Olympics - high-risk target?

[klacquement]

Conventional wisdom seems to prevail that the Olympics are going to be a high-profile target for terror attacks.  We're all gearing up to provide high-visibility security because of the large international presence.

However, when is the last time a high-profile event was hit?  Bruce Schneier, a recognized expert on security has this to say:

This is certainly the conventional wisdom, but is there any actual evidence that it's true? The 9/11 terrorists could have easily chosen a different date and a major event -- sporting or other -- to target, but they didn't. The London and Madrid train bombers could have just as easily chosen more high-profile events to bomb, but they didn't. The Mumbai terrorists chose an ordinary day and ordinary targets. Aum Shinrikyo chose an ordinary day and ordinary train lines. Timothy McVeigh chose the ordinary Oklahoma City Federal Building. Irish terrorists chose, and Palestinian terrorists continue to choose, ordinary targets. Some of this can be attributed to the fact that ordinary targets are easier targets, but not a lot of it.

I know that we still need to be vigilant around the Olympics, but how much more security is actually needed?  Or are we just putting on a huge show for the international community while the real threats laugh as we fortify one front and leave holes elsewhere?

 

[Loachman]

Munich.

 

[aesop081]

Atlanta olympics in 1996

 

[Nauticus]

I'm curious what his alternative would be, and how his opinion would quickly change of something DID happen at the Olympics.

He clearly stated that "SOME" of the reason would be that it's harder to hit a major event. The whole point of higher security measures is to ensure it continues to be harder to hit major events.

 

[AmmoTech90]

Irish terrorists chose, and Palestinian terrorists continue to choose, ordinary targets. Some of this can be attributed to the fact that ordinary targets are easier targets, but not a lot of it.

He knows not what of he speaks.  High profile events are targeted, but attacks are rarely successful, because of the security around them.
Brighton Bombings, 1984.  Gee, no targeting of a high profile event there...

 

[OldSolduer]

I forget who quoted this, but it could have been Carlos the Jackal, the most feared terrorist of the 70's:

"Terrorists only have to be lucky once, the security forces have to be lucky always" or words to that effect.

Yes the Olympics are a target and that is why we are securing the Olympics.

Munich, Atlanta should be reminders of that.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Maybe we can trick the Taliban by inviting them to compete in the games.
When they show up we arrest them because their probably high on opium.

 

[OldSolduer]

Maybe we can trick the Taliban by inviting them to compete in the games.
When they show up we arrest them because their probably high on opium.

In what events?  :christmas happy:

 

[klacquement]

In what events?  :christmas happy:

100m bullet catch?

 

[George Wallace]

There is also the option of hiring them as Staff..........Butts Party on the Grenade Range.

 

[The Bread Guy]

If it wasn't the winter olympics, there's always the javelin and hammer catching squad with openings.

 

[danchapps]

If it wasn't the winter olympics, there's always the javelin and hammer catching squad with openings.

I can now see an IOC statement being released as follows:

"Due to a budget change the use of starter pistols will cease. Instead, normal pistols will be used, with members of the Taliban/Al-Quaida to be used to stop bullets from hitting innocent bystanders in the stands. False starts are now encouraged."

 

[OldSolduer]

I can now see an IOC statement being released as follows:

"Due to a budget change the use of starter pistols will cease. Instead, normal pistols will be used, with members of the Taliban/Al-Quaida to be used to stop bullets from hitting innocent bystanders in the stands. False starts are now encouraged."

We sure spiralled on this one didn't we?

 

[mariomike]

I forget who quoted this, but it could have been Carlos the Jackal, the most feared terrorist of the 70's:
"Terrorists only have to be lucky once, the security forces have to be lucky always" or words to that effect.

I think it was the IRA after a failed attempt to kill Britain’s prime minister, Margaret Thatcher, in October 1984.

 

[a_majoor]

"Terrorists only have to be lucky once, the security forces have to be lucky always" or words to that effect.

The PIRA:

We must be lucky once; you must be lucky always

After almost killing Prime Minister Thatcher and much of the Conservative party heirarchy in the Brighton hotel bombing

 

[OldSolduer]

Thanks for the correction guys!

I'm not a deep a thinker as Thucydides. > :christmas happy:

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I don't know about it being a security risk, but I do know it's nothing more than an international phallic stroke and penis envy contest and always a colossal waste of tax payer money. I wish they would just shit can the whole idea, then all those self righteous yobs on the IOC can go get real jobs and leave us alone.

 

[danchapps]

We sure spiralled on this one didn't we?

Yes, yes it did spiral. But you have to admit you chuckled, even slightly, didn't you.

All kidding aside, I think we'd all rather be safe than sorry with something like this. I had a teacher that was the Team Canada Pole Vault coach in Atlanta. He said it scared the crap out of him when that happened. He thought for sure he was safe there.

 

[OldSolduer]

Yes I did chuckle, and more than a little!! ;D

 

[Greymatters]

Conventional wisdom seems to prevail that the Olympics are going to be a high-profile target for terror attacks.  We're all gearing up to provide high-visibility security because of the large international presence.

However, when is the last time a high-profile event was hit?  Bruce Schneier, a recognized expert on security has this to say:
I know that we still need to be vigilant around the Olympics, but how much more security is actually needed?  Or are we just putting on a huge show for the international community while the real threats laugh as we fortify one front and leave holes elsewhere?

A lot of the analysis depends on what group is being assessed and what they are likely to do.  But the greatest impact will be the skew from 'experts' all across the continent doing some last-minute scare-mongering..