The American Spectator

Tim| 12.28.09 @ 11:46AM

Imagine if he had succeeded. I doubt that, even now there'd be an official determination made, whether this was a genuine "man caused disaster" or icing or bad wiring.

Sean| 12.28.09 @ 12:10PM

Really we don't have any airport security. If we want real security we would have to fire all those in charge of homeland security right now and get rid of the current President and Congress.

A man who is a known terror threat can walk on a plane with no screening gee we wouldn't want to profile anyone. This whole thing of course will be an excuse for the government to trample on US citizens.

Jeff| 12.28.09 @ 12:25PM

drug mules smuggle in alot of drug by swallowing their packages ... it would be nothing to build a bomb with the nastiest explosives, encase it in the appropriate material with a timer that is swallowed just prior to boarding a flight ... with a round trip ticket and a bunch of luggage ...

nothing would detect that short of a full body xray ... you could strip the guy down to his birthday suit and still pass him thru security ...

you don't "spot" the bad guy by looking for the guy carrying a bomb ... you need to spot him thru other means ...

Al Adab| 12.28.09 @ 12:59PM

Any individual with eveil intent may cerate a disaster and kill or injure many in proximity. That does not make such an act less of an act of terrorism if, as in this case, it is ideologically motivated. Or war is not simply with organizations which seek to do us harm, but with the mindset that creates fanatics. The fact that our own government is currently in the hands of people no less fanatical in their Faith than these evildoers should give us all pause.

L. Ross| 12.28.09 @ 1:17PM

Al, I don't really know what you are trying to say, but trust me on this, use a spell checker, brother. Your poor spelling makes you look foolish.

Al Adab| 12.28.09 @ 2:44PM

Thanks L. R. it would help to have spellcheck or simply smaller fingers.

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.28.09 @ 4:45PM

Hey L. Ross
Are you a fourth grade english teacher? No?
Then shut the hell up about typos.
Al has contributed a lot of thoughtful insights here over time.
Get the log out of your own hiney, before you start discussing a toot on our part.

PS You screwed up a comma placement...Ross.
(and since I am a #1 world wide bestselling author, I can missssssspell for effect...any time I want to.)

Al Adab| 12.28.09 @ 5:33PM

Ken,
Many thanks for the kind comments. Sometimes my fervor gets ahead of my fingers.

JP| 12.28.09 @ 1:32PM

In the aftermath of 9/11 there were a few lone voices that argued against creating another federal bureaucracy. Bureaucrats are good at filing reports, creating Power Point presentations, and chairing endless meetings. It matters not who is President -it's just the nature of things.

For a terrorist organization like Al Qaida, they only have to be lucky once. This seems to be missing from the Obama administration's reaction. It's all been damage control. But this shouldn't come as a surprise if one considers that Napalitano considers returning Vets are bigger threat than Al Qaida.

Dennis D| 12.28.09 @ 2:17PM

Profiling is needed now.

rssg| 12.28.09 @ 2:42PM

Best of all....stop all Mooooslim immigration for a period of at least a few years. Let the ragheads over there police themselves. Tell them we're not gonna accept their people anymore until they get a handle on radicalism in Islam.

Of course they never will get a handle on it, for jihad is part of Islam - always has been, alwasy will be.

Franklin| 12.28.09 @ 3:16PM

I wonder what the result would be if we take every failed terrorist attempt, put them in a wide-open field and then detonate successfully.

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.28.09 @ 4:50PM

Folks,
I take the Christmas bomber very seriously.

.......almost as seriously as I take our current government which seems to think killing a few million of us is the right thing to do.

Tim| 12.29.09 @ 10:07AM

Ken you should be more concerned that this so-called "Flying Dutchman" is allowed to assault a fellow passenger under the bogus authority of a "war on terror".
Sure, the suspect's pants may have been on fire, there may have been popping noises too, but does this allow us to abandon our principles? NO!
He should have summoned a constable and been a good witness.
Just as our SEALs face court martial under Obama's reign, just as CIA officers and Justice Department lawyers are even now being targeted for prosecution, this lawless passenger must be made to answer for his crimes.

Tony in Central PA| 12.29.09 @ 11:04AM

This Administration will underreact, or they will react in a way that is dishonest. By reacting dishonestly, I mean they may try to use this event to justify some measure that will do nothing to diminish our vulnerability to terrorism ( " Man - Caused Disasters " ).
The worldview of this Administration finds the motivations of Al Quaida incomprehensible. The idea of somebody being willing to die for something is the big problem here. This Administration also seems to share the typical hard left disdain for history, even recent history. So the lessons of the 1993 WTC bombing response remain unlearned and we will have another National History Lesson concerning the risks of treating enemy combatants like everyday crooks.

arnold| 12.29.09 @ 12:18PM

Instead of being on a "No Fly" list, why isn't Janet Napolitano, head of Homeland Security, on a "No Job List" ? Her statement that "the system worked" is typical political "spin". (You can be sure she will be soon be "thrown under the bus"). Also, it's another example of our Nanny-state PC approach to security, be it about water boarding or giving Muslims special scrutiny at checkpoints ( as the Israelis do with no plane attacks in 40 years). How soft we've become in our approach to terrorist was shown Sunday on the 60-Minutes segment, "Out of the Shadows"in an interview of the CIA supervisor who helped to eliminate the Taliban threat in Afghanistan in 2001. An excerpt :

"Asked what orders he gave his men, he said, "Orders were fairly simple: 'Find al Qaeda and kill them, especially leadership. Destroy command and control. If the Afghans, including Taliban leaders wanted to help us, we are receptive.'"

"How did that work? I mean, going to each individual tribal leader one by one and offering them what? Saying what?" Logan asked.

"Well, in a very crude way, it would be a carrot and a stick. The carrot would be 'If you come cooperate with us, we will reward you and your people.' The stick was 'If you do not cooperate, the chances of your survival are greatly diminished.' And we would prove this by attacking Taliban leaders who had rejected our overtures," Crumpton explained.

"Killing them?" Logan asked.

"Yes. And the next day, we'd talk to the tribal leader that was next door. We would make him the same offer. Given the incentive that we had set the previous day, he was much more amenable to negotiations in our favor," Crumpton replied.

"Because he heard the guy that wouldn't cooperate was killed yesterday?" Logan asked.

"Or in some cases, he saw that his fellow commander, his tribal ally was killed," Crumpton said.