Thieving Bastards
Bryn Fraser
confiscated without explanation.
He is British, White and carrying a biometric passport.
The phone carries all of his personal details, his address book and
confidential information about his patients. It also carries pictures
of his South American holiday.
I want it returned!
So what the F**k gives?
Bryn
Seriously pissed off...
fitlike min
There is a guy called Conway who may be able to help.
Bryn Fraser
>
> - Show quoted text -
I am waiting for an explanation...
Bryn
La N
"Just because they can."
Bryn Fraser
That I am afraid is the truth.
Bryn
Fred J. McCall
:As my stepson crossed the border into the United States his mobile was
:confiscated without explanation.
:
:He is British, White and carrying a biometric passport.
:
Why do you think any of that should matter?
:
:The phone carries all of his personal details, his address book and
:confidential information about his patients. It also carries pictures
:of his South American holiday.
:
:I want it returned!
:
:So what the F**k gives?
:
For those who haven't heard, the US Customs Service (upheld by the 9th
Circuit Court) has been engaging in a program of random forensic
searches of electronic equipment (laptops, phones, and PDAs). The
program is RANDOM - country of origin and such don't matter (and yes,
they do it to US citizens returning to the country, too).
They generally wind up keeping the equipment for several weeks. They
should have made this clear to your stepson when they took the device.
However, there have been cases where they have kept the equipment for
months.
If it was anyone but Customs and Border Protection, such searches
would be unconstitutional. It's been going on for at least 4 years
that I'm aware of.
--
You are
What you do
When it counts.
Bryn Fraser
> :
> :He is British, White and carrying a biometric passport.
> :
>
> Why do you think any of that should matter?
Well I thought only suspicious looking brown people with Islamic
sounding names got focused on...
NB: "biometric passport."
>
snip 8><------------------------------------------------------
> :
> For those who haven't heard, the US Customs Service (upheld by the 9th
> Circuit Court) has been engaging in a program of random forensic
> searches of electronic equipment (laptops, phones, and PDAs). The
> program is RANDOM - country of origin and such don't matter (and yes,
> they do it to US citizens returning to the country, too).
>
> They generally wind up keeping the equipment for several weeks. They
> should have made this clear to your stepson when they took the device.
> However, there have been cases where they have kept the equipment for
> months.
>
> If it was anyone but Customs and Border Protection, such searches
> would be unconstitutional. It's been going on for at least 4 years
> that I'm aware of.
Thanks for that possible explanation.
I will tell it to my elderly friend, ex-US Marine Corps, WWII and
Korean Vet, who suffered similar treatment when he returned from New
Brunswick after a fishing trip. I know that a fishing pole wrongly
handled can take a man's eye out but he is sliver haired and obviously
knocking on a bit.
Are you sure that Customs are not going for easy targets? No paper
work and the like?
By this time tomorrow his sister will have been engaged in a very
earnest conversation with her congressman, a member of a party to
which she has made contributions, huge contributions, over a period of
many years.
I am sure all present will enjoy hearing how this develops. :-]
Bryn
fitlike min
They are looking for porn and his phonecalls to Osama Bin London.
God help him if he knows any Arabs.
deem...@aol.com
> > :
> > :He is British, White and carrying a biometric passport.
> > :
>
> > Why do you think any of that should matter?
>
> Well I thought only suspicious looking brown people with Islamic
> sounding names got focused on...
That's called profiling and is a nasty no-no. Heaven forbid the
authorities concentrate their resources on the groups most likely to
be the problem. Screw common sense, it's the LAW!
>
> NB: "biometric passport."
>
> snip 8><------------------------------------------------------
>
> > :
> > For those who haven't heard, the US Customs Service (upheld by the 9th
> > Circuit Court) has been engaging in a program of random forensic
> > searches of electronic equipment (laptops, phones, and PDAs). The
> > program is RANDOM - country of origin and such don't matter (and yes,
> > they do it to US citizens returning to the country, too).
>
> > They generally wind up keeping the equipment for several weeks. They
> > should have made this clear to your stepson when they took the device.
> > However, there have been cases where they have kept the equipment for
> > months.
>
> > If it was anyone but Customs and Border Protection, such searches
> > would be unconstitutional. It's been going on for at least 4 years
> > that I'm aware of.
>
> Thanks for that possible explanation.
>
> I will tell it to my elderly friend, ex-US Marine Corps, WWII and
> Korean Vet, who suffered similar treatment when he returned from New
> Brunswick after a fishing trip. I know that a fishing pole wrongly
> handled can take a man's eye out but he is sliver haired and obviously
> knocking on a bit.
>
> Are you sure that Customs are not going for easy targets? No paper
> work and the like?
It's supposed to be random. Even if it isn't, they have to pick a
few out so they can say "See, we searched this 11 yo girl rather than
just picking swarthy 20-somethings with funny names"
La N
> On Dec 21, 3:50 pm, Bryn Fraser <brianlovett...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
> It's supposed to be random. Even if it isn't, they have to pick a
> few out so they can say "See, we searched this 11 yo girl rather than
> just picking swarthy 20-somethings with funny names"
>
>
And that's why I mentioned, "Because we can".
- nil
Glenallan
"Fred J. McCall" <fjmc...@gmail.com> wrote
> Bryn Fraser <brianlo...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> :As my stepson crossed the border into the United States his mobile was
> :confiscated without explanation.
> :
> :He is British, White and carrying a biometric passport.
> For those who haven't heard, the US Customs Service (upheld by the 9th
> Circuit Court) has been engaging in a program of random forensic
> searches of electronic equipment (laptops, phones, and PDAs). The
> program is RANDOM - country of origin and such don't matter (and yes,
> they do it to US citizens returning to the country, too).
> --
> You is
> What you is
> When it counts.
Yes...you are quite correct.!
It happened to me about 5 years ago, entering the US via Logan Airport.
When I got to the Customs Booth I could plainly hear the two Hispanic guys
discuss my case in Spanish. On account of my Foreign Service for
Her Majesty in South America I could plainly hear and understand
every word.
"Hey, Rodrigo...doan you think this Gringo has the shifty eye.??
"You is right Pedro...lookathat...hey, whassis name.??"
"Oh....eet eez that ole fuckero Glenallan again.
Pretend you eez stupid, stupid. Ask him if that kids fishing
rod he has is a .22 calibro rifle"
"Hey...Glenallan...whatya do with a .22 calibro rifle in the US??
I replied in perfect Spanish..."I dunno, I find eet on the plano...
doan I know you from somewhere??"
"Right...that's it Glenallan...you dumb Brit..phone,
fountain pen, monicle, watch, hundred bucks bribe you aint offrin.
Take your British ass to that room over there.
"Pedro...look into his biometrics"
I'm glad I didn't have a phone.!!
G.
deem...@aol.com
> "Fred J. McCall" <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote
>
> > Bryn Fraser <brianlovett...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > :As my stepson crossed the border into the United States his mobile was
> > :confiscated without explanation.
> > :
> > :He is British, White and carrying a biometric passport.
> > For those who haven't heard, the US Customs Service (upheld by the 9th
> > Circuit Court) has been engaging in a program of random forensic
> > searches of electronic equipment (laptops, phones, and PDAs). The
> > program is RANDOM - country of origin and such don't matter (and yes,
> > they do it to US citizens returning to the country, too).
> > --
> > You is
> > What you is
> > When it counts.
>
> Yes...you are quite correct.!
> It happened to me about 5 years ago, entering the US via Logan Airport.
> When I got to the Customs Booth I could plainly hear the two Hispanic guys
> discuss my case in Spanish. On account of my Foreign Service for
> Her Majesty in South America I could plainly hear and understand
> every word.
Bait...at Logan they'd be Irish :-)
fitlike min
> "Fred J. McCall" <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote
>
Did he do an anal search? Better watch those Spanish men
Peter Jason
"fitlike min" <kill...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:ee91ddbb-e367-49a7...@u18g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
In polite circles this is called a "cavity search".
La N
When I was flying from Palm Springs to Edmonton earlier this year, the
security people at the Palm Springs airport wore vinyl gloves and did
intense scrutiny of various traveling out of the country. Those same
security agents spent quite a bit of time sprinkling white powder on my
laptop computer and investigating its every niche. I guess they were
concerned that it was wired to explode on the plane.
- nil
The Phantom Piper
wrote:
>
> So what the F**k gives?
Enter Rome; deal with the Roman 'Civil' (Military) Structure...
(You *do* realise that America jails both a higher percentage
_and_ a greater total number of its own citizens than any other
nation on the planet, including China?)
So why is your Greek here in Nova Roma anyway?
Watching Over My Shoulder,
The Phantom Piper
The Phantom Piper
wrote:
>
> I am waiting for an explanation...
Er... It always *was* a Rootin'-Tootin'-Shootin'
Wild'n'Wacky Authoritarian Xenophobic place,
and got much, *MUCH* worse after 9/11 and
the appointment of King George 'Little Boots'
Bush and his Regent, Tricky Dick Cheney...?
Just Guessing,
The Phantom Piper
fitlike min
> "fitlike min" <killwh...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
My apologies, I got it confused with Anal Probing which is a little
differrent I expect.
F.
Val
wrote:
O, yes! With any luck, congress critter parlay issue right up to media
circus, stepson gets phone back and we get something besides tiger's
woody to take our minds off economy-for this relief much thanks!
{{{{{{{{{{{{{Bryn!}}}}}}}}}}}}}
conwaycaine
"Bryn Fraser" <brianlo...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:fea0e3b9-2b59-404d...@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
These border guards sometimes get carried away with all their newfound
power.
Hire an attorney and burn someone a new arsehole.
conwaycaine
****
I just did.
Sue the bastards.
Or at least file a complaint with the nearest British consulate.
Raise enough of a ruckus and someone will back the bozos up against the wall
conwaycaine
****
They can because we let them.
Some of these people cannot handle any amount of power.
deem...@aol.com
> "fitlike min" <killwh...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
No, they won't. The program has already passed the court test.
Bryn Fraser
Interesting you should say that..
Bryn
deem...@aol.com
Lawsuits can be brought again. It's just if it's already gone
through, it's harder to win without extenuating circumstances. US law
is (supposed to be) weighted toward precedence.
Bryn Fraser
> "fitlike min" <killwh...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
This idea I like...
Bryn
conwaycaine
<deem...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:dab9a430-9c3f-4621...@o28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
*****
Are you saying they just legalized illegal search and seizure??
conwaycaine
<deem...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:f84ec3a3-d43a-4678...@j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
***Sort of like English Common Law??
deem...@aol.com
> <deemsb...@aol.com> wrote in message
I'm pretty sure the court found it was "legal" search and seizure.
Of course, "legal" and "right" aren't the same thing.
deem...@aol.com
No "sort of" about it since that's where a large amount of our
legal system comes from.
Bryn Fraser
>
> - Show quoted text -
The boy says he does not want to make fuss in case it interferes with
him getting back into the USA.
I expect him to get his phone back return of post..
Bryn
deem...@aol.com
Probably for the best if he plans on coming back sometime. All
sorts of watch lists out there. Did they at least give him a receipt?
Bryn Fraser
Little sod won't even tell us what crossing he used.
Mind you I don't blame him, knowing his mother and sister..
Scary, uber-scary..
Bryn
deem...@aol.com
If they're that scary, maybe he should send them after his phone?
S�im� mac Liam
E-mail me as many of the details as you can.
--
Saint S�im� mac Liam
Carriagemaker to the court of Queen Maeve
Prophet of The Great Tagger
Canonized December '99
Bryn Fraser
That's what worries him..
Them going after it..
Bryn
Bryn Fraser
wrote:
> Carriagemaker to the court of Queen Maeve
> Prophet of The Great Tagger
The minute I have any detail I'll let you know..
Thanks for that..
Bryn
conwaycaine
<deem...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:4637a2ad-7730-4c5e...@a21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
********
Apparently no one in government really wants to protect and defend our
Constitution these days.........
conwaycaine
<deem...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:8112ec7c-1c79-42e1...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
***And that was my point..........
deem...@aol.com
> <deemsb...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4637a2ad-7730-4c5e...@a21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 23, 9:47 am, "conwaycaine" <conwayca...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > <deemsb...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:dab9a430-9c3f-4621...@o28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> > On Dec 22, 9:52 am, "conwaycaine" <conwayca...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > > I just did.
> > > Sue the bastards.
> > > Or at least file a complaint with the nearest British consulate.
> > > Raise enough of a ruckus and someone will back the bozos up against the
> > > wall-
>
> > No, they won't. The program has already passed the court test.
>
> > *****
>
> > Are you saying they just legalized illegal search and seizure??
>
> I'm pretty sure the court found it was "legal" search and seizure.
> Of course, "legal" and "right" aren't the same thing.
>
> ********
>
> Apparently no one in government really wants to protect and defend our
Nope, they're all too busy feeding at the trough.
conwaycaine
<deem...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:5e86c16e-5b82-47e8...@v13g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
*****
And once in, almost impossible to get out........
Merry Christmas, deems, to you and to all on scs...................
deem...@aol.com
> <deemsb...@aol.com> wrote in message
Same to you and yours.
Fred J. McCall
:
:> :
:> :He is British, White and carrying a biometric passport.
:> :
:>
:> Why do you think any of that should matter?
:
:Well I thought only suspicious looking brown people with Islamic
:sounding names got focused on...
:
:NB: "biometric passport."
:>
:snip 8><------------------------------------------------------
:> :
:> For those who haven't heard, the US Customs Service (upheld by the 9th
:> Circuit Court) has been engaging in a program of random forensic
:> searches of electronic equipment (laptops, phones, and PDAs). �The
:> program is RANDOM - country of origin and such don't matter (and yes,
:> they do it to US citizens returning to the country, too).
:>
:> They generally wind up keeping the equipment for several weeks. �They
:> should have made this clear to your stepson when they took the device.
:> However, there have been cases where they have kept the equipment for
:> months.
:>
:> If it was anyone but Customs and Border Protection, such searches
:> would be unconstitutional. �It's been going on for at least 4 years
:> that I'm aware of.
:
:Thanks for that possible explanation.
:
:I will tell it to my elderly friend, ex-US Marine Corps, WWII and
:Korean Vet, who suffered similar treatment when he returned from New
:Brunswick after a fishing trip. I know that a fishing pole wrongly
:handled can take a man's eye out but he is sliver haired and obviously
:knocking on a bit.
:
:Are you sure that Customs are not going for easy targets? No paper
:work and the like?
:
Positive. We got a bulletin inside the company a year or so ago
describing this program and advising that we not take our regular work
machines out of the country, as there was a possibility that we might
not get to keep them when we reentered (which would sort of impact
work).
I wouldn't think we'd be a real 'easy target'...
:
:By this time tomorrow his sister will have been engaged in a very
:earnest conversation with her congressman, a member of a party to
:which she has made contributions, huge contributions, over a period of
:many years.
:
:I am sure all present will enjoy hearing how this develops. :-]
:
Personally, I still think it ought to be unconstitutional.
Unfortunately for my view, the 9th Circuit doesn't agree.
--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to
live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden
deem...@aol.com
Agreed. After yesterday, though, we won't be able to carry liquids
or powders onto planes.
La N
<deem...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:6ba0171a-cc28-481b...@upsg2000gro.googlegroups.com...
***********************************
I thought the liquid thingy was already in effect. Thus, I was told in Palm
Springs. IIRC I actually had my contact lens solutions confiscated. I know
we couldn't take bottled water on to the plane.
- nil
deem...@aol.com
> <deemsb...@aol.com> wrote in message
Anything over 6 ounces isn't supposed to be allowed, but I've been
missed with a bottle in my carry on. My powder point was about the guy
yesterday who ignited some kind of powder. I didn't think matches or
lighters were allowed, either.....
Some airports are now selling bottled water after you pass
security. Of course, it's pretty expensive.
S Viemeister
>
> Anything over 6 ounces isn't supposed to be allowed, but I've been
> missed with a bottle in my carry on. My powder point was about the guy
> yesterday who ignited some kind of powder. I didn't think matches or
> lighters were allowed, either.....
>
> Some airports are now selling bottled water after you pass
> security. Of course, it's pretty expensive.
>
I can buy half a case of water, for what one bottle costs at the airport!
deem...@aol.com
> deemsb...@aol.com wrote:
>
> > Anything over 6 ounces isn't supposed to be allowed, but I've been
> > missed with a bottle in my carry on. My powder point was about the guy
> > yesterday who ignited some kind of powder. I didn't think matches or
> > lighters were allowed, either.....
>
> I believe the limit is 100ml - quite a bit less than 6 ounces.
You could be right. I remember 6 oz somewhere in the foggy past.
>
> > Some airports are now selling bottled water after you pass
> > security. Of course, it's pretty expensive.
>
> >
> I can buy half a case of water, for what one bottle costs at the airport!
True. Captive audience and all that.
The Phantom Piper
>
> I believe the limit is 100ml - quite a bit less than 6 ounces.
Which is pretty silly, when you consider what would
happen if any terrorist who passed Chemistry brought
the three Liquid Ingredients (suitably coloured and
mislabeled, of course) necessary to make only as
much as _10ml_ of Nitroglycerine onboard, and made
it in the onboard loo (in about 20 minutes time).
With an upper limit of 100ml *each* of those three
chemicals (one of which is merely used as a Wash,
to remove unwanted water created in the Nitration
process), our hypothetical High School Graduate
could *easily* make enough in the WC to blast a
10' wide hole in the side of the plane, which would
certainly bring it down.
Perfect Safety is only possible in Police States
where - for example - the Government knows what
each citizen owns, purchases, and keeps at home.
The purpose of Terrorism is to Terrorise: if we want
to _assure_ victory for the terrorists, all we need do
is give up our Democratic Freedom out of Fear.
I wonder if our elected so-called Representatives
understand this principle...
Watching Barn-Doors Being Closed,
The Phantom Piper
conwaycaine
<deem...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:6ba0171a-cc28-481b...@upsg2000gro.googlegroups.com...
***
And on international flights all must remain seated for an hour before
landing.
Are they planning on passing out bedpans to the older gits???
conwaycaine
"The Phantom Piper" <ThePhan...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4e97f5b6-004f-4a41...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
Watching Barn-Doors Being Closed,
*****
And that is exactly what happens.
"Shoe bombs? Okay, everyone off with his shoes"
"There. Problem solved"
None of these new security measures will accomplish a thing except
"reassure" (hah!) the American people that "something is being done to curb
these terrorists".
All show, no substance.
deem...@aol.com
> <deemsb...@aol.com> wrote in message
I really love this one......I'm sure any prospective terrorist HAS
to wait that long before doing his thing. "Darn, now I can't blow up
the plane because they won't let me out of my seat for the last hour.
Curses! Foiled again!"
deem...@aol.com
> "The Phantom Piper" <ThePhantomPi...@comcast.net> wrote in messagenews:4e97f5b6-004f-4a41...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
> Watching Barn-Doors Being Closed,
>
> *****
>
> And that is exactly what happens.
> "Shoe bombs? Okay, everyone off with his shoes"
> "There. Problem solved"
>
> None of these new security measures will accomplish a thing except
> "reassure" (hah!) the American people that "something is being done to curb
> these terrorists".
> All show, no substance.
I'm pretty sure those "assurances" will be lost in puddles of
urine.
Deirdre Sholto Douglas
> And on international flights all must remain seated for an hour before
> landing.
The same rule applies...and has applied since 9-11 or
shortly thereafter...on all flights going into DC.
> Are they planning on passing out bedpans to the older gits???
You're warned a bit ahead of time so you can "go",
but it's my understanding (at least on DC flights)
that if anyone "breaks" the No Standing Rule, the
flight is automatically diverted. I've no idea _where_
it's diverted to...Baltimore, perhaps?...because I've
never seen anyone actually stand, but the old gits
seem to manage fine.
Deirdre
________________
It's a small world until an airline loses your luggage.
Ian Smith
wheesht ony mair an' gied us this:
> On Dec 27, 10:04 am, "conwaycaine" <conwayca...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> <deemsb...@aol.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:6ba0171a-cc28-481b-
a192-32f...@upsg2000gro.googlegroups.com...
>> On Dec 26, 9:41 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Bryn Fraser <brianlovett...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Personally, I still think it ought to be unconstitutional.
>> > Unfortunately for my view, the 9th Circuit doesn't agree.
>>
>> Agreed. After yesterday, though, we won't be able to carry liquids
>> or powders onto planes.
>>
>> ***
>>
>> And on international flights all must remain seated for an hour before
>> landing.
>> Are they planning on passing out bedpans to the older gits???
>
> I really love this one......I'm sure any prospective terrorist HAS
> to wait that long before doing his thing. "Darn, now I can't blow up the
> plane because they won't let me out of my seat for the last hour.
> Curses! Foiled again!"
Lol, indeed, so you just set off your explosives at "T minus 61 minutes".
What next, a new rule which specifically bans "blowing planes up", to be
printed on all airline tickets and signposted at terminal gates ("Dinnae
blaw us up" at Glasgow Airport). There, that'll sort 'em out! Lol.
--
Calendar - http://www.1r5.net
Bryn Fraser
wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 07:14:02 -0800, deemsb...@aol.com couldnae haud thur
> wheesht ony mair an' gied us this:
>
> > On Dec 27, 10:04 am, "conwaycaine" <conwayca...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >> <deemsb...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> >> news:6ba0171a-cc28-481b-
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> On Dec 26, 9:41 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Bryn Fraser <brianlovett...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Personally, I still think it ought to be unconstitutional.
> >> > Unfortunately for my view, the 9th Circuit doesn't agree.
>
> >> Agreed. After yesterday, though, we won't be able to carry liquids
> >> or powders onto planes.
>
> >> ***
>
> >> And on international flights all must remain seated for an hour before
> >> landing.
> >> Are they planning on passing out bedpans to the older gits???
>
> > I really love this one......I'm sure any prospective terrorist HAS
> > to wait that long before doing his thing. "Darn, now I can't blow up the
> > plane because they won't let me out of my seat for the last hour.
> > Curses! Foiled again!"
>
> Lol, indeed, so you just set off your explosives at "T minus 61 minutes".
> What next, a new rule which specifically bans "blowing planes up", to be
> printed on all airline tickets and signposted at terminal gates ("Dinnae
> blaw us up" at Glasgow Airport). There, that'll sort 'em out! Lol.
>
> --
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hey guys! Cool idea. Lets not have any passengers, then no problems!
But then you have to watch the cabin crews carefully...
Bryn getting in the spirit of things
Sorry PP...
Fred J. McCall
:On Dec 21, 10:39�am, Bryn Fraser <brianlovett...@googlemail.com>
:wrote:
:>
:> So what the F**k gives?
:
:Enter Rome; deal with the Roman 'Civil' (Military) Structure...
:
:(You *do* realise that America jails both a higher percentage
:_and_ a greater total number of its own citizens than any other
:nation on the planet, including China?)
:
Liar.
Highest percentage - Rwanda
Highest number - China (calling half their prisoners 'administrative
detainees' rather than prisoners shouldn't take them off the list).
If you hate it so much here, feel free to go home and bludge off your
brother.
--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
soul with evil."
-- Socrates
Fred J. McCall
:On Dec 22, 3:00�pm, "deemsb...@aol.com" <deemsb...@aol.com> wrote:
:>
:> � � No, they won't. The program has already passed the court test.-
:
:Interesting you should say that..
:
It's true. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has already upheld the
program. The only other venue that can overturn them is the US
Supreme Court.
--
"It's always different. It's always complex. But at some point,
somebody has to draw the line. And that somebody is always me....
I am the law."
-- Buffy, The Vampire Slayer
Fred J. McCall
:
:<deem...@aol.com> wrote in message
:news:dab9a430-9c3f-4621...@o28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
:On Dec 22, 9:52 am, "conwaycaine" <conwayca...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
:>
:> I just did.
:> Sue the bastards.
:> Or at least file a complaint with the nearest British consulate.
:> Raise enough of a ruckus and someone will back the bozos up against the
:> wall-
:
: No, they won't. The program has already passed the court test.
:
:*****
:
:Are you saying they just legalized illegal search and seizure??
:
Border Protection has always been treated as if the Constitution
doesn't apply to them....
--
"Rule Number One for Slayers - Don't die."
-- Buffy, the Vampire Slayer
conwaycaine
<deem...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:049c0432-564a-439e...@m38g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
*********
The stupidity of it all boggles the mind.
These rules and regulations are supposed to protect us?
Hah!
(Can you imagine someone, in a careless moment, reaching back to scratch his
bum and being immediately shot to death??)
conwaycaine
"Deirdre Sholto Douglas" <finch.e...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:7pphak...@mid.individual.net...
> conwaycaine wrote:
>
>> And on international flights all must remain seated for an hour before
>> landing.
>
> The same rule applies...and has applied since 9-11 or
> shortly thereafter...on all flights going into DC.
>
>> Are they planning on passing out bedpans to the older gits???
>
> You're warned a bit ahead of time so you can "go",
> but it's my understanding (at least on DC flights)
> that if anyone "breaks" the No Standing Rule, the
> flight is automatically diverted. I've no idea _where_
> it's diverted to...Baltimore, perhaps?...because I've
> never seen anyone actually stand, but the old gits
> seem to manage fine.
Ah but they don't understand the situation with auld gits and auld
prostates.
When it is time to go, it is time to go.
No "ifs", no "ands", no "buts".
(And well I know)
conwaycaine
<deem...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:4e528313-7422-47df...@e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
****
They want terrorism?
Deprive a bunch of old men of the right to relieve themselves.
conwaycaine
"Fred J. McCall" <fjmc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:61ghj5di3tlknfgkb...@4ax.com...
> "conwaycaine" <conwa...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> :
> :<deem...@aol.com> wrote in message
> :news:dab9a430-9c3f-4621...@o28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> :On Dec 22, 9:52 am, "conwaycaine" <conwayca...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> :>
> :> I just did.
> :> Sue the bastards.
> :> Or at least file a complaint with the nearest British consulate.
> :> Raise enough of a ruckus and someone will back the bozos up against the
> :> wall-
> :
> : No, they won't. The program has already passed the court test.
> :
> :*****
> :
> :Are you saying they just legalized illegal search and seizure??
> :
>
> Border Protection has always been treated as if the Constitution
> doesn't apply to them....
That would make sense.
Smuggling and all............
La N
>
> Ah but they don't understand the situation with auld gits and auld
> prostates.
> When it is time to go, it is time to go.
> No "ifs", no "ands", no "buts".
> (And well I know)
Best you double up on the Flomax before traveling.
- nil
deem...@aol.com
> <deemsb...@aol.com> wrote in message
Men? Shoot, how 'bout the "sweet little ol' ladies"?
La N
You know, guys, they make superabsorbable Pull-Ups for Adults now.
- nil
Deirdre Sholto Douglas
Maybe you should consider using Amtrak instead...the
way the warnings on board are worded, I don't think
they take prisoners or make exceptions...and I don't
think you want to be the reason a flight of business-
men landed in Baltimore instead of DCA. MBAs can
get pretty testy when their itineraries are at risk...
Deirdre
________________
Backup not found: (P)anic (P)anic (P)anic
The Phantom Piper
>
> Hey guys! Cool idea. Lets not have any passengers, then no problems!
If they keep at it, they'll achieve that in no time!
(Back to Ocean Liners, eh? And soon, there'll be no more
of those pesky Icebergs to spoil the voyage either!)
> But then you have to watch the cabin crews carefully...
Yeah - I've never trusted those shifty bastards...
> Bryn getting in the spirit of things
>
> Sorry PP...
Just you have a care which Spirits you're Getting Into, eh?!
(You might want to try one of those Dowager Duchesses
of Atholl - I hear they're pushovers for braw Fraser men...)
Calling A Priest,
The Phantom Piper
The Phantom Piper
>
> Liar.
Idiot. Come for the Article; stay for the Cites:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States
"The United States has the highest documented incarceration
rate in the world.[3][4] It also has the highest total documented
prison population in the world.[3][5][6]"
[3]: Walmsley, Roy (2009). "World Prison Population List.
8th edition" (PDF). International Centre for Prison Studies.
School of Law, King's College London. http://nicic.org/Library/022140.
[4]: "New Incarceration Figures: Thirty-Three Consecutive
Years of Growth" (PDF). Sentencing Project. December 2006.
http://www.sentencingproject.org/Admin/Documents/publications/inc_newfigures.pdf[5]:
World Prison Brief - Highest to Lowest Figures. International
Centre for Prison Studies. School of Law, King's College London.
[6]: "Prison Brief for United States of America". King's College
London, International Centre for Prison Studies.
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/rel/icps/worldbrief/north_america_records.php?code=190.
Blowing Another Fred-Lie Out Of The Water,
The Phantom Piper
Fred J. McCall
:On Dec 26, 9:41�ｿｽam, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
:> Bryn Fraser <brianlovett...@googlemail.com> wrote:
:>
:> :
:> :> :
:> :> :He is British, White and carrying a biometric passport.
:> :> :
:> :>
:> :> Why do you think any of that should matter?
:> :
:> :Well I thought only suspicious looking brown people with Islamic
:> :sounding names got focused on...
:> :
:> :NB: "biometric passport."
:> :>
:> :snip 8><------------------------------------------------------
:> :> :
:> :> For those who haven't heard, the US Customs Service (upheld by the 9th
:> :> Circuit Court) has been engaging in a program of random forensic
:> :> searches of electronic equipment (laptops, phones, and PDAs). �ｿｽThe
:> :> program is RANDOM - country of origin and such don't matter (and yes,
:> :> they do it to US citizens returning to the country, too).
:> :>
:> :> They generally wind up keeping the equipment for several weeks. �ｿｽThey
:> :> should have made this clear to your stepson when they took the device.
:> :> However, there have been cases where they have kept the equipment for
:> :> months.
:> :>
:> :> If it was anyone but Customs and Border Protection, such searches
:> :> would be unconstitutional. �ｿｽIt's been going on for at least 4 years
:> :> that I'm aware of.
:> :
:> :Thanks for that possible explanation.
:> :
:> :I will tell it to my elderly friend, ex-US Marine Corps, WWII and
:> :Korean Vet, who suffered similar treatment when he returned from New
:> :Brunswick after a fishing trip. I know that a fishing pole wrongly
:> :handled can take a man's eye out but he is sliver haired and obviously
:> :knocking on a bit.
:> :
:> :Are you sure that Customs are not going for easy targets? No paper
:> :work and the like?
:> :
:>
:> Positive. �ｿｽWe got a bulletin inside the company a year or so ago
:> describing this program and advising that we not take our regular work
:> machines out of the country, as there was a possibility that we might
:> not get to keep them when we reentered (which would sort of impact
:> work).
:>
:> I wouldn't think we'd be a real 'easy target'...
:>
:> :
:> :By this time tomorrow his sister will have been engaged in a very
:> :earnest conversation with her congressman, a member of a party to
:> :which she has made contributions, huge contributions, over a period of
:> :many years.
:> :
:> :I am sure all present will enjoy hearing how this develops. �ｿｽ:-]
:> :
:>
:> Personally, I still think it ought to be unconstitutional.
:> Unfortunately for my view, the 9th Circuit doesn't agree.
:>
:
: Agreed. After yesterday, though, we won't be able to carry liquids
:or powders onto planes.
:
I was joking with someone else in the security queue, as we both
juggled jackets and shoes and belts and computers, that it was only a
matter of time until they simply required us all to fly nude.
It's coming, people....
--
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable
man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore,
all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
--George Bernard Shaw
Fred J. McCall
:
:<deem...@aol.com> wrote in message
:news:6ba0171a-cc28-481b...@upsg2000gro.googlegroups.com...
:On Dec 26, 9:41 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
:> Bryn Fraser <brianlovett...@googlemail.com> wrote:
:
: Agreed. After yesterday, though, we won't be able to carry liquids
:or powders onto planes.
:
:***********************************
:
:I thought the liquid thingy was already in effect.
:
They just restricted the amount. That's different from absolute
prohibition, the same way that a speed limit isn't a prohibition on
driving.
:
:Thus, I was told in Palm
:Springs. IIRC I actually had my contact lens solutions confiscated.
:
They were wrong. Contact lens solution falls under a 'medical
exemption' for saline for medicinal purposes. You simply declare it
as you start screening (don't put it in the 1 quart bag with all your
other liquids) and they should screen it by hand. No size limit on
container. They will open the container and make sure it's just
saline solution.
Oh, just for you, Nilita, there is also no limit on the size of the
container of KY Jelly one may bring aboard. No, I am not making that
up.
Should this happen again, refer them to the Memorandum dated September
25, 2006, from the Office of Screening of Persons With Disabilities
(Department of Homeland Security). Yes, visual impairment (including
needing contacts) is a 'disability'.
--
You have never lived until you have almost died.
Life has a special meaning that the protected
will never know.
Fred J. McCall
:On Dec 26, 11:39�am, "La N" <nilita2004NOS...@yahoo.com> wrote:
:> <deemsb...@aol.com> wrote in message
:>
:> news:6ba0171a-cc28-481b...@upsg2000gro.googlegroups.com...
:> On Dec 26, 9:41 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
:>
:> > Bryn Fraser <brianlovett...@googlemail.com> wrote:
:>
:> � �Agreed. After yesterday, though, we won't be able to carry liquids
:> or powders onto planes.
:>
:> ***********************************
:>
:> I thought the liquid thingy was already in effect. �Thus, I was told in Palm
:> Springs. �IIRC I actually had my contact lens solutions confiscated. �I know
:> we couldn't take bottled water on to the plane.
:>
:> - nil
:
: Anything over 6 ounces isn't supposed to be allowed,
:
It's 4 ounces and there are exceptions.
:
:... but I've been
:missed with a bottle in my carry on. My powder point was about the guy
:yesterday who ignited some kind of powder.
:
It was PETN.
:
:I didn't think matches or
:lighters were allowed, either.....
:
They didn't used to be, but I think they started allowing lighters
again a while back. It doesn't matter, though, since he 'ignited' the
PETN with a liquid detonator. No matches or lighters involved.
--
Wheresoe�er ye be death will overtake you,
though ye were in lofty towers. -- Koran
Fred J. McCall
:On Dec 26, 1:35�pm, S Viemeister <firstn...@lastname.oc.ku> wrote:
:> deemsb...@aol.com wrote:
:>
:> > � �Anything over 6 ounces isn't supposed to be allowed, but I've been
:> > missed with a bottle in my carry on. My powder point was about the guy
:> > yesterday who ignited some kind of powder. I didn't think matches or
:> > lighters were allowed, either.....
:>
:> I believe the limit is 100ml - quite a bit less than 6 ounces.
:
: You could be right. I remember 6 oz somewhere in the foggy past.
:
It's currently 100 ml (3.4 ounces). Somewhere I got the idea that it
was 4 ounces. I wouldn't doubt that they keep changing it slightly
just to keep us all confused.
:>
:> > � �Some airports are now selling bottled water after you pass
:> > security. Of course, it's pretty expensive.
:>
:> �>
:> I can buy half a case of water, for what one bottle costs at the airport!
:
: True. Captive audience and all that.
Which I still think is the real reason they won't let you bring drinks
in with you.
Fred J. McCall
:On Dec 26, 10:35�am, S Viemeister <firstn...@lastname.oc.ku> wrote:
:>
:> I believe the limit is 100ml - quite a bit less than 6 ounces.
:
:Which is pretty silly, when you consider what would
:happen if any terrorist who passed Chemistry brought
:the three Liquid Ingredients (suitably coloured and
:mislabeled, of course) necessary to make only as
:much as _10ml_ of Nitroglycerine onboard, and made
:it in the onboard loo (in about 20 minutes time).
:
You think they're not going to notice the little glass carboy for the
acid?
:
:With an upper limit of 100ml *each* of those three
:chemicals (one of which is merely used as a Wash,
:to remove unwanted water created in the Nitration
:process), our hypothetical High School Graduate
:could *easily* make enough in the WC to blast a
:10' wide hole in the side of the plane, which would
:certainly bring it down.
:
Not really, no, but you go ahead and try that.
Hint #1: The reaction is *very* exothermic and the nitroglycerine
tends to explode as it is formed, yielding an explosion just large
enough to blow your hands and face off and splash you with acid.
Hint #2: A 10' wide hole in the side of the plane is quite unlikely
to bring it down unless the airframe undergoes structural failure and
the aircraft disintegrates. Quite unlikely.
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
Fred J. McCall
:
:And on international flights all must remain seated for an hour before
:landing.
:
Listening to the news, they make that sound like it is going to be
applied to *all* flights.
:
:Are they planning on passing out bedpans to the older gits???
:
I figure if I really need to go I'm just going to ask them for one of
those little plastic cups....
--
"Oooo, scary! Y'know, there are a lot scarier things
in the world than you ... and I'm one of them."
-- Buffy the vampire
Fred J. McCall
:
:"The Phantom Piper" <ThePhan...@comcast.net> wrote in message
:
I was watching the news today and an 'expert' on this kind of stuff
was pointing out that if someone sang "Mary Had A Little Lamb" and
then blew themselves up that TSA would come out with a rule
prohibiting singing.
--
"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night
to visit violence on those who would do us harm.
-- George Orwell
Fred J. McCall
:conwaycaine wrote:
:
:> And on international flights all must remain seated for an hour before
:> landing.
:
:The same rule applies...and has applied since 9-11 or
:shortly thereafter...on all flights going into DC.
:
Really? I hadn't noticed that and I've flown in and out of there a
time or two since then (although I usually elect to go through BWI,
since the drive down the coast to PAX River is easier from there).
The Phantom Piper
>
> Hint #1: The reaction is *very* exothermic
Point #1: It sure is, and you *might* not even
get by with using the wee sink as a water-bath
for it - although again I can think of a method
whereby the hypothetical terroist would bring on
an overhydrated pre-mix and just "clean" it with
(being deliberately vague) the third material used
(which, as you know, doesn't need to be stored
in Glass).
> Hint #2: A 10' wide hole in the side of the plane
> is quite unlikely to bring it down
Point #2: You are an idiot and that's one of the
most idiotic things you've ever written: such a
large hole from a closed bathroom at altitude,
when the rest of the plane is pressurised, could
very easily lead to either a catastrophic failure
of large sections of fuselage or the ability of the
pilot to control the aircraft or _both_. Outcomes
such as Aloha 243 fall into the "Miracle" category,
you know, and would only be counted upon by
idiots such as yourself.
Talking To A Moron,
The Phantom Piper
Fred J. McCall
:On Dec 28, 5:29�am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
:>
:> Liar.
:
:Idiot. Come for the Article; stay for the Cites:
:
:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States
:
:"The United States has the highest documented incarceration
: rate in the world.[3][4] It also has the highest total documented
: prison population in the world.[3][5][6]"
:
If you redefine 'incarceration rate' and 'documented prison
population'.
Rwanda's 'incarceration rate' is higher, but they define it away.
China classifies half of their 'documented prison population' as
'administrative detainees' to get their 'documented prison population'
below ours.
Again, if you hate it here so much, feel free to move to Rwanda or
China or just go home and bludge off your brother.
Scotty
wrote:
>
>It was PETN.
I've handled PETN, although I use that word loosely, I stayed as far away
from the stuff as I could. A blasting cap contain 1 gram of the stuff was
described as a "three joint" detonator. If it went off in your hand it
would probably take of the first joint of the thumb and two joints of the
pointing finger, or vice versa.
But I can't imagine a liquid initiator, any clues? If the plastic bag was
the PETN he could have just slapped his leg.
Lesley Robertson
news:up0ij511b8n3f25em...@4ax.com...
> "La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> :
> :
> :Thus, I was told in Palm
> :Springs. IIRC I actually had my contact lens solutions
> confiscated.
> :
>
> They were wrong. Contact lens solution falls under a 'medical
> exemption' for saline for medicinal purposes. You simply declare it
> as you start screening (don't put it in the 1 quart bag with all
> your
> other liquids) and they should screen it by hand. No size limit on
> container. They will open the container and make sure it's just
> saline solution.
Depends on who's doing the screening, and how well-informed they are,
methinks. During the last "no liquids" panic, my neighbour had his
lens solutions confiscated. Since he was the pilot on the flight, that
seems a little pointless - if he'd wanted to bring the thing down, he
didn't need his lens solution!
The shop selling incontinence pads in DutyFree row is going to add a
little something to Departure Lounges...
Lesley Robertson
Fred J. McCall
:On Dec 28, 11:57�am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
:>
:> Hint #1: �The reaction is *very* exothermic
:
:Point #1: It sure is, and you *might* not even
:get by with using the wee sink as a water-bath
:for it - ....
:
For some very large value of 'might' that is spelled "won't".
:
:... although again I can think of a method
:whereby the hypothetical terroist would bring on
:an overhydrated pre-mix and just "clean" it with
:(being deliberately vague) the third material used
:(which, as you know, doesn't need to be stored
:in Glass).
:
You're obviously not making nitro the same way anyone else does.
So your new plan is to simply walk a bottle of nitroglycerine through
the security checkpoint? Well, it sounds a somewhat less fancy way to
blow yourself up than your original plan.
Hint #3 - No terrorist with even a fraction more sense than God gave,
well, YOU is going to be stupid enough to try any such thing.
:
:>
:> Hint #2: �A 10' wide hole in the side of the plane
:> is quite unlikely to bring it down
:
:Point #2: You are an idiot and that's one of the
:most idiotic things you've ever written: such a
:large hole from a closed bathroom at altitude,
:when the rest of the plane is pressurised, could
:very easily lead to either a catastrophic failure
:of large sections of fuselage or the ability of the
:pilot to control the aircraft or _both_. Outcomes
:such as Aloha 243 fall into the "Miracle" category,
:you know, and would only be counted upon by
:idiots such as yourself.
:
Congratulations on your demonstration that you don't know shit about
aircraft (to add to the list of all the other things you don't know
shit about).
You've been watching too many movies where someone shoots out a plane
window and horrible things happen.
Hint #4 - They don't.
:
:Talking To A Moron,
:
Another Silly Soliloquy By,
:The Phantom Piper
Fred J. McCall
:On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:36:08 -0700, Fred J. McCall <fjmc...@gmail.com>
:wrote:
:
:>
:>It was PETN.
:
:I've handled PETN, although I use that word loosely, I stayed as far away
:from the stuff as I could. A blasting cap contain 1 gram of the stuff was
:described as a "three joint" detonator. If it went off in your hand it
:would probably take of the first joint of the thumb and two joints of the
:pointing finger, or vice versa.
:
Yeah. Pretty touchy stuff. He reportedly had something like 80 grams
of the stuff on him, which is enough to pretty much shred a small
automobile.
:
:But I can't imagine a liquid initiator, any clues? If the plastic bag was
:the PETN he could have just slapped his leg.
:
Well, it's not quite that sensitive, but I don't know that I'd want to
carry a bunch of it around like that. It is usually going to take
some significant shock (exploding wire detonator) or some such to set
it off.
I can think of several things that might have been in the syringe, but
I'm not going to go into details (for obvious reasons).
--
"Death is my gift." -- Buffy, the Vampire Slayer
deem...@aol.com
Ahhh....nothing like the fragrance of urine and feces........
Nebulous
<fjmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Scotty <nob...@home.net> wrote:
>
>:On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:36:08 -0700, Fred J. McCall <fjmc...@gmail.com>
>:wrote:
>:
>:>
>:>It was PETN.
>:
>:I've handled PETN, although I use that word loosely, I stayed as far away
>:from the stuff as I could. A blasting cap contain 1 gram of the stuff was
>:described as a "three joint" detonator. If it went off in your hand it
>:would probably take of the first joint of the thumb and two joints of the
>:pointing finger, or vice versa.
>:
>
>Yeah. Pretty touchy stuff. He reportedly had something like 80 grams
>of the stuff on him, which is enough to pretty much shred a small
>automobile.
>
>:
>:But I can't imagine a liquid initiator, any clues? If the plastic bag was
>:the PETN he could have just slapped his leg.
A news report I read said it was moulded to his body and sewn inside
his underpants.
Neb
La N
Anyway, as people are once *again* frightened of flying, here's a little
something to put perspective in the odds of being in a plane usurped by
terrorists. Interesting link provided to me by an American friend. As is
often the case, readers' comments are just as interesting:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/12/odds-of-airborne-terror.html
The Odds of Airborne Terror
by Nate Silver @ 1:58 PM
Not going to do any editorializing here; just going to do some non-fancy
math. James Joyner asks:
" There have been precisely three attempts over the last eight years to
commit acts of terrorism aboard commercial aircraft. All of them clownishly
inept and easily thwarted by the passengers. How many tens of thousands of
flights have been incident free?"
Let's expand Joyner's scope out to the past decade. Over the past decade,
there have been, by my count, six attempted terrorist incidents on board a
commercial airliner than landed in or departed from the United States: the
four planes that were hijacked on 9/11, the shoe bomber incident in December
2001, and the NWA flight 253 incident on Christmas.
The Bureau of Transportation Statistics provides a wealth of statistical
information on air traffic. For this exercise, I will look at both domestic
flights within the US, and international flights whose origin or destination
was within the United States. I will not look at flights that transported
cargo and crew only. I will look at flights spanning the decade from October
1999 through September 2009 inclusive (the BTS does not yet have data
available for the past couple of months).
Over the past decade, according to BTS, there have been 99,320,309
commercial airline departures that either originated or landed within the
United States. Dividing by six, we get one terrorist incident per 16,553,385
departures.
These departures flew a collective 69,415,786,000 miles. That means there
has been one terrorist incident per 11,569,297,667 mles flown. This distance
is equivalent to 1,459,664 trips around the diameter of the Earth, 24,218
round trips to the Moon, or two round trips to Neptune.
Assuming an average airborne speed of 425 miles per hour, these airplanes
were aloft for a total of 163,331,261 hours. Therefore, there has been one
terrorist incident per 27,221,877 hours airborne. This can also be expressed
as one incident per 1,134,245 days airborne, or one incident per 3,105 years
airborne.
There were a total of 674 passengers, not counting crew or the terrorists
themselves, on the flights on which these incidents occurred. By contrast,
there have been 7,015,630,000 passenger enplanements over the past decade.
Therefore, the odds of being on given departure which is the subject of a
terrorist incident have been 1 in 10,408,947 over the past decade. By
contrast, the odds of being struck by lightning in a given year are about 1
in 500,000. This means that you could board 20 flights per year and still be
less likely to be the subject of an attempted terrorist attack than to be
struck by lightning.
Again, no editorializing (for now). These are just the numbers.
Deirdre Sholto Douglas
> A news report I read said it was moulded to his body and sewn inside
> his underpants.
Oh, great...now we have "The Knickers Bomber". I'm
sure his mother is very proud of her boy.
Deirdre
________________
If all else fails, re-write the documentation.
Scotty
wrote:
OK, but it does get worse:
http://homelandsecuritynewswire.com/saudi-suicide-bomber-hid-ied-his-anal-cavity
Charles Ellson
<finch.e...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Nebulous wrote:
>
>> A news report I read said it was moulded to his body and sewn inside
>> his underpants.
>
>Oh, great...now we have "The Knickers Bomber". I'm
>sure his mother is very proud of her boy.
>
Earlier reports on the BBC referred to the explosive being "moulded
round his genitals" while the later "how it might......" cartoons
rather more coyly had a thick band wrapped round his thigh. Taking
into account the use of heat-detecting body scanners my money is on
the exploding codpiece for which of the two is less likely to be
noticed on the way to the 'plane.
The Phantom Piper
>
> For some very large value of 'might' that is spelled "won't".
I've seen a 15 year old kid use a bucket of tap water
with a single tray of ice cubes hurriedly dropped in it.
(This was decades ago, when such Good Clean Fun
as making nitroglycerine in yer da's back room at
midnight was still A-OK.)
The flask he was using had got too hot to hold, you see...
> You're obviously not making nitro the same way anyone else does.
If you knew anything about it, you would have
known instantly what I was talking about.
> So your new plan is to simply walk a bottle of
> nitroglycerine through the security checkpoint?
> Well, it sounds a somewhat less fancy way to
> blow yourself up than your original plan.
*WHOA* there, Sparky: that'll be _YOUR_ 'plan', eh!
I said "a hypothetical terrorist" - (gee Fred, I didn't
realise you identified so heavily with them)...
And no, the hypothetical Terrorist From Tucson
wouldn't be walking any finished product through
security - again: if you knew anything about it, you
would have known *exactly* what I was referring to.
Here's a Clue: it's a three-step process; you know
Step #3? That could be delayed until the overwet
stuff from steps #1 and #2 had been brought aboard.
And being what it would be at that time, it wouldn't
be very hazardous to transport.
> You've been watching too many movies where someone
> shoots out a plane window and horrible things happen.
Shooting out a window and blowing out a large
section of fuselage from a lightly-sealed area with
a pressurised cabin on the other side are two very
different things. `Tell you what, Fred: in the spirit
of Drearduh's suggestion, why don't you purchase
a commercial airliner, take her up to 35,000 feet
(_by yourself_, of course, over open ocean, say),
and then try it and see if you survive, m'kay?
Waiting For Your Report,
The Phantom Spectator
Ian Smith
wheesht ony mair an' gied us this:
I wonder if a "chemical sniffer" device would have picked up the explosive?
--
Calendar - http://www.1r5.net
Fred J. McCall
:On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 14:55:31 -0700, Fred J. McCall
:
One can only hope that the fire in his pants did 'appropriate' damage.
Some people just should not ever reproduce...
Fred J. McCall
:
:Anyway, as people are once *again* frightened of flying, ...
:
Speak for yourself. I wasn't "frightened of flying" after 9/11 and
I'm certainly not "frightened of flying" now (and I'll be doing so
this Saturday).
The only thing I'm "frightened of" with regard to flying is that I'm
afraid they're going to just make things even more inconvenient in
order to try to convince me that they are 'doing something' in
response to the latest incident.
--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to
live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden
Fred J. McCall
:Nebulous wrote:
:
:> A news report I read said it was moulded to his body and sewn inside
:> his underpants.
:
:Oh, great...now we have "The Knickers Bomber". I'm
:sure his mother is very proud of her boy.
:
I believe I've heard him referred to as "The Butt Bomber". His
parents are so proud of him that his Dad is one of the people who
tried to turn him in.
--
You are
What you do
When it counts.
Fred J. McCall
:On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 14:55:31 -0700, Fred J. McCall <fjmc...@gmail.com>
:
Yeah, I'd already heard about that one. No surprise. I mean, we
already knew these people were total assholes, right?
Fred J. McCall
:On Dec 28, 1:32�pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
:>
:> For some very large value of 'might' that is spelled "won't".
:
:I've seen a 15 year old kid use a bucket of tap water
:with a single tray of ice cubes hurriedly dropped in it.
:
:(This was decades ago, when such Good Clean Fun
:as making nitroglycerine in yer da's back room at
:midnight was still A-OK.)
:
:The flask he was using had got too hot to hold, you see...
:
Yeah, why don't you go out in the middle of a big empty field and try
that?
:> You're obviously not making nitro the same way anyone else does.
:
:If you knew anything about it, you would have
:known instantly what I was talking about.
:
Yeah, right...
:> So your new plan is to simply walk a bottle of
:> nitroglycerine through the security checkpoint?
:> Well, it sounds a somewhat less fancy way to
:> blow yourself up than your original plan.
:
:*WHOA* there, Sparky: that'll be _YOUR_ 'plan', eh!
:
Nope. You're the one who is suggesting it. I think it's an
absolutely barmy idea.
:
:I said "a hypothetical terrorist" - (gee Fred, I didn't
:realise you identified so heavily with them)...
:
And we're back to "The Phantom Pillock makes barmy shit up and then
pretends someone else said it" game.
:
:And no, the hypothetical Terrorist From Tucson
:wouldn't be walking any finished product through
:security - again: if you knew anything about it, you
:would have known *exactly* what I was referring to.
:Here's a Clue: it's a three-step process; you know
:Step #3? That could be delayed until the overwet
:stuff from steps #1 and #2 had been brought aboard.
:And being what it would be at that time, it wouldn't
:be very hazardous to transport.
:
You really don't have a clue what you're talking about, do you?
However, let us suppose for a minute that you have your "overwet
stuff" (you know that nitroglycerin is relatively insoluble in water
and vice versa, right?). Just how much actual nitro is in your 3.4 oz
bottle?
Hint: Since nitro isn't particularly soluble in water, you can only
desensitize tiny amounts by mixing them with lots of water.
Oh, just so you'll know, there is no 'overwet' nitroglycerin
intermediate product in the making of nitroglycerin and there is no
third substance used to 'dewet' it.
:> You've been watching too many movies where someone
:> shoots out a plane window and horrible things happen.
:
:Shooting out a window and blowing out a large
:section of fuselage from a lightly-sealed area with
:a pressurised cabin on the other side are two very
:different things. `Tell you what, Fred: in the spirit
:of Drearduh's suggestion, why don't you purchase
:a commercial airliner, take her up to 35,000 feet
:(_by yourself_, of course, over open ocean, say),
:and then try it and see if you survive, m'kay?
:
I already suggested this to you as part of your "make nitro in the
airplane lavatory" scheme, remember?
Do let us know how it comes out...
conwaycaine
"La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:EG3_m.59228$PH1.54906@edtnps82...
> conwaycaine wrote:
> >
>> Ah but they don't understand the situation with auld gits and auld
>> prostates.
>> When it is time to go, it is time to go.
>> No "ifs", no "ands", no "buts".
>> (And well I know)
>
> Best you double up on the Flomax before traveling.
I tried that once.
My blood pressure nose dives from time to time and one night I got up to
make a trip and was nailed with a seizure like episode.
The docs said it was the Flomax combined with getting up from a prone
position.
Apparently one is most prone to such reactions during the first few weeks of
starting the medicine.
Avodart seems to be working but not as well as Flowmax.
(Oh the joys of old age)
Lesley Robertson
news:ca0kj51f8lqajptf1...@4ax.com...
> "La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> :
> :Anyway, as people are once *again* frightened of flying, ...
> :
>
> Speak for yourself. I wasn't "frightened of flying" after 9/11 and
> I'm certainly not "frightened of flying" now (and I'll be doing so
> this Saturday).
Yup. I have to fly week after next.
> The only thing I'm "frightened of" with regard to flying is that I'm
> afraid they're going to just make things even more inconvenient in
> order to try to convince me that they are 'doing something' in
> response to the latest incident.
Precisely. I keep finding myself mentally replanning my packing to
take account of all the fiddly little rules.. It's bad enough having
to get everything into one bag - I'm used to taking the car with me!
Lesley Robertson
conwaycaine
"Deirdre Sholto Douglas" <finch.e...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:7ps3va...@mid.individual.net...
> conwaycaine wrote:
>>>> Are they planning on passing out bedpans to the older gits???
>>> You're warned a bit ahead of time so you can "go",
>>> but it's my understanding (at least on DC flights)
>>> that if anyone "breaks" the No Standing Rule, the
>>> flight is automatically diverted. I've no idea _where_
>>> it's diverted to...Baltimore, perhaps?...because I've
>>> never seen anyone actually stand, but the old gits
>>> seem to manage fine.
>>
>>
>> Ah but they don't understand the situation with auld gits and auld
>> prostates.
>> When it is time to go, it is time to go.
>> No "ifs", no "ands", no "buts".
>> (And well I know)
>
> Maybe you should consider using Amtrak instead...the
> way the warnings on board are worded, I don't think
> they take prisoners or make exceptions...and I don't
> think you want to be the reason a flight of business-
> men landed in Baltimore instead of DCA. MBAs can
> get pretty testy when their itineraries are at risk...
I don't fly.
I haven't flown since these silly rules went into effect.
"Shoes off and here let me scan your bare feet with this explosive sniffer"
is the height of idiocy.
Now here comes this new muzzy with explosives "secreted" somewhere in or
around his bottom.
May I tell you what they will be "scanning" and "sniffing" next?
Airports are going to resemble the Dog Whisperer's compound.
conwaycaine
<deem...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:f5ef4b12-f00e-45fa...@m26g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 28, 9:53 am, "conwaycaine" <conwayca...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> They want terrorism?
> Deprive a bunch of old men of the right to relieve themselves.-
Men? Shoot, how 'bout the "sweet little ol' ladies"?
****
I hadn't thought about that crowd.
Who are the stupid people that dream this stuff up?
And how does aggravating the hell out of the flying public reduce terrorism?