In my view, it wasn’t so much what they could buy in this particular instance but the laisseq-faire attitufe about who was doing the buying that provided the cause for alarm.
‘Anything to make a buck’ seems to be the genral attitude in all areas of business.

A dangerous consequence of spinning the AQ-9/11 theme is that so many people, once hiving wised up to the spin, are now dismissing the rhreats to our country altogether.
The presidential candidates limit their message to a stay-vs-leave position re Iraq, without giving a substantive clue as to how they assess threats to stability in the entire region (Pakistan, Afghanistan) threats to the US homeland or the worsening situation globally.
The debates are as shallow as presidential pronouncemnts.

News outlets are asleep. The sting operation revealing the ease in procuring nuclear materal rais caused a mere blip in coverage, especially when compared to coverage of campaign fund raising or trophy wives.

The American public is asleep as well. We are sheep, happy to be led to the shopping mall.in a cloud of eblivion.

I’m more worried about our Ship of State now than I was on 9/11,

Criticism is mounting over a)Bush’s blaming violence in Iraq on the same group of people who took down the World Trade Center and b) the continued focus on Iraq while bin Laden has reportedly reconstituted his group and is essentially living in remote areas of Pakistan — hidden and, in essence, protected. In this sense, the U.S. victory in Afghanistan now has emerged as more of a forced relocation than a decimation.

Bush conflates the enemy in Iraq with a Shia caliphate and Iran. But those responsible for 9/11 are Sunnis and Saudis. In the last week three posts/articles address the Sunnis militants , but this doesn’t fit into the “Axis of Evil” BS.
1) From Sullivan and the LAT:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/07/the-saudi-war-o.html

Although Bush administration officials have frequently lashed out at Syria and Iran, accusing it of helping insurgents and militias here, the largest number of foreign fighters and suicide bombers in Iraq come from a third neighbor, Saudi Arabia, according to a senior U.S. military officer and Iraqi lawmakers.

About 45% of all foreign militants targeting U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians and security forces are from Saudi Arabia; 15% are from Syria and Lebanon; and 10% are from North Africa, according to official U.S. military figures made available to The Times by the senior officer. Nearly half of the 135 foreigners in U.S. detention facilities in Iraq are Saudis, he said.

2) A Beirut Star editorial:
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&article_id=83705&categ_id=17

Now the US administration is using the same sort of “evidence” to drum up animosity toward Iran. Yes, the US is detaining 20 Iranians and one Lebanese, who it says are part of an organized Iranian effort to undermine the US military’s mission. But the Americans are also holding hundreds of Jordanian, Saudi and Egyptian suspects, yet they have never claimed that this constitutes proof that those states are waging war on US troops.

So W is correct, but making assertions that don’t fit the facts. Radical Saudis and their financiers are our #1 enemy, but Iran and Syria makes for a better sound bite and propaganda. What would happen to GWOT if W says our #1 enemy is SAUDIS ARABIA?