Originally Posted by bocastephen
We all know water is harmless, but we also know there are plenty of highly explosive chemicals that look just like water. In a way when you think about it, it's almost a surprise none of these terrorists thought before to fill a bottle with frozen nitro glycerin, warm it rapidly to cause greater instability, then smash it in the lav to detonate the mix.
here is an old historical article that details what could happen when this stuff is blown up.
It IS a PITA and it is not practical on a long-term basis. Dehydration is a serious issue when flying and I have been told repeatedly over the past 4 years not to rely on the airline to provide for my needs. "They" say: Don't expect the airline to provide food, sufficient beverages, pillows, water in the lavs for washing my hands (see AA thread), whatever. Now the TSA is saying I can't personally provide for my needs, either. So you bet I am not happy right now, and I have already postponed a planned trip for one week to give things a chance to settle down.
That said, if you read the book "1000 Years of Revenge" by Peter Lance, it also talks about filling contact lens solution bottles with chemicals that could be used to make explosives. I am not surprised the DHS/TSA has reacted as it has, but I don't think it can realistically be permanent. It wouldn't surprise me if we eventually end up with something like sealed bottles of water allowed, open bottles discarded. (But do we have enough people to scan everyone at the boarding door?)
If the US adopted the current UK model of nothing but your ID and wallet onboard, I would give up nearly all flying. The only advantage in flying short haul flights is the ability to make use of the time en transit. If I can't have a laptop, phone and/or reading material with me in the airport and on the plane, forget it. Business travelers, who are forced to spend hours every week on planes, depend on this time to manage their workload. It is not a workable long-term policy and will kill the productivity of their citizens.
My personal belief in all this is that you cannot make the world 100% secure unless you are willing to endure tremendous hassles that drain your productivity and your personal liberties. At some point, the ability to move freely and relatively unhindered will win out over security that remains imperfect. If we want to adopt El-Al style security to fly San Francisco to LA to be "safe", well fine, but wait and see how few people are willing to go through that on a weekly basis.