Fix This

Filed in International by on December 29, 2009

By now you’ve probably all heard about the attempted terror incident on NW 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas Day. The accused terrorist wannabe, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, is the son of a Nigerian banker. He had a valid U.S. Visa issued in 2007 (obviously Obama’s fault). He was carrying 80 grams of PETN explosive (pentaerythritol tetranitrate) in his underwear bomb (more explosive than attempted shoe bomber Richard Reid). He was supposedly trained by al Qaeda in Yemen and two former Guantanamo detainees claimed credit for the attempted bombing. These detainees were released by the Bush administration in 2007 (obviously also Obama’s fault):

Guantanamo prisoner #333, Muhamad Attik al-Harbi, and prisoner #372, Said Ali Shari, were sent to Saudi Arabia on Nov. 9, 2007, according to the Defense Department log of detainees who were released from American custody.

Abdulmutallab was placed on the “Watch List” at least 1/2 year ago. After all this talk about the “War on Terror” we have obviously dropped the ball AGAIN on this issue. Why were these men released from prison and why weren’t they tried and convicted before? Obviously, the Bush torture program was an utter failure. It either radicalized these guys or failed to get information out of them. Why did Abdulmutallab get a U.S. Visa and why wasn’t it revoked when he was placed on the Watch List? Do agencies STILL not communicate with each other?

Plus, what future actions can we take? I think al Qaeda obviously found a security loophole in boarding procedures which I hope we’re closing. I do think this is a failure in the Obama administration (non-revocation of the U.S. Visa) and I hope they are addressing this issue. I’m glad that the only al Qaeda guys left are crazy, stupid ones but it only takes a lucky crazy stupid guy to hurt a lot of people.

Tags: ,

About the Author ()

Opinionated chemist, troublemaker, blogger on national and Delaware politics.

Comments (100)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. PBaumbach says:

    a guy on NPR indicated that there are about 500,000 names (many duplicates/aliases) on the list this guy was on, and he was NOT on the watch list, which has only about 4,000 names.

    also, it sounds like this guy bought his ticket in Nigeria, and flew through Amsterdam. I think that this means that he went through security in Nigeria. Does anyone know how ‘the system’ should work, how US homeland security should fit into checking in a passenger in Nigeria?

    I do too little international travel to know this area.

    Let’s also remember our core principles, that justice is based on what someone has done, in a provable way. We can’t lock folks up in gitmo based on influence they will have in the future (there was a Tom Cruise movie based on this premise).

    Yes, we have organizations that investigate what people are planning to do, and in the lionshare of cases they are able to avert such situations.

  2. Tom S says:

    How about if we get leaders for TSA and Customs as a start? both parties are to blame on this one!

  3. A. price says:

    no, tom. the repukes are intentionally standing in the way of a director for TSA… seemingly with the hopes we will be attacked and they can blame it on Obama. well, republicans…. your plan almost worked. Americans were almost killed for your gains. these people are pure evil.

  4. Scott P says:

    You’re right, A. price. Somewhere, Dick Cheney is doing his best Don Adams impression … “Missed it by that much.” I hate to say it, because I don’t like thinking such bad things about anybody, but I can’t shake the feeling that there are a good number of conservative leaders who would much preferred to have seen that plane get blown out of the sky.

  5. Delaware Dem says:

    Of course. Republicans were overjoyed when 9/11 occurred. They cared not about the innocent Americans that died that day. They only cared about having a reason for war. And if you don’t think that is true than why was Rumsfeld gleefully planning on attacking Iraq the night of 9/11? Why was Bush planning on taking Saddam out in June of 2001?

  6. Scott P says:

    I’m sure John McCain is disappointed that “Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Yemen” just doesn’t have the same ring.

  7. Lizard says:

    are the moonbats going to start saying that Obama new about the nigerian but did nothing? His father contacted US authorities and reported him as a threat. Obama had more specific info than Bush did about the AQ threat pre 9-11…

    time to order more tinfoil

  8. PBaumbach says:

    a call from the bomber’s father to the local US consulate in Nigeria is not equivalent to a report on the president’s desk noting AQ’s desire to use planes to attack the US. perhaps if the security brief had used a pop-up book format W would have spent some time considering it.

    not even close to equivalent

  9. xstryker says:

    Hypocrisy watch: No one (not Republicans, not Democrats, not bloggers, not the media) complained when Bush stayed on Christmas vacation for 2 weeks after the attempted “Shoe Bomber” incident.
    He just hung around Camp David for a while and barely mentioned it.

    But now that Obama’s in charge, when a guy incinerates his nutsack with Al Qaeda backing, suddenly everyone wants the President to come home and go Rambo.

    Hey, can we call that guy the Dick Bomber?

  10. PBaumbach says:

    isn’t it more of a teabag bomber?

  11. anon says:

    I’d like to dedicate this song to the Crotch Bomber incident:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQ4xtnFois

    (watch the chair fly across the screen at 0.57)

  12. Tom S says:

    A. Price,
    & how long did it take Obama to nominate the people for these posts??

  13. A. price says:

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/81356.html?storylink=addthis there tom. and to answer your question, september. so the republicans have intentionally made it so we are less safe and encouraged attacks so they can blame it in democrats. i cant think of a better definition of treason…. thats right.

  14. Tom S says:

    So 8 months to get nominations?? Is that treasonous too? So in this case the people last on the list are the guilty ones…but this doesn’t apply to anyone from the democratic party who are in charge now.

    AND I agree that the republicans are just as guilty.

    Only question left is who is Obama going to throw under the bus? Or will it just get brushed aside for more important issues like health care, then immigration reform, etc?

  15. donviti says:

    I used to think Tom acted stupid. Now I just think he is stupid unintentionally.

  16. A. price says:

    by not approving the nominee, the republicans proved it isn’t something they really care about. I’ll give you that it took a while, but that attack McCain’s campaign manager wished for almost happened. the terrorists (conservatives) almost won.

  17. Lizard says:

    AP Exclusive: Somali man arrested in Nov with powdered chemicals, syringe, in echo of Detroit

    Canadian Press ^ | 12/30/09 | Jason Straziuso
    A man tried to board a commercial airliner in Mogadishu last month carrying powdered chemicals, liquid and a syringe that could have caused an explosion in a case bearing chilling similarities to the terrorist plot to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner, officials told The Associated Press on Wednesday.

  18. Tom S says:

    …guess you think I “acted stupidly”? Good name calling as we remember the events of the past year.

    Some day you’ll realize the problem isn’t republicans or democrats …it’s what motivates our politicians and that is only to get re-elected.

  19. Lizard says:

    U.S. Knew of Airline Terror Plot Before Christmas

    Associated Press / FOX ^ | Dec. 30, 2009 | AP/Fox
    The U.S. government had intelligence from Yemen before Christmas that leaders of a branch of Al Qaeda there were talking about “a Nigerian” being prepared for a terrorist attack.

  20. Lizard says:

    who’s going under the bus over this failure?

    my money is on Napalitano.

  21. Lizard says:

    who has been President for nearly a year?

    Obama) Letter to The Honorable Kip Hawley, Adminstrator TSA (2007)
    Project Vote Smart ^ | 10/19/2007 | Barack Obama

    (ED Note: The following is a letter sent by Obama and Dick Durbin in October of 2007, castigating the TSA for not doing enough to prevent bombers from getting through security):

    The Honorable Kip Hawley Administrator Transportation Security Administration 601 South 12th Street Arlington, VA 22202-4220

    Dear Mr. Hawley:

    We are writing to request quick action to improve the detection of bomb materials at Chicago O’Hare International Airport and our nation’s other airports. Our letter is prompted by the recently released Transportation Security Administration (TSA) report indicating that undercover agents posing as passengers carrying materials for fake bombs were able to walk through airport security undetected at alarming rates during tests last year.

    According to yesterday’s USA Today, TSA carried out these tests at three of the nation’s busiest airports, including O’Hare International Airport in Chicago. Two other airports—Los Angeles International Airport and the San Francisco International Airport—joined O’Hare as the testing grounds for detection of bomb materials at passenger security checkpoints. Of the 75 passengers who carried fake explosives through screening stations at O’Hare, nearly 60% passed undetected. These passengers were able to slip past security with false detonators and explosive materials by hiding materials under their clothes and in everyday items such as CD cases, briefcase linings, and toiletry kits. These test results are a frightening reality check for travelers about the screening capability of our nation’s airports.

    Although some progress has been made since 9/11, the threat posed by terrorism is still real and is still evolving. Materials to make bombs can come in all shapes and sizes, can be hidden with common household items, and can be difficult to detect. It is critical that the TSA respond to these new challenges to stay ahead of the threat. In your October 16 testimony before the Senate Commerce, Transportation, and Science Committee, you stated: “A lesson from 9/11 is that we must be proactive—we must anticipate threats that continue to grow in sophistication and complexity.”

    Yet, a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report this month noted that although the TSA has recognized the need for better technology to detect such materials, this technology has not been deployed successfully. In its assessment, GAO rated the TSA’s ability to “deploy checkpoint technologies to address vulnerabilities” as “generally not achieved.”

    We believe that the 60% failure rate at O’Hare demonstrates a failure that goes far beyond “generally not achieved.”

    The Department of Transportation conducted similar covert tests in 2002 and found that screeners missed 60% of simulated bombs at that time. It is unacceptable that this number remains unchanged five years later. While we commend the TSA for continuously running these covert quality tests and for acknowledging the deficiencies in technology to detect explosives, these efforts are futile unless real changes are made.

    We would like prompt answers to the following questions.

    1. In last year’s tests, what types of deficiencies were identified that led to the poor testing results? What steps have been taken and will be taken to address those deficiencies? 2. Were any deficiencies identified that were particular to O’Hare Airport? What steps have been taken and will be taken to address those deficiencies? 3. What steps have been taken and will be taken to better train screeners so that they will more effectively detect bomb materials? 4. What steps have been taken and will be taken to improve the performance of detection equipment to assist screeners in finding bomb materials? 5. What targets have been established for improved performance in future tests?

    Thank you for your attention to this matter. We would appreciate a response within two weeks.

    Sincerely,

    Barack Obama United States Senator

    Richard J. Durbin United States Senator

  22. Observer says:

    The Obama/Clinton State Department missed the Crotch Bomber’s active visa TWICE after he was reported by his father in November. And we now know that Obama’s CIA has been tracking him since this past summer, but told no one else.

    Democrats spent the last eight years blaming Bush for 9/11 based upon a briefing containing vague statements about al-Qaeda having the goal of hijacking planes for terrorist purposes — when will you blame the Obama Administration for missing an attack where there was much more specific intelligence?

  23. Von Cracker says:

    duly noted except for your lame excuse-making (read: vague).

    Now what? What do you want us to do?

  24. Lizard says:

    Adoration of Obama is imune to facts.

    Government is the moonbats’ religion, Obama their savior. all failures, shortcomings and problems are the fault of: Bush, Republicans, NeoCons and/or TeaPartyPeople. (while Palin is reviled, she has not yet become blameworthy…give it time)

  25. Observer says:

    No excuse making — the briefing contained no-specific information about a broad goal of hijacking/bringing down planes somewhere in the world. There was no specific actionable intelligence — especially since the evidence for this goal was a plot that had been stopped in the Philippines several years before.

    Now, whose heads should roll here? Napolitano’s? She ought to, given her inept response over the last few days. Hillary’s? Maybe, given the failure of her department. Dennis Blair’s? Perhaps, given the massive intelligence failure here.

    When will there be a 12/25 Commission to investigate the failures of the Obama Administration in keeping America safe from terrorism — looking at this event, Fort Hood, and the Arkansas jihadi who shot troops last summer? Will you support a call for such a commission? Or do you put your party ahead of your country and choose instead to sweep the Obama Administration’s failures under the rug?

  26. liberalgeek says:

    How does Ft. Hood fit in here. There is ample evidence that the Ft. Hood shooter was mentally ill. He was also born and raised in the US. Please don’t conflate him with real terrorists.

  27. Observer says:

    Actually, there s ample evidence that the Fort Hood shooter was connected to the international jihad movement.

    Of course, there is also evidence of mental illness. It is called Islam.

  28. Observer says:

    Also, LG, is it REALLY your position that someone born and raised in America cannot be a terrorist? I’m sure that Eric Rudolf and Tim McVeigh appreciate your being on their side.

  29. just kiddin says:

    Observer: recall that the right wing were quick to point out that Oklahoma bombings were done by “muslims”. McVeigh was part of that right wing extremist nut job bunch, I never believed he acted alone. It was the reason CAIR was organized to fight back against lies and deceptions of ALL muslims.

  30. just kiddin says:

    Oh there is a jihadist movement alright. Its called the Christian Jihadist against all muslim nations who just happen to have oil under their feet. Bush and his axis of evil! There is now a possiblity we are going to war on 5 fronts. Iraq,Afganistan/Pakistan, Somolia, Yemen! Gee whose next?

  31. Observer says:

    Actually, the initial police reports had an individual described as having a Middle Eastern appearance with McVeigh. That has never been adequately explained. It does, however, explain why there was an initial concern about Muslim terrorism — especially coming only a year after the first WTC attack.

  32. liberalgeek says:

    That isn’t my point at all. My point is that there is homegrown terrorism and there is foreign terrorism. There seems to be a good deal of evidence pointing the panty-bomber to organized terrorism. The links for Ft. Hood are almost nil. A few posts on a blog site, does not a Jihadist make.

    As for your hate of Muslims, I will point out that there are many Christian terrorists, some of which you named above.

  33. Observer says:

    Really, JK? If there really were such a “Christian jihad”, Islam would no longer exist on this planet.

  34. just kiddin says:

    Observer. Let me call you what you are a rascist. There just happen to be more than 1.5 billion muslims in the world. CAIR has reported hundreds of times that they do not view AlCIADuh as followers of Islam. These nuts kill more muslims than any other race. They kill their own.

  35. Observer says:

    I hate no one based upon race, JK.

    And given that al-Qaida is clearly operating in a fashion consistent with the Quran and the earliest practices of Islam, I’d have to argue that you are clearly nuts.

    (By the way, Muslim is not a race.)

  36. just kiddin says:

    Who uses weapons of mass destruction against impoverished poor nations? Dont believe the Afganis, the Iraqis, have armies, navies, air force, or weapons of mass destruction. If you want to stop terrorism, perhaps the US should rethink its position of killing millions of muslims in their soverign nations, occupying them by force. Its not our freedoms they hate, its the fact that we are slaughtering them on a large scale. While Obama promised diplomacy we get more war, and if Joe Leiberman gets his way the US will be deploying to Yemen any time now. Course according to Bob Bauer we need 2 million soldiers…get your ass ready to deploy.

  37. h. says:

    What muslim country did we occupy pre-9/11 ?

  38. liberalgeek says:

    From Observer:

    Of course, there is also evidence of mental illness. It is called Islam.

    Hate, perhaps not based on race, but certainly hate.

  39. A. price says:

    “And given that al-Qaida is clearly operating in a fashion consistent with the Quran and the earliest practices of Islam, I’d have to argue that you are clearly nuts.”

    wrong you racist, ignorant, rush limbaugh wanna be. the jihadist form of islam that al queda practices came about in the 60s and 70s as a reaction to european occupation of their part of the world. the “earliest practices” of islam promoted peace and tolerance….. a break from the oppressive violent religion that ran things back then…… any guess as to what it was? ill give you a hint… they have killed people who wont convert. Oppressed women for almost their entire existence and try every 100 years to exterminate the jews….

    survey says CHRISTIANITY ding ding ding! READ A BOOK!

  40. pandora says:

    Observer is a christian fundamentalist bigot. Which really just shows how flimsy his beliefs are, and how insecure he is. That mental illness comment is a disgusting piece of filth.

  41. cassandra_m says:

    RWR is a bigot of the first order and pretty damned stupid on the business of profiling. If the US Government had decided to do profiling on domestic terrorists after OK City (and others) most of the guys writing on this blog would be on lockdown. Unfairly, but white guys everywhere would get alot of extra surveillance. Which was the point, of course, of the wingnut freakout over the DHS reports on domestic extremists — it felt a little too much like profiling to those sympathetic with these nuts.

    But wetting their beds over brown people is feature, not a bug for these wingnuts including RWR.

  42. Von Cracker says:

    with all prejudice, all religion is a mental defect. so watch your words, Ob.

    now, if you’re looking for a scapegoat, then yes, let’s fire Napolitano. If you want something done of substance, lets look at the point where the information line broke down, then take appropriate action. Or is that too un-reactionary for you?

    you see, Ob, your reasoning belies the ruse you try to project.

  43. Von Cracker says:

    to answer your question, h., foreign troops on the ground and conglomo-corps taking natural resources in muslim countries qualifies as occupation, to them. it’s their belief, meaning that you cannot apply your thinking to them, you have to see it from their point of view.

  44. Observer says:

    A.price — it is clear you haven’t studied Islam. Might I suggest a wonderful book for you, written by an Afghani, Destiny Disrupted. While generally sympathetic to Islam (its author was raised, and remains nominally, Muslim), it is an honest enough portrait of the earliest period of Islam to note the roots of jihadism there and the connection of the modern jihadi movement to streams of Islam that have existed throughout the history of the religion.

    And I do find it odd that you consider the statement that Islam is a mental illness to be bigoted and offensive, while you would never take take the same position if such a statement were made regarding Christianity, or religion in general.

    Oh, and by the way — I’m no fundamentalist of any stripe.

  45. Observer says:

    So, pandora, where is your criticism of VC for his comment? Or are you a hypocrite?

  46. Observer says:

    By the way, cassie, where did I (or this RWR person) propose profiling? Quit tilting at windmills and battling strawmen.

  47. Lizard says:

    silly Observer, VC was just explaining that it is all “our” fault.

    Rich white men are to blame for everything.

  48. Von Cracker says:

    putting words in my mouth, eh?

    can’t be racist if you hate everyone.

  49. Von Cracker says:

    is exceptionalism a form of pride? “my skydaddy can kick your bearded wizard’s ass” is the root of all this shit.

    so there

  50. Observer says:

    Come on, all you opponents of bigotry. Go at the bigoted atheist or admit your hypocrisy!

  51. h. says:

    Them meaning terrorists? If the governments of those muslim countries disapproved of our “occupation”, don’t you think we’d be asked to leave? I mean we just didn’t show up one day and set up shop(pre- 9/11).

    I don’t think we’re “taking their natural resources”, I think those corps. purchase said resources. No.

  52. Von Cracker says:

    saying it doesn’t make it so, Ob. nice try though.

    i don’t believe in Romulans, does that mean I’m bigoted against non-earth humanoids?

  53. Mark H says:

    VC, watch out, there may be Klingons listening 🙂

  54. Von Cracker says:

    again h., try not to project your understanding and values on these groups, it’s not the proper perception they have of us, rightly or not.

    why do you think the phrase “one person’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter” exists in the first place?

    it’s how they perceive us (which is mostly incorrect and bigoted in its own way), not the other way around.

  55. Von Cracker says:

    They are not merry men, Mark! or so i’ve been told.

  56. Von Cracker says:

    Some people believe that the NY Giants are the best ever, I don’t and I routinely make them aware of that. I guess I’m a bigot.

    Catching on yet, mercuryhead?

  57. rhubard says:

    “What muslim country did we occupy pre-9/11 ?”

    Saudi Arabia. Though we would not consider it an occupation — our military was there by the ruling family’s invitation — bin Laden considered it an occupation.

  58. h. says:

    So it was only an occupation through the eyes of terrorists. Got it.

  59. h.,

    We have had U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia since the first Gulf War. We’re there with the cooperation of the Saudi government. The presence of U.S. troops in Islam’s mostly holy cities, Mecca and Medina, have been cited by bin Laden as a reason for his hatred of the U.S.

    I find it fascinating that some guy in the Mid Atlantic reads a book on Islam and now considers himself an expert on it. Not only that, but feels comfortable calling everyone who practices one of the world’s biggest religions, “insane.” That’s pretty darn arrogant if you ask me.

    As far as religion goes, you could find stories interesting stories in the Bible as well, particularly in the Old Testament. Look at the story of Job (God wagers with Satan to destroy a man’s life), the story of Esther (a woman spares her people through sex) or the story of Jericho (God orders the destruction of all men, women and children in the city) for a few examples.

    What I don’t like is the double standard for Muslims. Whenever a Muslim does something violent, certain pundits say it’s because of Islam. When a Christian does something violent, no one blames the religion of Christianity for it. Perhaps Muslims are like Christians, with some of them doing violent things and some of them using their religion to justify it.

  60. Observer says:

    US troops are not in Mecca or Medina.

    And as for the reason for the different treatment of Islam and Christianity when one of the religion’s followers engages in terrorism, there is a simple reason. In the case of Christianity, it goes against the teachings of the religion as found in the authoritative sources of the Christian faith. In the case of Islam, it is easily supported from the authoritative teachings of Islam. Not to mention the fact that Christians respond by condemning the terrorism, while large segments of the Islamic world respond by explaining why Muslims feel the terrorist acts are justified.

  61. I guess you’re not very familiar with the terrorism of the Irish Republican Army and its apologists, then. Terrorism was not invented on 9/11/2001.

  62. Observer says:

    And I guess you are not aware that the IRA was a Marxist group condemned by both the Republic of Ireland and the Catholic bishops of Ireland.

  63. cassandra_m says:

    And I guess that you are not aware that the IRA had multiple splinter groups and the Marxist part of it became one. The “mainstream” of the IRA (the Provisional IRA) never bought into any of the Marxist stuff — and stayed focused on its very nationalist and very republican project.

    We already get that you are our village idiot, RWR — no need for you to keep working at it.

  64. cassandra_m says:

    And it is completely remarkable how much RWR does not know about these religions. The authoritative sources of Christian faith — the Bible specifically — are filled with acts of individual violence, wars, and all kinds of permissions for those acts. Christianists everywhere used those authoritative sources to justify everything from the Crusades, to the mistreatment of Native American (and Eskimo and Aborigine) children and nations, to slavery, apartheid and all kids of other bigotries.

    Almost every religion of the Book has its crazies — those who would use that book to justify the worst behavior on the planet. Pretending that there is something unique to Islam in this thing does indeed make you a fundamentalist, RWR.

  65. Lizard says:

    TSA Subpoenas Bloggers, Demands Names of Sources

    NY Times ^ | 12/30/2009 | AP
    As the government reviews how an alleged terrorist was able to bring a bomb onto a U.S.-bound plane and try to blow it up on Christmas Day, the Transportation Security Administration is going after bloggers who wrote about a directive to increase security after the incident. TSA special agents served subpoenas to travel bloggers Steve Frischling and Chris Elliott, demanding that they reveal who leaked the security directive to them. The government says the directive was not supposed to be disclosed to the public. Frischling said he met with two TSA special agents Tuesday night at his Connecticut home for…

  66. Lizard says:

    Bush security briefing = Obama security briefing

    HOLY COW!!!! Obama Got Pre-Christmas Briefing Warning a Terror Attack May Be Coming

    Newsweek/The Lid ^ | 1/1/2010 | The Lid
    It had become clear to the President and top advisers that before Christmas, the US government was in possession of “bits and pieces” of information, which, if they had been properly knitted together, “could have…allowed us to disrupt the attack In response to the post Northwest flight 253 Janet Napalitano critics, Democratic strategists asserted that President Barack Obama “has been far more aggressive in fighting al Qaeda” than the previous administration . In an e-mail this afternoon to supporters — which incidentally excoriated Republicans for politicizing the attempted bombing of Flight 253 — the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) stressed…

  67. dominique says:

    HONESTLY? SERIOUSLY?!?

    Comment by Delaware Dem on 29 December 2009 at 10:00 am:

    Of course. Republicans were overjoyed when 9/11 occurred. They cared not about the innocent Americans that died that day. They only cared about having a reason for war. And if you don’t think that is true than why was Rumsfeld gleefully planning on attacking Iraq the night of 9/11? Why was Bush planning on taking Saddam out in June of 2001?

    OMFG!!! The fact that this unbelievably stupid, filthy comment went completely unaddressed speaks volumes to the credibility of the contributors to this site. I mean, honestly. You’re a bunch of censor-crazy ninnies and this one gets a pass? Why would you allow such nonsense – such venom – to be spewed BY A CONTRIBUTOR, no less????

    If you don’t disagree with this statement and are not offended by it REGARDLESS OF YOUR PARTY, you should just call it a day because it’s a clear sign that you’ve lost touch with reality and you need to seek professional help. Like maybe a TEAM of doctors to try to figure out what the fuck is wrong with you.

    You guys would be funny if you weren’t so frightening to those of us who are rational, reasonable people. Here’s a news flash – you are no better than the loons on the right. You are simply their counterparts on the left – LOONS! Thank God or the flying spaghetti monster or whatever deity you worship (or don’t) that the fringe on either side is a minority because this would be a truly fucked up place if there were more of you.

    My head explodes a little every time I visit this site (which is why I have only stopped by a handful of times over the past year) because I can’t believe how closed-minded a bunch you are. And you call yourselves progressives?? What a joke.

    It’s so disheartening because you’re all so articulate and you seem to do a lot of reading (of course, it’s all one-sided, but still…) so one would think that you would possess the intellectual capacity to know that neither side is all good or all evil, and yet it’s always the same nonsense – ‘repukes’, ‘rethugs’, pathetic attempts to create false enemies (Rush, Glenn Beck, Hannity, Teabaggers, Sarah Palin, blah, blah, blah, zzzzzzzzz…) If I hadn’t met most of you in person, I would have thought this site was run by tweens with a thesaurus and an obsession with wikipedia.

    I beg of you – all of you – to grow the fuck up. The partisanship in this country is disgraceful and every one of you can bitch and moan about the evil of the other side all you want, but as long as you keep framing everything as us vs. them, good vs. evil, NOTHING will change. You are part of the problem. Please stop.

    Happy Fucking New Year.

  68. A. price says:

    I think REPUBLICANS are innocent of DD’s charge, but there is NO doubt in my mind that Dick Rummy and Karl saw it as the perfect chance to use their dummy front man to go to war. Look at Dick’s record with that part of the world. He is a vicious brown-people hater. The man NEEDS us to be at war. Just like McCains campaign manager (his name escapes me) ACTUALLY ADMITTING his candidate would benefit from a terrorist attack. There are republicans who know they have a history of winning on national security. one would only then need to make the connection that if national security becomes an issue, the republicans can use it for political gains. It is not a far stretch so see how the ones isolated from the rest of the country and in the beltway bubble who think only in terms of how to win elections would come to hope for an attack of the nation…..
    “i hope he fails”
    Now, i have in doubt either than some in the Democratic leadership saw Katrina as a political jackpot to use against Bush.

  69. anonone says:

    Hi Dominique,

    Did you watch the whole republican convention in 2008 cheer and applaud wildly at the end of the 9/11 video? The whole convention! Like it was a great accomplishment!

    Don’t you agree that the Bush and the republicans used 9/11 for political purposes, including for gaining support to invade Iraq?

    And finally, compare how the repubs have reacted to the Underwear Bomber to the way the Dems reacted in 2001 after 9/11, anthrax, and the shoe bomber. No Dems were calling for Rice to resign. Hell, the spineless rats even voted for her promotion to SoS later on.

    If you are honest about it, the evidence that repubs use terrorism primarily to gain a political advantage is undeniable. In their dark hearts, many would love to have a serious terrorist attack if it would damage Obomba politically.

  70. A. price says:

    not to mention schmucks like Rudy who turned 9/11 into his personal catch-phrase.

  71. I didn’t catch DD’s comment but I agree that it’s unfair. A. and A1 are right though to point out how often Republicans have used “terrorism” as a political tool (especially Giuliani). In fact, the 2004 Republican convention was held just minutes away from Ground Zero with Bush standing behind a podium with a cross on it.

    Cheney’s been running around since he’s been out of office yelling “terror, terror!” and appears to be using the attempted Christmas Day attack to say “I told you so.”

  72. dominique says:

    I think the GOP used the fear of future terrorist attacks for political purposes just like the Dems use the fear glaciers melting into my living room and dying or going bankrupt because my health insurance is going to become completely unaffordable for political purposes. Neither is ok.

    Both parties want to see the other fail (without any regard to the fact that the failure of the party in power = the failure of the country as a whole,) but I don’t think anyone wants anyone to actually die. Dems are desperate to get health care passed. What kind of an asshole would I be if I said that Democrats want uninsured people to die to prove that we need a public option? Sane, rational, responsible people do not assign an ideology to an entire group of people based on the behavior/rantings of a select few. Isn’t that what racists do?

    I realize this is a liberal blog, but I always thought that liberals were supposed to be warm-hearted people who want the world to be a more caring, loving, peaceful place. The anger and viciousness that is so prevalent on most liberal blogs – from both the contributors and the posters – seems to be such a contradiction of the core philosophy of the party. It’s 90% of the reason I switched my party affiliation. I didn’t want to be a part of that kind of nastiness; it’s immature and unhealthy. When people argue in that manner, their credibility is damaged. That’s not to say that there isn’t nastiness on conservative blogs, but the left definitely takes it to a different level. There’s a way to get your point across in a reasonable manner. My grandmother used to say you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. People should be able to debate an opinion without creating a boogeyman and without making vicious, unfounded accusations of the other side.

    One of the most appealing things about Obama – and most of what got him elected IMO – was the fact that he was so much more mature, rational and level-headed than Bush. Isn’t it ironic that his most ardent supporters seem utterly incapable of demonstrating those qualities?

  73. nemski says:

    The one thing I can say about Delaware Dem is that he consistently uses a broad brush. As much as I disgreed with the Bush Administration’s Iraq fiasco, the Patriot Act,dropping the ball in Afghanistan, and flagrant use of fear as a political tool, I don’t think there were any Republicans “overjoyed” by 9/11.

  74. Brooke says:

    Well, Christian terrorists murdered Dr Slepian in his kitchen, are responsible for over 200 bombing and arson attacks on clinics in the US alone, and thousands of other incidents of terror and intimidation… any one of which might impact anyone here tomorrow.

    So I’ll take my chances with the TSA, thanks.

  75. anonone says:

    Dominique,

    Your grandmother was right, if you want to catch flies. But look at who liberals are up against: they are the very same people you cited in your first post: “Rush, Glenn Beck, Hannity, Teabaggers, Sarah Palin…” Are you holding them up as examples of virtue? And who are the liberal equivalents?

    Next, you write “but I don’t think anyone wants anyone to actually die,” except that is what war is actually about, isn’t it? So anyone who wanted to go to war in Iraq actually did want people to die. There is no way of getting around that. And how could anyone cheer after watching a video of the twin towers collapsing? How?

    And this I know: when it comes to choosing between human health and money, republicans, in general, always choose money. Always. And many Dems do, too.

    Finally, if “90% of the reason I switched [your] party affiliation” was because of the nastiness of liberals, I think that you’re not looking very hard at the record of the past 8 years and the current nastiness and dishonesty on your side, including “Rush, Glenn Beck, Hannity, Teabaggers, Sarah Palin…” and recall that Bush/Cheney left office with very high approval by members of their party.

    I don’t think that you can say with a straight face that liberals are more nasty than conservatives.

  76. A. price says:

    not to mention Fox “Al-Jezera of the right” News’ personal crusade against Dr Tiller, one which ultimately ended in his murder in a CHURCH. No parallels to Islamic extremism there, no sir. But as long as terrorists kill for the American Christian God, i guess it is ok.

  77. Democrats focus on many issues. Health care reform will help millions of people and climate change affects billions. Terrorism affects less people but is scarier so people focus on it.

    As PBaumbach points out in the first comment, the terrorist watch list is a real mess. It included people like Ted Kennedy and Cat Stevens. It has too many people, making it practically useless. One thing the attack attempt did point out is that information-sharing between agencies and countries is still error-ridden. This needs to be fixed. Bush/Cheney failed to fix it in their 8 years, and Obama obviously hasn’t fixed it either.

  78. dominique says:

    Understand this – I don’t have a ‘side’. I do not strictly align myself with any particular party nor do hold up any media caricature or politician (that may be redundant) as an example of virtue. I am not promoting any of those people, but I don’t find them any less repulsive than their counterparts on the left – Keith O, Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz, Alan Grayson, etc. They’re all loons on equal footing, as far as I’m concerned and they’re all damaging the fiber of our country by pitting people against each other rather than trying to find common ground.

    I am registered as a republican only because we live in a closed primary state. I would vote for a democrat if I felt s/he was better qualified for a position. As far as I’m concerned, I see two viable parties: one that has some great (albeit Utopian) ideas but an utter inability to organize and get past their own petty infighting to follow through with anything and one that has discipline and focus, but falls a little short on humanity from time to time. Given the choice, I would rather side with the organized party and hope that moderate voices like my own will move their policies a little bit to the center.

  79. Joanne Christian says:

    Bingo and Ditto to Dominique’s comments in this thread.

    Time to get that third party rolling, or not commit us to a primary pairing.

  80. anonone says:

    Dominique,

    “Keith O, Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz, Alan Grayson, etc” have a tiny fraction of the audience of Rush, Glenn Beck, Hannity, and FOX. They are hardly “counterparts.” Plus, they don’t spout blatent lies and racist comments like the these conservative mouthpieces do.

    Could you cite a single example of Maddow being a “loon”? I would have thought that having a female with Ph.D. from Oxford in her position would be something that you would applaud, not deride. I think that if you read her bio, you’ll agree that comparing someone of her intellectual and career accomplishments with Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, or Palin is incongruous.

    This country was founded by revolutionaries pitting themselves against royalists. The political process is all about people pitting their ideas against each other. It is the fiber of our country, and a strong political debate enhances, rather than destroys, that fiber.

  81. I notice Dominique did not single out Observer for calling all Muslims insane. Only DD.

  82. What you do not understand is that I can take care of my own health care; I can’t take care of crime, national security, or terrorism. That is why I have a government to take care of the latter while I can use the market to take care of the former.

    As for Maddow, I agree that she is no loon unless all libs are loons by his definiton. I disagree with her, but I find her engaging and entertaining. Ober on the other hand….

  83. anon says:

    What you do not understand is that I can take care of my own health care; I can’t take care of,,,

    What you do not understand is that it is not all about you.

  84. anon,

    Isn’t conflating “I” with “we” something conservatives do a lot?

  85. John Manifold says:

    I can take care of my own health care.

    Taking his medical advice from Dr. Seville:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJeb9QFoLzQ

  86. Brooke says:

    Well, I doubt RD can “take care of his own healthcare”. Without public money for education, government support of hospitals, vast government agencies investigating claims for drugs, laws regarding workplace safety and working hours, courts which permit prosecution for fraud and action against injury, and about nine billion other actions of government, our individual ability to “take care of our own healthcare” would be limited to our ability to recognize non-poisonous plants in the yard.

    I’ll bet you he can’t do that.

  87. A. price says:

    listen to yourselves. How many of you calling for a third party mocked the purification of the Repuke party. “it will be their down fall” “they will have nothing but their insane base left” These things are true, and they will be true for the Dems if we follow them down the same dogmatic hole.
    MOST of america is not a far left progressive. just like MOST of america is not a TeaBag nut case. and to say that the only people allowed in our party are those who have the exact same interpretation of the exact same talking point only ensure that we will have NO representation at all. America is about compromise. that was the message i got from Obama the whole campaign. The Left may FEEL betrayed but think about this….. how is what you want Obama to do ANY different from that Bush did?

    heres dome deep though for ya

    Were you mad that Bush pushed through an agenda without regard to the rules of how our government works?

    Or were just a petulant baby who was mad he didnt push through YOUR agenda without regard to the rules of how our government works?

    not close your eyes and repeat this mantra “wa-hey guru ram sita ram”

  88. pandora says:

    Um… maybe I’m wrong, but didn’t RepubDavid once state that he gets his health care through a Veteran’s program?

    And I guess I have become more militant. I’m just so tired of the lies from Cheney and the Republican leadership. (Beck and Limbaugh are liars, but they are entertainers first, so I can separate them from people who should know better and whose position grants them undeserved credibility.) And the outrage over DD’s comment (which I don’t think was fair) is noticeably missing when it comes to what the Right is saying.

    Demanding that Dems/Liberals not fight back while not acknowledging the reason for the fight is hardly fair. We learned the hard way how Conservative lies could turn a man who served his country (Kerry) into something akin to a traitor while a man who got into the National Guard and one who received 5 deferments were patriots. Personally, I don’t intend to let that nonsense happen again.

    Somedays it’s interesting to imagine if Hillary had won, and how opinions would change given that she’d be dealing with the same crap – probably more crap since the Rs would have their favorite whipping boy, Bill Clinton, to add to the mix.

    And here’s the truth – and a truth I feel a little embarrassed about – when Bush became President in 2000, I made myself get over it. When 9/11 happened it never occurred to me to point fingers. Iraq was my tipping point, and with my concern came people incessantly questioning my patriotism. And, hey, that political stunt worked for a while. So, I’m sorry, I won’t be going down that path again.

    In addition, I never drank the kool-aid when it came to Obama. I always knew I was voting for a centrist. I also was consistent in saying that I would vote for and support the Dem candidate – no matter who. (If you can’t say that, then you were involved in a personality contest which had nothing to do with believing in, or supporting, the Dem platform.) BOTH were centrists whose platforms were almost indistinguishable. I preferred Obama mainly because I didn’t have the energy to relive the Clinton years. So much for that theory.

    All that said, I won’t be rolling over again. I intend to call out every lie. And if that means fighting fire with fire (taking a page out of the Republican playbook) then count me in. If that means looking at HCR as a starting point, then count me in. And… if that means being called mean when I hammer Republican lies – because that’s not supposed to be my nature – too bad.

    I don’t agree with Obama on everything (70% at most) but we can’t actually have that discussion because we’re too busy refuting Republican crap about birth certificates, death panels and socialism. Seriously, if the Rs want a debate, I’m ready… once they drop the crap that I refuse to let slide. Been there, done that, and won’t be doing it again.

  89. A. price says:

    go pan go!

  90. anonone says:

    pandora has opened the box!!!!

  91. just kiddin says:

    Appears to me that Maddow, Olberman, Schultz the progressives (if you can call them that) continue to out the Rush, Hannity, Oreilly and other loons with facts. They do it on a daily basis. If you only listen to right wing and never hear the other side you are a partisan.

    I don’t count on any of em, but like to read foreign accounts and then make up mind and even then wonder if the facts presented are actually facts. I find the internet and the alternative press filled with stories that never make main stream news. And lets face it none of these pundits actually write their own material, they have huge staffs of producers to write the script. The pundits just mouth the words.

  92. just kiddin says:

    As far as I am concerned all religious zealots have lost their minds. Certainly the evangelical christians have, certainly the terrorists who claim to be followers of Islam are, and Jews who wrap their heads in zionism are as well. Its about time we started to wrap our heads around the rule of law, the Constitution the bill of rights and leave religion out of everything. Zealots are zealots no matter what religion they profess.

  93. Lizard says:

    White House Adviser Briefed in October on Underwear Bomb Technique
    newsweek.com ^ | Jan. 2, 2010 | Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball

    White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan was briefed in October on an assassination attempt by Al Qaeda that investigators now believe used the same underwear bombing technique as the Nigerian suspect who tried to blow up Northwest Airlines Flight 253 on Christmas Day, U.S. intelligence and administration officials tell NEWSWEEK.

    The briefing to Brennan was delivered at the White House by Muhammad bin Nayef, Saudi Arabia’s chief counterterrorism official. In late August, Nayef had survived an assassination attempt by an operative dispatched by the Yemeni branch of Al Qaeda who was pretending to turn himself in. The operative had tried to kill the Saudi prince by detonating a bomb on his body, but stumbled on his way into the prince’s palace and blew himself up.

    Saudi officials initially thought the bomb had been secreted in the operative’s anal cavity. But after investigating the matter more thoroughly, they concluded it had likely been sewn into his underwear, thereby allowing the operative to bypass security checks before his meeting with the prince. A main purpose of Nayef’s briefing for Brennan was to alert U.S. officials to the use of the underwear technique.

  94. nemski says:

    lizard, you have a point don’t you? ‘Cause you might have to enlighten us.

  95. pandora says:

    Lizard is incapable of independent thought. He can only cut and paste other people’s words.

  96. Mike Matthews says:

    Lizard reminds me of the other right-wing troll, anonni, who frequently did the same thing. Hmmm…

  97. just kiddin says:

    Here’s how the Afgan war is going. 5 canadians killed including a journalist from the Calgary Herald. Two french journalists kidnaped, work with French TV. US pledges another $16BILLION for helicopters, combat and transport planes. Right, lets send more weapons to the corrupt puppet Karzai goverment despised by the Afganis, so he can arm up the drugged out zombie soldiers encapable of fighting against the non addicted, fierce Taliban!

    # of troops slaughtered: 1556. aint war grand for the war profiteers.

    Dennis Kucinch speaks the damned truth:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch? V=V4Um20VFaI
    and: http://www.youtube.com/watch? V=gVcb4 HuSpg. Hope that works.

  98. dominique says:

    UI – I didn’t call out Observer because I didn’t see his comment. To be honest, I was just scanning through the comments and DD’s jumped out. After reading it, I continued to scan in the hopes that I would find something, ANYTHING, calling him out for it. Sadly (predictably?) there wasn’t a peep.

    Pandora – Honey, please. What the GOP did to Kerry was disgusting, but have you already forgotten what the left did to McCain?

    Also, what DD said was not simply unfair, it was offensive. I don’t catalog every comment that comes from the left or the right because, frankly, I have generally have greater concerns than the rantings of lunatics; however, I can’t think of anyone else (other than Alan Grayson) claiming that the other party wants people to die. That’s not to say that no one on the right has done it – either way, it’s completely unacceptable.

    A1 – I’ll give you that RM may not be a loon. In all fairness, I haven’t been able to sit through her whole show because I’d rather eat glass than listen to that grating, sing-song, aren’t-I-cute voice. That said, if you want to take her out of the loon column, you’d also have to take Bill O out. I’ve only seen his show a handful of times and, while I don’t agree with everything he says, he’s actually pretty reasonable.

    Again, kids, you seem to be missing my point. There are assholes on both sides of the political spectrum. I’m encouraging (begging?) all of you to fight the urge to emulate them.