You can opine until the cows come home, however, if your opinion is baseless, it's not worth much. You make several false assumptions, including your theory that they will use the same tactics, numbers, and weapons as before. Make no doubt about it, hijacking an airliner is still at the top of the international terrorist shopping list.

I will agree with you whole heartedly about "feel good" security, it sickens me as well. That is one reason I believe the managers of the FAM program have instituted policies that profile their fams. They fams been pimped out to the airlines to be their corporate security cheerleaders. It's a disgrace.

I have found the lively discussion on this Frequent Flyer Forum to be enjoyable. A good debate is one of the freedoms we enjoy as citizen's in this country.

It is alway's good to see what the "other side" is thinking. The plain truth is when the majority of Americans do not want the Air Marshal program, it will be gone. When I say "majority" that number would include the politicians who listen to their constituency, as well as Airline decision makers.

One of the statements I have read a couple of times from a few different members deals with a hi-jacking not ever happening again because the passenger's will rise up. Well thats a very good concept in the realm of a "theoretical" exercise. My question is in the real world, "Which of you is willing the first to be killed in the assault on the hi-jackers?" You do realize that although the hi-jackers may loose, several passengers will most likely be killed or seriously injured? We all like to think we would do the right thing, but when faced with the situation do you have skill, training, and mindset to jump into the fray and win? If you do, what are the odds you will be on the plane that gets hi-jacked, and do you really want to be the one to get dirty?

Hi-jackings have been with us for decades. I do not think they will go away. May be awhile before we see another attempt, but it will happen. It has already happened oversea's. Granted these were third world countries for the most part, but it does go to show that there are indeed people out there with the idea still in their head.

Some who have joined recently, like I have, decided to trade insult for insult. Some of it has been rather comical. Coming into a web forum where the discussion centers around disdain for government procedures and programs, such as the Air Marshal program is like a Street Narcotics Officer signing into a pro Marijuana website and going head to head. Not going to change anyone's mind, but that does not mean that those people represent the public as a whole, or that they are right in their opinions. But in their own world, in the confines of a web board they can be right as rain. Isnt technology great!

The fact that you used the term "flying FAM" means that you are obviously more than you seem...my fellow FAMs recognize this term for what it is.
I never said that I knew anything. I simply believe that there is often more to what goes on then the Gov sees fit to let us in on. Shoot well...shoot shmell. There is more to it than putting on a gun and sitting in first class...but then you probably already know that.
So where would you spend the money? I assume you have an answer since you think all of mine are wrong? More CBP Inspectors? Like the ones who let 4 of the hijackers in? More FBI? Like the ones who let the Syrian band (who caused all of the uproar lately go with expired visas). Kinda like the ones most of the 9/11 hijackers had.
The best anyone can do is spread the "bets" around and hope that one of them will pay off when it comes to terrorism. FAMs, CBP, ICE and FBI are all multiple layers in the security issue.
BTW...never called myself an expert in anything. Just trying to make a pun which I assume you did not get...or maybe you have no since of humor. Either way....
I hope I never have to find out how good of a shot I am in the environs of my workplace. That means that all bets are off...and a lot of people die.

I still can't understand the people on this site's animosity towards FAMs. I don't expect gratitude...maybe just less hostility.

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
George Orwell


Sleep tight America...

Don't hurt your shoulder patting yourself on the back or anything.

As for the quote, Orwell never said anything like that. It is just another piece of disinformation floating around out there that you have accepted as fact. Truly disconcerting, I must say, for one who represents our "security apparatus" acting on solid "intel."

The closest thing Orwell said to that was in a discussion of what he though Kipling believed: "[Kipling] sees clearly that men can only be highly civilized while other men, inevitably less civilised, are there to guard and feed them."


Glad to hear you say that you know that you don't know anything. Perhaps - just perhaps - there is not so very much to know. Since you favor George Orwell, give his book 1984 a read. A manual for our times.Our government has clearly shown itself to be gullible and also ready to twist, select or shamelessly inflate intelligence to suit its purposes. Just like any other government and more than some.


Well, I'm with you there. I hope those on airplanes who are armed never do have to start shooting. It would not turn out well.

As to the hostility, I don't feel any in general towards FAMs. I sure do towards those who try to make us believe they are essential in such numbers or that they are beating back a real, present threat. I accept them the way I accept police at ballgames and in high schools: as a necessity and with gratitude but no great belief that they will be needed very often at all. And when people who carry guns and who are willing to infringe on my rights citing mysterious unspeakable knowledge start to loom so large in my everyday life, my concerns for democracy and my bullsh*t detectors both go into over drive.

As to having answers, as I think I clearly said, I don't think there are any. If someone wants to do mayhem, they will. If an organization of dozens let alone hundreds, let alone the the thousands we are led to believe are out there really were out there and capable -- we would have some unsuccessful tries and some successful tries. Either kind would be a success for a terrorist because either would sow more fear. As it stands, the awful single event of 9/11 was far more successful than the terrible results of that day: it has had us cowering in fear ever since. They have broken our spirit and our courage and inspired us to attack people not culpable just to make ourselves feel like we doing something.

Yes, put some FAMs in some seats. Unlike others, I don't care if they are 1st class or not. But the program should not be too big. Yes, screen bags, wand people. But don't pretend you are creating a "sterile" environment which must be evacuated when a little lapse is made. That is both stupid and crazy. It both creates a false sense of security inside the screened areas and contributes to a false sense of fear everywhere else.

Surely spread the bets around, but mostly get on with life.

Since you are new here and like quotes, here's one for you that I have posted before. It is from a blind and deaf person who fits my criteria for a person of courage more than any character played by a Bruce Willis type:

If you are who you say your are, I do appreciate your willingness to put yourself in harm's way. Just don't expect me to buy the notion that there is as much danger for you or for me in the air as there is for the average firefighter, police man or resident of some our worse neighborhoods.

Best wishes,

Teacher49

Hey Teach,

Due to the fact that this thread is about Air Marshal's, and not the government, or cops, or whatever in general, could you please describe a specific instance where a Federal Air Marshal has infringed upon your rights, and loomed in your everyday life? I respectfully request specifics. Not theory, or second hand information, or opinion of government programs. Specifics please. This thread started very specific. About how a Federal Air Marshal supposedly "stole" a first class upgrade seat. We have (with much entertainment) digressed from there.

Oh, and even though you don't buy into the program, we will still defend you if and when the time comes. And if and when the time comes we will do our best to bite our lip and not say " I told you so".

I'm sure your students are very lucky, as I am sure you put as much effort into their lesson plans, as you do this web board about your frequent flyer bennies.

Have a good day.

Hey, Marsha,

As you point out, this thread has digressed. Several people claiming to be FAM's came on like Bruce Willis "Die Hard" wannabes with bullsh*t rhetoric about saving us all, and nonsense about "there are things nobody knows about except some kind of brotherhood of 'rough men'"

Yawn.

So, if the thread got into a broader area regarding the need/justification for FAMs in the first place, look no further than your own.

Haven't seen any heroics yet specifically by a FAM ... or do you have some specific examples?

As to your request for specifics, there are many threads on this site in different forums about FAMs and others in the "security" world interfering with passengers and other regular citizens without cause. One example was the poster who was detained and challenged to explain why he was traveling "mileage run style" on the same plane in both directions without luggage. Other stories about people being stopped from snapping pictures in departure areas, on trains, etc. You can do the research yourself, they are easy enough to find.

Thanks for your concerns for my students - insincere as they many be. As a teacher in private adult education whose students pay directly and who will only pay for an education with which they are satisfied, feedback about their satisfaction is always direct and specific. In my travel to three continents to work with hundreds of students, they do keep on coming back over a multiple year training. So, not to worry about them.

It is only some others who get a paycheck to be part of huge apparatus which first fans our fears then exists to baby sit them and who do get paid regardless of their productivity. But you are correct, you are being paid to maybe, one day, perhaps, we all hope not, have to perform to try to save your own behind as well as those of the folks in first class you so obviously detest. I guess we all need to count on the former motivation.

In the ulikely event that you may be needed professionally, may your aim be better than your logic and may your emotional equilibrium under stress be more reliable than the fussiness you have shown here - for all our sakes.

Best wishes,

Teacher49

Some things are said so well that they bear repeating!

Bruce

Dont know where you got Marsha there "babe", but your post is exactly what I thought it would be, a rambling discertation. Maybe you have mixed some of my posts up with the other's, I don't recall saying I "detested" people who sit in first class.

I didnt think you would answer any of my questions with specifics. I bet you have none. Just rhetoric. You listed a bunch of stuff, most of which did not involve FAMS.

And in quickly reviewing some of the other posts, even the more "colorful" ones I dont recall seeing anything about how only a "brotherhood of rough men" know it all, or will save everyone.

Of course I shouldnt neglect the fact that from what I have seen, your posts tend to take on a derogatory, inflaming sort of quality.

Oh, and by the way, who said anything about heroics? By the way in the past couple of years FAMS have been involved in legitimate situations where individuals violated the law, perpetrated violence, and caused concern for those travelling with them. Heroics, not in my book.. Just doing their job. Was it a hi-jacking, not yet.

I am sure you will have some well thought out response, that not only insults, but deviates from the discussion at hand. Oh, and I shouldnt forget that my logic is questionable. I'm sure you will touch on that again.

Nah. Done.

Best wishes,

Teacher49

FWIW: ^

I do think a certain percentage (~50%) of all LEO's, regardless of context, should not be there psychologically, I can see where the FAM's were a good idea on paper, but in implementation, bad. Better to have gone the Israeli approach. But given all that, as long as they're out ther, good for them!

Some things are definitely worth repeating. At least the police don't steal the best seats behind home plate.

If what is meant by '9/11 style hijacking' is taking over a commercial plane and using it as a missile -- well the threat of that is quite unrealistic today. Not only is such a plan virtually impossible today, it was impossible by the 4th airplane on the morning of Sept 11. Once word got out what the purpose of the hijacking was -- and no one is under any illusions today -- it is clear that a handful of hijackers could at worst blow up an airplane or crash it into a field somewhere. Use it as a bomb to blow up something else -- that is extremely unlikely.

Lets look at some documentation and move out of the realm of opinion for a moment, shall we?

First of all, the only plane that was unwarned was the first plane (American flight 11). They were totally unprepared. United flight 175 (the second one) was warned, although not in much time to do anything. They had only a few minutes. One passenger, Brian Sweeney called his mom (8:59 AM) and told her the passengers were thinking about storming the cockpit. Another passenger, Peter Hanson called his dad (9:00 AM) and told him that he believed the hijackers were going to crash into a building but in Chicago. Minutes later they crashed (9:03 AM). American flight 77 was hijacked between 8:51 and 8:54. Between 9:16 and 9:26 Barbara Olson called her husband, the Solicitor General of the US, and notified him of what had happened. He in turn notified her that the planes were being used as weapons. She asked what to tell the pilot. The plane crashed into the Pentagon at 9:37:46. United 93 was hijacked at 9:28. At 9:32 people started calling their families and were notified of the attacks. The passenger assault began at 9:57 and lasted until the hijackers crashed the plane.

Back to opinion : Look at those times - there was time to fight and nobody did. Only the last flight fought back and it took 25 MINUTES AND A VOTE! This is not to disparage their memories-they were heroic. My point is that most people are not born with the basic double-load of guts. They need time to work up their courage. Going from zero to killing people in a matter of seconds is difficult if not impossible for the average civilian. A few of the Alphas may step forward and get the rest in the fight, but you need time for that. It takes time....adrenaline is a hell of a thing. It freezes many people, especially if they just saw someone brutally murdered. Nonetheless the myth of the passengers fighting back is just that - a myth. Trained soldiers in WWII had a firing rate of only 20%. Think about that - only 20% of TRAINED soldiers in WWII fired their weapons at the enemy. The rate was raised to 80% in Korea and 95% in Vietnam. But that was only because of innovations in training, not because of a new breed of human was developed. Passengers fighting back will only happen given time and the ability to coordinate. Do you think the next hijackers will give them the time to do so? Send them to the back of the plane like on 9/11? I don't. They learn their lessons and have since terrorists began using hijacking as a means of political speech in 1985 (TWA 847 in Athens, Greece).

Which begs the question - will another hijacking happen again? Well, again we turn to the documentation. From 1960-1984 there were 495 hijackings in the world with an average of 20 or so a year. From 1985-2001 there were 390 hijackings, with an average of 25 a year (the year most experts begin the age of terroristic hijacking): http://www.bts.gov/publications/pock...e03_table.html). In 2002 through mid-2003 there were 16 hijackings (there is no more current available data in public records).

The 9/11 attacks saw an impact upon the US unprecedented in the history of this country. Nineteen men, armed only with a small blade and their will, changed the course of our history and hurt us in a way never before seen. Why would they give that up? The world has seen time and time again that terrorists return to hijackings, even after the hijacking ends in utter failure. So why, after their most spectacular success, would they give up this tried and trued method of creating terror and getting worldwide media attention?

Clauswitz said to prepare for your enemy's capabilities not his intentions. We would be wise to follow his advice.

My BS opinion only (backed up with lots of facts). Your mileage may vary.

Law Dawg

Teacher said-Haven't seen any heroics yet specifically by a FAM ... or do you have some specific examples?

Not mentioned in the article but the man who tackled this guy was a FAM : http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/...in509955.shtml

Tackled?

Yep. Happened right in front of him and he just reacted. His firearm was in one of the deep concealment rigs and he didn't go for it.