As the Shadow Defence Secretary brings up the alarming expansion of the Argentine Airforce near the anniversary of the Falklands War, and as the twatish Hugo Chavez makes mouse-like demands for the UK to hand back (back? They never fucking belonged to you) the islands, one wonders about Latin America's future in world politics. The ever defiant Hugo Chavez being a case in point.
Closer trade ties with China and the EU, more prospereity and growth in economies (though, perhaps, nothing near reasonable stability), expansion (in some areas) in military - and certainly defiance. Does the Monroe Doctrine still exist? Will potential giants such as Brazil one day join the Western World?

WHOA! dude drunken posting does not good internet make =) , trust me i know this one intimately.

We are losing the influence we had in Central and South America to China in pretty rapid fashion. 100 years of bad politics will do that I guess.

The part that REALLY boggles my mind is how we are treating Mexico. We couldnt have a better person in charge of Mexico as far as American interests, and yet we have a massive portion of our country that is looking to cut the legs out from under him.
Guess whats going to happen to the Mexican economy after our border hawks get their way and Bush finally gives in. Its most profitable export, labor is going to collapse, the Mexican economy is going to head into the shitter, Fox is out. The fallout and even greater poverty, along with massive anti-US feelings this will drum will supercharge the radical Mexican left and they will sweep to power. Its like watching an accident in slow motion. Chavez and company will then get a new playmate, and China, a brand new best buddy.

Its amazing watch the people in charge make stupid mistake after stupid mistake.

By the way.. why wasnt this Border Security thing this big a story a year ago? All of a sudden it just got massive airplay and the agenda was set.
Things that make you go hmm.

2005 wasn't an election year, for one thing.

2005 wasn't an election year, for one thing.

Which brings us to the sudden upsurge of terror threats for 2006. Kind of amazing that we really haven't seen an increase in terror threats since November of 2004, went through 2005 without any significantly reported threats and come the summer of 2006 we start seeing them again much as we started seeing them in the summer of '04.

I'll take a wild guess and say that terror threats are a cyclical thing only occuring every two to four years depending on the election...errrr...weather in the middle east.

I guess you don't remember the whole "New York Subway" threat , or the "LA-Melbourne Australia Al Qaeda Target" stuff, all in 2005.

The headlines were still there, it just is harder to remember them when no arrests are made and they don't result in any attack.

I guess you don't remember the whole "New York Subway" threat , or the "LA-Melbourne Australia Al Qaeda Target" stuff, all in 2005.

The headlines were still there, it just is harder to remember them when no arrests are made and they don't result in any attack.

read above...this will help: significantly reported threats

Wasnt the NY subway threat one of those...oh well it was a threat from 3 years ago things...kind of like all of the ones that happened during the 2004 terror threat resurgence?

The NY subway threat was, as I recall, based on sketchy details at best.

Oh gods Rover, please tell me you don't think the nasty Rovians are planning the terrorist attacks.

What's more likely is you seeth so much when you hear the names of Bush and Rove that it blocks your neuron pathways.

Loosen up man, if you've really been following the troubles in Iraq you'd see there are regular attacks.

Infact you could go so far as to say that perhaps the terrorists are trying to influence our elections away from the Republican party. Make nervous nellies think that there's a chance the bad boogie men will go away if you vote Democrat....

First Tower bombing anyone....USS Cole anyone...

Fandros

Oh gods Rover, please tell me you don't think the nasty Rovians are planning the terrorist attacks.

What's more likely is you seeth so much when you hear the names of Bush and Rove that it blocks your neuron pathways.

Loosen up man, if you've really been following the troubles in Iraq you'd see there are regular attacks.

Infact you could go so far as to say that perhaps the terrorists are trying to influence our elections away from the Republican party. Make nervous nellies think that there's a chance the bad boogie men will go away if you vote Democrat....

First Tower bombing anyone....USS Cole anyone...

Fandros

No, I don't think the Rovians are planning terrorists attacks. What I do think is they are in a position to call terror alerts much as was done during the '04 election cycle. One can think what they want I just find it to be a bit curious that we saw a glut of "terror alerts" from about July of '04 and suddenly after the election the frequency of the alerts came to a crawl, its not a deniable thing its a fact, just look back at old news reports. Its right there out in the open.

If the theory is that Al Qaeda is ramping things up to influence the election it really doesn't make sense as the natural reaction to a terrorist attack is to hit them back with everything we've got, and they know that. Hell, the Viet Cong knew that, its a very basic tactic in terrorism and insurgencies. Also the natural reaction of the American populace is to not change horses in a time of "war", so really if they are then they must realize that the current administration has a failing strategy and Al Qaeda wants them to continue.

If you think about it the republicans ace in the hole is to use "terror alerts" to their advantage, and why not do it if they can. They hold the keys and the door, they can manipulate from the highest levels. This isn't to say that the Dems arent capable of the same games if they held the keys, its simply saying that we have a very corrupt bunch down in Wasington that will do what is necessary to hold onto the power they wield.

You mentioned the USS Cole...an excellent example that sheer military might does nothing to deter terror.

Nah, can't buy it.

Can buy that bin Laden's boys have ramped up each time there was an election in Afgan. and Iraq and think it'll work on you nervous types.

They try it and it'll be 4 more years of Republican powah!

Fandros

Why are we having terror alerts? There's no "war" is there? I thought we were done with that f---king nonsense.

Why are we having terror alerts? There's no "war" is there? I thought we were done with that f---king nonsense.

Its not that we are having terror alerts and having them doesnt show that there is a war on. But don't confuse an insurgency in Iraq with terror alerts in the USA, theres not much of a correlation between them...because we are fighting them over there so they won't fight us here...no?

Its that the terror alerts seem to ramp up at times like ummm...US elections...over here...in the USA...the United States....home of the red white and blue...purple mountains...fields of grain...you know...this place...not Iraq or Afghanistan.

Terror alerts were such bullshit.

OMG.. WE ARE ON ORANGE!!!!! WHATS THAT MEAN? ANYONE KNOW? WHAT SHOULD I DO? IS BEING SCARED ENOUGH?

We still use colors? I haven't heard one in forever.

Fandros

Yea. The need suddenly vanished after the 04 elections.

In December 2004 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_2004), the Homeland Security Advisory Council (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeland_Security_Advisory_Council) voted to review the color-coded system. One panel member suggested that it has outlived its usefulness.[14] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeland_Security_Advisory_System#_note-13) In a public forum, Ridge conceded the system had invited "questions and even occasional derision."[15] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeland_Security_Advisory_System#_note-14) Ridge also said that he had not always agreed when others pushed to raise the threat level. "Sometimes we disagreed with the intelligence assessment," Ridge said. "Sometimes we thought even if the intelligence was good, you don't necessarily put the country on [alert]. ... There were times when some people were really aggressive about raising it, and we said, 'For that?'"[16] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeland_Security_Advisory_System#_note-15)

I keep waiting for Ashton Kutcher to pop out and yell "YOU BEEN PUNKED BITCHES!!"

You see them at airports..charts with terror alert levels in color. Big whoop....

You mentioned the USS Cole...an excellent example that sheer military might does nothing to deter terror.

Actually that was an example of not being prepared to use the military might at our disposal to stop terror.
Now if an unauthorized boat comes too close to a Navy ship, they have orders to sink it.
Ever wonder why there never was a repeat of that incident?

*adjusts tinfoil hat*
And we all know the Administration uses terror alerts to manipulate the election results.

And we all know the Administration uses terror alerts to manipulate the election results.

I think they would view it as "We need to remind people we are at War". And please, the administration is most certainly NOT above scaring the American people.

Case in point is this latest assclownery in Florida.
Gonzalez holds a press conference to announce they have arrested 7 "Terrorists"
-No contact with Al-Queda
-No weapons
-No explosives
-No plans
-"Aspirational rather than Operational"
They werent even Wahhabists, they were Moorish Scientists... aka, loons.
The great preparation for the plot was that one of the men had been to Chicago once.

Yet... we feel the need to scare everyone and REMIND everyone that AlQueda is everywhere!!!!!

Oh... btw.. here is one the scary people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSrHgJyTK60&search=brother%20corey

So L2, how far along the plotting and planning do we allow them to go before you deem it wise to shut them down?

It's domestic home grown sure, but their aims were destructive.

Fandros

OMG.. WE ARE ON ORANGE!!!!! WHATS THAT MEAN? ANYONE KNOW? WHAT SHOULD I DO? IS BEING SCARED ENOUGH?
You should purchase plastic sheeting and duct tape, of course. Failing that, duck and cover.
It's domestic home grown sure, but their aims were destructive.
These aren't the droids we're looking for. Whether the arrests are justified or not, this has all the earmarks of another Padilla case, another <insert name of FL professor that was aquitted> case.

This site (http://www.terroristwarning.com) claims to track all terrorist "incidents" reported in the news. It has archived all these incidents since June of 2002. The chart below just plots the total incidents per month since that time. Draw what conclusions you will from it, I was just bored and wanted to see what the chart would look like:

http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/8616/chart1me.jpg

So L2, how far along the plotting and planning do we allow them to go before you deem it wise to shut them down?

Fandros

Why we let them blow stuff up. That way we don't even have to coerce the media into covering the story.*























*sarcasm

You should purchase plastic sheeting and duct tape, of course. Failing that, duck and cover.

These aren't the droids we're looking for. Whether the arrests are justified or not, this has all the earmarks of another Padilla case, another <insert name of FL professor that was aquitted> case.

Okay granted that's a possibility still the question remains.

Homegrown or not we still have to prevent the likes of a Timothy McViegh (sp) happening again as well as stop bin Laden's crew right?

Fandros

Of course. My hope is that the arrests are warranted, that laws and Constitution were followed and that justice will be done. It'd also be nice if the administration doesn't refer to what might be a few discordant loons as a major terrorist plot, or other sensationalizing rhetoric. But at the very least, yes, catch the bad guys.

EDIT: BTW, those of you in the NYC area will be vaporized (http://www.prweb.com//releases/2006/6/prweb403497.htm) some time in the next few days according to the true bible code. I just thought you should know.

Oh, I dont mind the busting of these guys. I guess they took some muslim oath or somesuch and were looking for someone to introduce them to Bin Laden... whatever..

I do mind the exploitation of this non event to intentionally drum up fears of terrorism.

Atty Gen Gonzales calling a major press conference to announce it is ludicrous. These guys were about as far from bombing the Sears Towers as I am to banging Angelina Jolie.. sure, Id love to do it, and i've thought about it... but it aint gonna happen.

You should purchase plastic sheeting and duct tape, of course. Failing that, duck and cover. This type of shot at the administration is pathetic because it's so confused. The entire website that was/continues to be/ rediculed was basically a "You're on your own for three days if bad things happen. Here's what you can do to stay alive and help others..." type of list.

How can Bush be the tyrant savior of all things good yet tell people they're on their own unless their local and state governments do something.

If we're not in this 'war' then we must at least use our domestic law enforcement agencies to do something like Clinton did. "We must treat terrorism as a law enforcement issue." But Bushco can't even do that without you bitching. Pathetic.

Bad things do happen and this barking at everything the Bush administration does like a little caged dog should be embarrassing to you people. Instead, you like two-year olds being denied your candy.

Given a good Ruffi in her cocktail and the right music and you can make it happen L2!!!

She's too damn hot and the complete woman to me ( albiet crazy as a loon) to ever walk the face of the earth and not be available to me!!


As for AG Gonzo puffing up the report, well it's politics as always. The Dems blare loudly any trumpet they can for the same results.

Fucking Murtha saying Bush and America are a greater threat to the world than Iran or North Korea...

Wtf...respect the man for his military career, but he's definately on a limb here. Hurting the troops with this kind of statement(s) and top it off with him being one of the top pork barrel politicians....

Sorry...derail(s) off...

Fandros

This type of shot at the administration is pathetic because it's so confused. Down, boy! Just being facetious, nothing being ridiculed. I'll try to remember to add the LOLEZ next time. And for the record, I do like two year olds being denied my candy. It's my damn candy, after all.

I'm still not sure about this whole "Angelina Jolie is the hawtest" thing. Sometimes I see a hint of it in her, but more often she does nothing for me. Just not seeing it.

kind of like Iraq!

or us, to Latin Americans!

I'm still not sure about this whole "Angelina Jolie is the hawtest" thing. Sometimes I see a hint of it in her, but more often she does nothing for me. Just not seeing it.

That's OK. I'll take your turn with her when it comes up. I'm just that kind of friend :)

Amaria tener copula sexual con Angelina Jolie

Fucking Murtha saying Bush and America are a greater threat to the world than Iran or North Korea...

This is based on a story that has since been retracted (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/broward/sfl-ctownhall25jun25,0,7119684.story):
Correction: An article in Sunday's editions misinterpreted a comment from U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., at a town hall meeting in North Miami on Saturday. In his speech, Murtha said U.S. credibility was suffering because of continued U.S. military presence in Iraq ,and the perception that the U.S. is an occupying force. Murtha was citing a recent poll, by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, that indicates a greater percentage of people in 10 of 14 foreign countries consider the U.S. in Iraq a greater danger to world peace than any threats posed by Iran or North Korea.
As noted, Murtha was referring to world wide attitudes cited in a poll (http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0615/dailyUpdate.html), not his own.

Ahhhh a retraction I wish I had heard of.


Thanks

Fandros

It only came out a couple hours ago, so no surprise you weren't aware.