ambulances being cased in NY for use in terrorism?

I ran across this article and thought of our EMS friends here. Keep your eyeballs peeled, boys. To everybody: still not carrying an urban PSK? Think about it.

http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=\SpecialReports\archive\200408\SPE20040819a.html

Suspicious Interest in Ambulances Prompts Terror Alert in NYC Suburb
By Scott Wheeler
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
August 19, 2004

(CNSNews.com) - Officials in Westchester County, N.Y., on the outskirts of New York City, issued an internal terrorism alert to law enforcement and emergency response personnel Aug. 12 after receiving several reports about Middle Eastern men and "suspicious activity concerning ambulances," according to government documents obtained by CNSNews.com.

The documents include the Aug. 12 alert itself, which was posted by the Westchester County Department of Emergency Services and was "based on information from New Jersey authorities." Wednesday afternoon, the county's Department of Emergency Services confirmed that it had issued the alert, but did not provide any further details.

According to one witness-described incident, included in the alert, "an individual who attended an open-house at an ambulance squad in Middlesex County, [N.J.,] claimed he was from Pakistan and a physician." br>
The eyewitnesses said the man "asked a series of questions to the squad members that related exclusively to the operation of the emergency vehicles, including the speed at which the vehicles responded to calls and the use of the lights and sirens."

The Middle Eastern man was described as acting "very nervous" and "did not ask about patient care," according to the government documents, which also quoted the witnesses as saying the suspicious man "left the premises when asked to complete a membership application."

The alert indicated that the second incident occurred at a hospital in Essex County, N.J. "A male of Middle-Eastern appearance" was seen "standing near an ambulance at the emergency room doors while writing notes in a small notepad," the CNSNews.com-obtained documents stated.

"When confronted by the vehicle's operator, a firefighter/EMT, the man asserted that he was employed as an ambulance mechanic. He then asked where a nearby fire department serviced its vehicles," the government alert stated. When the man was asked for identification, he "provided an illegible New York driver's license" and then left.

The terrorism alert outlined a third suspicious event. While it provided no location for the incident, the documents did cite a description from the New Jersey Office of Counter Terrorism.

There was "an unusual attempt by three men of Middle-Eastern appearance to join a volunteer ambulance squad. The men expressed to squad members an 'abnormal interest' in operating the emergency vehicles, and further insisted that the process by which they obtain the appropriate credentials and certifications to join the squad be expedited at their personal expense," the alert stated.

All three incidents happened inside of a one-week time frame earlier this month. The warning also provided the following context: "Due to the recent threat elevation to ORANGE (HIGH) for the financial sector and intelligence relating to the threat of Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Devices (VBIEDs), any suspicious activity relating to emergency vehicles is of particular concern and should be reported to law enforcement
immediately."

The report also referenced locations where other vehicle bombs were used, including Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and "notably in the 1993 World Trade Center" bombing.

As CNSNews.com previously reported, counter terrorism experts believe "hundreds if not thousands" of so-called "probing attacks" have been reported since the al Qaeda sponsored terrorist strikes on New York City and the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.

These probing attacks, according to experts interviewed by CNSNews.com, are conducted by groups and individuals possibly associated with Islamic extremist organizations. The goal of probing attacks, the experts said, is to conduct surveillance of vulnerable American institutions that may end as the real target for violence in the future.

I get into a rage when EMS is abused! we had a case in South Africa fairly recently [i'm sketchy of the details off hand] when an ambulance was hijacked, and the personel were raped! I get infuriated even more so because the people who do this knid of stuff will actually still recieve help from the same organisation that that they ABUSED when they get injured committing another crime, resisting justice or simply living a "normal" life <img src="/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />.


I need to go cool off so i can start making sense...

[edit]
Here is a link to a follow up of the incident

And this is from a more recent article

<<The KwaZulu-Natal health department has welcomed the arrest of five suspects in the hijacking of an ambulance and rape of one of the crew at Imbali.

Police say they found two of the suspects stripping the emergency vehicle in the Midlands area. The ambulance crew had responded to a fake emergency call.>>

If you all focus on "Middle Eastern" looking individuals, you are formenting racism, discrimination, and missing the potential real terrorists.

I don't know how many of you are old enough or remember an airport massacre that was credited to a German terrorist group that hired some Asian individuals to do the actual killing. The date and the details escape me, but maybe someone else remembers it.

If the "Al Queda" really exist in the United States as a terrorist organization, it occurs to me they would have enough money and sense to hire white middle class dressed people for their information gathering purposes.

They could hire legitimate private investigators by claiming they want business information that will let them compete and overwhelm an existing business provider. The "Hell's Angels" in Southern California used this tactic of hiring private investigators to find out addresses and facts about police officers for the purpose of threatening the officers. The "Hell's Angels" also used to have a Chief of Police in Wisconsin working for them by providing information they could not otherwise obtain. He was eventually caught and prosecuted.

These terrorists could hire gang members dressed and acting conservatively to ferret out information, get the information, and then kill the gang member since few of the authorities would care about a gang related murder. They can watch TV, go to the libraries, attend PTO meetings, and go to local politicians town hall meetings and garner all kinds of information for their needs, and none of them has to be or look like "Middle Eastern" individuals.

I for one believe most of this paranoia is being created by people who want more control and less freedom for the American people in the United States of America, and they are not from abroad.

Bountyhunter

When all the information you are able to get is slanted one way, the decitions you make will be skewed. If all the information is bad, you will plan for the bad, and become suspicious. If the information you are given only allows you to see one side of a situation, you will not consider the other side.

The people and situations that are listed in the US 'probative attacks' are listed as Middle Eastern, even one saying he was from Pakistan. I will take that at face value because facts like that are easy to verify.

What I do not take at face value is that they did not, in the alert, list the three Ambulances KNOWN to have already gone missing from various NY area maintenence lots, along with at least one garbage truck, over the last year. (as reported by Reuters, June 2004) Or the several small Cesna planes that were purchased over the internet from an Ohio company and when they tried to make delivery to an address listed on the form, it turned out to be a recently built Mosque, which refused the delivery. When the purchaser contacted the seller, he was arrested under the Patriot Act.(as reported by BBC, May 2004)

Not that I check other sources.

Rena

The info acted upon by the authorities in the news story involved Middle Eastern-looking men. While this fact is potentially unfortunate for the reputations of Middle Eastern-looking men, it is still a fact. When non-Middle Eastern-looking suspects are discovered doing such things, I hope that they too are dealt with appropriately.

My point in posting the story was not to focus undue scorn or suspicion on Middle Easterners. The point was to make other EMS personnel aware of the CONCEPT that someone could be actively looking to use ambulances in the U.S. as a terrorism tactic. This was the chief problem with the 9/11 attacks: Americans did not have the CONCEPT in mind that a plane would be used as a missile.

Regarding the attempted sale of Cessnas to a mosque, I have some serious doubts. Airplanes are not delivered to street addresses, they are delivered to airports with known airport IDs. Airplanes are typically flown to their new home after purchase by a ferry pilot or the purchaser themselves. No pilot in his or her right mind is going to even begin to undertake a trip with an airplane to a street address. Secondly, the paperwork required to purchase an airplane would make it almost impossible to do so over the internet. I really have to question the vailidty of a story that would contain such obvious anomalies.

As I sit here listening to Warren Zevon singing about the soldiers, spooks, and mercenerys of the '60s and 70's, I can't help but wonder... does anybody else miss the good old days when the CIA had enough field agents and HUMINT to make the "BAD GUYS" disappear into shallow graves??? TO ALL WHO MAY TAKE OFFENSE...PLEASE exercise your sense of humor and take this with a grain of salt, I just couldn't help myself <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Troy

P.S. Send lawyers, guns and money...

Ah, yes...Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner! One of my favorites! Brings a smile to my face just thinking about it.

Thanks for that, Troy. I just may have to go find that tape...

The late Mr. Zevon's talent will sorely be missed!

David

The concept was well in the American mind. NORAD had war gamed the scenario prior to 9/11. Tom Clancy even flew a 747 into the White House in one of his books. (The one just before Executive Orders. The title escapes me just now). I think this whole country just needs to take a collective deep breath and quit seeing phantom terrorists in the bottom of every teacup. Seems an awful lot like the Red Scare of the '50s.

Bountyhunter: In the '90s we conspiracy theory geeks used to say that if you claimed it was "for the children" you turn this country into a police state with little effort. Now we use "to protect against those who would do us harm" in the same context. The majority of the people of this land will gladly sacrifice every freedom and civil liberty in any attempt to achieve a utopia that is unattainable.

So that's why the standard procedure for a hijacking was to comply 100% w/ the hijacker's demands? Apparently the country's security leaders hadn't conferred enough with Tom Clancy.



Like that little teacup incident on 9/11/2001? Just a phantom, right?

Back on topic: keep an eye out, fellow EMS folks.

Glock-a-Roo:

Pre 9/11, complicity with hijackers was advocated by the majority of politically correct (The media didn't want to hear "Fight to the death" advice from those who knew better.) security advisers as the way to survive hijackings without injury.

Post 9/11 mindset for most people today is "Hell, if I'm going to die, I may as well fight for my life". There are still too many PHRASECENSOREDPOSTERSHOULDKNOWBETTER. out there who still don't get it and never will. Because of that, we are going to end up being farmed like sheep by the moneyed interests who don't care squat about anything except their bottom line.

Bountyhunter

Is it "Debt of honor" or something like that ..??...
I can't find it in my library

One might order a home-built kit to be delivered to a street address, but Cessna does not build or sell airplane kits.

I really question how much damage a terrorist could do with a Cessna. And what kind of Cessnas were they? A C172, for example, could barely get off the ground with 4 passengers.

Were they new or used? The only ones you could buy "off the Internet" would likely be used ones, I think.

I wish the original poster had posted a link to the actual article, or at least copied the article for us to read. Like you, I have a hard time taking this "threat" seriously.

Bountyhunter brought up the question of why they don't hire the work done.

Not to rant on "Middle-Eastern-looking men", but if you considered white people as infidels, would you trust them or their information? I'll bet space aliens wouldn't! (As long as movies are being brought up, what about "Mars Attacks"??? -- heeheeheeheehee!) <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Sorry. Too much root beer tonight....

'Pup

That's the one. Thanks

Well thanks for the heads up.However this is something we've been told many times over the past few years.

Its sog in my dept that once we hit "orange" and above no rigs are to be left unattended.

But then again one can buy a used fire truck or ambulance pretty cheap so the need to steal them,and thus put everyone on alert,would seem to be they thing not to do.

BelgainPup

Infidels that work for money are something they can use, not respect. The information they bring back can be checked by using multiple infidel investigators to compare notes, and killing infidels is something they have no qualms about.

Survivalgene said it best when she said if you fixiate on certain people, you will miss the action that causes the problem.

Why are you so fixiated on "Middle Eastern" appearing people when more killings of our own people per year are done by our own people than the loss of life on 9/11. Being murdered by your next door neightbor can't possibly be any better than being murdered by a terrorist.

Are you per chance a Government spinmeister working to justify the excesses of the TSA and the Patriot Act? Had one of those on another chat site just before the Iraq invasion who called himself "Paper Tiger". He wrote so well that he didn't appear to be suffering the hormones of youth, a condition that would have explained the venom thrown toward the Irag government.

Bountyhunter <img src="/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

I think that there needs to be a line drawn between Middle-eastern men who are actually from the middle-east (i.e.: carrying a middle-eastern passport) and Americans of Arab descent. The latter should be treated no better or worse than white anglo-saxons from Alabama to Wyoming. If these men pose a greater risk then so be it-they are United States citizens and are guaranteed all the protections of the U.S. Constitution. But a foreign national from the Middle-east should be--and will be--scrutinized much more closely than the elderly grandma from Schenectedy. If that's seen as racist then so be it.

Regards, Vince

P.S.: A TSA question: should American citizens be allowed to carry guns or knives on flights originating in the United States? (That should get the juices flowing!)

One problem with that is, how does the average person know whether a "Middle Eastern-looking person" is born in Syria or Schenectady? The three medical students who were arrested and detained for 17 hours after allegedly joking about 9/11 and discussing plans to carry out a terrorist attack were all US citizens - 2 naturalised, 1 born in the USA. Annie Jacobsen had no way of knowing whether the "terrorists" she still thinks she encountered on a flight to LA were foreign-born or US citizens.

The problem with eroding civil rights to combat terrorism is that terrorism is a response to the erosion of civil rights. As long as people feel that they have a legitimate way to make their grievances heard, they generally don't resort to terrorism. Terrorists generally are people who feel they are powerless to change the status quo in any other way.

"One problem with that is, how does the average person know whether a "Middle Eastern-looking person" is born in Syria or Schenectady?"
I think that the possession of a U.S. passport entitles one to the full protection of the Bill of Rights. I realize this may make some of our good neighbors to the north or the south uncomfortable. I squirm over the fact that our Canadien, Mexican, British, and Italian allies might be delayed or detained through no fault of their own. But, with the exception of the Israelis and possibly the British, no other country in the world is the target that we are. I am also under no illusions that the possession of a U.S. passport automatically guarantees that person's innocence and/or good intentions. I just think that is a logical place to BEGIN the search.
Regards, Vince
P.S.: Doesn't anyone have an opinion on how the TSA should be conducting business?

"Terrorists generally are people who feel they are powerless to change the status quo in any other way. "

Think about that for a minute.

In other words, their ideas are so worthless and bereft of the power to influence others that they have to resort to mass murder to get attention? Is that supposed to make us feel guilty? I'm sorry, but the Al-Queda types can either express themselves the way the rest of us do (i.e.: peacefully and democratically) or they can be exterminated.

Just like the Nazis.

And good riddance.

Vince

norad45:

If we had watched that good white American born excellent soldier Timothy McVeigh a little more closely, the atrocity he committed might have been avoided.

There are people in many countries who want to live in the United States for a better life. Just because their countries are on a list of "Unfriendlys" does not mean the individuals are anti-American. We have born-in-America types of all races that are worse for our country than their foriegn born contemporarys. Judge the act, not the heritage.

Knives of 3" or less should be mandatory on all air flights the world over. The bad guys will get around security because they look for ways. The good guys end up naked except for their fists and larger numbers per flight.

Bountyhunter

Aardwolfe:

You said it better than I did.

Ditto.

Bountyhunter

Norad45:

Nazism is not extinct, it has just taken a different route and is being used to one degree or another by many "Democratic" governments. Just as the Nazi's changed the laws slowly until they felt safe in their strength, so will governments that use their stratagies.

You do not have to be German to be a facist, and you do not have to call your organization Nazi's to be one.

Bountyhunter

Norad45:

While we may be considered "Ugly Americans" by many peoples and some nations, we are not in so much danger that we need an organization like the TSA, or the restrictions of the Patriot Act, because laws to protect our nation were very comprehensive before 9/11.

In my vaulted opinion (No ego problems here.) most of this Homeland Security crap is a smoke screen for the benefits the average American citizen is losing in order to shore up the rich. It is designed to keep us from thinking about the shortcomings of our elected officials, the skewed taxing of the lower wage earner, and the outsourcing of jobs so that some rich jerks can die with more toys than other rich jerks.

Bountyhunter

“If we had watched that good white American born excellent soldier Timothy McVeigh a little more closely, the atrocity he committed might have been avoided.”

The atrocity he committed was uniquely his own, unless you buy into the middle-eastern connection theory with him. I do not. At any rate, there have been no more McVeighs in the last 10 years which leads me to believe he was an aberration. Can you say the same about Al-Queda?

“Judge the act, not the heritage.”

No, judge the passport.

“Nazism is not extinct, it has just taken a different route...”

In 1941 the Nazis were the most dominant power on earth. They controlled Europe from the Atlantic all the way to the Urals. They seemed unbeatable. Now they are an afterthought. True, there are a few PHRASECENSOREDPOSTERSHOULDKNOWBETTER. totalitarian governments on the planet and even a few PHRASECENSOREDPOSTERSHOULDKNOWBETTER. ones, but name me ONE based on National PHRASECENSOREDPOSTERSHOULDKNOWBETTER. philosophy.

I’ve just finished an excellent book “Bodyguard of Lies” by Anthony Cave Brown. Among other things it details the extraordinary security measures that were undertaken by the (mostly British) Allied secret services prior and up to the Normandy landings. I’m sure the German nationals who were interned during those years in Britain thought their rights were violated also. Yet today there is a free Britain who did not fall into dictatorship and instead saw the defeat of the Nazis.

“Knives of 3" or less should be mandatory on all air flights the world over. The bad guys will get around security because they look for ways. The good guys end up naked except for their fists and larger numbers per flight.”

Do you mean these knives should be carried by passengers or only by the crew? If you mean passengers then I agree, except I don’t believe it should be mandatory. It would be a funny scene though: the TSA refusing an elderly lady the chance to board her flight because she left her knife at home!
Regards, Vince

I have felt (for years before 9/11) that there should be a Federal conceiled carry permit that would allow a private citizen (after an extensive test/background check, of course) to carry weapons of their choice anywhere they choose inside our borders, regardless of state laws, but Fat Chance of that ever happening. Psychos in fast food joints and terrorists on domestic flights wouldn't have ANY chance of killing many innocent bystanders if every fifth or sixth person in this country were trained and licensed to take out the "rabid dogs" that seem to be such a problem today. For those who would say that that's what the Police are for...WAKE UP!!!, they can't be everywhere and are seldom where they need to be, and I don't think anybody wants to pay the taxes it would cost to HAVE them everywhere they need to be.

Sorry for the rant, but I had to get that off my chest.

Troy

Wildcard,
I absolutely agree with you on a national CCW law. I recently read somewhere that there is a bill in work that would allow retired police officers to carry concealed weapons nationwide. IIRC. That would be a good start to allowing all citizens that same right.

Robert

Hey Vince,
The only problem is that the Nazis, Soviets, or Chicoms are the only ones that would "get the job done" and exterminate the problem... don't get me wrong, I agree that extermination IS the answer, but if you're going to use the "final" solution, you have to ask yourself... will I be able to look at myself in the mirror in the morning? If my acts would spare my family/friends/allies pain and suffering, YES I could, and with a smile on my face. I'll appologise ahead of time for anyone that this may offend, but that IS the way I feel. If anybody has any thoughts that may mellow this conviction, I'll be happy to read them ( I've never been too stubborn to learn), but it'll take more than the standard "Oh, those poor people, we need to help them understand the error of their ways" arguement to do any good.

Troy

VERY wise words friend, I agree.

I'm not always sure I agree with ya 100% bounty, but yeah, ya got a good point there, buddy.

Troy

While it might be a step in the right direction, what does a retired law officer have on an N.R.A. certified Instructor or a certified range officer retired (or otherwise) from the military? If the gate's going to be opened (we can only hope) then it should be opened to anybody who can pass a reasonable psych/background check, don't you agree?

Troy

I want to start by apologizing by not doing my research before posting. The bill isn't for retired LEO, but for off-duty LEO. I think the reason is because there is a fear that an off-duty officer will be attacked by a criminal he/she put away in the past. This may not be ideal, I just think it's a step forward.

I did also find this link. http://www.nationalccw.com This is a bill that would give CCW reciprocity in all 50 states.

Robert

Wildcard163:

Did you know that in Yugoslavia before Tito's death as well as in other PHRASECENSOREDPOSTERSHOULDKNOWBETTER. countries those who were approved for carrying sidearms could carry them anywhere including Government buildings.

Granted the restrictions to obtain carry permits were tough, and party affiliation mattered, but once approved, you could be packing heat even while argueing with an elected official in a Government facility.

You try that in the USA, and the sales of Pepto Bismol would go through the roof for all the legislators that would poop their pants.

Bountyhunter

Norad45:

I don't think Timothy McVeigh was anything more than an angry white American citizen who lost a lot of his faith because of the Waco atrocity.

I don't believe T.M. had a middle-eastern connection, but I do believe he was conned into believing his action was sanctioned by what he considered "right thinking" government people in the USA.

I believe he was told the children in the day care center were going to be out of harms way when he set off the bomb, and after the fact, I believe he was told it was an unfortunate logistics screwup. Being a "good Soldier", I think he accepted the outcome as "collateral damage" that happens in many military operations. I think he was told that he had killed all the supervisors and planners of the Waco fiasco and the "wrong thinkers" in the Government were covering up the efficiency of his actions. I think he would have broke down and given up his superiors if he had figured out how he had been munipulated. I believe he thought his death was going to be faked.

I believe our spy satillites picked up his explosive experiments before the Oklahoma bombing and I cannot understand why the authorities didn't act when the testing was going on, unless there were people "on the inside" who wanted him to go on. Timothy McViegh was and is a murderer, a terrorist, a fool, and a hormone driven young man who was used by older more intelligent men to commit his act.

A passport and having your butt born in the USA do not make you a good person, a loyal citizen, or a "never to be" terrorist. American history is replete with citizens who were and some who still are a detriment to this country.

We are now where Germany was once and the government is attempting to restrict its citizens under the guise of terrorist control. Stop and think how being "accidently" put on a "no fly" list can affect business ventures, free speech, social activism, and physical health if you are not allowed to fly. I believe the placement of Senator Ted Kennedys name on the "no fly" list was done intentionally for the purpose of threatening the masses who would complain about the abuses of power going on right now. It seems to work on you because you really believe it is for the nations good, and it is not.

Everyone ought to carry a blade on every airline the world over, and the airlines should have "loaner blades" available for those that forget or do not usually carry one. One of my favorite fantasies of a hijacking gone bad is to have a normal sized hijacker attempt to hijack a plane full of little people who can't reach higher than his belt line with their knives. Instant "Gender Bender" without having to go to Sweden for the operation.

Bountyhunter <img src="/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

I agree 100% with NORAD.

PC nonsense is gonna get us killed.

If you can't tell the difference between one nutcase who can kill 2 -3 people because his daddy treated him badly, and a group who detests us because we are NOT Islamic, you have bigger problems than can be resolved here.

Yes, there will always be freelancers, but so far ... the terrorists we have seen are all middle-eastern men who want to kill as many of us as possible.

BTW - I'm Buddhist. They hate anyone who is not Mohamedan.

Not "dislike". Not "disagree with". HATE. Get it?

I'm not sure what you think I said, except that what you think I said bears no resemblance to what I said, so allow me to rephrase my post.

>>In other words, [terrorists'] ideas are so worthless and bereft of the power to influence others that they have to resort to mass murder to get attention?

That's not what I said.

>>Is that supposed to make us feel guilty?

No, that's not what I said either.

>>I'm sorry, but the Al-Queda types can either express themselves the way the rest of us do (i.e.: peacefully and democratically) or they can be exterminated.

Sometimes terrorists' demands are rejected because they are dealing with a totalitarian government that is completely intransigent. (e.g. the French Resistance dealing with the Nazi occupation.) Sometimes they're rejected because they're completely unacceptable or unrealistic. Sometimes the reason falls somewhere in the middle. (The Irish PHRASECENSOREDPOSTERSHOULDKNOWBETTER. Army's demands that Northern Ireland be returned to Ireland, despite the fact that 2/3 of the population wished to remain with Great Britain, were unreasonable, IMO; otoh, the problem was probably greatly exacerbated by the government's refusal to address the discrimination against Catholic citizens by the Protestant majority.)

Whatever. The point I was trying to make is that, by cracking down on the freedoms that your forebears fought and died for, in the name of "security", the government is creating the very conditions that make people turn to terrorism and extremism.

Are the government measures going to swell the ranks of Al Qaeda? Probably not. (Although it does make their job a lot easier; why bother planting a bomb, when you can shut down a major freeway for 17 hours by picking up the phone and reporting a conversation you "overheard" in a restaurant?)

But will it swell the ranks of PHRASECENSOREDPOSTERSHOULDKNOWBETTER. militia groups, whose members already think the government has too much power? I suspect it will. Will it result in a resurgence of "Black Power" terrorism, or race riots? It's not that far-fetched, IMO.

Whether you "approve" of Al Qaeda, the IRA, white supremacy groups, or any other terrorist organisation is really not the issue. If you believe that their claims are totally unjustified (or if they're so far gone in their hatred that they don't even have any claims), then the only possible response is to fight them, and accept that there will be casualties on both sides along the way. But you should always bear in mind that the terrorists' main objective is to destroy your way of life; if your government is willing to do that for them, then they can kick back and relax and have a good laugh at your expense.

Maybe there's hope yet, but what about the states with NO CCW (Illinois for one)?

So be it, bounty, maybe the flip-floppers and double talkers would get out of the business (we could only hope). <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />
I once heard a stand-up comic (I don't remember who) do a routine on the practicallity of a national dueling day, at the time, it was funny, but the more I think of it, the more it makes sense. The gist was that if you were at odds with someone, divorce lawyer, quack doctor, jerk boss, whoever, one day a year you could challenge them to a duel without breaking the law. Just think of the possibilities. <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Troy

The bill is supposed to make all states give reciprocity to all other states. Then a CCW permit would be similar to a driver's licence, one is recognized in all other states. However, I'm sure there will be lots of problems with law-abiding citizens being arrested for carrying a concealed weapon in a state without it's own CCW law, but while following the national CCW law. There are a lot of kinks that will have to be worked out for this to work, but it's a step in the right direction. Do a search on "national CCW law" and you will find lots of forums and other info on this.

Robert

There was an LA police officer some years back that had a GREAT idea:

If you want to reduce crime, get a gun, learn how to use it properly and safely, and make sure there's only one story to tell.

Now, if this happened nationwide, what do you think would happen to the crime rate? If you're a rapist, burglar or terrorist, and you KNEW most of the people were armed, how would you feel? Would you just consider your crime, or follow up on it?

Admittedly, it's a pretty pathetic country that would have to come to this, but America has become almost totally insane. I have heard that most democracies only last about 200 years. I guess our time is up.

BTW, I'm not going to spell it out, but there IS a useful weapon that can probably be carried on a plane, train or bus, that would probably be overlooked upon inspection. You weapons guys know what it is, right?

'Pup

Wildcard163:

Just think of the adult diaper and toilet paper stocks you could make money on if that happened.

Bountyhunter <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

DBAGuy:

I agree the people who carried out 9/11 were middle-eastern extremists of the Islamic faith.

I strongly believe the first tier of supporters for their logistics and finances were also middle-eastern extremists of the Islamic faith.

I somewhat believe that the second tier of supporters for their logistics and finances were also middle-eastern extremists of the Islamic faith.

After the second tier, I believe you will run into muddy water about who financed what.

I do not believe that 9/11 was planned by middle-easterners who hate us but was planned by people who would gain money, power, and control of assets by getting us into a war.

My parents are of Serbian descent and have absolutely no love for Turks or Middle-Easterners because of the Ottoman Empire that ruled their country for almost 400 years. They always spoke badly of Islamic cultures to me, but I am American raised since age 5 and do not share their hatred, but judge people by my experience. I tell you this so that you understand that my upbringing has not colored my opinions in a favorable manner for middle-easterners.

Timothy McVeigh did not kill 2 or 3 people, and you seem to have missed the point that he is the "next door neighbor" I was referring to when comparing terrorist acts.

My main reasons for not believing that 9/11 was not planned or initiated by middle-easterners of the Islamic faith is from part of my parents teachings. Muslims do things on days that are special to them. 9/11 is Americas Madison avenue type of occurance which was done on a day that conincides with our telephone emergency number so that people would not forget. The middle-eastern countries have nothing to gain in the long term by attacking the mightiest nation in the world and then doing it on a day that would be etched in our collective minds forever. They lost lives, military equipment, money, oil production control and are now an occupied country. They didn't plan 9/11, but they will now try to punish us with terrorist acts because we acted against them, and the powers that put this all together will control the American people more and give us less.

Follow the money and leave personal hateful feelings out of it, and you will see a whole new tunnel that we are being guided into and through. That tunnel is not for the benefit of the average American citizen.

Bountyhunter

Let me get this straight. You think that the people who were ultimately responsible for planning the 9-11 mass murders were not middle-eastern? You mention "Madison avenue". but nobody else. Please explain if you can what countries, organizations, and politicians you believe were behind it. I know that there was a congresswoman down in Georgia who thought that George W. Bush did it. You don't think it goes all the way to him do you?

Conspriracy theories have always fascinated me. Not because I believe in any of them but because it is interesting to see how they can be so elaborately constructed with ZERO evidence.

Regards, Vince

"Stop and think how being "accidently" put on a "no fly" list can affect business ventures, free speech, social activism, and physical health if you are not allowed to fly. I believe the placement of Senator Ted Kennedys name on the "no fly" list was done intentionally for the purpose of threatening the masses who would complain about the abuses of power going on right now. It seems to work on you because you really believe it is for the nations good, and it is not."

I believe in being vigilant where the powers of my government are concerned. I do not believe in being paranoid. I do not see sinister conspiratorial forces behind every simple bureaucratic foulup. I have no doubt that Ted Kennedy thinks that being put on a no-fly list was a plot by the Bush administration to destroy him politically. Sorry, I don't think that Ted is that important anymore.

Personally, I would much rather have him flying than driving! <img src="/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Regards, Vince

“I'm not sure what you think I said, except that what you think I said bears no resemblance to what I said…..”

I was responding to this quote from you:

“Terrorists generally are people who feel they are powerless to change the status quo in any other way.”

The rest of the comments on that post were my own, not yours (hence no quotation marks.)

“If you believe that their claims are totally unjustified (or if they're so far gone in their hatred that they don't even have any claims), then the only possible response is to fight them, and accept that there will be casualties on both sides along the way.”

I agree completely with this, and I also believe that this exactly describes why we must fight them. The idea is to make sure that their casualties are far greater than ours. I would bet that after Afghanistan and Iraq we have come close to achieving this, but there are a lot of them left.

Regards, Vince

Let me be absolutely clear: I never advocated a "final" solution or anything like it. I did not even use that term so the use of quotations is misleading. (I'm sure it was unintentional but it stilll needs correcting.) I advocate the extermination of enemy combatants and the destruction of the network that supports them. In other words, war.

Vince

Approximately 2 months ago we (Emergency Services) were notified that all ambulances, medic units and fire apparatus responding to Ft. Detrick under a mutual aid agreement would now have to stop at the front gate and be inspected before proceeding onto the base. This was in response to intelligence reports, that potential terrorist attacks might employ emergency vehicles. Pete

Zippo and a can of hairspray???

Chapaquidic Ted is about as dangerous as it gets if you're a law-abiding gun owner!

Sorry about that, didn't mean to infer that you suggested anything, I was talking in the context of history. The point I was trying to make is that if you start a job, you have to finish it, or it will surely come back to bite you in the rear-end...regardless of how distasteless or unpopular finishing said job may be (witness Vietnam and Gulf War I to name just two involving the U.S.). Again, sorry, I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth.

Wildcard163:

Yeah, but how do us balding, but still extremely good-looking guys explain the hairspray?

Bountyhunter <img src="/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Norad:

When you want to destroy the network that supports them, which is their countrymen, their religious beliefs, and their country and you eliminate all, that is not war, that is genocide.

Many condemn Hitler in words, but still subscribe to his methods, and they are not German.

Bountyhunter

Norad45:

I don't think it was a plot against Senator Ted Kennedy, but I do believe it was done intentionally to show how easily the TSA and the Patriot Act can impede the fortunes of the masses.

If you are a regular flyer who makes money with your commutes, being put on a no fly list will hamper your ability to make a living. If you are socially active and you become deathly ill requiring your transportation by plane, placement on a no fly list can get you killed.

It does not matter who is in power as power corrupts everyone, but the legal existance of a no fly list jeapordizes the oppositions ability to function at the discretion of those that control the no fly list.

Bountyhunter

Sorry, but I am done on this thread.

Too much seriousness makes for bad stomachs.

Good luck to the rest of you!

Bountyhunter <img src="/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

THANKS, bounty, that was (part of) my point.

Troy

Kind of sounds like Germany circa 1936, no?

Troy

Aw c'mon, keep preachin', some of us are enjoyin' the sermon <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Troy

No problem. I figured that's what you meant and thanks for the correction.
Regards, Vince

No, I was speaking of enemy combatants and the financial network that supports them. Who said anything about "their countrymen, their religious beliefs, and their country?" Who here is advocating genocide?

See, that's the problem with seeing a bogeyman behind every tree. The forest is pretty thick, and sooner or later you will miss a real one while chasing down the phantoms.

Regards, Vince

>>The idea is to make sure that their casualties are far greater than ours.

Well, not exactly. The Nazis accomplished this with their invasion of the USSR, but they still got their asses handed to them in the end. Some might argue that the Americans had the same result in Vietnam. If the enemy is prepared to lose 100 men for your one, and they win in the end, then they win - period.

You have to keep your target in sight, and I don't think Bush has.

The reason the Nazis inflicted so many casuaties on the USSR was that before the war Stalin had most of the officers of the Red Army above the rank of Major murdered--40,000 in all. A lot of the Soviet equipment was the equal of or even superior to that of the Wermacht and of course their army was many times larger.The reason the Germans ended up defeated was that the abilities of the new Soviet officers finally caught up with the courage and doggedness of the average Soviet soldier. Leadership on both sides made all the difference in that war (as it usually does.)
We lost Vietnam because the American people had had enough of a war where it seemed that there were no vital American interests at stake. I don't recall the Viet Cong ever murdering people by the thousands in New York City though.

That's what makes this war a little different.

I think Bush has kept HIS target in sight--I just don't think that his target and yours are the same. <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Regards, Vince

Since this has become somewhat of a historical discussion I will "brave the waters" and chime in while still keeping silent my political veiws. <img src="/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> The other big mistake with Hilter and the USSR was Hilter's attempt to try to fight a two-front war. The Germans simply didn't have the resources for it. Not to mention that the USSR is some very harsh land the Soviet soldiers were well "dug in" and well acustomed to harsh environment as well. I believe Hitler's ego got the best of him there (as well as other places) as is the case with many people who obtain such enormous influence and power over others.

>>The reason the Nazis inflicted so many casuaties on the USSR was that before the war Stalin had most of the officers of the Red Army above the rank of Major murdered--40,000 in all.

There were many other reasons. For example, Stalin appointed political commissars who had no military training or experience, but who were political toadies who had authority over the military commanders on scene. In some cases, the commissars accepted the "advice" of the military officer; in others (such as the Kerch peninsula) they overrode the military advice with horrific results. (As I recall, the commissar at the battle for Kerch - where John Demyanyuk was taken prisoner - decreed that anyone more than a 100 metres from the front line was a coward and would be shot; as a result, the soldiers were crammed in shoulder to shoulder, creating a perfect target for the German artillery.)

When I studied Russian at the Canadian Forces Language School, our instructor (who had been evacuated from Leningrad as a child during the first year of the siege) insisted that Stalin was the one who secretly arranged for the food warehouses to be torched, destroying much of the city's food supply; many Leningraders to this day believe that Stalin wanted Leningrad to fall and had sent many of his political adversaries there so they could be denounced for their "failure" when it did.

He also gave ironclad orders that not one inch of Russian soil should be given up without a fight to the death. Commanders who staged a tactical withdrawal, even if the end result was successful, were court-martialled and executed. As a result, I believe whole divisions began the war surrounded on three sides and were quickly annihilated because they weren't permitted to fall back to a more defensible location.

The fact remains, the Soviets suffered much higher casualties than the Nazis but ended up winning the war, which negates your assertion that inflicting higher casualties necessarily equates to military victory.

>>We lost Vietnam because the American people had had enough of a war where it seemed that there were no vital American interests at stake. I don't recall the Viet Cong ever murdering people by the thousands in New York City though.

>>That's what makes this war a little different.

Are you so sure Americans aren't already losing their stomach over the mounting casualties in Iraq - especially after it was discovered that there were no WMD, and there were no ties to Al Qaeda?


>>I think Bush has kept HIS target in sight--I just don't think that his target and yours are the same.

They took a bunch of young reservists, whose only "crime" was being patriotic and wanting to serve their country, sent them over to a land that was in total anarchy, gave them no proper training in how to run a prison, allowed them to do it without proper supervision, and then hung them out to dry when they screwed up.

If Bush's "target" is American civil rights and democratic freedoms, then I'd have to agree with you. That doesn't make him right - only right wing <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

"The fact remains, the Soviets suffered much higher casualties than the Nazis but ended up winning the war, which negates your assertion that inflicting higher casualties necessarily equates to military victory."

My assertion had nothing to do with WWII. You brought that up. My assertion has to do with the war on terror. And it is, I believe, quite valid.

"Are you so sure Americans aren't already losing their stomach over the mounting casualties in Iraq - especially after it was discovered that there were no WMD, and there were no ties to Al Qaeda?"

Well, I'm one American who is not losing his stomach for the war on terror. But I'll admit, it's the soldiers actually doing the fighting whose stomach matters more than yours or mine. From what I can see they are doing the job and doing it well.

And there were WMD (at least according to the UN). And, according to the 9-11 commission, there WERE Al Queda ties to Iraq--they just haven't established the connection to 9-11 (yet).

"They took a bunch of young reservists, whose only 'crime' was being patriotic and wanting to serve their country, sent them over to a land that was in total anarchy, gave them no proper training in how to run a prison, allowed them to do it without proper supervision, and then hung them out to dry when they screwed up."

Wow, you must be running out of arguments to bring up the prison abuse scandal now. Let's see: 20-30 (at most) bad apples at Abu Ghiraib and 199,970 soldiers serving their country honorably. I like those odds myself.

"If Bush's "target" is American civil rights and democratic freedoms, then I'd have to agree with you. That doesn't make him right - only right wing."

That's hilarious. I frequent several boards (mostly gun-related) and the general concensus there is that Bush is too PHRASECENSOREDPOSTERSHOULDKNOWBETTER.! Anyway, I've concerned myself with American civil rights and democratic freedoms far longer than you have and you can take it from me: they are in far less jeopardy than you think.

Regards, Vince

There is something to Roland, the headless Thompson gunner.

ps - The sh-t has hit the fan

I think this discussion is getting a little lengthy, but I love that it has lasted this long.

I always try to remember that no opinion is wrong. It is just an opinion. What bothers me is when people try to speak for me or beat me with their opinion without anything to back it up.

Forums are great for letting people know other opinons, facts and circumstances. And a little thread drift here and there...

Rena

Some Americans may be losing their stomach but I'll guarantee that many others feel that we had plenty of provocation to do what-ever we want, where-ever we want, WMD's or not. As for the "prison incedent", the prisoners in question are lucky that they didn't have professional, determined interigators working on them, although, if that had been the case, the general public most likely wouldn't have ever heard a word. I've said enough now, I'm going to try to follow bountyhunters lead.

Troy

Since you attached your message to my last entry, I will reply by saying that, in jest, we are both referring to songs by Warren Zevon..............no secret message or slight intended and I for one, have not taken the liberty to speak for anyone else.

Well, let me clarify what I meant. I think it's a huge mistake to assume that Americans are any less capable of taking a fight to its finish than other nationalities, when the situation warrants it. The blood that was spilt at Guadalcanal and the Battle of the Bulge should have dispelled that myth before it ever got started. The idea that the USA will give up and call off the dogs as soon as they realise they're not going to have it their own way is a dangerous delusion for anyone that wants to tango with them.

Nor do I think that Americans have forgotten or forgiven what happened on September 11, or that it has ceased to matter to them.

However, I think it's also a dangerous delusion to believe that the Iraqis will give up once they see how strong your resolve is. Maybe some of them are killing American soldiers because they're Saddam supporters or Al-Qaida sympathisers; but if my country were invaded by a superpower - even one that claimed to have my best interests at heart - I'd probably think it was my patriotic duty to take up arms against them, and I'd be very surprised if the average Iraqi citizen didn't feel the same way. (Sure, they were cheering the "liberators" in the streets of Kabul - if my country were invaded and overrun by the world's greatest superpower, I'd probably want to do some serious ass-kissing too. But would that reflect my true feelings toward the invaders? Maybe not.)

But I think that some Americans - even maybe some on this forum - are beginning to wonder if George W. Bush didn't abuse their righteous anger in order to settle a personal score. We were all told that Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction (Always Capitalised). Oops, sorry, no he didn't. Our bad. <img src="/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> But he was in league with Al Qaeda. Well, oops again. Sorry, no he wasn't. Our bad. <img src="/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

So are Americans going to lose their stomach for a fight? Not as such, but they might well start to question whether the "security" measures being implemented are really for their benefit.

I guess we'll know for sure when - I mean if - Kerry wins the election <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

My point about the Military Police reservists who are going to go to prison for their handling of the prisoners at Abu Ghraib was that these were ordinary young men and women whose only intent was to go overseas and do their patriotic duty; because they were plunged into a situation for which they had no training, no experience, and inadequate supervision, they're going to be hung out to dry by the people they volunteered to risk their lives for. Maybe it's just me, but I think that sucks.

?However, I think it's also a dangerous delusion to believe that the Iraqis will give up once they see how strong your resolve is.?

I agree. That?s why you may as well plan on annihilating the terrorists there. I don?t know anyone who is suggesting we bluff them.

?We were all told that Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction (Always Capitalised). Oops, sorry, no he didn't. Our bad. But he was in league with Al Qaeda. Well, oops again. Sorry, no he wasn't. Our bad.?

He DID have WMD (unless the UN was lying as well.) And while he was not in league with Al-Queda his security agents had contacts with them. While that might have been the immediate reason for war, the primary reason was to remove an enemy of the United States from power. As some would say: ?Mission accomplished.? <img src="/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

As far as the prison thing goes, I find it odd that you feel sorrier for the abusers than the prisoners they abused. In my opinion, the abusers and the prisoners were all equally scum.

Regards, VInce

"I agree. That?s why you may as well plan on annihilating the terrorists there."

It would be so nice if the terrorists would just co-operate - gather themselves into one spot and hold up signs saying "I am a terrorist - shoot me!" But somehow, I don't think it's gonna happen. Which is why I find your notion of annihilating them all so charmingly naive. <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

You're assuming that the number of terrorists is finite and non-regenerating.

"He DID have WMD (unless the UN was lying as well.)"

Interesting, then, how they all seem to have vanished into thin air.

"While that might have been the immediate reason for war, the primary reason was to remove an enemy of the United States from power."

That wasn't the reason Bush gave to the American people.

"As some would say: ?Mission accomplished.? "

As some others would say: "Oops. This puddle was a whole lot deeper than it looked when we stepped into it."

"As far as the prison thing goes, I find it odd that you feel sorrier for the abusers than the prisoners they abused. In my opinion, the abusers and the prisoners were all equally scum. "

I find it odd that most of these "scum" had no criminal records or history of violence, and yet by some amazing cosmic coincidence they all ended up in the same unit.

For a more plausible explanation of what happened - and why I believe those "scum" were victims of their own leaders - check out these web sites on the Stanford Prison Experiment:

"The Stanford Prison Experiment was a landmark psychological study of the human response to captivity, in particular, to the real world circumstances of prison life. It was conducted in 1971 by a team of researchers led by Philip Zimbardo of Stanford University. Volunteers played the roles of guard and prisoner, and lived in a mock prison. However, the experiment quickly got out of hand, and was ended early."

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Stanford%20Prison%20Experiment

http://www.prisonexp.org/links.htm

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/05/08/MNGN76IG761.DTL

For one critical of the comparison (which I personally didn't find all that convincing), see:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2100419/

The old saying goes "Kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out" and add to that "and tell the whiners to get in line." Mind you, I'm just quoting a t-shirt/bumper sticker from the 60's

"Which is why I find your notion of annihilating them all so charmingly naive. "

I never thought we'd get them all--I'm saying we need to get all we can. Looks like we've bagged quite a few so far. Let's keep up the good work.

"Interesting, then, how they all (WMD) seem to have vanished into thin air."

Now who's being naive? Maybe you think Saddam dismantled them all? I like your "thin air" theory better!

"I find it odd that most of these "scum" had no criminal records or history of violence, and yet by some amazing cosmic coincidence they all ended up in the same unit."

So what was it then, another conspiracy? I doubt it. I think it's more likely they ended up there because they were the LEAST qualified to go into combat. Maybe they were not the sharpest tools in the shed. But someone has to do the guarding. What is the alternative? Should we just let all the terrorists and Baathist thugs loose because we don't have any trained prison guards there?

This is war. Bad things happen sometimes. On a scale of one to ten the prison fiasco was about a 3. We learn from it and move on.

Regards, Vince

I'm gonna just bow out of this discussion before Chris is forced to add another locked thread to my list <img src="/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

I'll bow out too. The debate has been fun though.

Regards, Vince