| 0 |
Subject: Domestic security, 6 years later
Posted by: Perm Dude
- [17946246] Wed, Oct 24, 2007, 17:52
I was reading through this great interview about security (in particularl, the type and emphasis of security at airports), and the huge amount of money we are spending on security. Far and above pre-9/11 amounts. Are we at the point where we can ask: "Is it worth it?"
Money quote:
Q: So if you were in charge of airport security, are there any things that you would implement?
A: I think we should ratchet passenger screening down to pre-9/11 levels. I like seeing positive bag matching. That's something that was done in Europe for decades. The U.S. airlines screamed and screamed and refused to do it, and now they are.
Really, I would take all the extra money for airport security and have well-trained guards, both uniformed and plainclothes, walking through the airports looking for suspicious people. That's what I would do. And I would just give back the rest of the money. If we secure our airport and the terrorists go bomb shopping malls, we've wasted our money. I dislike security measures that require us to guess the plot correctly because if you guess wrong, it's a waste of money. And it's not even a fair game. It's not like we pick our security, they pick their plot, we see who wins. The game is we pick our security, they look at our security, and then they pick their plot. The way to spend money on security airport security, and security in general is intelligence investigation and emergency response. These are the things that will be effective regardless of what the terrorists are planning.
It isn't just an inconvenience to airline passengers anymore. The "need for security" can easily turn one paranoid, spending more time and money (at the expense of civil rights which are sometimes freely given and sometimes not) in the effort to finally feel "secure." At what point do we tell people you can't use the court system anymore if you don't have ID? How about domestic flying? Trains?
And what about the harvesting of personal information about people? Is there a point where it has no security value at all? Is that point actually before the information is recorded?
At what point does that information become too much, in a free society, to trade for the illusion of security? |
Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well.
[Lengthy or complex threads may require a slight delay before updating.] |
| 189 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Sun, Jan 10, 2010, 08:29
|
Being less dependent, creating oil ourselves, wow, look at the jobs that would create. Im telling you I am going to email this post to my senator, how to create jobs. But no, we have a chosen minority that dont want to ruin the environment, so god forbid, we become self efficient. You could put this post in the jobs forum.
|
| 190 | biliruben
ID: 16105237
Sun, Jan 10, 2010, 10:12
|
A majority want to ruin the environment?!?
|
| 191 | Pancho Villa
ID: 29118157
Sun, Jan 10, 2010, 10:34
|
But no, we have a chosen minority that dont want to ruin the environment, so god forbid, we become self efficient.
In order for this country to become self sufficient, energy wise, we would need to dramatically cut back on our consumption, as well as dramatically alter the products we use.
That stems from the fact that there is no "easy oil" left in this country, oil that can be inexpensively retrived by drilling a hole and pumping it into barrels. This country's unexploited oil reserves exist in deep water off shore sites, shale and tar sands, and remote locations like ANWR, which, if you've ever seen last year's Ice Road Truckers TV show, can hardly be classified as "easy oil."
Most of these extraction techniques are extremly expensive, economically unfeasable at today's price per barrell, and yes, in most cases, environmentally damaging.
Short-sighted demands to "Drill, Drill, Drill" will not make this country energy self-sufficient. The most promising way to achieve self suffiency is to ween ourselves from petroleum and turn to natural gas, which this country does have an abundance of reserves, is easier and more environmentally to extract, and doesn't produce the pollutants that oil does. Solar, wind and nuclear are also the future of self sufficient energy consumption.
Jobs would not only be created in the extraction industries, but in the technology and manufacturing fields as well, as we engineer products more in line with the future of transportation, electricity generation, heating and cooling.
|
| 192 | biliruben
ID: 16105237
Sun, Jan 10, 2010, 10:39
|
F'in tree-hugger.
|
| 193 | Tree
ID: 248472317
Sun, Jan 10, 2010, 11:11
|
F'in tree-hugger
i think the phrase you're looking for is Liberal Commie Socialist Marxist.
|
| 194 | sarge33rd
ID: 420471012
Sun, Jan 10, 2010, 13:47
|
you forgot "self-loathing America hating"
:)
|
| 195 | Building 7
ID: 471052128
Thu, Jan 28, 2010, 09:46
|
Did the Underwear Bomber have help in the Amsterdam Airport
Buried at the very end of a two page article published on ABC News on January 22, 2010, is this quote:
Federal agents also tell ABCNews.com they are attempting to identify a man who passengers said helped Abdulmutallab change planes for Detroit when he landed in Amsterdam from Lagos, Nigeria.
Authorities had initially discounted the passenger accounts, but the agents say there is a growing belief the man have played a role to make sure Abdulmutallab “did not get cold feet.”
...........................................
Kurt Haskell has indeed been telling the story about this man since immediately after the Christmas Day incident. On December 26, Sheena Harrison of MLive.com reported:
A Michigan man [Kurt Haskell] who was aboard Northwest Airlines Flight 253 says he witnessed Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab trying to board the plane in Amsterdam without a passport.
Haskell said he and his wife were sitting on the ground near their boarding gate in Amsterdam, which is when they saw Mutallab approach the gate with an unidentified man.
[...]
While Mutallab was poorly dressed, his friend was dressed in an expensive suit, Haskell said. He says the suited man asked ticket agents whether Mutallab could board without a passport. “The guy said, ‘He’s from Sudan and we do this all the time.’”
Mutallab is Nigerian. Haskell believes the man may have been trying to garner sympathy for Mutallab’s lack of documents by portraying him as a Sudanese refugee.
The ticket agent referred Mutallab and his companion to her manager down the hall, and Haskell didn’t see Mutallab again until after he allegedly tried to detonate an explosive on the plane.
Five days later, MLive.com published an update written by Haskell in which he said this about obfuscation on the part of the FBI and Dutch authories:
Please note that there is a very easy way to verify the veracity of my prior “sharp dressed man” account. Dutch police have admitted that they have reviewed the video of the “sharp dressed man” that I referenced. Note that it has not been released anywhere, You see, if my eye witness account is false, it could easily be proven by releasing the video. However, the proof of my eyewitness account would also be verified if I am telling the truth and I am. There is a reason we have only heard of the video and not seen it. dutch authorities, “RELEASE THE VIDEO!” This is the most important video in 8 years and may be all of two minutes long. Show the entire video and “DO NOT EDIT IT”! The American public deserves its own chance to attempt to identify the “sharp dressed man”. I have no doubt that if the video indicated that my account was wrong, that the video would have already swept over the entire world wide web. Instead of the video, we get a statment that the video has been viewed and that the terrorist had a passport. Each of these statements made by the FBI is a self serving play on semantics and each misses the importance of my prior “sharp dressed man” account. The importance being that the man “Tried to board the plane with an accomplice and without a passort”. The other significance is that only the airport security video can verify my eyewitness account and that it is not being released.
Who has the agenda here and who doesn’t? Think about that for a minute
........................................
Me: Somebody decides what stories to run and not to run at different news organizations. Supposedly, independently ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, FOX, NYT, MSNBC, etc. all thought this story was not newsworthy.
|
| 196 | Mith
ID: 43914286
Thu, Jan 28, 2010, 11:01
|
Law enforcement occasionally requests that media organizations not report or wait to report certain things. Though I know I've seen or heard Kurt haskell's account and assume a lot of other people have as well on alternative media, including some of the bigger web sites.
NPR interviewed Haskell on December 28th.
So I don't know why the gvt would gain from supressing it at the mainstream level if the average person who listens to radio reads news on line is likely is likely to stumble across it anyway
Maybe the FBI simply wouldn't varify Haskell's account, failing some previously-agreed standard the industry holds for running this or certain types of stories.
What would a more sinister alternative be? That mass media has collaborated to protect the well-dressed man?
The first link is a Huffington Post entry from Christine Negroni. She also writes for the NYT and wrote a Times article about airline safety following the bloomers-bomber incident and didn't mention haskell. At HuffPo, after noting an account about another incident incident with a different passanger before the same flight, she wrote:Flight 253 passenger Kurt Haskell, also reported that even before the plane departed Amsterdam, he saw Mr. Mutallab in the company of an older Indian gentleman, who was telling the ticket agent that Mr. Muttallab was a Sudanese refugee and should be allowed to board the airplane without a passport. I know, I know, it sounds incredible. But Mr. Haskell, an attorney in suburban Detroit does seem reasonable. His account is at least worth checking out. Maybe that's a clue about what she ran into if she tried to include Haskell's story in her NYT article. Perhaps media is wary of getting burned by unsubstantiated witness accounts following terror-related incidents which turn out to be fabrications, such as the guy who claimed to have confronted and prevented a terrorist attack aboard a plane he was never actually on.
|
| 197 | Pancho Villa
ID: 29118157
Thu, Jan 28, 2010, 11:09
|
Who has the agenda here and who doesn’t? Think about that for a minute
I think about what would have transpired had the attack been successful.
As we know following 9/11, the President was given bipartisan support to invade Afghanistan, implement the Patriot Act and Homeland Security, increase defense spending to benefit entities like the Carlyle Group, Halliburton and General Dynamics, all while blocking any independent and transparent investigation of the attacks.
Is it really a suprise that Mutallab's father's warnings were ignored when FBI field agents in Minnesota and Arizona were ignored when they sounded warnings about Muslims taking flying lessons, but never caring to learn how to land, or the
blatant Florida flight school cover-up?
|
| 198 | Building 7
ID: 471052128
Thu, Jan 28, 2010, 14:02
|
One theory is that he was on the watch list and they let him in on purpose so they could track him and possibly find other terrorists. The government has admitted to doing that sometimes.
Another theory is that he was a patsy and his handlers wanted him to get caught, so that the war on terror could continue. They need one of these "attacks" on occasion to keep the war on terror going. They also seem to have a big hankering to go into Yemen and luckily this guy was supposedly trained there. So they gave him some fake explosives and some instructions. This may also explain why he did not set off the explosives in the bathroom where he could not have been stopped. Ditto for the shoe bomber.
They are also using this as an excuse to wheel out a bunch of body scanner machines. So now for the rest of her life my daughter will have to be oogled by TSA employees.
|
| 199 | boikin
ID: 532592112
Thu, Jan 28, 2010, 14:07
|
B7 why are you my favorite poster? Good possible theories.
|
| 200 | Mith
ID: 43914286
Fri, Jan 29, 2010, 15:53
|
I think I found the reason why the media stopped paying attention to Kurt Haskell's account that a well-dressed man was was telling the ticket agent that Muttallab was a Sudanese refugee and should be allowed to board the airplane without a passport: Dutch counterterrorism officials confirmed a few days later that Abdulmutallab was carrying a valid Nigerian passport and had a valid U.S. visa.The confirmation on Umar Farouq Abdulmutallab's passport comes after a fellow passenger claimed to have seen a possible accomplice help the 23-year-old Nigerian board the flight.
Kurt Haskell, a Michigan resident returning home from a safari in Uganda with his wife, told the Detroit Free Press that he noticed Abdulmutallab "because of who he was traveling with" - a wealthy looking Indian man in his 50s.
Haskell, who was playing cards near the ticket counter at Schipol Airport, said the Indian man told ticket agents that Abdulmutallab "needs to board the plane, but he doesn't have a passport. ... He's from Sudan. We do this all the time."
But the Dutch counter-terrorism unit's investigation into Abdulmutallab's passport pokes holes in the theory that the alleged bomber had help evading security.
|
| 201 | Building 7
ID: 43735169
Sat, Jan 30, 2010, 08:25
|
Underwear bomber's visa kept valid for larger probe, hearing told From The Detroit News:
Washington --The State Department didn't revoke the visa of foiled terrorism suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to protect a larger investigation, a top State Department official revealed Wednesday.
Patrick F. Kennedy, an undersecretary for management at the State Department, said Abdulmutallab's visa wasn't taken away at the request of federal counterterrorism officials concerned that doing so would have foiled an investigation into al-Qaida threats against the United States.
"Revocation action would've disclosed what they were doing," Kennedy said in testimony before the House Committee on Homeland Security.
Allowing Abdulmutallab to keep the visa increased chances federal investigators would be able to get closer to apprehending the terror network he is accused of working with, "rather than simply knocking out one soldier in that effort."
When asked about why the State Department wouldn't revoke the visa despite indications he was involved in a terror plot, Kennedy reiterated his assertion that intelligence agencies sometimes request visas not be revoked "for the purpose of rolling up an entire network, not just one person."
......................................
If you read the back pages of the Detroit News you may already know all about this.
|
| 202 | Building 7
ID: 471052128
Mon, Feb 01, 2010, 12:27
|
The Remaining Questions From Flight 253 And A Discussion Of The Possibilities
From the Haskell Family Blog:
1. Who is the Man in Orange?
2. Did Mutallab know the Sharp Dressed Man?
3. Was it intended that the bomb explode?
4. Did the U.S. Government know that Mutallab had a bomb when it allowed him to board Flight 253?
5. Why is the U.S. Government seeking a plea deal for Mutallab?
6. Why did a fellow passenger call me to discuss changing my story?
7. Why are the important questions being ignored by the mainstream media
Here is #7:
It would seem that in a free country the press would be investigative on all important questions, including those that may show corrupt/grossly negligent activities by its own government. However, as often has been the case, the mainstream media is all too quick to put the “official” story out to the public and not ask the difficult questions. As I am finding out, it is very difficult for a normal everyday citizen to have his concerns heard in the media. Any official statement from the government, however, is immediately reported worldwide. One has to wonder whether the ties between the large corporations that run the media and the U.S. Government itself, have become so tight as to jeopardize the freedom and safety of the U.S. citizens. It has come to the point that some are calling my wife and I heroes for insisting on the truthful reporting of this story. That is a very sad statement, because we are not heroes, but only eyewitnesses. The belief that we are heroes, speaks of the current sad state of affairs in this country. Those that have something to say are scared to come forward with the truth. The United States of America is no longer a free country.
.......................................
So now we know the underwear bomber was allowed to enter the US on purpose, so as to track him and catch more terrorists. At least selected readers of the Detroit News, rotoguru.com, and the Haskell family blog are aware of it. I'm sure the passengers of Flight 253 will be tickled to find this out.
So, sometimes they let terrorists in who are on the terrorist watchlist. What about 911? Were any of them let in on purpose? Many of them were sending off alarms left and right. Big Media should be trying to find out.
|
| 203 | Mith
ID: 43914286
Mon, Feb 01, 2010, 13:21
|
These questions remain regarding Haskell's ceredibility:
1. Why is Haskell still touting the claim that Mutallab did not have a passport after the Dutch cnfirmed that he had one?
2. Why is Haskell still touting the claim that Mutallab boarded with a one-way ticket when the it has confirmed for over a month that he had a round-trip ticket from Lagos to Detroit by way of Amsterdam?
|
| 204 | walk
Dude
ID: 32928238
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 11:03
|
NYT: The Politics of Fear
I agree with this editorial.
|
| 205 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 12:31
|
I didnt know where to put this so what the hell. Hope it all shows-
Even if you are not a sports fan, this is very interesting!
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
36 have been accused of spousal abuse
7 have been arrested for fraud
19 have been accused of writing bad checks
117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses
3 have done time for assault
71, repeat 71
cannot get a credit card due to bad credit
14 have been arrested on drug-related charges
8 have been arrested for shoplifting
21 currently are defendants in lawsuits,
and
84 have been arrested for drunk driving
in the last year
Can you guess which organization this is?
NBA or NFL?
Give up yet?
Scroll down . . .
Neither,
it's the 535 members of the
United States Congress
The same group of Idiots that crank out
hundreds of new laws each year
designed to keep the rest of us in line.
You gotta pass this one on!
|
| 206 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 12:32
|
Dam the pictures didnt come out, oh well.
|
| 207 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 12:33
|
You get the point.
|
| 208 | Tree
ID: 23143812
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 12:48
|
1999 called, and it wants its (questionable and unverifiable) information back...
NG - you're still kinda new here, so please take this as constructive criticism.
posting an email here that was forwarded to you without at least looking into its veracity is not going paint you in a good light.
I'd reccomend doing research on something before accepting it as the truth, not to mention passing it on.
|
| 209 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 12:50
|
Dude, that info is pulled from an 11 year old blog post.
Snopes.
|
| 210 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 12:51
|
Ah ya beat me to it.
|
| 211 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 12:57
|
Still, though: Wonder what the numbers are now? Even with William Jefferson in jail now, I think Congress certainly has a lot of small-time crooks.
|
| 212 | DWetzel
ID: 278201415
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 13:13
|
A different topic would possibly be the spot to wonder about it. Or to speculate about random criminal histories of unnamed Congresspeople.
Even if the above were accurate, it's ridiculously off-topic and should be deleted (preferably by NG himself). "Not knowing where to put it" is not an excuse for dumping it into some random thread.
|
| 213 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 13:17
|
We're all guilty of post dumping. Prefaced by a "not sure where to put this" seems absolutely fine to me, even if I don't agree with the premise of the post.
|
| 214 | DWetzel
ID: 278201415
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 14:32
|
"We're all guilty of post dumping."
Not all of us. (At least I don't think so.)
How hard is it to start a new topic if it's genuinely something new? Or to find a topic that's semi-relevant?
I don't mean to go off on this too hard, but what's the point of having topics for posts if we're not even going to attempt to get somewhere near them?
|
| 215 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 14:37
|
Lighten up already, DW. "I didnt know where to put this" should provide at least some immunity.
|
| 216 | DWetzel
ID: 278201415
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 14:43
|
Trust me, I could be going off a lot harder than this. This IS "lightened up". ;)
Immunity, no. Mitigating circumstances, yes. If it weren't an 11 year old spam email hoax being pasted into a thread, I'd be substantially more lightened up.
I don't think there was anything malicious about this--he wasn't deliberately trying to derail threads or anything--but I think calling it careless and inconsiderate is not going overboard at all. So I am.
|
| 217 | Building 7
ID: 471052128
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 17:07
|
It sounds like something Congress would do. I was going to guess the bloggers at rotoguru that they were talking about.
|
| 218 | boldwin
ID: 441481016
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 17:56
|
Let's face it, the general tenor of that 'hoax' was spot on and the current figures are surely similar. Snopes is not an unassailable judge of true and accurate. They tend to jump on differences that don't make a difference just to score a gotcha. They lean tho not nearly as bad as fact-check which is a purely political propaganda mill.
|
| 219 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 18:19
|
Who called it a hoax? Snopes said it was unverifyable, which is hardly a 'gotcha'.
|
| 220 | Tree
ID: 248472317
Wed, Feb 10, 2010, 20:15
|
Let's face it, the general tenor of that 'hoax' was spot on and the current figures are surely similar.
the point is, we don't even know if the figures were accurate back in 1999. It's information that can't be verified, as there are no names attached.
The same bit of "information" has been passed around, only attached to the Parliaments of various countries and professional sports leagues.
|
| 221 | Tree
ID: 248472317
Sun, Mar 07, 2010, 18:48
|
Officers: Pakistan arrests American-born al-Qaida
hopefully, we'll get some U.S. confirmation on this, but presuming it's true, this goes a long way in proving that the Right Wingers in this country are absolutely correct when they say that this country is less safe with Obama and he's weak on terrorism.. [/sarcasm]
|
| 222 | Tree
ID: 248472317
Mon, Mar 08, 2010, 08:45
|
Close, but no cigar...
An American member of al-Qaida was picked up in a raid in Pakistan's southern city of Karachi, Pakistani officials said Monday, but reversed earlier assertions that the detained man was the terror network's U.S.-born spokesman.
They identified the suspect as Abu Yahya Majadin Adam, but gave no details on his background or role within al-Qaida.
A name very close to that is listed on the FBI's Web site as an alias for Adam Gadahn, the 31-year-old spokesman who has appeared in several videos threatening the West since 2001. The resemblance created confusion among officials Sunday, leading them to believe that the suspect was Gadahn, an army officer and a senior intelligence officer said.
|
| 223 | Perm Dude
ID: 201027169
Thu, Jun 20, 2013, 14:10
|
Missed this, but a good piece: Judge's statement at the sentencing of the shoe bomber.
|
| 224 | sarge33rd
ID: 4609710
Thu, Jun 20, 2013, 14:54
|
I have long, and often said...these are terrorists, not soldiers. They are criminals, not combatants. It is a legal issue, not a military one.
|
| 225 | Boldwin
ID: 2555216
Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 07:12
|
I have long said , they thus don't have Geneva Convention protections for that reason and if they aren't citizens, they don't necessarily have constitutional rights, only basic human rights.
|
| 226 | Mith
ID: 412561115
Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 08:13
|
Hahaha!
A perusal of your posts in the "Closing Gitmo is Pandering to the Left" thread betrays what you have actually long believed about the unalienable rights of terrorists and accused terrorists.
|
| 227 | sarge33rd
ID: 4609710
Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 09:50
|
Our judicial system Boldwin, grants rights to ALL accused. Citizens or no, makes no never mind. Again, when "rights" are selectively doled out, they cease to BE rights, and become privileges.
|
| 228 | Boldwin
ID: 2555216
Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 11:00
|
It is a privilege to be a citizen. It isn't a right.
If our law treats all mankind exactly the same all people the world over would be allowed to vote in our elections. That isn't legal but your confusion on the matter partially explains why you'd rather be set on fire than allow us to check voter's ID's.
Sneaking up to people without a uniform to kill them is a decidedly uncivilized barbaric act and does not make you eligible to special protections built into the written and unwritten codes of civilization.
|
| 229 | Mith
ID: 412561115
Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 12:12
|
I'd ask about the distinction between the unwritten codes of civilization and basic human rights but I know better.
|
| 230 | Boldwin
ID: 2555216
Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 12:33
|
Suffice it to say that neither one involves voting in other people's elections or murdering people and getting special soft accomodations and privileges as a reward..
|
| 231 | Perm Dude
ID: 201027169
Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 12:35
|
Heh. Citizenship is certainly a right. But the Constitution, for those with even a whisper of awareness of it, doesn't limit rights to citizens only.
The Founding Fathers were quite clear on this.
|
| 232 | boikin
ID: 430211013
Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 13:16
|
Unless they decide to you know drone assassinate you on foreign soil. I guess your rights as a citizen are limited by our boarders?
|
| 233 | Perm Dude
ID: 201027169
Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 13:20
|
All rights are limited in one way other--we have millions of citizens locked away in jails in this country, for instance. That doesn't make them without rights. Or that citizenship is a privilege rather than a right.
|
| 234 | Mith
ID: 412561115
Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 15:26
|
Pretty sure the FFs didn't include a drone strike exemption in the DOI.
I'll let Boldy's work here and in the Gitmo thread serve as yet another response to his recent laughter over my pointing out that the political right has been and continues to be the more authoritarian faction in American politics.
|
| 235 | sarge33rd
ID: 4609710
Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 18:33
|
Our criminal justice system Boldwin, is not confined to US citizens. It is applicable, to all who face US charges. Just as Turkish law prevails when charged in a Turk court, or German law in a German court. US Law is relevant to any and all who face charges in a US court.
That you would argue otherwise, speaks ill of both your grasp, and our nations future.
|
| 236 | sarge33rd
ID: 4609710
Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 18:45
|
From 228:
If our law treats all mankind exactly the same all people the world over would be allowed to vote in our elections.
I gotta ask B, are there really people who think you know WTF you are talking about? Seriously?
|
| 237 | Boldwin
ID: 465452112
Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 20:22
|
Yeah, lots of people agree with #228. Lots of people believe illegal aliens do not have the same legal rights as citizens and that sneaking up to someone to kill them without wearing a uniform does not get you Geneva Convention protections.
|
| 238 | Perm Dude
ID: 201027169
Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 20:31
|
Again, sarge, not worth it. He lives in a fantasy land of his own making, where the rules change merely because he might otherwise feel discomfort. Let it ride.
|
If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect,
you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com | |
|
|
Post a reply to this message: Domestic security, 6 years later
|
|