Man Shot Dead On American Airlines Plane

[Phil B]

Zzap I dont know what world you live in but it sure isnt the same one I live in.  There are more terrorists in south east asia then anywhere in the world. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Different ways of looking at the same thing.

Look in the southern prov. of Thailand. southern Philippines, Napal, Sri Lanka, Indonesia and the list goes on.  By defination these are terrorists. 

In each of these countries, the political situation is different, though there are links between certain groups in Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia.

Do you have a figure as to how many 'terrorists' there are (I mean active ones, not people who might sympathise with their goals) how this compares to the total population, and how many of those may be likely to try and get a bomb onto an airplane?

I am not saying that there is no danger, or that it doesn't need to be dealt with, but I believe the risks are much lower than certain political interests and the sensationalist media make us believe.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As far as numbers go I would only be guessing because a terrorist can be your neighbor and you wouldnt know untill he/she blew themselves up. I by no means think you should start looking at your neighbors for certian signs. One of their bests tools is anonymity.

I agree whole heartly about the media. We will never know the whole story. Each media station weither it is CNN, BBC, FOX or any number of news stations always spin the stories to fit their political affiliation.

Yes the political situations are different, but the end results are the same. Keep in mind some of my coments are general in nature, do I think the terrorists in indonesia will put a bomb on a plane ... no. As long as the threat is there they make us change our ways and they win.

[Thug]

I'm sure this man was nowhere near a terrorist, yet another mistake made by the state.

Who can we blame?

[lomatopo]

I fly all over yankland and let me tell you there is no uniform standard. (inluding going through customs) It's rather sad actually. Some want electronics out, some don't care, some want shoes off and some dont care.. some want your coat off some dont care. My point being is the ones that don't care are where the bloody risk is. Its a bad assumption on a marshal's part that well no way potential terrorists could get through security. His job is to assume they did make it through security.

I’ve flown ~ 65 domestic segments (departing or arriving or both) within the U.S. in the last two years. In my experience TSA security checkpoints have been uniformly standard.

Notebook PC’s always come out, and get put in a plastic tub to go through the x-ray machine.. AFAIK no other electronics need to be removed from carry-on luggage. I’ve traveled with mobile phones, USB HDD, MP3 player, noise-cancelling headphones and these always remained in my roll-a-board or briefcase.

Shoes are a separate matter, you do not have to remove them, however if choose not to and the walk-through x-ray machine gets triggered then you will be subject to a secondary screening. And your shoes may ultimately get x-rayed anyway. All experienced travelers remove their shoes.

Any coat over a shirt (suit coat, jacket, parka, etc.) does have to get x-rayed. This was implemented back in Sep. 2004, as far as I can remember.

In retrospect I do agree that if a passenger says they have a bomb then the FAM should assume they do. There are other ways to get a bomb on board a plane other than carrying it through a TSA check-point. How they choose to handle the situation after that is up to them as a result of their experience and training.

Since 911 I've heard countless stories of people bringing weapons, ammo and all sorts of prohibited items on planes, so saying it doesnt happen is not true. Now if you compare Europe - its for the most part a bloody fortress - last trip out of frankfurt I got screened 3x before I boarded my flight. Took another flight out of Munich same 3X screening before I boarded and every thing was uniform.

Have you heard of countless stories of people bringing bombs on-board? If so, please share one or two. That is what we are discussing here in this thread. Note that Richard Reid, the shoe bomber, originated at LHR and was not subject to a TSA check.

I’ve flown BKK-MUC-BKK (LH) three times and BKK-FRA-IAD (TG/LH) four times in the past two years. For flight departing BKK for Germany I have only experienced a single screening at BKK. Carry-on bags are x-rayed at the entrance to the pier, and there is a walk-through x-ray machine. There is no direction or requirement for shoes or coats to come off, nor do notebooks or electronics come out of the bag. As mentioned I have a belt that cannot be worn through he walk-through x-ray machine in the U.S. without setting it off. It has never set-off the walk-through x-ray machines in BKK, FRA, MUC, KUL, SIN, NRT.

For flights departing Germany for the U.S. I have been subject to a single screening. A walk-through x-ray machine and carry-ons get x-rayed in a separate machine. Shoes, coats, electronics remain on or stowed. Note that I am a connecting passenger.

For flights departing Germany for BKK either as a connecting or originating passenger, I have only been subjected to a single screening. Again, a walk-through x-ray machine, separate x-ray machine for carry-ons, and shoes, coats and electronics remain on or stowed.

Intra-Asia travel (BKK-SIN/KUL/NRT) is always limited to a single screening, for me anyway.

Since our experiences are so different that would suggest something less than uniformity. However you may be profiled in such a way that you require additional screenings. Or perhaps your name is similar to someone on a no-fly list?

Honestly you think the yank screeners you've encountered could detect a bomb? Training and skills are lacking - there about as close as you can get to a mcdonalds employee.

I honestly think that TSA security check-points are relatively secure for bomb threats. Many security people seem to believe that a bomb would make its way onto a plane via an airside employee or as part of cargo (not checked bag), and not by a passenger. Yes, a passenger would then use/detonate the bomb after having retrieved it on-board the aircraft. I doubt said bomber would likely run down the aisle screaming he had a bomb, and if he freaked out, wouldn’t he just leave the bomb behind as he tried to exit the aircraft?

Not sure what you mean by “there (sic) about as close as you can get to a mcdonalds employee”? Are you saying that McDonalds employees are not skilled (at what they do) or well-trained? Are you saying that they are somehow inferior (to you)? Are you saying that anyone who might have an opinion different than your own is somehow like a McDonalds employee? Whatever that might mean?

Canada uses them, as well as Australia, Singapore, and others. Security outside the US can be very stringent, as can it be lacking in the US occasionally.

Yes, you are correct, and I was incorrect. I did not realize so many other countries utilized state-sponsored security forces for flights. I was surprised to see how many do. I assume that this was a result of 9/11/ I know that the U.S. had ~ 35 FAMs prior to 9/11, and now there are estimates ranging from 1,500 ~ 3,000. Note that the FAM program has been bounced around from agency to agency something like four times, and morale within the FAM program has been described, by a FAM representative, as being low as of a few months ago. (I can’t find the quote.)

I did find out that Germany has a FAM program. And I did read the following, but cannot provide a link to the original source,

“German press is reporting that German FAMs are trained much more extensively in pyschology than are U.S. FAMs. Josef Scheuring, representative of the German Federal Police (Bundesgrenzschutz (BGS)) and a board member in the German Police Union (Gewerkschaft der Polizei - GdP) says, from what they know of the shooting, had German FAMs been confronted with this situation, shots most likely would not have been fired, due to their more extensive training.”

Let the German-bashing commence.

Easy to say when you weren't there. I suppose if you'd been behind Mohammed Atta at the security check you'd have protested him being pulled aside by security.

I do find it ironic that it is ok for you to say my opinion means nothing as I as not there, yet you make an inference to a situation where you were clearly not present.

Your suppositions about my potential behavior in a fictional scenario are beyond comprehension. This does sound like some sort of personal attack. Are those allowed on TV? Or just by Moderators? An apology is expected.

I’ve seen hundreds of people get pulled aside for secondary screening at TSA check-points in the last four years. I have never once felt the slightest urge to involve myself in other people’s jobs or their business.

Note that as a BOS-based UA flyer, were I to have been flying that day I would have been clearing security, as it was then, in terminal C with the hijackers of UA 175, and not in terminal B where Mohammed Atta cleared security prior to boarding AA 11. I was scheduled to fly two days later on a UA flight to SFO. I didn’t fly again until 9/22 (BOS-SFO-NRT-SIN), and departure from BOS was sobering. I got to see many UA employees whom I have ecountered dozens of times. They were very, very sad, and emotional. All I could get out was “I’m sorry”.

That being said if you cannot debate by presenting facts and must resort to calling people idiots, find somewhere else to post.

Note that there is huge difference between saying that what someone said is idiotic, and saying that the person who said something is an idiot. I clearly did the former, and not the later but this subtly may be lost on you?

I have read and reread your posts in this thread and have not seen a lot of facts (any?) presented by you. Nor have you heeded your own advice by refraining from personal attacks.

I’d say that if TV had rules requiring open debate, the presentation of only facts and the complete lack of personal insult and innuendo then there would likely be but a handful of active, posting members. Would cdnvic be one of those?

[dr_Pat_Pong]

Personal insult. LOL Take as ye shall give. YOU are a rude one lomawhatever

[dr_Pat_Pong]

BTW you are on watch now

[cwilliam]

I believe the Marshalls have been suspended (with pay) from duty. A number of unanswered questions here. Interesting, BUT Thai related???

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The suspension is just policy.Suspended with pay,give me 5 yrs.