Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Assessing the politics of the Detroit attack



The plane that a Nigerian national sought to bring down with a bomb last week. AP photo by J.P. Karas

The attempted bombing of an airliner bound for Detroit on Christmas Eve has stoked a fierce political debate, forced President Obama to recalibrate his vacation plans and served as a reminder of the potency of national security issues for the two parties.

Republicans have seized on the failed terror attack to paint the Obama Administration as out of touch on critical national security issues -- seeking to connect the dots between the President's decision to close Gitmo, the Fort Hood shooting and even the withdrawal of troops from Iraq as indicative of a wrong-headed approach.

"They just don't get it," wrote Michigan Rep. Peter Hoekstra, the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee in a fundraising e-mail to supporters. "These are the same weak-kneed liberals who have recently tried to bring Guantanamo Bay terrorists right here to Michigan!" (Hoekstra is currently embroiled in a crowded primary fight for the GOP gubernatorial nomination in Michigan.)

Democrats, on the other hand, are aiming to turn the blame on Republicans -- specifically South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint, a leading conservative nationally, who currently has a hold on the President's nominee to head the Transportation Security Administration.

Chad McGowan, the Democrat running against DeMint in 2010, said that the South Carolina Republican was "putting his partisan agenda ahead of our safety,", adding: "This is not the time to have nobody in charge of America's air security. Terrorists don't care if we're Republicans or Democrats -- they only care that we're Americans."

The vitriol of the back and forth blame game is evidence that the echoes of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks remain a major point of political contention.

In the wake of those attacks, Republicans -- led by then President George W. Bush -- cast themselves as the party best equipped to keep the country safe from future attacks. Many Republicans ran -- and won -- on that issue alone in both 2002 and 2004, using Democratic opposition to the creation over the Department of Homeland Security as symbolic of a broader misunderstanding of the way the world changed on Sept. 11.

But, as the decade wore on, the primacy of national security issues -- and Republicans clear polling advantage on the issue -- faded. That erosion in GOP numbers was due to a number of factors, not the least of which was the flawed strategy of the Bush Administration in Iraq and the mishandling of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans.

Beginning with the 2006 election and reaching a culmination in the 2008 election of President Obama, Democrats grew increasingly willing to engage with Republicans over matters of national security -- using the flawed intelligence that led the country into the Iraq war as evidence that the GOP had no special claim to keeping the U.S. safe from attack.

According to 2008 exit polling, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) won voters who said they were "very" worried about a future terrorist attack by a 54 percent to 43 percent margin. But, among those who said they were "somewhat" concerned about an attack, Obama nudged out McCain 51 percent to 48 percent while among those who were "not too concerned" about an attack Obama won by a far broader 67 percent to 31 percent.

Recent polling bears out the fact that national security has become a jump ball issue between the two parties although President Obama's standing on the issue has declined somewhat since earlier this year.

A USA Today/Gallup poll conducted in late November showed 45 percent approving of how Obama is handling terrorism and 47 percent disapproving; a May USA Today/Gallup poll showed a far more robust 55 percent approving as compared to 37 percent disapproving.

At the same time, there has been a clear decline in terrorism as a top of mind issue for Americans. That same November USA Today/Gallup poll showed 39 percent of the sample saying it was either very or somewhat likely there would be a future terrorist attack on domestic soil, a decline from the 47 percent who said the same in the May survey.

While terrorism may have faded somewhat as a political issue in recent years, the recent attempted attack in Detroit has served as a reminder of the nervousness, tension and bitter disagreement that sits just below the surface on this issue.

As of today, domestic matters -- the economy, jobs and heath care -- still seem likely to dominate the issue landscape in the 2010 midterm elections. But, another attack (or even an unsuccessful attempt like this one) could well drive the terrorism issue to the front of many voters' minds.

If that were to happen, it is not an obvious political win for either side. "My sense is that neither side will get any real traction from this story," said Democratic strategist Matt Bennett. "The TSA hold issue is too insidery, and the Republican charges are too transparently political to have an impact."

By Chris Cillizza  |  December 29, 2009; 1:27 PM ET
Categories:  White House  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Last "Live Fix" Chat of the decade!
Next: Democratic commission recommends elimination of superdelegates

Comments

You could look it up in a dictionary, a book of logic, or a guide to rhetoric. Then it might not appear novel to you.

Posted by: nodebris | January 5, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Not surprisingly, some are using a novel definition of ad hominem:

"I commented on the quality of your thought. That's not ad hominem. Calling someone a pederast or libtard is ad hominem. Calling your expressed thoughts insubstantial and pathetic is not."

Posted by: nodebris | January 4, 2010 10:49 AM

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/white-house/parties-ramp-up-rhetoric-on-te.html

Posted by: JakeD | January 4, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

So much for no ad hominem "personal attacks" anymore. For those who want to actually discuss the topic:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/morning-fix/obama-plots-national-security.html

Posted by: JakeD | January 4, 2010 8:21 AM | Report abuse

mike46, my 3-year old mutt could type a better post if I put a dog cookie on my keyboard.

Posted by: nodebris | January 3, 2010 12:25 AM | Report abuse

All this criticism is coming from the party that disregarded all information the Clinton administration gave them during the 2001 transition period. We know how that worked out and 3000 people are not here anymore because of that neglect. Now they want to criticize the Obama administration because of an unsuccessful terrorist attack? It reminds me of Republicans criticizing the Clinton administration when they foiled the millennium attack on Seattle in 2000. The guy was stopped by custom officials at the docks in Seattle and the Republicans somehow insinuated that he should have been stopped earlier. Since this was his first point of entry into the USA you have to wonder where he should have been stopped. Canada? In the middle of the Straight? O well.

Posted by: Opa2 | January 2, 2010 12:38 AM | Report abuse

Pretty easy to figure out what the phrase of the day is over in the alternate universe.  Wow, terrorists are *dark skinned young men*.  All we need to do to be safe is pull aside all DSYM and cavity-probe them.  And since the Undiebomber was African, not Arab, this vindicates all that suppressed bigotry the right wing has been straining to unleash again.

Posted by: SeattleTop | January 1, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

It must be difficult for liberals to find
fault with a terrorist who looks like a poster boy for the most dedicated Obama voters: young, black muslims. Obama´s non-plan is to further inconvenience all
worldwide travellers coming to the USA even further. Instead of profiling those
that almost exclusively terrorize Americans, Obama wants to spread their politically correct net universally.
Does anyone really think that preventing
Scandinavian grandmothers from going to the restroom during the last hour of a flight will prevent terrorist attacks in the future?

Posted by: mike46 | January 1, 2010 11:33 AM | Report abuse

"Jake D: You totally missed the point of the post."

You give him too much credit if you think that's due to mere ignorance or inattention.

Posted by: nodebris | January 1, 2010 2:56 AM | Report abuse

ceflynline, excellent re Shemya. Often thought the same.

For those cheney-ites out there, think of parking a saudi in the aleutian islands. Doesn't that send sparks up your leg?

Posted by: nodebris | January 1, 2010 2:54 AM | Report abuse

"By the way the Nazis were not A Right-wing party. They were Socialists and therefore Left-wing."

Credulity = infinite.

Posted by: nodebris | January 1, 2010 2:50 AM | Report abuse

"By the way the Nazis were not A Right-wing party. They were Socialists and therefore Left-wing."

Credibility = zero.

Posted by: nodebris | January 1, 2010 2:49 AM | Report abuse

"YES there are Right-wing extremist groups "

OK, you just admitted the fact that your previous posts objected to, using the words you objected to.

Posted by: nodebris | January 1, 2010 2:47 AM | Report abuse

URGENT TO SEC. NAPOLITANO: This Bush-era spawned Gestapo is subverting YOU and President Obama. Wake up and smell the police state that is destroying America on YOUR WATCH.

And the feds don't need to search my hard drive -- they hijacked my entire computer long ago and they can and have sabotaged my output at will. Your "fusion centers" are Ground Zero of the American Gestapo. Now it's on YOU:

U.S. SILENTLY TORTURES AMERICANS WITH CELL TOWER MICROWAVES, SATELLITES, SAYS VETERAN JOURNALIST

• Secret Bush legacy multi-agency federal program uses cell tower/GPS satellite microwave/laser electromagnetic radiation attack system to torture, impair, subjugate "targeted" citizens -- and oversees local "community watch" vigilante terrorism and financial sabotage campaigns.

See story at:

http://Poynter.org ("Reporting" section)

OR

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america OR NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "U.S. SILENTLY..." / "GESTAPO USA"

Posted by: scrivener50 | December 31, 2009 11:12 AM | Report abuse

Btw, why don't we just execute the terrorists that failed? Guilt isn't an issue, we know they did it!

1st pump them for info.

Posted by: Obaama | December 31, 2009 9:23 AM | Report abuse

Porpie, what paradise are you from? The US pays for WORLD security so those 'socialist paradises' have extra money to blow, and then act holier than thou as they sit back and let our boys take care of their national security with their lives.

After ww1 we withdrew. Do your history - Europe begged us not to.

After we sacrificed another 1/2 million men give or take at the altar of Europes folly, we (with Europe) decided we would do things differently. So far, so good. 'Wars' like Iraq or Afghanistan are minor and before the wws' were considered normal.

The 100+ countries we have troops stationed in, asked us to be there.

Unless you think you can talk the bad guys into dancing the macarena while blowing kisses...

Seattletop, I attended the Cheney rally in 2004 in Parma Oh, in the paddock. If the secret service wasn't there your peaceful brothers on the left would've happily beaten me up and tossed me out. As it was they tried to give me the bums rush. But I don't intimidate easily :)

Posted by: Obaama | December 31, 2009 9:02 AM | Report abuse

NEWS ALERT

WASHINGTON – As the government reviews how an alleged terrorist was able to bring a bomb onto a U.S.-bound plane and try to blow it up on Christmas Day, the Transportation Security Administration is going after bloggers who wrote about a directive to increase security after the incident.


THAT MEANS YOU -

Farlington Blade
SeattleTop
JakeD
Elijah24
ceflynline
mark_in_austin


JANET NEPOLITANO WANTS TO KNOW WHERE YOU ARE GETTING ALL YOUR INFORMATION.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 31, 2009 8:45 AM | Report abuse

Perhaps I said it on this blog before Cheney - but the statement is true that Obama is PRETENDING that the war on terror is over.

This is a serious issue.


There is a whole conscious effort on the part of Obama to IGNORE THE WAR ON TERROR - as if taking the phrase "war on terror" off the government paperwork will have some magical effect.


Obama's policy on terrorism has been horrible.


Last month, a Somali man tried to get on a plane as well. - WHY DIDN'T OBAMA HAVE EVERYONE ON HIGH ALERT SINCE THAT INCIDENT???


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 31, 2009 8:24 AM | Report abuse

Elijah, I am being brutally sarcastic.

I'm ridiculing ironwolf's comparing property damage to assassination and trying to gin up some phony righteousness about a fictitious politically violent left. That's not even fairy dust. It's just plain not happening.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 11:57 PM | Report abuse

Im gonna assume you are being sarcastic, Seattle. I don't think Dr. Tiller was nobody.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 11:49 PM | Report abuse

TO: OBAMA WHITE HOUSE (Rahm, Ax, Val-J, Gibbs, Carney) c/o Dr. Gates
RE: Consider all possibilities, go proactive, change the subject

BOTCHED TERROR BOMBING A 'FALSE FLAG' FLIGHT?...
http://nowpublic.com/world/botched-terror-bombing-false-flag-flight
...perhaps to deflect attention from the need to expose America's horrific shame?

U.S. SILENTLY TORTURES AMERICANS WITH CELL TOWER MICROWAVES, SATELLITES, SAYS VETERAN JOURNALIST

• Secret Bush legacy multi-agency federal program uses cell tower/GPS satellite microwave/laser electromagnetic radiation attack system to torture, impair, subjugate "targeted" citizens -- and oversees local "community watch" vigilante terrorism and financial sabotage campaigns.

TEAM OBAMA, THIS SLOW GENOCIDE IS NOW HAPPENING ON YOUR WATCH.

See story at: Poynter.org ("Reporting" section)
OR http://www.nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves
nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america OR NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "U.S. SILENTLY..." / "GESTAPO USA"

Posted by: scrivener50 | December 30, 2009 11:47 PM | Report abuse

But elijah24, what if the damaged property belongs to a *businessman* who wears a *suit and tie* like Mitt Romney? Isn't that a lot worse than some ordinary person getting a round in the head?

Some are more equal than others!

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 11:10 PM | Report abuse

@porpie: welcome, and so hang around. But don't bother engaging with JakeD, he's just a snotty teenager and the snarky sort of goading you see below is all he does here.

Ditto snowbama and 37thand0, who represent fewer people than monikers.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 11:02 PM | Report abuse

well wolf, property damage is bad and certainly it is wrong. And the people who would do that may stand for the same viewpoints that I do, but they do not represent me. Still, it doesnt have that same fatal ring to it as A GUNSHOT TO THE FRIGGIN' HEAD!

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 10:39 PM | Report abuse

Ok, if anyone wants to actually discuss the thread topic, I will be over here:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/12/democrats-gop-politicizing-fai.html

Posted by: JakeD | December 30, 2009 10:25 PM | Report abuse

ceflynline and Mark are getting all creative here with our "storing canned terrorists" problem. Ceflynline wants to bore 'em to death and Mark wants to put them to work. How about they build the wind generators on Shemya? Then you both get your wish! And Alaska gets some great Bureau of Prisons jobs, you betcha.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | December 30, 2009 10:19 PM | Report abuse

Back on the topic of political fallout from the Detroit terrorist attack, wasn't Janet Napolitano on the "short list" for U.S. Supreme Court? Not anymore ; )

Posted by: JakeD | December 30, 2009 10:07 PM | Report abuse

If you see a "friend" in trouble it's your duty to say what you see as wrong!
This is not a "hate mail" and the defensive posture is not necessary, Seattle Top understands as many US citizens do, I have a number of friends in California, they understand as well.
I have been getting e-mail on how to buy American house foreclosures, especially in Florida. Your nation is being sold out from under you, your people! Government/business have to look o/s for buyers for many of these houses!
Recession, no it's a fire sale! Have a look at who owns the USA...China/Middle East and Australian's buying houses for 20/30 cents on the dollar!
Spend a day or two looking at the statistics to get a clear perspective Jake, I don't really mean to be nasty!

Posted by: porpie9254 | December 30, 2009 10:04 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD | December 30, 2009 9:52 PM | Report abuse

LOL!!! This "third world economy" even in a recession is still bigger than ANY other country's. Thanks for the laugh though.

Posted by: JakeD | December 30, 2009 9:44 PM | Report abuse

Typically juvenile JakeD snark but that post pretty well describes how much of the world sees us. Remember when we were the champions of human rights?

Neither do I.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 9:42 PM | Report abuse

Jake,
You are correct, you can't rely on your vote being counted! Too, the USA is a "third world economy" with nuclear arms and young men and women that are desperate to work and be seen to be patriotic!

Your proud history...founding fathers, wars against imperialist England and slavery, my, what a far cry from those days!

SSDD and you can't see or smell it!

Posted by: porpie9254 | December 30, 2009 9:37 PM | Report abuse

porpie9254:

Thankfully, you do not vote here in America.

Posted by: JakeD | December 30, 2009 9:25 PM | Report abuse

Proposition: USA the "sickest developed country on the earth"?

As someone who has visited (USA) and reads US media, all sorts.

You have invaded nations and killed millions taken the national resources to assist with the massive costs, this includes artefacts of the ancient middle east! You have hunted for Osama Bin Laden as the "root of all evil" when it is actually your (US) culture based on greed and fear that has caused the world's turmoil!
Lets look at the "grand old girl" a.k.a. GOP, yes, conservative morals and so-called principles.

1/You have millions losing homes.
2/Unemployment if truth be known in the 10's of millions.
3/Health for 10's of millions non existent!
4/You legally kill criminals, yet, let those suffer....euthanasia is illegal.
5/You scream about all the "illegals" jumping your southern borders, yet employ them before many of your own people?
6/You give the wealthiest a trillion dollars to get back on their feet???
7/Your media is dominated by ex-pat Australians like Murdoch that love to made Americans more bitter at every opportunity!
8/You are told you are the "land of the brave, the free" when at every turn your GOP wants more fences and screens more penalties for those that challenge the minority (wealth/power)! Most conservative/religious folk are often at the lower end of the socio-economic pile! Brainwashed!
9/ How far will the "right" in the USA go to secure another election victory?? We have seen 2000/2004 elections where the world looked on as criminals (GOP) did all to manipulate a Republican win! Terrorism the ally of the GOP power brokers, think of this....GOP insider, I know a friend who know somebody who can.... remember "Bay Of Pigs".
Maybe nothing to be concerned about politically....Hollywood did give us 2012 the movie, yeah nothing to really worry about?

This will be part of the great American novel of the last 50 years or so!

Posted by: porpie9254 | December 30, 2009 9:17 PM | Report abuse

mark_in_austin:

Google Earth Shemya, spend a bit of time studying it and the uninhabitted rocks around it, and then think about thye fact that much of the time those rocks are covered by impenetrable Aleutian fog. They never get particularly warm. Keeping the cells at a comfortable 72 deg F would keep the realative humidity in the very low single digits much of the time.

Think of spending the rest of your life itchy, chilly, and desperately waiting for just a glimpse of the sun.

My supervisor, who maintained the Cobra Dane radar facility long ago, remarked, when I suggested this, that OBL himself would spill everything he knew to get off that island with only a couple of days experience with the wonders of Shemya.

This place has every advantage over Gitmo, from being real U. S. territory, (Residents are Alaskan voters should they choose to register) while being in no one's particular back yard. This is Alcatraz magnified many times, but with no view period, and certainly no view of San Francisco.

Survival time in those waters? Seconds, apparently.

Posted by: ceflynline | December 30, 2009 8:59 PM | Report abuse

ceflyline, the isolated penal colony approach is always worth a view, but why limit it to terrorists?

Another possibility is to have the penal colony in the Dakotas where the presumably Arab prisoners can fabricate wind generator parts until we are free of Arab oil. That would give them hope, and a reason not to slaughter their guards unprovoked. They could be sold on the idea that they are liberating their countries from western influence with each blade, each rotor, each tower.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 30, 2009 8:41 PM | Report abuse

And now for a really off the wall, but somewhat on thread, thought.

We need somewhere really disturbing to jail, permanently, airplane bombers who try and fail, as well as al Quaeda operatives we may someday capture.

It needs to be remote, and so not in anyone's particular back yard, and simply unapproachable undermost conditions.

South of Saipan there is one such island, Aguijan, a nice, uninhabited mountain with steep sides and only one real point it can be approached by boat. Tunnel into this island, put cells every 100 ft or so, and use this as a maximum security total isolation facility. Cut the cells so that they have just one window on an infinite sea, and let our life plus 100 year sentence servers contemplate the vastness of the Pacific.

But there is perhaps an even more daunting place to store our unwanted most dangerous people in all the world.

Google Earth Shemya Island, or Atto, or Aggatu Island. These are all Islands in the "Near Islands" (because they are "near" the Kuriles, actually) Aggatu is uninhabited, and there are a couple of rocks near to Shemya that also have no human inhabitants.

Somewhere in those islands we could put a totally unescapable maximum security prison suitable for those social misfits whom we have no answer to except to keep them permanently away from all other Human Beings. The weather, and the Bitter cold Ocean around those islands guarantee that. Build comfortable, somewhat over large solitary confinement cells with two doors, one being the door that communicates with the part of the prison controlled by the guards, and the other of which would communicate to an outside courtyard that fronts on the Sea. Prisoners would be able to normally move about that courtyard to their hearts content, (ask any veteran of Shemya about THAT phrase) but would have to be in their cell alone at meals in order to get fed. Food would be moderately varied, (as perhaps five regular main daily meals and four particular Sunday dinners, repeated endlessly.) low calorie diets, perhaps 1100 calories a day, Adkins or its equivalent. Inmates to have access to a controlled, monitored, censored internet, with [perhaps an hours time one or two days a week to spiritual counseling.

Forever, no other communications and expectations that they only leave when their corpse is cremated and their ashes scattered to the Aleutian breezes.

Even should this have no actual deterrent effect, it gets those unwanted terrorists out of everyone's back yard.

Forever. Plus 100 years.

Posted by: ceflynline | December 30, 2009 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Like I said, your EXTREME proposal is not needed in a standard cost-benefit analysis, just set up an "isolated gateway approach" for all Muslim men aged 18 to 32. Better yet, how much do you think that KLM could get for seats aboard their new 777 non-stop, non-Muslim flights?

Posted by: JakeD | December 30, 2009 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Jake D: You totally missed the point of the post.

The only way to absolutely guarantee that no Richard Reeds get on airplanes coming to the U.S. is 100% whole person inspection. Noi profile that could conceivably be written could guarantee not to miss a "terrorist". Ergo, for the kind of protection that perople are screaming for to happen you would need the isolated gateway approach.

The question is, how much would it cost and who would pay for it?

The point it leads to is that even should we go to the trouble and expense, (and try to think of how many people would have to stay the night in Goose bay, EVERY night) the next Richard Reed would just try to ignite his shoes out over the Atlantic just as the plane begins its approach to Gander. You don't save ANY lives or planes, you just shift the point where the debris field falls.

More better is to make a world where EVERY one we deal with behaves the way our good neighbors to the North behave.

Now all you have to do is figure out hiow to do THAT.

Posted by: ceflynline | December 30, 2009 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Back on topic, at the official Obama blog today, White House Communications Director, Dan Pfeiffer, quoted several public statements of Obama's that explicitly state we are at war:

"The difference is this: President Obama doesn’t need to beat his chest to prove it, and – unlike the last Administration – we are not at war with a tactic (“terrorism”), we at war with something that is tangible: al Qaeda and its violent extremist allies. And we will prosecute that war as long as the American people are endangered."

REALLY? Well, Mr. Pfeiffer, actions speak louder than words (especially when Obama goes GOLFING right after addressing the issue but cuts the game short and races back to his vacation home when a friend's child slips and hurts himself). He is trying to pretend that we are NOT at war. He seems to think if he has a low-key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of Sept. 11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he closes Guantanamo and releases the hard-core Al Qaeda-trained terrorists still there, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gets rid of the words, ‘war on terror,’ we won’t be at war.

But we are at war, and when he ACTS like we aren’t, it makes us less safe. Just because it doesn’t fit with the view of the world he brought with him to the Oval Office. It doesn’t fit with what seems to be his goal — social transformation — the restructuring of American society.

REALLY?????

Posted by: JakeD | December 30, 2009 7:27 PM | Report abuse

wow that took forever to post. I wrote that last 3 hours ago.
and I still don't see my response to you, ceflynline.
Don't worry it was ok. No nastyness

Posted by: ironwolf1 | December 30, 2009 7:13 PM | Report abuse

OK!!! Enough is enough!!! When does the government become Obama's responsbility? Are only its successes his and any failures still Bush's fault?
Was Bush wrong for releasing the 2 animals who helped plan this?
In hind sight, HELL YES, he was wrong. But hind sight is almost always 20/20. And remember, he was being hammered by the Left on a daily basis to release more & more of the savages, just like Obama is getting beaten up by them now for not closing the place immediately when he became President.
Let's drag out the old & weary Right-wing complaint that Clinton should have grabbed Osama when he had the chance and 9/11 would never have happened. Would that be appropriate?
NO, It's all BULLS**T.
Obama IS the President NOW and that means the it's now HIS responsibility! If he didn't want that, then he shouldn't have ran for the job.
Everyone in DC has their own jobs to do.
That means the Right-wing has to work WITH him to get things done and the Left has to stop blaming Bush & include the Right in their plans.
It also means press hungry clowns like Schumer need to stop saying "You lost, get over it".
They lost an election, not their voice or their responsibility to their constituents.
And Responsibility is the OBLIGATION of both sides of the Aisle in the Congress and the White House.

Posted by: ironwolf1 | December 30, 2009 7:11 PM | Report abuse

Here's what we know so far:

1) The U.S. government had received several worrisome reports about Abdulmutallab, including a warning from the man’s father. The CIA says that his name didn’t surface until November, but an earlier report about a person of interest known internally as “the Nigerian” was received in August.

2) Several clues to the unfolding plot were not shared sufficiently within the intelligence community. The CIA and the National Counterterrorism Center, which was created on the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission, did not adequately alert the FBI or others who might have acted on information they received.

And agencies did not trigger their own alarms by connecting clues about the suspect with other available data, which might have shown he posed a high risk. “Listmasters didn’t link up some of the data points that were vague but available,” a knowledgeable official said.

A U.S. intelligence official contended that the data points were too elliptical to be useful: “Abdulmutallab’s father didn’t say his son was a terrorist, let alone planning an attack. Not at all. I’m not aware of some magic piece of intelligence that suddenly would have flagged this guy — whose name nobody even had until November — as a killer en route to America, let alone something that anybody withheld.”

3) The transfers of the 198 inmates left in the Guantanamo Bay detention facility will be slowed, and no more will go to Yemen in the foreseeable future.

4) Body scanners are likely to be much more widely used and deployed in U.S. airports. The list of people who receive special security screening is likely to be increased somewhat but not dramatically, because that would slow down travelers and dilute the attention to the highest-risk cases.

Posted by: JakeD | December 30, 2009 7:10 PM | Report abuse

ceflynline:

I wouldn't go to the extreme of your "Island Airports". I would simply institute extra screening procedures for all Muslim men between the ages of 18 and 32.

Posted by: JakeD | December 30, 2009 7:05 PM | Report abuse

oh and Elijah
I haven't had the chance to research the last Left-wing group to murder someone, but for destruction of private property, I would say the conference in Copenhagen comes to mind.
Definitely violent and certainly dangerous.

Posted by: ironwolf1 | December 30, 2009 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Notice the reply to historical fact.

That does not suit my taste for sausage.

End of argument

ad it always is with libs. No facts need apply.

Did you notice the wheels came off the climate hysteria once science prevailed and al gore turned into a joke. Again.

Posted by: snowbama | December 30, 2009 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Just one more comment on that whacky list of terrible leftist intimidation. I live in Seattle, near it anyway, and those riots got local coverage. I know people who were there.

It wasn't the protestors smashing windows, it was violence junkies taking advantage of the melée. Every news report made that clear. In your zeal to see a bogeyman left you seem to have overlooked it.

There has been no potent left in America since 1939, just fearmongers and crybabies on the right seeing monsters.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Sno
I'm afraid I have to agree with you regarding Seattletop.

I may have differences of opinion with Elijah24 but at least there is coherent thought to the debate there.

Posted by: ironwolf1 | December 30, 2009 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Wolf.

You might as well yell at the sun for rising. That clown is incorrigible. He only comes here because no one else will talk to him. He has been banned several times for nastiness , a Fix first.

His is the most narrow and ignorant of views although he considers herself enlightened. Ha.

Posted by: snowbama | December 30, 2009 6:49 PM | Report abuse

Ironwolf, your arguments are as old and dull and shopworn as what the creationists are selling. I've exchanged with you on this because you showed promise in praising Obama's speech but since then you've just been posting the same old boilerplate like it all comes from the same factory and bears the same logo.

I'm not intrerested in your right-skewed take on the Nazis, fact is that you need your politics in starkly contrasting hues, like black and white, and the idea that the pole of your allegiance could have coughed up totalitarian governments and the Holocaust is simply not to be entertained. Does not compute, Will Robinson.

Fascism is totalitarianism of the right. Deal.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 6:47 PM | Report abuse

I suggest if you need a friend that bad ped, you inflate one or shine up a penny and head over to your usual spot.

No one here is interested in your antagonizing. You've been banned a record number.

Get the message yet?

Posted by: snowbama | December 30, 2009 6:38 PM | Report abuse

to Seattletop:
I'm afraid it is you who has proved yourself to be a troll with the snide comments.

The Nazis/Leftist comparison is not a canard but historically accurate.

The Nazis rounded up ANYONE who opposed them.
Just because they were Nationalists does not mean the weren't also Socialists.
Their full name was the Nationalist Socialist German Workers Party. NSDAP

There are several points where the Nazi party and the current spate of Leftist organizations converge.
NO ONE is saying Liberals are Nazis and there can be no absolute comparison between the true evilness of Hitler and anyone in the Democratic party.

That being said, tactics used by, & much of the social agenda of, the Nazis ARE being used by the Left today.
The Nazis' battles with German Communists in Berlin in 1932 can be fairly compared to the Leftists battles with the Police during the G8 in Seattle.
Socialized medicine, Government mandates to factories, Advocacy of total gun control(confiscation), Relatively compliant media, Non-military security force.
These are all things that the Nazis in 1934 began and they are thing that the really hard-core Left advocate today.
I'm not saying today's Left are Nazis. That would be unfair, inflammatory and just plain mean. But to ignore history by seeing only the most horrific parts of the Nazi era and then misinterpreting them as the acts of a Right-wing organization, has the effect of excusing the radical actions of the Nazis that the Horrors possible.

No, the Nazis were, without a doubt, one of the most savage and evil organizations in our collective history. But we can't forget what they were before they became the monsters that nearly destroyed Europe.

Jumping up & down, screaming "troll, troll"(metaphorically speaking) to anyone who disagrees with you and calling them "fanatics" for their opinions is a sign of the intolerant and narrow minded.

It is like those who claim that anyone who dislikes or disapproves of Obama and his policies is a racist.
Those, sir, are the true canards.
Shame on you.

Posted by: ironwolf1 | December 30, 2009 6:34 PM | Report abuse

One last thing to think about, before the trolls go exponential order on us.

Herewith is a proposal for making it impossible for terrorists to get on flights terminating in the U.S. It isn't serious for reasons that will be obvious, but it scales the problem, and proves that stopping terrorists from flying into the United States isn't the solution.

Require that all flights terminating in the United States originate on some gateway airport, located on an Island or some sufficiently remote location that the immediate security of the whole area can be insured. For flights from Europe that could be Gander, Newfoundland or Goose Bay Labrador or Thule, Greenland, or from farther south perhaps Asension Island, or Tenerife, Canary Islands. From Asia it could be Kodiak or Adak, or Wake island or Palmyra Atoll or some of the islands off Mexico that nobody seems to want very badly.

All passengers would be required to deplane and remain over night, while their identities and passports and visas are checked. Al;l baggage would be removed from the plane, inspected, and all passengers and baggage would be closely inspected again the next day before being loaded or boarded. Inspection would be by U. S. Customs and TSA specialists, who would have all the time they needed for complete inspections.

That would insure that there would be no incidents on terminal legs of U. S. bound flights. The expense to the passengers to make that overnight stop would be their problem. The expense of maintaining sufficient a force of inspectors, TSDA agents, trusted baggage handlers, aircraft handlers, airport personnel, etc would cost SOMEBODY quite a bit of money, and the complainers are free to tell us who is to pay it. It WOULD be a financial bonnanza for the Islands where the airports are located.

Of course it would just mean that the point of attack would be on an inbound leg to the gateway airport rather than on the way into the U.S. Successful attacks would be just as deadly as if they were over the Continental U.S., and the B..ers would be just as adamant that Obama bore full responsibility. And it would still be just as easy for a crazy to get to Canada, hire a charter boat and head for Port Clinton OH, and bypass all the international mess and all the inspections.

There are realistic things we can do to make air travel safer, but not one of the current complainers has actually proposed a single reasonable thing to do.

Posted by: ceflynline | December 30, 2009 6:30 PM | Report abuse

Please list all the arrests and property damage from:

tea parties with right wingnut crazies

vs

world bank and climate conference peaceniks

compare.

Posted by: snowbama | December 30, 2009 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Evolving is not clinging to discredited notions from the 60s. Your promised land euphoria is predicated on taking my money. I went to grad school. I worked 2 and 3 jobs. I took risks. Who deserves the return on that?

Posted by: snowbama | December 30, 2009 6:22 PM | Report abuse

snobama, you need to evolve. the rest of us have. catch up.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Who was the last person killed by a leftist extremist, wolf? When was the last left-wing act of extremism, or even threat thereof?
Right-wing extremists (which i prefer to call crazies) have threatened the life of the president since they knew how to misspell his name. Most are not serious, but how is anyone to know until action is taken which is which? the crazies carried guns into town-hall meetings with their congressmen and senators and even the President himself. And let us not forget that it was a right-wing crazy that shot Dr. George Tiller in the head as he served as an usher at his church. Quite the bold statement for the pro-life crowd.
The fact is that when Dems are in power, the southpaws tend to chill out and see what happens. For that reason alone, leaving left wingers off the list would be justified.
Finally Left wingers (extreme or not)tend to abhor violence. That's why righties tend to call them cowards. Yet another reason that they don't really pose a serious threat. The right loves its guns. and they hate any government intervention in their life (unless they need it) In fact, hate seems to motivate the right extreme. as does fear. these are two very dangerous motives that tend to lead to violence.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 6:09 PM | Report abuse

Sorry I can't do this in one-syllable words, zouk.

Fascism unites industry and government. Fundamental to the definition. Nationalization is an artifact if the left but nit part of the definition.

Did the Nazis establish peasant collectives? No they had slaves. Did the Nazis have workers owning the factories? No they had a few super-rich do that for them.

Maybe you might read a book not written by someone at Fox news.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 6:05 PM | Report abuse

So taking over industry is now a feature of the right.

More babbling from the bimbos.

That means Barry is an extreme right wimgnut.

Who knew?

Posted by: snowbama | December 30, 2009 5:49 PM | Report abuse

Let's review j w booth.

He killed the first republican president.
He was an actor.
His thoughts were akin to the Dixiecrats.
He hung around with senator Robert Byrd.

Sounds like a leftist to me. Was he in the same local Klan as grand wizard Byrd?

Posted by: snowbama | December 30, 2009 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Simply stating that most of them are crazy doesn't change the fact that they are crazy, violent LEFTISTS.

I am willing to concede that violence is not a strict perview of the left or right, demonstrating that the ped is talking out of his red hot poker garage as usual.

But I will remind you of the mass murderers from history- Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. All denizens of the LEFT.

And you may recall the repubs freed the slaves and passed civil rights.

Posted by: snowbama | December 30, 2009 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Having firmly held views is not the mark of a troll or the ignorant.

==

firmly holding views that are starkly incorrect is the mark of a fanatic.

The Nazis were beliggerent nationalists, they had a national industrial policy, racism was official policy. They were right wing by any definition not predicated on potraying it as pristine.

This is a very dead horse you're beating.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Congratulations wolf, with the Nazis as leftists canard you have successfully closed the loop and you have now joined the trolls. This entitles you to full lifetime exemption from the posting protocols so start cranking up the insults!

I will only ask you to go goog who the Nazis rounded up first. Hint: it was not their right wing "opponents."

if you need to whitewash the extreme right to keep your allegiances unsullied then yes, you ARE one of them.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Abe Lincoln killed by a leftist

==

Did you even finish HIGH SCHOOL?!?

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 5:11 PM | Report abuse

to Elijah24
Top
nodebris
Gentlemen, I am no wingnut & I abhor extremists of any stripe.
BUT the report did specify Right-wing groups.
It did not say extremist groups et-al.
That is the part I find objectionable.
To cite Bill Ayers would be merely beating a dead horse. I prefer to remind you of others, such as Joanne Chesimard and the BLA, William Morales & the FALN. I doubt any of you would refer to these people or their groups and their associates as right-wingers.
I mention them (even though their hay-day was the 70's) because they are still at large (and unrepentant) and they still have violent supporters.
I know this because I am in law enforcement and am fully informed (as fully as one can be in a constantly evolving situation) about these and other extremist groups.
Regarding Janet's Canadian slip, by your own acknowledgment, she was factually correct but phrased the thought poorly.
This report was factually correct but phrased poorly.
As such it conveyed a political message as much as it supplied an intelligence warning.
YES there are Right-wing extremist groups and they need to be monitored in some way or at least be made aware of their existence BUT there are also extremist groups on the Left and they are no less dangerous.
By the way the Nazis were not A Right-wing party. They were Socialists and therefore Left-wing. Reasons they are painted as Right-wing are:
1. They opposed Communist Russia and therefore were assumed(wrongly) to be diametrically opposed to them.
2. The Nazis had a Anti-immigrant mentality (with a special hatred for Jews in particular)
3. Neo-Nazis that idolize the Nazis racist ideals ARE Right-wing loons (based on other crazy ideas of theirs).
Another point, adhering to any specific religion with respect for others religious beliefs is the cornerstone of our Nation.
I am a relatively religious person and a gun owner. I respect anyone else's choice to own one or not.
Having firmly held views is not the mark of a troll or the ignorant.
Refusing to accept that others have other views and denigrating them for those views IS the mark of a troll. As is the use of snide or insipid terms.
BTW my information on Napolitano's comments came from Newsday and NBC News.


Posted by: ironwolf1 | December 30, 2009 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Osama bin Laden is leading a parade right here in America. They are called Republicans trying to put their masks back on.

Should America give Republicans another chance to get even tougher on terror?
Republicans make Obama appear especially competent.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 30, 2009 5:07 PM | Report abuse

shrink2:

If you have some time, here's a good account of Tora Bora from Peter Bergen.

http://www.tnr.com/article/the-battle-tora-bora

Posted by: mnteng | December 30, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

I hate to respond to anything snowbama posts, but his history lesson needs to be graded.

Booth was a States Rights pro slavery southerner, about as Right Wing as you can get. (The abolitionists were the real liberals.)

Giteau was a republican office seeker miffed that he didn't get a plum assignment he thought Garfield owed him.

Czolgosz was the era's analog to a ditto head, convinced the the anarchist press's attacks on Czar McKinley were justification for assassination. He had about the same level of mental derangement as Rush's Thunderbolts as well. (Term taken from Descriptions of purgatives concocted for Lewis and Clark by noted Physician Benjamin Rush. See comments on said adventure to note the aptitude.)

The mental defective who shot at FDR, missed and killed the Mayor of Chicago was a hard money republican if he was anything political. (some say he was actually mob and hit his actual target.)

The Puerto Ricans who shot up Blair House were hard do categorize politically in terms of dem and rep, because they were radical nationalists.

Sarah Jane Moore was a card carrying republican and card Carrying NRA type. She thought Ford was a liberal embarrassment.

Squeeky Fromme was a druggie whose mental processes defy categorization.

Reagan's assailant was of the mental set of the Greek who burned down the temple of Dianna to gain lasting notoriety. He may not have been able to spell political persuasion, let alone define it or decide how it related to him.

But in good troll form the actual truth of the assertions never matters. You just spout the nonsense and expect to get a pass on it.

Posted by: ceflynline | December 30, 2009 5:01 PM | Report abuse

In America we allow some criminals to go free so that we avoid locking up innocents. As a result crime will never fully dissappear.

But one single instance of a successful terror attack is too much. See the difference. Most libs don't.

Treating these souless mass murderers like drunk drivers is idiocy and is going to get us killed.

Posted by: snowbama | December 30, 2009 4:53 PM | Report abuse

The surge in Iraq did not work,
unless you think victory was achieved (tell me about it, I want to believe) or will be. The surge in Afghanistan will not work, unless you have the next novel theory of victory. The news today is awful.

More dead Americans fighting in places that used to be relevant, or maybe not, to defeating terrorists. Was bin Laden correct? Will Americans bleed themselves white (pun intended but not funny) trying to chase the dream of a fearless life?

Look at the economy of 2001 to the present.
We are wasting ourselves.

One day, after questions were being asked about the Tora Bora failure being covered by the build up to Iraq, when he was asked about what had been expended chasing bin Laden, Bush remarked with his special smirk, "Well he is not leading any parades."

Obama will never be so stupid, but he is going to fail if he pursues the same surge and leave militarism. He had no choice you say. But he'd better not talk about victory.

The way to deal with terrorists is the way we deal with the flu, crime, cancer and roaches. No one talks about victory and only stupid people pretend the threat is greater or less than it is.

Science not ideology controls the method.
No one talks about being soft on cancer. You just keep working on prevention and eradication. You never win the war on crime and you never lose, so long as you never stop.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 30, 2009 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Just another day of delusion for the ped

Posted by: snowbama

==

Chris Cillizza: this is snowbama calling another poster a pedophile, that is, someone who sexually molests prepubescent children. No, it's not short for pedant of pedestrian, as you know perfectly well.

If we get banned for stating the obvious in plain language, e.g. Referring to someone who posts racism as a racist, something like this, insinuating moral depravity and felonious behavior with no supportive evidence, the ban should be immediate.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Part of the politicization process that is affecting this relatively minor incident, (it didn't succeed, after all) is a process that the Republicans developed after Nixon's resignation. Wghen high level republican officials get accused of serious misconduct, and in fact are convicted and jailed for it, the republicans go after the next Democrat's administration trying to find an analogous incident to attack, so they can say that the dems do it too. So with most of Nixon's administration having been indicted for something or other, the Republicans attacked Bert Lance. There wasn't anything to the accusations, but Lance being a man who understands that public officials ought to be honest, and appear honest, withdrew from consideration and defended himself admirably,. The U. S. lost his services, of course, but that only made the Republicans feel even gooder.

After Reagan and Bush I set incredible examples for malfeasance, corruption, and general high level misconduct, the Republicans had to attack Clinton for some of everything that Reagan's administrators got convicted for. So they needed scandals, and drummed up Whitewater. They needed personal scandals, and found Paula Jones, (who seems to have been perjuring herself all along, since at the time she claims Clinton was harassing her he seems to have been in a dinner meeting with numerous big wigs.) when it was all done they had only Monica. Something about monica's hangers on and handlers makes that look like a Soviet Sex Set Up.

George ignored and actually rejected warnings of a terrorist attack, and got 9/11. The Republicans need a 9/11 out of Obama, and Detroit is probably about as close as they will ever get, so here they go. Of course, when it gets out that most of the fault lies in inspectors in Lagos and Amsterdam who don't actually work for or have particular ties to the U. S. government, and that there was actually not much the U. S. could have done had all the information gotten to all the appropriate people, the Snowbama's of the world will STILL demand that Obama was personally responsible for paying for the man's ticket.

Rational discourse will have to take place over and around the grumbling of the bunch of trolls who populate most political blogs. When enough of us get frustrated enough to go out and work HF at the club radio station for a while, 37th and O, Scrivenor, Snowbama, Zouk and company will have the blog to themselves and Chris can decide if the results are worth it.

Posted by: ceflynline | December 30, 2009 4:40 PM | Report abuse

"To use the term Right-wing in the report about extremists without naming any specific group is a blatant smear of all Right-wing groups.

This report should have been apolitical and pointed out the dangers that ANY extremist group poses and that ALL of these groups would love to get their hands on former military personnel.
Any other wording is just obvious bias against Right-wing organizations in general."

Well, the report didn't name any groups because there was no reason to suspect any groups. The report was clear about this. There was no suspicion. However, you had a myriad of conditions. The economic downturn, the election of a black President, the marginalization of Republicans in general, the resurgence of wedge issues such as gun control, immigration, and church recognition.

Of course there is always a danger from all extremist groups, but the conditions were such to make taking precautions correct. Now there's nothing in the report that casts suspicion on any group and it's definitely wrong to investigate any group without probable cause. However, it's also wrong not to be alert.

Posted by: DDAWD | December 30, 2009 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Abe Lincoln killed by a leftist
James Garfield killed by a leftist
William McKinley killed by a leftist
John Kennedy killed by a leftist
Franklin Roosevelt shot at by a leftist
Harry Truman shot at by leftists
Gerald ford shot at by leftists twice
Ronald Reagan shot by leftists
George w bush shot at by leftists

did you even pass history class?

Posted by: snowbama | December 30, 2009 4:34 PM | Report abuse

Well you call the Nazis leftists too so pardon me if I place zero value on your opinion.

As for Oswald, go research his visa approval for return from Cuba, expedited and rushed through, and try again on that Communist thing.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Last I checked lee Harvey Oswald was a communist. I know from your perspective this is to the right but to most of us it is leftward.

The use if violence is a particularly leftist liberal method.

Compate the damage and arrests at world bank and climate conferences with the peaceful tea parties.

Just another day of delusion for the ped.

Posted by: snowbama | December 30, 2009 4:21 PM | Report abuse

"To use the term Right-wing in the report about extremists without naming any specific group is a blatant smear of all Right-wing groups."

Now, I know you aren't trying to argue that there is not such thing as a right-wing extremist, so what term would you find suitable to describe the phenomenon without smearing all right-wing groups?

Also, equating a non-political criminal gang like the crips with the left-wing is something that I consider far more offensive that that which you complain about. Why don't you just add in the mafia, the hell's angels, and the columbian cartels while you're at it?

Posted by: nodebris | December 30, 2009 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Well iron you looked promising there for a while but if you think that political assassination in the USA is an equal opportunity employer then I guess you're really no more informed (or honest?) than the trolls.

Political violence in the US is, to all but the most exacting scholars, a fetish of the right wing. It's the wingnuts who obsess over guns, it's the right that kills opponents, it's the right that killed King and the Kennedy brothers, that shoots abortion doctors and Jewish community centers.

I hope you're not going to respond with some Bill Ayers retread, that would close the loop.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 3:55 PM | Report abuse

No Wolf. Wrong again. It was a smear against EXTREMIST groups. There are right wing groups (i.e. the tea parties) and right wing extremists (i.e. the KKK). And if the word extremist applies to you, I don't, and Im certain that the HS Sec doesn't really care if you are offended by it. If, however, you are a law abiding good citizen of our country, but you happen to be a right winger; her words should not have bothered you at all.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 3:51 PM | Report abuse

And no Left-wing extremist organizations would want assassins? Just the Right-wing groups?
Are you kidding me?
And the Liberal-Left accuses Republicans of Fear-mongering?

The only extremist groups that have been DOCUMENTED to have military veterans as members are GANGS, like the crips & bloods.
We have received intell warning us of the increased dangers that officers on patrol in gang areas face. These "vets" were members of these gangs beforehand & this is an ongoing problem the military is trying to eliminate.

To use the term Right-wing in the report about extremists without naming any specific group is a blatant smear of all Right-wing groups.

This report should have been apolitical and pointed out the dangers that ANY extremist group poses and that ALL of these groups would love to get their hands on former military personnel.
Any other wording is just obvious bias against Right-wing organizations in general.
As the head of DHS, the responsibility for the misleading and insulting wording of the report lands on her shoulders.

Posted by: ironwolf1 | December 30, 2009 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Make that Iran

the end result was an electoral landslide. The liberal was sent back to peanutville in disgrace. Liberal meddling was thoroughly discredited. Until this year when we forgot the danger of leftist incompetency.

Posted by: snowbama | December 30, 2009 3:35 PM | Report abuse

@mark: good point on the piracy comparison.

My point is not that the military has no role but that the conventional military operations like armies and ordnance on battlefields are worse than useless in this endeavor.

After 9/11 we didn't go after the surviving perps, we *invaded Afghanistan* the graveyard of empires. ObL was long gone, the Afghan government was certainly out of the planning of the attack. But to the ham-handed tough-talkin' G-droppin' nutjobs in the Whire House, more anxious to appear tough than achieve anything, well, "Let's Roll" was the phrase of the day.

Now we're stuck, and AQ just set up shop elsewhere.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 3:25 PM | Report abuse

30 years ago this week the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. At that time we also had a spineless confused liberal in charge. His dallying with Iraq permanently altered the balance of power and handed the country and several hostages to our enemies. Back then we also had economic imbeciles and cardigans as energy policy.

And they say history doesn't repeat.

Posted by: snowbama | December 30, 2009 3:19 PM | Report abuse

That may be, Wolf, but the easiest place to get into this country if you have funding is across the great lakes from Canada. Thats a fact. It may not have been awfully PC for her to say it, but it's usually your side that wants to dump all things PC. Does that only apply to the things you want to say?

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 2:59 PM | Report abuse

No Wolf, you may have missed it, but her original statement, in its full context was clear. After it was cut and twisted, she reiderated the part that was cut out on certain right-wing networks who's name is similar to that of an animal in the canine family. But it wasnt really an amendment. You just didnt get the whole thing. If the statement you heard was all she had said, i would agree that she should resign, but since it isn't, the shame shouldn't be on her, but on those who twisted her words.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

One of her other winners:
"Nonetheless, to the extent that terrorists have come into our country or suspected or known terrorists have entered our country across a border, it's been across the Canadian border. There are real issues there."
She won a lot fans in Canada with that one.

Posted by: ironwolf1 | December 30, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Napolitano's warnings about right wing hate groups was appropriate and prescient. Excoriating her for a prudent warning just before two right wing nutjobs with guns got in the news looks beyond partisan all the way to clueless.

Of course hate groups are going to recruit returning vets. They're looking for marksmen willing to become assassins.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

It is readily apparent that His Royal Highness Barry has not a clue whether to dither or dally.

I mean we all know he liked to split the difference and vote Present. But punching out for a week in the middle of this? A new low in ineptitude.

My guess is he knows not what to do at all. I know. An investigation. Or a summit. Or a conference. An apology. A TelePrompTer interlude.

Posted by: snowbama | December 30, 2009 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Elijah24:
Obama reinforced her amended statement. The one she made after people on the Right AND the Left jumped on her case after her first comments. And this isn't the first time she has put her foot in her mouth.
Do you remember her support for the DHS report on domestic terrorism? The one that insinuated that returning vets would be recruited into right-wing extremist groups? But no "Right-wing" groups were named, so who are they? The Left-wing group ELF was named (rightly so), but the Right-winged groups remained unnamed & ambiguous. Essentially a broad-brush smear of any Right-wing group with just enough politically correct plausible deniability to escape a libel suit. After vets groups howled, she had to back track on that too.
The Secretary is more interested in making political hay than in doing the job.
Homeland Security is a job for someone that has more experience in that field.
I don't care if it's a man or woman, black white, pink or purple, just pick someone who has the qualifications for the job and not someone for a political payoff.

Posted by: ironwolf1 | December 30, 2009 2:42 PM | Report abuse

credit where DUE

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 2:36 PM | Report abuse

@ironwolf: why should Obama have worn a tie? The function of a cravat is to deprive the brain of oxygen as an aid in making business decisions. I would rather the President got his full complement.

By the way, for an Obama non-supporter giving credit where do is something of a Red Sea parting sort of event here. Happens occasionally in the other direction but there are so few opportunities. Thanks.

Hope you don't get banned for it.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 2:33 PM | Report abuse

What she said, before Fox News took her out of context, was that after the problem was discovered, the system worked from that point on. the plane landed, law enforcement on the ground was ready to act the moment it touched down. The passengers were propperly debriefed. She did not say that the system worked perfectly from the beginning. But if you conveniently leave off the first part of her statment, yes it does sound clueless. Listen to the whole statement.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Why, wolf? What has Sec. Napolatano done that should cost her job, other than say something that was too easily taken out of context and turned into something completely different that what she actually said? Even President Obama, in one of the statements that you rightly called appropriate, reinforced her actual statement.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Good call Iron :)

But turnabout IS fair play.

Posted by: Obaama | December 30, 2009 1:12 PM | Report abuse

My my, how different the comments are now that the one who was created by the midi-chlorians is in office.

Gone are comments on vacations, not freaking out in front of little children, a President has a lot to do, it's not his fault...

Posted by: Obaama | December 30, 2009 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Elijah24 :
I think it's just a way for some people to jump on Obama's case the way the Left hammered Bush for sitting there in the classroom after the attacks on the World Trade Center on 9/11.
Lame tit for tat complaints. the Left was wrong then & the Right is wrong now.
However, and this may seem nit-picking, I do think Obama should have at least put on a tie before he gave the news conference. If it was off the cuff or impromptu then OK but for a formal appearance 2 days later? Not very professional or presidential. The blame for that goes to both him & his aides (Emmanuel & Gibbs).

While I am not an Obama supporter, one must give credit where it is due. As such, his statement was very appropriate & hit all the right points. I hope his follow-thru is as good.
I believe that Napolitano should either fall on her sword & resign or be the first to be axed. Her initial comment, that everything worked the way it was supposed to, was totally clueless. This isn't the first time she has made comments that show she is out of touch with her job requirements.

Posted by: ironwolf1 | December 30, 2009 12:52 PM | Report abuse

It seems to me that the GOP should be careful with their scapegoating, less the story evolve into an examination of how and why the Bush administration released the two leaders of this plot from Guantanamo.

Posted by: nodebris | December 30, 2009 12:52 PM | Report abuse

If the failure was systemic then the problem is with the Bush-Cheney administration. The Bush administration enacted only that system and supervised the installation of that system. They campaigned on the fact that no new attacks had occurred on their watch. They have bragged about their competency on this matter. The fact the system failed is their fault. The problem the Obama administration has is they have not reviewed these system. My observation is two fold on what they were left by previous administration. First, based on what we know if Bush-Cheney had a hand in a policy, the policy is likely screwed up. Based on everything else we know about those guys and it should reviewed. Two, these are so many things that are screwed up and only so many hours in the day that you have to pick your battles. Do you go after economy that is in free fall or focus on security that seems to be working. When you are left with that many fires to fight you do what you can.

Posted by: bradcpa | December 30, 2009 12:39 PM | Report abuse

"Obama has been very very low key on terrorism"

I suppose that if your measure is how often the President repeats the words terrorism and terrorist in major speeches, he has certainly been lower key than his predecessor.

If, however, your measure is how many domestic arrests and overseas actions have occurred, this administration has hardly been low key.

The confusion arises when one is unable to differentiate between what is actually happening and how it is being spun.

Posted by: nodebris | December 30, 2009 12:36 PM | Report abuse

C'mon dude, do you think for a minute that he would have stayed in Hawaii if the bomb had gone off? Put yourself in his shoes. The president (not just this one) has to be constantly aware of every major event that takes place in the world, and there is always something going on. Do you think that he should never take a vacation, or for that matter a nap for 4 to 8 years?

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 12:20 PM | Report abuse

Seriously: Is this Obamas fault? Yes and no.

We all have short memories. When the no fly list was set up a few folks were accidentally detained, remember? The Dems used it to attack the GOP, Bush specifically (what's that I hear about anonymous attacks on gov't?).

Obama has been very very low key on terrorism in an attempt to pacify his pacifist base :). So he gets his 'thank god he's not Bush' peace prize while quietly bombing Yemen.

But the result is he stays on vacation while bombs Thank God do not go off in Detroit. If one thinks this doesn't have an effect on public perception...

If it doesn't happen again for a while I doubt this is more than a tempest in a teapot. Happens again, different story.

I think there should be a step lower than the no fly, a 'search the heck out of them' list if you will.

Posted by: Obaama | December 30, 2009 12:05 PM | Report abuse

There has certainly been an attempt to capitalize on this by Rep. Peter Hoekstra and that should be placed in its proper place, as the opinion of one man hoping to get an edge on his gubernatorial opponent.
Shameless politicking at best. But to paint the entire Republican Party with the same brush is disingenuous at best, a blatant lie at worst.
Regarding DeMint holding up Obama's TSA appointee; after seeing the tax problems that Obama's other appointees have had and the whole Van Jones controversy, it is certainly prudent to go over any further Obama appointees with a fine tooth comb.
Remember TSA is a Government agency and as such the day to day operations run themselves without any input from DC. Holding up a nominee really has no effect on airport security.
On to aircraft security:
Granted this flight originated outside the US, but Delta/Northwest is a US carrier and I'm afraid we should consider requiring US carriers to shoulder some more responsibility for security even at overseas locations.
A prime example of pro-active security is EL-AL. They have the same security measures for their flights in every city of every country the fly to. Granted, they are a government owned & operated entity but I'm sure similar arrangements could be worked out for our carriers overseas also. And yes I know it will be expensive but I'm sure it would cost less in dollars than the cost in lost lives.

We also should make sure no pork gets involved in the process.
OK did every have a good laugh? Figured we needed one here.

Posted by: ironwolf1 | December 30, 2009 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Blade, I was worried a little when I made that first post that it might be taken the way 37th took it, so i just see this as a chance to clarify. I wish more of the right would make their cases the way Mark in Austin does, but we dont get to choose our opposition, do we?

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Ultimately, there won't be much long term political fallout from this incident. Luck, mostly. The West dodged another bullet and this particular tactic is less likely to work.

One has to wonder about train travel. A bomb on the Acela (or TGV, S-Bahn, or Shinkansen) would wreak as much havoc when detonated in or under a city. Pretty much, AQ is taking a hacker's mentality and probing for weaknesses.

A brief word of advice, elijah. Don't take 37th personally and don't bother engaging. It's not worth the trouble unless you want to make points to the broader reading group.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | December 30, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

"I just hope all of us can hold our Nation together until 2012"

So, what are you doing to "hold our Nation together" besides writing anonymous Internet posts attacking the government?

Posted by: nodebris | December 30, 2009 11:05 AM | Report abuse

The TSA can't fight terrorism because it's non-union?? LMAO!!!

Goodness, that's freakin hilarious. Let me wipe my eyes.

"Several of Obama's nominees had to withdraw because of meaningless fake media "scandals", and a few have had to resign for the same reason. .....
This mindset that every presidential adviser and administrator must avoid even the slightest whiff of scandal, and that any mistake should be punished by firing the people involved, is going to drastically reduce the quality of people involved in government. Ethical standards and accountability are necessary, but they shouldn't be used as political tools to weaken the President's administration."

Posted by: Blarg

Well Blarg, I suppose holding a candidate to his very own (completely bs) campaign promises just shouldn't, shouldn't! be used to weaken his administration? lolol part two.


Posted by: Obaama | December 30, 2009 11:05 AM | Report abuse

mpwynn, that sounds an awful lot like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Who do you think he should hire? Arie Flischer as press sec? Maybe Tom Ridge as HS Sec.? Maybe he should also replace Joe Biden with, Idunno, Dick Cheney?

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 10:10 AM | Report abuse

President Obama once again convinces me that he is unprepared to be President of the United States. With the exception of one Secretary of State and one Secretary of Defense, the least he could do is be smart enough to surround himself with competent advisors and agency executives. After one more public information disaster in response to yet another terrorist attack, security breaches, policy failures, the first official 'Brownie' that should be canned is Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. He's missing serious meetings. The next person to go should be Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. If that doesn't work, the President may just be the next person booted from public service. I just hope all of us can hold our Nation together until 2012, given the fact our country's leaders are doing 'one heckof a job'!

Posted by: mpwynn | December 30, 2009 10:01 AM | Report abuse

shrink2, that's a good point. Several of Obama's nominees had to withdraw because of meaningless fake media "scandals", and a few have had to resign for the same reason. Now people are calling for Napolitano's resignation over a breach of security that was in no way her fault.

This mindset that every presidential adviser and administrator must avoid even the slightest whiff of scandal, and that any mistake should be punished by firing the people involved, is going to drastically reduce the quality of people involved in government. Ethical standards and accountability are necessary, but they shouldn't be used as political tools to weaken the President's administration.

Posted by: Blarg | December 30, 2009 9:54 AM | Report abuse

No that is NOT what I am trying to do. I never once used the word irrational. I also never said there was anything wrong with it. I even pointed out that it does not make you cowards. I disagree with your point of view, but I understand it, and in the world we live in they are certainly legit. You have said not one word to refute my point. You have only attacked my motives for pointing it out. That leads me to believe that you realize that I'm right. If you feel belittled by my comments, perhaps it's time for you to reconsider your point of view. But I said nothing that should be taken as an insult.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 9:52 AM | Report abuse

DeMint places a hold on TSA Administrator.
TSA stays non-unionized and leaderless.
Terrorism occurs.

Who is to blame? Republicans, who formed a dysfunctional agency Americans loathe to begin with and Republicans for leaving it leaderless under the Democratic President who won in a landslide.

Sarah Palin can't see Nigeria on a map.

Posted by: anarcho-liberal-tarian | December 30, 2009 9:35 AM | Report abuse

Let's get back on topic - Obama has been doing his best to ignore the war on terror - hoping it will go away.


Obama is releasing terrorists from Gitmo.


For some reason, Obama appears to believe that closing Gitmo will end the war on terror - as if Gitmo is the entire war.


Has Obama finally called the Ft. Hood attack a "terrorist attack?" The American people really have to ask themselves why Obama is so insistent on denying reality.

Obama would probably want to deal with the Detroit plan bomber as a "criminal incident." Again a denial of reality.


AT some point, Obama is going to have to face the reality that INTELLIGENCE DEMANDS are not consistent with the "rules of evidence" for a trial - and Obama's entire policy is going to have to change.

How many terrorism-related incidents have there been this year in the US ???


Obama is IGNORING THIS THREAT - Obama is pretending that the most important issue is the health care bill.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 30, 2009 9:29 AM | Report abuse

"In my opinion, Bruce Schneier should be running DHS. But since he's not political and never will be, I don't see it happening."

Good point. This assertion receives too little attention.

Really good people are increasingly lost because of the meat grinder of politics and the 24 hour news stalkers. There are not a lot of great administrators that crave attention, positive or negative.

As a joking example, many months ago I was so enamored of our ceflynline, I tried to convince him to run for office. He demurred, he has a life it turns out.

I hope we return to balance. If DC's agency leaders have to lose their personal lives in order to survive politics, we are not going to have leadership, just hacks, spokes-flaks and shills.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 30, 2009 9:24 AM | Report abuse

elijah24

No, what you are trying to do is belittle people who legitimately disagree with you - by implying that they have irrational "fears."


The truth is that they disagree with you.


Your fear is that they are right.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 30, 2009 9:14 AM | Report abuse

Don't be an idiot 37th. Of course terrorism is to be feared. My thing is that we shouldn't live our lives, and base all of our policy around fear. The first thing they tried to teach us at basic is that fear is ok. It's natural, and it’s useful. But we must master fear and not let it master us, or we will never complete the mission. The same is true for our country. Fear of terrorism, immorality, and anything else, should have a voice in the decisions that are made. But they must not dominate the conversation, or we will all end up in fall-out shelters in a fetal position.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 9:06 AM | Report abuse

BOTCHED TERROR BOMBING A 'FALSE FLAG' FLIGHT?

http://nowpublic.com/world/botched-terror-bombing-false-flag-flight

...perhaps to deflect attention from America's horrific domestic shame?

U.S. SILENTLY TORTURES AMERICANS WITH CELL TOWER MICROWAVES, SATELLITES, SAYS VETERAN JOURNALIST

• Secret Bush legacy multi-agency federal program uses cell tower/GPS satellite microwave/laser electromagnetic radiation attack system to torture, impair, subjugate "targeted" citizens -- and oversees local "community watch" vigilante terrorism and financial sabotage campaigns.

See story at: Poynter.org ("Reporting" section)
OR http://www.nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves
nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america OR NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "U.S. SILENTLY..." / "GESTAPO USA"

Posted by: scrivener50 | December 30, 2009 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Some good food for thought from Bruce Schneier, arguably the smartest security guy in the world:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/12/29/schneier.air.travel.security.theater/index.html

Much like Bush fought the Iraq war with the military he inherited from Clinton, Obama is fighting the current one with the DHS he inherited from Bush. It takes time to change how agencies the size of Defense, DHS, or State function and work together, and not having top appointees in place (due to a combination of political obstruction and the administration taking a long time just to nominate some people) isn't helping.

In my opinion, Bruce Schneier should be running DHS. But since he's not political and never will be, I don't see it happening.

Posted by: Gallenod | December 30, 2009 9:00 AM | Report abuse

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/29/AR2009122902601.html?hpid=sec-politics

Are we going to see a piece on Republicans leaving politics and how that is good news for Democrats? No?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/29/AR2009122902601.html?hpid=sec-politics

The terror attack making no impact on oil prices? All economic indicators stable or improving as Obama's first year winds up?
No? Well I think Republicans have a good reason to be afraid. Like Axelrod says, you can not run on rhetoric and their record of achievement is awful. If anyone thinks Bush/Cheney was an isolated incident, think again. That is all there is to Republican politics.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 30, 2009 8:58 AM | Report abuse

According to reports out this morning, a Somali man was caught LAST MONTH attempting to board a plane with chemicals and a syringe


SO, Homeland Security and Obama should have been on HIGH ALERT for bombs on planes.


Instead, Obama is more concerned about making wildly expensive deals to push through the health care bill - AND Obama release 12 terrorists from Gitmo last month as well.


PLUS we don't find out about this incident for 5 days - now we know what Obama was hiding all last weekend.

The hits keep on coming.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 30, 2009 8:51 AM | Report abuse

elijah24


According to your reasoning, no one should be afraid of terrorists, they are completely harmless, right?


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 30, 2009 8:44 AM | Report abuse

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/29/AR2009122903379.html?hpid=topnews

I agree, and here we see the WaPo describing Republicans choosing to score political points on terror fears. That empowers terrorists, it is their whole reason for being: making Americans afraid.

Playing politics with peoples' fears is a cowardly act, especially if conservatives really are afraid all the time and you are right, that is a fundamental aspect of being conservative, i.e., if everything was better in the old days then the future is scary by definition. They should be afraid of Republicans looting their life savings.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 30, 2009 8:39 AM | Report abuse

Shrink, I'm not sure that it is just politics for Republicans (or more specifically: conservatives). I think they are honestly afraid. I don't want to sound like I’m calling them cowards. They aren't. But the overwhelming majority of their ideology is based on fear. They want guns out of fear that they will be mugged, robbed, raped or attacked Red Dawn style by whomever. They are anti-same-sex marriage out of fear that it will destroy morality. They are against every environmental measure out of fear that it will wreck the economy. etc. etc. etc.
The "politics of fear" is not a stunt to drum up votes. I think they are honestly afraid, and because a good many Americans are also afraid, there is a natural attraction to that way of thinking.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 8:26 AM | Report abuse

There is no doubt that Obama has downgraded the priority of the war on terror - it is that simple AND it is clear now that policy is WRONG FOR AMERICA.


Obama acted like he could cruise into Cairo, make one speech and the entire war would be over.


Obama's policy extends to CHANGING THE CRITERIA FOR RELEASE OF THE DETAINEES FROM GITMO.


This is extremely serious.


Obama was the strength of the intelligence - AS MEASURED AGAINST THE RULES OF EVIDENCE IN COURT - to be a part of the criteria in deciding whether to release a terrorist.


This is the WRONG way to go.


The entire idea that evidence obtained through intelligence operations is going to fit neatly into the rules of evidence for a court is just WRONGHEADED AND SILLY.


However, this appears to be Obama's policy.


All the releases should be halted immediately. Yes, two of the terrorists which apparently were involved with this incident were released by Bush - but that at a time when those detainees were deemed to be the least dangerous.


NOW Obama has WEAKENED the criteria even more.


All the Gitmo releases should be halted immediately - there is no need to do it - and the root of the policy is nothing but Obama's arrogance.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 30, 2009 8:22 AM | Report abuse

Playing the politics of terror fear is a Republican game, a distraction from the fact that their economic policies, the politics that matter, failed. America's lost decade is what needs to be politicized.

As an aside, some jerk complained at that term yesterday; sorry about reality being harsh, but this is a term being used by experts everywhere nowadays, for an example today,

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/30/business/global/30emerge.html?_r=1&hpw

The American economy is in shambles and all our power derives from our economy. You want to be free and fight terror too? First, don't go broke.

The domestic politics of the terror debate empowers the terrorists, they know it, we know it, so why do Republicans do it? Lets take it from the top. Cheney discovered you can sell an awful lot of terrible things to the American people if it is lathered with fear.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 30, 2009 8:15 AM | Report abuse

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/29/AR2009122901433.html?hpid=topnews

Ceflyline seems to have had a direct link to the Prez.
The presidential response seems to address the correct concerns, IMO.

As to Chris Fox's assertions that AQ is not a military problem, I suggest they are not focused. AQ is more like a confederation of pirates than a brace of burglars. During the ascendancy of piracy in the 18th century we began to develop laws against piracy that recognized the quasi-military nature of the pirates.

AQ presents similar problems, as well as the additional twist of being motivated by religious fervor [Chris Fox did recognize this, explicitly]. Fervor removes AQ from being predictable as to means - but does make them predictable as to their goals. Thus the long term response to the AQ type threat must be re-education: alternatives to Madrassas. In the short term, law enforcement plays an enormous role, and has disrupted at least 38 major plots in Europe and a few here. In the short term the military plays a huge role, too. Finding and destroying the leadership, its money and weapon flows, its training bases, and its safe harbors [as they emerge] is a combined intelligence and military priority. It is somewhat like "whack-a-mole", but necessary, IMHO.

The potential for overkill and alienation [discussed by Chris Fox] is understood by the current commanders and the attempt to avoid that negative feedback loop is thoroughly to be encouraged. AggieMike, this is new territory for Marines, but they [you] remain our best hope for this difficult task.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 30, 2009 7:58 AM | Report abuse

"I hope Obama is reading this - because I think his priorities are all messed up."
==
I hope the President is doing about a million things that are NOT reading a blog on WaPo.com. I also hope that his advisors are far more informed than anyone who posts on this blog.
Honestly, do you think that the President of the United States is sitting in the Oval thinking "Gosh, I just dont know what to do. snobama, what do you think? oh I'm an America hating muslim? huh, I hadnt considered that. Drindle, what about you? snobama is a racist? Thats an interesting point too. Great that clears this whole thing up. I now know what to do!"
Something tells me that this is not how he (or hopefully any president) has (or will) ever made decisions.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 7:44 AM | Report abuse

"Unions have strangled the life out of every industry they take over. Demint deserves a reward for stopping an already disfunctional TSA from further slide. "
-snobama
==
How about early retirement? Thats a joke. I do think he needs to drop his hold, but this incident is not just his fault.
Look, Mark in Austin is right, this shouldnt be political. Mistakes were made. Both parties are culpible, and both are responsible for fixing them. If we could keep our eyes on the ball, and put country before political ideology and hatred for our political opposition, we could learn a lot from this.

Posted by: elijah24 | December 30, 2009 7:32 AM | Report abuse

There is a difference between having an election and obsessing about things that have to be changed which do not have to be.


You are reading WAY too much into the election.


The opponent was McCain, by the way, not Bush.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 30, 2009 3:05 AM | Report abuse

"Obama has been obsessed with proving that Bush did something wrong - that we have to change what Bush did."
----
That was decided on Nov. 4th 2008

Posted by: JRM2 | December 30, 2009 2:51 AM | Report abuse

"Obama is more interested in closing Gitmo than properly fighting terrorism...


YES that is EXACTLY the point -


----


I hope Obama is reading this - because I think his priorities are all messed up.


And that includes emphasizing the health care bill, which should be put aside, in favor of concentrating on the economy.


I do hope Obama is reading this because he needs to hear it - if he is surrounded by a bunch of yes-men this country is in for a pack of trouble.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 30, 2009 2:27 AM | Report abuse

See?

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 2:23 AM | Report abuse

"Obama is more interested in closing Gitmo than properly fighting terrorism...

YES that is EXACTLY the point -


Obama is currently in the process of RELEASING a bunch of Gitmo detainees because the intelligence does not live up to the standards of "rules of evidence" for a Obama-desired trial.


Bush released detainees who were thought to be the least dangerous.


Now it is obvious that those releases were WRONG - so we have to STOP releasing the terrorists from Gitmo right away.


Obama's policy IS GOING IN THE COMPLETELY WRONG DIRECTION.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 30, 2009 2:21 AM | Report abuse

Hey JRM2, this had actually been a pretty good thread as long as one ignores the two trolls trying to filth it up. I'm guessing at the number, I think the three most tedious trolls here are fewer than three people.

For some reason CC tolerates these jerks and is determined that The Fix should be a welcome place for their disruptions. That doesn't mean the rest of us need to play along.

I do appreciate your reiterating Obama's achievements but do you think it'll stop 37th etc. from repeating the same lies fifteen minutes from now?

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 1:56 AM | Report abuse

"Obama is more interested in closing Gitmo than properly fighting terrorism...
Posted by: 37thand0street |"
----
You ignorant little fool.

In the first 8 months of Obama's term he was responsible for giving the order to fire which resulted in the deaths of over half of the most dangerous terrorists on the CIA's most wanted list including the top Al Qaeda commander in Pakistan and several top Taliban commanders and most recently the guy who had conversed with Hasan of the Fort Hood shootings.

I would say that the last guy wasn't very good at combatting terrorism since he let us get attacked sending our country spiraling into ruin.

Posted by: JRM2 | December 30, 2009 1:40 AM | Report abuse

Sorry Mike but national pride means nothing at all to me, and not in this context either.  I'm only interested in preventing attacks.  And I think that treating a pack of criminals as some sort of army is not only inaccurate, it's ineffective.

When armies face armies in battle they achieve victory by killin' a whole buncha people.  If we've learned anything from Iraq it should be that you don't overcome deep-seated resentment by killing the most resentful people, that just creates more resentment.  It may be an uncomfortable thing for a man in uniform to accept but the Muslim world has some legitimate grievances against the USA.  Disclaimer (not that it will help): I am not saying we deserved the attacks of 9/11 nor that we deserved the idiot with the syringe in his undies either.  The 3000 receptionists and janitors who died in 9/11 in no way deserved their fate. We won't make any progress by intimidating, threatening, or bombing Muslims, we'll just create new crops of radicals.  And no, we're not going to wipe out a billion people.

Our support for Israel's brutal occupation (some ally), our installation of the Iranian Shah in '53, our invasion of Iraq.
The way to overcome the threat of radical Islam is to discredit it so it cannot operate in secrecy, so that Muslims who know people who are attracted to the allure of radicalism turn them into the cops instead of protecting them.  That's how you get Capone.  You can't wipe out an idea with armies.

The Muslim world once embraced radical Islam more than now.  The radicals are too ham-handed and cruel and they have made enemies.  We should exploit and expand the diminution of their support, not re-create it with ham-handed Cold War impulses of our own.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 1:35 AM | Report abuse

I got three words for all you Obama bashers: MY PET GOAT

Posted by: JRM2 | December 30, 2009 1:32 AM | Report abuse

Apparently this guy was trained by a couple of guys Bush and Cheney let out of Gitmo

Posted by: JRM2 | December 30, 2009 1:31 AM | Report abuse

"The enemy we face in AQ is a ragtag collection of fugitives which, NIMBY hysteria aside, has no special power or craft, and should be dealt with no differently than smugglers or drug dealers."

I wish I could agree with you.

Not just from a national pride point of view (we can't really be kicked around by ragtag thugs, can we?), but from a realistic point of view (what enemy do we face and what are his capabilities, competencies, and limitations?)

Posted by: USMC_Mike | December 30, 2009 1:17 AM | Report abuse

Mark, thanks for pointing out the good posts. Regrettably I have not done much digging into the weeds of the 9/11 attacks, specifically with regard to radio frequencies and RG's alleged failures therein, but found the posts interesting (as a communications officer who was once forced to study wave propogation theory.)

Posted by: USMC_Mike | December 30, 2009 1:02 AM | Report abuse

I think you need to reread Lord of the Rings, Mike. I read it only s few weeks ago on my Kindle. The Hobbits were not complacent about Sauron.

Sauron was a Maia, one the the lesser Ainur. A being of godlike stature and power (this is in the Silmarillipn, not LotR). The enemy we face in AQ is a ragtag collection of fugitives which, NIMBY hysteria aside, has no special power or craft, and should be dealt with no differently than smugglers or drug dealers.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 30, 2009 12:03 AM | Report abuse

Hey Mike - scroll through with search set for "ceflyline" and you will read the most informed series of posts. The rest of us were just grazing.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 29, 2009 11:44 PM | Report abuse

No, we are not at war.

We have troops occupying two countries for spurious and dubious reasons, and we are hated and occasionally bothered by a gang of international criminals.

To promote the action of a disgruntled loser into a circumstance comparable to troops by the tend of thousands is extreme and obsessive. By that analysis we're at war with Von Brunn too.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 11:39 PM | Report abuse

Not sure if the following comment will be considered "on topic", as I have not yet read everyone's posts...

Inasmuch as no one should (though the extreme of either side might) hope for the success of our enemies, for political gain, I hope (very much) that the attempted attack yields/renews the realization that we (not merely as a nation) are at war, indeed.

Just like the Hobbits who had become so accustomed to peace and tranquility in the Shire that they eventually came to believe it to be the default, We (Americans/Westerners) do not tend to perceive the evil of Sauron, though he is both very real and very determined, because we live in peace and freedom.

I have to believe the threat briefs the President receives (daily) are substantially more detailed than anything I get to hear. [I know we are at war.]

Posted by: USMC_Mike | December 29, 2009 11:32 PM | Report abuse

Yeah like some hyperventilating semi-literate troll knows "what's good for America"

just curious dies anyone read 37thand0 posts? Or dies everyone scroll past them? What pointless blog clog

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 11:17 PM | Report abuse

So armpeg....are you saying that the people questioning Janet Napolitano now are all the right-wing nut Fascist/Neo-Conservatives here and in the Republithug Fascist Party?

Argh...it is difficult to even parody the partisan wharrlgarble of folks like you without sounding like a lunatic.

Posted by: Ken_Davis1 | December 29, 2009 10:52 PM | Report abuse

Obama is more interested in closing Gitmo than properly fighting terrorism. This is because Obama is obsessed with proving that Bush did something wrong - and we have to change something.


With all of Obama's attempts to state that the Courts should handle the detainees - OBAMA IS RELEASING THESE TERRORISTS WITHOUT COURT REVIEW.


Obama is also not concentrating on the economy - Obama's handling of the stimulus money has been atrocious.


How much more has to happen before the liberals begin to realize that many of Obama's policies are completely unrealistic?


Sorry Obama - the economy and the States do not have enough money for your health care plan - now it is time to go back and drop the health care plan - and start to concentrate on actually governing properly.


Obama has been obsessed with proving that Bush did something wrong - that we have to change what Bush did.


When will the liberals realize that people almost died as a result of this irrational obsession ?


.


Posted by: 37thand0street | December 29, 2009 10:38 PM | Report abuse

Let's be serious folks - Obama tried to walk away from the War on Terror.

Obama was acting like he could make one speech in Cairo, eliminate the phrase "War on Terror" in government paperwork, and the whole thing would be behind us.


Obama has been de-emphasizing the terrorist threat from day one. This policy is now a COMPLETE FAILURE.


And thank God no one died.


Yes, the Gitmo detainees who were reported to be involved in this incident were released two years ago - HOWEVER THE LESSON TO BE LEARNED IS DON'T RELEASE ANY MORE.


Those two should still be in Gitmo.

Yea.


It is about time that many of Obama's programs are identified as being unworkable and unrealistic - this time no one died.


Obama is NOT CONCENTRATING ON WHAT IS IMPORTANT FOR AMERICA - instead he is off on some other agenda.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 29, 2009 10:17 PM | Report abuse

The one sure thing that would have happened had Janet Napolitano been a President George W. Bush appointee, after the Detroit failed bombing attack by a Al Qaeda operative, is that all the liberal far-lefty Socialist/Communists here and in the Democrap Socialist Party--controlled Main Stream Media, would have nailed her hide to a wall, with her failure, and she'd be fired. Because she's an Obama one though, they're circling the wagons and screw any Americans who get killed the next time.

Posted by: armpeg | December 29, 2009 10:06 PM | Report abuse

ceflynline, that's why we don't do all the things we can do for travel security. The bottom line forces us to grab at cost effective measures that will get as much as possible. The hard facts of public preference dictates a lot of it. The balancin point is when people feel "safe enough" to fly and segments of the economy are stimulated. In the end we rely heavily on people, and people can be innattentive, lazy, bribed, etc.

My old dad is 85 and he swears he owns a pair of tighty-whiteys that are used exclusively for flying. One pat-down while wearing boxers was enough for him. They aren't the tighty-whiteys with the flame-proof waistband and the tinfoil insert however.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | December 29, 2009 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Can that be mangled into "bad news fir Democrats?"

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 9:22 PM | Report abuse

In political news:

Rep. George Radanovich (R-CA) is expected to announce today that he won't run for another term, the Sacramento Bee reports.

Posted by: drindl | December 29, 2009 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Chris, yes I agree, but for the defeat meme or word symbol problem...I do believe they will be defeated. These people are ridiculous.

Terror in general is not something that will be defeated but this group should have been an historical artifact a long time ago. It is just my opinion, insert all disclaimers here, hope no one felt offended, except of course: Bush/Cheney voters. You people need to stay away from the polls. God is watching you.


Posted by: shrink2 | December 29, 2009 8:57 PM | Report abuse

A couple more remarks and then to bed.

Stipulating that there was a security slip up, it was obviously in TSA and DHS. These two agencies happen to be the whole cloth fabrication of the previous administration. To date Obama hasn't begun shaking EITHER one up, and hasn't managed to get his man (you know, "the President deserves to have his man") confirmed to run TSA.

NOW he has all the ammunition he needs to shoot the Bush administration ops full of holes and reorganize to suit himself. And the republicans can't even object, because THEY are the ones complaining that TSA and DHS are so obviously in need of reorganization.

Reorganize DHS out of existence, and finish federalizing TSA, putting it and the Coast Guard and perhaps the Department of Domestic Communications law enforcement, (and maybe the FCC) in their own bailiwick.

Posted by: ceflynline | December 29, 2009 8:42 PM | Report abuse

@shrink2: The ugliest part about the WoT hysteria is the promotion of terrorists to Marvel Comics super-power status.  As though talking to AQ confers the power to walk through the walls of supermax prisons, as though we need to use the military to deal with them.  Yeah, sure, defeat an idea with troops.

Reality check: international terrorists are fugitives in their own countries, they're disgruntled angry people and the only advantage they have is their willingness to die for their brain-charred causes.  They should be dealt with as a law enforcement issue, not by occupying entire countries that they once sojourned in.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Would it be considered fair for Amtrack to do a split screen ad for the Metroliner showing passengers on one side, boarding a nice, comfortable convenient train, paired with passengers suffering the slings and arrows of outrageous TSA to board the NE Shuttle?

Posted by: ceflynline | December 29, 2009 8:08 PM | Report abuse

"The name 'Homeland Security' always freaked me out too-- when did we start referring to America as the "Homeland"? Just in 2001. Too close to the 'Fatherland'. It was always 'domestic security' before -- and that worked just fine, without this gingoistic propagandist overlay. Posted by: drindl"

Don't you remember the TV miniseries from the seventies where "Homeland was the Midwest and the Corn Belt. Forgot the name of that series. The U. S. had been broken up and was being "assisted" by Soviet advisers. Secret headquarters in N Virginia, say about where the CIA had its training ranges near Warrenton?

Posted by: ceflynline | December 29, 2009 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Thankfully, another botched terrorist attack. Just like Al Q's earlier Yemeni project, never forget: the rectum bomber.

The Cole disaster should have been the wake-up call about that place and what to do about people who go there "to study" and then want to come to America.

We are obviously incompetent but fortunately, the terrorists are also incompetent and horrible too, which puts them at a permanent disadvantage. We will defeat them. They are nasty creatures, ridiculous, possessed not by religion, but by only by TV & Death. That is all they are.

So the threat they pose is merely political. They pose no other threat unless you dread rare disease in general. They are worth controlling, they must be controlled, but the attention this gets empowers them more than you know.

America needs to get a grip, stop fooling around and fix the problem with the pragmatic, relentless approach we use for things like the flu (which sure has killed more people than terrorists ever will). I wonder about why we fear what we fear, it is not logical, that is the only obvious part.

Everybody is doing the best they can, but it is not good enough and it is never going to be good enough and this is not sports.
The domestic politics of terror are grotesque.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 29, 2009 7:54 PM | Report abuse

"Make flying as safe as we can get it? The same people who want it howl when the best measures are presented to them. Posted by: margaretmeyers "

The problem is that, were we to ACTUALLY do all we could to make flying the safest from terrorist activity we could, it would cost beyond belief, and all the once were fliers would insteaqd be taking the train, or, for transoceanic travel, taking the high speed passenger ships that would be developed to get people across the atlantic in two days and across the pacific in five.

Posted by: ceflynline | December 29, 2009 7:53 PM | Report abuse


right on seattle

25 bin laden family members..
flew out of...guess

Florida... within 2 hours of the attacks,
straight to Yemen.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | December 29, 2009 7:41 PM | Report abuse

wonder how many folks are quitting flying, for their new year's resolution

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | December 29, 2009 7:40 PM | Report abuse

Why would Bush go after the son of his dad's business partners?

On the contrary, the only plane in the air after 9/11 was whisking the bin Ladens to safety and out of reach of interrogators

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 7:38 PM | Report abuse


people are going to gripe about the "total recall" xray machines too.

holland has plenty of them at the airport.
can't use them.
it's in court for privacy rights.

go figure.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | December 29, 2009 7:37 PM | Report abuse

The name 'Homeland Security' always freaked me out too-- when did we start referring to America as the "Homeland"? Just in 2001. Too close to the 'Fatherland'.

It was always 'domestic security' before -- and that worked just fine, without this gingoistic propagandist overlay.

Posted by: drindl | December 29, 2009 7:35 PM | Report abuse

I saw photos of Barry and the bomber side by side. Although difficult to distinguish I think I can tell

one is an American hating, Muslim loving, hate church attending, African born, mission failing, incompetent.

The other is just a bomber on an airplane.

==

just think... this sick sh|t gets a pass here but correctly calling it out ad racism will lead to a ban threat, I hope the FBI has it's eyes on this sicko

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 7:34 PM | Report abuse


wish Bush would have gotten bin laden.

bin laden family reigns supreme in Yemen.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | December 29, 2009 7:34 PM | Report abuse

I support the post of Publius14 @ 634.

Indeed, security often takes a backseat to public convenience. Americans moan if they are told one carry-on, and try making them put the very substances that look like PETN in their checked bag. They don't want to take off their shoes, they don't want an honest pat down, they don't want to be delayed and they do want to fly with everything they own.

The airports, meanwhile, charge Uncle Sam unbelievable rates for the spaces TSA occupies and resists the screening of employees. The airlines want Uncle Sam to pay for everything while they shirk as many responsibilities as possible. NWA can't make this guy a selectee when he buys his ticket? That's their responsibility when a single, young male buys a ticket with cash and has no bags. The airlines couldn't be relied upon to properly check ID, which is why TSA now does it.

Make flying as safe as we can get it? The same people who want it howl when the best measures are presented to them.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | December 29, 2009 7:32 PM | Report abuse

On bomb-sniffing dogs, we use lots of them in Afghanistan and Iraq because they are really good at it. Their handlers are military, however, and thus also in South Asia. Not anyone can train them, either. Handlers and trainers cost money, and that's not dogfood.

Posted by: Publius14 | December 29, 2009 7:29 PM | Report abuse

"AP is reporting that the CIA was tracking the underwear bomber since August. Either they didn't share the info, or the PC police didn't want to be accused of being bigots (against muslim extremists wanting to kill Americans) Like the Ft. Hood killer, this guy made threats, and they were ignored by this administration. Posted by: Cornell1984"

The problem is, IF CIA was tracking him, how was it to turn surveillance of him over to an agency that could actually yake action?

Same problem with NSA surveilling comms into and out of the U. S. Were NSA to develope evidence of criminal activity, it could do nothing, because it would be compromising programs that are much too sensitive to give up to convict some petty thief or murderer.

If such domestic surveillance is appropriate, give it to a law enforcement agency and monitor it through the courts. THEN when our surveillance digs up evidence of a crime we can indict the criminal and jail him.

When CIA is watching you, it has every reason to keep that a secret. If it keeps it a secret, how can the people who need the information get and use the information?

Posted by: ceflynline | December 29, 2009 7:29 PM | Report abuse

I saw photos of Barry and the bomber side by side. Although difficult to distinguish I think I can tell

one is an American hating, Muslim loving, hate church attending, African born, mission failing, incompetent.

The other is just a bomber on an airplane.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 7:29 PM | Report abuse

Geheim Staats Polizei

secret state police

stadt means city

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 7:25 PM | Report abuse

interesting stuff, cef -- when I was growng up, way back when, I had an older cousin who was a Ham radio operator. He was one of the early nerds- always knew what was happening before anyone else did.

Also, Publius:

'We can detect PETN, but at a quarter million a pop. Dogs can do it too, but they're all in South Asia. We can breed dogs easily enough, but not their trainers, and that puts them out of reach too, unless you want them'

I am confused as to why all these dogs/trainers are in South Asia--could you tell us?

Posted by: drindl | December 29, 2009 7:25 PM | Report abuse

mark:

I have been away from the community for fare too long to know of the friction between DNI and ANYONE, but can guess. DIRNSA is always someone big but an insider, so he tends to be jealous of his empire. CIA is often a sideliner, with some knowledge of the Agency, but almost never up from the ranks.

DNI is an outsider, and therefor probably somebody you really DON'T want in your secure facility, because he just doesn't know anything worth knowing, and it takes too long to teach him, even should he be willing to learn. Porter Goss got a PUBLIC reputation as more interested in his new office furnishings and his perks than in the responsibilities of his office, or in his ops. From my point of view I always suspected that he was an intelligence poseur, full of himself because he got to be on the Intelligence oversight committee, but relatively innocent of any real understanding of what the agencies did or how they did it. Once he left his replacement had all the built up bad feeling PG generated to get in the way of good relations, and HE wasn't any more qualified to be the top intelligence man than Goss was. The position itself is probably impossible, since anyone who knows enough to do the job well ought to be doing the job more directly at whichever agency he came up through. When they were building the department it looked mostly like sending Khrushchev out as political commissar to watch the red Army. It scared me, because it put him in charge of budgeting, and Goss never was good at knowing what really deserved funding, like OB specialists, and what really didn't, like black ops units.

And in my heart I have always known the proper translation of GESTAPO, which is just Geheim Stadts Polezei, or, in colloquial English, Homeland Security Police. Too close to DHS for my liking, and it puts, or tried to put, the Secret Service out of the control of Treasury, where it belongs.

Posted by: ceflynline | December 29, 2009 7:21 PM | Report abuse

Yeah libs. Bush really messed this up.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 7:19 PM | Report abuse

Yemen is the new war.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | December 29, 2009 7:18 PM | Report abuse

AP is reporting that the CIA was tracking the underwear bomber since August. Either they didn't share the info, or the PC police didn't want to be accused of being bigots (against muslim extremists wanting to kill Americans)

Like the Ft. Hood killer, this guy made threats, and they were ignored by this administration.

Posted by: Cornell1984 | December 29, 2009 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Cornell if you thing Cillizza shills for Democrats then either you've never read The Fix or you have turbo-charged reading comprehension problems. This is the guy who gives ink to Pawlenty and hadn't one good word about Obama ever.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 7:16 PM | Report abuse

It is utterly pointless to listen to anything Republicans have to offer on any subject. They announced, months ago, that they will NOT work with this President on anything whatsoever over anything at all.
To hear them criticize the President over this incident is simply more of the same. They have NO constructive criticism to offer, they have NO ideas, and they have NO responsibility to anyone other than their corporate sponsors and their own quest to regain domestic political power.
They are the Party of NO, and they are sticking to their story.

Posted by: cms1 | December 29, 2009 7:12 PM | Report abuse

what the alert color code for Xmas?

that system really works

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | December 29, 2009 7:11 PM | Report abuse

Well, I am convinced. Chris Sleazilla gets the opinion of one democrat strategist who says this will hurt the republicans.

Odd how Chris censors the fact that it took 280 days for Obama to NOMINATE a person for the TSA position, and that was only after the SEIU and AFSCME union thugs approved of his hack choices. You see, our government is created only to get more union paying members for the thugs, regardless of the harmful effects it has on our country or our security.

So, the TSA nominee refuses to answer senate questions. He lies, hems, and haws. Harry Reid could overcome the Hold with 3 days of hearings or debate. He never put the guy up for a vote.

While Chris Sleazilla uses propaganda to go after republicans, now that a 20 year old thesis he thought was a valid political weapon, he will do anything to prop up the liberals, and refuses to hold those in power accountable.

Sellouts.

Posted by: Cornell1984 | December 29, 2009 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Yeah like the much-maligned Michael Brown fall-guy resigned.

If W was still in office we'd be on Day 5 of "tough" this and "tough" that and probably a replay if "bring 'em own."

Napolitano made a dumb remark. Bush got us into two stupid wars. Get some perspective.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 7:08 PM | Report abuse

drindl: Get your amateur license, work some public service events, and learn Emergency radio work by doing. It is fun, and in no great time you will get a feel for all the things that went wrong on 9/11. If you can't easily find a Ham organization near you, check out the ARRL web site and they will hook you up.

Bu the way, when a tornado takes down all the wires and high spots in a town, the police and fire have problems there too. So we show up and help out.

If you find it fun, come look me up at Hamvention (Registerred trade mark) I help put it on every year.

Posted by: ceflynline | December 29, 2009 7:05 PM | Report abuse

How about the systematic foolishness of apologizing to despots and giving out deadlines to Iran?

How about the systemic failure of proclaming the system works, right before you admit it didn't.

Can Janet resign now? Then Barry?

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 7:04 PM | Report abuse

BTW, this is America, you don't get to detain someone forever without charges or a hearing just because you don't like their looks or their name. Due process: It's catch and release unless you have something on them. Imagine if you detained without due process snowmelt, Jake, or 37?

==

Just imagine how much nicer this blog would be.

Conservatives always have someone to hate.  The targets shifts every generation or so .. remember "secular humanists?"  Now there was a bogeyman for you .. the poor are a perennial favorite, gays are never far off the bulls-eye either, lately Latinos (way to go, goopers, you have < 10% support among America's fastest growing demographic).

But Muslims are the bullseye now.  The most vicious racism I've ever read, excepting only the Obama birth BS, was in the year or two after 9/11 when political blogs were screechfests.

How many of you have Muslim coworkers?  I have several.  Nobody's ever going to persuade me to see them as enemies.  I feel much more camaraderie with them than I could ever feel toward anyone so untroubled by racism and lying as to be comfortable in the Republican Party.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 7:02 PM | Report abuse

As is often the case, ceflyline, I thank you for the wealth of information. I have also thought that the creation of DHLS was an unnecessary and costly new layer of bureaucracy when what we really needed was modernization and streamlining the inter-agency communication of critical information. As ceflyline says, that communication should go through the National Security Advisor, and be available to the Prez.

It is a slight bit off topic but no threadjack to ask ceflyline and anyone else here who may have information about the friction between the DNI and CIA. I have thought the creation of the post of DNI was going to be problematic. How can having two intelligence chiefs be made to work?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 29, 2009 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Hey zouk, try to stay on topic.  Don't use a single line to pivot into your tired laundry list of hates, everyone here can reel them off in their sleep.
As long as I've been tracking politics conservatives have gone into red-faced rage at any consideration of the natural environment.  And not just teabagger nutjobs, but the now-extinct Goldwater conservatives too.  Long ago it was rage at giving the prevention of extinction priority over business profits, even balancing the loss of entire vertebrate genera against miniscule losses in largess.

But now it isn't field mice or owls dying out, now it's glaciers breaking up, rising seal levels, and a truly bleak HUMAN future, and still the conservatives scream in rage.  Funny, they're the same people who harp about "self-interest" when it comes to their nutty ideas about economics and behavior, yet they sneer at their own bloody self-preservation.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 6:51 PM | Report abuse

cool, cef... thanks for the info. ONe of the topics of conversation in NY was why the emergency command was in the Towers--which had already been hit by a terrorist attack.

http://therealrudy.org/command.php

And many people think that it was located there because it was a place, near City Hall, where Rudy could keep a convenient 'bunker' -- his love nest with his girlfriend, where his wife and kids couldn't find him.

Posted by: drindl | December 29, 2009 6:49 PM | Report abuse

"The politics of the Detroit attack"? Say what?

I thought some young sociopath unsuccessfully tried to blow up himeslf and the plane he was on. I guess that's just me. Isn't it horrible taste to try to make political hay from this tragedy? Of course, as MM implied, this is pure troll bait. The Fix aka Jake's Place is like a frenzied Troll ant hill today.

BTW, this is America, you don't get to detain someone forever without charges or a hearing just because you don't like their looks or their name. Due process: It's catch and release unless you have something on them. Imagine if you detained without due process snowmelt, Jake, or 37? They would turn into ACLU-ers overnight. :)

Posted by: broadwayjoe | December 29, 2009 6:48 PM | Report abuse

A systemic failure in security admitted


Now let's admit the systemic corruption in the liberal congress

The systemic fraud in climate data and models.

The systemic inflation in printing money and borrowing.

The systemic illegitimacy of health care changes over the wishes of the voters.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 6:41 PM | Report abuse

@ceflynline: TOTAL co-sign on abolishing the hideously named Department of Homeland Security. To your fine list of reasons I would add that there was never s good reason to create it in the first place. Maintaining hysteria should not be a government function.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 6:38 PM | Report abuse

For credibility, I am a survivor of the Pentagon attack on 9/11; I knew seven of the victims. I am a retired Army officer who prefers kinetic solutions for terrorists, but not bystanders. I also do not believe a Pentagon bureaucrat (and I used to be one), no matter how hard he works, has any right to designate enemy combatants, especially if they are citizens like me.

My opinion about the Christmas attack? Homeland security at all our points of entry has been under-resourced since forever (multiple administrations, Congresses, and parties in power). Solutions have favored inconvenience for passengers at the expense of detection procedures (technical and canine) that will work, but cost a lot. We can detect PETN, but at a quarter million a pop. Dogs can do it too, but they're all in South Asia. We can breed dogs easily enough, but not their trainers, and that puts them out of reach too, unless you want them. Some people don't like dogs, but we tick passengers off anyway, so why not tick off some more? Security at airports is way better than at seaports by the way.

As to the human intelligence failure this time, people were too cautious this time. Indicators were present that would have backed up PETN detection, but many people in many places, including the ticket agents, needed to act in concert. Now that we all know what God alone knew at the time, it is possible to see that Abdulmuttalab almost returned the kickoff for a touchdown.

It's time to look at the special teams coach. It's time to fund security adequately. It's also time to quit bickering about this.

Posted by: Publius14 | December 29, 2009 6:34 PM | Report abuse


TEAM OBAMA: EXPOSE BUSH-CHENEY CELL TOWER TORTURE AND IMPAIRMENT OF AMERICANS -- OR BE BLAMED FOR THAT, TOO

If Team Obama were really smart, they would CHANGE THE SUBJECT from the botched airliner terror bombing...

...and expose the Bush-Cheney legacy misuse of a U.S government cell tower- based microwave/laser electromagnetic radiation weapons system that has been TORTURING AND IMPAIRING unconstitutionally "targeted" and persecuted Americans since the early '00s.

Perhaps the government perpetrators of this heinous torture matrix are among those who see the heightened threat of terrorism as a convenient diversion.

See story at: Poynter.org ("Reporting" section)

OR http://www.nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves
http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america OR NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "GESTAPO USA"

Posted by: scrivener50 | December 29, 2009 6:30 PM | Report abuse

drindl:

Problems with Motorola Trunked System radios are common all over the country. REGARDLESS of system used, Motorola, Kenwood, Icom, the radios are tied together by repeaters, whose transmitting antennas get put on top of the highest towers available for good technical reasons. In this case those antennas were on the Twin Towers, and much of the related support equipment was in various buildings in the area. Once both towers had been hit the radio systems were going down in a hurry.

There are LOTS of differing opinions of whether Motorola's Trunking Systyems are, or ever were, good, bad, or indifferent. Those disagreements make the spits and spats on all the poilitcal blogs in the country seem positively harmonius.

For 9/11, machts nichts, because as the communication cables running up the central shafts burned up communications went up in smoke as well. Handi talkies like police and fire carry are about worthless as direct communications links under those conditions. There could havebeen a million good reasons to tar and feather Rudi for bad choices, but none of it mattered that particular day because the whole system was smoke and ashes about the time the first tower came down.

By the way, no, I was fixing traffic signals in Dayton at the time, but we got lots of lessons learned briefings about Hams providing emergency Comms in NYNY after 9/11. We regularly have to replace some downed telephone switch, or lost government communications system in an emergency. It is one of our fundamental reasons for being the Amateur Radio Service.

Posted by: ceflynline | December 29, 2009 6:26 PM | Report abuse

Regarding the release of terrorists: The apparent definition of a terrorist is anyone who is released from GITMO. I presume, therefore, that Snowbama & 37th would oppose the release of ANY detainee. Well, at least any since Jan. 20, 2009.

Regarding release of proven terrorists, I couldn't resist checking on the two individuals who were on the Yemeni tape and claimed responsibility for planning this attempt. This is from ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/men-believed-northwest-airlines-plot-set-free/story?id=9434065)

"Guantanamo prisoner #333, Muhamad Attik al-Harbi, and prisoner #372, Said Ali Shari, were sent to Saudi Arabia on Nov. 9, 2007, according to the Defense Department log of detainees who were released from American custody. Al-Harbi has since changed his name to Muhamad al-Awfi."

So, umm, exactly "W"ho was president back then?

BTW - thanks for the cite, snowbama. There's some interesting biographical information on the released detainees.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | December 29, 2009 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Apparently liberals think Rudy and condi are on the hook for this. Are you sure it wasn't Reagan somehow?

They will never admit how useless their guy is.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 6:14 PM | Report abuse

"We have to do better. Even if we cannot be perfect, there seems to be no reason to think this was close to adequate."

We DO have to do better, and better starts by breaking Intelligence up into its components again.

Think of it as competition among businesses. When three intelligence agencies, who don't particularly coordinate, come to similar conclusions, you may have more faith in the conclusion, than when all those agencies work is turned over to the Presidents people to massage any way they see fit. Before Porter Goss got to strut around as boss spook, there was only as much coordination in Intelligence gathering as was needed. Now we have one organization trying to project one Intelligence opinion, and as we learned about Rummy, Dick, Dave and friends, making up data, and suppressing data they didn't like made it possible for the President to claim "WE BELIEVED". The next time we get into a George like administration, his Proter Goss can make it up as he goes along, and only the American people will suffer for it. For all the money we pay for those extra levels of politbeureau oversight of Intelligence, we only get the ability of a President to run TOTALLY BLIND and be able to claim, again, "We Believed"

Posted by: ceflynline | December 29, 2009 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Americans are not stupid. Obama and Napolitano look horrible in how they are handling this. The mid-terms are not about how silly the Republicans look - next year will be a referendum on the President and the Democrats. Right now, they aren't looking too good. This will only knock them down further.

Posted by: kenpasadena | December 29, 2009 6:06 PM | Report abuse

"BTW, I never considered the screw-ups that led to 9-11 [mostly within the FBI] to be GWB's fault. "

Second point:

I HAVE always considerred that 9/11 wasn't an intelligence failure, it was a failure of Condolezza Rice to do HER job. The National Security Affairs Adviser, later the national Security Adviser, is responsible for knowing what important data is being developed and forwarded by the various Intelligence Agencies. It was what let Kissinger trump Shultz on a daily basis, because Schultz would brief State's positions for the day, and Kissinger would then brief what Intelligence, especially NSA had forwarded over the previous 24 hours. Henry always seemed to know more than Schultz. When Henry took over at State he made sure that HE knew what was being briefed by his replacement, so he wasn't being upstaged by the National Security people.

Condi was the designated person responsible to the President and the Nation to get the information, like reports of Arabic speaking students taking flying lessons saying they didn't need to know how to land, (or take off for that matter) It is public record that she kept Richard Clark from briefing the President on what he had.

That is the problem with the current Intelligence structure, because there are now three or four layers of Presidential appointees standing between the president and the actual Intelligence developing agencies, each of whom is an impediment to an analyst getting his conclusions to the President if anyone in the political levels doesn't want that information to get to the President. ESPECIALLY when the President doesn't want to be told, for instance, that there is no credible evidence of Iraq having ANY WMD programs, let alone credible ones.

I too want competence, but since nothing so far reported seems to rise to briefable intelligence, in this case none of that applies to either Obama or Napolitano.

Posted by: ceflynline | December 29, 2009 6:04 PM | Report abuse

cef, were you in New York then? This is what we heard about it here:

'In The Real Rudy: Radios, Greenwald documents how radios used by the FDNY on 9/11 were the same ones that malfunctioned during the 1993 attack on the Twin Towers. When - eight years later - Giuliani finally purchased new communications equipment for $14 million from Motorola, it was never field-tested. A week later, the equipment was recalled after a firefighter's mayday went un-heard. Giuliani reissued the old batch of radios. And on 9/11 when a police helicopter warned that the North Tower could collapse, more than 120 firefighters remained inside.'

[FDNY Captain John] Joyce's book, "Radio Silence FDNY," lays out the many problems with the purchase of the Motorola XTS-3500 radios and with their operational problems at fires and other emergencies before the radios were pulled from service. [...]

'In the book, Joyce questions how many of the 343 firefighters who died on Sept. 11, 2001, might have escaped the World Trade Center if they had new working radios - instead of the older Saber radios that were reissued after the XTS-3500s were pulled from service in March 2001.'

Posted by: drindl | December 29, 2009 6:02 PM | Report abuse

"

Thanks, BB. That gives the UK visa denial no weight in the totality of the matter, I guess.

BTW, I never considered the screw-ups that led to 9-11 [mostly within the FBI] to be GWB's fault. Similarly, I do not have reason to blame this screw-up on BHO. But I demand competence and want it at this level. We have to do better. Even if we cannot be perfect, there seems to be no reason to think this was close to adequate.
-----------------
I did think the failure to get the police and firefighters on the same frequencies in NYC was RG's fault, however. Posted by: mark_in_austin "

Three points to answer, last first. Fire and police aren't normally on each other's frequencies, except designated shared frequencies, because unless they are on separately they would never be able to communicate at all as they would constantly be stepping on one another's transmissions. When the towers went down they took most of the police and fire repeaters with them, and amateurs had to step in and make THEIR repeaters available, (which we gladly did). Laws of physics tend to trump the laws of men and all that.

Posted by: ceflynline | December 29, 2009 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Obama's terrorism policy for the year appears to have been:


1) Go to Cairo, make a speech, send out a press release that Obama has changed the Middle East


2) Direct all federal agencies to stop using the phrase "war on terror"

Obama did not "come to Washington" to fix the economy or to fight terrorism - he came to "make history."

Obama is not doing the job.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 29, 2009 5:50 PM | Report abuse

I do recall, ceff, that even with all the info they got from the Clinton Admin, some of whose 'hair was on fire' about potential terrorist attacks, that terrorism was not on Ashcroft's top ten concerns, the first being pornography.

Posted by: drindl | December 29, 2009 5:49 PM | Report abuse

I guess I must be wrong, but I was sort of sure that TSA only provides security at Airports in the U.S. If I am, I want to know how i can get hired by TSA to work in Manila, or Bangkok, since I could easily live in particular extravagance on a TSA screener's wages PLUS my presumed OPERS retirement.

Seriously, while there are many improvements that ought to be made to Bush's cobbled up TSA, and the unified Intelligence headquarters, (in the latter case by abolishing it and going back to independent NSA, CIA, DIA etc. organizations reporting through their chains of command and coordinated by the National Security Adviser.), they mostly work on things on this side of our barrier oceans.

SO, just who WAS in charge of searching the latest Yemeni terrorist at Lagos and at Amsterdam? WHO was responsible for checking him against the data bases that he was supposedly recorded in?

Were ANY of them in any way responsible to U. S. Government agencies, or were they either airline employees, or local airport employees, or local government ( Nigerian, Dutch) employees?

The squawks from the Republicans are there to get revenge for Democrats blaming George and Dick for letting 9/11 happen, but THOSE accusations rise out of information that became available later that show an appalling lack of qworry, (at best) or a deliberate refusal to look at facts presented to them.

None of which seems to apply to this incident.

Posted by: ceflynline | December 29, 2009 5:41 PM | Report abuse

"I did think the failure to get the police and firefighters on the same frequencies in NYC was RG's fault, however."

so do they, mark.

Posted by: drindl | December 29, 2009 5:40 PM | Report abuse

"Chad McGowan, the Democrat running against DeMint in 2010, said that the South Carolina Republican was "putting his partisan agenda ahead of our safety,", adding: "This is not the time to have nobody in charge of America's air security. Terrorists don't care if we're Republicans or Democrats -- they only care that we're Americans."

________________________

Uh, helllloooooo....who waited until Sept. of 2009 to even nominate someone to head up the TSA????? Our Democrat President.

Who put health care reform ahead of this guy's confirmation? Our Democrat legislature.

They can cry obstructionism all they want...truth is, they want this specific union-organizing guy to head the TSA...and if he'd just been forthright about his plans, like Sen De Mint wanted, they'd have gotten an up or down vote....and likely lost.

And the TSA DOES have an acting Administrator - Gale Rossides - and she appears to be EXTREMELY qualified.

Posted by: boosterprez | December 29, 2009 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Blade

Obama released 12 Gitmo detainees last week - 6 to Yemen.


The problem is that the criteria for release has changed.


Obama is now applying the "rules of evidence at trial" in the condiderations to determine if there should be a release.


The clear situation is that intelligence does not work that way.


Intelligence agencies are going to be extremely reluctant to see any evidence at a trial which may reveal sources and methods, or reveal a spy we may have that is still out there.


So there is always tension about which evidence to present in open court.


The cases are weak because of intelligence demands - it is not going to work - we are in the middle of war.


Sorry to disrupt Obama's vacation.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 29, 2009 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Most Republicans are showing they are hopeless, seeming to care more about trying to score a few political points than genuine national security. Given the dismal failures of the Bush-Cheney administration, despite warnings apparently ignored, to prevent the 9/11 tragedy, in which Democrats did not react with justifiable strong criticisms, Republicans on this issue, as some others, have absolutely no credibility.

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | December 29, 2009 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Obama's agenda has been going in the COMPLETELY WRONG DIRECTION all year.

It is pretty simple.


Obama has spent more time on where to place RELEASED GITMO TERRORISTS - rather than improving security for Americans.


Obama has distracted the entire country and Congress on the whether we are going to create a MASSIVE GOVERNMENT PROGRAM -


Instead of CONCENTRATING ON THE ECONOMY.


Obama has spent more time telling everyone to remove the phrase "war on terrorism" from the paperwork - rather than anything else.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 29, 2009 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Anyone notice how slow Chrissy fox is now in his retorts now that all his static IP addresses have been blocked.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 5:22 PM | Report abuse

Surprise. We're at war. Apologizing is not the answer.

I presume his father wasn't surprised since he reported his own son to the US embassy.

The obimbobots in the usual flash of utter incompetence and inexperience ignored the report. Mr transparency isnot discussing these matters. Not the wh breaches, not the base murders, not the mad airplane bombers.

The teleprompters are in the shop for their million mile repair.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 5:17 PM | Report abuse

If Obama is "surprised" that al Queda would try to bomb a plane, he should resign immediately.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 29, 2009 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Mark, Bush ignored an explicit PDB about AQ planning to fly planes into buildings because he was more interested in reviving the Star Wars fantasy. The Nigerian bomber appears to have surprised everyone.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Thanks, BB. That gives the UK visa denial no weight in the totality of the matter, I guess.

BTW, I never considered the screw-ups that led to 9-11 [mostly within the FBI] to be GWB's fault. Similarly, I do not have reason to blame this screw-up on BHO. But I demand competence and want it at this level. We have to do better. Even if we cannot be perfect, there seems to be no reason to think this was close to adequate.
-----------------
I did think the failure to get the police and firefighters on the same frequencies in NYC was RG's fault, however.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 29, 2009 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Obama has SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGED THE CRITERIA FOR RELEASING TERRORISTS FROM GITMO.


Obama has done this PRIMARILY TO AVOID THE POLITICAL EMBARASSMENT WHICH POTENTIALLY COULD RESULT FROM OBAMA LOSING AT TRIAL OR A TERRORIST BEING RELEASED ON A TECHNICALITY.

So, instead of the OVERRIDING CRITERIA being "Potential Danger to the US" - now all of a sudden we have the OBAMA DISCOUNT - put aside some of the risk of danger - because now the government has to consider the potential embarassment of release at a high-profile trial because all the intelligence does not fit neatly into the "rules of evidence."

It's pretty simple.


Our stance on terrorism is significantly reduced.

(Meanwhile Obama is more concerned about how to focus-group the language concerning the serious problems of the health care bill so that the poll numbers don't go down too far.)


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 29, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Just five days earlier, the U.S. Department of Justice announced the transfer of 12 Guantanamo detainees to Afghanistan, Yemen and the Somaliland region. The six detainees released to Yemen were identified as: Jamal Muhammad Alawi Mari, Farouq Ali Ahmed, Ayman Saeed Abdullah Batarfi, Muhammaed Yasir Ahmed Taher, Fayad Yahya Ahmed al Rami, and Riyad Atiq Ali Abdu al Haf.

 
 
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/29/sending-detainees-radical-hotbed-yemen/

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

As if 37th has any idea what Obama spends time on.

As if it's possible to do any good *without* highlighting a Bush failure.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Let me simply illustrate the point - how much time and energy has Obama put into "closing Gitmo" as opposed to "improving the security of the US against terrorism."


You see?


Obama is obsessed with implementing policies which somehow highlight that "Bush did something wrong" rather than actually governing properly.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 29, 2009 4:55 PM | Report abuse

I'll bite. 37th&O wrote: "Instead, we have a policy which generally weakens America's readiness - Obama has been releasing terrorists to YEMEN."

Name one. Note, said individual must have been released following the inauguration.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | December 29, 2009 4:55 PM | Report abuse

@Mark - I think I read a quote on The Times (we call it the London Times but there, it's simply The Times). He applied for a VISA for a study course. He'd previously studied for three years at University College of London. The authorities concluded that the supposed course was bogus. Here's the quote:

“He was refused entry on grounds that he was applying to study at an educational establishment that we didn’t consider to be genuine,” a Whitehall official said.

and here's the link:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6968539.ece

Incidentally, here's a chilling quote from the foreign minister of Yemen, Dr al-Qirbi,

“They may actually plan attacks like the one we have just had in Detroit. There are maybe hundreds of them — 200, 300.”

Well, off to track down an obscure quotation by William Berkeley. I'm helping out Mrs. Blade with a translation.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | December 29, 2009 4:49 PM | Report abuse

There is something seriously wrong with Obama on terrorism management. It is just that simple.

Obama has obsessed for years about how bad Bush's approach to terrorism was, however Obama has failed to develop a coherent separate approach.

Instead, we have a policy which generally weakens America's readiness - Obama has been releasing terrorists to YEMEN.


Obama, for reasons based on his partisan beliefs, has steadily placed terrorism on the back-burner.


Obama somehow thought he could cruise into Cairo, make a speech and all the terrorism would be gone.


How much time has Obama spent on Homeland Security in his administration beyond attempting to dismantle what Bush put in place? That is what Obama's policy is all about - proving that Bush did something wrong - not improving the security of America.


Obama spent more time on insisting that the phrase "war on terror" be removed from the paperwork - more time than actually seeing to it that America was secure.


Obama has spent so much time on a review of Afghanistan - but after all those months it is CLEAR THAT OBAMA MISSED THE POINT COMPLETELY.


Obama is wasting the time of the country with this health care distraction - a much better health care bill could have been put together with true bipartisan negotiations - rather than attempting to jam a massive government program down the throats of America - a policy that no one wants unless they are believing a lie put out by Obama.


Obama has been going in the wrong direction all year - and the democrats have become insane name-callers.


Legitimate policy differences have been constantly cast as "something else." Meanwhile, Obama releases more prisoners to Yemen.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 29, 2009 4:48 PM | Report abuse

@mark_in_austin

I like the banker line. Too funny. I expect to see a timeline soon.

It appears that information once again was in a silo and not properly shared across agencies and countries. I would think that America and England would share no fly lists among other things.

Posted by: ModerateVoter | December 29, 2009 4:45 PM | Report abuse

"What ever happen to America first and politics second? I fear it will take something terrible to change this attitude."

on the contrary, if something terrible happened Republicans would fall backwar. In their chairs in their haste to use it to their advantage, cranking up the hate machine. The sound of clinking glasses of bourbon could be heard miles away.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 4:44 PM | Report abuse

You don't seem to understand liberal paybacks. He owes them. A deal is a deal.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 4:42 PM | Report abuse

You will eventually find that the sharing of databases was a part of the Bush patriot act that was stripped out by liberals in fealty to their ACLU overlords. Fox news will report it and the ignorant stream media will ignore it. It may make suicide look weak.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Unions have strangled the life out of every industry they take over. Demint deserves a reward for stopping an already disfunctional TSA from further slide.

Stopping the socialistS dead in their tracks is Americas last best hope.

Posted by: snowbama

Right and management had nothing to do with it. I suggest you review your history and the rise of labor in America. Then ask yourself why unions are not what they used to be. Playing the union fear card worked in the by gone past not now.

By the way, the TSA issue is about the right to vote about forming a union not that they actually will form a union. TSA management can take steps to ensure that the formation of a union is not necessary. I know Human Resource managers that specialize in keeping the workers happy and the unions out.

Maybe I should give the head of the TSA their numbers? Oh wait....

Posted by: ModerateVoter | December 29, 2009 4:35 PM | Report abuse

The war is already lost

general Harry Reid

right before it was won.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 4:31 PM | Report abuse

BB, I noted the same factors and asked whether it was true that the UK denied him a visa. Armpeg also wrote that the UK denied him a visa. I assume that is true until someone posts a link to the contrary. Yes - DHLS missed this one by a mile, if that is the case. at first I laughed when my neighbor said to me last night "They must have ignored it b/c the caller said he was a Nigerian banker."
Then I stopped laughing. Is it true that the visa slipup is under the jurisdiction of State, not DHLS? I do think we require competence here, at the least - I am trying to figure out the chain of mistakes.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 29, 2009 4:29 PM | Report abuse

What ever happen to America first and politics second? I fear it will take something terrible to change this attitude.

Posted by: ModerateVoter | December 29, 2009 4:26 PM | Report abuse

A near miss is not the time to proclaim full speed ahead on this dangerous course.

It is time to make the essential changes to make sure the next one is not fatal.

What we are rooting for is proper strategy not based on suicidal liberal dogma.

Look at the repub support the president got when he decided( well on his own time and way) to fight in afghanistan.

It is the liberals who will accept no fault for their own failures.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Unions have strangled the life out of every industry they take over. Demint deserves a reward for stopping an already disfunctional TSA from further slide.

Stopping the socialistS dead in their tracks is Americas last best hope.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 4:18 PM | Report abuse

That anyone tries to make political hay out of this is shameful. There was a time when attacks on us brought us together, as it does people of most countries.

Now all it does is cause further division and the sense that some people are actually rooting for something awful to happen. This bodes very ill for our future as a nation.

Posted by: drindl | December 29, 2009 4:17 PM | Report abuse

Try this exercise.

Read this thread skipping the snowbama posts.

Now read it again including them.

Which experience us better?

Not even clever snark, just nasty and stupid, but indefatigable.

Hey zouk, we get it, OK? Message: zouk despises the President. Do we needy reminders six times per hour, all day?

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 4:09 PM | Report abuse

@FairlingtonBlade

I have to agree with you.

Another screw up like that and she is out. Why she said what she said is beyond me.

Jim DeMint playing the Union angle will not work.

Posted by: ModerateVoter | December 29, 2009 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Addendum to scrivener post, below:


If Team Obama were really smart, they would CHANGE THE SUBJECT...

...and expose the Bush-Cheney legacy misuse of a U.S government cell tower- based microwave/laser directed energy weapons system that has been TORTURING AND IMPAIRING unconstitutionally "targeted" and persecuted Americans since the early '00s.

Perhaps the government perpetrators of this heinous torture matrix are among those who see the heightened threat of terrorism as a convenient diversion.

See: Poynter.org -- "Reporting" section

OR: http://NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "U.S. SILENTLY TORTURES..." and "GESTAPO USA"

Posted by: scrivener50 | December 29, 2009 4:07 PM | Report abuse

Today Iran was caught smuggling uranium. Barry says that they have that right. But if they ever nuke someone, he will begin to consider the possibility of eventual but not binding serious consequences.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Obama's/Napolitano's Homeland Security gang didn't notify Obama for 3 hours, as he was peacefully sleeping while vacationing in Hawaii.(Whatever became of the Democrap Socialists and the Democrap Socialist Party--controlled Main Stream Media's outraged crocodile tears when Pres. George W. Bush didn't jump up right away after being told about the 9/11 WTC terrorist attack?)

==

Have you forgotten already? Wow, after only a few days the details are murky for you. Let me help.

The first reports of the incident talked about a firecracker. There was a popping sound and a small fire. It was only later that we learned it had been a lot more serious.

And do you really think that a suspicious passenger on a flight that landed safely is comparable to three planes flown into buildings? I’d advise you to get some perspective but, given the wide-eyed hysteria of every one of your posts, I’d say that ship sailed long ago.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 4:03 PM | Report abuse

A good job was done is not the phrase that ever leaps to mind concerning the obimbo fools.

Except for TelePrompTer reading.

Now that the beloved and essential devices have been fed exed to Hawaii, the messiah is finally prepared to discuss the bombing.

You will have to watch it on Fox. The other networks haven't figured out what happened yet and how they will cover for the liberal bumbling again.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 3:59 PM | Report abuse


A PAGE FROM THE 'FALSE FLAG' PLAYBOOK?

Where have we heard this refrain before?

A rich third-world banker alerts the U.S. government that his rich son has become radicalized, and in a matter of a few weeks, the rich son attempts to set off some sort of incendiary device inside an airborne American airliner. The son immediately tells authorities he was operating under orders of Al Qaeda, and that more attacks will follow. The suspect's family photos are instantly distributed to an eager and unquestioning mainstream media. "Sources" suggest sidebar angles about the growing terrorist threat emanating from Yemen, and the critical need for "naked" X-ray scanners at airports.

Media pundits jump all over blind-sided Obama administration officials such as Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, who makes herself available to the Sunday talk shows and quickly becomes the saber-rattling right's convenient whipping gal.

Does any of this sound familiar? Echoes of the summer of 2001 and the warning that Bin Laden was poised to attack American skyscrapers with hijacked airliners?

As N.C.I.S. Special Agent LeRoy Jetho Gibbs often remarks on TV: "I don't believe in coincidences."

FOR THE REST OF THE COMMENTARY:

http://nowpublic.com/world/botched-airliner-bombing-narrative-just-too-convenient OR (if link is sabotaged): NowPublic.com/scrivener

***

U.S. SILENTLY TORTURES AMERICANS WITH CELL TOWER MICROWAVES, SATELLITES, SAYS VETERAN JOURNALIST

• Secret Bush legacy multi-agency federal program uses cell tower/GPS satellite microwave/laser electromagnetic radiation attack system to torture, impair, subjugate "targeted" citizens -- and oversees local "community watch" vigilante terrorism and financial sabotage campaigns.

See story at: http://Poynter.org ("Reporting" section); OR http://nowpublic.com/world/u-s-silently-tortures-americans-cell-tower-microwaves
NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "GESTAPO USA"

Posted by: scrivener50 | December 29, 2009 3:56 PM | Report abuse

The more one hears, the more one is dumbfounded that this guy wound up on a plane to the States. Warning + cash ticket + one way + no luggage = B O M B (with apologies to Television Without Pity & 24). I remember being subjected to extra screening after I bought a same day one way ticket (I was driving back from KC and had accidentally bought a ticket for the return date). Although the US govt. bears some responsibility, one needs to remember that Schipol Airport is not located in the U S of A.

Politically speaking, the Biggest Loser is Janet Napolitano. At least Obama didn't say she was doing a heckuva job. One can say that there's a lot we don't know at this point and be fine. She went out on a (rotting) limb and said all was well. That emperor was buck naked and it wasn't just one little kid who noticed.

The second Biggest Loser is Jim DeMint. Regardless as to if it would make a difference, blocking the TSA nominee at this point in time is horrible optics. The Republican strategy of blocking nominees may begin to backfire.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | December 29, 2009 3:54 PM | Report abuse

@armpeg

I do not see one post here where anyone is saying a good job was done in this case.

Stupid statements not with standing (yours and Janet Napolitano's) we need to learn from this and adapt.

Posted by: ModerateVoter | December 29, 2009 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Lemme see now.
The Socialist Communist Obama worshippers here see nothing wrong with the Obama administrations, and Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano's handling of the attempted terrorist attack by Al Qaeda operative and trainee, Umar Tarouk Abdulmutallab, at the Detroit airport on Xmas day. And they agree with Janet Napolitano that (Homeland Security) "...had no info to keep him (the terrorist) off of the plane", and that the terrorist attack "..was handled correctly".
Apparantly to these simpleton America--haters, it's more important to save Obama's and Napolitano's skins, than the lives of Americans on that civilian aircraft.
To their way of thinking, all rational non-far-left Obama-worshipping Americans are supposed to ignore, pooh-pooh, excuse, and disregard that:
* The terrorists own father contacted our Embassy in Lagos, Nigeria a month ago to warn them that his son Abdulmutallab was being radicalized and was receiving training by Al Qaeda in Yemen.
* The UK Homeland Security had him on their No-Fly list and had refused him a Student Visa.
* Obama's/Napolitano's Homeland Security Dept., not only didn't put him on their No-Fly list, they ignored the UK's info on this guy and actually gave him a Multi Visa to enter the USA.
* Obama's/Napolitano's Homeland Security Dept. ignored and/or pooh-poohed the Va.-based InterCenter's warnings given them by an informer in Yemen, as well as a intercepted and monitored phone call between Al Qaeda terrorists, that warned them of a looming bombing attack comming within the USA.
* Obama's/Napolitano's Homeland Security Dept's. million dollar 'Aviation Detection System' not only failed to detect the bomb that this guy had strapped to his body, but they failed to even rudimentially pad this guy down, since that would have found the bomb around his belt.
* Obama's/Napolitano's Homeland Security hot-shot Security team acted like a bunch of Keystone Cops because they knew nothing about this attack untill the civilian passengers on that aircraft had him, and had disarmed him. Only then did they act like a Homeland Security team, supposedly protecting the passengers.
* Obama's/Napolitano's Homeland Security gang didn't notify Obama for 3 hours, as he was peacefully sleeping while vacationing in Hawaii.(Whatever became of the Democrap Socialists and the Democrap Socialist Party--controlled Main Stream Media's outraged crocodile tears when Pres. George W. Bush didn't jump up right away after being told about the 9/11 WTC terrorist attack?)

Posted by: armpeg | December 29, 2009 3:36 PM | Report abuse

No wonder Detroit is in the toilet.

Posted by: jckdoors | December 29, 2009 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Barry can figure out in a single day that the Boston pd acted stupidly. Yet after three days he can't figure who and why someone tried to blow up a plane.

Perhaps if he invited the young man over for a beer and apologized we could all get along.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

It is simple really. United we stand divided we fall. Democrats and Republicans need to come together on this for the good of Americans. Does that mean we do it the Democrat or Republican way. Nope but some combination of the two.

At the end of the day, holding up TSA appointments does no one any good. Assuming people are innocent until proven guilty does not help when the "innocent" person explodes a plane on route.

Posted by: ModerateVoter | December 29, 2009 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Don't forget republicans voted against the stimulus package, which included funding for airport security. Why do republicans want to help kill Americans?

Posted by: thecorinthian | December 29, 2009 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Maybe the public defender can get him off because he was illegally detained in that choke hold. Was he read his Miranda rights before the fire was wrenched from his pants, without his permission, that sounds like an invasion of privacy.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 2:49 PM | Report abuse

"Its not like they have anything constructive to bring to the table. Their politics is limited to snark."

Allow me to repeat that.


Posted by: margaretmeyers | December 29, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

____________

Watch Fox News !!: There's 300 Million People in America...


Fox News's Hannity & O'Reily get what...

1 Million Viwers a Night ??

Call me when Fox News's Hannity & O'Reily get 10-20 Million Viewers Per Night.

It'll Never Happen.

Note: Fox News has Convinced Their Tea Parties & Obama Hate Mongers, that their News Channel has Majority of America's Viewership

[HA] Fox News Doesn't Come Close to Majority of America's Viewership !!

Look at Fox News's Demographics, Geographical Map,The Voting Group that Voted Against President Obama and Notice the Big Bump to Fox News, after the Election, the McCain-Palin [[Loss]] The Southern & Mid Western States, Losers In Need of Everything & All Things Negative about President Obama, these Low Life's Feed Like Sharks on Pres.Obama.

"My Freedoms being Taken from Me" ?

The Man's been President for 11 Months and their Screaming "My Freedoms are being Taken" and Yet can't Explain or Prove such a Assertion.


"I want My Country Back" ?

Who in the He!! has taken a Damn Thing Freedom from Them ?

Bush's Patriot Act: Took their Freedoms Away & their Rights to Privacy Away, Did You hear Limbaugh-Hannity-O'Reily tell their Listeners the Patriot Act was Wrong & Illegal and they should March on Washington DC ?

Nooooo

False News: Is Fixed News & Fraud News

Posted by: omaarsblade | December 29, 2009 2:37 PM | Report abuse

Republicans Praying on their Knees for a Successful Terrorist Attack.

Republicans On their Knees Praying for the Economy To get Worse, and Not Get Better.

Republicans on their Knees Praying that the Unemployment Rates Grow Even Higher.

Republicans on their Knees wanting something Bad to happen to the President of the USA.

Republicans on their Knees Praying for No Health Care Reform.

Republicans on their Knees Praying for the Absolute Worse for America, Under the Obama Presidency, Placing their Political Titles Over America and the American Population.

Bad Kharma, Bad Kharma Bad Kharma

__________________

Some of You So Called Republican sound just like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck Hate Monger.

Your 2010-2012 Gloating about a Failed Terrorist Attack, that would have Killed 300 Or More People is [[Deplorable, Distasteful & Detestable]]

Your Hateful & Hate Filled Swipe is not about a Foiled Terrorist Attack, Its all about being Happy for the Republicans.

You're Sick and a Low Life, just Praying for a Successful Terrorist Attack on America, for Political Gains in 2010-2012 [SICK]

This is Far Beyond Democrat or Republican Politics, this is about how Fate Prevented what would have been a Terrible Crime Against Humanity.

Posted by: omaarsblade | December 29, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

So liberals must be pleased this guy lawyered up immediately instead of getting the CIA to encorage him to roll up his network.

No partisan differences? Why is a mass murderer of civilians in a war even given Geneva rights, much less US rights.? Make that "alleged " Obambi.

I say light his underwear back on fire until he talks. Then hand him to the Egyptians.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 2:34 PM | Report abuse

Of course Republicans will try to rile the rubes with this, its not like they have anything constructive to bring to the table. Their politics is limited to snark.

Posted by: SeattleTop | December 29, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Unlike the folks the FBI rounded up a few months ago in Dallas and Denver, this fellow was not the subject of an investigation. However, the confluence of the father's report, the one-way ticket paid for in cash, no luggage, and that he was a young adult male traveling alone should have raised a flag. I understand the UK denied him a visa on these grounds - is that true?

As with every endeavor, there is a limit to likely effectiveness. We cannot stop every possible attack. But AQ's interest in the airplane as bomb is obvious. The Canadians are now going to enforce a series of stricter air traffic rules. We should, as well.

There will be no partisan points to make, for the reasons you state, CC, but there should be practical points to seize upon by TSA, and understood by all.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | December 29, 2009 2:09 PM | Report abuse


Of course, there is plenty of blame to go around, if you are into playing that sort of game.

"Two of the four leaders allegedly behind the al Qaeda plot to blow up a Northwest Airlines passenger jet over Detroit were released by the U.S. from the Guantanamo prison in November, 2007, according to American officials and Department of Defense documents."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/northwest-flight-253-al-qaeda-leaders-terror-plot/story?id=9434065

Frankly, I just want DHS and TSA to learn from their mistakes and fix the problems. Which is only a pipe dream as long as politicians are involved.

Posted by: mnteng | December 29, 2009 2:04 PM | Report abuse

Liberals would prefer to forego any coverage of this until after another election or two.

No sense piling on to the "Obama is weak, confused, inexperienced and feckless" meme.

Posted by: snowbama | December 29, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Can we just imagine in our heads all of Jake and Snowbama's posts from the last 3 days? We don't really have to see them all over again, do we? Really, we don't.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | December 29, 2009 1:35 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company