New Wave Outpost Forum

Things We've Learned From The Christmas Airliner Attack:


You can be on a terror watch list and not have your visa revoked.

Having a third party pay in cash for your ticket from Nigeria to Amsterdam to Detroit with no luggage, does not raise suspicion.

A prominent Nigerian banker/politician warning the American embassy about the threat posed by his own "radicalized" son does not raise any red flags.

Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security defines having a terrorist smuggle explosives onto a commercial US airliner and detonate them as "the system working".

A SEVEN-year-old Minnesota boy who has been on a terrorist watch list since he was two has not yet tried to blow up an airliner- I guess the system DID work.

If you travel, expect LONGER delays and more stringent restrictions. No blankets in your lap, no video viewing or bathroom usage or leaving your seat 1 hour before landing, less carry on luggage.

Al-Qaeda may have sent this idiot out as a test. Emboldened by the apparent ease at which explosives can be smuggled onto an airliner, the next one they send may not be so inept. Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab claimed that he is one from a production line of terrorists that has been trained in Yemen by al-Qaeda.

We're no safer from terrorist attacks involving airliners than before 911.

The same people in charge of US airline security, the Hurricane Katrina relief effort in New Orleans and banking legislation that helped bring about the crash of 2009 now want to reform your health care system.





<a href="http://www.djcraig.net/los_angeles_dj">DJ Craig</a>

Well sure, but at least we didn't offend anyone by "profiling". That's what's truly important. A few planes? Lives? Whatever. Acceptable loss. Yay America!

but we did offend someone yesterday here:
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/ ... s1228.html


"....The passenger told authorities the two men, described as being Middle Eastern, were speaking "loudly" in their native language.

The passenger then saw a suicide bomber on the DVD version of the movie "The Kingdom," and one of the men reportedly got up to use the lavatory when the fasten-seatbelt sign was lit.

"The totality of those three occurrences led this passenger to believe this was suspicious," Johnson said. "

[quote]Originally posted by djcraig[br]The same people in charge of US airline security, the Hurricane Katrina relief effort in New Orleans and banking legislation that helped bring about the crash of 2009 now want to reform your health care system.[/quote] Right on. The government should not be in charge of enforcing industry regulations, providing emergency/rescue services, or transportation security. The free-market can provide all that, maybe even have a lot of competing firms that cut corners, offer a dizzying number of tiered plans like a cellular or long-distance calling plan, or provide quality services only to the highest bidders. Have fun living on that planet.

(<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091228/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_airliner_attack" target="_new">Also</a>: Napolitano conceded Monday that the aviation security system failed, backtracking from a statement Sunday in which she said the airline security system worked.)

[b]BBC: Welcome to the Private Police Force[/b]
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vLfghLQE3F4&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Coupl'a other points:
<a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/12/odds-of-airborne-terror.html" target="_new">The Odds of Airborne Terror</a> "...you could board 20 flights per year and still be less likely to be the subject of an attempted terrorist attack than to be struck by lightning."

<a href="http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/12/separating_expl.html" target="_new">Security expert Bruce Schneier</a>: "Only two things have made flying safer [since 9/11]: the reinforcement of cockpit doors, and the fact that passengers know now to resist hijackers." Almost every other measure is just for show. The TSA No-fly list has roughly 1 million people on it, and has probably blocked more peace activists from flying than actual terrorists.

Weve also learned that too be a successful terrorist you light the explosives--not your dick.[}:)][:D]

On a lighter note:

<div style='background-color:#e9e9e9; width: 425px;'><object id='A64060' quality='high' data='http://aka.zero.jibjab.com/client/zero/ClientZero_EmbedViewer.swf?templateID=203931&service=sendables.jibjab.com&partnerID=JibJab' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' wmode='transparent' height='319' width='425'><param name='wmode' value='transparent'></param><param name='movie' value='http://aka.zero.jibjab.com/client/zero/ClientZero_EmbedViewer.swf?templateID=203931&service=sendables.jibjab.com&partnerID=JibJab'></param><param name='scaleMode' value='showAll'></param><param name='quality' value='high'></param><param name='allowNetworking' value='all'></param><param name='allowFullScreen' value='true' /><param name='FlashVars' value='templateID=203931&service=sendables.jibjab.com&partnerID=JibJab'></param><param name='allowScriptAccess' value='always'></param></object><div style='text-align:center; width:435px; margin-top:6px;'>Try JibJab Sendables® <a href='http://sendables.jibjab.com/ecards'>eCards</a> today!</div></div>

[quote][i]Originally posted by SallyLightfoot[/i]

Right on. The government should not be in charge of enforcing industry regulations, providing emergency/rescue services, or transportation security. The free-market can provide all that, maybe even have a lot of competing firms that cut corners, offer a dizzying number of tiered plans like a cellular or long-distance calling plan, or provide quality services only to the highest bidders. Have fun living on that planet.
[/quote]

Way to retard and obfuscate the point. But since you brought it up, the inherent interest in doing a job right when there is a profit motive involved (and perhaps some sense of accountability) increases exponentially. If I had to pick between UPS and The US Post Office to be in charge of efficiently handling all of my country's deliverables, that would be an easy choice.

The retired postal workers could always get jobs in airport security.




<a href="http://www.djcraig.net/los_angeles_dj">DJ Craig</a>

[quote][i]Originally posted by djcraig[/i]<br>Way to retard and obfuscate the point. But since you brought it up, the inherent interest in doing a job right when there is a profit motive involved (and perhaps some sense of accountability) increases exponentially.[/quote]No, you were venting aimlessly about the government being poor at security, as well as disaster relief, regulation, health care and whatever else. You cynically bitched about a group of complex problems without explaining what the possible solutions might be. You were even too lazy to state explicitly that switching over to a free-market approach is a solution, but it was implied.

You believe a profit motive improves everything exponentially. While you're smoking rock, let's reflect on that for a minute. If that's true, why don't we let the free-market airlines provide their own security and jack up ticket prices accordingly? Why bind them with a one-size-fits-all security approach at all? Each airline could have its own set of rules and regulations, so maybe you don't have to take your shoes off when you go through Continental's metal detector, and maybe when you fly Delta, the passengers can carry guns on board (for private citizen terrorist deterrence, of course [:D]). Maybe American airlines can be more competitive by requiring you to ship your luggage to your destination on your own, in advance. Maybe if you want to fly super-safe, you fly SouthWest-- but they require a super-thorough cavity search before check-in. Let consumers decide for themselves what they are willing to pay for security, right? Get the government out of airport security [i]entirely[/i]-- this is great free-market stuff here.

Or, we could do away with mass air-transit altogether, and promote the use of smaller, corporate jets. Flying could once again be primarily for the rich, and those of us who can afford it can get ferried around like CEOs. Sure, it would create more sky congestion, would be very expensive, less efficient, and not available to all, but then [i][b]these same results are so fucking great in the private health care market[/b][/i] that we'd be foolish not to apply these free-market bromides here.

[quote][i]Originally posted by djcraig[/i]<br>If I had to pick between UPS and The US Post Office to be in charge of efficiently handling all of my country's deliverables, that would be an easy choice.[/quote]Yes, dream big, free-market brother. But should your "easy choice" really be UPS, [i]one of the largest unionized companies in the country[/i]? The free-market dude does not abide.

Shit, never knew this was the Right Wing new wave outpost!

[:D]

Wasn't "Katrina" a Bush fuck-up? Lying ass bastards.(not you, them)

But, still, having to take my shoes off at the airport last month REALLY pissed me off!

What should *we* do? Where do we start?

"Change - Just ignore them and they'll go away"

Katrina was a natural disaster, Levees breaking was an Army Corp fuck up, lamest excuse for disaster relief was a Bush fuck up, making New Orleans look like shit was a Ray Nagin fuck up....LOL

I say flying on an airliner is a privilege, like driving a car, not a right. I kinda look at flying as public transportation, you give up alot of rights(like privacy) when you fly. The TSA is a total waste and I think the airlines should be responsible for the safety on THEIR planes. If an airlines could promise you that you'd be perfectly safe(from terrorist) on their planes they could make a ton of cash charging premium dollars for safety. The airlines would do the passenger checks physical or otherwise(background) that they would require to assure safety onboard their planes. I only fly about 4-6 times a year and really don't mind the hassle and if they would want me to walk thru a body scanner I wouldn't have a problem with it, IF it made the plane completely safe from terrorist. End Rant.

~~~~~~Always remember you are unique....just like everyone else.~~~~~~

good t-shirt idea:

"I flew to Detroit for Christmas and all I got were second-degree burns on my junk".

Prepare to be exposed to more radiation from those new airport body scanners..I feel so safe[8D].

Time to really crank up racial profiling for flights. If those that fall under that umbrella don't like it, then don't fly.

[quote][i]Originally posted by SallyLightfoot[/i]
<br>[quote][i]Originally posted by djcraig[/i]<br>Way to retard and obfuscate the point. But since you brought it up, the inherent interest in doing a job right when there is a profit motive involved (and perhaps some sense of accountability) increases exponentially.[/quote]No, you were venting aimlessly about the government being poor at security, as well as disaster relief, regulation, health care and whatever else. You cynically bitched about a group of complex problems without explaining what the possible solutions might be. You were even too lazy to state explicitly that switching over to a free-market approach is a solution, but it was implied.

You believe a profit motive improves everything exponentially. While you're smoking rock, let's reflect on that for a minute. If that's true, why don't we let the free-market airlines provide their own security and jack up ticket prices accordingly? Why bind them with a one-size-fits-all security approach at all? Each airline could have its own set of rules and regulations, so maybe you don't have to take your shoes off when you go through Continental's metal detector, and maybe when you fly Delta, the passengers can carry guns on board (for private citizen terrorist deterrence, of course [:D]). Maybe American airlines can be more competitive by requiring you to ship your luggage to your destination on your own, in advance. Maybe if you want to fly super-safe, you fly SouthWest-- but they require a super-thorough cavity search before check-in. Let consumers decide for themselves what they are willing to pay for security, right? Get the government out of airport security [i]entirely[/i]-- this is great free-market stuff here.

Or, we could do away with mass air-transit altogether, and promote the use of smaller, corporate jets. Flying could once again be primarily for the rich, and those of us who can afford it can get ferried around like CEOs. Sure, it would create more sky congestion, would be very expensive, less efficient, and not available to all, but then [i][b]these same results are so fucking great in the private health care market[/b][/i] that we'd be foolish not to apply these free-market bromides here.

[quote][i]Originally posted by djcraig[/i]<br>If I had to pick between UPS and The US Post Office to be in charge of efficiently handling all of my country's deliverables, that would be an easy choice.[/quote]Yes, dream big, free-market brother. But should your "easy choice" really be UPS, [i]one of the largest unionized companies in the country[/i]? The free-market dude does not abide.
[/quote]

I like how you read in, interpret and infer whatever you like- quite an imagination. I guess that's a requirement for rigid, black/white, polarized thinking...

So your choice between two unionized entities is to go with the less efficient, less profitable one. I like it.

BTW ask Chrysler and the other automakers how that union thing worked out for them.

While were at it, let's unionize airline security and make it so borderline retards cannot be turned away from employment there. In fact, in the interest of fairness and creating a level playing field, let's create a quota system so a certain number of non-qualifying individuals can be subsidized and put in charge of stopping the next attempted bomber. Enjoy your next flight, comrade.

Far be it for me to divine the magic solution but I do know what doesn't work. Spewing out "the answer" so people don't have to do any individual thinking is the job of an authoritarian government, supported by those who fear that the success of others is always at the cost of someone else.




<a href="http://www.djcraig.net/los_angeles_dj">DJ Craig</a>

<p align="justify">Dude, bringing in the USPS into a discussion about the joys of privatepartization of our profit-for-care and crappy security isn't very good. I pay 40 cent to have something put on an airplane and flown to the other side (anywhere) of the country - and it gets there in three days. Sure, their system is also riddled with wasteful and corrupt spending, but it's one of the few govt. services people should be very cool with. Shit would hit the fan if lowlife scum made the mail a no-bidding contract the way it was done for the subhumans at blackwater and halliburton. The invasion of Iraq and the war in Afghanistan are now privatised wars - and they both failedwhaled every step of the way at a monetary cost that'll skyrocket this country into a third world dump faster than the overpopulation of mexicants will (which it will also do)[}:)]


________________________
<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v465/Nuwavghost/dij.gif">