Terror attack foiled on Northwest Airlines flight

[Berkut]

For the record, I am not claiming that increased security measures are "no big deal", I am saying from what I can tell the annoyance is grossly exaggerated in most cases. Certainly it does not come close to rising to "OMG TEH Terrorists ahve won if we cannot have more than 100ml of gel on the plane!".

No, the terrorists do not care about how annoyed airline passengers are - their goal is not to make people reduce their flying to the states by .05% due to emo-rage over idiotic security measures.

[Grallon]

You win the war on terror when the entire population of the third world is exterminated.

Just the muslims - we do need the cheap labor for the manufacturing of our endless stream of consumer junk remember? 



G.

[Neil]

You win the war on terror when the entire population of the third world is exterminated.

Just the muslims - we do need the cheap labor for the manufacturing of our endless stream of consumer junk remember? 

The native poor are sufficient for that.

[alfred russel]

By the way, it's gonna be a total bitch for me to fly back, they already did all that new stuff to me when I left. I'll probably literally be strip searched next time, I'm gonna have to get there four hours early.

My advice: get in the line with the cute security guard and pretend it is a date.

[alfred russel]

My problem with the security responses is that they seem so stupid. A guy tries to blow up a plane with a substance in his shoe? Everyone has to take their shoes off. Never mind that there aren't checks for the other spots you can carry items, such as your pockets.

If they are really going to force you to stay in your seats during the last hour of flight because a guy tried to blow up a plane in the last hour, is that really going to deter an attack? Why wouldn't they blow up a plane two hours before landing?

But at the end of the day, taking off your shoes, sitting in your seat for an hour, and losing the map thing (which is a new innovation anyway) are minor annoyances that aren't going to keep the masses from flying.

[Berkut]

Yep - plenty of the measures seem pretty silly. I just don't buy into  the hysteria that silly measures == ZOMG TEH TERRORISTS ARE WINNING!!!!

[MadImmortalMan]

Napolitano is on TV saying that the security response system worked perfectly. I thought the bomb just didn't go off when it was supposed to. 

[DGuller]

My problem with the security responses is that they seem so stupid. A guy tries to blow up a plane with a substance in his shoe? Everyone has to take their shoes off. Never mind that there aren't checks for the other spots you can carry items, such as your pockets.

If they are really going to force you to stay in your seats during the last hour of flight because a guy tried to blow up a plane in the last hour, is that really going to deter an attack? Why wouldn't they blow up a plane two hours before landing?

But at the end of the day, taking off your shoes, sitting in your seat for an hour, and losing the map thing (which is a new innovation anyway) are minor annoyances that aren't going to keep the masses from flying.

At some point, isn't the display of the utter stupidity dangerous in itself?  Discrediting yourself loses you the two main benefits of providing security: making people feel safe, and dissuading bad guys from trying to test you.

[KRonn]

Napolitano is on TV saying that the security response system worked perfectly. I thought the bomb just didn't go off when it was supposed to. 

I believe she's backed off on that, saying that there were failures; I give her credit for that. And she tried to point out that what she originally said were taken out of context. Of that I'm not sure, as I heard her speak on one of the news shows, and it had me shaking my head a bit. What ever the case, this looks like a wake up call and security will have to re-evaluate their procedures, obviously.

[alfred russel]

Napolitano is on TV saying that the security response system worked perfectly. I thought the bomb just didn't go off when it was supposed to. 

I believe she's backed off on that, saying that there were failures; I give her credit for that. And she tried to point out that what she originally said were taken out of context. Of that I'm not sure, as I heard her speak on one of the news shows, and it had me shaking my head a bit. What ever the case, this looks like a wake up call and security will have to re-evaluate their procedures, obviously.

My take is that preflight security in a flight originating from another country really isn't our business (assuming the country isn't ridiculously lax).

[Richard Hakluyt]

nice, punishing travellers because officials are incompetent. His own dad informed on him for crying out loud!

According to what I've heard about the case, the Nigerian dude didn't trigger enough flags to be put on the no fly list.

He was on another list, a more general "could be dodgy" list. What I don't understand is why that didn't trigger a proper search which would have revealed the explosives he was carrying.

[Martinus]

nice, punishing travellers because officials are incompetent. His own dad informed on him for crying out loud!

According to what I've heard about the case, the Nigerian dude didn't trigger enough flags to be put on the no fly list.

He was on another list, a more general "could be dodgy" list. What I don't understand is why that didn't trigger a proper search which would have revealed the explosives he was carrying.

Precisely. He should have been searched.

[Admiral Yi]

He was on another list, a more general "could be dodgy" list. What I don't understand is why that didn't trigger a proper search which would have revealed the explosives he was carrying.

Good question.  Let's blame the Dutch.

[syk]

He was on another list, a more general "could be dodgy" list. What I don't understand is why that didn't trigger a proper search which would have revealed the explosives he was carrying.

Good question.  Let's blame the Dutch.

[CountDeMoney]

It's never been that easy to take down an aircraft, which is why these security measures are a band-aid solution that make flying a pain in the arse.

You can only have liquid in 100 ml bottles...but you can have ten of those if you want. Seriously. WTF?

Even before 9/11 planes weren't falling out of the sky everyday. I fly fairly frequently, and, trust me, it's becoming a pain in the ass, and each time some nutbar tries to do something, they ramp the security a notch until in a decade or so we're all gonna have to fly naked.

So your big bitch is that you can't have liquids in bottles of more than 100ml?

That seems pretty trivial to me.

No shit.

"What? I can't take my shampoo, conditioner and pomade with me?  I have to buy it at my destination?  At a Walgreen's, just like one at home?  The Terrorists have won!  Paul Mitchell has lost!"