Why We Are Safer

Kathianne, Ben Franklin did say it. Go find it and prove me wrong, and if he didn't then I will. Tryanny cannot exist without a freepress. Why? Because if you know that tryanny is coming, you can take it on, and bring it down. Just like "we" did to the King of England in the Revolutionary war. What if the Soviet Union had a freepress during the Cold war? There was a reason they didn't have a freepress........tyranny
 
Just ask SinisterMotives.

He always finds me hot bods for avatars.

:D
 
smilies-24941.png
 
Try the health clubs, various forms to please the masses. Of course, when you find one, no guarantee it will stay that way. Whatever your preference.
 
...Now, let's talk reality.

In 2003, both houses of Congress killed a bill that would have significantly stiffened the security at the petro/chem plants arounfd the country, especially those in of near major metropolitan areas. As it stands now, any deranged sot with a couple of sticks of dynamite could walk into a chemical plant and cause acatastrophe that would make the World Trade Center look like a Sunday school picnic.

All it took was the greasing of the appropriate skids by chemical industry lobbyists for Congress to swallow the industry's "It would be prohibitively expensive..." poormouthing. It's good to see that our Congressional representatives are looking out for our best interests.
 
Very true Bully, and both houses of Congress are run by the Republican-fascist-special interest party. If Bush is so concerned with safety why doesn't he fully fund the Homeland Security Department? If he's so concerned, why doesn't he press for funding for more air marshalls? National security isn't Bush's concern, he wanted to attack Iraq and depose Saddam to avenge his daddy.
 
Originally posted by acludem
Very true Bully, and both houses of Congress are run by the Republican-fascist-special interest party. If Bush is so concerned with safety why doesn't he fully fund the Homeland Security Department? If he's so concerned, why doesn't he press for funding for more air marshalls? National security isn't Bush's concern, he wanted to attack Iraq and depose Saddam to avenge his daddy.

Your post is truly laughable. But please allow me to refute.
1. The GOP has a thin majority in the Senate, and don't have the backbone to force the minority Dems to stage real filibusters.
2. I already talked about why fascist is not an accurate label for the GOP, even though libs insist on using it.
3. Special interests... the Democrats are a hodgepodge of special interests: the pro-abortionists, the extreme environmnetalists, the anti-gun crowd, the hardcore socialists, and the hardcore anti-business unions, to name a few. Not to mention that the majority of DNC funding comes from people like George Soros giving millions at a time, whereas the majority of RNC contributions are small individual donations.
4. Bush created the Homeland Security Dept. It's ridiculous to say that he doesn't care about the issue. I will agree, however, that we should have more air marshals.
5. "To avenge his daddy..." pretty funny. Maybe you should re-read the other threads in this forum and learn what the actual justification for the war was.
 
Originally posted by gop_jeff
Your post is truly laughable. But please allow me to refute.
2. I already talked about why fascist is not an accurate label for the GOP, even though libs insist on using it.


Jeff

Liberals have been using that label for conservatives forever. If I had to hazard a guess, I would bet that there are very few liberals that could give an accurate definition of the term. They seem to use it as a catch all label when they dont know what else to call us.
 
4. Bush created the Homeland Security Dept. It's ridiculous to say that he doesn't care about the issue. I will agree, however, that we should have more air marshals.

This is the only problem I have with what you posted. Bush might actually care about homeland security, but he doesn't show it. Sure, nobody is going to hijack a plane and crash it into a building, but he fails to look at other problems, such as chemical facilities which people can easily walk into. Also, what happens when Bush grants amnesty to the sleeper cells in America? It seems like being re-eclected is first and foremost on his mind.
 
Originally posted by jimnyc
Are you dead? No? Then I'm guessing you're pretty safe.

Depending on how you look at that, you could say that the wildebeest in a herd of 50,000 is safer than the one in a herd of 40,000 because theres more to choose from.
 
Originally posted by DKSuddeth
Depending on how you look at that, you could say that the wildebeest in a herd of 50,000 is safer than the one in a herd of 40,000 because theres more to choose from.

Well, technically speaking that is true!

My point is that 'I' am just as safe as I was 3 years ago. Maybe not safer as the subject asks, but certainly no worse off. I think the country is much more prepared for terrorist attacks and much better prepared to thwart them.
 
I think the country is much more prepared for terrorist attacks and much better prepared to thwart them.

In most cases I would have to agree. There still needs to be more done in the border and harbor areas, but thats just my opinion.
 
In most cases I would have to agree. There still needs to be more done in the border and harbor areas, but thats just my opinion.

Agreed !

A good start would be to put the National Guard on our boarders, no more token efforts to stop illegal immigration !!!
 
Originally posted by DKSuddeth
In most cases I would have to agree. There still needs to be more done in the border and harbor areas, but thats just my opinion.

Yes, I would agree that those 2 areas can use some beefing up. But, they are better protected now than pre 9/11.
 
Originally posted by Palestinian Jew
This is the only problem I have with what you posted. Bush might actually care about homeland security, but he doesn't show it. Sure, nobody is going to hijack a plane and crash it into a building, but he fails to look at other problems, such as chemical facilities which people can easily walk into. Also, what happens when Bush grants amnesty to the sleeper cells in America? It seems like being re-eclected is first and foremost on his mind.

While I'm not in the DHS, I would imagine that there are people who evaluate the possibilities of different attacks, the fallout from those types of attacks, etc. I agree that it would be a travesty if people used a chemical plant as part of a terrorist attack.
As far as his immigration plan, I am no fan of it. But maybe I'll talk about that in a different thread.
 
im not a fan of it either. the companies are sending our jobs down there to begin with, then hes going to let them up here legally if they have jobs waiting for them. am i not the only one who sees soemthing wrong there?
 

Forum List

Back
Top