TSA wrecks Texas caribou hunters meat

The Anchorage Daily News ^ | May 31st | Craig Medred

[Smokin' Joe]

Just that the cuts in the packaging looked like the type of incision one would expect from a boxcutter (single edged razor blade in a handle). If so, the inspectors are using them now. Irony is lovely stuff.

[gc4nra]

"I'll bet you dollars for donuts that this was the work of some emplyee at the TSA that was determined to teach a lesson to what
they perceived as a gun weilding, Bambi killing Right Wingnut."


You may be right Sam, but it could also be the work of some idiot with a ninth grade public school education that was just grandfatherd over from being private security.

[_Jim]

the scenario we're discussing is one in which a large bomb explodes in line before any airport employees ever take a look

Still not a viable, hypothetical situation.

You

a) 'make up' a story devoid of the actual facts/the personnel/the 'eyes' present in a 'terminal' area scanning for suspicious twitches, sweating, etc, you also

b) overlook any number of preceeding 'catch points' of this 'bomber' with a large 'device' (the securing of such materials NOWADAYS draws scrutiny before the event) These 'catch point' include 'tip offs' by friends, family members as well as passers-by NOT to mention most successful bombers 'test' their efforts as to detonation/detonator, packaging and NONE of these efforts takes place in a vacuum/off-the-face-of-the-earth out of 'sight or sound' of curious others ...

A good 'movie plot'/scene you've got - a completely viable, hypothetical situation you don't got ...

[_Jim]

Or, as in the case of AA587, an FAA team player willing to

The un-knowing one wishes to provide ANY shred of proof on this?

Has your memory failed: Remember the Tail in the bay, broken just above the attachment points?

As SEEN by the whole COUNTRY on the evening NEWS?

Furthermore, are you saying that Airbus, Boeing, McDonnel-Douglas, et al have ALWAYS built 100% percent RELIABLE aiframes resulting in ZERO accidents from their products?

[WFTR]

I just finished a commentary about this kind of incident in Saving a few more jobs. The airline industry is hurting, and a large part of why it is hurting is that the new security procedures have made flying an even more horrible experience than it used to be. September 11 was bound to do some damage. A hurting economy is another big factor. However, stupid actions by security are only going to make everything worse. Likely one or two airlines will fail. If they continue this kind of nonsense, three or four airlines will probably fail.

WFTR
Bill

[eno_]

You are the one with the faulty memory:

The engines came off about the same time as the tail, plus a piece of a wing.

The only explanation for all those things coming off is that they were ripped off due to unusual aerodynamic loads.

The way that usually happens is that the plane loses control and THEN stuff starts coming apart.

Witnesses saw fire and/or explosion on board, before anything came off, so there is a likely cause of loss of control.

The official leaks started with "bad engine," "old engine," "birds sucked into engine," etc. before the tail was blamed.

Governments have a long history of covering up successful sabotage/terrorism. It is VERY likely that AA587 is just such a coverup, especially with the timing and location.

[eno_]

Make them ALL fail.

They screwed up the use of CAPPS, which allowed 9/11 to happen.

They handed taxpayers the bill for a $15B bailout.

THEN IN ADDITION we get stuck with the security bill.

The airlines should all burn in hell.

Not a penny more to the airlines. Teach them, and the TSA, a lesson. No flying, no need for a TSA.

[4Freedom]

You're off topic, now.

The question was would a large bomb exploding in a line packed with 2,000 passengers waiting to check their baggage or enter the so-called 'sterile' area through a busy checkpoint be as damaging to the confidence of the traveling public as a bomb exploding on a plane?

Yours is a non-answer.

[Trust but Verify]

Yes.

[JimRed]

Cutting open packaged game meat or fish is against both TSA policy and procedure, he added.

And now the terrorists and drug smugglers know exactly how to disgiuse their contraband...

[snopercod]

Those explosive sniffers sniff for nitrates. Perhaps the meat packer put a little preservative on the meat?

[eno_]

So the Red Team whistleblower who found that security could be breached almost 100% of the time is wrong? Or, in any other way, could you show me HOW it is unreasonable or irrational to think the TSA is useless and a total waste of taxpayer money?

[4Freedom]

Yes and no. If a package tests positive twice for explosive trace either on the same machine after it's been cleaned or on two different machines, that package is going to be examined every which way.<p.

Same goes for a bag that attracts a dog's attention.

[4Freedom]

Maybe it was set down on a recently fertilized lawn or the truck or car had just transported a couple bags of lawn fertilizer before it dropped this meat off at the airport.

Whatever. If a bag or box alarms, it's going to be checked.

[Centurion2000]

Eggzactly ! Airlines will go the path of trains. Absorbed by goobermint and you'll then pay for your ticket at the counter and or mine April 16th of every year.

I will not subject myself or my family to such fake safety measures that have no problem shooting me from the sky with an F-16 but worries about an armed, pilot having small arms conceiled upon their person for defense of the cockpit.

Makes you wonder if there is not some way to get around all of this. Like maybe a luxury blimp or ship that could waive all these stupid requirements by just posting a few armed guards or something.

Whoever comes up with a way around this will OWN the air industry.

[eno_]

Some people theorize there will be a proliferation of air taxis. They could take enough of the business to break the backs of the current large carriers, and the likely survivors like Southwest and Jet Blue would then have the choice of reshaping the way security works or going extinct like the dinosaur airlines.

[4Freedom]

Until one of their air taxis blow up.

[Squantos]

Agree. Currently we use my FJ80 that has a 72 gallon fuel capacity to road trip in. Comfy , Quiet, Safe, DVD , Sat FM and reliable so far.....:o) Looking for one of those nifty Sat Tracking thangs that mount on the roof so we can freeep and watch the noooooze also. Ones we found are wayyyyy too big.

But rest assured we don't use our cell phone as that is unsafe ....:o)

I won't fly commercial till they get this fiasco finished and finalized.

Stay Safe Centurion !

[eno_]

For the same reason the 9/11 terrorists didn't fly an Embraer into a suburban low-rise office, I think they will see air taxis as an even less worthwhile target. At some point it falls below the threshold of damage you could do with an explosive belt on a budy street. Plus, air taxi fliers are much more likely to check each other out. If the other 8 passenegers are camel-fanciers, I ain't flyin'.

It is quite possible that commercial flying has to change fundamentally. It was no bed of roses before 9/11. I think the customers expected that there would be some trade-off: less ocnvenient security, but better service - or SOME kind of offsetting inducement. Instead, it went from bad to much much worse. The customer, and taxpayer, is degraded, insulted, billed for the people doing the degrading and insulting, and expected to take it. No wonder the general sense is that airlines and the TSA can eat s--t and die.

[El Gato]

look forward to seeing all those neat rest stops on the interstates being used for safety inspections in the future. Thats the next step for them to take IMO.

Too late, they are already doing it. Interstate 80 is rife with various "game checks", "seat belt checks", and so forth. Of course they not looking for Abdul with a bomb, but rather Jorge, Floyd or LeRoy with some illicit substance. Of course they will fine you if you don't have your seat belt on, or have a pheasant without the head or feet attached.