similar attackers in the past.

The experts made the following observations

These are extremist individuals. Al Qaeida does not seek them out, they seek Al Qaeida.
Bush et al are simply wrong when they say it is because they object to our freedoms, our way of life, our wealth
They do it because they are already fanatic, but then are pushed over the edge by the policies of the Western Governments - by the British / American anti-Muslim-country actions. There are many people who strongly object to these policies, but it is the extremists who get pushed into doing these violent acts

and, of course, the communities who strongly object to these policies don't feel strongly motivated to find and stop these extremists.

Even so, it was leaks that broke this plot - not high tech Patriot Act stuff.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

They want to contol the Middle East as well as Africa. If and when they achieve that, who is to say they will not set their sites on Europe and the Far East next?

No more so than Bush clearly having his sights on destroying the Muslim way of life in the Middle East.

Shane, the administration is spinning you like a top. Just like the Viet Nam nonsense of the domino theory (if Viet Nam goes communist, then Cambodia, Thailand, the Phillipines, and soon Australia will fall), this theory of the Muslims involved in a Jihad against us just ain't so.

They are upset about what we are doing to them - and parking a 130,000 man high tech army in Iraq with huge compounds and permanent bases does make it look a LOT like WE are invading THEM.

/Bevin

August 12, 2006

A new world order is being usherd in. Every event is a move closer to justifying the loss of individual privacy. I take the revelations about the potential terror attacks with a pinch of salt, not because I am stupid but because a political agenda of control is being pushed through by any means necessary.

We are not being made safer, we are being placed at greater risk every day that new revelations of rapes, murders and mistreatment of the iraqi people by western soldiers happens. With every shipment of armourment that is sent to Israel to support their bully boy tactics, with the negative political rhetoric about muslims. Safer.. you must be mad, if ever we are were a target for terrorism it is now. Because we have done much to encourage hatred and not dispell it.

Jesus is coming, we should not be alarmed as the events unfold, biblical prophecy is unfolding before our eyes, in ways we never even imagination. Why thank those who are used by powers and principalities against us?? Shocking!

August 12, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

By Neil: Heck, Bill Clinton is a heck of a lot better leader than Bush ever could hope for...

Very revealing statement, Neil.

all the best,

gcw

August 12, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

gina i said: And it's not just the extreme muslims. It's the extreme jews, the extreme christians, etc etc etc.

Here's the problem in a nutshell: "favoritism" [read James 2:8,9]

I've got some bad news for John Hagee.

1] He's a racist

2] He creates division

3] He doesn't know his Bible

It's Christians such as him that are part of the problem.

August 12, 2006

A lot of 'Christians' are so called problems. Like, the right wing fascist ones as well.

August 12, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

the Muslim way of life in the Middle East.

That would be "the way of life" where, if a woman is raped by a stranger, she is then murdered by her male relatives to preserve their honor.

"The way of life" where, instead of inivesting money in manufaturing, education, and infrastructure, it is invested in armaments.

"The way of life" where they produce none of the high tech goods they so covet.

"The way of life" where, when someone prints an insulting cartoon, you call for his beheading, instead of writing a protest letter to the editor.

"The way of life" where children are taught that "the Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is true, and that it is a righteous act to sneak up on cafes and buses and blow up others.

"The way of life" where, despite billions in oil revenues, the mass of Saudis live in poverty, while 6000+ princes live in unbelievable luxury.

"The way of life" that has the vast majority of Muslims discontented, but since they cannot remedy their own misery, want to inflict pain on others.

Some way of life. Sounds more like a "way of death." If the people there were happy with their "way of life," they'd want to live it, rather than commit suicide.

August 12, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

And it's not just the extreme muslims. It's the extreme jews, the extreme christians, etc etc etc

Oh, I know what you mean. Why, we read extreme Christians every day calling for the beheading of Muslims. All over North America, Christians angry over the slaughter of other Christians in Darfur kidnap their Muslim neighbors, then videotape their beheadings to show the world we Christians are upset. Yep, happens all the time. We see Christian homicide bombers every day wrapping themselves in dynamite and poisoned nails, then finding a busload of children to incinerate.

And we see Christians and Jews everyday, building rocket launchers and placing them next to apartment complexes, so that we can randomly rain down havoc. And if our victims respond, why, they might hit the apartment complex, and we win a propaganda victory. Extreme Christians and Jews get rid of their uniforms, and hide among civilians, hoping our enemies will kill our own countrymen, so we can gain a propaganda victory. Extreme Christians and Jews transport their troops in ambulances, hoping for similar results.

Oh yes, they're all the same, they very same.

All you have to do is ignore some troublesome little facts.

August 12, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Ed Dickerson said: