Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2014?

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

Phys251 said:

I just took a look at the date of this thread. It says September 1, 2014.

2014. Not 2002. It's been over a decade, and some people still haven't learned their lesson?

My response to the OP is, HELL no. Stop taking away my liberty in the name of "security."

Click to expand...

Yeah that's Right.....that is the date. Oh and Stevens was killed in 2012. Not a Decade ago.

How again does it take your liberty to put the nation on the highest Alert level? Are you a US diplomat that will need to be locked down for 24-72 hrs?

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

MMC said:

Yeah, his WH spokesperson already said they wouldn't be raising the threat level. But that was before Feinstein came out with what she said.

Click to expand...

Feinstein isn't keeping with the administration's position. Rogers said the same thing. We just have to take it on faith that someone somewhere is watching. If we receive the promised attack, Obama is toast. If we don't, he just remains stale bread. It's all a political calculation, and seems to have nothing whatever to do with actual security or the relative safety of the population both here and abroad. If terrorism is on the run, it sure appears to be headed our way.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

MMC said:

Yeah that's Right.....that is the date. Oh and Stevens was killed in 2012. Not a Decade ago.

How again does it take your liberty to put the nation on the highest Alert level? Are you a US diplomat that will need to be locked down for 24-72 hrs?

Click to expand...

Spare me the George W. Bush, black-or-white, all-or-nothing, you're-with-us-or-you're-against-us rhetoric. We endured eight years of that man and are still paying for it.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

Phys251 said:

Spare me the George W. Bush, black-or-white, all-or-nothing, you're-with-us-or-you're-against-us rhetoric. We endured eight years of that man and are still paying for it.

Click to expand...

Save the Neo Con/Neo Lib excuses.....it has nothing to due with their ideology.

That has nothing to do with Terrorists attacks being up over 300%. Nor does it have anything to do with Terrorism that has increased 60 some percent from 2011 until this moment in time.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

MMC said:

Save the Neo Con/Neo Lib excuses.....it has nothing to due with their ideology.

That has nothing to do with Terrorists attacks being up over 300%. Nor does it have anything to do with Terrorism that has increased 60 some percent from 2011 until this moment in time.

Click to expand...

Yeah sure it has nothing to do with neocon ideology. Cool story bro.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

Phys251 said:

Yeah sure it has nothing to do with neocon ideology. Cool story bro.

Click to expand...

Yeah, and all that increased activity by terrorists around the rest of the planet really has to do with the Neo's. :roll:

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

MMC said:

That's what was said in 2012 and we lost a US Ambassador....

Click to expand...

The entire US doesn't need to be on alert because a diplomatic compound, in an unstable region, where the CIA was operating, got attacked on 9/11/2012.

And yes, a lot of the steps they would take are mere security theater.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

MMC said:

If BO doesn't want to do it. Then all Americans should do so for themselves. To be aware.....is to be alive. Just sayin!

Click to expand...

What nonsense. The US is a big country, and the vast majority of it faces no threat at all. If we know of a specific threat, we should take steps. Acting because "boo scarey bad guys exist!" is a waste of resources.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

I don't know what specific actions take place when this alert level is raised, or whether I would agree with every one of them. But I certainly think all necessary precautions involving air traffic, U.S. diplomatic missions and military installations, important public buildings, etc. should be taken. I also think that too much public hand-wringing about what these people might do to the U.S. tends to elevate their status. What is done should be done calmly and privately, except possibly for a few words enlisting the public's help in keeping its eyes peeled.

Best of all, deny them the chance to get set by launching heavy, continuing air attacks on targets all over northern Syria and Iraq as soon as possible. People in cities like Mosul should be warned that unless they turn on these people and drive them out, that their own safety cannot be guaranteed. What no one here seems willing to recognize is that a lot of people in these areas are not all that unsympathetic to the jihadists. If they think no more of their families than to harbor these bastards among them, the responsibility for the deaths of innocent people falls on them.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

MMC said:

Well.....Sept has arrived. We are down to 10 more days until the Anniversary of 911. We have asked others to up their security and watch for those who have Passports with their Airports. We have had to evacuate our Embassies in Iraq and Libya. We have AQAP threatening and taunting us in their New Magazine. Then we have ISIL who has threatened to come after us if we didn't stop the airstrikes on them. We continued and now they are vocal and probing us.

Last year BO did not set the Nation at the highest level. He didn't do so in 2012 and We lost an Ambassador in Libya. With the way things have been with our relations overseas. Should we take any chances this year? What say ye?

Click to expand...

IF...there is a clear and present danger to US citizens then, of course.

Having witnessed from afar the clown act of amber, orange, red, pink and chartruess warning levels following the 911 attack, I would suggest anything less than a documented and legitimate threat is a non starter; we need not create more "the sky is falling" scenarios.

The last attack against the US was in Benghazi where the president insisted it was a spontaneous demonstrations, he had defeated terrorism and vote for him as often as you can.

I would say that raising red flags at this point is merely proving to the terrorists the horrible truth, they won. Americans are afraid to even travel in their own country. If there is still such a threat, then some questions need to be put to those responsible for security starting with the head cop, Barrack Obama; they've had 13 years to fix this problem and live up to any government's primary mandate...the security of its people.

I would say it's time to stop cowering before imagined enemies and start demanding answers as to how the most powerful nation on earth, a nation that stood defeated on December 8 1941, and emerged four years later the leader of the free world.

That's what's missing, the American of which the world stood in awe.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

MMC said:

Yeah HB.....also AQAP was telling us an attack is Imminent in their New Magazine. Mocking us as to 911 when.



A new English-language Al Qaeda magazine features a how-to article on making car bombs and suggests terror targets in the United States, including casinos in Las Vegas, oil tankers and military colleges, and implies that an attack is imminent. “The timeline concludes with the date 201?’ and blank spaces and question marks for the photo and information of the next attack -- implying that it is coming soon,” said MEMRI Executive Director Steve Stalinsky. There is a suggested list of targets for lone-wolf, or individually executed, terror attacks, including New York's Times Square, casinos and night clubs in Las Vegas, oil tankers and trains, the Georgia Military College, the U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, and General Atomics defense contractor in San Diego.....snip~

New Al Qaeda Magazine Hints an Attack on US Is Imminent - Leah Barkoukis

http://www.debatepolitics.com/war-terror/203333-new-al-qaeda-magazine-hints-attack-us-imminent.html

Click to expand...

How serious is that threat...

Is it a threat or something purporting to be al Qaeda......

I am seeing propaganda here, take anything remotely related to terrorism and throw it out to keep a nation in panic.

It worked for the Romans, Hitler, and a score of countries.

My stance is this....IF Al-Qaeda has a remote chance after a 13 year long war costing millions of lives, then it's hopeless.

Either the US military-intelligence community is incapable of delivering the security promised, or they have really wasted a lot of mmoney, bullets, bombs and missiles as well as some lives. Being afraid of a date does not fit my description of "killing them where they stand, chasing them if they hide."

Sounds like after all this war Al-Qaeda is more powerful than ever, if only in the collective imagination of the nation.

Fact, you have a much greater chance of dying in a car accident on your way to the airport, than dying as a result of a terrorist attack.

ban the automobile this instant.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

Visbek said:

The entire US doesn't need to be on alert because a diplomatic compound, in an unstable region, where the CIA was operating, got attacked on 9/11/2012.

And yes, a lot of the steps they would take are mere security theater.

Click to expand...

That said it all.

"Security theatre"...I think that is the perfect description.

Really, it is high time George Orwell was required reading

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

Fearandloathing said:

How serious is that threat...

Is it a threat or something purporting to be al Qaeda......

I am seeing propaganda here, take anything remotely related to terrorism and throw it out to keep a nation in panic.

It worked for the Romans, Hitler, and a score of countries.

My stance is this....IF Al-Qaeda has a remote chance after a 13 year long war costing millions of lives, then it's hopeless.

Either the US military-intelligence community is incapable of delivering the security promised, or they have really wasted a lot of mmoney, bullets, bombs and missiles as well as some lives. Being afraid of a date does not fit my description of "killing them where they stand, chasing them if they hide."

Sounds like after all this war Al-Qaeda is more powerful than ever, if only in the collective imagination of the nation.

Fact, you have a much greater chance of dying in a car accident on your way to the airport, than dying as a result of a terrorist attack.

ban the automobile this instant.

Click to expand...

Yeah that's AQAP, the ones that BO and his Team say are the most dangerous. Fighting in Yemen. According to reports this weekend they claimed to kill 3 spies that were working for the US. So they took them out and executed them. Plus they killed 11 Yemenis soldiers in 3 separate attacks.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

MMC said:

Yeah that's AQAP, the ones that BO and his Team say are the most dangerous. Fighting in Yemen. According to reports this weekend they claimed to kill 3 spies that were working for the US. So they took them out and executed them. Plus they killed 11 Yemenis soldiers in 3 separate attacks.

Click to expand...

OK my good friend, with that, how exactly does one justify saying the US is even progressing in the war on terror? I hate to say this, but in my time I have heard presidents declare war on illiteracy, poverty, drugs and terror.....

I submit that there's been a retreat in all areas with the possible exception of illiteracy, but after seeing what inner city kids have for education I will have to be convinced......

My motto is along the lines of "one form of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. It applies to lifestyle, jobs, marriages and particularly in politics. It ain't working.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

Fearandloathing said:

OK my good friend, with that, how exactly does one justify saying the US is even progressing in the war on terror? I hate to say this, but in my time I have heard presidents declare war on illiteracy, poverty, drugs and terror.....

I submit that there's been a retreat in all areas with the possible exception of illiteracy, but after seeing what inner city kids have for education I will have to be convinced......

My motto is along the lines of "one form of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. It applies to lifestyle, jobs, marriages and particularly in politics. It ain't working.

Click to expand...

Oh, I don't think we have really pressed the War on Terror......which is why it has spread and morphed. BO has been back-peddlin from War. Yemen is nothing really but Air Strikes and as we see in all this time it, has not rid Yemen of AQ.

Still AQ or ISIL can go after those who are Overseas.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

Smartmouthwoman said:

I'll be flying on 9-11, but admit I'm a little apprehensive. Not about my flight, but about our country experiencing some sort of attack on that day. Let's just hope the terrorists remain as ineffective as our president. Neither of them seem to be able to find their own butts with both hands.

I wouldn't mind a higher state of security this year. Then again, that might result in a full body pat down by a butch TSA agent. I could do without that.

Click to expand...

That will be one of the safest days to fly.

When Pan Am Flight 103 blew up over Lockerbie, Scotland I wait a week or so and booked Pan Am to London and Flight 103 coming back. I knew I'd get a hell of a deal (and I did). I also knew that would be a very safe flight. It was.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

Visbek said:

If there is no credible threat, there is no need. The world is not more screwed up than usual.

I'm pretty sure most such steps are mere security theater anyway.

Click to expand...

The world is more screwed up today than it was back on January of 2009 and that's a fact jack.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

Visbek said:

What nonsense. The US is a big country, and the vast majority of it faces no threat at all. If we know of a specific threat, we should take steps. Acting because "boo scarey bad guys exist!" is a waste of resources.

Click to expand...

Try again.....its not nonsense for Americans to be on alert for themselves. Whether here or overseas. Hey you want to watch TV and your entertainers and do what you do, while ignoring some obvious events that have taken place. Including your own government talking in circles while playing catch up with those against us in issue of the War on Terror. Then that's on you. Again, to be aware is to be alive.

Oh and I doubt I would tremble in ANY way whatsoever dealing with those of this type. Or really any others either. So save all that BS about the Big Bad scary guys from overseas or those who hide behind man made laws.

Taking any measures that increase Security for some.....such as those of the State Dept or that call for them to lock down due to events is prudent. Even if they do not raise the level for the Physical Country. It should be done for those overseas in that region and all across Northern Africa. Especially with Travel bans up and Embassies that have been evacuated showing the perspective for what it is.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

I don't think the airports are any less secure (in this country). If I wanted to do serious collateral damage to the USA I would target a place with a lot of people, like a large shopping mall or a school. (No, don't read anything into that...I'm not going to attack anyone). That said, we can hardly shut down shopping malls and schools, just like I always argued about 9/11 that even with intelligence that said they were going to try to involve planes, WTF was Bush supposed to do - ground our entire air system indefinitely? He couldn't, for obvious reasons.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

MMC said:

Well.....Sept has arrived. We are down to 10 more days until the Anniversary of 911. We have asked others to up their security and watch for those who have Passports with their Airports. We have had to evacuate our Embassies in Iraq and Libya. We have AQAP threatening and taunting us in their New Magazine. Then we have ISIL who has threatened to come after us if we didn't stop the airstrikes on them. We continued and now they are vocal and probing us.

Last year BO did not set the Nation at the highest level. He didn't do so in 2012 and We lost an Ambassador in Libya. With the way things have been with our relations overseas. Should we take any chances this year? What say ye?

Click to expand...

Maybe but I honestly don't see what difference it makes. If someone is willing to died themselves if it means they get to kill you, there's not a whole lot you can do. Actually there are things we can do but we really don't want to. Another topic.

I guess and hope the NSA, FBI, CIA, etc. and on their jobs.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

Risky Thicket said:

That will be one of the safest days to fly.

When Pan Am Flight 103 blew up over Lockerbie, Scotland I wait a week or so and booked Pan Am to London and Flight 103 coming back. I knew I'd get a hell of a deal (and I did). I also knew that would be a very safe flight. It was.

Click to expand...

Risky, I'm not sure what the actually amounts have been spent to fight wars in the middle east, but I've seen estimates as high as $3 trillion thus far. But for the sake of argument, let's say about half that much.

Imagine what type of security that America might be enjoying if a trillion and a half dollars spent so far in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan were poured directly into high-tech security technology to be used here (American borders and territories), but also in high-tech intelligence to be used in unfriendly countries.

Such an investment would have been way more enduring for the present and the future, and much less costly of American and foreign lives. Approximately 600,000 Americans have been in the Middle East. Deaths - too many. Injured warriors by the tens of thousands, which will cost our nation billions and billions over the next 30 to 40 years for ongoing medical care.

How much would it cost to install missile detection devises on commercial airliners - and of course mount an anti-missile missile or two? If on-board security is a serious concern...have armed Air Marshalls located in three places inside each flight. I don't know have many years it would take for Air Marshalls' pay to eat up a trillion bucks, but I bet it's be over a very long time.

I don't think most people realize how much a trillion of anything is. Well, check it out:


If you stack a trillion-worth of "$1000 bills" together, then:

1 million dollars = 4 inches high

1 billion dollars = 364 feet high

1 trillion dollars = 63 miles high

(give or take a foot or two)

How much is a trillion dollars? | IHTD

With as much money that's been spent on war over the last 13 years we could stop the second coming of Christ over America and it's territories.

Just sayin. :shrug:

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

Removable Mind said:

Risky, I'm not sure what the actually amounts have been spent to fight wars in the middle east, but I've seen estimates as high as $3 trillion thus far. But for the sake of argument, let's say about half that much.

Imagine what type of security that America might be enjoying if a trillion and a half dollars spent so far in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan were poured directly into high-tech security technology to be used here (American borders and territories), but also in high-tech intelligence to be used in unfriendly countries.

Such an investment would have been way more enduring for the present and the future, and much less costly of American and foreign lives. Approximately 600,000 Americans have been in the Middle East. Deaths - too many. Injured warriors by the tens of thousands, which will cost our nation billions and billions over the next 30 to 40 years for ongoing medical care.

How much would it cost to install missile detection devises on commercial airliners - and of course mount an anti-missile missile or two? If on-board security is a serious concern...have armed Air Marshalls located in three places inside each flight. I don't know have many years it would take for Air Marshalls' pay to eat up a trillion bucks, but I bet it's be over a very long time.

I don't think most people realize how much a trillion of anything is. Well, check it out:


If you stack a trillion-worth of "$1000 bills" together, then:

1 million dollars = 4 inches high

1 billion dollars = 364 feet high

1 trillion dollars = 63 miles high

(give or take a foot or two)

How much is a trillion dollars? | IHTD

With as much money that's been spent on war over the last 13 years we could stop the second coming of Christ over America and it's territories.

Just sayin. :shrug:

Click to expand...

Good points, bruv. It would work indeed. I think, however, the money that owns Congress at present is military/industrial and as such tech giants don't yet own Washington. As long as neocons and Teabaggers can gum up the works in DC every problem will be confronted with a military/industrial hammer.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

Risky Thicket said:

Good points, bruv. It would work indeed. I think, however, the money that owns Congress at present is military/industrial and as such tech giants don't yet own Washington. As long as neocons and Teabaggers can gum up the works in DC every problem will be confronted with a military/industrial hammer.

Click to expand...

Neo-Cons and Teabaggers? What about the Neo Libs and their devotion to becoming a citizen of the world. We wouldn't want you to forget that other half that's into Nation building while trying to spread Blue Bonnet on it with all their so called, good intentions.....which rarely come out in any solution.

Also many Tea Partiers I know.....are more closer towards isolationism or dealing with direct threats. Not about loading up others with weapons and arms either.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

MMC said:

Neo-Cons and Teabaggers? What about the Neo Libs and their devotion to becoming a citizen of the world. We wouldn't want you to forget that other half that's into Nation building while trying to spread Blue Bonnet on it with all their so called, good intentions.....which rarely come out in any solution.

Also many Tea Partiers I know.....are more closer towards isolationism or dealing with direct threats. Not about loading up others with weapons and arms either.

Click to expand...

Excellent! Me likey.

Re: Should the US Raise Security Threat to the Nation at its Highest Level for Sept 2

Smartmouthwoman said:

As long as golf courses aren't being threatened, this president isn't engaged.

Unfortunately we have no leader.

Click to expand...

Oh wow, two open dislikes, hates masculine women (use of derogatory term BUTCH) and also hates Obama, just from one little old poll.