Someone, somewhere, with an ounce of rational thought to their name, please explain to me just how banning shampoo, creams, drinks etc. from "carry on" luggage is making my flying experience "more secure"?
In the near hysterical reaction of aviation authorities in the wake of "Shampoo Terrorist" Arrests last week, we suddenly find ourselves in a world where a drink on the plane is banned.
The claim that a "liquid explosive" was going to be used, so we have to ban these things from being "in the cabin" during a flight is ludicrous. Changes in the last couple of days to extend the ban to fruit juices and other such products simply make flying an endurance test for people.
This latest bit of "show security" is all about scaring the crap out of the public - a bottle of pop, or conditioner, is not a terrorist weapon - nor will it ever be.
A progressive voice shining light into the darkness of regressive politics. Pretty much anything will be fair game, and little will be held sacred.
Monday, August 14, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Amy Hamm and the Undefined Notion Of "Sex-Based Rights"
So, Ms. Hamm is appealing her disciplinary ruling to the BC Supreme Court . Okay, in itself, I think of that as mostly a "nothing bur...
-
Running around the internet, and speaking in various venues is a somewhat rare creature by the name of Walt Heyer who claims to be an ...
-
It's amazing how the right wingnuts manage to parrot each other. Over at the magazine Catholic Insight , we find "Real Woman"...
-
Right on cue, leading wingnut over at AFTAH has weighed in on the Birth Certificate issues I mentioned yesterday. Says The Peter(): First...
No comments:
Post a Comment