al-Qaeda tries to down USA plane with Canadian abord?

SparkyOne wrote:

If he would have blown up the airplane then it wouldn't have been a threat or an attack either just big brother blowing up the airplane to try and rally everyone to hate terrorists I'm sure.

Heck I bet this guy is a CIA operative!  He failed to kill everyone on that airplane on purpose so he could get caught

We are supposed to understand that all brown people are secret members of a shadowy group sometimes known as Al Qa'eda. And if they aren't members of Al-CIA'da, then we are encouraged to assume they are simply auditioning for full-time jobs with Al-CIA'duh. Everyone is a potential Al-CIA'da hit man lurking behind every tree and public washroom ready to shove a Holy book down our throats before they blow us all to kingdom come Islamic gladio-style.

It's like Church inquisitors of long ago who pointed accusing fingers and shouted, "Heretic!", and, "illuminata!"

Al CIA'duh is a fake replacement enemy for the evol Sovs.

NorthReport wrote:

You may not have family members flying over the holidays but I do. Get a grip yourself. 

I'm flying over the holidays myself, and the last thing i'm worried about is a terrorist bombing.  I'm also not worried about being struck by lightning, and i'd guess that the chances of each are comparable.

If this is really about keeping your family safe, they're much more likely to get killed or injured on a highway than in a plane.  And yet you're not on a mad posting spree telling us al about the dangers of cars.

I suppose you'd rather post about "an unresolved tension at the heart of militant Islam" than about, say, the need for adequate public transit funding.

For many, mandatory stip searches before boarding will be worth the perception of security.

Stockholm wrote:

... the guy cleared security in Lagos, Nigeria. He then changed planes in Amsterdam. People don't go through security again when they change planes within the same terminal

Not true - depending where you're flying to/from you may have to clear security again when you land.  Last time I flew into Santiago on my way to Mendoza I had to clear security [b]in Santiago[/b] when I landed before I could enter the terminal proper (and my flight was coming from Atlanta).  I've had to do the same thing in Europe.

Quote:

this has nothing to do with Schiphol airport or with Dutch security. If you are looking for a smoking gun - you better start looking in Lagos.

On this one I agree (sort of) - but that's only because Netherlands hasn't instituted a security check for people entering the airport from another flight.  Expect that to be high on the list of possible changes in the future.

But, if [url=http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2009/12/flight_253_passenger... report[/url] is to be believed, the "bomber" boarded without a passport - I find that amazing because, if the US were to refuse to allow him entry he'd be sent back to Amsterdam [b]at the airline's expense[/b].

I feel sorry for you North Report. You are a very scared person who is easily influenced by media. The saddest part of all is that while you are fretting away finding every link to every crappy excuse for journalism on the web you do not notice the fact that you and your family are in iminent danger of cars, climate change, cancer, poverty, and mental health problems. This is how most of us will die and there are very specific causes for each that could be identified if we could stop obsessing about fake terrorists and criminals and scary people trying to attack us because they hate our freedom.

wage zombie wrote:

For many, mandatory stip searches before boarding will be worth the perception of security.f

The response to this episode is what I have seen referred to as "security theatre". Steps are taken to make everyone feel nice, warm, cuddly and safe. The actions don't involve any kind of profiling, and thus are politically correct. The actions also involve huge amounts of cost and inconvenience, and accomplish nothing.

After September 11, people were forced to go through elaborate-seeming checks, and forced to come to the airport 2 hours early. This effectively made air travel between such points as New York City and Boston, or Washington DC not worthwhile, thus dealing a long-term blow to an already staggering airline industry. Security checks were added to the lobbies of New York City office buildings. In the courthouses where I practiced, a well-running photo ID bypass was scrapped, and new cards issued to all attorneys making re-application.

After the Richard (I think) Reid attempt to detonate his sneakers, people were made to remove their shoes while boarding planes. This increased the aggravation of going through security, but does anyone really think that sneakers are a prime place to hide explosives?

Next was the summer of 2006 plot to bring down multiple planes at the same time, using explosives concealed in hair gel bottles, to be mixed on the planes. Now, people can't bring Poland Springs water onto planes that no longer have food service. Again, flight was made maddingly inconvenient and uncomfortable, since one cannot bring on carry-on luggage shampoo or other cosmetics they intend to use at their destination. Thus, almost everyone must check bags, and be forced to wait 30 to 120 minutes for luggage to be returned. How much safety is really gained?

Now, let's talk about methods that could be effective. It could start with not allowing people onto planes who are on terrorist databases, or at least screening them privately and far more extensivly. Umar Farouk Abulmutallab was in such databases. Indeed, he was reported by his own father, who was concerned about his son's voyage off the deep end [url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34592031/ns/us_news-security/](link), excerpt below[/url]:

msnbc wrote:

Watch list

Despite being on the broad terrorist watch list, Abdulmutallab, who comes from a prominent and wealthy Nigerian family, had a multiple-entry U.S. visa. It was issued last year. U.S. officials say he came to the attention of America intelligence in November, when his father expressed concerns to the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria about his son's extremist views.

As Lorne Gunter points out in [url=http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/politically+correct+myth+airline+bom..."The politically correct myth of airline bombers" (link)[/url]:

Lorne Gunter wrote:

Now not only will airport security inspectors be asking us to unbuckle our belts so the may scan our fly areas for weapons, they'll be looking for icing sugar secreted away in our jockeys, too.

And, of course, all this will amount to barking up the wrong tree.

By Boxing Day, the effects of Abdulmutallab's failed terror attack on a Detroit-bound flight were already being felt by innocent air passengers in North America and Western Europe. On international flight inbound for the U.S., no passenger was permitted to rise up out of his or her seat during the final half-hour before landing, nor were they permitted to hold any personal items on their laps during this 30-minute, Homeland Security-imposed timeout.

On some flights, no cabin lights were dimmed, so flight attendants might more easily check passengers "packages" to ensure they weren't hiding any that might go boom.

But why the last 30 minutes of flights? Why not 45? Or 60? Indeed, why permit passengers to rise from their seats at all once airborne? Simply issue everyone with catheters or bleach bottles and never turn off the "Fasten Seatbelts" sign.

Each new layer of security, each new inconvenience for the travelling public, is mostly a placebo. It does very little to improve our inflight safety. Instead, each is imposed mostly to make it appear as though authorities are doing something and to give us the public some reassurance that they are safe in the air.

As Mr. Gunter correctly states (same link as above), some kind of narrowing of focus is necessary to make security measures effective, and avoid massive inconvenience for all:

Lorne Gunter wrote:

No matter what we screen for, no matter how much we irritate and inconvenience passengers at airports, the bad guys will figure out new ways to bring potential death aboard our planes.

The real trick is screening out bad guys. But to do that would require a cultural will the West has not yet shown itself capable of. It would require us to admit that young Muslims -- mostly young Muslim males -- see themselves at war with the West, so they require a special level of scrutiny from security and intelligence forces.

Perhaps Mr. Gunter's approach isn't totally correct. Israel would be crippled, given the number of young Muslim males it has, to use the "Gunter" approach. They use behavoral profiling, which identifies certain "red flag" conduct and intensively scrutinizes those people. Even Jack London's canine character [u]White Fang[/u] could identify the approach of an attacker to his master's house, as opposed to the approach of someone arriving on legitimate business. The attacker did not fare well.

If a dog can do it (and I don't think it's only fictional dogs that can) why can't we?

And one more thought; why not a little waterboarding of Mr. Abdulmutallab? I sure would like to know who is Al Quaeda contacts are and what their plans are. But, oh, heavens no. Just as we must respect Mr. Khadr's rights, we must respect Mr. Abdulmutallab's. The rights of travellers are subordinate to the politically correct solicitude for Mr. Abdulmutallab's and Mr. Khadr's rights.

Quote:

It would require us to admit that young Muslims -- mostly young Muslim males -- see themselves at war with the West, so they require a special level of scrutiny from security and intelligence forces.

Quote:

why not a little waterboarding of Mr. Abdulmutallab? I sure would like to know who is Al Quaeda contacts are and what their plans are. But, oh, heavens no. Just as we must respect Mr. Khadr's rights, we must respect Mr. Abdulmutallab's. The rights of travellers are subordinate to the politically correct solicitude for Mr. Abdulmutallab's and Mr. Khadr's rights.

Fucking fascist trolls really creep out of the woodwork when shit like this happens. They can't wait to fire up the concentration camps. Take your Gunter and fuck off.

[url=http://www.legitgov.org/northwest_bomb_plot_oddities.html]Northwest Bomb Plot 'Oddities'[/url] Citizens for Legit Government

Quote:

According to CNN, the terror suspect's father tried to warn authorities. CNN reported: The father of a man suspected in a botched terror attack aboard a Northwest Airlines flight contacted the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria recently with concerns his son was planning something, a senior U.S. administration official said Saturday. The father -- identified by a family source as Umaru Abdul Mutallab -- contacted the U.S. Embassy "a few weeks ago" saying his son, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, had "become radicalized," the senior administration official, who is familiar with the case, told CNN.

And yet, Abdulmutallab was not obliged to undergo any additional airport screening layers, prior to boarding for the last leg of his journey to Detroit.

Also, lest we forget: Three key provisions of the Patriot Act are scheduled to expire 31 December 2009. Hmm. I wonder if post-Abdulmutallab they will get renewed?

Abdulmutallab was thwarted by a quote, unquote vacationing movie producer, Jasper Schuringa, who, within seconds, asserted that he not only tackled the suspect and put him in a headlock but also tried 'to search his body for any explosives' (CNN). Unless one was a bona-fide law enforcement professional or a military agent, who on earth would think of searching a man who had just set himself on fire, in a matter of seconds, for more explosives

 

And speaking of radicalizing, US whistleblower Sibel Edmonds says that the CIA's massive radicalization program in Asia and Africa is ongoing. [url=http://911reports.wordpress.com/2009/09/17/sibel-edmonds-deposition-vide... Edmonds Deposition Video Clips re: 9/11 & Nuclear Trafficking[/url] The struggle for legit colder war enemies continues

NorthReport wrote:

Quite the bleeding hearts here. Someone gets on a plane and tries to blow it up and you want to the authorities to do nothing. What kind of absurd world do you live in? Dictators love people like that. 

These are people who were either hurt asa children or been deprived of all hope by Israeli and U.S. conduct. Have pity on them.

NorthReport wrote:

With that kind of thinking perhaps we should have a national holiday named after that wonderful human being Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. He could be our hero of the new century or something like that. 

 

With WHAT kind of thinking? I wasn't the one who forgot to put the man on the "no fly list".  That was the fault of your precious authorities.  "Bleeding hearts" bear no blame for this at all.

And it's truly offensive that you'd think I see this disturbed fool as a hero.  You owe me and all the other "bleeding hearts" an apology for such a disgusting suggestion.

 

 

You'd think someone in the over-bloated security-industrial complex would have been sent a memo about the father's warning. Door number one again, Monty: Let it happen on purpose. Again.

Quote:

From start to finish, this discussion has served no useful purpose

I don't know, North Report got to troll the site and call everyone who didn't buy zis paranoid agenda a "bleading heart". Now we know that s/he has immunity from the all mighty Babble Policy.

Ken Burch wrote:

Besides, the incident on the Delta flight was "the authorities" fault.  THEY'RE the ones who forgot to put the guy on the "no fly list" when his  father's warning should have sealed the deal on that.

Manchurian Candidate:

The Pentagon knew who it was dealing with. His father had warned them weeks before. Based on what it knew, the Pentagon said, "Ah, he's our man! We can use him."

Quote:

Not one single solitary alternative to what the authorities are doing has been suggested here. Just bash, bash, bash the authorities. Get a grip.

 

No remember, my suggestion wasn't "real world" enough for you. It's to zaney to suggest that if we stopped ATTACKING and KILLING people around the world that maybe we would be safer when we fly around that world in climate change mobiles.

 

I think that this thread is a stupid waste of time because you are not interested in discussing why this happened or what might actually be done to stop people from blowing up planes. You just want some kind of "yeah, NP's got a good point more security!!!" love in and you have called anyone who disagrees with your stupid idea a "bleeding heart". You just keep saying "but look at this, we need more security" and all that shit. So what are you looking for? A forum to call people names or a discussion? I think you are trolling and I'm outa here.

NorthReport wrote:

9/11 never happened.

9/11 was an inside job.

Ken Burch wrote:

His FATHER warned the officials that his son had gone off the rails.

Oh, the Pentagon knew alright. They used him as their Manchurian Candidate (or mole). He thought he was working for al-Qaeda. That's what the CIA wanted him to think. Al-Qaeda is a front organization for the CIA. Al-Qaeda has no real existence of its own. "Al-Qaeda exists because we say it exists."

The reason why he got on the plane and why the "bomb" had the strength of a firecracker is that it was necessary for him to be on the plane, but it wasn't necessary for him to kill anyone to achieve the objective of creating post 9/11 security and Global War On Terror (continued Dutch military engagement in Afghanistan) hysteria.

The end result?

The Pentagon got what it wanted.

NorthReport wrote:

I see.

So kids have disagreements with their parents and their parents complain to the authorities, and on that basis kids, young adults should be put on a no-fly list. Right. Let's just continue to bash the people that are trying to protect the flying public.

 

His father warned the authorities that he had embraced a violent extremist philosophy.  It was a hell of a lot more than  "a disagreement".  It's not like dad called the security services because the kid wanted to borrow his car for the weekend.  Why are you so determined to let the "authorities" off the hook for their negiligence?  And why are you lashing out at "bleeding hearts" instead of the authorities, when none of US had anything to do with what happened on that plane?  Are you that upset because we don't support say, carpetbombing Yemen and Nigeria?