Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Sandbox - National
test
The Sandbox - National The Sandbox is a collection of off-topic discussions. Humorous threads, Sports talk, and a wide variety of other topics can be found here.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 646
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Jon Bon 396
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
Starscream66 279
George Spelvin 265
sharkman29 255
Top Posters
DallasRain70795
biomed163285
Yssup Rider61006
gman4453295
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48665
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino42682
CryptKicker37220
The_Waco_Kid37076
Mokoa36496
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-14-2012, 09:20 AM   #16
WTF
Lifetime Premium Access
 
WTF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by essence View Post
It doesn't exactly take rocket science to realise that embassies in the middle east on the anniversary of 9/11 may be more vulnerable to attack.

Geez.
And don't you think that the ambassador should know this risk and plan accordingly.

Should Washington micro manage ever detail of movement ?

We are killing folks with drones, do any of you think that there will not be deaths on our side?

I'm not sure wtf it is some of you want. Do you want to pull out of the ME completely? Or do you want war in the ME?

WTF is it you want?
WTF is offline   Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 09:50 AM   #17
essence
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 21, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,586
Default

BTW, the original report in The Independent seems to be increasingly discredited.
essence is offline   Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 10:13 AM   #18
WTF
Lifetime Premium Access
 
WTF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExNYer View Post

But, apparently we did nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by essence View Post
BTW, the original report in The Independent seems to be increasingly discredited.
Care to comment exNYer?
WTF is offline   Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 10:52 AM   #19
i'va biggen
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2011
Location: kansas
Posts: 28,773
Encounters: 17
Default

they had broken the Japanese code before pearl harbor,and look what happened...
i'va biggen is offline   Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 11:01 AM   #20
Guest032516
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 1, 2009
Location: TBD
Posts: 7,435
Encounters: 33
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WTF View Post
And we did not suspect that the Towers would be a target? The WTC had been targeted before. Nothing was done.

We are still on some stupid alert for flying in this country. Orange? Do you know how many false alerts there are?
No, we didn't suspect it. That is just 20/20 hindsight.

BTW, doesn't the second paragraph in your post kind of refute the first paragraph? There were a lot of false alarms in 2001, also.

With as many targets as we have in a continent-sized country of 300+ million, there is no reason to assume they would have hit the same target again. Even if we DID think they would go for the WTC again, why wouldn't we be looking for another car or truck bomb? And the WTC had already changed the parking security to make sure no more big vehicles could get near the WTC.

Even if we suspected plane hijacking, why would we have suspected IN 2001 they would crash the planes into anything? Sure we do NOW, but that's because we have seen it happen. In 2001, we would have assumed it would be hostage taking, just like all of the plane hijackings in the 1970s and 1980s. The ragheads had never done kamikaze missions before and the default position of security personnel is always to assume this crisis is like the last crisis and to act and negotiate accordingly.

And if we did suspect a plane on a kamikaze mission, would we not IN 2001 have suspected an attack on the White House or the Capitol Building while Congress was in session, or the Pentagon (that one WOULD have been true)?

Sure we know NOW what Al Queda is capable of. But not then.

Also, there are about 10,000 flights a day in this country. Even NOW we cannot defend them all. Even if we had specific information that AQ was going to attack a US commercial plane some time later this year, what would we do? Search everybody twice? Cut liquids down from 3 ounces to 1 ounce?

The truth is, we could only warn people to be on extra alert. Many wouldn't fly and the rest would be looking to kill any passenger that causes problems

Speaking of which, the only REAL defense is passengers rising up and killing hijackers with their bare hands. And frankly, that happened once already when some crazy guy tried to kick in the cockpit door on a plane. The passengers "subdued" him and in the process choked him to death.

And that is probably why AQ hasn't tried more hijackings. Even they know if won't work again. Which is why they have switched to shoe bombs and underwear bombs.

The current failures in security are nothing like the 9-11 failures. This was much more preventable. I don't mean we could have stopped the rioters, but we could have evacuated and cleared out the secret documents and files. And probably saved lives.
Guest032516 is offline   Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 11:11 AM   #21
joe bloe
Valued Poster
 
joe bloe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 10, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 5,740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExNYer View Post
No, we didn't suspect it. That is just 20/20 hindsight.

With as many targets as we have in a continent-sized country of 300+ million, there is no reason to assume they would have hit the same target again. Even if we DID think they would go for the WTC again, why wouldn't we be looking for another car or truck bomb? And the WTC had already changed the parking security to make sure no more big vehicles could get near the WTC.

Even if we suspected plane hijacking, why would we have suspected IN 2001 they would crash the planes into anything? Sure we do NOW, but that's because we have seen it happen. In 2001, we would have assumed it would be hostage taking, just like all of the plane hijackings in the 1970s and 1980s. The ragheads had never done kamikaze missions before and the default position of security personnel is always to assume this crisis is like the last crisis and to act and negotiate accordingly.

And if we did suspect a plane on a kamikaze mission, would we not IN 2001 have suspected an attack on the White House or the Capitol Building while Congress was in session, or the Pentagon (that one WOULD have been true)?

Sure we know NOW what Al Queda is capable of. But not then.

Also, there are about 10,000 flights a day in this country. Even NOW we cannot defend them all. Even if we had specific information that AQ was going to attack a US commercial plane some time later this year, what would we do? Search everybody twice? Cut liquids down from 3 ounces to 1 ounce?

The truth is, we could only warn people to be on extra alert. Many wouldn't fly and the rest would be looking to kill any passenger that causes problems

Speaking of which, the only REAL defense is passengers rising up and killing hijackers with their bare hands. And frankly, that happened once already when some crazy guy tried to kick in the cockpit door on a plane. The passengers "subdued" him and in the process choked him to death.

And that is probably why AQ hasn't tried more hijackings. Even they know if won't work again. Which is why they have switched to shoe bombs and underwear bombs.

The current failures in security are nothing like the 9-11 failures. This was much more preventable. I don't mean we could have stopped the rioters, but we could have evacuated and cleared out the secret documents and files. And probably saved lives.
We were operating on the T.S. Garp pre-disastered strategy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBSAeqdcZAM
joe bloe is offline   Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 11:11 AM   #22
Guest032516
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 1, 2009
Location: TBD
Posts: 7,435
Encounters: 33
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WTF View Post
Care to comment exNYer?
Not until Essence posts something substantive.

Do I have to take Essence's word for it that it is being increasingly discredited?

Also, I was careful to say "IF" it is true, it is on Obama.

Also note this post was addressed to Joe Bloe. For some background you might want to read the thread about the supposed gangrape of Ambassador Stevens.
Guest032516 is offline   Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 11:30 AM   #23
WTF
Lifetime Premium Access
 
WTF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExNYer View Post



The current failures in security are nothing like the 9-11 failures. This was much more preventable. I don't mean we could have stopped the rioters, but we could have evacuated and cleared out the secret documents and files. And probably saved lives.
I will let your answer be my answer
''That is just 20/20 hindsight..''

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExNYer View Post
. That is just 20/20 hindsight..



.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExNYer View Post

BTW, doesn't the second paragraph in your post kind of refute the first paragraph? There were a lot of false alarms in 2001, also.



.
That was my point, to criticize one without criticizing the other is total BS.

I criticize neither. You seem to want to have it both ways.
The problem is paralysis. Life is all about risk assessment. For the most part we get it right. But nobody gets it right all the time. You have fallen into the BS political gotcha trap.

Carry on if that is all you want to do.
WTF is offline   Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 11:33 AM   #24
WTF
Lifetime Premium Access
 
WTF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExNYer View Post
Not until Essence posts something substantive.

Do I have to take Essence's word for it that it is being increasingly discredited?

Also, I was careful to say "IF" it is true, it is on Obama.

Also note this post was addressed to Joe Bloe. For some background you might want to read the thread about the supposed gangrape of Ambassador Stevens.
I already know joe blow is full of shit.

I am hoping you are not.

The United States Government is huge, to blame everything on the President is ludicrous.

You have lowered yourself to his level.
WTF is offline   Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 11:49 AM   #25
essence
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 21, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,586
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ExNYer View Post
Not until Essence posts something substantive.

Do I have to take Essence's word for it that it is being increasingly discredited?
Do I have to do all the work for you?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...te-attack.html

I don't think the White House would make such clear statements if there was any hint of truth about them.

Grudge report, indeed.
essence is offline   Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 12:14 PM   #26
Guest032516
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 1, 2009
Location: TBD
Posts: 7,435
Encounters: 33
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WTF View Post
I already know joe blow is full of shit.

I am hoping you are not.

The United States Government is huge, to blame everything on the President is ludicrous.

You have lowered yourself to his level.
I don't blame everything on the President, nor should anyone.

But some things should be.

9-11 was unique and very likely unreproducible.

But this was far more preventable. Not guaranteed, of course. But if they had done something - anything - reasonable, and Stevens got killed anyway, then Obama shouldn't get the blame.

We should always have a heightened sense of alert on 9-11. This isn't the first time there has been trouble on a 9-11 anniversary.

There aren't that many embassies and consulates in the Middle East and N. Africa.
Guest032516 is offline   Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 12:23 PM   #27
Guest032516
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Apr 1, 2009
Location: TBD
Posts: 7,435
Encounters: 33
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by essence View Post
Do I have to do all the work for you?

I don't think the White House would make such clear statements if there was any hint of truth about them.

Grudge report, indeed.
No, but you should at least do the work you started. How hard would it have been to post that link the first time?

And the first Article was from The Independent, not Drudge. Drudge might have linked to it, but that doesn't make it a "Grudge" report.

And so far all I am seeing is a blanket denial, which is to be expected. I'll wait to see how the Independent responds.

Unlike certain posters in the thread about Ambassador Stevens being gang raped, I and NOT hoping The Independent report is true.
Guest032516 is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved