Are you scared of terror?

  • News
  • Thread starter Smurf
  • Start date
  • #26
SpaceTiger
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
2,940
2
Smurf said:
Are you scared of terror?
I'm not scared of terrorism itself, just what it makes politicians do.
 
  • #27
Art
Anttech said:
You like cricket art? :-) nice!

Would be nice if England win for a change!
Well they're one up with one to go so they can't actually lose this time. :approve:
There's a lot of rain around the British Isles at the moment which will suit England as it could force a draw.

If England do win the series I wonder which country Ponting and his team will seek asylum in :biggrin:
 
  • #28
Informal Logic
SpaceTiger said:
I'm not scared of terrorism itself, just what it makes politicians do.
Well said.
Pengwuino said:
At least ill smell good when i forget who my family are :rolleyes:

And the only terrorists im scared of are democrats.
I am shaking in my shoes that the massive hoards of heavily armed Democrats will march to the hill and take over the country too. Right. :rolleyes:
 
  • #29
691
1
I'm scared of Girl Scouts. They stalk me and throw boxes of thin mints and malamars and shortbread cookies at me... Do you know how bad those things are for you? I can't help eating box after box after box though. Damn Girl Scouts!!! They hide in malls and just inside of supermarkets and at the bank and on campus and at work for gods sake!!! You can't avoid them---you can't.

The likelihood of a terrorist attack on me is far less than of being mobbed by doe-eyed 8 y/o girls and their little boxes of heart attacks and obesity.
 
  • #30
356
2
Revolt Against The Girl Scouts!!!
 
  • #31
96
0
They are not terrorists..
 
  • #32
Skyhunter
I am scared of Penqwino.

Does that count?
 
  • #33
Skyhunter
Smurf said:
I will never wear deodorant for a woman, and I don't ever expect one to wear any for me. It's unnatural, there's nothing wrong with body odur. But I'm going to get so many distastefull replies for saying that, because society is so ingrained into thinking that odur is evil and you need to cover it up with whatever you can.
That is what I meant by honesty. If I were hiding my body odor I would have not have known that the first woman and I were incompatible. (Not that I found either of them terribly interesting.)
 
  • #34
SOS2008
Gold Member
24
0
Skyhunter said:
I am scared of Penqwino.

Does that count?
Yes, he terrorizes us all.
 
  • #35
loseyourname
Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
1,749
5
Look at your hypocrites, ganging up on Pengwuino for making a witty reponse to SOS' claim that the only terrorists she is afraid of are in the US government. What? Her statement counts as a legitimate point, but his is just an "ad hominem zinger?"
 
  • #36
SOS2008
Gold Member
24
0
loseyourname said:
Look at your hypocrites, ganging up on Pengwuino for making a witty reponse to SOS' claim that the only terrorists she is afraid of are in the US government. What? Her statement counts as a legitimate point, but his is just an "ad hominem zinger?"
That's sweet of you LYN -- But for the record, I have been joking with Pengwuino in this thread, and I get the distinct impression Skyhunter's post was in jest as well.
 
  • #37
356
2
Yeah LYN, lighten up.

Besides, exactly which one of pengwuino's posts was a 'legitimate point'? When he called me stupid? Or when he implied there was a conspiracy to kill off stupid people? Or was it when said democrats are terrorists?

Really now...
 
  • #38
Pengwuino
Gold Member
4,989
14
What? What happened?

I leave a thread and everyone starts fussing over lil ol me??? :blushing: :blushing: :blushing:
 
  • #39
468
4
loseyourname said:
Look at your hypocrites, ganging up on Pengwuino for making a witty reponse to SOS' claim that the only terrorists she is afraid of are in the US government. What? Her statement counts as a legitimate point, but his is just an "ad hominem zinger?"
Well, I don't see the Democrats using fear-mongering tactics, but I do see the current administration doing so. According to the http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=terrorism&x=8&y=15 [Broken], fear-mongering qualifies as terrorism. Interestingly enough, they use a fear of terrorism to coerce people into doing things. Nice. In the words of Jon Stewart, it's "the goal of this administration to spread irony throughout the world."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #40
Pengwuino
Gold Member
4,989
14
Manchot said:
Well, I don't see the Democrats using fear-mongering tactics, but I do see the current administration doing so. According to the http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=terrorism&x=8&y=15 [Broken], fear-mongering qualifies as terrorism. Interestingly enough, they use a fear of terrorism to coerce people into doing things. Nice.

"America is less safe now"
"Bush is going to take away your social security checks"
"Bush is going to take away all your rights"

Good point. Democrats don't use fear-mongering tactics.

I'm learning to shuffle poker chips. Damn flippers though, its hard as hell.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #41
468
4
Bush has taken away rights (through the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act). America is less safe now (as Katrina showed us). And we all know where Bush would stuff social security if he had the chance. Fear-mongering involves saying false things to scare people, such as "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction." Saying the truth isn't fear-mongering.
 
  • #42
Pengwuino
Gold Member
4,989
14
haha so natural disasters are considered ammunition for "america is less safe now"? Sounds like every president in history that has had rain can have his opposition say that. Please, what rights (and please specifically point them out in the legislation) are we missing (except my right to a big ol shotgun.... but eh, that was taken a way a while ago). And please, where are the "facts" showing where bush would "stuff" social security... or should we let the mathematics take over and let the system go bankrupt?
 
  • #43
SOS2008
Gold Member
24
0
Manchot said:
Bush has taken away rights (through the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act). America is less safe now (as Katrina showed us). And we all know where Bush would stuff social security if he had the chance. Fear-mongering involves saying false things to scare people, such as "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction." Saying the truth isn't fear-mongering.
I was about to make a similar response--thank you Manchot.

Maybe Pengwuino could become an understudy to Rove plus that would consume all of Rove's time, heh heh.
 
Last edited:
  • #44
SOS2008
Gold Member
24
0
Pengwuino said:
haha so natural disasters are considered ammunition for "america is less safe now"? Sounds like every president in history that has had rain can have his opposition say that. Please, what rights (and please specifically point them out in the legislation) are we missing (except my right to a big ol shotgun.... but eh, that was taken a way a while ago). And please, where are the "facts" showing where bush would "stuff" social security... or should we let the mathematics take over and let the system go bankrupt?
This is why you become a target. :rolleyes: Please try to contribute something meaningful, and stop asking for facts or sources when you are the biggest offender on this forum for lacking these things.
 
  • #45
468
4
Pengwuino said:
haha so natural disasters are considered ammunition for "america is less safe now"? Sounds like every president in history that has had rain can have his opposition say that. Please, what rights (and please specifically point them out in the legislation) are we missing (except my right to a big ol shotgun.... but eh, that was taken a way a while ago). And please, where are the "facts" showing where bush would "stuff" social security... or should we let the mathematics take over and let the system go bankrupt?
According to Bush, natural disasters count against safety. Why else would he put FEMA underneath the Department of Homeland Security?

As for our eroded rights, one need only look at the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act. (Have you?) Since a "terrorist" is defined under the as someone who coerces others, breaks federal law, and endangers human life (a definition under which many violent criminals would qualify as terrorists), wiretaps can be authorized in many cases without having to satisfy probable cause (which we are guaranteed under the fourth amendment). As a student, under the No Child Left Behind Act, if my school receives any money from the federal government, then my name is by default given to the military, without my permission.

As for Social Security, I submit to you that it's too early to predict what's going to happen with it. If you say that something needs to be done now, then you must agree that Eisenhower should've done something to prevent the dot-com bubble burst. (It's the same time difference.)
 
  • #46
I think the lefties and righties both can find ammunition to show that the other side "fear mongers" either by lies or exagerations and both sides can also find means of justifying their side's claims which the other is calling fear mongering. Neither side is going to be able to satisfy the other so there is little point in arguing it.
 
  • #47
SOS2008
Gold Member
24
0
TheStatutoryApe said:
I think the lefties and righties both can find ammunition to show that the other side "fear mongers" either by lies or exagerations and both sides can also find means of justifying their side's claims which the other is calling fear mongering. Neither side is going to be able to satisfy the other so there is little point in arguing it.
Agreed both sides can make claims accordingly. However, Manchot's reply stands that "Saying the truth isn't fear-mongering" in regard to the examples provided by Pengwuino. In this case satisfaction is not in question.

Other than that, those who bother to stay informed about events such as Katrina know this illustrates Americas inability to respond to any disaster, including a terrorist attack. The right to privacy in general has been under attack by the Bush administration, and in view of the many threads on Social Security, I am not feeling as kindly as Manchot to explain these things (again) in reply to a post that is ludicrous, if not in poor academic form.
 
  • #48
I wasn't passing judgement on anyone's points. I just think it's rather futile to get into a "they did this" "well they did that" arguement, whether the points made are good or not. Wouldn't it be easier to just agree on the idea though point out you disagree with the examples? Then you can skip reiteration. :wink:
 
  • #49
Skyhunter
TheStatutoryApe said:
I think the lefties and righties both can find ammunition to show that the other side "fear mongers" either by lies or exagerations and both sides can also find means of justifying their side's claims which the other is calling fear mongering. Neither side is going to be able to satisfy the other so there is little point in arguing it.
This is the kind of stuff that scares me and illustrates how Bush has made the country less safe.

As it happens, Saddam's nuclear centrifuge program during the late 1980s was one of the most efficient covert nuclear efforts the world has ever seen. The scientists who pulled it off are very gifted men and women, many of whom are now out of work. Their names are still being kept secret by the international agencies familiar with their work. But a source close to one of those agencies recently said that of the 200-some scientists at the top of its nuclear list, all but three remain unaccounted for. In a country with porous borders, where everyone -- but especially those associated with the former regime -- is in danger every day, many experts say at least some scientists are bound to be tempted to sell their knowledge to the highest bidder. And as the Pakistani network exposed last year shows, the nuclear black market is alive and well.

"Weapons don't make themselves," says Anne Harrington, director of the Committee on International Security and Arms Control at the National Academies. "Somebody has to interpret how to take military doctrine and intent and make it real. Materials, particularly nuclear materials, are not something you scoop out of the dirt. The human element is critical in all of this."

Nobody knows how many Iraqi scientists may have been lured over the borders into Iran, Syria, or beyond. Nobody knows because no one is keeping tabs. But several observers agree that so little attention is being paid to Iraq's scientists, the war may actually have increased the chances of nuclear capabilities proliferating beyond the country's borders. Between its unemployed scientists and the disappearance of large amounts of WMD-related materials from former weapons sites, Iraq now poses a nightmare scenario, according to Ray McGovern, who spent 27 years analyzing intelligence for the CIA and afterward cofounded Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. "The danger is much more acute, both from the proliferation side and the terrorism side," McGovern says. "Before we invaded, there was no evidence that Iraq had any plan or incentive to proliferate. They didn't even have a current plan to develop WMDs. They just hadn't been doing it. Now, my God, we have a magnet attracting all manner of foreign jihadists to a place where the WMD expertise is suddenly unprotected. It just boggles the mind."
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2005/09/armageddon.html
 
  • #50
Pengwuino
Gold Member
4,989
14
SOS2008 said:
This is why you become a target. :rolleyes: Please try to contribute something meaningful, and stop asking for facts or sources when you are the biggest offender on this forum for lacking these things.
actually the fact of the matter is that people in this thread, mainly on your side of things, are the most noterious for not providing facts. Im not sure how many times ive seen people quote the patriot act as to where we actually are losing all hope of freedom... but I assume the number is <1 time. Unless of course, sites like reopen911.com and michael moore are credible on this forum. :rolleyes:
 

Related Threads for: Are you scared of terror?

  • Last Post
3
Replies
59
Views
4K
  • Poll
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
6K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • Poll
  • Last Post
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Replies
119
Views
11K
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
Top