On 5 Jun 2005 15:41:50 -0700, wrote:

wrote:




Exactly how the bomb got on board Pan Am flight 103 has never been
positively established. But as I recall one of the leading threories
is that the bomb was carried on board by a White European woman
who didn't even know she was carrying a bomb.



Then

Randy wrote:
Actually they have determined that it was one of the girlfriends of the
conspirators, who carried an altitude triggered bomb on board in her
checked baggage. That is where the old, pre 9-11, questions about: has
anyone else had control of your luggage, and did someone else pack your
luggage came from.


Ok, checked baggage rather than carry-on. IIRC she was told it was a
gift she was to give someone in the US. Otherwise like I thought--
the girfriend was European, right?

I probably had confabulated that story with this one:

In 1986 a bomb was found in a false bottomed bag a pregnant
Irish woman was trying to carry onto a flight in London:

http://www.rosenblit.com/ADC_letter.htm
... hen Hindawi was arrested he revealed that he was
a paid agent for Syria and claimed that he had been
specifically instructed by Syria to romance and then
impregnate a naive woman who could be utilized as a
completely unwitting human bomb and thereby more likely
avoid detection by airport security (who then operated
according to standardized terrorist profiles). ...


... OK, and then how does body-searching middle-aged white males, aging
grandmothers or grandfathers help solve this? Pre-screening baggage for
explosives and carrry-on resolves the entire issue you are discussing above
-- and that is, theoretically, already done and has been the norm for
years. The highly personal, invasive searches of people who are highly
unlikely to be terrorists is the issue and appears to be a significant
waste of resources (i.e. tax dollars and time), drives people away from
that mode of transportation (I *will not* fly unless I absolutely have no
choice, and I'm not alone in that attitude), and does nothing to solve the
problem. All this in the name of attempting to show no bias despite the
fact that the most likely perpetrators match a specific profile.




+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+