Important thoughts...these explain my skepticism rather cogently

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 12:19 am

Took this from George Washington's blog...they talk mostly about economics but I believe this note should be remembered:

I - like most Americans - am relieved that the trickle-down emotion du jour has shifted from fear to hope. It feels nicer.

But it is no more real than switching from watching the tv from the horror channel to the feel-good-movie channel.

They are both fiction. Neither the Neocons or Neolibs deliver on their promises.

The Neocons drummed up fear of terrorists, but actually made America less secure, and stomped on our liberties in the process.

The Neolibs promised hope, but gave none. Remember, it was under Clinton that many of the financial laws were repealed, and the dot com speculative bubble created.

Hope is just an emotion. Admittedly, real hope for fundamental and lasting change is important.

But false hope given by polished politicians like Obama and Bill Clinton is less than worthless . . . it is dangerous, for it lulls people to sleep so they won't demand real change.

After the Honeymoon is Over

When the honeymoon between the voters and Obama is over, people will judge him on who he picks to lead his cabinet and what he actually does.

After the honeymoon is over, the only questions will be whether Obama:

* Protected our liberty and restored the Constitution and the rule of law

* Restored the balance of power

* Ensured justice

* Kept us out of imperial wars

* Stopped the looting of our treasury and pockets

* Otherwise protected our country

Whether or not Obama does these things - and not whether he administers the hope drug - is the question.

Unless the fundamental tyranny, injustice, imperialism and economic foolishness are addressed, then America will have one heck of a hangover when the drug wears off.

http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/

DocZaius · Post by **DocZaius** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:58 am

Hm. I didn't even know George Washington had a blog.

I wonder if he's replaced his wooden dentures with a more modern composite.

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 8:50 am

like i've said, there hasn't been another terrorist attack on US soil since sep11....believe me, there have been attempts...some thwartings you've possibly heard of, a lot you've not....bush's mandates to prevent this from happening succeeded....the idea that our liberties were violated as a result, as true as it might be, comes secondary to security imho.

i don't agree with the thought that

The Neocons drummed up fear of terrorists, but actually made America less secure, and stomped on our liberties in the process.

-- it's malarkey...terrorists are a very real thing...the thought that they aren't indicates to me that the gov't has done a good job of putting all at ease.

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 8:52 am

additionally - i'm not criticizing the citizens of non-metropolitan areas that don't buy into the thought that terrorism is a fear that is totally overblown.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:09 am

like i've said, there hasn't been another terrorist attack on US soil since sep11....believe me, there have been attempts...some thwartings you've possibly heard of, a lot you've not....bush's mandates to prevent this from happening succeeded....the idea that our liberties were violated as a result, as true as it might be, comes secondary to security imho.

i don't agree with the thought that
The Neocons drummed up fear of terrorists, but actually made America less secure, and stomped on our liberties in the process.
-- it's malarkey...terrorists are a very real thing...the thought that they aren't indicates to me that the gov't has done a good job of putting all at ease.

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Benjamin Franklin

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:13 am

austin aint the hotbed of terrorism...i'm not surprised.

Tipmoose · Post by **Tipmoose** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:15 am

like i've said, there hasn't been another terrorist attack on US soil since sep11....believe me, there have been attempts...some thwartings you've possibly heard of, a lot you've not....bush's mandates to prevent this from happening succeeded....the idea that our liberties were violated as a result, as true as it might be, comes secondary to security imho.

i don't agree with the thought that
The Neocons drummed up fear of terrorists, but actually made America less secure, and stomped on our liberties in the process.
-- it's malarkey...terrorists are a very real thing...the thought that they aren't indicates to me that the gov't has done a good job of putting all at ease.

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Benjamin Franklin

How about you define where...EXACTLY...that line in the sand gets drawn hmmm?

What are laws? Are not ALL laws curbs on our freedoms in the name of security? I think, once again, you are only worried about laws that YOU don't agree with.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:23 am

austin aint the hotbed of terrorism...i'm not surprised.

Look man - for two years when I worked for the state of Texas, I was doing anti-terrorism training. There is a division of the TAMU system called the National Emergency Response and Rescue Training Center (NERRTC). We travelled around the US meeting with state and local authorities helping them form the Emergency Response Plans. In those plans, there were appendices called annexes, one of which being the Terrorism Incident Annex. I took courses in biological and chemical weapons. Let me tell you this - there is some sick shit out there that has caused me to lose sleep. You don't want to know what I know. Hell, I don't want to know some of the stuff I know. I wrote a few annexes including the best from ERPs across the country. I read most of the ERPs from the various states. I travelled from Anchorage AK to Tallahassee, from NYC to LA, from San Francisco to VA, from Northern MN to South Texas and points in between doing this. Let me just say this - we have been damn lucky.

Point being is that I am not some rube spouting bullshit. I know a little more about this than the average person.

And given all that I know, I will never support bullshit things like warrantless wiretapping of US citizens. One of the things bin Laden was hoping for was that we would react in fear and change our society. I will not live in fear, nor will I compromise my beliefs in what this country stands for.

Rant over.

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:30 am

you're too funny slide...i gotta admit that.

after all that, after all you've learned and all you've seen with your very own eyes, you still lemmingly side with your party line....with all you've seen and experienced, you'd think you'd be more 'tolerant' of the measures needed to prevent the stuff you've seen.

you're definitely a funny guy! i'm laughing my ass of right now...thanks!

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:39 am

and i'll add...i respect the, as you put it, the 'rube' that spouts off moreso than a person TRULY knowledgeable about the ugliness that is terrorism and can denounce the measures needed to prevent such catastrophes from occurring again so vehemently that he delegitimizes himself when he blindly adopts his party view.

you say the gov't promotes living in fear...i say the gov't promotes being pro-active in it's fight to keep it's citizens safe

there's a cost to security...you should know that...

AdGator02 · Post by **AdGator02** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:54 am

you know it's not just democrats that are pro-civil liberties. ex. AA.

I don't mind going through extra security at the airport, but don't want my phone tapped. I'm fine with profiling, though I totally understand people who say it's wrong. Determine people of interest based on a number of 'qualifications,' don't waste time looking at me and my phone calls/bank statements/etc. without any indicators. Time and resources are limited, so stay focused.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 9:56 am

Excuse me? Calling me a lemming? I don't think so my friend. Every opinion I have ever stated is mine and mine alone.

I don't appreciate your implication.

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 10:07 am

lemming is not a negative word....there are leaders and there are lemmings...neither one's negative

a lemming to me is someone who goes with the crowd....you have gone with your crowd considering the wealth of knowledge and expertise FIRST HAND you do possess on the ugliness of terrorism...this myth that successful thwartings of terrorist activities for the purpose of keeping fear in everyones mind is just that....a myth....what's hilarious is YOU KNOW THIS! you know this FIRST HAND!

i'm sorry if i offended you but it's true - you are a lemming and i mean no harm by it. apologies slider nonetheless.

AdGator02 · Post by **AdGator02** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 10:09 am

come on, you know the connotation of lemming.

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 10:11 am

come on, you know the connotation of lemming.

a lemming is a rodent...THAT would be insulting.

TTBHG · Post by **TTBHG** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 10:13 am

Did I mention how awesome this place is?

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 10:28 am

lemming is not a negative word....there are leaders and there are lemmings...neither one's negative

a lemming to me is someone who goes with the crowd....you have gone with your crowd considering the wealth of knowledge and expertise FIRST HAND you do possess on the ugliness of terrorism...this myth that successful thwartings of terrorist activities for the purpose of keeping fear in everyones mind is just that....a myth....what's hilarious is YOU KNOW THIS! you know this FIRST HAND!

i'm sorry if i offended you but it's true - you are a lemming and i mean no harm by it. apologies slider nonetheless.

Apologies accepted. We were both teetering on the precipice there for a bit.

I, and everyone on both sides of the political and ideological aisle, are all for doing everything possible to prevent terrorism and to thwart their activities. NO party or ideology in this country has a monopoly on safety and security issues, and to imply such is ridiculous. What I am NOT for is turning the US into a police state in the name of security.

The bottom line is this - it is impossible to defend us against all terrorism. Even the experts agree on that. However, it is possible for us to do so that is within the extent of the law and that will not violate the basic premises of our country. Such is the case for an open society.

Believe me, I want bin Laden dead with his head on a pike on the top of the US Capitol, and his body buried with pig carcasses in it and dumped into the middle of the ocean. Everyone wants him dead and I hope we get him.

DocZaius · Post by **DocZaius** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 10:30 am

Interestingly, I learned today that lemmings are NOT suicidal.

It turns out that while their population does explode every few years, causing a mass migration in which many will die due to drowning or falling, depending on what natural hazards they have to cross.

The notion of lemmings-as-suicidal-rodents came about after Disney filmed a documentary called "White Wilderness" in 1958. During the filming, instead of filming the lemmings in their natural environment, Disney instead took a few dozen and drowned them.

Seriously. From the Snopes link, above:

Disney's White Wilderness was filmed in Alberta, Canada, which is not a native habitat for lemmings and has no outlet to the sea. Lemmings were imported for use in the film, purchased from Inuit children by the filmmakers. The Arctic rodents were placed on a snow-covered turntable and filmed from various angles to produce a "migration" sequence; afterwards, the helpless creatures were transported to a cliff overlooking a river and herded into the water. White Wilderness does not depict an actual lemming migration — at no time are more than a few dozen lemmings ever shown on the screen at once. The entire sequence was faked using a handful of lemmings deceptively photographed to create the illusion of a large herd of migrating
creatures.

Fucking Disney!

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 10:51 am

lemming is not a negative word....there are leaders and there are lemmings...neither one's negative

a lemming to me is someone who goes with the crowd....you have gone with your crowd considering the wealth of knowledge and expertise FIRST HAND you do possess on the ugliness of terrorism...this myth that successful thwartings of terrorist activities for the purpose of keeping fear in everyones mind is just that....a myth....what's hilarious is YOU KNOW THIS! you know this FIRST HAND!

i'm sorry if i offended you but it's true - you are a lemming and i mean no harm by it. apologies slider nonetheless.
Apologies accepted. We were both teetering on the precipice there for a bit.

I, and everyone on both sides of the political and ideological aisle, are all for doing everything possible to prevent terrorism and to thwart their activities. NO party or ideology in this country has a monopoly on safety and security issues, and to imply such is ridiculous. What I am NOT for is turning the US into a police state in the name of security.

The bottom line is this - it is impossible to defend us against all terrorism. Even the experts agree on that. However, it is possible for us to do so that is within the extent of the law and that will not violate the basic premises of our country. Such is the base for an open society.

Believe me, I want bin Laden dead with his head on a pike on the top of the US Capitol, and his body buried with pig carcasses in it and dumped into the middle of the ocean. Everyone wants him dead and I hope we get him.

look - all i hear a lot about is how our lives are being compromised and how unfair and unconstitutional these precautions are...you want safe, support the govt's endeavors and their methods...you don't like it, vote em out or move to canada.

one party has no monopoly on the safety issues...you have to acknowledge the fact that both parties have different views as to how important that fear is on the priority ladder...i fear obama's vigilance on the matter is tempered.

i'm not hoping to see an event occur mind you...i'm hoping it doesn't of course...i just think the whole 'what's in it for me?' generations ideals have sadly overcome the thought that our society should come first.

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 10:55 am

Well then we need to respectfully agree to disagree then. Obama will be tough on terrorism, trust me. The fact that we are currently in a Muslim country has been the best recruiting tool for al Qaeda. And Obama has stated that he will send more troops to Afghanistan - the real central war on terrorism.

Tipmoose · Post by **Tipmoose** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 11:07 am

Hey, Slide...

When are you going to answer the question I asked above??

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 11:27 am

Well then we need to respectfully agree to disagree then. Obama will be tough on terrorism, trust me. The fact that we are currently in a Muslim country has been the best recruiting tool for al Qaeda. And Obama has stated that he will send more troops to Afghanistan - the real central war on terrorism.

I read yesterday that the war in Afghanistan is unwinnable, regardless of how many troops we send in there to extend our EMPIRE.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 11:32 am

Just because there are real enemies out there doesn't take away from the fact that politicians LOVE using any emotion against the citizens to get BULLSHIT ILLEGAL laws passed that would never otherwise be passed. and rad, 9/11 was an inside job.

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 11:46 am

Well then we need to respectfully agree to disagree then. Obama will be tough on terrorism, trust me. The fact that we are currently in a Muslim country has been the best recruiting tool for al Qaeda. And Obama has stated that he will send more troops to Afghanistan - the real central war on terrorism.

respectfully - and i hope i don't sound fired up because i'm really not...i'm already behind in some things i need to get done today...but respectfully, i seriously knew the whole 'we shall then agree to disagree' comment was coming.

i still don't really understand how a person so wealthy in knowledge and experience, as it relates to the ugliness of terrorism, can be so 'thanks for protecting me but no thanks to that sort of protection'? how can you be that way? i actually had no idea how versed and aware you were of the reality of terrorism....because you were not residing or working in a terrorist targeted area, i took for granted that you WERE a 'rube' and had no idea...i respect being a 'rube' actually...they're not privy to the things you've seen and learned....the fact that you are NOT a 'rube' and that you ARE knowledgeable baffles me....it's like, you are in favor of DECREASING govt's help to protect it's citizens from tragic occurrences you are very much familiar with and understand at great lengths...you've lost sleep over it as you say and still, you are critical of govt's methods of pro-actively protecting....it's true we can not prevent all (even though the past 7 years were) acts of terrorism as grand a scale as the WTC but why not try?

i say fuck all to those who think about how things impact themselves individually before they think about how things impact society.

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Nov 07, 2008 11:47 am

Just because there are real enemies out there doesn't take away from the fact that politicians LOVE using any emotion against the citizens to get BULLSHIT ILLEGAL laws passed that would never otherwise be passed. and rad, 9/11 was an inside job.

see slider...i respect AA cause he's a 'rube' as you put it.