Fortress USA!

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 4:12 am

Force wrote:When will people wake up and realize that the reason we don't have our borders sealed is because they WANT us to get hit, which will create MORE fear, which will enable them to pass even more laws allowing them to spy on us and siphon off more money into the war machine?

Why do people actually believe that these scoundrels CARE about them, when in actuality we are nothing more than pawns and pocketbooks to them?

Or do they actually believe that these clowns really give a shit about joe-bob living in the trailer park? Please.

And left our flank (America) undefended. Why? Why are our borders neglected while at the airports people have to take off their shoes, endure rigorous screening, etc.?

I'll tell you why- the only explanation that makes sense is that the power elite, or the military/industrial complex, or whatever you want to call it, WANTS us to be hit again, so they can have an excuse to send our sons and brothers and friends to die so that they can control an oil-producing country.

http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... 0&start=75

So folks, should the USA become a fortress as Force asserts?

your thoughts?

samtzu · Post by **samtzu** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 8:05 am

Well.... I agree with Force... to a point.

There is a conspiracy, but it is a conspiricy of the profit motive. Follow the money and you will see policy in a clearer light.

A war on terror makes a lot of money for moneyed interests, just as the Vietnam war made a shitload of money for Bell Helicopter and Colt Arms. Economically, a war makes sense. Absolute terror does not. If enough of these terrorist incidents happen, people will lose faith in the economy, will hoard and hide their capital, and the economy grinds to a noisy halt.

However, if the level of terror is maintained at a medium pitch, the economy grows stronger, people continue to spend, and the wealthy get even wealthier. As they stay wealthy, there are jobs for everyone and all is right with America.

Sealing the boarders would cancel all of that. Hell, the corporation I work for has enough trouble getting parts in from Canada, Mexico, and Germany, as it is. Tightening everything up would make it worse, and I don't think the HUGE multinational corporation that own this corporation would stand for that. The borders have to stay open for America to survive.

It's a delicate balance.

Of course, all it takes is one suitcase bomb to blow that balance to smithereens.

Personally? Leave the boarder open and kill every fifth person that crosses it. That will slow the terrorists down and help to reduce the population growth of this country. I mean, someone would have to really want to come to America if those were the conditions of entry...

Or maybe we could make boarder crossing some sort of televised Gladiator type event.... hmmmmmm

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 8:18 am

it's all bullshit.

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 8:32 am

DVD Burner wrote:it's all bullshit.

easy for you to say...

here are some resources by which one could actually inform themselves on the subject...

National Defense Magazine

V

SCENARIOS OF ANTITERRORISM

Law Enforcement Problems at the Border Between the United States and Canada: Drug Smuggling, Illegal Immigration and Terrorism

Pravda.RU Third summit of the Americas will prove imperialist pretensions by USA

Democrats & Liberals:: Look in the Rear-View Mirror!

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 8:36 am

damn, it didn't publish the hyperlinks... poop

cowboyangel · Post by **cowboyangel** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 8:39 am

I'm suffering from thread overload...symptoms are bug-eyed startlement, drooling and a sense of loss of where to go. Couldn't this topic have been placed under Politics Everyday.....?

Anyway, think of the implications of Americans and foreign travel with more hatred focused on us everyday.....

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 8:47 am

Drug Smuggling: do you mean the elderly that go to Canada to get less expensive meds they cant get in the states?

Illegal Immigration: do you mean the folks that are on this land that are not native Indian or Mexican Indians. this originaly stolen land?

Terrorism: Are you talking about the C.I.A. agents that taught how to Terrorize outside of the states? you know.... the so called "terrorist" the C.I.A. created by inflicting these narley situations on people in foreign lands that are coming back now biting all of America in the butt?

cowboyangel · Post by **cowboyangel** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 8:50 am

In the Fortress it's interesting to see who has served....hat tip to Joel

Recognizing who served
AlterNet log
September 10, 2004
http://www.alternet.org/election04/log/

This could be the last election where military service
in Vietnam has any political currency. But just for
the record, it's worth noting who really served among
the heavyweights in each of the major political
parties. There are some surprises here. Did you know
John Kerry received three purple hearts? Just kidding.
But here's the list. Be sure to check out the bottom
where the people who spend their time jabbering about
military service (the TV pundits) have their military
credentials exposed.

Democrats
* Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71.
* David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72.
* Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.
* Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan.
1971 as an army journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.
* Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor,
Vietnam.
* Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-'47; Medal of Honor, WWII.
* John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze
Star with Combat V Purple Hearts.
* John Edwards: did not serve.
* Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze
Star, Korea.
* Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star &
Bronze Star, Vietnam.
* Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-1953.
* Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve,
1968-74.
* Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army
Reserve 1979-91.
* Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII, receiving the
Bronze Star and seven campaign ribbons.
* Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam,
DFCs, Bronze Stars, and Soldier's Medal.
* Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart,
Silver Star and Legion of Merit.
* Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne,
Purple Hear! t.
* Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in
Vietnam; Bronze Star with Combat V.
* Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.
* Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57
* Chuck Robb: Vietnam
* Howell Heflin: Silver Star
* George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII.
* Bill Clinton: Did not serve. Student deferments.
Entered draft but received 311.
* Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy.
* Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953
* John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and Air Medal
with 18 Clusters.
* Tom Lantos: Served in Hungarian underground in WWII.
Saved by Raoul Wallenberg.
* Wesley Clark: U.S. Army, 1966-2000, West Point,
Vietnam, Purple Heart, Silver Star. Retired 4-star
general.
* John Dingell: WWII vet
* John Conyers: Army 1950-57, Korea

Republicans
* Dennis Hastert: did not serve.
* Tom Delay: did not serve.
* House Whiip Roy Blunt: did not serve.
* Bill Frist: did not s! erve.
* Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.
* George Pataki: did not serve.
* Mitch McConnell: did not serve.
* Rick Santorum: did not serve.
* Trent Lott: did not serve.
* Dick Cheney: did not serve. Several deferments, the
last by marriage.
* John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven deferments to
teach business.
* Jeb Bush: did not serve.
* Karl Rove: did not serve.
* Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. "Bad knee." The man
who attacked Max Cleland's patriotism.
* Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.
* Vin Weber: did not serve.
* Richard Perle: did not serve.
* Douglas Feith: did not serve.
* Eliot Abrams: did not serve.
* Richard Shelby: did not serve.
* Jon Kyl: did not serve.
* Tim Hutchison: did not serve.
* Christopher Cox: did not serve.
* Newt Gingrich: did not serve.
* Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as aviator
and flight instructor.
* George W. Bush: six-year Nat'l Guard commitment (in
four).
* Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a
non-combat role making movies.
* Gerald Ford: Navy, WWII
* Phil Gramm: did not serve.
* John McCain: Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of
Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.
* Bob Dole: an honorable veteran.
* Chuck Hagel: two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star,
Vietnam.
* Duke Cunningham: nominated for Medal of Honor, Navy
Cross, Silver Stars, Air Medals, Purple Hearts.
* Jeff Sessions: Army Reserves, 1973-1986
* JC Watts: did not serve.
* Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer.
* G.H.W. Bush: Pilot in WWII. Shot down by the
Japanese.
* Tom Ridge: Bronze Star for Valor in Vietnam.
* Antonin Scalia: did not serve.
* Clarence Thomas: did not serve

Pundits & Preachers
* Sean Hannity: did not serve.
* Rush Limbaugh: did not serve (4-F with a 'pilonidal
cyst.')
* Bill O'Reilly: did not serve.
* Michael S! avage: did not serve.
* George Will: did not serve.
* Chris Matthews: did not serve.
* Paul Gigot: did not serve.
* Bill Bennett: did not serve.
* Pat Buchanan: did not serve.
* Bill Kristol: did not serve.
* Kenneth Starr: did not serve.
* Michael Medved: did not serve.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 8:54 am

Republicans ? Why dont we call all these guys Punks
* Dennis Hastert: did not serve.
* Tom Delay: did not serve.
* House Whiip Roy Blunt: did not serve.
* Bill Frist: did not s! erve.
* Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.
* George Pataki: did not serve.
* Mitch McConnell: did not serve.
* Rick Santorum: did not serve.
* Trent Lott: did not serve.
* Dick Cheney: did not serve. Several deferments, the
last by marriage.
* John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven deferments to
teach business.
* Jeb Bush: did not serve.
* Karl Rove: did not serve.
* Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. "Bad knee." The man
who attacked Max Cleland's patriotism.
* Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.
* Vin Weber: did not serve.
* Richard Perle: did not serve.
* Douglas Feith: did not serve.
* Eliot Abrams: did not serve.
* Richard Shelby: did not serve.
* Jon Kyl: did not serve.
* Tim Hutchison: did not serve.
* Christopher Cox: did not serve.
* Newt Gingrich: did not serve.
* Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as aviator
and flight instructor.
* George W. Bush: six-year Nat'l Guard commitment (in
four).
* Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a
non-combat role making movies.
* Gerald Ford: Navy, WWII
* Phil Gramm: did not serve.
* John McCain: Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of
Merit, Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.
* Bob Dole: an honorable veteran.
* Chuck Hagel: two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star,
Vietnam.
* Duke Cunningham: nominated for Medal of Honor, Navy
Cross, Silver Stars, Air Medals, Purple Hearts.
* Jeff Sessions: Army Reserves, 1973-1986
* JC Watts: did not serve.
* Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer.
* G.H.W. Bush: Pilot in WWII. Shot down by the
Japanese.
* Tom Ridge: Bronze Star for Valor in Vietnam.
* Antonin Scalia: did not serve.
* Clarence Thomas: did not serve

Pundits & Preachers
* Sean Hannity: did not serve.
* Rush Limbaugh: did not serve (4-F with a 'pilonidal
cyst.')
* Bill O'Reilly: did not serve.
* Michael S! avage: did not serve.
* George Will: did not serve.
* Chris Matthews: did not serve.
* Paul Gigot: did not serve.
* Bill Bennett: did not serve.
* Pat Buchanan: did not serve.
* Bill Kristol: did not serve.
* Kenneth Starr: did not serve.
* Michael Medved: did not serve.

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:02 am

cowboyangel wrote:I'm suffering from thread overload...symptoms are bug-eyed startlement, drooling and a sense of loss of where to go. Couldn't this topic have been placed under Politics Everyday.....?

Anyway, think of the implications of Americans and foreign travel with more hatred focused on us everyday.....

yes it could have, but i thought i would be a dick today.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:12 am

Never forget!

147 Franklin D. Roosevelt (D)
132 Harry Truman (D)
122 Dwight D. Eisenhower (R)
174 John F. Kennedy (D)
126 Lyndon B. Johnson (D)
155 Richard M. Nixon (R)
121 Gerald Ford (R)
175 James E. Carter (D)
105 Ronald Reagan (R)
098 George HW Bush (R)
182 William J. Clinton (D)
091 George W. Bush (R)

sparkletarte · Post by **sparkletarte** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:22 am

Holy shit. Who cares who served in Vietnam?! All I would care about is if someone is a good leader- serving in a war has nothing to do with that.

Yes, you are becoming a fortess, and yes your borders are close to being sealed, not 'sealed' of course, but 'more protected'. Your customs people even stop people going north a hundred feet from the Canadian border with dogs and a full search. I guess we might be smuggling guns (ha) or cocaine (okay maybe) or people (most likely, haha) out of the US.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:26 am

Damn it. I forgot to post in the last post that those are the I.Q.'s of the presidents.

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:26 am

CA, DVD,

does this mean civilian public service has no merit?

and where is Michael Moore's record? Al Franken? all those liberal pundits, where was their service?

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:27 am

Simply Joel wrote:CA, DVD,

does this mean civilian public service has no merit?

That is exactly right. As I said before......it's all bullshit.

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:42 am

DVD... but i don't think any of us want a feudal system, a theocracy or despotism... so, i think "we the people" is the best option available at this time.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:47 am

Simply Joel wrote:DVD... but i don't think any of us want a feudal system, a theocracy or despotism... so, i think "we the people" is the best option available at this time.

This administration has made it so that it does'nt matter what "we the people" want, need or think.

What they want is anarchy. At midnight we shall get the Uzi’s, tek9's and ak47's, setup our militia’s and wait for the revolution.

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 10:09 am

DVD Burner wrote:
Simply Joel wrote:DVD... but i don't think any of us want a feudal system, a theocracy or despotism... so, i think "we the people" is the best option available at this time.
This administration has made it so that it does'nt matter what "we the people" want, need or think.

What they want is anarchy. At midnight we shall get the Uzi’s, tek9's and ak47's, setup our militia’s and wait for the revolution.

'cause you say it better than i do...

DVD Burner wrote: it's all bullshit.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 10:10 am

shitmouse · Post by **shitmouse** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:16 pm

one thing that gets me spooked with this mudslide of homeland (in)security and advancing technologies is the head on collision i can see happening with big brother being sewn a bit more into our lives.

here shortly, a billboard along hwy 101 will be rigged to know what radio station you are playing (if any) in your car while driving by, for demographics; then they push an ad at you designed specifically for your demo.
- airports having overly sensitive info about you and your background is creepy as well.

not addressing this thread sharply, just had to blab what comes to mind when i think about "Bushiery" getting re-elected.
-b

Force · Post by **Force** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 8:44 pm

samtzu wrote:Well.... I agree with Force... to a point.

There is a conspiracy, but it is a conspiricy of the profit motive. Follow the money and you will see policy in a clearer light.

Ah, thank you for elaborating my point so intelligently- I no longer have the desire to spend this much time disassembling all the hyperbole and pure bullshit joel tries to interject into whatever reasonable points are raised which he doesn't agree with.

If you read my posts, you see that I'm not advocating a total no-in no-out sealing of our borders as Joel would have you believe- in fact, I'm not advocating we seal our borders at all, rather just pointing out that IF we were in such danger it's a funny thing we haven't been hit yet when our borders are so porous...

it's a sure sign of a bullshitter who knows he's full of shit when he doesn't just have to twist his own words but SOMEONE ELSE'S also...

Force · Post by **Force** » Mon Sep 13, 2004 8:45 pm

Simply Joel wrote:...i thought i would be a dick today.

Today?

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Tue Sep 14, 2004 3:20 am

Force wrote:
samtzu wrote:Well.... I agree with Force... to a point.

There is a conspiracy, but it is a conspiricy of the profit motive. Follow the money and you will see policy in a clearer light.
Ah, thank you for elaborating my point so intelligently- I no longer have the desire to spend this much time disassembling all the hyperbole and pure bullshit joel tries to interject into whatever reasonable points are raised which he doesn't agree with.

If you read my posts, you see that I'm not advocating a total no-in no-out sealing of our borders as Joel would have you believe- in fact, I'm not advocating we seal our borders at all, rather just pointing out that IF we were in such danger it's a funny thing we haven't been hit yet when our borders are so porous...

it's a sure sign of a bullshitter who knows he's full of shit when he doesn't just have to twist his own words but SOMEONE ELSE'S also...

So, when someone using your words in which they "agree with Force... to a point" on the e-playa "for elaborating my point so intelligently" that is acceptable, yet when I post a pundit or editorial of which you do not agree, it is "all the hyperbole and pure bullshit"?

Force wrote:"I'm not advocating a total no-in no-out sealing of our borders"

of course you're not... as I read your words, you are simply finger pointing problems yet offering no solutions.

Force wrote:it's a funny thing we haven't been hit yet when our borders are so porous...

key operative word in that sentence fragment is "yet"

and as far as me being a dick, today, yesterday, tomorrow? at least I do know what I am, what I have been, and what I will be...

You on the other hand... well, I'll allow fellow e-playans decide which nouns to apply to you, as well as, what to make of the information I post here.

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Tue Sep 14, 2004 4:43 am

Hey y'all, it's all just a debate. Lets not loose our heads.

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Tue Sep 14, 2004 6:30 am

Force wrote:
Simply Joel wrote:...i thought i would be a dick today.
Today?

http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic.php?t=3292

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Tue Sep 14, 2004 6:57 am

Force wrote:
samtzu wrote:Well.... I agree with Force... to a point.

There is a conspiracy, but it is a conspiricy of the profit motive. Follow the money and you will see policy in a clearer light.
Ah, thank you for elaborating my point so intelligently- I no longer have the desire to spend this much time disassembling all the hyperbole and pure bullshit joel tries to interject into whatever reasonable points are raised which he doesn't agree with.

If you read my posts, you see that I'm not advocating a total no-in no-out sealing of our borders as Joel would have you believe- in fact, I'm not advocating we seal our borders at all, rather just pointing out that IF we were in such danger it's a funny thing we haven't been hit yet when our borders are so porous...

it's a sure sign of a bullshitter who knows he's full of shit when he doesn't just have to twist his own words but SOMEONE ELSE'S also...

and....
http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic. ... 1287#81287

samtzu · Post by **samtzu** » Tue Sep 14, 2004 8:47 am

We will never get the 'ego' out of our discussions... especially if we continue to slap people over the head with our own ego as if it were a dead fish (which in many cases is a very accurate metaphor)

The "You're a doo-doo head!" approach should have been dropped about the time we all reached adolescence, but Western Culture retards the emotional growth of its citizens as a matter of policy. At least, it seems that way. It is only in 'Primative' societies that you are treated as an adult at adolescence and are expected to act that way...

Fucking Primatives! Why don't they go back to where they came from!? Doo-doo heads!!

Now, what were we talking about?

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Tue Sep 14, 2004 8:50 am

samtzu wrote:We will never get the 'ego' out of our discussions... especially if we continue to slap people over the head with our own ego as if it were a dead fish (which in many cases is a very accurate metaphor)

The "You're a doo-doo head!" approach should have been dropped about the time we all reached adolescence, but Western Culture retards the emotional growth of its citizens as a matter of policy. At least, it seems that way. It is only in 'Primative' societies that you are treated as an adult at adolescence and are expected to act that way...

Fucking Primatives! Why don't they go back to where they came from!? Doo-doo heads!!

Now, what were we talking about?

I'll line up to be called "doo-doo head" anyday before I will sign onto the "believe in my ideology or i will blow you and myself up and anyone standing around, be damned the innocents..."

sticks and stones can break my bones, and whips kind of excite me...

DVD Burner · Post by **DVD Burner** » Tue Sep 14, 2004 9:06 am

Simply Joel wrote:
Force wrote:
Simply Joel wrote:...i thought i would be a dick today.
Today?
http://eplaya.burningman.org/viewtopic.php?t=3292

which reminds me, where's Alpha and Zephryus? Now those are some intelligent people.

Force · Post by **Force** » Tue Sep 14, 2004 9:38 am

Simply Joel wrote:
Force wrote:
samtzu wrote:Well.... I agree with Force... to a point.

There is a conspiracy, but it is a conspiricy of the profit motive. Follow the money and you will see policy in a clearer light.
Ah, thank you for elaborating my point so intelligently- I no longer have the desire to spend this much time disassembling all the hyperbole and pure bullshit joel tries to interject into whatever reasonable points are raised which he doesn't agree with.

If you read my posts, you see that I'm not advocating a total no-in no-out sealing of our borders as Joel would have you believe- in fact, I'm not advocating we seal our borders at all, rather just pointing out that IF we were in such danger it's a funny thing we haven't been hit yet when our borders are so porous...

it's a sure sign of a bullshitter who knows he's full of shit when he doesn't just have to twist his own words but SOMEONE ELSE'S also...
So, when someone using your words in which they "agree with Force... to a point" on the e-playa "for elaborating my point so intelligently" that is acceptable, yet when I post a pundit or editorial of which you do not agree, it is "all the hyperbole and pure bullshit"?

No, when you post something of mine out of context and then talk about it as if I were in favor of draconian big brotherism, then that is not only hyperbole, it is also pure bullshit.

Jackass.

Or to use a device you're so fond of;

Main Entry: hy·per·bo·le
Pronunciation: hI-'p&r-b&-(")lE
Function: noun
: extravagant exaggeration (as "mile-high ice-cream cones")

i.e., I said ice cream cones are nice, you reposted what I said and made it sound like I said the more ice cream you eat the better! In fact, we should all have mile high ice cream cones!

See the difference?

Pointing out that the government has done little to make our borders more secure against those who wish us ill while making much hay of the airports (which are more exciting and telegenic on the 11 o'clock news than a canadian border gaurd searching the family station wagon) in order to illustrate why the gov is full of crap, is a far cry from saying we SHOULD be sealing our borders and digging bomb shelters.

Ya Doofus.

So did you just not understand that, or did you willfully decide to have an argument with me and therefore decide to twist my words in an effort to discredit me?

It's a small mind that assumes that anyone who disagrees with him is automatically wrong. I prefer to find out WHY the person disagreeing with me believes what they do, because they may have information I don't, or have some insight I don't. I've certainly learned over the years I'm fallible. Unfortunately, your combative arguing style doesn't allow for us to be anything but adversaries forever.

And this is what I meant when I said that people like you will be the ruin of our world. As long as there are people who are totally unwilling to even look at someone else's viewpoint, then we will never see peace. And there are way too many of you, and I'm tired of arguing with you and fighting this pointless battle that I don't see an end to, ever.

So have fun with your little war.

Force wrote:"I'm not advocating a total no-in no-out sealing of our borders"

Simply Joel wrote:of course you're not... as I read your words, you are simply finger pointing problems yet offering no solutions.

I've offered plenty of solutions, but typically, you refuse to acknowledge them, so why should I bother?

Try having a fair and honest conversation with me and you will see my attitude change immediately.

Fortress USA!

Fortress USA!

~