If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wired)   1969. In the era of Free Love, Skyjackers were messing up airlines. No one knew when the next Skyjacker would come, or where. Here's how the US hardened up, rubbed them out, and cleaned up the mess   (wired.com) divider line 75
    More: Interesting, U-shaped, United States, airport check-in, Cuban Government, true democracy, Caribbean Sea, airlines, bad publicity  
•       •       •

10014 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Jun 2013 at 10:44 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



75 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-18 09:42:21 AM
By July 1968 the situation had become dire enough to warrant a Senate hearing. The FAA was represented at the hearing by a functionary named Irving Ripp, whose testimony was devoid of even the slightest hint of hope. "It's an impossible problem short of searching every passenger," Ripp testified.


Just imagine, there was a time when a little minor molestation was considered too high a price for the privilege of air travel.
 
2013-06-18 10:14:53 AM

Sybarite: By July 1968 the situation had become dire enough to warrant a Senate hearing. The FAA was represented at the hearing by a functionary named Irving Ripp, whose testimony was devoid of even the slightest hint of hope. "It's an impossible problem short of searching every passenger," Ripp testified.


Just imagine, there was a time when a little minor molestation was considered too high a price for the privilege of air travel.


For some of us, it still is.
 
2013-06-18 10:18:22 AM
Oh Tobias,  you're still the blowhard. You can always taste a juicy one from miles away.
 
2013-06-18 10:40:22 AM

elvisaintdead: Oh Tobias


Wrong thread?
 
2013-06-18 10:43:48 AM
www.commondreams.org

"If they'd have listened to me, 9/11 would not have happened."

True story:  During this time, Ralph Nader proposed making armoured cockpit doors standard on all
airliners.  It was rejected as too expensive, and to this day he loudly claims that he could have single
handedly thwarted the 9/11/01 attacks if only they'd listened to him.
 
2013-06-18 10:50:10 AM
I love how Castro at the same time encouraged the problem, yet detested the people doing it
 
2013-06-18 10:53:32 AM
and they didn't need to take granny's shampoo?
Golly gee willikers, I guess somehow in the future we turned into sniveling assholes.
 
2013-06-18 10:57:32 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: I love how Castro at the same time encouraged the problem, yet detested the people doing it


Yea, Fidel Castro and Che Guevera are/were arseholes of the highest order.

Bone heads wearing those Che shirts are always mock-worthy.
 
2013-06-18 10:59:53 AM
Well, no large plane can ever be taken over again, so that's out of the bad guy play book. Plus the 'enemy' is now looking at every possible scenario. Even hiring authors and screen writers to imagine up some. Nothing will be dismissed as 'it couldn't happen'. So was it worth it? They have more recruits maybe, but lost a ton more in two wars. If they count Americans being more paranoid as a win, they haven't been paying attention.
 
2013-06-18 11:01:09 AM
Ya don't have to like Fidel and Che, but 'arseholes of the highest order,' given the context is quite a stretch seeing at one time we were sharing the earth with the likes of, say, Idi Amin Dada.
 
2013-06-18 11:01:17 AM

dittybopper: For some of us, it still is.


THIS
 
2013-06-18 11:01:34 AM
Mad magazine had a funny take on this. During the flight everyone jumped up brandishing a gun or bomb and yelling "This is a hijacking". They all looked at each other kind of funny and then they all sat down and that was the end of that.
 
2013-06-18 11:04:10 AM
Dailey pronounced the experiment a roaring success

usahitman.com
 
2013-06-18 11:05:23 AM
"The twenty-eight-year-old heir to a New Mexico real estate fortune hijacked a Delta Airlines jet while inexplicably dressed as a cowboy; a sociology student from Kalamazoo, Michigan, forced a Piper PA-24 pilot to take him to Havana because he wanted to study Communism firsthand; a 34-year-old Cuban exile diverted a Northwest Airlines flight back home because he could no longer bear to live without his mother's delicately seasoned frijoles."

I bet them are some damn good Frijoles right there.
 
2013-06-18 11:05:26 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: I love how Castro at the same time encouraged the problem, yet detested the people doing it


He made money off it, gave the Us a black eye, and had an american to abuse afterwards.
Win-win-win for him.
I have no sympathy for the clowns that thought they owuld be happy there.
 
2013-06-18 11:05:57 AM

Sybarite: By July 1968 the situation had become dire enough to warrant a Senate hearing. The FAA was represented at the hearing by a functionary named Irving Ripp, whose testimony was devoid of even the slightest hint of hope. "It's an impossible problem short of searching every passenger," Ripp testified.


Just imagine, there was a time when a little minor molestation was considered too high a price for the privilege of air travel.


That was before the Dark Times. Before Reagan.
 
2013-06-18 11:07:01 AM

DjangoStonereaver: [www.commondreams.org image 350x290]

"If they'd have listened to me, 9/11 would not have happened."

True story:  During this time, Ralph Nader proposed making armoured cockpit doors standard on all
airliners.  It was rejected as too expensive, and to this day he loudly claims that he could have single
handedly thwarted the 9/11/01 attacks if only they'd listened to him.


Maybe they were thinking of hijackers taking control of a plane with the goal of crashing it, or maybe not. I would love to see a transcript that indicated people worried about that in the 60s and 70s. Hijackers seemed to want something else, and expressed a willingness to die. That's not the same as wanting to turn the plane into a guided missile.
Pilots didn't fly to Cuba because they were personally at risk. They flew to Cuba because passengers were at risk. DB Cooper got his money by threatening to blow a plane up, not by putting a gun to a pilot's head. Armored doors wouldn't do anything to change the choices airlines and pilots make in these situations, and they wouldn't prevent the hijackers from making their demands in the first place.
So sure, Ralph could have prevented 9/11, but that seems coincidental. From what I can tell, his proposal was meant to solve a different problem, wouldn't have worked, and would have cost a lot of money.
 
2013-06-18 11:12:00 AM

Sybarite: By July 1968 the situation had become dire enough to warrant a Senate hearing. The FAA was represented at the hearing by a functionary named Irving Ripp, whose testimony was devoid of even the slightest hint of hope. "It's an impossible problem short of searching every passenger," Ripp testified.


Just imagine, there was a time when a little minor molestation was considered too high a price for the privilege right of air travel.


49 U.S.C. § 40103 (2) "A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit through the navigable airspace."

/Yes, I know there was no right to fly law back in 1968, but there is now.  And we see how well everyone stands up for that right...
 
2013-06-18 11:13:15 AM
Cuba...now that would have been an better plan

images.nymag.com
 
2013-06-18 11:17:38 AM

signaljammer: Ya don't have to like Fidel and Che, but 'arseholes of the highest order,' given the context is quite a stretch seeing at one time we were sharing the earth with the likes of, say, Idi Amin Dada.


So you are saying they didn't kill, jail, or exile tons of Cubans? Not just the rich Cubans, but anyone who had ever worked for anything in their lives, the educated middle class. That is why Cuban is a 3rd world craphole. While Che was worse than Castro by far, Castro was no saint. People who wear Che shirts deserve to be punched in the face. If they don't know why sanctifing him is so offensive to exiled Cubans, they are tools. If they do know why and still wear the shirts, they are tools.
 
2013-06-18 11:18:42 AM
Fly El Al?
 
2013-06-18 11:19:31 AM

rumpelstiltskin: wouldn't have worked, and would have cost a lot of money.


like the TSA?
 
2013-06-18 11:21:34 AM

rumpelstiltskin: DjangoStonereaver: [www.commondreams.org image 350x290]

"If they'd have listened to me, 9/11 would not have happened."

True story:  During this time, Ralph Nader proposed making armoured cockpit doors standard on all
airliners.  It was rejected as too expensive, and to this day he loudly claims that he could have single
handedly thwarted the 9/11/01 attacks if only they'd listened to him.

Maybe they were thinking of hijackers taking control of a plane with the goal of crashing it, or maybe not. I would love to see a transcript that indicated people worried about that in the 60s and 70s. Hijackers seemed to want something else, and expressed a willingness to die. That's not the same as wanting to turn the plane into a guided missile.
Pilots didn't fly to Cuba because they were personally at risk. They flew to Cuba because passengers were at risk. DB Cooper got his money by threatening to blow a plane up, not by putting a gun to a pilot's head. Armored doors wouldn't do anything to change the choices airlines and pilots make in these situations, and they wouldn't prevent the hijackers from making their demands in the first place.
So sure, Ralph could have prevented 9/11, but that seems coincidental. From what I can tell, his proposal was meant to solve a different problem, wouldn't have worked, and would have cost a lot of money.


Kind of like airbags. Nader fought so hard for airbags because he thought it was impossible to change Americans' seatbelt habits. Once they made seatbelts mandatory by law, usage shot up over 80 percent almost immediately. And seatbelts without air bags save far more lives than airbags without seatbelts.
 
2013-06-18 11:23:00 AM

zeroman987: That is why Cuban is a 3rd world craphole


Free healthcare makes such a wasteland of a nation, it's the only reason that makes sense on why we don't do it here
 
2013-06-18 11:25:44 AM
Let me guess, they hired a bunch of mouth breathers that would otherwise be stocking shelves at Walmart or practicing law to frisk everyone before they got on their flight after walking through millions of dollars of unnecessary scanning machines?
 
2013-06-18 11:28:45 AM
Why would you hijack a plane to go to Cuba? Even then there were plenty of ways to get there that don't involve air piracy. And it can't be because you can't afford to travel since you had cash for a ticket and a gun already.
 
2013-06-18 11:35:08 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: I love how Castro at the same time encouraged the problem, yet detested the people doing it


Useful Idiots Stalin called people like that. People you don't necessarily want on your side but who's actions are helpful to your cause so you let them do their thing
 
2013-06-18 11:42:07 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: zeroman987: That is why Cuban is a 3rd world craphole

Free healthcare makes such a wasteland of a nation, it's the only reason that makes sense on why we don't do it here


Yeah, about that free healthcare system:

For Cubans, a bitter pill.

Written by someone from a country with an actual working free healthcare system.

Of course, most of the people interviewed in that article are Morons, so YMMV.
 
2013-06-18 11:42:08 AM
DjangoStonereaver:
"If they'd have listened to me, 9/11 would not have happened."

True story:  During this time, Ralph Nader proposed making armoured cockpit doors standard on all
airliners.  It was rejected as too expensive, and to this day he loudly claims that he could have single
handedly thwarted the 9/11/01 attacks if only they'd listened to him.


Nader is full of shiat.

The hijackers didn't batter down the cockpit doors. They had the pilots let them in by threatening/harming others (flight attendants). Remember, until that morning it was unthinkable that somebody would take over an airliner specifically to crash the plane. It was always to go somewhere else... the hijackers wanted to LIVE. So the pilots had been trained (as TFA says) to comply with the demands as much as possible.

If the doors had been armored the pilots still would have unlocked them because they were trained to do so and people hadn't expected that kind of goal for a hijacking. If anything, the lack of armored doors probably made the hijacker attacks LESS costly- the only cockpit door that got battered was United 93, where the PASSENGERS were breaking in to stop the hijackers from reaching their chosen target (likely Congress or the White House). A better secured door would have kept that from happening.

What made 9/11 successful was not the physical properties of the door but the mindset of the world not having caught up to the new mindset of the terrorists.

That's not the case today. Hell, we could probably go ahead and skip the armored cockpit doors because now the passengers aren't just going to sit there and let a hijacker have his way. If you're likely dead anyway you might as well go down on your own terms and try to stop those evil bastards.
 
2013-06-18 11:44:25 AM
There they were interrogated for weeks on end, accused of working for the CIA despite all evidence to the contrary. The lucky ones were then sent to live at the Casa de Transitos (Hijackers House), a decrepit dormitory in southern Havana, where each American was allocated sixteen square feet of living space

Skyjackers who rubbed their G2 interrogators the wrong way, meanwhile, were dispatched to squalid sugar-harvesting camps, where conditions were rarely better than nightmarish.


images3.wikia.nocookie.net

Yet graphic news reports about this brutal treatment did little to slow the epidemic's spread.

images.wikia.com
 
2013-06-18 11:44:31 AM

dittybopper: Yeah, about that free healthcare system:

For Cubans, a bitter pill.

Written by someone from a country with an actual working free healthcare system.

Of course, most of the people interviewed in that article are Morons, so YMMV.


Fancy that, a country with sanctions on it has trouble getting items manufactured outside its borders

Who'd a thought
 
2013-06-18 11:46:20 AM

mbillips: rumpelstiltskin: DjangoStonereaver: [www.commondreams.org image 350x290]

"If they'd have listened to me, 9/11 would not have happened."

True story:  During this time, Ralph Nader proposed making armoured cockpit doors standard on all
airliners.  It was rejected as too expensive, and to this day he loudly claims that he could have single
handedly thwarted the 9/11/01 attacks if only they'd listened to him.

Maybe they were thinking of hijackers taking control of a plane with the goal of crashing it, or maybe not. I would love to see a transcript that indicated people worried about that in the 60s and 70s. Hijackers seemed to want something else, and expressed a willingness to die. That's not the same as wanting to turn the plane into a guided missile.
Pilots didn't fly to Cuba because they were personally at risk. They flew to Cuba because passengers were at risk. DB Cooper got his money by threatening to blow a plane up, not by putting a gun to a pilot's head. Armored doors wouldn't do anything to change the choices airlines and pilots make in these situations, and they wouldn't prevent the hijackers from making their demands in the first place.
So sure, Ralph could have prevented 9/11, but that seems coincidental. From what I can tell, his proposal was meant to solve a different problem, wouldn't have worked, and would have cost a lot of money.

Kind of like airbags. Nader fought so hard for airbags because he thought it was impossible to change Americans' seatbelt habits. Once they made seatbelts mandatory by law, usage shot up over 80 percent almost immediately. And seatbelts without air bags save far more lives than airbags without seatbelts.


Before 9/11, no one ever thought a bunch of hijackers would commandeer the plane from the crew, that
is true.  And even if all the 9/11 planes had been equipped with armoured cockpit doors the hijackers would
probably have been able to get access by the threat of harming the crew or passengers.

The sad fact is that it took intrusive passenger screenings to stop the first wave of skyjackings, and it was
only when institutional complacency about such screenings set in that we had the 9/11 attacks. And even
then, there have been incidents (the Shoe bomber, the bottle bomber).
 
2013-06-18 11:48:25 AM

akula: What made 9/11 successful was not the physical properties of the door but the mindset of the world not having caught up to the new mindset of the terrorists.

That's not the case today. Hell, we could probably go ahead and skip the armored cockpit doors because now the passengers aren't just going to sit there and let a hijacker have his way. If you're likely dead anyway you might as well go down on your own terms and try to stop those evil bastards.


This.

I find it laughable that people don't realize that 9/11 was a one time thing:  You can get away with something like that *ONCE*, but afterwards, everyone knows they have nothing to lose, so all the security theater put in place post-9/11 is essentially useless.  The passengers aren't going to allow that to happen, and in fact, that change actually happened on Flight 93 when the full gravity of the situation was realized by the passengers.
 
2013-06-18 11:48:41 AM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: Why would you hijack a plane to go to Cuba? Even then there were plenty of ways to get there that don't involve air piracy. And it can't be because you can't afford to travel since you had cash for a ticket and a gun already.


It would make for an awesome entrance. You got your bell bottoms, your best tie-dyed shirt, you stroll off that plane a hero. All the locals, including Castro, would be lined up to see you: "Man, that cat is down! Dig It!", they would say. Then you would all go to Castro's pad to get stoned and listen to some Floyd.
Or you could just wash up on a beach somewhere.
 
2013-06-18 11:55:39 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: Fancy that, a country with sanctions on it has trouble getting items manufactured outside its borders

Who'd a thought


The US is the only source of aspirin and antibiotics in the entire World?

Besides which, medical equipment, medical supplies, and medicines are specifically exempted from the embargo.
 
2013-06-18 11:59:31 AM

dittybopper: akula: What made 9/11 successful was not the physical properties of the door but the mindset of the world not having caught up to the new mindset of the terrorists.

That's not the case today. Hell, we could probably go ahead and skip the armored cockpit doors because now the passengers aren't just going to sit there and let a hijacker have his way. If you're likely dead anyway you might as well go down on your own terms and try to stop those evil bastards.

This.

I find it laughable that people don't realize that 9/11 was a one time thing:  You can get away with something like that *ONCE*, but afterwards, everyone knows they have nothing to lose, so all the security theater put in place post-9/11 is essentially useless.  The passengers aren't going to allow that to happen, and in fact, that change actually happened on Flight 93 when the full gravity of the situation was realized by the passengers.


Exactly.

With all the talk about "first responders" people forget that the REAL "first responders" are the folks on the scene to whom all this is happening. In a hijacking event the last line of defense isn't the TSA or airport police, it's not even a rapid reaction special operations force. It's the people on the damn plane. And unless the terrorists are buying enough seats to basically charter the damn bird they're going to be outnumbered. Not every passenger will have the ability to fight back but many do and will react. Why? Because the pre-9/11 mindset of "just give them what they want" is over. It ended once people realized those assholes didn't care about their lives, only about causing harm with their dying breaths. Flight 93 realized that in order to stop people willing to die to hurt others you need to be willing to die yourself. That's made even easier when you realize you're ending up dead whether you act or not.

On September 10, 2001 people were under the impression that a hijacker who was willing to die would use a bomb to blow the plane, not use the plane AS a bomb. We know better today.
 
2013-06-18 12:04:38 PM

rumpelstiltskin: So sure, Ralph could have prevented 9/11, but that seems coincidental. From what I can tell, his proposal was meant to solve a different problem, wouldn't have worked, and would have cost a lot of money.


I don't know what Ralph was thinking but I remember watching a Nightline episode in the 90's about how easy it would be to hijack a plane and use it as a missile.  It wasn't as if it was inconceivable.  Anyone else see that episode?
 
2013-06-18 12:11:59 PM

DJShamrock: "The twenty-eight-year-old heir to a New Mexico real estate fortune hijacked a Delta Airlines jet while inexplicably dressed as a cowboy; a sociology student from Kalamazoo, Michigan, forced a Piper PA-24 pilot to take him to Havana because he wanted to study Communism firsthand; a 34-year-old Cuban exile diverted a Northwest Airlines flight back home because he could no longer bear to live without his mother's delicately seasoned frijoles."

I bet them are some damn good Frijoles right there.


Yea, I was thinking that myself. You steal a plane to get back home for food? Momma knows what she is doing.
 
2013-06-18 12:12:21 PM

rwfan: rumpelstiltskin: So sure, Ralph could have prevented 9/11, but that seems coincidental. From what I can tell, his proposal was meant to solve a different problem, wouldn't have worked, and would have cost a lot of money.

I don't know what Ralph was thinking but I remember watching a Nightline episode in the 90's about how easy it would be to hijack a plane and use it as a missile.  It wasn't as if it was inconceivable.  Anyone else see that episode?


There's a difference between "inconceivable" and "likely." I'm sure people thought about the possibility beforehand. It just seemed far fetched and highly unlikely. There was really nothing to make most people think it was a strong possibility before 9/11.
 
2013-06-18 12:16:04 PM
"The most popular suggestion was for the FAA to build a mock version of José Martí International Airport in a South Florida field, so that skyjackers could be duped into thinking they had reached Havana."

Word of this idea had leaked at the time. I wonder how many hijackings this prevented, because some hijackers might have thought that it had been built and they'd encounter this trap.
 
2013-06-18 12:20:21 PM

akula: There's a difference between "inconceivable" and "likely." I'm sure people thought about the possibility beforehand. It just seemed far fetched and highly unlikely. There was really nothing to make most people think it was a strong possibility before 9/11.


Popular novels had described militaristic uses of civilian aircraft before 2001. But common impression at the time was that a hijacking would merely cause an inconvenience to crew and passengers.
 
2013-06-18 12:22:18 PM

DjangoStonereaver: mbillips: rumpelstiltskin: DjangoStonereaver: [www.commondreams.org image 350x290]

"If they'd have listened to me, 9/11 would not have happened."

True story:  During this time, Ralph Nader proposed making armoured cockpit doors standard on all
airliners.  It was rejected as too expensive, and to this day he loudly claims that he could have single
handedly thwarted the 9/11/01 attacks if only they'd listened to him.

Maybe they were thinking of hijackers taking control of a plane with the goal of crashing it, or maybe not. I would love to see a transcript that indicated people worried about that in the 60s and 70s. Hijackers seemed to want something else, and expressed a willingness to die. That's not the same as wanting to turn the plane into a guided missile.
Pilots didn't fly to Cuba because they were personally at risk. They flew to Cuba because passengers were at risk. DB Cooper got his money by threatening to blow a plane up, not by putting a gun to a pilot's head. Armored doors wouldn't do anything to change the choices airlines and pilots make in these situations, and they wouldn't prevent the hijackers from making their demands in the first place.
So sure, Ralph could have prevented 9/11, but that seems coincidental. From what I can tell, his proposal was meant to solve a different problem, wouldn't have worked, and would have cost a lot of money.

Kind of like airbags. Nader fought so hard for airbags because he thought it was impossible to change Americans' seatbelt habits. Once they made seatbelts mandatory by law, usage shot up over 80 percent almost immediately. And seatbelts without air bags save far more lives than airbags without seatbelts.

Before 9/11, no one ever thought a bunch of hijackers would commandeer the plane from the crew, that
is true.
  And even if all the 9/11 planes had been equipped with armoured cockpit doors the hijackers would
probably have been able to get access by the threat of harming the crew or passengers.

The sad fact is ...


www.heatedforest.com

www.toledoblade.com
 
2013-06-18 12:37:12 PM

BafflerMeal: DjangoStonereaver:


(snip)

Before 9/11, no one ever thought a bunch of hijackers would commandeer the plane from the crew, that is true.

Fictional characters:

http://img.fark.net/images/cache/850/v/vz/vzRAroWiZ5pNTYLQsjeBG7hAYc 8. jpg?t=3-5VVilw849txlKc9c1x-A&f=1372046400

And writers of fiction:

http://img.fark.net/images/cache/850/n/nh/nh5yZXzS99-Up0I4MOCllQ2mUG c. jpg?t=fn8pwmzAtPbeIqM7l53wdQ&f=1372046400

Do not rebut the point that policy planners did not think it was a plausible scenario.
 
2013-06-18 12:38:49 PM

akula: rwfan: rumpelstiltskin: So sure, Ralph could have prevented 9/11, but that seems coincidental. From what I can tell, his proposal was meant to solve a different problem, wouldn't have worked, and would have cost a lot of money.

I don't know what Ralph was thinking but I remember watching a Nightline episode in the 90's about how easy it would be to hijack a plane and use it as a missile.  It wasn't as if it was inconceivable.  Anyone else see that episode?

There's a difference between "inconceivable" and "likely." I'm sure people thought about the possibility beforehand. It just seemed far fetched and highly unlikely. There was really nothing to make most people think it was a strong possibility before 9/11.


There is also a difference between unlikely and far fetched or highly unlikely.  I don't see why it would be far fetched for someone to use a commercial airline as a missile when there were people who would blow themselves up on a bus crowded with men, woman and children or people who would drive a truck loaded with explosives into a U.S. military barracks (in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia) or a U.S. embassy or a navel ship.  There are no shortage of prior suicide attacks and it was no secret that Al Qaeda had a hard on for killing American citizens.
 
2013-06-18 12:44:32 PM

DjangoStonereaver: BafflerMeal: DjangoStonereaver:

(snip)

Before 9/11, no one ever thought a bunch of hijackers would commandeer the plane from the crew, that is true.

Fictional characters:

http://img.fark.net/images/cache/850/v/vz/vzRAroWiZ5pNTYLQsjeBG7hAYc 8. jpg?t=3-5VVilw849txlKc9c1x-A&f=1372046400

And writers of fiction:

http://img.fark.net/images/cache/850/n/nh/nh5yZXzS99-Up0I4MOCllQ2mUG c. jpg?t=fn8pwmzAtPbeIqM7l53wdQ&f=1372046400

Do not rebut the point that policy planners did not think it was a plausible scenario.



Ok, I will not rebute the very specific claim you just made about 'policy planners'.  But this kind of thing has been in fiction for years.  Meaning it was in the intellectual commons.  And please, yes, I know those guys were fictional characters.  The point is the writers and producers of that show were aware enough of the idea in common media that it made it into a show.

You're being obtuse or dishonest if you really feel this was an unconceived of act.
 
2013-06-18 12:49:35 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-06-18 12:57:08 PM
"Take this bus to Cuba."


/can't believe I'm first
//c-c-c-c-c-combo breaker for the rest of y'all
///nothing is obscure on, well, wherever we are right now.
 
2013-06-18 12:57:12 PM

RoyBatty: [i.imgur.com image 850x984]


I think one thing is certain, no one in the government was going to stand up after 9/11 and say "Oh yeah, I totally predicted that one".  I am convinced that "policy makers", but not Bush, were aware of the possibility but the hope was that potential hijackers would not be able to smuggle weapons on to a plane in the U.S.
 
2013-06-18 12:59:04 PM

rwfan: akula: rwfan: rumpelstiltskin: So sure, Ralph could have prevented 9/11, but that seems coincidental. From what I can tell, his proposal was meant to solve a different problem, wouldn't have worked, and would have cost a lot of money.

I don't know what Ralph was thinking but I remember watching a Nightline episode in the 90's about how easy it would be to hijack a plane and use it as a missile.  It wasn't as if it was inconceivable.  Anyone else see that episode?

There's a difference between "inconceivable" and "likely." I'm sure people thought about the possibility beforehand. It just seemed far fetched and highly unlikely. There was really nothing to make most people think it was a strong possibility before 9/11.

There is also a difference between unlikely and far fetched or highly unlikely.  I don't see why it would be far fetched for someone to use a commercial airline as a missile when there were people who would blow themselves up on a bus crowded with men, woman and children or people who would drive a truck loaded with explosives into a U.S. military barracks (in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia) or a U.S. embassy or a navel ship.  There are no shortage of prior suicide attacks and it was no secret that Al Qaeda had a hard on for killing American citizens.


BafflerMeal: You're being obtuse or dishonest if you really feel this was an unconceived of act.


A little perspective, here: This year will mark 12 years since the attack in a few months. Twelve years is a fair amount of time. A kid born after the attack will be in middle school. We'll finally begin drinking some decent scotch distilled post-9/11.

In other words, it's been a while. It's easy to think it's ALWAYS been this way. But it hasn't.

The simple fact is that most people did not expect that to be a potential attack method. Even if think tanks and defense experts had thought it up, it had not filtered down to the public. Even the airlines still had the "comply with everything" policies in force. Unless you have an airliner filled with those think tank employees or NORAD conceptualists onboard the people in the seats and in the little office in the pointy end of the plane still aren't thinking of this as a likelihood.

What some might think of is NOT what is necessarily present in the public consciousness. There's books out there with all kinds of scenarios in them. That doesn't mean that the public considers such things as a strong possibility or even a potential problem.
 
2013-06-18 01:07:51 PM

akula: rwfan: akula: rwfan: rumpelstiltskin: So sure, Ralph could have prevented 9/11, but that seems coincidental. From what I can tell, his proposal was meant to solve a different problem, wouldn't have worked, and would have cost a lot of money.

I don't know what Ralph was thinking but I remember watching a Nightline episode in the 90's about how easy it would be to hijack a plane and use it as a missile.  It wasn't as if it was inconceivable.  Anyone else see that episode?

There's a difference between "inconceivable" and "likely." I'm sure people thought about the possibility beforehand. It just seemed far fetched and highly unlikely. There was really nothing to make most people think it was a strong possibility before 9/11.

There is also a difference between unlikely and far fetched or highly unlikely.  I don't see why it would be far fetched for someone to use a commercial airline as a missile when there were people who would blow themselves up on a bus crowded with men, woman and children or people who would drive a truck loaded with explosives into a U.S. military barracks (in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia) or a U.S. embassy or a navel ship.  There are no shortage of prior suicide attacks and it was no secret that Al Qaeda had a hard on for killing American citizens.

BafflerMeal: You're being obtuse or dishonest if you really feel this was an unconceived of act.

A little perspective, here: This year will mark 12 years since the attack in a few months. Twelve years is a fair amount of time. A kid born after the attack will be in middle school. We'll finally begin drinking some decent scotch distilled post-9/11.

In other words, it's been a while. It's easy to think it's ALWAYS been this way. But it hasn't.

The simple fact is that most people did not expect that to be a potential attack method. Even if think tanks and defense experts had thought it up, it had not filtered down to the public. Even the airlines still had the "comply with everything" policies in force. ...


I think I owe you & dittybopper a beer, akula.  This'll have to do:
 
Displayed 50 of 75 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report