NEWS: Credible Security Threat To NYC Transport

I posted elsewhere in this thread (or the other one about this threat) that Monday actually made sense - honoring the man who "discovered" the heart of Inifdel-land, or America as we've come to call it.

Similar story?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I just don't trust these so-called alerts due to good sources very much. It could be legit or it might not be legit.

Either way it's a show of power by the police, feds, and all the acronym government orgs at the expense of right to privacy.

I'm expecting something to almost happen with someone getting caught or averted which will probably be blown out of proportion or be vague and open to reasonable criticism.

Nothing has happened in over four years right? Time for the puppet masters to remind us of how scared we should be. These are the same people that didn't notice a jetliner knocking on the pentagon's door. Ooops.
They've got our backs now though...right?

[edit on 8-10-2005 by 2nd Hand Thoughts]

Originally posted by 2nd Hand Thoughts
Nothing has happened in over four years right?

Wrong! Attacks have expanded accross the globe. Bali? Spain? England? There is even evidence that the most horrendous incidents in the Russian Federation are actually rooted in islamic fundamentalist operatives there.

Damned if you do and damned if you don't? There was plenty of evidence after the fact in 9/11 that plenty of agencies knew something was coming. They said nothing, and there was outrage. Now, they release information to the public and there is outrage. You can't have it both ways folks.

Blast From The Past

I must say, all this talk really takes me back.

If I close my eyes, I can almost imagine it's September 10, 2001 again.

Those were the days.

Originally posted by Relentless

Originally posted by 2nd Hand Thoughts
Nothing has happened in over four years right?

Wrong! Attacks have expanded accross the globe. Bali? Spain? England? There is even evidence that the most horrendous incidents in the Russian Federation are actually rooted in islamic fundamentalist operatives there.

Damned if you do and damned if you don't? There was plenty of evidence after the fact in 9/11 that plenty of agencies knew something was coming. They said nothing, and there was outrage. Now, they release information to the public and there is outrage. You can't have it both ways folks.

Precisely mate, it's ridiculous when you look at the scuffle from a distance.

Authorities know about imminent event, say nothing - Cover up! Conspiracy!

Authorities know about imminent event, warn people - Fear Mongering! Conspiracy!

Neighbours dog pictured weeing in garden - Conspiracy!

There are conspiracies, but some people will seem to warp anything that comes their way into one for some unknown reason in their complete hate for authority..
Anarchists I think they're called.

Sometimes I think the fight for truth seems to be twisted into a fight for being different and right.
There is a clear difference between fighting for ones rights and inciting hatred, all these people manage to do is make the situation worse for everyone and to actually give the authorities the excuses they need.

[edit on 9-10-2005 by AgentSmith]

Anarchists Against Anarchy

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Anarchists I think they're called.

Careful, I've run into trouble over that before.

I've been told I don't know what an Anarchist is by some who claim to be Anarchists. They tell me they want to impose a Marxist form of government on people.

Frankly, I'm not sure even the Anarchists really know what they stand for.

Then again, that sort of individualized philosophy is kind of refreshing -- where it manages to peek through the enforced orthodoxy of "mainstream Anarchism".

What a world, what a world.

I consider myself a social anarchist, social because I appreciate that humanity prospers when we work together, anarchist because I don't want to be ruled, especially by thugs.

I suspect that many people presented as anarchists at public demonstrations have an agenda to provoke trouble and discredit valid public outcry.

No terror attacks in the subway, was it all scare and news filler? I have my doubts about the Feds as far as competence is concerned, so if local authorities felt better safe than sorry, I can appreciate that.

Originally posted by Relentless

Originally posted by 2nd Hand Thoughts
Nothing has happened in over four years right?

Wrong! Attacks have expanded accross the globe. Bali? Spain? England? There is even evidence that the most horrendous incidents in the Russian Federation are actually rooted in islamic fundamentalist operatives there.

I'm thinking of NY and the subways and how US terror alert levels come and go and it's over "credible sources" from the same government agencies that couldn't take care of hijacked planes. One of which flew into the pentagon. SO, I trust their sources and unnacountable performance not one bit.

SO the man and woman on the street pays the price while the fat cats breeze through the highest security checkpoints with a security badge. I want to see representatives of the cities and "The People" checking up on these "alerts" based on "credible sources". The increases in security need to be explained to a non-governmental group of some sort.

[edit on 9-10-2005 by 2nd Hand Thoughts]

Nothing happened or found. No one questions the sources or what the threat was in detail. No skin off anyone's nose. Just more intrusive searches on the way to work. Until the next high alert comes and goes. So we'll just live with random alerts from phantom sources until forever ends.

Originally posted by 2nd Hand ThoughtsJust more intrusive searches on the way to work. Until the next high alert comes and goes

did you have to endure a search? what was so intrusive about it?

If you know they are searching bags and you ride the subway, you leave the embarrassing objects at home. This means no drug toys, sex toys (I saw this in an airport - nothing funnier than watching two men explain the pumps to the bag inspectors) or contraband (poppers in the aforementioned guys' bags). You use common sense and, provided you have not been doing anything wrong, you should waltz thru the checkpoints with much ease. IF the checkpoints even exist.

I ride the subways back and forth to work normally and take cabs if I work late. Well, the day of the announcement I started taking subways no matter what time I left work. I took the subway to appointments during the day and worked and rode the subways over the weekend. I carried a bag with me. Never searched.
never saw a search. saw cops, plainclothes (so obvious) and uniformed.

I spoke with people about searches. some people did see them. some were searched. not one complaint.

even the ACLU put a hold on their incessant whining during the "terror threat."

you see, if this threat was real (seems the informant is backtracking now) and they searched bags and an attack was put off for even one day, the searches worked so quit whining about intrusive searches and stop holding up the line and the rest of us, who are happy our local gov't went overboard on this rather than take the word of a gov't that has managed to trip and stumble over too many events during the last 5 terms

crakeur:

You have an opinion and viewpoint. So do I. I wouldn't want it any other way.

But your calling me and others "whiners" because we may disagree with all or some of you opinion and/or viewpoint is counter-productive to a discussion.

Very reasonable way you ask how a SEARCH is INTRUSIVE...huh?...a search IS intrusive by definition. Whether or not you like it is a personal and relative opinion.

And then you wind up talking about sex toys and poppers..."if you have nothing to hide then..." ...we've heard that one before. It's not in the Bill of Rights.

I'm no Freud but...lets just say you probably have an interesting top dresser drawer.

My point is Was The Searching Necessary OR Justified? There is nothing wrong with asking that question as an American citizen. Who has more authority at this point: An American citizen or a mid-eastern "source"? NYPD jumped...fine. But WHO said jump? And why? And over what?

Research the National Republican Convention and download some video. This is what is happening on the other end of the "terror" spectrum.


[edit on 11-10-2005 by 2nd Hand Thoughts]

Originally posted by 2nd Hand Thoughts

You have an opinion and viewpoint. So do I. I wouldn't want it any other way.

agreed

Originally posted by 2nd Hand Thoughts
But your calling me and others "whiners" because we may disagree with all or some of you opinion and/or viewpoint is counter-productive to a discussion.

having an opinion is fine. whining about a bag search while others are waiting to move on is counterproductive. you don't have to agree with it but you don't have to make others suffer as a result.

Originally posted by 2nd Hand Thoughts
Very reasonable way you ask how a SEARCH is INTRUSIVE...huh? And then wind up talking about sex toys and poppers.

I'm no Freud but...

[edit on 11-10-2005 by 2nd Hand Thoughts]

but what. I was at an airport screening watching two morons have those things removed from their bag. thought I'd inject a little himor into it. you're not Freud. I can see that.

By the way, you didn't answer me. Did you have your bags searched on the subway? If so, where (curious as I really didn't see any bag searching stations anywhere I went) and how was THAT SPECIFIC SEARCH intrusive? You knew it was highly likely that you might be subjected to a search so how was THAT SPECIFIC SEARCH intrusive.

I don't disagree that a random search when nothing warrants it is intrusive but, in the case of the NYC subway system this weekend, the NYC local gov't deemed it was necessary and they told the public they would be searching bags so it wasn't very unexepected.

if you don't want to share as to how it was intrusive, please just clue me in as to which station was doing the searching.

thanks.

I edited a bit by ADDING.

No I was not searched because of THIS INSTANCE. Which changes things not one bit. I still have a right to watch what is going on in all major cities and comment as an American living in Orwell's 2005.

I forgot to delete the edited line, it wasn't a dig of any kind.

out of curiousity, do you live in NYC or work in NYC?

Chicago. But I was in NY on 9/14 of this year.

IF I could ask you, what is your race or appearance and so forth. Everyone no matter what race is treated differently at different times. When I don't have my work clothes on, I get treated like crap a lot of the time. I'm caucasion and it's usually at the hands of caucasion people and almost universally by people of "authority". Even when in actuality I may have more "authority" over them.

We are all affected by increased security and misinformed paranoia. I mean, needing to consider what you want to be seen in a possible search where we wouldn't have been searched four years ago should not be taken lightly by anyone.

IMO there is an increased US versus THEM attitude in law enforcement now in all areas. This is what happens when "everyone" is a possible "threat".

What I think is truly sad is that things like the NY rep. convention abuses of "authority" get swept under the rug while this makes the news. If things like the convention or the beating in New Orleans recently were reported equally as they occur, I think people would start asking some good questions in larger numbers.

Sadly, it takes a racial twist to get a beating covered. Who doesn't think that all races and national backgrounds don't get beat down every day? It's a seperatist way to do the news. I'm caucasion and I've been mistreated (not as badly as that guy in Lousianna thank god) by the cops too. I'm digressing but this is not just a black vs. bad cops thing. It's an us vs. bad cops thing. This is what happens to different extents during a "terror alert".

I'm about questioning authority but not taking authority away where it's needed. I'd say the NY police most likely did a good job because I believe they are well-intentioned and primarily professional about their jobs. I don't automatically take away the "benefit of the doubt" where badges are concerned. But where do the warnings come from?

Are they indeed serious threats or are they masked exercises or tactics to test the waters for increased security?

EDIT: I should have said "bad cops" initially instead of just "cops". I don't think most cops are bad.

[edit on 11-10-2005 by 2nd Hand Thoughts]

Originally posted by 2nd Hand Thoughts
Chicago. But I was in NY on 9/14 of this year.

I love how the non- new york city residents are all up in arms over the searching of bags during a threat that the mayor and the police chief took seriously.

it isn't just you 2nd so don't get the idea that I am picking a fight. I'm not. I agree that there are times when we should challenge authority. There is also a time when we should not. This past weekend in NYC was a time to let things be done as the authorities desired. Even the ACLU agreed to the bag searches during this time of elevated risk.

Look at it this way. You have tickets to the white sox game tonight. Someone calls in a threat to the section you are sitting in. They say someone will blow up a backpack in that area. Don't you think they should search the bags of people coming in to the stadium? Or ban bags altogether (probably doing that anyway)? If there is a specific threat, it is the local gov't's job to determine how to act on this risk. In the case of the NYC subways, had the police not stepped up their presence and had the searches not taken place, and a bomb or 4 went off, wouldn't the public be screaming for the heads of all those in charge that ignored the threat and did nothing about it?

I hate waiting on lines at the airport and I find it ridiculous that I am often asked to remove my shoes and belt before I can pass thru the metal detector. I see the need for this type of security and if removing my shoes means the flight is a tiny bit safer for me and my family, it was worth the anguish.

So, I have to be searched to have an opinion? Thinking that way, I can't have a VALID opinion on the rights of murder victims' families because I haven't had a family member murdered.

There are cities west of NY NY by the way.

First of all, I would be at a Cubs game where I can sit in a real ball park and not a frisbee...What I would want to know was who called in the threat.

This wasn't some threat called in remember. This was a valid source. You don't know the source living in NY NY any more than I do living in Anchorage Alaska where it could happen to be tommorrow. The precedent for the rest of the country should include accountability for the initial alert. Alerts do occur west of NY NY by the way.

We obviously disagree on at least two ideas:

1. That anyone outside of NY is entitled to an opinion. Especially one that you do not share.

2. That the public is owed more information regarding threat sources before and especially after privacy is compromised.

Just to add, I had a friend who looks about as suspicous as a nun who had his grandfather's pocketknife confiscated at a Bear's game. He had attended Bear's games before and it was never a problem. It was winter and the blade was dull and about two inches in length. A pencil would be more dangerous. The idea being that search and seizures occur all the time and under different conditions: who is doing them, the alert level (publicized or not) of that building/area, who is being searched or questioned, on and on.

"Necessary" or not, I find it intrusive whether it ruins the mood for someone out to enjoy a sporting event or when someone in the future wonders what is or isn't acceptable today even though it may have been acceptable yesterday. That's intrusive. It's not a strip search of course, but it is a way of thinking that is still pretty new to AMerica. So if I have to now consider it or what I look like with regard to where I am going and whether of not I should know my rights in detail before I go, I want to know what is going on and why.

I can say that a search or whatever worked becuase nothing happened, but I can also wave a magic wand over someone and say that they won't die today too because of my super-powers.

[edit on 11-10-2005 by 2nd Hand Thoughts]

Originally posted by 2nd Hand Thoughts
1. That anyone outside of NY is entitled to an opinion. Especially one that you do not share.

2. That the public is owed more information regarding threat sources before and especially after privacy is compromised.

#2 first. I agree that we should be given more information regarding threats, when it is available. Telling us we have a threat and then raising the levels of security to levels unseen before, while not giving us much detail as to the threat is unfair.

#1. you are reading way more into my words than I am saying. Simply put, the threat was deemed real and the searches were deemed a necessity for this weekend. They told us what was going on so it wasn't much of a surprise to anyone when they saw the cops doing searches (again, I have never seen this and I use three of the biggest stations in the city). When the ACLU says they are not going to fight the use of random searches in the subways, even they are admitting that there is a time and place when these things are necessary. Perhaps the local ACLU folks felt that they would be safer with the searches.

As for there being places outside of NYC in the country, I'm well aware of it and your smug attitude is unwarranted and unnecessary. I am merely stating that this one incident is not a violation of anyone's rights. When you were here on the 14th, did you get subjected to a search? I'm guessing no because they really aren't doing them.

I prefer the cubs over the sox as well but I am a mets fan (another glutton for annual punishment) so I will root for the american league.

Where was I smug? Any more smug than when you said that you "love" it when non-New Yorkers have an opinion about something in NY? I wasn't being smug, I thought it necessary to bring up that searches occur to various extents everywhere. You made comments that about was I searched myself or not regarding this particular search. The topic of searches and terror alerts are not unique to NY.

My point all along has been who "deemed" the whole exercise necessary? Yes it was "deemed" necessary. SOmeone needs to deem it so, but who and based on what? That is not something that needs to be kept from voters and taxpayers.

Anyway, why is the ACLU so important? They barely care about anything that goes on online at all (meaning that they pick and choose) and I disagree with some of the "stands" that they do take. They aren't me and I'm not them and I don't use them as a moral or legal dipstick based on what they fight or don't fight.

I live by roads that close down during some "elevated alerts". I have no idea why or when it will happen. Warranted or not, it is intrusive to my daily routine. Why is a road shut down on say a tuesday and then open on Wednesday? Hardly anyone asks why. Personally, it makes me feel like an ant when someone puts a hand in their path.


[edit on 11-10-2005 by 2nd Hand Thoughts]