or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Sitting Ducks?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sitting Ducks? - Page 2

post #16 of 29
i realize this analogy is about to fall apart, but it occurs to me that a restaurant that actually gets shut down for health code reasons really has to be a pretty gross place. not the kind of place that's going to have very good food to begin with, generally speaking. ever see restaurants with a light on overnight, especially in the kitchen? keeps the cockroaches from scurrying about. /andrew
post #17 of 29
Globetrotter is right - you have to get the terrorist. I think that we in the UK have to lose a bit of the political correctness, too. 'Community leaders' are complaining in the media that it's not fair that young muslim men are stopped and searched, and the lefty brigade wring their hands about their rights. We need to be very clear with this section of the community; they will simply have to understand that until AQ starts recruiting elderly white Christian women, their young men are likely to be stopped. Those who support the terrorists and help to spread their hatred, such as the Al-Muhajiroun organisation, should be proscribed, prosecuted and deported - instead, their leaders live on welfare benefits, protected by lunatic legislation and preying on impressionable, badly-educated youths from unassimilated communities. Currently, the police and intelligence services in UK are warning that the bombers could try to target public transport again.
post #18 of 29
Quote:
My father was a track technician for the MTA (NYC Transit Authority) for 30 years. He can tell stories about the crime and rats that are quite entertaining (well, the rat stories anyway). Some quick highlights: Apparently the pretty big sized rats you see while waiting on the platform are runts. There are immense, colossal rodents deep in the dark tunnels. He said in the summer they would rest their bellies on the cool rails and let their legs dangle. Apparently these rats have no fear of men. One large rat apparently stole the sandwich out of a bag of a co-worker as they were eating during a work break. I have since corroborated this story with several MTA retirees. Overall, I would have to say the new york subway system, as described as it existed in the 1980s sounds nothing short of hell on earth. murders, rapes, arson, acid thrown from moving subway cars, people pushed in front of trains, these are the work stories I heard from my father growing up. Anyway, I'll end my nostalgic subway trip down memory lane with this: as a retiree, my father has lifetime free access to the NYC transportation. Needless to say, he hasn't been taken a train or bus in NYC since the day he retired. And he refuses to believe that it may have gotten any better in the last 15 years. I won't even go into my commute from the east side to Fordham Road in the bronx on the 6 to the 4 to the D train for 2 years in high school. Anyone ever see "The Warriors"? :-)
Oddly enough I have friends who think the period of the Warriors was New York's greatest hour. Your old man say anything about people living in the subway?
post #19 of 29
Quote:
Globetrotter is right - you have to get the terrorist. I think that we in the UK have to lose a bit of the political correctness, too.  'Community leaders' are complaining in the media that it's not fair that young muslim men are stopped and searched, and the lefty brigade wring their hands about their rights.  We need to be very clear with this section of the community; they will simply have to understand that until AQ starts recruiting elderly white Christian women, their young men are likely to be stopped.  Those who support the terrorists and help to spread their hatred, such as the Al-Muhajiroun organisation, should be proscribed, prosecuted and deported - instead, their leaders live on welfare benefits, protected by lunatic legislation and preying on impressionable, badly-educated youths from unassimilated communities. Currently, the police and intelligence services in UK are warning that the bombers could try to target public transport again.
sorry, if middle aged jewish guys were blowing up subways, first I would be out there going on record saying there was no way to justify it, secondly I would be happy to submit to what ever searches and/or checks that were needed to make sure that I was't involved. all we do know about the terrorists is that they are relativly young muslim men. if this is the only thread, that is what we should pursue, and we should do what ever it takes, even if it may be a little unpleasant to some innocent people, to get to the source. what walter said about brining those responsible to justice - the answer is not to take the 5 or 10 people who put together te bombs and try to put them in a jail where they get 3 meals a day and a mosque for 20 years. what needs to be done is to find every body who was involved - in planing, in logisitics, in moral support, in finance, in training, etc, and kill them. anything short won't work. this isn't a civil law matter, this is war with "pirates" - with a non-territorial entity whose only reason for existance is to kill non-muslims. "allied" units should be killing around the clock - track down the people who have been giving money - kill them, track down the guy who let them stay in his house - kill him. track down the guy who tought them how to make bombs, kill them. and while they are at it, they should be looking for the people who could be planning the next jobs, and kill them, too. the people involved in this are not afraid of going to jail. we also can't focus on the ones who put the bombs together or actually pull the switch, because even death doens't scare them. we need to destroy any support they have, destroy their financial base, their support, etc.
post #20 of 29
Globe... I understand where you're coming from. One note: many of these guys aren't afraid of death, either.
post #21 of 29
Quote:
Globe... I understand where you're coming from.  One note:  many of these guys aren't afraid of death, either.
actually, if it was up to me I would take their whole family, and clan if possible, and lock them in a room full of pigs for life. let them think that they are going to heaven and leaving their father and brothers and maybe all their cousins and grandparents to rot in a pig stye. and I would wrap what ever could be found of their bodies up in bloody pigskins.
post #22 of 29
Horace, Yes, my older brother sounds like your friends. He becomes physically ill in the "new" Times Square. I think he yearns for the days of Bonds International Casino hosting the Clash, with the myriad arcades with their phony state i.d.s for sale up and down the strip. According to my dad, the transit authority began construction on a 2nd Avenue subway line many years ago. Apparently they completed a long stretch of the track and platforms that were simply abandoned when the plan stalled. I grew up on 106th and 2nd, and you can see the vents above the un-used platforms. Anyway, according to him, these abandoned platforms and tunnels were teeming with homeless people. I think they plan on simply rehabilitating these unused portions of tunnel for the new 2nd avenue line which is supposed to be completed by 2008 or 2010, something like that.
post #23 of 29
Quote:
Quote:
(ViroBono @ July 09 2005,03:39) Globetrotter is right - you have to get the terrorist. I think that we in the UK have to lose a bit of the political correctness, too.  'Community leaders' are complaining in the media that it's not fair that young muslim men are stopped and searched, and the lefty brigade wring their hands about their rights.  We need to be very clear with this section of the community; they will simply have to understand that until AQ starts recruiting elderly white Christian women, their young men are likely to be stopped.  Those who support the terrorists and help to spread their hatred, such as the Al-Muhajiroun organisation, should be proscribed, prosecuted and deported - instead, their leaders live on welfare benefits, protected by lunatic legislation and preying on impressionable, badly-educated youths from unassimilated communities. Currently, the police and intelligence services in UK are warning that the bombers could try to target public transport again.
sorry, if middle aged jewish guys were blowing up subways, first I would be out there going on record saying there was no way to justify it, secondly I would be happy to submit to what ever searches and/or checks that were needed to make sure that I was't involved. all we do know about the terrorists is that they are relativly young muslim men. if this is the only thread, that is what we should pursue, and we should do what ever it takes, even if it may be a little unpleasant to some innocent people, to get to the source.
just two small concerns with this: this seems to be the same underlying logic for racial profiles. blacks commit more crime, so let's target and harass blacks even if they are innocent. and, i have to wonder if such actions would further alienate already disenfrancised groups and push them further into extremism. and, by focusing so much on young muslim men, you might let equally dangerous non-muslim men slip through. the last major bomb outage in london was in 99 and the one responsible, David Copeland, was white. and, with oklahoma, the terrorists were white. i wouldn't want a situation where we're so focused on that middleclass muslim family that we let the crazy, white supremacist muttering to himself through.
post #24 of 29
Quote:
Quote:
(globetrotter @ July 09 2005,05:54) all we do know about the terrorists is that they are relativly young muslim men. if this is the only thread, that is what we should pursue, and we should do what ever it takes, even if it may be a little unpleasant to some innocent people, to get to the source.
just two small concerns with this: this seems to be the same underlying logic for racial profiles. blacks commit more crime, so let's target and harass blacks even if they are innocent. and, i have to wonder if such actions would further alienate already disenfrancised groups and push them further into extremism. and, by focusing so much on young muslim men, you might let equally dangerous non-muslim men slip through. the last major bomb outage in london was in 99 and the one responsible, David Copeland, was white. and, with oklahoma, the terrorists were white. i wouldn't want a situation where we're so focused on that middleclass muslim family that we let the crazy, white supremacist muttering to himself through.
An apples and oranges comparison. David Copeland was a mentally-ill individual who planted 3 bombs in London. I used to live quite close to where he was captured, and many young white males were stopped during the hunt for Copeland; so far as I'm aware, none turned to Nazism as a result. The police knew they were looking for a young white male because of the evidence they had. Copeland operated alone, and targeted specific groups. This case was very different to organised Islamic Fundamentalist terror campaigns which seek to indiscriminately kill. However much the racial stereotype thing is trotted out, the fact remains that Islamic fundamentalist terrorists tend to be Muslims; can you name any terrorist convicted of a crime connected to Islamic Fundamentalism who wasn't a Muslim? The police would be foolish not to concentrate on that section of the community where the suspects are most likely to come from - to do otherwise would be a waste of resources. There is a world of difference between investigating a major crime and harrassing one section of the community. I think the rest of the Muslim community will understand and co-operate, because they don't want these creatures in their midst either - that's certainly the impression I get from speaking to Muslim colleagues and from the news here. In UK the police and MI5 have much experience in dealing with terrorists; I do not doubt that their surveillance of other groups such as Irish Republican terrorists will be relaxed whilst those responsible for the London bombings are tracked down. Our white supremacists tend to be relatively non-violent, and are closely monitored anyway.
post #25 of 29
Quote:
I think the heightened vigilance and security measures make it unlikely that terrorists will target a mass transit system again in the near future.  Kind of like going to a restaurant that has recently reopened after being shut down for health code violations.
I don't know about that.... Granted, the Tokyo subway authorities are more vigilant than they were a month ago, and perhaps terrorist might purposefully strike in unexpected and unpredictable ways for maximum effect, but I really don't see how it has become any harder to hit the subway station under the Ginza shopping district or my station fifty meters underground that I take into the outskirts of the governmental district. Perhaps Washington DC has implemented more security measures than Tokyo, though. Bic
post #26 of 29
Quote:
An apples and oranges comparison. David Copeland was a mentally-ill individual who planted 3 bombs in London.  I used to live quite close to where he was captured, and many young white males were stopped during the hunt for Copeland; so far as I'm aware, none turned to Nazism as a result.  The police knew they were looking for a young white male because of the evidence they had. Copeland operated alone, and targeted specific groups. This case was very different to organised Islamic Fundamentalist terror campaigns which seek to indiscriminately kill.  However much the racial stereotype thing is trotted out, the fact remains that Islamic fundamentalist terrorists tend to be Muslims; can you name any terrorist convicted of a crime connected to Islamic Fundamentalism who wasn't a Muslim?  The police would be foolish not to concentrate on that section of the community where the suspects are most likely to come from - to do otherwise would be a waste of resources.  There is a world of difference between investigating a major crime and harrassing one section of the community.  I think the rest of the Muslim community will understand and co-operate, because they don't want these creatures in their midst either - that's certainly the impression I get from speaking to Muslim colleagues and from the news here.   In UK the police and MI5 have much experience in dealing with terrorists; I do not doubt that their surveillance of other groups such as Irish Republican terrorists will be relaxed whilst those responsible for the London bombings are tracked down.  Our white supremacists tend to be relatively non-violent, and are closely monitored anyway.
ViroBono, Can you further expand on Copeland. When I repeated what you said about Copeland, the PC police in England denied all of it and started to attack me as a 'racist half-wit'. They're still upset that I wrote that the attack was most likely related to Al-Queda. They're still trying to argue that this attack was more likely to have been orchestrated by a group like the National Front as an attempt to ruin good relations between the Muslim community and wider British society. As evidence, they're pointing out that one of London's biggest Muslim areas, around Aldgate, was one of the areas targeted. This what they said regarding Copeland: "Are you mad? Now you are making up anecdotal evidence. The police didn't use stop and search powers to find the Nailbomber. Why would police randomly stop random young men in the street? You're talking about four million men. Copeland was found through methodical proper police work." Can you give me some evidence to back up your claims; i'd love to shove it back at those people. And, they also made this statement: "That's an example of people enjoying the British way of life - free speech. What, terrorists let off a few bombs and everyone should change their political views of the Iraq War? The terrorists aren't going to change British foreign policy this way. The Irish couldn't do it, and they've let off a lot more bombs here than anyone else." Not too familiar with English history, but didn't that work where Britain allowed the formation of Irish Republic due to terrorism of the IRA early in the last century?
post #27 of 29
Esquire The idea that the bombings in London may have been carried out by right-wing extremists is risible - I doubt they would have either the contacts or expertise to carry out such an attack. It's worth noting that Copeland left the British National Party (successors to the National Front) because they were not extreme enough. Groups which are legitimate (if rather unsavoury) political parties such as the BNP are closely monitored. The more extreme groups such as Combat 18 are too, though they are very small. The BNP are more interested in gaining political credibility. Other than the Irish Republicans, the only other group known to have planted bombs are Animal Liberationists, but they tend to focus very specifically on those they think don't like fluffy bunnies. However, theories that the London bombings were carried out by other than Islamic terrorists are surfacing on various lefty soap-dodger sites - I'm told that Israel, our own government and the CIA have all been mentioned. That the police and security services are focussing on Islamic terrorism suggests to me that this is much more likely than suggestions made by a group of lefty soapdodgers who set out to be controversial. There's an old Yorkshire saying: 'there's none so blind as them that don't want to see', and it certainly applies to those on sites like Urban 75 et al. In the Copeland case, it is true that he was caught by methodical police work (what sort of work do they think catches criminals? MacDonald's work?), but it is also true that many young men matching the description were questioned; the police took over 1600 statements. I did not say that anyone was randomly stopped in the street - and in any case, that's not what stop and search is about either (though it suits the lefty argument to say it is) - police must have a reason to stop someone. But again, the Copeland case was entirely different in that Copeland was a psychotic individual, not a politically/religiously mitivated group. About the only thing correct thing the clowns have said is that our foreign policy is unlikely to be changed by the bombing. Irish Partition was very complex and there is plenty of information available elsewhere. However, it is certainly true that Tony Bliar's policy in NI has been to appease terrorists. I suspect that this was more to do with wanting to appear to be the man who brought peace to NI than being swayed by terrorism, which was not particularly prevalent when he was elected. The British people will not bow to terrorists. Many people in UK think that we were taken to the Iraq war on a lie; terrorists are unlikely to change that view or that to the contrary. On another forum I contribute to, which is military, we also get these lefty types trying to impose their ludicrous theories from time to time; they never last.
post #28 of 29
Quote:
In the Copeland case, it is true that he was caught by methodical police work (what sort of work do they think catches criminals?  MacDonald's work?), but it is also true that many young men matching the description were  questioned; the police took over 1600 statements.  I did not say that anyone was randomly stopped in the street - and in any case, that's not what stop and search is about either (though it suits the lefty argument to say it is) - police must have a reason to stop someone.  But again, the Copeland case was entirely different in that Copeland was a psychotic individual, not a politically/religiously mitivated group. About the only thing correct thing the clowns have said is that our foreign policy is unlikely to be changed by the bombing.  Irish Partition was very complex and there is plenty of information available elsewhere.  However, it is certainly true that Tony Bliar's policy in NI has been to appease terrorists.  I suspect that this was more to do with wanting to appear to be the man who brought peace to NI than being swayed by terrorism, which was not particularly prevalent when he was elected.  
ViroBono: Ah, yes, the PC Police is trying to cower me into submission by branding me as a racist for suggesting the involvement of islamic fundamentalists. Instead, they lecture me as to how they're the ones being rational and that the police should not jump to conclusions, but base it on facts. I agree that it would be a mistake to automatically link all cases of terrorism to radical islamicists. But, considering that this attack fits the profile of all the other AQ attacks, I am just flabbergasted that they refuse to acknowledge that pattern. I'm not too sure what IRA's bombing pattern was, but I'm confident it didn't fit the AQ pattern. And, as you pointed out, the investigators should focus their resources on the most likely suspects in a race to prevent another possible attack. I would imagine that this must be standard procedure, where regardless of the crime, the police always focus in on the most likely suspects and go from there. Yet, to do so in this case, the PC police would call that simply racist. Could you clarify your statement about all those young white men being stopped to be questioned. Was it basically anybody who fit the description was called in to be questioned? That seems different where you have a physical description for a criminal for commiting a crime vs. questioning people when you don't even know what the criminal looks like. And, what do you mean by that's not what stop and search is about? What was the stop and searches the 'community leaders' were complaining about? And, how is that not random if its targeted towards muslims for simply being muslim. Perhaps, I misintrepeted you and GB's statements, but that's what you seemed to be advocating where the police should pay extra attention to a young muslim man simply for being muslim. If a young muslim man was carrying a backpack in the subway, should the police be able to stop him and search his backpack? Finally, has been a situation where Blair bowed down to the media and public pressure so that this would tie up the work of investigators?
post #29 of 29
In the Copeland case, there was some (poor-quality) CCTV and other evidence from which a description was gained and this was the basis of determining who to interview. The PC/lefty types imagine that stop and search is a technique used by the police to harrass minority groups by stopping and searching them at random. The reality is different; the police have to follow rigid procedures, and individuals who are stopped have various rights. Specifically, an individual cannot be stopped just because of his colour or race. More here. Most anti-terrorist activity is intelligence-led, and for obvious reasons this is rarely made public; it is the critics who jump to conclusions. Additionally, and I suspect much to the chagrin of the professional police-haters, the police work hard and are quite successful at community relations. The Muslim community doesn't want the lunatic extremists any more than anyone else. Do the PC loonies have any proof of these attacks not being down to Islamic extremists? No. They simply make it up to suit their own agenda. If a police officer saw a young Muslim male carrying a backpack on the Underground, and he suspected that he may be about to commit a crime or involved in terrorist activity, he can stop and search him, just as he could anyone else in the same circumstances. In answer to your final question, Bliar's government has brought in more new laws than any other and the bureaucracy that goes with it. As a consequence police officers spend more time on paperwork than on the streets. This is not in response to public pressure (Bliar doesn't listen), but usually to minority groups whose votes he wants, especially if prominent members of those groups give money to his party. It's also worth remembering that his wife, the Wide Mouthed Frog, is a human rights lawyer, who makes money out of all this socialist nonsense.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Sitting Ducks?