Foiled al Qaeda Plot?
Dunno whether to believe this or not. I basically quit believing anything this administration said about 2.5 years ago. Fool me 5, 366 times shame on you...fool me 5,367 times, shame on me...
If I had to guess: they busted a couple of guys who were participating--in some sense of 'participating'--in a half-assed copy-cat plot. We are told, for example, that:
It's not that I'm not glad they caught them, but I expect that they're spinning here as usual. Perhaps not out of whole cloth this time...but I suspect exaggeration.
Dunno whether to believe this or not. I basically quit believing anything this administration said about 2.5 years ago. Fool me 5, 366 times shame on you...fool me 5,367 times, shame on me...
If I had to guess: they busted a couple of guys who were participating--in some sense of 'participating'--in a half-assed copy-cat plot. We are told, for example, that:
U.S. authorities don't have details on the West Coast plot, such as whether a specific flight was targeted or a day scheduled, Townsend said.
It's not that I'm not glad they caught them, but I expect that they're spinning here as usual. Perhaps not out of whole cloth this time...but I suspect exaggeration.
posted by Winston Smith at
3:58 PM
11 Comments:
It could be that trumpeting their achievements would have disrupted further investigations. So they took the political heat instead, until it grew hot enough to endanger the program(s).
If true, that would be the right thing to do. I do suspect there have been a number of thwartings we haven't heard about, because we haven't needed to.
Now that there's been a political spitstorm against the NSA spying program, I would expect its effectiveness is diminished, if only for the higher awareness of it. It will be interesting to see whether the New York Times will be found liable, either legally or morally, for blowing its cover.
I would expect its effectiveness is diminished, if only for the higher awareness of it. It will be interesting to see whether the New York Times will be found liable, either legally or morally, for blowing its cover.
You've really got to be a fool don't you? Tom, what makes you think that your calls right now aren't being listened to? There simply isn't an expectation of privacy - especially for those who commit crimes, they expect the opposite.
Terrorists often use keywords and codes for that purpose. It is so foolish to say that now they know we are listening they will stop talking. Bin Ladin is reported to not use phones for that reason.
Is anyone in the world, outside of America, suprised to hear that we are listening to the calls of our enemies? Even the heads of China, Canada and Iran, et. al. assume we are listening to them when we can - the outrage that anyone feels stems from the fact that America, the home of freedom (from oppression) is bugging their citizens illegally.
Tom, your comments smack in the face of serious logical shortcomings. I'm afraid that you aren't a shill and you believe the hype.
This "the effectiveness of the program has been compromised" line has been refuted time and again. The right keeps using it, though.
Once more: terrorists already knew that their lines could be tapped. It doesn't matter to them whether there's a warrant or there isn't. It only matters to us.
Anyway, these guys were NEVER calling each other up and having conversations like "Hey, Abdul, how's the planning for that anthrax attack against Cleveland on the 22nd of April 2006 going?"
Oh, and note also the Administration's attempt to suggest without proof that this massive Big Brother program stopped the West coast attacks. Shamless.
Er, SHAMELESS. SHAM-ful actually...
This essay makes passing reference to the familiarity of AQ members with the fact that we bug their phones, as well as illustrating what looks to me like a pretty damned good job of combatting terrorism without abandoning our principles:
http://corrente.blogspot.com/2005/08/terrorizing-judges.html
I can't bring up the article linked up in the main post right now, but if it's the one involving using shoe bombs to hijack a plane, Atrios points out that it doesn't make much sense to use shoe bombs to hijack a plane:
http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_02_05_atrios_archive.html#113952416730533532
I don't see how it can be definitively refuted, WS. Or in fairness, proved, for that matter. I presented it as red meat, as food for thought. But I respect your choice to be a vegetarian.
My judgment of the facts as I know them is that the "outing" of Valerie Plame didn't compromise national security, altho the possibility certainly exists. The same is true of the NYTimes' outing of the NSA project, altho in my opinion, the possibility of harm to national security is far greater in the latter case.
The difference is that Republicans seem to have broken the law in both cases.
So I guess that's not a difference, really...
My judgment of the facts as I know them is that the "outing" of Valerie Plame didn't compromise national security, altho the possibility certainly exists. The same is true of the NYTimes' outing of the NSA project, altho in my opinion, the possibility of harm to national security is far greater in the latter case.
How does the disclosure of the program harm it, absent the assumption on the part of al Qaida that the U.S. was not wiretapping? They don't seem that stupid.
If the NSA is doing large-scale data-mining, that would be another thing - except that that capability has been well known for a long time. So, if you tell me that Duhbya is baldly lying to protect the asset, too late, that cat's already out of the bag, too.
So, how?
That's right, LL.
I also noticed that, when testifying before Congress that absent the NY Times disclosure of the illegal wiretapping, AQ operatives might have FORGOTTEN that we had cell phone tracking capability, Attorney General Gonzales forgot to wear the red fuzzy wig, round rubber nose and giant floppy shoes.
We've made this point over and over again, as have many others... But the conservatives just keep repeating the "our security was compromised" mantra.
It's rather like the Saddam-9/11 link. Just keep saying it, and eventually it gets worn into the minds of people who aren't really paying attention.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home