An alert from the TSA. "Government warns of terror threat to trains," by Jim Popkin for NBC News (thanks to Jeffrey Imm):
In a bulletin released Friday to U.S. law enforcement officials, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is warning of “continued strong terrorist interest” in targeting mass transit systems in the U.S. The 10-page threat assessment, labeled “Unclassified/For Official Use Only” and obtained by NBC News, cautions that the “U.S. mass transit and passenger rail systems are vulnerable to terrorist attacks because they are accessible to large numbers of the public and are notoriously difficult to secure.” Previous rail attacks in Madrid, London and Mumbai “could inspire terrorists to conduct similar attacks in the United States,” the report adds.However, the authors of the intelligence analysis make clear that there are no known, immediate dangers. “At this time, there is no credible intelligence regarding specific plans by any extremist groups or individuals to perpetrate an act of terrorism against the U.S. mass transit system,” they write.
"Mass Transit System Threat Assessment"
The report is titled the “Mass Transit System Threat Assessment” and was prepared by TSA’s Office of Intelligence. It comes just weeks after Amtrak announced a series of new security measures. Amtrak does not routinely screen passengers or their baggage with metal detectors or other devices, as all U.S. airlines do. Instead, it announced on Feb. 19 that it would use so-called Mobile Security Teams to randomly check passengers and baggage.
The report identifies Al-Qaida as one of the “most likely actors” in potential attacks. “Al-Qa’ida and affiliated extremists pose the greatest threat to the U.S. mass transit and passenger rail system,” it states. “The threat to heavy and commuter rail in the Homeland is greater than the threat to buses and light rail. Attacks on buses overseas tend to be small-scale and are carried out mainly by smaller separatist groups within their own countries.” Other terror groups are a threat, too. “Lebanese Hizballah, which has supporters inside the United States, is less likely to attack U.S. domestic interests unless it perceives the United States has become a direct threat to its leadership, its armed capabilities, or to Iran,” the TSA authors write.
TSA worries that rail-industry insiders might become terrorist accomplices: “The insider poses a significant threat to transportation security.
Why would an employee do that? Insider jihad.
The report identifies Al-Qaida as one of the “most likely actors” in potential attacks.
The administration should pray that the perpetrators of such an attack weren't let into the country after 9/11. Even legal immigration would take a big hit.
Didn't fighting al Qaeda "over there" mean we wouldn't have to deal with them "over here"? The excuses that would be made in the wake of a deadly train attack would be priceless.
Again TSA is focused on known terrorist groups with bases not in this country, and offering attack warnings based on statistical probabilities that do not include 'sudden jihadists', 'sympathizer terrorists', non-Muslim/Arab -appearing converts to Islam, gangstas affiliated with terror groups ~ all of whom are already here in this country.
The people in this group will most likely choose smaller buses and light rail as targets because they are softer targets than passenger rail and mass transit.
So, based on TSA's caveat, we’ll all just be looking for Arabs with backpacks and hope for the best.
statistical probabilities that do not include 'sudden jihadists', 'sympathizer terrorists', non-Muslim/Arab -appearing converts to Islam, gangstas affiliated with terror groups ~ all of whom are already here in this country.
The non-Muslim/Arab-appearing converts are statistically the least likely -- if you simply look at the terrorists who have already attacked or are on wanted lists. There was one Belgian female convert who tried fatally to suicide-bomb; there is Adam Gadahn, there was Johnny Walker Lindh; that's about it. (Padilla doesn't count because he looks ethnic.) But there have been thousands of Muslim/Arab-appearing (and Indonesian-appearing and African-appearing) terrorists already and terrorist sympathizers. It's a simple fact that the vast majority of Muslims in the world are Third World peoples, while the vast majority of whites in the world are non-Muslims. No amount of repetition of the mantra that "Islam is not a race" will change this ethnographic complexion.
Bottom Line: It would be irrational -- and downright dangerous -- to give equal weight in our surveillance and vigilance to the non-Muslim/Arab-appearing converts, when they don't have equal representation in reality.
The best indicator would be what they're doing, as opposed to what they look like, although the latter should not be dismissed at all.
"The best indicator would be what they're doing, as opposed to what they look like"
The stakes are too high to wait for people to actually do suspicious things.