Get the facts. Not fear.


August 18, 2006 7:57 PM

So apparently explosives can be made out of liquid and be detonated with any form of electrical charge. Where does that leave us? No carrying on board a plane any form of liquid or electrical equipment. This on top of scissors, nail clippers or any other form of sharp instruments. The logical part of me thinks: I rather be inconvenienced and arrive alive, than be allowed all the things I want to carry onboard a plane and maybe get blown up in the skies.

BBC NEWS | UK | Baggage advice for UK passengers

But then where do you draw the line? Every measure has a counter-measure. Which will basically mean that if our current level of paranoia increases we’d end up seeing what I had suggested earlier and that is: everyone going onboard on a plane is stripped naked and rendered unconscious.

The answer cannot be an ever stringent level of security. The solution can only be via a thorough addressing of the root causes of terrorism. Easier said than done I’m sure but it has to be more productive and less wasteful than to engage in an ever spiralling race to outmanoeuvre the terrorists’ ingenuity.

I shall end with a couple of pieces that examines the plausability of blowing up planes using liquid explosives, and also a Jon Stewart bit on The Daily Show questioning this incessant fear of “what-if”. Our paranoia is only limited by our imagination about where the terrorists can strike next and how they’d do it, which is everywhere and anyhow. So when do we stop being afraid?

Mass murder in the skies: was the plot feasible? | The Register
[IP] On the implausibility of the explosives plot.

9 thoughts on “Get the facts. Not fear.

  1. sourrain

    I wouldn’t mind being rendered unconscious for a 24hour flight to australia.However, I am sick of all this circus that has all attention focused on the fight on terrorism.

    In my opinion, it has all gotten out of hand.The terrorists had won without even trying – they had changed the face of air travel forever.

    Did you know it was discovered that those ‘suspects’ did not even book any airtickets – and most of them did not even own passports? Don’t sound like a well laid plan to blow the world up to me.

    Did you also know that since last week’s crisis, President Bush’s ratings had gone up by 11%?

    Go figure

    Reply
  2. mooiness Post author

    sourrain: I read about them not having passports and the like. Damn. Changed the face of air travel forever alright, without even trying that hard. I’m still glad that the police caught on to them though, as dubious as it is.

    Lynne: hip hip hurray!

    herman: yeah, he’s the BOMB.

    Reply
  3. john riemann soong

    It’s all because our sense of privacy … hence we don’t know what the passengers are up to.

    Come to think about it, even without the terrorist threat, I’d rather not have a concept of “privacy” on the plane anyway. Wouldn’t it be better if we were all talking to one another rather than regarding each other as strangers?

    The solution is to break down the interpersonal barriers. That way possible hijackers and bombers will stick out like a sore thumb.

    For example, we may not even want to inquire about what that guy is carrying to the bathroom because we were brought up in a culture of privacy. Whereas if we start using people skills rather than the cold fears of paranoia, we might actually get somewhere. And not flag innocent people on the basis of their ethnicity either.

    Reply
  4. mooiness Post author

    john: interesting way of looking at it. However being friendly to each other still would not negate the need for security checks on the ground. And terrorists can be friendly on first impressions too. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    Reply
  5. Pingback: Mooiness! » The year that was - my 2006, part 2

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *