Tuesday, August 15, 2006


[+/-] show/hide text
Maybe I'm missing something but I'm not quite getting this ban on airline passengers carrying liquids into airports. I mean, people smuggle illegal substances on to airplanes all the time, and it's not in their baggage. What security measures do we have against terrorists sneaking explosives in their gullets? Anyone scanning for breast implants loaded with nitro instead of saline?

I know what you're thinking: Who the hell would put explosives in their bodies? Suicide bombers, that's who! Are these ideas crazy? So what? Since when are suicidal terrorists sane?

Yes, the new security certainly inconveniences them, but I never heard anyone trumpet "We must inconvenience terror." Must be a dozen ways around this liquid ban, though I can only name three. How many can you think of?

Inconvenience Terror


3 Comments:

  1. They could also just buy their own 747 and crash it into a building. But it's alot more difficult.

    Personally, I'm not so sure they're going to be able to take down a plane this way anyhow. It takes a pretty big explosion to bring down a plane from the inside.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8/16/2006 03:12:00 AM
     

  2. Josh, you're presenting some straightforward logic, but I'm saying that's an incomplete method for dealing with people who are already thinking beyond what is logical. This liquid ban is like adding another lock to the front door while leaving the kitchen door unlocked. People don't buy 747s every day, but illegal substances regularly get smuggled in digestive tracts. At best, this ban is an inconvenience to terrorists. At worst, it forces them to smuggle explosives in a way that we regularly fail to detect.

    As far as the explosive power needed, that's another example of straightforward logic: big plane requires a big explosion. Actually, it only takes two small ones: one for the cockpit door and another for the cockpit. Plane goes down pretty easily if there's no way or no one to control it.

    This ban is a good show of security and, again, I'm sure it's an inconvenience in terror plots, but IMO it's more spectacle than anything else.

    By Blogger Sumocat, at 8/16/2006 12:55:00 PM
     

  3. Still waiting for the infamous Pantaloon Bomber :P

    Timbo

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8/16/2006 06:40:00 PM
     

Post a Comment

<< Home




Archive

  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • October 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • April 2013
  • January 2013
  • August 2012
  • June 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • December 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005