Balta1701 Posted December 27, 2009 Share Posted December 27, 2009 Since we were a bit away, I figured let's create a thread for this and post a few things in case some folks wanted to comment on the guy detonating his underwear in an aircraft landing in Detroit. Top Republican on the House Intelligence committee Pete Hoekstra (MI) thinks that it's the Obama administrations fault. Asked by Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace if it is fair to blame the Obama administration for the attacks, the Michigan Republican replied ""Yeah, I think it really is." Hoekstra said that increased domestic threats have made themselves more evidence this year, with this attack and the Fort Hood shootings, but said that the Obama administration is trying to "downplay" the threat. "The Obama administration came in and said we're not going to use the word terrorism anymore, we're going to call it man made disasters, trying to, I think, downplay the threat from terrorism," he said. "In reality, it's getting much more complex." Joe Lieberman thinks the appropriate response is to bomb Yemen. The WaPo on how the guy could be on the terrorist watch list but not on the no-fly list. I'm thinking this may be the real lesson here; the complete joke that is the watch list/no fly list system was probably key to this guy getting onto this flight. The TSA has responded to the attack by deciding it has to be an even worse experience to fly; now you have no choice but to check that 2nd bag, which I'm sure has nothing to do with the fact that the airlines want to charge for it. And if you happen to have to pee, you've got an hour that you need to hold it. And a commentary on why having the President remain on vacation is the right move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny Hates Prospects Posted December 27, 2009 Share Posted December 27, 2009 When I first read about this I started laughing my ass off. As soon as I read he was Nigerian I thought he's probably a Nigerian businessman, and then a couple paragraphs down it said the kid's father is a Nigerian businessman! L-O-f***ing-L! Seriously, these people can't do anything right. I wonder how that new Nigerian Disney World is going? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 27, 2009 Author Share Posted December 27, 2009 QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 27, 2009 -> 04:14 PM) When I first read about this I started laughing my ass off. As soon as I read he was Nigerian I thought he's probably a Nigerian businessman, and then a couple paragraphs down it said the kid's father is a Nigerian businessman! L-O-f***ing-L! Seriously, these people can't do anything right. I wonder how that new Nigerian Disney World is going? Based on press reports, it sounds like the guy did everything right, the problem seems to have been that the explosive wasn't mixed/prepared correctly and thus became more of an incendiary. And anyway, Nigeria does plenty of things right. Unless you don't like filling up your car's gas tank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted December 27, 2009 Share Posted December 27, 2009 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 27, 2009 -> 03:18 PM) Based on press reports, it sounds like the guy did everything right, the problem seems to have been that the explosive wasn't mixed/prepared correctly and thus became more of an incendiary. And anyway, Nigeria does plenty of things right. Unless you don't like filling up your car's gas tank. I love you. Right, as often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 27, 2009 Share Posted December 27, 2009 The big picture of this and the Ft Hood attack seems to be that Al Qaeda seemingly is moving into much smaller/softer attacks. If they are transitioning into more manageable projects, instead of the huge 9-11 style attacks, things could really start to change in this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 27, 2009 Author Share Posted December 27, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 27, 2009 -> 04:46 PM) The big picture of this and the Ft Hood attack seems to be that Al Qaeda seemingly is moving into much smaller/softer attacks. If they are transitioning into more manageable projects, instead of the huge 9-11 style attacks, things could really start to change in this country. This is another interesting point, although I hesitate to include Ft. Hood in this discussion. We might actually have to focus on legitimately working on security, rather than the window-dressing version we've been happy with so far. AQ could long ago have started launching olympic-park sized events in, you know, malls or other public places and probably had serious impact Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 For the record not everything having to do with Muslim terrorists is "al-Qaida," you're giving them way too much credit if you do that (both al-Qaida and the terrorists who wants people to think he's al-Qaida). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 Are there any reports that this guy or the Ft.Hood guy are members of Al-Qaeda? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 I figured that the terorists go to Detroit and looked at it. They thought that it already had been blown up and left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 28, 2009 Author Share Posted December 28, 2009 QUOTE (KipWellsFan @ Dec 28, 2009 -> 12:48 AM) Are there any reports that this guy or the Ft.Hood guy are members of Al-Qaeda? It depends on how you define Al Qaeda at this point. There are press reports that this guy claimed he was a member. There are press reports that the Ft. Hood shooter had email contact with a cleric in Yemen that you might have been able to call sort of linked to that. Neither one of them appear to have trained in camps, served in Afghanistan, or had any dealings/funding from any sort of central organization. If you define AQ as the remnants of the centralized organization that existed on 9/11, then no, these guys didn't have any dealings with it. If you define AQ as the looser network of anti-American groups that grew up after we failed to kill off AQ in Afghanistan and the remaining guys spread throughout the region, then we might be getting closer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 "The system worked." Seriously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 QUOTE (mreye @ Dec 28, 2009 -> 09:45 AM) "The system worked." Seriously? LOL, that's as idiotic as blaming Obama for this. The guy was, from what I read, on the terrorist watch list, but somehow NOT on the no-fly list (f*** up), AND he got through screening with explosives (f*** up). The system worked... that's a laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 QUOTE (mreye @ Dec 28, 2009 -> 09:45 AM) "The system worked." Seriously? You're doin' a heck of a job Janet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 She's backtracked on that today. I wanted to talk about this yesterday, but I was flying home and my layover was through Detroit, and I was superstitious. I think we're using the wrong kind of machines in security. We need puffer machines, not magnetometers. Millimeter Wave technology would also be a smart thing to apply across the board here. I know that there are civil liberty concerns with that, but I think that these technologies provide the capabilities to identify the new most likely threats. Truth is that the day of the hijack is dead and gone, After 9/11, hardened cockpit doors and a more aware American population has basically ensured that. Explosive detecting screening devices on passenger luggage has made a Lockerbie attack much less likely as well. So there are really two areas that are primarily vulnerable to attack in air security - cargo and explosives like PETN. Better cargo inspections take care of the first, and there are plenty of technologies that will help root out the second. I do want to say that I think we have a pretty good security system in the US for flights, by and large. For all the craziness, there is a genuine effort to make us safe in the air, and with the exception of PETN type attacks which are very difficult to carry out, we have made attacking us in the skies much more difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Dec 28, 2009 -> 09:59 AM) She's backtracked on that today. I heard that this morning. She's saying it worked after the initial incident - we were able to contact all other flights in the air, etc. In other words, after the first horse got out of the barn we were able to close the barn doors. I hope the 278 people that horse almost killed can sleep easier knowing the "system worked." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 I just don't understand why everyone has to suffer for DHS' mistake. And honestly, not getting up for the last hour is ridiculous. How about being "escorted?" Or even better, I'll give my toddler in diapers to you for the last hour and YOU can keep him in his seat. I feel horrible for all the Flight Attendants out there having to deal with angry passengers. I can't imagine they would want that job much longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonxctf Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 Tampa airport has this machine you walk into, it closes up, shoots a poof of air on you and then traces the air for chemicals prior to letting you through. takes an extra 15 seconds, but it beats having to take your shoes off and getting felt up by a TSA employee. now, the obvious issue here is the international flight issue, not domestic. Domestic screenings are going fine. But how the he*l do you make sure that the airport in Nigeria does everything they are supposed to do when flying to the US? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 QUOTE (mreye @ Dec 28, 2009 -> 11:14 AM) I heard that this morning. She's saying it worked after the initial incident - we were able to contact all other flights in the air, etc. In other words, after the first horse got out of the barn we were able to close the barn doors. I hope the 278 people that horse almost killed can sleep easier knowing the "system worked." Well, the problem wasn't with the US system per se, it might have been more with the Nigerian and Dutch systems to be fair. The TSA does not control individual security screenings in other countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Dec 28, 2009 -> 11:33 AM) I just don't understand why everyone has to suffer for DHS' mistake. And honestly, not getting up for the last hour is ridiculous. How about being "escorted?" Or even better, I'll give my toddler in diapers to you for the last hour and YOU can keep him in his seat. I feel horrible for all the Flight Attendants out there having to deal with angry passengers. I can't imagine they would want that job much longer. The US isn't the only country that requires this. If your flight overflies Israel, the same restrictions apply in Israeli airspace, actually. These are temporary measures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Dec 28, 2009 -> 11:38 AM) Tampa airport has this machine you walk into, it closes up, shoots a poof of air on you and then traces the air for chemicals prior to letting you through. takes an extra 15 seconds, but it beats having to take your shoes off and getting felt up by a TSA employee. now, the obvious issue here is the international flight issue, not domestic. Domestic screenings are going fine. But how the he*l do you make sure that the airport in Nigeria does everything they are supposed to do when flying to the US? Those are the puffer machines that really should be in wider distribution. Problem is that they're expensive, and you can't shove that expense on airports that are already operating in the red, or a beleaguered airline industry that's having enough issues finding money to keep planes in the air. It's something the government really has to cover the costs of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonxctf Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 Usage About 95 machines have now been installed in 34 airports. According to an article on the 10th of October, 2007, USA Today, the TSA had planned on installing 434 machines, however due to maintenance problems like breaking down they have halted installation and "have no plans to acquire more." [5] Among those airports where they are in place are: * Albany International Airport * New York (John F. Kennedy International Airport) * Boston (Logan International Airport) * Miami International Airport * San Francisco International Airport * Denver International Airport * Phoenix (Sky Harbor International Airport) * Portland, Oregon (Portland International Airport) * Providence (T.F. Green Airport) * Hartford-Springfield Bradley International Airport * Newark Liberty International Airport * Greater Rochester International Airport * San Diego International Airport * Tampa International Airport * Palm Beach International Airport * Gulfport-Biloxi International Airport * Los Angeles International Airport * Salt Lake City International Airport * Buffalo Niagara International Airport * Dallas Fort Worth International Airport * San Juan (Luis Muñoz Marín International Airport) * Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport * Las Vegas McCarran International Airport * Indianapolis International Airport * Charlotte / Douglas International Airport * Fort Lauderdale (Florida) International Airport * Greater Cincinnati Northern Kentucky Airport (CVG) * Pittsburgh International Airport While many people have complained that passing through the Puffer is an uncomfortable experience, the technology is virtually foolproof in preventing false-negatives.[citation needed] As well as having been implemented in US airports, there are also Puffer machines at the Statue of Liberty[3] (GE EntryScan3), just before visitors enter the statue itself. This is one example of the many increased security measures taken for popular New York landmarks post September 11th 2001. On September 3 2006, the Transportation Security Administration announced that it is suspending installation of the Puffer after "seeing some issues that [it] did not anticipate with the devices." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonxctf Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 It also says that those puffer machines are $160k/each. According to the ATA there are 526 airports in the US which offer commercial/public service. Assuming that on average, each airport needs 5 of these machines (more in LAX, ORD, less in Rockford, Bloomington-Normal, etc) that means that the total cost of putting machines in their necessary spots would be $42,080,000. The current US population is 308,248,249 people. Which means that if we implemented a per/person tax of 13.7 cents, we could cover the entire cost of these machines, nationwide. Shoot double it to 27.4 cents per person to cover any costs associated with maintenance and repair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Dec 28, 2009 -> 12:12 PM) It also says that those puffer machines are $160k/each. According to the ATA there are 526 airports in the US which offer commercial/public service. Assuming that on average, each airport needs 5 of these machines (more in LAX, ORD, less in Rockford, Bloomington-Normal, etc) that means that the total cost of putting machines in their necessary spots would be $42,080,000. The current US population is 308,248,249 people. Which means that if we implemented a per/person tax of 13.7 cents, we could cover the entire cost of these machines, nationwide. Shoot double it to 27.4 cents per person to cover any costs associated with maintenance and repair. Plus there are also labor costs involved. They need to be used in conjunction with instead of in place of magnetometers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Dec 28, 2009 -> 11:12 AM) It also says that those puffer machines are $160k/each. According to the ATA there are 526 airports in the US which offer commercial/public service. Assuming that on average, each airport needs 5 of these machines (more in LAX, ORD, less in Rockford, Bloomington-Normal, etc) that means that the total cost of putting machines in their necessary spots would be $42,080,000. The current US population is 308,248,249 people. Which means that if we implemented a per/person tax of 13.7 cents, we could cover the entire cost of these machines, nationwide. Shoot double it to 27.4 cents per person to cover any costs associated with maintenance and repair. Please tell me you're not serious. This is the same FAA that just threw a $5 Million Christmas Party and the same government that wastes untold amounts of $$$$. That $42M will very quickly be $42B when the jackasses in DC get their hands on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 28, 2009 Author Share Posted December 28, 2009 It appears that we may now be back to the point where flying while non-white is an offense again. While en route from Orlando, Fla. to Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, a passenger aboard U.S. Airways Flight 192 reported that two men were acting strangely, said Suzanne Trevino, a Transportation Security Administration spokeswoman. "The passengers alerted the flight crew and they called for law enforcement and TSA officers to meet them when the plane arrived," Trevino said. Once the plane arrived at Sky Harbor for its scheduled stop about 8 p.m., the two men were met by Phoenix police, TSA and FBI officials, said Special Agent Manuel Johnson, a FBI spokesman. The passenger told authorities the two men, described as being Middle Eastern, were speaking "loudly" in their native language. The passenger then saw a suicide bomber on the DVD version of the movie "The Kingdom," and one of the men reportedly got up to use the lavatory when the fasten-seatbelt sign was lit. "The totality of those three occurrences led this passenger to believe this was suspicious," Johnson said. The men were cooperative with the FBI when questioned, then were later released to catch another flight to their final destination in California. Neither was charged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts