'Mass Murder' Foiled - A terror plot is exposed by the policies many American liberals oppose

Opinion Journal ^ | August 11, 2006 | Review and Outlook

[GiovannaNicoletta]

Americans went to work yesterday to news of another astonishing terror plot against U.S. airlines, only this time the response was grateful relief. British authorities had busted the "very sophisticated" plan "to commit mass murder" and arrested 20-plus British-Pakistani suspects. As we approach the fifth anniversary of 9/11 without another major attack on U.S. soil, now is the right moment to consider the policies that have protected us--and those in public life who have fought those policies nearly every step of the way.

[Brilliant]

Here's the meat of the editorial:

Democrats and their media allies screamed bloody murder last year when it was leaked that the government was monitoring some communications outside the context of a law known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. FISA wasn't designed for, nor does it forbid, the timely exploitation of what are often anonymous phone numbers, and the calls monitored had at least one overseas connection. But Mr. Reid labelled such surveillance "illegal" and an "NSA domestic spying program." Other Democrats are still saying they will censure, or even impeach, Mr. Bush over the FISA program if they win control of Congress.

This year the attempt to paint Bush Administration policies as a clear and present danger to civil liberties continued when USA Today hyped a story on how some U.S. phone companies were keeping call logs. The obvious reason for such logs is that the government might need them to trace the communications of a captured terror suspect. And then there was the recent brouhaha when the New York Times decided news of a secret, successful and entirely legal program to monitor bank transfers between bad guys was somehow in the "public interest" to expose.

For that matter, we don't recall most advocates of a narrowly "focused" war on terror having many kind words for the Patriot Act, which broke down what in the 1990s was a crippling "wall" of separation between our own intelligence and law-enforcement agencies. Senator Reid was "focused" enough on this issue to brag, prematurely as it turned out, that he had "killed" its reauthorization.

And what about interrogating terror suspects when we capture them? It is elite conventional wisdom these days that techniques no worse than psychological pressure and stress positions constitute "torture." There is also continued angst about the detention of terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay, even as Senators and self-styled civil libertarians fight Bush Administration attempts to process them through military tribunals that won't compromise sources and methods.

In short, Democrats who claim to want "focus" on the war on terror have wanted it fought without the intelligence, interrogation and detention tools necessary to win it. And if they cite "cooperation" with our allies as some kind of magical answer, they should be reminded that the British and other European legal systems generally permit far more intrusive surveillance and detention policies than the Bush Administration has ever contemplated.

[goldstategop]

We should thank liberals for the anti-anti-Islamofascist stand in the Age Of Islamofascist Terror just as we thanked liberals for their anti-anti-Communist stand during the Cold War.

(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em Down Hezbullies.)

[libertylover]

We don't yet know how the plot was foiled

It seems to me we do. Another report said that U.S. intelligence picked up chatter between two ringleaders (and brothers) and alerted British authorities. Plus large amounts of money had been wired to them. BTW, intercepting terrorist phone calls and monitoring their money transfers are the very same tools Democrats have not wanted to use against the Islamofacists.

[AmericaUnited]

Rednecks will be our last line of defense and there won't be any Geneva convention baloney in the mix!

"He just needed killing" is in the Redneck Geneva convention :)

[teddyballgame]

Its just a good thing that the NY Times didn't catch wind of this surveillance plan. They might have tipped off the terrorists before they could get caught.

[AmericaUnited]

They really are the scum of the earth.

[Interesting Times]

Outstanding op-ed. Bookmarked...

[VOA]

Some sayings that drive liberals crazy these days:

In times of war, Truth is so precious that she must be surrounded by
a Bodyguard of Lies.
...approximately what Churchill said concerning military secrets

In times of war, the law is silent.
...the Roman sentiment that during time of national crisis, some legal
niceties don't get exercised as they do in peacetime

[rabidralph]

A caller in to Fox & Friends remarked, "Remember, it was Harry Reid who exclaimed, 'We killed the Patriot Act'!"

[Responsibility2nd]

Let's emphasize that again: The plot was foiled because a large number of people were under surveillance concerning their spending, travel and communications. Which leads us to wonder if Scotland Yard would have succeeded if the ACLU or the New York Times had first learned the details of such surveillance programs.

Needs Repeating.

[Responsibility2nd]

Let's emphasize that again: The plot was foiled because a large number of people were under surveillance concerning their spending, travel and communications. Which leads us to wonder if Scotland Yard would have succeeded if the ACLU or the New York Times had first learned the details of such surveillance programs.

Needs Repeating.

---

And repeating. This is one great article. I've read it twice so far.

[listenhillary]

Bump

[Donaeus]

This is what I came up with on Paint...

[nuconvert]

Great Piece! pong

[Democratshavenobrains]

Lefties love moving the goalposts about what will make them happy. The fact that we caught terrorists planning something is bad because we didn't catch them earlier.

[GeronL]

Thats pretty good.

[GiovannaNicoletta]

LOL!!