1–1011–17

yet more flight delays

From: milko 9 Jul 2014 09:27
To: 99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD) 2 of 17
41114.2 In reply to 41114.1
Stories in the press today that this will soon apply to pretty much all flights. Have a good trip!
Reply
0/0
From: ANT_THOMAS 9 Jul 2014 09:57
To: 99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD) 3 of 17
41114.3 In reply to 41114.1
They were doing this in 2002 when I went to Canada, I assume due to the 9/11 panic. I had to prove every electronic item was working. Phone, camera, speakers, MP3 player etc.
Reply
0/0
From: 99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD) 9 Jul 2014 11:20
To: milko 4 of 17
41114.4 In reply to 41114.2
Eeef, that makes me angry! :@ (see?)
Reply
0/0
Message 41114.5 was deleted
From: milko 9 Jul 2014 12:06
To: 99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD) 6 of 17
41114.6 In reply to 41114.4
I do see! Quite fearsome indeed. 

Meanwhile the Guardian found someone who reckons he knows and that what he knows is that this doesn't even work anyway. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/08/tsa-agent-new-airport-security-cell-phone-rules

Just in case you had the unfortunate misconception that it might not be a complete waste of time with no useful purpose.
Reply
0/0
From: 99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD) 9 Jul 2014 13:14
To: milko 7 of 17
41114.7 In reply to 41114.6
quote: milko
Just in case you had the unfortunate misconception that it might not be a complete waste of time with no useful purpose.

No such misconceptions here! I fully expect it to be of FA value in defeating terrorism and supreme value in inconveniencing everyone and increasing delays. Hence the terrorists make more gains!

From that article though...
 

quote:So, how should a rational security system deal with "recent and relevant information" about the "devilish technical skill of those terrorists who design ever more sophisticated means of concealing explosives"? Simple: announce to the public (and would-be iBombers) that all carry-on electronics will be subject to enhanced scrutiny, contingent upon case-by-case analysis, as well as the occasional random search.


Looking like a Muslim?
Reply
0/0
From: milko 9 Jul 2014 13:34
To: 99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD) 8 of 17
41114.8 In reply to 41114.7
It's not just looking like a Muslim. If they have a funny name, or a beard, they need checking out too. Everyone else should be alright I think.
Reply
0/0
From: 99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD) 9 Jul 2014 13:50
To: milko 9 of 17
41114.9 In reply to 41114.8
Well, I don't look like a Muslim, and I don't have a beard. Should I change my name back from Nigel Lickmynipples though?
Reply
0/0
From: koswix 9 Jul 2014 14:57
To: 99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD) 10 of 17
41114.10 In reply to 41114.9
No, he said you only had to worry if you have a funny name.
Reply
0/0
From: milko 9 Jul 2014 15:12
To: koswix 11 of 17
41114.11 In reply to 41114.10
funny haha or funny peculiar? I don't know.
Reply
0/0
From: koswix 9 Jul 2014 16:34
To: milko 12 of 17
41114.12 In reply to 41114.11
Night lickmynipples didn't really register on either, so he should be fine.
Reply
0/0
From: 99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD) 9 Jul 2014 17:01
To: koswix 13 of 17
41114.13 In reply to 41114.12
Are you suggesting that Lickmynipples is a commonplace name north of the border? Elsewhere it might be considered funny (peculiar).
Reply
0/0
From: koswix 9 Jul 2014 18:41
To: 99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD) 14 of 17
41114.14 In reply to 41114.13
Fairly standard.
Reply
0/0
From: graphitone 9 Jul 2014 19:05
To: 99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD) 15 of 17
41114.15 In reply to 41114.13
If only your first name was Ian.

Mr I Lickmynipples.

 :-|
Reply
0/0
From: 99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD) 9 Jul 2014 19:24
To: graphitone 16 of 17
41114.16 In reply to 41114.15
That's fairly standard.
Reply
0/0
From: graphitone 9 Jul 2014 19:35
To: 99% of gargoyles look like (MR_BASTARD) 17 of 17
41114.17 In reply to 41114.16
Never said it was funny.

 
Reply
0/0