http://gamingtrend.com
October 24, 2014, 08:45:03 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Your tax dollars at work, part 2  (Read 2667 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
unbreakable
Guest
« on: May 11, 2005, 06:25:36 PM »

Terror Alerts in 2004 were manipulated for political reasons, according to Tom Ridge, former head of Homeland Security.
Logged
Rob_Merritt
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 925


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 12, 2005, 11:11:24 AM »

No surprises here.
Logged

Ranulf
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 99


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: May 12, 2005, 07:21:39 PM »

Well, duh.  smile
Logged
th'FOOL
Executive Producer and Editor-At-Large
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5016


Never whistle while you're pissing


View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 12, 2005, 08:10:14 PM »

The only thing that is remotely surprising about that is that someone actually admitted to it.

even then, it's not that surprising.
Logged

Mike Dunn
Executive Producer & Managing Editor, GamingTrend
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2005, 05:41:24 AM »

I dont know what's sadder, that the people in power value politics ahead of the good of the country, or that the public is apparently unconcerned about it.

I think Im going to start looking in to what the best country would be to migrate to.  My gut feeling is that the long term prospects for the USA are not good.  With the people in power at the moment, our nation's future will be a lot like Iraq looks now.
Logged
jpinard
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 611


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: May 16, 2005, 01:02:25 AM »

Quote from: "unbreakable"
I dont know what's sadder, that the people in power value politics ahead of the good of the country, or that the public is apparently unconcerned about it.

I think Im going to start looking in to what the best country would be to migrate to.  My gut feeling is that the long term prospects for the USA are not good.  With the people in power at the moment, our nation's future will be a lot like Iraq looks now.


Yep, I feel the same way.  IN fact if I had no family here, I'd be on the first boat out.  My new home of choice would be probably be Germany or New Zealand.  Canada used to be up there, but seeing their government officials are as corrupt and greedy as ours, leaves me sad.
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #6 on: May 16, 2005, 03:29:51 AM »

I was looking at New Zealand myself, but they do a sort of 'scoring' system.  After looking into it, I realized that I fall a bit short of their required score without having a college degree, so that option will take a bit of work.

Ive also started learning Spanish.  Now while there isnt an 'ideal' country to go to with that option, it does open up more opportunities than not speaking a foreign language.
Logged
ravenvii
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2026



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: May 16, 2005, 05:05:24 AM »

I'm thinking the exactly same things as you guys. The good ole' US of A is going to be a pretty crappy place to live down the road unless something changes drastically in the government. But I have a feeling that you will find corruption everywhere, be it Germany, New Zealand or Canada. I'll be glad to be proven wrong, though.
Logged
th'FOOL
Executive Producer and Editor-At-Large
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5016


Never whistle while you're pissing


View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: May 16, 2005, 05:55:05 AM »

Have any of you spent extended periods of time in any other countries?  I think you'd be surprised at how good things are here compared to most of the world.
Logged

Mike Dunn
Executive Producer & Managing Editor, GamingTrend
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2005, 06:23:32 AM »

I think its a good idea to get out before the fit hits the shan.
Logged
Toe
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1493


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: May 16, 2005, 12:00:19 PM »

Quote from: "unbreakable"
Terror Alerts in 2004 were manipulated for political reasons, according to Tom Ridge, former head of Homeland Security.


I read nothing of them being "manipulated for political reasons" in that article (not saying that they were not, but that article does not prove anything). Some people in charge wanted a certain level based on information provided, others disagreed with that assesment. Why does this suprise anyone?
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #11 on: May 16, 2005, 12:59:23 PM »

Nobody seemed surprised to me.
Logged
Toe
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1493


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: May 16, 2005, 01:35:09 PM »

Quote from: "unbreakable"
Nobody seemed surprised to me.


Suprised at what? That an article that says nothing at all about terror alerts being "manipulated for political reasons" is used to vainly support an argument that they were? Weak.
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #13 on: May 16, 2005, 09:37:07 PM »

Look man, you should probably take your trolling for a political arguement elsewhere.  There are sites in which that is their forte.

A critical thinker would realize that QUOTES in the article point to that exact conclusion.  After all, the Dept of Homeland Security has a better idea of what constitutes a high alert than people in the White House (since they are just going off of analysis by those departments, they arent bringing anything new to the table).

Quote
More often than not we were the least inclined to raise it," Ridge told reporters. "Sometimes we disagreed with the intelligence assessment. Sometimes we thought even if the intelligence was good, you don't necessarily put the country on (alert). ... There were times when some people were really aggressive about raising it, and we said, 'For that?' "


So if a critical thinker, rather than a Faux NewsCorp parrot, were to just ask "Why?" regarding the terror alert level, it would lead them to the conclusion that it was both created and manipulated solely to terrify the electorate into voting for the candidate who benefits the most from people thinking the country is at 'war'.

Let's not focus too much on the fact that the man who orchestrated the attacks on September 11 is still at large, a family friend of our president, and will never be caught.  Such thinking would make us lose focus on the 'war on terror' which is going on in Iraq  :roll:

Another amusing aside is how the Al Queda guy captured in Pakistan was being talked up as some high ranking capture.  After some reporters and other people started asking questions, however, it turned out he was essentially an Al Queda intern; he made coffee, did photocopying, etc.  But I dont imagine you would conclude that is a case of media manipulation, either.
Logged
Toe
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1493


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: May 17, 2005, 11:02:04 AM »

Quote from: "unbreakable"

A critical thinker would realize that QUOTES in the article point to that exact conclusion.


Hehe, yeah right. Watch out for for those black helicopters too man. A critical thinker would take the quotes for face value and not try to twist them around in a vain attempt to prove a weak point.
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #15 on: May 17, 2005, 12:50:39 PM »

Quote from: "Toe"
Quote from: "unbreakable"

A critical thinker would realize that QUOTES in the article point to that exact conclusion.


Hehe, yeah right. Watch out for for those black helicopters too man. A critical thinker would take the quotes for face value and not try to twist them around in a vain attempt to prove a weak point.


Have another sip, buddy.

Logged
Toe
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1493


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: May 17, 2005, 01:55:12 PM »

Quote from: "unbreakable"
Quote from: "Toe"
Quote from: "unbreakable"

A critical thinker would realize that QUOTES in the article point to that exact conclusion.


Hehe, yeah right. Watch out for for those black helicopters too man. A critical thinker would take the quotes for face value and not try to twist them around in a vain attempt to prove a weak point.


Have another sip, buddy.

http://wilsonhellie.typepad.com/for_the_record/pictures/koolaid7.jpg


LOL! Nice site you pulled that from. Frequent there often? smile That would explain you totally twisting around what was in the quotes to fit your radical political viewpoint.
I am just a middle-of-the-road, non-partisan average joe. Sorry if I do not buy into to your political rhetoric.
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #17 on: May 17, 2005, 02:12:49 PM »

Quote from: "Toe"
LOL! Nice site you pulled that from. Frequent there often? smile That would explain you totally twisting around what was in the quotes to fit your radical political viewpoint.
I am just a middle-of-the-road, non-partisan average joe. Sorry if I do not buy into to your political rhetoric.


Sure, your ranting makes you seem really level headed and non-partisan.

Do a google image search on 'kool aid', tough guy.
Logged
Toe
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1493


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: May 17, 2005, 02:32:06 PM »

Quote from: "unbreakable"
Quote from: "Toe"
LOL! Nice site you pulled that from. Frequent there often? smile That would explain you totally twisting around what was in the quotes to fit your radical political viewpoint.
I am just a middle-of-the-road, non-partisan average joe. Sorry if I do not buy into to your political rhetoric.


Sure, your rant makes you seem really level headed and non-partisan.

Do a google image search on 'kool aid', tough guy.


Wake up dude. You said "Terror alerts in 2004 were manipulated for political reasons, according to Tom Ridge", then you cite an article which says nothing of the sort. Sometimes he did not agree with the assessment. He did not imply that the other party's assessment was politicaly motivated. Thats something you came up with on your own.

Quote
The level is raised if a majority on the President's Homeland Security Advisory Council favors it and President Bush concurs. Among those on the council with Ridge were Attorney General John Ashcroft, FBI chief Robert Mueller, CIA director George Tenet, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell.


You mean you have some of those people that disagree with each other? Whoa, stop the presses! I smell government corruption!

Personally, I think it was more a matter of covering their asses. Even if the evidence they had was flimsy, if something did happen, they would have been strung up.
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #19 on: May 18, 2005, 12:12:36 AM »

Quote from: "Toe"
Wake up dude. You said "Terror alerts in 2004 were manipulated for political reasons, according to Tom Ridge", then you cite an article which says nothing of the sort. Sometimes he did not agree with the assessment. He did not imply that the other party's assessment was politicaly motivated. Thats something you came up with on your own.


Then what is your theory for why the terror alerts were being called?

Quote
You mean you have some of those people that disagree with each other? Whoa, stop the presses! I smell government corruption!

Personally, I think it was more a matter of covering their asses. Even if the evidence they had was flimsy, if something did happen, they would have been strung up.


 :roll:

Oh ok.  The timing was just an amazing cooincidence, how the alert raised any time news came in from the 'reality based community' that was contrary to Bush's propaganda.

At any rate, go whine somewhere else.  Just because you can't figure out the motives of other people doesnt mean they dont have motives.  Doing your thinking for you on this issue is a waste of time, because even if I proved myself 100% right beyond any doubt with footnotes, eye witnesses, and testamony, you would still deny it.

You are arguing a point which most people, even Republicans, already conceed as truth.  The difference is most have already come to terms with Bush being able to do no wrong, so they justify it to themselves.
Logged
whiteboyskim
Senior Staff Writer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7849


Hard partier


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: May 18, 2005, 12:23:56 AM »

Quote from: "unbreakable"
Look man, you should probably take your trolling for a political arguement elsewhere.  There are sites in which that is their forte.

A critical thinker would realize that QUOTES in the article point to that exact conclusion.  After all, the Dept of Homeland Security has a better idea of what constitutes a high alert than people in the White House (since they are just going off of analysis by those departments, they arent bringing anything new to the table).

Quote
More often than not we were the least inclined to raise it," Ridge told reporters. "Sometimes we disagreed with the intelligence assessment. Sometimes we thought even if the intelligence was good, you don't necessarily put the country on (alert). ... There were times when some people were really aggressive about raising it, and we said, 'For that?' "


So if a critical thinker, rather than a Faux NewsCorp parrot, were to just ask "Why?" regarding the terror alert level, it would lead them to the conclusion that it was both created and manipulated solely to terrify the electorate into voting for the candidate who benefits the most from people thinking the country is at 'war'.

Let's not focus too much on the fact that the man who orchestrated the attacks on September 11 is still at large, a family friend of our president, and will never be caught.  Such thinking would make us lose focus on the 'war on terror' which is going on in Iraq  :roll:

Another amusing aside is how the Al Queda guy captured in Pakistan was being talked up as some high ranking capture.  After some reporters and other people started asking questions, however, it turned out he was essentially an Al Queda intern; he made coffee, did photocopying, etc.  But I dont imagine you would conclude that is a case of media manipulation, either.


Actually I'm a pretty good critical thinker, and the assessment I take from that article is that the people who voted to raise the threat alert were extremely paranoid. Timing? Try more like "Hey guys, we intercepted an al Queda message." The reaction: "Holy shit! Raise the alert level!" Ridge: "Guys, it's one guy telling the other to get some pears while at the store."

Normally I'll tend to disagree with you ton.. unbreakable, but you can back up your facts and assertations better than this. slywink Or do you also think the Hero of Chappaquiddick is an upstanding member of society? biggrin
Logged

Behold the glory of my new blog!
Filmmaking is vision plus faith plus balls, all 3 of which Hollywood knows little about.
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #21 on: May 18, 2005, 05:10:19 AM »

Ah, so the guys who were asleep at the wheel during 9/11, the guys who invaded a country which didnt participate in that attack, and the guys who now continue to be completely lazie faire regarding public safety made mistakes spurred by paranoia?  You give them far too little credit.

None are so blind as those who refuse to see.

BTW, asshol... i mean pal.  Yes, just so everyone here knows, my name is Tony.  Wow, thats a real shocker.  Maybe you can be like that shitbird Tareeq and post all my personal info for everyone to see now.  Real class you guys have.

[edit] I can't figure out what the hell Ted Kennedy has to do with this or anything else.  Why you right wing zealots keep invoking his name is a mystery to me, but I still cant get over your strange fascination with Hillary Clinton either.  But then again, I cant understand how you guys continue to admire and respect a man who forced his housekeeper to become a drug dealer for him (Limbaugh), and a man who was possibly sexually harassing someone working for him, but at the very least having phonesex with her (while he is married, btw).   Ive always found it amazing how OReilly basically build his career by bashing Clinton, and his revealed hypocracy doesnt even show up on the radar.  How a male cheerleader who dodged Vietnam gets to smear slime over two decorated Vietnam vets is pretty high on that list as well.

Given the staggering amount of hypocracy you guys already ignore, I guess it all really doesnt register that highly.  But, if you finally wake up and realize you sold out your country, 'I told you so' isnt going to make me feel any better.  Hopefully I will be living in an actual free country at the time, rather than a former one.
Logged
Toe
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1493


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: May 18, 2005, 11:36:42 AM »

Quote from: "unbreakable"
Then what is your theory for why the terror alerts were being called?


Uh, because this council got some evidence maybe? Evidence that some thought was flimsy and did not warrent an alert raise and others thought did warrant an alert raise? Of course, this is just a theory I guess even though thats what comes directly from the article you brought up. Heh.

Quote from: "unbreakable"
At any rate, go whine somewhere else.  Just because you can't figure out the motives of other people doesnt mean they dont have motives.  Doing your thinking for you on this issue is a waste of time, because even if I proved myself 100% right beyond any doubt with footnotes, eye witnesses, and testamony, you would still deny it.

You are arguing a point which most people, even Republicans, already conceed as truth.  The difference is most have already come to terms with Bush being able to do no wrong, so they justify it to themselves.


Hey, I am just pointing out that your assumption/point that the terror alerts were manipulated for political reasons is not proven nor implied by the article you presented. Thats all. Pretty funny how you automatically assume I am a Bush supporter/republican/anti-democrat when that is far from the case.

You can show me some real evidence to back up your claim that terror alerts were manipulated for political gains and I would still argue that the article you pointed out here does not prove that. Maybe one day you will realize how stupid you sound.
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #23 on: May 18, 2005, 02:58:31 PM »

Quote from: "Toe"
Uh, because this council got some evidence maybe? Evidence that some thought was flimsy and did not warrent an alert raise and others thought did warrant an alert raise? Of course, this is just a theory I guess even though thats what comes directly from the article you brought up. Heh.

Um.  Yeah.  Would that be the same evidence that Cheney had which wasnt shown to the 9/11 commission, even though there wasnt anything which wasnt shown to them?

Quote
You can show me some real evidence to back up your claim that terror alerts were manipulated for political gains and I would still argue that the article you pointed out here does not prove that. Maybe one day you will realize how stupid you sound.


Here is a statement just as intelligent as the one you presented- show me the evidence that it wasnt manipulated for political reasons.  It's kind of sad that you dont possess the class to see what I wrote, say "oh well the guy is entitled to his unsubstantiated opinion, just as I am entitled to my unsubstantiated opinion."


A quick reminder, since you seem to be forgetting how things work here-

Quote
Off-Topic
Talk about anything you want, just don't be an ass about it.
Logged
Toe
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1493


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: May 18, 2005, 03:43:21 PM »

Quote from: "unbreakable"



A quick reminder, since you seem to be forgetting how things work here-

Quote
Off-Topic
Talk about anything you want, just don't be an ass about it.


Just giving back what your dishing out bud.
Logged
whiteboyskim
Senior Staff Writer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7849


Hard partier


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: May 18, 2005, 04:13:10 PM »

So it's not whether the evidence is flimsy or not, it's all about the seriousness of the charge? Gotcha.
Logged

Behold the glory of my new blog!
Filmmaking is vision plus faith plus balls, all 3 of which Hollywood knows little about.
warning
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7325



View Profile
« Reply #26 on: May 18, 2005, 05:06:51 PM »

It's nice to be able to discuss politics and religion here at CG but we're not very tolerant of baiting and personal attacks in P&R threads.  Please ratchet it down a bit... k?

And if I'm counting correctly, 14 out of the last 16 posts in this thread were by either toe or unbreakable.  Maybe you guys could discuss this via PM or email?
Logged
RunningMn9
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 99


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: May 18, 2005, 11:30:30 PM »

Wow.
Logged
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #28 on: May 18, 2005, 11:34:04 PM »

I think the losers should stick to their loser site.
Logged
RunningMn9
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 99


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: May 19, 2005, 01:15:05 AM »

Quote from: "unbreakable"
I think the losers should stick to their loser site.


That wasn't very polite at all.  We're all hurt.

To the original topic - while the linked article provides no evidence at all regarding the motivations of the people that Ridge disagreed with (or even who disagreed with Ridge - maybe Colin Powell tipped the balance against him) - I am surprised that Ridge is saying anything at all.

I thought Bush and Ridge were tight, and Bush generally frowns upon this sort of thing.  Unless Ridge has further political ambitions, then this makes more sense.
Logged
stiffler
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4071


View Profile WWW
« Reply #30 on: May 19, 2005, 01:31:05 AM »

Quote from: "unbreakable"
I think the losers should stick to their loser site.


Just drop it.  Now.
Take it to PM, e-mail, or even behind the woodshed.
Stop with the insults like that or you will find yourself looking for another "loser site" to post on.
Logged

Xbox Live Gamertag: cstiffler
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.162 seconds with 85 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.043s, 2q)