What would happen after another Terrorist attack?
- Thread starter Drjones
- Start date
- Status
Nothing different as far as the government is concerned, but I do think that the public would become more aware that we're in a war zone.
Right now and theoretically, only those approved by a government (state or local or NICS) can get or carry a gun.
<wishfulthinking>
Just as the bank robber in (GA?) who was shot twice (once by himself and once by a citizen), I can't believe that the government would think it's all bad that citizens are armed. Of course PRK and its sister squishbrain states are the exceptions, but more of "Homeland Security" may be shouldered by citizens without objections by the governments.
</wishfulthinking>
Right now and theoretically, only those approved by a government (state or local or NICS) can get or carry a gun.
<wishfulthinking>
Just as the bank robber in (GA?) who was shot twice (once by himself and once by a citizen), I can't believe that the government would think it's all bad that citizens are armed. Of course PRK and its sister squishbrain states are the exceptions, but more of "Homeland Security" may be shouldered by citizens without objections by the governments.
</wishfulthinking>
sm
member
Agree with BH.
I also believe people may take personal safety and situational awareness more seriously. Even to the point of ignoring sheeple , politics and even some laws.
I also believe people may take personal safety and situational awareness more seriously. Even to the point of ignoring sheeple , politics and even some laws.
What rights lost? Facts please.
I hear this a lot, that our rights are being taken away by the Bush Administration but I can't think of specifically what rights are being lost? To me this all seems like more scare tactics from the left to scare people into voting for them...
Can someone name some specific, concrete examples of rights we've lost since 9/11. Not things that "might" happen or it "seems" we've lost this or that...
Concrete facts. Anyone?
I hear this a lot, that our rights are being taken away by the Bush Administration but I can't think of specifically what rights are being lost? To me this all seems like more scare tactics from the left to scare people into voting for them...
Can someone name some specific, concrete examples of rights we've lost since 9/11. Not things that "might" happen or it "seems" we've lost this or that...
Concrete facts. Anyone?
Zak Smith
Member
Here are some topics we discussed on TFL: no knives on airplanes, random frisks as boarding planes, cannot lock luggage on planes, "secret searches", Total Information Awareness - including harvesting your credit card use data, random auto searches to board ferries, etc...
Add "data bases" to the list.
I'm really torn on this one. On the one hand, I think we've been too lax in allowing potential enemies to "make themselves at home," but on the other hand I'm worried we're heading toward an Orwellian world. I'm usually not short of opinions, but I'm genuinely stumped here.
I'm really torn on this one. On the one hand, I think we've been too lax in allowing potential enemies to "make themselves at home," but on the other hand I'm worried we're heading toward an Orwellian world. I'm usually not short of opinions, but I'm genuinely stumped here.
Waitone
Member
I may be naive but I think the ruling class is running slightly scared of the taxpaying class and the largess class. A lot of legislation and administrative actions taken by Washington is designed as CYA should another world class terror attack take place. Example would be the color code system or the alerts which are based on one piece of information from one suspect. The ruling class has determined they do not want to be seen as not having done something that would have prevented an attack, hence the ineffective, eyewash security provisions.
All this makes me believe the ruling class feels threatened and that's A GOOD THING!
All this makes me believe the ruling class feels threatened and that's A GOOD THING!
What rights lost? Facts please.
I hear this a lot, that our rights are being taken away by the Bush Administration but I can't think of specifically what rights are being lost? To me this all seems like more scare tactics from the left to scare people into voting for them...
Can someone name some specific, concrete examples of rights we've lost since 9/11. Not things that "might" happen or it "seems" we've lost this or that...
Concrete facts. Anyone?
<<
I was thinking the same thing. There haven't been any rights lost;, except for terrorists.
I hear this a lot, that our rights are being taken away by the Bush Administration but I can't think of specifically what rights are being lost? To me this all seems like more scare tactics from the left to scare people into voting for them...
Can someone name some specific, concrete examples of rights we've lost since 9/11. Not things that "might" happen or it "seems" we've lost this or that...
Concrete facts. Anyone?
<<
I was thinking the same thing. There haven't been any rights lost;, except for terrorists.
I'd like to believe that people would realize that the only defense is a good offense and arm themselves appropriately. Unfortunately, I don't give my fellow man enough credit to wake up and smell the coffee. I think we'd most likely see blissninny types cowering ever more tightly behind the gov.
Carlos Cabeza
Member
I hope the next wave gets shot in the head in the isle of the airplane by the armed air marshals.
2nd Amendment
member
It depends entirely on what the hypothetical strike consists of. If it's a bio/chem attack and it's marginally effective(several tens of thousands dead) then the result will be chaos. People will not leave their homes, they won't shop, they won't spend and some won't work. Economic devastation. Possibly even flight from urban areas creating a "refugee" situation.
How will the government deal? By grabbing more control where ever it can. Of the markets, of travel, of identification. And that is the terrorist goal. They aren't dumb enough to think they can kill us all. But they can screw up everything that matters and makes this nation what it is.
How will the government deal? By grabbing more control where ever it can. Of the markets, of travel, of identification. And that is the terrorist goal. They aren't dumb enough to think they can kill us all. But they can screw up everything that matters and makes this nation what it is.
TallPine
Member
As in, "they came to take the terrorists, and since I wasn't a terrorist, I said nothing ... then when they came to get me ..."
How do you know someone is a "terrorist" until they have been tried and convicted? But now they can lock up a "terrorist" (or "enemy combatant" - doesn't even matter if you are a US citizen) indefinitely without a trial.
Edward429451
member
Uhh, just because they haven't stapled the Patriot act to our forheads yet doesn't mean the rights aren't gone. 'Domestic terrorism' laws haven't been enforced yet either. But they are in place.
Chris Rhines
Member
No.
- Chris
Zak Smith
Member
CMichael,
It could be the case that the Government is "trying to protect Americans from further terrorist acts" and infringing on our rights (and assuming more power in the process).
-z
It could be the case that the Government is "trying to protect Americans from further terrorist acts" and infringing on our rights (and assuming more power in the process).
-z
TallPine
Member
Well, then how about doing something actually useful for a start?
Like protecting our borders and arming airline pilots ...?
I know, we have legislation now for the latter, but God only knows when it will ever happen. The Bush administration has been fighting this tooth and nail from the start. They could have just done it right away without any "act of congress"
Well, start by reading three novels. Farenheit 451 and 1984 and Animal Farm.
Then read the Constitution, then read the Patriot Act.
Then you might understand that the "Law and Order! Bush is RIGHT! We're at WAR" crowd is more of a threat to our freedom than Diane Feinstein, Teddy Kennedy, and the like ever could be.
Yes, it could possibly be. In fact, I am persuaded that GW and John Ashcroft have only the best intentions.
That doesn't mean that they are doing the right thing.
BTW, CMichael, please learn to use the QUOTE function. It isn't really difficult.
From the Associated Press
GUANTANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba (Jan. 17) - A year has passed since the first detainees captured in the war on terrorism arrived at this outpost, raising questions about the length of the mission and when, or if, the prisoners will be tried.
U.S. attorneys are reviewing international law to see how it could be applied to military offenses. But no decisions have been made and no preparations are underway for trials in Guantanamo.
At least four detainees deemed not to be threats have been repatriated. But others continue to be interrogated and the mission's commanding general said Thursday that U.S. officials would press ahead with a mission that has yielded ``valuable information.''
``We're making progress every day,'' Army Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller said of interrogations into the suspects' alleged links to the fallen Afghan Taliban regime or al-Qaida terrorist network.
The first detainees arrived Jan. 11. Now this remote U.S. camp on Cuba's eastern tip houses more than 620 prisoners from 41 countries, held in a legal limbo that has caused visible strain.
Ten men have tried to hang themselves, said Navy Capt. Al Shimkus, who heads the camp hospital.
The prolonged detentions and interrogations of prisoners, who are not allowed lawyers, has provoked criticism from human rights groups.
``What the United States has effectively done is create a 'human rights-free zone,''' said Curt Goering, senior deputy director of British-based Amnesty International's U.S. office. ``It's a deeply frustrating situation because the U.S. government has long prided itself on human rights but has discarded them in this case.''
The Guantanamo mission takes on particular importance as the United States nears a war with Iraq and looks for allies in its expanded fight against terrorism.
The mission goal has been to extract information, but if there is a war, officials aren't ruling out the possibility of sending traditional POWs to Guantanamo.
Critics warn the government's refusal to give the detainees POW status could backfire on U.S. troops.
But Miller defended their treatment of the prisoners, saying ``Should our servicemen and women be in the same position, I would hope they would be treated in the same humane manner.''
Although weary of the uncertainty, some detainees have settled in, guards say. Some have even started flirting with female guards - a switch from early days when many would avoid eye contact with females, according to Capt. Judith Brown, 35, from Lexington, Ky.
The men's health has improved in the months since they abandoned a hunger strike to protest their detentions. Now, they're hoarding food and most have gained an average of 13 pounds.
``It's weird because we were with some of these guys from the very beginning when they were captured in Afghanistan,'' said Marine Lance Cpl. Ray Gilbert, who was in one of the first groups to be deployed to southern Afghanistan after Sept. 11. ``I still remember some of the men's faces.''
He now guards the fence between Guantanamo and Cuba - a sharp contrast to the action he saw in Afghanistan.
``I feel sort of left out now,'' said Gilbert, 21, from Richmond, Ky. ``But I'm still happy to be here.''
01/17/03 03:22 EST
Copyright 2003 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.
GUANTANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba (Jan. 17) - A year has passed since the first detainees captured in the war on terrorism arrived at this outpost, raising questions about the length of the mission and when, or if, the prisoners will be tried.
U.S. attorneys are reviewing international law to see how it could be applied to military offenses. But no decisions have been made and no preparations are underway for trials in Guantanamo.
At least four detainees deemed not to be threats have been repatriated. But others continue to be interrogated and the mission's commanding general said Thursday that U.S. officials would press ahead with a mission that has yielded ``valuable information.''
``We're making progress every day,'' Army Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller said of interrogations into the suspects' alleged links to the fallen Afghan Taliban regime or al-Qaida terrorist network.
The first detainees arrived Jan. 11. Now this remote U.S. camp on Cuba's eastern tip houses more than 620 prisoners from 41 countries, held in a legal limbo that has caused visible strain.
Ten men have tried to hang themselves, said Navy Capt. Al Shimkus, who heads the camp hospital.
The prolonged detentions and interrogations of prisoners, who are not allowed lawyers, has provoked criticism from human rights groups.
``What the United States has effectively done is create a 'human rights-free zone,''' said Curt Goering, senior deputy director of British-based Amnesty International's U.S. office. ``It's a deeply frustrating situation because the U.S. government has long prided itself on human rights but has discarded them in this case.''
The Guantanamo mission takes on particular importance as the United States nears a war with Iraq and looks for allies in its expanded fight against terrorism.
The mission goal has been to extract information, but if there is a war, officials aren't ruling out the possibility of sending traditional POWs to Guantanamo.
Critics warn the government's refusal to give the detainees POW status could backfire on U.S. troops.
But Miller defended their treatment of the prisoners, saying ``Should our servicemen and women be in the same position, I would hope they would be treated in the same humane manner.''
Although weary of the uncertainty, some detainees have settled in, guards say. Some have even started flirting with female guards - a switch from early days when many would avoid eye contact with females, according to Capt. Judith Brown, 35, from Lexington, Ky.
The men's health has improved in the months since they abandoned a hunger strike to protest their detentions. Now, they're hoarding food and most have gained an average of 13 pounds.
``It's weird because we were with some of these guys from the very beginning when they were captured in Afghanistan,'' said Marine Lance Cpl. Ray Gilbert, who was in one of the first groups to be deployed to southern Afghanistan after Sept. 11. ``I still remember some of the men's faces.''
He now guards the fence between Guantanamo and Cuba - a sharp contrast to the action he saw in Afghanistan.
``I feel sort of left out now,'' said Gilbert, 21, from Richmond, Ky. ``But I'm still happy to be here.''
01/17/03 03:22 EST
Copyright 2003 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL.
JPM70535
Member
This is going to be short and to the point.
As long as there are threats to America from Muslin extremists, I don't really give a flip whether their rights are respected or not.
Their avowed purpose is death to Americans , be they adults or children. As their last overt act caused thousands of American deaths, I see no reason to be concerned if a few ( thousand?) Non-Citizens of middle eastern extraction suffer some deprivation of the rights accorded to American citizens
AMERICA, MY COUNTRY RIGHT OR WRONG BUT MY COUNTRY
As long as there are threats to America from Muslin extremists, I don't really give a flip whether their rights are respected or not.
Their avowed purpose is death to Americans , be they adults or children. As their last overt act caused thousands of American deaths, I see no reason to be concerned if a few ( thousand?) Non-Citizens of middle eastern extraction suffer some deprivation of the rights accorded to American citizens
AMERICA, MY COUNTRY RIGHT OR WRONG BUT MY COUNTRY
SodaPop
member
It amazes me that there are so many people in this country that think we haven't had a terrorist attack since Sept 11th. We've had about half a dozen attacks by fanatical muslems THAT NOBODY TALKS ABOUT.
We even had a Biological TERRORIST ATTACK!!!
I've asked the same question to my friends to see who's being brainwashed by the news media.
They downplayed the stupid kid that flew his plane into the building down in Florida. What did the letter he left behind say about Osama Bin Laden???
Two terrorists drove around in a car shooting AMERICANS and one of the members was and may still be a member of The Nation of ISLAM.
We had the attempted C4 Shoe bomber.
We had a plane that went down in Long Island right after Sept 11th that is still UNSOLVED.
There are about a half dozen more attacks on buses and trains where Islamic lunatics shouted things about killing Americans and stabbing people.
Where is the guy that was spreading Anthrax around the country? Didn't that happen AFTER SEPT 11TH???
We don't want a back-lash against the mild mannered Muslems living in this country, so the government and the media are downplaying all the TERRORISTS ATTACKS as just acts of crime.
Last edited:
SodaPop
member
For which ones?
Here is yet another under reported Terrorist attack.http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/7/10/205838.shtml
Remember the Egyptian guy that went into the LAX airport and opened up on Israelis?
Here is yet another under reported Terrorist attack.http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/7/10/205838.shtml
Remember the Egyptian guy that went into the LAX airport and opened up on Israelis?
- Status
