Full body scans for US bound flights

[mgb_phys]

It is just silly to lump together the dangers posed by crew members and the dangers posed by passengers, for effective measures, they constitute totally independent groups, each requiting their own set of effective security measures.

The important point is not to base your security on what happened last time
That was the whole problem.
Hijackers in the past didn't hurt anybody, they were either paid or flew to Cuba.
So policy was don't resist. That allowed a bunch of hijackers to fly planes into buildings.

So deciding that hijackers are all middle eastern men, and only security checking them is going to have the same effect. They are going to get a white looking guy to smuggle the next bomb.
Then you add the specific details of that guy to the list ... and so on.

Do you think El-Al security look down the line of passengers and don't bother to search anybody with a yamulke ?

 

[chayced]

From Wikipedia
2000 October 13, Firebombing of Temple Beth El (Syracuse) :Islamic Terrorists

2000: 2000 New York terror attack Three young men of Arab descent hurled crude Molotov cocktails at a synagogue in The Bronx,New York to "strike a blow in the Middle East conflict between Israel and Palestine".[24] Islamic Terrorists

2001 May 21 The Center for Urban Horticulture at the University of Washington burned. Replacement building cost $7,000,000. Earth Liberation Front members pleads guilty.[29][30]
ELF
2001 September 11: September 11, 2001 attacks carried out by Al-Qaeda. The attacks were carried out by Islamic fundamentalists using hijacked commercial airplanes to damage the twin towers of the World Trade Center, and The Pentagon. Building 7 of the World Trade Center was also destroyed but was not hit with a plane. A fourth plane crashed prematurely in Pennsylvania. Investigations have been conducted. Some critics however maintain that a thorough enough investigation has not been carried out. Islamic Terrorists.
2001 September 18: November - 2001 anthrax attacks. Letters tainted with anthrax kill five across the United States, with politicians and media officials as the apparent targets. On July 31, 2008 Bruce E. Ivins a top biodefense researcher committed suicide.[31] On August 6, 2008 the FBI concluded that Ivins was solely responsible for the attacks and suggested that Ivins wanted to bolster support for a vaccine he helped create and that he targeted two lawmakers because they were Catholics who held pro choice views.[32] Crazy Guy?
May 2002 Mailbox Pipe Bomber: Lucas John Helder rigged pipe bombs in private mailboxes to explode when the boxes were opened. He injured 6 people in Nebraska, Colorado, Texas, Illinois, and Iowa. His motivation was to garner media attention so that he could spread a message denouncing government control over daily lives and the illegality of marijuana as well as promoting astral projection. Crazy Guy
2002 July 4: 2002 Los Angeles Airport shooting Hesham Mohamed Hadayet, a 41-year-old Egyptian national, kills two Israelis and wounds four others at the El Al ticket counter at Los Angeles International Airport. The FBI concluded this was terrorism, although they found no evidence linking Hadayet to any terrorist group.[33] Islamic Terrorist
October 2002 Beltway Sniper Attacks: During three weeks in October 2002 John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo killed 10 people and critically injured three others in Washington D.C, Baltimore, and Virginia. An earlier spree by the pair had resulted in 3 deaths in Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, California, Arizona, and Texas to bring the total to 16 deaths. No motivation was given at the trial but evidence presented showed an affinity to the cause of the Islamic jihad. Islamic Terrorist
2006 March 5: Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar injured 6 when he drove an SUV into a group of pedestrians at UNC-Chapel Hill to "avenge the deaths or murders of Muslims around the world".[34] Islamic Terrorist
2006 Seattle Jewish Federation shooting, Egyptian shoots six Jewish women Islamic Terrorist
2007 October 26: A pair of improvised explosive devices were thrown at the Mexican Consulate in New York City. The fake grenades were filled with black powder and detonated by fuses causing very minor damage. Police were investigating the connection between this and a similar attack against the British Consulate in New York in 2005.[35] ?
2008 February: In the first reported incident of animal-rights extremists physically assaulting the family members of animal researchers, six masked activists attempted to force their way into the home of a University of California, Santa Cruz, researcher and injured the researcher's husband.[36][37] Animal Rights
2008 March 3: Four multimillion-dollar show homes place in Woodinville, Washington are torched. The Earth Liberation Front is suspected in the fires.[38] ELF
2008 May 4 Multiple nail laden pipe bombs exploded at a Federal Courthouse in San Diego at 1:40 AM causing "considerable damage" to the entrance and lobby and sending shrapnel two blocks away. The F.B.I. is investigating links between this attack and an April 25 explosion at the FedEx building also in San Diego.[39][40] ?
2008 July 27 Jim D. Adkisson opened fire in the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville,Tennessee killing two and injuring seven before being tackled to the ground by congregation members. A note found in his SUV indicated this was intended as a suicide attack and said the church was apparently targeted because of its support of liberal social policies.[41] Crazy Conservative
2008 August 2, August 3 University of California-Santa Cruz molecular biologist David Feldheim's home was firebombed. A car belonging to another researcher from that University was destroyed by a firebomb in what is presumed to be related. FBI is investigating incidents as domestic terrorism related to animal rights groups.[42][43] Animal Rights
2008 Summer and Fall: White House computer email archives attacked several times. Chinese intelligence suspected.[44] Not Terrorism.
2009 April 8: According to a report in the Wall Street Journal intruders have left malware in power grids, water and sewage systems that could be activated at a later date. While the attacks which have occurred over a period of time seem to have originated in China and Russia it is unknown if they are state sponsored.[45] ?
2009 May 31: Assassination of George Tiller. Dr. George Tiller, a doctor who provided late term abortions was shot to death in a Wichita, Kansas church. Tiller was shot previously in 1993 and his abortion clinic had been bombed in 1985. Alleged assassin Scott Roeder, who believes in justifiable homicide of abortion providers, has been arrested for the killing.[46][47] Anti Abortion
2009 May 25: Crude bomb explodes in a Starbucks in Manhattan's Upper East Side. On July 14 Kyle Shaw age 17 is arrested and pleaded not guilty. He is being held pending $300,000 bond or $100,000 cash bail. Police allege his motive was to emulate "Project Mayhem" a series of assaults on cooperate America portrayed in the movie Fight Club.[48] Crazy Guy
2009 June 1: Arkansas recruiting office shooting One military recruiter was killed and another critically injured by gunshot at a Little Rock, Arkansas Army/Navy Career Center. The suspect Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad said he was upset over U.S. killing of Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan.[49] Islamic Terrorist
2009 June 10: United States Holocaust Memorial Museum shooting. A gunman identified as 88 year old James Wenneker von Brunn walked into the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington D.C. and shot a guard who later died. Wenneker von Brunn was critically wounded when security guards immediately returned fire but is expected to live.[50] Wennecker von Brunn has been described as a white supremacist and a neo-Nazi.[51] White Supremacist
2009 July 4: A denial of service attack of unusual length and sophistication affected United States and South Korean government websites as well as websites for the Washington Post and NASDAQ. Websites for several U.S. government agencies were shut down for up to 3 days. A sophisticated organization or nation was suspected according to the National Intelligence Service.[52] ?

So, a rough total:
8 Islamic Terrorist acts.
2 ELF
2 Animal Rights
2 Crazy Guys
1 Crazy Conservative
1 Anti Abortion
1 White Supremacist
4 Unknown
This is not a complete list, but it's pretty clear from this that the largest group is made of Islamic terrorists. Then if you lump ELF and Animal rights you have the second largest group. Then lumping crazy conservatives and anti abortion (even though these were perpatrated by single individuals, not members of a movement) you get the third largest group. Then plain crazy people. Then the lone White Supremacist. Then 4 unknown.
So, back to the apples. If red apples have a much higher chance of having a worm, which do you inspect?

 

[mheslep]

Muslim terrorist or US marine?

With thousands of people per day moving through an airport, spend time and money to scan this one:

or this one:
http://cache.virtualtourist.com/683887-Grandmother-Hungary.jpg

 

[cristo]

Muslim terrorist or US marine?

Both

With thousands of people per day moving through an airport, spend time and money to scan this one:

or this one:
http://cache.virtualtourist.com/683887-Grandmother-Hungary.jpg

The old lady, definitely. There's something about that smile that just doesn't fit.

 

[mheslep]

The old lady, definitely. There's something about that smile that just doesn't fit.

That's actually a photo of Borek; his posting photo is the one he uses when attempting to board airplanes.

 

[drizzle]

The old lady, definitely. There's something about that smile that just doesn't fit.

 

[qsa]

from wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_profiling

It has also been pointed out that many Arabs and South Asians resemble South (and occasionally even North) Europeans. On the other hand, confusion with Latin Americans and Caribbean people with Arabs is very common at airports. The constitutional basis for racial profiling has been a point of considerable discussion. The fact remains that racial profiling is also targeted against Europeans and others with similar ethnic features when abroad, as the practice is common throughout the world.





In the United States, the government does not have the right to conduct searches based solely on racial profiling. The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to be safe from unreasonable search and seizure without probable cause. Since the majority of people of all races are law-abiding citizens, merely being of a race which a police officer believes to be more likely to commit a crime than another is not probable cause. In addition, the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution requires that all citizens be treated equally under the law. It has been argued that this makes it unconstitutional for a representative of the government to make decisions based on race. This view has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in Batson v. Kentucky and several other cases.

 

[chayced]

And where does the state of intense fear come from? Maybe we/you should also be afraid of the lone gunmen.

That's just it, a lone gunman is a fact of life. Crazy people happen. A person who is the member of a violent movement that turns to violence is not a lone gunman, they are the pawn of something bigger than themselves. Do you honestly think that all terrorists would have committed their terrorist acts without being involved in a group that supports their actions? Without people that praise their actions?
Are the members of ELF people that were blowing up things before they met, or did they form a sick group think that brainwashes people into thinking that the ends justify the means?

The problem is that we cannot fight the source of these terrorist actions, we can simply fight the actions themselves.

Back to the OP: Unless body scans can do internal scans, I think we should work on better explosive sniffers.

 

[Borek]

Both

Actually - neither. But his first name is Ibrahim and he just killed several people including himself.

 

[rootX]

The problem is that we cannot fight the source of these terrorist actions, we can simply fight the actions themselves.

Yes it is possible to fight the source but one method I can think of doesn't involve guns/bombs.

 

[qsa]

Yes it is possible to fight the source but one method I can think of doesn't involve guns/bombs.

I thought Ossama and company were trained by US and they were brothers in arm againt former soviet union. Something went wrong, if you solve that may be you will have an end to this situation.

 

[chayced]

Yes it is possible to fight the source but one method I can think of doesn't involve guns/bombs.

Well, do enlighten me, because last I heard trying to reason with an unreasonable person was foolish. If we can somehow either prove to the people they recruit that their cause is unjust, or THAT THEY CANNOT ACOMPLISH THEIR OBJECTIVES AND ONLY FIGHT IN VAIN, then we can keep this form of terrorism down to a minimum. However the former is not politically correct, and the latter involves making terrorism nearly impossible which is what this thread is about.

I thought Ossama and company were trained by US and they were brothers in arm againt former soviet union. Something went wrong, if you solve that may be you will have an end to this situation.

They were terrorists then. We knew it, but at the time it seemed like the enemy of our enemy was our friend. Nothing to solve. They wanted what we had at the time and were willing to play nice to get it.

 

[qsa]

They were terrorists then. We knew it, but at the time it seemed like the enemy of our enemy was our friend. Nothing to solve. They wanted what we had at the time and were willing to play nice to get it.

So teaming with terrorists and drug trafficers for national cause means playing dirty just like the terrorists. But I think the US as a supper power should always conduct itself in the highest moral way, which will be good for all in the long run. Otherwise, all other nations (and groups) will imitate, bringing humanity to such a low state with grave consequences. But I am affraid that the words of plato to alexander''s father phillip are still true.

You shall rule the world with bribary, treachery and force of arms.

 

[Cyrus]

So teaming with terrorists and drug trafficers for national cause means playing dirty just like the terrorists. But I think the US as a supper power should always conduct itself in the highest moral way, which will be good for all in the long run. Otherwise, all other nations (and groups) will imitate, bringing humanity to such a low state with grave consequences. But I am affraid that the words of plato to alexander''s father phillip are still true.

You shall rule the world with bribary, treachery and force of arms.

Man, if you really believe this you don't know politics. I want to sell you a bridge in Brooklyn.

 

[rootX]

Well, do enlighten me, because last I heard trying to reason with an unreasonable person was foolish. If we can somehow either prove to the people they recruit that their cause is unjust, or THAT THEY CANNOT ACOMPLISH THEIR OBJECTIVES AND ONLY FIGHT IN VAIN, then we can keep this form of terrorism down to a minimum. However the former is not politically correct, and the latter involves making terrorism nearly impossible which is what this thread is about.

There is not much that can be done other than
- improving the Western image among Middle east population
- subduing the terrorists through force
- increasing the defenses
at the same time, in parallel.

I believe #1 (Middle east culture and religion) is the source.

 

[mheslep]

I thought Ossama and company were trained by US and they were brothers in arm againt former soviet union. ...

With the exception of one or two individuals, no they were not.

 

[Monique]

Man, if you really believe this you don't know politics. I want to sell you a bridge in Brooklyn.

And you probably also think that there was nothing wrong with Guantanamo Bay? I probably don't even want to know the answer.

 

[drankin]

And you probably also think that there was nothing wrong with Guantanamo Bay? I probably don't even want to know the answer.

Different topic but what's wrong with Guantanamo?

 

[arildno]

The important point is not to base your security on what happened last time

Nonsense. It is precisely that you should do, along with active monitoring for new developments.

That was the whole problem.

No, it is not a problem at all.

Hijackers in the past didn't hurt anybody, they were either paid or flew to Cuba.

Tell that to the victims of the multiple hijackings from members of the PLO during the 70's.

So policy was don't resist. That allowed a bunch of hijackers to fly planes into buildings.

No. That policy was forced upon western countries by marxist traitors in their midst who made, and make, a sentimentalist show of how oppressed the hijackers are.

So deciding that hijackers are all middle eastern men, and only security checking them is going to have the same effect. They are going to get a white looking guy to smuggle the next bomb.
Then you add the specific details of that guy to the list ... and so on.

Correct. It is called an arms race. For each step, the costs for prospective terrorists to become effective will increase, until they enter the "diminishing-returns"-zone.
Then, their activities as such will be discouraged.

 

[arildno]

And where does the state of intense fear come from? Maybe we/you should also be afraid of the lone gunmen.

Since none of them belongs to an intercommunicating culture of hatred and violence, they operate beneath any sensible "radar screen" we can set up.

Therefore, it is pointless to bother about them, until the identifiable traits of such individuals can be detected reliably, in a cost-effective way.

This is no argument whatsoever against monitoring
a) those actively engaged in hate-generating sub-cultures (for example, readers/contributors at jihadist websites, members of the local KKK club, academics with a zeal for marxist revolutions and so on)

b) wider cultures where sub-cultures of type a) is greatly over-represented.

 

[Monique]

I think it will be a big mistake to only suspect people with a certain outward appearance or with a certain nationality. No matter what you say, I'm pretty sure that the US intelligence services will be aware of that as well.

Different topic but what's wrong with Guantanamo?

It appears to me that Cyrus is not concerned with human rights, when it comes to national security. That's why I was wondering about his opinion about Gitmo.

I think the following marine officer Brig. Gen. Michael Lehnert has conveyed the message well:

"I think we lost the moral high ground," Lehnert said. "For those who do not think much of the moral high ground, that is not that significant.

"But for those who think our standing in the international community is important, we need to stand for American values. You have to walk the walk, talk the talk."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-marine-gitmo25-2009sep25,0,1946707.story"

http://www.amnestyusa.org/counter-terror-with-justice/guantanamo-bay---a-human-rights-scandal/page.do?id=1108202"

 

[Borek]

I have a feeling that both Monique and me are treated as people who are against screening, while it is quite the opposite - we think that everyone should be screened.

Practicalities, cost-effectivenes are different things that make this idea impossible at this stage, but they don't matter at the very general level, they become important when we talk about implementations.

 

[lisab]

I haven't read every post in this thread, so sorry if this has already been mentioned.

The problem with any sort of profiling is that it's very simple for terrorists to figure out what profile is being scrutinized. They will adjust, and before you know it we'll have blonde hair, blue eyed women being recruited for suicide bombing missions.

The best way IMO to fight this is with feet-on-the-ground intelligence. We should have seen this underwear bomber coming months in advance (the clues were there, including http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8435266.stm" who was thwarted at Mogadishu, of all places).

Only with intelligence can we get out ahead of them. We need better methods to mine the data, of course, to sort out the signals from the noise.

That said, airport screening should continue, but with the knowledge that those systems are tooled to look for MOs that are already known to authorities.

 

[Galteeth]

Man, if you really believe this you don't know politics. I want to sell you a bridge in Brooklyn.

Practically speaking, such "realpolitik" actions do in fact have long term negative consequences besides the moral issues. The CIA refers to this as "blowback." Chalmers Johnson, a former CIA agent, wrote a book on this subject. It could be argued, with merit, that the taliban and Al-Qaeda are US created monsters.

EDIT: Saddam Hussein and the Iranian government as well.

 

[Newai]

But I don't care about global hijackings. I care about hijackings that concern the united states, there is no need to obfuscate the issue.

I thought all hijackings concern the United States, and every country the plane can possibly reach.

 

[Newai]

If they choose that option as a majority solution, it simply proves they were morally degenerate to begin with, and even more severe measures against them are justified, and should have been enforced from the start.
The reason for that is, of course, because that option is an IMMORAL choice.

They should instead choose the option of ridding their own sub-communities of those with terrorist leaning, i.e, "ratting on", for example, ideological leaders preaching unwarranted hatred against non-members, rather than the wall of silence which is this sub-populations preferred choice to evil committed, and celebrated within their ranks.


To avoid to implement an extremely effective scan measure merely out of the justified fear that some immorals will become unjustifiedly enflamed by it and resort to violence is to make the immoral choice of submitting to the cruel, wilful master as a slave, and require that others do so as well.

The differences in opinion following since this post are summed up with prevention versus reaction. It makes sense to me that in the theory of security, we do not focus on the individual but rather the holes those individuals sneak through. Gleaning over the current efforts, it looks like an attempted balance on both prevention and reaction.

I don't see much accomplishment in the arguments in this thread for prevention when digging through history, but the effort for prevention looks to be based on that theory. Of course, the can of worms appears to be inherent in arguing between perceived security and real security. Anyway...

I do not understand how your solution is realistic. Yes, their community has a burden of ratting out their own, but this is assuming they are in that capacity, which I doubt is often present. Instead, what I see, and I bet many others here can share, is a completely different way anyone of Middle Eastern descent feels just walking around in public now. The now new alien among us is a bitter and fearing stranger.

But you didn't answer my question. So with this in mind, can you assure me that focusing security on this group will not increase tensions, and inadvertently create more terrorism? Because from where I stand at least, I'm willing to put up with the extremely painful extra three hours in line if that means less possibility of terrorism.

 

[arildno]

But you didn't answer my question. So with this in mind, can you assure me that focusing security on this group will not increase tensions, and inadvertently create more terrorism?

It is an irrelevant concern.
Even if there is a tenfold, or thousandfold, temporary increase in terrorism due to that morally degenerate individuals throw a totally unjustified bleat about how they are "unfairly" treated, that is not sufficient reason to spare them that treatment.

Such terrified withholding is simply to subject oneself, and others, into a state of pitiable slavery before the cruel master.

And THAT is a deeply immoral choice of action.

 

[Borek]

temporary increase

I think that's where you are mistaken.

 

[ranger]

It is an irrelevant concern.
Even if there is a tenfold, or thousandfold, temporary increase in terrorism due to that morally degenerate individuals throw a totally unjustified bleat about how they are "unfairly" treated, that is not sufficient reason to spare them that treatment.

Such terrified withholding is simply to subject oneself, and others, into a state of pitiable slavery before the cruel master.

And THAT is a deeply immoral choice of action.

Are Muslims, and those in resemblance to the westernized stereotype, now morally degenerate? And it *is* justified for any group to throw a bleat for unfair treatment, even at the expense of your false sense of security. Furthermore, luckily, security officials can't be that naive because surely the increase will be long term. Not from the 'morally degenerate' group, but from the other groups placed on the pedestal, because face it, tactics can be changed easily.

 

[dotman]

This is no argument whatsoever against monitoring
a) those actively engaged in hate-generating sub-cultures (for example, readers/contributors at jihadist websites, members of the local KKK club, academics with a zeal for marxist revolutions and so on)

b) wider cultures where sub-cultures of type a) is greatly over-represented.

There is an argument against monitoring group (b), and it is exactly what you had stated:

Therefore, it is pointless to bother about them, until the identifiable traits of such individuals can be detected reliably, in a cost-effective way.

With regards to profiling supposed terrorists in this thread, it's not nearly as easy as it seems. Profile everyone of Arab descent? Most American Arabs are Christian, not Muslim. Profile Muslims? 88% of Muslims world-wide are not Arab at all.

Ethnic profiling on its own has serious constitutional liabilities with concern to the 14th and the 1st amendments. That notwithstanding, the practical problem with ethnic profiling is it flat out does not work in terms of either reliability or cost-effectiveness.