Terror attack foiled on Northwest Airlines flight

[Razgovory]

Blame the Dutch.

[HisMajestyBOB]

Anyway, I love how this thing works. Take the idea about the flight map, for example - not only this is completely retarded, but it completely fails to prevent a situation like the one - where a know AQ-linked suspect, who was ratted on by his own father, carries a fucking bomb on board of a plane. A case like this should have been easily prevented not only with the safety measures put in place following 911, but actually in the most lax and devil-may-care security systems in place - but it wasn't just showing how incompetent and falling the system in place is.

So what the response is? Making even more idiotic rules that in no way address the security risk that just happened, but the control freaks running this shit hope will get through because the mob is scared and thus can be persuaded with more crap.

Jesus christ. I hate humanity so much.

This way, though, the idiots at TSA and Homeland Security, among others, can claim to be doing things instead of being (rightfully) blamed for being incompetent idiots. It's an exercise in CYA.

[CountDeMoney]

Why we'll never have to worry about planes smacking into buildings anymore.

Following lesson of United 93, air travelers are quick to react on their own to threats aloft

DETROIT (AP) — They heard a pop that sounded like fireworks. They saw a glow of flame followed by a rush of smoke. And that was enough for passengers on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 to pounce.

From several seats away, Dutch tourist Jasper Schuringa says he jumped to extinguish a fire ignited by a quiet man who just moments before allegedly told passengers his stomach was upset and pulled a blanket over himself. Schuringa said his first thought wasn't to signal a flight attendant or wait for an air marshal to break cover, but rather, "He's trying to blow up the plane."

"I basically reacted directly," Schuringa said Saturday in an interview with CNN. "I didn't think. I just jumped. I just went over there and tried to save the plane."

Aviation safety experts once would have called Schuringa's actions a mistake and cautioned passengers against fighting back during hijackings and other crises in the air. That was before the Sept. 11 attacks and the actions of passengers on United Flight 93, who learned while aloft about the hijacked jets that slammed earlier that day into New York's World Trade Center.

They staged a cabin revolt against the al-Qaida terrorists who had taken control of their flight and died when their plane crashed into a field in Shanksville, Pa. But they succeeded in keeping the jet from destroying another building that day, and their story became legend.

"I don't think people are going to sit back and let somebody kill them in the process of fulfilling their extremist agenda or whatever it happens to be," said Dave Heffernan, who helps oversee self-defense training for commercial flight crews at Valenica Community College in Orlando, Fla. "People have talked about it. They've thought about it. They have a plan of action."

On Saturday, a day after the failed attack on Northwest 253, federal prosecutors charged Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 23, a native of Nigeria, with trying to destroy the airliner with a device containing a high explosive attached to his body. They alleged that Abdulmutallab set off the device — sparking a fire instead of an explosion — as the flight from Amsterdam descended toward Detroit Metropolitan Airport.

Schuringa, of Amsterdam, told CNN that he didn't think about his own safety when he extinguished the fire with his hands. He and other passengers said that several people on board, including members of the flight crew, then joined him in taking Abdulmutallab to first class to strip off his clothes and search for any more explosives.

Schuringa did not immediately reply to e-mail and phone messages from The Associated Press.

"In a matter of minutes everything was settled down. ... The passengers were proactive. We just did it. There was nothing to talk about," said Syed Jafry, 57.

Another passenger, Richelle Keepman, 24, of Oconomowoc, Wis., said passengers were later interviewed by authorities and released from the airport. When Schuringa came through the area, "We were all clapping," she said.

Schuringa joins the passengers on United 93 and others who have leapt into action to defend themselves aloft since 9/11. Just three months after the attacks, Briton Richard Reid was overpowered by passengers and crew members on a flight from Paris to Miami as he tried to ignite plastic explosives hidden in his shoes. A doctor onboard went so far as to inject the restrained Reid with a sedative.

Passengers aren't only responding to obvious acts of terror. In June, two off-duty officers handcuffed a traveler who took off his clothes and kicked and punched a flight attendant on a US Airways flight to Los Angeles from Charlotte, N.C. In April 2008, passengers duct-taped a drunken man to his seat after he attacked a United Airlines flight attendant on a trip to Los Angeles from Hong Kong.

"Aggressive intervention has become the new societal norm," said Bill Voss, an expert at the Flight Safety Foundation in Alexandria, Va.

The day after the attack, authorities at airports worldwide tightened security, imposing extra searches on the ground and telling passengers flying to the U.S. from overseas they can't get out of their seat during the last hour of their flight. None seemed to mind, and many said they knew the story of United 93 and would respond aggressively if the new security measures failed.

"I know how to tackle," said Stephen Evans, 39, a former rugby player traveling from Chicago to Dulles International Airport near Washington. "Your odds are better to get the guy and risk an explosion on the plane rather than fly into Washington's Monument or what have you."

Jennifer Allen, 41, of Shelby Township, Mich., arrived in Detroit from Amsterdam on Saturday's Northwest 253.

"We're not so blase, not so willing to accept that we're safe and we can let someone do our security for us," she said. "We're not going to sit there and wait for somebody else to do it because if you wait, it might be too late."

[Bluebook]

Sometimes I think we will lose this battle (despite our pathetic opponents); our responses are so unintelligent and pusillanimous 

How do you lose the war on terror? Or, for that matter, how do you win it?

[CountDeMoney]

Sometimes I think we will lose this battle (despite our pathetic opponents); our responses are so unintelligent and pusillanimous 

How do you lose the war on terror? Or, for that matter, how do you win it?

Quit hating America, terror lover.

[Bluebook]

Sometimes I think we will lose this battle (despite our pathetic opponents); our responses are so unintelligent and pusillanimous 

How do you lose the war on terror? Or, for that matter, how do you win it?

Quit hating America, terror lover.

Im just saying the goals need to be more clearly defined. To have a war on terror is about an pointless as a war on injustice. How do you win? Better then to have a war on militant islamic fundamentalism. Or a crusade.

[Tamas]

This is one of those rare occassions where I agree with Marty.

[CountDeMoney]

Im just saying the goals need to be more clearly defined. To have a war on terror is about an pointless as a war on injustice. How do you win? Better then to have a war on militant islamic fundamentalism. Or a crusade.

TEH WAR ON TEH TERROR is a war on militant islamic fundamentalism, and all their little friends, except for the states that sponsor them, because then that would be a real war, and we can't have that.

[DisturbedPervert]

So what the response is? Making even more idiotic rules that in no way address the security risk that just happened, but the control freaks running this shit hope will get through because the mob is scared and thus can be persuaded with more crap.

It's only a matter of time before they're putting us in diapers and strapping us to the seats

[Richard Hakluyt]

Sometimes I think we will lose this battle (despite our pathetic opponents); our responses are so unintelligent and pusillanimous 

How do you lose the war on terror? Or, for that matter, how do you win it?

There is a specific campaign here, against militant Islamic fundamentalists. It can be won, just as other campaigns against terrorism have been won in the past. It will take patience, intelligence and fortitude. So far we have not done too well in these areas IMO.

I agree with you that the "war on terror" is a rather foolish expression. You should note that I didn't use that expression and only do so when I'm being sarcastic.

[DGuller]

Sometimes I think we will lose this battle (despite our pathetic opponents); our responses are so unintelligent and pusillanimous 

How do you lose the war on terror? Or, for that matter, how do you win it?

When Osama comes out for a photo op with General Petraeus to sign unconditional surrender.

[DGuller]

There is a specific campaign here, against militant Islamic fundamentalists. It can be won, just as other campaigns against terrorism have been won in the past. It will take patience, intelligence and fortitude. So far we have not done too well in these areas IMO.

I agree with you that the "war on terror" is a rather foolish expression. You should note that I didn't use that expression and only do so when I'm being sarcastic.

I agree, I've been saying for many years what an idiotic phrase that is.  How can you win a war that you can't even name in a non-retarded fashion?

[Tamas]

Im just saying the goals need to be more clearly defined. To have a war on terror is about an pointless as a war on injustice. How do you win? Better then to have a war on militant islamic fundamentalism. Or a crusade.

TEH WAR ON TEH TERROR is a war on militant islamic fundamentalism, and all their little friends, except for the states that sponsor them, because then that would be a real war, and we can't have that.

Excellent executive summary.

[KRonn]

Agree with marti (and others); one tosser (on the terrorist watch lists) fails to do much but we hand anti-Western forces victory on a plate with retarded and disruptive security measures 

Sometimes I think we will lose this battle (despite our pathetic opponents); our responses are so unintelligent and pusillanimous 

Kind of seems that way. Rather than put stricter security in to prevent the mad men from getting on flights, the response is more severe measures to everyone else since the mad men will get on flights anyway, er, due to more lax security measures. But that said, we can't prevent every terrorist act; as the phrase goes, they only have to succeed once, while we have to have 100% success.

And yeah, the War on Terror phrase is a bit off. Terrorism is the method used, while it's actually a war on a certain subsets of Islamic radicalism who have been making war on the ROTW. The again, it doesn't help, IMO, with the new phrases "Man caused disaster" in place of Terrorism, or "Overseas Contingency Operations" to replace War in Iraq/Afghanistan, or other.

[Josephus]

Travelling is going to keep getting worse and worse.

Here are the New Safety Rules currently in place on all inbound US flights, and more than likely in destinations as well.

1. A Single small piece of carry-on.

2. Intimate pat-downs, hand searches, checking clothing seams.

3. Passengers must stay seated during the last hour of the flight and must have nothing in their laps.

4. Flight paths will no longer be shown on aircraft monitors ( )

5. Some airlines are adopting even stricter measures like giving passengers a crew escort when they go to the bathroom and keeping cabin lights turned up high.

All these options really make me want to fly to the States immediately.