warning 27 replies

Please wait...

yod@

I'm way cooler than n0e (who isn't though?)

50 XP

14th April 2004

0 Uploads

4,898 Posts

0 Threads

#1 14 years ago

all these warnings issued in u.s about a new strike , is the security tightened , does anyone heed it?




colonel_bob

Here & There

50 XP

4th June 2004

0 Uploads

6,685 Posts

0 Threads

#2 14 years ago

I would guess no. With all these general thrreats going around, no one seems to pay much attention anymore. And, even if one of these general threats was credible, no one would be able to act on it. What we need is a specific threat to be more alert, but no one seems to want to give us that... :lookaround:




AegenemmnoN VIP Member

The cream of the crop

228,590 XP

19th August 2003

0 Uploads

21,534 Posts

0 Threads

#3 14 years ago

i dont buy into it, and i really dont give a shit. big broher will save us from ourselves! :uhoh:




V0rtex

Thread hijacks: 1

50 XP

26th April 2004

0 Uploads

2,324 Posts

0 Threads

#4 14 years ago

Yes, security is tightened. For example, yesterday three cities (Whashington D.C., Newark, and some other) had been known to be targets for terrorists, so police pulled any suspicious cars/trucks entering the cities over and searched for bombs. If you mean do civillians heed to the warnings, well, not to my knowledge because there's nothing they can do about it.




Octovon

Spaceman

54,945 XP

5th August 2003

0 Uploads

5,317 Posts

0 Threads

#5 14 years ago

I'm not worrying about terrorist attacks. Then again I'm not American. Besides that fact, I dont really feel a need to be worried. Tom Ridge tells the world that there is a strong chance of a terrorist attack every three and a half seconds, after the first few, you could probably memorize what he says. I know its good for him to tell everyone, it could cause panic to the populace [except that they've heard this hundreds of times already], but it also lends some help to the terrorists. By telling the people that you are beefing up security at certain places, wouldnt it be logical for the terrorists to strike at an equally important, yet lighter-defended target?




JP(NL)

Flying Dutchman

50 XP

28th April 2003

0 Uploads

8,315 Posts

0 Threads

#6 14 years ago

if I were a terrorist I'd target a (neuclear) powerplant, not a tightly defended city...




FN_lewrbm69

It's Not Easy Being Green

50 XP

10th November 2003

0 Uploads

3,372 Posts

0 Threads

#7 14 years ago

it is more likly me getting killed by a ham sandwitch




emonkies

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

17th July 2003

0 Uploads

15,096 Posts

0 Threads

#8 14 years ago

They are said to be targeting financial institutions. In the 3 cities mentioned police have setup barricades and blocked some streets and are checking peoples id's entering the area.

Nuke powerplants are very high on the target list and have very high security already.

And yes the crying wolf thing is getting old. Im wondering how much is threats and how much is bush trying to remind people a "threat" still exists. I cant wait til that idiots out of office.




Mr. Matt VIP Member

#BanRadioActiveLobster

356,406 XP

17th June 2002

7 Uploads

33,654 Posts

779 Threads

#9 14 years ago

If you change your routine out of fear, the terrorists have accomplished what they set out to do. It's in their name, the 'terror' part. They want to scare you. And if you show that you're scared, they've succeeded. To hell with the warnings; if they're not scaring anyone, they're not winning.




Odessa

"when will this pain stop?"

50 XP

8th February 2004

0 Uploads

468 Posts

0 Threads

#10 14 years ago
Anlushac11And yes the crying wolf thing is getting old. Im wondering how much is threats and how much is bush trying to remind people a "threat" still exists. I cant wait til that idiots out of office.

:agreed Thats what I was thinking when I heard it.