Chinese pet food scarier than these four

This one is straight from one of my favorite blogs on the Web: Philly's own Attytood. Take a few minutes and check out this very well-written piece. Here's two passages that I thought particularly poignant:

People who think that violence and bloodshed are an answer to anything are indeed a danger to a civil society, so unless the facts are radically different than what's been reported so far, we should have praise for law enforcement, including the NYPD and the FBI, for not letting this kind of nonsense get very far. It shows yet again that the law-enforcement approach to fighting this type of threat - so ridiculed when John Kerry dared even mention it in 2004 -- remains the one that in most cases works best. That said, the plot was not exactly the biggest thing going on the world right now.

Except at the CNN-sponsored presidential debate, where "liberal" moderator Wolf Blitzer would have us believe that the break-up of a half-witted scheme by these four losers was proof that all of Bush's terrorism policies are working, and shouldn't the Democrats fall in line. Here's how he put it to John Edwards (via Nexis):

BLITZER: Senator Edwards, let me let you clarify what you said the other day. You said the war on terror is a bumper sticker, not a plan.

With the news yesterday, this alleged plot at JFK which could have done, supposedly, horrendous damage and caused an incredible number of casualties, [emphasis in original] do you believe the U.S. is not at war with terrorists?

[Snip]

Look, what really happened at JFK was a hijacking. A chance for the potential next leaders of the United States to talk about a) real threats from bona fide terrorists, such as the unstable situation we've fostered in Pakistan and b) other issues that actually affect the day-to-day life of most Americans, like education, was hijacked by questions based around a local law-enforcement matter.

And, as Josh Marshall and others pointed out over the weekend, this is yet another time that implausible, half-baked and unfeasible plots have been trumpeted as high victories in the war in terror, including one plan to take down the Brooklyn Bridge with a blowtorch, the plot to "blow up the Sears Tower" by losers in Miami who probably couldn't find Chicago on a big road map, and our own inept Fort Dix crew. Not that it will happen, but I wish the media, from CNN to Fox to the AP to everyone in between, would go to the nearest window and yell: "All 'terrorism' is not created equal."

This is by far the most spot-on analysis of the news coverage about the JFK plot I've read.

To hear the authorities tell it, one could conclude that officials stopped another 9-11 just in the nick of time.

A quick sample of quotes:

• Between a news release and a news conference, this is what Roslynn R. Mauskopf, the United States attorney in Brooklyn, said about the case: "Had the plot been carried out, it could have resulted in unfathomable damage, deaths and destruction," and "The devastation that would be caused had this plot succeeded are just unthinkable." (Also keep in mind that Mauskopf is a U.S. Attorney, and it's not well documented that U.S. attorneys in the Bush administration are as political as any U.S. attorneys in history. If they are not, they are fired.

• "Once again, would-be terrorists have put New York City in their cross hairs," said NYPD Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly.

• "I believe I spoke the simple truth at the press conference: the ambitions were horrific, the capacities were very limited, but they kept trying. Their signature was their persistence," said Mark J. Mershon, assistant director in charge of the F.B.I.'s New York office.

It's hard to figure out who's most responsible for absurd fear-mongering - the media, or the three people above, from left to right - Roslynn R. Mauskopf, United States attorney; Raymond W. Kelly, New York City police commissioner, center; and Mark J. Mershon, assistant F.B.I. director, right, following their news conference on Saturday.

It didn't matter which news network you tuned in to over the weekend - it was "hype the terror plot," 24-7.

Of course, according to The New York Times, Mauskopf's press release mentioned that the "public was never at risk" and told reporters that law enforcement "had stopped this plot long before it ever had a chance to be carried out," but news reports conveniently neglected to mention that fact.

Other sources painted a similar picture. "Capability low, intent very high," a law enforcement official said of the suspects, as quoted in the Times.

Other law enforcement officials and engineers dismissed the perception that the planned attack would have resulted in a catastrophic chain reaction so widely reported in the media, citing safeguards that would have stopped any explosions from spreading.

AP wrote this on Saturday: But while pipeline and security experts agreed that such an attack would have crippled America's economy, particularly the airline industry, they said it probably would not have led to significant loss of life as intended.

I'm sure glad to see that AP didn't overreact. I'm sure there are some experts out there who could back up the media's and the government's ridiculous claims about thousands dead, right? From Attytood:

Richard Kuprewicz, a pipeline expert and president of Accufacts Inc., an energy consulting firm that focuses on pipelines and tank farms, said the force of explosion would depend on the amount of fuel under pressure, but it would not travel up and down the line.

"That doesn't mean wackos out there can't do damage and cause a fire, but those explosions and fires are going to be fairly restricted," he said.

Oh. Well, maybe another expert backs it up:

John W. Magaw, a former head of the Transportation Security Administration, told The Washington Post that such an attack 'may not cause a lot of deaths, but it would be spectacular and seen around world."

He said it "could cripple the airlines."

So, a fire at JFK's fuel facility could "cripple the airlines"?

Heaven help us.

So, the last two big terror-scares, to sum up - four pizza delivery guys who were going to attack Fort Dix, an army base full of armed soldiers; and four half-baked, wanna-be terrorists who had a pipe dream (pardon the pun) of attacking JFK's airline fuel pipeline, but they had no money, no detailed plans and no explosives.

In other words, these guys didn't know C-4 from Connect Four. By all accounts I've read, these bozos were as close to attacking JFK's pipeline as Jaws, our family cat. Sorry, little buddy - I'm collectin'.

Top photo by Peter Foley/European Pressphoto Agency via The New York Times

JFK Airport plot convenient excuse for W to crank up the PR machine

My first thought when I heard about the FBI's sting operation that uncovered the plot to blow up JFK International Airport and surrounding neighborhoods was, "thank God the FBI caught them." However, my second thought was, "I wonder if this is being milked by an administration that never misses an opportunity to remind us how safe it's keeping the country."

To me, that's a pretty pathetic thought for any American citizen to have, yet that's how cynical I've become in the face of the Bush administration's relentless PR and marketing effort to force feed their image as the Party That Can Keep Us the Safest. I'd invite anyone who thinks that's cynical to look up various quotations by Dick Cheney and Rudy Giuliani from this year alone - the evidence is easy to find. (You can find lots of it in CMB's archives.)

Of course, the media didn't miss an opportunity to hype the living daylights out of this story over the weekend, either. Don't get me wrong - of course it's a big story, and the media has a responsibility to cover it, and cover it well. But, the media never ceases to amaze me when something like this is uncovered. Just like the plot to attack Fort Dix last month - you would have thought that nothing else was happening in the world, at all.

Ever since 9-11, I just get the feeling that the media has overtly complied with the Bush administration's wishes to scare the living daylights out of us. History shows that a frightened public is a compliant public. Since the 9-11 attacks, there are examples too numerous to mention of this administration's taking advantage of our fears. The USA Patriot Act is probably the best example.

The FBI infiltrated the suspected Muslim terrorist cell that plotted to blow up the airport, its fuel tanks and a jet fuel artery, arresting three men, one of them a former member of Guyana's parliament. A fourth man is still being sought in Trinidad as part of the plot that authorities said they had been tracking for more than a year and was foiled in the planning stages.

Again, bravo to the FBI for a job well done (I really mean that), but this whole incident raises the question - how safe are we, really? Our ports, nuclear plants, food and water supply and many other areas are still wide open, all because of the War in Iraq. This administration has gotten way with homeland security on the cheap. I sure hope our luck continues, but Homeland Security shouldn't be left to chance with luck. Above, fuel tanks are seen at JFK International Airport in New York Sunday, June 3, 2007. I know that there's a great deal that I don't know about security at airports, but just from what I've seen from doing what little air travel I have done in the past few years, our security measures could use a great deal of improvement.

Above, yesterday an approaching aircraft flies overhead past a marker indicating the route of the jet fuel pipeline supplying JFK airport near 157 Ave. and 99th St. in the residential neighborhood of Howard Beach, Queens, N.Y. The lengthy pipeline was installed decades ago to replace barge deliveries of jet fuel. Should it be this easy for a would-be terrorist to identify and find a major jet fuel pipeline? Just a thought.

And one more thought - I did some reading about the plot that the FBI uncovered, and it seems that the terrorists had a difficult time acquiring explosives to do the job. Really? How hard is it to get explosives in America? Not that hard. Timothy McVeigh didn't find it very hard, and neither did the people who perpetrated the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993. Either the media (and really, the FBI and this administration) are all blowing this threat way out of proportion (anything think that's far-fetched?), or these four terrorists are the dumbest people walking the planet. Or, it could be a combination of the two.

My point in all of this is that my feelings are yet another indication to me about how far this administration's credibility has fallen - it's to the point now that any report about terrorism or the War on Terrorism can and should be viewed with skepticism before being believed.

I'll feel much more safe, and a whole lot more trusting of our government, when Bush is out of office.

Top photo, Reuters
Second and third photos by David Karp, AP
Bottom photo by Rick Maiman, AP