Shoebomber 2.0 in De-troy-it

[Felch]

KH is right that we don't know anything about the government test aside from the quantity of explosives used. There are a lot of important details we don't know about that test, and they make it reasonable to doubt its validity.

What we do know is that two separate terrorists tried to blow up planes using similar methods and both failed. Box cutters have proven significantly more dangerous than PETN. Because the flashier stuff draws headlines, and because the government is run by ****wits, we have invasive and ineffective security procedures in place, and more coming. It looks like the terrorists won this round in spite of not blowing up ****.

[KrazyHorse]

No comment on my C4 video, drake?

I didn't watch it. Seemed like an irrelevant distraction.

My irrelevant distraction demonstrates what happens when you take a specified amount of explosives, put it in a single clump and detonate it.

Yours shows what happens when you take a specified amount of explosives, rig it in some unspecified way, then detonate it and call it a "test".

I understand, Drake.

Again, this is why you're not a scientist.

[Drake Tungsten]

KH is right that we don't know anything about the government test aside from the quantity of explosives used. There are a lot of important details we don't know about that test, and they make it reasonable to doubt its validity.

In case you haven't noticed, KH has produced exactly zero evidence to support his assertion that the underwear bomb was not a significant threat to the airplane. People associated with the investigation disagree with him and a government test with a smaller amount of PETN produced a clearly dangerous result.

I can't believe how easily some of you are fooled by false intuition and bluster.

[Felch]

In case you haven't noticed, KH has produced exactly zero evidence to support his assertion that the underwear bomb was not a significant threat to the airplane. People associated with the investigation disagree with him and a government test with a smaller amount of PETN produced a clearly dangerous result.

I can't believe how easily some of you are fooled by false intuition and bluster.

He doesn't have to produce evidence. The bomb failed. We already know it was not a significant threat. That puts the burden on you. You posted a link to a government test. We know nothing about that test other than the quantity used. We don't know how the explosives were detonated, or where they were placed in the plane. It's obvious that location matters. A small shaped charge applied to a hull is more effective than a large bomb that blows up in the middle of the fuselage.

In other words, we're missing out on important details with your test. If we knew more about the test, it would be more convincing.

[DaShi]

I don't know. KH made some good points about how the Empire was doomed to fall regardless of colonialism.

[Drake Tungsten]

He doesn't have to produce evidence. The bomb failed. We already know it was not a significant threat.

This makes no sense.

[Guynemer]

KH is right that we don't know anything about the government test aside from the quantity of explosives used. There are a lot of important details we don't know about that test, and they make it reasonable to doubt its validity.

What we do know is that two separate terrorists tried to blow up planes using similar methods and both failed. Box cutters have proven significantly more dangerous than PETN. Because the flashier stuff draws headlines, and because the government is run by ****wits, we have invasive and ineffective security procedures in place, and more coming. It looks like the terrorists won this round in spite of not blowing up ****.

Meanwhile, an exceptionally brave and/or masochistic terrorist could smuggle a boxcutter onto a plane via his rectum. Wheeeeeee!

[Guynemer]

I can't believe how easily some of you are fooled by false intuition and bluster.

Isn't that exactly the point most of us are trying to make, in regards to Americans in general?

[Drake Tungsten]

Meanwhile, an exceptionally brave and/or masochistic terrorist could smuggle a boxcutter onto a plane via his rectum. Wheeeeeee!

A boxcutter would be worthless post 9/11, as airline passengers aren't going to sit quietly in the hope of eventual rescue in a hostage situation. Explosives are a far more serious threat.

Isn't that exactly the point most of us are trying to make, in regards to Americans in general?

I don't know. Most of the arguments in this thread seem pretty incoherent and/or out of touch with political reality.

The obvious argument against the new airline safety regulations isn't that they show Americans are "pussies" or some other nonsense, but that they're unnecessary and unlikely to work.

[Guynemer]

How?

Explosives blow up, the plane may or may not explode, 200 or so people may or may not die.

Other weapons are intended to take over the plane to crash it into something, thousands dead.

They could blow up 15 planes before the explosives become as dangerous as boxcutters.

[Drake Tungsten]

How?

Explosives blow up, the plane may or may not explode, 200 or so people may or may not die.

Other weapons are intended to take over the plane to crash it into something, thousands dead.

Terrorists will never take over a plane again.

[Arrian]

Damn you two are bored.



Is it possible that we're happy to play along like we REALLY REALLY care about terror in the air in part because we'd much rather the enemy continue to focus on airliners instead of softer targets? Probably too smart for our government.

-Arrian

[The Mad Monk]

Near his testicles? Do I smell Darwin Award?

No, that's barbecue.

[Drake Tungsten]

Is it possible that we're happy to play along like we REALLY REALLY care about terror in the air in part because we'd much rather the enemy continue to focus on airliners instead of softer targets? Probably too smart for our government.

Our government cares about terror in the air for the same reason terrorists continue to focus their efforts on airliners rather than softer targets: airline attacks are spectacular and have a public impact far greater than the sum of their human death toll.

[Wiglaf]

As a government official responsible in part for enacting the airline security policies you are complaining about, I need to mention that it is not the government that is stupid, but the investors in the stock market who pull their money out when a plane goes down. KH as a Stock-savvy Physcisit I thought you would understand this.

AT&T stock went down as a result of 9/11. AT&T stock did not go down as a result of the Oklhahoma City bombing. Explain that.