-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peerzy
The image of the country would stop me coming. If you're asked to name an area in the world where your most likley to die not from natural causes im sure alot of people would say the middle eastern area, just because of how the media has reported on the area and such.
Every person who says that is absolutely totally wrong.
In the US how many people are fired every year?! Kids shoot each other at school over the stupidest things!! People in the US with no permit have guns, the mobs are on the streets, and you're telling me you're more likely to die in the safe environment of Israel..??? How can you say such a thing!?!
@Nikki & JPaul: The guards are not there to make people scared.. Why do you think they have them? To keep the civilians SAFE, not SCARED. In fact I feel a hell of a lot safer in a place like Israel rather than a big outlet in the US with no security guards stopping suspicious people from entering the big shops, who might just be the next to blow the place to the ground.
Same with London, or any other big place in the world nowadays. No one is safe without the right safety precautions. If there are no guards, then yes you may feel more "free" as you put it. But in todays world you are not safe. Just image, god forbid, you walking down the street and walk into a book store. The place is packed because the new Harry Potter book has just been released. There are no security guards checking peoples bags at the entrance. A person walks in with a bag that you would think is a regular handbag.
10 minutes later: 30 dead, hundreds wounded.
That's what security guards PREVENT. They make sure things like that do not happen. If the civilians will cooperate with security, I can promise you it will be so much harder for these mad terrorists to do anything, that the chances will get as low as 0%, rather than 50-50 with no guards.
I'm not saying put up 2341235908 guards at each store, but I think a guard for a store is plenty to make the society a safer place. 2-3 guards in big-big stores (like WHSmith and places like that). Life would go on exactly as it does today, but the big difference would be that we would all be much much safer. Less unemplyment, and the war on terror would be easier (because if an attack takes place, the world stops, and that gives time for these animals to find their next target).
Think about it........
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Anyone who finishes a post with "Think about it..." is a condescending idiot.
People are saying that they don't want to live like you do. They would rather have the tiny element of risk than have their liberties so eroded. If your country feels that the risk is so high then lots of people won't want to visit, because you are declaring it as very dangerous.
If as you say the risk is no higher than elsewhere, then get the armed guards off the streets. You don't need them. If you choose to keep them, cool it's your choice, but expect it to have the effect it does.
Think about that.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
In fact I feel a hell of a lot safer in a place like Israel rather than a big outlet in the US with no security guards stopping suspicious people from entering the big shops, who might just be the next to blow the place to the ground. Same with London, or any other big place in the world nowadays. No one is safe without the right safety precautions. If there are no guards, then yes you may feel more "free" as you put it. But in todays world you are not safe. Just image, god forbid, you walking down the street and walk into a book store. The place is packed because the new Harry Potter book has just been released. There are no security guards checking peoples bags at the entrance. A person walks in with a bag that you would think is a regular handbag. 10 minutes later: 30 dead, hundreds wounded.
The thing is, this is not a normal occurance in these places. We all know it is possible, however at this time we do not need to live in constant fear of it happening and do not need to take such drastic steps to prevent it.
We can only hope things do not reach the level they have where you are that we need to take those steps.
Yes it is true that the violence in the states due to crime is higher then most other places, but the average person does not need to worry about being a victim each and every day of their lives.
The sort of violence you are protecting yourself from with all these gaurds is not "normal" in my view. In general, people do not go out and randomly kill to support their cause in the states.
TD
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Now, following the terrorist attack on London, my home city, I would like to ask ya'll: Why are you worried to come to Israel?
What's so different here than anywhere else in the world? 9/11, Baali bombings, Madrid, London...... nowhere is safe nowadays, so why not come and visit Israel?
Because Rafi.........personally, I would'nt go to london, nor new york nor any major city, for 2 reasons
1: I don't like cities
2: no major city is safe atm
But I think the main reason for most is because 9/11 and london have happend once, Isreal has buildings/busses etc exploding quite frequently.
As for the guards and religion, if I start on that I'll piss you all off cos I think the whole situation and belief (meaning all religions) is bollocks, period.
Jonno :cool:
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Israel? It's just not on my list of places to visit because there's nothin there im interested in. And thats before thinkin about security issues.
I'd like to check more Europen countrys,
even Russia is a bit more interesting than Israel imo.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
, if I start on that I'll piss you all off cos I think the whole situation and belief (meaning all religions) is bollocks, period.
Jonno :cool:
Any right thinking person would say "Cool, you're as entitled to your belief system as I am".
I will support yor right to be wrong any day of the week.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Well exactly, cos it IS my opinion, and the funny thing I find about it all is that someone can preach about they're religion, but a man can't give a view against it without being wrong.
Religion makes me angry in any form pretty much, therefore I've given up arguing about it even tho I have kinda here so I'm gonna be quiet now.
Having said that, it is each to their own.......my opinion is just my own.
It's a funny ol' world init :rolleyes:
Jonno :cool:
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tralalala
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peerzy
The image of the country would stop me coming. If you're asked to name an area in the world where your most likley to die not from natural causes im sure alot of people would say the middle eastern area, just because of how the media has reported on the area and such.
Every person who says that is absolutely totally wrong.
Yup, we are wrong i agree, but it's how the media shows the country, which puts people off.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
Well exactly, cos it IS my opinion, and the funny thing I find about it all is that someone can preach about they're religion, but a man can't give a view against it without being wrong.
Jonno :cool:
But you also think they are wrong, it cuts both ways.
I think everyone who disagrees with me is wrong. They are, from my point of view. They equally think I am wrong, because I disagree with them.
The funny thing is that often we are both right, from our own perspective. That's why it's important to try to see things from the other persons point of view.
Even when they are obviously wrong.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
@JPaul: The risk here is no higher than elsewhere BECAUSE of the security. If the security was taken off the streets, then Israel would become a place much more vulnerable than others. But that's not the case, as Israel has had too much experience in attacks, and that's why we are so good at preventing them.......
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikibonbon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
You are lying. There aren't (EVEN) 10 security guards at the front of any government building and I've been to every single Safeway in DC.
Well, just returned home to see this. Busy, nowhere did I mention security guards in front of government buildings. Not once. Keep your words out of my mouth.
I will admit, I did the common exageration thing on the number of guards (more like 6 or 7), and nowhere did I imply it was due to terroist threats.
The "demographic" I was speaking of was younger black teens/twenties folks.
You may have been to every single Safeway in DC, so what? It is not that uncommon for places like this to hire off duty police officers to walk around stores and keep an eye out for shoplifters. Go to NYC, Dallas, LA, it's a common practice.
In ending, you are not Bush, please don't try to control what I see. :lol:
Oh I know what you were getting at. Also see my above quote again. It wasn't to say YOU said anything about government buildings.
The fact is you are still lying (which you admitted). Even at Hechinger Mall on Benning Rd, you'd be hard pressed to find 6 security guards in the whole fucking shopping center and that area fits your "demographic" to a tee (oh and they have a Safeway too). I mentioned has anyone seen 10 security guards in any grocery store to some coworkers and they LTAO!!!!.
You're subterfuge with this "Keep your words out of my mouth" is unnecessary since your mouth is full of :shit:.
There is no "so what" if I've been every Safeway in DC. They don't have 10 or even 6 security guards so again...you are lying.
btw Bush seems to be your good ole boy, not my mine.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Whatever Busyman, you know better what I saw than myself. You are correct, whatever you say.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikibonbon
Whatever Busyman, you know better what I saw than myself. You are correct, whatever you say.
Well no...
Maybe Black Hawk Security decided to have thier morning meeting at Safeway store #37 that day.
Maybe there was a security guard convention and the local Safeway was a good way to put on a good show of force as well as have the convention.
Maybe the government should move their confidential files to Safeway from now on so if someone tries to steal them, there could be 10 flashlights shone on this thief and he would be blinded for like a whole 10 seconds.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
I guess someone should tell the gentleman in bold that he shouldn't bother going into work today, because everyone knows that no Safeways in Washington DC have security guards...
D.C. Slots Goal Met, Backers Say
Petitions Submitted For Nov. 2 Ballot
By Serge F. Kovaleski
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 7, 2004; Page A01
Supporters of a plan to bring slot machines to the nation's capital ended their five-day petition drive yesterday claiming that they had collected more than 50,000 signatures and had met the legal requirements to get the issue on the November ballot.
As organizers submitted the forms to the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics just before a 5 p.m. deadline, the president of the California company hired to run the petition effort said he was confident that at least 17,599 of the signatures -- the minimum needed to put the gambling proposal before voters Nov. 2 -- were from registered D.C. voters.
The elections board has 30 days to review the 3,869 petition sheets and the signatures on them to determine how many are valid. The petition push, which did not begin until Thursday evening, has been dogged by opponents' allegations that many of the signatures were gathered illegally. Anti-slots activists said they plan to argue before the board that many petition circulators were not D.C. residents, as required by law, and that campaign workers made false statements about the initiative to get people to sign the forms.
But Angelo Paparella, president of Progressive Campaigns Inc., based in Santa Monica, Calif., said he expected that more than 20,000 of the signatures collected would be ruled valid. The rest are people who are not registered to vote in the city or whose addresses do not match D.C. voter rolls, he said.
"The majority of these signatures on these petitions will be upheld by the elections board, so I fully anticipate that voters will have a chance to be heard on this issue come November," he said. Paparella said the initiative had met another legal requirement by getting signatures from at least 5 percent of registered voters in six of the city's eight wards.
The initiative would ask voters to approve a plan to install as many as 3,500 video lottery terminals in an entertainment complex to be built on a 14-acre site at New York Avenue and Bladensburg Road NE. The two investors in the project so far are D.C. businessman Pedro Alfonso and Rob Newell, a financier from the U.S. Virgin Islands. The initiative's general counsel is former D.C. Council member John Ray. Alfonso and Ray did not return calls yesterday.
Paparella said that about 200 paid workers took part in the signature-gathering, and that half of them were not D.C. residents, coming from states that included California, Utah, Washington, Florida and Michigan. That explanation appears to conflict with previous statements from Ray, who said last week that Progressive Campaigns had brought in managers from out of town, "but they are not supposed to be circulating any petitions."
Paparella said that the petition circulators earned about $3 per signature but that some workers received bonuses for performing well, such as getting 100 signatures or more a day with a validation rate of at least 50 percent.
"Workers were brought in from out of town because of the short time frame," Paparella said. He contended that District law allows the use of workers from elsewhere in the country as long as a D.C. resident witnesses all the signatures being placed on each petition form.
But opponents of the gaming project -- as well as several of the out-of-town petition workers -- said that numerous signatures were not witnessed by a D.C. resident. In some cases, D.C. residents brought along as witnesses were seen several blocks away from the out-of-town circulators or were trying to monitor several of them at once, according to interviews.
A security guard at a Safeway on Capitol Hill said in an interview yesterday that several workers paid him $55 Saturday night after he agreed to sign the affidavit on their petitions stating that he had witnessed the signatures on those forms.
"At the time, I was busy and I didn't see every signature. But I did notice them standing out there," said the guard, speaking on the condition that his name not be used. "One of them said, 'You see me standing out there getting signatures. I didn't write any myself.' "
The guard added that after showing the workers two forms of identification and signing the affidavit, he was given $20 in cash and a $35 check from a company named Initiatives Plus that showed a Seattle address.
Paparella said that Initiatives Plus was one of several national companies hired to help conduct the petition drive. "There are a lot of different layers here," Paparella said.
A petition circulator from Northern Virginia said in an interview that after he and a neighbor told an organizer Friday evening that they had collected signatures without a D.C. resident as a witness, the organizer told them to forge the signature of the witness who had accompanied them the night before.
His neighbor then did so, said the Northern Virginia man, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
"If anyone signed the petition saying they witnessed the signatures when they didn't, or if someone told them to break the law, they should be prosecuted," Paparella said.
Regina James, one of the plaintiffs who was involved in an unsuccessful suit to block the petition drive, said she filed a complaint yesterday with the elections board, alleging that the petition workers had violated the city's laws and "made a mockery of the process."
Slots opponents also have alleged that petition circulators used questionable tactics and arguments to persuade people to sign.
Charles Callis, 58, said that after he dropped off his wife yesterday morning at the Metro station on Rhode Island Avenue NE, a petition worker told her she could win a car if she signed the form because it was the final stretch of the drive.
Later on, Callis said, the petition worker told him that the money from the slots would go to rebuilding the District's school system. "I think they were deliberately trying to do the bait-and-switch and divert attention away from the fact that this is gambling," Callis said.
Some homeless people in the District were recruited to work in the petition drive. One of them, 41-year-old David Williams, who said he has been living at a District shelter for about six months, complained yesterday that he had been taken advantage of and had been paid only $35, even though he had collected about 80 signatures.
"I need money, and to be cheated like this is very unfair," he said.
Antoine Pitts, 28, a graphic designer from Detroit, said he learned about the signature drive from a company he identified as Petition Management. He said he had been paid $400 and was expecting an additional $2,600.
"A witness saw all my signatures," Pitts said, adding that the company paid for his airfare and hotel stay. "It was a good free vacation."
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
And this guy apparently felt the need to lie about where he worked....tho I would have come up with something a little better...
D.C. weighs in on Kobe's fiasco
By James Wright
Published: Thursday, July 24, 2003
Article Tools:Email This ArticlePrint This Article Page 1 of 2Next Page
Arthur Roberts loves pro basketball, and it is not unusual to see him wearing shirts and shorts supporting his favorite team: the Los Angeles Lakers.
But ask the 25-year-old about Kobe Bryant, the Lakers forward who has been charged in Colorado with rape, he shrugs his shoulders.
"Kobe Bryant is a grown man with a wife, he should have known what he was doing," said Roberts, a security guard at the Safeway in the Petworth section of Washington, D.C. "If he raped that girl, he should get what he deserves. If he gets off free, I will still respect him as a ballplayer."
Bryant was accused of sexual assault by a 19-year old employee at the Lodge & Spa at Cordillera in Edwards, Colo, a resort hotel he was staying at for the rehabilitation of a knee injury suffered at the end of the Lakers season. District Attorney Mark Hurlbert, after two weeks of examining evidence and interviewing Bryant and the woman, decided to prosecute the five-time NBA all-star and key leader of the Lakers' three consecutive championships in 2000, 2001 and 2002.
Bryant, in a tearful press conference last Friday, said he was not guilty of rape and, with his wife Vanessa by his side, said he was only guilty of adultery and will fight the charges. He has hired Pamela Mackey, a noted Denver defense attorney, who has represented the likes of John and Patricia Ramsey, author Hunter S. Thompson and Colorado Avalanche goalie Patrick Roy.
Mackey said that Bryant will have a jury trial in Eagle County, Colo., where the alleged offense took place. A preliminary hearing will be held on Aug. 6, but the actual trial date is not known, though Mackey believes it will be sometime in January 2004, right in the middle of the NBA season.
If Mackey's estimation holds, Bryant will likely miss the 2004 NBA All-Star game, which will be held in Los Angeles in February.
Reflecting the sentiments of many Washingtonians, Roberts said Bryant should have known better, given his status as a superstar ballplayer. "These guys should learn by now that this type of stuff is going to happen," he said. "Look at what happened to Juwan Howard and Chris Webber. Those guys were accused of rape, and it turned out to be bogus. They have got to learn that all these women want is a little fame and money."
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikibonbon
"Kobe Bryant is a grown man with a wife, he should have known what he was doing," said Roberts, a security guard at the Safeway in the Petworth section of Washington, D.C..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikibonbon
A security guard at a Safeway on Capitol Hill said in an interview yesterday that several workers paid him $55 Saturday night after he agreed to sign the affidavit on their petitions stating that he had witnessed the signatures on those forms.
I like this better.........
Quote:
Kobe Bryant is a grown man with a wife, he should have known what he was doing," said Robert, Joe, Mack, David, Tiki, Steve, BonBon, Austin, Ralph, Doug, Richard, Dick, Harry, and Potter, security guards at the Safeway in the Petworth section of Washington, D.C..
Quote:
Security guards at a Safeway on Capitol Hill said in an interview yesterday that several workers paid them $55 Saturday night after they agreed to sign the affidavit on their petitions stating that they had witnessed the signatures on those forms.
Your point was what?
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Wow, tiki's just proved that Safeway's security guards have opinions :blink:
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
The chances of being hit by a drunk driver in a major city is higher than that of being caught in a terrorist blast.
I worry about neither.
I wouldnt want to get rid of cars or alcohol nor would i want my freedom infringed in a pointless attempt at "Security".
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rat Faced
The chances of being hit by a drunk driver in a major city is higher than that of being caught in a terrorist blast.
I worry about neither.
I wouldnt want to get rid of cars or alcohol nor would i want my freedom infringed in a pointless attempt at "Security".
I agree, depending on the city obviously. If there is no alcohol and loads of terrorists then things may change a bit.
Think about it ....
Quote:
@JPaul: The risk here is no higher than elsewhere BECAUSE of the security. If the security was taken off the streets, then Israel would become a place much more vulnerable than others. But that's not the case, as Israel has had too much experience in attacks, and that's why we are so good at preventing them.......
I love the idea of someone saying "Our Country is only safe because there are armed guards everywhere and you will get searched when you go shopping. Why doesn't anyone come visit us".
FFS even if it is as safe as everywhere else, which is highly dubious, why would people want to go thro' that (other than pilgrims and aid workers (to prevent confusion)). There's a whole World to see where you can just go about your business.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tralalala
Every person who says that is absolutely totally wrong.
In the US how many people are fired every year?! Kids shoot each other at school over the stupidest things!! People in the US with no permit have guns, the mobs are on the streets, and you're telling me you're more likely to die in the safe environment of Israel..??? How can you say such a thing!?!
@Nikki & JPaul: The guards are not there to make people scared.. Why do you think they have them? To keep the civilians SAFE, not SCARED. In fact I feel a hell of a lot safer in a place like Israel rather than a big outlet in the US with no security guards stopping suspicious people from entering the big shops, who might just be the next to blow the place to the ground.
Same with London, or any other big place in the world nowadays. No one is safe without the right safety precautions. If there are no guards, then yes you may feel more "free" as you put it. But in todays world you are not safe. Just image, god forbid, you walking down the street and walk into a book store. The place is packed because the new Harry Potter book has just been released. There are no security guards checking peoples bags at the entrance. A person walks in with a bag that you would think is a regular handbag.
10 minutes later: 30 dead, hundreds wounded.
That's what security guards PREVENT. They make sure things like that do not happen. If the civilians will cooperate with security, I can promise you it will be so much harder for these mad terrorists to do anything, that the chances will get as low as 0%, rather than 50-50 with no guards.
I'm not saying put up 2341235908 guards at each store, but I think a guard for a store is plenty to make the society a safer place. 2-3 guards in big-big stores (like WHSmith and places like that). Life would go on exactly as it does today, but the big difference would be that we would all be much much safer. Less unemplyment, and the war on terror would be easier (because if an attack takes place, the world stops, and that gives time for these animals to find their next target).
Think about it........
What is the very nature of the word terrorist? A person who causes terror. Here, and most places in the free world, they have not succeeded. Attacks happen, we mourn for those lost, we try to find a reason, and we go back to our lives. The best way to fight terrorism is to show these people they cannot win, that they can't make us live in fear of them. The moment we start to live in fear of what terrorists could do, and give up our civil liberties so that we can feel safe, terrorists have already won. Even if they never attack again, they have won, because they have created the fear that they so desire.
If someone wants to blow something up badly enough, I doubt security guards would stop them from doing so. Of course we know it can happen. We just choose not to dwell on the fact. It's not that we're naive, we do know all about the terrible things that can and do happen in this world. We choose to live free in spite of all these things because we will not let fear run our lives.
You choose to live in fear of what may happen. What you call security, I call paranoia. Suspicion of everyone carrying a bag, suspicion of anyone with Arabic features, and the need to have armed guards everywhere is a manifestation of that fear.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikkiD
If someone wants to blow something up badly enough, I doubt security guards would stop them from doing so. Of course we know it can happen. We just choose not to dwell on the fact. It's not that we're naive, we do know all about the terrible things that can and do happen in this world. We choose to live free in spite of all these things because we will not let fear run our lives.
You choose to live in fear of what may happen. What you call security, I call paranoia. Suspicion of everyone carrying a bag, suspicion of anyone with Arabic features, and the need to have armed guards everywhere is a manifestation of that fear.
Well, if that were the case we would have 200 attacks in Israel every year, and that is not the case. We have managed over the last 5 years to reduce it to maybe 1 or 2 a year in the worst case.
And yes, the fact I live in a country surrounded by Arabs, who most likely hate us Israelis for being as succesful as we are (Hi-Tech, stuff like that), makes us worry about people of Arab nature (and there are many of those), because we do not know when then next mad man might turn up. The fact is there are so many Arabs that are close enough to Israel to attack, that we need the security guards, otherwise it's just as if I went to the border with Syria and flashed them my ass and told them to try catch me.
It's all precautions for our safety, and it works. That's the important bit - it works.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikkiD
Quote:
Originally Posted by tralalala
Every person who says that is absolutely totally wrong.
In the US how many people are fired every year?! Kids shoot each other at school over the stupidest things!! People in the US with no permit have guns, the mobs are on the streets, and you're telling me you're more likely to die in the safe environment of Israel..??? How can you say such a thing!?!
@Nikki & JPaul: The guards are not there to make people scared.. Why do you think they have them? To keep the civilians SAFE, not SCARED. In fact I feel a hell of a lot safer in a place like Israel rather than a big outlet in the US with no security guards stopping suspicious people from entering the big shops, who might just be the next to blow the place to the ground.
Same with London, or any other big place in the world nowadays. No one is safe without the right safety precautions. If there are no guards, then yes you may feel more "free" as you put it. But in todays world you are not safe. Just image, god forbid, you walking down the street and walk into a book store. The place is packed because the new Harry Potter book has just been released. There are no security guards checking peoples bags at the entrance. A person walks in with a bag that you would think is a regular handbag.
10 minutes later: 30 dead, hundreds wounded.
That's what security guards PREVENT. They make sure things like that do not happen. If the civilians will cooperate with security, I can promise you it will be so much harder for these mad terrorists to do anything, that the chances will get as low as 0%, rather than 50-50 with no guards.
I'm not saying put up 2341235908 guards at each store, but I think a guard for a store is plenty to make the society a safer place. 2-3 guards in big-big stores (like WHSmith and places like that). Life would go on exactly as it does today, but the big difference would be that we would all be much much safer. Less unemplyment, and the war on terror would be easier (because if an attack takes place, the world stops, and that gives time for these animals to find their next target).
Think about it........
What is the very nature of the word terrorist? A person who causes terror. Here, and most places in the free world, they have not succeeded. Attacks happen, we mourn for those lost, we try to find a reason, and we go back to our lives. The best way to fight terrorism is to show these people they cannot win, that they can't make us live in fear of them. The moment we start to live in fear of what terrorists could do, and give up our civil liberties so that we can feel safe, terrorists have already won. Even if they never attack again, they have won, because they have created the fear that they so desire.
If someone wants to blow something up badly enough, I doubt security guards would stop them from doing so. Of course we know it can happen. We just choose not to dwell on the fact. It's not that we're naive, we do know all about the terrible things that can and do happen in this world. We choose to live free in spite of all these things because we will not let fear run our lives.
You choose to live in fear of what may happen. What you call security, I call paranoia. Suspicion of everyone carrying a bag, suspicion of anyone with Arabic features, and the need to have armed guards everywhere is a manifestation of that fear.
Exactly, but he's not listening, coz' it's what he's used to and cannot see that freedom > fear.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
But I'm not afraid... Why won't ya'll get it??
I feel safe, not afraid. I live a totally normal and SAFE life.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
And why dont you get it?
Especially coming from London...
We dont LIKE being surrounded by armed men, otherwise we'd give more of our coppers guns.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
I understand the fact that you don't like it.
My main point in this thread is that today, not enough security means too much vulnerability. That's all.
I'm not here trying to clash with people and get into fights, otherwise who would I have to talk to on FST!? :lol: I'm just giving my oppinion - everyone is entitled for his/her own oppinion, correct? :)
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
They are indeed.
You were asking why we didnt visit though :P
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tralalala
I understand the fact that you don't like it.
My main point in this thread is that today, not enough security means too much vulnerability. That's all.
I'm not here trying to clash with people and get into fights, otherwise who would I have to talk to on FST!? :lol: I'm just giving my oppinion - everyone is entitled for his/her own oppinion, correct? :)
Absolutely.
In addition your original question re why more people don't visit has been answered. The very oppressive security measures which you need and want do not sit well with many other people.
Which is also why major sporting events will also avoid you, just another price you have to pay.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Why would major sporting events not occure in Israel..??
Just a couple of weeks ago it was decided that a WTA tourney will take place here, the Maccabiah (a sort of Jewish Olympics) takes part every 4 years with people from all over the world....... Israel is not a dull place let me tell you that.. :)
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tralalala
Why would major sporting events not occure in Israel..??
Just a couple of weeks ago it was decided that a WTA tourney will take place here, the Maccabiah (a sort of Jewish Olympics) takes part every 4 years with people from all over the world....... Israel is not a dull place let me tell you that.. :)
I cant remember who said this
"This has cause major events not to take place in Israel (Maccabi Haifa had to play their Champions League clashes in Cyprus.. and that's only 1 example out of many)."
Oh wait, it was you I was quoting. Then you say I'm talking pish.
Where's that banging head against wall smillie.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Well, if that were the case we would have 200 attacks in Israel every year, and that is not the case. We have managed over the last 5 years to reduce it to maybe 1 or 2 a year in the worst case.
Quote:
It's all precautions for our safety, and it works. That's the important bit - it works.
:blink:
If it works... then why 1 or 2 a year?
Without armed guards, Canada has managed to limit the number of terrorist bombings to... oh wait, we haven't had a terrorist bombing in like, forever. And we have lots of Arabs. Go figure.
Even in the US and Europe, where there HAVE been terrorist attacks recently, the number of attacks in proportion to the security you propose is ludicrous. An average of say 1-2 attacks per year over 20 odd countries? I'd say we're still pretty safe.
Quote:
My main point in this thread is that today, not enough security means too much vulnerability. That's all.
You say you're not afraid, however, that statement is completely paranoid. Sounds like fear to me.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
Well exactly, cos it IS my opinion, and the funny thing I find about it all is that someone can preach about they're religion, but a man can't give a view against it without being wrong.
Jonno :cool:
But you also think they are wrong, it cuts both ways.
I think everyone who disagrees with me is wrong. They are, from my point of view. They equally think I am wrong, because I disagree with them.
The funny thing is that often we are both right, from our own perspective. That's why it's important to try to see things from the other persons point of view.
Even when they are obviously wrong.
:lol: I like that, you make sense in a Johnny Vegas kinda way.
I'd like to buy you a pint one day :lol:
Jonno :cool:
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
I would like to drink said pint and return the favour :beerchug:
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
"A boy doesn't have to go to war to be a hero; he can say he doesn't like pie when he sees there isn't enough to go around."
Edward W. Howe
:P
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rat Faced
"A boy doesn't have to go to war to be a hero; he can say he doesn't like pie when he sees there isn't enough to go around."
Edward W. Howe
:P
Nice one .... what the feck are you talking about.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Ok I've had a read over this thread and I don't think anyone has said it but........this "Armed Guards" on busses thing, I maybe wrong but surely that actually puts a loaded gun in the mix?
Whats to stop someone getting his gun and going on a rampage?
Like sky marshals except it's a lot easier to step on a bus in the street than get on a plane.
A knife in your pocket, step onto bus, dissarm guard by stabbing him, grab gun, shoot people.
So not only do you have the threat of terrorists and bombs, but also random hijackings and shootings with supplied weapons.
Of course I could be wrong but thats how I see it.
Jono :cool:
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon L. Obscene
Ok I've had a read over this thread and I don't think anyone has said it but........this "Armed Guards" on busses thing, I maybe wrong but surely that actually puts a loaded gun in the mix?
Whats to stop someone getting his gun and going on a rampage?
Like sky marshals except it's a lot easier to step on a bus in the street than get on a plane.
A knife in your pocket, step onto bus, dissarm guard by stabbing him, grab gun, shoot people.
So not only do you have the threat of terrorists and bombs, but also random hijackings and shootings with supplied weapons.
Of course I could be wrong but thats how I see it.
Jono :cool:
That's actually a very good point. I'm not sure I feel that the guns would be stolen, but paranoid guards with guns scares me too. Who knows, they might think I look like a terrorist and shoot me.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rat Faced
"A boy doesn't have to go to war to be a hero; he can say he doesn't like pie when he sees there isn't enough to go around."
Edward W. Howe
:P
Nice one .... what the feck are you talking about.
And so the wheel of wtf turns, like the days of our lives.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnnY
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Nice one .... what the feck are you talking about.
And so the wheel of wtf turns, like the days of our lives.
At last, some sense.
-
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
That's actually a very good point. I'm not sure I feel that the guns would be stolen, but paranoid guards with guns scares me too. Who knows, they might think I look like a terrorist and shoot me.
Funny I was thinking that just as I clicked on to read this :lol:
Dammit woman :frusty:
But yeah a very good point, I mean I've been followed round shops by security cos they thought I looked dodgy or something, so why not shoot me if I'm fiddling with a bag? (no inuendo please :rolleyes: )
Jonno :cool:
