MAYBE WE SHOULD CONDUCT RANDOM CAT-SCANS TOO
In the wake of the massive, coordinated bombing strike on Bombay's commuter trains yesterday, we learn that my own New York City will once again step up the random bag searches that were supposedly in place since last year's massive, coordinated bombing strike on London's urban transit system.Let's review:
* Last summer, London subways and buses attacked. New York subway riders randomly searched for a month or two.Is it just me, or does this make no sense.
* Yesterday, Bombay trains attacked. New York subway riders randomly searched today.
posted by Mike at 7:07 AM
13 Comments:
Agreed, makes no sense. As DHS sec. Chertoff made clear earlier this year, NYC is completely safe. That's why they don't get much security money any more.
But I tell you what: if I was living in one of the real terrorist targets, like Chattanooga, Tenn, or Dothan, Alabama, I'd be quaking in my boots right now.
Wait, I'm confused. Those places don't have mass transit systems.
Can "The Terrorists" attack locations not on a mass transit network?
This is obviously a COYA move. It keeps the police/security powers that be from getting hit with questions such as, "Couldn't you at least have done random bag searches!!??" if something goes wrong.
As for Chattanooga, I've been there. My main recollection is that the people were nice enough on foot. Driving, however, was a competitive contact sport, with drivers of big trucks being especially aggressive. Uninitiated Mideast types might never make it to their designated targets.
It was done either:
A) To placate the fearful masses to show that they're on the job
OR
B) because they actually believe that the terrorists are actually organized enough to hit globally at the same time.
I believe that it's A. There's been no evidence yet to show that the terrorist organizations are capable of organizing a simultaneous attack globally.
Ded's option A is certainly in play. Maybe we can call it "Collateral Repair."
But I'm gonna go with SW's . . . let's call it "Preemptive Ass-Covering" as the real reason.
Either way, it's a waste of my time at best, a violation of my rights at worst.
And . . . unless you search EVERYONE's bags, it doesn't even work!
Mike wrote:
"And . . . unless you search EVERYONE's bags, it doesn't even work!"
Randomness is probably seen as a deterrent.
However, given how heavily the terrorists rely on suicidal sociopaths, there's actually a chance one of those bag searches could prove fatal, to the searcher and others nearby.
Yeah, I think random searches are a deterrent thing, not terribly effective at nabbing all the bad guys.
I think preemptive ass-covering sounds about right on this one, with the deterrence being a bonus. Hey, if it keeps a few knives and guns out of the subways, it can't be all bad.
A terrorist bomber, even if not intending to be suicidal might choose that path, in order to avoid being captured.
The though of a life time of torture in GitMo, is sure to make these people more desperate to avoid getting caught.
In other news, I understand that intelligence gathered under torture at GitMo has uncovered a plot to destroy our ability to maintain and enjoy insect zoos and petting farms. That's probably how they determined that the trains are safe now.
Weas-
I'm not sure I "get" the last paragraph.
Noentheless, it made me laugh. I like it.
If you saw Olberman last night, then you know what he's talking about. If you didn't, some report was produced by a Homeland Security computer that rated terrorist targets in the US. Among them were a Popcorn factory and a Petting Zoo. Indiana had the most potential targets while San Diego, a city with a heavy Naval presence, didn't make the cut.
So it sounds to me like that Homeland Security computer got infected with a pork virus.
And funny you should say that . . . you might have read that Georgie couldn't stop himself from talking about eating pork, when he met with Ms. Merkel in Germany.
And, no, I'm not joking.
Here's a link to the NYT story.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/12/washington/12assets.html?_r=1&hp&ex=1152676800&en=6b0502da91a3d945&ei=5094&partner=homepage&oref=slogin
Or not.
It's linked at:
http://thismodernworld.com
Post a Comment
<< Home