But a spokesman for Buckeye Partners, the company that operates the pipeline, said that an explosion at a fuel-tank farm at the airport would not ignite the pipeline.

"It's not like the pipeline is a stick of dynamite and the whole thing would blow up," said Roy Haase, the Buckeye spokesman. "Pipelines don't blow up."

"The devastation that would be caused had this plot succeeded is just unthinkable," Ms. Mauskopf said.

The only reluctant concession to reality in the entire article is:

Despite their "extraordinary efforts," the men never obtained any explosives, authorities said.

"Pulling off any bombing of this magnitude would not be easy in today's environment," said Former U.S. State Department counterterrorism expert Fred Burton, though he added that it was difficult to determine the severity of the threat without knowing all the facts of the case.

Since Defreitas had worked at JFK, security has tightened and his knowledge of the operation was severely outdated.

Like the Fort Dix "terrists" the fact that they were such idiots means they were far too stupid to put anything over on anyone as sharp as  the 26 percenters.

So of course they were nothing to be scared of... were they? Or were they?

Never mind... It must be time to bomb somebody for this. These guys were terrists, dadgummit!

Planning to rob Fort Knox with a water pistol is no reason to lock anyone up and throw away the key, even if they are "serious."

Since we have seen umpteen of these dastardly "plots" melt into government lies, I do not take these accusations at face value until ONE OF THEM turns out to be true.

This is the same government that ignored real warnings about 9/11, but tells us that Jose Padilla is the boogeyman.

Only 28% of the country can be fooled all of the time.  Are you a member of that minority?

I am in more danger from a fellow American with a handgun or drunk at the wheel than I am from terrorists, and I don't spend my life quivering in fear of drunks or gangbangers the way George W. Bush wants me to fear "terrorists" like Padilla or the Fort Dix morons.

If the object of "terrorism" is to terrify me enough to vote Republican, why would I let these clowns control me by being scared?

Once upon a time America was populated by brave people who understood danger but didn't hide under their beds because the president told them to be scared.

Once upon a time we had a president who was not himself a coward, and who told us that the worst thing to fear is fear itself.  Now we have a coward for a president and he wants us to be as cowardly as he is.

Kadir "was arrested Friday as he was boarding a flight from Trinidad to Venezuela, where he planned to pick up a travel visa to attend an Islamic religious conference in Iran."

Link

On one side we have Edger and his sources, one of which I showed wouldn't quote the NYT.

On the the other we have a NYT reporter and the police.

1. Question the infomants immediately
   
2. Claim terrorists are too dumb to be a threat
   
3. Make snide comments about Fox News
   
4. Talk about real threats like natural disaters
   
5. Lash out at anyone who takes terrorism seriously

On 27 January 2007, at an antiwar protest at Washington DC, Sparling claimed that a passing protestor may have spit near him, according to the New York Times. [6]

IndedependentsUnbound

Now, what did the NYTimes actually write? Link

Later, as antiwar protesters passed where he and his group were standing, words were exchanged and one of the antiwar protestors spit at the ground near Mr. Sparling; he spit back.

Note that the NYT article does not say "may have." It also does not quote Sparling, leading a reasonable person to believe that the reporter saw the incident.

Now, in the very next paragraph we find that:

Capitol police made the antiwar protestors walk farther away from the counterprotesters.

Why did they do that? Could it be that the police saw:

words were exchanged and one of the antiwar protestors spit at the ground near Mr. Sparling; he spit back.

We have the reporter and the police who were there, yet you chose to believe someone who was not??

Your source also writes:

Three WWII vets happened to be getting off flights about that time and just knew what the young man in the wheel chair was so upset about? How did they know? Did someone tell three elderly gentlemen. in civilian attire, about the young man's plight?

No, I would say that the three vets saw a military uniform, a man wearing it sitting in a wheel chair with part of a leg missing who was crying and upset and just naturally went to help him.

That would be my guess, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to arrive at it.

So in the end all you have are claims. Unsupported claims.

BTW - Aren't you one of those who who was upset over Gonzales' and Card's trip to the AG who was in the hospital with a very treatable, but painful disease??