Comments on: Terrorist Attack On Flight 253: The Real Story Starts To Break

By: James Hanley

James Hanley — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 17:32:44 +0000

In what way does this even differ from the Richard Reid (shoebomber) event? Doesn’t any criticism of Obama on this apply equally to Bush on that one?

Or more precisely, just as Bush did nothing wrong in that case, Obama has done nothing wrong in this one.

As usual, people who are motivated primarily by ideology, rather than an objective concern for understanding, say moronic stuff. It’s predictable, and it might get you guys all hot and bothered to say this stuff, but to people who really care about the direction of this country, it’s quite boring.

By: Politically Correct National Security « drkatesview

Politically Correct National Security « drkatesview — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 13:06:28 +0000

[...] As the real story emerges on this very close incident, there are many questions. There were two bombs on this flight, and passengers were left exposed to this for more than two hours both on the plane and in the ’sterile’ area; a host of suspicious circumstances; at least two other people involved, and more, yet the government covers this all up and refuses to acknowledge or deny any eyewitness reports. [...]

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 21:45:48 +0000

First of all, the FBI not releasing information does not amount to a coverup. It amounts to them making sure their ducks are in a row, and that they know everything they need to know, before making incomplete information publicly available to spur on conspiracy theories. There are dozens of plots foiled before they even begin which the general public doesn’t even know about, because there’s no reason to tell anyone. Does that make them all coverups?

Second, getting on Obama about taking 3 days to respond is plain foolishness. In what was for all intents and purposes an identical attack involving a shoe instead of underwear, Bush stayed on vacation for 6 days before addressing anything. You don’t get to accuse someone who performs twice as well as you of underachieving.

Third, the reason everyone was kept on the plane was undoubtedly so that security and the FBI would be in place for the disembarkment and ready to do their jobs. Airplanes are designed to not let a cabin fire spread beyond the cabin, everyone was perfectly safe as far as that’s concerned.

Finally, to what end would Obama have wanted a successful terror attack? The only semi-feasible reason I can think of would be to cement another enemy to attack, but that would only serve to spread American troops even more thinly, dramatically increase the cost of the war in the Middle East, and upset everyone who wants the troops to come home (meaning everybody). There is no possible rational reason for wanting a terror attack to succeed on his watch.

Please at least try to think a LITTLE bit logically before spewing this kind of crap.

By: History Punk

History Punk — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 18:15:32 +0000

For this to make sense, you got to postulate something resembling a probable, rational motive.

By: JD

JD — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:25:37 +0000

“Could it possibly be that Janet and Barack messed up the handling of the attempted terrorist attack on Flight 253 because they were expecting to deal with an actual plane being blown up and innocents killed, and when it did not happen, they were adrift without anything to say?”

Um… no.