Seriously, look it up. Reagan might have escaped the assassination attempt unharmed, except for maybe getting squashed by a Secret Service side of beef, if his limousine hadn’t been so heavily armored. The bullet that got him was deflected into him by bulletproof glass.
And now here’s another case where the intended protection made the disaster possible. One thing everybody agreed on, after the 9/11 hijackings, was that airliner cockpit doors had to be made impregnable unless the crew let you in. So they did that: Only the wrong guy was locked in.
And wouldn’t you know it – now there are rumblings of the other-than-Alex-Jones variety that the guy was a Moslem convert. I’ve no idea whether it’s true.
The 150 people who died would be just as dead if he was an atheist or a Catholic… Insanity and malice come in all flavors…
Perhaps he was a closet Moslem, or perhaps he was one of those crazed Presbyterians, but more likely it was the depression.
That reinforced door’s role in the crash is a great example of the law of unintended consequences.
I understand that there is rule in the USA that there is never only one person in a cockpit. What they actually do is have a stewardess occupy the empty chair. Of course, that could just as easily lead to tragic unintended consequences: “Crazed stewardess overcomes pilot, takes over airliner.”
That article is over a day old and is now contradicted by several other “discoveries” and theories. I’ll bet we will hear several more in the immediate and not-too-distant future.
One I particularly like is that the door lock can be disabled from outside by a “secret code” known to the flight crew, but the code can be overridden and locked down from the inside. Well, of course . . . since bad guys now know there’s a “secret code” all they have to do is grab a flight attendant and threaten to kill him/her to force the door to be opened from the inside, testing the resolve of the pilot in control to sacrifice a couple attendants to save everybody else. As far as I’m concerned, that has been the potential weakness of cockpit security all along.
The secret code is no longer a secret once it is given to one person.
The German source for this is PI-News. While they occasionally might give an interesting perspective on what mainstream media reports, they are hugely xenophobic and islamophobic (as only we Germans know how to do properly).
Not knowing much about Alex Jones, his WP description sounds like “likes christianity, freedom of speech, the right to keep and bear arms and pulls the tinfoil hat out quickly once his pet peeve gets mentioned”.
If that is so, PI News is pretty much of the Alex-Jones-variety.
Is passenger safety too important to leave in the hands of humans?
“I’m sorry Dave, I’m afraid I can’t do that”
Good to know, thanks.