PDA

View Full Version : Terrorists attempt to blow up a plane headed for Detroit


Preacher
12-25-2009, 09:03 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,581153,00.html

Print (http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,581153,00.html)
ShareThis (javascript:void(0))

http://www.foxnews.com/images/592853/8_61_Airline253_320.jpg (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,581153,00.html#) AP

Northwest Flight 253

A male passenger on an international flight bound for Detroit Friday tried to blow up the plane with an explosive device in an incident that the White House is labeling an attempted act of terrorism.
Several people were hurt on the plane, which had Delta markings, but was listed as Northwest Flight 253. One person, possibly the suspect, was admitted to the University of Michigan Medical Center at Ann Arbor, hospital spokeswoman Tracy Justice said.
The suspect, who ABC reported suffered second-degree burns, told federal investigators he was connected to Al Qaeda, though authorities are questioning the veracity of that statement, Fox News confirmed. A federal situational awareness bulletin noted that the explosive was acquired in Yemen with instructions as to when it should be used, ABC said.
Rep. Peter King (R-NY) identified the suspect as 23-year-old Abdul Mudallah of Nigeria, and King said Mudallah "definitely has connections" to Al Qaeda.
King said Mudallah was not on any terrorism watchlist.
"This could have been catastrophic," said King, speaking to "FOX Report" Friday night. "We were lucky on this one." White House officials confirmed Friday that the attack was an attempted act of terrorism.
"He appears to have had some kind of incendiary device he tried to ignite," said one of the U.S. officials.
Authorities initially believed the passenger had set off firecrackers that caused some minor injuries. The suspect reportedly suffered second-degree burns in the failed attempt to ignite the device.
Delta Air Lines spokeswoman Susan Elliott said the passenger was subdued immediately. She had no details on the injuries. Delta and Northwest have merged.
An FBI spokeswoman in Detroit said the incident is being investigated. It came just as the flight, an Airbus 330 carrying 278 passengers, was arriving in Detroit from Amsterdam.
Passenger Syed Jafri, a U.S. citizen who had flown from the United Arab Emirates, said the incident occurred during the plane's descent. Jafri said he was seated three rows behind the passenger and said he saw a glow, and noticed a smoke smell. Then, he said, "a young man behind me jumped on him."
"Next thing you know, there was a lot of panic," he said.
Rich Griffith, a passenger from Pontiac, said he was seated too far in the back to see what had happened. But he said he didn't mind being detained on the plane for several hours. "It's frustrating if you don't want to keep your country safe," he said. "We can't have what's going on everywhere else happening here."
President Barack Obama was notified of the incident and discussed it with security officials, the White House said. It said he is monitoring the situation and receiving regular updates from his vacation spot in Hawaii.
J.P. Karas, 55, of Wyandotte, Mich., said he was driving down a road near the airport and saw a Delta jet at the end of the runway, surrounded by police cars, an ambulance, a bus and some TV trucks.
"I don't ever recall seeing a plane on that runway ever before and I pass by there frequently," he said.
Karas said it was difficult to tell what was going on, but it looked like the front wheel was off the runway.
The Homeland Security Department said passengers may see additional screening measures on domestic and international flights because of the incident.
"We encourage those with future travel plans to stay in touch with their airline and to visit www.tsa.gov for updates," the department said.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has been briefed on the incident and is closely monitoring the situation.
The department encouraged travelers to be observant and aware of their surroundings and report any suspicious behavior to law enforcement officials.

Fire Haley
12-25-2009, 09:20 PM
Hang him Barack - you know you want to.

MACH1
12-25-2009, 09:53 PM
Hang him Barack - you know you want to.

:rofl: Yeah right.

At least the "suspect" will have FREE health care to look forward to. :coffee:

Preacher
12-25-2009, 10:14 PM
guys....

this is a terrorist attempt against our nation, can we keep the politics out for a while.

I Obama does something stupid..ok let talk. But til then, this is a torrorist issue against the UNITED states.

MasterOfPuppets
12-25-2009, 10:15 PM
keep lettin em in the country ....:coffee:

HometownGal
12-25-2009, 10:48 PM
keep lettin em in the country ....:coffee:

My sentiments exactly. :mad:

Should have made him eat a live firecracker on the way to the hospital and then we taxpayers wouldn't be stuck with footing his medicals bills.

GoSlash27
12-26-2009, 01:42 AM
guys....

this is a terrorist attempt against our nation, can we keep the politics out for a while.

I Obama does something stupid..ok let talk. But til then, this is a torrorist issue against the UNITED states.

Werd.

Galax Steeler
12-26-2009, 07:56 AM
Seems like we got lucky on this one. It goes to show you that our security let another one through the gates.

Fire Haley
12-26-2009, 09:15 AM
The suspect, identified by a U.S. government official as 23-year-old Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab


Just another London student, who happens to be a Muslim terrorist - so why are they afraid to call him a Muslim terrorist?


Passengers Help Foil Attempted Terror Plot

An attempted terrorist attack on a Christmas Day flight began with a pop and a puff of smoke - sending passengers scrambling to subdue a Nigerian man who claimed to be acting on orders from al Qaeda to blow up the airliner, officials and travelers said.


A high-ranking law enforcement official told CBS News that the suspect apparently used a syringe to inject a chemical into powder located near his groin, a technique not seen in previous attempted attacks. It's possible, the source said, that this incident was a test of whether the materials could pass screening and how effective they might be at causing damage.

The White House said it believed it was an attempted act of terrorism and stricter security measures were quickly imposed on airline travel. The incident was reminiscent of Richard Reid, who tried to destroy a trans-Atlantic flight in 2001 with explosives hidden in his shoes, but was subdued by other passengers.

One law enforcement official said the man claimed to have been instructed by al Qaeda to detonate the plane over U.S. soil, but other law enforcement officials cautioned that such claims could not be verified immediately, and said the man may have been acting independently — inspired but not specifically trained or ordered by terror groups.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/12/26/national/main6023725.shtml

GoSlash27
12-26-2009, 09:23 AM
One law enforcement official said the man claimed to have been instructed by al Qaeda to detonate the plane over U.S. soil, but other law enforcement officials cautioned that such claims could not be verified immediately, and said the man may have been acting independently — inspired but not specifically trained or ordered by terror groups.

One of these days they're gonna figure out that this is the true face of terrorism.

Fire Haley
12-26-2009, 09:50 AM
I say Obama should bomb Nigeria - just to be sure.

Leftoverhard
12-26-2009, 08:12 PM
Seems like we got lucky on this one. It goes to show you that our security let another one through the gates.

Read much? That wasn't "our" security - he came from Nigeria via Amsterdam...

Hammer Of The GODS
12-26-2009, 09:35 PM
Read much? That wasn't "our" security - he came from Nigeria via Amsterdam...

Sorry, this incident falls DIRECTLY at the feet of our security!

I don't care where the plane is coming from, it is up to OUR security to ensure that NOTHING gets into this country!

It's coming boys and girls. We are on borrowed time. There will be another attack here in the US. Our crack security measures(paid for by our taxes) will see to that.

How many times will this government hit the snooze button before it wakes up? The way they are handling things now they will snooze us right into oblivion!




.

Galax Steeler
12-27-2009, 07:29 AM
Sorry, this incident falls DIRECTLY at the feet of our security!

I don't care where the plane is coming from, it is up to OUR security to ensure that NOTHING gets into this country!

It's coming boys and girls. We are on borrowed time. There will be another attack here in the US. Our crack security measures(paid for by our taxes) will see to that.

How many times will this government hit the snooze button before it wakes up? The way they are handling things now they will snooze us right into oblivion!




.

That is what I am saying it is on our security to keep them out of this country and they didn't do it.

SteelerEmpire
12-27-2009, 08:07 AM
Yet another knuckle-head tries to strike again ... it would be a next "logical" step for the terrorist groups to recruit outside of the normal profile of a middle-eastern terrorist...

HometownGal
12-27-2009, 08:31 AM
I say Obama should bomb Nigeria - just to be sure.

Nah - he'd rather spend our money on lavish vacations and sunbathing on the beaches in Hawaii.

Fire Haley
12-27-2009, 10:05 AM
"What? me worry?"

http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/766/slide_766_14286_large.jpg

revefsreleets
12-29-2009, 09:15 AM
You know, we've talked about this subject before. Our security is a complete joke. We look for the wrong things. We use the WORST possible medium (airports), all the way at the end of the "people funnel" to cast our nets for these guys. We waste energy, resources, time and money by the billions. We are COMPLETELY REactionary. And the worst part is, this guy completely succeeded even though he DID NOT actually blow up the plane. The government will step in and save us by adding even more superfluous and reactionary security elements still looking for things that already occurred (and almost certainly won't be tried again) instead of forward looking truly preventive methods. Also, we need to focus on HUMINT closer to the source.

The terrorists have got to just be laughing at us now...one single dude, completely low-tech, and a FAILURE to boot, and look at the havoc this one numbskull wreaked. Paralyzing a whole nation of paranoid people into idiotic confusion based on irrational fear....

http://www.ohio.com/news/nation/80251502.html

Confusion fills skies after failed attack

Captains left to choose restrictions. Reading, lavatory use banned

By Michael Tarm
Associated Press

Published on Tuesday, Dec 29, 2009

CHICAGO: You are now free to move about the cabin. Or not.

After a two-day security clampdown prompted by a thwarted attempt to bomb a jetliner, some airline officials told the Associated Press that the in-flight restrictions had been eased. And it was now up to captains on each flight to decide whether passengers can have blankets and other items on their laps or can move around during the final phase of flight.

Confused? So were scores of passengers who flew Monday on one of the busiest travel days of the year. On some flights, passengers were told to keep their hands visible and not to listen to iPods. Even babies were frisked. But on other planes, security appeared no tighter than usual.

The Transportation Security Administration did little to explain the rules. And that inconsistency might well have been deliberate: What's confusing to passengers is also confusing to potential terrorists.

''It keeps them guessing,'' transportation expert Joseph Schwieterman said.

By not making public a point-by-point list of new security rules, federal officials also retain more flexibility, the DePaul University professor added, enabling them to target responses to certain airports or flights seen as more vulnerable.

''There was criticism after 9/11 that rules could be way too cookbook — not allowing authorities to adapt them to different settings, to different airports,'' Schwieterman said.

If the objective was to befuddle, then on Monday it was mission accomplished.

On one Air Canada flight from Toronto to New York's LaGuardia Airport, crew members told passengers before departure that they were not allowed to use any electronic devices — even iPods — and would not be able to access their personal belongings during the one-hour flight.

An hour before a US Air flight from Manchester, England, to Philadelphia landed, flight attendants removed passengers' blankets and told them to keep their ''hands visible,'' said passenger Walt Swanson of Cumbria, England.

Even bathroom visits were affected on some flights.

On Continental Flight 1788 from Cancun, Mexico, to Newark, three airport security agents frisked everyone at the gate, including babies, prompting one to scream loudly in protest. On the plane, crew announced that the toilets would be shut down the last hour of the flight and passengers would not be able eat, drink, or use electronic devices.

The warning that the bathrooms would be shut down led to lines 10 people deep at each lavatory. A demand by one attendant that no one could read anything elicited gasps of disbelief and howls of laughter.

One of the Transportation Security Administration restrictions that most annoyed the airlines was an order to shut off in-flight entertainment systems on international flights. Airlines objected, and on Sunday night, the TSA apparently relented and left it to the discretion of airline crews to decide whether to turn off the systems.

Canadian officials Monday banned most carry-on luggage for U.S.-bound passengers. Only medical devices, small purses, cameras, laptop computers, canes, walkers, diaper bags, musical instruments and bags containing ''life-sustaining items '' are allowed.

CHICAGO: You are now free to move about the cabin. Or not.

After a two-day security clampdown prompted by a thwarted attempt to bomb a jetliner, some airline officials told the Associated Press that the in-flight restrictions had been eased. And it was now up to captains on each flight to decide whether passengers can have blankets and other items on their laps or can move around during the final phase of flight.

Confused? So were scores of passengers who flew Monday on one of the busiest travel days of the year. On some flights, passengers were told to keep their hands visible and not to listen to iPods. Even babies were frisked. But on other planes, security appeared no tighter than usual.

The Transportation Security Administration did little to explain the rules. And that inconsistency might well have been deliberate: What's confusing to passengers is also confusing to potential terrorists.

''It keeps them guessing,'' transportation expert Joseph Schwieterman said.

By not making public a point-by-point list of new security rules, federal officials also retain more flexibility, the DePaul University professor added, enabling them to target responses to certain airports or flights seen as more vulnerable.

''There was criticism after 9/11 that rules could be way too cookbook — not allowing authorities to adapt them to different settings, to different airports,'' Schwieterman said.

If the objective was to befuddle, then on Monday it was mission accomplished.

On one Air Canada flight from Toronto to New York's LaGuardia Airport, crew members told passengers before departure that they were not allowed to use any electronic devices — even iPods — and would not be able to access their personal belongings during the one-hour flight.

An hour before a US Air flight from Manchester, England, to Philadelphia landed, flight attendants removed passengers' blankets and told them to keep their ''hands visible,'' said passenger Walt Swanson of Cumbria, England.

Even bathroom visits were affected on some flights.

On Continental Flight 1788 from Cancun, Mexico, to Newark, three airport security agents frisked everyone at the gate, including babies, prompting one to scream loudly in protest. On the plane, crew announced that the toilets would be shut down the last hour of the flight and passengers would not be able eat, drink, or use electronic devices.

The warning that the bathrooms would be shut down led to lines 10 people deep at each lavatory. A demand by one attendant that no one could read anything elicited gasps of disbelief and howls of laughter.

One of the Transportation Security Administration restrictions that most annoyed the airlines was an order to shut off in-flight entertainment systems on international flights. Airlines objected, and on Sunday night, the TSA apparently relented and left it to the discretion of airline crews to decide whether to turn off the systems.

Canadian officials Monday banned most carry-on luggage for U.S.-bound passengers. Only medical devices, small purses, cameras, laptop computers, canes, walkers, diaper bags, musical instruments and bags containing ''life-sustaining items '' are allowed.

Fire Haley
12-29-2009, 04:08 PM
Wait till that warmonger Obama invades Yeman - he'll need to reinstate The Draft to do that though, 18-35 y/o's - better get your boots polished.

revefsreleets
12-30-2009, 09:54 AM
Obama is on the case....everything will be fine, since this breach of security is CLEARLY all Bush's fault....

Doesn't "The system is working" seem oddly like "You're doing a heckuva job, Brownie!"?

MACH1
12-30-2009, 11:08 AM
Obama is on the case....everything will be fine, since this breach of security is CLEARLY all Bush's fault....

Doesn't "The system is working" seem oddly like "You're doing a heckuva job, Brownie!"?

Only because he was able to finally get off the golf course.

Dino 6 Rings
12-30-2009, 11:13 AM
I didn't think we could call these people Terrorists any more? Thought they were just confused kids that are being brainwashed?

He's a criminal, right? I mean, calling him a terrorist is so 2008.

beSteelmyheart
12-30-2009, 07:22 PM
"It keeps them guessing" ...
Oooo, I bet those terrorists are shaking in their boots, now!! :mad:
Can we read a book? Can we take a dump? Do we have to keep our hands in sight at all times?
Christ, it sounds like a combination of being in detention hall & a nervous mother trying to keep her young son from masturbating at night, now that's sure to be a real deterrent!
Now if a decent American citizen had to take a dump & they wouldn't let him use the john, would he be arrested for terrorist activities if he pooped his pants? It wouldn't surprise me.

Preacher
12-30-2009, 11:22 PM
"It keeps them guessing" ...
Oooo, I bet those terrorists are shaking in their boots, now!! :mad:
Can we read a book? Can we take a dump? Do we have to keep our hands in sight at all times?
Christ, it sounds like a combination of being in detention hall & a nervous mother trying to keep her young son from masturbating at night, now that's sure to be a real deterrent!
Now if a decent American citizen had to take a dump & they wouldn't let him use the john, would he be arrested for terrorist activities if he pooped his pants? It wouldn't surprise me.


I don't know... the logic makes sense to me.

By producing an established set of rules of what can and can not be done, it is very easy to then find workarounds to bring down a plane.

However, when things which are allowed on one plane are disallowed on another plane, it makes it much more difficult. Hide a bomb in a book? Maybe, just depending on whether you are allowed to get it or not. In your underwear? Maybe, if you are allowed to use the bathrooms. No blankets? Can't go grabbing for it without drawing attention.

Does it seem silly? Yep. But put yourself in the place of someone trying to bring down a plane. Exactly how much harder does it make it for them, when they don't have a certain set of rules they can follow anymore?

BTW, years ago I worked Airport security for a summer. it was a complete joke. Truth of the matter is, from what I see now, it probably still is. There were a NUMBER of ways to get something on a plane, including a gun hidden on the person.

Nothing that I have seen changes that now.

VegasStlrFan
12-30-2009, 11:46 PM
Time to embrace profiling. If you match a high risk profile, you better get to the airport earlier, its gonna take some time to get on the plane. Get over it!

tony hipchest
12-30-2009, 11:49 PM
has anyone heard about that polish terrorisist who tried to blow up a tour bus?


























....he burnt his lips on the tail pipe.

*rimshot*

Vincent
12-31-2009, 06:23 AM
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyharnden/100020934/barack-obama-gets-an-f-for-protecting-americans/
Barack Obama gets an 'F' for protecting Americans

There is no more solemn duty for an American commander-in-chief than the marshalling of “every element of our national power” – the phrase Obama himself used on Monday – to protect the people of the United States. In that key respect, Obama failed on Christmas Day, just as President George W. Bush failed on September 11th (though he succeeded in the seven years after that).

Yes, the buck stops in the Oval Office. Obama may have rather smugly given himself a “B+” for his 2009 performance but he gets an F for the events that led to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab boarding a Detroit-bound plane in Amsterdam with a PETN bomb sewn into his underpants. He said today that a “systemic failure has occurred”. Well, he’s in charge of that system.

The picture we’re getting is more and more alarming by the hour. Here are some key elements to consider:

1. Abdulmutallab’s father spoke several times to the US Embassy in Abuja, Nigeria and visited a CIA officer there to tell him, apparently, that he feared his son was a jihadist being trained in Yemen. According to CNN, the CIA officer wrote up a report, which then sat in the CIA headquarters at Langley for several weeks without being disseminated to the rest of the intelligence community. This was not just a casual encounter. Again according to CNN, there were at least two face-to-face meetings, telephone calls and written correspondence with the father. If it’s true that the CIA sat on this then it beggars belief.

2. After 9/11, the huge bureaucracies of the Homeland Security Department and the Directorate of National Intelligence (DNI) were created. Inside the DNI, the National Counter Terrorism Center was created. These organisations were created to “connect the dots”. It may well be that the fault lay with NCTC and not the CIA – CIA spokesman George Little says here that “key biographical information” and information about “possible extremist connections in Yemen” was passed to NCTC. If NCTC knew about it, then did someone at the National Security Council within the White House? There’s a huge blame game beginning so we’ll no doubt know soon enough.

3. It wasn’t just the meeting with the father. According to CBS, “as early as August of 2009 the Central Intelligence Agency was picking up information on a person of interest dubbed ‘The Nigerian’ suspected of meeting with ‘terrorist elements’ in Yemen”. So there were other parts of the jigsaw that were not put together.

4. In his studied desire to be the unBush by responding coolly to events like this, Obama is dangerously close to failing as a leader. Yes, it is good not to shoot from the hip and make broad assertions without the facts. But Obama took three days before speaking to the American people, emerging on Monday in between golf and tennis games in Hawaii to deliver a rather tepid address that significantly underplayed what happened. He described Abdulmutallab as an “isolated extremist” who “allegedly tried to ignite an explosive device on his body” – phrases that indicate a legalistic, downplaying approach that alarms rather than reassures. Today’s words showed a lot more fire and desire to get on top of things – we’ll see whether Obama follows through with action. In the meantime, he went snorkelling.

5. There has been a pattern developing with the Obama administration trying to minimise terrorist attacks. We saw it with Abdul Hakim Mujahid Muhammad, a Muslim convert who murdered a US Army recruit in Little Rock, Arkansas in June. We saw it with Major Nidal Malik Hassan, a Muslim with Palestinian roots who slaughtered 13 at Fort Hood, Texas last month. In both cases, there were Yemen connections. Obama began to take the same approach with Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. We’ll see whether this incident shakes him out of that complacency. Whether it’s called the war on terror or not, it’s clear that the US is at war against al-Qaeda and radical Islamists.

6. Guantanamo Bay. It seems that two of the Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) planners behind this attack were released from Guantanamo Bay during the Bush administration. That calls into question the competence of Bush administration officials but also the wisdom of closing Guantanamo Bay. How many other enemies of America and the West are going to be released back to the battlefield? As Mike Goldfarb asks: “Is the Obama administration seriously still considering sending some 90 Yemeni detainees now being held at Gitmo back to their country of origin, where al Qaeda are apparently running around with impunity?”

7. Janet Napolitano, Obama’s Homeland Security Chief, has been a disaster in this, exhibiting the kind of bureaucratic complacency that makes ordinary citizens want to go postal. On Sunday, she told CNN that “one thing I’d like to point out is that the system worked” and ABC News that “once the incident occurred, the system worked”. A day later, she grumbled that quoted “out of context” before reversing herself, telling NBC: “Our system did not work in this instance. No one is happy or satisfied with that. An extensive review is under way.” The “system worked” comment was a “heckuva job, Brownie” moment. Is she up to the job?

8. Will Obama hold individuals accountable? Briefing the press today behind a cloak of anonymity as a “Senior Administration Official”, Denis McDonough, NSC chief of staff (he gave the game away by saying he was from Minnesota), said that Obama “intends to demand accountability at the highest levels” before adding: ” It remains to be seen what that means exactly.” If heads don’t roll – and soon – then Obama’s words will seem hollow. It’s an opportunity for him to show some real steel.

9. There’s a continued, unfortunate tendency for everyone in Obamaland to preface every comment about something going wrong with a sideswipe against the Bush administration. On Sunday, Bill Burton, Deputy White House Press Secretary, briefed: “On the Sunday shows, Robert Gibbs and Secretary Napolitano made clear that we are pressing ahead with securing our nation against threats and our aggressive posture in the war with al Qaeda. We are winding down a war in Iraq that took our eye off of the terrorists that attacked us, and have dramatically increased our resources in Afghanistan and Pakistan where those terrorists are.” Why pat yourself on the back for “winding down a war in Iraq that took our eye off of the terrorists that attacked us” when the issue at hand is why the US government under Obama, er, took its eyes off a terrorist who did try to attack us and nearly killed 300 people? It’s bordering on the juvenile. Obama’s been president for a year now. It’s time for him to accept that things that happen as his responsibility, not Bush’s. It’s time for him to echo Ronald Reagan, who said over Iran-Contra: “I take full responsibility for my own actions and for those of my administration.”

10. Will there be US air attacks against targets in Yemen? Watch this space. It’s safe to say that Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula or AQAP, described to me by a senior intelligence official today as “officially recognised and in corporate terms a sanctioned franchise of al-Qaeda” that is plainly now seeking to become an international rather than just a regional Islamist player.

revefsreleets
12-31-2009, 02:28 PM
Even Maureen freaking Dowd is piling on...and I can't say I disagree with most of what she says...

http://www.ohio.com/editorial/commentary/80399602.html

President without a pulse

By Maureen Dowd
New York Times

Published on Thursday, Dec 31, 2009

WASHINGTON: I was walking through a deserted downtown on Christmas Eve with a friend, past the lonely, gray Treasury Building, past the snowy White House with no president inside.

''I hope the terrorists don't think this is a good time to attack,'' I said, looking protectively at the White House, which always looks smaller and more vulnerable and beautiful than you expect, no matter how often you see it up close.

I thought our guard might be down because of the holiday; now I realize our guard is down every day.

One thrilling thing about moving from W. to Barack Obama was that Obama seemed like an avatar of modernity.

W., Dick Cheney and Rummy kept ceaselessly dragging us back into the past. America seemed to have lost her ingenuity, her quickness, her man-on-the-moon bravura, her Bugs Bunny panache.

Were we clever and inventive enough to protect ourselves from the new breed of Flintstones-hardy yet Facebook-savvy terrorists?

W.'s favorite word was ''resolute,'' but despite gazillions spent and Cheney's bluster, our efforts to shield ourselves seemed flaccid.

Obama's favorite word is ''unprecedented,'' as Carol Lee of Politico pointed out. Yet he often seems mired in the past as well, letting his hallmark legislation get loaded up with old-school bribes and pork; surrounding himself with Clintonites; continuing the Bushies' penchant for secrecy and expansive executive privilege; doubling down in Afghanistan while acting as though he's getting out; and failing to capitalize on snazzy new technology while agencies thumb through printouts and continue their old turf battles.

Even before a Nigerian with links to al-Qaida tried to blow up a Northwest Airlines jet headed to Detroit, travelers could see we had made no progress toward a technologically wondrous Philip K. Dick universe.

We seemed to still be behind the curve and reactive, patting down grannies and 5-year-olds, confiscating snow globes and lip glosses.

Instead of modernity, we have airports where security is so retro that taking away pillows and blankies and bathroom breaks counts as a great leap forward.

If we can't catch a Nigerian with a powerful explosive powder in his oddly feminine-looking underpants and a syringe full of acid, a man whose own father had alerted the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria, a traveler whose ticket was paid for in cash and who didn't check bags, whose visa renewal had been denied by the British, who had studied Arabic in al-Qaida sanctuary Yemen, whose name was on a counterterrorism watch list, who can we catch?

We are headed toward the moment when screeners will watch watch-listers sashay through while we have to come to the airport in hospital gowns, flapping open in the back.

In a rare bipartisan success, House members tried to prevent the Transportation Security Administration from implementing full-body imaging as a screening tool at airports.

Just because Republicans helped lead the ban on better technology and opposed airport security spending doesn't mean they'll stop Cheneying the Democrats for subverting national security.

Congressman Pete Hoekstra of Michigan was weaselly enough to whack the president and ''weak-kneed liberals'' in his gubernatorial fundraising letter.

Before he left for vacation, Obama tried to shed his Spock mien and juice up the empathy quotient on jobs. But in his usual inspiring/listless cycle, he once more appeared chilly in his response to the chilling episode on Flight 253, issuing bulletins through his press secretary and hitting the links. At least you have to seem concerned.

On Tuesday, Obama stepped up to the microphone to admit what Janet Napolitano (who learned nothing from an earlier Janet named Reno) had first tried to deny: that there had been ''a systemic failure'' and a ''catastrophic breach of security.''

But in a mystifying moment that was not technically or emotionally reassuring, there was no live video and it looked as though the Obama operation was flying by the seat of its pants.

Given that every utterance of the president is usually televised, it was a throwback to radio days — just at the moment we sought reassurance that our security has finally caught up to Total Recall.

All that TV viewers heard, broadcast from a Marine base in Kaneohe Bay, was the president's disembodied voice, talking about ''deficiencies.''

Citing the attempt of the Nigerian's father to warn U.S. authorities six months ago, the president intoned: ''It now appears that weeks ago this information was passed to a component of our intelligence community but was not effectively distributed so as to get the suspect's name on a no-fly list.''

In his detached way, Spock was letting us know that our besieged starship was not speeding into a safer new future, and that we still have to be scared.

Heck of a job, Barry.
Dowd is a New York Times columnist.

BrandonCarr39
01-01-2010, 03:37 AM
I don't watch tv much anymore(except for, of course, football games), so don't watch CNN or FOX, however, was at Taco Bell last night, and I overhead some guy say to someone that he heard on those news stations that WW3(i.e. an attack on Iran to start it off) could start in 2 months.

I've heard lots of rumors lately on an attack on Iran, which would set off this whole enchalada - even Bob Chapman(International Economic Forecaster who's track record is very accurate) says his sources say an attack on Iran is imminent within the next 6 months.

Anyhow - will what happened here lead to worse things in the future? I don't know. But 2010 will be very interesting.

steelwalls
01-01-2010, 04:08 AM
Our head of Homeland security needs to go. All those recources spent on investigating "dangerous" veterans has really paid off, has it not???

Her comments after the attempeted murder of allmost 300 people was enough to make me sick to my stomach. How on Gods green Earth could anyone even elude (much less come out and say) to the fact this situation was handeled correctly? I add this to the long list of huge F up's and total lack of brains this woman has displayed as the person 'keeping us safe'. If Janet Not-a-clue-o had any shread of dignity she would get the F out of the way.

Obama should sh!t can her azz, but wont.

AllD
01-01-2010, 08:30 AM
The flight to Detroit was intentional because it has the highest concentration of ex-Pat Muslims in the US.

The US is becoming more regionalized in different ways than red vs. blue states. Detroit is a perfect immigration point for muslims because of the established network and its cheap real estate. Eventually small businesses will put some kind of floor on the economy and home grown muslims will predominate.

Vincent
01-02-2010, 03:53 PM
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/krauthammer010110.php3

Jan. 1, 2010 / 15 Teves 5770
Obama's dangerous denial
By Charles Krauthammer

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Janet Napolitano — former Arizona governor, now overmatched secretary of homeland security — will forever be remembered for having said of the attempt to bring down an airliner over Detroit: "The system worked." The attacker's concerned father had warned U.S. authorities about his son's jihadist tendencies. The would-be bomber paid cash and checked no luggage on a transoceanic flight. He was nonetheless allowed to fly, and would have killed 288 people in the air alone, save for a faulty detonator and quick actions by a few passengers.

Heck of a job, Brownie.

The reason the country is uneasy about the Obama administration's response to this attack is a distinct sense of not just incompetence but incomprehension. From the very beginning, President Obama has relentlessly tried to play down and deny the nature of the terrorist threat we continue to face. Napolitano renames terrorism "man-caused disasters." Obama goes abroad and pledges to cleanse America of its post-9/11 counterterrorist sins. Hence, Guantanamo will close, CIA interrogators will face a special prosecutor, and Khalid Sheik Mohammed will bask in a civilian trial in New York — a trifecta of political correctness and image management.

And just to make sure even the dimmest understand, Obama banishes the term "war on terror." It's over — that is, if it ever existed.

Obama may have declared the war over. Unfortunately, al-Qaeda has not. Which gives new meaning to the term "asymmetric warfare."

And produces linguistic — and logical — oddities that littered Obama's public pronouncements following the Christmas Day attack. In his first statement, Obama referred to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab as "an isolated extremist." This is the same president who, after the Fort Hood, Tex., shooting, warned us "against jumping to conclusions" — code for daring to associate the mass murder there with Nidal Hasan's Islamist ideology. Yet, with Abdulmutallab, Obama jumped immediately to the conclusion, against all existing evidence, that the would-be bomber acted alone.

More jarring still were Obama's references to the terrorist as a "suspect" who "allegedly tried to ignite an explosive device." You can hear the echo of FDR: "Yesterday, December 7, 1941 — a date which will live in infamy — Japanese naval and air force suspects allegedly bombed Pearl Harbor."

Obama reassured the nation that this "suspect" had been charged. Reassurance? The president should be saying: We have captured an enemy combatant — an illegal combatant under the laws of war: no uniform, direct attack on civilians — and now to prevent future attacks, he is being interrogated regarding information he may have about al-Qaeda in Yemen.

Instead, Abdulmutallab is dispatched to some Detroit-area jail and immediately lawyered up. At which point — surprise! — he stops talking.

This absurdity renders hollow Obama's declaration that "we will not rest until we find all who were involved." Once we've given Abdulmutallab the right to remain silent, we have gratuitously forfeited our right to find out from him precisely who else was involved, namely those who trained, instructed, armed and sent him.

This is all quite mad even in Obama's terms. He sends 30,000 troops to fight terror overseas, yet if any terrorists come to attack us here, they are magically transformed from enemy into defendant.

The logic is perverse. If we find Abdulmutallab in an al-Qaeda training camp in Yemen, where he is merely preparing for a terror attack, we snuff him out with a Predator — no judge, no jury, no qualms. But if we catch him in the United States in the very act of mass murder, he instantly acquires protection not just from execution by drone but even from interrogation.

The president said that this incident highlights "the nature of those who threaten our homeland." But the president is constantly denying the nature of those who threaten our homeland. On Tuesday, he referred five times to Abdulmutallab (and his terrorist ilk) as "extremist[s]."

A man who shoots abortion doctors is an extremist. An eco-fanatic who torches logging sites is an extremist. Abdulmutallab is not one of these. He is a jihadist. And unlike the guys who shoot abortion doctors, jihadists have cells all over the world; they blow up trains in London, nightclubs in Bali and airplanes over Detroit (if they can); and are openly pledged to war on America.

Any government can through laxity let someone slip through the cracks. But a government that refuses to admit that we are at war, indeed, refuses even to name the enemy — jihadist is a word banished from the Obama lexicon — turns laxity into a governing philosophy.

Leftoverhard
01-03-2010, 06:19 PM
A man who shoots abortion doctors is a murderer.
An eco-fanatic who torches logging sites is an arsonist.


There, fixed that for you. Those guys are also terrorists. They all (including Abulmatallab) are part of groups, large or small, that want to cause terror in order to achieve a goal.

Vincent
01-05-2010, 05:50 PM
A man who shoots abortion doctors is a murderer.

If you want to go down that alley, is a man who shoots a murderer a murderer?

Vincent
01-06-2010, 07:02 AM
OK, first I must give credit where credit is due. The "president" has a firm grasp of the obvious. And it only took him a mere week and a half to come to grips with reality. Well done Barry!! Well done.

Yes, while most needed just nanoseconds to conclude that there had been a breach, well actually a series of breaches, and as the news emerged, why it happened, our "leader" didn't jump to a hasty conclusion that might have exacerbated the dilemma. We should be grateful for his steady hand. How am I doing GMB? I'm trying to do this, man! :rofl:

Is it appropriate for the "PotUS" to use such, um, colloquial language in public view? I'm, of course, thinking of the children here. I mean, what would happen if Little Johnny followed the "president's" "leadership" when say, presenting the 'rents with a disastrous report card and brushed it off as a "screw up"?

http://www.reuters.com/article/hotStocksNews/idUSN0511866320100105
Christmas incident was "screw up" - Obama said
Tue Jan 5, 2010 5:59pm EST
Related News

WASHINGTON, Jan 5 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama told his security chiefs on Tuesday that the botched Christmas Day plane bombing was the result of a screw up by U.S. intelligence and that the country had barely dodged disaster, according to a quotation released by the White House.

"This was a screw up that could have been disastrous," the president said during a meeting in the White House situation room, according to the White House media office. "We dodged a bullet but just barely. It was averted by brave individuals not because the system worked and that is not acceptable. While there will be a tendency for finger pointing, I will not tolerate it."

"I will not tolerate it." Quit it Barry, yer killing me!! :toofunny::sofunny::rofl:

Leftoverhard
01-06-2010, 12:52 PM
If you want to go down that alley, is a man who shoots a murderer a murderer?

Yeah, if that man fits this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder) description...:noidea:

Usually that's for a judge to decide. Although I have a feeling you are perfectly able to research things you're interested in all by yourself.