[Merged] Attack on NW253 / Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab / New TSA Regulations

[yg17]

ModNote: Since the Community discussion thread has become predominantly about the same things as the PRSI thread, I went ahead and merged these. Hope that's okay --mkrishnan

For your daily dose of WTF:

A passenger set off firecrackers aboard a plane at Detroit Metropolitan Airport, causing a commotion and some minor injuries, a Delta Airlines official said Friday.

Delta Flight 253, an Airbus 330 carrying 278 passengers, was arriving in Detroit from Amsterdam when the incident took place Friday afternoon, said Delta spokeswoman Susan Elliott.

The passenger was immediately subdued, Elliott said. She had no details on injuries.

An FBI spokeswoman in Detroit said the incident was being investigated.

The pilot reportedly declared an emergency due to a smoke indicator alarm.

The flight landed at 12:01 p.m. ET, 21 minutes later than scheduled, according to the Northwest Web site.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34592031/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

[dukebound85]

not the brightest bulb in the room. i wonder if he had a little foresight into what would happen once he did this?

wonder how old he was, 16?

this shouldnt be taken lightly imo

[Buzz Bumble]

Simply more proof that fireworks should NOT be sold to the general public - most people are simply way too stupid! :(

[mkrishnan]

Apparently (http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/explosives-northwest-airlines-plane-amsterdam-detroit/story?id=9423871) the man with the fireworks was coming from Nigeria by route of Amsterdam. So you can take your pick and write it off as the ganja or as a 419 scam gone horribly wrong. :D

[harperjones99]

Simply more proof that fireworks should NOT be sold to the general public - most people are simply way too stupid! :(

So one guy lights fireworks on a plane and this means the massively overwhelming majority of the rest of us should not be allowed to by them? Interesting view.

[aethelbert]

I'd love to know how someone makes it through multiple security checkpoints in two separate countries with firecrackers.

[trule]

I'd love to know how someone makes it through multiple security checkpoints in two separate countries with firecrackers.

airport security is a placebo ... feel safer now?

[yg17]

I'd love to know how someone makes it through multiple security checkpoints in two separate countries with firecrackers.

I can think of a place you can hide them where they'll go undetected by security ;)

[dukebound85]

I can think of a place you can hide them where they'll go undetected by security ;)

socks, jean pockets, body cavities lol

[yg17]

socks, jean pockets, body cavities lol

That'll be the TSA's next move....full body cavity searches for each passenger.

[dukebound85]

That'll be the TSA's next move....full body cavity searches for each passenger.

free physicals! gotta make sure I am in good health;)

[yg17]

free physicals! gotta make sure I am in good health;)

I'm just going to make sure I eat plenty of Taco Bell before any TSA agents have to go looking up there.

[Eraserhead]

He deserves to go to jail for this IMO. That said there is little you can do to stop this happening occasionally.

[aethelbert]

I can think of a place you can hide them where they'll go undetected by security ;)
I was thinking more along the lines of what types of excuses will be offered by the security department at Schiphol as to how this slipped through.

[Abstract]

I'm just going to make sure I eat plenty of Taco Bell before any TSA agents have to go looking up there.

It would get so hot up there, you may inadvertently set off the fireworks!

[ucfgrad93]

He deserves to go to jail for this IMO. That said there is little you can do to stop this happening occasionally.

Agreed. Fortunately, it wasn't anything more serious.

[emt1]

He deserves to go to jail for this IMO. That said there is little you can do to stop this happening occasionally.

Are you kidding me? Of course he deserves to go to jail. Jesus Christ. How is that even something that needs to be said? He deserves 40 years AT LEAST for that ****.

[FrankieTDouglas]

Are you kidding me? Of course he deserves to go to jail. Jesus Christ. How is that even something that needs to be said? He deserves 40 years AT LEAST for that ****.

seriously?

[obeygiant]

Are you kidding me? Of course he deserves to go to jail. Jesus Christ. How is that even something that needs to be said? He deserves 40 years AT LEAST for that ****.

Well I think Richard Reid got life in prison at Supermax. Now just about everyone in the world has to take off their shoes while going thru the security check point at the airport. I wonder BS we'll have to do now after they detail how this guy got these explosives onboard.

[sushi]

Unfortunately I can't find the link to the article that I read. Sorry.

But the article indicated a binary type device. Part A was strapped to his leg (which was a powder). He was in the process of introducing Part B (which was a liquid). The article also indicated that it was more of an incendiary type device rather than an explosive type device. Additionally, they mentioned something along the lines that it was an advance device.

[MacNut]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/12/26/airline.attack.london/index.htmlCounterterrorism officers are searching buildings in London in connection with the alleged terrorist attempt aboard a flight to Detroit, police said Saturday.

The officers were believed to be searching locations including an apartment block in central London, but a spokeswoman for the city's Metropolitan Police would not say specifically where and what they are looking for, or how many officers are involved.

She also said the police are making several inquiries at the request of U.S. authorities.

The FBI was interviewing a Nigerian man who allegedly ignited a small explosive device Friday shortly before a Northwest flight from Amsterdam, Netherlands, landed in Detroit.

A U.S. government official identified the suspect as Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 23. He was taken into custody and is being treated for second- and third-degree burns on his thighs, which he suffered after the device exploded, according to federal law enforcement and airline security sources.

The sources told CNN that Abdulmutallab flew into Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport on a KLM flight from Lagos, Nigeria. A U.S. administration official said the suspect did not undergo secondary screening in Amsterdam, though Schiphol officials say all connecting passengers bound for the United States undergo secondary searches.

Schiphol officials said they boosted the secondary screening for U.S.-bound connecting passengers Saturday, doing body searches and bag checks instead of using the usual metal detectors and X-ray machines. The measures were being implemented at the request of U.S. authorities, a Schiphol spokesman said.

There was also increased security Saturday for U.S.-bound passengers in Britain, whether they were connecting through Britain or flying direct.

BAA, which operates several British airports including London's Heathrow, said all passengers on U.S.-bound flights will now be subject to the secondary screening at the gate. The screening used to happen on a random basis.

[mkrishnan]

Interesting... so this is progressing towards terrorism and away from mere stupidity.

[MacNut]

Interesting... so this is progressing towards terrorism and away from mere stupidity.The reports I heard last night were saying this was terrorism.

[sushi]

The reports I heard last night were saying this was terrorism.
Likewise.

The articles that I first read were terrorism related.

Edit: An example article (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/27/us/27plane.html)

Governments React After Terror Attempt on Airplane

WDIV-TV, via Reuters
Northwest Airlines Flight 253 on the runway after arriving at Detroit Metropolitan Airport from Amsterdam on Friday. (Delta and Northwest have merged.)

By ANAHAD O’CONNOR and ERIC SCHMITT
Published: December 26, 2009
Transportation authorities began imposing tighter security measures at airports on Saturday as investigators conducted searches to learn more about the Nigerian engineering student accused of igniting an incendiary device aboard a Northwest Airlines jet as it landed in Detroit on Friday.

The White House declared the incident "an attempted act of terrorism." The plane landed safely around noon on Christmas Day after passengers helped subdue the suspect.

[Dont Hurt Me]

They should just tie this guy up with the shoebomber with a stick of dyno between both and letem go at it. Lets face it both should be locked up for life or better yet made into food/fertilizer for pigs. Both a waste of human flesh.

[MacNut]

Reports are that this guy picked up the device and was trained on how to use it in Yemen. So it appears he was not acting alone.

[mkrishnan]

The reports I heard last night were saying this was terrorism.

It seemed like the earliest reports yesterday, like the one yg17 posted, were equivocal on this count, but it does seem this way at the moment.

[MacNut]

It seemed like the earliest reports yesterday, like the one yg17 posted, were equivocal on this count, but it does seem this way at the moment.When I got a breaking news report from the AP on my iPhone around 5 pm they implied that it was a terrorist attempt.

Here is a bit better link.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/27/us/27plane.html
A federal counterterrorism official who asked not to be identified said Mr. Abdulmutallab was apparently in a government law enforcement-intelligence database, but it is not clear what extremist group or individuals he might be linked to.

[yg17]

And so it begins....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34595552/ns/us_news-security/

NBC News said it had learned that the new steps include:
Pat downs of passengers at airport security, concentrating on the upper torso and legs;
Physical inspections of all carry-on bags at the gate;
Requiring all passengers to be seated for the full hour prior to arrival;
Banning the use of blankets and pillows one hour prior to arrival. U.S.-bound travelers were undergoing body searches at Amsterdam's airport, where authorities say Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab of Nigeria boarded Northwest Airlines Flight 253 and tried to set off an incendiary device as the plane was descending to its destination.
Story continues below ↓ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34595552/ns/us_news-security/#storyContinued)advertisement | your ad here (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26613008/)


"The extra measures apply worldwide on all flights to the U.S. as of now and for an indefinite period," says Judith Sluiter, spokeswoman for the Dutch National Coordinator for Counterterrorism.


Complete bullcrap IMO. Especially the last two. They're all a bunch of feel good rules by the power tripping TSA that will make us feel safer even though they don't do a damn thing to increase security. Maybe the US ought to focus on why someone who was in a counter-terrorism database and known to have links to Al Qaeda was allowed to board the flight in the first place.

[MacNut]

The problem is how did they not search the dude to find out he had explosives on him. I thought the security checks we do now should find this stuff.

[aethelbert]

Complete bullcrap IMO. Especially the last two. They're all a bunch of feel good rules by the power tripping TSA that will make us feel safer even though they don't do a damn thing to increase security.
From my understanding, the TSA is not making any changes in procedure due to yesterday's incident. This all seems to be in effect for long-haul flights entering the United States, which is even more ridiculous seeing as other countries put up with the US telling them how to run their airports.

[yg17]

From my understanding, the TSA is not making any changes in procedure due to yesterday's incident. This all seems to be in effect for long-haul flights entering the United States, which is even more ridiculous seeing as other countries put up with the US telling them how to run their airports.

Wouldn't the one hour rule be a TSA thing though, especially since that for the last hour of a TATL flight, it will probably be in US airspace? Why would a foreign airports' security care about the last hour?

[aethelbert]

Wouldn't the one hour rule be a TSA thing though, especially since that for the last hour of a TATL flight, it will probably be in US airspace? Why would a foreign airports' security care about the last hour?
If I recall correctly, when they tried something similar a few years back for all flights in and out of Reagan and Dulles, it was a rule issued by the DHS. Even then, cabin crews seldom enforced it.

[luminosity]

Check this out: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/12/26/20091226airlineregs-ON.html

WASHINGTON - Some airlines were telling passengers on Saturday that new government security regulations prohibit them from leaving their seats beginning an hour before landing

The regulations are a response to a suspected terrorism incident on Christmas Day.

Air Canada said in a statement that new rules imposed by the Transportation Security Administration limit on-board activities by passengers and crew in U.S. airspace. The airline said that during the final hour of flight passengers must remain seated. They won't be allowed access to carryon baggage or to have any items on their laps.

I feel sorry for all the poor souls who have to fly anytime soon. I'm glad I got my flying out of the way just a couple weeks ago.

[Eraserhead]

Is this going to happen worldwide or going to be US only?

[mkrishnan]

Probably just for the US domestic flights, flights into the US, and possibly also for international flights to other countries that are frequent targets.

It seems a bit extreme to me. I wonder if the TSA will be able to get people to buy off on this. Nothing in one's lap for an hour, and no getting up for an hour, seem excessive. I could see not getting up during the final descent process, and perhaps the requirement that stowable items be stowed during takeoff and landing (rather than having a stack of junk in one's lap), but this seems excessive.

Usually I'm supportive of the TSA's moves, but with this one, I think there's going to be a negligible security gain, and it's going to be a huge PITA.

[Eraserhead]

Nothing in one's lap for an hour, and no getting up for an hour, seem excessive.

Why don't we all fly naked?

[aristobrat]

So now the bad guys have to attempt to blow up the plane before the final hour of the flight?

[jessica.]

I'd like to see just how far they take this nonsense. I don't think that this will make me feel any more safer than normal. Besides, how does the Bill of Rights for Air Passengers (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7445111) weigh in on all of this?

I'm flying tomorrow, I can't wait to see what kind of BS they pull.

[luminosity]

My view of it is that we should take reasonable precautions, but just accept that on very rare occasions, a terrorist is going to succeed. All it takes is once and our collective law enforcement personnel must be right 100% of the time. That is not possible.

Instead of living in fear, we should just accept certain risks inherent with living and not living in a closet.

[Eraserhead]

While preventing people carrying things like Swiss Army knives on the plane and standard metal guns has some security advantages in that you force people who want to blow up planes to be more inventive and get hold of military hardware which makes their plans far more obvious - I'm not going to buy a ceramic knife for my kitchen.

And banning some slightly annoying stuff like scissors means that the security is kept tight as the employees have a stake in catching people and selling the proceeds.

The liquids stuff is more dubious, the limit would be far less onerous if it was say 200ml as you can easily get 200ml bottles of shampoo/deodorant etc.

Instead of living in fear, we should just accept certain risks inherent with living and not living in a closet.

+1

[mkrishnan]

^^ Why don't we all fly naked?

There's a science fiction writer, Robert Heinlein, who wrote a novel, The Puppet Masters (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Puppet_Masters) in the early 50s, which essentially deals with the aggregation of power to the government and hysteria surrounding a hard to detect terror (in his case, alien body snatchers). In the novel, they actually do require people to go naked to try and prevent the monsters, but I think one of the clever monsters hides in a naked woman's purse or something like that... :p Anyway, that novel has been apropos again in the US for a decade now, sadly. :(

So now the bad guys have to attempt to blow up the plane before the final hour of the flight?

Quel inconvenient! :D

P.S. Reuters reports some new security regulations in Europe, arising from this. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BP0TS20091226

[Eraserhead]

P.S. Reuters reports some new security regulations in Europe, arising from this. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BP0TS20091226

I hated flying enough as it was :(.

[rdowns]

Typical government knee jerk reaction. We are no safer than before 9/1, it's all just an illusion. You only need to see how easy it is to circumvent the President's or Pope's security to realize the TSA doesn't stand a chance.

[luminosity]

I flew immediately after the foiled terrorist plot in 2006, which is when all the liquid regulations started. People forget that they didn't start right after 9/11.

Also, I find it terribly interesting in a car accident sort of way that we always raise the alarms and overreact after something happens. Isn't it a little late by then? Rethinking your approach to a tough pitcher while you're at the plate doesn't work if the ball is already in the catcher's mitt for strike three (later at-bats aside).

I once got a first-hand look at how haphazard our TSA officials can be when I accidentally got my leatherman knife through security a couple years ago. I didn't even realize I had forgotten to take it off, but no matter. I still made it through.

[Eraserhead]

Typical government knee jerk reaction. We are no safer than before 9/1, it's all just an illusion. You only need to see how easy it is to circumvent the President's or Pope's security to realize the TSA doesn't stand a chance.

I thought the US didn't even bother with the XRay machines and metal detectors before 9/11, adding those at least is worthwhile.

[mkrishnan]

Also, I find it terribly interesting in a car accident sort of way that we always raise the alarms and overreact after something happens. Isn't it a little late by then?

In some fairness to TSA and other national and international agencies trying to prevent air terrorism, air terrorism isn't exactly like car accidents. The likelihood that you will be in a car accident in the next year is low, but at the same time, there will be many car accidents, the world over, to study in the next year, as there have been every year since cars became commonplace.

In contrast, the frequency of terrorist attacks on airplanes and airports is actually quite low. Now I think the TSA and other agencies should be aggressively studying the process flow at airports and on planes to try and understand how to stop terrorists in advance, rather than after the fact. In fairness to them, there have been at least a few incidents internationally where this did indeed happen. But at the same time, what they're trying to stop is hard.

Now (perhaps I agree with you) any intervention should be judged based on whether it violates civil liberties, how likely it is to save lives, and (in that order), the extent to which it inconveniences travel. Some changes will pass that test and others won't. Changes, when they are made, need to be uniform and adhered to by staff / agents. In this case, I don't think not being able to stand during the last hour of flight or have things in your lap is really a violation of civil liberties. It is a huge PITA, and I think it's right to ask how likely it is that lives will be saved. But I also think people are unnecessarily harsh on the governing bodies trying to keep the airways safe.

[rdowns]

I thought the US didn't even bother with the XRay machines and metal detectors before 9/11, adding those at least is worthwhile.

That's not true. We've had xray machines and metal detectors for as long as I can remember.

[luminosity]

In some fairness to TSA and other national and international agencies trying to prevent air terrorism, air terrorism isn't exactly like car accidents. The likelihood that you will be in a car accident in the next year is low, but at the same time, there will be many car accidents, the world over, to study in the next year, as there have been every year since cars became commonplace.

In contrast, the frequency of terrorist attacks on airplanes and airports is actually quite low. Now I think the TSA and other agencies should be aggressively studying the process flow at airports and on planes to try and understand how to stop terrorists in advance, rather than after the fact. In fairness to them, there have been at least a few incidents internationally where this did indeed happen. But at the same time, what they're trying to stop is hard.

Now (perhaps I agree with you) any intervention should be judged based on whether it violates civil liberties, how likely it is to save lives, and (in that order), the extent to which it inconveniences travel. Some changes will pass that test and others won't. Changes, when they are made, need to be uniform and adhered to by staff / agents. In this case, I don't think not being able to stand during the last hour of flight or have things in your lap is really a violation of civil liberties. It is a huge PITA, and I think it's right to ask how likely it is that lives will be saved. But I also think people are unnecessarily harsh on the governing bodies trying to keep the airways safe.

But I think it's reasonable to ask just how far it's reasonable to go in the name of safety. In theory, if you want a truly safe flight, everyone should be strip-searched in some way before boarding, or perhaps there could be stalls instead of seats and we would all be required to stand naked in a temperature-controlled plane as we fly to our destination, receiving our clothes just before departing. I'm sure anyone with a few minutes on their hands could think of any number of more secure ways of ensuring a safe flight.

My point is that safety ought not necessarily to be paramount, and in fact we should accept that it clearly is not, because we have to balance it out with certain comforts and requirements that people naturally require if they're going to travel.

How far along the spectrum do we want to go? How far does it make sense to go? Unless you have a truly over the top method of security on flights, it's never going to be truly safe, and it probably couldn't be completely safe anyway. I believe that it's wiser and just plain more reasonable to have certain regulations that make sense but that also recognize the reality that someday, someone is going to slip through the net and cause harm to people. I'm willing to accept that risk in exchange for an easier time traveling. I'm not saying that all regulations should be tossed out and that it should be a free for all. Instead, I think we just need to have a little more sense in what we choose to zero in on and also just (again) accept that we're never completely secure. We accept a risk when we get out of bed, and indeed every day somewhere in the world someone probably never makes it out of bed for one reason or another and ends their life in some bizarre accident.

[Eraserhead]

That's not true. We've had xray machines and metal detectors for as long as I can remember.

I must have mis-remembered. I don't think many countries took them particularly seriously before 9/11 though.

[mkrishnan]

...We accept a risk when we get out of bed, and indeed every day somewhere in the world someone probably never makes it out of bed for one reason or another and ends their life in some bizarre accident.

I don't think this is what I'm saying at all. I think that safety is a greater concern than inconvenience, but I don't think it supercedes inconvenience. I'm not saying anything arbitrarily irritating should be done just to make a marginal improvement in safety.

OTOH travelers do a lot of griping, don't show respect to TSA, and they get criticized for everything they do, and I think that's in bad taste also. It's not fair to them to, on the one hand, criticize them for not pro-actively preventing acts of terrorism before the methodology is even tried, and at the same time, to automatically reject everything they do as too inconvenient, regardless of how inconvenient there is. Or, worse, to blur the line between inconveniences and violations of civil liberties.

I must have mis-remembered. I don't think many countries took them particularly seriously before 9/11 though.

I think they were turned down in sensitivity -- one didn't have to take off one's shoes (unless they had a lot of metal in them), or belts, etc. After 9/11, there were times when the sensors were turned so high that the metal waist button on a pair of jeans would set it off even if there were no other metal on the person.

[luminosity]

But, again, how many of our current "inconveniences" make sense? I'm fine with inconveniences that make sense (running stuff through the x-ray machines and such is fine with me). I'm not fine with nonsense like what is apparently in force now on flights domestic and international, and I'm not fine with the liquid regulations. They just don't make sense. Or not enough to be viable.

If we really want to be safe, we should double down on it and really be safe. Hire an agent for every passenger, or a certain number of passengers, and have them trained to do nothing but scan people during a flight. Go all out. None of this "inconvenience" stuff that pays lip service to safety but doesn't actually improve it and is annoying at best.

[rdowns]

I don't think this is what I'm saying at all. I think that safety is a greater concern than inconvenience, but I don't think it supercedes inconvenience. I'm not saying anything arbitrarily irritating should be done just to make a marginal improvement in safety.

OTOH travelers do a lot of griping, don't show respect to TSA, and they get criticized for everything they do, and I think that's in bad taste also. It's not fair to them to, on the one hand, criticize them for not pro-actively preventing acts of terrorism before the methodology is even tried, and at the same time, to automatically reject everything they do as too inconvenient, regardless of how inconvenient there is. Or, worse, to blur the line between inconveniences and violations of civil liberties.



I think they were turned down in sensitivity -- one didn't have to take off one's shoes (unless they had a lot of metal in them), or belts, etc. After 9/11, there were times when the sensors were turned so high that the metal waist button on a pair of jeans would set it off even if there were no other metal on the person.

How do you think this new rule makes anyone safer? Do terrorists only attempt their acts in the last hour of the flight? If my laptop contains explosives, can they only be used in the last 60 minutes of a flight? Let's not even talk about limiting liquids.

I see a huge inconvenience for the customer here. The last hour is when the liquids have had sufficient time to make their way through my system and have to come out. Are they going to have passengers pee themselves?

Again, a knee jerk reaction by TSA so they can give the illusion that they are on top of things.

[yg17]

Why don't they just put a bar going across our laps like they have on roller coasters so we can't get up?

And, I really hope that with these new restrictions, someone drops trou and takes a dump right there in their seat, since they couldn't get up to use the lav. Maybe that'll send a message.

[luminosity]

Why don't they just put a bar going across our laps like they have on roller coasters so we can't get up?

And, I really hope that with these new restrictions, someone drops trou and takes a dump right there in their seat, since they couldn't get up to use the lav. Maybe that'll send a message.

It would probably be taken away for inspection by the finest equipment the nearest airport could provide. You know, possible terrorist activity and all that.

[mkrishnan]

How do you think this new rule makes anyone safer?

I believe I already stated quite clearly that I didn't, and I don't. That doesn't change my view of the general principle.

[stubeeef]

Why don't we all fly naked?

:p:p:p

[synth3tik]

If one thing is blatantly obvious it is that these rules and regulations do very little. The only purpose for this is to make people feel like something is getting done. All these regulations do in interfere with everyday people.

It's a sham.

[luminosity]

I believe I already stated quite clearly that I didn't, and I don't. That doesn't change my view of the general principle.

My own general principle is that if want to be safe, then we all need to stop pretending and start actually being safe. Either that or just accept reality, which by the way we have to deal with no matter how many precautions we take.

Sometimes, the bad guys succeed. That's life. We do what we can but sometimes bad things happen.

[rdowns]

Lovely (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/26/umar-farouk-abdul-mutalla_n_403943.html) :rolleyes:


An official briefed on the attack on a Detroit airliner said Saturday the U.S. has known for at least two years that the suspect in the attack could have terrorist ties.

The official told The Associated Press that the suspect, Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab, has been on a list that includes people with known or suspected contact or ties to a terrorist or terrorist organization. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing.

[Eraserhead]

There's probably so many people on the list that it doesn't actually do its job.

Its like putting people who let their teenagers have sex (or had sex as teenagers) on the sex offenders register.

[OutThere]

Ridiculous. Another stupid reaction to an isolated incident. We have to surrender liquids, take off our shoes and (now) remain seated at the end of flights. Are these measures really going to stop someone determined. Of course not, they just make flying less enjoyable for everyone else.

What about flights that are an hour long or less? "You must stay seated during the flight, you may not read or use a computer." :rolleyes:

[zioxide]

what a ****ing joke this country has become

[yg17]

I think the hour rule is the dumbest of them all. Now the "terrorists" will just light themselves on fire 2 hours before landing :rolleyes:

I would actually think that blowing the plane up earlier rather than later is better since there will be more fuel to add to the explosion. Isn't that Chemistry 101?

[NT1440]

uh, bathroom breaks at all?

[yg17]

uh, bathroom breaks at all?

Not in the last hour, so I suggest whipping it out and peeing in the barf bag. Ladies, I'm not sure what you can do, it might be more difficult.

[rdowns]

The airlines can give out bed pans as needed. Next!

[Eraserhead]

Couldn't you hit someone with one of these bed pans :eek:?

[rdowns]

Couldn't you hit someone with one of these bed pans :eek:?


Cheap plastic. Problem solved.

[Abstract]

Define "firecrackers". Was this a bomb that simply didn't explode properly?

[bobber205]

Cheap plastic. Problem solved.

What if it was cheap enough to break and form into a weapon!? :D

[OutThere]

The NYT article about this quotes the director of homeland security saying that they want the new security measures to be 'unpredictable' and vary from airport to airport so passengers won't know what to expect. Give me a ********** break.

[Buzz Bumble]

Simply more proof that fireworks should NOT be sold to the general public - most people are simply way too stupid! :(
So one guy lights fireworks on a plane and this means the massively overwhelming majority of the rest of us should not be allowed to by them? Interesting view.

If only it was just "one guy", but it's not and that's the problem. There are FAR too many idiots out there doing moronically stupid things like throwing fireworks, putting them inside animals mouths, letting them off for for days before and weeks after the actual "celebration" day, etc., etc. Fireworks should only be allowed to be used by licensed professionals. Everyone else can simply go to a local display.

[notjustjay]

A federal counterterrorism official who asked not to be identified

Jack Bauer :eek:

Seriously, just wait until one day a terrorist tries to set his underpants on fire. The TSA will respond by mandating that everybody board the plane naked.

[VideoFreek]

Complete bullcrap IMO. Especially the last two. They're all a bunch of feel good rules by the power tripping TSA that will make us feel safer even though they don't do a damn thing to increase security. Maybe the US ought to focus on why someone who was in a counter-terrorism database and known to have links to Al Qaeda was allowed to board the flight in the first place.I agree with you totally. Unfortunately, this will likely have long-term consequences in the form of more nonsensical "flight safety" rules. It's a bit like living in a police state; every time a security lapse occurs, the traveling public is made to suffer through the imposition of increasingly draconian rules that do little to improve real safety, and serve only to pacify the public by creating the illusion of tightened security.

This incident teaches us two things: 1) by and large, we know who the bad guys are, and maintaining effective security requires only that we keep a close eye on them, and 2) the "normal" security procedures that we all suffer at airports are not very effective. I can't think of a single terror plot that has been foiled by routine airport screening; terrorists are simply too smart for that. The answer, IMO, is increased intelligence efforts, relentless scrutiny of known and suspected operatives, and yes perhaps even a bit of "profiling." On the other hand, strip-searching grandmas and harassing parents traveling with infants by repeatedly x-raying their baby milk is pure BS.

[mkrishnan]

The NYT coverage today had an interesting tidbit...

The government was vague about the steps it was taking, saying that it wanted the security experience to be “unpredictable” and that passengers would not find the same measures at every airport — a prospect that may upset airlines and travelers alike.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/28/us/28security.html

EDIT: Sorry, I missed OutThere's post of essentially the same information. :o

[SilentPanda]

The NYT article about this quotes the director of homeland security saying that they want the new security measures to be 'unpredictable' and vary from airport to airport so passengers won't know what to expect.

AKA any time somebody "official" at the airport tells you to do something you better do it because it's the new unpredictable rule! :p :mad:

I propose "Naked Airlines". Honestly this kind of crap is why I rarely fly... last time I flew to DC (2003ish?) they wouldn't let us get up when we were 30 minutes away from starting to land...

[rdowns]

This all seems too neat. The administration called it a terrorist act immediately while they dithered on the Fort Hood shooting and still don't call it a terrorist act. New TSA rules go into effect within a day. Administration talking very freely about this. Just doesn't seem right to me. [/tin foil]

[SilentPanda]

[/tin foil]

The government recently acquired all the tin foil companies since people were using them as terrorist devices... make sure you're using black market tin foil. If you can't find any let me know. I have a guy.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Its becoming crazy, first they let this nut on a plane, then they fail to detect his extremist weapon, then they want to pass new rules restricting all the law abiding flyers. Its a screw job and the terrorist win as far as I can tell. The law abiding fliers loose. It like making grandma take off her shoes. Just reactionary idiocy ran wild.

[skunk]

I find myself less and less inclined to fly anywhere.

[luminosity]

Well, I'm not sure anyone will be taking Northwest flight 253 ever again:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34602186/ns/us_news-security/

[mkrishnan]

Well, I'm not sure anyone will be taking Northwest flight 253 ever again:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34602186/ns/us_news-security/

The only way this story could have gotten any better is if the disruptive passenger on the later iteration of the flight had been Ivana Trump (http://www.anorak.co.uk/234748/celebrities/ivana-trump-linked-to-abdul-farouk-umar-abdulmutallab.html). :D

[IntheNet]

Apparently (http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/explosives-northwest-airlines-plane-amsterdam-detroit/story?id=9423871) the man with the fireworks was coming from Nigeria by route of Amsterdam. So you can take your pick and write it off as the ganja or as a 419 scam gone horribly wrong. :D

I am concerned that this terror attack, combined with recent Ft. Hood terror attack, signal that BHO is not treating War on Terror seriously... we are being tested by Al Qaeda...

[rdowns]

I am concerned that this terror attack, combined with recent Ft. Hood terror attack, signal that BHO is not treating War on Terror seriously... we are being tested by Al Qaeda...


I was wondering when you'd get here to blame it on BHO. Now sit down and be quiet, this is the last hour of this thread.

[IntheNet]

I was wondering when you'd get here to blame it on BHO...

Not just me...

Napolitano: "The system worked"
http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/1209/Napolitano_The_system_worked.html?showall
DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano said that the thwarting of the attempt to blow up the Amsterdam-Detroit flight this week demonstrated that “the system worked.” Asked by CNN’s Candy Crowley on “State of the Union” how that could be possible when the young Nigerian who sought to set off the bomb was able to smuggle explosive liquid onto the flight, Napolitano responded: “We’re asking the same questions.”

Dateline 1871: Chicago Fire Chief Declares--'The System Worked!
Mark Finkelstein
December 27, 2009 - 17:16 ET
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2009/12/27/dateline-1871-chicago-fire-chief-declares-system-worked
Interview with Chicago Fire Chief Alden Brown two days after the Great Chicago Fire...

Peter King rebukes Napolitano
http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/1209/Peter_King_rebukes_Napolitano.html
Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) rebuked Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano Sunday for saying that the botched terrorist attempt to blow up an Amsterdam-Detroit airline flight Friday demonstrated that "the system worked." “The fact is the system did not work, and we have to find a bipartisan way to fix it. He made it on the plane with explosives and detonated the explosive," King said on CBS's "Face the Nation." "If that had been successful, the plane would have come down and we would have had a Christmas Day massacre with almost 300 people murdered."

[bobber205]

Not just me...

Napolitano: "The system worked"
http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/1209/Napolitano_The_system_worked.html?showall
DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano said that the thwarting of the attempt to blow up the Amsterdam-Detroit flight this week demonstrated that “the system worked.” Asked by CNN’s Candy Crowley on “State of the Union” how that could be possible when the young Nigerian who sought to set off the bomb was able to smuggle explosive liquid onto the flight, Napolitano responded: “We’re asking the same questions.”

Dateline 1871: Chicago Fire Chief Declares--'The System Worked!
Mark Finkelstein
December 27, 2009 - 17:16 ET
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2009/12/27/dateline-1871-chicago-fire-chief-declares-system-worked
Interview with Chicago Fire Chief Alden Brown two days after the Great Chicago Fire...

Peter King rebukes Napolitano
http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/1209/Peter_King_rebukes_Napolitano.html
Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) rebuked Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano Sunday for saying that the botched terrorist attempt to blow up an Amsterdam-Detroit airline flight Friday demonstrated that "the system worked." “The fact is the system did not work, and we have to find a bipartisan way to fix it. He made it on the plane with explosives and detonated the explosive," King said on CBS's "Face the Nation." "If that had been successful, the plane would have come down and we would have had a Christmas Day massacre with almost 300 people murdered."

There are many people on this board that think your mind is very simple and not capable of facts.

I guess that makes it true.

We're all pretty sick and tired of you blaming everything on Obama. Were the attacks on London and Madrid signs that Bush was treating the War on Terrorism seriously? Of course not, you like Bush.

[IntheNet]

We're all pretty sick and tired of you blaming everything on Obama.
http://i45.tinypic.com/4hdp1c.jpg

~

Janet 'Mission Accomplished' Napolitano Achieves Coveted 'Eternal Beclownment' Status As Bomber Links to Ft. Hood Shooter Revealed
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2009/12/janet-mission-accomplished-napolitano.html
Beginning with her embrace of the impotent euphemism “man-caused disasters” to the hit job on conservatives and veterans that she was forced to apologize for, to her assertion that crossing the border illegally “isn’t a crime per se”, to her boneheaded claim that 9/11 terrorists came in through the Canadian border, Ja-No has confirmed time and again that she’s not ready for prime time. Today, she caps off her horrible year by playing Big Pollyanna in the wake of the Flight 254. The botched bombing — foiled by a faulty detonator and brave passengers, not by homeland security bureaucrats or any preemptive measures by intel officials — shows that the in Ja-No’s fantasy world.

[bradl]

Let's debunk this whole mess of fail that InTheNet posts (as usual):


Not just me...

Napolitano: "The system worked"
http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/1209/Napolitano_The_system_worked.html?showall
DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano said that the thwarting of the attempt to blow up the Amsterdam-Detroit flight this week demonstrated that “the system worked.” Asked by CNN’s Candy Crowley on “State of the Union” how that could be possible when the young Nigerian who sought to set off the bomb was able to smuggle explosive liquid onto the flight, Napolitano responded: “We’re asking the same questions.”


Simple. Look at where his flight originated. Lagos, Nigeria, on a KLM flight. The whole bloody world knows how poor security is in Nigeria. He got it on from there. KLM588 flew from DNMM-EHAM, where he remained in transit to N. America. Since he was in transit, he transferred to the NWA253 flight, and off he went.

So is it BHO's fault here? No. Napolitano's fault? No. TSA's fault? No. DHS' fault? No. Everything in the USA worked.


Dateline 1871: Chicago Fire Chief Declares--'The System Worked!
Mark Finkelstein
December 27, 2009 - 17:16 ET
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2009/12/27/dateline-1871-chicago-fire-chief-declares-system-worked
Interview with Chicago Fire Chief Alden Brown two days after the Great Chicago Fire...


This has absolutely nothing to do with this incident. Idiotic that you would even include it.


Peter King rebukes Napolitano
http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/1209/Peter_King_rebukes_Napolitano.html
Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) rebuked Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano Sunday for saying that the botched terrorist attempt to blow up an Amsterdam-Detroit airline flight Friday demonstrated that "the system worked." “The fact is the system did not work, and we have to find a bipartisan way to fix it. He made it on the plane with explosives and detonated the explosive," King said on CBS's "Face the Nation." "If that had been successful, the plane would have come down and we would have had a Christmas Day massacre with almost 300 people murdered."

The blame for this would land on Dutch security, as well as security in Nigeria. Those are the ones that failed here, not US security. But you're too blind (whether by naivety, stupidity, or ignorance, it is hard to tell; but I believe we're starting to find out which) to see that, or use common sense to figure that out.

Good cases in point for US security: Do you think it is possible to get that type of liquid onto a US DOMESTIC flight? I can guarantee you that, as a pilot, the answer is NO.

The Dutch, however, have the ball rolling, as they should be, as they should be the primary point in this investigation:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e1e8fd44-f1da-11de-bcfc-00144feab49a.html

A police spokeswoman at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol declined to comment about security procedures at Amsterdam Airport, where large numbers of passengers are processed en-route to North America from Africa. Judith Sluiter, spokesperson for he Dutch counter-terrorism agency NCTb, said that Abdulmutallab did not go through passport control, and that it had started a probe into where the suspect originated.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8430699.stm

The Dutch counter-terrorism agency NCTB said the suspect boarded a KLM flight from Lagos to Amsterdam's Schipol airport, then connected to the Northwest Airlines flight to Detroit.

A preliminary investigation, however, found no security lapses, and despite being listed as having a potential terrorism connection, the suspect had a valid U.S. visa.


http://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/article1331623.ece/Kamer_eist_opheldering_over_mislukte_aanslag


Members of the Second Chamber (Lower House) of the Dutch parliament demanded an explanation from Minister of Justice Hirsch Ballin, given that the plane that took off from The Netherlands, asking especially how the suspect managed to smuggle the explosives on board, despite the reportedly strict security measures at Schiphol Airport.


Perhaps it is that you've drank to much of the teabagger/birther/Beck/Palin/anti-Obama KoolAid/Snake Oil to get anything near credible except from talking heads. I don't know, and frankly, I don't care. But you have to wonder why more and more people on here think that you are and what you post is a joke. Perhaps that (among other reasons) is why you're on my ignore list, but as flying is a second profession and dream for me, I won't let someone like you misinform the people here with wrong information.

BL.

[dukebound85]

uh, bathroom breaks at all?

I got yelled at by F.A's for trying to go to the bathroom when approaching DIA

Next time, I will just piss on the floor

I was in great pain. Do not drink a couple beers on a plane...I learned that much

Though yesterday, I noticed at O'Hare, they had TSA people checking every other person at the gate for additional pat downs and carry on checks. First time I had seen that

Also, was patted down after walking through the machines. First time that has hapend as well.....though they on both arrival and departure, they only did arms and torso...no leg checks

IMO, this security is silly as anyone motivated enough can get around it

Whats to stop people from having sharp tools (plastic/wooden/whatever) hidden in their socks? Or will this later be found out after the fact? I could think of so many more.....

[bradl]

I got yelled at by F.A's for trying to go to the bathroom when approaching DIA

Next time, I will just piss on the floor

I was in great pain. Do not drink a couple beers on a plane...I learned that much

Though yesterday, I noticed at O'Hare, they had TSA people checking every other person at the gate for additional pat downs and carry on checks. First time I had seen that

Also, was patted down after walking through the machines. First time that has hapend as well.....though they on both arrival and departure, they only did arms and torso...no leg checks

IMO, this security is silly as anyone motivated enough can get around it

Whats to stop people from having sharp tools (plastic/wooden/whatever) hidden in their socks? Or will this later be found out after the fact? I could think of so many more.....

DIA, as in Dulles Int'l Airport, or Denver Int'l Airport?

Either way, it means that these new 'restrictions' are happening for Domestic flights, as well as int'l flights coming into the US. This is a bloody joke.

BL.

[dukebound85]

DIA, as in Dulles Int'l Airport, or Denver Int'l Airport?

Either way, it means that these new 'restrictions' are happening for Domestic flights, as well as int'l flights coming into the US. This is a bloody joke.

BL.

Oh comeon, as a pilot you should know this;) Its Denver, Dulles is IAD

But yea, I had noticed these extra measures when I flew yesterday. The Denver incident was a few months ago to be fair however

[yg17]

Oh comeon, as a pilot you should know this;) Its Denver, Dulles is IAD

But yea, I had noticed these extra measures when I flew yesterday. The Denver incident was a few months ago to be fair however

Denver is DEN ;)

It's not uncommon for people to refer to airports by acronyms that are not the airport code so I can see where the confusion is.

[bobber205]

How old were you when that was taken?

Obama could cure cancer and InTheNet would say "Why didn't we cure another disease?!"
This irrational fear of "liberal" policies, even when they're not liberal at all either means 1)InTheNet is genuinely paranoid big bad government will get him or 2)he hates Obama because he's black

I can't think of any other reason. It's like when people hate Sotomayor because of that quote everyone was throwing around. They assumed she was a racist even though they knew that quote was out of context. They were justifying their own racist tendencies. The blatant disregard of facts matches the aforementioned pattern of behavior.

[flopticalcube]

Great. Flying home on Tuesday and my wife hates flying and airport security at the best of times (which is not now as she has raging PMS!). WHat a joy this flight will be. :(

WHat I don't get is that the man's own father outed him to the FBI two months ago and yet he was given a multiple entry visa.

[MacNut]

Denver is DEN ;)

It's not uncommon for people to refer to airports by acronyms that are not the airport code so I can see where the confusion is.Actually it goes by both. DIA and DEN.

[yg17]

Actually it goes by both. DIA and DEN.

The official IATA code is DEN though.

[IntheNet]

This irrational fear of "liberal" policies...

10.5% unemployment (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus.nr0.htm), tripling of national deficit (http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2009/10/us-budget-deficit-triples-under-obama-democrats-media-silent-update-dems-plan-2nd-stimulus/), and the greatest ratings drop of any modern president (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Devastating-numbers-in-new-Gallup-survey-65380327.html)! Go liberal policies....

It's like when people hate Sotomayor because of that quote everyone was throwing around. They assumed she was a racist

What if Sarah Palin said this:
"I would hope that a wise white woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a black male who hasn’t lived that life."

Answer: She'd have been crucified! But Sonia Sotamayor said this:

"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life (http://feministlawprofessors.com/?p=10952)."

And conservatives were taken to task for merely asking her to explain it!

...even though they knew that quote was out of context.

See link above for full Mario G. Olmos Memorial Lecture in 2001, which she delivered at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law... not taken out of context whatsoever... Sotomayor’s quote shows she believes her Latin background better qualifies her than a white male... that is the very definition of racist belief.

[MacNut]

The official IATA code is DEN though.All I know is the place is huge. Takes 10 minutes from landing to taxi to the gate.

[luminosity]

And conservatives were taken to task for merely asking her to explain it!


And uh, that has what to do with airline security?

[IntheNet]

And uh, that has what to do with airline security?

Reference was to bobber205's cite of Sotamayor's quote; I was answering that. My prior post on Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano's quote addressed airline security issue... However, in direct reference to airline security, The Sun has a frightening article on 25 British-born Muslims are plotting to bomb Western airliners:

25 Brits in Jet Bomb Plots
By ANTHONY FRANCE
Crime Reporter
and ALEX WEST
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2785733.ece
Cops fear that 25 British-born Muslims are plotting to bomb Western airliners. The fanatics, in five groups, are now training at secret terror camps in Yemen. It was there London-educated Umar Abdulmutallab, 23, prepared for his Christmas Day bid to blow up a US jet. The British extremists in Yemen are in their early 20s and from Bradford, Luton and Leytonstone, East London. They are due to return to the UK early in 2010 and will then await internet instructions from al-Qaeda on when to strike. A Scotland Yard source said: "The great fear is Abdulmutallab is the first of many ready to attack planes and kill tens of thousands.

Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2785733.ece#ixzz0aworDPAu

[flopticalcube]

Looks like Yemen will be the next front in the ongoing Middle East War (soon to be followed by Iran).

[racers]

10.5% unemployment (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus.nr0.htm),

You can't expect an economy to get better in under a year and jobs are the last thing to recover

tripling of national deficit (http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2009/10/us-budget-deficit-triples-under-obama-democrats-media-silent-update-dems-plan-2nd-stimulus/)

1.2 Trillion on January 8 2009 before Obama even took office
http://cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9958/01-08-Outlook_Testimony.pdf

What if Sarah Palin said this:
"I would hope that a wise white woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a black male who hasn’t lived that life."
Answer: She'd have been crucified!
Why do you try to victimize Palin all the time

[bradl]

The official IATA code is DEN though.

As a pilot, I could give a smeg about the IATA code! :D They are mainly used by travel agents and for air travel, so passengers need only worry about that.

Pilots and ATC use ICAO codes, so I do as well, as that's what everything will be going to in the near future. So Dulles would be KIAD; Denver would be KDEN.

BL.

[IntheNet]

Looks like Yemen will be the next front in the ongoing Middle East War (soon to be followed by Iran).

Indeed!

Lieberman: Yemen will be tomorrow's war
Digital Journal
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/284554
Independent Senator of Connecticut and 2000 Democratic Vice-Presidential candidate Joe Lieberman said on Sunday that Yemen will be "tomorrow's war If we don't act preemptively." Lieberman cautioned about the release the 90 Yemeni who are currently being held in Guantanamo Bay, “I know the president made a promise he'd close Guantanamo because of what it represented in world opinion. But today it's a first-class facility. It's way above what's required by the Geneva Convention or our constitution. It would be a mistake to send these 90 people back to Yemen because, based on the past of what's happened when we've released people.”

[yg17]

Once again, Joe Lieberman proves that he's an idiot.

[Dagless]

It would be nice if these people would stop trying to bring planes down.

[flopticalcube]

Any more info on travel restrictions? Last I heard is things within the US are fairly random with regard to pat downs and bag searches. There was a rumor going around that all electronics were banned on some flights but that appears to be fear-mongering more than anything else.

[mkrishnan]

Any more info on travel restrictions? Last I heard is things within the US are fairly random with regard to pat downs and bag searches. There was a rumor going around that all electronics were banned on some flights but that appears to be fear-mongering more than anything else.

The NYT ran a piece today with a summary of the latest information.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/29/us/29security.html?hp

It looks like, right now, it's a moving target -- some of the changes reported yesterday have already been dialed back or modified in the past day.

[jessica.]

Any more info on travel restrictions? Last I heard is things within the US are fairly random with regard to pat downs and bag searches. There was a rumor going around that all electronics were banned on some flights but that appears to be fear-mongering more than anything else.

At BUR last night out of the 20 or so people ahead of me in line none of them were randomly searched nor patted down. I know on every flight I've been on at least one person is randomly pulled aside and searched but this was prior to the events of 12/25 and 12/27. Either way, it did not seem as though there was much else going on aside from the TSA screeners actually looking at the X-Ray machine screens a bit closer and calling for a supervisor more often than normal. I think it's CYA until further notice as the security at that airport really did f this one up.

[yg17]

The NYT ran a piece today with a summary of the latest information.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/29/us/29security.html?hp

It looks like, right now, it's a moving target -- some of the changes reported yesterday have already been dialed back or modified in the past day.

Restroom monitors? Good god, I haven't had anyone monitor when I went to the john or how long I was in it since elementary school :rolleyes:

[flopticalcube]

The NYT ran a piece today with a summary of the latest information.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/29/us/29security.html?hp

It looks like, right now, it's a moving target -- some of the changes reported yesterday have already been dialed back or modified in the past day.
Thanks for the link.

[IntheNet]

It would be nice if these people would stop trying to bring planes down.

Today's Wall Street Journal editorial, "The Terror This Time," speaks to this issue and the War on Terror the administration forgot about...

The Terror This Time
Janet Napolitano says the system worked. No, we were brave and lucky.
The Wall Street Journal
DECEMBER 28, 2009
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704680804574620931268246094.html
"This increasing terror tempo makes the Obama Administration's reflexive impulse to treat terrorists like routine criminal suspects all the more worrisome... Janet Napolitano, the secretary of homeland security, told CNN yesterday that "one thing I'd like to point out is that the system worked." Yet the terrorist screening system seems to have failed in at least two crucial ways: first, in failing to revoke a visa to the U.S. that Mr. Abdulmutallab had obtained last June despite a later warning to U.S. consular officials from his own father that he was becoming radicalized and might have terror network ties; and second, in not adding him to a no-fly list from a lower-level watch list."

[rdowns]

Restroom monitors? Good god, I haven't had anyone monitor when I went to the john or how long I was in it since elementary school :rolleyes:

Good morning ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to Delta flight # 456 with non-stop service to New York. Please direct your attention to the video screens for information on new rules and regulations that were needed because we had 1 incident in 98 million fights into the US in 8 years.

Before we begin the video, please join me in congratulating the passenger in seat 32B who went poo-poo in the potty.

http://uvtblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/clapping.gif

[mkrishnan]

Restroom monitors? Good god, I haven't had anyone monitor when I went to the john or how long I was in it since elementary school :rolleyes:

I heard you will have to hold up one finger or two fingers, to register your intent, before you will be allowed into the bathroom. Lucky you're not a selectee... they have to bag it and bring it back out for verification! :eek: ;) (J/K)

[yg17]

I heard you will have to hold up one finger or two fingers, to register your intent, before you will be allowed into the bathroom. Lucky you're not a selectee... they have to bag it and bring it back out for verification! :eek: ;) (J/K)

What do you hold up if you want to use the lavatory to join the mile high club?

[mkrishnan]

What do you hold up if you want to use the lavatory to join the mile high club?

I don't know about you, but doing that correctly takes me a while... ;) After the second Nigerian, I don't think that they'll let me take anyone in the bathroom for that long. ;)

[IntheNet]

We are now getting both sides of issue from same person in Obama Administration - it worked/it failed - depending on what day asked...

Napolitano Acknowledges Security Failed in Allowing Terror Suspect on Plane
December 28, 2009
Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/28/napolitano-acknowledges-security-failed-allowing-terror-suspect-plane/
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano conceded Monday that airline security failed in allowing a Nigerian on a terror watch list and allegedly armed with explosives onto a Detroit-bound flight, a turnaround from her declaration a day day earlier that "the system worked."

[yg17]

*sigh*

Once again, the right wing idiots are taking quotes out of context.

When Napolitano said the system worked, she was talking about after the incident. After it happened, all flights currently in the air and scheduled to depart to the US were notified to take extra precautions. She never said the system prior to the incident worked.

http://thepage.time.com/transcript-napolitano-on-state-of-the-union/

And one thing I'd like to point out is that the system worked.
Everybody played an important role here. The passengers and crew of the flight took appropriate action. Within literally an hour to 90 minutes of the incident occurring, all 128 flights in the air had been notified to take some special measures in light of what had occurred on the Northwest Airlines flight. We instituted new measures on the ground and at screening areas, both here in the United States and in Europe, where this flight originated.

Of course, I wouldn't expect the dumbasses at Faux News to understand that. They don't even know that a poll can't add up to 120%

Edit: I actually clicked the link to the Faux article and even they acknowledge that Napolitano said the system worked after the incident. It's such a simple concept that even the brainless morons at Faux understood it, what a surprise that was to me. So it's you who fails at reading comprehension.

[IntheNet]

...Of course, I wouldn't expect the dumbasses at Faux News to understand that...

Umm... not just Fox News there champ...

Napolitano Says U.S. Must Reexamine Terror-Watch and No-Fly Lists
Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano, After Saying Screening System Worked, Concedes That Changes Needed
ABC News
By PIERRE THOMAS and HUMA KHAN
Dec. 28, 2009
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/flight-253-terror-suspect-umar-farouk-abdulmutallab-detroit/story?id=9432139
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano flip-flopped today on the government's performance in the Christmas Day Northwest Airlines terror attack, saying changes need to be made to the passenger screening system. Just a day earlier, she told CNN that the "system worked" and there was "no suggestion that [the suspect] was improperly screened."

And more fail from Hillary & Co. at State Department... The State Department got a warning from the terrorist’s father that his son was up to no good just a few weeks before the flight from Amsterdam =>

State Department ignored warning on Abdulmutallab
Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/28/AR2009122800582.html?wprss=rss_world
When Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s father in Nigeria reported concern over his son’s “radicalization” to the U.S. Embassy there last month, intelligence officials in the United States deemed the information insufficient to pursue. The young man’s name was added to the half-million entries in a computer database in McLean and largely forgotten.

[yg17]

Uh, no, you said that Napolitano was saying two different things depending on which day she was asked. She never said the screening system worked. No such thing ever came out of her mouth. That's bullcrap and you know it. And the guy was granted a visa in 2008. Gee, who was president in in 2008? I think it was your hero Dubya. But I expect you to stick your hands over your ears and scream "La la la I can't hear you!" just like you do every time you're presented with facts.

[IntheNet]

Uh, no, you said that Napolitano was saying two different things depending on which day she was asked. She never said the screening system worked. No such thing ever came out of her mouth. That's bullcrap and you know it.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Sunday the thwarting of the attempt to blow up an airline flight Christmas Day demonstrated that “the system worked (http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/1209/Napolitano_The_system_worked.html).”

And the guy was granted a visa in 2008. Gee, who was president in in 2008? I think it was your hero Dubya.

Two points for both athletically deflecting any blame herein and at the same time being apologist for administration that points everything on prior administration....

Napolitano Now Says Terror Prevention System ‘Failed Miserably’
BREAKING: Breitbart Video
http://www.breitbart.tv/napolitano-now-says-terror-prevention-system-failed-miserably/

[skunk]

Napolitano Now Says Terror Prevention System ‘Failed Miserably’
BREAKING: Breitbart Video
http://www.breitbart.tv/napolitano-now-says-terror-prevention-system-failed-miserably/You do seem to have enormous difficulty with the comprehension of simple English. The distinction between the response to an incident "working" and the screening process "failing" seems perfectly clear to me. You are either being extremely dense or extremely obtuse. You choose.

[yg17]

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Sunday the thwarting of the attempt to blow up an airline flight Christmas Day demonstrated that “the system worked (http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/1209/Napolitano_The_system_worked.html).”



Two points for both athletically deflecting any blame herein and at the same time being apologist for administration that points everything on prior administration....

Napolitano Now Says Terror Prevention System ‘Failed Miserably’
BREAKING: Breitbart Video
http://www.breitbart.tv/napolitano-now-says-terror-prevention-system-failed-miserably/


Holy ****, it's like talking to a 5 year old.

Napolitano NEVER said the screening system worked.

What part of that are you having trouble understanding? The notion that she said screening prior to the flight worked is complete ************ and you know it.

Please, go back to school and learn how to read.

[luminosity]

It's clear that someone here is trolling and the best response is none at all. Let's just all move forward with a rational discussion, instead of feeding a very obvious troll.

[IntheNet]

You do seem to have enormous difficulty with the comprehension of simple English. The distinction between the response to an incident "working" and the screening process "failing" seems perfectly clear to me. You are either being extremely dense or extremely obtuse. You choose.

The Homeland Security Secretary said Sunday that the "system worked" despite the fact that a terrorist was able to board a flight with dangerous chemicals and attempt to detonate them on board; save for heroic passenger action and a failed device the Christmas day flight would have been a major terror incident. Now the same Homeland Security Secretary says Monday that the system "failed miserably" and you're questing my comprehension?

Clueless Napolitano Now Concedes System 'Failed Miserably'
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2009/12/28/clueless-napolitano-now-concedes-system-failed-miserably

[yg17]

Jesus effing Christ, Napolitano never said the screening system worked. Are you not capable of reading?

There is not one system. There are many systems. Some work, some fail. Napolitano was talking about two different systems. I do not know how to make that any more clearer to you.

[skunk]

you're questing my comprehension?Absolutely I am. To anyone who had any interest in the truth, the distinction is as clear as day. You, however, wilfully misrepresent the facts and distort the quotations to support your ludicrous bias.

[IntheNet]

There is not one system. There are many systems. Some work, some fail. Napolitano was talking about two different systems. I do not know how to make that any more clearer to you.

:D

Powerline does an excellent job (http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/12/025255.php) addressing the liberal spin here over Obama/Napolitano apology tour:

POWERLINE: "So the "system" consists of hoping there is an alert Dutch filmmaker on board, and that the terrorist's detonator fails?"

NAPOLITANO: "What we are focused on is making sure that the air environment remains safe, that people are confident when they travel. And one thing I'd like to point out is that the system worked. Everybody played an important role here. The passengers and crew of the flight took appropriate action."

POWERLINE: "The idea that responding to terrorist attacks, rather than preventing them, constitutes "success" is eerily reminiscent of our policies pre-September 11. The administration's spin was a little thick even for CNN's Candy Crowley:"

CROWLEY: "I'm sorry, but if he was not improperly screened or properly screened, and yet you want Americans to feel safe on the planes, and so if it was properly screened and he got on anyway with that, it doesn't feel that safe."

NAPOLITANO: "Well, you know, it should. This was one individual literally of thousands that fly and thousands of flights every year. And he was stopped before any damage could be done."

POWERLINE: "Once again, Napolitano seems to take seriously the idea that the height of effective counter-terrorism is to get the word out after a terrorist attack occurs. After today's lame television appearances, a number of observers have called for Napolitano to be fired. There is no evidence, however, that her pronouncements are anything other than a faithful reflection of her boss's policies."

[yg17]

No, you still don't get it.

If you're not willing to have an intelligent debate, I'm done here. Until you learn how to read facts presented to you, I'm done wasting my time. It's like arguing with a brick wall.

[bradl]

It's clear that someone here is trolling and the best response is none at all. Let's just all move forward with a rational discussion, instead of feeding a very obvious troll.

Very true. And when he has cold hard facts slapped in his face, he has no response or rebuttal of the evidence before him. Definitely a troll, and to be honest, worthy of the ignore list. I'd suggest using it, since he can't keep a thread on topic, can't respond to anyone's post, and quotes BS posts from some obsessive agenda-having blog that misquotes everything.

Definitely worth adding to one's ignore list.


If you're not willing to have an intelligent debate, I'm done here. Until you learn how to read facts presented to you, I'm done wasting my time. It's like arguing with a brick wall.


Anthrax said it best, with their song "Caught in a Mosh":


Which one of these words don't you understand
(I'm caught in a mosh!)
Talking to you, is like clapping with one hand

What is it -- Caught in a Mosh


BL.

[rdowns]

Oh thank sky fairy. We're safe again. Captains may now, at their discretion, allow the use of blankets and pillows in the last hour of a flight. :rolleyes:

[yg17]

Some interesting numbers courtesy of Nate Silver

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/12/odds-of-airborne-terror.html
The Bureau of Transportation Statistics provides a wealth of statistical information on air traffic. For this exercise, I will look at both domestic flights within the US, and international flights whose origin or destination was within the United States. I will not look at flights that transported cargo and crew only. I will look at flights spanning the decade from October 1999 through September 2009 inclusive (the BTS does not yet have data available for the past couple of months).

Over the past decade, according to BTS, there have been 99,320,309 commercial airline departures that either originated or landed within the United States. Dividing by six, we get one terrorist incident per 16,553,385 departures.

These departures flew a collective 69,415,786,000 miles. That means there has been one terrorist incident per 11,569,297,667 mles flown. This distance is equivalent to 1,459,664 trips around the diameter of the Earth, 24,218 round trips to the Moon, or two round trips to Neptune.

Assuming an average airborne speed of 425 miles per hour, these airplanes were aloft for a total of 163,331,261 hours. Therefore, there has been one terrorist incident per 27,221,877 hours airborne. This can also be expressed as one incident per 1,134,245 days airborne, or one incident per 3,105 years airborne.

There were a total of 674 passengers, not counting crew or the terrorists themselves, on the flights on which these incidents occurred. By contrast, there have been 7,015,630,000 passenger enplanements over the past decade. Therefore, the odds of being on given departure which is the subject of a terrorist incident have been 1 in 10,408,947 over the past decade. By contrast, the odds of being struck by lightning in a given year are about 1 in 500,000. This means that you could board 20 flights per year and still be less likely to be the subject of an attempted terrorist attack than to be struck by lightning

All of these new ridiculous rules and regulations about standing up and using blankets and iPods to decrease the odds of something happening from 1 in 10.4 million to what, 1 in 10.5 million?

[flopticalcube]

Oh thank sky fairy. We're safe again. Captains may now, at their discretion, allow the use of blankets and pillows in the last hour of a flight. :rolleyes:

I could live without a pillow or blanket but the need to get up in the last hour is sort of sacred to me. I promise I won't spend long in the toilet! ;)

[rdowns]

Well, well, well. Looks like Bush released the masterminds of this terrorist act from Gitmo to his buddies the Saudis in 2007.

Link (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/men-believed-northwest-airlines-plot-set-free/story?id=9434065)

Two of the four leaders allegedly behind the al Qaeda plot to blow up a Northwest Airlines passenger jet over Detroit were released by the U.S. from the Guantanamo prison in November, 2007, according to American officials and Department of Defense documents. Al Qaeda claimed responsibility for the Northwest bombing in a Monday statement that vowed more attacks on Americans.

American officials agreed to send the two terrorists from Guantanamo to Saudi Arabia where they entered into an "art therapy rehabilitation program" and were set free, according to U.S. and Saudi officials.

[yg17]

Well, well, well. Looks like Bush released the masterminds of this terrorist act from Gitmo to his buddies the Saudis in 2007.

Link (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/men-believed-northwest-airlines-plot-set-free/story?id=9434065)

Can't wait to see InTheNet's response to this, oh, that's right, we won't get one. His hands are covering his ears to keep him oblivious to the world around hom :rolleyes:

[MacNut]

Well, well, well. Looks like Bush released the masterminds of this terrorist act from Gitmo to his buddies the Saudis in 2007.

Link (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/men-believed-northwest-airlines-plot-set-free/story?id=9434065)I thought there were people pleading to release the people in gitmo back to their home countries. Isn't this the reason not to release any of them.

[bobber205]

I thought there were people pleading to release the people in gitmo back to their home countries. Isn't this the reason not to release any of them.

Sigh.
This isn't what is being argued. Gitmo should have never existed.

Right now we're pointing out the extreme hypocrisy of the far right.

[MacNut]

Sigh.
This isn't what is being argued. Gitmo should have never existed.

Right now we're pointing out the extreme hypocrisy of the far right.Maybe Gitmo should never have existed but what to we do with these people? Send them back so they can plot against us?

[bobber205]

Maybe Gitmo should never have existed but what to we do with these people? Send them back so they can plot against us?

Convict them fairly on the crimes they have committed and if they are guilty they go into jail.

If we treat them differently than other criminals, including terrorists that are Americans, is what they want. They want us to show everyone that our system of justice, a core tenet of our Society, Western Society, is flawed.

Gitmo was a victory for the terrorists, nothing less. It did nothing than embolden our enemy.

[MacNut]

Convict them fairly on the crimes they have committed and if they are guilty they go into jail.

If we treat them differently than other criminals, including terrorists that are Americans, is what they want. They want us to show everyone that our system of justice, a core tenet of our Society, Western Society, is flawed.

Gitmo was a victory for the terrorists, nothing less. It did nothing than embolden our enemy.So we either hold them in gitmo or let them go free and attack us? They don't need gitmo to be emboldened. They hate us no matter what. They hated us long before gitmo existed.

[IntheNet]

I thought there were people pleading to release the people in gitmo back to their home countries. Isn't this the reason not to release any of them.

Conservatives have made the case to keep detainees at Guantanamo indefinitely, at least insofar as the War on Terror progresses. That was the plan of the prior administration upon initiating the facility... It has been predominately progressives, Democrats, and civil libertarians that have wanted either Gitmo closed or detainees released or both. You are absolutely correct that most of those released from Gitmo will come back to threaten the United States; none should have ever been released from Guantanamo.

Convict them fairly on the crimes they have committed and if they are guilty they go into jail.

:rolleyes:

Why didn't we have bobber205 during WWII; we could have just sent the Oregon Police Department to Normandy and that would have been that!

They hate us no matter what. They hated us long before gitmo existed.

Precisely!

[flopticalcube]

:rolleyes:

Why didn't we have bobber205 during WWII; we could have just sent the Oregon Police Department to Normandy and that would have been that!

Nuremberg is what we need now. Normandy was the assault on the Talibannies eight years ago.

Lack of a fair trial is a little embarrassing. Even Saddam had a trial.

[hulugu]

Slate's Christopher Hitchens has an interesting (http://www.slate.com/id/2239935/) take on the subject:

No sooner is the fanatical and homicidal Muslim arrested than it turns out that he (it won't be long until it is also she) has been known to the authorities for a long time. But somehow the watch list, the tipoff, the many worried reports from colleagues and relatives, the placing of the name on a "central repository of information" don't prevent the suspect from boarding a plane, changing planes, or bringing whatever he cares to bring onto a plane. This is now a tradition that stretches back to several of the murderers who boarded civilian aircraft on Sept. 11, 2001, having called attention to themselves by either a) being on watch lists already or b) weird behavior at heartland American flight schools. They didn't even bother to change their names.

Why do we fail to detect or defeat the guilty, and why do we do so well at collective punishment of the innocent? The answer to the first question is: Because we can't—or won't. The answer to the second question is: Because we can. The fault here is not just with our endlessly incompetent security services, who give the benefit of the doubt to people who should have been arrested long ago or at least had their visas and travel rights revoked. It is also with a public opinion that sheepishly bleats to be made to "feel safe." The demand to satisfy that sad illusion can be met with relative ease if you pay enough people to stand around and stare significantly at the citizens' toothpaste. My impression as a frequent traveler is that intelligent Americans fail to protest at this inanity in case it is they who attract attention and end up on a no-fly list instead. Perfect.

I think the phrase security theater, coined by Bruce Schneier, is apt.

Moreover, the issue of the day is not why our intelligence agencies cannot, after nearly eight years, observe and track would-be terrorists, but rather what Janet Napolitano said.

Those overly concerned with Napolitano are looking to score political points and are unable to deal with the real complexity of the issue, which is our intelligence agencies inability to disseminate information at the right time.

[flopticalcube]

Those overly concerned with Napolitano are looking to score political points and are unable to deal with the real complexity of the issue, which is our intelligence agencies inability to disseminate information at the right time.
Maybe they should switch to Macs. ;)

[rdowns]

Moreover, the issue of the day is not why our intelligence agencies cannot, after nearly eight years, observe and track would-be terrorists, but rather what Janet Napolitano said.

Those overly concerned with Napolitano are looking to score political points and are unable to deal with the real complexity of the issue, which is our intelligence agencies inability to disseminate information at the right time.

Her statement was a joke and, in my opinion, right up there with Bush's "you're doing a heck of a job Brownie".

DHS isn't looking too good at the moment but the lack of attacks on us since 9/11 say to me it is likely working.

[dukebound85]

Denver is DEN ;)

It's not uncommon for people to refer to airports by acronyms that are not the airport code so I can see where the confusion is.

haha good call:o

[hulugu]

Her statement was a joke and, in my opinion, right up there with Bush's "you're doing a heck of a job Brownie".

DHS isn't looking too good at the moment but the lack of attacks on us since 9/11 say to me it is likely working.

But at best, the statement is emblematic of the problems within DHS and the other three-letter agencies, but it is not the substance of the problem, which is a fundamental disconnect between the various agencies. The problem isn't at DHS alone and the focus shouldn't be on that single bloated glob of an agency.

I'm still not sure how effective the counter-terrorism efforts really are. Are we good? Or lucky? And I worry that Al Qaeda and other similar groups have been so focused on Afghanistan, Iraq and attacking our allies that they haven't made a significant attempt yet. Instead, they may be relying on patsies and proxies to keep their name in the papers, while aiming their operational objectives elsewhere.
Or, we could be under continuous assault and only by happenstance and bad-luck does one man get through.

I don't know, but the story AFAIK, shows that there are serious problems that need to be addressed.

[obeygiant]

Some interesting numbers courtesy of Nate Silver

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/12/odds-of-airborne-terror.html

Actually those numbers are completely meaningless. Unless you know how many times terrorists tried and failed.

Over the past decade, according to BTS, there have been 99,320,309 commercial airline departures that either originated or landed within the United States. Dividing by six, we get one terrorist incident per 16,553,385 departures.

What if the terrorists only tried six times? Then they have a 100% success rate.

[Macky-Mac]

Actually those numbers are completely meaningless. Unless you know how many times terrorists tried and failed.

Over the past decade, according to BTS, there have been 99,320,309 commercial airline departures that either originated or landed within the United States. Dividing by six, we get one terrorist incident per 16,553,385 departures.

What if the terrorists only tried six times? Then they have a 100% success rate.

Meaningless? not at all....whether they tried to attack every flight and were only successful six times, or only attacked 6 times and were successful each time, the danger to the traveler from terrorist incidents still works out to be only 1 per 16,553,385 departures

you probably have more risk from using those airline blankets which aren't washed as often as you would like to think they are.........:eek:

[yg17]

Actually those numbers are completely meaningless. Unless you know how many times terrorists tried and failed.
Over the past decade, according to BTS, there have been 99,320,309 commercial airline departures that either originated or landed within the United States. Dividing by six, we get one terrorist incident per 16,553,385 departures.What if the terrorists only tried six times? Then they have a 100% success rate.

The number 6 comes from the 4 9/11 flights, the shoe bomber flight, and the crotch bomber flight. 4 were successful, two were not.

[Macky-Mac]

Well, well, well. Looks like Bush released the masterminds of this terrorist act from Gitmo to his buddies the Saudis in 2007.

Link (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/men-believed-northwest-airlines-plot-set-free/story?id=9434065)

Conservatives have made the case to keep detainees at Guantanamo indefinitely, at least insofar as the War on Terror progresses. That was the plan of the prior administration upon initiating the facility.......

So it was Bush who released these terrorists? Ack, what were those compassionate conservatives thinking when they did that? :eek:

[kavika411]

I hope they read this guy his Miranda rights.

[KingYaba]

What a ****ing joke. Calls for Full-Body Screening Devices Grow After Terror Attempt. Who is calling for this? Oh that's right. Our wonderful politicians.

Senator Joe Lieberman, a Connecticut independent, called for more widespread use of the full-body scanners after the aborted attack. “We were very lucky this time but we may not be so lucky next time, which is why our defenses must be strengthened,” Lieberman, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said in a statement yesterday.

I'm still waiting for the orange jumpsuit call. Chain everyone in a chair wearing nothing but numbered jumpsuits. That'll make airplane travel safe. :rolleyes:


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=a4fzip9qPK44

[yg17]

Just more fear mongering from Joe Lieberman :rolleyes:

[Compile 'em all]

"As far as I’m concerned, all of this airport security – the cameras, the questions, the screening, the searches, is just one more way of reducing your liberty and reminding you they can fck with you anytime they want, as long as you’re willing to put up with it. Which means, of course, anytime they want. Because that’s the way Americans are now. They’re always willing to trade away a little of their freedom for the feeling – the illusion – of security."

RIP George Carlin.

[rdowns]

I'd have some respect for Lieberman if he would just switch to the Republican party already. If I were Reid, I'd take away his committee chair as soon as the health care vote is over, just in case, by some miracle, he votes with the Ds.

[NT1440]

I thought there were people pleading to release the people in gitmo back to their home countries. Isn't this the reason not to release any of them.

Those who were merely picked up for no reason are the ones that should walk free. NO ONE has suggested those involved in illegal activity should just walk free from Gitmo.

[yg17]

"As far as I'm concerned, all of this airport security – the cameras, the questions, the screening, the searches, is just one more way of reducing your liberty and reminding you they can fck with you anytime they want, as long as you're willing to put up with it. Which means, of course, anytime they want. Because that's the way Americans are now. They're always willing to trade away a little of their freedom for the feeling – the illusion – of security."

RIP George Carlin.

The best part came before that ;)


I'm getting tired of the security at the airport. I'm tired of someone with a double-digit IQ and a triple-digit income rootin' around in my bag for no reason and never finding anything. Haven't found anything yet. Haven't found one bomb in one bag. .... The whole thing is ****in' pointless.

And it's completely without logic. They'll take away a gun but let you keep a knife. Well, what the **** is that? In fact, there's a whole list of lethal objects they allow you to take on board. Theoretically, you could take a knife, an icepick, a hatchet, a straight razor, a pair of scissors, a chain saw, six knitting needles, and a broken whiskey bottle, and the only thing they would say to you is, "That bag has to fit all the way under the seat in front of you."

And if you didn't take a weapon on board, relax. After you've been flying about an hour, they're gonna bring you a knife and fork! They actually give you a ****ing knife. It's only a table knife, but you could kill a pilot with a table knife. It might take a couple of minutes. Especially if he's hefty. But you could get the job done. If you really wanted to kill the prick.

****, there are a lot of things you could use to kill a guy. You could probably beat a guy to death with the Sunday New York Times, couldn't you? Suppose you just have really big hands? Couldn't you strangle a flight attendant? ****, you could probably strangle two of them, one with each hand. That is, if you were lucky enough to catch 'em in that little kitchen area. Just before they break out the ****in' peanuts. But you could get the job done. If you really cared enough.

So why is it they allow a man with big, powerful hands to get on board an airplane? I'll tell you why. They know he's not a security risk, because he's already answered the three big questions. Question number one:

"Did you pack your bags yourself?"

"No, Carrot Top packed my bags. He and Martha Stewart and Florence Henderson came over to my house last night, fixed me a lovely lobster Newburg, gave me a full body massage with sacred oils from India, performed a four-way around-the-world and then packed my bags. Next question."

"Have your bags been in your possession the whole time?"

"No. Usually the night before I travel – just as the moon is rising – I place my suitcases out on the streetcorner and leave them there, unattended, for several hours. Just for good luck. Next question."

"Has any unknown person asked you to take anything on board?"

"Well, what exactly is an 'unknown person'? Surely everyone is known to someone. In fact, just this morning, Kareem and Yousuf Ali ben Gabba seemed to know each other quite well. They kept joking about which one of my suitcases was the heaviest."

And that's another thing they don't like at the airport. Jokes. You can't joke about a bomb. Well, why is it just jokes? What about a riddle? How about a limerick? How about a bomb anecdote? You know, no punch line, just a really cute story. Or suppose you intended the remark not as a joke but as an ironic musing? Are they prepared to make that distinction? I think not! And besides, who's to say what's funny?

Airport security is a stupid idea. It's a waste of money and it's there for only one reason: to make white people feel safe. That's all it's for. To provide a feeling, an illusion, of safety in order to placate the middle class. The authorities know they can't make airplanes safe; Too many people have access. You'll notice that drug smugglers don't seem to have a lot of trouble getting their little packages on board, do they? No. And God bless them, too.

And by the way, an airplane flight shouldn't be completely safe. You need a little danger in your life. Take a ****in' chance, will ya? What are you gonna do, play with your prick for another 30 years? Are you gonna read People and eat at Wendy's till the end of time? Take a ****in' chance!

Besides, even if they made all of the airplanes completely safe, the terrorists would simply start bombing other places that are crowded: pawnshops, crackhouses, titty bars, and gang bangs. You know, entertainment venues. The odds of your being killed by a terrorist are practically zero. So I say, relax and enjoy the show.

You have got to be realistic about terrorism. Ya gotta be a realist: Certain groups of people – muslim fundamentalists, christian fundamentalists, jewish fundamentalists, and just plain guys from Montana – are going to continue to make life in this country very interesting for a long, long time. That's the reality. Angry men in combat fatigues talking to god on a two-way radio and muttering incoherent slogans about freedom are eventually going to provide us with a great deal of entertainment.

Especially after your stupid ****in' economy collapses all around you, and the terrorists come out of the woodwork. And you'll have anthrax in the water supply and sarin gas in the air conditioners; There'll be chemical and biological suitcase bombs in every city, and I say, "Relax, enjoy it! Enjoy the show! Take a ****in' chance. Put a little fun in your life."

[Eraserhead]

The question:

Did you pack your bags yourself? Should have saved someone (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=840683) from the death penalty recently ;).

They also don't let you take scissors of knives on the plane. I've had both confiscated at security (and only the knife was confiscated inside Cambodia).

[yg17]

The question:

Did you pack your bags yourself? Should have saved someone (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=840683) from the death penalty recently ;).

They also don't let you take scissors of knives on the plane. I've had both confiscated at security (and only the knife was confiscated inside Cambodia).

This was from George Carlin's show back in 1999, before 9/11 so there were much fewer restrictions. But it is still extremely relevant 10 years later.

[IntheNet]

Calls for Full-Body Screening Devices Grow After Terror Attempt. Who is calling for this? Oh that's right. Our wonderful politicians.

:rolleyes:

I'm fairly certain one of the primary responsibilities of politicians in a representative democracy is caring for their constituents and it is hardly surprising that Sen. Joe Lieberman is doing precisely that! Bravo Joe! Especially in view of this:

'Hundreds of al-Qaeda militants planning attacks from Yemen'
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article6970574.ece
Times
Hundreds of al-Qaeda militants are planning terror attacks from Yemen, the country’s Foreign Minister said today. Abu Bakr al-Qirbi appealed for more help from the international community to help to train and equip counter-terrorist forces. His plea came after an al-Qaeda group based in Yemen claimed responsibility for the failed Christmas Day airliner bomb plot.

[bobber205]

:rolleyes:

I'm fairly certain one of the primary responsibilities of politicians in a representative democracy is caring for their constituents and it is hardly surprising that Sen. Joe Lieberman is doing precisely that! Bravo Joe! Especially in view of this:

'Hundreds of al-Qaeda militants planning attacks from Yemen'
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article6970574.ece
Times
Hundreds of al-Qaeda militants are planning terror attacks from Yemen, the country’s Foreign Minister said today. Abu Bakr al-Qirbi appealed for more help from the international community to help to train and equip counter-terrorist forces. His plea came after an al-Qaeda group based in Yemen claimed responsibility for the failed Christmas Day airliner bomb plot.

Terrorism really scares you doesn't it InTheNet?

[fivepoint]

:rolleyes:

I'm fairly certain one of the primary responsibilities of politicians in a representative democracy is caring for their constituents and it is hardly surprising that Sen. Joe Lieberman is doing precisely that! Bravo Joe! Especially in view of this:

'Hundreds of al-Qaeda militants planning attacks from Yemen'
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article6970574.ece
Times
Hundreds of al-Qaeda militants are planning terror attacks from Yemen, the country’s Foreign Minister said today. Abu Bakr al-Qirbi appealed for more help from the international community to help to train and equip counter-terrorist forces. His plea came after an al-Qaeda group based in Yemen claimed responsibility for the failed Christmas Day airliner bomb plot.

We must ask ourselves what is the source of these terrorist actions in general? How big of a role does poverty play? How big of a role does "hatred of freedom/capitalism" play? How big of a role does America's military presence across the globe play? How big of a role does religion play?

Islam warms against mixing with non-Muslims 2:21, 3:28,3:118, 5:51,5:144, 9:7,9:28, 58:23,60:4. Islam calls on Muslims to wage war against non-Muslims 2:191, 2:193, 4:66, 4:84, 5:33, 8:12, 8:15-18, 8:39, 8:59-60, 8:65, 9:2-3, 9:5, 9:14, 9:29, 9:39, 9:73, 9:111, 9:123, 25:52, 37:22-23, 47:4-5, 48:29, 69:30-37. Islam encourages war against the non-Muslims by glorifying it 2:216, 9:41, 49:15, or by promising lust in paradise to the Shaheeds who die in such a war 3:142, 3:157-158, 9:20--21.

For those without a handy Koran, here are just a few examples: O ye who believe! Murder those of the disbelievers .... and let them find harshness in you. [Koran, Repentance: 123] Humiliate the non-Muslims to such an extent that they surrender and pay tribute. [Koran, Repentance: 29] O believers, do not treat your fathers and brothers as your friends, if they prefer unbelief to belief, whosoever of you takes them for friends, they are evildoers. [Koran, Repentance: 20] Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends.... whoso does that belongs not to God. [Koran, The House of Imram: 60]


If we don't understand the problem, we can't hope to solve it. It seems to me there's still a huge knowledge gap on what the motivations and goals of Muslim extremists are, and that Western leaders need to come to some sort of consensus regarding the cause and certain steps to improve the situation.

My personal belief is that recent Islamic extremist terrorism is due to a combination of things... I think that by significantly reducing our military presence abroad, being honest about some of the more frightening teachings of Islam [above], and curbing our meddling in other countries' affairs it would go a long way towards improvement. This is not to say that it is 'our fault'. Far from it. Only to say that easiest and most effective way to improve things going forward, may be to fix the things in our own back yard.

[IntheNet]

We must ask ourselves what is the source of these terrorist actions in general? How big of a role does poverty play? How big of a role does "hatred of freedom/capitalism" play? How big of a role does America's military presence across the globe play? How big of a role does religion play?

I agree with all that; but in the interim we need to protect our citizens as a sovereign nation.

Terrorism really scares you...

Should it?

http://i45.tinypic.com/21pvud.jpg

[yg17]

Should it?



Courtesy of Gizmodo:
http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/12/500x_odds-of-airborne-terror2.jpg

If terrorism scares you, then you might as well not get into a car since you have a much greater chance of dying in a car crash than a terrorist attack. Hell, you might as well just not go out of your house at all.

Death tolls aren't what the terrorists are looking for. They just want to scare Americans, which people like you are helping them succeed at. The best thing we could've done after the crotch bombing incident is to try the guy like any other criminal picked off the streets and not changed one goddamn thing about aviation security.

[fivepoint]

Courtesy of Gizmodo:

Excellent imagery. Very important for everyone to keep things in context! It's such an easy thing to get worked-up over. Reminds me of the gigantic window-shade recall we heard about a few weeks ago because a few babies had been strangled. Why not recall all stairs because grandma fell down them? Or how about chicken because too many dogs choke on the bones?

That being said, I think we can all agree that it's worth while to put in place common-sense deterrents/protections against these actions in the future... and that better understanding the terrorists' motivations is very important.

[Eraserhead]

^^ You've missed the elephant in the room of reasons for Islamic terrorism. Palestine.

[bobber205]

I agree with all that; but in the interim we need to protect our citizens as a sovereign nation.



Should it?

http://i45.tinypic.com/21pvud.jpg

No it doesn't scare me like the boogeyman doesn't. I am worried about it but not scared. When you're scared you don't think logically.

If terrorism scares you then the terrorists have won.

That's their whole goal!

[IntheNet]

If terrorism scares you, then you might as well not get into a car since you have a much greater chance of dying in a car crash than a terrorist attack.

Such absurd thinking... thank God rational folks don't rely on your Vegas "odds" justification. Instead rational people assess verified threats to national security and assign competent military and civilian counter-terrorism expertise to address these threats. To those Americans that have already died from terrorism, along with those Americans, civilian and military, that bravely serve in anti-terrorism roles, we owe and our indebted for our security.

[djellison]

I don't care what security they put in place or what terrorists do. I WILL conduct the air travel I need to. I WILL go to the places I want to. I WILL NOT let the terrorists win.

[yg17]

Such absurd thinking... thank God rational folks don't rely on your Vegas "odds" justification. Instead rational people assess verified threats to national security and assign competent military and civilian counter-terrorism expertise to address these threats. To those Americans that have already died from terrorism, along with those Americans, civilian and military, that bravely serve in anti-terrorism roles, we owe and our indebted for our security.

I'd estimate that approximately 5,000-6,000 Americans have died as a result of terrorism (and that's including victims from our own homegrown terrorists like Timothy McVeigh) since this country was founded. Meanwhile, 40,000 die each year from car accidents. And you're trying to tell me that terrorism is the bigger threat? What about the Americans who have died from a car crash, do we owe them anything?

Based off those numbers, we should be encouraging people to fly everywhere instead of driving as an alternative.

[dmr727]

Based off those numbers, we should be encouraging people to fly everywhere instead of driving as an alternative.

That's fine with me! :D

[IntheNet]

And you're trying to tell me that terrorism is the bigger threat?

If you sit down and list them all we face lots of threats... disease, crime, unemployment, domestic terrorism, international terrorism, nuclear proliferation, etc. etc. etc. Some of these threats government can protect us from and some we need to take our own personal protection. What you're talking about - car accidents - is a threat we protect ourselves from by driving carefully, wearing seat belts, etc. International terrorism is what our government addresses. Other threats are handled and addressed by local and state governments. In terms of airline travel, international terrorism is a great threat. Government should help address that.

Are you objecting to that?

[BoyBach]

What a ****ing joke. Calls for Full-Body Screening Devices Grow After Terror Attempt. Who is calling for this? Oh that's right. Our wonderful politicians.



I'm still waiting for the orange jumpsuit call. Chain everyone in a chair wearing nothing but numbered jumpsuits. That'll make airplane travel safe. :rolleyes:


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=a4fzip9qPK44


Presumably Lieberman has some incentive (financial or otherwise) with these scanners being implemented across the US?

[aethelbert]

That's fine with me! :D
Hey dmr727, I need to go to the grocery store. Can you pick me up in, say, five minutes? I'm afraid of streets.

[yg17]

If you sit down and list them all we face lots of threats... disease, crime, unemployment, domestic terrorism, international terrorism, nuclear proliferation, etc. etc. etc. Some of these threats government can protect us from and some we need to take our own personal protection. What you're talking about - car accidents - is a threat we protect ourselves from by driving carefully, wearing seat belts, etc. International terrorism is what our government addresses. Other threats are handled and addressed by local and state governments. In terms of airline travel, international terrorism is a great threat. Government should help address that.

Are you objecting to that?

I'm not sure if I would call 4 successful terrorist attempts out of nearly 100,000,000 flights in 10 years a "great threat"

I think it's about equal with the chances of pilot error or mechanical failure, in fact, perhaps not even as big of a threat as those. In 10 years, just off the top of my head, fatal accidents coming to or leaving the US, we have the Alaskan Airlines crash off the coast of CA, Concorde, the AA crash in Queens, the Delta RJ crash in KY, the Continental crash in Buffalo.

That's 5, sounds like bad pilots, bad maintenance crews and poor aircraft design are bigger threats.

[dmr727]

Hey dmr727, I need to go to the grocery store. Can you pick me up in, say, five minutes? I'm afraid of streets.

No problem. I just need someone to clear about 5,000 straight feet of open area in front of the grocery store, and we'll be all set!

[IntheNet]

In 10 years, just off the top of my head, fatal accidents coming to or leaving the US...

If you're not worried about terrorism affecting air travel then good for you... be sure to fly a lot internationally and domestically, make certain to sit next to any young Middle East travelers you might see (especially if they are male and have Al Qaeda affections), and put up a brave front in public and proclaim on your own that terrorism is not a problem! Don't get frustrated, however, if the rest of us want our Government to address this issue with more concern...

[BoyBach]

No problem. I just need someone to clear about 5,000 straight feet of open area in front of the grocery store, and we'll be all set!


Why not take advantage of their home delivery service? :D

208966

[yg17]

If you're not worried about terrorism affecting air travel then good for you... be sure to fly a lot internationally and domestically, make certain to sit next to any young Middle East travelers you might see (especially if they are male and have Al Qaeda affections), and put up a brave front in public and proclaim on your own that terrorism is not a problem! Don't get frustrated, however, if the rest of us want our Government to address this issue with more concern...

Statistically speaking, the pilot is just as likely to do something stupid as a random middle eastern person on the plane, so no, I'm not worried about terrorism.

Most people don't even think twice about the people in the cockpit. They could be tired and overworked. They could be bad at their job. Hell, they could even be drunk and I bet 99% of the passengers never even think about that possibility. So why worry about the middle eastern guy on the plane?

[aethelbert]

make certain to sit next to any young Middle East travelers you might see
What does that have to do with anything? Not all Middle Easterners are terrorists, not all terrorists are Middle Easterners (as seen Friday). Maybe I should now fear black people on aircraft as well?

Why not take advantage of their home delivery service? :D
Hmm, that might work better. I'll PM you my grocery list and you can drop the goods over my building. Thanks in advance!

[Macky-Mac]

If you're not worried about terrorism affecting air travel then good for you... be sure to fly a lot internationally and domestically, make certain to sit next to any young Middle East travelers you might see (especially if they are male and have Al Qaeda affections), and put up a brave front in public and proclaim on your own that terrorism is not a problem! Don't get frustrated, however, if the rest of us want our Government to address this issue with more concern...

male with Al Qaeda affections? :D

you make flying sound like a dating service

[yg17]

What does that have to do with anything? Not all Middle Easterners are terrorists, not all terrorists are Middle Easterners (as seen Friday).

Hell, not all terrorists are dark skinned either. Who's to say that white guy sitting next to you doesn't have something planned.

0.000004027373697%

That's the percentage of flights in the past 10 years that have been downed by a terrorist attack. No, I'm not worried. Not in the least bit.

[jb1280]

If you're not worried about terrorism affecting air travel then good for you... be sure to fly a lot internationally and domestically, make certain to sit next to any young Middle East travelers you might see (especially if they are male and have Al Qaeda affections), and put up a brave front in public and proclaim on your own that terrorism is not a problem! Don't get frustrated, however, if the rest of us want our Government to address this issue with more concern...

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/12/odds-of-airborne-terror.html
Therefore, the odds of being on given departure which is the subject of a terrorist incident have been 1 in 10,408,947 over the past decade. By contrast, the odds of being struck by lightning in a given year are about 1 in 500,000. This means that you could board 20 flights per year and still be less likely to be the subject of an attempted terrorist attack than to be struck by lightning.

You are such a fraud and someone who has already been defeated by the terrorists.

I am on roughly 25 return trips to the US via Schiphol per annum and have not had any major concerns about a terror attack.

I could get killed by a loose bus at SFO waiting for a taxi or something, or slip on a piece of ice.

The fact is that it is actually quite amazing the number of flights per day that cross the Atlantic that have no incidents - whether terror, mechanical, or human error.

Getting on any flight means that you assume a certain amount of risk. How many planes have been brought down by Al Qaeda in the last 20 years compared to those brought down by weather/pilot error/mechanical issues?

One is to be vigilant, and the fact that passengers are now aware that things like this take place means that we are in fact safer on flights.

There are also things that can be done to streamline information sharing and consular issues with individuals who are of concern.

Anecdotally, the last time I flew from AMS to DTW I sat next to a Pakistani guy who did not try to blow up the aircraft.

It's funny how those who most likely don't even carry a passport are those who are most likely to be most concerned about an incident such as this one.

[IntheNet]

You are such a fraud and someone who has already been defeated by the terrorists. So you're against Barry from DC on this issue?

Because Barry said today that a "systemic failure" occurred and, in direct opposition to his Homeland Security Chief, admitted that this "systemic failure" led to a "catastrophic breach of security." We Americans expect the president to address the security situation that threaten the citizens and sometime promptly, fire clueless Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano!

Obama Says 'Catastrophic Breach' Led to Bomb Plot
By ELIZABETH WILLIAMSON
The Wall Street Journal
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126212276274109385.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories
HONOLULU -- President Barack Obama on Tuesday said a "catastrophic breach" of security led to the Christmas Day attempted bombing on a Detroit-bound airplane. "A systemic failure has occurred and I consider that totally unacceptable. There was a mix of human and systemic failure that contributed to this catastrophic breach of security," he said.

[rdowns]

With the Republicans (Jm DeMint specifically) holding up confirmation of a TSA Director due to political reasons, you have to wonder what responsibility they have in this breach. If terrorism is so important, then the jobs that directly effect fighting them need to be a hell of a lot less political.

[yg17]

So you're against Barry from DC on this issue?

Because Barry said today that a "systemic failure" occurred and, in direct opposition to his Homeland Security Chief, admitted that this "systemic failure" led to a "catastrophic breach of security." We Americans expect the president to address the security situation that threaten the citizens and sometime promptly, fire clueless Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano!

Obama Says 'Catastrophic Breach' Led to Bomb Plot
By ELIZABETH WILLIAMSON
The Wall Street Journal
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126212276274109385.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories
HONOLULU -- President Barack Obama on Tuesday said a "catastrophic breach" of security led to the Christmas Day attempted bombing on a Detroit-bound airplane. "A systemic failure has occurred and I consider that totally unacceptable. There was a mix of human and systemic failure that contributed to this catastrophic breach of security," he said.

Oh jesus, not this again.

Napolitano never said that the system leading up to the incident worked. She and Obama both agreed that it failed.

[leekohler]

Oh jesus, not this again.

Napolitano never said that the system leading up to the incident worked. She and Obama both agreed that it failed.

He'll just keep saying it. I wouldn't bother replying.

[hulugu]

What does that have to do with anything? Not all Middle Easterners are terrorists, not all terrorists are Middle Easterners (as seen Friday). Maybe I should now fear black people on aircraft as well?

You should, apparently, be completely scared out of your mind if someone of vague Middle Eastern-decent sits next to you, this is how we defeat terrorism.

I don't care if he's Tony Shalhoub. Start crying, because "Monk" is going to kill you. With a crotch bomb.

And, again, I'd like to direct the conservation away from Napoltano's statement and toward how the national security apparatus failed (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/28/AR2009122800582_2.html?nav=rss_email/components&sid=ST2009122802585):

...The next day, under a program called Visa Viper, mandated by Congress to ensure all terrorism-related information is promptly reported to Washington, the embassy sent a cable saying the father was "concerned that his son was falling under the influence of religious extremists in Yemen," a State Department official said.

The State Department, under existing procedures, passed the Viper information to the National Counterterrorism Center for entry in its terrorism database. Neither the State Department nor the NCTC, officials said Monday, checked to see if Abdulmutallab had ever entered the United States or had a valid entry visa -- information readily available in separate consular and immigration databases. "It's not for us to review that," the State Department official said.

According to the Department of Homeland Security, Abdulmutallab has twice obtained U.S. visas, and before this month had visited the United States once in 2004 and once in 2008.

An intelligence official said that because Abdulmutallab had not previously been entered into the system as a terrorism suspect, procedures did not include such checks. Administration officials said these apparent gaps are among those to be studied in the review Obama has ordered....

[IntheNet]

Napolitano never said that the system leading up to the incident worked. She and Obama both agreed that it failed.

You can apologize for them all you want but verbatim quotes last forever.

Analysis: Many question 'system worked' comment
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091229/D9CT6TE80.html
"The system worked," Napolitano declared on CNN during questioning about the lapses that let Abdulmutallab and his devices onto the plane. Gibbs used nearly the same language on CBS, saying that "in many ways, this system has worked," without elaborating. Later that same day, Napolitano put it differently on ABC, saying "once the incident occurred, the system worked."

With the Republicans (Jm DeMint specifically) holding up confirmation of a TSA Director due to political reasons...

Actually Sen. Jim DeMint is right to be concerned about unionization at the TSA; as soon as the administration's nominee promises not to unionize TSA staff I am sure the Senator will release his objections...

[rdowns]

Actually Sen. Jim DeMint is right to be concerned about unionization at the TSA; as soon as the administration's nominee promises not to unionize TSA staff I am sure the Senator will release his objections...


So you're OK with playing politics with the security of our country. How nice.

[IntheNet]

So you're OK with playing politics with the security of our country.

Democrats did it for eight years; it's our turn now!

:D

[yg17]

You can apologize for them all you want but verbatim quotes last forever.

Analysis: Many question 'system worked' comment
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091229/D9CT6TE80.html
"The system worked," Napolitano declared on CNN during questioning about the lapses that let Abdulmutallab and his devices onto the plane. Gibbs used nearly the same language on CBS, saying that "in many ways, this system has worked," without elaborating. Later that same day, Napolitano put it differently on ABC, saying "once the incident occurred, the system worked."

At no point did they say the system leading up to the departure of the flight worked. You can spin it, and take the quote out of context all you want, but the fact of the matter is, you're lying and you know it. Either cut the crap and engage in a real, truthful debate, or get out of PRSI.

[IntheNet]

At no point did they say the system leading up to the departure of the flight worked. You can spin it...

Note link to story and quotes...

Analysis: Many question 'system worked' comment
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091229/D9CT6TE80.html
"The system worked," Napolitano declared on CNN during questioning about the lapses that let Abdulmutallab and his devices onto the plane. Gibbs used nearly the same language on CBS, saying that "in many ways, this system has worked," without elaborating. Later that same day, Napolitano put it differently on ABC, saying "once the incident occurred, the system worked."

[yg17]

Note link to story and quotes...

Analysis: Many question 'system worked' comment
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091229/D9CT6TE80.html
"The system worked," Napolitano declared on CNN during questioning about the lapses that let Abdulmutallab and his devices onto the plane. Gibbs used nearly the same language on CBS, saying that "in many ways, this system has worked," without elaborating. Later that same day, Napolitano put it differently on ABC, saying "once the incident occurred, the system worked."

You bolded the very part of the quote that proves you wrong. After the incident occurred, the system worked. It is clear as day and only an ignoramus would think differently.

[IntheNet]

the system worked.

Please explain to me HOW THE SYSTEM WORKED?

The Yemen jihad terrorist was able to board a plane and carry explosives on a US aircraft over US airspace. The only thing that prevented this jihad terrorist from detonating referenced "crotch bomb" was a failed device and another passenger who tackled this terrorist. Is the SYSTEM that clueless Napolitano references WORKING fellow passengers who tackle terrorists and failed devices?

Please explain to me HOW THE SYSTEM WORKED?

After the incident occurred...

Can't she admit it was a terrorist act? It wasn't an "incident" but an attempted terror attack! And besides, who cares what happened after; what's she doing to prevent it?

[yg17]

Please explain to me HOW THE SYSTEM WORKED?

The Yemen jihad terrorist was able to board a plane and carry explosives on a US aircraft over US airspace. The only thing that prevented this jihad terrorist from detonating referenced "crotch bomb" was a failed device and another passenger who tackled this terrorist. Is the SYSTEM that clueless Napolitano references WORKING fellow passengers who tackle terrorists and failed devices?

Please explain to me HOW THE SYSTEM WORKED?

The system that worked was the system that notified other airplanes en route to the US, and other airports of what happened and to take extra precautions and to increase security measures. That is the system she was talking about. This has been explained to you a thousand ***** times now and you keep ignoring it.

[IntheNet]

The system that worked was the system that notified other airplanes en route to the US, and other airports of what happened and to take extra precautions and to increase security measures. That is the system she was talking about...

What about THE SYSTEM she's suppose to be responsible for that prevents jihadi terrorists from getting on airplanes? Any chance she'll get around to fixing THAT SYSTEM? We were warned today that Yemen has 300 crotch-bombers ready...

'Hundreds of al-Qaeda militants planning attacks from Yemen'
Times
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article6970574.ece
Hundreds of al-Qaeda militants are planning terror attacks from Yemen, the country’s Foreign Minister said today. Abu Bakr al-Qirbi appealed for more help from the international community to help to train and equip counter-terrorist forces. His plea came after an al-Qaeda group based in Yemen claimed responsibility for the failed Christmas Day airliner bomb plot.

[skunk]

Please explain to me HOW THE SYSTEM WORKED?"The system" referred to here is, as has been explained, the immediate notification of other aircraft in flight of the method of attack and the risks posed, to prevent multiple simultaneous instances of the same MO from succeeding. Ms Napolitano has made this very clear already. If you are unable to read the relevant quotes, I expect the report can be obtained in Braille.

[bobber205]

Democrats did it for eight years; it's our turn now!

:D

Who was president during 9/11? Oh that's right, it was Clinton's fault.

[yg17]

What about THE SYSTEM she's suppose to be responsible for that prevents jihadi terrorists from getting on airplanes? Any chance she'll get around to fixing THAT SYSTEM?

Oh, you mean the system in Amsterdam that completely failed to detect the explosives he was carrying and prevent him from getting on the plane? In case you haven't looked at a map recently, Amsterdam is not a part of the US. It's almost 4,000 miles away with a giant pond between us and them.

Or are you talking about the Bush state department that gave him a visa in the first place?

[rdowns]

Who was president during 9/11? Oh that's right, it was Clinton's fault.



Bush Inherited 9/11 Attacks (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/28/mary-matalin-bush-inherit_n_404949.html) :rolleyes:

[bobber205]

Bush Inherited 9/11 Attacks (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/28/mary-matalin-bush-inherit_n_404949.html) :rolleyes:

So terrorism is inherited and recessions are not? Neither are deficits or anything else Bush did. K. :D

[IntheNet]

Bush Inherited 9/11 Attacks (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/28/mary-matalin-bush-inherit_n_404949.html) :rolleyes:

It's a fair assessment; since Barry keeps yapping about what he inherited...

[bobber205]

It's a fair assessment; since Barry keeps yapping about what he inherited...

I thought he didn't though? Which is it?

[racers]

It's a fair assessment; since Barry keeps yapping about what he inherited...

Bush was told about impending attacks and had time to respond.
We were in a recession before Obama took office
The are NOT equal

[Macky-Mac]

It's a fair assessment; since Barry keeps yapping about what he inherited...

so now you're arguing that all of the problems Barry has to deal with were really Bush's fault :eek:

[IntheNet]

Bush was told about impending attacks and had time to respond.

Respond how?
Shut down all aviation?
Shut down all buildings?

Exactly how could GWB have responded to a very vague and cryptic warning? Liberals like to bandy about this cryptic warning that the prior president received... Respond how? Wasn't like we knew when, where, how, or who!

[bobber205]

Respond how?
Shut down all aviation?
Shut down all buildings?

Exactly how could GWB have responded to a very vague and cryptic warning? Liberals like to bandy about this cryptic warning that the prior president received... Respond how?

How should Obama have prevented this attack?

Bought top of the line security equipment that could have prevented this for ALL airports in the world?

The warnings Bush received were not vague and had been received for years.

[IntheNet]

The warnings Bush received were not vague and had been received for years.

You avoided the question... based on the PDB the prior president received what could he have done to prevent 09-11-01? Be specific based on text of PDB on what he could have done, knowledgeable of we (then) not knowing who, when, where, or how?

[Macky-Mac]

Respond how?
Shut down all aviation?
Shut down all buildings?

Exactly how could GWB have responded to a very vague and cryptic warning? Liberals like to bandy about this cryptic warning that the prior president received... Respond how? Wasn't like we knew when, where, how, or who!

maybe he could have;

..... rational people assess verified threats to national security and assign competent military and civilian counter-terrorism expertise to address these threats......

[yg17]

You avoided the question... based on the PDB the prior president received what could he have done to prevent 09-11-01? Be specific based on text of PDB on what he could have done, knowledgeable of we (then) not knowing who, when, where, or how?

For starters, you were allowed to bring small knives on airplanes before 9/11, which is ultimately what the hijackers used to kill the pilots and take over the plane. Banning those once he got the PDB would've been a good start.

[bobber205]

For starters, you were allowed to bring small knives on airplanes before 9/11, which is ultimately what the hijackers used to kill the pilots and take over the plane. Banning those once he got the PDB would've been a good start.

In any case, that was Bush's problem and his access to vast resources and top secret information to deal with, not ours.

[NT1440]

So they pulled the juke move and Yemen will be the new warzone? And it really looked like Iran had that on lock.....

[hulugu]

For starters, you were allowed to bring small knives on airplanes before 9/11, which is ultimately what the hijackers used to kill the pilots and take over the plane. Banning those once he got the PDB would've been a good start.

Unfortunately, the PDB of August 6, 2001 (http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/terrorism/80601pdb.html) was not that specific, instead the most revelvant passage was:

We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that...Bin Laden wanted to hijack a US aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Shaykh" "Umar" Abd al-Rahman and other US held extremists.

Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York...

However, Bush administration officials did ignore, or otherwise forget, briefings (http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020812/story.html) given by Sandy Berger and Richard Clarke indicating that Al Qaeda was, especially after the bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen, becoming a increasing danger to US interests. Clarke claims that he briefed Condi Rice and others, including a plan that would help "roll up" Al Qaeda, using SOG tactics in Afghanistan and the seizure of financial accounts. If implemented in early-2001, these tactics may have halted the September 11 operation in its tracks. However, like many historical events, a particular astute FBI investigation from D.C., a communicative CIA, NSA, or State, or a dozen other factors could also have kept September 11 from happening.

The important lesson was two-fold, the first is administration officials failed to learn from the previous one and dismissed information for partisan reasonings. And second, that our intelligence agencies may be very good at collecting huge amounts of information, but have trouble disseminating that information to other agencies.

It appears that while the first lesson may have been learned, the second one has yet to be solved. The problem appears to have been between two agencies that failed to forward (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2009/12/29/GR2009122900017.html) information about Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

[Zombie Acorn]

For starters, you were allowed to bring small knives on airplanes before 9/11, which is ultimately what the hijackers used to kill the pilots and take over the plane. Banning those once he got the PDB would've been a good start.

You can fashion a toothbrush into a killing weapon, small knives were not what allowed 9/11 to happen, they could have just as easily used plastic.

[XNine]

You avoided the question... based on the PDB the prior president received what could he have done to prevent 09-11-01? Be specific based on text of PDB on what he could have done, knowledgeable of we (then) not knowing who, when, where, or how?

Bush was given all names and contacts and information that the Clinton Administration and it's Intelligence agencies had gathered on suspected terrorists, terrorist activities, watch lists, etc. Read the 9/11 report and see how much information they gathered about the intelligence Bush received and how NOTHING was done about it.

And you know what's even worse? Your party actually started this whole fiasco when Reagan sent his CIA into Afghanistan to teach them how to fight against the "evil dreaded commies" of Russia invading. he gave them training, weapons, and money. And now they're using it all against us.

You know how all of this would have been prevented? If your beloved Reagan had let the Russians role into Afghanistan and the rest of the middle east and swallow it whole. Hell, we could have given Russia 10 Billion dollars and they would have left Israel alone, given us good, stable prices on oil, and marched through the middle east and put an end to all of it.

And yet, here we are. Wondering why our economy is in the *******. Wondering why oil prices are so high, wondering why we have to fear flying anywhere.

Next time Russia wants it, I say we let them have it, and support them.

[mkrishnan]

The AP is reporting this morning that a Somali man tried to board a plane in Mogadishu a month ago, also carrying a syringe and a seemingly similar explosives plan to Abdulmutallab's.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/12/30/world/AP-AF-Somalia.html

MOGADISHU, Somalia (AP) -- Officials say a Somali national tried to board a commercial airliner in Mogadishu last month with powdered chemicals, liquid and a syringe that together could have caused an explosion. The hallmarks bear chilling similarities to the terrorist plot to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner.

Police spokesman Abdulahi Hassan Barise says the suspect was arrested before the Nov. 13 Daallo Airlines flight departed. It was scheduled to travel from Mogadishu to the northern Somali city of Hargeisa, then to Djibouti and Dubai.

Two international officials in Nairobi said Wednesday the incident is similar to the Detroit attack in that the Somali man had a syringe, a bag of powdered chemicals and liquid. U.S. officials are aware of the incident and hastening to investigate any possible links with the Detroit attack.

[skunk]

Next time Russia wants it, I say we let them have it, and support them.Sound advice.

[djellison]

He'll just keep saying it. I wouldn't bother replying.

What is worth doing is adding him to your ignore list. He has no ability to conduct a debate and adds nothing to this place other than theocratically derived nonsense.

[leekohler]

What is worth doing is adding him to your ignore list. He has no ability to conduct a debate and adds nothing to this place other than theocratically derived nonsense.

I did that over a week ago.

[werther]

You avoided the question... based on the PDB the prior president received what could he have done to prevent 09-11-01? Be specific based on text of PDB on what he could have done, knowledgeable of we (then) not knowing who, when, where, or how?

Bush, upon becoming president, disbanded the Hart-Rudman Commission on Terrorism, disbanded the terrorism taksforce headed by Richard Clarke which met weekly to discuss terrorist activities.

He then put Cheney in charge of the anti-terrorism commission which did not meet once prior to 9-11

They failed miserably.

Edit: I am leaving my original comment in tact but must preemptively qualify,...err correct my first statement.
Bush did not disband the Hart-Rudman commission but rather did not heed any of the recommendations.

[IntheNet]

Bush, upon becoming president, disbanded the Hart-Rudman Commission on Terrorism, disbanded the terrorism taksforce headed by Richard Clarke which met weekly to discuss terrorist activities.

Ahhh... getting rid of Richard Clarke (and the Task Force he headed) was the best, repeat best, thing that GWB did while in office... Clarke, an avowed bureaucrat with no anti-terror accomplishments, did absolutely nothing but talk a big game and little else, and eliminating Clarke from power (and to a lesser extent the task force he headed) was what led to success in the War on Terror from 2002-2008.

He then put Cheney in charge of the anti-terrorism commission which did not meet once prior to 9-11

Wise move here....Cheney's direct management of anti-terrorism kept Al Qaeda at bay from 2002-2008...

They failed miserably

09/11/01, as it played out, could not have been prevented; even the 911 Commission came to that decision eventually.

[yg17]

Wise move here....Cheney's direct management of anti-terrorism kept Al Qaeda at bay from 2002-2008...


No, instead we got the DC sniper and the anthrax attacks. Great job Dick :rolleyes:

[hulugu]

...Wise move here....Cheney's direct management of anti-terrorism kept Al Qaeda at bay from 2002-2008...

Because Cheney is actually Nick Fury from S.H.I.E.L.D.

09/11/01, as it played out, could not have been prevented; even the 911 Commission came to that decision eventually.

Hmmm....from the 9/11 Commission Executive Summary:

We write with the benefit and handicap of hindsight.We are mindful of the danger of being unjust to men and women who made choices in conditions of uncertainty and in circumstances over which they often had little control.
Nonetheless, there were specific points of vulnerability in the plot and opportunities to disrupt it. Operational failures—opportunities that were not or could not be exploited by the organizations and systems of that time—included:
• not watchlisting future hijackers Hazmi and Mihdhar, not trailing them after they traveled to Bangkok, and not informing the FBI about one future hijacker’s U.S. visa or his companion’s travel to the United States;
• not sharing information linking individuals in the Cole attack to Mihdhar;
• not taking adequate steps in time to find Mihdhar or Hazmi in the United States;
• not linking the arrest of Zacarias Moussaoui, described as interested in flight training for the purpose of using an airplane in a terrorist act, to the heightened indications of attack;
• not discovering false statements on visa applications;
• not recognizing passports manipulated in a fraudulent manner;
• not expanding no-fly lists to include names from terrorist watchlists;
• not searching airline passengers identified by the computer-based
CAPPS screening system; and
• not hardening aircraft cockpit doors or taking other measures to pre-
pare for the possibility of suicide hijackings.

[werther]

Ahhh... getting rid of Richard Clarke (and the Task Force he headed) was the best, repeat best, thing that GWB did while in office... Clarke, an avowed bureaucrat with no anti-terror accomplishments, did absolutely nothing but talk a big game and little else, and eliminating Clarke from power (and to a lesser extent the task force he headed) was what led to success in the War on Terror from 2002-2008.



Wise move here....Cheney's direct management of anti-terrorism kept Al Qaeda at bay from 2002-2008...



09/11/01, as it played out, could not have been prevented; even the 911 Commission came to that decision eventually.

Isn't it strange that after 9-11 the Bush administration enacted almost every recommendation that the Hart-Rudman commission suggested.
Your addiction to party politics is astounding. There were many things that Clinton could have done and a ****** ton that the Bush admin could have done to prevent the attacks.

Cheney did not do a damn thing when it mattered most and then lied before the 9-11 commission.

[XNine]

InTheNet prefers to seperate his milk plate from his meat. He refuses to provide any kind of sound response when one of his points is riddled full of holes, instead trying to inject another nonsensical point into the mix.

but, to get back on topic here, this is one of the rare instances where I wish torturing were allowed. I don't think anyone could have stopped me from killing this Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab if I were the one that jumped on him. Get all the info you can out of him, then discard this piece of ****.

[bobber205]

InTheNet prefers to seperate his milk plate from his meat. He refuses to provide any kind of sound response when one of his points is riddled full of holes, instead trying to inject another nonsensical point into the mix.

but, to get back on topic here, this is one of the rare instances where I wish torturing were allowed. I don't think anyone could have stopped me from killing this Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab if I were the one that jumped on him. Get all the info you can out of him, then discard this piece of ****.

I see your logic, but it only works if torturing has ever been shown to be an effective way of getting TRUE information out of a person. It's not.

In fact you get terrible information. It only serves to make you feel better.

[XNine]

I see your logic, but it only works if torturing has ever been shown to be an effective way of getting TRUE information out of a person. It's not.

In fact you get terrible information. It only serves to make you feel better.

Yeah... I know. But this bastard definitely deserves it.

[mgguy]

Cheney did not do a damn thing when it mattered most and then lied before the 9-11 commission.

Proof, please.

[bobber205]

Yeah... I know. But this bastard definitely deserves it.

If we torture people, I assume you're ok with everyone else doing it, including to our people.

Should we torture serial murderers? They have ACTUALLY killed people as opposed to this idiot. Why don't we torture them to get out information as well?

If he deserves torture why not just kill him?

[skunk]

Time to invade Nigeria.

[Peterkro]

Time to invade Nigeria.

Which just happens to be a major oil producer,win win.

[skunk]

That's handy. :)

[IntheNet]

Time to invade Nigeria.

Yemen too, and Iran, and North Korea I guess... we have so many nations to attack and so little time...

[hulugu]

InTheNet prefers to seperate his milk plate from his meat. He refuses to provide any kind of sound response when one of his points is riddled full of holes, instead trying to inject another nonsensical point into the mix.

but, to get back on topic here, this is one of the rare instances where I wish torturing were allowed. I don't think anyone could have stopped me from killing this Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab if I were the one that jumped on him. Get all the info you can out of him, then discard this piece of ****.

I think he's already been tortured, he did basically set his thighs and crotch on fire. Then I'm sure he was grabbed, manhandled, and probably punched kicked or otherwise assaulted.
Then, once the flight landed and a half-dozen people stopped standing on his neck, he got arrested.

[yg17]

Yemen too, and Iran, and North Korea I guess... we have so many nations to attack and so little time...


People like you scare me. You'd bomb every ****ing country on this planet if you could.

We have American terrorists born and raised in the US. Are you suggesting we bomb ourselves?

[skunk]

Are you suggesting we bomb ourselves?Well, it would save the rest of us a lot of trouble.

[bobber205]

Yemen too, and Iran, and North Korea I guess... we have so many nations to attack and so little time...

Hi Stephen Colbert!!

Since when did you start visiting PRSI? :D

[Iscariot]

http://www.matthewgood.org/wp-content/uploads/500x_odds-of-airborne-terror2.jpg

[djellison]

On Jan 9th, I will get on a plane, I will fly LHR to LAX, have a couple of days in LA on business, and on the 12th, I will fly LAX to LHR (with a probable connection in Washington)

I live in a country that suffered decades of bombings in its cities by the IRA. We had bombings on the London Underground, and the next day we just got on with our lives. Terrorism isn't going to change my plans. You will not change my world view with violence. You will not influence me by attempting to blow up my fellow Brits.

Here's a message to any terrorists thinking of targeting my flights now or in the future

Don't bother - you're wasting your time. Your aims will not be achieved by violence. That threat of violence does not bother me. I will not change my plans because of your neanderthal like negotiation techniques. If you have a problem with the world, deal with it like a man, not an animal.

[skunk]

I will not change my plans because of your neanderthal like negotiation techniques.We have little information about Neanderthal negotiating techniques, but they had a larger brain than us, so best not to assume too much :).
If you have a problem with the world, deal with it like a man, not an animal.Man is an animal, and one of the most violent at that. Perhaps it would be better to deal with the world in a less manly fashion.

[bobber205]

On Jan 9th, I will get on a plane, I will fly LHR to LAX, have a couple of days in LA on business, and on the 12th, I will fly LAX to LHR (with a probable connection in Washington)

I live in a country that suffered decades of bombings in its cities by the IRA. We had bombings on the London Underground, and the next day we just got on with our lives. Terrorism isn't going to change my plans. You will not change my world view with violence. You will not influence me by attempting to blow up my fellow Brits.

Here's a message to any terrorists thinking of targeting my flights now or in the future

Don't bother - you're wasting your time. Your aims will not be achieved by violence. That threat of violence does not bother me. I will not change my plans because of your neanderthal like negotiation techniques. If you have a problem with the world, deal with it like a man, not an animal.

Attitudes like this defeat terrorism. War mongering, "lets' torture them because they're real bad people and scare me alot" attitudes make us LOSE against terrorism.

If we change our philosophy or way of life in any significant way, then they've won. They don't want to create an army and "invade" us, so that "fight them over here so we don't have to here" crap is just not even a possibility. It's not Germany we're against and it's not 1942.

[IntheNet]

Attitudes like this defeat terrorism.

Water boarding to gain valuable intelligence helps too... ;)

Democrats Join Calls for Napolitano to Step Down Following Failed Attack
January 01, 2010
FOXNews.com
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/01/democrats-join-calls-napolitano-step-following-failed-attack/
Democrats have joined the ranks of those calling for Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to step down following the attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight a week ago.

[skunk]

Water boarding to gain valuable intelligence helps too... ;)Please remind me which of the values you choose to defend is represented by the torture of prisoners?

[rdowns]

Water boarding to gain valuable intelligence helps too... ;)

Democrats Join Calls for Napolitano to Step Down Following Failed Attack
January 01, 2010
FOXNews.com
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/01/democrats-join-calls-napolitano-step-following-failed-attack/
Democrats have joined the ranks of those calling for Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to step down following the attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight a week ago.

Typical FOX drivel. Democrats are a member of the NJ State Senate and a Dem. strategist. LOLz.

And I would like to see her resign.

[flopticalcube]

Please remind me which of the values you choose to defend is represented by the torture of prisoners?
Manifest Destiny (at least as he may define that).

[skunk]

Manifest Destiny... is not a value, it's a chemical imbalance.

[flopticalcube]

... is not a value, it's a chemical imbalance.
LOL! Too true...