So are we safer today?

Question

Well after reading this you may be surprised, an under cover investigation team was able to acquire a license from the Nuclear regulatory commision that would have allowed them to buy radioactive material, you know that stuff in dirty bombs, with little more than a set of incorporation papers and a P.O. Box as an address, no brick and mortar building, real employees, no website, no nothing, just a cheap incorporation and a P.O. Box, wow 6 years and this is what we've accomplished, somedays I think we're freaking doomed here with the Gang that couldn't shoot atright running the show.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/12/us/12nuke.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

By the way it was form the GOA so at least someone in Government thinks about what the hell we should be looking at

Thedre weren't any from 93 to 2001 either, were we safe then, My God what a simple way of thinking, all the depth of a turnip with none of the flavor

Wil the last part of your name there, well I can see why you got it

Skooz is the another language for the word CLUELESS

If's and's are you playing liberal and smoking dope today, They were able to get licensed to purchase radio active material, and quite frankly who cares if it was Congres the GOA has always been seen by all but the feeble minded as a reliable agency, you people can defend anything and you call us partisans, what a load of fecal matter

Answer 1

See, the republican logic on this one is that we are fighting them in Iraq so security can be relaxed here. Plus, no one wants to have their taxes raised a little bit to pay for better security here when we can spend all our money fighting them there and not have to worry about here. Our fighting forces should be protecting our borders not Iraq's.

Answer 2

I certainly don't feel any safer because I know it's only a matter of time before something else happens on a much larger scale than 9/11.

I also think that when the next attack does occur that our Government may even turn on it's own citizens in an effort to protect the enemy.

And we'll also have Americans turning against Americans as they take sides on whose right and whose wrong for this happening to us.

It's already been made obviously clear to us that we have many people within our Government who are blatantly against Americans and want to aide and abet our enemy's.

Amnesty is only one example of how they are doing this to us.

I even tend to think that because of how Bush was elected in the first place to be President of the United States only after votes in Florida were conveniently lost that our votes no longer make any difference.

So much has changed in America and so much has happened that I think it's only by the grace of God that we still exist at all.

God bless America!!!

Answer 3

No, I don't feel we are any safer!
1. We supposedly went to war in Iraq to find and destroy WMD, yet someone could buy the materials here to make WMD. And Bush admitted yesterday that probably someone in the White House leaked the identity of the CIA operative whose job supposedly was to track down WMD ("loose nukes").
2. Our invasion of Iraq has caused anger, resentment and thus an increase in terrorist recruiting and activity.
3. The "no fly" list isn't effective either because it includes the names of dead people and excludes some of the most dangerous known terrorists because the personnel checking IDs at airports aren't cleared to know those names.

For those that would argue that we must be safer because we haven't had an attack in US since 9/11, using a 'negative proof' is a logical fallacy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_proof
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(logical_fallacy)

BTW... Please take care in painting with that broad brush of political positions. I'm more Liberal than Conservative... Libertarian actually.

Answer 4

Think about this. After 9/11, Homeland Security was formed. Their job, to uncover conspiracies against this country. So tell me again , what's the CIA for. Weren't they in charge of that. So they drop the ball, we get a new branch of government, and you ask if I think we are safer. Not a chance. Things are exactly the same as before 9/11.
Business as usual.

Answer 5

Sorry I don't read the lying liberal rag NY Times. The Arabs pay too much into it for me to believe one thing they write but as for your question. Other then 9-11, there have not been a single terrorist attack but under Clinton there were several.

Answer 6

There are a lot of if's, might's and can's............from the biased NY Times. Okay, it's not like they mailed a thermonuclear warhead bonehead. Besides, I'm not surprised that CONGRESS set this up, I wonder how many were democrats. I wonder if they were trying to see if they could sell more Nuclear technology to China or North Korea like Clinton did?

Answer 7

Of course we're safer. We are aware of and attacking the terrorist threat now. For the first time.

Edit: Really? No terrorist attacks from 1993 - 2001?

Tell that to the families of the murdered crewmen on the USS Cole. You are the clueless one.

Answer 8

Safer? You are kidding right? The director of homeland security chertoff said on tv yesterday were gonna get attacked this summer. He would know right? Just what Bush needs something to get us off topic on all the investigations giving him problems.

Answer 9

Will Obama and Hillary surrender to Al Qaeda on the day they get into the WH?

Answer 10

i think that we are safer today than we every were unfortunatley we are still in iraq but thats only because the soldiers havnt finished thier job they dont have enough resources to do so the sooner we finish there the safer we will be