
The New, Terrifying, No-Electronics US Flight Security Rules - Flemlord
http://gizmodo.com/5434592/no-electronics-allowed-during-international-flights
======
CWuestefeld
Just flew back into USA last night from a week in Cancun. I saw two
differences in security:

1\. Every carry-on bag was searched. Oddly, many people had those neck-pillow
things, which were completely ignored. I bet you could pack a lot of semtex
into one of those pillows.

2\. The security guy at the entrance to the gates -- you know, where we
routinely take off our shoes, empty pockets, etc., was holding a sign say NOT
to take off shoes. This supports Schneier's theory that the TSA is only
engaging in theater, making a show of defending against whatever the most
recent threat was.

~~~
jrockway
Yeah. In LHR today, my bag was hand-searched, and I was patted down. Except,
they didn't pat my whole body, and they only opened the smallest pocket in my
backpack.

It may or may not be theater, but it's certainly not security.

Don't get me started on how I wasn't allowed to use a blanket or jacket for
the last hour of the flight. I wish I was joking...

------
jrockway
After being subjected to these rules today, I almost want to be the legal test
case for compliance with secret rules. Is refusing to comply with an
unpublished rule a violation of the rules? (I am pretty sure the Constitution
has something to say about this...)

Basically, this proves that the terrorists won. One nut with a fake bomb can
change millions of lives.

~~~
fuzzmeister
The latest reports I've seen indicate that the bomb was not fake:

"A preliminary FBI analysis indicates the device contained PETN, also known as
Pentaerythritol Tetranitrate, a highly explosive chemical."

[http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/12/27/airline.attack.qanda/ind...](http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/12/27/airline.attack.qanda/index.html)

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PETN>

~~~
jrockway
Not this time. Pretend to be setting off a bomb, though, and see if the TSA
doesn't react.

I am looking forward to the "mp3 player bomber" and the "paperback book
bomber".

------
siculars
Frankly, most airport security is an absolute joke and exists solely to add a
certain amount of discomfort to all travelers _including potential
terrorists_. The new TSA rules (like most of the old TSA rules) are utter
theatrics.

If anyone really wants to see how security should be done just go to an
international terminal which ElAl flies to and watch how they screen
passengers at their check in. The ground staff are not there to frisk you or
ask you to take your shoes off. They work directly for the airline and have
received extensive security training. What they do is actually ask you a
battery of questions designed to flush out inconsistencies. ElAl also pays
much closer attention to so called "no fly" lists.

I think it's safe to say, and I'm sure the majority of us would agree that
ElAl knows a thing or two about how to keep their planes in the sky with a
maximum degree of confidence in their security. Would it really be that hard
for other airlines to take a page out of their playbook? If not for the
profiling (which I'm sure they do) then at least the questioning by ground
staff.

~~~
coffeemug
_If anyone really wants to see how security should be done just go to an
international terminal which ElAl flies to and watch how they screen
passengers at their check in._

From my anecdotal experience, El Al has security personnel that appears
trained to a naked eye, but in reality is extremely ineffective, flawed, and
unethical. I had the misfortune to go through El Al security four times. These
all occurred in a span of two weeks, roughly in the same circumstances (I had
to fly into Israel, fly out, fly back in, and fly back out). I can tell you
that the outcome of their screening is heavily inconsistent and highly
dependent on the prejudices of the particular agent doing the interview, and
not necessarily on advanced training procedures.

I had the same answers for their questions every time. Two of the times the
agents were Israeli jews who immigrated from Russia. Since we share a common
background, both let me pass after very few questions because my trip details
seemed perfectly reasonable to them. The other two times, I was interviewed by
jews of clearly middle-eastern descent - both had no understanding of my
cultural background, and both thought my trip details were extremely
suspicious, subjecting me to a detailed search. So the outcome of the
interviews was effectively random, which means they might as well perform
random searches.

The interviews were highly unethical, inappropriate, and degrading. Even more
importantly, they were completely ineffective, resulting in a random outcome
highly dependent on each agent's personal prejudices. I don't know what good
security looks like, but I can tell you that this most certainly isn't it.

------
ghshephard
Hanging out in YVR right now - the line that normally takes 15 minutes took 95
minutes today. It is the first time I've ever been told not to arrive so early
for a flight. Apparently people showing up 3 1/2 hours early for a flight
screws it up for other people somehow. Mea Culpa.

1\. Every single person had their luggage opened and sorted through, item by
item.

2\. Every single person was being fully patted down. Including checking the
soles of your (shoeless) feet.

The pat down was remarkably thorough - the seams of my pants were checked. The
waistband, shirt cuffs, pants cuffs each carefully probed, hair was cautiously
checked.

I was particularly impressed with what a good mood all of the screeners and
passengers were in. Nobody was grumpy, and everyone was basically taking
everything in a pretty good way, despite the inordinate delays.

~~~
ghshephard
Just landed in SFO. Some observations:

o United has (for now) discontinued Channel 9 (the pilot/ATC channel)

o The Pilot said the following "The TSA has requested I notify you of the
following - You will not be allowed to move around the cabin for the last hour
of the flight, you will not be allowed to have anything in your lap in the
last hour of the flight, no blankets, jackets, nothing. We will make an
announcement 15 minutes prior to the last hour of the flight so you can use
the washroom."

So, when the announcement came that there was 15 minutes until lockdown in our
seats - there was an immediate rush to line up for the washrooms, that spanned
most of the cabin.

Interestingly enough, absolutely nobody paid attention to the 'Nothing in your
lap' rule, and nobody policed it. People kept working on their laptops, tray
tables were down, and nobody said anything. People kept wandering to the
washroom.

One of the more ironic elements of the trip was as follows, the pilot
announced "I will not be allowed to point out landmarks as we are flying" -
and then 30 minutes prior to landing he noted "As you can all see on your left
side, we are flying over the Golden Gate Bridge"

Definitely a bizarre experience.

~~~
marvin
The pilot obviously thinks the new security measures are stupid.

------
uuilly
I am happy to report that this post is coming from 30k feet via an iPhone on
virgin America.

~~~
GoboGobo
Virgin America only flies domestic. Most of these restrictions will apply to
the international flights _to_ the US. (I guess the US doesn't really care
about what happens outside, as long as everything coming in is checked)

~~~
uuilly
It's probably that they have no way of doing so once the plane is foreign
airspace. Lots of Americans are on the outbound flights so they care a great
deal for the plane's safety.

------
yason
Why don't they just anesthesize people at the gates and shove them into
comfortable boxes to be carried by cargo planes.

It would certainly be more pleasant for the travellers.

~~~
asciilifeform
> Why don't they just anesthesize people at the gates

Because the regime insists that citizens be reminded that they are cattle.

~~~
jrockway
No, it's because drugs are evil.

------
rubyrescue
i bought the domain 'iamnotacriminal.com' on my iphone post-security at SEA
after a particularly nasty interaction with TSA - i just felt violated and
tired of the treatment. at the time i thought it might be a great project to
let off some steam - perhaps a community wiki of TSA incompetence.

more lucrative projects have always put it on the back burner but it's
tempting to have a HN 'hack fest' made up of only disgruntled unwilling
participants in the 'security theatre' that are also hackers and launch the
site...

------
bmm6o
I was expecting problems, but I was surprised when I flew today. Jetblue, JFK
to LGB (via IAD) had the exact same security checks and regulations as every
other time I've flown them. I guess it just shows how inconsistently the rules
are applied, which is frustrating in its own way.

------
sown
I hate people.

~~~
cubicle67
Unfortunately, after having just spent a good few hours of my Boxing Day
holiday (because Boxing Day fell on a Saturday, we get a Monday public holiday
in leu) in a shopping centre, I'm inclined to agree

------
coolestuk
There is an elephant in the room.

The threat to US/Western Europe/Australasia is coming from muslims. They are
by far the biggest terrorist threat to these areas. So we should have a 'no-
fly' rule for muslims. A minority of current flyers would suffer
inconvenience. As it is, the majority of flyers suffer both inconvenience and
the possibility of being murdered.

I hardly fly any more because it is such an awful experience. It is only a
matter of time before another plane comes down - in September Abdullah Asieri
stuck a bomb up his ass and passed through 2 sets of airport security AND the
Saudi security services, which shows us that there is no way to stop someone
getting a bomb on board. Dealing with suicide bombers is the most difficult
thing to do. They have no fear of any punishment, and they can take their
deathly payload anywhere.

People should start reading sites like www.jihadwatch.org or
www.thereligionofpeace.com instead of believing the politically correct media.
Islam is the oldest form of totalitarianism.

I'm no racist (I don't believe there are races). For 15 years I have lived in
the heart of the most muslim area of London. I've seen most non-muslims leave
the area, and watched as the muslims have become more and more radical. I'm
married to an asian, and I've had two muslim boyfriends in the past.

~~~
mquander
You may not be racist, but you're a bigot. No matter whether or not Muslims
tend to bomb airplanes more than anyone else, preventing Muslims from flying
is both unethical and inconsistent with the principles of Western democracy.

~~~
jrockway
But only Muslims commit terrorist attacks. Remember the Oklahoma City bomber?
Muslim. Remember the Unabomber? Muslim.

Oh wait... they were both Regular Old White Guys.

~~~
plinkplonk
"But only Muslims commit terrorist attacks."

I sympathize with your outrage when confronted with blatant bigotry, but this
isn't what was implied. If you take a random sample of a 1000 terrorist
attacks in the world, I suspect you'd have well over 85 % of them committed by
Muslims.

Now, this in itself doesn't imply that you can (or should) discriminate
against Muslims, because that is a very very small percentage of the total
Muslim population, but there is _some_ truth to the old saw "Most muslims are
not terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslim".

I am not sure what the correct conclusion to draw is, but as a proto truth,
perhaps just like Communism is a dangerous and suboptimal way to run a
society, maybe a religion with millions of followers that advocates eternal
war and subjugation of the Infidel should be carefully watched. In the Middle
Ages this would be Christianity. In the 20th century, this would probably be
Islam.

I also submit we may never be able to have rational discussion of this topic,
except among very close friends, because it would veer rapidly into divisive
topics and useless hairsplitting - a prime example of "things you can't say"
(or discuss rationally). Besides this is politics - something that should
rarely be on HN in any case.

~~~
jrockway
100% of terrorist attacks are committed by terrorists. That sounds like a
better filter than religious beliefs.

You have to look at it the other way. 0.00% of Christians commit terrorist
attacks. 0.00% of Muslims commit terrorist attacks. Therefore, it doesn't seem
too valuable to discriminate in this way.

 _a prime example of "things you can't say"_

You can say it, but legalized discrimination goes against every value a Free
society has. Liberty is more important than a little bit of temporary safety.
It's that simple.

~~~
plinkplonk
"You can say it, but legalized discrimination goes against every value a Free
society has."

I completely agree. I was careful to make the point that discrimination is
_NOT_ ok even if 100% of terrorist acts in the world were by Muslims because
the number of people who are decent citizens far outweigh the terrorists, just
as the number of decent communists far outweighed the Red- Terror-kill-all-
capitalists folks and McCarthyism was not an acceptable solution either.

I was reacting to your "But only Muslims commit terrorist attacks." That is an
_exaggeration_ of the claim made by those who _would_ advocate legal
discrimination. Mischaracterizing your opponents' arguments (no matter how
distasteful their ideologies are) isn't the right way (imo) to refute their
ideas. You do it again with

" 0.00% of Christians commit terrorist attacks. 0.00% of Muslims commit
terrorist attacks. "

Most muslim terrorists are educated in madrassas where they study their
religion for a long time. Saudi Arabia and Iran (and to a lesser extent,
Pakistan), where much of Islamic terrorism originates are the terrorism
originates are theocracies or hevaily theocratic. Their motivation, training,
goals and methods are all influenced by religion are religious. To deny that
there is a religious element to Islamic terrorism is an extreme position not
justified by facts. You could argue that this isn't "True Islam", but that is
a different argument.

Again I completely agree with your idea that "Muslims must NOT be
discriminated against" idea. Such discrimination is against everything Western
Democracy (and human decency) stand for.

I am still disturbed by Islam as a political and social ideology dictating how
others should submit to the "true believers". I guess I just don't go to
extremes in _either_ direction. Some social visions _are_ dangerous.

All that said, I will now follow my own advice of keeping politics off HN!
Peace!

