I hope your little one is better real soon!
This went into effect Monday. It was a surprise as far as I can tell to everyone. It was not expected, at least this early.
Can you refresh my memory? What were we talking about. heh!
Posted on 05/25/2004 4:52:15 PM PDT by Wolfstar
17 minutes ago (at time of posting) The intelligence does not include a time, place or method of attack but is among the most disturbing received by the government since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, according to a senior federal counterterrorism official who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity Tuesday.
Of most concern, the official said, is that terrorists may possess and use a chemical, biological or radiological weapon that could cause much more damage and casualties than a conventional bomb.
"There is clearly a steady drumbeat of information that they are going to attack and hit us hard," said the official, who described the intelligence as highly credible.
The official declined to provide any specifics about the sources of the information but said there was an unusually high level of corroboration.
Despite that, the official said there was no immediate plan to raise the nation's terrorism threat level from yellow, or elevated, to orange, or high. The threat level has been at yellow — midpoint on the five-color scale — since January.
Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller plan a news conference Wednesday to outline an intensive effort by law enforcement, intelligence and homeland security officials to detect and disrupt any potential plots. And the FBI plans to dispatch a bulletin to some 18,000 state and local law enforcement agencies warning of the threat.
Beginning with Saturday's dedication of the new World War II Memorial in Washington, the summer presents a number of high-profile targets in the United States. They include the G-8 summit in Georgia next month that will attract top officials from some of America's closest allies, the Democratic National Convention in Boston in July and the Republican National Convention in August in New York.
The FBI and Homeland Security Department also are concerned about so-called soft targets such as shopping malls anywhere in the United States that offer a far less protected environment than a political convention hall.
U.S. authorities repeatedly have said al-Qaida is determined to mount an attack on U.S. soil, in part to announce to the world that it remains capable of doing so despite the money and effort that has gone into homeland security in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks.
There also is concern terrorists might try to mount an attack to coincide with the November election. The political fallout from the March 11 train bombings in Spain taught al-Qaida that an attack timed to an election can have a major impact. Spain's former ruling party was ousted in the voting that followed the bombing, which killed 191 and injured more than 2,000.
The official did not say how many suspected al-Qaida or other terrorist operatives are believed in the country, whether they made their way into the United States recently or have been here for some time. The FBI has warned in the past that Islamic extremist groups may attempt to recruit non-Middle Easterners or women for attacks because they would be less likely to arouse suspicion.
Special security attention already is being focused to the nation's rail, subway and bus lines. The FBI last week sent out an intelligence bulletin to law enforcement agencies urging vigilance against suicide bombers, who have been used by terror groups worldwide to devastating effect but not so far in the United States.
Separately, Immigration and Customs Enforcement chief Michael Garcia told reporters Tuesday that some 2,300 of its agents are being deployed to assist in security for the high-profile events scheduled this summer in the United States. These include as many as 20 agents each day working with the Secret Service to protect the campaigns of President Bush (news - web sites) and Sen. John Kerry (news - web sites), the Democratic presidential candidate.
Garcia said his agency also is working to "tighten the investigative system" to ensure that terrorists do not enter the United States by way of human smuggling operations or through the vast, largely unprotected border with Canada.
Believe me, I'm not questioning their commitment, but this particular decision seems unusual.
Oh! That must be SO hard! At least my entire family are all Conservative, thank God. We have a big ole time bashing JFnKerry. LOL!
I hope your little one is better real soon!
This went into effect Monday. It was a surprise as far as I can tell to everyone. It was not expected, at least this early.
Can you refresh my memory? What were we talking about. heh!
The 6-county state of emergency in GA in ref to the G8 summit next month. They are already activating the GA Nat'l Guard.
The thread is long, isn't it.
Oh yes! That's right! Thanks!!! :)
And yes, it DOES seem early. Makes me wonder how many of them know more then they are telling us!
And yes, I got up this morning and this thread was still going. Everyone is interested.
One of the posters compared having a border with being 'locked down' and imprisoned. if it wasn't you, then it was someone who sounded exactly like you and shared your ideology; I'm not going to wade through the 600 replies to find it. Regardless of whether it was you or another so-called "conservative" reconquista advocate who said it, my point (which you failed to address) still applies.
You either don't respect or comprehend the Constitution. Patrolling our border isn't a 'flowery pipe-dream' as you suggest . it's an integral part of sovereignty.
On a related note, since you seem to adore the party instead of conservative principle, I'd love to know if you support Bushs' endorsement of abortionist Specter instead of Pat Toomey. Also, if you support him appointing open sodomites and their lovers to head the American Embassy in Romania.
You'll probably say "what do those pesky issues have to do with principles or conservatism? That stuff doesnt matter."
All hail your hero-leader Bush. for shame.
I have not read through this entire thread but I've seen enough to share this experience again.
In 1989 I rode Amtrak from New York back to California. About halfway through the trip a Middle Eastern guy sat down near me in the glass viewing car. He told his story. He was from Egypt and had illegally entered the US five times, three through the Canadian border and twice through Mexico. That was his fifth try. He was going to San Jose, CA. I didn't ask a lot of questions nor did I pull out my copy of Salman Rushdie's "Satanic Verses". I was barely 22 and naive but not stupid. I don't recall the details of the conversation but at some point I realized something wasn't right. ME guy talked about getting a car and seemed so excited to be in this country. I told him he needed a driver's license. He said no, he didn't need one of those.
At that time I wondered why he wanted to get into the US so badly. Now I don't. San Jose/Santa Clara is a locale for ME terrorist groups.
"my point (which you failed to address) still applies."
What on God's little green earth is your point? Is it that you want our borders sealed, closed, barricaded, etc? Great and noble in theory, but how in the heck do you intend to get in done. It's wonderful that you want this, it's beautiful, it's cool, it's high-minded, it's groovy, it's rad, it is a thought to make us all feel warm and fuzzy inside. But you haven't given me or anyone here any idea on just how in the heck this is to be accomplished. Oh, you are good at demagoguery like most good liberals, but woefully short on solutions. Don't tell me that the solutions are ready and available if I only bothered to search them, instead offer them, offer them here, right now on this forum. Maybe I'm missing it, so please enlighten me.
"On a related note, since you seem to adore the party instead of conservative principle, I'd love to know if you support Bushs' endorsement of abortionist Specter instead of Pat Toomey."
I don't know how open borders and Right-to-life is a "related note." Maybe it's related if you are suggeting we have our American troops protect all fertile wombs from the terror of abortionsists much like we'd have our troops protect every square inch of our borders from terrorists.
In any event, you might want to check into some of my previous replies concerning that election, my friend. You would find that I was very baffled by Bush selling out Toomey, as I was just as upset with Santorum. It still bothers me.
Bottom line, I'll take Bush any day of the week despite his selling out on that election which ultimately cost Toomey a senate seat in my opinion. If you want to denigrate Bush over one issue (open borders), well, have at it pal - I want no part of it.
I found a Wanted Poster for everyone to print out and put around town!
It is in Microsoft Word.
To get to the poster, you must go to the News page on this site (which I have provided a link for) then click the link on the right of the page due to some rules my host has.
http://westhamptontars.8m.com/whats_new.html
Note: that is the NYC FBI number at the bottom of the poster.
I'm clueless? Amazing. So throwing up your hands in surrender and saying nothing can be done is your answer? Trust the president? A guy that has bent backwards to provide an amnesty for millions of illegals with a promise of millions more to come? ROFLOL
Well it's so nice that you are satisfied. There is a sucker born every minute comes to mind.
Actually, I think there are far less like you then you think. Just look at how few voted for buchanan last election.
I don't get the apology either.I say watch him.
Obviously you prefer nation killing, it's a great concept to you, right? Just be up front about it and admit it.
Nation killing? No, just laughing at the like of you is far more fun then nation killing.
Here's you a laugh, get a load of the lingo emanating from the January 2004 Summit of President Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox. Fox openly talked about open borders, he talked about the US, Canada, and Mexico uniting under one "umbrella" with American wages dropping to meet Mexico's rising wages, with the rest of the western hemisphere joining in at some point. But Ronald Reagan warned us, "A nation without borders is not a nation."
President Bush signed the Declaration of Quebec City on April 22, 2001, making a commitment to globalist goals for the Western Hemisphere. These proclaimed goals include "hemispheric integration," "greater economic integration," "interdependence," and "national and collective responsibility" for the Western Hemisphere. The purpose is to expand NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) into the hemisphere-wide Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).
Before we hear any talk of open borders for the Western Hemisphere, Americans should realize the enormous disparity between the United States and other Western Hemisphere countries. U.S. per capita income is eight times the Latin American average. The United States produces six times the goods and services of all 20 Latin American nations combined, and 20 times the goods and services of Brazil alone.
Expanding NAFTA to all of Latin America would only exacerbate these trends because of the enormous gulf between living standards. Free trade is based on the theory that economic differences and resources are exploited until there is equality, and since cheap labor is the chief resource of other countries in the FTAA, the result must be to reduce American wages.
Economic disparity is only one measure. The differences are just as immense in government and police corruption, and in respect for property rights, contracts, and copyright and patent protections, there is no Bill of Rights, in these nations, or in the FTAA that we are expected to meld with, give way to, and sacrifice our wealth, sovereignty, and standard of living to.
NAFTA, which is now celebrating its tenth anniversary, is a model train wreck for FTAA. When the first President Bush and candidate Bill Clinton were persuaded to support NAFTA, Mexican President Carlos Salinas promised that all three big North American countries would benefit, that NAFTA would open up a large market in Mexico for U.S. products, and that increased wages in Mexico would keep Mexicans at home and stop the tide of illegal migration.
Instead, the United States exported jobs rather than products, and the U.S. trade balance with Mexico changed dramatically from surplus to deficit. Real wages in Mexico are lower than before NAFTA, and the influx of illegal aliens and illegal drugs has grown into a mighty invasion.
So keep laughing, you will need your sense of humor.
Fortunately for the U.S., people like you aren't born every minute.
Unfortunately for the U.S. people like you are. These things are said by leaders right in your face, and you either refuse to believe what they tell you up front, or you approve, which is it?
Yes it is. I noticed the disparity of people like me who voted for President Bush...and those like you who voted for buchanan. How unfortunate...for your world.
The way you evade issues would lead one to suspect you to be a man with an agenda. So when you get done with the personal attacks and finally get around to addressing the NAFTA/FTAA issue you find so amusing let me know.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.