Major Terror plot foiled against U.K.-U.S. bound flights

[kevin]

Personally, I dont give a flip about what they do with airplane rights...its private property...they tell you that you cant have something you are either going to leave or suck it up...there really isnt much you can do about it...you cant have anyone fired from the airport as they are following what the gov't told them to do...plus the fact that i do not fly so anything they say or do does not effect me in anyway...

Airports to my knowledge are not private property. The planes are. You can get someone fired from anywhere if they are breaking the rules. And just because you don't do something doesn't make you apathy about it authoritative.

But I understand the sentiment, out of sight, out of mind.

[brunota2003]

Personally, I dont give a flip about what they do with airplane rights...its private property...they tell you that you cant have something you are either going to leave or suck it up...there really isnt much you can do about it...you cant have anyone fired from the airport as they are following what the gov't told them to do...plus the fact that i do not fly so anything they say or do does not effect me in anyway...

Airports to my knowledge are not private property. The planes are. You can get someone fired from anywhere if they are breaking the rules. And just because you don't do something doesn't make you apathy about it authoritative.

But I understand the sentiment, out of sight, out of mind.

that is what I'm getting at...in the airport you are allowed to have that stuff out (as far as I know) but on the airplane you arent, you have to put it in the stow away bags, so if they tell you to do something while you are boarding the airplane, well there isnt much you can do besides throw a temper tanturm and make yourself look like a fool on tv...as for firing someone, yes on evidence, but if they are just doing their job...then no...

[zoeyann]

Gtalum,

While I see this as a security precaution and not tyranny and you see it oppositely, I love your passion for our country and our freedoms. I do love the old saying that while I may disagree with what you say I will defend to the death your right to say it. We live in a country where debates like this are free to take place and open forums and debate have made this country great.

While ideally we should have absolute rights, there are restrictions on rights and freedoms and their always have been. It is necessary because there are bad people in this world who would abuse these freedoms to harm others. Until you can change those people there will be times like this and the good will have to suffer for the bad

[Regit]

I have to reiterate that what you can carry on a flight is not connected to freedoms at all. You have absolutely no right to carry ANYTHING on a plane, you are simply given the privilege.

Now if you believe that the government is taking away a genuine freedom, then I congratulate you for raising as big a stink as you possibly can. But I haven't seen anyone give an example of an actual freedom being taken away.

I know there are previous examples of possible infringements on freedom during the war on terror, but I mean a loss of rights that's directly connected to this story. If you can give me a real example, I'll happily join your cause.

[chadtm80]

Gtalum,

While I see this as a security precaution and not tyranny and you see it oppositely, I love your passion for our country and our freedoms. I do love the old saying that while I may disagree with what you say I will defend to the death your right to say it. We live in a country where debates like this are free to take place and open forums and debate have made this country great.

While ideally we should have absolute rights, there are restrictions on rights and freedoms and their always have been. It is necessary because there are bad people in this world who would abuse these freedoms to harm others. Until you can change those people there will be times like this and the good will have to suffer for the bad

Excellent post.. Agree 110% on each and every line

[gtalum]

While I see this as a security precaution and not tyranny and you see it oppositely, I love your passion for our country and our freedoms. I do love the old saying that while I may disagree with what you say I will defend to the death your right to say it. We live in a country where debates like this are free to take place and open forums and debate have made this country great.

While ideally we should have absolute rights, there are restrictions on rights and freedoms and their always have been. It is necessary because there are bad people in this world who would abuse these freedoms to harm others. Until you can change those people there will be times like this and the good will have to suffer for the bad

I appreciate your post.

[brunota2003]

hey...the world would be no fun if you could not debate on issues, right? at least IMHO it would not be very fun...

[Regit]

Gtalum,

While I see this as a security precaution and not tyranny and you see it oppositely, I love your passion for our country and our freedoms. I do love the old saying that while I may disagree with what you say I will defend to the death your right to say it. We live in a country where debates like this are free to take place and open forums and debate have made this country great.

While ideally we should have absolute rights, there are restrictions on rights and freedoms and their always have been. It is necessary because there are bad people in this world who would abuse these freedoms to harm others. Until you can change those people there will be times like this and the good will have to suffer for the bad

It's so refreshing when someone makes a post like this in a debate. It's great to see someone either back up their ideas with facts, or acknowledge the other person's point of view.

It's much better than being condescending or making accusations that the person of picking a fight, not arguing correctly, acting like a kid, or anything else.

That being said, I concur that though I may disagree that any rights are being taken away, it's nice to see someone who actually cares about their rights. There are fewer of those people in America than there should be.

[The Sandcrab]

A toast . . . to Zoey and Gt

[GalvestonDuck]

All debate aside, I'm just grateful that we're watching and reading news about a foiled plot instead of hearing about the attack, the recovery efforts, the body count, and references to how "8/10" could have been prevented. It was...and that's what really counts.

[gtalum]

Agreed 100% on that. the good news is that thsi can finally give us the confidence that US and allied intelligence is working well and staying at least one step ahead of these guys.

[Regit]

Agreed 100% on that. the good news is that thsi can finally give us the confidence that US and allied intelligence is working well and staying at least one step ahead of these guys.

Also a good reminder that they don't even have to be in the US to attack us.

[nystate]

I hate to tell you, but TWA was about 2 steps from going out of business well before TWA 800. It may have spurred it a little bit quicker the last bit into the grave, but TWA's death started in 1978 when deregulation occurred. By you rlogic, AA and UA should be out of business since they each lost two airliners on 9/11. Instead, they are two of the healthier remaining US legacy airlines.

Actually, many airline industry insiders will tell you that without flight 800, TWA may have been able to recover. TWA wasn't in great shape, but TWA 800 just cut off any chance TWA had at making a return to profitability.

The AA and UA situations were completely different. People felt it patriotic to fly AA or UA after 9/11, where the unknown aspects of TWA 800's demise made people more paranoid and frightened to fly TWA after that. Same thing with Valujet-why do you think they changed their name to Air Tran?

[gtalum]

Actually, many airline industry insiders will tell you that without flight 800, TWA may have been able to recover. TWA wasn't in great shape, but TWA 800 just cut off any chance TWA had at making a return to profitability.

Long story short, Carl Icahn and his Karabu Corp. (manifested as Cheaptickets.com) killed TWA, regardless of what TWA's ex-employees might say.

The AA and UA situations were completely different. People felt it patriotic to fly AA or UA after 9/11, where the unknown aspects of TWA 800's demise made people more paranoid and frightened to fly TWA after that. Same thing with Valujet-why do you think they changed their name to Air Tran?

Oh I agree. A crash is always bad news for an airline, especially mechanically-caused crashes. No doubt about it. I was just addressing the fact that TWA was already one foot in the grave way before the flight 800 disaster. I do concede that the crash probably accelerated the inevitable.

Just to be nitpicky, though, ValuJet didn't actually change its name to AirTran. AirTran was an existing very small Orlando-based charter airline that bought ValuJet while ValuJet was nearly worthless. Because of the publicity surrounding the ValuJet name AirTran decided to run the whole operation under the AirTran name.

[Audrey2Katrina]

Our freedom and privacy is slowly being taken away by the U.S. government not the Taliban.

Why? Because a few "privileges" have been suspended when boarding an airplane/jet? THIS is ridiculous. And we're supposed to be talking about OVER-reacting? By the tone of some folks here you'd think they were carting people off to concentration camps and enforcing dusk to dawn curfews everywhere--there is not a single "right" being lost here as per the US Constitution. And even "freedom" has it's restrictions where/when the rights/safety of the vast majority are in any way endangered.

Obviously, the new restrictions here do not make us any safer otherwise why would the UK have different more strict restrictions? Doesn't that mean that eventually the U.S. ban will expand if we are to be truly SAFE.

I'd really like to know how you can be certain that they haven't made anyone ANY safer? This is pure conjecture at its finest. They doubtless will not prevent all future terrorist acts--but if they ban one--or two--then they have served their purpose. I can't "prove" that the restrictions in and of themselves have dissuaded a single terrorist effort--and your statement is equally impossible to prove--you simply cannot prove a negative--logically. But such dramatic assertions do make for nice rhetoric.

Grandma's water bottle and little Billy's gameboy are no threat to anyone.

Little Billy's "cell phone" sure did a lot of damage to the Spanish railway system.

What's next? We fly naked and wear government assigned robes when boarding the plane? I guess many of you will still say "better safe than dead" even while wearing your Taliban-like plane robes.

Or perhaps while we're hypothesizing in the absurd, we could equally all simply give up the effort altogether--- just let anyone come on board with whatever they want as a personal item--I mean after all, it'll only happen to .00001 of the flights! I wonder how many here realize that the constitutional "right" to habeas corpus was suspended by the orders of a US president during a war--and they were returned once the war was over. Now I would never advocate going to this level of extreme given this situation--but my heaven, worrying about a friggin' bottle of water, or some perfume, or a sports drink? This is beyond ridiculous!

A2K

[stormtruth]

Now I would never advocate going to this level of extreme given this situation--but my heaven, worrying about a friggin' bottle of water, or some perfume, or a sports drink? This is beyond ridiculous!

A2K

It's you and the government worried about the bottles of water and sports drinks not me. I want them on the plane remember? It's you and some other people on this thread that suddenly fear them and are terrified of the terrorists. I think the security levels are already enough as they were before the new restrictions and I don't think these new ones will help one bit. Planes will still be blown up even with them. So, I'm happy to board a plane full of water bottles, cosmetics, perfume and sports drink. I'm not afraid like you.

[Jack8631]

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

-Benjamin Franklin

[brunota2003]

Now I would never advocate going to this level of extreme given this situation--but my heaven, worrying about a friggin' bottle of water, or some perfume, or a sports drink? This is beyond ridiculous!

A2K

It's you and the government worried about the bottles of water and sports drinks not me. I want them on the plane remember? It's you and some other people on this thread that suddenly fear them and are terrified of the terrorists. I think the security levels are already enough as they were before the new restrictions and I don't think these new ones will help one bit. Planes will still be blown up even with them. So, I'm happy to board a plane full of water bottles, cosmetics, perfume and sports drink. I'm not afraid like you.

but it is you who is "freaking" out over them banning those items...

[coriolis]

I guess its out of the question that my right to have a bottle of beer in my car will ever be restored.

[Janice]

I am afraid of the terrorists. They are growing in numbers and they will die to see us die. That does not mean I will not continue living my life to the fullest. It is what you cannot see that will hurt us and leave us unprepared. I trust my government and the other governments who are doing their best to protect us. I will obey by their new restrictions if this even saves one plane. You can bet they are plotting another attack somewhere and I trust my government to foil that one too. Before 9/11, we were ignorant of all this. We have not been hit on our soil before by terrorists. We learned a good lesson.