Underwear Bomber

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

But that is not what happened, right? And there are important reasons partly having to do with the system in place that this did not happen.

Part of the explosive device was sewn into AbdulMutallab's underwear, a law enforcement official told CNN Monday. A preliminary FBI analysis found that the device AbdulMutallab allegedly carried aboard the flight from Amsterdam, Netherlands, to Detroit, Michigan, contained the explosive pentaerythritol tetranitrate, known as PETN. The source could provide no details on the device. The amount of explosive involved was sufficient to blow a hole in the aircraft, a source with knowledge of the investigation told CNN Sunday.

If Luck is the major part of our Security Plan, then the Plan worked perfectly.

[hblask 1]

Seriously? The administrations job is to run the TSA and Homeland Security. This was an epic fail by both. I'm not saying that it is Obama's fault (not yet anyway) directly but the buck has to stop on his desk. Oh and lets continue to blame everything on Bush and Regan. After all they started AQ right?

The notion that any person or department or group of people can EVER have enough manpower to know the activity of every single person in the world and prevent every one of them from doing anything bad..... well, it's just silly.The best we can do is 1. stop pissing everyone off so that they want to bomb us, and 2. stop drowning our intelligence agencies in useless information acquired through the PATRIOT Act and other unconstitutional programs.And if you think I'm someone who wants to blame everything on Bush and Reagan, you haven't read much of what I've written. I've been brutal to Obama, for the most part. But facts is facts: Reagan trained Al Qeda, taking them from irrelevant to an important terrorist organization. And all the presidents since then have done things to make them hate us more, especially GWB. I don't really think that's partisan, just reality. But to make you feel better, I agree that Clinton made mistakes dealing with them, too, mainly by not taking out bin Laden when he had the chance. But before 9/11 that probably wouldn't have been politically feasible, even if all the intelligence agencies said it was necessary.

[CaneBrain 95]

Are you serious, "success" a "non-story." Step away from the coolaid man. Guy got on a plane with a bomb. That's epic fail, period. Only reason there isn't a bunch of dead people is just pure luck.I'm, not saying it's Obama's fault, I'm just saying that saying he is totally not to blame is ridiculous. We don't yet know where the exact failure points are and untill we do we don't know who should be held responsible.

Yeah, how did Obama and his administration not personally go to Amsterdam and prevent this? He is TOTALLY NOT TO BLAME PERIOD. Also, VB is smarter than all of us and he says that getting this explosive to detonate was next to impossible. Lets not ignore that. Let's also not ignore that 500,000 people are on the terror watch list. Putting them all on the no fly list is simply not feasible. Anyone with a name roughly similar to any of those 500,000 people would have to go through intrusive additional screening. It would be chaos.It's not a success, per se. It's not a failure either. It just is. Calling this pure luck is the definition of kool-aid drinking. So is trying to score cheap political points off a half-brained terror attempt.Also, BG's point is the best one here. there is no foolproof system. But if this is the best Al-Qaeda can do then we are doing pretty good.....and that is due to contribution from both political parties.

[Sal Paradise 57]

Yeah, how did Obama and his administration not personally go to Amsterdam and prevent this? He is TOTALLY NOT TO BLAME PERIOD.

this is a pretty odd opinion since you've stated multiple times that 9-11 was at least somewhat bush's fault.

[85suited 0]

Putting them all on the no fly list is simply not feasible. Anyone with a name roughly similar to any of those 500,000 people would have to go through intrusive additional screening. It would be chaos.

putting .01% of the worlds population on the no fly list is not feasable?

[CaneBrain 95]

this is a pretty odd opinion since you've stated multiple times that 9-11 was at least somewhat bush's fault.

because a lot of reports since 9-11 stated that they had intel about an upcoming terror attack involving the hijacking of planes. also, I dont think you can compare one 23 year old Nigerian's lame (and according to VB virtually impossible) terror attack to a massive, coordinated hijacking with the intent to destroy numerous important American buildings. Not to mention 9-11 worked and this did not. Results-oriented thinking I suppose but with terrorist attacks that stuff is pretty important.....and I bring up 9-11 against Bush mostly because of his and Cheney's insistence that they did a "great" job with national security (a claim I obviously think is total crap).if it comes out that the administration knew more about this possible attack than 'his father told the American embassy that he was into radical Islam', I will change my mind. At this point, I dont think you can put blame on anyone except the security at the Netherlands Airport.

[CaneBrain 95]

putting .01% of the worlds population on the no fly list is not feasable?

not according to Homeland security under both a Republican and Democratic administration. When both sides agree on something, it is usually a good point.Also, many Muslim men have very similar names. They have to stop and do additional screening not just of the men on the no-fly list but of anyone whose name is similar (which will encompass a LOT of people). The extra security needed to do this would be prohibitively expensive and would cause incredible delays, particularly on international flights.We are just going to have to accept that life, and flying, comes with some risk.

[85suited 0]

Democract or Republican administration, I am not buying that with today's technology, you can't match every airline's passenger list against a 500,000 person terror watch list.At most what could there be 2 additional searches per flight?Anyone here a statistician? Realistically, shouldnt the TSA agents be scanning your boarding card anyway... YOu could sort that out at the front of the airport.There should also be a system of getting like sounding names off a list of you are not a terroristI am sure this is way to pie in the sky thinking

[hblask 1]

Also, many Muslim men have very similar names. They have to stop and do additional screening not just of the men on the no-fly list but of anyone whose name is similar (which will encompass a LOT of people).

This is totally effective, because fortunately, Muslims don't know about fake IDs. Shhhhh, nobody tell them.

[CaneBrain 95]

Democract or Republican administration, I am not buying that with today's technology, you can't match every airline's passenger list against a 500,000 person terror watch list.At most what could there be 2 additional searches per flight?Anyone here a statistician? Realistically, shouldnt the TSA agents be scanning your boarding card anyway... YOu could sort that out at the front of the airport.There should also be a system of getting like sounding names off a list of you are not a terroristI am sure this is way to pie in the sky thinking

See Hblask's post for another of what I am sure are many many reasons that this is really pie in the sky stuff. We are just going to accept that air travel (like car travel) has some risk. The best maybe, sorta kinda practical improvement we could make, I think, is to upgrade the x-ray machines at airports. But I am sure the cost would be astronomical. Fiscal responsibility is really, really hard!

[hblask 1]

Democract or Republican administration, I am not buying that with today's technology, you can't match every airline's passenger list against a 500,000 person terror watch list.At most what could there be 2 additional searches per flight?Anyone here a statistician? Realistically, shouldnt the TSA agents be scanning your boarding card anyway... YOu could sort that out at the front of the airport.There should also be a system of getting like sounding names off a list of you are not a terroristI am sure this is way to pie in the sky thinking

Here's the problem: there are 6 billion people in the world and way fewer names than that. I have a (distant) relative whose last name is Johnson. They are on the no-fly list. They have asked TSA why. It's because of their name. How do they get off the list? There is a way, says TSA, but we're not allowed to tell you.So this person has to bring about a dozen notarized documents to the airport (he travels for business frequently), and give himself an extra 45 minutes while he is pulled aside and TSA has to call their superiors and check the stack of documents he has to bring.Most of the names on the current no-fly list are false positives. Do you really want to add a half million people to that list? Maybe we could just put *everyone* on the no-fly list, and only the people who can guess the secret TSA procedure to get off the list should be able to fly?

[Zealous Donkey 0]

Yeah, how did Obama and his administration not personally go to Amsterdam and prevent this? He is TOTALLY NOT TO BLAME PERIOD. Also, VB is smarter than all of us and he says that getting this explosive to detonate was next to impossible. Lets not ignore that. Let's also not ignore that 500,000 people are on the terror watch list. Putting them all on the no fly list is simply not feasible. Anyone with a name roughly similar to any of those 500,000 people would have to go through intrusive additional screening. It would be chaos.It's not a success, per se. It's not a failure either. It just is. Calling this pure luck is the definition of kool-aid drinking. So is trying to score cheap political points off a half-brained terror attempt.Also, BG's point is the best one here. there is no foolproof system. But if this is the best Al-Qaeda can do then we are doing pretty good.....and that is due to contribution from both political parties.

Maybe if we could just move to the no fly list the names of those whose father calls and warns that his son may be invloved in a suicide mission. That is what happened in this case. That this guy was not on the no fly list was a massive fail on someones part.

[strategy 4]

.

[hblask 1]

We should just start naming everyone with a unique hex string.I call DEADBEEF.

I call BADDAD.

[nutzbuster 7]

There needs to be a movement away from a seemingly overly P.C. pre 911 attitude and a move towards more of a profiling one imo.Ever fly EL AL? Someone once said it's like having an hour physical, complete with a colonoscomy. Pretty safe airline, that El AL.Also, when police or FBI or anyone along those lines tries to solve a crime you don't blindly round up everyone in the entire City. You start by collecting data, pinning it all up on a board and do reasonable deduction and identifying similarities. PROFILING. narrow down the people "MOST LIKELY TOO" etc. If you fit that bill, then tough shit. That is the world we all live in for the moment.and VB is not the most intelligent one here. Just the most brainy.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

I agree with all the intelligent posts in this thread and disagree with all the really stupid ones.

[CaneBrain 95]

Maybe if we could just move to the no fly list the names of those whose father calls and warns that his son may be invloved in a suicide mission. That is what happened in this case. That this guy was not on the no fly list was a massive fail on someones part.

His father only told the embassy that his son was getting way too into radical Islam. If he had mentioned that his son may be involved in a suicide mission (and had even the slightest credible evidence of it), that would be completely different.....no one here on either side would disagree with that. Also, think of the potential abuse. X hates Y because of personal problems. X calls the American embassy and informs them that Y is a terrorist. Y is put on the no fly list for no reason other than that X has a grudge. Not feasible. And this X and Y scenario is exactly how so many innocent people ended up in Guantanamo with the true terrorists there. Especially if you start offering reward money too. I am not sure how practical this would be.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

...I dont think you can compare one 23 year old Nigerian's lame (and according to VB virtually impossible) terror attack to a massive, coordinated hijacking with the intent to destroy numerous important American buildings...

So wait......if it had been a massive coordinated attempt that resulted in getting a bomb on board the aircraft, then the Administration or Homeland Security would be at fault?I agree with you that the expectation that we catch every attempt is just plain not reasonable. However neither is it reasonable to blame Bush for 911.And to state that the System worked and is secure simply because the bomb didn't detonate is a complete fabrication. A 23 year old was able to get explosive material on board an aircraft - enough explosive material to blow a hole in in the side of the plane. That demonstrates a flaw in the system. If the flaw originates in Amsterdam, it is still a flaw in our overall plan. Look. If someone smuggled a gun on a plane - that alone demonstrates a failure. Even if the gun wasn't ultimately used or misfired or didn't have bullets. If Napolitano said: "Sure he got a gun through security, but the system worked because he didn't get the bullets through." Would you buy it?Besides now even Napolitano is calling this a failure:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...no_N.htm?csp=34Napolitano concedes security system failedWASHINGTON — Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano conceded Monday that the aviation security system failed when a young man on a watchlist with a U.S. visa in his pocket and a powerful explosive hidden on his body was allowed to board a fight from Amsterdam to Detroit......A day after saying the system worked, Napolitano backtracked, saying her words had been taken out of context.“Our system did not work in this instance,” she said on NBC’s “Today” show. “No one is happy or satisfied with that. An extensive review is under way.”

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

I agree with all the intelligent posts in this thread and disagree with all the really stupid ones.

Dang.I'll try harder.

[strategy 4]

.

[slink 1]

Here's the problem: there are 6 billion people in the world and way fewer names than that. Most of the names on the current no-fly list are false positives. Do you really want to add a half million people to that list? Maybe we could just put *everyone* on the no-fly list, and only the people who can guess the secret TSA procedure to get off the list should be able to fly?

I believe David Benyamine was once identified on the no-fly list due to his name being the same/similar to another's.

[CaneBrain 95]

There needs to be a movement away from a seemingly overly P.C. pre 911 attitude and a move towards more of a profiling one imo.Ever fly EL AL? Someone once said it's like having an hour physical, complete with a colonoscomy. Pretty safe airline, that El AL.Also, when police or FBI or anyone along those lines tries to solve a crime you don't blindly round up everyone in the entire City. You start by collecting data, pinning it all up on a board and do reasonable deduction and identifying similarities. PROFILING. narrow down the people "MOST LIKELY TOO" etc. If you fit that bill, then tough shit. That is the world we all live in for the moment.and VB is not the most intelligent one here. Just the most brainy.

Again, I like the sentiment but I wonder about the feasibility. El Al can do this because they are one airline that services one small country and limited routes. Could this be done on a massive scale for a gigantic country like America without massive disruptions and prohibitive costs? Can we do profiling when so many Muslim names are so similar? Will we just end up doing more damage by pissing off every Muslim who gets cavity searched?I think we are doing a pretty decent job now. People are more on the ball and alert to threats. A foolproof system is impossible.

[CaneBrain 95]

So wait......if it had been a massive coordinated attempt that resulted in getting a bomb on board the aircraft, then the Administration or Homeland Security would be at fault?I agree with you that the expectation that we catch every attempt is just plain not reasonable. However neither is it reasonable to blame Bush for 911.And to state that the System worked and is secure simply because the bomb didn't detonate is a complete fabrication. A 23 year old was able to get explosive material on board an aircraft - enough explosive material to blow a hole in in the side of the plane. That demonstrates a flaw in the system. If the flaw originates in Amsterdam, it is still a flaw in our overall plan. Look. If someone smuggled a gun on a plane - that alone demonstrates a failure. Even if the gun wasn't ultimately used or misfired or didn't have bullets. If Napolitano said: "Sure he got a gun through security, but the system worked because he didn't get the bullets through." Would you buy it?Besides now even Napolitano is calling this a failure:

I agree that the Netherlands security system failed. I just dont know if the US can make every country do what we want them to in terms of security.

[Zealous Donkey 0]

His father only told the embassy that his son was getting way too into radical Islam. If he had mentioned that his son may be involved in a suicide mission (and had even the slightest credible evidence of it), that would be completely different.....no one here on either side would disagree with that. Also, think of the potential abuse. X hates Y because of personal problems. X calls the American embassy and informs them that Y is a terrorist. Y is put on the no fly list for no reason other than that X has a grudge. Not feasible. And this X and Y scenario is exactly how so many innocent people ended up in Guantanamo with the true terrorists there. Especially if you start offering reward money too. I am not sure how practical this would be.

Of course you are correct on this point. I did read at least one article that stated his father warned of him being involved in a suicide mission. But you are right about the potential abuse. I still think this guy should have been stopped before he ever got on the plane. He probably won't be able to get on one again.

[hblask 1]

OK, I know you've all been waiting for the real solution.Step 1. Get rid of TSA.Step 2. Pass a law that every airline must provide $10,000,000 of life insurance for every passenger on every flight, payable if a terrorist attack on the plane kills that person.Step 3. Put the insurance companies in charge of security at airports.(Maybe a different order would be better, but you get the point....)Step 4. Quit pissing off the world.