"Nobody will ever bring down a plane with a sharp object. Ever, ever." Um you might want top reconsider that one.

Nobody will ever bring down a plane with a sharp object. Ever, ever.

It wasn't the bringing down of a plane with sharp objects that caused problems. It was the taking over of the plane using sharp objects.

"It was the taking over of the plane using sharp objects." Conan...

once upon a time, sure. Now how you gonna get through that armored cockpit door? How're you going to get past those burly men who have decided that they will be no easy meat, any longer.

Think the game has changed substantially. OTOH, only an idiot would try to fly with a knife... regardless of right, TSA is the current regime, and they don't allow knives. There are much better ways of demonstrating against civil liberties erosion, than bringing what most people consider a dangerous weapon onboard. Even my Swiss army knife was sniffed at in the old days.

OTO,OH this is a good reason why I don't fly at all. It is no longer convenient on hops under 1000 miles or so.

Now how you gonna get through that armored cockpit door? ~ Posted by: SwissArmyD at July 7, 2014 9:01 AM

Same way the 9/11 hijackers did. The cabin crew on at least one flight blocked access to the cockpit and prevented the hijackers from getting into the cockpit.

The hijackers then started slitting the throats of the flight attendants until the captain relinquished control of the plane.

How're you going to get past those burly men who have decided that they will be no easy meat, any longer. ~ Posted by: SwissArmyD at July 7, 2014 9:01 AM

That's the real game changer.

Prior to 9/11, the standard protocol was to give in to the hijackers since most hijackings were about flying the plane somewhere and getting money or other concessions. Giving in minimized casualties.

The intent of the hijackers at Entebbe to kill the Jewish passengers started changing that.

The wanton murder of Leonard Klinghoffer on the Achille Lauro was another nail in the coffin of simply giving in.

Finally, 9/11 ended it.

Oh, they're having a real frenzy. The latest on US-bound international flights: If you have a phone, tablet, laptop or whatever and the battery is empty, they won't let you take it on the plane. As if having a dead phone isn't already enough to ruin your day, now the TSA wants to take it away.

As someone else noted: Christmas is coming early for the TSA, as they confiscate all sort of nifty electronics...

Um...from what I heard on the news recently, the idea is that you're supposed to turn it on before boarding to prove it isn't going to be used as a trigger for a bomb. (Though I would imagine it would be relatively easy to get around that test - but what do I know?)

More here:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u-s-tightens-security-electronics-overseas-airports-n149186

Um you might want top reconsider that one.

You're welcome to try hijacking any flight I'm on with a knife or box cutter. Well, actually, a knife would be better. It will cause me to think more carefully on how to disarm you without injury to myself or others.

On the other hand, you'll have also given me an object with which I can carve you up like a Thanksgiving Turkey. So, thanks for that.

As if having a dead phone isn't already enough to ruin your day, now the TSA wants to take it away.

Teh Stupid Agency strikes again. Ok, so I can't get a piece of broken tech on in my luggage. So how do I get it home?

Oh, yeah, I mail myself a parcel. And I send it par avion. Deer TSA: that's a French phrase meaning "by air". Air mail. A sizable amount of which is shipped via passenger airliner.

*facepalm*

it isn't going to be used as a trigger for a bomb

How does that work? I'm pretty sure a working cell phone is necessary if you want to use it to trigger a detonation remotely via a cell call. I was under the impression that the TSA was worried about dead iGear being stuffed with Semtex and detonated by suicide bomber. A suicide bomber just needs enough primary explosive to detonate a secondary explosive charge, and a trigger to start the primary.

If you want a more sophisticated mechanism, you could use a aneroid barometer and the aforementioned par avion packages. For that you just need a decent bomb maker, and someone who can manage to ship parcels.

How does that work? I'm pretty sure a working cell phone is necessary if you want to use it to trigger a detonation remotely via a cell call. ~ Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie at July 7, 2014 11:43 AM

I'm guessing the way it works is that you walk up to the "repurposed mall workers manning the TSA checkpoints" to board the plane and when asked to turn on your device, you say the battery is dead (or actually disconnect said battery so it doesn't detonate the device before you're ready).

Not being an expert in the subject, I'm not 100% on the details or intricacies.

If it turns on and acts like a computer, phone, or other device, it's presumed to be okay.

OMG, I can't believe the people chiming in here defending the TSA. This country is so fucked.

By the way, Amy, reposted at TSA News:

http://tsanewsblog.com/14217/news/from-the-so-what-department-tsa-division/

"If it turns on and acts like a computer, phone, or other device, it's presumed to be okay."

Which is another illustration of stupidity and ignorance on the part of the TSA. A sizable number of laptop computers have space inside for a second hard drive. This space inside the case is more than enough for explosives, or even a small gun.

Passengers will act as though they are being saved once again, though, because they do not realize that everything TSA confiscates today has flown on airliners for the last 70 years.

Meanwhile, there is no enemy. So many populated targets exist in the United States with no protection all…

OMG, I can't believe the people chiming in here defending the TSA. This country is so fucked. ~ Posted by: Lisa Simeone at July 7, 2014 12:16 PM

I don't think anyone's defending the TSA as much as not rushing to agree that a guy sneaking a knife onto a plane is a good example of why we don't need the "repurposed mall workers" and the security theater they provide.

Not that I agree with the TSA. Personally, I think people should be able to bring pocket knives onto the plane. And if they don't have one, one should be issued to them - to cut up what passes for meat in their airline meal if for no other reason.

But it's not legal these days ... and this guy knew it. Hence the hollowed out shoe compartment.

And let's not hold this idiot up as a civil liberties hero. He tried to sneak a knife aboard a plane in a hollowed out compartment of his shoe. Who does that? It's not like he was desegregating a lunch counter or exposing NSA spying.

His motivation? Just guessing, but avoiding the fee for checking a bag. Or maybe he wanted to feel like James Bond. Or maybe he wanted to see if he could get it past the repurposed mall workers manning the TSA checkpoints.

I guess he found out the answer to number three. And the prize for discovering the answer is jail.

Idiot.

I've snuck a knife through the TSA more than a few times. Usually it was a small one I forgot I had on me and had to get it through or mail it home. Hiding it in a secret compartment in a shoe that is going through an x-ray machine is not the way to do it.

OT: What does it say about the people writing the spell check applications on our computers that Google Chrome doesn't recognize the word "snuck?"

Thank you Conan:

"And let's not hold this idiot up as a civil liberties hero. He tried to sneak a knife aboard a plane in a hollowed out compartment of his shoe. Who does that?"

Yes, I agree - who does that? And I further agree that we shouldn't hold this guy up as some sort of civil liberties case. It's not.

Now, if we can get one of the little old ladies to start something about her knitting needles being taken away - then we might have something.

Conan OT;

"What does it say about the people writing the spell check applications on our computers that Google Chrome doesn't recognize the word "snuck?"

Answer: outsourced offshore

> Nobody will ever bring down a plane with
> a sharp object. Ever, ever.

It's a weird thing to say.

The "Ever, ever" is... Weird.

For all you regular readers of the Goddess' blog you can skip past this post. I'm going to post my regular rant about not needing the TSA. For all you new readers, please read it carefully and refute any statement or misstatement. ;-)

=================================================
The TSA was not needed one hour and one minute after Tower II was hit!

The paradigm, the norm, the expected, what everyone was taught to do was to sit down, shut up and wait for the plane to land and the negotiations happen. That was the model from before Entebbe and afterward.

The passengers on board did not really know what was about to happen on September 11, 2001 at 8:46:30 when Flight 11 struck Tower I.

Even the passengers on Flight 175 probably didn't realize what was about to happen when they struck Tower II at 9:03:02.

The Pentagon crash of Flight 77 at 9:37:46 may have been still a matter of ignorance.

At 10:03:11 on September 11, 2001, United Airlines Flight 93 crashed after the brave souls counter-attacked and caused the hijackers to crash the plane.

The time difference is 60 minutes and 9 seconds from Tower II being struck to the crash of Flight 93. The shoe bomber and panty bomber were taken down by fellow passengers as well. Recently, JetBlue's Flight 191 pilot was taken down by the passengers once he was out of the cockpit. Additionally how many times have you heard of passengers' concerns and diverted flights?

The TSA is and has always been a joke, no make that a total stupidity, that has wasted our country's fortune going down a rabbit hole.

If you don't believe me look at the 9/11 timeline.

There will never be another 9/11 style attack unless the attackers can arrange planes full of geriatrics, and even then it would be doubtful.

Oh, and someone brought bombs being an issue. If bombs were effective and simple then the Lockerbie bombing would have been repeated multiple times between 21 December 1988 and 11 September 2001. That's 4647 days or 13 years. Where was the TSA in that time? There was one successful bombing that was done in Colombia and two unsuccessful attempts in that time. The bombing in Colombia was a drug dealer assassination and not a terrorist attack.

Basically the normal was used in an abnormal way. Once it was realized it was countered.
=================================================

If I'm getting this wrong, please let me know.

Heck, I hadn't though about it, but I undoubtedly contributed to the success rate of the TSA. A couple of years ago, when my mother died, I was cleaning out her house. On the way home, I put several smaller knick-knacks in one of our checked bags: this included several letter openers made of brass, silver and pewter.

There were three of us, with six bags. At the airport at o-dark-thirty, I mixed them up; checked one of the carry ons and carried the bag with the sharp stuff. You should have seen the TSA eyes light up when that bag went through X-ray. You'd think it was Christmas! They had such fun digging out all the "sharp" object of the bag and displaying them for all to see.

On the generous side, I suppose it broke up an otherwise utterly boring job. And they were rather nice about it - they let me take the bag back out of security and check it it.

At the same time, it highlighted the stupidity of the whole system. I mean, who is going to hijack a plane with a letter opener?

I have a couple of issues with the TSA, a large federal bureaucracy, that could have easily been privatized, and created by the airlines themselves.

The only thing good about a national organization, is standardization, and once you know the rules, and the drill,
You can expect the same sort of thing at every airport.

But, no, we don't get that, the procedures, and requirements are different at every airport.

Maybe it is to keep those terrorists off balance, but what it appears to do even better, is piss off, and drive away the customer base.

I agree, the thousand mile cut off, or even a bit further if taking guns, or other valuables that must be checked, is a good rule of thumb for driving.

In my experience, the best way to sneak a knife on board a plane is to completely forget it on the bottom of your purse.

On the same flight in which the TSA confiscated my hand cream, my husband got through a 6-inch iron pipe. (He just carries these sorts of things. He likes to build things.)

I got through twice with pocket knife in a fanny pack (don't judge me) that I just forgot. It was very small but the time I took it to housing court it was caught.

This is how we get buy-in from violations of our civil liberties. People become used to it and think, "Wow, gee, how nice that my government isn't stealing my stuff in their push to offer pretend security."

The hidden goal -- I believe -- is making us docile in the face of the civil liberties erosions. And they are succeeding. Baaaa...baaaaa...you can practically hear the sound of sheep from the "security" lines.

~ Posted by: Amy Alkon at July 8, 2014 5:23 AM

It's funny how many people are rushing to condemn Hobby Lobby in its fight against the intrusive Obamacare mandates while protesting government intrusion and coercion in other parts of people's lives (TSA, IRS, NSA etc.). I guess the intrusion's okay when it's being done to "them" and not to us.

Our government has insinuated itself too deeply into the private lives of its citizens, whether it's in security theater or dictating healthcare options or mandating automobile gasoline mileage.

And it's done this at our insistence ... and with our willful blindness. We see government intrusion or coercion in one sphere and we cheer it on, because it's the other guy (those crazy Christians at Hobby Lobby) and decry it when it reaches our shores.

We cry for government protection against real and imagined enemies and stand in line while our civil liberties are stripped from us in the name of security.

We look to the government to take over the hard work of educating our children and then gnash our teeth because Johnny not only can't read or add, he doesn't even know he can't.

We dismiss people who talk about morality or individual responsibility as crazies, preferring instead a government that allows anything and promises to take care of everything ... at not cost to us, the rich guy will be made to pay.

We long for the good old days when things worked, then insist the government pay union wages to all and provide benefits to the non-productive.

And, when things hit bottom, we look to the government to save us from the mess we insisted it create.

We have indeed found the enemy ... and it is in fact, us. So, grab your bread and let's go to the circus.

"Disbelief in magic can force a poor soul into believing in government...." ~ Tom Robbins (Still Life with Woodpecker)

"We're our own dragons as well as our own heroes, and we have to rescue ourselves from ourselves." Tom Robbins (Still Life with Woodpecker)

[/rant]

It's funny how many people are rushing to condemn Hobby Lobby in its fight against the intrusive Obamacare mandates while protesting government intrusion and coercion in other parts of people's lives (TSA, IRS, NSA etc.). I guess the intrusion's okay when it's being done to "them" and not to us.

Not really. You see Hobby Lobby did not argue that the government intrusion was wrong. Just that they deserved an exemption from a small part of it, but not the rest of it, because of the close personal relationship the owner of Hobby Lobby has with the creator of the universe

Hobby Lobby argued that it was wrong for the government to force them to do something that went against their religious beliefs (as silly as the rest of us may find them).

No matter how silly you might [rightly] find the owners of Hobby Lobby and their case to be, their argument was that the government was going too far in forcing them to pay for specific health insurance benefits that went against their religion.

Sounds a lot like the argument that the government is going too far when presuming people to be guilty and searching them randomly at the airport or collecting data about people's cell phone usage or singling out the president's political opponents for IRS scrutiny or serving no-knock warrants or confiscating assets without conviction or seizing private property for "the common good" and giving it to developers or....

It's about how much power the government should be allowed to have and whether the Constitutional limitations on federal government power should be enforced.

And when you cheer the government's limitations of civil liberties against people with whom you disagree, but decry it when it happens to people with whom you agree or with whom you wish to court favor, you're not part of the solution.

I dont think you should get a religious exemption from secular law.

After all the bible says non virgins should be killed on their parents porch if they try to get married.

That being said, I dont think the government should be able to tell a business how to operate, much beyond 'dont dump sewage wherever you feel like it' or what benefits to offer their employees

I dont think you should get a religious exemption from secular law. ~ Posted by: lujlp at July 8, 2014 10:27 PM

Until that secular law stomps on your right to not be forced do things to which you have religious objections.

We can't force Jews to drive on Sabbath. But we also can't be forced to drive them.

We can't force Catholics to eat meat on Friday during Lent. But restaurants also can't be forced to carry a non-meat product to accommodate them.

Granted, the situation gets trickier when we reach health insurance and other matters of "public good." Can Christian Scientists who own a small business be forced to provide health insurance that covers surgery? Can a Scientologist-owned business be forced to cover psychiatric care? Should Hobby Lobby be forced to carry all 20 forms of contraception?

We need some government oversight and regulation in society. Nonetheless, we should always opt for the least amount that will protect society. Less is better than more when it comes to government.

We have too much government now and that government is insatiably grabbing more power every day. It must be stopped.

However, in order to stop it, individual Americans will have to take responsibility for their own lives - and too many people are not willing to do that.

We elected that government. Maybe we deserve it.

"A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have." ~ Barry Goldwater

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." ~ H.L. Mencken