Bush Cries Wolf!
Today we're hearing the very, very exciting news from the Bush League that the War On Terror is working.* We were concerned there for awhile. It seems that they just discovered that we thwarted — no doubt by using illegal surveillance techniques — a horrible, 9/11-style attack on a tall building in LA whose correct name escaped the President's memory. We're waiting, of course, for details on the "plan" that was evidently "thwarted". The thwarting was so super-duper top-secret that even the mayor of LA had never heard about it.
Myself, I can't wait to see what the meaning of "plan" and "thwart" turn out to be when they issue from the mouth of the Humpty-Dumpty administration. What I've found most interesting today is the nearly universal reaction of indifference to the President's warning that that plan was thwarted but we're still in danger. Boo!
The imagined facial expression that accompanies this indifference (I've only read what people have not been saying about it all) says to me: "well, I suppose he could be right, but it takes less energy just to wait and see how much he's lying this time."
———-
*For fans of Anna Russell, I hear "that's how we know the War On Terror is working!" said in the same way that Ms. Russell said of the appearance in "Siegfried" of Albrecht's leitmotif: "that's how we know that the curse is working!"
One Response
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Leave a Reply
To thwart spam, comments by new people are held for moderation; give me a bit of time and your comment will show up.
I welcome comments -- even dissent -- but I will delete without notice irrelevant, rude, psychotic, or incomprehensible comments, particularly those that I deem homophobic, unless they are amusing. The same goes for commercial comments and trackbacks. Sorry, but it's my blog and my decisions are final.
on Friday, 10 February 2006 at 01.19
Permalink
Cries wolf, seeks to heighten public anxiety in preparation for our next collective dose of "we will keep you safe" serum, seeks to direct attention to events in the past, those being a bit less embarrasingly bad than certain events in the present. That last, by the way, owes plenty to the well-known phenomenon that causes people to remember the good of days past more than the bad.
As to this particular story, I'd like a coherent explanation of just how the al Qaeda bad guy(s) would use a shoe bomb to take over an airliner so they could fly it into a some building or other in Los Angeles (or was it Los Alamos, or Los Altos . . . er, uh, one of them Los's, anyway).
What? Do they throw the shoe at the cockpit door and hope it explodes, blowing the door open instead of just blowing up the hapless folks in first class?