Does he know something we don't?

It's just scaremongering. We need the vast NSA spying operation and immense military-industrial complex because otherwise a nuclear bomb could go off at any moment.

www.getelastic.com/lisa-simpson-gets-why...not-imply-causation/

He'll probably set it off himself - a bit of good old false flag!

Yeah the corrupt people in power in America don't invade their neighbours,they pay others to do it and have a coup d'etat with a bit of drug trafficking for good measure.

What a funny little comedian that man is,his scripts are terrible though.

Why manhattan? bit of an odd thing to say.

So he's more worried about a nuclear bomb going off in a big financial city than he is about one going off in his own city.....
what a load of bullshit.

vimeo.com/20355767

wake_up_bomb wrote:
I don't see it as scaremongering at all.
If he wanted to scaremonger he could have suggested a massive threat from Russia (falsely).
He didn't (as there is not), and I think his comment was actually a reassurance.

The idea that any government has to justify mass surveillance is ridiculous - what is going to stop it? Who is going to stop it?
There is no alternative to vote for - you yourself don't vote.

Hemingway wrote: Yes, it's always reassuring to know that a nuclear weapon could go off at any moment!

I saw it as saying they will continue to direct efforts against the threat of domestic terrorism rather than a non-existent threat of external nuclear attack.

That is the stance they have held since 2001. I believe that if they wanted to scaremonger as you have claimed they could have jumped on the opportunity of a double threat from Russia and domestic terrorism.

They didn't.

Hemingway wrote: If you're still sucking up that "threat of domestic terrorism" bullshit, Ernest, good luck to you.

Quality Street wrote: He is starting to look as vacant and spaced out as Bush used to.I doubt he even remembers his own name anymore without autocue to remind him.

Hemingway wrote:
he should be most afraid of cops and peanuts since they kill more than terrorists in the US.
But he's not is he? Because.... he's scaremongering.

A bit more of the same press conference.

Quality Street wrote:
He doesn't really come across as a great motivational speaker!
I'd like to see more of that kind of reaction to these conniving bastards.

He's been watching those best Korean movies

Am I the only one that thinks that a bomb in Manhattan at the intersection of Wall Street and the Federal Reserve Building, along with another one halfway between Congress and the White House, wouldn't be a disaster so much as a Fresh Start? Would hide all that non-existent gold rather nicely........sorry...being sarcastic

If I anticipated unprecedented doom and disaster in my life my Dr would have me sectioned, if the POTUS projects it onto a nation it's in the interests of national security!

Space Bandit wrote:
Or they are doing their job?

wake_up_bomb wrote:
I am not "sucking up" anything. It's obvious that there is a benefit to the governments of the world to exaggerate the threat, it is equally obvious that there must be a threat of some degree unless you believe seven billion people are incapable of independent action or even thoughts.

Hemingway wrote: Hemingway wrote:
Of course there are benefits to people in positions of power to have a population that feels threatened by external forces. If they look to their government, law enforces, secret services and military for protection they are less likely to pay attention to domestic issues and more likely to accept authority and control and even oppression and loss of liberty. This has been true for centuries and its why North Korea tells its population that they are under siege and its why we have the Patriot Act and its counterparts across Europe.

This is not a benefit that we share with our rulers. On the contrary. And it is morally repugnant. You can call it scaremongering, exaggerating threats, or being alarmist. It is the same thing. Talking about a hypothetical nuke in NY as the POTUS is alarmist, irresponsible and most of all is an attempt to justify the illegal and immoral spying carried out by the NSA and GCHQ. It is also an attempt to justify extra-legal assassinations, renditions, imprisonment without trial, torture, bombing of civilians, funding of terrorism. organisng coups, the persecution of whistle-blowers and illegal wars.Hemingway wrote: Their job should be to pritect and serve the people they swore to: us.
Not to protect the interest of the miliitary industrial complex, banks and their own power.Hemingway wrote: Indeed there is one threat. Us. And for the reason you have given: indipedent action and thought