July 8th, 2005
 senji
|
2005/07/08 15:16:00 - Fond misunderstandings…
|
<them> seeing as that whole area's (Kings Cross – Ed) a huge building site, could that have been how the terrorists slipped through the net?
<me> what net?
<them> the security check net.
<me> what security check net?
Current Mood: ![[mood icon]](https://imgprx.livejournal.net/1443282c4f05ae4d667e254a568bfe62172a46b1/qo2A3jVL9CcvJ6oBAfebvOSgOhlB1nVah3iOvszT2kVrSe8j0sy4NtHOzf4XOGWFlyPaTq8wfHX_22aaXk8MYJzzefCEFvuUJNJXc8-gP0SQPYQO-ceC0VM6CUVRCZOT) amused
Entry Tags: irc, tube bombings
|
 ilanin
![[userpic]](https://l-userpic.livejournal.com/16492846/2132496)
|
2005/07/08 14:31:48
|
Dude. Seriously. wtf? What city/country has a security check net for a rail terminus? Especially for a *subway* terminus, wherein a thorough security check would probably take longer than an appreciable fraction of the journeys...
|
senji
|
2005/07/08 14:33:10
|
London, apparently.
|
 fluffymormegil
|
2005/07/08 14:34:11
|
London, Ashford, Calais, Lille, Paris, and Brussel.
|
ilanin
|
2005/07/08 14:37:28
|
If you're counting those, none of which actually do, then you missed out Tokyo, at very least.
|
fluffymormegil
|
2005/07/08 14:40:14
|
There are railway stations in all of those places with at least one secured passenger-services platform...
|
ilanin
|
2005/07/08 14:41:47
|
Which is rather different to what I was actually saying, which was a "secured" terminus, in the manner of an airport.
|
ilanin
|
2005/07/08 14:49:54
|
And of course, even that isn't actually of much practical use, since the terrorists get on somewhere else. What you would need is a secure network, which is even more stupidly expensive and utterly implausible (until somebody comes up with an automated detection system for Bad Things which actually works, anyway).
|
fluffymormegil
|
2005/07/08 14:50:26
|
I hadn't noticed Gatwick Airport, in the large, to be particularly secured.
Airside, yes. Though ISTR a stunt by one of the redtop rags suggesting that airside personnel vetting was not what it might be.
|
ilanin
|
2005/07/08 14:53:24
|
For airside read trackside, naturally.
As for personnel vetting at airports, very much so. If you can be bothered to click through the advert which non-premium subscribers have to put up with, salon.com's Ask The Pilot column has a lot to say about the subject of airport security, none of which is complimentary when it talks about the screening of airport service crews.
I kind of lapsed in putting "secure" in inverted commas. I think we all know there is no such thing, just relative degrees.
|
 alfvaen
|
2005/07/08 19:46:39
|
Obviously they snuck through Platform 9 3/4.
|
|
|
|
|
