Skip to comments.
Suspect in O’Hare weapons incident back in custody
Chicago Tribune ^
| November 5, 2001
| Matt O’Connor and Jon Hilkevitch
Posted on 11/05/2001 8:53:06 AM PST by RightRules
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:49:30 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
A 27-year-old Chicago man was taken back into custody and is to appear today in U.S. District Court to face federal charges stemming from his weekend arrest for allegedly trying to bring nine knives and other weapons aboard an airliner at O
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-103 next last
To: syriacus
I can't understand why they let this suspect go in the first place. I thought the new terrorist legislation requires that a suspect is detained up to 7 days. With all that weaponry, security still let him go. I don't see how increasing the already burgeoning federal employee status will help increase security nationwide except make it hard to fire an employee, guarantee an employee with lots of bennies as in health and life insurance, compensatory time off, earned sick and annual leave, a guaranteed 3-4% increase in pay every year, plus grade and or step increases. Grade increases are considered a promotion while step increases are guaranteed after so much time spent at one grade. So how do these benefits guarantee increased security?
Comment #62 Removed by Moderator
To: RightRules
Funny thing is I just flew from Chicago to Omaha on United Airlines a week before 9/11. I will admit that the workers at O'Hare totally
incompetent. You could bring a bazooka through security and they wouldn't realize it.
The workers are minorities who have little care for their jobs and seem more interested in going out and partying, they are young, some seem in late teens early twenties. To federalize these goons would be a huge mistake. They are lousy workers, and to federalize them would make it harder to fire them. I say send them to work at McDonalds.
63
posted on
11/05/2001 10:58:11 AM PST
by
Dengar01
To: mountaineer
If I read this article correctly, federal employees let this person go the first time and non-government employees caught him doing the same thing again. Who got fired and who is still employed?
To: austingirl
![](http://www.tigersweat.com/movies/airplane/air03s.jpg)
Excuse me, have you seen our boxcutters?
To: TheOtherOne
He probably made the simple observation like:
1) There is a fire/crash axe waiting for him in the airplane's cockpit, so taking the nail clippers away from his was rather pointless.
2) He will be flying the plane, so how could he hijack it from himself?
3) He will be flying the plane, so he could use the plane as a weapon if he wanted to.
OR, most likely
4) He called the luggage screener a stupid jackass for taking away something explicity allowed by the latest FAA security standards...
66
posted on
11/05/2001 11:03:02 AM PST
by
Fixit
To: RightRules
The problem with making feds out of security screeners is just that: to satisfy the PC watchdawgs, we will simpy have to hire all those poor screeners who will lose their jobs. So, we wind up with better-paid versions of what we have now. You are right on the money with that one.
To: TheOtherOne
I think that effectively took Postal services out of my discussion. Straw man 1, you 0. Did you also exclude IRS auditors versus CPA firms? Being the sort of guy who considers score-keeping so important he does it himself, I don't think so.
68
posted on
11/05/2001 11:06:36 AM PST
by
aculeus
To: ginger's dad
When the media was interviewing this guy (I think after the 1st arrest)the first thing I noticed was that this guy had dried blood on his lips. Did't look like a sore, it looked like the blood had come from inside of his mouth. Did anyone else notice this?
To: RightRules
GURUNG! Hero to the stupid!
70
posted on
11/05/2001 11:14:37 AM PST
by
dennisw
To: VaBthang4
I would also be interested in seeing the names of all the passengers booked on that flight. It's doubtful that this guy could have pulled off a hijacking alone. We may be seeing the "B" team now with the "A" team having been used up on Sep. 11.
To: MississippiMan
Is this bumbling, nonsensical idiocy at its pinnacle or what?Patience. We have not yet reached the peak...
To: RightRules
![](http://british-forces.com/fkac/history/regiments-coprs/6th_QE_Gurkha_Rifles.JPG)
http://www.thegurkhamuseum.co.uk/
Could Subash Gurung have been a Gurkha soldier? Gurkhas are known for
their unique knives featured on all of the unit designation patches of the Gurkha
Regiments which you can see by clicking on the one above.
Gurkhas come from Nepal, a landlocked state with the Chinese province of
Tibet to the north and India on the other three sides. It is 520 miles long
and nowhere exceeds 140 miles in breath, averaging between 90 and 100
miles. It is the only Hindu monarchy in the world and has never been ruled
by any other country. It still has very poor communications and, off the
few motorable roads, the main beast of burden is human.
Gurkhas are thickly set, stocky people with an average height of about 5
feet and 4 inches with a wheaten to olive complexion, almond eyes, high
cheekbones, thick, black hair and very strong leg muscles.
The Gurkhas who join the British Army become part of a limited and very
real military tradition. The Gurkha presence in the British Army began in
1815, When the Gurkhas of Nepal were defeated by the Bengal Presidency Army
of the Honorable East India Company during the Anglo-Nepal war of
1814-1816. Mutual empathy between each side led to the Gurkhas being
offered services under British Officers as Campaign troops, this was excepted.
42 years later, in 1857, Indian units of the Bengal presidency Army
mutinied, resulting in Company rule being superseded by British
governmental rule, with delegated authority in a viceroy representing Queen
Victoria. Gurkha units had shown such loyalty and Nepal supported Britain
so well during the mutiny that Gurkhas were incorporated into the Indian
Army, which was raised from the remnants of Company troops.
In 1902, there were ten regiments of Gurkhas and an eleventh was raised in
both World Wars. These regiments are known collectively as the Gurkha
brigade. On Indian Independence delicate negotiations led to Six regiments
detailed to stay with the Indian Army and the other four, the 2nd, 6th, 7th
and 10th Gurkha Rifles became an integral part of the British Army on 1st
January 1948.
To: Fixit
4) He called the luggage screener a stupid jackass for taking away something explicity allowed by the latest FAA security standards...Oh, joy. I'll go back to being an airline passenger. I can now arrive with properly manicured nails.
NOT until I can keep my Boy Scout Knife!
To: aculeus
Did you also exclude IRS auditors versus CPA firms? Being the sort of guy who considers score-keeping so important he does it himself, I don't think so. Huh? Yes, I think there should be no Federal IRS. As I said, security is the only area where Federalization makes sense.
To: Ben Hecks
I agree...
I have no doubt that the FBI is on it.
To: RightRules
Point of information: While Nepal is predominately Hindu, it has about a 5% Muslim minority. Of those Muslims, the Indians claim that they have been infiltrated by Wahhabists and jihadists. The Nepalese Muslims deny this. There have supposedly been Nepalese Muslims who have hijacked jets in India (see Times of India for stories.) The jihadists are found in *every* country where there are any Muslims; even if those Muslims only make up a tiny minority of the population. So even if someone has a passport from a "friendly" or neutral country, if he is Muslim it is *possible* that he may be jihadist.
To: RightRules
Now I'm hearing on WLS in Chicago, that in this hearing for Gurung, it's being stated that even though he lived in the same building as those 2 arrested from the train, they don't believe that there's any connection between Gurung, and the terrorists! Unbelievable! As Dick Cheney says, there are no coincidences.
AND I can't believe what I just heard, that this was a ONE WAY ticket...
To: RightRules
I saw the guy on the news and he is definitely suspicious. He gave them a phony address for starters.
To: RightRules
Could we have, or do they already have a computer program for scanners that would digitize the scanner images and ring an alarm if "suspicious" images showed up on the carry on bags? Could it be 3D? Help cut down on some of the variables that our highly trained, skilled and motivated "security" help might miss?
80
posted on
11/05/2001 1:06:36 PM PST
by
garyhope
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-103 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson