FAA

[Event Horizon]

edew, I've never flown with my gear so that's why I was asking. Since I take it no one ever takes their blades carry-on then I imagine it won't be a big change for those traveling with their equipment. Thanks for the info.

[its_me_mango]

hi guys, okay you've been thrashing it out while out was off the board, and i received a bunch of e-mail: here it one.
Derar Cathleen,
Thanks for your concerned note. As far as I
have heard, no Hokkeko members were injured in the disaster, and a Kanji
John de Clef Piniero
was told to leave the area just before the second plane hit, so he escaped in the nick of time. Rieko Black was set
within an hour of the blast to fly to L.A. and was very relieved that she
stayed on the ground. My wife Molly was in Iowa installing a big sculpture; she returned, of course, not by plane
but by rent-a-car. The book on Sakyamuni sounds interesting.

Next from Mergs: in a nutshell: CHILL.

oKAY, SO one day later i'm a little calmer, however, all my long time friends and all family reside in new york, very difficult situation. it's like us reviewing a bout or a game, it's always easier from the sidelines. someone wrote to tell me that his coach was islamic. it's okay too, i used to live with islamic people, it's not a great thing, no offense, out of maybe 1000 islamic people about 10 liked me, 1 was a close friend, one who would sort of go to the mat for me, but also for his family, his biggest concern for me was that i say indoors alot and not "get hurt" then he decided to go ahead and train my in taewon do, but he had to do a big mental thing, and tell himself that i was strong, and so he could go ahead and train me, but his wife was not strong so he could not, but there's really a friendship there, we really respect one another, but i also know that if he had to go to war, he would, and so would i.

sky marhall idea is a deterrent to war, and we shouldn't worry too much about our fencing gear. Airlines don't want to lose customers, they want to keep customers, good customers, and that's what we are, good customers, they're pretty good in accommodating us, we have been able to carry cats/dogs/birds and whatever on board. It will be necessary to buy a shell and ship our weapons separtely. Maybe tag the stuff SPORTING goods, and allow them to look inside our bags. My bags were thouroughly searched on the streets and at the airport in Fiji during a coup, and i really didn't like it, but there you go. It was in their best interests to check out my gear, because i also look indian. (namaste)
I don't know what else to add here, but, we have to separate our ideas of what we think islam is and learn what is really is. also we need to realize that there are many branches of it, and there are fanatics as well as moderates. what i see is a growing trend toward fanaticism and less moderation.

[foodle]

FYI the Air Marshal program already exists. People have simply been calling for its expansion.
http://www.faa.gov/apa/Factsheet/2000/fact4A ug.htm

Also, how much money is ear-marked for the missile-defense system? How much would it cost for an expanded Air Marshal program? Somehow I think that the 1st number is a lot bigger than the 2nd.

[ 09-15-2001: Message edited by: foodle ]

[three_hundred_fifty_five]

Originally posted by Inquartata:
<STRONG>

Well, it has certainly been feasible on El Al, which has had not a single hijacking in decades. And though Israel is a much smaller nation than the US, with far fewer flights to protect, so too are its resources of manpower and money to pay for them commensurately smaller...

It can be done. But it would probably need the government to run and pay for it, not the airlines, as is presently contemplated.</STRONG>

What I meant was having a sky marshall or sky marshalls on every single US flight would not be feasible. Of course it could be feasible with El Al. California alone has an A S S load more airports, airplanes and flights than all of Israel.
I felt I didn't have to state that because of my following remarks on the large number of flights within the US.

[three_hundred_fifty_five]

Originally posted by its_me_mango:
<STRONG> ...sky marhall idea is a deterrent to war, and we shouldn't worry too much about our fencing gear...</STRONG>

You are literally getting less intelligent with every remark. The sky marshall idea is a deterrent to war??? So with sky marshalls, war cannot be started? Wasn't Osama bin Laden's first attempt at destroying the World Trade Center done without airplanes and more importantly without sky marshalls on an airplane? Step away from the crack pipe... it's for your own good.

[edew]

Originally posted by its_me_mango:
<STRONG>

sky marhall idea is a deterrent to war, and we shouldn't worry too much about our fencing gear. Airlines don't want to lose customers, they want to keep customers, good customers, and that's what we are, good customers, ...</STRONG>

Hey, the hijackers paid in cash for one-way tickets THAT day (or at least that was what was reported). I'm sure the airlines would consider them to be GREAT customers.

[sabreuse]

Originally posted by edew:
<STRONG>

Hey, the hijackers paid in cash for one-way tickets THAT day (or at least that was what was reported). I'm sure the airlines would consider them to be GREAT customers.</STRONG>

I heard that a several of them paid for their tickets on the same credit card. My thought when I first heard this was that they were being thrifty (Why pay for a round trip ticket when you're on a suicide mission. Better yet, put it on a credit card so you never have to pay.) Now why this didn't raise any red flags with the ticket agents is beyond me but I guess anybody can have twenty-twenty hindsight.

[edew]

Virtually everyone pays by credit card for airplane tickets, so that shouldn't raise any flags. Buying one-way tickets might, since one-way tickets are usually more expensive than a round-trip (I always wondered why).

[its_me_mango]

my iq remains static, or well within a 5 point range, which is about 131. since you really can't juggle it too much. Folks we have to ignore people like that, that's what makes america weak. some jerks let them on the plane and they did it because about 4 months ago some other bunch of jerks said, hey civil liberties are getting demolished here, we gotta let these guys onto the plane, and they dumped profiling, because it wasn't up to someone's idea of civil liberties etc. i still don't think you people understand that this inflitration is long standing. Anyway, the other day I went shopping for some new bedsheets and i decided to go with a 50%-50% cotton poly blend rather than the 100% egyption cotton, just one small step ...etc etc. [get ready for someones comment: what does egypt have to do with...etc etc. etc]
I'm into boycotting, and boycotting again. for now,

[its_me_mango]

also, i wanna be a fencer seems to be sincere, okay, so i won't trash him as much as possible, next is someone named 355, who tried to explain to me that sky marshalls won't prevent a war. why not 355? (im not confused)
sorry that i sound mean, but i'm not really, i just feel a little bit strong about this thing, sorry 355 and iwanttobeafencer, you seem like a nice kid, but you're too young to realize certain things,

[ 09-16-2001: Message edited by: its_me_mango ]

[its_me_mango]

it's still up to the faa to reinstate the kind of regulations that were once in place up until 1985, when they laid off about a million air traffic controllers to save money, and cut back on the sky marshall plan. I have called the Faa and they've told me they plan to review the program, and i called my house representative and his people are really nervous and they told me to call my senator and i did and my senator wants to know how we feel about this.

[edew]

Originally posted by its_me_mango:
<STRONG>my iq remains static, or well within a 5 point range, which is about 131. since you really can't juggle it too much. Folks we have to ignore people like that, that's what makes america weak. some jerks let them on the plane and they did it because about 4 months ago some other bunch of jerks said, hey civil liberties are getting demolished here, we gotta let these guys onto the plane, and they dumped profiling, because it wasn't up to someone's idea of civil liberties etc. i still don't think you people understand that this inflitration is long standing. Anyway, the other day I went shopping for some new bedsheets and i decided to go with a 50%-50% cotton poly blend rather than the 100% egyption cotton, just one small step ...etc etc. [get ready for someones comment: what does egypt have to do with...etc etc. etc]
I'm into boycotting, and boycotting again. for now, </STRONG>

Call me ignorant, but I think "egyptian cotton" is a method of manufacturing the cotton, rather than the location of where the cotton was grown. Don't tell me you're going to next boycott the gasoline since 40% of it or so come from the middle east. Maybe we should ban the playing of Steve Martin's "King Tut" song, or the song, "Walk Like An Egyptian" by the Bangles(?).

No more hummus for you, young man!

[sabreuse]

Originally posted by edew:
<STRONG>Virtually everyone pays by credit card for airplane tickets, so that shouldn't raise any flags. Buying one-way tickets might, since one-way tickets are usually more expensive than a round-trip (I always wondered why).</STRONG>

I wasn't saying that the fact that they were paid for with a credit card should have raised a red flag. I meant the fact that several one-way tickets for different passengers on different flights were paid for with the same credit card seems unusual.

[its_me_mango]

oh sh_t, i thought i was doing something glorious for my country (the sheet stuff), okay, let's not get hysterical here, it should be obvious by now that me, edew and sabreuse have good ideas, but we each think our idea is best and then it's difficult to convey everything on the board. Me (mango) and the edew, we should listen a little better first, and saberist, that is really an astute observation, the only problem is that there is nothing inherintly illegal about it, but, if the plane were boarded by a sky marshall, he would have been alert to the possibility of a problem from a passenger or passengers. Deterrents are really effective.


[ 09-17-2001: Message edited by: its_me_mango ]

[arcon]

[ 10-19-2001: Message edited by: arcon ]

[Moonitic]

If someone wants to profile me, peachy. If someone wants me to dump the contents of my luggage out for the world to see, they're welcome to it. I have nothing to hide. People have seen underwear before. Heck, people have seen me IN my underwear before (theatre for three years). If it makes someone feel safer to know that I, as a fellow passenger, am not armed & have no ill intentions, then I'll go along with it.

I'd hope others would do the same.

And, let me state this: I grew up in Detroit. We had armed guards & metal detectors checking us BEFORE it became almost "the norm". I couldn't carry a backpack because of the situations in my Detroit junior high. I look at the kids nowadays & say, "Been there."

Guys, as Craig said in another post, there is no reason to insult one another. In fact, when it degenerates into such a fight, neither side's point of view is seen or heard. You lose credibility when you get that way. Step away for a while. Breathe.

[three_hundred_fifty_five]

Originally posted by its_me_mango:
<STRONG>also, i wanna be a fencer seems to be sincere, okay, so i won't trash him as much as possible, next is someone named 355, who tried to explain to me that sky marshalls won't prevent a war. why not 355? (im not confused)
sorry that i sound mean, but i'm not really, i just feel a little bit strong about this thing, sorry 355 and iwanttobeafencer, you seem like a nice kid, but you're too young to realize certain things,

[ 09-16-2001: Message edited by: its_me_mango ]</STRONG>

Sky marshalls cannot prevent war. If a terrorist or country wants to start a war with the USA or any other country, they can do so without hi-jacking commercial airplanes. What part of that don't you get?

How many wars were started by hijacking commercial airplanes? None!!! (note: the United States Government has not officially declared war on any country)

IQ of 131 my A S S. The fun puzzles on the placemats at Pizza Hut do not qualify for actual IQ score.

[ 09-17-2001: Message edited by: three_hundred_fifty_five ]

[Inquartata]

355---As I said, yes, the US has many times more flights than Israel does. But we also have vastly more money than Israel does. This applies to California as well; California, were it a separate nation, would be in the top ten in terms of GDP, much higher than Israel. The point is that on a per-capita or per-flight basis it would cost us no more, proportionally, to guard every US flight than it costs Israel to guard every El Al flight. ( Moreover, we had an Air Marshal on every US flight for several years after the Athens hijacking, so if it was done, it must be possible. )

If the government does not shoulder the cost of such a program, which is now both likely and preferable ( IMO ) then each ticket might need a surcharge to support it. you know, like they now levy surcharges for fuel costs, airport facilities, and who knows what else. Imagine a flight with, say, 40 passengers, times a surcharge of, say, $10 per ticket. That's $400. You think you couldn't get qualified people for $400 a flight, day in and day out? Each flight pays for itself ( assuming few near-empty flights ) and the bigger flights with 100 or more passengers more than compensate for those and for administrative costs.

edew---Once again, El Al planes have impervious cockpit doors. Bulletproof, bombproof and kickproof need not mean airtight. ( They also implement all of the pre-flight measures discussed, to the hilt. Bag searches, person searches, roaming agents questioning passengers, unknown takeoff times, etc. ) Of course, a terrorist could probably gas an airliner with such doors, and the plane's ventilation system would carry it into the cockpit. But then the plane would simply crash...

I see no greater intrusion in having an anonymous cop on a plane than on having plainclothes cops in any other public place where there is not and never has been an expectation of privacy. It is not at all the same as having one quartered in your home. Then too there are no Constitutional protections in the private sector ( well, not in such a case ), so the airlines could put armed private security on board right now if they chose, and we couldn't say "Boo" about it. I'd rather have Federal Marshals than rent-a-cops, myself...


All that being said, I agree with you that it's not the panacea that its me mango seems to think. What the mind of man can devise, it can also work out a way to undo. However, it might at least instill a modicum of caution in the obnoxious drunks and fractious passengers, if not the terrorists...

[ 09-17-2001: Message edited by: Inquartata ]

[edew]

Originally posted by its_me_mango:
<STRONG>... the only problem is that there is nothing inherintly illegal about it, but, if the plane were boarded by a sky marshall, he would have been alert to the possibility of a problem from a passenger or passengers. Deterrents are really effective.


[ 09-17-2001: Message edited by: its_me_mango ]</STRONG>

My understanding of the sky marshall idea is that the sky marshall is an undercover person, so passengers won't know who is the sky marshall. It's not as though the guy sitting next to the cockpit looking back at the rows and rows of passengers will be the sky marshall. If so, it's no problem for several hijackers to take the guy out. The sky marshall is supposed to be alert and undercover. When something happens, it's up to him to decide when and how to react. Given the goon mentality prevalent among the law enforcement community, I can see law suits up the wazoo.

[edew]

Originally posted by Moonitic:
<STRONG>If someone wants to profile me, peachy. If someone wants me to dump the contents of my luggage out for the world to see, they're welcome to it. I have nothing to hide. People have seen underwear before. Heck, people have seen me IN my underwear before (theatre for three years). If it makes someone feel safer to know that I, as a fellow passenger, am not armed & have no ill intentions, then I'll go along with it.
</STRONG>

How about a body-cavity search? How about 24-hour detention at the airport? How far is too far, in terms of civil liberties? What I've mentioned here are already being done to US citizens by our law enforcement agencies, and not always on someone who eventually was convicted. I remember first reading about strip searches being abused in 1978. It hasn't really been eliminated since then.