Posted on 08/13/2006 4:44:18 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
Many on here have suggested the phones are probably intended for use as detonators. As I understand this usage someone from a remote location calls the phone number for the phone being used as a detonator, and the incoming signal triggers the bomb. But the detonator/phone does not work without a battery. I already suggested that they may insert batttery at last moment so as to prevent anything monitoring the phone's location (such as a satellite). I'm just trying to identify for the experts all the conceivable reasons they are doing this, including as a diversion to keep us chasing our tales. We know it is widespread, young Muslim men are doing it, traleling around buying up huge quantities of tracfones or other cell phones, then immediately disassembling them. I figure the brain power of FR could help the authorities (remember TANG-gate? Buckhead? anyone?).
My point was elements on the left and in the media would rather treat terrorism as exclusively a Law Enforcement issue. That sentiment was apparently expressed by some of the Dem guests this morning. The law, operating in tandem with the military, coupled with a vigilant society is the only way to combat terror in my opinion..
#498, I totally agree. They also keep insisting that GWB has been in office over 6 Years. I ask these trolls if the New Term in office for GWB started in 2000 when Clinton was still in the WH.
The Drive-By Media always refers to it as "criticizing" President, as if merely stating a difference of opinion can result in a froth-mouthed conservative backlash.
The DBM and dems are so dumb and/or they think the people are dumb when they come up with these false choices. Of course in USA or UK urban areas when they locate an AlQ nest they go in with the cops. If the nest is in Beirut, Fallujah or other "enemy" terroritory, it is OK to drop a MOAB or bunker buster on their hideout. Just common sense. Yes, coordinate. No need to either-or.
Basically I think she has only one core value - the self-promotion of Arianna Huffington. Cindy Sheehan has more sincerity than AH does. We just thought she was a conservative when she spouted the rhetoric of the right. This is a woman who actually got into the California governor's race = definitely an attention seeker.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/08/michael_chertoff_rep_pete_hoek.html
About halfway down the page:
WALLACE: Of course, your big issue is your opposition to the war in Iraq, and you've pointed it out again today. You think that it's a distraction from the war on terror.
Last week you were asked the following, and let's put it up on the screen, what would you do right now if you were in the Senate about Iraq? Your answer, "I would have supported, you know, the Kerry-Feingold amendment which calls for pulling out all U.S. troops out of Iraq by next July.
Mr. Lamont, what do you think happens to Iraqis who trusted us to protect them from the insurgents? What do you think happens with all the sectarian violence if we pull all of our troops out in less than a year?
LAMONT: Look what's happening now. We've been there three years. We've gone from greeted as liberators to just a few dead- enders, to some sectarian violence, to civil war. You know, unlike Senator Lieberman, unlike President Bush, I think we've got to look at the facts on the ground.
Things are getting worse, and our very visible front-line presence is making the situation worse in many ways. So let's be clear with the Maliki government. Let's say we have no permanent intentions upon your military bases. We're going to not be here on a permanent basis. It's not unconditional. We're going to start bringing our troops home, and we ought to have them home within a year.
I think that's reasonable, gives them time, their 200,000 troops to step up. But it's a basic message. I mean, President Bush says we'll stand down as soon as the Iraqis stand up. I turn that on its head. I think the Iraqis won't stand up until we stand down.
So let's negotiate a phased withdrawal. Chris, we'll be there. We'll be there for humanitarian support. We'll be there for reconstruction. But now's the time to get the very American face off of this perceived occupation.
WALLACE: But the prime minister, al-Maliki, was here just recently and said we need U.S. troops to continue to be there. What if you're wrong, Mr. Lamont, Senator Lamont? What if you're wrong? You vote for this, to get them out, and there's a blood bath?
LAMONT: There is a blood bath. What if it keeps getting worse? What if it gets even worse? No, I don't think I want to have 132,000 troops back in the middle of a civil war. I think only the Iraqis will be able to solve this for themselves.
We'll be there for support. We've got our troops in Kuwait. We have our maritime presence. We'll make sure that Iran and others don't come in to create any mischief. But I think the big difference between the president and I, the senator and I, is I think it's now time for the Iraqis to step up and take control of their own destiny.
WALLACE: So under all circumstances, all troops out by next July.
LAMONT: I don't know about all circumstances whatever. But right now I think our policy ought to be let's be clear with the Maliki government. We're going to have our troops out within a year. We'll be there for reconstruction, training, everything else in the background. But yes, I think let's set the record straight.
Then:
WALLACE: This week you even linked the war in Iraq to what's going on in Israel. Take a look at this, if you will.
LAMONT: Sure.
WALLACE: This is what you had to say. "Hezbollah has been emboldened. They're attacking Israel. I think you can just look around the Middle East right now and you can see just the many factors of how this invasion of Iraq was a disaster."
Mr. Lamont, here's a brief history of Hezbollah, and let's put it up. In 1983, they bombed the U.S. embassy and the Marine barracks, killing 258 Americans.
In 1996, they helped the Iranians blow up the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 servicemen.
They have been at war with Israel for a quarter century. Can you really blame Hezbollah on the war in Iraq?
LAMONT: I'd say the war in Iraq has emboldened Iran. An emboldened Iran doesn't have its historical enemy, Iraq, right there, makes Israel more vulnerable. Iran, Syria, Hezbollah -- there is a nexus there.
Yes, I think we've destabilized the Middle East and we've done nothing for Israel's security because of this.
WALLACE: And you think that this Hezbollah attack -- you can link it to the fact that we're in Iraq?
LAMONT: Well, what I said was our invasion of Iraq has done nothing for Israel's security and has emboldened Iran. Absolutely.
*******
Lamont is an idiot!
LOL...Tell us how you really feel, Samantha.
That certainly is true. But to the moonbats, who only hear part of the story as put out by the MSM, he makes perfect sense.
It is a good read. Unfortunately, it ends with Frances Townsend, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, under her desk in her office talking on the phone with No. 10 Downing Street and FBI Director Mueller looking at her and commenting on her choice of clothes.
I would have liked the story to continue on from there!
Oh dear, on top of everything else, who taught him English.
Don't know, but using search on Mackinac Bridge within FR I got these
Look what Wallace said:
What if you're wrong, Mr. Lamont, Senator Lamont?
He is already addressing Ned as Senator Lamont!
When David Brinkley ran the show it was one of the best things on TV. Sam and Cokie ran it into the ground and Steponallofus turned it into a joke.
As to George Will, he has a well documented personal hatred of the Bush family that dates back to the 1980s. He should stick to baseball. He won't embarass himself (quite) so badly.
I would guess that this conventional wisdom and the voting habits it reflects ends this year.
I grew up in the community with the largest percentage of Jewish citizens outside of Israel, Scarsdale, NY. No one could ever explain the dichotomy to me then. I have a feeling none of those friends can explain it to themselves now.
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.