AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 09:22 AM

That would put a crimp in transportation, wouldn't it? After last week would that be such a bad thing? We managed before aeroplanes came along, and that was even without all the things we have now like computers and mobile phones.

If people to be put into keeeping airlines going, that means they own part of the airlines. If it's public money, that means the public own them. That's as much capitalism as it is socialism.

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: kendall
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 10:03 AM

W is on right now, stumbling all over himself, stuttering, misspronouncing words, ending every sentence on the upswing like it was a question. Still insisting that "They" hate freedom. I just find it very difficult to take this guy seriously.

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 12:13 PM

Note he said someone was playing politics "trying" to "twist" his words.

I have a hard enough time trying to straighten out he says into some coherent sentences.

Sometimes it is like trying to straighten out a pretzel.

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 12:35 PM

Anybody watch "60 Minutes" last night?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: Mrrzy
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 12:50 PM

All "laid-off" airline employees should be immediately hired as consultants by the new office of homeland protection or whatever it was. Don't bail out the airline companies, who cares about their profits. Bail out the people who are about to lose their jobs - and in so doing, get all their expertise in answering the question How would you get past yourself if you were a terrorist? Baggage handlers would then help close the baggage loopholes, pilots the cockpit ones, attendants the passenger ones, and so on. When we get out air traffic back and people are rehired into the industry it will then be a lot safer, at least... and if people don't go back to flying, no need to bail out the companies.

This applies to travel of humans, of course. Cargo would still need to go, but not ever on a plane with passengers. What we'll do about crop dusting, or rich folks with personal planes, I haven't thought of yet.

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 12:52 PM

That last sentence in that last post I made got garbled - it should have read:

If people put money into a business, such as an airline to keep it going, that means they own part of that business. If it's public money, because the representatives of the community believe it is necessary to keep it going, that means the public own's that part of the business. That's just as much capitalism as it is socialism.

If an airline company goes broke, the aeroplanes are still there, the people who operate them are still there. If it's important to the community that they keep flying, it keeps flying, and the government picks up the bill, if the fares don't cover the cost. That's common sense.

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 12:53 PM

DougR, I think you have me confused with somebody else. Where did I say anything like that?

Don Foirth

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 12:56 PM

(Hells Bells! Can't even spell my own name this morning.)

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: Troll
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 01:09 PM

Don. 12:56 P.M. is afternoon. Go take a nap. You've been working too hard.

troll***BG***

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: The Shambles
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 02:00 PM

I am trying to see any of the senarios when the flight crew would need to come back to the passengers and vice versa?

I am sure there may be some problems involved in doing this, but would these be bigger problems than more future potential suicide bombers hi-jacking planes?

Until the flight crew is completely sealed off from the pasengers, I cannot see the passenger confidence that the industry needs, ever returning.

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: kendall
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 02:19 PM

the cheapest and most effective way to put a stop to this crap is the install cockpit doors that are secure. Second to that Sky Marshals on every flight.

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: Justa Picker
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 02:26 PM

The cockpit doors can be ten inches thick and made of solid lead. If a terrorist demands "open the cockpit door now or we blow up the plane", doesn't matter how secure the doors are, if they carry through on the threat.

I do however endorse the Sky Marshalls idea but with several not just one on board each flight, and also the flight crew being trained in some method of self defense.

As grotesque as this also might sound, all commercial aircraft should also be equipped with a self destruct mechanism to minimize the chances of what happened on September 11th ever happening again.

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 02:38 PM

If they'd blown up the planes on September 11th we'd be mourning the terrible deaths of 200 people or so instead of 6000 plus.

I suppose sealed-off compartments would mean that, if something happened to disable the flight crew, the geek in tourist class who knows how to fly wouldn't be abe to go up front and heroically save everyone. And if the captain has a heart attack, there won't be a chance for a doctor from among the passengers to come to the rescue. And you won't have the scenario where the pilot nonchalently strolls down the pkane so as not to worry bthe passengers, and has a look at what has gone wrong in teh tail section.

But I doubt if these things happen too often in real life.

But I'd still sooner go by airship, if there isn't a way you can get there by train.

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: heric
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 02:39 PM

AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is

so bright I gotta wear leaded shades.

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 04:18 PM

Troll, I'm in Seattle. I posted that at 9:56 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
From: kendall
Date: 24 Sep 01 - 06:24 PM

El Al has sturdy doors. As far as a self destruct program goes. what makes the difference if the pilot blows it up or the terrorist does it? Also, if they say they will blow it up, what would be gained by opening the door?

---

These are the threads in the series on the World Trade Center Tragedy. Please post only to the most recent thread in the series. The others are closed because they are too long for some browsers to open. There is no need to "refresh" old threads in this series. These links should be sufficient.
Thanks
-Joe Offer-

---

• World Trade Center-Unreal Disaster
• AMERICAN ATTACKS--PART TWO
• AMERICAN ATTACKS---PART THREE
• AMERICAN ATTACKS- - -PART FOUR
• AMERICAN ATTACKS- - - PART FIVE
• AMERICAN ATTACKS**SIX -about enough huh?
• AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART SEVEN..thoughts
• AMERICAN ATTACKS=PART EIGHT.more still
• AMERICAN ATTACKS**Part 9,one week later
• AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
• AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART ELEVEN: Long Haul
• American Attacks**Part Fifty - Got him!
• American Attacks**Part Twelve: Steady On
• American Attacks:Thirteen and Lucky?

---

This thread is closed. Please do not post any more messages in this thread. Additional messages will be deleted.