rhino_uk

If we accept that 9/11 was the start date for all the madness we see today in our airports, why is that it's only airports that are affected and only when "the kettles" are discussing flying do they have this overwhelming urge to FEEL safe.

Purely from memory, since 9/11 I can think of the following terrorist attacks & plots:

Madrid Train bombing - 191 dead - No major changes to security
London bombings - 72 dead - No major change to security
2 x Bali bombings - 202 + 26 dead - No major change to security
UK Easter bombing plot - foiled (believed to target shopping mall - No change to security
UK Bluewater plot - foiled (believed to target shopping mall - No change to security
NY subway plot - foiled - No change to security
Times Sq car bomb - failed - No change to security


Now compare that to-
Shoe bomber - failed - shoe carnival
Liquid plot - foiled - Liquid restrictions
Underwear bomber - failed - Nude-o-scopes & patdowns
Toner cartridges - failed - Lets not even discuss the stupidity of a ban on toner carts in hand luggage

I really can't work out the focus on airports when no other target gets "hardened" in the same way.

If it's still good enough to go on London Underground (subway) without jumping through all the hoops why does the same principal not apply at airports

jordanmills

Three reasons:
1, most people don't fly much, so you can do a LOT of stuff without most people caring
2, since most people have little experience with flying, you can claim all sorts of idiotic things in the name of safety
3, there's a LOT of money to be made in the air travel industry... follow the money