Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush's popularity unchanged by foiled bombing plot (AFP wishful thinking alert)
AFP ^ | 08/18/06

Posted on 08/18/2006 7:02:30 AM PDT by presidio9

President George W. Bush's popularity was not given a boost by the foiling of an alleged plot to bomb planes flying from Britain to the United States, according to a poll.

The Pew Research Center poll found that 37 percent of Americans approved of Bush's overall performance, virtually unchanged from a July survey.

Fifty percent approved of Bush's handling of terrorist threats, compared to 47 percent in June. The poll was largely conducted after the alleged airline bombing plot was revealed on August 10.

"The severity of the president's image problem is reflected in the fact that while many Americans (49 percent) feel the level of US involvement in resolving the Lebanon crisis has been appropriate, far fewer (36 percent) say they approve of Bush's handling of the issue," Pew said.

Meanwhile, the alleged airline bombing plot did not have a high impact on Americans' concerns about another terrorist attack.

A quarter of people surveyed by Pew expressed "high concern" about an attack against the United States, up from 17 percent in 2004.

The small rise in US public concern is similar to the one seen after the public transportation bombings in London in 2005 and Madrid in 2004, Pew said.

The poll was conducted between August 9-13 among 1,506 people. It has a plus or minus four percentage point margin of error.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bullzogby; bush; bushassers; jobapproval; londonairlineplot; makingitup; mediabias; mediawar; proterrorist; term2; zobgyism

1 posted on 08/18/2006 7:02:31 AM PDT by presidio9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Everybody already knows that he's working to prevent terrorism.

Everybody already knows that the terrorists are working to defeat America.

Nobody's mind is changed by proof of that.

2 posted on 08/18/2006 7:05:53 AM PDT by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Probably because most Americans don't know the part that American surveillance played in disrupting the plot.

Most Americans probably think the Brits did this all by themselves because the American part in the operation was completely swept under the rug, or underplayed, or inserted briefly and quickly into news reports with no elaboration or expansion on the subject.

But that's just me griping at how I have to use alternative media resources to get the news I'm looking for because the MSM chooses to excise all the relevant facts from every story they report.


3 posted on 08/18/2006 7:06:24 AM PDT by coconutt2000 (NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I'd be curious as to the questions beig asked in the poll.

The one I usually like seeing is, "do you think that despite Bush's past successes in stopping terrorism, boosting the economy, lowering taxes and bringing moral clarity to the country, do you continue to see the President as a failure?"


4 posted on 08/18/2006 7:07:27 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz ("If you liked what Liberal Leadership did for Israel, you'll LOVE what it can do for America!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Its Pew, what else would you expect.


5 posted on 08/18/2006 7:19:03 AM PDT by BoBToMatoE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

I hope the DNC will pay bigtime for the slam they have given the only guy in the world who has the guts to stand up to a threat of any kind. Bush is not the conservative everyone wanted, but he isn't the liberal some accuse him of either and he understands what his job is in time of war. He has my total backing because he loves his and my country and is doing all he can to protect it. He also just happens to be the Islamic Terrorists MUSLIM,s worse nightmare because they don't scare him.


6 posted on 08/18/2006 7:20:08 AM PDT by cousair
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

42% according to Russmussen, up 3 points in 7 days and holding.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Bush_Job_Approval.htm


7 posted on 08/18/2006 7:28:44 AM PDT by elfman2 (An army of amateurs doing the media's job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elfman2

Are you watching the oil prices coming down?


8 posted on 08/18/2006 7:35:01 AM PDT by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ClaireSolt
"Are you watching the oil prices coming down?"

Not really, but I’ve heard about it. Still they haven’t showed up at the pump yet.

9 posted on 08/18/2006 7:43:01 AM PDT by elfman2 (An army of amateurs doing the media's job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Still waiting for the dems plan on fighting terrorism. They oppose the Patriot Act, profiling, no fly lists and cheer the demise of NSA surveillance and NSA data mining (things all recommender by the sacred 9/11 commission) yet at the same time decry that the President is not implementing the recommendations of the 9/11 commission.

They oppose military action and want it taken off the table no matter what, even when dealing with a nation like Iran. Instead, they want to work with the United Nations, despite once again it being shown the the UN is an ineffective, antisemitic, anti-U.S., anti-Western Civilization, and corrupt institution. See, for example, the latest UN resolution on disarming the Hezbos collapse before the ink was dry.

They say they want to take us in a "new direction." Well, its clear what that direction is, millions of Americans dead. Dead because to the democrats terrorism is a joke that can be ignored. The REAL IMPORTANT THING IS SOCIALISM!!! Socialism must be implemented at all costs!!! Our cities being nuked!?!? Never going to happen, not in the dems minds. Just like it was never possible that terrorists would fly planes into buildings.

To 99% of Americans, 9/11 was a horrible event (the 1% being the Ward Churchills and Ramsey Clarks). Even still, to the democrats it was a horrible event because those damn nuisance terrorists interrupted the implementation of socialism. I mean, things were going great up until that point, the dems were getting ready to obstruct and oppose the "llegally" selected President, win the mid-terms and impeach him. Instead, they had to line up behind him, which they only did in appearance as Daschle and Clinton were busy setting up the 9/11 commission to try and blame Bush for 9/11). The interruption of their plans was the real tragedy for them. Not the loss of life (the dead only vote dem don't ya know), and not the damage to the economy (hey, worse economy since Hoover another thing to use against Bush), no, it was that it woke the country up to the danger of islamic facism.

Of course, the dems can't have that and have worked everyday to convince Americans that Wal-Mart, Haliburton and George Bush are the REAL enemies, not Islamo Facists. With the Lamont victory it is clear that they live in 9/10 land. And why not, thanks to their allies like the ACLU our government is probably more restricted in what it can do now than it was on 9/10. We are afforded less ability than to protect ourselves than we were on the day the terrorists used our ACLU created system against us. Why, Harry Reid can't wait to get to a microphone or release a statement celebrating any setback or judicial decision that puts us back in 9/10 land.

Yep, meet the "new direction." same as the old direction.
10 posted on 08/18/2006 8:07:40 AM PDT by FlipWilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
My take on why Bush continues to lag in the poles is that he is not seen as a leader. He is a feminized presence in the white house - he wants to be perceived as friend to all and a foe to none. Its too late for Bush - he decided to play the moderate game when we needed a strong leader like a Lincoln or Washington to move this country forward. Whats most disappointing is that he had so much potential - and pretty much squandered it. The congress will lose the GOP majority because of Bush's lack of courage to speak boldly and lead without worrying what the libs and NY slimes think. I rank him above Carter but thats not saying much.
11 posted on 08/18/2006 8:22:27 AM PDT by sasafras (("Licentiousness destroyes order, and when chaos ensues, the yearning for order will destroy freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sasafras
I rank him above Carter but thats not saying much.

So you are saying that Bill Clinton was a better President than George W. Bush?

12 posted on 08/18/2006 8:29:47 AM PDT by frogjerk (REUTERS: We give smoke and mirrors a bad name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: elfman2
Still they haven’t showed up at the pump yet.

That's only because there is a lag time between the oil is sold, and it is delivered and refined. The same thing happens in reverse. When NYMEX takes a big jump upwards the prices at the pump generally remain constant for a couple of weeks too.

13 posted on 08/18/2006 8:32:15 AM PDT by presidio9 (“The term ‘civilians’ does not exist in Islamic religious law.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FlipWilson
To 99% of Americans, 9/11 was a horrible event (the 1% being the Ward Churchills and Ramsey Clarks). Even still, to the democrats it was a horrible event because those damn nuisance terrorists interrupted the implementation of socialism. I mean, things were going great up until that point, the dems were getting ready to obstruct and oppose the "llegally" selected President, win the mid-terms and impeach him. Instead, they had to line up behind him, which they only did in appearance as Daschle and Clinton were busy setting up the 9/11 commission to try and blame Bush for 9/11). The interruption of their plans was the real tragedy for them. Not the loss of life (the dead only vote dem don't ya know), and not the damage to the economy (hey, worse economy since Hoover another thing to use against Bush), no, it was that it woke the country up to the danger of islamic facism.

I posted a thread a few weeks ago that said that 1/3 of Americans believe that the current Adminstration had prior knowledge to the September 11th attack. You are overestimating the intelligence of the American people.

14 posted on 08/18/2006 8:34:22 AM PDT by presidio9 (“The term ‘civilians’ does not exist in Islamic religious law.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk
I rank him above Carter but thats not saying much.

This is idiotic. This person is obviously comparing Bush to Reagan, which is unfair. But this president is clearly more effective than his father and Clinton among recent presidents.

15 posted on 08/18/2006 8:36:14 AM PDT by presidio9 (“The term ‘civilians’ does not exist in Islamic religious law.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sasafras

opinions we all have them
go Dubya


16 posted on 08/18/2006 8:38:52 AM PDT by italianquaker (Democrats and media can't win elections at least they can win their phony polls.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

If you are implying whether I think Clinton is a better president than Carter - thats like comparing bad to worse. Ultimately it is one mans opinion - take it or leave it - but Bush had a chance to lead on many issues and he had a congress that would of went along after 911 but instead he played his hand as a moderate and ended up alienating everyone. Bush trails in the polls because he is not a leader. After Clinton the GOP wanted to win so bad and take Gore out that we didnt care if the person elected was a moderate. Conservative principles are winning principles we just need the right candidate without too many skeletons and who has good public speaking skills (which Bush get an D+) to orate them to the public. Bush, ulike Reagan, doesnt use the bully pulpit to sway public opinion - his staff is the worst when it comes to using the media at hand (yes I know that most of them are leftests)to orchastrate why the public should be behind certain policies.

Look Im not saying that Bush is the worst president ever - but he will not a have a favorable note in history from either the right or the left. He has done little to make his mark and history books are never written about moderates. The left hates him and the right is not too happy with him either - it is a bed that he has made.


17 posted on 08/18/2006 9:08:19 AM PDT by sasafras (("Licentiousness destroyes order, and when chaos ensues, the yearning for order will destroy freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sasafras
Bush trails in the polls because he is not a leader.

Trails who in the polls? He isn't running for President again.

18 posted on 08/18/2006 9:09:53 AM PDT by frogjerk (REUTERS: We give smoke and mirrors a bad name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

"But this president is clearly more effective than his father and Clinton among recent presidents."

Oh is that so - well tell us wise grasshopper - what objective evidence do you have for such a statement?


19 posted on 08/18/2006 9:10:52 AM PDT by sasafras (("Licentiousness destroyes order, and when chaos ensues, the yearning for order will destroy freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

"Trails who in the polls? He isn't running for President again."

Bush's popularity polling numbers - try re-reading the headline for this blog. His numbers will hurt local candidates and shows that he has little influence on voter opinion - very big if we want to keep congress in the hands of the GOP.


20 posted on 08/18/2006 9:13:13 AM PDT by sasafras (("Licentiousness destroyes order, and when chaos ensues, the yearning for order will destroy freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: sasafras
The left hates him and the right is not too happy with him either

I have many bones to pick with him as well. And I had many bones to pick with Reagan as well.

No President is perfect but on the things that he said he would do I believe he has delivered on. On the issues of taking the fight to the terrorists, pro-life issues, and appointing SCOTUS justices he gets close to an A with me.

21 posted on 08/18/2006 9:13:26 AM PDT by frogjerk (REUTERS: We give smoke and mirrors a bad name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: sasafras

I truly don't care about MSM popularity polls. If some in the GOP do care about these made up polls I then we are really in trouble.


22 posted on 08/18/2006 9:14:39 AM PDT by frogjerk (REUTERS: We give smoke and mirrors a bad name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: coconutt2000

"Most Americans probably think the Brits did this all by themselves because the American part in the operation was completely swept under the rug, or underplayed, or inserted briefly and quickly into news reports with no elaboration or expansion on the subject. "

What exactly was our role?


23 posted on 08/18/2006 9:14:54 AM PDT by takenoprisoner (Could mecca be Satan's' throne?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sasafras
"But this president is clearly more effective than his father and Clinton among recent presidents."

Oh is that so - well tell us wise grasshopper - what objective evidence do you have for such a statement?

SCOTUS nominations.

24 posted on 08/18/2006 9:15:48 AM PDT by frogjerk (REUTERS: We give smoke and mirrors a bad name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: sasafras
"But this president is clearly more effective than his father and Clinton among recent presidents."

Oh is that so - well tell us wise grasshopper - what objective evidence do you have for such a statement?

W's Tax Cuts

25 posted on 08/18/2006 9:16:44 AM PDT by frogjerk (REUTERS: We give smoke and mirrors a bad name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: sasafras
"But this president is clearly more effective than his father and Clinton among recent presidents."

Oh is that so - well tell us wise grasshopper - what objective evidence do you have for such a statement?

Saddam Hussein removed from power.

26 posted on 08/18/2006 9:17:51 AM PDT by frogjerk (REUTERS: We give smoke and mirrors a bad name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

"I have many bones to pick with him as well. And I had many bones to pick with Reagan as well."

Agreed

"On the issues of taking the fight to the terrorists, pro-life issues, and appointing SCOTUS justices he gets close to an A with me."

This war is getting bogged down because we are too PC to fight it the way it needs to be fought.

Although Bush signed the partial birth abortion ban he has done very little to sway public opinion on why this is a horrific procedure. It seems that he is only concerned about this issue come election time - same thing of the marriage amendent issue. Meantime you have Mrs. Bush speaking out in favor of abortion and gay marriage. Dont tell me that your wife isnt an influence on you - hell to pay sometimes when you get in an argument : )

He almost appointed a known liberal Harriet Miers - who wrote articles in support of legalized racism (ie. affirmative action). Also check out this link re. one of his latest appointments:

http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/8/82006f.asp


Look Im not saying that Bush is the worst president we could of gotten he is better than the alternative definitely. But Im trying to offer some explanation of why his popularity numbers are so low - which if you compare to other past presidents they are.



27 posted on 08/18/2006 9:23:56 AM PDT by sasafras (("Licentiousness destroyes order, and when chaos ensues, the yearning for order will destroy freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: sasafras
Meantime you have Mrs. Bush speaking out in favor of abortion and gay marriage. Dont tell me that your wife isnt an influence on you - hell to pay sometimes when you get in an argument : )

Link please. And also, W vetoed the abhorrent carve-up-an-embryo bill.

28 posted on 08/18/2006 9:27:00 AM PDT by frogjerk (REUTERS: We give smoke and mirrors a bad name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

Saddam Hussein removed from power is your objective evidence?????? I guess it is how you define effective. My definition of effective from the president standpoint would be his ability to enact policies from the executive office. Therefore to get congress to follow his lead. He hasnt shown much ability in this respect - not dis'n him just stating the truth.

Re. Hussein - any president could have taken out Hussein - we are the greatest military power on earth - what would of been peculiar is if we didnt - especially after 911.


29 posted on 08/18/2006 9:29:50 AM PDT by sasafras (("Licentiousness destroyes order, and when chaos ensues, the yearning for order will destroy freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

Saddam Hussein removed from power is your objective evidence?????? I guess it is how you define effective. My definition of effective from the president standpoint would be his ability to enact policies from the executive office. Therefore to get congress to follow his lead. He hasnt shown much ability in this respect - not dis'n him just stating the truth.

Re. Hussein - any president could have taken out Hussein - we are the greatest military power on earth - what would of been peculiar is if we didnt - especially after 911.


30 posted on 08/18/2006 9:30:06 AM PDT by sasafras (("Licentiousness destroyes order, and when chaos ensues, the yearning for order will destroy freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

"Link please"

Google it - I dont have time to research it for you.


31 posted on 08/18/2006 9:32:36 AM PDT by sasafras (("Licentiousness destroyes order, and when chaos ensues, the yearning for order will destroy freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

It would be helpful if the pollsters asked those who polled negatively if they thought the president should be more conservative or more liberal. Of course, the questions would have to be more artful but I think the responses would be more informative. (I guess that's why they don't do it).


32 posted on 08/18/2006 10:01:56 AM PDT by Inwoodian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner

Apparently, and I'm surprised, Time magazine did an article:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1225453,00.html


33 posted on 08/18/2006 10:15:49 AM PDT by coconutt2000 (NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: sasafras
Oh is that so - well tell us wise grasshopper - what objective evidence do you have for such a statement?

No, first you tell me what was so great about Carter, Bush the Elder, and Clinton.

34 posted on 08/18/2006 10:33:14 AM PDT by presidio9 (“The term ‘civilians’ does not exist in Islamic religious law.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: cousair

The Muslims don't scare Bush because he is a Christian who believes God's promises. Read the BOOK, we win in the end.


35 posted on 08/18/2006 10:51:44 AM PDT by conservative blonde (Conservative Blonde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sasafras

If the GOP loses the Congress it is not Bush's fault but the fault of individual congress people who squandered their personal popularity for greed, fame or arrogance.


36 posted on 08/18/2006 10:56:58 AM PDT by conservative blonde (Conservative Blonde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: coconutt2000

The US provided intercepts of communications between
British citizens? uh? ah ok.

Still more alarming is this exerpt from the article:

"So as not to derail the British round-up, Chertoff had to wait until the early hours of Thursday morning after all the London arrests were made before notifying U.S. airports of the threat, "

So Chertoff sits idly by while a threat to our national well being looms? His excuse, "not to derail the round up?" WTF? What if they weren't all rounded up and some got thru? What would be his excuse then for not notifying the airports of this threat?

I am not convinced this HS deal is the real deal...much less that it had anything to do with the round up. IMO the "knowledgeable US official" is either lying, or Chertoff himself by his own inactions in this scenario is a threat to our national security. That's why this dept was created in the first place. To notify those whose lives are in danger of the pending threat and hopefully save lives. In this case, Chertoff is more worried about arresting folks than he is concerned with saving lives.


37 posted on 08/18/2006 11:27:11 AM PDT by takenoprisoner (Could mecca be Satan's' throne?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner

Too many people confuse phto ops and image with leadership. They might have paid attention to an insignificant court ruling yesterday instead of signing pension reform.


38 posted on 08/18/2006 11:35:45 AM PDT by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ClaireSolt

"Too many people confuse phto ops and image with leadership. They might have paid attention to an insignificant court ruling yesterday instead of signing pension reform."

bingo


39 posted on 08/18/2006 1:12:02 PM PDT by takenoprisoner (Could mecca be Satan's' throne?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner
The US provided intercepts of communications between British citizens? uh? ah ok.

Not necessarily limited to communications between British citizens. International communications intercepts aren't limited by our laws, especially when there is no traversal of U.S. domestic soil. We could be dealing with a satellite intercept, cell phone intercept, or wire taps on known terrorist phone lines in foreign countries. Some of those countries would probably be very unhappy to hear how we learned what we learned, so it is notably vague except that signal intercepts by us were useful.

"So as not to derail the British round-up, Chertoff had to wait until the early hours of Thursday morning after all the London arrests were made before notifying U.S. airports of the threat, "

This makes sense. If we'd burned the British operation, we'd risk all future intelligence cooperation between our nations. According to some sources, the Brits accelerated their time table for the arrests at our insistence, because we felt the risk was already too high to continue to use the surveillance of the known plotters to uncover other terrorist operatives.

You ask what would've happened if some of them remained free, but you neglect the fact that demonstrating awareness of the plot here would've triggered a scatter and go to ground response in the plotters in England, leaving them uncaught and likely to attempt the attack later. As it is, the terrorists will have to start all over, without the ones that were captured by the Brits.

In this case, Chertoff is more worried about arresting folks than he is concerned with saving lives.

I think you're being unfair to Chertoff. Arresting folks and saving lives are the same thing in this case. I think he acted appropriately, and he had a lot more information than we do when he made the decision. He probably still has more information than we do. I'm not going to second guess him without a good reason, and I'm not likely to do much angry and obnoxious second guessing until he fails in his duty. I might nitpick about better ways to do somethings, or make suggestions, but I wouldn't impugn his motives by suggesting that his priorities are out of whack when it comes to protecting American civilian lives.

40 posted on 08/18/2006 2:17:34 PM PDT by coconutt2000 (NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: conservative blonde

Oh believe it, I have read the Good Book, and I am aware who wins. What bothers most of us is that there are a lot of Americans who don't see America first and understand that God really shed His Grace on her! President Bush does.


41 posted on 08/19/2006 7:26:24 AM PDT by cousair
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: coconutt2000
thank you for a well reasoned and well thought out response.

I too would like to believe that we are capable of intercepting international terrorist communications via satellite with some degree of proficiency. But wouldn't that be profiling? By law, we do not profile. We search grandma's bosom on a random basis so there is no appearance of profiling while untold numbers of muslims pass to board without notice. Does this not give you pause? It does me.

Now if our NSA is internationally profiling muslims as you suggest, then it should be done as well at airports with extreme prejudice. Why not? Because it is illegal. If it weren't illegal, we wouldn't be wasting time taking grandma in her wheelchair to the side for further
search.

It's insane. But it is the law of the land. So in order for the NSA to remain within the law, they would have to listen to grandmas communications as well. Are you getting this yet?

I believe in the UK they can profile when it comes to terrorism. Moreover, since muslims are responsible for terrorism, they are lawfully able to focus on muslims. Therefore, I am convinced this is why Scotland Yard and other intelligence and LE agencies within the UK were able to bust these would be terrorists.

Meantime, I am not convinced of the same for the US. I give you airport PC insecurity as empirical evidence.
42 posted on 08/19/2006 9:10:33 PM PDT by takenoprisoner (Could mecca be Satan's' throne?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson