Too little, too late

September 28th, 2006

The ban on liquids such as toothpaste and perfume being carried through airport security in hand luggage will be lifted at UK airports in November.

This is inadequate, either there is a (non-)credible threat from liquid explosives or there is not. As there is not, neither practically nor created by F.E.A.R. then there is no reason for the ban to lifted IMMEDIATELY. It took a matter of days to ease the total ban on hand luggage, why so long for liquids.

The banning of all-but-essential liquids in hand luggage was introduced after an alleged plot to blow up planes was thwarted last month.

Under a new Europe-wide agreement to be approved next week, passengers will be able to carry on board 100ml containers of liquid in a transparent plastic bag.

So despite the ‘lifting of the ban’ the impositions and subtle degredations of passengers will continue. People are supposed to feel grateful that they are now allowed a simulacrum of ‘normaility’?

Since the tightening of restrictions on Aug 10, passengers leaving UK airports for all destinations except the United States have been allowed to take liquids in carry-on luggage as long as the items were bought after travellers have passed through security checks.

But those travelling to America cannot take liquids on board even if purchased at “airside” outlets.

Good, good continue to shoot yourselves in the foot.

Earlier this week, US authorities said liquids could be taken on board flights leaving America if they were purchased from secure airport stores.

The UK’s deception still subject to junior role in the ‘special relationship’.

On Aug 10, all carry-on bags were banned, leading to huge queues at airports and numerous flight delays and cancellations.

After a few days, smaller hand luggage was permitted to be taken on board and last week the DfT announced that larger bags would once again be permitted on planes.

This is not the road back to normality. This is the road to the State increasingly defining/controllling perceptions of normality.

One Response to “Too little, too late”

  1. irdial Says:

    And of course, this is all reported without question. No one has been named as the person responsible for making these determinations, so that they can be personally grilled. No oneis allowed to sue for compensation for beign inconvenienced over a non existant threat…need I go on?

    These new restrictions are totally insane. They are making the populatoin jump through these hoops to inure them to the security state of mind. There was no threat iin the first instance, and so now the WHOLE THING should be abandoned since there is absolutely no possibliity of liquids being a threat on airplanes.

    The problem once again, is that these rules are being implimented opaquely, ie, by faceless nameless people, who are probably unqualified to make any sort of judgement on any subject, let alone aircraft security.

    Also it has to be said, thes carriers, the airlines, are PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS offering services to PRIVATE CITIZENS. If they want you to be able to carry on a litre bottle of Pepsi, that is between YOU and THEM and is not the affair of anyone else.

    If I go and charter an aircraft, I will be able to take whatever I llike onto it, since I am the person who is paying for the service. There is no interference between me and the charter company by any third party. It should be no different with a 747 operated by BA.

    Someone now needs to mount a legal challenge to this insanity. In a free country, this would take the form of a Class Action.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.