So I took a casual look at the local blog buzz which gave us the usual mix of opinions. We had some bravery, logic, and outright bigotry; all to be expected. Passions run high when terrorism casts its evil shadow upon us. But this stood out as egregious and defeatist.

I think that this proves that maybe, just maybe, unconventional methods of surveillance are not only necessary, but beneficial. Sure, we're plunging down the highway to fascism, but we'll be safe little fascists, won't we?

Let's be clear here. US Intelligence had little if anything to do with this. Bush was informed by Blair this time. The Homeland Security Secretary, Michael Chertoff, said, "...the British succeeded in disrupting the plot. And there’s no question the focal point of the operational activity was in Britain ... we really took a lot of our cue from them." Leave it to the right-wing to spin a close call, a potential disaster, into more misplaced adoration of President Bush. Compare these folks to the opposition in Britain and you will see why the Europeans seem so refined when compared to us.

On the Tory and Liberal Democrat benches there was no attempt to make political capital. The shadow home secretary, David Davis, confined himself to praise for the security services. [Link]

Next, Chip mentions "unconventional methods of surveillance". Unknowingly he confuses the illegal signal intelligence carried out by the Bush Administration with actual human intelligence. The British "...had an undercover operative deep inside the group of at least 30 terrorists." A human penetrated a cell of terrorists, a tip from a captured informer, and then some covert signal espionage; all carried out on another continent at that, not by the US with your illegal activities. That's what led the involved intelligence agencies - which, again, appears to be British and Pakistani - to begin to monitor the activities of the suspects; not indiscriminate eavesdropping, this wasn't luck. The obvious point here is that you can waste time looking for a needle in a haystack or you can go in head first directly at the enemy. The British did just that and it paid off in spades. Few liberals question the usefulness of "NSA wiretaps, SWIFT, and data-mining" provided they know what they are listening to and what to listen for.

Finally, Those on the right get sick thrills translating liberal positions on the War on Terrorism, in Iraq, and on national security as weak an offering comfort to the enemy. They say we would welcome the creation of the Ummah. They say we think of terrorists as "wonderful people". They say we are defeatist. Well that logic can now be thrown right back at Chip and his fellow brown shirts, because now it is perfectly fine to let our civil liberties evaporate in the face of bunch of cowardly terrorists.

Jesus Christ! Do these people just hate liberals or liberalism all together?