georg jetson
Regular Member
That'd be funny. But it's not. The rest of this post is an exercise in restraint.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Is this truly necessary?
- Thread starter ncwabbit
- Start date
- Status
That'd be funny. But it's not. The rest of this post is an exercise in restraint.
John Canuck
Regular Member
It's a shame that guy was never punished.
Brion
Regular Member
Maybe if you got your MMR vacine, LIKE YOU'RE SUPOSSED TO, it would be a non-issue. Friggin' crazy's that think that vacines are mind control injections...
Exactly... we are no more safe, nor less safe than before 9/11.... although we are LESS FREE.
:banghead:
Last edited:
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
I wasn't trying to be funny. That was bitter, cynical commentary.
Gil223
Regular Member
The world today is indeed different than the one many of us grew up in. There was the relatively innocuous "beatnik movement" of the 1950's, which only seemed to increase the number of coffee drinkers, finger-snappers, and 'poets' in our society. Things began to change in the 1960's, with the introduction of the hippie/"flower child", "free love" and the expanded (at least openly) use of illegal reality-altering substances. The gradual shift of our societal values took its toll on personal pride, work ethic, respect for the laws (and those who are charged with their enforcement), the traditional "family unit", patriotism, etc., over the decades. Is there anywhere in our country where people don't lock their doors and windows when they leave the house these days? Where can one park their car, leave it unlocked with the keys in it, and reasonably expect to find it when they return? Sixty years ago the "home invasion" robbery was unheard of, and today that criminal action is fairly common. Criminal interpersonal actions seemed to be restricted mainly to within the 'criminal community', and between the residents thereof. Your neighbors would keep an eye on the children at play, and wouldn't hesitate to discipline and/or report them to their parents for significant misbehavior. The abuse of illegal substances was not widespread, and our elders were still addressed as "Mr./Mrs./Sir or Ma'am". Mutual respect was the order of the day, and most moms were still primarily homemakers. Disagreements between kids were either talked out, or "duked out" and nobody even thought about using a gun on a schoolmate. Tattoos were decorations found primarily on men - mostly military men - and rarely if ever seen on women. And the only body piercings were found in the ear lobes of women or gypsies. The culture and society of our country has definitely changed - and not for the better. Pax...
Not really, the government and peoples knowledge of the world is what changed. There was terrorism before, there were attacks before.
MilProGuy
Regular Member
I'll agree there was terrorism before 9/11, and attacks...but December 7, 1941 was the last one perpetrated on Americans of the degree of severity of 9/11/2001. It had been sixty years since Americans suffered such a devastating attack by people who were hell-bent on destruction.
thebigsd
Founder's Club Member
Oklahoma City? Domestic terrorist or not, it was still terrorism that was not prevented by our government.
MilProGuy
Regular Member
You are correct.
Perhaps, if the Department of Homeland Security had been around back then it wouldn't have happened.
georg jetson
Regular Member
Oh... OK.
MilProGuy
Regular Member
I enjoyed reading your most excellent post.
Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts with us.
davidmcbeth
Banned
Looks like Belichick is up to his old tricks!
I hope that was some sarcasm.
MilProGuy
Regular Member
Gil223
Regular Member
I do make an effort to be as objective as I possibly can when I read these posts. And I do agree with you... however, I see it - DHS - as a double-edged sword. Our "intelligence and enforcement" organizations have a reputation (deserved or not) for being notoriously territorial, and not particularly inclined to exchange information between the directorates. When everybody wants to be the "hero" and lay claim to all the "glory" for eliminating a perceived threat, it results in instances like Pearl Harbor and 9/11. This attitude probably carries over into the international intelligence community as well. (I have a difficult time believing that a 6'4" Arab - whose picture was spread all over the world, and whose face was as well-known as Michael Jackson - could hide for more than an hour without any of the international intel agencies knowing his location to within 50 meters.) And now, all our intel agencies have been hobbled by putting them under the direction of the DHS, which managed by a leftist (and is owned and operated by the Obama Firearm Elimination Corp). Then there's the FBI... an organization that took the better part of 2 years to find the well-known daughter of William Randolph Hearst, and heir to the Hearst empire, Patricia Hearst, even with photos and knowledge of where she was. (The FBI can also take credit for Ruby Ridge, Waco and several other LE fiascos.)
Government agencies are not noted for their efficiency or effective use of energy expended - at least some of which can be blamed upon politics, both internal and external. Could an agency such as DHS have prevented 9/11? My personal opinion is "Perhaps". But, only IF the lines of communication between all intelligence gathering organizations were open and properly coordinated. The accumulation of glory is not what the security of our nation is about. It is supposed to be about protecting the citizens and our sovereignty as best we can. Were the "sniper nests" at the Superbowl necessary? The obvious answer from the "Monday morning quarterbacks" will be a resounding "NO!" On the other hand, there are the "What IF scenarios"... What if there had been some attempt at deadly terrorist activity... What if there was a terrorist plan of action that was cancelled because of the presence of additional "unnecessary security". There are probably many more potential scenarios in the "What if" category, than there are in the "We didn't need it" camp. Pax...
P.S. If we plan for, and act upon, the "What if's" we can minimize the opportunities to be surprised by a horrendous loss of lives.
Last edited:
Welcome to 1984. You were all warned, and now it's going that way. Having guns isn't just so you can protect yourself in immediate danger. It's so you can deal with the tyrants who have infested this country. Be careful, because you can be deemed a terrorist and shot by one of these snipers at will. You are not free, you are slaves.
The DHS is the new NKVD. Department of Homeland Scrutiny. You are all under the watchful eye of big brother now. DHS is nothing more than an oppressive commie organization collecting names of dissenters to be killed at the first opportunity. The people who run it are related to the terrorists who blew up the towers. No way in hell having the DHS would have stopped 911.
The DHS is the new NKVD. Department of Homeland Scrutiny. You are all under the watchful eye of big brother now. DHS is nothing more than an oppressive commie organization collecting names of dissenters to be killed at the first opportunity. The people who run it are related to the terrorists who blew up the towers. No way in hell having the DHS would have stopped 911.
Last edited:
MilProGuy
Regular Member
I'd be interested in you elaborating a bit on the phrase highlighted in red. Haven't heard this one before, and I thought I'd heard it all.
Last edited:
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
I don't know about you all, but that "homeland" business has been creeping me out since day one.
Homeland
Fatherland
Motherland
Whoever named it that was sick. Trying to pin a patriotic or wholesome sounding name to it so it would seem more palatable. They should have just named it something more along the lines of what it is, something like Directorate for State Security. The shiftiness in the naming proclaims the underhanded intentions. Why bother to mislead people if you are creating something wholesome?
JoeSparky
Centurion
But would the Jews sent to the ovens have been so willing to embark IF THE NAZIS HADN'T LIED TO THEM TO GET THEM INTO THE RAILCARS?
- Status