![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
The Terrorists have Won.
Simple as that. They've won.
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/08/fear-mongering-leads-to-anti-arab.html
http://www.mahablog.com/?p=951
Each and every one of those passengers needs to be lined up and donkeypunched by a syphallitic leper.
Irish terrorists have killed more british people than the middle eastern ones have. Have any flights ever been delayed because the assholes refused to fly until those scary "furners" speaking in irish accents were ejected?
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/08/fear-mongering-leads-to-anti-arab.html
http://www.mahablog.com/?p=951
Each and every one of those passengers needs to be lined up and donkeypunched by a syphallitic leper.
Irish terrorists have killed more british people than the middle eastern ones have. Have any flights ever been delayed because the assholes refused to fly until those scary "furners" speaking in irish accents were ejected?
no subject
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.
no subject
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?
no subject
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.