And I very much doubt that the average muslim has any concerns whatsoever about being strip searched, it is in their interests too that no bombs get onboard the plane as they will get to their destination alive so I am sure the typical muslim would be willing to undergo a little extra inconvenience and be sure they will be alive at the end of their flight

What is better ? longer check in time or being blown up at 35,000ft ? should be no contest

 

I would rather check in 4 hrs before departure and be properly screened then kill time after that in the departure lounge having a few drinks than I would getting blown up

 

And as for your claim above you are wrong, I am off to Dubai in March on Emirates and on the travel documents it states that they want you to check in 3 hrs before departure

OK, I stand corrected. Frankly, I'd love three hour check-ins to become the norm. It might encourage people to look for alternative forms of transport. After all, central London to central Paris would take around five or six hours compared with three by train. As for those who choose to accept a three or four hour check in, how many will be refused permission to board because they've used the time to get drunk?

OK, I stand corrected. Frankly, I'd love three hour check-ins to become the norm. It might encourage people to look for alternative forms of transport. After all, central London to central Paris would take around five or six hours compared with three by train. As for those who choose to accept a three or four hour check in, how many will be refused permission to board because they've used the time to get drunk?

I would normally agree, but I think quite frankly the only way to stop this sort of thing is to have EVERYONE wear the proposed special airline gowns (along with the luggage compression idea). It's the only way to do it properly in all honesty, too much is left to risk by singling out certain racial or religious groups.

I would normally agree, but I think quite frankly the only way to stop this sort of thing is to have EVERYONE wear the proposed special airline gowns (along with the luggage compression idea). It's the only way to do it properly in all honesty, too much is left to risk by singling out certain racial or religious groups.

 

everyone?... why should my mother go through this? when was the last time a.... no hold on, when is the FIRST time a white female pensioner blew a plane up?...

 

everyone should go through checks yes, but some sections in society need checking more thoughrough then others, as some people ARE more likely to be bombers then others. fact.

everyone?... why should my mother go through this? when was the last time a.... no hold on, when is the FIRST time a white female pensioner blew a plane up?...

 

everyone should go through checks yes, but some sections in society need checking more thoughrough then others, as some people ARE more likely to be bombers then others. fact.

 

Ridiculous. There was a time when no Muslim had ever blown up a plane either, so saying certain groups are yet to do it is nonsense. What about the possibility of a mentally-ill white, "unsuspicious-looking" person being coerced into doing it by Islamic radicals?

Ridiculous. There was a time when no Muslim had ever blown up a plane either, so saying certain groups are yet to do it is nonsense. What about the possibility of a mentally-ill white, "unsuspicious-looking" person being coerced into doing it by Islamic radicals?

 

until the womans institute rises up as a public threat to law and order i think my assertation that certain section of our society WONT blow planes up is sound :)

 

the proposed measures deal with that.... a mentaly ill person would be under the 'at higher risk' catagory, especially if traveling alone, rather then joe bloggs and his nuclear family popping over to spain on hols... god it aint rocket science.

until the womans institute rises up as a public threat to law and order i think my assertation that certain section of our society WONT blow planes up is sound :)

 

But the whole point is before September 11th, Islamic extremists weren't considered any kind of threat to air travel either. That obviously changed quickly. So if we give an unlimited free pass to anyone who isn't a Muslim, that leaves the door shockingly wide open for any kind of crazy people.

 

Btw, how do you even propose airport staff know who is a Muslim and who isn't? Could you tell the difference between a Muslim and a Hindu on one glance? Should we just cut the corners and have all Muslims wear black stars at all times?

 

 

the proposed measures deal with that.... a mentaly ill person would be under the 'at higher risk' catagory, especially if traveling alone, rather then joe bloggs and his nuclear family popping over to spain on hols... god it aint rocket science.

 

It would be ridiculously foolish to think all mentally-ill people are diagnosed and registered. And besides, the threat isn't even restricted to just mentally-ill people... "normal" people who are threatened by Islamic extremists as well.

But the whole point is before September 11th, Islamic extremists weren't considered any kind of threat to air travel either. That obviously changed quickly. So if we give an unlimited free pass to anyone who isn't a Muslim, that leaves the door shockingly wide open for any kind of crazy people.

Btw, how do you even propose airport staff know who is a Muslim and who isn't? Could you tell the difference between a Muslim and a Hindu on one glance? Should we just cut the corners and have all Muslims wear black stars at all times?

It would be ridiculously foolish to think all mentally-ill people are diagnosed and registered. And besides, the threat isn't even restricted to just mentally-ill people... "normal" people who are threatened by Islamic extremists as well.

 

Did you get taught history at school ?

 

Am shocked you don't remember the spate of muslim hijackings in the 70's and 80's

But the whole point is before September 11th, Islamic extremists weren't considered any kind of threat to air travel either. That obviously changed quickly. So if we give an unlimited free pass to anyone who isn't a Muslim, that leaves the door shockingly wide open for any kind of crazy people.

 

Btw, how do you even propose airport staff know who is a Muslim and who isn't? Could you tell the difference between a Muslim and a Hindu on one glance? Should we just cut the corners and have all Muslims wear black stars at all times?

It would be ridiculously foolish to think all mentally-ill people are diagnosed and registered. And besides, the threat isn't even restricted to just mentally-ill people... "normal" people who are threatened by Islamic extremists as well.

 

passports dear boy, passports. they would be used to identify possible threats or people most likely to pose a threat.

 

the bottom line is... there are sections in society that will NEVER pose a threat, and if they ever were suspected of doing so (kids, old people etc etc etc) they would be identified under these proposals as high risk. high risk cases mean extra security measures, low risk = normal security measures. theres utterly no need to treat children and little old ladies as a threat.

passports dear boy, passports. they would be used to identify possible threats or people most likely to pose a threat.

 

the bottom line is... there are sections in society that will NEVER pose a threat, and if they ever were suspected of doing so (kids, old people etc etc etc) they would be identified under these proposals as high risk. high risk cases mean extra security measures, low risk = normal security measures. theres utterly no need to treat children and little old ladies as a threat.

So a white Muslim extremist gets a fake passport and disguises himself as an elderly woman.

So a white Muslim extremist gets a fake passport and disguises himself as an elderly woman.

 

yeah like thats gonna happen... that strengthens the case for id cards! :lol:

 

but they still have the usual security checks anyway, that would more then likely discover such a daft plot.

It’s about time they started focusing on the most likely suspects, instead of blanket PC inconvenience. Strip search the Islamists and anyone who’s visited an Islamic country, because they’re the only ones who are trying to blow up planes.

the pc do-gooders will cry foul, picking on certain racial groups... but why not? its not john smith and his nuclear family going on holiday that are blowing planes up is it. its a harsh fact that certain races/religious groups ARE the ones blowing planes up, so why shouldnt they be checked and why should john smith and his nuclear family waste hours going through checks when its quite obvious they dont blow planes up.

 

So, it's your contention that White or European people dont join Extremist/Terror groups and go around blowing stuff up and killing innocent people........ :rolleyes:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Walker_Lindh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh

 

And, er, the IRA, ETA, Baader Meinhoff, Red Brigade, Black September....??? All figments of our imagination...... Or are you of the opinion that they were all somehow the more "fluffy" end of the Terrorist spectrum.......

 

Bollocks.... Security checks apply to EVERYONE.... Or not at all..... These groups are clever, if ONLY certain racial groups are being targeted for these extra security checks, then they'll start recruiting Bosnian Muslims, or Kosovars, Chechens, Anglo converts (such as, oh, John Walker Lindh...), etc, for these sorts of actions NONE of whom exactly fit the racial profile you're suggesting.....

 

...Or else they'll just change targets..... Cant exactly stop people from going into shopping centres or town centres can you......? Unless you think that we should all just walk around naked...... :lol:

 

 

So, it's your contention that White or European people dont join Extremist/Terror groups and go around blowing stuff up and killing innocent people........ :rolleyes:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Walker_Lindh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh

 

And, er, the IRA, ETA, Baader Meinhoff, Red Brigade, Black September....??? All figments of our imagination...... Or are you of the opinion that they were all somehow the more "fluffy" end of the Terrorist spectrum.......

 

Bollocks.... Security checks apply to EVERYONE.... Or not at all..... These groups are clever, if ONLY certain racial groups are being targeted for these extra security checks, then they'll start recruiting Bosnian Muslims, or Kosovars, Chechens, Anglo converts (such as, oh, John Walker Lindh...), etc, for these sorts of actions NONE of whom exactly fit the racial profile you're suggesting.....

 

...Or else they'll just change targets..... Cant exactly stop people from going into shopping centres or town centres can you......? Unless you think that we should all just walk around naked...... :lol:

 

ahhh the return of the terrorists pal!

 

the legislation COVERS ALL GROUPS SUSPECTED/KNOWN of being a threat... atm that is entirely from the extremist muslim groups. bader meinhoff , red brigade, black september, the ira.... WHO? :lol: they have been inoperative for decades! :rofl: BUT if they did resume hostilities they WOULD fall under the EXTRA security measures.

 

tell me why tf should my mother, 78, be treated the same as a muslim extremist ?....

 

ahhh the return of the terrorists pal!

 

the legislation COVERS ALL GROUPS SUSPECTED/KNOWN of being a threat... atm that is entirely from the extremist muslim groups. bader meinhoff , red brigade, black september, the ira.... WHO? :lol: they have been inoperative for decades! :rofl: BUT if they did resume hostilities they WOULD fall under the EXTRA security measures.

 

tell me why tf should my mother, 78, be treated the same as a muslim extremist ?....

 

Even going by your assumption that the ONLY threat is from Islamic extremists, you're still yet to sufficiently answer the scenario of a non-Muslim (mentally-ill or otherwise) being fooled or black-mailled into it by extremists. That threat is particularly relevant to old people such as your mother, where obviously deteriations in mental health are common but are not always monitored by the state.

Edited January 7, 201015 yr by Danny

Even going by your assumption that the ONLY threat is from Islamic extremists, you're still yet to sufficiently answer the scenario of a non-Muslim (mentally-ill or otherwise) being fooled or black-mailled into it by extremists. That threat is particularly relevant to old people such as your mother, where obviously deteriations in mental health are common but are not always monitored by the state.

 

.... i have, because current restrictions/checks would discover these...plus if a new terrorist group raised its head that demograph would be then included in extra checks. our intelligence is pretty good, its unlikely that a new group could just spring out of nowhere. ... and its pretty obvious that my mum and little kids aint terrorists! currently the only threat IS from islamic groups.... that a good enough starting point.

.... i have, because current restrictions/checks would discover these...plus if a new terrorist group raised its head that demograph would be then included in extra checks. our intelligence is pretty good, its unlikely that a new group could just spring out of nowhere. ... and its pretty obvious that my mum and little kids aint terrorists! currently the only threat IS from islamic groups.... that a good enough starting point.

 

Racial profiling is morally wrong, end of.... We had this sort of thing in the 70s and 80s with Irish Catholics, and look how well that worked out eh....? Innocent people banged up for 15-20 years for the "crime" of being Irish..... <_<

 

I repeat, airport security checks apply to EVERYONE, or NO ONE..... You cant mitigate for the random "lone-nut" who could just one day decide to plant a bomb, or even just take up a gun and kill random people in a shopping centre like that bloke in Finland just did over the festive season.....

 

And how would your racial profiling of passengers stop someone from getting to an airport employee with either cash or blackmail... People can be "bought off"....

Racial profiling is morally wrong, end of.... We had this sort of thing in the 70s and 80s with Irish Catholics, and look how well that worked out eh....? Innocent people banged up for 15-20 years for the "crime" of being Irish..... <_<

 

I repeat, airport security checks apply to EVERYONE, or NO ONE..... You cant mitigate for the random "lone-nut" who could just one day decide to plant a bomb, or even just take up a gun and kill random people in a shopping centre like that bloke in Finland just did over the festive season.....

 

And how would your racial profiling of passengers stop someone from getting to an airport employee with either cash or blackmail... People can be "bought off"....

 

It is not morally wrong at all, El Al racially profile, any muslim plus africans from countries with known islamic links are strip searched by El Al security before being allowed to fly and which airline is universally recognised as the safest to travel on ? El Al is

 

Political correctness needs to take a back seat in priority to saving lives

It is not morally wrong at all, El Al racially profile, any muslim plus africans from countries with known islamic links are strip searched by El Al security before being allowed to fly and which airline is universally recognised as the safest to travel on ? El Al is

 

Political correctness needs to take a back seat in priority to saving lives

 

You're missing the point... Whatever security checks are in place should be on EVERYONE..... So, I'm not exactly being "PC" (whatever that means anyway....), I believe in equality, so that means that everyone, regardless of race, creed or colour should be "inconvienienced" equally for the greater good, so no one can be accused of playing favourites.... Sounds perfectly fair and rational to me, if people dont like it, tough.....

It is only 1 step above the El Al system that has made El Al the safest airline in the world with not a single in flight incident in 42 years

 

EVERY muslim or black african that travels on El Al is taken to a room by El Al security and is interrogated and strip searched so my suggestion is identical to El Al with the excepton of the passenger doesn't get their clothes back until they have landed as they could meet someone airside who somehow smuggled a bomb so they would get their clothes back when they have landed

 

El Al despite being the natiional airline of the worlds most hated country is the safest airline in the world to fly on, they are clearly doing something right

 

Actually Qantas are the worlds safest airline. The last time Qantas had a fatal accident was in 1951. No Jet engined Qantas plane has ever been involved in a fatal incident.

 

I have flown Qantas on 7 occasions and never was there any ridiculous over the top security like that. Just a safe flight and superb service. Despite being part owned by BA they are by far the best airline i have flown on.

 

Maybe so but other airlines could learn a lot from El Al

 

El Al is the only airline in the world that passes the passengers luggage through compressor chambers to detect if there is anything that will explode onboard, this is both hand luggage and personal luggage

 

El Al by strip searching muslim passengers and black african passengers eliminates the chance of target groups attacking their planes

 

El Al by taking swabs from every passengers fingernails and clothing detects if a person has been near explosives

 

El Al is the only airline that has a direct connection to every intelligence agency blacklist/terrorist list/banned list in the world

 

El Al has 5 undercover plainclothes armed police on every flight

 

Every airline would be as good as safe from terrorism if they adopted El Al tactics

Seeing as you've been to Australia, you should know that they explosive test a very high number of passengers without the use of profiling. I was tested 3 times, once in Melbourne, once in Sydney and once in Brisbane.