The End of Carry-on Laptops, Cell Phones, Wris****ches, etc.

Experts: Air security focuses on past threats
Laptops, cell phones and watches pose potential danger

(AP) -- The next terrorist attack could be carried out by airline
passengers who hide bomb ingredients in hair gel or baby milk bottles
and assemble their weapon in a locked restroom, security experts warn.

The announcement Thursday of a foiled plot to blow up jetliners flying
from London to the U.S. using explosives hidden in hand luggage could be
the opening of a new chapter in air travel, they said: hours-long
security checks, visual inspections of prescription drugs, bans on
everyday items.

Bomb experts and troubleshooters for airline security interviewed by The
Associated Press said mobile phones, computers, wrist watches or
anything else with a battery should be prohibited from flights.

Perhaps most chillingly, they warned that security staff at airports are
not looking for the right things -- and the change in tactics required
would likely overwhelm current security operations.

"That theater we see, of people taking off shoes, is not going to stop a
suicide bomber. The terrorists have already sniffed out the weak spots
and are adopting new tactics," said Irish security analyst Tom Clonan,
who noted that security measures usually are designed for the last
attack, not the next threat.

He said a terrorist group will almost certainly try to blow up a plane
with a bomb assembled on board unless security measures improve
fundamentally.

Anti-terrorist authorities in Britain and the United States declined to
describe the bomb design in the foiled plot -- whether it was primarily
liquid or, more likely, contained liquids in a more complex ingredient list.

Whatever the case, experts predicted passengers may soon have to change
their travel habits radically.

"Every businessman needs to have his laptop on a long-haul flight, and
now you won't be able to. Even a battery-operated watch would provide
enough power for a detonator. All you need is one shock," said Alan
Hatcher, managing director of the International School for Security and
Explosives Education in Salisbury, England.

Airlines have toyed with the idea of banning innocuous personal-care
items from carry-on luggage following previous security scares, only to
have the focus change because of the difficulty of enforcing tougher rules.

But Thursday's developments could dramatically increase the likelihood
that security will come first no matter what the logistical hurdles.

The technology for the kind of liquid or crystallized explosives
possibly involved in the thwarted terror plot is not new.

The threat first appeared in January 1995 in the Philippines, when
police stumbled on a suspected al-Qaeda plot to target U.S.-bound planes
with bombs based on nitroglycerine carried on board in containers for
contact lens solution.

At that time, aviation authorities announced plans to ban aerosols,
bottled gels and containers of liquids holding more than 30 milliliters,
about an ounce, on U.S. airliners departing Manila, but the idea was
never properly enforced.

Even then, baby formula was excluded from the ban -- even though, in
powdered form, it can provide a good vehicle for masking crystallized
explosives.

A decade later in Belfast, Northern Ireland, an Algerian man was
convicted of possessing 25 computer disks detailing how to bring down an
aircraft using, among other things, crystallized explosives hidden in a
container of talcum powder.

During that trial, FBI explosives expert Donald Sachtleben testified he
built and detonated three bombs based on the instructions found in the
Algerian's home.

Despite this decade-old knowledge, airport security officials around the
globe still permit passengers to carry a wide range of containers onto
planes without any visual inspection.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/08/10/ter....ap/index.html

[
Basically, you'll have to board the plane with the clothes on your back,
and whatever emergency medicines you have to take during the flight.
Nothing else.

Probably not even a hearing aid if you need one.

The not-so-friendly skies.
]


--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.

Per Steven L.:
and assemble their weapon in a locked restroom, security experts warn.

Obvious solution: locate the facilities in the middle of the cabin with no doors
or curtains. It would even have additional value as passenger entertainment.
--
PeteCresswell

"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
news
Per Steven L.:
and assemble their weapon in a locked restroom, security experts warn.

Obvious solution: locate the facilities in the middle of the cabin with no
doors
or curtains. It would even have additional value as passenger
entertainment.
--
PeteCresswell

I hear the next terrorist tactic is to immobilize passengers and crew with
spray cans of Silly String.

RO

Ron O'Neal wrote:
I hear the next terrorist tactic is to immobilize passengers and crew with
spray cans of Silly String.


and Silly Putty

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:01:22 GMT, "Steven L."
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted
someone who said :

The next terrorist attack could be carried out by airline
passengers who hide bomb ingredients in hair gel or baby milk bottles

Even making passengers fly naked after downing a bottle of magnesium
citrate and taking a supervised enema will not make them safe.
Terrorists will just put bombs in the luggage as they did for Air
India. To avoid xray, they could use a chemical fuse. They can use
bioweapons -- themselves if necessary infected with something horrible
disease, coughing into the stuffy recirculated cabin air. An envelope
of anthrax would never show up on x-ray. If airport security gets too
tight, they can blow up trains, subways, buildings, nuclear power
plants, oil refineries ....

To be safe, you primarily have to reduce the number of people with
legimate reasons for wanting you dead, and wanting it so desperately
they are willing to sacrifice their lives in the process. If you get
things to the point everyone on earth prays each night to their god
for your hideous demise, you will never be safe.

Bush seems to think the opposite. He thinks the way to be safe is to
do as many things as possible to enrage terrorists or potential
terrorists.

One of the great errors everyone makes is thinking terrorists are not
motivated by the same things you and I are. Imagine what sort of
injustice it would take before you would consider terrorism. Now you
are beginning to understand the mind of a terrorist. You have no
power if you put on blinders and refuse to do any study of what makes
them tick. You must at least get curious WHY they want to kill you,
and don't be content with silly answers that have no counterpart in
your own experience. You need to find a reason that would motivate you
in the same circumstances.

You also have to sort out the crying wolf from the real thing, and put
the danger in perspective. You are more likely to die in your bathtub
than at the hands of terrorists.

"In this possibly terminal phase of human existence, democracy and
freedom are more than just ideals to be valued - they may be essential
to survival."
~ Noam Chomsky


"Everybody's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's a really
easy way: stop participating in it."
~ Noam Chomsky


--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green, http://mindprod.com
See links to the Lebanon photos that Google censored at
http://mindprod.com/politics/israel.html

"Steven L." wrote in message
ink.net...
Experts: Air security focuses on past threats
Laptops, cell phones and watches pose potential danger

(AP) -- The next terrorist attack could be carried out by airline
passengers who hide bomb ingredients in hair gel or baby milk bottles
and assemble their weapon in a locked restroom, security experts warn.

The announcement Thursday of a foiled plot to blow up jetliners flying
from London to the U.S. using explosives hidden in hand luggage could be
the opening of a new chapter in air travel, they said: hours-long
security checks, visual inspections of prescription drugs, bans on
everyday items.

Bomb experts and troubleshooters for airline security interviewed by The
Associated Press said mobile phones, computers, wrist watches or
anything else with a battery should be prohibited from flights.

Perhaps most chillingly, they warned that security staff at airports are
not looking for the right things -- and the change in tactics required
would likely overwhelm current security operations.

"That theater we see, of people taking off shoes, is not going to stop a
suicide bomber. The terrorists have already sniffed out the weak spots
and are adopting new tactics," said Irish security analyst Tom Clonan,
who noted that security measures usually are designed for the last
attack, not the next threat.

He said a terrorist group will almost certainly try to blow up a plane
with a bomb assembled on board unless security measures improve
fundamentally.

Anti-terrorist authorities in Britain and the United States declined to
describe the bomb design in the foiled plot -- whether it was primarily
liquid or, more likely, contained liquids in a more complex ingredient
list.

Whatever the case, experts predicted passengers may soon have to change
their travel habits radically.

"Every businessman needs to have his laptop on a long-haul flight, and
now you won't be able to. Even a battery-operated watch would provide
enough power for a detonator. All you need is one shock," said Alan
Hatcher, managing director of the International School for Security and
Explosives Education in Salisbury, England.

Airlines have toyed with the idea of banning innocuous personal-care
items from carry-on luggage following previous security scares, only to
have the focus change because of the difficulty of enforcing tougher
rules.

But Thursday's developments could dramatically increase the likelihood
that security will come first no matter what the logistical hurdles.

The technology for the kind of liquid or crystallized explosives
possibly involved in the thwarted terror plot is not new.

The threat first appeared in January 1995 in the Philippines, when
police stumbled on a suspected al-Qaeda plot to target U.S.-bound planes
with bombs based on nitroglycerine carried on board in containers for
contact lens solution.

At that time, aviation authorities announced plans to ban aerosols,
bottled gels and containers of liquids holding more than 30 milliliters,
about an ounce, on U.S. airliners departing Manila, but the idea was
never properly enforced.

Even then, baby formula was excluded from the ban -- even though, in
powdered form, it can provide a good vehicle for masking crystallized
explosives.

A decade later in Belfast, Northern Ireland, an Algerian man was
convicted of possessing 25 computer disks detailing how to bring down an
aircraft using, among other things, crystallized explosives hidden in a
container of talcum powder.

During that trial, FBI explosives expert Donald Sachtleben testified he
built and detonated three bombs based on the instructions found in the
Algerian's home.

Despite this decade-old knowledge, airport security officials around the
globe still permit passengers to carry a wide range of containers onto
planes without any visual inspection.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/08/10/ter....ap/index.html

[
Basically, you'll have to board the plane with the clothes on your back,
and whatever emergency medicines you have to take during the flight.
Nothing else.

Probably not even a hearing aid if you need one.

The not-so-friendly skies.
]


--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.

Pretty soon we will all just have to fly nude.
Could be fun.

Host.

"Steven L." wrote in message
ink.net...
Experts: Air security focuses on past threats
Laptops, cell phones and watches pose potential danger

(AP) -- The next terrorist attack could be carried out by airline
passengers who hide bomb ingredients in hair gel or baby milk bottles and
assemble their weapon in a locked restroom, security experts warn.

The announcement Thursday of a foiled plot to blow up jetliners flying
from London to the U.S. using explosives hidden in hand luggage could be
the opening of a new chapter in air travel, they said: hours-long security
checks, visual inspections of prescription drugs, bans on everyday items.

Bomb experts and troubleshooters for airline security interviewed by The
Associated Press said mobile phones, computers, wrist watches or anything
else with a battery should be prohibited from flights.

Perhaps most chillingly, they warned that security staff at airports are
not looking for the right things -- and the change in tactics required
would likely overwhelm current security operations.

"That theater we see, of people taking off shoes, is not going to stop a
suicide bomber. The terrorists have already sniffed out the weak spots and
are adopting new tactics," said Irish security analyst Tom Clonan, who
noted that security measures usually are designed for the last attack, not
the next threat.

He said a terrorist group will almost certainly try to blow up a plane
with a bomb assembled on board unless security measures improve
fundamentally.

Anti-terrorist authorities in Britain and the United States declined to
describe the bomb design in the foiled plot -- whether it was primarily
liquid or, more likely, contained liquids in a more complex ingredient
list.

Whatever the case, experts predicted passengers may soon have to change
their travel habits radically.

"Every businessman needs to have his laptop on a long-haul flight, and now
you won't be able to. Even a battery-operated watch would provide enough
power for a detonator. All you need is one shock," said Alan Hatcher,
managing director of the International School for Security and Explosives
Education in Salisbury, England.

Airlines have toyed with the idea of banning innocuous personal-care items
from carry-on luggage following previous security scares, only to have the
focus change because of the difficulty of enforcing tougher rules.

But Thursday's developments could dramatically increase the likelihood
that security will come first no matter what the logistical hurdles.

The technology for the kind of liquid or crystallized explosives possibly
involved in the thwarted terror plot is not new.

The threat first appeared in January 1995 in the Philippines, when police
stumbled on a suspected al-Qaeda plot to target U.S.-bound planes with
bombs based on nitroglycerine carried on board in containers for contact
lens solution.

At that time, aviation authorities announced plans to ban aerosols,
bottled gels and containers of liquids holding more than 30 milliliters,
about an ounce, on U.S. airliners departing Manila, but the idea was never
properly enforced.

Even then, baby formula was excluded from the ban -- even though, in
powdered form, it can provide a good vehicle for masking crystallized
explosives.

A decade later in Belfast, Northern Ireland, an Algerian man was convicted
of possessing 25 computer disks detailing how to bring down an aircraft
using, among other things, crystallized explosives hidden in a container
of talcum powder.

During that trial, FBI explosives expert Donald Sachtleben testified he
built and detonated three bombs based on the instructions found in the
Algerian's home.

Despite this decade-old knowledge, airport security officials around the
globe still permit passengers to carry a wide range of containers onto
planes without any visual inspection.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/08/10/ter....ap/index.html

[
Basically, you'll have to board the plane with the clothes on your back,
and whatever emergency medicines you have to take during the flight.
Nothing else.

Probably not even a hearing aid if you need one.

The not-so-friendly skies.
]


--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.

The end result seems to be having the passengers submit to a strip search,
the likes of which are used with prisoners entering prison.
and, as we all know, those strip searches have NEVER stopped the flow of
money, drugs, and weapons into the prisons - or control of the outside FROM
within those prisons.

Roedy Green wrote:
To be safe, you primarily have to reduce the number of people with
legimate reasons for wanting you dead,

I agree wholeheartedly. Let's kill them all.

Steven L. wrote:
Experts: Air security focuses on past threats
Laptops, cell phones and watches pose potential danger


I figured out the solution to this and all other passenger-born attacks
on commercial aviation a long time ago:

Trusted flyer identification

Frequent airline travelers, or those who wish to avoid the more
draconian security measures can voluntarily submit themselves to an FBI
security check. Those who successfully pass the security check (and
nobody who's visited Pakistan will ever pass), are issued a biometric
identity card that can be used to expedite airline security checks.

Those air travelers who are not trusted flyers get deep cavity
searches, if they get on a flight at all. Take the ****ing bus, raghead
bitches.

wrote in message
ps.com...

Steven L. wrote:
Experts: Air security focuses on past threats
Laptops, cell phones and watches pose potential danger


I figured out the solution to this and all other passenger-born attacks
on commercial aviation a long time ago:

Trusted flyer identification

Frequent airline travelers, or those who wish to avoid the more
draconian security measures can voluntarily submit themselves to an FBI
security check. Those who successfully pass the security check (and
nobody who's visited Pakistan will ever pass),

Does that include people who have worked at the US embassy in Pakistan ?