Slashdot Mirror
UK Terror Chief Blocked From Boarding Aircraft
Jeremiah Cornelius writes "Two days before toner cartridges threatened western civilization, Britain's Home Office minister Baroness Neville-Jones was en route to a Washington summit when she was found to have an over-sized aerosol can in her bag. While being questioned by airport security staff for transporting a container with more than 100ml of liquid, the Baroness seemingly took offense at being lectured on the importance of security procedure: 'Of course I know how important it is,' she said, 'I'm the Security Minister.' The Baroness is also former head of the British Joint Intelligence Committee, and was traveling at the time to discuss the war on terror with US security chiefs. According to a Home Office spokesman, trained in the use of the passive voice, 'Liquids were inadvertently left in a bag. The item was removed and the Minister fully complied with subsequent checks.'"
Why would the people implementing security theatre want to subject themselves to it?
They know it's just show. Not to mention the whole being above the law thing.
Sent from my PDP-11
She missed a glorious opportunity to praise the airport security for her unplanned security check. It is a good thing that British Security Officers check all people, even the Security Minister.
"The Baroness is also former head of the British Joint Intelligence Committee, and was traveling at the time to discuss the war on terror with US security chiefs."
They must be talking about the 'terror' that they use to manipulate the average sheep into believing that these blatant invasions of privacy and freedom are a good idea.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Seriously, Slashdot is getting worse than the mainstream press.
How was she "blocked" as the title says?
On the contrary, this is exactly what is needed. Unless the foolishness affects those in charge of it they will never stop their ill conceived practices.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Good. I'm happy she was offended. I say we run through the entire procedure word-for-word, action-for-action for EVERY public official who flies commercially. And I hope every single one of them is every bit as offended as the rest of us are for being treated at best like petulant children who need to be taught a lesson, and at worst like criminals who have no rights. The more public officials get pissed off over being treated the same way the average citizen is treated, the more likely there is to be an outcry against this kind of crap.
As the Security Minister, she should have known damn well that she needed to double check her bags for compliance BEFORE leaving home. So if she gets pissy over having to endure the same lecture as some other poor sap who simply forgot it was in there, tough shit. She's not above the law. And since she's one of the ones who seem to think it's so important, she needs to the standard just as much as everyone else, if not moreso.
Why stop there? Surely such a large aerosol can warrants the full body cavity search with glove . What makes all of this security theater even more stupid is that they refuse to profile. How many white 71 year old female bombers have there been?. They probably would have waved someone wearing a burka right through while they were wasting time with the minister who is quite obviously of old British decent (she even has a peerage!) just so that they aren't accused of profiling. Ridiculous!
Why do we still have the liquid restrictions when they are not a credible threat? Meanwhile flammable liquids and gasses in cigarette lighters are ignored as they should be.
It's really become an expensive joke instead of anything resembling security.
The problem is that other groups will claim racism due to said profiling. And then after that, them terrorists will be recruiting white 71 year olds.
The story title aptly characterizes her as Terror Chief. Her role, like that of her American counterpart, is to instill terror in the populace. She is one of the most valuable, if unofficial, players on the Al Qaeda team, thanks to the interest of our ruling elites in promoting (for different reasons) terrorism.
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Can't believe the alternative is to have an entire body grope. How is that procedure even remotely decent enough to be considered for deployment in an airport? That's probably worse than prison treatment, and the people in airports are presumed innocent (yeah right).
with the ETA you have a point, but the whole northern ireland conflict does have deep religious roots.
People, what a bunch of bastards
No, Anne Thwacks, you can't confirm that WE are more terrified. You can confirm that YOU are more terrified.
I'm not terrified of either. This is just how the world has always worked.
Clearly you really hate government because you've been slapped with a couple of £35 parking tickets. I agree that the outsourced traffic enforcement is pretty scummy, but the speed limit fines are totally justified. Those speed limits are the rules. If you don't like the rules don't play the game (or do something positive to change the rules).
I can't wait for a terrorist to hijack a charter flight. The first step to undoing this insane airport security crap is to inconvenience the wealthy and powerful. Either that or it will help expose the stupidity of the system to the media.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
First of all, the Islamic faith is far from unique in its desire to displace conflicting cultural patterns. You might be familiar with another such religion - Christianity.
Second, there is a difference between cultural conflict and war. You need to learn to separate the two, and understand that just because the woman in a burka might want the other women around her to wear burkas does not mean that she's a terrorist. Having airport screeners harass members of one culture is not an appropriate weapon for use in a cultural conflict.
"Destruction of one culture concurrent with the rise of another" is not what airport security is intended to defend against. People being killed is what airport security is intended to defend against. You need to get your fears of cultural assimilation out of the picture, as they have nothing to do with the topic of airport screenings.
If you don't want to draw a distinction between killing everyone who doesn't conform to your culture on one hand, vs. spreading your culture through various social and political means on the other, that's your problem; reforming bigoted radicals isn't my line of work.
Oh, and profiling is not and will not be effective. A brief look at recent history will demonstrate why:
When we put more scrutiny on shoes, did the total frequency of attempted attacks go down? No, the attackers just didn't bother trying another shoe bomb.
When we put more scrutiny on liquids, did the total frequency of attempted attacks go down? No, the attackers just didn't bother trying liquids.
So if you put more scrutiny on people who match your biggoted view of what a terrorist looks like, is the frequency of attempted attacks going to go down? No, the attackers will send bomb-carriers who don't fit your profile. You think they can't recruit such people, and they laugh.