If I frequented these New York City locations, this kind of thing would make me nervous:
Five suspicious bags have been found unattended this year at Penn Station and other sensitive locations, prompting an investigation into whether they were left by terrorists attempting to gauge the city’s response.
Could just be some forgotten bags. Could be someone pulling a hoax. But it could also be someone probing security for a future event.
The Knoxville News Sentinel plays to anti-war emotionalism by covering the funeral of a fallen American sailor.
It’s time we stop undermining the war on terror. We know people are dying; no need to get in our face with it.
[/Bill O’Reilly]
What’s become of the “bold,” optimistic plan for the moon station/mission to Mars?
Bush unveiled the “Vision” in a Jan. 14 speech, promising to “extend a human presence across our solar system,” starting with a return to the moon by 2020 and an eventual human spaceflight to Mars.
. . .
Despite charges of election-year grandstanding, Bush appears to have gained nothing politically from the announcement. A Jan. 18 Washington Post-ABC News poll found that 62 percent of Americans opposed the plan. Bush has not mentioned it since the speech.
[Emphasis added.]
I wonder why that is?
I don’t know enough about the situation on the ground in Nigeria to tell if this is largely political rhetoric, or an actionable call to violence, but Governor Ahmed Sani of Zamfara State has called for the destruction of all churches in the state.
Appears to be another example of hardline radical Islam finding a voice in government.
Since the first Israeliesque version didn’t go over so well with the locals, Quiddity has uncovered a flag redesign with some new symbolism.
I’m not sure this one will win much public support, either.
Josh Marshall raises a good point in calling out President Bush for invoking race when discussing Iraq.
At last month’s press conference, Bush pontificated:
Some of the debate really center around the fact that people don’t believe Iraq can be free; that if you’re Muslim, or perhaps brown-skinned, you can’t be self-governing and free. I strongly disagree with that. I reject that, because I believe that freedom is the deepest need of every human soul, and, if given a chance, the Iraqi people will be not only self-governing, but a stable and free society.
I thought this was just one of those weird comments he makes when not reading off the teleprompter. But he raised this point again yesterday:
There’s a lot of people in the world who don’t believe that people whose skin color may not be the same as ours can be free and self-govern. I reject that. I reject that strongly. I believe that people who practice the Muslim faith can self-govern. I believe that people whose skins aren’t necessarily — are a different color than white can self-govern.
Last time I checked, America, or India, or a host of other countries where the citizens govern themselves aren’t just white. But as for his point, who is criticizing our nation-building foray into Iraq on the basis of race? I’ve heard plenty of people who are skeptical on our chances of establishing a full democracy in Iraq, but the difficulties they always discuss are (1) the fact that Iraq has never been a democracy, or (2) how the rival factions make it difficult to construct a new government. I don’t hear any one playing the race card . . . except for Bush.
Seems like this is another way the administration is going after those who question it’s policies–brand them as racists.
