Posted on 01/20/2005 8:37:30 AM PST by kona coffee
WASHINGTON - On this snow-draped Inauguration Day in Washington, a few people on Capitol Hill were thinking about the worst: a catastrophic attack that could kill or incapacitate most members of Congress, the president, the vice president and the cabinet.
advertisement
The unseen presence at this first inauguration since Sept. 11, 2001, is al-Qaida, whose terrorists showed three years ago how capable they were of killing thousands of Americans in one place at one time.
At 9:30 on inauguration morning, in his office in the Longworth Building, a short walk from where the president would soon take his oath, Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., said, It is very clear that al-Qaida wishes to do only things that are destabilizing to the United States. More modest terrorists would have blown up an apartment building in the last three years. But al-Qaida is not dead and they dont think small. They think in terms of the power of the United States and how do you symbolically destroy, physically destroy, that power.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Sounds almost hopefull.
Who is trafficing in "Fear Mongering" now?
It would truly be a disaster if all the Republicans were killed while attending the inauguration while the Democrats were plotting their comeback.
"Sounds almost hopefull."
My sentiments exactly. MSNBC has turned into one of the most biased "news" organizations ever.
Yep. How many different 'news' organizations have written about this now? Just wishful thinking on their part. Ghouls.
Meaning, read my article?
Welcome to Free Republic!
I tell you, the MSM is doing everything it can to provoke some loose cannon into attempting an assassination.
Why would MSNBC publish this? Didn't they get the memo from Michael Moore that not only is the terrorist threat overblown and overhyped, but that it doesn't even exist? I know I sleep easier after hearing the world reknowned director Michael Moore tell us that. </sarcasm>
:::SNIFF:::SNIFF:::
I don't think I can think an unthinkable thought.
ping!
...Under Sherman?s bill, the line of succession would begin with the Secretary of State and extend through the Cabinet, but would for the first time include officials outside Washington, D.C., and in some cases outside the borders of the United States, specifically the ambassador to the United Nations, the ambassador to Great Britain and a few other American ambassadors...
I don't get the rush to get power OUT of the hands of the duly elected and into the hands of those who are appointed.
Why remove the Speaker and Senate President Pro Tempore from the lineup? They've been elected and they know what's going on.
Why an ambassador?
You could get some real putz that way.
Actually, you're probably closer to the truth than my first thought of it being just mere wishful thinking.
BTW, is there no official Inauguration thread today? FR seems slow (not computing wise, people-wise) today.
And you joined just to post this?
The Senate ProTem is typically the oldest senator from the majority side. Its an honorary position. Often, they have difficulty remembering their own name, let alone knowing what's going on. I'd be in favor of moving the majority leader into that succession slot.
THANKS!
I even searched 'inauguration' and didn't find it.
Sorry. I used to be a member a while back. Lost my password, etc. Have lurked for years. Wanted to get back "on board". Thanks.
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.