"Donal" wrote
It is obvious that you only operate on the fringes of "sensitive" work.

Never claimed otherwise.

It is easy to explain to a (5$/hr) security guard that he cannot open your
briefcase. The security guards *do* get some training.

Then why was one of my subordinates detained for 6 hours?

If you have ever had a problem, then you really need to look at yourself.

Nope! If the person has proper identification and credentials, and is
dressed in a business suit, it should be sufficient.

"Vito" wrote in message

Nope! If the person has proper identification and credentials, and is
dressed in a business suit, it should be sufficient.

Not if that person looks to be of Arab descent...

CM

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Donal" wrote
It is obvious that you only operate on the fringes of "sensitive" work.

Never claimed otherwise.

It is easy to explain to a (5$/hr) security guard that he cannot open
your
briefcase. The security guards *do* get some training.

Then why was one of my subordinates detained for 6 hours?

I don't know. He should have simply been refused admission.


If you have ever had a problem, then you really need to look at
yourself.

Nope! If the person has proper identification and credentials, and is
dressed in a business suit, it should be sufficient.

That is absolute rubbish!!! The 9/11 hijackers could easily have satisfied
your criteria.


Regards


Donal
--

"Donal" wrote
Nope! If the person has proper identification and credentials, and is
dressed in a business suit, it should be sufficient.

That is absolute rubbish!!! The 9/11 hijackers could easily have
satisfied
your criteria.

The 9/11 hijackers had US DoD ID badges and courier cards? I don't think so.
But, in any event, airport security didn't stop them then nor would it stop
them now. The problem was in the air. A hijacking had always meant a
little time spent in Cuba or other unintended destination but loss of life
had been very seldom. Hence air crews were trained to accomodate hjackers
willingly. And that's what happened in all but the last plane. That policy
has changed. I doubt 5 (?) hijackers could seize control of a plane
carrying 100+ people with box cutters today.

Muslims , around the world, are aggressive towards their neighbors
(Philippines ,Thailand, Bali ,Kashmir, Israel , The Sudan, Algeria ,
France, Lower Manhattan ) and have been since their inception (the invasion
of Spain in 711 and France in 732-etc.,etc.). At the root is Mohammed, who
killed those who disagreed with him, and his Koran calling for the murder
of those who will not "submit". This is less a religion than priestly
theocratic fascism, and free peoples need to treat it as we dealt with
similar threats.


"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Donal" wrote
Nope! If the person has proper identification and credentials, and is
dressed in a business suit, it should be sufficient.

That is absolute rubbish!!! The 9/11 hijackers could easily have
satisfied
your criteria.

The 9/11 hijackers had US DoD ID badges and courier cards? I don't think
so.
But, in any event, airport security didn't stop them then nor would it
stop
them now. The problem was in the air. A hijacking had always meant a
little time spent in Cuba or other unintended destination but loss of life
had been very seldom. Hence air crews were trained to accomodate hjackers
willingly. And that's what happened in all but the last plane. That policy
has changed. I doubt 5 (?) hijackers could seize control of a plane
carrying 100+ people with box cutters today.

"Barrett Bonden" wrote
....This (Islam) is less a religion than a priestly theocratic fascism, ...

Good point.