I don't want to sound paranoid, but . . .

The more I learn about the most recent terror plot, the more the government's response annoys me. Instead of protecting us, the Bush Administration manipulated the news - and hoodwink the news services - to the advantage of (i) hiding bad news, and (ii) increasing the government's incursions into our civil rights.

I am not saying that there was not a real terrorist plot afoot. I absolutely believe that there was a serious threat. I am glad these people were caught.

But here's the thing. The government has been aware of this plot since December - that's eight months.

The US and the British governments debated the timing of the arrests. Yes, there are tactical issues involved in deciding when an arrest should be made: have all the participants been identified? how advanced is the plot? has enough intelligence and evidence been gathered? etc. These are complex issues and I am certain they figured into the debate.

But after eight months of surveillance, the plotters still had not gotten passports and had not purchased tickets.

So I question the timing of the arrest - with the US position in Iraq becomes more unstable by the hour, the Israeli war with Hezbollah going poorly, the Iranians openly laughing at us, with the republican losses and Joe Liberman's loss in the recent primaries, and with the administration increasingly coming under attack for any number of improprieties - lo and behold after nine months these arrests could not have come at a timelier moment.

And to ensure that the message ("we have nothing to fear but the democrats") was made loud and clear the administration directed that every airline passenger must throw away all of their toothpaste, cologne, soft drinks, water, make-up, perfume, and etc. The resulting chaos was guaranteed by the way the directive was made. The resulting chaos guarantied that media attention would be diverted to the airports and away from the horrors of Iraq and Lebanon and NSA wiretapping and the democratic victories at the polls.

And why do I think that these suspicions are not entirely paranoid?

Because if liquids and gels were really dangerous, and the government has known this since December . . . why wasn't the regulation put in place sooner? This could have been approved by the appropriate agencies, circulated in the CFR, published for public comment and given final approval in the usual manner. Issues such as compensation would have been considered, and people would have had notice before arriving at the airport that there were new rules.

So all of the panic could have been easily avoided. Instead, it looks to me as though it was packaged, managed and largely created by the Administration. To say that it was openly exploited by the Administration is merely obvious (see Dick Cheney's comments on how lucky we are that a democrat is not in the White House - as if this plot was stopped by the Republican party's British wing and not Her Majesties' Finest).

Considering the cost to the public of this panic attack, the costs to the airlines, the costs to the duty free shops and airport vendors (interesting rule change today, people can buy at the duty free shops if the duty free shop attendant carries the purchase on board). I really wonder whether the risk was so substantial as to warrant the chaos (considering that the members of the conspiracy had not purchased plane tickets or obtained passports and were under arrest anyway).

I really wonder whether this new policy has stopped a single terror plot, or for that matter, even slowed one down. To quote one newsreporter "as soon as we build a better mousetrap, the terrorists build a better mouse."

Meanwhile, with all of this concern about toothpaste, the British today let a 12 year old boy board a plane without a ticket or passport.

I think they need to do a lot better job fixing the gaping holes in security, before they worry about the dimples.