On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 22:05:52 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote:

On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 17:19:46 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 20:24:50 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote:

On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 19:42:04 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

...snips....

I'm just waiting now for Sen Kennedy to call for guards at every
computer, electrical tower, dam, and river that exists in the USA.

Our mutual contempt for the Kennedys aside....

Would this not be the stated objective of the Office of Homeland
Defense?

I have seen no statement to the effect that the Office of Homeland Defense
desires to spend irresponsibly. In my opinion, the Democrats would do so if they
could. I firmly believe they would post a guard for every container that enters
the country, as long as the guards could be members of the AFGE.


Check out http://www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/ and see if you think
your 2 Billion Dollars is being well spent.....

My personal views are colored by the fact that I work at an airport
and I see the fruits of the money spent. I am totally underwhelmed...

Gene,

Hell no I don't think the money is well spent. I think the Democrats and their
whining about the "lack of security" have caused money to be wasted, big-time.
My attitude about securing an airplane from being used as a weapon is simple:
Keep the damn cockpit doors closed. Amen. Airplane cannot be used as a weapon
without cockpit access.

The emphasis on finding personal weapons, e.g. knives, box cutters, etc., seems
a waste of time and money. I could do significant damage with a Cross ballpoint
pen up a nose or through an ear drum. Yet, these are not removed from
passengers.

I think federalizing the security folks was a Democrat-pushed idea that the
administration caved under. Why? Heat of the moment, decisions based on urgency
and pressure rather than objective analysis. The Dems love the idea of thousands
of new AFGE members, and a bigger government.

Regards,






John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

Gene,

Hell no I don't think the money is well spent. I think the Democrats and
their
whining about the "lack of security" have caused money to be wasted,
big-time.
My attitude about securing an airplane from being used as a weapon is simple:
Keep the damn cockpit doors closed. Amen. Airplane cannot be used as a weapon
without cockpit access.

The emphasis on finding personal weapons, e.g. knives, box cutters, etc.,
seems
a waste of time and money. I could do significant damage with a Cross
ballpoint
pen up a nose or through an ear drum. Yet, these are not removed from
passengers.

I think federalizing the security folks was a Democrat-pushed idea that the
administration caved under. Why? Heat of the moment, decisions based on
urgency
and pressure rather than objective analysis. The Dems love the idea of
thousands
of new AFGE members, and a bigger government.

Regards,

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

Good grief, John. You've gone around the bend. Do you suppose the democrats
have
a GWB double? Do you suppose they hog-tied the real president and sent the demo
double up to the microphone at the press conference where GWB anounced the
creation of the Dept of Homeland Security?

Is the Chesapeake cold this time of year? If so, go jump in it and wake up. The
Republican Party has made far more political hay off 9-11 than Al Qaida could
ever dream of. "If we can keep the people afraid, they will pass Patriot Acts
and believe our stories about nuclear threats from third world countries."

And you're about 180 degrees off course on your union noise. One of the things
that Ashcroft did when he brought all those federal departments under the
"homeland security" heading was to eliminate collective bargaining rights for
employees in those departments. It's an emergency, you know. LIkely to go on
for years, or at least until well past the next fear-motivated election.

On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 10:58:15 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote:

On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 09:24:13 -0400, JohnH
wrote:

On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 22:05:52 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote:


I have seen no statement to the effect that the Office of Homeland Defense
desires to spend irresponsibly. In my opinion, the Democrats would do so if they
could. I firmly believe they would post a guard for every container that enters
the country, as long as the guards could be members of the AFGE.


Check out http://www.whitehouse.gov/homeland/ and see if you think
your 2 Billion Dollars is being well spent.....

My personal views are colored by the fact that I work at an airport
and I see the fruits of the money spent. I am totally underwhelmed...

Gene,

Hell no I don't think the money is well spent. I think the Democrats and their
whining about the "lack of security" have caused money to be wasted, big-time.
My attitude about securing an airplane from being used as a weapon is simple:
Keep the damn cockpit doors closed. Amen. Airplane cannot be used as a weapon
without cockpit access.


You say, "I have seen no statement to the effect that the Office of
Homeland Defense desires to spend irresponsibly. In my opinion, the
Democrats would do so if they could."

And then you say, "Hell no I don't think the money is well spent. I
think the Democrats and their whining about the "lack of security"
have caused money to be wasted, big-time."

You need to adopt a position other than: Democrats, BAD...
Republicans, GOOD and stick with it.....

You can't blame the Democrats for what the Republicans control. (Not
that they didn't get some of the things they would have wanted,
anyhow.)

You can't keep the cockpit doors closed all of the time... not the way
aircraft are designed. El Al does a pretty good job keeping their
passengers safe.... maybe we could model THEM...... if the modeling
was prevented, then you could pounce on liberal views and gun control
nuts....

The emphasis on finding personal weapons, e.g. knives, box cutters, etc., seems
a waste of time and money. I could do significant damage with a Cross ballpoint
pen up a nose or through an ear drum. Yet, these are not removed from
passengers.


Amen... fingernail clippers, 3/4 inch long nail files, other WMD.....

It goes MUCH deeper than this.... even to the people that are most
frequently "screened"..... the pilots, who, if they want to keep
their jobs must remain mum.....

I think federalizing the security folks was a Democrat-pushed idea that the
administration caved under. Why? Heat of the moment, decisions based on urgency
and pressure rather than objective analysis. The Dems love the idea of thousands
of new AFGE members, and a bigger government.



The situation was fairly stupid, anyway. The Airlines were tasked
with providing security. They bought the cheapest equipment and
personnel they could find to get the job done.... usually through
contractors They did, after all, have a profit motive. With 9/11,
the Federal Government required them to buy equipment and hire
personnel that they simply could not afford to purchase.....
certainly, with nobody flying, fuel prices skyrocketing, and no
revenue being generated.

We already had the FAA which was starved for money. Why didn't we
give *them* the money and personnel to get the job done. During the
Clinton Administration they were cut back so severely that they didn't
have travel budgets sufficient to do adequate routine surveillance.
Mark them as victims, too.... during "orange" alerts, they can't even
let people into the FAA building to transact normal business.....
ever conducted business in a parking lot?

Looking at the whole picture, I see nothing that indicates to me that
the Republicans have done anything different than the Democrats in
taking over another part of American life because they know what is
best for my safety and THEY can do it better because, after all, they
ARE the government..... and don't question ANY of this because it is
a matter of National Security.

Down side of this is that the previous workers have been replaced by
minimum wage types and wholesale firings of these new "affordable"
workers for unsuitability and illegal behavior has been the oft
repeated result.

You've never lived until you have been screened for any threat you
might pose to America and the American people by a guy that doesn't
quite have a grasp of the American Language. He want's to see my
underwear and I want to see his Green Card..... This is especially
aggravating to me, when I know some of the competent, experienced, and
articulate people that this guy replaced.... because he would work
cheaper and was selected by the government over the more experienced
and qualified.

Please don't couch all of this in Democrats, BAD... Republicans, GOOD
rhetoric. Thus far, other that giving me a better sounding reason why
this is "good" for me (and I'm speaking VERY generally) I feel just as
violated by this Republican administration as I did by the Democrats.
I'm not sure Algore would have done things significantly different.
Frankly, that scares and unsettles me.

Amen. They both screwed the pooch on this one. But, I think the Dems pushed in a
little deeper.

Respectfully,

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

Chuck, how many senators voted for the Patriot Act? Thank God for the
elimination of collective bargaining rights for those folk.

John

1. A whalloping majority of Senators. Wasn't it 90-something? Interesting that
the first response of the government in a time of trauma was to curtail civil
rights.
What do we suppose would happen if the terrorists somehow "took over" the US?
Gosh, I bet we'd lose our civil rights.

2. Please get consistent. First, you try to pass off the Department of Homeland
Security as a Democratic conspiracy to increase the number of union jobs. Then,
you "thank God" that the Dept of Homeland Security has suspended collective
bargaining. Does it bother you in any way that you are being thankful for the
complete refuting of your earlier, erroneous, inflammatory and prejudicial
statement?

On 16 Aug 2003 16:42:01 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Chuck, how many senators voted for the Patriot Act? Thank God for the
elimination of collective bargaining rights for those folk.

John

1. A whalloping majority of Senators. Wasn't it 90-something? Interesting that
the first response of the government in a time of trauma was to curtail civil
rights.
What do we suppose would happen if the terrorists somehow "took over" the US?
Gosh, I bet we'd lose our civil rights.

2. Please get consistent. First, you try to pass off the Department of Homeland
Security as a Democratic conspiracy to increase the number of union jobs. Then,
you "thank God" that the Dept of Homeland Security has suspended collective
bargaining. Does it bother you in any way that you are being thankful for the
complete refuting of your earlier, erroneous, inflammatory and prejudicial
statement?

I believe 98 senators voted for the act. This number would include several
Democrats.

No, Chuck, I said, "I think federalizing the security folks was a
Democrat-pushed idea that the administration caved under." By this I meant the
federalizing of the thousands of screening personnel at the airports. Perhaps I
was unclear. I apologize. I think the Department of Homeland Security was a good
idea, as long as it consolidated and made more efficient the operations of the
agencies it subsumed.

I'm not sure to which '...earlier, erroneous, inflammatory and prejudicial
statement' you are referring. Please quote it for me, and I'll let you know if
I'm bothered.

Respectfully,

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

JohnH wrote:

On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 12:47:07 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:

Chuck, how many senators voted for the Patriot Act? Thank God for the
elimination of collective bargaining rights for those folk.

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

That's our John...he'd bring back slavery if he could...

Harry, the difference between being a working slave of a property owner, and a
non-working, welfare-receiving deadbeat lies only in ownership. At least a slave
could go to sleep feeling he had accomplished something during the day.

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

There are very few "non-working, welfare-receiving" deadbeats around
these days, John. If you are talking about those who receive AFDC, the
payments are to provide a subsistence existence for children. General
welfare these days mostly is restricted to those incapable of working
because of some medical reason.


--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
JohnH wrote:

On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 12:47:07 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

JohnH wrote:

Chuck, how many senators voted for the Patriot Act? Thank God for the
elimination of collective bargaining rights for those folk.

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

That's our John...he'd bring back slavery if he could...

Harry, the difference between being a working slave of a property owner, and a
non-working, welfare-receiving deadbeat lies only in ownership. At least a slave
could go to sleep feeling he had accomplished something during the day.

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

There are very few "non-working, welfare-receiving" deadbeats around
these days, John. If you are talking about those who receive AFDC, the
payments are to provide a subsistence existence for children. General
welfare these days mostly is restricted to those incapable of working
because of some medical reason.




What planet do you live on?

I was kind of wondering the same thing.

--
Steve (here to have fun) Barker

=======================
Remove the not dot from my address to abuse my email box
"Jim" wrote in message
news:t6x%a.133101$Oz4.26683@rwcrnsc54...

What planet do you live on?

Within the last couple of days they arrested two guys at the Seattle airport.
One was on the "do not fly" list.
Both had Pakistani passports, and had slipped illegally into the US across the
Candian border at Blaine.

Both guys paid cash for one-way tickets to NY.

Was it a coincidence that they wanted to be in NY this afternoon?
Probably.

If the terrorists could knock out electic power without being caught
wouldn't this be an effective way to blackmail us? Why would they
need to do other stuff?

If the terrorists could knock out electic power without being caught
wouldn't this be an effective way to blackmail us? Why would they
need to do other stuff?

Absolutely.