NYCLU sues city over subway searches

[wowbagger]

(reply to the possibility of a sucessful subway bombing in NY)



"and so be it."

Does this mean we are to lie down like sheep before the slaughter, and do nothing to protect ourselves? Are we to just take it and take it, again and again, without any form of preventative measures? Are we only to concern ourselves with the aftermaths of such attacks?

I'm really trying to get a handle on this.

These "measures" just aren't effective.

Example: I am a terrorist- just like the ones who suicide bombed London's Tube. I know my bag might get searched so a group of us waits till winter and hide the bombs our cool "puffy" jackets and BLAM!! KABOOM!!

Now what did the random searches accomplish exactly? Did it really prevent anything?

We don't have to "take it" but we should be smart about our efforts to combat it and not getting willy nilly with our personal freedoms.

 

[MalcolmX]

(reply to the possibility of a sucessful subway bombing in NY)



"and so be it."

Does this mean we are to lie down like sheep before the slaughter, and do nothing to protect ourselves? Are we to just take it and take it, again and again, without any form of preventative measures? Are we only to concern ourselves with the aftermaths of such attacks?

I'm really trying to get a handle on this.

Not having these searches doesn't mean we don't do anything, let's be realistic here. As it has always been done, this is all about intelligence and infiltration. The U.S. lacks this and this is one of the big reasons why an attack is successful. Many of the attacks and plots that were stopped in the 1990's were because of intelligence as it is an invaluable tool. Random searching is far from being effective.

 

[419gam]

You are wrong. It works for Israel in the airport. The terrorists knew Israel would do the random search and therefore, would not go that route. That's why you don't hear bombs going off. That's the goal. I don't like it as much as the next person. But right now, we are at war with the terrorists. However, overtime, it will ease off when everything cools down. We are in a cycle.

Israel doesn't search randomly. They use profilling methods and intelligence gathering. If you are under srcutiny by the Israelis you better believe its not random, you need to cooperate fully because you have already been earmarked as suspicous.

 

[TheBear]

These "measures" just aren't effective.

Says who? Has there been any bombings in NY subways since this measure was implimented? Who is to say there will not be any terrorists who will have second thoughts about bringing a bomb into a NY subway?

Now what did the random searches accomplish exactly? Did it really prevent anything?

Random searches does on main thing - it adds a level of deterrence to would-be subway bombers.

We don't have to "take it" but we should be smart about our efforts to combat it and not getting willy nilly with our personal freedoms.

This is the main point.

According to the civil liberties unions, we can't profile, we can't random search, we can't wire-tap, the Patriot Act needs to be thrown out, national ID cards are a bad idea, and on and on.

Knowing all this, what is your 'smart' solution to counter terrorism? I don't want to hear what you wouldn't do. Your posts here reflect that quite nicely. I just want to know what you would do to counter terrorism in the US.

 

[trunks2k]

Says who? Has there been any bombings in NY subways since this measure was implimented?

Just exactly how many bombings of the NY subway were there before hand?

 

[TheBear]

Just exactly how many bombings of the NY subway were there before hand?

Do you have any answers to my bottom line question, or are you just going to nit-pick the peripherals?

This is the main point.

According to the civil liberties unions, we can't profile, we can't random search, we can't wire-tap, the Patriot Act needs to be thrown out, national ID cards are a bad idea, and on and on.

Knowing all this, what is your 'smart' solution to counter terrorism? I don't want to hear what you wouldn't do. Your posts here reflect that quite nicely. I just want to know what you would do to counter terrorism in the US.

I'd like you to address my main point. What you got?

 

[MidnightBlue]

Says who? Has there been any bombings in NY subways since this measure was implimented? Who is to say there will not be any terrorists who will have second thoughts about bringing a bomb into a NY subway?

How many bombings were there in the New York City subways before?

Random searches does on main thing - it adds a level of deterrence to would-be subway bombers.

How do you figure that? These are guys who are getting ready to blow themselves up; you think they're afraid of getting arrested? You send out 18 guys simultaneously. Three of them get nailed, you still have 15 bombs on the subways. Or say they close down the subways the rest of the day when they catch the first three. You've just paralyzed the City. You can do it as often as you like. So say they decide to search every single person who comes into a subway station. So you take your bombs to the Staten Island Ferry and the buses. They tighten up there, so you take it over to Grand Central, and hit the LIRR a couple times. So they tighten up there. Now most of the average people of New York City have to take off their shoes and bend over for a cop every time they go to work. But they're safe, right? Oh, wait, somebody just blew up the Queensboro Bridge.

According to the civil liberties unions, we can't profile, we can't random search, we can't wire-tap, the Patriot Act needs to be thrown out, national ID cards are a bad idea, and on and on.

That's right. If we don't have freedom, what are we defending?

Knowing all this, what is your 'smart' solution to counter terrorism? I don't want to hear what you wouldn't do. Your posts here reflect that quite nicely. I just want to know what you would do to counter terrorism in the US.

1. Stop writing Israel a blank check.

2. Stop invading other countries on the flimsiest of pretexts.

3. Work toward genuine peace in the Middle East, and that means talking to people we don't like to talk to.

4. Treat all acts of terrorism as criminal acts. (Like we do when our own people commit terrorist acts. You know, Tim McVeigh, Eric Rudolph, the Unabomber.)

5. This will be unpopular, and I'm not proud of it, but honestly, if it were my decision, I think I'd have agents infiltrating masjids, monitoring sermons, and building intelligence (and criminal cases) against every imam who praises terrorism or incites people to violence.

 

[marblehead]

I'm wondering how many people who think that searching people's bags in New York subways is a good idea have actually been in New York subways. I'd love to see them try and search everyone coming into Grand Central during rush hour. Unless they want to continuously stop the flow of the whole city the searches won't be effective.

 

[TheBear]

That's right. If we don't have freedom, what are we defending?

More importantly, what good is freedom, if we're not alive to enjoy it?

 

[TheBear]

1. Stop writing Israel a blank check.

Is that what the terrorists want?

2. Stop invading other countries on the flimsiest of pretexts.

Is that what the terrorists want?

3. Work toward genuine peace in the Middle East, and that means talking to people we don't like to talk to.

Is this what the terrorists want?

4. Treat all acts of terrorism as criminal acts. (Like we do when our own people commit terrorist acts. You know, Tim McVeigh, Eric Rudolph, the Unabomber.)

You forgot OJ Simpson.

5. This will be unpopular, and I'm not proud of it, but honestly, if it were my decision, I think I'd have agents infiltrating masjids, monitoring sermons, and building intelligence (and criminal cases) against every imam who praises terrorism or incites people to violence.

I agree with you here. Problem is, ACLU would be all over that with lawsuits and injunctions.

 

[wowbagger]

Says who? Has there been any bombings in NY subways since this measure was implimented? Who is to say there will not be any terrorists who will have second thoughts about bringing a bomb into a NY subway?

Why would they care? If they get pulled out for a random search, they simply decline and walk away. No questions or detaining allowed (without a probable cause they cannot force anyone to submit). Then they go to another station. KABOOM!!

I don't understand why you think it's a deterrent when its so simple to subvert.

This is the main point.

According to the civil liberties unions, we can't profile, we can't random search, we can't wire-tap, the Patriot Act needs to be thrown out, national ID cards are a bad idea, and on and on.

Knowing all this, what is your 'smart' solution to counter terrorism? I don't want to hear what you wouldn't do. Your posts here reflect that quite nicely. I just want to know what you would do to counter terrorism in the US.

Use intelligence and diplomacy. Those are the 2 options which would serve us best.

One thing I would definitely do is fire Bush's speech writer. Every time he speaks about good vs evil and his terrorist "war" I can see another Al-Qaeda group getting more recruits. Or maybe just tape his whole mouth shut.

Another small example might be to spread rumors through to the Al-Qaeda network that causes distrust and dissention in the ranks. Use the inernational media. Maybe something about how people are spies and betrayers only out to get reward money or something. I'm sure they do all sorts of that stuff now though but they can't tell us. I hope (cross fingers) they are doing creative strategies that I would never even fathom. (It's too bad that the smartest graduates don't normally go for the government jobs.)

Anyway...There are literally thousands of things they could be doing (and I hope that they are) which would be a better and more effective use of time and money than checking grandmas' bag on the subway.

Bu even if I didn't know of any possible alternative to this terrorist problem, I would still think that random (and only with consent) searching of bags was a lame idea.

wowbagger

ETA: I would also get our borders and immigration "holes" closed up.
If they can't get in, they can't blow you up. I would profile any people who had traveled to countries with known terrorist activities (like if a young man's passport says he has been to Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Syria before coming to the US, I think it should raise some flags)

 

[TheBear]

Why would they care? If they get pulled out for a random search, they simply decline and walk away. No questions or detaining allowed (without a probable cause they cannot force anyone to submit). Then they go to another station. KABOOM!!

It's Monday morning. An al_Qaeda operative in the US is given the green light to bomb a subway station on Friday. All plans are final. But on Tuesday, a new wrinkle appears. The NYPD starts random searching of bags.

Gee. Ya think the al_Qaeda operative might re-think the plan? You don't see one iota of deterrence?

Use intelligence and diplomacy. Those are the 2 options which would serve us best.

Do you honestly believe al_Qaeda, et al, are interested in a dialogue with westerners? Get real.

Bu even if I didn't know of any possible alternative to this terrorist problem, I would still think that random (and only with consent) searching of bags was a lame idea.

wowbagger

I'm just glad I'm not placing my safety and the safety of my family, on your perspective of how to protect us.

 

[MalcolmX]

It's Monday morning. An al_Qaeda operative in the US is given the green light to bomb a subway station on Friday. All plans are final. But on Tuesday, a new wrinkle appears. The NYPD starts random searching of bags.

Gee. Ya think the al_Qaeda operative might re-think the plan? You don't see one iota of deterrence?

Of course not, the searches are random. If you don't want to be searched then you turn around and go to another turnstile or station. When you get passed the random search, then you take the train to the desired location and detonate.

If anything, they've already carried out a train attack, so they're not going to go for that again since they know security will be higher, but not on the buses or perhaps just setting an explosion off in the terminal is a better idea. They will adapt to whatever security is put up. A person determined to attack will attack. That's why intelligence and infilitration is the name of the game.

You don't take down a big drug trade by arresting the dealers, you send in undecover agents to find out what is what and dismantle from within. It's a tactic that should receive the most attention.

 

[MidnightBlue]

More importantly, what good is freedom, if we're not alive to enjoy it?

What happened to "Live Free or Die"?

Or "Give me liberty, or give me death"?

 

[MidnightBlue]

Is that what the terrorists want?

Is that what the terrorists want?

Is this what the terrorists want?

Probably. Should we refuse to do the right thing just to spite them?

I agree with you here. Problem is, ACLU would be all over that with lawsuits and injunctions.

It should be a covert operation.

 

[wowbagger]

It's Monday morning. An al_Qaeda operative in the US is given the green light to bomb a subway station on Friday. All plans are final. But on Tuesday, a new wrinkle appears. The NYPD starts random searching of bags.

Gee. Ya think the al_Qaeda operative might re-think the plan? You don't see one iota of deterrence?

On the contrary, what better terror to Americans than to bomb a subway with extra useless security that can easily be subverted? NY may be making the subway a more attractive target.

Do you honestly believe al_Qaeda, et al, are interested in a dialogue with westerners? Get real.

Not Al-Qaeda, but the countries in the Middle East and also any countries that can help us with intelligence. The Saudi's could certainly do more, as well as Pakistan and Syria where the core groups are most likely living. The ME is a mess and the US is at a disadvantage wih our intelligence there. We need their help.
BUT, we have to do it quietly. Sticking our noses over there publicly incites anger at our "meddling".

 

[SisterGeoff]

I have as much of a case as claimed by ACLU.

No you don't because not only is the preamble of the contiution not binding law upon going back and reading the preamble you are not even quoteing from it but rather from the Declaration of Independance of which no part is legally binding.

For future refrence the preamble to the Declaration of independance:

When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident:

That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...

Not to be confused with the preamble of the Consitution:

We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The ACLU is taking away my Constitutional rights!

Here is the Bill of Rights and here is the remainder of the amendments, which of theses rights is the ACLU attempting to take away from you?

 

[TheBear]

What happened to "Live Free or Die"?

Or "Give me liberty, or give me death"?

I was living in LA during the riots. The looting, arson and mayhem lasted about 5 days. There were plumes of smoke rising everywhere. News helicopters were showing live footage of all kinds lootings, fires, and a guy named Reginald Denny getting dragged out of his truck, and almost beat to death. Much of these helicopter shots were of places where police were nowhere around. There were some places where the LAPD was so outnumbered, they were ordered to withdraw. Other areas, they were ordered to stay out. The fires and looting continued, spreading to a wider and wider area of the city. Rioters were going to gas stations and filling up gas cans, driving to their targets, and setting more buildings on fire. The National Guard was called in and deployed to some of the hot-spots, with their M16's. It was quickly learned that they had no ammo! The rioting and fires were getting closer and closer to our home. By the 4th day, with the chaos continuing (virtually unchecked), the city set up vehicle check-points, issued an after dark curfew, banned the filling up of containers with gas, and did a few more things to get the situation under control.

I am greatful for the restrictions temporraily put on the city. The fires were within a mile from our home when things finally started to subside.

So, you can take those lofty, starry-eyed and theoretic slogans, and.......... Well, I'll just leave it at that.

I live in the real world, not the theoretic world. How about you?

 

[TheBear]

Probably. Should we refuse to do the right thing just to spite them?

The 'right' thing? According to who? You?

 

[TheBear]

When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident:

That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...

What was the first on the list of rights? Oh yeah. Life!