List of items banned on planes following terror

[bevin]

You are right. Bush and Blair are playing on the fears of the population in the hope of getting some bounce for the Fall elections.

FEMA and DHS are really blowing billions of dollars building a strong wall around 1% of the security boundary while 99% of the boundary has nothing at all.

Ask yourself what it would take to disrupt the Super Bowl, the Macy's Parade, to bring down some random apartment complex in Billings Montana, or to hit any one of the 'not in the top 100 obvious targets' list.

/Bevin

[cricket]

Here's an idea. Maybe one airline could offer non-secured flights. The lines could be shorter and the fares cheaper!

Now, who'll be the first to book a flight? Anyone?

[olger]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Bravus said:

Bonnie, what stopped these attacks? It wasn't someone being picked up at the airport gate with something on their person, it was good investigative and police work catching the plotters well before they got to the airport. The bottom line is, if we're depending on the screeners in the airport to protect us, it's probably already too late, because that system is just always going to not be powerful enough. All that these bans accomplish is massive inconvenience for the thousands of innocent travellers (and possibly the impression that 'something is being done'). The real work of stopping terrorists is doen exactly as it was successfully done in this case - and all kudos to the police and security forces who did the excellent work - not by keeping nail clippers off planes.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Amen from olger.

[bonnie]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

olger said:

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Bravus said:

Bonnie, what stopped these attacks? It wasn't someone being picked up at the airport gate with something on their person, it was good investigative and police work catching the plotters well before they got to the airport. The bottom line is, if we're depending on the screeners in the airport to protect us, it's probably already too late, because that system is just always going to not be powerful enough. All that these bans accomplish is massive inconvenience for the thousands of innocent travellers (and possibly the impression that 'something is being done'). The real work of stopping terrorists is doen exactly as it was successfully done in this case - and all kudos to the police and security forces who did the excellent work - not by keeping nail clippers off planes.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Amen from olger.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

You may be right. That sentiment along with Cricket's suggestion sounds like a far better solution.

The ideal would be to have two planes side by side, headed for the same destination.

One where only the most obvious items are confiscated and relying solely on good investigative and police work. No waiting lines, no invasion of privacy of your personal carry-on. That would be completly unnecessary. We know that good in this situation has to be perfect as to all the many that would be willing to blow up a plane. Perfect only applies to those that have the job of keeping the airlines as safe as possible. We all know it would never be applied to the common man/woman in their daily occupations. Besides many of us realize this is a hoax any way. There really isn't that much of a threat, except by those we have judged to be lying or trying to frighten.

On the other, business as usual. Not just relying on the good(perfect) investigative results. Those boarding the second plane have the naive opinion that good in no way will be translated to perfect. Those foolish people that believe there to be a threat know that just like they themselves, errors happen, oversights, sometimes even the obvious slips thru the cracks.Let them have the inconvenience of the long lines.

It would certainly have an advantage this way. Short, very short lines on planes that were allowed to take off based on good(perfect) investigative work, and only confiscating the obvious items of danger. Those that have knowledge that this is a joke could be the very first to board.

[bonnie]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Bravus said:

Bonnie, what stopped these attacks? It wasn't someone being picked up at the airport gate with something on their person, it was good investigative and police work catching the plotters well before they got to the airport. The bottom line is, if we're depending on the screeners in the airport to protect us, it's probably already too late, because that system is just always going to not be powerful enough. All that these bans accomplish is massive inconvenience for the thousands of innocent travellers (and possibly the impression that 'something is being done'). The real work of stopping terrorists is doen exactly as it was successfully done in this case - and all kudos to the police and security forces who did the excellent work - not by keeping nail clippers off planes.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

It may be just a little misleading to say or imply that they were depending on the screeners at the airport. Probably more in line to say the screeners at the airport are only part of the equation. The system of good investigative police work will not always be sufficient either.

Maybe there are those that believe in combining the best efforts of both. Neither will work 100% of the time and for that when it happens the criticism of those that did not wish to be inconvenienced will be as vehement as the criticism now. Seems many have become experts in this field, know exactly what should be done, and seem to believe it can be done perfectly according to their imperfect dictates. I, for one, wish all that have the solution, would step forward enmasse and fix this mess. One can't do it alone, but surely sheer numbers of "experts" coming forward together could make a significent difference. Look around you here and take note of the experts that have come together.

And then there are those..........

[Neil D]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

How come they didn't ban liquids LONG ago, why now? This is all so ridiculous. It's all just a nice plan to instill more fear into people. And the people just accept it.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

The reason why they did NOT ban these items is because individuals would experiment, if they could get these items, at home for thier own use. Now, you can not do that, as you have to be a certified lab or some such thing to be able to experiement.

I know this to be true, as I attempted to get some fungi that was toxic to the Bee mite, that is causing decimations of hives of nearly 40% in some area. There is good university evidence that this fungi is toxic to the mite, and harmless to the bees and is a natural occuring in the enviorment. I thought if I could obtain and figure out a way to adminster it, I could innoculate my bees with this funus and they would thrive....I found out that I have to be a certified lab to be able to do what I want to do...

So much for the entrepurnerial ideas that change businesses...Stupid bean counters wont let those whose ideas have come progress

[Dr. Shane]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Bush and Blair are playing on the fears of the population in the hope of getting some bounce for the Fall elections.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

And they probally waited until after the Connetticut primary so that Lieberman would lose his seat. Wait until we see what they have cooked up for October. <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/dizzy.gif" alt="" />

[cricket]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Stupid bean counters

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Why do you insist on using derogatory terms when talking about classes/groups of people? Will you ever learn, or should the people turn on the likes of you before you ever "get it"?

[CyberGuy]

I heard on the News that the government will revise that banned list very shortly as I suspected they would. This always happens as the first list is always a knee jerk reaction to a threat and it soon becomes clear that this is to much of a hardship on some people.

Most people who just use domestic fights for an hour or so would not have a problem with these restrictions. But for a flight lasting several hours such as a flight from east coast to west coast or over the atlantic or Pacific this can become almost unbearable with certain items on a carryon.