I have hesitated for some time to join the ranks of the Obama-disenchanted, if only to avoid giving the Republicans more fuel. But I also believed in President Obama and in his message of new beginnings. He had the audacity to speak about hope and oh, how we needed to feel hopeful as we closed down the nightmare years of the Bush/Cheney regime. Like so many others, I have kept my eyes posted on the horizon awaiting signs indicating that this new era of change is dawning, but so far, as I greet the same familiar sun, I find myself ever more disenchanted and fast running out of hope. The uproar around the failed airline terrorist and the subsequent political hysterics finally shifted me from dwelling in the "audacity of hope" to realizing I actually am feeling the rage of the hopeless.
I have supplied myself with an endless list of reasons, if not excuses, for why the Obama administration has made many of its reckless decisions, like advancing the war in Afghanistan while nations like China are investing in Afghanistan's resources, but the response to Umar Faruk Abdulmatallab really has me baffled. I mean from where I'm sitting, it appears that this punk Nigerian kid has managed to effect more policy change so far as national security goes in a handful of days than our Congress has accomplished in, oh, months, or perhaps years, of ineffectual border control legislation. Quite frankly, Abdulmatallab's attempt at blowing up an airplane does not alarm me nearly as much as the response from our nation's leadership, which, at best, reveals an administration and Congress that is confused and panic-driven.
And at worst, as an American, I am more than uncomfortable that the Civil War politics of this nation (and let's face it, that's exactly what we have going between the Republicans and the Democrats -- a Civil War), have given the Republicans and now some Democrats reasons to exaggerate this issue to such an extent that this one incident now carries enough weight to influence military policy decisions. Exactly who is in charge of policy decisions in this nation -- the administration or a single would-be terrorist bomber?
Consider that as a result of this one punk Nigerian would-be terrorist bomber, airline travel in this nation has become even more unbearable. It's our rights that are getting revoked, not the terrorist's. Within days of this guy's failed attempt to blow up an airplane, all Americans now have lost even more rights -- such as they are -- on airplane flights. According to new regulations, passengers will not be allowed to use their coats to cover themselves if they are cold; they will not be allowed to use the facilities one hour prior to landing; they may not be able to open the overhead lockers and I heard one discussion that books may even be banned -- books!
I can only imagine the reaction terrorist organizations are having to this type of response from our nation's security system. Imagine this conversation: "If all it takes is one young man with a finger nail polish remover bomb to create such havoc in this country, much less wipe out yet another handful of American rights and freedoms, what have we got to lose by sending one attempted suicide bomber onto a plane after another? America can be controlled like a frightened child. It's far too easy to scare this nation now. The leadership and its Congress is fractured. America is too frightened to win." I have no problem imagining a dialogue along those lines somewhere in the Middle East.
Am I suggesting that we don't respond to a terrorist attempt? Of course not -- but the issue is how a nation responds. Abdulmutallab got through security systems; so do what is essential to heighten the security to make sure that it won't happen again. But is it necessary to shame the nation publicly in the process? Is it necessary to give this one would-be terrorist so much attention that in effect we have to say he succeeded because he has, in fact, raised the terrorism level in this entire nation? He may not have blown up an airplane but he most certainly has turned our nation up-side-down. We have to realize that we are empowering terrorists by our outrageous, if not out of control, response to them.
The Bush/Cheney regime has tragically guaranteed that we will live in a climate of terrorism for years to come, if not decades. We can count on Abdulmatallab's not being the last person to attempt to board a plane with the intention of blowing it up. Common sense tells us that in a world gone mad with terrorism, there is little hope that bombing Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, or Yemen -- should that idiocy start -- will inspire an end to terrorist attacks or suicide missions. We have entered an age of madness but we can't afford to respond to this madness by having a president admit we were unprepared and by having fellow Congressmen attack the policies of the nation before the rest of the world -- followed by the disintegration of more American rights and freedoms. How does taking away our freedoms improve our safety? We are giving the terrorists exactly what they want by doing this. Even if the bomb did not explode on that airplane, they still got what they wanted because in the end, it is the terrorists who are causing America to change its way of life -- not Americans. Is this going to continue until we Americans have to apply for the right to travel on an airplane, producing documents proving we have a legitimate reason to leave one location and go to another? That could happen in a nation that is losing a grip on itself.
Until we get a grip on ourselves, any chance of getting out of the madness of this era of terrorism is hopeless.
Yet, the past is repose and America has gone from false hope to hopelessness - a poor position by any measure.
Too late to come back is more likely to be its epitaph recognizable at some point in the not too distant future.
Neither.
The debt-based money system run by fractional-reserve bankers at the international level controls the horizontal, it controls the vertical. Politicians are shadow-puppets controlled by the technocrats of a false monetary system based on debt to a financial elite.
Hate to be so conspiratorial but it is the only thing that makes sense in the long term. This system determines where the money goes, what enterprises get funded, which get strangled. And armaments industries are extremely well funded!
There may or may not be a hierarchy pulling the srrings (although I feel there is), but the really sickening thing is, whether or not it is planned consciously, the system of money issuance via debt assumption by the citizens of the planet is a true and frightening matrix that runs our lives and proceeds automatically by the simple expedient of all the beneficiaries of the system pursuing their own self-interest.
Bottom line is that no amount of vigilance can stop a committed terrorist from doing his job.
We on the other hand have poor intelligence. an easy to penetrate perimiter, civil liberties, no profiling, little torture, and a hyper media accountability. We have been incredibly lucky to have been sent stupid terrorists. Except for 9-11 and the first WTC bombing we have been virtually terror free before after and during GW's presidency. How about Madrid... did they keep one of the few allies in Iraq safe?
To hear Giuliani and others exploit this incedent with a complicit media, is disgusting and plays directly into the hands of OBL. In order to retain our freedom we are going to have to tolerate some terrorism some time some place. Can we tolerate a corrupted media? Bush and Cheney kept americans safe at home after 9-11 If they can take that credit? In truth they put them if far greater danger around the world. BTW I am a registered republican, but this kind of politics is as un-american as Jane Fonda in Hanoi.
For years, our last president decided to make us as frightened as possible with the hope that you find HIM irreplaceable, staying the COURSE. You find that same mindset today with the rethuglican response of how we should profile and scaremonger the population into rejecting the American way and adopting the ways of living in a fearful society full of suspicion and mistrust (at least until you give them power over your lives again).
This was always the strategic method "Al Quaeda" (Bin Laden) would use to make us implode from within by making us spend money, chasing ghosts, chasing a false sense of security, repealing our liberties and self-destructing our society by way of division.
If the president has identified errors in our process, but now is angry enough to address it, then only now will we have safe ports, chemical facilities, airlines, malls, borders and facilities. At least, reasonably safe enough to call them so, because in a free society there is no way to keep a criminal mind from committing crime unless you lock them up, limit their resources or they be killed.
These moronic restrictions the airlines came up with on their own. Obama and the TSA didn't implement them.
It isn't "the punk Nigerian bomber" that's causing all this change. It's the fact that "the punk Nigerian bomber" successfully got on the plane. I think that Obama deserves loads of criticism but all this about the Christmas day bomb attempt is not deserved.
The only change we're going to get is the change left in our bank accounts after this shakes out.
Terrorism is just another word for goosing the market in the direction they want it to go.
Up is down, black is white, transparency is secrecy, slavery is freedom, blah, blah, blah
We're all tired of it. The time is coming for change, all right. I just hope the powers-that-be are ready for the change in us.
From your response it seems you do not understand why we have become a scared, pathetic country. Bush et al used fear and hate to propogate their agenda and invade Iraq. For 8 yrs the boogeyman was around every corner and we needed the neocon Govt to protect us at any cost...including the freedoms and way of life our soldiers were fighting to keep....
Sadly, the macho Cheney,Palin crowd has used this technique effectively without real scrutiny. Frankly, as a Democrat, this cowardly approach makes me ill. My uncles who served in Wars and especially my Uncle Francis who died fighting at age 19 would be disgusted at this Party of Eisenhower in 2010. The Right is happy to give up their freedoms for security....pretty sad lot
Invading Iraq was not the smartest move that Bush did. But, with his policies, he did stop a lot of attacks on us. By using enhanced interrogation, he got a lot of good info.
I am sure Nick Berg would have no problem with giving up a few rights to be safe. In case you forgot who he is, the terrorist cut off his head, simply for being an American.
Let's look at Obama's track record so far.
Obama was going to close Gitmo within his first year - Not Done !!!
He was going to start pulling troops out of Iraq - Not Done !!!
Stimulus was going to keep unemployment under 8% - It is 10%
When Bush left office, oil was around $50/barrel, now it is $80.
The root cause of terrorism has not been adequately addressed or else there will be no reason for unnecessary destruction by these terrorists; that is not to excuse the hardline or deviating attitudes of some of these groups. An understanding need to be developed between the Western nations and some of these core groups to lessen their destructive behaviors.
After that, using careful statisitical observation of the nation's highways we will determine that driving cars is also inherently unsafe and we will all revert to pedestrianism. Soon a spate of knife-attacks will reveal that even walking is inherently dangerous, and no one will ever leave their homes again, rather watching glued to the television for future warnings.