Step away from the cake, ma'am

Chris wrote:

Nor are men immune, as I learnt when flying back to Washington
after a holiday in France this month. I don't really look the Arab-terrorist
type - I'm blond, with blue eyes - and I was travelling with my wife and
18-month-old baby, not something your average terrorist tends to do. None of
which saved me from a hand down my trousers after I was hauled aside for a
random check on the gangway leading to the aircraft.

Any man putting his hand down my trousers will have some serious hurt on him.
And, I don't care if it's some TSA fruitcake (no pun intended). That's an
improper search by TSA's own rules, in public or in the private room.

Also, I like fruitcake. I never understood the problem, unless there are a lot
of people out there that don't know how to make one.

--
Jim

carry on

No lie. When we came back from New England in October, a couple of
jars of Maple Syrup in the luggage set off their bomb detectors. I
saw them wanding and frisking a 7-year-old little girl! I surely felt
safe on that flight, knowing that little blond girl was not carrying
explosive maple syrup on her person.

But many billions are being spent on a miserable failure anti-missle
system, and hundreds of billions on an even worse mid-east war. Does
anyone doubt that Bush's Iraq fiasco has made us far less safe?

"Bob Fry" wrote

But many billions are being spent on a miserable failure anti-missle
system, and hundreds of billions on an even worse mid-east war. Does
anyone doubt that Bush's Iraq fiasco has made us far less safe?

As long as you insist on interjecting personal political opinion in a place
where it does not belong, I'll answer.

Yep I doubt it. You are not looking at a possible favorable long term
picture.

By the way, when was the last time there was a terrorist attack ON American
soil? I would rather have our trained, volunteer soldiers fighting on there
soil, as ours.

By the way, don't many new technologies take a while to get the bugs worked
out?

There are two views on every issue, and this is not the proper place to air
them.
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" writes:

Yep I doubt it. You are not looking at a possible favorable long term
picture.

Possible, rather unlikely. I've worked with mid-easterners for many
years. There is no way they are ready for democracy and there is no
way a government favorable to the West--let alone the US--will be
installed, and last, in Iraq. Not for decades.

By the way, when was the last time there was a terrorist attack ON American
soil? I would rather have our trained, volunteer soldiers fighting on there
soil, as ours.

Oh, like the Iraq war prevented new attacks? I doubt even you believe
that. Probably Bush doesn't by now.

By the way, don't many new technologies take a while to get the bugs worked
out?

Yes, but you've missed the point.

There are limited resources--dollars--to spend (in spite of Bush's
huge deficits). Therefore the rational thing to do is seek the most
effective marginal rate of return on those dollars. This we have not
done at all, and I cited two examples: checking container cargo and
chasing down Russia's loose nuke material. Doing those properly would
give us far more safety than the current policies at much less cost.

There are two views on every issue, and this is not the proper place to air
them.

Especially when a view contradicts yours, eh? If we can talk
fruitcake we can talk Bush's simplistic and ideologic politics.

"Bob Fry" wrote in message
Especially when a view contradicts yours, eh? If we can talk
fruitcake we can talk Bush's simplistic and ideologic politics.

I agree Bush is a fruitcake.

There are two views on every issue, and this is not the proper place to
air them.


Especially when a view contradicts yours, eh? If we can talk
fruitcake we can talk Bush's simplistic and ideologic politics.

Just don't take my silence to your clever reply as agreement, or
disagreement. I'm willing to put my actions where my beliefs are, and not
clutter this *great forum*, with things as personal and unchanging as
politics and religion. They don't belong here.

How about you? Are you willing to talk planes instead of politics?
--
Jim in NC

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 15:30:06 -0500, "Morgans"
wrote:

How about you? Are you willing to talk planes instead of politics?


I am!

z

(Thinking that plane talk is what these forums are all about, but
sometimes wondering if the group's been mis-named.)

"Morgans" writes:

How about you? Are you willing to talk planes instead of politics?

Sure.

First clear day in a couple of weeks (we get radiation fog in
California's Central Valley every winter), so I left work early to
warm up the oil in the Aircoupe.

Heading south from the Sacramento area to the Delta, a strong north
wind at altitude let me achieve 160 mph groundspeed. I don't see that
often on the GPS. Then I turned 180 deg to see how slow I could get;
briefly held below 10 mph groundspeed! Great fun on a brisk winter
day. Everything has greened up and the ducks, geese, and large white
birds, possibly sandhill cranes, were all flying around in flocks
below. North California, a great place to fly.

"Bob Fry" wrote in message
...

But many billions are being spent on a miserable failure anti-missle
system, and hundreds of billions on an even worse mid-east war. Does
anyone doubt that Bush's Iraq fiasco has made us far less safe?

Of course, everyone who is not a corrupt political hack doubts statements
like that.

If you've ever tasted British christmas pudding, you'd realize that TSA is
doing good work by sealing America's borders to it. It's a concoction only
the British could love!

Shawn
"Chris" wrote in message
...
Step away from the cake, ma'am

The latest follies of US airport security are pushing
travellers to the limits, says Tony Allen-Mills



Britons rushing to America to take advantage of the sinking
dollar would do well to heed the latest US security warning. The
Transportation Security Administration - also known to frequent flyers as
Thousands Standing Around - has advised passengers not to travel with
fruitcake.
Apparently, the dense composition of "heavy" foods such as
fruitcake and Christmas pudding might be mistaken for explosives by
airport screening machines. A passenger whose baggage triggers an alarm
might in turn be subject to intensive search procedures - and those are no
laughing matter. No unsuspecting Briton flying in or out of Fortress
America is safe from a poke in the groin or a fondle under the bra.



While few of us begrudged the enhanced security that smothered
American airports after the tragedy of 9/11, a recent tightening of
already intensive screening procedures is provoking increasing passenger
resistance.

Here's the kind of thing you can now expect to see at any
American airport. Jenepher Field, 71, a grandmother who walks with a cane,
was led aside at Kansas City airport for a private inspection of her
breasts. When an 83-year-old California woman was subjected to similar
treatment, she complained to the screener: "For God's sake, what are you
looking for? I've never had anyone do that to me before."

Nor are men immune, as I learnt when flying back to Washington
after a holiday in France this month. I don't really look the
Arab-terrorist type - I'm blond, with blue eyes - and I was travelling
with my wife and 18-month-old baby, not something your average terrorist
tends to do. None of which saved me from a hand down my trousers after I
was hauled aside for a random check on the gangway leading to the
aircraft.

I couldn't help noticing, as my wife and baby stood helplessly
by and a screener peered at the metal studs on my Mexican cowboy belt,
that several Arab-looking males were sauntering onto the plane.

Of course, that's a racist observation, but it's also the crux
of America's problem. Billions of dollars are being spent on unpleasantly
invasive security procedures that are applied to who, exactly? Kansas
grandmothers and blond Englishmen? The TSA responds that Al-Qaeda is
almost certainly probing US airports for signs of potential weakness. If
Osama Bin Laden notices that a certain group of traveller is immune from
security checks, he will refine his recruiting efforts. "The suggestion
that our screeners should pay less attention to grandmas and babies is
like giving a free pass to terrorists," declares James Loy, former head of
the TSA.

I suppose it's just about possible that Bin Laden could find an
American grandmother willing to board a plane with a baby packed with
explosives. Yet I'm far from alone in wondering if the random nature of
these checks owes more to the administration's fear of being sued for
discrimination if it singles out suspect groups - single Arab males, for
one.

In Fortress America, a new book on post-9/11 security, Matthew
Brzezinski quotes a former security director of El Al, the Israeli state
airline, as laughing at American procedures. According to Offer Einav, at
least 80% of airline travellers are good citizens who present no danger.
El Al's system of passenger profiling aims to identify these citizens so
that security resources can be concentrated on the 20% who may present a
risk.

"Israel's passenger profiling differed fundamentally from the
American version," writes Brzezinski. "It was used not to roll the dice in
the hope of ferreting out potential hijackers during a random check, but
primarily to identify and eliminate honest travellers."

So, what can a British family do to avoid being singled out for
so-called secondary screening (look for the dreaded SSSS alert on your
boarding passes)? Let me pass on a helpful tip. Choose your Christmas
presents carefully.

After a quick trip to Iowa earlier this year, I stopped at an
antiques shop in Des Moines on my way back to the airport in the hope of
adding to my collection of arcane American objects. I found a delightful
tin can, covered with ancient red paint and bearing a handsome spout. It
was perhaps 75 years old, and I thought it would make an unusual vase to
put on the dining-room table. What I liked most about it was the yellow
lettering that spelt out the word GASOLINE.

I suppose some part of me knew that turning up at an American
airport with a petrol can, even an old and empty one, might prove a risky
venture. I figured I could persuade them that a terrorist would scarcely
attempt to check in with a suitcase marked "Bomb".

Well, you can imagine the rest. I missed my plane, supervisors
were summoned, security lines were paralysed, and I was given a long
lecture about security being no joke.

I eventually got the can back to DC, but only after the captain
of the next available flight agreed to take the risk of flying me. Happy
trails, everyone. And stay away from the fruitcake.