12/30: Reid capture in progress

[Undertoad]

It's not a great shot, but what you're looking at is a passenger's camera shot of approximately eight passengers tying up Richard Reid after he tried to blow up his shoes.

It's what you might think - evidence of the deputization of every able-bodied person in air security. Think he could have gotten away if he wasn't tied down with belts and injected with Valium? No way. A third of the passengers would have held the guy down, made him one with the aisle carpeting if needed.

Deservedly so.

We don't even really need these new security procedures now - passengers are willing to hand out a beat down on a plane after 9/11. I know that if I were in that position before 11-9 (hi tw!), and the hijackers said they had a bomb, I probably wouldn't have done anything. But as it is now, I'd be the first to charge down that aisle and inflict whater damage on them I could. I know I'm not alone either.

[tw]

Originally posted by Undertoad
... evidence of the deputization of every able-bodied person in air security.

Where are those Air Marshalls so touted by the White House? Some unreported facts. First were rumors to be only about 50 Air Marshalls when the program was reinstated in September. Typically, two or more per flight. But then the President wanted you to think it was safe to open National (Reagan) Airport. In reality, reopening was to appease Trent Lott, Orin Hatch, Jesse Helms, etc who did not want to drive to BWI or Dulles International (or take Amtrak). So the Pres said every flight in or out of National would have Air Marshalls. Perfect spin doctor trick. How many such guards are left for any other airport? Zero. Lying by telling half truths. National was opened at the expense of security on every other flight. A flight from Newark to CA will never have any security because George Jr got National Airport reopened - to appease rich, lazy Congressman.

There is no such security on flights from other airports because there is only enough security agents for flights that might contain top Congressional leaders. All in-flight security is reserved for National Airport so that Congress can have their precious National (Reagan) airport. Heaven forbid that a Congressman should travel like a common American from BWI or Dulles.

And so yes, passengers must get involved since they are and will be the only security on planes that don't carry Congressman. Had we been told the truth, then more than just terrorists would know which airports are best to fly from. This thanks to the reopening of National - which leaves no security for any other airport. Screw airline security since all security must be on flights only to and from National. After all, those are the flights that Congress - top Congressional leaders who support George Jr - only worry about.

BTW, this and more pictures are available at http://www.nytimes.com .

Heh. Where do you get this shit, man? Salon?

There was a case, not too long ago, of a guy getting up and heading toward the bathroom during the final 30 minutes of flight. 2 Air Marshals were on his ass like white on rice.

Also, I notice you list names of Congressmen - and end with an "etc", like there's more - well, then who? More Republicans, I assume - I bet Chuck Schumer or Dianne Feinstein or Barbara Mikulski or Tom Daschle would <b>never</b> take place in a nefarious plot like that - man, it must just be that only Republicans would do such a thing.

Come on. I guarantee you that Air Marshals are on at least 1 in 5 flights into the district area - BWI, Dulles or National, and probably just as many leaving. Not everything is some wild conspiracy, as much as we'd all like to believe it. I seriously doubt National was opened because fatcat senators were too lazy to drive an extra 10 minutes to Dulles, and I'll continue to doubt that until you can show some proof. I'm a fan of your writings, tw, but this is one of the silliest things I've read in a long time.

[edited to correct the spelling of Daschle's last name - I left the L out before]

[tw]

Originally posted by dhamsaic
There was a case, not too long ago, of a guy getting up and heading toward the bathroom during the final 30 minutes of flight. 2 Air Marshals were on his ass like white on rice.

There were not enough air marshalls to even cover every National flight - a rumor considered so reliable as to be reported by national news services and one reason why National could not return to a full schedule. How many have been added since then is unknown. However the numbers in October were 'yelling' an obvious fact. Since every incoming and outgoing National flight must have air marshalls, and since there were so few trained to be air marshalls, then opening of National would consume all available security. It still consumes most air marshalls.

It takes time to train even professional law enforcement people for the unique requirements of a plane. It takes time to ramp up. Since National now has so many flights and since every one must have air marshalls - a specific condition for the reopening of National - then who is left for Minneapolis, Boise, Sacremento, Houston, and Phoenix flights?

Congressman have reserved, secure, valet, free parking in National. They don't use BWI or Dulles unless absolutely essential. That is why National was reopened. Every major security agency in the DC area strongly demanded National closed permenantly. Only Congress has power to veto such demands. Listed were Congressman historically more interested in their own self serving interests than in those of the nation. Robert Byrd could have been added to this list if it would make one feel better. But the bottom line remains - if not flying to or from National, then it is extremely unlikely your flight will have air marshalls.

Had National remained closed, then the probability of in-flight security would have been increased by hundreds of percents.

[Scopulus Argentarius]

Originally posted by dhamsaic
Deservedly so.

We don't even really need these new security procedures now - passengers are willing to hand out a beat down on a plane after 9/11. I know that if I were in that position before 11-9 (hi tw!), and the hijackers said they had a bomb, I probably wouldn't have done anything. But as it is now, I'd be the first to charge down that aisle and inflict whater damage on them I could. I know I'm not alone either.

Imagine if the passengers had known for sure that the guy was a terrorist and not just some whacked out passenger...

[Nic Name]

SWEATY feet and the unwitting action of nearby passengers prevented Richard Reid, the alleged British shoe bomber, from blowing up an airliner, according to sources close to the investigation.

And, is it possible that this foiled plan, was the second shoe bombing of a commercial airliner? I never did like the "official" non-explanation of the downing of Flight 587 in Queens, New York.

Well, it was better than the goddamn speculation that every retard and their friend was tossing out. I got to hear people say "Well I think it was a suitcase bomb that someone snuck on." And you're qualified to that opinion how? "Well, it just looks like it." Oh. Since you haven't seen close-up pictures of the actual damage, right?

At least that whole mechanical failure bullshit shut up the conspiracy idiots.

[bluebomber]

Originally posted by dhamsaic
Well, it was better than the goddamn speculation that every retard and their friend was tossing out. I got to hear people say "Well I think it was a suitcase bomb that someone snuck on."

I am a fully qualified conspiracy theorist. My qualifications are that I am paranoid delusional. Anway, what really happened is that 587 was brought down the same way 800 was brought down: a shoulder-launched surface to air missile. Of course, this may simply be another delusion.

[Nic Name]

wasn't me

[jeni]

when i went through the metal detectors before going to my gate at BWI last tuesday, they made me take off my shoes because the metal detector went off. i don't know why, because it didn't go off at san jose and i was wearing the same shoes, and nothing metal besides. i guess there are metal supports in my shoes or something, but i still find it funny that the detectors at SJC didn't reflect that.

[tw]

Originally posted by jeni
when i went through the metal detectors before going to my gate at BWI last tuesday, they made me take off my shoes because the metal detector went off. i don't know why, because it didn't go off at san jose and i was wearing the same shoes, and nothing metal besides. ... but i still find it funny that the detectors at SJC didn't reflect that.

You have assumed a standard exists. It did not even exist in the early 1980s. Some airports would detect everything. Others never detected keys, change, swiss army knife, or belt buckle as long as they were not together.

Security alerts were noted by increased sensitivity of the machines in too many airports. It surprised me that Newark metal detectors were always set more sensitive than many other airports. But now we know that security was so lax in some locations. Management would even take the test for potential security employees who could not otherwise pass. Since those scanner settings were adjustable by employees, well, we can both speculate from there.

BTW, county courthouse metal detectors always detected everything. However when visiting a county prison, I was turned back after the scanners because I was carrying my book. When I went back to have the security tower hold my book, I suddenly realized that I had a swiss army knife in my pocket that metal detectors never sensed both going in and coming back. Next time I visited the prison, security sensor sensitivity was detecting everyone. Again, security is only a function of how much the guard wants to check for that day. Sensitivity is adjusted by local people - not set by a national standard.

But then again we are returning to the complaints of the FAAs own Inspector General. Even she could not get the attention of an organization famous for its graveyard mentality. And so today, there is still not standards for scanner sensitivity for the FAA? What else is new?

[Nic Name]

Judge: "Mr. Reid, state your full name and email address."

Reid: "Richard C. Reid, and you can email me at: shoe-bomber@hotmail.C0M"

Judge: "Is that the same email address found on your home computer?"

Reid: "Actually, it is web-based, so I can access my email account from wherever I am in the world,
like when I am put up by AA at an airport hotel and I want to say goodbye to my mother."

Judge: "Cool. How do you plead?"

Reid: "Not Guilty."

[matt]

Originally posted by Scopulus Argentarius
Imagine if the passengers had known for sure that the guy was a terrorist and not just some whacked out passenger...

After hog-tying him with belts and shooting him up with valium, the passengers would have gotten to line up and take turns pounding the shit out of him.

"Not fit to stand trial" would be an understatement.