I Have Zero Reason To Believe The Plot Wasn't Real. I Refuse To Mock It.

The administration has cried wolf far too many times. No one is disputing that. But it is ignorant to not take every new instance as an individual one to be assessed with reset perspective. If this incident is looked upon wisely with a clear perspective it is logically deduced that this was in fact legitimate.

I don't care if the administration spins it to their gain, as that's what they do. I care not for the petty gripe about every nth detail in which we can mock. Those are all petty political complaints to a situation that is far more relevant. The fact is with some situations, it may be wiser to choose to just sit down, take a breath, shut up and be thankful.

It is very possible that a plot was averted today that put hundreds if not thousands of innocent lives at risk. As a democrat, I am always thankful of such circumstance.

Foolish be not: There are terrorists in the world that spend every moment of thought plotting how to harm us. It is a good thing when we catch some of them legitimately. Save the mockery for the administration follies that are worthy of mockery. Rest assured they provide us with ample opportunity. But don't be so blind to not be thankful when we should be thankful. Hundreds of lives may have been saved by this intervention today.

Peace,

OMC

Like the Canadian Mounties with their fertilizer bomb sting - how transparent can it get?
Tarpley mocked: If a Mounty comes to your door and says, you just won a 10-year supply of fertilizer, don't sign for it!
You'll be taken into custody!

What a Koincidence this happened the day the latest Big Lie flick WTC premieres!

"World Trade Center" isn't a "Big Lie flick." It's based on what really did happen to a few Port Authority cops. Oliver Stone consulted them about everything in the movie. The people the movie is based on says it is true to life. Many of the rescuer extras in the movie were actually 9-11 rescuers, because they would be able to recreate it most accurately. This isn't that rah-rah jingoistic crap that was "Flight 93." This is the real deal.

Oh yeah, and why are you talking like a Freeper pretending to be a DUer?

:)

Seriously, I don't believe it was totally fake. I just think that LOTS of these kinds of things happened all the time and that the WH just picked this one to blow up (no pun intended :evilgrin:) into a national calamity because the GOP could possible lose the House. Code Red for them; a damned nuisance for the rest of us.

of the terrorists who have taken over our government.

They've killed 1000's of people already and they aren't anywhere near done yet.

I'm afraid of tornado's too but I fail to see how that affects the logical argument put forth.

or not to live in fear.

I prefer to try to overcome my fears and to live as fearlessly as possible. It doesn't mean that I'm a risk taker or anything like that. I just refuse to let them make me afraid anymore.

Unless you could point me to where in the OP I touted fear or that we should act afraid, then your argument is absent of logic within the context of the argument put forth in the OP.

The OP had nothing to do with fear. It had to merely do with being thankful that a plot was averted that had the potential to take innocent lives.

After all the republican swift-boating lies, I have absolutely no reason to believe them about anything, and no reason not to mock them.

I have kept quiet and lurked regarding this all day just to get abetter look at this thing and I am definitely with you.

One major factor is that the Brits took this one down and I am inclined to believe them just a little bit more than our govt when it comes "turrists" (come to think of it, knowing that the Bush cabal is running the show, I probably trust them more on just about everything) Besides, with those subway bombings from last year fresh on their minds I dont think they are fucking around.

"There are terrorists in the world that spend every moment of thought plotting how to harm us..

You sound like a Dick...Cheney.

So Bush and Cheney's foreign policy is dangerous because it manufactures terrorists....that don't exist?

Hm.

Terrorists who don't like us actually exist!

enough already

terrorism by Bushco has only made this world much more dangerous. And like you said has manufactured many thousands more terrorists. It is utterly juvenile for anyone to mock what happened today, or to think that somewhere down the road we will not suffer a horrible act of terrorism.

We don't know the full details yet, but based on what I've heard, I am very thankful that this plot was foiled. Who here wants to continue mocking, until we have another 9/11?

Even some of those on OUR side are easily brainwashed too. Pity.

You are right. Everybody loves us. We bring freedom to the masses and we're met with hugs and flowers wherever we go. :eyes:

whether or not that's all we want to focus on is the problem with people like Cheney, not whether or not it's true. So that statement made in the proper context is completely legitmate, and mocking it is not. We have to try and seperate ourselves from being against attacking terrorists and the war in Iraq. It's crucial that we articulate we want to stop terrorism, but we think Iraq was not the answer. If anything that Iraq made things worse. If we go national saying this recent episode is fake and not worth talking about, then the Republicans will destroy us.

Yeah, of course there are people who want us dead. My whole life I have been aware that many, perhaps most people in the world would be happy to see me die, and a few of them would actively work toward that end.

It seems that more than a few of us, perhaps because they have led a charmed life of luxury and social ease, did not recognize this basic fact of human existence until its 100,000,000,000th televised manifestation on September 11, 2001. Basically, a bunch of rich white people suddenly felt what anyone poor, black, brown, yellow, or just plain different feels at least from their first day in school. And it has driven the fuckers crazy.

Hate crimes are uncommon and basically unpreventable compared to other modes of death. We are so much more likely to save our lives by buckling up than we are scanning the horizon for gangs of skinheads. Whereas the rest of us just go on with our lives and hope that the rednecks, religious fanatics, serial killers, rogue policemen, racists, homophobes, or whoever hates us, doesn't get us, the pampered cowards who had their bubble pricked on that fateful morning now think they have to turn the entire world into a supermax prison.

The eventual result will be their own starving children hunting them for meat, and justice will then be served.

:applause:

...you live in a fantasy world.

While I think that this administration and others have used terrorists and the threat of terrorism for political gain, I am not that cynical nor shortsighted to think that the United States -- and by association the West -- has no enemies that would like nothing more than to destroy us, be it through physical harm, economic disruption, etc.

The United States actually has enemies that would like nothing more than to destroy us, be it through physical harm, economic disruption, etc!

I'm sorry, I just don't buy into everything that passes as "liberal, progressive thought" here.

And not recognizing stark reality is one such example.

Glad to hear that - I guess the Muslim world has learned to take Afganastan, Iraq and Lebanon in stride. Always knew they were reasonable people.

I think this Administration has put us all at risk. They are not saving any "innocent" lives. They are killing innocent people every hour of the day. Of course, if we only think of ourselves, I guess your perspective makes much more sense...

Again, I fail to see how your argument affects in any way the logical argument put forth in the OP. I also resent the fact that you are falsely implying that my post in some way condones the administration's actions, that I don't realize they put us at risk, or that I care not that they kill thousands as long as it isn't us. That is an absurd violation of logic and extremely flawed in its premise.

out another fake? Welllll...

They want maximum fear and advertisement of their actions, right? More bang for their bucks, right? That means maximum death toll, something spectacular that shocks people when they see it, and within camera range, right?

So how are they going to get all that from explosions somewhere over the ocean? Even if they blew up multiple planes, its lots of effort without any camera footage to create fear in the hearts of Americans and joy in the hearts of arabs (statement not exactly sarcasm but somewhere in the vicinity and not directed at you either) Now if they flew it into something where you have lots of people with cameras on dry land...

I think whatever or wherever fits that description is where they'll be trying to get to whenever they do try again. And that's why I think this is another fake.

So how are they going to get all that from explosions somewhere over the ocean? Even if they blew up multiple planes, its lots of effort without any camera footage to create fear in the hearts of Americans...
I don't even know how to respond to something that retarded.
What do you honestly think would happen (aside from you shouting about how * did it) if the entire country woke up to the news that 4-10 planes had been blown up over the atlantic by terrorists?

Not nearly as much as when the WTC collapsed.

Not nearly the death toll. We might get a few pictures of pieces of plane and possessions silently floating in the ocean, but that's not anywhere near as graphic as the pictures of people running and screaming covered with soot, the plane destroying itself against the WTC, people jumping out of the building and falling to their deaths, firemen running around trying to rescue people. No, I think they'll try something similar to the WTC.

You have to stop looking at this from your own point of view and start using their "what will get us what we really want" point of view.

You gotta be kidding. Fool me once, shame on you...Fool me a hundred times, shame on you. May I ask, what other times did you believe them before this one?

I'm just askin'.

We just have their word.

And that's not worth a lot these days.

There's proof that there was one but it's your choice whether to dismiss it all or believe it.

However, I have yet to see any proof there wasn't one. Do you have any links?

just asking ...

just asking ...

I wonder if some posters are spewing this crap to make DU appear to be full of idiots for the likes of Limpballs and Hannity to quote. They post a LOT, but I'm thinking (hoping) they are few in numbers

:thumbsup:

To those who
don't think terra-ists, and terra-plots are for real;

Tell that to the families of the victims of the London
bombings last year,

and

the Madrid bombings. They are just two examples.

They're doing a hell of a job today!

and I believe BushCo will use it however they can to their advantage. That's what they do. They are opportunistic and vicious. Good grief there have already been leaks telling how they hope they can spin this to their advantage.

There was a boy who cried wolf. But there did end up being a wolf. If we ignore possible threats because we mistrust BushCo, we may be ignoring them at our peril.

What makes me believe this was real is the fact that the Brits busted it up. I have more faith in their Intelligence than I do in Homeland Security.

Mz Pip
:dem:

give Buschco all the credit for this one as well. Agreed on the fact that they will try to capitalize on it of course!

I don't think it was an immediate threat. I don't think it deserved the reaction we've given it.

...but I do believe the threat existed.

The lightbulbs and soft drink terror plot really doesn't have me terribly alarmed.

warmed about possible attacks like this. It's taylored after the Bojinka plan uncovered in 94-95. Unfortunately even after 911 our Govt. didn't take the necessary precautions.

I was wondering why we hadn't seen people more alarmed about things like large bottles of shampoo or toothpase. Strong oder, fairly consistant density, etc.

that would be liquid or gel explosives hidden in soft drinks or whatever and a flash which is a nice high voltage arc.

coherent thought.

You have an hour to edit though, thankfully. :)

but the hype isn't.
I think about the quiet grace in which Bill Clinton handled the several thwarted terror attempts without politicizing them including the millineum plot.
I don't remember the media using these instances 24/7 to boost Clinton's popularity.
The one meme that resonates throughout almost every report on TV is that Republicans are strong and Democrats are weak.

It was the Brits who broke up this little party George......just sit the fuck down and shut up.

I'm sure there was a plot, I have no doubt. The religious wackos and fairy tale believers on all sides are destroying our world piece by piece, and it sickens the hell out of me.

One of the justifications for the Iraq war is this fantasy notion that all of the "terrorists" are somehow pinned down in Iraq.

There certainly are and will continue to be terrorists. The thing about them is that they are distributed, mobile, and are not going to confront concentrated force with concentrated force.

WE are the ones who are pinned down in Iraq, sapping our ability to nimbly counter them where we need to.

If we are "fighting them in Iraq so we don't have to fight them here" then how did these guys pop up in Britain? Simple. They bloom where they are planted, and move where the ground is fertile.

Watch the British press do some ACTUAL reporting and investigative research into it.

Watch the players go from big-time to small-time, and watch the plot go from big-time to small time.

Get back to me after that happens.

but I'll damn sure mock it's political use.

the Brits thwarted it. There's something way more credible about the lads across the pond than say...Michael Chertoff.

:beer:

to the cause of discrediting Bush than your standing above it.

But if you want to tally things up, getting rid of the Republican regime could save more lives than any foiling of a terror plot. So the ethical lines are a little blurry. Especially since making fun of the plot is not going to hinder the authorities stopping it in any way, shape, or form.

That has absolutely nothing to do with this as that is its own isolated argument that does not in any way impact mine.

"Especially since making fun of the plot is not going to hinder the authorities stopping it in any way, shape, or form."

Didn't say it would. It just makes us look stupid and gives credence to the false premise that we are deluded and in denial and are not capable of being strong against the terrorists. If you want to make that false premise a real one, then by all means continue mocking when victories against terrorists occur. I, however, will continue to be grounded in reality and pushing to show we are a bright capable party that can be strong in the fight against terrorism and that has the ability to protect our nation.

Spreading irrational hatred is much more valuable politically than appearing to be reasonable. You seem to be mixing up yourself and the people here with Democratic politicians. The politicians will continue to take the safe ground you advocate. We can act "reasonable" all we want but it won't affect anything. The value of a site like this is spreading fear and distrust of the administration at a grassroots level. You can try to get everyone here talking like politicians, but you won't succeed--and in my view, it would make the whole DU project pointless.

If you really think people's looniness on left-wing websites discredits Democratic politicians, how come the bloodthirsty racism on right-wing websites doesn't discredit Republican politicians? What's worked against us is the grassroots right spewing anti-liberal venom and grotesque scandals about Democratic leaders, and it's time to turn that cannon back on the right. It's the one thing we can do that the politicians can't.

So I'll say it: Dick Cheney is a blood-drinking, Satan-worshipping, child molesting agent of the Red Chinese government, born in Nazi Germany of Hitler's sperm and space-alien eggs.

I didn't mention politicians at all. I'm talking about our message. DU's message. Our grassroots message.

Many people come here for information and education. Many have been turned on to the ills of the republican party and the truth of the democratic party by visiting here. When they come, I want them to be assured that though we fight against the administration and their horrible policies, that we are still grounded in reality and will be tough on terrorism in addition to how much better we'd be at domestic policies. That doesn't in any way mean we can't be politically incorrect here. That is the beauty of DU and I agree. I consider it to be best, however, when there is actually some shred of logic and intelligence behind the political incorrectness. There have been many posts of mockery on today's events that are completely void of reasoning and logic in my opinion, so I chose to offer a counter to them so that there isn't just silliness that can be found here but rational and logical deductions as well. It is all about balance. If only the logical and factual posters posted threads things would get boring. But if only the silly kneejerk void of reasoning posts were present then we'd be as pathetic as freeperville.

Balance of logical, silly, emotional and borderline insane posts are what make DU so exciting and great. Count on me to continue to attempt to provide the logical end of the balance.

But I don't think it is more important than spreading fear and doubt.

Indiscriminately mocking even those terror plots that are likely to be genuine is very bad for Democrats. It plays into all the Republican stereotypes that Dems have no seriousness about national security.

Mocking must be targeted at the many genuine targets offered by this administration. When it comes to actual threats, though, Dems need to be deadly serious.

This is exactly the sort of thing that has people rolling their eyes and ignoring everything the left has to say, and then you guys whine when your own tripe spills over onto people like Ned Lamont. Look in the damned mirror, you're your own worst enemies. And shut the fuck up once in a while.

discredit all criticisms of Democrats?

No idea what you just said.

why do those of the right (Clinton murders, etc.) only seem to help them?

That stuff doesn't help them, most people ignore it. People don't ignore mocking terrorist attacks though.

Lots of well intentioned believers.

I would hope there were tons of them after his UN speech condemning the administration lies and offering logic and reasoning to those who were being irrational and absent of truth.

So I appreciate the compliment. I'm glad you see the wisdom in this thread enough to compare it to the wisdom of the threads calling out the administration's lies and deceit after the UN speech.

More like buying into a half ass terror tale on the face of it for the sake of rather being safe than sorry.

Where is the rationality of upending the whole cha-cha on the basis of a foiled "plot" where there was apparently nothing but "aspiration". Why imminent danger red alerts when they supposedly have the nitwits in custody? What exactly is the breathless panic all about?

Because everybody at DU "knew", they've said so on a near daily basis for the last 2 years. Now you pop out and say there were DUers who didn't "know"??? Hmmm.

every single point was thoroughly debunked using credible sources.

So far with this aleged terror plot all we have is some people making jokes about soft drink bottles, some paranoied delusions about it being done to allow selling high priced watter, and a general lack of belif in Bush.

Now I know we can't outright trust what * says. But do you have any serious critisms or is this just they lied in the past so this probobly is too?

I absolutely agree they are taking advantage of it. But as far as MIHOP... I want some more info first.

these things happen. A segment of the subscribers seriously get frightened by this bullshit, no matter how many times it happens.

..and many boards (this one included) and blogs were as TCO describes. Many of them (TPM comes to mind) have come to regret it. It's still too early on this one for me to make a reasonable decision, but past history causes me to lean in a certain direction. Fool me once...

I am esentialy agnostic on this issue. I haven't got all the facts. I don't even know if enough 'facts' are available.
I also agree that the administration is not to be trusted. But then there have been actual real terror attacks. I bet they are spinning the shit out of it either way. No idea how realistic the threat was or wasn't... Which is of course the reason for my agnostisim.

I do know that the MSM is a bunch of blubering idiots. I saw chertof on PBS last night. Then I saw one of the news shows thismorning... one reporter is talking about how things can be conceled in liquids etc. (similar to chertofs remarks) another one is acting like they where going to combine off the shelf products to get a chemical reaction.
Bunch of fucking idiots.
So I do sometimes wonder how much things get distorted before we even hear them.

It probably was real. And it could even have been something instigated by false-flag operatives but I would rather err on the side of safety. Having said that, I really do not think we should focus ONLY on airplane attacks. This entire episode is being studied by those who would do us harm. I really don't think they will come at us from the air but once they have us focused there, they will come from another direction. that's just my opinion.

I'll file it under "crazy internet ramblings"

with a completely open mind.

But then, that was the point of the electroshock therapy, wasn't it?

Don't be sorry, be safe.

to cause or effect every single event in the world, even the bad things he caused to happen before he was born? I once said that I didn't think Karl Rove caused Bill Clinton's dog to be run over and my God the accusations of being a "freeper" were overwhelming! And when I said I didn't think Karl Rove was using a laptop and plane to steer hurricanes, man, I don't even like to think about the flames that started.




:toast:

That's the whole point. They can come up with lie after lie (as we've seen) and we can't call them on it because we can't PROVE it. (Until somebody in the govt. leaks something years from now). After all, the govt. has the CIA and we have nothing.

Which is EXACTLY what "tak every new instance as an individual one..." is doing.

Sure, it might be a real terror alert. But if I were a bettin man, my money would be against it. The last 6 years suffices for that.

Possibly the distinction between "prima faciae" and "all things considered" is useful here. Prima faciae, it's another administration hoax. All things considered (speaking prospectively), it could turn out to be real, DESPITE the justified prima faciae assumption of bullshit.

This issue isn't so much what the ultimate fact of the matter is, but rather, which is the more justified presumption - that the administration is telling the truth, or that they're lying. Either presumption can certainly be overridden by later evidence - that's not a problem.

Memory only gets you in trouble....

You say "It's more ignorant to ignore history. Which is EXACTLY what "tak every new instance as an individual one..." is doing."

But that shows a lack of understanding for what that statement means to begin with.

Treating an instance as an individual one does not mean that you do so inside a vacuum. Whenever you make deductions based on rationality, reasoning and logic you do so with every bit awareness, information and education that you have at your disposal. Therefore, all lessons learned of the past would be an integral part of that thought process.

The ignorance stems from forsaking that thought process of reasoning and deduction by simply kneejerk defaulting to the outcome of history without any further attempts at evaluation. That is in fact ignorant, my friend. If when looking at this new instance using all information available, including the cried wolf lessons, it was determined that it is every bit as preposterous as the florida arrests, then mockery would be in order. But after reviewing all of the information available along with the knowledge of the tendency to make these things up, I am in firm belief that this one is legitimate.

See? Deductive reasoning.

... treating the instance as a member of a group - in this case, a group of historically similar cases.

I'm not sure what you aren't grasping here.

You can treat it as an individual instance while using new lessons of logic learned from past experience. I'm not sure why that is such a difficult concept to understand. You use the logic learned along with other aspects of deduction and create an assessment. Sometimes you'd find that the outcome of similar incidents of the past are applicable to this instance as well. But other times you may find after applying sound deduction skills that this time, if even surprising, it is a different outcome.

To just shove things into a group and by default give them the same deductive result without further assessment is a sure way to be wrong quite often.

Who needs predicates? They're all just individual instances! LOL - whatever you say, Aristotle.

I'll stick with Frege, thank you very much.

I mean, you seriously with a straight face just wrote "Who needs predicates?" in response to my well formed explanation?

Wow. Just wow. Like, you didn't even attempt to understand my post did you. You were just going to write the same false sentiment back anyways right?

Cause the whole point referenced on several occasions in my explanation is that the predicates are a mandatory part of the deduction process. And yet, you respond with complete disregard for the quite simple to understand concept?

It appears you have no desire nor intention to understand the legitimacy of my argument, as if you had that desire it would've been fairly easy for you to grasp by now. But no, instead it appears you just want to hold onto your position for sake of pride and stubborn resolve rather than actually opening your mind to the concept of logical understanding.

That's ok though, to each their own.

But it kinda cracked me up that after detailing the logic step by step the response was still "Who needs predicates?" :rofl:

Your opening subject line sentence "I Have Zero Reason To Believe The Plot Wasn't Real." is just plain false.

You DO have such a reason: the administration says it.

Whether you choose to accept that reason as sufficient for a mere *presumption* of trumped-up A-Team hoax (which can always be overridden) is your business. But it's just plain false to say you have NO reason to disbelieve it.

Firstly, it's not like this news was broken by this administration. This administration also are not the only ones in the world who are taking it seriously. You can't just look at it in a bubble and say "well the administration said it so it must not be true".

But I criticize that reasoning for more than just that. It is because that reasoning, that line itself, is a wash in any terror announcement ever. Whether or not a terror announcement was real or fabricated, the administration would ALWAYS use it to their advantage, announce it, and propagate it for their gain anyway. Whether real or not. So it therefore is a wash and cannot be used as a legitimate logical factor in determining whether the details of the plot are in fact real or fabricated. Any time a detail will always be equal by design, it is generally not worthy of inclusion. In this case, by design, a real or false terror threat would be touted by the administration.

The thing is the truly wise, through deduction, logic and reasoning, can determine which is which.

Peace,

OMC

... on statements put out or leaked or fanned by the administration - I'll be happy to find out which of us comes out ahead.

It's not a cop-out to disbelieve - presumptively - a known liar - in a situation that is advantageous for the liar to lie - it's just having good sense.

But again - that's a reason. Whether that reason sways you is your own business.

It is cute tho how you attempt to get around the simple error by classifying it as a "cop out". Yah - and I guess not believing perjured witness because they perjured themselves is also a reasonless cop-out - LOL!

The fact that the speaker is a liar is a *reason*, not a cop-out, for presumptively disbelieving the liar. Again, what you do with that reason is up to you. It seems odd to me, though, to think there's anything at all odd about *other* people being skeptical of what a liar says, on topics he's been known to repeatedly lie about in the past, and in situations within which he's been known to lie.

Oh yah - I forgot - they're just all individual instances to you. Not members of a group of related instances (or "pattern of behavior" as a different jargon goes). It would indeed be hard to ever make any inferences if all we had were group-less individual instances. Hume rendered that point smashingly.

We really need a talking to a wall smiley... ...badly.

Until that time comes, I'll go with

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

:toast:

A no win situation. Face it - some people hate bush and crew no matter what they do. There is no logic to it, hatred works that way.

If our fed govt stopped a nuclear device from going off, there would be no praise here. It would all be bitching, conspiracy, etc and so on.

We have hard working people who have dedicated many years of service to the government and do work hard for our benefit, and if they suceed, we wash it away in hate for one man.

Screw the undercover folks who leave their family for months to pursue leads, the folks listening to endless chatter, and so on. The government is no made up of any good and decent people, it's all evil. Smack the mailman for me tomorrow - he has been on time for two years, just to make bush look good.

Mock the Plot...

don't tip the Plot over!

We've been flying with a bomb inside
Some baby lotion.
So I'd like to know where you got the notion.
To mock the plot.........etc.

Damn I'm glad I wasn't drinking anything!

Now ya done gave me an earworm...dammit...

:D

Todd in Beerbratistan

:hide:

:patriot:

Same thing holds for the response. Sure contact lenses are extreme... but I have to say my first reacton upon hearing this was 'what took so long?' I figured terrorists would have tried toothpase or drink bottles for smugling explosives long ago.

If there is good reason to doubt this I will. And I accept that the cry wolf administration is reason to be careful so I won't say everything was definate... but I think most of the critism here so far has been of the 'tinfoil hat' variety.

irregardless of the timing the plot was real and I think we hurt ourselves by saying it wasn't. We can criticize the Iraq War and still promote National Security. If not it may just bite us in the butt again.

with the newly banned items and plastics bags to put our belongings in.

They weren't on chalkboards or sandwich boards. They were all on big laminated signs.

I just found that amazing that in a heartbeat that all airports had these big signs with all the newly banned items.

get rid of this cheney/nixon's ghost/bush/rove/matalin/bfee admin for the various ways they have made it infinitely worse & continue to treat the matter as a subject line for political expediency

...but that is not the same as zero probability. It can't be known if it is real, hyped, or completely fabricated. We can only assign probabilities. And all of our individual assesments of those probabilities would be colored by our own worldviews.

If someone has established themselves as a serial liar, as many members of both Blair and Bush's team have, everything they say comes into question. This is exactly how testimony is treated in a court of law, a lying witness has zero credibility, whether or not some of his/her statement is truthful..

I don't see how the court of public opinion should be any different.

but I still refuse to mock it.

I'm waiting till we get more facts.

I must say however the fact that the Pakistani ISI was involved in uncovering it is very suspicious.

911 funds came from the Pakistani ISI.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=107432

They've known about this for a while and only acted on it today. When Rove said he'd do what he could for Lieberman, I wonder if Joe's response was "Oh great! Do you think you could cough up a terror alert for me?" "Sure, no probs."

Not likely I guess, but it was one of the first things that ran through my mind.

..the problem lies with just how big of a threat this really was. For all we know, these people had about as much serious chance to blow up planes as those people who wanted to level the Sears tower. Considering all the lies and manipulation by the administration up to this point, my gut reaction is to assume there's a large part of this we're not being told, a part that would make all the running around with our hair care products in little plastic baggies look really silly.

One can never be sure...but I refuse to be a sheep of this administration. Of course we have bad people out there who want to harm us, but the worse kind reside in the WH. And they have always used the fear factor to achieve their agenda.

whether british or american have to say - really, about anything.

I was duped on 9/11 2001. I will not be again.

especially if it includes the word "terror."

I will view it with skepticism, as details emerge. We find out that there was an infiltrator in the group, did that infiltrator advance this idea? Do we know that? Sounds like they did not have the materials, according to a recent post.. I will wait to see how credible and immediate this threat truly was. Honestly, there have been plenty of big arrest like this since 9/11 that turned out to be... well.. not exactly as advertised.

Skepticism is healthy. Someone has to ask the important questions... because the media is asleep and the govt is corrupt. You know damn well that if Clinton was in office and this happened, the rightwingers would be doing the same damn thing.

I should have used that.
:9

they deserve the benefit of the doubt. :sarcasm:

I'm very glad the Brits are on their toes. Lord knows, the asshats in charge here aren't.

their gain is our loss

Thank you for the much-needed sanity and logic.

I think many of the major discussions going on around here are completely missing the point.

Sure, there may be something to this "foiled terrorist plot." Just because they are constantly pissing on our feet and telling us it's raining doesn't mean that it can't actually rain.

But that's not the real issue here. The issue is not whether or not this plot is as full of crap as the MIAMI SEVEN. The real issue is that the Bush administration has once again teamed with our breathless chicken little corporate media to hype a "TERRA TERRA TERRA" story to kingdom come for strictly political reasons.

Scotland Yard may or may not have caught a bunch of dangerous would-be terrorists, and the timing of this may or may not have been orchestrated to the day. But there is one thing we know for sure, and that is that BushCo yelling "CODE RED! CODE RED! CODE RED!" about this already foiled plot was and is a calculated PR gambit. And our corporate media is, once again, more than happy to play Charlie Brown to BushCo's "TERRA ALERT" Lucy football.

I have spent all day on the phone. This was very organized, there was training abroad (London to Pakistan), there was an exchange of money. There was planning involved, movements made, cash supplied. This was real. This has nothing to do with the White House sleazy abuse of the information.

I was skeptical this morning, but while I have timing questions, I have to say that this does appear to be a real, aggressive, and very well coordinated plot. Which is why there is no article from me debunking it like the NYC plot.

That does not change that the White House reacted with the kind of political smut they are known for and they should be criticized. But people need to separate the one from the other.

I think they need a few "foiled terror plots" before the attack we all fear.

See: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1871040&mesg_id=1871040

At first, they tried to "cheap out" by planting agent provocateurs among local nutcases. Problem was that, once people looked at the "terrorists", they figured out the score. So this time, they went back to their roots and imported real "al Qaeda" guys from Pakistan. Naturally, with all that expense, they felt comfortable playing up the media as we've all seen today.

I've always respected your posts and consider you to be someone quite capable of logical reasoning, as you've proven time and time again.

Thank you for providing further confidence to the legitimacy of this plot.

This administration has earned all the skepticism it receives, and more. It is entirely reasonable and expected for DUrs to be dubious first and trusting second, given the false stories and fake news spewing from the WH and GOP.

You were skeptical and spent the day researching the facts...perfect response for a journalist. Had more journalists taken this approach over the last six years, fewer hoaxes and deceptions would have reached us. As more of us hear more facts, we will also likely settle on more accurate opinions.

So...people will separate one from the other given some time. But I am comfortable with some DUrs' first day impressions being characterized by mistrust, skepticism, and need for more research and verification. If not us, then who?

I posted earlier this day that I was skeptical. But I think it is very important that we separate criticism of this administration's political exploits and sleaze from actual events that have nothing to do with those exploits... the Brits did brilliant work on this, there is no question. That is all I am saying, let us separate the two and discuss each in its proper context:)

E_V_E_R_Y_T_H_I_N_G

Don't forget.

intellectual integrity than conservatives, I'm appalled that so many in a forum like this respond with these childish, pouty denials when Scotland Yard foils a plot to kill hundreds of people.

Will the Republicans be able to use this? Yes. The Democrats could use it too, if they didn't have their heads up their asses.

Do I live in fear? No. I know it is far more likely I'm going to be killed by my car, my eating habits, or my blood pressure than some terrorist.

I've no doubt this will give the Republicans a little boost. But it will be old news long before November, and we'll still have the Iraq war and gas prices and global warming.

Did Scotland Yard foil a plot to kill a bunch of innocent people? Looks like it. That's good news, and thank God they're doing their job. And if the Republicans exploit it, well... that's what Republicans do. But I'm not going to deny reality because reality isn't politically convenient.

The OP is correct.

You know something? I actually agree with you. Huh.

anyhting could happen

We have no answers for 911, so the whole terror thing is in question.
The Madrid and London bombings just seemed to happen to reinforce dubby's war aspirations. We had a bombing to inspire the Australians too.
There is no doubt that people hate us, but dubya has done nothing to alleviate it in any way. His first moves were to ignore information collected about Osama, etc. More actions included leaving the I/P situation fester and dropping out of Non- proliferation and test ban treaties.
Logic dictates that we would be much safer with diplomatic efforts than cowboy politics.
:tinfoilhat:

I posted my own theory about it here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1880691&mesg_id=1880691

Excerpt:

Was this a "plot" by the US and British government to manipulate the next election? I have serious reservations about supporting that point of view for a host of reasons. I believe there's something more obvious, and logical, behind the timing of these things.

Here's my theory, in a nutshell. I believe "the terrorists" want the GOP to remain in control of the government in the USA.

------------

It's not as whacky as you might think, but I'm not gonna reproduce the whole thing here.

I'd have to go along with you EXCEPT for this from Time Magazine

It's all in the timing yanno? Worked great to get Lamont and Isreal off the front pages eh?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1881017

:hi:

I too appreciated your output on this matter. But who did you talk to on the phone? What is their sources? Who are they?

Just because it was uncovered by the Scotland Yard, doesn't mean they aren't manipulating for political gains. Remember David kelly? That's still a mystery unsolved.

I also would like the British opinion on this...Does anybody have any idea? Are they buying it?

and welcome to DU

:hi:

:hi: back to you and thanks for the welcome. :)

Intel here and there is very much in agreement on this. Yes, real. Yes, credible. Yes, organized. Yes, funded. Everyone seems to be missing the major point here, however. Pakistan is our "ally" in the war on terra... so why are they funding and harboring terrorists? In fact, the money track from Atta's Floria account let - via Dubai to the head of ISI. Pakistan just bombed an Indian train station. Osama seems to have escaped there. Is there some reason that we are invading countries of no threat and partnering actual sponsors of terror? That is what I think people need to really focus on.

It amazes me that to this day so many americans still believe Iraq is a central front in the war on terror, yet supposed plot after plot after arrest after intel has not yet implicated one goddamn Iraqi. In fact, they've come from everywhere but friggin Iraq.

I also agree that the deeper question of disturbance is why the areas of the world that these terrorists often are coming from are always our deep allies such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, UAE, Britain etc...

Are we the biggest funders of worldwide terrorism behind the scenes when it comes down to it? If so, what is the end game? I know we have theories, but I'm not sure any one of us or group of us truly have any real idea of what their end game truly is, if this isn't all just made up in my head to begin with.

... but guess what? More people were killed in auto accidents in the month of Sept 2001 than in the terror attack. One month, right here in the US.

The terror is real, but keep the whole thing in perspective. What is the likelihood of any one of us dying in a terror attack? Damn low. And we put our life on the line every time we get behind the wheel of a car, or eat at a cheap buffet.

I refuse to be scared of shit that is damned unlikely to happen.

scared or taking it out of perspective.

... if I said you were. But the media sure is.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Tony Snow: A Vote for Lamont is a Vote for Another 9/11

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1865964

In light of that, the timing is coincidental enough that it makes me raise my eyebrows. Remember that using the media to disseminate propaganda is a very old, widely practiced form of social manipulation. To believe unquestioningly that the terror plot was true is to believe that our government would never lie to us and neither would our media. There might have been a time when I would have believed that, but not since the lead-up to the Iraq war. I've seen enough now to KNOW that both our government and media will indeed blatantly lie to us when it suits their purposes.

I do believe terrorism is real and I don't believe it's all a plot, but this administration in particular is particularly skilled at lying to the public about very important issues, so for that reason I cannot blindly trust it when they tell me a terror plot has been foiled.

The wire services are reporting that Pakistani intelligence uncovered the plot.

Of course they won’t go into the fact that there is evidence that 911 funds came from The Pakistani ISI.
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1060313/asp/nation/story_5962372.asp

Nor will they mention that the Pakistani and Indian press reported that the 911 Commission was bribed by Pakistani officials in order to remove references to Pakistan in the final report.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=107432

No. We will just hear about how great the Pakistani ISI is, and what a great ally in the war on terror they are. It stinks to high heaven and we should be investigating these important and very relevant items that have been totally ignored. It would be very sad indeed if because of this recent development we chose to sit down, shut up and continued to not question the ISI and the American intelligence agencies closely related to it. The bizarre evidence of Pakistani complicity in the worst terrorist attack in US history demands an explanation.

strikes again. :)

and paid to do.

regardless of the administration.

they did not get them with war. they got them thru investigation. doesnt matter who is in office, we expect this.

this isnt what my gripe is with this. bush created the environment where everyone questions him. his fault. he gets to own it. what happens when abuses the fear button. we had terrorism before bush came in. we will have it when he leaves. we have people whose job is to catch these people

it is bullshit bushco using terrorism to decry the democrats. they caught these people thru investigation, which they say dems want to do and will be unsuccessful.

then the story that comes out cannot just be a truth, it has to be flawed everywhere. reaction cannot be reasonable, it has to be extreme, ripe for critisism. that does not mean i dont believe or appreciate caputring these guys. it means once again, shit is left to call on the administration and their behavior.

while watching the Lieberman concession speech.

According to 80% of DU.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1871170

be capable of rising above our hatred for the GOP enough to still be objective and able to deduce the common sense reality of this situation.


:hi:

...this was a British thing and for Bush to hijack what I'm guessing was more British intel than US, well that ticks me off.

And I'm pissed off that they're using it as a campaign ploy with crap like "If democrats hadn't vote for Lieberman we would be safer from attacks like this"

I'm playing fair - they AREN'T

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.