Public executions?

jstillwell · Post by **jstillwell** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:36 pm

That's a lame answer.

zonyl · Post by **zonyl** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:47 pm

If you were talking about my respose to DB, I thought that one liner would evoke an interesting answer from him. He didnt dispute the need for Air Marshalls, didnt indicate he had issue with the person being acted upon by the feds, just claims they are incompetent. I didnt get the impression he supported Marshalls to begin with, the fact they challenge ones privacy, let alone increae gov involvement (ie more tax dollars) in "terrorist protection"

--

I already stated my position about this person being reckless based on the facts that are given so far. This person caused the situation to begin with and DB's response didnt refute that.

EBSB52 · Post by **EBSB52** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:53 pm

jstillwell wrote:
EBSB52 wrote: If this gov knew how to handle the matter in a large scale way, the terrorists wouldnâ€™t win, but since the gov at the very least knew in a general sense of 9/11, I think they win along with the terrorists.

It might be my Bird Flu clouding my comprehension, but I don't really get your last phrase. Not to be glib, but shooting citizens is a "win-win"?

Remember to keep it simple though, I'm more medicated then usual. Thanks.

The terrorists win, that 's obvious. The US gov wins by being able to pass Patriot Act / TSA / all kinds of anti-Constitution shit..... get my point?

EBSB52 · Post by **EBSB52** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:55 pm

DiggityBiggity wrote:
zonyl wrote:
I forget things all the time, but I dont expect sympathy from others when I do.

Uhhm.. The man was shot 5 times and killed.. sympathy? I think that's an understatement... I expect professionalism with men who are armed with guns.. not child like reactions

Your concerned leader

Diggity"The Air Marshalls are nothing but failed prison guards"Biggity

Criminal impunity via the court system is a recipe for murder......

zonyl · Post by **zonyl** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:57 pm

EBSB52 wrote:
jstillwell wrote:
EBSB52 wrote: If this gov knew how to handle the matter in a large scale way, the terrorists wouldnâ€™t win, but since the gov at the very least knew in a general sense of 9/11, I think they win along with the terrorists.

It might be my Bird Flu clouding my comprehension, but I don't really get your last phrase. Not to be glib, but shooting citizens is a "win-win"?

Remember to keep it simple though, I'm more medicated then usual. Thanks.
The terrorists win, that 's obvious. The US gov wins by being able to pass Patriot Act / TSA / all kinds of anti-Constitution shit..... get my point?

Elighten me, what exactly did the terrorists win? The gov benefited by this recent series of events, but that is what it always does.

EBSB52 · Post by **EBSB52** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:59 pm

zonyl wrote:
DiggityBiggity wrote:
zonyl wrote:
I forget things all the time, but I dont expect sympathy from others when I do.

Uhhm.. The man was shot 5 times and killed.. sympathy? I think that's an understatement... I expect professionalism with men who are armed with guns.. not child like reactions

Your concerned leader

Diggity"The Air Marshalls are nothing but failed prison guards"Biggity
You want to pay more taxes for better marshalls?

How about less Imperialism for no need for marshalls? Does Sweeden have Marshalls?

Again, it's not about better, more competent marshalls, it's about the gov propagating this, 'shoot first, ask later' mentality, backed by criminal impunity cause, 'they have such a difficult job' horseshit.

EBSB52 · Post by **EBSB52** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 7:03 pm

zonyl wrote:
EBSB52 wrote:
jstillwell wrote:
EBSB52 wrote: If this gov knew how to handle the matter in a large scale way, the terrorists wouldnâ€™t win, but since the gov at the very least knew in a general sense of 9/11, I think they win along with the terrorists.

It might be my Bird Flu clouding my comprehension, but I don't really get your last phrase. Not to be glib, but shooting citizens is a "win-win"?

Remember to keep it simple though, I'm more medicated then usual. Thanks.
The terrorists win, that 's obvious. The US gov wins by being able to pass Patriot Act / TSA / all kinds of anti-Constitution shit..... get my point?
Elighten me, what exactly did the terrorists win? The gov benefited by this recent series of events, but that is what it always does.

The two victories are accidentally/coincidentally correlated. The gov wins by having the ability to pass BS; the terrorists win by making the US paranoid and less "free." By "free" I mean that the citizens have fewer freedoms and privacy due to the intrusions the gov now has the license to do. So as much as the US gov hates the terrorists, they benefit at first.

zonyl · Post by **zonyl** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 7:29 pm

EBSB52 wrote:
zonyl wrote:
DiggityBiggity wrote:
zonyl wrote:
I forget things all the time, but I dont expect sympathy from others when I do.

Uhhm.. The man was shot 5 times and killed.. sympathy? I think that's an understatement... I expect professionalism with men who are armed with guns.. not child like reactions

Your concerned leader

Diggity"The Air Marshalls are nothing but failed prison guards"Biggity
You want to pay more taxes for better marshalls?

How about less Imperialism for no need for marshalls? Does Sweeden have Marshalls?

Again, it's not about better, more competent marshalls, it's about the gov propagating this, 'shoot first, ask later' mentality, backed by criminal impunity cause, 'they have such a difficult job' horseshit.

Of course the gov is promoting the shoot first mentality. This is exactly the image they want to give and in their minds the most effective way to thwart would be bombers.

--

This is what I am talking about with DB. I knew this would be EB's response to that question and thought it would have been DB's as well, but he threw out a response that was seemingly out of character.

zonyl · Post by **zonyl** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 7:33 pm

EBSB52 wrote:
zonyl wrote: Elighten me, what exactly did the terrorists win? The gov benefited by this recent series of events, but that is what it always does.
The two victories are accidentally/coincidentally correlated. The gov wins by having the ability to pass BS; the terrorists win by making the US paranoid and less "free." By "free" I mean that the citizens have fewer freedoms and privacy due to the intrusions the gov now has the license to do. So as much as the US gov hates the terrorists, they benefit at first.

I know the Gov benefitted from this, that is not a contestable point.

I seriously dont think Al Queda's goal was "Make the US less free". I honestly dont think they care about our personal rights over here either way. They are after something bigger (money, power, etc) and apparently still have not "won". If this is a competition in which someone wins, is the game now over? People are still watching reality TV shows, playing Texas Holdem, debating who has got the faster car in forums, etc. Doesnt seem like it is putting an appreciable prize into the terrorists hands.

For that matter what was Al Queda trying to achieve with 9/11? Was this an Israel thing? Cant believe Bin Laden was really all that religious to have a genuine jihad.

Indy · Post by **Indy** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 8:20 pm

What has established the air marshall's incompetence or unprofessionalism? Does anyone know the training procedures for air marshalls?

DiggityBiggity · Post by **DiggityBiggity** » Thu Dec 15, 2005 11:50 pm

Indy wrote:What has established the air marshall's incompetence or unprofessionalism? Does anyone know the training procedures for air marshalls?

As I've said.. the Air Marshalls are failed prison guards.. I'm not kidding.. DrudgeReport had the articles..

As for hiring "more competent" air marshalls... yeah, I'm against the idea that we need them.. but if we do.. we sure as hell better make sure they're rational people, trained to the highest standards.