DIY cruise missile thwarted

Not neccessarily.....with three lanes going forward (and usually in four going forward) in MOST roadways trucks are NOT permitted in the left lane. So those puttering in the middle lane are blocking up the truck passing lane. It's amazing how often trucks have to go to the slow lane to get around the dense people in the wrong lane. It's quite possible the truck was frustrated by the blue heads in the incorrect lane and he couldnt' get around. Frustrated guys (and girls) in 40 ton vehicles are something I steer clear of with either the gas or the turn signal. You chose wisely. ;-)

I asked: "Ok, so what _was_ the purpose of your project? What were you trying to accomplish?"

Bruce Simpson replied:

Ok, here's a quote from your website:

"The best way to counter this type of technology being assembled by terrorists within the borders of our own country(ies) is to educate the public as to just how possible it is."

What good would that do, except possibly give ideas to scumbags who might never have thought they could do it?

"The price of freedom is vigilance and without the practical proof that it could be done, who would have believed that your new neighbor could be building a "terror weapon" in their garage?"

So basically you're trying to stir up paranoia?

Furthermore, your site says that you are specifically attempting to use materials, components, tools and techniques that won't raise suspicion. So what are people supposed to do, be suspicious of everyone who builds things in their garage or tinkers with electronics, model planes, etc?

Or perhaps you think the government should start restricting common materials, components, and tools?

Frankly, I don't see anyway that you activities could have a positive result for anyone other than terrorists and others who want to see free societies become less free.

Hey, it's a big country...

IMHO, his project points how STUPID it is to think that one _can_ "do something about terrorism" by attempting to restrict _any_ "common materials, components, and tools".

It also goes to show what a bully the USA is on the international scene, that a nation like N.Z. can be intimidated, by the thought of the USA considering it "not helpful", into going outside its own laws to hassle its own citizens. As a loyal American citizen, I am offended by, and ashamed of, the actions of my nation in this matter.

-dave w

9/11/01 attacks happened because we had an outdated policy of apeasement of hijakers on the FALSE ASSUMPTION that ALL hijakers wanted to take a plane to some other country and land. There was NO provision for suicide in policy (pilots and crew were compelled by law with severe penalties to conform to) whether or not Israel had implemented anti-terrorism policy (no appeasement) and SCREAMED at us for nearly a decade to do the same.

Furthermore we did not simply lock the doors (see above Israeli screaming probably interpreted as whining).

We screwed ourselves.

But did we leave open the opportunity for people to save themselves? Nope. 3 of the 4 planes went down in a fireball with their tail between their legs having been fully disarmed before arriving on-board so the citizens (of their own country) were precluded from acting in response by the very same government the constitution is written to protect us from. It is failing to do so.

The one plane that did fight back, did so by violating every rule in the book and finding and USING weapons. They are criminals not heros. They broke the law big time!

At least if you properly follow the silly, sick, sad, illegal laws that were on the books at the time of the incident.

Jerry

Lead, follow, or get outta the way!

Once you understand that trucks live on the road, and you understand driving etiquette, usually you will have little trouble with the "drivers" that live there.

Ever see a truck flash his running lights 2 or 3 times? That is the way a truck says, "Thank you" to a vehicle that cleared the way, or to tell someone that it is OK to get over in front of him/her. The latter is usually done with headlights. Most "drivers" actually have an amazing amout of courtesy. It is people who don't spend a whole lot of time on the interstate that do not understand the "rules of the road".

~ Duane Phillips.

So true......I drove for two years over the road and fully understand the pressure. 99.99% of the time they are all courteous but once in awhile the pressure is on and mistakes are made.......it may be the only profession where the professional has to deal directly with the amateur in his workplace. A few things which I would make certain are enforced or implemented

1) anyone in the wrong lane forcing another driver to pass on the right is immediately ticketed for improper lane use 2) tractor trailer doubles are not permitted to drive in snow, sleet or freezing rain, they must immediatly stand down 3) any limited access road which ends into a redlight area must have flashing 'light is red' signal board a half mile ahead of the redlight 4) anyone passing on the shoulder can be shot on sight ;-)

While I accept the possibility that this is what occurred, I don't recall seeing any proof Mr. Simpson's legal problems were the result of U.S. influence. As for NZ "going outside its own laws", what law did they break?

What exactly do you expect the public to do about it?

I used to drive a 77 Toyota corolla on I80 between DesMoines and Chicago. While not often, I began flashing the headlights when they passed me like I saw being done when I was clear of them. Have done some DYI moving in 26' trucks, one really appreciates the blindness of looking back from one of those things. I would have to say the vast majority of professional drivers are downright courteous to a fault. So that's what blew me away when I looked up to headlights at 65mph in a 50mph curve,... in the slow lane.

Joel. phx

The one feature of the media and especially the government leaders following 9/11/01 was they would get on the media and state with particularity what things they feared terrorists would do, then said (again very publicly), gee I wish we had the funding to abate that, but we don't.

Well they got the funding and they STILL didn't abate it. But they are still on TV with the same crap of educating potential terrorists of precisely what to do. I predict they will get yet more money, not abate a thing, and repeat it all again.

Mean time I have a heretical question. Where are these domestic terrorists we are protecting ourselves from?

And since the vast bulk of the monies are being used for paying salaries of lots of police at about 15 levels of juristiction. Most of their time is spent justifying their existence, not by finding terrorists. No that is hard. They find and arrest U.S. citizens for "petty crimes" which used to be called infractions but now have been felonized as a means to keep us "safe". I guess the safest citizen is one who is safely tucked away in a jail cell. And made a part of the system on release by being a felon.

Besides the obvious civil rights implications of criminalizing almost all of daily activity, what about the loss of business productivity, or the least factored in element, the loss of life experience and simple freedom to live.

And there is nowhere one can go in the United States to be somewhat free of the risk of being randomly criminalized. With overlapping juristictions even the most remote and technically disconnected citizen is under the thumb of at least 5 levels of police. England by comparison has ONE.

And since now using any form of transportation subjects you to random search and proof of identification, and in most cases financial responsibility, the poor are filling the jails with increasing rapidity indeed.

And once tagged as a criminal, you are treated as one by default for the rest of your life, whether or not you have committed a crime. And police routinely falsify probable cause that a crime has been committed and almost as commonly fabricate evidence of the crime itself. There is a "practical" presumption of guilt in the "justice system" and even a moderately effective defense is horifficly expensive and inaccessable to ALL but a tiny fraction of accused "criminals".

Jerry

So clearly, not issuing advisories to the pubilc that airliners could be used in this way didn't work as a method of preventing such attacks. My point exactly.

If the public *had* been warned of the magnitude of this threat they may have forced the airlines and authorites to ramp up their security measures *before* the events of 9/11. That may have saved lives.

So what's wrong with learing from that mistake and realising that "security by obscurity" is indeed nothing but a myth?

So it's better to ignore the problem and simply *hope* that all those university educated terrorists with millions of dollars in funding won't think of this idea themselves??

I honestly don't think that's a smart move.

-- you can contact me via

Below

I can not agree with this. I plan all my maneuvers well ahead of time. I like lots of "buffer" room between me and other cars.

I will move into the left lane to pass about 125-150 feet behind the car I am going to pass.

if the person in the "wrong lane" in your opinion is already SPEEDING then the person who passes in the right lane AND SPEEDS (must be since I am speeding and he is passing)

I am not saying I am passing a guy doing 40 at 50 I am doing near 65 or "70" while I am passing. Boo Hoo if I am in the way of the guy wanting to do 80 in the 55.

Otherwise I agree. I hate it when I go left to pass and the guy in the left is doing 50. get the hell out of the passing lane. Jersey has this one small thing right. Drive right pass left. if you are DRIVING in the left lane police can and will pull you over and ticket you. :-)

Not sure about this. IE I am not sure I know what your saying but if you mean the tractor trailers with "dual" trailers on the back as in one box and then another box on its own link etc.. I would tend to agree its asking for trouble :-)

why ?

GRRRRR ABSOLUTELY !!! Same Goes for tailgaiters. Shoot to Kill on sight.

Chris Taylor

It called means to an end.

just because something is legal does not make the REASON for doing it "right" or even in some cases legal.

While this is not something applied to people it is VERY IMPORTANT for it to be applied to a government.

Chris Taylor

Below

It is odd that you say it is obvious. when it clearly is NOT obvious. they knew. that was not the issue. the problem is most hijackers would prefer Hmmm what would they prefer ??

HOW ABOUT NOT DYING !!

THIS kind of attack on becomes useful and practical when the hijacker DESIRES to both DIE and Take others with him.

Not make rash stupid decisions just because somethign is unknown. Remember most politicians ARE the public till they BECOME politicians.

If someone would have raised ashcroft to be less an asshole when he was a child he might not be trying to tear this country apart today.

Not useless. More work. the solution is to hunt down the bad guys. problem is image is actually more important than ACTION to politicians.

it EASY to restrict legal citizens and pretend you are doing something useful but very HARD to "actually" get the bad guys and you do not get as much image points right away this path. sad but true.

So if someone wanted to build his aircraft and was not trying to make ANY point at all. they would be equally wrong in your eyes ?

I have always had the dream of making an Autonomous aircraft capable of circumnavigating the planet with NO external user input. Why ? just because it would be cool.

you think I should "can" my dream JUST because it could help terrorists.

Bullshit. terrorists will use anything they can/want. what I do and make will not change that.

you say do not give them ideas. they will just use other or existing ideas.

the problem is NOT the technology. the problem is the desire. the terrorists WANT to do harm. if they have to do it with stones and knives then god dammit they will do it with stones and knives.

it matters not WHAT I make or do.

and NO ONE should be telling me what I can and can not build just because some asshole might do something bad with it ESPECIALLY considering HE WILL do his "bad thing" no matter what.

that is not even up for discussion. HE WILL do his bad thing. the TOOL he uses is not relevant and NOT the problem.

Chris Taylor

Chris Taylor

Airline hijacking solution is EASY.

Each passenger is issued access to one frangible firearms or weapon. (anything that will not take down the plane)

Pilot hits a button and the hatches open giving access to the weapons.

their would never be a successful hijacking anywhere ever again and probably never even be a "serious" hijacking attempt ever again.

Problem solved. NO rights restricted or removed.

Chris Taylor

I had the same idea - put them in the little overhead cabinets along with the oxygen mask... pilot pushes the "repel boarders" button, pistol drops down on a string for each passenger to use...

-dave w

Any US government security agency that couldn't put "airplane hijacking" and "suicide bomber" together and come up with exactly the scenario we saw on

9/11 isn't fit to guard the donuts at an Overeaters Anonymous meeting.

I'd ask how incompetent our security agencies are, and why we waste so much money on them, except I already know the answer...

A handful of terrorists murdered thousands of innocent civilians. But our own government is jsut as responsible for those acts as the terrorists: they created the envirnment that GUARANTEED it would happen, and did nothing to prevent it. It's almost as if they WANTED a disaster like this to happen to justify global warfare.

It never has been. The only time it can even sort of work is when your ATTACKER is the one without the knowledge. If the attackers are smart, and the victims are clueless, they are sitting ducks. Unless they have cell phones and use the phrase "Lets roll!"

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!