razorjak | The Terrorists have Won.

On behalf of my country, I apologise.

That news made me more sick & angry than the reports of the London Bombing itself.

What sickens me is the mentality of the idiots. It's as if they expect a hijacker to be dressed up in cartoonish stereotypical middle eastern gard and wielding a scimitar or something.

I'm sure the fucks are patting themselves on the back thinking they've foiled some sinister plot. When, in fact, they've become cogs in a larger sinister plot. That being the neocon plot to keep the population of the world scared and compliant.

sorry to intrude J,

but i aggree, the Irish have Plagued the English for almost 200 years, and ive never come accrost anything that said "englishmen refuse to board a boat or bus, plane ect. because of an Irishman was already on-board" and no, if a "terrorist" was to be on your plane, he would not be dressed ready to meet Allah. he's going to fit right the F*#@ in.

But if you were to come to Az for a DAY! just one, and see the anti-Muslim BILLBOARD's downtown that pricat parties have bought and the general word spoken on these people, it would be enough to eithe rmake you puke or become homocidal.

-Derek

Not going to win any points with me using the "Plagued the English" comment. Switch Irish to IRA or one of the other names they've gone under and we're golden.

Other than that. Agreed.

um, yea, i dint mean it that way, your right. sorry

you've got it. fucking british public.

Start generalising about a nation, and you're as bad as the people on the plane.

tell you what - i see any sign whatsoever that that isn't totally typical from my neighbours and associates, and i'll stop. generalisations are a problem when they are innaccurate.

to be fair, though, my opinion of the british public is no worse than my opinion of humanity in general. fucking *people*.

Hate and suspicion is what the authorities want. It's when people start banding together and questioning that Governments become scared.

I'm not saying that vigilante behaviour is justified. Hell, I'll be one of the first agains the wall when the tabloid-reading masses mobilise with their pitchforks.

Most of the time I agree with you. But until someone sets up a working meritocracy I can take the entrance exam for, I'll be the minority in the corner trying to change people's opinions one by one and avoiding sweeping statements.

fair enough. i'm just fairly bitter and unpleasant, really. i am sometimes pleasantly surprised by people, but as i said to

mrph, i have the disadvantage of being in roughly the whitest place on earth, and working with some real *winners*.

20 million passengers a year travel through Manchester Airport (Heathrow, by comparison process 70m/year), that's over 55000 per day.

There were 150 people on the flight in question making them 0.2% of one airports daily volume.

That sounds pretty much like an exceptional case rather than typical.

If 500 flights a day nationwide were being cancelled because of passengers being racist then it becomes a legitimate generalisation.

Most people hereabouts think the passengers were morons. Then again, Coventry's a very mixed city, so that may not be typical.

i've been avoiding talking to people about this, to be fair. my region is Scotland's Old Tory stronghold, and i work in a very blue collar job, in a very, very white place. my employer is the largest in the region. the equal opportunities survey showed *all* white employees, except two "prefer not to say". and one of those was me. i've already had my weekly complement of "they should go back where they come from" from unrelated conversations. :/

Each and every one of those passengers needs to be lined up and donkeypunched by a syphallitic leper.

Well, I'm not that, but sign me up. Course, I guess I'd have to swim over there to get the job done.

Thanx for the mahablog link though, very insightful.

There used to be a saying in Ireland during the 70s.. "Innocent until proven Irish".. that clearly now has no place... They're talking about profiling people of the Islamic faith here to isloate pockets of 'potential risk'.. You're right.. They won.

Right, profiling is not the answer. We should continue to search everyone at random because it's Random people that are trying to blow themselves up with tens to hundreds of others.

I'm not saying round any arabs up and inter them, but if you're looking for arab terrorist, it doesn't make much sense to search at random. It makes sense to pay them closer attention. Everyone should be scrutinized, but damnit all, I've had a bloody background check, does that matter a damn bit? No. Lets keep on closely scrutinizing little old ladies and blonde people, because we KNOW they're as just as much of a threat as men from Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the like.

Come on Jak, if you're looking for a male rapeist in your hotel, are you going to stop everyone or are you going to look for someone closely matching the description?

Using past behaviour to predict future behaviour in war is what lead to the Maginot Line, and we all know what a great defence that was.

Is the threat from just people who look like 'Arabs'[1] or is it from the Islamic population in general?

If security focuses on young Arab men, then they are much more likely to miss someone who isn't. [2]

You'll notice that most American Muslims are not Arabic.

Just looking at men?
Women have been sucide bombers for over 20 years.
Women of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), or Tamil Tigers, have perpetrated 30–40% of the organization's suicide bombings, which number more than 200.

[1] Which is itself a pretty broad range, from south European to African.
[2] So the terrorist organisation sends half a dozen suspicious looking & acting Arab men as decoys for the actual armed combatants and security spends all their time on the decoys.

Using past behaviour to predict future behaviour in war is what lead to the Maginot Line, and we all know what a great defence that was.

Yes and no. The Maginot line was actually large enough and strong enough that the German Armored Formations bypassed them where possible. In the center of the front, there was very little movement of the front until the Fortresses had been reduced from the rear over the course of weeks. From a modern force doctrine, the Maginot line was pretty good. They just failed to take into account for a lot of new factors. And More critically, the fact that the germans would bypass it again as they had before by going through the low countries. Eban Emael was sufficiently strong and difficult in the geology of Belgium that it was a key point the germans HAD to take in order to enter the rest of the low countries and then france. More over, the entire French Military doctrine was too stiff to quickly respond to the german invasion. The German advance was inside the decision making loop of the French High command. Even the larger, more powerful French ARmored Units in the north were being sent forwards to engage german forces that were already 20 miles to their rear. The example is very poor because there's so much more of an issue with the Maginot line than just "It was a static front and war in the future was about mobile fronts".

Is the threat from just people who look like 'Arabs'[1] or is it from the Islamic population in general?

The threat is largely from People from the Middle East who are devotees to a not so uncommon interpretation of Islam. A White or Asian octogenarian is NOT a threat based on current data. Islamofascist tactics are changing, but they're still sticking to a general pattern. The Home Growns are a new factor, but not significantly outside their previous pattern.

If security focuses on young Arab men, then they are much more likely to miss someone who isn't. [2]

There should be little excuse for a young Arab descended male Terrorist boarding an aircraft with explosives or with knives. Yes they have started going to pains to make themselves look less arab, shave, haircut, etc. But strictly speaking, the obvious holes should have been plugged a long damn time ago.

If your ship has a leak, you fix the big bloody leak that's right in front of you, you don't ignore it and only apply general work to all of the hull. Nor do you ignore the rest of the hull, but half assed measures on the big leak are going to bite you in the ass.

Just looking at men?
Women have been sucide bombers for over 20 years.
Women of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), or Tamil Tigers, have perpetrated 30–40% of the organization's suicide bombings, which number more than 200.

But the larger picture doesn't include the TAmils in the West, they're mostly isolated to Shri Lanka are they not?

They just failed to take into account for a lot of new factors... More over, the entire French Military doctrine was too stiff to quickly respond to the german invasion.

These were the points of my metaphor. Build big installations & rules & people stop thinking. that's huan behaviour. That's why Israeli airport security procedures don't advocate racial profiling.

Tell people to focus on one group & they won't pay attention to anybody else, and you only need one anyone else - and they don't need to actually be terrorists, they just need to be mules.

These were the points of my metaphor. Build big installations & rules & people stop thinking. that's huan behaviour. That's why Israeli airport security procedures don't advocate racial profiling.

True, but I also get the impression that the Israeli's don't waste time on a lot of the things that the TSA does. "Ooh, you've got some sharp nail clippers there, those are illegal." There's also the aspect that RAcially, many Israeli's and Palestinians are of the same race. The possible positive target based on that profile is too likely. If you're in a hotel in Japan looking for Italian Mobsters, stopping all Italian seeming people and giving them close scrutiny is probably a good idea. IF you're in Corsica, it's probably not going to do you any good.

Tell people to focus on one group & they won't pay attention to anybody else, and you only need one anyone else - and they don't need to actually be terrorists, they just need to be mules.

Focus solely, no. Pay them, greater scrutiny, yes. And the Mule issue is more likely than you imagine. But not the way you envision. I expect, it's not too long before we see bombs that have been implanted under the skin/tissue (in the abdomen?) or swallowed/inserted like drug Mules do. At that point it's going to be functionally impossible to find them. Which means getting them BEFORE they start the operation is going to be even more critical. Good thing we have the NYT giving everyone the play by play. :-/

But we're not just looking for arab terrorists, are we? We're looking for converts like Don Stewart-Whyte, Oliver Savant and Brian Young. All three were detained after the recent UK bomb scare.

Come on Jak, if you're looking for a male rapeist in your hotel, are you going to stop everyone or are you going to look for someone closely matching the description?

But you're not looking for a criminal who's already committed a specific crime in this case, are you? You're looking for someone who's likely to. Big difference.

But we're not just looking for arab terrorists, are we? We're looking for converts like Don Stewart-Whyte, Oliver Savant and Brian Young. All three were detained after the recent UK bomb scare.

Granted. Ignoring everyone else is clearly not the answer, I don't espouse that. However, the preference for not profiling suicide bombers and other terrorist in this current day and age is sheer lunacy. There is a current profile. Does that mean the security people should stick to it like glue? No. Does it mean that they should use it as a guide for who they inspect closely, you betcha!

But you're not looking for a criminal who's already committed a specific crime in this case, are you? You're looking for someone who's likely to. Big difference.

Better yet. You've had a string of Murders that are directly attributed to the Sicilian Mob. Do you check out women, black people, irish, asians or look for Goombas toughs?

The problem is that the TSA is not encouraged to be imaginative. They're told to do X. It's assembly line security. One size fits all. That doesn't work very effectively.

Better yet. You've had a string of Murders that are directly attributed to the Sicilian Mob. Do you check out women, black people, irish, asians or look for Goombas toughs?

Problem is, we're not dealing with a specific ethnic group here - the mafia might be Italian and go back generations, but the current problems are more widespread. It's the religion, not the ethnicity or nationality, that's the common thread. And that's much harder to spot.

You could focus on people or arabic or Indian/Pakistani descent, sure. You'd accidentally catch a few Hindus, Christians and Sikhs in the net, but you'd get your increased checks on those who fitted into that group. Would it work, though? Would it actually deliver any benefits?

Problem is, we're not dealing with a specific ethnic group here - the mafia might be Italian and go back generations, but the current problems are more widespread. It's the religion, not the ethnicity or nationality, that's the common thread. And that's much harder to spot.

Yep. It is more rarified, but there are ways to catch them and weed them out. The terrorist elements cannot solely rely upon native converts in the countries they target, they just don't have enough that are willing to do so. And invariably, it's young men from those countries who's families immigrated.

Mind you, those communities need to go under a fine microscope. The Imams/Mullahs who are advocating terrorist acts or worse facilitating those acts need to be put on a plane home. They're not welcome.

You could focus on people or arabic or Indian/Pakistani descent, sure. You'd accidentally catch a few Hindus, Christians and Sikhs in the net, but you'd get your increased checks on those who fitted into that group. Would it work, though? Would it actually deliver any benefits?

Honestly, if you in the process taught the security staff more about the people's of the various regions you probably would. There are functional ways to tell a sikh from a hindu. Sure, disguises are possible, but they're not impenetrable, certainly not with state issued documentation. I don't think I've met many Singh's that are Muslim. Does this mean brand them or put a stamp on their passport which denotes what their religion is, not bloody likely.

Security tasks aren't hard because they're easy. Taking the easy way out and just searching everyone isn't effective. It's certainly not engendering any sense of security in people.

First of all, I imagine you would agree that profiling should be done carefully and properly by trained professionals if it is to be used, rather than on a racial basis by the general public.

Second of all, if we begin excluding little old ladies and blonde people from searches, how long do you think it will be before word gets out, and the terrorists rustle up some elderly folk or dye their hair blonde?

First of all, I imagine you would agree that profiling should be done carefully and properly by trained professionals if it is to be used, rather than on a racial basis by the general public.

Yep, I currently don't trust what we have for security in the US air travel community BECAUSE of the manner and method with which they're hired, trained, what rules they must abide by, what rules we must abide by, what policies they enforce and the methods by which they enforce them.

Case in point, US Military forces deploying on chartered flights walked through Airports with Rifles, Grenade Launchers, Automatic weapons, etc. They boarded planes as units and flew to theatre. They were forced to discard small knives and other tools that they generally carry about with them because it's the kind of thing you have to carry. Were their combat knives discarded. No. Were their firearms checked in luggage. No. Does this make ANY sense what so ever?

Another example is how thefts from luggage has risen not fallen since security was raised at airports. How that happened I have no idea, but a terrorist cell, interested in getting weapons on board would probably be best served by stealing firearms out of the only luggage that's checked and still has locks on it and then getting it onboard a specific flight.

From a general comforture level, the flying public has been coddled and jerked around like a student in a grade school class.

Second of all, if we begin excluding little old ladies and blonde people from searches, how long do you think it will be before word gets out, and the terrorists rustle up some elderly folk or dye their hair blonde?

It's not excluding. It's a matter of don't spend 20 minutes making the little old lady turn out her bags at the desk when you've got 20 other people going past who've been checked less thoroughly. Being a good security agent is not a matter of looking at a card for the flowchart and handling each and every person in exactly the same way. The little old lady is less of a threat. If intelligence points to little old ladies as threats, great, start checking them out closer.

Check people out, if they're nervous, sweating a lot, trip some other factors, then check them out closer, regardless of who they are.

Examples of how NOT to secure the Air:

Penn's experience with the TSA is NOT how it should happen. Either from a security standpoint or from a fixing the problem standpoint. A special list for VIPs to get through security. Sorry, I don't like the idea of a privileged few who get special treatment because they're in the government or a star.

John's experience with the TSA and "dangerous guns" that he legally and lawfully checked. Kit's Observations of the incident.

I have personally stood around and argued with several TSA agents, a Delta official and a cop who were adamant that blank 30.06 ammo, packed loosely in a .50 cal ammo can was not allowed on the plane and that they'd have to confiscate it. It didn't help there cause that there were probably 50 Re-enactors standing around in earshot who walked over and started challenging their arguments. What was clear was that THEY wanted the ammo so they could use it. When they realize we really did know the law and showed how their logical arguments were false, they backed down surprisingly.

TSA and horror stories go hand and hand. The current state of Airline Security isn't. The number of test bombs, test firearms and other things that get through is absurd, yet, soldiers armed with guns aren't trusted with a small pocket knife onboard. That makes perfect sense.

First of all, I imagine you would agree that profiling should be done carefully and properly by trained professionals if it is to be used, rather than on a racial basis by the general public.

Yes. Carefully. So far, we've seen a lot of people saying they won't profile at all. There are reasonable methods to do so based on the current data we have on the terrorist acts so far.

Second of all, if we begin excluding little old ladies and blonde people from searches, how long do you think it will be before word gets out, and the terrorists rustle up some elderly folk or dye their hair blonde?

They might even track down some folks from Iran that have bit more than a touch of blood from Alexander and Company. But, exclusion of little old ladies is not what I mean. Greater attention to those that are more of the profile, fewer that are not within the profile.

Happened to a Canadian in the US recently.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/08/18/doctor-winnipeg.html

The Terrorists have Won.

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject