Posted on 08/13/2006 5:54:29 PM PDT by ButThreeLeftsDo
Experts characterize the terrorist threat foiled early Thursday in London as the "most serious" since Sept. 11, 2001. This was the real deal, about which details will become available as the investigation continues. Candidate George W. Bush loved to lampoon the Clinton administration's emphasis on law enforcement and the legal system as tools against terrorism. They were too wimpy for him; a good, strong military action against a terror-sponsoring state was more his kind of action. And so military action we got. In Afghanistan it was essential, but in Iraq it was not. There it has increased manyfold the number of terrorists targeting the United States and worldwide animosity toward it.
Meanwhile, patient, meticulous police work in Britain and elsewhere identified and monitored this plot by a smallish, nonstate group of criminal terrorists until the need to take them down became urgent.
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
However, if the Bush administration had employed the same tactics to uncover this as did the Brits....this newspaper would have been the FIRST to decry their "illegal methods".
Very well put, Mike.
US law enforcement has stopped domestic plots since 9-11. The (accurate) criticism of Democrats is that they believe the ONLY response to terrorism is law enforcement--at home AND abroad.
NSA ain't zactly COPS, I think, but just as long as the job gets done...
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.