Go Back   FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Practical Travel Safety and Security Issues
Sign in using an external account

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 9, 12, 1:21 pm   #91
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiff View Post
I definitely don't agree with you.

I'm more likely to die driving to the airport than I am to be injured in any way at the airport. And that's not because of TSA/DfT.

Terrorism succeeds because cowards are all too willing to change their behavior and cede their rights and liberties as the terrorists dictate they should. It's shameful and disgusting.
Because the U.S.A. is less likely to be attacked than Europe.
See the 2012 Global Terrorism Index Quoted previously!
Please don't die on the way to the airport, folk will miss you!
GLEN36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 12, 1:26 pm   #92
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: AA, QF, DL, SPG, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 54,923
Quote:
Originally Posted by GLEN36 View Post
Because the U.S.A. is less likely to be attacked than Europe.
See the 2012 Global Terrorism Index Quoted previously!
Please don't die on the way to the airport, folk will miss you!
The probability of an attack in either place is effectively zero and I refuse to let such a small probability or criminals' actions cause me to change my behavior or cower in fear.
__________________
You cannot uphold American ideology with un-American actions. It's time for Change.
Spiff is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 12, 1:35 pm   #93
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 46
May I respectfully suggest that you take a few moments to check the 2012 Global Terrorism Index. (As mentioned previously)
What is the source of your information re the probability of attack?
I definitely do not cower in fear. And have been travelling the globe since 1955, and still going strong.
GLEN36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 12, 1:42 pm   #94
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: AA, QF, DL, SPG, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 54,923
Quote:
Originally Posted by GLEN36 View Post
May I respectfully suggest that you take a few moments to check the 2012 Global Terrorism Index. (As mentioned previously)
What is the source of your information re the probability of attack?
I definitely do not cower in fear. And have been travelling the globe since 1955, and still going strong.
Number of so-called incidents recently? Probability of incident affecting me? (effectively) Zero.

As I mentioned earlier, it's far too easy to just color criminal acts as terrorism. I wouldn't glorify such criminal activity as some are eager to do.
__________________
You cannot uphold American ideology with un-American actions. It's time for Change.
Spiff is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 12, 1:48 pm   #95
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 46
Why not check the link I posted earlier?
GLEN36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 12, 2:01 pm   #96
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Programs: AA EXP 3MM, FB Plat, AS Gold, Marriott Gold, Fairmont Plat, BA wannabe
Posts: 672
THIS is the message to take away....

Quote:
Originally Posted by exilencfc View Post
LHR is very bad at the moment as they failed a security audit a few months ago (there is a huge thread on the BA board about it).
I've flown through LHR T5 4 times in the last 2 weeks, and the increase of random secondary screenings has increased markedly. I was told that the random "kick-out" algorithm was 20%, and that doesn't include what the agent monitoring will find and that includes an automatic secondary for keeping your iPad in your case.

Given that there are only TWO secondary screeners in each screening area (serving two lines); the backlogs have been 20 minute + on each of these trips. I counted 20+ bags pushed into the secondary area on my last trip; and saw two full family meltdowns and countless other arguments.

It's bad....be prepared with lots of time and patience...
fishferbrains is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 12, 2:43 pm   #97
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by GLEN36 View Post
I trust that you never have to experience living with the daily threat of terrorist violence. Where every day one has to check ones car before setting out to work. Where even a piece of scrap newspaper under one of the wheels could hide a bomb. A technique used on a number of occasions.

You may not agree with me, but once experienced, Never Forgotten!

Your opinion will obviously never change. So I suggest we agree to disagree!
You continue not to address my relevant points and are relying on fear mongering and calls for "we need to be seen to do *something*" to justify the situation.

I'll repeat my points.

It is trivial for a terrorist to insert enough PETN in their rectum and completely bypass ALL of the security being used at LHR or in the USA. Therefore, all of this theater that you support is rendered utterly ineffective.

You realize that orders of magnitude more people die every year on our roadways than we lose to terrorism in 100 years- before all of the current security theater. The problem is that humans are not rational animals, and most people don't really take the time (or have the motivation) to use their brains and think things through... and are therefore more than happy to give away their most basic freedoms for the illusion of security. We could debate the point if the security theater was preventing threats, but it is not. There have been no less threats than before the latest theater, and those that were implemented were not stopped by the security theater. So it's not only ineffective in stopping attacks, but also ineffective in stopping people from trying. A failure in every regard.

You can talk about terrorism until you're blue in the face... but nothing you have said counters my point that the security procedures in place do not stop terrorism.

As for living under the constant threat of terrorism, where do you live that you had to check your car each day to be sure a bomb wasn't on it? With respect, there are probably several thousand people in the entire world for whom car bombs are actually a potential threat, and I have a hard time believing you are one of those.
corporate666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 12, 3:04 pm   #98
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by corporate666 View Post
You continue not to address my relevant points and are relying on fear mongering and calls for "we need to be seen to do *something*" to justify the situation.

I'll repeat my points.

It is trivial for a terrorist to insert enough PETN in their rectum and completely bypass ALL of the security being used at LHR or in the USA. Therefore, all of this theater that you support is rendered utterly ineffective.

You realize that orders of magnitude more people die every year on our roadways than we lose to terrorism in 100 years- before all of the current security theater. The problem is that humans are not rational animals, and most people don't really take the time (or have the motivation) to use their brains and think things through... and are therefore more than happy to give away their most basic freedoms for the illusion of security. We could debate the point if the security theater was preventing threats, but it is not. There have been no less threats than before the latest theater, and those that were implemented were not stopped by the security theater. So it's not only ineffective in stopping attacks, but also ineffective in stopping people from trying. A failure in every regard.

You can talk about terrorism until you're blue in the face... but nothing you have said counters my point that the security procedures in place do not stop terrorism.

As for living under the constant threat of terrorism, where do you live that you had to check your car each day to be sure a bomb wasn't on it? With respect, there are probably several thousand people in the entire world for whom car bombs are actually a potential threat, and I have a hard time believing you are one of those.
U.K. serving military (now retired)
I concede that some have been missed, but how many have been stopped?
GLEN36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 12, 4:28 pm   #99
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by GLEN36 View Post
U.K. serving military (now retired)
Thanks for your service.

However, this raises a good point. The IRA/UK "troubles" lasted 28 years. About 650 soldiers were killed and slightly fewer civilians, over the course of the entire 28 years. In the same period, more than 150,000 Britons were killed on the roadways.

What was the relative expenditure on counter-terrorism vs. counter-roadway deaths. Highly disproportional.

Quote:
I concede that some have been missed, but how many have been stopped?
If one is ever stopped, you will hear about it from every news source for the rest of your days. It's not like they keep these things secret - they have government bloat to justify, after all.

Remember the toner bomb? That was discovered by intelligence services, but it was stopped before it (potentially would have) went off. It was hailed as a great triumph and proof that we must remain ever vigilant.

Airport security does a fantastic job.... of finding water bottles and of hassling passengers. They are utterly ineffective in preventing terrorism, however.

You still have not accepted my irrefutable point that this enhanced airport security does absolutely nothing to provide security, but rather just the illusion thereof. Until they do full body cavity searches on every passenger, or develop a technology that can find implanted bombs (or inserted bombs), then all of the enhanced security is for naught.

It is the equivalent of building a moat and fence around 75% of your home, and leaving the other 25% completely unguarded - and telling people "75% is better than nothing, at least we're ensuring they don't get through those areas".
corporate666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 12, 3:15 am   #100
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by corporate666 View Post
Thanks for your service.

However, this raises a good point. The IRA/UK "troubles" lasted 28 years. About 650 soldiers were killed and slightly fewer civilians, over the course of the entire 28 years. In the same period, more than 150,000 Britons were killed on the roadways.

What was the relative expenditure on counter-terrorism vs. counter-roadway deaths. Highly disproportional.



If one is ever stopped, you will hear about it from every news source for the rest of your days. It's not like they keep these things secret - they have government bloat to justify, after all.

Remember the toner bomb? That was discovered by intelligence services, but it was stopped before it (potentially would have) went off. It was hailed as a great triumph and proof that we must remain ever vigilant.

Airport security does a fantastic job.... of finding water bottles and of hassling passengers. They are utterly ineffective in preventing terrorism, however.

You still have not accepted my irrefutable point that this enhanced airport security does absolutely nothing to provide security, but rather just the illusion thereof. Until they do full body cavity searches on every passenger, or develop a technology that can find implanted bombs (or inserted bombs), then all of the enhanced security is for naught.

It is the equivalent of building a moat and fence around 75% of your home, and leaving the other 25% completely unguarded - and telling people "75% is better than nothing, at least we're ensuring they don't get through those areas".
You're welcome.
If you have the time, check the following links some interesting info here.
Time for me to close down for a wee while, and spend some time with family and friends.
Wishing all members of the forum a Merry Christmas and a Peaceful New Year.

http://www.homelandsecuritynewswire....s-sniffer-mice

http://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/tec.../sniff-success

http://www.corbettreport.com/article...t_scanners.htm

http://www.ukaccs.info/security.htm

http://www.cio.com.au/article/444186...mb_detection_/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ger-Mouse.html

http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/...les_stats.html
GLEN36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 12, 3:30 pm   #101
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by GLEN36 View Post
You're welcome.
If you have the time, check the following links some interesting info here.
Time for me to close down for a wee while, and spend some time with family and friends.
Wishing all members of the forum a Merry Christmas and a Peaceful New Year.

http://www.homelandsecuritynewswire....s-sniffer-mice

http://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/tec.../sniff-success

http://www.corbettreport.com/article...t_scanners.htm

http://www.ukaccs.info/security.htm

http://www.cio.com.au/article/444186...mb_detection_/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ger-Mouse.html

http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/...les_stats.html
Very interesting indeed, thank you for the links.

Seems to largely confirm what has been posted on here before... that the scanners are ineffective in detecting PETN explosives, that sniffer dogs are more effective but still flawed, and that the current security practices do not provide any real additional security.

Quite a shame that we (as nations) spent so much money and got nothing in return. Almost criminal, really. All in the name of a false sense of security.

A well known American famously said (slightly paraphrasing) "those who would trade liberty for security, deserve neither". I agree with him.

Have a great Christmas and enjoy the time with the family!
corporate666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 12, 4:28 pm   #102
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Anywhere I need to be.
Programs: OW Emerald, *A Gold, NEXUS, GE, ABTC/APEC, South Korea SES, some other CCs
Posts: 13,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by celle View Post
OK. Thank you. That explains a lot. I apologize unreservedly to N830MH for not understanding his difficulties and for criticising his English.

However, I still maintain that, since he has no personal experience of UK security procedures, he is not qualified to judge them and so should not condemn them out of hand.
And he will soon as I remember reading he will fly to Basil sometime on BA.
__________________
RIP AA. 1934-9 Dec 2013.
AA_EXP09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 10, 12, 4:45 pm   #103
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Zealand/ UK
Programs: NZ, EK, QF, SQ.
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by AA_EXP09 View Post
And he will soon as I remember reading he will fly to Basil sometime on BA.
I expect you mean Basel/Basle - alternative spellings.

I look forward to reading the personal account of his experiences.
celle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 12, 9:21 am   #104
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Anywhere I need to be.
Programs: OW Emerald, *A Gold, NEXUS, GE, ABTC/APEC, South Korea SES, some other CCs
Posts: 13,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by celle View Post
I expect you mean Basel/Basle - alternative spellings.

I look forward to reading the personal account of his experiences.
I didn't remember how to spell it and I've never been there so don't know the IATA code.
I also look forward to reading his TRs.
They are generally informative and he does try hard to share his experiences despite not being the best in English.
__________________
RIP AA. 1934-9 Dec 2013.
AA_EXP09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 12, 10:30 am   #105
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: From ORK, live LCY
Programs: HH Gold, BA Gold, IHG Platinum, UA Gold, National Rail Gold, ABP
Posts: 12,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by pacer142 View Post
As a general point of UK law...

It is certainly not *permitted*, and unlike the US there is not a constitutional right to photograph on private property (which an airport is). (It is legal to photograph on public land e.g. on the street, but an airport is not a public place for those purposes).

Assuming no other law exists, which it may well do, the situation would be that as soon as you took photographs on private property having been told not to (there are almost always no-photography signs in airport screening areas) you would be trespassing, and thus reasonable force may be used to remove you from the premises as you are no longer welcome.

Neil
Quite correct. In fact, true signs or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by N830MH View Post
Because British security is very bad and they had no aviation security experienced at all. They do not have to go to classroom. It will take approximately 40 hours training. They don't have a qualified. They never was. Security have be improved and needs more training. They didn't hassles. They have be improving the security screening and reduce wait time at checkpoint. They have to take own responsibilities, and they have find a better security. Must have a high school diploma or GED standard.
So I hear. But it isn't my experience.

Two weeks ago I went through LHR T5 south security, elite lane. There were two people in the queue ahead of me. When the queue cleared, I was invited to proceed to the X-ray belt where the clerk put out two bins for my stuff, saying nothing. When they were full, she put out a third. I finished up and she said "you obviously know what you're doing, go on through". I did not beep the metal detector, have my bags emptied, get body-scanned, nor experience anything else which I could class as negative at that checkpoint.

It happened similarly at LGW on Saturday. The person ahead of me had their carry-on pulled because one of the Christmas presents she had contained an aerosol above the permitted limit.

Mrs. stifle had an uneventful experience at LHR T1 today, excepting that her medi-alert necklace was enough to set off the metal detector and she had a quick pat-down. No bags searched or any other silliness.

It is worth keeping some context. People generally do not post if, like the majority, they have had a perfectly normal experience at security (or anywhere else) today.

People don't generally post when things are uneventful.
__________________
See my flight calendar
stifle is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Bookmarks


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 9:40 am.