The United Police States of Amerika

Nice. Superbowl 2011 gives us a gigantic show of force from our Benign and Almighty Protectors. Just read the article.

-----------------------------------------------------------------


Robots, guns, horses highlight Super Bowl security demonstration
Parking lot A at Rangers Ballpark in Arlington was a bad guy's nightmare on Friday, as officers from 12 law enforcement agencies -- including the FBI, ATF and ICE -- showed off the equipment they will use to secure Cowboys Stadium on Super Bowl Sunday.

The event, billed as the Super Bowl XLV Joint Information Center Public Safety Media Day, drew everything from bomb dogs and robots to mounted patrol officers to haz-mat teams.

The coolest demonstration I saw was the Arlington Fire Department's bomb robot, which has a long official name but which I -- as a technology fan -- would like to call Awesome.

Arlington firefighters remotely helped the robot pick up a "suspicious backpack" and stuff it into a container that can withstand a pretty big bomb blast. (See short video below.)

The equipment will on site Super Bowl Sunday, just in case.

Special Agent Matthew Segedy, senior SWAT team leader for the Dallas field office of the FBI, had some high-powered weapons and sniper scopes on display. Segedy said FBI agents will be stationed inside Cowboys Stadium for the Super Bowl, in case of emergency.
He said agents from the Houston field office are helping out, just as Dallas agents helped out in 2004 when the Super Bowl was in Houston.

The Arlington Fire Department folks were also on site during the NBA All-Star Game at Cowboys Stadium and the World Series at Rangers Ballpark. (It's been a rather big year for sports in Arlington, huh?)

But Segedy said the FBI was not involved in those events because they were not at the same security threat level as a Super Bowl -- which is a Level 1 national security event.

--------------------------------------------------------------

And he calls it awesome. I call it creepy. The fact is, if a terrorist sneaks in with a bomb, all the snipers in the world won't do any good. In fact, come to think of it, what idiot would try to snipe an individual in such a crowded place?! Then there's the massive amounts of security personnel decked out like the United States' freaking Army. Personally, I'm not a football fan, but if I were, I sure wouldn't want to walk past a few rows of faceless paramilitary goons with riot shields and M-4s.

The Arizona Massacre

Has anyone else noticed anything REALLY odd about the reporting on it? Every single article I've read on the subject from a major news outlet makes no mention of the fact that at least two of the people who stopped the shooter were armed. They felt confident in going after him because they had their guns with them, and one opened fire. Why no mention of this fact?

Another issue - "right-wing rhetoric" is constantly blamed for this guy's rampage. That makes perfect sense, right? After all, he made videos about the gold standard! Of course, they were also completely incoherent ramblings that made no degree of sense, and there's the minor fact that most of those who knew him described him as left-wing. One of his favorite books is the Communist Manifesto, not exactly a right-wing staple. His target was a "blue-dog" Democrat who is opposed to gun regulation. BUT HE MADE VIDEOS IN FAVOR OF THE GOLD STANDARD!!! Well, I'm convinced. Who else here is willing to bet that even if he had never heard Rush Limbaugh or Sarah Palin he still would have gone ballistic? He was a deranged lunatic, and most of those who knew him KNEW that he was dangerous and violent.

Even better, they're now wanting to ban 33-round magazines for handguns. The fact is, he would have gone on a rampage ANYWAY, even with standard 10-round mags. It's called "reloading" - it actually doesn't take that long with a Glock. Speaking of which, sales of the Glock 19 have skyrocketed. Get 'em while they're available - and legal.

Some thoughts on WikiLeaks

I cannot believe that I haven't posted on this subject yet. We all know what the statists say - "WikiLeaks is a threat to national security! Julian Assange is a traitor!"

First of all, it is NOT a threat, in any way, to national security. The only thing that MIGHT be dangerous in some vague way are the documents listing "vital" locations across the world. They consist almost entirely of mines (palladium, cobalt, etc.) and undersea cables, with a few other locations that aren't in either category. My thoughts are:

#1: Just how do you expect terrorists to get to undersea cables?
#2: If terrorists thought strategically, most of these places would have been attacked already. Listing them isn't doing any damage.
#3: Terrorists DON'T think strategically. They want to kill as many people as possible, and visibly destroy as much as possible. Attacking a mine, no matter how important or how valuable, is not going to achieve the same effect on the public as bombing buildings, turning them into very visible ruins, which causes TERROR.

I'm also still curious as to how Assange could be a "traitor," considering that he's not a citizen of the United States.