Friday, August 11, 2006

Flying Away with No Water

Next week I am on vacation and off the Internet. Claire Kenyon will be your guest blogger.

I get to experience the new airline rules, no water, toothpaste, gels and liquids of most any kind. The US government is being a bit over reactive but they were only two possibilities

  • They can over react to the news and cut back restrictions later as they can more accurately understand the risk factors.
  • They can possibly under react where the world learns about a new method to attack planes and the US doesn't try to prevent that new threat.
At least the planes are still flying, the rest are just comfort issues.

1 comment:

  1. I just flew from O'Hare to LaGuardia with no delay of any kind. Things didn't look quite as nice at LaGuardia, but I wouldn't be concerned (unless you are going to the UK)

    Since I always check one bag, I didn't find the new restrictions much of a hassle (and my carry on was lighter than normal!). That said, I am not a fan of airline security.

    As this post says, the US has two options (do nothing, increase security), but emphasizing the immediacy of the situation is misleading. Liquid explosives are not new (here is a brief Scientific American article from yesterday), and I cannot imagine the prospect of concealing explosives in liquids/gels surprised anyone in the know.

    We could have banned liquids before, but we didn't, we could be supplying airports with more expensive screening equipment, but we aren't. Simply reacting to a recently uncovered attack makes our national security policy seem ad hoc with no long term planning involved. Also, this type of response creates an air of panic, exactly the reaction terrorism strives to insight. I very much hope a more rational public discussion of counterterrorism can take place in the future.

    On a lighter note, I look forward to Claire's posts.