I wasn't even alive in the 80s
Printable View
I wasn't even alive in the 80s
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis
Yes, because panzerjaeger t-shirt=nazi. Comparison does not make sense! :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
* I was at an airport security and was asked to take my flipflops off. I very politely asked the person what possible bomb could be hidden in a pair of flip flops. His reply was theater voicing "we have a loudy here". Enter airport security personnel, guns drawn.
In the interrogation room I was informed that uttering the word "bomb" was oh so bad. Very very very bad. Terroristicly bad even.
I then asked them if airport security now had reached some sort of Harry Potter world, where uttering the world "Voldemort" would evoke evil. In her defense, my interrogator held her face for about 5 seconds before laughing her cute behind off and set me free.
* I had a can of beer in my rucksack (I collect foreign beers). Obviously Code Red. I drank it in record time with security staff watching - several pats on the pack and a loud burp later I was no longer deemed a potential threat.
* I brought a ceremonial short sword in my hand luggage. It cost about 10.000€. I was asked to hand it in as it endangered the flight. The item was as blunt as could be, and I politely explained that I could cause way more harm with stuff found in the tax free shop inside of the gate. Interrogation room once again. Ended with me keeping the sword.
* I could go on.
I fly a lot, and it is just obscenely retarded how airport security works. So much time, money and effort to waste.
Should they inquire about the sword, yes of course. Should it be a big debacle - no. The "war on terrorism" has quickly escalated to a war on freedom, a war against our own populace. Someone in this forum once explained that forcing school lunches on children to fight obesity was wrong as it was the Swedish way of starting the adherence to the state at a young age.
Having to take flipflops off is the American way of..?
Note: this is not general US bashing, just that airports have a international protocol by - well - the strongest link in this case - and the US is this strongest link.
Ummm... it's not that far of a stretch from an already-attempted terrorist plot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shibumi
Quite frankly, acting like a pompous brat towards airport security says more about you than the TSA. I know you think you're clever, but I guarantee you that they hear the same "but why should the rules apply to me" whining from dozens of people each and every day.
I know that it is fashionable to bash airport security, and indeed it is a pain compared to what it used to be, but it is their a$$ on the line if someone gets through. It is clunky, inefficient, and imperfect today, but has and will continue to get better as technology and techniques continue to evolve - and may well be phased out to some degree if the threat from Islamic extremism diminishes. It took El Al years to refine that airline's sophisticated security apparatus, and under far more favorable conditions.
I try to work with them instead of against them. They're just trying to keep me safe, after all. Trust me, they don't want to be handling your nasty flip flops any more than you want to take them off. :beam:
Shoe bombers shoes:Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...osive_shoe.jpg
As a sidenote - do note that that carried explosives enough to give him a bad burn. Would not do much to an aircraft though.
Flipflops:
http://ladymuffin.blogg.se/images/20...s_98105931.jpg
Now where would you hide a bomb?
It is quite cute that you defend one of the biggest scams in modern history - the theaters of airport security. But it is a bit mislead when you try to do it just to spite me - against all common reason.
I would suppose that it's possible the interior of the flip-flop (the sole) could be hollowed out and packed with C-4 or some other explosive, then pieced gently back together.
A professional could make a bomb out of almost anything, really.
ATPG, I have the deepest respect for your achievements in TWMII, and I generally bow when you post in here. In this case however, you are more than utterly wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy
Yes of course you could hollow out the sole of a flip flop and fill it with C4, you could even make a big enough blast to blow out an aircraft window!
If you held it to someones face, you could possibly sacrifice your hand to (not def.) kill him/her (just like you could with stuff from the tax free store).
You are obviously a guy above average intelligence, fight with me on this.
I'm not saying it's right or wrong that we have security measures to prevent against such threats, but threatening to blow someone's head apart with C-4 is a powerful enough threat to be a security risk. It's also possible the C-4 could be used against a cockpit door or something.
I'm generally on your side that the security is overboard. All I'm saying is, and it doesn't have to be C-4, but anyone with average intelligence could make a bomb out of your flip-flop. One that could be lethal or at least present the appearance of a threat, or a possible security risk anyway.
That's all I was pointing out.
You could also buy a vodka bottle at the tax free store after the control - breaking it at the handle - and threaten someones face.Quote:
Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy
Or you could buy 10 bottles - spill it out in the cabin - ignite the carpet and you would get quite a fire.
Two hollowed out flip flops with military C4 could in the worst case scenario make a dent in a cockpit door. In the average case scenario it would leave a burn mark that is REALLY hard to wash away - meaning hours of extra labor for the janitor detail. Oh the horror.
In the soles of course, which appear to be less than an inch shorter than Reid's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shibumi
Here's a better question. Do you honestly believe the TSA has the time and resources availible to carefully analyze each every pair of shoes that pass through the airport for a) the ability to create a bomb out of them and then b) the blast radius and lethality of said bomb before they ask people to remove them?
I wasn't trying to spite you. You're post came off as genuinely arrogant and lacking in understanding of the unenviable position airport security is in - trying to stop the very real threat of terrorism while operating under arduously strict procedures (no profiling) and attempting to respect passenger privacy concerns. The fact that you've admittedly been dragged into interrogation rooms at least three times seems to indicate that the problem resides with you and not the TSA.Quote:
It is quite cute that you defend one of the biggest scams in modern history - the theaters of airport security. But it is a bit mislead when you try to do it just to spite me - against all common reason.
Okay. Military weapons knowledge isn't my forte, and that's one of the many reasons I'm just a pizza delivery man.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shibumi
I don't suppose there are explosives more powerful that could in fact be threatening to life or limb? The 9/11 hijackings were carried out with box cutters, iirc. Threatening to literally blow someone's head to pieces right in front of everyone could be more than a little coercive, if people were afraid of rushing people with tiny blades.
I already agree with you that what is too dangerous to be let on a plane seems arbitrary to the lay person, but I suppose they judge the likelihood of certain kinds of threats being lethal or dangerous on a plane and go with their judgments on it, right or wrong. Someone is going to do that job, and the reason why is because people need to earn money to make a living, and the government is going to want to cover its own butt if something bad goes down. Further, the reason why we have such beefy security now is because whenever there's a crisis everyone panics and demands maximum security. This is the end result.
I'm not saying I agree with it. And since I don't know, and most people don't know what is or isn't threatening (look at how they feel about guys dressed as Imams. Lots of terrorists forget about disguises and go plan their attacks dressed as clerics....), someone makes that assessment for us and it makes some people feel safer, and that allows some of them to fly on planes, and that allows airlines to make money, and flights remain within an affordable range for common people, I guess.
Pentaerythritol tetranitrate is the weapon of choice for would-be suicide plane bombers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy
There are most def explosives you could hide in a sole of a flip flop shoe that is as harmful as a box cutter or a broken glass bottle.Quote:
Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy
My point however is that the amount of time, energy, and money wasted on protecting us from hypothetical threats could be way better spent elsewhere. And as a side note - that probably should be a main point - terrorists win when they affect the lives of the average guy. An idiot brought explosives enough to threaten a window - kaboom everyone around the world has to take any kind of footwear off.
It is like giving the terrorists a walk over (I generally hate sport terms). When it comes to impact divided by means (ability) - the shoe bomber must be the most efficient terrorist in history. But only so because the government nods, and the blind masses follow.
Have you had a look at the security industry? And yes, it is quite and industry these days - worth billions of billions. They have lobby groups - those like us feeling insecure. There are also political gains in having the population feel insecure.
Me? I prefer to live in a world where people can pass through security with flip flops, and where they can say the name Voldemort without fear.
PJ
Do you often make random assumptions based on what I can only believe to be ill-read book knowledge - or do you save those moments for this forum?Quote:
Pentaerythritol tetranitrate is the weapon of choice for would-be suicide plane bombers.
Oh, if you're talking about money wasted, then security and certain military actions taken do total in the trillions.
That was Bin Laden's plan, to cripple us economically like the Soviets, overreacting to the threats he posed. He was right about that much, we are in much worse financial shape, and the military/security industries are thriving at the expense of basic necessities. The illusion of security is not the same as security, I agree.
Stuff gets past security and it destroys hundreds of lives, prompting even more security, until it does become ludicrous. I think security on airplanes should be opt-in.... if you're in a hurry and don't want to pay extra, fly "gutsy". You agree to not hold the airline responsible in the event of a terrorist attack or a madman on the plane. In return, you pledge to tackle anyone who acts like a jackass. You're also on the plane where, if it gets hijacked, the military shoots it out of the sky before approaching a city.
If you're a security-minded type, you can go on the plane where everyone is checked twice, every thing is checked twice, and you pay for sky marshals and all the security bells and whistles. And it will take you 2 hours longer to get anywhere. Fine. That's choice, and I support choice.
Are you speaking broadly, or implying that my statement about PETN is a 'random assumption'?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shibumi
:2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy
:curtain:Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
Also, as much as I disagree in principle with the formation of the TSA and especially with the replacement of private workers with unionized ones, it should be noted that the agency's annual budget, which covers not only air travel but security for highways, railroads, buses, mass transit systems, pipelines, and ports, is ~8 billion, comprising .00223% of the national budget. As bloated as it may be, airport security is not bankrupting the nation.
That is beside the point. The nazis were bad guys, particularly when it comes to a certain ethnicity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
No such conclusion is drawn. As per above, nazi references in Israel is a different matter entirely.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
Would they accept you if you wore jeans, you think? Symbol of evil colonialism, part of teh grand conspiracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump
This, exactly this. Times two for two guys. That is exactly my point in this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shibumi
Perhaps you are right, Shibumi. Maybe your criticism is right. I would not automatically deem your objections unreasonable.
But as for me, I won't shed a tear when you are removed from my plane. Not after you have made the entire plane wait for half an hour, have created a tense security situation, just because you used my flight to make your political statement. For me it would be goodbye and good luck on your next attempt to board a plane and do cry your heart out all you want at your congress.
You guys complain about airport security and how its teh prezidents evil plot and he and only he started the whole thing and then -- boom -- someone is going to bring an IBIED (Infant-borne Improvised Explosive Device) on board and I'm gonna be all like "I told you so" yeah
Dunno about America but flight security has always been tight here, certainly nothing new. There have always been terrorist groups here and a plane is kinda awesome, instant world coverageQuote:
Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump
These discussions about airport security are moot, or at least as far as the original topic is concerned. The Imams were cleared by security - twice - and should have been allowed on the first plane like everybody else. The other passangers aren't qualified to determine security risks, and being "uncomfortable" around islamic dress is no reason.
Comparing it to Rosa Parks suggests a lack of perspective, though.