'Al-Qaeda links' suspect probed over US plane 'attack'

[-:Undertaker:-]

Luckily my memory has served me correctly. As soon as there is terrorism you talk of crackdowns and you go on about easy it is to travel in airports.

Yet when Manchester introduced new "Naked scanners" in their airports earlier in the year. First of all you say;
And then you go on to say...You talk of a lack of threat seeing as there's been no "terrorist attack on a plane in recent years" and then go on to say this proves the current method is "working". This only shows that it is not the case.

You use one example of a terrorist attack to erode civil liberties, what the hell is the point in fighting islamic extremists if we then introduce a basic police state where all its citzens are suspected terrorists?.

I don't want intrusion into peoples lives.
I don't want everyone treated as suspected suspects.
I don't want naked body scanners in airports.
I don't want ID cards.

I want common sense security, body searches and bag searches by using scanners which can detect suspicious items.

I want common sense to be used, that means don't go searching old age pensioners for weapons/bombs - it doesn't even need explaining, its beyond stupid.

I'm afraid there's no pleasing you as the government are always wrong when it comes to surveillance in your eyes.

Actually yes they are, the idiots in office preach to us how we need survellience and a PC state, yet keep the borders open - hello has nobody realised the flaw in that tactic?. The simple truth is, they dont really care about security, they dont really care about whether they can do their job right or not - all they care about is going ahead with building their big government databases, leaving office and then going on to another organisation which offers them a very generous salary so they can retire quite nicely.

A simple outlook but the sad thing is that its true, thats all they care about. They are all rotten to the core.

And although you say it's not surprising he came into the country as we can't control of borders, he came to the UK to legitimately study the first time, which is of course a fine reason to come into the UK, he was paying to attend our Universities.

I don't have a problem with this, what I wish to know is if the authorities checked his background or not.

However you will be surprised to learn that earlier this year he tried to re-enter the UK and said that he would be attending some college, which later to be a fake college and he was rejected from entering the UK. Our immigration system is by no means perfect, but it isn't as bad as you claim.

They do not know who is here and who is not, we don't have an immigration system. There is no system, hence why the government just doesn't know or have the means to know who is here and who is not.

He was also flagged up by the UK intelligence agencies along time ago, however he wasn't worthy of surveillance. For over two years the US also had their eye on him too. There is obviously many failings here for the UK & US intelligence agencies, and for the Dutch airport security however it is not as bad as you make out.

They failed in their job to prevent an attack which could of easily of happened, even though his father apparently even altered security services about his sons growing extremism.

[Jordy]

You use one example of a terrorist attack to erode civil liberties, what the hell is the point in fighting islamic extremists if we then introduce a basic police state where all its citzens are suspected terrorists?.

I don't want intrusion into peoples lives.
I don't want everyone treated as suspected suspects.
I don't want naked body scanners in airports.
I don't want ID cards.

I want common sense security, body searches and bag searches by using scanners which can detect suspicious items.

I want common sense to be used, that means don't go searching old age pensioners for weapons/bombs - it doesn't even need explaining, its beyond stupid.

Actually yes they are, the idiots in office preach to us how we need survellience and a PC state, yet keep the borders open - hello has nobody realised the flaw in that tactic?. The simple truth is, they dont really care about security, they dont really care about whether they can do their job right or not - all they care about is going ahead with building their big government databases, leaving office and then going on to another organisation which offers them a very generous salary so they can retire quite nicely.

A simple outlook but the sad thing is that its true, thats all they care about. They are all rotten to the core.

I don't have a problem with this, what I wish to know is if the authorities checked his background or not.

They do not know who is here and who is not, we don't have an immigration system. There is no system, hence why the government just doesn't know or have the means to know who is here and who is not.

They failed in their job to prevent an attack which could of easily of happened, even though his father apparently even altered security services about his sons growing extremism.

Well the altering of security services in Nigeria is of no concern to us, the concern is why wasn't he flagged up more severely and how he got past Dutch security. Sadly it's a fact with the vast majority of poor nations, you can pay your way to do anything in these countries. There's always corrupt officials, however it's not viable to stop every flight going to these nations because of this.

Both UK & US intelligence agencies for the record flagged him up in the past, just neither of them saw it serious enough to put him on No-Fly lists or surveillance.

What is so wrong with naked body scanners? It doesn't immediately make everyone a suspect, it makes it fair seeing as everyone goes through one. It's a much more reliable method of security, there is of course the chance that a Dutch official waved him through security regardless, hence how he got a bomb on the plane. However if there had been a naked airport scanner, I think a bomb in his underpants would show up quite clearly.

The current metal detectors don't seem to work all that well as people in this thread have said. And a 'pat-down' clearly doesn't work as the pat-down doesn't involve security sticking their hands in your underpants to see if there's a bomb in there.

Borders do need tackling but this is an example of it working in part, seeing as the UK refused him entry a second time.

As for only searching select people, how fair would it be to go to Dubai and there's a queue where white people are vigorously searched while Arabs are waved through no trouble. There has been white terrorists before, the IRA for example. There's no way that is fair.

And of course, if you have an official deciding who warrants a search or not, e.g. the person who will say the granny won't be a bomber so don't bother searching her. If there's an official deciding these things, all it takes is one corrupt guy to let through a terrorist and a plane load of people die. That's probably what happened in this scenario.

[-:Undertaker:-]

What is so wrong with naked body scanners? It doesn't immediately make everyone a suspect, it makes it fair seeing as everyone goes through one.

It is treating people like they are suspects, that is the crucial point.

It's a much more reliable method of security, there is of course the chance that a Dutch official waved him through security regardless, hence how he got a bomb on the plane. However if there had been a naked airport scanner, I think a bomb in his underpants would show up quite clearly.

It perhaps is, but its at the expense of what we are supposedly trying to protect from these nut cases, freedom.

Borders do need tackling but this is an example of it working in part, seeing as the UK refused him entry a second time.

Indeed it is, still nowhere near good enough.

As for only searching select people, how fair would it be to go to Dubai and there's a queue of where white people are vigurously searched while Arabs are waved through no trouble. There has been white terrorists before, the IRA for example. There's no way that is fair.

It is fair, and it would be fair in Dubai if they wished to do this because it is their sovereign country, their sovereign rights i'd accept if I was on my way to Dubai because if you go to another country you have to abide by their way of doing things and their situation.

Who is more likely going to be a terrorist?

A young nigerian man or a old aged british woman?

And of course, if you have an official deciding who warrants a search or not, e.g. the person who will say the granny won't be a bomber so don't bother searching her. If there's an official deciding these things, all it takes is one corrupt guy to let through a terrorist and a plane load of people die. That's probably what happened in this scenario.

If there is a corrupt guy then it won't matter if hes searching old women or not, because hes still corrupt so regardless of whether he is searching old woman or not he is still going to let the terrorist through isn't he.

[Jordy]

It is treating people like they are suspects, that is the crucial point.

It perhaps is, but its at the expense of what we are supposedly trying to protect from these nut cases, freedom.

Indeed it is, still nowhere near good enough.

It is fair, and it would be fair in Dubai if they wished to do this because it is their sovereign country, their sovereign rights i'd accept if I was on my way to Dubai because if you go to another country you have to abide by their way of doing things and their situation.

Who is more likely going to be a terrorist?

A young nigerian man or a old aged british woman?

If there is a corrupt guy then it won't matter if hes searching old women or not, because hes still corrupt so regardless of whether he is searching old woman or not he is still going to let the terrorist through isn't he.

It may well be eroding a little bit of freedom but I'd still rather someone see me naked for a split second (and bare in mind they'd see thousands of naked bodies on a daily basis) than die by blowing up on a plane. These things can be prevented, it's no ideal way but it does work.

If EVERY person was forced to walk through a naked body scanner, there would be no chance for a corrupt official and this could of been prevented.

Bare in mind the people looking at what goes through naked body scanners, are based at an external location. You also don't choose which scanner to go through, and at most airports I've been to, it could be any one of ten, you just go where your directed to. Even if a corrupt official was working on monitoring the naked body scanners, it would be a very small chance that they would have the terrorist go through the same naked body scanner they're monitoring.

I would be somewhat disgusted if someone searched me for a bomb based on my skin colour. However I couldn't care less if someone searches me for a bomb if everyone else is also being searched.

[Seatherny]

I agree with most of Jordy's points and I will +rep them when I next can.
There is just no pleasing undertaker.

You say what are the chances of a granny blowing up a plane? What are the chances of the son of a rich nigerian becoming a terrorist? I mean he can get whatever the hell he wants he is so rich.

Fact is, yes there is less chance of a granny being a terrorist, but anyone can be a terrorist regardless of their age and skin colour.

What they need is naked body scanners in all airports. Like Jordy said, if you set the xray alarm off, the security guard doesnt put his hands near your private parts.

[-:Undertaker:-]

It may well be eroding a little bit of freedom but I'd still rather someone see me naked for a split second (and bare in mind they'd see thousands of naked bodies on a daily basis) than die by blowing up on a plane. These things can be prevented, it's no ideal way but it does work.

If EVERY person was forced to walk through a naked body scanner, there would be no chance for a corrupt official and this could of been prevented.

Bare in mind the people looking at what goes through naked body scanners, are based at an external location. You also don't choose which scanner to go through, and at most airports I've been to, it could be any one of ten, you just go where your directed to. Even if a corrupt official was working on monitoring the naked body scanners, it would be a very small chance that they would have the terrorist go through the same naked body scanner they're monitoring.

I would be somewhat disgusted if someone searched me for a bomb based on my skin colour. However I couldn't care less if someone searches me for a bomb if everyone else is also being searched.

A terrorist attack would still happen regardless of what security you put in place, as I have said before; if another big attack happens it will be an attack from inside (something you can not really prevent) rather than a simple terrorist boards an plane with a bomb.

Liberty comes before it all, and the path we choose to take.

I agree with most of Jordy's points and I will +rep them when I next can.
There is just no pleasing undertaker.

You say what are the chances of a granny blowing up a plane? What are the chances of the son of a rich nigerian becoming a terrorist? I mean he can get whatever the hell he wants he is so rich.

Fact is, yes there is less chance of a granny being a terrorist, but anyone can be a terrorist regardless of their age and skin colour.

What they need is naked body scanners in all airports. Like Jordy said, if you set the xray alarm off, the security guard doesnt put his hands near your private parts.

Well the chances of the nigerian becoming a terrorist are pretty high, as he held extremist view whereas the old granny doesn't seem to have much sway of being a terrorist don't you think?. Of course anyone can be a terrorist regardless of their age or skin colour, but the fact is that most terrorists nowadays are now black/brown, are islamic extremists and are typically in their 20's - there is no escaping that fact.

I am for security, but not at the cost of liberty and I just find it stupid when older people are searched like criminals in airports. Why fight islamic extremism when we have laws and practices in this country which rival those of communist Chinas?. This is only a small part of the whole picture, our liberties are being eroded at an amazing pace, such as the longer detention scheme brought in by this government which is a disgrace.

We have more CCTV than China which is a non-democratic socialist state - what does that say about us both to ourselves and to the rest of the world?

[Seatherny]

A terrorist attack would still happen regardless of what security you put in place, as I have said before; if another big attack happens it will be an attack from inside (something you can not really prevent) rather than a simple terrorist boards an plane with a bomb.

Liberty comes before it all, and the path we choose to take.



Well the chances of the nigerian becoming a terrorist are pretty high, as he held extremist view whereas the old granny doesn't seem to have much sway of being a terrorist don't you think?. Of course anyone can be a terrorist regardless of their age or skin colour, but the fact is that most terrorists nowadays are now black/brown, are islamic extremists and are typically in their 20's - there is no escaping that fact.

I am for security, but not at the cost of liberty and I just find it stupid when older people are searched like criminals in airports. Why fight islamic extremism when we have laws and practices in this country which rival those of communist Chinas?. This is only a small part of the whole picture, our liberties are being eroded at an amazing pace, such as the longer detention scheme brought in by this government which is a disgrace.

We have more CCTV than China which is a non-democratic socialist state - what does that say about us both to ourselves and to the rest of the world?

You say increase security but do not search older citizens? :S
They should be allowed to search anyone, regardless of their age.

[alexxxxx]

airport security not in the UK is a sham. in switzerland they let me through when i beeped in the metal detector.. :S

[Jordy]

A terrorist attack would still happen regardless of what security you put in place, as I have said before; if another big attack happens it will be an attack from inside (something you can not really prevent) rather than a simple terrorist boards an plane with a bomb.

Liberty comes before it all, and the path we choose to take.

Well the chances of the nigerian becoming a terrorist are pretty high, as he held extremist view whereas the old granny doesn't seem to have much sway of being a terrorist don't you think?. Of course anyone can be a terrorist regardless of their age or skin colour, but the fact is that most terrorists nowadays are now black/brown, are islamic extremists and are typically in their 20's - there is no escaping that fact.

I am for security, but not at the cost of liberty and I just find it stupid when older people are searched like criminals in airports. Why fight islamic extremism when we have laws and practices in this country which rival those of communist Chinas?. This is only a small part of the whole picture, our liberties are being eroded at an amazing pace, such as the longer detention scheme brought in by this government which is a disgrace.

We have more CCTV than China which is a non-democratic socialist state - what does that say about us both to ourselves and to the rest of the world?

Liberty does not became above all. The fact a government has done all it can to prevent me from dying is what I want, and that includes scanning everybody. If you have a system everyone has to go through it reduces the risk of tampering, unlike your suggestions of certain people not being scanned based on appearance, age etc. Just months ago you were claiming the current security in Airports worked.

And you may well be right, perhaps the next big terrorist attack will come from the inside, however until security in airports in increased by better naked body scanners, there will be more attempts to blow up planes by simple terrorists, that needs to be eradicated.

[Jordy]

A terrorist attack would still happen regardless of what security you put in place, as I have said before; if another big attack happens it will be an attack from inside (something you can not really prevent) rather than a simple terrorist boards an plane with a bomb.

Liberty comes before it all, and the path we choose to take.



Well the chances of the nigerian becoming a terrorist are pretty high, as he held extremist view whereas the old granny doesn't seem to have much sway of being a terrorist don't you think?. Of course anyone can be a terrorist regardless of their age or skin colour, but the fact is that most terrorists nowadays are now black/brown, are islamic extremists and are typically in their 20's - there is no escaping that fact.

I am for security, but not at the cost of liberty and I just find it stupid when older people are searched like criminals in airports. Why fight islamic extremism when we have laws and practices in this country which rival those of communist Chinas?. This is only a small part of the whole picture, our liberties are being eroded at an amazing pace, such as the longer detention scheme brought in by this government which is a disgrace.

We have more CCTV than China which is a non-democratic socialist state - what does that say about us both to ourselves and to the rest of the world?

Liberty does not became above all. The fact a government has done all it can to prevent me from dying is what I want, and that includes scanning everybody. If you have a system everyone has to go through it reduces the risk of tampering, unlike your suggestions of certain people not being scanned based on appearance, age etc. Just months ago you were claiming the current security in Airports worked.

You may well be right, perhaps the next big terrorist attack will come from the inside, however until security in airports is increased by better naked body scanners, there will be more attempts to blow up planes by simple terrorists, that risk needs to be eradicated