DFWstangs Forums - Reply to Topic
Thread: Al-Qaida Failed attempt on Christmas. Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the DFWstangs Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
12-31-2009 11:59 AM
MR TINFOIL HAT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevo View Post
I was waiting for tinhat to make this conclusion, but he never figured it out, oh well.



That is for one person, divide that number by 250 passengers on board one plane, and it gets much lower.

Also, consider this... if some single person gets hit by lightning while out plowing the back forty, it is traumatic for his friends and family.

If a single American civilian is killed in a terroristic action on American soil, it then sends shockwaves throughout our country, and if it is in a fashion such as the attacks on 911, it can tailspin our country into a recession or depression.

People like tinhat are laughably hypocritical, they bitch about big government and conspiracy until something like this happens, then they cry about wanting more government control and more safety measures. You can't have it both ways, either the government controls your environment and you are safe in their bubble, or they don't and you are free to protect yourself.

Stevo
Well considering we have big government I just expect them to use all the resources we have. Nothing should have to change, like I said all throughout this thread they knew about this guy coming and did nothing. The white house is admitting mistakes were made. So I said step up measures in OTHER countries since we can't seem to successfully use the methods we have in place. A thumb scan machine in OTHER countries or harsher security checkpoints should have been done a long time ago. I don't want it both ways. I just want them to actually try to protect us though, and if they can't just admit it, and stop trying to pass laws that take away freedoms under the guise of security if they can't provide it. Nothing more, nothing less. I have no problem with more government control in airports of foreign countries that fly to the US.
12-31-2009 11:42 AM
Stevo
Quote:
Originally Posted by forever_frost View Post
Or, if a country doesn't meet our guidelines, we don't fly from there.
I was waiting for tinhat to make this conclusion, but he never figured it out, oh well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
1 in 500,000 for lightning? I thought it would be more. They're taking our rights away on a 10 mil to one chance. Good to know some real stats, thanks.
That is for one person, divide that number by 250 passengers on board one plane, and it gets much lower.

Also, consider this... if some single person gets hit by lightning while out plowing the back forty, it is traumatic for his friends and family.

If a single American civilian is killed in a terroristic action on American soil, it then sends shockwaves throughout our country, and if it is in a fashion such as the attacks on 911, it can tailspin our country into a recession or depression.

People like tinhat are laughably hypocritical, they bitch about big government and conspiracy until something like this happens, then they cry about wanting more government control and more safety measures. You can't have it both ways, either the government controls your environment and you are safe in their bubble, or they don't and you are free to protect yourself.

Stevo
12-30-2009 10:26 PM
Sgt Beavis
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
1 in 500,000 for lightning? I thought it would be more. They're taking our rights away on a 10 mil to one chance. Good to know some real stats, thanks.
Note: That is for being KILLED, not Struck, by lightning in a "given year". Being "struck" over an 80 year lifespan, the odds are 1 in 6250.

All this numbers stuff is quite fascinating
12-30-2009 10:23 PM
Sgt Beavis
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceyko View Post
Who made those odds?
The terrorism odds are from the Gizmodo article I linked earlier. Those odds were complied from Bureau of Transportation Statistics data collected from 1999 to 2009.


The Lightning odds are from NOAA. (odds of being killed in any given year)
http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/medical.htm


Asteroid odds are from NASA.
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2009...is_Update.html
12-30-2009 10:12 PM
MR TINFOIL HAT 1 in 500,000 for lightning? I thought it would be more. They're taking our rights away on a 10 mil to one chance. Good to know some real stats, thanks.
12-30-2009 10:04 PM
ceyko Who made those odds?
12-30-2009 09:57 PM
Sgt Beavis Here is an interesting comparison to the risk of a being the victim of an airborne terror attack.

The odds of being a victim are 1 in 10,408,947.

The odds of being killed by lightning are 1 in 500,000.

The odds that the asteroid Apophis will hit Earth in 2036 with the force of an 880 MEGATON Bomb - 1 in 250000.

Considering the odds, I think we might want to put that money to better use....
12-30-2009 08:36 PM
MR TINFOIL HAT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sgt Beavis View Post
The TSA FINALLY bans Snow Globes.

About fuckin time. I was so fuckin' scared of that shit bringing down an airliner..

http://www.businessinsider.com/final...lusterStock%29
Nice.
12-30-2009 01:46 PM
Sgt Beavis The TSA FINALLY bans Snow Globes.

About fuckin time. I was so fuckin' scared of that shit bringing down an airliner..

http://www.businessinsider.com/final...lusterStock%29
12-30-2009 01:39 PM
Sgt Beavis
Quote:
Originally Posted by forever_frost View Post
I say an air marshal needs to be on every international flight coming into the country. If anything gets screwy, the guy gets shot right then

Are you ready to pay for that? Do you know how many international flights we have going in an out of this country?



I've ready the TSAs new rules. What a load of bullshit. Fortunately they've moderated them extensively to give the POC the ability to make decisions. None of this will keep you safe anyways. Hell, even these body scanners will fail to keep you safe. Wanna know why?

This is why...

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-a...,7740219.story

Quote:
In an elaborate ruse, a bomber posing as a repentant extremist tried to assassinate Prince Muhammad bin Nayef, Saudi Arabia's security chief.

Al Qaeda operatives prepared an explosive device that was inserted into the rectum of the Saudi militant, who flew from Yemen to Jidda, Saudi Arabia, to meet with the prince.

He got through airport and palace security before the explosive was triggered by a call from Yemen, killing him but only wounding the prince.
Even body scanners can't pick up a bomb shoved up a terrorists ass. To detect is, you would need a much higher X-RAY dosage.

I call bullshit for an even bigger reason. RISK. What is the actual risk? Gizmodo did a good job is illustrating the actual risk of dying in an airborne terror attack..

http://gizmodo.com/5435954/the-true-...e-terror-chart
12-30-2009 10:27 AM
futant this is all an elaborate plan to anally probe women
12-29-2009 06:39 PM
tazz007 All this B.S. going on, and people still support the TSA?

Look just issue every passenger a base ball bat. There, cheaper, less government, and real security.


Yes, I would rather have a plane full of armed people on board, than have more government B.S. rules and regulations. The feds do such a great jog don't they
12-29-2009 04:09 PM
ceyko
Quote:
Originally Posted by forever_frost View Post
Or, if a country doesn't meet our guidelines, we don't fly from there.
I think this is somewhat more realistic then anything mentioned for long term success. Although the airlines would pitch a fit.
12-29-2009 04:05 PM
forever_frost Or, if a country doesn't meet our guidelines, we don't fly from there.
12-29-2009 04:00 PM
MR TINFOIL HAT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevo View Post
Lets say we give the Nigerians 10 billion dollars to upgrade airport security, what then? Lets say we give every podunk third world shit hole 10 billion dollars to upgrade airport security. WHAT THEN? What makes you think we can control what happens in Nigeria? In Amsterdam? Brazil? Yemen?



Still waiting for you answer this question. We can make as many rules as we choose, our empty suit sack of shit 'leader' can talk until he is blue in the face, and at the end of the day, all the other countries around the world don't have to do shit.

Stevo
There's thousands of ways to force it in other countries. I'll give you an example. We have it brought about as a global problem, which in turn requires a global solution. If every country has to do it, and it's brought about as safety for everyone, not just Americans, most countries would go along with it. For the countries that don't go along we put people in place and international laws with severe penaltys. There are plenty of solutions to your question you just have to be creative. Hell they could just make a simple thumb scan that everyone has to do before boarding that checks a database with known people of interest logged in it. Our government has ways of getting other countries to do things they don't want to do, don't think for a second that if our government wants something done in other countries they will wait for that country to give us permission.
12-29-2009 03:53 PM
forever_frost I say an air marshal needs to be on every international flight coming into the country. If anything gets screwy, the guy gets shot right then
12-29-2009 03:13 PM
justinsn95
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeb View Post
Meanwhile, the TSA continues to hassle middle aged white men, and white men carrying large sums of money, and white women with intrusive searches while they ignore more obvious subjects (ie:nigerians) because they might be accused of "profiling"

<--gets the TSA experience 4 times a month
I don't think that guy should have been singled out or profiled in any way. After all, it could have been a lifestyle choice, or a religious preference to have a crotch that smokes.
12-29-2009 02:51 PM
67camino
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevo View Post
Lets say we give the Nigerians 10 billion dollars to upgrade airport security, what then? Lets say we give every podunk third world shit hole 10 billion dollars to upgrade airport security. WHAT THEN? What makes you think we can control what happens in Nigeria? In Amsterdam? Brazil? Yemen?



Still waiting for you answer this question. We can make as many rules as we choose, our empty suit sack of shit 'leader' can talk until he is blue in the face, and at the end of the day, all the other countries around the world don't have to do shit.

Stevo
Lets say if you can't secure the airplane then you can't fly it into America.
12-29-2009 01:55 PM
Stevo
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
BUNCH OF COPY/PASTED BULLSHIT THAT I DIDN'T WRITE...
Lets say we give the Nigerians 10 billion dollars to upgrade airport security, what then? Lets say we give every podunk third world shit hole 10 billion dollars to upgrade airport security. WHAT THEN? What makes you think we can control what happens in Nigeria? In Amsterdam? Brazil? Yemen?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevo View Post
What do you expect our country do to FORCE foreign countries to do what we want?
Still waiting for you answer this question. We can make as many rules as we choose, our empty suit sack of shit 'leader' can talk until he is blue in the face, and at the end of the day, all the other countries around the world don't have to do shit.

Stevo
12-29-2009 01:00 PM
ceyko
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
Having a passport should be a no brainer if you plan on flying International flights. If it requires excessive oversight SO WHAT! This is for our safety, we waste trillions and we're all of a sudden worried about the price tag when it comes to our safety?
Look, I'm not disagreeing with your general opinion on screening locally and nationally or the cost.

IMHO, all this is mute anyway with the ports and borders being vulnerable.
12-29-2009 12:57 PM
MR TINFOIL HAT
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceyko View Post
I may have missed it or your point, but no where in there does it say anything about a passport/identification.

Also, in these lesser/third world countries there would need to be excessive oversight. Bribes are easy.
Having a passport should be a no brainer if you plan on flying International flights. If it requires excessive oversight SO WHAT! This is for our safety, we waste trillions and we're all of a sudden worried about the price tag when it comes to our safety?
12-29-2009 12:53 PM
MR TINFOIL HAT I don't think a worldwide system for every airport is asking too much. If you don't have the system you can't have International flights. It can't be any more expensive then all the bailouts and useless bullshit this country spends money on. After all it's for everyones safety, so no one should have a problem with what it costs or requires.
12-29-2009 12:49 PM
ceyko
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
The new TSA rules force them to do it. You act like this is some impossible feat when it's all really simple if they are actually concerned for our safety.
I may have missed it or your point, but no where in there does it say anything about a passport/identification.

Also, in these lesser/third world countries there would need to be excessive oversight. Bribes are easy.
12-29-2009 12:46 PM
ceyko
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevo View Post
Hopefully you can read it this time, as you totally missed it last time.

Stevo
To do this would require forcing the airlines to do something. i.e. hire security/contractors to validate all this stuff and permit/deny entry onto the airline's plane.

Pros
-The obvious, it could possibly work.
-I know this is also a con, cause the airlines will pass the costs off to us. However, it would save their airplanes from crashing. With insurance and all that, I'm not 100% convinced that the airlines REALLY care that much about saving their airplanes or the people on them.

Cons:
-Cost to us, the ticket purchasers.
-Probably would not work since the airlines would hire the cheapest possible people to do it and not provide proper training and/or discipline/rewards to do a good job.
-Even more hassle at the airports

In my simple little world, if I bring a terrorist into the country via a car - I'd probably be held personally responsible. Why can airlines get away with it?

Hell, focusing on airplanes is fine - but I'm guessing the real threats are coming in via our borders or ports. For all I know this was just a diversion.
12-29-2009 12:42 PM
MR TINFOIL HAT The new TSA rules force them to do it. You act like this is some impossible feat when it's all really simple if they are actually concerned for our safety.


(a) departing from any foreign location to the United States (including its territories and possessions), you must immediately implement all measures in this SD for each such flight.
1. BOARDING GATE

1. The aircraft operator or authorized air carrier representative must ensure all passengers are screened at the boarding gate during the boarding process using the following procedures. These procedures are in addition to the screening of all passengers at the screening checkpoint.
1. Perform thorough pat-down of all passengers at boarding gate prior to boarding, concentrating on upper legs and torso.
2. Physically inspect 100 percent of all passenger accessible property at the boarding gate prior to boarding, with focus on syringes being transported along with powders and/or liquids.
3. Ensure the liquids, aerosols, and gels restrictions are strictly adhered to in accordance with SD 1544-06-02E.
2. During the boarding process, the air carrier may exempt passengers who are Heads of State or Heads of Government from the measures outlined in Section I.A. of this SD, including the following who are traveling with the Head of State or Head of Government:

1. Spouse and children, or
2. One other individual (chosen by the Head of State or Head of Government)
3. For the purposes of Section I.B., the following definitions apply:
1. Head of State: An individual serving as the chief public representative of a monarchic or republican nation-state, federation, commonwealth, or any other political state (for example, King, Queen, and President).
2. Head of Government: The chief officer of the executive branch of a government presiding over a cabinet (for example, Prime Minister, Premier, President, and Monarch).

2. IN FLIGHT

1. During flight, the aircraft operator must ensure that the following procedures are followed:
1. Passengers must remain in seats beginning 1 hour prior to arrival at destination.
2. Passenger access to carry-on baggage is prohibited beginning 1 hour prior to arrival at destination.
3. Disable aircraft-integrated passenger communications systems and services (phone, internet access services, live television programming, global positioning systems) prior to boarding and during all phases of flight.
4. While over U.S. airspace, flight crew may not make any announcement to passengers concerning flight path or position over cities or landmarks.
5. Passengers may not have any blankets, pillows, or personal belongings on the lap beginning 1 hour prior to arrival at destination.

AIRCRAFT OPERATOR ACKNOWLEDGMENT: The aircraft operator must immediately provide written confirmation to its assigned PSI indicating receipt of this SD.
AIRCRAFT OPERATOR dissemination required: The aircraft operator must immediately pass the information and directives set forth in this SD to all stations affected, and provide written confirmation to its PSI, indicating that all stations affected have acknowledged receipt of the information and directives set forth in this SD. The aircraft operator must disseminate this information to its senior management personnel, ground security coordinators, and supervisory security personnel at all affected locations. All aircraft operator personnel implementing this SD must be briefed by the aircraft operator on its content and the restrictions governing dissemination. No other dissemination may be made without prior approval of the Assistant Secretary for the Transportation Security Administration. Unauthorized dissemination of this document or information contained herein is prohibited by 49 CFR Part 1520 (see 69 Fed. Reg. 28066 (May 18, 2004).
APPROVAL OF ALTERNATIVE MEASURES: With respect to the provisions of this SD, as stated in 49 CFR 1544.305(d), the aircraft operator may submit in writing to its PSI proposed alternative measures and the basis for submitting the alternative measures for approval by the Assistant Administrator for Transportation Sector Network Management. The aircraft operator must immediately notify its PSI whenever any procedure in this SD cannot be carried out by a government authority charged with performing security procedures.
FOR TSA ACTION ONLY: The TSA must issue this SD immediately to the corporate security element of all affected U.S. aircraft operators.
FOR STATE DEPARTMENT: Retransmittal to appropriate foreign posts is authorized. Post must refer to STATE 162917, 201826Z Sep 01, Subject: FAA Security Directives and Information Circulars: Definitions and Handling, for specific guidance and dissemination.

Gale Rossides
Acting Administrator
12-29-2009 12:31 PM
Stevo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevo View Post
What do you expect our country do to FORCE foreign countries to do what we want?
Hopefully you can read it this time, as you totally missed it last time.

Stevo
12-29-2009 12:31 PM
MR TINFOIL HAT Also any ticket bought within 24 hours of departure, and especially cash purchases of tickets automatically get sent to the counter terrorism flight verification system before that person can board the plane.
12-29-2009 12:27 PM
MR TINFOIL HAT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevo View Post
Let me ask you this: What do you expect our country do to FORCE foreign countries to do what we want?

Seriously, you have this all worked out in your head, lets hear your grand plan to enforce stricter safety and airport boarding regulations on foreign soil, in Lagos, Nigeria.

Stevo
It's real simple. Anyone coming into the United States has to show a passport to get on a plane, and also has to be checked worldwide to make sure they are not a suspect of terrorism and on any lists. In this post 9/11 world we live in I don't think that's too much to ask regardless what country they are departing from.
12-29-2009 12:14 PM
Stevo
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
You're right, there's no way possible they could have seen this coming, and I just expect too much from the intelligence community.
Let me ask you this: What do you expect our country do to FORCE foreign countries to do what we want?

Seriously, you have this all worked out in your head, lets hear your grand plan to enforce stricter safety and airport boarding regulations on foreign soil, in Lagos, Nigeria.

Stevo
12-29-2009 12:08 PM
MR TINFOIL HAT Supposedly these are the new TSA rules. http://gizmodo.com/5435188/official-...nderpants-bomb
12-29-2009 11:50 AM
GhostTX FFS...are we going to have underwear searches now? We already have to take our shoes off because of the one attempt.

12-29-2009 11:21 AM
MR TINFOIL HAT
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67camino View Post
So your saying that this administration made this shit up just to make themselves look like a bunch of dumb asses.
No, I'm just posting a video of Webster Tarpley. I don't know what the fuck is going on with this mess.
12-29-2009 11:18 AM
67camino
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
Check out this video of Webster Tarpley talking about this fiasco. http://rt.com/Politics/2009-12-29/de...-act-fake.html
So your saying that this administration made this shit up just to make themselves look like a bunch of dumb asses.
12-29-2009 11:15 AM
MR TINFOIL HAT Check out this video of Webster Tarpley talking about this fiasco. http://rt.com/Politics/2009-12-29/de...-act-fake.html
12-28-2009 09:33 PM
MR TINFOIL HAT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevo View Post
I am pretty certain 'we' had no idea he was flying anywhere. If you think America has the means to instantly know if some flake drives to an airport in Nigeria, purchases a ticket, then walks 50 feet, then boards an airplane 30 minutes later, you are greatly confused. It isn't like these airlines send a passenger manifest before they take0off, or when in the air, or even as they land. They only know who is on the plane after it lands, and passengers are getting off the plane and walking into customs.



Again, he was not on the 'known terrorist list' or the 'no fly' list, he was on a 'person of interest' list, and that list only applies to America, it isn't circulated worldwide.



No one is making excuses, I am simply pointing out that there isn't a means of enforcing American rules on foreign soil, unless we invade said countries and occupy their airports. It isn't going to happen.



Again, you assume that American intelligence instantly knows everything happening everywhere around the world, it just isn't so. Passenger manifests are not wired across oceans for the receiving country to scrutinize before airliners take off. We do not label people as a terrorist on the word of a family member. Our spies cannot just appear in a small town in Nigeria asking questions about someone and learn all there is to learn in a day, or a week, or a month.

You need to pull the tin-foil hat off for a bit, and use some common sense.

Stevo
You're right, there's no way possible they could have seen this coming, and I just expect too much from the intelligence community.
12-28-2009 06:09 PM
Stevo
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
You don't think we didn't know he had scheduled a flight to America? Our intelligence knew he was attempting to come to America, so how about a call to Nigeria, and then one to Amsterdam.
I am pretty certain 'we' had no idea he was flying anywhere. If you think America has the means to instantly know if some flake drives to an airport in Nigeria, purchases a ticket, then walks 50 feet, then boards an airplane 30 minutes later, you are greatly confused. It isn't like these airlines send a passenger manifest before they take0off, or when in the air, or even as they land. They only know who is on the plane after it lands, and passengers are getting off the plane and walking into customs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
We could at least call those two airports he's going to be at, and ask them to thoroughly search this guy, after all he is on a list.
Again, he was not on the 'known terrorist list' or the 'no fly' list, he was on a 'person of interest' list, and that list only applies to America, it isn't circulated worldwide.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
You want to keep making excuses for these failures when there are very simple solutions.
No one is making excuses, I am simply pointing out that there isn't a means of enforcing American rules on foreign soil, unless we invade said countries and occupy their airports. It isn't going to happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
I know our intelligence community is busy trying to find reasons to label most Americans terrorists, but really how hard is it at the bare minimum to pick up the phone and call these two airports to inform them of a possible terrorist and ask for a little more thorough search?
Again, you assume that American intelligence instantly knows everything happening everywhere around the world, it just isn't so. Passenger manifests are not wired across oceans for the receiving country to scrutinize before airliners take off. We do not label people as a terrorist on the word of a family member. Our spies cannot just appear in a small town in Nigeria asking questions about someone and learn all there is to learn in a day, or a week, or a month.

You need to pull the tin-foil hat off for a bit, and use some common sense.

Stevo
12-28-2009 04:00 PM
forever_frost I like to think outside the box
12-28-2009 03:47 PM
67camino
Quote:
Originally Posted by forever_frost View Post
Or, skip the trial, treat him like a terrorist and bathe him in pig's blood and have a woman shoot him, then bury him in a swine farm
That's an option too.
12-28-2009 03:43 PM
forever_frost Or, skip the trial, treat him like a terrorist and bathe him in pig's blood and have a woman shoot him, then bury him in a swine farm
12-28-2009 02:41 PM
67camino The best thing to do now would be to put him on trial find him guilty and have a public execution.
12-28-2009 02:03 PM
MR TINFOIL HAT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevo View Post
I'm curious, what do you expect our country to do? March in to Nigeria, and arrest someone based on the word of his father?

Okay, once again, I'll ask it. How can our government enforce rules and laws in another country? We have no jurisdiction in Nigeria, how can we dictate what they do there? How is it Americas fault that someone fucked up in a foreign country?

We can stop them as they enter our country, as they try to step foot on our soil, and force them to leave and not let them enter, but we cannot control what happens at airports else where. People are refused entry hundreds of times a day at airports in America, due to these 'lists' and because of various other reasons, but we cannot stop them from getting on a plane in Nigeria.

Even if it is an American airliner, if it is leaving a foreign airport, the customs agents at that airport are only subject to the rules and laws there, and those laws are only as strong as the people strong as the people in that country that are enforcing them. Regardless of what you think, we cannot dictate what happens or who gets on a plane at an airport in Nigeria.

Stevo
You don't think we didn't know he had scheduled a flight to America? Our intelligence knew he was attempting to come to America, so how about a call to Nigeria, and then one to Amsterdam. We could at least call those two airports he's going to be at, and ask them to thoroughly search this guy, after all he is on a list. You want to keep making excuses for these failures when there are very simple solutions. I know our intelligence community is busy trying to find reasons to label most Americans terrorists, but really how hard is it at the bare minimum to pick up the phone and call these two airports to inform them of a possible terrorist and ask for a little more thorough search?
12-28-2009 12:18 PM
Stevo
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
Well that's what's entailed in the job of keeping us safe. No one said it was easy, but there always seems to be some excuse deemed acceptable when security officials drop the ball. There is no acceptable excuse with all the security screening and technology we have IMO. It's even more pathetic when the father of the suspect gives you a heads up about his sons views, and potential threat to America.
I'm curious, what do you expect our country to do? March in to Nigeria, and arrest someone based on the word of his father?

Okay, once again, I'll ask it. How can our government enforce rules and laws in another country? We have no jurisdiction in Nigeria, how can we dictate what they do there? How is it Americas fault that someone fucked up in a foreign country?

We can stop them as they enter our country, as they try to step foot on our soil, and force them to leave and not let them enter, but we cannot control what happens at airports else where. People are refused entry hundreds of times a day at airports in America, due to these 'lists' and because of various other reasons, but we cannot stop them from getting on a plane in Nigeria.

Even if it is an American airliner, if it is leaving a foreign airport, the customs agents at that airport are only subject to the rules and laws there, and those laws are only as strong as the people strong as the people in that country that are enforcing them. Regardless of what you think, we cannot dictate what happens or who gets on a plane at an airport in Nigeria.

Stevo
12-28-2009 11:40 AM
AL P
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceyko View Post
I agree with profiling and also paying attention to people acting nervous and such. I'd rather see a higher training/more thorough group at the gates.

We've all heard the stories, here is one I just seen. A buddy gave the gate security people a bit of a hard time. They seperated him for a search. Searched him and found nothing. He had a lighter in his back pocket. To me, we're wasting money/time if they can't even find a lighter on someone they specifically searched. Might as well open the gates up.
As bizarre as it sounds, lighters and matches are ok.

If you ask me that is fucking hilarious. We have idiots in charge of airline security, that is the biggest problem.

I'm disappointed that the guy who stopped this didn't beat this fuck to death on the plane. I think it sets a bad example for future terrorists. I would have bashed his fucking brains in with whatever I could find or choked him to death. In his Good Morning America interview the guy who stopped the incident did say he was choking him pretty good. I think he stopped too soon.
12-28-2009 11:20 AM
MR TINFOIL HAT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevo View Post

I can't imagine how many reports they get daily from people all around the world, and what it takes to investigate each and every report.

Stevo
Well that's what's entailed in the job of keeping us safe. No one said it was easy, but there always seems to be some excuse deemed acceptable when security officials drop the ball. There is no acceptable excuse with all the security screening and technology we have IMO. It's even more pathetic when the father of the suspect gives you a heads up about his sons views, and potential threat to America.
12-28-2009 10:03 AM
67camino The system worked people! Well at least Janet Napoliitano thinks it worked. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...-suspect-plane

Wait maybe she thinks it don't work now. Who knows.
12-28-2009 07:42 AM
ceyko Yeah, I just reported MR TINFOIL HAT. He's not going to like where I told them he is hiding stuff.

I kid.
12-28-2009 12:37 AM
Stevo
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
I didn't even mention the PA in this entire thread. I don't know where you got that from because I never said it.
I never said you did, but others have in this thread, and I'm still waiting for them to answer. But, after looking at the way I worded my post, I can see how you could assume I did, my mistake there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
His father contacted US officials and warned them so you'd think they would look into when these people on lists are coming into the country.
I can't imagine how many reports they get daily from people all around the world, and what it takes to investigate each and every report.

Stevo
12-27-2009 10:41 PM
MR TINFOIL HAT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevo View Post
This 'database' that you keep referring to isn't what you think. He wasn't on the actual 'known terrorist list', he wasn't on the 'no fly list'. Those two lists are global lists, the one he was on was an American list.

I'm still curious as to how/why you think the Patriot Act is enforced in foreign countries.

Stevo
I didn't even mention the PA in this entire thread. I don't know where you got that from because I never said it. His father contacted US officials and warned them so you'd think they would look into when these people on lists are coming into the country.
12-27-2009 05:33 PM
Stevo
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR TINFOIL HAT View Post
Yes, he was fresh in the database. That means he should have been on the radar even more, especially with his father warning us about his son.
This 'database' that you keep referring to isn't what you think. He wasn't on the actual 'known terrorist list', he wasn't on the 'no fly list'. Those two lists are global lists, the one he was on was an American list.

I'm still curious as to how/why you think the Patriot Act is enforced in foreign countries.

Stevo
12-27-2009 04:00 PM
MR TINFOIL HAT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevo View Post
He was given the visa a year and a half ago, and was only put in the 'terror database' last month.

Stevo
Yes, he was fresh in the database. That means he should have been on the radar even more, especially with his father warning us about his son.
This thread has more than 50 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome