Will Car Bombs be a Regular Occurrence in the US Within the Next Couple of Years?

[theDoctorisIn]

Obviously the threat Islamic extremists is only going to increase... so when is the time to forget political correctness and start getting tough on Islamic Extremists? What do we do when terrorists start blowing up shopping malls here in the US? Do we just continue on with our current laws or do we get tough and start watching people more closely?

At that point, when malls start getting blown up, would you rather leave our laws the way they are and risk getting blown up in a building/shopping mall, or would you like to increase security by watching people more closely on the internet, sealing the borders, infiltrating mosques, etc... in order to reduce and hopefully almost eliminate this threat?




Risk of small-scale attacks by al-Qaeda and its allies is rising, officials say

To reverse the question on you (and give an answer at the same time) how much of the Constitution are you willing to shred for the illusion of safety?

Obviously the Constitution doesn't matter any more just look at what the current administration is doing.... But, that's the question.... Where is the line? Do we just let people come in and terrorize us or do we change some things to make it safer????

Well, your entire post is a hypothetical.


So, until something happens, your post and question are meaningless.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Obviously the threat Islamic extremists is only going to increase... so when is the time to forget political correctness and start getting tough on Islamic Extremists? What do we do when terrorists start blowing up shopping malls here in the US? Do we just continue on with our current laws or do we get tough and start watching people more closely?

At that point, when malls start getting blown up, would you rather leave our laws the way they are and risk getting blown up in a building/shopping mall, or would you like to increase security by watching people more closely on the internet, sealing the borders, infiltrating mosques, etc... in order to reduce and hopefully almost eliminate this threat?




Risk of small-scale attacks by al-Qaeda and its allies is rising, officials say

Hmmm..... Who was Timothy McVeigh?

The McVeigh thing is so overused, and telling in that he is the only one you can name, and it's over and over....

How about doing some real research, Rocks, and making a strong argument that
1. Muslims are not monolithic

2. Societies evolve, and that alone may mitigate the dire effects predicted

3. As Ataturk so correctly stated, there a many cultures, but only one civilization....and Muslims want to belong to it as well.

And, as a mental health exercise, it willl get you out of the global warming rut.

The above outline would be an interesting and do-able rebuttal...

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Next crop of US terrorists may well be TP fringers.

(CNN) - Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle says two of her opponent's supporters "staged" the brawl that erupted Thursday at a candidate forum attended by her and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
"There were two women that were actually looking for a fight, trying to get that to be the top news story and they succeeded," Angle told national radio host Jerry Doyle on Friday. Audio of the exchange was posted online by well-known Nevada political journalist Jon Ralston.
Reid supporters ‘staged’ brawl, Angle says – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs


Did you say 'left wing' violence?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Some of that best intelligence in the world?
That same bunch that told us all that scary stuff about Iraq?

counter-intelligence might be a more apt term.

Now, whose fault could it be?

"The real aberration occurred in the mid-1970s when the United States granted its legislative branch the greatest control over intelligence matters of any Western nation, and overturned the system which had prevailed in the United States since the Founding.

The damage done to the CIA by this congressional oversight regime (Democrat-controlled Pike and Church Committees) is quite extensive. The committees increased the number of CIA officials subject to Senate confirmation, condemned the agency for its contacts with unscrupulous characters, prohibited any further contact with these bad characters, insisted that the United States not engage or assist in any coup which may harm a foreign leader, and overwhelmed the agency with interminable requests for briefings (some 600 alone in 1996).

[A]s Henry Kissinger once observed about the Church Committee, that it is an illusion that “tranquility can be achieved by an abstract purity of motive for which history offers no example.” It is precisely this illusion which has prevailed in congressional circles since the heyday of Frank Church and Otis Pike. As Church himself once argued, the United States should not “fight fire with fire . . . evil with evil.”

Senator Robert Torricelli of New Jersey, who led the charge in the mid-1990s to prevent the CIA from hiring unsavory characters. Torricelli rallied to the defense of State Department employee Robert Nuccio, who leaked classified material dealing with CIA operations in Guatemala to Torricelli, who in turn held a press conference and revealed the information to the media. It was these revelations that led to congressional restrictions on the ability of agents in the field to deal with “bad people.”
Congressional Oversight and the Crippling of the CIA

 

[Ozmar]

That's funny. The CIA didn't exist until 1947

 

[R.C. Christian]

Obviously the threat Islamic extremists is only going to increase... so when is the time to forget political correctness and start getting tough on Islamic Extremists? What do we do when terrorists start blowing up shopping malls here in the US? Do we just continue on with our current laws or do we get tough and start watching people more closely?

At that point, when malls start getting blown up, would you rather leave our laws the way they are and risk getting blown up in a building/shopping mall, or would you like to increase security by watching people more closely on the internet, sealing the borders, infiltrating mosques, etc... in order to reduce and hopefully almost eliminate this threat?




Risk of small-scale attacks by al-Qaeda and its allies is rising, officials say

The better question is to ask yourself and others around you "why does Al Quaida want to attack a shopping mall?". Hint: it has to with cause and effect.

 

[skookerasbil]

Obviously the threat Islamic extremists is only going to increase... so when is the time to forget political correctness and start getting tough on Islamic Extremists? What do we do when terrorists start blowing up shopping malls here in the US? Do we just continue on with our current laws or do we get tough and start watching people more closely?

At that point, when malls start getting blown up, would you rather leave our laws the way they are and risk getting blown up in a building/shopping mall, or would you like to increase security by watching people more closely on the internet, sealing the borders, infiltrating mosques, etc... in order to reduce and hopefully almost eliminate this threat?




Risk of small-scale attacks by al-Qaeda and its allies is rising, officials say

Hmmm..... Who was Timothy McVeigh?

s0n..........nobody cares about Tim McVeigh except the hyper-k00k left. Anyway........I woouldnt lose any sleep.........no terror bad guys are going to give a rats ass about blowing up a cornfield in Bumfook USA!!!

 

[Douger]

It shouldn't be, we have some of the best intelligence in the World, we should be able to use our numerous, interconnected, and bloated intelligence community to stop the terrorists at home. Or maybe not...?

Are you kidding ? Those clowns couldn't find their asses with both hands.

What's next ? Tell us about the financial 'experts" ?

 

[zzzz]

No!

America is not the middle east or southern Asia where explosives are readily available to anyone. Therefore whomever wants to create chaos and destruction must spend a considerable amount of time and money just to secure the materials. It would be during this time that their actions would alert the police or FBI of the possibiility of something happening. Contrary to what some people say, we have very good police agencies throughout the country and I have faith that they will be able to nip in the bud most terrorist attempts as they have done already.

Saying that, I believe that three may be a few acts of terrorism in the US in the future because no one is perfect and something always falls through the cracks. Depending upon the severity of the situation the response could encompass further restrictions of our liberties. The American people let the government take some after 9-11 and even though it was suppose to be temporary some of the actions taken are still in effect. Once you let someone take something away from you it is very hard to get it back, espaicially rights because it makes a precedance that the courts would base their decision on.

How far would the people let the government take their rights? Lincoln took Habeas Corpus in the disagreement between the states and that is one of the big rights we have. That is an example where an action was ruled unconstitutional but Lincoln and the military ignored the ruling which should give all those people who beleive it will never happen again, pause.