mnealtx 0 #26 August 3, 2004 Lemme see if I've got the Dem platform position down... The President didn't do enough to protect the country from terrorism...but anything they DO do is a useless measure and oppressive. That seems about right, from the posts I've seen. So YOU tell us, since evidently the Democratic party knows all... what security measures WOULD satisfy y'all? Apparently none that are taken by a Republican gov't....Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,107 #27 August 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteHow many GA aircraft terrorist attacks have there been? Who cares? There is verifyable and actionable intelligence demonstrating that terrorists continue to plan to use GA aircraft as a delivery mechanism, but we don't know where or when. So, if it's your job to make GA airports safe from such threats, what would you do to make them safe? I mean, any restriction will inconvenience someone. You know the threat is real, and they have the capability to carry it out, you are in charge, what would you do to keep us safe from just this one scenario?? Last I heard, the credible threats were for the use of car or truck bombs. What has been done to secure cars and trucks from theft by terrorists? Nothing. The GA rules are like locking the tiny bathroom window while the doors are wide open with a welcome mat outside.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,107 #28 August 3, 2004 QuoteLemme see if I've got the Dem platform position down... The President didn't do enough to protect the country from terrorism...but anything they DO do is a useless measure and oppressive. That seems about right, from the posts I've seen. So YOU tell us, since evidently the Democratic party knows all... what security measures WOULD satisfy y'all? Apparently none that are taken by a Republican gov't.... I don't belong to the Democratic party, so I can't address your question. I take your point about the stupidity of this administration's rules, though.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #29 August 3, 2004 Don't put words into my mouth. Let me make it a bit more clear, since you wanted to use one word in my post to sidestep the question: The (lets call it the) Opposition spent the last 3 years alternately saying that the President : 1. Should have done more to prevent the 9/11 attack 2. Isn't doing enough to protect the country from attack 3. Anything they ARE doing is a wasted effort and oppressive. Now, let me restate the question again: Just what actions WOULD satisfy you that enough is being done, domestically, to prevent further attacks?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,107 #30 August 3, 2004 QuoteDon't put words into my mouth. Let me make it a bit more clear, since you wanted to use one word in my post to sidestep the question: The (lets call it the) Opposition spent the last 3 years alternately saying that the President : 1. Should have done more to prevent the 9/11 attack 2. Isn't doing enough to protect the country from attack 3. Anything they ARE doing is a wasted effort and oppressive. Now, let me restate the question again: Just what actions WOULD satisfy you that enough is being done, domestically, to prevent further attacks? 1. Eliminate all the STUPID rules that are in place for feel-good reasons only. Like the restrictions on model rockets, the requirement to put bike locks on GA airplane propellors, and fingerprinting your local cardiologist before he can fly his Bonanza. 2. Re-allocate the thousands of people currently monitoring the STUPID rules to determine where the real threats lie and deal with them. Every government employee enforcing a STUPID rule is one fewer available to deal with real threats.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #31 August 3, 2004 Thank you for a direct and honest answer. I disagree with a lot of the current actions being taken, but I also feel that it's a rock/hard place situation, for the reasons listed in my last post. I realize your ... distaste ... with the current gov't tends to color your views, but I still can't understand WHY you're championing the Democratic candidate, especially when it's VERY well known they're the KINGS of "feel good law".... Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,107 #32 August 3, 2004 QuoteThank you for a direct and honest answer. I disagree with a lot of the current actions being taken, but I also feel that it's a rock/hard place situation, for the reasons listed in my last post. I realize your ... distaste ... with the current gov't tends to color your views, but I still can't understand WHY you're championing the Democratic candidate, especially when it's VERY well known they're the KINGS of "feel good law".... Can you point to any post in which I have championed the Democratic candidate?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #33 August 3, 2004 QuoteWell, the point of my post was to point out that nothing of what is being suggested to address the possibility of terrorist GA action will be difficult to circumvent. So while it is not valid to say, "It hasn't happened, therefore it won't happen," at the same time it is pretty stupid to dedicate a major initiative toward one tiny fraction of the ways in which a plan might be gone about by terrorists. But doesn't it give you a warm safe feeling to know that the gov't is protecting you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #34 August 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteThank you for a direct and honest answer. I disagree with a lot of the current actions being taken, but I also feel that it's a rock/hard place situation, for the reasons listed in my last post. I realize your ... distaste ... with the current gov't tends to color your views, but I still can't understand WHY you're championing the Democratic candidate, especially when it's VERY well known they're the KINGS of "feel good law".... Can you point to any post in which I have championed the Democratic candidate? My bad... from the basis of your posts in the other thread (For those who want God out of the White House) I presumed you were against President Bush.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #35 August 3, 2004 To be perfectly honest, I'd just as soon take care of protecting myself..... But with that said, most of the current generation is too wrapped up in "me me me me me me me" to take the responsibility to do that for themselves, or anyone else. Womb to Tomb - and voting even beyond that - seems to be the Democratic mantra. So, Kev - why is it good when the Democrats want to expand welfare and the failed socialized medicine experiment, and to force preferred opportunity down our throats, but it is bad when those evil Republicans take steps to protect the self-serving sheep of today?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #36 August 3, 2004 QuoteSo, Kev - why is it good when the Democrats want to expand welfare and the failed socialized medicine experiment, Because I believe that health care and food should be fundamental rights. Quoteand to force preferred opportunity down our throats Don't know what that means. Quotebut it is bad when those evil Republicans take steps to protect the self-serving sheep of today? I don't think republicans are evil. I don't know who the self-serving sheep are that you're referring to, but nice buzz word, and I'm all in favor of steps to protect us. What I have a problem with is lip service and useless actions that serve no purpose other than to make it look like someone's doing something. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crwmike 0 #37 August 3, 2004 QuoteMy point was not to specifically point out GA planes used as flying bombs, but to maybe take a longer view than "Well, it hasn't happened yet, so why worry about it"... Skydivers are a creative bunch, you are going to tell me that you can't come up with a scenario where a small aircraft could be used in some way to inflict major damage to property and/or loss of life? I would think the inherent MOBILITY would be enough of a threat to give it SOME consideration... Joe McCarthy would have loved you. Michael Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #38 August 3, 2004 Quote Because I believe that health care and food should be fundamental rights. QuoteDon't know what that means. The Equal Opportunity Act, where the color of your skin is more important than your ability to do the job. Quote I don't think republicans are evil. I don't know who the self-serving sheep are that you're referring to, but nice buzz word, and I'm all in favor of steps to protect us. What I have a problem with is lip service and useless actions that serve no purpose other than to make it look like someone's doing something. Haven't seen you crapping on what Kerry says he is going to do with Homeland Security, only what the current administration is doing - I'd say that's a pretty fair indicator of which way you're biased.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TypicalFish 0 #39 August 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteMy point was not to specifically point out GA planes used as flying bombs, but to maybe take a longer view than "Well, it hasn't happened yet, so why worry about it"... Skydivers are a creative bunch, you are going to tell me that you can't come up with a scenario where a small aircraft could be used in some way to inflict major damage to property and/or loss of life? I would think the inherent MOBILITY would be enough of a threat to give it SOME consideration... Joe McCarthy would have loved you. Michael How come? Did that sound communist? Please tell me how....(Seriously)"I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #40 August 3, 2004 QuoteHaven't seen you crapping on what Kerry says he is going to do with Homeland Security That's because I like what Kerry has to say about homeland security. Instead of cutting funding to first responders like Bush did, he will increase it. He said he will harden targets such as nuclear and chemical facilities, and seaports. And he will increase scrutiny of visas. Yes, I'm biased, I think Kerry will do a better job. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #41 August 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteHaven't seen you crapping on what Kerry says he is going to do with Homeland Security That's because I like what Kerry has to say about homeland security. Instead of cutting funding to first responders like Bush did, he will increase it. He said he will harden targets such as nuclear and chemical facilities, and seaports. And he will increase scrutiny of visas. Will one of these hamsters seal the Mexican border? I don't think so.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,076 #42 August 3, 2004 >Will one of these hamsters seal the Mexican border? I don't think so. Wouldn't help with terrorism much (the Canadian border is much more porous) but it would cut down on illegal immigration. Would cost tens of billions, though - are you willing to shell out the money? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,107 #43 August 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteThank you for a direct and honest answer. I disagree with a lot of the current actions being taken, but I also feel that it's a rock/hard place situation, for the reasons listed in my last post. I realize your ... distaste ... with the current gov't tends to color your views, but I still can't understand WHY you're championing the Democratic candidate, especially when it's VERY well known they're the KINGS of "feel good law".... Can you point to any post in which I have championed the Democratic candidate? My bad... from the basis of your posts in the other thread (For those who want God out of the White House) I presumed you were against President Bush. Oh, I dislike Bush (43) intensely. Don't care all that much for Kerry either, would far prefer someone else to beat Bush in November - even another Republican like McCain. Unfortunately Kerry is the only game in town.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,107 #44 August 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteWell, the point of my post was to point out that nothing of what is being suggested to address the possibility of terrorist GA action will be difficult to circumvent. So while it is not valid to say, "It hasn't happened, therefore it won't happen," at the same time it is pretty stupid to dedicate a major initiative toward one tiny fraction of the ways in which a plan might be gone about by terrorists. But doesn't it give you a warm safe feeling to know that the gov't is protecting you? Ha ha. Every cent spent on some pointless feelgood "security" precaution is a cent wasted that could have been better used elsewhere.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #45 August 3, 2004 Imagine what the 12.5 trillion cents we've spent in Iraq could have done for homeland security. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ChasingBlueSky 0 #46 August 3, 2004 QuoteActually when I found the airport wide open I was more concerned about theft than terrorism. On that particular day there was also 5 or more aircraft on the ramp not even tied down. Over reaction is going to change things. Hate it or not, its coming in the name of national security. And this WILL eventually impact skydiving related activities. I could see jump planes being required to file flight plans one day and non-towered runways having mandatory no-activity times._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tkhayes 348 #47 August 3, 2004 QuoteSome of the smaller airports are so loose, a thief or terriorist could pick or choose what kind of aircraft they might want. I remember visiting an airport that had both hanger doors open, security gate open, and nobody present. The FBO's kid just left for a few hours. dead reckoning vertical correction - MOST of the GA airports are loose. It is sill yto say that we can even control it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites crwmike 0 #48 August 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteMy point was not to specifically point out GA planes used as flying bombs, but to maybe take a longer view than "Well, it hasn't happened yet, so why worry about it"... Skydivers are a creative bunch, you are going to tell me that you can't come up with a scenario where a small aircraft could be used in some way to inflict major damage to property and/or loss of life? I would think the inherent MOBILITY would be enough of a threat to give it SOME consideration... Joe McCarthy would have loved you. Michael How come? Did that sound communist? Please tell me how....(Seriously) Joe made his fame and fortune by taking vague, ill-defined threats that tap into some deep rooted emotions in our society ...and getting a significant portion of our citizens up in arms. His freedom crushing witch hunts were supported by a large number of people who felt we must crush freedoms to be safe. Don't trade what made this country great for a bit of false security. Michael Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TypicalFish 0 #49 August 4, 2004 QuoteJoe made his fame and fortune by taking vague, ill-defined threats that tap into some deep rooted emotions in our society ...and getting a significant portion of our citizens up in arms. His freedom crushing witch hunts were supported by a large number of people who felt we must crush freedoms to be safe. Don't trade what made this country great for a bit of false security. Michael I guess I just do not see examining the open spots in the security surrounding the GA segment as a "freedom crushing witch hunt". Especially when the original point of my post was to say that we shouldn't just ignore it because it hasn't happened before. If there is a vulnerability, it should be identified and addressed, no matter how trivial it may seem. I am sure passenger screeners didn't think much of box cutters prior to September 11th, either. I guess I just don't see keeping your mind open to possibilities as a parallel for McCarthyism..."I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tunaplanet 0 #50 August 4, 2004 QuoteThis will stop the terrorists in their tracks No. Kerry and his old, drunken crewmates sloshing around patrolling the dangerous waters of Boston Harbor will keep them at bay. And if that doesn't work his riveting, bullshit, super-imposed bullet movie will surly do the trick. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 2 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
billvon 3,076 #42 August 3, 2004 >Will one of these hamsters seal the Mexican border? I don't think so. Wouldn't help with terrorism much (the Canadian border is much more porous) but it would cut down on illegal immigration. Would cost tens of billions, though - are you willing to shell out the money? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,107 #43 August 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteThank you for a direct and honest answer. I disagree with a lot of the current actions being taken, but I also feel that it's a rock/hard place situation, for the reasons listed in my last post. I realize your ... distaste ... with the current gov't tends to color your views, but I still can't understand WHY you're championing the Democratic candidate, especially when it's VERY well known they're the KINGS of "feel good law".... Can you point to any post in which I have championed the Democratic candidate? My bad... from the basis of your posts in the other thread (For those who want God out of the White House) I presumed you were against President Bush. Oh, I dislike Bush (43) intensely. Don't care all that much for Kerry either, would far prefer someone else to beat Bush in November - even another Republican like McCain. Unfortunately Kerry is the only game in town.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,107 #44 August 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteWell, the point of my post was to point out that nothing of what is being suggested to address the possibility of terrorist GA action will be difficult to circumvent. So while it is not valid to say, "It hasn't happened, therefore it won't happen," at the same time it is pretty stupid to dedicate a major initiative toward one tiny fraction of the ways in which a plan might be gone about by terrorists. But doesn't it give you a warm safe feeling to know that the gov't is protecting you? Ha ha. Every cent spent on some pointless feelgood "security" precaution is a cent wasted that could have been better used elsewhere.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #45 August 3, 2004 Imagine what the 12.5 trillion cents we've spent in Iraq could have done for homeland security. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #46 August 3, 2004 QuoteActually when I found the airport wide open I was more concerned about theft than terrorism. On that particular day there was also 5 or more aircraft on the ramp not even tied down. Over reaction is going to change things. Hate it or not, its coming in the name of national security. And this WILL eventually impact skydiving related activities. I could see jump planes being required to file flight plans one day and non-towered runways having mandatory no-activity times._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #47 August 3, 2004 QuoteSome of the smaller airports are so loose, a thief or terriorist could pick or choose what kind of aircraft they might want. I remember visiting an airport that had both hanger doors open, security gate open, and nobody present. The FBO's kid just left for a few hours. dead reckoning vertical correction - MOST of the GA airports are loose. It is sill yto say that we can even control it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crwmike 0 #48 August 3, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteMy point was not to specifically point out GA planes used as flying bombs, but to maybe take a longer view than "Well, it hasn't happened yet, so why worry about it"... Skydivers are a creative bunch, you are going to tell me that you can't come up with a scenario where a small aircraft could be used in some way to inflict major damage to property and/or loss of life? I would think the inherent MOBILITY would be enough of a threat to give it SOME consideration... Joe McCarthy would have loved you. Michael How come? Did that sound communist? Please tell me how....(Seriously) Joe made his fame and fortune by taking vague, ill-defined threats that tap into some deep rooted emotions in our society ...and getting a significant portion of our citizens up in arms. His freedom crushing witch hunts were supported by a large number of people who felt we must crush freedoms to be safe. Don't trade what made this country great for a bit of false security. Michael Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TypicalFish 0 #49 August 4, 2004 QuoteJoe made his fame and fortune by taking vague, ill-defined threats that tap into some deep rooted emotions in our society ...and getting a significant portion of our citizens up in arms. His freedom crushing witch hunts were supported by a large number of people who felt we must crush freedoms to be safe. Don't trade what made this country great for a bit of false security. Michael I guess I just do not see examining the open spots in the security surrounding the GA segment as a "freedom crushing witch hunt". Especially when the original point of my post was to say that we shouldn't just ignore it because it hasn't happened before. If there is a vulnerability, it should be identified and addressed, no matter how trivial it may seem. I am sure passenger screeners didn't think much of box cutters prior to September 11th, either. I guess I just don't see keeping your mind open to possibilities as a parallel for McCarthyism..."I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #50 August 4, 2004 QuoteThis will stop the terrorists in their tracks No. Kerry and his old, drunken crewmates sloshing around patrolling the dangerous waters of Boston Harbor will keep them at bay. And if that doesn't work his riveting, bullshit, super-imposed bullet movie will surly do the trick. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
