| Author |
Message |
    
Duncan
Real Name
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 1378
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 7:48 am: |     |
Sbenois, an uncharacteristically emotional response my boy. 1-2Many is making no prediction just arguing both sides of the CYA mentality that is legitimately percieved when the threat level is raised and no specifics are given. I would hope that the manufacturer of my crystal ball could do better than either/or.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take"
Wayne Gretzky |
Duncan
Real Name
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 1379
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 8:16 am: | |
Reflective..
quote:Homeland Security spokeswoman Rachel Sunbarger said intelligence led the agencies to detain the flight Wednesday night, but an FBI official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told The Associated Press the incident did not involve terrorism.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take"
Wayne Gretzky |
sbenois
Citizen
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 10558
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 9:38 am: | |
The point, my fellow thespian, is that no one can predict the future with the certainty that is inherent in a statement like:
the hypocrisy for this New Year's Eve is pretty outrageous. if it truly is dangerous, they should send people home. if it isn't, we shouldn't be wasting all this effort and attention on a non-issue.
As far as I know, the bad guys don't generally share their final plans with the NY Police Department.
So I'm not objecting on emotion, I'm actually objecting to just how illogical the statement is.
---> Brought to you by Sbenois Engineering LLC <-
Hey, it also wouldn’t look good coming out of a motel with your wife’s best friend saying you were just planning a surprise birthday party for her husband...- Arturo November '03
|
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 1607
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 11:13 am: | |
1-2many and sbenois, no one knows what the threat level was. The fact that there was no bad incident is not proof that we needed the extra protection, nor is it proof that it was unnecessary. The only thing that is sure is if something bad happened or something bad was visibly thwarted. But neither of those things happened, so we may never know.
I do not know if the extra enforcement was called for or just a CYA or publicity trick. How can I?
Tom Reingold
There is nothing
|
DrFalomar
Citizen
Username: Drfalomar
Post Number: 113
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 11:33 am: | |
Another wonderfully perverse element of our homeland security was noted in the Star-Ledge yesterday: To make it more difficult for Latino laborers to get day work, Freehold is going to ticket those at a muster point (the town itself created!) for loitering and also report the workers to the Office of Homeland Security. So trying to find work now makes a person a potential terrorist. What a joke. |
1-2many
Citizen
Username: Wbg69
Post Number: 830
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 1:01 pm: | |
just to clarify, I was not predicting the future. hence the use of the term "if".
the point being, still, IF it's actually dangerous, or suspected to be dangerous, tell people so. tell them to stay home. IF not, then knock off all the BS. quit misdirecting our attention from the fact that the only New Years bombing - was in Baghdad. |
Brett
Citizen
Username: Bmalibashksa
Post Number: 551
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 1:17 pm: | |
1-2: I think they did say it was dangerous by raising the threat level (For what ever that’s worth) They also may feel that Americans are smart enough to know that any gathering of more then 100,000 people is a potential target. Then they have to add in the fact that Americans are going to do whatever they dam well please.
The NYPD figured that people are still going to go, it’s a very historical event, and they were going to do what they had to in order to make everyone safe.
Let the terrorists know that we’re going to go about our everyday business, and if they try to f*** with that they better watch out.
|
1-2many
Citizen
Username: Wbg69
Post Number: 832
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 1:20 pm: | |
Brett, I respectfully disagree. the gov't gave us very mixed messages. no one said "stay home", except one lone lawmaker in Connecticut - who, by the way, was ridiculed for that fair interpretation of the warnings. |
Brett
Citizen
Username: Bmalibashksa
Post Number: 552
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 1:31 pm: | |
They didn't want us to stay home. They weren't going to tell us what to do, but they were there to protect us if needed.
BTW: I dislike Bloomburg, and sat home last night and watched on TV. |
United Strawberry of America
Citizen
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 1682
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 2:20 pm: | |
this thread is idiotic.
"and I'm p*ssed that I'm on the list, just so some p*ssant can say that he gave me a lower score than the last time (whenever that was)"
The above post was the last of many unpunished personal attacks committed by Nohero.
|
Brett
Citizen
Username: Bmalibashksa
Post Number: 553
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 2:28 pm: | |
Dave seriously can’t you do anything about this asshat?
BTW: I stop posting on any thread that straw does.
|
United Strawberry of America
Citizen
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 1686
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 3:11 pm: | |
ASSHAT??? that is a great word! I love it!
I'm going to use it in a sentence myself.
"I just got home and boy is my asshat tired"
no, that's not going to work. Let's try another.
"Brett, was at the firing range and he accidently shot a hole in his asshat."
That one I like. 
"and I'm p*ssed that I'm on the list, just so some p*ssant can say that he gave me a lower score than the last time (whenever that was)"
The above post was the last of many unpunished personal attacks committed by Nohero.
|
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 1609
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 4:00 pm: | |
Now that 1-2many has clarified her position, I agree with her and disagree with you, Brett. The city did not passively allow the Times Square celebration to occur. It actively ran the event, encouraging people to come. They had the power and authority to call it off. They do sometimes call of traditional events.
Tom Reingold
There is nothing
|
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 2627
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 5:02 pm: | |
Maybe there's something on which we can all agree. For the first entry for "Asshat of the Year" - Rep. Chris Shays:
quote:Connecticut Rep. Christopher Shays, a member of the country's Select Homeland Security committee, issued a warning about the New Year's Eve celebration in New York City's Times Square.
Contrary to reassurances about safety from the Homeland Security Department and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Shays said Tuesday that he would not go to Times Square.
"I think it's really irresponsible for our government to tell people that they don't need to take precautions," Shays said. "If Secretary Ridge says, 'Just do what you normally do,' I would say, what do you normally do? If normally, you go to Times Square, I wouldn't do what you normally do."
It's unclear why Rep. Shays wanted to "act out" like that. Maybe he wanted the opportunity for a big "I told you so", in case something happened. He probably thought nobody would remember after a few days. |
mfpark
Citizen
Username: Mfpark
Post Number: 115
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 5:13 pm: | |
I am very critical of much that is done under the guise of national security and counter-terrorism, but I have to ask again--in this instance, what would you do if you were Mayor Bloomberg or the NYPD?
Let's face facts--even the best intelligence information is speculative. The reality is that a terrorist attack on US soil is remote, but at the same time plausible. We know that sometime, somewhere they are going to try again, but I doubt the government has any idea when or where or how, even just before the strike.
So, we have to live with the reality that while an attack is unlikely at any one given point in time, it is likely to occur at some unknown point in time--maybe tomorrow, maybe next year; perhaps in New York, perhaps Stockholm or Los Angeles or Beirut or Riadh.
This is the nature of terrorism, as opposed to traditional open warfare. It is meant to be symbolic, to keep an entire populace off balance and on edge, to disrupt the normal fabric of life in subtle and large ways. The only way to prepare for it is to do what the Israelis do--live life as normally as possible, while simultaneously being on guard at all times. Sometimes it will work, and sometimes it will not. And, of course, you have to root out the terrorists, through preemptive strikes, disrupting their ability to operate, and addressing conditions that help foster terrorism.
I think the Mayor and NYPD did the only thing they could do, and it would be the same thing you would do in their place. Move forward as normal, with your flank broadly covered, and hope for the best. Did it work? Again, we do not know if it worked, but we will know when it does not work. |
Habanero2
Citizen
Username: Habanero2
Post Number: 17
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 5:26 pm: | |
Whats your point park?
"You kids today have it easy. When I was a kid everything was HUGE. My dad was nearly four times bigger than me. You couldn't even see the tops of counters.... Then gradually everything became smaller until it was the manageable size it is today." |
mfpark
Citizen
Username: Mfpark
Post Number: 116
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 5:30 pm: | |
Sorry, let me make it more clear. The Mayor and NYPD and Feds did the only thing they could do regarding New Years Eve. They did it the right way. |
anon
Citizen
Username: Anon
Post Number: 891
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 5:40 pm: | |
A number of thoughts:
The GOP is "more alligned with the propaganda machine" because it is in power! If the Dems held the Presidency and the Congress, the "propaganda machine", whatever that is, would be serving their interest.
The Republicans are no more a unified party than the Dems. What do Mike Blumberg and Tom DeLay have in common? It is just that one of their guys is President, so they can all say they support him, whatever that means.
Last Presidential election, the "American People" chose the Democratic candidate over the Republican candidate by a small plurality. The Republican got the job because of 500 odd votes in an odd election count in an odd State! If a few more old folks had remembered to take their glasses when they went to vote, Gore would be President, and everyone would be talking about the disorganization of the Republicans. The Republicans hold both Houses of Congress but by only a few seats. So the Republicans ought to stop gloating and the Democrats ought to stop whinning, and engaging in self-pity!
Why do some people hate Bush so much? I'm not sure because I think "hate" is too strong an emotion for someone you don't actually know personally. But in this age of celebrity people "love" or "hate" people whom they have never met but are just images on a TV screen. As to Mr. Bush, it could be that he is President despite winning the popular vote, that he ran as " a uniter not a divider" but has conducted himself as the latter not the former and has done so by playing to the Right rather than the Center. I don't know many Dems who actually "hated" Bush Sr. The only folks who seemed to hate him were the extreme Right. |
mfpark
Citizen
Username: Mfpark
Post Number: 118
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 5:41 pm: | |
Habanero, let me add that it is easy to take cheap shots at the Mayor, NYPD and Feds here. Part of my job involves security in the City, and I would have done the same thing. Christopher Shays and others, in this case, simply do not know what they are talking about, because they have not faced real operational situations like this. |
Brett
Citizen
Username: Bmalibashksa
Post Number: 554
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 1, 2004 - 7:30 pm: | |
I'm going to let mfpark take it from here I think we're in the same mindset on this. Plus as I said before, no posts once straw gets in on a thread. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 620
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 2, 2004 - 11:31 am: | |
The republicans are unified. Bloomberg was a Profeta....just changed his party affiliation to get elected. Bloomberg is a liberal republican, or a conservative democrat, or.....it doesn't matter and is no indication of what or where the republican party is as a whole. Bloomberg is an aberration with a few Northeastern immitators. |
tjohn
Citizen
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 2026
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 2, 2004 - 6:26 pm: | |
That's too bad CJC. Bloomberg is the kind of elected official I would like to see more off. Has skills. Speaks clearly. Tackles issues head-on. Not too much doublespeak. |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 424
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 3, 2004 - 5:15 pm: | |
Here's a fun exercise. Let's guess which MOLers go for the Naked Machine and which prefer the Blob Machine. |
Montagnard
Citizen
Username: Montagnard
Post Number: 333
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 3, 2004 - 6:15 pm: | |
I'd take the Naked Machine for the simple reason that there is less software to go wrong. I travel frequently and I'm willing to accept the intrusion to marginally decrease my risk. |
mfpark
Citizen
Username: Mfpark
Post Number: 130
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, January 3, 2004 - 6:22 pm: | |
If I went through the Naked Machine, all they would see is a Blob anyway  Gotta go on a diet.... |
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 1626
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 5, 2004 - 5:03 pm: | |
That was a great essay, Dr. O'Boogie. Thanks for pointing us to it. It was very succinct. I thought it was going to make its conclusion on the nature of fear, but really, it made a commentary on our current leadership.
Once again, we see that fear sells. The other, more important stuff, requires more considered thought, which so many people seem reluctant to spend.
Tom Reingold
There is nothing
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page