That jihad crisis thing is, like, so 2002. "`No Fly' List of Terror Suspects Will Be Cut in Half (Update1)," by John Hughes for Bloomberg News, with thanks to Doc Washburn:
Jan. 17 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. government will cut in half the ``no fly'' list of terror suspects banned from flights so it can better focus on people who pose the greatest threat, the head of the transportation security agency said.The paring, to be complete in a month, will drop ``those who were feared to have presented a threat in the past but no longer do,'' said Kip Hawley, chief of the Transportation Security Administration.
The ``no fly'' list and a roster of people who warrant extra checks were expanded after Sept. 11 to prevent a repeat of the terrorist attacks. The lists have frustrated travelers, including Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy, who was delayed from boarding flights in 2004 because his name matched an alias of someone on a list.
The security agency processed 20,000 requests last year from people who believed they were wrongly on lists or were being mistaken for people on the lists, Hawley told the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee today in Washington. Agency spokesman Christopher White declined to discuss the size of the lists, citing security concerns.
So what? I was on the list myself at one point. Anyone who is a loyal citizen and isn't doing anything illegal shouldn't mind putting up with some inconvenience.
I disagree that you (innocent citizen) shouldn't be outraged if you show up on the no-fly list. Of course that you should be outraged that the clowns in Homeland Security are doing piss-poor job. It is not like you putting up with their ineptitude helps enhance security. Quite the opposite.
In an ideal world I'd agree with Georgie on this point, but we must realise that the HS guys are working with enormous amounts of information and they have to filter it with imperfect methodology. If a google search brings up 200 or more hits with a person's name and "Jihad" as search terms I'd say that's sufficient reason to put them on the list. Let them get on with it and continually work to refine their methods. In the meantime I think Mr. Spencer is right to accept this as a neccessary inconvenience, as should all who work in this field. Better to inconvenience some innocents than let the bombers fly.
As for cutting the list in half, this is good if they've found a way to reliably filter out people like Spencer, who end up on the list for reasons that can be dismissed. But it's bad if it's simply an economy measure -- I fear that it will be an application of a completely wrongheaded criterion. It is spurious to think that a person who's been on the list is no longer a threat because they've laid low during the period they are on the list. Let's have some hard evidence. Most jihadis do not reform -- they only get more subtle in their approach and generally drive themselves deeper into extremism. Their hatred of the west will not go away because we've made it harder for them to fly -- evidence has it that this has, in fact, had the opposite effect.
I am determined, personally, not to make a fuss if they feel I need to be screened; I will do my level best to be cooperative and let them do their job. If it is too problematic for me, I will take up the case in a way that does not interfere with their work, offer them complete information, and behave with respect and good manners. I recommend the same for all innocent citizens.
We are indeed victims, but let's be clear that the victimizers are *not* the authorities doing their best to provide protection...
Oh, and the "google" example was not intended as a prescription for generating a no-fly list. I sincerely hope they have much more sophisticated tools than google to work with.
Ted Kennedy was on the list? I guess the list used to cover Islamaniac lapdogs as well as potential terrorists.
I took a proactive approach, I made my own no fly list and then I put myself on it. I will take my name off my list when it is reasonably safe to go back in the water.
I am a Indian ( a Hindu) who travels to different parts of world as a programmer. Because of my Skin colour I have experienced racial profiling at airports. This is just becasue obviously of our resemblance to these Islamic terrorsits. I Understand it is for our own safety becasue no one has terrorist printed on his passport and everyone must be scrutinised. I NEVER complain although I am paying price for action of these terrorists who have not only defamed their own people but also people who look like them.
But still the moderate muslims take out big processions of protest on such issues and make big hoppla hoooo on such matter where its ALSO for their own safety( for gods sake). Afterall the people of their own religion themsleves responsible for bringing this suspicion on them by their actions. Has anyone ever heard of a chineses, budhhist or hindu or a christian protest such issues with so much violence. Other religions do protest allright when some issue comes up ,but in CIVILiSED WAY with regard for human life.
WHY dont moderate ISLAMISTS instead take out protest processions when a jihadi kills innoncents. At that that time ALL THEY DO is give out a small statement condemning the act and it sounds like they are doing a favour or condeming the act just for sake of condeming it rather than really feel sorry for it.
I DONT SEE anything wrong at extra security checks and dont consider it an insult either,despite no fault of hindus/Indians. Then WHY do these people feel insulted. Isnt it a sign of their own guilt or Is it a sign that secretly they are for jihad although on outside they claim to moderates?
A little INCONVENIENCE for our own safety should THANKED instead of bieng protested. Unless of course you have an hidden agenda or are not INNNONCENT.
"That jihad crisis thing is, like, so 2002."
-- from the posting above
Yes.
And what could more perfectly demonstrate this fact than the recent announcement, by Harvard Law School, that it was appointing to its law faculty that thrusting young academic, the insufferable (an epithet used to describe him even by fellow members of something called Beth Shalom, a left-wing Jewish temple in Cambridge) Noah Feldman.
For surely even Frank Vogel, the Two Noble Sanctuaries Adjunct Professor of Islamic Law, with those references in hand from John Esposito (a nice photograph of Esposito and Feldman together can be seen somewhere on the Internet), and Roy Mottahedeh, and who else in the same galere -- Sells? Ernst? who else from MESA Nostra helped persaude those supposedly unfoolable members of the hiring committee -- full of those who have no idea that "Islamic law" is merely part of Islamic theology and not man-made law at all, and who believed, in their ignorance or deep belief in credentials, that Noah Feldman was just the ticketti kead Harvard's "Islamic law" effort (not too much of Schacht other than the obitary-booklet by Wakins will be distributed by the Islamic Legal Studies program) through the next three decades and longer. What a colossal mistake. How innocent about the subject of Islamic law and of Islam those impressonable hiring-committee members, and the rest of the faculty and Administration, turned out to be. If only they had spent a month reading Schacht, Jeffery, Antoine Fattal, trying to figure what Islam is about.
Had they done so, then they would not have had to look too deeply into the self-promotion. they could only have looked at the title of Feldman's book:
"After Jihad."
A case of a single book title that speaks volumes.
I am seeing a whole lot of the jihadist mentality on campus. Soon we won’t be able to fly, learn or possibly even survive in the good ole USA. Got a college campus near you? Keep your eyes peeled, they are becoming nothing more than FOB’s for the islamists. So what does a parent do, where can we send our kids to learn w/o the brainwashing or the threat of them being killed for what or who they are?
Come on, people. Being put on a no-fly list in a way that can be cleared right at the airport by a few phone calls, or being subjected to extra searches in the name if security is a minor inconvenience. Being put on a no-fly list in the sense of being actually unable to fly at all is a huge inconvenience that nobody should have to put up with.
Besides, what is it for? Anyone can be safe to put on a plane after a proper cavity search and in handcuffs.
That’s right,
We should just make flying no different than being sent to prison. Heck, lets just make the entire country resemble San Quentin, in the name of safety and security. Our rights are being taken day by day, and many are allowing it to happen. I told you this was a slippery slope and some here hammered me for it. Well next comes the Trains and then the Buses, after that grocery and video stores can follow suit. The islamists and their apologists have made this country into exactly what we have fought against for the last 200+ years. That's what we get when the schools no longer teach what it is to be an American. They all know, when we are destroyed the rest of the world will easily follow.
If a google search brings up 200 or more hits with a person's name and "Jihad" as search terms I'd say that's sufficient reason to put them on the list. Let them get on with it and continually work to refine their methods.
Hey what a great idea!! You mean if the name Hillary Rodham Clinto in conjunction with supports islamic jihad shows up in a Google search then we have her experiencing some of the hassles we have to go through because of the liberal excitement to have these people live among us?
What about Nancy Pelosi and jihad? :-)
Ted Kennedy just got off the list :-(
and we KNOW Ted Kennedy supports jihad by throwing open our borders!!
Keith Ellison supports jihad. He is a danger to our way of life. I don't care that he got elected to something. I'd be afraid to be on a flight with him. He swore on that filthy war manual the kkkoran.
A little INCONVENIENCE for our own safety should THANKED instead of bieng protested. Unless of course you have an hidden agenda or are not INNNONCENT.
Posted by: Rajesh_singh
That YES. but I deeply RESENT the moslems for being the CAUSE of this inconvenience.
Removing them from the West and cutting ties [and air travel] with their moslem countries would restore our lives to their prior beatitude.
Teddy (I run away and abandon drowning women) Kennedy. Who lives in Mass. Anymore? Certainly not any decedents of the Minutemen, they should crate up and store the statue of the Minuteman before someone blows it up. I was born in Mass. Sorry to say, but we had the good sense to leave. Thankfully the only reason I was born there is that my dad was attending OCS. Also, I am a descendent of the original Minutemen; he was a Captain in that great group of Americans. If not for that fact I too would hang my head low. If he saw what has become of his state he would be enraged.
I figured one thing out:
We are the TINY MINORITY of "islamophobes". Thought I'd like to suggest a more appropriate term: "Islamo-awares".
Their "tiny majority" are those who have begun to think for themselves and are reeady to leave the hive.
This is the true nature of the Tiny Minority as I see it.
We need to gather up a HUGE MAJORITY in a major hurry!
Someone, close to me, is given special attention every time she flies. She is blond, has green eyes, and an Anglo name. She has never visited a Moslem country, has not contact with people of that persuasion, travels with a companion of impeccable credentials. Yet, while imams and lay Moslems are passed through without a hitch, this person is profiled by our "security experts" on duty at the airports.