NationStates Jolt Archive

The Anti-Terrorism proposal is back and revised. Take a look by just searching "Anti-Terrorism" in the proposals section.

No. If you want our support, provide the link yourself. Not doing so is rude and lazy.

No. If you want our support, provide the link yourself. Not doing so is rude and lazy.
'sif it would get much support anyway

Haroutioun - check my sig "lazy linking for idiots" if you want to do a lazy link.

Here is your link http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_proposal1/match=anti-terrorism.

Description: The fight on terrorism is not any one nation's fight but a global one. It requires a global response. It is important to set up international standards in security to help battle this increasingly dangerous situation. Here are some of the changes I propose.

1. To secure airports by stepping up both privatized and federal security.
a. Ensure federal and privatized airport security cooperation with each other.
b. Mandatory background screening on ALL airport security employees.
2. To cooperate with other UN nation's security protocols.
3. Require all nations to look objectively at intelligence before that nation can commit military action.
4. Share intelligence with other nations regarding terrorism.
a. Start up the ATIG Agency (Anti-Terrorism Intelligence Gathering) to coordinate the flow of shared intelligence between other UN member nations.
5. UN member nations help fund the global anti-terrorism effort.

Happy?

no, because, no offence ment, but i wish a terrorist would blow up this concept. it seems to be at least once or twice a week, an anti-terrorism proposal comes up, only to be shot to pieces. can you at least give it a break for a houndred years (aprox a few months, RWT)

Here is your link http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_proposal1/match=anti-terrorism.



Happy?
No, but I can see your nation is relatively new to NS so I will go easy.

Description: The fight on terrorism is not any one nation's fight but a global one. It requires a global response. It is important to set up international standards in security to help battle this increasingly dangerous situation. Here are some of the changes I propose. This is a description? Seems more like a mission statement to me? You could start by saying.....
In a time where international terrorism is rife and terrorists move freely and unhindered, we believe measures should be undertaken by the International Community to stem the movement of terrorist cells and to enhance security protocols in all forms of travel between nations. We the Nations of the NSUN shall..... Etc
It is at this point you could add your pointed provisions of the proposal.

And on your points.....
1. To secure airports by stepping up both privatized and federal security.
a. Ensure federal and privatized airport security cooperation with each other.
b. Mandatory background screening on ALL airport security employees. I have no Problem here. Its common sense and practise for international points of travel.

2. To cooperate with other UN nation's security protocols. This I do have a Problem with as it is vague as to be pointless. If my nations security Protocols require all travelling folk to wear bright red clowns noses are you required to facilitate and cooperate in this silly venture?

3. Require all nations to look objectively at intelligence before that nation can commit military action. Where the heck did this come from? Is this not a proposal on stopping the movement of Terrorism? Oh wait we are back to the problem regarding your opening description.

4. Share intelligence with other nations regarding terrorism. Add the word "pertinent" before intelligence. Should you have to provide the information that a suspect’s favourite colour is blue and is a Virgo? No! I didn’t think so. Yes that he/she is a Known activist and the files on what the suspect is suspected of.
a. Start up the ATIG Agency (Anti-Terrorism Intelligence Gathering) to coordinate the flow of shared intelligence between other UN member nations. I certainly am against this. If your nation requires Information regarding one of my citizens your nation may apply through the usual diplomatic channels. Data protection is held dear amongst my citizens and I am unwilling to give it to a group that can give it out freely to whom ever feels someone might be a terrorist erm perhaps?
5. UN member nations help fund the global anti-terrorism effort. If it becomes a resolution, it is funded By UN Nations so this is unnecessary to add.

VL.

No, but I can see your nation is relatively new to NS so I will go easy.

This is a description? Seems more like a mission statement to me? You could start by saying.....
In a time where international terrorism is rife and terrorists move freely and unhindered, we believe measures should be undertaken by the International Community to stem the movement of terrorist cells and to enhance security protocols in all forms of travel between nations. We the Nations of the NSUN shall..... Etc
It is at this point you could add your pointed provisions of the proposal.

And on your points.....
I have no Problem here. Its common sense and practise for international points of travel.

This I do have a Problem with as it is vague as to be pointless. If my nations security Protocols require all travelling folk to wear bright red clowns noses are you required to facilitate and cooperate in this silly venture?

Where the heck did this come from? Is this not a proposal on stopping the movement of Terrorism? Oh wait we are back to the problem regarding your opening description.

Add the word "pertinent" before intelligence. Should you have to provide the information that a suspect’s favourite colour is blue and is a Virgo? No! I didn’t think so. Yes that he/she is a Known activist and the files on what the suspect is suspected of.
I certainly am against this. If your nation requires Information regarding one of my citizens your nation may apply through the usual diplomatic channels. Data protection is held dear amongst my citizens and I am unwilling to give it to a group that can give it out freely to whom ever feels someone might be a terrorist erm perhaps?
If it becomes a resolution, it is funded By UN Nations so this is unnecessary to add.

VL.

If my nations security Protocols require all travelling folk to wear bright red clowns noses are you required to facilitate and cooperate in this silly venture?
wow. Are you saying that your nation has a security protocal that requires people to wear bright red clown noses? Huh. It seems like you guys are almost sympathizing with terrorists.

no, because, no offence ment, but i wish a terrorist would blow up this concept. it seems to be at least once or twice a week, an anti-terrorism proposal comes up, only to be shot to pieces. can you at least give it a break for a houndred years (aprox a few months, RWT)

no

If my nations security Protocols require all travelling folk to wear bright red clowns noses are you required to facilitate and cooperate in this silly venture?
wow. Are you saying that your nation has a security protocal that requires people to wear bright red clown noses? Huh. It seems like you guys are almost sympathizing with terrorists.
You will find my nation is erm, Hard nosed, when it comes to facilitating terrorists. I was simply pointing out the fact that you need to flesh out your provisions as to what is and is not acceptable when it comes to international cooperation. I assure you terrorists of any form are unwelcome in the nation of the Venerable Libertarians and the Region of the Realm of Hibernia. However we take a very pragmatic approach to the subject of Terrorism and view each case of a suspected terrorist group which has been raised by our International Colleagues with a very biased judicial eye. We look at the evidence of each and we decide if we believe what you tell us based on factual evidence. We do not ever bend to the whims of Nations who demand measures be taken simply because they Might be terrorists.

OOC. My personal dislike for any proposals taken directly from RL current affairs is well known on these forums. This is NS, not RL.

You will find my nation is erm, Hard nosed, when it comes to facilitating terrorists. I was simply pointing out the fact that you need to flesh out your provisions as to what is and is not acceptable when it comes to international cooperation. I assure you terrorists of any form are unwelcome in the nation of the Venerable Libertarians and the Region of the Realm of Hibernia. However we take a very pragmatic approach to the subject of Terrorism and view each case of a suspected terrorist group which has been raised by our International Colleagues with a very biased judicial eye. We look at the evidence of each and we decide if we believe what you tell us based on factual evidence. We do not ever bend to the whims of Nations who demand measures be taken simply because they Might be terrorists.

OOC. My personal dislike for any proposals taken directly from RL current affairs is well known on these forums. This is NS, not RL.

I didn't mean you in particular but it seems that a lot of responses to my anti-terrorism proposal are simply against a terrorism resolution in any form rather than the actual acts which that resolution would mean. Though I admit, their have been some valid points which I continue to edit my proposal, most of the complaints are not actually associated to the proposal but to terrorism in itself. And to respond to your last statement which was "We do not ever bend to the whims of Nations who demand measures be taken simply because they might be terrorists" (though we respect that) my proposal to start up the ATIG Agency (Anti-Terrorism Intelligence Gathering) I felt would be a valuable resource that you, or any other UN member could use to help identify terrorists. Terrorism RL or NS is a incredibly complicated battle but if we share our intelligence accordingly we increase the probabilty of catching known terrorists and diverting possible disaster. However, understand that if the ATIG where to declare a person a terrorists and warn you, how you used that warning would be up to you. You could either accept that warning or reject it. This proposal says nothing as to how you should deal with known terrorists.

I don't know what anyone else thinks but personally, I like your proposal. Hope it goes through.

His Highness, King Pimp of The Empire of Homedogs

1. To secure airports by stepping up both privatized and federal security.
You're going to lose support just with that line. Several nations, including Enn, do not have private security companies (well, technically the entire police force of Enn is a private company under the control of Lady Faren, but that's another matter). In order to comply, Enn would have to create an entirely new industry. Which we'd really prefer not to have to do when our own system works perfectly well.
Also, the term 'federal' is only applicable within a small minority of nations, nations that were actually federated. Most won't. Yes, it seems like splitting hairs, but that's what has to happen in resolutions.

Perhaps you could change it to something along the lines of "1. To secure airports by increasing security:"

---
Also, minor nitpick, but shouldn't you also be securing other ports (seaports, river ports, spaceports if you're future tech)? It would probably be easier, and more effective, to just say ports, rather than airports.