CIA KNEW OF UNDIES BOMBER: The CIA was keeping tabs on a man they called "The Nigerian" who was meeting with "terrorist elements" in August, months before his father contacted the U.S. embassy, concerned his son was getting mixed up with Islamic radicals, CBS News reports. "The Nigerian" was Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the man who attempted to blow up Northwest Flight 253 on Christmas Day, but the connection was not made among U.S. intelligence authorities until Abdulmutallab's post-flight arrest at Detroit's airport. The CIA did not dispute the CBS News report. President Obama criticized on Tuesday the "systemic failure" of the nation's security apparatus.
What are these clowns doing? How does a guy on a terrorist watch list, known by the CIA, able to get on a plane with explosive devises attached to him? I was willing to give passes all around on 9/11 because of the surprise element and just to move on, although in hindsight thought the Bush Administration should have fired a bunch of CIA people. But this? Nearly nine years later, with tons more intelligence gathered, years to adjust and tinker with our security procedures, is totally unacceptable. Why do we have little old ladies and babies taking off their shoes in airport security lines? Why do I get pulled into a random bag search? What is the point of these hideously inefficient and stupidly politically correct security measures? It's like a retarded 11th grader come up with these rules trying to be "fair" to everyone. Fairness has nothing to do with security from Islamic Terrorism. Here's what we do - if you are on a terrorist watch list or a close match to an individual on a terrorist watch list - you are red flagged and double-triple checked through security before getting on an airline.
And also, I really, really hope this terrorist watch list is comprised only of individuals associated with Al Queda and other like minded groups. I sincerely hope there are not former IRA members or Columbian FARC or Quebecois Separatists or Aryan Nation people on this list. These are bad people, no doubt, but this is not a bad people list. It should be a list of people who openly declared war against United States Civilians and who openly state they want to kill us. When little old ladies from Nebraska blow up a plane or an Aryan Nation Leader flies into the World Trade Center or when a Columbian drug dealers start doing suicide bombing missions against the US, then we may need to adjust our procedures. But until then, can we just focus on the actual Islamic Radicals who are at war with us?
Can someone explain to me what is wrong with this? Are we so terrified of racial profiling that we are going to risk getting blown to pieces in the air and enforce all sorts of stupid bureaucratic procedures to give the illusion of safety and then, as Janet Napolitano said, praise our Homeland Security as "working."
There cannot be anything illegal about tracking Islamic Radicals. We are so confused by historical analogies having nothing to do with the current situation. Liberals are instantly fearful of internment camps and all sorts of civil liberties being exploited. Believe me - I am equally if not moreso worried about such things - but this is be akin to worrying about felons gun rights. What sane person would prioritize a known felon's gun rights? What sane person thinks someone on a terrorist watch list is entitled to get onto an airline flight without additional security? And how is this even borderline problematic to anyone but useless bureaucrats who don't have a clue how to do their job and decide to enforce endlessly stupid new procedures (such as not getting up in the last hour of the flight or taking off our shoes) that would not have stopped any terrorist attack in the first place.
3 comments:
Al-Queda is already adapting to and exploiting the racial profiling element of security. They know we're going to look more stringently at people from the Middle East (or who look like they're from the Mideast), and will alter their tactics accordingly.
The "Nutsack Bomber" (which is what I like to call him) is not the stereotypical Mideast terrorist -- his Islamic name notwithstanding. Soon, you will probably see female operatives who will try to blow shit up, and then -- the real kicker -- you'll see operatives who can pass for white, or will indeed be white (as far as I'm concerned, the "perfect" operative for Al-Queda would be a generic white person -- preferably female, since people tend to give women more of a pass when it comes to security).
With respect to racial profiling right now... Yes, that's going to be a necessary evil. Believe me, as a person who "looks Middle Eastern," I've had to endure my share of it -- especially when I fly out from my small midwest town. Nevertheless, I do so without incident or complaint, despite the annoyance.
But I think it would be extremely myopic (and foolish) of us to NOT do more expanded behavioral profiling, which is what the Israelis excel at. We need better trained, educated, and paid personnel who can observe, anticipate, and act based on a potential suspect's natural human behavioral tells. Most (if not all) of these terrorist operatives haven't gone through extensive military training where they can better control their unconscious emotions, and thus, they end up revealing far more than they think they do. After all, human nature/body language is universal.
Anyway, finding a better security solution that combines technology and profiling (racial, behavioral, or whatever) is going to be tough as hell to pull off... And yes, I have summed up this entry by drolly stating the obvious.
simple racial profiling obviously wouldn't work. we don't have the resources to check every person who could have middle eastern descent. it would be inefficient, pointless, and impossible to do...not to mention it would alienate the very population in the best position to be the first line of defense against islamic terrorism.
behavioral profiling is exactly what led to this guy being put on the list. i don't know that we even need to expand the behavioral profiling so much as just get the existing system to function. we have the information, but for some reason the system breaks down when it comes to ACTING on the information.
i will worry more about the strength of our adversary when they pull a rabbit out of the hat and get some dumbass with next to no connection to islamic fundamentalism to blow up a plane or otherwise murder tons of civilians in the name of islamic fundamentalism. but with this fort hood shooting and the recent christmas underpants bombers, these guys might have well been wearing signs across their chests saying "One day I'm going to murder a bunch of American civilians in the name of Islamic Extremism."
Fact is, today, we need a little less irony when dealing with the Islamic Fundamentalists. When they say they think it's justified to murder Americans in retaliation to perceived wrong-doings, I'm taking them at their word and not getting on a plane with them.
I guess I wasn't clear in my previous post.
I wasn't implying that non-Muslim westerners will join Al-Queda for suicide attacks. Rather, I expect Al-Queda to employ "western-looking" (i.e. white) Muslim extremists as operatives in future missions. That will -- quite obviously -- exacerbate the very difficult and alienating process of racial profiling.
Indeed, Al-Queda is already recruiting amongst the peoples of Chechen/Kosovan/Serbian descent, and so on. And if I were Al-Queda, that's what I would do, too, because it makes perfect sense from a tactical perspective.
I mean, if you're going to attack a western enemy, what better way to blend in than to have an operative that looks more like the majority of the populace?
The already onerous task of security is going to get that much more difficult.
But I hope I'm wrong.
Post a Comment