Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Located in states and major urban areas throughout the country, fusion centers are uniquely situated to empower front-line law enforcement, public safety, fire service, emergency response, public health, critical infrastructure protection, and private sector security personnel to understand local implications of national intelligence, thus enabling local officials to better protect their communities. Fusion centers provide interdisciplinary expertise and situational awareness to inform decision-making at all levels of government. They conduct analysis and facilitate information sharing while assisting law enforcement and homeland security partners in preventing, protecting against, and responding to crime and terrorism.

[url]
http://www.dhs.gov/state-and-major-urban-area-fusion-centers[/url]

 Jihadin wrote:

Located in states and major urban areas throughout the country, fusion centers are uniquely situated to empower front-line law enforcement, public safety, fire service, emergency response, public health, critical infrastructure protection, and private sector security personnel to understand local implications of national intelligence, thus enabling local officials to better protect their communities. Fusion centers provide interdisciplinary expertise and situational awareness to inform decision-making at all levels of government. They conduct analysis and facilitate information sharing while assisting law enforcement and homeland security partners in preventing, protecting against, and responding to crime and terrorism.

[url]
http://www.dhs.gov/state-and-major-urban-area-fusion-centers[/url]

So, I'll need to fire weinerdog shaped balls of plasma at those first. Got it. KAMEHAMEHADOG!

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 whembly wrote:
@Jihadin: What about dem Fusion Centers we've been hearing about?

If I have to put on an earring and fuse with Frazz, not even Chuck Norris will be able to save you.

Unless you mean the nuclear type. And it's everyone's god given right to have a tokamak in their basement. You can have my plasma containment unit when you pry it from my 6000 degrees K dead fingers.

Google up "Fusion Center"... put on your tinfoil while you're at it...

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Its cold up there..........but they have oil........

You know, a war with China would be an excellent excuse to annex Canada.

Only if the Chinese invade Anchorage first.

 Coolyo294 wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Its cold up there..........but they have oil........

You know, a war with China would be an excellent excuse to annex Canada.

Only if the Chinese invade Anchorage first.

Um... have you been to Anchorage?

Every one of 'em are packing heat... EVERY. ONE. OF. THEM.

Sure, there's only like 300k living in Anchorage (something like 700k in whole state)... but, the Moose will kick the gak out of the Chinese.

Just saying...

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 whembly wrote:
@Jihadin: What about dem Fusion Centers we've been hearing about?

If I have to put on an earring and fuse with Frazz, not even Chuck Norris will be able to save you.

Unless you mean the nuclear type. And it's everyone's god given right to have a tokamak in their basement. You can have my plasma containment unit when you pry it from my 6000 degrees K dead fingers.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.

Wait, what are we talking about again?

 whembly wrote:

Google up "Fusion Center"... put on your tinfoil while you're at it...

Meh. Makes sense. When I was an elected official, it was one of the little things they had us do, so that there would be a clear chain of command in an 'emergency'. This is old news.

Coolyo294 wrote:Only if the Chinese invade Anchorage first.

The Aleutians should do. I'll bring the T-51bs, you bring the thermonuclear holocaust.

The Alasken comes out mostly at night...mostly....

 d-usa wrote:

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.

Wait, what are we talking about again?

Not sure. I was talking about talking about the right to keep and bare doomsday devices. The forums laughed at me, but now *I* BARON IVEAGH will do the laughing! BWA HA HA HA HA!



You don't need no oil,
nor a tokamak coil
solar stations provide Earth with juice.

Power beams are sublime,
so no one will mind
if we cook the occasional goose.

These arguments are holy without merit, in any kind of fact, it is pure racism against President Obama, if a white democrat got in (ala Bill Clinton or equivalent). We would not here this kind of rhetoric. If this is the ONLY argument the right wingers can put up "If you elect who we don't like there will be civil war" I truly pray the President Obama gets in office for four more years, because the alternative I bare not even thinking about, this stuff is scary. The objections the right has against women's rights to abortion, free access to birth control and the right to have ultimate say over their lives and their reproductive capabilities is truly scary.

I have been raised by parents who believe in equality for all people and that the debates that are going on in the states at the moment have very little traction else were in the world.

Galdos wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
they also are studying the possibilities of an alien invasion, a zombie outbreak, and invading canada again. Just because they are examine possibilities does not mean they are even remotely likely to occur.

I read somewhere that we've had a contingency plan to invade Canada in the books since the late 1700s.

Contingency? The US has invaded Canada twice already lol.

Neither went very well. Most eventful thing to come from it was the destruction of Toranto White House burned to the ground.

Fixed that for you.

whembly wrote:

 Coolyo294 wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Its cold up there..........but they have oil........

You know, a war with China would be an excellent excuse to annex Canada.

Only if the Chinese invade Anchorage first.

Um... have you been to Anchorage?

Every one of 'em are packing heat... EVERY. ONE. OF. THEM.

That sounds about right. I know that if I lived in the middle of Kodiak terrotory, I would never carry less than a .357 magnum, and even then the only reason I wouldn't carry anything even larger than that is because I'm a wuss and can't reliably hit anything if the kick is greater than 180 grain.

 azazel the cat wrote:

Fixed that for you.

I dunno, the battle of Put-In-Bay was pretty eventful. It's a rare day you see the Royal Navy pretty conclusively handed their ass.

BaronIveagh wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

Fixed that for you.

I dunno, the battle of Put-In-Bay was pretty eventful. It's a rare day you see the Royal Navy pretty conclusively handed their ass.

Sometimes they even kicked their own ass!

 mattyrm wrote:
If there was a civil war now, wouldn't the whole rest of the world help out?

I remember the Confederates wrongly thought that the British would assist them.

But I reckon if its most of America vs the Young earth, racist, science denying hicks that make up about 35 million people in the US, then pretty much everyone else in the world would want to pitch in this time..

Even France and Japan!

Couldn't help but think other nations would jump in. If not for economic interests then to knock down the US a rank or 2.

Wonder what China would want to do? Stay out of it just make money out of a "lend lease" program.

Help the US government or try to knock the US into the stone age?

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

Located in states and major urban areas throughout the country, fusion centers are uniquely situated to empower front-line law enforcement, public safety, fire service, emergency response, public health, critical infrastructure protection, and private sector security personnel to understand local implications of national intelligence, thus enabling local officials to better protect their communities. Fusion centers provide interdisciplinary expertise and situational awareness to inform decision-making at all levels of government. They conduct analysis and facilitate information sharing while assisting law enforcement and homeland security partners in preventing, protecting against, and responding to crime and terrorism.

[url]
http://www.dhs.gov/state-and-major-urban-area-fusion-centers[/url]

So, I'll need to fire weinerdog shaped balls of plasma at those first. Got it. KAMEHAMEHADOG!

I think you'll find all your best plasma rifles are wiener dog powered.

 Poppabear wrote:
These arguments are holy without merit, in any kind of fact, it is pure racism against President Obama, if a white democrat got in (ala Bill Clinton or equivalent). We would not here this kind of rhetoric. If this is the ONLY argument the right wingers can put up "If you elect who we don't like there will be civil war" I truly pray the President Obama gets in office for four more years, because the alternative I bare not even thinking about, this stuff is scary. The objections the right has against women's rights to abortion, free access to birth control and the right to have ultimate say over their lives and their reproductive capabilities is truly scary.

I have been raised by parents who believe in equality for all people and that the debates that are going on in the states at the moment have very little traction else were in the world.

Pure racism? I guess that's why EVERY poll taken in any state in the US, regardless of lattitude shows a majority of people liking Obama on a personal level, but disliking how ineffective his policies are. It's funny, because in your clumsy attempt to paint 80 million people as racists, you show what an ignorant bigot you yourself are.

Also the 'right' doesn't have a problem with women's right to access birth control, we have a problem with being forced to pay for it. If as a Catholic, you find abortion abhorrent, you should not be forced to subsidize a practice you consider shockingly immoral and sacrilegious. Your position would require that a woman's right to have other people pay for her day after pill trumps the freedom of religion for the largest single religious group in the country. How is that equality? No one is saying that they can't have access to the drugs. We are saying people of faith should not be forced by the government to do something they consider evil. Let's not mince words- you would abrogate the freedom of religion, a natural right of all Americans.

And I can think of a half-dozen 'white democrats' who are far more despised than Obama in the eyes of the right. It's funny how you don't even pause to consider Obama's background as a radical racist... I guess we can't talk about that though, since it's the wrong kind of racism.

Actually... yeah. A lot of it IS about racism, both against blacks and against Muslims-- the reason why so many people try to label Obama a Muslim is because that way they can bash him harder (also because he's black, and apparently darker skin tone is associated with Islam with many people).

I've seen white people with tans that are darker than Obama.

 Silverthorne wrote:
Also the 'right' doesn't have a problem with women's right to access birth control, we have a problem with being forced to pay for it. If as a Catholic, you find abortion abhorrent, you should not be forced to subsidize a practice you consider shockingly immoral and sacrilegious. Your position would require that a woman's right to have other people pay for her day after pill trumps the freedom of religion for the largest single religious group in the country. How is that equality? No one is saying that they can't have access to the drugs. We are saying people of faith should not be forced by the government to do something they consider evil. Let's not mince words- you would abrogate the freedom of religion, a natural right of all Americans.

So you are happy for people who don't have the same gods as a group who doesn't like contraception, abortion etc to have their (possibly non-) religious freedoms quashed because group A doesn't like it?

Are you happy that blacks can now vote, women can own property, get jobs and so on? Pretty sure all those were frowned on by large groups of people, often large religious groups, at some point in history. Just because the rules handed down to mankind via some stone tablets, or visions, or however your god chooses to communicate with his followers says "thou shalt not", doesn't mean everyone else should have to suffer from it.

You'd rather everyone pay for child support, foster homes etc for the millions of unwanted children that not providing "free" or subsadised contraception, birth control etc would result in? Because I can tell you right now that the cost for supporting that would be orders of magnitude higher than the current provisions.

Besides, the seperation of church and state is to ensure that everyone is treated the same, no matter what way they face to pray, not to enforce one group's rules on everyone else.

 Melissia wrote:
Actually... yeah. A lot of it IS about racism, both against blacks and against Muslims-- the reason why so many people try to label Obama a Muslim is because that way they can bash him harder (also because he's black, and apparently darker skin tone is associated with Islam with many people).

Yet those same people voted for him in 2008. Strange...

The charge of racism has been thrown around so much recently for such nonsensical things its meaning is lost. Disagreement with Oabam policies means you are racist, and should feel bad.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 Silverthorne wrote:
Also the 'right' doesn't have a problem with women's right to access birth control, we have a problem with being forced to pay for it. If as a Catholic, you find abortion abhorrent, you should not be forced to subsidize a practice you consider shockingly immoral and sacrilegious. Your position would require that a woman's right to have other people pay for her day after pill trumps the freedom of religion for the largest single religious group in the country. How is that equality? No one is saying that they can't have access to the drugs. We are saying people of faith should not be forced by the government to do something they consider evil. Let's not mince words- you would abrogate the freedom of religion, a natural right of all Americans.

So you are happy for people who don't have the same gods as a group who doesn't like contraception, abortion etc to have their (possibly non-) religious freedoms quashed because group A doesn't like it?

Are you happy that blacks can now vote, women can own property, get jobs and so on? Pretty sure all those were frowned on by large groups of people, often large religious groups, at some point in history. Just because the rules handed down to mankind via some stone tablets, or visions, or however your god chooses to communicate with his followers says "thou shalt not", doesn't mean everyone else should have to suffer from it.

You'd rather everyone pay for child support, foster homes etc for the millions of unwanted children that not providing "free" or subsadised contraception, birth control etc would result in? Because I can tell you right now that the cost for supporting that would be orders of magnitude higher than the current provisions.

Besides, the seperation of church and state is to ensure that everyone is treated the same, no matter what way they face to pray, not to enforce one group's rules on everyone else.

Do you support abortion on demand at any point in the pregnancy? Are you in support of partial birth abortion? What about medical care for babies that survive partial birth abortion? Guess which President does, and which party does.

Both sides are extreme and/or crazy.

 azazel the cat wrote:

Sometimes they even kicked their own ass!

Considering that every ship in my BFG fleet is named after something embarrassing, stupid, or dishonorable the RN has done....

Victoria, Bulwark, Implacable, and Courageous all have spots...

Abortion is a tricky issue. I see what both sides say and I think both have merit, or at least one side isn't totally fething stupid like when they talk about gay marriage.

Both sides concede an inch in the debate, either, since it'll weaken their position. It isn't that liberals believe in partial birth abortion, but as soon as they say that those are illegitimate they will then lose ground on the issue and have to defend those that question why abortions an hour before they become partial birth abortions aren't also wrong, etc.

Instead of bitching about abortion, why don't those on the right propose an economic and public health policy that would lessen the need for them? Abortion tracks closely to income, neighborhood, and education so why not work to improve those so that there are fewer actual abortions? People against abortion get so focused on it alone that they can't see the forest from the trees.

And, yeah, Silverthorne stop being stupid. Race and racism is a huge part of the modern right in this country. And while I'm not a Christian my reading of the New Testament leads me to believe that Christians should be a lot more upset about all the gross military spending that we do instead of paying for birth control.

You people.

See what I mean. Disagree and you're a racist. hey if TheHammer says, it must be so.

TheHammer wrote:
Abortion is a tricky issue. I see what both sides say and I think both have merit, or at least one side isn't totally fething stupid like when they talk about gay marriage.

Both sides concede an inch in the debate, either, since it'll weaken their position. It isn't that liberals believe in partial birth abortion, but as soon as they say that those are illegitimate they will then lose ground on the issue and have to defend those that question why abortions an hour before they become partial birth abortions aren't also wrong, etc.

Instead of bitching about abortion, why don't those on the right propose an economic and public health policy that would lessen the need for them? Abortion tracks closely to income, neighborhood, and education so why not work to improve those so that there are fewer actual abortions? People against abortion get so focused on it alone that they can't see the forest from the trees.

And, yeah, Silverthorne stop being stupid. Race and racism is a huge part of the modern right in this country. And while I'm not a Christian my reading of the New Testament leads me to believe that Christians should be a lot more upset about all the gross military spending that we do instead of paying for birth control.

You people.

How are you still here?

 AustonT wrote:

How are you still here?

I ask that question every time I see you post, so...


Hammer does have a point. Instead of screaming about abortions, why not address the underlaying issues that lead to them? It seems that a lot of this is trying to come ot terms with the symptom rather than the disease.

It's like gun control: other countries that have similar cultures and gun laws do not seem to have this problem on anywhere near the scale of hte US. So what is the underlying cause?

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

Sometimes they even kicked their own ass!

Considering that every ship in my BFG fleet is named after something embarrassing, stupid, or dishonorable the RN has done....

Victoria, Bulwark, Implacable, and Courageous all have spots...

I'd assume you've got Astute somewhere in there too, right?

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 AustonT wrote:

How are you still here?

I ask that question every time I see you post, so...


Hammer does have a point. Instead of screaming about abortions, why not address the underlaying issues that lead to them? It seems that a lot of this is trying to come ot terms with the symptom rather than the disease.

It's like gun control: other countries that have similar cultures and gun laws do not seem to have this problem on anywhere near the scale of hte US. So what is the underlying cause?

I thought you had me on ignore after I corrected all your fail posts where you blamed autocorrect and websites that don't exist for your own blatant errors and fallacies.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

Hammer does have a point.

TheHammer wrote:
stop being stupid.

Yeah I think I see it now...hey maybe you guys can Skype about how Herbert Hoover wasn't a Progressive?

I stopped reading when I scanned over it and read Ku Klux Kan.

And this is why no one will invade us:
http://awesome.good.is/transparency/web/1207/armed-to-the-teeth/flash.html

If a true civil war breaks out... watch out!

I have complete faith in my body armor.