Posted on 12/31/2009 8:45:24 AM PST by crosslink
.
The dog may have been attracted to the bag because the bag may have been in a room where explosive powder was. So maybe the dog smelled old traces of it.
Or Mr Orange suit carried the bomb on board, left the stuff in the bathroom. Pantybomber then retrieved the stuff, stuffed his panties and went to his seat to do the deed.
When did mr orange suit use the bathroom?
Yes, they are portraying him that way. Does that sound like the world-traveling son of an extremely wealthy banker?
Sounds like a well rehearsed taqiya skit to me!Thank you Obama, Acts 2,3,4.....infinity soon to follow.
I want to know the name of the person who decided to let this POS on the flight, I want to know the thinking that went in to letting him board in that person's mind.I am NOT alone.
And I sure as hell am NOT a racist.
Nothing racist about any of those questions and they all need to be answered. I can’t help but wonder if 0drama was surprised and shocked by the security breach or the failure of the mission. Maybe I should adjust my tinfoil hat but it seems against all odds that this guy was allowed to board and it now seems like any trail leading to an explanation for that is being clumsily blocked or covered.
I’m fed up with this cr@p!
What are we missing? If he has the money, etc. Why not get a passport, dress nice, and travel unnoticed?
Why not provide him with a no-fail detonator?
There’s a lot about this that is really odd.
God is good, the plot failed, and it’s going a long way to demonstrate Obama is asleep at the switch!
If you knew you might be on a no-fly list then wouldn’t you try not to show your passport even if you had one?
This interview with Kurt Haskell, linked earlier in the thread, is interesting. He is the one who overheard the "well-dressed Indian man" helping the panty bomber in Amsterdam and he saw the FBI escort the "man in orange" away after bomb sniffing dogs hit on his luggage and later reemerged with the "man in orange" in cuffs. He sounds pretty credible and others witnessed the latter event too.
For some strange reason the FBI is denying the existence of the "well-dressed Indian," the "man in orange" and the Indian guy who video taped the flight.
Does anyone remember hearing, while President Bush was in office, that one reason the gov’t wasn’t going after the Muslims agressively was because there were already so many in the country the gov’t was afraid of them?
I don’t recall hearing that did you? I do recall a recent story about terrorist-connected Muslims put into high positions in 0bowdown’s government.
The terrorist was supposed to succeed, with U.S. gov’ts blessing. Someone’s really interested in getting rid of the world’s surplus population. I feel that the Value Jet downing several years ago was a terrorist act, as was Flt. 800.
Let's not forget the plane that crashed into Jamiaca Bay, NYC in late November, 2001. Three weeks later the world learned about the existence of the shoebomb.
I just don’t remember the source. It could be something I ate, but even still, I wonder how much ‘fear’ plays into the government policy toward the Muslims.
Bush: Pre-emptive strike policy using CIA and special ops.
Obama: Sit here and wait for them to play their tricks and set up their taqiya initiatives, fortress AMerica? ( Oh yes, the perfect excuse to take away citizen freedoms)
Which one do you like?
I would like Obama’s if he would sent the targets into my neighborhood. Make for some interesting target practice.( sarc.)
Bush had a successful policy.Obama’s is doomed to failure
by its very nature.
If they are well entrenched in our bureaucracies and the military, and there is a case to be made for that, then there would be a lot for politicians to fear there. Not least of which would be the public reaction.
As a component of national security, yes. If it is just another arm of his policies to bring the U.S. to its knees then it might not be such a failure.
I agree. It seeems purposeful. How could anyoone be THAT stupid.( Not).
Destabilizing US society gives the government all sorts of reasons to control people.
I agree. It seeems purposeful. How could anyoone be THAT stupid.( Not).
Destabilizing US society gives the government all sorts of reasons to control people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.