RE: Airport insanity
From: James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Oct 16, 2004 7:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Airport insanity .. On 15 Oct 2004 at 16:32, Tyler Durden wrote: .. He might have looked odd from the photo you saw circulated in the press, but I'd bet a lot of money no one would have picked him as looking like a terrorist. But the people sitting beside him did pick him as looking like a terrorist. What's the false positive rate? It's one thing if you see some guy lighting a fuse sticking out of his shoe, and quite another if you say You look kinda terroristy; I'm sending you off the plane. This works as a reasonable strategy only if: a. The probability ratios don't work out so that the overwhelming majority of people you throw off planes are innocent. (They almost certainly will, just because terrorists are so rare.) b. The terrorists can't figure out how to make themselves look less threatening. --digsig James A. Donald --John
RE: Airport insanity
-- Thomas Shaddack: a. The probability ratios don't work out so that the overwhelming majority of people you throw off planes are innocent. James A. Donald: Provided the number of people you throw off planes is rather small, I don't see the problem. Thomas Shaddack wrote: It isn't a problem for you until it happens to you. Who knows when being interested in anon e-cash will become a ground to blacklist *you*. I know when it will happen. It will happen when people interested in anon ecash go on suicide missions. :-) People who are, for the most part, not like us are trying to kill people like us. Let us chuck all those people not-like-us off those planes where most of the passengers are people like us. This really is not rocket science. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG KbVFhnyRmgiunG9XxU98lrDIIf2ZSXYFmkT7Dfe 4TIi2Ou/RGdPMFC3/LaIxWHM688e/B3FsA3jjPjK0
Re: Airport insanity
On Mon, 2004-10-18 at 15:17, Thomas Shaddack wrote: Pentagon protects their people by distance - being it by bombing from high altitude, or by using cruise missiles. Everybody uses the technology available to them. What's bad on it? Invariably, the side that uses the defensive measure - being it smart weapons[1] or human shields - classifies it as tactical, while the other side considers it cowardly. A nice example of symmetry in asymmetry. [1] The defensive aspect here is to allow the attackers to attack from distance beyond the reach of the other side's active defenses, thus not risking anything more than a piece of overpriced electronics. If some asshole is coming at you with a knife, it's cowardly to shoot him before he's in range? Dumbass.
RE: Airport insanity
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote: People who are, for the most part, not like us are trying to kill people like us. Let us chuck all those people not-like-us off those planes where most of the passengers are people like us. Thomas Shaddack Define us? Easier to define them Us is those people who do not much resemble them.
RE: Airport insanity
At 12:07 PM -0700 10/18/04, James A. Donald wrote: On Mon, 18 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote: People who are, for the most part, not like us are trying to kill people like us. Let us chuck all those people not-like-us off those planes where most of the passengers are people like us. Thomas Shaddack Define us? Easier to define them Us is those people who do not much resemble them. Here's *my* current definition of us: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect?tag=philodox-20path=tg%2Fdetail%2F-%2F0385720386%2Fqid%3D1098128506%2Fsr%3D8-1%2Fref%3Dpd_csp_1%3Fv%3Dglance%26s%3Dbooks%26n%3D507846 A great book. The world's greatest business plan. Cheers, RAH -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Re: Airport insanity
A very large number of muslims, particularly arab muslims- a small minority in the US, a large minority or substantial majority in many muslim countries, continually seek to confront the infidel in a wide variety of ways, and interpret our politeness and care to avoid harming muslims as weakness and fear. I would bet that statements that sound very, very close to this were uttered prior to Iraq II. Care to Avoid harming Muslims? You are either trolling with better skill than even I, the Great Tyler Durden could muster, or else you are completely and totally ignorant of world history. Go read some history books and you will understand the reason we (the US) has been targeted in particular. You'll quickly find that their hatred of us in not accidental. As for your looks like a mad bomber ideas, are you suggesting that, the day after a militant Indonesian muslim commits an act of terrorism, we should then exclude all asians from our airplanes, buses and subways? I don't think you've thought this out very well. -TD From: James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Airport insanity Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 10:27:38 -0700 -- James A. Donald: If you really look like the shoe bomber, then you should have to drive. Thomas Shaddack Ever tried to drive to Europe? Or to Hawaii? James A. Donald: Hard biscuit Thomas Shaddack Do I interpret this statement correctly as the endorsement of ethnicity-based travel restrictions? No. You can take a boat, if they will have you, drive to Mexico to fly with people less likely to be the target of mad bombers who look like you, hire a private plane, or take a long swim. Why airplanes don't count as a form of public transport? They do. I am afraid either I don't understand you correctly, or you are contradicting yourself. I was unclear. To clarify: So far the terrorists have not struck at buses outside Israel. When they do start striking at buses, then people who look like mad bombers should not be allowed on buses. Until then, they should be allowed on buses. The proposition that we need to walk delicately for fear of disturbing the tender sensibilities of arabs seems laughable. Being told I can't use some quite common resource, in this case an important means of transportation, because of so irrelevant factor as ethnicity, isn't exactly delicate. A very large number of muslims, particularly arab muslims- a small minority in the US, a large minority or substantial majority in many muslim countries, continually seek to confront the infidel in a wide variety of ways, and interpret our politeness and care to avoid harming muslims as weakness and fear. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG Kn476w4tT/gvivWH76W69/lBhHE5o0IKQ1oYJggS 4AiBUDha46+ldVnTeFiyvMwJoG9A/oE/Ac0FEd/uH _ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
RE: Airport insanity
-- On 16 Oct 2004 at 19:42, Adam wrote: First of all, there were 19 children killed in the OKC bombing. Were these children guilty of some crime worthy of being killed by a truck bomb? He was not targeting children. Second of all, you make it sound like McVeigh was just your average-Joe American. How could a non-fundamentalist knowingly kill 168 people? Osama Bin Laden is not a fundamentalist, yet he killed three thousand people. His religion is more like the Muslim equivalent of liberation theology, which is as far from fundamentalism as you can get. Third, does not being a suicide bomber make your cause more noble? Not being a suicide bomber means there is no need to screen you from flying on planes. Curious why you seem to think McVeigh was justified in his actions. BATF. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG jn1FZy8NQFwnLH6A/ePT+CTiAROr7+lergg2poqX 44kTUpiFNIutpZGh02oJsBCI9pZVnZ/MDSF8OJEsG
RE: Airport insanity
At 04:01 PM 10/16/04 -0700, James A. Donald wrote: Tim McVeigh did not target innocents, nor was he a suicide bomber. Neither did M. Atta et al. target innocents, he targeted those who elected the Caesars. And they were not pursuing suicide (a Moslem sin), since they are enjoying a comfy afterlife for their martyrdom. Nor, incidentally, was he a fundamentalist or a racist. Neither is Osama et al.; only infidels call him a fundie, and the Jihadists have no problem with lighter or asian folks who subscribe. In fact, they can be quite useful, as they don't fit the rascist profiling that the TSA goons practice...
Re: Airport insanity..Ethnicity is Bullshit
-- Tyler Durden Let's just state the obvious: September 11th occurred not because we had a few crazy Muslim fundamentalists out there that decided they hate our freedoms. The struck us because we've been fuckin' over a large swath of the Muslim (not only Arab) world for 100 years or so And the reason they are murdering Iraqi Christians, Filipinos, Ambionese and Timorese is? --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG m2hVqEkFSYQ0PKxyclcvEkjwbbFYMElmQS5ao0Uh 47AIr2bZ3JXSCGM1iNSQlysfAVI6XHBVHWeEvaM/E
Re: Airport insanity
There is still of course the matter of the unexploded bombs in that building that were dug out, and that the ATF received a Don't come in to work page on their beepers, and the seize and classification of all surveilance video tapes from things like ATM's across the street. --Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--- + ^ + :Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. /|\ \|/ :They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country /\|/\ --*--:and our people, and neither do we. -G. W. Bush, 2004.08.05 \/|\/ /|\ : \|/ + v + :War is Peace, freedom is slavery, Bush is President. - On Sat, 16 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote: Mc Veigh did not target innocents, and if he did target a plane full of innocents, perhaps in order to kill one guilty man on board, there is no way in hell he himself would be on that plane.
Re: Airport insanity
-- James A. Donald: Mc Veigh did not target innocents, and if he did target a plane full of innocents, perhaps in order to kill one guilty man on board, there is no way in hell he himself would be on that plane. John Kelsey Well, he targeted a building full of innocents, so he could get some BATF people in one part of the building, right? I guess I'm missing the part where he took especial care not to blow up people who had no connection with the Waco disaster. How would you differentiate his target selection from that of the 9/11 attackers who hit the Pentagon? If the 9/11 attackers had *only* targeted the pentagon, that would have been fine by me. I am one of those who cheered in the movie theater when the aliens blow up Washington in the movie Independence day Though you're right, he didn't do the suicide bomber thing. Does that constitute a guarantee that no white terrorist ever will do so? It is a good indication that sufficiently few will ever do so that it is not worth while checking shoes during boarding --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG tvzXxqFqeKwLL20vEBehl+eK0AJ0cAAzrXFkno0 44yKcITMM8GEtW/RIPtI+Em4Ylp7aOgWb/fCmC9AG
Re: Airport insanity
WOW! Let's examine your little clip here. Tyler Durden Care to Avoid harming Muslims? Your statement was that the US took special care in avoiding harm to Muslims. In this case we have Muslims tortured at Guantanamo and now angry as hell. And you expected...what? http://washingtontimes.com/national/20041018-124854-2279r.htm : : Despite gaining their freedom by signing pledges to : : renounce violence, at least seven former prisoners : : of the United States at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, have : : returned to terrorism, at times with deadly : : consequences. Wow! Tortured prisoners signed statements and then went back on their promises? The nerve! Note the incredible linguistic bias. Returned to terrorism?...That's a laughable statement for people who returned to their own country to fight an invader. And the word Despite it's arguable even more hilarious. And of course, your quote of this piece in this context points to your ever-present logic of They're more evil than we are therefore it's OK if we fuck them over. : : Additional former detainees have expressed a desire : : to rejoin the fight, be it against U.N. peacekeepers : : in Afghanistan, Americans in Iraq or Russian : : soldiers in Chechnya. Hum. Muislims helping Muslims to push the US or Russians out of their occupied countries. I've seen worse uses for religion. But more importantly, are you seeing where this is headed? Let's forget differing ideologies and get really, really practical here. If you or I were grabbed in our own country and brought 7000 miles away, and then tortured for 2 years, wouldn't you most likely become convinced that the torturing nation was a great evil that had to be stopped? Even more, what if your life sucked in your own country and you didn't have a lot to live for anyway? The violence sown by Western powers will continue to result in further Septemeber 11ths. Simply increasing the scope or intensity (a la Iraq II) isn't going to make things better. -TD --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG gZPWnxSpOCzn/7t/pyram/Z9ixbExE1haS5OzFBm 4i6xvRLGqBtHJfp8bm6GLFqF6pwABThwj/PjOpaVx _ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Re: Airport insanity
From: James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Oct 16, 2004 7:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Airport insanity .. Oh, and every white American (recall numerous references to Mr. McVeigh) Mc Veigh did not target innocents, and if he did target a plane full of innocents, perhaps in order to kill one guilty man on board, there is no way in hell he himself would be on that plane. Well, he targeted a building full of innocents, so he could get some BATF people in one part of the building, right? I guess I'm missing the part where he took especial care not to blow up people who had no connection with the Waco disaster. How would you differentiate his target selection from that of the 9/11 attackers who hit the Pentagon? Though you're right, he didn't do the suicide bomber thing. Does that constitute a guarantee that no white terrorist ever will do so? (After all, an awful lot of Arab terrorists also plan on living to fight another day.) --digsig James A. Donald --John
Re: Airport insanity
From: James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Oct 16, 2004 2:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Airport insanity For whatever reason, pictures of me always come out looking like some crazed religious fanatic. But that doesn't mean that I'm going to bomb anything. And I sure hope that I'm not going to be detained or denied entry because of how I *look*, alone. If you really look like the shoe bomber, then you should have to drive, or use public transport. --digsig James A. Donald Surely this is a matter best left to the private companies offering transportation, subject only to restrictions to prevent future 9/11 attacks. --John
RE: Airport insanity
I think you need to read this remake of the First they came for the commies poem. Short translation - whenever anyone's rights are being trampled upon, whether it affects you or not, you should protest. Goes along with one of the unsaid credos about cypherpunks: I absolutely disagree with what she said, but I'll defend to the death her right to say it. which along with Cypherpunks write code fell quite short of its goal. http://buffaloreport.com/021123rohde.html Here I'll save you the trouble. - - - They came for the Muslims, and I didn't speak up... By Stephen Rohde (Author's Note: The USA Patriot Act became law a little over one year ago.) First they came for the Muslims, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Muslim. Then they came for the immigrants, detaining them indefinitely solely on the certification of the attorney general, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't an immigrant. Then they came to eavesdrop on suspects consulting with their attorneys, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a suspect. Then they came to prosecute noncitizens before secret military commissions, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a noncitizen. Then they came to enter homes and offices for unannounced sneak and peak searches, and I didn't speak up because I had nothing to hide. Then they came to reinstate Cointelpro and resume the infiltration and surveillance of domestic religious and political groups, and I didn't speak up because I no longer participated in any groups. Then they came to arrest American citizens and hold them indefinitely without any charges and without access to lawyers, and I didn't speak up because I would never be arrested. Then they came to institute TIPS (Terrorism Information and Prevention System) recruiting citizens to spy on other citizens and I didn't speak up because I was afraid. Then they came for anyone who objected to government policy because it only aided the terrorists and gave ammunition to America's enemies, and I didn't speak up ... because I didn't speak up. Then they came for me, and by that time, no one was left to speak up. Forum Column (from the Daily Journal, 11/20/02). Stephen Rohde is an attorney. He edited American Words of Freedom and was was president of the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California. Does Rohde's text seem familiar? It should. He based it on one of the web's most widely-circulated texts about silence in the face of evil: In Germany, the Nazis first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I didn't speak up because I was a protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak for me. --Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--- + ^ + :Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. /|\ \|/ :They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country /\|/\ --*--:and our people, and neither do we. -G. W. Bush, 2004.08.05 \/|\/ /|\ : \|/ + v + :War is Peace, freedom is slavery, Bush is President. - On Mon, 18 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote: I know when it will happen. It will happen when people interested in anon ecash go on suicide missions. :-) People who are, for the most part, not like us are trying to kill people like us. Let us chuck all those people not-like-us off those planes where most of the passengers are people like us. This really is not rocket science.
RE: Airport insanity
At 07:42 PM 10/16/04 -0400, Adam wrote: First of all, there were 19 children killed in the OKC bombing. Were these children guilty of some crime worthy of being killed by a truck bomb? They were being used as human shields by the fedcriminals in the building. They were collateral damage, in the modern parlance. Ask the Iraqis to explain it to you. Second of all, you make it sound like McVeigh was just your average-Joe American. How could a non-fundamentalist knowingly kill 168 people? He was a retired US soldier, carrying out his mission to protect the Constitution.
RE: Airport insanity
James is wired to be unempathetic about victims, as was McVeigh, as are fearless military and criminal killers, as are national leaders of a yellow stripe who never taste the bitter end of their exculpatory spin. What makes the wire work is that they do not believe that what they do unto others will be done to them. This is their faith, blind, cross-eyedly focussed vision which sees a right safe path down the thinnest of righteous tunnels of imagined invulnerability. Call it the armor of cowards. Call it fundamentalism, or patriotism, or pinheads up their tiny assholes. Been there: saw the vision, sniffed the odor, licked the sides of the honey-dripping tunnel, gagged, muttered what the shit is this stuff I've been preached is myrhh out of the backdoors of virgins, yelled, hey, sarge, get me out of my hole. Sarge was long gone, preaching and laughing like the devil. AIDS of the mind is hard to cure.
RE: Airport insanity
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote: a. The probability ratios don't work out so that the overwhelming majority of people you throw off planes are innocent. Provided the number of people you throw off planes is rather small, I don't see the problem. It isn't a problem for you until it happens to you. Who knows when being interested in anon e-cash will become a ground to blacklist *you*. Do you propose a way to appeal the decision? Will the flight (and associated losses, eg. lost contract due to a missed meeting, etc.) reimbursed?
RE: Airport insanity
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote: Thomas Shaddack wrote: It isn't a problem for you until it happens to you. Who knows when being interested in anon e-cash will become a ground to blacklist *you*. I know when it will happen. It will happen when people interested in anon ecash go on suicide missions. :-) Never underestimate the power of the combination of the People With Agendas with Classified Computerized Profiling Algorithms. :) Be vigilant. People who are, for the most part, not like us are trying to kill people like us. Let us chuck all those people not-like-us off those planes where most of the passengers are people like us. Define us? This really is not rocket science. Personally, as a relatively frequent flyer, I worry much more about things like cutting corners of fuselage and engine maintenance and quality of fuel (and, perhaps even more, the quality of onboard coffee) than about bombers on board. (On the other hand, local states grew out of their imperial-lust phase couple decades/centuries ago, which makes their people less disliked. Somehow lesser tendency to trigger-happy gung-ho a-ramboin' seems to be helpful too.) Seeing things in perspective sometimes helps.
Re: Airport insanity..Ethnicity is Bullshit
You also seem to forget there is another potential factor - not only the visible one (ethnicity), but also one that isn't obvious to visual evaluation - religion. There is a significant black minority that inclines to Islam, some of them potentially radical. Do you want to suggest banning blacks from flying too? Seen any black suicide bombers? OK, let's just say it outright. In this case Ethnicity is just pure camaflauge for People who don't agree with my right-wing American Century politics. Just to remind us of the basics: Afghans and Iranians are not Arabs. Sub-saharan Africa has tens of millions of fully black Muslims. Arabs are Semites. Black Muslim radicalism tends to express itself by mugging Jews and stealing television sets. Strapping dynamite to one's chest just does not seem to be a black thing. Uh...what? If you're talking about the Nation of Islam (in the US), you almost NEVER find members in good standing mugging Jews or stealing TV sets here in New York, and any other location is going to be a statistical blip. Let's also remember that we don't have US-backed/paid-for tanks rolling through black neighborhoods every day. If we did I suspect Black Muslims might start fighting back. Let's just state the obvious: September 11th occurred not because we had a few crazy Muslim fundamentalists out there that decided they hate our freedoms. The struck us because we've been fuckin' over a large swath of the Muslim (not only Arab) world for 100 years or so now. They're tired of us being there and muckin' around in their politics, and they want it to stop. The fundamentalist part is sort of a 'strengthener', let's say...here's people who know they're probably going to have to kill large numbers of civilians to get their point across, so how can they justify this? Well, a nicely-tuned Wahabism will do just nicely thank you. Seems fairly predictable, really. -TD _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
Re: Airport insanity
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote: Sadre protected himself with Iraqi women and young children as human shields, showing that he expected the Pentagon to show more concern for Iraqi lives than he did. Pentagon protects their people by distance - being it by bombing from high altitude, or by using cruise missiles. Everybody uses the technology available to them. What's bad on it? Invariably, the side that uses the defensive measure - being it smart weapons[1] or human shields - classifies it as tactical, while the other side considers it cowardly. A nice example of symmetry in asymmetry. [1] The defensive aspect here is to allow the attackers to attack from distance beyond the reach of the other side's active defenses, thus not risking anything more than a piece of overpriced electronics.
Re: Airport insanity
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004, James A. Donald wrote: -- James A. Donald: If you really look like the shoe bomber, then you should have to drive, or use public transport. Thomas Shaddack Ever tried to drive to Europe? Or to Hawaii? Hard biscuit Do I interpret this statement correctly as the endorsement of ethnicity-based travel restrictions? Didn't domething like this been here already, in the form of Jim Crow laws, and later found unconstitutional? Why airplanes don't count as a form of public transport? They do. I am afraid either I don't understand you correctly, or you are contradicting yourself. The ...or use public transport from your earlier statement seems to mean that you said something along the lines if they can't fly, they should use public transportation, which includes airplanes. This is a measure good for pissing off (which is often the first step to radicalizing) the quite secularized majority of American Arabs. The proposition that we need to walk delicately for fear of disturbing the tender sensibilities of arabs seems laughable. Being told I can't use some quite common resource, in this case an important means of transportation, because of so irrelevant factor as ethnicity, isn't exactly delicate. What would you do if you'd be in the receiving end of such policy? Add more such restrictions and some percolating time - would you just bow and obey? How long it would take to get you pissed and eventually revolting? Are the arabs walking delicately to avoid offending our sensibilities? Vast majority of them yes. But you don't perceive them because they don't offend you and don't make the news. You also seem to forget there is another potential factor - not only the visible one (ethnicity), but also one that isn't obvious to visual evaluation - religion. There is a significant black minority that inclines to Islam, some of them potentially radical. Do you want to suggest banning blacks from flying too? Seen any black suicide bombers? Not yet. But maybe I just didn't look deep enough through the mass-medial fog of the terrorism war. Black Muslim radicalism tends to express itself by mugging Jews and stealing television sets. Strapping dynamite to one's chest just does not seem to be a black thing. With the proper leadership, everything is possible. Don't forget the WW2 kamikaze pilots, who weren't quite Arabs.
