T Nation

America Needs Another Terrorist Attack


Wow, just wow.


Beck is a right wing whack job and whatever his show is, it is not news.


It's out of context. I f you realize how lazy the American public is, this makes sense. People don't understand the prepare for war and pray for peace. Their will to do somehtign is very minimal, other than turning on the tube.

Threats to the country are there, whether it be from illegal immigration, terrorism, etc. and most don't demand something be done, until there is a disaster. These guys don't want one, but ti might take that to motivate the average person.


We could always just teach people how to be vigalent, active and moral in school, but I'm sure it's much more important to have art and music class and to learn another language, and to have gym class where the guys play dodgeball and the girls sit in a corner and gossip. There certainly is no room in our current curriculum to actually teach kids how to be good strong americans, people who accept responsibility, and take action when action needs to be taken. Na, that would never work, better just start a military draft and start a couple more wars to make sure we keep americans on thier toes.



You cannot play "responsibility".

You either have a society where people have to face the consequences of their actions or they don´t.

If they have to they will learn how to, if not, why should they bother.


So thier children and grandchildren aren't burdened with thier failures as human beings. My hope is that life expectancy continues to rise and people start living for 200 years, then people who screw the country for 40 years wont die and will actually have to live with the world they helped create. Again, if we focus a large part of our education on teaching people to be responsible for themselves, the rest will pretty much take car of itself. Part of that of course would be holding them responsible for thier actions and behaviors in school, if they screw up they pay the price, whatever it is. Non of this parents fighting thier battles, suing the school. All that shit is just making our kids weaker and more dependant on someone else to keep them alive. And once they are out of mommy and daddys grasp, nothing left there but the government to hold thier hand for the rest of thier life.



If there's one thing I'm certain of, we don't need our kids be learnin' 'nother them languages now! This is AMERICA (fuck yeah!) damn it! and if the rest of the world hasn't learned how to speak 'Merican yet, damn it, then they're to blame.

...Besides, they could be talking about me!


Stop being a douche, Obviously there is value to learning another language. However, the amount you can learn in a primary school setting is VERY minimal, and there may just be other things that are more important to teach our kids, like being responsible human beings. I mean I'm sure you would much rather have a bunch of Multi Lingual peices of shit running around, But i'd rather have a unilingual responsible human being, hell you would probably have a better chance of them being multilingual in the future if you teach them responsibility and morality.

I can't believe you even went there. You seriously picked through my post about having our kids be more responsible and then stretched the one point you could exploit to the extreme limit of what it could possibly mean. What a fucking worthless douchebag, you no doubt were never taught responsibility or morality, for that response was neither responsible or moral. And I'm sure you yourself are multilingual.




1) It's a good thing you're being serious, cuz lord knows I am
2) (see underlined) you know LOTS about learnin' other languages, huh?

And I'm sure you yourself are NOT multilingual.


My apologies if you were just funin me, your past posts lead me to believe you were not. I am not multi lingual despite 2 years of spanish in high school, which is exactly my point. My ability to count to 10 in spanish has yet to aid me in real life.



MY point was that you can try to indoctrinate them till the cows come home if they know that mommy, daddy or the nanny state will bail them out it won´t make a lick of difference.


Well obviously this would be a component of their "indoctrination". Society wide there would need to be changes, like kids being put in detention, and teachers having some teeth, and when a parent complains the school board and the superintendant firmly defend the teachers action "within reson" and when the parents sue the school, the judges side with the teachers and the school. Right now we have all the opposite happening, so it's not like you could just introduce a morality and responsibility class and have it go off with flying colors, you would need the mechanisms in place to be able to apply it. Eventually we might even get parents who dicipline thier kids and hold them accountable for thier actions like I used to be, and I'm sure many of you used to be.

Look I have a very big family, over 40 cousins, and it is pretty easy to see which parents held thier kids accountable and whos did not. Lets just say the ones who did not, well thier kids have been in jail more than once, or in other serious trouble with drugs, and or authority. The parents who held thier kids accountable, well almost every one of them is doing just fine and some are even raising some good kids of thier own.



9 our of 10 of my posts on this forum are just me making fun or blowing off steam. I can't really take most posters here seriously.

For example, a normal post of mine would be to point out that you were talking about "primary" education in your post above, but your example comes from "secondary" education...I'd probably then make a joke about the level of your education for confusing/conflating the two. Really though, my point is that primary school IS the place to begin teaching other languages, and then we wouldn't have stories such as your own of people taking only two years and not learning shit. Also, it might be worth looking into when people best learn other languages...hell man, we should start in kindergarten or before if only we had the capacity.

I guess you are right in a sense though, if we're just going to half-ass it and require only two years, then why bother requiring it at all...maybe just leave that to the kids who are going to go on to college.

eh...I think I'm rambling a bit, but vodka after a busy day has me a bit fuzzy.


Nothing to see here.


Taking the stance that "the only chance we have as a country is for Bin Laden to detonate a major weapon in the United States" is pure lunacy in any context. A former CIA Counter Terrorist Analyst proclaiming the same on a show self identified as "News," is just plain stupid. It is not news, it is over the top ridiculous. The sad part is people buy this baloney. Many people identify fox news as their news source.

What exactly is our government not doing to protect us that the only thing that will save us from our lack of defense is for a terrorist to detonate a large scale weapon on US soil? We have the military budget of what; nearly all other countries combined, yet somehow we are not doing enough and we need massive death and destruction on US soil to wake us up?

"Michael F. Scheuer is a former CIA employee. In his 22-year career, he served as the Chief of the Bin Laden Issue Station (aka "Alec Station"), from 1996 to 1999, the Osama bin Laden tracking unit at the Counterterrorist Center. He then worked again as Special Advisor to the Chief of the bin Laden unit from September 2001 to November 2004."

So, let's be very clear here; the head of the CIA Bin Laden Unit from 2001 to 2004 thinks the country needs a major detonation by Bin Laden in order to wake up the American people.

The premise is ridiculous, Beck is ridiculous, and I am sorry reporting like this is put on Nationwide Television and peddled as news.


Adding insult to injury:

While President George W. Bush also sent Guard troops to the border during his time in the White House, they were a response to the growing flow of illegal immigration, played solely a support role, and were unarmed.

In the context of growing drug violence on the country's 2,000-mile southern border - including a number of recent high-profile killings on U.S. soil - it's unlikely those troops would be deployed without weapons, marking a significant departure from previous U.S. policy.end quote


Jim Kouri, CPP

Jan. 6, 2007

In a story that should have rang alarm bells in very newsroom across the nation, armed Mexican entered the United States and attacked unarmed National Guard troops working at a border patrol post near the US-Mexican border. The troops had to retreat to safety.

Not surprisingly, the news story received scant coverage by the mainstream news media and hardly a mention on the Fox News Channel. It�¢??s a story that should outrage all Americans including President George W. Bush.

Unfortunately, President Bush and his Administration did not even comment on this vicious attack on unarmed US troops as well as the unbridled assault on American sovereignty. During a press conference held on Friday afternoon by Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff, there was not one word about this unprovoked attack on soldiers.
end quote


Obama called for a "comprehensive approach" to the problem of violence that includes an effort to reduce the flow of American guns south, providing Mexico's powerful cartels with much of their firepower.

But the possibility of sending armed troops to the border �¢?? an idea similar to one already proposed by Republican Gov. Rick Perry of Texas �¢?? quickly drew criticism from groups that consider themselves Obama allies.

Fernando Garcia, executive director of the Border Network for Human Rights, based in El Paso, called the idea "a surprise" and said that "for us, it's never been the solution."
end quote


Published: June 18, 2006
SAN LUIS, Ariz., June 16 �¢?? The first National Guard troops ordered to the United States-Mexico border as part of President Bush's plan to improve security have arrived in the four border states and are expected to begin work by Sunday.

Border Patrol and Guard spokesmen said Friday that the first group of Guard members would number about 800. By August, up to 6,000 Guard members are to be assigned to the border mission. Next year, that number is to drop to 3,000 as more Border Patrol agents are hired.[i]

Most of the Guard members will be unarmed unless they are in a hazardous area. Much of their time will be spent in Border Patrol offices watching monitors and handling other equipment, while those in the field will alert Border Patrol agents if they see someone crossing the border illegally.
end quote


Glen Beck is a hack and his show is garbage, not news.