Printable View
ok it was only purple dust in a condom that was chucked at tony blair in the house of commons but it so easily could have been a terroist chucking a deadly chemical dust that could have wiped out the entire uk government.
what do u think this says about how secure any world leader is including bush?
No world leader is really secure. It only takes a split second, one bullet. The main thing protecting world leaders is the fact that anyone who attacks one is likely to be instantly slaughtered by the tons of guards all the leaders keep around them. Running up and shooting the President for example is pretty much signing your own death certificate. I wonder what would've happened differently had someone thrown powder on the President, in this country. Likely would've been a bit bloodier I imagine.
The President came to Pittsburgh a few weeks ago, and they shut down the entire highway from the airport into town so that he could drive through. The President has his guards who are willing to take a bullet for him if necessary. They do go to great measures to protect the President. But still, some have been assassinated. Being a world leader is not a safe job.
It's a tough thing to judge really. As Unne said, there is no way to perfectly secure a leader, unless you drive around in the Pope-mobile.
As a leader, you will always be open to critics and have a lot of people who are against you. The problem is, it becomes very difficult to figure out who is voicing their opinion, and who is actually going to take matters into their own hands. Since we live in a free society, in the USA anyway, you can get relatively close to the President at many various events, which leaves plenty of space open for an assassination attempt.
Sadly, it's almost impossible to always be protected, but I generally feel that the security teams, at least in the USA, do a good enough job.
Take care all.
Well, we haven't had any big presidential assassination attempts in over twenty years, and we haven't had a successful one in over forty. I think our security is working pretty well. Either that, or there hasn't been a whole lot of lone gunmen on grassy knolls or psychopathic Jodie Foster stalkers lately.
Hey theres an idea, lets steal the popemobile, add rockets to it and send world leaders around the globe safely!
Ah....glad i thought of it
Technically, September 11 2001 and that nitwit in the Cessna who was after Clinton were both presidential assasination attempts. However, as you say, security, preparation and circumstance combined to protect the president's life in both cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by DocFrance
We've gotta take steps to protect our leaders, but that needs to be balanced against the risk of turning the powers-that-be into cloistered, unseen figures who just show up on TV now and then.
Quote:
Well, we haven't had any big presidential assassination attempts in over twenty years, and we haven't had a successful one in over forty.
Bush Sr. was almost assassinated and so was Ronald Reagen, Reagen got shot in 1981 there not big at all? Well I think there big attempts. I agree with Big D about sept 11 2001 to, that plane that crashed in Pennslyvania was supposed to hit the white house. I'd say every assassination attempt is big, then no assassination attempt.
When your a president or leader, there will always be people out there that would want to hate you, or even kill you. It must be a tough job, knowing that someone wants to kill you every day.
"It must be a tough job, knowing that someone wants to kill you every day."
In a wierd way, it comes with the title, in that in an election, there will be winners and losers, and the losers will often be upset with the winner no matter what. Bi-partisan politics are again a thing of the past.
Take care all.
Quote:
No world leader is really secure. It only takes a split second, one bullet. The main thing protecting world leaders is the fact that anyone who attacks one is likely to be instantly slaughtered by the tons of guards all the leaders keep around them.
do you think that's effective against an organization such as al queda who's main weapon is suicide?
I heard about that powder incident. Was it one of the U.K tabloids attempting to show how crap security is. The mirror got in to Buckingham Palace as a foot soldier didn't they. You'd think after last weeks fabricated photo fiasco the tabloids would stop showing up internationally laxes in security.
its was fathers for justice campaign or sumthin. tony blair and co should be thankful this security hole has been found and now they can fix it and stop some terroist getting in there with sarin, anthrax, suicide bombs etc.
Am I the only one who thought that the purple-flour-condom thing was really funny?
Gave me a silent chuckle :greenie:Quote:
Originally Posted by Skogs
recently security sheilds were foolishly installed in the houses of parliment.....not that they were any use. farthers for justice is about farthers being entitled to the same rights as mothers in seperations involving children. they throw purple baking powder to raise attention, that was all it was nothing.
our leaders know what they are getting themselves into when they become leaders...frankly both Bush and blair deserve it for all the innocents they have harmed through their eager war. if they die it wont be a loss, they will be replaced..thus is life
to be honest i hate bush and blair for what they,ve done, but while it would be cool to watch it on the news, i would never wish either of then to die, espically in something really horrid...like sarin gas :cry: