Where were the terrorists?

Mr.Smith · Jan 1, 2004

Mr. Smith was at the middle of the Las Vegas strip tonight, though drunkened by many liquors,

was ready to fight it out with some terrorists but they no showed.

There were all sorts of threats to Las Vegas this New Years. This was my first new years in Las Vegas and it was a total blast. Its a great place to be at if you get the chance.

The strip was closed to vehicles and was foot traffic only. Due to the terrorist threat, there was unprecidented police presence and armed ( With troops ready to go) military helicopters overhead. The amount of Las Vegas police milling about was incredible. They were prepared for the worst and thankfully nothing happened.

If you get a chance, Las Vegas is a fantastic place to be for new years eve.

Happy New Years to all........

Banned4Life · Jan 1, 2004

And Times Square didn't blow up either, so Congressman Gray (R-Chicken) can crawl out from under his bed now.

EverFresh · Jan 1, 2004

Where's Osama and where are the WMD while we're at it

Skyweasel · Jan 1, 2004

the fact that you the public can be manipulated endlessly by these sorts of "warnings". They are mostly about getting you to agree to give up your rights and freedoms. No one is going to "predict" a terrorist attack if it comes. The last time the info was available (911) it was withheld because the attack served the purposes of certain people in power.

tuleythetout · Jan 1, 2004

I don't think the terrorists are likely to try and orchestrate something big on a day when everyone is expecting it. 9/11 was such a success for them because our guard was down...they know that 12/31 would be much harder to pull off.

I think the worst thing we can do is see the lack of an attack on New Year's Eve as anything other than what it was. It was a no-contest and to see it as a victory is to lull ourselves into a false sense of security.

Jabow · Jan 1, 2004

All these threat levels are really stupid, all the terrorist have to do is wait until the level drops to do their stupid stuff.

Its like putting a big sign outside your house/apartment

level one - The alarm is on, the pitbulls are inside, we're all home, and we're packing .357 magnums

level two - We're on vacation, dad left 50k in the dresser, the doors are open.

RPM · Jan 1, 2004

GLAD TO HEAR THEY "NO SHOWED".

lander · Jan 1, 2004

Jabow,
I couldn't agree more. NYC is on some level nearly every day. They're warned us about planes, trains, bridges, tunnels, boats, malls, stadiums, subways, libraries, tall buildings, etc ...

It's almost as if they want to name every possible attack so they can claim they warned us should, God forbid, anything evil occur.

On the good side, Dennis Kucinich's recent initiative in Congress to change the alert colors to Pink, Fuchia, Lavendar, Purple and plum was quickly dismissed. Only the Californians showed support

Java · Jan 1, 2004

The terrorists remain at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Check out the book "1984" sometime about how the threat of "perpetual war" is used to stay in power and limit individual rights.
The US killed some 9000 Iraqi civilians (and tens of thousands of troops). How do we justify killing 9000 civilians (three times the death toll for 9/11) in a country that didn't attack us or pose any real threat?

TheFunkMonkey · Jan 2, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Java:
The terrorists remain at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Check out the book "1984" sometime about how the threat of "perpetual war" is used to stay in power and limit individual rights.
The US killed some 9000 Iraqi civilians (and tens of thousands of troops). How do we justify killing 9000 civilians (three times the death toll for 9/11) in a country that didn't attack us or pose any real threat?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're right, Saddam could've (and would've)killed 9000 civilians by himself. No need for America to get involved.

Not saying that justifies the American invasion. However, all these people who complain about the civilian deaths...do they REALLY think Iraq would've been better off with Saddam for another 20 years?

MeyerLansky · Jan 2, 2004

Vegas on new year's eve is worse than root canal.

Java · Jan 2, 2004

EACH YEAR over 11,000 US citizens are killed by firearms (and another 16,000 kill themselves with guns). How many billions has the government spent to improve gun control (and save US lives)? Ashcroft is in NRA pocket. He even blocked FBI from checking gun database to see if the 9/11 hijackers had purchased guns.

Alcohol-related traffic crashes killed about 17,000 people last year alone, and injured half a million more. (source www.madd.org) That is over 34,000 since 9/11/01. How much money/effort has former alcoholic and current president, Bush, spent to curb drunk driving? If they screened bar patrons the way they screen airline passengers, they would save a lot more citizens every year than would ever be killed by terrorists.

If saving lives was the REAL objective, the money currently being spent on "Homeland Security" could be used to really save lives instead of kickbacks to oil companies and other Bush supporters. (How many tobacco deaths a year?)

BTW, the US, under Reagan/Bush, sold Saddam chemical and biological weapons (including anthrax) in the 80's. How many Iraqi deaths are we responsible for when we supported him (and knew about a lot of his crimes).

Is Iraq better off without Saddam? It might be if we stopped him by following international law, using weapons inspectors, and getting the backing of the UN. How many more terrorists have we created? Look how much damage those two DC snipers did. Any policy that fuels anger at the US is just going to create more terrorists in the long run.

Saving the Iraqi's from Saddam was NOT are stated reason for going to war. If that is going to be a reason for war, then we should be invading China (remember Tianamin Square?).

studbolt · Jan 2, 2004

Never go to any huge public venue for New Years. I have found that private parties at friends houses are a shitload more fun. No traffic, parking, security, cost of drinks etc.. We had a hell of a party the other night, and I wasn't looking over my shoulder for Osamas second cousin.

Railbird · Jan 2, 2004

I think we need to check out Detroit and Montreal, it is big islam communitys and most likely where terror cells would be, also Northern Jersey. This thing between Isaac and Ishmael will Kickoff soon, the church will soon be raptured and Christ will say to his bride, come on lets go eat. How soon, we dont know the exact pitch but it is the Bottom of the 9th and 2 outs. How soon, we dont the exact day, but she is 9 months pregnant.

TheFunkMonkey · Jan 2, 2004

Java, we're kinda on the same page.

For example, I had to laugh when the FDA decided to ban ephedra. Supposedly the use of ephedra didn't justify the risk/reward relationship. Huh? Since *when* did the government use risk/reward in order to ban (or not ban) products from the marketplace? You mentioned several good examples. Alcohol, tobacco, firearms.

Oddly enough, the government didn't even NEED to get involved in the ephedra problem. The free-market was doing a great job of working things out. Ephedra sales were $1.3 billion in 2002, they'll probably be $500 million in 2003. People stopped buying ephedra LONG before the government decided to ban it.

Anyway, when it comes to the "hot" issues (Iraq, terrorism, etc), I think America is damned if they do, damned if they don't. Too many people expect America to develop a perfect solution to every problem, and that just isn't possible. Do I think America has made mistakes with Iraq? Yes. Do I think America has wasted LOTS of money (that could've been spent on Americans!) in Iraq? Yes.

But would the situation be better if America waited for UN backing? Maybe yes, maybe no. Who knows, maybe the UN would've waited four years to take action, and then the situation would've been even worse than it is now. Maybe we'd have to send more troops, more money, etc.

Same thing with terrorism. We're spending all this time/money trying to stop terrorism, but does it really prevent anything? Dunno. But if the government doesn't do anything, you know the media/public is gonna scream bloody hell if/when there is another attack in America.

Bottom line, lots of people are idealistic. But we don't live in an ideal world! So you gotta pick and choose what you're gonna complain about.

By the way, none of this has anything to do with sportsbooks or casinos. And it drives me nuts when people post non-relevant messages. But hey, I just reply to the messages that interest me!

TheFunkMonkey · Jan 2, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by studbolt:
Never go to any huge public venue for New Years. I have found that private parties at friends houses are a shitload more fun. No traffic, parking, security, cost of drinks etc.. We had a hell of a party the other night, and I wasn't looking over my shoulder for Osamas second cousin.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I went to New Orleans for NYE 1996 and 2000. Didn't have to worry about traffic/parking because we had a hotel. Didn't have to worry about cost of drinks because drinks are relatively cheap on Bourbon Street. Gotta love Huge Beers 2 Go.

But I wouldn't go again. Not only am I getting older, but you're right, I'd be worried about terrorism.

Oh, who the hell am I kidding. I'd love to go again!

But I'll admit, I don't think you can go to Bourbon Street these days without thinking about 9/11, terrorism, etc.

Mr.Smith · Jan 2, 2004

there are some truly nuts replys here....but lets not

I started this in the main forum so i dont want it to get too political....

I'm telling you all again, the Las Vegas strip is fantastic for new years. I just hope I gambled enough at my hotel to keep the free room offers coming, I would love to have a free room in las Vegas for New Years next year.

happy new years too all

Banned4Life · Jan 2, 2004

Railbird is absolutely right. That's why I changed my avatar to David Koresh. You can never be too prepared.

lander · Jan 2, 2004

Outstanding post Java.

I hope I'm wrong, but it seems like half of the Bushie supports get off more on the idea of a kill-per-view Fox 'un'-reality type coverage on this than they do about helping anyone.

Armchair general has superceded armchair QB in their lives