Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 09/05/04 9:08 am:

Hello again voicedude:

I looked at a map. It's impossible for him to go from there to here without driving on bridges. He's got about 40 rivers to cross. The biggest is the Columbia. He's gonna have this problem all the way across our free f***ing country, isn't he?

If we had turned the desert into glass when this thing first happened, we could still be going about our daily lives. But no. Bush attacked us instead!

excon

Clarification/Follow-up by voiceguy2000 on 09/05/04 9:11 am:
I wonder if there is some way he can get the people at Hoover Dam to call ahead to some of these future locations and give some kind of heads-up? Hell, they should put a Customs seal on the back of the truck that shows they have already inspected it once. It is a waste of time and energy for all concerned to keep doing this at each crossing, yet it is hard to make a really strong argument against their concerns.

Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 09/05/04 9:16 am:

Right!! Those cops'll do him a favor. Sure they will. Yeah, they're together. They're co-ordinated. Uh, huh.

I understand their concern, but responding to the attack by locking down this country is not the answer. If, like Bush said, it's our freedom that the terrorists hate - then they won.

excon

Clarification/Follow-up by voiceguy2000 on 09/05/04 9:33 am:
I am sorry to say it, but things are only going to get tighter until Election Day passes.

Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 09/05/04 9:45 am:

Thanks for your comments voicedude. To hear that you think this is only an election ploy rather than a sincere security effort only pisses me off further.

I lost my freedom before. You don't know how valuable your freedom is until you've lost it. I hesitate to tell you exactly how I feel about this, because I'm afraid I can't speak freely - here in the U. S. of A. - I'm afraid to speak my mind, right here on our forum, because I think they're watching, listening and reading all of it.

Doesn't that scare you? I'm scared. Not from terrorists, but from my own government.

excon

Clarification/Follow-up by voiceguy2000 on 09/05/04 10:01 am:
Actually, I had not intended my reference to Election Day to be a cynical comment -- just an acknowledgment of the fact that many people seem to anticipate a Spain-like effort by terrorists to do something here before Election Day in the belief that it will influence the elections as it apparently did in Spain.

I have said before that I don't agree with this assessment, and do not believe that a terrorist incident in the U.S. would lead people to change their votes. Indeed, the more severe the episode, the more likely (in my view) that Bush would be reelected, on the theory that people would not want to change horses in mid-conflict from a security standpoint.

But there is also an obvious political side effect of keeping people fully conscious of security concerns. It is hard to argue with them when we see what is happening in the rest of the world.

All of this makes me think of that character from the M.A.S.H. television series, Colonel Flagg. That's who is in charge right now.

Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 09/05/04 10:34 am:

It's not hard for me to argue. And, I will.

I think the proper response to the attack should have been two-fold. 1) An all out attack on terrorists no matter what country they were in (doing it, instead of saying it), and 2) a strengthening of our freedoms here at home (not the opposite), and touting to the world that we will not be intimidated! This country is free and will stay that way!

Number 2 stems from my belief that no matter how tightly the country is locked up, the terrorists (if they want to) will find a way to attack us, in any case. My proof is, that if extremely tight security worked, there would be no drugs in prison, and there are.

Therefore ANY, lockdown, Patriot Act, Homeland Security Police force, and searches at every *** bridge in the US does nothing to make us ANY safer. It only takes our freedom away.

excon

Clarification/Follow-up by voiceguy2000 on 09/05/04 11:05 am:
I suspect you're right about terrorists finding something to exploit despite our security efforts.

I would say, however, that drugs are different. First of all, for many, they represent a victimless crime, and people in charge of prisons may even figure that drugged-up inmates are easier to control anyway. Second, there are so many opportunities for bribery and other forms of corruption, not to mention blacxkmail, intimidation, and other forms of coercion, to keep the drug pipelines open. I think it would be much harder for terrorists to exploit these kinds of things to circumvent anti-terror measures.

I do agree, however, that a lot of the security measures are not likely to accomplish anything other than (a) causing massive annoyance to law-abiding citizens, and (b) creating an illusion that we are "doing something." I thought about this as I fed my shoes through the conveyor belt at National Airport a couple of weeks ago.

Richard Posner wrote an excellent piece for the New York Times a week or so ago, reviewing the 9/11 Commission's suggestions and concluding, in essence, that it is impossible to prevent terrorist strikes in forms not previously used by them.

Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 09/05/04 12:17 pm:

Oh ho, voicedude. These are cops we're talking about here - jail cops. Even though they personally might enjoy a joint in the evening, I guarantee you that they would resort to looking up a convict’s bunghole if they thought they could find "narcotics". Has it been that long since you've dealt with cops?

Now, I agree with you about corruption, but our border cops are no less susceptible to corruption, are they?

Drugs can't be stopped in prison because no matter how tightly it’s locked up, there are always holes in the security. It's the convict’s job to detect those holes, and they do. Just like it's the terrorist's job to detect holes and they will.

excon

Clarification/Follow-up by HANK1 on 09/06/04 11:58 am:

Tom: The big deal here is that Excon's son had to unload his 26' U-Haul truck that was loaded to the gills. Where did his belongings go? On the side of the road! I might add that Nevada is hotter than hell this time of year. Used to work in Vegas!

HANK

Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 09/06/04 12:20 pm:

I'll close with this. To all of your arm chair right wingers. It's easy to say that my son should bend over and like it, from the comfort of your air conditioned living room. But if this were to happen to you, I know you would be singing a different tune.

Given where we're headed, you're turn is a coming. Report back then and tell me how much you liked it.

excon

Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 09/06/04 1:41 pm:
Hank , it inconvienienced his son .In return we can feel confident that a vitally important site is being secured to the best of the gvt.s ability. Sorry ;in N.Y. we live by crossing bridges and tunnels. I know I may be delayed ,stopped and inspected at any given time. I don't like it but feel better knowing htat the bridge I am traveling is likely to remain there while I travel it . This inspection is equal to the inspection you get going to a Cubbies game. You cannot carry bags of food in any more and expect it not to be checked. If you went on a tour of a nuclear power plant you would expect to be screened. People in this country after 9-11 should realize that a site as important as the Hoover Dam is going to be a security check point. His son has taught us a valuable lesson . Find out ahead of time what security scrrening you may be subject to and be prepared to deal with it. Hank;commercial trucks dealt with this stuff all the time ;even before 9-11 .Unfortunately the times demand greater security. My God ! sometimes I wonder how people would've reacted to the restrictions of WWII if they were needed today????