Airline passengers on both sides of the Atlantic could be free to carry larger bottles of liquids in carry-on luggage under a two-year plan to relax current security rules that sharply restrict the amount of shampoo, hand lotion, and other types of liquids that can be brought in a plane cabin. Under an oft-criticized plan …
Hmmm Smells like
There is an election in 7 days.
But I'm So Thirsty...
I sure hope the $3 waters and $5 cokes will still available in the terminals.
Now, what about the pay-to-fast-track at the security screening? Is that for our own good, too?
Two fricken years?!?!?!
that is all...
So what they are saying is
that the machines cannot tell whether that's 100ml of shower gel or liquid explosive today, so why bother separating?
In other words, it's taken them 2 years to admit that the threat's overblown. However, they just can't rescind the restrictions because that'll make it look like they were wrong. So in order to avoid looking like the fools that they are, they'll phase liquids back in over 2 years and spend millions of dollars to do it.
There's a reason that blog is getting to be known as Propaganda Village.
Paris - because Kip Hawley is an Idiot® like her.
Here in Japan if you fly internally and take a bottle of water through security, they put it on a machine to check it. If it bleeps green you keep your water/liquid. Simple.
RE: So what they are saying is...
nono, what they're saying is that there never were any (binary) explosives that the existing scanners wouldn't have detected and this was all just to keep the fear level high enough that we carried on voting for the 'right' policies....
But now there's an election that the incumbents seem certain to lose, there's no longer any political mileage to be had and its time to bail before you're forcibly tossed out.
Air travel is dropping... HARD
Here at Orlando Int'l Airport in Florida (MCO) air travel for the past year dropped by something like 18% which is a huge hit for a place that's never experienced a drop and is used to rises on the order of 5% yearly. This means budgets, employment, and projects get slashed.
Jeez, you would have thought somebody bombed the place from all the ZOMG!!! in the local papers.
So they talked to a lot of air travelers and the two reasons for not flying was the economy and security, with those being about the only two reasons and each one being about 50% of the answers.
When they realized security was considered as big an issue as the crappy economy, they all started running around like Chicken Little and issuing stern proclamations that Security Keeps You Safe From Evil Terrorists, Citizen. To which a lot of people said "fuck you then, I'm driving instead" and have apparently actually backed it up by doing it, according to the latest monthly flights statistics.
So I'm not surprised. I expect the shoes thing to go next. Then perhaps I'll consider flying again myself.
Will they also be able to identify..
..the difference between a ham sandwich and liquid explosives? I only ask after watching a friend lose his sandwiches, before being subject to invasive search techniques after vigorously protesting.
I have to admit I was surprised I wasn't similarly detained for being unable to prevent myself from falling into fits of laughter.
We're safe, but who's watching the watchers?
No, it's not that they're criminals or terrorists. I'm actually thinking about their health. Next time you get an x-ray, notice that the nice man or woman is wearing a little hexagonal badge. It tracks the amount of radiation they're exposed to. But look for one on the TSA folks. And, here's a hint. They sit much closer to the x-ray source, it's a stronger x-ray source and it's on more. Yes, they're only "near" the machine for 20 minutes in an hour, but that's still a lot of radiation.
But what the heck, all they have is a high-school degree. They're disposable. (You guys REALLY need "the finger").
The issues now with airport security are more to do with the fact that it is now a burgeoning industry that involves millions of dollars/pounds/euros etc and thousands of people, consequently it has a voice that carries weight and is able to influence the powers that be for more reasons than simply security. Of course we need a degree of security but the current levels if reduced mean people becoming redundant and the consequences of that on already suffering economies etc.
So don't expect drastic reductions soon, a high fear factor will continue to be pushed more to keep the readies coming in than for your continued safety.
The worst thing...
...is that with a little thought, any resourceful/imaginative terrorist would be able to get around these restrictions - hotel shampoo bottles filled with the liquid explosive and stuffed up their backsides for a relevant example.
More "hardcore" would be like in the most recent Batman film where the Joker has someone surgically implanted with a bomb.
Actually, the real worst thing is that I'm sure the security decision-makers are *aware* of this already - but they want to "reassure" people, because voter goodwill (not security) is the main consideration.
I assume the US is much like here in these respects -- Jacqui Smith has to be obviously Doing Something, the inconvenience of the half-hearted security measures makes it obvious, but she's not going to go so far as to be actually effective (cavity searches for all, or x-raying people with suspiciously large scars).
Meanwhile, MI5 say they don't have enough money to monitor all the people they think are really worth keeping track of.
Is it unclear to those people that targeting the bad guys is more likely to do some good than to mildly inconvenience *everyone*?
We can't even be sure it'll improve once Cameron and Obama get in...
Re: Will they also be able to identify..
They badgered me for a 200ml pack of ready-made formula milk last time while junior dragged through the X-ray his bag with a 15cm big toy alarm clock (with an external ringer which can short contacts) sitting on top of a box of plasticine and wrapped in the cables from a set of headphones.
It is a circus.
Nothing to do with their qualifications and everything to do with their universal shitty, self-important, self-righteous, mindless little Hitler attitude. Fuck 'em.
What you have stumbled upon is obviously a government supersoldier creation programme. Everyone knows that gamma rays, in the right dose, cause superpowers, but as you correctly point out the educated won't put themselves up for the lab rat treatment.
Why don't they take a sample of the contents and apply a suitable charge to it - if it explodes then it's an explosive, if not the owner is free to take it on board.
Saves all this "we can't detect abc explosive, therefore need to charge you extortionate prices for a simple drink"
Re: Re: Will they also be able to identify..
>They badgered me for a 200ml pack of ready-made formula milk
errrr... the rule is 100ml didn't you know?
>sitting on top of a box of plasticine
errrr... plasticine does not look like an explosive on a scanner, try going through with C4
>It is a circus.
and you're the clown
"The TSA is in the process of installing advanced technology X-ray machines throughout the country. The new machines should be in place by the end of 2009, but it will take an additional year for them to be outfitted with software that can identify threatening liquids."
This is the most BS statement I've ever heard.
More TSA BS
These restrictions (like nail clippers, small scissors, pocket knives, nail files) have been BS (aka TSA theatre) from day one and have not made flying safer for one single solitary person.
They are, however, a chance for TSA to mindlessly force everyone to submit to overbearing governmental "power and authority" to help people get used to full governmental control over your miserable life. Don't like the hassle; drive. Don't like being stopped for search on the road; don't travel. Don't like staying at home; be homeless. Just don't be whinging to anyone about it because they don't care; not one iota.
some how I dont think that an X-ray machine (no matter how sophisticated) can tell the difference between :
H20 - water
H2O2 - hydrogen peroxide
The former costs $3/bottle the latter in sufficient concentration can launch
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTRabuq6YM0> -- You Tube warning
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9S_Qmn-CEM> -- You Tube warning
or a plane.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AG51IndWzMw> -- You Tube warning
Flames for the obvious reasons :)
Re: More TSA BS
>These restrictions (like nail clippers, small scissors, pocket knives, nail files) have been BS (aka TSA theatre) from day one and have not made flying safer for one single solitary person.
Why doesn't anyone get it? the rules are stricter than needed so that it takes an extra stretch to get past them, why does ASDA ask for id if you look under 25? it takes the doubt away, no, nail clippers will not kill anyone (unless you're really patient), but draw the line at nail clippers and you can't possibly argue the toss between a 3" nailfile and a 5" nailfile.
I would argue that the AC that wrote this *could* be very, very wrong, pehaps the extreme restrictions has made things safer, as it's so much more likely to get caught with something vaguely dangerous, i.e. very risky to try and get something very dangerous onboard, but of course we'll never know, perhaps if we didn;t have these restrictsions something would have happened, it's like the idiots who sat back after Y2K and said "see, nothing happened, it was all a waste of time and money" completely forgetting about the thousands of people who worked hard to make "nothing happen", fools like the AC above will think they are right because they can't be proved wrong (forgetting that they can't be proved right either).
- SMASH the Bash bug! Red Hat, Apple scramble for patch batches
- A BENDY iPhone 6, you say? Pah, warp claims are bent out of shape: Consumer Reports
- eXpat Files 'Could we please not have naked developers running around the office BEFORE 10pm?'
- CoTW Emma Watson should SHUT UP, all this abuse is HER OWN FAULT
- Vulture at the Wheel Renault Twingo: Small, sporty(ish), safe ... and it's a BACK-ENDER