| Author | Message | ||
     DrFalomar Citizen Username: Drfalomar Post Number: 111 Registered: 7-2003 |
So the war of terror has come to this: Mayor Bloomberg thinks that a million people are "courageous" to go to Times Square tonight when we are at orange alert status, military helicopters will be patrolling over the city and security will be at an all time high. Either people are in tremendous danger and so no one should go to Times Square or they are not in danger and the overwhelming security is unnecessary. But the authorities do not like these obvious equations (except for one smart Connecticut congressman) because the first would deny the city a night of great revenue and TV presence while the second would deny the White House a chance to show itself as actually doing something even if there's nothing to be done. So what we get is this: Times Square full of a million guinea pigs in case a terrorist does attack or a big security spectacular if one doesn't. Our homeland security efforts disgust me. They are pure pagentry. | ||
| ML1 Citizen Username: Ml1 Post Number: 1445 Registered: 5-2002  |
Dr. Falomar, you're supposed to end those kind of posts with -- "Go ahead, flame away!"  | ||
| Yogi Citizen Username: Yogi Post Number: 33 Registered: 12-2003 |
"Your lives are in danger" "But go about your normal activities." They're playing it so they can't lose. If there's no terror event, they were being prudent. If there is, they "warned" us. (This applies to leaders from both parties.) | ||
| DrFalomar Citizen Username: Drfalomar Post Number: 112 Registered: 7-2003 |
Bring on the flames then. I will enjoy extinguishing them. | ||
| mfpark Citizen Username: Mfpark Post Number: 112 Registered: 9-2001 |
Sorry, no flames here. The latest "theory" among the security gurus I work with is to "harden" potential targets. This means throw as much obvious security around a target as possible. The thought is that the only thing terrorists fear is having their attacks thwarted, so if they see a lot of helicopters, dogs, guns, etc. their chance of success is so low that they turn to "softer" targets. It is the type of argument that you cannot prove if you are right--you only find out when you are wrong. I am not saying I 100% agree with this, but it does provide an explanation about the mindset of the Feds and NYPD. I think the probability of a terrorist attack is not a whole lot different than it was before 9/11--the potential has always been there, especially in the last 20 years (look at Tom Clancy's novels about terrorist attacks at the Super Bowl--hardly a new idea). Dr. Falomar, the question is how should the authorities react? There are no direct threats that I have heard about (I am not in the direct loop, but I do have regular communications with the NYPD on threat status). However, governments tend to follow a minimax strategy of minimizing the maximum regret or loss. If you were the President or Mayor, would you have Hercules out in force or not? | ||
| Cato Nova Citizen Username: Cato_nova Post Number: 17 Registered: 12-2003 |
There is an interesting body of literature about how totalitarian nations constantly identify high levels of alert so that the citizenry can be focussed on an external enemy, rather than on the failures of their own government. It is a common propaganda move. Either we are safe, or we are not. The government would like to have it both ways, and that way, as Yogi notes, they cannot lose. On the other hand, as MFPARK notes, what can we do? What irks me no end is that the cost of these extra security efforts, like much of post 9/11 adjustments, will be borne by New Yorkers, rather than solely the feds, where it should be borne. It disgusts me to read that in order to reopen the Statue of Liberty, New Yorkers have to pony up their own funds for security. Where is Bush on that? And where are Schumer and Hillary? You can bet if we were Florida, or some other important Republican state or area, all of the costs of this would be picked up by the Feds. NY and NJ bear the costs of the US pissing off the world by the high handed arrogance of the unelected Bush regime. And NY's purported GOP governor and mayor just turn over and let us get reamed. | ||
| notehead Citizen Username: Notehead Post Number: 817 Registered: 5-2001  |
Cato, not only will NY'ers have to pay for the additional security, they are still waiting for the money Bush promised them shortly after 9/11. I wonder if terrorists, as they plan attacks on the US, give any consideration to which political party is dominant in the area. | ||
| 1-2many Citizen Username: Wbg69 Post Number: 821 Registered: 6-2002 |
Cato, I find your first paragraph interesting in terms of long term perspective after this New Year's Eve passes, with or without incident. we surely have a propaganda and diversion machine in place. I wonder if this color-coded alert system is the civilian counterpart (necessary due to evolution of terroristic acts) of the Defense Conditions 1-5, long used by US military. ratcheting up the condition to higher alert is both a way to alert the "attackers" that we're on to them, while also kind of daring them to do the same thing... and if they do, of course, we'll flip out and probably nuke them. because when *they* do it, it's a threat, though when *we* do it, it's defense. so goes the US rhetoric. | ||
| sportsnut Citizen Username: Sportsnut Post Number: 825 Registered: 10-2001 |
"we surely have a propaganda and diversion machine in place" You're only concerned with it now? Its been in existence for many years, but because of the current administration you choose to pay attention now? I have never, in my 38 years of existence, come across a group of people who are so consumed with hatred of a single person/administration. Even at his worst I never hated Clinton as much as people hate GWB. Don't get me wrong I do not worship the ground he walks on but he really isn't as bad as you all make him out to be. Is he partisan? Show me a politician who isn't. Is he beholdend to special interest groups? Again show me one who isn't. "and if they do, of course, we'll flip out and probably nuke them. because when *they* do it, it's a threat, though when *we* do it, it's defense. so goes the US rhetoric." Do you really believe that the US is acting like terrorists? Are you really that blinded by your hatred? There is a significant difference between what happened on 9/11 and attacking Iraq, no? | ||
| Tom Reingold the prissy-pants Citizen Username: Noglider Post Number: 1595 Registered: 1-2003  |
 Tom Reingold There is nothing | ||
| Tom Reingold the prissy-pants Citizen Username: Noglider Post Number: 1596 Registered: 1-2003 |
DrFalomar, I think you're attributing the fear to the mayor mistakenly. If I correctly recall what I heard on the radio today, Mr. Bloomberg is saying it's safe and a certain congressman says we should be afraid. And Bloomberg hopes to get an apology from the congressman after he is proven wrong. I was one of the first to get a high tech blinking light to hang on my bicycle. A friend asked if it really works at preventing someone from hitting me with a car. I said I didn't know yet. How do we know that the current efforts of the government are ineffective? I think we can only know if they fail to prevent an attack. That can only happen if an attack succeeds. Tom Reingold There is nothing | ||
| 1-2many Citizen Username: Wbg69 Post Number: 824 Registered: 6-2002 |
sportsnut, you're absolutely right that the propaganda machine has been in place for a long time. I think we have to fight it wherever it gets traction. the way I see it, Republicans are more aligned with it than Democrats. I don't hate Republicans, but I despise what looks to me like unbridled allegiance to the almighty corporate profit. and I see this administration as being more closely aligned with corporate profit, than Clinton's. I happen to think human lives are more important - first, saving them, and then, improving them. the perfect solution, I think, is embodied in neither party. But Democratic solutions are closer, to my mind. Clinton is not perfect by any stretch. but he is closer to what's better for the people at large, than a pres who rolls back environmental protections, gives giant tax cuts to the ultra-wealthy, lies to us to justify our first EVER pre-emptive war, gives secret deals to his cronies, where they will take enormous profits footed by taxpayers, attempting totalitarian rule by marginalizing dissenters, depriving people of their civil liberties - thereby threatening democracy but falsely stated to be done in the NAME of democracy, etc. I don't blame Bush solely for this; his administration is also to blame, and so is Congress. we can't overlook their critical role in allowing all this to happen. as for our actions in Iraq constituting terrorism? they're certainly not like a 9/11. but many civilians HAVE died, as well as many of our soldiers. for what? Hussein's captured now. why is there still fighting - unless what the Iraqi people really want is, in part, to be free from the US, too. I heard someone comment recently, "know why we have no exit strategy for Iraq? because we don't plan on leaving." this is an interesting theory, one that merits consideration. if true - we aren't there to save anyone. we're there to set up an outpost for further US colonialism. and if Iraq isn't a 9/11, well, the US' actions IMMEDIATELY after 9/11 as to Afghanistan kind of were. to cut off food to people who are, literally, near starvation, is certainly despicable, if not terrorist. the US used, or ignored, the plight of the Afghan people to try to get to al Qaeda - harming a LOT more people than al Qaeda did in the process!! so which is the bigger bully? | ||
| Tom Reingold the prissy-pants Citizen Username: Noglider Post Number: 1598 Registered: 1-2003 |
It's not just that people have become more hateful of their president than ever. By doing the things 1-2many cites, and many others, the president has earned our anger. Tom Reingold There is nothing | ||
| Kenney Citizen Username: Kenney Post Number: 257 Registered: 11-2003 |
You people are hilarious. The only limit to our realization of tomorrow will be our doubts of today..FDR.. Liberty, when it begins to take root, is a plant of rapid growth...G.W. Everyone wants a voice in human freedom. There's a fire burning inside of all us...L.W. Dave Ross is the coolest!!(being banned sucks) | ||
| Cato Nova Citizen Username: Cato_nova Post Number: 18 Registered: 12-2003 |
Of course the GOP is more aligned with the propaganda machine. The GOP actually is a party; the Democratic "party" is just a poorly held together of relatively powerless interest groups. Can you identify a single prominent Democrat who actually stands for something? For all I despise Bush, for mindless grandiose flagwaving, for using 9/11 as an excuse to enact a national security state, for screwing the northeast, and NYC in particular, I also have to admire how well the GOP is in control. And how well they have corralled the press, which has wasted the First Amendment by focussing on Michael Jackson and similar nonsense. Then again, what can you expect? We live in a nation where those with money can buy power, and buy also the acquiscence of the pathetic public. More bread! More circuses! | ||
| Tom Reingold the prissy-pants Citizen Username: Noglider Post Number: 1605 Registered: 1-2003 |
Yes, Cato. I respect the power that the Republican party has amassed, but I wouldn't use the word admire. I respect their power and control in the same way I respect a bandit's gun pointed at me. I do not have any predictions for the 2004 election. The Republican knows how to play the game, making it difficult to beat Bush. This observation has nothing to do with how Republicans govern. Tom Reingold There is nothing | ||
| Duncan Real Name Username: Duncanrogers Post Number: 1377 Registered: 12-2001  |
I would rathar talk about the myth of fingerprints "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" Wayne Gretzky | ||
| 1-2many Citizen Username: Wbg69 Post Number: 828 Registered: 6-2002 |
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. | ||
| Reflective Citizen Username: Reflective Post Number: 216 Registered: 3-2003 |
Right now, a British Airways plane is being detained at Dulles, being searched and passengers interviewed. No specifics, but a lotta of concern. | ||
| sbenois Citizen Username: Sbenois Post Number: 10556 Registered: 10-2001  |
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. Please send me the name of the manufacturer of your crystal ball. Obviously you are one of the few people on the planet who can predict when a threat is real or not. God Bless You. You have a real gift. ---> 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 |
