So we have the DHS issuing terror alerts, and of course the timing is suspicious. And the Bush Administration is being accused of playing politics. AND it is old info.
I am just simply amazed at how the left plays so fast and loose with, well, everything. So what if the info is several years old? Has it occurred to any in the press and the left that there may be info other then what they are releasing that is causing concern within the DHS? Intelligence is, by it’s very nature, secret. The 9/11 talks were planned many years before they occured. How would the left have treated that info?
That’s right, they decried that the Bush administration didn’t connect all the dots (while ignoring that neither did the Clinton admin, though the 9/11 Commission didn’t ignore it), yet, now that we have some dots being connected, the media and the left (and Dean, of course) have said “nope, doesn’t matter. It is (the timing)(political BS)(info too old). Take your pick.
Were attacks to occur and it be known that the DHS had 3 year old info, the DHS would be roasted, along with President Bush. You know, I know it, and the Left knows it. It is the standard lose-lose situation. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
It is just another reason that John Kerry and his Howard Dean type extreme left followers shouldn’t be allowed in the White House. The play with outlandish feelings, not cold hard thought.
A bit of an update:
DHS head Tom Ridge stated today in regards to the threat:
“This is the most significant, detailed pieces of information about any particular region that we have come across in a long, long time, perhaps ever,” he said.
So, it is old. It was also updated in January. Better safe then sorry.
More:
John Hawkins over at Right Wing News recommends that one not write while angry. He is probably correct, at least in this circumstance. Sometimes it can be cathargic, but at other times one can go to far, and sometimes one can create a mess. But, I stand by my words, no matter how disjointed or angry. The left has made this a damned if you do damned if you don’t issue. Like many. You cannot win.
However. lets go back to the New York Times crazy over.
Although bin Laden has not succeeded, his attacks against the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 demonstrate that he prepares operations years in advance and is not deterred by setbacks. Bin Laden associates surveilled our embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam as early as 1993, and some members of the Nairobi cell planning the bombings were arrested and deported in 1997.
We see here that Al Queda plans long term operations. In my opinion, this shows that Al Queda wants to make sure that they succeed. They aren’t putting Ops together quickly and going for it. They want to plan, implement, and walk away victorious.
The assumption that the alerts in NYC and DC, as well as the capture of several high ranking Al Queda members is just some nefarious plot based on a silly article in the New Republic is outrageous, and dememented.
