Browse By

84 Days Down, 97 to Go in Government’s “Certain” Terrorist Attack Time Frame

On February 2, 2010 the top 5 intelligence officials of the Obama administration told the Senate that an “attempted terrorist attack on the U.S. Homeland” within six months was not just a likelihood — it was “certain.” The intelligence officials followed up on this frightening claim with appeals for more money, more power and more discretion to eschew constitutional constraint.

It’s 84 days later and there’s been no attempted terrorist attack on U.S. soil. There are 97 days left to go in the intelligence chiefs’ window. Let’s keep track of the days together and count them down. Also keep track of whether these intelligence chiefs are held to account on their claim.

Update: No, some unruly passenger on a plane saying he had explosives (when he didn’t) and a fake passport (when he didn’t) isn’t an attempted terrorist attack. It’s a misunderstanding at best and a prank bomb scare by an unbalanced American ex-intelligence officer at worst.

5 thoughts on “84 Days Down, 97 to Go in Government’s “Certain” Terrorist Attack Time Frame”

  1. ramone says:

    shoe mirrors!
    pee-wee herman approved.
    the latest surveillance equipment. it works best on attractive female terror suspects wearing dresses. but, it also works on loose legged and short pants.
    another bad joke brought to you by

  2. Chucklenuts says:

    I ask this of the bleeting, chowder-heads:


    I can’t believe some of the mindless pap I see written. No, this wasn’t an attempt to “set the SUV on fire”. This was an attempt. albeit a failed one, to BLOW IT UP. To say that an explosion is a “fire” is technically true, but the rapid burning of exploding propane is not a “fire”. Anyone who attempts to describe it as such is a numbskull.

    I agree totally that security cameras will not stop these events. In a free society, that is pretty much impossible. What they did help us to do, among many other tools, was to gather evidence to find him.

    Please just call it terrorism, just admit it for once. It’s not a just political statement any more than an explosion is just a fire. I’ve worked in NYC at times. I stayed a block from there and went on walks and ate dinner nearby. I, and many other people could have walked right along side that SUV when it exploded.

    It is not a joke. Yes, the Detroit underwear bomber and this nutjob were incompetent, luckily. How much longer will good luck hold out. When dozens or hundreds of innocent people, perhaps your family and friends included, are killed, will you continue to make stupid jokes and complain about TV cameras on a public street? They may not be effective, but they are at least an attempt to thwart evil, violent behavior like the kind exhibited from this clown from Pakistan.

    I don’t care what his “beef” with the United States is. This is not the way to act. If people from the Middle East do not want to be profiled, then they need to speak up and stop encouraging and tacitly approving this kind of action. Silence can also be encouragement.

    I was in a meeting with friends in the WTC and I remember taking pictures of us on the roof about a year before they went down. I think how it could easily have been me. And all of us should remember that what almost happened here could easily have been another incident like the subway bombing, with your wife and/or kids involved.

    It’s not a joking matter, or fodder for stupid snarky comments about a coming police state. How many of you would let termites infest your house and chew it to the ground? That’s what the world is facing, an infestation. The house is still mostly strong; I believe that most people act with good intentions, and the evil people are a minority. But they are there, chewing away at your floor joists until one day you step and your foot falls through the floor. Speak up against them and help.

    1. Jim says:

      1. What a lovely equality you draw between people who don’t share your religion and insects.
      2. Read more carefully before you ask us to use the word terrorism “just once!” I’ve talked explicitly about the definition of terrorism and this particular event here and also here. We’ve discussed terrorism repeatedly here over the years, using the word.
      3. Your hyperbolic response is just what terrorism aims to generate.
      4. Go wash your face and calm down. You are thousands of times more likely to die of cardiovascular disease than of a terrorist attack. I fear for your safety.

  3. Chucklenuts says:

    More stupid snarkyness. (or is it snarkiness?)

    1. I knew this would get you going. I just love it when the pap-heads react to a push. Of course, the TRUTH is, I said nothing about religion. If you believe that people who react to things they don’t like by attempting to kill innocent people deserve more consideration than insects, then your definition of humanity needs updating.

    2. I call your attention to your own words. “…Maybe the person doing this was trying to scare people (“terrorism” is our modern word for “trying to scare people”)….”

    This is trying to equate real terrorism, which is what this was, to “trying to scare people”. Trying to scare people is NOT the same as trying to kill people. Killing those people may scare others, for sure, but the people killed are scared, they’re DEAD!

    3. I don’t even have a response, and I certainly didn’t employ much in the way of hyperbole. You clowns kept printing this “only 39 more terrorist shopping days to go…” crap over and over. Like you’re happy if they don’t manage to stop a terrorist attack and prove prove themselves wrong. Terrorism aims to generate fear. I am not afraid; I merely have sense and eyes wide open.

    4. Don’t fear for me. You’re the hyper one who couldn’t wait a half an hour to respond to a chiding post. Go grow into some pants.

    1. Jim says:

      1. My apologies for assuming that you meant the termites were Islamic; that was clearly incorrect, right? Pap, by the way, is easily digestible nutritious food. I’m glad you think what I write is nutritious. You’re getting confused about how to react to your terrorist insects. In your first comment, you expressed incredulity that I wouldn’t more strongly consider the importance of these terrorist insects. In your second comment, you expressed incredulity that I would give strong consideration to these terrorist insects. Which is it? Are they to be ignored or obsessed over?

      2. If you think the primary aim of terrorists is to kill people, you really don’t understand terrorism very well. Terrorists could kill 3,000 people a day and not put a dent in the population of this country. Terrorists want to provoke a reaction, just the sort of reaction that you’re providing.

      3. Well, of COURSE I’d be happy if terrorists didn’t attack. Silly. By the way, I like the use of the word “crap.” It rhymes with “pap.” Try using them together in a sentence to give it that extra “snap.”

      You can keep on going, but you’re not going to get me to treat a guy driving an SUV onto a curb and trying to light it on fire as if he were some existential threat to this country. He’s not. He’s a sorry-ass, pathetic attention-seeker who wants to be respected as a threat. I refuse to be the partner in his little dance. I also refuse to be the dance partner of the cable news outlets who, in sync with the terrorists, pirouette around with their snare drums and timpanis and rotating red graphics of constant crisis in order to gain ad revenue. I refuse to pretend his little curb-jump stunt was of national significance.

      4. I have very nice pants, thank you very much. The zippers are especially keen. Always the obsession with pants, these commenters.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!