Jump to content

So What, If Any Protection Should Be Afforded To Pamela Geller?


Recommended Posts

Laughable reason and pathetic response.....Really though, pathetic

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The only pathetic response is the person telling others to blow them, because they are upset by someone's response to their call to war, which they get to sit out of. Doing your "time" does not give you the right to start crying for war. ISIS is not our problem. We are not the world police.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 192
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The only pathetic response is the person telling others to blow them, because they are upset by someone's response to their call to war, which they get to sit out of. Doing your "time" does not give you the right to start crying for war. ISIS is not our problem. We are not the world police.

You're getting your dove talking points tangled with reality. I never said or even inferred that we should be the world police, but how about our government executing one responsibility that it is obligated to do: protecting it's citizenry from foreign hostels. So that you don't further blather up my meaning, foreign hostels who have issued the intent to kill an American citizen on American soil. The fact that that somehow equates to world policing for you should tell you what type nonsense you're regurgitating.

and the fact that I served most assuredly does gives me the right to say what I believe we should do to protect ourselves. The difference between you and I (one of many) is that I also believe that people such as yourself, who choose not to serve also have a voice in this conversation. I don't agree with you, but you have your opinion and I have mine, but you can still go f*** yourself (better?), for telling me that I have no right to say what I think we should do militarily after I've already done it.

Also as far as the other idiocy you're baaing: ISIS is not our problem?

Purported ISIS warning claims terror cells in place in 15 states

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/05/06/purported-isis-warning-claims-terror-cells-in-place-in-15-states/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're getting your dove talking points tangled with reality. I never said or even inferred that we should be the world police, but how about our government executing one responsibility that it is obligated to do: protecting it's citizenry from foreign hostels. So that you don't further blather up my meaning, foreign hostels who have issued the intent to kill an American citizen on American soil. The fact that that somehow equates to world policing for you should tell you what type nonsense you're regurgitating.

and the fact that I served most assuredly does gives me the right to say what I believe we should do to protect ourselves. The difference between you and I (one of many) is that I also believe that people such as yourself, who choose not to serve also have a voice in this conversation. I don't agree with you, but you have your opinion and I have mine, but you can still go f*** yourself (better?), for telling me that I have no right to say what I think we should do militarily after I've already done it.

Also as far as the other idiocy you're baaing: ISIS is not our problem?

Purported ISIS warning claims terror cells in place in 15 states

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/05/06/purported-isis-warning-claims-terror-cells-in-place-in-15-states/

Holy **** bob, did a clydesdale piss in your cornflakes this morning?

Also, do you not think the Department of Homeland Security, the CIA, FBI, and every other agency charged with defending this country's borders are not aware of and investigating vigorously these claims of an alleged ISIS presence on US soil?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy **** bob, did a clydesdale piss in your cornflakes this morning?

Also, do you not think the Department of Homeland Security, the CIA, FBI, and every other agency charged with defending this country's borders are not aware of and investigating vigorously these claims of an alleged ISIS presence on US soil?

I never said they weren't, I started a thread to ask if people here could agree that this person should be protected, and stated my opinion that we should take this latest direct provocation as reason enough to formally declare war on and attack ISIS at it's core.

I don't get what is so harsh about asking that? If you're referring to my tone with that other guy, I was pretty clear as to why his comments rubbed me wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said they weren't, I started a thread to ask if people here could agree that this person should be protected, and stated my opinion that we should take this latest direct provocation as reason enough to formally declare war on and attack ISIS at it's core.

I don't get what is so harsh about asking that? If you're referring to my tone with that other guy, I was pretty clear as to why his comments rubbed me wrong.

How is she not being protected now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is she not being protected now?

I think she is trying to provide security for herself. My question was, does anyone here agree that security should be provided for her. I have no idea of the level or competency of the security detail she can afford (if any), but I think she should be offered protection in the face of a clear and immediate threat from an enemy terrorist army with purported agents in 15 states.

My opinion is not written in stone, but I think it is the obligation of our government to protect it's citizens in a situation such as this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said they weren't, I started a thread to ask if people here could agree that this person should be protected, and stated my opinion that we should take this latest direct provocation as reason enough to formally declare war on and attack ISIS at it's core.

I don't get what is so harsh about asking that? If you're referring to my tone with that other guy, I was pretty clear as to why his comments rubbed me wrong.

Yeah, harsh was you telling someone else to blow you, and then go **** themselves, in two successive posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think she is trying to provide security for herself. My question was, does anyone here agree that security should be provided for her. I have no idea of the level or competency of the security detail she can afford (if any), but I think she should be offered protection in the face of a clear and immediate threat from an enemy terrorist army with purported agents in 15 states.

My opinion is not written in stone, but I think it is the obligation of our government to protect it's citizens in a situation such as this.

Not above the protection anyone else would get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think she is trying to provide security for herself. My question was, does anyone here agree that security should be provided for her. I have no idea of the level or competency of the security detail she can afford (if any), but I think she should be offered protection in the face of a clear and immediate threat from an enemy terrorist army with purported agents in 15 states.

My opinion is not written in stone, but I think it is the obligation of our government to protect it's citizens in a situation such as this.

If ISIS operatives were active in 15 states, the government, who spies on all of us, would sniff it out and deal with it. That would be protecting all of us, not just someone whose mouth is writing checks her *** can't cash.

ISIS operatives are a threat to us all, not just her. So they should protect all of us by seeing is this is legit, and, if so, stamping it out immediately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Protected how? Secret service?

The Secret Service would not be an option. They provide security for elected officials, their families, and "major candidates". I think a protective custody option would be more realistic, if she refuses, then it's on her, but the option should be offered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also I did serve and I think it's irresponsible to send our sons and daughters to die to protect a moron who instigated this.

This was far from the only provocation.....I have to a goo to a meeting, don't take the lack of response from here as ignoring. I'll continue this later if you're interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm fine with my tax dollars protecting any US citizen from an invading terrorist group. Really and truly, because I don't agree with this person's action either.

Well, they already do.

If a government security detail was provided to her, ISIS wins. They will then make these threats against all kinds of people, and then the government has to provide them with security details, and if they don't, it's a huge deal, they're protecting some, but not others.

The proper way to handle this is to allow our current homeland counter terrorism procedures deal with this. Again, she's not anymore special than any other US citizen. Stamping out the threat protects her and everyone else.

And what if they lied? What if they said they were going to kill her, but they kill someone else instead? Then the government looks dumb. If they exist, you deal with them, and then everyone is safe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also I get the point gafan was making precisely because I have served. The decision to mobilize troops is something that affects the lives of many people who voluntarily signed up to protect us. Many don't ever come home. It's not something that should be taken lightly, especially over this idiot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think she is trying to provide security for herself. My question was, does anyone here agree that security should be provided for her. I have no idea of the level or competency of the security detail she can afford (if any), but I think she should be offered protection in the face of a clear and immediate threat from an enemy terrorist army with purported agents in 15 states.

My opinion is not written in stone, but I think it is the obligation of our government to protect it's citizens in a situation such as this.

I think the FBI and police are plenty, as far as government provided security are concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...