Failed Bombing Over Detroit...

[Free-Man]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/12/26/airline.attack/index.html

Thank goodness this guy lit himself on fire. It'd been horrid had he succeeded.

[KevinTBrown]

Talking about it already in the political thread: http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?p=10235572#post10235572

[AaronJ]

And you're assuming that he knew what he was doing in the first place. Which is quite an assumption.

[the4thpip]

The message that should be taken from the Delta incident:
The most deadly weapons the 9-11 hijackers had weren't the box cutters but the element of surprise and the expectations of the passengers that everybody would be ok as long as they did what the hijackers wanted. Now that people's perceptions have changed, it's really hard to hijack a plane because other passengers would rather die than let you.

The message that most likely will be taken from this instead:
Taking away people's hand lotion and beverages and making them take off their shoes isn't enough! We need to take away something else - maybe their newspapers and hair pieces! And make them strip completely!

[DeadXMan]

did he get his ass kicked by the passengers, like the guy that tried this shortly after 9-11?

[Charles RB]

The message that should be taken from the Delta incident:
The most deadly weapons the 9-11 hijackers had weren't the box cutters but the element of surprise and the expectations of the passengers that everybody would be ok as long as they did what the hijackers wanted. Now that people's perceptions have changed, it's really hard to hijack a plane because other passengers would rather die than let you.

Except he was trying to blow it up, not hijack it - he failed because the bomb was a fuck-up.

What we should definately take from this is that ESTA is fucking useless.

[rick]

And you're assuming that he knew what he was doing in the first place. Which is quite an assumption.

Maybe it's me, but that sentence doesn't make much sense.

As for the attempted bombing.

While it's good the passengers stopped him, it also sounds like his bomb didn't go off properly in the first place.

Whoever it is going around calling themselves al Qaeda these days sure don't seem to have either the organizational skills of the technical skills of the earlier version.

This is of course a good thing.

[shrike]

And you're assuming that he knew what he was doing in the first place. Which is quite an assumption.

This post makes zero sense.

[Charles RB]

While it's good the passengers stopped him, it also sounds like his bomb didn't go off properly in the first place.

It went off and just burnt him, far as I can tell.


Whoever it is going around calling themselves al Qaeda these days sure don't seem to have either the organizational skills of the technical skills of the earlier version.

This is of course a good thing.

Since July 7 2005, there've been several attempted bombings by UK residents and citizens who claim to be al Qaeda that weren't stopped by the police - and they all crap up, the bombs either not going off, barely going off, or only taking out the bomber. It's almost like... suicide bombing is a stupid tactic if you only have a few competent bomb-makers.

[the4thpip]

WASHINGTON – The Associated Press has learned that a second Nigerian man has been taken into custody aboard a jetliner in Detroit after locking himself in the airliner's bathroom.

A law enforcement official tells the AP that the incident took place aboard the same Northwest flight that was attacked on Christmas Day. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the incident was ongoing.

A Delta spokeswoman says all 256 passengers have been safely taken off the plane. Delta operates the Northwest flight.

OK, is this:
1. a really stupid passenger
2. another terrorist
3. a really nervous crew getting a guy with the runs arrested
4. all of the above?

[Free-Man]

It went off and just burnt him, far as I can tell.



Since July 7 2005, there've been several attempted bombings by UK residents and citizens who claim to be al Qaeda that weren't stopped by the police - and they all crap up, the bombs either not going off, barely going off, or only taking out the bomber. It's almost like... suicide bombing is a stupid tactic if you only have a few competent bomb-makers.

These wannabe terrorists are actually quite frightening in a way. Al Queda may not exactly be well organized, but at least as a group, you have the chance of catching info through the pipes.

[king mob]

Since July 7 2005, there've been several attempted bombings by UK residents and citizens who claim to be al Qaeda that weren't stopped by the police - and they all crap up, the bombs either not going off, barely going off, or only taking out the bomber. It's almost like... suicide bombing is a stupid tactic if you only have a few competent bomb-makers.

The IRA were actually scary compared to this lot of fairly rubbish terrorists.

[K-DoG7p7]

If we have learn anything from what happened to day its that one must nevr get the runs while flying from Amsterdam to Detroit..

[Charles RB]

My mistake, as it turns out - he wasn't flying in from the UK, he'd left there a year ago and was flying in from Nigeria via Netherlands. I dunno if Nigeria uses the ESTA system. They do, however, tell the US when they're flying in.

Also, his parents allegedly contacted Nigerian and US authorities to warn them his son was dangerously radicalised. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8431530.stm) (This may be why he was on a watchlist)


The IRA were actually scary compared to this lot of fairly rubbish terrorists.

The Real and Continuity IRA's are also doing more stuff - it's not big scale, but terrorising policemen and judges does a lot of damage to the local justice system.

[Cam63]

The guy has third degree burns to his legs.

...Hopefully his genitalia didn't miss out.

[Spike-X]

Thanks to this complete and utter fuckwit, anyone flying in a plane will now be not allowed to leave their seats (good luck to anyone who flies with a recently toilet-trained three-year-old from now on), or to have anything in their laps (not even a book), for the last hour of a flight.

Something which wouldn't have prevented this guy blowing his pants up, and which probably won't do a damn thing to prevent future attempts. But the people in charge of security have to be seen to be doing something, dammit! And I guess making up new lame rules like this is easier than actually doing their fucking jobs.

[pariah-1972]

I know it's a slow news period but i really wish the news media would quit making this seem like a big friggen deal, i mean the guy isn't even smart enough to blow himself up properly.

[Cam63]

I'm fully for air marshalls/cops giving said fuckwits an appropriate calibre round between their eyes.

[the4thpip]

The guy has third degree burns to his legs.

...Hopefully his genitalia didn't miss out.

Talk about a neutered threat!

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

Talk about a neutered threat!

Did you just make a joke about a domestic and international threat? Awwww. How cute. I thought I hated you after your whole "LET'S STORM THE VATICAN!" thread. Thanks for attempting to clear that up, Pip.

I usually feel bad and second-guess my posts...but I am fully behind this one.

[the4thpip]

Did you just make a joke about a domestic and international threat? Awwww. How cute. I thought I hated you after your whole "LET'S STORM THE VATICAN!" thread. Thanks for attempting to clear that up, Pip.

I usually feel bad and second-guess my posts...but I am fully behind this one.

I am going to have to take that bottle of hand lotion from you, Miss.

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

I am going to have to take that bottle of hand lotion from you, Miss.

Hah. What a witty post in response to an act that came about after a terrorist threat that originated in the UK. Sure, my sister wasn't happy that she had to dump some makeup after she inadvertently added it to her luggage, but she got past it. I'm sorry that bottle of CD cost you so much, my friend.

Sorry, dude. I have lived across the globe and flying jokes ARE NOT funny. Unless. of course, you know how it feels to fly across the globe (thirteen hours) four times a year in order for you to make that assessment.

[the4thpip]

Hah. What a witty post in response to an act that came about after a terrorist threat that originated in the UK. Sure, my sister wasn't happy that she had to dump some makeup after she inadvertently added it to her luggage, but she got past it. I'm sorry that bottle of CD cost you so much, my friend.

Sorry, dude. I have lived across the globe and flying jokes ARE NOT funny. Unless. of course, you know how it feels to fly across the globe (thirteen hours) four times a year in order for you to make that assessment.

Now give me that hand lotion. It will make you feel safer.

Oh, and by coincidence: I used to fly from Germany to the US 3 times a year from 2000 to 2008. Long distance relationship. I flew on Oct 11, 2001.

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

Now give me that hand lotion. It will make you feel safer.

Oh, and by coincidence: I used to fly from Germany to the US 3 times a year from 2000 to 2008. Long distance relationship. I flew on Oct 11, 2001.


I have to wonder why hand lotion will make me feel safer. CLEARLY, I am a handsome male, but I don't get it. With all due respect, Pip, I am scared of flying and have been since a scary flight in December of 2001. I meant no disrespect (although it probably came off that way...), but I just don't take kindly to airport or flight jokes, man.

I have you beat. US to Korea. I win.

[the4thpip]

I joke because a fear of fyling is still completely irrational.

Somebody posted some good quotes on why that is last night on the politics thread: (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=10243022&postcount=1977)

[the4thpip]

And yes, it is a joke that they take away our hand lotion, and no, it should not make you feel any more or less safe that they do.

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

I joke because a fear of fyling is still completely irrational.

Somebody posted some good quotes on why that is last night on the politics thread: (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=10243022&postcount=1977)

For your information, it had nothing to do with a terrorist plot. It was similar to what happened to that Brazilian liner that went down earlier this year. I thought you were trying to be rational, but it is clear that you aren't.

[the4thpip]

For your information, it had nothing to do with a terrorist plot. It was similar to what happened to that Brazilian liner that went down earlier this year. I thought you were trying to be rational, but it is clear that you aren't.

Do you get into cars?
It would be a lot more rational not to get into a car than into a plane.

I know a "bad flight" can be a terrifying experience that is difficult to shake. But being afraid of getting on a plane again while driving is just not rational by any definition of the word.

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

Do you get into cars?
It would be a lot more rational not to get into a car than into a plane.

I know a "bad flight" can be a terrifying experience that is difficult to shake. But being afraid of getting on a plane again while driving is just not rational by any definition of the word.

Not really...considering how good of a driver I am. I rule in every which way. I am an alpha male.

It's also not irrational to be slightly anxious when you travel so many miles (30,000+ feet) in the air and then casually drive home in a car that you know and, in some cases, love. I am leaning towards you don't have a car, but you will prove me wrong. I honestly don't know what your argument is there, considering that cars don't fly 30,000 feet in the air. The old axiom is that you are more likely to die after getting kicked by a donkey than you are in a plane...but who willingly tries to get kicked by a donkey? There will never be drunk flights (by the way, three or more of my relatives are pilots), but the same trust can be applied to drivers on the road. For the record, try to assuage this situation by telling me how anyone (save for mob bosses) will attempt to blow up your car.

[Charles RB]

Thanks to this complete and utter fuckwit, anyone flying in a plane will now be not allowed to leave their seats (good luck to anyone who flies with a recently toilet-trained three-year-old from now on), or to have anything in their laps (not even a book), for the last hour of a flight.

Oh fuck, please tell me you're joking.



It's also not irrational to be slightly anxious when you travel so many miles (30,000+ feet) in the air and then casually drive home in a car that you know and, in some cases, love.

It is though, because accidents happen to people in cars they know and love all the time. There's more risk of injury or death from riding a bike or being in a car than there is from a terrorist attack on a plane or, in my case, on London public transport. And there's always more risk of a terrorist attack on public transport than on a plane (no security checks before you get on a train) - if I'm going to happily be in cars or use the Tube, I cannot rationally be worried that my plane might be the one-in-a-million that will get successfully bombed.

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

It is though, because accidents happen to people in cars they know and love all the time. There's more risk of injury or death from riding a bike or being in a car than there is from a terrorist attack on a plane or, in my case, on London public transport. And there's always more risk of a terrorist attack on public transport than on a plane (no security checks before you get on a train) - if I'm going to happily be in cars or use the Tube, I cannot rationally be worried that my plane might be the one-in-a-million that will get successfully bombed.

May I ask if you drive, Charles? Even if you have a license, I ask if you drive regularly.

[Charles RB]

May I ask if you drive, Charles? Even if you have a license, I ask if you drive regularly.

No. But that's not relevant to what I said. The only way your fear can be rational is if you're statistically more likely to be killed on a plane than driving, and you're not.

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

No. But that's not relevant to what I said.

It is actually, since, for some people, owning and operating a car means that drivers (preferably good drivers) are most likely in control of their actions. Can the same be said for planes, trains, and subways...especially during terrorist attacks like this flight in question? What if a bomber proceeds in destroying all engines?

For me, in any case, it is a heightened sense of awareness whenever I take the wheel (mind you, I am an alpha). This goes for my friends as well. Will there be wrecks on the road? It is bound to happen (but not necessarily with you if you are a careful PILOT).

[Charles RB]

It is actually, since, for some people, owning and operating a car means that drivers (preferably good drivers) are most likely in control of their actions.

You're assuming there's less of a chance of an accident because you're the one driving - that is not rational. Every driver who had a crash thought they were in control and knew what they were doing, and it could be another driver that causes the crash.


especially during terrorist attacks like this flight in question? What if a bomber proceeds in destroying all engines?

Except, again, the chances of a successfully terrorist attack on a plane killing you are statistically less likely than a road accident killing you. (Or the flu, for that matter) It hasn't happened in over eight years. Road accidents, meanwhile, killed more Americans than September 11 (and most of the dead there weren't in a plane).

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

You're assuming there's less of a chance of an accident because you're the one driving - that is not rational. Every driver who had a crash thought they were in control and knew what they were doing, and it could be another driver that causes the crash.

With all due respect, if you do not have a license, own a car, or drive, your opinion doesn't carry much weight, sir.


Except, again, the chances of a successfully terrorist attack on a plane killing you are statistically less likely than a road accident killing you. (Or the flu, for that matter)

Except that roads and cars won't attempt to "successfully" attack you. Even if it is remote, the fact is that the climate of the world unfortunately dictates that such events can happen in the air. This event for the current airline in question further proves that.

[the4thpip]

Not really...considering how good of a driver I am. I rule in every which way. I am an alpha male.

It's also not irrational to be slightly anxious when you travel so many miles (30,000+ feet) in the air and then casually drive home in a car that you know and, in some cases, love. I am leaning towards you don't have a car, but you will prove me wrong. I honestly don't know what your argument is there, considering that cars don't fly 30,000 feet in the air. The old axiom is that you are more likely to die after getting kicked by a donkey than you are in a plane...but who willingly tries to get kicked by a donkey? There will never be drunk flights (by the way, three or more of my relatives are pilots), but the same trust can be applied to drivers on the road. For the record, try to assuage this situation by telling me how anyone (save for mob bosses) will attempt to blow up your car.


May I ask if you drive, Charles? Even if you have a license, I ask if you drive regularly.

Being in control of your own car gives you a greater sense of security than sitting in a plane, with not even a visual of what the pilot is doing at any given time. That sense, though, is an illusion. You are not alone on the roads. Very experienced drivers because somebody else fucks up all the time. There is also a chance of technical failure that is outside your control.

Do you honestly think the only reason that so many more people drive in automobile accidents than on airplanes is because of inexperienced drivers?

Your idea of "rational" seems to be "being nice to you and/or agreeing with you."

Again, look at the link to the politics thread post I provided above.

And I do not own a car, but I am a member of a car sharing plan. It's the way of the future.

[the4thpip]

Except that roads and cars won't attempt to "successfully" attack you. Even if it is remote, the fact is that the climate of the world unfortunately dictates that such events can happen in the air. This event for the current airline in question further proves that.

http://www.crimedoctor.com/carjacking.htm

[the4thpip]

With all due respect, if you do not have a license, own a car, or drive, your opinion doesn't carry much weight, sir.


Are you a pilot then? Air traffic controller? Director of Homeland Security?

Following your logic, your opinion in aviation security doesn't carry much weight then, either, mein Herr.

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

Being in control of your own car gives you a greater sense of security than sitting in a plane, with not even a visual of what the pilot is doing at any given time. That sense, though, is an illusion. You are not alone on the roads. Very experienced drivers because somebody else fucks up all the time. There is also a chance of technical failure that is outside your control.

Do you honestly think the only reason that so many more people drive in automobile accidents than on airplanes is because of inexperienced drivers?

Your idea of "rational" seems to be "being nice to you and/or agreeing with you."

Again, look at the link to the politics thread post I provided above.

And I do not own a car, but I am a member of a car sharing plan. It's the way of the future.

So pilots are alone in the sky?

My "idea" is people not having the means to blow me up. I do not deny that there are shitty drivers out there. Hell, I had to push a young lady out of a snow plow yesterday afternoon.

I also don't give a rat's ass about the politics thread. I am merely telling you that the "friendly skies" are now a measure of terrorism and this dude who claims to have operated on behalf of Al Qeada proves it. Fact is it is more likely for a terrorist to board a plane than it is for someone to firebomb my car.

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

Are you a pilot then? Air traffic controller? Director of Homeland Security?

Following your logic, your opinion in aviation security doesn't carry much weight then, either, mein Herr.

I am better than you, and that is all that seems to matter on YABS.

EDIT: I am also giving up this argument. I am done posting.

[Charles RB]

So pilots are alone in the sky?

Planes very, very rarely crash into each other. Cars crash into each other all the time.


My "idea" is people not having the means to blow me up.

The last plane bombing was, what, Lockerbie twenty years ago? September 11 was a hijacking that cannot possibly be done ever again (because, as the Detroit flight shows, the passengers will now attack any hijacker).

Ever go to a bar, a shopping centre, an office block, a court, a hotel, a train station or train, a national monument, a concert, a sports match, a bank, a car park, a restaurant, a toilet? Terrorists can blow you up at any one of them. Any one of them is, in fact, easier to bomb than a plane. You could also get killed by a madman with a gun, an armed robbery, a mugging, or an accident at any of those places or on the way to them.

Stay at home? Home invasions, fire, gas leaks, natural disaster, accident - also all more likely than a terrorist attack on a plane.

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

Planes very, very rarely crash into each other. Cars crash into each other all the time.



The last plane bombing was, what, Lockerbie twenty years ago? September 11 was a hijacking that cannot possibly be done ever again (because, as the Detroit flight shows, the passengers will now attack any hijacker).

Ever go to a bar, a shopping centre, an office block, a court, a hotel, a train station or train, a national monument, a concert, a sports match, a bank, a car park, a restaurant, a toilet? Terrorists can blow you up at any one of them. Any one of them is, in fact, easier to bomb than a plane. You could also get killed by a madman with a gun, an armed robbery, a mugging, or an accident at any of those places or on the way to them.

Stay at home? Home invasions, fire, gas leaks, natural disaster, accident - also all more likely than a terrorist attack on a plane.

The question remains...can you drive?

[Charles RB]

Why do you keep asking that question as if it had any fucking bearing of any of the facts raised?

Also, you're not a pilot and you don't work for Air Traffic Control. So why are you talking about planes then? Under your own logic, your opinion about planes is worthless.

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

Why do you keep asking that question as if it had any fucking bearing of any of the facts raised?

Because you can't and therefore have absolutely no fucking idea about what it takes to navigate the road. Sorry, dude.

You should probably place me on "Ignore" now.

[Charles RB]

Because you can't and therefore have absolutely no fucking idea about what it takes to navigate the road. Sorry, dude.

You're not a pilot and you don't work for Air Traffic Control, and therefore have absolutely no fucking idea about planes, flying, or plane-related terrorism. Sorry, dude.

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

But how can you tell me about the road if you don't drive?

[Spike-X]

Oh fuck, please tell me you're joking.


I'm not joking. (http://www.boingboing.net/2009/12/26/yo-dawg-i-heard-you.html)

[Spike-X]

But how can you tell me about the road if you don't drive?
He's not telling you about the road, Thad. He's telling you about easily verifiable statistics. And facts.

And the fact is, you are thousands of times more likely to be harmed or killed while driving on the road than flying on a plane.

You're entitled to your own opinion. You're not entitled to your own facts.

[Charles RB]

But how can you tell me about the road if you don't drive?

Well, for a start, I've heard about road accident statistics. They're common knowledge, y'know.

Meanwhile, you're quite happy to tell everyone about flight when you're not a pilot.

Oh, and do you talk about comics on here? Well don't. You don't make comics, your opinion on them isn't worthwhile.



You're entitled to your own opinion. You're not entitled to your own facts.

Al Franken 2012!

[Charles RB]

And again - any public place can be attacked by a terrorist. It is easier for them to do this than blow up a plane. They can also be attacked by random crazies and criminals. I'm betting you go to those places like everyone else does though.

EDIT: Hell, many of the people killed on September 11 were at work. Who seriously believes we should all shit ourselves when we're going to work?

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

He's not telling you about the road, Thad. He's telling you about easily verifiable statistics. And facts.

And the fact is, you are thousands of times more likely to be harmed or killed while driving on the road than flying on a plane.

You're entitled to your own opinion. You're not entitled to your own facts.

Spike, is your bike going to be attacked by terrorists or alleged terrorists?

[Spike-X]

...what?



No, seriously, what?

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

And again - any public place can be attacked by a terrorist. It is easier for them to do this than blow up a plane. They can also be attacked by random crazies and criminals. I'm betting you go to those places like everyone else does though.

EDIT: Hell, many of the people killed on September 11 were at work. Who seriously believes we should all shit ourselves when we're going to work?

Of course I go to all those place. Hell, I apologize, Charles, for snapping at you. I didn't mean it.

But my point is, while it does seem rare this stuff happens with airlines, it still DOES happen with airlines. This guy wasn't successful, but who is to say another dude won't be?

I think I am done for real now, guys. I am sorry about raising your tempers. My bad.

[Charles RB]

Spike, is your bike going to be attacked by terrorists or alleged terrorists?

No, but if he works in a financial district, a stadium, a restaurant, a bar, or a government building? Then his workplace is likely to get attacked by terrorists.

Also, his bike is likely to be hit by a car or turned over by weather/road conditions. Also, his bank is likely to get attacked by armed robbers when he's visiting it. Also, his local pub is likely to have violent drunk arseholes in it and if he goes to a football match he's likely to run into football hooligans (or whatever the equivalent of his sport). Also, if he goes out at night, he's likely to be mugged.

[Charles RB]

This guy wasn't successful, but who is to say another dude won't be?


But that's true for anything.

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

All right. Once again, I am sorry for my actions tonight...to everyone. What I did was totally uncalled for and I hope you forgive me if I offended you. My outbursts...weren't me and I do apologize for those, primarily directed towards CharlesRB and Pip.

[the4thpip]

That is quite all right.
Feel free to post some of your best fish recipes instead. (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=160939)

[Charles RB]

No worries.

[J.R. LeMar]

Wow. That was interesting. I don't think I've seen someone on this board argue so adamantly against reality since the golden days of the Rick Olney thread (FYI: I've been driving for 17 years, just in case anyone wondered).

In any case, my first thought about this was lamenting how much harder security is going to get. I just read an article on changes for international passengers coming into America. Now they're recommending getting to the airport @ least three hours early, just in case. One official even recommended bringing a book with you to read while you wait. I'm like, I used to bring a book to read on the plane, and now I need another one to read in the airport? Sheesh.

I swear, soon they're just gonna say that we should all come to the airport naked.

[worstblogever]

I'm fully for air marshalls/cops giving said fuckwits an appropriate calibre round between their eyes.

Just not in an enclosed cabin in mid-flight, promise?

[Forseti]

There's a Nigerian email scam joke in that story somewhere, waiting to be set free. Especially considering the failed terrorist is actually the son of a banker.

[mikekerr3]

Planes very, very rarely crash into each other. Cars crash into each other all the time.



The last plane bombing was, what, Lockerbie twenty years ago? September 11 was a hijacking that cannot possibly be done ever again (because, as the Detroit flight shows, the passengers will now attack any hijacker).

Ever go to a bar, a shopping centre, an office block, a court, a hotel, a train station or train, a national monument, a concert, a sports match, a bank, a car park, a restaurant, a toilet? Terrorists can blow you up at any one of them. Any one of them is, in fact, easier to bomb than a plane. You could also get killed by a madman with a gun, an armed robbery, a mugging, or an accident at any of those places or on the way to them.

Stay at home? Home invasions, fire, gas leaks, natural disaster, accident - also all more likely than a terrorist attack on a plane.


Ratioal assesment of risks is so passe':wink:

[mikekerr3]

Because you can't and therefore have absolutely no fucking idea about what it takes to navigate the road. Sorry, dude.

You should probably place me on "Ignore" now.

And have absolutely no fucking idea about flying. So what point are you trying to make?

[mikekerr3]

Spike, is your bike going to be attacked by terrorists or alleged terrorists?

If you can die doing it the risk is the same. Whether by a inattentive driver or a terrorist, the bicycle is far more dangerous than flying

[mikekerr3]

Just not in an enclosed cabin in mid-flight, promise?

A bullet hole doesn't do what the movies show, that's in the same category as a car exploding in mid-air after going off a cliff. It just makes a slow leak. there is not THAT much pressure differential

[Sean Walsh]

There's a Nigerian email scam joke in that story somewhere, waiting to be set free. Especially considering the failed terrorist is actually the son of a banker.

Apparently this guy's family is rather well off over in England. But reports say the family was just terrified of him, and he embraced the al Qaida lifestyle when, according to them, their own lifestyle was more than able to provide him a good and secure life.

[worstblogever]

A bullet hole doesn't do what the movies show, that's in the same category as a car exploding in mid-air after going off a cliff. It just makes a slow leak. there is not THAT much pressure differential

I wouldn't take the chance. I know we're not talking "What happens to Goldfinger" at the end of his Bond movie, but it's still not a good idea.

[mikekerr3]

I wouldn't take the chance. I know we're not talking "What happens to Goldfinger" at the end of his Bond movie, but it's still not a good idea.

I think that the laws of physics make a bullet hole much safer than an unrestrained terrorist on a aircraft.

[AaronJ]

As I said, I would never fly out of or, especially, into the United States again. And I determined that years ago.

But now they want to pat everyone down? Oh man. If I were dumb enough to allow that to happen to me, I worry about the outcome.

Some guy I don't know, with a patch on his arm, putting his hands on me? No. Uh-uh.

[Free-Man]

I think that the laws of physics make a bullet hole much safer than an unrestrained terrorist on a aircraft.

Well, I would think the sensible thing to do is just make sure any authorized and armed men and women on the plane are damn good at their job. A bullet MAY not do any damage, but I'd prefer that we don't take any chances.

[AaronJ]

Well, I would think the sensible thing to do is just make sure any authorized and armed men and women on the plane are damn good at their job. A bullet MAY not do any damage, but I'd prefer that we don't take any chances.

Yes, because nothing is better than having armed people on a plane.

[Free-Man]

Yes, because nothing is better than having armed people on a plane.

Are air mashals that bad an idea? If not, I'm not adverse to arming the pilots if they receive proper training.

[AaronJ]

Are air mashals that bad an idea? If not, I'm not adverse to arming the pilots if they receive proper training.

I think it's a terrible idea.

And I think the whole paranoia is beyond rational. But I've felt that for 10 years.

[worstblogever]

I think that the laws of physics make a bullet hole much safer than an unrestrained terrorist on a aircraft.

Uh huh. Or maybe a taser makes more sense for helping to subdue and restrain someone.

[Free-Man]

Uh huh. Or maybe a taser makes more sense for helping to subdue and restrain someone.

Ah, but what about those mini-tasers you can shoot out of a gun?:wink:

[Tyr]

They truly tragic thing about this is even though he failed in his attempt to blow up the plane, the terrorist still accomplished his mission.

[Free-Man]

They truly tragic thing about this is even though he failed in his attempt to blow up the plane, the terrorist still accomplished his mission.

I dunno. Paranoia among Americans was always pretty high, and I still have to go through ridiculous (but ultimately futile) security measures at the airport.

[Sally Sensational]

Uh huh. Or maybe a taser makes more sense for helping to subdue and restrain someone.

I would think that one of the tasers that shoots out the contacts MIGHT be able to disrupt something electrical if it hit the wrong spot in an aircraft.

But then again, even if that were to happen, it's not an open hole that leads to sudden and possible catastrophic depressurization.

[the4thpip]

As I said, I would never fly out of or, especially, into the United States again. And I determined that years ago.

But now they want to pat everyone down? Oh man. If I were dumb enough to allow that to happen to me, I worry about the outcome.

Some guy I don't know, with a patch on his arm, putting his hands on me? No. Uh-uh.
Just do what this guy does
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4UlmLOU8JA

[the4thpip]

They truly tragic thing about this is even though he failed in his attempt to blow up the plane, the terrorist still accomplished his mission.

I think in the hearts and minds of people, it's a majority that will think "gee, those guys really aren't that dangerous if all they manage to do is burn their own crotches."

While the news media and those responsible for airline security go into panic mode.

So it's not a complete victory.

[Cam63]

I'm sure the passengers are still pissing themselves.

...and welcome.

[kingdom2000]

They truly tragic thing about this is even though he failed in his attempt to blow up the plane, the terrorist still accomplished his mission.

Terrorists have won every time including with 9/11. They changed us on a fundamental level, creating a society based on fear, making decisions on fear, willing to sacrifice their freedom for illusion of security, and while we talk a big game about freedom, sacrifice for it and so forth, the American people are really full of it. Shoot we can't even rebuild after an attack out of fear of another one. Our own quaking fear of everything pretty much is its on propanganda without even including Iraq and Afghanistan into the equation.

[worstblogever]

I would think that one of the tasers that shoots out the contacts MIGHT be able to disrupt something electrical if it hit the wrong spot in an aircraft.

But then again, even if that were to happen, it's not an open hole that leads to sudden and possible catastrophic depressurization.

If the taser got into the locked cockpit.

Well, I'm still going with taser as opposed to gun also should mean that the most powerful weapon on the aircraft is a taser. Should an air marshall have their weapon stolen (as made famous in the "Terror at 30,000 ft." episode of Twilight Zone) from their holster, and its used to take anyone on board hostage... I'd think it's a concern.

Just... everyone promise me this isn't a "right to bear arms" debate.

[pariah-1972]

They truly tragic thing about this is even though he failed in his attempt to blow up the plane, the terrorist still accomplished his mission.His mission was to burn his pants up?

Crazy Nigerians what will they think up next.

[king mob]

Terrorists have won every time including with 9/11. They changed us on a fundamental level, creating a society based on fear, making decisions on fear, willing to sacrifice their freedom for illusion of security, and while we talk a big game about freedom, sacrifice for it and so forth, the American people are really full of it. Shoot we can't even rebuild after an attack out of fear of another one. Our own quaking fear of everything pretty much is its on propanganda without even including Iraq and Afghanistan into the equation.

It's not just America that's going nutty, we are over here, well, our government is. Most of who remember what the IRA did will remember a genuine terrorist threat rather than some half arsed loner setting his trousers on fire.

The problem is that it's very difficult to go on as normal as we did under the IRA, as the government are creating laws to deal with 'the terrorist threat', which are in most of the cases bloody pointless as we have exisiting laws to deal with terrorism, but these new laws infringe more upon the general population than the small handful of genuinely dangerous people.

[Charles RB]

I just read an article on changes for international passengers coming into America. Now they're recommending getting to the airport @ least three hours early, just in case.

Last September, Gatwick recommended I turn up four hours early.

Thank Christ for books and the Star Wars Trilogy arcade game.



But now they want to pat everyone down? Oh man.

They already do random pat-downs. That's nothing compared to "you have to share a cabin with babies that can't be changed for a whole HOUR".

[Iangould]

Not really...considering how good of a driver I am. I rule in every which way. I am an alpha male.


Your need to announce this somewhat undercuts the credibility of your claim.

But I'm sure if a drunk teenage driver in a stolen car is coming up behind you at 90 MPH when you're stopped at a traffic light all you'll need to do will be to display your enormous genitals and all will be well.

[Iangould]

Just not in an enclosed cabin in mid-flight, promise?

That' where the "appropriate caliber" comes in.

Air marshals use special highly frangible bullets with penetrate humans just fine but are very unlikely to go on to penetrate the hull of an aircraft.

[ShaunN]

Sorry, I just dropped in on this thread, but I think a lot of people are missing a crucial point here: as long as Western countries - specifically the US - keep killing innocent Muslims in countries around the world, the easier and easier it will be for Al Qaeda to recruit people like this young man. It doesn't take a lot of brain power to understand that the West is hardly the "good guy" in this present conflict. There is no "good guy" and the cycle of violence and retaliation is already too far along to be stopped. Besides, the US lost whatever moral claim it had to being a "victim" the day it attacked Iraq.

Glenn Greenwald at Salon has an excellent column about this:

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html?story=/opinion/greenwald/2009/12/29/terrorism

As he points out, understanding the causes is not the same as justification. If I were a young Muslim living in a Western country and I had any sense of association with my fellow Muslims, I would be enraged by Western hypocrisy on the question of killing innocent people. Heck, I'm not Muslim and I still find the hypocrisy sickening.

[king mob]

Sorry, I just dropped in on this thread, but I think a lot of people are missing a crucial point here: as long as Western countries - specifically the US - keep killing innocent Muslims in countries around the world, the easier and easier it will be for Al Qaeda to recruit people like this young man.

Completely but Obama isn't going to say that, and even though the British government has been told that our invovement in the invasion of Iraq is driving these sort of people to become radicalised, we won't admit such a thing in public. This is especially annoying as we saw the same happen during the Troubles but I guess that shows that government never learns.


It doesn't take a lot of brain power to understand that the West is hardly the "good guy" in this present conflict.

It's not, and to be fair I don't notice people playing the simplistic 'goodies V. baddies' in this thread, though it has popped up on CBR often in the past.

[the4thpip]

His mission was to burn his pants up?

Crazy Nigerians what will they think up next.

http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/picture-39.png

Well, they weren't very nice underpants, so it's not a great loss.

[worstblogever]

That' where the "appropriate caliber" comes in.

Air marshals use special highly frangible bullets with penetrate humans just fine but are very unlikely to go on to penetrate the hull of an aircraft.

Ah, that's smart, then. Truly, knowing is half the battle! Yo friggin' Joe.


http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/picture-39.png

Well, they weren't very nice underpants, so it's not a great loss.

Yeah, I doubt Calvin Klein or Victoria's Secret will be mass-producing those in the near future.

[the4thpip]

Who's running the TSA? No one, thanks to Sen. Jim DeMint (R)



WASHINGTON — An attempt to blow up a trans-Atlantic flight from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas Day would be all-consuming for the administrator of the Transportation Security Administration — if there were one.

The post remains vacant because Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., has held up President Barack Obama's nominee in opposition to the prospect of TSA workers joining a labor union.

As al Qaida claimed responsibility Monday for the thwarted attack and President Barack Obama made a public statement about it, Democrats urged DeMint to drop his objection and allow quick confirmation of nominee Erroll Southers, a counterterrorism expert, when the Senate reconvenes in three weeks.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/politics/story/81356.html

So, it seems like just like the war against gays in the military, the war against organized workers is also more important that fighting terrorists for Republicans.

[Thadeus Thunderwinkle]

Guys, I have a confession. When I woke up yesterday morning, I knew I was in the wrong for virtually all of my posts in this thread. You see, I was drunk as all hell which should explain why my posts were self-centered, confrontational, and irrational. It won't happen again. I just had to get that off my chest since it was nagging at me for a while. I apologize for my actions and have a good New Year's. Peace.

[Charles RB]

Who's running the TSA? No one, thanks to Sen. Jim DeMint (R)


http://www.mcclatchydc.com/politics/story/81356.html

So, it seems like just like the war against gays in the military, the war against organized workers is also more important that fighting terrorists for Republicans.

If the Democrats don't make big noise about this, THEY ARE IDIOTS.

Again.

[mikekerr3]

Guys, I have a confession. When I woke up yesterday morning, I knew I was in the wrong for virtually all of my posts in this thread. You see, I was drunk as all hell which should explain why my posts were self-centered, confrontational, and irrational. It won't happen again. I just had to get that off my chest since it was nagging at me for a while. I apologize for my actions and have a good New Year's. Peace.

Positing while drunk often leads to bad ends, for me its posting while morphined to Neverland:wink:

[the4thpip]

If the Democrats don't make big noise about this, THEY ARE IDIOTS.

Again.


Reid to push for vote on stalled TSA nominee
Senate Democrats will try to confirm a new head for the agency over the objections of Sen. Jim DeMint
By Alex Koppelman

Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., apparently plans to continue his hold on the nomination of Erroll Southers to head the Transportation Security Administration. But Senate Democrats want to take him on, and Majority Leader Harry Reid will reportedly schedule a cloture vote sometime shortly after the chamber returns from its holiday recess.

It's not too surprising that Reid would try to overcome DeMint's objections now. Beyond the obvious problems caused by the lack of someone permanently in charge at TSA, there's a political angle too -- after the attempted bombing of Flight 253 on Christmas, DeMint's fellow Republicans are likely to be uncomfortable about being seen to block Southers' confirmation.

The timing could be a little better for Reid, though. The recess means the incident won't still be on the front pages by the time of the cloture vote, which diminishes some of the power of the issue for him.

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2009/12/29/cloture_tsa/index.html

[Spike-X]

Guys, I have a confession. When I woke up yesterday morning, I knew I was in the wrong for virtually all of my posts in this thread. You see, I was drunk as all hell which should explain why my posts were self-centered, confrontational, and irrational. It won't happen again. I just had to get that off my chest since it was nagging at me for a while. I apologize for my actions and have a good New Year's. Peace.
Yeah, I figured you'd had a couple. Don't let it trouble ya! Apart from the other night, you've always been a hell of a decent bloke here at CBR.

[the4thpip]

If the Democrats don't make big noise about this, THEY ARE IDIOTS.

Again.


Who's running the TSA? No one, thanks to Sen. Jim DeMint (R)



http://www.mcclatchydc.com/politics/story/81356.html

So, it seems like just like the war against gays in the military, the war against organized workers is also more important that fighting terrorists for Republicans.

DeMint took flak over the weekend from a Democratic senator, Claire McCaskill, who declared that DeMint's opposition to his confirmation was "nuts."

"All it's doing is hurting the traveling public, because the most important front-line agency to protect Americans, right now, on flights, is being held up over political stuff."

Video here:
http://rawstory.com/2009//01/demint-blames-tsa-holdup-on-union-politics/

[Charles RB]

Thank you, McCaskill!

[CutterMike]

Guys, I have a confession. (...)

It happens -- Note my sig.

[the4thpip]

http://salon.com/ent/comics/this_modern_world/2010/01/04/this_modern_world/story.jpg

[the4thpip]

The rapid introduction of full body scanners at British airports threatens to breach child protection laws which ban the creation of indecent images of children.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jan/04/new-scanners-child-porn-laws

:tongue:

[Charles RB]

That is BRILLIANT.