Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kodiak_bull who wrote (9132)	10/7/2001 10:55:26 PM
From: The Ox	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

Having the NG at airports is not such a bad thing, they need to be located somewhere and can be moved when the need arises. As for travel cards, there's no need. Tracking individuals based on SS# or immigration numbers is all that we need but it will take years to integrate the different government's data bases to allow reliable and secure transfer of information. Right now there is a great ability to forge documents but that can change relatively quick. The real issues are the size of the data bases and accessibility. Billions of records need to be 'online' 24-7-365. This country has to rethink and reengineer it's data bases and eliminate the possibilities of tampering. This is a huge task but one that's not insurmountable.

To: kodiak_bull who wrote (9132)	10/7/2001 11:18:07 PM
From: Dale Baker	Respond to of 23153

It is now late in the weekend, so I will keep this short. Once you secure the departure area, the dropoff and checkin facilities are still vulnerable. Not hard to kill dozens or hundreds at a crowded checkin line - unless someone with automatic weapons is nearby to disrupt (or more likely deter) your plans. You "feel good" because the difficulty level for disrupting attacks has been raised. Not a waste of money, if you make it a regular military duty in the future and staff your military accordingly. Europe does it all the time, even peaceful Switzerland. Right now, I don't think all luggage is matched to passengers who have boarded (it may have changed - I was overseas a long time). Granted you can't fly a plane into a building with a piece of luggage but you can certainly blow it out of the sky at a moment of your choosing with the right device. Matching luggage reduces the odds of a bomb in checked luggage since I don't think we will effectively screen every bag on every plane. Still, a suicide bomber who can hide the bomb in his Samsonite will defeat that system too. Personally, I don't think we can construct and maintain the database you have in mind without creating serious chaos. Between the costs, the mistakes and the Orwellian implications, my guess is it will remain an interesting idea. Thanks for a thought-provoking exchange. Good thing we only have to worry about stocks tomorrow.

To: kodiak_bull who wrote (9132)	10/7/2001 11:56:45 PM
From: Malcolm Winfield	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23153

The NG may make people feel better, but you can still check a bomb onto a plane in your check in luggage. Right after they ask you "Has this bag been in you possession at all times"? "Yes". And then you disappear. I read an article the other day saying that only 5% of all bags checked on a plane actually go through a bomb check. the NG isn't going to help with this, unless they're back there with dogs and other devices used in bomb detection.