Originally Posted by
WalterSFO
are you saying that if there is a legitimate threat, they don't need to figure out a way to deal with it?
Not every legitimate threat requires an ineffective, hare-brained-like response to deal with it. And yet that kind of response is too often what the USG/DHS/TSA delivers -- no exception this time.
You do realize that there are means to detect and interdict explosives, and it's not present-day science-fiction?
Originally Posted by
TomMM
That "article" and its sources are engaged in a cheap attempt to rationalize a blundered operation. The Saudis had more about that than USN personnel picked up.
When it comes to AQAP, the Saudis and Emiratis always find a way to try to justify and US military "assistance"/"engagement" against their local/regional opposition. They come up with this stuff through "human" sources more than US raids come up with stuff through raids for "goods".
Originally Posted by
GrayAnderson
Before I get to the bold, what I suspect you're going to get is agencies (and corporations) putting in orders for computers with totally removeable hard drives and/or simply keeping sequestered systems overseas and in the US and using portable HDs to move data back and forth. This exceeds my technology knowledge, but is it possible to set something like this up with no real risk of data remaining on the "core" computer?
With that said, the bold is my suspicion as well. The sorts of knock-on effects for this will get "interesting" given that this basically requires checking a bag for most travelers...I suspect that such a move would trigger public pressure for requiring all airlines to offer one checked bag for free (since you're basically forcing probably 80% of all travelers to check a bag if they can't take a tablet, laptop, or presumably an e-reader through security), or at least a compromise of allowing pax to check their computer bag. I also expect lawsuits.
On the other hand, I also expect that an electronics ban and the attendant hassles could easily do a number on a decent number of short-haul domestic routes...for example, I think this could put a knife in the WAS-NYC/NYC-BOS shuttles. MIA-MCO also has room to go down pretty hard, and there are a few other city pairs that are probably going to take this pretty hard (either because they're driveable or because there are time-effective alternatives). Even the LA-SF pair has room to take a thumping.
As to the existing proposed ban, I'm wondering how much traffic is going to start getting re-routed through Canada or elsewhere (for example, I could see flights bound for the Southeast doing a stop at the Bahamas, while TIJ has a direct ground connection to the US and could easily "pinch hit" for SAN and/or LAX to some extent).
For operational security and/or preservation of legal self-interest, plenty of US persons route by land to/from the US via Mexico or Canada and then fly out of and back into Mexico or Canada and cross by surface means back into the US. This kind of ban will only encourage more of that kind of routing. But the USG will do what it can to convince the Canadians and perhaps even the Mexicans to try to do as we in the US want.
Nearly 20 years ago, when I would fly on some "domestic" routes -- domestic as in domestically in some countries other than the US -- it wasn't that unusual for me to be flying on routes where carrying my laptop in the passenger cabin was banned. I found ways around the bans, but the most common ways around the bans resulted in ridiculous outcomes that delivered nothing positive in terms of flight security and safety.
Originally Posted by
Canarsie
If so-called “leaders” were required to follow the very policies they create for others, we most likely would not see as many implementations of ideas which seem to be ridiculous at best.
This thought is not limited to airport security.
I know a fair amount of current and former senior government officials in the US and abroad, and a huge proportion of them seem to rarely (if ever) travel with a laptop. When it comes to cabinet level officials, the proportion who travel with a laptop has never been very high (and has generally been even lower for long-haul international trips on common carriers), but it seems to have dropped and not recovered since smartphones became so ubiquitous. Go figure, but smartphones keep getting a pass even as there is very little to nothing that can't be concealed behind two or three iPhone 6/7 Plus sized phones but can be concealed inside an iPad or Macbook Air.