Posted on 07/03/2002 12:19:12 PM PDT by bat-boy
As Americans prepare to celebrate a rare Thursday holiday, high-ranking officials in the Bush administration announced their discovery of a major new terrorism threat.
"This rates at least a bright orange, and it could turn red in an instant," according to George Hanover, an official in the Propaganda Ministry of the Third Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security.
Hanover explained that the alert was based on the FBI's discovery of a document that had been circulating on the Internet, and perhaps in other places.
"The document is quite specific," he said, "and it could be construed to call for violent action on this continent, and it might also involve suicide bombers backed by a well-financed organization with international connections."
Pressed for details, Hanover said that the originators of the document had "pledged their lives," which indicated a self-destructive willingness to die for their cause, as well as "their fortunes," which FBI analysts interpret as "signifying that they are people of some means, or else they would be talking about something other than their fortunes."
Hanover said he would not reveal other specific wording from the document, at the request of Vice President Dick Cheney. Cheney's request, which was also passed on to press associations and the broadcast and cable news channels, came about because he feared that terrorists might use some of the precise phrases in the document as "triggers to activate some of their sleeper cells."
However, the Attorney General's Office of Counter-Terrorism Investigation did release some details when Attorney General John Ashcroft held a news conference yesterday.
Displaying portions of the document on a screen, Ashcroft pointed out that "in this place, where a good American would say "endowed by God,' the author or authors of this terrorist manifesto says "endowed by their Creator.' And toward the end, they say they have a "Reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence,' rather than following the official American motto of "In God We trust.' "
Ashcroft said that his experts had parsed and analyzed the document, and felt confident that they could identify some of its authors and supporters.
For instance, he said, "we know that some of them have grown hemp - that's just a code word for marijuana, and it is currently used only by the advocates of legalization who would doom future generations of American children - which means that these criminals are very likely using illegal drug money to finance their terrorism campaign."
Another drug connection, Ashcroft said, lay in an unusual phrase in the document: "the pursuit of happiness." Some names associated with the document, the attorney general said, were suspected of involvement in smuggling, as well as of participation in an attack by terrorists in disguise on a ship in Boston harbor which resulted in the destruction of much of its cargo.
"The similarities with the U.S.S. Cole attack are too significant to ignore," Ashcroft said, "and we all know what other terrible things started beneath the lax security system operated by the Port Authority of Boston."
The attorney general said there were other Boston connections. "I don't want to give out this party's name, because we could be closing in on him," he said, "but he is an attorney from the Boston area who has defended unpopular clients before, and his name is associated with the document.
"In fact," Ashcroft continued, "he may have assisted in writing it, and with our new Patriot Act Domestic Communications Surveillance System, we have found several other messages which he either sent to his fellow conspirators or attempted to present to the general public. In one, he wrote that "the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,' and in another, he wrote that "this would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.' "
While most media representatives were content to take notes or prepare their hair for their soon-to-come standup shots outside the Justice Department offices, one unkempt print reporter asked the attorney general if the terrorist suspect was John Adams, second president of the United States, and whether the terrorist manifesto was the Declaration of Independence, issued on July 4, 1776.
Ashcroft said he could not dignify such an impudent question with an answer, and ordered security personnel to remove the troublemaker to a special counter-terrorism prison where he would be held incommunicado before appearing at a closed military tribunal.
The attorney general closed by reminding patriotic Americans that, to stand up against the security threats posed by terrorists, they should go shopping on July 4, rather than attend any public celebrations.
Ed Quillen of Salida (ed@cozine.com) is a former newspaper editor whose column appears Tuesday and Sunday.
It appears the local Denver newspaper is unhappy with the Patriot Act also.
The irony of this whole Patriot Act situation does not escape me. If the Congress had passed this bill during the Klintoon administration, this same journalist would be writing editorials on the sensibleness of it all. At the same time, the conservatives would be screaming and hollering about the expansion of government, civil liberties, Klintoon and Reno can't be trusted, etc., etc.
Now it's all upside down, with the lead characters reversing roles. It seems to me it all boils down to an issue of trust. Neither side trusts the other not to abuse the authority given the Justice Department. The libs will never trust Ashcroft, and the conservatives would have never trusted Reno.
In my opinion, both sides are correct. Neither party can be trusted any further than they can be thrown. If history is any indication, it will be only a matter of time until the laws passed in the Patriot Act expand and/or they are abused for political reasons.
What should anger both libs and conservatives (IMO)is that the Patriot Act was passed instead of a bill that would deport all non-citizen Muslums from the Middle East and Indonesia (as a start). This includes legal immigrants.
I think they should be angry because Congress passed the Patriot Act before providing for the protection of our borders by having the Army Corp of Engineers build a high-tech DMZ along the borders with Mexico and Canada.
Anyway, that's my two cents, for what it's worth.
RLTW!
Semper Suo
What I see is a campaign by the liberals and their media, to make fun of successful deterrence of terrorism by the Bush Administration, and blame them when the inevitable atrocities happen in spite of their best efforts.
THe USA has survived all these years in spite of the liberal Democrats and their agenda, not because of it. THe two major parties may well be almost identical twins in many ways, but the one on the left is the evil twin.
You seem to have bought into the "they all do it" line of defense. Ashcroft is no Janet Reno, and the left is much less responsible than the right.
Evidence? Did the right attack Reno as the left attacked Ashcroft's nomination - with lies, slander, and bigotry? No. Has Ashcroft come up with any bullshit "No controlling legal authority" rulings? No. Waco? My money says you won't see similar. etc I can go on forever.
I agree - neither side are angels. I think you have bought their propaganda if you think both are equally evil.
The Patriot Act is a giant pile of $**T.
Can someone with a brain tell me WTF this guy is talking about? I honestly don't understand his cryptic contention or what the hell he's trying to promulgate here. He's been known to propagandize to further his dogma, but this is just goofy. Wolfowitz needs to have another talk with him.
No wonder people think he's a freak.
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.