pilots refuse to fly with gun loons onboard

Gregory Procter wrote:


LIBassbug wrote:


Eddy_Down wrote:



Morton Davis wrote:


Box cutters could easily be concealed in shoes, up the rectum or vagina ,


It's like Mort came from a completely different planet, isn't it?

On our planet rectums and vaginas have small openings.


You have (5) very small fingers?

Is that a proposition?

--
Chris.
http://****france.com/

New Zealand tubbies.
http://www.geocities.com/libassbug/nztubbies.jpg

Vengeance is a hamburger that is eaten cold, writes Georges Dupuy in
Liberation.

No wonder the French military is a band of sissies, look at where they
get their stock from. (800k mpeg file.)
http://www.geocities.com/libassbug/frenchfighters.mpeg

funny mp3
http://www.geocities.com/libassbug/horserace.mp3

The new Three Stooge's
http://www.geocities.com/libassbug/happyfamily.jpg

Two clowns.
http://www.geocities.com/libassbug/groggyclown.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/libassbug/nickclown.jpg

"Nick Cooper" wrote in
message ...
On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 15:02:55 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


"Nick Cooper" wrote in
message ...
On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 00:27:48 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 23:06:46 GMT,
(Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 02:32:14 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 00:25:04 GMT,
(Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:06:08 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:12:56 +0000, Shaun
m wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 19:06:55 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 18:50:49 -0000, "nick"
wrote:

"Some flights to the US could be grounded after the airline
pilots' union
called on its members not to fly with armed sky marshals on
board."

"Airline pilots should not take off with marshals on board, the
British
Airline Pilots' Association (Balpa) has said."

"Capt Granshaw defended pilots' right to take action and said:
"Our advice
to pilots is that until adequate written and agreed assurances
are
received,
flight crew should not operate flights where sky marshals are
carried."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3357309.stm

Maybe you 'fraidy cats would like us to loan you some properly
trained
US Sky Marshals?

Are they as cowardly as the US passengers who were too scared to
deal
with four arabs armed with carpet knifes

What 4 Arabs armed with Carpet knives?

The ones on three out of four planes that took off one September
mornign a couple of years back

You mean the guys carrying BOX CUTTERS?

Maybe you should have read the thread properly. I merely pointed out
what Shaun was obviously refering to when Bogart either didn't or
pretended not to understand. Incidentally, not everyone calls them
"box cutters" - the term was certainly unknown in the UK beforehand.

And Mort twice took the time to point out the difference between box
cutters and carpet knives. If neither Shaun nor you understand the
terminology it's none of my concern.

I think it was more a case of you making a mountain out of a molehill.
Neither the term nor the item itself is generally familiar in the UK
and Shaun - perhaps imperfectly - simply used the nearest equivalent
that _is_ recognised here. I'm sure we could come up with lots of
"unfamiliar" terms for things that you don't have in the US that you
would have to similarly "translate."

Except by your own admission such knives are NOT known as carpet
knives....even in the UK

Although to be fair, as I've said, they are used by carpet fitters.

So are many other tools, but that doesn't make them carpet knives. Your
inability to admit to error is noted.

Bill Funk wrote

The only way a terrorist could get behind that locked,
bullet proof door is for someone to open it.
The British pliots (or rather, their union) seem to think
that having the pilots open that door is a really good idea.

Wouldn't the pilots have to open the door at some point
to go to the bathroom or for the stewardess to serve them
food and coffee?

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 20:18:26 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


"Nick Cooper" wrote in
message ...
On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 15:02:55 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


"Nick Cooper" wrote in
message ...
On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 00:27:48 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 23:06:46 GMT,
(Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 02:32:14 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 00:25:04 GMT,
(Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:06:08 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:12:56 +0000, Shaun
m wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 19:06:55 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 18:50:49 -0000, "nick"
wrote:

"Some flights to the US could be grounded after the airline
pilots' union
called on its members not to fly with armed sky marshals on
board."

"Airline pilots should not take off with marshals on board, the
British
Airline Pilots' Association (Balpa) has said."

"Capt Granshaw defended pilots' right to take action and said:
"Our advice
to pilots is that until adequate written and agreed assurances
are
received,
flight crew should not operate flights where sky marshals are
carried."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3357309.stm

Maybe you 'fraidy cats would like us to loan you some properly
trained
US Sky Marshals?

Are they as cowardly as the US passengers who were too scared to
deal
with four arabs armed with carpet knifes

What 4 Arabs armed with Carpet knives?

The ones on three out of four planes that took off one September
mornign a couple of years back

You mean the guys carrying BOX CUTTERS?

Maybe you should have read the thread properly. I merely pointed out
what Shaun was obviously refering to when Bogart either didn't or
pretended not to understand. Incidentally, not everyone calls them
"box cutters" - the term was certainly unknown in the UK beforehand.

And Mort twice took the time to point out the difference between box
cutters and carpet knives. If neither Shaun nor you understand the
terminology it's none of my concern.

I think it was more a case of you making a mountain out of a molehill.
Neither the term nor the item itself is generally familiar in the UK
and Shaun - perhaps imperfectly - simply used the nearest equivalent
that _is_ recognised here. I'm sure we could come up with lots of
"unfamiliar" terms for things that you don't have in the US that you
would have to similarly "translate."

Except by your own admission such knives are NOT known as carpet
knives....even in the UK

Although to be fair, as I've said, they are used by carpet fitters.

So are many other tools, but that doesn't make them carpet knives. Your
inability to admit to error is noted.

Your inability to work out exactly who said what is noted.
--
Nick Cooper

[Carefully remove the detonators from my e-mail address to reply!]

625-Online - classic British television:
http://www.625.org.uk
'Things to Come' - An Incomplete Classic:
http://www.thingstocome.org.uk
Lost in France (& Belgium) - Two weeks in Normandy, the Somme &
Flanders; Simon the Cat of 'HMS Amethyst':
http://www.nickcooper.org.uk

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 12:25:56 GMT, in a fit of unbridled digital verbosity, once
again proving the problem is located between the seat and the keyboard, Dave
Whitmarsh two-fingered to all:

|On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 12:13:34 GMT, "Morton Davis"
wrote:
|
|
|"Little John" wrote in message
...
| On 31 Dec 2003 07:39:33 -0800, in a fit of unbridled digital verbosity,
|once
| again proving the problem is located between the seat and the keyboard,
| (J. Hall) two-fingered to all:
|
| | And you honestly think we give a **** about some ****-whiskered Brits
| | who are too ****ing stupid to safeguard their own planes?
| |
| |I love that phrase "**** whiskers". I'll have to make a note of it for
| |later use...which brings us on to another point- there is a fear that
| |shooting in a plane might accidently depressurize the plane. The fact
| |that the 7000 series aluminium alloys modern planes are made of have a
| |tensile strength similar to mild steel does not count. I don't think
| |the marshalls will be firing armour peircing rounds in the plane; most
| |likely they will be using those JHP ones that flatten when they hit
| |something.
|
| They use Glasers, a bullet designed specifically for use by air marshalls.
|If
| you're unfamiliar with them, they're compressed lead shot in a thin copper
| jacket with a plastic tip. They're so frangible, they won't go through
|both
| sides of the typical house's drywall walls with any real force left. But,
|they
| pack a helluva whollop when they hit a former bad guy.
|
| http://mysite.elixirlabs.com/index.p...2665&page=1979
|
|
|Even if they fired 9MM rounds, danger to the aircraft, and the passengers,
|would be extremely slight.
|
|CITE!

Go to the link above. It's not difficult to glean that the real concern when
using standard bullets is hydraulic lines and power/control cables. The chances
are quite slim, considering the routing of these lines, for a bullet fired at a
would be hijacker to hit one of them. Slight, but not totally beyond concern.


jammin1-at-jammin1-dot-com

jammin1's Resources
www.jammin1.com

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 17:35:31 GMT, in a fit of unbridled digital verbosity, once
again proving the problem is located between the seat and the keyboard, AH#49
"Asshole™#49"@ your.net two-fingered to all:

|Bogart wrote:
|
| On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 15:01:43 GMT, "Scout"
| wrote:
|
| Yep, and that's what happened on the 4th plane. What I want to know is how
| having a sky marshal on board would have made matters worse. Would those
| passengers have died twice?
|
| How would having a SM on board have helped?
|
|Possibly by making sure that the Sky Marshall sits in first class, and
|gets to shoot the first person he sees that attempts to enter the
|Cockpit by force or without the "secret knock."
|
|
| The 4th plane didn't know
| their fate and the fate of the other planes until long after the
| terrorists had taken over the cockpit and killed the pilots. What
| does the SM add that would have changed their final outcome?
|
| He would be armed and would have (I hope) shot the ****ers dead trying
|to get inside.
|After all, who but somebody that was incredibly stupid would try to
|enter the cockpit besides flight personnel?
|
|And no, a bullet that pierces the hull of a plane will not suck all the
|passengers out through it like Bond, James Bond said it would in
|"Goldfinger" when he was chatting to Pussy Galore.

14 psi will barely give 'em a hickey if they stick their neck on it.


jammin1-at-jammin1-dot-com

jammin1's Resources
www.jammin1.com

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 18:02:54 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


" Bogart " wrote in message
ws.com...
On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 15:01:43 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


" Bogart " wrote in message
ws.com...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 22:51:54 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


" Bogart " wrote in message
ws.com...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 19:27:22 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


" Bogart " wrote in message
ws.com...
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:28:59 +0000, Shaun
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 00:28:34 GMT, Mongo Jones
wrote:

In talk.politics.guns

(Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:44:42 GMT, Mongo Jones
wrote:

In talk.politics.guns Chris Morton
wrote:

In article
,
nick
says...

"Some flights to the US could be grounded after the airline
pilots'
union
called on its members not to fly with armed sky marshals on
board."

Pizza loving anti-Semite points out that British pilots
would
rather
fly into
buildings than have armed POLICE on board.

They're as big a bunch of netwits as Jew hater Nick.

We should put the British Airline Pilots' Association on
notice
that
any flight WITHOUT armed sky marshals on board will be shot
down
as
a
precautionary measure.

And you honestly wonder why the rest of the world has such a
low
opinion of America?

And you honestly think we give a **** about some ****-whiskered
Brits
who are too ****ing stupid to safeguard their own planes?

You should, Decades of proper airline security has proved
stunningly
effective at stopping planes being hijacked

Prior to 9/11 when was the last time a US airliner was hijacked
in
the
US? And what ultimately stopped the domestic hijacking?

Are you saying that only the US managed to implement proper
"airline
security"?

No. I asked prior to 9/11 when was the last time a US airliner was
hijacked in the US? Would you like to take a guess?

"No"? Then your question really isn't relevent, since hijacking aren't
limited to US airliners alone.

Second why exactly should we exclude the most recent example to
show
that
security was inadequate?

If you know the answer to my first question it relates directly to
my
second question, What ultimately stopped domestic hijacking?

Nothing. 9/11 stands forth as an example that domestic hijacking was
NEVER
stopped.

Now tie both of these two questions together with the correct
answers
which I'm sure Shaun will be providing us, and then see how it
relates
to the question of putting SKY MARSHALS on airplanes.

Two buildings destroyed, 4 planes with crew and passengers dead,
thousands
of lives lost, many more injured.

And a commitment to SHOOT DOWN THE NEXT PLANE THAT IS HIJACKED.

Yea, I can see how that pretty much answers the question of whether we
need
sky marshals on planes. We do. Period.

We do not need Sky Marshals on domestic airliners. Prior to 9/11 the
mindset on hijacked planes was for the passengers to just sit, be
passive and cooperate, and eventually the plane will go to Cuba or
wherever and eventually they'll be released safely and flown home.
After 9/11 passengers realized they were going on a suicide ride and
that realization caused them to adjust both their behavior and their
tactics. You will no longer see a group of passengers sit back and
meekly accept their fate when they realize they are going to die no
matter what action they take. The new mindset is, if faced with this
situation you must either fight for control of the aircraft otherwise
you will be doomed to go down with the plane anyway. So you might as
well take the hijackers with you.


Yep, and that's what happened on the 4th plane. What I want to know is
how
having a sky marshal on board would have made matters worse. Would those
passengers have died twice?

How would having a SM on board have helped? The 4th plane didn't know
their fate and the fate of the other planes until long after the
terrorists had taken over the cockpit and killed the pilots. What
does the SM add that would have changed their final outcome?

Well, see unlike the passengers who are basically taught not to interfer,
the sky marshals have a slightly different objective, and probably would
have taken action prior to their complete takeover.

That's an assumption on your part.

However, I'm still waiting for you to tell me how a SM onboard would have
made things worse.

I thought you understood by my counterpoint that I feel they would
have made no difference in that 4th plane. One hijacker claimed he
had a bomb. Until the passengers were allowed to use their cell
phones, the other hijackers being already in the cockpit with the
pilots dead, they thought the plane was returning back to the
Washington DC area. The SM now kills the hijacker with the bomb, or
supposed bomb and they all rush the cockpit. Hijackers in cockpit
crash the plane intentionally or they fly around until the plane runs
out of fuel and they crash then. The SM didn't makes things worse,
no was he of any assistance.

Since 9/11 we've had at least 3
cases where an airliner was threatened by the behavior of an
individual on board. In all three cases these individuals were either
subdued immediately or killed by the passengers who are no longer
assuming the flight attendant is responsible for taking care of the
problem. In this type of environment the added factor of a Sky
Marshal might actually be a hinderance rather than a help as he could
be mistaken for a hijacker himself.

Well, then it would sort of behoove him not to act in a threatening
manner
without cause then, wouldn't it.

Odd how we don't get a lot of cases of people jumping undercover officers
on
the ground because they might be criminals.

Faulty attempt at comparisons. Draw a gun in the middle of Times
Square New Years Eve and start pointing it at everyone and see how
many people jump you. You won't have anyone asking you to show your
police badge or credentials. Only after you're beaten to a pulp will
they'll look in your pockets.

Speaking of faulty comparisons.....are you really suggesting that a SM is
going to suddenly jump up in the plane and start waving his gun around and
pointing it at everyone?

Is that what you really got from what I wrote? At some point if the
SM is to take action he has to use some sort of force. How do you
suggest he draw out a gun or other weapon and not be jumped by
passengers in the post 9/11 era without announcing he's the SM. At
that point he loses the advantage of surprise.

Seems like the only faulty comparison is yours.

You're not reading it correctly.


In fact, can you document even ONE case in which an air marshal was
attacked
because the passengers thought he was a terrorist, hijacker, or otherwise
a
threat to the craft?

There hasn't been, to my knowledge, an incident involving a terrorist
attempt since 9/11 when a SM was on board. If ever there is, you have
the potential of having the SM attacked and subdued by the passengers
before he ever gets a chance to do anything.

Perhaps, but very unlikely, since the people will know who the terrorists
are long before the SM takes action.

Really? You honestly think that now with SM's on board it hasn't
occurred to the hijackers to bring an extra man on for the purpose of
taking out the SM?


So tell me, how often is an undercover officer jumped while trying to stop a
mugging? Seems people are pretty well able to tell who is the real threat,
and who is protecting everyone else.

You seem less than adept at figuring it out.

Sounds like empty emotional rhetoric to me.

Talk to a SM. There are whole lot of them who don't agree with you.

Cite please, that SMs feel they are more likely to be seen as a threat than
as an aid.

Let me guess, you're rap's resident nutcase? I didn't say SM's feel
they are more likely to be seen as a " threat than as an aid. ".
I'm telling you how they feel. It's from personal experience and
personal contact. Not every one is an amateur detective.

Feel free to argue your " theories " with someone else.

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 06:27:48 +1300, Gregory Procter
wrote:



Eddy_Down wrote:

Morton Davis wrote:

Box cutters could easily be concealed in shoes, up the rectum or vagina ,

It's like Mort came from a completely different planet, isn't it?

Errr, isn't Floriduh a completely different planet?

You claim the moon is a planet too, Socky.

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 20:54:36 GMT,
(Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 20:18:26 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


"Nick Cooper" wrote in
message ...
On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 15:02:55 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


"Nick Cooper" wrote in
message ...
On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 00:27:48 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 23:06:46 GMT,
(Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 02:32:14 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 00:25:04 GMT,
(Nick Cooper) wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:06:08 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 20:12:56 +0000, Shaun
m wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 19:06:55 GMT, " Bogart "
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 18:50:49 -0000, "nick"
wrote:

"Some flights to the US could be grounded after the airline
pilots' union
called on its members not to fly with armed sky marshals on
board."

"Airline pilots should not take off with marshals on board, the
British
Airline Pilots' Association (Balpa) has said."

"Capt Granshaw defended pilots' right to take action and said:
"Our advice
to pilots is that until adequate written and agreed assurances
are
received,
flight crew should not operate flights where sky marshals are
carried."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3357309.stm

Maybe you 'fraidy cats would like us to loan you some properly
trained
US Sky Marshals?

Are they as cowardly as the US passengers who were too scared to
deal
with four arabs armed with carpet knifes

What 4 Arabs armed with Carpet knives?

The ones on three out of four planes that took off one September
mornign a couple of years back

You mean the guys carrying BOX CUTTERS?

Maybe you should have read the thread properly. I merely pointed out
what Shaun was obviously refering to when Bogart either didn't or
pretended not to understand. Incidentally, not everyone calls them
"box cutters" - the term was certainly unknown in the UK beforehand.

And Mort twice took the time to point out the difference between box
cutters and carpet knives. If neither Shaun nor you understand the
terminology it's none of my concern.

I think it was more a case of you making a mountain out of a molehill.
Neither the term nor the item itself is generally familiar in the UK
and Shaun - perhaps imperfectly - simply used the nearest equivalent
that _is_ recognised here. I'm sure we could come up with lots of
"unfamiliar" terms for things that you don't have in the US that you
would have to similarly "translate."

Except by your own admission such knives are NOT known as carpet
knives....even in the UK

Although to be fair, as I've said, they are used by carpet fitters.

So are many other tools, but that doesn't make them carpet knives. Your
inability to admit to error is noted.

Your inability to work out exactly who said what is noted.

His grasp of what someone has actually written seems to conflict with
his set pre-concieved agenda.

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 18:04:33 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


" Bogart " wrote in message
ws.com...
On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 15:08:13 GMT, "Scout"
wrote:


"Bill Funk" wrote in message
news On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 10:37:33 -0700, "Kevin McCue"
wrote:

Wanna bet your life that they wouldn't miss? I wouldn't. I'd
rather
deal
with the terrorist.
Since the Dept. of Homeland Insecurity seems to think that the
terrorist are likely trained ATP's how will the Air Marshal stop them
when
they are locked behind that now reinforced, bullet proof cockpit door?

The only way a terrorist could get behind that locked, bullet proof
door is for someone to open it.
The British pliots (or rather, their union) seem to think that having
the pilots open that door is a really good idea.

Right, which is why it was managed to be opened by a couple of people
armed
with nothing more than a drink cart.

How did they open a locked bullet proof door with a drink cart?

They rammed the door with it.

You're claiming a locked bulletproof door gave way to ramming from a
drink cart? Cite please.