As usual with Democrats, no matter what happens it’s always George W. Bush’s fault. Massachusetts congressmen interviewed by the Boston Herald blamed Bush for allowing the foiled London airliner terror plot to happen... even though it was stopped, but don’t bother them with the details.
The plot would have used liquid chemicals to fashion crude explosives, similar to a plan by original World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef from the mid-90s for taking down US airliners over the Pacific. (Yousef also plotted to shoot down Pope John Paul’s plane when he traveled to Manila for World Youth Day 1995.)
So now the Democrats say that since we knew the terrorists tried to use liquid chemicals back in 1995, why have people been allowed to carry on liquids all this time?
But Bay State congressmen blasted back at Chertoff and the Bush administration for failing to act quicker to address threats ranging from unscreened cargo to easily transportable explosives.
“The need to address this liquid explosives problem is over 10 years old,” U.S. Rep. Edward Markey said. “While this terrorist plan may have been thwarted, I still am gravely concerned about gaping aviation security loopholes that continue to put passengers and crew members at risk.”
Markey is either stupid or thinks we’re stupid. The reality is that despite the silly bans on nail clippers and other “jump through the hoops” security measures that have made air travel nearly unbearable since 9/11, a determined terrorist can still find at least a half-dozen or a dozen commonly carried items that are still deadly and still allowed on aircraft. In a conversation with a friend who works in law enforcement with federal and local agencies around the country, we listed as many as we could think of. How about these for deadly weapons: a pen, a zipper, a compact disc, a shoelace, a watchband, a credit card. I could go on and on. All of those can be used as weapons, although I won’t bother to enumerate how.
This is a war against Islamofascism
Now, Dom, don’t forget the famous Markey Act which prohibitted liquids on airlines until President Bush repealed it.
I’m no constitutional scholar, but I’m pretty sure that if a congressman sees a problem, he doesn’t have to wait for a proposed bill from the executive. Of course, the fact that any such “Markey Act” would be laughed out of committee (and rightfully so) is another issue entirely.
I didn’t realize that Bush was the only president we’ve had since 1972. All those teachers and mediots lied!
I’m with you Christopher it’s been stale for a while now.
I came back from London Saturday and British Air did provide as much to drink as you wanted.
Miss Kelly: Great minds think alike. While you were writing your comment, I was working on a blog post on that very topic.
Infanted: Was that before or after the terrorist plot was revealed?
It’s not us making the world more dangerous. It’s muslim extremists in nearly every single case. Just keep that in mind.
That said, I am 100% for profiling. I think the West should be protecting itself from muslim immigration and muslim criminal behavior. I have no problem with that—it’s even historically justified. They are our enemies and have been since before the middle ages. Wake up.