In December 2001, two months after 19 jihadists hijacked airplanes and flew them into the World Trade Centers, the Pentagon and a Pennsylvania field, Richard Reid attempted to detonate explosives hidden in his sneakers on an American Airlines flight from Paris to Miami. Passengers thwarted his plan, and the plane landed safely in Boston, Massachusetts.
Reid pleaded guilty to terrorism charges in October 2002 and is serving a life sentence at the nation's super-maximum security prison in Florence, Colorado.
As a consequence of these and other attacks airport security systems have become more and more thorough. Some airports now use full body scan machines.
However, as some of the 'read more' articles show, it remains possible - arguably even easy - to bring prohibited items (including bomb-making materials) through airport security.
Some people argue that airport security checking is so poor it should be reduced or even limited to spot checking. They say that airport security checks are intrusive (espcially full body scans), are wasteful of money and time, cause delays and frustration, and create an atmosphere of fear and suspicion.
Other people say that if security is not good enough we simply need to invest in better and better ways of checking - even if this means longer wait times for passengers and hefty price rises for tickets. If we do not, they say, then sooner or later there will be another avoidable plane disaster caused by terrorists - even another 9/11.
What do you think? Where do you stand? Do you agree or disagree with the proposal?
Read More
https://sites.google.com/site/artlessintegration/home/flight-philosophy-and-freedom articles.cnn.com/2009-12-25/justice/richard.reid.shoe.bomber_1_terror-attacks-american-airlines-f... snallabolaget.com/?page_id=506 science.howstuffworks.com/transport/flight/modern/airport-security5.htm www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/11/the-things-he-carried/7057/ It is proposed that all countries should increase security measures at international airports