The BBC has some details on the nature of the attack: ‘Airlines terror plot’ disrupted
It is thought the plan was to detonate explosive devices smuggled in hand luggage on to as many as 10 aircraft.[...]
He also said the plan “revolved around liquids of some kind”.
“Officials say the explosives would have been sophisticated and extremely effective,” our correspondent said.
Of course, the exact nature of the explosive devices surely haven’t been revealed to the public, so much of this is speculation.
Still, the sophistication of the devices seems to point to a serious organization, and not just some local fanatics, which is suggestive of al Qaeda or some new player.
Given the response to Richard “Shoebomber” Reid, one wonders what kind of security measures, both reasonable and unreasonable, are likely to evolve from this situation.
The increased hassles associated with flying after 911 are likely to increase, and this could have a serious effect on the airlines. As Sean Hackbarth rightly notes:
The no carry-on restriction and liquid ban better be temporary, or else the airlines will be hurt. One reason some people own a notebook computer is to get work done while in the air. Forcing computers and mobile phones to be stowed in the belly of a plane will have many business travelers saying, “Air travel is too much of a hassle; I’m going to teleconference.”
Indeed.
Along the same lines, James Joyner writes:
Still, the new countermeasures will further disrupt the economy, especially the fragile air travel industry. Flying by plane is bad enough owing to decisions by the industry to cram us into ever-smaller planes and existing security measures have ended the days when it made sense to take a plane from, for example, Chattanooga or Montgomery to Atlanta. Pre-9/11, my rule was that a five hour one-way drive made flying preferable if the rates were low enough and my stay short enough. I’ve since revised that to seven hours. The inability to take carry-on luggage probably bumps it to nine.None of that is a complaint about counter-terrorism measures. These restrictions strike me as quite sensible under the circumstances. But it goes to show that terrorists can be quite successful even when they are horribly unsuccessful.
Like is often said of the Pentagon, anti-terrorist officials often are “fighting the last war” so like with the focus on shoes that we currently have, it is quite likely that carry-ons in general will now face far, far greater scrutiny. On the one hand, I understand this, as a little bit of annoyance on the part of travellers is acceptable if it means stopping planes from being blown up. However, the degree to which such measures actually do anything other than create frustration is questionable.
The real challenge for security is to figure out what the next plot will look like, not assuming that the next attack will be the same as the last.
Sphere: Related Content
August 10th, 2006 at 12:25 pm
Stopped Terror plot and a practical concern
Update- There have been exceptions made for the above items I mentioned. There will be a TSA employee there to test that the substance is really milk. How does someone get trained in milk tasting?
August 10th, 2006 at 4:04 pm
[...] arian Rottweiler, The Heretik, The Moderate Voice, No More Mister Nice Blog, Minstrel Boy, PoliBlog, Right Wing News, Unclaimed Territory, PoliPundit.com
[...]
August 10th, 2006 at 10:51 pm
We always try to get everything in our carry-ons when we fly. That might not work so well this next time. I don’t fly ’til October, who knows what things will be like by then.