Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

threat to national security

Posted By: sosogohome on 2008-10-08
In Reply to: Americans have lost their minds or just dont care. - Obama is a risk to our National Security!.nm

and YOU have undisputed proof of this?


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

No threat to national security?

We just posted where these facilities are and what is going on, but hey....don't worry....no national security risk.  OMG!  What a bunch of flipping morons!!!


So you don't believe we have national security concerns?
If you do believe we have national security issues then what is your answer to keeping us safe?
McCain and National Security

McCain Lobbyist Scandal Continues: Government Warned Senator That Campaign Manager Was Undermining National Interests


The lobbying firm of McCain campaign manager Rick Davis acted in direct opposition to American foreign interests, which prompted a warning to McCain's Senate office from the United States government, according to a recent New York Times article.


Much has been reported about Rick Davis, top McCain adviser and lobbyist whose company, Davis Manafort, made its fortune in part by accepting jobs that didn't require employees to register as lobbyists. Davis has been in particular hot water for his company's work with pro-Russian Ukranian political candidates; Davis arranged for one of Putin's allies to meet with McCain during the time.


However, the New York Times has managed to take that already embarrassing story and make it even worse:


Mr. McCain may have first become aware of Davis Manafort's activities in Ukraine as far back as 2005. At that time, a staff member at the National Security Council called Mr. McCain's Senate office to complain that Mr. Davis's lobbying firm was undercutting American foreign policy in Ukraine, said a person with direct knowledge of the phone call who spoke on condition of anonymity.


A campaign spokesman, when asked whether such a call had occurred, referred a reporter to Mr. McCain's office. The spokesman there, Robert Fischer, did not respond to repeated inquiries.


Such a call might mean that Mr. McCain has been long aware of Mr. Davis's foreign clients. Mr. Davis took a leave from his firm at the end of 2006.



This isn't the only time when Davis' business interests have appeared counter to those of the United States: Davis' Ukranian contacts shared several business ties with Iran.


McCain suffered from a perception problem last month when the extent of his lobbying connection caused his campaign to fire several key staffers, as well as institute a new conflict-of-interest policy. The McCain camp has said that Davis is unaffected by the policy, as its implementation is not retroactive. Davis is no longer registered as a lobbyist.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/12/mccain-lobbyist-scandal-c_n_106832.html






National security and low taxes.. For me, that
nm
Right..and without strong National Security, the
nm
It's called national security. sm
jm is correct, in that the current administration's plans and policies have kept us safe.

A lot will be revealed, when it is safe to do so, so that our national security is not compromised.


You and I, as citizens, do not have the security clearance to be made aware of what has been averted.
Speaking of National Security,
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30107040/

I hope we are not having a war on US soil soon.

WASHINGTON - Cyberspies have penetrated the U.S. electrical grid and left behind software programs that could be used to disrupt the system, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday.

The spies came from China, Russia and other countries, and were believed to be on a mission to navigate the U.S. electrical system and its controls, the newspaper said, citing current and former U.S. national security officials.

The intruders have not sought to damage the power grid or other key infrastructure but officials said they could try during a crisis or war, the paper said in a report on its website.
"The Chinese have attempted to map our infrastructure, such as the electrical grid," a senior intelligence official told the Journal. "So have the Russians."

The espionage appeared pervasive across the United States and does not target a particular company or region, said a former Department of Homeland Security official.

"There are intrusions, and they are growing," the former official told the paper, referring to electrical systems. "There were a lot last year."

Authorities investigating the intrusions have found software tools left behind that could be used to destroy infrastructure components, the senior intelligence official said. He added, "If we go to war with them, they will try to turn them on."

Officials said water, sewage and other infrastructure systems also were at risk.

Protecting the electrical grid and other infrastructure is a key part of the Obama administration's cybersecurity review, which is to be completed next week.
Repubublican, former National Security Advisor,
Secretary of State turned off by McCains negative campaign, impressed by O's intelligence and steady hand in the face of pressing issues and economic crisis. "Taxes are always a redistribution of wealth and not socialism." Presidents get to examine tax structure. This is what perhaps one of the most respected republican with brains looks like. Highly unlikely he would endorse a socialist terrorist. Talks about need for "inclusion," not division and sees Obama as a "transformational" figure who reaches across generations.

Yep, that pretty much covers all the bases.
Civilian National Security Force...

These are Obama's words...


"We cannot rely only on our military for our national security, we need to have a Civilian National Security force that is just as strong, just as well funded."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s


 


Civilian National Security Force
From FactCheck.org (Complete analysis at link below.)

Obama was not talking about a "security force" with guns or police powers. He was talking specifically about expanding AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps and the USA Freedom Corps, which is the volunteer initiative launched by the Bush administration after the attacks of 9/11, and about increasing the number of trained Foreign Service officers who populate U.S. embassies overseas.
National Security Agency easedrops on Americans
more of less secure?  Warrantless wiretapping on anybody, anytime for any reason, all being recorded.  OK with you? 
My biggest concern is National Security. Obama
nm
Between May and July 2001, the National Security Agency reported
at least 33 different intercepts indicating a possible imminent al Qaeda attack. The FBI issued 216 secret, internal threat warnings between January 1 and September 10, 2001, of which 6 mentioned possible attacks against airports or airlines. The Federal Aviation Administration issued 15 notices of possible terrorist threats against American airlines. The State Department issued 9 separate warnings during the same period to embassies and citizens abroad, including 5 that highlighted a general threat to Americans all over the world.

Yeah, that Bill Clinton wasn't doing his job alright.

Oh, wait.
National security? Civil liberties? Must be socialist conspiracy
This is an amazing article that not too suprisingly will probably go unaddressed, right along with Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae corporate bailout story. The're too busy getting ready for the coronation ball. However, I just wanted to thank you for passing this along. The links and other articles also lead to some insightful and interesting reads on stories that will probably end up thrown under the royal coach. Let them eat cake!
Threat?

GT explained what she meant in the post afterwards, which you conveniently ignored.  She said: Yes, as in prove you are a bigoted fool, FRYE your butt.


Any reasonably intelligent person can see she was challenging this poster to be civil and honest and to debate instead of attack, as she herself explained in her above post.  Obviously, the poster wasn't up for that challenge.


So much for the threat. SM

This is what *I* consider a serious threat...sm
Not discounting whatever went on this weekend, but I thought this was of interest.

By the NewsMax.com Staff
For the story behind the story...
Thursday, March 16, 2006 9:11 a.m. EST

Ruth Bader Ginsburg Complains of Right Wing Death Threats

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is complaining that she's getting death threats from detractors who belong to the irrational fringe of society - people she says who have been egged on by mainstream conservatives who have been critical of the High Court.

In quotes picked up by The Associated Press Wednesday, Ginsburg told the Constitutional Court of South Africa last month that somebody in an Internet chat room had issued a death threat against herself and her former colleague, Sandra Day O'Connor.

According to Ginsburg, the chat room perpetrator declared:

OK commandoes, here is your first patriotic assignment ... an easy one. Supreme Court Justices Ginsburg and O'Connor have publicly stated that they use (foreign) laws and rulings to decide how to rule on American cases. This is a huge threat to our republic and constitutional freedom ... If you are what you say you are, and NOT armchair patriots, then those two justices will not live another week.

In a follow-up speech earlier this month, the Clinton-appointed justice said the whole experience had been disquieting for her.

The AP cited Ann Coulter as an example of a conservative who may have inadvertently encouraged radicals to threaten members of the court by joking during a recent speech that Justice John Paul Stevens should be poisoned.

Democrat: It goes on to say that Ginsberg did not speak up when a liberal commentator made a *wish him an early death* about Clarence Thomas, but was that Ginsberg's place to do so? And if so, did Clarence Thomas speak out for her?
Nothing like the threat of a
brisk IRS proctological exam to get a politician's mind right.
*Islamic Threat*
The *Islamic threat* grew over the past 50 years of our foreign policy.  This did not happen just because as Bush says, they are jealous of our freedom.  OMG, their ideology and ours are totally different and frankly, I dont think we will ever get a functioning democracy set up in the Middle East.  Instead of doing what Blair is doing now, setting up meetings with Islamic organizations to try to defuse the situation, we went head strong into Iraq..Oh, we are America, we are gonna kick butt, and what happened, we are now fighting a world wide terrorist war with it's breeding ground Iraq and to a minimum Afghanistan.  This was such an error in judgment and we will pay for it for decades to come.  Bush and his administration dont have to worry.  If we get attacked, they have bunkers, they have secret service that will be with them even after the term ends.  It is us, who ride the subways, rail roads, buses, shop at the malls..we are the ones..the poor slobs on the farms, who are fighting Bush's war and will die in terrorist attacks.  Thank you, Bush!
chavez threat
There have been many arrested over the past few years for just voicing threats that were meaningless, not like Robertson broadcasting all over the world about assassinating Chavez.  That most certainly is a crime.  You cannot threaten leaders of other countries, especially in a forum like Robertson has. 
Iran is CLEARLY a threat and that was what he
was conveying.  Making a statement about AVOIDING World War III is not irresponsible and I didn't hear him assume WWIII would evolve out of Iran specifically.  ANY country with nuclear weapons could spawn WWIII. 
American is clearly a threat to some
America is clearly a threat to many countries, especially seeing what we have been doing for the past four plus years and how we have fueled the hatred and terrorism around the world by chosing to invade and kill instead of holding diplomatic sessions..the thinking mans way of handling a disagreement/problem..no not cowboy Bush, he thinks nothing of sending over our loved ones to fight his illegal, immoral so wrong war, just as long as his daughters and the children of the lawmakers dont have to go.
She is a threat to Obama. and they will do
nm
Approaching threat.s are......
Israel and Aghanistan, not Iraq.
It all started in Afghanistan.
Was there a threat made?

I'm afraid that this is what is going to happen everywhere.  Anytime ANYTHING is said that sounds bad somebody is going to be reporting it to the FBI.  We are slowly going to lose freedom of speech at this rate. 


Obama threat already.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/02/10/obama.threat/?iref=mpstoryview
Perhaps. But to ignore the Islamic threat would mean sm
the end of life as we know it and we don't even want to imagine what the "new" life would be like.  Be careful what you wish for.
Sounds like a threat to me. And hey, I am being nice here. SM

How about trying to be nice in return. This sounds like a threat:


Can I call your arse to task when you step off your ******* truce*******..You bet I will..So, honey, keep posting good posts, debate posts and you will be **in**, jump off that and your arse is fried..



The answer is, there is no terrorist threat. sm

That sums it up. 


Thinly veiled threat
It was a thinly veiled threat.  Like someone stating..if you are interested in my punching you in the nose, keep up the baloney.  It was stated to make other countries shiver in their boots, however, what it does is make other countries race faster to make the nuclear bombs to protect themselves from the country they perceive as a terrorist country, the USA...you know the country that pre-emptively invaded a soverign nation which was no threat to them.
IED threat was known before war but troops not protected

I'm so glad that Joe Biden is in the White House now, considering he was one of only two who spoke up about this.  Our troops deserve an administration that respects and cares about them and will do its best to protect them.







Report: IED threat known before war


By Peter Eisler, USA TODAY


WASHINGTON —— Military leaders knew the dangers posed by roadside bombs before the start of the Iraq war but did little to develop vehicles that were known to better protect forces from what proved to be the conflict's deadliest weapon, a report by the Pentagon inspector general says.


The Pentagon "was aware of the threat posed by mines and improvised explosive devices (IEDs) …… and of the availability of mine resistant vehicles years before insurgent actions began in Iraq in 2003," says the 72-page report, which was reviewed by USA TODAY.


The report is to be made public today.


Marine Corps leaders "stopped processing" an urgent request in February 2005 for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles from combat commanders in Iraq's Anbar province after declaring that a more heavily armored version of existing Humvee vehicles was the "best available" option for protecting troops, the report says.


Marine officials "did not develop a course of action for the (request), attempt to obtain funding for it or present it to the Marine Corps Requirements Oversight Council for a decision on acquiring" MRAPs, the report says.


The military continued relying mainly on Humvees until May 2007, when then-incoming Defense secretary Robert Gates called procurement of the MRAPs his top priority. Since then, the Pentagon has spent more than $22 billion to buy more than 15,000 of the vehicles.


When field commanders first began requesting MRAPs, military officials saw the armored Humvees as a more immediate option to countering IEDs, Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said. "The threat has evolved and our force protection measures have evolved with it," he said.


The Marines requested the inspector general's investigation in February after an internal report accused the Corps of "gross mismanagement" of the urgent request for MRAPs. Hundreds of Marines died unnecessarily because of delays in fielding the vehicles, said the Jan. 22 study by Franz Gayl, a retired Marine officer and civilian science adviser.


Two U.S. senators —— Democrat Joe Biden of Delaware, now the vice president-elect, and Republican Kit Bond of Missouri —— demanded an investigation after details of Gayl's study were published.


"The Pentagon was aware of the threat IEDs posed to our troops prior to our intervention in Iraq and still failed to take the steps to acquire the technology needed to reduce the risk," Bond said after reviewing the report. "Some bureaucrats at the Pentagon have much to explain."


USA TODAY detailed the Pentagon's failure to move quickly on MRAP development in a series of stories last year. Gates credited one of those stories with sparking his interest in the vehicles.


Marine commanders in Iraq's then-volatile Anbar province sought 1,169 MRAPs in the February 2005 urgent request. "There is an immediate need for an MRAP vehicle capability to increase survivability and mobility of Marines operating in a hazardous fire area," it said.


The inspector general's report says that Marine officials advised Marine Corps commandant Michael Hagee at the time that armored Humvees were the "best available, most survivable" vehicles to meet the request.


MRAPs are far more resistant to IEDs and landmines than armored Humvees because they're higher off the ground and rest on a V-shaped hull, which deflects blasts from the vehicle's underside.


http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2008-12-08-mrap_N.htm


National ID.......
Not only won't you be able to fly, you won't be able to go into any federal building without one. A few states have said they will not do national ID cards (drivers license) and then some liberal idiots in Congress said well, if you don't go along with this government-backed pulling of your civil rights right out from under your nose, your state will receive NO government funding of any type, schools, roads, etc. Now if that ain't forced servitude into government, what is???? So many people really don't believe that is a problem. Since when do you feel you need a national ID card, for what purpose? As the government usually does, they mandate garbage on the citizens of this country in order to protect us......yea, right. No national ID card is going to protect us. If we can't protect the southern or northern borders of this country, how in the world will a little 'old card do that? It won't.....plain and simple. But then again, any time our dear old government mandates anything, the citizens of this country are screwed with fewer and fewer rights. Constitution is going down the tubes quickly.
P.S. I don't recall anyone posting a near death threat to the

remote to that.


Why is it you are the only ones who are "free" to display your anger on your board?


If you take a look at the posts on this board, the only time they get nasty is when a troll from your board comes here and begins spewing your hatred and rage.


Why are you so angry?  Your guy won. 


Whenever a liberal raises an issue concerning a Bush administration policy or decision, I seldom see an intelligent thoughtful response come from most of you.  Instead you attack the poster on a personal level when that poster never personally attacked YOU.  They complained about Bush.  Are you BUSH??


Time and time again, most of you come back with "all liberals" insults and rarely, if ever, address the question or issue that was raised.


If you can begin to understand that it isn't YOU PERSONALLY that we are referring to, maybe then we can begin to have an intelligent conversation on this board.


If you are a conservative, I respect your right to your opinions, and I'd like to learn more about them.  I can't do that if all you do is throw insults, which you are "free" to do on your board, but if we are angered or insulted by them, we are not likewise "free" to express that.


I had hoped that these new boards would eliminate the personal favorites that seemed to exist on the other board.  Looks like that isn't the case.


And as far as approaching the administrator about fairness, if I can't do that, then I truly don't belong in a forum like this one.  I belong in one that doesn't play favorites, where intelligent discourse can occur, where personal insults and attacks are prohibited for everyone, not just for some.


I just wonder how many people you've chased away from here, besides me.


I don't think this quote refers to ignoring a threat...
I think it speaks about creating and justifying a war, and in the Iraq war's case, a hasty and simple-minded war.  I don't know what Goering's thoughts were, but my own are that war should be a last resort and that seems like common sense.  This is in no sense to be construed as downplaying the threat of Islamic terrorism.  I would like to mention there that a big complaint about the Iraq war was that Bush ignored or didn't wish to consider the advice of folks who had a solid background in the Middle East.  The insurgency and threatening civil war were all predicted when we went to war but the advice was ignored.  Bush, it seems, reversed the usual order in which a country is forced to go to war:  He decided FIRST that he would go to war, then created justification, then ignored all the sage advice that Iraq was a potential powderkeg, and then he did what Goering prescribed to get the U.S. to rally around his cause (or at least some of the U.S.).  That's how it appears anyway.  I hope I am wrong about this but with the mounting well-documented evidence to the contrary I believe this will become the ultimate truth of the matter.
The post was inappropriate, but was a threat made??

Bye bye freedom of speech. 


FBI has better things to be working on and I'm afraid if this is any indication they are going to be bombarded with inappropriate statements. 


dorky song threat realized
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPBxmrWqI-g&feature=related
Right! Beck is a threat to the left so as usual,
nm
There's more than 8,000 National Guard
on standby right now waiting for the call. They are not all in Iraq like some people are falsely reporting.
National Guard
Strain of Iraq War Means the Relief Burden Will Have to Be Shared

By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 31, 2005; A14


With thousands of their citizen-soldiers away fighting in Iraq, states hit hard by Hurricane Katrina scrambled to muster forces for rescue and security missions yesterday -- calling up Army bands and water-purification teams, among other units, and requesting help from distant states and the active-duty military.


As the devastation threatened to overwhelm state resources, federal authorities called on the Pentagon to mobilize active-duty aircraft, ships and troops and set up an unprecedented task force to coordinate a wider military response, said officials from the Northern Command, which oversees homeland defense.


National Guard officials in the states acknowledged that the scale of the destruction is stretching the limits of available manpower while placing another extraordinary demand on their troops -- most of whom have already served tours in Iraq or Afghanistan or in homeland defense missions since 2001.


More than 6,000 Guard members were mobilized in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida when the storm struck on Monday, with the number rising to 8,000 yesterday and hundreds more expected to be called to active duty, National Guard officials said yesterday.


Missing the personnel is the big thing in this particular event. We need our people, said Lt. Andy Thaggard, a spokesman for the Mississippi National Guard, which has a brigade of more than 4,000 troops in central Iraq. Louisiana also has about 3,000 Guard troops in Baghdad.


Mississippi has about 40 percent of its Guard force deployed or preparing to deploy and has called up all remaining Guard units for hurricane relief, Thaggard said. Those include the Army band based in Jackson, Miss. They are mustering transportation to move them south, he said. Soldiers who have lost their homes are exempt, he said.


Mississippi has requested troops and aircraft from about eight other states -- including military police and engineers from Alabama, helicopters and crews from Arkansas and Georgia, and aircraft-maintenance experts from Connecticut, who are filling in for a Mississippi maintenance unit that is heading to the Middle East.


This is the biggest disaster we've ever had, so we're going to need more aircraft than we've got, said Col. Bradly S. MacNealy, the Mississippi Army National Guard's aviation officer. Mississippi has had to borrow from Arkansas UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters fitted with hoists, using them together with the Coast Guard to pluck to safety several dozen people stranded by floodwaters, he said.


Chinook helicopters from Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi are flying the equivalent of 18 large truckloads of critical supplies -- including ice, water, food and chain saws for road-clearing crews -- to Mississippi's coast, he said.


In Alabama, all the major Guard units activated for the disaster have already served in Iraq, and some still have contingents there, said Alabama Guard spokesman Norman Arnold.


Capt. Richard Locke of the Guard's 1st Battalion 167th Infantry headed toward Mobile yesterday with a force of 400 soldiers cobbled together from four units because the rest of the battalion is in Iraq.


Carrying M-16 rifles and 9mm pistols, the soldiers are assigned to control traffic at unlighted intersections, and patrol in Humvees and on foot to prevent looting.


Recruiting and retention problems are worsening the strain on Guard forces in hurricane-ravaged states. Alabama's Army National Guard has a strength of 11,000 troops -- or 78 percent of the authorized number. We're just losing too many out the back door, Arnold said.


Considering our national debt is now......... sm
sitting at, what, $3 trillion dollars, I doubt government oversight would be of much benefit to the auto industry. In fact, I kind of feel like the government really has the audacity to ask a private industry to prove a solvent plan when the government can't even balance their own books. Either way, the auto industry is going under. It's just a matter of whether it is now or 6 months from now.
its from the national review -

not worth reading, notorious right wing organization.


 


What do you think the national guard is
Our national guard is supposed to be the first responders if needed for natural disasters. Remember them? That's their job.....not the Army.

Ask yourself why you have never seen it scrolled across your evening news....they know people will explode over it but do it quietly and without OUR permission (remember this is OUR country?) and no one will be the wiser until it's done and in place.

It is on an Army website, not something the average citizen will be looking for. "Homeland tours" my butt. Permanent part of the active Army. The last thing this country needs is a full-time military brigade TOURING our country.

Well, when you look at the national polls
and see that 37% of Americans are in favor of the bill, I guess you can say that *most* people don't want this stimulus!
Any ideas on how paying down too much debt could be a terrorist threat?nm
 
Yeah, there was no threat made. It was a sick thing
nm
Does he even know the words of the National Anthem? sm
I don't remember him singing either, in the clip I saw.

Just wondering if anybody knew?

A ? for those in favor of national healthcare
What is your rationale for wanting government in charge of your healthcare? You have to know that if this happens, healthcare in this country IS going to be rationed, the same as it's been rationed in Great Britain, Sweden, and Canada. There will be long waits for procedures that we now take for granted being done in a very short time. I know Obama promised the same healthcare as he now has in the senate...do you believe him?
cancer and national health
It's these sort of false concerns -- LOOK OUT, SIX TO TWELVE MONTH WAITS AND BY THEN YOU'RE DEAD! DEAD!!!! -- that impede progress toward a fair healthcare system. They're repetition of talking points, nothing more. A ten-second internet search would tell you, for instance, that in the UK:

-Over 99% of people with suspected cancer are now seen by a specialist within two
weeks of being urgently referred by their GP.

-Over 99% of patients with cancer are receiving their first treatment within one
month of diagnosis.

-Over 96% of patients with cancer are receiving their first treatment within two
months of being urgently referred by their GP.

Now I'll leave it to you and Google to find the comparable numbers for the US.

The larger point is, though, that if you decide this nation doesn't need universal healthcare, then you need to say exactly who it is you don't want care provided to. Because that's all this ever comes down to: Who do you include, and who do you leave out?
Our new national anthem --- for all you Obots.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l46t_nrySg4
The National Guard already watches them.
Had a friend who was in Arizona for 6 months doing just that.
Not the same at all! The man inherited a national crisis,,,,,,sm
the likes of which have not been seen since the Great Depression, he had no hand at all in creating it. But he was brave enough and altruistic enough to come forward and TRY to bring changes that WOULD HELP OUR COUNTRY IN THE LONG RUN. Do you like instant Cup-A-Soup and coffee, because you and so many others are putting the RIDICULOUS load on Obama's shoulders to INSTANTLY come up with the perfect answer to all the crises (and yes, this is a multi-dimentional problem, no quick fix here), make everyone happy, snap his fingers, and poof the big bad depression that has been brewing for a LONG TIME since the Bush administration, and I say that because under President Clinton we had record surpluses in our nation, and by the by, you think W. was well-polished, well-experienced to head this country just cuz Daddy did? Come off it, he hired most of Daddy's friend and cabinet, he took his cues, but the poor guy could not even speak well, even with his Yale education. This man has been in office 4 months versus the past 8 years, a bit of inequity here?