SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Zeev's Turnips -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mark Ivan who wrote (449)9/13/2001 8:58:50 AM
From: Dale Baker  Respond to of 644
 
Mark, I doubt any air crews want guns on their planes. Between accidents and inexperienced crew trying to use them (and likely decompressing a cabin at 30,000 feet), they would kill more people than they save. Better to lock the cockpit and let everyone know the door won't be opened in a hijack attempt no matter what.

By all means, put undercover armed air marshals on flights at random. With 1000 marshals spread around the country, terrorists who can't get a gun on a plane would know they stand a good chance of running into someone who is armed, and knows what they are doing.



To: Mark Ivan who wrote (449)9/13/2001 10:10:41 AM
From: Carl R.  Respond to of 644
 
Mark, I've also heard suggestions of adding the capability of pumping sleeping gas into the cabin.

As for war, etc, I'm sure that no action will be taken until such time as the culprit is properly identified, whether it turns out to be bin Laden or someone else. The next step will be a diplomatic effort to get the country where such person or persons resides to release him/them into our control, but I believe that there will be a strong threat that accompanies such negotiations, and that threat will be much stronger than is usual, and will not just involve economic and political sanctions. As for the question of bombing civilians, should a war happen, I don't expect civilians to be targets, I just don't expect any particular effort to avoid them. I also don't look for any quick resolution - I think the aftermath of this week's events will go on for years.

Carl



To: Mark Ivan who wrote (449)9/13/2001 6:20:29 PM
From: bela_ghoulashi  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 644
 
If it wasn't bin Laden, I think we should take the opportunity to go after him anyway.

But the preponderance of all the available evidence that's available so far seems to suggest he was involved.