for 4 yrs. we've been looking at airliners as terrorist targets....why?

[mopaul]

IF we were really attacked by osama, who supposedly organized the crashing of 4 airliners, what gives everyone the idea that they'll use that exact method again?

all other possible attack scenarios are ignored, like our vulnerable nuke plants all over the country, or our oil refineries, or any other high profile targets, yet we seem to be focusing on airliners only.

it's just idiotic.

[pitohui]

1. who is we?

i doubt the threat to nukes are ignored, indeed, some believe there is decent evidence that united flight 93 was shot down over the penn countryside because it was 10 minutes away from the famous 3 mile island nuke -- not because it was yet anywhere near wash dc as the re-writers of history would have us believe

we hear more abt what is done w. airliners because some of us -- many of us -- fly every day & encounter the screening & security process

relatively few of us among the posters on this board routinely enter nuke plants, oil refineries, or chemical plants, tho i'm acquainted w. one infrequent poster here who does just that as a 3rd party contractor

"we" the public focus on what "we" the public can see, doesn't mean that security does not exist just because we haven't personally been thru a security screen at turkey point lately

[MindPilot]

6. Nuke plants are probably not the best example

Consider my first hand experience with this consists solely of driving past one once in a while, but it looks pretty secure to me. There are gates, guard shacks, razor wire, and it's been that way since long before 9-11. Most office buildings require a badge or employee escort to get in, and of course we all know airport screening has been in place since the 60s.

However, according to a 60 Minutes report a year or so ago, refineries and chemical plants are not very well-guarded.

I agree with the OP, all the aviation security is much ado about nothing. What I would like to know is what is the success rate of pre-board screening? Have they actually caught anyone deliberately bringing a destructive device or a weapon on board an aircraft with intent to commit a terrorist act? I'm guessing the answer is no.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. It's either because the dumbasses who run our government

lack imagination -- a bunch of "generals" fighting the last war -- or, if you are a true cynic or a believer in LIHOP, maybe they don't care if we get hit again in some other way. It just helps Junior's poll numbers if he can stand on some rubble with a bullhorn. Meanwhile we spend brazillions of dollars on aviation security, which IMO was just to make it look like those bumbling fools at the Ministry of Fatherland Security are actually doing something useful. Just trying to scare us and placate us at the same time.

[MindPilot]

3. You are absolutely correct. Why haven't they attacked us since 911?

First all it takes is a phone call to shut down an airport or any place for that matter. A few coordinated called-in threats could bring say, the entire petroleum distribution system to a halt.

It would be very easy for a suicide bomber to detonate in a crowded shopping mall, at a sporting event or any place there are a lot of people. Nothing is preventing them from detonating a McVeigh-style truck bomb. They could easily derail a train loaded with nasty chemicals. They could start wildfires. Our list of easy targets is endless.

You can't tell me I'm smarter than all the terrorist masterminds who are supposedly living their lives for no other reasons than to kill Americans and take our freedom.

Why hasn't it happened?! Why haven't they attacked us again? Because we're fighting them over there instead of over here? I don't buy that for a second.

[abluelady]

4. Assuming "we" is the Administration

it is an easy scare tactic. We all know people who are afraid to fly, in general. How easy to scare them even further. And terror is what Bush likes to propogate.

[MindPilot]

5. Another reason all this "security" is a dumb idea

The security checkpoints themselves are a really good target. It doesn't matter where they are, airport, sporting event, theme park, anyplace they make people line up to go through the metal detector it creates a large crowd of people in close proximity to each other.

Again, if there really is a bunch of terrorists out there looking to harm Americans, they have ample opportunity. It kind of make me think this whole terrorism thing is somewhat of a scam.

[LibDemAlways]

8. Forcing 90 year old wheelchair bound

great grandmothers to take their shoes off and stand up to be wanded - which I've witnessed at SEA-TAC - makes no one safer. Meanwhile, unscreened cargo containers are being loaded onto her flight and no one seems to give a shit.

Security checkpoints at places where crowds gather are a joke - often little more than a two-second purse/backpack check. Certainly little or no explosives screening. If someone did want to harm a bunch of people, there's nothing in place to stop it.

[Poppyseedman]

7. They are being ignored ???

all other possible attack scenarios are ignored, like our vulnerable nuke plants all over the country, or our oil refineries, or any other high profile targets, yet we seem to be focusing on airliners only.

You have no idea whatsoever what security measures are being taken to protect high profile targets in this country.

Just how do you assume your statement is true??? Because it popped in your head???

My brother works for a large chemical company in NJ and is constantly complaining the FEDS are a pain in the ass always in the way.

I went over the Hoover Dam last week and had to pass though a security check. They are also building a bypass over the Dam to move traffic off the Dam itself

[stray cat]

9. It certainly worked pretty well the first time