davetheflyer
New Member
I voted for overhaul TSA and punish him accordingly. Hopefully, his punishment will take into account that his goal was to enhance security, but if it needs to be strict enough to discourage further copycat security testers.
College Student, The TSA and Southwest Airlines (A Poll!)
- Thread starter derg
- Start date
naunga
New Member
tonyw
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I have a sneaking feeling that if someone were to stand up on an aircraft today fewer people would do something about it than we would hope.
Never under estimate the sheepishness of the general population.
[/ QUOTE ]
I dunna, man. If you have three options, and two of them result in you getting killed, what are you going to do? Option one is to sit there and do nothing. Result? You're dead. Option two is to fight the hijacker and get killed in the fight. Result? You're dead.
Option three is to kick the living daylights out of the hijacker and subdue him.
Result? You live.
So if there is only one way to ensure that you live, I think that self preservation will kick in and people will subdue the hijacker.
By the way, getting back to the subject here, I think that the TSA needs to be investigated and they need to figure out just how to make it actually work. Yes, there is a need to make sure that aviation is secure. But is the TSA's approach the best way to do it? That's a question that needs to be asked and I don't think it is.
But they also need to punish the kid who, after all is said and done, broke the law.
I have a sneaking feeling that if someone were to stand up on an aircraft today fewer people would do something about it than we would hope.
Never under estimate the sheepishness of the general population.
[/ QUOTE ]
I dunna, man. If you have three options, and two of them result in you getting killed, what are you going to do? Option one is to sit there and do nothing. Result? You're dead. Option two is to fight the hijacker and get killed in the fight. Result? You're dead.
Option three is to kick the living daylights out of the hijacker and subdue him.
Result? You live.
So if there is only one way to ensure that you live, I think that self preservation will kick in and people will subdue the hijacker.
By the way, getting back to the subject here, I think that the TSA needs to be investigated and they need to figure out just how to make it actually work. Yes, there is a need to make sure that aviation is secure. But is the TSA's approach the best way to do it? That's a question that needs to be asked and I don't think it is.
But they also need to punish the kid who, after all is said and done, broke the law.
pilot602
If specified, this will replace the title that
[ QUOTE ]
I dunna, man. If you have three options, and two of them result in you getting killed, what are you going to do? Option one is to sit there and do nothing. Result? You're dead. Option two is to fight the hijacker and get killed in the fight. Result? You're dead.
Option three is to kick the living daylights out of the hijacker and subdue him.
Result? You live.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's one thing to say folks, who at this point are nothing more than namless, faceless "people" will stand up and fight. It's one thing to assume that these people are courageous and strong and would sacrifice themselves for others.
Its another matter entirely when those folks have names put to them, faces applied to them and placed in a situation where no matter what they do they stand a very good chance at dying. In that situation I fear most people will sit idly by and watch their fate unfold infront of them.
Most folks don't think "if I'm going to die, I'm going out fighting." Most folks go into shock, fear, rationalization etc.
I see it in every person I've ever trained in martial arts. Its a different mindest, one that needs to be cultivated and one that even with years of training is still hard to will into acting upon. Because when "it" really happens no one knows what theyr'e really going to do.
I just don't think as many people will stand up and fight as we - the general public - would like to think.
I dunna, man. If you have three options, and two of them result in you getting killed, what are you going to do? Option one is to sit there and do nothing. Result? You're dead. Option two is to fight the hijacker and get killed in the fight. Result? You're dead.
Option three is to kick the living daylights out of the hijacker and subdue him.
Result? You live.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's one thing to say folks, who at this point are nothing more than namless, faceless "people" will stand up and fight. It's one thing to assume that these people are courageous and strong and would sacrifice themselves for others.
Its another matter entirely when those folks have names put to them, faces applied to them and placed in a situation where no matter what they do they stand a very good chance at dying. In that situation I fear most people will sit idly by and watch their fate unfold infront of them.
Most folks don't think "if I'm going to die, I'm going out fighting." Most folks go into shock, fear, rationalization etc.
I see it in every person I've ever trained in martial arts. Its a different mindest, one that needs to be cultivated and one that even with years of training is still hard to will into acting upon. Because when "it" really happens no one knows what theyr'e really going to do.
I just don't think as many people will stand up and fight as we - the general public - would like to think.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
[ QUOTE ]
He said something to the effect of, "We don't expect to catch 100% of threats at the checkpoint. That why we have multiple layers of security."
[/ QUOTE ]
Really? Where is the other layer? At MCO, there is the security chekpoint and the big machines to x-ray checked baggage. Other than that, TSA is not present. When driving through security checkpoints on airport property, they are staffed by AIRPORT security, not TSA. When this fiasco first started, they had TSA at the gates to screen selectees. If you didn't know what was going on, it LOOKED like they were pulling random people. Now the selectees have their own line at the checkpoint.
Funny story though. An Ops agent used to get really irritated at passengers who did not have their boarding pass or photo ID ready when he needed to check them to board the plane. He would send them over to TSA for 'extra screening.'
He said something to the effect of, "We don't expect to catch 100% of threats at the checkpoint. That why we have multiple layers of security."
[/ QUOTE ]
Really? Where is the other layer? At MCO, there is the security chekpoint and the big machines to x-ray checked baggage. Other than that, TSA is not present. When driving through security checkpoints on airport property, they are staffed by AIRPORT security, not TSA. When this fiasco first started, they had TSA at the gates to screen selectees. If you didn't know what was going on, it LOOKED like they were pulling random people. Now the selectees have their own line at the checkpoint.
Funny story though. An Ops agent used to get really irritated at passengers who did not have their boarding pass or photo ID ready when he needed to check them to board the plane. He would send them over to TSA for 'extra screening.'
naunga
New Member
[ QUOTE ]
Where is the other layer?
[/ QUOTE ]
That's exactly what I want to know.
I mean is he trying to imply that there are plain-clothes TSA agents cruising the concourses? Riiiight. They're working side by side with Santa Clause and Bug Bunny.
Or maybe they mean the handle full of local police that circulate through the terminal?
Goodness I feel soooo much safer knowing that the TSA and Sheriff Taylor (not Doug) is on the beat. Whatever.
Maybe he meant the National Guardsmen. Nope they've been gone for a while, and from what I hear it's very likely their weapons were not loaded to begin with.
Hmmm. I just can't seem to find that second layer of people making sure I don't have anything DANGEROUS IN MY F'ING BAG PAST THE TSA CHECKPOINT MORON (directed to the Deputy Director and Admiral Loy)!!
*sigh* Oh well. I know I feel safer with the TS..wait. Ah that's it. I feel safer flying my family places myself...and I only have to strip for one person and that's after we get to the hotel.
Where is the other layer?
[/ QUOTE ]
That's exactly what I want to know.
I mean is he trying to imply that there are plain-clothes TSA agents cruising the concourses? Riiiight. They're working side by side with Santa Clause and Bug Bunny.
Or maybe they mean the handle full of local police that circulate through the terminal?
Goodness I feel soooo much safer knowing that the TSA and Sheriff Taylor (not Doug) is on the beat. Whatever.
Maybe he meant the National Guardsmen. Nope they've been gone for a while, and from what I hear it's very likely their weapons were not loaded to begin with.
*sigh* Oh well. I know I feel safer with the TS..wait. Ah that's it. I feel safer flying my family places myself...and I only have to strip for one person and that's after we get to the hotel.
Bryan
New Member
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
After 9/11, people are going to react different too. If somebody stands up waving a box knife and screaming "allah is great, your all gonna die" there is going to be a serious a$$ kicking going on.
[/ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't bet on that.
The weeks and months following 9/11? Sure. But now that we're two years removed from the event life has pretty much gone back to normal - i.e. people are worried about their mortgages, losing their jobs, their kids latest report card, etc. I have a sneaking feeling that if someone were to stand up on an aircraft today fewer people would do something about it than we would hope.
Never under estimate the sheepishness of the general population.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would bet on it. Remember that guy that tried to blow his foot off - gang tackled. I think there are other examples of people acting weird that have been restrained by passengers. I agree maybe fewer than we would hope but enough to get the job done.
[ QUOTE ]
After 9/11, people are going to react different too. If somebody stands up waving a box knife and screaming "allah is great, your all gonna die" there is going to be a serious a$$ kicking going on.
[/ QUOTE ]
I wouldn't bet on that.
The weeks and months following 9/11? Sure. But now that we're two years removed from the event life has pretty much gone back to normal - i.e. people are worried about their mortgages, losing their jobs, their kids latest report card, etc. I have a sneaking feeling that if someone were to stand up on an aircraft today fewer people would do something about it than we would hope.
Never under estimate the sheepishness of the general population.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would bet on it. Remember that guy that tried to blow his foot off - gang tackled. I think there are other examples of people acting weird that have been restrained by passengers. I agree maybe fewer than we would hope but enough to get the job done.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
Now, I'm not a violent person by nature; but I don't care if I'm in the back of a plane or up front flying it; If someone wants to bring a knife on board trying to run the plane into the ground he's not coming off alive. One dude getting bum rushed by 10 people means he's going down, and probably getting his throat slit with that knife once he's on the ground. For that matter, if I were up front and someone's trying to come through that door there is going to be me with a crash axe waiting.
Like I said, I'm not a violent person. I've never been in a fight in my life, and I've only been on the receiving end of beat downs in grade schools (I've always been a pretty small guy); but someone trying to take out an airplane with me on board won't get too much sympathy out of me.
What was that thing that Dave posted up here? Something about one of the trusted? You can trust that even though I think killing is immoral, and I don't like violence, someone is not going come off that plane alive if they try to hijack the thing and I'm on it.
I hope most of ya'll feel the same way.
Cheers
John Herreshoff
Like I said, I'm not a violent person. I've never been in a fight in my life, and I've only been on the receiving end of beat downs in grade schools (I've always been a pretty small guy); but someone trying to take out an airplane with me on board won't get too much sympathy out of me.
What was that thing that Dave posted up here? Something about one of the trusted? You can trust that even though I think killing is immoral, and I don't like violence, someone is not going come off that plane alive if they try to hijack the thing and I'm on it.
I hope most of ya'll feel the same way.
Cheers
John Herreshoff
pilot602
If specified, this will replace the title that
[ QUOTE ]
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Congress wants to know how a 20-year-old college student apparently spirited box cutters and other suspicious items onto two airplanes, where they lay undetected for weeks after he allegedly told the Transportation Security Administration what he had done.
He even e-mailed officials his name and telephone number, the FBI said.
Rep. Tom Davis, R-Virginia, chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, said Monday he told TSA chief James Loy that the panel would review the agency's operations, including airline passenger screening.
<font color="red">"Despite significant seizures of prohibited items from passengers going through TSA security checkpoints, this week's events highlight possible weaknesses in the system which need to be addressed," Davis said in a letter to Loy. </font>
Nathaniel Heatwole, 20, of Damascus, Maryland, was charged Monday in federal court in Baltimore with taking a dangerous weapon aboard an aircraft. The case followed discovery of bags containing box cutters, bleach and other prohibited items aboard two Southwest Airlines planes.
Heatwole sent an e-mail to federal authorities in mid-September saying he had put the items aboard two specific Southwest flights as an act of civil disobedience to expose weaknesses in the security system, an FBI affidavit said. The objects were not found until last week.
The TSA did not send the e-mail to the FBI until last Friday. FBI agents then located Heatwole and interviewed him.
After his court appearance Monday, Heatwole, a junior at Guilford College in Greensboro, North Carolina, was released without bail for a preliminary hearing November 10. He faces up to 10 years in prison.
Rep. Peter DeFazio, the top Democrat on the House Transportation aviation subcommittee, said someone should be fired because of the incident. But he said Loy, a former Coast Guard commandant, should stay if he owns up to what the agency's deficiencies are.
"I'm still willing to give the admiral a chance to come clean with us," said DeFazio, D-Oregon. "He's a political appointee under tremendous pressure by this administration to cut corners, make things look good, not upset the airlines and not upset the passengers."
<font color="blue">Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, plans to hold a hearing in the next two weeks on aviation security.</font>
<font color="green">Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, whose department includes TSA, said officials "will go back and look at our protocol" for handling such e-mails. He said the agency gets a high volume of e-mails about possible threats and officials decided that Heatwole "wasn't an imminent threat."</font>
The e-mail provided details of where the plastic bags were hidden -- right down to the exact dates and flight numbers -- along with Heatwole's name and telephone number.
TSA spokesman Mark Hatfield said the agency was reviewing its procedures.
"Following an event like this, the results usually include adjustments and improvements in the procedures," he said.
The TSA's Contact Center was set up in May to handle communications to the agency. When an overt threat is received, operators are trained to notify a TSA investigator or security official, who then decides whether to refer it to the FBI or take other action, Hatfield said.
The center fields about 5,700 complaints, queries, compliments and threats each day. Heatwole's e-mail did not fall into the overt category because he never threatened harm, Hatfield said.
Now, call center workers will be trained to look for words or phrases that might fall outside the definition of overt but could signal a security threat, Hatfield said.
The incidents followed reports that aviation security still has substantial gaps more than two years after the September 11, 2001, terror attacks. Significant weaknesses in testing and training TSA screeners were cited in recent reports by the Homeland Security Department's inspector general and the General Accounting Office, Congress's investigative arm.
The inspector general's investigators recently carried knives, a bomb and a gun through Boston Logan International Airport's boarding procedures without being detected.
Both hijacked airliners that crashed into the World Trade Center took off from Logan.
[/ QUOTE ]
<font color="red"> Possible weakness? POSSIBLE weakness? WTF are you smoking, inhaling, injecting dude!? The whole damn TSA is one, gigantic weakness.</font>
<font color="blue"> Oh well McCain will make things ALL better - just as soon as he gets finishied raping airline unions of their collective bargaining RIGHTS.
</font>
<font color="green"> Well it's a good thing, Mr. Ridge, that you're going to change the e-mail handling protocol - because we all know the next time a bad guy is going to do something he's going to send you an e-mail telling you when, how and where he's going to strike! Yes it's comforting to know that the TSA will be searching it's e-mail everyday looking for the next attack.[/i]</font>
The entire DHS/TSA is a friggin' joke.
And as in the article Doug posted, the "circling of the wagons" begins. No one will be fired. Nothing will change. As evidenced with this quote:
[ QUOTE ]
Rep. Peter DeFazio, the top Democrat on the House Transportation aviation subcommittee, said someone should be fired because of the incident. But he said Loy, a former Coast Guard commandant, should stay if he owns up to what the agency's deficiencies are.
"I'm still willing to give the admiral a chance to come clean with us," said DeFazio, D-Oregon. "He's a political appointee under tremendous pressure by this administration to cut corners, make things look good, not upset the airlines and not upset the passengers."
[/ QUOTE ]
And the TSA will happily go about its business of "protecting" us from grandmas and flight crews - all while college students and drunks are sneaking items on board aircraft and crashing airport perimeters.
But, I guess it's just a covert plan of "multi-layered security" and we just can't see the "big picture." Silly us. (/sarcasm
ff)
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Congress wants to know how a 20-year-old college student apparently spirited box cutters and other suspicious items onto two airplanes, where they lay undetected for weeks after he allegedly told the Transportation Security Administration what he had done.
He even e-mailed officials his name and telephone number, the FBI said.
Rep. Tom Davis, R-Virginia, chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, said Monday he told TSA chief James Loy that the panel would review the agency's operations, including airline passenger screening.
<font color="red">"Despite significant seizures of prohibited items from passengers going through TSA security checkpoints, this week's events highlight possible weaknesses in the system which need to be addressed," Davis said in a letter to Loy. </font>
Nathaniel Heatwole, 20, of Damascus, Maryland, was charged Monday in federal court in Baltimore with taking a dangerous weapon aboard an aircraft. The case followed discovery of bags containing box cutters, bleach and other prohibited items aboard two Southwest Airlines planes.
Heatwole sent an e-mail to federal authorities in mid-September saying he had put the items aboard two specific Southwest flights as an act of civil disobedience to expose weaknesses in the security system, an FBI affidavit said. The objects were not found until last week.
The TSA did not send the e-mail to the FBI until last Friday. FBI agents then located Heatwole and interviewed him.
After his court appearance Monday, Heatwole, a junior at Guilford College in Greensboro, North Carolina, was released without bail for a preliminary hearing November 10. He faces up to 10 years in prison.
Rep. Peter DeFazio, the top Democrat on the House Transportation aviation subcommittee, said someone should be fired because of the incident. But he said Loy, a former Coast Guard commandant, should stay if he owns up to what the agency's deficiencies are.
"I'm still willing to give the admiral a chance to come clean with us," said DeFazio, D-Oregon. "He's a political appointee under tremendous pressure by this administration to cut corners, make things look good, not upset the airlines and not upset the passengers."
<font color="blue">Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, plans to hold a hearing in the next two weeks on aviation security.</font>
<font color="green">Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, whose department includes TSA, said officials "will go back and look at our protocol" for handling such e-mails. He said the agency gets a high volume of e-mails about possible threats and officials decided that Heatwole "wasn't an imminent threat."</font>
The e-mail provided details of where the plastic bags were hidden -- right down to the exact dates and flight numbers -- along with Heatwole's name and telephone number.
TSA spokesman Mark Hatfield said the agency was reviewing its procedures.
"Following an event like this, the results usually include adjustments and improvements in the procedures," he said.
The TSA's Contact Center was set up in May to handle communications to the agency. When an overt threat is received, operators are trained to notify a TSA investigator or security official, who then decides whether to refer it to the FBI or take other action, Hatfield said.
The center fields about 5,700 complaints, queries, compliments and threats each day. Heatwole's e-mail did not fall into the overt category because he never threatened harm, Hatfield said.
Now, call center workers will be trained to look for words or phrases that might fall outside the definition of overt but could signal a security threat, Hatfield said.
The incidents followed reports that aviation security still has substantial gaps more than two years after the September 11, 2001, terror attacks. Significant weaknesses in testing and training TSA screeners were cited in recent reports by the Homeland Security Department's inspector general and the General Accounting Office, Congress's investigative arm.
The inspector general's investigators recently carried knives, a bomb and a gun through Boston Logan International Airport's boarding procedures without being detected.
Both hijacked airliners that crashed into the World Trade Center took off from Logan.
[/ QUOTE ]
<font color="red"> Possible weakness? POSSIBLE weakness? WTF are you smoking, inhaling, injecting dude!? The whole damn TSA is one, gigantic weakness.</font>
<font color="blue"> Oh well McCain will make things ALL better - just as soon as he gets finishied raping airline unions of their collective bargaining RIGHTS.
<font color="green"> Well it's a good thing, Mr. Ridge, that you're going to change the e-mail handling protocol - because we all know the next time a bad guy is going to do something he's going to send you an e-mail telling you when, how and where he's going to strike! Yes it's comforting to know that the TSA will be searching it's e-mail everyday looking for the next attack.[/i]</font>
The entire DHS/TSA is a friggin' joke.
And as in the article Doug posted, the "circling of the wagons" begins. No one will be fired. Nothing will change. As evidenced with this quote:
[ QUOTE ]
Rep. Peter DeFazio, the top Democrat on the House Transportation aviation subcommittee, said someone should be fired because of the incident. But he said Loy, a former Coast Guard commandant, should stay if he owns up to what the agency's deficiencies are.
"I'm still willing to give the admiral a chance to come clean with us," said DeFazio, D-Oregon. "He's a political appointee under tremendous pressure by this administration to cut corners, make things look good, not upset the airlines and not upset the passengers."
[/ QUOTE ]
And the TSA will happily go about its business of "protecting" us from grandmas and flight crews - all while college students and drunks are sneaking items on board aircraft and crashing airport perimeters.
But, I guess it's just a covert plan of "multi-layered security" and we just can't see the "big picture." Silly us. (/sarcasm
ff)
pilot602
If specified, this will replace the title that
No offense John, but it's easy to type that on an Internet message board while sitting safely in an office or home. It's quite another thing when you're holding a knife to someones throat or, having one thrust at you.
Just something to ponder.
I've trained for years in a rather "rough" art. We use chains, swords, staves all kinds of weapons. I know ways to do things to the human body that are, simply put, just flat out wrong. And I'm to the point in my "training" where I can do those things without thinking - as simply a reaction to an attack. I've trained in Tokyo on two seperate occassions and know people who've used the art in real life situations where the attackers were not left standing.
As we all must do when getting involved with self defense/martial arts I've made the choice that if need be I am willing to do what's necessary to survive.
I'm not saying this to brag or impress - I'm saying it because even with my training, discipline and having already made my decision, if - or, god forbid, when - the actual moment comes when I have to make the decision in real-time even I'm not 100% sure what exactly will happen. No one can be.
Anyone who says otherwise is fooling themselves.
Just something to ponder.
I've trained for years in a rather "rough" art. We use chains, swords, staves all kinds of weapons. I know ways to do things to the human body that are, simply put, just flat out wrong. And I'm to the point in my "training" where I can do those things without thinking - as simply a reaction to an attack. I've trained in Tokyo on two seperate occassions and know people who've used the art in real life situations where the attackers were not left standing.
As we all must do when getting involved with self defense/martial arts I've made the choice that if need be I am willing to do what's necessary to survive.
I'm not saying this to brag or impress - I'm saying it because even with my training, discipline and having already made my decision, if - or, god forbid, when - the actual moment comes when I have to make the decision in real-time even I'm not 100% sure what exactly will happen. No one can be.
Anyone who says otherwise is fooling themselves.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
None taken of course.
I know what you're trying to say, but you really don't think when pushed we'd be able to act? I know it's easy to say we would sitting here, but I like to think that most of us would act on something like that if it were happening. I completly agree that we wouldn't know what would happen until the sh*t hits the fan and the chips are down; but I'd like to hope we could all react instead of just sit there with a deer in the headlights look.
Let's hope none of us have to find out.
Cheers
John Herreshoff
I know what you're trying to say, but you really don't think when pushed we'd be able to act? I know it's easy to say we would sitting here, but I like to think that most of us would act on something like that if it were happening. I completly agree that we wouldn't know what would happen until the sh*t hits the fan and the chips are down; but I'd like to hope we could all react instead of just sit there with a deer in the headlights look.
Let's hope none of us have to find out.
Cheers
John Herreshoff
pilot602
If specified, this will replace the title that
Agreed. Lets hope we never have to find out.
But my point is if I have doubt - albeit a very, very small amount of it - about myself I sure as hell don't want to go around betting complete strangers - most of whom have had no exposure, let alone have made a decision about, the types of moral questions/problems I've already come to terms with - are going to be able to act like anything other than deer in headlights and stand up and defend themselves or their neighbors or myself.
[ QUOTE ]
I know what you're trying to say, but you really don't think when pushed we'd be able to act?
[/ QUOTE ]
Case-in-point. There were four airplanes downed on the 11th. Only one of them had passengers that fought back. Granted one can argue that the passengers didn't know the aircraft were going to be used in the manner in which they were. And that historically passengers were generally left alive as leverage. But the passengers also didn't know they wouldn't be used as suicide rockets, either. Meaning they were already in a bad situation and no one knew what was going to happen so why not enact the "if I'm going out, I'm going out fighting" attitude and fight back. Like I said only one of the four managed to do tha and 25% is not a number I'd like to stake airline security on.
I think it's a cop-out for the TSA to rely on the "oh the pax will never let it happen" feeling that is prevalent these days. It should never get to the point where the passenger's involvement ever needs to come into play!
Just my stupid opinion.
But my point is if I have doubt - albeit a very, very small amount of it - about myself I sure as hell don't want to go around betting complete strangers - most of whom have had no exposure, let alone have made a decision about, the types of moral questions/problems I've already come to terms with - are going to be able to act like anything other than deer in headlights and stand up and defend themselves or their neighbors or myself.
[ QUOTE ]
I know what you're trying to say, but you really don't think when pushed we'd be able to act?
[/ QUOTE ]
Case-in-point. There were four airplanes downed on the 11th. Only one of them had passengers that fought back. Granted one can argue that the passengers didn't know the aircraft were going to be used in the manner in which they were. And that historically passengers were generally left alive as leverage. But the passengers also didn't know they wouldn't be used as suicide rockets, either. Meaning they were already in a bad situation and no one knew what was going to happen so why not enact the "if I'm going out, I'm going out fighting" attitude and fight back. Like I said only one of the four managed to do tha and 25% is not a number I'd like to stake airline security on.
I think it's a cop-out for the TSA to rely on the "oh the pax will never let it happen" feeling that is prevalent these days. It should never get to the point where the passenger's involvement ever needs to come into play!
Just my stupid opinion.
The pax almost let it happen again on the UAL 777 in South America. The guy had his head through the cockpit door until he got wacked with the dull side of a crash axe.
Here's the problem. If the knuckleheads try it again, America has been politically (and religiously) programmed to look for Arabs. The terrorists know that if an Arab raises a stink on an airplane, fight's on.
However, how many blonde haired terrorists are there? None. Alas, how about some of the Muslim eastern bloc nations, for example, the Muslims that took over the Russian theater? Not many turbans, beards or burkas in that group at all.
I really don't think the average Joe is charged up enough to know what poses a threat and what doesn't.
Chatting with some sky marshals that have been briefed about when there were some 'tests' being conducted that they intercepted, they weren't using arabic looking people. They were usually Eastern Europeans.
Here's the problem. If the knuckleheads try it again, America has been politically (and religiously) programmed to look for Arabs. The terrorists know that if an Arab raises a stink on an airplane, fight's on.
However, how many blonde haired terrorists are there? None. Alas, how about some of the Muslim eastern bloc nations, for example, the Muslims that took over the Russian theater? Not many turbans, beards or burkas in that group at all.
I really don't think the average Joe is charged up enough to know what poses a threat and what doesn't.
Chatting with some sky marshals that have been briefed about when there were some 'tests' being conducted that they intercepted, they weren't using arabic looking people. They were usually Eastern Europeans.
PurduePilot
New Member
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe he meant the National Guardsmen. Nope they've been gone for a while, and from what I hear it's very likely their weapons were not loaded to begin with.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is a little off the point and moot now, but was it legal to station the National Guard at the airport?
If I'm correct the military cannot be used to enforce civilian law domestically under posse comitatus, unless martial law has been declared. I think the last time that happened anywhere in the US was the weeks after Hurricane Andrew, in Florida.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Maybe he meant the National Guardsmen. Nope they've been gone for a while, and from what I hear it's very likely their weapons were not loaded to begin with.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is a little off the point and moot now, but was it legal to station the National Guard at the airport?
If I'm correct the military cannot be used to enforce civilian law domestically under posse comitatus, unless martial law has been declared. I think the last time that happened anywhere in the US was the weeks after Hurricane Andrew, in Florida.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
[ QUOTE ]
[This is a little off the point and moot now, but was it legal to station the National Guard at the airport?
If I'm correct the military cannot be used to enforce civilian law domestically under posse comitatus, unless martial law has been declared. I think the last time that happened anywhere in the US was the weeks after Hurricane Andrew, in Florida.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
[/ QUOTE ]
You are correct regards Posse Comitatus. I believe, though, that the NG was a show of force and support to the civilian airport police/authorities that had jurisdiction to whichever airport. In this support role, I understand that it was legal, though I can't cite specific regs as I write this.
[This is a little off the point and moot now, but was it legal to station the National Guard at the airport?
If I'm correct the military cannot be used to enforce civilian law domestically under posse comitatus, unless martial law has been declared. I think the last time that happened anywhere in the US was the weeks after Hurricane Andrew, in Florida.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
[/ QUOTE ]
You are correct regards Posse Comitatus. I believe, though, that the NG was a show of force and support to the civilian airport police/authorities that had jurisdiction to whichever airport. In this support role, I understand that it was legal, though I can't cite specific regs as I write this.
PurduePilot
New Member
[ QUOTE ]
You are correct regards Posse Comitatus. I believe, though, that the NG was a show of force and support to the civilian airport police/authorities that had jurisdiction to whichever airport. In this support role, I understand that it was legal, though I can't cite specific regs as I write this.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks, MikeD! No one really could ever give me a straight answer on that.
You are correct regards Posse Comitatus. I believe, though, that the NG was a show of force and support to the civilian airport police/authorities that had jurisdiction to whichever airport. In this support role, I understand that it was legal, though I can't cite specific regs as I write this.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks, MikeD! No one really could ever give me a straight answer on that.
For the life of me, I cannot understand why everyone is dumping on 20-year-old Nathaniel Heatwole, the kid who somehow managed to plant box cutters and other nefarious items on two airplanes. Now he faces 10 years in the slammer. For what? For embarrassing some people? We shouldn't be condemning Heatwole. We should be thanking him. But no, he likely goes to jail and the bumbling boobs who should have found his stuff keep their jobs. Something isn't right here. I mean, Heatwole wasn't exactly hiding. He personally e-mailed the Transportation Security Administration back on September 15 about at least six serious breaches of airport security on Southwest Airlines at Raleigh-Durham and Baltimore-Washington airports. Box cutters that were never found. Questionable contraband like duct tape and bleach that were never questioned. And here's the kicker: All this stuff sat there hidden in airline bathrooms for five weeks. Five weeks! What's more the kid sends the e-mail, with his name, with his phone number, with everything but his astrology chart, to the TSA, where it sits, un-answered, un-addressed, un-anything for more than a month. Newsflash! The kid isn't the problem. The TSA is. And now this massive 70,000-plus behemoth of a bureaucracy is ticked. You’ve got to be kidding me! Agency Deputy Administrator Steve McHale sniffed to the Daily News that "amateur testing of the system like this does not in any way assist us where there are flaws." Hey, Steve-o, wake up, will ya? A kid exposed you for what you are: pumped up, but hardly living up to your edict. Rather than condemning the kid, buy him a drink. In fact, buy him an outfit and hire him! He knows your weaknesses. And he knows how terrorists can know your weaknesses. And don't be so damn defensive. You botched it. Now get over it and please, deal with it. I've always feared there's something very wrong with a system that practically strip-searches an 82-year-old grandmother but lets a guy who looks like Usama bin Laden sail right through to the gate. No, a 20-year-old with a penchant for publicity isn't the problem. An agency with a penchant for screwing up, is.
Personally, I'd hire the guy as a consultant because he foiled security.
Kind of like the FBI and CIA hiring convicted hackers to consult on network security.
Putting this guy in jail isn't going to make us any safer but'll give the TSA the ability to 'save face' and get that phat budget.
Kind of like the FBI and CIA hiring convicted hackers to consult on network security.
Putting this guy in jail isn't going to make us any safer but'll give the TSA the ability to 'save face' and get that phat budget.
Similar threads
