Posted on 07/31/2005 5:46:16 PM PDT by Pikamax
Actually, I disagree with you. I sure won't think I deserve the panic--I have to way to demand that every Mosque be videotaped. Do you have some way of making that happen?
Speak with your Mayor, City Manager, police chief or senior officials, local FBI office, agent in charge, and military intel officers. Get the bug in their minds.
Wouldn't it be more prudent to have all 6,000 armed? Preferably with submachine guns. However they probably can't scrape up more 3,000 police who are qualified to be armed, or even that know which end of the tube the bullets come out of. :)
OTOH, the 3,000 armed police they do have might be more effectively employed storming a few mosques, particularly the one that seems to have been the common factor in all these bombings and attempted bombings.
Maybe there's some soft spoken quiet men making their way around the country helping these young muslims reach their matyr's reward a little sooner than they had planned.
WTF?
Oh yeah? Ask the Lord Mayor of London what he thinks about suicide bombers. He'll tell you that they're justified.
The mere fact that the brits elected and are not making an effort to recall boneheads like Livingstone and Galloway speaks volumes about the Brits IMHO.
Wish it weren't so, but I'm afraid it is.
"When did he give the date?"
That date's been floating around the net for as long as the suitcase nukes story has been out there. If memory serves, the deal was there would be lots of little terror events globally leading up to the big attack here. Dates given: 8-6 or 9-11. Sorry, no source. Just my leaky recollection.
Police protection is good, but...
this is a war.
Where are the troops?
That "every other Thursday" thing seems to be their pattern, doesn't it?
Looks like I'm going to be going from one war zone to another on vacation in a couple of weeks....
It's also a term frequently used in war zones.
And war zones can feel somewhat "prison-like."
Reading "The Haj" by Leon Uris will increase your understanding of the infantilism and crazed nastiness of these cranks...
Most of them don't have proper firearms training and hence are more likely to be a danger to themselves and the public if armed.
The Met Police firearms unit, who are trained, generally seem to hit whatever they're shooting at.
Unfortunately what they're shooting at is not always what they're supposed to be shooting at and they were already subject to various court actions even prior to shooting Mr Menezes for shooting people who weren't armed, were the wrong people and so on.
So heaven knows what the untrained ones would be like when let loose with firearms. I'd prefer to avoid finding out.
Gee, I've been hoping we'll see another goofy Not-In-Our-Name million-moron march in London and other Euro cities. Seems like we haven't heard from those folks in a while.
Indeed, I'm sure that many of the London marchers are starting to see things differently now that they've had a terror attack on their own soil. Let's hope that the Brits, now, see the folly in giving radical Islamist sanctuary in their country.
George, do you live in that big white house on Pensilvania Avenue?
I don't have any expertise on this subject, so say this with some diffidence, but -
on the face of it seems common sense that a police force in which the only armed officers are those who have volunteered, been vetted and intensively trained for the purpose is likely to be be more effective and safer in the use of those arms than a force where every officer carries a gun as a matter of course, whatever his competence. I'm not suggesting this is an argument against routinely arming police, but simply that when guns are actually used the average level of competence is likely to differ.
What I am curious about is just how long PC will last. A hypothetical: London is bombed again, with large loss of life like this time. The U.K. reacts how, to a second bombing. Ok, now its bombed a third time. And then a forth. What would the response by the U.K. gov't to a series of bombings, one after the other, spaced by let's see, about 3 weeks to a month apart. When does the U.K. reach it's limit, and what would that reaction be, when the limit is reached? At what point would the U.K. revoke all visas of muslim foreigners, or intern them, or kick all of them out, including those that have British citizenship?
What do you think will be the natural progression, or do you think that London (and the whole of the U.K.) will just continue to "take it" in the jugular, time after time after time. I wonder when a country (that includes ours) opts for extremist measures to counteract extremist terrorism, and how many of their own citizens have to die before that level is reached. Just been mulling this over in my mind. What think you?
Give 'em a little time. It will be worse than mosque torching sooner than later. Where's the IRA when you need them?
It's the same way in Canada...the government is totally nuts up there...
That's "asian" young man.
A number of years ago, a prophetic word came out about praying for our school busses. I think that's a great idea NOW due to the crazies who live and work here.
Soccer's what they play most. Midnight soccer....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.