Air Safety in Jeopardy

[PlanetJ]

Air Safety should not go to the lowest bidder. Please contact your
representative and tell them Air Safety is not for sell.

For all of you who fly, remember, it is important enough that your luggage
be screened by federal employees. But apparently NOT important enough that
the people who inspect the pilots, certify the aircraft maintenance and
maintain the navigational aids, radars, communications and so forth.

This administration is intent on contracting out to the lowest bidder an
important function that has been done PROFESSIONALLY (and safely) by "in
house" federal employees for over fifty years! I ask you to phone the local
office of your congressperson and senators and tell them to reinstate
protections (for Airways Facilities and Flight Standards employees of the
FAA) from outsourcing their jobs.

This is not a joke or a hoax! Legislation is being worked now regarding FAA
Reauthorization which will allow low bidder outsourcing. Please help!!!

Members of the Professional Airways Systems Specialists


See the link below:

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0703/072803p1.htm

[C J Campbell]

"PlanetJ" > wrote in message
...
| Air Safety should not go to the lowest bidder. Please contact your
| representative and tell them Air Safety is not for sell.
|
| For all of you who fly, remember, it is important enough that your luggage
| be screened by federal employees.

You do not speak English well. You do not know the history of luggage
screening. You have no idea of what you are talking about. Perhaps you are a
terrorist?

Using Federal employees for luggage screening is a recent development. No
one seriously believes that luggage screening, especially as it is being
conducted today, enhances either security or safety. The program should be
scrapped and replaced with some method of automatically detecting
explosives. All of the security screeners should be fired immediately.

[Mike Rapoport]

Government employees never get fired.

Mike
MU-2


"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "PlanetJ" > wrote in message
> ...
> | Air Safety should not go to the lowest bidder. Please contact your
> | representative and tell them Air Safety is not for sell.
> |
> | For all of you who fly, remember, it is important enough that your
luggage
> | be screened by federal employees.
>
> You do not speak English well. You do not know the history of luggage
> screening. You have no idea of what you are talking about. Perhaps you are
a
> terrorist?
>
> Using Federal employees for luggage screening is a recent development. No
> one seriously believes that luggage screening, especially as it is being
> conducted today, enhances either security or safety. The program should be
> scrapped and replaced with some method of automatically detecting
> explosives. All of the security screeners should be fired immediately.
>
>

[Tarver Engineering]

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
...
> Government employees never get fired.

Contractors are necessary to meeting peak travel demands. Not to mention
that the TSA's original bagage regulatory burden was unachievable.

> "C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "PlanetJ" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > | Air Safety should not go to the lowest bidder. Please contact your
> > | representative and tell them Air Safety is not for sell.
> > |
> > | For all of you who fly, remember, it is important enough that your
> luggage
> > | be screened by federal employees.
> >
> > You do not speak English well. You do not know the history of luggage
> > screening. You have no idea of what you are talking about. Perhaps you
are
> a
> > terrorist?
> >
> > Using Federal employees for luggage screening is a recent development.
No
> > one seriously believes that luggage screening, especially as it is being
> > conducted today, enhances either security or safety. The program should
be
> > scrapped and replaced with some method of automatically detecting
> > explosives. All of the security screeners should be fired immediately.
> >
> >
>
>

[C J Campbell]

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
...
| Government employees never get fired.
|
| Mike
| MU-2
|

Which demonstrates the real purpose of the security screening program: to
provide make-work jobs for the otherwise unemployable. It is nothing but a
form of welfare.

It would be one thing if it could be shown that a significant number of
hijackings had been prevented by luggage screening. However, it is far more
probable that the program actually increases the number of hijackings by
guaranteeing that almost all of the potential victims will be completely
disarmed.

The only reason that hijackings diminished in the last thirty years (not
fifty) is that a series of treaties and threats of armed intervention have
greatly reduced the number of safe havens for hijackers and terrorists. It
is the same methodology that finally defeated piracy on the high seas in the
19th century. There are still pirates, of course, and there will continue to
be thugs that try to take control of airplanes. But luggage screening will
not prevent these people from doing what they want any more than luggage
screening on sailing ships would have prevented mutiny and piracy.

The problem of religious fanatics willing to sacrifice themselves for
religious or political purposes is not new, either -- but it does require
different methods than traditional anti-piracy tactics. This requires
systematic destruction of a belief system and the social structures that
support it. That means killing clerics who incite people to violence,
destroying their places of worship, and controlling their means of
communication. The United States has been very successful at wiping out
dangerous cults within its borders, but it remains to be seen how effective
we can be in other countries. A good model might be the British subjugation
of violent cults in India and Africa during the 18th and 19th centuries. A
poor model would be the Spanish Inquisition or the Crusades, although the
Inquisition, at least, was rather successful in achieving its goals with
surprisingly little bloodshed and expenditure of resources.

[Tarver Engineering]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...

<snip>

> The only reason that hijackings diminished in the last thirty years (not
> fifty) is that a series of treaties and threats of armed intervention have
> greatly reduced the number of safe havens for hijackers and terrorists. It
> is the same methodology that finally defeated piracy on the high seas in
the
> 19th century. There are still pirates, of course, and there will continue
to
> be thugs that try to take control of airplanes. But luggage screening will
> not prevent these people from doing what they want any more than luggage
> screening on sailing ships would have prevented mutiny and piracy.

Hey now Campbell, your kind of thining might cut into Linda Daschle's
advocacy fees. You better watch your ass. :)