If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Pre-flight announcement needs to include passenger intervention
I said this on Sept 12/2001. I said this after the shoe bomber. I said
this after the "liquid" bomb threat. Now I'm saying it after the crotch bomber. The single most effective deterrent to keeping the "bad guys" (tm) off the plane is to alter the pre-flight passenger announcement along these lines: "Passengers are requested to inform the crew of any suspicious behavior they see or may be called upon by crew to subdue or incapacitate persons that are threatening the safety and security of the aircraft." When you hear that day after day, reconnaissance flight after reconnaissance flight, it beings to sink in that you won't be able to plan an effective in-flight catastrophe when that becomes the mindset of the travelling public. It's not tbe point that most passengers *ALREADY* are thinking along those lines. The announcement is not really for their benefit. The announcement is meant to spook those that are thinking about doing something nasty in the future, and are themselves or sending out other operatives to test various security proceedures, etc. Just like the security theater that is performed not for the benefit of the average passenger - it's performed as show of strength to spook the would-be bad-guy, get him to sweat, act nervous, etc. If security screeners really thought that they'd be discovering bombs, explosives, etc, then they'd be dressed in bomb suits as they rummage through gramma's purse at the security arch. What surprises me is that we haven't really seen something that in theory is more effective - which is to plant a bomb in a checked bag, which could be set off via a timer or by a radio signal from the bad-guy. Even during the much-publicised period during 2003 when it was announced that much more invasive screening of checked bags was going to start in Jan 2004, no bad-guys took advantage of that window of opportunity to check a bomb for their suicide flight. A bigger question is - why blow up a plane? Unless you own stock in companies that make security scanning equipment (or are running a gov't black-ops project to get congress to force these body-screeners into airports), it's not clear what exactly the allure is in blowing up a plane. I wonder why the crotch bomber wasn't tasked with simply flying to Detroit with the bomb safely in his pants, walk off the plane and head the nearest shopping mall and blow himself up along with a few dozen shoppers. Maybe while holding an iPhone in an Apple store screaming "God is Great!" while those around him can capture his performance on a camera phone. Maybe don't even fly him to the US - put him on a cruise ship instead. The moozlem idiots need to start leaving planes alone. They need to get a clue that it's not working. And do it before air travel becomes an absolute pain in the ass for everyone (pun intended). |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Pre-flight announcement needs to include passenger intervention
In article , Fly Guy wrote:
The moozlem idiots need to start leaving planes alone. They need to get a clue that it's not working. And do it before air travel becomes an absolute pain in the ass for everyone (pun intended). The latter has been the case for almost a decade. Now it's going to get worse. -- Erilar, biblioholic medievalist http://www.chibardun.net/~erilarlo |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Pre-flight announcement needs to include passenger intervention
Epsilon wrote:
The moozlem idiots need to start leaving planes alone. They need to get a clue that it's not working. And do it before air travel becomes an absolute pain in the ass for everyone (pun intended). The latter has been the case for almost a decade. Now it's going to get worse. So it would seem that the terrorist strategy is working very well, for minimal costs to the terrorists. I don't think their strategy is to increase the bottom-line of defence and security contractors who make full-body scanners and sniffers. Followup-To: alt.****wits And your strategy didn't work either. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Pre-flight announcement needs to include passenger intervention
Shawn Hirn wrote:
"Passengers are requested to inform the crew of any suspicious behavior they see or may be called upon by crew to subdue or incapacitate persons that are threatening the safety and security of the aircraft." Would that have prevented this latest incident? Has anything done since 9/11 prevented the shoe bomber or now this crotch bomber from getting on a plane? It doesn't cost any money, it doesn't waste anyone's time or cause any inconveinence to include that additional sentence in the pre-flight announcement. It's effectiveness at causing stress and anxiety for those conducting planning of a terror act and those attempting to carry it out can't be under-estimated. It might be enough to cause them to slip up or botch the attempt. If the guy was just sitting at the gate waiting to board like all the other passengers, I doubt he exhibited any unusual behavior. The announcement I'm talking about would not be played at the gate. It would be included as part of the pre-flight crap you hear once you're already seated on the plane. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Pre-flight announcement needs to include passenger intervention
"Fly Guy" wrote in message ...
The announcement I'm talking about would not be played at the gate. It would be included as part of the pre-flight crap you hear once you're already seated on the plane. Which no one listens to! Ian |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Pre-flight announcement needs to include passenger intervention
"Epsilon" schrieb
So it would seem that the terrorist strategy is working very well, for minimal costs to the terrorists. It works perfectly well. Terrorism is not about killing people, but causing people to panic. And they do, despite the fact that the risk of being killed by a brick falling off a building is probably much higher than the risk of getting blown up by some maniac. I would put warning signs on sidewalks. Every 10 metres: "Watch out for falling bricks!" I avoid flying whenever I can. Not because of terrorists, but because of the "security" measures against them. It has become ridiculous! Jochen |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Pre-flight announcement needs to include passenger intervention
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 15:47:06 +0100, Jochen Kriegerowski wrote:
"Epsilon" schrieb So it would seem that the terrorist strategy is working very well, for minimal costs to the terrorists. It works perfectly well. Terrorism is not about killing people, but causing people to panic. And they do, despite the fact that the risk of being killed by a brick falling off a building is probably much higher than the risk of getting blown up by some maniac. I would put warning signs on sidewalks. Every 10 metres: "Watch out for falling bricks!" I avoid flying whenever I can. Not because of terrorists, but because of the "security" measures against them. It has become ridiculous! Are you refering to the rules before 12/25/09? It's horrible, having to take your shoes off. Taking metal objects off is also really tricky. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Pre-flight announcement needs to include passenger intervention
"AZ Nomad" schrieb
It's horrible, having to take your shoes off. Taking metal objects off is also really tricky. It's neither horrible nor tricky. Just ridiculous. And I don't like to be ridiculed whenever some paranoids think they have to "do something". Is flying really so much safer if you can only carry 100 ml toothpaste instead of 125? Will the ziplock transparent bag where the toothpaste tube has to be in really save the plane from exploding? No more than a wolly hat will save me from falling bricks, one would think. Jochen |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Pre-flight announcement needs to include passenger intervention
Fly Guy wrote:
The announcement I'm talking about would not be played at the gate. It would be included as part of the pre-flight crap you hear once you're already seated on the plane. What do you read while they're giving the 'in an emergency proceed to the exits' talk these days? -- 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. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Pre-flight announcement needs to include passenger intervention
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 18:13:00 +0100, Jochen Kriegerowski wrote:
"AZ Nomad" schrieb It's horrible, having to take your shoes off. Taking metal objects off is also really tricky. It's neither horrible nor tricky. Just ridiculous. And I don't like to be no **** sherlock. go out and get yourself a sarcasm detector. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Passenger removed from flight in Labrador | James Robinson | Air travel | 13 | April 2nd, 2007 06:29 PM |
Flatulent passenger grounds flight | Alan Truism | Air travel | 0 | December 6th, 2006 10:01 PM |
Announcement: Interactive Web Site Visualizing International Passenger Air Traffic Network | [email protected] | Air travel | 0 | July 7th, 2005 02:27 PM |