Comments on: American Airlines Tests Anti-Missile Gear

Up To 3 Passenger-Carrying Jets To Get U.K. Defense Co.'s Laser Technology

[denn034]

This story is good to see.

[fibonacci_]

Boy does this make me feel safer.

[walt1944-2009]

It has been learned that the new anti-missile system being installed on passenger planes will alert the pilot of the launch of a missle. The pilot will then throw a switch which will release thousands of ballons each with a picture of the Great Emperor Bush II on them!

It is thought that once the missile "sees" all these faces of the Great Emperor Bush II looking at it, the guidance system on the missle will become hopelessly confused as to which one to target first, allowing the plane to make its escape (it is hoped!).

The system will be installed by KBR and Halliburton on all commercial aircraft at full taxpayer expense with the ballons being manufactured and inflated by peasants in China!

AIN''T THE WORLD ECONOMY WONDERFUL???

SIG HEIL, BUSH!!!

[starleo146]

My question is ---Who is paying for this I heard it was us the government will take care of it and again the government help the airlines bailed them out on 9/11 and will not help the uninsured children or the people who are losing their homes right and left.

[starleo146]

The part that always gets me is that CBS feels the need to advertise what the U.S. is doing to the rest of the world. (and the terrorists)

The terrorists are probably thinking, OK, we need to hurry up and do our thing, BEFORE they get that anti-missile gear installed and working. Geez

Posted by erasmus6 at 11:33 AM : Jan 05, 20

You are right and that is what was part of the problem with the Iraq war as well. Notice how no one is talking now you hardly see anything on tv anymore. They knew everything we did and was going to do before Even I saw that. This is why I agree with your post

[alphaa10-2009]

USAYestrrday said, "... The chances of a terrorist in obtaining a guided missile (and system to launch it), and in a position to launch it successfully, AND escape without being noticed (the smoke trail is quite obvious)... IS EXTREMELY NIL!"
---
Not really-- you forget most al Qaeda forward groups have survival last on their agenda. The key point in the MANPAD threat scenario is the missiles are (1) abundant in the world market (2) easily brought into the US in pieces (3) easy to deploy and fire.

Those who live near airports already understand how how low and slow the airliner flies on takeoff and approach patterns. It would be a piece of cake for even the most unreliable of the Skela, Stinger, and other AA missiles.

Your primer on the military industrial complex was appreciated. That is a fairly accurate description of how Rep. Cunningham (R) was caught-- but only after flagrant abuses over a long period.

A better, more recent case in point is the Boeing "Insecurity Fence" along the southern border. This multibillion project authorized by DHS cannot distinguish between windblown sagebrush and running ********. Boeing calls it a "technical problem", but the rest of us recognize it as the political malfunction it is.

[sjc_1]

I think it is sad that this system could become a marketing feature for one airline. If this is a necessary system, then all commercial airliners should have it where necessary and the government should help them with it.

It is nice to say that the stinger supply should be carefully watched, but so many of them made it into the hands of people in the middle east during the Afghan/Soviet war that I do not think that they know any more.

[erasmus6]

The part that always gets me is that CBS feels the need to advertise what the U.S. is doing to the rest of the world. (and the terrorists)

The terrorists are probably thinking, OK, we need to hurry up and do our thing, BEFORE they get that anti-missile gear installed and working. Geez

[usayesterday]

Actually, its cheaper to change some of our foreign policies, but then I guess companies and politicians wouldn''''t really benefit financially from that.

Posted by inbredwhty at 09:10 AM : Jan 05, 2008
..............

There''s an underlying mindset among the military industrial complex:

Peace is not profitable.

[inbredwhty]

Actually, its cheaper to change some of our foreign policies, but then I guess companies and politicians wouldn''t really benefit financially from that.