Posts Tagged “security”
This is the fourth in a series of posts I plan about the recent Orlando gay-nightclub shooting, by an American Muslim who appears to have been influenced by ISIS and other violent Islamists. By now my readers will surely know a great deal about this horrific event. The topic of this post is:
The FBI Blew It … Again!
I’ve blogged previously about the clusterfuck which is the US anti-terror effort. As I’ve said, it’s mostly all just “security theater,” pointless exercises intended to make people think they’re being kept safe, when in fact, they’re not. White-powder freakouts do nothing for anyone except cause needless anxiety and inconvenience.
You may recall the background of the Boston Marathon bombers. Russian intelligence had found the elder of the two was likely radicalized; they contacted the FBI, which ostensibly “investigated” him, but closed the book without doing anything. He and his brother subsequently carried out a devastating terror attack. Well, as many outlets — including the New York Times — have reported, the Orlando shooter had been on the FBI’s radar too … not just once, but twice (WebCite cached article):
Two years after [the shooter’s divorce], the Federal Bureau of Investigation was called in after reports from [his] co-workers that he, the American-born son of Afghan immigrants, had suggested he may have had terrorist ties. The F.B.I. interviewed him twice, but after surveillance, records checks and witness interviews, agents were unable to verify any terrorist links and closed their investigation.
Then, in 2014, the F.B.I. discovered a possible tie between [the Orlando shooter] and Moner Mohammad Abusalha, who had grown up in nearby Vero Beach and then became the first American suicide bomber in Syria, where he fought with the Nusra Front, a Qaeda-aligned militant group. Again, the F.B.I. closed its inquiry after finding “minimal” contact between the two men.
After the terrorist investigations cleared [the shooter], he maintained both his Florida security-officer license and his job. He also kept his Florida firearms license, and within the last few days he legally purchased a handgun and a “long gun.”
In the cases of both the Boston bomber and the Orlando shooter, the FBI had been handed leads on proverbial silver platters: Others had already done some work (in the case of one, the Russian government; in the latter, his own co-workers) and provided evidence of potential radicalization. And in both cases the FBI went through the motions of “investigating” — whatever that may have entailed. But also, in both cases, the FBI decided nothing was afoot and did nothing. Clearly, however, they were demonstrably wrong — both times. Something was, indeed, afoot with both of these terrorists … even so, the FBI, after looking into them, apparently never noticed any of it.
How could that be? The US has the most pervasive and comprehensive intelligence operation the world has ever known. They have the benefit of laws that permit them warrantless access to information during anti-terror investigations. There are virtually no limits to how deeply they can dive into a person’s life, if that person is suspected of having even a minor connection to terrorism.
Think about this the next time you’re in an airport and are asked to take your belt and shoes off, or if you see a frail 90-year-old lady being wanded by TSA agents. Just think about it. Think about the hurdles they make every American jump through, in the name of keeping us safe from terror … yet, when they actually have evidence someone might be a terrorist, they turn away and do nothing.
Just think about it, and wonder how rational all of this is. I suggest it’s not rational at all. If anything, it’s pointless and maybe even counter-productive (because it gives everyone a sense of security we don’t actually have).
I had expected there to be an investigation into why the FBI never caught onto the elder of the Boston Marathon bombers a few years ago, but that never materialized. So I don’t expect there will be any investigation into how the Orlando shooter squeezed out from under them, either. More’s the pity.
Photo credit: torbakhopper, via Flickr.
, federal bureau of investigation
, islamist terror
, islamist terrorism
, islamist terrorist
, islamist terrorists
, orlando FL
, orlando massacre
, orlando shooting observations
, pulse nightclub
, pulse nightclub shooting
, security theater
No Comments »
I’ve blogged a couple of times about the joke that is the TSA … you know, the people who make you take off your shoes and your belts, throw away your coffee, scan your innards — and in some cases pat you down thoroughly — before you go into the gate area of an airport. Interestingly, someone who once ran the TSA, from 2005 to 2009, agrees with this assessment. Kip Hawley wrote a book — and penned a piece for the Wall Street Journal — in which he makes this concession (WebCite cached article):
Airport security in America is broken. I should know. For 3½ years — from my confirmation in July 2005 to President Barack Obama’s inauguration in January 2009 — I served as the head of the Transportation Security Administration. …
More than a decade after 9/11, it is a national embarrassment that our airport security system remains so hopelessly bureaucratic and disconnected from the people whom it is meant to protect. Preventing terrorist attacks on air travel demands flexibility and the constant reassessment of threats. It also demands strong public support, which the current system has plainly failed to achieve.
The crux of the problem, as I learned in my years at the helm, is our wrongheaded approach to risk. In attempting to eliminate all risk from flying, we have made air travel an unending nightmare for U.S. passengers and visitors from overseas, while at the same time creating a security system that is brittle where it needs to be supple.
I applaud Hawley for finally admitting that the TSA does not actually serve its stated purpose and needs to change its ways. But even having given him that credit, I must point out that the man is a brazen hypocrite. Back in 2008, he was interviewed by Leslie Stahl in the course of a 60 Minutes piece on the broken nature of TSA security. In that interview, Hawley insisted to Ms Stahl that everything TSA was doing, was required in order to thwart al-Qaeda … and to skip any of it would be to let the terrorists through and risk another 9/11/2001. He was adamant that nothing TSA was doing amounted to “security theater.” You can read the article on the CBS News Web site (cached)*, if you wish.
I invite Mr Hawley to supplement his welcome comments on the TSA’s ineffectiveness, with an apology for having himself been part of the fraud behind it. (I don’t use that word lightly … the TSA is a fraud, in every sense of that word, except for the fact that the people who created and run it will never be prosecuted for having rammed their scam down the throats of American travelers.) Few people have the courage to make such an apology, so I don’t expect Hawley will ever offer it. This, I fear, is the closest he will ever come to doing so.
Photo credit: steuben, via Flickr.
Hat tip: CT Watchdog.
* The CBS article is broken into 4 pages; here are links and cached versions of each: Page 1 (cached), page 2 (cached), page 3 (cached) & page 4 (cached).
Tags: airport security
, airport security theater
, bruce schneier
, kip hawley
, security theater
, transportation safety administration
1 Comment »
Although I mostly focus on religious issues in this blog, I try to think critically about lots of things, all the time. Human beings are incredibly irrational and overemotional over a lot of things, not just religion. One of the things that doesn’t take too much “critical thinking” to realize is a fucking joke, is the absurd “security theater” debacles that crop up all over the country, from time to time. I have blogged about the joke that is TSA, but the full-blown ten-alarm freak-outs that happen go beyond the Homeland Security Dept. or even the federal authorities more generally.
In the last few days, Connecticut has been host to a rash of ridiculous overreactions. A week ago a white powder was reported found at a Meriden courthouse (WebCite cached article). A few days later, a white powder was found at a school in Enfield, and a lockdown ensued (cached). And a white powder arrived at schools in Newington and Madison, today (cached).
I honestly question the official reactions to all of these events. Sure, these things all “might have” turned out to be serious. Those mysterious “white powders” certainly could have been pathogenic or toxic agents that “might” have sickened or killed people.
But in all of these cases — and in many others that I could have listed here, but didn’t bother to — they weren’t. Officials were right to test the powders to find out if they were dangerous … but it turns out, they were harmless. (Curiously, even after testing, we seem never to be told what these things actually turned out to have been. Hmm.)
I seriously question the wisdom of “locking down” a school where a “white powder” has been found. Is it really that great of an idea to lock children into the very same building in which a substance one initially assumes to be dangerous was found? Really!? Somehow I don’t think so. Call me crazy, but I would think you’d want them outside that building, and as far from it as you could get them — if, that is, you truly believed that the mysterious white powder had the potential to kill them.
Also I seriously question the wisdom of closing a courthouse for a day … after it was found that a mysterious white powder was determined not to have been dangerous. What is the point of that? There was never any danger, hence, there’s no reason to continue acting as though there had been one. Grown adults are capable of pulling on their “big boy pants” (or “big girl pants,” as the case may be) and getting back to fucking work, once they realized they’d been hoaxed.
And that, of course, is what this is about. Officials can’t — or won’t — admit they’ve been fooled by things like this. They want us to know they’re “protecting” us; the only way to do that is for them to act as though everything weird that happens is an apocalypse-in-the-making. When they end up with egg on their faces, they can’t just admit they were swindled; they have to behave as though the danger remained — even though they (and we!) damned well know there never had been one in the first place.
I know the old mantra of the “security theater” perpetrators is, “But when something like this happens, we don’t know it’s not serious, so we have to act as though it is!” To that I say, bull-fucking-shit. It takes minutes for someone to come in and test a mysterious white powder to see if it’s dangerous. If it’s inert, the problem is over; vacuum up the shit and let everyone get back to their lives. Why lock down an entire building, over a little bit of white powder inside one room? Why close a building for a full day, after you realize you’ve been swindled? Why the overreaction? Why the tantrum? Why the absurd dance of bullshit that goes on around these things?
I’ll tell you why: Because otherwise, people won’t be aware of our “security officials,” and they won’t have any way to exercise the power they possess. They do this sort of thing, in short, because they can, and because none of us can say boo to them about it while it’s going on. Really, it’s all very juvenile — but no one in authority will ever admit it.
Update: The rocket scientists in charge of these white powder freak-outs, are still freaking out — even after any danger has been ruled out. Some of the schools affected will remain closed for the rest of the week — even though the powder has proven harmless (cached). Why? I have no idea. I can only assume it’s in order to maximize hysteria and inconvenience in those communities.
Photo credit: PsiCop original.
, anthrax hoax
, anthrax prank
, anthrax scare
, enfield CT
, freak out
, freak outs
, freaking out
, homeland security
, madison CT
, meriden CT
, mysterious white powder
, newington CT
, security theater
, white powder
1 Comment »
A couple weeks ago I blogged about the laughable fraud of “anti-terror security” which is inflicted on non-terrorist Americans every day, a post that was triggered by an asinine overreaction to something in my home state of Connecticut (cached article). Scams such as this depend on Americans’ inability to think critically. If we actually paid attention to what our leaders are saying, and took the time to really think about it, the fraudulent nature of TSA’s “security theater” would be obvious, and it would never be tolerated. However, Americans are easy to swindle and easily swayed by stupid platitudes and empty promises. So the scam continues.
I bring this up again because of TSA’s new, stricter and more invasive airport-security measures that have been implemented recently, and I’m gratified to see something of a backlash emerge against it.
In an op-ed which appeared in USA Today, Homeland Security secretary Janet Napolitano ostensibly addressed the pushback (WebCite cached article). In the process she revealed the fraud for what it is, when she opened it with this paragraph:
Nearly a year after a thwarted terrorist attack on a Detroit-bound airliner last Christmas Day, the recent attempt by terrorists to conceal and ship explosive devices aboard aircraft bound for the United States reminds us that al-Qaeda and those inspired by its ideology are determined to strike our global aviation system and are constantly adapting their tactics for doing so.
Here is where Napolitano’s lie is most evident: The event to which she alludes took place on December 25, 2009. That was nearly 11 months ago. If these new measures were truly intended to prevent that kind of attack, putting new measures in 11 months later is a lot like closing the barn door after the horses have gone loose. That the TSA — and the DHS to which it belongs — took 11 months to implement something to prevent it, demonstrates absolutely that there was no urgency behind it.
In other words, the 12/25/2009 attempted bombing literally cannot have been the real impetus behind this. It just can’t. So the secretary is lying when she suggests this is the case.
Napolitano goes on to lie again about what the TSA is doing:
Rigorous privacy safeguards are also in place to protect the traveling public. All images generated by imaging technology are viewed in a walled-off location not visible to the public. The officer assisting the passenger never sees the image, and the officer viewing the image never interacts with the passenger. The imaging technology that we use cannot store, export, print or transmit images.
Now, why do I say this is a lie? Because as CNET reported in August, officials and contractors have already been caught storing images of passengers which they were not supposed to have stored (cached article):
William Bordley, an associate general counsel with the Marshals Service, acknowledged in the letter that “approximately 35,314 images…have been stored on the Brijot Gen2 machine” used in the Orlando, Fla. federal courthouse. In addition, Bordley wrote, a Millivision machine was tested in the Washington, D.C. federal courthouse but it was sent back to the manufacturer, which now apparently possesses the image database.
Napolitano claims storage of these images is somehow “impossible,” but fails to admit that it has already, demonstrably, happened.
Napolitano compounds her lies in her closing paragraph:
Each and every one of the security measures we implement serves an important goal: providing safe and efficient air travel for the millions of people who rely on our aviation system every day.
If this were true, these measures would have been implemented back on December 26, 2009 … not now, close to 11 months later.
In this single op-ed, the secretary exposes the scam of “airport security” for what it is. I’m sure she didn’t intend this to be an exposé … she very likely assumes Americans will simply buy into her lies … but that’s precisely what she penned: a big lie.
Photo credit: publik16.
, airport security
, al qaeda
, attempted bombing
, body scanner
, body scanners
, december 25 2009
, department of homeland security
, detroit bombing
, janet napolitano
, security screening
, terror attack
, transportation safety administration
8 Comments »
The very same day I post about the scam which is daylight saving time, comes an event in my home state of Connecticut, which shines a massive floodlight on yet another scam: The supposed “security” meant to protect us from terrorist attacks. The venerable Hartford Courant provides this incredibly brief story on the incident (WebCite cached article):
State police say a harmless snowglobe in a carryon bag caused a partial evacuation at Bradley International Airport.
State police Lt. J. Paul Vance says a Transportation Security Administration worker spotted something that looked suspicious while screening bags and alerted state police shortly before 11 a.m. Sunday.
Vance says Terminal A was evacuated as a precaution but was reopened about 45 minutes later, after authorities determined the snowglobe did not contain explosives and was not a danger.
Full disclosure: I live near Bradley and have been there many times. What you may not know about it is that an evacuation of Terminal A is NOT a “partial” evacuation. It is a “full” evacuation. That’s because, as of this summer, ALL passenger flights go in and out of BDL though Terminal A. That’s right, Terminal A is pretty much the entire airport! The “old airport,” Terminal B, has been closed for months … and for a couple of years prior to that, only one airline used it, that being American Airlines.
I almost cannot believe the Courant purposely downplayed this event by using this wording — but they did. It’s inexcusable, but not surprising.
The cold hard fact is that airport security is nothing more than “security theater,” intended to make travelers feel as though they’re safe, when they’re not.
Second point of full disclosure: I happened to be traveling during the holidays in 2009, when a young man from Africa shoved explosives in his shorts and tried to set them off on a flight into Detroit (cached article). My return trip included extra security measures ostensibly designed to deal with that (cached). However, I can attest that, had I also packed explosives in my shorts, not one of the “extra” measures they implemented, would have even come close to finding it. All TSA did was add time and complexity to everyone’s travel, without adding so much as a micron of actual, extra “security.”
As CNN’s article on that event shows, the government actually had had all the information it needed to have prevented that young man from getting on the airplane … but they chose to do nothing about it.
And that, Gentle Reader, is what makes all the “security theater” a meaningless exercise. Real “security” means not letting the terrorists anywhere near an airport in the first place. The measures taken to — supposedly — detect weapons and explosives in the airports, are useless, if a terrorist is sufficiently driven to slip it through.
Although “security theater” is most noticed in airports and in aviation, it does crop up in other places too, such as in large-city mass transit systems. The same principle applies to all settings, though: True security lies in keeping terrorists out of public venues entirely, not in dealing with them once they’ve already arrived.
At any rate, authorities tend to go overboard when faced with “suspicious” packages and devices. They say it’s due to being “cautious,” because — it is said — IF the “suspicious” item turns out to truly have been dangerous, but no action had been taken, and someone was hurt or killed, there’d be hell to pay. While this is true, it’s also a fallacious false dilemma. There IS a large middle ground of possible choices between these two extremes; various shades of action that span the continuum between doing nothing and shutting down an entire airport. For example, there’s cordoning off the immediate vicinity of the device, calling in the bomb squad, and carting it away safely, but with everyone kept at a safe distance, with most people able to continue with their business. (Bradley’s Terminal A is a very large building, so there’s plenty of room to work with, if officials wanted.)
The reason that this sort of discreet measure is never taken, is because officials don’t want to use discreet measures: They want everything they do to be seen, to be seen BIG, and to be as noticeable as possible, so that everyone knows they’re doing their jobs. Quietly controlling the situation and removing the device with a minimum of trouble, is the opposite of that, and therefore is unacceptable.
The problem with idiotic hypersecurity debacles such as the snowglobe that closed Bradley International is not merely that they’re laughable or inconveniences for travelers. There are very real costs involved in closing airport terminals. Planes, for example, cannot fly in or out of them; this means airlines must incur the costs of shuffling airplanes and travelers around. Concessionaires cannot sell to empty terminals; this means a loss of business for them. I could go on, but won’t bother … you get the picture.
The “security theater” which has become a national obsession since September 11, 2001 is indeed a scam and a joke … but you need not just take my word for it. Folks much more expert on the matter than I, have weighed in, and they agree. See e.g. this 60 Minutes report on it (cached), as well as this report by The Atlantic (cached).
It’s a sad day when a mere snowglobe … someone’s harmless souvenir … can cripple an entire international airport. Unfortunately this kind of pathetic, laughable sham happens all the time in the US. But it shouldn’t. It’s a scam Americans should no longer tolerate.
Photo credit: Tenineight.
, bag screening
, bradley international airport
, governmental scam
, security theater
, snow globe
, terminal a
, terror prevention
, transportation security administration
, windsor locks CT
4 Comments »
Evangelist Tony Alamo — currently being tried for various child-related offenses (e.g. child abuse, child pornography, etc.) — has had a long and storied career of using his cult either to skirt the law or flout it outright. All by himself he exemplifies many of the problems associated with religions. His recent trial has brought out a number of revelations which are surprising even to his watchers. This can be seen in this AP report (via Yahoo News):
In the years after evangelist Tony Alamo took the 14-year-old girl as a bride, she said, she caught glimpses of her father on the surveillance cameras that fed into the minister’s office.
As her father walked by outside, monitors provided views from every angle. But even though only a few walls and doors separated them, leaving Alamo’s home without permission was unthinkable.
Alamo was a prophet, she’d been taught. He was “God’s chosen one.”
I’m trying to figure out how a man who possesses extraordinary divine insight, enough to be called a “prophet,” somehow has to rely on security cameras to know what’s going on in his own compound.
But it’s not coming to me.
And I suspect it never will.
Tony Alamo is no stranger to the US legal system; the AP article mentions that he’d done time in the ’90s for tax evasion. The degree of control he exerted over the lives of his moronic sheep was extensive:
At the compound more recently, followers filled out request forms for everything, whether clothing or toiletries. Alamo himself approved all expenditures, witnesses said.
Alamo’s house, meanwhile, had television, a swimming pool and ponies in the backyard — unbelievable luxuries for a life one described as floating just above the poverty line.
The point of Alamo’s hypocrisy becomes crystal clear in the very next sentence:
Those amenities led at least one mother to push her underage daughter to become an Alamo wife, testimony showed.
The prophet used these luxuries in order to “get some.”
I’m also trying to figure how a “prophet” needs to use enticements like this in order to acquire wives, but … again … it’s just not coming to me.
The sheer ridiculousness of Alamo’s operation is apparent:
Families were prohibited from keeping food at their homes, the 20-year-old woman said. Alamo also banned his followers from eating meat or dairy products. At one point, on a layover at a Las Vegas airport, the woman said she and another Alamo “wife” committed a sin — they ate a cheese pizza.
Sometimes, Alamo put requests from his followers on hold in order to have money to print the church’s apocalyptic tracts.
Those fliers, outlining everything from Alamo’s feared “one-world government,” his belief in flying saucers and his hatred of the Vatican, served as a backbone of the ministry after he stopped preaching in the wake of his 1994 tax conviction. Each person had a distribution quota, the 30-year-old woman said.
Records in Alamo’s office included the “account,” she said — a list that showed how much literature each follower passed out on the constant cross-country tracking trips. …
Interesting. Once again, a “prophet” somehow requires record-keeping in order to know what his sheep are doing? He can’t somehow manage the feat of just “knowing” what they’re doing, on his own?
A true paradox!
At any rate, propagating fear of a “one world government” would appear to make Alamo what R.T. Carroll of the Skeptic’s Dictionary calls a PCT (or “paranoid conspiracy theorist”). That’s all we need … a lunatic Christian evangelist out to rid the world of nefarious dangers like the Bilderbergers, the Illuminati, and Pizza Hut!
Tags: child abuse
, federal indictment
, paranoid conspiracy theorist
, tax evasion
, tony alamo
No Comments »