- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Faulty Bomb Detonated on Plane Bound for Detroit
Faulty Bomb Detonated on Plane Bound for DetroitFollow
To varus, the burning of just one man's ***** is a pretty big deal.
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
So, this is just freaking great.
My husband and I are flying out on Wednesday to go to Ireland. Because of this asshole and the assholes that let him fly even though there were red flags all over the place about him, our flight back to the US will be a peach, I'm sure.
The last hour of any flight into the US, no one will be allowed to have any personal belongings on their lap. You will also not be allowed to touch any of your carry-on baggage during this last hour. So for the last hour, I suppose we just sit there and pick our noses.
There will also be a ton more checking of carry-on baggage in the airports, and a lot more armed policemen around.
When we went to Italy for our honeymoon, my carry-on baggage was checked at every single gate. We didn't get past one gate. My husband says it's because I have dark hair and a darker complection. I think it's because I was with him and he just naturally looks suspicious.
My husband and I are flying out on Wednesday to go to Ireland. Because of this asshole and the assholes that let him fly even though there were red flags all over the place about him, our flight back to the US will be a peach, I'm sure.
The last hour of any flight into the US, no one will be allowed to have any personal belongings on their lap. You will also not be allowed to touch any of your carry-on baggage during this last hour. So for the last hour, I suppose we just sit there and pick our noses.
There will also be a ton more checking of carry-on baggage in the airports, and a lot more armed policemen around. When we went to Italy for our honeymoon, my carry-on baggage was checked at every single gate. We didn't get past one gate. My husband says it's because I have dark hair and a darker complection. I think it's because I was with him and he just naturally looks suspicious.
Apparently you will also be required to stow any personal electronics (cell phones, mp3 players, laptops, etc...) in your checked baggage - no carry-ons of that sort on inbound international flights at the moment.
Jophed,
You're not? Really? I mean let's look at the similarities between the two. Are you really saying that the result of this terrorist attack is why it's not important?
And yes muslims hijacked planes on 9/11 and another muslim hijacked a plane this time around. Of course, unlike you and Obama, I also believe the attack on ft hood was a islamic terrorist attack.
Quote:
You're equating this event to 9/11?
Really?
Really?
You're not? Really? I mean let's look at the similarities between the two. Are you really saying that the result of this terrorist attack is why it's not important?
And yes muslims hijacked planes on 9/11 and another muslim hijacked a plane this time around. Of course, unlike you and Obama, I also believe the attack on ft hood was a islamic terrorist attack.
Hijacked? There was no hijacking involved here.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
publiusvarus wrote:
And yes muslims hijacked planes on 9/11 and another muslim hijacked a plane this time around.
Lay off the egg nog.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Is the guy even a Muslim?
Yeah, pretty devout.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
The Liberal Media wrote:
Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula on Monday claimed responsibility for the attack on a U.S. airliner bound for Detroit on Christmas Day, saying it was retaliation for a U.S. operation against the group in Yemen.
[...]
The group said Abdulmutallab used explosives manufactured by al-Qaida members. "He managed to penetrate all devices and modern advanced technology and security checkpoints in international airports bravely without fear of death," the group said in the statement, "relying on God and defying the large myth of American and international intelligence, and exposing how fragile they are, bringing their nose to the ground, and making them regret all what they spent on security technology."
[...]
The group said Abdulmutallab used explosives manufactured by al-Qaida members. "He managed to penetrate all devices and modern advanced technology and security checkpoints in international airports bravely without fear of death," the group said in the statement, "relying on God and defying the large myth of American and international intelligence, and exposing how fragile they are, bringing their nose to the ground, and making them regret all what they spent on security technology."
Maybe airline security in Amsterdam is a lot different than airline security over at Midway Airport but, when I'm going through it, the idea of how advanced and impenetrable it is doesn't leap to mind.
"He bravely penetrated the security checkpoint monitored by an obese, middle aged woman with a high school diploma as she sat on a stool six feet away..."
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
BrownDuck wrote:
Apparently you will also be required to stow any personal electronics (cell phones, mp3 players, laptops, etc...) in your checked baggage - no carry-ons of that sort on inbound international flights at the moment.
So much for all of the apps I downloaded on my phone and the new DSi I purchased for the long flights.
It's a good thing I enjoy reading, and I did not invest in a Kindle.
Edited, Dec 28th 2009 3:00pm by Belkira
Debo,
Ok attempted hijacking.
Ok attempted hijacking.
Nope, no hijack attempt either.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
publiusvarus wrote:
Debo,
Ok attempted hijacking.
Ok attempted hijacking.
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Samira wrote:
Nope, no hijack attempt either.
He was a nogoodnik in any event!
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Hijack:
Are you liberals really going to argue that this guy wasn't a hijacker? Next you'll be saying he wasn't really a muslim...oh wait to late.
Quote:
to seize (a vehicle) by force or threat of force
Are you liberals really going to argue that this guy wasn't a hijacker? Next you'll be saying he wasn't really a muslim...oh wait to late.
publiusvarus wrote:
Hijack:
Are you liberals really going to argue that this guy wasn't a hijacker? Next you'll be saying he wasn't really a muslim...oh wait to late.
Quote:
to seize (a vehicle) by force or threat of force
Are you liberals really going to argue that this guy wasn't a hijacker? Next you'll be saying he wasn't really a muslim...oh wait to late.
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
Yes, "seize" is different than "blow the fUCk up". I realize it's subtle.
Edit: GDI Nobby.
Edited, Dec 28th 2009 2:28pm by Samira
Edit: GDI Nobby.
Edited, Dec 28th 2009 2:28pm by Samira
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
publiusvarus wrote:
Hijack:
Are you liberals really going to argue that this guy wasn't a hijacker? Next you'll be saying he wasn't really a muslim...oh wait to late.
Quote:
to seize (a vehicle) by force or threat of force
Are you liberals really going to argue that this guy wasn't a hijacker? Next you'll be saying he wasn't really a muslim...oh wait to late.
At which point did he "seize" control of the plane? By drawing attention to himself by setting off an explosive device? By that definition, any crying baby would be "seizing" a plane as well.
All those road side bombings in Iraq are really just hijacking attempts?
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#45REDACTED,
Posted: Dec 28 2009 at 4:49 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Boy you Democrats will do anything to avoid the issue of islamic terrorism.
We already said the guy was Muslim. Now we're talking about the fact that you have the vocabulary of an epileptic goat.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
publiusvarus wrote:
He would have taken complete control over the fate of the plane.
Hijacking "fate" = legitimate hijacking? No. And either way, he still failed.
Edited, Dec 28th 2009 5:16pm by bsphil
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
OMG ISLAMIC TERRORISTS ARE GUNNA GET US ALL GET IN THE PLANECAR GODDAMNIT
publiusvarus wrote:
Debo,
Ok attempted hijacking.
Ok attempted hijacking.
Wrong again, as usual.
He did not attempt to hijack. He attempted to blow up.
It may be possible to do both, but only in a specific order. Meaning, the hijacking first.
I know you really, really *really* want to make this something you can use as an indictment against Obama, but there's only so much you can twist reality before breaking the illusion. Yes, this was a potentially scary event, but it was ultimately thwarted. The President had no reason to break into the holiday weekend to tell us that nothing actually happened. If the attempt was successful, well, that would be a different matter.
And I'm sure that if Obama did go live Saturday at noon for his statement you would be just as riled up, ******** at him for ruining your holiday weekend and using the liberal media for such obvious scaremongering tactics. But, of course, you're just going to deny these claims. It's trivially easy to read you.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
Hijacking implies some control over the vehicle. A fireball plummeting to the ground is not under any kind of control.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
Publicvarious, I took the time to look up the definition of "hijack" on Merriam-Webster and Dictionary.com, and this is what I found:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hijack
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hijack
And here are the definitions of some the words used in the definition of "hijack:"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/commandeer
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/commandeer
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/seize
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/seize
You can keep arguing that the man in question was a hijacker, attempted hijacker, or whatever, but you will still be wrong. Nowhere was it mentioned in the article that he attempted to take control of the plane. In order for him to have taken control of the airplane, he would have needed to be in the cockpit, steering the plane as a pilot.
But he didn't.
He attempted to detonate a bomb, but failed miserably. But he didn't fail as much as you are, in this thread, trying to argue semantics when you don't even have your definitions straight. Kindly stop posting in this thread until you have a valid argument that shows you put thought into it and has factual information in it, not information pulled out of your wazoo.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hijack
Quote:
1 a : to steal by stopping a vehicle on the highway b : to commandeer (a flying airplane) especially by coercing the pilot at gunpoint c : to stop and steal from (a vehicle in transit) d : kidnap
2 a : to steal or rob as if by hijacking b : to subject to extortion or swindling
2 a : to steal or rob as if by hijacking b : to subject to extortion or swindling
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hijack
Quote:
1. to steal (cargo) from a truck or other vehicle after forcing it to stop: to hijack a load of whiskey.
2. to rob (a vehicle) after forcing it to stop: They hijacked the truck before it entered the city.
3. to seize (a vehicle) by force or threat of force.
4. to skyjack.
2. to rob (a vehicle) after forcing it to stop: They hijacked the truck before it entered the city.
3. to seize (a vehicle) by force or threat of force.
4. to skyjack.
And here are the definitions of some the words used in the definition of "hijack:"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/commandeer
Quote:
1 a : to compel to perform military service b : to seize for military purposes
2 : to take arbitrary or forcible possession of
2 : to take arbitrary or forcible possession of
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/commandeer
Quote:
1. to order or force into active military service.
2. to seize (private property) for military or other public use: The police officer commandeered a taxi and took off after the getaway car.
3. to seize arbitrarily.
2. to seize (private property) for military or other public use: The police officer commandeered a taxi and took off after the getaway car.
3. to seize arbitrarily.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/seize
Quote:
1 ausually seise \ˈsēz\ : to vest ownership of a freehold estate in boften seise : to put in possession of something <the biographer will be seized of all pertinent papers>
2 a : to take possession of : confiscate b : to take possession of by legal process
3 a : to possess or take by force : capture b : to take prisoner : arrest
4 a : to take hold of : clutch b : to possess oneself of : grasp c : to understand fully and distinctly : apprehend
5 a : to attack or overwhelm physically : afflict <seized with chest pains> b : to possess (as one's mind) completely or overwhelmingly <seized the popular imagination — Basil Davenport>
6 : to bind or fasten together with a lashing of small stuff (as yarn, marline, or fine wire)
2 a : to take possession of : confiscate b : to take possession of by legal process
3 a : to possess or take by force : capture b : to take prisoner : arrest
4 a : to take hold of : clutch b : to possess oneself of : grasp c : to understand fully and distinctly : apprehend
5 a : to attack or overwhelm physically : afflict <seized with chest pains> b : to possess (as one's mind) completely or overwhelmingly <seized the popular imagination — Basil Davenport>
6 : to bind or fasten together with a lashing of small stuff (as yarn, marline, or fine wire)
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/seize
Quote:
1. to take hold of suddenly or forcibly; grasp: to seize a weapon.
2. to grasp mentally; understand clearly and completely: to seize an idea.
3. to take possession of by force or at will: to seize enemy ships.
4. to take possession or control of as if by suddenly laying hold: Panic seized the crowd.
5. to take possession of by legal authority; confiscate: to seize smuggled goods.
6. Also, seise. Law. to put (someone) in seizin or legal possession of property (usually used in passive constructions): She was seized of vast estates.
7. to capture; take into custody.
8. to take advantage of promptly: to seize an opportunity.
9. Nautical. to bind or fasten together with a seizing.
2. to grasp mentally; understand clearly and completely: to seize an idea.
3. to take possession of by force or at will: to seize enemy ships.
4. to take possession or control of as if by suddenly laying hold: Panic seized the crowd.
5. to take possession of by legal authority; confiscate: to seize smuggled goods.
6. Also, seise. Law. to put (someone) in seizin or legal possession of property (usually used in passive constructions): She was seized of vast estates.
7. to capture; take into custody.
8. to take advantage of promptly: to seize an opportunity.
9. Nautical. to bind or fasten together with a seizing.
You can keep arguing that the man in question was a hijacker, attempted hijacker, or whatever, but you will still be wrong. Nowhere was it mentioned in the article that he attempted to take control of the plane. In order for him to have taken control of the airplane, he would have needed to be in the cockpit, steering the plane as a pilot.
But he didn't.
He attempted to detonate a bomb, but failed miserably. But he didn't fail as much as you are, in this thread, trying to argue semantics when you don't even have your definitions straight. Kindly stop posting in this thread until you have a valid argument that shows you put thought into it and has factual information in it, not information pulled out of your wazoo.
Kaolian wrote:
After a horrific accident involving a radioactive housecat, Davejohnsan becomes “THE CAT YODALER!†By day, mild mannered veterinary supplies salesmen, but by night, daemon feline scourge of the swiss alps! Swiss cheese production falls sharply in the first quarter as lack of sleep slowly drives everyone in Switzerland insane
Recent Visitors: 286
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (286)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Faulty Bomb Detonated on Plane Bound for Detroit
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC