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

AJiveMan said:

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

Click to expand...

You left out hates whiney libs.

Heard a general being interviewed on the news this morning and he thinks terrorists will target American churches and synagogues. Also said he doubts they will do anything on 9/11 since they're not big on sharing and will no doubt want their own 'special' day.

Any attack this country suffers will be 100% Obama's fault. His bootlickers better hope we make it thru the next two yrs, without incident.

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

Smartmouthwoman said:

You left out hates whiney libs.

Heard a general being interviewed on the news this morning and he thinks terrorists will target American churches and synagogues. Also said he doubts they will do anything on 9/11 since they're not big on sharing and will no doubt want their own 'special' day.

Any attack this country suffers will be 100% Obama's fault. His bootlickers better hope we make it thru the next two yrs, without incident.

Click to expand...

Why? will the cons impeach? :lamo

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

Smartmouthwoman said:

You left out hates whiney libs.

Heard a general being interviewed on the news this morning and he thinks terrorists will target American churches and synagogues. Also said he doubts they will do anything on 9/11 since they're not big on sharing and will no doubt want their own 'special' day.

Any attack this country suffers will be 100% Obama's fault. His bootlickers better hope we make it thru the next two yrs, without incident.

Click to expand...

The general doesn't know his hole from an ass in the ground. Compared to the risk there is really very little value in hitting a church or synagog.

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

AJiveMan said:

Why? will the cons impeach? :lamo

Click to expand...

I'd hate to see Obama with more American blood on his hands. He's a big enuff embarrassment already.

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

Smartmouthwoman said:

I'd hate to see Obama with more American blood on his hands. He's a big enuff embarrassment already.

Click to expand...

Why would that bother a conservative? One would think they'd be accustomed to seeing blood and body bags from Iraq and Afghanistan.

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

AJiveMan said:

Why would that bother a conservative? One would think they'd be accustomed to seeing blood and body bags from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Click to expand...

I'm sure you celebrate each and every one, too.

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

Smartmouthwoman said:

I'm sure you celebrate each and every one, too.

Click to expand...

You know me? from where?

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

I read this morning that the federal government has reportedly lost track of more than 6,000 foreigners on student visas, some of whom may be in the country "to do us harm." This according to ABC News. They state "58,000 students overstayed their visas in the past year. Of those, 6,000 were referred to agents for follow-up because they were determined to be of heightened concern." ABC found that "the number of foreign nationals obtaining visas to study in the U.S. has grown from 662,966 in 2003 to more than 1.2 million in 2012."

Excuse me but weren't the hijacking terrorists on 9/11 here on expired visas? WTF is wrong with this damn government? Lose track of 6,000 "questionable" nationals? After what this country went through on 9/11? For cripe sakes

Visa Program Struggles to Track Missing Foreign Students - ABC News

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

Smartmouthwoman said:

You left out hates whiney libs.

Heard a general being interviewed on the news this morning and he thinks terrorists will target American churches and synagogues. Also said he doubts they will do anything on 9/11 since they're not big on sharing and will no doubt want their own 'special' day.

Any attack this country suffers will be 100% Obama's fault. His bootlickers better hope we make it thru the next two yrs, without incident.

Click to expand...

Lets hope the Number of Terrorist Attacks and numbers don't increase like they have from 2010-2013. You remember Larouche, don't you?


Terrorism Flourishes During Obama Years.....

RAND Documents Rise of Terrorism Under Obama

Seth Jones, the associate director of the International Security and Defense Policy Center at the RAND Corp., released a report yesterday called "A Persistent Threat: The Evolution of al Qa'ida and Other Salafi-Jihadists." In a WSJ op-ed yesterday about the report, Jones reports, without mentioning Obama's repeated claims of having al Qaeda "on the run," that "The number of al Qaeda and other jihadist groups and fighters are growing, not shrinking.... From 2010 to 2013 the number of jihadist groups world-wide has grown by 58%, to 49 from 31; the number of jihadist fighters has doubled to a high estimate of 100,000; and the number of attacks by al Qaeda affiliates has increased to roughly 1,000 from 392."

Jones claims that Russia, China, and Iran all pose dangers to the US, but "these nations are not to our knowledge actively plotting attacks against the American homeland. A handful of terrorist groups, however, remain dedicated to attacking the U.S. at home and overseas.... Ayman al-Zawahiri remains committed to striking the U.S. He is flanked by a number of Americans, such as Abdullah al-Shami and Adam Gadahn, who support that goal." He identifies the threats to the US, itself, as coming primarily from groups operating in Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Syria, referencing Moner Mohammad Abusalha, an American who was a member of the al Qaeda affiliate organization al-Nusra, who blew himself up in a suicide bombing in Syria on March 29.....snip~

Terrorism Flourishes During Obama Years

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

AJiveMan said:

Why would that bother a conservative? One would think they'd be accustomed to seeing blood and body bags from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Click to expand...

Well, with History and what the Democrats/Liberals have going with Vietnam. They really shouldn't even be flapping their big mouths about any blood or bodybags. That's a History Marker they will always hold and will never be forgotten. So its best that just stay Mute on any of that BS. Just sayin!

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

MMC said:

Well, with History and what the Democrats/Liberals have going with Vietnam. They really shouldn't even be flapping their big mouths about any blood or bodybags. That's a History Marker they will always hold and will never be forgotten. So its best that just stay Mute on any of that BS. Just sayin!

Click to expand...

Oh, so you'd like to shut me up huh? That's typical of a conservative or a republican, seems I recall Reagan, and possibly even Bush telling people to shut up.

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

AJiveMan said:

Oh, so you'd like to shut me up huh? That's typical of a conservative or a republican, seems I recall Reagan, and possibly even Bush telling people to shut up.

Click to expand...

Well, that 56k Dead should be able to do so all on its own. But then I don't mind you revelin in its glory. Be down and show how ya get that groove on.

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

It seems that for now Jihadists are less likely to attack the US directly, since that would guarentee that we'd go into Iraq in full force. If the US does get attacked, Obama might catch some flack from FOX News and the conservatives for awhile but the attention would quickly shift back to our response. Raising the threat level may make air port security a little tighter, but it's not likely to prevent a well planned event. I'd imagine, it won't be the same kind of attack this time and will be executed from within a major city and already in place.

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

grip said:

It seems that for now Jihadists are less likely to attack the US directly, since that would guarentee that we'd go into Iraq in full force. If the US does get attacked, Obama might catch some flack from FOX News and the conservatives for awhile but the attention would quickly shift back to our response. Raising the threat level may make air port security a little tighter, but it's not likely to prevent a well planned event. I'd imagine, it won't be the same kind of attack this time and will be executed from within a major city and already in place.

Click to expand...

Heya Grip. :2wave: I think if we lost another Ambassador there would be more than just Fox news and conservatives to worry about.....already other overseas leaders and diplomats thinks he has diminished our role with the War on Terror. Can't just keep on with Airstrikes and think one is winning any such war.

They wont get anything off on our shores.....but now overseas, its a different story. They have better odds of making something happen. But then they have threatened the Europeans too.

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

MMC said:

Heya Grip. :2wave: I think if we lost another Ambassador there would be more than just Fox news and conservatives to worry about.....already other overseas leaders and diplomats thinks he has diminished our role with the War on Terror. Can't just keep on with Airstrikes and think one is winning any such war.

They wont get anything off on our shores.....but now overseas, its a different story. They have better odds of making something happen. But then they have threatened the Europeans too.

Click to expand...

I don't think Obama's actively trying to fight the War on Terror in Iraq. ISIL has started to blend in with the native populations by changing their clothing and structure. Obama is probably waiting till he's forced to commit more forces. The world is practically on fire right now with Libya being over run, I/P conflict, Egypt unstable, Pakistan with tens of thousands protesting, AQ in Somali and Yemen, now Russia invading Ukraine, with NATO reacting. If we overly commit to any one place with our diminished military, we won't be able to spread our forces around to anywhere else.

I wouldn't dismiss the US getting hit according to this article.

The Department of Homeland Security has lost track of more than 6,000 foreign nationals who entered the United States on student visas, overstayed their welcome, and essentially vanished -- exploiting a security gap that was supposed to be fixed after the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks.

"My greatest concern is that they could be doing anything," said Peter Edge, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement official who oversees investigations into visa violators. "Some of them could be here to do us harm."

“They just disappear,” said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla. “They get the visas and they disappear.”

Coburn said since the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks, 26 student visa holders have been arrested in the U.S. on terror-related charges.

Click to expand...

Visa Program Struggles to Track Missing Foreign Students - ABC News

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

grip said:

I don't think Obama's actively trying to fight the War on Terror in Iraq. ISIL has started to blend in with the native populations by changing their clothing and structure. Obama is probably waiting till he's forced to commit more forces. The world is practically on fire right now with Libya being over run, I/P conflict, Egypt unstable, Pakistan with tens of thousands protesting, AQ in Somali and Yemen, now Russia invading Ukraine, with NATO reacting. If we overly commit to any one place with our diminished military, we won't be able to spread our forces around to anywhere else.

I wouldn't dismiss the US getting hit according to this article.


Visa Program Struggles to Track Missing Foreign Students - ABC News

Click to expand...

I think he was trying to rely on or buy someone else to do it. Check this out from last month. If he thought there was an Emergency in Africa in trying to prevent terrorists from reaching the Atlantic. Then why wouldn't he raise the Threat Level here at home? Or abroad.....especially with all you have mentioned?


Obama gives France $10 million to fight terror in Africa.....

Incensed by the news that President Barack Obama gave $10 million to France to fight terrorism in three of its former African colonies, Minister Menelik Harris, of the Atlanta-based World African Diaspora Union, sent out an email message demanding that Obama keep his “terror money.” Menelik suggested that the president of the U.S. should instead “give us our trillions of dollars in reparations to rebuild Africa as one union government to protect our enslaved, devastated and scattered people.”

Aug. 11, website The Hill announced that Obama directed the $10 million in foreign aid to France to assist in “counter[ter]rorism operations on the African continent to target terror groups.” The article stated that money went to support a French counterterrorism operation code-named “Barkhan,” which would prevent the establishment of a “jihadist” foothold between Libya and the Atlantic Ocean. The Hill quoted a deputy national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, as saying the U.S. was “very focused on the threat of terrorism in Africa.” Obama issued a short statement concerning the money from his vacation spot on Martha’s Vineyard, located off the Massachusetts coast. “I hereby determine that an unforeseen emergency exists that requires immediate military assistance to France in its efforts to save Mali, Niger and Chad from terrorists and violent extremists,” said Obama.....snip~

Obama gives France $10 million to fight terror in Africa | New York Amsterdam News: The new Black view

Why are we giving the French 10 million to fight the War on Terror? When they have to fight it themselves anyways?

Oh yeah, he determined that Unforeseen Emergency exists. :roll:

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

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

MMC said:

I think he was trying to rely on or buy someone else to do it. Check this out from last month. If he thought there was an Emergency in Africa in trying to prevent terrorists from reaching the Atlantic. Then why wouldn't he raise the Threat Level here at home? Or abroad.....especially with all you have mentioned?


Obama gives France $10 million to fight terror in Africa.....

Incensed by the news that President Barack Obama gave $10 million to France to fight terrorism in three of its former African colonies, Minister Menelik Harris, of the Atlanta-based World African Diaspora Union, sent out an email message demanding that Obama keep his “terror money.” Menelik suggested that the president of the U.S. should instead “give us our trillions of dollars in reparations to rebuild Africa as one union government to protect our enslaved, devastated and scattered people.”

Aug. 11, website The Hill announced that Obama directed the $10 million in foreign aid to France to assist in “counter[ter]rorism operations on the African continent to target terror groups.” The article stated that money went to support a French counterterrorism operation code-named “Barkhan,” which would prevent the establishment of a “jihadist” foothold between Libya and the Atlantic Ocean. The Hill quoted a deputy national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, as saying the U.S. was “very focused on the threat of terrorism in Africa.” Obama issued a short statement concerning the money from his vacation spot on Martha’s Vineyard, located off the Massachusetts coast. “I hereby determine that an unforeseen emergency exists that requires immediate military assistance to France in its efforts to save Mali, Niger and Chad from terrorists and violent extremists,” said Obama.....snip~

Obama gives France $10 million to fight terror in Africa | New York Amsterdam News: The new Black view

Why are we giving the French 10 million to fight the War on Terror? When they have to fight it themselves anyways?

Oh yeah, he determined that Unforeseen Emergency exists. :roll:

Click to expand...

I don't know why we gave France anything?

With this second recent beheading, now there's going to be a big Media pressure to get more involved in Iraq.

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

grip said:

I don't know why we gave France anything?

With this second recent beheading, now there's going to be a big Media pressure to get more involved in Iraq.

Click to expand...

The Saudi and UAE are pushing.....Yeah I just put up a thread on them beheading the other Journalist. Now they are telling the British their man is next. Which if they behead him that leaves them the woman as their last hostage we know of. That's ours.

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

MMC said:

Heya Grip. :2wave: I think if we lost another Ambassador there would be more than just Fox news and conservatives to worry about.....already other overseas leaders and diplomats thinks he has diminished our role with the War on Terror. Can't just keep on with Airstrikes and think one is winning any such war.

They wont get anything off on our shores.....but now overseas, its a different story. They have better odds of making something happen. But then they have threatened the Europeans too.

Click to expand...

Greetings, MMC. :2wave:

A few years ago, a foreign "turncoat" expert on terrorism spoke at some conference for high level attendees, who were very interested and attentive - explaining in detail how it would probably be done. He said to expect a series of simultaneous attacks at various locations across our country, using backpacks or suitcase "dirty bombs," which would kill and injure as many people as possible at one time. Any thief that would find an unattended backpack or suitcase in a park would steal it, and opening it would detonate the bomb. Damn I wish I could find that article, because there were so many other things that he predicted, but the suitcase thing stuck with me...human nature being what it is. I wonder if Politico would still have it in their archives, because while lengthy, this was truly one of the most frightening things I've ever read! I've seen similar articles since, but that one was the most detailed by someone who knew what he was talking about! How do you issue an "alert" for something like that?

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

JV boys looking to letter are not going to do anything. Just ask Obama.

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

Oh yeah, the old Homeland security threat advisory system. I never really understood what we were supposed to do with it- do we start shooting anybody who looked suspicious or just get more paranoid and smoke more pot and barricade ourselves at home as the so-called threat levels increased? :doh

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...

100% agree. IMO, by far the safest time to fly is in the days immediately after a terrorist attack. Dealing with the long security lines, however, is likely to be a major hassle.

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

Phys251 said:

100% agree. IMO, by far the safest time to fly is in the days immediately after a terrorist attack. Dealing with the long security lines, however, is likely to be a major hassle.

Click to expand...

I have a TSA Global/Trusted Traveler Pass. No longer do I have to wait in long lines for domestic travel or re-entry from foreign travel.

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

grip said:

The world is practically on fire right now with Libya being over run, I/P conflict, Egypt unstable, Pakistan with tens of thousands protesting, AQ in Somali and Yemen, now Russia invading Ukraine, with NATO reacting....

Click to expand...

It's hardly on fire.

Pakistan and Egypt have had issues for years, nothing new there. Al Qaeda is pretty throughly beaten down (though we should note that terrorism is a technique rather than an organization, and "eliminating terrorism" is as foolish as "eliminating guerrilla warfare.")

Conflicts in many parts of the world have actually calmed down lately -- e.g. there's far less conflict in most of Central and South America these, mostly due to quasi- and ex-Marxist insurgencies giving up. Southeast Asia and the Himalayas are generally quite calm, e.g. Nepal's Maoist insurgency is far less active than in previous years; the government of Myanmar/Burma is slowly relaxing its totalitarian grip; separatist insurgents in Thailand are still active, but engaged in peace talks. Morocco's conflicts have calmed down; Tunisia seems to be doing fairly well; Algeria is generally stable. Israeli-Palestinian talks are continuing, and the latest conflict was actually pretty short. Russia attacking Crimea and the Ukraine isn't much different than their invasion of Chechnya (remember that?).

It only seems like "everything is getting worse!" if you fail to pay attention to the various successes and improvements, and assume that every bad event around a very large and very populated world is the Worst Thing Ever.

I wouldn't dismiss the US getting hit according to this article....

Click to expand...

I would.

Almost all of the 9/11 hijackers entered the US on travel or business visas. Students who fly to the US will face the same level of scrutiny as anyone else. The student visa program does need tightening up, but it's not an existential threat to the US. Neither is ISIL/ISIS, which is kind of busy trying to consolidate its holdings and actually manage (and cruelly dominate) an actual state, and is also getting bombed by the US and attacked by the Kurds. And who knows what the NSA is doing?

Granted, it's not smart to bury one's head in the ground and act like everything is just fine. At the same time, reacting with too much fear to the conditions of the world results in an equally negative overreaction. E.g. it wastes resources, it can turn our attention away from more critical vulnerabilities, and can inure the public to warnings of threats.