Chess Online

Play online chess!

Pages:  1 2 Next »
From	Message
anomalocaris 16-Apr-13, 18:58	Boston Bombing could it be the right? According to CNN, could be right wing extremist. townhall.com WOW, and you guys think FOX is bad. Very small of CNN also very dangerous. The right is officially the crazy party now, main stream media has everyone convinced. You can already see it from our friends over seas. They have been sold a lie and have taken the bait hook line and sinker. Get ready for a one party nation.
dmaestro 16-Apr-13, 19:29	Right wing extremism is the most probable cause of the options based on what we know now. We have been expecting right wing terrorism for a long time. As I said over at 1A, we need much stronger domestic security regardless. We can't afford the lax security at major events. We need active surveillance, security perimeters, etc. Security trumps other concerns.
anomalocaris 16-Apr-13, 19:32	DM Based on what? The fact that people don't want their gun rights taken?
dmaestro 16-Apr-13, 20:21	Gun rights are NOT being taken away. But that is a good excuse for right wing domestic terror.
anomalocaris 16-Apr-13, 20:52	DM All I can say is pathetic and that doesn't cover it.
softaire 16-Apr-13, 21:37	It was a former disgruntled military right-winger who doesn't want to pay taxes and has stocked up on pressure cookers and ball bearings. (Ya better ban pressure cookers and ball bearings.) It's obvious that it couldn't be Al Qaeda, a domestic group like the Black Panthers, a secret government agency or even OWS. It must be a right-winger. That's the story and we'll be hearing it until Al Qaeda takes credit for it. If you read DM, he is saying we need more Big Brother, more surveillance, more security which all means more cameras, drones, wire-tapping, eves-dropping, and searching through emails and postings.
proginoskes 17-Apr-13, 08:01	no one needs a pressure cooker over 10psi, let alone 15psi . . . we need some legislation
tat3225 17-Apr-13, 09:34	Deleted by tat3225 on 21-Apr-13, 21:51.
dmaestro 17-Apr-13, 12:07	Proper security is the answer; who did it is secondary. It is more important to prevent these attacks and, failing that, have the capability to catch the perpetrator(s); surveillance being a key tactic. Omnipresent and extra surveillance before and during events which are obvious targets is NOT big brother. No one should be able to plant a bomb at these public events without being detected and with no visual records avaiable to ensure arrest. It should be as simple as reviewing all the visual evidence to detect the culprit. Perimeter security should be beefed up as well.
anomalocaris 17-Apr-13, 13:36	DM You probably feel who did it is not a big deal because its not FOX blaming the left. Comments like this guy made are despicable. Sadly this is the media norm these days and most people just ride right along. Make as many bad associations with the right as possible even in times of chaos. Never let a human tragedy go to waste.
dmaestro 17-Apr-13, 14:15	The Olympic bomber was a right wing extremist motivated by hatred for "global Socialism" and abortion. Most experts consider the right wing terrorist threat as quite real.
anomalocaris 17-Apr-13, 14:44	Experts? I wonder if its the same experts that handled Benghazi?
dmaestro 17-Apr-13, 15:09	We are going to have increased security in this country. Just watch. And we will defeat right wing extremism. Just watch.
anomalocaris 17-Apr-13, 15:24	Ok Good for you. This country is turning to poop. Just watch. I must say DM you are a real Nancy Drew. This crime has been solved and the future of the country decided on this top notch investigation work.
itchynscratchy 17-Apr-13, 16:38	<<We are going to have increased security in this country.>> What kind of security could have prevented this exactly? Are you going to frisk anyone who attends a public event?
thumper 17-Apr-13, 17:01	DM and his ilk want license plate readers located every mile and cameras with facial recognition capability on every corner as well as drones complete with high resolution cameras, IR, cell and acoustic intercept capability cruising above the streets and homes of the people they wish to rule. It's for our own good of course... it's for the children...
softaire 17-Apr-13, 18:05	Nancy Drew??? Naa... he is more Nancy Pelosi than anybody else.
changeling 17-Apr-13, 18:59	tat Nice: "...I live in Boston, and what happened on Monday is horrific and gruesome. I have full faith in the US government and their search for those responsible. I love the US government, despite my criticism at times. The FBI and DHS and other agencies are composed of people, actual human beings who all care about their jobs. It is hard to believe that any counterterrorism agents are not devoted to hunting terrorists and preventing terrorism. These people choose to deal with the worst, and sometimes most frightening aspects of humanity. Some conspiracy theorists believe that these people could somehow be involved in a terror attack that amputated the limbs of many, killed a child, severed the leg of that child's sister, propelled nails into the bodies of children and painted the street with blood. Such an accusation, I think, is insulting to investigators..." It's about time more of you Americans in here felt the same way about the people who do extraordinary things with extreme diligence in defence of your country, instead of rubbishing them whenever something of this nature happens that could not actually be foreseen. Do you expect the powers that be to be able to stop every single idiot with a grudge out there?
tat3225 17-Apr-13, 19:15	Deleted by tat3225 on 21-Apr-13, 21:51.
tat3225 17-Apr-13, 19:37	Deleted by tat3225 on 21-Apr-13, 21:52.
changeling 17-Apr-13, 19:37	Careful now tat!.   siliconcowboy.wordpress.com
changeling 17-Apr-13, 19:41	tat Your post (19:37) no worries.   I was simply stating that too many in here (mostly American) are very quick to rubbish (denigrate) US security services whenever anything goes wrong (as in attacks on Americans or on American soil). Your democrat line on shooters is a little 'left field' though.
tat3225 17-Apr-13, 19:55	Right. Well, clearly if the silicon cowboy says so............I should really be more careful.
changeling 17-Apr-13, 19:57	LOL.....................
tat3225 17-Apr-13, 20:34	I just want to say that I understand privacy concerns and I think it's a good thing for people to be mindful of this. However, from my perspective, I do not necessarily feel like my privacy is threatened or that it could be threatened in an effort to prevent terrorist attacks. I'm not an FBI agent, but if I was looking for the terrorists who planted Mondays bombs I can't think of something further down on the list than randomly snooping email and cell phone records. How is this useful? There is SO much data. Furthermore, what am I looking for? Someone who says anti-American things? Someone who hates the IRS? Aside from the fact that id be investigating at least a third of America based on that criteria, how do I know that the bomber felt this way? I don't. Nor would I ever believe anything said by a bomber. Which is why surveillance footage and photos, combined with actual bomb fragments is what id go for first. That makes sense. It just seems like email, cell, any kind of snooping would lead to red herring after red herring........
dmaestro 17-Apr-13, 20:55	I am not advocating a police state like North Korea. What I am advocating is common sense surveillance and security measures at public events which are obvious targets, not big brother snooping on every house or street. Big difference. Obviously it is difficult to prevent a terror attack over a 26 mile run. But patrols and surveillance combined with stricter perimeters at critical points would make it harder and would make sure we can catch perpetrators. If we are lucky there is enough video from the event to help catch the bombers. But more comprehensive surveillance would ensure we can identify who did it.
changeling 17-Apr-13, 20:59	Just saw a report that stated a surveillance camera on a nearby store (roof corner) may give some clue as to who.
proginoskes 17-Apr-13, 21:06	DM I think they had 2000 national guard, 500 police, and a handful of DHS types (mostly FBI) around the event already. How much more should there or could there have been that would have made a difference? Serious question.
dmaestro 18-Apr-13, 04:01	Security experts are assessing exactly what improvements are needed. Obviously more ongoing surveillance video would have been helpful. Again I am only saying that for these types of crowded and soft target public events we should employ more of the security resources and technological capability we have. I am not saying we need big brother in every residential neighborhood.
itchynscratchy 18-Apr-13, 04:38	<<I am not saying we need big brother in every residential neighborhood.>> Well ok, but this was a marathon. How do you survey every stretch of a 26 mile run full of people without resorting to putting a camera on every street corner?
Pages:  1 2 Next »

GameKnot: play chess online, chess clubs, chess teams, monthly chess tournaments, Internet chess league, online chess puzzles, free online chess games database and more.