rumors of a dirty bomb attack, 7 NFL stadiums would be the targets of alleged plot

#26
#26
therealUT said:
Working on the success they had last time, they should just enter the stadium with Swiss Army Knives and begin forcing fans to jump over the edge of the stadium.

On a serious note, the easiest way to accomplish said goal would be to load their cars with C4, and park them in parking garages where people tailgate and in other large tailgating spots.

With that being said, I will be expecting a call from the FBI, CIA, and/or NSA at anytime now.
Click to expand...
Haven't you read Kiddiedoc's rants? There are no garages where people are allowed to really tailgate anymore.
 
#27
#27
I've always thought that a place like Neyland, with it's poor security would be the place to do something like therealUT suggested.

9-11 was an awful event. Almost 3,000 died. In a stadium of 105,000, and with explosions happening at key points, the damage or chaos that followed ALONE would surpass the 3,000 mark.

Also, if they ever DO start attacking sporting venues, that form of entertainment as we know it, will end.

People won't pay money to go to places they may be killed by a suicide bomber and universities and small professional franchises won't have the money to ensure the safety of the people that would pay money.
 
#28
#28
What I fear is a chemical attack on a large number of people. Can you imagine the damage a Crop Duster could do with a couple of passes over a stadium?
 
#29
#29
GAVol said:
What I fear is a chemical attack on a large number of people. Can you imagine the damage a Crop Duster could do with a couple of passes over a stadium?
Click to expand...


It wouldn't even have to be real. Just a cloud of "something" over a stadium like Neyland would cause such panic that people would die, and quit going to sporting events.
 
#30
#30
Had this incident not been proven to be a hoax before Sunday I wonder how many people would have still attended these games?
 
#31
#31
CSpindizzy said:
Had this incident not been proven to be a hoax before Sunday I wonder how many people would have still attended these games?
Click to expand...

Hard to tell. Personally, I still would have gone. I know some people would rather give up the things they enjoy, sit at home, live in fear and vote Republican, but that's unacceptable to me.

I honestly just don't see the terrorist threat to be as dangerous as the administration would lead you to believe. If they were really that concerned about it, then they would have taken appropriate security measures a long time ago. Nothing is really safer than it was before, things have just been tweaked to appear that way.
 
#32
#32
Especially the ads going up by some certain candidates trying to scare us about some impending attack...
 
#33
#33
OWB said:
Hard to tell. Personally, I still would have gone. I know some people would rather give up the things they enjoy, sit at home, live in fear and vote Republican, but that's unacceptable to me.

I honestly just don't see the terrorist threat as dangerous as the administration would lead you to believe. If they were really that concerned about it, then they would have taken appropriate security measures a long time ago. Nothing is really safer than it was before, things have just been tweaked to appear that way.
Click to expand...


Disagree. Airport security is much better. It's not perfect, and it has it's holes and annoying situations, but it is much better than it was pre 9-11.
 
#34
#34
It's 'much better' if you only consider going in the front door. But your ignoring the other ways of breaking security in airports.
 
#35
#35
I think we're safer if for no other reason than, for good or bad, more people are simply paying attention to the issue.
 
#36
#36
Ask anyone that lives in Israel if just paying attention works. Top of the line security and open-ended police powers have done little to curb terrorism. But somehow we are told that the GOP has a grip on preventing attacks.
 
#37
#37
OrangeSquare said:
Disagree. Airport security is much better. It's not perfect, and it has it's holes and annoying situations, but it is much better than it was pre 9-11.
Click to expand...

Just the fact that it has holes and annoying situations 5 years later should show you that not everything that could have been done has been done.
 
#38
#38
OWB said:
Just the fact that it has holes and annoying situations 5 years later should show you that not everything that could have been done has been done.
Click to expand...
I agree that not everything that could be done, has been done. However, I feel there are plenty of good reasons for not doing absolutely everything to make airports 100% secure. You can never have 100% security, 100% control, and 100% speed in any operation. Where you opt for more control, you take less security and speed, more security, less control and speed.

We have to keep a focus of the primary use of airports: business travelers. Time is money in the business world, and a quick way to curb economic growth in this country is to make people wait in line for four and five hours while every last person and every last bag is searched. I doubt that our the TSA's actual mission is to stop every last suspicious item from getting through security. Their mission is, most likely, to make the risk determinant great enough that the reward is miniscule in comparison, therefore deterring terrorists from using airports to carry out their attacks or causing them to resort to more sophisticated and involved planning. As I have stated earlier, the more sophisticated and involved a plan is, the greater the odds of our intel operatives picking up on it. Now, I doubt you will find any stated mission of TSA that states they are not trying to find every last lighter, toe nail clipper, and loose wire in all luggage that passes through checkpoints, just as every Battallion CO will state that they are committed to bringing every soldier in their battallion home at the end of the war. Realistically, they know that they will have achieved success at bringing home 90% of the battallion and having met all their objectives.
 
#39
#39
Did I say any different?

I am smart enough to know that had the Dems been in power, it wouldnt be any different than it is today.

That's what some of you can't admit. One party is just as bad as the other one. You are both holding on, hoping the American public doesn't figure it out and elect someone that doesnt belong to either of the two major parties. Doing everything you can, keeping them out of debates and making it hard for anyone to even try. But, mark my words, sooner rather than later, it will happen and it won't be until we have some actual independant thinkers running this country, that things will begin to get better.
 
#41
#41
therealUT said:
I agree that not everything that could be done, has been done. However, I feel there are plenty of good reasons for not doing absolutely everything to make airports 100% secure. You can never have 100% security, 100% control, and 100% speed in any operation. Where you opt for more control, you take less security and speed, more security, less control and speed.

We have to keep a focus of the primary use of airports: business travelers. Time is money in the business world, and a quick way to curb economic growth in this country is to make people wait in line for four and five hours while every last person and every last bag is searched. I doubt that our the TSA's actual mission is to stop every last suspicious item from getting through security. Their mission is, most likely, to make the risk determinant great enough that the reward is miniscule in comparison, therefore deterring terrorists from using airports to carry out their attacks or causing them to resort to more sophisticated and involved planning. As I have stated earlier, the more sophisticated and involved a plan is, the greater the odds of our intel operatives picking up on it. Now, I doubt you will find any stated mission of TSA that states they are not trying to find every last lighter, toe nail clipper, and loose wire in all luggage that passes through checkpoints, just as every Battallion CO will state that they are committed to bringing every soldier in their battallion home at the end of the war. Realistically, they know that they will have achieved success at bringing home 90% of the battallion and having met all their objectives.
Click to expand...

I'll agree with all that. I'll take that corporate greed over our very own personal security any day of the week. America rocks.
 
#42
#42
Wow, in the span of about 10 minutes both OWB and CSpin have actually agreed with me. Which means, that I am only a couple posts away from being called a liberal communist by Johnny Quest.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top