Shuttle Ops in a Post-9/11 world

Gah. What's wrong with this picture?

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Co...4/050404_disco
very_hmed_6a.ss_h.jpg


--
Herb Schaltegger, GPG Key ID: BBF6FC1C
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin, 1759
http://www.individual-i.com/

Herb Schaltegger wrote:

Gah. What's wrong with this picture?


http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Co...4/050404_disco
very_hmed_6a.ss_h.jpg

You're misrepresenting things at KSC again, Herbs; that's not Shuttle
Ops; that's Photo Ops.

Challenger's Ghost

Yeah, I know what you mean. That photo was taken from just outside my
office, to which a SWATter had paid a brief visit just a bit earlier
("just checking on which way you're pointing your bazooka" - no,
really, his words).

I wonder if anyone gives any thought to the fact that these
astro-people drive home from work every day without armed coverage? So
why, then, do they feel the need for a strong armed presence within the
confines of a secured facility?

-Kim-

On Thu, 5 May 2005 11:33:44 -0500, Pad Rat wrote
(in article .com):

I wonder if anyone gives any thought to the fact that these
astro-people drive home from work every day without armed coverage? So
why, then, do they feel the need for a strong armed presence within the
confines of a secured facility?

Exactly. Schneier makes excellent points about all this so-called
"security" we've spent so much money on since 9/11. I wish those
running the show would heed some of them.

--
Herb Schaltegger, GPG Key ID: BBF6FC1C
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin, 1759
http://www.individual-i.com/

Pad Rat wrote:

Yeah, I know what you mean. That photo was taken from
just outside my office,

snip

-Kim-

I've been getting the impression for some time that you've been working
at Cape Canaveral.

Are you saying you've finally wangled a job on the Kennedy Space Center
again, one where the fellow was worried that you might have your camera
with you? If not, are you saying this photo was snapped outside Kennedy
Space Center proper?

Challenger's Ghost

On Thu, 05 May 2005 09:33:44 -0700, Pad Rat wrote:

Yeah, I know what you mean. That photo was taken from just outside my
office, to which a SWATter had paid a brief visit just a bit earlier
("just checking on which way you're pointing your bazooka" - no, really,
his words).

I wonder if anyone gives any thought to the fact that these astro-people
drive home from work every day without armed coverage? So why, then, do
they feel the need for a strong armed presence within the confines of a
secured facility?



lol, scratches head as he takes off his shoes to get on an airplane. Makes one
wonder who it is that they consider to be the enemy. Some religous nut
declares a holy war on the US, then proceeds to blow up US property around
the world. While doing so, is essentially ignored by many government
agencies until he gets it right on his second attempt on the same
building. What were they working on all those years? Must have been the
Patriot Act, because it must have taken more time to come up with that
great piece of legislation, than the week or two it took to get it passed
through Congress. That's it, more data should make them more intelligent.
Kind of makes one wonder what's on the shopping list of legislation that
they're working on for when the next ...

Benjamin Franklin, smart guy.

--
Craig Fink
Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @

"Michael Gardner" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Pad Rat" wrote:

Yeah, I know what you mean. That photo was taken from just outside my
office, to which a SWATter had paid a brief visit just a bit earlier
("just checking on which way you're pointing your bazooka" - no,
really, his words).

I wonder if anyone gives any thought to the fact that these
astro-people drive home from work every day without armed coverage? So
why, then, do they feel the need for a strong armed presence within the
confines of a secured facility?


Press coverage

We're spending a lot of money to give us the illusion of security, when the
reality is that many of the measures put in place after 9/11 won't do much
to stop terrorism.

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

On Fri, 06 May 2005 09:03:49 -0400, Jeff Findley wrote:


"Michael Gardner" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"Pad Rat" wrote:

Yeah, I know what you mean. That photo was taken from just outside my
office, to which a SWATter had paid a brief visit just a bit earlier
("just checking on which way you're pointing your bazooka" - no,
really, his words).

I wonder if anyone gives any thought to the fact that these
astro-people drive home from work every day without armed coverage?
So why, then, do they feel the need for a strong armed presence
within the confines of a secured facility?


Press coverage

Photo op, the subject of the picture isn't the astronauts.


We're spending a lot of money to give us the illusion of security, when
the reality is that many of the measures put in place after 9/11 won't
do much to stop terrorism.

More than just money, we're losing the war by giving up our freedoms.
Losing the very thing we've fought so hard for over the last couple of
centuries. It doesn't make me feel any safer to see little old ladies
taking off their shoes and giving up their fingernail clippers to get on
an airplane.

On 9/11 we had a paradigm shift, about what a hijacking is all about.
Three planes hijacked and used as weapons. People on the fourth plane
actually learning about the paradigm shift real time, and responding to
properly to the paradigm shift. They were heroes who did what was
necessary to stop the aircraft from being used as a weapon, and it worked.
What 9/11 did was change the paradigm and make the life of a would be
hijacker much more difficult. As the other passengers are no longer going to
cooperate and are much more likely to shove the hijackers out the door.
Cooperating was the proper thing to do pre 9/11, but no longer.

To me, the tactic of using aircraft as weapons only worked because it was
not in the conscious realm of possibilities. Now that it is in the realm of
possibilities, it won't work again. All the expense in money, freedom, and
ideals are a bad trade for the illusion of security.

--
Craig Fink
Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @

"Pad Rat" wrote in message
oups.com...
Yeah, I know what you mean. That photo was taken from just outside my
office, to which a SWATter had paid a brief visit just a bit earlier
("just checking on which way you're pointing your bazooka" - no,
really, his words).

I wonder if anyone gives any thought to the fact that these
astro-people drive home from work every day without armed coverage? So
why, then, do they feel the need for a strong armed presence within the
confines of a secured facility?

I forgot to add that the presence of armed security guards is not new. When
I first attended an astronaut walkout back around 1990, there were SWAT guys
standing around, too. I also recall a coworker's story about security guards
with shotguns on the roof of an OPF during roll-over to the VAB. That was
back in the early 80s.

The security's not new, but it does seem kind of ridiculous.

Kim Keller wrote:
The security's not new, but it does seem kind of ridiculous.

What is new is that they are now made quite visible on purpose, to show
americans that NASA is taking heavy duty security measures.

Since the PR folks are told that americans like to see such scenes,
then they make sure the machine-gun toting guard is prominent in the pictures.