Originally Posted by
SeriouslyLost
That's a terrible analogy. You're confusing intent with action. Intending to put orange juice in an engine is not the same as actually putting someone on a no-fly list.
Taking it further, the damage to the engine if they then did put the orange juice into the engine is only broadly the same as actually subsequently denying someone boarding: you have the engine and can show it's orange juice, whereas (by design) you can't easily show why someone was denied boarding.
The action of placing someone on a no-fly list does cause harm: it causes them to be unable to fly if they should subsequently try to do so. They may not *discover* this fact until they do try to fly, but the action that harmed them (being put on the no-fly list) is still there. The result of that harm (being denied boarding) is simply the only way to discover the action that caused second harm.
In both cases (NFL and orange juice engine list), the entity has put the individual on a list. Presence on that list has negative implications, should the individual attempt to engage in a specific action (fly, or get his oil changed). Unless and until one's presence on that list actually causes the individual harm (can't fly, is barred from doing something else, gets orange juice in his engine), the mere presence on the list hasn't harmed that person.