|
not getting to Barbados the hard way
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
wrote in message ... On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:38:29 -0500, wrote: On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 13:52:08 -0800, wrote: No pun intended... http://nation.foxnews.com/airport-sc...strips-airport The only thing he did wrong was wait until he got out of the metal detector. He should have stripped in the line, run his clothes through with his shoes and laptop, then got dressed on the other side. I doubt any "indecent exposure" charge sticks if he was wearing regular underwear so this became one of those infamous "disorderly conduct" arrests. I doubt it also, but this whole business is moronic. http://vodpod.com/watch/4923312-thre...ed-by-tsa?pod= I'd say for short distances.... (under 1000 miles), trains are starting to look a whole lot better. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On 11/24/10 8:37 AM, YukonBound wrote:
wrote in message ... On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:38:29 -0500, wrote: On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 13:52:08 -0800, wrote: No pun intended... http://nation.foxnews.com/airport-sc...strips-airport The only thing he did wrong was wait until he got out of the metal detector. He should have stripped in the line, run his clothes through with his shoes and laptop, then got dressed on the other side. I doubt any "indecent exposure" charge sticks if he was wearing regular underwear so this became one of those infamous "disorderly conduct" arrests. I doubt it also, but this whole business is moronic. http://vodpod.com/watch/4923312-thre...ed-by-tsa?pod= I'd say for short distances.... (under 1000 miles), trains are starting to look a whole lot better. We took the Amtrak Silver Meteor to Florida on Monday, When we went to the waiting lounge, the attendant looked at my photo ID. That was it. Pleasant trip, no hassles, slept most of the way. Dining car was ok, too. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
"Gene" wrote in message ...
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 23:05:57 -0800, wrote: I doubt it also, but this whole business is moronic. http://vodpod.com/watch/4923312-thre...ed-by-tsa?pod= We had the local TSA morons detain a bunch of suspicious fellows in a large green vehicle. Forced them to produce ID, assume the position, and then thoroughly searched them and the subject vehicle for, uh, something.... Doing their job, you say? Here's a picture of the suspicious subject vehicle: http://tinyurl.com/32npc4u And the suspicious uniformed and badged potential terrifying terrorists were making one of their twice nightly runs inspecting runway, approach, and taxiway lights. -- It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance. -Thomas Sowell Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC. Homepage http://pamandgene.tranquilrefuge.net/boating/the_boat/my_boat.htm Forté Agent 6.00 Build 1186 Saw a movie a while ago where the terrorista hijacked a vehicle like that and was determined to ram a certain plane with it and blow it up. Mebbe the zealous TSA workers saw that movie too. -- Ziggy® |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:37:38 -0400, "YukonBound"
wrote: wrote in message .. . On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:38:29 -0500, wrote: On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 13:52:08 -0800, wrote: No pun intended... http://nation.foxnews.com/airport-sc...strips-airport The only thing he did wrong was wait until he got out of the metal detector. He should have stripped in the line, run his clothes through with his shoes and laptop, then got dressed on the other side. I doubt any "indecent exposure" charge sticks if he was wearing regular underwear so this became one of those infamous "disorderly conduct" arrests. I doubt it also, but this whole business is moronic. http://vodpod.com/watch/4923312-thre...ed-by-tsa?pod= I'd say for short distances.... (under 1000 miles), trains are starting to look a whole lot better. I take the train to San Jose sometimes. You can buy the ticket on the train. We need to stop overreacting and start thinking. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image,
having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote:
I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Nov 24, 4:00*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 11:34:43 -0800 (PST), "Jack." wrote: . A few minutes later, a guy empties his pockets and has a pair of nail clippers. Nail clippers. TSA informs the Soldier that they re going to confiscate his nail clippers My BS detector just went off TSA says Items permitted in aircraft cabins: * * * Pets (if permitted by airline check with airline for procedures) * * * Walking canes and umbrellas (once inspected to ensure prohibited items are not concealed) * * * Nail clippers with nail files attached * * * Nail files * * * Tweezers * * * Safety razors (including disposable razors) * * * Syringes (with medication and professionally printed label identifying medication or manufacturer’s name) * * * Insulin delivery systems * * * Eyelash curlers Might be BS, I can't say for sure. Nail clippers being on the allowed list doesn't mean the story isn't true. Children weren't supposed to be aggressively patted down, but they are. Besides, I have seen the confiscated items at an airport, and have seen nail clippers among the items. Maybe the list changed? Personal story... on a trip to Napa Valley a few years ago, they confiscated a souvenir corkscrew at security when returning. It was in my wife's purse. They did let us mail it back home. When we got home and were unpacking, my wife reached into her purse to get something, and her pepper spray fell out. She had it with her on the plane out there and back, through security twice, and no one noticed. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Nov 24, 4:42*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. This is all to make flying on a commercial flight safer, and it does achieve something toward that. It does not try to make the airport itself safe... that has never been the goal. If a terrorist simply wants to kill lots of people, there are many environments that are more target dense and less secure than an airport. Concerts and sporting events, to name two. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
"Jack." wrote in message ... On Nov 24, 4:00 pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 11:34:43 -0800 (PST), "Jack." wrote: . A few minutes later, a guy empties his pockets and has a pair of nail clippers. Nail clippers. TSA informs the Soldier that they re going to confiscate his nail clippers My BS detector just went off TSA says Items permitted in aircraft cabins: * Pets (if permitted by airline check with airline for procedures) * Walking canes and umbrellas (once inspected to ensure prohibited items are not concealed) * Nail clippers with nail files attached * Nail files * Tweezers * Safety razors (including disposable razors) * Syringes (with medication and professionally printed label identifying medication or manufacturer’s name) * Insulin delivery systems * Eyelash curlers Might be BS, I can't say for sure. Nail clippers being on the allowed list doesn't mean the story isn't true. Children weren't supposed to be aggressively patted down, but they are. Besides, I have seen the confiscated items at an airport, and have seen nail clippers among the items. Maybe the list changed? Personal story... on a trip to Napa Valley a few years ago, they confiscated a souvenir corkscrew at security when returning. It was in my wife's purse. They did let us mail it back home. When we got home and were unpacking, my wife reached into her purse to get something, and her pepper spray fell out. She had it with her on the plane out there and back, through security twice, and no one noticed. ---------- Nail clippers and cuticle scissors are now ok whereas the were prohibited for the first 5 years or so. Butane lighters are also allowed now and this is because it was costing too much to dispose of them due to hazmat classification. When lighters were prohibited you could carry 5 books of paper matches? |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
wrote in message ... On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. ---------- A big problem I have with pouring so much money into airport security is that it's reactionary management and we basically ignore the other methods of entry into the continental US. But it seems to be more for show than anything else. We're acting like a boxer that only protects himself from a right hook and leaves himself wide open to any other blow. Not a good plan for someone that doesn't enjoy getting his a-- kicked. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
In article 815c57c4-1a75-4339-947d-
, says... On Nov 24, 4:42*pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. This is all to make flying on a commercial flight safer, and it does achieve something toward that. It does not try to make the airport itself safe... that has never been the goal. If a terrorist simply wants to kill lots of people, there are many environments that are more target dense and less secure than an airport. Concerts and sporting events, to name two. Persons on private flights are not subjected to TSA molestation but, they have the capacity to fly the plane into something because they have control of it already. The TSA is nothing more than a jobs program. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Nov 24, 6:59*pm, BAR wrote:
In article 815c57c4-1a75-4339-947d- , says... On Nov 24, 4:42*pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. This is all to make flying on a commercial flight safer, and it does achieve something toward that. *It does not try to make the airport itself safe... that has never been the goal. *If a terrorist simply wants to kill lots of people, there are many environments that are more target dense and less secure than an airport. *Concerts and sporting events, to name two. Persons on private flights are not subjected to TSA molestation but, they have the capacity to fly the plane into something because they have control of it already. Private airplanes, in general, don't carry 375 innocent people that just want to get to a destination, and the vast majority aren't the size of a 767. The TSA is nothing more than a jobs program. It's a little more than that, but not much. It's how our government does airport screening / security. What else do we want to turn over to them? |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:19:37 -0800 (PST), "Jack."
wrote: On Nov 24, 4:42*pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. This is all to make flying on a commercial flight safer, and it does achieve something toward that. It does not try to make the airport itself safe... that has never been the goal. If a terrorist simply wants to kill lots of people, there are many environments that are more target dense and less secure than an airport. Concerts and sporting events, to name two. Something, but not very much. Why would a terrorist care if he killed people on the ground vs. in the air? It's pretty obvious that anyone trying to get on a plane has to go through a lot more hassle than simply walking into the airport. I thought the point was to make us safer? I don't recall DHS claiming to make us safer only on the plane. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 16:18:10 -0800 (PST), "Jack."
wrote: On Nov 24, 6:59*pm, BAR wrote: In article 815c57c4-1a75-4339-947d- , says... On Nov 24, 4:42*pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. This is all to make flying on a commercial flight safer, and it does achieve something toward that. *It does not try to make the airport itself safe... that has never been the goal. *If a terrorist simply wants to kill lots of people, there are many environments that are more target dense and less secure than an airport. *Concerts and sporting events, to name two. Persons on private flights are not subjected to TSA molestation but, they have the capacity to fly the plane into something because they have control of it already. Private airplanes, in general, don't carry 375 innocent people that just want to get to a destination, and the vast majority aren't the size of a 767. The TSA is nothing more than a jobs program. It's a little more than that, but not much. It's how our government does airport screening / security. What else do we want to turn over to them? So, you think it should be turned over to a for-profit company? Who's going to regulate that? Do you really want Halliburton looking down your pants? |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 18:05:49 -0500, "MMC" wrote:
wrote in message ... On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. ---------- A big problem I have with pouring so much money into airport security is that it's reactionary management and we basically ignore the other methods of entry into the continental US. But it seems to be more for show than anything else. We're acting like a boxer that only protects himself from a right hook and leaves himself wide open to any other blow. Not a good plan for someone that doesn't enjoy getting his a-- kicked. Exactly! |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
"MMC" wrote in message
g.com... "Jack." wrote in message ... On Nov 24, 4:00 pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 11:34:43 -0800 (PST), "Jack." wrote: . A few minutes later, a guy empties his pockets and has a pair of nail clippers. Nail clippers. TSA informs the Soldier that they re going to confiscate his nail clippers My BS detector just went off TSA says Items permitted in aircraft cabins: * Pets (if permitted by airline check with airline for procedures) * Walking canes and umbrellas (once inspected to ensure prohibited items are not concealed) * Nail clippers with nail files attached * Nail files * Tweezers * Safety razors (including disposable razors) * Syringes (with medication and professionally printed label identifying medication or manufacturer’s name) * Insulin delivery systems * Eyelash curlers Might be BS, I can't say for sure. Nail clippers being on the allowed list doesn't mean the story isn't true. Children weren't supposed to be aggressively patted down, but they are. Besides, I have seen the confiscated items at an airport, and have seen nail clippers among the items. Maybe the list changed? Personal story... on a trip to Napa Valley a few years ago, they confiscated a souvenir corkscrew at security when returning. It was in my wife's purse. They did let us mail it back home. When we got home and were unpacking, my wife reached into her purse to get something, and her pepper spray fell out. She had it with her on the plane out there and back, through security twice, and no one noticed. ---------- Nail clippers and cuticle scissors are now ok whereas the were prohibited for the first 5 years or so. Butane lighters are also allowed now and this is because it was costing too much to dispose of them due to hazmat classification. When lighters were prohibited you could carry 5 books of paper matches? Reply: Is show. Most of the TSA people are stupid. Could not make the cut at McDonalds from what I observe. We went to Rome, about 6 years ago. SFO to Rome, via Cincinnati. Reach in the backpack while in the secured area having lunch. A 5" folding knife is in the backpack. Would have been nice to take it out to cut the hard bagel, but just left it in there and got back on the airplane. Look at how many weapons were smuggled aboard for hijackings before 9/11. 9/11 the hijackers used the FAA rules to take over the plane. Flight crews were told to go along with the hijackers. Will never happen again. People will die, while the hijackers are overpowered and most likely killed aboard the airplane. I think they should not only allow knives aboard the planes, but if you do not have one, you get issued one. You think a hijacker(s) will survive more than 45 seconds? May be a crew member or passenger hostage killed, but probably at the most one. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
"HarryK" wrote in message ... On 11/24/10 8:37 AM, YukonBound wrote: wrote in message ... On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:38:29 -0500, wrote: On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 13:52:08 -0800, wrote: No pun intended... http://nation.foxnews.com/airport-sc...strips-airport The only thing he did wrong was wait until he got out of the metal detector. He should have stripped in the line, run his clothes through with his shoes and laptop, then got dressed on the other side. I doubt any "indecent exposure" charge sticks if he was wearing regular underwear so this became one of those infamous "disorderly conduct" arrests. I doubt it also, but this whole business is moronic. http://vodpod.com/watch/4923312-thre...ed-by-tsa?pod= I'd say for short distances.... (under 1000 miles), trains are starting to look a whole lot better. We took the Amtrak Silver Meteor to Florida on Monday, When we went to the waiting lounge, the attendant looked at my photo ID. That was it. Pleasant trip, no hassles, slept most of the way. Dining car was ok, too. We can rent either a 'compartment with fold down bed.... or a bunk type bed in a sleeper car for overnights. When I was doing a lot of train travel in the 60's.. I saved the money and tried to get some shuteye in the regular reclining chairs. Got tiresome on a cross country trip of 5 days. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
wrote in message ... On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:37:38 -0400, "YukonBound" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:38:29 -0500, wrote: On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 13:52:08 -0800, wrote: No pun intended... http://nation.foxnews.com/airport-sc...strips-airport The only thing he did wrong was wait until he got out of the metal detector. He should have stripped in the line, run his clothes through with his shoes and laptop, then got dressed on the other side. I doubt any "indecent exposure" charge sticks if he was wearing regular underwear so this became one of those infamous "disorderly conduct" arrests. I doubt it also, but this whole business is moronic. http://vodpod.com/watch/4923312-thre...ed-by-tsa?pod= I'd say for short distances.... (under 1000 miles), trains are starting to look a whole lot better. That will work until some jihadi decides to sneak a firecracker on a train. Then you will be stripping at the subway station. Thank God the nearest subway to here is at least 800 miles away. ;-) |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
"Gene" wrote in message ... On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 23:05:57 -0800, wrote: I doubt it also, but this whole business is moronic. http://vodpod.com/watch/4923312-thre...ed-by-tsa?pod= We had the local TSA morons detain a bunch of suspicious fellows in a large green vehicle. Forced them to produce ID, assume the position, and then thoroughly searched them and the subject vehicle for, uh, something.... Doing their job, you say? Here's a picture of the suspicious subject vehicle: http://tinyurl.com/32npc4u And the suspicious uniformed and badged potential terrifying terrorists were making one of their twice nightly runs inspecting runway, approach, and taxiway lights. Maybe someone on the TSA had a grudge against one of the airport workers........... |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Nov 25, 7:43*am, BAR wrote:
In article aa0fbb58-8b90-4c9d-957c-48c214ce0541 @y30g2000prb.googlegroups.com, says... Persons on private flights are not subjected to TSA molestation but, they have the capacity to fly the plane into something because they have control of it already. Private airplanes, in general, don't carry 375 innocent people that just want to get to a destination, and the vast majority aren't the size of a 767. You are thinking in the wrong direction. On 9/11 they didn't care about the number of passengers on board they used the airplanes as guided missles. A Cessna 182 can carry about 800 lbs of "cargo" besides the pilot. Of course that's possible, but a 767 @ 475 knots with 375 innocent passengers is a much more effective "terror" weapon (and is harder to stop) than a Cessna @ 140 knots with a single willing pilot and some cargo. If that ever happens look for private aviation to take a huge hit. The TSA is nothing more than a jobs program. It's a little more than that, but not much. *It's how our government does airport screening / security. *What else do we want to turn over to them? By confiscating nail clippers and bottles of shampoo. Their methods are questionable, but it's much harder for a real threat to make it through security. And I think it's always been about calming the herd. The real security work is not done by the TSA drones we see at the airport. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Nov 24, 8:39*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:19:37 -0800 (PST), "Jack." wrote: On Nov 24, 4:42*pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. This is all to make flying on a commercial flight safer, and it does achieve something toward that. *It does not try to make the airport itself safe... that has never been the goal. *If a terrorist simply wants to kill lots of people, there are many environments that are more target dense and less secure than an airport. *Concerts and sporting events, to name two. Something, but not very much. Why would a terrorist care if he killed people on the ground vs. in the air? It's pretty obvious that anyone trying to get on a plane has to go through a lot more hassle than simply walking into the airport. I thought the point was to make us safer? I don't recall DHS claiming to make us safer only on the plane. The conversation is about TSA agents and security screening at airports. That's only about airborne security. Wider DHS measures are another thing completely. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 07:48:26 -0800 (PST), "Jack."
wrote: On Nov 24, 8:39*pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:19:37 -0800 (PST), "Jack." wrote: On Nov 24, 4:42*pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach. Most of this should happen before the airport. This is all to make flying on a commercial flight safer, and it does achieve something toward that. *It does not try to make the airport itself safe... that has never been the goal. *If a terrorist simply wants to kill lots of people, there are many environments that are more target dense and less secure than an airport. *Concerts and sporting events, to name two. Something, but not very much. Why would a terrorist care if he killed people on the ground vs. in the air? It's pretty obvious that anyone trying to get on a plane has to go through a lot more hassle than simply walking into the airport. I thought the point was to make us safer? I don't recall DHS claiming to make us safer only on the plane. The conversation is about TSA agents and security screening at airports. That's only about airborne security. Wider DHS measures are another thing completely. So boarding isn't related to airborne security? Nice try! If you want to be safer while flying, don't allow the cockpit doors to be opened during flights. Then, no matter what sharp implement is available (and there are plenty) the pilots can't be involved other than landing the plane. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
|
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 13:26:50 -0500, wrote:
On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 10:13:19 -0800, wrote: If you want to be safer while flying, don't allow the cockpit doors to be opened during flights. Then, no matter what sharp implement is available (and there are plenty) the pilots can't be involved other than landing the plane. Have you ever watched the dance they go through when a pilot uses the rest room? (it involves most of the air crew) A bad guy is not going through that door, knife or not. The Israelis don't have this problem... |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Nov 25, 1:13*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 07:48:26 -0800 (PST), "Jack." wrote: On Nov 24, 8:39*pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 14:19:37 -0800 (PST), "Jack." wrote: On Nov 24, 4:42*pm, wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:18:16 -0500, "MMC" wrote: I agree with Ken, I'm not afraid of someone seeing my scanned image, having some guy search me for contraband or making me take off my jacket and shoes. As long as EVERYONE has to follow the same production and EVERYONE is subjected to the same inconvenience, we'll all stay safe. It's unfortunate things have gotten to this point but, maybe because of the new rules, at least they got home safe. ------- The company that makes the screening machines is represented by Michael Chertoff, former DHS head (DHS owns TSA) and the machines are being bought with Obama bailout money (another 1,000 for $300M). I guess that makes it bipartisan? If the new measures were above board, why can you be charged (and fined up to $11k) for not playing along instead of just not being allowed to board, like before? It's about corruption and coercion, under the BS cover of security.. I'm boycotting air travel until Obamas wife and kids go thru this cr*p. There's a big diff between being safe and feeling safe. It's a pretty widely held understanding that the scanning and groping don't make us safe. We need intelligent profiling, and we need a layered approach.. Most of this should happen before the airport. This is all to make flying on a commercial flight safer, and it does achieve something toward that. *It does not try to make the airport itself safe... that has never been the goal. *If a terrorist simply wants to kill lots of people, there are many environments that are more target dense and less secure than an airport. *Concerts and sporting events, to name two. Something, but not very much. Why would a terrorist care if he killed people on the ground vs. in the air? It's pretty obvious that anyone trying to get on a plane has to go through a lot more hassle than simply walking into the airport. I thought the point was to make us safer? I don't recall DHS claiming to make us safer only on the plane. The conversation is about TSA agents and security screening at airports. *That's only about airborne security. Wider DHS measures are another thing completely. So boarding isn't related to airborne security? Nice try! ??????? The boarding process is exactly what we were talking about. That begins when you leave the general area, process through TSA security, and go to the gate area. Ticketed passengers only. It's not just walking down the jetway. Do you understand the distinction, and process? If you want to be safer while flying, don't allow the cockpit doors to be opened during flights. Then, no matter what sharp implement is available (and there are plenty) the pilots can't be involved other than landing the plane. ?????? The cockpit doors were reinforced after 9/11 to prevent forced entry. Have you not flow in the last 9 years? |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
In article ,
says... On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 13:26:50 -0500, wrote: On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 10:13:19 -0800, wrote: If you want to be safer while flying, don't allow the cockpit doors to be opened during flights. Then, no matter what sharp implement is available (and there are plenty) the pilots can't be involved other than landing the plane. Have you ever watched the dance they go through when a pilot uses the rest room? (it involves most of the air crew) A bad guy is not going through that door, knife or not. The Israelis don't have this problem... Because they profile. Most hard core liberals are against profiling, don't you know? |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
"Crotchedy Harry" wrote in message ...
In article , says... On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 13:26:50 -0500, wrote: On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 10:13:19 -0800, wrote: If you want to be safer while flying, don't allow the cockpit doors to be opened during flights. Then, no matter what sharp implement is available (and there are plenty) the pilots can't be involved other than landing the plane. Have you ever watched the dance they go through when a pilot uses the rest room? (it involves most of the air crew) A bad guy is not going through that door, knife or not. The Israelis don't have this problem... Because they profile. Most hard core liberals are against profiling, don't you know? Liberals don't want you profiling. They do it all the time. It's called "sizing up" the opponent. The thing is when they make a mistake, they never admit they were wrong. Check out Krause, Deplume, Jps, Donny etc. You'll see what I mean. -- Ziggy® |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 09:28:13 -0500, Ziggy® wrote:
Liberals don't want you profiling. They do it all the time. It's called "sizing up" the opponent. The thing is when they make a mistake, they never admit they were wrong. Check out Krause, Deplume, Jps, Donny etc. You'll see what I mean. Knock it off. Seriously. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 11:19:19 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote: On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 09:28:13 -0500, Ziggy® wrote: Liberals don't want you profiling. They do it all the time. It's called "sizing up" the opponent. The thing is when they make a mistake, they never admit they were wrong. Check out Krause, Deplume, Jps, Donny etc. You'll see what I mean. Knock it off. Seriously. Hope your Thanksgiving went well! My rotisserie turkey was spectacular. Just wish I could do one bigger than 15 lbs, 'cause there's not enough leftovers for another meal. This year I put the ham on a water smoker for about four hours. Wow. What a great flavor. -- Hope you're having a great day! John H |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
"Wayne.B" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 09:28:13 -0500, Ziggy® wrote: Liberals don't want you profiling. They do it all the time. It's called "sizing up" the opponent. The thing is when they make a mistake, they never admit they were wrong. Check out Krause, Deplume, Jps, Donny etc. You'll see what I mean. Knock it off. Seriously. OK -- Ziggy® |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Nov 26, 10:24*am, John H wrote:
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 11:19:19 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 09:28:13 -0500, Ziggy® wrote: Liberals don't want you profiling. They do it all the time. It's called "sizing up" the opponent. The thing is when they make a mistake, they never admit they were wrong. Check out Krause, Deplume, Jps, Donny etc. You'll see what I mean. Knock it off. * Seriously. Hope your Thanksgiving went well! My rotisserie turkey was spectacular. Just wish I could do one bigger than 15 lbs, 'cause there's not enough leftovers for another meal. This year I put the ham on a water smoker for about four hours. Wow. What a great flavor. -- Hope you're having a great day! John H The local Mennonites here do a great job of smoking or deep frying turkeys for people. Very reasonable too. This years was better than ever. |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Nov 26, 1:29*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 11:53:59 -0500, I am Tosk wrote: What is a "Water Smoker"? A smoker with a pan of water under the food. It puts some steam in the smoke. Most of them do it. How low can you keep the temps on something like that? I smoke my meat at 160 degrees F and don't let the smoke house get hotter. I do that with a length of 8" pipe from the fire box to the smokehouse... I always wondered how you kept the temps that low for so long without some flame in the firebox... |
OT not getting to Barbados the hard way
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 13:29:56 -0500, wrote:
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 11:53:59 -0500, I am Tosk wrote: What is a "Water Smoker"? A smoker with a pan of water under the food. It puts some steam in the smoke. Most of them do it. For the ham, I also throw in some cloves and half a bottle of red wine. Gives a nice flavor. -- Hope you're having a great day! John H |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:13 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com