Forums > Social Discussion > Airport Security Tightens, UK 10/08/06
Login/Join to ParticipateGOLD Member
What a Bummer
3,224 posts
Location: Shatfield, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
What a Bummer
3,224 posts
Location: Shatfield, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
Posted:
For those who don't know, or intend on flying out from the UK today...
16 men were arrested in connection with suspected terrorist activities today. The plan as such, to blow up explosives in the hand luggage midflight. Due to that, nearly every UK airport is on max security. Queues, for check-in and going through security gates galour. Also, changes to whats allowed in hand luggage has changed, and only the following items are allowed:
Thoughts anyone?
For those who don't know, or intend on flying out from the UK today...
16 men were arrested in connection with suspected terrorist activities today. The plan as such, to blow up explosives in the hand luggage midflight. Due to that, nearly every UK airport is on max security. Queues, for check-in and going through security gates galour. Also, changes to whats allowed in hand luggage has changed, and only the following items are allowed:
Written by: BTI UK Travel Alert
UK AIRPORTS BAGGAGE POLICY
Bulletin issued by BTI UK Travel Alert Service:
09.05 – 10 August 2006
Please be advised of the following development(s) that may impact your travel program:
Further to today’s national security alert at UK airports, the Department for Transport (DoT) has issued additional security measures. With immediate effect, the following arrangements apply to all passengers starting their journey at a UK airport and to those transferring between flights at a UK airport.
All cabin baggage must be processed as hold baggage and carried in the hold of passenger aircraft departing UK airports.
Passengers may take through the airport security search point, in a single (ideally transparent) plastic carrier bag, only the following items. Nothing may be carried in pockets:
-pocketsize wallets and pocket size purses plus contents (for example money, credit cards, identity cards etc (not handbags));
-travel documents essential for the journey (for example passports and travel tickets);
-prescription medicines and medical items sufficient and essential for the flight (eg diabetic kit), except in liquid form unless verified as authentic.
-spectacles and sunglasses, without cases.
-contact lens holders, without bottles of solution.
-for those travelling with an infant: baby food, milk (the contents of each bottle must be tasted by the accompanying passenger) and sanitary items sufficient and essential for the flight (nappies, wipes, creams and nappy disposal bags).
-female sanitary items sufficient and essential for the flight, if unboxed (eg tampons, pads, towels and wipes).
-tissues (unboxed) and/or handkerchiefs
-keys (but no electrical key fobs)
All passengers must be hand searched, and their footwear and all the items they are carrying must be x-ray screened.
Pushchairs and walking aids must be x-ray screened, and only airport-provided wheelchairs may pass through the screening point.
In addition to the above, all passengers boarding flights to the USA and all the items they are carrying, including those acquired after the central screening point, must be subjected to a secondary search at the boarding gate. Any liquids discovered must be removed from the passenger.
There are no changes to current hold baggage security measures.
Regrettably, significant delays at airports are inevitable. Passengers are being asked to allow themselves plenty of extra time and to ensure that other than the few permitted items listed above; all their belongings are placed in their hold baggage and checked in.
Thoughts anyone?
SILVER Member
addict
667 posts
Location: Cannock, staffordshire, United Kingdom
addict
667 posts
Location: Cannock, staffordshire, United Kingdom
Posted:
well said cole
well said cole
enticed, entrapped, entombed.
intoxicated, impaled, ingested.
bewitched, beaten, broken.
enter the love realm...
insert ur token
o jej, ale bym ci wylizal ten pepek
stepped up promotions
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
If they're going to disallow little tubes of lipgloss, then what about those jello filled bras? Or breast implants ? One could imagine using an insulin needle to transfer a liquid from boob L , to boob R, give it a good smack and Kaboom!!!!
Now might be a good time to thing about selling off those airline shares and investing in the counterterrorism industry
If they're going to disallow little tubes of lipgloss, then what about those jello filled bras? Or breast implants ? One could imagine using an insulin needle to transfer a liquid from boob L , to boob R, give it a good smack and Kaboom!!!!
Now might be a good time to thing about selling off those airline shares and investing in the counterterrorism industry
BRONZE Member
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada
veteran
1,247 posts
Location: lost, Canada
Posted:
Stout, I cant beleive you thought of those jelly bras! That makes me laugh. Now I will know the real reason the security dude is feeling me up next time I travel.... he's checking the bra! lol
Stout, I cant beleive you thought of those jelly bras! That makes me laugh. Now I will know the real reason the security dude is feeling me up next time I travel.... he's checking the bra! lol
"God *was* my co-pilot, but then we crashed, and I had to eat him..."
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
yes, and I would HOPE that this was not discovered by random wire-tapping, but by targeted intelligence.
I will again point out that AIRPORT SECURITY DID NOT FIND THIS THREAD, Scotland Yard did.
Tell me, Cole, what harm can a paperback book do that a passport cannot? The reaction is a knee-jerk one and it's not based on logic, evidence, or any rational safety concern.
And as long as people are willing to tolerate this sort of thing in the name of "safety" then our rights will continue to erode until we come to a point where you can be stopped on the street, searched, and dragged into custody without trial, perhaps even executed, all because someone thought you looked funny.
In five short years the USA has gone from a complete bill of rights to having US Citizens still behind bars with no charges and no trial.
The rest of the "Free World" faces the same threat.
And I'd rather that I and everyone I love be blown to a billion pieces at 37,000 feet than see that happen.
Written by: coleman
yes, the intelligence services stopped this plot - but have you considered what that means, what a massive intelligence operation like that involves...?
i am confused at why are you not outraged at the massive invasion of privacy that must have been committed by the intelligence services to track and prevent an attack of this magnitude?
yes, and I would HOPE that this was not discovered by random wire-tapping, but by targeted intelligence.
I will again point out that AIRPORT SECURITY DID NOT FIND THIS THREAD, Scotland Yard did.
Tell me, Cole, what harm can a paperback book do that a passport cannot? The reaction is a knee-jerk one and it's not based on logic, evidence, or any rational safety concern.
And as long as people are willing to tolerate this sort of thing in the name of "safety" then our rights will continue to erode until we come to a point where you can be stopped on the street, searched, and dragged into custody without trial, perhaps even executed, all because someone thought you looked funny.
In five short years the USA has gone from a complete bill of rights to having US Citizens still behind bars with no charges and no trial.
The rest of the "Free World" faces the same threat.
And I'd rather that I and everyone I love be blown to a billion pieces at 37,000 feet than see that happen.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
SILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
2,666 posts
Location: Preston, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
2,666 posts
Location: Preston, United Kingdom
Posted:
I think you've been reading a little too much George Orwell, and maybe a tad too much Da vinci Code doc
Just say that this plot was missed by Scottland Yard, if these measures were standard then they might be enough to stop it from happening.
I think you've been reading a little too much George Orwell, and maybe a tad too much Da vinci Code doc
Just say that this plot was missed by Scottland Yard, if these measures were standard then they might be enough to stop it from happening.
Chief adviser to the Pharaoh, in one very snazzy mutli-coloured coat
'Time goes by so slowly for those who wait...' - Whatever Happend To Baby Madonna?
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
So you're saying that you want paperback books and electronics banned on all flights?
Tell me, have you ever been on a 16-hour flight? It's awful. I can only imagine what it might be like if you were allowed to bring nothing aboard. It would be inhumane.
And do you have any idea how easy it is to get around airport security? Airport security simply stops honest people from blowing up planes just like locks stop honest people from stealing.
If the threat is THIS bad, then they should stop all airline travel, period until the threat has passed.
But we have to realize that life is not safe, flying on a plane, driving in a car, or even walking on the street is not safe, and that terrorism is a fact of life that we're going to have to live with. Every increase in security increases security by an increasingly small amount. The probability of terrorist attack does not drop significantly with further increases.
What's more, terrorists use a number of tools to coordinate their attacks. Know one they use a heck of a lot? The internet. Know another? Mobile phones. Maybe we should shut down all internet nodes and cellular networks. Maybe we should close all ice cream parlors because they might be the next target. And no I'm not being extreme. Banning water and paperback books is extreme.
So look at what the terrorists have accomplished: they've crippled travel in and out of the UK, which could cripple its economy. They've scared the living daylights out of tens of millions. And they did it all in spite of their original plot failing. Whoever is masterminding this has succeded, even if nobody died.
Well played, sir, whoever you are. You are dispicable, but very good at what you do.
As for us, our generation is going to have to accept that today is not September 10, 2001. Terrorism has come to the West and it is here to stay. We cannot get rid of it within our lifetimes. We have to live with it and we must accept that we may die by it. No matter how "safe" we try to make our lives, they are infinately creative.
We have to stop treating them as bogeymen and start treating them as what they are: murderers. We need to use effective intelligence to stop their plots, just as was done in this case (note: none of the suspects had even purchased the liquid ingredients for the explosives) and we need to hold our heads high and send them a message that their tactics will not work.
Or we can react like this and completely paralyze ourselves every time they go "boo!" Maybe we need to take the El-Al stance on security. El-Al has had ONE and exactly ONE hijacking ever. And they are determined that they will never have another. Israel lives with terrorism as a daily event and they carry on.
And either we'll learn to do that...or we'll suffocate.
Written by: Brit_Joe
Just say that this plot was missed by Scottland Yard, if these measures were standard then they might be enough to stop it from happening.
So you're saying that you want paperback books and electronics banned on all flights?
Tell me, have you ever been on a 16-hour flight? It's awful. I can only imagine what it might be like if you were allowed to bring nothing aboard. It would be inhumane.
And do you have any idea how easy it is to get around airport security? Airport security simply stops honest people from blowing up planes just like locks stop honest people from stealing.
If the threat is THIS bad, then they should stop all airline travel, period until the threat has passed.
But we have to realize that life is not safe, flying on a plane, driving in a car, or even walking on the street is not safe, and that terrorism is a fact of life that we're going to have to live with. Every increase in security increases security by an increasingly small amount. The probability of terrorist attack does not drop significantly with further increases.
What's more, terrorists use a number of tools to coordinate their attacks. Know one they use a heck of a lot? The internet. Know another? Mobile phones. Maybe we should shut down all internet nodes and cellular networks. Maybe we should close all ice cream parlors because they might be the next target. And no I'm not being extreme. Banning water and paperback books is extreme.
So look at what the terrorists have accomplished: they've crippled travel in and out of the UK, which could cripple its economy. They've scared the living daylights out of tens of millions. And they did it all in spite of their original plot failing. Whoever is masterminding this has succeded, even if nobody died.
Well played, sir, whoever you are. You are dispicable, but very good at what you do.
As for us, our generation is going to have to accept that today is not September 10, 2001. Terrorism has come to the West and it is here to stay. We cannot get rid of it within our lifetimes. We have to live with it and we must accept that we may die by it. No matter how "safe" we try to make our lives, they are infinately creative.
We have to stop treating them as bogeymen and start treating them as what they are: murderers. We need to use effective intelligence to stop their plots, just as was done in this case (note: none of the suspects had even purchased the liquid ingredients for the explosives) and we need to hold our heads high and send them a message that their tactics will not work.
Or we can react like this and completely paralyze ourselves every time they go "boo!" Maybe we need to take the El-Al stance on security. El-Al has had ONE and exactly ONE hijacking ever. And they are determined that they will never have another. Israel lives with terrorism as a daily event and they carry on.
And either we'll learn to do that...or we'll suffocate.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
C'mon. Now you're being silly.
These guys were caught BECAUSE of Airport security. Indirectly. They were mixing liquids because if they had just gotten 10 sticks of dynamite they wouldn't have passed airport security. This catch was an example of how airport security worked perfectly. It caused the terrorists to alter their plans enough to get them caught.
You sit in the corner and think about an Israeli Airport without security and come out when you're ready to think logically.
Written by: Doc Lightning
Airport security simply stops honest people from blowing up planes just like locks stop honest people from stealing.
C'mon. Now you're being silly.
These guys were caught BECAUSE of Airport security. Indirectly. They were mixing liquids because if they had just gotten 10 sticks of dynamite they wouldn't have passed airport security. This catch was an example of how airport security worked perfectly. It caused the terrorists to alter their plans enough to get them caught.
You sit in the corner and think about an Israeli Airport without security and come out when you're ready to think logically.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
They hadn't even gotten the liquids. We don't even know what the liquids were.
I do know that some rather innocuous substances can be made explosive when mixed.
Remember Tim McVeigh and the fertilizer and motor oil?
Written by: NYC
These guys were caught BECAUSE of Airport security. Indirectly. They were mixing liquids because if they had just gotten 10 sticks of dynamite they wouldn't have passed airport security. This catch was an example of how airport security worked perfectly. It caused the terrorists to alter their plans enough to get them caught.
They hadn't even gotten the liquids. We don't even know what the liquids were.
I do know that some rather innocuous substances can be made explosive when mixed.
Remember Tim McVeigh and the fertilizer and motor oil?
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
BRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
Posted:
I thought (who was it? sorry... don't remember) had found out that you can buy books in duty free and take those. As for electronics, it was all fine without them before they came along, I really don't think they're necessary. Personally I tend to get annoyed at people next to me listening to music I don't like at a volume where I can still hear it even though they wear headphones...
All in all I don't think it's any worse than me having to give my fingerprints when wanting to go to a conference in the USA Though having to take proof that I actually need my medication is annoying me, but hey.
I thought (who was it? sorry... don't remember) had found out that you can buy books in duty free and take those. As for electronics, it was all fine without them before they came along, I really don't think they're necessary. Personally I tend to get annoyed at people next to me listening to music I don't like at a volume where I can still hear it even though they wear headphones...
All in all I don't think it's any worse than me having to give my fingerprints when wanting to go to a conference in the USA
Though having to take proof that I actually need my medication is annoying me, but hey. "vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
SILVER Member
member
50 posts
Location: USA
member
50 posts
Location: USA
Posted:
Personaly I'll take all of this in hindsight. Yes, it's now a bigger pain in the butt to fly, but if the millions of people that fly in the next year make it where there going safely then I'd say it's worth the added trouble.
Although I'll admit that I'm not too sure how much all these added checks have done. I've flown 4 times since 9/11 when everything has been "stepped up". All 4 times I've taken a homemade wooden knife with me (they said air marshals were on 4 out of 5 flights,I'm just paranoied enough to think I'd be on the plane without the marshal and with the bomber/hijacker) and everytime it was never even close to being found.
Personaly I'll take all of this in hindsight. Yes, it's now a bigger pain in the butt to fly, but if the millions of people that fly in the next year make it where there going safely then I'd say it's worth the added trouble.
Although I'll admit that I'm not too sure how much all these added checks have done. I've flown 4 times since 9/11 when everything has been "stepped up". All 4 times I've taken a homemade wooden knife with me (they said air marshals were on 4 out of 5 flights,I'm just paranoied enough to think I'd be on the plane without the marshal and with the bomber/hijacker) and everytime it was never even close to being found.
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
They caught me a few times with stuff I forgot to unpack from my carry on. One time one of my students was online behind me when I got caught with a knife.
I'm surpised that Mike is so anti-security. We can blow up half of Lebanon looking for terrorists as long as Mike doesn't have to wait a few extra minutes in a security line?
They caught me a few times with stuff I forgot to unpack from my carry on. One time one of my students was online behind me when I got caught with a knife.
I'm surpised that Mike is so anti-security. We can blow up half of Lebanon looking for terrorists as long as Mike doesn't have to wait a few extra minutes in a security line?
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
BRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
Posted:
I've flown a couple of days after 9/11. They said you could take no hand luggage, and to be there 3 hours before the flight. I was there 2.5 hours before the flight, and the airport wasn't open yet. Oh, and they did let everyone take the hand luggage in. The only thing was that people seemed to avoid standing too close to Arabs in the lines.
I've flown the day after the bombs in Madrid. Absolutely no extra-security that I could spot.
I've flown a few days after the bombs in London, again no extra security.
So maybe it's a good idea that they finally do what they've been saying all along.
I've flown a couple of days after 9/11. They said you could take no hand luggage, and to be there 3 hours before the flight. I was there 2.5 hours before the flight, and the airport wasn't open yet. Oh, and they did let everyone take the hand luggage in. The only thing was that people seemed to avoid standing too close to Arabs in the lines.
I've flown the day after the bombs in Madrid. Absolutely no extra-security that I could spot.
I've flown a few days after the bombs in London, again no extra security.
So maybe it's a good idea that they finally do what they've been saying all along.
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
BRONZE Member
and behold!
464 posts
Location: Liverpool, United Kingdom
and behold!
464 posts
Location: Liverpool, United Kingdom
Posted:
Yeah! Ban jelly bra and wonderbras! They lead to nothing be let down and disappoints!
Written by: stout
If they're going to disallow little tubes of lipgloss, then what about those jello filled bras? Or breast implants ? One could imagine using an insulin needle to transfer a liquid from boob L , to boob R, give it a good smack and Kaboom!!!!
Now might be a good time to thing about selling off those airline shares and investing in the counterterrorism industry
Yeah! Ban jelly bra and wonderbras! They lead to nothing be let down and disappoints!
Why let your body be a temple? When it can be a theme park?
Wii Console Number: 3294 0297 7824 7498
SILVER Member
addict
667 posts
Location: Cannock, staffordshire, United Kingdom
addict
667 posts
Location: Cannock, staffordshire, United Kingdom
Posted:
the tube stations had extreme security after london attacks
i couldnt get back home for a week after i was on way home on the day it happened and had got as far as milton keynes when the train was sent back again.
the tube stations had extreme security after london attacks
i couldnt get back home for a week after i was on way home on the day it happened and had got as far as milton keynes when the train was sent back again.
enticed, entrapped, entombed.
intoxicated, impaled, ingested.
bewitched, beaten, broken.
enter the love realm...
insert ur token
o jej, ale bym ci wylizal ten pepek
stepped up promotions
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
These, NYC, are apples.
Non-Https Image Link
This is an orange.
Non-Https Image Link
Written by: NYC
I'm surpised that Mike is so anti-security. We can blow up half of Lebanon looking for terrorists as long as Mike doesn't have to wait a few extra minutes in a security line?
These, NYC, are apples.
Non-Https Image Link
This is an orange.
Non-Https Image Link
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
In medicine we have a concept of "number needed to treat." That is the number of people with a condition that you need to treat to prevent a bad outcome.
In this case the NNT is on the order of millions. They're talking about making these restrictions permanent.
Think of what that would mean: I certainly am not ever going to go to England again if it means getting crammed on a plane for 8 hours with no book to read. No parent with small children would do this, either because you cannot possibly entertain a 4-year-old boy on a plane for several hours with...nothing. This would totally destroy the leisure air travel market in and out of England. Airlines rely on this market and so they would probably go out of business. Essentially, this would destroy mass air transport in rather short order. Only a few airlines that cater to only business passengers, like MaxJet, would remain.
And all because we're afraid.
Written by: Dedphrog
Personaly I'll take all of this in hindsight. Yes, it's now a bigger pain in the butt to fly, but if the millions of people that fly in the next year make it where there going safely then I'd say it's worth the added trouble.
In medicine we have a concept of "number needed to treat." That is the number of people with a condition that you need to treat to prevent a bad outcome.
In this case the NNT is on the order of millions. They're talking about making these restrictions permanent.
Think of what that would mean: I certainly am not ever going to go to England again if it means getting crammed on a plane for 8 hours with no book to read. No parent with small children would do this, either because you cannot possibly entertain a 4-year-old boy on a plane for several hours with...nothing. This would totally destroy the leisure air travel market in and out of England. Airlines rely on this market and so they would probably go out of business. Essentially, this would destroy mass air transport in rather short order. Only a few airlines that cater to only business passengers, like MaxJet, would remain.
And all because we're afraid.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
As a little side-thought, it occurs to me that that outcome would be really good from an environmental perspective.
Given that airplanes are so environmentally destructive and that the numbers using them is increasing, a decrease in how convenient they are, is, arguably, a good thing.
However, i'm not so sure that people will cut down on using them- like it or not, a high proportion of the population does seem to prefer super-strict precautions if they feel that it cuts the risk of airplane destruction.
Written by: Doc Lightning
In medicine we have a concept of "number needed to treat." That is the number of people with a condition that you need to treat to prevent a bad outcome.
In this case the NNT is on the order of millions. They're talking about making these restrictions permanent.
Think of what that would mean: I certainly am not ever going to go to England again if it means getting crammed on a plane for 8 hours with no book to read. No parent with small children would do this, either because you cannot possibly entertain a 4-year-old boy on a plane for several hours with...nothing. This would totally destroy the leisure air travel market in and out of England. Airlines rely on this market and so they would probably go out of business. Essentially, this would destroy mass air transport in rather short order. Only a few airlines that cater to only business passengers, like MaxJet, would remain.
And all because we're afraid.
As a little side-thought, it occurs to me that that outcome would be really good from an environmental perspective.
Given that airplanes are so environmentally destructive and that the numbers using them is increasing, a decrease in how convenient they are, is, arguably, a good thing.
However, i'm not so sure that people will cut down on using them- like it or not, a high proportion of the population does seem to prefer super-strict precautions if they feel that it cuts the risk of airplane destruction.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
Well, a 747-400 at a 70% load factor uses less fuel per passenger mile than a family sedan carrying two people, and given that the vast majority of cars carry only one passenger, I'd see cars gone long before I'd see aircraft gone.
The newer generation of aircraft will probably cut the fuel use per seat-mile by another 25%.
That is...IF there is a market with these restrictions.
The thing is that the majority of the populace are sheep. They'd give ANYTHING, and I mean ANYTHING to be safe. These safety precautions aren't based on safety. Example: Put your explosives in a medicine bottle and add some food dye, then say that this is your medication. It can have a prescription with your name on it and everything. That's not hard to forge at all.
So none of these new restrictions actually do anything to make us safer, but they make sheep with no critical thinking skills FEEL safer.
One day we'll have to realize that terrorism is here to stay until we develop a power source that isn't based on fossil fuels. As soon as we do that, we'll cut a huge amount of income to the mid-east.
Written by: onewheeldave
As a little side-thought, it occurs to me that that outcome would be really good from an environmental perspective.
Given that airplanes are so environmentally destructive and that the numbers using them is increasing, a decrease in how convenient they are, is, arguably, a good thing.
Well, a 747-400 at a 70% load factor uses less fuel per passenger mile than a family sedan carrying two people, and given that the vast majority of cars carry only one passenger, I'd see cars gone long before I'd see aircraft gone.
The newer generation of aircraft will probably cut the fuel use per seat-mile by another 25%.
That is...IF there is a market with these restrictions.
The thing is that the majority of the populace are sheep. They'd give ANYTHING, and I mean ANYTHING to be safe. These safety precautions aren't based on safety. Example: Put your explosives in a medicine bottle and add some food dye, then say that this is your medication. It can have a prescription with your name on it and everything. That's not hard to forge at all.
So none of these new restrictions actually do anything to make us safer, but they make sheep with no critical thinking skills FEEL safer.
One day we'll have to realize that terrorism is here to stay until we develop a power source that isn't based on fossil fuels. As soon as we do that, we'll cut a huge amount of income to the mid-east.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
Dreamer
4,308 posts
Location: York, England
4,308 posts
Location: York, England
Posted:
Yeah, forcing people to purchase things in duty-free isn't about safety, its about someone trying to make a quick buck. So now I can't bring my library books on the plane, and what if I wanted to study for an exam? Imagine all the people like me who can't stand the in-flight movies... and then the ones that can't sleep on airplanes. Those restrictions, not terror threats, would be what would make me not want to go to or thru the UK on a vacation(holiday). I don't have much choice when it comes to getting there for school(uni), boats take too long (and are prone to running into ice bergs
).
This is a huge knee-jerk reaction, and it sort of annoys me that its come so soon after america discovered, hey, maybe we can let people carry tweezers again. You can make some nunchucks out of two cans of soda and a scarf, or a shoelace (etc). There's a million places to get soda in the airport and the beverage cart has it as well. For that matter much footwear makes a good weapon, and is easier to hang onto and control than a book. Lets just take some more time with the xrays and searches they do before the gate, xray the footwear if you need to, and get on with our lives.
Whats even weirder about this is that British security on airplanes used to be very minimal (lets say, last year) and then suddenly everything has to be in a transparent bag, and not much of it?
And how are you supposed to travel on a long flight without contact lens solution anyway?
Yeah, forcing people to purchase things in duty-free isn't about safety, its about someone trying to make a quick buck. So now I can't bring my library books on the plane, and what if I wanted to study for an exam? Imagine all the people like me who can't stand the in-flight movies... and then the ones that can't sleep on airplanes. Those restrictions, not terror threats, would be what would make me not want to go to or thru the UK on a vacation(holiday). I don't have much choice when it comes to getting there for school(uni), boats take too long (and are prone to running into ice bergs
). This is a huge knee-jerk reaction, and it sort of annoys me that its come so soon after america discovered, hey, maybe we can let people carry tweezers again. You can make some nunchucks out of two cans of soda and a scarf, or a shoelace (etc). There's a million places to get soda in the airport and the beverage cart has it as well. For that matter much footwear makes a good weapon, and is easier to hang onto and control than a book. Lets just take some more time with the xrays and searches they do before the gate, xray the footwear if you need to, and get on with our lives.
Whats even weirder about this is that British security on airplanes used to be very minimal (lets say, last year) and then suddenly everything has to be in a transparent bag, and not much of it?
And how are you supposed to travel on a long flight without contact lens solution anyway?
Keep your dream alive
Dreamin is still how the strong survive
Shalom VeAhavah
New Hampshire has a point....
BRONZE Member
grumpy poorly froggy
3,999 posts
Location: Nuneaton, United Kingdom
grumpy poorly froggy
3,999 posts
Location: Nuneaton, United Kingdom
Posted:
IMO
I am sure that once they are sure they have stopped this attack things will go back to 'normal' again.
sorry folks but your all complaining about the restrictions that are being tempory put in place. yes they are a pain in the back side and very inconvinant, saftey precautions usualy are, and saftey precautions are needed in cases like this. or am i the only one who thinks so.I would much prefer them to be doing things this way rather than not being so strict, people dying and then people complaining that more saftey things should of been put into place.
sure it could of been better thought out but its not like they had much notice, and terror attacks are something pretty new in the system of things so of cause they are not going to be getting everything right. give them a break. be greatful that it wasn't the usual case of an attack happening, conspiricy theorys flying all over the place saying how they had a warning, they could of stopped it and then everyone going round saying how they should of done this and they should of done that. Don't get hung up about the conspiracy theorys of how there wasn't going to be an attack anyway. Its pointless.
again all IMO and not wanting to offend any of my friends who i do love to bits
IMO
I am sure that once they are sure they have stopped this attack things will go back to 'normal' again.
sorry folks but your all complaining about the restrictions that are being tempory put in place. yes they are a pain in the back side and very inconvinant, saftey precautions usualy are, and saftey precautions are needed in cases like this. or am i the only one who thinks so.I would much prefer them to be doing things this way rather than not being so strict, people dying and then people complaining that more saftey things should of been put into place.
sure it could of been better thought out but its not like they had much notice, and terror attacks are something pretty new in the system of things so of cause they are not going to be getting everything right. give them a break. be greatful that it wasn't the usual case of an attack happening, conspiricy theorys flying all over the place saying how they had a warning, they could of stopped it and then everyone going round saying how they should of done this and they should of done that. Don't get hung up about the conspiracy theorys of how there wasn't going to be an attack anyway. Its pointless.
again all IMO and not wanting to offend any of my friends who i do love to bits
Life's too short to worry about where you put your marshmallows
Carpal \'Tunnel
7,193 posts
Location: in the trees
7,193 posts
Location: in the trees
Posted:
Non-Https Image Link
LIQUID TERROR: Training People To Act Like Subservient Slaves
Terrorists planned to mix liquids so why are they all being poured into airport bins?
Steve Watson / Infowars.net | August 11 2006
The latest terror plot facade is nothing more than an exercise to assess how subservient the general population has become and a primer to making permanent the panicked and ridiculous freedom crushing security measures we are seeing being rushed into implementation at the moment.
Whilst the government is saying there is no going back on these measures and that they will become permanent, the media is bleating about rushing in biometric retina scanners and Orwellian behaviour sensing technology. This is the only way they can do these things without backlash and protest, just have a major terror alert and rush them through.
How is it that people can still deny that our governments are forwarding a big brother control agenda? ID cards, Biometric databases, retina scanners, face scanning cameras, behaviour sensing machines. The list goes on. It has been proven over and over that these measures will not help prevent terrorism, the government itself has even admitted this, so why do they relentlessly push them?
The latest mind bending terror stupidity has every passenger at airports pouring their potentially explosive liquids into bins inside the airports.
How stupid can things get? How far does it have to go before people start asking simple questions about what they are being made to do in the name of security?
Non-Https Image Link
If these liquids are potentially explosive what the hell is the good in pouring them all into large bins inside overcrowded airports and mixing them all together?
The Asheville Citizen Times interviewed a mother who was forced to pour away her baby's milk:
"I have mixed feelings about all this," Leoni said as she waited to board a flight for Miami at Asheville Regional Airport. "On the one side, Im fine with the safety measures and the effects, but on the other hand, I had to pour out my babys milk this morning. They said I couldn't take it on board."
Non-Https Image Link
And here she is pouring the potentially deadly milk into a vat of other potentially explosive dangerous liquids.
The official counterterrorism statement told us that the plan involved mixing a sports drink with a gel-like substance to concoct explosives that could be ignited with an MP3 player or cell phone. The sports drink could be combined with a peroxide-based paste to form a potent explosive cocktail, counterterrorism officials said.
If you believe the dodgy science that suggests that these liquids can be ignited by calling up your mom or whacking on a bit of Led Zeppelin on your MP3 player then they better clear the airports pretty smartish because those bins full liquids could go up any second. unless they are just bins full of baby milk and Dr Pepper that is.
The Scientific American states:
Furthermore, some chemicals can be mixed to create a toxic gas capable of killing people in an enclosed space such as an airplane.
Great, marvelous, lets get mixing them in bins then!
The XOPL blogger here is bang on the money and I couldn't put it any better:
Sir, I'm going to have to take this bottle of water away from you since it might be a liquid explosive, and I'm going to have to mix it with all of these other bottles of possibly liquid explosive, and I'm going to have to dump them all in this trash can... together. Nevermind that the plot specifically mentions mixing chemicals and/or nitroglycerin... which explodes if handled too roughly.
The only conclusion you can reach here is that airport security are not looking for terrorists because if they truly believed terrorists were attempting to board planes with liquids they wouldn't be mishandling the liquids in this way.
Non-Https Image Link
LIQUID TERROR: Training People To Act Like Subservient Slaves
Terrorists planned to mix liquids so why are they all being poured into airport bins?
Steve Watson / Infowars.net | August 11 2006
The latest terror plot facade is nothing more than an exercise to assess how subservient the general population has become and a primer to making permanent the panicked and ridiculous freedom crushing security measures we are seeing being rushed into implementation at the moment.
Whilst the government is saying there is no going back on these measures and that they will become permanent, the media is bleating about rushing in biometric retina scanners and Orwellian behaviour sensing technology. This is the only way they can do these things without backlash and protest, just have a major terror alert and rush them through.
How is it that people can still deny that our governments are forwarding a big brother control agenda? ID cards, Biometric databases, retina scanners, face scanning cameras, behaviour sensing machines. The list goes on. It has been proven over and over that these measures will not help prevent terrorism, the government itself has even admitted this, so why do they relentlessly push them?
The latest mind bending terror stupidity has every passenger at airports pouring their potentially explosive liquids into bins inside the airports.
How stupid can things get? How far does it have to go before people start asking simple questions about what they are being made to do in the name of security?
Non-Https Image Link
If these liquids are potentially explosive what the hell is the good in pouring them all into large bins inside overcrowded airports and mixing them all together?
The Asheville Citizen Times interviewed a mother who was forced to pour away her baby's milk:
"I have mixed feelings about all this," Leoni said as she waited to board a flight for Miami at Asheville Regional Airport. "On the one side, Im fine with the safety measures and the effects, but on the other hand, I had to pour out my babys milk this morning. They said I couldn't take it on board."
Non-Https Image Link
And here she is pouring the potentially deadly milk into a vat of other potentially explosive dangerous liquids.
The official counterterrorism statement told us that the plan involved mixing a sports drink with a gel-like substance to concoct explosives that could be ignited with an MP3 player or cell phone. The sports drink could be combined with a peroxide-based paste to form a potent explosive cocktail, counterterrorism officials said.
If you believe the dodgy science that suggests that these liquids can be ignited by calling up your mom or whacking on a bit of Led Zeppelin on your MP3 player then they better clear the airports pretty smartish because those bins full liquids could go up any second. unless they are just bins full of baby milk and Dr Pepper that is.
The Scientific American states:
Furthermore, some chemicals can be mixed to create a toxic gas capable of killing people in an enclosed space such as an airplane.
Great, marvelous, lets get mixing them in bins then!
The XOPL blogger here is bang on the money and I couldn't put it any better:
Sir, I'm going to have to take this bottle of water away from you since it might be a liquid explosive, and I'm going to have to mix it with all of these other bottles of possibly liquid explosive, and I'm going to have to dump them all in this trash can... together. Nevermind that the plot specifically mentions mixing chemicals and/or nitroglycerin... which explodes if handled too roughly.
The only conclusion you can reach here is that airport security are not looking for terrorists because if they truly believed terrorists were attempting to board planes with liquids they wouldn't be mishandling the liquids in this way.
SILVER Member
coming to a country near you
4,696 posts
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear, Australia
coming to a country near you
4,696 posts
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear, Australia
Posted:
oh wait, this is serious. s**t.
oh wait, this is serious. s**t. "but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"
jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
Then again, the idea is that two (or more) specific liquids are mixed, in very specific quantities, placed, in a very specific part of an airplane (ie in a location where explosion will bring down the plane) and triggered.
Thus a relatively small quantity (necessarily small to aid with getting on the plane without attracting attention) causes maximum casualities (a plane full).
Dumping the liquids in bins is not an ideal method of disposal (as we'd expect, due to the short notice that precautions had to be put in place), but, realistically, any explosions due to the mixtures is definitly not going to approach anywhere near that of a plane going down.
In fact, any explosion is likely to be very minor, harming at most, a few people.
Additionally, given the need for specific quantities and ideal mixing conditions, the fact that the bins are also full of a lot of genuine baby milk, shampoo etc; means an actual explosion is highly unlikely.
The asking of simple questions needs to be done by those on both sides of the argument
Then again, the idea is that two (or more) specific liquids are mixed, in very specific quantities, placed, in a very specific part of an airplane (ie in a location where explosion will bring down the plane) and triggered.
Thus a relatively small quantity (necessarily small to aid with getting on the plane without attracting attention) causes maximum casualities (a plane full).
Dumping the liquids in bins is not an ideal method of disposal (as we'd expect, due to the short notice that precautions had to be put in place), but, realistically, any explosions due to the mixtures is definitly not going to approach anywhere near that of a plane going down.
In fact, any explosion is likely to be very minor, harming at most, a few people.
Additionally, given the need for specific quantities and ideal mixing conditions, the fact that the bins are also full of a lot of genuine baby milk, shampoo etc; means an actual explosion is highly unlikely.
Written by: ravehead
How far does it have to go before people start asking simple questions about what they are being made to do in the name of security?
The asking of simple questions needs to be done by those on both sides of the argument
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
SILVER Member
member
175 posts
Location: Falmouth, Cornwall, England (UK)
member
175 posts
Location: Falmouth, Cornwall, England (UK)
Posted:
I don't like where everythings moving
I don't like where everythings moving
SILVER Member
addict
667 posts
Location: Cannock, staffordshire, United Kingdom
addict
667 posts
Location: Cannock, staffordshire, United Kingdom
Posted:
well i hope the planes are supplying formular milk on the planes pre misk cartons as they cant take babys milk away from them. especially bbies that are going to need to be fed with milk!!!
surely they have scientific methods to check liquids for anything potentially harmful such as dip sticks???
if they can check for drugs jus by a dip stick on someones palm of there hand surely they can figure out whats harmful and whats genuine or what is the mother gona do let her baby drink the milk and the baby then explodes!!!
well i hope the planes are supplying formular milk on the planes pre misk cartons as they cant take babys milk away from them. especially bbies that are going to need to be fed with milk!!!
surely they have scientific methods to check liquids for anything potentially harmful such as dip sticks???
if they can check for drugs jus by a dip stick on someones palm of there hand surely they can figure out whats harmful and whats genuine or what is the mother gona do let her baby drink the milk and the baby then explodes!!!
enticed, entrapped, entombed.
intoxicated, impaled, ingested.
bewitched, beaten, broken.
enter the love realm...
insert ur token
o jej, ale bym ci wylizal ten pepek
stepped up promotions
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
THANK YOU Dave.
So utterly obvious to the rest of us.
[I mean, they let the Employees at KMart use box cutters, who's to say they won't Hijack KMart and fly it into the Whitehouse? )
Written by: onewheeldave
Then again, the idea is that two (or more) specific liquids are mixed, in very specific quantities, placed, in a very specific part of an airplane (ie in a location where explosion will bring down the plane) and triggered.
Thus a relatively small quantity (necessarily small to aid with getting on the plane without attracting attention) causes maximum casualities (a plane full).
Dumping the liquids in bins is not an ideal method of disposal (as we'd expect, due to the short notice that precautions had to be put in place), but, realistically, any explosions due to the mixtures is definitly not going to approach anywhere near that of a plane going down.
In fact, any explosion is likely to be very minor, harming at most, a few people.
Additionally, given the need for specific quantities and ideal mixing conditions, the fact that the bins are also full of a lot of genuine baby milk, shampoo etc; means an actual explosion is highly unlikely.
THANK YOU Dave.
So utterly obvious to the rest of us.
[I mean, they let the Employees at KMart use box cutters, who's to say they won't Hijack KMart and fly it into the Whitehouse?
) Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
BRONZE Member
grumpy poorly froggy
3,999 posts
Location: Nuneaton, United Kingdom
grumpy poorly froggy
3,999 posts
Location: Nuneaton, United Kingdom
Posted:
i thought they were letting baby milk on as long as the parents taste it/ has been tested. well in the UK anyway
i thought they were letting baby milk on as long as the parents taste it/ has been tested. well in the UK anyway
Life's too short to worry about where you put your marshmallows
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
WHAT two liquids? what do they look like? Clearly if the terrorists know, it's not dangerous to tell the public.
Written by: onewheeldave
Then again, the idea is that two (or more) specific liquids are mixed, in very specific quantities, placed, in a very specific part of an airplane (ie in a location where explosion will bring down the plane) and triggered.
WHAT two liquids? what do they look like? Clearly if the terrorists know, it's not dangerous to tell the public.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
I tend to agree with the article, well not in such a conspiracy theorist way, but even after 9/11, the restrictions weren't THIS bad.
My argument is that this is a knee-jerk reaction. That banning paperback books and lipstick isn't doing anything --not jack squat-- to make people safer.
All I'm saying is that people need to THINK about HOW these measures make people safer before they go "Oh, if it'll make me safer then I'm all for it!"
Now, explain to me, someone how a paperback book is dangerous when a passport isn't.
The next step for the terrorists is to sew strips of explosive into their clothes, or perhaps even to implant bombs in their bodies.
The emphasis is mine, and both illustrate points I've been trying to make. We've gone from relatively free societies to having random bag checks on the subway, detainment without charge or trial, and torturing of prisoners.
Every time one of these things happen they slowly chip away at our rights just a little more. In 50 years at this rate, our societies will resemble no police state to date; they'll be far more draconian. And the terrorists will still be able to figure ways around it.
I tend to agree with the article, well not in such a conspiracy theorist way, but even after 9/11, the restrictions weren't THIS bad.
My argument is that this is a knee-jerk reaction. That banning paperback books and lipstick isn't doing anything --not jack squat-- to make people safer.
All I'm saying is that people need to THINK about HOW these measures make people safer before they go "Oh, if it'll make me safer then I'm all for it!"
Now, explain to me, someone how a paperback book is dangerous when a passport isn't.
The next step for the terrorists is to sew strips of explosive into their clothes, or perhaps even to implant bombs in their bodies.
Written by: NY Times
News of the latest plot on Thursday set off a huge security clamp-down at British airports - particularly at Heathrow in London, Europe's busiest - that resulted in equally huge delays and cancellations in flight schedules. Two airlines, British Airways and Ryanair, warned Saturday that unless security procedures were accelerated, airports would no longer be able to cope with the hundreds of thousands of passengers trying to fly out of Britain every day.
Mr. Reid hinted the security clamp-down may be eased, saying it was "time limited." But he did not say when.
He also said the latest plot provided fresh evidence to support police demands for counterterrorism laws to be amended to permit detention of people without trial or charge for 90 days. The current limit is 28 days.
While the government insists that the latest plot was real, many of its critics today started to question publicly the veracity of the government's depiction of it, citing previous occasions - including an intelligence dossier used to justify the invasion of Iraq 2003 - when official assertions of a threat proved wrong.
Mr. Blair is on vacation in the Caribbean. His absence has been criticized by adversaries who contend that if the plot was as serious as Mr. Reid and others maintain, he should return home.
The emphasis is mine, and both illustrate points I've been trying to make. We've gone from relatively free societies to having random bag checks on the subway, detainment without charge or trial, and torturing of prisoners.
Every time one of these things happen they slowly chip away at our rights just a little more. In 50 years at this rate, our societies will resemble no police state to date; they'll be far more draconian. And the terrorists will still be able to figure ways around it.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
Good points there Doc, all the hype and paranoia in the world isn't going to stop terrorism. If I can figure out how to smuggle liquids onto a plane by reading a Victoria's Secret catalogue, who's to say terrorists can't too.
This is a lot more than an issue of mere inconvinenece, as was previously suggested. The police state gets just that much closer with every incident.
Good points there Doc, all the hype and paranoia in the world isn't going to stop terrorism. If I can figure out how to smuggle liquids onto a plane by reading a Victoria's Secret catalogue, who's to say terrorists can't too.
This is a lot more than an issue of mere inconvinenece, as was previously suggested. The police state gets just that much closer with every incident.
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [airport security tighten * 08 06] we found the following existing topics.
- Forums > Airport Security Tightens, UK 10/08/06 [205 replies]
Show more..
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com