Northwest Airlines Attack: Security Failure of Staggering Proportions

From the Telegraph UK, "Analysis: Detroit Terror Attack is a Major Intelligence and Security Failure":

The fact that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was able to trigger his home-made incendiary device on board a US airliner represents an intelligence and security failure of staggering proportions.

Tough questions need to be asked of not just the US security agencies – such as the CIA and the FBI – but also of Britain's MI6, MI5 and the Metropolitan Police's counter-terrorist unit.

How can a Muslim student, whose name appears on a US law enforcement database, be granted a visa to travel to America, allegedly acquire an explosive device from Yemen, a country awash with al-Qaeda terrorists, and avoid detection from the world's most sophisticated spy agencies?

Every intelligence agency across the world is fully aware that the targets of choice for al-Qaeda and its numerous affiliates and sympathisers are airliners – preferably those flying to the US. Yet Abdulmutallab seems to have avoided detection in both Nigeria and Holland when he passed through the various security checks at Lagos and Schiphol airports respectively.

Embarrassingly for the Washington, Lagos airport had recently been given the "all clear" by the US's Transportation Security Administration, an agency established in the wake of the 9/11 attacks which was supposed to improve the security on American airliners.

Attacking airlines is not exactly new territory for al-Qaeda. After 9/11, Richard Reid, a British Muslim convert, tried to blow up a transatlantic airliner by detonating explosives hidden in his shoes. More recently, Britain was the base for the so-called liquid bomb plot when a group of British Islamists plotted to destroy up to 10 US bound airliners in a series of attacks designed to kill thousands.

As 9/11 showed, for a relatively cheap outlay- the cost of the operation was estimated at round £300,000 – the impact of an airline attack can be global: the desired conclusion for every al-Qaeda mission.

Yet Abdulmutallab, a 23-year Nigerian, who US officials said studied mechanical engineering at University College in London, came frighteningly close to committing a terrorist atrocity undetected.

If you missed it, check out Air Canada's "travel advisory."

Also, at the New York Times, "New Restrictions Are Imposed on Air Passengers": "The restrictions will again change the routine of air travel, which has undergone an upheaval since the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington in September 2001 and three attempts at air terrorism since then."

There will be more attempts in the future. But Democrats will continue to pooh-pooh the threats, and radicals like Spencer Ackerman and Matthew Yglesias will laugh at what a "joke" al Qaeda is, while calling for a "law enforcement" approach that's careful not to inflame tender Muslim sensibilities, insh'allah.

Leftists Spin Attempted Northwest Airlines Attack as Evidence of Fake Al-Qaeda Threat

William Jacobson wrote an important post this morning on the leftist reaction to the attempted bombing of Northwest Airlines 253. See, "Terrorist Attacks Plane, Think Progress Attacks Pete Hoekstra." Checking William's essay we find that the first reaction of radical bloggers is to deny conservatives a partisan advantage on national security. Steve Benen's entry was the most egregious, "PETE HOEKSTRA, SHAMELESS BUFFOON...." Basically, amid a security threat that even the administration's taking seriously, radical leftists are reduced to namecalling.

But there's something more significant to consider with regards to how the left perceives this terror plot. I'm reading Spencer Ackerman's post on this, "al-Qaeda’s Desperate Bid For Relevance, The Failed Plane Attack & Afghanistan." Despite his purported national security "credentials," Spencer Ackerman's woefully unserious about war and terrorism. Recall that this is the guy who called for President George W. Bush's death at the Hague, and for that reason alone his rants will garner the attention of leftist foreign policy vultures. A good example of this childishness is Ackerman's tweet from yesterday, seen here:

Then at his essay, he links to this tweet from Dylan Matthews (we can infer that Matthews means Detroit, not Denver):

There's a huge logical leap from suggesting that Abdul Mutallab's attempted attack was amateurish to suggesting there's no al Qaeda threat justifying a U.S. presence in Afghanistan. But that's the thinking of people like this, and it's surprising how much play such unseriousness gets in leftist policy circles.

Ackerman links to Matthew Yglesias' post as well, from yesterday, "Not So Scary 'Terror'." Yglesias writes there:

Obviously, people shouldn’t be lighting anything on fire inside airplanes. That said, all the big Christmas airline incident really shows to me is how little punch our dread terrorist adversaries really pack. Once again, this seems like a pretty unserious plot. And even if you did manage to blow up an airplane in mid-air, that would be both a very serious crime and a great tragedy, but hardly a first-order national security threat.

I can't imagine the possibility of a single terrorist taking down a trans-Atlantic passenger airliner as being simply a "serious crime and great tragedy." While not on the scale of a strategic nuclear exchange, we minimize the serverity of such lower-grade terror attacks (dismissing them as "tragedies") at the risk of much greater -- even catastrophic -- threats to human life.

What's especially troubling about the leftists, again, is their haste to gain partisan points to downsize a forward American foreign and military policy. Just now, ABC News reports that there's indeed al Qaeda guidance and planning in the Northwest incident. See, "Investigators: Northwest Bomb Plot Planned by al Qaeda in Yemen: Officials Say Bomb Materials Sewn Into Suspect's Underwear by Top Terror Bomb Maker" (via Memeorandum):

The plot to blow up an American passenger jet over Detroit was organized and launched by al Qaeda leaders in Yemen who apparently sewed bomb materials into the suspect's underwear before sending him on his mission, federal authorities tell ABC News.

Investigators say the suspect had more than 80 grams of PETN, a compound related to nitro-glycerin used by the military. The so-called shoe bomber, Richard Reid, had only about 50 grams kin his failed attempt in 2001 to blow up a U.S.-bound jet. Yesterday's bomb failed because the detonator may have been too small or was not in "proper contact" with the explosive material, investigators told ABC News.

Investigators say the suspect, Abdul Farouk Umar Abdulmutallab, a 23-year-old Nigerian student whose birthday was last Tuesday, has provided detailed information about his recruitment and training for what was supposed to be a Christmas Day suicide attack.

But even in the absence of evidence of al Qaeda's ties to the Abdul Mutallab, we know the nature of al Qaeda's threat has been transformed significantly since September 11, 2001. Audrey Kurth Cronin, an expert on international terrorism, and the author of "How al-Qaida Ends: The Decline and Demise of Terrorist Groups," has noted recently that al Qaeda today is a fractured organization with a decentralized leadership. The group is more of an idea than an actual entity. As such, there's little doubt of the seriousness of the threat, since follow-on organizations will likely take up the initative where Osama bin Laden left off. Indeed, Kurth Cronin suggests that while al Qaeda's capabilities have been significantly weakened, and Western leaders have indeed suffered from an over-emphasis on leadership decapitation, "Even in its diminished state, al Qaeda and its franchises remain armed and dangerous."

And this is to say nothing of the larger military and political threat from al Qaeda in South Asia. The nexus between Taliban operatives in Pakistan, the Lashkar terrorists implicated in the Mumbai attacks, and remnants of the al Qaeda operatives from pre-9/11 Afghanistan remains a central focus of American strategic planning and national security interests. (See, Bill Roggio, "Al Qaeda builds a 'Shadow Army'.")

It would thus be pure suicide to take serious the anti-American rants of "experts" such as Spencer Ackerman and his terrorist apology-brethren in the Democratic Party. Indeed, "Attackerman" is already walking back some of his more stupid ruminations from yesterday (without much success, for that matter).

Jasper Schuringa Interview: Dutch Tourist Tried to 'Save the Plane'

Jasper Schuringa, the Dutch tourist who jumped on terror suspect Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab, is interviewed at CNN. Plus, the Los Angeles Times has a report, "Dutch tourist on flight to Detroit says he jumped on suspect to 'try to save the plane'." Also, at the New York Post, "Terror hero: I didn't hesitate." (Via Memeorandum.) Check back here a bit later for an in-depth analysis of the event.

HBO's Terror in Mumbai: 'This is a Struggle Between Islam and the Unbelievers' ...

Live blogging: I'm watching HBO's documentary, 'Terror in Mumbai'. This is a gripping production. Some of the witnesses are showing their injuries. The Mumbai killers walked slowly through the train station, killing indiscriminately. Blood is everywhere at the station. Mothers tried to protect babies. Some were shot dead.

10:16am: The video of the killing is so real. Unbelievable amounts of blood at the train station. The police had no training or preparation for such an attack ... The terrorists left the train station (Chhatrapati Shivaji), heading to the hotels ...

10:21am: Police intercept communications between the terrorists and the handlers in Pakistan. Attackers hit the Tiffin restaurant at the first hotel. Now the clips are from the Leopold Cafe. Fareed Zakaria, of CNN, is the narrator. He notes that the terrorists, poor villagers, are mezmerized by the opulence at the hotels. The videos are from hotel cameras mounted high on the walls. It's like the cameras are silent witnesses to evil ...

10:30am: The Taj hotel is set on fire. More communications between the terrorists and their controllers in Pakistan. Smoky inside the hotel. Fire blazing outside. Mumbai police gathering in the streets (afraid to storm the hotel...).

10:38: Mumbai's top three police commanders were killed. The city's security forces are in complete meltdown mode. There's an interview here with one of the surviving terrorists, Kasab. He describes his training in a terrorist indoctrination camp. It sounds like something from Pol Pot's Cambodia ... trained to kill, without remorse ...

10:42: Watching this, I get the feeling of how it all went down in real time. The controllers were ecstatic with the success of the operation ... they were thrilled that the entire world's media was watching the horror in Mumbai ...

10:44: Now, a pair of the killers are headed to Nariman House, the location of the Jewish hostel ... hostages are taken. More communications between the handlers in Pakistan and the terrorists ... victim's families are interviewed here. Mothers in tears at what happened ..

10:48: They program documents the capture of "Kasab," the terrorist who is interviewed. He says "we were all supposed to die ..." That is, the assault was a total suicide operation. Handlers have no respect for human life, not even those of their killers ... "For your mission to end successfully you must be killed ... God is waiting for you in heaven," the controller tells Fadahlallah, one of the gunmen ... "God willing, God willing" is the response from the killer in Mumbai ...

10:56: Now, videos of the commando raid at the Jewish house ...

11:05: It's over now.The film doesn't dwell on the killings of Rabbi Holtzberg and his wife Rivkah. Reports earlier indicated that they were targets all along. The film concludes with audio tapes of the Lashkar-e-Taiba plotters in Pakistan. The voice says, "you're just watching the trailer. The full movie is yet to come.

Then, Fareed Zakaria gives his final analysis: Pakistan security services are implicated, since Lashkar was established to fight in Kashmir. There's no disentangling state sponsorship here, which is a failure of American foreign policy, since Pakistan is our key "ally" in South Central Asia.

I'll have more analysis in a later post today. I'll be writing about the attempted airline plot in Detroit, and the left's reaction to it. Meanwhile, I found this report on Mumbai, "Sixty Hours of Terror: Ten Gunmen, Ten Minutes." I can't vouch for it's credibility, but it's worth a look for some of the information in any case ...

Attempted Terrorist Attack on Northwest Flight 253

Early this afternoon, I saw something online about how someone tried to set off a firecracker on an airliner. Thinking this was a prank, I went upstairs to read and then fell asleep. Now it turns out the story is a major Christmas day terrorist threat, and is likely to cause a new round of leftist denialism and handwringing. Thers, at Whiskey Fire, dismissing the episode as mere "tiny bombs," suggests this is great news for conservatives, who'll "wet their pants in an ecstasy of hysterical screeching." But late news reports indicate a threat of potentially catastrophic proportions. From the New York Times, "Terror Attempt Seen as Man Tries to Ignite Device on Jet."

A Nigerian man tried to ignite an explosive device aboard a trans-Atlantic Northwest Airlines flight as the plane prepared to land in Detroit on Friday, in an incident the United States believes was “an attempted act of terrorism,” according to a White House official who declined to be identified.

The device, described by officials as a mixture of powder and liquid, failed to fully detonate. Passengers on the plane described a series of pops that sounded like firecrackers.

Federal officials said the man wanted to bring the plane down.“This was the real deal,” said Representative Peter T. King of New York, the ranking Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee, who was briefed on the incident and said something had gone wrong with the explosive device, which he described as somewhat sophisticated. “This could have been devastating,” Mr. King said.

It turns out that the suspect is alleged to have ties to al Qaeda, and was previously listed on U.S. government databases. See, The Hill, "King: Airline bombing suspect had 'significant terrorist connections'." Also, at USA Today, "Al-Qaeda Linked to Failed Detroit Plane Attack."

The Los Angeles Times reports how the suspect attempted to detonate the device:

The suspect smuggled a powder aboard the plane in a container taped to his leg, the official said. Covering himself with a blanket to hide his actions, he used a syringe to inject a liquid into the powder, and a fire resulted from the combustible mix, according to the official, who did not identify the materials.

One key takeaway from the event is that the "threat of attack on an aircraft remains viable" (although I had discounted threats to airliners in my previous analysis of "Global Challenges in 2010"). And Larry Johnson looks at the vulnerability of current airport security screening procedures:

Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air commented on the incident noting, “He may just be a nut who smuggled fireworks on the plane, but still, that leaves the question of how he managed to do that.”

Well Ed, here’s how:

Let’s start with the fact that there is no screening system or requirement in place at international airports that will detect explosives. If the preliminary reports that the Nigerian brought firecrackers on the plane that’s not surprising at all. Fireworks normally do not contain any metal and will pass undetected through any of the walk thru metal detectors used throughout the world. Here we are 8 years after the 9-11 attacks and we still employ security detection systems incapable of detecting explosives.

Then there is the laughable TSA restrictions on liquids you can bring on board a plane. Here’s the TSA policy:

Make Your Trip Better Using 3-1-1

3-1-1 for carry-ons = 3.4 ounce (100ml) bottle or less (by volume) ; 1 quart-sized, clear, plastic, zip-top bag; 1 bag per passenger placed in screening bin. One-quart bag per person limits the total liquid volume each traveler can bring. 3.4 ounce (100ml) container size is a security measure.

Consolidate bottles into one bag and X-ray separately to speed screening.

Be prepared. Each time TSA searches a carry-on it slows down the line. Practicing 3-1-1 will ensure a faster and easier checkpoint experience.

3-1-1 is for short trips. If in doubt, put your liquids in checked luggage.

Declare larger liquids ....

Truth is you can get at least one pound and two ounces worth of liquids into a quart bag. So try this scenario on for size. Two terrorists traveling together pack their clear plastic quart bags with six 3 ounce bottles. That is 18 ounces each. Let’s also assume they put a binary liquid explosive in the bottles, such as PLX. And they have a small amount of TATP to use as a booster charge.

Under this scenario two terrorists working together can bring more than 1 kilo worth of high explosives onto a plane undetected. There is no required system in place that will detect the explosives in their TSA approved “clear plastic quart bags.” So Ed, you should not be surprised with the firecrackers. We still do not have a security technology in place at all airports that can prevent such a threat.

Eight years ago Richard Reid, an Al Qaeda operative, boarded a plane in London wearing shoes packed with TATP. He’s lucky he did not blow himself up just walking to the plane because the explosive is so volatile. He tried to light his shoes but, because he had pissed on his laces, they were too damp to light. His fellow passengers beat the crap out of him and prevented a terrorist incident.

So here we are 8 years later and we still have done nothing to prevent the threat from an explosive. I fully acknowledge that it is a threat we rarely see. But that excuse will not fly if a terrorist group decides to run the risk of blowing airplanes out of the air. Let’s face it, we never learn.

On that cheery note, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

More at Memeorandum.

The Obamas Non-Christmas

ABC News reports on the president's family trip to Hawaii, "Obamas Begin Hawaiian Holiday, an Annual Tradition." The Obamas will not exchange gifts, although perhaps due to the earlier outcry, Malia and Sasha will receive presents after all. (See, "Obama's "Non-Religious" White House Christmas and No Christmas Gifts for his Kids.") Plus, presidential Christmas mass is out. Lynn Sweet has the story, "The Obamas Hawaii Christmas: Will it Include Church?" With Christian church services under the bus, the Astute Blogger notes that "Barack Hussein Obama is as Christian as is convenient to be." The president wouldn't miss a trip to the gym, however, the narcissist that he is. (See, "For the Obamas, Christmas Starts at the Gym.") And don't forget the communist Christmas tree ornament controversy. (See, "Obama's Tree Festooned with Evil.") Given that disaster, the theme of president's weekly address is no coincidence. See, HotAir Pundit, "Obama Weekly Address Makes a Point To Talk About the Ornaments on the White House Christmas Tree."

And previously, Obama left out any mention of God Our Lord in his Christmas cards this year. See, "Obama Christmas Card: No Mention of Christmas, Obama vs. Bush Christmas Card Side By Side."

None of this should be surprising. Mark Schmitt, commenting yesterday on the Senate passage of the ObamaCare monstrosity, remarked:

I've always argued that Obama viewed his central domestic mission as changing the culture and practice of American politics. The passage of health reform is a revelation of just how desperately that change is needed and how difficult it will be to achieve.

Well, maybe not so difficult, if the wholesale rejection of American Christmas traditions are any indication.

RELATED: "Obama Will 'Recharge' on Hawaii Vacation" (via Memeorandum).

Bernie Sanders to Fund $10 Billion in Community Health Centers

Folks should really think about this press release, from Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, "$10 Billion More for Community Health Centers will Revolutionize Care." It notes that:

A $10 billion investment in community health centers, expected to go to $14 billion when Congress completes work on health care reform legislation, was included in a final series of changes to the Senate bill unveiled today.

The provision, which would provide primary care for 25 million more Americans, was requested by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

The program is distasteful as a matter of pork barreling, but it points to something that I've shown at this blog: Achieving universal health coverage is entirely feasible through state-level intitatives. State-federal grant programs are used routinely to fund everything from community development to education. And so it is with health care. In September, I investigated the left's outrage at the swine flu death of a college student in Ohio. As I showed at the time, Ohio has acheived virtually universal health coverage through an aggressive system of community health networks. No one is to be denied treatment under network policy, and Ohio launched the "Health Care Coverage Reform Initiative" which pledged to provide 100 percent coverage to Ohioans by 2011. Whatever the merits of the programs, the case demonstrates that universal health availability is entirely possible without the creation of new federal programs.

So, it's especially important to note that Senator Sanders is perfectly willing to cut loose the ObamaCare "public option" in exchange for earmarked healthcare for the states. Why? Why would a declared socialist forego the expansion of the federal Leviathan in exchange for a few billion dollars for the states? It's obvious -- especially from the language of the press release, which hails "the revolution" in primary health care -- that citizens could be fully and competently served at the state and local level. That's how federalism works. It's always better to seek local solutions to policy questions, and especially in this case when the U.S. is on the verge of destroying the last protections for private health provision in the nation.

The example also provides a window into the communist mindset of the most hardline leftists. At Firedoglake, Brian Sonenstein has announced the threat of a primary challenge against Senator Sanders. Think about that. Leftists want to out the socialist Bernie Sanders! Previously it was Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut who was within the FDL crosshairs. Now we're talking about a self-proclaimed Marxist who's being targeted by Hamsher's Henchmen. Even Nate Silver's taking issue. He notes:

There have ... been people who have been arguing the bill in what I believe to be bad faith ... I mean in particular two or three of the writers at the blog FireDogLake. I don't exactly know what's going on over there; as a group, they're whip-smart, and they also reflect a diversity of voices, some of which I have had a problem with and others of which I haven't. But some of the initiatives they've launched over the past week, particularly teaming with Grover Norquist to pursue a conspiracy theory about Rahm Emanuel, threatening to primary Bernie Sanders, and attacking Joe Lieberman's wife, are a little bizarre and not reflective, in my view, of a website that is in the frame of mind right now to have a fact-based debate about the merits of the health care bill.

Actually, I don't think FDL is in "the frame of mind" to have a fact-based debate on healthcare. Jane Hamsher's been in the news for appearing on Fox News in an attempt to create a bipartisan consensus in opposition to the bill. But no one on either side wants to cooperate. Hamsher wants a federlized state socialist health bureaucracy. The only difference between Hamsher and her fellow travellers, like those at Daily Kos, is patience. She wants the Stalinist solution now. Kos is looking in terms of the five-year plans.

Either way, with Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders selling out the public option for the local health clinic option, it's perfectly clear that the ObamaCare legislation to totally unnecessary, and that the hordes at FDL are pushing the most extreme leftist program imaginable. This is a debate over the scope and speed of the socialist takeover. Witnessin this debate -- this internecine battle among socialists -- is perhaps the most informative element of all the recent wrangling over passage of the bill.

UPDATE: The post is revised.

Susanna Maiolo, Deranged Attacker, Knocks Down Pope Benedict in Major Security Breach for Vatican

Gateway Pundit has additional videos, "82 Year-Old Pope Benedict Attacked, Knocked Down at Midnight Mass (Video)." Reading the report, the news suggests the attacker was "unstable." The Fox News report says that the woman was "Susanna Maiolo, 25, a Swiss-Italian national with psychiatric problems." And that Maiolo was "taken to a clinic for necessary treatment." She should be taken to jail pending trail. Be sure to read the ABC report, "Pope Delivers Christmas Message Despite Fall: Susanna Maiolo Knocked Pope Benedict to the Ground in a Serious Security Breach ..." (More at Memeorandum.)

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Kristin Chenoweth: 'Do You Hear What I Hear?'

From Christmas Eve last year: The beautiful Kristin Chenoweth singing, "Do You Hear What I Hear?" Merry Christmas everyone!

Last Minute Shopping

I went out for a bit to get a couple of things. Here's the parking lot shuffle outside the Target store at the Irvine Markeplace. I picked up a couple of CDs and a gift card:

I cruised down to South Coast Plaza after that. Actually less hectic there. Warm weather today too, probably high 70s in Costa Mesa/Santa Ana. And Sorry if that's not too "Christmas-y." If folks want a White Christmas around here, theyll need to head for the high elevations. Or, perhaps folks prefer having "four seasons." See, "Withering Storms Batter the Nation as Travelers Face Delays, Deadly Conditions" ...

I parked next to this hot Chevy Camaro:

South Coast Plaza's the location for Orange County's haute couture. Lots of designer stores, like Zegna:

And Versace:

I was heading over to Nordstrom's:

Didn't actually see anything I wanted (for my wife, that is). So, I took some pics of Santa's House. Families are waiting to have their pictures taken:

I took the escalator down to get a better shot. This is the back side of Santa's House:

Santa, with one of his elves, waiting for the next family:

Okay, my wife texted. She needs to go out too. I'm heading back out to the car, but first a shot of the Brooks Brothers store:

And Guess:

And Ralph Lauren:

And Carolina Herrera:

See also, American Digest, "Something Wonderful: Last Minute Shopping":

One of the abiding delusions of the male mind is the belief it is actually possible to put off critical Christmas shopping until late on the 23rd of December. I am the apostle of this delusion. I take comfort in this false belief every year. No amount of actual experience ever shakes my conviction that it is not only possible to shop like this but economically prudent too. And every year this faith is tested and found wanting. Whatever I may save in last minute markdowns I pay for in this evening's glowing and gut-wrenching angst.

ObamaCare Now Goes to Conference: Public Option Remains Stumbling Block to Compromise

My sense is there's little doubt that the Democrats will get their disastrous ObamaCare monstrosity passed. Legislative chokepoints remain, of course. The bill could die in conference committee, and apparently there's some buzz on this exact possibility. From Patricia Murphy, "Senate Passes Sweeping Health Care Reform, but Trouble Lies Ahead"

President Obama told PBS' Jim Lehrer on Wednesday he is "very satisfied" with the Senate bill, and predicted a smooth road ahead as the House and Senate meet to work out their differences. "You know, what's interesting is, the House version and the Senate version are almost identical." Obama said he would be directly involved in the conference process, but declined to list specific provisions that would be deal breakers for him.

Other potential negotiators were not so optimistic. In the days leading up to the vote, moderate Democratic senators warned their House colleagues that any changes to the Senate bill on abortion, taxes, or the public option could jeopardize health reform altogether.

Plus, from Anna Mulrine, "Senate Passes Healthcare Reform But Negotiations With House Will Be Tough":

Senators took to the floor to pass healthcare reform legislation today, marking the first time the body has conducted business on Christmas Eve since 1963 (before that, it was 1895). But even as the votes tallied along the expected party lines, with the final count 60 to 39, it was clear that hard work remains. Democrats are steeling themselves for the contentious process of melding the Senate and House versions of the bill, with liberal lawmakers warning that they are ready to bargain hard and push back in the wake of a process that left many feeling steamrolled by their more conservative colleagues.

The conventional wisdom has been that whatever healthcare bill was given the nod by the Senate, where only one defector would sink the legislation, would form the basis for conference committee negotiations with House Democrats. But there is a growing sense that "this is going to be a lot more difficult than people realize," says Mike Lux, a Democratic political strategist. True, when Howard Dean, the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, blasted his party for bowing to conservative and centrist Democrat demands and urged Senate lawmakers to "kill" their bill rather than push through legislation without a public option, few seemed fazed ....

But the public option remains a point of contention—and there are others, including rules regarding federal funding for abortion and the "Cadillac tax" on premium health plans. The crux of the complaints coming from liberals is that though the president supported the public option and a number of other reform measures, he did not fight for them ...

Plus, at CNN, "Next Step: Turn Two Health Care Bills Into One."

And Ann Althouse on the left's unhappiness, "The Senate finally passes the health care bill — and the question is, for people who wanted the bill to pass: How good or bad are they supposed to feel?"

Video Credit: Stop the ACLU, "New Ad: Lefty Group Calls Obama a Liar."

Also Blogging:

* Allahpundit, "Michelle: ObamaCare is the tipping point in the Dems’ culture of corruption."

* The Astute Bloggers, "OBAMACARE: TURD SOUP."

* Cold Fury, "America's Last Stand."

* Ed Morrissey, "Senate passes Reid bill, 60-39."

* Pirate's Cove, "Health Travesty Passes, Fish Wrap Blames The Right For Partisanship."

* Pundit & Pundette, "Act in haste, regret at leisure."

* Right Wing Nut House, "THE WORST PIECE OF LEGISLATION IN MY LIFETIME."

* William Jacobson, "I'm out of breath from explaining, hundreds of times, why this is a monstrous lie. But it is on its way towards passage with the help of the mainstream media, mini-media pundits, and blogspheric sycophants."

Plus, Peter Wehner, "The Culture of Corruption" (via Memeorandum).

Obama: 'Health Care Most Important Legislation Since Social Security Act'

Okay. Right.

At ABC News, "Obama: Health Care Bill Would Be Most Important Legislation Since Social Security Act" (via):

President Obama praised the Senate's 60-39 passage of the $871 billion health care overhaul bill despite the fact that not a single Republican voted in favor following 24 consecutive days of often bitter debate and deep partisanship.

"This will be the most important piece of social legislation since the Social Security Act passed in the 1930's and the most important reform of our health care system since Medicare passed in the 1960's," said Obama, before leaving for his Christmas vacation in Hawaii, which he delayed until Senate passed the health care bill.

The president also hailed the legislation as the "largest deficit-reduction plan in over a decade," and added that he looks forward to working with both chambers of Congress "over the coming weeks" to bring a final bill to his desk.

All 58 Democrats and two independents voted for the health care bill, as expected, without any Republican support. Sen. Jim Bunning of Kentucky, who is retiring at the end of his term, was the lone Republican who did not vote.

In a celebratory press conference, jubilant Democratic leaders invoked the memory of the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, whose wife Vicki watched the vote from the Senate gallery.

"This is a victory for the American people," Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said. "This morning's vote brings us one step closer to making Ted Kennedy's dream a reality."

Well, Dems better enjoy the partisan good times while they last. A reckoning is coming. See, "Voters Are Unhappy With the Economy, and Don't Think Obama Has Helped."

And about that deficit reduction, see Weasel Zippers, "Senate Approves Raising Debt Ceiling Limit To $12.39 Trillion."

Dan Riehl's fed up with the lies, "This is getting surreal. He either deserves to be called a liar straight out, or a clueless dilettante who really doesn't understand how dangerous he is."

Photo Credit: Moonbattery, "Recession, Depression, Recovery."

Anwar al-Awlaki Reported Killed in Yemen Airstrike

From Jake Tapper, "Sources: Air Strike in Yemen May Have Killed Imam Who Inspired Fort Hood Shooter, Two Top Al Qaeda Officials":

Sources tell ABC News that an air raid in Yemen this morning may have killed two top al Qaeda officials as well as an imam believed to have inspired the alleged Fort Hood shooter.

Those believed to have been present at the target in the eastern province Shabwa included the leader of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Nasser al-Wahayshi, his No. 2, Saeed al-Shehri, and Anwar al-Awlaki, who was quoted telling Al Jazeera Web that Maj. Nidal Hasan, asked him "about killing U.S. soldiers and officers. His question was is it legitimate" under Islamic law.

Awlaki said the query was a year before the Fort Hood shooting, making him "astonished. Where was American intelligence that claimed once that it can read any car plate number anywhere in the world?"

The sources would not get into whether the air raid was conducted by US or Yemeni forces.

US officials are still seeking confirmation that the raid definitively killed the three men.

Earlier this year, al-Wahayshi, a Yemeni, called for shariah law for Yemen. "The time for the rule of Islam has come so that you could bask in the justice and tolerance it brings," he said. He described the president of Yemen, Ali Abdullah Saleh, who has cooperated with the US in fighting al Qaeda, as "an infidel and an agent ... and today he is using all forms of oppression with the pretext of preserving unity."

Last month al-Wahayshi called for attacks on Western airports and trains. Writing in an e-magazine Sada al-Malahem, al-Wahayshi told supporters, "You do not need to exert great effort or spend a lot of money to make 10 grams of explosives, more or less. Do not spend a long time searching for materials as they already exist in your mother's kitchen. Make them (bombs) in the shape of a bomb you hurl, or detonate through a timer or a remote detonator or a martyrdom-seeker belt or any electrical appliance."

More at the link.

Thomas Joscelyn, at the Weekly Standard, provides analysis:

When Aulaqi’s ties to Major Nidal Malik Hassan first surfaced in the aftermath of the Fort Hood shooting, the FBI was quick to pooh-pooh them. The Bureau claimed that Hassan’s numerous emails back and forth with Aulaqi were consistent with Hassan’s research. (Maj. Hassan was reportedly researching the psychological effects of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan.)

This was transparently false. There is no legitimate reason for a Major in the U.S. Army to contact a leading al Qaeda cleric with ties to the September 11 hijackers (Aulaqi assisted at least two of them en route to their day of terror as a “spiritual advisor”). Aulaqi does not have anything legitimate to say about the psychological effects of combat on U.S. troops other than, as a leading al Qaeda ideologue, he is all for them. Also, we’ve come to learn that Hassan said something to the effect that he couldn’t wait to join Aulaqi in the afterlife.

Got that? Major Hassan -– who professed his admiration of suicide bombings and offered a theological justification for them in a June 2007 presentation at Walter Reed Hospital -– told a top jihadist ideologue, who preaches the virtues of suicide bombings, that he couldn’t wait to be reunited in the next life.

Meanwhile, the FBI concluded: “Nothing to see here, move along.”

This latest reported airstrike, whether it killed Aulaqi or not, further demonstrates the underlying absurdity of the FBI’s “analysis” of Hassan’s ties to Aulaqi.

Anwar al Aulaqi has played a prominent role in al Qaeda’s war against the West and America – so much so that his home was an appropriate military target. And if that strike killed any of the al Qaeda leaders who were reportedly meeting there, then it was a successful one in terms of depleting the terror network’s ranks.The dichotomy could not be any plainer: The U.S. military, which bungled its own evaluation of Major Hassan, is at war with al Qaeda and its allies. For years, the FBI couldn’t put together a prosecutable case against one of America’s more effective enemies. For those who believe terrorists can be defeated primarily, or even exclusively, by our law enforcement agencies and in the courts, the story of the FBI's investigations into Anwar al Aulaqi is a striking rebuttal.

But reports are conflicting. See ChattahBox, "Rumors Of Anwar al-Awlaki’s Death May Be False, CBS Says."

Also blogging:

* Allahpundit, "Bonus: Yemen strike may have also killed Gitmo alumnus."

* Ed Morrissey, "Breaking: Jihadi recruiter Awlaki killed in Yemen raids."

* Michelle Malkin, "Report: Fort Hood jihadist spiritual advisor allegedly killed in Yemen raid."

* Jawa Report, "Air Strike in Yemen Targets Al Qaeda Meeting at Home of Anwar Awlaki, Update: Associates of Cole Bomber al Quso."

* Outside the Beltway, "Fort Hood-Linked Imam Killed in Yemen Strike."

Image and Video Credits: The News Bizarre.

Montazeri Memorial Sparks New Wave of Iran Protests

I've got a couple of U.S. news reports on the latest wave of unrest in Iran. See the Washington Post, "Iran Warns That it Will Deal 'Fiercely' With Protesters," and, "Iran Beats Mourners, Signaling Harder Line":

Iranian security forces clashed with mourners in the city of Isfahan on Wednesday, according to opposition Web sites, signaling a possible hardening by Tehran in its response to protests following the death of a dissident cleric.

Security forces beat back crowds with batons in Isfahan, about 200 miles southeast of Tehran, after mourners gathered at a central mosque for a memorial service for Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, opposition sites and news agencies reported. Mr. Montazeri, an architect of the Islamic Republic, fell out with the conservative clerical establishment in the late 1980s and had been a critic of the government ever since.

During the six months of protests that followed contested presidential elections in June, he became a spiritual guide for the opposition movement. News of his death over the weekend sent mourners to the holy city of Qom, where he had lived. Protesters turned the memorial into antigovernment demonstrations.

Plus, more video at Enduring America, "Latest Iran Video: The Isfahan and Mashhad Protests (23 December)." And, an opposition blog, "A Brave woman Tears Khamenei’s Picture (Taken to Hotel)."

Plus, at Babylon & Beyond, "IRAN: Video of Dissident Cleric's Funeral Ceremony."

Protest at Claire 'Joker' McCaskill's Office

I told you our friends in St. Louis have the best tea party operation in the county. From Dana Loesch, "Protesters Gather for a Second Time Outside Claire McCaskill’s Office" (Via Memeorandum):

A hundred or so protesters gathered outside of Sen. Claire McCaskill’s University City office during their lunch hours for the second time in two weeks to protest McCaskill’s continual lack of representation.

The overwhelming majority of Missouri (and national) voters oppose Harry Reid’s senate fauxcare bill, yet McCaskill is eager to play the part of the rubber stamp and help pass it in the senate – and even complains about having to do so on Christmas. This is what she wanted!

That's Jim Hoft above, of Gateway Pundit. See "Michelle Malkin & Mark Steyn Report on the National Joker Outbreak (Video)":

The Tim Robbins-Susan Sarandon Split - Er, Kinda Like the Sino-Soviet Split?

Breaking: "Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins Call it Quits After 23 Years":

Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins, the lovebirds-turned-Hollywood power couple who met while filming 1988's "Bull Durham," separated over the summer after 23 years together and have called it quits. Today it was made official.

Publicist Teal Cannady confirmed the split and said no further comments are forthcoming.

Sarandon, 63, and Robbins, 51, have two sons together -- Jack, 20, and Miles, 17. Sarandon has a daughter, actress Eva Amurri, from a previous relationship.

Though they were together for more than two decades ...

... the couple never married, attracting attention for that, for the difference in their ages and for their liberal political activism. As a couple, they supported John Edwards' presidential candidacy but then shifted support to Barack Obama -- though you probably won't find Susan playing Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton any time soon.

Also, "Reaction to the Tim Robbins-Susan Sarandon Split."

Kinda like the Sino–Soviet split.

Interesting side note: Sarandon's daughter Eva Amurri starred in the recent Rock the Vote ad calling on young people to withhold sex from opponents of Obamunism. Ms. Amurri dropped the f-bomb throughout.

That's some great Hollywood family values, eh?

While You Were Sleeping...

Opinionnation Man, an old blog buddy and frequent reader here, laid out an interesting argument against conservative bloggers at his post, "The Emergence of Right-Wing Lunacy":

I haven’t been following the political blogoshpere in some time. But when I made the rounds this week I was happy to find a divide between the right-wingers. I’m happy, but, not surprised ....

I noticed the role reversal immediately between the Left-Wing lunatics and the Crazy-Righties. I realized that the conservative backing of heavyweight blogs was a defense from the insanity of the left-wing minority. Because, the entire growth of political blogging came throughout the Bush Administration. And so I knew that once a democrat was in office, the rational arguments against left-wing propaganda would change into the same insane hate-fueled attacks that is the mainstay of liberal blogs.

That is one of the reasons I stopped blogging. I saw the way self-proclaimed rational thinkers attacked the character and patriotism of John McCain. And I made it clear then, that I did not want to be associated with the conservative blogoshpere. And I’m supportive of LGF and his effort to point out how bad the right-wing has become since President Obama took office.

Interesting, I wonder if Opinionnation Man is now posting over at Democratic Underground, "Sounds like someone has seen the light?":

Few bloggers have had quite as controversial a career as Little Green Football’s Charles Johnson. Johnson began blogging in earnest back in 2001 after the attacks on the twin towers, and continues putting out content at a furious pace nearly a decade later.

But the main reason I can’t march along with the right wing blogosphere any more, not to put too fine a point on it, is that most of them have succumbed to Obama Derangement Syndrome. One “nontroversy” after another, followed by the outrage of the day, followed by conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory, all delivered in breathless, angry prose that’s just wearying and depressing to read.

http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2009/11/the-evolution....

Actually, sometimes conservatives are over the top. That said, I too was one of John McCain's biggest supporters in 2008 -- probably the first major blog to come out for The Maverick, and early. But McCain's patriotism's been wearing thin for a while. And now the former GOP presidential nominee is working to get more Dems to declare themselves RINO. See, "Huh: John McCain Once Again Stabbing GOP in Back Helping Sway Another Democrat to Defect." (And how's that Parker Griffith thing working out?)

No offense, but if my good friend Opinionnation Man's cool with that, I'm sure old C.J.'s glad to have another liberal join his "castigate-the-right" crusade. Or, maybe it's just time to wake up and smell the coffee.

More Hypocrisy from 'Hammering' Jane Hamsher

Hey, I'm pleased folks are ripping into "Hammering" Jane Hamsher. As I've said all along, she's the most despised hypocrite on the netroots left (and that's saying a lot). Everybody hates her, conservatives and radicals.

Tommy Christopher has a sweet post highlighting even more of Hammering Hamsher's rank hypocrisy, pointing to this MSNBC segment from last summer, when Hamsher appeared across from Jillian Bandes:

This is the real problem with Hamsher’s Fox appearance. She’s dishonestly using the PHrMA deal as a smokescreen to whatever her real objection is. When Jillian Bandes pointed out this deal with the devil, Hamsher had nothing to say about it.

Nobody likes the PHrMA deal (except pharmaceutical companies), but most supporters of reform have been willing to hold their noses and accept it as the price of getting a good bill. To wave it around at this late date is disingenuous at best (as is much of her opposition to the bill). Hamsher was throwing red meat to Fox’s audience instead of focusing on her real problem with the bill.

I don’t know what that is for sure, but I suspect it has something to do with this statement, from the Fox & Friends appearance:

“If you’ve got insurance right now through your employer that you like, this bill taxes the benefits, middle class benefits, and actually causes it to be worse, to cut back on benefits, and to be more expensive copays, that’s how they bend the cost curve is by making sure that you use less services.”

This is all true, and an excellent point, but neither Hamsher nor Doocy bothers to ask the question that David Shuster asked in that clip from July: What about the tens of millions of people who have no insurance, good or otherwise?

Jane Hamsher loves to remind people that she survived cancer (three times), even calling it “offensive” for someone to argue with her because of it. What she seems to have forgotten is that, for all the trouble she had with her insurance company, she had insurance. She’s urging people to kill a bill that will cover tens of millions of people who don’t have insurance now (rather than urging a strong push to improve the bill in conference), while she is living proof that having insurance can be the difference between life and death. Now, that’s offensive.

I hate when people do this, but since Jane opened the door, I have to say this. My dad dropped dead of a heart attack at age 58, without health insurance. If he had had health insurance, he’d probably still be alive today. Does that make me right about health care reform? No. This thing should be argued on the merits. I think most people would agree that we need an America in which both Jane and my dad get to survive.

RTWT. Hat Tip: The Rheotorican.

Plus, Robert Stacy McCain at the American Spectator, "Second Thoughts for Jane Hamsher?"

Christmas Trains

I'll be on the road for a day-trip today. Be back tonight, since my wife's working and I'd like us to be together on Christmas Eve. I'm heading out to my mom's house in Yucca Valley. She's got something of a family reunion cooked up, with my uncle and all his kids and grandkids, etc. My sister'll be there with her family as well. In any case, I thought I'd leave a few shots from our holiday choo-choo train we set up a couple of nights ago. The train's actually moving in the pictures here. Notice the second shot down, with Batman and the Joker in battle mode on the tail end of the caboose. My youngest boy's been having a good time playing with the train. We actually bought it when my first son as about a year-old, and we've set it up each Christmas since. The smokestack puffs little balls of smoke and the bell rings "ding-ding" pretty loud.

Have a wonderful day and finish your shopping. I'll be back online late tonight or early Thursday. Merry Christmas! My good friend Jan has a picture posted of her Christmas tree as well, so check that out: "Sending Peace..."

Illinois Prison Plan Foes Fear Area Would Be Terror Target

From the Los Angeles Times, "Officials seek to reassure Illinois residents on Guantanamo prison transfer":

At a public hearing on Obama's plan to convert a state facility in Thomson, Ill., to a federal prison housing detainees, opponents say the area would become a target for terrorists.

Facing anxious citizens afraid of becoming terrorist targets, federal officials confirmed Tuesday that some of the most notorious Guantanamo detainees could be sent to Illinois if the Obama administration buys a state prison.

The proposed federal prison in Thomson would be the site for military tribunals for five alleged plotters in the 2000 bombing of the U.S. destroyer Cole, said Alan Liotta, the Defense Department's principal director for detainee policy, at a public hearing on the plan.

The prison could also house some of the alleged Sept. 11 plotters, perhaps including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, if they are convicted in an upcoming federal trial in New York City, officials said.

Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, a Democrat, plans to sell the underused Thomson Correctional Center to house up to 100 Guantanamo detainees and other maximum-security inmates. Thomson, about 150 miles west of Chicago along the Mississippi River, now houses about 200 minimum-security inmates, far below its capacity.

The state Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability, which conducted the six-hour hearing, could not torpedo the federal prison plan even if it wanted to. Its recommendation on whether to sell the site would merely be advisory. The panel said it would not vote on the proposal before Jan. 14.

Quinn, who was en route to Germany, did not attend.

Surrounding communities welcome the proposal, as do many state officials, because of the estimated 3,000 jobs it could create.

But that brought no comfort to opponents, who called the plan too risky.

"Terrorists would want to hit us to make a point, here in the Midwest, in the American heartland," Amanda Norms told the Associated Press. "Is a little economic gain worth the risk?"

She was among dozens of demonstrators who massed outside in the cold.

See also, the New York Times, "Plan to Move Guantánamo Detainees Faces a New Delay." (Via Memeorandum.)