Apparently a Nigerian National on a transatlantic flight that originated in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Attempted to ignite an explosive aboard the aircraft.
Here is a link to a news story about the incident, and I apologize if this has been posted previously this evening on the forums
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/12/25...ers/index.html
Looking forward to the ineffective security theater harrassment that this will produce at the airport for the post-holiday flights.
Two articles with further links on the theatrics that pass for security at our airports:
Economist's Gulliver Blog
Atlantic article
We need to separate and be honest about the components of airline security: the things that actually can defeat attacks (most of which should happen well prior to the TSA security check at the airport), the things that deter attackers from trying even though they won't defeat a trained attacker (the TSA security check), and the things that are wrongheadedly added in for good measure to make people feel like the government is doing something and/or is being fair (half-assed harrassment of grandma whose body language, travel documents, IDs, luggage, etc shows that she isn't trying to pull anything over, but doing a frisk on her anyway that is embarassing, annoying, and insulting, but would not find even the most poorly hidden contraband). And as one Israeli CT expert told me, we need to focus more on resilience when it comes to strategic message to our populations than fearmongering approaches that make them afraid of the threat.
I agree with you on how poorly planned and conducted airport security is in the US, and it can get quite aggravating to say the least.Quote:
Originally Posted by pjmunson
For example in my junior year in high about year and a half ago, I was embarking on a college program to Cambridge University at Dulles Airport in DC, my home city. At airport security I found affairs quite haphazard in the way they were conducted. As in my instance, some film I was bringing on the trip to take pictures was almost destroyed because security demanded to screen it via x-ray despite the fact that I proved that it was indeed film. While at the same time many other passengers who had more questionable items where rushed through security without the time being taken to process them.
Coming back home after the college program at Cambridge and gong through London's massive Heathrow Airport,. I found security on the other side of the Atlantic to be not much better, due to the fact that I didn't find security to be alert and vigilant, in addition I found the security station that I went through to be poorly manned. Even though I was subject to standard procedure I didn't find things as quite as through as they should be. All of this I found quite surprising for a nation that has first hand experience dealing with the IRA, acts of state sponsored terrorism, and recently violent Islamic Jihadists.
I therefore agree with you fullheartedly that incompetent security and mindless/illogical harassment at airport security is not only aggravating but is also a threat.
On first reading of the few reports it is amazingly similar to Richard Reid, the "Shoe bomber" a few years ago and why attempt to ignite the device when at the end of the journey? Secondly, if this is a genuine AQ plot, it is remarkable that an attack on air transport features; an activity supposedly with such high security features. Note the references to: no secondary screening and no hand baggage - for a young Nigerian adult male.
Speaking of airport security...
I was selected to be one of the passengers who got the more thorough inspection on a flight out of Atlanta a few years back. This had happened to me before, because I often purchased tickets online, on short notice. However, this time was different. I was flying on a gov't flight, paid for and checked in with a gov't credit card, I showed my military ID when I got my tickets and while going through screening, and only 15 minutes earlier I checked an M4 and M9 in a hard shell case. The screener apologized to me a few times while quickly going through the motions of the inspection, realizing how absurd it was. I didn't care - I laughed.
You were clearly singled out for very good reasons - too obvious ones to tell you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmedlap
Were not practically all of the plots or bombings concerning aircrafts comitted by persons which fitted to a often surprising degree the risk profiles? I know this is a rather sensitive topic, but given the limited time and ressources for security checks the overall effort should focus on them, while keeping up a (far) more irregular/sparse pattern for intensiv checks for other profiles.
Firn
P.S: Good to hear that this obviously timed bombing was prevented. Kudos to the crew and the passenger(s).
Hey Firn,
Not sure I fully understand "to obvious to tell you". Schmedlap fits a current profile ? If you mean this is an OPSEC issue, then say so please.Quote:
Originally Posted by Firn
This is one of the very reasons we teach the local security to check everybody. Not a single person should be exempt from a full screening (shoes off, physical search and yet another screening at the gate). Some folks just don't know what's going on and being ignorant doesn't translate into easier checks and apologies in lieu of security.Quote:
Originally Posted by Firn
There's an inordinate amount of pressure on security personnel to perform an effective job in a matter of seconds. Simply being trained to identify potential flammable and/or explosive mixtures obviously is useless if we don't permit security to do a thorough inspection. This especially holds true at the gate... The enormous amount of hazmat available at the gift shops are not being controlled.Quote:
Originally Posted by Firn
Could you expand on "timed bombing" ? All I've read indicates the bonehead has serious burns.Quote:
Originally Posted by Firn
I'm glad to see passengers getting involved - time we sent a message to would be fanatics: We won't take this Sierra any more :D
Just too thickly veiled irony about the comic nature of the incident when viewed from his perspective. In short I forgot the ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
I refered to the overall timing of the bombing. We recently had also the video of the captured soldier. It seems to be that dear AQ&C looks closely at the (christian) calendar before making international moves. I would suit me fine, If the person in question would always "time" the bomb as splendidly as yesterday.Quote:
Could you expand on "timed bombing" ? All I've read indicates the bonehead has serious burns.
TrueQuote:
I'm glad to see passengers getting involved - time we sent a message to would be fanatics: We won't take this Sierra any more :D
Firn
Firn, I'm just a thick-headed sort, but you've lost me now. I don't work at the airport, but I do teach airport security personnel awareness training. Sorry, but I don't see the comic nature herein.Quote:
Originally Posted by Firn
Not sure where you're going with this para. Captured Soldier and Christian Calendar ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Firn
The 23 year-old Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab claims he was toYou may not have access to LEO and the BDC, but this BBC article has a different twist.Quote:
to ignite an explosive device as the jet approached Detroit
David,maybe because at the end of the journey he would not only kill the passengers and destroy the plane but he would also disrupt Airport operations all in one strike. Thoughts?Quote:
Originally Posted by davidbfpo
Maybe. I think it was for the purpose of sending the message.Quote:
Originally Posted by slapout9
Triggering it over the mid Atlantic would optimize the chance of success; even if the bomb did not completely destroy it, the plane would have to continue to fly for some time and could still crash if the bomb did significant damage. He didn’t do this.
I don’t know the flight path. But I imagine an Amsterdam to Detroit flight does not fly much over the USA, probably flies more over Canada then comes into Detroit from the NW. If so, there would only be a small timeframe of flight over the US – at the end of the journey on the approach to Detroit.
In the mind of a terrorist blowing up a jetliner over the continental United States sends more of a message then it does blowing one up over the Atlantic or Canada.
There is nothing comic in the bombing, I thought this was clear. I commented Schmedlap's experience and I agreed with him that it could seem absurd to him, given the circumstances.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
I refered to the fact that AQ or elements which share the same ideology choose Christmas to send the video of the captured soldier. As David said, it seems to be part of their Info Warfare, just as the choice to try to wreck the airplane on the 26th of December. Note also how the producers want to have the mental link to Vietnam fortified.Quote:
Not sure where you're going with this para. Captured Soldier and Christian Calendar ?
Hopefully this clears our misunderstanding up. Communication is both easy and difficult.
Firn
This is the seating arrangement for the NWA Airbus A300-300. According to this news story, a passenger in 16G looked over his left shoulder and back three rows and saw a glow of flame, smoke, and commotion. This would place the suspect in row 19 left of center. Just like Richard Reid, he was going for the fuel tank. This all goes back to Bojinka.
Somebody correct me if I am wrong here but aren't there also legal issues with how passengers are selected for "additional screening"? I think that part of the issue is that other people like the eighty year old grandma have to be selected to avoid even the appearance of "profiling" or somebody is getting sued.
As for Schmedlap, he is a former military officer and veteran of the War on Terror. He is therefore clearly a threat because he is a current or future member of a right-wing militia. The fact that he is in law school just proves that he has nefarious intent. :D
SFC W
I wonder if it isn't something much more simple. Perhaps it just took him that long to work up the courage. I would imagine that even suicide bombers have to work themselves up to the task and I know that some never get there.Quote:
Originally Posted by slapout9
SFC W
Maybe, a news report says the guy is doing a lot of talking so maybe we will find out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Uboat509
I was thinking more along the lines of the airport itself was the final target, blowing it up on landing or near landing would magnify the effect on the populace to enclude a lot more news coverage.Quote:
Originally Posted by bourbon
Firn,Quote:
Originally Posted by Firn
Thanks for your clarification and video link !
Stan
Can't answer for the USA but the EU countries are held to a minimum standard and anything above and beyond that is their business. We were detained in charles de gaulle for having explosive traces detected. Yet, we just transited Frankfurt without a hitch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Uboat509
I see what you're getting at and would only add that everybody be subjected to additional screening. No room to whine.
As for grandma, older folks, especially in wheel chairs, are too easy to use. We've already had an incident involving a wheelchair with drugs stuffed into the tires and frame.
Regards, Stan
19A according to the guardian:Quote:
Originally Posted by bourbon
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...rate-explosiveQuote:
The device allegedly used by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab involved a syringe and a soft plastic container filled, reportedly, with 80g of PETN. The remnants of the bomb are being analysed in an FBI laboratory.
PETN is relatively stable and is detonated either by heat or a shockwave. It is possible that the suspect used a syringe that was converted into an electrical detonator, but more likely the syringe was filled with nitroglycerin.
Abdulmutallab was in a window seat, 19A, and allegedly had the device strapped to his left leg, against the body of the plane. The idea was almost certainly to blow a hole at much higher altitude, so that the decompression would tear the aircraft apart.
I also wonder what secret forumla is used to deterimne who gets additional screening and who does not. When I was flying both inside the US and overseas, with an active duty military ID AND a red, official passport, I was routinely selected for the additional screening. Seems that someone on US Government travel orders, with a military ID, and an official Government passport would not be the prime source of security concerns....
:eek:Amen and it still happens to me with a retired military ID, a current CAC, and red passportQuote:
Originally Posted by Tankguy
I actually had to explain why I had a red passport to the TSA person....:rolleyes:
then my metal knee sets off the alarm and it really gets sillly :eek:
Of No Practical Significance from Threats Watch
A brief commentary with some salient points... dead to the point
Quote:
Eight years on, new legislation, new organizations, reconfigured security apparatus, and we still lack the ability to keep the usefully delusional from trying to blow their extremities up at altitude.
We could start by realizing that when somebody's father tells the US Embassy that his son is starting to go Jihad on him...... we should listen.......and then maybe do something besides listen like flag his passport,Visa:rolleyes: instead of taking the passengers blankets away from them and telling them no bathroom breaks for you during the last hour of flight:rolleyes:......wait I got it..... lets hire some security experts with PHD's that fix it.:wry:Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
Whether we are talking about CT, COIN, other threats, people always talk about how we need to reorganize, retrain, etc, to deal with the new age threat. Even if any of that would ultimately be helpful, we are never going to get anywhere until our bureaucracies and their promotion mechanisms start selecting out the guys who say, "I know how to fix this. We'll just make everyone stay seated with their hands on their laps for the last hour of the flight." More importantly, the systems need to select out all of the sycophants who sit through that meeting nodding, smiling, and stroking the boss rather than saying, "You dumba**, what keeps them from blowing the plane at 1+15 out, especially when you plan on publicizing your brilliant plan immediately to show the public how safe you made them?"
Our entire security apparatus needs a healthy dose of de-arrogantization and the re-introduction of reality through frank transmission of information and criticism both up and down through the chain of command. That is not happening today.
Pretty soon we will have to fly naked,with no luggage,sitting on the outside of the plane, under the eyes of an armed Predator escort.:D
Didn't practically all of the recent wanna-be-bombers fit into rather narrow threat profiles? Or am I wrong?
Firn
Yes, they did. And our PC fed.gov clownshow FUBAR'd it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Firn
Why were we letting this clown into the US anyway? Did he have a skill? Bring some economic benefit? I see no reason to let ANYONE that fits certain threat profiles to travel here, period.
The following quotation from a Mel Brooks' character (Governor William J. Le Petomane) seems very apropos here:Quote:
Originally Posted by pjmunson
BTW, Le Petomane is an interesting choice of character name. Go here to read the complete story of this extract:Quote:
Originally Posted by Blazing Saddles
Quote:
Joseph Pujol, better known as Le Petomane (which we may loosely translate as "the fartiste") . . . Le Petomane performed his unique act from 1887 to 1914, and became one of his country's best-known vaudevillians. At one point he was earning 20,000 francs a week, compared to 8,000 for his contemporary Sarah Bernhardt.
Hey Wayne !Quote:
Originally Posted by wm
But this quote from Ken Wainstein is much more convincing ;)
Quote:
Ken Wainstein, who became the first Assistant Attorney General for Homeland Security in 2006, told CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller that Abdulmutallab represents the kind of operative who could be "a goldmine" for al Qaeda.
Wainstein points out that Abdulmutallab speaks English, is Westernized, has multiple entry visa to the U.S. and can "fly under the radar."
Stan,Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
As my dad told me, "Hindsight is always 20-20."
I think it is very interesting in our victorian puritan rooted country, that the soon to be implemented body scanners are not causing a huge issue. Imagine some guy in a dark room with a computer is going to be digitally removing peoples clothes. That would include men, women, grandma, grandpa, and little girls and boys. In any other venue the same technology would result in in prosecution from peep show to child pornography. I haven't heard one word.Quote:
Originally Posted by slapout9
Then again I quit flying a few years back. Haven't flown since 2003 in fact. In my laboratory I have a digital video camera ($30) that does the same basic thing as the millimeter wave technology ($500K). This isn't about security but abusing privacy and companies making money. It wouldn't have stopped any recent terrorist attack either.
I have been off-line for a few days so catching up and with a lot of reading today on this attack.
At the start (Post 4) I expressed surprise that the bomber waited till the approach to Detroit.
Bourbon's points (Post 11) are well taken, I just think an un-explained airliner crash mid-ocean provokes more fear than downing the plane elsewhere and of course complicates the forensic aspect (remember the Lockerbie crash would have been over the ocean if the plane had left on schedule). Even a crash over the tundra of frozen Canada would pose problems as those flights do fly the northern route.
Slap,
(Responding to Post 10). A crash at Detroit airport IMHO was unlikely, although the media footage would have been immense and if unexplained a gain for creating fear.
The analysis by Peter Neumann, ICSR @ Kings College, London is a good start: http://icsr.info/blog/INSTANT-ANALYS...irlines-Flight and and I recommend these two articles: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews Which looks at the internet writings of Mutallad.
Secondly Steve Coll writes on a Nigerian article and the broader aspects: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...lmutallab.html
I would draw attention to the willingness of Mutallab's father to report his concerns to the US Embassy in Nigeria, the role of family information - distinct from that from the community or public - is often overlooked and appears to be downgraded by officialdom at times, maybe in this episode too.
The other issue is why AQ continue to pursue attacks on airliners, a supposedly "hardened" target; which Professor Bruce Hoffman has pointedly referred to in his lectures and writings.
Making sense of all the information available apparently before Mutallab boarded the flight is now obscured by the media furore and already I have read "a failure to join the dots up" a nice simple headline that does not help understanding.
Yecch. I have no desire to see the elderly or the adolescent disrobed. Whoever wants that job can have it. I don't even want to view most of the out-of-shape masses of chewed bubble gum in the 18 to 35 demographic. I made it through a few tours in combat without mental issues (some would beg to differ). I don't know how I would hold up staring at the average disrobed American traveler for 8 hours at a time, 5 days per week, for 20 years. There's a job that will burn people out quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by selil
Again even though this question has been asked in detail before.Quote:
Originally Posted by davidbfpo
Why didn't this guy attempt to detonate the device, when the aircraft was over the Atlantic? Had he been successful, the plane very well likely would have gone down and if he is connected to AQ or any other terrorist group, they could have still claimed responsibility. As that was the case with the perpetrators behind Air India Flight 182, which blow up midair far off the coast of the Britain/Ireland.
Anybody recall Air France flight 447 that disappeared over the Atlantic, en route to Rio de Janiero in June 2009? It was kind of a big story for a few days, largely due to the mystery involved. Mystery is not nearly as terrorizing to a populace as having an aircraft blown up within their airspace. We are all still guessing at what happened to Air France 447 and we'll probably never know unless the black box miraculously washes up on shore and some passer-by recognizes it as something important. I think that helps to shed some light on why terrorists don't prefer to detonate over the ocean.
Schmedlap,Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmedlap
I'd overlooked my argument a long time ago on SWC that AQ appears to pick targets - in the West - where two media footage options are present: the public with cameras / mobile phones and public and private CCTV.
If the KLM flight had detonated over the USA only the first option would be present; could the plane have flown onto Detroit airport - I think not, but crashing / landing anywhere in greater Detroit would have attracted a horde of TV cameras.
I also wonder about, speculate, the option for their own publicity team. Why would this be required with so much footage being available? A developing thought.
In my opinion (colored no doubt by my own status as an immigrant Muslim):
1. There is no way to stop all "radicalization", but the pool of available recruits would definitely shrink if public discourse WITHIN Muslim settings (media, community groups, politics, mosques) includes a healthy dose of counter-jihadi propaganda and a narrative which allows "reporters" to see themselves as doing a good deed, not as traitors to the cause of Islam.
Unfortunately, most of these recruits never run into anyone who vigorously challenges their views and has the vocabulary to do so. Most of the time, fellow Muslims will prefer to become quiet and slide away (or if they are exposed to left wing academia, nod in approval at this person's willingness to challenge the imperial war machine, while silently tut-tutting to themselves about some of the theological fantasies the brave rebel is spinning).
In this case, some family members seem to have argued more and even went so far as to inform the CIA..which I think is a reflection of Dad's status and awareness that his position in modern Nigeria could be jeopardized by this nut. In other cases, you may get warnings from friends or acquiantances. All that is more likely to happen if this option is in people's minds: that they can report someone going nutty and that such a report is actually a good deed and not "snitching" or treachery. For that to happen, examples of such reporting need to be amplified and broadcast as a good deed. Positive propganda...
The US govt can do only a little in this matter, but I am sure there are possible programs involving universities and media scholarships and whatnot that can have an impact. If they are not "official", that helps. But that presupposes that there are American planners who have an idea of what the narrative and counter-narrative should look like and on current form, I dont think the US govt is likely to perform too well in this area.
2. Once someone is "radicalized" (which really means that he takes orthodox Islamic teaching seriously AND then connects his Islamic obligations to the need to act against the great satan) he or she has to find someone willing to help out with the tactical part. He has to get the explosive or make it. If he or she remains isolated, it is virtually certain that he will fall into the hands of some intelligence agency (all the paintball jihadis and the clueless bastards who flew to Pakistan recently are in this category) but if he makes contact with actual trained jihadis, then he can proceed with the next step. What this means is that the crucial link in this process is the actual jihadi trainers and experts. There are probably none to be found within the US. Given the high level of radicalization in Britain, maybe you can find some there, but probably not even there anymore.
To meet them, you have to go to AF-Pak, Yemen or Somalia. There are probably some scattered through subsaharan Africa and Indonesia and Phillipines but the wannabe jihadis best bet is to fly to Pakistan or Yemen. Ergo, that is where you have to focus your intelligence energies. I dont believe this bull#### about grievances (very real ones like Palestine or partly manufactured ones like Kashmir) being the "root cause". Root causes are a dime a dozen. Its the trained people who connect "root cause" to actual bomb in rectum. There are a few thousand trained people and most of them are in Pakistan. When and if they are wrapped up, the threat is pretty much gone.
Can they be wrapped up? I dont know.
3. Airport security is important, but its the very last step. And the current system seems designed to create theatre more than focus on actually stopping someone. Intelligence should be able to identify most cases long before they get to the airport. But I will leave the details of airport harassment to the experts...
Concur. This is very typical of embassy rank and file especially in Sub-Sahara. Ignore it long enough, or, embellish what the current administration wants to hear. Either way, you drop the ball.Quote:
Originally Posted by omarali50
A BBC report:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8436497.stm and under a sub-title 'True Nigerian':The bulk of the report is on an apparent feud between the two Nigerian intelligence agencies:Quote:
Mr Abdulmutallab Sr was a "courageous and true Nigerian", Mrs Akunyili said. But the minister condemned the actions of the son as "un-Nigerian".
Reports from within the Abdulmutallab family compound, on a quiet Abuja street lined with middle-class homes, say the family is understandably traumatised and emotionally drained. Friends say family members are personally horrified by the charges against the 23-year-old and at the same time buffeted by the high politics and blame-games that have been unleashed in Nigeria and the United States - partly as a result of blunders by intelligence agencies.
While the trial of their son looms in the United States, the family are also in the unusually painful position of having his youthful-looking face stare out at them from hourly television news bulletins.
Mr Abdulmutallab Sr is a widely-respected banker. He is now considered by many people in the United States and Nigeria to be a hero for having swallowed his paternal pride and sought help in trying to bring home a wayward son.
Quote:
One of Nigeria's two main intelligence agencies has blamed the other for failing to share key information two months ago about Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
Personally, I'd rather get blown up than put up with much more airport security hassles.
It's somewhat selfish of me, but I figure that if I were to fly on a commercial airliner everyday for the rest of my life, with pre-9/11 security, the chances of me being the victim of an act of terrorism would be almost zero.
(Break, break, break...)
TSA screenings and no-fly lists are passive measures. They are static. The enemy trying to penetrate those defenses has the initiative. He can fail 100 times. He only needs to succeed once - and every once in a while, he will succeed.
This war must be fought on the offensive. I know it sounds irritatingly cheesy, but "Be the hunter, not the hunted."
No matter what we do though, the enemy will get through to targets in the West. When he does so, it is not necessarily reasonable to go into psycho-hall-monitor-from-hell mode.
I'll leave the rest to Christopher Hitchens...
Well, this doesn't make a lot of sense:
The risk is not so much from passengers flying from or through Iran, Syria, or Cuba--where internal security is generally quite tight, and where the regimes have no desire to be implicated directly (if at all) in an attack against a US airliner. The risk is from passengers passing through countries with poor airport security--a rather different issue.Quote:
BBC News, 3 January 2010
Tougher US air screening for 'terror-prone' countries
The new screening comes into effect on Monday
The US authorities are introducing tougher screening rules for passengers arriving by air from nations deemed to have links with terrorism.
Reports say people flying from Nigeria, Pakistan, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Yemen and Cuba will have pat-down body searches and have carry-on baggage searched.
...
The Transportation Security Administration said in a statement that the new rules apply to passengers flying from or through countries on the US State Department's "State Sponsors of Terrorism" list - Cuba, Iran, Sudan and Syria - and "other countries of interest".
Tell the Troops where the off limits area are and they'll go there just to prove they can; tell smart attackers where you're 'clamping down' and they'll find other routes. :rolleyes:
Sigh.:mad:
We're insane. Really...
Yep!Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken White
and they were so busy with tougher screening that this dude just walked on by:oQuote:
From a Wall Street Journal Op-Ed by L.Gordon Crovitz, 3 Jan 10:LINK.Quote:
...
"Timothy Healy, the head of the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, explained the unit's "reasonable suspicion" standard like this:
"Reasonable suspicion requires 'articulable' facts which, taken together with rational inferences, reasonably warrant a determination that an individual is known or suspected to be or has been engaged in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to, terrorism and terrorist activities, and is based on the totality of the circumstances. Mere guesses or inarticulate 'hunches' are not enough to constitute reasonable suspicion."
If this sounds like legalistic language, it is. Indeed, a quick Web search was a reminder that this language is adapted from Terry v. Ohio, a landmark Supreme Court case in 1968 that determined when Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches allows the police to frisk civilians or conduct traffic stops. In other words, foreign terrorists have somehow now been granted Fourth Amendment reasonableness rights that courts intended to protect Americans being searched by the local police." (emphasis added /kw)
Using law enforcement organizations, techniques and rules in a futile attempt to counter espionage and terrorism is just STOOPID!!! :eek:
We're nuts... :mad: :rolleyes:
P.S.
Happy New Year, Stan. :cool:
Actually there is an LE rule that should be used..... exigent circumstances......which means there are times when situations and people are so dangerous that you DON'T follow the normal rules. Like blowing up planes,buildings,countries.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken White
that would require the Feds to, you know, actually, like think...:D
Slap, I've heard of this very same situation (my brother-in-law is a LEO with the Capitol Police). The perp was in a building and the LEOs collectively decided that my Bro's 92-pound Shepperd should go first :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by slapout9
... Sure as Sierra, the dude came outta the building pronto :D
Quote:
Those circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to believe that entry (or other relevant prompt action) was necessary to prevent physical harm to the officers or other persons
Hey Ken, Back at ya !Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken White
Somewhat long and challenging on the Saudi role, but makes a series of points on the 'new' TSA actions, under the title: 'Muslim profiling is a recipe for insecurity: The profiling of ordinary Muslims loses the support of the very people we need to contain al-Qaeda'.
Link:http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...security/print