Terrorism .....are we alert enough

[Salv]

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:

That's a fairly feeble attempt at sidestepping the real point - de Menezes did nothing to justify his death. Unfortunately you are unable to admit that you made a mistake in thinking that he did.

 

[jamespowers]

look, if you have a problem with the police in England, file a formal complaint. That isn't our scope here and neither is feelgoodism.
I don't recall all the points of the original article I spoke of earlier and I cannot find it again to check it out. I think the woman's last name was MacDonald though. I'll do some more searching and see if I can get the full text.

Regards to all,

J

 

[geo]

Salv,
His death is unfortunate. In extreme situations like terrorism or wars, people's judgement is altered, and the instinct of survival dominates reasoning. The guy was killed by mistake, and mistakes like these occur in extreme situations. I do not judge the police for shooting him, because under similar circumstances, I could have made the same mistake. Many of us armchair (or keyboard) philosophers here would have made the same mistake.

 

[Feraud]

That's a fairly feeble attempt at sidestepping the real point - de Menezes did nothing to justify his death. Unfortunately you are unable to admit that you made a mistake in thinking that he did.

Absolutely not. I replied to Baron Kurtz and said I would be the first one to stand up to say a situation like that is wrong.

You are beating a dead horse in pushing the England situation. If you consider your police force a "hit squad" then take it up with them.

The fact still remains that if anyone is ever acting suspicious on an airline, subway, or where ever they should be checked out. Not shot down, but questioned. I do not care if you are white, brown, or green.

Case closed?

 

[Viola]

Granted, the "brown and overcoat" mistake was not yours,

I'll own that one. The "brown" aspect covers what I shall refer to as Racially Ambigious Tan, the color that Hollywood uses to play everyone who isn't white i.e. Italians playing Indians, Jews playing Sicilians, and the Rock playing an Egyptian emperor.

My point was merely that I believe that those cops would have less likely to unload into a pale pink native Englishman, and that his "tan" hue contributed to his murder.

Overcoat vs. denim coat thing I merely apologize for. I had only meant that, last I checked, jackets were allowed on the train and it is not terroristic to want one. My bad.

 

[Daisy Buchanan]

QUOTE=Feraud]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.[/QUOTE]
I agree. It may be a huge inconvenience to us travelers, but if it makes me safer, than I say do it. That's just my opinion. I think that there are a lot of things that we as American's can do to try and make this world a safer place. I'm glad to hear that Koopkooper and Senator Jack did what they did. I wish more people would be as vigilant.
When I first heard the news of the most recent terror plot, I was horrified. The many laws that people are saying are invasive to their privacy are some of the same laws that helped to thwart this potentially massive attack. I have nothing to hide, so an invasion into my phone conversation isn't gonna bother me. Once again, this is just my own opinion.

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.

Well, if this man didn't have anything to hide or had some bit of common sense he wouldn't of run.Would you really run?? If I was stopped by the police, that would be the last thing I would do. I have nothing to hide. Running just raises their level of suspicion and puts the authorities on higher alert. I don't think that search and seizure is unreasonable when my safety is at stake. I can't tell you how many times I have had my bags searched at the airport. Yes, it is annoying, but it makes me feel more secure. Let's face it. We live in a world full of extremeists who would like nothing more than to see us suffer through another 911. It is because of them that this invasion of privacy is occuring. So, although the government leaves a lot to be desired, but we can't blame them for this, we can only blame those who are planning these massive attacks. Also, I hear people opposed to the government complaining about their ways. But, I neve hear these people suggest any other way of operating. All they do is talk about how horrible the government is in their handling of the situations. I would have more respect for these complainers if they actually put other ideas on the table. Yet, they don't, this makes me lose respect for them. If you don't like the way government is operating, that's fine, but talk about ways to make it better, don't just complain then offer up nothing......

 

[Pilgrim]

A friend once asked if I would demand all of my Constitutional rights if it meant a city was destroyed.

Questions like this are part of the problem, NOT part of the solution. The question is meaningless, and has no more significance - nor deserves an answer - any more than the question: "Do you walk to school or carry your lunch?".

People often try to support their own agendas by asking questions that allow no meaningful answer. They ask the question rhetorically, to make their OWN point - and ignore yours.

Don't dignify such questions with an answer. Demand that the questioner define a condition in which such a question would apply.

 

[Viola]

Daisy, if you're willing to give up your right to private conversations because you have "nothing to hide," to be searched at any time, to be shot without explanation in the streets by the feds... is the nation that ends up so safe still the U.S.?[huh]

Would I run from a bunch of strange men following me through the subway station? Like my hair was on fire. All you would see would be a short blur.

 

[Feraud]

Terrorism works. It undermines our sense of safety, trust in neighbors, faith in "those in charge", and political policy. It causes us to fight amongst ourselves about questions that we agree more on than not.

I do think everyone who has taken the time to write has valid points. What we probably disagree with is the degree to what steps we are willing to take for our security. The beauty of our discussion is no one is willing (I hope lol ) to kill anyone else over a difference of opinion.

:cheers1: To you all!

 

[Feraud]

Daisy, if you're willing to give up your right to private conversations because you have "nothing to hide," to be searched at any time, to be shot without explanation in the streets by the feds... is the nation that ends up so safe still the U.S.?[huh]

Wait a sec. She never said she is willing to be shot without explanation in the streets by the feds!!
You do not have the right to take one sentence a person writes and lump it in together with everything you think is wrong with the world!

No one should feel the need to defend a statement they did not make.

A slight edit is in order.

 

[Viola]

Wait a sec. She never said she is willing to be shot without explanation in the streets by the feds!!
You do not have the right to take one sentence a person writes and lump it in together with everything you think is wrong with the world!

No one should feel the need to defend a statement they did not make.

A slight edit is in order.

I'm not trying to be nasty and I apologize. (I'll leave in the original post otherwise this one won't make any sense)

I guess I misconstrued her being okay with that guy getting shot. Off day, not enough coffee, my fault.

 

[Feraud]

Off day, not enough coffee, my fault.

Let us all break for coffee!

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Well, if this man didn't have anything to hide or had some bit of common sense he wouldn't of run.Would you really run?? If I was stopped by the police, that would be the last thing I would do. I have nothing to hide. Running just raises their level of suspicion and puts the authorities on higher alert.

Sorry to keep harping on this one, but he didn't run from the police. He had no idea there were people following him. He ran to catch a train that was just about to leave. And when we say run, he dashed across the platform: no more than 10 yards. He took his seat. Armed men rushed onto the train. They shouted at him and he rose to see what was going on. One of them grabbed him and pinned him to his seat. Another shot him 6 times in the head, once in the shoulder. One bullet missed. These are the established facts - established from eye witness accounts (somewhat unreliable: these are the same accounts that tell us there were wires running out of his jacket into his pocket), police testimony and CCTV footage.

He was a casual labourer with no links to any terror organisation.

In the days following the attacks the level of media manipulation (planting of false stories, rumours, information and downright lies) by the police and politicos, and the cowardly aquiescence by the very same media was astonishing, and perhaps unprecedented in the UK (it is possibly matched by the behaviour of the police over their handling of the Stephen Lawrence affair - a black teen who was killed in London by a gang of white thugs - but this is argued over).

As you can see, this issue has stimulated a very large amount of thought on my part. I'm done for now.

bk

 

[Daisy Buchanan]

Daisy, if you're willing to give up your right to private conversations because you have "nothing to hide," to be searched at any time, to be shot without explanation in the streets by the feds... is the nation that ends up so safe still the U.S.?[huh]

Would I run from a bunch of strange men following me through the subway station? Like my hair was on fire. All you would see would be a short blur.

No, I never said that I was willing to be shot. All I was saying is that if I was about to be apprehended by the feds, I would do as they say. Running just raises the suspicion level. Do I think it's fair that this person was shot, NO. Do I want to be shot, NO. I never said this. If you are going to quote other loungers, you should try to get it right. I also stated, quite a few times that this was just my opinion. Jumping down my throat for an opinion you don't like is wrong. I wasn't judging you for saying you would run, I was just asking you why you would. Once again, as I stated before, I understand why people are complaining about the way terrorism is being handled. But, I have yet to hear these "complainers" make statements as how to handle terrorism. Complain away, when they have a better idea.
And no, I have nothing to hide, and any person who is not carrying a bomb on a plane has nothing to hide as well. So yes it is an inconvenience. But I'd rather be inconvenienced than dead. We wouldn't have to give up our civil liberties if mass quantities of terrorists didn't have many different plots for massive massacres.

Wait a sec. She never said she is willing to be shot without explanation in the streets by the feds!!
You do not have the right to take one sentence a person writes and lump it in together with everything you think is wrong with the world!

No one should feel the need to defend a statement they did not make.

A slight edit is in order.

Thanks Feraud. Sometimes people can become passionate about a cause, and only read parts of statements because of this passion. It isn't fair to mis-quote anyone. Thanks you.

 

[carebear]

The idea that the visible security efforts you see at the airport have or can have any effect on a truly professional or motivated terrorist of any stripe is laughable.

Do a little research into the TSA's record of catching test items. They have the same miss rate now as private security had prior to 9/11. The accounts of theft by TSA and airport employees continue to accumulate. Anything that can be taken out of baggage can be put into baggage.

Check the numbers of items and tools accidently and innocently left on board aircraft by servicing personnel. If they can do it by accident, they can do it on purpose.

The probability that random or subjectively based "stop and frisks" would be misused is so high as to be frightening, based on our nation's past experience with court-sanctioned violations of basic liberties. The gains (poorly documented if any) don't justify the cost in, yes, inconvenience and the creation of a culture where all are now suspected of being guilty of something before being proven innocent by authority.

In short, there's little we can do security wise that is visible to the public that will matter one iota in how "secure" we really are. It's all smoke and mirrors to fool an ignorant and fearful populace, made more fearful by those who are there ostensibly to protect us.

The guys we are actually catching, here and abroad, are being caught by good solid police work. Amazingly, the Brits, who put a high value on long term observation, are catching people with plans and materials all worked out. We're busting Texas retail phone salesmen and boot-lacking Florida nutjobs.

 

[Daisy Buchanan]

Sorry to keep harping on this one, but he didn't run from the police. He had no idea there were people following him. He ran to catch a train that was just about to leave. And when we say run, he dashed across the platform: no more than 10 yards. He took his seat. Armed men rushed onto the train. They shouted at him and he rose to see what was going on. One of them grabbed him and pinned him to his seat. Another shot him 6 times in the head, once in the shoulder. One bullet missed. These are the established facts - established from eye witness accounts (somewhat unreliable: these are the same accounts that tell us there were wires running out of his jacket into his pocket), police testimony and CCTV footage.

He was a casual labourer with no links to any terror organisation.

In the days following the attacks the level of media manipulation (planting of false stories, rumours, information and downright lies) by the police and politicos, and the cowardly aquiescence by the very same media was astonishing, and perhaps unprecedented in the UK (it is possibly matched by the behaviour of the police over their handling of the Stephen Lawrence affair - a black teen who was killed in London by a gang of white thugs - but this is argued over).

As you can see, this issue has stimulated a very large amount of thought on my part. I'm done for now.

bk

Once again, I DO NOT THINK IN THIS INSTANCE THAT THE MAN WHO WAS BRUTALLY SHOT 6 TIMES SHOULD HAVE BEEN SHOT.
In other cases, when people run from the feds, this raises suspision.

 

[Daisy Buchanan]

I'm not trying to be nasty and I apologize. (I'll leave in the original post otherwise this one won't make any sense)

I guess I misconstrued her being okay with that guy getting shot. Off day, not enough coffee, my fault.

Thanks. I just saw this. I think it was being posted at the same time I was writing my last post.
Thanks again. I appreciate it. If I were there, I'd join you for that cup of coffee.

 

[Story]

"Situational Awareness is your friend"

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.

Annie Jacobsen
http://www.womenswallstreet.com/columns/column.aspx?aid=846

Strongly suggested reading for all.

 

[jamespowers]

Annie Jacobsen
http://www.womenswallstreet.com/columns/column.aspx?aid=846

Strongly suggested reading for all.

That's the article! Thanks Story. :eusa_clap

Regards,

J

 

[VintageJess]

Amazingly, the Brits, who put a high value on long term observation, are catching people with plans and materials all worked out. We're busting Texas retail phone salesmen and boot-lacking Florida nutjobs.

Carebear,

You might also note that in the United Kingdom many of the anti-terror laws provide law enforcement and intelligence agencies with far more leeway in investigating than what we have here in the U.S.

Jessica