"They hate us for our freedom..."

[natedogg]

From Reason's "Hit and Run" blog, the best comment ever about the terrorists' motives:

If it were really the case that terrorists "hate us for our freedoms," we'd be getting more popular with Al Qaeda every month.

Too true. Sad but funny.

natedogg

[microbet]

They also hate us because we don't teach creationism in our schools. Oh wait a second...

[PokerMatt]

Bin-laden must be laughing at how much money we're wasting enforcing the Patriot Act. There are still gaping holes in our security that his associates could use to cause terror in this country. I wonder why he hasn't attacked us again... may it be because this idea of a worldwide, coordinated terrorist network with sleeper cells waiting for the right moment to attack is a fantasy? Not to say we should ignore terrorism, but it's not the threat that most of our leaders and media make it out to be.

Patriot Act sums it up pretty well. [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

[IQ89]

[ QUOTE ]
I wonder why Bin Laden hasn't attacked us again...

[/ QUOTE ]

The time it took between the first Twin Towers attack and 9/11 was about ten years. Ten years, and he wasn't on the run like he is now, nor was he having to lug a dialysis machine and an intravenous drip from cave to cave every other night.

[ QUOTE ]
I wonder why he hasn't attacked us again... may it be because this idea of a worldwide, coordinated terrorist network with sleeper cells waiting for the right moment to attack is a fantasy? Not to say we should ignore terrorism, but it's not the threat that most of our leaders and media make it out to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

These guys arent stupid. There are gaping holes in our security that no politicians want to touch. While we argue about wether or not libraries should tell the gov what books we read, we leave ourselves vulnerable on many fronts. Bush and co. make a big hulabalo about the ineffective steps they take and point to 3 years terror free as evidence that theyre actualy doing something. There are sleeper cells in this country and they have the will to carry out more attacks. Like I said theyre not dumb, they could easily strap on some bombs, head down to the mall and kill dozens, maybe hundreds of Americans. The reason they dont in my opinion is because they dont want to mess up the lax conditions in which they operate now. When they aquire some nuclear weapons though you can be sure that the benefits for them will far outway the consequences.

Just an example of what I see as evidence that no one really wants to address this issue honestly. AQ Kahn, the Pakistani scientist who headed their nuclear program and then a worldwide nuclear black market, is under house arrest in Pakistan. The Pakistani line is that this guy acted alone and they shut him down when they found out about it. This explanation is absurd on numerous levels. Pakistan, our ally who Bush praises regularly will not grant us any access to this guy. The CIA submits questions in writing to the Pakistan gov and relies on them to take it from there. This is complete bs and big, bad, never willing to comprimise our security Bush just sits by and allows it to happen or leaves it to mid level beaurocrats to fix the problem. Hold a televised press conference, tell the world that we are going to interogate and hold this guy, and then go and take him by force if Pakistan wont cooperate. Here is a case where I would suport our government holding someone with no charges indef. But no, stupid ass Bush will hold a teenager from suburban California as an enemy combatant, but when it comes to the head of a huge nuclear black market he just sits by and does nothing.

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]
They also hate us because we don't teach creationism in our schools. Oh wait a second...

[/ QUOTE ]

See, al qaeda should LOVE us by now.

Hell, even the The Flying Spaghetti Monster is getting his due.

natedogg

[tomdemaine]

Thank you for this site. Hilarious

[PokerMatt]

[ QUOTE ]
These guys arent stupid. There are gaping holes in our security that no politicians want to touch. While we argue about wether or not libraries should tell the gov what books we read, we leave ourselves vulnerable on many fronts. Bush and co. make a big hulabalo about the ineffective steps they take and point to 3 years terror free as evidence that theyre actualy doing something. There are sleeper cells in this country and they have the will to carry out more attacks. Like I said theyre not dumb, they could easily strap on some bombs, head down to the mall and kill dozens, maybe hundreds of Americans. The reason they dont in my opinion is because they dont want to mess up the lax conditions in which they operate now. When they aquire some nuclear weapons though you can be sure that the benefits for them will far outway the consequences.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with what you say about them not wanting to commit suicide attacks, because it will make conditions for them more difficult. However, this is built on the assumption that these sleeper cells exist, when there's no evidence that they actually do. I remember a couple years back or so when Bush was touting the arrests of so-called sleeper cells in our country. Not a single one of these people was convicted of any crime because the evidence was very, very weak and required some amazing leaps of logic to come to the conclusion that these people were plotting terrorist attacks. In 3+ years, even using the Patriot Act, the government hasn't been able to find evidence that these sleeper cells exist and that they're part of an organized worldwide terror network.

[ QUOTE ]
Just an example of what I see as evidence that no one really wants to address this issue honestly. AQ Kahn, the Pakistani scientist who headed their nuclear program and then a worldwide nuclear black market, is under house arrest in Pakistan. The Pakistani line is that this guy acted alone and they shut him down when they found out about it. This explanation is absurd on numerous levels. Pakistan, our ally who Bush praises regularly will not grant us any access to this guy. The CIA submits questions in writing to the Pakistan gov and relies on them to take it from there. This is complete bs and big, bad, never willing to comprimise our security Bush just sits by and allows it to happen or leaves it to mid level beaurocrats to fix the problem. Hold a televised press conference, tell the world that we are going to interogate and hold this guy, and then go and take him by force if Pakistan wont cooperate. Here is a case where I would suport our government holding someone with no charges indef. But no, stupid ass Bush will hold a teenager from suburban California as an enemy combatant, but when it comes to the head of a huge nuclear black market he just sits by and does nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that it's somewhat absurd that we can't have direct contact with AQ Kahn. But think of how it would be if the shoe was on the other foot. Do we let other countries come into Guantanimo whenever they wish and interrogate their citizens that we are holding captive?

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
Not to say we should ignore terrorism, but it's not the threat that most of our leaders and media make it out to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

The threat of terrorism in general is something that can't be ignored. Fortunately, the terrorists currently most intent on attacking the U.S. (Al Queda) are basicly a bunch of incompetent fanatics. They got lucky on 911, and, largely due to our own incompetence, managed to do some serious damage with a lame-brain scheme of hijakcing airliners and flying them into buildings.

Unfortunately, they struck at a time when we had incompetent fanatics in the White House, who have seen the 9/11/2001 attacks as the first shot in a religious war between Christianity and Islam, and are doing everything in their power to make that vision reality.