On 31 Dec, 08:59, broadssailor wrote:
On 31 Dec, 07:29, Paul Hyett wrote:



On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 at 05:17:27, Kevin Alfred Strom
wrote in uk.politics.misc :

Far better technique than converting our societies into ever-tightening
"national security" states:

1) Stop invading and occupying other people's countries or fomenting
revolution in them, and 2) stop supporting those who do; if we did so,
90 per cent. of the hatred of the West would disappear in time. At the
same time we need to 3) take steps to prevent the invasion and
occupation of our own lands.

If they stopped carrying out terrorist attacks on the West, *we'd* stop
hassling *them*...
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham

Chicken and the egg......
America has long tried to change the world into it's own vision. The
UK has been its Poodle, certainly since Thatchers time, and probably
before.The 'Special relationship' IMHO is something which exists only
in the minds of some British politicians.
I do feel however, that the time has come for 'profiling' at airport
security. The Authorities know who is a 'probable, and who certainly
isn't, based on the intelligence information which they possess - why
aren't they using it?

Because it's politically incorrect. I heard a live interview on You
and Yours just after that nutter. The security rep said right away
that the airports and security services need to start observing the
likely people by body language and by using common sense instead of
imposing restrictions upon everyone. Let's face it, if you had two
guys at the checkout desk - one of them is a ginger haired Scot in a
kilt and the other is a middle-eastern looking guy with shifty eyes
and a slightly nervous disposition, then which one do you think is out
to drop the plane?
By the lack of our politicians actions we are all suffering by having
our liberties constantly restriced.
The terrorists are certainly winning.

McKevvy