Terror rant

So much to cover...

I will just say that I don't think our current course of action has been good at all. It is just terrible. But, that doesn't mean turn in a more violent approach.

Oh. So in order to avoid dying, you want a military dictatorship where all laws are set in motion to keep you safe. Sounds wonderful. Shit, why don't I just pack up and move to China? Might as well, they are opening up while you are locking us down.

Unwarranted wiretaps? Check.
Remove the need for search warrants? Check.
Lock up prisoners without providing a lawyer for however you want? Check.

And don't tell me "we're better." You give it up, you don't get it back.

No. We can't be Israel. We are NOT a country based on a religion. We are a country based on ideals. You throw away that and we aren't better than North Korea.

You talk about freedoms here while talking about removing morals above. Which is it? Sacrifice our morals by throwing away the freedoms of some so that we can still keep our freedoms? Right, that makes sense.

I'll tell you what, I don't give a flying fuck about being inconvenienced on a flight. Yes, those 24-hour flights that I take will be a bitch without some of my electronics, but that's life. I choose to travel so that's what happens.

 

Only in America. Let's go to a world war with a billion people because otherwise we might have to stand in long lines at airports and go without Ipods for hours at a stretch.
Yes, the toothpaste, perfume BS is just that. There were national guardsman in uniform at Logan yesterday. What good they'd do against liquid explosives is anyone's guess. Haven't you all figured it out yet? The main purpose of most anti-terrorist security is to make you, the public, frightened. Scared people are easy to control.

 

That's a lot of hysteria for a Saturday morning, pastor crass.

Since no one on this entire thread suggested anything you spewed above, it seems pointless to respond, since you'll manage to misinterpret it anyway, but what the hell:

Did someone here say that? Show of hands.  Anyone? Bueller?

Do you mean without a warrant, or just unnecessary? Necessity is relative and subjective.

I'm going to pretend you didn't just say Israel is no better than North Korea.

Do you even read what people post here, or do you just look at the words and extrapolate the interpretation that works best for your planned response??

Freedom?  Terrorism is by definition the death of freedom.  Every time the dopey color chart flips from yellow to orange to red, that's your freedom. We live in a country that is completely inexperienced and unprepared when it comes to disaster or disruption or national crisis. We could barely handle the clocks changing from 1999 to 2000. Katrina? The national response to any crisis is to simply shut down.  Is that freedom?

We have our freedom today because we fought for it. Are you not willing to fight for it now? And anticipating your next question--who the hell are you going to fight--I'll just answer: we're not fighting against superhero villians with exotic powers, we're fighting against mere humans (if you can call them that) who are inferior to us in number, power, skill, intelligence, and every other way. Find them and end it.

If you still think this is the issue, I have nothing to add.

Finally, let's not pretend anyone here has the answers. There may not be any answers.  It's a beautiful day where I am...I'm going to go enjoy it.

 

So, you are willing to throw away our moralism and I'm the one throwing out hysteria?

You said, "I'm willing to sacrifice America's moralism."
What does this mean if not sacrificing our own ideals?

I didn't say Israel was no better than North Korea. For someone arguing that I don't read, you make an incredibly huge leap. So, I'll break it down very simply for you:
1. Israel is a country founded on religion.
2. America is founded on ideals.
3. You take away America's ideals and the result is not religion but abject dictatorship.

There you go.

And yeah, I think inconvenience on a flight is the issue. : Right. That's why today I'm not driving to the airport to pick up a close relative who's flight was just canceled. It was supposed to arrive today from Heathrow. Not happening.

So, of course, inconvenience is my only concern. :

As to answers, yes, some do. I have answers. But there is little to no point in going over them since I'm not of high enough importance to influence anything.

 

I could understand this thread, or AF's World war III thread if the London gang had actually blown up a bunch of airplanes. But they didn't.
The authorities caught these guys. The plot had no chance of getting started. The investigation was begun by a tip from a British Muslim who didn't get want to get blown up either. In short, this was an optimum scenario. The toothpaste and Starbucks ban is just the authorities trying to convince people they're safe, because the operative formula is Inconvienence=Safety.
It's annoying, sure, but no more than that.

 

Whoever said the war on terrorism is one that won't end in the traditional sense had it right, which is why I've shaken my head every time some left-leaning person has suggested we need a timetable. For this endeavor, a timetable is simply not possible. There will always be someone who wants to carry out terroristic acts. Period. And my gut-level feeling is that every one of these plots -- and there most surely will be others -- that is foiled brings us one step closer to one that is not. There will be another successful attack on the United States.

 

And it will be by non-Muslim American citizens.

 

If you really want to have an end to terrorism, you need to be Nixon smart, not Bush stupid.

If I'm prez (and yes, I know, God forbid) I call up the Saudi kind and explain things. This whole jihad thing stops...or Mecca becomes a very glassy ocean. The biggest issue we have is that our "friends" the Paks and Saudis inspire and tolerate most of the funding and organization of the terrorist cells. Me, I'd wack Musharif.

if they won't respect us...and they won't...then they should fear us. Instead, we have our military bogged down and getting destroyed by $8 improvised bombs — we're a laughing stock, like the Soviets were in Afghanistan.

And as for the Iranians, if they really want nukes, we should offer them one. As in "catch."

and yes, you can drill for oil through glass.

 

Is that a direct quote? I don't think so.   I said, quote, "And yes, I am willing to set aside our fabulous American 'morals' if it means finding an end to this national disaster."

Whose morals? Al Gore's? Ann Coulter's? Do you mean the Constitution? Religious values? Is it 'immoral' to destroy an enemy who has no morals at all? We can debate American morals all day, but the political and social landscape in this country would suggest you won't ever get a consensus on a definition. I would argue that American morality is fluid and changing constantly, depending on the situation. That's why politics exists.

a) We were talking about the way Israel protects itself. The basis for a nation's existence has nothing to do with it's commitment to security and defense.  
b) Israel is a country founded on much more than religion, but I'm not going to get into that here.

I'm sure you do have answers. I'm just not sure we agree on the questions.

And Michael--You are so right that the National Guardsmen and the lip gloss in the trash is just great theater...it took more than four years after 9/11 for airlines to ban lighters and matches. But do you really think that a failed plot equals relief? Would you feel different if the plan originated at Logan, and you were supposed to be on one of the planes?

 

Funny, but I thought Jan. 1, 2000 went pretty damn smooth because we WERE so prepared. If anything, we OVER prepared and were laughing about what a non-event it was because NOTHING BAD HAPPENED.

Sorry if your plane fell out of the sky that day, 21.

Katrina?

Well, it wasn't the nation's shining moment, that's for sure.

But you know something?

People in New Orleans were stranded for a few days.

Compare that to what happens when an earthquake hits Pakistan . . . or yesterday's typhoon in China. We'll see how quickly help arrives in those places.

Only you won't see it, because CNN won't be broadcasting the same soundbite (people in front of Convention Center saying, on cue, "We want help!") that they showed every 30 minutes in the days after Katrina.

 

Yes, 21, I would feel safer if the authorities had arrested plotters aimed at Logan rather than Heathrow. That would mean the US was as much on its toes as the UK seems to be.
I have a great deal of respect for you, vingt et un, so I recommend you pick up the current Atlantic Monthly and read James Fallows' article which posits that chances of a teror attack in the US have indeed decreased, and if it weren't for the idiot war in Iraq would've decreased even more. It's based on extensive reporting on experts in the field, not just his say so.