Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
AtticaFlinch

CNN to Al Qaeda: Next Time Don't Send an Amateur.

Recommended Posts

Is PETN traceable by bomb sniffing dogs?

Why havent we and others made a huge investment in the use of bomb sniffing dogs, like yesteryear.

I know I'd think twice about smuggling PETN in my tightie whities if I knew a bomb sniffing dog would be canvassing up every aisle of every flight before takeoff.

Edited by Highway6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the most obvious red flags, our government still could not stop this guy? I can't wait until they are in control of my health care.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the most obvious red flags, our government still could not stop this guy? I can't wait until they are in control of my health care.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is PETN traceable by bomb sniffing dogs?

Why havent we and others made a huge investment in the use of bomb sniffing dogs, like yesteryear.

I know I'd think twice about smuggling PETN in my tightie whities if I knew a bomb sniffing dog would be canvassing up every aisle of every flight before takeoff.

Dogs are trained for specific smells of certain chemicals that are key ingredients for their specialty.

I'm not familiar enough with the explosive to know if it CAN be detectable with a sniffer dog, if it is, it's an additional thing a dog will have to be trained for. The only thing is that it makes a stronger case for those body Xray machines.

With the most obvious red flags, our government still could not stop this guy? I can't wait until they are in control of my health care.

Umm....keep it on topic?

As far as the CNN topic, I was outraged at first, but I think they probably would help the security forces.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Umm....keep it on topic?

Dude! WTH.. You're not a mod.

A ) Lockmat's side comment highlights the ineptitude of our gvt and their ability to do anything big. It's not like 10 other people took the healthcare side comment and ran with it. You jumped the gun and I find that way more offensive than the original comment.

B ) You're not a mod...Next time, instead of policing users, just press the "Report" button.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude! WTH.. You're not a mod.

A ) Lockmat's side comment highlights the ineptitude of our gvt and their ability to do anything big. It's not like 10 other people took the healthcare side comment and ran with it. You jumped the gun and I find that way more offensive than the original comment.

B ) You're not a mod...Next time, instead of policing users, just press the "Report" button.

Are you a mod ? Seems you're doing the same thing

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude! WTH.. You're not a mod.

A ) Lockmat's side comment highlights the ineptitude of our gvt and their ability to do anything big. It's not like 10 other people took the healthcare side comment and ran with it. You jumped the gun and I find that way more offensive than the original comment.

B ) You're not a mod...Next time, instead of policing users, just press the "Report" button.

Dude! WTH.. You're not a mod.

A ) Lockmat's side comment highlights the ineptitude of our gvt and their ability to do anything big. It's not like 10 other people took the healthcare side comment and ran with it. You jumped the gun and I find that way more offensive than the original comment.

B ) You're not a mod...Next time, instead of policing users, just press the "Report" button.

Right back at you. :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think our mods, and even editor, do a good job of only exerting their authority when needed. For the most part, they all just act like normal users.

So it really really irks me when we have normal users playing cop.

Don't compare what we did as equal. It is not the same thing.

I have no interest in reporting you as what you did probably isn't against any rules. I was calling you out for acting like an jackass. You chose to go Public with playing cop, instead of pressing the report button... I was giving you a dose of your own medicine. My goal was to highlight your jackassedness to you in hope you won't do it again. I'll assume I am successful.

Me calling out jackassbehavior. You telling another user how to use HAIF. Not the same thing.

By the way.. this is the post where you'll probably wanna press the report button for me using the word jackass.

Edited by Highway6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dogs are trained for specific smells of certain chemicals that are key ingredients for their specialty.

I'm not familiar enough with the explosive to know if it CAN be detectable with a sniffer dog, if it is, it's an additional thing a dog will have to be trained for. The only thing is that it makes a stronger case for those body Xray machines.

I have a buddy who used to work for the TSA, and he told me about these little handheld machines available that could detect any number of substances to the particle millionth. They are far more effective than dogs, but so far nobody has them. If the TSA had them, and had this been a domestic flight (which it was not - so blaming our government is moot), this clown would certainly have been picked up before getting on the plane. Unfortunately, the TSA is overextended as is, and they're strapped for cash. There's no way they could afford to equip every airport in the US with even one of these machines, let alone airports overseas. There's a certain vocal contingent (not naming names) who get their panties in a wad every time the government tries to spend any of their tax dollars. I can imagine the objections now:

"They make me take off my shoes, those idiots. How can those idiots be trusted with more of my tax dollars?!"

-or-

"Why should we spend money so other countries' airports are secure? Unless we're talkin' about Iraq or Alqaedastan, it's time for us to stop bein' the world's police force."

-or-

"With the most obvious red flags, our government still could not stop this guy? I can't wait until they are in control of my health care."

Edited by AtticaFlinch
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a buddy who used to work for the TSA, and he told me about these little handheld machines available that could detect any number of substances to the particle millionth. They are far more effective than dogs, but so far nobody has them.

I worked for a defense subcontractor awhile back and saw a device similar. I'm not familiar with the technology behind the device you are mentioning... but the devices I got to play with were more designed for detecting airborne biological attacks. That said, I don't think they would be able to easily detect a sugar type substance packaged away in someone's pants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Umm....keep it on topic?

The Healthcare bit was just to pile on. My main point is that the red flags were numerous and obvious and our government showed seriously inadequacy. It directly relates to the topic.

He was on the watch list

His dad sounded the alarm on him

He bought a one-way ticket

He paid cash for his ticket

Do they need him to wear a name-tag that says "Terrorist" on his chest?

Think of all the technology in this world and how the private sector utilizes it. The govt is very much behind and is not on track to keep us very safe, so it seems. I will be flying this weekend and am not worried (only b/c the numbers are in my favor that I won't be on a plane blown up), but this event should not make us feel very safe in general.

Edited by lockmat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a buddy who used to work for the TSA, and he told me about these little handheld machines available that could detect any number of substances to the particle millionth. They are far more effective than dogs, but so far nobody has them. If the TSA had them, and had this been a domestic flight (which it was not - so blaming our government is moot), this clown would certainly have been picked up before getting on the plane. Unfortunately, the TSA is overextended as is, and they're strapped for cash. There's no way they could afford to equip every airport in the US with even one of these machines, let alone airports overseas. There's a certain vocal contingent (not naming names) who get their panties in a wad every time the government tries to spend any of their tax dollars. I can imagine the objections now:

By no means am I a security expert. Maybe some can help out.

This watch list. Is it just the USAs or is it an inernational list?

What things are in place for international flights for govts/airlines to know who is on their plane before they board? I would find it hard to believe that nobody knows who is really getting on their planes. The airlines have just as much at stake for their company and employees safety not to know. Don't people have to show their passports?

I would also be surprised to learn that the US govt does not have the capability to know who is flying into our country. If that's the case, we're doomed.

Edited by lockmat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Healthcare bit was just to pile on. My main point is that the red flags were numerous and obvious and our government showed seriously inadequacy. It directly relates to the topic.

He was on the watch list

His dad sounded the alarm on him

He bought a one-way ticket

He paid cash for his ticket

Do they need him to wear a name-tag that says "Terrorist" on his chest?

Think of all the technology in this world and how the private sector utilizes it. The govt is very much behind and is not on track to keep us very safe, so it seems. I will be flying this weekend and am not worried (only b/c the numbers are in my favor that I won't be on a plane blown up), but this event should not make us feel very safe in general.

Dollars to donuts, this was a test of the system and not a real attempt. All this talk of heightened security, and there are still gaping holes in the system. Despite this, the one hugely positive takeaway from this is now Al Qaeda is aware of just how seriously the other passengers will take any threat on a plane. Gone are the day when passengers feel relatively safe in a hijacked plane. Now they know their life is going to end if they don't stop the terrorist on their own. This kid didn't succeed because other passengers beat the crap out of him when they realized what he was doing. And good for them for doing so. A difficult to ignite explosive won't ever be quicker and more effective than ten fists.

By no means am I a security expert. Maybe some can help out.

This watch list. Is it just the USAs or is it an inernational list?

What things are in place for international flights for govts/airlines to know who is on their plane before they board? I would find it hard to believe that nobody knows who is really getting on their planes. The airlines have just as much at stake for their company and employees safety not to know. Don't people have to show their passports?

I would also be surprised to learn that the US govt does not have the capability to know who is flying into our country. If that's the case, we're doomed.

He was on Britain's watch list which is how he made it on to our watch list. The difference is, Britain's watch list is also their no-fly list. We have two separate lists. Had he been on our no-fly list too, he'd have been turned away at the airport when he showed his passport.

So you know, we communicate well with Britain. Their watch list is available to us and vice-versa. Many other countries have lists of varying sorts that we either have limited or no access to. There is no international list. So, yes, we're doomed, but it doesn't matter much anyhow. All it takes is a fake passport and a non-infamous face to circumvent any list of any kind.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dollars to donuts, this was a test of the system and not a real attempt. All this talk of heightened security, and there are still gaping holes in the system. Despite this, the one hugely positive takeaway from this is now Al Qaeda is aware of just how seriously the other passengers will take any threat on a plane. Gone are the day when passengers feel relatively safe in a hijacked plane. Now they know their life is going to end if they don't stop the terrorist on their own. This kid didn't succeed because other passengers beat the crap out of him when they realized what he was doing. And good for them for doing so. A difficult to ignite explosive won't ever be quicker and more effective than ten fists.

Hopefully they don't start thinking above the level of a 1st grader and detinate it in the bathroom where nobody can see them.

He was on Britain's watch list which is how he made it on to our watch list. The difference is, Britain's watch list is also their no-fly list. We have two separate lists. Had he been on our no-fly list too, he'd have been turned away at the airport when he showed his passport.

So you know, we communicate well with Britain. (Tongue-in-cheek???) Their watch list is available to us and vice-versa. Many other countries have lists of varying sorts that we either have limited or no access to. There is no international list. So, yes, we're doomed, but it doesn't matter much anyhow. All it takes is a fake passport and a non-infamous face to circumvent any list of any kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By no means am I a security expert. Maybe some can help out.

This watch list. Is it just the USAs or is it an inernational list?

What things are in place for international flights for govts/airlines to know who is on their plane before they board? I would find it hard to believe that nobody knows who is really getting on their planes. The airlines have just as much at stake for their company and employees safety not to know. Don't people have to show their passports?

I would also be surprised to learn that the US govt does not have the capability to know who is flying into our country. If that's the case, we're doomed.

The government is entirely capable of controlling entry via plane travel. It would involve, among other things, profiling, severe travel restrictions, and other tactics usually associated with police states. The question is, how far are we willing to go? And how much are we willing to spend on that level of security expertise in sufficient numbers? Don't discount the political influence of the airlines and associated businesses, who are in it to make a profit, not defend the borders of the US. I'm too cynical, but IMO when it comes to politics, money talks and a few hundred dead on a blown-up plane will never trump the pursuit of profits.

Regarding security--the Israelis are not just experts in tactics but considered innovators in security technology, and their lobby in Washington is quite powerful. I expect we'll be hearing much more about profiling. At the risk of being indelicate, if you want to disarm and marginalize a Muslim threat --which is what this is all really about--they pretty much wrote the book.

Policies and technology are only as good as the people paid to implement them, and $10 an hour employees aside, TSA policies are reactionary and useless--the result of beauracrats scrambling to come up with 'solutions' after they get their asses chewed following an incident.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..... or start thinking above the level of a first grader and book seats in the back row where they are less visible as they light their fuse.

..... or start thinking above the level of a first grader and have 1-2 additional strongmen hold off the heroes for just long enough.

Relying on the other passengers to take care of business once they successfully sneak a bomb on board is a failing strategy.

We need the scanners. We need common sense to get back in the driver's seat.

The no-fly list is reserved for those who are thought to pose a threat to airplanes. Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the man charged with the would-be Christmas Day bombing, was on the watch list because his own father had warned American officials about his son’s increasing radicalism. But an Obama administration official said “there was insufficient derogatory information available” to merit Mr. Abdulmutallab’s inclusion on the
(no-fly)
list.
-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The government is entirely capable of controlling entry via plane travel. It would involve, among other things, profiling, severe travel restrictions, and other tactics usually associated with police states.

We willingly walk through metal detectors now. It would only involve money to have the additional full body scanner in every terminal security checkpoint right behind each metal detector. It's not profiling if everyone is subjected to it.

And the civil rights squeamishness aside... ( I don't see how a muted snapshot on a screen for 5-10 seconds seen by a person in another room that cant see me, would be more violating than if I were isolated for a pat down or strip search )... People would get accustomed to it quickly enough.

I'm sure people complained about metal detectors back in the day as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The government is entirely capable of controlling entry via plane travel. It would involve, among other things, profiling, severe travel restrictions, and other tactics usually associated with police states. The question is, how far are we willing to go? And how much are we willing to spend on that level of security expertise in sufficient numbers? Don't discount the political influence of the airlines and associated businesses, who are in it to make a profit, not defend the borders of the US. I'm too cynical, but IMO when it comes to politics, money talks and a few hundred dead on a blown-up plane will never trump the pursuit of profits.

Regarding security--the Israelis are not just experts in tactics but considered innovators in security technology, and their lobby in Washington is quite powerful. I expect we'll be hearing much more about profiling. At the risk of being indelicate, if you want to disarm and marginalize a Muslim threat --which is what this is all really about--they pretty much wrote the book.

Policies and technology are only as good as the people paid to implement them, and $10 an hour employees aside, TSA policies are reactionary and useless--the result of beauracrats scrambling to come up with 'solutions' after they get their asses chewed following an incident.

Hi Crunch,

Thanks for the input.

Maybe it would be helpful if we just discussed the ideal situation, like the one we have (man on watch list) and not so much on an unknown person. I'm not sure of the likelihood of an unknown person (someone not on a list) committing a terrorist act. The least we could do is do a better job at protecting ourselves from the people we know are a threat. I won't belabour the point and restate the red flags that were there in this case. And I hope I'm not being presumptious to believe it would have been easy to keep this particular guy off the plane. I also know it's simple for a mistake, even an obvious one, to happen at least one time, so I don't want to beat up the responsible party up too bad.

But let's take the passport for example.

Is it really THAT easy for someone to get a fake passport or to trick the passport system? What happened when they scanned his passport and his information showed up on the screen? I wonder what the protocol is when a person on the list is shown to be at the airport?

I think if we just pay Google, they could probably create a system that's impenetrable.

I really am not trying to be naive. These are simple questions and I'm sure they have more complicated answers than I expect, I hope. I understand money vs. govt. vs. business etc. Even with those restrictions, I'm just surprised it is so hard to keep someone who's on the list, off the plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Policies and technology are only as good as the people paid to implement them, and $10 an hour employees aside, TSA policies are reactionary and useless--the result of beauracrats scrambling to come up with 'solutions' after they get their asses chewed following an incident.

I'm sure we all have had numerous ridiculous items confiscated in the name of "security." My personal favorites were a pair of round-tipped grooming scissors with blades shorter than 3/4 an inch and a small bottle of Guatemalan hot sauce. I suppose I could have slowly sprinkled some hot sauce in the pilot's eyes while trimming his sideburns, but aside from that, I have no idea how I could have brought down an entire plane. A couple years before the hot sauce seizure, but still after 9/11, I brought a bottle of Madeira in from Portugal without anyone so much as raising an eyebrow. I guess the terror level had been elevated in the interim or something, but I still have no idea how a bottle of flammable liquid could ever be perceived as safer than a bottle of liquid that only makes you feel like you're on fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the civil rights squeamishness aside... ( I don't see how a muted snapshot on a screen for 5-10 seconds seen by a person in another room that cant see me, would be more violating than if I were isolated for a pat down or strip search )... People would get accustomed to it quickly enough.

I'm sure people complained about metal detectors back in the day as well.

I really, really dislike the implications of this on future applications. It's like the NRA argues and like the old saying says, "Give 'em an inch, and they'll take a mile."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even with those restrictions, I'm just surprised it is so hard to keep someone who's on the list, off the plane.

Idea...what if we treated people on the no-fly list like we do pedifiles? When someone on the list enters through security into the terminal, people on that flight should be notified that someone on the list is flying on their plane.

A couple things I'm not sure about...

1. How sure are we of these people on the list? Can we take it to the bank that they're a true threat? If we're affraid to offend someone who truly is not a threat, can the govt. notify them that they're on it so they have an opportunity to defend themselves and get their names off? Or do we want to get them in the act and say, "ah-hah, we got you!"? If they are a true threat, hopefully they'll just try and find someone else to do the job or at least deter them. Maybe the terrorist-camps don't have mailable addresses? ;)

2. This would probably cause panic in the airport. However, why would we be letting someone on the no-fly list to fly in the first place? I guess we truly are willing to take that chance over offending someone. After-all, this guy was on the no-fly list, yet allowed anyway? Hmmm, maybe they should call it something different.

The govt. should come out with more details, unless of course it's confidential for some reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure we all have had numerous ridiculous items confiscated in the name of "security."

I would say the best way to avoid confiscation of questionable items should just check their baggage. Airlines should just tell their passengers, "If you're not sure, check it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After-all, this guy was on the no-fly list, yet allowed anyway? Hmmm, maybe they should call it something different.

Again, being on the watch list doesn't automatically guarantee inclusion on the no-fly list in this country. May be silly, but we have that whole not-trying-to-look-like-a-totalitarian-state thing going on.

I would say the best way to avoid confiscation of questionable items should just check their baggage. Airlines should just tell their passengers, "If you're not sure, check it."

Yeah, I'm pretty much to the point where I don't carry anything on except for a book. It's too much of a hassle these days. I pack light so I'm not ever required to pay for extra luggage.

Edited by AtticaFlinch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geezus... I'm never being an asshat to another HAIFer ever again....... ( Okay, Not true.. but still. Freaky. )

http://www.cnn.com/2...line/index.html

"The poster writes about being in boarding school, with possibilities of attending Stanford University or the University of California-Berkeley."

That would have been a great place for a religious fundamentalist!

Edit: Anybody else a little dismayed the story about Charlie Sheen's wife is more popular than this story?

Edited by AtticaFlinch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, being on the watch list doesn't automatically guarantee inclusion on the no-fly list in this country. May be silly, but we have that whole not-trying-to-look-like-a-totalitarian-state thing going on.

So let them know they're on it, giving them a chance to clear their name. If they don't, let all the passengers know. Avoiding embarrassment is up to them.

At the very least, notify the pilots, flight attendents ect (if they don't already) so to keep a close eye on them.

Edited by lockmat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So let them know they're on it, giving them a chance to clear their name. If they don't, let all the passengers know. Avoiding embarrassment is up to them.

At the very least, notify the pilots, flight attendents ect (if they don't already) so to keep a close eye on them.

I say they just make sure either Harrison Ford, Wesley Snipes or Samuel L Jackson is on every flight.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say they just make sure either Harrison Ford, Wesley Snipes or Samuel L Jackson is on every flight.

LOL

Sorry, had to make a reply in addition to my +1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we know there are a lot of stinkin names on the last, although I'm still not convinced it's difficult to filter it once the person enters the airport.

After the warning, Mr. Abdulmutallab was placed on a broad terrorist watch list with several hundred thousand names but not on the no-fly list.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126212276274109385.html?mod=rss_whats_news_us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, the watch list, the no-fly list, the could-be terrorist list... all the lists... if your name is on ANY of these - you don't get to board an airplane. Period.

Second, the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber - total amateurs. We should do nothing different when these incidents happen (amateur hour). We over react, put in place even more ineffective security measures.

Third, the amount of screening that is done by TSA is ridiculous, worthless, and really no more effective than before TSA was formed. The number of toe nail clippers, scissors, full tubes of toothpaste, and PertPlus+ shampoo needlessly discarded is criminal. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), TSA - total waste. It is dehumanizing to put the once-proud Coast Guard under the DHS. What?

And finally... not even full body "Total Recall" scanners would have caught the underwear bomber. He shaped the explosive element into a phallic form and put in his crotch. I don't know about you, but even when I've been patted down, rarely do the TSA agents go in for the squeeze - in that area. Whether they felt it - or saw it on x-ray - their only reaction would have been: lucky man.

Basically, if they're going to get us, they will find a way. In the mean time, we're wasting millions/billions of dollars on ineffective screening and just adding to needless delays at the airport....

Airports used to be happy/sad places. When people could escort their children and loved ones onto a boarding plane. Or wait for them - right at the jet way. Those moments were truly touching. Sad, tearful good-byes; jubilant re-unions. Sometimes, I would cry. And I didn't even know those people.

But no more.

The whole mile long security line, take your shoes off routine, put everything in the bin - BUT NOT YOUR TICKET - kinda kills that atmosphere. I miss the old days.

Daniel is travelling tonight on a plane

I can see the red tail lights heading for Spain

Oh and I can see Daniel waving goodbye

God it looks like Daniel, must be the clouds in my eyes

They say Spain is pretty though I've never been

Well Daniel says it's the best place that he's ever seen

Oh and he should know, he's been there enough

Lord I miss Daniel, oh I miss him so much

Daniel my brother you are older than me

Do you still feel the pain of the scars that won't heal

Your eyes have died but you see more than I

Daniel you're a star in the face of the sky

Daniel is travelling tonight on a plane

I can see the red tail lights heading for Spain

Oh and I can see Daniel waving goodbye

God it looks like Daniel, must be the clouds in my eyes

Oh God it looks like Daniel, must be the clouds in my eyes

So sad.

EDIT: The only effective screening is what Israel does. The underwear bomber idiot would have not even thought about even trying to board an El Al flight.

Edited by BryanS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was watching Fox News at the car repair shop yesterday:

-- according to Karl Rove, implementing the air-puff technology (where you walk through a thing that looks like a metal detector but which shoots puffs of air) would have stopped the bomber. This technology exists but is expensive.

-- the guy tried to get on the plane in the Netherlands without a passport, according to a witness who is also a lawyer and blogger. The bomber was there with an older Indian man. The Indian man said "He's from Sudan, we do this all the time." When the person at the desk refused, they asked to speak to a manager. This means either the manager gave in and let the bomber on in the name of good customer service, or the bomber eventually produced a passport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-- the guy tried to get on the plane in the Netherlands without a passport, according to a witness who is also a lawyer and blogger. The bomber was there with an older Indian man. The Indian man said "He's from Sudan, we do this all the time." When the person at the desk refused, they asked to speak to a manager. This means either the manager gave in and let the bomber on in the name of good customer service, or the bomber eventually produced a passport.

That's the problem. Our government can do as much as they want with TSA screeners on US soil... but this was a breakdown at another country's airport. Those screeners are non americans. I remember flying into the US from Belize and being amazed at how little their security officials screened us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the problem. Our government can do as much as they want with TSA screeners on US soil... but this was a breakdown at another country's airport. Those screeners are non americans. I remember flying into the US from Belize and being amazed at how little their security officials screened us.

Considering for years the big issue for airport security was drug importation, our systems were in place to combat that, not potential terrorists. With drugs, it's better to let the perpetrator get onto US soil where he/she can be caught at customs (and tried in America). Obviously, with a terrorist, it's better to stop the problem before it gets on the plane.

We're dealing with a totally different animal than the one we're equipped to contend with, but we're still using the same antiquated protocols to counteract it. There needs to be an international effort to deal with this, not more half-measures to give us all warm fuzzies about our safety. I know this scares some NWO nuts and UN haters, but there needs to be an international body that establishes and implements a universally codified set of regulations to ensure security continuity around the globe.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was watching Fox News at the car repair shop yesterday:

-- according to Karl Rove, implementing the air-puff technology (where you walk through a thing that looks like a metal detector but which shoots puffs of air) would have stopped the bomber. This technology exists but is expensive.

-- the guy tried to get on the plane in the Netherlands without a passport, according to a witness who is also a lawyer and blogger. The bomber was there with an older Indian man. The Indian man said "He's from Sudan, we do this all the time." When the person at the desk refused, they asked to speak to a manager. This means either the manager gave in and let the bomber on in the name of good customer service, or the bomber eventually produced a passport.

Does that assume that the explosive has to be outside the body? I can just see the looks on their faces: "Captain, we got a positive result on this one. We've stripped him down naked, but can't find anything! ... wait a minute... OOhhhh... we get it now."

You're only as strong as your weakest link. I've flown out of CDG back to the US two or three times now. Didn't have to take off my shoes. Or any of the other silliness. What a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're only as strong as your weakest link.

The problem with screening technology is that it cannot keep up with the human propensity to find new ways to blow each other up. We're spending trillions to get beat by cavemen with IEDs in the desert. I think the single weakest link is lack of coordination among intelligence agencies, both ours and foreign. Ideally there would be just one 'list', and it would be international. But there again, intelligence is often faulty and worse, corruptible.

Maybe some meaningful changes in the intelligence agency structure will come about because of this.(putting it all under "homeland security' and considering that meaningful: fail) An old Army BF of mine used to work on a lot of joint task force stuff with the DoD/ DEA and CIA, and he always complained that nothing got done because they were all more interested in a pissing match over jurisdiction than anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're spending trillions to get beat by cavemen with IEDs in the desert.

According to this article (from which I extrapolate a bit), the economies of the developed world are no longer sustainable without some serious retooling anyhow. Soon we won't have the trillions to spend to keep up with the cavemen anymore. Once we've reached this inevitable economic parity, we'll all be in caves and they'll have no more airplanes to blow up. Everybody wins... er, loses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously every airline passenger needs to be strip searched with a full body cavity probe.  This should probably apply to all Metro passengers as well. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously every airline passenger needs to be strip searched with a full body cavity probe. This should probably apply to all Metro passengers as well.

NBC nightly news just showed that this scanner can now submit images that are less personal; basically just showing the outline of a body...so it seems the privacy issue is becoming a less valid argument, if one at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does that assume that the explosive has to be outside the body? I can just see the looks on their faces: "Captain, we got a positive result on this one. We've stripped him down naked, but can't find anything! ... wait a minute... OOhhhh... we get it now."

Hrm, good question. I don't know. I was under the impression that a lot of these techniques rely on the explosives being outside the body. Maybe it's possible to use a combination of detection techniques? Air puffs plus bomb sniffing dogs as you exit the air-puff bomb detector area?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NBC said they don't use the air puffs anymore because they worked well in the labs, but not in real life b/c it mixed whatevers in the air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely someone is near to perfecting homemade injestable explosives, right? If drug mules are willing to swallow balloons filled with uncut heroin for a little cash, committed jihadists will swallow worse for their God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At that point I don't think it would even be worth it for the terrorists. They might as well use easier methods on easier non-airport targets.

Also, I don't think the R&D abilities of 20-30 guys in Yemen can compare to the extensive R&D abilities of the drug cartels. Not that it matters -- remember, the terrorists' biggest success to date did not utilize any bombs at all.

Edited by N Judah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At that point I don't think it would even be worth it for the terrorists. They might as well use easier methods on easier non-airport targets.

Also, I don't think the R&D abilities of 20-30 guys in Yemen can compare to the extensive R&D abilities of the drug cartels. Not that it matters -- remember, the terrorists' biggest success to date did not utilize any bombs at all.

The Yemenis are the Polaks of the Arab world. I guess our intelligence departments didn't find anything they do to be too serious ever since the CIA realized the best way to stop a Yemeni horse mounted attack was to turn off the merry-go-round. They can't get to us by water either after they installed screen doors on all their submarines. I hear they bought some septic tanks, but we don't have to worry about an invasion till they learn how to drive them. Did you hear about last week's big Yemeni tragedy? Apparently the power went off across the entire country and people were stuck on escalators for hours and hours.

You just know this Nigerian kid was trained by Yemenis because he obviously wasn't successful. I say, let's not worry about any intelligence out of Yemen (aside from the fact there's no intelligence to come out of Yemen) as any Yemen suicide mission will be about as successful as a WWII Japanese kamikaze pilot who's been on 35 flights.

You know how to keep a Yemeni in suspense?

Edited by AtticaFlinch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NBC nightly news just showed that this scanner can now submit images that are less personal; basically just showing the outline of a body...so it seems the privacy issue is becoming a less valid argument, if one at all.

That's the problem. It's not the nakedness. It's the shape. People wear clothes to hide - or showoff - their shape. That is still a private matter, for those who can't show it off. Being able to hide what you really look like under clothing. And like I said, unless that scanner can also perform virtual colonoscopies, we're still vulnerable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the problem. It's not the nakedness. It's the shape. People wear clothes to hide - or showoff - their shape. That is still a private matter, for those who can't show it off. Being able to hide what you really look like under clothing. And like I said, unless that scanner can also perform virtual colonoscopies, we're still vulnerable.

Agreed. The scanner is worthless and a waste of money. They will just put it inside and go to the bathroom. http://www.strategyp...talcavities.pdf

Edited by brian0123
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the problem. It's not the nakedness. It's the shape. People wear clothes to hide - or showoff - their shape. That is still a private matter, for those who can't show it off. Being able to hide what you really look like under clothing. And like I said, unless that scanner can also perform virtual colonoscopies, we're still vulnerable.

I will not be writing a novel anytime soon as a result of my poor ability to describe something. They finally have last nights video on their website. Here is a screen shot of what I was talking about. Really, we have no excuse now.

gallery_723_64_30137.jpg

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/vp/34635900%2334635900

As the video says, they're becoming mandatory in other countries and coming soon to a US airport near you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will not be writing a novel anytime soon as a result of my poor ability to describe something. They finally have last nights video on their website. Here is a screen shot of what I was talking about. Really, we have no excuse now.

http://www.msnbc.msn...5900%2334635900

As the video says, they're becoming mandatory in other countries and coming soon to a US airport near you.

If it can't detect genitals, then how can it be trusted to detect a gun of the non-fleshy variety?

Seriously... it can detect a belly button but not a nipple?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will not be writing a novel anytime soon as a result of my poor ability to describe something. They finally have last nights video on their website. Here is a screen shot of what I was talking about. Really, we have no excuse now.

Looking at that image, it does not appear to be peering deep enough into the colorectal region of the body. People have hidden all kinds of things up there. Large amounts of cocaine and other illicit drugs, prison inmates sneaking cell phones into their jail cells (they probably put it on vibrate), etc, etc. If we're not willing to go to that level of invasive screening, we're wasting our time and money. A lot of time and a lot of money.

The highest return on investment in terms counter-measure effectiveness, and really the only ones we need, are: metal detectors, reinforced bullet-proof cockpit doors on aircraft, scanning of luggage for bomb/explosive residue, and banning travel if your name is on any government bad list(s).

Taking your shoes off, forbidding tubes of toothpaste, keeping non-ticketed passengers out of the terminal, the entire TSA, the entire DHS, etc - all that is nothing but a huge waste, offering the least return on counter-measure effectiveness. This latest case is proof enough: the guy smuggled on-board the same stuff as the shoe bomber guy. We've added more and more screening and idiotic rules - yet it got us nothing. Zip. Spent millions, yet we got a $0 return. What a waste.

The only next effective screening technique, if we must add more, would be Israeli-style pre-flight interrogations coupled with full body cavity searches. No advanced technology needed, nor required.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...