Who let the dogs out?!? (TSA is at RVR this morning)

[eblkheart]

I actually saw them a couple of years ago in Union Station in Chicago, checking bags.I thought that was interesting. However, the checks were completely random.

 

[winterskigirl]

TSA is so useless! They're hanging around at more stations doing absolutely nothing. Useless :angry2:

 

[Anderson]

Another add...doggy team at RVM as well. On the basis primarily of this but also of other stuff I've seen over the last week or so, I'm of the opinion that someone somewhere is spazzing out about something (probably the Islamic [EXPLETIVE DELETED]).

You know, it might be something else. There was a report that came out this week that since 9/11 more Americans have been killed by righting domestic terrorists than by the Islamic kind. And Richmond WAS the capital of the Confederacy.

It's not good to make assumptions about who'S suspicious. As the Amcop video that in on continual loop and drives me crazy at BAL says, "there are no suspicious people, there are only suspicious behaviors."

That would require a pretty blasted loose definition of "domestic terrorists" (e.g. including every random mass shooting) or methods of killing (e.g. including added deaths from folks driving instead of flying).

 

[SurebetVA]

Another add...doggy team at RVM as well. On the basis primarily of this but also of other stuff I've seen over the last week or so, I'm of the opinion that someone somewhere is spazzing out about something (probably the Islamic [EXPLETIVE DELETED]).

You know, it might be something else. There was a report that came out this week that since 9/11 more Americans have been killed by righting domestic terrorists than by the Islamic kind. And Richmond WAS the capital of the Confederacy.

It's not good to make assumptions about who'S suspicious. As the Amcop video that in on continual loop and drives me crazy at BAL says, "there are no suspicious people, there are only suspicious behaviors."

Why the slam on Richmond being the capital of the Confederacy? As a resident of Richmond I see this city as being a lot more progressive and not a hot bed of hate groups. It has been like 150 years ago. I can think of other cities that would be more likely candidates for hate groups to be organized. I would think Baltimore would be a big concern right now just because of recent history and racial tensions are still high which would be a magnet for any idiot who wanted to start trouble.

 

[andersone]

Eliminate the TSA and eliminate 47K jobs,,,,

wait, put them to work on all the new Amtrak equipment we could buy

As mother said, you can't defeat people who are willing to kill themselves

 

[Ryan]

Another add...doggy team at RVM as well. On the basis primarily of this but also of other stuff I've seen over the last week or so, I'm of the opinion that someone somewhere is spazzing out about something (probably the Islamic [EXPLETIVE DELETED]).

You know, it might be something else. There was a report that came out this week that since 9/11 more Americans have been killed by righting domestic terrorists than by the Islamic kind. And Richmond WAS the capital of the Confederacy.

It's not good to make assumptions about who'S suspicious. As the Amcop video that in on continual loop and drives me crazy at BAL says, "there are no suspicious people, there are only suspicious behaviors."

That would require a pretty blasted loose definition of "domestic terrorists" (e.g. including every random mass shooting) or methods of killing (e.g. including added deaths from folks driving instead of flying).

I don't think so. Give me a list of Americans killed by Islamic terrorists since 9/12/01 and I'll give you a list of n+1.

Of course we can't have the Justice Department actually look at right wing terror, because ZOMG SOCIALISM!!! or something.

 

[jis]

You know, it might be something else. There was a report that came out this week that since 9/11 more Americans have been killed by righting domestic terrorists than by the Islamic kind. And Richmond WAS the capital of the Confederacy.

It's not good to make assumptions about who'S suspicious. As the Amcop video that in on continual loop and drives me crazy at BAL says, "there are no suspicious people, there are only suspicious behaviors."

That would require a pretty blasted loose definition of "domestic terrorists" (e.g. including every random mass shooting) or methods of killing (e.g. including added deaths from folks driving instead of flying).

I don't think so. Give me a list of Americans killed by Islamic terrorists since 9/12/01 and I'll give you a list of n+1.
Of course we can't have the Justice Department actually look at right wing terror, because ZOMG SOCIALISM!!! or something.

I tend to agree with Ryan. A lot of stuff that would normally be characterized as terrorism is characterized as something else. There is a bit of "if we call it something else then we don't have to deal with it" attitude, i.e. Ostrich with head in sand thing. Pakistan did this with their terrorists for a while. Now they are being devoured by them with no end in sight, and also dragging the rest of the world down with it. As you can see IMHO the bias may be in the other direction.
But all this is getting way off topic.

Of course there is not much that exists at present to keep the dogs in, so why is it a surprise that they get let out from time to time?

 

[chakk]

I think they should put the police dogs in charge--often, they've got more sense (and scents--I got that in before anyone else did ) than the people at the other end of the leash.

Not always. A police dog in San Francisco recently bit another officer (not the dog's handler). The officer shot the dog in self-defense. The dog will survive, but will be retired from police duties.

 

[Mystic River Dragon]

Well, I did say "often"--I guess all of them aren't perfect. I hope they both (human officer and K-9 officer) get better and that the dog finds a good home that is a perfect fit for him.

 

[AmtrakBlue]

Perhaps the officer who was bit was a rogue officer and the dog knew it.

 

[Bob Dylan]

"Man bites dog!" Now there's a story!

 

[jis]

"Man bites dog!" Now there's a story!

Man found infected with Rabies. Dog requires vaccination injections.

 

[oldtimer]

"Man bites dog!" Now there's a story!

Man found infected with Rabies. Dog requires vaccination injections.

We all know what one of the symptoms of rabies is "Foaming" :giggle: :help: :wacko:

 

[neroden]

Another add...doggy team at RVM as well. On the basis primarily of this but also of other stuff I've seen over the last week or so, I'm of the opinion that someone somewhere is spazzing out about something (probably the Islamic [EXPLETIVE DELETED]).

You know, it might be something else. There was a report that came out this week that since 9/11 more Americans have been killed by righting domestic terrorists than by the Islamic kind. And Richmond WAS the capital of the Confederacy.

It's not good to make assumptions about who'S suspicious. As the Amcop video that in on continual loop and drives me crazy at BAL says, "there are no suspicious people, there are only suspicious behaviors."

That would require a pretty blasted loose definition of "domestic terrorists" (e.g. including every random mass shooting) or methods of killing (e.g. including added deaths from folks driving instead of flying).

A short essay on word usage follows:

The Charleston massacre was quite definitely terrorism -- it was intended to cause people's behavior to change by terrorizing them.

Nobody seems to use the term "terrorism" accurately these days, by the way: much of what ISIS and al-Qaeda do is *not* terrorism. Killing US soldiers with roadside bombs is NOT terrorism. Killing prisoners is considered immoral and against the Geneva Conventions, but it isn't terrorism; it's done for expediency, not as an advertisement.

By the accurate definition, terrorism is, specifically, violence used as a *publicity stunt* to scare people.

9/11 was terrorism, and it was spectacularly effective terrorism: bin Laden's (stated!!!) goal was to scare the US into abandoning its principles, into acting like despots, kidnapping people, torturing them, imprisoning them without trials, etc. -- he wanted the US to destroy the US's good reputation in the world -- and the US government responded exactly the way bin Laden wanted.

Most racist violence in the US *is* terrorism, in that it's specifically intended to scare other black (or Hispanic) people into submission. This was done with great success during the Jim Crow era, and before that during the era of slavery. It has had less and less success in recent years (thank goodness).

This terrorism is part of how Jim Crow was established (for a timeline, a good starting place is http://racialinjustice.eji.org/timeline/1870s/)-- though the racist gangs who set up Jim Crow in the 1870s also engaged in plain old violent-overthrow-of-the-government ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilmington_insurrection_of_1898 , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_Riot_of_1874) which isn't terrorism, it's a coup.

Every single abortion clinic bombing was a deliberate terrorist act, designed to terrorize doctors into not performing abortions.

"Shock and Awe" doctrine, as promoted by G W Bush during the invasion of Iraq, is explicitly terrorism. The purpose of the "shock and awe" invasion tactics was specificallly, according to the Bush administration, to scare the general public and the militias in Iraq. In other words, "shock and awe" was a terrorist action taken by the US government. It was also a *failure*, since rather than being scared into submission, Iraqis got mad and organized militias....

But if you look at the media, they never use the word "terrorism" to mean terrorism. They use it to mean "Islamic", which is ridiculous and offensive, applying it to non-terrorist violence committed by Muslims, while refusing to apply it to blatant acts of terrorism committed by non-Muslims. Glenn Greenwald has an essay on this: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/06/19/refusal-call-charleston-shootings-terrorism-shows-meaningless-propaganda-term/

 

[jis]

**Like** ^

 

[Ryan]

**Like** ^

Yep.

 

[dlagrua]

We have no problem with the K-9 units at the stations. So far they appear to be trained to not be aggressive against the innocent passenger. We do have a problem at the airports with the Blueshirt Sturmtroopers as they treat the innocent passenger as a convict. This is why we have not flown in 13 years.

As an honest and courteous citizen that has led an exemplary life, I steadfast refuse to be treated as an animal. It surprises me that people that board airplanes;are so docile, submissive and accepting of this tyranny. Ok, continue to blindly trust the powers at large but first ask the native American Indian how that worked out for them.

 

[AmtrakBlue]

We have no problem with the K-9 units at the stations. So far they appear to be trained to not be aggressive against the innocent passenger. We do have a problem at the airports with the Blueshirt Sturmtroopers as they treat the innocent passenger as a convict. This is why we have not flown in 13 years.

As an honest and courteous citizen that has led an exemplary life, I steadfast refuse to be treated as an animal. It surprises me that people that board airplanes;are so docile, submissive and accepting of this tyranny. Ok, continue to blindly trust the powers at large but first ask the native American Indian how that worked out for them.

I have never had a bad experience with the TSA at airports. Sure, some people do, but considering the thousands that pass through airports daily, heck, hourly, your analysis is like saying you'll never take Amtrak again because of #188's deadly accident.

 

[MARC Rider]

Another add...doggy team at RVM as well. On the basis primarily of this but also of other stuff I've seen over the last week or so, I'm of the opinion that someone somewhere is spazzing out about something (probably the Islamic [EXPLETIVE DELETED]).

You know, it might be something else. There was a report that came out this week that since 9/11 more Americans have been killed by righting domestic terrorists than by the Islamic kind. And Richmond WAS the capital of the Confederacy.

It's not good to make assumptions about who'S suspicious. As the Amcop video that in on continual loop and drives me crazy at BAL says, "there are no suspicious people, there are only suspicious behaviors."

That would require a pretty blasted loose definition of "domestic terrorists" (e.g. including every random mass shooting) or methods of killing (e.g. including added deaths from folks driving instead of flying).

Sorry, I should have cited my source:

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/tally-of-attacks-in-us-challenges-perceptions-of-top-terror-threat.html?_r=0&referrer=

According to that article, law enforcement is more worried about the home grown antigovernment white supremacist types than they are about jihadis.

 

[MARC Rider]

Another add...doggy team at RVM as well. On the basis primarily of this but also of other stuff I've seen over the last week or so, I'm of the opinion that someone somewhere is spazzing out about something (probably the Islamic [EXPLETIVE DELETED]).

You know, it might be something else. There was a report that came out this week that since 9/11 more Americans have been killed by righting domestic terrorists than by the Islamic kind. And Richmond WAS the capital of the Confederacy.

It's not good to make assumptions about who'S suspicious. As the Amcop video that in on continual loop and drives me crazy at BAL says, "there are no suspicious people, there are only suspicious behaviors."

Why the slam on Richmond being the capital of the Confederacy? As a resident of Richmond I see this city as being a lot more progressive and not a hot bed of hate groups. It has been like 150 years ago. I can think of other cities that would be more likely candidates for hate groups to be organized. I would think Baltimore would be a big concern right now just because of recent history and racial tensions are still high which would be a magnet for any idiot who wanted to start trouble.

OK I concede that Baltimore has a significant confederate history. But the lost cause symbolism is greater in Richmond. It was the confederate capital and there are still lots of statues and monuments to the lost cause. The few confederate monuments in Baltimore are tucked away and you need to look hard for them. And while Richmond itself is a progressive city, the countryside surrounding it is, shall we say, more sympathetic to the lost cause than is the case further north.

 

[jis]

We have no problem with the K-9 units at the stations. So far they appear to be trained to not be aggressive against the innocent passenger. We do have a problem at the airports with the Blueshirt Sturmtroopers as they treat the innocent passenger as a convict. This is why we have not flown in 13 years.

As an honest and courteous citizen that has led an exemplary life, I steadfast refuse to be treated as an animal. It surprises me that people that board airplanes;are so docile, submissive and accepting of this tyranny. Ok, continue to blindly trust the powers at large but first ask the native American Indian how that worked out for them.

I have never had a bad experience with the TSA at airports. Sure, some people do, but considering the thousands that pass through airports daily, heck, hourly, your analysis is like saying you'll never take Amtrak again because of #188's deadly accident.

**Like** ^

 

[MrFSS]

This one is getting way off topic.

If you have something to say about the goings on at RVR security, fine. But Civil War history should be in another forum on that subject.

Please limit your conversation to the topic at hand.

 

[jis]

The only mode of terrorist attack on Amtrak trains so far has been through damaging track causing derailment. That is not to say that a Madrid style attack could not happen, and such an attack in one of the New York tunnels for example or say through a bomb planted on a train in RVR that explodes upon arrival at Washington union Station could be quite devastating. So there is some justification for random checks. Being snotty about it being TSA rather than Amtrak or local PD is just being a bit silly IMHO, as long as it is just a bunch of K9s and some random ID checks and such.

OTOH, if anyone claims that all security barriers at airports should be removed, IMHO they are out of their minds. Remember the security barriers went up originally to prevent insurance fraud, which was the initial reason for taking over and crashing planes. The politically motivated stuff came a little after that, and today getting on a plane without going through some reasonable set of security checks is essentially unthinkable, except perhaps by those who are self-proclaimed "will never fly" The question now is one of striking the right balance rather than total removal of these measures both for trains and planes.