March 16, 2004

Terrorism and You

Posted by tomo at 03:46 AM in politics . | 16 Comments

It seems that the March 11 Madrid (M-11) bombings have led to overwhelming victory for the Socialists over the Popular Party, despite that party, while still in power, quickly pinning the blame for the attack on ETA. Whether it was ETA or al Qaida, it seems that the political change may be favorable to both, aka "terrorists win".

So what are y'all's thoughts on how various terrorist acts would affect our own presidential election this year? Would an al Qaida attack just before election strengthen the candidate viewed as "tougher" on terrorism or would it be interpreted as a failure to protect the country? The people of Spain viewed their government's support of the US as having fatally endangered their own. Would a large attack by Iraqi insurgents against the Americans in Iraq have the same affect on our country? How do domestic attacks such as the Oklahoma City bombing and the Columbus freeway shooter fit in, as well as the forgotten about anthrax scare? And finally, who's trading futures on what the terror alert level will be come Election Day?


 

Comments

It happened 911 days after Sept. 11th, on 3/11. To me, those numbers alone are significant enough to point to al Queda.

Posted by: polamex at March 16, 2004 8:32 AM

I haven't done the math myself but I hear that it was actually 912 days because those who thought it was 911 weren't taking into account the leap day.

Posted by: agent1073 at March 16, 2004 11:28 AM

Or.. what happens when Bush announces we have caught Osama in say... September?

Posted by: ryan at March 16, 2004 11:45 AM

Yeah I used a date calculator and it is 912. But let's say 911 days after the day after 9/11. Maybe the terrorists forgot about leap year too.

Posted by: polamex at March 16, 2004 12:26 PM

Maybe they are using a 0 based counting scheme where terrorism_day[911] is actually the 912th element.

Posted by: ryan at March 16, 2004 1:58 PM

:) exactly!

Posted by: polamex at March 16, 2004 3:02 PM

OMG the terrorists are computer scientists!! (open source militia?)

Posted by: agent1073 at March 16, 2004 3:05 PM

Yes we outsourced your dell customer service to Kabul so what do you expect.

Posted by: hagi at March 16, 2004 5:56 PM

I believe that the most important things that have been mentioned here are:
1. Osama WILL be brought out before the election. Whether b/c Bush knows approximately where he is and steps up the search in September (wouldn't that be ironic eh?) or they put all the resources into getting him before November...he will be found.

Osama is NO Saddam though, with his beliefs and convictions, HE WILL NOT ALLOW BEING CAUGHT ALIVE!

2. The bombings in Spain were timed purposely for the elections, no matter who was behind them. The number thing may be true or a coincidence, but with it happening days before the election, you can bet aunt tilly's pony that was planned!

So bringing out Osama before November will have an effect on voting, as would any travesty that would occur. I think we'll find out soon enough b/c you can bet the farm that one or both will.
Thanks.

A new, and great documentary: Bush's Brain
http://movies.yahoo.com/news/ap/20040315/107939580000.html

Posted by: An American Patriot at March 16, 2004 10:11 PM

One more thing: Anyone who thinks that Bush is not an idiot, even now, please click on my name.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040313/od_uk_nm/oukoe_bush_women_1

Posted by: An American Patriot at March 16, 2004 10:20 PM

Bush is the smartest president in recent history. The entire world is scared of the USA don't you think that counts for something...that includes Khadafi, Castro, Putin, Baathists, Taliban, Al-Queda, and of course those evil Canadians.

Posted by: hagi at March 16, 2004 10:44 PM

The greatest threat to islamic fundamentalism of a violent nature is a US president who appears to be unpredictably anxious to bomb someone in the mideast at the drop of a hat...which in the long run is a much better deterrent to unrelenting and miilitant religious fanaticism than, let's say, ummm...discontented tree-huggers?

True 'American Patriots' are serving in the armed forces or supporting their country right here on US soil, not dyeing their hair before a loosely organized march led by aging hippies, while branding their leftist pothead community-college ideology as fact.

Posted by: hagi at March 17, 2004 6:29 PM

well said hagi

Posted by: villageidiot at March 17, 2004 9:40 PM

You're right hagi. We should just nuke ANY country that has religious fundamentalists in it. Why stop at countries that had otherwise contained such fundamentalism, releashing latent fundamentalism in its wake?

And yeah.. ALL the people I know serving in the armed forces are doing it out of patriotism, and money (to pay for an education) and oppurtunity to do something, anything, and the fun to be had when destroying/killing/nuking has little to do with it.

A true patriot protects the interests of the people that the government is meant to serve, not the government itself. A true patriot calls out their leaders when they make mistakes (willingly or not). So soldiers and patriots aren't necessarily the same, since soldiers are designed to fight not think and follow orders not question. What you're describing is parrotism.

Posted by: agent1073 at March 18, 2004 12:19 AM

hey did you really mean to say parrotism? either way yes islam is not the only religion responsible, lest you forget those wonderful "Crusades" - making the recent blurring of our country's line between church and state so troubling...

i would prefer to think of our soldiers as patriots based on their allegiance to freedom and the worldwide protection of individual liberties. i see your point about following orders as well. the only response to that would be that our armed services are 100% voluntary, where the ranks are not filled by mandatory conscription..(is that redundant?)

oh yeah Liberty aint got s@#t on St. Joe's either

go hawks

Posted by: hagi at March 18, 2004 4:00 PM

Gotta nuke something. Why not nuke people with the expressed idea of killing us? Nuke the whales!

Posted by: villageidiot at March 19, 2004 12:22 PM