Vindicated

[BDII]

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=240188273058865

War On Terror: George Bush and Tony Blair have been ceaselessly lambasted for charting a new course to defend the free world against terrorism. The foiling of the British airline plot proves how right they've been.

 

[Pseudonym]

But these two leaders have been right all along in recognizing the magnitude of what the civilized world faces, and the extraordinary measures required in defending us against this new threat.

I hate it when people say "new threat." Contrary to popular belief, terrorism existed before 9/11 and the United States was attacked by terrorists many times prior to 9/11. Why people think that 9/11 brought a "new threat" to United States national security is beyond me. Terrorism has been a threat for decades.

So even more surveillance is needed, in case there's a Plan B.

...

This huge, ongoing challenge requires the U.S., U.K. and all other countries who cherish freedom to use every surveillance method possible to prevent future plots.

Each day that passes George Orwell is seeming more and more like a psychic.

But under Bush's and Blair's leadership dozens of terror plots have been thwarted.

Two words: London Underground

Of course I don't expect any government to thwart all terrorist attacks; that's not possible. But seriously, no matter how much surveillance is used (where was the surveillance in July 2005?), terrorists will still attack. There are holes in every system and there will always be a way for them to attack. But giving up our freedoms and the principles on which we founded our country means that they win. The more we submit to fear, the more they win.

 

[JoyJuice]

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=240188273058865

War On Terror: George Bush and Tony Blair have been ceaselessly lambasted for charting a new course to defend the free world against terrorism. The foiling of the British airline plot proves how right they've been.

That is one bozo editorial.

What worked was a tip, surviellance, and arrests.

In otherwords a police operation that has nothing to do with Bush and Blair's war in Iraq replete wit the mischaracterization of making a difference in the war on terrorism. It is in fact is doing the opposite as we now have more of these terrorist nuts to police.

 

[ElvisFan42]

One would think that being tipped off by a Muslim in Pakistan would prove how wrong they were.

 

[k]

I couldn't click on the article because the very first line in the OP is a falsehood considering they have not been lambasted for "charting a new course for fighting terrorism" but because the ink from their pens have bled all over the most important legal documents in human history that guarantee Freedom.

 

[MachZer0]

That is one bozo editorial.

What worked was a tip, surviellance, and arrests.

In otherwords a police operation that has nothing to do with Bush and Blair's war in Iraq replete wit the mischaracterization of making a difference in the war on terrorism. It is in fact is doing the opposite as we now have more of these terrorist nuts to police.

From the article:

Dozens of suspects had to be kept under close surveillance for months, their phones tapped, their transfers of cash from Pakistan monitored.
Right there are two areas in which Bush has been attacked: the National Security Agency's international phone monitoring and the Treasury Department's surveillance of international financial transactions. And it's now more obvious than ever that such methods are imperative if terrorist cells are to be stopped before they strike.
Counterterrorism officials have told reporters that the terrorists changed the shape of their plan regularly, and that it required extensive wiretapping and physical monitoring of their preparations to discern the scale and timing of the plot.

Those are the tools used for the surveillance which, according to you, worked to foil this plot

 

[JoyJuice]

From the article:

Those are the tools used for the surveillance which, according to you, worked to foil this plot

Absolutely surveillllance was part of it.

I don't know how it works in Britian or Pakistan, but here in the States where I live it is extremely rountine for any policing operation to get a tip, just like they did in Britian, obtain warrants for wiretapping or what have you, obtain evidence, and make the arrests just like they did in this case. Just ask the mafia, they'll tell you how it works. It was not warrantless wiretap surveillance that initiated the action.

 

[MachZer0]

Absolutely surveillllance was part of it.

I don't know how it works in Britian or Pakistan, but here in the States where I live it is extremely rountine for any policing operation to get a tip, just like they did in Britian, obtain warrants for wiretapping or what have you, obtain evidence, and make the arrests just like they did in this case. Just ask the mafia, they'll tell you how it works. It was not warrantless wiretap surveillance that initiated the action.

So you're going on a hunch that the plot was exposed by a tip and then insinuating that the plot would have been foiled without the tools I referenced earlier?

 

[JustOneWay]

This article is just an opinion. One person's opinion. If he feels Bush and Blair are vindicated, great. I dont.

Now if anybody can prove to me that this terror outfit was captured by randomly wiretapping millions of phones, or monitoring millions of citizens bank transactions without warrants, I may change my mind.

 

[MachZer0]

This article is just an opinion. One person's opinion. If he feels Bush and Blair are vindicated, great. I dont.

Now if anybody can prove to me that this terror outfit was captured by randomly wiretapping millions of phones, or monitoring millions of citizens bank transactions without warrants, I may change my mind.

I assume that the specifics are classified, so we'll have to wait for the NYTimes to get their hands on another leak that they can publish to find out how the culprits were discovered

 

[Vylo]

A Bristish Mulsim noticed strange behavior of an acquaintance and called it in to the British police.

 

[JustOneWay]

A Bristish Mulsim noticed strange behavior of an acquaintance and called it in to the British police.

Really? Hmmmm...

- Do you work for the New York Times?

 

[JoyJuice]

So you're going on a hunch that the plot was exposed by a tip and then insinuating that the plot would have been foiled without the tools I referenced earlier?

No hunch required, it is a fact a tip got the ball rolling.

Here, a link:

"The tip was from a person who had been concerned about the activities of an acquaintance after the July 7, 2005, terror attacks in London, the official said."

In addition, I am not insinuating anything. What I am stating is given normal US police procedures conducted legally every single day here in States, given the tip, normal and again constituitional legal warrant aquiring proceedures that allows for wiretapping and surveillince would have netted the same results.

This by no means "vindicates" the need for warrantless wiretaps.

 

[Vylo]

Really? Hmmmm...

- Do you work for the New York Times?

No but I can read articles.

A tip from a member of the British Muslim community about suspicious behavior by an acquaintance alerted authorities to the alleged conspiracy, and a neighbor of the alleged plotters helped confirm those suspicions, the memo said.

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/08/12/terror.plot/index.html

As I said, this was the result of tips and then survailence, not random wiretappings or unwarranted intrusion.

 

[ElvisFan42]

I know this is real hard for the Bush cheerleaders to understand, but what part of obtaining a warrant don't you get?

Do you really have a problem with getting a warrant?

Besides, the wiretapping Bush has been doing found NOTHING, they only found this because of a tip.

 

[variant]

I'm really not sure why obtaining warrants to go after criminals, and those suspected of planning criminal activity, and succeeding in this pursuit, should vindicate all wiretapping whether warranted or not.

That would just be silly.

Wiretapping has been used since there have been wires, and it can be used quite successfully within the boundaries of the law.

 

[Vylo]

I know this is real hard for the Bush cheerleaders to understand, but what part of obtaining a warrant don't you get?

Do you really have a problem with getting a warrant?

Besides, the wiretapping Bush ahs been doing found NOTHING, they only found this because of a tip.

You were actually expecting people to pay enough attention to this to note the bolded statement? American Idol is on, they can't be trifled with silly things like protecting their rights .

 

[k]

How ironic is it that some of those who claim to be the most deeply Patriotic people in the US are in the same group so desperately seeking justification for the abdication of the Constitution?