Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
It would involve international police work to find and target the actual terrorists...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
I've often thought that the best possible response to 9/11 would have been to arm the pilots, expand the air marshall program, and rebuild the twin towers ASAP exactly where they stood.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
We can find their training camps in the tribal zones of Pakistan and the Pakistani army and police will go right in and clean them out, just like they've done with the Taliban

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
I've often thought that the best possible response to 9/11 would have been to arm the pilots, expand the air marshall program...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Riverlove:
I'm not so sure about the ease of that. Much of the "army" is loyal to the Taliban and Al Qaida, although I'm certainly not against a good effort this time.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
"This is just using machines to do what people already do."

No, it's not. What PEOPLE do - people like Valerie Plame - is inflitrate target groups to learn who are the decision makers and what they specifically intend to do.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
And I'M talking about using 'humint' to gather actual information on real terrorists rather than treat ever single innocent person as a suspect who needs a data file.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Finn - didn't you learn the lesson from the last 8 years - that no amount of blind sweeps and technology can replace the human intelligence factor ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
"The last 8 years have been an attempt to recapture HUMINT capability."

Yeah, that's why Cheney outed Valerie Plame - the one person in a postition to keep accurate tabs on Iran's nuclear development.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
It's not ? Are you saying that al Qaeda has a large domestic presence right here in the USA ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
No - what I'm saying is that terrorist attacks - like the one on 9/11 - are organized and carried out by foreigners. And that targeting our efforts where they belong is much more efficient than trying to screen tens of millions of innocent domestic passengers (or billions, wordwide) for the roughly 2 people per year averge who might wreak havoc. And it preserves our liberties better as well.

BTW - nice strawman.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Finn

Aisde from civil liberties issues (no search or sezure without a warrant) here's the problem with depending on software to catch terrorists: worldwide, in order to work, statistically you'd have to have an negative error rate of less than 1 in 10 billion (by negative error rate I mean not getting a hit on a positive).

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Cause damn sure that's the profile that gets the most "attention" from the screeners.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Simply put three guys on every plane, one in the cockpit on the ride along seat, one in the kitchenette by the access door, and one in plainclothes amongst the passengers at random, armed with weapons firing glasier safety rounds.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
"But you’re okay with randomly searching people without a warrant ..."

Where did I say that ? Anywhere ? Can YOU find it ? I certainly didn't write it, or even hint it.

It's merely based on YOUR false dilemma - either we screen everyone electronically or we pull random people out for searching ! There's simply no other alternative !!!

READ my posts where I proposed an alternative - that wasn't either of those - three or four times already. And stop arguing with the voices in your head.

---

Quote:

---

You should also be able to eliminate the marshall in the cockpit, with the pilots being armed.

---

Quote:

---

advocating upping the Intel agency infiltration and observation of terrorist organizations in order to nip the bud at the source

---

Quote:

---

We spend a lot of time worrying about terrorists smuggling suitcase nukes into the country, but surface-to-air missiles are more likely, and I don't know a viable defense against it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
"I see. So your solution, then, is to do nothing, until Al Qaeda has a “large domestic presence.” Neither is a good option, or one that I will accept."

Nope. Never proppsoed it, never even hinted at it. Try reading my posts again.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

Finn, I think you've misinterpreted Rue's talking points as something else entirely.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Geeze, what my problem is...

Is not so much what they're doin tho that is annoying enough, it's that it DOES NOT WORK - it's mere theatre and ineffective, nothing but showmanship and extra hassle to appear like they're "doing something".

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
"I'M talking about using 'humint' to gather actual information on real terrorists rather than treat ever single innocent person as a suspect who needs a data file."

Hello,

Here, Rue seems to explicitly state that she wants to use human intelligence resources to collect information on terrorist groups at the front end, rather than casting a wide net at the back end.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

I don't think she is advocating sending all the security home, and leaving a vacant revolving door in front of the airplanes.

Rather, she seems to be saying that the primary focus of effort should be on intelligence gathering and infiltration, with less emphasis on 8 ounce liquid bottles, shoes, and sophisticated electronic intention-reading devices.

---