The whole scenario of the British "bombers" who were caught allegedly plotting to blow up flights from the UK to the US has exponentially increased the fear factor for Americans who see mean brown people behind every bush (punny? I make'em, you decide). The August 10th incident which has led to the ludicrous banning of every liquid imaginable on US flights, when absolutely no evidence has shown that there was a plot to do anything at all here is such an incredible politicization of the event that it's just sad that people are buying into it.

The explosives that the shmucks in Britain were trying to allegedly make were apparently binary explosives whose formulation, while not overly complex would not have been exactly simple to create on an aircraft in flight. Besides needing all the right chemicals like among other things quantities of sulfuric acid and a lot of ice to control the temperature of the reaction, the smell apparently and the time required to formulate the explosives would have been dead giveaways that something was up in the lavatory on the plane. Unfortunately, the public's reference for binary explosives is probably "Die Hard with a Vengence", without a rational explanation of the difficulty of actually formulating an effective compound in sufficient quantity in a uncontrolled environment. Even in the movie, the binary components were already formulated and ready to go; there was no "back-story" on how they got there.

Even the dumbest fucking air marshal in the TSA might figure out that there was a problem when he saw a passenger going into the lav with heavy duty rubber gloves, an apron, several flasks and a cooler of ice. Really.

But listen to the voice of the adminstrator of the most useless government agency on the planet as he continues to beat the "all fear, all the time" drums:

Three weeks later, the nation's top aviation security official said the threat remains. "This continues to be a very serious threat and we are taking no chances on the security of our aviation system," said Edmund S. "Kip" Hawley, head of the Transportation Security Administration. "It would be a mistake to conclude that because of the arrests in the United Kingdom that we can lower our security posture."

The absolute paranoia that the 1600 Crew has induced has lead to a spate of incidents, none of which have proven to be any more related to terrorism than the man in the moon.

In the days after the TSA increased security, more than 10 flights were diverted or searched, and at least one airport was shut down. On Aug. 16, a flight from London to Washington Dulles International Airport made an emergency landing in Boston because an unruly passenger acted up in the cabin. The woman made references to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, told crew members that she had visited Pakistan and urinated on the cabin's floor, according to an FBI affidavit. The woman, who is under evaluation for mental illness, is being held on federal charges of interfering with a flight crew. She had no connection to terrorism, officials have said.

More security incidents followed. A Delta Air Lines jet was searched after a flight attendant became suspicious of a passenger who spent too much time in the restroom and may have tampered with a smoke detector. An American Airlines jet made an emergency landing in Tampa and was searched after the crew found that both lavatories were locked.

An airport in West Virginia was evacuated after a woman's glass water bottle and a container of face cleanser tested positive for explosive residue. The FBI later determined that the woman had no explosives.

The next week, a Northwest Airlines flight returned to Amsterdam shortly after takeoff when a U.S. air marshal became suspicious of 12 passengers who passed around cellphones and ignored orders to keep their seat belts on. The 12 were detained but released by Dutch authorities, who also said there was no connection to terrorism.

There have been other incidents of people being denied boarding because of things written in Arabic on their clothing, or their speech or appearance. Instead of going on with our lives, we are allowing the very idea of the possibility of terrorism to control our lives and our destinies. Wouldn't that mean that the bumbling, fumbling terrorists have won the day, and that we have become what they expect us to be, weak, scared people who crave the surety of Big Brother in the Nanny State at all costs.

Even and most especially our self-respect.

"We've educated the public to be afraid of things," said Bob Hesselbein, an airline pilot and chairman of the Air Line Pilots Association's national security committee. "Let's hope they never find a way to weave explosives into clothing because it's going to be pretty darned embarrassing on an airplane.. . . We are treating everybody as a potential terrorist, and that breeds more fear."

As the Church-lady would say: "How conveeeninent".

George F. Will, male chauvanist pundit? It's hard to believe, well not really that Will wrote about Claire McCaskill, running for Senate from Missouri. Will who often seems to write things like this about Al Gore:

Nevertheless, the likelihood that Gore will seek the presidency is suggested not only by the logic of what he says but also by what he does not say. Given how clear and present he says the danger is, he should be more specific and radical regarding the economic, indeed civilizational, changes he considers necessary.

So when will writes this about Claire McCaskill, it rings as hollow as a Ronald Reagan cowboy in a "B"-western.

McCaskill is imprudently forthright.

So it's better, in the opinion of Will to hide her views, be less than forthright, and most of all not have female genitalia while trying to fill a "mans job". That way he can continue to write his own unserious stuff in the Washington Post and make his appearances on PunditHead Programming where he can rail against the "unserious" Democrats who have no ideas, agendas, plans or reason for existance as a party.

"Mission Accomplished" for George Will is when he can beat up on a Democrat. No wonder the Post pays him.

So, how many Friedmans before the wingnut faction begins to whip up the all-war all the time rhetoric in advance of the next "Shock and Awe" campaign?

President Bush, invoking the same language that he used to describe Iraq before the March 2003 invasion, called Iran a "grave threat" and said "there must be consequences" for Tehran's actions. "It is time for Iran to make a choice," Bush said in a speech to the American Legion's national convention in Salt Lake City.
...
Since his 2002 State of the Union speech, when he singled out Iran as part of an "axis of evil," Bush has tried without success to roll back Tehran's nuclear energy program. He has asserted, without offering proof, that it is a cover for weapons development.my emphasis

Up next, the outing of a super-secret intelligence operative, the mau-mauing of the disloyal opposition and the pundits get to ride around in tanks for a weekend at Fort Irwin and 29 Stumps.

Donald Rumsfeld, one half of the kill'em all and let god sort'em out cabal of the 1600 Crew:

Surely by now we have learned the lesson that when our country gives our troops a mission, they should have the resources and support to finish the job. And surely, we have learned the dangers of giving the enemy the false impression that Americans cannot stomach a tough fight.

Except he's well, not willing to stomach a tough fight if it involves being in uniform, in the Military, in the desert, in the heat and in the vicinity of anything that has the letters "I" "E" or "D" in it together.

But other than all that, he's Rumsfeld's kind of guy! I wonder what Anthony will say when they start the draft again?

Probably the most fun this election cycle has been watching Katherine Harris, the woman most responsible for Preznit Incredibly Ignorant go down in not just flames but a huge screeching fireball. The beauty of it is, that she's done it all to herself.

The most recent missive from St Katherine of the Chads:

U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris told a religious journal that separation of church and state is "a lie" and God and the nation's founding fathers did not intend the country be "a nation of secular laws."
...
Separation of church and state is "a lie we have been told," Harris said in the interview, published Thursday, saying separating religion and politics is "wrong because God is the one who chooses our rulers."
...
State GOP leaders -- including Gov. Jeb Bush -- don't think she can win against Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson in November. Fundraising has lagged, frustrated campaign workers have defected in droves and the issues have been overshadowed by news of her dealings with a corrupt defense contractor who gave her $32,000 in illegal campaign contributions.

Well, she did demonstrate in 2000 that she really doesn't truly believe in the electoral process, and now she's demonstrating that she doesn't really support, defend or understand the Constitution of the United States.

The first phrase in the First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." is called the establishment clause.

My guess, after the election she'll become either a Senior Fellow at some wingnut think tank like Concerned Women of America (what are they concerned about, anyhow?) or the Eagle Foundation. Or she could always become a co-blogger with the Shrieking Harpy (you know who, no linkee). Whatever, I don't think she's going to be occupying a seat in the Senate from Florida, call me crazy but it's just a hunch.

Well, I wonder if the Department of Homeland Security will be billing Mr. Karr for his business-class trip from Bankok to LA?

The DNA sample taken from suspect John Mark Karr does not match DNA found on JonBenet Ramsey's body and no charges will be filed against the schoolteacher who claimed he was with the child when she died, CNN affiliate KUSA reported.

And for the record, no, I don't think that Jon Benet's parents were involved.

-sigh- I guess the talking heads can get back to Natalee Holloway or Chondra Levy (or whoever).

Sebastian Mallaby.

Gosh, Sebastian d'ya think perhaps if Wal-Mart were to adopt a strategy that placed people ahead of profits even marginally they'd get this kind of crap?

And I love this:

Last year Hillary Clinton returned a campaign contribution from Wal-Mart, even though she had no compunction in banking a check from Jerry Springer.

Once upon a time Wal-Mart used to be a huge supporter of American companies by being a retailer that provided access to markets and consumers access to American-made goods. Then something happened, Wal-Mart went beyond huge, to something else entirely. It became a soul-crushing monolith with, for want of a better word, "interesting" employment practices and a reputation for crushing suppliers who could not meet their "Every Day Low Prices" promise. Like this:

Vlasic Pickles was roped into a contract with Wal-Mart, in which Wal-Mart sold a 3 gallon jar of whole pickles for $2.97. Wal-Mart sold 240,000 gallons of pickles per week. But the price of the 3 gallon jar was so low, that it vastly undercut Vlasic's sales of 8 ounce and 16 ounce jars of cut pickles; further, Vlasic only made a few pennies per 3 gallon jar. With its profits tumbling, Vlasic asked Wal-Mart for the right to raise the price per 3 gallon jar to $3.49, and according to a Vlasic executive, Wal-Mart threatened that if Vlasic tried to back out of this feature of the contract, Wal-Mart would cease carrying any Vlasic product. Eventually, a Wal-Mart executive said, "Well, we've done to pickles what we did to orange juice. We've killed it"—meaning it had wiped out competitor products. Finally, it allowed Vlasic to raise prices; but in January 2001, Vlasic filed for bankruptcy.

Separately, states are beginning to address Wal-Mart's practice of forcing its workers to rely on taxpayer-subsidized medical care instead of providing affordable health-care because it was not helpful in maintaining their "bottom line" numbers. To their credit, it seems that Wal-Mart may be addressing this slowly, but whether it's for show or part of a longer-term strategy to bring the company into the mainstream of corporate citizenship or an election-cycle aberration is anyones guess.

So, Mr. Mallaby up in your Washington Post Inside the Beltway Pundit Office, get on out to some place that is actually affected by Wal-Mart. Go talk to the employees of CostCo and other retailers, and then some Wal-Mart employees who do the same jobs; compare and contrast. See what impact Wal-Mart has had on entire communities. Are they really better off for the lack of competition and cheap imports at "EDLP" from China (or whereever)?

Then come back and report on whose hand is getting bitten, and why. Just my ill-informed opinion, but maybe you'll discover you have been shouting down the wrong aisle.

Interesting article on the South Dakota abortion-ban. Seems that the woman who is the figurehead of the movement, was like all pro-choice until she regretted her choice. Now she's trying to make sure that no one else in South Dakota gets to exercise their free will, you know, like she did.

Kayla Brandt had an abortion three years ago and instantly hated having done it. Now, hoping to stop other women from making the same choice, she is a public advocate for the most severe abortion ban in the nation.

"I don't want anyone to feel what I did," Brandt says.
...
"I was in a relationship and panicked and got scared and ashamed, and thought an abortion was the means to fix my mistake," said Brandt, who came to see herself as a "mother who was sadly stripped of her child."

"Where's the baby's choice?" Brandt asked. "What about the life of the baby?"

Shorter Kayla Brandt: "It's okay for me, but not thee". Hmmm....let's see, she could have used contraception (assuming she didn't), her partner could have used contraception (assuming he didn't and she wasn't conceiving immaculately), she could have carried the baby to term and immediately put it up for adoption...

No, Kayla chose to have an abortion. The she realized that being all grown-up meant she had to live with the consequences of her actions, and that's just not a very republican or christofascist thing to do ... live with the consequences of their actions, especially when they can proclaim their status as victims.

I wonder how Kayla Brandt will face another young woman who can't make her choice because she was raped by an abusive family member, or a stranger. I don't think she'll care much, she doesn't seem to now.

Because fundamentally this is all about her.

IMHO.

1. Waaay effing stupid
   
2. To the Kitchen, Woman!
   
3. Reprise
   
4. An ideal American! (according to, well, Rumsfeld)
   
5. Katherine the Self-Destructing
   
6. All John Mark Karr all the time
   
7. Wankerism
   
8. Christofascists to the Rescue! (Operation Rescue, that is)