Another foiled attempt to blow up a plane results in a ridiculous rule from TSA
Yesterday, i enjoyed a quiet, rainy/snowy Christmas Day with my family. I wrote a post about Airplane Sugar Cookies, and I spent the evening with the love of my life and his family. Yet…while I was enjoying happy times with my loved ones, someone else was trying to take all those joyous moments away from 200+ people in Detroit, Michigan.
A 23-year-old Nigerian man named Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab attempted to destroy Northwest Flight 253 by ways of an explosive device he had attached to his body. The flight originated from Nigeria, where he originally boarded, connected in Amsterdam and made its final journey to Detroit. Abdul wasn’t on the “No Fly” list, but he is on a list of people suspected to have a connection to terrorism.
As the plane soared over Detroit, the man complained of a stomachache, hunched over in his seat, covered himself with a blanket and triggered the device. Luckily, it failed to fully detonate and, instead, started a fire (on the man) rather than creating an explosion (on the plane). The man, who was badly burned and taken into custody upon the plane’s safe landing, claimed to be associated with al-Qaida and that he was instructed to blow up the plane as it descended into Detroit’s airport. But with such stringent rules about carry-on liquids, you may be wondering how the man was able to smuggle explosive materials on board the flight. Yahoo! reported that the “explosive device consisted of a six-inch packet of powder and a syringe with a liquid, which were sewn into the man’s underwear so they would be near his testicles and unlikely to be detected.”
Of course, there is more to be said about this incident, but you can find plenty of information on a myriad of channels like BBC or the New York Times. What I really want to write about is the new, rather absurd regulation being implemented by the Transportation Security Administration…
TSA will now limit on-board activities (during the last hour) on all planes flying within U.S. airspace. This means no bathroom, no iPod, no purse, no blanket, no pillow, no…anything. And yes, I think this is absurd. At this rate, we won’t be allowed to carry anything onto a plane…at all.
I personally think it all goes back to the screening process. This man was not on the “No Fly” list, but his name did appear on a list with 500,000 other terrorist-related people. Even though thia liat boasts a lot of names, shouldn’t this be a red flag to any airline ticketing agent/airport security officer? If you’re even associated with terrorism, shouldn’t you be searched? Metal detector, body search, the whole nine yards? I would think it’s better to be safe than sorry, no matter how many people require additional screening. Keep the random searches going, but implement mandatory searches of people who appear on any sort of list.
And here’s a thought: our bags go through X-ray machines, but do we? No. We pass through metal detectors. And even though the screening process in Nigeria and Amsterdam didn’t pick up the metal syringe sewn into Abul’s underwear, an X-ray machine might have. Yes, I know it might be a little unrealistic for passengers to pass through metal detectors and giant X-ray machines, but I think this comes down to a more strict screening process rather than controlling on-board activities. Spend the money on creating and installing life-size X-ray machines and potentially save millions of lives in the long run. Terrorism isn’t going away…
People are still getting on board with liquids that are not regulation sized or packed in the proper, quart-sized plastic bag. I know a woman who made it from Florida to Illinois with a full 8-ounce bottle of perfume. Another friend of mine, who rarely travels, finally decided to take a winter vacation from New York to Hawaii and made it all the way there and back with a full 10-ounce bottle of sun tan lotion. So whether they are in a suitcase, strapped to a leg or sewn into underwear, TSA workers still miss a few liquids here and there.
What about the passengers who are careful to read the rules? Or the savvy travelers who know the rules like they do the ABCs? It’s almost like that saying I heard when I was a little kid, “One bad apple ruins the bunch.” I know the “bad apple” in this case is a terrorist, and I am not insensitive to the incident in Detroit, 9/11 or any terrorist attack for that matter. What I mean here is that TSA implements a lot of ridiculous rules, while some of their employees don’t even perform their jobs correctly. And I do stress the word some. I happen to know a few TSA workers who boast impeccable records.
I applaud the brave crew members and passengers on board Flight 253, and my heart aches for all the people affected by 9/11. But the average traveler should not be punished for the actions of terrible, harmful people. I’m sure many of us would rather endure a longer screening process than be stripped of our civil liberties on board an aircraft.
- 70 Comments »
- Posted in Travel News on December 26th, 2009
