and they didn't elevate the terror alert? Well I guess there was no point in panicing people because everything was under control. You see we knew about the attempted attack and we were in complete control of events, so completely in fact that we aren't even sure why we're telling you about it now, except to prove to our critics that there really are terrorists in the world, and we know where they are and what they are doing at all times. We have complete control of the situation, but of course the situation could get out of control, and when it does we will elevate the terror alert, but events will never get out of control as long as we are in office. We may even consider a subterror alert, to alert you when we are going to raise the terror alert, but that would only happen if something we didn't know about was happening. Get it?

I love reading your long daily (approximately) posts over at Unclaimed Territory, but over here the style has been frequent and shorter posts. Is there any way you can emulate Tim while you're doing this guest gig?

This is a great summary.

Those who are trying to turn this incident into political gain should remember that the British police stopped the terrorists. There is no political gain to be had here. Terrorism still is a threat, the situation in Iraq is steadily worsening, and the conflict in Lebanon continues. Those who seek political gain on either side need to stop claiming that every incident supports their position and look very carefully at the entire situation. If we could bring peace to the Middle East, that would be cause to claim a political victory. Give the credit for stopping the bombing where it is due, the police not the politicians.

I particularlly hate when people believe that we started a war on terrorism after 9-11. Quite frankly we have been at "war" with terrorism since terrorism was invented. If this administration wasn't at war with terrorism before 9-11 then that was their problem and eventually harmed the country.

Clinton's team was sure working hard against terrorism and even warned these numbskulls about it. Of course their advice went unheaded because of the hubris and contrary nature of this administration. "We know everything" and "if Clinton did it it must be wrong" are the two guiding principles of this administration.

Next time someone says that is "pre 9-11 thinking" make sure they never make that mistake again. Tell them you've been against terrorism your whole life, and you're glad they joined the fight after 9-11 but you sure wish they had been against it before then. Kind of sad that more people haven't called these right-wingnuts on this.

It is particularly galling that Cheney today said something about how unfortunate it is that Lieberman (that great fighter of terrorism) should have been pushed out in the Democratic Primary. All too convenient. These plotters, discovered by the Brits, were probably planning for a 9/11 or October attack. So it sure is a good thing that Lieberman and Bush led us to invade Iraq, and supported Israel in invading Lebanon. We are winning the hearts and minds of the Muslim community all right!

As a famous German once said:

"...the common people don't want war. [But] the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and [for] exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country"

It was guy named Goering, Herman Goering. He apparently knew what he was talking about. He founded the Gestapo.

Rob

The threat was announced against intercontinental -- not transcontinental -- flights.

1) Drudgereport.com reports that the arrested people are of Pakistani descent. But we're spending hundreds of billions on Iraq and Afghanistan, and picking a fight with Syria and Iran. How strange.

2) Bush now is using the nonsensical term "islamic fascists" in his speeches. I think it's a sign of desperation.

I think the Dems should totally politicize this -- it's so easy to turn it against Bush.

It is absolutely ridiculous, infuriating and disgusting that a Hispanic grandmother in Miami on her way to Houston has to empty out her suitcase and be subjected to this nonsense. Or a black businessman in Denver. Or a white bricklayer in London. How about targeting people who have more than a .0005% percent of being a terrorist and leaving everyone else alone?

I really don't think most people pay attention to the whittling away of our constitutional rights. They seem so abstract... unless something is happening to you. People do pay attention, though, to being inconvenienced themselves while traveling, and when hearing other travelers' tales of woe. Perhaps those inconveniences (are meant to) have the effect of making the public say, "Okay, go ahead, and do whatever you have to do to catch these guys?"

For the forseeable future, a lot of anxious people will be traveling without the few comforts that were still left to us, e.g., a carry-on bag with a change of clothes & immediate necessities, including whatever solutions are needed for contact lenses, for example, and maybe the books and knitting that many find relaxing (we don't really know yet). Barefeet on dirty concrete airport floors. Groping body searches. (Maybe women should just consider traveling braless?) Bags that now MUST be checked, AND left unlocked, and that may or may not arrive when we do, given the massive delays. Who knows if the contents will be intact? The reasons why I usually travel carry-on.

What will we still be allowed? Our travel papers (must have that photo ID!) and any medications. Oh, and breast milk or formula for babies (which must be tasted during security check!). No water, or any other liquids.

Sounds like a possible silent public health crisis in the making to me. A lot of possibly dehydrated people, exhausted from standing in security lines for hours, on perhaps more medications than they were already taking, just so they don't have a meltdown.

Ironically, travel used to be one of the privileges of the haves, and the burden of the have-nots who were seeking a future, before it became something the rest of us did, too. Now, travel is just one more area in which the Bush Administration has led the way in further widening the gap between us and them-- by wiping out the middle ground. At least as far as our experience of travelling goes...

I can't help but notice that if/when plots/terrorists are discovered, it happens either before they are even in the airport (from intelligence), or after they have boarded and are ready to take action (oops! too late). Are there ever any terrorists who are actually discovered during the Security Check? Just wondering...

(I'm getting ready to take a work-related trip overseas in less than two weeks... can you tell how much I'm looking forward to it? No lenses, only one prescription, but definite dietary intolerances, for which I've always carried my own food.)