Bush Administration Prevents Another Terror Attack on U.S. Soil

[Limeyfellow]

I'll give Bush credit for the fact that there haven't been any terrorist attacks these last few years.

Well apart from the Anthrax terror attacks and a few other small attacks. Funny how people always forget about such things for some reason.

Though to be honest not alot has changed since the 1996 Anti-Terrorism Act. The biggest problem we have though I would say is all those nutjob militia and white supremists that where making up cyanide gas weapons and so on in the 90s, usually because they believed the UN were secretly going to invade the US with a Chinese army, were all released between 2002-2004 and since very little review of them have been carried out. These people had planned attacks when the death numbers would be in the tens of thousands and no longer considered a threat anymore but have the same views and abilities as before. People tend to forget about the domestic terrorists nowadays.

 

[Eghad]

On a serious note, fighting them over there won't stop home grown plots that spring from the general culture of evolving Jihadism in the USA.

B I N G O

 

[Fremmer]

This was nipped in the bud way before there was any actual danger.

That's my point. The Administration has acted in a timely manner to prevent the attacks before things get very dangerous and the attacks actually occur. Which is better than waiting until there is actual danger and/or until after the attack.

 

[Waitone]

That's my point. The Administration has acted in a timely manner to prevent the attacks before things get very dangerous and the attacks actually occur. Which is better than waiting until there is actual danger and/or until after the attack.

Commendable and can not minimized in its importance. What bothers me is DOJICEFBIDHSetal puts on a big PR event to talk about a small group of good ol' bo'ees trying to work out a franchise operation with AQ while at the same time refusing to do a PR gig on the signs of Islamist infiltration of the southern border. No PR event was staged to talk about the prayer rugs and korans found in the US desert. No discussion about the open intel of islamists entering into operational agreements with Mexican gangs to smuggle people into the US. No mention of the open source information of AQ cells being set up all over Latin America. No talk about AQ training camps being set up in northern south america. And no discussion of open source information of Victor Hugo sponsoring schools in Venezuela to teach Arabs how to pass for Mexicans. Stuff like losing the lip hair or chin spinach and learning how to speak Spanish.

Now if I know about this stuff from open sources available to me on a casual basis, why no PR productions highlighting the evidence that Mexico is becoming a major base of operations for an attack on the US. I think we all know the reason why. The hypocrisy is quite notable. I submit is represents prima fascia evidence of at a minimum dereliction of duty.

 

[SecDef]

That's my point. The Administration has acted in a timely manner to prevent the attacks before things get very dangerous and the attacks actually occur. Which is better than waiting until there is actual danger and/or until after the attack.

Ah, but see, that's why the quote from the US Attorney becomes fear mongering.

 

[madmag]

And President Bush does deserve credit for this: he is the head of the executive branch of government, and he is responsible for leading agencies such as the FBI, CIA, and Department of Homeland Security in a way to prevent these attacks.

Ok, I am not a Bush supporter, but I am willing to give some in the administration credit for doing a good job on this case. Now, will Bush and his administration be willing to step up and take responsibility for future terrorist attacks on this country due to security failures? Probably not.

Two things are clear to me.

First the Iraq war has done absolutely nothing to reduce the chance of terrorist attacks on this country. Probably increased the chances due to unnecessarily stirring the pot in the middle east. Second, the overall security effort of the Bush administration is poor at best. Our borders are not even close to being secure.

Remember this thread. Let's see if Bush steps up to the plate if another major terrorist attack occurs on this Country.

more like kerosene.

BTW, jet fuel is kerosene. The only difference is it is more filtered and they add a purple dye to show it is for jet use only....but it is just kerosene. Not to say it does not burn hot. The trade centers are poof of that fact.

 

[dyoun06]

Congress

First the Iraq war has done absolutely nothing to reduce the chance of terrorist attacks on this country. Probably increased the chances due to unnecessarily stirring the pot in the middle east. Second, the overall security effort of the Bush administration is poor at best. Our borders are not even close to being secure.

How about putting a little of the pressure on Congress that has to fund the "War on Terror" as well as show a unified approach as a Nation. Too many Politico's using this for leverage.

 

[dyoun06]

UN Commission

Yep, it sure was. Of course, it is just coincidental that Bush's hurriedly thrown together DHS looks surprising like the DHS recommended by the Commission on National Security/21st Century (1998-2001) formed during the Clinton administration.

My apologies -- forgot President Clinton and his Administration worked for the U.N. We can go back and forth to President Kennedy looking at studies and examinations. Bottom line who signed the Executive Order and put it in Place? Who bumped the spending for Armed Forces about 3X over Clinton? Who really cared about American Freedom and Independence?

 

[madmag]

How about putting a little of the pressure on Congress that has to fund the "War on Terror" as well as show a unified approach as a Nation. Too many Politico's using this for leverage.

Nothing wrong with that, but Bush is the only one with the authority (without votes) to protect our borders. Also, we are only at war in Iraq due to one person...Bush. He moved this nation to war using false information. I see it as about the same as Johnson and the Gulf Of Tokin incident. Yes, I know it says only Congress can declare war, but we all know the truth is the President can make war anytime he wants. In fact, I think the only minor improvements in border security is due to Congress forcing Bush to take some action. His so called call up of some national guard units was just a political game. Forget the Posse Comitatus Act, the President has always had the necessary authority to protect the borders of the USA...he just does not want to act.

Yes, Congress should pull together to protect this country, but it sure would help to have a President that is willing and able to do his part. I voted for him the first term....that's why I am so pissed. (can I say that?).

 

[Playboypenguin]

Like I said in an earlier post, I have a small bit of problem with the operating procedure law enforcement uses to catch people like this. Another thing I will add is that I am not sure what saddens me more, that the politicians use these tired old PR tactics or that some people still fall for them.

And a final note...giving George Bush credit when a law enforcement agency does it's job is like giving Ronald McDonald credit when you get a good hamburger at McDonald's.

 

[madmag]

giving George Bush credit when a law enforcement agency does it's job is like giving Ronald McDonald credit when you get a good hamburger at McDonald's.

Not fair, Ronald McDonald is just a wooden dummy that sits on a bench in front of McDonald's. We know George is smarter than you average wooden dummy...right?

 

[dyoun06]

Why Democrats Don't Care...

Not fair, Ronald McDonald is just a wooden dummy that sits on a bench in front of McDonald's. We know George is smart than you average wooden dummy...right?

I think I mentioned this before... but I don't agree with the Presidents agenda on Border Protection or believe that every thing he does is correct 100% of the time. But I do support him 100% as our President and stand behind him as an American (BTW: I would have never posted personal attacks about President Carter or Clinton and did support them 100% when they were my President -- even though I did not vote for either). Guess I was raised to have a little more pride in America than some. Doesn't mean we cannot make our opinion known at the polls -- but I think there are more proper forums than the attacks I see in some of these postings.

For all the non US Citizens that read these forums -- believe me there are still alot of True Americans out there willing to still defend this Nation.

 

[Playboypenguin]

Guess I was raised to have a little more pride in America than some.

Or maybe you just don't appreciate the freedoms one enjoys in this country. One of which is the freedom to express discontent with it's elected officials. Maybe you have confused patriotism with devotion to state.

 

[dyoun06]

Devotion to State

Maybe you have confused patriotism with devotion to state.

Sounds like you simply do not like people with strong convictions about what's right and what's wrong, with the brass to stand up for it, and the brainpower to defend it? So many "Bush" bashers want to live in non-absolutism - in "the gray area" because the gray area is "safe" and they can say whatever they feel and it would be politically incorrect to disagree with their 1st amendment right to free speech. People can continue to call our President names and/or demonize Him and the good people that support him here and elsewhere. It is pretty obvious that most of the "information" posted is merely an emotional response to the situation - and it is being posted on purpose and with a very specific reason: so that they can dismiss our President and whatever he has done or has to say, regardless of its validity or soundness.

 

[Playboypenguin]

Sounds like you simply do not like people with strong convictions about what's right and what's wrong

No, I simply don't like sheeple that use tired old sound bytes such as calling people's patriotism into question as soon as they speak against the establishment. If you are one of those then I would have a problem with you for that reason. Not because of any sense of conviction but because of the weakness of character it takes to challenge the moral character of someone simply because they do not toe your version of the line. Pretty simple.

 

[madmag]

Guess I was raised to have a little more pride in America than some.

Stop right there. I served my Country in the Army before many here were born. I continue to give the office of President respect, but I reserve the right to criticize all I want. American flags fly at my home every day of they year. And I wear my American flag pin every day of my life. I also lived through the McCarthy era, so let's not do that again. Get off your pedestal.

It is my opinion, but I feel Bush has damaged this Country severly...and I voted for him.

I cringe every time I see the death toll numbers of our military in Iraq. I feel most are lives lost for no good reason. That's my opinion, and I earned the right to express it.

 

[dyoun06]

Get off your pedestal

Get off your pedestal

Last input on this thread... I don't consider RESPECT (especially for our Commander in Chief) as being on a pedestal. I was taught to always "respect the rank" even if you don't respect the person. Had a couple 1st Sergeants I did not like as a person but I did respect them. We have had a few Presidents, Congressman, etc. I do not respect as a person -- but I hold my tongue when appropriate. No -- it is not a pedestal there is a right and wrong way to do things.

 

[Playboypenguin]

Stop right there. I served my Country in the Army before many here many were born. I continue to give the office of President respect, but I reserve the right to criticize all I want. American flags fly at my home every day of they year. And I wear my American flag pin every day of my life. I also lived through the McCarthy era, so let's not do that again. Get off your pedestal.

All of the things you mention are the sign of a true patriot. Especially the prt of reserving the right to criticize. That is one of the most important rights we have. it is a shame how some people want to make it seem like it is somehow "unpatriotic".

The sad thing is you should not have to quote your record to defend your right to speak. Anyone that would tear you down for not being silently obedient has no idea what this country stands for in the first place.

I am so tired of having to give my credentials to people who challenge my patriotism but just for the record I am a man that was born into poverty, joined the military, served 8yrs in the ARMY, saw combat on three different arenas including the first Gulf War, served in the peace corps, volunteer in my community and even served time as both an LEO and a school teacher. Now I am a small business owner...I guess that makes me un-American.

 

[TwoXForr]

Playboy Penguin

It is kind of like the guys that get caught in stings where they think they are talking to a 14yr old girl on the net and it is really a police officer. The guys are scum and deserve to go down hard but I just have a problem with the whole issue of entrapment. I do not like it when an undercover person puts the carrot in from of someone, tells them "doesn't that carrot look tasty", then bust them when they eat it.

This was actually started by a group called Perverted Justice, and they started doing it long before Dateline and the cops got involved. Besides what are these guys animals that they cannot resist the urge they have within themselves. They just pose as the 14yr old, then the guys come on to them. Check out thier website, they are trying to keep the net a little safer for kids.

 

[Playboypenguin]

They just pose as the 14yr old, then the guys come on to them. Check out thier website, they are trying to keep the net a little safer for kids.

When they just do that I have very little problem with the practice. but we has a big stink here not too long ago where alot of the guys caught were fighting the conviction on grounds of entrapment. the courts reviewed the chat transcipts and found they had grounds because the officers were actively encouraging them and leading them on during the chats. One law enforcement group was even going as far as claiming they were a 15yr old girl but had been emancipated so they had full legal rights of an adult. This was preying on peoples ignorance of that law in the eyes of the court.