It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

RON PAUL: Police manhunt for Boston Marathon bombing suspect scarier than attack

page: 8
54
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Okay, since our government took the rights away from our fellow Americans in Boston why don't we all do something about it!

Or should we just keep complaining about it on a website and just keep throwing a fit.

Pass the chips and dip, please.

My point is, if there really is a problem why do we always assume someone else is going to take care of it instead of actually calling them out ourselves.




posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
reply to [url=http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread944124/pg7#pid16325921]post
But we want this type of agressiveness in other areas.
Gangs
Drugs

Do you really want milk toast cops in the war on drugs?



End the war on drugs. Hey presto, no need for any cops to fight it and maybe a drop in gang crime, as the drugs they were fighting over can now be legalised and purchased.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by LogicGrind
 




I should have said that a segment of our well armed individuals are idiots, not all of them.

You could also accurately say that a segment of our unarmed individuals are idiots too.
You don't have to own a firearm to be an idiot... or be dangerous.

After all, how many people were shot at the finish line of the Boston Marathon this year?
And...
Bombs are already illegal.


Idiots with firearms are more dangerous than idiots without firearms.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by LogicGrind
 


So does this militarised police force make you feel any safer? Are you worried about dying in a terrorist attack?
Do you require this type of protection in other areas of your life that may kill you? Like driving a car or crossing the street or being struck by lightening?

At what stage will you say no more. That's too much protection? Too late I imagine



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by LogicGrind
 




Idiots with firearms are more dangerous than idiots without firearms.

Sounds like a challenge.

You get an assault weapon, loaded, in your hands.

and

I get a passenger sedan, engine running.

We face off, 25 feet separating us....

I'd take that challenge.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by LogicGrind
In the end, they got both the suspects in only 4 days...kind of hard to argue with those results.


Uhm, it's only hard to argue if you neglect the fact that the CIA had Tamerlan years before the event actually occurred. The bombing itself was 100% preventable... everything which went down afterward was ass covering and unnecessary bullcrap.

Rregardless of whether they are Chechnian or government terrorists, the terrorists won AGAIN. Citizens were terrorized, inconvenienced, and freedom and liberty was, yet again, ordered to roll over and take it some more. EPIC FAIL by the system.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


Had they tried to come into my home, they would have been met by my 357 magnum, police, military, or intruder.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by LogicGrind
 


So does this militarised police force make you feel any safer? Are you worried about dying in a terrorist attack?
Do you require this type of protection in other areas of your life that may kill you? Like driving a car or crossing the street or being struck by lightening?

At what stage will you say no more. That's too much protection? Too late I imagine


No, it doesn't make me feel any safer because I am not a police officer. But that doesn't mean I don't understand the need. If I was a police officer or if a loved one of mine was a police officer, I would feel safer that the police had the equipment they needed to take on people with a lot of firepower. I don't have to be in that situation to understand it though.

I have no worries about dying in a terrorist attack.

We still live in a free society, only really really anal idiots complain about our "freedoms" being taken away. They are sheltered individuals that have no knowledge of the world outside of the United States.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by LogicGrind
In the end, they got both the suspects in only 4 days...kind of hard to argue with those results.


Uhm, it's only hard to argue if you neglect the fact that the CIA had Tamerlan years before the event actually occurred. The bombing itself was 100% preventable... everything which went down afterward was ass covering and unnecessary bullcrap.

Rregardless of whether they are Chechnian or government terrorists, the terrorists won AGAIN. Citizens were terrorized, inconvenienced, and freedom and liberty was, yet again, ordered to roll over and take it some more. EPIC FAIL by the system.


Did they have enough evidence to take Tamerlan into custody? He was on watch, yes, but are you suggesting that the government should just go out and arrest everyone who is on a watch list? That would cause a whole other round of complaints from people. Again, damned if you do, damned if you don't.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by auto73912621
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


Had they tried to come into my home, they would have been met by my 357 magnum, police, military, or intruder.


LOL!!

I doubt it soooo much. They, 6+ men, would have shot you dead INSTANTLY.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by LogicGrind
I'm sorry, but I have a low opinion of the American public...in general...they are stupid and stupid people need to be governed.


Interesting. I also have a low opinion of the American public, but apparently for the exact oposite reason as you. I see the majority of the American people appear to be perfectly happy living on their knees so long as they don't have to confront the possibility of dying on their feet. How the average American avoids spending their entire day with their head hung low with shame over what they have allowed and accepted is beyond me.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by LogicGrind

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by LogicGrind
In the end, they got both the suspects in only 4 days...kind of hard to argue with those results.


Uhm, it's only hard to argue if you neglect the fact that the CIA had Tamerlan years before the event actually occurred. The bombing itself was 100% preventable... everything which went down afterward was ass covering and unnecessary bullcrap.

Rregardless of whether they are Chechnian or government terrorists, the terrorists won AGAIN. Citizens were terrorized, inconvenienced, and freedom and liberty was, yet again, ordered to roll over and take it some more. EPIC FAIL by the system.


Did they have enough evidence to take Tamerlan into custody? He was on watch, yes, but are you suggesting that the government should just go out and arrest everyone who is on a watch list? That would cause a whole other round of complaints from people. Again, damned if you do, damned if you don't.


If the CIA was involved, there's about a 95% chance they put him up to it. We're talking about an agency that under the cloud of 'national security' does all sorts of things with no accountablility, including money-making ventures (drugs, arms selling, etc) that make them less reliable on appropriated funds. They likely killed one of our presidents as well because he threatened, then followed up with a NSM to take away their operational capability.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by LogicGrind
are you suggesting that the government should just go out and arrest everyone who is on a watch list?


No, I'm suggesting that the Federal government should keep a tighter leash on their pets.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by LogicGrind

Originally posted by lynxpilot

Originally posted by LogicGrind
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


But since we have cowboys that love their guns...our police have to be better armed than what they confront.


That's the opposite of the purpose of the Second Amendment. Defense is both a right and responsibility of individuals. Well-armed individuals means no need to have ridiculous gestapo-like domestic forces.


Except our well armed individuals are idiots.

I'm sorry, but I have a low opinion of the American public...in general...they are stupid and stupid people need to be governed.


Your first sentence does not discriminate other than 'well armed'. There are lots of well-armed people out there that are not idiots, and besides that, who are you to judge?

Your second sentence is not only a broad brush that insults any number of people solely because they are American public. This puts you on a mighty high horse. Reckon you can handle the fall?



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by LogicGrind
 


They could have gone to his house in the morning to see if he wanted to load up his backpack and go for a picnic. No harm there. Or simply followed him that morning, it's not a violation of his rights to tail him.

It simply would have been prudent. They have a billion dollar budget with 15000 agents there are two options; they did it or allowed it. Either way heads should roll- literally.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 02:11 PM
link   
I am not suprised that lots of folks are clueless about the american constitution. Most schools barely touch the subject. In high school we only spent about a week on it and just about eveyone forgot what it was about.

I am not kidding!



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by LogicGrind
I'm sorry, but I have a low opinion of the American public...in general...they are stupid and stupid people need to be governed.


Interesting. I also have a low opinion of the American public, but apparently for the exact oposite reason as you. I see the majority of the American people appear to be perfectly happy living on their knees so long as they don't have to confront the possibility of dying on their feet. How the average American avoids spending their entire day with their head hung low with shame over what they have allowed and accepted is beyond me.


You speak as if you aren't one of them. If you are an American, then you allowed it as well. Just because you disagree with what has happened, doesn't mean you take no responsibility in allowing it to happen.

I am free of that guilt though, because I don't see anything wrong with where our society is today. If anything, I think we need more regulations in some areas.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by lynxpilot
 



If the CIA was involved, there's about a 95% chance they put him up to it. We're talking about an agency that under the cloud of 'national security' does all sorts of things with no accountablility, including money-making ventures (drugs, arms selling, etc) that make them less reliable on appropriated funds. They likely killed one of our presidents as well because he threatened, then followed up with a NSM to take away their operational capability.


95% chance huh...where exactly did you pull that number out of?

Sorry, I don't buy it...you will need a little evidence to back up a claim like that, not just speculation.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by LogicGrind
are you suggesting that the government should just go out and arrest everyone who is on a watch list?


No, I'm suggesting that the Federal government should keep a tighter leash on their pets.


So you are suggesting that the Federal Government was behind this attack?

That is surprising, I expected more.



posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by lynxpilot
 



Your first sentence does not discriminate other than 'well armed'. There are lots of well-armed people out there that are not idiots, and besides that, who are you to judge?

Your second sentence is not only a broad brush that insults any number of people solely because they are American public. This puts you on a mighty high horse. Reckon you can handle the fall?


If it makes you feel any better, I clarified my statement about armed people to not include all of them.

And for the second statement, I stand by it. I am part of the American public, by stating that the American public is stupid, it is a generalized observation. Meaning that more than not, if you encounter someone out in public...they are going to be stupid.

If it makes you feel any better, it's not just the American public...it is the entire world population. The stupid out-number the non-stupid.
edit on 30-4-2013 by LogicGrind because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
54
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join