Terrorist paranoia is now getting ridiculous

[Marcus Telcontar]

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/06/1073268036714.html

Doesnt this nonsense make you wonder when it's going to stop? Yes, some precautions are necessary, but I really do get the feeling that things are going too far. None of these measures are going to stop real terrorists.

But banning toilet queues??????

:rolleyes

[JediBoricua]

:lol

I read that since the US started taking pictures of all foreigners entering it's soil, Brasil started doing the same to all americans entering it's territory.

Lula da Silva is a comedy genius!

[Darth Viscera]

Why is this not a prudent measure? I mean sure it sounds funny, but if I were a part of a flight crew, it'd make me rather edgy to see half a dozen people massing for what could turn out to be an all-out zerg rush.

[JMK]

I can see it now, someone is going to get arrested or fined for dropping the dook or hosing their neighbor because they couldn't get to the bathroom in time.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Yeah but who would want to hold the bathroom for 14 hours. That doesn't seem fair to me. Their has to be some limits to this because we could go to far with this. What if we go to the extreme and say build a police state? Sure we will be safe from Terrorists but do we want to give up freedoms just to be safe?

[Marcus Telcontar]

My point would be, how exactly do these measures deter terrorists? Considering the 9/11 terrorists came in mainly legally and appeared law abiding citizens, can you tell me what these measures will really produce?

[Darth Viscera]

well to me, it seems like this new rule is trying to make it harder for a group of potential hostiles to take over a plane.

I don't think that making people keep to themselves onboard jumbo jets is going to quite usher in the era of the police state.

[ReaperFett]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
well to me, it seems like this new rule is trying to make it harder for a group of potential hostiles to take over a plane.

Explain how someone sitting far away from a toilet will get to use it. They get up, it's engaged, they sit down?

[Darth Viscera]

They can still use the bathroom, they just can't form a line for it. Maybe they'll call numbers or something, like at a deli or restaurant. Who knows.

[ReaperFett]

The point is, you CAN'T use it. What if you can't physically see the toilets? You can hardly get up every five minutes and try the door, can you?

And anyway, they want it to stop people massing up? What happens when the toilet light becomes vacant? Why, a mass of people rush to the toilet! So what's the difference?

(And not all planes have engaged lights)

[JMK]

That's what Viscera's saying, maybe they would give numbers out or something.
"Now serving number 7"
And you get up and go. They could automate this or get an attendant to be stationed there. Which would suck either way. What happens to the mile high club? :lol If they ensure that only one person goes at a time, that's all but toast.

Still, I think this idea is going a little too far.

[Loklorien s'Ilancy]

well damn - i always wanted to be in the mile high club :grumble

[Jedieb]

That's what Viscera's saying, maybe they would give numbers out or something.
"Now serving number 7"
:lol
There's a simple solution to this. Duct Tape, and lot's of it! Sure, some people may actually explode sending feces flying all over the plane, but the terroists will finally be stopped!

[Sanis Prent]

Who is the idiot who thought this one up, and why are my tax dollars paying him to do this?

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by Sanis Prent
Who is the idiot who thought this one up, and why are my tax dollars paying him to do this?

Here here. I agree completely

[Darth Viscera]

hmmm, the sole hardliner holdout. What a precarious predicament. Well, I know when to stay and when to fold. *dives out of the plane in question and lands safely on his hands 40,000 feet below*

[Zeke]

Originally posted by s'Ilancy
well damn - i always wanted to be in the mile high club :grumble

One of my uncle's friends got him to fly a private airplane for him so he could be in the mile high club. My uncle said it wasn't too unsimilar to flying in turbulence, so it wasn't a big deal.

[Mr Dust]

Personally, I think the thing with the sky marshalls is the best idea. I mean, you have two or three guys on a plane, armed, and trained in how to use said armaments. In my opinion, it's the perfect solution. It doesn't hurt the passengers, because they have no idea who the marshalls are. It's not intrusive or invasive in any way, form, or fashion.

[ReaperFett]

Debatable. You fire a gun and miss, you can hit a passenger. Plus, it only takes two to take out a sky marshall.

And imagine the scenario. Man eats or drinks too much. Feeling sick, he runs for the toilet. Sky marshall sees large man running towards cockpit. What happens next?

While the idea of SKy Marshalls seem okay, I don't want proper handguns brought onto an airplane AT ALL.

[Figrin D'an]

They're trained on how to handle firearms on airplanes and in crowded spaces. It's not like they're going to pull their weapon the instant they see something suspicious and go postal on some guy.

[Jedieb]

Isn't their ammo modified as well? But regardless, I can't picture an air marshall gunning someone down on their way to pee. At some point he/she is going to identify themselves before they shoot giving someone time to shout; "For the love of Pete, I'm just going to pee!"

[ReaperFett]

And couldn't a terrorist say that before heading into the cockpit?

[Figrin D'an]

And couldn't the air marshall make sure they guy goes to the toliet and not the cockpit?

[ReaperFett]

How? He just darted past him.

Also, you've now just revealed the Air Marshall to the plane. Terrorist #2 then deals with him a while later, while #1 goes for the cockpit.

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
How? He just darted past him.



Yes... because it's impossible to get up and observe where the person goes, or ask another passenger where he went.

:rolleyes



Also, you've now just revealed the Air Marshall to the plane. Terrorist #2 then deals with him a while later, while #1 goes for the cockpit.

There is usually more than one air marshall on the flight. Not to mention that they're trained in more than just firearms usage (ie. physical combat, incapacitating a hostile, etc.).



You can play these theoreticals all day. It's not going to change the fact that the system is in use and hasn't gotten any major complaints so far.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I am actually more for better security to keep terrorists off planes. Simple just do some good old looking for who is the obvious candidantes. Don't frisk the 80 year old White grandmother keep an eye on the arabs trying to get on planes. Those are the guys who are going to do a terrorist act, if you do a better job at airport there shouldn't be a need to have an air marshall on the plane.

[ReaperFett]

There is usually more than one air marshall on the flight. Not to mention that they're trained in more than just firearms usage (ie. physical combat, incapacitating a hostile, etc.).



You can play these theoreticals all day. It's not going to change the fact that the system is in use and hasn't gotten any major complaints so far.
Not true. the US is now demanding ALL flights have them reguarding the US, and most don't yet. A lot of companies have apparently been considering wether it is viable to stop going to the US at all. Others are refusing to budge until they are told more specifically what is required. Couldn't tell you how the split is, but it isn't that distant.

Also, they only have to have A sky marshall on SOME flights.

[JediBoricua]

The whole running into the cockpit thing is not doable now because they have replaced all cockpit doors with heavier locked doors, not the flimsy ones they had before.

And btw the Air Marshall program is intended for random flights, not all of them.

There have to be more than 10,000 flights a day in the US, there is no way you can have one marshall per flight.

[Charley]

Also, fears of explosive decompression and getting sucked out of bullet holes are unsubstantiated urban legends. You can thank Goldfinger for propogating that one.

[ReaperFett]

No, I'm more fearful of a missed shot entering my skull :)

[Figrin D'an]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
No, I'm more fearful of a missed shot entering my skull :)

Again, these aren't reckless fools that are going to bust a cap in someone without considering their surroundings. It would be far more dangerous if there was a struggle for a gun, in which case other passengers might see fit to actually help out the air marshall (one would hope anyway).

Actually firing the weapon is a last resort. If an air marshall can take control of the situation without discharging a round, he'll likely do so.

[ReaperFett]

It would be far more dangerous if there was a struggle for a gun
And if a terrorist gets to a sky marshall, that's what we get. How secure is the information? I mean the pilot has to be told, but by who? And how does he find out? And where does he? And so on.

[Sanis Prent]

That, and you're pretty up close & personal on a plane. If a discharge occurs, its likely point blank. Factor JHP ammunition into it, and its reasonably safe to other bystanders.

And if I were you, I'd be more fearful of a possible terrorist exploding an entire plane.

[ReaperFett]

I don't want reasonably safe, I want safe! :)

Can't they use a stun gun or something?


Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
I am actually more for better security to keep terrorists off planes. Simple just do some good old looking for who is the obvious candidantes. Don't frisk the 80 year old White grandmother keep an eye on the arabs trying to get on planes.
The problem is, that's easy to counter. All you need is a guy who isn't of Arab descent, and he gets in under the radar.


Those are the guys who are going to do a terrorist act
Depends. I mean, the UK and Russia have had terrorist trouble for 20-30 years.

[Sanis Prent]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
I don't want reasonably safe, I want safe! :)

I want a solid gold toilet and a rocketship. My wish is actually more realistic than yours.


Can't they use a stun gun or something?

Sure, if they want something that is wholly unreliable at incapacitation. Stun guns aren't the amazing non-lethal elixir of problem solving that some gun-phobics seem to think. They really don't work very well.


The problem is, that's easy to counter. All you need is a guy who isn't of Arab descent, and he gets in under the radar.

Hi Bob. I'm Saleem, and this is my friend Ahmed. We were wondering if you would be interested in exploding yourself for Allah? The death benefits are fantastic. Seventy-two Virgins! That's like a whole 71 more than that Jesus guy offers. WHAT A DEAL!


Depends. I mean, the UK and Russia have had terrorist trouble for 20-30 years.

Insinuating that Irish Catholics are going to suddenly start exploding American buildings is the most left field thing I've heard from you, Fett. Congratulations on topping yourself.

[Jedieb]

If there's a terroist on a plane, then you're far better off with an Air Marshal on board. If there isn't a terroist then the idea that an Air Marshal is going to shoot someone with a bladder problem is just far fetched. An Air Marshal won't guarantee your safety, but if something does happen you've got a much better chance of stopping any terroist with them on board.

[ReaperFett]

I want a solid gold toilet and a rocketship. My wish is actually more realistic than yours.
My comment was slightly joking :)

"I don't want top-up, I want STAYS UP!" :)


Sure, if they want something that is wholly unreliable at incapacitation. Stun guns aren't the amazing non-lethal elixir of problem solving that some gun-phobics seem to think. They really don't work very well.
Charley, just because I mention stun guns doesn't mean you have to start bashing people who disagree with you on firearms. "Having a gun on board isn't the life-saving elixir of problem solving that some gun nuts seem to think".


Hi Bob. I'm Saleem, and this is my friend Ahmed. We were wondering if you would be interested in exploding yourself for Allah? The death benefits are fantastic. Seventy-two Virgins! That's like a whole 71 more than that Jesus guy offers. WHAT A DEAL!
Are all arabs suicide bombers? No. So why would all suicide bombers definately, 100% likely be arabs?


Insinuating that Irish Catholics are going to suddenly start exploding American buildings is the most left field thing I've heard from you, Fett. Congratulations on topping yourself.
Where did I say that, hm? He said A TERRORIST ACT. Not destroying American buildings. Learn to read before learning to assume.

Sky Marshalls aren't there because someone said "We gotta stop people exploding American buildings!". It's to stop terrorists.

[Kria'thn Ki]

I don’t see why there can’t be some system that locks an aeroplanes controls completely.

Its like the guys who attack secure money van drivers partners to draw them out. Why can’t there be a code or something you type In and that’s it, the controls are completely locked or even blown. I mean in the case of the van, I’ve always thought it ridiculous that they can’t get out and help their partners, for the sake of leaving the van itself.

In the case of an aeroplane it just autopilots to the nearest airfield and lands. Or till the technology is available to actually land the aeroplane properly, (which I hear is almost there) its locked till the tower it gets to unlocks it from the ground. To me it seems the perfect fail safe solution.

[Sanis Prent]

Originally posted by ReaperFett
Charley, just because I mention stun guns doesn't mean you have to start bashing people who disagree with you on firearms. "Having a gun on board isn't the life-saving elixir of problem solving that some gun nuts seem to think".

There is no bash at all. The misconception from the anti-gun constituency is that guns are used by those who voluntarily seek the lethal route for whatever perverse reason, when a non-lethal alternative would perform just as well at threat neutralization. The fact is that a gun is much more effective at neutralization than any non-lethal means.



Are all arabs suicide bombers? No. So why would all suicide bombers definately, 100% likely be arabs?

You're all about absolutes. You're going to be sorely dissapointed in the lack of absolutes in real life. I never said that 100% of suicide bombers were arabic, but look at the overwhelming majority, and find the trend.


Where did I say that, hm? He said A TERRORIST ACT. Not destroying American buildings. Learn to read before learning to assume.

Sky Marshalls aren't there because someone said "We gotta stop people exploding American buildings!". It's to stop terrorists.

Then let me spell it out. 9-11 happened when terrorists on an airplane hijacked it and crashed it into a building. This in turn causes increased scrutiny on airline security.

When was the last time the IRA attacked America, outside of the movie "The Devil's Own"?

[Sanis Prent]

Originally posted by Kria'thn Ki
I don’t see why there can’t be some system that locks an aeroplanes controls completely.

Its like the guys who attack secure money van drivers partners to draw them out. Why can’t there be a code or something you type In and that’s it, the controls are completely locked or even blown. I mean in the case of the van, I’ve always thought it ridiculous that they can’t get out and help their partners, for the sake of leaving the van itself.

In the case of an aeroplane it just autopilots to the nearest airfield and lands. Or till the technology is available to actually land the aeroplane properly, (which I hear is almost there) its locked till the tower it gets to unlocks it from the ground. To me it seems the perfect fail safe solution.

You can still explode locked and autopiloted planes. There is no perfect contingency, ever.

[Jedieb]

There is no bash at all.
Nah, this was a compliment:

Insinuating that Irish Catholics are going to suddenly start exploding American buildings is the most left field thing I've heard from you, Fett. Congratulations on topping yourself.
:rolleyes

I just wonder if the problem of cargo flights have been addressed. From what I've heard, their security is pretty weak. If a terroist is looking for a flying missile a UPS or USPS plane can do the job just as effectively as a passenger flight.

[Anbira Hicchoru]

Eat it, smart-aleck. There wasn't any bashing in what he had quoted.

[ReaperFett]

In the case of an aeroplane it just autopilots to the nearest airfield and lands. Or till the technology is available to actually land the aeroplane properly, (which I hear is almost there) its locked till the tower it gets to unlocks it from the ground. To me it seems the perfect fail safe solution.
I don't think we're anywhere near ready to have planes that could land, not sure though.


You're all about absolutes. You're going to be sorely dissapointed in the lack of absolutes in real life. I never said that 100% of suicide bombers were arabic, but look at the overwhelming majority, and find the trend.
I don't disagree, but to focus on one group risks missing some.



When was the last time the IRA attacked America, outside of the movie "The Devil's Own"?
Directly, not a clue. Indirectly, not a clue but more recent I'd wager.

[Jedieb]

Eat it, smart-aleck.
THERE'S a compliment! :)

[Anbira Hicchoru]

Originally posted by Jedieb
THERE'S a compliment! :)

No such thing as a free lunch, goldbricker.

[Kria'thn Ki]

Originally posted by Sanis Prent
You can still explode locked and autopiloted planes. There is no perfect contingency, ever.

Yes sadly very true. However at least it'd make it no worse than any other soft target and remove the point of Hijacking a plane to attack a certain target.


Originally posted by ReaperFett
I don't think we're anywhere near ready to have planes that could land, not sure though.

Your probably right, i'm probably thinking about remote planes, still locking an autopilot to fly to an airfield or location in the middle of nowhere might still work.

Though technology isn't as far off as you might think. Planes can of course take off and fly the journey by themselves, its just there's so many variables in landing, thats the kicker.

[Jedieb]

No such thing as a free lunch, goldbricker.
???

[Charley]

Originally posted by Jedieb
???

If you want a compliment, earn it :)

[Jedi Master Carr]

Reaper I can't think of one group outside of Muslims who do the sucide thing. Neo-Nazis, IRA, Miltiia groups, and Columbian drug lords none of those do sucide bombings. There are the Chechna(sp) rebels in Russia but they only attack Russians and could care less about America there is no interest there. Besides Alquida the only group we have to worry about as terrorist in the US are home grown nuts like Eric Rudloph and Tim Mcveigh and so far they don't seem willing to kill themselves.

[Charley]

Originally posted by Jedi Master Carr
Reaper I can't think of one group outside of Muslims who do the sucide thing. Neo-Nazis, IRA, Miltiia groups, and Columbian drug lords none of those do sucide bombings. There are the Chechna(sp) rebels in Russia but they only attack Russians and could care less about America there is no interest there. Besides Alquida the only group we have to worry about as terrorist in the US are home grown nuts like Eric Rudloph and Tim Mcveigh and so far they don't seem willing to kill themselves.

Chechens are also Muslim.

[Jedieb]

If you want a compliment, earn it
You may want to follow that advice yourself. :)

[Jedi Master Carr]

Originally posted by Agent Charley
Chechens are also Muslim.

Are you sure? I thought they were a mix. It is a different case there though since they don't do it because they are extremists but because they are trying to get independence from Russia. It is a very complicated mess there.

[Jedieb]

That debacle at the theater was horrible. I don't see that clearing up until the Chechens get their independence. The Iron Curtain use to be able to squash these things, but that's a thing of the past.

[Charley]

Originally posted by Jedieb
You may want to follow that advice yourself. :)

I don't ask for, nor do I expect compliments.

[Jedieb]

They why even make comments about others? And why give advice you don't follow? Again, if you don't care then you shouldn't pay attention. :)

[Smidget]

Behave children, no reason to start bickering at each other. I agree with having Sky Marshalls on board. Personally, I will never get onto a plane :) Flew once and it scared the jeebus out of me. Bad experience with turbulance. White knuckle flight all the way. Not that it was all that far, but enough to make me never fly again.

I do have to agree with this terrorist paranoia going too far, though. I have to chuckle when I hear the occasional news report stating "We're at Orange alert" or whatever it is they call it now.

I have friends who work in government and they all say that no one in the general public ever realizes just how close we come to war almost daily. I'm glad I don't know! I like being oblivious to that knowlege.

I remember people saying "if you change the way you do this, the terrorists win." Seems to me that with all the fear the media keeps instilling with their reports of terrorist alert status', they already won.

Live life, be happy, and quit worrying so dang much. We have the military and the government to do all that worrying and fighting for us - thankfully.

Oh, and if you're that worried about your safety on an airplane, there is a simple remedy to that fear.

DON' FLY!

[Charley]

Originally posted by Jedieb
They why even make comments about others? And why give advice you don't follow? Again, if you don't care then you shouldn't pay attention. :)

Pardon?

[Jedieb]

Behave children, no reason to start bickering at each other.
Yes Daddy! :)

[Tear]

Terrorist paranoia..

So your not allowed to wait outside the bathroom and you have to ask the flight attendent to tell you when the bathroom is free..wow thats gotta be hell huh?

I dont think its over exaggerating safety in that case. The cockpits are going to be locked in flights i think now..but if 5 or 6 people stand up and walk toward the bathroom..walk passed the bathroom and begin pounding down the door. Someones gonna wish they implemented that plan. So you cant get up and stand around on the plane..big deal.

Marshalls on the plane is sort of a double edged sword. But its a sword to use on behalf of safety (ironic i know) where one wasnt before. Their presence alone might deter some sort of plan to hijack a plane because they have to deal when a hidden element. Suicide bombers want to die..but they want to kill other people when they do, not get shot before.

Sure theres bad aspects the marshalls could miss and hit someone...but that can happen on the ground too. People dont go around saying that dont want cops on the streets because if a gun fight breaks out they might get shot. Id prefer the cops on the streets to keep the gun fights to a minimum :)

After 9/11 people raged on how safety precautions were such a joke on airlines and it took something horrible to wake people up. Well...now people are complaining its getting a little much? What!? is it going to take another 9/11 before it becomes acceptable?

If im going bungey jumping..im not gonna complain the 15 minutes it might take to check the lines and clips for safety is too long because i have other stuff to do.

Taking my finger prints and my picture before letting me into America isnt that big of deal...if they start taking blood samples and strap on gloves to "search for things" THEN i might start complaining but until that happens. Im gonna say things arent that bad. I can live without a few creature comforts for a few hours.

[JediBoricua]

It may not be a big deal in a 4/5 hour flight from NY to LA, but being forced to sit down for a 14 hour flight from Sidney to LA is a bit too much to ask, IMO.

It's downright abusive!

[Marcus Telcontar]

After 9/11 people raged on how safety precautions were such a joke on airlines and it took something horrible to wake people up. Well...now people are complaining its getting a little much? What!? is it going to take another 9/11 before it becomes acceptable

Do you honestly think all of this will stop another 11/9? Because I am very sure that it will not.

[Tear]

Of course not there are too many areas that cant be covered or safety ensured. But they are sure as hell making an effort so there wont be another 9/11.

You think that if they didnt implement all this security that another 9/11 would have happened already? Because...im pretty sure another would have happened.

Ok so what Do YOU want them to do? Tone down security...? Then when another 9/11 happens what then? Least this way they are doing everything they can to TRY and ensure everyones safety.

Its unbelievable how many people can sit back critisize things because they interrupt small parts of their life styles and little freedoms like being able to mill around a plane. I dont think it'll stop either. The more security and safety measures airlines and goverments implement, the more people will whine and complain about it...but i guarantee you if another 9/11 does occur people will scream and shout that it wasnt enough.

Im also sure that if your on a plane and three guys start to mill around the bathroom thats near the cockpit of a jet but a few air marshells detain them and find out they were hijackers...your gonna be pretty happy they implented those precautions.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Nice Starwman. Bzzzzt. Not biting today

[Tear]

Wah?

Is that some kangaroo slang or simply something of an age difference because the only part i understood was the "not biting."

[ReaperFett]

I think he meant Strawman. And I have no idea :)

[Sanis Prent]

Strawman is where you only participate in an argument by nipping only the weakest point in someone's argument and nothing else.

As for me, I'm not ever keen on sacrificing my liberties in the name of security.

[Jordana Montegue]

There's a fine line between security and overkill. By that I mean this:

There are definitely measures that should and need to be taken in order to do what can be done for the safety of the public. However, there is also a point when it can and sometimes does get to be a bit too much.

Just from personal experiences, there are some areas where I personally feel that the government is getting to a little too 'Big Brother-ish" - then there are areas where, again this is my personal opinion, where I feel that they are way too lax.

Its easy to sit around and complain - our constitution gives us the right to do that, its called the Freedom of Speech. It's also real easy for those living in other countries to sit back and scrutinize what Americans gripe about when it comes to their own lifestyles, etc, etc - but if the shoe were dropped on the other foot ..... I think you get the point.

Sanis Prent states that he isn't keen on sacrificing his liberties in the name of security and that's fine. I'm not sure what I'd be willing to sacrifice, to be quite honest, if anything at all.

But I also take my own safety into my own hands to the best of my abilities. I choose to never get onto a plane. Am I safe from acts of terrorism? I'm only safe from terrorist acts that involve highjacking planes - unless they decide to crash it into a building I happen to be in on that particular day.

Eh, I'm rambling, forgive me; I am tired.

The point is this: Its a lose-lose situation until something either goes wrong or right. If they government and the airlines sat back and did nothing to improve the safety on flights, the public would be in an outrage. Now that they have and are taking steps to increase security and safety, there are those in the public who are outraged because it seems rather mundane, tedious or intrusive - what have you.

100% of the people are not going to be satisfied. Plain and simple. You cannot please everyone all of the time but 'you' can do your best to please most of the people some of the time.

Personally - I don't worry about things of this nature. Why should I? Live life, be happy. End of story.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Originally posted by Sanis Prent
Strawman is where you only participate in an argument by nipping only the weakest point in someone's argument and nothing else.

As for me, I'm not ever keen on sacrificing my liberties in the name of security.

I agree with you there I am not willing to give up personal freedoms. To me that is going to far to give up our rights we are giving into the terrorists.