Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Strife767

  • Rank
    A realistic optimist

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  1. David Paszkiewicz should be fired

    Pathetic and infantile. Grow the hell up. You're totally incapable of thinking of any 'setup' between taping the rooms and that? Talk about a false dichotomy; very black and white world you must live in.
  2. David Paszkiewicz should be fired

    If the pattern's taught me anything, a post starting with this is sure to have little to no actual content. Let's see... Why in the world not, if concern over the safety of the kids spending a night at a hotel is so great? Surely it would do a lot more good than a piece of tape. Non-sequitur, it seems.
  3. David Paszkiewicz should be fired

    Look at that fallacious appeal to emotion. The tape does not create safety in the least, so the above statement is total non-sequitur. There are parents with them? And you still think the tape is necessary? If the kids aren't even left 100% alone, then all the less reason. Looks like the question that you started your post with wasn't sincere--you were more than happy to make the assumption that was necessary for this last part here.
  4. David Paszkiewicz should be fired

    It is considering that if something happened to them, the tape would make no difference overall. Not to mention that if multiple people are in a room (as I imagine they'd have to be), what would Paszkiewicz do, yell at all the occupants even if it was just one of them who snuck out? What's next, cowbells around the neck? Unless there's one person per room, it would only narrow it down at best, actually.
  5. David Paszkiewicz should be fired

    Wait, are you saying that tape on the door would magically prevent anything form happening? Taping the doors doesn't make anyone safe all by itself. That's like saying that putting a "do not rob" sign on your front lawn will keep your home from getting burglarized. Your reasoning is silly. The tape would keep tabs on someone sneaking out, but it would do absolutely zero to protect them while they're in their room. However much protection that locked door gives, the tape does not add to.
  6. the perpetual excuse

    It directly agrees with this terrorism expert who is a consultant to several government agencies: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006...the_terror.html Wonder why that is?
  7. the perpetual excuse

    Very well put.
  8. the perpetual excuse

    The word is TERRORist. How do you think they earned that name? Dictionary definition: "noun: a radical who employs terror as a political weapon" You don't have to be an authority to know how something as basic as how terrorism works. Just open a history book once in a while. Hell, it's right in the name, come on. The people in the towers and the planes were not the real targets; the rest of us were. IIRC, Osama was pleasantly surprised because he didn't expect the towers to fall at all. When you cannot be assured of having a phone call with someone overseas without it being listened in on by the government, that liberty is already lost. Where is the paranoia there? You just confirmed that what you're alleging I'm "paranoid" about is already actually happening! Please explain how being outraged at something that is already actually F**KING happening is "paranoid." Listen to yourself. Listen to how desperate you are to dismiss what I'm saying. Think about what is being given up in exchange for the illusion of security. I ask again: whatever happened to probable cause? Attacks like 9/11 are not planned in one phone call. The government would have plenty of time to get a warrant to record suspicious communication. So why doesn't it? Because it doesn't care about the freedoms of all of us who aren't planning terrorist attacks on the phone, don't you see?
  9. We need change!

    Coming from someone who is wrong as often as you are, I'll take that as a compliment.
  10. the perpetual excuse

  11. the perpetual excuse

    Again, those who would give up freedom for security deserve neither. It's a sad day when this country has forgotten the meaning of "essential liberties" and how important it was to have them. Actually, most of that 'sentiment' is just a jab at the Bush-heads who seem to think that having Bush in office makes us impervious to terrorist attacks. Pointing out the fact that he didn't stop 9/11 is just injecting a bit of reality back into the equation. Don't you see how terrorism works? The whole point is to SCARE you. If we had been able to show that their plans failed, that would deter them a whole hell of a lot more than the woefully misnamed "Patriot Act". You know what would kill their morale? Rebuilding the Twin Towers immediately (and hell, make them one floor higher just to spite them). I'm sure we could have rebuilt them in less time than it took them to plan the attacks! What better way to demoralize terrorists and their cause than to negate all of their efforts and planning and show them that we can build faster than they can destroy? Instead, people like you do exactly what they want. You get scared, and you become willing to hand over the freedoms that generations of people have fought and died for, just for the illusion of security. Yes, it's an illusion. You CAN'T make an airplane 100% safe; too many people have access. Even with all of the added checking and stopping going on in airports since 9/11, it's still only a small percentage of people who are actually stopped and thoroughly checked. What terrorist wouldn't take those odds? Even if it was 99% (and even something like 50% would slow airports down to the point of unusability), the terrorists would still try, because of their fanatical devotion to their cause. And eventually, one of them would get through and cause another disaster. Then what? You have to be realistic about this. Those freedoms you're so willing to concede? A whole lot of people have fought pretty damned hard to get them. Don't squander them. It isn't worth it. Handing over essential liberties will not stop maniacs from trying to kill us, it will not stop the occasional one from succeeding, and too many people have given their lives for these freedoms for me to be willing to just hand them over for the illusion of safety. NO ONE is capable of perfectly protecting us. If you think that's possible, you are living in a dream world. Nothing short of housing the entire population of the US in bomb shelters and never allowing them to leave would come even close to doing the job. I wonder if you would be willing to go that far just to feel safe.
  12. Wishing Everyone A Happy holiday

    That's just not true. Plenty of Jews spell it with an H, as a simple googling will reveal.
  13. the perpetual excuse

    So, it would have been easier to thwart, and yet it wasn't. Bush Sr. had even less of an excuse to fail at it, by your logic.
  14. the perpetual excuse

    I think he meant Nixon, hotshot; he was a Republican. I'd rather have a president who sleeps around than one who racks up trillions of dollars in a pointless "war" anyday. http://pearly-abraham.tripod.com/htmls/bushlies1.html
  15. We need change!

    Asking you who is and isn't a nut job is like asking John Wayne Gacy for childcare tips. Of course, it's not like anyone actually asked you.