Terrorism .....are we alert enough

[koopkooper]

Folks, I'm concerned for my country. I don't think our residents are even awake as they walk the streets. Here's why.

Two weeks ago I had to fly home for my 94 year old Grandfathers funeral.
I caught the train to the airport and after a few stops a man got on the train wearing a beanie on his head (ski mask Americans call it I think) and a scarf wrapped around his face, he was wearing a modern motorbike jacket and he carried a bag that seemed quite stuffed full. (it was not a cold or windy day by the way)

Well my heart started beating faster and faster, as I pictured him blowing up Sydney in 30 minutes. Here's the strange thing, no one on the packed train even gave him a second look, mind you they all stared at me,hell I was going to a funeral so naturally I am wearing a black suit, tie and black fedora.Perhaps I am the distraction all potential terrorists should hope for.

Anyway I got off at my stop armed with the train and cart number, tried to find train station staff, ofcourse these days it's impossible to find a human as everything is automated and there are just cameras everywhere with no one watching them. Eventually I found someone and breathlessly told him what happened and you know what ...he didn't seem to care, didn't want to write down my discription of the man or take my details.
I just gave up and found the nearest phone booth ( a challenge also) and I called the authorities myself who took my call very seriously.
I assume they picked up this guy pretty soon after the call and found out what his caper was, but you know what.......I bet I was the only guy who did anything about what I saw and I think that is a huge concern.
And here is my other concern.....to me it seemed like this guy was trying to avoid the cameras which are located on train stations and inside the actual trains.....ok here's my question....who watches the cameras??? I suspect no one does.....if somone was then why didn't they report this strange activity ...yes folk 90% of the time the CCTV cameras simply record footage so they can go back to it after the crime....too bloody late.

 

[Senator Jack]

I was in a similar situation. About two years after the first Trade Center attack ('93) I was taking the subway to work every day, as usual, when I began to notice there were very muscular Middle-eastern men exhibiting some very odd behavior. They'd get on the train every morning but at different doors and then look at each other, as though they were making sure they were all on. They all carried large duffel bags, and looked like paramilitary types. This went on for about two weeks. One morning, one of them stood next to me and I noticed a tattoo at his thumb joint. When I got to work I called the FBI. I figured they were going to think I was another nut, but the agent kept me on the phone for about 30 minutes, asking me to describe them, the tatooo, etc. He said they were going to look into it.

I think I saw these men once more after that, and then never again. I often wonder if they were part of some cell.

Regards,

Senator Jack

 

[jamespowers]

I think the message here is going to be to keep your eyes open around you. It could save your life.
I can't remember the author's name but she had an article in the Wall Street Journal concerning an airline flight she had in which several mid-east men were getting up and going to the bathroom in shifts---the same bathroom. When one passenger tried to use the bathroom he was pushed out of the way by one of them. She had an idea that they were trying to assemble something in there and told the stewardess. It ended up getting an air marshal involved but I don't remember the details now.
This whole mess with assembling a bomb in pieces and mixing liquids brought that article to mind. The woman was later questioned by the FBI on the ground if my memory serves me correctly. That one woman could have alerted the whole intelligence network to such a plot and had them ready for it. :eusa_clap Just remember to do your part and not walk around in condition white as well. It might make a difference and the two stories told here might have averted a tragedy as well.

Regards,

J

 

[koopkooper]

Yeah....scary stuff, even now when I think of it sends a shiver down the spine.
Jack I know how you felt....you start to question yourself and wonder if they think that perhaps you are a bit paranoid!
Even my friends think I overeacted but that's the problem, people try to justify this strange behaviour,I think that's what these nuts hope for.
I guess when I was talking to the Rail Employee that he was looking at me thinking I'm insane. We all have a duty to report this kind of behaviour, if we don't we will have another 9/11 or London bombing.
Certainly living here in Sydney we are a major threat as we are the largest city in Australia,it's funny that people will stare at us and ignore the obvious!

 

[Pilgrim]

You raise an interesting issue, and one which is debated in the US, although it's not usually put in these terms: When does security increase to the point where you live in a police state?

I don't think there's a clear answer.

You can station a policeman on every bus, train car and public conveyance and they can check every derelict carrying a duffel bag, college student taking his laundry home, different-looking person with a big lumpy bag, and every mentally adrift person carrying their home in a shopping bag.

But it costs you millions and millions of dollars hiring additional police officers, it trashes your budget, and the result is 99.9% spending your time messing with people who have no ill intent toward anyone.

You can monitor phone calls, filter internet communication, etc. but you end up breaking existing laws that were put in place for good reason. Do you find some suspicious conversations? Probably. Do you have reason to act? I don't know. Does this also cost an incredible amount of moeny, require hiring more security staff, and generally pose an unreasonable burden on law-abiding citizens? Quite possibly.

Now, these things DO need to be done - to some degree, in some places, with judgment and with regard for law. The question is how much, where, when, and how "safe" do you need to be? How "safe" can you be without breaking a mess of laws and becoming a de facto police state where all citizen travel and communication is monitored?

I don't know, but the world of Big Brother is one SHORT step away when you know everything about every citizen. I don't want that for any country.

You simply cannot be safe all the time, you can't examine every nut and homeless person, you can't guard against everything all the time. What the US government (and I assume Great Britain and others) are trying to do is balance the equation and at least provide a level of surveillance that allows them to spot signs of organized activity - not necessarily individual nuts, because there are millions of those, in different flavors.

The recent aircraft problems show that security in Great Britain did their job successfully and spotted a group effort in time to abort one action. Good for them! And I'm sure that the US and British authorities have squelched other plots we'll never hear about. But sooner or later, IMO there will be more deaths from terrorism in the US. The odds simply point that way.

But it makes me nervous when the authorities can arrest people - not tell them why they're being arrested - and make it illegal for their family and friends to tell anyone what happened. This is the case in the US right now, and it is happening. I would feel more comfortable if there had been more meaningful debate about how far things should go, instead of a partisan stampede to the right, passing new laws to make the right wing happy, and leaving it to the courts to reverse decision after decision and action after action. (Which they have.)

Hey, I DO appreciate being safer. I'm not sure the process by which that has been achieved is going to be enough to assure ongoing safety. I don't think ANY process can assure ongoing safety. It only takes one nut with a will and a way to build a bomb. Terrorism is NOT a movement, it's a technique. Anyone can do it. The best we can do is try to spot the group efforts, but sooner or later one or more of the individual nuts will score.

Let me be clear: I don't have solutions - my comments are simply part of the ongoing debate. If the day comes when we can no longer debate this, the police state will be in place and it will be too late for the US.

 

[Feraud]

I can't remember the author's name but she had an article in the Wall Street Journal concerning an airline flight she had in which several mid-east men were getting up and going to the bathroom in shifts---the same bathroom. When one passenger tried to use the bathroom he was pushed out of the way by one of them. She had an idea that they were trying to assemble something in there and told the stewardess. It ended up getting an air marshal involved but I don't remember the details now.
This whole mess with assembling a bomb in pieces and mixing liquids brought that article to mind. The woman was later questioned by the FBI on the ground if my memory serves me correctly. That one woman could have alerted the whole intelligence network to such a plot and had them ready for it. :eusa_clap

I read this article too! Scary stuff huh?

I cannot get over how complacent people are when it comes to observing and "getting involved" in their environment.
Maybe one reason no one notices strange behavior is because everyone is on their cell phone nowadays.

 

[Pilgrim]

I do agree that if people are generally alert to strange behavior, there's no harm (and potential good) in reporting it. And I suspect that many people are more alert than ever before.

 

[Viola]

I read this article too! Scary stuff huh?

I cannot get over how complacent people are when it comes to observing and "getting involved" in their environment.
Maybe one reason no one notices strange behavior is because everyone is on their cell phone nowadays.

I thought that woman sounded like the worst kind of panicky racist. The men had been previously searched. The stewardess merely told her there was "an air marshal in place" to get her to shut up and take her seat.

None of those guys were arrested afterwards, none of them had criminal records, and there was no bomb found in place.

Its not that different than the case in England where they unloaded into a guy for the crime of being brown and wearing an overcoat.

 

[Mike in Seattle]

What amazed me, at SeaTac Int'l six weeks ago, we were getting on a flight to Oakland and not one but TWO passengers made it to the gate, ready to step onto the plane, without going through security and having their tickets stamped. Why they didn't cancel the flight and/or shut down the airport (that's what I thought the procedure was), I don't know. How they did it, I don't know.

 

[Feraud]

I thought that woman sounded like the worst kind of panicky racist. The men had been previously searched. The stewardess merely told her there was "an air marshal in place" to get her to shut up and take her seat.

None of those guys were arrested afterwards, none of them had criminal records, and there was no bomb found in place.

Its not that different than the case in England where they unloaded into a guy for the crime of being brown and wearing an overcoat.

There seems to be a fine line between panicky racist and "if you see something, say something" kind of person I guess. [huh]
I do not remember reading the men had been previously searched.
If anyone is acting suspicous they should be stopped and questioned. I do not care if they are terrorists or Spring Break participants.
Does it make any situation wrong because none of the men were arrested, had criminal records, or had a bomb on hand? How do officers of the law protect us if they are not allowed to assume or check suspicious activity?
I was not aware the guy in England was killed because he was brown and wearing an overcoat.
I assumed the guy was a total idiot for running into a subway station a day after multiple bombings. It is hard to have sympathy for people with no common sense.

 

[Viola]

There seems to be a fine line between panicky racist and "if you see something, say something" kind of person I guess. [huh]
I do not remember reading the men had been previously searched.
If anyone is acting suspicous they should be stopped and questioned. I do not care if they are terrorists or Spring Break participants.
Does it make any situation wrong because none of the men were arrested, had criminal records, or had a bomb on hand? How do officers of the law protect us if they are not allowed to assume or check suspicious activity?
I was not aware the guy in England was killed because he was brown and wearing an overcoat.
I assumed the guy was a total idiot for running into a subway station a day after multiple bombings. It is hard to have sympathy for people with no common sense.

Define suspicious and decide on the number of mistakes and accidental shootings you want to live with. How much should our lives be disrupted because some cop thinks you look furtive (read, busy) or defiant (read, hoping not to get mugged on the train) or, "Arab looking"? (God knows you could be Iraqi, Italian, or Iroquois)

Decide how much protection is worth giving up any pretence of upholding our rights against unreasonable search and seizure. Personally I'd run through the subway too if I was being chased. That guy didn't do anything that earned him the death penalty.

 

[Spatterdash]

Honestly, no, we're not safer.

It would appear that in order for us to be completely safe from Islamic terrorists, we as a nation would have to adopt a culture and a government that was fundamentalist Muslim.
We aren't gonna do it.
Therefore we will always be seen as a great evil and a worthy target by fanatical extremists.

We would rather be free and deal with the hatred of extremists groups. The alternative is never considered for discussion because that alternative is insane.
A friend once asked if I would demand all of my Constitutional rights if it meant a city was destroyed. The answer is yes. My city, my house, they can be destroyed. My family, my friends, none of them want to give up their rights as Americans, especially since that wouldn't be enough to placate religiously-motivated maniacs.
No, I don't think we're having our rights stripped away, not yet, but the talk is in the air. If we're going to be alert, let's be alert not just for attack from terrorists, but also from those who would use the attacks to gain control of our government and citizenry.

No, we're not safe, I don't think we ever were, nor I do see how America should suddenly change just because pundits on both sides of the aisle use the stupid phrase "post 9/11 world".

 

[Salv]

I was not aware the guy in England was killed because he was brown and wearing an overcoat.
I assumed the guy was a total idiot for running into a subway station a day after multiple bombings. It is hard to have sympathy for people with no common sense.

Never have I seen so many errors in just three sentences...

Jean Charles de Menezes was Brazilian, so he had olive coloured skin, much like most middle-eastern men: he was as brown as most of the people under police surveillance. He was wearing a denim jacket, not an overcoat - there's a picture of his body lying on the train floor here (I won't post the picture itself) which clearly shows him wearing just a thin jacket. He was shot the day after failed bombing attempts, not the day after multiple bombings, and far from "running into a subway station" he walked in at a normal pace, stopped to pick up a free newspaper in the station, paid for his ticket, walked through the ticket barrier and used the escalator to get down to the platform. The only time he ran was to get on the just-arrived train - just as hundreds of people run for a train every day in London.

His only mistake was to live in a block of flats in which two suspects also lived. The police made a mistaken identification of him, and assumed he was their man partly because he had "Mongolian eyes" similar to one of the real suspects.

Got any sympathy yet?

 

[Matthew Dalton]

I'm not sure how concerned I am about our country in regards to this. In part because "alert" and "afraid" can become mixed up so easily.

Personally I'm more worried about acts of Parliament than acts of Terrorism.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

What Salv fails to mention is that what most people (mis)understand about the Menezes debacle is exactly the misinformation promulgated by the police in the days immediately following the shooting. The police were out there spreading BS to the media in an attempt to cover up their own disastrous errors.

For example, it was said that he ran from officers after hearing a warning. WRONG.

For example, it was said he hurdled a turnstile. WRONG!

For example, it was said he was wearing a puffa-type jacket. WRONG!

For example, it was said he was a middle eastern man. WRONG!

who said all these wrong things? You got it, the police. And what's theie punishment for intentionally misleading the public? Nothing that i know of.

Back on topic. I agree that we need to be vigilant. And i'm not afraid to say it that if a white chap were to get on a train exhibiting certain behaviours, i probably wouldn't feel so worried as if it were a middle eastern chap. Now, this (my own racism) disgusts me, as it should anyone else.

bk

 

[Feraud]

Define suspicious and decide on the number of mistakes and accidental shootings you want to live with. How much should our lives be disrupted because some cop thinks you look furtive (read, busy) or defiant (read, hoping not to get mugged on the train) or, "Arab looking"? (God knows you could be Iraqi, Italian, or Iroquois)

Decide how much protection is worth giving up any pretence of upholding our rights against unreasonable search and seizure. Personally I'd run through the subway too if I was being chased. That guy didn't do anything that earned him the death penalty.

Yes, how do we define suspicious? It is all subjective isn't it? Your rationale might be different from mine. How can we than judge the air marshalls or whomever from doing what they think is right? I cannot quantify how many accidental shootings I am willing to live with. Having said that, I want law enforcement officials to do the best job they can and not shirk their duties because it may look "politically incorrect" to search someone who looks like a stereotypical terrorist.
What kind of search is unreasonable? Why is being searched such a travesty against one's sense of dignity? Innocent people have nothing to hide.

Never have I seen so many errors in just three sentences...

Got any sympathy yet?

Dude, relax. Viola quoted the "brown & overcoat" comment. Go bust her chops, o.k.?
No I do not need to have sympathy. My concern is the society as a whole, not one person. Running into a subway, the day of, day after, or during makes no difference. Let's not argue semantics here.
My point is one should have common sense in society. When society is feeling "on edge" due to terrorism, etc. you would be better served by considering your surroundings. The case in England might not be the best example of it, and I am not going to defend it.

Here is my own example. When the US goes on "High Alert" and the red flags are being raised, I almost expect to be searched by police on the NYC subways! Why? Because everyone tends to wear shorts and sandals while I travel to work with a fedora, shoulder bag and raincoat (if necessary). Should I throw a temper tantrum over my Civil Rights if a cop asks to check my bag? It takes a lot less time to comply and be on my way to work.

Not that anyone cares about anything other than "their rights".

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Should I throw a temper tantrum over my Civil Rights if a cop asks to check my bag? It takes a lot less time to comply and be on my way to work.

No temper tantrums necessary.

But it think it would be correct for people to be concerned if the police decided to board the train, pin you to your seat, and pump 8 bullets into you because you were wearing what you were. All this without any kind of search. (this is what happened to Menezes, as revealed by the police under pressure from the enquiry into the affair)

bk

 

[Feraud]

But it think it would be correct for people to be concerned if the police decided to board the train, pin you to your seat, and pump 8 bullets into you because you were wearing what you were. All this without any kind of search. (this is what happened to Menezes, as revealed by the police under pressure from the enquiry into the affair)

bk

I will be the first one to stand up and say any situation like that is wrong!

However that is not original situation I chose to discuss. I am talking about the article jamespowers referred to. I accept the fact Viola and I may have different ideas on "reasonable seach". I am not going to give in to the idea that we be less vigilant in airport security because some people who travel have "tender sensibilities" when it comes to suspicious profiling.
I travel and want my family to be safe. If I or anyone else has to stand for a search before boarding a plane, than do it and be done! We are free to find another mode of transportation if we do not like it.

 

[Salv]

What Salv fails to mention is that what most people (mis)understand about the Menezes debacle is exactly the misinformation promulgated by the police in the days immediately following the shooting. The police were out there spreading BS to the media in an attempt to cover up their own disastrous errors.

Excellent point BK.

Dude, relax. Viola quoted the "brown & overcoat" comment. Go bust her chops, o.k.?
No I do not need to have sympathy. My concern is the society as a whole, not one person. Running into a subway, the day of, day after, or during makes no difference. Let's not argue semantics here.
My point is one should have common sense in society. When society is feeling "on edge" due to terrorism, etc. you would be better served by considering your surroundings. The case in England might not be the best example of it, and I am not going to defend it.

Granted, the "brown and overcoat" mistake was not yours, but your callous dismissal of the murder of a completely innocent man needs to be addressed. I shouldn't need to repeat that he was not "running into a subway" and was showing a lack of "common sense" but you seem to have missed the part of my post where I described his movements leading up to his murder. Here it is again:

...far from "running into a subway station" he walked in at a normal pace, stopped to pick up a free newspaper in the station, paid for his ticket, walked through the ticket barrier and used the escalator to get down to the platform. The only time he ran was to get on the just-arrived train - just as hundreds of people run for a train every day in London.

How is that lacking in "common sense"? And how many innocent individuals need to die at the hands of the police before you start to show sympathy?

Should I throw a temper tantrum over my Civil Rights if a cop asks to check my bag? It takes a lot less time to comply and be on my way to work.

If only Jean Charles de Menezes had been given time to throw a temper tantrum... but no, dragged to the floor and shot in the head without warning.

 

[Feraud]

And how many innocent individuals need to die at the hands of the police before you start to show sympathy?

lol lol I cannot help but laugh at that.
Let us just say you have thrust an argument on me that I have absolutely no need to justify!

Tea and sympathy for all! :cheers1: