Luggage bomb hoax lands couple in jail
Jan 16, 2003, 8:00 am
#61
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Indian Harbour Beach, Fla, USA
Programs: AA Lifetime Plt
Posts: 1,986
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Guy Betsy:
I've heard that the bomb detection machines can't detect substances of heavy density.
Hmm. Me thinks an idea to pack some heavy heavy blue fermented cheese in large quantities.
Won't the screener be screaming for his/her life when he opens the bag and gets a whiff of the lovely cargo!
I think I'd throw in a couple kilos of DURIAN too. (DURIAN: SMELLY FRUIT , well at least to Western noses, FOUND ONLY IN THE FAR EAST)</font>
I've heard that the bomb detection machines can't detect substances of heavy density.
Hmm. Me thinks an idea to pack some heavy heavy blue fermented cheese in large quantities.
Won't the screener be screaming for his/her life when he opens the bag and gets a whiff of the lovely cargo!
I think I'd throw in a couple kilos of DURIAN too. (DURIAN: SMELLY FRUIT , well at least to Western noses, FOUND ONLY IN THE FAR EAST)</font>
A Virgin Blue flight was delayed for four hours because someone had some durian in their checked luggage.
I do like the comment in the newspaper story attributed to one of the local authorities:
"Brisbane Magistrate Jim Herlihy yesterday suggested idiots were being confused with terrorists".
The URL of the newspaper piece is:
[URL=http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,5847998%255E421,00.html[/ URL]
(edited to fix a misspelling, then I started moving stuff around, too, and the link vanished -- it's one of THOSE days)
[This message has been edited by greggwiggins (edited 01-16-2003).]
Jan 16, 2003, 8:06 am
#62
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Indian Harbour Beach, Fla, USA
Programs: AA Lifetime Plt
Posts: 1,986
ooops. Please ignore.
[This message has been edited by greggwiggins (edited 01-16-2003).]
[This message has been edited by greggwiggins (edited 01-16-2003).]
Jan 16, 2003, 9:40 am
#63
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 928
If a person walks into a bank and implies that they have a weapon in their coat to a cashier, is this not a felony? same thing applies here folks. It is a law not to joke around about bombs.
Jan 16, 2003, 9:47 am
#64
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by tsadude:
If a person walks into a bank and implies that they have a weapon in their coat to a cashier, is this not a felony? same thing applies here folks. It is a law not to joke around about bombs.</font>
If a person walks into a bank and implies that they have a weapon in their coat to a cashier, is this not a felony? same thing applies here folks. It is a law not to joke around about bombs.</font>
Jan 16, 2003, 10:14 am
#65
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 31,215
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by FWAAA:
And in what way did they joke about a bomb? Please elaborate, since the prosecutor thought otherwise.</font>
And in what way did they joke about a bomb? Please elaborate, since the prosecutor thought otherwise.</font>
Jan 16, 2003, 10:25 am
#66
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 928
When their bags were put through a bomb detection machine, federal screeners found what turned out to be a snow boot with batteries, wires and an electrical power strip arranged in a suspicious way.
Screeners also found a note that read, "To the uniformed puppet opening this bag -- congratulations. You've just brought this once free nation one step closer to becoming a fascist police state,"
I guess I was wrong to assume that this was a sick joke. But really what is happening is that the TSA is a covert United Nations New World Order special section with black helicopters ready to disram the whole country. Just joking. It is amazing that I (and many others)spent 21+ years in the military defending our constitution and freedom only to be spit on only because we are trying to keep travel safe as possible. I cannot speak for my fellow TSA counterparts, but I have experienced catostrophic events that left ugly memories. Sorry for caring for your safety. I do not have to do this job but I felt a responsibility because of my experiences to help out. By the way my wife also felt the same way and she is with the TSA also. There are people in this organization not just collecting a paycheck.
Screeners also found a note that read, "To the uniformed puppet opening this bag -- congratulations. You've just brought this once free nation one step closer to becoming a fascist police state,"
I guess I was wrong to assume that this was a sick joke. But really what is happening is that the TSA is a covert United Nations New World Order special section with black helicopters ready to disram the whole country. Just joking. It is amazing that I (and many others)spent 21+ years in the military defending our constitution and freedom only to be spit on only because we are trying to keep travel safe as possible. I cannot speak for my fellow TSA counterparts, but I have experienced catostrophic events that left ugly memories. Sorry for caring for your safety. I do not have to do this job but I felt a responsibility because of my experiences to help out. By the way my wife also felt the same way and she is with the TSA also. There are people in this organization not just collecting a paycheck.
Jan 16, 2003, 10:28 am
#67
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Commuting around the mid-atlantic and rust-belt on any number of RJs
Programs: TSA Random Selectee Platinum, * Gold, SPG/HH/MR mid-tier, and a tiny bag of pretzels.
Posts: 9,255
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Brian:
They were detained for suspicion. Simple as that. They were released when it was determined that there was insufficient evidence. Recasting this as being arrested for criticizing the government is utterly unsupported by any available facts. </font>
They were detained for suspicion. Simple as that. They were released when it was determined that there was insufficient evidence. Recasting this as being arrested for criticizing the government is utterly unsupported by any available facts. </font>
What we have here is a reaction to speech critical of the government.
Papers please, comrade.
------------------
Saving the world, one clue at a time.
Jan 16, 2003, 10:34 am
#68
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Commuting around the mid-atlantic and rust-belt on any number of RJs
Programs: TSA Random Selectee Platinum, * Gold, SPG/HH/MR mid-tier, and a tiny bag of pretzels.
Posts: 9,255
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by tsadude:
It is amazing that I (and many others)spent 21+ years in the military defending our constitution and freedom only to be spit on only because we are trying to keep travel safe as possible.</font>
It is amazing that I (and many others)spent 21+ years in the military defending our constitution and freedom only to be spit on only because we are trying to keep travel safe as possible.</font>
The latter is not (the TSA).
It's not the frontline folks fault. I don't blame the troops. In the TSA's case, its the REMFs who are the root cause of the problem.
http://lists.village.virginia.edu/sixties/HTML_docs/Resources/Glossary/Sixties_Term_Gloss_Q_T.html#Letter%20'R' jas the definition for REMF for those not in the know--I know that the FT censor won't let it thru.
------------------
Saving the world, one clue at a time.
Jan 16, 2003, 11:03 am
#69
Suspended
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Los Angeles
Programs: Loyal to Myself
Posts: 8,303
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ClueByFour:
Except for the small fact that in the eyes of a "reasonable individual" (Eg, the district attorney in question) there was [i]no evidence of anything. Ergo, available facts.
What we have here is a reaction to speech critical of the government.
Papers please, comrade.
[/B]</font>
Except for the small fact that in the eyes of a "reasonable individual" (Eg, the district attorney in question) there was [i]no evidence of anything. Ergo, available facts.
What we have here is a reaction to speech critical of the government.
Papers please, comrade.
[/B]</font>
In a real percentage of cases, evidence is inadequate to support the contemplated charge, and the person is released. This is the law, and how the system works.
Please don't confuse your own deeply held view about the actions these people took,
and the law, which was followed scrupulously.
Jan 16, 2003, 11:15 am
#70
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 928
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ClueByFour:
Don't confuse the two. The former is a noble and thankless occupation worthy of the respect and support of a grateful nation.
The latter is not (the TSA).
It's not the frontline folks fault. I don't blame the troops. In the TSA's case, its the REMFs who are the root cause of the problem.
http://lists.village.virginia.edu/sixties/HTML_docs/Resources/G lossary/Sixties_Term_Gloss_Q_T.html#Letter%20'R' jas the definition for REMF for those not in the know--I know that the FT censor won't let it thru.
</font>
Don't confuse the two. The former is a noble and thankless occupation worthy of the respect and support of a grateful nation.
The latter is not (the TSA).
It's not the frontline folks fault. I don't blame the troops. In the TSA's case, its the REMFs who are the root cause of the problem.
http://lists.village.virginia.edu/sixties/HTML_docs/Resources/G lossary/Sixties_Term_Gloss_Q_T.html#Letter%20'R' jas the definition for REMF for those not in the know--I know that the FT censor won't let it thru.
</font>
Jan 16, 2003, 11:25 am
#71
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Commuting around the mid-atlantic and rust-belt on any number of RJs
Programs: TSA Random Selectee Platinum, * Gold, SPG/HH/MR mid-tier, and a tiny bag of pretzels.
Posts: 9,255
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Brian:
The job of the police is to detain people whose conduct may be criminal. The job of the DA is to review the evidence and see if charges are warranted. This goes on every day, many thousands of times.
In a real percentage of cases, evidence is inadequate to support the contemplated charge, and the person is released. This is the law, and how the system works.
Please don't confuse your own deeply held view about the actions these people took,
and the law, which was followed scrupulously. </font>
The job of the police is to detain people whose conduct may be criminal. The job of the DA is to review the evidence and see if charges are warranted. This goes on every day, many thousands of times.
In a real percentage of cases, evidence is inadequate to support the contemplated charge, and the person is released. This is the law, and how the system works.
Please don't confuse your own deeply held view about the actions these people took,
and the law, which was followed scrupulously. </font>
I come from a family of judges, laywers, and, in one case, a officer of a local DA's office. I can tell you that if a cop in this part of the world showed up with that kind of crap (eg, the "evidence" in this case) at so much as a preliminary hearing before a district justice, he/she would be laughed out of court. I don't know how things work locally in SJC, but I'm betting the DA got one look at this and did not feel like making an @ss of him/herself in front of a DJ and/or grand jury.
Don't preach to us about how the process is supposed to work--I know how it works, and can smell bu!!$h!t when it comes around. This is one of those times.
------------------
Saving the world, one clue at a time.
Jan 16, 2003, 11:52 am
#72
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,953
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Take care that you're not one of the asphalt spreaders.
Thanks for serving in the military but no thanks for 'serving' in the TSA. As CB4 pointed out, the two have nothing to do with each other.
Suppose you tried to keep people safe by closing the airports. Problem solved, no deaths while flying. Everyone's safe. However, it's a unacceptable solution as no one wants that kind of safety. Your organization forces a level of "safety" on many of us who do not want to be "protected" in that manner any more than they want you to keep us safe by closing the airports.
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
Thanks for serving in the military but no thanks for 'serving' in the TSA. As CB4 pointed out, the two have nothing to do with each other.
Suppose you tried to keep people safe by closing the airports. Problem solved, no deaths while flying. Everyone's safe. However, it's a unacceptable solution as no one wants that kind of safety. Your organization forces a level of "safety" on many of us who do not want to be "protected" in that manner any more than they want you to keep us safe by closing the airports.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by tsadude:
It is amazing that I (and many others)spent 21+ years in the military defending our constitution and freedom only to be spit on only because we are trying to keep travel safe as possible. I cannot speak for my fellow TSA counterparts, but I have experienced catostrophic events that left ugly memories. Sorry for caring for your safety. I do not have to do this job but I felt a responsibility because of my experiences to help out. By the way my wife also felt the same way and she is with the TSA also. There are people in this organization not just collecting a paycheck.</font>
It is amazing that I (and many others)spent 21+ years in the military defending our constitution and freedom only to be spit on only because we are trying to keep travel safe as possible. I cannot speak for my fellow TSA counterparts, but I have experienced catostrophic events that left ugly memories. Sorry for caring for your safety. I do not have to do this job but I felt a responsibility because of my experiences to help out. By the way my wife also felt the same way and she is with the TSA also. There are people in this organization not just collecting a paycheck.</font>
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
Jan 16, 2003, 1:09 pm
#73
Suspended
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Los Angeles
Programs: Loyal to Myself
Posts: 8,303
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ClueByFour:
In this case, the evidence was lacking from the get go.
I come from a family of judges, laywers, and, in one case, a officer of a local DA's office. I can tell you that if a cop in this part of the world showed up with that kind of crap (eg, the "evidence" in this case) at so much as a preliminary hearing before a district justice, he/she would be laughed out of court. I don't know how things work locally in SJC, but I'm betting the DA got one look at this and did not feel like making an @ss of him/herself in front of a DJ and/or grand jury.
Don't preach to us about how the process is supposed to work--I know how it works, and can smell bu!!$h!t when it comes around. This is one of those times.
</font>
In this case, the evidence was lacking from the get go.
I come from a family of judges, laywers, and, in one case, a officer of a local DA's office. I can tell you that if a cop in this part of the world showed up with that kind of crap (eg, the "evidence" in this case) at so much as a preliminary hearing before a district justice, he/she would be laughed out of court. I don't know how things work locally in SJC, but I'm betting the DA got one look at this and did not feel like making an @ss of him/herself in front of a DJ and/or grand jury.
Don't preach to us about how the process is supposed to work--I know how it works, and can smell bu!!$h!t when it comes around. This is one of those times.
</font>
Because I am not paranoid about law enforcement, I tend to think that they would not waste their own time and risk censure for an arrest with no substance behind it. You may disagree, but that is opinion, not fact.
[This message has been edited by Brian (edited 01-16-2003).]
Jan 16, 2003, 1:39 pm
#74
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,498
In this case, the risk of censure was pretty close to zero, so you might want to reconsider your statement.
Bruce
Bruce
Jan 16, 2003, 2:01 pm
#75
Suspended
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Los Angeles
Programs: Loyal to Myself
Posts: 8,303
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by bdschobel:
In this case, the risk of censure was pretty close to zero, so you might want to reconsider your statement.
Bruce</font>
In this case, the risk of censure was pretty close to zero, so you might want to reconsider your statement.
Bruce</font>
I am not saying that it could never happen.. it is possible, even in this case. But stating it as fact ("In this case, the evidence was lacking from the get go.") is an unwarranted assumption that could not reasonably made from published reports, even assuming the reports were completely true and accurate, which is unknown.
It is the entire "black and white" mentality that I find uncalled for.