IP: I second Lauren's comments -- Re F.A.A. Announces Stricter Rules; Knives No Longer Allowed -- get out your dull chopsticks

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> To: farber () cis upenn edu
> cc: lauren () pfir org
> Subject: Re: IP: F.A.A. Announces Stricter Rules; Knives No Longer Allowed 
> -- get out your dull chopsticks
> Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 08:18:04 -0700
> From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren () vortex com>
>
> > Lets see -- no razor blades sold? No  food knives on planes?  No
> > screwdrivers? If this is the security we are going to get, we will 
> continue
> > to be in trouble. djf
>
> I appreciate that the FAA wants to look like it's doing *something*.  But
> none of the new rules being promulgated would have stopped the recent
> events, and some of them are just plain stupid.  Stopping people from having
> even plastic knives is going to have an effect on terrorists?  Give me a
> break.
>
> What's to stop a determined terrorist from hiding a (possibly folding)
> *real* plastic weapon in a can of deordorant?  Or a sharp weapon hidden in
> their eyeglasses frames, or in a hundred other places?  For that matter,
> terrorists may be able to achieve the same effect without any real weapons
> at all, just by *claiming* to carry explosives.
>
> Some airports are said to be planning to ban all carry-ons, including,
> reportedly, women's purses.  Already people are asking what would happen to
> people carrying medicinal supplies who can't risk having their materials
> lost in the baggage maze.
>
> This is insane.  People are reacting with their glands, when what is needed
> right now is cold logic.  Unless the next plan is to force every passenger
> to fly naked and be treated like prisoners being flown around by the U.S.
> Marshals Service, chained in their seats after undergoing body cavity
> searches, these sorts of measures are *not* going to prevent terrorism,
> though they may well wreck the airlines.
>
> The wrong part of the equation is being attacked.  The focus needs to be on
> the planes, not on the airports and the passengers.  Having a law
> enforcement officer on more flights could make sense.  Better security for
> the cockpit crew has long been known to be necessary.  While we're at it, it
> shouldn't be possible to disable the voice and data recorders or transponder
> simply by pulling easily-accessible breakers.  While pilots won't like it,
> video recordings of the cockpits should be instituted.  These devices
> should all have independent power supplies not dependent on the plane's
> main power.
>
> Most of this is really only aimed at commercial aviation of course.  What
> about general aviation?  A small plane could carry a significant bomb.
> Cargo flights?  Remotely piloted vehicles?  What about container ships
> and trucks?
>
> Terrorism must be fought, and the criminals involved in terrorist attacks
> must be brought to justice.  But there's a largely unspoken and painful truth
> that we will need to consider sooner or later.  Terrorism by its very nature
> often has an unending supply of operatives, and will take advantage of
> whatever resources are available in a society to accomplish terrorist
> goals.  Even Israel, probably the most secure democracy in the world in
> terms of anti-terrorist measures, still undergoes frequent deadly terrorist
> attacks.
>
> Even if we slowly, a step at a time, convert the U.S. into a security police
> state, with civil liberties gradually eroded for "good causes," there
> will still be terrorism.
>
> Terrorists will adapt.  We'll ourselves have accomplished the goal that
> the terrorists could never have accomplished on their own -- the destruction
> of the United States as we know it today.  Fight terrorism?  Yes, of course!
> But before we start shredding the Constitution, we'd better think
> long and hard about the importance of the values we're trying to protect.
>
> In the wake of Tuesday's tragedy, one U.S. Senator was reported to have said
> (more or less the exact words): "Bomb them to hell.  I don't care about
> collateral damage."  It's easy to understand this emotional reaction to
> Tuesday's massively murderous acts.  But one wonders if the terrorists,
> driven in their case by evil zeal, didn't express similar sentiments.  We
> must fight our enemies vigorously, but we must take care not to become them.
>
> --Lauren--
> Lauren Weinstein
> lauren () pfir org or lauren () vortex com or lauren () privacyforum org
> Co-Founder, PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
> Moderator, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
> Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
> "Reality Reset" Columns - http://www.vortex.com/reality



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/