FLSkinz83 Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 2 minutes ago, Captain Wiggles said: Do you feel the same way about House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy? Shouldn't he then also have asked about or suggested plans as to how to keep the capitol building safe? 🤪 Haha. See above. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCB Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 Buddy if you think it's rough in here, do NOT look at the sandwich thread. 8 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 Yea the Pelosi thing is definitely a litmus test for me going forward. They can’t get off it. Defies the programming 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epochalypse Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 3 minutes ago, FLSkinz83 said: You really need to get a grip. I never said "Dems". I mentioned Pelosi because she's the speaker and Bowser because She's the Mayor. If you want to add Trump, Pence, McCarthy, go ahead. I think I hear your mom calling you upstairs for supper. Best zip up before you go. Here I'll even add a smiley face for you. 🙂 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 Giving credit where it's due, at least he didn't blame January 6 on Hunter Biden. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 3 hours ago, FLSkinz83 said: How am I gonna watch the Skins if I go there? Internet connection is shoddy. There is no team called the Redskins. The Skins ended in 2020. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epochalypse Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 3 minutes ago, Burgold said: Giving credit where it's due, at least he didn't blame January 6 on Hunter Biden. Can't put all the owning out there at once, gotta keep some in reserve or the lib triggering high fades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skintime Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 2 minutes ago, 88Comrade2000 said: There is no team called the Redskins. The Skins ended in 2020. And how does a 4yo know that the internet is bad if he's been in the US since he was young? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLSkinz83 Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 4 minutes ago, Burgold said: Giving credit where it's due, at least he didn't blame January 6 on Hunter Biden. They haven't gone through all the laptops yet. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 24 minutes ago, Fergasun said: People have marched, protested, etc. in DC well before many of us were born. There are many days where protestors mass outside... I can't remember what it looked like during Obamacare. No group ever felt entitled enough to jump the barricades and storm the Capitol until January 6.... unless you count the redcoats during the War of 1812? Sure, there was the shooter in the late 1990s, the bomb in the 1970s and the Puerto Rican nationalists in thre 1950s. Those acts of violence were a bit different, ie. lone wolf. Foreign armies, terrorists and lone wolves, and January 6. In hindsight no one thought this could happen, because we really expected our political opposites to respect the rule of law. I say this because I question the need for increased physical security. I think about 2000. That year, the election was actually decided incorrectly. I won't say stolen because the Florida Dems did it to themselves by somehow developing a butterfly ballot that diverted more than enough votes away from Gore to give the election to Bush. Even Pat Buckhannon who was the beneficiary of those votes said they weren't his. And yes, there was major anger. And yes, there was major frustration. And yes, there were major protests. But you know what didn't happen? An insurrection that included the breach of the Capitol Building, the assault and murder of police, and a President egging on his followers to more violence. Now, maybe that's because Al Gore conceded even though everyone urged him to fight the results, but in any case, here was a case where almost everyone knew the election did not represent the will of the people or how they intended to vote and yet still the violent radical left did not try to overthrow the government. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Llevron said: Yea the Pelosi thing is definitely a litmus test for me going forward. They can’t get off it. Defies the programming They generally go to great lengths to make everything out to be the fault of democrats. But just bypassing all that is clear as day in regards to Trump and his conspirators and solely worrying about whether Nancy appropriately gauged the Republican outrage to the extent they would storm the capitol building, and whether or not she asked for something she may not even have the authority to ask for is frankly unbelievable even for that ilk. Edited June 13, 2022 by BatteredFanSyndrome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 1 hour ago, FLSkinz83 said: Doesn't congress oversee the Capitol Police Board? And who's in charge of DC police? Bowser? Everyone knew trouble was coming. They knew thousands of white supremacist MAGA lovers were coming to town. They did nothin. Jesus, go back a few dozen pages. It's been discussed ad nauseam. Stop this non-sense. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airborneskins Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 18 minutes ago, Ball Security said: What recommendations would you give to improve physical security while balancing out a sense of open government? I recall reading a Garfield biography. During his time citizens could walk into the White House and ask to speak to the President without an appointment. How wild is that? Since I do not work for the Capital Police, nor am I familiar with their policies, I cannot comment on what I would do. I know it seems like a cop out. However, the discussions that you do hear are not about physical security. What I do know is that it is extremely difficult to walk the line of security and politics. Even at the White House, convenience trumps (no pun intended) security. Physical Security improvements were (and continune to be) improved after the Garfield incident. Unfortunately, protection can sometimes be more reactionary then proactive. 12 minutes ago, Llevron said: Those steps are absolutely physical security related. Physical security isn’t just barriers to entry, or more guard presence. Not to belabor the point, but look up some of the National standards if you disagree. The one I’m currently studying is called NIST. Procedure is often seen as more important than barriers to physical entry. Those are common security controls. They are the easy ones. It’s the ones behind them that make a target harder to attack. Yes. Procedure, and how to react to events are very important, and sometimes more important than having barriers. However, if you do not have the physical measures in place (not manpower related) to counter (or deter) something, your procedures can sometimes be thrown out the window. Having a CDU team (or multiple teams) on call at any given time is a good thing, however, with CDU teams being limited in size, how does that help when "attacks" are coming from all different directions? Physical Security measures should be in place to direct an attack of that nature to areas where you can better utilize your CDU teams. 11 minutes ago, Fergasun said: People have marched, protested, etc. in DC well before many of us were born. There are many days where protestors mass outside... I can't remember what it looked like during Obamacare. No group ever felt entitled enough to jump the barricades and storm the Capitol until January 6.... unless you count the redcoats during the War of 1812? Sure, there was the shooter in the late 1990s, the bomb in the 1970s and the Puerto Rican nationalists in thre 1950s. Those acts of violence were a bit different, ie. lone wolf. Foreign armies, terrorists and lone wolves, and January 6. In hindsight no one thought this could happen, because we really expected our political opposites to respect the rule of law. I say this because I question the need for increased physical security. The right to peacably assemble and peacefully protest is one of the reasons that America is great. However, you need to be prepared in case things do go sideways. In this day and age, with crazy extremists on both sides, and counter protestors just wanting to cause havoc (on both sides), Increasing physical security is just one way to be prepared. If we allow something like this to occur again, without increasing the physical security of the most vulnerable locations, the next time could have a much different outcome. Again, I am not bashing the capital police and their security. I know first hand how difficult it is to protect the leaders of this country when they choose convenience over security. It is extremely difficult. I just hope that there is a legitimate conversation occuring about how to keep this from happening again, and how to be ready for it if it does. Because all that I seem to see / read / hear is people (from both sides) bashing the other political party about an insurrection and who is at fault, not about how to stop it from occuring again. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLSkinz83 Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 Believe it or not, I've mostly enjoyed my first foray into the political conversation on this forum. JDR and I are meeting up for drinks. HTTR! 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 (edited) 37 minutes ago, 88Comrade2000 said: There is no team called the Redskins. The Skins ended in 2020. Time of death might have been 2020, but the skins entered the coma they never woke up from in 1999. There was that one brief moment when everyone thought they'd recover, but even St. Joe couldn't pull off a resurrection. Edited June 13, 2022 by Burgold 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wiggles Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 1 minute ago, FLSkinz83 said: JDR and I are meeting up for drinks. Tell him I says when it comes to football he needs to....... DO...... Better! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ball Security Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 10 minutes ago, FLSkinz83 said: Believe it or not, I've mostly enjoyed my first foray into the political conversation on this forum. JDR and I are meeting up for drinks. HTTR! You’re telling me you haven’t been drinking all this time? 🥁 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLSkinz83 Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 4 minutes ago, Ball Security said: You’re telling me you haven’t been drinking all this time? 🥁 Pre-gaming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 17 minutes ago, Burgold said: Time of death might have been 2020, but the skins ended the coma they never woke up from in 1999. There was that one brief moment when everyone thought they'd recover, but even St. Joe couldn't pull off a resurrection. Actually, Skins died in March 93; when Gibbs retired. The haven’t been the same since and the 2 instruments post death of destruction were Norv Turner getting hired in 94 and Dan Snyder buying the team in 99. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 35 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said: Again, why are you so concerned about whether or not Pelosi properly gauged whether or not there was going to be an unprecedented attack? There is exactly one path that leads someone to standing in a thread discussing an attempted installation of a dictator, muttering "But Nancy Pelosi..." It starts with a person who still possesses enough awareness of reality, to recognize that an armed mob storming the Capital building intent on reversing an election so the loser can stay in power anyway, won't sit well with the people who voted against the loser. So, he can't just flat out endorse the actions of the mob. But he wants to, anyway. And this conflict, leads to a plan. "I know. I'll frantically search till I can find something, no matter how trivial, that I can kind of imply that somebody on the other team did wrong." In short, show me somebody who mentions Nancy Pelosi in this thread, and I'll show you somebody who's knowingly trying to defend a systematic attack on democracy, that in this one case resulted in a bad look. "Well, yeah, a Gun Nut just murdered 19 elementary school children with the over the counter weapon that I fully intend to keep flooding the country with. But somebody should have fixed the latch on that one door." 6 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma There Goes That Man Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 1 hour ago, FLSkinz83 said: I've acknowledged that she doesn't the authority. Is she not allowed to ask or suggest? I'm not trolling. The idea that this never happened before and they didn't think it would get this bad is a lame argument. They knew thousands of people would be there. And if you want to blame Trump for getting people riled up, go ahead. Bottom line - The security was greatly lacking and most people don't seem to care why or don't want to ask the questions because they are so obsessed with Trump. everybody is picking on you but they don’t understand and have never been in a position to understand. they simply don’t care. When my house was broken into, the biggest concern the police had was to sit me at a table in a dimly lit room and repeatedly ask me for hours why I only had ADT and didn’t also have a fence around my yard, flood lights, a guard dog, and automated hair fire torch for when they kick the door open ala Home Alone. After all, the police correctly understand the biggest question that needs to be asked when a break in in occurs is “why didn’t you stop it better” and the fault always lies with the victim and not the burglar silly libs 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, FLSkinz83 said: I've acknowledged that she doesn't the authority. Is she not allowed to ask or suggest? I'm not trolling. The idea that this never happened before and they didn't think it would get this bad is a lame argument. They knew thousands of people would be there. And if you want to blame Trump for getting people riled up, go ahead. Bottom line - The security was greatly lacking and most people don't seem to care why or don't want to ask the questions because they are so obsessed with Trump. I do want to point out that a lot has been covered. There is a 100+ page report out there. Much of what you are saying that people don't care or don't want to ask questions about has been covered in detail. https://www.rules.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Jan 6 HSGAC Rules Report.pdf She's said she leaves the security up to the security experts. That certainly seems reasonable, no? I'm sure the police would love to be told how to run security by a politician with no experience on running security. From there, the issue isn't so much that Trump riled them up (on scene) it is that it was pre-planned and that wasn't well communicated to the relevant people (though I'm not saying that Trump riling people up on the scene was a completely non-factor and I think what he did BEFORE hand was even more important). (See the sections of the linked pdf on Situational Information Report). Essentially, the FBI put out one level of warning that the CP via e-mail that wasn't seen or taken seriously and didn't put out another higher level warning that would have more likely gotten the attention of the higher ups and didn't even bother to follow up that somebody was paying attention to what they did put out. Sort of like 9/11, the intelligence that this wasn't likely to be just a normal protest existed (the FBI had the information) but it wasn't communicated in a timely and detailed manner to the relevant people. Essentially, I believe most of the questions you are asking have been answered. The current hearing is more about why people showed up with a plan to attack the Capitol then why there wasn't better security in place because that has been addressed. (It seems 5 minutes of google could have saved you all a lot of back and forth.) Edited June 13, 2022 by PeterMP 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CousinsCowgirl84 Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 (edited) 19 minutes ago, PeterMP said: I do want to point out that a lot has been covered. There is a 100+ page report out there. Much of what you are saying that people don't care or don't want to ask questions about has been covered in detail. https://www.rules.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Jan 6 HSGAC Rules Report.pdf She's said she leaves the security up to the security experts. That certainly seems reasonable, no? I'm sure the police would love to be told how to run security by a politician with no experience on running security. From there, the issue isn't so much that Trump riled them up (on scene) it is that it was pre-planned and that wasn't well communicated to the relevant people (though I'm not saying that Trump riling people up on the scene was a completely non-factor and I think what he did BEFORE hand was even more important). (See the sections of the linked pdf on Situational Information Report). Essentially, the FBI put out one level of warning that the CP via e-mail that wasn't seen or taken seriously and didn't put out another higher level warning that would have more likely gotten the attention of the higher ups and didn't even bother to follow up that somebody was paying attention to what they did put out. Sort of like 9/11, the intelligence that this wasn't likely to be just a normal protest existed (the FBI had the information) but it wasn't communicated in a timely and detailed manner to the relevant people. Essentially, I believe most of the questions you are asking have been answered. The current hearing is more about why people showed up with a plan to attack the Capitol then why there wasn't better security in place because that has been addressed. (It seems 5 minutes of google could have saved you all a lot of back and forth.) In fairness I don’t think the media does a great job of covering those answers. Fox News for instance didn’t cover any of the Jan 6 commission reports even though it was led by a bipartisan group. And cnn just seems to bounce from headline to headline at a superficial level. 95 percent of people aren’t going to read a report, expecting them too is a little arrogant. So I think it is perfectly reasonable for a layman or someone who is just peripherally familiar with politics and government to ask these questions. Edited June 13, 2022 by CousinsCowgirl84 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted June 13, 2022 Share Posted June 13, 2022 6 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said: Fox News for instance didn’t cover any of the Jan 6 commission reports even though it was led by a bipartisan group. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now