Text 3324, 124 rader
Skriven 2010-01-19 15:47:23 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
Ärende: "Flying is the safest way to fly"
=========================================
Hello Robert,

On Saturday January 16 2010 14:06, you wrote to me:

 RB>>> You digress. My point is that their method is _effective_,

 MV>> Is it effective? How do you know?

 RB> Oh, Michiel - give it up! I assume you also read newspapers and follow
 RB> news broadcasts. Enough, at least, to know about the terrorist attacks
 RB> on western airplanes (mainly European and American), and the lack of
 RB> them on El Al. And I assume you're also aware that any attack on El Al
 RB> would be headline news throughout the world.

Sure, a successful attack would make the news. But how many successful attacks
haven there been on non El-Al airplanes after 9/11? yes, there have been
attempts. Are you sure there were no unsuccesful attempts on ElAl flights? The
Israeli are not all that talkative when it comes to security.

 RB>>> not that they are "nice" or "fair". They concentrate on the high
 RB>>> risks, and the results thus far have been good.

 MV>> The same about results can be said about the South Africans. Or
 MV>> the Japanese. Or the Chinese.

 RB> Sure. The Muslim terrorists really have a hate on for South Africans,
 RB> Japanese and Chinese - whereas they have absolutely nothing againsh
 RB> the Israelis.

You are making a lot of assumptions. Muslim terrorists could very well have a
grudge against South Africa. There is a persistent rumour that Isra‰l and South
Africa worked together on nuclear weapons. Mind you, it need not be true, what
suffices is that some believe it.

 RB> You don't believe that yourself.

I am not in the believing bussines. I look at the facts. and the first fact is
that I do not really know what the  "Israeli method" is. Oter than waht they
can not hide, such as that every passenger is interogated on a one by one
basis, we only know what they choose to tel us. "Not everything" may be an
understatement.

But the point is there is simply not enough data to draw conclusions about the
effectiveness of "their method", whatever that is.

 MV>>>> Do you know that the chance of being killed by a terrorist
 MV>>>> attack is far less than the chance of being killed by lightning?

 RB>>> Like to explain what that has to do with the subject at hand?

 MV>> That if you want to be effective in saving lives, invest in
 MV>> lightning protection instead of airport security.

 RB> In the same vein, I suggest you invest in earthquake-proofing for your
 RB> house, since you are at risk if an earthquake ever happens in the
 RB> Netherlands...

On the contrary. The risk of being killed by an earthquake is extremely low
here. I do not think there is a single recorded case. So it is not effective to
invest in earthquake proofing.

 MV>> Of course I do not want to be murdered. But when I consider the
 MV>> subject rationally, I see that discriminating people will decrease
 MV>> my chances of survival rather than increase them.

 RB> And not concentrating on the risk groups will dilute the chances of
 RB> finding true terrorists, while wasting resources on low-risk groups

That assums you can acurately isolate the risk groups. I say you can not.
99.99% of what you consider the high risk group is no more a terrorist than you
or me. With figures that low, you can not perform meaningfull statistics.

 RB> and reducing popular support for stricter security measures because
 RB> they do more to hinder and irritate harmless passengers than to
 RB> pinpoint (young Muslim male) terrorists.

99.99% of the young male Muslims are as harmless as you and me. Labelling
harmless people as terrorists, while leaving other groups untouched, sets bad
blood. There is too much of that already.

I think you would take a different stance if you had ever been on the wrong
side of discrimination. I have. My late wife was 1/4 Indonesian. And it showed.
When I travelled alone, I was never stopped at border. I was always wved
through. When my wife accompanied me, there was always something. Open the boot
pleae. Your passports please. Well, they just wanted to see HER passport, but
to avoid the appearence of racism, they asked for mine as well. And that was
WAY before 9/11.

http://www.vlist.eu/marieke.jpg

Bob it is bloody annoying to be singled out on appearance.

Need I add that my next companion was white caucasian and blond and the with
HER, I nver was stopped at borders again?

 MV>> The problem with terrorists has never been so big after we started
 MV>> this "war on terror". It is counter productive.

 RB> The only problem is that "we" _didn't_ start it.

Yes we did.

 RB>  I seem to remember a minor affair on September 11, 2001.

Bob, it didn't start with 9/11. 9/11 was not a spontaneous event, it was a
reaction to something elkse, the roots of which go back decades if not
centuries. Look at a map of the middle and far east. What do you see? Straight
red lines that depict bordes. Borders drawn by Western colonial forces without
no concern whatsoever for the locals. THAT is when it started.

 RB> And the fact that "a few" people were disturbed enough not to want a
 RB> repeat of that. Amazingly enough, even a few Europeans feel that way.

And the problem will not go away until we admit that it was OUR actions in the
past that are at the root of the problem and until we are prepaired to meet the
victims of our actions half way.

if we do not, we will face terrorism forever.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)