So what IS allowed on airplanes these days?

The answer is quite simple and not PC...

1.Ban all Arabs from flying on planes.
2.Let 'western' people without criminal convictions for violence etc carry knives on planes.
3. Have at least two air Marshals an ALL planes.
4. Have a solid bullet proof door on planes for pilots and in the event of a problem a push of a button to signal a hijacking event (all planes have these?) Locks the pilots in the plane so only being on the ground will let the door be opened (or a special code that trafic control have or the maker, a unique code for each plane...?) This would stop the pilots opening the door even if terrorists were killing people.
5. The same Hijacking button would activate an auto-pilot that is located in a part of the plane that Hijackers cannot get access to, so even if they got in the cabin or smashed the controls to make the plane crash, it would land safely.
6. Spend some money on security for once!
 
At most major airports in the US only broken down machine guns, plastic explosives if detonators are in separate luggage and terrorists from security person's home country. Also generally, guides on how to fly large aircraft straight and the Koran if it fits into the carry on luggage compartment.
John
 
Right now, I think that all you are allowed on airliners is harsh language and wishful thinking.
 
on a recent flight, i carried:
a glass bottle (snapple) (bludeoning possibilities, and also the possibility of shattering and using a shard. i don't think the classic "hold the neck and smash the bottle" would work though.

belt, i carried on keys hooked to a locking carabiner, another carabiner clipped to my bag, some thin nylon rope from EMS, my carryon half full with books and a notebook computer, a few pens in the bag.

just wondering- i know its completely distasteful, but if the hijackers have already killed passengers/crew, what about using the corpses as a shield/weight in a rush? (yes, my stomach turns as i suggest it, but since we're on the topic of using whats available...) it could knock over a badguy, or tangle him up, surprise him, etc. plus, i honestly don't know whether there are any taboos or anything about handling bodies- that could work to your advantage.
 
Originally posted by mnblade
A few ideas for defense:

* The aforementioned metal Cross pen makes a nifty jabber.

* You can use your belt wrapped around your knuckles for a loaded fist, or swing the buckle bolo style to send a POS bad guy for a loop. Also, a good choker if necessary.

* Don't forget, taking off a sock and loading it with something that has heft (keys and coins, for instance) makes a pretty sweet blackjack. :eek:

Don't ask how I learned this stuff. :cool:

Yeah, then they are going to go after us pen nuts too by not allowing any writing instruments of any kind :rolleyes:

Might as well fly buck-naked! Then that mile-high club won't seem so elusive. LMAO
 
I remember in the 3rd grade always having to go to class with a sharp #2 pencil and a fountain pen.
 
Originally posted by Gus Kalanzis
I remember in the 3rd grade always having to go to class with a sharp #2 pencil and a fountain pen.

...and there was a point in time that every boy carried a pocketknife to school
 
I am very disappointed that no one on this thread has criticized The General for saying that all Arabs should be banned from planes and that only "western" people with no records be allowed to carry knives. I have been in a number of arguments with people before and I never used this term, but I will now: the General's arguments are simply racist. I also argue that there is a simple test for racism: would any of you be willing to be treated the way that the General suggests Arabs be treated if members of your ethnic group were guilty of crimes? As a black person, would I be justified if I said that all truck driving "good ole boys" be imprisoned because some have been involved in hate crimes? Would the people of Okinawa be justified in lynching U.S. soldiers because some attacked local women? Should all Christian fundamentalists be banned from Olympic venues and strip searched if they come near a Planned Parenthood Office? Should the British be banned from China because they once fought a war to sell them opium? Should all young white veterans be denied access to weapons because of Tim McVeigh? Do all suspects have a right to shoot cops because of what happened to rodney King? I'm pretty sure that none of you would agree to anything I just suggested because you can name countless people in all of the above mentioned categories who are good, decent folks. The same is quite true of Muslims and Arabs (remember about 20% of Arabs are Christian). I am just as disappointed about increased restrictions as anyone, however, that cannot be an excuse for dscrimination.
 
Good points Anthony, and you're right, of course. What has disturbed me in the past and continues to disturb me is that up until now, there hasn't been any widespread condemnation by Muslim leaders of terrorist activity. With the WTC attack, they are speaking out against it, but it seems forced and reluctant. That angers me.

I would probably be a lot more sympathetic if the Muslim leaders would also "do the right thing", but it seems that they usually choose not to.

I think that anyone who is a member of an ethnic group that performs these kinds of actions should speak out against them, otherwise there is a perception that the actions are implicitly accepted. Not fair perhaps, but often true.
 
Anthony,

Good point, and thank you. The General was out of line with his comment about Arabs. It seems even today we're still afraid to criticize somone for voicing those viewpoints. It's okay to have them (one's feelings can never be wrong -- they're feelings), but I am sure that the forumites of middle-eastern descent would agree that not all "Arabs" are terrorists. I work at a university science department where a large percentage of our faculty are from that region, and they are ALL good people, upstanding members of the community, and United States citizens. Treating any group a certain way based on the actions of a few is at the least stereotyping. Treating them poorly because of their ethnic background is indeed racist. That was not my intent in starting this thread.

Thank you, Anthony, for your post. More hate isn't the answer and will not fix anything. Wiping Osama Bin Laden, his terrorist associates, and their harborers off the map regardless of their ethnic background is what we need to focus on.

-Al-
 
<b>Novel Security Measures</b>
<i>A local man was kept off a recent flight because of a book he was carrying.</i>
by Gwen Shaffer

<b>Book him: By carrying the novel Hayduke Lives!, Neil Godfrey set off a bizarre turn of events that prevented him from flying.</b>

Everyone knows it is a bad idea to try and board a plane carrying a box cutter, a flight manual written in Arabic, or a sack full of mysterious white powder. But with ultra-tightened airport security, a book could also prevent you from boarding that plane.

No kidding. It happened just last week in Philadelphia.

Neil Godfrey arrived at Philadelphia International Airport around 9:30 a.m. on Wed., Oct. 10. His brother’s girlfriend dropped him off with plenty of time to spare before his 11:40 a.m. United Airlines flight. Godfrey was on his way to Phoenix, where his father lives. From there, the family was planning to head out for a vacation at Disneyland.

It is fair to say that Godfrey — brother of City Paper webmaster Ryan Godfrey — doesn’t look unusual for a 22-year-old kid living in Center City.

His outfit that day was typical: black Dockers, a T-shirt with a logo for the now-defunct Phoenix Gazette newspaper and New Balance running shoes. He has a medium build, recently dyed jet-black hair and a quiet demeanor.

When Godfrey stepped up to the ticket counter, the United clerk informed him he had been selected for a random baggage search.

"No problem," he replied, going through the usual motions of checking his bag and getting a boarding pass. Now toting nothing but a novel and the most recent copy of The Nation magazine, Godfrey hiked through the concourse toward his boarding gate.

As he passed through the metal detector, an airport security guard furrowed his brow at Godfrey’s reading selections as they disappeared through the conveyor belt.

On the cover of the book, Hayduke Lives! by Edward Abbey, is an illustration of a man’s hand holding several sticks of dynamite. The 1991 novel is about a radical environmentalist, George Washington Hayduke III, who blows up bridges, burns tractors and sabotages other projects he believes are destroying the beautiful Southwest landscape.

"For the first time, it occurred to me the book may be a problem," Godfrey recalls.

He proceeded through the security checkpoint and sat down to read near his boarding gate. About 10 minutes had passed when a National Guardsman approached Godfrey.

"He told me to step aside," Godfrey says. "Then he took my book and asked me why I was reading it."

Within minutes, Godfrey says, Philadelphia Police officers, Pennsylvania State Troopers and airport security officials joined the National Guardsman. About 10 to 12 people examined the novel for 45 minutes, scratching out notes the entire time. They also questioned Godfrey about the purpose of his trip to Phoenix.

The fact that Godfrey recently dropped out of Temple University and has yet to find a job may have piqued suspicion of law enforcement officials even more.

"The fact that I don’t work or go to school may have contributed to them thinking I have nothing to live for," Godfrey speculates.

Eventually, one of the law enforcement officials told Godfrey his book was "innocuous" and he would be allowed to board the plane.

"I was pretty shaken up," he says. "But I also felt guilty that I hadn’t realized bringing this book to the airport may cause a problem."

Another 10 minutes or so passed while he sat in the waiting area. A female United employee — Godfrey failed to jot down her name — came over and informed him that he wouldn’t be allowed to fly, "for three reasons."

The first reason, she said, was that Godfrey was reading a book with an illustration of a bomb on the cover. Secondly, she said, he purchased his ticket on Sept. 11. (Godfrey bought the ticket on Priceline.com shortly after midnight, at least eight hours before the World Trade Center was attacked).

And the final reason cited by the United employee was that Godfrey’s Arizona driver’s license had expired. The employee pointed to a date to substantiate this allegation.

"No," Godfrey told her. "That’s the day the license was issued."

The woman then pointed to another date on the card, Feb. 17, 2000, contending it was the expiration date. Godfrey countered that the date identified him as "under 21" until then.

"Too bad, it’s too late," the flight attendant informed him.

A defeated and disappointed Godfrey reclaimed his luggage and was escorted out of the airport.

When he got home, Godfrey did what a lot of guys do when they need consoling — he phoned his mom.

Godfrey’s mother offered to call United and attempt to straighten things out. A central reservation clerk assured her that her son was not banned from ever flying United again. She booked him on a different flight to Phoenix, this one departing Philadelphia at 3:04 p.m. that same afternoon.

Godfrey scurried back to the airport, leaving the Abbey novel at home. He exchanged it for a seemingly benign novel, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban.

When Godfrey arrived at the airport around 1:15 p.m., his luggage was again searched. But as Godfrey passed through the metal detector, a police officer recognized him from the commotion just a few hours earlier. The cop pulled Godfrey aside and made a few phone calls. Ultimately, he declared that everything checked out fine. But a National Guardsman standing nearby vetoed that decision.

"This time, they took my Harry Potter book and about four people studied it for 20 minutes," Godfrey says.

Finally, at about 1:45 p.m., officials apparently felt reassured that Godfrey was not a security threat. They told Godfrey he would be permitted on the plane, but that he couldn’t pass through security until 2:30 p.m.

At the appointed time, an escort took Godfrey through security, while at least 15 law enforcement officials looked on. Rather than taking Godfrey directly to his gate, however, he was ushered into a private interrogation room.

"They patted me down and found nothing," Godfrey says. But when he emerged from this room, Burt Zastera, supervisor of airport operations for United, told him he would not be allowed to fly.

"He told me he didn’t know the reason why, that he was ‘just conveying the information,’" Godfrey recalls. Zastera gave Godfrey a contact number he could call for a full explanation.

Godfrey’s father called that number and was told his son was banned from flying United because he cracked "a joke about bombs."

"That is totally false," Godfrey says, pointing out that no one at the airport ever mentioned this to him. Plus, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations stipulate that any passenger who jokes about explosives be arrested on the spot. By contrast, Godfrey was never charged or even accused of breaking the law. In fact, Philadelphia Police officers didn’t even file an incident report, according to department spokesman Cpl. Jim Pauley.

Other airport and law enforcement officials have very little to say about Godfrey’s treatment.

Zastera says he is "not allowed to comment" on what happened because it is a security matter. United Airlines spokesman Chris Bradwig says he is "unaware" of the Oct. 10 incident.

"Even so, we don’t comment on security matters," he says.

A supervisor with Aviation Safeguard, the company United contracts to man security checkpoints in Philadelphia, denied responsibility for detaining Godfrey.

"The only ones who determine who can’t get on a flight is the airline," says an Aviation Safeguard supervisor, who refused to provide her name. "We don’t stop any books."

Philadelphia International spokesman Mark Pesce agrees that only individual airlines determine whether to permit a passenger to fly.

"When a passenger passes through security, it is under the jurisdiction of the airline. We don’t get involved," he says, adding that stories like Godfrey’s are likely to become increasingly common.

The FAA has no policy regulating "specific types of reading material," says spokeswoman Arlene Salac.

from http://www.citypaper.net/articles/101801/news.godfrey.shtml
 
Very well said anthony, no seriously very valid points indeed.

However, liberal viewpoints went out the window when a 767 and 757 were flown by ARABS into the World Trade Center. When you see mass killings and terrorist acts, how often is it commited by Arabs? Why? Well the if, buts and why's are moot points. It is a war and such people cause the problems. I was stuck in the center of Bangor for 3 hours the other day, because an Arab person planted a 'bomb' in the center of Bangor. Great, right? The other week an Iranian national immigrant was arressted with bomb making material and plans for our local nuke power plant and RAF airbase. You don't see local people or westerners doing this do you? Take the IRA, they are nasty people but you would NEVER see them use chemical weapons or fly planes into buildings for Gods sake. This is not terrorism, it is a war against the western world, red and black ants, we will never get along will we?

When I said ban Arabs from being on planes, I intended this as a tempory measure till better things can be done. When America was at war internment camps were set up for Japanise nationals? Was this wrong? Probably but can you take the chance in a time of war? We are at WAR! In life you must act against those MOST likely to do such terror, and if we are all honest that terror mostly has an Arab face. Am I lieing?

The airlines are taking the right of the many to protect us from the few. Do any of you honestly think this level of biological and terrorist threat is not from Arabs?:rolleyes:

Call me a racist if you like, but we are at war and I call it as I see it, I want to carry a knife on a plane so if it happened to me I could stand up and fight those scum bag Arabs. I saw the images of Palistinian low lifes (eight flipping THOUSAND of em) celebrating the terror, the Arab world made claims of dissapointment and regret over this, while the people burn flags and spat at our culture. Call me what ever you want, but deep down I dislike myself for holding these views, I know it is wrong and a dark seed of hatred has settled on my heart, but the practicalities suggest I am living in the real world even if I dislike the reality of it. Notice how America provided more aid to Afganistan before this than the whole Arab world put together? They are big on mouth and empty on actions, untrustworthy and a threat to life, which they evidently hold in the lowest regard.

I don't know what dissapoints me more, liberal views that appease terror? The world today as it is? Or my own clouded viewpoint? :confused:

I used to be a Liberal person, now I see danger all around the world and the worst hive of evil is in the Arab world.
 
General, I don't know if you are racist or not. I do know that you recommend racist reactions to a problem. First, by placing everyone under strong scrutiny, you greatly reduce the risk of an attack. In case you didn't know, not all people who are terrorists match the swarthy stereotype. There are blonde, blue eyed, east Asian, and black fundamentalists. Second, would you be willing to be banned from public transport in skinheads or the National Front began to attack Black Britons in your community? Afterall, you're a white man who likes knives; to most non-whites, you sound pretty suspect. As for te treatment of the Japanese, most Americans now feel that tyhat was wrong, especially considering that we had 40x more Germans and Italians in the country. We even had a German in charge of the army.
 
Anthony, I respect your view point and deep down know you are right and I am wrong. My reaction is due to fear and the desperate need to do something about a problem. I am in no way proud of my feelings and I know they are wrong. However sometimes in times of war we need to do terrible things to protect the majority.

All I am suggesting with regards to planes is you ask which group is MOST likely to do this and until security is 100% improved, do not allow such groups on planes!

If skinheads went on a rampage and killed thousands of people an planes or buses or whatever I would call for this as well. I am aware the human race has done this and not 'groups' but we can't ban the human race from flying can we? I am simply talking about risk assesment and if we are honest we are in real risk at the moment in this case from this group. Does that make me racist? The fact I have coloured and jewish friends is in any way relevant? I don't know, but if bears/sharks/big cats or whatever eat people on a regular basis, we need to act! Those actions may mean keeping away from such groups or creatures or taking more measures for security. I don't say kill them all like others, just go for the villains and accept that at the moment bearded religious males with AK-47's are part of a high risk group, thats all.
 
General,

I see the point you are making and would agree with it if it were not for this: you could just as easily replace the term "Arab" in your last post with "men". Fact is, you never do see women carrying out these acts. Maybe women would feel safer if...

The internment camps were wrong, and did nothing to help us win the war. That is documented. Yes, the terrorists are of middle-eastern descent, but not everyone of middle-eastern descent are terrorists. I just can't agree with what you suggest. It will serve no good to treat any US citizen as anything less.

From your last post, I am of the impression that you do not hate all middle-easterners. Are you racist? I don't know, because I don't know you. However, I think everyone has their own definition.

Like I said, this wasn't where I wanted this thread to go, so this will be my last post on this matter here.

-Al-
 
Originally posted by Dexter Ewing

...and there was a point in time that every boy carried a pocketknife to school

I think I remember my Dad telling me that he used to carry a 22 rifle with him to school so he could hunt squirrels on the way home...(long time ago!)

--gordon
 
It IS a good point Anthony. But I don't intend to allow anyone of ANY race to harm my family or me.
I may be a racist when I get angry when I watch repeats of WTC attacks, or the WELL EDUCATED in the USA Middle Eastern young people proclaim Bin Badin a hero of Islam on TV and listen to BS rhetoric from other EDUCATED AND LIVING in the US Middle Eastern people proclaim the US a terrorist "DEVIL" country. Probably none of the victims or any of their family members had a damn thing to do with US policy making re the Middle East. They're dead though.

I can be proud as an American when I see hard working people of any nationality or religion "making it" in the US. Maybe I am a racist, I just hate *******s of any race or nationality trying to destroy America.
John
 
I agree I aught to have stated these 'men' rather than Arabs! That was a generalisation and unfair. I also accept that the majority of Muslims or Asians are not, like these people and wish no harm to anyone. Its just after seeing so many documentories on TV with Asians in Birminham and Leeds and Manchester and... the list goes on! Claiming its a war against them and they hate us and 'respect' Bin Laden! They are British when it suits them and whilst enjoying the comforts of being a European, spout hatred and racism towards people like you and me!

In Bangor (North Wales) there is a moderate sized Muslim community. This is highly unusual for North Wales as as a rule, few ethnic minorities live here. Well, in a number of places there is graffiti sprayed on walls and one near the train station proudly boasts "We respect Osama Bin Laden and will kill the Infidels" oh and another "Allah will strike again". Now of all the places in North Wales ONLY Bangor has had problems and bomb threats on a daily basis. Strange how it is one of the few places with a Muslim community.

If it has a beak and quacks, chances are its a duck.

Now I admit I was wrong to say some of what I said, but sometimes you need to drop the PC and do what you need to do to protect the innocent. That is my point and I stick by it, who honestly thinks the bombing of Afganistan will not create another 10,000 nut jobs willing to die for Allah?:rolleyes: But what else can we do? Sit back and do nothing?:confused:

I see the death and destruction and think what is the point? So many ignorant cultures want to blame the west because they are so stupid and corrupt that they cannot run their own affairs! We help with aid and get what? BOMBED! They are like sulky children having a bad day.

Anyway I have said my peace... Many will call me racist, but I think I am practical and honest. To answer the question about being banned from transport if people of my own 'group' were doing these deeds, I would say if it was happpening in 'those' counties, you bet it would happen! Lets remember they are the minorities and not us in our countries. As to would I be willing to give up rights, my answer would be YES. We have lost rights for FAR LESS in this case if white knife carrying Welsh men with a grudge had done this I would be ashamed to my core and while it was nothing to do with me I would EXPECT the blame and not see it as totally unfounded. But then I would say that woulden't I?:eek:

Practicality not political correctness aught to rule from now on.
 
Reiterating : nothing sharp or edgy allowed.

My favorites:
-Surefire E2
-Hefty keys on a longish paracord lanyard (across the face, or garrot)
-Belt (across the face, or choke)
 
Okay, I lied. I can't seem to stay away from this thread.

General: you've clarified your position well. We are all furious and are looking for answers, but I'm not sure any exist. This is new ground to us. Israel and Ireland have been dealing with similar situations for a while, but over here, the idea of real terrorism (not just some nut -- whose name I won't dignify in print -- blowing up a government building to make a friggin point) is completely foriegn. How are we to deal with this? What sacrifices are we willing to make? How long are we ready for this to go on?

In the past our ememy was much more obvious; our goal reasonably in sight (the Vietnam Conflict, nay, WAR, excluded); our people more united (again -- Vietnam excluded). Today's war is not so well defined.

In WWII, the number of Americans of Japanese or Asian descent that were interned was, I imagine, far less than the number of Americans of middle-eastern descent living here today. Are they all to be viewed as a potential enemy? I say no, but I am one person, and my only involvement in politics is at the voting booth. Hopefully the citizens we have elected to represent us will make choices that will not only help solve the problem, but choices that we can be proud of 25 years from now.

This is new ground, and I suppose it is discussions like this one that will allow us as world citizens to better understand what is going on around us.

May we never be forced to show our teeth, use our knives, or fire our guns on our own soil.

I love this country,

-Al-

P.S.: Sorry if I got a little wishy-washy at the end. I just got my Sebenza in the mail and I'm a little teary-eyed. It's just so darn beautiful.:)
 
Back
Top