Greetings from your friendly, neighborhood, TERRORIST!

Personally, I'd rather my law
enforcement (military or civilian) be a little less jumpy, but if they are,
the solution is not for me (or the original poster) to comply with their
illegitimate requests. Rather, the solution is to fire the jumpy law
enforcement officers and hire ones that have more common sense.


The OP does not have the ability to fire jumpy law enforcement officers (at
least not those in question). However, he probably does have a pilot
certificate. It can be revoked at any time without recourse.

I would not bet my certificate that there would be no adverse consequences to
not obeying orders, whether these orders are legit or not. Not in this
country. Not now.

Jose



--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

In a previous article, (Teacherjh) said:
I would not bet my certificate that there would be no adverse consequences to
not obeying orders, whether these orders are legit or not. Not in this
country. Not now.

Which is about the saddest thing ever.


--
Paul Tomblin http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
The software said it requires Windows 95 or better, so I installed Linux

(Paul Tomblin) wrote in
:

In a previous article, (Teacherjh) said:
I would not bet my certificate that there would be no adverse
consequences to not obeying orders, whether these orders are legit or
not. Not in this country. Not now.

Which is about the saddest thing ever.



and maybe a terrorist is thinking twice before attempting an attack..
Because there was a brave National guardsman that saw something out of the
ordinary (assumed), stood his ground and took the un-popular step of
removing a unknown threat. Politely and with professionalism...

Regardless what we say here, Put yourselves in his shoes...on the last
watch someone got in and 3000 people paid the price. There are people still
out there that want to repeat their horror... Thank goodness hes stepping
up....

Which is the best thing ever...

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"C Kingsbury" wrote in message
ink.net...


And yes, I do know that of which I speak. I was grounded for three
months
after 9/11 because of the massive BOS-NYC-DC TFRs that no one cared to
explain.

TFRs that were not reasonable, that were not justified, and should have
been
criticized loudly. Inasmuch as you sit around claiming that they *were*
reasonable, you deserved to be grounded.

Let me put it to you this way: how many people three years ago thought we
would make it through to today with not a single domestic attack?

Here's the real problem: the government can't really afford to tell us
everything it knows that decisions are based upon. So we're left to argue in
an atmosphere of highly-politicized misinformation. The TFRs were probably
an extreme over-reaction but sometimes these things are clear only in
hindsight.

From my perspective, the one possible benefit to a Kerry administration
might be to reduce the level of mistrust that's out there, though I suspect
the fever-swamps of the right might just trade places with the Michael Moore
left and indulge themselves in equally ludicrous persecution fantasies. In
WWII the country was effectively united 100% on this issue of winning the
war. Today it is not and the lack of inter-party trust is a key faultline
there, that poses a great threat to our ability to respond effectively.

If we get hit again at home, and with the election right around the
corner
there's plenty of reason to be on guard, we might lose everything.

Everything? That seems a little extreme. How, exactly, do you suggest
that
we'd lose literally everything? Near as I can tell, we'd lose very
little.
Our government is reasonably well protected from problems even when the
"top
brass" is killed. Frankly, while I can't stand to think of anyone being
killed, sometimes I think we could benefit from losing the entire top
echelon of government so we could start over. I certainly don't believe
we'd lose everything, or even close to everything.

Well, it all depends on magnitude. A dirty bomb that renders a large part of
a major city uninhabitable, or a chemical attack that kills into the
thousands, could be enormously destabilizing to a host of tightly
interconnected systems. The economy would be devastated as it's just now
recovering from 9/11, and this could cause major issues in the global
economy. The price of oil could surge even more, which digs the hole deeper.
Exchange rates could go wacky and upset all kinds of arrangements. A global
depression is a very real possibility.

No, OK, this is not "everything," perhaps I am being a little hyperbolic,
but I think you're being far too blithe about the cost of the kind of
destabilization such an attack entails.

And of course, if we did lose a significant part of the government, or a
very large number of civilians, we could be looking at a lot more war than
just Iraq. To paraphrase an old Navy man, the US has not yet begun to fight.
If the people of this country got well and truly *****ed off* and were
willing to really commit to a no-holds-barred war, well, I shudder to
consider the consequences. The US has a very potent martial streak that has
not yet been fully awakened by the GWOT. Another big attack could shift the
national mood in unexpected directions, some of which would prove very
unpleasant for the sandier parts of the world.

Of course, if you think the whole terrorism thing is a big lie ginned up by
Karl Rove to get Shrub elected, there's probably no point in discussing the
issue further.

Best,
-cwk.

C Kingsbury wrote:

Here's the real problem: the government can't really afford to tell us
everything it knows that decisions are based upon. So we're left to argue in
an atmosphere of highly-politicized misinformation.

Not only that, but Kerry will not be privy to much of the information until he's
elected (*if* he's elected), so he can't really have a good idea of what he will do
about many of the situations we face today.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


C Kingsbury wrote:

Here's the real problem: the government can't really afford to tell us
everything it knows that decisions are based upon. So we're left to argue
in
an atmosphere of highly-politicized misinformation.

Not only that, but Kerry will not be privy to much of the information
until he's
elected (*if* he's elected), so he can't really have a good idea of what
he will do
about many of the situations we face today.

George, you make a very good point...

Because he can't be privy to all the info, he's left with only being able to
attack what has gone before. And of course, hindsight is 20/20.

Which, in turn, leaves all of us with the Hobson's Choice of: Do we
continue as we are currently going (with all the inherent risks...) or do we
change horses and hope the new horse doesn't balk at the bell.

The more I think about it, the more I realize that this coming election is
one which will have very far reaching implications for our future.

No matter what your preferences may be...please, everyone, GO VOTE!!!

Remeber, if you don't vote...you can't ever say "Don't blame me, I didn't
vote for (Insert Winner.)"

;o)

Jay Beckman
Student Pilot - KCHD
50.1 Hrs ... Nowhere to go but up!

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

The soldier had no business running the original poster off, unless he was
on military property (it's not clear whether he was or not).

He wasn't.

We have a government that will not trust its own citizens to own
semi-automatic rifles that look mean, but which will sell the latest
weaponry to any third world thug that wants it. No wonder they are edgy.

I am getting rather edgy myself. If the National Guardsman had made any
threatening moves, I think Mr. Nescio would have been justified in shooting
him in self defense.

C,

In case you haven't noticed, there's at least a couple ten thousand loonies
out there who want to kill us in large numbers.


Oh yes? Says who? Bush? Yeah, right.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"C Kingsbury" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Nomen Nescio" ] wrote in
message
...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Well, I guess I made the list of suspected terrorists, this weekend.

Guess I get to be the lone voice of dissent here.

In case you haven't noticed, there's at least a couple ten thousand
loonies
out there who want to kill us in large numbers. Maybe that's GWB's fault,
maybe it isn't, but that doesn't change the situation on the ground *right
now.* You're hanging around off the edge of a runway next near an ANG
base.

He wasn't near the runway. The runways are several hundred feet away and the
airport is all fenced and locked.

Sorry, but I can see where the guys are going to get a little edgy. Sounds
like the soldier was a little gruffer with you than he needed to be, but
that's not his first order of business.

It should be. As civilians, we outrank him. AND his commander.

mike regish