Remembering what's important
Jun 26, 2005 | 6:45 pm
#31
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Programs: AA Plat (2MM), AS MVPG, DL DM, HH Dia(life), Hyatt Dia, SPG Plat
Posts: 281
Originally Posted by amarain
At any rate, it's obvious that the vast majority of people have completely forgotten what happened, what that day was like, how angry we all were for a few days, and now everything has gone back to normal.
Jun 26, 2005 | 6:48 pm
#32
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Programs: UA 1P
Posts: 184
Originally Posted by Bart
Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, non-Airborne. You missed the point I was responding to. Someone said better-trained passengers and unless there are a bunch of secret schools out there, I don't know of any airline or government program that has trained passengers how to react to terrorist situations. Do you?
[snip]
(Your comments cause me to question your military background. Not meant as an offense; just curious about what it is in your military background that makes you think civilians can be relied on 100% of the time to take appropriate action.)
[snip]
And I wouldn't hang my hat on ex-military for physical reaction to threats; a lot of ex-military let themselves get fat and out of shape; some don't. That's not laughable, it's sad. (Which category do you fit in?)
[snip]
(Your comments cause me to question your military background. Not meant as an offense; just curious about what it is in your military background that makes you think civilians can be relied on 100% of the time to take appropriate action.)
[snip]
And I wouldn't hang my hat on ex-military for physical reaction to threats; a lot of ex-military let themselves get fat and out of shape; some don't. That's not laughable, it's sad. (Which category do you fit in?)
Just for the record, my reading comprehension skills are fine, but thanks for the concern. (one interesting note - there was a passenger on one of the 911 flights who may have been better trained in anti-terrorism operations than the average FAM - Danny Lewin. For those unfamiliar, he was a former Israeli special operations officer. Of course, he was outnumbered and unequipped - he was taken out quite earlier)I certainly never said that civilians could be called upon to react or react appopriately 100% of the time. Cops certainly do not. There's no way civilians could.
On the other hand, I seem to have much more faith in the civilian population than some on this forum. As to your concern about my military status and fitness - I'm in reasonable shape, and I'd be happy to fax you a DD214. I wasn't a super-airborne anti-terrorist commando of some sort (were you? if so, I'm impressed with your intestinal fortitude, if nothing else), but I'm refering a bit more to the attitude of taking action rather than pathetically accepting one's fate in a bad situation. Enough reasonably agressive people of a sufficient level of fitness can resolve a situation, one way or another. Well, so long as the population isn't conditioned to do nothing and wait for rescue that may never come.
Jun 26, 2005 | 7:33 pm
#33
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,389
Originally Posted by dgolding
I certainly never said that civilians could be called upon to react or react appopriately 100% of the time. Cops certainly do not. There's no way civilians could.
Originally Posted by dgolding
On the other hand, I seem to have much more faith in the civilian population than some on this forum. As to your concern about my military status and fitness - I'm in reasonable shape, and I'd be happy to fax you a DD214. I wasn't a super-airborne anti-terrorist commando of some sort (were you? if so, I'm impressed with your intestinal fortitude, if nothing else), but I'm refering a bit more to the attitude of taking action rather than pathetically accepting one's fate in a bad situation. Enough reasonably agressive people of a sufficient level of fitness can resolve a situation, one way or another. Well, so long as the population isn't conditioned to do nothing and wait for rescue that may never come.
However, it doesn't matter what we did in our past as much as it matters how we are in the present. To that end, what we did in our past does matter if it contributes to how we are in the present. On the other hand, if we do nothing to enhance or hone those skills, then they are but mere memories of perhaps better days. I mean this with no disrespect towards any former or retired military or other endeavor. I only mean that it takes more than "ex-military" to get my attention.
Crisis situations require ordinary people to do extraordinary things to survive. To a certain degree, you can rely on those who have been trained to respond although there is always a possibility that someone who has been trained may freeze up. Untrained people who are not expected to respond can, at times, surprise everyone by responding in a particularly aggressive and effective manner. Some people are instinctive warriors. However, I would venture to say that in a society and culture that discourages physically aggressive behavior and naively believes that all problems can be solved intellectually, those instinctive warriors are a rare breed.
The real b*tch of it is that these are matters that are decided in a matter of seconds (when the opportunity presents itself), with the odds of survival decreasing with each minute that elapses. And under those conditions, even highly-trained professionals have the odds stacked against them.
Jun 26, 2005 | 8:02 pm
#34
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by PatrickHenry1775
Regarding the last few posts, we only have to look at the 9/11 flight that crashed in the Pennsylvania field to see how effective passengers are. I only wish that more Americans had been on the flight on which Richard Reid tried to light his shoe bombs. That idiot even resisted initial attempts to apprehend him, so passengers would have been justified in beating him to a pulp. I hope that Richard Reid is incarcerated in a cell block or pod with some white supremacists who make every day a living hell for him.
Jun 27, 2005 | 7:01 pm
#35
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Currently: U.S. Virgin Islands
Programs: AA EXP, CO PLT, Marriott PP
Posts: 365
Originally Posted by GUWonder
If only the above fiction were reality.
The current US government foolishly created the best training ground possible for terrorists since a) the Soviets left Afghanistan and we let the Pakistanis et al play their own games in Afghanistan and b) we belatedly addressed that power void/issue after 9/11 (in piece-meal).
Where is the terrorist-training ground & haven that is todays version of Afghanistan on the eve of 9/11? Iraq.
The current US government foolishly created the best training ground possible for terrorists since a) the Soviets left Afghanistan and we let the Pakistanis et al play their own games in Afghanistan and b) we belatedly addressed that power void/issue after 9/11 (in piece-meal).
Where is the terrorist-training ground & haven that is todays version of Afghanistan on the eve of 9/11? Iraq.
1) Saddam was involved in both WTC I and II attcks.
2) Due to the above point and a few other isssues, he was removed.
3) Afghan was the home of many al-Qaeda Ottoman hopefuls. We took Afghan.
4) A battlefield needed to be created - Iraq was a choice property. Better there than the U.S.
5) We kill the jihadists in Iraq.
Very easy to understand.
Next question.
Jun 27, 2005 | 7:16 pm
#36
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Miami, FL
Programs: AA EXP/Marriott Plat/Hertz PC
Posts: 12,724
Originally Posted by amarain
I just read some extracts from the 9/11 Commission here.
Even though you hear 9/11 this, 9/11 that every day - it's become a cliche, really - reading those accounts, imagining what it must have been like to be on those flights, remembering that day gave me chills.
It's become so easy, amidst all of the ridiculousness to forget what exactly is happening - or rather, is NOT happening. After reading those transcripts, reading all the 'security' measures that were in place that day, I'm reminded that nothing has actually changed, and it makes me angry.
Even though you hear 9/11 this, 9/11 that every day - it's become a cliche, really - reading those accounts, imagining what it must have been like to be on those flights, remembering that day gave me chills.
It's become so easy, amidst all of the ridiculousness to forget what exactly is happening - or rather, is NOT happening. After reading those transcripts, reading all the 'security' measures that were in place that day, I'm reminded that nothing has actually changed, and it makes me angry.
Jun 27, 2005 | 11:46 pm
#37
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,077
Originally Posted by DMorris
Swimming past the above fiction I failed to encounter any hint of reality. GU, with all of your knowledge and ability to determine the truth, I am surprised at your question. I will enlighten you. Consider the following:
1) Saddam was involved in both WTC I and II attcks.
1) Saddam was involved in both WTC I and II attcks.
Let me help you with some basic facts and interrupt your use of confusion to advocate your version of "history" -- a "history" story which is nothing more than revisionist history to peddle political viewpoints regardless of facts & reality.
Presuming that by "Saddam" you are talking about Saddam Hussein and that by "WTC II att[a]cks" you are referring to 9-11, here are some facts:
1. OBL was behind the WTC II (aka 9-11) attacks
2. OBL & Co. made repeated attempts on Saddam Hussein's life and on attacking his regime.
3. No objective evidence of Iraqis involved in Saddam Hussein's government participating in the attacks on 9-11 or in the planning. KSM and OSS have independently confirmed such and OBL-, KSM- and OSS-handlers in the ISI know that to be the case too.
Originally Posted by DMorris
2) Due to the above point and a few other isssues, he was removed.
Originally Posted by DMorris
3) Afghan was the home of many al-Qaeda Ottoman hopefuls. We took Afghan.
If you don't want to let the facts get in your way, that's your own business; however, dishonesty and revisionist history do not a reality make.
Originally Posted by DMorris
4) A battlefield needed to be created - Iraq was a choice property. Better there than the U.S.
Originally Posted by DMorris
5) We kill the jihadists in Iraq.
Very easy to understand.
Next question.
Very easy to understand.
Next question.
Originally Posted by GUWonder
The current US government foolishly created the best training ground possible for terrorists since a) the Soviets left Afghanistan and we let the Pakistanis et al play their own games in Afghanistan and b) we belatedly addressed that power void/issue after 9/11 (in piece-meal).
Where is the terrorist-training ground & haven that is todays version of Afghanistan on the eve of 9/11? Iraq.
Where is the terrorist-training ground & haven that is todays version of Afghanistan on the eve of 9/11? Iraq.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The CIA believes the Iraq insurgency poses an international threat and may produce better-trained Islamic terrorists than the 1980s Afghanistan war that gave rise to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, officials said on Wednesday.
A classified report from the U.S. spy agency says Iraqi and foreign fighters are developing a broad range of skills, from car bombings and assassinations to coordinated conventional attacks on police and military targets, officials said.
Once the insurgency ends, Islamic militants are likely to disperse as highly organized battle-hardened combatants capable of operating throughout the Arab-speaking world and in other regions including Europe.
Fighters leaving Iraq would primarily pose a challenge for their countries of origin including Saudi Arabia and Jordan.
But the May report, which has been widely circulated in the intelligence community, also cites a potential threat to the United States.
"You have people coming to the action with anti-U.S. sentiment ... And since they're Iraqi or foreign Arabs or to some degree Kurds, they have more communities they can blend into outside Iraq," said a U.S. counterterrorism official, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the report's classified status.
Canada also released an intelligence report saying the Sunni insurgency in Iraq posed a global problem given that most of the world's Sunni Muslims live outside the Middle East.
"The current war in Iraq is creating a whole new set of extremists," the Canadian Security Intelligence Service said in a briefing document obtained by Reuters.
Meanwhile, a Pentagon official said the CIA report appeared to be a synthesis of intelligence information already known to military commanders in the Gulf region.
Iraq has become a magnet for Islamic militants similar to Soviet-occupied Afghanistan two decades ago and Bosnia in the 1990s, U.S. officials say.
A classified report from the U.S. spy agency says Iraqi and foreign fighters are developing a broad range of skills, from car bombings and assassinations to coordinated conventional attacks on police and military targets, officials said.
Once the insurgency ends, Islamic militants are likely to disperse as highly organized battle-hardened combatants capable of operating throughout the Arab-speaking world and in other regions including Europe.
Fighters leaving Iraq would primarily pose a challenge for their countries of origin including Saudi Arabia and Jordan.
But the May report, which has been widely circulated in the intelligence community, also cites a potential threat to the United States.
"You have people coming to the action with anti-U.S. sentiment ... And since they're Iraqi or foreign Arabs or to some degree Kurds, they have more communities they can blend into outside Iraq," said a U.S. counterterrorism official, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the report's classified status.
Canada also released an intelligence report saying the Sunni insurgency in Iraq posed a global problem given that most of the world's Sunni Muslims live outside the Middle East.
"The current war in Iraq is creating a whole new set of extremists," the Canadian Security Intelligence Service said in a briefing document obtained by Reuters.
Meanwhile, a Pentagon official said the CIA report appeared to be a synthesis of intelligence information already known to military commanders in the Gulf region.
Iraq has become a magnet for Islamic militants similar to Soviet-occupied Afghanistan two decades ago and Bosnia in the 1990s, U.S. officials say.
Apparently I am not the only that knows that Iraq was not a choice property for attacking in the manner it was.
D-, when swimming past your above fiction, I am not the only one who failed to encounter any meaningful hint of reality in reading your post. "Your knowledge" and "ability to determine the truth" clearly produces different results than the reality as observed by far more objective realists.
Last edited by GUWonder; Jun 27, 2005 at 11:49 pm
Jun 28, 2005 | 12:11 am
#38
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: AA, WN RR
Posts: 3,122
I am not so sure that the CIA knows much about that part of the world. For years the CIA was fairly certain that Iraq had WMD in its possession and was developing additional weapons. We now know that was incorrect.
Jun 28, 2005 | 12:24 am
#39
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: AA, WN RR
Posts: 3,122
Originally Posted by Bart
The victims on UA flight 93 responded heroically. Had the passengers not reacted, the terrorists certainly would have taken out another target and would have killed more innocent victims located inside the target as well as bystanders within the immediate vicinity. The passengers on UA flight 93 paid the ultimate sacrifice to save lives. I don't think there could have been any other outcome in order to stop the terrorists on that flight.
I don't know if others would do the same thing knowing that they are essentially going to get themselves killed in an effort to prevent others from getting killed. I don't mean this as any sort of affront against the passengers of flight 93. I'm just pointing out that charging a cockpit and either risking that the terrorists may really have a bomb and will detonate it or that the terrorist pilot will deliberately crash the plane or that the plane may end up crashing anyway due to loss of control or other factors, is a helluva decision to make. I personally think that many people are determined to fight back. However, I also think that there are a number of people who might hesitate, thinking that perhaps the terrorist doesn't intend to crash the plane. The real question that comes into play is the combination of mentalities at a given critical moment and who will prevail.
Combat troops who take unusual risks do so without thinking about it. It just seems like the right thing to do at the time. Once they've survived the encounter, perhaps even receiving a medal for their actions, they look back, think about what they did and become a little more careful the next time. It's human nature. There are those who are truly fearless, but for the most part, many will not be so bold the next time around. Many of the troops on D-Day pretty much figured out that they were already dead, and it was just a matter of time before their fate was sealed. There were many extraordinarily brave deeds on that day. Those who survived it suddenly realized that they loved being alive and began to take more precautions on their next combat engagement. Not saying that they lost their nerve. Just saying that the closer they got to the point of realizing that they were indeed going to go back home alive, they became more and more careful. The passengers on UA flight 93 knew their fate was sealed. Not so sure another plane of passengers would take the same action. They may, they may not. There are too many dynamic factors as varied as the different personalities that board any given flight.
As for the rest of your post, you illustrate my point exactly about my criticisms of vigilante passengers. Reid was subdued, restrained and handed over to law enforcement authorities so that he could stand trial for his crime. But you would go the extra step to beat him to a pulp because, after all, he has it coming. You're not interested in justice; you crave the emotional satisfaction of beating someone up to compensate for the fear and terror they instilled in you and others.
Not exactly becoming of someone using the handle of a patriot whose name is associated with the fundamental American principles of rights, due process and fair treatment under the law.
I don't know if others would do the same thing knowing that they are essentially going to get themselves killed in an effort to prevent others from getting killed. I don't mean this as any sort of affront against the passengers of flight 93. I'm just pointing out that charging a cockpit and either risking that the terrorists may really have a bomb and will detonate it or that the terrorist pilot will deliberately crash the plane or that the plane may end up crashing anyway due to loss of control or other factors, is a helluva decision to make. I personally think that many people are determined to fight back. However, I also think that there are a number of people who might hesitate, thinking that perhaps the terrorist doesn't intend to crash the plane. The real question that comes into play is the combination of mentalities at a given critical moment and who will prevail.
Combat troops who take unusual risks do so without thinking about it. It just seems like the right thing to do at the time. Once they've survived the encounter, perhaps even receiving a medal for their actions, they look back, think about what they did and become a little more careful the next time. It's human nature. There are those who are truly fearless, but for the most part, many will not be so bold the next time around. Many of the troops on D-Day pretty much figured out that they were already dead, and it was just a matter of time before their fate was sealed. There were many extraordinarily brave deeds on that day. Those who survived it suddenly realized that they loved being alive and began to take more precautions on their next combat engagement. Not saying that they lost their nerve. Just saying that the closer they got to the point of realizing that they were indeed going to go back home alive, they became more and more careful. The passengers on UA flight 93 knew their fate was sealed. Not so sure another plane of passengers would take the same action. They may, they may not. There are too many dynamic factors as varied as the different personalities that board any given flight.
As for the rest of your post, you illustrate my point exactly about my criticisms of vigilante passengers. Reid was subdued, restrained and handed over to law enforcement authorities so that he could stand trial for his crime. But you would go the extra step to beat him to a pulp because, after all, he has it coming. You're not interested in justice; you crave the emotional satisfaction of beating someone up to compensate for the fear and terror they instilled in you and others.
Not exactly becoming of someone using the handle of a patriot whose name is associated with the fundamental American principles of rights, due process and fair treatment under the law.
When dealing with terrorist scum like Richard Reid, fundamental American principles such as rights, due process, and fair treatment under the law should not be a concern, especially considering those concepts have been truncated during the screening of Americans in airports. The Clinton administration made the mistake of applying American law enforcement principles to terrorism. The result was Somalia, WTC I, the U.S.S. Cole, and 9/11.
If terrorist suspects basically caught in the act (i.e. Richard Reid, battlefield combatants) are apprehended alive, I personally have no problem with extremely vigorous interrogation, although we should stop well short of electrical devices and other bona fide methods of torture as an example for the rest of the world. Once such a suspect stops talking, or his information is demonstrated to be false, then two rounds of .45 ACT - splurge and use JHP bullets - should be used to speed the suspect to his rendezvous with the virgins in paradise. Good riddance.
Jun 28, 2005 | 12:33 am
#40
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,077
Originally Posted by PatrickHenry1775
I am not so sure that the CIA knows much about that part of the world. For years the CIA was fairly certain that Iraq had WMD in its possession and was developing additional weapons. We now know that was incorrect.
Yes, there are deficiencies, but I am not so sure that any other sizeable part of the US government knows much more than the CIA about "that part of the world".
Last edited by GUWonder; Jun 28, 2005 at 12:36 am
Jun 28, 2005 | 12:42 am
#41
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: AA, WN RR
Posts: 3,122
Originally Posted by GUWonder
The better part of the CIA was confident that there were no nukes in Iraq, but were told to make a slam dunk case to get us into Iraq. And they played enough games and pulled enough shennanigans to make sure the Boss had his way.
Yes, there are deficiencies, but I am not so sure that any other sizeable part of the US government knows much more than the CIA about "that part of the world".
Yes, there are deficiencies, but I am not so sure that any other sizeable part of the US government knows much more than the CIA about "that part of the world".
Jun 28, 2005 | 1:05 am
#42
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,077
Originally Posted by PatrickHenry1775
GU, I agree with you there, and that is a huge issue. Our intelligence is so poor, the terrorists/whacked-out Wahhabis can operate with impunity over large expanses of the Mid-East. Combine that factor with several governments that largely sympathize with the Islamofascists, and we have a problem.
Jun 28, 2005 | 5:05 am
#43
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,389
Originally Posted by PatrickHenry1775
When dealing with terrorist scum like Richard Reid, fundamental American principles such as rights, due process, and fair treatment under the law should not be a concern, especially considering those concepts have been truncated during the screening of Americans in airports. The Clinton administration made the mistake of applying American law enforcement principles to terrorism. The result was Somalia, WTC I, the U.S.S. Cole, and 9/11.
If terrorist suspects basically caught in the act (i.e. Richard Reid, battlefield combatants) are apprehended alive, I personally have no problem with extremely vigorous interrogation, although we should stop well short of electrical devices and other bona fide methods of torture as an example for the rest of the world. Once such a suspect stops talking, or his information is demonstrated to be false, then two rounds of .45 ACT - splurge and use JHP bullets - should be used to speed the suspect to his rendezvous with the virgins in paradise. Good riddance.
If terrorist suspects basically caught in the act (i.e. Richard Reid, battlefield combatants) are apprehended alive, I personally have no problem with extremely vigorous interrogation, although we should stop well short of electrical devices and other bona fide methods of torture as an example for the rest of the world. Once such a suspect stops talking, or his information is demonstrated to be false, then two rounds of .45 ACT - splurge and use JHP bullets - should be used to speed the suspect to his rendezvous with the virgins in paradise. Good riddance.
Jun 28, 2005 | 8:12 am
#44
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 181
Originally Posted by GUWonder
Apparently the above post is indicative of an example of how some have no trouble rolling over facts to advocate revisionist history.
Let me help you with some basic facts and interrupt your use of confusion to advocate your version of "history" -- a "history" story which is nothing more than revisionist history to peddle political viewpoints regardless of facts & reality.
Presuming that by "Saddam" you are talking about Saddam Hussein and that by "WTC II att[a]cks" you are referring to 9-11, here are some facts:
1. OBL was behind the WTC II (aka 9-11) attacks
2. OBL & Co. made repeated attempts on Saddam Hussein's life and on attacking his regime.
3. No objective evidence of Iraqis involved in Saddam Hussein's government participating in the attacks on 9-11 or in the planning. KSM and OSS have independently confirmed such and OBL-, KSM- and OSS-handlers in the ISI know that to be the case too.
What an entertaining way to mix facts and fiction. Due to A (a false A at that) and unmentionables that cover everything from A to Z, he was removed. Get to the chase. The "and a few other issues" were why he was removed. Your Item 1 was the false god used to rally a critical mass to buy fiction so that a new reality could be designed. Of course, reality is not easy to design, but fictions are.
The Ottoman Empire was not looked upon kindly by either Al-Qaeda or by the Taliban. Their inspiration comes from Arab (and even Kurdish-led) adventures far more than Turkish (read: Ottoman) ones.
If you don't want to let the facts get in your way, that's your own business; however, dishonesty and revisionist history do not a reality make.
The (il)logic of false choices.
Very easy to understand that you are operating on false premises. See my above response to your Item 1. (And the Prague "meeting" is just pushing the envelope to the point of prima facie insanity.)
I hope the following is not too hard to understand:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor..._iraq_cia_dc_4
Apparently I am not the only that knows that Iraq was not a choice property for attacking in the manner it was.
D-, when swimming past your above fiction, I am not the only one who failed to encounter any meaningful hint of reality in reading your post. "Your knowledge" and "ability to determine the truth" clearly produces different results than the reality as observed by far more objective realists.
Let me help you with some basic facts and interrupt your use of confusion to advocate your version of "history" -- a "history" story which is nothing more than revisionist history to peddle political viewpoints regardless of facts & reality.
Presuming that by "Saddam" you are talking about Saddam Hussein and that by "WTC II att[a]cks" you are referring to 9-11, here are some facts:
1. OBL was behind the WTC II (aka 9-11) attacks
2. OBL & Co. made repeated attempts on Saddam Hussein's life and on attacking his regime.
3. No objective evidence of Iraqis involved in Saddam Hussein's government participating in the attacks on 9-11 or in the planning. KSM and OSS have independently confirmed such and OBL-, KSM- and OSS-handlers in the ISI know that to be the case too.
What an entertaining way to mix facts and fiction. Due to A (a false A at that) and unmentionables that cover everything from A to Z, he was removed. Get to the chase. The "and a few other issues" were why he was removed. Your Item 1 was the false god used to rally a critical mass to buy fiction so that a new reality could be designed. Of course, reality is not easy to design, but fictions are.
The Ottoman Empire was not looked upon kindly by either Al-Qaeda or by the Taliban. Their inspiration comes from Arab (and even Kurdish-led) adventures far more than Turkish (read: Ottoman) ones.
If you don't want to let the facts get in your way, that's your own business; however, dishonesty and revisionist history do not a reality make.
The (il)logic of false choices.
Very easy to understand that you are operating on false premises. See my above response to your Item 1. (And the Prague "meeting" is just pushing the envelope to the point of prima facie insanity.)
I hope the following is not too hard to understand:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor..._iraq_cia_dc_4
Apparently I am not the only that knows that Iraq was not a choice property for attacking in the manner it was.
D-, when swimming past your above fiction, I am not the only one who failed to encounter any meaningful hint of reality in reading your post. "Your knowledge" and "ability to determine the truth" clearly produces different results than the reality as observed by far more objective realists.
Jun 28, 2005 | 9:29 am
#45
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Miami, FL
Programs: AA EXP/Marriott Plat/Hertz PC
Posts: 12,724
Originally Posted by PatrickHenry1775
When dealing with terrorist scum like Richard Reid, fundamental American principles such as rights, due process, and fair treatment under the law should not be a concern, especially considering those concepts have been truncated during the screening of Americans in airports. The Clinton administration made the mistake of applying American law enforcement principles to terrorism. The result was Somalia, WTC I, the U.S.S. Cole, and 9/11.
To me, the people who suspend rights over here in reaction to the terrorists have become their allies. They've broken the back of 200 years of liberty and handed the terrorists what they aimed for. It's really sad.
Last edited by whirledtraveler; Jun 28, 2005 at 9:37 am