From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Wed May 22 2002 - 23:57:23 MDT
On Wednesday, May 22, 2002, at 09:50 pm, Phil Osborn wrote:
> in order to facilitate security and reduce its impact
> upon normal life. That is, you could volunteer to be
> checked out thoroughly by the FBI, presumeably,
> telling them whatever they wanted to know that would
> be necessary to exclude you from the group of likely
> security risks. Carrying the resulting ID card would
> speed you through various security related lines at
> airports, etc.
We already have security ID cards for airport workers to get past
security. We already give them background checks to verify that they
are OK. Some of the 9/11 hijackers had forged airport security passes
and pilot's licenses. No matter how good the background check is,
credentials can be forged. By the time we go through the expense, the
technology, and the hassle of definitively proving who we are, it would
have been easier to just search the bag anyway. I don't understand why
we would want to create a special class of people who don't get their
bags searched. From a security point of view, scrutiny on people who
can bypass the system should be higher, not lower.
> Anyway, Bill could not even present a single complete
> sentence of the idea without being instantly shouted
> down by these two women guests. I mean, literally, he
> never got one single sentence in. Of course, he could
> have continued talking, but then he would have
> appeared as rude and overbearing, and women make 85%
> of the consumer purchases in America....
You forgot to mention that Bill also claimed that America was weak
because it had been "feminized", and that men should run the war against
terrorism because women aren't as good at war than men. That's what set
the women off.
-- Harvey Newstrom, CISSP <www.HarveyNewstrom.com> Principal Security Consultant <www.Newstaff.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:17 MST