Right, because seeing who is talking to overseas terrorists is the same as the TSA fingerbanging granny at the airport.
On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 11:47 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 21 May 2008 07:18:44 CDT, Dennis Henderson said: > > > In the US, anything considered "taking action " or "necessary" violates > some > > civil or constitutional right or is leaked out by some "conscientious > > objector". It would seem some organizations care more about keeping their > > phone calls private than allowing the government to do its one > > constitutionally mandated function; Protecting us from all enemies, > foreign > > and domestic. > > And exactly how far are they allowed to trample over our Constitutionally > mandated freedoms to do it? > > Should the President be allowed to say "screw even the minimal oversight > of the FISA court" and do mass wiretapping of US citizens with zero > oversight? > In case you didn't notice, he came out and admitted flat out that He. > Broke. > The. Law. > > Are we a nation of laws or of men? > > And do you *really* think that all of the "Security Theater" with trying to > get on board a flight actually does any good, when *anybody* who has half a > brain can get into the restricted areas of the airport? Consider the > following > two items from Dave Farber's I-P list about a week ago: > > > From: K.E. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: May 12, 2008 2:49:16 PM EDT > > To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Farber < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Security and Pittsburgh's Airport > > > > > The airport is restricted private property but if you know someone > > and get your name on the list and go shoot animals. > > Video: Hunting On Pittsburgh International Airport Property > > > > Favorite Quotes: > > > > The airport should have a professional wildlife biologist on site, > > as have many other major airports, including Philadelphia and > > Cleveland. Those airports contract with the USDA for that service. > > Pittsburgh does not. > > > > Allegheny County Airport Authority gave 28 of its employees > > exclusive rights to hunt deer on its 9,000 acres in and around > > Findlay Township. > > You can carry a gun and shoot . You can even bring your friends with > > you and no one at the airport knows who those people are. > > http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/news/16192688/detail.html > > "The airport authority allows those 28 authorized employees to bring > > buddies along, and officials have no idea who those buddies are. We > > do not track the names of the guests," Jenny said. > > > > Just how many deer live on the airport's 9,000 acres is unknown, > > because according to a 2007 USDA document, the airport authority has > > never commissioned a deer density survey. > > Even without the study, the USDA says current density far exceeds > > the recommended five-to-12 deer per square mile. > > Second item: > > > From: Vadim Antonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: May 12, 2008 6:57:15 PM EDT > > To: David Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: ip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: [IP] Security and Pittsburgh's Airport > > > David -- just to make it clear - deer on the airfield are a very serious > > safety issue. Much more serious than all terrorists in the world - the > > likelihood of hitting a deer and wrecking the landing gear (with likely > > fatal outcome for the pilot and passeners) is much higher than being a > > victim of a terrorist attack. And this is not like "no one knows who > > these people are", they have to be escorted by a cleared airport > employee. > > > > Besides, "non-authorized" personnel can easily walk onto airfield through > > the general aviation parking and FBOs in *all* US airports. As a member > of > > a flying club I got codes to combination locks on gates in different > > airports, so I can pick up aircraft during off-hours - and I didn't have > > to go through any clearance process. I can easily bring firearms, too, - > > no one's looking, and it is not prohibited (i.e. one can rent an airplane > > to go for a hunting trip). The only "guns prohibited" signs I've seen in > > GA areas are at the entrances to the federal facilities such as control > > towers, radar sites, etc. Heck, I do not even have to show my ID to get > > keys to an aircraft, as long as I know the name under which the > > reservation has been made, the a/c registration number, and smile nicely. > > > > The "access to airfield" controls are security theater, plain and simple, > > designed mostly to impress and intimidate the sheepie. It is nearly > > impossible (and prohibitively expensive) to secure a civilian airfield > > against an intruder which has minimal tactical and camouflage skills (and > > a bolt cutter, if he's too lazy to climb over the fence), so no one > really > > tries. > > > > So this article should be read as a barely covered pimping for more funds > > to TSA (and more useless restrictions and hassle for the rest of us), and > > not as a valid alert about some new security threat or especially lax > > attitude of the airport administration, with obligatory anti-gun paranoia > > mixed in for a good measure. > > There's an airport across the street. There's a chain link fence around > it. > Nobody actually expects the fence to stop a determined human - it's only to > stop *our* local deer from wandering out there. And by and large, it > works, > as I often see deer on our side of the street, and only rarely have I > spotted > them on the airport grounds in the 18 years I've been working across the > street. > > A chain link fence is sufficient to stop a *real* threat to many airports. > > What *real* threat are they stopping with the "no liquids" policy, > especially > when there's a lot of low-wage people that work on the other side of the > security perimeter who can probably be bribed to sell you the *special* > bottle of liquid that you gave him before he went on shift? > > Or any of the 3 zillion *other* ways to attack airport security that are > obvious and not much is done about them because they are *HARD* problems > to solve - for instance, there's a *really* nice queue of several hundred > people on the *outside* of the security checkpoint, where one explosive > device could get them all. But that's too hard, so we'll make you remove > your shoes and belt and throw out your bottled water and lighters - but you > can take your laptop on board, complete with all of the improvised weaponry > that you can make with it: > > A broken CD shard has nice sharp corners, probably works just as well as > boxcutters, and we know how well *those* work. > > Anybody who's carrying around a 3-5 foot Ethernet cable has a garotte. > > The lithium battery is a *much* more interesting fire source than anything > you could have cooked up with liquids in the bathroom. Oh, and did anybody > mention that most of the interesting liquids require you to *sit there and > watch it* for a half hour or more? Meanwhile people are gonna be banging > on the door... > > If all else fails, the battery and a sock make a nice improvised > blackjack... > > _______________________________________________ > Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. > https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec > Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list. >
_______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
