New 'Dawn' emerging in 2010

New 'Dawn' emerging in 2010

There are 53 comments on the Alamogordo Daily News story from Jan 10, 2010, titled New 'Dawn' emerging in 2010. In it, Alamogordo Daily News reports that:

I enjoy keeping up with all the new Hollywood film releases. It helps me plan my 2010 entertainment needs.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Alamogordo Daily News.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Dave

Cathedral City, CA

#1 Jan 10, 2010
Just what we need - more fear-mongering by the righties. We've already given up our right to privacy thanks to their over-reaction to 9/11. Our right to free speech has been curtailed (anyone who didn't go along with bush's needless invasion of Iraq was assailed as un-American). Now we're supposed to live in fear of the Chinese so the gun toting uber-patriots can take control of our government.
No other country is a threat to take over the United States and anyone who tell you different is doing so to advance their own twisted political view. Unless they're just making a Hollywood movie.
mssl

Ryderwood, WA

#2 Jan 10, 2010
Gotta love the Chinese. Ignore the fact they have one of the worst human rights records, then let them use their human abuse to take our jobs. Now let them buy the country. People in the defense industry in Alamo used to celebrate the A-Bomb. It was needed as a good moral resistance to the 'Red Threat'. Why are those people silent now? So this is what all the money spent on nuclear weapons in New Mexico has come to I guess. Chinese jobs and the destruction of America and Americans. Real patriots, I'm sure.
Ron Jeske

Modesto, CA

#3 Jan 10, 2010
Watching some of the promotions of movies coming to theaters is less than appealing. There is enough violence in the thirty seconds of promo to last most movies a week. Another form of escapism? Maybe so.
Robert Swain

United States

#4 Jan 10, 2010
"...Red Dawn scared the heck out of people in 1984..."

HAH! In your dreams, Mr. Ellsworth. My biggest fear was that the film's director would get signed to make more movies. He did, and somehow "Conan The Barbarian" turned out pretty well. Anyway, "Red Dawn" did not make me fear the possibility of Cuban commies taking my gun from my 'cold dead fingers' as portrayed in the movie...and the bumper sticker. An unintentional comedy, to be sure.
alamo mom

Alamogordo, NM

#5 Jan 10, 2010
Personally I don't see how anyone could overreact to 9/11.
Den-Mark

Ozark, MO

#6 Jan 10, 2010
"The thing that sets American Christians apart from
all other people in the world, is he will die on his feet before he will live on his knees"
George Washington 1777
Fact Oid

Alamogordo, NM

#7 Jan 11, 2010
mssl wrote:
Gotta love the Chinese. Ignore the fact they have one of the worst human rights records, then let them use their human abuse to take our jobs. Now let them buy the country. People in the defense industry in Alamo used to celebrate the A-Bomb. It was needed as a good moral resistance to the 'Red Threat'. Why are those people silent now? So this is what all the money spent on nuclear weapons in New Mexico has come to I guess. Chinese jobs and the destruction of America and Americans. Real patriots, I'm sure.
Thousands of officials have fled China, mostly to the USA, over the past 30 years with some 50 billion dollars in public funds, the China state media said Monday, as the government scrambles to stem the tide of public corruption.

As many as 4,000 officials have disappeared, using criminal gangs, mainly in the United States, to launder their ill-gotten gains, buy real estate and set up false identities, the Global Times said.

The USA allows this occur at its peril.

“I got it back!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!”

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#8 Jan 11, 2010
Dave wrote:
Just what we need - more fear-mongering by the righties. We've already given up our right to privacy thanks to their over-reaction to 9/11. Our right to free speech has been curtailed (anyone who didn't go along with bush's needless invasion of Iraq was assailed as un-American). Now we're supposed to live in fear of the Chinese so the gun toting uber-patriots can take control of our government.
No other country is a threat to take over the United States and anyone who tell you different is doing so to advance their own twisted political view. Unless they're just making a Hollywood movie.
Dave,
I cannot count 1 freedom I have lost since 9/11 NOT 1
I supported the invasion because so may of the opposition in congress did.. And they had the SAME intel, so don't go that route either.. I do not suport it today because we have learned that our Intel (starting with Bush 1 and Clinton) was flawed. I am NEVER called un-american (unless it is some whacked out extremist doing it). YOur parroting of left wing talking points is so transparent, it almost hurts m eyes!
Gorky

Tularosa, NM

#9 Jan 11, 2010
The Partial List

* Roadblocks as part of random searches for drivers who have been drinking or using drugs.
* The extensive use of the military in civilian law enforcement, particularly in the war on drugs.
* Black school children in prince George's County MD are being taught by the police how to behave when stopped or arrested. It is assumed by both school officials and the cops that it will happen.
* The use of handcuffs on persons accused of minor offenses and moving violations.
* Jump-out squads that leap from police vehicles and search nearby citizens.
* Much greater use of wiretaps and other forms of electronic surveillance.
* punishment before trial such as pre-trial detention and civil forfeiture of property.
* punishment of those not directly involved in offenses, such as parents being held responsible for the actions of their children, employers being required to enforce immigration laws, and bartenders being made to enforce drinking laws.
* Warrantless searches of persons and property before entering buildings, boarding planes, or using various public facilities.
* Closing of public buildings or parts of buildings to the public on security grounds.
* Increased restrictions on student speech, behavior, and clothing.
* Increased mandatory use of IDs.
* Increasing restrictions on attorney-client privacy.
* Greatly increased government access to personal financial records.
* Loss of a once widely presumed guarantee of confidentiality in dealings with businesses, doctors, accountants, and banks.
* The greatest incarceration rate of any industrialized country in the world.
* Mandatory sentencing for minor offenses, particularly marijuana possession.
* Increased surveillance of employees in the workplace.
* Laws in 11 states that make it a crime to suggest that a particular food is unsafe without a "sound scientific basis" for the claim.
* Random traffic stops of blacks are so frequent that the drivers are sometimes said to have been stopped for DWB (driving while black.)
* Increased use of charges involving offenses allegedly committed after a person has been halted by a police officer, such as failure to obey a lawful order.
* Widespread youth curfews.
* Expanded definition of pornography and laws against it.
* Increased use of private police forces by corporations.
* persons being forced to take part in line-ups because of some similarity to actual suspect.
* Loss of control over how personal information is used by business companies.- Eviction of tenants from homes where police believe drugs are being sold.
* public housing projects being sealed to conduct home-to-home searches.
* Use of stereotypical profiles (including racial characteristics)to justify police searches.
* Seizure of lawyers' fees in drug cases.
* Warrantless searches and questioning of bus, train, and airline passengers.
* Random searches of school lockers.
* Random searches of cars in school parking lots.
* Increased number of activities requiring extensive personal investigation and disclosure.
* Lack of privacy in transactions such as video rental or computer use.
* Video surveillance of sidewalks, parks and other public spaces.
* Involuntary drug testing increasingly used as a prerequisite for routine activities such as earning a livelihood or playing on a sports team.
* Steady erosion by the courts of protection against search and seizure.
Fact Oid

Alamogordo, NM

#10 Jan 11, 2010
Gorky wrote:
The Partial List
* Roadblocks as part of random searches for drivers who have been drinking or using drugs.
* The extensive use of the military in civilian law enforcement, particularly in the war on drugs.
* Black school children in prince George's County MD are being taught by the police how to behave when stopped or arrested. It is assumed by both school officials and the cops that it will happen.
* The use of handcuffs on persons accused of minor offenses and moving violations.
* Jump-out squads that leap from police vehicles and search nearby citizens.
* Much greater use of wiretaps and other forms of electronic surveillance.
* punishment before trial such as pre-trial detention and civil forfeiture of property.
* punishment of those not directly involved in offenses, such as parents being held responsible for the actions of their children, employers being required to enforce immigration laws, and bartenders being made to enforce drinking laws.
* Warrantless searches of persons and property before entering buildings, boarding planes, or using various public facilities.
* Closing of public buildings or parts of buildings to the public on security grounds.
* Increased restrictions on student speech, behavior, and clothing.
* Increased mandatory use of IDs.
* Increasing restrictions on attorney-client privacy.
* Greatly increased government access to personal financial records.
* Loss of a once widely presumed guarantee of confidentiality in dealings with businesses, doctors, accountants, and banks.
* The greatest incarceration rate of any industrialized country in the world.
* Mandatory sentencing for minor offenses, particularly marijuana possession.
* Increased surveillance of employees in the workplace.
* Laws in 11 states that make it a crime to suggest that a particular food is unsafe without a "sound scientific basis" for the claim.
* Random traffic stops of blacks are so frequent that the drivers are sometimes said to have been stopped for DWB (driving while black.)
* Increased use of charges involving offenses allegedly committed after a person has been halted by a police officer, such as failure to obey a lawful order.
* Widespread youth curfews.
* Expanded definition of pornography and laws against it.
* Increased use of private police forces by corporations.
* persons being forced to take part in line-ups because of some similarity to actual suspect.
* Loss of control over how personal information is used by business companies.- Eviction of tenants from homes where police believe drugs are being sold.
* public housing projects being sealed to conduct home-to-home searches.
* Use of stereotypical profiles (including racial characteristics)to justify police searches.
* Seizure of lawyers' fees in drug cases.
* Warrantless searches and questioning of bus, train, and airline passengers.
* Random searches of school lockers.
* Random searches of cars in school parking lots.
* Increased number of activities requiring extensive personal investigation and disclosure.
* Lack of privacy in transactions such as video rental or computer use.
* Video surveillance of sidewalks, parks and other public spaces.
* Involuntary drug testing increasingly used as a prerequisite for routine activities such as earning a livelihood or playing on a sports team.
* Steady erosion by the courts of protection against search and seizure.
Gorky, if you spent one day as a cop you would know the reasons for every point you were trying to make.

In a nutshell, big criminals make little mistakes, and this is why so many police are killed and injured while interacting with people who have seemingly just been stopped for speeding...like Timothy McVeigh. Or, the Beltway Snipers. Or....
Perfection

Alamogordo, NM

#11 Jan 11, 2010
Gorky wrote:
The Partial List
* The use of handcuffs on persons accused of minor offenses and moving violations.
* Much greater use of wiretaps and other forms of electronic surveillance.
* Warrantless searches of persons and property before entering buildings, boarding planes, or using various public facilities.
* Closing of public buildings or parts of buildings to the public on security grounds.
* Increased restrictions on student speech, behavior, and clothing.
* Increased mandatory use of IDs.
* Increasing restrictions on attorney-client privacy.
* Greatly increased government access to personal financial records.
* Loss of a once widely presumed guarantee of confidentiality in dealings with businesses, doctors, accountants, and banks.
* The greatest incarceration rate of any industrialized country in the world.
* Mandatory sentencing for minor offenses, particularly marijuana possession.
* Increased surveillance of employees in the workplace.
* Laws in 11 states that make it a crime to suggest that a particular food is unsafe without a "sound scientific basis" for the claim.
* Random traffic stops of blacks are so frequent that the drivers are sometimes said to have been stopped for DWB (driving while black.)
* Increased use of charges involving offenses allegedly committed after a person has been halted by a police officer, such as failure to obey a lawful order.
* Widespread youth curfews.
* Expanded definition of pornography and laws against it.
* Increased use of private police forces by corporations.
* persons being forced to take part in line-ups because of some similarity to actual suspect.
* Loss of control over how personal information is used by business companies.- Eviction of tenants from homes where police believe drugs are being sold.
* public housing projects being sealed to conduct home-to-home searches.
* Use of stereotypical profiles (including racial characteristics)to justify police searches.
* Seizure of lawyers' fees in drug cases.
* Warrantless searches and questioning of bus, train, and airline passengers.
* Random searches of school lockers.
* Random searches of cars in school parking lots.
* Increased number of activities requiring extensive personal investigation and disclosure.
* Lack of privacy in transactions such as video rental or computer use.
* Video surveillance of sidewalks, parks and other public spaces.
* Involuntary drug testing increasingly used as a prerequisite for routine activities such as earning a livelihood or playing on a sports team.
* Steady erosion by the courts of protection against search and seizure.
Sorry sir, but I can't see much in there that is a DIRECT result of legislation passed since 9/11 by former president Geroge Bush..
In fact, I can remember when I was in High School (back in the 80's) when our school lockers were searched 4 times each year... And I don't believe that Geroge Bush or the PArtiot Act was responsible..
Your regurgitation of left witg anti bush talking points is admirable, but VERY inaccurate..
On a side note....
If you believe I am getting a little TOO personal or direct, please state so and I will re-dress the answer in a more amicable way. Even though I believe your political stance to be VERY far left, I still enjoy discussing issues and I know I abused that over the last month or so. For that I will offer an apology and pledge to be a better participant in a discussion!?
mssl

Ryderwood, WA

#13 Jan 11, 2010
Perfection wrote:
<quoted text>
Dave,
I cannot count 1 freedom I have lost since 9/11 NOT 1
I supported the invasion because so may of the opposition in congress did.. And they had the SAME intel, so don't go that route either.. I do not suport it today because we have learned that our Intel (starting with Bush 1 and Clinton) was flawed. I am NEVER called un-american (unless it is some whacked out extremist doing it). YOur parroting of left wing talking points is so transparent, it almost hurts m eyes!
Perfection - I'll give you one example of a right you have lost. Your right to a warrant before your front door is kicked in by the police. That is a right lost since 9/11. So there you go.
Perfection

Alamogordo, NM

#14 Jan 11, 2010
mssl wrote:
<quoted text>
Perfection - I'll give you one example of a right you have lost. Your right to a warrant before your front door is kicked in by the police. That is a right lost since 9/11. So there you go.
Can't see that happening, nor have I heard of ANY innocent Americans having it happen to them...

“Navy veteran. ”

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

#15 Jan 11, 2010
mssl wrote:
<quoted text>
Perfection - I'll give you one example of a right you have lost. Your right to a warrant before your front door is kicked in by the police. That is a right lost since 9/11. So there you go.
Do you have any examples of this happening? I could not find any changes in laws that allow the police to enter your home without probable cause. The same still applies to warrants required to search you home.
Any links to the contrary are appreciated as I like to keep up to date on these things.

I know Katrina was a cluster and local law enforcement were illegally taking away people guns. Congress has since address this to prevent it from happening again. It is said that the NO police department may have murdered local civilians in the aftermath of Katrina. They are still digging into that mess.
Perfection

Alamogordo, NM

#16 Jan 11, 2010
US Navy wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have any examples of this happening? I could not find any changes in laws that allow the police to enter your home without probable cause. The same still applies to warrants required to search you home.
Any links to the contrary are appreciated as I like to keep up to date on these things.
I know Katrina was a cluster and local law enforcement were illegally taking away people guns. Congress has since address this to prevent it from happening again. It is said that the NO police department may have murdered local civilians in the aftermath of Katrina. They are still digging into that mess.
The ONLY example given will be one from a "Spin Site" that distorts facts and produces crapolla......
Bill English

Albuquerque, NM

#17 Jan 11, 2010
Fact Oid wrote:
<quoted text>
Gorky, if you spent one day as a cop you would know the reasons for every point you were trying to make.
In a nutshell, big criminals make little mistakes, and this is why so many police are killed and injured while interacting with people who have seemingly just been stopped for speeding...like Timothy McVeigh. Or, the Beltway Snipers. Or....
BAAAALONEY!!!!
Captain America

Ceres, CA

#18 Jan 11, 2010
I can certainly comment on the Patriot Act in terms of how police function differently.

They don't.

No rights of normal honest residents and citizens of the USA were lost under the Patriot Act.

For instance, it has been legal for decades to use a no-knock warrant if evidence would be lost or officer safety would be compromised otherwise.

People outside the security and law enforcement field do not quite understand what goes on, and TV gives a bad point of reference for a lot of things, including all things law enforcement, counter-terror, intel gathering, and security.

We cannot treat drug dealers, terrorists, and international criminals (including illegal immigrants) with the same level of rights and consideration we do US Citizens. Sorry.

If we try, we start to see what is going on right now all over Europe and the USA.

Unfortunately too many ex-cops and legend in their own mind officers (usually chiefs) think they know better, and we see the results in the increasing amount of police being murdered as a result.

When I hear a long time officer brag about never having to draw a weapon, I know they guy is an over efficient pain in the arse and nothing more.

The Patriot Act is likely bad law, and it should never be used as a day-to-day enforcement tool, but it is necessary if we have any hope of keeping up with an amazingly sophisticated and smart criminal who would just as soon cut your throat as whistle.

Even Obama is starting to figure this out.

Now if we can just get the State Department to quit handing out visas to known criminals and terrorists we might have a chance, although I doubt it.
Gorky

Tularosa, NM

#19 Jan 11, 2010
You're right, it wasn't the direct result of legislation passed by legislation or G. Bush. Most of these items were unconstitutional precursors to homeland security and were pass by executive order, signed by the President, but was probably not discussed with him. Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Rove, and the whole Carlyle group were likely behind it. I seriously doubt that the President was involved, except for the signing.

Congress was not involved---asleep at the wheel. All this was from Sam Smith's Progressive Review around the time after 9/11. I don't have the exact post, but its http://prorev.com/ if your interested.
Perfection wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry sir, but I can't see much in there that is a DIRECT result of legislation passed since 9/11 by former president Geroge Bush..
In fact, I can remember when I was in High School (back in the 80's) when our school lockers were searched 4 times each year... And I don't believe that Geroge Bush or the PArtiot Act was responsible..
Your regurgitation of left witg anti bush talking points is admirable, but VERY inaccurate..
On a side note....
If you believe I am getting a little TOO personal or direct, please state so and I will re-dress the answer in a more amicable way. Even though I believe your political stance to be VERY far left, I still enjoy discussing issues and I know I abused that over the last month or so. For that I will offer an apology and pledge to be a better participant in a discussion!?

“I got it back!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!”

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#20 Jan 11, 2010
Gorky wrote:
You're right, it wasn't the direct result of legislation passed by legislation or G. Bush. Most of these items were unconstitutional precursors to homeland security and were pass by executive order, signed by the President, but was probably not discussed with him. Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Rove, and the whole Carlyle group were likely behind it. I seriously doubt that the President was involved, except for the signing.
Congress was not involved---asleep at the wheel. All this was from Sam Smith's Progressive Review around the time after 9/11. I don't have the exact post, but its http://prorev.com/ if your interested.
<quoted text>
Well,
I gotta hand it to you....You rip a website on another thread for being a good place to get reports on the queen or something like that for global warming..... Then you jump here and use a link that is about as open minded and Harry Reid at a NAACP meeting..
The Progressive Review!!?? Wow, a Fox news for all those that HATE former President Bush!! LOL

You've GOT to be able to do better than that!??
BomBa

Silver City, NM

#21 Jan 12, 2010
I predict in the latter part of 2010, the current prop of ANTI-Government teabagger's will be branded as the domestic terrorists they truly are. Something will happen that will push them and their cause over the edge and they will be the new American Taliban.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Patrick Swayze Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Patrick swayze is gay (Sep '06) May 5 Swayze 353
News Revealed: Up to 60 per cent of grieving people ... Mar '16 Elise Gingerich 1
News ABC Casts Colt Prattes to Lead Dirty Dancing Re... Feb '16 Never Heard Of Him 1
Patrick Swayze Is Not, Was Not, and Never Will ... (Feb '12) Dec '15 JSabo 2
Patrick swayze (Nov '15) Nov '15 Grace 2
News Send Your Messages To Patrick Swayze (Mar '08) Dec '14 Janet McCain 420
News I'm still alive, says Patrick Swayze from hospi... (Apr '09) Dec '14 dirty dancing 13
More from around the web