I honestly don't know why they'd want to do it over the ocean, though I just figured they were going to set up the bombs once they hit land. And that it made the most sense doing it from Britain because no one would suspect it, and/or perhaps security was different. Plane hijacking's been done already in the US; maybe they figured it'd be easier overseas.
The whole "no liquids" policy just bugs me, from more than a practicality standpoint. You can use anything as a weapon if you get creative enough; there's really just no such thing as "perfectly safe". If one wants to create terror and devastation, he'll find a way to do it, independent of the government's extreme-actions-after-the-fact policy...
Comments 11
I don't want to give them ideas, but can you think of a place with more cars, not to mention trucks?
Maybe intelligence is doing a better job than we think.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I honestly don't know why they'd want to do it over the ocean, though I just figured they were going to set up the bombs once they hit land. And that it made the most sense doing it from Britain because no one would suspect it, and/or perhaps security was different. Plane hijacking's been done already in the US; maybe they figured it'd be easier overseas.
The whole "no liquids" policy just bugs me, from more than a practicality standpoint. You can use anything as a weapon if you get creative enough; there's really just no such thing as "perfectly safe". If one wants to create terror and devastation, he'll find a way to do it, independent of the government's extreme-actions-after-the-fact policy...
Reply
Leave a comment