US forced British to make arrests? I was dead on with this one!!!!!

[inthebrain]

Lamont beats Lieberman and looks what happened!!! These jokers didnt have passports or plane tickets!!!! Chalk another one up for the "far leftists" who've "taken over the Democratic party"!!!!!




Source: U.S., U.K. at odds over timing of arrests
British wanted to continue surveillance on terror suspects, official says


By Aram Roston, Lisa Myers, and the NBC News Investigative Unit
NBC News
Updated: 8:13 p.m. ET Aug 12, 2006
LONDON - NBC News has learned that U.S. and British authorities had a significant disagreement over when to move in on the suspects in the alleged plot to bring down trans-Atlantic airliners bound for the United States.

A senior British official knowledgeable about the case said British police were planning to continue to run surveillance for at least another week to try to obtain more evidence, while American officials pressured them to arrest the suspects sooner. The official spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the case.

In contrast to previous reports, the official suggested an attack was not imminent, saying the suspects had not yet purchased any airline tickets. In fact, some did not even have passports.

The source did say, however, that police believe one U.K.-based suspect was ready to conduct a "dry run." British authorities had wanted to let him go forward with part of the plan, but the Americans balked.

At the White House, a top aide to President Bush denied the account.

"There was unprecedented cooperation and coordination between the U.S., the U.K. and Pakistani officials throughout the case," said Frances Townsend, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, "and we worked together to protect our citizens from harm while ensuring that we gathered as much info as possible to bring the plotters to justice. There was no disagreement between U.S. and U.K. officials."

Another U.S. official, however, acknowledges there was disagreement over timing. Analysts say that in recent years, American security officials have become edgier than the British in such cases because of missed opportunities leading up to 9/11.

More at link:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14320452/
-------------------------------------------
EDIT: COPYRIGHT. PLEASE POST ONLY 4 OR 5
PARAGRAPHS FROM THE COPYRIGHTED NEWS
SOURCE PER DU RULES.

[beam me up scottie]

1. So this was because of the results of the Connecticut primary?

:eyes:

[opihimoimoi]

2. These guys have a Talent to Fuck Things Up..Don't they?

BushCo was too late for the first (9/11) and too early for this one, Damn.

[CJCRANE]

3. If you believe

that Bush let 3,000 people die on 9/11 to suit his own purposes, started a war based on lies which has led to 20,000 American casualties (including injuries), left hundreds more to die in New Orleans after Katrina because they were the wrong color...then it's not too far-fetched to believe now is it?

[CJCRANE]

4. delete

dupe

[gratuitous]

7. That's the question that first occurred to me

Apparently, all of the billions of dollars squandered, all of the thousands of lives wasted, and all the rest of it over the last five years was in such a fragile balance that one adverse result from an off-year minor party primary in a small state could knock it all into a cocked hat.

I mean, that is basically what the Republican message has been this past week, isn't it?

[sandnsea]

5. "some" did not have passports

suspects obtained "some of the materials for the explosive".

So by your own reference article, you were about as far off as Bush was on his WMD. God I wish people would learn how to fucking read.

[inthebrain]

8. You really got me on that one!!!!!

They were planning coordinated attacks on international flights and your contention is the difference between "some" and "they".

I guess the fact that "they" hadnt purchased tickets didn't stick out to you either.

[sandnsea]

9. I guess planning v. implementing escapes you

Words have meanings, that's why there's so many of them. They were planning the attack, not getting ready to implement it immediately. Planning to kill people, with the means to do it, is a crime.

[inthebrain]

10. Move the goal posts much?

You're original contention was the difference between "they" and "some".

I never said they were getting getting ready to implement it immediatly. Where you pulled that from I have no idea. The folks in the UK are well aware of their own laws. They wanted to gather more evidence on these folks.

I suppose you don't have a beef with raising the alert level here over this either. Especially when "some" of them didnt have passports to board an internation flight. Nor did any of them have airline tickets.

Yet, our officials here tryed to play this off as it was an imminent attack. That couldnt have been farther from the truth. Meanwhile, we have folks like Mehlman and Cheney issuing talking points the day before on this stuff. Behind the scenes they pressured UK officials to make these arrests immediatly.

[sandnsea]

13. Wow, YOU are the one who said you were "dead on"

And that they didn't have passports when in fact many of them did. Not to mention that some materials had been purchased as well. YOU are the one whose original post was WRONG and that is all I pointed out. This is not a made up plot to go along with the made up terrorist ridicule of the far left, of which Lamont is not a part of and would not support if he knew anybody was trying to connect him to it.

Which is not to say that this Administration did not prepare to completely politicize it because that's just what those bastards do. So why don't you focus on their failure to put appropriate security measures in place when they first learned of these possiblities, at least a year ago, instead of making yourself look like an idiot by denying that terrorists want to kill people and are developing plots to do it.

[inthebrain]

28. I stated that I was "Dead on"

regarding the BA pressuring the Brits to make arrests. It's clear in my title. Mehlman and Co offered a bunch of talking points as to how Lamont is not capable of keeping us safe.

Your attempt to split hairs and offer strawman fallacies is getting dull.

[sandnsea]

29. Based on "no passports", which isn't true

If your premise isn't true, I don't know how your conclusion could have been "dead on". Certainly the Bushies knew the arrest was coming and may have even pushed for it to coincide with Lamont's win, but that doesn't equate to there being no plot which is what your OP implies and the part that I was referring to.

[inthebrain]

30. My OP does not imply that.

You're making a big stink over a generalty. Not to mention offering a slew of straw man arguments.

I never once said that there was no plot. I think you need to learn how to read and stop putting words in the mouths of others.

My OP does imply that this threat was not even close to imminent. Your splitting hairs over me saying "they didn't have passports" when the article says that " Some didnt have passports". Both are generalities.

Yet, you take where the atricle says "they had some materials" to mean "they had many materials". As if that makes the threat any more fucking imminent. You're conflating one with the other while playing "glass half empty/glass half full" and using straw man arguments to do it.

This is nothing more than circle jerk antics and you've offered nothing to the discussion. Reading your counterpoints is like watching a monkey jerk off with sandpaper.

[sandnsea]

34. Well was it all political or not??

Your OP implies that you were one of those who was sneering at the plot all along and "knew" it was just an imaginary political ploy by Karl Rove. And now you misinterpret the very article you post to try to pretend you were "dead on" about the whole thing being politics when you simultaneously admit there was a plot.

Talk about circle jerk antics.

[inthebrain]

46. I get it now

After all your efforts to circle jerk and smear I'm supposed to say that the timing of this wasn't political. Afterall, you have some point to what you are saying despite your lacking in precision on any of it.

Of course it was political. Bush and Cheney got in the way of their investigation, even threatening to "render" these folks. I wonder how you think a conviction will come through w/o airline tickets and passports for SOME of them.

Or the fact that they only had SOME of the materiels.

Most of these are going to walk. Either way, our justice system is about proving guilt, not innocense. It is up to the government to prove that these people are guiulty. An arrest only be made based on "probable cause".

But that's our justice system. I wouldn't go running to ask you the difference between a "false arrest" and one based on probable cause.

[elehhhhna]

14. I will withhold final judgement unit the BRITS tell us what "parts" they

posessed.

No tickets? Bad.

How MANY HAD passports? That'll tell me how many were imminent threats.

What bombmaking materials did they posess (cellphone, gatorade bottle, c-4...what?)


Also interested in how many are charged, and with what.

[sandnsea]

16. These were false arrests???

That's what's being implied, the British go around making false arrests at the direction of Karl Rove. It's absolutely idiotic. Blair is on the thinnest of ice with the British public as it is, he's not going to risk any further alienation with a trumped up terrorist plot.

[LiberalUprising]

21. False arrests happen all the time

and yes even in merry ole England, what is your point?

[sandnsea]

24. Oh yes, large networks

huge investigations, all completely false. Happens every day. :eyes:

[LiberalUprising]

31. Ever hear of Lee Harvey Oswalt?

Just one example but if you are implying that you trust the track records of these two goverments for the truth, then you are very naive at best.

I don't know any more than you what if anything actually happened or was being plotted but I also am not ruling out the obvious. :shrug:

[sandnsea]

36. Oh yeah, everything's a conspiracy

Exactly my point.

[LiberalUprising]

38. WTF is your problem

I gave one example to your statement and said I didn't know any more than you what was true and you came back with an assinine response and say THAT is your point?:crazy:


Besides nobody said anything about false arrests until you brought it up and I was pointing out that false arrests do indeed happen, if you choose to believe differently, you better get yourself some tin foil.

[inthebrain]

41. He does that a lot on this thread

It's called a straw man argument.

[sandnsea]

42. You said "all the time"

and then you use the biggest conspiracy theory of them all to base your false arrest claim on. Either you believe the British had evidence to make arrests, or you believe that they engaged in a fabricated conspiracy for the benefit of the Bush White House. There is certainly MORE info to wait for, but based on what we've got so far, there is certainly a solid basis for a very real terrorist plot. Nobody should be ridiculing or minimizing that.

What this administration has done to politicize it is a whole other matter.

[LiberalUprising]

43. If you say so

n/t :banghead:

:silly:

[katinmn]

44. All I see is "Ignore."

:) A decision made some months ago.

Hey LiberalUprising. :hi: Have you been to Camp Casey yet?

[LiberalUprising]

45. Hey Kat

Lol, Yea, I had her on ignore for a long time then decided since I'm not around here much anymore to give her amnesty, my mistake.

No we haven't made it down this year, work has been slow and don't have the funds for gas right now.
Hopefully we will get down sometime this month but it doesn't look good right now.

How have you been?
Are you gonna get a chance to come down?

:headbang:

[elehhhhna]

22. I doubt they were false arrests. I also doubt the Brits

have as much evidence as they wanted and until I hear what I posted above, it seems they're busted for talking. Thought crimes. I'm waiting for MORE INFO, m'kay?

[sandnsea]

23. I'm all for INFO

Which when things of this nature hit DU becomes a rare commodity. DISINFO, as the original post was, runs rampant however. A group under surveillance for quite some time, making trips to Pakistan, experimenting with the explosives, purchasing some of the ingredients, many having passports - this is not just a thought crime.

[LiberalUprising]

33. Oh I get it now

We should just all ask sandnsea what is DISINFO, how could I have been so blind? :eyes:

[sandnsea]

35. No, just read the damned article n/t

[inthebrain]

37. He's looking for a flame war

It's easy to walk away from.

[paulk]

39. actually, you got your ass handed to you

what do you think - you can make the kind of contraversial claim you did and not be challenged on it?


-----------

[inthebrain]

40. Oh Please point out the controversial claim

Lets see if it's as laiden with the same fallacies.

In terms of me "having my ass handed to me", I was never aware that there was viable competition here. But this is always the strategy when arguments are brought to bare and we see what they are made of; When you run out of ammo, declare victory. When that doesn't work, why not move the goal posts?


Your friend laid out a set of straw man arguments to more than one person and was caught red handed.

[Evergreen Emerald]

6. British wanted more evidence Bush wanted to exploit for political gain

They risked convicting these guys by ending the investigation too early because they needed a boost in the polls. I am weary of this administration.

[inthebrain]

11. One of them has already been released.

Another one is expected to walk as well.

[katinmn]

12. This big scare should not have happened. Our media reported

this suspect act as fact just as they do with any "news" released from the RNC/Homeland Security/White House. And now they have been caught with their pants down.

Bush lied to get us into a war, he's made millions of new enemies for us, and Iraqis certainly aren't better off under US occupation. Bush has not been held accountable for the Big Lie, the torture of prisoners, or illegal domestic spying. Will the media ever get it? Bush/Cheney are liars and everything they say or leak should be treated as suspect.

The media have become traitors to democracy.

[niallmac]

17. CNN didn't just report it. They paid homage to the event. n/t

[katinmn]

18. I know. And they are still playing it up. They love scaring people.

:puke:

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2006/fighting.terror/

Banner:


Subhead:


Threatening photo:


Threatening headline:

(CNN) -- Khalid Kelly is angry, and that ought to worry you.

[niallmac]

19. Fear is what keeps the Bush gang out of the Hague and CNN

selling it's merchandise.

[BenDavid]

15. Now this group has links to

Al Queda....Maybe like 26 degrees of separation....You know the old I knew this guy, who knew this guy, that knew this guy, that knew this guy...etc. etc, who knew this guy's cousin....By Monday and the cease fire is not holding then will the media still stay 24/7 on this cluster fuck, or will they give a care about the 2603 dead Americans in Iraq. Could be they agree with Tony Snow, "that is just a number".....

[Imagevision]

20. This is the story the White House denies

[Disturbed]

25. WH claims that Darth didn't know about this plot until

it was announced. Anyone believe that he was so out of the loop?

[elehhhhna]

26. He likely wrote the check for it last year, then forgot.

[OregonBlue]

27. Remember that poll just a few days ago about dems being trusted

on terrorism more than repukes. They must have seen advance copy of that and decided they had to GET THIS OUT THERE NOW!

[inthebrain]

32. Remeber this lady?

Katrina

[OregonBlue]

47. Yes and as we approach the anniversary and the Spike Lee movie

comes out etc., it will be a sorry reminder to the American people of just how badly this regime has failed the people.