...it's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there...

August 10, 2006

Terror Plot Foiled

What is it with these terrorists and the 11th?

I was on a lot of planes during my vacation, and I didn't see a single muslim. Not that that means anything, but I remember noticing it at the time. Usually there's one or two waiting at the gate whenever I fly and I go through the usual mental gyration. You know the one, like this: "oh there's some muslims... I wonder if I should get on the plane... oh no then I'd look like a total racist... I guess they look okay... gee I hope they're not terrorists." Then you get on the plane, nothing happens and you realize you were nervous about nothing. But of course, then something like today's arrests happen.

People are saying this was supposed to be bigger than 9-11. If the plan was to blow up a dozen planes over the ocean, it would have been big. On a scale with 9-11, but it wouldn't have been worse than 9-11. Which makes me think that maybe they were planning to wait until the planes were over the U.S., and detonate the explosives over populated areas. Just a theory.

Or maybe not. Thinking about the whole "fourth generation warfare" thing, it's probably not in the terrorists' interest to "top" 9-11's horror. Ten or twenty planes blowing up over the ocean is evil enough to demonstrate that the terrorists are still there, and that they can still pull shit. It would have been terrible for the victims and their families. People would have been shocked and there would have been political repercussions for sure. But I still don't think it would have been big enough to change certain attitudes which need changing before we can really take care of the problem.

Attitudes like this one:

Do I sound as if I don't believe this alert? Why, yes, that would be correct. I just don't believe it. Read the article. They say the plot had an "Al Qaeda footprint." Ooh, are you scared yet? What that really means is that they found NO evidence whatsoever that the plot had anything to do at all with Al Qaeda, but the plot simply made them think "gosh, this is something Al Qaeda would do." That's what a footprint means. Nice, but no cigar.

Were these guys totally innocent? Probably not. But there's no reason to believe they were any more Osama's right-hand than Jose Padilla, the famed dirty-bomber who I think is now only being charged with jay-walking or something...

That was from a "brilliant" left wing blogger, quoted at Townhall.com, who apparently thinks that "red alert" is only appropriate if there's an al Qaeda plot. I suppose deadly plots by anyone else do not deserve a "red alert," This idiot thinks its a Republican plot to distract from Lieberman's loss. Yes, Lieberman the Democrat. In other words, if Lieberman the Democrat had not lost two days ago, then the Homeland Security Department would not have taken any steps to tighten airline security after the discovery of a plot to blow up airplanes.

You know what, after three plus years of blogging I've learned that I can't argue against such an idiotic theory. People who believe that shit will never be silent, but people will stop listening to them someday.

Posted by annika, Aug. 10, 2006 | TrackBack (0)
Rubric: annikapunditry


I am reading a book called "Menace in Europe." It rates the European countries most likely to create terrorists:

1. United Kingdom
2. Netherlands
3. France

The rating is based up the governments tolerance towards Islamic fascism, Moslem crime rate and Moslem assimilation.

It looks like the book hit the nail on the head this time.

Posted by: Jake on Aug. 10, 2006

First of all, I'll go on record as saying I would love to end all immigration to this country from Muslim countries. Period. I don't care if it sounds racist. I'm past caring about that PC crap. The less of them that are here, the less they can reproduce themselves and their vile religion.

Secondly, the quote falls in line perfectly with the George Soros Left. Each terror plot should be looked at as an individual crime rather than as part of a larger war on Western Civilization. (Ergo, the War on Terror is misguided because there is no larger cultural war going on between the West and Islamo-fascism.) This is the idiocy of the Left and why they must never have control of government. To put it simply, if the Left gains control people will die as a consequence because terrorism simply isn't taken seriously by these people.

Posted by: Blu on Aug. 10, 2006

Ok, the latest from the Lefty blogs and talk shows is that this was all....you guessed it - a hoax. You see, after the Leiberman loss, the Republicans want to really push the idea that the Dems aren't serious about terrorism. (As if they haven't already secured this in the minds of most sane and serious people.) So, with Tony Blair and Pakistan, the Republicans came up with this elaborate hoax that will ultimately reek havoc on the British and American travel industry for days to come and require the promulgation and implementation of new procedures throughout the US and the UK in a very short amount of time. Sure - it makes perfect fucking nonsense. Conspiracy at a global level. What a bunch of idiots.

And if the Reps/Bush really cared so much about whether Lieberman won or lost - (he's going to win the general anyway) - wouldn't they have planned this "hoax" a day before the Lieberman election? These people will say anything because they Left has gone totally nuts. But don't take my word for it, just go check out the Lefty blogs. The moonbats are coming up with more kooky conspiracies at even as you read this post.

Posted by: Blu on Aug. 10, 2006

Keith Olbermann is already trying to lay the foundation for an exaggeration of the plot. He claims on his show that he is going to do a "smell test" as to whether what is alleged is even possible. He also made reference to the Brits having a "horrible" year related to terror. Of course, his goal is to get the viewer to go "hmmm, I wonder if the Brits are just making this up to look good?" And every time the alert level goes up in this country Olbermann insists that Bush only did it to help his approval numbers. The guy is fucking nut-ball. I wonder how many ratings points he lost when I switched over to FOX?

Posted by: Blu on Aug. 10, 2006

Olbermann's ratings are probably equivalent to Air America's.

It might be comparing apples & oranges, but they are both still rotten.

Posted by: reagan80 on Aug. 10, 2006

Don't know where to post this comment - this seemed as good as any.

I'm sickened by the news of the truce. How do you all spell surrender? Since when do terror groups get treated like nations at the UN? Oops, I forgot that I was talking about the UN - where Israel is a terroist group and semi-humans like Hamas and Hez are treated like civilized nations.

I NEVER have been this disapointed by the Bush Administration. How cowardly has the West become?

Posted by: Blu on Aug. 12, 2006

oH bLU,

I'm sorry you are feeling so glum. It is truely a sad day when the nations of the earth attempt to put an end to violence and murder. So terribly sad. It breaks my heart to see the Lebanese people going back to their towns. And I am grief stricken over the Israeli's leaving their bomb shelters. SUch cowardice from our stalwart leader. So much good could have been accomplished if the Lebanese civilians could have been left outside when winter arrived. Then they would know just what Hezbollah could do for them. I will miss seeing those Beriut apartment blocks demolished each morning as I rise and those emotional Jews rocking back and forth while their dead 20 year old sons and daughters are lowered into the earth. That's some good stuff and it will surely be missed.

I'm with you Blu: some quasi-governmental group steals two of my guys to arrange a prisoner exchange, like they have before, fuck'em this time. Blow their, oh I guess it isn't their country, but blow it up anyway. Dams, bridges, water pumping facilities, airports, apartment buildings, gas stations, all of it! OUR CITIZENS ARE PRECIOUS! They must understand!

Ya, know blu, it reminds me of the situation with Japan at the end of the war. If we had five or seven A bombs I bet we could have doubled the number of GI's we saved by not invading. In fact we might have caused the resurrection of a few thousand sailors from Pearl. If the Israeli's could have continued bombing and invaded Lebanon with an occupying force I'll bet in the next ten years at least 1000 fewer than the unknown number of Jews that terrorists would kill, won't be killed by terrorists. That's the kind of math that wins Fields Medals, fuck that Russian (Jew) nut and the frog conjecture. I think GB should get the Fields for the "metrics" he calculated for the Iraqi's that would have been killed by Saddam since 91 and the number killed to save them. I think by now the ratio is about 10 killed to save one who might have been killed. That's some fine Texas calculating if you ask me. Who cares about reducing space and surface to a point and whether it is a sphere, too ethereal for me. I want to know the height of two piles of Iraqi dead. The actual ones we have buried and the pile of those Saddam might have killed. maybe we could divide it by the height of the pile of the ballots cast in the election or better yet we could divide by the height of the pile of hundred dollar bills that were allocated for reconstruction but only lined peoples pockets. We could arrive at a number with the units: graft dollars per dead Iraqi/saved Iraqi. I am sure there is a Fields Medal for George in here somewhere!

Blu I sympathize with your exasperation, I really do.

Posted by: stawman on Aug. 15, 2006

Strawman, I get your argument, but I don't believe this cease fire will hold. It's already crumbling, and not from the Israeli side.

Posted by: annika on Aug. 16, 2006

From the AP: "'After the Holocaust was questioned by the president, now I have real doubts about it,' said Maryam Zadkani, a 23-year-old graphic artist as she wandered around the exhibition."

This is what you don't get, Straw. Your side has never understood human nature or evil and that is why you are wrong about this and nearly all the big questions regarding foreign policy.

"...nations of the earth attempt to put an end to violence and murder."

What a joke. I laughed when I read that inane BS. Yeah, you end violence and murder by ensuring the instigators of violence and murder are in control and can claim victory. Only a Left-wing whack job could see this as "putting an end to violence and murder." In case you didn’t' get the memo, Straw, Hez now has more control of S. Lebanon than before the war. This is their country - or I should say that it is now Iran and Syria's country. And thank goodness those "peacekeepers" will be there to keep things safe for Iran and Syria.

Hez will not disarm. They have already broken the truce agreement in their refusal. What a big fucking surprise - Muslims don't keep their word. And the U.N. et al will pretend it never happened. (Kinda like the great oversight with "Oil for Food.") You think the cowards that make up the governments of France and Lebanon are going to insist that their armies disarm Hez? How soon, Straw, before your friends from Syria and Iran begin rearming them. (I say friends because I'm certain that any friend of Chavez is a friend of yours. And we all know how he loves his fellow Western-hating fanatics.)

And it's not about kidnapping "two of my guys to arrange a prisoner exchange.” Is that really the range of your moral compass? It IS about an endless stream of violence from these semi-humans. It never ends. Israel abides by “world opinion” and gets out of Lebanon and what does it get? Hez kidnapping its people (really it was Iran but Hez did their bidding.) It's the same story over and over again no matter the location. Israel had every right to carpet bomb Lebanon. Lebanon allowed all this to happen because it was too cowardly to run Hez out of the South. What don't you get, Straw? Is Israel just supposed to sit their and say "yeah, come kidnap my citizens, send over your suicide bombers, and while you are at it, send some rockets our way too and make certain you aim at civilians if possible. We'll just sit here and play with our collective Johnson while you guys try to wipe us off the map."

Straw, you are a moral adolescent. You consistently manage to take the wrong side on all the important battles. Whether you are standing with the barbarians of Islam or the barbarians of Communism, you always manage to pick the side that hates America, the West, and the side that wants to end our way of life. More importantly, however, you choose the side that consistently devalues individual, political, and economic freedom. You seem to prefer those that would enslave people. What does that tell us about you?

I must respectfully disagree with Annika: You have no argument. Or the one your present is a pathetic joke provided by a moral relativist with no sense for the distinction between right and wrong and good and evil. Not all deaths are equally tragic, Straw. Not all human “civilizations” are equally as valuable. Pick a side, Straw. (Actually, you already have.)

Regarding your comment about Japan: Are you really too stupid or historically ignorant to figure out that the bombs we dropped on Japan saved more of their people than ours? Again, you misunderstand the enemy.

And regarding the “piles” of Iraqi dead: Hmmm, let me see if I get this: In Straw's world, we equate the Hussein death squads to the deaths of people fighting for their freedom and to ensure a democratically elected government is able to withstand an Iranian-backed insurgency? Yeah, Straw, I want to live in your world. We could all carry around our little red books - that is while we are not kneeling towards Mecca to pray.

p.s. Hey, Staw, here's a research assignment: Find out how much money your favorite boogeyman, Halliburton, received from the government under Clinton and Carter. I'm sure it was $0 because Halliburton only starting making money during the Bush administration, right?

Posted by: Blu on Aug. 16, 2006


I think you should relax, and notice that the forces of Islam are not in fact who would be killed if they carpet bombed Leb. Truely, more young men would as a result, take up arms and willingly give their life to avenge the assult.

I am not actualy on their side, never have been and have only expressed sympathy for the deaths of non combatants. I know you see acquiescing as tacit support and therefore deserving of death. I just can't make that equation but it does not mean that I support the goals of HEz. Whatever has given you that idea? Just because I don't think carpet bombing Lebanon into dust is a nice idea?

WE disagree on tactics not goals. I am not as sure as you that the solution to this threat is an outright assult. Too many moslems in the world, not all of them are sympathetic to the Islamists and being more brutal and crueler than you ememy does not get you a place at the table where a good life is being laddled out.

Posted by: strawman on Aug. 16, 2006

If our differences are only tactical, then I clearly have not read you well. I'll take you at your word.

Posted by: Blu on Aug. 16, 2006