And look not one of these attacks was thwarted by a multi-billion dollar war effort…it was all law-enforcement!

I’m actually more afraid of our education system…

the reason there have been no attacks since 9/11 is because we are looking for them, like so many presidents had done before georgie. Yes, these people are supremely incompetent and just the smallest bit of vigilance goes a long way.

You’d almost think the terrorists want the Iraq War to continue for recruitment reasons.

Q. Who’d a thunk it?
A. Anyone paying an iota of attention.

They’re not interested in fighting terrorists, they’re either hoping it just kinda goes away on its own, or like Mary said, feel the threat sufficiently remote to themselves personally that they can feel free to marginalize others for taking the problem seriously.

I think Mary has got it right. I highly doubt I will be involved any form with a terrorist incident, therefore I dont “fear” the threat of terrorism, but the left likes to project this upon me because, I feel, thats how they look at the situation. If a terrorist incident happened in their neighborhoods, liberals would be screaming for us to open branch Gitmo’s and a telephone surveillance that actually does spy on Americans.

1. They don’t believe Islamic fundementalist terror is real, it is only something to scare people into supporting the “neo-con cabal”, therefore one has to claim they are fearless to be seperate from the “sheeple” that think terrorism is real

2. A lot of my friends lean left and also tend to be very self-centered. As long as it doesn’t happen to them, or someone they know, it is simply pictures on the TV. Nothing to fear from this performance art - it isn’t going to touch them so why think about it? The old “a liberal is a conservate that hasn’t been mugged yet.” theory.

Just make stuff up, huh? You just make stuff up. Facts? We don’t need no stinking facts - we have king george to ‘protect’ us. Shooter and the King - what a match up. Stop the lies and maybe the good Lord will forgive you for blindly following the current criminal assministration. What a tool! Praise god, not bush.

Every day I pray to George W. Bush, the one true God that he restores peoples reasoning.

So you are praying to the ‘one true God - george bush’? Are you serious? Really serious? Have you fallen so far that now bush is God? How are you going to explain that when end of days arrives? You so scared about brown furriners that you will swap out your God for bush? If what you are espousing is supported by the rest of the 27%’ers, then truly we are doomed. Truly doomed.

“(destroying habeas corpus, enabling torture, muzzling the press), your promotion of public hysteria may be purely cynical.”

Now who’s doing the fear mongering?

What is the purpose of our cynicism? If as you say, we are merely using the threat of terrorism solely for the growth of state power, Id just as soon vote Democrat and actually get more powerful and intrusive government.

Sure, Bush spends a lot of money, but Im not actually seeing any of this habeas corpus destroying, torture enabling, muzzling the press business you talking about. I feel cheated.

And don’t bother with logic, or reasoned argument; just scream “DUMMIES!” and try to intimidate all who disagree with you with insults and sarcasm.

It is, after all, what people like you have always done; “KING GEORGE! WE DON’T NEED NO STINKIN’ FACTS! WORSHIP G-D, NOT GEORGE BUSH! THERE IS NO LEFT! YOU’RE JUST BEING MEAN TO US!”

And so. You guys can’t even muster a reasoned argument anymore, can you?

Nyomy,

That’s a questionable claim.

I don’t see much difference between believing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will prevent domestic terrorism and believing that chucking a few virgins into a volcano every year to will prevent crop failure.

Oh, Im sure you’ve said the same thing on Huffington Post.

Putting that aside, maybe you could tell us why Neo is wrong.

Why do I always have to explain to people that 9/11 doesn’t matter?

If it mattered, the President of the US wouldn’t have underfunded the 911 Commission. He wouldn’t have stonewalled the 911 Commission. He wouldn’t have had Condi lie to the 911 Commission.

If it was really important, don’t you think the President would want to understand how it happened?

He don’t, and it don’t.

What else you got?

Honestly, what is there left for you people to understand about how it happened? Or are you a “truther”?

Have steps been taken to prevent this in the future?

Well, here’s your chance to denounce ideological vilification by the left on this post, as it looks as if Robert and Roderick are suggesting that the Bush administration had foreknowledge of 9/11 and are currently keeping us uninformed and continued danger of a repeat attempt.

Is that what your saying guys? Please feel free to explain, because right now Im assigning this allegation as a smokescreen to hide the fact that you guys were justifying the attack in the first place.

Try opening your eyes, bubblehead. Ever hear of the Military Commissions Act, you know, the law that explicitly stripped the right of habeas corpus from those locked up (”accused” would hardly be accurate, since that term at least implicitly suggests the existence of some kind of evidence) as “unlawful enemy combatants?” Can you possibly be unaware of the repeated assertions by the Imbecile-in-Chief about the legitimacy and lawfulness of the use of torture, as well, of course, the minor fact that they’ve actually been torturing prisoners by the hundreds? Have you missed the criminilization of the media’s reporting on various government leaks, except those, of course, that are part of the Republicans’ officially sanctioned propaganda campaign (Scooter Libby anyone?) Wake up!

That’s right, Lefties! Bush is evil, the right-wing is just scared, 3K of our fellow citizens weren’t murdered on 9/11 (or, if they were, it doesn’t really matter.)

Ahh, the stink of Republicanism at its most aromatic. Needless to say, no one on the left has said that 9/11 didn’t happen or that it didn’t matter. This is simply the kind of utterly typical statement by half-wits that were home schooled using materials from the Rush Limbaugh Academy. Yes, 3000 Americans were murdered. Now here’s a novel idea: the neocon filth should’ve actually gone after the people that murdered them instead of exploiting the incident as an excuse to start a war against a country that didn’t have a damn thing to do with it. You know what would be a good idea: If the Imbecile-in-Chief actually pays attention to the terrorist warnings this time instead of simply ignoring them, which is what allowed 9/11 to happen in the first place.

Ticking their toes till they talk isn’t torture, which is the corollary of what they were getting under Saddam and would still be getting today if the world had followed the advice of the anti-war movement. So no fako crocodile tears for humanity, please!

“it isn’t invasion if we call it liberation,”

It certainly isn’t a liberation to the religionist and nihilist destroy the areas around Baghdad is it?? However, it my be a liberation to the people who saw it for what it was.

“it isn’t corruption if the right people benefit from it.”

Our democratic allies would be the main beneficiary of liberation. An inference that was once our core principle, abandoned today for the cult of political correctness, derision, and the ill-conceived perspective of hating conservatism and the religion right just because hey have the courage to champion our core values on the question of Iraq — even though their heart is not in it; human liberation. The greatest pity of all is see seeing many of my former comrades whoring themselves to the most sadistic elements of international right wing etremism, because of petty, parochial hatreds?? What a pity!!!

That’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m saying 9/11 isn’t important. Where did I get such an idea? I was following my President’s lead. Why else wouldn’t the President want to know how it happened?

It’s because it’s not important.
Unless, of course, you think W is hiding something because he had something to do with it.

For me it’s the former.
Which is it for you?

By the love of our one true God, George W. Bush, {Tom ;)}, The Military Commissions act stripped no one of habeas corpus. “Unlawful enemy combatants” by definition, never had that right in the first place. The leftist definition of “torture” is generally somewhat at the level of college fraternity hazing, as well as the leftist definition of criminilization and muzzling. One would imagine the actual jailing and government persecution and prosecution of journalist in this country. Quite honestly, Im just not seeing any of that.

Robert, Im sorry but you still hadnt answered my question. Which is it for me? I think your just being ridiculous in order to give yourself another excuse not to care.

What’s your question?
Do I think Bush knew about it beforehand?
No.

Do I think it was justified?
No, I don’t agree with OBL’s preemptive strike anymore than I agree with W’s.

If those aren’t the questions, do me a favor. Ask me the question.

That’s funny coming from the Right. The Right needed a fainting couch because John Kerry made a joke last year they construed as an insult to our soldiers.
Yet they will protect us from terrorists.
Ha ha ha. Too funny.

C’mon Harry. Let’s see how well you handle waterboarding.

I was in Spain one year after the terrorist attack in Madrid. I expected to hear nothing else in the Spanish news, but to my surprise there was very little mention of terrorism at all. The Spaniards were back then talking about a big forest fire in the Galicia Region (North West Spain).

My point here is that Europeans don’t allow terrorist to dominate their lives the way we do. For good or bad terrorism in America has become big business. It is a business born of hype, hot air, sensationalism, empty patriotism, and political expediency.

A lot of misguided Americans that like to call themselves Neo-Conservatives, and Right WIng Conservatives buy into this theory that terrorism, in order to be confronted has to be hyped.

The fact is that nothing helps a terrorist more than hype. The true war on terrorist is in the shadows, it uses stealth, intelligence, immagination, deseption, and even torture and murder if necessary. There’s no Aircraft Carrier grandstanding, or infantile name calling to the detractors of Terrorist policies.

In Europe, and other countries of the world terrorism is viewd as an on going dirty war that every one knows has been with them before they were born, it will continue all trough teir lives, and will be here pn hearth way after we all die.

For you see, terrorism can’t be stopped any more than crime can’t be stopped, or war itself can’t be stopped. But just like crime, terrorism can be hyped by sertain political and economic interests into something is not. Europeans understood this a long time ago, and act accordingly, we in America don’t.

Getting back to here and now, these have to be some of the most pathetic terror attacks ever - difficult to distinguish from minor accidents. For goodness’ sake, a car is full of gas anyway; and gas cylinders too often enough. People drive cylinders of gas around all the time. Now and again - oh my god! - they probably carry boxes of nails, bolts, tools or whatever in the same vehicle. (Aiee!)

Oh boy, that certainly indicts the entire War on Terror.

http://snipr.com/1ns74

gil:
“The fact is that nothing helps a terrorist more than hype.”

I get it now. 3K people killed in now morning? Ho-hum, didnt happen to me.

The President of the United States ON September 11th, 2001 doesn’t care.
Why do you?

Oh boy, is it ever related. Its making her point perfectly.

Robert, it really isn’t that difficult to know “what happened” on 9-11, just read the 9-11 Commission Report, Nova, or Popular Mechanics. They’ve all done a pretty good job explaining “what happened”, and where “we failed”.
So why do you remain ignorant?
And many of our own soldiers, sailors, and airmen have “handled waterboarding” as part of their training. It’s called SERE (survival, evasion, resistance, escape). Didn’t you ever see G.I. Jane? Waterboarding, in fact, was developed to “simulate torture” rather than actually “be” torture. If you want me to be worried about it, you’ll actually have to come up with “real” torture we inflict (unscented deodorant and underinflated balls don’t count, either).
And Al Qaeda and Iraq have had ties long before we invaded. If you don’t believe Richard Clark, who will you believe? Besides, chanting screeds like “Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11″ is a lot like saying “Mussolini had nothing to do with Pearl Harbor”.
I’m not even going to the anti-semitic, Jewish plot PNAC crap. You lefties now turn to nazis for your hate Bush rhetoric, huh?
But, let’s see….Bush is “expanding State control”, “torturing”, “muzzling the press”, “creating terrorists”, etc. Gee. I guess I should be “afraid” of him. And you guys have the NERVE to say he’s the one “manufacturing fear”. Apparently you’re not “that” worried about being “rounded up” because you hate Bush types keep “typing away”, don’t you? How “brave” you guys on the left are, huh? How “European” of you to just “ignore it” because it “won’t go away”, and focus on the “real” enemy: Bush, and us righties.
But, hey, I guess you lefties didn’t play Dungeons and Dragons all those years and not learn a little something about courage. And your enemies are just as “real”.

What I am saying by ” Nothing helps terrorism more than hype” is that for the next five years after the attack we talk about terrorism on a daily basis. That is hype.

We invaded a country that had nothing to do with the attack, and then have been hyping that invasion into a war on terrorism. Is not. The war in Iraq was a mistake by Bush, then it became a sectarian war, and now it has a terrorsit component, only Al quaida in Iraq stays in Iraq, and for the most part attacks Shiite.

3,000 people lost their lives on 9-11. Do you have any idea how many people loose their lives because of drugs every year directly or indirectly? How many policeman, how many kids, how many inocent people??

It would be nice to focus in te war on drugs because it kills so many more Americans than any terrorist attack will ever do. But is not politicaly expedient, is not glamorous, you can’t hype it into a multi-billion program for arms, or an ever expanding military career can you?

Is it because he didn’t care, or because he had something to hide?
I’ve bben told only crazy conspiracy theorists think he had something to hide.

I agree, and I’m no conspiracy theorist.

Also, how anyone can see a connection between Iraq and al Quaeda and can’t see a connection in how an American (like Padilla) is treated and how they (as an American) can be treated is being willfully ignorant.

Except therapy and medication, of course.

Perhaps we should work on coping skills?

I never said I was ignorant of how 9/11 happened.
Nice irrelevant point, though.

I said it wasn’t important, and I cited the fact that the President of the United States on 9/11/2001 (of all people) didn’t think it was important.
That (I believe) is why Bush; was against the creation of the 911 Commission; underfunded the 911 Commission; stonewalled the 911 Commission; and rewarded Condi with the Secretary of State position after she bald-face lied to the 911 Commission.

Why is this important to me?
Because we have people like harry, who come here and try to justify the Iraq war by bringing up 3000 dead americans on 9/11.

I’m just letting harry know that I’m not falling for his irrelevant “reasons” for the Iraq war.

By asking harry why he thinks Bush was against the 911 Commission, I’m making him face the fact I already know. 9/11 is NOT important, and makes a pretty sorry excuse to invade Iraq.

Wingers have been bringing up 9/11 to justify all kinds of garbage my government has done.
I’m calling them out on it.

I believe Padilla was accused of being a terrorist, but it was never proven.
I don’t see why the government can’t accuse you (or I) of being a terrorist with no proof also.

That’s not “fear mongering”, that is true. (and it also points out how far America has strayed from its core belief system).

Though I can’t say the same for some of the commenters here.

You worry that “the government” might accuse you of being a terrorist with no reason. Fine.

Is there any evidence of that happening? Are random innocent civilians being rounded up and disappeared?

No.

Are random innocent civilians being murdered by terrorists?

Yes.

Therefore, rather than worrying about the hypothetical perils of government tyranny, why not focus on the very real perils of Islamic terror?

Instead, the Left denies the existence of Islamic terror (handwaving away the burnt and mangled bodies), and constantly engages in fearmongering about the jackbooted agents of oppression who are always just about to start rounding up the innocent (but never quite get started).

So who’s really the “reality-based community?”

Not you guys.

You say “No” like you have some way to back it up.
Do you only have government assurances?

Remind me agin why Americans (or anyone) should blindly take their government at its word.

History books are filled with the reasons why you (they) shouldn’t.

But you keep blindly trusting government. That’ll eventually work out for you. (sarcasm alert)

And your papragraph that starts with “Instead” is one of the finest strawmen I’ve seen anyone brazen enough to construct in public.

Because living under a tyrranical government is a MUCH greater threat to me than being killed by a terrorist.
A statistics class might help explain why.

we invaded a country that had nothing to do with the attack, and then have been hyping that invasion into a war on terrorism. Is not.
Take the global view. What are the root causes of terrorism? One interpretation is : the inability of the Arab and/or Muslim world to come to terms with modernity, one symptom of which is the overwhelming rule of tyrants in that part of the world. Terrorism is one consequence of tyranny.

Perhaps you thought that the US was attacked on 9/11 because of things we did wrong, such as supporting Israel instead of the Palestinians. I did not, because I saw that even when the US supported the Arabs, we were not appreciated. A Palestinian Christian told my mother that the only reason that Eisenhower told the Brits, French and Israelis to get out of Suez in 1956 was because Eisenhower was afraid of the USSR. As regards the injustice of the Israeli occupation compared to what was before, the father of this Palestinian Christian told his children before 1967 to get out of the West Bank because Christians could not advance. As the father was an employee of the Jordanian civil service, he knew.

Also note that Osama at one point stated that one reason for going after the US was that we had troops in the “ holy land” of Saudi Arabia. We had troops there as a consequence of not taking out Saddam in 1991. So, in that sense, we were damned if we did and damned if we didn’t.
The US was not exactly on good terms w Saddam before 9/11. The October 2002 “Joint Resolution to Authorize the use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq” listed about 20 reasons for doing so, none of which stated that Iraq had any responsibility for 9/11. The resolution stated that Saddam had ties with terrorism, and that is a fact. Is it OK to try to assassinate a former President- as long as he is a Republican?
Did you wish to ignore those 20 or so reasons, and keep Saddam in power? Do you also maintain that at the time of the invasion, that Saddam no longer had any connection with possession of weapons of mass destruction nor personnel nor infrastructure for constructing weapons of mass destruction? In other words, would you have supported the lifting of UN sanctions against Saddam? For now we will ignoring the thousands of Iraqis that Saddam would have killed and/or tortured had he remained in power. Had sanctions been lifted on Saddam, what do you think of the implications of both Iran and Iraq seeking to build a nuclear bomb?
In other words, it ain’t that easy. Go and make fun of Bush and all those dumb simplistic moronic un-nuanced redneck neocons. I doubt that things would have been better had you been in charge. My guess is that they would have been worse.

The paranoia of the Left is truly something to behold. I think a lot of it stems from their dabbling in illegal drugs. They’re contantly afraid the Feds are going to bust them. . .

Poor Robert. America is picking on him.

But if it makes you feel better to blame big bad Bush, and then dismiss 9/11 as unimportant, you go right ahead.

It’s not a question of whether we should do something about the threat of terrorism or not, but how much should we spend on it.

$200+ billion a year is way too much.

What would be reasonable?

Maybe $10 billion…10 times more than we spend to prevent an Avian Flu pandemic.

Come on Neo, this is the 21st century. Terrorists cannot truly threaten the Western World… can they?

This allows us to add these particular events to the fairly long list of what you might call the Keystone Cops school of terrorist activity—would-be perpetrators who don’t seem to be able to do much more than harm themselves.

That’s what happens when you don’t got any training camps and safe havens. Iran is doing much better in the terror bizness, if you’ve noticed, due to their training camps and logistics.

A lot of Leftists think of guerrila warriors as some kind of Angels of Vengeance, without need of Mortal Sustenance. But even terrorists are mortal, neo, they need food, rest, and psychological rest the same as us.

They do not spring up full formed out of the brow of Allah, ready to commence the Jihad against the infidel with the knowledge and wisdom of the ages; regardless of how much utter crap the BBC puts out in favor of our enemies.

And the same might have ended up being true, in reverse, of these most recent would-be terrorists—if they’d been just a bit more technically competent, they might have perpetrated a horrific mass murder.

While luck and Murphy does come into it, Neo, I think the primary cause of these spoiled attacks is the same thing that got the Japanese concerning qualified carrier pilots. You need people with real experience in fields to be able to do them professionally. Because Allah gets AQ’s most experienced agents first and doesn’t give them back, the terrorists have a severe shortage of experienced AND trained personnell. That makes their attacks… a lot more likely to screw up just on a percentage basis. Course, Israel and Europe makes up for that by releasing terrorists left and right but HEY, they aren’t really dangerous, Neo….

The problem is, most people don’t know how you actually get competent in terrorism, so they can’t really tell the difference, Neo. An Iranian Quds force guy is about the same as Al Qaeda to them, no diff. That’s bad.

Shooter and the King - what a match up.

You ever get the sense, Neo, that the Left is living in some kind of cartoon land with their cute nicknames for Bush and Cheney? Shooter hehe. Happy sappy sidekick! I mean in the real world, if Cheney really executed people by shooting them, you wouldn’t really have anyone talking about him let alone making fun of him; he would be too scary to even think about.

And so. You guys can’t even muster a reasoned argument anymore, can you?

It’s kind of hard to do that when they’re snorking, injecting, and inhaling every drug high known to man. Psychologically, if not physically, if you get the smoke swirls.

Well… there’s something to be said for an influx of Leftist Views, Neo. It clears the sinuses quite well. The more I read these comments, the more that Russian guy becomes a wonder and Sergei’s comments sound funnier and funnier. It is refreshing to see a Russian perspective on the useful idiots, that is all.

$200+ billion a year is way too much.

Maybe $10 billion…10 times more than we spend to prevent an Avian Flu pandemic.

Defense wouldn’t be so expensive for America if all the people that benefited from it, like the Germans, French, and what not, paid us money for it, Alphie. But they don’t, because American protection is free, due to the fact that Americans pay for it in blood and treasure.

Also everybody ignores the fact that experience counts for more in combat than just rolls of money. That’s that old argument concerning what are the Sinews of War, Money or Good Men?

http://www.heritage.org/research/features/BudgetChartBook/charts_s/s7.cfm

So much for the “we’re going broke” straw man.

It’s always a bit funny to see left-liberals, who demand ever more government regulation of their lives, who believe the government when it says it will take their money and look after their health, their environment, and their economy, who “blindly” accept the government’s word when it tells them what’s good for them and what’s bad for them, but who suddenly acquire a suspicion of government when it comes to the one thing a government is most needed for: the security of its people.

Still, better they display at least this much skepticism than none at all, which is their normal state. Unfortunately it’s clear, just from Robert’s attempts here alone, that a skeptical or critical approach to government is not something they understand very well — they confuse it with a simple-minded opposition to government, or, worse, with an excuse for the most vulgar displays of partisan hostility (for an example of which, at its most pathological, see the self-styled “legaleagle” above). A skeptical, as opposed to blindly oppositional, approach would certainly be able to raise questions about Iraq or the treatment of suspected terrorists — while at the same time acknowledging that the problem extends beyond the perpetrators of a single deed to terrorist-supporting states and cultures, and that this scope means that ordinary criminal law may not be sufficient to deal with it. It would allow for, yes, a “nuanced” approach that is notably lacking in the collection of childish taunts and rants from lefties we see above.

During the cold war, the Soviets had to match our spending pretty much dollar for dollar if they wanted to keep up.

In Iraq, we are outspending the insurgents by a ratio of 1000:1 and are still losing.

There are much better places to spend our money.

Robert is “afraid” of living under a “tyrranical government”, yet keeps “living here”, even though, according to him, one “exists” here.

What exactly do these dummies think is accomplished by placing quotation marks around words such as “afraid,” “living here,” and “exists” (unlike the purpose that is obviously served in this sentence, for example). They seem to be trying to convey some kind of point, but the only thing clearly demonstrated is that they are too stupid to have attended a four-year college. Here is the second manifestation of the same disease from Sally:

It’s always a bit funny to see left-liberals, who . . . “blindly” accept the government’s word when it tells them what’s good for them and what’s bad for them

Again, there is nothing whatever conveyed by the use of quotation marks around “blindly,” except attendance at the Rush Limbaugh Fellatio Academy. Admittedly, my knowledge of such people is purely abstract; I have never actually seen one where I work, where I eat, or where I went to school; if one somehow sneaked into my house to take a dump, I ‘d have to have the whole place renovated. But it remains true that Argument by Punctuation is one the hallmaks of a rightwing halfwit.

You really struck a nerve with the moonbats with this one. If anything ever demonstrated the intellectual vacuity of the Left, the comments on this thread are the ne plus ultra of idiocy. What’s sad is the complete ignorance of facts. We are challenging their religion, and they’re marching in the virtual street, chanting “Death to Neocons!”

Pathetic.