What were they thinking?!

[billvon 3,176]

>Nope - I never claimed that. Nice attempt to put words in my mouth, though.

OK, then you seem to be contradicting yourself. I'll ask you directly - do you think the passengers and crew did what was appropriate during that incident?

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>Nope - I never claimed that. Nice attempt to put words in my mouth, though.

OK, then you seem to be contradicting yourself. I'll ask you directly - do you think the passengers and crew did what was appropriate during that incident?

Yes, I do - I've never said differently.

If passengers are part of 'the system', why don't I get to bypass security like TSA and crew, when I fly?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[wmw999 2,644]

I think it depends in part on what one expects from the government. If one expects thorough protection, then that part of the system failed. If one expects the means to participate in that protection, well, the system didn't fail, but it sure worked at the last possible (and very post-optimal) time. Personally, I'd find it hard to call it too much of a success.

It's kind of akin to being in freefall at 400 feet after failing to pull and the AAD failure because you didn't turn it on, and having your last elbow of the container work. Yeah, you're alive. But you might oughta re-think your procedures.

BTW, I do think of myself as part of the system, and how I can help things to operate more smoothly or better.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

I think it depends in part on what one expects from the government. If one expects thorough protection, then that part of the system failed. If one expects the means to participate in that protection, well, the system didn't fail, but it sure worked at the last possible (and very post-optimal) time. Personally, I'd find it hard to call it too much of a success.

I don't expect perfect protection - that's impossible. But I *do* expect 'the system' to act on the type of 'red flags' that were surrounding the Underoo Bomber.

Quote

It's kind of akin to being in freefall at 400 feet after failing to pull and the AAD failure because you didn't turn it on, and having your last elbow of the container work. Yeah, you're alive. But you might oughta re-think your procedures.

That's a good analogy, and I agree with you on it.

Quote

BTW, I do think of myself as part of the system, and how I can help things to operate more smoothly or better.

While I'm *NOT* going to sit idly by while someone lights their underwear on fire or charges the cockpit with a knife, I don't consider myself 'part of the system' in that respect.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,176]

>Yes, I do - I've never said differently.

Cool. Sounds like you agree with her, then. She said "one thing I'd like to point out is that the system worked. Everybody played an important role here. The passengers and crew of the flight took appropriate action."

>If passengers are part of 'the system', why don't I get to bypass
>security like TSA and crew, when I fly?

The crew doesn't bypass security when they fly.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

But cherrypicking is so much easier if your only goal is to smear someone you hate.

Mikee is easy....

Napolitano is:

Older female in position of power( non hot)
Successful
Democrat
Member if the Obama Administration

Pretty much the worst nightmare for our good "United States" around here

Fixed it to show the outcome

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

No the system as provided by our gov failed demonstratively.


The People however did suceeded

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

Quote

Quote

News:

"The system worked!"

- Janet Napolitano, United States Secretary of Homeland Security

By now, everybody knows how that statement has been twisted, spun, demagogued and politicized, to the absolute silliest. You wanna keep shootin' blanks, knock yourself out.

If you make a stupid statement like "the system worked," you're gonna get skewered for it. She started retreating less than 24 hours later, and last night I heard Obama threw Intelligence under the bus to make up for it.

+1

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

But cherrypicking is so much easier if your only goal is to smear someone you hate.

Mikee is easy....

Napolitano is:

Older female in position of power( non hot)
Successful
Democrat
Member if the Obama Administration

Pretty much the worst nightmare for our good "United States" around here

Fixed it to show the outcome

Maybe in a United States that thrives on goosestepping and imprisoning people under the Patriot Act for things it was never intended to do... or big brother spying on the people. or torturing people.... and on and on and on..

I dont think that is what the founding fathers of our country had in mind.. to turn the country over to a bunch for right wing fascists. I guess your milage really does vary... based on what the pilondinal cyst said today.

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

>"The system worked!"

The system did indeed work for that incident. On 9/11/01 - not so much.

You have to be out of your mind. The only part of the system that worked was everything AFTER the guy tried to detonate the bomb. Every part of the system prior to that moment was an absolute and miserable failure.

The only thing that stood between that plane full of people and death was the terrorist's own stupidity, poor tools, bad luck, or all three.

The intelligence community had information about this terrorist and didn't connect. Even the guy's own father turned him.

He was already on a watch list, yet he never made it to a no-fly list, even after credible evidence that he was up to something.

He (according to news reports) got on the plane with out a passport. WTF???

He bought an international ticket with cash and checked no luggage. Unless they've changed the "profile", that is supposed to be THE red flag.
Lastly and not surprisingly, airport security also failed to catch the bomb.

What part of the system are you trying to say worked? The part where a PASSENGER on the plane jumped the guy and put the fire out with his hands? OK, you're right - that part worked fine. Good thing that passenger was on duty that day.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[billvon 3,176]

>The only part of the system that worked was everything AFTER the guy
>tried to detonate the bomb.

Exactly. The system there - the actions of the passengers and the crew - DID work. Which is what she said, if you read anything beyond those three words.

>The part where a PASSENGER on the plane jumped the guy and put the
>fire out with his hands? OK, you're right - that part worked fine. Good
>thing that passenger was on duty that day.

Yes, and we are all glad that Todd Beamer was on duty eight years ago as well.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

or big brother spying on the people.

Echelon was pre-bush.

Quote

or torturing people....

'extraordinary rendition' started under clinton

Quote

and on and on and on..

meet the new boss...same as the old boss.

Quote

I dont think that is what the founding fathers of our country had in mind.. to turn the country over to a bunch for right wing fascists.

When that actually HAPPENS, let's discuss it. Looks like we're in a HARD swing the opposite direction now, anyway.

Quote

I guess your milage really does vary... based on what the pilondinal cyst said today.

Yeah, that's that 'high road' of yours, all right...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>The only part of the system that worked was everything AFTER the guy
>tried to detonate the bomb.

Exactly. The system there - the actions of the passengers and the crew - DID work. Which is what she said, if you read anything beyond those three words.

Please...enough spin, already, you're throwing off the experiments at the supercollider.

Quote

>The part where a PASSENGER on the plane jumped the guy and put the
>fire out with his hands? OK, you're right - that part worked fine. Good
>thing that passenger was on duty that day.

Yes, and we are all glad that Todd Beamer was on duty eight years ago as well.

Neither this passenger nor Beamer were 'on duty', they were passengers that made a decision to act when they saw something wrong.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Amazon 7]

It is pretty pathetic Mikee.... how you TRY to say that ANYTHING done under the Clinton administration BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD

Anything done under Bush.... GOOD

I have not seen the fringe right shifting to a high road.. and I would hate to miss out on all the low road posts you guys are making daily.

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

>The only part of the system that worked was everything AFTER the guy
>tried to detonate the bomb.

Exactly. The system there - the actions of the passengers and the crew - DID work. Which is what she said, if you read anything beyond those three words.

>The part where a PASSENGER on the plane jumped the guy and put the
>fire out with his hands? OK, you're right - that part worked fine. Good
>thing that passenger was on duty that day.

Yes, and we are all glad that Todd Beamer was on duty eight years ago as well.

If that was an attempt to be funny, you failed miserably. Pretty f*cking uncalled-for comment, too.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

It is pretty pathetic Mikee.... how you TRY to say that ANYTHING done under the Clinton administration BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD

Anything done under Bush.... GOOD

No, that would be YOUR schtick, but in reverse of what you wrote. I just show that the Dems do/did it too.

Quote

I have not seen the fringe right shifting to a high road.. and I would hate to miss out on all the low road posts you guys are making daily.

We're giving as good as we get from you and Lucky.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,176]

>If that was an attempt to be funny, you failed miserably.

No. Would you have preferred that Beamer and company not act against the terrorists? I'm glad he did - indeed, it was the only thing that day that stopped any of the terrorists.

[chuckakers 426]

Quote

>If that was an attempt to be funny, you failed miserably.

No. Would you have preferred that Beamer and company not act against the terrorists? I'm glad he did - indeed, it was the only thing that day that stopped any of the terrorists.

Sorry, I took your comment the wrong way. I agree that Beamer and the rest of the passengers did the right thing. Hell, they did the only thing they could.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>any system that relied on a passenger for resolution is not a successful one . . .

??? It is the only thing that stopped the fourth aircraft from being used against another target on 9/11, and it stopped both the shoe bomber and this guy. Clearly it is one method that is effective at stopping terrorist attacks.

???????????

You consider that a success? That's the problem - you think that just because they didn't hit the intended ground target, the loss of a plane and all its passengers somehow qualifies as a success. "Less shitty" does not equal success.

On Xmas, we had "less shitty" again. If the person had been more competent, rather than a mental nutcase with delusions of glory, there's a good chance we'd have a plane blown up in midair (or perhaps just damaged with nearby passengers killed) and have no clue what happened yet. The knee jerk reaction seems unlikely to actually prevent it again, yet inconveniences the fuck out of everyone on board.

Getting lucky is not something to be proud of.

[billvon 3,176]

>On Xmas, we had "less shitty" again.

And if you think that stopping a terrorist from destroying an aircraft, and having everyone on board land safely is just "less shitty" - then I'd rather be on that "less shitty" plane than on yours.

There were a lot of screwups on the ground. In the air, both the passengers and crew performed excellently; claiming that they performed to some degree of "shit" is pretty insulting.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

???????????
You consider that a success? That's the problem - you think that just because they didn't hit the intended ground target, the loss of a plane and all its passengers somehow qualifies as a success. "Less shitty" does not equal success.

Yes, in those circumstances it can be considered success.

You do understand that success or failure is not absolute thing, right? For example if I made $1M a year, at this moment I'd consider that "success", but for Bill Gates making only 1M a year would likely mean failure.

Quote

On Xmas, we had "less shitty" again. If the person had been more competent, rather than a mental nutcase with delusions of glory, there's a good chance we'd have a plane blown up in midair (or perhaps just damaged with nearby passengers killed) and have no clue what happened yet.

I think the "problem" there is that it's kinda hard for terrorists to find people who believe in imaginable Jesus/Mohammad so much that they're ready to destroy themselves who are also smart enough.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[Rstanley0312 1]

Quote

Quote

???????????
You consider that a success? That's the problem - you think that just because they didn't hit the intended ground target, the loss of a plane and all its passengers somehow qualifies as a success. "Less shitty" does not equal success.

Yes, in those circumstances it can be considered success.

You do understand that success or failure is not absolute thing, right? For example if I made $1M a year, at this moment I'd consider that "success", but for Bill Gates making only 1M a year would likely mean failure.

Quote

On Xmas, we had "less shitty" again. If the person had been more competent, rather than a mental nutcase with delusions of glory, there's a good chance we'd have a plane blown up in midair (or perhaps just damaged with nearby passengers killed) and have no clue what happened yet.

I think the "problem" there is that it's kinda hard for terrorists to find people who believe in imaginable Jesus/Mohammad so much that they're ready to destroy themselves who are also smart enough.

WTF...... since when did the terrorists we are facing now do anything in the name if Jesus? I know that has happened in the past but I think it is comical you just cannot stop yourself from taking a shot at religion or specifically Christianity.

Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

[kallend 2,230]

Quote

BRATISLAVA, Slovakia — A failed airport security test ended up with a Slovak man unwittingly carrying hidden explosives in his luggage on a flight to Dublin, Slovak officials admitted Wednesday — a mistake that enraged Irish authorities and shocked aviation experts worldwide.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,582132,00.html

Those Slovakians!

I bet fully half of Slovakians are of below average intelligence.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>On Xmas, we had "less shitty" again.

And if you think that stopping a terrorist from destroying an aircraft, and having everyone on board land safely is just "less shitty" - then I'd rather be on that "less shitty" plane than on yours.

There were a lot of screwups on the ground. In the air, both the passengers and crew performed excellently; claiming that they performed to some degree of "shit" is pretty insulting.

“When a suspected terrorist is able to board a plane with explosives on Christmas Day, the system has failed in a potentially disastrous way,” Obama said at the White House in a statement to reporters.

Only you think that the passengers were being blamed for this event. Ridiculous is your notion that it should have to fall to the passengers to do this. Wendy probably said it best - that it got to the very last link in the chain is the failure.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

???????????
You consider that a success? That's the problem - you think that just because they didn't hit the intended ground target, the loss of a plane and all its passengers somehow qualifies as a success. "Less shitty" does not equal success.

Yes, in those circumstances it can be considered success.

You do understand that success or failure is not absolute thing, right? For example if I made $1M a year, at this moment I'd consider that "success", but for Bill Gates making only 1M a year would likely mean failure.

Calling the loss of 37 passengers and 7 crew a success is loser talk.