They are not radicals.  They are Moslems. 

Interesting to call them Moslems.  Not sure if it is meant as a joke, but I believe it is insulting to Muslems to call them that.  I dont know though.

These guys were very stupid though.  Not sure what they were trying to accomplish by this act.  Why would they try to attack a military base?  It doesn't really seem like it would do anything to help their cause.  If they did pull off the attack, we would be pissed off, but it would be a different feeling than if they attacked massive amount of civilians within the country.  In ways, I think we remember more about the twin towers than we do about the Pentagon being attacked as well.

The world is getting smaller with the population rising every year and we continue to try and influence the World with our own agendas.  As scary as this seems, it might only be a matter of time till we can expect these type of attacks to happen throughout the U.S.  We are very lucky we dont have to worry things that say Isreal or Iraq have to worry about on a daily basis.  Im not sure we can stop everything, we proved that with the Virginia Tech shootings.  I do think that the "War on Terror" is something that needs to be stopped, not in actions but in saying it.  Its more of a police action.  We fight them through intelligence and being vigilant.  An army cant fight a target that really cannot be seen, unless its some sort of quick reaction special forces action to foil terrorist plots. It is the small acts that are the scariest though.  The daily bombings in Iraq could very well turn into something just as deadly here.  As easy as it is to access guns here or on the black market, and as well as our media portrayed the Virginia Tech shootings all over the world, im hoping these Islamic Fundamentalists didn't take any notes.  I refuse to live in fear and have our government expect us to live our daily lives in fear.  As was stated earlier, I think our government is borderline fascist in certain ways.  Is it really so bad to not try to influence our agendas on the world and to be apart of it, rather than define it?  I think that focusing more on our own well being and freedoms is not that bad, and in fact, something that we need to do. 

LB's reaction is the one I dread. It encourages bigotry and the quoting of Rick Santorum!

However, there is a simple fact I just cannot deny.  In our era, It is the Muslim religion that is invoked in the name of violence more than any other.

People say Islam is a "peaceful" religion.  It is only if its adherents decide to imbue its texts with peace.

Bloody murder, torture, and war have all been executed in the name of Christian rectitude.  It all depends on what portions of the Bible adherents choose to emphasize.

I look not to Islam but the politics behind Islam today in certain areas of the world.  Indonesia is the biggest Muslim nation on the planet.  Indonesia has the same Allah, the same Mohamed, and the same Koran as other predominantly Sunni nations, such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Syria.  The difference isn't inherent in Islam, but in the political and cultural interpretation of Islam. 

The Unites States does not use "Christianity"* to justify the violence and plunder it commits across the globe.  Our ideology of deception is political, couched in buzzwords such as "democracy," "freedom," and "globalization."

*Though Christian funny-mentalists would dig it.


::)



What I get a kick out of is when they interview the neighbors and family members. It not just these guys, it's
anyone who ever took out his family and then himself, anyone who ever has done anything of a vicious nature,
it's the same story. "He was such a good boy, I can't believe he was capable of such a thing," or "You must have
the wrong person, no way he could do that." Just once I want to hear someone say, "Man, he was a thug, a real
peace of S**T, it doesn't surprise me one bit."


It's like the line you always hear on the news when they bust the latest Jack the Ripper: "Neighbors described him as a quiet man who kept to himself."
Well, duh, if he ran around the neighborhood waving a felling axe and screaming, "I am God, I am God! Bow down and worship me!," he would find his serial killing ventures curtailed in a hurry!

http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/03/couto.gif

and yet, these guys were so dumb and they were going to launch a frontal assault on a fortified army base.


"Fortified Army Base"?

Honestly, there is rarely anything "fortified" about a military base in the US.  In reality, they have probably less security then your average College or State Capitol.

Military bases are remarkably soft targets.  Once you get past the main gate (which has at most normally 1-2 people with 9mm pistols", you then largely have free reign.  And on most bases, they do nothing more then a cursory ID check.

Fort Dix is largely a training base.  That is where I am slated to go for training for the Quartermaster Corps.  Other then MPs (which are no better armed or numerous then the police department of a 50-100,000 population city), there is nothing to stop them.  Their plan was to rush the gate, then drive around causing as much death and destruction as possible before being killed.

And the death toll would have been high if they had done it.  You often have platoons of 30-60 people marching from one location or another, or congregating at mess halls and outside of barracks.  None of them are armed, and if they do have weapons (M-16 for training purposes) they have no bullets.

The idea of a "heavily fortified base" is largely a fantasy.  Quite a few bases have almost no security, and civilians routinely drive through them.  Edwards Airforce Base, Fort Rucker, Fort Benning, and Camp Lejeune all have major highways running right through them.  It is only "High Security" bases like Seal Beach and Fort Knox that would have had any chance to stop an attack of this kind - and even then only after a lot of people had been killed.

"Fortified Army Base"?

Honestly, there is rarely anything "fortified" about a military base in the US.  In reality, they have probably less security then your average College or State Capitol.

Military bases are remarkably soft targets.  Once you get past the main gate (which has at most normally 1-2 people with 9mm pistols", you then largely have free reign.  And on most bases, they do nothing more then a cursory ID check.

Fort Dix is largely a training base.  That is where I am slated to go for training for the Quartermaster Corps.  Other then MPs (which are no better armed or numerous then the police department of a 50-100,000 population city), there is nothing to stop them.  Their plan was to rush the gate, then drive around causing as much death and destruction as possible before being killed.

And the death toll would have been high if they had done it.  You often have platoons of 30-60 people marching from one location or another, or congregating at mess halls and outside of barracks.  None of them are armed, and if they do have weapons (M-16 for training purposes) they have no bullets.

The idea of a "heavily fortified base" is largely a fantasy.  Quite a few bases have almost no security, and civilians routinely drive through them.  Edwards Airforce Base, Fort Rucker, Fort Benning, and Camp Lejeune all have major highways running right through them.  It is only "High Security" bases like Seal Beach and Fort Knox that would have had any chance to stop an attack of this kind - and even then only after a lot of people had been killed.

So if we really are in a "War on Terror," how can the government leave our military bases so vulnerable to terrorism?  Just makes me think the "War on Terror" is a euphemism for something else!
::)

So if we really are in a "War on Terror," how can the government leave our military bases so vulnerable to terrorism?  Just makes me think the "War on Terror" is a euphemism for something else!
::)



You think??



Cat

So if we really are in a "War on Terror," how can the government leave our military bases so vulnerable to terrorism?  Just makes me think the "War on Terror" is a euphemism for something else!
::)

Nah, The War Against Terror isn't a euphemism - it's an acronym ;)

So if we really are in a "War on Terror," how can the government leave our military bases so vulnerable to terrorism?  Just makes me think the "War on Terror" is a euphemism for something else!
::)


Defense and protection of something as large as a 10 square mile Mliitary Base is largely about both prevention (like what happened here), or about the concept of protection.  Since probably 60-90% of most military bases are little more then wide open space, there is nothing much to protect.  Camp Lejeune is almost 250 square miles in area, yet the "populated" areas cover maybe 3-5 square miles.  It is simply impossible to even try and keep everybody out that does not belong.

And a lot of bases also serve as facilities for other government agencies.  Maxwell AFB in Alabama is also headquarters for the regional FAA, FAQMA, FEMA, and OSHA offices.  It is simply impossible to try and convert all of the bases in the US to some kind of High Security facility like a prison.  Most of them have more civilian employees then military personnel, and are simply to large to keep everybody out or do in-depth background checks.

Picture putting a parimiter up around Kansas City, and then expecting to keep out everybody that did not live there.  That is basically what you are talking about.  Like in any area of security, deterence and prevention is the key to preventing incidents, not brute force.

The media have given a name to these guys, they are calling them the "Fort Dix Six." The six had a bail
hearing Friday and not surprisingly, bail was denied. The lawyers for one defendant stated that the whole
case is based on entrapment and now that they've been arrested their families are being harassed.

The more I hear about this case the more it sounds like a criminal matter, not a terrorist plot. They had
plans to gain access to a military base a kill as many soldiers as they could, this is a conspiracy to committ
murder. Because the people who devised the plan were Islamic they're using the guise of "Terrorist Plot"
to prove Bush's Homeland Security plan is working.

The media have given a name to these guys, they are calling them the "Fort Dix Six." The six had a bail
hearing Friday and not surprisingly, bail was denied. The lawyers for one defendant stated that the whole
case is based on entrapment and now that they've been arrested their families are being harassed.

The more I hear about this case the more it sounds like a criminal matter, not a terrorist plot. They had
plans to gain access to a military base a kill as many soldiers as they could, this is a conspiracy to committ
murder. Because the people who devised the plan were Islamic they're using the guise of "Terrorist Plot"
to prove Bush's Homeland Security plan is working.

What they're going to say is Homeland Security can't work if liberal bubbleheads are going to pissnmoan about "civil rights" all the time.  Let's tap everybody's phone and prohibit people of Arab decent from delivering pizzas!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/phone.gif

The media have given a name to these guys, they are calling them the "Fort Dix Six." The six had a bail
hearing Friday and not surprisingly, bail was denied. The lawyers for one defendant stated that the whole
case is based on entrapment and now that they've been arrested their families are being harassed.


I might accept entrapment, if not for the fact that the entire investigation started when they tried to get a training video converted to DVD.  The company enlisted to make this copy then contacted law enforcement and the investigation got going from there.

In many ways, it is interesting to try and imagine what would have happened if this had happened before 9/11.  Back then, nobody took the idea of terrorist attacks in the country seriously, and such requests for investigation were routinely ignored (or pur on low priority).  There were reports made by the flight schools that trained the 9/11 hijackers, but nobody paid it much attention.

In fact, if the timelines had been reversed, things probably would have turned out much different.  If Fort Dix had been attacked (and investigation revealed that tips has been ignored), then you probably would have had more in place - which would have acted on the tips of suspicious students attending flight schools.

Security is really about 2 things: perception and prevention.  This covers everything from your house (keeping bushes clear, lighting, alarm systems) to a bank (dye packs, cameras, alarms), to Government Facilities (armed guards-military, FBI investigation, FBI-CIA-law enforcement investigation).  The idea is to either look so impregnable that nobody tries anything, or to try and catch them before anything ever happens.

But if somebody really decides to attack someplace, and keeps it a close enough secret, there is nothing you can do to stop it.