Flight restrictions in UK and elsewhere

[Maverick]

Originally posted by Chairboy
Maverick, you're OK with books and music being forbidden?  I gather that by your use of the word 'whine'.

I'd say, and it's probably not popular, but I'd say "just deal with it."  Don't overreact, don't freak out about this stuff, just do your best without screwing up the very liberties we hold dear.

More people die on the road every day than died in the 9/11 attacks.  While absolutely terrible, what's even worse is how our rights have been systematically removed since.  The reaction has essentially handed pieces of victory to the folks attacking us.

How would I handle this threat?  Brief security on the threat and tell them to be vigilant.  Don't create 'zero tolerance' rules that hurt everyone and short circuit judgement, allow them to do their jobs.  Tell them about the liquid explosives threat so it's on their radar, arrest the folks MI5 & Scottland yard and whatnot have surveilled, and keep living life.  Huddling in a corner weeping is not the right answer.

What are you going to brief security about? What are you going to allow on board? What are you going to prohibit on board? As to the arrests, I belive the news said that most are already under arrest. Now if you assume that they got them all, are you really sure that there are not additional cells that the informant just didn't get briefed about? If the bad guys are arrested are you suggesting that all threats have just been eliminated and the threat is all gone?

People dying in traffic is not the point nor is it relevent to the subject at hand. Please stay on topic. As to the number of folks who die as a result of a terrorist act, I believe the current record is about 2700.

FWIW I can understand the bit about liquids and electronic devices. It's too easy to put some kind of detonator on board that way. This includes for explosives that may be on checked luggage. If the checked luggage isn't scanned for explosives and liquids you have just opened the door and leaving an electronic device onboard means you can detonate in flight from the device.

I think banning books is a bad idea and it would be easy to insure the book is not a planted weapon. Scan it and riffle the pages for the inspector. Should be simple enough.

Now getting back to my questions. Please explain what your ideas are to handle the terror threat to commercial air travel. Please be specific. What are you going to do that is different than what is being done?

Please note that I have NOT said anywhere in this or the other thread dealing with the terrorist situation the brits broke, that I approve of the measures. If you say I do that is your assumption and has neither been stated nor implied by myself.

[bj229r]

How about 'Muslim-only' airplanes?

[Chairboy]

Originally posted by Maverick
What are you going to brief security about? What are you going to allow on board? What are you going to prohibit on board?

Perhaps I was unclear in my message.  I will brief security on the threat "Hi guys, a bunch of folks were going to blow up planes using liquid explosives.  Here are some pictures and facts related to this.  As to what is allowed and prohibited on board, I tell the security "Now that you know this was their plan, there may still be others that were arrested that will want to follow through on this, so use your head.  If people are carrying some liquid with them, check it out.

Originally posted by Maverick
People dying in traffic is not the point nor is it relevent to the subject at hand. Please stay on topic.

Overreaction is the topic, and I've stayed on it.  Thousands of people die every day in traffic accidents, do you think all cars should be outlawed?

Originally posted by Maverick
FWIW I can understand the bit about liquids and electronic devices. It's too easy to put some kind of detonator on board that way. This includes for explosives that may be on checked luggage. If the checked luggage isn't scanned for explosives and liquids you have just opened the door and leaving an electronic device onboard means you can detonate in flight from the device.

Does this defense of yours protect against...  a TIMER?  c'mon.  You tell me to stay on topic, then moments later we're in Ian Fleming land.

Originally posted by Maverick
Now getting back to my questions. Please explain what your ideas are to handle the terror threat to commercial air travel. Please be specific. What are you going to do that is different than what is being done?

(slowly) Oook, I'll repeat myself.  Instead of "AARGH BAN TEH EVERYTINGGGG!!!!11!" I'd brief security then go about life as usual.  I can't fix everything myself, first thing I learned as a manager is that micromanaging creates "one size fits none" solutions.  Instead of global item bans, I'd trust the people assigned to security to, when equipped with the right information, do their jobs.

[Maverick]

You said you are going to brief security. I see. They are briefed. Now what are your specifics. Come on. I want to see something different than what they are doing now. You say they are going to check out the liquid. Uh OK how? What else are we going to look for? So far bombs have been disguised as shoes and now liquids are suspect. What are your guidelines for liquids? Since security has been briefed and they are looking for "stuff" they were briefed about, how is this different from what they are already doing?

As to the Ian Flemming bit. Don't you think bringing a binary bomb to be assembled and then detonated on board kinda fits that bill there?

I already told you I think banning books is kinda silly. I suppose you could start a fire with one or maybe give paper cuts but both of those are easily handled on board.

All I'm asking for is what your system would be and how is it going to differ and be less intrusive or at least better than what is going on now?

Until you can show driving deaths are terror related your opinion on it's relevence is not justification for it's inclusion about air traffic terrorism. IMO

You mentioned timers so you are ok then without screening checked baggage, correct? Just checking on it.

I already know Laz's answer. Every other passenger is armed and we just shoot the islamics on board.

[BTAirsol]

I travel a lot in my job. I try not to check in my bags but carry on. We will see cell phones, laptops, car alarm/door lock devises checked in also. For the price of safety I will accomidate. My biggest fear is a bomb being detenated in a busy terminal, that still needs to be addressed. When I walk into a terminal with the long lines, you could set one off being a suicide bomber right there and take out many people. We live in a different world for our freedom now. Get use to it.

[lazs2]

agree with funked on this one.

Mav... what you gonna do when they learn how to weave and dye C4 to look just like clothes?

What do I suggest?   Put sky marshalls on every flight...  gee.. the guy is pouring two liquids together and taking his laptop apart and removing some kinda electronics from it and hooking them up to the comound he made and....

I would also allow anyone who had a concealled carry permit or any police officer to carry weapons on board...

It is the lack of freedom that has caused the problem not too much of it.

lazs

[Maverick]

Laz,

Just to answer your points here.

I believe the C4 issue would be detected by the sniffers used to find explosives. Not sure but I think they are checking for known explosives now.

How is the sky marshal going to observe that if the liquids are in small bottles in the pockets of the perp and he does all the assembly (and detonation) in the john. Oh and the electronics could be the pda in another pocket.

Same for the CCW permit carrying guy. Given that a CCW permit carrier is on the plane, how is the sky marshal going to tell that the ccw person is not the terrorist if they draw a weapon and point it at another passenger. Who's he going to shoot first or does he shoot both the gun person AND the person that the weapon was being pointed at, assuming he can see any of this from the other end of the cabin?

What freedom has been lost in the airport security protocal? Please be specific.

Again I'm not taking a side one way or the other, just trying to find out what plan would satisfy those who don't like the current airport security.

[Boroda]

Originally posted by ramzey
forgive ignorance
is dog able to smell if you hide something in your ass?

Sure it can.

Smell for dogs is much more important then eyesight for us humans.

Dogs are superior to humans. Seriously. They can't betray, they never talk too much, they understand much more then an average human being, and - yes, they can smell what you swallowed several hours ago.

[AquaShrimp]

I have no problem with any article I bring on a plane being searched.  Why would anyone else have a problem?

I think some people get confused about air travel, or any form of travel for that matter.  Its a privilege, not a right.

[RedTop]

Originally posted by AquaShrimp
I think some people get confused about air travel, or any form of travel for that matter.  Its a privilege, not a right.

BINGO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:aok

[Toad]

The governments and the industry have known about liquid bombs for nearly 20 years. Possibly more.

Research Korean Air Flight 858; that one was a liquid explosive set off by a radio-concealed ignitor right next to the bottle.

We were briefed on this way back then. At the time, the defense was 'shhh.. don't talk about it!'.

They figured there was no acceptable way to combat the threat. Acceptable meaning a method the traveling public would accept. They felt it would mean the death of the industry if necessary measures were taken.

You're seeing most of what they then considered as necessary being finally implemented now.

[Stang]

Bye-bye airline industry.

[Rolex]

The US airline industry isn't going bye-bye. There is no way to replace the 700,000,000 times per year people get from Point A to Point B by airplane.

Let's keep in mind that the investigation in the UK prevented a threat. People at the airport didn't. I don't think anyone objects to other people being thoroughly checked to ensure our safety is enhanced. But that works the same for those other people about us, too.

I think an improved topic would be the instances of non-professionalism by those doing the checking, not overall gripes about rights being violated by checking in general. I've seen plenty of it and that is what annoys me, not the check itself.

Maybe I'm not alone.

[ramzey]

Originally posted by Toad
The governments and the industry have known about liquid bombs for nearly 20 years. Possibly more.

They don't use liquid explosives for first WTC attack?

[Toad]

Originally posted by ramzey
They don't use liquid explosives for first WTC attack?

I was referring to the use of carry-on liquid explosives and accelerators used to bring down aircraft.

The bomb used in the first WTC attack was made of urea pellets, nitroglycerin, sulfuric acid, aluminum azide, magnesium azide, and bottled hydrogen.

KAL 858 was destroyed by a bomb triggered by C4 hidden in a radio placed next to a liquor bottle containing PLX, or Picatinny Liquid Explosive. PLX is a liquid binary explosive, a mixture of 95% nitromethane and 5% ethylene diamine. It is a slightly yellowish liquid that can pass for booze say in a tequila bottle.