ptown_trojans_1
Posts: 7,632
Apr 7, 2010 10:25pm
Just breaking:
A passenger attempted to light an explosive device aboard an airliner flying from Washington to Denver but was subdued by a federal air marshal, sources close to the House Homeland Security Committee told NBC News.
A government source told NBC the aircraft was a Boeing 757.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36243847/ns/us_news-airliner_security/
A passenger attempted to light an explosive device aboard an airliner flying from Washington to Denver but was subdued by a federal air marshal, sources close to the House Homeland Security Committee told NBC News.
A government source told NBC the aircraft was a Boeing 757.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36243847/ns/us_news-airliner_security/
O
ou1980
Posts: 877
Apr 7, 2010 10:30pm
Amazing.....would love to hear the details on this dirt bag!
O
ou1980
Posts: 877
Apr 7, 2010 10:32pm
Watch...
Whatever this guy tried to use, you will forfeit for future flights!
Whatever this guy tried to use, you will forfeit for future flights!
ptown_trojans_1
Posts: 7,632
Apr 7, 2010 10:34pm
Apparently, it was his shoes he tried to ignite, ala Richard Reid.
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Apr 7, 2010 10:37pm
Fuck, now we are going to have to wear those plastic hair net booties and pack our shoes away when we fly.
.jpg)
september63
Posts: 5,789
Apr 7, 2010 10:47pm
Why wont someone light their (crocks) on fire? I could live without seeing anyone wearing them again.
ptown_trojans_1
Posts: 7,632
Apr 7, 2010 10:50pm
This will be interesting, from the link:
Sources told NBC News that the passenger who was subdued was a Qatari diplomat who would have full diplomatic immunity.
S
spartan
Posts: 178
Apr 7, 2010 10:53pm
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/UAL663/history/20100407/2134Z/KDCA/KDEN
the flight path of flight 663.
smoking on a plane?
the flight path of flight 663.
smoking on a plane?
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Apr 7, 2010 10:54pm
So would he have to be tried under a military tribunal?ptown_trojans_1 wrote: This will be interesting, from the link:Sources told NBC News that the passenger who was subdued was a Qatari diplomat who would have full diplomatic immunity.
ptown_trojans_1
Posts: 7,632
Apr 7, 2010 10:56pm
I honestly have no idea.LJ wrote:So would he have to be tried under a military tribunal?ptown_trojans_1 wrote: This will be interesting, from the link:Sources told NBC News that the passenger who was subdued was a Qatari diplomat who would have full diplomatic immunity.
ptown_trojans_1
Posts: 7,632
Apr 7, 2010 11:02pm
Guy was in bathroom, no explosives. Marshal smelled smoke. Sounds like the guy either tried to or mistakenly caught his shoes on fire. No motive know yet.
Man, I'd hate to be at Dulles right now.
Man, I'd hate to be at Dulles right now.
The Equalizer
Posts: 1,003
Apr 7, 2010 11:03pm
how the hell do you accidentally set your shoes on fire in an airplane bathroom?
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Apr 7, 2010 11:07pm
lol foreignersThe Equalizer wrote: how the hell do you accidentally set your shoes on fire in an airplane bathroom?
S
spartan
Posts: 178
Apr 7, 2010 11:09pm
its in denver.ptown_trojans_1 wrote: Guy was in bathroom, no explosives. Marshal smelled smoke. Sounds like the guy either tried to or mistakenly caught his shoes on fire. No motive know yet.
Man, I'd hate to be at Dulles right now.
ptown_trojans_1
Posts: 7,632
Apr 7, 2010 11:10pm
Ah, thanks.spartan wrote:its in denver.ptown_trojans_1 wrote: Guy was in bathroom, no explosives. Marshal smelled smoke. Sounds like the guy either tried to or mistakenly caught his shoes on fire. No motive know yet.
Man, I'd hate to be at Dulles right now.
Glory Days
Posts: 7,809
Apr 7, 2010 11:20pm
looks like he was just trying to smoke a cig in the boy's room.
THE4RINGZ
Posts: 16,816
Apr 7, 2010 11:29pm
What causes one to light their footware on fire in the washroom? Seriously is he that fucking stupid that he thought he could do that, go back to his seat, and get off the plane like nothing happened?
King, Prince, Diplomat, whatever, what a fucking dumbass.
King, Prince, Diplomat, whatever, what a fucking dumbass.
gibby08
Posts: 1,581
Apr 7, 2010 11:32pm
FOR???ccrunner609 wrote: Thank you GWB
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Apr 7, 2010 11:35pm
gibby08 wrote:FOR???ccrunner609 wrote: Thank you GWB
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Air_Marshal_ServicePrior to September 11, 2001, the Federal Air Marshal Service consisted of varying numbers of FAMs depending upon the perceived threat and funding availability. Only 33 FAMs were active on 09/11/01.[6] As a result of the 9/11 attacks, President George W. Bush ordered the rapid expansion of the Federal Air Marshal Service. Many new hires were agents from other federal agencies, such as the U.S. Customs Service, U.S. Border Patrol, U.S. Housing and Urban Development Office of the Inspector General (OIG), Drug Enforcement Administration, U.S. Postal Inspection Service, ATF, IRS CID, and many others.[7] A classified number of applicants were hired, trained, and deployed on flights around the world. As of August, 2006, this number is estimated to be in the thousands.[8] Currently, these FAMs serve as the primary law enforcement entity within the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
gibby08
Posts: 1,581
Apr 7, 2010 11:37pm
You act like this wouldn't have been stopped before 9/11
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Apr 7, 2010 11:39pm
You mean the 1 in 909 chance?gibby08 wrote: You act like this wouldn't have been stopped before 9/11
There were only 33 Air Marshall's before 9/11 and there are around 30,000 commercial flights in the U.S. per day.
Simple math says you are wrong.
ptown_trojans_1
Posts: 7,632
Apr 7, 2010 11:40pm
Probably, but the probability of an Air Marshal being on the flight would have been greatly lower.gibby08 wrote: You act like this wouldn't have been stopped before 9/11
Can't deny that.
Cleveland Buck
Posts: 5,126
Apr 7, 2010 11:40pm
Barack would have gone up there and handled it himself if there wasn't an Air Marshal available. No worries.
gibby08
Posts: 1,581
Apr 7, 2010 11:41pm
I'm not saying what Bush did wasn't good...but you can't say either that this wouldn't have been stopped not for that
LJ
Posts: 16,351
Apr 7, 2010 11:43pm
Well, before Bush added marshals, there were only 33, so at best the chances of an Air Marshal being there was 1 in 909gibby08 wrote: I'm not saying what Bush did wasn't good...but you can't say either that this wouldn't have been stopped not for that
It's rumored there are over 1500 air marshals in service today, so let's go conservative with 1,000, that takes your chances to 1 in 30.
That's a huge difference.