Shots fired at Fort Lauderdale Airport

[Skip]

Harden airports all you want. They'll pick another target.

Next time you're at Chipolte, waiting in line, look around and ask yourself if there's anything unique about a target of opportunity in which five people are murdered and anywhere else in real life.

We'll have the same victims, same tragedy, same media narratives/manipulation.

Quite frankly I am surprised the jihadists lack creativity because there are many other opportunities. Guns/air travel keep giving lending credibility to people who believe there is another agenda in addition to terror. These are the things the media hypes up so it's no surprise to me.

[DireWolf]

I hope all the steps you mentioned are paid for by Private Airlines via ticket prices. I know I dont want my taxes to go up. Im guessing here, but I think there is a significant part of the populace who doesnt use air transportation. Its like all of us paying so you can have the broncos and rtd. Im against it.

While I haven't run the numbers even at a high level, my initial gut assumption (based on some actual observations/data) on this is that between redirecting TSA funding, small increase in airline/airport-transit fees (no big deal, the "add-on" fees are already a bit ridiculous), and possibly a small per-vehicle road-toll, these could be funded without additional general tax dollars, especially for major airports...

I'm not opposed to small traveller-specific fee increases, as long as I'm getting value on investment and not paying to fund my own figurative assraping......

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

[DireWolf]

Harden airports all you want. They'll pick another target.

Next time you're at Chipolte, waiting in line, look around and ask yourself if there's anything unique about a target of opportunity in which five people are murdered and anywhere else in real life.

We'll have the same victims, same tragedy, same media narratives/manipulation.

Quite frankly I am surprised the jihadists lack creativity because there are many other opportunities. Guns/air travel keep giving lending credibility to people who believe there is another agenda in addition to terror. These are the things the media hypes up so it's no surprise to me.

I agree, and really you can only just push the low-hanging-fruit around so much, but there are some actual differences.

For example, I'm not going to be forcably (voluntarily as per the law) disarmed while standing in line at Chipotles like I am in an airport walking up to the checkpoint or baggage claim (and everywhere in between). Now while that doesn't provide any defense against EID/VBIED threats, etc., it does give me potential risk mitigation for other threats as long as my situational awareness hasn't gone in the crapper, which in turn leads to at least some potential level of overall risk reduction....

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

[CS1983]

To be honest, that there hasn't a string of successful muslim attacks at the ground level (a few spread out isn't a string) since makes me think 1 or 2 of 3 things is the case:

1) the DHS/FBI/NSA etc. are REALLY FREAKING GOOD (unlikely)
2) there's really not as much of a domestic threat as we have been kowed into believing there is
3) or they're REALLY BAD at being terrorists.

Given they're REALLY GOOD at being terrorists in the Middle East, the latter of the 3 is less likely. Given that there's been very few "we stopped em!" incidents (and very few successful attacks), I doubt that 1 is likely. That leaves #2 as the most likely.

No IEDs going off on the 5 freeway at rush hour (any idiot with internet access can build one), mass shootings are fairly ineffective compared to a bombing and given how rare they are compared to ability ..., etc.

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/terrorism/wrjp255a.html

look at the link since Sept 11 and focus on the Islamic ones. All really low grade BS for the most part.

Biggest ones were Nidal Hassan, San Bernardino, Orlando Florida (which was really effective, but they were fith in a barrel), and that's it for deaths in any appreciable number.

NYC in Sept 2016 has 29 injured, so they made a valiant attempt but we should be seeing such effectiveness a lot more if the threat was really there in any appreciable level -- particularly for the $ spent on "fighting terrorism". I simply cannot believe the various agencies are THAT effective at prevention.

The terries are much more effective overseas with small teams. They're not any smarter overseas. The cost of bomb making materials to have IEDs all over the interstates and in shopping malls can be purchased on a 7/11 clerk's salary.

Just doesn't make any sense.

[Skip]

I agree, and really you can only just push the low-hanging-fruit around so much, but there are some actual differences.

For example, I'm not going to be forcably (voluntarily as per the law) disarmed while standing in line at Chipotles like I am in an airport walking up to the checkpoint or baggage claim (and everywhere in between). Now while that doesn't provide any defense against EID/VBIED threats, etc., it does give me potential risk mitigation for other threats as long as my situational awareness hasn't gone in the crapper, which in turn leads to at least some potential level of overall risk reduction....

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

That's a good point.

The lack of creativity does make a monopoly on violence an important factor. If they do get creative it becomes less of an obstacle and that is my fear.

The moment the media stops hyping certain things, or, they expand beyond the jihadist template, we are really in trouble. I've often said we are sometimes lucky that a firearm is used in these attacks because they become a handicap for those who aren't trained.

[janenewman2]

Sounds like he was an ISIS convert.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[KestrelBike]

To be honest, that there hasn't a string of successful muslim attacks at the ground level (a few spread out isn't a string) since makes me think 1 or 2 of 3 things is the case:

1) the DHS/FBI/NSA etc. are REALLY FREAKING GOOD (unlikely)
2) there's really not as much of a domestic threat as we have been kowed into believing there is
3) or they're REALLY BAD at being terrorists.

Given they're REALLY GOOD at being terrorists in the Middle East, the latter of the 3 is less likely. Given that there's been very few "we stopped em!" incidents (and very few successful attacks), I doubt that 1 is likely. That leaves #2 as the most likely.

No IEDs going off on the 5 freeway at rush hour (any idiot with internet access can build one), mass shootings are fairly ineffective compared to a bombing and given how rare they are compared to ability ..., etc.

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/terrorism/wrjp255a.html

look at the link since Sept 11 and focus on the Islamic ones. All really low grade BS for the most part.

Biggest ones were Nidal Hassan, San Bernardino, Orlando Florida (which was really effective, but they were fith in a barrel), and that's it for deaths in any appreciable number.

NYC in Sept 2016 has 29 injured, so they made a valiant attempt but we should be seeing such effectiveness a lot more if the threat was really there in any appreciable level -- particularly for the $ spent on "fighting terrorism". I simply cannot believe the various agencies are THAT effective at prevention.

The terries are much more effective overseas with small teams. They're not any smarter overseas. The cost of bomb making materials to have IEDs all over the interstates and in shopping malls can be purchased on a 7/11 clerk's salary.

Just doesn't make any sense.

It's strange no matter which way it's looked at. The DC snipers (muhammad and the malvo kid) had quite the reign of terror going, and that was just with a stolen semi-AR w/ an [unmagnified] EoTech red-dot in the trunk of a chevy caprice. 10 killed in the DC area, 7 killed in other states, all in a 10-month period. Those two weren't exactly geniuses, and they had people sprinting around their cars just to fill up on gas. Just 2-5 guys could use similar, coordinated tactics and really put a city on edge.

The DHS/FBI could never be good enough to stop something like that from happening, and it'd probably take them some time to put a stop to such a group, especially if said group were a bit more careful than the DC snipers. So it's not #1. And I don't think it's #3, given how simple doing something like this would be, especially if tactics were refined (makes me sick to say this, but imagine if they used a silencer and subsonics?) I guess that leaves it as #2 most likely.

[Skip]

Possibility #4: They intercept far more as far as communications are concerned than they let on, and they don't advertise when they "catch" potential "future criminals" under guises of other charges and/or investigations. Virtually everybody talks to somebody utilizing some medium.

[snip]

Which touches on one of the fears since 9/11: de-centralized network of "sleeper cells" that could act simultaneously.

Czech minister controversially says: Buy guns to protect from terrorist 'Super holocaust'

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/...market-weapons

[BushMasterBoy]

[CS1983]

Well dang ole, Cletus, looks like we might got ourselves another gone native:

The Ft. Lauderdale Airport shooter is a Muslim convert who years before joining the U.S. Army took on an Islamic name (Aashiq Hammad), downloaded terrorist propaganda and recorded Islamic religious music online, according to public records dug up by the investigative news site of an award-winning, California journalist. This is pertinent information that the Obama administration apparently wants to keep quiet, bringing up memories of the Benghazi cover up, in which the president and his cohorts knowingly lied to conceal that Islamic terrorists attacked the U.S. Special Mission in Libya.

Information is slowly trickling out that links the Ft. Lauderdale Airport shooter to radical Islam while the official story from authorities is that the gunman is a mentally ill, Hispanic Army veteran named Esteban Santiago that became unhinged after a tour in Iraq. Only one mainstream media outlet mentions the possibility of Santiago’s “jihadist identity,” burying it in a piece about New York possibly being his initial target. A paragraph deep in the story mentions that investigators recovered Santiago’s computer from a pawn shop and the FBI is examining it to determine whether he created a “jihadist identity for himself using the name Aashiq Hammad…” The reset of the traditional mainstream media coverage promotes the government rhetoric that omits any ties to terrorism even though early on a photo surfaced of Santiago making an ISIS salute while wearing a keffiyeh, a Palestinian Arab scarf.

The public records uncovered in the days after the massacre suggest Santiago (Hammad) is a radical Islamic terrorist that’s seriously committed to Islam. Besides taking on a Muslim name, he recorded three Islamic religious songs, including the Muslim declaration faith (“there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger”) known as the Shahada. He also posted a thread about downloading propaganda videos from Islamic terrorists on a weapons and explosives forum. The investigative news site that unearthed this disturbing information connected the dots between Santiago, who is of Puerto Rican descent, and Hammad, an identity he created in 2007.
[snip]

More at link: http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/20...-joining-army/

Will be interesting to see how this shakes out.