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). |
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 09:01 PM |
Announcement: Interactive Web Site Visualizing International Passenger Air Traffic Network | [email protected] | Air travel | 0 | July 7th, 2005 02:27 PM |