Re: New air security: must be seated last hour of flight
celtex
"Fritz Wuehler" <fr...@spamexpire-200912.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote
in message
news:2ea39d9938032c2e...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
> SO WHAT ARE PASSENGERS SUPPOSED TO DO IF NATURE CALLS? PISS AND
> SHIT IN THEIR PANTS? OLD PEOPLE TAKE DIURETICS AND SOME HAVE
> INCONTINENCE AND HAVE SHORT NOTICE FOR RELIEF. IF THIS IS
> GOVERNMENT'S IDEA OF FREEDOM AND LIBERTY FOR ITS CITIZENS, ITS
> TIME FOR A 2ND REVOLUTION. LET THE REPUBLIC OF TEXAS LEAD THE
> WAY.
>
>> Security tightened for U.S.-bound air passengers
>
>> 2:41pm EST WASHINGTON, Dec 26 (Reuters) - Airline passengers headed
<snip>
How about any rag heads on plane have to be seated across the isle from an
Air Marshal with hands in lap for the full flight. Forget holding all of us
hostage for political correctness! If we don't adopt a more reasonable
screening process we will always be "after the fact" corrections that don't
work. More profiling less incursions would be the best way to go. Send the
TSA folks to Israel for some real anti-terrorist training.
Alex Clayton
news:4b377a4e$0$5340$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net...
>
>
> How about any rag heads on plane have to be seated across the isle from an
> Air Marshal with hands in lap for the full flight. Forget holding all of
> us hostage for political correctness! If we don't adopt a more reasonable
> screening process we will always be "after the fact" corrections that
> don't work. More profiling less incursions would be the best way to go.
> Send the TSA folks to Israel for some real anti-terrorist training.
>
>
This PC crap will go on as long as people allow it. I feel sorry for the
families with little kids and the flight attendants who will have to deal
with the crying, and bitching.
--
I think drug tests are great. Since I have to pass them to earn money to pay
taxes, Everyone on or applying for welfare should have to pass them to get
some of my money.
NotMe
"Alex Clayton" <alex...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:jKmdnWHOqLjZDqrW...@nventure.com...
You can't spit on the floor for one hour before the flight lands. I expect
the floors to become very slippery at the 1 hr + 15 min point prior to
landing.
William Black
Except that this one isn't an Arab...
--
William Black
"Any number under six"
The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat
single handed with a quarterstaff.
celtex
news:hh8bp6$kcg$3...@news.eternal-september.org...
> celtex wrote:
>>
>> "Fritz Wuehler" <fr...@spamexpire-200912.rodent.frell.theremailer.net>
>> wrote in message
>> news:2ea39d9938032c2e...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
>>> SO WHAT ARE PASSENGERS SUPPOSED TO DO IF NATURE CALLS? PISS AND
>>> SHIT IN THEIR PANTS? OLD PEOPLE TAKE DIURETICS AND SOME HAVE
>>> INCONTINENCE AND HAVE SHORT NOTICE FOR RELIEF. IF THIS IS
>>> GOVERNMENT'S IDEA OF FREEDOM AND LIBERTY FOR ITS CITIZENS, ITS
>>> TIME FOR A 2ND REVOLUTION. LET THE REPUBLIC OF TEXAS LEAD THE
>>> WAY.
>>>
>>>> Security tightened for U.S.-bound air passengers
>>>
>>>> 2:41pm EST WASHINGTON, Dec 26 (Reuters) - Airline passengers headed
>> <snip>
>>
>> How about any rag heads on plane have to be seated across the isle from
>> an Air Marshal with hands in lap for the full flight. Forget holding all
>> of us hostage for political correctness! If we don't adopt a more
>> reasonable screening process we will always be "after the fact"
>> corrections that don't work. More profiling less incursions would be the
>> best way to go. Send the TSA folks to Israel for some real anti-terrorist
>> training.
>>
>>
>
> Except that this one isn't an Arab...
>
> --
maybe he would have been detected prior to boarding. What type of "bomb" was
he caring in his shorts? I was reading he came from a very privileged family
and was educated in London.
Mar...@aol.com
> > Security tightened for U.S.-bound air passengers
> > 2:41pm EST WASHINGTON, Dec 26 (Reuters) - Airline passengers
> > Saturday after an attempt to blow up a U.S. jet bound for
> > Detroit, including pat-downs and an order to stay seated during
> > the last hour of flight, airlines and security officials said.
What this means is that if some nut is determined to blow up
the plane,
he will do so BEFORE the final hour of the flight. Another useless
measure
by the TSA, which is accountable to no one. What ever happened to
public
hearings prior to rule changes and Congressional oversight?
mgr...@trib.com
<fr...@spamexpire-200912.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote:
> SO WHAT ARE PASSENGERS SUPPOSED TO DO IF NATURE CALLS? PISS AND
> SHIT IN THEIR PANTS? OLD PEOPLE TAKE DIURETICS AND SOME HAVE
> INCONTINENCE AND HAVE SHORT NOTICE FOR RELIEF. IF THIS IS
> GOVERNMENT'S IDEA OF FREEDOM AND LIBERTY FOR ITS CITIZENS, ITS
> TIME FOR A 2ND REVOLUTION. LET THE REPUBLIC OF TEXAS LEAD THE
> WAY.
I heard something on CNN where you can just hit your call button and
the flight crew will escort you to the restroom.
Michael
pltrgyst
<fr...@spamexpire-200912.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote:
>SO WHAT ARE PASSENGERS SUPPOSED TO DO IF NATURE CALLS?....
We had this rule for about two years following 9-11 for all flights into
Washington National Airport. It was then relaxed.
-- Larry
DevilsPGD
<2ea39d9938032c2e...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net> Fritz
Wuehler <fr...@spamexpire-200912.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> was
claimed to have wrote:
>SO WHAT ARE PASSENGERS SUPPOSED TO DO IF NATURE CALLS? PISS AND
>SHIT IN THEIR PANTS? OLD PEOPLE TAKE DIURETICS AND SOME HAVE
>INCONTINENCE AND HAVE SHORT NOTICE FOR RELIEF. IF THIS IS
>GOVERNMENT'S IDEA OF FREEDOM AND LIBERTY FOR ITS CITIZENS, ITS
>TIME FOR A 2ND REVOLUTION. LET THE REPUBLIC OF TEXAS LEAD THE
>WAY.
Now in-flight TV for US-Canadian flights are apparently not allowed.
Somebody clue me in, how is that even remotely security related?
Trust No One�
>
> Now in-flight TV for US-Canadian flights are apparently not allowed.
>
> Somebody clue me in, how is that even remotely security related?
AIUI in-flight TV is not banned completely - just the channel that shows the
aircraft's position on a map.
I guess the reasoning here is that the would-be bomber would be denied
useful cues as to when to detonate his/her bomb. They would want to time it
so that the aircraft is downed over a major city, extracting maximum
collateral damage.
--
Peter <X-Files fan>.
Charles Packer
> I guess the reasoning here is that the would-be bomber would be denied
> useful cues as to when to detonate his/her bomb. They would want to time it
> so that the aircraft is downed over a major city, extracting maximum
> collateral damage.
Except that the detonation of that amount of PETN,
the explosive used, would just punch a hole in the
fuselage. At a low altitude it wouldn't down the
plane. An article in the Guardian at
points out that the plan must have been to detonate
the bomb at a much higer altitude.
This shows that the reaction by the authorities, to
ban leaving one's seat in the last hour of flight --
or any other restriction for that interval -- is
juat a public relations gesture, and will probably
be relaxed eventually.
--
Charles Packer
http://cpacker.org/whatnews
mailboxATcpacker.org
Kurt Ullman
"Trust No One�" <dana....@usa.xnet> wrote:
> I guess the reasoning here is that the would-be bomber would be denied
> useful cues as to when to detonate his/her bomb. They would want to time it
> so that the aircraft is downed over a major city, extracting maximum
> collateral damage.
Since one can look out a window, I don't see how that can be very
helpful. Also routes are well-known so all someone has to do is time
things and THEN look out the window. If you were really interested in
that, you would fast track the GPS-based make up your own route software
they have been playing with for ages.
--
To find that place where the rats don't race
and the phones don't ring at all.
If once, you've slept on an island.
Scott Kirby "If once you've slept on an island"
mgr...@trib.com
We also had a similar rule for flights in and out of SLC during the
'02 Winter Olympics. I remember the flight attendant only being up
long enough to serve a small bottle of water on a flight from CPR to
SLC. From SLC to LAS to don't they had enough time even mention
offering a bottle of water.
Michael
The Daring Dufas
> On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 16:48:09 -0600, "celtex"
> <jimdn...@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>
>> "William Black" <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:hh8bp6$kcg$3...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>>>> an Air Marshal with hands in lap for the full flight. Forget holding all
>>>> of us hostage for political correctness! If we don't adopt a more
>>>> reasonable screening process we will always be "after the fact"
>>>> corrections that don't work. More profiling less incursions would be the
>>>> best way to go. Send the TSA folks to Israel for some real anti-terrorist
>>>> training.
>>>>
>>> Except that this one isn't an Arab...
>>>
>> maybe he would have been detected prior to boarding. What type of "bomb" was
>> he caring in his shorts? I was reading he came from a very privileged family
>> and was educated in London.
>
> have only one group to analyze (as a rule) and have a very, very small
> country both geographically and population wise. That makes a WORLD of
> difference in a country's ability to deal with any kind of problem.
> Even with all this, there are repeated attacks because as soon as
> someone figures out that they'll face resistance through one method,
> they shift to another.
Like the vagina or womb bombs that the female suicide bombers are trying?
TDD
Mxsmanic
> For as much as everyone touts Israel's screening and security, they
> have only one group to analyze (as a rule) and have a very, very small
> country both geographically and population wise.
El Al also has an extremely small number of daily flights. Their security
solutions would not necessarily scale up very well.
Mxsmanic
> AIUI in-flight TV is not banned completely - just the channel that shows the
> aircraft's position on a map.
Except that this channel is often part of the complete programming of the
in-flight entertainment system, and shutting it off requires shutting
everything off in many cases.
> I guess the reasoning here is that the would-be bomber would be denied
> useful cues as to when to detonate his/her bomb. They would want to time it
> so that the aircraft is downed over a major city, extracting maximum
> collateral damage.
So do they require keeping all the windows closed, too? There are some
excellent clues to be seen by looking through them.
Kurt Ullman
Mxsmanic <mxsm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So do they require keeping all the windows closed, too? There are some
> excellent clues to be seen by looking through them.
Take away their watches. Excellent clues can be found there. A lot of
doing something to be doing SOMETHING.
JohnT
> So do they require keeping all the windows closed, too? There are some
> excellent clues to be seen by looking through them.
I don't think that windows are openable on Transatlantic aircraft. (But
I know what you mean.)
--
JohnT
Fiftycal
wrote:
>> I guess the reasoning here is that the would-be bomber would be denied
>> useful cues as to when to detonate his/her bomb. They would want to time it
>> so that the aircraft is downed over a major city, extracting maximum
>> collateral damage.
>
>So do they require keeping all the windows closed, too? There are some
>excellent clues to be seen by looking through them.
Don't say that. The bureaucrats current "solution" is going to
involve everyone flying naked and handcuffed. Don't give them the
idea to put blindfolds on everyone also.
Jeff Hacker
the Northwest 253 incident, which was caused due to the inability of the US'
Homeland Security folks to coordinate with the Dutch authorities after the
bomber's own father called them to report his son as a radicalized
terrorist.
Jeff
<mgr...@trib.com> wrote in message
news:afb6c9d4-4253-4957...@n16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
Sancho Panza
Actually, flight attendants usually instruct passengers to raise the
window shades on takeoff and landing.
Fly Guy
> > Now in-flight TV for US-Canadian flights are apparently not
> > allowed.
> >
> > Somebody clue me in, how is that even remotely security related?
>
> AIUI in-flight TV is not banned completely - just the channel that
> shows the aircraft's position on a map.
When travelling by plane, I always take my Garmin Geko - a very small
hand-held GPS. It doesn't have any internal maps, but it does store
thousands of way-points. I've got probly a hundred airport runway
coordinates stored on it. I hold it near a window (I usually have a
window seat) and I can get a fix on the speed of the plane, position,
altitude, heading, etc. I select the destination airport and can get an
instant, real-time readout of the estimated arrival time, and if we're
flying directly toward the destination airport, or if we're circling,
etc.
I usually have it on during taxi, takeoff and landing (the flight
attendents don't notice because they're usually already seated during
take-off/landing, or I'll hide it as they walk by).
The garmin is about 5 years old. I've also got a much more sensititive
GPS receiver (Photomate 887) that is about the size of the end of your
thumb. It can communicate via blue-tooth or usb cable to a PC, and if
you're running something like Streets and Trips on a laptop, you can get
a real-time position display on the map.
I've also been able to hold a Garmin Nuvi close to a window and get it
to display my current position and speed.
It would have been really cool for someone on that Delta flight to have
had an aviation-band radio receiver and to record the radio
communication between the cockpit and control tower during that
incident.
Brian
>We also had a similar rule for flights in and out of SLC during the
>'02 Winter Olympics. I remember the flight attendant only being up
>long enough to serve a small bottle of water on a flight from CPR to
>SLC. From SLC to LAS to don't they had enough time even mention
>offering a bottle of water.
>
>Michael
Hawaiian serves beverages on their flights including some that are
only about 20-25 minutes. You do have to drink it fast though.
Mxsmanic
> Actually, flight attendants usually instruct passengers to raise the
> window shades on takeoff and landing.
That's because the risk of an accident requiring evacuation, as low as it is,
is still higher than the risk of a terrorist attack.
But I don't think the government knows that.
Anyway, if people would just stop flying, the airlines would pressure the
government into abandoning this absurdity real quick. Most air travel is
unnecessary, even in business contexts, so a boycott is entirely practical.
pltrgyst
Path:news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!aioe.org!not-for-mail
From: Fly Guy <F...@Guy.com>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian,rec.travel.air
Subject: Re: New air security: must be seated last hour of flight
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:45:50 -0500
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <4B395F4E...@Guy.com>
References: <2ea39d9938032c2e...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>
<1kpgj51ec00r3soga...@4ax.com> <7prd5p...@mid.individual.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: /Rg06CALwARDXoIUo8hAwA.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: ab...@aioe.org
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.1
Cancel-Lock: sha1:zp0w3OtJ7X3yP9790hWDtZKlJ2k=
Xref: eternal-september.org alt.politics.libertarian:30086 rec.travel.air:3406
>When travelling by plane, I always take my Garmin Geko - a very small
>hand-held GPS....
>
>I usually have it on during taxi, takeoff and landing (the flight
>attendents don't notice because they're usually already seated during
>take-off/landing, or I'll hide it as they walk by)....
>
>I've also been able to hold a Garmin Nuvi close to a window and get it
>to display my current position and speed.
>
>It would have been really cool for someone on that Delta flight to have
>had an aviation-band radio receiver and to record the radio
>communication between the cockpit and control tower during that
>incident.
Forwarded to TSA.
It will be really cool if they blacklist you, or if other passengers object to
your choosing to endanger their lives by beating the crap out of you.
-- Larry
John Doe
> Anyway, if people would just stop flying, the airlines would pressure the
> government into abandoning this absurdity real quick. Most air travel is
> unnecessary, even in business contexts, so a boycott is entirely practical.
BBC showed a sample of people in their broadcast, and all those who were
interviewed welcomed the added security that those measures bring and
none minded the extra hour(s) they need to spend at airport waiting to
be screened through security.
Whether this is a biased sample or not doesn't matter. this is what
politicians see and such reports just validate their decisions.
After the shoe bomber, people were made to remove shoes. And jokes were
made "what's next, someone will have a bomb in their underwear ?".
Well, it happened. But I guess government realised how silly it would be
to force everyone to go through security wearing nothing but their
underwear/bras. But they had to implement something, anything, to
pretend they were doing something about it. They probably picked a few
ideas out of a hat a decided that everyone needs to be seated down for
the hour before landing.
I wonder what the other suggestions were that weren't picked. Perhaps it
they were truly silly, there might be some humour in it and people could
take it in stride. (and I could see Monthy Python getting back together
to parody those new measures in a new TV series),
Fly Guy
(the full header of my previous post)
> From: Fly Guy <F...@Guy.com>
> Forwarded to TSA.
(giggle)
> It will be really cool if they blacklist you,
You mean I'll have to stop buying tickets under the name "Fly Guy" ?
Wow. That makes me sad.
> or if other passengers object to your choosing to endanger
> their lives by beating the crap out of you.
Because I use a device that runs on 2 AAA batteries, while other people
are using laptops, cell phones, hand-held games that put out far more
RFI?
Mxsmanic
> BBC showed a sample of people in their broadcast, and all those who were
> interviewed welcomed the added security that those measures bring and
> none minded the extra hour(s) they need to spend at airport waiting to
> be screened through security.
That's because they've forgotten what civil liberties are, and what life is
like after they are lost. They believe in a danger that isn't there, and they
are throwing away their freedoms to be "protected" from it.
All democracies tend to evolve in this direction as part of their life cycle.
> Well, it happened. But I guess government realised how silly it would be
> to force everyone to go through security wearing nothing but their
> underwear/bras. But they had to implement something, anything, to
> pretend they were doing something about it. They probably picked a few
> ideas out of a hat a decided that everyone needs to be seated down for
> the hour before landing.
The former head of DHS in the U.S. now says that terror suspects don't deserve
the same basic rights to due process as U.S. citizens. That's a very worrisome
and slippery slope.
Mxsmanic
> Forwarded to TSA.
People have already recorded the conversation. While TSA isn't very bright and
might still exhibit yet another incompetent knee-jerk reaction, there isn't
any thing particularly risky about recording ATC communication, and it is
routinely done. The government records all of it, it's recorded on board the
aircraft, and anyone else can record it, too.
> It will be really cool if they blacklist you, or if other passengers object to
> your choosing to endanger their lives by beating the crap out of you.
How would he be endangering anyone's life?
Would it be really cool if you lost your freedom of speech, or your freedom of
religion, or your freedom to travel where you wish? Because with current
trends, all of that is coming.
Mxsmanic
> Because I use a device that runs on 2 AAA batteries, while other people
> are using laptops, cell phones, hand-held games that put out far more
> RFI?
And keep in mind that none of these gadgets put out enough RFI to have any
effect on aircraft systems, as many years of experience have demonstrated.
DevilsPGD
Not only do the many years of experience show us that these devices
aren't a threat, but the simple fact that they're allowed on planes tell
us all we need to know.
We can't even take a bottle of water through security due to the vague
possibility of a threat, if leaving a phone or laptop on was a credible
threat you wouldn't even be allowed to check them, and definitely
wouldn't be able to bring them in cabin.
DevilsPGD
<dana....@usa.xnet> was claimed to have wrote:
>DevilsPGD wrote:
>>
>> Now in-flight TV for US-Canadian flights are apparently not allowed.
>>
>> Somebody clue me in, how is that even remotely security related?
>
>AIUI in-flight TV is not banned completely - just the channel that shows the
>aircraft's position on a map.
All in-flight TV was banned for a couple days.
>I guess the reasoning here is that the would-be bomber would be denied
>useful cues as to when to detonate his/her bomb. They would want to time it
>so that the aircraft is downed over a major city, extracting maximum
>collateral damage.
If the bomber can't figure out their rough location based on the time
and/or looking out the window, and can't manage to remember to bring
their portable GPS with them, a TV with just enough accuracy to show you
roughly which two states you're near probably won't add much.
Strabo
> On Dec 27, 4:13 am, Fritz Wuehler
> <fr...@spamexpire-200912.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> wrote:
>> SO WHAT ARE PASSENGERS SUPPOSED TO DO IF NATURE CALLS? PISS AND
>> SHIT IN THEIR PANTS? OLD PEOPLE TAKE DIURETICS AND SOME HAVE
>> INCONTINENCE AND HAVE SHORT NOTICE FOR RELIEF. IF THIS IS
>> GOVERNMENT'S IDEA OF FREEDOM AND LIBERTY FOR ITS CITIZENS, ITS
>> TIME FOR A 2ND REVOLUTION. LET THE REPUBLIC OF TEXAS LEAD THE
>> WAY.
>
> the flight crew will escort you to the restroom.
>
> Michael
>
Why bother. Just shit in their hands and let them take it to the
restroom.
u
news:2f0jj5l7a3o5lmjab...@4ax.com:
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:45:50 -0500, Fly Guy <F...@Guy.com> wrote:
> Path:news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!
eternal-se
> ptember.org!aioe.org!not-for-mail From: Fly Guy <F...@Guy.com>
fuck you you asshole fascist nazi(i am just protecting the
homeland).