"Security Feints": sad article
Sep 5, 2006, 8:18 am
#17
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Between AUS, EWR, and YTO In a little twisty maze of airline seats, all alike.. but I wanna go home with the armadillo
Programs: CO, NW, & UA forum moderator emeritus
Posts: 35,506
Laura Mansfield, a counterterrorism consultant and Arabic translator, says many of the incidents involve terrorist sympathizers hoping to divert attention from actual terrorists moving forward with real plots.
"There is a combination of things going on. They are trying to get the threat level reduced by creating a bunch of false alarms so people will be complacent. It's also a strategy of red herrings and disinformation," she said.
"There is a combination of things going on. They are trying to get the threat level reduced by creating a bunch of false alarms so people will be complacent. It's also a strategy of red herrings and disinformation," she said.
Sep 5, 2006, 8:51 am
#18
Moderator, Omni, Omni/PR, Omni/Games, FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Between DCA and IAD
Programs: UA 1K MM; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 67,295
to the Washington Times for this piece of drivel.The way they slant the article--from the headline "Airline-security incidents seen as terrorist feints" completely misrepresenting the lead-in paragraph (which says the incidents have "more to do with flukes, red herrings or terrorist probes than with actual, imminent threats, intelligence observers and security officials say," NOT that all the incidents are seen as feints as the headline suggests) to the selections of quotes and people interviewed--is hardly journalism.
Sep 5, 2006, 9:15 am
#19
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by essxjay
I dunno S-guy. Why about this part:
Kicker quotes like these are ^ in my book.
Kicker quotes like these are ^ in my book.
Unfortunately, I wonder how many people actually read the whole article. I'm willing to be a lot of people didn't make it that far.
Sep 5, 2006, 9:53 am
#20
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Salish Sea
Programs: DL,AC,HH,PC
Posts: 8,974
Originally Posted by gnaget
Read it and weep! The hardcopy had a list of all "incidents", which clearly demonstrated that the premise of this article is idiotic. This "security consultant" should be tarred and feathered.
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...2238-5164r.htm
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...2238-5164r.htm
Suffice it to say that the genuine experts in security keep a very low profile. They do not seek publicity and go to great lengths to keep their identities out of the media. These clowns are self-promoting charlattans; the only thing being "probed" is the gullibilty of the press and, by extension, the general public.
The bomb hoaxes are simple cause-and-effect. The media gleefully reports one, some neanderthal copycat emerges, the media reports that and so on...
Did the threats suddenly stop, or did the media finally realise they were being had and belatedly apply some editorial nous ?
Sep 5, 2006, 10:05 am
#21
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: USA
Programs: UA/CO(1K-PLT), AA(PLT), QR, EK, Marriott(PLT), Hilton(DMND)
Posts: 9,538
I think it's pretty obvious that security scares have cost the airline industry a lot of money.
British Airways alone has calculated the cost of last months parlava was about $80 million (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5316920.stm).
It seems that the airlines, already targets of terrorism are also targets of politicians who use terrorism fears for their own ends.
British Airways alone has calculated the cost of last months parlava was about $80 million (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5316920.stm).
It seems that the airlines, already targets of terrorism are also targets of politicians who use terrorism fears for their own ends.
Sep 5, 2006, 12:42 pm
#22
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: AA PLT; UA Gold
Posts: 5,378
Originally Posted by andrzej
The "people" in this instance seem to be Randy Peterson - owner and operator of this website, so take it for what it's worth, but he has the power to shut down this forum if he chooses. Also, I and many others agree with him.
Personally, I enjoy the exchange of ideas and information on this forum, including posts from people with whom I disagree.
Last edited by justageek; Sep 5, 2006 at 1:26 pm
Sep 5, 2006, 1:00 pm
#23
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Yiron, Israel
Programs: Bates Motel Plat
Posts: 68,959
Originally Posted by justageek
Some of them actually agree with some of the points made by "anti-TSA" people on this board.
What Randy said -- and I agree with him on this -- is that the repeated denunciations by the same posters, often with no new information being presented, is not only not effective but also counter-productive. The people you want to reach simply turn off.
What Randy did not say -- but I am -- is that overstating a position also undermines your case.
If someone wants to say that the TSA is not effective, and provide substantiation, that is one thing. (Indeed, I have often taken that position myself.)
If he wants to call them "Communists" and "perverts", then he has gone overboard and, IMHO, not worth serious attention.
Sep 6, 2006, 1:17 am
#24
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: PDX
Programs: TSA Refusenik charter member
Posts: 15,978
Originally Posted by Superguy
I believe I said there were a few good quotes at the end of the article. Those were the ones I referred to.
Unfortunately, I wonder how many people actually read the whole article. I'm willing to be a lot of people didn't make it that far.
Sep 6, 2006, 1:57 am
#25
Suspended
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Siesta Key
Programs: AA EXP-1.6MM, Hilton Diamond, ManU & Chicago Bears #1 Fan
Posts: 9,697
Originally Posted by justageek
Considering that some of the most frequent posters on this forum are TSA Officers and Supervisors, and Federal Air Marshals, I'm not sure what more we could do to make it more balanced. Some of them actually agree with some of the points made by "anti-TSA" people on this board. So, I guess it could be that the only way to keep the truth about the TSA from getting out would be to shut down the forum completely.
Personally, I enjoy the exchange of ideas and information on this forum, including posts from people with whom I disagree.
Personally, I enjoy the exchange of ideas and information on this forum, including posts from people with whom I disagree.
For some reason you chose not to quote the following:
1. I also don't like what's going on...
2. I'm more than willing to debate, whether I agree or disagree with somebody as long as they present a valid point. Name calling is not a valid debate, it gets old very quickly and turns people off.
That's all some of us are saying. Just like you I don't want any forum shut down, but I could see why Randy is posting a warning. I have learned so much from all the different forums over the last few years, including this one, but recently I hardly visit this one anymore because it basically became TSA bashing only, with viscious name calling and no real new debatable information.....YMMV
Sep 6, 2006, 2:12 am
#26
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
I have learned a lot from this forum and continue to do so .... especially from those posts criticizing the TSA and from those working for it and those tolerating it. But that's not a discussion for this thread as much as the article which is peddling hysteria until it gets to the end of the article and some common sense is said in passing.
Sep 6, 2006, 8:43 am
#27
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by essxjay
Too true.
Sep 6, 2006, 8:57 am
#28
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of ORD
Programs: AA Plat UA Premier
Posts: 9,177
I want to go on record as saying the TSA seems to be improving. ORD was good yesterday as it is most always.
LAX a poster child if ever there was one was fine also yesterday. Well OK. Five of them spent 6 minutes looking at the xray screen instead of just grabbing the darn bag and checking it. They really held up the line.
But I haven't seen anybody screaming at passengers in months.
LAX a poster child if ever there was one was fine also yesterday. Well OK. Five of them spent 6 minutes looking at the xray screen instead of just grabbing the darn bag and checking it. They really held up the line.
But I haven't seen anybody screaming at passengers in months.
Sep 6, 2006, 9:56 am
#30
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by Bart
To underestimate the resourcefulness of international terrorists or downplay their intentions just because it causes inconveniences at the security checkpoint seems just as dumb, to me, as it is to overreact to every incident as a possible terrorist probe.
A. "underestimating" the resourcefulness of "international" terrorists (or downplaying "their" intentions)
and
B. overreacting to every incident as a possible terrorist probe.
That is, just because there is A does not mean there is always B (or vice versa).