I'm really glad they thwarted the big terrorist plot in the U.K. After all, it only took them three days to let us know what might have happened after turning around a London-NY flight on Monday. OK, sure, I know it takes a few days to investigate this kinda crap. But are you telling me they weren't on high terrorist alert immediately after the incident?
I've been waiting for a couple of days to find out why that plane was turned around. We saw a brief news story on it Monday, but nothing could be found on the BBC website. I had actually forgotten all about it, until the news exploded today.
I understand the whole idea of not panicking people. I also understand the idea of not shutting down a major international airport and keeping flights coming and going. Still, if they had to turn a plane around, especially an international flight, chances were that something serious had gone down, or was planned. Should more information had been released then? Perhaps. But I still have to wonder if these terror alerts are just molded to fit the needs of the governments involved.
8 comments:
You sound ridiculous!
It's times like these that although I don't normally approve of torture, I would support a limited amount to extract information that could swart actions like this.
I'm not saying beating people up, but how about low-level torture such as sleep deprivation, sensory changes, (hot-cold etc), calorie deprivation, tickling etc and all done under a doctor's supervision. Some would agree that this could be affective with some types of people.
Now, again, I know some would never approve torture, but what if your YiaYia was on that plane? Would you have liked the CIA to have extracted info to save her.
It's a sad state the world is in that we have to consider this.
I say keep Guantanamo open a bit longer til this war against terror is over.
We plan to go to Egypt this winter and people are asking if we are worried about terrorist. Well, I am worried about flying home in the fall than I am about going to Epypt!
Cyn
But I still have to wonder if these terror alerts are just molded to fit the needs of the governments involved.
Can you elaborate a little on what you mean here, please? I tend to agree, if I think what you are saying is in fact what you ARE saying.
Note, this is a different Anonymous than the first person who commented.
Well, it isn't that I think there wasn't a plot of some kind. I just have to wonder at the 3 day delay in breaking the news, and how the release of a terror alert/foiled terrorist plot, etc., works to the advantages of the governments involved. It just seems we get these alerts or these stories around the times when certain things are happening in politics, to remind people that hey, we gotta stay scared, but look we are on top of it.
It just seems like there is a preplanned decision about when and how to release the information on these types of plots, to work to a political advantage.
Ah, if that makes sense. My head is still swimming with the Iliad a bit right now.
It's times like these that although I don't normally approve of torture, I would support a limited amount to extract information that could swart actions like this.
Swart? What does that mean?
What makes you think that torture, in any form, increases information? It's been proven time and time again that people will say anything - anything their interrogators want to hear - in order to stop the pain. Torture does not lead to accurate information that "swarts" attacks, it just leads to a tortured person.
But if you support torture, you're in luck, because both the US and UK use plenty of it.
L-Girl: Typical liberal thinking. I suppose having people killed is preferable to you.
P.S. Please don't tell me it's a logical fallacy, straw-man, or red herring, because I'll tell you to get some new material!
P.S. Look up swart in the dictionary! (or watch a Batman movie!)
I think Scruffy meant "thwart".
But hey, Americans are pretty stupid to have voted for Bush, what do you expect.
Post a Comment