Re: Explosive smuggling (@#%$@# deleted)
High-speed trains are almost as much fun to blow up as planes, and muckers can do that by blowing up the tracks without even having to get on the train. This just means that the era of centralized transportation is nearing its end. There are multiple possible choices for the future (most americans are already exercising one), but it seems inevitable that concentrated and therefore vulnerable transportation is doomed. Predictably, highly-structured and organized societies have developed their own cancer and it seems unlikely that anything can be done about it. One route that is being tried by many nation-states - dumbing down the average population to the point of practical illiteracy (making them subject to ruling by technology alone) and docile acceptance of ad hoc genital/rectal security checks - does not seem to work, since it reduces profits and foments rebellion. A suicide-oriented individual with a modest support can blow up any commercial aircraft or train. Or bus. Witness the futility of profiling - I predict that the next attempt will be made by chinese or a bushman or a white danish businessman working on behalf of a competing gov-enterprise. Time to start building my own super-light aircraft. = end (of original message) Y-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows: Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com
Explosive smuggling (@#%$@# deleted)
And the current monitoring systems... Do they work to detect the presence of explosives in the physiological duct? No, not at all. There were a few articles on that grim subject pretty recently. Bottom line: There is no technology available today that would work in a practical way to do this. They are working on some things that could do it, but they will all be slow and expensive and they may expose passengers to X-rays or neutrons or something in order to work. One side benefit of these things is they will also be effective against drug smuggling. The risk is very real; a woman could carry several pounds of explosives. They are aware of this but there isn't much they can do right now. The way I see it, there are currently three risks to air travel which are simply inherent in the current reality of the system. One is explosives or other weapons smuggled in the body. Two is the risk of the plane being taken down from an external weapon, like a missile or even a big machinegun on the ground. Three is the risk of pilot suicide. I don't see that there is a technological solution to any of these attacks, and they are all real. Weapons smuggled in the body: I'm not sure if this has ever happened yet, but tons of drugs make their way around the world at a steady 98.6, so this is a real possibility. A missile from the ground: Many shoulder-launched missiles go missing every year, including ones from the US military. Many have been given to the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan while they were fighting the Soviets. Certainly the Pakistani ISI, and the Iraqis and Lybians and North Koreans have easy access to these things. Even if a terrorist can't get a missile, I would imagine that a plain old 50 cal machinegun, somewhere in the approach path of the planes, would probably be able to do the job. Pilot suicide: It is accepted by everyone but the Egyptians that pilot suicide was the cause of the Egypt Air crash in 1999. It is accepted by everyone that the cause of the Silk Air crash in December of 1997 was pilot suicide. How common is pilot suicide? Those are the only two that I know of. We will end up doing many expensive and harmful things to achieve a goal (perfect air safety) which is impossible to achieve. Taking away nail clippers is not the answer.
Re: Explosive smuggling (@#%$@# deleted)
At 11:49 PM 12/26/01 -, Dr. Evil wrote: effective against drug smuggling. The risk is very real; a woman could carry several pounds of explosives. They are aware of this but there isn't much they can do right now. No one has yet mentioned surgically implanted explosives. You could carry more than a twat's worth. You'd need a mechanical or chemical trigger to avoid electronics-detection. Think: punch yourself 6 cm left of the scar, to push the plunger. A martyr is truly a great delivery mechanism. Was 'Reid' wearing Nikes? What does airport 'security' do about those sneakers that flash upon heelstrike?
Re: Explosive smuggling (@#%$@# deleted)
No one has yet mentioned surgically implanted explosives. You could carry more than a twat's worth. You'd need a mechanical or chemical trigger to avoid electronics-detection. Think: punch yourself 6 cm left of the scar, to push the plunger. Yeah, there have definitely been cases of surgically implanted drug smuggling, so surigcal explosives wouldn't be surprising either. A good plastic (haha) surgeon might be able to implant 10lbs or more, easily enough to bring down a plane. Breast implants would be the obvious place to put it, because they certainly can't open up every woman who wants to get on a plane with augmentation so what can you do? Even if they CAT scanned every passenger, and breast implants showed up on the scan, what could they do about it? We're going to have to cut you open and take a sample of that breast material. This is starting to sound like an Austin Powers sequel... Except unfortunately this could be a grim reality, not a joke. I remember reading about a drug smuggler who was stopped because his legs were unusual looking. They opened them up and found out that the purpose of his trip was business. The solution to this problem might be greater use of high-speed trains, video conferencing, and other things to make air travel less necessary. What does airport 'security' do about those sneakers that flash upon heelstrike? They should be seized and destroyed by the fashion cops.
Re: Explosive smuggling (@#%$@# deleted)
At 01:53 AM 12/27/2001 +, Dr. Evil wrote: The solution to this problem might be greater use of high-speed trains, video conferencing, and other things to make air travel less necessary. High-speed trains are almost as much fun to blow up as planes, and muckers can do that by blowing up the tracks without even having to get on the train. Back when I was living in New Jersey and commuting to DC, I usually took the train instead of the plane - it took about 15 minutes longer, but was much nicer (I lived closer to the train station, and most places I went in DC were closer to the train than the airport, which made up for the Metroliner being a bit slower.) Now that they're adding an hour or two to the plane trip, even the slow trains would be a slam dunk, and they've now added an even faster train (though I'm not sure if it stops in Central Jersey or just Newark.) Here in California, if I'm going to Burbank it's still an hour or so faster to fly than drive, but getting more ridiculous, though for Orange County or LAX it's still a lot faster to drive. But at least you can drive down the Grapevine without them demanding that you take off your shoes, jacket, hat, pager, cellphone, wallet, computer, wristwatch, screwdrivers, pocket knife, nail files, scissors, car keys, and golf clubs and unwrap all your Christmas presents.
Re: Explosive smuggling (@#%$@# deleted)
On Wednesday, December 26, 2001, at 05:44 PM, David Honig wrote: Was 'Reid' wearing Nikes? As Osama told him, Just do it! What does airport 'security' do about those sneakers that flash upon heelstrike? An ideal detonation device. Walk softly and carry a big stick. Click your heels three times and you'll be home. Toto, I don't think we're over Kansas anymore. Me, I haven't been on a plane in over two years. And given the dangers and the police state measures, I don't expect to be traveling by air any time in the next few years. A good thing most places I want to travel to I can get to by car. --Tim May Extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice.--Barry Goldwater
