Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

I have this image

by Lasthorseman Sat Sep 22nd, 2007 at 06:38:39 PM EST

I have this image in my head.
It comes from some years ago  at camp. We were firing different high power rifles into close range targets, about say 30 meters.  A plastic 2 liter container full of water explodes violently when hit with a .223 caliber AR-18.  The M1 Garand does the same thing only with more violence.  Both rifles do pack some serious kick so you best have the dam thing planted solidly on your shoulder.  Incredibly powerful, very loud and awesome destruction these weapons have.

On Friday here in the US we did have another "incident".

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/21/bomb.hoax/index.html

The incident was dutifully picked up by media who once again advanced the meme of "post 911 world".  At the press conference the cops said "She is lucky she complied with our instructions, otherwise she would be in the morgue".  The right wingers jumped upon the story citing how "normal" and "justified" the police were in their actions and some even questioned why the police did not "shoot first and ask questions later".

The "news" footage also featured state police toting some of the very same weapons I outlined before.  My concern is that in a crowded setting such as an airport who is to say these bullets don't pass through five people in addition to their target.

The right wing continues to sell security, even if that means at gunpoint.

Can I come live over there, I really am sick of this bullshit.


Display:
Can I come live over there
Here, you mean? You don't have to ask.

"If you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles." Sun Tzu
by Turambar (sersguenda at hotmail com) on Sat Sep 22nd, 2007 at 07:40:43 PM EST
do you really want to go anywhere near an airport to get here?

but honestly, her actions were no those of the sharpest knife in the box were they.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Sat Sep 22nd, 2007 at 08:18:56 PM EST
Can I come live over there, I really am sick of this bullshit.
It may be better "over there", but if you do move you may find it's déja vu all over again.

Oye, vatos, dees English sink todos mi ships, chinga sus madres, so escuche: el fleet es ahora refloated, OK? — The War Nerd
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Sep 23rd, 2007 at 03:21:56 AM EST
It is called common sense.

I mentioned in another post yesterday that when I was young a friend's brother committed armed robbery of a small store. The police arrived quickly and chased him until he was trapped. He then pulled out the revolver and the police shot him multiple time. He did barely survive. The gun was a toy.

Logan Airport is the scene of where most of the 9/11 hijackers departed. For someone to play a practical joke or make light of the high level of security at that airport is irresponsible and frankly stupid.

The person who said she was lucky to be alive was the commanding officer in charge of security there and he is right. All that was needed was the same quick trigger that was used on my friend's brother and this young lady may not be alive.

Security at airports are a very serious matter and I appreciate these people being vigilant and not taking chances. Particularly since I do travel quite a bit.

by BJ Lange (langebj@gmail.com) on Sun Sep 23rd, 2007 at 09:24:47 AM EST
The first time I saw soldiers in jungle camo and fatigues sporting SMGs at Ontario airport after 9/11 I was not reassured. I never am by that kind of thing.

Oye, vatos, dees English sink todos mi ships, chinga sus madres, so escuche: el fleet es ahora refloated, OK? — The War Nerd
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Sep 25th, 2007 at 05:38:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What's your point? Perhaps tell your radical Islamic friends not to bomb us anymore. It is so much easier to appease those you know will harm you and to lash out at those that will not.
by BJ Lange (langebj@gmail.com) on Wed Sep 26th, 2007 at 06:43:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
My point is exactly as I said: I am never reassured by open displays of firepower.

We have met the enemy, and it is us — Pogo
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Sep 26th, 2007 at 06:51:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It is so much easier to appease those you know will harm you and to lash out at those that will not.

In the present example, "those you know will harm you" were, for Star Simpson, the people with the guns.

Unless she obeyed their orders completely.

So you're saying that it is the fact that they didn't shoot her that shows merit?  Yes, it does.

Mr. Bush and/or other people seem to be gearing up for shooting in Iran.  Are the iranians "those you know will harm you"?  Or is it that, in this case, it is Mr. Bush and/or others who, the iranian people are being told, will harm you.  And maybe the iranian gay community is an example of "those that will not."

"Those that will not" are...us...no?

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.

by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Wed Sep 26th, 2007 at 06:56:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The statement was in reference to the fact that many find it easier to treat radical Islam with fear and instead join with them in attacking their enemies who you know won't hurt you.

In regard to Star Simpson, this is not a foreign policy debate or characterizing airport security as thugs.

It is a matter of acting responsibly and maturely. Anyone who does not regard an airport as a high security zone needs to start reading newspapers or just stay home.

by BJ Lange (langebj@gmail.com) on Wed Sep 26th, 2007 at 08:15:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't fly any more unless I absolutely can avoid it. Airport security has become a prank.

We have met the enemy, and it is us — Pogo
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Sep 27th, 2007 at 03:16:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
absolutely cannot avoid it

We have met the enemy, and it is us — Pogo
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Sep 27th, 2007 at 06:12:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That's yet another fascinating justification of your position: anyone who opposes your authoritarian ideals is in league with the enemy. Superb stuff.

You're so terrified of the Islamist threat that you'll approve shooting anyone doing anything that might possibly be misinterpreted as a threat and you accuse us of being scared of them? You have granted terrorists the power to define your universe. You are an example of their best allies in the US.

Incidentially, who are these enemies of "radical Islam" who "won't hurt me"?

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Thu Sep 27th, 2007 at 03:41:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I know I'm always late to the "now he gets it" party, but I suddenly saw it: before, it used to be "the islamofascists", but now it's "radical Islam"--a much wider target.

BJ Lange: could you define that term, please,as I have a sense that it may be far different (and worse) than you think: instead of fearing some radical islamicists, I may actually respect them.

btw, my troll radar is still making this SCRREEEEEEEEEEEE!  SCREEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! noise.  So: "radical Islam": you didn't make that one up yourself, did you?  As a form of deconstruction, can you remember when you first started hearing it?

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.

by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Thu Sep 27th, 2007 at 04:24:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
(Hat tip to jj at moonofalabam for this link):

http://www.culturekitchen.com/mole333/blog/my_wife_faces_homeland_security_part_iii_the_re

I believe that the identification required (and which I happily provided) for the OneNASA badges sufficiently meets the recommendation to ensure that I am who I say I am and to verify that I am not a terrorist. Any additional investigation should be done based on a valid and reasonable suspicion that I am a threat to my country - not on a global premise that any one of us might be a terrorist. As an aside - is every delivery person and service provider going to have these badges and the accompanying investigative background check? Will the terrorist actually arrive at JPL in an Arrowhead or FedEx or U-Haul truck and be waved through the gates after a cursory paperwork review?

Administrator Griffin's comment that everything will be fine if we just tell the truth sends chills down my spine - in part because I so well remember the McCarthy era, and in part because a day rarely passes that we don't read about how information entrusted to the government has been lost, stolen, misused or otherwise compromised. Is Mr. Griffin so naïve as to believe that our telling the truth will make everything fine? Frankly, I think we have valid reasons to be concerned that the government may not adequately secure and protect our information. The events even in my own life time have certainly suggested that we cannot always trust the government to protect our information or our civil liberties! (When I was a young woman, I was detained entering the United States at Port Huron. It's a rather long story, but just let me say that on that dark and stormy night - yes, it really was a dark and stormy night! -- I learned how fragile and precious our civil liberties are, and how easily we can lose them to the over-enthusiasm or incompetence of a government agency.)

(My emphasis.)

Susan Foster worked for NASA's Jet Propulsion Lab in Pasadena, CA. for nearly 40 years. She is choosing to resign rather than sign the blanket waiver



Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.
by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Thu Sep 27th, 2007 at 06:29:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Perhaps tell your radical Islamic friends not to bomb us anymore. It is so much easier to appease those you know will harm you and to lash out at those that will not.

So if we don't agree with a thuggish aproach, we're all the friends and helpers of terrorists? It must be so easy having such a simplistic worldview, where everything appears to be black and white. unfortunately the world isn't a 1950's wesstern.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Wed Sep 26th, 2007 at 07:12:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think BJ Lange may be a very (or fairly) high-level troll...the test is: does he deal with the arguments or only accelerate tension ("your terrorist friends") while getting ever more...talking points...those sheets they create with the answers du jour.

Or, I think he may be intelligent, but he still really believes that the most dangerous people to his life and liberty are brown, muslim, and would blow him up in a second if they could.

But he hasn't put on the glasses of an iranian and had a look at the fight scene from the other side.  I'll post this map again, as I think it says so much.

If a person can't make a mental picture for any of the cities listed, what does that person know about Iran except what they've read in the papers, watched on tv, or read in a blog?

I mean, maybe BJ Lange is an expert on Iran, but when he calls Ahmadinejad (had to look that up; not the type of politician I would vote for) a "madman", that's rhetoric, and it sounds like Bush rhetoric, and the only use for this rhetoric is to further Bush's aims, which at present seem to be to ENLARGE the conflict in the middle east.

I read some of the Kos diary about this bill that's been passed.  I was taken by one poster's opinion that this whole Iran fandango (it's a dance--what american cares what's happening in Pakistan at the moment?  Ditto Iran if the roles of the dice change)...this ugly flower is a tactic to make americans content if things just stay the way they are--with the Iraq invasion ongoing, a kind of three steps forward and two steps back approach, where you end up one step ahead each time.

It is hard to see an image crumble, or shatter, or melt...the world I saw at fourteen had some fantasy elements, but I suppose I didn't mind losing them--I think I went after them and modified my opinions.

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.

by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Wed Sep 26th, 2007 at 07:23:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
For "he" read "she or he"

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.
by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Wed Sep 26th, 2007 at 07:28:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It has become common practice in the US to use "they" as a gender-neutral singular pronoun.

We have met the enemy, and it is us — Pogo
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Sep 27th, 2007 at 03:14:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I actually prefer to read "he or she"--but it may just be me

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.
by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Thu Sep 27th, 2007 at 04:04:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It takes getting used to, I must admit.

We have met the enemy, and it is us — Pogo
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Sep 27th, 2007 at 06:17:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think "she or he"/"he or she" keeps the inviduality, whereas "they" can too easily become an abstract.

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.
by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Thu Sep 27th, 2007 at 06:32:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I gave you a 2 for using this kind of argument:

tell your radical Islamic friends not to bomb us anymore


"Dieu se rit des hommes qui se plaignent des conséquences alors qu'ils en chérissent les causes" Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet
by Melanchthon on Thu Sep 27th, 2007 at 04:13:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Should I give you a 3 for calling that an 'argument'?

We have met the enemy, and it is us — Pogo
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Sep 27th, 2007 at 06:15:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
tell your radical Islamic friends not to bomb us anymore

That's not just an ad hominem, it's a smear alleging criminal activity (complicity in mass terror attacks).

It's also standard hard-right talk in the US: if you're not with us you're against us, if you oppose "homeland security" measures you have something to hide, love it or leave it...

So it's worth lower than a warning 2, in my view.

Every time you forget to hang on to your pants, BJ Lange, down they fall. (Which does have its funny side -- just that accusing decent people of siding with bombers isn't funny at all).

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Sep 27th, 2007 at 06:43:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Let me add the comments I made on this story here as well:
someone:

Star said to the police that she is an Electrical Engineer and an Artist, and likes breadboards and LEDs. Does she normally wear breadboards attached to her clothes? It is actually not inconceivable as she is an MIT student, and such a thing would not be out of place there. Certainly she is intelligent enough that if she thought about 'airport', 'war-on-terra', and 'jumpy cops' she'd've remembered that some people out there would react poorly to her attire.
The reaction on MIT lists is in part outrage at the ignorance of technology this incident displays. Certainly any realistic view of the world would concede that circuitboards at airports == trouble. Some MIT students are idealistic geeks, at a place where taking geekiness, and freakiness to the extreme is quite normal. They are not happy to admit that some of this is not compatible to the larger reality, as of yet. There has been some bad experiences with the press in the past, and hopefully this will not turn into that.

Though, really?? Would anyone with an actual bomb in fact attach the circuit board to their clothes??? With LEDs? Is that suppose to be some kind of a counter stealth tactic? Wow, I guess the cops are one step ahead on that one!!

And my answer to BJ Lange's remarks:
someone:

Uh huh. Except a black toy gun looks like a real gun, while a breadboard with a battery and LEDs, taped to the outside of a sweatshirt looks nothing like a bomb, and would suggest that the would be bomber is utilizing some kind of advanced "hey, look at me, I have a bomb, so it couldn't really be a bomb, he he" counter stealth strategy. And that seems rather unlikely. The device was small. Could easily have fit into a handbag, even.

Question: If her 'decoration' was less crudely made, say on a PCB, with a nice cover to make it look store bought, would it then be okay for her to wear to the airport? Because, you know, wearable electronics are available. As well as a large variety of battery operated devices. So, is the line here, "it just can't look like you put it together yourself"? Then I guess we are not safe from terrists willing to put even a minimum of effort into presentation.

by someone (s0me1smail(a)gmail(d)com) on Sun Sep 23rd, 2007 at 11:54:42 AM EST
Let me add to what you said.

This is not even worth debating. It' a matter of personal responsibility and common sense - particularly when you know it is the airport that primarily launched 9/11.

This girl should spend a day in prison just to learn that there are limits to personal freedoms.

by BJ Lange (langebj@gmail.com) on Sun Sep 23rd, 2007 at 05:30:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Reminds me of this.



Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.

by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Sun Sep 23rd, 2007 at 05:46:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm not debating people do have a responsibility.  You cannot yell fire in a crowded theater, but to explain my situation more completely I am a card carrying member of the 911 MIHOP set.  As such I see this as another marketing point which the right wingers have so skillfully seized for their continued Nazification of America efforts.

Security was not nor should it be the entire soul of American culture.

by Lasthorseman on Sun Sep 23rd, 2007 at 06:19:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
my, this comment really reeks to me of authoritarianism.

an innocent prank, inappropriate at worst, and you want to throw her in prison, even for a day?

oh man...

if you say it's not worth debating, does that mean you think that's true for all of us here?

isn't  that just another way to say 'shut up, and agree with me?'

'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty

by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Thu Sep 27th, 2007 at 08:48:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well your security are being told that they should look for electronic devices to triger a bomb, and someone wanders through with an electronic device that has apparently no purpose, then you are going to ratchet up their level of paranoia. Didn't I see as well somewhere that she was also carrying a lump of plasticene going through security in her hands as well? That's got to push securitys paranoia up that extra level as well. Now I don't know about you, but I habe a general policy not to wind up people whose accepted work equipment runs to rubber gloves and have experience of advanced cavity searches.

as for not being safe from terrorists who are willing to put minimal effort into presentation, isn't that the essence of irregular warfare? that they blend into the general populace?

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.

by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Sun Sep 23rd, 2007 at 06:34:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Because it makes sense to look for electronic devices to trigger bombs that are carried around quite openly? No one would have bothered to carry the thing, say, under a shirt, or in a bag? Yeah, she had some play-doh. A bad combination to be found with perhaps. But that circuit was not suspicious!
by someone (s0me1smail(a)gmail(d)com) on Mon Sep 24th, 2007 at 01:33:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
My concern is that in a crowded setting such as an airport who is to say these bullets don't pass through five people in addition to their target.

European police often walk around with submachine guns. The weapons American airport police would most likely use would be pistols loaded with hollow-point ammunition, which tends not to pass through bodies.

My main response to this incident is the same as it was to the taisering of the student at the Kerry event: in both cases, about half the posters on blogs believe the police behaved entirely appropriately! People who think that might as well be citizens of Nazi Germany: they have gone past the point of no return. They no longer have an idea of what a normal country is like.

Something I haven't seen anyone mention is that the MIT student didn't look particularly white. That certainly could have had something to do with it.

This formulation of the police is puzzling:

"She's extremely lucky she followed the instructions or deadly force would have been used," Pare told the Associated Press. "and she's lucky to be in a cell as opposed to the morgue."
Since when does luck, as opposed to plain common sense, have something to do with following orders given by police, especially if they have their guns drawn on you? Evidently, the Boston police think that MIT students are some kind of freaks.

A bomb, H bomb, Minuteman / The names get more attractive / The decisions are made by NATO / The press call it British opinion -- The Three Johns
by Alexander on Sun Sep 23rd, 2007 at 06:32:42 PM EST
Well, many MIT students are some kind of freaks. And proud of it!
by someone (s0me1smail(a)gmail(d)com) on Mon Sep 24th, 2007 at 01:31:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
People who think that . . . have gone past the point of no return. They no longer have an idea of what a normal country is like.

That is just about right.  

The Fates are kind.

by Gaianne on Tue Sep 25th, 2007 at 05:22:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Who cares what she did, or how stupid it was?  

Only an idiot could think she was a real terrorist, whether her actions required intervention or not.  

The real point is that on less than a suspicion, the airport cops were prepared to commit actions that would have slaughtered bystanders--innocent, upstanding American citizens.  

What kind of police would entertain doing this?  

What kind of civic life do we have?  

If certain mid-twentieth century, rogue, totalitarian dictatorships come to mind--well they should.  

We all know how this movie ends.  The ticket is bought, and you do not get to walk out.  Make your preparations for what is coming now.  

And if you don't like excitement, don't fly to or from the US. Make other arrangements.  It has not been safe for years.  

The Fates are kind.

by Gaianne on Tue Sep 25th, 2007 at 05:16:25 PM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]