Sign in to follow this  
Guest groundpounder75

Salon story details Govt warning to Airlines...

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

How are terrorists victorious? Through fear, and those who help them by perpetuating it. It's time to give their agenda a rest.... They want people to post links like this. They want to wreck our economy, and people staying off air carriers out of fear would do just that. I know it's not your intention, but have you ever asked yourself which side you're really helping? Do you really know what terrorism means? It feeds on building fear of all the ways we can meet our maker. Actually, not that they are listening, but my post is just as much for CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS etc..... I'm sick and tired of hearing them pander to the terrorists' agenda for a few soundbytes. Same goes for some less than bright government officials who post the "warning of the week".The terrorists are winning this war. Our biggest weapon has gone unused--that of ignoring them, and treating them as the criminal animals they are rather than as humans with a cause. God forbid we ever give gangbangers the same press. I'm more likely to be killed by one of them than any fool with a missile.I think it's time you practice restraint in your posts Braun, so we can truly have "Victory in all we do". Lending a terrorist cause or control over aviation is their victory, not ours.Just my two cents, as usual.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi John,You said:"The terrorists are winning this war. Our biggest weapon has gone unused--that of ignoring them, and treating them as the criminal animals they are rather than as humans with a cause."I'm afraid that ignoring terrorists does not work. The United States of America has been subject to these attacks since at least 1979.So how long should we ignore them. Exactly how many innocent civilian lives have to end until they are no longer ignored?Would like like a list of terrorist acts that, IMHO, have already been ignored in the past? Ignoring them is what will continue the attacks, IMHO.Regards,Joe :-waveHere are Picture Galleries of My Trip out west in 2002.Gallery #1 Pima Air & Space Museum + AMARC (Boneyard) at Davis Monthan AFB, Tucson, Arizona. (over 240 Pictures)http://www.pbase.com/sonar5/pimaamarc

Share this post


Link to post

Joe...Are you suggesting I said we shouldn't go after them? That's not what I am saying at all. I am saying that we shouldn't give 'em the press they crave or the fear they crave. I think I made that point very clear in this post and others I've made on the forum. You are way out of line to suggest that I feel we shouldn't go after these cowards and punish them for being the criminals they are. Unless you mean we shouldn't "ignore" them by instead catering to their needs, but I am not going to put that meaning into your post, as I don't think that's your point.My point, is we should quietly and without publicity go about our business, while rooting out and exterminating these creatures that believe genocide is the only way to handle their bogus cause. Bin Laden being a "man of the Muslim world" is just that--bogus. He's a wealthy man who craves the headlines like that found in Braun's link. Take that away, and you take away the water these terrorists feed by. And any expert will tell you the same thing. So to sum up: ignore them in the PRESS, but hunt 'em down.-John

Share this post


Link to post

The article is not something that I want to read. I am trying to go to flight school now and reading that crap scares me. The way I feel about it is all we need is one more attach on our airlines and that will be it as far as air travel goes and public confidence. Traveling by plane will be the last resort for a lot of people if we sustain another mass attach on our already screwed up airlines.

Share this post


Link to post

John...not entirely directed at you. I am completely amazed at the hostility and open anger directed at me for simply posting links to articles such as these here in this forum. No one NEEDS to read them, those that wish to may, those that don't...pass.The way I see it, we have lived with these threats all along. Simply calling them out, for all to see, does not give them power, nor make them reality. In fact, the opposite is quite true. Far too long, we have ignored the constant stream of data, which shows our world is not all that warm and fuzzy any more. We have a growing threat against our way of life, and that there is a contingency of folks who wish us nothing more than the utmost of harm.If you don't think that Stinger missiles and commercial aircraft are a reality in today

Share this post


Link to post

hey John,cant' handle the heat, or what?I am not out of line. They were your words. You said, specifically in this post:"Our biggest weapon has gone unused--that of ignoring them,"Your words, John, not mine.Here is my nickel.The next time a Terrorist takes out a major target, there will be hell to pay if there is no warning posted.Just like Iraq. If Iraq is shown to blow up Paris with a nuke, the same people will be complaining that we didn't do enough in order to serve their own warped political agenda.Just like these forums, you have choice, john.You said:"......CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS etc..... I'm sick and tired of hearing them pander to the terrorists' agenda for a few soundbytes."John, that is pretty sad, IMHO. If you are so sick and tired, (in your own words), then why do you continue to listen to them. I have not watched CBS, or ABC nightly news in a long, long time. I rarely watch MSNBC. CNBC Is the only channel I get at work, and I get my "Press" from mainly the following sources:1) Dow Jones2) AP Feed wire....Not the slimmed versions.3) Direct Reuters wire feed4) Fox news and Drudge for comedy, and entertainment.You see, John, I make sound, reasonable choices IMHO, and I know when to turn the crap off the TV, and not subject myself or my kids to the dribble that is shown on the tube. So make a choice john, if you are sick and tired, do you have the mental fortutude to just turn it off.Or just don't read the threads. No one is forcing you too, but if you decide to post, then others, like me will as well.The press has every right to report on whatever issues they want to as long as they don't endanger lives willingly. It is your responsibility, john, to not watch it, or to turn it off, and tell others not to watch, IMHO. You know what, john, that is what I do when I talk with friends or clients or whoever.So do you believe in Freedom of the Press, and freedom of speech?And there is my nickel because I never jave just two cents.So as for me being out of line. I disagree, and you are entitled to your opinion as am I. :-)Have a day,Sonar5Here are Picture Galleries of My Trip out west in 2002.Gallery #1 Pima Air & Space Museum + AMARC (Boneyard) at Davis Monthan AFB, Tucson, Arizona. (over 240 Pictures)http://www.pbase.com/sonar5/pimaamarc

Share this post


Link to post

Braun,Don't worry about it. I appreciate you listing the links, and while you don't make comments anymore regarding them, I do see where others attempt to interject your actual opinions out of posting a link.It is quite comical to see others make assumptions out of posting a link.You never said whether you agreed or disagreed with the article yet everyone can plainly see the LEAPS that are made out of you posting a link.You did comment after recieving a certain reply....It is quite sad.I appreciate you posting it, and thank you.Best Regards,Joe :-)Here are Picture Galleries of My Trip out west in 2002.Gallery #1 Pima Air & Space Museum + AMARC (Boneyard) at Davis Monthan AFB, Tucson, Arizona. (over 240 Pictures)http://www.pbase.com/sonar5/pimaamarc

Share this post


Link to post

Well for what it's worth Joe, I felt you did express your opinion taking issue with my thoughts, and not me. I appreciate that.After Desert Storm, I was one of perhaps thousands of American tourists in Europe. As I was preparing to board my flight home, the gate agent told me "we're informing all passengers that although no specific flight has been threatened, the airline is being threatened". I was offered passage home on another flight, if I wished.I flew as planned.Next time a terrorist makes a threat, I'm not going to change my routine. I'm not going to bury my head in the sand. But they make their threats knowing that the media will faithfully report it, and knowing that some will be scared from going about their lives. The more of us who play along, the more the terrorists have to celebrate.I have no problem with freedom of the press. I'm asking that the press choose self-restraint. If they don't, I'd fight like heck if the government tried to censor them. But as for freedom of the press, so goes freedom for both of us to express our opinions. Let's agree that that is more important, and more worth fighting for....

Share this post


Link to post

"in case you have not noticed yet, the world IS on fire, and there are plenty of conspiracies out there"I guess it comes down to, is the cup half full, or half empty. I prefer the half full view, because a world where we focus on the fire is truly an empty one. All my life, people have been scared of this or that. In the 60's, it was communists everywhere. The 70's, it was dope, or the SLA (and communists everywhere). In the 80's, it was dope....and communists everywhere, and an odd Arab here and there. I'd say the 90's were the Arab's decade, and now the 00's.But go back fifty years. 100. 500. When hasn't the world been on fire? Yet going back through the same time, what brings hope and a reason not to fear are the stories of heroism. The London blitz, and the way the British made their way through that. The Jews, as they somehow survived ###### oppression with dignity. The Indians, who bravely fought for their land and their beliefs and somehow still hold onto their traditions today--my wife's ancestry originates from a tribe that populated central Mexico.I read these threads because this forum belongs to all of us. As long as there are those who want to refute (and have the right to refute) something I say, I'm going to offer my opinion. So like it or not, you're stuck with that :)

Share this post


Link to post

As long as there are those who want to refute (and have the right to refute) something I say, I'm going to offer my opinion. So like it or not, you're stuck with that :)Amen! Your opinion is as valuable as anyone else's. Please never stop offering yours up. You see...when we stop discussing, stop debating...we really have lost!Cheers to you John!bt

Share this post


Link to post

Now to answer this statement...You're right. You're right. Your premise is sound. Truth is though, dope can't kill thousands with one stroke. Can't be used as a weapon. No matter who your boogie man is, in the old days, even if we wanted to kill thousands (basic human nature) it was too hard. Not any more:StingersSmallpoxDirty bombsAirliners into buildingsWhy don't you kill your best friend, when he really ####### you off? Because you have compulsion, morals, upbringing, humanity, compassion, and a million other euphemisms.Today

Share this post


Link to post

You raise a good point--the scale of destructive risks today is far greater. Or is it? I don't know the answer, but I do know whether I'm killed in a terrorist attack or by a gangbanger, I'm just as dead. My world (at least this one) would be over. I can argue that drug use has killed more than all of our nuclear weapons ever have, especially if you include alcohol and tobacco. Daily, thousands are killed in alcohol/drug related accidents on this planet.Airplanes flying into buildings? How about aircraft carriers, as witnessed by our seamen in WW-II. Yet somehow the world survived, and the terrorists of the day ended up part of our world again. Go back further, to the mustard gas of WW-I. To the mass slaughter of Indians to whom the gun must have seemed as much of a weapon of mass destruction as our nuclear weapons do today.Yet look at the other side of the coin. If we somehow survive all the cr*p coming our way that can hurt us or kill us, we have a chance at a far better life than even our fathers did. I live in my own home, own two cars, can type on this keyboard at eleven o'clock at night. I live better than 99 pct. of the world, through no fault of their own. I don't feel I have the right to be worried about a chance encounter with a terrorist, when someone born in the depths of Africa is lucky to make it out of their teens. All of us in these forums are living, even if not by intention, against the time of others who should be getting more press attention than the terrorists do.When I was but a young boy, we all sat clustered around our TV sets, fearful that one misstep in Cuba would bring our end. I hardly knew what was going on, but I was old enough to see the fear in my parents eyes as my father--a nuclear physicist, drilled us on how to decontaminate ourselves. I argue that the world was more dangerous then, at that moment 40 years ago. Today most experts agree that our enemy can bring mass terror, and perhaps destroy the population of a city. But we are likely not to face the "mutual assured destruction" that was doctrine as many of us grew up. None of us has to grow up living in Hanoi at the end of '72, which must have seemed like the end of the world to the children living there who were my daughter's age.I can't say I want to see us shake hands and make peace with our enemies. At least a portion of the Muslim world has said, out of some need for revenge, that our destruction--genocide--is their goal. It is my feeling that in self defense, we kill them first before they kill us. And we make it clear that the friend of our enemy is also our enemy, which despite our talk, hasn't been made clear. But I don't want to see our press drawn in towards showing the terrorists what an impact they have on our lives. If I were to heed things which cause fear, I would not get in the car to go to work. Every day, without fail, someone is injured or killed on the Loop 101, the 60 mile stretch of freeway in Phoenix I use. That puts my odds of getting hurt about 1-100,000, give or take. Unless I count the time two years ago when a weapon of mass destruction...a SUV....decided that my stopping was an inconvenience, compressing the rear half of my compact into the size of a woman's compact. I walked away. My car was lifted off the ground, and spun several times before landing in a bush, which saved my hmmhmm. Now my car is two cars...the "old" front end and the "new" rear end they grafted onto it to make it a car again :) I plan on buying an SUV.At the end of '99, I stood atop the WTC, one tourist among many. That was less than two years before 9/11, and by then the plot to destroy the WTC was well under way. The day I went up, visibility was over 60 miles, very much like 9/11. If I just count the days that could have been used to attack the WTC, my odds were what-- 1-1000? I knew going up there what had happened in '93, and I knew going up there what a target it was. But I'd rather die in my 40's having lived, than live to 90 living scared. I think that's the decision my British cousins made during the Blitz, and the decision my wife's Indian cousins made when they confronted the strangers in their world.BTW..I'm too lazy to spell check tonight, and proofread, so read at your own risk :)

Share this post


Link to post

>Our biggest weapon has >gone unused--that of ignoring them, and treating them as the >criminal animals they are rather than as humans with a >cause.In a recent thread weren't you arguing, strenuously and emotionally, that the method of transporting arrested members of Al Qaeda to the detention center in Cuba was inhumane? You seem to have veered away from your benign approach with that statement above.And in message 9 I see you've referred to the WWII Blitz of London. Churchill, of course, wasn't exactly in the habit of "ignoring" the enemy in his day, even though those in power during the 1930s certainly wanted to ignore his constant warnings about the growing threat. And when he became Prime Minister he wasn't in a mood to ignore the reality facing the nation: he told the British people he had nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. Of course, the specific threat from the bombers wasn't ignored either: children were evacuated to the countryside, lights were turned off all over the city to prevent its easy identification from the air, and people took shelter in the stations of the London Underground. And Britain survived.So perhaps it's good not to ignore the enemy: Perhaps it's best to face the realities by identifying the foe and his likely tactics, and by preparing the population with threat assessments and defensive measures, and then fighting the conflict, while taking all reasonable precautions when dealing with suicidal fanatics.

Share this post


Link to post

"You seem to have veered away from your benign approach with that statement above."What?Paul...You gave me the best laugh of the day... Methinks you have a severe case of selective amnesia. I was very clear in that thread that the terrorists who are guilty don't deserve any human courtesy--they didn't allow the 9/11 victims any, or the Cole victims, or the emmbassy victims in Africa. And I noted in that thread, and again now, that no one has the courage to draw a distinction between the guilty and the innocent--but I do accept the fact that some feel that such means of transportation was needed regardless of the guilt of the prisoners, even if I don't.I didn't like what I saw, because it is a known fact that our government mistakenly hauled off some innocent victims of the Taliban to Cuba. We don't even treat our own domestic prisoners by throwing hoods over their heads, unless we plan on executing them. I can't make it any clearer than that, but it seems that you and Sonar would rather take words from my posts, rather than meaning. Who is censoring whom?As for ignoring threats, I've also made myself very clear, that I would like the PRESS to back off. Same goes for government officials on the low rungs of the ladder with their fr*ggin "leaks". If a credible threat comes in where a city has to be evacuated, let it be published with the help our government's leadership. But articles such as the one Braun cited serve only one purpose--to cite potential and uncertain threats, to sow worry and concern, and to disrupt our economy.If you and Sonar and Braun are interested in publishing all the ways terrorists can nail us, let me help you:The can easily attack our dams and our bridges. We have no screening system in place to detect trucks full of explosives, any of which can bring down a bridge or a building. Take a boat, and you can bring down a dam.Any inflatable boat is big enough to bring a small nuclear device into one of our harbors. An enemy ship can easily come within an hour's striking distance, and outside our twelve mile limit, from which an inflatable can be launched. We can't even detect boatloads of "boat" people.Our subways are helpless against a gas attack like that in Japan.Your citing of the measures the British took was comparing apples and oranges. The British dealt with an enemy that could be detected by radar, and one which oddly enough played by some rules of war, although not always. We're facing an enemy that can't be detected by any means, and that plays by no rules. So what are the alternatives--let the press post vaugue warnings, and give the terrorists success in sowing fear? Or let our government do its job, and post legitimate and specific warnings when needed. So far, vague warnings like "the threat is high" or "they'll use missiles against our airplanes" are more for political and ratings points. The whole campaign on terrorism is highly political. And it's a ratings game in the press. But no good will come from crying wolf--because when we do get a legitimate warning, our public may allow the terrorists to go unnoticed.Personally, I think this reply will be a waste of time. When people focus on words more than meaning, then they are simply grandstanding. I'm not going to rehash everything I said in a locked thread, but next time, please get your ducks in a row before you quote me out of context. It's an embarassment to the phrase "intelligent conversation".

Share this post


Link to post

>You gave me the best laugh of the day... Methinks you have >a severe case of selective amnesia.Well I'm glad you think this dialog is so very funny. Heck, if I'm trying to challenge your "all over the place" emotional and faulty logic, and you just end up laughing at me, what's the point? In fact quite frankly I don't think you're up to a decent discussion on a subject like this--you rely too much on demeaning sarcasm, hackneyed reactions such as "that was the best laugh of the day," and gems such as "your efforts to converse with me are an embarrassment (it has two "r"s by the way) to 'intelligent conversation'."Still I'll make a few points before I stop reading and responding to anything I see here that has your name on it.No, I don't have selective amnesia--I'm simply trying to get to the heart of your faulty arguments without lots of sub-points and conditional statements and disclaimers.>no one has the >courage to draw a distinction between the guilty and the >innocent>it is a known fact that >our government mistakenly hauled off some innocent victims >of the Taliban to Cuba. We don't even treat our own >domestic prisoners by throwing hoods over their heads, It's war. It's war with terrorists. And you accept that war can be a confusing affair don't you? You accept that all the enemy combatants and those suspected of being enemy combatants might not have an up-to-date and validated Al Qaeda membership card with them at the time of their capture, and therefore the transportation of some otherwise innocent folk to a detention camp could in fact happen? And you accept that this can be discovered later and that some people can then be released?And do you accept the notion that our military is filled with and run by professionals who do what they do as humanely as possible? Do you believe the military is in fact reluctant to get into many conflicts? In short, based on all your accumulated knowledge of US military operations and tactics, especially when compared to those of various enemies, shouldn't we be giving the military the benefit of the doubt in matters of such overwhelming importance as the means of transit to a detention camp?Can you understand that people who expend such intensity and emotion on whether members, or suspected members, of a trained and determined terrorist group should be transported with hoods on can be construed as having a misplaced set of priorities? That's what I believe you demonstrated on that issue, along with a less than constructive method of making your point.As for hoods, I've flown on airliners across the Atlantic where passengers wear blackout masks over their eyes, presumably to keep the lights out and to help them get some sleep. In fact I believe that in the little kits that Virgin Atlantic Airlines hands out to its passengers these types of masks are made available for the passengers' comfort, along with socks and toothpaste and that kind of thing. So why you would get so darned upset about people who can't see where they're going is beyond me. I only bring it up because you're willing to say dire things about terrorists on the one hand, while arguing strenuously about your concerns involving their transportation on the other, which strikes me as very odd. And since you're so outspoken and intransigent on these issues, I thought I'd take the time (far too much time as a matter of fact) to challenge your logic.>As for ignoring threats, I've also made myself very clear, >that I would like the PRESS to back off.>But articles such as the >one Braun cited serve only one purpose--to cite potential >and uncertain threats, to sow worry and concern, and to >disrupt our economy. Do you remember the massive publicity and fear and the disruption of the economy in the Washington DC / Virginia area at the time those snipers were on the loose? Had the threat been played down businesses wouldn't have lost so much money, and after all, there really was a very small chance that if you'd been loading goods in your car after a trip to a shopping mall in that area that you'd end up being shot dead.Still it happened, and repeatedly, and there was a crescendo of media coverage and pervasive fear...and it all eventually led to the capture of the perpetrators. Because the public was listening, and everyone was working together, eventually these needles in the haystack were found. A truck driver listening to a media report made a note of the license plate of the suspects' vehicle, and within hours it was located.A similar thing happened here in Southern California after the very, very tragic kidnapping and murder of little Samantha Runnion. There was massive media coverage, and daily briefings by the Orange County Sheriff, along with the FBI and the Highway Patrol, etc. And they didn't have much to go on at first, but they instructed the public on what to look for, and what the clues would be, and sure enough they received some information that led to the apprehension of the killer within a few days. Without massive media coverage and public involvement and vigilance though, it wouldn't have happened.Sometimes the media can do very good work. Whenever there's some disaster in Southern California--and there have been a number--I've seen that and appreciated it. On the other hand there's the Russian approach: Some time ago I read about a murderer on the loose in some Russian town or city. He was victimizing women, but there were no media reports because the powers-that-be decided not to upset the public and tarnish the image of the place. And the killings went on, and people were not aware of the basic need to be prepared and vigilant....We just can't ignore the terrorists or their tactics you see.>Your citing of the measures the British took was comparing >apples and oranges. The British dealt with an enemy that >could be detected by radar, and one which oddly enough >played by some rules of war, although not always. >We're facing an enemy that can't be detected by any means, and >that plays by no rules.Now how do you conclude that the current enemy has perfected an impenetrable form of personal stealth? Recent reports have indicated the US has captured more than one top terrorist operative, eliminated a carload by missile in Yemen, and arrested members of terrorist cells in more than one American city. The government also broke up a massive plot to blow up New York City's Lincoln Tunnel as well as other bridges and tunnels by terrorist fanatics in the early 90s. It may even be that the government and police agencies received tips about suspicious activities that led them to some of these arrests, and the tips might well have been the result of...publicity about suspected threats.>The whole campaign on terrorism is highly political.I think it's highly practical and that the government is doing its best to keep the population safe, and they've succeeded since 9/11/01.And one last observation for you: It's perfectly plausible to hold diametrically opposite points of view and still have a decent discussion in which you don't make an effort to be demeaning and sarcastic. But if you do, and one suspects you'll continue that approach, I expect others will respond to you in kind. Remember though, someone who disagrees with you doesn't actually have to be an amnesiac to reach his conclusions about your point of view. It could also be that you're missing something somewhere in the scheme of things.Now I'm out of time, and certainly out of interest. Your oft-stated views here needed some counterpoint though, and I hope you'll broaden your thinking a bit.

Share this post


Link to post

"and still have a decent discussion in which you don't make an effort to be demeaning and sarcastic"The tone of your posts launched the "demeaning and sarcastic" theme. but you can't see that, as you seemed blinded by something. You certaintly are stating everything as fact, vs. points to be "discussed". And you follow the same pattern all of your posts do--turning attacks on thoughts to attacks on the person. You are right--"discussion" is over. And I said it with a lot less prose than you, didn't I?

Share this post


Link to post

>And you follow the >same pattern all of your posts do--turning attacks on >thoughts to attacks on the person.That's pure rubbish JohnCi. The only thing I'm ever interested in discussing is the issue at hand; when I run into individuals who suggest people they disagree with are amnesiacs and incapable of intelligent conversation I sometimes try to bring those annoying tactics to their attention and suggest they stick to the subject at hand. It's all about being constructive on the forums, and I've said that many, many times. That nonsense above proves to me you've learned nothing, and that your judgment can't be trusted.>You are right--"discussion" is over. And I said it with a lot less >prose than you, didn't I? No. You're an individual who spends a lot of your time transferring your highly opinionated and narrow thoughts to a public forum, and sometimes you're bound to be challenged. If the already high number of your posts tends to rise more slowly in the future, perhaps your observations about less prose will have more validity. Believe me, I wouldn't take the time to write all this if you hadn't managed to build up quite a reserve of indignation by the sheer volume and frequency of your narrow writings here.

Share this post


Link to post

"If the already high number of your posts tends to rise more slowly in the future"You insist on being insulting and unfair, don't you. Now you're attacking the number of my posts? Why don't you take time to do a study on them.... I help a large number of people in these forums, and answer questions concerning my software. My "hangar chat" posts make up a small percentage of my participation here. Who started the insults? You mention a locked thread, and derive meaning out of context against what I said. Basically you argue that I can't view things my way. Fine, let's move on. But if you continue to offer attacks on my person (come on, my spelling? PHD's don't know how to spell, and mine is pretty d*mn good). I feel I said something--my remark about "intelligent discussion" that you viewed as a personal attack. Far from it. I do want to hear sound views. But at the same time, I have a right to say what I say without the character attacks you seem to feel necessary. You saw my responses to Braun and Joe, and still you came in with no objective other than to defame me. Fine. So one last time, I'm offering you a chance to drop the insults and insinuations (such as your "benign" comment") and engage in real discussion, even if you want to do it offline. Too often I have agreed with your posts, and considered your opinion the final word to lose that respect for you over this.

Share this post


Link to post

>I help a large number of >people in these forums, and answer questions concerning my >software. My "hangar chat" posts make up a small percentage >of my participation here. Well, I agree, and that's a very fair point. Surely I've learned many things from the gurus, and yes, I think you are one of them.Yes, I was referring to the number and the tenor of your posts in this section; while a small percentage, they do outnumber mine.John, I have to go. I'm simply concerned that many conversations can't occur here and on many other forums without gratuitous nastiness, and it doesn't have to be so. But apparently you feel the same about me, so let's try to do better, okay? Of course everyone's welcome to their opinion, but all the negative stuff tends to deter any decent discussion, or make it that much more difficult when one does get involved. I mean I've spent too much time on this, and should probably not have responded when I saw your original post above.Okay, let's focus on Thanksgiving now. I'm off to San Francisco tomorrow. Enjoy your holiday too.

Share this post


Link to post

"Do you remember the massive publicity and fear and the disruption of the economy in the Washington DC / Virginia area at the time those snipers were on the loose?"I do, since I worked in Montgomery County for a number of years even after moving to Phoenix (it was a heck of a commute). I have dozens of friends there, many who lived mere blocks from some of the shootings. The media did a great service, yet at the same time, I have to feel the snipers were also playing the media and killed some just to seen "their names in lights" so to speak.BTW, we've implemented our version of "Amber Alert" here in Arizona, and it was just triggered the first time over the weekend. It saved a girl's life. I'd be a fool to say the media is all bad. There's a difference between asking for restraint, and asking for no media at all."I've flown on airliners across the Atlantic where passengers wear blackout masks over their eyes"I've been offered those as well on my transpacific and transatlantic hops. But they are far different from hoods. Imagine having a pillowcase over one's head for 15-20 hours. You're breathing your own CO^2, and the feeling of suffocation can be overwhelming. Had the prisoners been blindfolded, I wouldn't have blinked an eye. "I think it's highly practical and that the government is doing its best to keep the population safe, and they've succeeded since 9/11/01."I don't disagree with that, but there are always lower tier government officials trying to play oneupmanship against our President and our military. They are usually the ones leaking "threats", only for political points."Now how do you conclude that the current enemy has perfected an impenetrable form of personal stealth?"That's not my conclusion--that's the governments. There is grave concern over our ports. We have to gain the mindset that terrorists will hit us off balance. They will hit where we are weak. As I said above, boat people are slipping in every day. Our borders are not yet secure. So in a sense I am being like Braun--I'm raising an alarm. I am not a boater, but I hope our offshore boaters are vigilant.

Share this post


Link to post

You no good bum! You get to go to Frisco! :) That is one plan I agree with....Enjoy Thanksgiving. BTW, I did respond to some of the points you made, while you were writing this. Please give me an honest opinion of what you think, and I'll accept your thoughts without rebuttal...Regards,John

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this