Slashdot Mirror
TSA Bans Toner and Ink Cartridges On Planes
Grond writes "The US has banned toner and ink cartridges from passenger aircraft in the wake of last month's bomb plot. 'The printer cartridge ban affects cartridges over 16 ounces.' No word yet on whether that's a weight or volume measurement or whether it's a per-cartridge or per-passenger limit."
The ban comes alongside a prohibition on air cargo originating from Yemen and Somalia. Bruce Schneier's blog points out another potential consequence from the recent bomb plot: the end of in-flight Wi-Fi.
Nice. Its disturbing to see that the TSA is still behind the curve. Honestly, I am surprised that TSA did not ban underpants after the last idiot that tried to smuggle a bomb in his shorts and if they ban Wi-Fi., that is the only thing that makes cross country flights tolerable these days, especially in coach.
What is it going to take for us to realize that the TSA is simply not effective? All this reactionary effort is not helping us to be competitive in the business space and the costs are not insubstantial. My last flight on Thursday to San Jose got me a grope by the TSA agents who now apparently are permitted to do full on frisk-downs. What's next, squat and cough?
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
/popcorn
If it makes you feel better, you can keep playing this game. Or, alternatively, you could just man-up and accept that there will be some risks if you don't live in a shell and let yourself be terrorized.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Oh good! I was wondering when the season premier for Homeland Security Theater was going to be broadcast. This is yet!
In this episode, the knee-jerk reaction is to ban toner and ink cartridges, because like bottled water and cola, some Macgyver type will be able to whip together a fusion bomb in those few hours of flying, without anyone noticing!
Yet another ban for show rather than actual security. How about, gee, I dunno, profiling passengers? You know, be politically incorrect and actually practice forensic science for a change, and stop harassing and inconveniencing the rest of us?
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
From all those novelty travel-sized toner cartridges they are going to start selling at the airport.
The terrorists really did win...
I don't think these guys would be happy with their promotion being messed up.
I fly all over the country bringing toner cartridges and Ink refills to needy executives all over the world...
See terrorists... you make baby Muhammed Cry!
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
So, if you want a pint of water it has to go into a toner cartridge, do I understand this correctly?
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
Clearly the answer is to ban the thing the bomb came in and search those things because we all know that everything is going to be the exact same and its going to make us be safer! Whats next? Someone tries to put some explosives in gum therefore we ban gum while ignoring everything else?
Its becoming increasingly obvious that the TSA is designed to cripple airlines, make comfortable travel nearly impossible, violate privacy all the while doing nothing to stop a real terrorist plot.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
1. Google Sponsoring In-Flight WiFi This Holiday Season. Easy to offer something that's getting banned. Next: free bottles of water from the fountain of youth (in convenient 3oz sizes)?
2. Pilots protest of TSA's pat-down rules. But only as concerns pilots. Everyone else should still be treated like cattle.
How long before everyone is required to fly stark naked and without luggage on passenger planes? I know I have nothing to hide, do you?
The official announcement is still light on details, but the ban will apply to both carry-on and checked luggage and will affect "domestic and international flights in-bound to the United States." Apparently ink and toner will still be allowed on flights out-bound from the United States.
The distinction between domestic flights and out-bound international flights makes no sense to me. If someone can target a domestic flight by assembling the toner-bomb in the US, why couldn't the same person target an international flight out-bound from the US?
Furthermore, is there any evidence that a toner cartridge and printer were selected for any particular reason? Is there any reason toner cartridges make for a particularly attractive bomb container? If not, this seems worse than useless, since an attacker would simply select a different container while the screeners are busy looking for toner cartridges.
Good thing nobody would put a bomb on a cargo flight...
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Is there something specific to printer cartridges that make it easier to hide bombs in them than any other object of approximately the same size? Or is this just another mindless reaction?
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
I can't wait until they ban passengers!
Thank god I have my portable dot matrix printer thats almost bigger then the damn plane....
The terrorists keep winning. I'm pretty sure we've done just about all we can do to protect ourselves without severely impeding our basic rights. Locking the cockpit with a bullet-resistant door and only allowing passengers to the gate (after screening) ensures we'll never have a 9/11-type attack again. Everything else is just really making flying annoying and more and more cost/time prohibitive. Basically, they keep winning despite not killing anyone.
Install plug-in ethernet ports (alongside laptop power outlets).
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
I thought the bombs were on cargo/commercial (FedEx or UPS) planes, not passenger aircraft. If so, why are we (again) punishing the passengers for no apparent reason? Haven't we annoyed and inconvenienced the flying public enough already?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
I'm far more concerned about TSA's new pat-down procedure than I am about not being allowed to bring toner with me on a plane. Not that the ink/toner cartridge ban makes much sense, but how often do you bring printer supplies with you on a plane?
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
Only synthetics should be allowed on flight. That's easier to scan anyway and will drive the cost down.
Oops, I think I played too much Mass Effect.
Take your shoes off, let them strip search your wife, let them fondle your children. As if any of this is really about your safety.
Yawn, this is so not surprising. TSA's entire security theater policy can be summed as 'close the barn door after the cows got out.' A well funded, basically useless, organization, whose role is to annoy travelers.. On a recent trip I forgot to take my toiletries bag out of my carryon luggage on the way out and wasn't challenged. On the way back I took it out and lost my shampoo bottle since it was 4oz (limit is 3) though it had barely a dab of shampoo left in it. Sheesh. Venting is such fun, sigh.
As someone who has worked in the world's busiest airport during the world's busiest travel times over the past 5 years, every time I see the TSA ban stuff like this or add a new level of security it just makes me shake my head. You know the old saying about locking the barn door after the horse escapes? That doesn't fully capture it. This is more like locking the barn door after the horse escapes through the giant fucking hole in the middle of the barn wall. It does nothing to help what already happened and isn't going to solve the original problem at all.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Let's just cut to the chase and ban people from airplanes. Every single terrorist plot involving hijacking or detonating an explosive aboard an airplane involved at least one person. By completely banning people from flights, it will make air travel completely safe. This has the added benefit of allowing the TSA enough time to give everyone a full-cavity search since they no longer have to worry about being able to depart on time. After all, you never know where those terrorists might hide their explosives. Of course to do all of this in a timely manner, we'll need to double the number of TSA security personnel, but it's probably worth the extra hundred dollars just to know that the flight you can't take is completely safe from terrorists. Can't put a price on piece of mind after all.
like the airplane engineers have never heard of a faraday cage for the cockpit
If you think all of the important electronics are located in the cockpit, you clearly have never seen an airplane before.
What I don't understand about the screaming to ban deadly packages flying by air mail is that for literally 100 YEARS letter bombs have been on the scene. I myself was in Washington DC in about 1975 when a letter bomb posted by the IRA was delivered to the British Embassy. It blew the hand off a secretary who opened it up. Yes, there was an investigation, the police were called, the IRA condemned etc. etc. but nobody suggested banning packages in the mail or removing the rights of anyone who went into a post office. Heck, these devices from Yemen didn't even explode and we're falling apart with fear!
What the hell is going on? Why has the US become a nation of panty-wetting idiots?
"And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
What? What?! Really? Again? Someone tried something, so NOW we will make it illegal. Yes, that makes so much sense. So by this logic, if someone tries to smuggle a bomb on themselves, the TSA will then begin banning passengers. You know, because someone may try again ! I'm not saying these is an easy solution to this, but really the solution is not banning random items that have been used in the past. How about spending money on good training and good employees? How about having a dozen lines for screening so that there's less need for urgency because there are plenty of screeners who can take their time to be effective?
I will shred my adversaries. Pull their eyes out just enough to turn them towards their mewing, mutilated faces. Illyria
We need new technology that could take a person anywhere in the world without having to spend 2 hours in the airport waiting to get onboard.
With the help of TSA and terrorists, this could well be achieved in our current generation, because airflight will soon be too inconvenient, if not cost prohibitive, to be economically viable.
We need to step ahead of the terrorists and eliminate the threat model entirely.
For the cost of 16 ounces I could probably charter my own BBJ.
how they did it. I work with diesel fuel systems. If I need to send a failed fuel pump back to the factory in Germany, it has to go by boat. The tiny amount of fuel still left in the pump after it is cleaned will get detected, and I will get a friendly visit from law enforcement if I try to send it by plane.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
So what if they don't offer in-flight wi-fi service. My laptop and bomb can always form an ad-hoc network. Guess they'll just have to ban laptops (or bombs).
It's a good thing they did not hide the bomb in coffee.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
This is profiling. They're picking on people who, for whatever reason, need or want to carry toner/water/shoes or whatever on a flight. Changing the parameters of the profiling to skin colour or some such so that you, personally, aren't inconvenienced would not make it better.
... if I fly, I can't take my printer with me *AT ALL* because the cartridges aren't even allowed to be in the checked in luggage?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Bet those would really be a hit at the office xmas party! Fool your friends!
"DUUUUDE, I was photocopying my ass and ran out of toner, I totally thought that was an awesome real toner cart, then it BLEW UP!!@! This the best xmas party EVAR!!Q! Shit I'm drunk..."
This is the NSA, we're gonna geet U h@x0r5! Also, what is a h@x0r5?
So is this a ban on the cargo hold carrying Cartridges? If so, I can't imagine a HP or Xerox repair guy carrying cartridges to do an emergency service someplace. Let's see Shoes, now we have to X-Ray the Shoes, Underwear, now we have backscatter devices... Printer Cartridges, humm, I guess will just ban those and force everyone to use pencils? Wait, Pencils can be used to poke people's eye's out, so we'll have to ban those.. Wait, paper too can deliver a nasty cut, that's as dangerous as a knife! Let's ban that too!
This does however highlight the problem with the TSA not even looking at cargo carried on aircraft. Forget the UPS, Fed-Ex and DHL crowd, we're talking air cargo services offered by the carriers. Why is it that the TSA never scans that stuff or even looks at it?
Once again, our security is in the hands of a bunch of people who couldn't make it as McDonalds entry-level employees...
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Because people are fundamentally unforgivable cowards, and much worse, so goddamned gullible that they actually believe the government can keep them safe in the absolute or near-absolute sense of the word. We in the West all talk the Big Talk about how liberty is worth the risks (and indeed, even at this time of year in many places recount how hundreds of thousands of soldiers went off to fight a couple of world wars to stop totalitarian regimes from making us all Very Safe), but no one really means it.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
The article states that only cartriges 16 onces and above are banned. Most cartridges are closer to 8 ounces (Epson 98XX 78XX) of toner and I am not aware of any that you would be traveling with that would be 16 ounces.
Seems like a non issue to me.
out of the millions of objects and packages people make and use, printer cartidges are the only ones of the right shape and size to hold explosives.
As long as we have Captain Hindsight around we will always be safe!!!!
Well, at least to the credit of those trying to protect air travel - It takes a lot less effort to severely damage an airplane at altitude (thanks to the stresses of a pressurized cabin) to the point where it will not fly than it does to damage a ship or train to the point where it causes massive loss of life. (Although due to derailment, a train is probably easier.)
So a small bomb can take down a plane, but can't necessarily take out a ship or train, especially if in a cargo area.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
I think they should skip all the in-between steps and do a proper analysis.
Muslim extremists are willing to give their lives because of the 72 virgins thing. They wear extra pairs of trousers / underpants to protect their genitals. So, the only sure solution is to require all male passengers to be eunuchs. Knowing you have no equipment is the only way the TSA can be sure you aren't going to kill yourself to get laid.
Unfortunately, this would cause a problem for the "feeling resistance" alternative to backscatter.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Does this mean I shouldn't buy ink cartridges because it might be a bomb? Whose checking those ink cartridges at Best Buy to make sure it doesn't blow up a store full of people? Are Office Depot inspecting ink cartridges before delivering them to government entities?
Seriously....blowing up a plane is a blip on the radar. If 9-11 can't be replicated, meaning they can't take over the plane and fly it into something or cause it to detonate and crash into a target......then I think you've done your job as well as can be expected and at some point in time another incident will occur. If the precautions were taken to prevent plane takeover and targeting, then it's about equivalent to a catastrophic plane malfunction. People seem to be OK with with their chances flying in a plane that could fall out of the sky on a catastrophic failure, so I think they need to come to terms with there being a chance the plane might explode.....due to a bomb or...a fuel leak......or hitting another plane....or whatever.
The rest of this crap is just job security and budget inflation for TSA. Someone with ties to TSA is making a shitload of money on all the tech whether it helps or not. And making money on the "travel friendly bags" and other things the TSA has implemented. The TSA will of course not be held accountable if any of the measures they've inflicted fail to prevent terrorist attacks, it will just be an example as to why they need MORE budget and MORE expensive tech and MORE specifications for bags/clothing/shoes/wallets/belts/glasses/underwear/etc.
Why has the US become a nation of panty-wetting idiots?
People are making a lot of money off the fear industry. Chertoff, the former head of Homland Security, is a consultant for one or more of the companies that make the bomb detection and body scanning equipment that the TSA is mandating be used
Can we please have the terrorists try laptops next. There have even been instances of spontaneous laptop suicide yet they are still allowed on planes.
If we can separate people form their cherished toys perhaps we can convince people of how stupid the whole security theatre thing is.
User Friendly has the answer.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
This week it is toners, last week it was underwear, before that it was shoes and liguid bottles
If I were to place a bet, I would guess the next one would be iPhones or the even more ubiquitous iPods.
Reply to That ||
Terrorist: "Well, I had this fancy bomb all put together and I was ready to blow myself and 200 other people out of the sky, but then the damned TSA went and made it illegal to do that. Since I have an instinctive need to obey the laws of the infidels, I suppose my plan is right out the window. Oh well. I guess I'll just walk down to the donut shop and gorge myself. Maybe I'll take up farming. Fava beans, anyone?"
You can't take a screwdriver on board as it could be used for stabbing.
So how about a "normal" pen?
Privacy is terrorism.
Just ban everything. It's pointless not to at this point. Anything and everything can be used as a weapon, so why not? Just strip away all of our privacy and rights to 'keep away' those evil 'terrorists'!
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Please come eight hours early to lounge in the evacuation suite while served ex-lax brownies. Failure to evacuate is grounds for being barred from the flight.
Sadly, TelavianX, the answer is a resounding "NO" and cannot be yelled loudly enough at our stupid elected officials, who seem to think everything's roses (or at the ass clowns that elected them, me included).
I'd expat right the fuck now if I could.
Ocean is land, covered with water.
I'm surprised that they haven't done this yet. All they're proving is that terrorism works. It makes life hell for the entire country. Mission accomplished!
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Obviously, these toner cartridges were packed in some sort of suitcase. Imagine that, a closed case on a plane that a terrorist could use to put any kind of horrible device. The only logical reaction is to ban all suitcases. This should also apply to duffle bags, backpacks and other forms of closed containers. Travellers will be encouraged to carry their clothes in big piles to the check in area where they will be looked through (and any funny underwear will be lifted up high for everyone to laugh at). Then, the whole pile will be shovelled onto the airplane. Luggage pickup areas will now have a dump truck back up to them and dump the cargo bin's contents onto the ground for traveller's to fight through. Make sure you write your name and address in big letters all over every piece of clothing in permanent ink. And remember, it might be a minor inconvinience but this and other measures like the upcoming "automatic strip searching for hot passengers" rule help keep the skies safe from terrorists.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Some day some terrorist is going to try to smuggle a bomb in a dildo, and the TSA will respond by declaring that all dildos are banned from air travel and are to be confiscated at the gate by security officers.
...are you really happy with the way that President Obama is handling this issue? His Administration hasn't done jack-shit to halt the growth of the security theater industry.
As a leftie, I have to say that I am dismayed at the rapid disintegration of our individual liberties and freedoms since President Obama came to office, and at the utter lack of discipline of the rest of the party, causing the recent realignment of the House.
The checks seem to keep getting written to the TSA and the companies that supply them with their toys (Smiths, etc.) and there is no end in sight. The Democrats have not made any positive moves in this regard, and seem to rank individual liberties (such as being able to carry my fucking Starbucks through security) below pandering to the fear filled right and left. It all sucks.
The reality, as it has already been stated above, is that passengers now know that their own security is in their hands, and given the proclivity of the average American to "throw down" for very little reason, I feel pretty damn safe on an aircraft, and not an iota of that feeling comes from the TSA.
Ocean is land, covered with water.
Why has the US become a nation of panty-wetting idiots?
Yes. It's a consequence of the way we've been brought up, protected from everything bad and even bad thoughts, so once something does actually enter our consciousness it consumes everything. Like someone who's lived in a bubble away from all germs all of a sudden meeting the common cold.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
... we all know just how important Yemen is as a supplier to the global toner cartridge market.
Have gnu, will travel.
This is so stupid.
More security theatre. I think the real terrorists work in DC.
Next thing you know some t'rrrrrist decides to knit his bombe-de-jour from guncotton [1], TSA gets wind of it and *boom* - no not that bomb, that would never work - there go your clothes when you want to fly. Only TSA-approved one-time-use Tyvex straightjackets from now on.
[1] guncotton is possibly better known as nitrocellulose and has been used as eg. smokeless powder in ammunitions.
--frank[at]unternet.org
Lets see them ban all shoes from China. Maybe cell phones from Japan too.
Soon we'll see headlines, TSA Bans All Passengers From Flying.
Isn't toner/ink some sort of - LIQUID?! It's common knowledge that liquids are very dangerous! If we let any liquid on a plane the terrorists win!!!
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
I was going to have a few drinks and go throught the TSA lines a few times. The only problem is the airport has a no smoking policy. I would need a cigarette after the frisking. :)
Obviously, the answer is to force everyone to vomit before boarding a plane.
Cavity searches wooo! (not)
Jesus!!! TSA is so knee-jerk (or just jerks but that's a different rant). Every time a bomber uses something they either ban it or you have to remove it (shoes). I hope they never add the explosives to the fabric of underwear. That's going to be fun.
The best explanation of this I've ever heard was the one given in an older Mythbusters episode.
Basically, there's no way that the FAA could fully test each mobile device in every possible operating mode with every possible configuration of flight electronics under every conceivable condition. The technology changes so quickly that even if all current cell phone tech is safe, there is no way to know if some near future piece of gear might interfere.
So they play the safe route. No unnecessary wireless transmissions or EM interference around the flight electronics. I'm not an engineer, but the cost/benefit ratio on this seems favorable to me.
Owing to the fact that it's impossible to test all combinations of devices and planes, under all circumstances and actually know what might/could happen -- they've chosen to ban the whole thing.
Why would they need to? Surely interference at mobile phone frequencies is interference whether it's an iPhone, an ancient 3310, or just a noise generator operating at those frequencies.
What could/might happen? People forget to turn their equipment off all the time. It hasn't happened yet.
This ban on electronics while in-flight is bullshit. I've "forgotten" to turn off my cell phone, and numerous other electronics and nothing has happened.
Yeah. If somebody's iPod can bring down an airliner, I don't think I want to be on it anyways.
Godaddy is a scam and a ripoff.
To be fair, Al-Qaeda are even crazier than the Irish. And they are trying to blow us up, not just the British.
... and with plane services so terrible, the USA might finally get a decent intercity and interstate passenger train network!
http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2010/05/17/concern.pdf
I am not going to go through one of those machines.
VERY scary stuff here.....
Ian Ameline
Some of these planes (eg 747s) have been in service since before cell phones existed.
So what? A cell phone is nothing more than a fancy radio transmitter. Radio transmitters have been around longer than airplanes. You really don't think the designers of the 747 took RF emissions into account when they designed the thing?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Thank you for an awesome sig.
That a pilot who is sympathetic to the cause, couldn't bring weapons through security and pass them off to his co-conspirators so that they could use said weapons on a different plane. It's just unthinkable, and you're a super-genius.
Not cunnilingus, you insensitive clod!
I agree with most of your sentiment, but let's not forget that these bombs were defused minutes before going off, only thanks to a tip-off by a repentant Al-Qaida operative. And each of these devices had enough explosive to significantly damage the fuselage of the aircraft. This one was a close, scary shave.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
It has nothing to do with the planes. If it did, they would be dropping out the sky like flies. The reason is it wreaks havoc on the cells on the ground - handing over from cell to cell incurs an overhead and several hundred phones hitting a new cell every ten seconds causes the networks serious problems.
[FUCK BETA]
Remember before the TSA was created, when airline security was required to be provided by the airlines themselves, and was therefore a cost center?
I used to work in that job in those good old days. 30 minutes' training and out to the X-ray machines you go, earning a little more than minimum wage.
Edith Keeler Must Die
In other news, the TSA has banned the presence of all humans from airplanes.
"Them buggers are just too damn unpredictable for us to worry about the threat anymore. This move should make flights MUCH safer!" quotes a source at the TSA who commented on condition of anonymity.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I worked at and voluntary left the TSA I can say: the TSA has a boner for toner.
6.8SPC TR of 550, l xwind at 6, drift rt at 26" drops 77". AT has 503 ft-lbs at 1403 fps. FT 0.86
The airlines lose money with every new silly TSA regulation because it makes it more and more unpleasant to fly. Because of this, airlines have to cut costs to remain profitable which results in worse service which results in less people wanting to fly then the TSA comes up with a silly new regulation which makes it even more unpleasant to fly, and it goes on and on.
Don't they teach Economy where you live? In a capitalist system, airlines (and all companies) will cut costs always; let it be to avoid losses or to get yet more profits. The only limit they have is that they can't cut costs so much that they can no longer offer a commercial product (they have to buy fuel for the aircrafts if they want me to buy their tickets). If increasing costs (due to security concerns, or whatever) make it impossible to offer the product at rates that the public can afford, then they simply stop producing that (and do something else or disolve or go bankrupt).
As a reductio ad absurdo exercise, let me ask you: do you think that if tomorrow one company has some of their costs go down (for example, fuel gets a 99% discount) they would stop cutting costs? Giving raises to employees? Lowering their tickets rates to "compensate" the customers for this change? Not a chance in hell.
The lesson is finished, just let me one opinion more: before posting a sign like yours, maybe you should know a little more how the world works so you know what are you talking about...
Why can't
...some explosives inside an annoying crying baby, then they'd ban them.
The others are just brainwashed fanatics and will include the occasional non-idiot.
Note the incompetence of the shoe and underwear bombers as well as that moron from Seattle who was caught in Afghanistan.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
In order to reduce terrorism on airline flights the only measure necessary is securing the cockpit. Without access to the cockpit the potential to hijack a giant missile is gone and you just have a few hundred people gathered in one place, something you can find in any other city. Any thing else is just for show.
dust mites designed to eat through doors to the pilots cabin?
Dust mites? Couldn't someone just use a lock pick disguised as a palm pilot stylus or some crud like that?
The big WTF here is someone thinks WiFi is a risk. However, there's nothing really stopping the bad guys from using it right now, now is there?
The article says A cellphone connected to a detonation circuit could have allowed a terrorist to trigger an explosion by calling or texting the phone.
No shit. The earth is round... tell us something we didn't know.
It most assuredly was not the ban on use of cell phones on a plane that stopped them from doing this, you know. Bad guys aren't particularly exacting in terms of following the rules, you know, right?
There are plenty of ways bad guys could communicate a trigger to their device if they needed that. In reality, they are probably more likely to use timers.
Just a reminder.... timers have a unique characteristic.. they don't suffer from issues like random communication failures or black outs so much. A 5 minute timer is 5 minutes, regardless of availability of a cell signal.
And a person who can rig a cell phone to an explosive can probably rig some other type of small common reliable radio just as easily.
It's not like the bad guys are working with off the shelf parts or care two shits worth about no-WiFi or no-Cellphone rules.
You would be sitting in security for 6 hours+ at pretty much any major airport in the US if they spent 10 minutes per passenger screening people.
Obviously, the answer is to force everyone to vomit before boarding a plane.
So you're suggesting bringing back the in-flight meal as a pre-flight meal?
We are always prepared for the LAST threat!
The technique was pioneered by the Tamil tigers, which had political, not religious motivations.
...when was the last time you heard about a successfully thwarted attempt? You offer lack of evidence to the contrary as proof, which is utterly absurd.
While I agree with your points I think the real issue here is the definition of "effective". In this context it does not simply mean stopping terrorist acts it means stopping them with minimal impact to air travel. After all you could stop all terrorist attacks on planes by banning all commercial air travel - but this is hardly an effective solution. The reason that TSA are ineffective is that they cause a massive inconvenience for travellers and, of all the terrorist plots caught, none (to my knowledge) have been caught by their security measures and all have been caught by better intelligence. This is clear evidence that intelligence is the most effective way to solve the problem since it has close to zero impact on the traveller and has been shown to work.
The Christians should fight the nutcase fringe element of their own faith and until they do, all professed Christians should be treated as criminals.
The quickest path towards resolving this is genuinely for all non-criminal young Christians to start ejecting the radical element from within their ranks. The next time one of your peers tells you how evil all those gays or abortion doctors are, tell him to shut the hell up, to grow up, and step away from the radical idiot who cares less for their life than for his own ego. End the war from within, and see those who fear you turn into your supporters.
And don't give me all that "they aren't REAL Christians", they say they believe in Christ just the same as you do and just like the muslim terrorists proclaim the same faith in Mohammed as the mainstream muslims.
Treat all Christians as the murdering terrorists the fringe of Christianity are until they learn to stand up against their own noxious element.
The ounce is weight as well as volume ? Ye gods, why do people keep sticking to imperial.
What a depressingly stupid machine.
Christ. Who the fuck cares? Why are you so arrogant that you think your body is of any importance to anyone else? Scared they might end up on saggy-white-naked-middle-class-nobodies.com?
It's evident that terrorists will alway find some mean to blow up a plane ; and banning all objects and making people wear flight suits is too inconvenient.
But there is another way to keep terrorists from blowing up passenger planes: ban the planes.
Problem solved.
Can't wait till someone sticks a bomb up their arse. TSA would then make everyone pass a colonoscopy in order to get on a plane.
8 Fluid Ounces = cup
16 Fluid Ounces = pint
and as I've always understood it, a Pint's a Pound the world Around..... in other words Pint = Pound.... interesting that a Pound is also 16 Ounces. Article is a bit misleading on that. I mean a Pound of ink? That's a pretty huge amount if you ask me.
agree with most of your sentiment, but let's not forget that these bombs were defused minutes before going off
But they were defused on the ground, right? So if they were only *minutes* from going off, wouldn't they have gone off on the ground?
With the first link, the chain is forged.
Listen, the one common element has since 9/11 has been aircraft. So, ban aircraft. That'll finally make us "safe". But just because that may be too big a leap right away, ban international flights. Or just stop flying to Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Pakistan, and Ireland.
At what point are enough materials banned from flights that planes now go into the air mostly empty because so much has been banned that very little of anything gets onto planes?
I see a bright future in the shipping industry -- and by shipping, I mean boats. Fedex and UPS are going to have to stop flying as every fedex box could be a potential bomb.
There's one final solution for the USA that might make you safe. Isolationism. Close the borders, no flights in or out, put up walls on every border, make the economy domestic only (might be good to put your own people back to work), stop exports, stop imports, and ignore the rest of the world. I mean, you do that anyway, or perhaps you treat the rest of the world as if it *is* the USA.
Surprisingly, I suspect that if the USA were to follow that plan, there would be a worldwide drop in terrorism, mostly due to the fact that the USA would have pulled their troops out of all those other countries that they have troops in, and they'd stop sticking their noses in other people's business.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Soooo....
Some friends and I started a TSA Bingo game a couple years ago. a 4x4 grid of banned items. The winner gets an open tab for a year at the neighborhood brewpub (very dangerous). In any case, I now have three in a row with the toner thing. My card has "inkjet ink", which was close enough.
I cannot bring my mini inkjet with me anymore when I travel for work. in fact, I have no way other than to waste my time using Kinko's et al.
None of this makes us any safer. We were practically incontinent due to laughing when we made these ridiculous bingo cards. How absurd!
Yet as soon as some "official" decides to commit the absurd, it becomes acceptable, and we all feel so googly safe, and say, "geez, I have nothing to hide, therefore...."
Targeting everyone else and making their lives miserable rather than targeting the problem.
I have found that usually rather than fix a problem, or punish an individual, they would rather make more onerous rules that not only do not help, but actively make it harder for anyone else to get anything done.
Likely rules already exist that were not followed, or they lack the resources to effectively follow their own rules. Doing something like this is just a show to make it seem like they are being effective. Its all just a PR campaign and has nothing to do with reality or actually being effective. Sad but true 9 times out of 10 it seems.
To their credit, many times they simply don't have the resources or the will to enable effective change, so this is the best they can do with what they got.
So they want to ban in-flight wi-fi to keep bombs from being triggered remotely over teh interweb?
There are other wireless communications that could trigger a detonation... like cell phones, radio, or GPS signals.
In a pinch they could trigger detonation using an altimeter or a clock, like in the old days.
So what's the point of banning wi-fi? The internet is just too scary for planes, I guess.
The problem I have with those situations, is how easily it could just be a bombing of the Reichstag. There is really no way to ever know with any real certainty without just trusting the government.
a handful of selfish greedy people are no match for millions of selfish, greedy people -u4ya
Yes, because when I vomit I evacuate my bowels and spill my innards all over the place...
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Owing to the fact that it's impossible to test all combinations of devices and planes, under all circumstances and actually know what might/could happen -- they've chosen to ban the whole thing.
That's the dumbest line of reasoning I have ever heard of, but I don't doubt that it's true.
A much saner approach would be to require better shielding on the airplane's components.
Honestly, I don't know the make and model of every car on the market, but that doesn't stop me from crossing the street.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
Well, at least to the credit of those trying to protect air travel
There's a very old saying:
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
TSA has been the source of more fear and harassment in this country than any terrorist ever has been able to accomplish.
Now all the terrorists have to do is come up with some new plot and try to pull it off. They don't even have to be successful, just as long as they are caught they can crank up the level of harassment to Americans everywhere.
I don't give the assholes trying to protect air travel credit for shit. Allow guns on airplanes and you can bet your ass there won't be any more hijacking attempts. Of course, it's not a perfect solution, since you still have the occasional suicidal maniac who wants to go down in a blaze of glory, but some sacrifices must be made for our security. ;)
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
Because Amtrak's idea of a train station in many parts of the Chicago to New Orleans line is a double-wide that sits a hundred feet off the tracks, because unlike aircraft, trains do not leave the station up in the sky, so one could get around almost any security scheme you could come up with by merely walking down the tracks, and because one could just as easily sabotage a train by planting explosives anywhere along the tracks without ever setting foot on the train. There's a certain degree of infeasibility and absurdity involved in adding that sort of security to trains, and by infeasible and absurd, I mean essentially impossible and utterly laughable.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
No crap, brainiac. That's precisely the scenario I didn't describe.
Again, that's precisely the scenario I didn't describe.
So let's break down what I actually did say. I know comprehension of 1 sentence is a lot to ask:
"a pilot who is sympathetic to the cause,"
Meaning, a pilot who isn't going to crash a plane that he's piloting, but is willing to assist co-conspirators in crashing a different plane.
"couldn't bring weapons through security and pass them off to his co-conspirators so that they could use said weapons on a different plane"
Also meaning, a pilot who isn't going to crash a plane that's he's piloting, but is willing to assist co-conspirators in crashing a different plane.
This really isn't all that complicated of a scenario, and is precisely why pilots are scanned for weapons.
who says you can't hate your own kind? you're an idiot.
why do you cower? i have never cowered and no one including those you fear have ever done anything to me... probably because i have a history of defending myself with the greatest force available to me.
if any account can be considered a sockpuppet, then ALL accounts are sockpuppets. i am a singular person and have never represented myself as anything but. you're a moron.
you're completely pathetic.
So a small bomb can take down a plane, but can't necessarily take out a ship or train, especially if in a cargo area.
My point is there is nothing NEW in that. At any time since the invention of air freight, it has been possible to put a bomb in a box and see that box ride a plane, just as letter bombs are literally 100 years old. Sure, timed or remotely detonated bombs are relatively new (like maybe 80 years), but that makes little difference.
What has changed in the last few years that we now see a 100 year old threat as being something to freak out about?
You may say, as the TSA do, that the fact a threat is old does not mean that we should not defend against it. But the issue here is freedom and perspective. What if the Yemen bombs had gone off? Planes might have crashed, people might have been killed. It would have been awful. However, I myself think that there is nothing wrong with doing what we have ALWAYS HISTORICALLY DONE in the face of such incredibly rare and isolated acts of lunatics: shrug and let life carry on.
That is what the British did with the IRA (give or take a few public waste bin removals).
That was what Germany did with Baader-Meinhoff.
That is what Spain has been doing with ETA for the last half century.
The pitiful reaction in the US to Middle East terrorists almost makes me what to become a terrorist myself!
"And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"