And you know this how, exactly? I take it as fairly strong evidence that the British suspects in the most recent case left martyr tapes. It seems they were intending to do something. That the recent threat was apparantly thwarted does not mean it didn't exist, nor does it mean we shouldn't take prudent steps to make it more difficult for such attacks to succeed in the future.
You will note those attacks were thwarted
before the recent insanity about liquid, for instance. You realize that means that the attacks were stopped without disarming someone of a bottle of water purchased post-security, a bottle of mosturizer, or a can of soda.
You may think it's apropos that we all fly naked after a full body scan. In the name of security, of course. Prudent steps, natch. I'd submit to you that if things continue towards that end that you won't have a job and people won't fly.
But we will be safe. A poodle encased in a block of lucite is a very secure poodle. Unfortunately, it's useless--as will the national air transit system if this crap continues.
It seems some in here suffer from the "I am the world" fallacy. I'M not trying to sneak anything bad on board an aircraft, therefore nobody is and the TSA is a waste of time. I'M never going to take anything that might be dangerous into an aircraft lavatory, therefore nobody will and flight crews that become suspicious over such behavior are merely being paranoid.
No, I'm suggesting that none of this paranoia crap adds to security in any meaningful way. And you will note that, *rimshot*,
that type of paranoia did not catch the most recent attack attempt. It's not a coincidence.
FAs are chasing people out of the lavs and soliciting LEO help to do so over a bag. Meanwhile, most of the cargo in the belly remains unscanned and uninspected (for instance). Which do you think is going to materially lower your chance of dying on an airplane?
