British Embassy Attacked

I suppose this is just what the hardliners in Iran want. Reports indicate they, as opposed to Ahmadinejad, seem to be driving the hostage situation.

But will the mainstream media report it? Gateway Pundit has it, with graphics.

Following increased tensions between Tehran and London over the detention of 15 British marines who entered Iranian waters illegally and likely gatherings by protestors in front of the embassy compound, the police increased security measures and arrangements around the embassy here in Tehran on Friday.

Comments

[Fred Beloit]

Now for you my so brainy new friend nowinger. You inserted the word "routinely" in the first sentence of your comment above, you sly fox. But it really doesn't belong there does it? Your description of the screeners actions; now aren't you being just a little unfair? Maybe you are just a teeny weeny bit of an exagerator in this case? Or do you spend your free time in airports watching the screeners feeling women up, you dog you?

[Fred Beloit]

Here is something for your consideration, Nif and no. That very fact that the TSA is testing the system demonstrates they are working to improve it. Yet you two are against making the improvement to the system by incorporating enemy profiles into the procedure. Just as you say you are for getting bin Laden, but you would go stark raving nuts if our troops forced their way into the Pakistan area where he is hiding. Basically, you are against anything the Government tries to do because you want Bush to fail, regardless of the consequences. This is patriotism at its best, is it not?

[Zifnab]

"That very fact that the TSA is testing the system demonstrates they are working to improve it. Yet you two are against making the improvement to the system by incorporating enemy profiles into the procedure. Just as you say you are for getting bin Laden, but you would go stark raving nuts if our troops forced their way into the Pakistan area where he is hiding. Basically, you are against anything the Government tries to do because you want Bush to fail, regardless of the consequences. This is patriotism at its best, is it not?"

Investigating the problem doesn't get you any brownie points until you actually fix said problem. Saying, "We conducted a test. It failed," does not make my airport experience any safer. When they conduct tests that succeed, we can talk.

And we've had the No-Fly list up for 5 years. This has been the result of the "Bush" security model.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List#False_positives_and_alleged_misuses
"Daniel Brown, a United States Marine returning from Iraq, was prevented from boarding a flight home in April 2006 because his name matched one on the No Fly List. The rest of his company refused to leave the airport until Brown was allowed to board."
"Dr. Robert J. Johnson, a surgeon and a former lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army, was told in 2006 he was on the list, although he had had no problem in flying the month before. Johnson was running as a Democrat against U.S. Representative John McHugh, a Republican."
"In August 2004, Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) told a Senate Judiciary Committee discussing the No Fly List that he had appeared on the list and had been repeatedly delayed at airports. He said it had taken him three weeks of appeals directly to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge to have him removed from the list"
"U.S. Representative John Lewis (D-GA), widely known for his civil rights advocacy, has been stopped many times"
"Jesselyn Radack, a former United States Department of Justice ethics advisor who argued that John Walker Lindh was entitled to an attorney, was placed on the No Fly List as part of what many believe to be a reprisal for her whistleblowing."
"In February 2006, U.S. Senator Ted Stevens stated in a committee hearing that his wife Catherine had been subjected to questioning at an airport as to whether she was Cat Stevens due to the similarity of their names"

So, this has been the great harvest of DHS screening efforts without just going after guys named "Mohammad". Senators, Congressmen, marines, and political dissidents. You know what I couldn't find a catalogue of? Terrorists caught with the No-Fly list.

Why would Democrats continue to support a policy with hundreds of false positives but no successful hits? Why would Democrats support the expansion of this policy?

No one wants Bush to fail. We pray fervently on a daily bases we can get through a weak without hearing about another Bush failure. To date there have been such a mountain of failures that Bush would have to cure cancer, solve world hunger, and go back and time to kill Hitler before he could reasonably be considered "medicore". People don't want Bush to fail. They want Bush to just stop whatever he's doing and remain perfectly still until the end of his term so he doesn't have the opportunity to fail again without anyone else's encouragement.

[Buzzy]

Everyone here know that the reason American grannies and old men are being searched and checked is the fault of the left who screams profiling every time someone suggests we double check the Muslims and ignore the 92 year old granny in the wheelchair.

And yes the left has sandbagged the Bush administration from day one. Maybe that's OK since what goes around comes around and the next DEM in the White House is going to go through hell from day one too. Won't be in 2008 though boys. America isn't about to elect Obama or Hillary and Edwards is both a trial lawyer and politician, the lowest of the low in ethical standards in people's opinion. I'll also predict that the GOP retakes the Senate although the DEMs might narrowly hang onto a slim majority in the House.

[templar knight]

You're right, Buzzy, we owe the next Dem president all the hell we can possibly muster. Payback is in order, big time.

[Zifnab]

"America isn't about to elect Obama or Hillary and Edwards is both a trial lawyer and politician, the lowest of the low in ethical standards in people's opinion. I'll also predict that the GOP retakes the Senate although the DEMs might narrowly hang onto a slim majority in the House."

I expect sleeping pills will be flying off the shelves come Nov 7th '08, as Republicans struggle to keep dreaming.

[templar knight]

Good, Nabby, I hope one of these lowlifes wins. That is what it will take to bring Americans to their senses. But I predict trouble for whichever of the three wins. Payback will be in order.

[Buzzy]

Personally I'm pulling for Obama so I can spend 4 years calling him Obama bin Laden and calling him a traitor every time he caves in to the Islamofascists or oil prices rise.

Of course if Hillary takes on Obama as her VP we can still do that after we impeach her and he takes over. The Obama supporters would probably help us impeach her BTW.

[Fred Beloit]

Now don't be silly, Zif. You must know that successful tests of the system happen all the time. It just isn't news. The MSM would never print a story titled: "Another Success after Test Probe of Airport Security Fails and Gun Smugglers Are Caught".