"Take note: absolute security is only possible if we're
completely nude and without luggage when we board aircraft, and of course,
after security personnel have inspected all of our bodily orifices."
Troubled Youth: Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab has been charged by the United States with attempting to blow up an aircraft which was enroute from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas Day.
There are many ways to
encapsulate the state of the world. When rational people scrap perfectly good
cars, then we know: There's an economic crisis, and governments are trying to
boost the economy with scrapping fees and by stimulating the stinginess-is-cool
gene.
When bankers head out at
night and withdraw cash from five different ATM machines, then we know: There's
something rotten in our financial system.
And when even the U.S. president
is informed that some passenger has repeatedly gone to an aircraft toilet, then we know: The world is degenerating into terrorism
hysteria.
It was Sunday evening shortly
after 9pm German time [Dec. 27], when several news outlets flashed the breaking
story around the world: according to a statement from the White House, Obama
had been informed about a conspicuous passenger aboard a flight to Detroit.
Just imagine: the most powerful man in the world is being bothered during his Hawaiian
vacation with information that an African on Northwest/Delta Airlines flight 253 was
suffering from nausea and couldn't be dragged out of the toilet by the crew. Silliness
rules the world.
COMPLETELY OFF COURSE
On Christmas, another
Nigerian, student Umar Faruk Abdul Mutallab, wanted
to turn himself into a torch with a homemade incendiary device aboard the same Northwest/Delta
Airlines flight [two days earlier], thereby causing the jet to crash over Detroit. He didn't
succeed - but he was successful in that the world has been turned upside-down
since his botched suicide attempt.
We're hearing everywhere that
security must be raised: at airlines, at airports and among politicians. That's
always very laudable and the reflex is more than understandable. However, in
their effort to preclude a future attack ŕ la Abdul Mutallab, security regulators
are off course. It's true that the arrangements they're crafting will get on
the final nerve of passengers, although they can also be easily circumvented by
potential attackers. Posted
by WORLDMEETS.US
Take the toilet ban,
for example. On transatlantic flights, restrooms will be locked an hour before
landing. After all, Abdul Mutallab had locked himself into one of these little
“retreats” for 20 minutes to assemble his incendiary device. And what does this
“security measure” achieve? From now on,
there will be a sharper odor on U.S. flights and attackers will be going to the
toilet 1.5 hours before landing.
Or take the ban on blankets. In
the future, these will have to be locked in the overhead luggage compartment an
hour before landing. After all, Abdul Mutallab ignited his incendiary device
beneath a blanket. And this achieves what? More passengers will leave well
air-conditioned aircraft with a cold - and bombers will just place a suit
jacket over their lap instead of a blanket.
Or take the ban on liquids.
In the future, carry-on luggage may contain no liquids whatsoever; no
deodorant, no nail polish, no aftershave. But above all - no nasal drops, which
are used by anyone suffering from congestion to try and prevent their eardrums
from being turned inside out by cabin pressure during take-off and landing.
Even so, such measures couldn't have stopped an Abdul Mutallab: he had the components
of the incendiary device sewn into his underpants.
The new regulations for U.S.
flights don't bring the tiniest bit more security, and regulators know it. But
to do nothing after this type of attempted attack - that's not possible given
the usual spiral of hysteria.
Mere mortals like us holler
for more security. Politicians call for tougher laws. Security experts always
want more security than there already is. And out of this cacophony arise
monsters like this toilet ban.
Let's take note: absolute security
is only possible if we are completely nude and without luggage when we board aircraft,
and of course, after security personnel have inspected all of our bodily
orifices. However, justifiably, we don't want that. After all, we're already
hot under the collar about so-called nude scanners that the E.U. wanted to
favor us with at check-in. Nevertheless, a nude scanner would have detected the
components of Abdul Mutallab's incendiary device.
Posted by WORLDMEETS.US
That some ordinary airport staff
might see us almost exactly as God created us - that doesn't suit us. Although
it's true that we go to the FreieKorperKultur
nudie beach, use the sauna and the communal showers after we exercise and don't
object to getting undressed at the doctor's office. But the fact that airport staff
might see us nearly naked - that's not acceptable. Now we've suddenly discovered our
privacy - and would rather be prohibited from peeing prior to landing. This no
longer has anything to do with logic - only hysteria.
