"Genaro" <genaro@cablespeed.com> wrote in message
news:Xns982A791EFC178genaro@216.196.97.142...

Genaro wrote:

Harry Hope wrote:

Within hours of the news of the alleged plot, the Republican
National Committee e-mailed a fundraising appeal by former New
York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani claiming, "In the middle of a war
on terror, we need to remain focused on furthering Republican
ideas more than ever before."


From The Capital Times, 8/19/06:
http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/column/index.php?ntid=95539&nt
pi d=0

Obey your government: Toss that killer lip gloss

By Joel McNally


As people obediently lined up at airports across the country to
throw away killer lip gloss, expensive perfume and even bottles
of fine wine, an irreverent question came to mind:

Is there anything the government could order the American people
to do in the name of fighting terrorism that would be so
ridiculous they would refuse to do it?

We are all undergoing government training.

And so far we are all passing with flying colors.

Whether that is something we should be proud of is questionable.

We could look back on it one day as the biggest mistake the
citizens of a once free nation ever made.

Terrorists aren't the only ones who know how to use fear as a
political weapon.

The current administration has shown before it knows how to use
fear to win elections and maintain power.

Republicans are going into midterm elections in a weakened
position precisely because the American people are starting to
see through their political exploitation of public fear.

A growing majority of citizens now oppose the war in Iraq, waged
to protect us from fictitious weapons of mass destruction and
nuclear mushroom clouds that existed only in overheated
administration imaginations.

So it was like old times for the government to see that it could
still make the citizenry stand in line to throw away bottles of
Chanel No. 5 and potentially explosive tubes of lipstick to
prevent those deadly products from falling into the hands of
terrorists.

On the first few days of air travel after the announcement of an
alleged plot to blow up airliners between Britain and the U.S.,
most passengers were concerned only about traveling safely and
minimizing the horrendous delays and missed flights.

But with time for further reflection, we should all start asking
some common sense questions about how throwing away lip gloss
protects us from terrorism.

The 24-hour news channels hauled out experts to spin imaginative
tales about how two seemingly harmless-looking liquids could be
combined on board an airplane to create a suicide bomb.

Why, there could even be some kind of detonating device
concealed in an iPod to set the whole thing off.

None of the experts ever explained what airline security and
other flight personnel would be doing while these mad scientists
were concocting their deadly hair gel and Carmex cocktails and
hooking them up to Game Boys.

After the nation has spent $20 billion to improve airport
security since 9/11, the process still appears to be not just
low-tech, but positively stone age.

Modern technology can identify exactly whom on Earth a single
hair belongs to, but the only way airport security can tell that
a bottle of breast milk isn't a deadly explosive is to force a
mother to drink part of it before boarding the plane.

Zero tolerance policies have always been a substitute for
thinking.

Instead of screening lip gloss and bottled water to determine
whether there is any remote possibility they could be dangerous,
simply ban all liquids and gels.

Confiscating even the most innocuous liquids may be a test of
just how far government can go in manipulating the American
people to comply with absurd rituals.

So far, the end is nowhere in sight.

Not only did people willingly surrender their most beloved
beauty, cosmetic and personal care products, but they even threw
away expensive purchases marketed directly by the airports.

Duty-free shops in airports have always had a powerful allure
for travelers.

The shops are chock-full of liquid products from liquor to the
most expensive perfumes on the planet.

People who rarely drink alcohol or smell any more exotic than
Old Spice are unable to resist what they perceive as bargain
prices.

They haul gallons of the stuff onto airplanes.

When people started dumping those precious - and securely sealed
- liquids in order to be permitted to fly, it was proof the
government could get the public to do just about anything by
invoking terrorism.

And, of course, it was not just in the airports that there were
immediate attempts to exploit the public's newly heightened fear
of terrorists.

Within hours of the news of the alleged plot, the Republican
National Committee e-mailed a fundraising appeal by former New
York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani claiming, "In the middle of a war
on terror, we need to remain focused on furthering Republican
ideas more than ever before."

Actually, if the alleged plot turns out to be real, it raises
even more questions about the Republican idea of wasting
hundreds of billions of dollars and 2,600 American lives in
Iraq, which had nothing to do with the terrorist attack on the
United States, instead of pursuing Osama bin Laden.

---------
Amazing how you libs never miss an opportunity to get your digs in
about Iraq, no matter what the topic of conversation, for example:

I was at the doctor's the other day for a colonoscopy feeling a
little nervous about it when the nurse walked in holding this
instrument I'd never seen before and the 2.600 American casualties
in Iraq didn't make me feel any better. or...

I was busy with the toilet plunger last night trying to dislodge a
clog, but after several attempts, no luck. And the hundreds of
billions we're wasting on Iraq didn't budge that clog an inch.

Keep on hammering those talking points, boys. But we all know which
party takes national defense seriously and who is more determined
to fight the war on terror against radical Muslims.

You mean like this?


http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051210/news_lz1e10rubin.ht
ml December 10, 2005

While President Bush paints Iraq as the central front in the war on
terror, the former members of the 9/11 commission say the
government isn't doing enough to protect us from another attack at
home.

The bipartisan panel issued a shocking report card this week on the
government's response to 41 recommendations the commission made in
July 2004. The government earned five F's, 12 D's, two incompletes
and only one high grade (an A minus for blocking terrorist
financing).

Even more unsettling were the emotions panelists displayed about
the gaps in security precautions. "Are we crazy?" demanded former
Republican governor of Illinois Jim Thompson. "Why aren't our tax
dollars being spent to protect our lives?"
...

---------
Precisely. In answer to Gov. Jim Thompson's question, here's a link
that explains where our tax dollars are being spent within DHS.

http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/press_release/press_release_
0613.xml

rofl His source - a government press release.

Tell us again how Indiana has more terrorist targets than New York
state.
lol

p.s. Cowardly response redirect fixed.

---------
Sorry, but I couldn't find any leftist sources that had anything good to
say about the Dept. of Homeland Security, or anything else for that
matter.

Genaro wrote:

Genaro wrote:

Harry Hope wrote:

Within hours of the news of the alleged plot, the Republican
National Committee e-mailed a fundraising appeal by former New
York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani claiming, "In the middle of a war
on terror, we need to remain focused on furthering Republican
ideas more than ever before."

From The Capital Times, 8/19/06:
http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/column/index.php?ntid=95539&n
tpi d=0

Obey your government: Toss that killer lip gloss

As people obediently lined up at airports across the country to
throw away killer lip gloss, expensive perfume and even bottles
of fine wine, an irreverent question came to mind:

Is there anything the government could order the American
people to do in the name of fighting terrorism that would be so
ridiculous they would refuse to do it?

We are all undergoing government training.

And so far we are all passing with flying colors.

Whether that is something we should be proud of is
questionable.

We could look back on it one day as the biggest mistake the
citizens of a once free nation ever made.

Terrorists aren't the only ones who know how to use fear as a
political weapon.

The current administration has shown before it knows how to use
fear to win elections and maintain power.

Republicans are going into midterm elections in a weakened
position precisely because the American people are starting to
see through their political exploitation of public fear.

A growing majority of citizens now oppose the war in Iraq,
waged to protect us from fictitious weapons of mass destruction
and nuclear mushroom clouds that existed only in overheated
administration imaginations.

So it was like old times for the government to see that it
could still make the citizenry stand in line to throw away
bottles of Chanel No. 5 and potentially explosive tubes of
lipstick to prevent those deadly products from falling into the
hands of terrorists.

On the first few days of air travel after the announcement of
an alleged plot to blow up airliners between Britain and the
U.S., most passengers were concerned only about traveling
safely and minimizing the horrendous delays and missed flights.

But with time for further reflection, we should all start
asking some common sense questions about how throwing away lip
gloss protects us from terrorism.

The 24-hour news channels hauled out experts to spin
imaginative tales about how two seemingly harmless-looking
liquids could be combined on board an airplane to create a
suicide bomb.

Why, there could even be some kind of detonating device
concealed in an iPod to set the whole thing off.

None of the experts ever explained what airline security and
other flight personnel would be doing while these mad
scientists were concocting their deadly hair gel and Carmex
cocktails and hooking them up to Game Boys.

After the nation has spent $20 billion to improve airport
security since 9/11, the process still appears to be not just
low-tech, but positively stone age.

Modern technology can identify exactly whom on Earth a single
hair belongs to, but the only way airport security can tell
that a bottle of breast milk isn't a deadly explosive is to
force a mother to drink part of it before boarding the plane.

Zero tolerance policies have always been a substitute for
thinking.

Instead of screening lip gloss and bottled water to determine
whether there is any remote possibility they could be
dangerous, simply ban all liquids and gels.

Confiscating even the most innocuous liquids may be a test of
just how far government can go in manipulating the American
people to comply with absurd rituals.

So far, the end is nowhere in sight.

Not only did people willingly surrender their most beloved
beauty, cosmetic and personal care products, but they even
threw away expensive purchases marketed directly by the
airports.

Duty-free shops in airports have always had a powerful allure
for travelers.

The shops are chock-full of liquid products from liquor to the
most expensive perfumes on the planet.

People who rarely drink alcohol or smell any more exotic than
Old Spice are unable to resist what they perceive as bargain
prices.

They haul gallons of the stuff onto airplanes.

When people started dumping those precious - and securely
sealed - liquids in order to be permitted to fly, it was proof
the government could get the public to do just about anything
by invoking terrorism.

And, of course, it was not just in the airports that there were
immediate attempts to exploit the public's newly heightened
fear of terrorists.

Within hours of the news of the alleged plot, the Republican
National Committee e-mailed a fundraising appeal by former New
York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani claiming, "In the middle of a war
on terror, we need to remain focused on furthering Republican
ideas more than ever before."

Actually, if the alleged plot turns out to be real, it raises
even more questions about the Republican idea of wasting
hundreds of billions of dollars and 2,600 American lives in
Iraq, which had nothing to do with the terrorist attack on the
United States, instead of pursuing Osama bin Laden.

---------
Amazing how you libs never miss an opportunity to get your digs in
about Iraq, no matter what the topic of conversation, for example:

I was at the doctor's the other day for a colonoscopy feeling a
little nervous about it when the nurse walked in holding this
instrument I'd never seen before and the 2.600 American casualties
in Iraq didn't make me feel any better. or...

I was busy with the toilet plunger last night trying to dislodge a
clog, but after several attempts, no luck. And the hundreds of
billions we're wasting on Iraq didn't budge that clog an inch.

Keep on hammering those talking points, boys. But we all know
which party takes national defense seriously and who is more
determined to fight the war on terror against radical Muslims.

You mean like this?


http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051210/news_lz1e10rubin.h
tml December 10, 2005

While President Bush paints Iraq as the central front in the war
on terror, the former members of the 9/11 commission say the
government isn't doing enough to protect us from another attack at
home.

The bipartisan panel issued a shocking report card this week on
the government's response to 41 recommendations the commission
made in July 2004. The government earned five F's, 12 D's, two
incompletes and only one high grade (an A minus for blocking
terrorist financing).

Even more unsettling were the emotions panelists displayed about
the gaps in security precautions. "Are we crazy?" demanded former
Republican governor of Illinois Jim Thompson. "Why aren't our
tax dollars being spent to protect our lives?"
...

---------
Precisely. In answer to Gov. Jim Thompson's question, here's a link
that explains where our tax dollars are being spent within DHS.

http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/press_release/press_release_
0613.xml
---------

Precisely *what*? DHS got flunking grades, their puff piece is
supposed to change that?

And they're STILL flunking!

Washington Post, 8/20/06:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/19/AR200.
.. DHS Terror Research Agency Struggling

Science and Technology Unit Crippled by Turnover, Budget Cuts,
Priority Shifts ...

http://www.knoxnews.com/kns/national/article/0,1406,KNS_350_4913372,0.
.. August 13, 2006

WASHINGTON - As the British terror plot was unfolding, the Bush
administration quietly tried to take away $6 million that was
supposed to be spent this year developing new explosives-detection
technology and divert it to cover a budget shortfall in the Federal
Protective Service, which provides security around government
buildings.

Congressional leaders rejected the idea, the latest in a series of
Homeland Security Department steps that have left lawmakers and some
of the department's own experts questioning the commitment to create
better anti-terror technologies. ...

Eagerly awaiting your excuses...

oh yeah: "I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and I really
don't care. It's not
that important. It's not our priority."

Relax and take a breath. All I did was put up a DHS budget link in
response to Thompson's question about where the money is being spent.