They are considering raising the terror alert level.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp.../terror_threat

Quote:

---

The government is considering raising the threat level in Washington and New York City and for financial companies, a Homeland Security Department official said Sunday
It was not immediately known what intelligence was leading the government to consider such action.

---

I know why. Bush saw a threat to his re-election. That's why.
Who remembers that 2 days after Kerry chose Edwards and every news story was about Edwards that Tom Ridge held a press conference to warn us that the terrorist were planning something? Who remembers that during his morning meeting with the CIA and the FBI that day he said nothing to them of holding the press conference? Who remembers speculation that it was done to take the focus of Kerry and Edwards?
Now just 2 days after the Democratic convention he does it again.
This is the type of administration Bush runs.
And it sucks!

Yup,.. to raise the terror alert meter actually means: The American people are really starting to consider John Kerry. We better pump them up with a large dose of fear to get them back under control.

It's working, I'm terrified! :D

And here's something interesting from ABC news:
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/ap20040801_723.html

Quote:

---

Ridge said it would be up to New York City officials to decide whether to move to the highest level, red. The city has remained on orange since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001

---

Let me get this straight. It's up to NY City? Not the Feds? So the terror alert color system is voluntary? Or does Ridge want it both ways. If nothing happens, he didn't raise the alert cause he was right not to. And if something happens he can blame NY for not raising it?
I wish JaxSon were around to explain it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayward Clam

It's working, I'm terrified! :D

---

Me too. I'm shaking in my boots. I've locked my door and I'm hiding under my desk at this very moment.

One more thing:

"The future doesn't belong to fear, it belongs to freedom" - John Kerry, 7-29-2004 ; Democratic Convention

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WebHead

One more thing:

"The future doesn't belong to fear, it belongs to freedom" - John Kerry, 7-29-2004 ; Democratic Convention

---

What really has me scared are those new electronic voting machines in Florida.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imaeditedbysowulo

What really has me scared are those new electronic voting machines in Florida.

---

They're not seriously going to do any electronic voting yet are they? Oh man,.. I mean, I'm kinda for electronic voting, but not yet. I say give it until next election to bust out that sort of thing. This election is too important to be introducing new methods of voting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WebHead

They're not seriously going to do any electronic voting yet are they? Oh man,.. I mean, I'm kinda for electronic voting, but not yet. I say give it until next election to bust out that sort of thing. This election is too important to be introducing new methods of voting.

---

I'm not positive, but this article leads me to believe that they are. Scary times we live in, you ask someone for proof of something and all they have to say is their computer crashed and no more accountability.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...ida.voting.ap/

You know,.. this is BullSheet! If they start messing around with the election date, and having electronic voting and sheet gets screwed up from it,.. then I really honestly will just throw in the towel. Man,.. why do these idiots gotta keep screwing with sheet? Just leave it alone. The system we have works fine as long as the counting is done correctly.

One more thing,.. last time your computer crashed,.. did data get deleted? I didn't think so. This is the biggest pile of crap I've heard so far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WebHead

One more thing,.. last time your computer crashed,.. did data get deleted? I didn't think so. This is the biggest pile of crap I've heard so far.

---

Yea I was thinking the same thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WebHead

Me too. I'm shaking in my boots. I've locked my door and I'm hiding under my desk at this very moment.

---

Now why would you do that wrbby? Fear of terrorists? Geesh man, they don't want YOUI! To them, you are nothing!
What they want is an occasional "mass murder" like 9/11!! That is all they need, and that is their agenda! No, not individuals! But, mass fear, or "hysteria", is what they do!
What happened in Spain? Care to be serious for a moment?
That is the way "they" work!
So, what if another "Grand" attack on us or the UK happened again?
What and how would you think then?
Is that what it's going to take for YOU (and sooooo many others) to realize that they are at war with us???
Joke all you want about hiding under your desk. BUT: this is NOT the USSR with nukes threatening us now!!
What do you propose???

I propose that we kill the entire family of every 'suicide' bomber to get our justice. I've been thinking about this since 9/11 occurred and I cannot think of any other single way that will put an end to this crap.

Liberating countries is nice but it only opens ourselves up to more acts of terrorism. You start killing entire families of these people and the **** will stop quick.

That would help society in two ways. One you would have less suicide bombers because not too many people would want their entire family to be executed. Two, you would see people being a lot more interested in what their children are up to which in turn would make their kids be better people.

It's barbaric sure, but it beats the way we are being prepared to live the rest of our lives. I spend extra time doing my job now because 90% of the businesses I do work for have insane security measures in place. Most places require a security badge to be issued to me and any time there is a new guy working the desk, look out.

This is BS and I'm sick of it. Let's start killing these terrorist's families and begin a war on terrorism that will actually have an end to it.

Posted by TripleRLtd

Quote:

---

Joke all you want about hiding under your desk. BUT: this is NOT the USSR with nukes threatening us now!!
What do you propose???

---

I can't speak for Wehead but I propose letting the FBI and the other law enforcement agencies do their job. I intend to not live in fear. I will say one thing. Not one U.S. soldier in Iraq has done anything to prevent any attacks on NYC. As per 91-1 commission.
You may not stop all attacks but the average citizen can best defend our country by not changing anything we would do (except keeping our eyes open which we are doing anyway).

What the US can do is find Osama and blow him away. If we did that in a timely manner to every terrorist we can really disrupt them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TripleRLtd

Now why would you do that wrbby? Fear of terrorists? Geesh man, they don't want YOUI! To them, you are nothing!
What they want is an occasional "mass murder" like 9/11!! That is all they need, and that is their agenda! No, not individuals! But, mass fear, or "hysteria", is what they do!
What happened in Spain? Care to be serious for a moment?
That is the way "they" work!
So, what if another "Grand" attack on us or the UK happened again?
What and how would you think then?
Is that what it's going to take for YOU (and sooooo many others) to realize that they are at war with us???
Joke all you want about hiding under your desk. BUT: this is NOT the USSR with nukes threatening us now!!
What do you propose???

---

I propose hunting Osama Bin Laden rather than hunting Iraqis. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by techs

What the US can do is find Osama and blow him away. If we did that in a timely manner to every terrorist we can really disrupt them.

---

Well!! For once we agree!! But damn man: the "punk" is hiding in caves we know nothing about!! Some of them may even be in Iraq!
So, what do YOU suggest, other than get rid ob Bush?
I ask you this because HE is the first Pres to take on the "terrorist" threat! Of course things won't go perfectly! But: at least someone has finally done something about it!!!
First it was the Taliban and Afghanistan! Then it was another "supporting" state: one with definite "aims" against us, and one with difinite "aims" at getting "right" with the fundamentalists!!! So, what do YOU suggest techs?
BTW: this is NOT a partisan fight!!!
When will you ever get that????

"then I really honestly will just throw in the towel."

Wouldn't this be considered politically incorrect? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TripleRLtd

Well!! For once we agree!! But damn man: the "punk" is hiding in caves we know nothing about!! Some of them may even be in Iraq!
So, what do YOU suggest, other than get rid ob Bush?
I ask you this because HE is the first Pres to take on the "terrorist" threat! Of course things won't go perfectly! But: at least someone has finally done something about it!!!
First it was the Taliban and Afghanistan! Then it was another "supporting" state: one with definite "aims" against us, and one with difinite "aims" at getting "right" with the fundamentalists!!! So, what do YOU suggest techs?
BTW: this is NOT a partisan fight!!!
When will you ever get that????

---

It's up to our intelligence agencies to find information that will lead them to the whereabouts of Osama. They CAN find him. Money talks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tecumseh

"then I really honestly will just throw in the towel."

Wouldn't this be considered politically incorrect? :D

---

Yes that would be politically incorrect, but anything goes in this forum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TripleRLtd

I ask you this because HE is the first Pres to take on the "terrorist" threat!

---

Well, no, Clinton did plenty, it is just that the media doesn't tell us, cause it is controleed by the right

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TripleRLtd

Well!! For once we agree!! But damn man: the "punk" is hiding in caves we know nothing about!! Some of them may even be in Iraq!
So, what do YOU suggest, other than get rid ob Bush?
I ask you this because HE is the first Pres to take on the "terrorist" threat! Of course things won't go perfectly! But: at least someone has finally done something about it!!!
First it was the Taliban and Afghanistan! Then it was another "supporting" state: one with definite "aims" against us, and one with difinite "aims" at getting "right" with the fundamentalists!!! So, what do YOU suggest techs?
BTW: this is NOT a partisan fight!!!
When will you ever get that????

---

He is the first President to take on the terrorist threat. AFTER 9-11. Before 9-11 he told us our greatest threat was long range missles. In fact on 9-11 Condi Rice was going to give a speech announcing we were making missle defense Bushes top priority. Even after all the evidence that Osama was planning to crash planes in the US.

The part about Afhanistan:
at least someone has finally done something about it!!!
First it was the Taliban and Afghanistan!
I agree with.

This part:
Then it was another "supporting" state: one with definite "aims" against us, and one with difinite "aims" at getting "right" with the fundamentalists!!!
is totally wrong. Definite aims against us? There was no evidence Saddam was involved in any terrorist plot against us since he tried to kill Bush Sr. While this was bad he apparently got the message we sent and stayed out of the way of terrorists who might want to strike the US.
He was not trying to get "right' with the fundamentalists. He paid money to suicide bombers who attacked Israel to try and keep the Osamas from trying to overthrow HIM. They hated him. He hated them. Which is why we supported his war against Iran.

And as annoying as you are, I will help you out and cite some of the things he did...

38 days after taking office, the WTC was bombed, those responsible, Ramzi Yousef, Abdul Hakim Murad and Wali Khan Amin Shah are still behind bars. Where exactly is Osama?

FBI's counter terrorism budget tripled and was doubled for all agencies overall. A single top level national security post was created to coordinate all the federal counterterrorsim agencies. Al Queda cells in over 20 different countries were cleaned up...

1998, after the terrorist attacks in Kenya and Tanzania, he sent tomahawk missles into Sudan and Afghanistan actually leading Newt Gingrich to say "The President did exactly the right thing. By doing this we're sending the signal there are no sanctuaries for terrorists."


Of course 3 years later, Gingrich went on that fair and balanced Fox on Sept 13, 2001 saying that it was a horrible action to only send in the tomahawks, blaming Clinton for not doing enough

Honestly, don't feel like doing much more than saying that Clinton actually issued an Executive order for the assassination of Osama. And after the Cole, assigned Clarke to develop a plan for going after Al Queda, which was shelved by the Bush administration until we invaded Afghanistan, which then followed those guidelines.

All this while battleing a hostile congress, a hostile media and no more BJ's

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

And as annoying as you are, I will help you out and cite some of the things he did...

38 days after taking office, the WTC was bombed, those responsible, Ramzi Yousef, Abdul Hakim Murad and Wali Khan Amin Shah are still behind bars. Where exactly is Osama?

FBI's counter terrorism budget tripled and was doubled for all agencies overall. A single top level national security post was created to coordinate all the federal counterterrorsim agencies. Al Queda cells in over 20 different countries were cleaned up...

1998, after the terrorist attacks in Kenya and Tanzania, he sent tomahawk missles into Sudan and Afghanistan actually leading Newt Gingrich to say "The President did exactly the right thing. By doing this we're sending the signal there are no sanctuaries for terrorists."


Of course 3 years later, Gingrich went on that fair and balanced Fox on Sept 13, 2001 saying that it was a horrible action to only send in the tomahawks, blaming Clinton for not doing enough

Honestly, don't feel like doing much more than saying that Clinton actually issued an Executive order for the assassination of Osama. And after the Cole, assigned Clarke to develop a plan for going after Al Queda, which was shelved by the Bush administration until we invaded Afghanistan, which then followed those guidelines.

All this while battleing a hostile congress, a hostile media and no more BJ's

---

Today Zell Miller the Democrat turned Republican was on Meet the Press and he admitted that Newt Gingrich and others wanted to impeach Clinton for going into Bosnia. I believe Newt said, "The US has no right to attack a foriegn country that has not attacked us"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WebHead

It's up to our intelligence agencies to find information that will lead them to the whereabouts of Osama. They CAN find him. Money talks.

---

Money talks...to who? Someone that will lie just to get the money, then go off and fund another terrorist organization...someone would turn in Osama, just to get the money, then fund future projects all in his name...he would be the greatest martyr the world has ever known, because it was his multi-million dollar reward that got the ball rolling again for Al Quada...

You really should try to think this through just a bit more...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by techs

What the US can do is find Osama and blow him away. If we did that in a timely manner to every terrorist we can really disrupt them.

---

Yeah, just make sure its not before the election! It would be a Bush conspiracy!
:thumbs: