Fearful skies?

Bush’s campaign of fear in the skies has utterly failed. I can tell you this because I’ve just travelled the length of our great land on six different planes and through five different international airports and the trip was relatively quick and painless. Unless you want to talk about the sleep deprivation!

My wife and I took a well deserved vacation and flew to Hilton Head, South Carolina, all the way from California, right after a foiled bomb plot and just as some unfortunate woman was creating a national incident.

Why Hilton Head? Well, as I recall it was Bill Clinton's favorite vacation spot when he was President so we knew that 'good times' were surely to be had there. Turns out that the area is one of the nicest I have ever been to. Hands down better than Carmel or Monterey. I was impressed. We loved it.

Even though the airlines were supposedly on HIGH ALERT, one would hardly notice by the brisk way in which we passed through security. Yes, I had to take off my shoes. Yes, I had my laptop swabbed for explosives residue. Yes, my wife had to empty her bag onto a TSA counter to explain the summer sausage and the tube of chapstick. But it took no more than I ever remember it taking to fly on a plane before 9/11.

In fact, there were no jack-booted secret police waiting to take me away to a cold dark cell. Nor were there even menacing armed guards watching my every move. Why would there be, right? Well, that's what I'd like to ask liberal opinion columnists across the nation. Like this poor deluded soul:

Flash forward to today, to the America of George W. Bush. Fear is the coin of the realm. It’s the essence of his political currency. We may be the richest, most powerful nation in history, but you’d never know it. President Bush’s call to place 6000 National Guard troops on the Mexican border, his secret hijacking of the nation’s phone records, his warrantless spying on domestic phone and e-mail communications, his seemingly endless war in Iraq, and his threatened war with Iran all share a common denominator. And that denominator is fear. ~Bush's Fear Factor
If you listen to the left in this country in newspapers and on TV, Bush is a nascent proto-dictator bent on world dominion and derailing our slow migration to some communist promised land. Taint true, brother. Taint true.

In fact, the security measures may not be stringent enough by my estimation. Even after a foiled bomb plot and a deranged woman carrying banned items and muttering about Al Qaeda-- going through airport security still seemed to be a routine periphery event.

In short, there is no Bush campaign of fear. Only an effort by the left to create a fear of a Bush campaign of fear, which, in and of itself, is a perfect illustration of the hypocrisy of the tactics of the left these last few years.

Posted by Eric Simonson at August 24, 2006 9:30 PM
Comments
Comment #177315

I also generally have good experience when traveling, except that I get that more complete check very often. I don’t know why. They must be profiling me. It was kind of interesting last time I traveled. They had some kind of machine that sprayed air.

I also agree that this climate of fear idea is BS. I guess if people feel fearful in general, they probably feel fearful now. But I have noticed that a lot depends on people’s personalities, which remain remarkably stable under all sorts of conditions. Some people seem to be unhappy, fearful or nervous most of the time; other not.

Posted by: Jack at August 24, 2006 11:11 PM
Comment #177316

Eric-

I agree that we need MORE security. The TSA do their best, but they still don’t inspect that which comes in through the back doors. And I’m much more worried about the cargo hold or engines compartments than I am the cabin. Lets face it, the best security in the cabin are the passengers themselves. I doubt that people would allow a takeover these days knowing that doing nothing can lead them into a building.

But more and better security is needed all around. I’d gladly get practically strip searched in an airport if I knew that all aspects of security were being paid attention to. But what we have is simply half-assed. Instead we spent all our security money making Iraq the most dangerous nation on earth for an American. 300 billion dollars buys a whole lot of cargo inspectors, border patrol agants, air marshals, etc. There may even be enough left over for a tax break for middle class people who desperately need it.

But where does this idea come from that Bush is pro-security while the left is not? Aren’t the people on the left screaming about better, more carefully crafted, and necessary security? As opposed to wars based on faulty intel and half assed security measures which piss people off for no GOOD reason. Half assed security is not security. It is a joke…much like everything else this administration has done.

Posted by: Kevin23 at August 24, 2006 11:14 PM
Comment #177318

So much for the Republican strategy.

Posted by: Trent at August 24, 2006 11:46 PM
Comment #177322

I travel, out for 10 days back for 4. The only difference I noticed after the foiled plot in London is the TSA now has agents at the gate to randomly inspect carry on bags for liquids and gels. You can buy water after you pass security but you cant take it on the plane. Hopefully they come to their senses on that.
Of course who ever you qouted re” W’s fear factor probably thought the same as I do, cause (s)he didn’t mention anything about airport security.
(s)he did mention other reasons we all should be concerned about. If it was Clinton doing the same conservatives would be(and rightfully so).
Now that I think about it what a cheap shot tying your trip and airport security into the debacle in Iraq, and warrentless spying. How Bushesque!

Posted by: j2t2 at August 25, 2006 12:02 AM
Comment #177324

What happened to the great presidents who tried to reassure the American people in times of crisis instead of trying to scare the living bejesus out of them?

“The greatest thing we have to fear is fear itself.” ~FDR

Posted by: JayJay Snow at August 25, 2006 12:08 AM
Comment #177325

Is that fear like the ACLU claiming in their lawsuit on the NSA surveillance question, that some of their people were afraid to call them because they were afraid they were being tapped. What a crock.
On the other hand maybe we should put the ACLU under scrutiny. The left has continually and consistently peddled the fear factor. It will be a blessing to the American people when Hairy (sic) Reed (sic), Dicky Turbin (sic), Nancy Pillowsee (sic), Diane Badtankard, gee whiz there are going to be too many to list, but when the people see thru their illconceved ideas and send them into retirement at taxpayers expense. Of course I only named some Defeatocrats, but there are some Reps that also should fine a new career path. It is kinda fun watching some of those in public domain servanthood (did I really say it that way) shoot their mouths off and say nothing and the hot air expended contributing to global warming. Oh well, enough ranting for now.

Posted by: tomh at August 25, 2006 12:15 AM
Comment #177328

Eric, if going through airport security was such a breeze, and you’re so rested and refreshed after your vacation, why launch into yet another liberal slagfest upon your immediate return, hmmm? Honestly, I’m looking forward to the golden day when one of your articles actually omits the word “liberal.”

Just so Jack doesn’t think I’m unhappy, fearful or nervous all the time (and for Kevin, Trent, Jay Jay, and j2t2’s amusement!):
Check out Kirsten Powers and Michael Brown putting the smack-down on Hannity and Coultergeist over Republican notions of “homeland security.”
Now that really gave me a chuckle!

This is good too: Paul Hackett debating the “War on Terror” with Texas Republican candidate, Van Taylor on Hardball.
Hackett (and Matthews, for that matter,) shredded Taylor’s talking points so badly, I almost ended up feeling sorry for the guy! Yes, it was that embarrassing.

Posted by: Adrienne at August 25, 2006 12:33 AM
Comment #177329

I travel a lot, and there is no comparison. I get through airport security much, much faster post 9/11. This was true immediately after and now, and is partly because airport security is now privatized. However, I disagree this has any relation at all to the BS Bush has peddled to convince Americans to spend all their money on Iraq. Please, yes, spend more on airport security. Better yet, spend more on other commonsense security measures.

Posted by: Max at August 25, 2006 12:41 AM
Comment #177330

Fear to me is a government whose majority leaders would lead a cheer for their party like this one:

“Ladies and gentlemen, we just killed the patriot act!” Harry Reid

How very FDR of them, so JFK like, why, it’s the best Neville Chamberlain impersonation in nearly 70 years. Yikes!

That is frightening.

Posted by: JR at August 25, 2006 2:27 AM
Comment #177333

Eric,

You’ve taken your straw man technique to new extremes. That “campaign of fear” link says nothing about airport security. The paragraph you quote says nothing about airport security. Who on the left is complaining about Bush using airport security as a scare tactic?

Posted by: Woody Mena at August 25, 2006 4:18 AM
Comment #177335

I AM A OLD MAN:

I am writting about the woman [ I WOULD HAVE SAID LADY — BUT SHE WAS NO LADY ],who was the cause of the transatlantic flight being diverted to Boston because this woman URINATED ON THE CABIN FLOOR.

They should have spanked her butt, and locked her in the john untill they reached where they were going to.

If she is going to acted like a spoild child then she should be treated like one.

CHARLIE GEORGE

Posted by: CHARLIE GEORGE at August 25, 2006 6:52 AM
Comment #177346

Eric’s article is just another step in the denial campaign of the right.
They never claimed WMDs, and Al-Qaieda link to 911 and the GOP never used a claim of making America safer.
Now they have to be in denial of the fear mongering.
Like alcohol and drugs, denial and enablers are the mennace to clear thought and inner peace.
Eric may want to book his next vacation at Hazelden in Minnesota.

Posted by: Joe at August 25, 2006 10:21 AM
Comment #177347

The very fact that we’re being “puffed” by air and everything we own is pawed thru before boarding shows me we aren’t “safe” in the least…and since 90% of the cargo that’s on passenger flights isn’t checked, I KNOW we aren’t safe…and most of the cargo arriving in ourports from overseas isn’t checked either (only about 3%, if that)…

So, either there is a terror threat and our country’s administration doesn’t give a fig, considering how much cargo isn’t examined,

or,

there simply is an infinitesimally teensy tiny threat that’s not worth doing too much about

or,

there’s simply no threat at all…it’s just a method to keep the people “in line” (pun intended).

Posted by: Lynne at August 25, 2006 10:28 AM
Comment #177348

This article is disingenuous on many levels. The Bush administration never tried to stop us from traveling, shopping, engaging in business as usual. Who in the left claims it did? It never asked us for any sacrifice — in fact, going on vacations, buying new cars, etc., etc. was encouraged because it kept the economy going. Wave the flag, trust our leader, and go ahead and by that new home theater system — in fact, let’s cut taxes; nevermind that we’re spending hundreds of billions defending American from Iraq (*cough*). When have Americans been asked to sacrifice so little? (Besides the lives of our armed forces, that is?) Our children, what with these huge deficits increasing the national debt, have to sacrifice, but not us.

No, the fear card, the linking of Iraq with 9/11, the implication that if a Democrat wins office we’ll have another terrorist attack, has been used for mundane political purposes, as a cheap and cynical ploy to win votes and justifying violating the Constitution. Remember the Republican National Convention?

Essentially, this article provides anecdotal evidence that this administration is NOT doing enough to combat terrorism on our soil. That’s something Democrats have been pointing out for awhile.

Posted by: Trent at August 25, 2006 10:37 AM
Comment #177350

“In fact, the security measures may not be stringent enough by my estimation. Even after a foiled bomb plot and a deranged woman carrying banned items and muttering about Al Qaeda— going through airport security still seemed to be a routine periphery event.”

OK - so this SHOULD be scary to anyone. Our domestic security reacts to attacks rather than proactively secures. My dog behaves the same way when chasing rabbits. The rabbit runs in a circle (once) then runs away… the dog keeps tracking the scent in a circle and runs that circle for several times. When she looks up, the rabbit is gone. It works every time.

We need to look up and determine where the “rabbit” is heading next. We are not doing that. You can use fear as a leverage for your own gain or as motivation to find solutions.

Hijack a plane and fly it into a building - LOOK FOR BOX CUTTERS!

A guy tries to blow up a plane with his shoes - SCAN EVERYONE’S SHOES!

A terrorist cell tries to carry liquid explosives aboard a plane - BAN ALL LIQUIDS!

But we forget some of their tactics. Remember people blowing up commuter trains? I spend last week traveling all of DC on the subway with my family… carrying a fairly large backpack - and was never once screened or made to go through a metal detector. Anyone see an issue with that?

The one thing we’ve done is spy on American phone calls (illegally) and tracked international banking… If American mafia can predict and avoid these tactics… why do we think terrorist cells can not? I’m not saying get rid of them, but they need to be carried out through legal channels… and watched, as much for fine tuning/ effectiveness as for Constitutionality.

The only thing we have seriously acted on is our Southern border - and as of yet, I’ve not heard of any terror cells trying to enter from the south. The come in from Canada or enter through major airports legally through VISAs. Shouldn’t we consider adding man power to secure our ports & start at least considering possible attacks using chemical and power plants? One of McVie’s trucks blown up in a chemical plant (pesticide, etc.) located near a large city (Baton Rouge) and BAM! There’s goes a huge section of the city. Would probably make 9/11 look small.

This is a rational approach to terror/fear… find weak points and secure them. This has not been done. Bush has seen terror/fear as a leverage to push a political agenda, while doing very VERY little to actually make us more safe. His Administration has seemed to attack Democrats harder than the actual terrorists and seems to think that an American political party represent as much danger as the terrorists he has forgotten.

Ask yourself 2 questions: Who has Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, Mehlman & Snow demonized more? (Actual terrorists or American politicians?) Why?

Posted by: tony at August 25, 2006 10:54 AM
Comment #177352

Eric

Your joking, right? To say that Dems and Libs are the fearmongers, not Bush & Co.? That is absurd.

Adrienne

Thanks for the links, they illustrate well which political party is prone to delusion.

Posted by: mark at August 25, 2006 11:12 AM
Comment #177356

Bush, Homeland Security, and the TSA haven’t created a campaign of fear about flying so much as they have created a system of ineptitude. Not too long ago, a journalist from CNN (can’t remember which one) asked an executive from Israel’s El Al airlines why they have the best record on safety/anti-terrorism and America has the worst. The executive’s reply was that El Al looks for terrorists while America looks for nail clippers. Touché.

Posted by: Mister Magoo at August 25, 2006 11:28 AM
Comment #177364

All BOO! and no ghost.

Posted by: tony at August 25, 2006 11:56 AM
Comment #177368

When I wake up and turn on the news to see a heightened terror alert, I know exactly what’s going on: a new poll just came out with lower than expected approval ratings for the president.

Personally, I’m hoping for Level Red all the way through November. I’d feel much safer that way.

Posted by: Kevin23 at August 25, 2006 12:09 PM
Comment #177373

JR:
“Fear to me is a government whose majority leaders would lead a cheer for their party like this one:

“Ladies and gentlemen, we just killed the patriot act!” Harry Reid

How very FDR of them, so JFK like, why, it’s the best Neville Chamberlain impersonation in nearly 70 years. Yikes!

That is frightening.”

No, what is truly frightening is a party full of Republicans so taken in by simplistic talking points and jingoistic soundbites that they now automatically judge legislation by it’s title, rather than by it’s content.
The Patriot Act(s) contain many unconstitutional provisions, therefore, they are actually UN-PATRIOTIC — despite the heart-stirring but manipulative title that was given to them.
So, killing off the Patriot Act(s) as they now stand, and then re-working, listening to arguments from both sides of the aisle, and coming to a consensus on new legislation that will effectively deal with, and combat the threats of terrorism, while keeping true to America’s founding principles, is exactly what needs to be done.

PS to mark, glad you liked the videos! :^)

Posted by: Adrienne at August 25, 2006 12:38 PM
Comment #177379

Our unfriendly skies are largely a result of government corruption and incompetence. That is the real danger.

We have all the symptoms of a nation that is increasingly bankrupt, morally and fiscally.

For those who want a deeper understanding of the growing culture of corruption in government offices since 1950, of which today’s conduct in government offices and covert operations is simply an extension, just look at what your congress persons are doing (or not doing).

The fact is, our skys are not as safe as they should be.
There is little to prevent checked-in luggage from containing an explosive, since not all checked-in luggage is inspected. That explosive can be triggered by ground cellular, radio signal, or automatically via timer or altitude, etc.

There is reason for concern, but not the way it is currently being handled. Not by taking fingernail clippers away from passengers. No carry on luggages should be allowed and all checked luggage should be searched.

Of course 100% security is impossible, but common-sense measures and warnings are often ignored. Why? Why are airlines now OKing laptop computers?

Does it always require a disaster before the tombstone agencies take adequate measures?

Posted by: d.a.n at August 25, 2006 1:08 PM
Comment #177380

Here’s an apropos statement from Judge Taylors recent decision on the illegality of the TSP. With regards to Bushes politiks of fear while ignoring actual anti-terror tactics:

As Justice Warren wrote in U.S. v. Robel, 389 U.S. 258 (1967):
Implicit in the term ‘national defense’ is the notion of defending those values and ideas which set this Nation apart… . It would indeed be ironic if, in the name of national defense, we would sanction the subversion of … those liberties … which makes the defense of the Nation worthwhile.
Damn those liberal terrorist loving judges.


Posted by: Dave1 at August 25, 2006 1:10 PM
Comment #177382

Adrienne-

I finally got a chance to view those videos. I have to say that spoiled little Ann didn’t surprise me one bit when she threw her little tiffy fit. I was actually hoping for more out of that one, but it was fun to see her try to act the victim…especially since victims are her number one target.

The Hardball clip was terrific. I would vote for that Hacket guy in a second. Democrats need to be more like that. Stong sounding, sure of themselves, and ready to take a question head-on. Then the unthinkable happened: a TV host actually called a politician out for not answering the question or for giving a BS answer. Why has this not happened until now? Where was this verve 3-4 years ago? If Matthews could have had some sack earlier, we could have saved 3000 lives and over 300 billion dollars.

Then again, one need only look to the sole veto this president exercised to come to the stark realization that this administration cares nothing about saving lives. The only worry is mobilizing the political base.

Mr Magoo and DAN-

I’m not sure what you guys are talking about. I am in CONSTANT fear of fingernail clippers ever since 9/11.

By the way, my teeth don’t count as clippers, right? Seems to me they are functionally similar, and 100% of terrorists have them. Isn’t that a direct link?

Posted by: Kevin23 at August 25, 2006 1:27 PM
Comment #177386

Kevin23,
Huh? I’m saying focus is on the wrong things. The real danger is not from fingernail clippers. The real danger is from carry-on and checked-in luggage that may contain an explosive, since not all checked-in luggage is inspected. It is just a matter of time. The explosive can be triggered by an on-board or ground-based cellular, radio signal, or automatically via timer or altitude, etc. Also, the root of that danger is incompetent and corrupt government. Take the recently discovered plot in Britian. That method (using a combination of liquids) was know about since 1995. So, why was it ignored until now?

Posted by: d.a.n at August 25, 2006 1:50 PM
Comment #177402

Kevin 23
YOU ARE WRONG!! Not all terrorists have teeth. Dental hygene isn’t big outside the US. I have heard that even in Europe you can spot an American by their white teeth. Good point though.

Posted by: 037 at August 25, 2006 2:40 PM
Comment #177412

Eric-

You came to town and didn’t visit? That’s just not polite; cancel my membership in Illuminati.

I hope your “Renaissance” was a good one.

Posted by: George in SC at August 25, 2006 3:02 PM
Comment #177423

Kevin, I can’t help but laugh whenever Ann is faced with any kind of a debating situation — because “she’s” simply incapable of debate. Coulter only knows how to be talking-head spouting lies about “librullls” with no interruptions — by people who are only too delighted to give her that opportunity.

“I was actually hoping for more out of that one,”

Aw! I really enjoyed it’s liberal tag team mow-down aspect. And didn’t you love how Ann croaked: “— eh.. Bill Clinton!” at one point in that segment? S’funny!

“The Hardball clip was terrific. I would vote for that Hacket guy in a second. Democrats need to be more like that. Stong sounding, sure of themselves, and ready to take a question head-on.”

Definitely. That very attitude — confidence, intelligence, boldness and certainty in our beliefs and in our goals for the country is exactly what Democrats need to start showing America. The DLC hasn’t been fostering that kind of attitude, and that needs to change.

“Then the unthinkable happened: a TV host actually called a politician out for not answering the question or for giving a BS answer. Why has this not happened until now? Where was this verve 3-4 years ago? If Matthews could have had some sack earlier, we could have saved 3000 lives and over 300 billion dollars.”

Seriously. But the fact that somebody on TV finally did so actually made me euphoric while I was watching it! And that’s pretty sad — that it’s been so long since we’ve seen a media figure really trying do their job that it almost becomes an event when it occurs.

“Then again, one need only look to the sole veto this president exercised to come to the stark realization that this administration cares nothing about saving lives. The only worry is mobilizing the political base.”

I couldn’t agree more.

Posted by: Adrienne at August 25, 2006 3:36 PM
Comment #177428

Kevin, 037,

i have it on good authority that the next RED level alert will be against lefties. Anyone seen using their left hands to sign for their ticket will be denied boarding (unless they have a RNC membership card or their name ends in Laden)

Posted by: Dave1 at August 25, 2006 3:51 PM
Comment #177434

Thanks for the warning, Dave. As a left-handed liberal lady, that’s important intell! :^)

Posted by: Adrienne at August 25, 2006 3:59 PM
Comment #177437

Hey lets look at some more fun Ann Coulter crap.
Here she is on evolution in her new book about goddless liberals. Can you say brainless conservative?
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/08/ann_coulter_on_evolution_part_1/

http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/06/ann_coulter_no.html

And here is some nice input about Ann and her god

http://baltimorechronicle.com/2006/072806BECKENDORF.shtml

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-bibleconservative.htm

Posted by: 037 at August 25, 2006 4:16 PM
Comment #177446

jack,

I also generally have good experience when traveling, except that I get that more complete check very often. I don’t know why. They must be profiling me.

Maybe you fit the McVeigh profile. I have a feeling that it’s ok to profile non-arab or minority groups.

They did also go through my wife’s suitcase. TSA left a note in fact that said that her suitcase was randomly selected to be manually checked. I can’t seem to find it now, but I was going to save it.

Posted by: eric simonson at August 25, 2006 4:47 PM
Comment #177451

Eric - I just can’t reconcile the whole idea that everything in the wild-blue-yonder is really okay. Perhaps it is not a calculated fear tactic, but you have to understand that the media is not all aimed at those with higher reasoning ability. Hollywood comes out with “Snakes on a plane”. There is undeniable profiling done at the airport, (I have been randomly checked at every gate since 9/11 except once when my facial hair was shaved. How random is that?). And now we have to be cautious if a woman takes out a bottle of hand lotion?

Perhaps it is not causing outright fear, but you certainly can’t deny the fact that it creates the inability to relax.

Posted by: DOC at August 25, 2006 5:06 PM
Comment #177485

woody,

You’ve taken your straw man technique to new extremes. That “campaign of fear” link says nothing about airport security. The paragraph you quote says nothing about airport security. Who on the left is complaining about Bush using airport security as a scare tactic?

Sorry about that, I thought you’d probably recall numerous examples yourself, like these:

After five years, the only success that I can discern is the Bush Administration’s ability to frighten its own citizens into submission. Inflicting emotional distress is not a winning strategy, unless you are talking about elections. Nancy

The biggest threat to the American citizens is the pain and suffering caused by the increased security measures since yesterday. Just when we were able to get to some level of acceptance of the TSA screening, we are now hit with screenings that will double, triple, or quadruple the time it takes to get through the security line. ~Politics Of Fear And Airport Security

Of course, to be a straw man argument you must be saying that liberals must not have ever meant airport security or the Terror threat level for air travel promotes Bush’s ‘campaign of terror’.

Does the left ever include air travel or security in what they describe as “Bush’s culture of fear?” Surely not.

Fear at the airport

I am traveling to Chicago on Saturday with the kids. And I am dreading it, oh, how I am dreading it. I am not scared to travel. Are you? I hope not. It’s just what the Bush adminstriation wants. Make you as frightened as possible so they may take away any freedom you think you may have. We’ll see it at the aiport Saturday. The fear is spreading. No liquids! Trash bins are spilling over with bottles at airports all over the United States. That’s fear. ~portland.metblogs.com

No, never. The left would never say that something as necessary and common sense as airport screening is actually a political weapon designed to instill fear in the populace… would they?

The GOP Playbook: Fear-Mongering

In the wake of an unfolding terror plot and their own plummeting poll numbers, Republicans in Washington have once again dusted off their tired campaign playbook in a desperate attempt to stay alive politically. Party leaders and even White House officials have again begun engaging in fear-mongering to distract from their failed record and salvage their dwindling campaign prospects in November. ~democrats.org

I mean aren’t there any examples out there that I could have included?

If terrorism doesn’t scare you, maybe Bush will

Scared yet? Well, you may be soon.

What we almost certainly will see in aftermath of the alleged plot to blow up several planes en route to the U.S. is a thunderous response from President Bush and other Republican leaders.

With the midterm elections less than three months away, they will attempt to scare Americans into re-electing Republicans or risk facing instant annihilation at the hands of an evil and murderous enemy. chicagotribune.com

Then there’s this… which is almost classic.

A new wave of fearmongering ensued after British authorities announced the arrest on August 10, 2006, of “24 people in an alleged plot to blow up U.S.-bound planes.” Airport security screeners “scrambled to implement a new ban on all liquids and gels” passengers had in their carry-on luggage, “from lip gloss and toothpaste to perfume and tequila.” “Baby formula, prescription medication and essential nonprescription medication are still allowed.” [5] sourcewatch.org

Or there’s, “Bush Uses Terror Threat to Sell Surveillance Programs”

I could go on, but I’m pressed for time.

Posted by: eric simonson at August 25, 2006 7:48 PM
Comment #177500

DOC,

As much as I despise our 1984 way of life, TSA is slowly getting a clue. The best thing they can do for security is be unpredictable. A “professional” attack only takes place when the probability of success is high so being unable to predict securities next move is a deterent. I can only hope the stupid stuff we know about is political food for the sheep and not indicative of the real stuff.

As for profiling; they seem to have my name and or picture on file as the step to the side, open your bags, stand with arms and legs spread, is my way of life in the PVD-BWI corridor.

Adrienne,

Fun stuff. “Sean? I think I can leave now” made coffee come out my nose. Caused a bit of prairie dogging, but it was worth it to see Annhole have a clue for even just an instant.

Posted by: Dave1 at August 25, 2006 9:47 PM
Comment #177536

Dave, ouch! Glad you didn’t drown yourself.
Since Ann wants to personally kill all of us “librullls”, it’s best if we don’t give her any assistance. ;^)

Posted by: Adrienne at August 26, 2006 1:14 AM
Comment #177544

Eric

I have been in Europe all summer trying to get a sense of the political climate here and airline security is all over the map depending on the country, it seems.

Far and away, The Dutch are the best.

Every single international traveler gets a personal exit interview by security personnell…and it isn’t a surface interview,either.

The Germans also are efficient.

However,Italian security needs a lot of work…a lot of work.

The British are up against the wall…Heathrow is a downright scary place….profiling is almost impossible there and most travelers are non-English speakers or English speakers who would give American security personnel pause for further scrutiny.

By the way,while most in Europe are against the war in Iraq now,most folks are even more resentful to the Islamic way of thought than ever before,I think.

Generally,I heard many many times that the essence of Islamic thought lacks the concept of a soul now…something that I never heard before.

Tolerance is being replaced by instutional hatred and resentment all over the continent.

I have written a few pieces on what is happening here and will post them upon my return next week,however,the general sentiment is that the new left government of Prodi in Italy is a joke,and it’s economy is getting crushed as a result.

Interesting times indeed

Posted by: sicilian eagle at August 26, 2006 2:48 AM
Comment #177546

This is interesting— and related to the topic of this post.

HOUSTON - A stick of dynamite was found in a college student’s checked luggage on a Continental Airlines flight from Argentina, one of seven security incidents Friday that caused U.S. flights to be diverted, evacuated, searched or delayed.

Howard McFarland Fish, 21, was charged with carrying an explosive aboard an aircraft and was in the custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Federal authorities have determined that his actions were not acts of terrorism, ICE spokeswoman Luisa Deason said in a statement.

Houston Fire Department Assistant Chief Omero Longoria said Fish told authorities he works in mining and often handles explosives. Longoria said federal officials were investigating whether the explanation was true.
yahoo news

Posted by: eric simonson at August 26, 2006 3:17 AM
Comment #177693

I would like to see, just once, a post on this site containing real thought! I’d swear these are the same talking points echoed by the White House, Rush Limbaugh, and Annhole Coulter.

Help stop the terrorists - vote them out!

Posted by: ChristianLeft at August 27, 2006 2:26 AM
Post a comment