Pilots Group Grades U.S. Aviation Security an 'F'

You're obviously using the wrong drugs.

mike regish

"Doug Carter" wrote in message news:ZdCYd.9307

USA's greatest threat is Rock and Roll.

mike regish wrote:
You're obviously using the wrong drugs.

mike regish

"Doug Carter" wrote in message news:ZdCYd.9307

USA's greatest threat is Rock and Roll.


Sorry, forgot the trailing

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 17:29:13 GMT, Doug Carter wrote:

OK, presuming that TSA is ineffective then apparently OBL and Al Queda
have been, for the most part, neutered by their devastating losses in
the Mideast.

well, flying 2 big planes into a skyscraper is only good for propaganda.
horrible pictures for the media.
what would you do if you _really_ want to cause severe damage? think about
infrastructure! think about water, energy, internet, ...

#m

--
http://www.terranova.net/content/images/goering.jpg

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 17:40:52 GMT, Doug Carter wrote:

Would you
suggest that after two white males rob a bank that we should be looking
for "two humans?"

Would you say that we should all watch out for white males because they are
potential bank robbers?

#m

--
http://www.terranova.net/content/images/goering.jpg

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 13:13:19 -0500, mike regish wrote:

You're obviously using the wrong drugs.

And I am missing SEX.
Isn't it "Sex, Drugs and Rock'n Roll"?

:-)

This brings me to an idea: what about embarassing the screeners? Just put
some adult toys in your luggage. Are there some legal restrictions in the
US?

#m

mike regish

"Doug Carter" wrote in message news:ZdCYd.9307

USA's greatest threat is Rock and Roll.


--
http://www.terranova.net/content/images/goering.jpg

Islam is not restricted to Arabic countries but then Islam is not the problem. Specific Arabic terrorist groups that use Islam as a blind are the problem.

.... which means that profiling would not be all that effective. That
is, unless you profile so narrowly that you essentially just get the
criminals themselves. The whole point of profiling is to detain people
based on surface similarities to the group you are targeting, hoping
that you'll snag someone.

I have no problem with detaining members of "specific Arabic terrorist
groups that use Islam as a blind". But this isn't profiling.

We may have made it more difficult to accomplish a certain kind of action, but we've also made it more difficult to thwart it should it occur.

Sorry, not following this argument...

We ban pocket knives on airplanes. Terrorists will find it harder (but
not impossible) to use a pocket knife to carry out their plan. But
should a terrorist manage to get one aboard, the rest of the (now
unarmed) passengers will have a harder time preventing the terrorist
from actually completing his deed. Further, a terrorist will know how
to use a sharp pencil as a weapon, and the average person will be at a
disadvantage in such an attack. Perhaps we should outlaw sharp pencils,
and only allow people to do their work using lipstick.

While I'm not advocating shootouts at thirty thousand feet, it's only
half in jest that I submit an alternate plan: everyone who boards an
aircraft is issued a gun, and if he hasn't used it by the end of the
flight, he has to explain why.

I have no problem with good people having weapons, and I think disarming
=all= people is more apt to disarm good people than bad people. This
tips the odds in favor of the bad, and I do =not= believe that this is
compensated for in this case by trusting in law enforcement.

Would you suggest that after two white males rob a bank that we should be looking for "two humans?"

For the time that we are actively looking for the actual bank robbers,
we should be looking for people who match the description. However,
once they are caught (or no longer being sought in any given venue) we
should no longer harass folks who innocently resemble the robbers.

If we are just trying to prevent bank robbery in general, the fact that
two white males robbed a bank once is of little consequence. Detain
white males and the next robbery will be committed with a trained dog
and a hand grenade.

The reaction to so called "profiling" is, for the most part, an emotional derivative of the civil rights movement in this country rather than a fundamental issue.

It is a reasonable reaction, considering the abuses of authority that
occured then, and are occuring even now. The DC TFR is an abuse of
authority which accomplishes nothing. Talk about profiling - the
attackers were giant jumbo jets, and it's the little mosquitos that are
kept away. AIRLINERS should be banned from DC, and all air transport
there should be by four seat single engine propeller planes weighing
less than 18,500 pounds.

Jose
--
Math is a game. The object of the game is to figure out the rules.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Martin Hotze wrote:
On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 17:29:13 GMT, Doug Carter wrote:


OK, presuming that TSA is ineffective then apparently OBL and Al Qaeda
have been, for the most part, neutered by their devastating losses in
the Mideast.

well, flying 2 big planes into a skyscraper is only good for propaganda.
horrible pictures for the media.

Exactly. The 9/11 attack will go down in history as one of the
century's greatest tactical blunders because of the massive and
effective counter attack against Al Qaeda and stimulus for security
improvements it triggered.

what would you do if you _really_ want to cause severe damage? think about
infrastructure! think about water, energy, internet, ...

Of course. The changes in TSA are trivial compared to what has changed
around the rest of the infrastructure.

Martin Hotze wrote:
On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 17:40:52 GMT, Doug Carter wrote:


Would you
suggest that after two white males rob a bank that we should be looking
for "two humans?"

Would you say that we should all watch out for white males because they are
potential bank robbers?


We may be actually getting closer to the point. Try to keep in mind
that the objective of profiling in law enforcement is not to target a
particular group but rather to not waste time on low risk possibilities.

DHS and the FBI have lists of people who are known terrorists in this
country under false ID. Not looking for them seems silly.

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 16:53:38 -0500, Tom Fleischman wrote:

snip

This brings me to an idea: what about embarassing the screeners? Just put
some adult toys in your luggage. Are there some legal restrictions in the
US?


Yes, in fact there are. You and your baggage can be denied access to
the aircraft if you are found in posession of what the screeners deem
to be "obscene materials".

really?!?!

don't know how many kids are reading this group, so I don't want to become
more explicit here .... but: are you really SERIOUS about that? can you
point me to some information?

what is obscene material? is this regulated state by state? means: not OK
in Utah, but OK in California?

#m

--
http://www.terranova.net/content/images/goering.jpg

Jose wrote:
The whole point of profiling is to detain people
based on surface similarities to the group you are targeting, hoping
that you'll snag someone.

We may have a disconnect here. I think you are talking about one
possible action you might take based on a profile match. What I have
seen proposed is *not* asking the extra questions, taking a second look
at paperwork, etc. of those people who clearly *do not* match the profile.

Profiling does *not* mean arresting everyone in a given group (at least
in the USA).

We ban pocket knives on airplanes. Terrorists will find it harder (but
not impossible) to use a pocket knife to carry out their plan. ...
...Perhaps we should outlaw sharp pencils,
and only allow people to do their work using lipstick.

Work quality might improve Keep in mind that banning sharp things
serves only to reduce collateral damage to the passengers. With the
replacement of cockpit doors and the change in pilot procedures, the
erstwhile terrorist can freely saw away at the cockpit door all day
long. The pilot will simply land the plane and let a SWAT team deal
with the problem.

We may lose a few passengers to sharp pencils but at least we keep the
airplane out of buildings.

While I'm not advocating shootouts at thirty thousand feet, it's only
half in jest that I submit an alternate plan: everyone who boards an
aircraft is issued a gun, and if he hasn't used it by the end of the
flight, he has to explain why.

I agree. Stats clearly show violent crime rates going down whenever gun
laws are relaxed. Shoot (pun intended), I don't think you would have to
issue guns; I'd be happy to bring my own

Sadly, this is impractical since jittery, untrained passengers would
probably spend more ammo shooting each other than the very occasional
terrorists anyway

If we are just trying to prevent bank robbery in general, the fact that
two white males robbed a bank once is of little consequence.

Except that in the case of terrorists we have long lists of them that
are in the country using fake ID. Seems like a good idea to look for
them. The point of profiling is not to arrest everyone in a given
profile but rather to not waste time on extra questions and paperwork
checks for those who do not meet the profile.

The DC TFR is an abuse of authority which accomplishes nothing.

I don't like it either but if you have ever launched to the North from
DCA you can see that its not practical to shoot down an attacking
aircraft before it nails the capital or white house.

There does not seem to be a good solution for this. Airlines are
clearly the biggest tank of jet fuel but if a PC-12 loaded with TNT make
it to the Mall I don't think people would be happy with that either.