Asking USA to help fight human rights abuse in the IRI?

I apologize for posting this picture, painful to watch. Please forgive me, family and friends! But not so smart Iranian political opposition, including my friend Prince Reza Pahlavi, are asking for help from beautiful USA, in order to stop ''human right abuses'' in their Islamic Republic, a regime many of them actually helped being created, mainly by mistake due to their ignorance. Now who do you think might have killed this former inmate, below? Read the story. And which regime do you think has the biggest number of inmates, and which one treats its inmates worse than the other, the Islamic republic of Iran or the mercantilist republic of the USA? And which one has relatively more inmates wrongly convicted for crimes they've never committed, and in which country police kills more people, just on the street, without any trial? I am all for a secular regime in Iran to replace the Islamic regime, but please, it should be Iranians job to do it, and to do it in a civilized manner.

Former inmate, badly beaten by New York City jail guards in 2012, fatally shot in Brooklyn

A former New York City inmate who was hogtied and badly beaten by Rikers Island jail guards in 2012 has been fatally shot in Brooklyn.

FXN.WS

Response to a friend on Turkey and Daesh:

One friend says Turkey may actually support Daesh and only pretends not to for NATO reasons. (I have no idea if true or not.):
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.../research-paper-isis...

A response to Susan Bahry a Facebook friend on Turkey and Daesh:

Unfortunately, that seems to be true. President Erdogan is working along with US and UK for a policy of regime change in Syria and of toppling President Assad. It seems they all favour an Islamic Caliphate that would govern the whole region of Western and Central Asia, and North Africa, from the borders of China and Russia to the Maghreb, Sahara and Mali.

It seems the idea of an Islamic Union has been promoted in Western governing circles for decades.

Years ago, President Erdogan was encouraged to dream of the same - rebuilding the former Islamic Ottoman Caliphate. When he travelled with his strictly hijabed wife to London to receive the most grandiose official welcoming by the Queen and her Majesty's government, bigger than for any other head of state or for the Pope, and since then, Erdogan started seeing himself as the head of such Caliphate. He sees Daesh, favoured by the Anglo-American governments over the Syrian government, as just a prelude to his Turkey's Islamic Caliphate.

It is no secret that Erdogan has allowed Turkey's borders to be a way of transit for ISIS/Daesh to recruit young men and women from the West, and for Daesh/ISIS to sale its production of oil, a multi-billion dollar market via Turkey, which enables the Islamist gangs to generously pay their recruits and their efforts of war and terrorism. It also benefits the Economies of the West and the big Corporations, with the present much lower oil prices, detrimental to Russia, Iran and Iraq. Therefore, instead of fighting against Daesh, Erdogan is fighting against the Kurds who are fighting against Daesh (Islam unity against Kurdish ethnic separatism).

If US, UK and their Nato followers would leave the region and stop pushing for regional ethnic and religious sectarian fights, then Kurds, Arabs, Turcs, Persians, Armenians and others could start cooperating with and respecting each others. As did former European States who created European Union instead of continuing fighting against each others like did Germans, French, English, Italians, Austrians and so on. If the merchant of death stop selling their weapons to the belligerents and arming them, if they start behaving based on a minimum of ethic and moral principles, then a different dynamic would be created, one of cooperation between the regional actors.

This is a big ''if''. Too much money is at stake. Just think of Canada: at the beginning of the year, it signed a contract with Saudi Arabia to sale military equipment for the amount of 15 billion dollars. Right after that contract, the Saudi King Abdullah passed away, and the Prime minister Harper gave tribute to him, calling the leader of the most backward regime on Earth a ''man of peace''. Neither the NDP or the Liberals dared to criticize the deal and to wow to cancel it if forming the government: too much money at stake: think about ''employment'' and ''jobs''. US had several contracts of tens of billions of dollars with the same Saudi Arabia in the past decade and since the state was created in 1920. The government of France is also trying to please the same backward states, for the same reason of money: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, and the Persian Gulf Emirates.

It is sad, but the ECONOMY is the main concern of our governments and of our society, of our social and political system, nationally and internationally. ''MORALITY''? No leader yet to promote that concept in International Relations. Perhaps that is one of many reasons many of our youngsters, disappointed, joined and are joining Daesh As cruel and sad as it is, it gives many of them, disillusioned by the immense inequalities and injustices, disillusioned by our immorality, a purpose in life. They see Islamists welcoming them, calling them for a cause; they see them ready to die for a cause, compared to our politicians, to those better off in our society, just alive to self-serving and for more money.

A big paradigm shift is needed in our developed world. Instead of stealing other countries wealth and peace, and then accept more ''refugees'', we need to be less selfish, to help other countries to develop, to encourage them to stop an uncontrolled growth of their population, and to help them provide peace and comfort and happiness to their citizens.

I AM ANGRY BY THE LACK OF WORLD LEADERSHIP in the wake of Islamic terrorism.

November 13 at 10:31pm · Edited ·

I AM ANGRY BY THE LACK OF WORLD LEADERSHIP in the wake of Islamic terrorism.

I watched and listened for hours many ''expert'' analysis in north American (Canadian and US), also French medias. They are all missing [to present] the bigger picture, the real picture.

When the mass killing occurred in Charlie Hebdo in Paris, President François Holland's reaction was that he was ''shocked'', and he wasn't the only one using that term. Today with the carnage in Paris, UK Prime Minister used it again by saying he is ''shocked'' for the events in Paris. Shocked? Gentlemen, then you must be really out of touch with reality, unless you are the incarnation of hypocrisy. How come I was not shocked then, nor shocked now?

You also hear words like ''saddened''. Sorry gentlemen and gentlewomen but I am neither shocked nor saddened, today. I am angry. 

I said and wrote then at the massacre of Charlie Hebdo that those acts were all expected, any time, any day, anywhere. And I was saddened every single day, for many many years, for the lack of leadership around the world and the hypocrisy of the leaders of the so called Western world.

Closing borders, apprehending perpetrators , ''bringing them to justice''. expressing ''shock'', ''surprise'' and ''sadness'' , declaring ''state of emergency'', ''deploying' 1500 soldiers'' as French president François Holland did in France'', and expressing solidarity with France and the French people, aren't enough and show a complete lack of leadership in fighting Islamic extremism and terrorism.

Gentlemen, gentlewomen, we know the SOURCES of these acts of terror and murdering, and we are in a state of war, a special ''undeclared'' war, sometimes even declared, by ISIS, for example. We just need to destroy those SOURCES. 

But we keep to have those sources of terror as our ''allies''! It's not only ISIS! 

We actually created those sources, if you remember! We actually created those artificial ''Trucial States'' in order for us to rule the oil wealthy region of the Persian Gulf, and the larger region the English Merchant dared to call ''the Middle East'', considering Himself and England as the center of the world. 

We actually created the State of Afghanistan in the mid-19th century by declaring war to the ''Persian empire'' and detaching it from it, to create a ''buffer'' state in order to protect our British interests in India from Russia, and in order to simultaneously weaken ''Persia'', in order for us to rule the region and the world. We continue to do so and to keep our troops in the region in order to control it. We created, thanks to George W. Bush, the ISLAMIC state of Afghanistan to replace a former secular monarchy.

We actually created, in 1947, another Islamic state that we still protect, the Islamic State of ''Pakistan'' by joining pieces of Iranian Balouchistan, Afghani Pashtunistan, Punjab and Sind. A state to be officially ruled by his/her Majesty the King/Queen of England/UK, until 1956, when it was decided that Pakistan's dependance to England should become less visible and less obvious. 

We actually created, in 1920, the State of Iraq when it was just a territory jointly ruled by the Ottoman and the Persian empires. And we actually traced its borders, yes British officers did trace those borders, deliberately in such a way that Persians and Kurds be submitted and oppressed by a minority of Sunni Arabs, in order to create a state of permanent conflicts between those communities, conflicts that continue to these days: divide and rule was our motto. Remember?  We still are militarily present there to keep that state of conflicts. ISIS is the illegitimate child of George W. Bush's military crimes in Iraq. Simultaneously, the same year of 1919-20, we created, with the help of our Colonel Lawrence, - remember?, the even more Islamic and most backward State of Saudi Arabia, an Islamic state belonging to one single big family. All of those ''states'' created by us are, of course, our allies today. That alliance must stop.

Through our ''Pakistan'', which we allowed to possess nuclear weapon in order to control India, we created, in 1979, the Taliban, providing them weapons paid to us by the Emirates, Qatar, and the Saudi king who, together and with our other friend the Emir of Kuwait, own a big chunk of the world's oil. Over 80% of their oil income, I heard, goes back to our Western banks. 

And those allies are, financially, the very sources of the Islamic terrorism that encourages killing and murdering around the world, also raping girls and women in Africa and Western Asia (or ''Middle East'' [of England]). 

Those sources remain untouched because they assure our financial interests, the interests of the wealthiest of us in the Western world. We keep Saudis and Qataris and Kuwaitis and other Emirates as our allies, despite the fact they are also the financial sources of the Islamic terrorism that kills some of our citizens. 

The Talibans were created to fight Russia and its Soviet Union, then. Today, their existence give us the excuse to be militarily present there, and to make sure we control the region. ISIS, Taliban, AlQaida are all for justifying our presence there... Sorry, but you have to realize, M. Cameron, M. Holland, M. Obama, and M. Harper/Trudeau, that ''we'', that ''you'', are in no way innocent in the murdering of innocent people in your own countries, as long as you keep those sources of terrorism as your allies. 

We must stop our own ''creatures'' to continue raping humanity, particularly the women. Stop them financing and encouraging those acts of terrors. We must eliminate those sources that permanently attempt to destroy our great human civilization, Islamist forces that aim to politically replace our progressive secular institutions by the regressive Islamic Rule (Qaida) of the Sharia. Otherwise, in the words of a former French ''intellectual'', Roger Garaudy, a former Christian and ''Communist'' ''intellectual'' who converted to Islam, THE FUTURE BELONGS TO ISLAM. 

I heard Garaudy presenting his thesis about '' The future belongs to Islam / LE FUTUR APPARTIENT À L'ISLAM'', over 25 years ago, in a conference at Glendon College where I had just started teaching, coming from Iran, running away from the Islamic laws there, for my kids. I challenged him, during the conference, and he seemed defeated, as I was sure he was wrong, and the audience seemed pleased with my challenging him. But now, I am not as sure as I was. On that day, there was not much any female student wearing the hedjab at Glendon College. Today, about one out of ten of them, if not more, are proudly wearing it. I have absolutely nothing against whatever cloth people want to wear, and I appreciate when men and women wear descent ones. But I am scared about the message I am getting. 

Do you want a world governed by ISLAM? I do not. I strongly am opposed to the ''submission'' of our developed world, of our free society, and I feel very insecure saying it, and proclaiming it, when I see how ferociously the Islamic militants kill their opponents, and how weak is the reaction of the ''developed'' world, blinded by a politically correctness that is completely out of touch with reality. 

Islamic rule is the biggest threat to human civilization, only second to the threat of climate change to our environment. Both threats are the result of the same acts of greed of our wealthiest people around the world, a result of our mercantilist and economist society. A result of our weaknesses, all of us.

What to do? I know what I would do, what I would have done, if I was the President of France or the Secretary General of the United Nations, Prime Minister of Canada or India, President of Iran or Turkey or Tajikistan,,,, if I just had any executive power to do anything in a larger scale.

Obama Frees Sept. 11, 2001 ‘20th attacker!

Obama Frees Sept. 11, 2001 ‘20th attacker!

Cheap price to pay for cheap oil, perhaps.

While we were busy here with the Federal elections in Canada, I failed to notice that on September 23 or 24, 2015, Obama administration released from Guantanamo prison to Saudi Arabia a prominent member of Al Qaida and the man trained to be the 20th hijacker for the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, named Shalabi.

Here are just some several of the many things a declassified memo says about him (from investors.com):

• "Detainee (Shalabi) is a member of al-Qaida and a long-term bodyguard for Usama Bin Laden (UBL), serving in that position beginning in 1999."
• "Detainee received specialized close combat training for his role as a suicide operative in an aborted component of the 11 September 2001 al-Qaida attacks."
• "Detainee participated in hostilities against U.S. and Coalition forces and was captured with a group referred to as the Dirty 30, which included UBL bodyguards and an assessed 20th 11 September 2001 hijacker."
• "Detainee received advanced training at multiple al-Qaida camps."
• "Other incidents for which he has been disciplined include inciting and participating in mass disturbances, failure to follow guard instructions and camp rules, inappropriate use of bodily fluids, unauthorized communications, damage to government property, attempted assaults, assaults, provoking words and gestures, and possession of food and non-weapon type contraband."

This terrorist is said by President Obama to have been released to be rehabilitated in a program in his native Saudi Arabia.

Shalabi was bodyguard to Osama bin Laden himself, as well as trained to take part in the Sept. 11, 2001, suicide attacks. 

Does that sound like someone who is going to be rehabilitated in Saudi Arabia? Perhaps by returning to the terrorist battlefield to help ISIS destabilize governments of Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Iran, and massacre Kurds, Christians, other ''non-believers'' , also Muslims who aren't following their Islamic Tradition/ Sunna.

Last year, president Obama released from Guantanamo to Qatar, 5 other prominent anti-shiite, anti-Iranian terrorists, responsible for many attacks and mass killings against Shi'as and Iranians, . 

As a former US resident, I campaigned enthusiastically for Senator Barack Obama to become President of the USA, and strongly supported his presidency and his person, so far. Sad, very sad.

Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/…/092415-772691-obama-releases-hi…
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

In solidarity

In the name of Earth Solidarity and a march towards Peace, Freedom, and Prosperity in Iran

I support in solidarity the IRI's Supreme Leader, Hazrat Seyyed Ali Khamenei, in helping the Syrian people and their government who are defending themselves against Islamic terrorists. I support him and the government of the IRI in caring to help Hezbollah in Lebanon and Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah whom I found speaking the truth and serving the Lebanese people. 

I support helping and encouraging the people in Irak and their government I support helping our Kurdish brothers and sisters and their leaders fighting ISIS,. 

And I support Ayatollah Khamenei in approving the recent nuclear deal and I congratulate President Rouhani and its Iranian negotiating team. 

I throw my support to the IRI Supreme Leader in his general and noble fight against Islamists and in keeping Iran and Iranians safe, particularly against the backward Taliban and Al Qaeda, the brutal criminal ISIS (Daesh) and their present backward Saudi Wahabi supporters who are bombing Yemenis and oppressing people in Bahrein.

Simultaneously, I support the Supreme Leader in condemning the foreign military presence and arms sales in the region. I notice that the Supreme Leader do not himself use the slogan of ''Death to'' used by some crowd. 

Iranians should ask for the evacuation of all foreign troops from the region and any region, and for a denuclearization and demilitarization of the region, and of the world.

I also support Foreign Minister Javad Zarif proposal of officially recognizing Israel on the ground that they make peace with Palestinians and with a Palestinian State.

Simultaneously, Iranians should unite and get together in solidarity to implement their sacred cultural principle of Good thoughts, Good Words, Good Deeds into the present constitution in vigour. Iranians should ask for constitutional changes that would implement this principle and also all principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which Iran was one of the first signatories. 

I wish to transform the Islamic Republic of Iran into a more inclusive Republic of Iran. 

I wish for a free, loving, happy, and prosperous Iran that would also sign a pact with all neighbouring countries to form, gradually, an Iranian - Turanian Union, on the model of the European Union.

I said.
August 1, year 70 of the New Era

Ahmadinejad brise les tabous à l'Onu

Article publié en 2011 que je viens de découvrir, moi-même!

LE FORUM DE L'EXPRESS

NATIONS-UNIES: AHMADINEJAD BRISE LES TABOUS ET LES DEMOISELLES QUITTENT LA SALLE

More Sharing ServicesPartager

Shodja Eddin Ziaïan – 3 octobre 2011

Lies, sex and the UN aurait pu servir de titre pour illustrer la situation critique dans laquelle se trouve notre monde, en particulier les pays atlantiques - Europe de l’Ouest et surtout Amérique du Nord servant de modèle.

Mensonge quotidien du politiquement correct, scandales sexuels de politiciens aux mœurs trop légères ou facilement corrompues par l’argent… C’est cette décadence morale qui fait la force de la Qaida et des islamistes que la force des armes ne pourra réduire, tout au contraire. C’est elle qui permet à un Mahmoud Ahmadinejad de se déchaîner à la tribune de l’ONU contre les États-Unis et le désordre mondial.

Le président irano-islamique, en effet, vient de briser à nouveau les tabous à l’Assemblée générale de l’Organisation des Nations Unies, une organisation qui n’en porte que le nom, étant à double titre une organisation des États-Unis, composée d’États qui ne sont pas toujours des nations. Admis comme États membres figurent de minuscules entités territoriales de quelques dizaines ou centaines de milliers d’habitants comme Andorre, Bahamas, Bahrein, Barbade, Belize, etc. (ordre alphabétique) et qui y ont une voix égale à l’Inde, le Brésil, le Japon, l’Iran, l’Allemagne, le Canada…!

La nation kurde (plus de 20 millions de kurdes) n’y est pas représentée, ni les Pashtuns, ni Sindis, ni Pundjabis, ni les Français du Canada (la nation Québécoise). Et la nation palestinienne qui souhaite en devenir État membre n’y parvient pas, car, nul ne l’ignore, s’y oppose l’État d’Israël, petit, mais surarmé, démocratique à l’occidental, et soutenu par la superpuissance américaine dont il séduit le complexe militaro-industriel-financier.

Les États-Unis d’Amérique menacent donc d’exercer leur droit de veto contre l’admission de la nation palestinienne comme État membre de l’ONU, droit de veto que cet État et ceux de la France, de l’Angleterre (du Royaume Uni), de la Russie et de la Chine formosienne s’étaient arrogé en tant que vainqueurs de la Seconde Guerre mondiale.
Que cet ordre ou désordre mondial désuet doive donc être modifié et remplacé par un nouvel ordre pacifique et rationnel, depuis longtemps nul esprit quelque peu sain n’en doute. Fallait-il donc Mahmoud Ahmadinejad pour nous le rappeler à sa manière à la tribune de l’ONU et pour condamner cette arrogance de quelques États qui s’arrogent le droit de dominer le monde et de décider du sort des autres peuples?

Piètre image donc que celle des délégations de ces mêmes pays quittant la salle, une fois de plus, pour ne pas entendre les quatre vérités que nul n’ignore, mais que le président irano-islamique, dont le pays est militairement assailli et encerclé par ces mêmes pays faut-il le rappeler, leur flanque en pleine figure de manière assez insolente. Image insolite que celle de délégués de puissances et grande puissance quittant la salle comme des demoiselles pudiques ne voulant pas entendre des propos qui les feraient rougir.

Si on croit isoler l’Iran en partant, isoler un Mahmoud Ahmadinejad peu présentable, ne portant pas la cravate, ne respectant pas les convenances et ne ménageant pas ses propos, on se trompe et on se détache de la réalité: le monde ne peut continuer à ce train, on le sait, ça ne peut durer, il y a trop d’injustices et de souffrances, sans parler des graves problèmes écologiques. Toute l’Afrique, tout le corpus majoritaire de la population mondiale, tous les pays pauvres ou beaucoup moins riches n’ont que faire de ces convenances nord-atlantiques onusiennes et des étiquettes somme toute hypocrites que leurs délégués mimiquent. Quant au message des délégués des pays nord-atlantiques quittant la séance durant le discours du président irano-islamique, il s’agit d’une démarche belliqueuse d’abandon de dialogue. Ils feraient mieux d’écouter et surtout de faire face aux réalités.

Si l’on croit isoler ainsi M. Ahmadinejad, on perd aussi de vue que, malgré les propagandes anti-iraniennes de certains gouvernements arabes, il est encore plus populaire dans le monde arabe que le populaire président Obama. On perd aussi de vue que la grande majorité des Français, Anglais et Allemands et la majorité des Américains (je cite des pays sympathiques à Israël), et, peut-être, une majorité d’Israéliens eux-mêmes, souhaiteraient l’admission à l’ONU d’un État palestinien (69% des Israéliens accepteraient la décision onusienne de reconnaître un État palestinien, indiquait récemment le Jerusalem Post).

Même si j’admire le discours onusien du président Obama, comme ses autres discours, même si je suis touché par les discours passionnés, tout à tour, du président Mahmoud Abbas et du premier ministre Benjamin Netanyahu, c’est toutefois celui du président Ahmadinejad qui retient l’attention en raison de sa substance globale subversive, malgré le délirium religieux qui l’accompagne et l’entoure: les formalités et discours hypocrites ne suffisent plus en ces moments de détresse et de crise, les tabous doivent être brisés.

Le système moderne de société est en crise depuis longtemps et les sonnettes d’alarme se sont fait entendre clairement depuis les années 1960 à qui ne voulant pas faire la sourde oreille.

Je le signale depuis des années, le projet de système islamique se voulant mondial n’est qu’une réaction sérieuse à cette crise de notre monde, une régression face aux difficultés que le système moderne vieux de cinq siècles éprouve depuis un demi-siècle et qui deviennent de plus en plus aiguës. Il n’y a jamais eu en Iran de révolution islamique comme on dit (contre un roi despote – Mensonge!), mais il y a eu, en 1978-9, en Iran, le déclenchement d’une contre-révolution islamique à l’échelle mondiale, contre la modernisation et la modernité.

Les deux systèmes, moderne (occidental) et pré-moderne (islamique), tous les deux caractérisés par le recours à la violence, se rejoignent souvent comme les deux faces d’un même Janus. On l’a constaté depuis le 11 septembre 2001. Les réticences concernant l’usage de la violence dans un monde qui s’oriente vers le post-moderne s’affirment de plus en plus, mais les soubresauts violents sont tout non seulement possibles, mais inévitables, comme nous l’avons vu avec l’administration américaine de Bush-Cheney-Rumsfield, voire d’autres gouvernements de droite comme celui de Stephen Harper au Canada ou de Nicholas Sarkozy en France.

Contrairement à ce que l’on suggère souvent en croyant percevoir un Choc des civilisations (A Clash of Civilization, Huntington) entre l’Occident et l’Islam, ce qui se passe vraiment sur notre planète c’est que la force de destruction islamique (pré-moderne) est en train de saper les fondements de la modernité, d’une modernité en crise qui n’est pas encore parvenue à se dépasser.

Cela fait une trentaine d’années que je le vois et le prévois: le système moderne économiste, productionniste et inter-état-nationaliste né d’une renaissance rejetant l’obscurantisme religieux, est aujourd’hui nié d’une part par des forces progressistes écologistes et pacifistes, mais aussi par une antithèse réactionnaire, celle que représente le fondamentalisme cosmopolite islamique qui dénonce le système moderne et le combat. Ce dernier combat entre deux systèmes obsolètes belliqueux devrait avoir pour synthèse la consolidation d’un nouveau système planétaire post-moderne en voie de formation dont les contours vont se préciser.

En se niant réciproquement l’une l’autre, ces deux forces bellicistes et belliqueuses continueront à être, sans le voir ni le vouloir, les accoucheuses de notre nouvelle société post-moderne en formation: la société mondiale pacifique d’information et de coopération dans laquelle les États-nations s’effacent et s’effaceront de plus en plus au profit de gouvernements régionaux s’occupant des affaires locales et d’un gouvernement mondial répondant aux besoins globaux, système dans lequel la guerre deviendra de plus en plus désuète sauf, pour longtemps et pour nous rappeler son existence, dans les films de hollywood et les jeux vidéos, mais aussi dans certains esprits affectés par les bourrages de crâne.

Certes, l’accouchement ne se fait ni ne se fera entièrement sans douleur.

* Shodja Eddin Ziaïan est enseignant à Glendon, collège bilingue de l’université York, à Toronto, chercheur associé au York Center for International and Security Studies; ancien rédacteur à la radio-télévision iranienne et islamique à Téhéran.

US AIRPORT SECURITY FAILURE (95%) EXPOSED

AIRPORT SECURITY FAILS TO UNCOVER 95% OF GUNS, EXPLOSIVES

http://abcnews.go.com/ABCNews/exclusive-undercover-dhs-tests-find-widespread-security-failures/story?id=31434881

ABC News, June 1, 2015. An internal investigation of the Transportation Security Administration revealed security failures at dozens of the nation’s busiest airports, where undercover investigators were able to smuggle mock explosives or banned weapons through checkpoints in 95 percent of trials, ABC News has learned.

The series of tests were conducted by Homeland Security Red Teams who pose as passengers, setting out to beat the system.

According to officials briefed on the results of a recent Homeland Security Inspector General’s report, TSA agents failed 67 out of 70 tests, with Red Team members repeatedly able to get potential weapons through checkpoints.