With the inane rules and regs which rocketry has been subject to, I
thought this somewhat apropos.
What, exactly, are they trying to protect from terrorism? The
government's ability to suspend any Right whatsoever?
Are there precedents for this? I am not familiar with, say, delayed
elections during WWII.
"fascism will come to america under the guise of democracy"
Gary, as far as I am aware, this is indeed unprecedented.... They even had
an election right smack in the middle of the Civil War if I remember my
history correctly...
shockie B)
BTSOOM. What could the terrorists do to disrupt the election worse than last
time?
Or are they trying to label Florida a terrorist group :-)
Well, Pearl Harbor would have been 13 months after the election
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD"
>>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
that way we would start calling President Bush.....King Bush
The Sky is Falling, The Sky is Falling
-------------------------------------
Jim Chambers
NAR 80299 L1
-------------------------------------
F.A.R.T.
Friendly American Rocket Technologies
Friendly American Rocket Team
-------------------------------------
Cleverly Disguised
As A Responsible Adult
-------------------------------------
I've seen a lot of versions of this quote, with attributions to Will Rogers
and Huey Long. Any one got a good reference for the original?
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD"
>>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!
May be further OT but my parrot won't even sh*t on the NY Daily News. That
paper sucks so bad, last week they claimed they had interviews with Elvis,
Jim Morrison and Janis Joplin.
That reminds me of an old joke....
If Mama Cass shared half her ham sandwich with Karen Carpenter, they both
might still be alive today. :-)>
P.S. I KNOW SHE DIDN'T CHOKE ON A HAM SANDWICH!!! GIVE ME A BREAK!!!
(Precursory response to the anal retentive know-it-alls and those with
snopes.com in their "Favorites")
You were there huh? What did you put in her mouth? There's only one
thing I can think of & from the rumors I've heard, no one is gonna
choke on it. 8-)
More likely that Bin Laden is laughing his a$$ off, at you.
"We can't expect the American People to jump from Capitalism to
Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them
small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that
they have Communism."
"It would be the greatest mistake, certainly, to think that
concessions mean peace. Nothing of the kind. Concessions are nothing
but a new form of war."
"We will offer the Christian world unheard of peace overtures, and
these nations, stupid and decadent, will leap at the chance to be
our friends; they will willingly cooperate in their own destruction.
Then, when their guard is down, and they have gone to sleep, we will
smash them with our clenched fist."
"There are many who lust for the simple answers of doctrine or
decree. They are on the left and right. They are not confined to a
single part of the society. They are terrorists of the mind."
"Freedom does not always win. This is one of the bitterest lessons
of history."
Deaver wrote:
You know, I can understand taking precautions and trying to mitigate
disruptions and panic. I can understand extra security at transportation
centers and ball games and things like that. I can understand concern
and even paranoia.
But, at some point, there are lines that cannot be crossed. Its the
lines that make America what it is, or, what it should be. When we cross
those kind of lines, we lose more than we gain.
Open elections. I mean, to me, they are a defining characteristic of the
American Republic. A Right to vote. Lots and lots of people have died to
gain and protect a Right like that. It shocks me that Homeland Security
(apparently) would even consider "delaying" an election. It is kowtowing
to the terrorists, for one thing. It is, IMHO, an insult to the
principles and ideals upon which this nation was founded, for another.
If we are not willing to vote, to carry an election to completion under
a threat, or even an attack, what is left that is more important or
American that we WOULD be willing to carry on with in the same
circumstances? What other parts of the Constitution and our way of life
are relative to the whims and threats of those who may wish us harm?
No, I would not be thinking of how to delay an election. I would be
doing my best to ensure that it goes off successfully.
No matter what.
I agree.
I think (and hope) that the concern is, if there's a major attack such as what
happened on 9/11, people in that city or cities would be unable to get to the
polls. NYC was pretty much chaos, with no public transportation, people
searching for loved ones, large areas closed off, etc. If the election went
forward and those folks didn't get to vote, they'd probably not be very happy
about it, and you can bet your bottom dollar that whichever side lost the
elections would raise a stink.
Yeah, really... why aren't they talking about, like, contingency plans to
set up polling places under emergency circumstances, instead of "delaying"
the election??
-dave w
plans to
Perhaps "they" are. Would you want to tell your enemies about your
contingency plans? Hey guys, if you try to disrupt our elections on
November 2 we have a secret plan to move our elections to ..... Oh
yea, that makes sense. And realistically, the Federal Government
has no business setting up polling places. That's a State issue.
It's so nice to have an executive branch that is at least willing to
explore emergency situations instead of worrying which intern is on
duty today. I'm sure our enemies would like to disrupt any chance
of Bush being re-elected. John/John would continue the
Carter/Clinton policy of appeasement. You will see embassies
captured and/or bombed, hostages taken, burned out helicopters with
the pilots dragged through the streets. They would be given at
least 4 years to rebuild.
So you think (a) we would see more attacks by "the terrorists"
under a Democratic presidency than under a second Bush term, but
that (b) an attack near the election would nevertheless tend to
provoke people to vote against Bush?
Hmmm... if people generally believed (a) to be true, then (b) isn't too credible.
Or is your position that a vote against Bush is in fact a vote "for The
Terrorists" but most of the population does not believe that it is, and
therefore we should be denied the vote in a time of crisis lest we, based
on that lack of belief, vote "wrong"??
-dave w
I think the terrorists hate and fear Bush. Bush has eliminate two
countries that supported enemies of the U.S. and has convinced Libya
that continuing against us is a quick way to loose your position
of power. Democrat Presidents (Carter and Clinton) were soft on
terrorists and countries that supported them and the result was a
number of attacks on us (including the first Trade Center bombing).
They were successful in influencing the elections in Spain and
probably feel they can influence them here. I personally feel that
if a Democrat is elected President there will be a gradual increase
in major events against the U.S. both at home and abroad.
I never said we should change the date or place of the Federal
Election. Luckily Texas has a very convenient early voting policy
that would allow me to vote before November 2.
I believe many Americans, like the Spaniards, are easily influenced
by fear and images selected to be shown by media. I think any
attempt to influence the election through terror will have a very
strong reaction. I'm not sure what that reaction would be however.
In the past the public has strongly supported the President
(regardless of party) immediately following a national crisis. If
that continues, a terrorist attack would backfire (assuming I'm
correct and hate Bush).
David We> Alex Mericas wrote:
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.