I am someone that travels a decent amount I'd say, probably averaging about 12 flights a year these days between work and pleasure and have been through many airports and the varying security measures between them all.
I've been through the good, the bad and 'teh stupid', but always got to my destination safely.
That being said, I dont think the new Security Directive will do absolutely ANYTHING to make our country safer as none of the issues that lead to this incident are being addressed past the most obvious reactionary measures.
But what I really want to know is who is doing the lobbying behind this potential goldmine for the various security scanner manufacturers and drumming up the additional fear to support them.
While I may be lazy and not take my toiletries out of my bag to show off my awesome travel size deodorant, shampoo and free sample of a cologne that I dont care for but I have to bring because it's under 3oz, I appreciate the need for security while traveling above all.
Many in the online community as well as the intelligence community have pretty much written the rule adjustments off as reactionary measures to make average people feel like something is being done, and I would have to agree. The problem is I haven't heard some of these people make a clear argument about the stupidity of many of the rules that have been imposed (and now relaxed but extended).
Instead, I just hear how some scanner that will have celebrity cock pictures on TMZ before they make it to their destination is going to be put in all these airports (Bonus Question for TPM or the likes: How much lobbying are the Airport Scanner companies doing right now to drum up additional fear?? If they win, its an unlimited pay day you realize, right?)
But how effective will any of this really be? I think it will be a waste of time, money, and make people not want to fly (What if I gotta piss or gotta go #2?, should I just soil my pants for the greater good (of those whose nose doesn't function)?
For those who havent seen the directive:
Security Directive sd-1544-09-06 (now that the 2 bloggers who put it online have been visited at their house I'm probably ok to link to it lol)
Now lets take a look at what we got here....
- Passengers must remain in seats beginning 1 hour prior to arrival at destination.
Why, because after a 10 hour flight from Europe or Africa, in that 11th hour, the terrorist is going to want to blow up the plane, but if s/he did it anywhere between 0 and 10 hours into the flight it would be a total failure right? .... wrong.
- Passenger access to carry-on baggage is prohibited beginning 1 hour prior to arrival at destination.
So when they warn everyone regarding the ability to access their bag after 10 minutes, they cant pull out what they need?... srsly?
- Disable aircraft-integrated passenger communications systems and services (phone, internet access services, live television programming, global positioning systems) prior to boarding and during all phases of flight.
Since stop watches can't make it through security, it wouldnt be possible to determine the planes route and time it takes to arrive at the location, right?
- While over U.S. airspace, flight crew may not make any announcement to passengers concerning flight path or position over cities or landmarks.
Let them know about a lot of European landmarks when were over Europe though!!
For serious, see #3, timing is easy enough to work out.
Now, for the last, and also dumbest idea from the TSA's best (backup, as it was Christmas) and brightest agents is this next one. I mean, if you are cold, you should just rub your arms a lot or cuddle with the overweight guy that shoulda been required to buy 2 seats
- Passengers may not have any blankets, pillows, or personal belongings on the lap beginning 1 hour prior to arrival at destination.
Since once again, they cant blow up a plane on an 11 hour journey 1:15 prior to arrival? Common sense can evade these stupid new rules.
But now, lets get back to these body scanners.
They seem like they could help give a $200,000 guise of security to everyday passengers, with no additional security actually given. All these scanners will stop are people bringing tiny sacks of weed on their flights.
I hear how this is effective security, the best we got, but, the best we got cant stop someone from catching someone shoving their bomb material up their ass or under their fat rolls (if fat) and if a most basic method of hiding something from police officers cannot be caught by these machines, nothing useful will ever be accomplished besides boosting the stock prices of the companies which produce these machines and the radiation everyone is subjected to from them.
Some may be restated from above, but here are some questions I'd like to see some answers to:
- All the people that are on TV advocating for these machines specifically, what ties do they have to the companies which produce these machines (L3). How much lobbying is being performed on behalf of the manufacturers, and if any, how does their rhetoric differ from those who do not have any ties and actually think the machines will be useful?
- This attack occurred from fault security at foreign airports where we dont have reach, why don't we implement the random phone call/stop by's that El Al is known to do for suspected people traveling? We have a list of 600,000 people of concern that we should be able to review if traveling to a suspect country.
- If someone can go to the bathroom in the first 10 hours of an 11 hour flight, why not take your supplies out of your bag, go to the bathroom, take the bomb material from your ass, sit for a minute, set it up correctly, and blow up the plane somewhere between take off and 1 hour prior to landing? They already told us the scanner wont find stuff in body cavities, so how is any of this prevented?
Before being subjected to all the additional crap while flying, it would be nice to know the answers to some of these questions, because if some good fear lobbying is helping guide this, I'm gonna be pretty pissed off when asked to enter one of those machines.