We're so freakin' spoiled, it's unreal. WAKE UP, people. It's these freedoms that people take advantage of.

I have no problem with the airlines not allowing carry on at all. I'm sure certain exceptions would have to apply.

Without those freedoms, we're just another country. Our military fought to give us those freedoms, and now we want to fold them lke a bunch of wimps. I hate the "we have to give up our freedoms to save our freedoms" situation.

 

I don't believe a laptop is any safer in the cargo hold as it is as carry on. Same for much of this stuff.

Agreed. We also have the "I can kick the f***ing s*** out of you and your entire country so bring it on" mentality.

 

This could be the next battle with the airlines. I wonder if one airline would have the balls to be the most restrictive and try to compete on that basis. Huge gamble, but it could really grab market share if it worked. I don't think it would, but who knows.

 

Not a chance. People have the "I'm not hurting anything with my ...." mentality, and they won't stand for a 4 hour wait to get through security like there is in Israel. If American said we have a 4 hour wait, and United said they could get you on a plane in 30 minutes, American would be in bankruptcy before you can blink.

We're so freakin' spoiled, it's unreal. WAKE UP, people. It's these freedoms that people take advantage of.

Which is exactly why we should be defending them, not restricting them.

 

I am referring here to governmental efforts to restrict freedom in other areas, NOT airline security. Flying on a plane is not a right. Therefore, they can and should restrict it as necessary. What I am saying is, even if terror reign huge in this country at some point, we are that much more obligated to protect every Constitutional freedom we have. Not the opposite, which is the disturbing trend coming from the far right.

Not a chance. People have the "I'm not hurting anything with my ...." mentality, and they won't stand for a 4 hour wait to get through security like there is in Israel. If American said we have a 4 hour wait, and United said they could get you on a plane in 30 minutes, American would be in bankruptcy before you can blink.

 

What if American's wait was also 30 minutes because you couldn't carry anything on, you had to wear AA slippers, and all coats would be sealed in a container before boarding the plane? 100% searches?No belts, no hats, etc?

 

I agree if the wait was longer, they would be toast, but I wonder how restricted we would accept.

Here's a nice little bit on El Al's security program, at least the un-classified portions of it, for anyone who's interested.

Here's a nice little bit on El Al's security program, at least the un-classified portions of it, for anyone who's interested.

 

Its a nice piece on Al Gore anyway

Its a nice piece on Al Gore anyway

Bloody hell, that's what happens when you have USA Today articles open in 2 tabs right next to each other.

Without those freedoms, we're just another country. Our military fought to give us those freedoms, and now we want to fold them lke a bunch of wimps. I hate the "we have to give up our freedoms to save our freedoms" situation.

 

I don't believe a laptop is any safer in the cargo hold as it is as carry on. Same for much of this stuff.

 

I'd rather "fold like a wimp" than allow terrorist to kill hundreds or thousands of Americans because a small sect of people believe that having their cell phone in their carry-on bag is their Constitutional "right."

 

You can't have it both ways. In the case of airline security, I'll happily accept new restrictions if it means that more lives are saved.

Which is exactly why we should be defending them, not restricting them.

 

I am referring here to governmental efforts to restrict freedom in other areas, NOT airline security. Flying on a plane is not a right. Therefore, they can and should restrict it as necessary. What I am saying is, even if terror reign huge in this country at some point, we are that much more obligated to protect every Constitutional freedom we have. Not the opposite, which is the disturbing trend coming from the far right.

No, I agree about that...

 

I'm talking strictly about the airlines.

I found it pathetic though how there was an add for "World Trade Center" on the cnn.com story about the terror plot.

 

Lets just put Wesley Snipes and Samuel L. Jackson on every flight, and we'll all be safe.

What if American's wait was also 30 minutes because you couldn't carry anything on, you had to wear AA slippers, and all coats would be sealed in a container before boarding the plane? 100% searches?No belts, no hats, etc?

 

I agree if the wait was longer, they would be toast, but I wonder how restricted we would accept.

Probably worth pointing out that the wait is not the only issue with all of this security...it also winds up costing a lot of money. Money that is paid for by the people who are flying. If you want to have enough security personal to say, do like El Al does and interrogate everyone for 10+ minutes, and profile people, and bring anyone who you think might be a medium to high threat into a separate room...you're going to need a massive upgrade in both the quality and quantity of the security personnel in U.S. airports. In other words, the costs would be very, very large, and they would probably be enough to push business away from the airlines, and force their lobbyists to arrange for another bailout or something like that.

I was watching "Why We Fight" last night at a friends. Then I heard about this as I was falling asleep last night. Here's some random thoughts that may or may not have anything to do with this.

 

*We're literally spending billions of dollars to foil plots that only involve maybe a couple hundred thousand dollars to carry out. Don't get me wrong - I'm so glad that we are - but it's kind of weird to think about.

 

*This is why terrorism is such an effective weapon. The plots don't even need to be carried out and sometimes they work. Terror attacks aren't usually just about killing people. It's about having an economic effect, it's about creating a palpable fear among the people you're trying to affect. So it works. And in this case, the plot never even had to come to fruition. We can fight a "war" on terrorism, but its too attractive a weapon to ever go away.

Side note/other topic for discussion: does anyone think that something like this may have been an effort by Al Qaeda to steal some of their thunder back from Hezbollah, now that the Shi'ite group has taken over as dominating the news and seems to have the mantle of main group resisting the invasion of the West? I've sort of been wondering if they would shoot for something like this in response to those events.

Nah. This sounds like something that was years in the planning. I would doubt it was a knee-jerk reaction to the sudden rise of Hezbollah in the headlines.

I'd rather "fold like a wimp" than allow terrorist to kill hundreds or thousands of Americans because a small sect of people believe that having their cell phone in their carry-on bag is their Constitutional "right."

 

You can't have it both ways. In the case of airline security, I'll happily accept new restrictions if it means that more lives are saved.

 

I was thinking more along the lines of search and seizure, probable cause, wiretapping, due process, freedom of speech, stuff like that. The "if you have nothing to hide, why would you want that freedom" stuff.

Nah. This sounds like something that was years in the planning. I would doubt it was a knee-jerk reaction to the sudden rise of Hezbollah in the headlines.

That doesn't mean that they couldn't have ordered it to spin up now in response to that mess.

If terrorists were transporting liquid explosives with the intent of detonating mid-flight, as all indications seem to be, it's scary to think about future instances involving terrorists smuggling aboard such items.

 

I can't begin to speculate which chemicals are involved, but if these people are truly determined to kill others and are willing to die for their cause, why not injest the material? Think of a situation closely resembling that featured within "Maria Full of Grace." Or wear clothing items which allow pockets where liquid items may be stored? I'm not saying anything new here, really. It's just tough to imagine complete security from persons transporting undectable (aside from trained dogs) liquids.

 

I'm sure London's counterterrorism units have been following this particular cell for a very long time. When they were reasonably certain an attack may be forthcoming, and potential co-conspirators were since identified, then the arrests were made. Doesn't sound like an instance of someone innocently stumbling across an Al-Qeada plan.

Edited August 10, 200619 yr by Flash Tizzle

It could very well be, get ready to launch it now to coincide with etc...

it was a nytroglycerin compound...

 

that stuff - yikes.

That doesn't mean that they couldn't have ordered it to spin up now in response to that mess.

 

Exactly. I can believe they are wating for a perfect opportunity before some attacks. Whether an Anniversary date, in response to American agression, real or not.

That's some powerful stuff they had there.

 

I wonder how this will complicate my parents' trip to LV next month (he has to carry on his insulin).

Exactly. I can believe they are wating for a perfect opportunity before some attacks. Whether an Anniversary date, in response to American agression, real or not.

I guess this means that Isreal is getting ready to kick some serious ass, huh?

 

Get freakin' real, people. I thought I was a conspiracy nut... guess not.

this is WW3. at least the UK will fall into line now (hopefully).

this is WW3. at least the UK will fall into line now (hopefully).

(where's that rolly smilie?)

 

That's just an ignorant statement.