[gusecrync]

If we've going to quote the article, maybe we should include:

It IS a proven fact that once you go through security, they own you.

DQ, this is absurd.

[Dr.Hoodoba]

Ninja, would you please stop that?!

It matters done about his nationality or his race or even where he was born. Fact is, he's a suspected terrorist who had no business being cleared for the flight. And you know this, man.

But it seems to me as though you might be trying to protect this individual or a least condone his trying to get the hell out of Dodge before his cover was blown.

Thank God though, that the bomb didn't detonate, but only smoked up.

Your opinion is your opinion, but so is my opinion mine. Stop shooting me down because of MY opinion. Think what you want to. I'm still not changing it one bit.

Zippy, you're right, it IS absurd.

Actually, it starts when you are about to go through the security checkpoint. If you don't do everything that they want you to do, including emptying your pokets multiple times, letting them tell you that the medicine that you have to have with you is not allowed on the flight, taking off your shoes, going back through the metal detector a 3rd or 4th time, or submit to being scanned with the wand, and lastly, if you are one of the ones randomly selected for another screeniong in the gate room and you refuse, guess what? "Sir, if you don't let us do this, you can't get on the plane."

They are playing; "Who's Your Daddy?". That is why I said they own the travelers.

[15Praxanant]

@Fab...

Fair enough, but notice only one name was given, the others were just "officials". People are willing to say many things when their names are not on the credits.....

And you are quoting Bloomie? What the hell does he have to do with this? He is also the one squawking about less Homeland Security funds coming to us next year. Big Surprise, nothing terrible happens, we hit a recession and nobody wants to pay to wrap the Xth largest city in bullet proof Teflon.



On the fair side, do I think there may have been mistakes? Yes, but a mistake does not mean that the system itself is inadequate. If you upped security, you would STILL be prone to mistakes, and in the meantime every innocent person would be subjected to many unnecessary checks, probes and policies.

The best defense has been, so far, being able to stop something before it happens, not AS it happens.

[Irravepem]

Ninja, please stop that!

Your opinion is your opinion, but so is mine. Stop shooting me down because of MY opinion. Think what you want to. I'm still not changing it.

And I will not stop posting. You are the problem with national security and defense spending. You and people like you will have arabs stopped in the street merely because they LOOK suspicious. The more I hear you say it, the more I am driven to change your perspective before you, and people with the same attitude, strip us of the freedoms we gained 250 years ago.

Zippy, you're right, it IS absurd.

Actually, it starts when you are about to go through the security checkpoint. If you don't do everything that they want you to do, including emptying your pokets multiple times, letting them tell you that the medicine that you have to have with you is not allowed on the flight, taking off your shoes, going back through the metal detector a 3rd or 4th time, or submit to being scanned with the wand, and lastly, if you are one of the ones randomly selected for another screeniong in the gate room and you refuse, guess what? "Sir, if you don't let us do this, you can't get on the plane." That uis not owning you. You are applying superlatives to something that does not apply. If you are already saying that security is so extensive, then what other "searches" do you think would have made it harder to flee? A mandatory 24 hour stopover for all international flights! OOH THE FUN!!!!

They are playing; "Who's Your Daddy?". That is why I said they own the travelers. Re-read your context Daq. You skip back and forth between saying that there is not enough and "there is so much how did this happen". It is difficult when you do not maintain a singular line of reasoning through a discussion. This is not a crime, but it just makes it hard to converse with you when you seem to take differing positions on the same subject.

BTW, when you express an opinion on something, do NOT state it as a "proven fact". You may feel they "own you" but they do not. You are exaggerating for illustrative effect, but doing so to such an extent that it makes it sound like you are jumping up and down and yelling rather than talking sensibly...

Relax. You are entitled to your opinions just like everyone else, but being unwilling to accept anything to the contrary does not say much about yourself.

[longrema]

Hence why I said that no matter how much they call themselves trying to beef up security with those high-tech devices, there are still lapses in the system in other areas.

Remember, those new body scanners were put in place to help detect and stop hidden explosives from being smuggled onto the flights. That may have work if he weren't carrying anything suspicious, and it appears that he weren't.

The screw-ups that had occured along the way are what caused things to go awry. But he's in custody now.

[lkastonidwedsrer]

So maybe this discussion can move forward?

[sposicke]

Hopefully.

[AgJ5mNXM]

Playing here at WNY would be far more interesting if folks would PLEASE refrain from going after each other ad infinitum and simply respond with Facts, Links, Opinions.

Of course sometimes we all go at it , but the on-going tit for tat is TEDIOUS as hell to sift through. A little self-restraint never hurts.

Back on topic:

This, if actually true, is ridiculous + bone-headed + bureaucratic BS of the worst sort:


... Mr. Shahzad called the airline and booked a flight to Pakistan via Dubai ... he arrived at the airport, paid cash for his ticket and was given a boarding pass.

Airlines are not required to report cash purchases, a Homeland Security official said.

[GroosteFoessy]

Zippy, you're right, it IS absurd.

I wasn't agreeing with you. The absurdity of some airport security procedures is not "owning you." Much of it is to fulfill job descriptions.

The suspect that got on the plane may have been "owned."

The screw-ups that had occured along the way are what caused things to go awry

Since he was apprehended, how do you know anything went awry? Suppose he had an accomplice who was a passenger on the flight, but never boarded after the other was arrested.

[JulieSmithdccd]

So much for moving forward!