Originally Posted by
gsoltso
Ok, what I am referring to as an Xray (CTX) has a CT component to it, that works in conjunction with the xray. That has the ability to tell the difference. I was not specifying that, but ok, there you go.
The organization is moving towards the 100%, I have nothing else to give you on that, because it is not in my sphere of influence.
1. Remains an impossibility because of the new policies (if all involved respond the way they are supposed to). The most likely scenario will involve an IED blowing the plane up or killing a handful of people near the bomber.
2. Remains a viable threat. The best way to screen the shoes is xray.
3. Is a viable threat. Watch the videos I posted earlier in the thread, there is even one that details how simple it would be to circumvent the screening in place now. This makes a fairly compelling case to ramp up the tech or ban all LAG. I want the tech rolled out to help the checkpoint, but that is not in the budget right now. When it is, I think we could see some constructive direction on the ban.
Shoe bombing is not a viable threat. Never was. One lone loonie tried it unsuccessfully. Others tried bra bombs and could have had greater success - so why isn't every woman being disrobed, patted down or x-ray'd? Isn't that a viable threat too? Or we only rank our threats based on how palatable the screening process is for people?
Liquid bombs are not a viable threat. You're ignoring the fact that liquid explosives need highly controlled environments for mixture and transport. This stuff can't be cooked up in someone's apartment, tossed in a shampoo bottle, carried to the airport, taken on a plane and then detonated undetected. It doesn't work that way.
These lab and controlled demos are useless. Show me a demo where someone creates such a bomb in a totally uncontrolled environment using accessible ingredients, is transported just like any baggage and then detonated in a way which would not be detected by others and stopped.