I DON'T TRUST THESE TERROR THREATS
During Bush's presidency, Britney Spears was asked how she thought he was doing. Her response was something like "I just think we ought to trust the president." (At the time, the president was engaged in a baseless, illegal war against Iraq.) Britney is stupid and seems to be on drugs. So what's your excuse for trusting the government? Now our top news story is chatter which has revealed possible Al Qaeda plots to attack embassies and as a result, we've shut many of them down all over the world. I don't want terror attacks and we should be on guard for legally-obtained chatter, but I also can't ignore these points. In the same way that Bush manipulated us into a state of panic with the color-coded terror alert system, this chatter comes at a very convenient time. The Obama administration and Congress are unpopular. What perfect timing! Then the chatter will make us afraid and in fear, we'll rally behind the government which can protect us from the muslim boogeyman. Our government will magically become heroes and protectors and not so unpopular all of a sudden. And we'll forgive the government for it's surveillance on US citizens which has shocked the nation since it was discovered how heavily the Obama administration was spying on us. With this mounting Al Qaeda threat, we'll gladly give up more civil liberties just to say safe. (Safe from a threat that we're learning of from a government we shouldn't trust unless we're Britney Spears.) Republican hawks like Lindsey Graham the Sissy Hawk are using this chatter as an excuse to justify the NSA program--actually agreeing with democrats for once. And yes, it's easy for obstructionist republicans to reach across the aisle and agree with them when democrats start acting like republicans. Obama's a specialist in this field. As Glenn Greenwald pointed out: "And so, here we are in the midst of, you know, one of the most intense debates and sustained debates that we’ve had in a very long time in this country over the dangers of excess surveillance, and suddenly an administration that has spent two years claiming that it has decimated al-Qaeda decides that there is this massive threat that involves the closing of embassies and consulates throughout the world." I hope there isn't a threat at all. But if there is a real threat, anyone who exploits it is a low-down skunk. This seems like it could be a bipartisan coalition of skunks in both parties designed to trick us. And if we were truly worried about stopping terrorism, maybe we should stop creating generations of terrorists who arise directly as a result of US foreign policy. You don't wage illegal wars like the one in Iraq and send drones to bomb innocent children without serious repercussions for decades to come. They'll pop up at 9/11, at the Pentagon, on airlines and at marathons in Boston. Unless we stop the US foreign policy which creates more of them.