<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Yes and we're damm lucky none of those cargo containers they DON'T inspect ( both maritime and air cargo) have not had bad things in them either.<br><br>And That's one reason you shouldn't go around the world bullying other people and acting like you're the fscking Galactic Empire !! <br><br>You're sitting yourself up for others to "Bring it on " !!<p><hr></blockquote><p>No Kidding. Also there are probably enough unaccounted for shoulder fired<br>surface to air missiles around that could easily bring down a passenger jet<br>on final approach or take off.<br><br>And the would-be terrorist firing it, doesn't need to be a suicide bomber.<br><br>There are more ways to bring down a plane than ways we can have security<br>check passenger entering a plane. Taking off our shoes before boarding isn't<br>going to make us safer.<br><br>[color:red]Allez Cuisine! Bang a gong, it is on</font color=red>

Agreed. Now if these terrorists were just a bit smarter, they wouldn't kill themselves in stupid suicide missions. They could just make a small bomb in a luggage that gets checked and if it passes, then just push a button from anywhere on earth and have the luggage explode. With the current gps and radio technology, it wouldn't be hard to fabricate something like that. <br><br>The question now is what do you call the act of using terrorism as a propaganda tool in order to scare people?<br><br>_________________________________________<br>Just a different kinda geek...

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>The question now is what do you call the act of using terrorism as a propaganda tool in order to scare people?<p><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>*DING* <br><br>...And The man Wins a Cheroot! <br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> Taking off our shoes before boarding isn't<br>going to make us safer. <p><hr></blockquote><p> <br><br>No you're quite right IronChef...<br><br>but it sure helps my stock in Dr Schoals!! <br><br>David (OFI)<br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> The question now is what do you call the act of using terrorism as a propaganda tool in order to scare people? <p><hr></blockquote><p> <br><br>I dunmo .. Celandine - I'd call that Bush's Domestic Policy !! <br><br>David (OFI)<br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> Not to sound morbid, but the odds of dying are 100% or 1 in 1. The leading <br>causes of death are - <br><br>Heart Disease - 1 in 5<br>Cancer - 1 in 7<br>Stroke - 1 in 24<br>Motor Vehicle Accident - 1 in 84<br>Suicide - 1 in 119<br>Falling - 1 in 218<br>Firearm Assault - 1 in 314<br>Pedestrian Accident - 1 in 626<br>Drowning - 1 in 1006<br>Motorcycle Accident - 1 in 1020<br>Fire or smoke - 1 in 1113<br>Bicycle accident - 1 in 4919<br>Air/Space Accident - 1 in 5051<br>Accidental firearm discharge - 1 in 5134<br>Accidental electrocution - 1 in 9968<br>Alcohol poisoning - 1 in 10,048<br>Hot weather - 1 in 13,729<br>Hornet, wasp or bee sting - 1 in 56,789<br>Legal Execution - 1 in 62,468<br>Lightning - 1 in 79,746<br>Earthquake - 1 in 117,127<br>Flood - 1 in 114,156<br>Fireworks discharge - 1 in 340,733<br><br>source - August 2006, National Geographic<br><p><hr></blockquote><p>I just read this whole thread and I don't understand why anyone would not agree with you. You are pointing out that we are over reacting to small threats. I more than agree. We are spending billions of dollars on miniscule threats to our lives in knee jerk reactions to something that would be teenage terrorists have done and they are laughing at us.<br><br>It is not moribund at all to point out we have a 100 % chance of dying. It is lucky the odds are 100% because it would get crowded if we didn't die. Two million US citizens die every year. What you are pointing out is that the amount of dollars and hysteria is inversely proportional to helping us to stay alive longer. More dollars for homeland defense and less for childhood cancer. Idiotic.<br><br>What I learned on vacation driving across a big chunk of this country: We are killing ourselves with cheeseburgers while staring at CNN (which plays at each rest stop) ingesting each tid-bit of hysterical news. I stayed at a cottage with two elderly ladies who wanted to turn on the news every day to make sure the terrorists didn't get the upper hand. (Fortunately the TV didn't work, I cut the cable.) They were full of fears about nonsense. This forum reminds me of a bunch of hysterical old ladies jumping on the latest scary thing. We're not girlie men, we're nervous blue hairs and the terrorists have won.<br><br>We are going to base our lives and our presidential candidates on what terrorists will do and that is kind of sad. We actually live in a much safer world than we ever had in the entire life of this planet and we cower in fear instead of enjoying it.<br><br><br><br>

Well, the way I see it, terrorism on it's own is the act of scaring people. So using propaganda for the same purpose would be terrorism as well? <br><br>Here are a couple definitions of terrorism:<br><br>Any act including, but not limited to, the use of force or violence and/or threat thereof of any person or group(s) of persons whether acting alone or on behalf of, or in connection with, any organisation(s) or government(s) committed for political, religions, ideological or similar purposes, including the intention to influence any government and/or to put the public or any section of the public in fear.<br><br><br>Terrorism is the systematic use or threatened use of violence to intimidate a population or government and thereby effect political, religious, or ideological change.[1][2] Acts of terrorism are not intended to merely victimize or eliminate those who are killed, injured, or taken hostage, but rather to intimidate and influence the societies to which they belong. Modern terrorism has come to be defined in part by the influential power of the mass media, which terrorists co-opt in their efforts to amplify and broadcast feelings of intense fear and anger. As a type of unconventional warfare, terrorism is designed to weaken or supplant existing political landscapes through capitulation or acquiescence as opposed to subversion or direct military action.<br><br><br><br>Now, who are the good guys? ;)<br><br>_________________________________________<br>Just a different kinda geek...<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by djstefan on 08/21/06 05:46 PM (server time).</EM></FONT></P>

So considering motor vehicles are the most common cause of death outside of "health" related issues. When will the government require people to be intimately familiar in their operation, prove that they're able to handle a vehicle safely and license those who are able to demonstrate they have passed these requirements to an adequate level?<br><br><br>Shame people believe driving is a right and not a privilage!<br><br><br>- This is gonna get pretty interesting. <br>- Define "interesting". <br>- Oh, God, oh, God, we're all gonna die..

As a parent of a child who will soon be getting his license I could not agree more. 45 thousand dead by auto accidents is just nuts and we do not take the act of being behind the wheel seriously. Pouring rain on the Hutchinson Parkway coming out of New York at 1 AM and there were three very decent wrecks. One of them with the bottom of the car the only thing showing. It was raining hard and it had not rained in some days. So the road was slick. Did that stop people from blowing by me at 80? But at least I was in New York where it is illegal to talk on a cell phone while driving.<br><br>The people blowing by me were very good drivers. They had to be because the Hutch is a very narrow road to begin with but the rain made it deadly difficult to navigate. They did not really need a driving lesson but they did need to realize how frail life is. Not sure how to do it. Would having a news channel showing the 45,000 dead children and adults strewn on our highways each year? We sort of do that now but we don't show the broken bodies like in drivers Ed. Not sure it would work anyway because we would become quickly inured to it. I guess I would start with mandatory cell phone restrictions and 100% seat belt laws. If you are caught without a seatbelt or with a working cell phone in your car at any time you are summarily shot at the side of the road. That would clean the gene pool.<br><br><br><br>

Oh do I remember the Hutch. Like the Jamaica Way, only longer.<br><br>Anyway, I couldn't agree more on the cell phone thing. NY gets it. Although, I don't really know how much safer the hands free thing is. Even with both hands on the wheel, being deep into a conversation is still a distraction, IMHO. I cannot tell you how many time I have narrowly missed being T-boned or rear ended by drivers yammering away on their cell phones and having no clue as to the world around them.<br><br>